THE CRUX OF IT: Some are far more protected than others and less willing to admit it.

 

 

 

 

In my opinion, Roger Ailes is by all appearances, a piece of shit.

This is the man that in his past as a political consultant, helped to package Nixon for the masses, helped to gloss over Reagan’s Alzheimer’s, worked to elect Bush, and in 1996, founded Fox News.

Fox News is also widely known to be extremely questionable at best and completely malignant at its worst.

“Roger Ailes is not on the air. Roger Ailes does not ever show up on camera. And yet everybody who does is a reflection of him.” Those words came from Rush Limbaugh. That endorsement should be evidence enough of his bane.

This propaganda device, created in his image, that calls itself a source of actual news, has made its owner Rupert Murdoch an EXTREMELY large amount of money since its inception.

They’ve managed to do this by spewing the most divisive and fearful hate speech. That speech has targeted virtually everyone that is not white: Black people, Muslims, Mexicans, even a fictional black character – etc.

Over the years, the comments that have been allowed (and more factually, encouraged) to define the Fox narrative have been some of the most offensive to ever be continually aired as part of a designed platform.

Of course, many people have objected to Ailes and all of his “reflections”, but no action against him in the slightest has ever been taken to punish or eliminate this demagogue…

UNTIL…

…He allegedly harmed a white woman.

This brings me to my point.

This man is more than likely FINISHED at the network that he himself Frankensteined into existence.

ANYTHING could be insinuated or blatantly screamed about entire groups of people of color and their supposed character, but the moment this pig crossed the line with possibly just a suggestion of sex, only then is he is condemned as reprehensible and lined up for the “firing squad”.

 

This is NOT meant to suggest that harassment is at all excusable!

This is NOT meant to suggest that women are not subject to absolutely unfair treatment.

This is NOT meant to suggest that if this person did something wrong that he should not be punished.

This is NOT meant to suggest that any woman should not have access to protections.

 

The point is this:

 What does this say about the worth or value of one allegedly wronged woman as compared to entire   groups of maligned people over decades.

 What does that say about who is actually the more protected and who is actually the more vulnerable.

 What does that say about the compunction to right perceived wrongs or not and for whom?

By the way, the allegedly wronged women at Fox have been complicit in the verbal persecution  of others for their entire careers at the network and will undoubtedly be unsatisfied with anything less than their definition of  justice and recompense – for themselves.