The Gift of Truth Excels all Other Gifts (Buddha)
Milestone
Before starting this post, I want to do a bit of self-promotion, which also means I thank you my Readers, who have been so kind and forthcoming in some cases, and so brutally honest in others.
I can now say that when you do a Google search for "politically incorrect", my site will come up on page 6. No big deal.
Yet, if you do a Google search for "no spin", my site will come up on page 1.
Plus, if you do a Google search for "truth no spin" or "politically incorrect spin", my site will come up in the number 1 spot on the number 1 page. Top of the whole Web!
My goal of course would be to arrive at the number one spot on the Web if you do a Google search of "truth".
Thank you all.
Rock
Out of Whack: Imbalance in Our Country and the World
Balance is what we need.
The Pope
The Pope evidently just condemned the death sentence of Saddam Hussein. I think the Pope is wrong. I also believe the Catholic Church, my former church, is mistaken about at least a few more things—like birth control, abortion, the war in Iraq, and war in general. With regard to yesterday's post, the Pope lacks yang. Remember, Pope Benedict XVI, Your Holiness, respectfully, there is a time for peace and a time for war. Please read your Bible (Ecclesiastes, 3:1-8, see the end of this post). When 3,000 of our innocent civilians are murdered, it is a time for war.
Gerald Ford
Gerald Ford evidently thought it was a mistake to invade Iraq. This is another reason why I'm glad he wasn't re-elected, even though we got the disastrous Jimmy Carter in his place. Ford was a good and decent man, who did heal our nation after Watergate. Yet he was not a great geo-political thinker, as Nixon was.
We are a Country out of Balance
Speaking of yin and yang (yesterday's post), another way of putting this concept is to speak of things like the Feminization of America. There is nothing wrong with females nor the female point of view. There is nothing wrong with progressives nor progressivism. What is wrong is imbalance.
Let's take concepts like the death penalty, war, revenge and terrorism. On all these issues the United States is about evenly split. The radical liberals are against the death penalty, all war, all revenge, and oppose tough measures to protect us from terrorism. The conservatives are on the opposite pole. Does this mean we are balanced in this country, for and against these concepts? Not exactly. We are balanced like in a civil war, with polar opposites hating each other. We are not balanced as in politely disagreeing. We are polarized, with passion; and this passion is not friendly. We are balanced like the hot and cold air in a tornado.
Vicious Liberals
There is no meaner nor more vicious human being on the face of the earth now than a passionate liberal (except for the passionate liberals who read and comment on this blog! :). Of course, I am exaggerating, but not much. Saddam Hussein and terrorists are worse than liberals. Whereas Hussein and terrorists are assassins, liberals are character assassins. Liberals are assassins of everything decent and good and right, including the survival of America.
click to show/hide the rest of the post
Where is my proof? the liberals will say. My proof is what I see and hear. For example, go to Media Matters to witness the character assassination of every conservative on the planet. Defenders of this garbage website will say that they are just quoting what conservatives really say, and just showing video clips of conservatives actually speaking.
What they don't reveal, and never will, is that everything they publish is taken out of context. It's like what the press did to Gerald Ford, repeatedly showing him stumbling down the airplane steps and labeling him forever as clumsy. The man was an all-star football player, and was offered a contract by the Green Bay Packers. He was not clumsy. Plus, Media Matters only goes after conservatives. There is nothing good to say about any right-winger. Bush is evil. Cheney is dark. Rumsfeld was a war-monger. Conservatives are corrupt. This is presented as watchdog journalism. I think watchdog journalism is fine, but it should be balanced. Watchdog both sides and then we can talk. Otherwise, it is the opposite of watchdog journalism; it is really what they call lapdog journalism—the presentation of only one side. Media Matters therefore equals liberal lapdog journalism. Their "reporters" are liberal lapdogs.
Brain Challenged Liberals
Even purveyors of untruths like Media Matters would be all right if people didn't take them as gospel. Liberals just don't seem to have the brainpower to distinguish truth from propaganda. They listen to Letterman, Jon Stewart, the liberal news media, Hollywood nitwits, and our corrupt teachers who preach liberal mantras to our vulnerable children.
Propaganda versus Truth
I will repeat, any website, any blog, any news show, or any classroom which teaches only one side of things is fostering propaganda, not truth. Media Matters has one message—conservatism is bad. This is propaganda. Jon Stewart and David Letterman have the same message. They are propagandists. Contrast them with Dennis Miller, who criticizes both sides.
Great Journalism
The only answer for truth in America has been talk radio, Fox News, Christian broadcasting, and the blogosphere. There are no great journalists in America anymore, except for conservatives like Charles Krauthammer and George Will. What I mean by a great journalist is one who seeks the truth. Instead, we have hacks like Dan Rather who manufacture evidence against conservatives. Even Walter Cronkite has lost his moral authority as far as I am concerned. In his day, he was seen as a great symbol of the free press. Now, he has revealed himself as a raging liberal, and I can't stand to even listen to him anymore. The same goes for Bill Moyers.
