Counterculture Con HQ

September 25, 2011

Morgan Freeman Says Tea Party Will Do Whatever They Can to “Get This Black Man Outta Here”

Filed under: Cinema, Entertainment, Race — Tags: — Jesusland @ 09:45

Turns out Morgan Freeman is just another Leftist Hollyweird race baiter like the rest of them.  This is the same Morgan Freeman, mind you, who told us that the only way to end racism is to stop talking about race.  So disappointing, but this is what modern Liberalism does to folks.  He says racism is worse in America with Barack Obama as president, and on that we agree.  But it’s not because of the Tea Party, but because of the continuous race baiting like this.  As far as I’m concerned, Leftist race baiting has set race relations in America back 35 years at least.

“Their stated policy, publicly stated, is to do whatever it takes to see to it that Obama only serves one term. “Screw the country. We’re going to whatever we do to get this black man, we can, we’re going to do whatever we can to get this black man outta here.”

ps., I will never again pay for another movie with this guy in it.  He ruined it for me.

UPDATE:  that same racist Tea Party that can’t stand to see a black man in the White House just gave Herman Cain (a black man) a resounding victory in the Florida straw poll.

September 9, 2011

Kingdom of the Three Genocides

The modern Turkish state was founded on the genocide of three Christian nations.  This particular Islamic state is virtually swimming in the blood of the Martyrs.  Politically incorrect history, courtesy of CCHQ.

If you’re a fan of Roman history, you’ve heard of Pontus.  The Pontic kingdom was the offspring of the ancient Greek wayfarers and explorers who colonized Asia Minor and the southern coast of the Black Sea beginning in 800 B.C.  When Pontus was eventually conquered by Rome in 63 B.C., it was folded into the Eastern Roman Empire, whose capital resided in Constantinople.  Almost 1,500 years later when this last hellenized bastion of Rome fell to the armies of Islam in 1453, the “Pontic Greeks” remained on the northern coast of what is today known as Turkey.  But the Turks could not long abide an older ethnic population in their midst, sharing their country but refusing to assimilate into Islam.  So they did to this stateless minority what they did to the Armenians– genocide.  The campaign against the Pontic Greeks included massacres, forced deportations and death marches.  Pontic villages and towns would be surrounded by Turks and their inhabitants massacred.  Over 500,000 Pontians were deported of whom comparatively few survived, with those who were able to escape and survive seeking refuge in neighboring Russia and Greece.  The death toll is estimated at between to 350,000 — 450,000 Greek Pontians killed in massacres and death marches.  They were the last remnants of a civilization dating back almost three millenia, now dispersed forever.

And the Armenian genocide from 1896 through 1923.  Victims: 1.5 million.  It was the deliberate and systematic destruction of the Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire, which took part almost concurrently and in the same historical context as the Assyrian Christian genocide of 1914 — 1920.  Stay tuned for more on this later.

The Assyrian Christians were a race of people indigenous to the area of northern Mesopotamia, the descendants of the ancient Assyrian empire which fell around 600 B.C., and among the first of nations to convert to Christianity.  They were known to send their missionaries to nations as far flung as China and Japan.  Their dogged adherence to Christianity has made them one of Islam’s number one targets for hundreds of years, with their persecution culminating in modern times with their genocide at the hands of the Ottoman Empire’s “Young Turks” in the early 20th century.  The Turks committed massacres against, and forced death marches upon, all those Assyrians who refused to convert to Islam.  For example, in 1915, 8,000 Ottoman Turkish soldiers surrounded almost 20,000 Assyrian civilians in at least 30 villages and massacred them all.  And that was just the beginning.  The Assyrian nation lost almost two thirds of it’s population at the hands of the Turk.  Total dead are estimated at 750,000.  But their story has been all but ignored by our historians, in my opinion because this constitutes politically incorrect history that can’t be pinned on the “Western imperialism” that so consumes our intellectuals of the Academy.  Here, however, you will finally hear from the victims and eyewitnesses of this genocide who managed to survive those purges, death marches, and pitched battles.  This is history of a people lost to our memory.  It is a forgotten genocide.

Part 2

Part 3

September 1, 2011

Flash Mobs a Sign O’ the Times

Is a post-Christian society a more civilized one? Are we becoming a more decent and compassionate society as we become more secular progressive? That’s what they promise us, isn’t it?  Welcome to a religion-free, morally relativist world.

August 27, 2011

UCLA Professor: Without Media Bias the Average US State Would Vote Like Texas

Liberal bias?  What Liberal bias, right Libs?  lol

The media’s shameless bias is no big secret.  There’s an old Republican truism that the mainstream media’s Liberal bias gives the Democrats a 15-point handicap in any given election.  Problem is we haven’t yet found a way to prove it quantitatively.  Until now.  In his book Left Turn, Professor Tim Groseclose has gathered the thousands upon thousands of data points necessary to prove not only how the mainstream media is biased Left, but also how this distorts the American mind and affects their voting choices.

“The data shows that yes, they are indeed Liberal.”

Notice, he waited until he had tenure to release his findings!  And here he says that without Liberal bias in the media, your average U.S. state would vote like Texas or Tennessee!

August 16, 2011

A Tale of two parties: The hecklers

Those Teabaggers are so HATEFUL and so ANGRY.  Or at least that’s how the Dems and their allies in the media like to portray them.  As evidence they provide the following where some Tea Party activists confront Obama about alleged reports that Vice-President Biden called the Tea Party a bunch of terrorists to whip up support for the debt limit deal.

That’s it?  They sounded pretty civilized to me.  Sure, they were persistent, but their tone was even and level, and they let him speak.  How incredibly presidenti­al Barack might have sounded if he had acknowledg­ed their grievances and then apologized on behalf of Joe Biden and the rest of this administration’s hatchet men and attack dogs who have so lowered the bar on political discourse in this country over the last three years.  He is the “Healer in Chief”, here to bring a “new tone”, is he not?  lol. But that’s just not how Obama is built.  When he’s off script, it’s back to his old Chicago Way.  And yet this mild little incident is what the Dems are currently shopping around to prove how extreme and “terroristic” those baggers are.  Pretty thin gruel if you ask me.

