The Tolerance of Liberals
Some people don't understand what it means to win with grace
The Tolerance of Liberals
When you tell someone that you don’t respect their choices, they tend to react with anger. That’s what happened last week, when I made a very public acknowledgement of my sorrow at the re-election of Barack Obama. The emails were numerous, many caustic, some unprintable in a family newspaper, and a few threatening. One fellow called me a “dirty cu*t,” another questioned my sanity and a third tried to use his law degree to shame me into silence. Note to the middle-aged male attorneys out there: save your arrogance for the pretty little things on bar stools who are more susceptible to your checkbook-er-charms.
Given the fact that I’m a conservative in a very liberal town, one in which there were precincts that registered zero votes for Mitt Romney (voter fraud? What voter fraud?) the hostility of my readers doesn’t surprise. What does, however, is the level of vitriol that spews from mouths and fingers when you say something that annoys.
I spent a good part of Thursday ‘unfriending’ people from Facebook, and not only the crass-and-crowing liberals. Some of the comments lobbed by suicidal conservatives made me realize that even among my fellow travelers there are extremes which should be avoided at all costs. Of course, the balance is always tipped in favor of liberals when it comes to offensive behavior; remember the nice things allegedly mature women said about Sarah Palin? Remember how they accused her of not being the mother of her Downs Syndrome child, the one a few shameless souls thought she should abort? And remember the deafening silence of the Democrats or, more specifically, female Democrats? The hatred was palpable.
I’m nowhere as important or ubiquitous as the comely and savvy governor, so my critics are both less vocal and less newsworthy. Still, it was with profound sadness that I read the emails in response to my piece last week, because they represented a hollowing-out of the human soul, a degradation of the spirit that separates sentient beings from damp clods of earth. I have learned that when someone is unable to defend his position, he resorts to ad hominem attacks with tangential topics. For example, there was the fellow who assured me I was racist because I refused to use the term “President Obama” in my column, even though I’d referred to him as “president.” There was the woman who said that she was a Catholic who believed in abortion, and don’t dare tell me that she wasn’t in good standing with the church (okay, I won’t. I’ll leave that to the Bishops.)
There was the gay man from San Francisco who, even though I hadn’t said anything about same-sex marriage in the piece, felt it necessary to tell me that his ‘husband’ was a much better “American” than I was because his “people” came over on the Mayflower. There was the black woman who said that Barack Obama was so much better than those mediocre white men who had been keeping her people down all these years. To her, I was moved to mention that mediocre white men had freed the slaves, passed the Civil Rights Act, ended segregation, and risked death at KKK road blocks like my father. I also reminded her that this president had come from the womb of a mediocre white woman
I could tell the comment was not appreciated by the response, which included several words not even Andrew Dice Clay could pronounce.
Some people actually tried to engage in civil discourse, but they were about as common as a bar of soap at an Occupy rally. Others mocked my sadness, going so far as to say that I should just jump in front of a Regional Rail car and be done with it. Given the problems SEPTA has in running its trains on time, this is probably not the most effective way to do myself in if I were so inclined.
And then there were those who were convinced that I hated Barack Obama, even though I said I didn’t. Apparently, when a white person doesn’t vote for the “First Black President” and then brazenly admits it in print, she must be hiding some crisp percale sheets in her linen closet. These were the most depressing emails, the ones that saw racism in the shadows and refused to believe that anyone could actually embrace a conservative without ulterior, sinister motives.
Every four years, there are winners and losers. But there is a bitter edge to it this time, a sense that we’ve been ripped along jagged lines that draw blood.
I’m not done fighting for my beliefs, not by a long shot. But I do seek an armistice of sorts. Not yielding, not compromising.
Just finding that place where, as Yeats wrote, “peace comes dropping slow.”
