Brokaw, Occupy Democrats, and Alternate History
- 1 List of ironies
- 1.1 (1) Trump is a bit of a windbag, but the video does all the things it accuses him of.
- 1.2 (2) NBC "News" and Occupy Democrat, their partner propaganda outfit, team up, to have Tom Brokaw, present their case.
- 1.3 (3) Remember Brokaw took over NBC News after the shame of a scandal
- 1.4 (4) It was the Democrats that gave us the things Tom is whining about
- 1.5 (5) This video starts by offering you lies of omission (and commission)
- 1.6 (6) Once you get past the lies, the point is nothing but an anecdote
- 2 Conclusion
List of ironies
(1) Trump is a bit of a windbag, but the video does all the things it accuses him of.
(2) NBC "News" and Occupy Democrat, their partner propaganda outfit, team up, to have Tom Brokaw, present their case.
NBC also runs MSNBC the channel that makes FoxNews look "fair and balanced".
(3) Remember Brokaw took over NBC News after the shame of a scandal
In 1992 “Dateline NBC" was caught rigging trucks to explode (using model rocket engines), as part of their consumer reporting.
While Brokaw avoided major scandal during his tenure, his protege and successor (Brian Williams) was fired for lying more than the Hillary Clinton (and getting caught). As was Dan Rather (from CBS). And we know most newsman that claim to be non-partisan and "completely fair", come out as staunch Democrats after they retire, to the surprise of no one but others in the media ( if you ignore all the complaints of spin and bias for their entire careers). Tom was no exception and admitted as much in 2004, then took-over and destroyed the credibility of "Meet the Press" with his bias.
Occupy Democrat, the agency is a far left propaganda outfit that exists to spin facts and history with mistruths and lies, until it fits their political agenda. So the two of them team up to revise history, and hope the gullible base don't notice. (They don't). (Even if Tom/NBC didn't actively partner with Occupy, the fact that their rhetoric can be used with a propaganda outfit, shows you enough about their political alignment.
(4) It was the Democrats that gave us the things Tom is whining about
Remember who the Democrats are, they're the party that gave us all of our biggest shames that he's whining about, then blames it all on everyone else, because taking responsibility is not in their nature.
They gave us Slavery, Indian Removals, Trail of tears, Segregation, Jim Crow, Lynching, the Ku Klux Klan, they gave us Japanese Internment, they opposed the civil rights movement in 1964 (Republicans broke their filibuster), they opposed the voting rights act of 1965, then tried to re-invent the fiction that it was only the South that was the problem (it wasn't), and all the lifelong democrats magically shifted parties after that and now vote Republican: which explains why in 1968 Nixon didn't carry the South (Democrat Wallace did), in 1976 Jimmy Carter did carry the South (and carried Georgia in 1980), GHW Bush didn't get half the South Clinton did. So where was this magical "shift" they claim happened? In 2000, 30 or 40 years after the old democrats died out? So they're the party that never takes responsibilities for their actions.
(5) This video starts by offering you lies of omission (and commission)
- (a) "Law abiding Japanese were interned".... BY THE DEMOCRATS! (Not Republicans)
- (b) "In Germany they declared war on their own citizens".... Who declared war? The left wing National Socialists and Fascists and allies of FDR until the war. The American Progressives and FDR administration had been throwing praises towards the German Nazi's and Italian Fascists, and they had been throwing them back. Mussolini correctly stated that "FDR is one of us", and FDR was copying the Italian model. The Gini Coefficient that the left and Occupy movements love to quote came from where? Corrado Gini, the guy who wrote the book on economic fascism. Once the war broke out, and after it, they changed their tune, hoping their base wouldn't notice. (They didn't). But those who know history, still remember where they stood.
- (c) Senator Joe McCarthy was the next revisionist history example. Context: after 20 years of the Democrats/FDR allying with the Soviets, and them putting spies in all levels of our government (getting the bomb from us, causing China to fall, starting the war in Korea, and so on). There had been warnings for years about the degree of infiltration at Defense Dept, State Dept, Amerasia scandals, OSS (CIA), Manhattan project. Joe McCarthy was given internal memos from State dept. and FBI showing that there were at least 57 known communists on the payroll and at least 3 years after they'd been warned about them, they were still on the payroll -- and the Truman administration had been covering it up, and obstructing letting Congress/Senate know (as was required by law). When the Jr. minority party Senator pointed this out, instead of investigating the claim, the Democrat controlled Tiding's investigation, investigated and attacked McCarthy for his whistleblowing. Since the Freedom-of-information act (and fall of the soviet union) we know his list came from State and the FBI (he didn't make it up), that there had been a coverup and conspiracy by Democrats to prevent embarrassment but that had cost secrets and lives, and that most of the people that Joe was FORCED to name (against his will), were actually spies paid by the Soviets (or at least associates working unknowingly for the Soviets). McCarthy was the victim in McCarthyism, and Brokaw either doesn't know the real history, or is counting on his base to not know.
