Did You Know? Hate Speech Is Okay As Long As It’s Coming From A Liberal

Carrie Prejean, also known as Miss California, is not only beautiful, she is classy, smart, and true to herself. She was asked an incredibly difficult and politically divisive question during the last round of the Miss USA pageant and answered the question honestly, truthfully, and with courage even though she knew in her heart the ultimate cost would be her dream; to be crowned Miss USA. This in an incredible display of this woman’s integrity, self-confidence, and dignity and she deserves to be respected for her opinions, popular or not.

So what was the famous controversial question asked by gay blogger and Miss USA judge Perez Hilton?

“Vermont recently became the 4^th state to legalize same-sex marriage. Do you think every state should follow suit? Why or why not?”

Her answer:

“I think it’s great that Americans are able to choose one or the other…I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman, no offense to anybody out there, but that’s how I was raised, and that’s how I think it should be between a man and a woman.”

It is obvious by Perez Hilton’s sheer disgust with her answer and his hate-filled comments after the show that he really didn’t want to know the answer to why not same-sex marriage, as he pretended to ask, but simply hoped to pressure her to say why same-sex marriage should be implemented in every state. He couldn’t even contain himself after the pageant. He personally attacked Miss California in his video blog expressing his disappointment and calling her a “stupid Bit*h.” He ranted, cursed, and personally attacked Miss California; basically throwing a fit in his video. Perez Hilton has shamed the entire gay rights movement with his reaction to Miss California’s answer. During his video blog, he actually claimed that he is not mad at her because she doesn’t support same-sex marriage, but because she “doesn’t inspire” and “doesn’t unite.” Even after his publicized blog rant, Mr. Hilton explained during an interview with Julie Chen of CBS News, that since Carrie Prejean represents California, a state that has recently outlawed same-sex marriage through Proposition 8 (a proposition added to the ballot by the people of California by the way), she should have been “better prepared” to answer the question and that she “alienated millions of people” because of how she answered, not what she answered. “Better prepared” must mean that she should have answered it the way he thought she should have. What a crock! Mr. Hilton has so perfectly shown how intolerant the Left is of any opposing opinions and views!

So where are the lawmakers, the ACLU, and the outcries of the public against hate-speech?? Hate-speech laws are the darling of liberals and the Democrat party. If the libs are so against “hate-speech,” they should be willing to hold one of their own to the same standards, but we all know better than to expect that. If Mr. Hilton’s rant against Miss California was not hate-speech, than we have some serious problems here. Hate-speech is not only reserved for verbal degradation against race and sexual orientation, but also includes degradation against religion and ideology. It seems that the current (completely unconstitutional) laws against hate-speech are only enforced against those evil conservative Christian “rightwing extremists.”

So what if Miss California answered the famous same-sex marriage question the other way? What if she said that she wished all states would follow Vermont’s lead and legalize same-sex marriage? This would have been a perfect follow up question for Julie Chen in response to the diatribe spewed out by Perez Hilton during the CBS News interview. Even Shanna Moakler, Miss USA pageant Co-director, called Miss California’s response “insensitive” and “not compassionate.” Ms. Moakler has also claimed Miss California’s answer alienated sponsors and caused them to feel “a sense of betrayal.” Does anyone naively think she would have been called insensitive for offending conservative sponsors had she answered in support of same-sex marriage? No way! It would have been a non-issue. I am ashamed of you Ms. Moakler and Mr. Hilton for your insensitivity and intolerance of Miss California’s personal ideology.

Carrie Prejean a.k.a Miss California has had a great attitude throughout this whole insane ordeal. Instead of being upset and complaining to Donald Trump about the stupid question asked by Mr. Hilton, she has taken the higher ground. She has not only congratulated Miss North Carolina on her win, she has offered to get together with Mr. Hilton for lunch to better explain her response to his question, she has offered Mr. Hilton her love and support as a person and has shown him much respect, respect that has not been reciprocated back to her in the least.

While Miss Prejean is being demonized for her honest response to a question that should have never been asked, the one who should be the outcast is Perez Hilton for behaving like such a schmuck. In his insistence for the American people to accept his beliefs, lifestyle, and morals, he has clearly demonstrated he is not capable of accepting the beliefs, lifestyle, and morals of those who think differently than himself. Mr. Hilton and those like him are guilty of the very intolerance they are trying to prevent. They are fighting for their own liberty, but at the expense of the liberty of others.

I support you Carrie! I am encouraged that you had the bravery to speak your heart, even knowing the ultimate cost of your answer. God bless you and everyone like you!

 

We Are Responsible For Our Future

“freedom is only part of the story and half the truth. That is why I recommend that the Statue of Liberty on the East coast be supplanted by a Statue of Responsibility on the West coast.”

Viktor E. Frankl
Man’s Search For Meaning

Do You Want To Silence Opposing Views Too?

As Bush walked onto the inaugural stage, the pro-Obama crowd felt it necessary to mock and ridicule him. I am ashamed and embarrassed for those imbeciles who insist on behaving like animals. Have people so little respect for the office of the President that they would treat their outgoing leader with such contempt? It appears to be so.

This is a perfect example of the liberal intolerance of opposing views. Liberals are determined to silence those who disagree with them while insisting that the silenced be conciliatory to liberal views. What a blatant violation of the 1st amendment to the Constitution. Isn’t the promise of freedom of speech supposed to apply to everyone? According to liberals, apparently not.

One example of this intolerance is the libs are determined to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine, which will enable government bureaucrats to silence conservative talk-radio. I specify only conservative talk-radio because there are so few liberal talk-radio stations that get any attention at all. And therein lies the problem of “fairness.”

Congress refuses to admit that conservative talk-radio is as popular as it is because the people actually want to listen to it! It is simple, conservative talk-radio is driven by public demand! The only reason liberal views do not have “equal” airtime is because consumers do not demand it! It’s as simple as that.

This is also the reason why liberals do not like the free market. Free markets favor conservative views and the libs cannot allow the rational choice of consumers to ruin their big plans!

Wait. Aren’t our elected officials in Congress supposed to be representing  us, the people, their constituents? Their actions make it blatantly obvious that public service is not in their agenda.

Government Mandated Censorship Here We Come!

If anyone naively believes that our beloved Democratic Congress honors and respects our Constitution, they are gravely mistaken.  This accusation is not unfounded.  Amongst the many issues that can be called into question, one stands out above all the rest, and that’s the issue of free speech.  Congress is currently working hard to reinstate an old piece of rejected legislation called The Fairness Doctrine.  The Fairness Doctrine is meant to regulate the expression of controversial issues and public opinion regarding the same.  This legislation would do little more than silence conservative voices on the radio air waves.  This is a frightening concept.  What this means is that a government commission would be responsible for monitoring the radio waves to make sure that what is being broadcast is “honest, equitable, and balanced.”  So who determines what is honest, equitable, and balanced?  Can any one person or group of persons really be qualified to determine what honest, equitable, and balanced is?  This is simply an open door for corrupt, power hungry politicians to silence the voices who oppose them.  If the government empowered gulag does not like Rush Limbaugh, for example, then they would actually have the power to silence him for good.  Is Mr. Limbaugh alone in this threat?  No way!  What about Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Mark Levine, and many many more conservative talk radio voices?  I seem to recall a particular part of the Constitution called the Bill of Rights and I think one of those Rights deals with free speech!  Does anyone remember what the first amendment to the U.S. Constitution says? 

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Without this 1st amendment guarantee, we citizens would be subject to a serious violation of our individual liberties.  This encroachment on our freedoms would start small and then build over time in order to avoid the risk of rebellion.  And the news media would be right by their side to implement the “new rules.”  A recent example of how this may take place happened on Monday, January 5th.  NBC banned Ann Coulter from their news station FOR LIFE simply because they didn’t agree with the topic of her new book, “Guilty.”  They just didn’t want anything to do with someone who had a negative view of the president-elect Obama and took the unprecedented step of banning her completely.  Aren’t the news media supposed to be the epitome of fair and balanced?  Aren’t they supposed to represent views from both sides of the political spectrum?  Oh don’t we wish!  This is certainly how it is supposed to be, but these current media mongols have one agenda, and that is to further the cause of the Democrats and force liberalism down the throats of every impressionable person they can.  Their want nothing more than to squash conservative views to ensure that the next generation of voters will be overwhelmingly liberal in their ideals. 

This whole flap with NBC and Ann Coulter is just the beginning of our troubles since our “wonderful” Democratic Congress has already started down this path to censorship.   If our elected representatives cannot even respect our basic fundamental liberties, such as free speech, that have been upheld and fought for with the blood of our ancestors and our children, wake up my friends, we are truly on the road to TYRANNY.

Note:  NBC has since taken back their “ban” on Ann Coulter due to the negative publicity they received from the very same conservative media that they, along with our government representatives, wish to silence.  It won’t be long until they succeed if we are not fighting back.

Forget The Republicans, Let’s Start A Conservative Party!

If the Republicans want to run away from conservative principles, then let’s just let them go.  Conservatives are so tired of compromising Republicans who claim to be conservative, but they are clearly more moderate than ever.  Or maybe we can just convince them that they are on the wrong track and need to come back to reality and get back on our side!!  Moderation does not win conservative votes, McCain has proven that point.  McCain wasn’t on the side of conservatives from day one, so many conservative voters couldn’t see past the blatent dis.  Sarah Palin was his only hope, but it just wasn’t enough to win. 

We need to make sure our Republican politicians understand that conservative voters do not want them to compromise their values in order to “get along” and “reach across the aisle.”  We need someone who will go against the flow and stand up for conservative morals no matter what the costs.  Passion is what we need in a candidate!  Barack Obama had liberal passion, but there was not one on the Republican side who had this passion for conservatism.  It is still not clear who will stand in the gap for us, for there is clearly a large gap that needs to be filled.  Any suggestions anyone?