Blog on the Run: Reloaded

Monday, September 12, 2016 6:32 am

The normalization of Donald Trump

If Donald Trump is elected our next president, there will have been several reasons why, but the most important one by far will have been the national news media’s performance. The media have both beaten up Hillary Clinton over nonexistent “scandals” and ignored or downplayed aspects of Trump’s character and actions that in any sane society would render him fundamentally unfit to be a major party’s nominee for the highest office in the land.

Examples of the former date back at least as far as the original New York Times story on the Whitewater real-estate deal in 1992, in which Bill and Hillary Clinton were suspected of having somehow benefitted improperly — the fact that they lost money notwithstanding. In Hillary Clinton’s case, they have included allegations of wrongdoing over investing in cattle futures, misplacing documents, and mishandling emails, and in no case was Clinton found to have committed wrongdoing.

Most recently, the Associated Press purported to prove that donors to the Clinton Global Foundation had somehow benefitted improperly with their relations with Hillary Clinton while she was Secretary of State. In point of fact, none of them did. Two weeks after it tweeted that it had found “pay for play” in those relationships, a claim the AP’s own reporting did not bear out, the AP took that tweet down with no explanation or apology that I’m aware of.

And just this weekend, the media, following as always the lead of their GOP sources, have acted outraged that Hillary Clinton referred to half of Trump supporters as a “basket of deplorables.” Only here’s what Clinton actually said:

You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people (and) now have 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive, hateful, mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks — they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America. But the other basket — and I know this because I see friends from all over America here — I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas — as well as, you know, New York and California — but that other basket of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they’re just desperate for change. It doesn’t really even matter where it comes from. They don’t buy everything he says, but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different. They won’t wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroine, feel like they’re in a dead-end. Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well.

Was it scandalous that Clinton said this? On the contrary, polling shows that she is understating the problem. Hell, The New York Times found that almost 20 percent of Trump supporters thought freeing the slaves was a bad idea and another 17 percent weren’t sure. They’re not just a basket of deplorables, they’re a kettle of vultures and a gen-u-wine Bucket o’ FAIL. Hell, Trump himself frequently retweets people who are white supremacists themselves and/or follow some of the leading white-supremacist Twitter accounts.

And yet somehow Republicans and the media alike thought Clinton owed these people some kind of apology, with CNN describing Clinton’s assertion as a “shocking statement.”

Meanwhile, the media continue to normalize Trump’s bullying, narcissism, and bigotry, which has been blatantly obvious since he started his campaign more than a year ago with this assertion:

When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

Oh, some are good people. How big of him.

Trump has proven himself to be a serial liar of world-historical proportions. He has lied about tariffs, reporters, his own political performance, the economy’s performance, and whether he was self-funding his campaign. He has lied, bigly, about his charitable givingHe even has lied about who was the biggest liar in the GOP nomination race. And one finding of the independent fact-checking site Politifact is that not only is Trump the most dishonest major politician on the U.S. scene today, Hillary Clinton is second only to Barack Obama in honesty.

His temperament, which some professionals have identified as narcissistic personality disorder, makes him a significant threat to place in charge of the nation’s nuclear weapons.

Yet despite clear evidence that Trump is too deeply flawed to be qualified for president, cable news gave him far more free air time than it gave his GOP opponents for the nomination:

According to The New York Times, Trump has received $1.9 billion worth of earned media, which includes coverage of the candidate on television and social media, and in newspapers and magazines. That is more than twice the amount of earned media Democratic Party front-runner Hillary Clinton has received and more than six times the amount received by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), the second-biggest earner of free media among Republicans.

Meanwhile, print/online pundits have persisted in reassuring the American people that he would “pivot” away from such views after winning the nomination to appeal to more moderate voters. This is staggering, for there has been no evidence whatever that such a transformation was ever in the cards. Trump has lied voluminously, but he has said one thing that the media need to take to the bank: “I am who I am. It’s me. I do not want to change.”

As I write, Trump trails Clinton by 5 percentage points in national polls, and, also at this writing, the way to 270 electoral votes appears shorter and straighter for Clinton than it does for Trump. But given the dramatic difference in qualifications of the two major-party nominees, the gap ought to be much wider.

