Because threatening to kill people will make America great again

There were several factors that led me to reject Donald Trump as a possible candidate to support.

Of course one of the factors was the man himself. A belligerent, boorish lout who passes off vile invectives, gutter-speak and juvenile insults as “standing up to political correctness.” An inarticulate buffoon unable to defend his own policy positions in large part because he really doesn’t have any firm positions. A big-government loving crony capitalist with no deeply-held principles. All of this weighed heavily in my decision to reject Trump as a candidate.

But another factor that sealed the deal for me was the despicable behavior of many who virulently support him.

Though I am certain there are people who support Donald Trump who know how to behave like civilized human beings, they seem to be lost in the cacophony of Trump’s more ardent fans.

Not since Barack Obama ran for President in 2008 have I witnessed such vitriol targeting those who oppose a chosen candidate.

But instead of hurling the word “racist” at everyone who disagrees, Trump’s more vocal supporters lob names like “RINO,” “Hack,” and “Elitist.” If that were all they did, I would be able to dismiss it. But they don’t stop there. Conservative women who oppose Trump or simply support another candidate are called every vile name in the book — names one ordinarily only hears coming out of the mouths of hateful Leftist men or in the lyrics to some rap music.

And then there are the threats.

After Dana Loesch appeared on Fox News to explain why she joined the group of writers who made the case against Trump in National Review, she became a target. I follow Dana on Twitter. I’ve seen the disgusting things hurled at her. It is vile, absolutely vile.

Last night, she tweeted this:

I couldn’t believe it. When Leftists altered her NRA ad to show her shooting herself in the head, conservatives rallied to defend her. We were outraged. But now, Trump supporters are doing even worse?

When she tweeted that out last night, this was one of the responses she received:

Dana’s husband Chris is also getting his fair share of threats. Because threatening to kill people will make America great again apparently.

Who knew?

And, yes. When he called out these idiots for threatening to kill him, Trump supporters descended like locusts and began attacking him for being a crybaby, for whining about getting death threats.

You see, Dana and Chris deserve this because they attacked Trump. And nobody can attack Trump.

Just like nobody can attack Obama.

It isn’t political correctness that they oppose. It’s just that they want to determine what is permitted to be said and what is not. They want to be able to make criticism of Trump banned speech. They want to shut down anyone who questions Trump’s sincerity, his past, his own statements. And if you have the gall to actually satirize Trump the same way one would Jeb Bush or John Boehner or Paul Ryan or John Kasich or Chris Christie or anyone else, you are to be attacked. Because political correctness is okay provided that the banned speech is anything negative toward Trump.

And woe be to anyone who does not toe the line. Refusing to hop on board the “Trump Train” means anything used against you is fair game. No insult is too vile. No threat too extreme. No angry response too far over the top.

In a lot of ways, extremist Sharia adherents and these extremist Trump supporters have a lot in common. They both like to issue fatwas against anyone who dare blaspheme against their Prophet. They have their favorite websites where they go to read about the latest blasphemy against their demi-god and then they rush to Twitter and attack whoever it is who dared to defy him.

Behead those TRUMP

For Trump supporters like these, the future must not belong to those who slander the Donald. They will stand with Trump should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.

And any speech that demeans their Prophet must be banned. And those who blaspheme are only asking for whatever vile and despicable thing that comes their way as a result.

They’re only begging for more.

What can you say about a presidential candidate that engenders this kind of support?

This isn’t simply “recognizing” the anger of the people. This is tapping into it, fomenting it, encouraging it and using it for your own ends.

It doesn’t surprise me that a man who cannot control his own base impulses doesn’t care about the hateful impulses of his supporters. In fact, he seems to revel in it.

Consider what happened earlier this week. Though tame by comparison, Trump’s giving voice to a woman calling Ted Cruz a “pussy” is indicative of how Trump uses this hateful and divisive behavior for his own ends. Trump does nothing to curb this behavior. And why should he? Bread and circuses. Keep the crowds good and riled up. He doesn’t just turn a blind eye to it, he gives it validation. He repeated her nasty insult of Cruz for the whole crowd to hear then reveled in the boorish cheers his saying it produced.

Any man who either through tacit approval or direct encouragement promotes this kind of vitriolic and nasty behavior is not a man I want coming anywhere close to the Oval Office.

If we abhor the hatred and division Obama has spawned, how could we possibly be okay with this?

As far as I’m concerned Donald Trump is as unfit to lead this Republic as that felonious cretin Clinton or that bellowing socialist Sanders.

