This was, of course, in response to Limbaugh's putrid tirade about a Georgetown law student invited to testify before Congress about a colleague that needed birth-control pills for treatment of an ovarian cyst. Although the need was medically verified, the insurance company insisted it was for contraception and continued to deny coverage. For having the temerity to speak out, womens' rights activist Susan Fluke was attacked as a "slut," and a "prostitute" by Limbaugh, and those were just the headlines. He continued that Ms. Fluke, "is happily presenting herself as an immoral, baseless, no-purpose-to-her life woman. She wants all the sex in the world whenever she wants it, all the time, no consequences. No responsibility for her behavior." I only hope that Sandra Fluke has a good lawyer because in the world of real journalism, this is known as "slander."
Everyone knows that Rush Limbaugh, like Ann Coulter, is a provocateur who knows the more outrageous his remarks, the more headlines they receive, and publicity generates income. In fact Limbaugh and Coulter are the Tea Party inverse of Mr. and Mrs. Jack Sprat, and up until now, anything they said was mainly for publicity or self-aggrandizement. This time, however, Limbaugh not only stepped over the very same line that brought down Don Imus, he snorted it. I don't know which is the most offensive, his complete ignorance of how womens' contraception works, his referring to a womans' health advocate as a prostitute, or his total disdain for the rules of broadcast journalism. Rush's claim that Fluke was, "having sex so frequently that she can't afford all the birth control pills that she needs," was simply stupid. After four marriages, didn't any of his wives tell him how it works? During his non-apology about "using those two words," Limbaugh was perspiring like a whore in church, so I don't understand his rage against prostitutes. Nor do I understand how he can oppose contraception, when he himself is a scumbag.
As a proud graduate of the U. of Memphis' College of Journalism, among the first things we learned was what was and what was not considered "protected speech" under the 1st Amendment. Usually, people in the "public eye," celebrities, or commentators, having been placed in that position by design or circumstance, are considered fair game for criticism, which explains tabloid journalism, The Jersey Shore and The Fashion Police. That's why if I wanted to call Sarah Palin a moronic inferno of malediction or infer that Rush is showing traces of being back on the Oxy, that is protected speech because they are both "public figures." To intentionally pronounce malicious falsehoods against a private person that may tend to damage their reputation, however, is against the law. Attempting to defend the defenseless, the "ditto-heads" are scrambling to find equivalencies in leftist rhetoric by Bill Maher or Ed Schultz. The problem is that these editorialists always pick their fights with the powerful and the pontific. Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly prey on the powerless and rely on scapegoating singular examples, like doctored Acorn videos or selectively edited speeches by Shirley Sherrod, to besmirch an entire movement or people. Let the blowhards ridicule Nancy Pelosi's botox all they want, but never ask a female congressional witness to post sex tapes online for your edification. That makes you not just a defamer, but a pervert, too.
This entire controversy exploded onto social media with a ferocity I had not yet seen. When Limbaugh apologised for his words but not for their intent, dozens of petitions popped up on Facebook and Twitter urging signers to go after Rush's advertisers. Limbaugh scoffed at the herd of corporate sponsors heading for the door saying it was, "like losing a couple of french fries from the container when it's delivered to you at the drive-thru...You don't even notice it." It's true that Limbaugh appears to never have missed a french fry, but with over 98 sponsors and counting suspending their ads, that's beginning to sound like a supersized order. Still, Rush affirmed that on the business side, "everything's cool," although his final radio program of the week contained over five minutes of dead air. By brushing off the desertion of advertisers, Rush has inadvertently left a blueprint for protesters to follow; go after his networks and local stations, which would be Clear Channel Communications, Premier Radio Networks, and locally, WREC-AM600. Rush's audience has been characterized as "angry, white men," but after 20 years of spewing his vile misogyny about "feminazis...out there protesting what they actually wish would happen to them sometimes," surely the mothers, wives, and daughters of these angry men deserve to scream, "Enough!" Hey, it's just the free market at work.
Limbaugh may well be "too big to fail," and survive the onslaught of outrage coming his way, but consider the long-term damage he has done. Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine, the only Republican to vote against the Blunt Amendment which would have vastly restricted womens' access to contraceptives, announced she will leave public office, blaming an "atmosphere of polarization." Not a single Republican rebuked Limbaugh for his noxious campaign. Santorum said Limbaugh was "just being absurd," and Romney disapproved of his "choice of words." Frontrunner Romney might have shown some courage with a "Joseph Welch moment," but he blew it. Welch was the Army attorney who finally confronted Senator Joseph McCarthy in the fifties by saying, "Have you no sense of decency sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?" This assumes Rush ever had any decency to begin with. It's a mammoth undertaking to knock Limbaugh from his perch, but never underestimate the power of passionate women on social media. The unwarranted attack on Sandra Fluke's character has morphed into an insult to all thinking women. Rush might save his job, but he's lost the GOP any chance they might have had to win the presidential election.
45 comments:
It couldn't happen to a more deserving asshole.
If only HIS mother had 'understood' the proper use of birth control!
z
Greenlight Finance 866-66-FASTER continues proudly and resolutely to sponsor Limbaugh, as does Life Lock at 800-440-4833. Give them a call. They don't read online petitions, but they do answer the telephone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqQD4dzVkwk
you are there.
