Prim anti-Trumpists wail about being "terrified" — evidently forgetting that Trump's predecessors were (less crassly) similar

01 March 2019

Pantywaists' frenzied hysteria

I have written about fraidy-cat douchebags before. I return to that subject today.

This time providing a specific example of how pantywaist-ism prevents us from dealing with genuine problems.

For instance

Democrats and the Deep State delight (daily) in anything that confirms what we already knew about President Trump.

Rather than doing anything honorably useful to oppose the President whom they dislike, they mindlessly prattle their fright into the Cosmos' uncaring wind.

Below is an inadvertent (and probably not personally telling example of this) from Marjorie Cohn.

Cohn is an intelligent attorney. She should (but here representatively does not) know better than to futilely floor-pound her verbalized fists like a scandalized toddler:

Cohen knows what Trump is capable of.

His testimony should terrify us.

Cohen called Trump “a racist,” “a conman” and “a cheat,” who enlisted others to do his dirty work.

“Trump did not directly tell me to lie to Congress. That’s not how he operates.” He “would look me in the eye and tell me there’s no business in Russia and then go out and lie to the American people.”

“In his way, he was telling me to lie,” Cohen testified.

“Lying for Mr. Trump was normalized and no one around him questioned it. In fairness, no one questions it now.”

“Trump is a cheat,” Cohen testified.

“Mr. Trump is a conman."

“Mr. Trump is a racist."

“I fear that if [Trump] loses the election in 2020, there will never be a peaceful transition of power.”

That is the most disturbing thing Cohen said. He knows better than anyone what Trump is capable of.

That's it?

That's the entirety of your indictment, Madame Attorney?

Allow me a rebuttal:

President Trump is exactly what we all knew he was, when an electoral majority in the United States voted him into office.

Are we only now to become "terrified"?

Just because Trump's previous lawyer confirms that the elected Commander in Chief is an arguably bad and petty-minded person?

Counselor Cohn's argument appears to assume that none of the President's predecessors were also lying con-people. Meaning commanders in chief who displayed:

power-lust

unlimited hypocrisy

and

unconstrained appetites for self-enrichment.

Realistically speaking, self-serving mendacity is the minimum requirement for becoming an American president.

What else is new, other than President Trump's crassly uncultured lack of refinement?

His bumbling repulsiveness, I am grateful for. This so, given how easily Presidents Obama and Bush II escaped the tornados of criticism that a just culture would have aimed their way for:

unalloyed lying

deceptive manipulations

egregious mass murders

and

gargantuan hypocrisies.

War criminals and more, they.

Finding Trump to be grossly worse (in practice) than those two, seems a stretch to me.

At least President Trump is open about his autocratically grasping nature.

Pretend-liberals are usually "terrified" of the wrong things

The real problem is not President Trump. It's the grift-oriented American culture that put him, and his equally offensive predecessors, into office.

We are a society that consistently works to benefit those with money and power.

This characteristic comes (always) at the expense of ordinary people. We the Rabble are daily conned into thinking that we are free, in part because we are allowed to vote.

The moral? — We Untermensch seem to have an unquenchable thirst for Establishment propaganda's kool-aid

It doesn't help that packs of (societally unperceptive) anti-Trump fraidy-cats misidentify what and whom we should be afraid of.

Democrats and Deep State are just as much menaces to freedom as President Trump is.

Rather than being terrified — and despite being a "lefty" — I suspect that cradling one's Second Amendment arms might be a better idea. I despise oppressors and pillagers, wherever they originate.

When they come for you, whichever side you are on, I will come to your aid.

In that respect, consider J. D. Tuccille's (essentially Niemöllerian) idea that:

I don't share in our age's deep tribal divisions along political and cultural lines.

The two leading factions of American politics can't stop fighting each other. But if anybody can keep the peace, it may be those of us who can't abide joining either camp.

Some of us dislike them both but are perfectly willing and able to cross the boundaries of culture, lifestyle, and partisanship to socialize and do business.

[M]aybe we individualists will just accidentally find ourselves serving as social glue.

It will be the ultimate irony if the only people bridging divides and holding the country together in the years to come are those of us too ornery to join our countrymen in their mutual loathing.

PeteFree.com

Prim anti-Trumpists wail about being "terrified" — evidently forgetting that Trump's predecessors were (less crassly) similar