Public Opinion Shatters

Posted by John Lindsay on 22nd July 2018 in News, Op Ed, Uncategorized

It has  been some time since Roseanne Barr was terminated by ABC for sharing her thoughts publicly. It was widely reported she wrote something disrespectful to former president Barack Obama senior adviser, Valerie Jarrett. Why Ms. Barr’s comment to an adviser of a president whose legacy has been rapidly chipped away into obscurity would warrant such a harsh backlash could only be adjudicated in the court of public opinion.

The abnormal thing about the reaction to Ms. Barr’s tweet was the agreement by both liberal and conservative media organizations. When two opposing ideologies agree there can be only two conclusions – Either both are right or both are wrong.

Typically, conservatives see something destructive and do nothing based on a host of proverbial advice. No good deed goes unpunished. Pearls before swine. If you have nothing nice to say don’t say anything. Conservatives believe the sticks and stones adage and realize, though it may make you feel good, harsh retaliation rarely improves the situation. Yet, this was not the case for Roseanne.

Despite the innate conservative resistance to confrontation, there are also those who believe it is their obligation to break the silence. Unfortunately, most inspired defenders of truth and justice are unable to adequately verbalize why they disagree.  They are poorly trained with little incentive to confront a pride of lions with insatiable appetites. Few have the ability to present a wise, concise argument out of the gate. The reality is, when a conservative tests the temperature of the water on the liberal left side of the pool and discovers how truly cold it is, they will never take the plunge.

The disadvantage for someone on the right with honing their rhetorical technique is they rarely battle with a like or reasonable mind. Those on the left have no honor when it comes to debate. They abide by no rules of decorum. A novice conservative sparing toe to toe with someone on the left is far more likely to be spit upon than engage in healthy debate – which is part of the left’s strategy to keep those on the right scared, discouraged and, most of all, silent.

It is a general assumption someone who acquires wealth is successful though their prosperity could well have been ill-gotten. We are encouraged to hear when someone has lived to a ripe old age in spite of the fact quantity in no way indicates the quality in which they lived. Even those who are miserable smile for photographs. We can only see what we are shown, and, consequently, look at the cropped snapshots presented to us and too often buy what others sell without bothering to get the full picture.

Successful marketing has led to think those reading and rewriting the liberal talking points have a relationship with and responsibility to the truth and are thereby good and fair and trustworthy. But those who read and write what they are told by those promoting a leftist agenda reduce themselves to the status of puppets and have traded the road leading to truth, maturity and wisdom for the dubious security of a career and a promise of notoriety.

The consistency of the relentlessness of the left is second only to their ability to so synchronously beat out Democrat talking points. The conservative who dares to disagree and express original thoughts supported by evidence, insight and rationale is ridiculed, attacked, dehumanized and, in some cases, completely destroyed while those on the left are praised and promoted for pandering.

Rosanne Barr, lost her job for three reasons. For failing to foresee the ferocity of the backlash by the left. Secondly, for not being familiar with the unwritten law she broke (considering she has the right as an American citizen to freely and peaceably voice her opinion). Thirdly, for being creative.

The most important characteristic about creative individuals is they have no choice but to be creative. Their creative nature adds the elements of humor, comparison and a range of tactics from shock to subtlety in order to capture their audience emotionally. They also intentionally leave room for interpretation by which they create a platform to further insult their target through the baseness by which the recipient takes their meaning. In other words, the creative critic uses the target’s own response to expose their true nature.

Unfortunately for the creative conservative, the left has adopted a new defense tactic. They will move en masse on behalf of the assaulted, negatively labeling the action or comment (which in this case was racist), and then associate them with the far right whether or not this happens to be where they fall. Once the pieces are in place, they will use the one to disparage all of their enemies by association. This puts the right in a pickle: Side with Rosanne Barr and against a defenseless thin-skinned liberal and be perceived a racist or allow another strong, influential voice to be silenced to save yourself.

Engaging in other people’s battles may make one feel engaged, selfless and helpful. Lending your voice to a member of your team may be compelling and seem encouraging. However, no one who is continually insulated from criticism becomes stronger, smarter or wiser. Knee-jerk reactions based on limited information is not objective reasoning. There is a good reason Lady Justice wears a blindfold. Senses, and, by extension, feelings, should be mortified during the process of deliberating a verdict. The instant feelings enter the equation, reason is lost and neutrality forfeit. The only benefit to jumping on an opinion bandwagon is to make ourselves appear righteous when the opposite is true.

The only way to truly contribute to the individual being confronted is to advise them to address the critic themselves with maturity and grace. Who is inspired to learn to equip themselves when battles are being manipulated and fought for on their behalf by self-indulgent virtual armies? President Trump lost no sleep over the personal attacks by the press and prominent public figures. What support he has received pales in comparison to the enraged outcries of those who oppose him. The reason so few come to his defense is because those in his camp know he does not need their affirmation in order to feel good about himself or his actions. He does not need the help of the people. The people need his, which is what qualifies him to be president.

If it is better to resist engaging in other people’s affairs and to give latitude to creative criticism, then grace should also be given to the Kathy Griffins as well. In spite of the fact her antics could have been construed as a criminal attack on the president as well as inciting violence, her goal was to create something with shock and awe which could be widely interpreted, had it not been for the manipulative wave of public opinion. The instant an opinion on a topic is posted, someone else’s paradigm is altered. Once a person is sold, the chances of them receiving facts contrary to their adopted point of view disintegrate.

Concessions should be made for communicating creatively, which should not be offered to the likes of Madonna and Robert De Niro whose remarks will define them as crass and uninventive. Such public outbursts should be considered proverbial by their piers warning them a negative word expressed emotionally is a thought expressed without creativity or talent.

Rosanne Barr broke no law. If the tweet were sent by anyone else it would have been ignored. Valerie Jarrett, being in the public eye herself should have had skin thick enough to receive the critique in stride – to answer or not – unassisted. A mature response to Roseanne’s statement might have read as follows, “It is clear something I said or did offended you and you have the freedom in this fine country to criticize me. However, in your critique, you compared me to a fictional character which some might consider racist. I’m sure that is not what you intended and I pray any backlash will be weathered with patience and grace as they are merely reacting to a very sensitive issue. Please feel free to continue to hold me to a higher standard as it is our mutual goal to be ever improving which can only be done through constructive unrestricted opposition.”

Unfortunately such gracious responses are unlikely to be shared by individuals who bow to institutions whose objectives are opposed to unity and healing. Public opinion does not matter. It shatters, and is as useless as winning the popular vote.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.