jump to navigation

Draconian Politics of Hillary Clinton Lying Left May 4, 2007

Posted by Daniel Downs in Democrats, dishonesty, elections, First Amendment, Freedom of Speech, liberals, morality, news, politics, power, tyranny, wealth.
trackback

Accuracy in Media (AIM) makes the incredible claim that Hillary Clinton was responsible for end of Don Imus’ career at NBC. Most believe it was the result of Imus’ tawdry remarks about the young ladies of Rutger College. Their complaints were furthered by the influence of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, the two outstanding spokesmen of freedom and civility. According to AIM, Media Matters was the first to air the demand for Imus’ head on the Senator’s silver platter.

Okay, Imus was certainly no John the Baptist. His speech might have resembled ancient demons, but his obnoxious voice was loud with accusations against the Clintons. May be the words of Jesus applicable here; he said, “If Satan be divided against himself, his house will fall.”

Yet, we should not be fooled. Imus did not remain on the air over 20 years spewing forth his foul humor because those on the Right or Left, ethnically sensitive or not, thought he deserved to lose his large income. In fact, Imus would have been as poor as most of us had his guttural jibes had not been applauded by the many. Obviously, a whole lot of Americans thought his program was funny and entertaining. So what does that say about many Americans?

Anyway, AIM’s argument is one of sound investigation and reasoned criticism. It connects the dots between Senator Clinton, Media Matters, David Brock, the Democratic party, liberal media supporters like General Electric, pundits like Keith Olbermann, and financiers of liberal tyranny like George Soros, and many others As the ancient proverb goes, ‘All dirty and sleeping in the same bed.’

I am sure many applaud this band of high rollers of American decadence and corruption. I am equally certain many of us are grieved by their blatant flaunting of evil against life, morality, and freedom. That is not an unfair statement.

The opponents of Don Imus are not trying to civilize the airwaves. That is a bold-faced lie. They are seeking to cleanse it from any anti-Democrat, anti-Clintonian, anti-liberal, or any other influential voice against their agenda from the airwaves. In his book “The Tyranny of Tolerance,” Judge Robert Dierker shares an insider’s insights into the workings of these new tyrants. These 21st Century oppressors are what he describes as speech police who are demoralizing our culture and robbing the rest of us of our precious freedom and rights. This judge is not a lone voice. An increasing number of legal professionals and people of other professions who are tired of the liberal obsession against our nation’s moral and legal heritage. They have and are speaking, writing and working to right the wrongs of radical liberals.

Getting back to Hillary, the one who benefited the most by Imus’ demise was Senator Clinton, according to AIM. She did not eliminate Imus by proving his often time harsh statements false. Her proxies did not silence Imus by superior argument or any legal precedent. She eliminated his political opposition by hook and by crook, and this fits her profile. It is hard to imagine Senator Clinton as a person of high principle. She appears as one seeking power and money. Why else would she have remained with a man so unfaithful as her husband? Only two reasons exist for a woman remaining with such a playboy: One is fear. Fear has kept many a women victim to unfaithful or abusive men. Two is power and money. As incredible as it may seem, women can be motivated by the power and prestige of high society, and the power of high society is money. Of course, everyone among the rich and powerful are neither immoral nor tyrants. Hillary Clinton may not be very immoral, but her political alignment and her means of eliminating opponents suggest a tyrant.

If AIM is correct, Senator Clinton is certainly not a reputable leader like Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson actually believed and upheld the First Amendment. He did so against all the extremely harsh, nasty, vindictive, demeaning accusations by many who claimed to be Christians. They believed Jefferson was out to destroy their freedom of religion. Jefferson, however, was confident of the truth. Unlike Jefferson, Clinton represents a party that certainly is seeking to destroy more than just freedom of religion. They are a vicious bunch of scoundrels who intend to suppress the free speech rights of anyone who opposes their views and agendas. They are afraid of the influential critics like Imus probably because his accusations were often true.

I am not opposed to a women president. I am not a blind follower of the Republican Party. I am not because I have learned the wisdom of George Washington’s opposition to party politics and its unending evils. What I am against is tyranny. I am against anyone whose views, agenda, and influence diminishes my and others legitimate freedom and rights.

To see how AIM connected the dots, read the article AIM Report: How Hillary’s Hit Man Got Imus.

Technorati Subscribe by Email Permalink

Advertisements

Comments»

No comments yet — be the first.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: