Now, let's throw some perspective on that little straw-dog, shall we?
Michelle Malkin did a great job of throwing together a rogue's gallery of jackasses - whether from HollyWeird or the Big Rotten Apple or other liberalite nests - with examples of the rich and obnoxious as well as many other, less-notable but still disgusting examples of the shallow end of the gene-pool.
There's even a pornographic web-movie making the rounds, featuring a Sarah Palin look-alike...and no, I will NOT provide any links to it.
Imagine the outrage, the horror, the "peasants-with-torches-marching-to-lynch-the-evil-mad-scientist" FRENZY the liberalite media would launch if even the slightest HINT of anything like this were aimed at their Messiah....
How many remember the way they frothed at the NewYorker cover - with obama dressed as a Muslim and his wife as an urban commando?
And don't even get me started on how they go on about Bush, Cheney, or any other non-liberalite they decide needs to be tarred, feathered, lynched, assassinated, etcetra.......
No, two wrongs do NOT make a right.
That's not the point.
The point is that when the "watchdogs of government" become the lapdogs - or worse, fancy themselves as the "kingmakers" of this nation's government - then this nation has a SERIOUS problem, since the place of the media is protected by the very Constitution they're seeking to circumvent.
QUIS CUSTODIET IPSOS CUSTODES?
THAT is why the Founders included the Second Amendment.
Not to protect the government from us, but to protect us from the government.
Some might suppose that since the free exercise of the Second Amendment has been folded, spindled and mutilated by the legislatures and courts into abominations like the D.C. gun ban - which (surprise, surprise) turned the nation's governmental capitol into the nation's MURDER capitol - that perhaps it might be time to impose similar sanctions on the Press, limiting or removing some of the protections given them under the First Amendment.
I don't think that's a viable answer, since the obvious question would be: "Who would decide what those sanctions might be, and when would they be lifted - if ever?"
I propose a different solution.
A free market solution - unlike what Congress and the President did to nationalize, socialize, Marxist-ize the banks after the crisis that dems like PeanutBoy cahtuh, Sick Willie cliton and the slimy pukes like dodd, frank, et al created in the housing market (research: Community Reinvestment Act).
I do not spend money on ANY of the newspapers.
I do not waste ANY time on ANY of the broadcast networks.
I do not waste ANY time on pbs, cnn, msnbc...
(....and with the latter, I'm also boycotting anything sold by nbc's parent company, GE...although that last is largely because they're still doing business with Iran while the asshats in Tehran are sending explosive toys to Iraq for their Quds force agents provocateur to blow up people like me and my buddies.)
In a word: Boycott.
...and that includes their major advertisers, too.
Ask McDonalds why they've suddenly reversed course on their former active promotion of the gay marriage agenda....
We The People still have a few cards left to play besides to run crying to the Big Brother Nanny State.
And that includes the cards we play on 4 November.
Play those cards VERY carefully.
4 comments:
Well said TS, the power is still in the hands of the people, if they so choose to use it.
I myself also don't buy papers or anything of the sort any more, i only visit their sites to get stories off, that's it.
They won't get a red cent off me. I only support the conservative outlets now, nothing else, they can eff for all i care because i know they have nothing but utter contempt for folks like you and i.
Do you not think, though, TS, that it is only a minority of us out there that could/would be supportive of this type of boycott? And, not enough to cause much financial impact?
I would like to think I'm wrong, but it certainly seems to me that it is the left that supports the papers, CNN, NBC, etc., and it is that media which speaks "directly" to them - and they are, unfortunately, the majority.
First, if there truly WAS a majority of liberalites, how the hell did W. end up getting elected...twice?
Second, the AFA - American Family Association - started a boycott of McDonalds, protesting their support for the pro-homosexual agenda.
After only a few months, McD's changed their position.
As for the media, it's not just them who would "feel" any boycott. The real target is their bottom line - the advertisers who buy ad time and make them their money.
Merchants view everything through the prism of their profit-margin.
Don't pull the weed - aim for the root.
Post a Comment