If you like the work at Patriot Retort, please consider contributing

Hit the tip jar DONATE button in the side bar. Even a few bucks can make a world of difference!

Share, share, share

12 thoughts on “Because threatening to kill people will make America great again

  • February 11, 2016 at 2:27 pm

    You’re on a hopeless journey, Dianny, like Diogenes, to find an honest man in politics. Carson was our best hope and the process has pretty much succeeded in crushing him.
    A few thoughts about your posting:
    1. Twitter (and the rest of “social media”) is the bane of courteous intercourse and, in particular, political discourse. Twitter encourages a ubiquitous hooligan culture to run rampant in a society and that’s what we’re seeing with Twitter in all aspects of social interaction, not just politics. If Twitter is the reality of our American universe as it appears to be, then shame on us for submitting to it. I refuse to use Twitter or Facebook or any other of those kinds of applications. Frankly, I think complaining about tweets is about as brainless as complaining about a television program on which you could change the channel — stop using Twitter. There is life without Twitter, televisions, i-phones, etc. [I’ll bet you 90% of Twitter users in America have not read a book in the last year!]
    2. “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.” I’ve never ever had a bad word hurled at me or written about me, no matter how vile it was (and I’ve had plenty in my lifetime), that ever gave me a black eye or a bloody nose. It’s too bad we’ve become so “sensitive” and have forgotten that words speak more about who uses them than they do about at whom they’re aimed. The Eagles song “Get over it” comes to mind.
    3. I would rather have an opponent who confronts me (like a Trump) than a Casca or a Brutus (like Cruz and Rubio) cloaked in perfidy. The GOP was tooting their horn — “Oh, look what a great big field of great candidates to choose from” — and what we really had was overwhelming sleaze: some are just more openly sleazy than others.

    • February 11, 2016 at 2:46 pm

      Correct. Words can’t hurt me. You may call me brainless, but as someone with an IQ of 147, I shrug it off. You may tell me to “get over it,” but what you fail to acknowledge is this vile behavior is not limited to social media. The woman who shouted that Cruz is a pussy was not tweeting it out, she was standing live and in person at a Trump rally. And rather than simply let it go and shrug it off, Trump decided to repeat it live and on camera. Though there may be no honest men in politics, I fail to see how that should be a reason for me to support a dishonest and putrid man like Trump. Do all politicians lie? Yes. Do all politicians behave like untrained apes encouraging their devoted flock to storm the very pillars of decency and morality that made this the greatest nation on earth in an effort to drag us into the gutter? No they do not. I do not excuse this behavior from the pulpit of Jeremiah Wright. And I do not excuse it from the rally podium of Donald J. Trump.

      • February 21, 2016 at 4:36 pm

        What a bunch of sanctimonious, limp-wrist freaks. “I won’t vote for Trump, he’s rude!” “I don’t like the way he combs his hair!” “He’s not a ‘true’ conservative.” Get past your trivial gripes. Cruz first … Trump next.

  • February 11, 2016 at 4:55 pm

    I agree with you on the particular incident you’re referring to regarding that woman’s expression…and Trump knew what he was doing when he repeated it — shame on him. What I consider “brainless,” and I said so specifically in my comment, is railing against tweets. I stand by my “Get over it” comment — words are just words (we don’t need speech police like the UK), so remember bad words speak to the character of the speaker not to the receiver. And I understand your attitude toward Trump…as a Carson supporter, to hear Trump say some of the things he does makes my skin crawl. What I’m unclear about is where you draw your line on whom to support. For example, “a dishonest and putrid man,” if he was just dishonest but not putrid, does he warrant your support? Would I like honesty and decency and morality to reign? You bet; that’s why I support Carson — he’s the nearest to possessing those qualities where the other candidates fail miserably. But I’m also a realist in knowing that we are not going to get “Mr Smith Goes to Washington.” Because I like a position of Rubio’s doesn’t mean I’m all-in for an insincere candidate. Because I don’t like Cruz’s deceit, doesn’t mean I’m all-against some of his ideas. Because I think Trump is a pompous ass, doesn’t mean there aren’t things he says that I like. All-or-nothing doesn’t seem to me to be a winning proposition, which is why, when you described in an earlier post that you may have to hold your nose when voting this year, I will be in a booth next to you doing the same thing. Sadly, this is where our society has devolved after 60 years of a sinister liberal education system, a destructive technology dependency, a complicit media, and a deaf-and-blind religious sector. I’m too old to believe things will change in my lifetime, but I’m hoping for at least a first step in November. Who can best determine what that step must be and how to make it happen will get my vote regardless of the letter after his name or the behavior of his supporters.