Now let’s compare and contrast that episode with how wild-eyed Leftists deal with the other side.  This was how they heckled and harangued one of the GOP frontrunners, Mitt Romney, at the Iowa State Fair:

Savages.  And yet it’s the Teabaggers who are the angry, violent ones.  Uh huh, sure.

The fact is that Liberalism never made somebody a better person.  It hasn’t, and here you have more proof.  For all their protestations about caring for “the poor” (i.e., themselves), it’s not an ideology that places very much emphasis on codes of personal behavior, which is why they can do whatever they damn well please and never be accused of hypocrisy.  Conservatism, on the other hand, does emphasize personal behavior, which is why anybody on the Right who falls short of their standard is condemned by the Left as a “hypocrite”.  A good Lib has no such dilemma, and that’s why they can behave as childishly as they want and still regard themselves as a paragon of secular progressive virtue, as long as they have the correct beliefs. Especially when the target of their bile is one of those eeeevil Reichwingers.

That’s why there are hecklers, and then there are hecklers.

August 5, 2011

Sen. John Kerry (D) to mainstream media: Censor the Tea Party

Liberal fascism rears it’s statist, collectivist head.

“The media in America has a greater responsibility than it’s exercising today. 

The media has got to begin to NOT give equal time or equal balance to an absolutely absurd notion just because someone asserts it. 

It doesn’t deserve the same credit as a legitimate idea.”

Isn’t the mainstream media liberal enough for ya, Sen. Kerry?

The greatest threat to freedom of speech today is coming from the Left.  Jonah Goldberg, author of the bestselling book Liberal Fascism says,  “Many modern liberals and leftists act as if they know exactly what fascism is.  What’s more, they see it everywhere—except when they look in the mirror.  Indeed, the left wields the term like a cudgel to beat opponents from the square like seditious pamphleteers.”

August 4, 2011

Cultural Elite: The state will raise your children

Culture destroyer: Jennifer Aniston

Virtually everything modern Liberalism promotes today advances the clock of civilizational collapse.

Jennifer Aniston does not believe that women have to wait — or settle — for a man to start a family. Speaking at a Los Angeles press conference for her movie about artificial insemination, ‘The Switch,’ Aniston said that “times have changed” along with the idea of the traditional family. So if that means having one without the man in the picture, that’s okay.

“Women are realizing more and more that you don’t have to settle, they don’t have to fiddle with a man to have that child,” Aniston said. “They are realizing if it’s that time in their life and they want this part they can do it with or without that.”

“That,” of course, meaning the man. “It’s happening more and more,” said Aniston.
In ‘Switch,’ Aniston, 41, plays a woman who elects to take on life as a single-parent through artificial insemination. When questioned, the most famous single woman on the planet said she didn’t “have plans” to take the insemination option for motherhood at this time.

But she vigorously defended the rights of other single women going down that road.  Aniston even engaged in one testy exchange with a reporter who insisted that her movie character was being “selfish” having a child without a father-figure in her life. Minutes after the question was asked, Aniston circled back and insisted that family life has “evolved” from strictly “the traditional stereotype of family.”

“The point of the movie is, what is that which defines family?” Aniston said. “It isn’t necessarily the traditional mother, father, two children and a dog named Spot.”  “Love is love and family is what is around you,” she added.  Aniston also took issue with the word “selfish” in terms of the single woman moving ahead with the decision to have a child.  “I don’t think it’s selfish,” she said. “It’s quite beautiful because there are children that don’t have homes that have a home and can be loved. And that’s extremely important.”

Aniston fielded a slew of questions about motherhood in the press conference promoting the movie about the very-topic which has dogged her in the entertainment media for year. She even dutifully answered yet another question about whether she wants to be a mother in the future.  “Yah, I’ve said it years before,” said Aniston. “I still say it. That’s today. Yah.”

Source

Jennifer Aniston’s movie promotes single motherhood by artificial insemination where fathers are irrelevant.   That’s what it does.  Womyn need men like fish need a bicycle.  And she defends this as “family that has evolved.”   Yet even in her interview she attempts to walk back her initial support by blurring the line between artificial insemination and adoption.  The two are not equivalent, and subconsciously she acknowledges this.

Once we step away from the PC line, single mother families– which are the natural consequence of the 60s counter culture and sexual revolution– are not “evolved” families, they are an unprecedented prehistoric devolution of the family institution.  It’s caveman days all over again, folks, where the male is free to plant his seed willy nilly and females are reduced to the status of brood mare.  Except today we have the welfare state (i.e., the taxpayer) to foot the bill for the inevitable consequences of this sexual revolution and shattering of traditional cultural taboos.

Jennifer Aniston has the money to do as she pleases.  Her wealth insulates her from the consequences of virtually any boneheaded decision she chooses to make.  And if she pays for it, then goddess bless her.   Yet the baby mamas in waiting to whom she is giving her blessings are not rich.  I’d wager most of them are broke.  So the children they choose to have on their own– with Jennifer’s blessings– will essentially be wards of the Liberal welfare state.  And without a father figure around to impose discipline, they’ll probably end up in jail too.

But though modern Liberalism is a lifestyle only the rich can afford to live, the Left promotes their values to the poor, and it has destroyed their communities in a way rapacious capitalism never could have.  Thus the Left’s welfare state has become indispensable in a society whose social institutions have been shattered by that very same moral and cultural relativist Leftwing elite whose values continue to undermine “the traditional stereotype of family.”

The New Normal: Children Out of Wedlock

She needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.

