All the Rage

I'm guessing it may have been "Pick A Topic" day at ol’ Ayn Rand and Dr. Ghate reached into the old top hat and pulled out a small piece of paper that had on it one word: Eco-terrorism. Being the brilliant mind he obviously is, Ghate had to dissect the thought process and rationale of those who seem to believe in the liberal "ends justify the means" doctrine.

To me, Eco-terrorists are simply liberal-academia-brainwashed vandals, who will inevitably become murderers. It's only a matter of time that whatever it is they plan on destroying will contain a human being or two trapped within. These punks are not worthy of such intellectual inspection. To give them such time for brainy analysis elevates them to a status they aren't worthy of. Thus my inability and refusal to accept the very well thought out concepts and premises offered by Dr. Ghate.

Next....

Shankar Vedantam of the Washington Post believes Republicans are racist down to their very core. White Republicans especially. Now while Vedantam may now have an "Employee of the Month" privilege with the liberal Washington elite and can go to a couple of parties via the back door, one can see the obvious flaws in his piece and his attempts to place another wall between white-and-everyone-else America.

Vedantam led off, "Put a group of people together at a party and observe how they behave. Differently than when they are alone? Differently than when they are with family? What if they're in a stadium instead of at a party? What if they're all men?"

Duh. Of course men behave differently, as do women. Men talk sports and tits, women talk fashion and size; this isn't rocket science. But where the writer goes with this is predictable. Also it partially explains where a lot of our tax dollars are going in liberal academia.

I think we all know where the author is going with this. Republicans are racists... again.

As the writer did not include what those negative words were, it's impossible for me to comment on the intent or accuracy of this study, but I will say this: it's an election year. Liberals will do one of the only things left they do best: race bait. To be quite frank, these studies are just another attempt to paint minorities the poor victims at the hands of evil white conservatives.

Because of political correctness, I do talk differently about women to men than I do when women are around. As human nature being what it is, I'll bet women say some things behind closed doors that would rate at least an R in the movies. As this will be considered airing dirty laundry by those who have skins thinner than that on old ketchup, tough: blacks have some rather harsh things to say about whites when they're not in the room as well.

But just who is responsible for the negative image of blacks and minorities, Kanye? I don't see conservatives promoting gangbangers into pop icons. I don't see conservatives condoning out-of-wedlock birth as if blacks are just a bunch of over-breeding monkeys who don't know any better. I don't see conservatives embracing Affirmative Action, as they don't believe blacks are so inherently stupid as to need that extra push. I don't see conservatives promoting welfare and social benefits. I don't see conservatives acting like black people's best friends, while liberal Democrats to this day cover up a past that was racist, murderous, and to this day unacknowledged. Thank you very much, Black "History" Month.

Liberals originate most of the negative associations that adhere to minorities, and Vedantam’s piece is shameful. The Washington Post, by publishing this, is showing not only political bias but also racial slander. They think they are doing a public service. That kind of backward thinking is another reason race relations in the nation remains an unsolved mystery, by design.

I consider the troops as important as any celebrity journalist does. David Westin at ABC may think the war finally has hit home, but liberals only think things real when they have the audacity to happen to them. The troops volunteer to do something greater than themselves. ABC anchorman Bob Woodruff went to Iraq for ratings and will be paid more this year than most of those grunts will see in a lifetime. I'm sorry Woodruff was injured, but unlike the soldiers, he could pull the plug and go home whenever he wanted. The troops will remain until the mission is done. Who is more worthy of media attention?

By the way, anyone see Democracy Now!'s Amy Goodman last week. In case you missed it (and I have no choice), she was broadcasting from the headquarters of Al Jezeera in Qatar. Now Goodman claims to be a leader of "independent" journalism. No one tells Amy what to say or what to do.

So it was quite telling to see Ms. Goodman last week all dolled up, hair combed to the point of a sheen, make-up on her face, lipstick, new clothes, etc. This week, we’re back to same ol’ ordinary Amy. I guess the owners of Al Jezeera don't want uncombed, haggard-looking American feminists, like the ones we get to see on a daily basis, on their newscasts. That is, unless they're on videos, (that only they receive) about to be murdered by terrorists. I'd also be curious if the independent Goodman could say whatever she wanted, or if she was willing to be jailed and/or much worse should she be critical of any facet of Muslim society.

I guess we'll never know.

If this isn't hate speech, I don't know what is.

- World Net Daily

Isn't there ever a positive message a liberal can offer to kids? Global warming is burning the Earth up. It's going to be extra cold this winter. SUV's are making the air unbreathable. The children are our future. Abortion on demand. George Bush doesn't care about black people. We created terrorists and they are misunderstood by evil, intolerant Neocons. It's a man's world and they force women to shave.

I've commented on inflammatory diatribes like those issued by Bond before. Talk about a one trick pony. I just wonder when America will wake up and see what cowardly liberals force into the minds of impressionable young students. If there were a conservative giving a speech at Fayetteville, the university would be remiss if they didn't provide a liberal voice for "balance." Liberals can rant until they're blue in the face unchallenged because such a challenge would be disastrous and they know it.

Who was given time to respond to Julian Bond? Any guesses out there...?

We've all read about the Danish cartoons that caricatured the Prophet Muhammad, thus sending thousands of Muslims worldwide into the streets in a murderous frenzy. As I am still unable to see the constructive wisdom in the act, as well as the thinking, here's a quote to ponder....

- Pakistan Association of New Zealand president Naveed Hamid said his group had organized a march because Muslims wanted to make their hurt felt to the public

Now while I believe in God, I'm not an avid churchgoer. Maybe it’s something about me previously working in a marketing department for a ministry. I understand the passion some have for their religion and would never denigrate someone's religious belief. Then again, I'm not a liberal.

Remember a few years ago, artist Andres Serrano created a stir when he presented a photograph at a New York City museum of a crucifix in a jar of his own urine? How many Christians, who were justifiably outraged, took to the streets and started burning things?

Or how about Chris Ofili's paining of the Holy Virgin Mary described lovingly by writer Jerry Saltz:

By general appearance, the painting could have been created by a six-year-old. The "skills" weren't there. Again, there was outrage by Christians, but no taking to the streets worldwide in violent protest.

Maybe it's because we know how to protest over here. Maybe it's because we are the tolerant ones and know the difference between right and wrong. Maybe it's because some know the answer to "What would Jesus do?" Maybe it's because our society is maturer.

To say anything more would invite personal jihad, and I just don't need the hassle.