Showing posts with label left. Show all posts
Showing posts with label left. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 31, 2007

Debunking the 9-11 Conspiracy Theories

This is quickly becoming a classic conspiracy theory, and one reason for the ascent is the lack of actual facts known by the majority of Americans. As with many issues facing us today, everyone twists the truth to accommodate their own ideas. If you hate the Bush administration, then any insignificant detail can be made into an unencroachable argument that the government destroyed the twin towers. If you love George W. Bush, you call these conspiracy theorists crack pots. On this issue, I have to side with the Bush lovers. I myself like George W. Bush, and I support him as president, but I most certainly do not love him or his administration. The entire administration has been run poorly, and sloppily for the past six years, and no one with an honest mind can disagree with that statement. However, to blame a terrorist attack on the government just because you might have watched a hatchet job documentary that distorted information to make a political point, and that was created by a low rate person like Michael Moore that one minute complains taxes are too low on the rich, and the next minute changes his residence to avoid paying taxes, is a vastly short sighted and irresponsible thing to do. There have been claims that federal gold was removed from the twin towers weeks before the disaster, but that is not true. Federal gold was never stored in the towers, only personal and corporate holdings. Next, there are those that claim the buildings were blown up with charges...one question, why didn't anyone notice the charges being placed? Do you realize how much work, and C-4, it takes to bring down two buildings by placing charges in the basement? It is ridiculous that people are so full of hate that they create such outlandish stories. Next, why did Bush finish his time with the children? Perhaps, as the rest of us, he was told that it was probably an accident, and he did not want to worry the children he was speaking to. Perhaps he is a compassionate man, not a calculating mass murderer. Next, the dispersement of funds issue is another example of taking insignificant details and blowing them out of proportion. Did you not see the way our bureaucracy handled Katrina relief? Do you think we also have a weather machine that created the hurricane just so we could create a bureaucratic nightmare in its aftermath? Wake up people. Finally, what about the claims from terrorists leaders that they had something to do with the planning of 9-11? Are they on the government payroll? Look people, 9-11 was a tragedy, not a government conspiracy. The last bit of information that proves the government had nothing to do with 9-11 is very simple. To pull off such an event, thousands of people would have had to be involved, and the government would have had to pull off this mind blowing event without a hitch, with no one admitting the fallacy to the press for their 15 minutes of fame...the Government is not even capable of baking a cake without 47 mistakes and a vote, so how do you think these people, called incompetent idiots by most of the people that believe this theory, could pull off such an event? Well, are they morons, or masterminds? Make up your mind, or take your Lithium.



Thursday, January 18, 2007

UnHolywood

The death of Hollywood is not a death in the conventional definition of the word. In fact, many in Hollywood are still making millions from movies, television, and documentaries. However, the death of Hollywood is more of an ever present internal decay of civility and culture that threatens to distort the meaning of the term mainstream. For instance, are George Clooney and his political views mainstream? Hardly, but in an acceptance speech he praised Hollywood for being real, and for understanding what real people are thinking and feeling on a daily basis....anyone else see a problem? Mr. Clooney simply serves as an example of the fact that Hollywood has lost touch with mainstream America, and in many ways it is losing credibility. In the heyday of Hollywood, the actors and actresses embodied the values of the populous. We even elected one of the most popular presidents in our history due in large part to his life in Hollywood. What has happened? For one, the culture of the left coast has invaded the culture that is Hollywood. It is not uncommon today for a star or starlet to be divorced weekly, and to have a lifetime membership at the Betty Ford Clinic. These examples are symptoms of the larger problem, a lack of morality, and a complete detachment between the multi-millionaires on the big screen, and the people that pay $12 a pop to watch them. One example of this moral decay is the recent scene starring a twelve year old actress that depicts her being viciously raped by her father. Is that mainstream American values? Hey, but her parents are hoping the scene will win little Dakota an Oscar, and what is more important than the money that will generate? You see, as Hollywood becomes more and more edgy, and less and less moral, there comes a race to be the edgiest, and in that race, the winner will truly lose mainstream America, and their soul. Hollywood? How about UnHolywood?