The whole thing kind of reminded me of the left's attack on Joe the Plumber.
Time to exhale, Randy.
Now, for the rest of the story...
Sandra Fluke is the former head of a group called 'Georgetown University Law Students for Reproductive Justice'. She is not just your average law student. She is being backed the progressive public relations agency 'SKOKnickerbocker' where Anita Dunn,former Obama communications director, is the managing editor. On Feb. 9, a group called 'The Feminist Majority Foundation' arranged for Sandra to appear at a press conference criticizing the Catholic Bishops for objecting to the Obama contraceptive mandate. After that,Congressman Elijah Cummings, former chairman of the Congressional Black Congress, invited Sandra to testify in front of the House Oversight Committee. She was turned away by Darrell Issa, because she had no expertise in the church/state debate, and she was known to be a leftist political rabble rouser. A week later, Pelosi staged the mock hearing that introduced Fluke to the world. Pelosi's hearing was a subterfuge to get Fluke national exposure. The entire Fluke affair was engineered by a cabal of progressives in order to turn attention away from Obama's assault on the Catholic Church and to change the argument away from Obama's monstrous blunder and make it into a feminist issue. Due to the public's ignorance of the background of the situation Fluke and the lefties were a success. Another reason why Fluke is a phony is that any woman can get a month's supply of birth control pills at any Walmart or Target for $9/month. For a three year tenure in law school that amounts to $324, not $3,000. I'll bet that Sputnik didn't know anything about any of this and if he knew, he would keep it quiet. He is SUCH an honest man who wants the public to have the whole truth before making up their minds. Anybody know what a four-flusher is?
Cousin Cliff, you rascal you. Someone could write a book on the one sentence that you submitted. Liberal hypocrisy is staggering. A sin is only a sin when a conservative does it (Hey Bill Clinton...wink,wink) For instance, the Left scewered Bush over gas prices back around 2006 and they didn't get over $3/gal. Now the Left is trying to sell the public on the idea that $4/gal. or higher is a blessing in disguise. They also complained bitterly about Bush's national debt and called it a national security concern, but now they are completely OK with a debt ceiling that is much higher and see it as no problem. And it goes on and on and on. Go figure.
Rush is bombastic and is at least as much an entertainer as he is a politico. Only a hard core leftist could embrace someone like Bill Maher, though. He is one of the most evil men in the public eye. Rush may be something of a buffoon, but Maher is satanic. Sput seems to be rather fond of Maher. You know what they say about birds of a feather...
Does the University of Memphis School of Journalism teach journalistic integrity? It either is not taught or Sput's leftist ideology prevents him from practicing it. An honest leftist will get no where. Now there is one caveat and that is ignorance. If someone steadfastly and emphatically presents information that is not completely true, he may be ignorant and not dishonest at all. Sometimes I find myself wondering which factor is the predominant one. To be fair, I might add that a strong subconsious filter, such as extreme leftist ideology, can make one appear to be dishonest when the issue is really a distorted mental lens. I always try to give a dog a good name.
Anon, 8:27 as usual your rhetoric promotes ignorance of ignorance and judgment without critical reasoning offered.
Perhaps you would care to consider offering a working definition for “evil” and “satanic” before enumerating at least one attribute of Maher’s that makes him such. If you come up with something, you can then offer your “reasoning” about how Rush gets described as: “may be something of a buffoon”?
Anon, I give you credit for being very skilled at saying nothing of substance while making it appear astute and authoritative. I hope you are capitalizing on your skill by receiving a handsome salary from the think tank bucks. What a coup for the PTB if they are receiving your services free of charge.
Bill Maher is openly anti-religion and mocks God and believers freely. He produced a movie in which he reveled in his atheism and demeaned believers (and God) called 'Religulous'which is a word formed from 'religious' and 'ridiculous'. Some would call the content of this movie hate speech. Why go to so much trouble to denigrate something that so many people hold dear in there lives? To my thinking that is pure evil...like taking something precious and grinding it under foot. However, I get the feeling he may be one of your heroes. To each his/her own. Rush is obviously buffoonish and his latest caper (Fluke) proves that. In a sense, he seems to believe that he is above the law (of good taste), but this latest exercise in poor judgment may undo him. Even some conservatives are calling for him to step down. He is becoming a liability to the movement that he professes to cherish. That makes him a buffoon. In regard to your puerile attempt to cast aspersions on me you make yourself the fool. I am sorry, but that is true. If to you I am skilled at saying nothing of substance, that very statement certifies your ignorance. Just as you challenged me, I challenge you to back up your statements. But, be careful that you don't put yourself in a worse light than you already have. Your serve...
How about a fair and balanced moment. Limbaugh's faux pas, though regrettable, is nothing compared to Maher's long list of vulgar things that he has said about conservative women. What?! No moral outrage against Maher? Not even from the feminists? Could this be what some have called selective indignation? In Sput's world only Democrats always do the right things. That's about as sophomorish an attitude that one can have. And, I am NOT a Republican. They are completely ineffectual, spineless losers. They just keep the Dems seats warm until the Dems can get back in office and continue their march to full-blown socialism. Sput's ravings can only appeal to the most dim-witted and ignorant echelon of liberaldom. And that is no joke.