- (d) "all that while blacks, who had been enslaved [by the democrats], were being treated by 2nd class citizens [by other democrats]" -- they left out the "by democrats" parts.
- (e) ignoring that all the worst fascism and intolerance of these elections (so far), has been democrat radicals going to Republican political gathers and assaulting them, just like Hitler's SA did pre-WWII. (San Jose, Chicago, L.A, San Diego, etc).
- (f) Claiming that ISIS might use Donald Trumps claims as a recruiting tool. Because he says that we need better vetting before letting in mass refugees from terrorist countries (and from the most violent religious problem we have today). On the other hand, we KNOW that ISIS uses Hillary and Obama as recruiting tools. So he's comparing a hypothetical of "they might" use Trumps call for better border security as a tool (but haven't yet), yet they have used Obama's drone bombing and Hillary's actions ALREADY as one.
We seem to have a national history of Democrats doing really bad things, and Democrats in our press forgetting to point out what party they belonged to, and blaming a Republican for being a threat, because some of his populist rhetoric might be a fraction as divisive as Sanders or Warren or other democrats rhetoric is, on a regular basis. I don't like that divisiveness in either side, but I like a pot lecturing me on the kettle's blackness, even less.
(6) Once you get past the lies, the point is nothing but an anecdote
Once you get past all those lies and errors and embarrassing misstatements of facts (as if a Democrat like Brokaw or Occupy Democrats cares about the actual facts), then Tom ends with his minor point. There was one good Muslim-American that fought and died for American values in Afghanistan (the good war), before Obama let that place go to shit -- and in Brokaw's mind that should make up for the half dozen major terrorist attacks that left thousands of Americans dead due to muslim radicalism. (And he forgot completely about, or at least forgot to mention Orlando, San Fernando, Fort Hood, Chattanooga shootings, Boston Marathon, Pentagon and Twin Towers, and so on). Nothing to be concerned about with radical islam, time to move on.
The point isn't that I think we should persecute Muslims for their religion. (Not at all). Or that I like Trump's style. But if overstating what other people said is wrong, or if lying is a bad thing (as Brokaw is claiming), then perhaps he should be more careful with the facts and context himself?
It's the denial of the left to accept history, and to attempt to rewrite it, that is infuriating the populist movements in the first place.
There are those that are mad because they know history and how Brokaw just raped it like Bill Cosby on an drugged up intern. There are others that are mad because they can do relative threats -- and the threat of letting in 100's of thousands of un-vetted refugees from muslim countries that hate us, outweighs their compassion for the plight of innocents, caused when Obama failed to do anything about the war in Syria or growth of ISIS. All of the backlash of Trumpism is against the lash of Obama and the Obamabots. If the left could be honest for once in their miserable lives, and own the real risks and mistakes, and explain to the American people what they're going do to mitigate it, then maybe we could make real progress. But their strident denial of reality, is causing a more shrill retaliation that allow Trumps rhetoric to strike nerves and gain momentum. And the more we get denials like this puffy-propaganda riddle diatribe, the more they convert people that know better into supporting windbags like Trump.
I don't like Trump because he throws arounds words sloppily, then corrects and moderates them a little later (sometimes), then repeats the process. But based on his history, he's done nothing to persecute minorities or muslims, and he's often used bravado and exaggeration. So we know he's unlikely to do what democrats have done (round up people based on their race). And if he tried, I have faith that our system of government wouldn't allow it (if Democrats aren't in control). We also know that each time a Democrat Talking Head in an expensive suit, exaggerates or lies about what he said, that an angel dies. And there's few of those things left.
So everything I hate about Trump's style, is exaggerated in the other side. Brokaw and Occupy is doing everything with their lies of omission/commission, revisionism, distortion, attacking Trump (and his supporters by proxy) that they claims to hate or to be "warning against" from the other side, in his sanctimoniously-ignorant style. It's that hypocrisy and lies, that make we want to vote for everything they hate, just to wipe their smug expressions off their hypocritical lying mouths.
Thus every time I see a fraud like Brokaw, distorting history for partisan politics, it makes me want to vote for Trump just to show those douche-nozzles what I think of their fascist propaganda. I won't vote for Trump, but I will vote against the criminality of Hillary, the apologism of that by the media, or against the lying liars that lie about their causes like Brokaw, Occupy, and anyone willing to propagate that tripe (over either not knowing better, or not caring).