Political Correctness
Definition from Google. noun: the avoidance, often considered as taken to extremes, of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against. A simple example: If Laura, Kate and Sarah go out for lunch, they will call each other Laura, Kate and Sarah. If Mike, Dave and John go out, they will affectionately refer to each other as Fat Boy, Bubba and Wildman. Is this offensive to the men doing the nicknaming? Is it offensive to others who might hear them? Does it matter? A more complex example: As reported in the media, in a memo to students sent out by West Virginia University (WVU), Title IX coordinator James Goins, Jr. declares that anyone who refuses to use a person’s preferred transgender pronouns is breaking federal law! A political example: Robert Litan, a Democrat, was fired from his left leaning think tank after delivering testimony against an Elizabeth Warren-backed Labor Department plan to regulate financial advisers. Half of House Democrats and virtually all Republicans in Congress oppose the plan because of its costs. Instead of rebutting his argument, Ms. Warren decided to punish it, he was fired from his think tank. One ridiculous example: Princeton University’s ‘Men’s Engagement Manager’, to rehabilitate men that are too masculine. Obviously there are many more, even more dramatic, examples of political correctness gone wild in our culture today. Political correctness can be best described as the opposite of or the enemy of truth.

Delusional media

from The Gray Area:
The Time editorial, When a President can't be taken at his word, by editor Nancy Gibbs, about Truth and Trump as liar, is a perfect example of why the public does not trust the media, and with all his faults, trust Donald Trump more. Here are a few of her points:
  • The TIME editor says that "TIME wrestles with when to say someone is lying".  She then references 'lying', 'alternative facts' and fact checker reports associated with President Trump's honesty or lack thereof. As per usual in the media, she does not shine that same light on her own industry.
  • She states the fact that "repetition of a false statement, even in the course of disputing it, often increases the number of people who believe it." That is a well-known and well-worn strategy that the left and the media have utilized for over 40 years against Republicans and the right. They can't handle it when it is used against them.
  • She cites examples of President Trump's lies, including voter fraud and wiretapping, which has only been determined as lies by the media. Certainly the claims are missing specific evidence, but, evidence is also needed from the media confirming their decision(s) that these are Trump lies. By the way, circumstantial evidence would be enough to keep the media legitimizing the claim if it were a Democrat making the claim. See the investigation of Russian collaboration with the Trump campaign, an obvious distraction strategy that the media gives credibility in the absence of facts.  Also see the playing down of the Russian conspiracy with the Clinton Foundation, Hillary's lying in general and to the American people about Benghazi and her irresponsible (illegal) misuse of top secret information. Did we forget Obama's scandal free admnisration?  Remember Cindy Sheehan vs coverage of Benghazi mom?
  • She describes how "trust is a transaction between leaders", ... "[they can] delay the pursuit of peace, alienate allies and appease enemies". She cites as an example the meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who the media claimed was disgusted with Trump comments on her visit (without facts, using only observation of body language and facial expression). They completely discount Trump's comments about a "great meeting" was had between the two. It is almost universal since President Trump won the election that everyone he meets with, supporters and opposition alike, have stated that their meetings were open, far reaching, fair, polite and honest. But, those comments cannot be repeated by the media, because it would hurt the template that he is not trustworthy which the left and the media (like in this article and others in this edition of TIME Magazine) are presenting.
This media message is just another chapter of "opposite-land". What is said by the left and the media (TIME Magazine) applies as much to them (usually more) than it does to their target (in this case Donald Trump). There is no question we have a problem with the truth in America in the 21st Century. The advent of Political Correctness in the 80s has replaced truth with only those statements and concepts that are 'approved' to be true.  This is the issue of truth that TIME and Nancy Gibbs should be talking about. Below I re-publish an article on this subject that was posted last year. More From The Gray Area:

365 Days Page
Comment ( 0 )