Moonbats Shout: Why Do Republicans Value The Truth More Than The Narrative Of The Collective?…

I’ve debated Moonbats for a long time. I’ve also read enough Moonbattery to identify when it becomes Pulitzer prize worthy. The level of intellectual pretzel logic inside this New Republic article highlights just how dissonant Moonbats can be.


Against the backdrop of the Rolling Stone false UVA rape story – an author at the New Republic argues the problem with conservatives is their desire to find the truth behind events.

This horrible tendency to find the truth diminishes the message needed by a collective narrative; which is ultimately dependent on accepting the story regardless of merit….

New Republic […] The right, on the other hand, tends to understand politics on the individual level, which fits in neatly with a general obsession with the capital-i Individual. Thus, the right tends to pore over the specific details of high-profile cases like those of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown, concluding that if those particular situations were embattled by complications or mitigating factors, then the phenomena they’re meant to represent must not be real either. And if a few highly publicized rapes turn out to be murkier than first represented, then rape itself is not a crisis, just a regrettable and rare anomaly.” (more)

According to the author, in the aftermath of the UVA story, what the Rolling Stone did wrong was allow an emphasis on truth to diminish the importance of the message.

liberal staircase instructions

Sign in the stairwell of The New Republic publishing office.

This entry was posted in Cultural Marxism, Dem Hypocrisy, media bias, Notorious Liars, Occupy Type Moonbats, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

61 Responses to Moonbats Shout: Why Do Republicans Value The Truth More Than The Narrative Of The Collective?…

  1. benzy says:

    I would then presume that the New Republic would simply advise those who were the victims of the press misrepresenting facts to further a cause should just “suck it up” and take it for the general welfare (as presented by the liberal press, of course). Never mind that your life, career and future may have been devastated, it was for our good cause.


    • auscitizenmom says:

      Hm. So, I guess it would be all right for us to destroy the career of the writer who wrote the story along with the publication it was in. For the greater good. Because we think that is what we want to do.


  2. BobNoxious says:

    I’ve been saying this all day- Libs want to be judged by their intentions rather than results. So long as they meant well, it doesn’t matter if there is nothing factual behind whatever the story may be.

    Liked by 1 person

    • cohibadad says:

      They don’t mean well. They mean to get their way and if lies don’t work they wouldn’t lose any sleep over using force, tyranny, or even mass murder. It is the way of the socialist. For the greater “good” isn’t really about good at all.

      Liked by 4 people

    • manickernel says:

      Thing is you don’t have to say it anymore. They are coming right out and saying it themselves, saw this exact argument yesterday on a comment about MSNBC. That the ideal is more important than any facts in a story, as the story is a representative illustration of reality even if it is false.


    • polk8dot says:

      ‘Libs want to be judged by their intentions rather than results’

      And that’s how we arrive at the cognitive dissonance of the ‘Yemen and Somalia being STILL great Obama success stories’ and ‘the Iran deal being a GREAT deal all round, a FOREVER-deal’ administration stance.


  3. dginga says:

    I know a young woman who is a Columbia Journalism School grad, and she told me (with a straight face) that in journalism her job is not to report the who, what, when, where, how, but to take the particular details of a situation and filter them through her own life experience, then write a story that not only gives the readers information of the event, but also “guides” them in what they should think, feel and do about it. I told her that I thought her job was to report the TRUTH. She said there is no standard of TRUTH. We each have our own TRUTH. I disagreed and told her there IS truth, and her job is to report the truth, and let ME decide how I feel about it. She said, no, that each individual has their own truth. I told her no, you may have your own PERSPECTIVE, but you cannot have your own FACTS. No, she said, her job is to report the facts within the framework of her own perspective, so that the rest of us can be guided in what we should think.

    Then my head exploded so we did not finish the conversation. That happens to me a lot when she is around.

    Liked by 7 people

    • auscitizenmom says:

      Ooh, understandible. 😯


    • lepanto says:

      As much as I want the home team to win, I want to know the final score of the ballgame. Keep that reporter off of the sports page.


