New York Slime slams Bernie Bros as Deplorable

After months of strenuously dis-reporting on Bernie Sanders' campaign and ignoring his supporters in much the way that it ignores the homeless and anyone else not within the palace gates, the New York Slime finally did an “in depth” report on the movement.   In its frenzy and its panic it could think of nothing better than to call Bernie supporters *deplorable.*

What is the world coming to!?  Bernie Bros have dared to push-back against the corporate Democrat narrative!

As is usual with gutter hit jobs, the Slime's article is short on facts and long on labeling.  Typical are lines like

“Some progressive activists who declined to back Mr. Sanders have begun traveling with private security after incurring on line harassment.”

Well now... When I was a cub reporter FOUR WORDS were drilled into me: who, what, when, how.   It seems that the Slime's polemicists have forgotten them

Some progressives... who? how many?  In logic, “some” means “one or more but at least one.”  

Harassment.... when? how?   Anything can be labelled anything... this is the chief smear tactic of sophists and demagogues.  A real reporter would abide, “Just the facts m'am”

Further down in the article we are told that “former Senator Barbara Boxer of California, a Clinton supporter who had been at the Nevada convention said she worried for her safety after being booed off stage.”

Is that the “some” progressive the Slime had in mind?  Being booed is a threat?  Maybe the Slime ought to do an article on Boxer's narcissistic paranoia?  Since when is booing not permitted in a public forum in a democracy?

Since whenever it is directed at the self-annointed sacrosanct of the corporate democrat elite.

According to the Slime, “Sanders fans were sharing details of Ms. Harris' recent fund raising swing in the Hamptons with Hillry Clinton donors.” 

Awh...it's really unbelievable the depths to which these Berni Bros will sink!

Worse! Worse!  Senator Sanders himself “elevated” the message by himself saying that “I don't go to the Hamptons to raise money from billionaires.”

Shameless!  Pure shamelessness to point out that Harris was a willing whore of the wealthy elite just as she was a chief prosecutor in a justice system designed to be both oppressive and sadistic, while giving a pass to fraudulent bankers.

No doubt fearful that this kind of arrogance by itself would be seen for what it is, the Slime wrapped its gutter tactics in the unassailable mantel of Feminst Identity.... which, in the United States today, serves the same function as La Santa Virgen del Pilar in Spain.  Wanna get ripped to pieces?  Attack either.

"Several well-known feminist writers said they had received death threats...."

Not nice.... but nicer still would be to know what was actually said and in what circumstances.   As the United States Supreme Court has recognized a statement which is facially a threat can be legitimate and legal rhetorical hyperbole. (Watts v. United States, 394 U.S. 705 (1969).)   Back in 1969, when Boxer herself was either at Woodstock or protesting the war,  a draft protestor publicly stated “I am not going. If they ever make me carry a rifle the first man I want to get in my sights is L.B.J. . .”  The Supreme Court held that, in context, the statement was not a criminal threat.  “The language of the political arena ... is often vituperative, abusive, and inexact.” In order to objectively qualify as an illegal “threat”  the words spoken must state a threat, must be intended as a threat and must be capable of being realized in the circumstances. A person's neurotic over-reaction does not ipso facto turn something into a threat.    Without being told what was allegedly said, it is not possible to form an opinion as to whether these feminists writers were seriously threatened or not.

"A Portland lawyer saw her business rating tumble on an online review site after tussling with Sanders supporters on Twitter."

Uh huh.  Post hoc ergo propter hoc, right? 

Let's just put the shoe on the other foot... or the fork in the other mouth.  Would the pro-LGBTQ bastion of political correctness be aghast and outraged if a certain baker saw his “ratings” tumble after exercising his First Amendment Rights not to bake a cake?   Of course not.  They would gleeful cheer his bankruptcy were it to happen.  So then....

Since when are certain people immunized from the consequences of their publicly stated opinions?   Ah ha... when they are (a) feminists, (b) corporate centrists, (c) Hillary supporters and (d) those whom the Slime has anointed as Sacrosanct.

The Slime can play this card all it wants, it holds water only in an ever shrinking circle of Narcissist Affluent Feminists, who thinking “all politics is personal”  (that's their motto) take everything personally.

Last but not least, the Slime's screed notes that “for some perceived Sanders critics, there has been mail sent to their home addresses. ... The message is clear: We know where you live.”

No.  The message is whatever was written in the mail.  Since when is it unlawful to send political mail to someone?  Since when do certain people deserve to live in an “off-limits” security bubble that immunizes them from any contact with fellow-citizens.   Is that the kind of Open Society a George Soros would support?   Evidently, for the Slime, there is “open” and then there is “open to a few.”   Par for the course.

Let's get one thing clear.  The New York Times has ever and always been the organ for American Corporate Imperialism.  They are very good at hiding assumptions under a veneer of reporting and very good at varnishing their real agenda under a coating of “humanistic” and “liberal” causes.   They will adhere to a high-minded, disinterested tone so long as things are going their way... but when faced with a real threat, the fangs are bared, the hissing starts and the lashing out begins.

©WCG