Pogrebin and Kelly: The Problem of Moral Orphans

 

An elderly priest I knew years ago had an impressive scholarly background in moral theology and philosophy. Despite that wealth of sophisticated moral reference points, he told me even at his advanced age his first consideration in matters of morals and conscience was still whether it was the kind of thing his parents, aunts, uncles, and siblings would do or approve.

His example is very human and normal—in a healthy society. Ideally, each child would have parents who are part of a community of parental peers who inculcate a shared set of reference points that guide us such that we rarely need a formal overlay of explicit rules. We know what is right and wrong by example and intuition. My mother knew that when I hopped on my bike to go off for hours at a time. If I got into mischief that (a) other adults would intervene and that (b) she would hear about it. More importantly, I knew that too.

There is a concept held by Aboriginal Australians they call “the law.” Everything passed down from ancestors (nature lore, hunting techniques, crafts, stories, myths, and morals) is “the law.” They did not use or conceive of categories like theology, biology, technology but accepted “the law” in its entirety as providing the entire context for personal identity, heritage and a complete frame of reference. Like you and every other 21st century American, I could not operate under “the law.” Nevertheless, I envy the security, comfort, and serenity that growing up within “the law” probably provided in pre-colonial times. It is the polar opposite of The Narrative which seeks to cut off any cultural heritage, any connectedness or pre-existing moral or cognitive framework and leave the individual socially and morally naked, craving whatever identity the Narrative assigns.

Lawyers and doctors value (or should value) the respect of their professional peers. The most important check on academic fraud should be the fear of losing the respect of others in the field. (Is that breaking down?) While the tyranny of political correctness is a scourge and an injustice, the bigger problem is the destruction of the moral communities built on truths and experiences that do not emanate from The Narrative.

Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly are unprincipled partisan hacks trying to hustle a book that has no substantive dirt on Justice Kavanaugh, their intended target, much less anything new despite a full year of “investigation” and privileged access to the entire dirt-manufacturing complex in the leftosphere and Democratic Party. But more disturbing is that they produced utter garbage without the slightest fear of losing the respect of their peers in the most influential newsrooms and magazines in the country.

This is not like the case of Jason Blair or Stephen Glass who deceived their editors and peers. The sheer obviousness of the crapfest generated by Pogrebin and Kelly was such that the first releases from the book did not last 24 hours before being shown to be full of nonsense and pathetic omissions and distortions—and no deep research or heavy lifting was required to show that.

The lefties have correctly identified family and every family-related means of personal moral formation as a competitor to the project of separating and atomizing us so that the state or the collective is the only social reality in our lives. The fact that there are so many people in positions of influence who can be shamed only by failure to serve The Narrative is why our political discourse is no longer a matter of good faith disagreements done in a shared context of respect for each other and for the truth. Is there anyone with moral standing Pogrebin and Kelly would recognize to tell them that they should be ashamed of themselves? That they have about as much professionalism as Dan Rather? Moral orphans.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s growing community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 24 comments.

  1. Arahant Member

    Journalism is dead. Journalistic ethics are deader.

    • #1
    • September 19, 2019, at 7:49 AM PDT
    • 10 likes
  2. Susan Quinn Contributor

    Byron York has a podcast of Mollie Hemingway, who covers a lot of the lies and distortions in the Pogrebin/Kelly book. I especially appreciated how tactful yet honest she was in describing their abhorrent efforts. She’s at the top of my list for professionalism and ethics. Hail, Mollie!