This is what the end of the “Patriarchy” looks like.  The nuclear family has been all but destroyed by the counterculture revolution of the 60s.  Back in the 80s when Vice-president Dan Quayle denounced Hollywood’s positive depiction of single motherhood in the show Murphy Brown, the term “family values” was turned into a punchline by cultural sophisticates of the day.  It would send the wrong message to our daughters that childbirth out of wedlock was a viable choice, Mr. Quayle warned:

”It doesn’t help matters when prime-time TV has Murphy Brown — a character who supposedly epitomizes today’s intelligent, highly paid, professional woman — mocking the importance of fathers by bearing a child alone and calling it just another ‘lifestyle choice.”’

He was vilified by the Left for his closed-minded intolerance.

The sexual revolution, the divorce revolution, and the welfare state have since come together to form a perfect storm of culture destruction in our poorest communities as unwed mothers and children out of wedlock in black communities become the “new normal”.  To affluent, white radical Vagina Warriors of the 60s – 80s who screeched that marriage is slavery and sexual intercourse is rape, this was ever their goal– to destroy that misogynous “patriarchy” and the oppression inflicted on womynkind.  They have succeeded beyond their wildest dreams, certainly in our poorest communities.  But while the rich white Liberal folk who promote this madness have the money to buy their way out of the worst consequences of their destructive worldview, poor blacks do not.  They become slaves to the State, and their children at risk.

In effect, secular progressive culture destruction has created the need for the Welfare State without which these fatherless families would be doomed.  In this way, the Welfare State and Leftwing culture destruction are symbiotic and mutually perpetuating, both justifying each other’s existence in a downward spiral of social dysfunction.

And this is what the end of the patriarchy looks like.

Blacks struggle with 72 percent unwed mothers rate

HOUSTON – Seventy-two percent of black babies are born to unmarried mothers today, according to government statistics. This number is inseparable from the work of Carroll, an obstetrician who has dedicated her 40-year career to helping black women.

“The girls don’t think they have to get married. I tell them children deserve a mama and a daddy. They really do,” Carroll says from behind the desk of her office, which has cushioned pink-and-green armchairs, bars on the windows, and a wooden “LOVE” carving between two African figurines. Diamonds circle Carroll’s ring finger.

As the issue of black unwed parenthood inches into public discourse, Carroll is among the few speaking boldly about it. And as a black woman who has brought thousands of babies into the world, who has sacrificed income to serve Houston’s poor, Carroll is among the few whom black women will actually listen to.

“A mama can’t give it all. And neither can a daddy, not by themselves,” Carroll says. “Part of the reason is because you can only give that which you have. A mother cannot give all that a man can give. A truly involved father figure offers more fullness to a child’s life.”

Statistics show just what that fullness means. Children of unmarried mothers of any race are more likely to perform poorly in school, go to prison, use drugs, be poor as adults, and have their own children out of wedlock.

The black community’s 72 percent rate eclipses that of most other groups: 17 percent of Asians, 29 percent of whites, 53 percent of Hispanics and 66 percent of Native Americanswere born to unwed mothers in 2008, the most recent year for which government figures are available. The rate for the overall U.S. population was 41 percent.

This issue entered the public consciousness in 1965, when a now famous government report by future senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan described a “tangle of pathology” among blacks that fed a 24 percent black “illegitimacy” rate. The white rate then was 4 percent.

Many accused Moynihan, who was white, of “blaming the victim:” of saying that black behavior, not racism, was the main cause of black problems. That dynamic persists. Most talk about the 72 percent has come from conservative circles; when influential blacks like Bill Cosby have spoken out about it, they have been all but shouted down by liberals saying that a lack of equal education and opportunity are the true root of the problem.

Read the rest.

August 3, 2011

Peter Parker sacrificed on Altar of Diversity

Knock off: Miles Morales as the amazing Spiderman.

Spiderman makeover reflects “browning” of America, strikes blow against whitey.

NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) – There’s a new web-slinger in town.

New Yorkers take their fictional heroes seriously, so it may come as a shock to some that Peter Parker, the Queens native whose destiny was forever altered by a radioactive/genetically altered spider, has been killed off in the “Ultimates” imprint of Marvel Comics. The Ultimate series is different from Marvel’s standard line, in which Peter Parker is still happily toiling away as everybody’s favorite hard-luck hero.

No, in the Ultimates series, Peter Parker gets killed at the hands of his nemesis the Green Goblin. But, being a comic book series, no hero stays dead for long. While Peter Parker may be gone, a new kid is stepping into the tights: Miles Morales.

Miles Morales is a half-black, half-Hispanic super-powered teen who gets into the hero game after being inspired by Parker’s death.

“He’s younger than Peter Parker, he’s coming from a completely different background, a completely different world view,” writer Brian Michael Bendis told the Associated Press. Bendis, who has been writing Ultimate Spider-Man (and many other) comics for Marvel since 2000, is enthusiastic about the change. “I’m now sitting with a pile of legitimately new Spider-Man stories to tell and that is the best news a writer could have.”

No word on whether the change in ethnicity is going to play a role in casting decisions in upcoming Spider-Man movies or Spider-Man: Turn Off The Dark.

Source

I’m hispanic and this is embarrassing to me.  So I apologize for what these lilly-white Liberals are doing to our beloved comic book characters for the sake of “diversity,” and ostensibly on my behalf, no less.  So embarrassing!

It doesn’t sit well with me that characters that we’ve grown up with our whole lives should be killed off, all for the sake of “diversity.”  These characters, like professional sports teams, are “public” property and not subject to the whims of politically correct writers or greedy team owners.  Or at least they shouldn’t be.  If the Minnesota Vikings move to L.A. just to chase that almighty dollah, for example, I swear on everything that’s holy I’m done with the NFL.  Finished.  Same here: this “Miles Morales” will NEVER be Spiderman.  Got that?

To which you respond, the world is a very different place than the one Peter Parker grew up in, you goddamn racist.  It’s browner now.  Superheroes should therefore reflect this browning of America.