Comments (53)
your America is dead Christine. We had the funeral last week. sayonara!— Ryan- You're a confused, sad individual Christine. Your beliefs don't add up. Time to re-think your life, sweetie.— Bradley85
- jeez. wow. DO NOT get down. we will come back. the midterms are around the corner. always love your stuff.— rysagr
- You're going to flunk those midterms unless you study harder. — carl and sons
- I have friends all over the political spectrum, and my experience has shown liberals to be the least tolerant. As a result, I avoid political conversations with them. Their loss...they could expand their horizons but choose not to.— FletcherT
- Fletcher, this is as pathetic as the whining over the Liberal Media. You can't lie and cheat, as the right did regarding WMD and startign the Iraq War and then cry that the media is biased when they call you on the lying and cheating. The idea that John McCain is out there today calling benghazi the biggestintelligence failure ever is embarrassing. Hello 9/11, hello WMD's!!! You can't stand firmly with a party that at it's core is intolerant against homosexuality, choice, the help given to those in poverty, minorities, science and claim that the other side is intollerant of your beliefs. Evolution is not a belief. It's not an opinion. It's freaking science. It's not an acceptable opinion that 2+2 =5. it's wrong. You want tolerance? Get on the right side of the truth. — shamdog
- This really is sad. How much longer are we going to have to be subjected to these pitiful displays of victimization? These lamentations about the country and liberals' behavior leads me to ask why you are so concerned with the speck in the liberal's eye while ignoring the plank in the conservative's eye?— Ed G
- I have friends all over the political spectrum, and my experience has shown liberals to be the least tolerant. As a result, I avoid political conversations with them. Their loss...they could expand their horizons but choose not to.
— FletcherT
---------------------------------------------
Of course you do, Fletcher. (Who ever says, 'I only have friends on one side of the political spectrum'?)
Anyway, it's very hard to be tolerant of ignorant, irrational, and backwards thinking when you'd like to see society progress. It's not easy, believe me.— Bradley85 - Ryan, unfortunately you might be right. Our America today resembles Soviet Union - the country I left in 1988. You might think it is a good thing. I beg to differ. I saw first hand what "EVERYTHING BELONGS TO PEOPLE" means and it's not pretty. This country used to pride itself on independent people who knew how to take care of themselves and rely on the government for simple things - defense, law enforcement, international relationships, etc. What we are moving towards is the government that controls our lives, regulates private industries and redistributes wealth. By no means I am a rich man, but, since my family came to the US, we worked hard to get what we have now, and we started with 0 (that's ZERO) - no English, no money, nothing. Just huge desire to succeed. We were able to accomplish what we dreamed of. We did it all because this country presented us with one thing we never had in the USSR - opportunity. We asked for nothing but the opportunity. And it pains me to watch this great country of ours moving on the path to the one full of freeloaders and lazy bums who look for their government's giveaways. It comes with the price - the government control. And the more freeloaders there are, the bigger chance of Obamas of the world to be reelected time and time again. I myself my not live to see the Greece on the shores of the Atlantic and Pacific, but unfortunately my kids and grand kids might. I pray for all Americans to wake up and stand up to those politicians who want to control us trough keeping us down and in need for the government. It might happen, it might not. In case if it doesn't we all eventually lose. You might not realize it now, but we all will lose. Unless, of course, your idea of America is Soviet Union. But remember, Soviet Union didn't survive as a country. Makes you think, doesn't it?— hollandpa
- Let's see... I think you may have gotten all the buzzwords and talking points in there. Good job. I do have a hard time believing that part about you came from the USSR if you really think that living here is anything like living there.
