Truth Has a Liberal Bent and Other Fantasy Stories

“Truth has a liberal bent.”

If you’re like me, and you believe the left has to constantly lie in order to survive, then you’ll know what a crock of hooey this particular progressive trope is.

The Democrats and the left in general brand themselves as the “party of science.” Conservatives, especially Christian conservatives, are anti-science while liberals embrace only fact based, reason driven arguments. That’s their claim, anyway.

But is it true? Off the top of my head, let’s look at a few reasoned, fact-driven arguments of the left:

Concealed carry will lead to wild west shoot outs.

Banning “assault weapons” will eliminate mass murder.

“Hands up, don’t shoot” actually happened.

Trump is Hitler and hired Russian hookers to pee on a bed Obama slept in.

Obamacare was a great success.

All arguments made by the left which are not backed up by a scrap of evidence or even a rational argument. Yet they are endlessly amplified through the left-o-sphere and accepted as gospel.

The man himself, Robert Reich. Image Source: huffingtonpost.com

No greater example of the anti-reason bent of the left is a recent column by Robert Reich. Originally published on his blog, it has now been picked up by Newsweek magazine and republished nationally. Or as nationally as their website gets.

The gist of Mr. Reich’s argument? That those violent protestors at Berkley who shut down a speech by Milo Yiannopolos were actually plants bought and paid for by Breitbart News in order to gin up headlines and to give Trump an excuse to cut off federal funds to college campuses which deny free speech rights. Thankfully, the ancient reptile civilization buried under the south pole was left out of this one.

His evidence? The facts upon which his argument, an argument widely embraced by many on the left, is based?

None. Nada. Zip. Zed.

Oh, sure, he connects a few sinister dots concerning articles published in Breitbart and how they relate to a tweet the President sent out or some crap like that.

But hard evidence? Something simple, like say a donation from a conservative group to the group who sponsored these thugs? Absent.

There is a money trail leading back to George Soros, but since that’s unhelpful, he ignores it.

WTO protests 1999 Image Source: indypendent.org

Reich never bothers to mention the same tactics and types of protests have been going on since the 1980s in Europe and America. We saw similar tactics at the 1999 WTO meet up in Seattle, the 2010 G-20 summit, the 2012 Democratic Convention. Black Bloc protestors committed all sorts of mayhem during the Occupy Wall Street movement, during the Ferguson riots, and were present at Trump’s inauguration smashing windows and setting limousines on fire. Were they too sent by Breitbart? Or were those part of the Matt Drudge mercenary army?

Yet despite the fact that these protestors (or people using their tactics) have been active for over 30 years, that every single one of Milo’s speeches has been met with fierce sometimes violent protests, we’re supposed to believe that this time it was right wing plants making all the trouble. Right wing plants who got so into their role as anarchists that they beat a Trump supporter unconscious.

Facts must be faced. This has all the credibility of numerous attempts to link mass shootings to the Tea Party. There is no validity to Mr. Reich’s argument. None at all. He has not a scrap of evidence to base his accusations on, yet that didn’t stop a major news outlet from running with his story.

Which is especially odd since Newsweek itself published a glowing endorsement of the protests just a few days earlier:

http://www.newsweek.com/milo-yiannopoulos-berkeley-protests-greet-right-wing-provocateur-551461

Hmmm. No mention of right-wing plants, just a sickening celebration of violence and hatred being employed in the suppression of free speech.

The bright side? Mr. Reich at least acknowledges how awful this violence was. He knows it’s bad, he knows how bad it makes the protestors look, so he has to find a way to blame it on the other guy.

In a perverse way, that’s a bright spot. Because usually the media pretends these things never happened, or do their best to downplay it. Or sing the praises of Milo getting “schooled” in national publications, pretending that violence and anarchy are somehow cool.

So Reich gets one thing right. These weren’t protestors, they were thugs. But they are products of the left and Reich is having a hard time dealing with that.

So hard, he’s frankly gone a little barmy.

* * *
Like what you read here? Then consider supporting the author. No, not a donation, I’m not a parasite. Just consider buying my novel and making a mutually beneficial economic transaction.

The book, WAYPOINT, published by fellow patriots at Roots Digital Media. It’s a nifty little thriller which NYT bestselling author Patrick Robinson (co-author of “Lone Survivor”) calls “Absolutely gripping. WAYPOINT is tense, twisting and fast-paced. Doesn’t let up until the final page is turned.”

Matthew Howe

College liberal turned conservative once he started paying taxes, Matthew has been active in the gun-rights and conservative movement for years. The author of the thriller Waypoint, (available on Amazon) he’s proud to live in the one county in downstate New York which went for Trump by 17 points.

About the Author

Matthew Howe
Matthew Howe
College liberal turned conservative once he started paying taxes, Matthew has been active in the gun-rights and conservative movement for years. The author of the thriller Waypoint, (available on Amazon) he's proud to live in the one county in downstate New York which went for Trump by 17 points.

3 Comments on "Truth Has a Liberal Bent and Other Fantasy Stories"

  1. It’s actually very complicated in this full of activity life
    to listen news on Television, therefore I simply
    use web for that purpose, and take the newest news.

  2. If a news organization is actually left-leaning, or if conservatives suspect it of being left-leaning, news stories can’t be trusted, and every fact mentioned now comes up for question. Conservative leaders and others have darker motives though, and attacking critics for having liberal bias is meant to discredit them, and also to discredit what could otherwise be legitimate criticisms.

    • True, some may have darker motives, but when conservatives are routinely characterized as racist, homophobe, islamophobe, etc… With little or no justification, simply because they oppose the liberal left’s agenda. How do you separate the bias from the legitimate criticism? In the short attention span society of today, public opinion is easily swayed by simple repetition of baseless accusations. Fewer and fewer people stay tuned in long enough to get to the “justification” of the accusations, IF any such justification even exists. The “left-leaning” bias isn’t just baseless accusations either. The bias also presents itself in something as simple as the stories selected for coverage and focus of attention. There are literally millions of potentially newsworthy stories going on daily. Do you think it is a coincidence that every major news outlet covers virtually the same stories every day? Sure there are major news stories that are deserving of near universal coverage, but not virtually every story, every day. There is as much, if not more bias in what is NOT reported as there is in what is reported and how it’s reported.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*