Has anyone wondered when the avalanche of entitlements will end?I once said that it will continue until there is a government agent who will come to your toilet and wipe your butt for you. At first that was hyperbole, but now I am beginning to wonder. How long do you think that a broke nation can continue to fork over freebies to tens of millions of feckless malcontents most of whom never made a serious attempt at becoming self-sufficient. 'Oh, boo-hoo! Who will come forward to pay for my contraceptives so that I can screw with peace of mind'? What a joke. Buy your own fucking contraceptives you inveterate leeches. How did America survive before the advent of LBJ's Great Society? Even as a teenager I bought my own contraceptives. This should set the whiney liberals to howling. i can hear it now...'Eeew! You are mean. You are selfish because you won't pay my bills, etc.' Perpetual infants.
...and that, my friends, is the sound of one hand clapping...
Bill Maher’s perception of religion in general is limited. He sees everything that is far-fetched or, as he says, ridiculous, and he ignores what can and does serve people who sincerely seek truth and purity in the teachings at the core of all religions. In this way he uses his limited perceptions to mock others while aggrandizing his limited ego-mind. I sense from watching him on his program that he knows where he is coming from and sincerely believes he is right. Being “right” does not go in for tolerance or understanding.
Ignorance is our natural human state. The more one comes to know this truth the wiser one becomes. The more one remains ignorant of his ignorance the more entangled in, and addicted to, illusions one becomes. Ultimately, everyone goes through the same stages of maturity. Much peace and tranquility is derived from being understanding and generous of spirit toward those who are less mature. As an analogy, how silly it is for a student in highschool to criticize an elementary school student for their lack of knowledge. “The child is the father to the man,” as someone once said.
The ego does not thrive on real, spontaneous compassion, kindness, and feelings of brotherly love. Hence, the lack of popularity in trying to live up to these and other virtues. Still, life goes on and we do the best we can as we can. Life is always offering lessons.
Maher even disses New Agers, so at least he is an even-handed besmircher of everything that spiritually inclined people hold sacred. Maher had Benjamin Creme, who is the very embodiment of New Age, on his show and mocked him to his face and to the TV audience. To me, that is malignantly evil and I am no fan of the New Age (but was for many years). Maher impresses me as the kind of guy who would find it pleasurable to torture caged animals. I have heard a number of people, including liberals, who speak of him as oozing hatred for those with whom he disagrees. He is a hate monger of the lowest order. Parenthetically, the adage that 'the child is father to the man' means that in raising a child a man concomitantly raises (or, matures) himself. In that sense the child serves as a 'father' to the man.
“How long do you think that a broke nation can continue to fork over freebies to tens of millions of feckless malcontents most of whom never made a serious attempt at becoming self-sufficient. 'Oh, boo-hoo!”
You would do well to seek out some figures on how many American citizens need to receive food stamps (now known as SNAP). As of August of 2011, 46 million people were receiving SNAP. Surely that is increasing as people are having their wages cut and jobs exported or given to someone willing to work for less. Prices go up and incomes drop or disappear. Referring to these millions of people as you do (see quote above) is cruel or simply ignorant.
I suggest you watch some of the true life stories of real people suffering the injustice and cruelty of our culture’s rugged individualist delusion and greed paradigm. Two places these stories can be found are on PBS TV programs, Need to Know or possibly Moyer’s Journal. The conventional media much prefers to ignore these realities by distracting us with “reality” TV competitions, for one. “The land of the free and the home of the brave” is being transformed into the sickening and the frightening. If you are paying any attention at all, you know that this is true.
Performs, I wasn't speaking of the truly needy...those who are victims of unfortunate circumstances. Most of this type just need a hand up until they can get back on their feet. I was referring to those who willfully live off of others with no intention of developing themselves to where they can be producers and not leeches on the productive efforts of others. There are lots of that type. I saw them everyday during my 36 year tenure as a teacher. Some liberals, like Frances Fox Piven, want a guaranteed income for life for everyone whether they choose to work or not. That is insane and destroys the human spirit. America has a spiritual wasteland of families who have never worked for several generations. This is treating people like cattle and is NOT compassionate at all. I have never known of anyone who was mentally and physically healthy and who had a good work ethic that didn't make something of themselves. There are countless examples. My wife received a minimal education in high school, admittedly because she was a druggie. She never went to college, but she has a spartan work ethic. After she matured and got 'clean' she worked her way up from an entry level job at a bank to become a vice-president and a member of the bank's
board of directors. Healthy people who can't make a go of it in life need to look within themselves for the answers and quit holding their hand out to be taken care of. Disabled or impaired people are the exception and should be taken care of by sociey. The others just need a kick in the ass.
Anon, i agree with you about those "with no intention of developing themselves to where they can be producers and not leeches on the productive efforts of others." We would be better off kicking the hedge fund shmucks, the bankers, and the lobbyists out of the system or, for that matter, out of the country.
Those skilled at sucking up the wealth and shitting on the impoverished suckees are a problem we need to recognize and solve. Let's get at it!
