Connect with us

Fake News Media

Slate Problems: Is Buttigieg’s ‘Gayness’ Diverse Enough?

He’s a white male. But he’s also gay. Slate pondered Buttigieg’s diversity street cred.

Published

on

As South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg’s star power rises in the Democratic Party’s 2020 presidential field, left-wing blog Slate is asking the tough questions about the 37-year-old candidate.

“Is Pete Buttigieg Just Another White Male Candidate, or Does His Gayness Count as Diversity?” said a headline by Slate’s Christina Cauterucci.

While the political left races to the “progressive” bottom, the factions into which it has divided itself are now beginning to war against each other, as demonstrated by Slate’s piece.

Trending: REJECTED: Marjorie Taylor Greene Stops Cori Bush’s Amendment to Allow Violent Convicted Felons to Vote

“But with momentum comes backlash, currently in the form of frustration that the well-qualified female and black candidates in the race are getting shoved aside for another white guy,” the piece said.

take our poll - story continues below

POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024?

  • POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Slate cited a couple commentators who went to battle on Twitter over the “white guy.”

“Mayor Pete seems head-and-shoulders smarter than the other candidates running, and IMO that should count for quite a lot,” self-described “tax policy guy” Alan Cole said.

https://twitter.com/AlanMCole/status/1109854396056326144

Writer Jill Filipovic fired back, suggesting that Cole was a sexist.

“Warren, who taught at Harvard, was one of the most well-regarded law professors in the country and one of the most intelligent people to serve in the senate, but we don’t politically reward, let alone even identify, that kind of fierce intelligence in women (esp older women).” she said.

https://twitter.com/JillFilipovic/status/1110184365471002625

Cauterucci then described the existential crisis of a party that, wrapped up in identity politics, has lost completely lost sight electing a presidential candidate based on merit:

These aren’t just random tweets; the conversation is at the heart of a broader debate on the left about identity and representation. After Democrats failed to win what looked like an easy general election for the country’s first major-party female presidential nominee in 2016, some progressives worried that Democratic voters would be too spooked—or too sexist—to nominate a woman again. Maybe Dems would be safer, some wondered, with a nice progressive white guy. But for many liberals, a return to the old pattern of putting forward white men in the mold of the disproportionate majority of American politicians would be a capitulation to American voters’ worst biases.

Then Cauterucci described how Buttigieg will appeal more to straight, white, males – which in this context is used as a denigration.

Straight white male voters will likely find it easier to see themselves in Buttigieg than in the women or people of color in the 2020 field. They’ll be right to do so: Buttigieg’s life experiences—how he’s been perceived, how he’s gotten paid, what he’s believed himself capable of, what opportunities have been available to him—almost certainly have far more in common with those of Sanders and Biden than those of Harris, Booker, and Warren.

Ultimately, the piece reached no conclusion about whether Buttigieg as a gay, white, male is more or less oppressed than any other group of “marginalized” Americans. Rather, Buttigieg was chided for not using his “gayness” to play the victim.

“But Buttigieg suggests that being gay has had ‘no bearing’ at all on anything else he’s done in his life,” the piece said. “There’s nothing objectively wrong with such an assimilationist perspective, especially for a newly out man who seems ready to lead on trans rights and other LGBTQ political issues. But it does makes him less exciting as the supposed gay trailblazer some on the left desperately want him to be.”


Follow Peter D’Abrosca on Twitter: @pdabrosca

Like Peter D’Abrosca on Facebook: facebook.com/peterdabrosca

Preorder Peter D’Abrosca’s Book: Enemies: The Press vs. The American People”

Fake News Media

Democrats’ Expert on Misinformation is CNN Hack Soledad O’Brien Who Has Pushed Fake News Incessantly for Years

The Democrats are shamelessly Orwellian.

Published

on

CNN propagandist Soledad O’Brien appeared before Congress on Wednesday as the Democrats’ expert on combating “misinformation.”

During the hearing, she called for her competitors to be censored and for alternative perspectives from the globalist-mandated consensus to be crushed.

“When news organizations make decisions based on ratings rather than responsible reporting, disinformation flourishes in dangerous ways,” O’Brien said while appearing before Congress.

“Cover the fact that lies and propaganda are being disseminated, but do not book people to lie on your show, because it elevates them and presents a lie as another side. Stop posing every story as having two sides, some stories, in fact, have many many sides, and are more complicated. And also, lies don’t have a side,’ she added, describing her vision for how news should be covered.

take our poll - story continues below

POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024?

  • POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

However, if O’Brien’s advice were taken by newsrooms, she would never be allowed on anymore due to her record of spreading reckless conspiracy theories about Trump being a Russian asset and other nonsense.

News aggregator @amuse posted some of O’Brien’s greatest hits on the fake news leader over the past few years:

Big League Politics has reported on other times in which O’Brien humiliated herself by posting falsehoods:

As usual, members of our esteemed media were caught lying on Wednesday, this time about the motivations for President Donald J. Trump’s visit to Iraq to visit troops.

Much ado was made when Trump did not visit Iraq on Christmas Day. NBC said that he was the first president not to visit the troops as Christmastime, only to correct themselves after Trump left for Iraq late Tuesday night. This led leftists conclude that the media had “shamed” Trump into visiting our fine soldiers.

“Shaming him seems to work,” CNN’s Soledad O’Brien said in reply to a Tweet by Brit Hume.

Hume had noted that by the time left-wing actress had blasted Trump for not visiting the troops, he had already visited them. Hume blasted O’Brien for her apparent lack of understanding of the concept of time.

“Yes Ma’am,” he said. “Trump read this Tweet when it was posted and time-traveled himself back to yesterday and flew to Iraq. Genius take.”

… What was wrong was the assumption that Trump had to be “shamed” to visiting the war zone. Embarrassingly, these leftists were proved wrong by leftist POLITICO.

“According to a White House official, the Trump administration had been planning the trip for more than six weeks,” said a Wednesday POLITICO piece.

Of course, the piece chided Trump for not being able to keep his trip a secret, citing two of Trump’s remarks about a potential trip to a war zone. 

The Democrats are shameless in pushing their Orwellian agenda. They are at war with objective reality and will stoop to unfathomable depths to achieve absolute power.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending