The liberal/establishment press attributes the latest
Republican/conservative primary election wins to “angry white males”. I believe
women also voted in those elections, along with blacks and Hispanics, but when
you want to undermine a vote and a large section of the American population,
you go after the “angry white males” because they are a safe target, and we all
know how crazy and out of control these white male people are. Take for example
the white males on the editorial staffs of the Wall Street Journal, The New
York Times and the Washington Post if you want to see some crazy angry white
males.
But is one “crazy” when one sees their lives and all
they’ve worked for being destroyed by socialist/leftists and make a peaceful,
legal attempt to halt the destruction by actually voting? There are no city
blocks of Ferguson or Baltimore being looted and burned by white males. There
is no equivalent to the Occupy Wall Street movement with riots and raping and
city parks being used as public toilets. The press expressed understanding when
these nuts took to the streets, and even made convoluted attempts to justify
the planned violence in Chicago last Friday as leftists halted a Trump speech. But
if a white male votes to re-establish sanity and constitutional principles to
his government and his daily life, he’s declared to be out of control and
“angry”. In this way the liberal press can then ignore the white male voting
block and make pitches for more destructive and intrusive government.
One supposes that white males are singled out in
today’s political environment because they have largely been silent and
accepting of social changes as long as these changes didn’t infringe on him or
his family’s lives. But Obama’s “fundamental transformation of America” and
Hillary’s and Bernie’s out-right socialism have awakened these men, and now
they want their country returned to sanity and are voting for Cruz and Trump to
get it back.
