by Mike Adams

Many of us have heard the saying, “Do what you say, and say what you mean.”

The problem with the Gay/Lesbian lobby is that they act like this saying doesn’t exist. The main reason I say this is because while the various Gay/Lesbian lobbies claim they are only looking for tolerance, they are in fact looking for acceptance.

There’s actually quite a bit a difference between the two. In fact if you judge by the actions of a majority of the Gay/Lesbian movements than you would likely come up with the conclusion that the G/L movement’s goal isn’t just tolerance. In fact actions show that they are (in typical liberal fashion) attempting to legislate acceptance.

Unfortunately legislating acceptance won’t work. Ask an African American if all the laws we have regarding racial diversity have solved racism. While an African American may say those laws were a step in the right direction, most African Americans feel that there is still discrimination going on.

One reason I bring African Americans into this equation is because many times the G/L movement like to compare their plight to African Americans. However, as many aggrieved African Americans have pointed out…1, African Americans can’t really hide who they are, and 2, African Americans never had a choice whether they could be African Americans, or anything else.

The G/L movements will try to point to scientific studies that indicate a majority of homosexual individuals have no choice. It was genetics, or something else biological that they had no control over that made them gay. At the same time one point of view that the G/L movement tries to squash at any cost are the stories of many individuals that successfully changed their sexual orientation. Whether through prayer, psychological intervention, or whatever, these people made a choice, and changed.

Another contradiction from the G/L movement is when you hear them preach, “We just want to be left alone, in the privacy of our bedrooms, to do whatever we want with whomever we want.” While a few states still have sodomy laws, when can you remember the last time anyone was charged with breaking one? In fact if people of the G/L movement kept what they do in the bedroom, in the bedroom, there would be no problem.

I submit the example of Rock Hudson. No one really knew he was gay. Thus no one had a problem with Rock Hudson. Some of the G/L movement may say something like, “Come on, what if a guy is a little effeminate? He would be discriminated against.” My answer to that is look at Liberace. ‘Nuff said.

I could go into the whole gay marriage issue but that’s a whole new page. Instead, a little advice to some of the homosexuals that may read this, the truth is, I don’t care who you choose to sleep with. If you’re the most qualified individual, you get the job. That’s tolerance. If you come out and tell me in the job interview that you’re gay, my answer would be, “So?” That’s tolerance. When you ask my opinion about the G/L movement, and then get upset when I say I think they’re wrong, that’s not tolerance. Now you’re not expecting me to tolerate your choices, and behavior, now you want me to accept that your choices of behavior are ok. I don’t.

Lastly, do what you say. Keep what you do in your bedroom well, in your bedroom. Say what you mean. Don’t say you want tolerance, but try to legislate acceptance.

by M. J. Adams

I recently signed out of my Hotmail account, and as usual something caught my eye. Very much like those “impulse” items, and magazines at a supermarket checkout line,
A Useful Idiot MSN had a title talking about “Anti-Americanism”.

In the small and incomplete description about the article, it stated that, “a recent poll showed…” and then cut off virtually placing a proverbial gun to my head, coercing me to click on the link.

The story filed by, A Useful Idiot AP can be found at this link, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19466360/.

Then when I got to the article I noticed the next part where they say, “…in Muslim countries…”.

I’m thinking, “Yeah, there are probably a lot of Muslims from other countries that don’t like us. Nothing new there.” After all they are taught ideologically that we are evil. So even when we the United States give more aid than many other nations combined, even though we’ve intervened militarily on the behalf of Muslims like in Kosovo, Muslims still suspect us of trying to thwart their faith.

Reading the rest of the article was equally anti-climatic as it flip-flops back and forth about other countries, what they think about us, and what others think about them.

Then I wondered how many people just scanned the link headline without actually reading the rest, or any of the article for that matter?

After all my experiences of spotting useful idiot’s media bias, here’s another method “they” use to form peoples opinion by sound byte, only it’s with an article headline instead. Masses of the busy, blissfully, ignorant will cruise by and see how global distrust of the United States, our President, and by default, you and I is growing.

While reading through the article, I also noticed that they didn’t mention all the countries polled. So it begs the question, did they ask the Iraqi’s whether they wanted us there, or not? I would be interested to find out since I read all kinds of reports from people actually over there tell us that while most Iraqi’s would rather the US not be there, they are thankful, and understanding that we are there, and not just leaving their country to chaos.

By the way, isn’t it interesting that the Iraqis have better understanding about this issue than most Democrats? I guess what they say about the relationship to clarity, and being faced with your own mortality is true.

If you’re not sure if you agree with my last few statements I refer you Michael Yon’s blog.

http://www.michaelyon-online.com/. Mr. Yon is not hiding out in the Green Zone of Baghdad. He is actively searching out the truth of what our forces are doing over there. Nor is he a mouthpiece for Al Jazeera.

It’s also interesting how the rest of the media virtually ignore people like Mr. Yon in their efforts to spin the US’s involvement over there. No, the media would rather publish suggestive headlines that say one obvious thing that agrees, or forwards their agenda than search out the truth.