And I totally agree.  Art and entertainment should reflect the culture that consumes it.  But only if it has developed in a way that’s natural and organic.  Not forced on us by these “deciders” with an agenda.  If there’s a market for ethnic superheros, then create them and sell them to us. If you have the pulse of the nation, then we’ll buy in.  If not, it’ll be just another Liberal flop.  So, is there a market for black, latino, and in this case cablanasian superheros?  Is there?  The answer is decidedly NO!  Because we don’t care about their race or their ethnic “experience”, we care about their superhero story, regardless of race.

Ethnic superheros have been around for decades; Mandrake, Blade, Storm, and Spawn, to name just a few.  Aren’t they good enough?  So why murder our beloved Peter Parker just to morph Spiderman into Tiger Woods?

That fact is, ethnic superheros have never really caught on beyond a niche following.  Give me a break, even non-whites don’t give a crap about ethnic superheros.  Certainly we aren’t going to follow someone because of his/her ethnicity.  I’m hispanic, and I’ve always loved Superman.  That’s never going to change.  Supes has the best mythology, bar none.  He’s unique among the pantheon of superheros.  Sure, he’s white, but he’s not even human for crissakes.  It’s about his species (again, story), not his race.

BUT, you respond, that’s only because “whiteness” is so normative and dominant in this culture, and we’ve all been so inculcated in that whiteness from the moment we opened our eyes.  Essentially, our minds have been “colonized” by whitey to view whiteness as “the norm.”  So although I may claim to care only about a hero’s story, it’s really about race; and black, latino, and mulatto superheros don’t really stand a fighting chance out there.  This Whiteness “matrix”, therefore, has to be shattered so that we can free our thinking from its hold and give ethnic superheros an even playing field.  And that way we can restore “self-esteem” to all our brown brothers and sistas!

And with that response you would reveal the ACTUAL reason Peter Parker had to die.  Because no ethnic superhero has ever been able to compete with the greats like Superman, Batman, Spiderman, et al., and because our children grow up loving them above all others, this only perpetuates this white dominance of which you speak.  So you have to hijack one of the Greats and turn him into a ghetto rat the likes of Miles Morales.  That way you will FORCE us to like an ethnic superhero, and thus help “free” our minds and end the tyranny of “whiteness” forever!  Sound about right? lol

And that’s all this is.  A blow by the forces of PC against whitey and “The Man.”  And who a better villain for this new hero of color than say, oh, those greedy, nasty, hateful Republicans and those raaaaaacist Tea Party “terrorists”!  After all, this is about his “experiences”, isn’t it?  lol

Now stay tuned for teh gay Batman.  You do know he’s gay, right?  Why else would he wear those goofy looking tights?  Sign O’ the times!

August 1, 2011

NBC Reporter to Obama: “We got nothing.”

Regarding the budget deal, NBC correspondent and JournOlist, Nora O’Donnell, lets her thoroughly biased, and hopelessly-in-the-tank-for-Obama Liberal slip show:

“You gave them everything they wanted and we got nothing!”

Bias?  What bias!

By “them” she obviously means those NASTY and BRUTISH orcs of the Tea Party, and by “we” she means the progressive and forward-thinking Light Bringers of the Democrat media complex.  Of course, when I say in the tank for Obama I mean they’ll carry anybody’s water who’s against the American rightwing.  They’re not actually very happy with the O right now.  He’s not Liberal enough.

During the budget debates, the Liberal media (redundant, I know) savaged the Tea Party as ignorant, irrational terrorists.  Yes, terrorists.  Funny, that’s the exact same language Joe Biden used.  But they’re not biased, nooo, of course not.

For a quick study on how the thoroughly corrupt Democrat media complex hatches their anti-conservative, anti-GOP narratives, click here.

Philadelphia teachers Helped Students cheat for their own good

Standardized tests the bane of self esteem movement

This is just sad.  Teachers in Philly explain how they helped their students cheat in order to, get this, help them!

Philadelphia English teacher explains why she helped students cheat

The revelation that more than 80 Atlanta teachers admitted to cheating on state standardized tests–with one group of elementary teachers even holding a “party” after school to change their pupils’ answers by hand–has rocked the education reform movement.  But one question has been left unanswered: Why would a teacher resort to cheating in the first place?

The Notebook blog has found a Philadelphia teacher willing to explain why she helped her 11th-grade English students cheat on the state’s standardized tests. (The blog earlier broke the story that Pennsylvania officials suspected cheating may have occurred in 60 state schools.)  The teacher, who remains anonymous in the story, says she began to help her students cheat because she worried their self-esteem was crushed by taking tests they were in no way academically prepared for. If a student asked a question during one of the eight yearly testing periods, she would help him or her find the right answer, or occasionally just point to it on the exam.  “I never went to any student who didn’t call me to help them cheat,” said the teacher. “But if somebody asked me a question, I wasn’t willing to say, ‘Just do your best.’ They were my students, and I wanted to be there for them.”

The teacher said administrators bullied teachers about boosting test scores so that the school would make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), creating a constant state of performance anxiety in the classroom. Schools with low scores must improve by a certain amount each year to avoid federal sanctions set forth by the No Child Left Behind law. In some cases, the federal government shuts down schools that fail to boost scores year after year.  “The prevailing message was, ‘We have to make AYP this year, or they’re going to shut our school down and you’re all going to lose your jobs.’ At every professional development [session], that’s what we discussed,” the teacher said. She added that many teachers at her school engaged in cheating.

The Atlanta scandal and a USA Today report of potential teacher-sanctioned cheating in 1,600 classrooms across six states has put pressure on the Obama administration for its focus on standardized testing. Teachers in some districts are being paid bonuses for their students’ performance on state tests, and many others have their performance evaluation tied to those scores.  Secretary of Education Arne Duncan says that the emphasis on tests does not encourage cheating. In fact, he sees it as the only way to ensure schools are adequately teaching their students.

