California: Dishonest Jack Cafferty Blasts Cal. Dems for Obsession with Social Issues

Hacker Boy (hacking into this disgraceful blog once again to bring sanity and truth): "Ummmm Skip, yo have doneit again."


Skip: "Hasn't Big Sis shut yu down yet? "


Hacker Boy: "Homeland Security is more likely to shut YOU down than me. But the point here is that you have put up another outrageously false headline. You know that Jack Cafferty, on CNN, has NOT "blasted" California. I presume you are talking about the California legsilature REQUIRING that socialstudy/history curriculums in California public schools include the 'contributions' of homosexual--gay and lesbian ws the way the AP put it--perople. But CNN and Jack Cafferty have NOT attacked the legislature for spending time on that."


Skip: "See, Hacker Boy, you are learning. Yes, I just assumed Dishonest Jack would have to condemn Democrats for putting homosexual propaganda in the public schools ahead of solving California's real problems. The state is BROKE. They are faced with having to make massive 'cuts' in the state budget, and with raising fees for people like college students. The state is dysfunctional--out of control in lamost every imaginable way. Yet, the Democrats in California think one of the main issues in the state is to ensure politically correct portrayal of homosexuals in social studies and history classes. California can't even teach its students real history, and is worrlying about this junk. Dishonest Jack, if you remember, accused REPUBLICANS of paying too much attention to social issues, when the economic issues facing this country are so serious Dishonest Jack (how he earned his name), on CNN, accused Republicans of concentrating too much on social issues because they ANSWERED CNN QUESTIONS on the issues in the CNN debate (somewhat reluctantly, especailly in the case of Romney--who complained that CNN was not paying enough attention to the economy and jobs in the debatge). Since Dishonest Jack Cafferty is THAT concerned about wasting time on social issues, I just assumed that he would blast Democrats in California for 'distracting' people from the important issues with this social issue junk. Just how much wore canit be than to worry about how homosexuals are treated in HISOTRY (where, really, they are rightly ignored, unless it was a big issue in a famous person's life, just as is true of adultery and other irrelevant conduct). Frankly, the contributions of adulterors to history are MUCH greater than the contributions of homosexuals. I think history hs done an injustice to Nero. He is looking pretty GOOD in comparison with California Democrats. Nero merely fiddled while Rome burned, and there is doubt whether he actuallly set the fire that destroyed Rome. Ther is no doubt that California Democrats have CREATED most of the problems in the state. Even Arnold the Slezy was much more a Democrat than he ever was a Republican--being to the LEFT of most Democrats. Rather than deal with the real problems of the state--problems which they created--Democrats are fooling around with this. Message to Democrats: People should vote against you for this alone, and WOULD if you were not in California. Since Dishonest Jack Cafferty gave a similar message to Reepubicans for merely answering CNN questions (no legislation involved), I naturally assumed that he would give the same message to Democrats. Of course, I admit I was probably wrong to assume that, since I have proven that CNN and Dishonest Jack are some of the worst lhypocrites to ever walk the Earth, on two legs or four (along with the rest of the mainstream media). Consider the despicable AP, and Yahooo "News", which made this California vote a FEATURED story last night, while rarely featuring stoires abut the real problems in California. The despicable AP has had more recent stories featured recently on the elections in THAILAND (could never meake this up) than on the problems in California. Yes, the despicable AP, and the mainstream media (includnig Dishonest Jack), are actually part of the left obsessed with social issues. Yep. I am saying that the mainstream media would let America BURN rather than stop pushing their view on these social issues."


Now that we have disposed of Hacker Boy, this blog article can continue. Yes, this shows that California and the mainstream media are INSANE. It also proves what I have asserted for decades: homosexual activists want APPROVAL of their lifestyle, rather than mere tolerance. They want SPECIAL "RIGHTS", instead of just not to be persecuted. Le me be as blunt as I can: Homosexual activists really want society to ENCOURAGE the idea that young peple should consider homosexual sex as merely natoher kind of sex with which to "experiment" as they are growing up. See the movie, "Kinsey". But even I was shocked that California would--with all of its real problems--give a PRIORITY to makng sure momosexuals are mentioned favorably in public schools in their non-teaching of hisotry. Three guesses as to whether EVIL GAYS (who certainly have existed in history, incuding as serial killers) will be featured in this new, insane world created in California history classes. Your first two guesses don't count.


The AP/Yahoo "News" st" (boycott Yahoo) breathlessly stated that this was the "first" such law in the country I CERTAINLY HOPE SO> I would hate to think any other state was quite this insane.


There was a "Get Smart" episode in the 1960s where Maxwell Smart was called in by the Chief to fol a plot to blow up California. Don Adams raised this queston: "Chief, do we really WANT to save California?" I asked this same question in a Newsvine article about a YEAR ago (Newsvine being the MSNBC blog site). I was "suspended" (lol) for that article, although a Newsvine person later admitted that there was no reason to suspend someone for that kind of black humor satire (although the Newsvine person said of course, that he woud not agree with that kind of article). Well, I ask the questgion again that I asked on Newsvine a year ago: If terrorists are planning to blow up California, and we find out about it, SHOULD WE SAVE CALIFORNIA? As Maxwell Smart said,: "Think about it." Note lthat I am not saying we should affirmatively blow up California. I am just askig whether the place is worth saving.


I bet you never thought I could come pretty close to being PROVEN right on askig the questin of whether California is worth saving. I submit to you that the California legislatlure has, in fact, proven me right to have asked that question. No, I don't know what Dishonest Jack has, or will, say about this. I don't watch him regularly, as I don't watch CNN regularly. But if he does ot "blast California Democrats, then he has proven himsslef probably the wrost hypocrite to ever walk the Earth, until the net mainstream "journalist" tops him.


P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight). Cannot make any difference to young people in California. They obviously are not being taught to rEAD--much more important that they learn about the "contributions" of gays to history. If anyone reads this article to any young person in California, feel free to correct obvious spelling /proofreading errors (spelling, of coure, not being usually relevant if you are reading out loud). Indeed, anyone who wants to quote this blog should feel free to correct obvious spelling errors and typos. What if you want to leave in the typos and spelling errors because you are quoting me in a negative way? Well, you can feel free to do that, too. I don't really think too many people will think I am important enough to be quoted either way, but I have no problem with even the most outrageous statements in this blog being quoted accurately, and I don not regard it as "inaccurate" to correct the obvius errors that I admit are common in this blog. No, errors of substance almost NEVER appear in this blog. But typos and spelling errors--often, but not always, typos--are all ove the place, since I absolutely am unable to proofread (in any reasonable amount of time). Now that you have permissioin, I expect to see quotes from this blog everywhere (lol). I do thiink that someone should read this particular article on the floor of at least one house of the California legislature--in OUTRAGE, if necessary. California kids, who are not being taught to read in California schools, should at least have a CHANCE to get otuof the state. Why? That is obvious. I have extensive readership within Homeland Security (Big Sis' domain). It is entirely possible that some people in Homeland Secruity will take this article to heart, and let California be blown up. Now I admit this is unlikely. But don't the orr yong people of California, who California has made certain cannot read this article for themselves, deserve to be WARNED of their danger, in they stay in California? I think so.