Use that word, INTOLERANCE. Throw it in their faces.
Hold them to their own standards. Make them own it.
Posted on 12/19/2013 4:17:46 PM PST by Kaslin
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Just one more thing on this Phil Robertson business. There's a piece at TIME Magazine today by an admittedly homosexual writer by the name of Brandon Ambrosino. And the headline of the piece says: "The 'Duck Dynasty' Fiasco Says More About Our Bigotry Than Phil’s." And he talks about the kind of things he's looking at on Twitter. He says a lot of conservatives are making a point about irony. On the one hand, here's Pope Francis, Il Papa, who believes the same stuff Phil Robertson believes, and he's been named Man of the Year. Phil Robertson goes out and says it, and he's gotta be dispatched, fired, suspended, destroyed, done away with.
Now, the writer thinks that the comparison doesn't quite hold up because the pope is not out talking about it the way Phil Robertson was, but can't deny that the belief is there. But the money quote here that makes the headline is at the end of the piece. "GK Chesterton said that bigotry --" this is a great definition of bigotry, by the way. Here it is. "-- is 'an incapacity to conceive seriously the alternative to a proposition.' If he is right -- and he usually is -- then I wonder if the Duck Dynasty fiasco says more about our bigotry than Phil’s."
Those are the words of the writer. They're not my words, GLAAD. Well, I just gotta make that point. I'm just reading from the piece. These are the words of Mr. Ambrosino. (interruption) Wait, wait, wait a minute. Wait a sec. What do you mean, I don't support boycotts? What are you talking about? Is there a boycott planned? Look, if people want to boycott something, fire away. I'm just not gonna lead one. I think the people that lead boycotts are showboats and are trying to draw attention to themselves. That's my problem with boycotts. They're gonna happen or not. I believe in the free market. The unfettered trickle-down of the free market.
But really, this definition of bigotry is pretty good: "an incapacity to conceive seriously the alternative to a proposition." Closed-minded. Closed-mindedness, rigidity, bigotry. And this guy is saying this knee-jerk, predictable slap jacket result from the gay community. I mean, he even asks earlier in the piece, a pull quote. "The point is worth considering. Even though Phil used crass, juvenile language to articulate his point, what he was getting at was his belief that homosexual 'desire' is unnatural, and inherently disordered. This opinion isn’t unique to Phil. It’s actually shared by a majority of his fans," including it's shared by the pope.
But then he asks in this piece, why does every time this happens, "Why is our go-to political strategy for beating our opponents to silence them? Why do we dismiss, rather than engage them?" This is, again, the words of the writer. That's the subheadline, in fact. And that was the question I was asking in the first hour, specifically the first half hour. Look, if you don't believe in God because there isn't one, if you don't believe in morality or sin because you don't believe it exists, why get so worked up about it? But more to the point, why shut people up?
That's what the left does, not just militant gays. The entire left. I don't care where they come from, the unions, from the White House, the feminists, I don't care who they are. That's the whole point. They don't want a level playing field; they want to eliminate all opposition. And the reason is real simple. Human nature, opposition threatens them. I firmly believe that most of these people on the left construct an artificial world that's made up in their minds the way they want. Utopia. And anything that reminds them there isn't utopia, gotta shut it up, gotta get rid of whoever's talking about it, gotta embarrass and humiliate and discredit anybody, because they're living in their little cocoons and they concoct this little utopian dream and desire.
Then when reality gets anywhere near it, whoever is articulating the reality has got to go. They simply cannot handle opposition. That's why I say over and over they can't beat us in the arena of ideas, and they know it. They're not even interested in the arena of ideas. They just want to eliminate opposition. That's what Obama's all about. What the hell do you think it is when a guy like John Podesta, who is heralded as one of the greatest leftist political strategists and operatives ever, when he likens the House Republicans to the Jonestown cult? Now, whenever a Democrat says what he really thinks, everybody on the left: "Well, you know, that's just a gaffe. That was just a flub."
No, it isn't. They tell us what they really think. And that's the way they look at the House Republicans. They don't want to engage 'em. They don't want to negotiate, bipartisanship. They want to eliminate 'em. That is their strategy, Mr. Ambrosino. I'll be glad to answer your question for you in your subhead. Now, Podesta says (paraphrasing), "Well, yeah, look, I made that comment in a magazine interview. That was a few weeks ago." So it really doesn't matter. So somebody should get to Phil Robertson and have him say, "Hey, you know, I made that comment in a magazine last week. Ah, that was last week. Ah, I did that interview months ago." Try it and see if he gets away with it.
Phil Robertson could no more use every technique the left uses to absolve themselves of any responsibility of what they do or say and get away with it than I could. But they give themselves an out. They eventually will always tell us who they really are. Podesta just did it here. "Well, come on, nobody really thinks that Podesta really believes House GOP's a Jonestown cult." Yes, he does, I firmly believe because he reacts to Republicans with hate, bigotry, you name it. I think that's all on the left. I don't think there's any question about it.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Somerset, Wisconsin. Hello, Dave. Great to have you on the EIB Network, sir. Hi.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. It's an honor to speak to you, sir.
