As ever, I do not like basic news briefs, so I try not to write them.
Today, I review recent hateful remarks from a certain US presidential candidate, Argentina's latest crackdown on protests, and how the pain of IDF's killing of three surrendering hostages sits in a country that's been protesting Netanyahu's choices all year.
Whether in war, migration, or economic crises, democracies are hard to build, and easy to lose. We have deep political wounds to try to heal.
https://onlysky.media/mclark/us-argentina-israel-and-a-world-of-normalized-extremes/
@MLClark The "certain US presidential candidate" spews that rhetoric because he knows it will get him adulation from those in attendance, which translates into money that funds his various legal defenses.
Does he really believe it? Who knows. His first and third wives are immigrants. But his audience assumes he's referring to non-white immigrants.
(Funny how he never mentions the Canadian border ...)
All this will be used in clips that will air during the general election.
That's very much what I talk about here: the fact that trying to address his rhetoric doesn't do any damage to him, not the way "deplorables" did to Clinton. The nature of the threat is different, and legacy media doesn't know how to report on these remarks without making them more useful on the campaign trail.
(I don't, either, except by naming the fact that reporting on them is an ineffective way to diminish their power - which is why I do when having to name That Name at all.)