Part of the problem is that about three in four white evangelical Christians say they’ll vote for Trump. That group makes up almost half the Republican primary vote and, on the basis of Christ’s teachings, might be expected to reject Trump’s bullying and bigotry. A number of prominent evangelical leaders have done so, but the rank and file appear almost all in (and some other evangelical leaders are just cashing in).

But I think a significant segment of the blame also lies with U.S. news media, who seek to create equivalence between Trump and Clinton when there simply is none.

Why? I don’t know. I suspect sexism plays a nontrivial role. In addition, perhaps the people who run news media are, as a group, Trump supporters. Perhaps they simply want to see a close race, figuring that that would generate higher ratings and readership (and possibly increased political-ad revenue as well). Perhaps reporters and pundits are in a rut of adhering to narratives that either were never true or, if they once were true, no longer are. Perhaps all of the above.

But whatever the reason, it adds up to journalism that is at best lazy and incompetent and at worst dishonest and dangerous, given the stakes for the Republic if Trump wins. And that will be the big takeaway of news-media coverage of this campaign, whatever the outcome of the election.





  1. […] SOURCE […]

    Pingback by The normalization of Donald Trump | Greensboro 101 — Monday, September 12, 2016 7:09 am @ 7:09 am

  2. Who Are The Deplorables ?

    ” You can’t win an American presidential election without the deplorables’ vote. Deplorables are America’s biggest minority. They might even be the American majority. They may or not be racist, homophobic and so forth, but they know they’re deplorable. Deplorable, and proud. They’re the median family whose real income has fallen deplorably by 5% in the past ten years, the 35% of adult males who deplorably have dropped out of the labor force, the 40% of student debtors who deplorably aren’t making payments on their loans, the aging state and local government workers whose pension funds are $4 trillion short. They lead deplorable lives and expect that their kids’ lives will be even more deplorable than theirs. ”

    And they don’t want a third Obama term.

    Was waiting for you to blame Bush. Nice try but that dog won’t hunt !

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Monday, September 12, 2016 8:32 pm @ 8:32 pm

    • Hard polling data suggests that Clinton either was correct or understated the proportion of Trump supporters who are bigots. So like it or not, that’s a fact. But your source’s argument is that Clinton can’t win without them. In point of fact, if the election were held tomorrow, she WOULD win, and her road to 270 electoral votes remains shorter and straighter than Trump’s, and the burden is on you to prove otherwise. But thanks for playing.

      Comment by Lex — Monday, September 12, 2016 8:35 pm @ 8:35 pm

  3. Lemme ask you something, Fred: Whom are you voting for?

    Comment by Lex — Monday, September 12, 2016 8:39 pm @ 8:39 pm

  4. I also talked the election on my blog a few hours ago. View@ to see my post about the election. By the way, I want Hilary to be the next president

    Comment by okotoenigma — Monday, September 12, 2016 9:40 pm @ 9:40 pm

  5. Lex… To answer your question . Guess who ?

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Tuesday, September 13, 2016 12:11 am @ 12:11 am

    • OK, Fred, so you support his bigotry, fascism and narcissistic personality disorder, and you think someone this obviously unstable is the appropriate person to have dealing with foreign powers and controlling nuclear weapons. Good to know.

      Comment by Lex — Tuesday, September 13, 2016 7:48 am @ 7:48 am

  6. Denver Post Deplorables Goes Way Too Far

    “Before elite donors at a glitzy fundraiser on Friday, Hillary Clinton managed to insult millions of Americans by arguing that half of Donald Trump’s supporters are deplorable individuals animated by racist, sexist, homophobic and other warped ways of thinking. Though she’s backed away from applying that characterization so broadly, she deserves the backlash she’s getting over the remarks.

    “You know, just to be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables,” Clinton said to laughter and cheers.

    Clinton’s “basket of deplorables” statement only contributes to the divided-nation dynamic that’s been so worrisome this election cycle. While we have argued that Trump himself is acting in racist, sexist and deplorable ways, we’ve been fully aware that overwhelming numbers of Republicans have loudly called foul for his stances that suggest he has some serious soul-searching to do.

