Category: Don Fisher

Culture Wars: Our Fading Hope


It is a period of civil war.  Liberal filmmakers and lawmakers, striking from their elitist enclaves, have won their first victories against the forces of decency and godliness.

During the battles, liberal spies managed to infiltrate the highest echelons of government, media, and the arts, securing an obscene ruling that same-sex couples may marry.  Their goal is to destroy an entire civilization under their perverted view of fairness.

Pursued by the truth, liberal directors and actors race to the screen to indoctrinate audiences into this twisted notion and aid in further enslaving the masses of the planet into their mistaken worldview.

Please forgive me if that revised intro into the Star Wars universe sounds hyperbolic.  It’s to illustrate that liberal creative types can’t be content to entertain us with a movie when there is a culture war at stake.  Consider the quotes by two of the newest Star Wars contributors: psychologist J.J. Abrams and biologist John Boyega.  I’m sorry – that should be movie director J.J. Abrams and actor John Boyega, who both play make-believe for a living.

In March of 2016, Abrams said this about homosexual characters in the future episodes of the Star Wars franchise: “I would love it.  To me, the fun of Star Wars is the glory of possibility.  So it seems insanely narrow-minded and counterintuitive to say that there wouldn’t be a homosexual character in that world.”  Yes, J.J., I guess it’s also narrow-minded to say there are people who believe that entertainers should entertain and not preach, but that clearly won’t shut up liberal blabbermouths with an ax to grind.

In October of 2017, Boyega said: “There definitely is that responsibility, but more the responsibility to hire those from those experiences to share their creative light.  That’s the pivotal thing.  If you hire the same sort of people, you’re just getting the same sort of film.  It’s not wrong, but then there’s a lack of variety.  I think that Oscar [Isaac, who plays Poe Dameron] is always looking at me with love in his eyes, and I guess that the fans saw it.  And then they realized that either he needs to chill or come out.”  What exactly Boyega was prattling on about in the first two sentences is a mystery, but he got to the point afterward by stating that two dudes who’ve helped each other in various adventures naturally just want to share a roll in the intergalactic hay.

Aside from their nonsensical babbling about responsibility and narrow-mindedness, and translating a friendship between two men into a sexually repressed homoerotic sideshow, neither Abrams nor Boyega seems to understand what made Star Wars a long-lasting cultural juggernaut.  It wasn’t about lofty and vague notions about the responsibility to include homosexual characters, engineering longing looks between men, or appeasing liberal sycophantic friends.  It was about the ongoing battle between good and evil, and entertaining audiences in the process.  To be sure, George Lucas was and is a liberal whose original message behind Star Wars was how primitive societies could whip more technologically advanced societies, which stemmed from his resentment over the involvement of the United States in Vietnam in the 1960s.  He needed to overlook the fact that the Star Wars rebels destroyed every Death Star and killed off the Empire via technology, but idealists rarely stop to look at logic or evidence, even in a fictional world.

The libs are aglow with the prospect of two men declaring their erotic feeling for each other in a science fiction movie, regardless of how ridiculously misplaced such a thing would be.  Parent company Disney doesn’t seem to care, at least publicly, as long as tickets and merch are sold.

Current Lucasfilm president and Star Wars “brand manager” Kathleen Kennedy seemed to quash this notion, at least for now, by saying: “We’ve talked about it, but I think you’re not going to see it in The Last Jedi.  In the next six or eight months, we will have some meetings about the stories that we will develop next.”

So the issue clearly isn’t dead, and as with any liberal cause, they will never give up on it.  They’ll just develop better marketing, such as “marriage equality” instead of “legalized sodomy,” and move forward to their goal.

A same-sex relationship is not new for the Star Wars canon, as some were introduced to in a video game and a couple of their novelizations, but the big screen is the big prize for Abrams and his fellow libs.  In their worldview, it makes perfect sense for a same-sex couple to be together, despite the real-world logic that such a couple could never produce offspring and are a tiny percentage of Earth’s population.  Logic and evidence aside, it’s time for the rest of the world to be dragged into their idea of progress.  Calmer and more rational heads may prevail and jettison this idiotic plot detail, but expect this issue to be hotly contested in storylines for Episode 9 (or “IX” for purists) of the Star Wars saga.

The denizens of Hollywood are rife with those who seek to corrupt and pervert society through any medium at hand.  In the words of Obi-Wan Kenobi: “You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.”

It is a period of civil war.  Liberal filmmakers and lawmakers, striking from their elitist enclaves, have won their first victories against the forces of decency and godliness.