Source

In study after study, American high school kids show far higher levels of “self esteem” than high school kids overseas, yet they score the lowest at every academic level.  Gee, I wonder why.  On what precisely is this false sense of “self-esteem” based?  Certainly not on accomplishment!  It seems we now know the answer– grades!  Inflated though they may be.  The American “self-esteem” movement has completely de-linked self-esteem from any kind of real achievement, and now even some social scientists are admitting that “self-esteem” has crossed into over-confidence.  Another PC idea that crashed and burned and wound up in the shit house.  And in a godless, secular society where a man’s worth cannot be measured by the transcendental or divine, what exactly is this so-called “self-esteem” supposed to be based on then?  If not on accomplishment, then what?   What’s left?  Why, nothing!  The sad truth about the self-esteem movement is that they have actually harmed the cause of our children, not benefited them.  Thanks to Liberals, secularism, and their “self esteem movement”, our youth now have little or no reason to have any real self esteem.  Plenty of narcissism though.

Here, George Carlin’s take on the BS that is the self-esteem movement:

July 28, 2011

Antonio Gramsci and The Culture War

CCHQ believes the war for Christendom and Western culture is the defining struggle of our times.  Much like the Cold War was to our parents and grandparents.  It is everything.  We will survive economic depressions, wars of foreign intervention, and even Obamacare!  But we won’t survive cultural marxism.

“Culture wars do not lend themselves to peaceful coexistence.  And while the conservatives won the Cold War against political and economic communism, we’ve lost the war against cultural marxism, which is now the dominant culture; while those of us who are the traditionalists, if you will, are now the counter culture.”

July 25, 2011

Separation of Church and State: VA Cemetery bans “God”, “Jesus”

Unconstitutional tombstones at Houston VA cemetery.

VA Cemetery Accused of Censoring Religious Speech

Separation of church and state!  It’s right there in the Constitution, didn’t you know!  So glad the Libs are standing up to that Reichwing theocracy!

Local veterans and volunteer groups are accusing Department of Veterans Affairs officials of censoring religious speech – including banning the word “God” — at Houston National Cemetery.  In one example cited in documents filed this week in federal court, cemetery director Arleen Ocasio reportedly told volunteers with the National Memorial Ladies that they had to stop telling the families, “God bless you,” at funerals and that they had to remove the words “God bless” from condolence cards.

The new allegations of “religious hostility” by VA and cemetery officials follow on the heels of a controversy over a prayer in Jesus’ name by Pastor Scott Rainey at a Memorial Day service in the cemetery.  U.S. District Judge Lynn N. Hughes ruled May 26 that Ocasio couldn’t stop Rainey from using the words “Jesus Christ” in his invocation.  Attorneys with the nonprofit Liberty Institute, which represented Rainey, filed an amended complaint this week after allegedly finding other instances of religious discrimination by cemetery officials against members Veterans of Foreign Wars District 4, The American Legion Post 586, and the National Memorial Ladies, a volunteer group that attends funerals of fallen service members.

The complaint accuses VA of “a widespread and consistent practice of discriminating against private religious speech” at the cemetery.  Ocasio is on vacation and could not be reached for comment. Her assistant, Amanda Rhodes, said the cemetery had no comment.  According to court documents, Ocasio banned members of the groups from using certain religious words such as “God” or “Jesus,” censored the content of prayer, and forbade the use of religious messages in burial rituals unless the deceased’s family submitted the text to her for prior approval.  Court documents also describe the closure of the cemetery’s chapel after Ocasio’s appointment as director two years ago.

“The doors remain locked during Houston National Cemetery operating hours, the cross and the Bible have been removed, and the Chapel bells, which tolled at least twice a day, are now inoperative,” the complaint reads. “Director Ocasio only unlocks the Chapel doors when meetings or training sessions are held at the building. Furthermore it is no longer called a ‘chapel’ but a ‘meeting facility.'”

“It’s just unfair that somebody would ask us to take God out of our vocabulary,” said Cheryl Whitfield, founder of Houston National Memorial Ladies.  “I could’ve kept my mouth shut and let things happen, but when it comes to standing up for your belief in God and giving comfort to the families, I don’t want to regret not saying anything,” Whitfield said. “We all had to stand up for what we believe in.

Source

Leftists are threatened by public displays of religion.  Unless of course someone invokes Allah, Mohammed, or the Mayan jaguar goddess Ixchel, then ain’t diversity just grand!

This is just the exception, you say?  Why should we care?  Because this isn’t the exception.  Militant secularism is, and has been, waging a not so subtle, and relentless war on Christianity for decades now.  If you haven’t noticed then you haven’t been paying attention.  Freedom FROM religion!  This has been modern Liberalism’s trajectory for going on 50 years, and it will only get worse.  Are you a Liberal christian?  Then choose your side.  Christianity or Liberalism.  You cannot serve two masters.

July 23, 2011

Norwegian massacre a public relations disaster to the Conservative movement

Neo-Nazi fruit cake Anders Behring Breivik

CCHQ offers its deepest condolences and prayers to the victims of this attack.  It doesn’t matter that Leftism also has its wackjobs, the Norwegian massacre is a public relations disaster of epic proportions for the Conservative movement.  We just got NUKED.  Henceforth and for decades to come, anybody who counts himself as a conservative, Christian, or who opposes mass Islamic immigration will be linked by our opponents on the Left to this monster and his crimes.  Every time you raise the spectre of Jihad, the Left will counter with Anders Behring Breivik. This comes at a time when the conservative movement was making real inroads in what has been a staunchly Leftist Europe.  This mad man has done for Islam what 1,000 Muslim terrorists couldn’t have done– crippled the Right and strengthened the Left.  And Lefties know it.  And not because any sane Leftist actually believes the likes of Breivik represent conservatives in general, no, but that won’t stop them from using him in their vile bloodsport of destroying conservatives at any cost.  They wouldn’t dream of letting a crisis like this go to waste.