    • #2
    • September 19, 2019, at 8:03 AM PDT
    • 14 likes
  3. Arahant Member

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Byron York has a podcast of Mollie Hemingway, who covers a lot of the lies and distortions in the Pogrebin/Kelly book. I especially appreciated how tactful yet honest she was in describing their abhorrent efforts. She’s at the top of my list for professionalism and ethics. Hail, Mollie!

    https://ricochet.com/podcast/byron-york-show/mollie-hemingway-on-the-war-over-kavanaugh/

    • #3
    • September 19, 2019, at 8:06 AM PDT
    • 5 likes
  4. Old Bathos Member
    Old Bathos Post author

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Byron York has a podcast of Mollie Hemingway, who covers a lot of the lies and distortions in the Pogrebin/Kelly book. I especially appreciated how tactful yet honest she was in describing their abhorrent efforts. She’s at the top of my list for professionalism and ethics. Hail, Mollie!

    I listened to that. Byron York is always spot on. Mollie is a pro unlike the two under discussion. The “seven corroborating witnesses” is a travesty. A law clerk or ad writer would be fired on the spot for something that glaringly false.

    • #4
    • September 19, 2019, at 8:10 AM PDT
    • 8 likes
  5. Jon1979 Lincoln

    The calculation in their New York Times story last weekend versus what is in the book is the interesting thing to me.

    The parts about the woman not remembering the incident with Kavanaugh, the information that Christine Ford’s friend, Leland Keyser, is now totally skeptical that Ford’s story ever happened, and Pogrebin and Kelly mentioned in the book that she was pressured by Ford’s other friends to perjure herself a year ago by testifying she did remember the incident. That’s one piece of information at least partially exonerating for Kavanaugh and two details that are damning for Ford and for the people who were backing her allegation against Kavanaugh.

    All of that was in the book. But none of it was in The New York Times, and since the same people who wrote the book wrote the article, it’s not as though they just skimmed the thing and missed the parts that helped Kvanaugh’s case.

    So then it comes down to why were those details left out of the story, and who left them out? Pogrebin and Kelly tried to throw their editors under the bus when the shirt hit the fan and Mollie Hemingway and others started to note the omissions, and the editors then siezed control of the bus and reversed it right back over them. Given the snarky/salacious tweet Pogrebin put out on the Times’ official Twitter feed, my guess is she was trying to have it both ways — she knew that others in the media would go with what was in the article, and give the Times’ angry progressive readers what they wanted to hear. That would become the story, while at the same time, the exonerating information in the book gave her and Kelly plausible deniability. They could point to those other details to show their book wasn’t a hit-job on Kavanaugh, while they selected specific things from the book that made the article a hit-job on Kavanaugh.

     

    • #5
    • September 19, 2019, at 8:14 AM PDT
    • 7 likes
  6. GrannyDude Member

    Pogrebin is the daughter of feminist and author Letty Cotin Pogrebin. Among other projects, she worked on the “Free to Be…You And Me” recording project that many of us may recall from our own or our children’s childhoods. (Alan Alda and Marlo Thomas warbling songs with lyrics like “…a doll, a doll…William wants a doll!”

    Pogrebin is my age, now. I wonder if, before letting this mendacious tripe go out under her name, she asked herself “would Mom be proud of me for this?” 

    My father was a journalist. To this day, it is his standard I hold myself to.

    • #6
    • September 19, 2019, at 8:34 AM PDT
    • 14 likes
  7. Old Bathos Member
    Old Bathos Post author

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    The calculation in their New York Times story last weekend versus what is in the book is the interesting thing to me.

    The parts about the woman not remembering the incident with Kavanaugh, the information that Christine Ford’s friend, Leland Keyser, is now totally skeptical that Ford’s story ever happened, and Pogrebin and Kelly mentioned in the book that she was pressured by Ford’s other friends to perjure herself a year ago by testifying she did remember the incident. That’s one piece of information at least partially exonerating for Kavanaugh and two details that are damning for Ford and for the people who were backing her allegation against Kavanaugh.

    All of that was in the book. But none of it was in The New York Times, and since the same people who wrote the book wrote the article, it’s not as though they just skimmed the thing and missed the parts that helped Kvanaugh’s case.