Liberals are stuck in the 70's. They saw Woodward and Bernstein get all that acclaim after exposing Watergate, and they think good journalism means showing how corrupt government is, especially conservative government. That's not what made Woodward and Bernstein successful. What made them resonate was truth. They exposed the truth. Even Woodward and Bernstein believe their own hype and fame. Now they too have revealed themselves as raging liberals, and cling to their 70's philosophy of anti-conservatism. That's why they are no longer great. They have stopped seeking truth. They are merely imitating themselves.
Krauthammer and Will are great because they seek the truth. Yes, they are conservative, but they don't hesitate to criticize conservatives if they think they are wrong, and praise liberals if they think they are right. Media Matters and other garbage sites will never do this. Their agenda is to destroy conservatism, not expose the truth.
Great Liberals?
Am I being biased myself? Am I against all liberals? Are there no great liberals? Yes, there are. FDR, JFK, Truman, Patrick Moynihan—I could go on and on, but not about anyone in the public eye today. Edward Kennedy is a disgrace to his brothers. John Kerry is a joke. Nancy Pelosi is a vicious communist. John Edwards has grown a bit, but he still wages his class warfare propaganda. Hillary is a Lady Macbeth. Clinton—yes, Bill does have some greatness about him, despite his undermining our government with perjury. I don't care about his sex life; I do care about his lying under oath and looking me in the eyes and lying. Yet, he did govern effectively in many ways; he was a great communicator; and he took the Democratic Party to the center.
click to hide most of this post
This is Balance
For everything there is a season,
And a time for every matter under heaven:
A time to be born, and a time to die;
A time to plant, and a time to pluck up what is planted;
A time to kill, and a time to heal;
A time to break down, and a time to build up;
A time to weep, and a time to laugh;
A time to mourn, and a time to dance;
A time to throw away stones, and a time to gather stones together;
A time to embrace, And a time to refrain from embracing;
A time to seek, and a time to lose;
A time to keep, and a time to throw away;
A time to tear, and a time to sew;
A time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
A time to love, and a time to hate,
A time for war, and a time for peace.
Ecclesiastes 3:1-8
Rock
(*Wikipedia is always my source unless indicated.)
Click here to get a button link to this blog:
Join me in the war on error, in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way! Support this site!
Subscribe to my feed
Join or Surf Rock's Political Blog Ring. Both Liberals and Conservatives are Welcome.
Technorati Tags for this post: Pope Benedict XVI, Ecclesiastes, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Watergate, yin and yang, Feminization of America, progressivism, Media Matters, watchdog journalism, lapdog journalism, David Letterman, Jon Stewart, Dennis Miller, Charles Krauthammer, Dan Rather, Walter Cronkite, Bill Moyers, Woodward and Bernstein, Patrick Moynihan, John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, John Edwards, Hillary Clinton, Lady Macbeth
Regular Technorati Tags for this blog: politics, political, politically incorrect, no spin, conservative, Republican, right wing, liberal, Democrat, left wing, leftist, democracy, election, peace, war, George W. Bush, editorial, opinion, news, current affairs, media, television, television, Hollywood, books, culture,. society, religion, God, fundamentalism, Christian, Catholic, Muslim, Jew, Israel, Palestine, blog, truth
hello mr. rock my friend....
ReplyDeletei have a few things up my sleeve again today i am afraid!
balance: you think of balance in terms of liberal and conservative.
i think of balance (sometimes anyway) in terms of male and female. example: i am female and conservative. now this would seem like an oxymoron on the surface. i mean do i want the men on the hill in my uterus? i think not. do i want the death penalty, i think so. you see, again i see yin and yang.
and mr. clinton? well, i don't give a fig about his sex life, but i do care what goes on in the oval office and i will never forgive him for the disgrace he caused it. he is morally bankrupt. a non-entity to me. and the mrs? evil. period. she only stayed with him for the power. to me that showed no character. she is not and never has been "the little woman". she is powerful in her own right, but feeds on his power as well. and the stupid women in this country cannot see it. amazing to me. sad too. she really could have been a woman to be respected. but she is not. sadly.
and on a final note: i think the two mrs. bushes are the finest first ladies in history. i have always loved barbara, but i think laura is hands down, the first LADY of the land.
am i saying too much? taking up too much of your time? if so, sorry..... smile
bee
Empress Bee, thanks for your comments. In fact, I am very happy that you opened up on these things, which makes me know you even more. I totally agree with you on what you said, and I appreciate your honesty. I do continue to give some praise to Bill because, as I said, he moved the Democrats to the center, and the other things I said.
ReplyDeleteI stand with you on your feelings for the First Ladies.
I understand you're looking at things as a balance between male and female. This is a good thing, the balance, if we can achieve it.
Thank you so much for your comments and recent help. I just received a shock today. I noticed that in changing templates, etc., I had lost what once were on my templates, which were links to your and Charlie's sites. I'll put them back on on the weekend.
If there is anyone else whose links I've lost, please let me know.
Take care Empress Bee.
Rock
How did Miss Bee get here first today, i am slipping, but since I did read her comment, I will say she impresses me.....