Norwegian massacre gunman was a right-wing extremist who hated Muslims

The man responsible for the massacre in Norway was a member of a Swedish nazi forum which encourages attacks on government buildings.  It was also revealed by local police that he had extreme right wing views who hated Muslims.  According to Swedish website Expo Anders Behring Breivik is a member of ‘Nordisk’ which has 22,000 members and focuses on political terrorism.

Officers also found a series of raving internet posts by the 32-year-old, who has been charged with two counts of terrorism after gunning down children on the island of Utoya and detonating a bomb in Oslo yesterday.  Media reports in Norway described Breivik as a ‘loner’, who lived with his mother in a wealthy suburb of west Oslo, was well-educated and enjoyed hunting.

Only a few days ago he set up a Twitter account and posted a single message: ‘One person with a belief is equal to the force of 100,000 who have only interests’.  It is attributed to the English philosopher John Stuart Mill, whose concept of liberty justified the freedom of the individual in opposition to unlimited state control.  The account appears to have only been set up a few days ago.

On his Facebook profile, Breivik describes himself as a Christian and a conservative.  It also listed interests such as body-building and freemasonry.

Breivik is believed to have grown up in Oslo, and studied at the Oslo School of Management.  He later appears to have moved out of the city and established Breivik Geofarm, a company believed to be an organic farm.  It specialised in melons and root vegetables. There is speculation among the media in Norway that this may have allowed him easy access to fertiliser, an ingredient used in bomb-making.  Along with the farm, he also appears to own a flat in Oslo. Breivik had no military background except for ordinary national service and no criminal record.

It is thought that the 32-year-old is a former member of Labour’s opposition youth party, Fremskrittspartiet.  According the website Atlantic.com, Breivik expressed extremist Islamophobic views on forums and criticised immigration policies.  He argued on a Swedish news website that the media were not critical enough about Islam and claimed that Geert Wilders’ Party for Freedom in the Netherlands was the only ‘true’ party of conservatives.  He argued that socialism was breaking down traditions, culture, national identity and other societal structures and that this in turn made society weak and confused.

July 21, 2011

Ministry of Propaganda: How They want you to Remember Margaret Thatcher

All your beliefs are belong to us.

Who needs rehabilitation camps when there are so many other easier ways to condition you!  The Perception Shapers are at it again.  George Orwell said those who control the past, can mold the future.  Liberal Hollywood has learned this lesson well in their depictions of historical characters like Che Guevara, Ronald Reagan, and now Margaret Thatcher.  Historians on the Napoleonic era are well aware that Napoleon wasn’t the squat little fat fellow of popular memory, from which today we derive the term “Napoleon complex.”  That was just British propaganda.  And yet, that’s how he will be remembered for all time.  His popular image is sealed in amber.  Similarly, the memory of our Thatchers, Reagans and Ws by future generations won’t be decided by their scholars and historians, but by today’s myth makers and propagandists.  With their cinematic depictions of the past they can control the future.

Thatcher Depiction plumbs new depths by portraying her as destroyed by dementia and guilt about her record

The cameras have not even started rolling on a new film being made about Margaret Thatcher’s life in which she is expected to be played by Meryl Streep, but already the project has been tainted by controversy over the negative way it intends to portray the former Prime Minister.

Meryl does Maggie

On first hearing about the production last month, a member of Lady Thatcher’s family, who wishes to remain anonymous, said they were ‘appalled’ to learn that she will be depicted as a dementia sufferer looking back on her career with regret.

Describing the film as a ‘Left-wing fantasy’ designed to cast doubt on her political legacy, her relatives and supporters are once again having to accept that, where the world’s best-known female politician of the 20th century is concerned, art rarely reflects life.

Told by means of flashbacks of her political life, the film opens with the octagenarian Lady Thatcher sitting alone in a sparsely furnished drawing room muttering to herself.  She is a melancholic, ghostly figure whose world has shrunk to almost nothing thanks to her declining mental powers. It soon becomes apparent that she frequently holds conversations with her late husband, Sir Denis, seemingly unaware that he is dead.

As the film unfolds, she sifts through some of the more controversial points of her 11-and-a-half years in office – notably the Falklands War and the Brighton bombing – questioning the decisions she made, rueful of the consequences of her extraordinary achievements.  In old age, the famous conviction politician is apparently racked by doubt; the unavoidable impression given is that this once-towering figure has been reduced to a pathetic figure consumed by doubts and fears.

The thread running through the film is that the price of power has been so high for Lady Thatcher that she is seeing out her days in a state of anxiety rather than peace, scarred by her time as Prime Minister.  Any sense of triumph in her career, or the historic greatness of her achievements, is absent from the script. In one scene she is shown tearfully wondering whether it was really necessary to sink the Argentine ship the General Belgrano, killing 323 men, as it purportedly retreated during the 1982 Falklands conflict.

Read the disgusting rest here.

Conservative women and minorities are an existential threat to the modern Left.  If the Democratic Party loses its edge with the female and minority demographic, it goes the way of the Dodo.  They are toast.  Conservative women and minorities must therefore be destroyed at all costs.  So does anybody seriously believe this won’t be a hit job on Thatcher?  A sneak peek here:

And now for the Prime Minister Thatcher you won’t see in a Hollywood propaganda piece– the real Maggie Thatcher:

July 10, 2011

Cultural elite Issues new Marching orders: Skip the Fourth of July

Fourth of July: Young Republicans on parade.

While Leftist elites admit below that patriotism makes people more conservative, our Leftist media will make damn sure it doesn’t make the news.

Harvard: July 4th Parades Are Right-Wing

Democratic political candidates can skip this weekend’s July 4th parades. A new Harvard University study finds that July 4th parades energize only Republicans, turn kids into Republicans, and help to boost the GOP turnout of adults on Election Day.  “Fourth of July celebrations in the United States shape the nation’s political landscape by forming beliefs and increasing participation, primarily in favor of the Republican Party,” said the report from Harvard.

