Media Bias
Tim Rutten writes a weekly column for the Los Angeles Times called "Regarding Media.Tim Rutten writes a weekly column for the Los Angeles Times called "Regarding Media. The Yiddish writer Sholem Aleichem once remarked that in the Jewish hamlets of his native Ukraine there were only two people who really were serious about God. One was the local rabbi and the other was the village atheist ... (snip)
[W]e all get along fairly well because most people behave pretty much like the residents of Aleichem's shtetl, neither aflame with religious certainty nor insistent on unbelief. This tacit arrangement is a deep expression of social sanity and makes possible not only the separation of church and state in a nation where faith flourishes, but also the unparalleled flowering of every sort of religious institution — devotional, educational and charitable — that is one of American culture's unique achievements.
Increasingly, though, this sensible accommodation is being undermined. It began with the demands by social conservatives — mainly evangelical Protestants and right-wing Catholics — that candidates for office and public officials make ritual obeisance to expressions of religious faith and conform themselves to a checklist of approved positions on issues ranging from abortion to capital punishment.
Here we go again with the liberal big lie strategy. The broadcast networks pick up this sort of rubbish...it is passed on to the public as news and conservatives never counteract with the truth.
Rutten, again, is totally erroneous in his view. His premise is entirely backwards. Any "sensible accommodation" in this country has been upended by the relentless activism from social liberals, not from conservatives. For the past several years, an aggressive secular-progressive ideology, largely supported by liberals, has sought to reconstruct the traditional American cultural and social landscape. To illustrate this, let me ask:
Which ideology began being "insistent" that an unborn human can legally be exterminated at any point, and for any reason, through all nine months of pregnancy?Which ideology seeks to remove "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance and "In God We Trust" from our coins? (BTW, "In God We Trust" made its first appearance on U.S. currency in 1864, during the Civil War (source). "Under God" was added to the Pledge over 50 years ago, in 1954. (In July 2006, House Republicans overwhelmingly voted in favor of the "Pledge Protection Act" (H.R. 2389). House Democrats voted overwhelmingly against it. (Dems voted 'nay' 158-39. Reps voted 'yea' 221-8.)))
Which ideology has been so "insistent" on the legalization of gay "marriage"?
Which ideology is behind the wish to remove decades-old monuments from public viewing? (this) Which ideology is behind the desire to remove a tiny cross from the 48-year-old Los Angeles County seal? (this)
Which ideology is responsible for providing legal defense to an organization whose stated mission is to oppose age-of-consent laws that make sex with children a crime?
Social Conservatives “demands” to not come from any desire for “ritual obedience” to religious faith…rather, it is a response to a relentless, uncompromising effort by progressive liberals. Unrestricted abortion, gay “marriage” and attacks on nativity scenes are just the tip of the iceberg. Rutten’s anti-conservative bias has it totally wrong.
Social Conservatives have not rejected accommodation…secular-progressive liberals are the moving force here and all the evidence points to it. [ LA Times ]
Democrat Flip-Flop
...and the frog said, "Why did you sting me? looking over his shoulder at his passenger. " Now we will both drown." "Because I am a scorpion...,” said the sinking scorpion..."That is what we do..."
Democrats are doing what Democrats do. They are manipulating facts to support their preconceived opinions and prejudices and squandering a unique political opportunity, which will soon be lost.
Partisan vitriol and political myopia have overshadowed sense and reason and the euphoria and sweet taste of victory will eventually turn to angst and the bitter taste of bile seasoned with denial.
That is what the Democrats do...such a true statement...manipulation, lies and postulating their elitist views just for congressional power. Nothing else matters to them. That will not stand, When world events turn and they begin their rush to avoid blame...their time will end.
Regardless of how or why we are engaged in Iraq, how and when we leave is of paramount importance.
Senators John McCain and Joseph Lieberman are correct in warning that failure would be “catastrophic” and spread instability throughout the Middle East…as well as undermine U.S. credibility.
Meanwhile, Senator Harry Reid originally agreed but apparently has ‘changed his mind’ after being taken to the partisan woodshed.
Queen Bee Nancy Pelosi claims adding more troops would be an escalation of the war that rejects a call from voters. The election results were not the mandate Nancy and the anti-war crowd claim to support their ‘cut and run’ mantra.
Reid’s flip-flop was a surprise…kinda. Just a week ago, Reid said he would support a troop surge if there were some plan for withdrawal. As McCain observed, "This is sort of a 180 in a very short period of time.’
Pelosi must still believe we can just sit down and 'talk' with the insurgents...having to deal with the war in Iraq takes too much of her time away from the socialist agenda she is trying to bulldog through congress. As for Reid, he has some new position every week or so. Maybe it just depends on which caucus he has been meeting with that week and then switches like a chameleon to whatever cause they have at the moment. Expediency is the watchword for Democrats...just do whatever it takes to keep power...everything else is totally irrelevant...including national security.
The Dems push to implement the recommendations of the Baker-Hamilton report is dumber than a box of rocks. Engaging Iraq neighbors to stabilize the region is just plain nuts.
There is zero incentive or motivation for Iran or Syria to help the U.S. stabilize a manufactured democracy they want to tear down.
Strategically and tactically, neither Iran nor Syria wants the U.S. to succeed. They want/need us to fail in order for them to introduce an Islamist theocracy.
The Baker report is defeatism personified. They don't call it quitting, but hey, that is what it is.
How can the Democrats possibly believe that two countries whose clerics call for our death and America's demise every day would assist us in any way? Iran wants to keep the Shiites on the war path. Their thinking is just plain nuts!!! There is no other way of saying it. We can only pray that the next two years brings back a sense to American voters to throw these fruitcakes out in 2008.
[ NewsWithViews ]
Grampus