Mediaboss Marketing

When it comes to mobilizing the base, realists on the right will grudgingly concede that liberals outperform conservatives. Its not even close. Progressives march, demonstrate, boycott and raise hell at the drop of a hat; the traditionalist, in response, rolls his eyes, bites his tongue and goes to work.

The efforts of noisy, left-wing agitators do not always or even, usually lead to electoral success. Still, to those of us who prefer order over chaos, law over anarchy and assimilation over multiculturalism, progressives domination of the news cycle, day after day, is tiresome.

A partial explanation comes to mind: Liberals typically argue with emotional appeals, while conservatives are persuaded by reason and evidence. Of the two forms of persuasion, an emotional appeal is more likely to inspire protests (which often include vandalism, arson and assorted acts of violence). Those who read newspapers or watch serious television news understand that professional journalists are highly skilled practitioners of the emotional appeal.

Reason and evidence might persuade, but they dont drive frenzied mobs into the streets. A high-profile illustration is the manner in which each camp has reacted to President Donald Trumps executive action on immigration.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals began its convoluted, legally indefensible ruling on Trumps immigration order as follows: To rule on the Governments motion, we must consider several factors, including whether the Government has shown that it is likely to succeed on the merits of its appeal, the degree of hardship caused by a stay or its denial, and the public interest in granting or denying a stay.

Of the three factors mentioned by the court, the second and third are irrelevant; only the first (legal merit) matters. But, for obvious reasons, the court studiously avoided the law most pertinent to its decision: Title 8 US Code, section 1182(f). That law had to be ignored, for it represents an insurmountable stumbling block (or should I say wall?) in the path of the courts predetermined ideological outcome: a defeat for Trump.

Judge for yourself. Here is Title 8 US Code, section 1182(f): Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

Passive news consumers, those who obtain their information (if any) from celebrities, Facebook and the E! television network, have never heard of the relevant immigration law. Because of the limited, largely inaccurate and inflammatory information they receive, they take to the streets to shout, burn and loot.

Only active news consumers, those who seek out additional (and legitimate) sources of information are aware of section 1182(f). If the law is what matters, its a slam-dunk. Case closed. That is a rational, evidence-based argument.

But among progressives, including the frequently overturned, activist Ninth Circuit Court, whether Trumps executive order is legal doesnt matter at all; what matters is delegitimizing the Trump administration and obstructing its progress. By any means necessary legal or not.

The Ninth Circuits decision advances the left-wing portrayal of Trump as an ignorant bigot who discriminates against Muslims (and blacks, women, gays, lesbians, the poor, the handicapped, etc.). That is an emotional appeal. Among leftists, the illusion of hate is a great motivational tool. It is quite effective, unfortunately, but it has nothing to do with the law.

Charles Davenport Jr. is a News & Record columnist who is published on the first and third Sundays of the month. Contact him at cdavenportjr@hotmail.com.

Read more here:
Charles Davenport Jr.: Liberals favor protest over law - Greensboro News & Record