There are plenty of corporate criminals. For that matter some of the biggest leeches are our own Congressmen. They are not subject to many of the laws that they pass for the peons. All they have to do is to serve for 6 years and they qualify for a lucrative life-long pension, and of course, they get special, gold-plated health care. None of them would ever subject themselves to Obamacare, because they know ho shitty it is. Ever wonder how so many of them can go into office with an average income and come out of office as millionaires? They allow themselves special I.P.O deals and they get to take advavtage of insider trading. So, yes, the leeches are not all poor people. The U.S. federal government is a version of Crime, Inc. and play the citizens for suckers every day. Just wait until you see what they have in store for us down the road.
Sput, the fact that you would serve as an apologist for Acorn and Shirley Sherrod tells me that you are either ignorant or dishonest. In fact, nearly every one of your commentaries puts me in the same quandry. I would rather believe that you are simply a radical, left-wing ideologue who sees everthing throgh a distorted prism. But, you make so many 'mistakes' in your reportage that it makes me wonder. And, with the exception of Allen and Cousin Cliff, your ditto-heads never call you out on anything. I guess most intelligent people just refuse to get involved with this blog. I have tried to get others involved with this blog just for a diversity of points of view, but when I get someone to read it, they say that they don't want to waste their time. One even said that he didn't want to leave his fingerprints on such a leftist fabrication. I guess I'm just masochistic.
Anon, while you rail against the corrupt politicians in great detail, you are nearly silent when it comes to the business elite, the owners, funders, upper management, and board members, whom I mentioned. It is these big shots of Big Biz who are making most of the decisions that profoundly affect the lives of millions, or make that billions, of us every single day. THEY DO NOT DESERVE THE RIGHT by virtue of any wisdom they possess to make these decisions, for they make them solely for the purpose of their own personal gain.
Our society would be much better off having a thousand more lazy, good-for-nothing loafers, than another crony capitalist out to make his killing.
We must democratize the business sector of our country, and re-democratize the government.
By the way, your “criticism” of Randy and his views are pathetic and childish. Give him an argument. Don’t call him names.
Additional material on the subject:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-march-13-2012/the-vulgar-games
First of all my husband is neither ignorant nor dishonest, you jerks. But he does have opinions and they are his, just like yours belong to you. Now what I have a problem with is that you GOP creeps won't even sign your names. You cowards. At least Randy puts himself out there and voices his and his only, opinion. You guys on the other hand don't even have the balls to sign your names. Pussy's!
The Obama administration is in bed with Wall Street. In condemning one of these elements you condemn both. The federal government opened the door to the housing crisis beginning with the Community Reinvestment Act which forced banks to make risky loads. I know this for a fact because my wife was one of the ones who had to sign off on very risky loans because of government coercion. She used to complain about it all the time, well before the subprime meltdown. Of course when the government opened the door unscruplous types took advantage of the situation to enrich themselves ultimately at the country's expense. It takes two to tango...Wall St. AND the federal government. If you hate rich people you should hate rich liberals as well and that includes your precious Obama. He and Michelle live royalty from the days of yore, yet for some reason the Left turns their heads when the discussion turns to filthy rich liberals...like Nancy Pelosi. It seems that only the conservative rich are evil. How do you think that the liberal rich became wealthy? I would submit that it is in the same way that the conservatives do...by being 'the business elite, the owners, funders, upper management, and board members'. Do you also despise fabulously wealthy liberals such as George Soros, or the Rockefellers? Performs you remind me of a famous socialist who said,'It is better for all to be poor than for a few to be rich'. In the end the only things that are shared by the serfs under a socialist government are poverty and misery, but I guess that this is worth while if no one drives a better car than you and there is no one to look up to or down on. Egalitarianism snuffs individual freedom and private property. That is where I draw the line. Why not move to Venezuela? By the way, I give Sput lots of arguments, but he is a leftist ideologue and they tend not to fair well in debates and they very seldom change their minds. That is not calling him a name any more than calling me a conservative is calling me a name. I periodically leave my name to assuage Sput's irascible and foul-mouthed wife. At least Sput seems to have some class. I very seldom come across nasty-mouthed, ill-tempered women unless it is while watching a biker documentary or some such.
Performs, here is a brief over view of what is going on in the world. The uber-wealthy constitute a global shadow government. They use governments to serve their ends. The wealthiest of the wealthy are pro-socialist. Does it stike you as odd that the extrememly wealthy would support an economic system that would take their wealth away? No, it just doesn't add up. Here is what is happening. The super-wealthy are super-capitalists. They support socialism to rob the wealth of the middle class thereby eventually eliminating them. When it is all said and done, there will be just two classes...a relatively small class of uber-wealthy, super-capitalistic elitists who will rule over a gargantuan class of the (equally) dispossessed and poor. They are going for it all. They will eventually own all of the Earth's resources and exercise control over humanity which will provide an endless source of very cheap labor. All of you starry-eyed, utopian, socialist dreamers will prove in the end to be their useful idiots. You are unwittingly helping the very people that you despise to realize their goals. They will live in opulent luxury while you will be performing some menial labor...perhaps in a factory or a farm. Duped and with no way of escape once their gobal plans are realized. There will be no free country to escape to. Welcome to Prison Planet where iron-fisted Communism will finally be realized and never to abate.