It makes me think that you spend a lot of time listening to talk radio and that your critical thinking skills are weak.— carl and sons - “there were precincts that registered zero votes for Mitt Romney (voter fraud? What voter fraud?)” “remember the nice things allegedly mature women said about Sarah Palin? Remember how they accused her of not being the mother of her Downs Syndrome child, the one a few shameless souls thought she should abort? And remember the deafening silence of the Democrats or, more specifically, female Democrats? “ Flowers, as usual, makes hollow, empty, petulant and completely ironic statements – if you’re trying to make a point about the discourse in today’s politics, you’re doing it wrong by engaging in the same. Please qualify those statements above, or just stop with this endless, self-centered useless week-long-now diatribe because of how you feel about the election results. Ugly political platforms have ugly consequences. So does the lack of enough self respect to learn the facts about what is going on this country. Time to grow up, girl! But you’ve never had a reputation of rising above anything you seem to think is from the gutter …— Tuptim
hollandpa, you nailed it.
And look at all the nasty comments we see today. Everyone of them comes from a liberal. Point made. Case closed.— PlumberJoe- I feel your pain. I am a lone Liberal in bright red Denton County, TX. If I put an Obama bumper sticker on my car it would probably be bombed our someone would shoot at me. There is real unreasoned hatred for this President from people who are really nice and caring when not on the subject of politics. A real Jeckle and Hyde. Anyway I can feel your pain on the other end of the spectrum. It's too bad we can't just discuss and express our opinions without others with an agenda twisting them into their own purposes. After all this is America and that means we do not have to agree but should respect one another as Americans. Certainly something should bring us together.— willin46
- willin46, something will bring us together. That is what people do when calamity strikes.
The stock market is now down to its July lows. More darkness to follow.
How did you find this Blog site from TX.— PlumberJoe - hollandpa did nail it, PJ. Those who voted for Obamaa- seem to exult in allowing Obamaa- and his policies 4 more years to destroy America. And there is nothing sophisticated or progressive or tolerant about today's liberals.— Thoughtful&concernedvoter
Well, what have we got here?
Don't you weasels ever give up?
He wasn't born in kenya.
"The Tolerance . . . " of right-wing whackaloons:
"Impeach Obama Robocall Campaign Launched By Conservative Group"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/14/impeach-obama-robocall-campaign_n_2132682.html- Every single time Christine writes a hateful, shameful, lie-filled, self-pity filled column and gets correctly called out for it, she retaliates by publishing one of these uber-stupid, lying, ultra-whiny rants about "liberals" being "nasty" to her. Christine conveniently forgets that she is bar-none, the nastiest, most partisan, inflammatory hack out there. THAT is why people call you out. You stink.— sophistry
- Just more hypocrisy from the aptly named HypoChrissy. I would urge anyone with a sincere gripe against Christine's sickening blog and column to write her an e-mail (of course, I would suggest being reasonable and relatively polite, as she routinely recycles hate mail into "I hate liberals" postings). Maybe she will quit and we will finally get some peace around here.— sophistry
- I spent most of yesterday away from my computer and just came across today's blog.
Christine, you have not written anything that calls for the kind of hateful vitriol that you have received from your opponents. You are ALLOWED to be disappointed and melancholy over the results of the election.
Some people simply do not know HOW to win gracefully.
Please know that you are not alone in your values. Those of us who are moderates are not for total government intrusion in our lives. As someone above said, all we ask for is opportunity.
One way that opportunity appears is in the form of a decent education, which is my personal cause, an education that is free and open to all. That kind of system requires government support.
See, that is my idea of ideal. The government is not there to tell us how to live our lives but offers the supports we all need occasionally to make the most of them.
Meanwhile, Chris, you have a right to your opinion which is neither racist nor misogynist. You are correct that whites as well as blacks sacrificed and on occasion were martyred for the advancement of civil rights.
We are a country of personal ideologies, principles and opinions with the overarching freedom to say what we want.
Unfortunately, the haters among us abuse the privilege.
Shame on them.
— Gendres - It is just amazing, utterly breathtaking, the hypocrisy, intolerance, and willful ignorance of most on the political left.— Mirror
- PG, in answer to your question, I believe that philly.com is international including its blogs.
As far as the stock market, there is still trepidation over the impending fiscal crisis in January. If everyone will just sit down and accept a compromise that repairs the tax system and increases revenue while controlling spending, the crisis should be resolved and the economy moved forward.