“The political right has been more successful in appropriating American patriotism and its symbols during the 20th century. Survey evidence also confirms that Republicans consider themselves more patriotic than Democrats. According to this interpretation, there is a political congruence between the patriotism promoted on Fourth of July and the values associated with the Republican party. Fourth of July celebrations in Republican dominated counties may thus be more politically biased events that socialize children into Republicans,” write Harvard Kennedy School Assistant Professor David Yanagizawa-Drott and Bocconi University Assistant Professor Andreas Madestam.

Their findings also suggest that Democrats gain nothing from July 4th parades, likely a shocking result for all the Democratic politicians who march in them.  “There is no evidence of an increased likelihood of identifying as a Democrat, indicating that Fourth of July shifts preferences to the right rather than increasing political polarization,” the two wrote.

The three key findings of those attending July 4th celebrations:

  • When done before the age of 18, it increases the likelihood of a youth identifying as a Republican by at least 2 percent.
  • It raises the likelihood that parade watchers will vote for a Republican candidate by 4 percent.
  • It boosts the likelihood a reveler will vote by about 1 percent and increases the chances they’ll make a political contribution by 3 percent.

What’s more, the impact isn’t fleeting. “Surprisingly, the estimates show that the impact on political preferences is permanent, with no evidence of the effects depreciating as individuals become older,”said the Harvard report.

Finally, the report suggests that if people are looking for a super-patriotic July 4th, though should head to Republican towns. “Republican adults celebrate Fourth of July more intensively in the first place.”

Source

Not to worry, Libs,  There’s always May Day!

So there you have it, another reason why the Left hates America, a fundamentally patriotic country.  Yet notice how Harvard says the Right has “appropriated” patriotism, as if conservative patriotism was devised as part of a concerted political strategy in a smoky back room.  The Left is fond of making this claim in order to explain their own disgust with patriotism, as well as other aspects of our cultural heritage, which comes back to bite them at the polls.  It’s those wily Republicans!  The truth is, the Right never appropriated patriotism, nor the flag, nor the Bible, nor any of those cultural traditions that we conservatives love to celebrate.  It’s the Left who has tossed them into the rubbish bin of history.  Indeed, the very notion of nation-state is contrary to Marxist dogma, and it simply bleeds over into Liberal scorn for patriotism, and even anti-Americanism.  Recall Michelle Obama’s interesting comment about pride in America?  But don’t you DARE question their patriotism!

America is the Great Experiment.  This is a country of immigrants, a mish mash of peoples from across the globe.  As a result, we have no common blood or culture to bind us together the way virtually every other country on Earth does.  We don’t even have an official language, thanks to our good Liberal friends who oppose any such efforts.  And if you ask them, we don’t even have a common religion, as they insist America is not a Christian nation.  So what makes us American?  Why, our history!  And the democratic and freedom-loving values we derive from that history.  This is what we celebrate on the Fourth of July.   And if we don’t commemorate that, then what’s left to bind us as Americans?

Nevertheless, the all-knowing cultural elite at Harvard has issued your new marching orders, and you, the good modern Lib that you are will simply accept them because they know best.  You got the memo, now follow it.

But what are all you old school JFK Liberals waiting for?  How much more evidence do you need before you finally realize today’s Democrat party is not the party of John Kennedy?  How much more proof do you need before you decide modern Liberalism is no longer your home and you jump ship?  I did.  So join me, the water’s warm over here!

June 29, 2011

“Imagine” this: John Lennon was a closet Rightwinger

Secret Reagan fan.

Lennon was a closet Republican: Assistant

Pot-addled hippies and Lefty hipsters the world over are having a mental breakdown right about now.  The guy responsible for the Left’s counter culture, anti-religious, anti-patriotism, anti-war, anti-capitalist anthem “Imagine” was a secret Rightwinger.  Love it!

John Lennon was a closet Republican, who felt a little embarrassed by his former radicalism, at the time of his death – according to the tragic Beatles star’s last personal assistant.

Fred Seaman worked alongside the music legend from 1979 to Lennon’s death at the end of 1980 and he reveals the star was a Ronald Reagan fan who enjoyed arguing with left-wing radicals who reminded him of his former self.

In new documentary Beatles Stories, Seaman tells filmmaker Seth Swirsky Lennon wasn’t the peace-loving militant fans thought he was while he was his assistant.

He says, “John, basically, made it very clear that if he were an American he would vote for Reagan because he was really sour on (Democrat) Jimmy Carter.

“He’d met Reagan back, I think, in the 70s at some sporting event… Reagan was the guy who had ordered the National Guard, I believe, to go after the young (peace) demonstrators in Berkeley, so I think that John maybe forgot about that… He did express support for Reagan, which shocked me.

“I also saw John embark in some really brutal arguments with my uncle, who’s an old-time communist… He enjoyed really provoking my uncle… Maybe he was being provocative… but it was pretty obvious to me he had moved away from his earlier radicalism.

“He was a very different person back in 1979 and 80 than he’d been when he wrote Imagine. By 1979 he looked back on that guy and was embarrassed by that guy’s naivete.”

Source

June 19, 2011

Leftists: So what if the West is becoming Muslim

The multiculti Left is ideologically and, more importantly, emotionally invested in disproving the Islamization of the West.  BUT, they say, even assuming the West is going muzzie, so what?  It’s just another construct.

June 4, 2011

East Jerusalem and the Fiction of the 1967 borders

Jerusalem, undivided capital of Israel.