The driving force behind the move for world government (NWO), which is what I have been talking about, is Agenda 21, short for The Global Agenda for the 21st Century. It was conceived by UN leftists and New Agers and presented to the world at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. George H.W. Bush along with over 178 other nations signed up for it as 'soft law'. But, Bill Clinton made it hard law in America through signing E.O.#12858 which established the President's Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD)which through bureaucratic regulation has been implementing Agenda 21 throughout the country for almost 20 years now. George W. Bush was also part of the cabal because he allowed it to proceed and kept the whole thing quiet from the citizenry. There are many trying to wake the public up to what is happening, but the mainstream media, and most of Congress (both parties), refuse to do so. The ultimate goals of Agenda 21 are to eliminate national sovereignty, re-distribute wealth from the developed nations to the Third World, eliminate individual freedom, and private property, and to control all of the Earth's resources under the guise of environmentalism. All human behavior which impacts the environment will be strictly controlled and most human behavior affects the environment in one way or another. Dick Durbin's pending legislation called The Livable Communities Act is a large part of the implementation of Agenda 21 in America. Look into that for yourselves. It wears an appealing environmental mask, but doesn't reveal the dark side of the issue. The prime targets of Agenda 21 are the developed (wealthy) nations. They will be forced to contribute a percentage of their GNP to the Third World countries. This has nothing to do with charity. Remember what I said about looting and eliminating the middle classes? It boils down to an ingenious method to institute world-wide Communism without firing a bullet. Kruschev was right about America (and the rest of the world) falling into Communist hands like fruit. He just didn't know about the ultimate mechanism for bringing it all about.
Here is a quick expose of the Livable Communities Act. It is a means to implement another one of the major goals of Agenda 21 which is to return as much of the earth to wilderness as possible. The LCA provides the means for this. Rural and suburban areas will be eliminated and all people will live in predesignated habitation zones. The idea is to re-develop cities into 'vertical' cities as opposed to 'horizontal' cities (sprawl). People will live on the upper floors of huge multi-story buildings which will have shops and offices, etc. on the lower floors. Transportaion will be reduced to walking, bicycling, and mass transit. There will be very few cars. Each habitation zone will be surrounded by its own food growing zone which will feed the people in each habitation zone. This will establish a limit on how many people can live in each habitation zone. Moving to another zone will depend upon the availability of food in that zone amongst other factors such as your having needed occupational skills for the zone in question. Google Biodiversity Map and you will see the overall plan. Wilderness zones are coded in red while the habitation zones are coded in light green. You will see that the vast majority of the country is planned to be wilderness. People are not going to be forced into these zones by machine guns and cattle cars. The need to move will be fabricated through government funding, regulations, etc. For instance, all funding of infrastructure will be eliminated to rural and suburban areas. In time, blight will kick in, property values plummet to near zero so people will look for an alternative. Voile! Durbin's Livable Communities will be waiting for them. Parenthetically, the Supreme Court's Kelo decision will prove to be an important element in the realization of the Livable Communities plan. As you know, the Supremes re-interpreted eminent domain (takings clause of the Constitution) so that now all a developer has to do is show that he can use someone else's property for something that will contribute to the greater good...like more tax money. Everyone's property is now at risk. This will be an invaluable help in re-developing the cities to accord with the dictates of the LCA. Our town is ready to install Smart Meters which is also a part of the LCA. It is being sold as a means of energy efficiency, but ultimately the government will be able to control the energy usage of each home. A book could be written on all of the particulars of the LCA, but this gives you an idea of what it is about. I, for one, will miss freedom.
Jerry, I agree with you. You hit the nail on the head!
I can no longer sit back and allow, communist infiltration, communist indoctrination, communist subversion, and the international communist conspiracy, to sap and impurify all or our precious bodily fluids.
It all goes back to when they started fluoridating water. Jerry, do you realize that in addition to fluoridating water, why there are studies underway to fluoridate salt, flour, fruit juices, soup, sugar, milk... ice cream. Ice cream, Jerry, children's ice cream!
You know when fluoridation first began? Nineteen hundred and forty-six. Nineteen forty-six Jerry. How does that coincide with your post-war Commie conspiracy, huh? Its incredibly obvious isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core Commie works.
I, uh...I...I...first became aware of it, Jerry, during the physical act of love. Yes, a uh, a profound sense of fatigue...a feeling of emptiness followed. Luckily I...I was able to interpret these feelings correctly. Loss of essence.
I can assure you that it has not recurred, Jerry. Women uh...women sense my power and they seek the life essence. I do not avoid women, Jerry.
But I...I do deny them my essence.
General Jack D. Ripper, great satire, but everyting that I said can be verified by simple Google searches. The plans are afoot. Whether they reach fruition is another thing. The fact that Communist's highjacked the Green Movement is easy to verify. Do a little research into what Gorbachev has been up to over the past 20 years or so. Ever heard of the Earth Charter? Maurice Strong? Robert Muller? Do you know anything about the Rio Earth Summit (a.k.a UN Conference on Environment and Development) of 1992? Agenda 21 was presented to the world from that meeting. If you will bother to do a little study you will easily learn that Agenda 21 is a blueprint for control of the Earth's resources and all human behavior that impacts the environment. From Agenda 21, the UN has recently written an environmental constitution for the world called DICED (The Draft International Covenant on Environmental Development). Its goals are to control global population growth, re-distribute wealth among the nations,force economic equity and justice,exert economic control over nations,land and water use control, and re-settlement control (where you are allowed to live). Communism may be an out-dated term, so call this whatever you want. Dick Durbin's Livable Communities Act is still current and going through the legislative channels. These are not the ravings of conspiracy theorists or the aluminum hat crowd. All you have to do is get off your silly ass and do a little research. Sometimes I think that liberals never read any books. Come to think of it, being uninformed is probably how most liberals stay liberal. Get with what is going on in the 21st century and let go of Woodstock.
