newsweek, april 23, 2007
If you are a parent or a grandparent, you have an absolute responsibility to read the latest Newsweek, dated April 23, 2007. This issue of the weekly magazine is a textbook containing very clear illustrations of the damage being done to America by the liberaliar jihad. I'll summarize some of the more telling items from the magazine, but please, go to the library and read the issue yourself. At the risk of sounding crazy (many of you already think I'm crazy, so I guess it doesn't matter) I'm telling you right now that America is at a crossroads today. The forces of modern liberalism, populated by the ideological descendants of Karl Marx and Chairman Mao, have declared war against the America of our Fathers. They are intent on destroying the old culture, the old customs, the old ideas and the old habits of America, and they will use any means necessary to accomplish their goals. I promise you that, unless the silent majority speaks out, rises up, and kneels in prayer, our children will become adults in a country where a radical leftist Cultural Revolution will be launched from our public schools and our colleges and universities, and America will become much like the China of the 1960's. It will happen unless we stand up against it.
Now, for the articles in the magazine:
1. That Night at Duke (page 40)-- This article gives a factual, almost minute-by-minute account of the entire Duke episode, including the actual events of the night in question. If you are the parent of a college student, you should be very scared. Those lacrosse players were guilty of nothing more than stupidity, immaturity, and sinfulness (which liberals tell us is not a crime) but they were railroaded anyway. Why? Because liberals don't care about justice; all they care about is advancing the liberal agenda by any means necessary. Check out this actual quote from the article:
For young men accustomed to success--to getting what they wanted by hard work, as well as by privilege--the powerlessness was lonely, isolating. It was also maturing.
Well, so long as the wrongful prosecution and the unconstitutional deprivation of their basic, unalienable human rights made them better people, I guess it's all cool! Thanks be to liberaliars for improving us! And you wonder why I detest liberalism!
As you read through the article, it becomes very clear that the two strumpets who "performed" for the lacrosse players were drunk and/or stoned out of their minds. It's also clear that they were angered by racist comments made by the players, so they cooked up a story to hurt the players. A rogue prosecutor, a college faculty composed primarily of liberaliars, and a dishonest, amoral, liberal drive-by media all conspired to illegally and unconstitutionally deprive the accused players of life, liberty and property without due process of law. Truly, this is one of the most shameful episodes in American history.
2. What Will We Learn? (page 35)--The topic is Imus. The following quote is from Rhyming Rev. Al:
"(Imus) can say he wants to be forgiven....But we cannot afford a precedent established that the airwaves can commercialize....sexism and racism."
Wow! That's quite a statement from a man who has gotten rich by spewing racism and sexism towards every functioning microphone he has ever seen! It's also quite a statement from a guy who has never done any more than pay lip service to the damage gangsta rap has done to our culture. What a hypocrite Sharpton is!
Of course, the good rhymin' reverend doesn't give two hoots about Imus, or anything Imus said. The same is true of all of the other liberaliars who feined such shock over the comments made by the I-Man. With liberaliars, the issue is never the issue.
In the days following Imus' comments, I have seen him described 3 different times in the press as, not a "shock-jock" (which he is) but as a "conservative talk radio host" (which he isn't). There is nothing conservative about Don Imus, and you're a liar if you say there is. Imus is a liberal. That's why all of the members of the Beltway liberal intelligentsia were so anxious to sit down with him on his show. But now, he is being labeled as a conservative. Why?
In the Newsweek article, there is a chart labeled "Leading Shock Jocks." The chart purports to show who the leading shock jocks are nationwide, and which of them will be targeted next for filthy, racist, sexist language. Now, when I hear the term "shock jock," the first name that pops into my mind is Howard Stern. A shock jock is a radio guy who makes his living getting just as dirty and raunchy as he possibly can on the radio in order to appeal to the lowest common denominator. There's a market for sleaze. Do you know who the top ten "shock jocks" were on that chart by Newsweek? In order, they were Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Dr. Laura, Laura Inghram, Glenn Beck, Neal Boortz, Bill O'Reilley, Michael Medved, and Don Imus. Those are shock jocks??
It is all so clear to me now. America's leading liberaliars intend to use the Imus situation to destroy conservative talk radio. They don't care about sexism and racism on the air. If they did, they would go after gangsta rap. They don't care about women being victimized. If they did, we would hear more liberal sympathy for the women of Va Tech who were victimized by an evil monster, instead of the sickening sympathy being displayed for the shooter. They don't care about justice. If they did, we would hear liberal outrage over the Duke lacrosse case. They don't care about racism. If they did, we would see liberals screaming for school choice and against the abortion holocaust of black babies. But liberaliars don't care. They are liars.