ReplyDeleteWell now Mr. Rock, you have done it again, you nailed it, almost.......
There is very little I can disagree about but I think you should add Brit Hume, and maybe Chris Wallace, (I believe he is fair and balanced, time will tell), to your list along with Krauthammer and Will. At least in my mind they belong there, I will wait for you to dispute my thoughts and of course I will concede to your point of view if you can convince me.
I find no fault with you list of great liberals, I am torn, should we add LBJ, I know his programs were an utter failure, ie, the Great Society, but he was one great politician. I must hold my nose when I also agree about Bill Clinton, I expect him to destroy anything good he has accomplished by his next ambition, First Man.
Are there any good liberal journalist, I suspect there is but off hand I cannot think of one. I would say that I believe Mort Kondracke is a fair liberal, as fair liberals go.
I would also say that I believe Mr. Paz is a fair liberal, he came to my site today to accept my apology in a most gracious manner.
The old sarge
Oh I forgot, the Pope should read Ecclesiastes
ReplyDeleteThanks everyone for all the comments. I'll get to responses tonight or tomorrow. I owe paz a response too.
ReplyDeleteHave a good day.
Rock
The pope should read Ecclesiastes?
ReplyDeleteYour quote from that, saying "there's a time for war" doesn't justify anything. And I would add that perhaps you should listen to the Pope, when asking "when is the time for war?"
It's funny, you can find many things in the two bibles (I assume the new replaces the old, but i'm funny like that), but the "do not kill" seems pretty unequivocal. But, no, that would never do, would it? So lets search out some justifications for killing some more, shall we? We will certainly be good people for doing that.
discoriggall, you said:
ReplyDeleteThe pope should read Ecclesiastes? Your quote from that, saying "there's a time for war" doesn't justify anything. And I would add that perhaps you should listen to the Pope, when asking "when is the time for war?" It's funny, you can find many things in the two bibles (I assume the new replaces the old, but i'm funny like that), but the "do not kill" seems pretty unequivocal. But, no, that would never do, would it? So lets search out some justifications for killing some more, shall we? We will certainly be good people for doing that.
The exact translation of the commandment which you are referring to is "do not murder," not "do not kill." The exact translation of many things in both bibles are lost by our insertion of convenient words.
God did not make the world so easy and so simple that you can just think happy thoughts and there will be world peace. Many times, unfortunately, you have to fight for peace. The justification for the war in Iraq is not from the Bible. It is from common sense.
I'll make it simple for you so you can understand, if you apply yourself really really hard.
Bad guys attack the U.S. Bad guy with connections to other bad guys is harming his people, and killing Israelis. Bad guy is trying to get nuclear weapons. Bad guy is shooting at our planes. Better to get bad guy before he gets and/or spreads nukes.
Now, in Iraq, instead of another Korea or Iran, at least we have a country that can't threaten its neighbors or the U.S. Too bad we weren't as effective or daring with Iran and Korea, right D.?
Let's send Iran and Korea flowers and see if that brings us world peace, as your theories claim. Peace, love, joy, holding hands, flowers and chocolate, kissing dictators—the liberal recipe for peace. The Neville Chamberlain solution. Let's just be nice to those nasty terrorists and then maybe they won't blow up our women and children.
America is so, so bad for deposing monsters and fighting for survival and freedom, isn't it?
Rock
"Bad guys attack the U.S. Bad guy with connections to other bad guys is harming his people, and killing Israelis. Bad guy is trying to get nuclear weapons. Bad guy is shooting at our planes. Better to get bad guy before he gets and/or spreads nukes."
ReplyDeleteBut there's no evidence he had connections with Bin-Laden; in fact Bin Laden did not support Saddam. When was he killing Israelis? There's NO proof he was trying to get nuclear weapons, though it would've been a good idea. He was shooting at our planes - because we were fyling them over his country!
Going around strong arming people won't help. I don't advocate the use of flowers; sometimes force is necessary. Just not there, then.
Iraq did not threaten American survival (or it threatened American survival as much as Grenada did), and the freedom that has been won in Iraq is freedom without security, which if you think about it, is actually no freedom at all. Freedom is not worth anything without security, and ironically, a despot offered more of that than 'America' has provided.
You will say 'YET!'
Those who've died without asking to be killed, will not care.
And I look at Korea and Iran, and I see a weak, poor nation which will crumble, and a developing democracy, which like yours has just had 'mid terms', and voted against the conservative regime currently in power. Do I worry about them - not yet, because so far Bush hasn't pushed them into war.
Iran will change, and do so faster if we don't demonise it. North Korea is more worrying, in fact more worrying than Iraq was - but you're not advocating invading N.Korea, and considering its proximity to your country, this is a mystery to me.
Sure, fight for freedom and survival - just do it right. Don't make people hate you in the process, and learn about reasonable responses. Did Britain bomb Ireland and require regime change? Will Spain bomb the Basques in retalliation for this weekend's terrorist attack?
Sure you do your upmost to stop future attacks, but you do it within reason. War in Iraq was anything but, and the terrorist threat seems to have increased, so thanks for protecting freedom.