    We condemned Mitt Romney in 2012 for making his 47 percent comments to well-heeled donors. Romney said that nearly half the nation was comprised of freeloaders who “pay no income tax” and who are in the tank for Democrats because of the party’s identification with government assistance.

    And we remember that in 2008, the last time Clinton ran for president, she happily joined criticism of then-candidate Barack Obama for telling donors that struggling Americans “cling to guns or religion or antipathy towards people who aren’t like them.”

    Clinton is right to attack the hate groups that have benefited from Trump’s rise. And she was right Friday to tell Democrats the party needs to empathize with Trump supporters who feel that the government and the economy have let them down.

    But her comments are the same kind of elitist statements coming from too many quarters that are poisoning the conversation and the debate.

    The country needs leadership here, not cocktail party derision.”

    What brought on your fit of ipse-dixitism.

    Yeah they are talking to you!

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Tuesday, September 13, 2016 6:58 pm @ 6:58 pm

  7. The only way that editorial makes any sense is if you 1) take one phrase out of context and 2) ignore the polling data that show conclusively that, yes, half or more of Trump supporters are motivated by racial animus.

    Also, Fred, Christ. If you wanted to vote for Gary Johnson, I’d understand that. But Trump? Really? Am I to assume you support his racism and bigotry? Am I to assume you honestly believe he’s stable enough to have his finger on the trigger? Am I to assume support a guy who’s a documented liar, a proven swindler and quite possibly a rapist of children? Do you stand by all that, Fred? Do you own it? Yes or no?

    Comment by Lex — Tuesday, September 13, 2016 7:05 pm @ 7:05 pm

  8. Not Deplorable, Not Horrible, Not Irredeemable

    “Secretary Clinton has now expressed “regret” for saying that half of Trump’s supporters are such “deplorables,” but what does it mean when a candidate for president could so glibly say that about a quarter of Americans are essentially trash people who have no claim on the body politic (“not America”)? One of the great political cancers of our time — and one that folks on the left and the right can succumb to — is the impulse to cast out of civic discourse those with whom we disagree. Partisans might denigrate their opponents as coastal “elites” who don’t represent the “real America” or as bigoted haters on the “wrong side of history.” Such impulses are mistaken. America contains multitudes, and “history” has all too often proven to be an arbitrary idol. Persuasion and sympathy are hallmarks of debate in a healthy republic. If politics is about excommunicating from polite society those with whom we disagree (those “deplorables”), the task of maintaining a diverse republic becomes much harder. Living in a pluralistic society means interacting with those whose opinions might differ from ours not just on trivial matters but also on serious ones. The tradition of religious liberty in the United States is in part premised on the idea that tolerance for intellectual difference is especially important for very difficult (and very personal) issues. This does not mean that we cannot champion firm moral views or even that some people might not subscribe to malicious or mistaken ideas, but we should be very wary about casting those with whom we disagree as essentially bad themselves and beyond redemption. RELATED: ’Deplorable’ Hillary Clinton Maligns Nearly 50 Million Americans At their highest, America’s great statesmen have stressed the importance of reconciliation instead of the poisoned comforts of demonization. Facing the most devastating war in American history, Abraham Lincoln did not denounce the members of the Confederacy (men who had taken up arms against their own government) as belonging in a “basket of deplorables.” Instead, he stressed the value of a common civil fellowship to help reknit the nation. Denouncing a huge swath of the American people as irredeemable deplorables, or invoking such rhetoric to draw media attention, is unworthy of the demands of our time and the obligations of the president. Moreover, the sentiments of Secretary Clinton’s statement contribute to a broader civil sclerosis. Making politics simply the conflict between right-thinking people and “deplorables” (or sheep misled by such “deplorables”) undermines the foundation of serious political discussion, which demands a good-faith effort at communication and a recognition that those who differ from us might have legitimate alternative viewpoints. Without that mode of discussion, politics degenerates into simply screaming slogans at the opposing side. It’s a commonplace to lament political “gridlock,” but the impulse to deplorablize one’s opponents very much gets in the way of finding prudential compromise. The politics of demonization decreases civil trust and threatens to increase the fractures of an already divided body politic. Emblematic of the tendency of Secretary Clinton’s remarks to stop conversation is her insistence that these “deplorables” are “irredeemable.” Such a bold declaration of irredeemability essentially says that these people are permanently malign (and should be perpetually maligned). For the perspective of secular politics, this is a bleak and troubling view. This view is also at odds with history, which is studded with those who have recanted deplorable views. As he chronicled in Witness, Whittaker Chambers once bent a knee to Soviet Communism, one of the worst totalitarian ideologies of the 20th century, only to later have a change of heart in favor of a much higher and nobler purpose. George Wallace stood in front of schoolhouse doors as a symbol of segregation and bigotry, only to recant his racism in later years; when Wallace died in 1998, civil-rights icon John Lewis did not denounce Wallace as an irredeemable deplorable but instead forgave him and said that he had changed. John Newton, author of “Amazing Grace,” once served as a slave trader only to convert to abolitionism. Newton’s great hymn speaks not of the irredeemable but instead of the universal hope of redemption: Amazing grace, how sweet the sound That saved a wretch like me. I once was lost but now I’m found. Was blind but now I see. We toil in a fallen world, and we are all in need of compassion and charity. Politics alone cannot redeem us, but a politics that admits no redemption is one that confines us to squabbles in a political ash heap — instead of the more important work of building and defending that city on a hill.”

