dana

Senator Santorum Was Right
By Cliff Kincaid
URL: http://ToogoodReports.com/
There is something seriously wrong with our media, and our society, when
America´s two most influential newspapers, the New York Times and the
Washington Post, can endorse a U.S. Supreme Court that rules that the U.S.
Constitution justifies racial discrimination against whites and the right to
homo***ual sodomy. It would be nice if our mainstream media would point out
that, in fact, none of this is actually justified or articulated in the
Constitution, and that the majority on the Court simply made it up, thereby
making a mockery of the Constitution and subverting the idea of
constitutional self-government that our founders gave us on July 4, 1776.
The Times and the Post editorialized in favor of the court´s ruling for the
homo***uals, with the Times noting that Justice Antonin Scalia said the
ruling may provide a basis for upholding homo***ual marriage. The Times is
in favor of that, too, even though the majority of Americans are not.
The elite media create the atmosphere that enables the "governing caste," as
Scalia put it, to destroy traditional values, overturn state laws, and find
rights in the Constitution that don´t exist because of what the majority of
the court calls "an emerging awareness." Scalia noted that the Court
majority had overturned one of its own decisions, the Bowers case, in which
it had declared no constitutional right to sodomy. The court said that the
Bowers decision had been strongly criticized over the years. Scalia found
that to be a very weak basis on which to overturn a previous decision. The
criticism, of course, had come from the militant homo***ual lobby and its
allies in the legal profession and the media.
In contrast to the editorials in the New York Times and the Washington Post,
the Washington Times editorial page found something seriously wrong in the
Supreme Court claiming a right to homo***ual sodomy in the Constitution. The
court "turned the Constitution upside down," said the Washington Times. The
paper said the ruling had violated states´ rights. More than that, however,
Scalia said the rationale for the decision could lead to the invalidation of
state laws against bigamy, same-*** marriage, adult ******, prostitution and
bestiality. "Every single one of these laws is called into question by
today´s decision." said Scalia.
The Washington Times editorial reflects an amazing turnaround for Tony
Blankley, editor of the editorial page, who had said he didn´t regard the
homo***ual assault on family values as any kind of threat. On CNN´s
Crossfire, Blankley had said he disagreed with Senator Rick Santorum´s point
that the Supreme Court could not legalize the homo***ual lifestyle without
approving other strange ***ual behaviors practiced in the privacy of a home,
such as ******, bigamy, polygamy, and adultery. Santorum´s remarks generated
a controversy among journalists and the homo***ual activists, with some
saying he should resign.
"I disagree with almost everything he said," said Blankley. "I´m confident
the Supreme Court can distinguish between consensual conduct by ***s and
*******s in private and ******, which is not consensual, by definition of
the relationship. So I don´t buy his argument. I don´t buy his argument that
American families are in danger from the one percent to two percent of
homo***uals in the country. We´ve had that population since the beginning of
time, and American families are fine."
At least Blankley didn´t recite the phony figure of 10 percent usually cited
by the media. But his statement helps explain why the Times op-ed page is
now carrying a column by open HIV-infected homo***ual Andrew Sullivan that
is devoted, in part, to advancing the homo***ual agenda and *** marriage.
Indeed, Sullivan used his column in the Times to attack Santorum. But
Santorum has been proven correct. It turns out that the court did not make
the distinctions that Blankley said they would.
Blankley is correct that homo***uals have always been with us, but for most
of our history their unnatural lifestyle was considered a symptom of a
mental illness, and sodomy was outlawed. History shows-and our founders
knew-that the open and approved practice of homo***uality is a sign of a
society in decline.


adults of the same ***, why should it allow states to regulate such
activities between adults of the opposite ***, which anti-******,
anti-bigamy, anti-polygamy and anti-adultery statutes certainly do?" Her
column appeared in the Washington Times before the court ruling. Blankley
should have taken it more seriously.


--
"[Liberty] considers religion as the safeguard of morality, and morality as
the best security of law and the surest pledge of the duration of freedom."
--Alexis de Toqueville

robert

Adultery? You want to arrest people for adultery? What the **** is it your
business.

Bigamy? What is absolutely ridiculous about this is that all you have to do
is live with two people of the opposite *** and never marry them and you are
baiscally committing bigamy. You can even write up a contract.

Inest? With minors, absolutely should be against the law. As bestiality.
The whole issue is consenuality.

roger

Toogood Reports contributor and "Best of the Web" award-winning writer Cliff
Kincaid is a veteran journalist and commentator who has been based in the
Washington, D.C. area for more than twenty years. A journalist by training
with a degree in communications, he serves as editor of the AIM (Accuracy in
Media) Report, a media watchdog group, and president of America's Survival,
Inc. (ASI), a public policy organization concerned with global issues. Cliff
records "Media Monitor" radio commentaries with AIM chairman Reed Irvine and
writes a regular column for AIM. A recognized and respected figure in the
conservative movement, Cliff is a frequent guest on radio and television. He
is the author or co-author of seven books, including Michael New: Mercenary
or American Soldier. You may e-mail your comments to him at
antiun@earthlink.net.
http://ajtoogood.com/column/general/kincaid/20030702.htm

More recently, Kincaid generated national media attention when he criticized
fellow conservatives for associating with religious cult leader Sun Myung
Moon and his Washington Times newspaper. The Washington Post quoted Times
editor Wesley Pruden as calling Kincaid "nuts" and saying he needed
professional help. Kincaid responded, "I am not a member of a cult and I
don't claim to be the Messiah." When the Times 20th anniversary event was
over, Kincaid had been vindicated, as Moon gave a bizarre speech claiming he
was God and that the Times had to promote his message. Times journalists
were embarrassed and humiliated. Kincaid's articles and reports on the
pernicious influence of the Moon organization in conservative ranks and
Moon's financial connection to North Korea and China are circulating to
movers and shakers in the conservative community.
http://www.usasurvival.org/bio.html

as

freedom."

the frog

Zero sum game. If you give special consideration to one race in
violation of the 14th, then other races have less consideration.

