Bless her heart, that little Tina Fey. She tried to simply be funny during the PBS broadcast of the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor but apparently her shtick didn't click for the PBS execs. They claim they cut her speech due to time constraints but anyone with a brain knows they cut Fey's slam on Palin and conservative women in general simply because they are still licking wounds brought on by the Juan Williams fiasco.
The last thing PBS needs is more evidence they are a media shill for the far left. And so the left chooses to stifle free speech rather than play by their own ideals. Tina, did you learn nothing from the human sacrifice of Juan Williams? The left has no loyalty, no standards, no shame. Right on cue, movements that tout government enforced social equality for all, predictably resort to cannibalism when their message begins to spell out their actual goals.
Here's what Fey said that PBS didn't "have time" for you to hear:
"And, you know, politics aside, the success of Sarah Palin and women like her is good for all women - except, of course --those who will end up, you know, like, paying for their own rape 'kit 'n' stuff," Fey said. "But for everybody else, it's a win-win. Unless you're a gay woman who wants to marry your partner of 20 years - whatever. But for most women, the success of conservative women is good for all of us. Unless you believe in evolution. You know - actually, I take it back. The whole thing's a disaster."
First off, this lie that the left floated about Palin supporting the payment for rape kits by the victim is rarely corrected. The truth behind the rape kit story goes back to the Former Police Chief, Charlie Fannon, who served when Palin was Mayor of Wasilla. Fannon was quoted by two reporters saying he did not think the cost of such kits should be the burden of Wasilla tax payers. He went on to say he believed the cost should be covered by the criminal. This part of his opinion on the matter was conveniently left out as is the fact that Sarah Palin, as Mayor, never supported this measure. I don't fault Fey for continuing this lie, she's but a mindless bot in the army of mindless bots. Her program does not contain a fact finding ap. Bless her bot.
This is how the left operates, taking a shred of information and weaving an amazing, colorful, fantastical yarn with it. Most times the truth is just the opposite of what they claim but facts never stop the minions of the left from obeying the instructions of their masters.
There's no explanation needed for Fey's objection to conservative women's views on gay marriage. That is a valid aspect to lampoon and depending on a person's opinion, the line either is funny or not. Fey is good on that score.
As for the evolution bit, more false insinuation being spewed by the Feybot. I don't know one conservative, male or female who wants the theories of evolution banned. On the contrary, conservatives want the THEORIES of evolution as well as the THEORIES of creationism taught so that children in our public schools have the opportunity to be exposed to all possibilities.
Teaching only one line of thought is in direct opposition to the definition of a liberal education yet for some reason, the concept of a Creator who possibly designed evolution in the first place, is an idea too scary for the secular left to wrap their heads around as adults let alone exposing the minds of their vulnerable progeny to.
Questionable theories are spouted constantly. This will be true till the end of time (if you believe in such a thing). Our children need to hear truth as well as tripe and be capable themselves in deciding what is what. Call me crazy, but I thought that was the point of a liberal education, the free exchange of ideas no matter how boring or off the wall. Why is the left so terrified of hearing opposing viewpoints? Is it because their arguments suck?
My progeny are exposed to liberal ideals all day, every day. The difference is I have made a game out of pointing out the liberal propaganda and explaining my reasons why it fails profoundly in helping people. I lay out my opinions as to how progressive movements serve to enslave the human spirit, not enrich it. This game has been so successful that my kids are now the ones pointing out liberal themes and explaining the progressive fallacies to me!
This is why I think PBS should have aired Fey's comments in full. Either live by your standards or stop claiming you have them. She won an award that she certainly deserves more than the ones doled out to Obama, Gore, Carter and Yasser Arafat. Tina Fey has actually made me laugh on occasion. Those other lefties with awards on their shelves have only made me cry yet the left silences little Tina Fey. PBS ironically has become the network of Professional Bot Silencers. So courageous they are.
PBS chopped Juan Williams for going off the left's script partially even though he was actually making a point FOR the left's script. Now they scrap Fey for speaking directly, verbatim, not one word edited from the progressive left's script.
Why would they muzzle their minions from both sides of their group? Is it because the message is finally being clearly deciphered? Yes, and the control center knows it. All the high-minded, altruistic code words (social justice, green, hope, change, evolution) are finally being understood for what they actually mean, the loss of an individual's privacy, personal property, personal beliefs, personal liberty, person hood, period.
This is the moment of truth. The progressive left has never been this close to real world-wide control as they are at this moment in history yet never have they been this close to being completely revealed for who they actually are and what they truly stand for. Technology is their favorite tool but it may well be their ultimate downfall. Are you a name or a number? There will be a moment we will all have to decide which we go by.
Me? "My name is Raymond J. Johnson, Jr. Now you can call me Ray, or you can call me J, or you can call me Johnny, or you can call me Sonny, or you can call me Junie, or you can call me Ray J, or you can call me RJ, or you can call me RJJ, or you can call me RJJ Jr." or you can even call me STUPID...