During the battles, liberal spies managed to infiltrate the highest echelons of government, media, and the arts, securing an obscene ruling that same-sex couples may marry.  Their goal is to destroy an entire civilization under their perverted view of fairness.

Pursued by the truth, liberal directors and actors race to the screen to indoctrinate audiences into this twisted notion and aid in further enslaving the masses of the planet into their mistaken worldview.

Please forgive me if that revised intro into the Star Wars universe sounds hyperbolic.  It’s to illustrate that liberal creative types can’t be content to entertain us with a movie when there is a culture war at stake.  Consider the quotes by two of the newest Star Wars contributors: psychologist J.J. Abrams and biologist John Boyega.  I’m sorry – that should be movie director J.J. Abrams and actor John Boyega, who both play make-believe for a living.

In March of 2016, Abrams said this about homosexual characters in the future episodes of the Star Wars franchise: “I would love it.  To me, the fun of Star Wars is the glory of possibility.  So it seems insanely narrow-minded and counterintuitive to say that there wouldn’t be a homosexual character in that world.”  Yes, J.J., I guess it’s also narrow-minded to say there are people who believe that entertainers should entertain and not preach, but that clearly won’t shut up liberal blabbermouths with an ax to grind.

In October of 2017, Boyega said: “There definitely is that responsibility, but more the responsibility to hire those from those experiences to share their creative light.  That’s the pivotal thing.  If you hire the same sort of people, you’re just getting the same sort of film.  It’s not wrong, but then there’s a lack of variety.  I think that Oscar [Isaac, who plays Poe Dameron] is always looking at me with love in his eyes, and I guess that the fans saw it.  And then they realized that either he needs to chill or come out.”  What exactly Boyega was prattling on about in the first two sentences is a mystery, but he got to the point afterward by stating that two dudes who’ve helped each other in various adventures naturally just want to share a roll in the intergalactic hay.

Aside from their nonsensical babbling about responsibility and narrow-mindedness, and translating a friendship between two men into a sexually repressed homoerotic sideshow, neither Abrams nor Boyega seems to understand what made Star Wars a long-lasting cultural juggernaut.  It wasn’t about lofty and vague notions about the responsibility to include homosexual characters, engineering longing looks between men, or appeasing liberal sycophantic friends.  It was about the ongoing battle between good and evil, and entertaining audiences in the process.  To be sure, George Lucas was and is a liberal whose original message behind Star Wars was how primitive societies could whip more technologically advanced societies, which stemmed from his resentment over the involvement of the United States in Vietnam in the 1960s.  He needed to overlook the fact that the Star Wars rebels destroyed every Death Star and killed off the Empire via technology, but idealists rarely stop to look at logic or evidence, even in a fictional world.

The libs are aglow with the prospect of two men declaring their erotic feeling for each other in a science fiction movie, regardless of how ridiculously misplaced such a thing would be.  Parent company Disney doesn’t seem to care, at least publicly, as long as tickets and merch are sold.

Current Lucasfilm president and Star Wars “brand manager” Kathleen Kennedy seemed to quash this notion, at least for now, by saying: “We’ve talked about it, but I think you’re not going to see it in The Last Jedi.  In the next six or eight months, we will have some meetings about the stories that we will develop next.”

So the issue clearly isn’t dead, and as with any liberal cause, they will never give up on it.  They’ll just develop better marketing, such as “marriage equality” instead of “legalized sodomy,” and move forward to their goal.

A same-sex relationship is not new for the Star Wars canon, as some were introduced to in a video game and a couple of their novelizations, but the big screen is the big prize for Abrams and his fellow libs.  In their worldview, it makes perfect sense for a same-sex couple to be together, despite the real-world logic that such a couple could never produce offspring and are a tiny percentage of Earth’s population.  Logic and evidence aside, it’s time for the rest of the world to be dragged into their idea of progress.  Calmer and more rational heads may prevail and jettison this idiotic plot detail, but expect this issue to be hotly contested in storylines for Episode 9 (or “IX” for purists) of the Star Wars saga.

The denizens of Hollywood are rife with those who seek to corrupt and pervert society through any medium at hand.  In the words of Obi-Wan Kenobi: “You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.”



Source link

The Science Is Settled! Now Shut Up!


Oftentimes, those on the political left assume the mantle of moral superiority, and superiority in their knowledge of scientific advances as well.  Both are self-serving and usually fraudulent claims, but that doesn’t stop liberals from pretending they are our intellectual and philosophical betters.  No matter how much factual evidence they’re shown that disproves an argument, they continue to spout the same nonsense and then accuse those who don’t agree with them of being behind the times or anti-science.  Their alleged scientific proof is often filled with holes or is nonexistent altogether, even as the liberal news media promote their unsubstantiated theories.  Disagreement is met with angry and sometimes violent rebukes from those who specialize in outrage instead of honest debate.