Jerry, I appreciate your willingness to share your thoughts about how you see things unfolding and in which direction we seem to be headed. I think what you are saying is far less distracting than most of what is babbled about on TV news. Still the freedom that I seek can never be taken from me. It lies within me as truth without contradiction and helps me rise above the limitations of my ignorance. It will solve all problems and answer all questions. My duty is to open my heart and try my best to keep it pure so it can abide there.
Additionally here are some quotes attributed to Robert F Kennedy:
All of us might wish at times that we lived in a more tranquil world, but we don't. And if our times are difficult and perplexing, so are they challenging and filled with opportunity.
Few will have the greatness to bend history itself; but each of us can work to change a small portion of events, and in the total; of all those acts will be written the history of this generation.
I believe that, as long as there is plenty, poverty is evil.
There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why... I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?
Personally, I like the Agenda 21 and Diced notions as starting points for change. The status quo sucks in my opinion.
Lots and lots of people today think that it would be groovy to live in a Marxist state. My bias is for individual freedom, civil rights, and private property. But, to each his/her own. By the way, I do acknowledge that the forces for freedom are being routed in America and throughout the free world. The battle is in the process of being lost and your brave new world is about to be put into place (could take a few more years, but no more than 30). So, you will soon be getting what you think you want. But, the elements that will be taking over have a history of being unimaginably rapacious once they have solidified their power. They wear a congenial mask until it is time to set up their shop and then you find out what they are really about. If you go along with their program, you may survive. Others are dispatched. They often solve supply and demand problems by mass murdering the excess demanders. A CIA agent infiltrated a group of them back in 1980. At the planning meetings he attended they discussed the re-eduaction camps that would be implemented after they take over. They estimated that they might have to liquidate at least 10% of the population who do not go along with the program, which at the time amounted to 25 million people. If what they said comes to pass, that will be 31 million today. Before you accuse this as the ravings of a conspiracy theorist, study world revolutions from the French Revolution, to the Bolshenik Revolution, to Hitler, to Stalin, to Mao, to Castro, to Pol Pot, etc. They tend to solve many of their problems through liquidation of entire populations. One of my favorite stories is how Stalin would fill cattle cars with people like sardines and then park the cars and leave them until the occupants died slow, unimaginably painful deaths. I'll spare you the details. I don't have to tell you about Hitler. One of their cheerleaders, George Bernard Shaw, thought that a good policy for them would to be the establishment of tribunals that each person would have to appear before every five years to explain why he should not be killed (in terms of his usefulness to society). When he/she ceased to give an adequate explanation, it would be bye-bye time for them. I heard him say all of this on a documentary through his own mouth. He also thought that dictators were wonderful...he especially liked Mussolini. These people don't have the same mindset as those that most of us think of as being civilized. The stories of horror from totalitarians are unimaginably ghastly. Those who think that a Marxist dictatorship would be a wonderful thing may be changing their minds after they live under one. Everyone who is allowed to live will get the basics, but at a horrendous price in terms of individual freedom and civil rights. If you think that it is better for all to be poor and dipossessed and treated like cattle, than for a few to be rich, then you may like it.
P.S. I am not speaking of Obama per se. He is just the front man for a huge progressive machine which in turn is allied with the globalists. The ones to fear are the ones who will be establishing the future global government. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights will be voided and then everything will be as they command. I forgot to say that it will be too bad for the 'useless eaters' of the world. You should hear about their plans for them. I hope that you are not a useless eater, because there will be no Bill of Rights to protect you. Don't forget that the French and the Germans thought that everything was cool until their respective regimes changed. Then things became crazier than seven hells...literally.
Here is an interesting article relating to Obama's recent (3/16/12) National Defense Resources Preparedness Order. Notice that it is written in 'The Progressive', a liberal magazine, and not by the hated conservatives. Apparently, even progressives have a limit on how much usurpation of power they will take from King Obama.
http://www.progressive.org/permanent_war_economy.html
I don't really expect anyone on this blog to read the article. Leftist ideologues stringently protect themselves from anything that might threaten their preconceived notions. Cognitive dissonance is too painful for them to bear. It would be horror beyond imagining if they were to have an epiphany that may lead them to believe that some conservative ideas might be correct. They would have to hide it from their cronies who have not had the experience. They could no longer go along with everything that the revolutionary guard espouses...how disconcerting. I thank the God, that most liberals don't beieve in, for my epiphany. It took a while, but I was finally able to wash the stink and delusions of liberalism from my psyche.
Jerry, aka Anon, being an open to epiphany fellow that you are, you will be glad to read this blog that brings together many of the ideas you have described but with a different way of looking at them.
