It’s been only a day since the bombings in Brussels, and the New York Times has issued a warning.No – it isn’t a warning of ISIS carrying out more attacks. It was a warning to reject the rhetoric of Donald Trump. As the Washington Examiner reported:
The New York Times editorial board responded to a wave of terror attacks that washed over Brussels early Tuesday morning by begging its readers to reject the rhetoric of billionaire businessman Donald Trump.
The appropriate response to the attacks, which have so far claimed the lives of 34 people, is “courage and steadfastness in the face of a threat that will take many years to eliminate,” the board wrote.
“It emphatically does not mean hysterical fearmongering of the sort promptly voiced by politicians like Donald Trump,” they added.Call it “hysterical fearmongering” all you want – but he’s the only candidate who’s actually offered solutions in response to the attacks. Isn’t it liberals who mock conservatives for praying after tragedies instead of taking action to prevent them?
The Times is likely scared that such attacks will boost Trump’s support, but considering their audience, they’re preaching to the choir.
Keep in mind that this is the “rhetoric” that predicted a possible terror attack in Brussels (a statement of Trump’s which the Times reported on and criticized in January).I’ll leave you with this. This is who the New York Times thinks we’d be safer from terrorism under:
[Note: This post was authored by Matt Palumbo. Follow him on Twitter @MattPalumbo12]