    • February 11, 2016 at 5:30 pm

      I appreciate your clarification. You and I agree on many things, Geoduck and I have always appreciated your honest debate. With regard to these threatening tweets on social media, permit me to venture into the hypothetical. Let’s say a Black Lives Matter activist tweeted out a threat to kill someone. Should we simply ignore it and say, “Oh, well. Words can’t hurt you.” It’s one thing to have someone hurl insults and invectives at you. Heaven knows I’ve had plenty hurled at me (before Trump entered the race mostly from vile little Leftists, but Donald changed that). It doesn’t silence me nor do I curl up in the corner eating my own hair out of fear. But hurling insults and making threats are not the same thing by any stretch of the imagination. Consider the story from last night about the guy who tweeted out a picture of a young woman with a Trump bumper sticker on her computer. He offered to smash her computer if the picture got enough retweets. They did in fact end up in a physical altercation. This wasn’t just on social media, but it was violence fueled by social media. Should Dana Loesch or Chris Loesch really shrug off physical threats of rape or murder? Should we as decent people not react in outrage at this sort of descent into madness? My family lived in Germany in the 1930s and 1940s. Now, I’m not saying Trump is Hitler. That is not my point. But when people are whipped up into an angry lather by any demagogue, the more unstable elements can see it as a tacit approval for acting on these calls for violence. I saw it in 2008 on election day when angry people carrying plywood signs with Obama’s face on them terrorized the people going in and coming out of my polling place — screaming in our faces, brandishing their plywood signs as if they wanted to hit us with them. These were how some people reacted to the likely victory of their own candidate. Hateful tweets filled with invectives I have come to expect. But when hateful tweets become overt threats, I believe I have reason to grow concerned.

  • February 11, 2016 at 5:57 pm

    So many reasons to reject Trump. So few sources who tell us specific reasons why we should support someone else.

    I look forward to the nomination, whoever it is, so this infighting can stop. It disgusts me, and it was reason #4, of 5, why I decided to vote for Trump in the primaries.

    • February 11, 2016 at 6:13 pm

      I think Conservative Review has done an excellent job vetting the candidates and making the case for Ted Cruz. Their breakdown of each candidates’ positions is pretty exhaustive.

  • February 11, 2016 at 6:48 pm

    I don’t utterly dismiss words — we have laws on using words in libelous or slanderous ways for good reason. It’s just that most nasty tweets seem nothing more than keyboard bravado. You’re right, threatening tweets are ugly and appear menacing; but my old habit is to assess the ground truth before determining my next course of action. I believe that in Obama’s fundamental transformation of America, silky smooth talk is just as potentially dangerous as bombastic talk. It seems within a society of victims, violence doesn’t really need much of a push to come at you. Like you, I fully believe in providing for my own self-defense and even at age 70, I have little fear in being able to protect myself from people who have threatened me. — Thank our Founding Fathers for the 2nd Amendment!
    Enjoyed this discussion a lot — thanks for the brain exercise. I tell my wife eating more fish during Lent is also good for the brain — she tells me if that’s true that I should eat a whale!

  • February 12, 2016 at 9:32 am

    Dianny, not only does Trump engender the vile rhetoric hurled at his critics, he encourages it. When Trump says he could could shoot someone in the middle of the street and not lose the support of his fans, he gives them his blessing that if nothing he does will cost him their devotion, then nothing they do will cost them his.

  • February 12, 2016 at 10:34 am

    people are free to say things on internet boards and twitter that they would NEVER THINK about saying to someones face. also, the sane trump supporters are just as ashamed of these loons as anyone else. this is why trump won’t be elected; the whole scene is just too reminiscent of 1939

  • February 12, 2016 at 1:16 pm

    Couldn’t these tweets be from Hillary supporters and then the blame goes on Trump supporters? And it can also happen the other way around – the same way most times a rope as a noose is left on a tree, or a racist comment on a wall – and whites are blamed and the stories all over news etc… and the people caught were a black person using it so blame is attributed to others.

    that’s the problem with putting credence in anonymous comments, forums, tweets etc… to accept them as true or credible is a waste of ones time. Can Loesch prove they are Trump supporters? She should just ignore this garbage – but hey she (and others) can use if for their agenda and own PR/facetime on TV – what they all LOVE anyways.

Comments are closed.