RUSH: Thank you very much.
CALLER: Just a quick plug for Two If By Tea. I, like you, wasn't a tea drinker until I discovered Two If By Tea and now every time I buy it I can't keep enough in the house.
RUSH: I appreciate that, sir. Thank you so much. It is the best iced tea in the country, there's no question. I'm happy to have your endorsement.
CALLER: Very tasteful. I just wanted to say that I think Phil Robertson knew what he was doing. I know you said you didn't watch the show so I'll give you a quick overview on it. At the end of every show, the family gets together for a big sit-down meal. They give a couple life lessons and then Phil does a prayer, and then about a year ago I think it was A&E -- and I suppose liberals -- tried to shut him down from doing the prayer every day at the end of the show.
RUSH: Yes, I've since learned that. Right, every show ends in a prayer --
CALLER: Yeah.
RUSH: -- before family dinner, said by Phil and then Willie, who is the CEO of the Duck Commander outfit.
CALLER: Yeah.
RUSH: He gives a little homily that's reflected in the entertainment portion of the show, and A&E's been trying to get them to stop that. A&E's has been asking them not to mention Jesus and not to pray.
CALLER: Right. He told them if he didn't mention Jesus and pray, they were gonna take the show elsewhere, and A&E decided that the show was more important at that point.
RUSH: Yeah.
CALLER: So it'll be curious to see what happens now.
RUSH: I'm not one of these people, folks, that think Phil got... What's the word? I'm having a mental block on it. He didn't get tricked by GQ. I guess it's possible he didn't know who they are, but somebody had to tell him. Somebody had to say, "Phil, why are you doing this?"
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: This is Rich in Lansing, Michigan. Great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. Thank you for taking my call.
RUSH: You bet.
CALLER: It's a real honor. Also, Merry Christmas to you and Kathryn.
RUSH: Thank you so much.
CALLER: I wanted to weigh in on this Phil Robertson thing. In my experience, I have found that if somebody has an opinion and they truly believe it in their heart of hearts, whether it's with the mainstream or against it, they're gonna hang on to it. They'll discuss it with people, maybe try to convert someone to their way of thinking, but in the end if it's not affecting them directly, they're gonna live and let live.
If, on the other hand, conversely, a person is espousing an opinion that they really don't believe in, but because it's the party line, it's politically correct or whatever, they gotta shut people up. Because every time they hear the dissenting idea, it reminds them that they're lying to themselves. So the more people they can recruit to their side, that makes it easier for them to believe that what they're saying is true, when they really don't believe it.
RUSH: I think you're on to something. It's akin to point I made earlier. These people concoct a world that is a dream. It's a utopia, only they have a combination of thinking it exists and hoping for it to exist, and they construct their lives in their belief that it does exist, and then it doesn't. So they see evidence of that, and it just upsets their world, and they can't handle that, and so whoever is responsible for upsetting the dream has got to be shut up or dispatched or what have you.
The left, liberals do not believe in "live and let live" on any subject. They are not tolerant. They don't have any tolerance. They don't practice it. There is no tolerance on the left whatsoever. It has got to comport and conform to what they think or whoever is in trouble, but I know what you're saying. Their little belief system is made up of things they know that aren't true, but they want them to be -- and eventually they convince themselves that it is a utopia out there, at least in their little world.
Something comes along and happens, and the imperfection of man ends up being illustrated, and it just disappoints them and shocks them and angers them and they don't want to have to face that reality. So they start calling whoever it is that upset their worldview names and destroy their character and reputation, get rid of 'em so that nobody else will believe them.
So I get what you're saying. These are people that basically cannot face the truth, and in the process they construct a little dream world. Now, by the way, this is not the leaders of the left. Obama and these guys, they're not the ones. I'm talking about their brainwashed voters and followers. There are many different degrees of leftists, and I'm not talking about the leaders. I'm talking about the pajama guys.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Let me give you an illustration what I'm talking about. The LA Times has just banned all comments on their website that even question global warming. They just don't want to hear it anymore. If you don't think global warming is happening, you don't exist. They're not gonna let you upset their world. Same thing at Reddit. Reddit has just implemented a ban on all comments that even question the validity of manmade global warming. They don't want their worldview to be upset at all.
END TRANSCRIPT
You violated the FR rule of posting TWO Rush essays in one hour ... just sayin
Just heard on Special Report tonight that A&E tried to tell the Robertsons that the word “Jesus” would not be allowed on the show. They stood up to that, as anyone who has watched the show would know, but it shows A&Es true colors. It’s not just the fag thing they have a problem with.
My, how very tolerant of them.