But don't ever call me 0238590572.
Besides, that number is reserved for little Tina Feybot, anyway.
Showing posts with label progressive. Show all posts
Showing posts with label progressive. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Soros' One World Order...A 2nd Rate Petting Zoo
As a kid I remember watching Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom and getting upset when Marlon Perkins would step aside, allowing nature to take its course. It seemed wrong to let those baby tigers fend for themselves or the gazelle get taken down by the lion. Marlon was standing right there! He could have stopped all the suffering and carnage but instead, he simply filmed for us so we could see the sometimes happy, sometimes sad, sometimes frightening reality of life in the wild.
Why would such a sweet, kind, knowledgeable man, which Marlon seemed to be, not step in and make all the episodes happy, save all the animals in danger? My father explained to me that if man gets involved in the process of these animals' survival, he would create far more suffering and destruction than what occurs naturally. Animals fair best when left alone to find their own food, solve their own dilemmas, stake out their own territory. Wild animals are happiest minus man's intervention. I would soon learn this holds true for all of God's creatures.
How many times have we all heard "do not feed the bears"? Why not? Because if the bears become dependent on food from humans they lose their hunting instincts, their diets become poor and they actually develop a taste for processed food over the more nutritious wild game. If a bear does become addicted and dependent, they are more likely to seek out humans, causing danger to people and the bear alike.
This scenario of dependence holds true for human beings as well. Think of the riots today in England as well as the ones that happened in Greece and France where people are dependent on the government for their livelihood from cradle to grave. When 20 somethings are protesting about working till the age of 62, that's a pathetic example of humans with zero self-reliance. What has become of young people when they beg for authority to provide them their dreams? Someone has been feeding the bears for far too long. Now that the tourists have exceeded their limits on their credit cards and have to pack up and go home, the junk food is gobbled and gone, leaving the cubs, hungry, clawing and clueless.
Europe has been plagued with this "all-providing government" mentality for centuries compared to America who has only sipped from the cesspool of dependency at certain points in our short history. However, as Europe toys with the idea of checking into rehab, America is full steam ahead, morphing into the big government dependency nightmare our forefathers drafted the Constitution to specifically avoid.
Enter George Soros, aka, Gyorgy Schwartz. This man has a track record of taking down financial systems for the purpose of personally profiting as well as positioning himself to gain control of the markets he prompted to fail. He's made no secret about his desire to bring on a One World government that he would control and provide the conscience for. In some warped way, he rationalizes his vision as fair and just, providing all humans on the earth an equal existence. He's plowed more money than we'll ever know into political campaigns, media outlets, academia and social outreach throughout the world to bring his dream to fruition.
The last piece in his puzzle is the destruction of the United States of America. He finally managed to get a circus bear into the White House. He's cracked the whip at the Fed, who obediently flooded the markets with dollars. And his media pool of trained seals are regurgitating the script he provides on a daily basis. Does Mr. Schwartz (that translates to "Mr. Black" in English) really want the people of the world to be happy? No. His reality of equality for all the humans of the world is no better than the existence of pitiful animals found in a petting zoo.
Since the beginning of time societies have formed with the authority of the masses in the hands of an unelected few. Some rulers in this scenario are intelligent, honest men bringing prosperity to that particular society...for a while. But inevitably in human existence, power is handed off to a jerk or worse, an egotistical madman. Sure, the dependent masses are treated equally under such a ruler, equally poor. It's the same old story, one step forward under a good ruler, two steps back under a putz. The only constant is the fact that the masses are kept like caged animals, with little to no ability to determine their own destiny.
Fast forward to the creation of the United States of America. With its conception, the gates of the petting zoo were flung open. All of the animals determined to fend for themselves, hoping to thrive or at least die with dignity, flooded this new land of freedom. It was the first time in history that man was an individual, not a serf. The ideal was to leave success and failure up to the individual, resulting in a country more amazing than anyone ever imagined. America became the number one destination for any human with self-confidence and a dream. Fortunes were made and fortunes were lost but the successes far outweighed the losses. No where was the standard of living for the majority of the populace this high and growing.
So why wouldn't the rest of the world want to take on freedoms like the United States and offer all of their citizens the opportunity to be a self-sufficient individual member of society? Because the old entrenched systems of authority knew handing that sort of power over to the masses would mean an end to their cushy positions. They too would be flung into the race to fend for themselves, no longer riding the backs of the men they owned.
You see, our founding fathers were the first Marlon Perkins. They respected, revered and had total faith in the abilities of man to survive without a keeper. Not only did they believe man would survive in the atmosphere of freedom, they imagined man would thrive. Freedom provides the ability to succeed and fail on one's own, two of the most precious experiences any human can have. These are the very two experiences a person like George "Sorrows" Black wants to take away from us all. He has no faith in the individual to conduct their own lives in a free society. He much prefers us all to reside in his crumby little petting zoo where he can watch us, feed us at prescribed times, keeping him amused and fulfilled, knowing he rules over all the dumb, incompetent creatures of the Big Schwartz Sorosful Kingdom.