    Like I said you are sounding more ipse dixit with each comment .

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Wednesday, September 14, 2016 12:51 am @ 12:51 am

  9. You didn’t answer the question, Fred. Is it because you’re ashamed?

    Comment by Lex — Wednesday, September 14, 2016 7:29 am @ 7:29 am

  10. Your question is full of assumptions not in evidence. ipse dixit

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Wednesday, September 14, 2016 10:35 am @ 10:35 am

    • Horseshit, Fred. Man up and own what your candidate stands for, or else disown your candidate. ETA: And re-read the original post. The claims are documented. Ipse dixit, my ass.

      Comment by Lex — Wednesday, September 14, 2016 10:37 am @ 10:37 am

  11. Claims documented ? Ha. Your internet hobby psychologist says Trump is narcissistic. Let’s stop with that one. And the NY Times that has to correct their correction page daily

    Your original post and subsequent comments and this crazed blogger over at HuffPo I take with cum grano salis

    If You Don’t Vote Democrat This November, Then Fuck You

    “Honestly I don’t give a fuck how you feel about any candidate. It’s absolutely irrelevant to me. If you are a person with a soul, who wants to see any further good develop from mankind in the next four years, you will do whatever you can to stop Donald Trump from becoming the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. Even if that means voting for a white female career politician who’s played the game just as dirty as every man who’s come before her, including our current president. Don’t y’all wish we could just vote him in another four years? Maybe you wouldn’t if you took a look at his donor list. But would you risk letting Trump win if Obama was the Democratic nominee? Would his shadiness matter then like Hillary’s does so deeply to you? This country absolutely needs a revolution. But at this moment in time, you’re literally choosing between the somewhat unlikely possibility of progressive change or an orange reality tv star who won’t renounce support from white supremacists. And somehow you expect me to accept that your conscience or morals matter at all? FUCK YOU.

    WE ARE DYING. Please don’t hand our lives over to this white devil madman. You might survive this. We might not. Do whatever you can to help us. Help me. Please don’t let Donald Trump become the president of the United States. I don’t want our blood to be on your hands.”

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Wednesday, September 14, 2016 6:27 pm @ 6:27 pm

  12. Again, changing the subject. Answer the question, Fred, or I am going to be forced to conclude that you support Trump because you support his racism. The dancing stops here. Shit has gotten real. Which side of history are you gonna be on?

    Comment by Lex — Wednesday, September 14, 2016 7:58 pm @ 7:58 pm

  13. I don’t support anybody’s racism. How about you and okotoenigma ?
    New Poll Finds That Hillary Supporters Are Pretty Racist Too

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Thursday, September 15, 2016 12:22 am @ 12:22 am

  14. I’ll address any other issues after you answer the question: Why do you support Trump?

    Comment by Lex — Thursday, September 15, 2016 7:21 am @ 7:21 am

  15. No you won’t… and because Trump looks Presidential compared with crooked Hillary, the media’s love affair with the Clinton’s not withstanding ( Even though she has not held a Press conference in 286 days )

    And for many of the reasons set forth in the below piece.

