Allison Bricker

Synopsis:

Global warming alarmists want Americans to believe that humans are killing the planet. But Not Evil Just Wrong, a new documentary by Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney, proves that the only threats to America (and the rest of the world) are the fl awed science and sky-is-falling rhetoric of Al Gore and his allies in environmental extremism.   The film warns Americans that their jobs, middle-class lifestyles and dreams for their children will be destroyed if the government rushes to judgment and imposes job-killing regulations on an economy already mired in recession.

Not Evil Just Wrong exposes the deceptions about global warming that scientists, politicians, educators and the media have been force-feeding the public for years, including fear-mongering about floods and dying polar bears. The documentary shows how environmentalists are pushing the same kind of anti-human propaganda that triggered a ban DDT and condemned millions of children to death by malaria, a story recounted in the documentary. Not Evil Just Wrong asks: Is carbon dioxide the new DDT and are we taking the same risks with our future?

Source(s):

Kelly

Whose fault is it when a man shoots another man? Or in the case of Richard Poplawski, whose fault is it that he shot and killed three Pittsburgh police officers? Do we blame the actions of Richard Poplawski for the deaths of these officers, or are we going to put the right-wing propaganda machine and so-called conspiracy theories on trial?  Because, by the tone and accusations thrown about by the liberal blogosphere, it seems that the latter is more-so the case.

In article after article, Richard Paplawski is labeled  as a conspiracy nut, an avid Fox News absorber, and a tin foil hat wearing, Alex Jones following young man who apparently let the crazy out of the bag.  And according to David Neiwert at Crooks and Liars, the media ought to be embarrassed for the important role they play in “whipping up the far-right crazies out there.”  Neiwert goes on to say that,

Because not only did Richard Poplawski avidly participate in white-supremacist online forums and right-wing conspiracy-theory sites, he also avidly consumed mainstream conservative media, particularly Fox.

I am reading this correctly?  To paraphrase, not only did Poplawski engage in white-supremacist online forums, because that is bad enough, but to top in off, Poplawski couldn’t get enough of conservative media, mainly the Fox News machine.  Now, I’m not interested in the least bit to defend any white-supremacist group or forum.  I do not support their whacked out ideas or their very blatant racism, however I do support their inherent right to the freedom of speech.  I am not aware of any online forum that coerces people to join, which leads me to understand that Poplawski likely sought out the forum based on his own beliefs.  Fox News, on the other hand, no one can escape them, right?

Laughable, nonetheless, and yet Media Matters has attempted to seriously postulate to its readers that Alex Jones’ appearance on Judge Andrew Napolitano’s Freedom Watch is just the sort of hyperbolic act that people like Poplawski will use as a launch pad for violence and death.  Eric Boehlert writes,

Jones also noted with excitement that Fox News’ Glenn Beck had recently begun warning about the looming New World Order on his show, just like Jones had for years. “It is great!” cheered the conspiracist. (Like Jones, Beck recently warned viewers that “the Second Amendment is under fire.”) Concluding the interview, Fox News’ Napolitano announced “it’s absolutely been a pleasure” listening to Jones’ insights.

We don’t know if Poplawski tuned in to watch Jones’ star turn for Fox News last month. But is there any doubt that Fox News is playing an increasingly erratic and dangerous game by embracing the type of paranoid insurrection rhetoric that people like Poplawski are now acting on? By stoking dark fears about the ominous ruins that await an Obama America, by ratcheting up irresponsible back-to-the-wall scenarios, Fox News has waded into a territory that no other news organization has ever dared to exploit.

Well, yes, I would say there is plenty of doubt that “people like Poplawski” are becoming cop-killers as a result of too much Fox News programming, Alex Jones or not.  And interestingly, that type of accusation is much akin the “Marilyn Manson caused Columbine” ridiculousness that typically comes out of the mouths of the right wing nuts to begin with.

But, most important is what is truly at stake here.  And what’s very telling is that since the right wing lost its mojo when George W exited the stage, they have found a way to leech on to the momentum of the liberty movement, while distorting it the way only the spin masters of Fox can do.  And while the lefties want to feel secure in their Obama win, they do not, and as they too feel threatened by liberty and tea parties, they have in turn exploited themselves and their enemies at Fox.

Rest assured, and to use the term so well coined by Alex Jones, the “left/right paradigm” is not only unraveling, but exposing itself more now than ever.

