Pages

Showing posts with label great mystery. Show all posts
Showing posts with label great mystery. Show all posts

Friday, September 17, 2010

The Great Mystery

In spite of the monumental events of these turbulent times, this blog has not featured many posts of late. Blogger in chief, actually the only blogger, Jean-Baptiste, has been busy with other matters. It is not because he has been overwhelmed by the onslaught of the popular press, such as the incessant frivolities from the trivial triumvirate of syndicate columnists, David Brooks, E.J. Dionne Jr., and David Sirota. It is true that untwisting the truth from their daily barrages against conservatism and their progressive propaganda would be a full-time job. Lately, they have repeated the big lie that BHO is actually moderate. Glen, Mark, Laura, Sean, and Rush along with their guests have gone to enormous lengths to show that he is our most radically leftist president in history. (Jean-Baptiste suspected this all along.) Also see David Limbaugh's book, Crimes Against Liberty, for a rundown of the evidence against BHO.

Actually, Jean-Baptiste has been meditating on the 'gods of the copybook headings.' Who are they? Kipling's poem says that they are not the market place. That leaves the Progressives as the primary suspect. Anyway, read the past blogs on The Overton Window, or Glen Beck's book itself for an explanation of what all that is about. Kipling's poem gives some insight into the motives of these 'god-like' progressives, delving into the 'Great Mystery.' The Great Mystery is: why do they keep doing it, why can't they just leave us alone? Is it their depraved greed and lust or some mental defect?

Anyway, Jean-Baptiste also had a garden and berry bushes to cultivate and harvest during the Summer. He had cats, birds, and raccoons to take care of. He had a lot of work to do outside. He had his stamp collection to work on. He even had to get away a little. Lately,he was also reading the Koran. The part where God says, 'remember me, I will remember you,' seems to fathom some unknowable depth. The first words of every chapter are, 'In the name of God, the beneficent, the merciful.' Beneficent means He gives us more that we deserve, merciful means that He punishes us less that we deserve. Christian mystics have said they pray incessantly, by saying the Jesus prayer with every breath: 'Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me.' The Islamic mystics repeat: 'There is no God but God." For the less theistic: 'There is no Reality but the Ultimate Reality.'

It can be a little tough to stay focused on the current convoluted progressive schemes of Axelrod, Emanuel, BHO, and their masters.

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

When Will Media Take off the Blinders?

As it is hard to find the time to do the searches and research, not to mention the composition, required to write a short post that does justice to a topic, I will again quote at length from a source on the web. (The Wall Street Journal; Best of the Web Today, August 14, 2009):


"The Media and the Haters on the Left Our item yesterday on media coverage of anti-Iraq vs. anti-ObamaCare protests prompted some interesting reader commentary, including this from William White:
The point you make about the media not covering liberal loonies at left-wing protests because such stories would be of dog-bites-man importance has some validity. However, I think you miss two much larger concerns.
First, I do not believe that the existence of left-wing fringe elements at liberal protests is at all common knowledge. Certainly political junkies like us know full well about what really goes on at these rallies. However, I think there is a huge swath of middle America that would be quite startled to get the full picture of liberal protests. I also think that were the media to provide such coverage it would notably alter public opinion on many political topics. (By way of contrast, note how the media cover religion. They almost never cover mainstream religious organizations and activity, but consistently report on religious extremists, and always in a negative light.)
Second, yes, at any political protest you will have elements there shouting, arguing, whatever, that politician so-and-so is a jerk and in bed with special interests and untrustworthy and all that. However, what infuriated me about the antiwar protests when Bush was in office is that the left's level of rhetoric was not just different in degree from what one might commonly see at political rallies but was different in kind. To me, the left became completely unhinged. To regularly brand Bush as Hitler, to regularly refer to the Bush administration as a "regime," to tolerate the not-uncommon calls for Bush's death or assassination reflected a serious change in the nature of political debate in this country. That change was very much a valid news story. In many respects, that change superseded the significance of the war itself. Yet, the media totally and completely ignored and whitewashed the level of lunacy among the left.
Now, maybe I, myself, am an extremist for seeing such an acute liberal bias in the MSM, but, I feel very strongly that the MSM is "at it again." They are working hard to report on fringe conservative protesters as a way to undercut conservative positions when they have regularly ignored the lunacy which exists on the left--and have ignored the size and sway that such extremists hold within the Democratic Party."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204409904574350400852801602.html

The poor job done by the news media in telling us what is really happening is a major cause of most societal problems. If we knew what was going on, we would vote for leaders who proposed solutions to the underlying problems, not to our superficial, though chronic, difficulties. The above quotation and other comments in the cited article demonstrate instances of media reporting based on their own political bias, while ignoring or even concealing obviously relevant evidence that is staring them right in the face. The goals and methods of the left are things that we should know in order to make an informed evaluation of current events. For a long time, the major mass media obviously has wanted us ignorant. Why? That's a good question.

Sunday, August 2, 2009

A Convenient Theory

One of the many comments to this blog directed our attention to an essay:

http://thebulletin.us/articles/2009/07/10/top_stories/doc4a576b0ec9caa441243158.txt

This is one of the best commentaries that I have ever read. Not only does the author demonstrate the irresponsibility of environmentalists who make unfounded predictions of doom, he exposes quite handily the snobbery and elitism of said environmentalists.

It has become clear to me that environmentalists, (at least the growing extremist fringe), hate capitalism. Why it is that they and liberals in general hold this view, given the irrefutable facts of history, is one of the great mysteries of our time. They want to turn back the clock and undue the advances of the modern world. They disguise there plans in a feigned concern for dangers to nature. They get monetary and moral support from some genuine environmentalists. However, to these radical environmentalist, who are actually not environmentalists at all, global warming is the latest and most convenient theory so far to help them with the destruction of capitalism, which is what they actually wanted all along. Thirty years ago, when they foretold the coming man-made ice age, their solution was the same: more and more limitations on industry. Doesn't this raise some suspicions? I guess if you're a mundane journalist with his marching orders who drank the conformist Cool-Aid, you're beyond help. God help us all.