New Jersey State Sen.-Elect Edward Durr (R) is becoming very good at being downright savage without even trying, and the same can be said for how often he triggers the mainstream media, prominent Democrats, and Never Trumpers (but I repeat myself on all counts) – also without trying.
Durr’s win was a surprise victory that literally no one including Durr himself saw coming, and was especially wild considering he only reportedly spent in the neighborhood of $2,300 compared to State Sen. President Steve Sweeney’s $300,000+.
Now if Durr was a *Democrat* who pulled off the shocking upset of a powerful Republican state leader, the media would be regaling us with umpteen “he pulls himself up by his bootstraps” stories mixed in with a large helping of Why It All Matters In The Scheme Of Things™ rhetoric for good measure.
But because he’s a blue-collar, Average Joe truck-driving Republican, and because he’s a Trump supporter who was quite vocal on social media about where he stood on the issues, his social media accounts are now being scoured by the Usual
Vultures Suspects in the mainstream media, with the Washington Post, in particular, taking a keen interest in Durr’s past writings because they’re really upset that they missed their chance to keep a Democrat in office.
No, really – they pretty much came out and said as much with the headline to the piece their media reporter Paul Farhi wrote last week. It read as follows:
“How the media missed a New Jersey senate candidate’s racist social media posts — until he’d already won.”
Beyond their very delicious pouting over the fact that the media hadn’t performed their usual function of doing their part to carry a Democrat over the finish line was their accounting of the supposedly “racist”/hurtful posts Farhi talked about that the media had missed:
“Mohammed was a pedophile!” he wrote in 2019 in a tweet that also described Islam as “a false religion” and “a cult of hate.” In other online posts since last year, he has called the coronavirus “the China virus,” blamed an “influx of #illegalAliens” for spreading disease, used the motto of the far-right QAnon conspiracy movement and compared vaccination mandates to the Holocaust. He also denigrated Vice President Harris on Facebook, writing that she had earned her position only as a result of her race and gender.
But as Newsbusters executive editor Tim Graham correctly pointed out in a write-up of his own about the WaPo’s piece, the points Durr made about Mohammed, the “China virus”, illegal aliens and the coronavirus, and Vice President Harris were either points that are legitimate arguments (NOT “racist” or “misogynistic”) or are arguments that really arent debatable at all except in the eyes of smug WaPo types who literally view everything through the prism of racism or sexism because hurt feelings and stuff.
Yours truly has not seen the allegedly offensive social media posts in question, because post-election, Durr went in and apparently deleted them and afterward issued the type of “apology” one issues when they still stand behind what they say but feel regret over how they may have made someone feel:
After his comments were reported last week, he deleted his Twitter account and released a statement. “I’m a passionate guy and I sometimes say things in the heat of the moment,” he said. “If I said things in the past that hurt anybody’s feelings, I sincerely apologize.”
He added, “I support everybody’s right to worship in any manner they choose and to worship the God of their choice. I support all people and I support everybody’s rights. That’s what I am here to do, work for the people and support their rights.”
In my view, if you’re not sorry for what you said but maybe feel like you could have worded something better, that’s exactly how you respond when faced with criticism over your prior postings.
But back to the WaPo, ultimately Farhi blames three main things for the media not catching Durr’s posts before Election Day: Layoffs in local newsrooms, the fact that no one saw Durr winning the election, and the heavy reliance of the MSM on opposition research sent to them from behind-the-scenes politicos, which didn’t come in this race from Sweeney’s side.
Farhi’s piece also assumes, rather arrogantly in my opinion, that if the media had posted about the tweets beforehand that Sweeney would have cruised to victory, which ignores the red wave that even Sweeney acknowledges swept parts of his state. Republican voters in his district were clearly motivated so much so that it’s unlikely that the “controversial” posts in question would have persuaded them against Durr. In fact, there’s a strong likelihood that most of the Republicans who voted for Durr would have been in agreement with what he wrote.
Whatever the case may be, the bottom line here is that the Washington Post is more or less openly admitting that the media failed to do what they feel is their job in carrying the Democrat’s water (as opposed to the balanced reporting they should be doing), and as a result, an uncouth, unheard of Trump Republican who is already outsmarting the media and Democrats before he’s even been sworn in swooped in and did the impossible.
The world’s tiniest violin is playing for the WaPo as we speak. You hate to see it. You really do. 😉