What they do care about is their atheistic, socialist worldview, and their ability to force we the people to submit to their worldview. This requires that all dissent be stifled and destroyed, and that all who would stand up against the liberaliar jihad be intimidated into silence. The Imus case will give liberaliars the opportunity to declare war on all conservative thought and opinion, and that includes on college campuses. If you are a parent or a grandparent, you need to be aware of the reality of this war. To do otherwise would be irresponsible.
Now, for the articles in the magazine:
1. That Night at Duke (page 40)-- This article gives a factual, almost minute-by-minute account of the entire Duke episode, including the actual events of the night in question. If you are the parent of a college student, you should be very scared. Those lacrosse players were guilty of nothing more than stupidity, immaturity, and sinfulness (which liberals tell us is not a crime) but they were railroaded anyway. Why? Because liberals don't care about justice; all they care about is advancing the liberal agenda by any means necessary. Check out this actual quote from the article:
For young men accustomed to success--to getting what they wanted by hard work, as well as by privilege--the powerlessness was lonely, isolating. It was also maturing.
Well, so long as the wrongful prosecution and the unconstitutional deprivation of their basic, unalienable human rights made them better people, I guess it's all cool! Thanks be to liberaliars for improving us! And you wonder why I detest liberalism!
As you read through the article, it becomes very clear that the two strumpets who "performed" for the lacrosse players were drunk and/or stoned out of their minds. It's also clear that they were angered by racist comments made by the players, so they cooked up a story to hurt the players. A rogue prosecutor, a college faculty composed primarily of liberaliars, and a dishonest, amoral, liberal drive-by media all conspired to illegally and unconstitutionally deprive the accused players of life, liberty and property without due process of law. Truly, this is one of the most shameful episodes in American history.
2. What Will We Learn? (page 35)--The topic is Imus. The following quote is from Rhyming Rev. Al:
"(Imus) can say he wants to be forgiven....But we cannot afford a precedent established that the airwaves can commercialize....sexism and racism."
Wow! That's quite a statement from a man who has gotten rich by spewing racism and sexism towards every functioning microphone he has ever seen! It's also quite a statement from a guy who has never done any more than pay lip service to the damage gangsta rap has done to our culture. What a hypocrite Sharpton is!
Of course, the good rhymin' reverend doesn't give two hoots about Imus, or anything Imus said. The same is true of all of the other liberaliars who feined such shock over the comments made by the I-Man. With liberaliars, the issue is never the issue.
In the days following Imus' comments, I have seen him described 3 different times in the press as, not a "shock-jock" (which he is) but as a "conservative talk radio host" (which he isn't). There is nothing conservative about Don Imus, and you're a liar if you say there is. Imus is a liberal. That's why all of the members of the Beltway liberal intelligentsia were so anxious to sit down with him on his show. But now, he is being labeled as a conservative. Why?
In the Newsweek article, there is a chart labeled "Leading Shock Jocks." The chart purports to show who the leading shock jocks are nationwide, and which of them will be targeted next for filthy, racist, sexist language. Now, when I hear the term "shock jock," the first name that pops into my mind is Howard Stern. A shock jock is a radio guy who makes his living getting just as dirty and raunchy as he possibly can on the radio in order to appeal to the lowest common denominator. There's a market for sleaze. Do you know who the top ten "shock jocks" were on that chart by Newsweek? In order, they were Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, Dr. Laura, Laura Inghram, Glenn Beck, Neal Boortz, Bill O'Reilley, Michael Medved, and Don Imus. Those are shock jocks??
It is all so clear to me now. America's leading liberaliars intend to use the Imus situation to destroy conservative talk radio. They don't care about sexism and racism on the air. If they did, they would go after gangsta rap. They don't care about women being victimized. If they did, we would hear more liberal sympathy for the women of Va Tech who were victimized by an evil monster, instead of the sickening sympathy being displayed for the shooter. They don't care about justice. If they did, we would hear liberal outrage over the Duke lacrosse case. They don't care about racism. If they did, we would see liberals screaming for school choice and against the abortion holocaust of black babies. But liberaliars don't care. They are liars.
What they do care about is their atheistic, socialist worldview, and their ability to force we the people to submit to their worldview. This requires that all dissent be stifled and destroyed, and that all who would stand up against the liberaliar jihad be intimidated into silence. The Imus case will give liberaliars the opportunity to declare war on all conservative thought and opinion, and that includes on college campuses. If you are a parent or a grandparent, you need to be aware of the reality of this war. To do otherwise would be irresponsible.
posted by hondo at 11:20 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home