    • furrcats says:

      You are describing propaganda

      Liked by 2 people

    • QuadGMoto says:

      She said, no, that each individual has their own truth.

      Is that true for everybody?


      • Everybody who votes Democrat.

        You and me? We probably aren’t allowed to have our own truth.

        Liked by 2 people

      • auscitizenmom says:

        They were pushing that kind of thinking back in the 60’s when I was still in school. It bounced off my not so liberal brain because it just didn’t compute.

        Liked by 2 people

        • QuadGMoto says:

          It didn’t compute because you think too much! 😉

          The point is that her statement is self-contradictory. She’s saying that it’s a universal truth that there is no universal truth.

          The eastern mysticism that was popular in the 60’s focuses on getting its adherents to accept contradiction as somehow better than those “lesser” beings who reject contradiction. Someones when you can’t understand something, it’s not because it’s “higher thinking”, it’s because it really doesn’t make sense.

          Liked by 1 person

    • doodahdaze says:

      She is what is called a Fanatic.
      Definition of FANATIC : marked by excessive enthusiasm and often intense uncritical devotion <they’re fanatic about politics> — fanatic noun — fa·nat·i·cal·ly ..
      They can be seen daily infesting the Boob Tube in swarms.


    • That Other Guy says:

      I would argue that although she may not have expressed it well, she is actually correct. Over the many years I’ve been expressing opinions on the interwebz (like this one), I’ve typically used the following sig:

      The truth as I perceive it to be.
      Your perception may be different.

      You see, Truth and Fact are not one and the same. Facts are incontrovertible within currently known parameters (regardless of who knows them). Truths on the other hand, are based on a given individual’s knowledge and perception.


      • John Denney says:

        You’re treading on thin ice.

        “. . . they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” – 2 Thess 2:10b-12

        If truth is based on your knowledge and perception, then “the love of the truth” would be loving your own knowledge and perception.

        One who believes a lie thinks it the truth, when it is not.

        Liked by 1 person

        • QuadGMoto says:

          A person who loves the truth seeks to understand what the truth is. When an error in understanding is discovered, a person who loves truth will correct their understanding.

          Thus, when the FBI report on the Michael Brown case came out showing that the facts of the matter was that Brown could not possibly have had his hands up, those who love truth either already knew that, or changed their mind about the case. Those who hate truth, however, converted the “hands up, don’t shoot” meme from error (at best) to lie.


          • QuadGMoto says:

            And just to add to that, lies and untruth are the characteristics of the devil:

            “You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.”
            — John 8:44


      • QuadGMoto says:

        Sorry, but that is not true. 😉 (Sorry, I just couldn’t avoid making the ironic statement.)

        The definition of truth is “that which comports with its object.” A fact is best described as being the object or some aspect of the object. So you could say that truth is “that which comports with a fact.”

        Here’s an example. If you are color blind and you perceive a red ball to be green, it is not true to say that the ball is green. The fact is that the ball is red. If you say that the ball is green, that statement does not comport with the fact, which is what makes the statement untrue. Now if you were to say that you perceive the red ball as green, that would be true because the object of that statement is your senses/perception rather than the ball.

        Liked by 1 person

      • nimrodman says:

        “Truths on the other hand, are based on a given individual’s knowledge and perception.”

        Then we would not have True / False tests.

        They’d be “Your perception / My perception tests.

        [An aside not directly relevant to the meaning of “true”:

        Pauly Shore has a good riff, but relating to California Valley-Speak:

        “In California, when you go to take your driver’s license test, instead of “True or False” it’s “Totally or Not Even.” ]


      • Zoe says:

        Truth is reality. In other words what is really real. I have a trillion dollar bill in my wallet. So am I a trillionaire? No because the bill is a fake. Doesn’t matter that I perceice that the bill is real and I could tell people that I have trillion dollars, but the reality is I don’t have a real trillion dollars because what is really real is that the bill is fake.