The most recent area of scientific legerdemain is, of course, climate change, or man-made global warming.  For the past decade or so, we’ve been inundated with dire predictions of earthly catastrophes that have yet to materialize, while we’re shamed into reducing our imagined “carbon footprint” in order to save the Earth.  We’re told the science is settled and that no further debate is necessary, despite no significant change in the worldwide climate or temperature.  Meanwhile, there is proof of faked data, which was revealed in the “Climategate” email scandal, and proof that the methodology for gathering temperature was fraudulent, as exposed by author Christopher Horner in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism.  There is abundant verifiable evidence that man-made global warming is a hoax perpetrated by the power-hungry and embraced by the gullible, but we’re told that the science is settled and that dissent is wrong or ignorant or even stupid.

Another area where the debate is allegedly over is homosexuality.  Lately, we’ve been assaulted by liberals who claim that an aberrant sexual orientation is assigned by heredity and that we should accept it as normal.  Of course, there is zero reliable evidence to support that theory, and the search for the elusive and most likely completely fictitious “gay gene” is ongoing.  However, we’re told that the science is settled there, too, because anecdotal accounts that Dave or Jane was always attracted to members of the same sex are supposed to be unassailable truth, regardless of the psychological conditions of Dave and Jane.  If we disagree, we’re anti-science or, of course, bigots.  There is no actual proof that the science is anywhere near settled on this, nor that it isn’t a choice, but we’re told we need to change laws and the definition of marriage because feelings are all that matter.  Oh, and “love wins,” whatever that’s supposed to mean.

Just as hotly contested as the previous two topics is the theory of evolution, which is now the official version of how mankind came into being on planet Earth.  One, and only one, explanation is allowed to be taught in schools, and it has nothing to do with a deity, because not everyone believes in a supreme being.  So atheist scientists who don’t believe in a supreme being are unwilling to consider the possibility that something other than a self-generated desire to change allowed the species to survive, thrive, and adapt in their environments.

Atheists in science have convinced themselves and other atheists that evolution is reality, but that isn’t enough.  Their goal is to silence the debate by calling their theory “settled science” as well.

In her book Godless” Ann Coulter confronted the so-called settled science of evolution and found significant gaps in it.  In fact, there is no supporting fossil evidence that proves that theory, and, Coulter notes, “[t]he evolutionists’ proof is their capacity to concoct a story.”  Yet evolution is taught as fact, and any deviation from that belief is eliminated from public schools and universities.  Once again, the science is settled because liberals say so.

To question any of the liberals’ current holy trinity is to risk being ostracized, ridiculed, silenced, and even re-educated until conformity to their dogma is achieved.  There is no room for alternate theories in the world of liberal beliefs.

To the ideological group that purports to be open-minded to other beliefs, liberals show an amazing ability to remain entrenched in their accepted groupthink universe while they accuse any dissenters of not being open-minded.  However, the definition of “open-minded” is not to accept anything that’s told to us, no matter how bizarre or unfounded in fact.  The definition is “willing to consider new ideas; unprejudiced.”  Nowhere in that short phrase is it suggested that we abandon logic, evidence, or common sense for the sake of the feelings of another person.

Even without evidence, the issue isn’t whether or not these theories are plausible.  The issue is that scientific theories should be treated exactly as all assertions are treated in our legal system, which is with actual verifiable evidence rather than bluster, outrage, and inflexible adherence to wishful thinking.  Prove it, or stop saying the science is settled.

Oftentimes, those on the political left assume the mantle of moral superiority, and superiority in their knowledge of scientific advances as well.  Both are self-serving and usually fraudulent claims, but that doesn’t stop liberals from pretending they are our intellectual and philosophical betters.  No matter how much factual evidence they’re shown that disproves an argument, they continue to spout the same nonsense and then accuse those who don’t agree with them of being behind the times or anti-science.  Their alleged scientific proof is often filled with holes or is nonexistent altogether, even as the liberal news media promote their unsubstantiated theories.  Disagreement is met with angry and sometimes violent rebukes from those who specialize in outrage instead of honest debate.