    So then it comes down to why were those details left out of the story, and who left them out? Pogrebin and Kelly tried to throw their editors under the bus when the shirt hit the fan and Mollie Hemingway and others started to note the omissions, and the editors then siezed control of the bus and reversed it right back over them. Given the snarky/salacious tweet Pogrebin put out on the Times’ official Twitter feed, my guess is she was trying to have it both ways — she knew that others in the media would go with what was in the article, and give the Times’ angry progressive readers what they wanted to hear. That would become the story, while at the same time, the exonerating information in the book gave her and Kelly plausible deniability. They could point to those other details to show their book wasn’t a hit-job on Kavanaugh, while they selected specific things from the book that made the article a hit-job on Kavanaugh.

     

    Mollie Hemingway has already caught differences between the book and articles these malignant clowns wrote during the confirmation fight. The innuendo, omissions and blatant attempt to create the impression of a pattern is despicable. The story is that the accusations were manufactured and groundless and that subsequent investigation only made that clearer. To try to salvage a smear is contemptible. There is no “plausible deniability” when the relevant facts are treated as irrelevant asides.

    • #7
    • September 19, 2019, at 8:37 AM PDT
    • 6 likes
  8. Jon1979 Lincoln

    Old Bathos (View Comment):

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    The calculation in their New York Times story last weekend versus what is in the book is the interesting thing to me.

    So then it comes down to why were those details left out of the story, and who left them out? Pogrebin and Kelly tried to throw their editors under the bus when the shirt hit the fan and Mollie Hemingway and others started to note the omissions, and the editors then siezed control of the bus and reversed it right back over them. Given the snarky/salacious tweet Pogrebin put out on the Times’ official Twitter feed, my guess is she was trying to have it both ways — she knew that others in the media would go with what was in the article, and give the Times’ angry progressive readers what they wanted to hear. That would become the story, while at the same time, the exonerating information in the book gave her and Kelly plausible deniability. They could point to those other details to show their book wasn’t a hit-job on Kavanaugh, while they selected specific things from the book that made the article a hit-job on Kavanaugh.

    Mollie Hemingway has already caught differences between the book and articles these malignant clowns wrote during the confirmation fight. The innuendo, omissions and blatant attempt to create the impression of a pattern is despicable. The story is that the accusations were manufactured and groundless and that subsequent investigation only made that clearer. To try to salvage a smear is contemptible. There is no “plausible deniability” when the relevant facts are treated as irrelevant asides.

    Pogrebin and Kelly’s bet was the information in their book that refuted the insinuations of the Times article wouldn’t emerge until the narrative of the article had been locked in as gospel. They’d only talk about the other things much later, to show they weren’t out to get Kavanaugh. The fact that Hemingway had access to the book and blew up the narrative less than 24 hours later foiled the plan.

    • #8
    • September 19, 2019, at 8:51 AM PDT
    • 5 likes
  9. Richard Finlay Member

    Jon1979 (View Comment):
    The fact that Hemingway had access to the book and blew up the narrative less than 24 hours later foiled the plan.

    To be fervently hoped but yet to be seen.

    • #9
    • September 19, 2019, at 9:31 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
  10. Richard Easton Member

    None of the MSM outlets have invited Mollie or her co-author on to discuss their book. They frequently boycott information that is inconsistent with their worldview.

    • #10
    • September 19, 2019, at 9:38 AM PDT
    • 9 likes
  11. Old Bathos Member
    Old Bathos Post author

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    Pogrebin and Kelly’s bet was the information in their book that refuted the insinuations of the Times article wouldn’t emerge until the narrative of the article had been locked in as gospel. They’d only talk about the other things much later, to show they weren’t out to get Kavanaugh. The fact that Hemingway had access to the book and blew up the narrative less than 24 hours later foiled the plan.