You are simply saying it shouldn't matter because they are white.

I thought you were of the party who worried incessantly about
fairness? Turn the tables on races and see if this wouldn't anger you?

The Frog


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++
"The multicultural project will never fully succeed if 'diversity'
is defined as one's own preferred ideologies and political groups."

--Richard E. Redding, "Grappling With Diverse Conceptions of Diversity,"
American Psychologist, April 2002, p. 301.

david lentz

What is the above, an admission of bigotry? If racial
discrimination is bad, then it must be opposed. Yet liberals
wish to to believe that while some racial discrimination is bad,
other racial discrimination is somehow good. Then liberals never
could make up their minds.

David

david lentz

If I were to confess to be a hoplophile, that is need to have
intimate ***ual relations with a weapon, would that right be
protected by the Supreme Court's right of privacy?

David

the frog

Your post has much truth. However, in the liberal mind, racism is only
a one way street.


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++
"The multicultural project will never fully succeed if 'diversity'
is defined as one's own preferred ideologies and political groups."

--Richard E. Redding, "Grappling With Diverse Conceptions of Diversity,"
American Psychologist, April 2002, p. 301.

r_c_wade2

Senator Santorum Was Right
By Cliff Kincaid

There is something seriously wrong with our media, and our society,
when America's two most influential newspapers, the New York Times and
the Washington Post, can endorse a U.S. Supreme Court that rules that
the U.S. Constitution justifies racial discrimination against whites
and the right to homo***ual sodomy. It would be nice if our mainstream
media would point out that, in fact, none of this is actually
justified or articulated in the Constitution, and that the majority on
the Court simply made it up, thereby making a mockery of the
Constitution and subverting the idea of constitutional self-government
that our founders gave us on July 4, 1776.

The Times and the Post editorialized in favor of the court's ruling
for the homo***uals, with the Times noting that Justice Antonin Scalia
said the ruling may provide a basis for upholding homo***ual marriage.
The Times is in favor of that, too, even though the majority of
Americans are not.

The elite media create the atmosphere that enables the "governing
caste," as Scalia put it, to destroy traditional values, overturn
state laws, and find rights in the Constitution that don't exist
because of what the majority of the court calls "an emerging
awareness." Scalia noted that the Court majority had overturned one of
its own decisions, the Bowers case, in which it had declared no
constitutional right to sodomy. The court said that the Bowers
decision had been strongly criticized over the years. Scalia found
that to be a very weak basis on which to overturn a previous decision.
The criticism, of course, had come from the militant homo***ual lobby
and its allies in the legal profession and the media.

In contrast to the editorials in the New York Times and the Washington
Post, the Washington Times editorial page found something seriously
wrong in the Supreme Court claiming a right to homo***ual sodomy in
the Constitution. The court "turned the Constitution upside down,"
said the Washington Times. The paper said the ruling had violated
states' rights. More than that, however, Scalia said the rationale for
the decision could lead to the invalidation of state laws against
bigamy, same-*** marriage, adult ******, prostitution and bestiality.
"Every single one of these laws is called into question by today's
decision…" said Scalia.

The Washington Times editorial reflects an amazing turnaround for Tony
Blankley, editor of the editorial page, who had said he didn't regard
the homo***ual assault on family values as any kind of threat. On
CNN's Crossfire, Blankley had said he disagreed with Senator Rick
Santorum's point that the Supreme Court could not legalize the
homo***ual lifestyle without approving other strange ***ual behaviors
practiced in the privacy of a home, such as ******, bigamy, polygamy,
and adultery. Santorum's remarks generated a controversy among
journalists and the homo***ual activists, with some saying he should
resign.

"I disagree with almost everything he said," said Blankley. "I'm
confident the Supreme Court can distinguish between consensual conduct
by ***s and *******s in private and ******, which is not consensual,
by definition of the relationship. So I don't buy his argument. I
don't buy his argument that American families are in danger from the
one percent to two percent of homo***uals in the country. We've had
that population since the beginning of time, and American families are
fine."

At least Blankley didn't recite the phony figure of 10 percent usually
cited by the media. But his statement helps explain why the Times
op-ed page is now carrying a column by open HIV-infected homo***ual
Andrew Sullivan that is devoted, in part, to advancing the homo***ual
agenda and *** marriage. Indeed, Sullivan used his column in the Times
to attack Santorum. But Santorum has been proven correct. It turns out
that the court did not make the distinctions that Blankley said they
would.

Blankley is correct that homo***uals have always been with us, but for
most of our history their unnatural lifestyle was considered a symptom
of a mental illness, and sodomy was outlawed. History shows—and our
founders knew—that the open and approved practice of homo***uality is
a sign of a society in decline.

activities between adults of the same ***, why should it allow states
to regulate such activities between adults of the opposite ***, which
anti-******, anti-bigamy, anti-polygamy and anti-adultery statutes
certainly do? Her column appeared in the Washington Times before the
court ruling. Blankley should have taken it more seriously.

weed57

..........