Time will tell if Mr. Sorrows will corral the people of the United States. He's got quite a few eating from his trough already but I believe the wild independent animals still outnumber the dependent progressive menagerie of pets Schwartzie has in his pen.
Word to the herd...bite this hand that feeds you!
Why would such a sweet, kind, knowledgeable man, which Marlon seemed to be, not step in and make all the episodes happy, save all the animals in danger? My father explained to me that if man gets involved in the process of these animals' survival, he would create far more suffering and destruction than what occurs naturally. Animals fair best when left alone to find their own food, solve their own dilemmas, stake out their own territory. Wild animals are happiest minus man's intervention. I would soon learn this holds true for all of God's creatures.
How many times have we all heard "do not feed the bears"? Why not? Because if the bears become dependent on food from humans they lose their hunting instincts, their diets become poor and they actually develop a taste for processed food over the more nutritious wild game. If a bear does become addicted and dependent, they are more likely to seek out humans, causing danger to people and the bear alike.
This scenario of dependence holds true for human beings as well. Think of the riots today in England as well as the ones that happened in Greece and France where people are dependent on the government for their livelihood from cradle to grave. When 20 somethings are protesting about working till the age of 62, that's a pathetic example of humans with zero self-reliance. What has become of young people when they beg for authority to provide them their dreams? Someone has been feeding the bears for far too long. Now that the tourists have exceeded their limits on their credit cards and have to pack up and go home, the junk food is gobbled and gone, leaving the cubs, hungry, clawing and clueless.
Europe has been plagued with this "all-providing government" mentality for centuries compared to America who has only sipped from the cesspool of dependency at certain points in our short history. However, as Europe toys with the idea of checking into rehab, America is full steam ahead, morphing into the big government dependency nightmare our forefathers drafted the Constitution to specifically avoid.
Enter George Soros, aka, Gyorgy Schwartz. This man has a track record of taking down financial systems for the purpose of personally profiting as well as positioning himself to gain control of the markets he prompted to fail. He's made no secret about his desire to bring on a One World government that he would control and provide the conscience for. In some warped way, he rationalizes his vision as fair and just, providing all humans on the earth an equal existence. He's plowed more money than we'll ever know into political campaigns, media outlets, academia and social outreach throughout the world to bring his dream to fruition.
The last piece in his puzzle is the destruction of the United States of America. He finally managed to get a circus bear into the White House. He's cracked the whip at the Fed, who obediently flooded the markets with dollars. And his media pool of trained seals are regurgitating the script he provides on a daily basis. Does Mr. Schwartz (that translates to "Mr. Black" in English) really want the people of the world to be happy? No. His reality of equality for all the humans of the world is no better than the existence of pitiful animals found in a petting zoo.
Since the beginning of time societies have formed with the authority of the masses in the hands of an unelected few. Some rulers in this scenario are intelligent, honest men bringing prosperity to that particular society...for a while. But inevitably in human existence, power is handed off to a jerk or worse, an egotistical madman. Sure, the dependent masses are treated equally under such a ruler, equally poor. It's the same old story, one step forward under a good ruler, two steps back under a putz. The only constant is the fact that the masses are kept like caged animals, with little to no ability to determine their own destiny.
Fast forward to the creation of the United States of America. With its conception, the gates of the petting zoo were flung open. All of the animals determined to fend for themselves, hoping to thrive or at least die with dignity, flooded this new land of freedom. It was the first time in history that man was an individual, not a serf. The ideal was to leave success and failure up to the individual, resulting in a country more amazing than anyone ever imagined. America became the number one destination for any human with self-confidence and a dream. Fortunes were made and fortunes were lost but the successes far outweighed the losses. No where was the standard of living for the majority of the populace this high and growing.
So why wouldn't the rest of the world want to take on freedoms like the United States and offer all of their citizens the opportunity to be a self-sufficient individual member of society? Because the old entrenched systems of authority knew handing that sort of power over to the masses would mean an end to their cushy positions. They too would be flung into the race to fend for themselves, no longer riding the backs of the men they owned.
You see, our founding fathers were the first Marlon Perkins. They respected, revered and had total faith in the abilities of man to survive without a keeper. Not only did they believe man would survive in the atmosphere of freedom, they imagined man would thrive. Freedom provides the ability to succeed and fail on one's own, two of the most precious experiences any human can have. These are the very two experiences a person like George "Sorrows" Black wants to take away from us all. He has no faith in the individual to conduct their own lives in a free society. He much prefers us all to reside in his crumby little petting zoo where he can watch us, feed us at prescribed times, keeping him amused and fulfilled, knowing he rules over all the dumb, incompetent creatures of the Big Schwartz Sorosful Kingdom.
Time will tell if Mr. Sorrows will corral the people of the United States. He's got quite a few eating from his trough already but I believe the wild independent animals still outnumber the dependent progressive menagerie of pets Schwartzie has in his pen.
Word to the herd...bite this hand that feeds you!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)