No Need to Invent New Reasons for Outrage

To borrow a phrase, Wolf is a NASTY woman. She’s a terrible human being who has brought shame on her entire family. We don’t have to invent new sources of outrage; she gave us plenty of material.

Back in January, President Trump made his now-famous “s***hole” comment, and the internet was a raging dumpster fire for the next 3 weeks.

Throughout the conversation, I continued to be baffled as to how so many people cast that remark as racist/dehumanizing. There was nothing racist or dehumanizing about it.

Some countries are better places to live than others, and a few countries are horrible places to live. Those places aren’t horrible to live in because of the geography, natural resources, or weather. No one wants to live there because of the *culture.* But since the culturally powerful Victim Groups had issued their Papal Bulls, no one was allowed to dissent from the commandments that might as well have been written on stone tablets.

Trending: Young Autistic Boy Screams for Help as Bullies Nail Wooden Plank to His Head

This week, I think a few of my liberal friends understand how I was feeling in January. Specifically, they’re baffled as to how anyone is interpreting the White House Correspondents Dinner speech as being an attack on Sarah Huckabee Sanders’ appearance. Just like with Trump’s remarks, it’s simply not there in the text.

take our poll - story continues below

Who are the happiest people?

  • Who are the happiest people?  

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

Wolf didn’t attack her appearance. She actually *complimented* Sanders’ makeup, then immediately attacked Sanders for supposedly lying.

That’s what happened. That’s clear from the context and the words on the page.

The attack on Sanders’ appearance just isn’t there. We shouldn’t care that a few culturally powerful Victim Groups (prominent women such as Maggie Haberman of the New York Times!) have declared this to be out of bounds. It’s not there in the text. She didn’t say it. Some have mentioned the comparison to the Handmaid’s Tale character, but the important part of that comparison is *abetting an evil regime.* When liberals compare Trump to Voldemort, they aren’t saying that his nose is flat.

Finally, I will point out that you don’t even *need* to say that Wolf attacked Sanders’ appearance to violently object to her “comedy” routine.

First, it was a very unfunny routine. It was 90% mean and only 10% funny. Wolf is not a good comedian. Second, she openly admitted her desire to use racial slurs against Sanders, using her speech as an attempt to coin a new racial slur. Third, she made a truly monstrous joke about abortion that even liberals are horrified by.

To borrow a phrase, Wolf is a NASTY woman. She’s a terrible human being who has brought shame on her entire family.

We don’t have to invent new sources of outrage; she gave us plenty of material.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Send this to a friend