One of the biggest disadvantages the American Right has in the political battle is it needs to constantly apologize for its own "extremists," while leftists openly defend theirs. Guilt by association is the primary tactic of the Left's propogandists in the Main Stream Media. Indeed, sometimes they even use guilt by non-association. And finally, there's the deeper question of who is an "extremist."There is a special election coming up in Montana, and the MSM is doing its best to destroy the Republican candidate Greg Gianforte. Gianforte, like other Republicans, donated to state legislature candidate and Republican nominee Taylor Rose during the last election cycle. However, the press has discovered he has been "described by watchdog groups as a white nationalist."
Organizations such as the Southern Poverty Law Center and Anti-Defamation League, which monitor hate groups, have posted a handful of summaries about their research on Rose since 2010, calling him one of several young white nationalists avoiding discussion of their most controversial views during bids for public office around the country.Those analyses highlighted Rose’s affiliation with groups that promote a return to “traditional European values” and a revival of “western civilization” that the watchdogs consider feeder organizations offering sanitized versions of white nationalist and racist philosophies. Rose has repeatedly denied those claims, arguing his views are based on political and religious histories, not race.[Gianforte on donating to suspect white nationalist: 'I was unaware of some of his views,'by Jayme Fraser, Missoulian, May 18, 2017]
Notice the scare quotes. What, precisely does Jayme Fraser (email him) find so frightening about traditional European values and Western Civilization? Why, precisely, should the views of "watchdogs" who are now explicitly partisan be taken as the sole basis of a supposed news story?Indeed, Rose is accused of offering "sanitized versions of white nationalist and racist philosophies." Of course, this is just another way of saying that there's no actual evidence of him saying anything "white nationalist" or "racist." Instead, Rose just seems to be opposed to mass immigration, proud of being an American and a Christian, and doesn't apologize for his conservatism. What exactly is controversial about this?A "white nationalist," if the term means anything, is someone who believes whites should have their own country, an ethnostate. Rose denies supporting this. There is no evidence to suggest he is lying. Indeed, we are simply told that "watchdog groups" can read his mind and declare he actually does support this. And the newspaper then uses this as the entire basis of a hit piece.However, more importantly, contrast this frenzy to the MSM's utter indifference to Keith Ellison, now the vice-chair of the DNC. In contrast to Rose, Keith Ellison quite explicitly endorsed a black ethnostate. More importantly, ZERO black congressmen cut ties with him when this was revealed and no one even denounced a plan for black secession itself! Far from being offended by this, mainstream publications like SLATE screamed for Ellison to become head of the entire Democratic Party.The double standards are so obvious and shocking and the arguments so obviously made in bad faith that no thinking adult can take these kinds of smears seriously. East Germany had far more responsive and responsible reporters than the lying smear merchants who make up our so called "free press" today. Republicans in Montana should demand answers, and an apology.(Watch Mr. Rose's video response to the charges below.)