HuffPo: Violence against Trump okay, violence against Clinton and Obama, not so much
06/13/2016 / By JD Heyes / Comments
HuffPo: Violence against Trump okay, violence against Clinton and Obama, not so much

( It should not surprise anyone that the Huffington Post, which slants its media coverage so far to the Left it is amazing the online news site’s management doesn’t require all in-house correspondents to dress like Mao, is against Donald J. Trump for president.

It should also not surprise anyone that this same “news” organization is condoning violence against Trump’s supporters, even if they are older Americans, if they are defenseless women, and if they are outnumbered five- and 10-to-1. Because after all, that’s what cowards and hypocrites do: They condone the incomprehensible and unforgivable.

A piece by “media studies scholar” Jesse Benn, titled, “Sorry Liberals, A Violent Response to Trump Is as Logical As Any,” not only excuses the vicious acts of violence directed at supporters of a presidential contender with whom they disagree, it justifies it as someone a natural reaction to all of the negative that Trump is presumed to be. Of course, those negatives have been created and exacerbated by Lefties like Benn, but that’s par for the course.

The rise of Donald Trump has exposed the frightening underbelly of America’s foulest tendencies. Our racism, nativism, xenophobia, misogyny, Islamophobia, ableism, and propensity toward authoritarianism have been laid bare. Reactions from those who stand opposed to these manifestations of oppression have varied from calm condemnation and routine peaceful protests, to blockades of roads and borderline riotous outbursts, including sporadic violence in various cities. This isn’t a coincidence.


Benn goes on, sticking to the Left-wing talking point and narrative that Trump is “inciting violence” simply by existing, by campaigning, by trying to win the presidency – the same thing that Barack Obama has done twice now, and Hillary Clinton (and without similar acts of violence at their campaign events, despite some pretty vehement opposition to his candidacy).

The “evidence” that Trump is doing the inciting? A New York Times video compilation of all the times Trump as called for violence (when in reality Trump has always reacted to violence that was directed at him first).

But as you can tell from Benn’s description of how crappy he thinks America (and Americans) are – you know, we’re xenophobes, we hate gays, all whites are racist, we’re nativists who don’t give a hoot about other peoples or countries – his view of “Trump” and “violence” is obviously skewed. So it won’t matter how logical any rebuttal to his nonsensical assertions is, the Kool-Aid drinkers like him and those who think like he does are not going to change their minds one iota.

Rational people, however, know better. In fact, they instinctively know two things.

One, Trump, by the mere act of campaigning, is not responsible for “inciting” violence anymore than any other candidate for higher office because showing up does not count as “inciting” – and 2) that he has as much right to campaign for the presidency with the expectation that he can do so in peace as the other candidate(s). Yet those two conditions are not being afforded to him. Instead, we get self-anointed pinheads like this Benn who make general proclamations about Trump and American society in general as though they were true and everyone ought to already know it, and then blame a candidate for sabotaging his own campaign events. It doesn’t get much more absurd than that.

Trump is not responsible for the protesters who make conscious decisions – or are paid, according to some reports – to show up at his events and taunt, pummel and terrorize his supporters, and to claim that he is makes about as much sense as putting Michelle Obama in charge of the nation’s school lunch programs.

Like Che and Mao and Stalin and Lenin before him, Benn justifies the use of violence against political opponents as though it is the proper way for a democracy to behave. But violence is the tool of the oppressor, the authoritarian, not the lover of liberty. To pretend that is what he is promoting is delusional and, frankly, sick.

If the shoe is suddenly put on the other foot and, say, Bernie Sanders supporters or even Trump supporters crash Hillary’s coronation later this summer, we’ll be on the lookout to see if Benn will justify that violence as well. We’re betting he will find some jacked up reason not to.


Submit a correction >>


This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author
Get Our Free Email Newsletter
Get independent news alerts on natural cures, food lab tests, cannabis medicine, science, robotics, drones, privacy and more.
Your privacy is protected. Subscription confirmation required.

Get the world's best independent media newsletter delivered straight to your inbox.

By continuing to browse our site you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.