    • wintermaid says:

      Just tell her that’s manipulation, which is the hallmark of propoganda. Then see if she thinks that is a good thing or not.


  4. RobJ says:

    Was that sign made by an ironic hipster to be intentionally stupid? Or was the sign made by a $200,000 private liberal arts college graduate, and it happens to be unintentionally stupid?

    Or do both conditions apply?

    Liked by 2 people

    • lovely says:

      I am surprised the employees have not protested the sign and and demanded a wider staircase so that everyone could walk up down left right and sideways whatever their predilection might be. The sign is a violation of someones civil rights.


      • Rick Caird says:

        Do you think anyone at the New Republic realizes the sign will guarantee people run into each other? The right side going up is the left side going down. BANG!


    • anonbob says:

      That sign only makes sense if you realize right and left is a matter of perspective.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Burnt Toast says:

    …then the phenomena they’re meant to represent must not be real either…

    To rational people this would be obvious.

    But, if you’re an authoritarian thug whose end goal is sending a few random innocents to the gulag to scare the rest of the sheep into line, not so obvious.

    Further, if the Trayvon Martin case was to represent the ‘phenomena’ of young black men and children being senselessly gunned down we have inner city drive-bys, if the Michael Brown case was to represent police brutality we have any number of clear-cut cases of excessive force SWATings every year, but they are not even honest about this ‘phenomena’ they claim to be trying to address either.

    Liked by 2 people

    • 7delta says:

      …then the phenomena they’re meant to represent must not be real either…

      Thar ya go. If ‘facts’ have to be manufactured to represent the chosen phenomenon, then that’s a pretty good indication there is no phenomenon, at least not from the perspective they want to represent.

      However, if they’re really sincere about reporting on a phenomenon, I can suggest one with lots of available hard evidence, but they’d have to represent themselves.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. wizzum says:

    I will not pre-judge, that is the salesman mantra……I’m not in sales anymore but still like the ethos. If i did pre-judge I know exactly the type of person who put that up in a stairwell, there are four of them on my floor at work, all four have different backgrounds but all could have a huge D tattooed on their foreheads. They mean well but just don’t think stuff through.


  7. lovely says:

    Of journalists such as those from “New Republic” I stand with Mr. Sowell’s words;

    It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong

    We are at a sick symbiotic state in our country where the liberal politicians and the liberal media convince each other of their rightness and enable each other in their wrongness.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. czarowniczy says:

    Moonbats Shout: Why Do Republicans Value The Truth More Than The Narrative Of The Collective? Ummmm….from what I’ve seen it might be due to their inability to recognize either.


  9. yakmaster2 says:

    “…narrative of the collective.” Hmmm. I suppose the collective is whatever group is chosen and the narrative is whatever storyline the masters want to create about that group. Fantasy is then perceived by the audience as reality.
    Well, we can all point to times in history when such schemes have resulted in persecution, oppression, witch hunts, and genocide. All done for “the common good.”


  10. Monroe says:

    Hmm…….if Johnny jumps off the cliff will you follow? A lesson taught by parents when kids do something wrong and use the excuse that his friend’s did it.

    Maybe one Dem will jump off a cliff and others will follow because of collective thinking.


  11. Monroe says:

    A classic psych study illustrating the bystander effect. Based on the liberal logic does that mean if a person is raped(men are also raped) in a crowd, then no one should help because awareness of rape is needed and the rape is for the greater good of society.


  12. QuadGMoto says:

    Wow. Such “reasoning.”

    “If you add a bunch of negative numbers together, you’ll get a positive result!”

    It’s clear that there are cases where a black man is genuinely the victim of white racism. So why haven’t those cases been turned into cause célèbre stories? Every single sensationalized story involving claims of racism pushed by the left lately has involved a black man who was clearly engaging in criminal behavior*, frequently actively violent criminal behavior.