This is NOT the time for politics as usual.— Gendres - Oooops, meant to type PJ.— Gendres
- Talk to your colleague Annette John Hall. I'm sure she can tell you some stuff about the tolerance of conservatives. Maybe you can compare stories.
I've never seen her write a column like this though, which is all to her credit. Maybe she just isn't a whiner.— carl and sons - Mirror - even Christine acknowledges that many on the right are just as extreme in their responses. There are equal opportunity offenders on both ends of the spectrum.
I agree with Chris that it is time for a cease fire and some truce talks. This is the government we have and we should be able to use it wisely to solve some serious problems like disaster relief, improving infrastructure and supporting a fair and equitable health care system.
— Gendres - Carl, I read Annette's column and it is indeed moderate in its appraisal, unlike some of the acid content so prevalent in some corners. Of course, Annette can afford to be generous because her side won and won big.
But there should always be room in this country for those with a conscience and personal values that may not exactly click with the avant-garde who want to push the norms of society further and further to the left.
It is always about finding balance between the extremes.
But we must never be deaf to the views of others.— Gendres - And mediocre white men "freed the slaves"? Really? Who made them slaves in the first place? Who then proceeded to de-facto re-enslave them by disenfranchising, terrorizing, and segregating them? Yeah, mediocre (or worse) white men. This is perhaps the most ridiculous thing you've ever written in a career devoted to ridiculousness.
I'm sorry that you've had to deal with obscene and violent comments from idiots, but every columnist, liberal or conservative does. It's part of the job, unfortunately. Deal with it or get a different job.— carl and sons - "even Christine acknowledges that many on the right are just as extreme in their responses. There are equal opportunity offenders on both ends of the spectrum."
And yes, Ann Coulter gets a passing mention as an offender.
But the offenders on the right are never worthy of the kind of screed that Flowers launches about the left. Why is that?— scoobysnacks - Because she likes to indulge in the ginned-up outrage that people on both sides seem to enjoy so much. Read her blog post about Krauthammer- same thing. Some guy on MSNBC said something she didn't like and so she's outraged.... OUTRAGED, sir!
Personally I think all these poeple should start fighting duels. Then we'd be rid of the lot of them, eventually.— carl and sons - Gendres- I was speaking about Annette's column over time, (not a specific one), and the nasty comments she gets every time she writes something. The public comments are bad enough, I'm sure the private emails are worse. And yet I never see a blog post or column from her like this one.
While I think everyone has a right to live their "conscience" and "personal values", it's when people try to make ME live THEIR values that it's time to push back. It's hard for me to see how a sentient, decent person could vote for a Republican given what that party has become.— carl and sons - carl, some things transcend politics. Personal values and philosophy are at the top of the list. When voting, we try to choose those party platforms that most agree with those ideals.
Sometimes we have to compromise when it is not 100% in our favor.
I think that all opinion writers are brave, especially when they espouse controversial positions. You are correct that some of the private emails they get are horrific and vile and I am glad you are sorry for that.
Christine, who is a conservative writer in a liberal paper in a mostly Democratic town is a particular target for this venom. She is allowed to vent once in a while without being criticized for that too.
I do not advise her to quit, because then the paper would be entirely off balance. Even the Inky has only a few conservative columnists.
No, she should not abandon her post as a religious concervative writer.
And she won't.— Gendres - If you look at the comments on these message boards, they have not been mostly from Democrats, for whatever reason. Maybe there's a lot of old white men around with nothing better to do. I doubt if Christine has it any worse than Annette, or Dick Polman or the rest of them.
I don't think she should quit either. I just think she should just stop with the whining and phony outrage. It goes with the job. She's not doing herself any favors- it's a drag no matter which political side it comes from.
