Did you ever wonder why so many leftist were willing to defend Reverend Wright, to the point of defending his hate speech itself (and not just his right to say it)?
Oh, the answer is obvious to anyone who has been LISTENING, but the willingness of the public to buy into too many leftist fantasies indicates that there are a lot of people out there not listening.
Most extreme leftists AGREE with REverend Wright that "our government is capable of anything", and that it is all right to "charge" them with antything (leftists believe in a "higher" cause than "truth"), because they deserve it (even if the particular "charge" is totally over the top, or outrageously false, such as Reveverend Wright's charge that the U.S. government invetend AIDS as a means of genocide against "people of colot").
Further, revisit my thesis, expounded in a few entries over the past week, that--unlike conservatives--extreme leftists become MORE EXTREME, and delusional, the more educated they are.
Enter Keith Olbermann, who is merely the worst example from a network out of control (MSNBC, which is merely the most extreme arm of NBC--in turn owned by General Electric, which is an American company out of control, doint business with Iran even as Iran killed our soldiers in Iraq). I don't even surf MSNBC anymore, and long ago labeled Keith Olbermann as the single worst cable TV "host" there is).
Olbermann was answering "online questions" (I think, without being sure, not on air on MSNBC, as I heard the audio of Olbermann's reply to one question on Laura Ingram's radio show, which happened to be on the radio as I woke up this morning--the only radio talk show to which I regularly listen being Rush Limbaugh's).
The question asked Olbermann about President Bush's comments about how early withdrawal from Iraq would merely leave America vulnerable to another attack by emboldening the Islamic extremist "cold blooded killlers" we are fighting in Iraq.
Olbermann's reply (typical of the EDUCATED extreme leftist: "An America we did not create includes cold blooded killers killing for political purposes".
What does that mean. Well, Laura Ingram was quoting it to say that Olbermann was calling our soldiers in Iraq "cold blooded killers", and it does have that implicatiion. However, the context indicates that is not a correct interpretation of what Olbermann directly meant to say (although indirectly leading to the same conclusion). In my view, the context is even WORSE than the idea that Olberman was deliberately intending to call our troops "cold blooded killers.
The next thing Olbermann said was that President Bush had no business talking about "cold blooded killers" when members of his own Administration might be subject to WAR CRIMES prosecution (Olbermann clearly suggesting that they have committed War Crimes).
Now the clear implication here is that the United States has committed "war crimes" in Iraq, and that necessarily means that U.S. soldiers are part of the "cold blooded" killings being committed in Iraq. However, I believe it is clear that Olbermann would probably say (as MOST leftists do, even though they don't really believe it; with some other leftists directly saying that "supporting the troops" is supporting the war) that U.S. soldiers are VICTIMS here, of the "cold blooded killers" in the Bush Administration (even though it is obviious that none of those people has directly killed anyone, and that any "killing" they have done has been through U.S. troops as the direct instrument of the "killing").
But look at what Olbermann is directly saying. Is he not repeating the assertion of Reverend Wright (after 9/11) that the U.S. government is at least as bad, if not worse, than Al Qaeda? Of course he is. That is EXACTLY what he is saying. Islamic extremists DLEIBERATELY blow up innocent civilians with bombs, but Olbermann is not interested in calling THEM "war criminals". His interest is in suggesting people who disagree with him are "war criminals" for getting rid of Saddam Hussein. Again, Olbermann would never agree that Saddam Hussein had committed, and was committing, CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY. Yet, that is an absolute FACT.
Is not the idea that we went to war in Iraq for POLITICAL PURPOSES the statement of a KOOK? Of course it is. That is the statement of a REverend Wright or Michael Moore. It is the statement of the kind of person who belives that President Bush arragend for 9/11 to happen FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES. It is the statement of a leftist extreminst willing to say ANYTHING, because--like Reverend Wright--he believes taht the U.S. government is the main force for evil in the world--much worse than Al Qaeda.
As I have said repeatedly, this is the insane world view of EDUCATED far leftists today. It is the world view of the hate mongers on the Daily Kos blog. That, in case you are unfamiliar with it, is the far left blog catering to far left hate speech (along with many others). It is the leftist blog which has posted pictures of Jena Bush's wedding in juxtaposition with pictures of violent death in Iraq (including pictures of death caused by the TERRORISTS--the leftist view being that we are reponsible for the terrorist atrocities, as we are responsible for 9/11). Yes, to the Daily Kos, and I am sure to Keith Olbermann, Jena Bush is not entitled to have a happy wedding. She is the daughter of a WAR CRIMINAL.
This is HATE stuff. Keith Olbermann is a bitter man consumed with HATE.
What is most disturbing about this? Right. Keith Olbermann has ratings lower than a test patteren, as does all of MSNBC. NBC is fading fast. GE itself is in decline. These people have become pretty much irrelevant (other than being part of a mainstream media apparatus that still seems to set the agenda of the direction of the "news" each day). But the most extreme of these people, and people on left wing blogs like the Daily Kos, are the most fanatic supporters of Barack Obama. They see a kindred spirit in Barack Obama (as Obama and REverend Wright obviously saw kindred spirits in each other).
MSNBC has been a fanatical supporter of Barack Obama this whole election cycle. NBC itself has not been very far behind.
The statements of Keigh Olbermann indicate what these people think Obama is all about. They think he is a FAR LEFTIST like them. They don't want a President to bring us together. They want a Preisdent who will bring those WAR CRIMINALS in the Bush Administration to "justice". They believe Barack Obama will be that kind of President (as he cozies up to the terrorists that people like Olbermann believe are not nearly as bad as the present government of the United States).
That should disturb you. It disturbs me. It is one of the reasons that I could never vote for Barack Obama, although I cannot vote for John McCain either. Even though I regard Hillary Clinton as part of the hard left, the evidence is that she is not nearly in Obama's class as a FAR LEFT EXTREMIST. That is why it is "laugh out loud" absurd to pay any attention of the rhetoric of Barack Obama about "bringing us together".
No comments:
Post a Comment