In particular, it observes the temporary, ill-conceived notion of personal property and its outcomes.
http://kulturcritic.wordpress.com/posts/enjoining-the-final-battle/
Rousseau exclaimed in his Traité sur l’origine de l’inégalité parmi les hommes:
The first man who put a fence around a piece of land and said: ‘this is mine’ and then found simpletons who believed him; he was the true founder of bourgeois society. How many vices, how many wars, how much murder, misery and grief the person might have prevented who would have torn down the fence-posts, filled in the ditches, and cried out to his fellow men: ‘Do not believe this trickster! You are lost if you forget that the fruits belong to you all, the soil to no one’.
And now the rest of the story...
Rousseau was one of the fathers of the French Revolution. He was one of the favorite philosophers of the Jacobins, a subversive order that instigated the Reign of Terror which made manifest horror beyond imagining. Their goal was (and continues to be in latter day incarnations) the destruction of all religion and all forms of government so that mankind can return to the 'freedom' of pre-industrialized society...no religion, no government no restraint upon the human appetites. Another way of saying a return to barbarism. If you will bother to read an unbiased account of the French Revolution, you will be exposed to some of the most satanic, barbaric slaughter of human beings imaginable. In fact, numerous times authors refused to describe the way that some individuals were slaughtered because they were too vile to be put into print. Here are a few that have been related...thousands of priests were slaughtered in an attempt to rid France of religion. One priest had his face cloven by a sword and then a wooden pike plunged through his heart. A government official had his heart cut out and was decapitated and both his heart and head were used as center pieces on a dining room table. One woman had her breasts cut off, each foot nailed to the floor, and then a fire set between her legs and was slowly burned to death starting with her genitals. Another woman had her breasts cut of and her entire sex organ, vulva and all, cut out by a knife while alive. The tales of unimaginably sadistic slaughter are innumerable. The tens of thousands that were guillotined were the lucky ones. The French Revolution was perpetrated by the politcal radicals of the day... followers of your beloved Rousseau. The Jacobins, who for all practical purposes were practicing satanists, loved him. Jacobinism to this day is used as a pejorative for radical, left-wing, revolutionary politics. Be careful about those that you select for heroes, because when you tell educated people of your fascination for Rousseau, they may start looking for the door. At least do a little research and don't put too much stock in selected quotes. Even Satan can be made to look good with selective editing. Saul Alinksy dedicated the original release of 'Rules for Radicals' to his hero Lucifer (Satan). Alinsky was a latter day Jacobin. And guess what? Alinsky is one of Obama's and Hillary Clinton's heroes. History runs in cycles. Some of the same undercurrents that drove the French Revolution are at work in America and throughout the free world today. Those who think that it can't happen in America are deceived. The same spirit that has instigated all world revolutions is still at work on planet earth. We haven't seen anything yet. Hitler and Stalin were pikers compared to what is coming. By the way, check on some sane quotes by others in regard to private property. Use critical thinking. Don't be snowed by what on the surface appears to be wisdom.
Performs, you have swallowed the Rousseauian/Jacobin lie hook, line, and sinker. It is the God of the Bible (as opposed to the countless idols that people follow) that ordained both private property and individual freedom. I'll let you verify that for yourself...if you care to. This is why one of the first things that revolutionaries do is to attempt to destroy true religion. The Jacobins attempted to murder all of the clergy in France. This is also the reason that modern liberals have such a fierce hatred of both Judaism and Christianity. Marx strove to to eliminate all private property and all religion for the same reason. In fact, the Communist Manifesto was derived almost point for point from the beliefs of the Jacobins and those who were behind the Jacobins. The truth of the matter is that this battle is the most ancient one of all. The Jacobins didn't invent it. They just perpetuated it. If you had the eyes to see, you could see evidence of all of this right here in America. And, you can take this to the bank... it will not result in a heaven of justice and equity on Earth, but just the opposite. The deceived don't know the spirit that is driving the whole hoax. But, the grisly mass murders of the French Revolution, the Bolshevik Revolution, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, et al all point to the nature of the spirit behind it. I really wish you well in your quest to find the Truth. You seem to be a very well-meaning person. But, you are deceived. I hate to say that, but someone told me the same thing long ago when I was involved in a New Age cult that was the real deal as far as New Age cults go...initiations of illumination, self-realization, reverence for the Great White Lodge that purportedly guides the evolution of humanity etc., the pursuit of godhood through reinacrnation, the whole bit. Thank God I escaped. For that matter much of modern liberalism amounts to a godless cult.
A, the fatal error in the argument you present is setting up an either/or mandate: either all private property and religious behavior and thinking is pure and socially healthy, or it is not worth a plug nickel. You seem to view your “enemies,” those with whom you disagree, only as all or nothing thinkers like yourself. Even somebody like Bill Maher whose rhetoric sounds extreme could easily be convinced (by me in a rational conversation) that the religious creeds of the world serve a useful purpose. But they also must be transcended (which involves a stage of rebellion) to get to, and actually experience, Infinite Truth.
Beliefs, opinions, and conclusions stop real growth. They separate individuals from one another creating conflicts. They aggrandize self rather than efface self, thus, fostering greed, arrogance, ignorance of ignorance, and other vices.
The idea of “conventional wisdom” is primarily that which one seeks and embraces because it offers one comfort, convenience and certainty. True freedom comes with questioning the beliefs and opinion set forth by the culture one identifies with. Here one dares to face impropriety and blasphemy in the effort to seek and find the truth from within oneself, and finally live it as best one can.
