Logic and reason have left the building

Trump made a statement giving the elites and the media the vapors:

“Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, and if she gets to pick — if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is. I don’t know.”

Trump's loose language can have many interpretations, and I would take him at his word that what he meant was that the political power of the gun rights movement might make a difference in the vote in November. On the other hand, the other interpretation, as Robert Ibrahim has noted over at the American Thinker in a post entitled The Real Reason Trump's Second Amendment Comment Provoked Outrage is also possible. Trump could be reminding not only the Hillary supporters and progressives, but the media too, that when a fee people are prevented from exercising their free choices, they can, indeed their duty when everything else is exhausted is to revolt.  It is the reason the Second Amendment was put into the Constitution.  When using reason, words, and peaceful protest do not effect change, indeed, when reason and peaceful protest is scoffed at, there remains only to revolt and resist.  (Before you become cynical over recent "peaceful protests" as at Ferguson, MO or Baltimore, MD, please remember the Tea Party protests in Washington, DC, where not only was there no violence whatsoever, but the place was cleaner than when the protesters arrived.)

This is an historical, proven fact, and why liberal media and elite are, if only subconsciously, going crazy against Trump: he dared mention -- and thus legitimize -- the one thing that must never be mentioned, not even as a remote consideration, because it is the one thing guaranteed to overthrow them: rebellion. Hence the media circus of shock, awe, and outrage: it’s all meant to quickly rebury this briefly exhumed and dangerous idea from the public’s eye.

And before someone sics the Secret Service or the FBI on me, let me be clear I am not threatening anyone. I am merely reporting what is known; that if the "progressives" do not back off, they will, at some point, draw a reaction from a people that have held back too long. Even God has his limits. Which brings me to another piece from the American Thinkers by Joanna Rosamond entitled Media Driven Insanity. A quote:

The fact that several months before elections we are constantly told that a candidate has already won, definitely rings an alarm bell. Orwellian “newspeak” morphed today into NewsSpeak, with the mainstream media acting as thought police. While we are being nonchalantly reminded about a long list of observable crimes that go unpunished, the media cheer their authors and try to contaminate us with the “enthusiasm.” One can´t help but notice how visionary Orwell´s writing was: “So much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don´t even know that fire is hot.”

Where did ol´ good logic go? The processes used in thinking and reasoning should be natural to homo sapiens, and it´s impossible not to have a brain-ache when you clearly see that it´s not the case.

The emphasis is mine.  Does the emphasized part cause anyone else to think of another document that has a similar phrase: "But when a long train of abuses...pursuing invariably the same object...to reduce them under absolute despotism...?" Perhaps it is just me, and I am becoming to paranoid, but it seems one has to suspect that some hanky panky is going on.  How can the everyday Democrats support a woman who has committed so much crime and mischief?  Indeed, how are everyday Democrats able to stomach Obama, Holder, Lynch, or any of the other un-indicted felons they have put in power?  More and more it boggles the mind.