Liberals Opposed to Expanding Costly Afghan War Apparently Love Terrorists
A. THE SOURCE
1. Don’t waste your time here.
B. THE TEASE
2. “People on the left” = pollster / political consultant Frank Luntz, BuzzFeed deputy news director Tom Namako, BuzzFeed foreign and national security editor Miriam Elder, actress Grace Parra, and Washington Post staff writer Tom McKay — clearly a “who’s who” of the liberal elite.
3. “Unmasked” is conservatives’ new favorite word, because it’s the term used to describe the routine and entirely proper identification of American citizens incidentally caught up in legally authorized surveillance that President Trump’s defenders believe somehow excuses his election campaign’s treasonous collusion with Russia.
4. So, just to be clear, The Federalist Papers is not speaking figuratively here — FP asserts that Luntz, Namako, Elder, Parra, and McKay literally support terrorists. And yet, incredibly, they all still have stable, well-paying jobs. The U.S. economy must be in better shape than we thought.
5. Unlike that wuss Obama, President Trump had the guts to pick up the phone when someone from the Pentagon called to report that U.S. military commanders decided without previously consulting him to drop the “Mother Of All Bombs” on a bunch of caves in Afghanistan.
6. “Bombing the mess out of ISIS” = killing three dozen ISIS fighters. Guess it wasn’t that big a mess.
7. Yes, it’s important to share this with as many people as possibly. English is hard; blowing things up is easy.
8. We’ve always wondered what liberals are REALLY like. When we close our eyes and try to visualize them, all we see is Amy Schumer cutting her toenails.
C. THE IMAGE
9. MOAB device, painted orange in honor of our new president.
10. Not Afghanistan.
11. President Trump, looking like he’s been punched in the face by Amy Schumer.
D. THE HEADLINE
12. It’s about time liberals came clean about their pro-terrorist sympathies. Now maybe they can admit that climate change is a hoax and that poor people don’t deserve health care.
13. Putting aside the fact that not even the most die-hard Trump supporters think ISIS was “devastated” by the MOAB media stunt, let’s examine how “the libs” ostensibly expressed their love for terrorists in response (via Twitter, naturally). As cited in the linked article, Frank Luntz stated, “I never expected to see so much opposition to bombing ISIS.” (Notably, Luntz did not say that he was opposed to bombing ISIS). Tom Namako asked, “Why did we use this massive bomb? Was anyone injured who was not an intended target? Why does this information need to be leaked out?” Namako’s BuzzFeed colleague, Miriam Elder, churlishly replied, “Why are you asking these pesky questions instead of Worshiping The Bomb, Tom?” Grace Parra opined that the prior U.S. strike on Syria was “a gateway drug for Trump.” And Tom McKay exclaimed (presumably with tongue in cheek), “We are all going to die.” No offense to ISIS, but it really needs to work on its fan club.
E. THE NUDGE
14. Calling something “another successful job” implies that there has been a prior successful job. We’ll wait for Sean Spicer to check on that and get back to us. In the meantime, we’ll simply observe that President Trump’s post-approved cave obliteration was such a success in destroying ISIS that the Pentagon now believes it might need to send several thousand more troops to Afghanistan to destroy ISIS. The libs sure aren’t going to like that — but what do you expect?
Pandering 7/10 • Idiocy 7/10
Banality 6/10 • Vileness 8/10