    The Conservative Case For Trump

    “As a longstanding Reagan conservative, my initial preference was Ted Cruz; yet I would have voted for any of the candidates over Hillary. I held my nose for McCain and Romney, and hope some at least hold their noses and vote for Trump. However, I’d rather you do more than that, I’d rather you consider actually voting FOR Donald Trump. The case for Trump is a good one.”


    “In January that changed. I found I liked what he said, but not him. Then the earthquake happened: Hillary attacked him as a misogynist and a sexist. Oh no, he’s done for now. But no, he retorted with one tweet, and one paragraph lambasting the Clinton’s prior activities with women, highlighting the Clintons’ hypocrisy. The press reported it. The Clintons skulked away without responding. The press wrung their hands, talked about it, had panels, articles, and in the end Trump won the first victory any GOP representative has had with the Clintons. Her popularity dove, an entire generation was hearing for the first time what had happened. Inconceivable. One tweet, barely one paragraph.

    That shook me to the core. Then someone showed me an article in December where Ted Cruz had stated that the Clintons’ sexual history had no place in his campaign. The light went on. Two weeks later after reassessing my preference, I switched from Cruz to Trump. I still liked Cruz, but I had discovered they were the only two highlighting essentially the same issues. I also recalled that it was Trump who had brought those important issues to the forefront, it was Trump that was taking the grief for being a racist, a bigot, literally all the normal things said about any member of the GOP, and yet, he was consistently climbing in the estimation of the GOP voters, not falling.

    He was doing the unthinkable. He was forming the narrative, and the media was reporting it. He was forming the narrative above the heads of the PC police, something I had not seen since Reagan. I started paying attention to those things he was saying, I started hearing about his rallies. I began reading about how the people surrounding him, people that had worked for him in the past really liked him, and thought he was genuinely brilliant. He was also highlighting the most important issues of our day, all of them:

    • The Wall. He wants to stop illegal immigration.
    • The Islamic threat. He does not want it to come here. He did not want a repeat of Europe’s mistake. He is the only candidate to say what needs to be done: a temporary moratorium on Muslims coming here.
    •Our need to have a great military again. He knows we need that and to give help for our veterans.
    •We need to smash ISIS, and radical Islam everywhere.
    •We need to jump start our economy. Bring jobs, be pro-business, pro-capitalist, better trade agreements.
    •Protect our Second Amendment.
    •Repeal and replace Obamacare.
    •His pro-life conversion is actually believable. He is pro-life.
    •He wants to cut spending, except for the military.
    •He wants to make America strong, respected, and for us to be proudly patriotic once again.
    •He is against common core, and wants locally controlled education.
    •He is for reducing regulation and the scope of the federal government.
    •There are lots more good and conservative policies, but this is enough to say for now.

    Notice those encompass two things: They highlight the most important issues of our day, and they encompass the three-legged stool of Ronald Reagan. These are issues most conservatives like.

    The first two are the most important of our day. We have to stop our country from being overwhelmed by illegals, and we have to win the war with Islamists, culturally here, and by defeating Islamists everywhere else. Without these two there will never be a conservative movement worth anything, let alone a country.

    His other issues are icing on the cake. They are a conservative wish list.

    One last thing, the reason a lot of people don’t like him: That in-your-face, seemingly out of control, nasty, over the top, attacking, unfair campaign style. You may not like it (sometimes I hated it), you may not like what he did to some of our candidates (many times I hated it), but understand this: It’s why he will beat Hillary, or any other candidate the Democratic Party puts in her place. It’s a strength. He knows how to win. He will win, which means we can work on the agenda above.

    Finally: When he wins, he will have to implement the agenda; we need someone who has that same strength to take the barbs that will be flung by the democrat/media complex (and our GOP sellouts). The new (R) President will need to be strong; they will try to destroy him every day. He will need to be able to form a narrative about the media, he will need to handle the PC police, and he will need to be resolute.