Just as we would expect from him, President Obama has thrown his lot in with the Arabs and is demanding Israel to withdraw to the 1967 “borders” as part of his new Middle East peace plan curtain raising.  I use the scare quotes because they were never actually historical borders, not in any genuine sense of the word, but merely an armistice line resulting from Israel’s war of independence in 1948.  There is nothing about those armistice lines upon which the Palestinians can lay any objective claim– Israel might have acquired more than that in ’48, or less.  No matter.  Those “borders” are as fictitious and impermanent as is the 48th Parallel in Korea.  Yet the real goal of pushing Israel back to pre-1967 lines isn’t about restoring “historical borders” or gaining the Palestinians a few extra acres of rocky soil on which to raise some goats.  If mere acreage were the issue, Palestinians would accept the proposed land swaps allowing Israel some semblance of defensible borders.  But they don’t.  No, CCHQ believes the real object of Obama’s and the Palestinian’s 1967 initiative is to split Jerusalem down the center, as it was pre-1967, and establish a Palestinian capital there.  Make no mistake about it, returning to ’67 is all about East Jerusalem.

What you won’t hear from President Obama, however, is that when it comes to the issue of those borders, the current Arab residents of Jerusalem don’t see eye to eye with him nor their palestinian brethren.

Arabs of Jerusalem ask Israel to remain in control

The Israeli Knesset’s Interior Committee met on Monday to discuss future control of Jerusalem as pressure mounts for Israel to surrender the city’s eastern half to the Palestinian Authority.  Among those slated to address the committee were Arab residents of eastern Jerusalem who want to continue living under Israeli sovereignty.

That these Arabs would risk their lives to come forward and request to remain part of Israel debunks the international misconception most recently enunciated by US President Barack Obama that the Palestinian Arabs cannot reach their full potential or live dignified lives while under “Israeli occupation.”

It also provides further evidence for the conclusion of Israel Today’s recent cover story revealing that many Palestinian Arabs do not want an independent state, and already live in peace and prosperity with their Jewish neighbors.  Monday’s Knesset gathering was called by lawmakers who are growing increasingly concerned over how parts of eastern Jerusalem are slowly falling under the de facto control of the Palestinian regime.

“Signs of Israeli sovereignty are disappearing in parts of Jerusalem that are behind the partition fence and their place is being taken by hostile elements,” wrote the lawmakers. “This, despite the lack of any decision by the Knesset or the government on the matter.”

They warned that this “impotence leads to the de facto division of Jerusalem.”

Source

May 29, 2011

Hollywood’s radical lefties Emerge from the closet

State funded Lefty propaganda

Sesame Street and Friends ‘pumping out left wing messages’

It isn’t paranoia when they really are out to get you.  It’s no longer a conspiracy theory when they admit to it.  Below, admitted and confessed cultural marxism in action from our friends in the entertainment industry:

The TV series Friends undermined family values; Sesame Street taught ethnic minorities about civil disobedience; Happy Days had a subtle anti-Vietnam subtext; and the 1980s cop show MacGyver tried to persuade pistol-packing Americans that guns are bad.  That is the considered opinion of Ben Shapiro, an investigative author and right-wing columnist who will publish a detailed expose tomorrow telling how Hollywood producers, writers and actors have been secretly using TV to promote what he calls a “radical” left-leaning political agenda.  Shapiro’s book, Primetime Propaganda revolves around comments by 70-odd industry heavyweights he approached for interviews.

The book promises to “profile the biggest names in showbusiness over the past 50 years” and includes a series of “gotcha” moments, in which the architects of the best-watched TV shows of modern times tell how they tried to use the medium of broadcasting to, as Shapiro puts it, “shape America in their own leftist image”.

“I was shocked by the openness of the Hollywood crowd when it came to admitting anti-conservative discrimination inside the industry,” Shapiro said. “They weren’t ashamed of it. In fact, some were actually proud of it.”  The book’s contents will only add weight to allegations – often aired by conservative Americans – that Hollywood is the exclusive domain of leftie propagandists.

Among Shapiro’s most revelatory interviewees is Marta Kauffman, the co-creator of Friends, who recalls how she hired a “bunch of liberals” to run the programme to “put out there what we believe”.  In 1999, she admitted casting the actress sister of Newt Gingrich, the prominent Republican, to play a preacher at a lesbian wedding because she wanted to annoy conservatives.  “When we did the lesbian wedding, we knew there was going to be some flak,” said Kauffman. “I have to say, when we cast Candice Gingrich as the minister of that wedding, there was a bit of a ‘f*** you’ in it to the right-wing, directly.”

Elsewhere in the book, Vin DiBona, the producer of MacGyver, agrees that Hollywood has a liberal bias, saying “I’m happy about it, actually.” The cult cop show advanced an anti-gun agenda, he added. “That was the whole premise of the programme, that MacGyver used his brain power and skill and science, and solved all the difficulties through ingenuity. No guns, no knives.”

Not just a comedy about military camaraderie, M*A*S*H also had a pacifist agenda, the show’s co-creator and director Gene Reynolds told Shapiro, who said: “We wanted to point out the wastefulness of war.”  And, with regard to Happy Days, writer Bill Bickley said he “had a whole subtext” attacking the Vietnam War. “If you really look for it, you can find it.”

The book is perhaps at its most condemnatory when accusing the creators of Sesame Street of attempting to brainwash young children. It quotes Mike Dann, one of the show’s founding executives, saying it “was not made for the sophisticated or the middle class”.  Early episodes featured the character Grover breaking bread with a hippie. Oscar, who lived in a rubbish bin, was supposed to address “conflicts arising from racial and ethnic diversity”.

Sesame Street tried to tackle divorce, tackled ‘peaceful conflict resolution’ in the aftermath of 9/11 and had [gay actor] Neil Patrick Harris on the show playing the subtly named ‘fairy shoeperson’,” notes Shapiro.  As to whether there may be a touch of McCarthy-esque paranoia about his belief that film-makers are planting the seed of socialism in the bosom of America, he adds: “It’s not paranoid to speak the truth. Hollywoodites admit openly to messaging their product, and to their scorn for [conservatives].”

Source

Now, you may believe it’s just fine and dandy that Hollywood is promoting what you consider a worthy cause or sound worldview.  That’s fine.  Just show us a shred of intellectual honesty and stop denying that’s what they’re doing, mkay?

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »

The Shocking Blue Green Theme. Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 27 other followers