I do not view those who believe differently as enemies, unless their beliefs lead to violence. And, of course there are a lot of 'wooden nickels' on the spiritual path. Most people have to kiss a lot of frogs before they meet their Prince. But, keep weaving your web of self-deceit if you choose to do so. You will not be beholden to me in the end. I still believe that you are a well-meaning person...keep searching and good luck. By the way, the 'stage of rebellion' bit sounds dangerous. I hope that the 'snake' that bit the Jacobins hasn't bitten you.
Performs, what do you presume 'Infinite Truth' to be and how do you purport to attain it? Are you saying that you have no beliefs or opinions, and draw no conclusions? No wonder your thinking is so confused. By the way I have never said that all religious behavior and thinking is socially healthy. There has been and continues to be a lot of religious thinking and behavior that is destructive. Just because some ideas are wrapped in religious language doesn't make them valid. The only stricture that I would put on private property is that of eminent domain which the Constitution permits. Do you not enjoy what you own? If not, will you give me your home and car and your most cherished personal items? I can arrange to acquire these things from you if you will tell me how to meet with you. I would love to deliver you from the guilt that owning things seems to bring you. I will do it as a favor. Just tell me how big of a truck to bring. Bill Maher would laugh you to scorn if you were to bring up the subject of religion in his prescence. Watch his movie 'Religulous' to see what I mean. You make it quite clear that you do not embrace 'conventional wisdom', or any other type of wisdom for that matter. That takes some doing. To go through life without a single shred of wisdom is quite a feat. You apparently seem to feel the same way about discernment and rational thinking in general. Finally, what type of rebellion do you envision that will open the doors of access to 'Infinite Wisdom'? Is it the rebellion that seems to go on constantly within your own mind or is it some sort of actual rebellion in the real world? I assume that you believe in the 'real' world. If not, stay away from fire and sharp onjects.
Jerry, Infinite Truth is one aspect of Divinity, Reality, Existence, the Being of all beings. My becoming more and more receptive to the love, grace and guidance that flows from the Divine Beloved through the lessons of day-to-day life is how I purport to approach I.T. As regards beliefs and opinions, I make efforts to not take them seriously or identify with them. I prefer to question or challenge what I learn with more critical thinking. I am okay knowing what I know and all that I do not know for now, but I do not intend staying there. You know that what you thought was true years ago no longer seems true now, so why should that not be the case now as well?
The biggest problem I have with the government’s obession with protecting private property rights is that the “owners” are making decisions that all to often affect the public in very destructive ways. They only give a shit about their business profits and their aquistion of more and more stuff and their personal power. This makes no sense and is not moral. (Note: read Robert Reich’s column in today’s San Francisco Chronicle) This will change because it is insane and must be changed. Maybe soon.
As regards my own personal property, I do my best to appreciate it and be responsible for it. As far as you wanting what I have, I doubt that you would want any of it or appreciate it as much as I already do. As long as you or I do not do harm to others by owning what we own, let us leave it as it is.
Understanding spiritual truth is simple because it is very rational. Intellectually almost anyone can grasp the concepts. What is very difficult is to live in accord with these principles, which would involve disentangling one’s self from the ignorance and delusions contained in most of what passes as “conventional wisdom.” One author has said: what calls itself “realism” is realisn’t. “...life is but a dream.”
The rebellion that will change the world is radical. I find it contained in the following quote:
“Do not try to conquer others; conquer yourself and you will have conquered the world. The simplest way to do this is to love God. Begin to love God by loving your fellow beings. Begin to see God by seeing Him in all beings and things. Give without thought of return; serve without thought of reward.” --Meher Baba
As an egalitarian progressive I would like to address one of the last bastions of discrimination and inequality. This involves the plight of the physically unattractive. Through an accident of birth and through no fault of their own many people are relegated to a life of loneliness due to something that they cannot help, namely being physically grotesque. I would like to make some suggestions to overcome this glaring injustice. First, the magnitude of the problem necessitates strong government intervention and the development of a program to rectify the situation. I am proposing that the President institute a Bureau of Equality for the Physically Repulsive. This bureau would assign all single people in the country with an attractiveness index, say a 1 to 10 scale with 10 being exotically beautiful and 1 being gag-a-maggot grotesque. Through a system of tax incentives and fines, pairings of 10's with 1's could be encouraged, 9's with 2's, and so on. Every citizen who is single would be required to submit forms monthly to the bureau which verify that he/she made legitimate efforts to date someone from a physically unattractive class under penaly of fine for non-cooperation. How could any fair-minded person argue with this? After about a century of this type of social engineering we could develop a race of people without the extremes of beauty and ugliness. This new race would be moderately and uniformly physically disgusting. Everyone would have an equal chance at companionship, if not marriage. We will have realized yet another egalitarian ideal. Beyond this, I am working on a proposal to integrate public school classrooms with the higher orders of ape, thereby extending egalitarianism to other orders of the phylogenetic tree. Why should humans exercise dominance over the lower orders of life? How disgustingly inequable to suggest that a man is superior to algae or moss. With luck, over several millenia we might devolve all life back to the amoeba state. This would consummate the egalitarian ideal for all life on Earth. After all, it is evolution that produces inequality. The only answer is to force devolution on all forms of life.
Post a Comment