    That’s Donald Trump.”

    I trust that is an answer, albeit one in which you find no merit

    Deplorably Yours,

    Fred Gregory

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Thursday, September 15, 2016 8:47 pm @ 8:47 pm

  16. This “argument” is shot through with both factual inaccuracies and tonal dissonance. Put another way, even you don’t believe what you’re saying here. You’re voting for Trump because his racism and sexism speak to you and for you, and you’re just ashamed to say it. After 40 years of listening to people talk for a living, I have a pretty fair idea when someone’s bullshitting me. Your argument reeks of bullshit. Own your prejudices, Fred. At least have the guts to do that.

    Comment by Lex — Thursday, September 15, 2016 10:35 pm @ 10:35 pm

  17. As the former token ” RINO ” at the N&R your slobbering defense of the Clinton’s 30 year track record of sleaze makes sense. They are as Ham Jordan, their own former ally called them … ” Grifters ” and you my friend with your personal insults sound like Keith Olberman.

    Arecord of over the top hyperbole

    ( Substitute racist for Nazi )

    “10) FOX News Security Are Just Like Nazis! – March 14, 2006

    Apparently [callers to Bill O’Reilly’s radio show who mentioned my name on air were told] that FOX security would then contact the local authorities . . . And two or three of these people who did call up and mention my name actually got phone calls from FOX security. Which is, you know, fascinating if, you know, we‘re living in, say, Nazi Germany, it‘s a good idea[.] – Colbert Report

    9) Bill O’Reilly Is Just Like A Nazi! – July 22, 2006

    At a meeting of television critics, Olbermann jokingly(?) held a paper cut out of O’Reilly’s face over his own face and flashed the Nazi salute, attempting to imply that O’Reilly sympathizes with Nazis.

    8) Kenneth Starr Is Just Like A Nazi! – August 18, 1998

    Facially, it finally dawned on me that the person Ken Starr has reminded me of all this time was Heinrich Himmler, including the glasses. –Quoted from The Big Show with Keith Olbermann

    7) Opponents Of The Ground Zero Mosque Might One Day Be Just Like Nazis! – August 16, 2010

    ‘They came first for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up because I was not a communist . . . .’ Pastor Martin Niemoller‘s words are well known . . . . Niemoller survived the death camps. In quoting him, I make no direct comparison between the attempts to suppress the building of a Muslim religious center in downtown Manhattan, and the unimaginable nightmare of the Holocaust. Such a comparison is ludicrous. At least it is, now. –MSNBC Transcript

    6) President George W. Bush Is Just Like Nazi-Appeaser Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain! – August 7, 2006

    On August 4, 1939, the prime minister of Great Britain, Neville Chamberlain, adjourned the British parliament and ordered it reconvened on October 1. He went on vacation. Eighteen days later, the Russians and Germans signed a nonaggression pact, removing the last obstacle to the Nazis rolling through Europe. . . . Chamberlain was on vacation. World War II started nine days later. . . . [T]here barely is or barely isn‘t a civil war in Iraq, and the intensity of the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah continues to spiral upwards. But President Bush, right on time, started his vacation today. –MSNBC Transcript

    5) On Second Thought, The Bush Administration Is Just Like Nazi Germany! – July 18, 2007

    After the Germans lost the First World War, it was the ‘back-stabbers and profiteers’ at home, on whose lives the National Socialists rose to prominence in the succeeding decades and whose accused membership eventually wound up in torture chambers and death camps. . . . And now Mr. Bush, you have picked out your own . . . ‘profiteer’ — your own scapegoat [Senator Hillary Clinton and anyone who publicly discusses potentially withdrawing troops from Iraq]. –MSNBC Transcript

    4) Did I Mention President Bush Is Just Like A Nazi! – January 31, 2008

    Now [extending immunity from lawsuits for telecom companies who comply with government requests for information on suspected terrorists] begins to look like the bureaucrats of the Third Reich trying to protect the Krupp Family industrial giants by literally re-writing the laws for their benefit. And we know how that turned out: Alfried Krupp and eleven of his directors were convicted of War Crimes at Nuremburg. –MSNBC Transcript