First liberals demanded that homosexualis be free to practice their deviancy behind closed doors.
Then they demanded that the doors be thrown open and that overt homosexualism be tolerated in every aspect of our lives.
Next came the demand that we move beyond tolerance to full acceptance.
Soon after that acceptance wasn't enough - we were expected to openly embrace homosexualism as the equal to normal man-woman love and sex.
But even openly embracing homosexuals as equals wasn't enough.
Now we are required to praise and promote homosexuals and to castigate anyone who dares speak against their vile practices.
There is only one more place for this escalation to go.
The next step will be mandatory participation in homosexual relationships.
It will be illegal to refuse a homosexual advance as it could be a traumatic experience for the homosexual.
To reject a homosexual will be a punishable as a Hate Crime by the government.
But leftists can say anything no matter how offensive, just check out MSNBC. Oprah said white people should just die, no media outrage.
The best iced tea in the country is the one I make from Lipton.
When one displaces God’s AUTHORITY with his own he becomes a god and angry.
Whom God would destroy He first makes angry.
Yes. So you must post more rush essays before the hour is over.
Rush nails it again.
The Civil Rights Act says you can’t discriminate in employment on the basis of creed or religion—so I think Phil’s suspension backs up against that wall & roars back.
Also, if Phil doing an interview with GQ wasn’t a breech of contract...& if they knew he was doing the interview....& we already knew A&E knew about Phil’s religious beliefs because he ends every show with a prayer in Jesus’ name...I think it’s A&E who is in violation of THEIR contract, as Phil signed no oath in support of some LBGT “community”.
I think the press accepts homosexual terms such as “gay” & “straight” as if they are fair & objective terms rather than terms loaded with connotations & moral value judgments & prejudice against heterosexuals by homosexuals.
Plus...the idea that SAME sex marriage is about “diversity” & opposite sex marriage is about sameness is Orwellian in its absurdity.....and what did Phil REALLY say? That he believes the Bible that says homosexuals won’t inherit the Kingdom of Heaven...which is merely a religious belief that harms nobody. He didn’t advocate violence or hate or making homosexuality against the law....he merely said it’s a sin & homosexuals won’t go to Heaven according to the Bible....so what is the big deal? I’m sure Phil would be the first one to say that God is the ultimate judge.
The Bible does not condemn homosexual temptation, but it clearly and unequivocally condemns acting on those temptations. Christians might even be homosexual offenders before they accept Christ, but they can’t be both Christian and unrepentant homosexuals. These are not radical thoughts, btw. This is simply what scripture says. Homosexuals are free to accept or ignore scripture, but they cannot reasonably claim scripture condones unrepentant homosexuality.
If a homosexual doesn’t believe scripture, then why be concerned if I mention what it says? If it’s a fairy tale, for example, ignore it and go on doing whatever you want. Either way, I’m not going to be silent simply because some homosexuals are offended. That path, trying to ban all offensive speech, is lunacy, because there is always someone, somewhere who will be offended by something said.
I respect a homosexual’s right to claim that sodomy is OK and same-sex “marriage” is on par with heterosexual marriage. They are free to say what they want, but I absolutely demand the same courtesy to say what I believe.
In a free country, offensive speech is not only permitted. It’s a protected right!
I was watching "The Five" with Greg Gutfield; etc. Greg Gutfield took the pc view that speaking against men having sex with men is the same thing as speaking against black people. This is a typical argument and quite an insult to Negroes. Negro is an identity while men having sex with men is a series of nauseating acts which are also physically dangerous and not just to the participants in the perversion. There is also the issue of child molestation, covered up by our pc/Communist culture, but a horrific element of men having sex with men, nevertheless.
I hesitate to call them homosexual because it is the act that defines the person(s) performing it. It is not an identity such as being a Negro (the proper ethnological term btw....). All the other participants of "the Five" pretty much agreed with Mr. Gutfield. I thought I was watching MSNBC.
I watched The Five also and I didn’t hear that. I thought Gutfeld’s opening remarks were an excoriation of A&E. I guess I don’t pay that close attention to the show.
Use that word, INTOLERANCE. Throw it in their faces.
Hold them to their own standards. Make them own it.
I imagine the Robertsons lawyers are going over those exact points as we speak. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a lawsuit against A & E for discriminatory practices demanding release from contract.
Actually I think the churches are next. Pastors will be prohibited from preaching the Word against homosexuality.
I caught that, too. Greg and his buddies failed the Test. LOL .... I banned The Five & RedEye from this house and deTwittered all five of ‘em ... uh ... except Dana .... she wasn’t there today.
Heck, if I were a Robertson, I’d declare Total War on A&E.... and line up everyone else on the show for GQ interviews. Dare A&E to fire them one at a time, one a week, for the next 4 months and burn down their own hit show.
Indeed. The agenda at A&E runs deeper than just their support of queer activism and it’s getting exposed as more people look into this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.