Joseph Marohl

This Monday a court in Ryazan, Russia, fined Nikolay Bayev and Irina Fet 1,500 rubles each (about $45 US each) for organizing a protest against homophobia. The two were charged with “popularizing homosexuality,” under a regional law banning pro-homosexual propaganda. The judge also ordered the posters proclaiming “Homosexuality is normal” and “I am proud of my homosexuality” to be destroyed.

Though, speaking only for myself, I am no more proud of my homosexuality than I am of my metabolism or shoe size, I respect the message of “pride,” while generally finding it mildly embarrassing—not that I lack self-respect or am, to even the tiniest extent, ashamed of or inhibited in my man-lust; I blush rather at the thought of feeling pride for something that is neither an accomplishment nor even a matter of slightest effort on my part.

I’m homosexual … just lucky, I guess. No, please, stay seated.

The phrase “popularizing homosexuality” makes me smile, though, and it is something I have perhaps not given enough effort to—my copy of the “homosexual agenda” having not yet arrived in the mail.

While failing to bring much mass appeal to homosexuality, I certainly have done my fair share in making it available to all … more so in my younger years, though, than recently, but I don’t like to brag.

Has homosexuality ever been popular? Well, sure, among homosexuals, but taking nothing away from some genuinely popular—though typically flash-in-the-pan—crossover lez and gay celebrities, none has ever been as popular in the mainstream as heterosexual celebrities. My experience has been that the only people more mesmerized by homosexuality than us homosexuals have been the perpetually sweaty and rather dim-witted defenders of traditional family values.

If smiling more, expressing genuine interest in others, and being sensitive to other people’s feelings were in fact keys to popularity, you’d think the gays would have outstripped the evangelicals quite some time ago.

I ask you: have the Christians ever created a TV show in which a crack team of bible-believing fundamentalists gives a makeover to some poor slob of an atheist who’s so far been unsuccessful in interjecting his worldview into state and federal laws, the currency, and bankers’ holidays? I think not. Christians, however, have succeeded in all the above and still win martyr points for suffering persecution at the hands of all-powerful secular humanists.

Also, have homosexuals ever boycotted a company sponsor of a TV show that once featured—briefly, and with agonizing self-consciousness—a kiss between a man and a woman? Do homosexuals picket high-school productions of Hello, Dolly! for its flagrant glamorization of the heterosexual lifestyle? Are jail terms ever reduced after the accused pleads “heterosexual panic,” vindicating some heinous violence on the basis that he or she was motivated by fear of being perceived as straight?

Short answer: no.

What would it take to make homosexuality popular anyway?

Well, first, you would have to take out the sex part, because a majority of those who have no kind words for us pervs have serious icks about sex in general, even the normal kind between wife-beating husbands and pill-popping wives. In favor of this approach, sexless homosexuality has proved moderately successful in the past in slightly increasing the likeability of certain non-threatening gays and lesbians, like Paul Lynde and Nancy Kulp, who then become figures of fun and ribbing and against whom some straight people like to measure their superior virility and sophistication.

Next, you might want to change the bible. Get rid of the passages about sodomites, men lying with men and women with women, and effeminacy, which invariably lead to talk of stonings, fire and brimstone raining from heaven, and pits of eternal darkness and gnashing of teeth. You can leave the passages on the abominations of eating shrimp and pork, injunctions against touching (much less fucking) during menstruation, and hating one’s own father and mother to be a true follower of Christ, as apparently these can be explained easily by understanding that they apply only to earlier dispensations or the mistranslation of Aramaic prepositions.

Finally, you will need to pretend that conservative Christianity is as valid and important as it ever was, despite evidence of decline in the past three or four years. You will also need to learn to remain politely mum about the states of Vermont and Iowa … and probably don’t mention that Massachusetts, the first state to legitimize homosexual marriage, has retained for several years the lowest divorce rate of any U.S. state. Sexually tolerant and progressive countries like Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and Iceland have no higher divorce rates than less liberal nations … and marked increases in marriage. Well, so much for threats to the family and the institution of marriage.

But facts can be a messy business when you’re aiming for popularity, so by all means, spare the homophobes’ prejudices and delusions—they’ll like you better for it. As a rule—but, sadly, not invariably a fact—nut cases rarely persecute and kill the people they like.