Journalist's admission a step to legitimizing pedophilia - Re-blog

In my youth, I tended to devour any popular fiction (books, films, etc.) that depicted themes so bizarre and personally challenging that they defied the protagonists’ ability to retain any semblance of humanity throughout the course of the story. Such fare was all the more plausible when the story’s hero was a young person who was still in the process of developing his or her value system.

When such circumstances materialize in the world in which we actually live, I cannot say they hold quite the same allure.

About a month ago, I wrote a column detailing a prediction that in its ongoing efforts to debase society, the political left would soon see fit to begin legitimizing pedophilia. To this end, pedophiles would form activist groups as the North American Man-Boy Love Association did in the 1970s and 1980s – but this time, they would have prominent, deep-pocketed supporters.

Switching the narative

I just want ANYONE to answer me this.

When former KKK member and Exalted Cyclops, Robert Byrd, who wrote a friendly letter to the Grand Wizard of the KKK in 1946, was first elected in 1950 to the West Virginia Senate as a Democrat, had he "switched sides"?

When he was elected to the US House of Representatives in 1953 as a Democrat, had he "switched sides"?

When he was elected to the US Senate in 1959 as a Democrat, had he "switched sides"?

When he filibustered against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for 14 hours as a Democrat, had he "switched sides"?

In his filibuster, he said, "Men are not created equal today, and they were not created equal in 1776, when the Declaration of Independence was written." Had he "switched sides"?

When he remained in office, re-elected continuously from 1959 to 2010, when at age 92 he died, each time being re-elected by the same Democrats of West Virginia who first elected him sixty years prior, had he "switched sides"?

And the more important question is, when did the people who elected him "switch sides"? Democrats have controlled the WV state Congress since 1931 until 2014, four years after Byrd's death. Democrats have since 1933 until today (2016) held the Governorship of West Virginia 67 of 83 those years. In which year did they "switch sides"?

---

source:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2010/06/what_does_an_exalted_cyclops_do.html
http://capitalismmagazine.com/2001/03/democratic-sen-robert-byrd-ex-klansman/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/18/AR2005061801105_3.html
http://www.wvencyclopedia.org/articles/756
https://www.archives.gov/legislative/features/byrd/
http://host.madison.com/ct/news/article_bea0ee78-82a8-11df-8e4d-001cc4c03286.html
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/06/28/obit.byrd/
http://wvmetronews.com/2014/11/04/gop-makes-historic-gains-in-state-legislature/
http://www.nga.org/cms/home/governors/past-governors-bios/page_west_virginia.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Governors_of_West_Virginia

Liberal in name only - Re-Blog

Do you support free speech, individual liberties and protections for private property? You must be a liberal.

Did that last sentence cause you to do a double take? I’m not surprised.

I’ve been reading a new book, “The Closing of the Liberal Mind,” and it shows that much of what passes for liberalism today is, historically speaking, anything but. Moreover, many who call themselves conservative today would have been considered “liberal” if they lived in the time of the Founding Fathers.

This distinction isn’t mere semantics, however. The shift I’m describing goes right to the heart of the political and culture wars that rage around us today. Author Kim Holmes demonstrates why the authoritarian stance adopted by many liberals today - as exemplified by speech codes, trigger warnings, boycotts and shaming rituals - is in fact more accurately described as illiberalism.