Friday, January 5, 2007

Enough with the fascism talk

After browsing the many blogs and websites on the internet dedicated to politics and news, I have come to multiple conclusions. For one, there is a very high degree of hate and venom on both sides of the political spectrum, and the idea of a moderate is becoming extinct. That said, one of my conclusions really bothered me concerning the political climate of today, and it stems from the use of hate speech. In fact, I was appalled by the racial slurs that riddled almost every sight, primarily the liberal leaning sites. Considering these facts, I probably should not be surprised by the rampant over use, and misuse, of a term that I came across on approximately 99 percent of the left leaning sites when the Bush administration came up. This term is fascism, and I was astounded by the number of people that use the word with no apparent knowledge of its meaning. The term fascist, as defined by Webster is one that partakes in the system known as fascism. So, I looked up the word fascism, and it was defined as follows:

a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.

Did I miss an announcement regarding the government? Are we really controlled by a dictator now, or do the majority of those using the term have absolutely no idea what it means? Looking even deeper into the definition, we see that a fascist is one on that forcibly suppresses opposition and criticism. If that were the case in the United States, then how are all of these people openly criticizing the current administration? Furthermore, how do these people explain the fact that the opposition party has control of the House and Senate? Once again, the far left has decided that facts are not important when an attempt to further one’s agenda is taking place. Finally, emphasizing aggressive nationalism and racism is listed. If this were the case in the United States, would millions of illegal immigrants still be living hear? All that I ask is that people think before they speak, what do you think?




Tuesday, December 5, 2006

Why Wal-Mart?

The newest “evil” being attacked by the left may be a surprise to many Americans. There is a full fledged attack on the Wal-Mart corporation that has actually gained endorsement from politicians such as Al Gore, John Edwards, and even the prodigal son of Democrats, Barak Obama. Upon hearing that this attack was being waged, I found myself a little bewildered. It just was not clear to me what the Left could possibly have against Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart provides millions of consumers with affordable goods; and they provide millions of employees, many of which would otherwise be unemployed, with jobs. So, I decided to go to the source. The group leading this charge against Wal-Mart has a website titled Wake-Up Wal-Mart. In an attempt to find out what the big problem with Wal-Mart is, I went to the web site and did a little digging. It did not take me long to find enlightenment. In fact, here is a list of the ills of Wal-Mart in the eyes of its detractors:

Wal-Mart has a responsibility to all Americans to set the standard for customers, workers and communities, and to help build a better America.
The truth is that Wal-Mart has let America down by lowering wages, forcing good paying American jobs overseas, and cutting costs with total disregard for the values that have made this nation great
In Wal-Mart's America, workers are paid poverty level wages even when they work full-time; In our America, workers are paid a living wage with proper health and retirement benefits.
In Wal-Mart's America, wealthy companies shift their health care costs onto tax payers like you and your families; In our America, corporations live up to their responsibility and provide their employees with adequate and affordable health care coverage.
In Wal-Mart's America, suppliers are forced to make their goods cheaper even if it means shipping U.S. jobs overseas; In our America, we value U.S. jobs and companies that buy and sell "Made in America."
After reading this list, a few blog post by those against Wal-Mart, and a list of groups endorsing the web site, it became abundantly clear why the Left has become anti Wal-Mart. Let’s take a look at what the list is really saying, without the Wal-Mart slant:
1. America has the responsibility to take care of workers and communities.
2. America has let us down by not insuring higher wages regardless of the cost to business.
3. It is the responsibility of the Government to make sure all people are paid high wages and granted healthcare coverage at no expense.
This is a much shorter list, but I think you get the idea. What is wrong with Wal-Mart? In a nutshell, it celebrates capitalism and personal responsibility. To the Left, this is the unforgivable sin. The argument is simply that Wal-Mart should run in a more socialistic manner. More evidence to the fact can be seen in some of the complaints of Wal-Mart employees who want change. One such comment stated that Wal-Mart will fire you if you get injured at home and can not go to work. Another stated that Wal-Mart no longer accepts doctor’s excuses for absences. In other words, if you do not go to work, you do not get paid, and you may be fired. In the world of the socialists, see France, there is no reason that a worker should have to be responsible to keep their job. It is all becoming clearer. The list of those endorsing the web site also brings clarity to the matter. The largest supporters all happen to be unions. Never would have guessed. So, is it really Wal-Mart that is under attack, or is it what Wal-Mart represents, the American way of life.