It is no wonder that the US is falling into the junk heap of history. When politicians can use the idea of first time sex as a metaphor for voting for a candidate, we have really dropped to a point in history that we doubt the country can ever recover. When a party debases women and what should be an important life passage, is made to be a joke, can we expect great things from that group of imbeciles.
Where are the women's groups protesting this distasteful ad? Their silence is indicative of their agreement that whoring around is OK as long as it is with a Democrat? Yet, they raise holy "H" when Romney said he had received "binders of women."
Of course, these same politically oriented groups had no problem with President Clinton being "serviced" in the Oval (or should we say Oral) office! Hey, that was just sex between two consenting adults, right? But when Herman Cain was accused of having an affair, they drove him out of the Republican primaries. Or the "high tech lynching" of Clarence Thomas, remember that? The Justice was not married at that time and neither was his accuser, Anita Hill.
It points to the very politically tainted interest groups that seem to get all of the print these days. No longer do we search for the truth, everyone has an agenda including the news media. If the pol crosses the "politically correct" line, he/she is hammered into submission. However, it seems that only Republicans seem to get that treatment!
When the truth seekers in the media no longer do their job and become another interest group, we have indeed lost our country as truth cannot see the light of day. Once truth become malleable, it no longer maintains the element of reality and can become anything one wants it to be. Like Alice learned, up is down and down is up.
Can we turn this boat around before it goes over the edge? You tell us--
Conservative Tom
When President Obama came to office, he had the good wishes of an overwhelming majority of his countrymen. His party controlled both houses of Congress. He marked a turning point in the nation’s troubled history of race relations. He had a free hand.
Nixon went to China when a McGovern could not have gone, because everyone was certain of Nixon’s hatred of communism, but not so certain of McGovern’s. President Obama could have led a renewal of marriage among poor Americans generally and among blacks in particular, and who would have held it against him? Not the Christians, certainly, who would have been gratified and surprised to find, in this regard, an ally in the White House. Not blacks themselves, because they looked to him as their leader. Not the media, who would have found themselves caught in the pincers. President Obama could have led the moral rally that Bill Cosby has for so long wanted to lead. He could have said, “There’s a reason why God included adultery among the things forbidden in the Ten Commandments!” He could have said, “I wasn’t virtuous either when I was young, but I now see that that was wrong. Fornication is not a sport. You should marry before you do what brings children into the world.”
He could have reached out to evangelicals, of whatever race, to promote the virtue of chastity. He could have roused the sluggardly mass media from its stupor and forced them to acknowledge how children suffer when they do not grow up with a married mother and father. He could have visited prisons and interviewed the men about the homes where they grew up. He did none of these things. Instead he acted so as to inscribe the sexual revolution in granite, as a new Ten Commandments from on high. In generations to come, this colossal cultural failure, this tremendous opportunity squandered, may loom larger than his economic failure.
When he and his people agreed to this repugnant ad, they said, “You, boy, growing up without a father, to hell with you. We want your vote, and we’ll arrest you if you hold up a gas station, but otherwise you can go hang.” They said, “You, girl, looking for somebody to marry and finding nobody because there aren’t that many decent men around anymore, to hell with you. We want your vote, and we’ll burn the Constitution to provide you with artificial estrogen, and we’ll throw you a party when you give up, when you get pregnant without marriage, but as for the real loss you and your children will incur from the cultural disarray, that’s your lookout and not ours. Besides, who needs a husband anyway?” They said, “You, people of faith, trying desperately to keep the moral sewage out of your homes, out of your children’s lives, fighting the television and the school textbooks and the internet at once, you can go to hell. Who cares if your children capitulate?”
Every citizen who still holds to the truth long neglected or scorned, that sex is for marriage, and children should grow up with a mother and a father, should pay heed. We may disagree about this or that economic policy. That is no exact science, and unforeseen events may save a bad strategy or frustrate a good one. But no believing Christian (or Jew, or Muslim) can justify so antisocial and vicious an ad. The people who conceived it are not on the road to corruption. They must already have rotted all the way through.
Where are the women's groups protesting this distasteful ad? Their silence is indicative of their agreement that whoring around is OK as long as it is with a Democrat? Yet, they raise holy "H" when Romney said he had received "binders of women."
