The liberal terror over Hillary Clinton losing the election somehow never goes away. You can tell from opinion articles published at The Washington Post over the weekend.
On the front of the Style section on Saturday, romance novelist Lisa Kleypas pleaded with Hillary Clinton not to bad-mouth romance novels, since she is a "romance novel heroine." As you can imagine, Bizpac Review reported Twitter had a field day with Hillary's actual husband and her "bimbo-busting."
This happened because Clinton stated in a podcast with Post editorial writer Jonathan Capehart that men and women learn abusive attitudes from reading romance novels about "women being grabbed and thrown on a horse and ridden off into the distance."
Kleypas thought that was all wrong and explained her romance novels are mainly set in the Victorian era, “when women were restricted in what they could wear, what they could learn, what they could earn. As idealized beings who belonged in the house, women were supposed to go from maidenhood to motherhood. They were required to be demure, virtuous and sexless, placed on a pedestal so high that their voices could never be heard.”
But “that definition of the ideal woman was a trap — a woman is trapped any time she lets someone else define her. And no one understands this better than you. I think that’s why you have such an extraordinary record of fighting for women’s causes.”
As the piece continued on page C-2, it carried the headline "Cliches about romance make heaving bosoms sigh in dismay."
Kleypas concluded: “During your legendary Wellesley College commencement speech in 1969, you looked into an unknown future and said, ‘Fear is always with us but we just don’t have time for it. Not now.’ You headed forward fearlessly and achieved so many of your dreams, including love, marriage and family. This is why I consider you an honorary romance heroine — no pedestal required, just a pantsuit.”
On the front page of the Outlook section on Sunday, the Post published some Fake News it liked. Jeffrey Lewis (Twitter handle @ArmsControlWonk) imagined how Trump would kill millions of Americans in a nuclear/conventional war with North Korea in 2019. This nightmare scenario started with an accident: North Korea shot down a South Korean airliner (think KAL 007 in 1983), and then Trump killed millions with a reckless tweet.
The Post also tried this shtick in the Outlook section in July of 2016, finding an expert to say Trump's "almost pathological anger" made him too nuts to have the nuclear launch codes. It came complete with a large graphic putting a mushroom cloud inside Trump's skull.
The online headline on the Lewis piece was "This is how nuclear war with North Korea would unfold: In one all-too-plausible worst-case scenario, millions die from mistakes and a tweet." South Korean president Moon Jae-in offers a limited response:
Moon's limited missile strike might have been enough by itself to start the nuclear war of 2019. South Korean and American officials are still trading accusations. But the surviving members of the Moon administration insist that things would have been fine had President Trump not picked up his smartphone: "LITTLE ROCKET MAN WON'T BE AROUND MUCH LONGER!"
It was an idle Twitter threat -- Trump hadn't yet been briefed about the missile strike, and it hadn't yet been discussed on Fox & Friends. But how would Kim Jong Un know that? To him, with U.S. forces lurking nearby and South Korean missiles slamming into his military sites, the meaning of Trump's tweet seemed clear: Trump was now using the shootdown as a pretext for the invasion he had wanted all along.
Kim Jong Un, in this liberal scenario, knows the Americans allowed the murder of Moammar Qadhafi and the hanging of Saddam Hussein, so he launches missiles at U.S. forces in Japan and South Korea, causing massive casualties in urban areas. The U.S. responded with a conventional air attack on North Korea, foregoing nuclear weapons, but Kim doesn't know that, so he starts lobbing his missiles at the Amercian homeland:
One warhead hit Manhattan — which North Korea’s state media had specifically mentioned as a target of its long-range missiles — while the two missiles pointed at Washington struck the Northern Virginia suburbs. Trump, in a makeshift bunker in the basement at Mar-a-Lago, felt the earth shudder as the last warhead landed in the town of Jupiter, Fla., about 20 miles away. The other two missiles fell wildly off course, detonating in the ocean or in rural, sparsely populated areas.
The direct hit on Manhattan killed more than 1 million people. An additional 300,000 perished near Washington. The strikes on Jupiter and Pearl Harbor each killed 20,000 to 30,000. These were just estimates; the scale of the destruction defied authorities' ability to account for the dead. Hundreds of thousands perished in South Korea and Japan from the combination of the blasts and fires.
It would be years before the U.S. government could provide an accounting of the toll. The Pentagon would make almost no effort to tally the enormous numbers of civilians killed in North Korea by the massive conventional air campaign. But in the end, officials concluded, nearly 2 million Americans, South Koreans and Japanese had died in the completely avoidable nuclear war of 2019.
Back in August, Lewis wrote a piece for the WashPost headlined "I’m a nuclear weapons expert. Trump’s presidency is my personal nightmare." First sentence? "My greatest fear is a reality: A lunatic has gained control of nuclear-armed missiles that could reach halfway around the globe. And, to make matters worse, Kim Jong Un has them, too."
Lewis has also tweeted that much of America (and his family) are fascists.
