Some might think calling Hillary Clinton a Stalinist is overwrought, like calling President Bush a Nazi, as leftists regularly do. After all, she has never starved millions of kulaks to death. Her secret police have never disappeared someone in the middle of the night, tortured him until he confessed to being a spy, then put him through a quick trial and shot him.
Fair enough. If those are the minimum requirements of Stalinism, then no American qualifies (yet). It would be more accurate to call Hillary Clinton an American Stalinist. It is fascinating to see how she apes a communist dictatorship in an American context.
The American Thinker has an entertaining piece by Kyle-Anne Shiver on Clinton's attempt to create an American Pravda. With the MSM blatantly on her side, it's astonishing that she would feel a need to create Media Matters to attack her attackers. She is either paranoid or she understands the importance of propaganda -- my bet is on the latter. She believes that the end of power justifies destroying truth. Words are nothing but weapons to be used in the fight for power.
Media Matters writes laughably inept attacks on Hillary Clinton's detractors, notably Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly.
To give you an idea of what passes for headline-worthy at Media Matters, Hillary's hall-monitor brigade caught Bill O'Reilly a couple of weeks ago in this misstep: "Culture Warrior" O'Reilly, who chided Dean over Book of Job misidentification, says Revelation "was written -- what? Five thousand years ago?" A paid writer expended well over 1000 words explaining that the Book of Revelation was written a little less than 2000 years ago. I'm personally shocked that in a 3-hour live radio broadcast, this was the only error the listener-monitor could find to transform into a written tattle.
It doesn't matter that Media Matters's arguments are specious and illogical. Hillary Clinton is counting on a media phenomenon in today's subjectivist culture: getting a "balanced" point of view. If a reporter brings up Rush Limbaugh's point of view, then the reporter (or analyst or spin doctor) feels obligated to note Media Matters's opposing opinion. All the "verbose mountains out of molehills," as Kyle-Anne Shiver calls it, is there to give their side prestige and weight. As long as it looks official, reporters can pass this tripe off as a point of view worth noting.
Kyle-Anne Shiver writes about a bizarre, hair-splitting Media Matters attack on Wolf Blitzer:
As a student during the Cold War, I can tell you that this tactic - seizing the detail to the exclusion of the substance -- is highly reminiscent of the way Pravda (the official news outlet of the Soviet Communist Party) used to take apart news from the free world for its unwashed masses. And I am truly appalled to see this verbal excrement make its way into the mainstream of American political discourse.
It is appalling. Hillary Clinton deserves to be derided as an American Stalinist because she shares the communists' contempt for reason and their willingness to lie in the pursuit of power. Behind her lies is the firm conviction that only one thing really matters: force.