The most recent area of scientific legerdemain is, of course, climate change, or man-made global warming.  For the past decade or so, we’ve been inundated with dire predictions of earthly catastrophes that have yet to materialize, while we’re shamed into reducing our imagined “carbon footprint” in order to save the Earth.  We’re told the science is settled and that no further debate is necessary, despite no significant change in the worldwide climate or temperature.  Meanwhile, there is proof of faked data, which was revealed in the “Climategate” email scandal, and proof that the methodology for gathering temperature was fraudulent, as exposed by author Christopher Horner in his book The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism.  There is abundant verifiable evidence that man-made global warming is a hoax perpetrated by the power-hungry and embraced by the gullible, but we’re told that the science is settled and that dissent is wrong or ignorant or even stupid.

Another area where the debate is allegedly over is homosexuality.  Lately, we’ve been assaulted by liberals who claim that an aberrant sexual orientation is assigned by heredity and that we should accept it as normal.  Of course, there is zero reliable evidence to support that theory, and the search for the elusive and most likely completely fictitious “gay gene” is ongoing.  However, we’re told that the science is settled there, too, because anecdotal accounts that Dave or Jane was always attracted to members of the same sex are supposed to be unassailable truth, regardless of the psychological conditions of Dave and Jane.  If we disagree, we’re anti-science or, of course, bigots.  There is no actual proof that the science is anywhere near settled on this, nor that it isn’t a choice, but we’re told we need to change laws and the definition of marriage because feelings are all that matter.  Oh, and “love wins,” whatever that’s supposed to mean.

Just as hotly contested as the previous two topics is the theory of evolution, which is now the official version of how mankind came into being on planet Earth.  One, and only one, explanation is allowed to be taught in schools, and it has nothing to do with a deity, because not everyone believes in a supreme being.  So atheist scientists who don’t believe in a supreme being are unwilling to consider the possibility that something other than a self-generated desire to change allowed the species to survive, thrive, and adapt in their environments.

Atheists in science have convinced themselves and other atheists that evolution is reality, but that isn’t enough.  Their goal is to silence the debate by calling their theory “settled science” as well.

In her book Godless” Ann Coulter confronted the so-called settled science of evolution and found significant gaps in it.  In fact, there is no supporting fossil evidence that proves that theory, and, Coulter notes, “[t]he evolutionists’ proof is their capacity to concoct a story.”  Yet evolution is taught as fact, and any deviation from that belief is eliminated from public schools and universities.  Once again, the science is settled because liberals say so.

To question any of the liberals’ current holy trinity is to risk being ostracized, ridiculed, silenced, and even re-educated until conformity to their dogma is achieved.  There is no room for alternate theories in the world of liberal beliefs.

To the ideological group that purports to be open-minded to other beliefs, liberals show an amazing ability to remain entrenched in their accepted groupthink universe while they accuse any dissenters of not being open-minded.  However, the definition of “open-minded” is not to accept anything that’s told to us, no matter how bizarre or unfounded in fact.  The definition is “willing to consider new ideas; unprejudiced.”  Nowhere in that short phrase is it suggested that we abandon logic, evidence, or common sense for the sake of the feelings of another person.

Even without evidence, the issue isn’t whether or not these theories are plausible.  The issue is that scientific theories should be treated exactly as all assertions are treated in our legal system, which is with actual verifiable evidence rather than bluster, outrage, and inflexible adherence to wishful thinking.  Prove it, or stop saying the science is settled.



Source link

The Liberal Media War on Thomas Jefferson


 

The Lying and Corrupt News Media never lets the truth get in the way of a good character assassination hit piece.

 

On Tuesday, March 7, the CBS Evening News, anchored by news reader Scott Pelly, continued the liberal lie that Thomas Jefferson fathered children with slave Sally Hemings.  Even though DNA evidence has proven that Jefferson was not the father of her children, it’s too salacious a story for the liberal media to leave alone.  In the CBS story, reporter Chip Reed claimed that the Jefferson/Hemings liaison is “…widely accepted by historians…,” which is just code for “we don’t have proof of this, but we want to run with it anyway.”

The Jefferson/Hemings lie is demonstrably false, but it has everything the dishonest media need.  Accusations of sexual impropriety against a powerful, beloved, white male: check.  Victimization of a poor, black, female slave: check. Innuendo and urban legends as proof: check.  With those boxes checked, they’re good to go.

This libelous accusation dates back to 1802 when discredited political journalist James T. Callender invented the preposterous notion that President Jefferson not only fathered many children with Hemings, but kept her as a concubine as well.  There was zero proof then, but that didn’t stop Callender or Jefferson’s other detractors from running with this salacious gossip.  Then, in 1998 when modern DNA proof cleared Thomas Jefferson, but pointed to his brother Randolph, the liberal news media recanted and apologized for spreading lies.  No, of course they didn’t.  I was just fooling with you.  Instead, they doubled down on it and spread the lie in an attempt to shape popular opinion into the provably false belief that Jefferson sired bastard children with one of his black slaves.

