As I looked through the morning newspaper, or what today passes as a newspaper, I was struck by the reach of the editors, or whoever it is that passes judgment about what constitutes ‘news’ these days in their daily duties.
The opinions page (of the Journal Sentinel in Milwaukee), where the editorials are found, today had a cartoon by Chan Lowe with attribution to the Tribune Content Agency. The cartoon featured a drawing of Carlos Danger (also known as the husband of Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton’s right-hand gal) looking at his smartphone and the heading was ‘Donald Trump Begins Fleshing Out His Potential Cabinet.’ The nameplate on the desk pictured has the following: Carlos Danger: secretary of online outreach. That, of course, is a reference to Huma’s husband’s problem of sending nude photos of himself to others. I believe that is referred to as ‘sexting’ in some circles.
So, we have a liberal person who is married to Hillary’s right-hand person, and who has been revealed more than once as a degenerate, pictured as a member-to-be of ‘President’ Donald Trump’s cabinet. Where-oh-where is the connection other than in Mr. Lowe’s liberal mind? How could he have conjured up the degenerate who is a decided liberal actually being thought of as a member of the future President’s cabinet?
This man is also the husband, but maybe not for long, of the newest person on the FBI list with something beyond 600,000 Hillary Clinton e-mails on her personal computer(s) that are now being sifted and sorted by the FBI while Hillary Clinton makes like there is no “there-there” with the fake smile on her face and with her teeth tightly clenched.
So, against that backdrop, how in the world did this cartoonist think he could tie a problem from Hillary-land to Donald Trump by insinuating that Trump would think of this pervert as a member of his cabinet? A preposterous reach or simply liberal spin aimed at the less intelligent voters yet to cast a ballot?
This situation is useful in describing the place we find ourselves in the world of politics today. We find a very liberal woman who is entitled to be the first female President, as we have all been told ad infinitum, favored by the liberal members of the press, of which there are many, being helped by the press that theoretically is neither liberal nor conservative…but balanced.
This absurdity seems to fit quite well in the ‘Hillary in Wonderland’ story being spun for the low-information voters upon whom her hopes and dreams rest.
BUT, the low-information voter and some very high information voters who glance at this absurdity can be influenced without even being aware this has occurred. That is the real danger of such editorial cartoons. We know there was a political motive behind this artist’s rendition just as there is a political motive behind this blog. My motive is pretty much ‘in your face’ so I don’t think I can be accused of intentionally placing people in danger of doing something they’d not otherwise have done because I misrepresented my position.
This cartoon was cute. But it was devious! It was intentionally devious; this could not have been accidental. It was intended to go way beyond cute. The idea that a purely Democrat problem could be intentionally and less-than-honestly linked to the Republican candidate for President of the United States goes way beyond what I would consider to be reasonable journalistic boundaries.
That it also ran just above a Bill Lueders editorial titled “The truth matters” is more than a little suspect. Mr. Leuders is the associate editor of The Progressive and his column was written for the Progressive Media Project one discovers if one reads the fine print. A liberal newspaper is dangerous. It is especially dangerous when it attempts to pose as something other than what it is and what it has always been intended to be.
The purchase of this newspaper by the USA Today organization will do nothing other than possibly to reinforce the liberal bent. Be careful of what you read; know its intended result. If it isn’t as clear as this blog, be very wary.