Thursday, October 27, 2016

Limited vs. Unlimited Government

Addendum to my previous post: There's another point that's quite important.  WaPo has introduced an idea in this article that will become increasingly common.

Washington Post barely managed to constrain its hysteria over the Malheur decision.  It repeatedly refers to a "circus sideshow" .. that's how they refer to people who read the Constitution and wave American flags.  You'll never hear them say anything like this about Black Lies Matter mobs that incite riots outside courthouses, nor did they ever mock people who demonstrated outside courthouses during same sex marriage cases.  But now, WaPo takes sides and is upset.  The entire piece sneers at opponents of expanded federal authority.  This isn't news reporting, it's propaganda on behalf of an unrestricted's Soviet style "journalism."

Am I exaggerating?  I don't think so.  The media used to refer to people like the defendants as "anti-government," as if they wished to abolish all government, something which was inaccurate but at least arguably might be problematic.  But now the term of opprobrium is "limited government activist."  (See the caption in the photos.)  "Enemy: one who believes in 'limited government' and works for it."  For a long time we've known that both the radical left and progressives refuse to acknowledge any limits to the authority of government. We will see increasing use of this "pejorative" in the near future.

Fine.  Now the battle lines will be clear.

Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?