Of course, these same politically oriented groups had no problem with President Clinton being "serviced" in the Oval (or should we say Oral) office! Hey, that was just sex between two consenting adults, right? But when Herman Cain was accused of having an affair, they drove him out of the Republican primaries. Or the "high tech lynching" of Clarence Thomas, remember that? The Justice was not married at that time and neither was his accuser, Anita Hill.
It points to the very politically tainted interest groups that seem to get all of the print these days. No longer do we search for the truth, everyone has an agenda including the news media. If the pol crosses the "politically correct" line, he/she is hammered into submission. However, it seems that only Republicans seem to get that treatment!
When the truth seekers in the media no longer do their job and become another interest group, we have indeed lost our country as truth cannot see the light of day. Once truth become malleable, it no longer maintains the element of reality and can become anything one wants it to be. Like Alice learned, up is down and down is up.
Can we turn this boat around before it goes over the edge? You tell us--
Conservative Tom
October 29, 2012
Rotten to the Core: Obama’s “First Time” Video and the Democratic Party
By now everyone paying attention to the presidential
race has heard of the tasteless double-entendre ad the Obama campaign has put
out, comparing voting for the President to losing your virginity. I am trying—I
am failing—to imagine the astonishment if someone had suggested the like to the
leaders of the Democratic party of my youth and my father’s youth. Those men
loved their country, even if their policies have led to the leviathan that now
buys our submission with our own money. There was something else besides
patriotism that united men like Stevenson, Humphrey, Muskie, Scoop Jackson,
McGovern, Shriver, Nunn, and Bradley. They were men, and they
understood that there are things a man does not stoop to do.
Plenty of people have noted the contempt for women that lies just beneath the
sniggering ad, the supposition that women are ditzy dames who vote for
dame-issues, which is another term for baby-making without baby-making. What
they are missing is the callous disregard for a group of people most devastated
by the sexual revolution.When President Obama came to office, he had the good wishes of an overwhelming majority of his countrymen. His party controlled both houses of Congress. He marked a turning point in the nation’s troubled history of race relations. He had a free hand.
Nixon went to China when a McGovern could not have gone, because everyone was certain of Nixon’s hatred of communism, but not so certain of McGovern’s. President Obama could have led a renewal of marriage among poor Americans generally and among blacks in particular, and who would have held it against him? Not the Christians, certainly, who would have been gratified and surprised to find, in this regard, an ally in the White House. Not blacks themselves, because they looked to him as their leader. Not the media, who would have found themselves caught in the pincers. President Obama could have led the moral rally that Bill Cosby has for so long wanted to lead. He could have said, “There’s a reason why God included adultery among the things forbidden in the Ten Commandments!” He could have said, “I wasn’t virtuous either when I was young, but I now see that that was wrong. Fornication is not a sport. You should marry before you do what brings children into the world.”
He could have reached out to evangelicals, of whatever race, to promote the virtue of chastity. He could have roused the sluggardly mass media from its stupor and forced them to acknowledge how children suffer when they do not grow up with a married mother and father. He could have visited prisons and interviewed the men about the homes where they grew up. He did none of these things. Instead he acted so as to inscribe the sexual revolution in granite, as a new Ten Commandments from on high. In generations to come, this colossal cultural failure, this tremendous opportunity squandered, may loom larger than his economic failure.
When he and his people agreed to this repugnant ad, they said, “You, boy, growing up without a father, to hell with you. We want your vote, and we’ll arrest you if you hold up a gas station, but otherwise you can go hang.” They said, “You, girl, looking for somebody to marry and finding nobody because there aren’t that many decent men around anymore, to hell with you. We want your vote, and we’ll burn the Constitution to provide you with artificial estrogen, and we’ll throw you a party when you give up, when you get pregnant without marriage, but as for the real loss you and your children will incur from the cultural disarray, that’s your lookout and not ours. Besides, who needs a husband anyway?” They said, “You, people of faith, trying desperately to keep the moral sewage out of your homes, out of your children’s lives, fighting the television and the school textbooks and the internet at once, you can go to hell. Who cares if your children capitulate?”
Every citizen who still holds to the truth long neglected or scorned, that sex is for marriage, and children should grow up with a mother and a father, should pay heed. We may disagree about this or that economic policy. That is no exact science, and unforeseen events may save a bad strategy or frustrate a good one. But no believing Christian (or Jew, or Muslim) can justify so antisocial and vicious an ad. The people who conceived it are not on the road to corruption. They must already have rotted all the way through.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for commenting. Your comments are needed for helping to improve the discussion.