    I am still absolutely amazed that the idiot left (but I repeat myself) can shout to the world about the police addressing criminal behavior as if the person committing the crime was actually innocent‘ It makes no sense whatsoever. So yes, mental disorder it is.

    (* The Eric Garner case is as close to an exception as there has been. Yet it was still borderline because he was resisting arrest and the police supervisor on the scene was a black woman.)

    Liked by 2 people

    • nimrodman says:

      QuadG said:
      — “It’s clear that there are cases where a black man is genuinely the victim of white racism. So why haven’t those cases been turned into cause célèbre stories?”

      So what’s that tell us? It tells me that it’s not really “racism” that they’re concerned about or want to eliminate. “Racism” is simply a cudgel, to be wielded against authority and whitey for whatever is their objective of the moment.

      — “Every single sensationalized story involving claims of racism pushed by the left lately has involved a black man who was clearly engaging in criminal behavior*, frequently actively violent criminal behavior.”

      Yes. Partly I think that one of their objectives is to throw off the yoke of being policed at all. They’ll clamor that they’re being policed unfairly, that we need more black officers, etc. Then when they get black officers they’ll belittle them as traitors and Uncle Toms, as did protestors at the Seattle Christmas tree raising last December (a woman was fully in a black policeman’s face, following him down the street and berating him loudly).

      The truth is, they don’t want to be policed by whitey and, furthermore, they don’t want to be policed at all. They do not want any restraint by authority.

      Again, the whole clamor about “racism” is simply a cudgel with which to beat authority about the head and shoulders in furtherance of these and other objectives of the left and of the black criminal class.

      Regarding Eric Garner: I wonder what was it that prevented him from complying with police orders and putting his hands behind his back peacefully?

      Liked by 1 person

    • jason says:

      Sundance and others have mentioned in the past, it seems many of these cases are picked simply because it’s not clear cut. Clear cut means it’s reported, all agree, interest fades. Murky waters, and people take a side, debate the facts, it stays relevant far longer than if all could look and say ‘that’s clearly wrong’.

      By the time the details come out, people are too mired in their original ‘feeling’ on the issue to be swayed (and/or too laze to actually take time to look into the facts) and no one holds anyone accountable.


      • Curry Worsham says:

        I’d take it a step further. I think they pick these cases that are without merit because they want to lose, to be “denied justice”. They want to not get the indictment or, if they get it, they want to not win in court. Of course, they win either way but not winning furthers the larger agenda of protests, riots and chaos. (See Cloward and Piven: overwhelming the system).

        Liked by 1 person

  13. David says:

    Replacing God with government is and always been the goal of leftist, communist, Marxist, progressives, New York time reporters, etc. What the left believes in is their religion and they can not succeed without destroying the peoples faith in God. The fact they will subjugate the truth to agenda is proof. The disease these people have is more than just an ordinary mental illness as they are puppets of the ultimate evil master.

    Liked by 1 person

    • smiley says:

      they replace G-d with themselves.
      masters of their own fate…like little gods.
      arrogance, pride, disdain for Judeo-Christian truth.
      they fill the spiritually-bankrupt void with “social ” causes….
      and are led like dumb sheep, not by The Shepherd, but a facsimile.

      Liked by 1 person

  14. jakeandcrew says:

    Good article in American Thinker on this topic, and it mentions the Treehouse as well:

    “What DOJ found made me ill,” echoed the Washington Post’s Jonathan Capehart in a March 16 piece titled, “‘Hands up, don’t shoot’ was built on a lie.” Capehart, who had blown off the November grand jury findings, had to concede that “the popular hands-up storyline” was perpetuated exclusively by Brown’s partner in crime, Dorian Johnson. The unpaid bloggers at the Conservative Treehouse were reporting this in August. They had quickly and accurately pierced the media’s ideological smokescreen just as they had earlier done in the Martin case. The media refused to examine the evidence the Treehouse compiled. It did not fit the pre-written script.