If you are truly horrified at incivility, then be horrified at all incivility, not crying with one eye and winking with the other.— carl and sons - And, Carl, if we had no opinion writers. bloggers or cable pundits to stir the pot, life would be much duller. Those of us who are political junkies would be especially deprived. It is an exciting sport.
Miss Flowers and I do not agree on everything, but I support her writing because she voices much of what I do support.
And I especially support free speech.
8-)— Gendres - Yeah, free speech is essential, but I think we'd be better off with a little less pot stirring and a little more journalism from both sides. — carl and sons
- Thank you!
Back in the day, there were only the Sunday morning talk shows and Washington Week on PBS. The latter was, and still is, especially notable for its civil dialogue between panelists from across the political spectrum. They are patient and polite. They disagree, but do not shout one another down.
Unfortunately, that no longer sells. It's considered a snorefest by today's audience. We've been brought down to the Jerry Springer/World wrestling level of Fox News and Hardball. - Listening to old public affairs radio programs from the 30s to the 70s, 3 things are obvious: Public civilty was expected from media and political personalities; the moderators are almost always intellegent, literate, and informed; and the issues have hardly changed over the last 70s years. Even much of the language used is the same.
Unfortunately the first two things have changed to reflect our lowest common denominator culture.— carl and sons - I don’t know if Flowers has any say in the headlines to her blogs or columns (excoriating random “liberal” comments but never addressing the equally or more appalling comments from the right), but she certainly is responsible for the content. She is notoriously ultra-thin-skinned and reactionary. All too often she goes off on an emotionally-based tirade, without taking time for basic dialog with those whom she disagrees (her use of snide language clearly indicates that she feels far above them), but because she cannot find it in herself to go outside her bubble, her blogs and column are and will forever only be arrogant pout-shout fests. They are perhaps the most wasted valuable space on this website, anytime she is not writing about sports or non-political-religious matters (I have found those blogs and columns to be the most fulfilling, personally). Does she even grasp what the concept of “every action (her blogs/column) has an equal and opposite reaction (emails/comments)”? Instead of scouring other right wing columns and blogs for source material, she’d do better for herself by not trying (and almost always failing) to insult her detractors if she did a little soul searching, express more fully-informed experiences – certainly her output would seem more heartfelt than bitter, mean and petulant, if she did. Often, it has disappointed me that she, a woman who seems to have had some significant career achievement, in a field that can provide some unique experiences to form some well-rounded views, falls so short of sharing truly inspirational or informative commentary most of the time. Not just in writing, but in her TV appearances, as well. There is a clear lack of self esteem going on. Or a major disconnect of what is in her head from what’s in her heart. But more columns of this tone/intent will unfortunately, only bestow a sub-par legacy and sadly, only more of the same kind of reactions. Deserving or not, that’s part of having this privileged platform.— Tuptim
- Very well put, @Tuptim. I have never understood WHY Flowers even has this great platform, when most of what she does is 1) recycle her own pouty rants or 2) recycle some other RWNJ's (sorry, but that is what they are! Look at her right-wing extremist sources...and Facebook!) loony arguments and 3) insult anyone who disagrees with her.
