Digital Masta wrote:
I read this and just thought, why are you throwing shade at them?
Because conditional altruism is a warm blanket sprinkled with abrasive glass. It's petty, childish, smug, ill motivated and purposefully intended to antagonize and shame for purely political reasons.
Digital Masta wrote:
Assuming AOC was telling the truth about her grandmother it is indeed ridiculous for her to say that stuff while being in a position to help her. So DW reached out to their community and decided to not only troll AOC and make her and her kind look foolish but also get her grandmother some help if she really needs it. They proved one of their own principles, that you don't need the government to help.
I don't quite remember this level of deep compassion exhibited by the charitable paragons over at the daily wire when Maria actually hit, but I could be wrong. AOC didn't give a shit either, she only uses it as a political bludgeon and I'm not criticizing the Daily wire for calling her out on her performative sympathies. But you're fooling yourself if you believe this wasn't primarily motivated by seething contempt and the indefatigable pursuit of the "Own the libs" philosophy. This is just my personal opinion(I do not expect nor demand anyone else to comport themselves similarly) but my first thought when I make the decision to help another person in need is not :How clever will this make me look? What slanted lesson can I impart upon the recipient? How much gratitude can I solicit from this person? etc...
If this sounds cynical, that's because this whole thing(sans the initial humor of it all) pretty much is; to its core.
Remove AOC from the equation and replace her with average Puerto Rican joe desolated by tragedy and let's see that Gofundme sprout the same wings. I have no doubt in the Daily Wire's ability to marshal its subscribers into action for good causes, they have an extremely loyal following and are continuing to grow at an exponential rate, and conservatives are indeed more generous than the so called "Libs" on an average per capita scale.
But bad faith is still bad faith, and this by my estimation was a prime example of it.
Don't misunderstand me, AOC comes out looking worse than anyone in this whole drama by being too proud to even accept the money(the comment about donating it to a Trans charity was a joke). She could have easily accepted the funds and allocated it to whatever cause she wanted related to the still ravaged country of Puerto Rico. Her desperate attempt to save face is as transparent as purified air and to reiterate--I have no sympathy for her other than perhaps her poor grandmother, who I'm sure is being fed all kinds of propagandized garbage about the people who raised money for her, albeit for intellectually dishonest reasons.
Digital Masta wrote:
The minute this situation with her grandmother happened she could have raised the money herself to help grandma and others affected. It's even worse if what she said was true and she rejected the money because she'd rather not soil her image by taking money from those evil, racist Republicans. And you're insulting them and the people that donated?
That doesn't exactly make you look like the good guy.
Agree to the first, as to the second; I don't care how it makes me look I'm just being honest.
If you want, I can enumerate for you every hack on the left who elicits my annoyance on a daily basis as well, starting with Don Lemon, Chris Cuomo, and Brian Stelter(the Trifecta of stupid). But honestly, I don't watch/listen enough of them to fully immerse myself in their inanity(and I think I'm happier for it). When I moved more towards the center, I started to gravitate to the right and expanded my horizons to conservatives, those who professed higher standards and principles and whose virtue supposedly spoke for itself. Unfortunately the people I like:Jonah Goldberg, David French, Noah Rothman, Coleman Hughes(A stretch, but noteworthy), George F. Will, Seth Mandel, Robby Soave(Libertarian-conservative), to name just a few..., don't always toe the party line, and are(to many of the Hardliners and Paleo-conservatives) utterly abhorrent(especially the first two).
Naturally this only amplifies my desire to listen to them more, a sort of Knee-jerk contrarian reaction, but the point is I have a preference for clear headed thinkers who don't default to a binary "Us VS Them" mentality, who try(But don't always succeed) not to impugn the motivations of those they disagree with(as I'm failing to do this very moment, but not entirely devoid of reasons mind you), and more specifically; don't get off on being mean, nasty, spiteful and egocentric. For fuck's sake, Greg Gutfield(funnier than the left says, but not nearly as much as he thinks) calls Tucker Carlson's show "Tucker Porn".
I understand completely what the Daily wire is, just as I understand fully what Vox is.
They cater to one select group, and that's fine, but it's not for me.
The primary difference however is Vox is toothless, they don't move the needle quite as effectively as the latter because the opinion sphere is owned completely by conservatives and it's not even close. And right now, grift is the course most widely consumed and contributes in no small part to the same division being perpetrated by the left.
So in summation, yes they're hacks, but that doesn't mean I don't agree with views they espouse, there's plenty of agreement in fact.
But when the left broke themselves, so did the right in response. Their hate fuels them now more than any higher loyalty to principle or cause, and that's practically indisputable at this point.
/End Rant.