    This is similar to the slimeweasel strategy of the Mueller team: release their heavily spun summary version of the report contents and, because they strategically delayed so the DOJ would be tied up for a month reviewing and declassifying the report, their version would harden into the accepted narrative without any rebuttal for 30 days. Barr and Rosenthal blew that up by announcing right away that (a) there was no collusion and (b) there was no reason to act on a BS obstruction. Hence the Mueller team/MSM rage.

    I think that NYT, Pogrebin and Kelly thought they could get headlines to sell the idea there were rich veins of dirt that the FBI ignored and jam that into our heads without timely rebuttal. These arrogant twits operate on the theory that there are no channels of information they do not own (or that they don’t deserve to own) so when they fail to sell (impose) a false narrative they get upset.

    • #11
    • September 19, 2019, at 9:50 AM PDT
    • 6 likes
  12. Old Bathos Member
    Old Bathos Post author

    Richard Easton (View Comment):

    None of the MSM outlets have invited Mollie or her co-author on to discuss their book. They frequently boycott information that is inconsistent with their worldview.

    Which is also why Thomas Sowell and Shelby Steele are unknown to so many despite being the most astute commentators on race, economics and culture in the country.

    • #12
    • September 19, 2019, at 9:52 AM PDT
    • 7 likes
  13. Jon1979 Lincoln

    Old Bathos (View Comment):

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    Pogrebin and Kelly’s bet was the information in their book that refuted the insinuations of the Times article wouldn’t emerge until the narrative of the article had been locked in as gospel. They’d only talk about the other things much later, to show they weren’t out to get Kavanaugh. The fact that Hemingway had access to the book and blew up the narrative less than 24 hours later foiled the plan.

    This is similar to the slimeweasel strategy of the Mueller team: release their heavily spun summary version of the report contents and, because they strategically delayed so the DOJ would be tied up for a month reviewing and declassifying the report, their version would harden into the accepted narrative without any rebuttal for 30 days. Barr and Rosenthal blew that up by announcing right away that (a) there was no collusion and (b) there was no reason to act on a BS obstruction. Hence the Mueller team/MSM rage.

    I think that NYT, Pogrebin and Kelly thought they could get headlines to sell the idea there were rich veins of dirt that the FBI ignored and jam that into our heads without timely rebuttal. These arrogant twits operate on the theory that there are no channels of information they do not own (or that they don’t deserve to own) so when they fail to sell (impose) a false narrative they get upset.

    They likely believed that no one who wasn’t on their side ideologically would have access to advance copies of the book, so the other information wouldn’t get out immediately after the story was published in the Times. Odds are pretty good they’re raging at whoever provided the advance copy to Hemingway (and once the blood was in the water on the woman not supporting the story Pogrebin and Kelly were claiming for her, CBS delivered the knockout blow with the information that the Times writers had ignored their own scoop about the attempt to suborn perjury to back Ford’s allegation).

    • #13
    • September 19, 2019, at 10:38 AM PDT
    • 7 likes
  14. Dr. Bastiat Member

    Old Bathos: Is there anyone with moral standing Pogrebin and Kelly would recognize to tell them that they should be ashamed of themselves?

    A question for the philosophers: Is it possible to shame the shameless?

    • #14
    • September 19, 2019, at 11:28 AM PDT
    • 6 likes
  15. James Gawron Thatcher

    Old Bathos:

    Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly are unprincipled partisan hacks trying to hustle a book that has no substantive dirt on Justice Kavanaugh, their intended target, much less anything new despite a full year of “investigation” and privileged access to the entire dirt manufacturing complex in the leftosphere and Democratic Party. But more disturbing is that they produced utter garbage without the slightest fear of losing the respect of their peers in the most influential newsrooms and magazines in the country

    This is not like the case of Jason Blair or Stephen Glass who deceived their editors and peers. The sheer obviousness of the crapfest generated by Pogrebin and Kelly was such that the first releases from the book did not last 24 hours before being shown to be full of nonsense and pathetic omissions and distortions—and no deep research or heavy lifting was required to show that.

    OldB,

    Once you can accept the absurd statement that only the narrative matters and the facts don’t matter then anything becomes possible. The new wokoids have swallowed the kool-aid deeply. They aren’t even slightly conscious that they are completely corrupt and it will be obvious.

    A.O. Sulzberger is only 67 years old. That is not old for a CEO. He could have been in command for another 20 years. However, they have rushed to bring in the new wokoid. A.G. Sulzberger is only 39 years old and undoubtedly can’t really tell the difference between proper policy and woke ideology.

    Andrew Klavan’s joke phrase, “The New York Times, a former newspaper” is no joke anymore.

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #15
    • September 19, 2019, at 12:15 PM PDT
    • 7 likes
  16. Old Bathos Member
    Old Bathos Post author

    James Gawron (View Comment):

    Old Bathos:

    Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly are unprincipled partisan hacks trying to hustle a book that has no substantive dirt on Justice Kavanaugh, their intended target, much less anything new despite a full year of “investigation” and privileged access to the entire dirt manufacturing complex in the leftosphere and Democratic Party. But more disturbing is that they produced utter garbage without the slightest fear of losing the respect of their peers in the most influential newsrooms and magazines in the country.

    This is not like the case of Jason Blair or Stephen Glass who deceived their editors and peers. The sheer obviousness of the crapfest generated by Pogrebin and Kelly was such that the first releases from the book did not last 24 hours before being shown to be full of nonsense and pathetic omissions and distortions—and no deep research or heavy lifting was required to show that.

    OldB,

    Once you can accept the absurd statement that only the narrative matters and the facts don’t matter then anything becomes possible. The new wokoids have swallowed the kool-aid deeply. They aren’t even slightly conscious that they are completely corrupt and it will be obvious.

    A.O. Sulzberger is only 67 years old. That is not old for a CEO. He could have been in command for another 20 years. However, they have rushed to bring in the new wokoid. A.G. Sulzberger is only 39 years old and undoubtedly can’t really tell the difference between proper policy and woke ideology.

    Andrew Klavan’s joke phrase, “The New York Times, a former newspaper” is no joke anymore.

    Regards,

    Jim

    In Eastern Europe and Russia the marxist lie eventually collapsed but in Russia especially, the moral rot was lasting. Contracts, normal commerce require the rule of law which requires some shared values regarding truth and fairness. The Times will eventually toss off the particular political infection but the more fundamental moral fiber of the broader culture may be pretty damaged by then.

    • #16
    • September 19, 2019, at 12:27 PM PDT
    • 4 likes
  17. Jon1979 Lincoln

    James Gawron (View Comment):

    Old Bathos:

    Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly are unprincipled partisan hacks trying to hustle a book that has no substantive dirt on Justice Kavanaugh, their intended target, much less anything new despite a full year of “investigation” and privileged access to the entire dirt manufacturing complex in the leftosphere and Democratic Party. But more disturbing is that they produced utter garbage without the slightest fear of losing the respect of their peers in the most influential newsrooms and magazines in the country.

    This is not like the case of Jason Blair or Stephen Glass who deceived their editors and peers. The sheer obviousness of the crapfest generated by Pogrebin and Kelly was such that the first releases from the book did not last 24 hours before being shown to be full of nonsense and pathetic omissions and distortions—and no deep research or heavy lifting was required to show that.

    OldB,

    Once you can accept the absurd statement that only the narrative matters and the facts don’t matter then anything becomes possible. The new wokoids have swallowed the kool-aid deeply. They aren’t even slightly conscious that they are completely corrupt and it will be obvious.

    A.O. Sulzberger is only 67 years old. That is not old for a CEO. He could have been in command for another 20 years. However, they have rushed to bring in the new wokoid. A.G. Sulzberger is only 39 years old and undoubtedly can’t really tell the difference between proper policy and woke ideology.

    Andrew Klavan’s joke phrase, “The New York Times, a former newspaper” is no joke anymore.

    Regards,

    Jim

    A.O. “Pinch” Sulzberger was the one who gave into the woke SJWs in the first place when he took over from his dad in the early 1990s. That’s when things like Kitty Kelly’s tell-all on Reagan became Page 1 news, and the paper decided that reporters could put their opinions in front page stories. The son’s simply carried on that downward direction, where Trump hatred just intensified the decline.

    • #17
    • September 19, 2019, at 12:27 PM PDT
    • 6 likes
  18. Full Size Tabby Member

    Richard Easton (View Comment):

    None of the MSM outlets have invited Mollie or her co-author on to discuss their book. They frequently boycott information that is inconsistent with their worldview.

    That says much of interest about the general state of the media today.

    • #18
    • September 19, 2019, at 12:33 PM PDT
    • 3 likes
  19. Percival Thatcher

    Jon1979 (View Comment):
    … CBS delivered the knockout blow with the information that the Times writers had ignored their own scoop about the attempt to suborn perjury to back Ford’s allegation

    It does seem that that should be a much bigger deal than it has been made out to be. It is only attempted subornation of perjury, but one doesn’t do that in support of the truth because one doesn’t need to.

    • #19
    • September 19, 2019, at 6:32 PM PDT
    • 2 likes
  20. Yehoshua Ben-Eliyahu Coolidge

    Old Bathos: Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly are unprincipled partisan hacks trying to hustle a book that has no substantive dirt on Justice Kavanaugh

    Can you imagine the hurt these two monsters have inflicted on Kavanaugh’s wonderful wife and daughters? We can at least take solace from the fact that Pogrebin and Kelly, and their fellow liars from Christine Blasey Ford on down, surely have places roped off and waiting for them in the hottest region of gehenom (otherwise known as hell).

    • #20
    • September 20, 2019, at 12:54 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  21. Old Bathos Member
    Old Bathos Post author

    Yehoshua Ben-Eliyahu (View Comment):

    Old Bathos: Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly are unprincipled partisan hacks trying to hustle a book that has no substantive dirt on Justice Kavanaugh

    Can you imagine the hurt these two monsters have inflicted on Kavanaugh’s wonderful wife and daughters? We can at least take solace from the fact that Pogrebin and Kelly, and their fellow liars from Christine Blasey Ford on down, surely have places roped off and waiting for them in the hottest region of gehenom (otherwise known as hell).

    Don’t have to imagine. My wife and daughter work at the school those girls attend. Hell of a family, lots of friends and apparently they already have toughened skins.

    My daughter knows Ms. Kavanaugh from brief daily exchanges. At the height of the Senate atrocity she came by with an orchid for my daughter’s birthday and apologized for being a day late. Imagine that, with all the tidal wave of evil crap directed their way, she does that. And apologizes for being a day late.

    The Kavanaugh family will be fine. 

    • #21
    • September 20, 2019, at 7:48 PM PDT
    • 5 likes
  22. philo Member

    Old Bathos: … The fact that there are so many people in positions of influence who can be shamed only by failure to serve The Narrative is why our political discourse is no longer a matter of good faith disagreements done in a shared context of respect for each other and for the truth. …

    Funny thing is…there seems to be an equal and opposite counter-influence for every forced (or “faked”) one crafted to prop up the Potemkin Narrative. Sure the immediate response is usually as anti-Trump / anti-Administration / anti-rational as intended but we have seen a shortening of the typical rebound period from about 48 hours in early 2017 to less than a news cycle in the most recent case. It is this rebound, and the effect of the repeated exposure to it, on the mind-set of the masses that I believe is going to be a driving force in 2020 and beyond. Many people just become numb to it…and tune out (i.e. not responsive to future stimuli of similar magnitude). Others become sensitized to it and, whether deliberately or as a trained reflex, begin to spot the flawed logic and/or intellectual dishonesty before getting to the end of any given breaking “Narrative Blockbuster.” At some point, they cannot “not see” it. (For me this is like holding penalties in football. For some reason my eyes are drawn to any act of this breaking of the rules on the screen…usually not called by the officials…on each and every play. I cannot “not see” it anymore.) The end result (for rational people, that is) is to shift support toward those being “held” or, in the more important case here, targeted by the persistent flawed logic and/or blatant intellectual dishonesty. (Sometimes you even want to call the offending buffoons names!). 