That is par for the course: the disagreement. You can't expect people to think you're a goddess, Christine, when you well know that your "see no shades of gray" opinions are extreme, old fashioned, and very unpopular, especially given the way our nation has just voted.— sophistry - Tuptim (The King & I reference?), as a woman I too am often disappointed with Flowers, and perhaps that is why I go harder on her. She has this prominent platform and she practically wastes it by using it as a playground for her feet-stomping, flailing temper tantrums. I’ll probably get slammed for saying this, but I truly think she has it in her to deliver columns with a higher level of intellect. But I also have a gut feeling that she merely chooses not to, on advice from her employer, to submit these kinds of low-based provocative screeds. It certainly draws numerous comment posts, and that has to count for something on this site. She has demonstrated pure eloquence and visceral compassion when she doesn’t deliberately employ easily divisive and cynical tactics. So, we know it’s there. What we don’t know is why it isn’t always there. What, is intelligence, compassion and comprehension now a thing of the past in order to keep your blogger/columnist job?— B Beal 19146
- Good point, @Beal. The more obnoxious Flowers is, the higher the page views and the greater the number of comments. Who knows? Maybe she doesn't even believe her own garbage talk. Maybe it's all just a ratings ploy, but the truth is that the worse and dumber the column, the greater the number of comments--mostly outraged ones. Don't pretend to be outraged by the outrage, Flowers. Nothing worse than a disingenuous old lady.— sophistry
Put 'em up, put 'em up! Which one of you first? I'll fight you both together if you want. I'll fight you with one paw tied behind my back. I'll fight you standing on one foot. I'll fight you with my eyes closed... ohh, pullin' an axe on me, eh? Sneaking up on me, eh? Why, I'll... Ruff!- Poppies.... poppies.... — carl and sons
- Tuptim and Beal, you both make interesting points about style and substance and you do so without the negative personality quotient that infects so many other posters. It does take rare intelligence to give constructive criticism.
You are both correct that some of Miss Flowers' pieces soar. Her humor and plays on words are a trademark. But with so much emotional give and take going on especially in the past two campaign years, there will inevitably be some strong differences of opinion.
Part of the rancor, and I see it far too often these days, is an undercurrent of anti-Catholic bias stemming from the deplorable scandals that have plagued the church in recent years. Anyone who dares to defend the Faith or raise the possibility that many of the accused clergy are indeed innocent risks being labeled an enabler or worse.
There are also the false accusations that anyone who does not fall madly in love with the President is automatically a racist. A columnist cannot even make a joke about him without liberal finger pointing.
My point has always been that whether you agree with Miss Flowers or not, there is no excuse, none whatsoever, for the often cruel and deliberately rude, crude and lewd comments flung at her.
Civility is a lost art indeed.— Gendres - Christine, you continue writing your beliefs. But, as I have said before, you have selective memory when you only accuse liberals of despicable speech. No one is more despicable than Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh in their inane, personal comments. Yet you fail to mention people like them to balance your commentary. So, when you only attack one side, be prepared to handle the response you receive from the other. But, as Gendres says, you should not be the victim of crude, rude and lewd comments.— lport
- Gendres, your points are all for nought because your dear Christine demonstrates intolerance, homophobia and pure, unadulterated hatred for all liberals (yourself included, sorry to tell you) if you vote for any candidate who wants to preserve a fetus at the expense of who-knows-what-else. Flowers is the ultimate, hypocritical, pro-death "pro-lifer," voting for wars, the death penalty, no health care, etc.
Until Christine Flowers can show some class, tolerance and respect for free-thinking Catholics (or atheists), she deserves no respect in return.— sophistry - Sophy, always the first to cast a stone, aren't you? You completely miss the many statements that Christine has said that castigate her "fellow travelers" for their inane or extreme rhetoric. Even Krauthammer calls them "morons". They all know that part of the reason that Romney lost was because of extremist views.
And how many times does She have to say she is NOT a fan of Ann Coulter. I have read Coulter and Malkin and can only get past a few words before I must stop. I also feel the same about Rev. Sharpton. Ed Shultz also gives me aceta. (I miss Keith Olberman so much.)
You can disagree all you want, but do so in a civilized manner and with evidence. I never read a single word from Miss Flowers calling for cruel punishment of her antagonists, as many have flung at her.
Iport, thanks for agreeing with me about the vicious comments. You have some strong opinions and disagreements but you stop short of hate speech.
I also defend the Church from the vicious anti-Catholics who would tear it to the ground. Neither Christine nor I care about who does or does not have faith as long as they do not force us to violate our own consciences.
And we both care deeply about a living, sentient unborn child being ripped apart for no other reason than the convenience of the mother.
