We’ve heard a lot about the word anonymous during this past week. Many of the definitions have not been kind. And what’s wrong with being anonymous? Let’s do research and see how the dictionary would describe the word:
Anonymous–A wall of invisibility
Anonymous–A bunker for explosive protection
Anonymous–Technological cancellation of weapons for mass destruction
Anonymous–A deceptive figure of speech to prevent lawsuits
Anonymous–A hiding place for less than truthful writers
Anonymous–A purposeful non-acknowledged name for nefarious purposes
OK, OK….so this did not come from a standard dictionary but from our MilesTones department. So let’s see how the Oxford Dictionary describes that popular word:
Anonymous–with a name that is not known or made known-an anonymous letter–
having no outstanding or individual features
This means no recognizable features, which is a blessing to those who are up to no good. However, there are some things that are so identifiable that it is foolish to try to pass it off as, well…nothing. Such was the Gray Lady this week.
A New York Times feature story was published tearing apart our President, Donald Trump. A big ballyhoo took place ahead of time to get the ‘marks’ in place (a term used in the carnival to mean, suckers.) It was proclaimed that a prominent member of President Trumps higher up administration had had enough, by golly, and he (or she) had written “the truth” about what the leader of the free world really [is] under the surface, and even what his intentions are (!)–so the Democrat-Communists are now clairvoyant! This was something even this writer was totally unaware of. (Oops-ended a sentence in a preposition! Sorry. Back to writing school.)
The source of this grand expose’ they said with all sincerity, was an “anonymous” source who wrote and furnished the story. How’s that again? A New York Times Op-Ed editor, James Dao, had his own byline on the story, so there is no question that he wrote the so-called expose’. Do the Communists really believe that we do not think for ourselves? Other writers also are convinced that the New York Times wrote that story.
Dao used no quotes in his story, which was a dead giveaway….such as, that anonymous person said……no, all of that was HIS story and assumptions.
Meanwhile, everyone is running to and fro trying to determine who “anonymous” is. This has gotten to the point of absurdity. The Dem-Commies think they can throw anything out that would make President Trump look bad and the public, who overwhelmingly voted him in, would buy it. Remember the “marks” on the midway of the carnival.
This is NOT the midway of a carnival–Indeed it would be a slander against the carnival to suggest otherwise.
The millions of people, many who had not voted in years, came out in droves on election day to vote Donald J. Trump into the Oval Office. And these voters who see the strides forward President Trump has made for America are not about to sit still while these Commie-lefties try to sabotage him.
The real citizens of America have toughened up and are ready to do whatever is necessary to protect our country.
FINALE: The New York Times has gone from ‘The Newspaper of Record’ to All the News that’s fake to print. This really is not a revelation about that fake newspaper. I lived in New York about 30 years ago and could see clearly during that time that the “newspaper of record,’ leaned to the left. So this is nothing new.
Here’s the point: We must petition the courts for a name change. Here is our brief: The New York Times name is to be changed to The New York Slimes. At least then we will see some accuracy in what they put out for human consumption.
Join the conversation!
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.