  15. doodahdaze says:

    Pulp Fiction.


  16. SouthCentralPA says:

    The Left is almost constantly projecting. Whatever they’re accusing you is of is typically what they’ve done or what what they’re planning on doing.


  17. doodahdaze says:

    The UVA rape story is now being decried as bad journalism. The lefitist’s who scream the loudest are the very same journalists who reported the Hands up don’t shoot Fergustan lies at the top of their lungs. They are all guilty of the same crimes. Calling for heads to roll at Rolling Stone when their own heads should roll right along with them.


  18. doodahdaze says:

    Today in America, a despised minority that is really no minority is the target of an establishment that considers this minority unworthy of respect, unworthy of rights, and unworthy of having a say in the direction of this country. It’s an establishment that has one law for itself, and another for its enemies. It’s an establishment that inflicts an ever-increasing series of petty humiliations on its opponents and considers this all hilarious.


  19. libby says:

    From the comments section of the TNR article, my favorite thus far (havent finished reading them all yet):
    “We on the Left sometimes tell Lies; lies about rape, racism, inequality, etc. We like to do this by making our narrative so vague that we talk evils as “structural” or “privilege”, but then the Right ruins all our fun by insisting these vagaries be supported by, you know, facts.”

    Liked by 1 person

  20. TeddyOn20th says:

    Did everybody catch the sleight-of-hand here?:

    And if a few highly publicized rapes turn out to be murkier than first represented,

    The phrase “a few highly publicized rapes” presupposes that there were rapes. But in fact, these incidents were not rapes at all. If I falsely claim that my house was broken into, and a few others do the same, and then our lies are uncovered, a journalist can hardly use the phrase “a few highly publicized burglaries” when in reality, no burglaries occurred.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Hector Poole says:

    From the movie The Man who Shot Liberty Valance….”When legend becomes fact print the legend.” We Have media that now prints legend.

    Liked by 1 person

  22. Chewbarkah says:

    “The right on the other hand tends to understand politics on the individual level, which fits in neatly with a general obsession with the capital ‘I’ individual.”

    How the author sees things:
    Truth is indefinite and relative, existing only in the mind of each person; this, is a “collectivist” attitude.
    Those who believe Truth is independent of themselves and their own perception of it are “obsessed with Individualism”.

    No irony there…

    Understanding the Left: Everything they say and do is tactical.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. John McLachlan says:

    If white, Christian conservative males really did commit hate-crimes against members of minority groups and really did oppress women, , as progressives claim, then there would be no need for progressives to fake hate-crimes, or to redefine oppression, in order to support their narrative, since reality would conform more closely to the progressive narrative.

    If the progressive narrative was true, sufficient genuine examples of hate-crimes and systematic oppression by white Christian males, perpetrated against minorities and women would exist that faking examples of these would be unnecessary.

    The fabrication of hate-crimes or evidence of oppression does not establish the gloomy reality which progressives describe in their narrative and can only be intended to promote misperception of reality and excessive dissatisfaction with America’s shortcomings by their audience.

    If reality was as harsh as progressives claim, then the majority of people would not need to be lied to, in order to recognize the shortcomings of their society.

    The supposedly ‘noble’ lie, favoured by the progressives, cannot be required to motivate people to end a greatly exaggerated or fictitious injustice.

    None-the-less, the progressives still lie, so the lie must serve some other purpose for progressives.


  24. peachteachr says:

    As the old folks in the South use to say, “Don’t that just beat a hog aflying?”
    BTW, SD, a group of agitators from Atlanta came to Valdosta yesterday to bring a letter to the Valdosta School system, after walking 17 miles for several days in honor of Kendrick Johnson being 17 when he died, and several were arrested. We still do not accept fools readily down here. For some reason, Kendrick’s sister was not allowed to walk at graduation last year and they wanted her to be allowed to walk in KJ’s place this year. Not going to happen. How is that for a dose of capital i ism?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s