— Gendres - When Christine Flowers can refer to Sandra Fluke in a respectful (not snarky or misogynistic) manner, I will eat my hat and change my mind. Until then, I count FIVE vicious slurs against Ms. Fluke BY Ms. Flowers. Don't even get me started on how many women Flowers doesn't personally know but have savaged in the press. She is hateful and disgusting and needs to be fired now.— sophistry
- Perhaps when I see a headline "The tolerance of conservatives" and an article listing the nasty stupid things conservatives have said, then I'll believe that Christine is truly interested in promoting civility. Until then I will continue in my current opinion of her work.— carl and sons
- i rarely visit, let alone post on this undeserved forum, but since there is an actual discussion (thanks to the mostly-absence of her most notorious acolyte), i choose to chime in briefly.
carl, excellent posts (among others who have had great posts, as well), and i commend you for your ignored but true comment: gendres can talk a big talk, but your phrase summed up her hypocrisy perfectly: "If you are truly horrified at incivility, then be horrified at all incivility, not crying with one eye and winking with the other". we all know, including gendres, exactly what that statement meant, and you will never, ever see an honest response from her.
soph has also properly noted that flowers receives what she dishes out. it's an example of instant karma. flowers pays mere lip service when it comes to "criticizing" republicans, but then spends 95% of her time chastising, and usually unfairly so, progressives. to say she isn't snide or snarky is, quite frankly, to lie.
so kudos to two excellent, tandem posts from soph and carl. before christine earns any respect, she must:
show civility toward sandra fluke (and gays, and atheists, and muslims, etc.)
write the column carl has suggested.
otherwise, she deserves everything she gets, and if she can't take the heat, she should get out of the kitchen. see you folks tomorrow (on one of her other undeserved fori).— thoughtful_critic - yes, i'll be seeing you too, _critic, in all the old familiar places. — PlumberJoe
- PJ - see you in the morning. Do you want chips with your sandwich?
— Gendres - I'm a liberal. I can't tolerate these morons:
"Georgia state Senate Majority Leader Chip Rogers recently convened the Republican caucus at the Georgia State Capitol to discuss an alleged conspiracy between President Barack Obama, non-governmental organizations, state government entities and chambers of commerce to create a United Nations communist dictatorship."
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/11/15/georgia-lawmakers-meet-over-obamas-mind-control-un-dictatorship-plot/
- Until any of you "pro-lifers" can describe what it was like in utero, I think it's more than safe to say that "sentience" does not exist in a fetus, especially one that still looks like a tadpole.— sophistry
- Christine, this morning, a very liberal, pro-Obama network which airs the Today Show took on the task of showing LEGAL immigrants take the oath of citizenship. As some of these new citizens recalled their respective journeys, I felt proud to be a fellow American.
Nevertheless, like most media events, it left me wondering about the true intentions/ motivations of NBC. In an age where a bloc of opportunistic politicians and activist organizations strive to downgrade the requirments of citizenship facing those who took the oath this morning, will the network's next presentation turn to the broader, "more inclusive" self-serving logic behind granting citizenship to illegals?
It's no secret in how the media employs subliminal techniques to introduce a concept or change a perception, prior to slamming viewers with full blown shows based on the particular morality the networks deem ordinary.
Coming soon will be a litany of situation sitcoms where wealthy, but less than caring, whites employ "undocumented" gardeners and maids who possess uncommon abilities to be ironic and cleverly sarcastic as they make fools of their naive employers. The creators will subliminally build into their minority characters "qualities" not displayed by their selfish, self-absorbed employers. It's a strategy successfully used to change racial perceptions and currently being used to make gayness not only acceptable but the norm.
— Right To Be Heard
1
Popular Posts
About this blog
See Christine Flowers on Channel 6's "Inside Story" Sunday at 11:30 a.m.
Christine M. Flowers
Daily News Columnist
Email Christine M. at cflowers1961@yahoo.com Reach Christine M. at cflowers1961@yahoo.com.
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners: