Anderson Cooper, Rush Limbaugh and CNN Are the Same: Except, Rush Limbaugh Is More Honest and Factually Informative ("Anderson Cooper Is Gay" Series

You will remember that tis blog has consistently shown yu that the people of CNN, including Anderson Cooper, are dishoenst hypocrites: professing to be "neutral" and "factual", when every word they utter is PARTISAN OPINION. 


A number of people have told me (mainly female, and including my two daughters and only close, if platonic, female friend):  "Skip we don't understnad why you make such a big pont out of how Anderson Cooper has used hi sprogram mainly for gay activist propaganda, and how CNN is The Liar Network, The Anti-Christian Network, and The Hypocrite Network.  Everyone knows that CNN, Anderson Coo[per, and other leftist mainstream media outlets present things from the left.  No, they are not honest when they say they are 'neutral', or are trying to present factual informatin withut an agenda.  However, lpeople who watch CNN and Anderson Cooper KNOW that they re getting a form of propaganda, and they don't care. They are coffortable with the propaganda of CNN, and want to watch it.  "Everyone does it':  pretends to be neutral when they are not.  Eeditor's comment: the reference here is probably to Fox, as well as to MSNBC and the rest of the media, but primarily to Fox as the only MAJOR "news '" network that does not put out essentially the same propaganda).  Since there is no such thing as either a neutral source of factual information, or an honest 'news'  source, why worry about it?   If you don't like CNN and Anderson Cooper, who everyoine but yoiu knew ws gay anyway and presenting propaganda on gay activist talking ponts, don't watch.  Watch something else, or listen to Rush Limbaugh.  No one is being misled here. People how watch the leftist propaganda of CNN know exctly what they are getting, and they discount the opinion stuff, jsut like you say yoiu can get factual informatin by listenting to Rush Limbaugh (editing out the opinions in yur mind)." 


Hogwash. Yes, I know what I just called my daughters, my female friend, and alomsost every other female on the planet.  I jsut said they are little different from the obvius hypocrites of CNN and the media. 


Doubt me?  Never do that.  It jsut embarrasses yoiu.  Notice that all of these females are saying that CNN,--including Anderson Cooper--and Rush Limbaugh are the SAME: both putting out "news" slanted by politicaly partisan and/or ideological positions (yes, slanted just as much by CNN as by Rush Libmaugh, or more, with the difference that Rush Limbuah is HOENST about presenting a point of view rather than an "objective" "news" program). But do they--these people wo say that I shuld not criticize Anderson Copr and CNN for lputting out false and tenditious propaganda--treat Rush Limbaugh the same: rejecting criticism of Rush Limbaugh because only people who WANT to here him listen?


Not a chance (especialy true of my female friend, Sylvia--which I dare to say because I know she does nto read this blog o my life wuld not be worth a plug nickel). Rush Limbuagh refers to a leftist activist woman as a "slut" (much less offesnive, in context than the things that have ben said about Sarah Palin, not only by Bill Maher but by the people on CNN).  That is suddently IMPORTANT: esepcailly to the HYPOCRITES of CNN and the mainstream media.  Do people like the the females who criticize me DISMISS these attacks on Rush Libmaugh as worthless, because people who do't want to listen to Rush Limbaugh know what they are getting? Again, not a chance.  Instead, people like Sylvia, if asked aobut Rush Limbuahg, wil lrefer to him as an 'extremist", and as a destrkuctive, divisive force in American Scoiety. Why, exactly, is Rush Limbaugh a more destructive and divistive force than the LEFTIST PROPAGANDA of CNN and MSNBC?  They really have no anser to that, other than just that Rush Limbaugh says such harsh things. 


Harsh? CNN and Anderson Coopoer tried ot LYNCH George Zimmerman.  CNN had the osition, and STILL has the positin, that "Tea Party" people are much more RACIST than othe people (usch as the peole of CNN).  CNN routinely calls peole RACIST. You kno wht?  That is WORSE than calling a leftist activist a "slut". It is more DIVISIVE. In fact, as this blog has shown, it encurages RACIAL HATRED and actually tends to incite RACE WAR. The idea that most of the "white" people of  America are out to "get" balck peole, and all other "peole of color", is DESTRUCTIVE and DIVISIVE--more so than anyting Rush Limbaugh says. No, I reject the idea that th ePARTISAN PROPAGANDA of CNN does nto have EVIL EFFECTS, which cannot be "solved" by me jsut refuing to watch CNN (alnong with most of the rest of America). CNN tells Hispanics that Arizona, and those who support Arizona, are "out to get them", lumping legal and illegal immigrants together as a matter of POLICY (CNN policy), and y tell me that all I have to do to "cure' my problem is to not watch CNN?  You eally are STUPID, aren't you?  Oh, I accept the criticism that I py too much attentin to CN, because NO ONE WATCHES.  However, CNN--as is true of the despicable AP and all other leftist media I reference by name--is merely an example of wht the entire mainstream media is dong.  When I talk about CNN, I am talking aoubt the nentire mainstream media in this country, as the eifferences between the individuals are immaterial.  Oh, MSNBC is like a caucus of the LEFTR WING of the DEMOCRATIC PARTY, rather than just a let wing proopaganda outlet, but there is less and less difference between the "left wing' of the Democratic Party and the "mainstram" of the Democratic Party.  Other than "obviiusness', I now notice almost no difference between CNN and MSNBC. Again, you might even regard MSNBC as more "honest" about hwhere they are coming from. 


Let us go back to Anderson Coope. You--mainly you feamles out there, or many of you--say that Anderson Cooper is not as 'extreme" as Rush Limbaugh?  I say that is FALSE.  Anderson Cooper is vastly mroe "extreme", and definitely more dishoenst.  Let us do a "thught experiment".  Imagine if Rush Limbaugh wre reveled to be a "partner" in some sort of religious organization/private group which is pushing the 'cure" of homosexual "orientation".  Let us further assume that Limbaugh was not "up front" abut this, but simply started leading off almost every program with some sort of story ATTACKING homosexuals. Then assume that Limbaugh's associaton with this attempt to "cure" homosexuals were RVEALED explicitly.  Can yo even IMAGNE the FLAK that Limbaugh would get for that?  "Hypocrite" and 'dishoenst" would be the KINDEST words you heard.  They are, in fact, the kindest words I ahve for the despicable Anderson Cooper. 


I kid you not.  For at lleast the last year, and probably long before that, Cooiper has used his program as a POPAGANDA vehicle for gay activist "talking points", INCLUIDNG "featuring" on hi sprogram almost EVERY "pastor" in America who has said anythng "controversial" aobut homosexuals (incuding almost every item that has been pushed on gay activist internet sites. Sure, CNN as a whole has done that, but Anderson Cooper has been MUCH WORSE than even the ret of CNN, which shows just how close the analogy is to Rush Limbuagh being revealed as a "homoseuxal cure' guy after featuring "anti-homoseuxal" "news" on almost every program.  Limbuahg, by the way, has featured very few of the knid of "news" items featred by Coope:  news items TRASHING isolated peole how may say something about homosexuals and Christians.  Sure, Limbaugh may occasioinally talk about how a "gay activist" has trashed a Christian church, or 'invaded" one, but it is hardly a rgular feature of Limbaugh's program.  When Limbaugh talks about the "issues" of gay marrraige and the likfe, he talks aobut the ISSUES.  When Anderon Cooper talks aobut the "issues", he TRASHES individual oppoents of gay activist issues; obviusly trying to discredit opponents of things in which Cooper feels he has a SELF-INTEREST by means of "gilt by association.  Again, Anderson Cooper is clearly MORE EXTREME (by far) than Rush Limbaugh--especially on "gay issues".  And Anderson Cooper, as indicated, goes beyond merely gay activist propaganda. Cooper TRASHES evangelical Christians at every opportuinity, in some of the most VICIUS material I have ever seen on television. 


For example.  Cooper openly ADOVATED taking away the Federal tax exmmption for a pastor in North Carolina, as Cooper made the whoe issue of "gay marriage' in North Carolina aobut the individual statements of a few "pastors" featured by gay activists in there FAILED attempt to stop the North Carolina ban on gay marriage.  ONE PASTOR.  ONE CHURCH.  And he was featured on MUYLTIPLE Anderson Cooper programs trying to discredit the North Carolina vote, and tryhing  to DESTROY this pastor, including AFTER the vote (60% gainst the CNN/Cooper propaganda position).  I say "one pastor", and "one church", but I shuld have said ONE AT A TIME.  Because Anderson Cooper had previusly tried to DEMONIZE another single pastor, and single church, in North Carolina because the pastor said that any parent who saw a child with a "limp wrist" should "crack that wrist".  The second pastor, referenced above, said that homosexuals should be 'rounded up" in fenced areas (sort of like FDR did with the Japanese-Americans) and allowed to "die off" (obvius, if somewhat offensive, hyperbole, but hardly the "issue" in North Carolina).  Cooper hasATTACKED--nver th eyears--pastor after pastor:  sometimes for statements aobut homosexuals, but often extending the attacks to reflect a HATRED of Christians who Cooper thingks disaporve of his lifestyle. 


For example, Cooper--in a series of segments over WEEKS, and even MONTHS--culminating last Labor Day, accused a Christian "author" of MURDER (kid you not) for wrfing a book on "strict Christian child rearing" (whihc book really just advocated STANDARD, "don't spare the rod" child rearing accepted for most of the hihstory of the United States, including my own childhood eyars).  No. Cooper does NOT believe in FREE SPEECH (talk about EXTGREME!!!!).  The Cooper idea was that the fact tihs book advocating "stinging" physical punishment (like nuns striking children on the kncukles with a ruler, as often described by O'Reily) was found in the nomes of a few peole who committed real CHILD ABUSE. I wonde if those females hwo thought it is enough just not to watch CNN would criticize Anderson Cooper for not letting peole who CHOSE to read these books on child discipine live in "peace"?  Obvisly, you can argue abut methods of child discipline.  But that is NOT what Anderson Coper did.  He, rather--typically-tried to discredt "stict" methods of child discipline by Coper's stand technique of "guilt by associatoin".  This time, Cooper went so far as to accuse an AUTHOR--who did NOT advocate physically injuring any child--by accusin g that author of being "responsbile" fo rMURDER and CHILD ABUSE.  Do Anderson Cooper and CNN regard themselves as "responsbile" for inciting RACE HATRED, and encouraging Muslims to make TERRORIST ATTCKS on the basis that CNN has reorted anti-Muslim "bigotry" in America?  Maybe they should.  They certainly should, if they applied the standards used by the despicable, anti-Christian Anderson Cooper. 


I could go on, but enough.  Do you see why Rush Limbaugh is LESs EXTREME than CNN?  You shuld.  Rush Limbaugh does not call peole RACIST nearly as often as CNN.  In fact, I call peple on the left racist more than Limbaugh, in my "don't turn the other cheek, nonChristian" phiosophy. It is not Limbaugh wo calls America a "racist country", or makes everything abut race. It is not Rush Limbaugh who affirmatively TRASHES atheists and agnostics (like me) the way CNN trahses Christians.  In fact, no ne except Bill Maehr TRASHES CHRISTIANS as consistently as Anderson Coper--in a deliberate attempt at "tuilt by association".  It is CNN that consistently gets its facts wrong--not Rush Limbaugh. It is the BIGOTS of CNN who kept talking abut Mitt Romney being a Mormon, even after the "religous right' had effectively abandoned oppositon to Romney (outside of the few fanatics featured on CNN).  I have never seen such BIGOTRY from Limbaugh.  It is CNN who tried to PRMOTE and SUGAR COAT the ridiculous "Occupy" "movement'--much more dishoenstly than Limbaugh ever did with the Tea Party.  ONE sign in a Tea Party rally involving thousands of peole was enough for CNN to CONDEMN the entire Tea Party.  With "Occupy" people, the fact that at least 1/3 of the peole were INSANE (often literaly), did not change the fact that the "Occupy" peole were expressing the 'frustratin" out there against Wall Street and capitalism. 


Q.E.D. (although I couud go on foreever--see previus articles in this blog over YEARS):  Anderson Cooper, and CNN, are MORE EXTREME than Rush Limbaugh. There is not even any qestion that they are MORE DISHOENST than Limbaugh. 


P.S  No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight). Yes, I do tend to get worse in my typkng on a Sunday ev3ening as I get tired, in a long article.  Tough it out.  When the going gets tough, the tough get going.  The "proofreading" never changes--0nly the yping.  There is NONE (except as my bad eyesight allows at the moment I am tyong).