I’m not a scientist, nor was I there to interview the characters in this drama, but I’ll take the word of experts who actually examined Jefferson’s DNA and compared it with those in Hemings’ family.  Apparently, the news media couldn’t do likewise.  They found their conclusion in the rumor and have repeated it ever since in order to comply with the adage “if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it.”

Liberals can’t stand decency or Christian morality, so they invent lies to tear down noble men and women, and the false tale about Jefferson is yet another chapter from the liberal playbook of deceit.

In the CBS piece, reporter Reed also allowed author Shannon LaNier to promote his book and his belief that he’s a descendent of Jefferson and Hemings, despite having no evidence to back up that claim, either.  Of course, no counter-argument was presented in the interview; just LaNier’s claim that he’s the sixth great grandson of Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings.

Although we’ve read and heard actual evidence of the bias, distortion, and outright lies that the liberal news media have spread in order to back up their specious arguments, this one is especially galling because it was so easily and summarily disproven.  By most reliable accounts, Thomas Jefferson was man of high integrity and deep compassion who treated his slaves as people rather than property and provided for their welfare.  Yet, the truth doesn’t have a chance when faced with the bullhorn of alleged journalists who conspire to deceive the public in order to advance their agenda.  They should be ashamed, or fined for their lies, but neither will happen.  They’ll give themselves a phony award and accolades and move on to their next target to destroy.  However, with enough information as ammunition, we can halt the advance of scurrilous lies and, hopefully, restore the dignity and honor to true American heroes such as Thomas Jefferson.

 

The Lying and Corrupt News Media never lets the truth get in the way of a good character assassination hit piece.

 

On Tuesday, March 7, the CBS Evening News, anchored by news reader Scott Pelly, continued the liberal lie that Thomas Jefferson fathered children with slave Sally Hemings.  Even though DNA evidence has proven that Jefferson was not the father of her children, it’s too salacious a story for the liberal media to leave alone.  In the CBS story, reporter Chip Reed claimed that the Jefferson/Hemings liaison is “…widely accepted by historians…,” which is just code for “we don’t have proof of this, but we want to run with it anyway.”

The Jefferson/Hemings lie is demonstrably false, but it has everything the dishonest media need.  Accusations of sexual impropriety against a powerful, beloved, white male: check.  Victimization of a poor, black, female slave: check. Innuendo and urban legends as proof: check.  With those boxes checked, they’re good to go.

This libelous accusation dates back to 1802 when discredited political journalist James T. Callender invented the preposterous notion that President Jefferson not only fathered many children with Hemings, but kept her as a concubine as well.  There was zero proof then, but that didn’t stop Callender or Jefferson’s other detractors from running with this salacious gossip.  Then, in 1998 when modern DNA proof cleared Thomas Jefferson, but pointed to his brother Randolph, the liberal news media recanted and apologized for spreading lies.  No, of course they didn’t.  I was just fooling with you.  Instead, they doubled down on it and spread the lie in an attempt to shape popular opinion into the provably false belief that Jefferson sired bastard children with one of his black slaves.

I’m not a scientist, nor was I there to interview the characters in this drama, but I’ll take the word of experts who actually examined Jefferson’s DNA and compared it with those in Hemings’ family.  Apparently, the news media couldn’t do likewise.  They found their conclusion in the rumor and have repeated it ever since in order to comply with the adage “if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it.”

Liberals can’t stand decency or Christian morality, so they invent lies to tear down noble men and women, and the false tale about Jefferson is yet another chapter from the liberal playbook of deceit.

In the CBS piece, reporter Reed also allowed author Shannon LaNier to promote his book and his belief that he’s a descendent of Jefferson and Hemings, despite having no evidence to back up that claim, either.  Of course, no counter-argument was presented in the interview; just LaNier’s claim that he’s the sixth great grandson of Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings.

Although we’ve read and heard actual evidence of the bias, distortion, and outright lies that the liberal news media have spread in order to back up their specious arguments, this one is especially galling because it was so easily and summarily disproven.  By most reliable accounts, Thomas Jefferson was man of high integrity and deep compassion who treated his slaves as people rather than property and provided for their welfare.  Yet, the truth doesn’t have a chance when faced with the bullhorn of alleged journalists who conspire to deceive the public in order to advance their agenda.  They should be ashamed, or fined for their lies, but neither will happen.  They’ll give themselves a phony award and accolades and move on to their next target to destroy.  However, with enough information as ammunition, we can halt the advance of scurrilous lies and, hopefully, restore the dignity and honor to true American heroes such as Thomas Jefferson.



Source link