Hypocrisy and the media.

The leftist media are at it again.

By now you've all heard about Senator Larry Craig's arrest for playing footsie in a public restroom (some say soliciting another man for sex). The media are now trying to destroy Larry Craig's life by public humiliation. This is bad enough but the real evil is that thy--the media--are humiliating Craig's wife and family and they are innocent of any footsie wrongdoing. Many will argue--both from the left and the right--that Craig deserves what he is getting and we have a right to know because what he did wrong and and because he's a US senator and so on and so on. Fine, I suppose, if you think Craig's personal problems are your business and he deserves humiliation. But his wife and family do not deserve this! The punishment the media are doling out far exceeds the crime! But, of course, the leftist media does not care, especially because Craig is a Republican (the media can accuse the right and not the left of violating standards because the left doesn't have standards).

So, of course, this whole incident makes Craig a hypocrite, right? I mean, after all, he is against special right for gays and he's against same-sex marriage and the gay agenda. So the guy, because he was apparently seeking sex from men, is a hypocrite! Nonsense. First, just because one is a sinner does not invalidate their positions on any given issue. And two, many homosexuals--many homosexuals--are against same-sex marriage. Hypocrisy is when someone says everyone should be doing this but I don't have to. Let me explain better: Al Gore is a hypocrite because he says everyone should save energy and make their homes green and environmentally friendly as possible yet he makes no effort to make his own home green. That's hypocrisy. If we say Craig is a hypocrite then no one can advocate anything because we all sin, we all make mistakes.

The media and the left have put gays (and other minorities) into a funny position. If you are gay and don't agree with the gay agenda you are a hypocrite. But no one says that heterosexuals whom support the gay agenda are hypocrites. Heterosexuals, apparently, are allowed more freedom to think than homosexuals are. This rule applies to blacks, too. We all know how bad it is for blacks who are conservative. They are publicly ridiculed and accused of not being black simply because they like lower taxes, a strong military and less government. What stupidity. The left do not think rationally. It's simply emotion. And Larry Craig and his family are destroyed because of this.

One little mistake . . .

The Left Destroys.

Have you heard about this one?

Dr. J. Michael Bailey, a psychologist at Northwestern University, has been under attack since his book, "The Man Who Would Be Queen" came out (ahem) in 2003. In his book, Dr. Bailey theorizes that some men who want to become women do so because of an erotic fascination with themselves as women. Even though the book was nominated for an award by the Lambda Literary Foundation, an organization that promotes gay, bisexual and transgender literature, many transgender women took offense to the book's premise. The militant transgender community believes that those who want to become women do so because they are trapped inside of a man's body; it's biology, not psychology, they claim.

Just a few days after the book came out, Lynn Corbay, a computer scientist at the University of Michigan, sent out an e-mail comparing Dr. Bailey's book to Nazi propaganda. A transgender advocate and consultant from L.A., Andrea James, even went so far as to post pictures of Dr. Bailey's children on her website with explicit captions. Attacks on Dr. Bailey are numerous (I believe they are listed at Corbays site--she must be very proud).

I have no idea if Dr. Bailey is right. For all I know, the transgendered women who have taken offense to Dr. Bailey's theory are right. The point is academic freedom has taken another punch in the mouth. And, as always, it is the left trying to stop those with whom they disagree with. The right in America never tries to silence those they disagree with (I challenge you to give me an example). It simply does not happen. But the left, true to their totalitarian tendencies, attempts to shut-up and destroy those they disagree with all the time. The right doesn't set out to destroy the lives' of those they disagree with. You won't find any example of such a thing in America. But for the left, it's what they do.

Makes me wonder what the left is so afraid of. Disagreement, surely, but why?

Nice Michael Medved Quote.

Minnesota Congressman Keith Ellison recently compared President Bush to Adolph Hitler, suggesting Bush “exploited” 9/11, like Hitler used the Reichstag fire, to seize absolute power. It’s true that both frightening episodes produced pro-government propaganda, but there are glaring differences. Anyone who defied Nazi propaganda ended up in concentration camp; anyone who denounced Bush propaganda got a big book contract, an exclusive interview on “Sixty Minutes” and general adulation from the media establishment. Of all the paranoid charges against the Bush administration, the silliest involves the suppression of dissent: from the time of the disputed election with Al Gore, millions of Americans loudly dissented from Presidential policies and none of them – not one – has faced dire consequences. Even at the time of the President’s greatest popularity, leftists energetically attacked him – protesting even against the invasion of Afghanistan. None of these critics suffered for their opinions and dissent remains lively, even ubiquitous, in today’s America. -- radio talk show host and author Micheal Medved

I am so tired of President Bush being compared to Adolph Hitler. It's sick. It shows you that most on the left are not serious thinkers. Grown-ups can disagree with the president's policies and not resort to silly, childish attacks. While there are those on the right who are just as childish, they are few and are shunned by mainstream conservatives. Mainstream liberals embrace the radical left. As proof, look at the Democratic candidates running for president. Most are fairly mainstream liberals but they pander to the far left and are attending, this very weekend, the Daily Kos Convention. The Daily Kos is a vile, despicable site that engages in all sorts of profane attacks on the current administration. Yet they are embraced by presidential candidates. There is no extreme right organization that the Republican candidates, as a whole, embrace (I won't speak for Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo because they are the token nuts on the Republican side of the presidential candidates, who knows whom they embrace?).

Few think on the left. They mostly emote.