    So, while what I described above is an unintended “learned response” imposed on the voting masses by the “influencers” you mention (and their faux-good-faith enablers in comment sections from sea to shining sea), it is the net effect in their game that may be most interesting of all. In seeking to use their positions to destroy one man, they are creating the conditions for a certain amount of political antifragility for that man. This moves that game into a region well beyond any known domain where their “influence” control system is honed and calibrated. Things usually don’t end well for those flying in these conditions…

    [If you made it this far, thank you for indulging my Saturday morning ramble. I’ll stop now.]

    • #22
    • September 21, 2019, at 7:53 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
  23. Old Bathos Member
    Old Bathos Post author

    philo (View Comment):

    Old Bathos: … The fact that there are so many people in positions of influence who can be shamed only by failure to serve The Narrative is why our political discourse is no longer a matter of good faith disagreements done in a shared context of respect for each other and for the truth. …

    Funny thing is…there seems to be an equal and opposite counter-influence for every forced (or “faked”) one crafted to prop up the Potemkin Narrative. Sure the immediate response is usually as anti-Trump / anti-Administration / anti-rational as intended but we have seen a shortening of the typical rebound period from about 48 hours in early 2017 to less than a news cycle in the most recent case. It is this rebound, and the effect of the repeated exposure to it, on the mind-set of the masses that I believe is going to be a driving force in 2020 and beyond. Many people just become numb to it…and tune out (i.e. not responsive to future stimuli of similar magnitude). Others become sensitized to it and, whether deliberately or as a trained reflex, begin to spot the flawed logic and/or intellectual…

    [If you made it this far, thank you for indulging my Saturday morning ramble. I’ll stop now.]

    There may be a kind of immunity effect emerging among the normals and the political neutrals but the left is also rapidly evolving into a tribe that increasingly regards integrity, fact and truth as the tools of enemies of The Narrative and its goal of extermination of freedom and the entirety of our western heritage. Putin conspired with Trump. The earth has 12 years left. Teen-aged Kavanaugh ran downtown rape parties…. the leftoid tribe demands a total sacrificium intellectus more sweeping than that of an Iranian mullah seminary education.

    • #23
    • September 21, 2019, at 9:34 AM PDT
    • 1 like
  24. philo Member

    Old Bathos (View Comment): …the left is also rapidly evolving into a tribe that increasingly regards integrity, fact and truth as the tools of enemies of The Narrative…

    For those who may be interested, Old Bathos is precisely correct in saying “rapidly evolving” but this is not really a new phenomenon. I can track my awareness of this total disregard for integrity, fact, and truth (sorry Mr. Old Bathos, I insist on the Oxford comma) among the democrat-media class back to at least the 2004 election cycle with “Mission Accomplished”, “the sixteen words”, Abu Ghraib, torture, “Bush Lied, People Died” etc., etc., etc. To me these were the first real trial runs of this type of Narrative dictation and clearly the prototypes for today’s broad, “coordinated” (surely not!) attacks (see: Journolist and better hidden follow-on entities). And the public, by and large, was not prepared for these Bush-era assaults. While Bush was reelected do not think for a minute that the term “Speaker Pelosi” wasn’t a direct result. They ultimately perfected the craft to the great benefit of Mr. Obama…but, while a slow process at times, We the People tend to learn from previous cons. A critical mass may have finally caught on…

    • #24
    • September 21, 2019, at 9:58 AM PDT
    • 1 like