    3) Attorney Floyd Abrams [Mediaite contributor/dad] Is Just Like A Nazi Collaborator! – January 21, 2010

    Floyd Abrams, who has spent his life defending American freedoms, especially freedom of speech. Apparently this life was spent this way in order to guarantee that when it really counted, he could help the corporations destroy free speech. . . . He will go down in the history books as the Quisling of freedom of speech in this country. –MSNBC Transcript

    2) Anyone Who Agrees O’Reilly Belongs In Nazi Germany Is The “Best Person In The World!” – August 6, 2009

    [Quoting Dr. Warren Hern, late-term abortion provider] ‘Bill O’Reilly is a disgrace to American society. . . . O’Reilly is a fascist and would fit right in Nazi Germany, as far as I’m concerned.’ There it is. Bill O’Reilly will never understand that the people who agreed with him on Tiller the baby killer . . . use bullets and bombs and he, O’Reilly, has voluntarily associated himself with and encouraged them.

    1) Democrats Are Just Like Chamberlain For Making A Deal With Those Nazi-Like Republicans! – May 23, 2007

    That’s what [a compromise with President Bush on funding for the continuation of the Iraq war] is for the Democrats, isn’t it? Their ‘Neville Chamberlain moment’ before the Second World War. –MSNBC Transcript

    As a result of Olbermann’s frequent Nazi mentions, viewers may already be numb to the harm, but that certainly doesn’t make it right. Olbermann himself recognizes that when others play the Nazi card it is worthy of denunciation (and “Worst Person in the World” distinction). Instead of concluding Olbermann is merely a hypocrite and move on, consider this attempt to shed light on Olbermann’s own Nazi-addiction as an intervention. The aim is to eliminate extraneous Nazi references from the national discourse, and if Olbermann can realize he has a problem, then all of us would be well along towards achieving that goal.”

    Wallow in your own bullshit, Lex.

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Friday, September 16, 2016 2:04 am @ 2:04 am

  18. Once again, Fred, you’re changing the subject. You’re an accomplished enough writer that if you were capable of defending Trump in non-bigoted terms IN YOUR OWN WORDS, you’d have done it by now. You haven’t done it because you can’t — because you don’t feel it. Instead of writing what you actually feel, you’ve reached instead for long quotes from other people because writing what you really feel would be too embarrassing. The problem isn’t that I don’t believe what you’ve said, it’s that you don’t believe it. And I suggest you ask yourself why, because I’m not the one wallowing in bullshit here. Lie to me if you like, but don’t lie to yourself.

    Comment by Lex — Friday, September 16, 2016 7:33 am @ 7:33 am

  19. Alright you win. I am voting for Gary Johnson. After all he knows that Aleppo is the 6th Marx brother

    Comment by Fred Gregory — Friday, September 16, 2016 1:27 pm @ 1:27 pm

  20. […] of the problem can be found in the news media’s problems in covering Donald Trump, which I addressed earlier this week, and I’ll have more to say on that in a bit. But let me start with the […]

    Pingback by Blog on the Run: Reloaded — Saturday, September 17, 2016 2:46 pm @ 2:46 pm

  21. […] of the problem can be found in the news media’s problems in covering Donald Trump, which I addressed earlier this week, and I’ll have more to say on that in a bit. But let me start with the […]

    Pingback by | Greensboro 101 — Saturday, September 17, 2016 3:09 pm @ 3:09 pm

  22. […] of the problem can be found in the news media’s problems in covering Donald Trump, which I addressed earlier this week, and I’ll have more to say on that in a bit. But let me start with the […]

    Pingback by The press is lying, but so are the voters | Blog on the Run: Reloaded — Saturday, September 17, 2016 3:55 pm @ 3:55 pm

  23. […] of the problem can be found in the news media’s problems in covering Donald Trump, which I addressed earlier this week, and I’ll have more to say on that in a bit. But let me start with the […]

    Pingback by The press is lying, but so are the voters | Greensboro 101 — Saturday, September 17, 2016 4:09 pm @ 4:09 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: