What a Hateful Liberal Bigot Looks Like

They have always existed, but they have become more emboldened with the recent leftward lurch in American political direction. I am talking today about liberal bigots, those lefties who are not only obstinately or intolerantly devoted to their own opinions and prejudices, but who also regard and treat those who disagree with them with vitriolic hatred. You frequently hear them harping about wanting freedom of speech, the right to express their opinions and viewpoints publicly, even the right to have their alternative lifestyles accepted by the mainstream public as 'normal' or at least 'acceptable'. But this freedom of speech, this right to express opinions and viewpoints, can never, ever extend to those who disagree with them. Perfect case in point came this past weekend with the Miss USA pageant questioning incident. As I previously discussed in another recent post, Miss California, Carrie Prejean, was a contestant in the pageant. She is a beauty queen, a model, and she had a simple goal, to win a beauty pageant title. She wasn't looking to change the world on Sunday night, and certainly when it came to the question-answer stage she did not expect a controversial question on an epic hot-button sociological and moral topic. In any event, that is exactly what she received from pageant judge Mario Lavandeira, who goes by the professional name of 'Perez Hilton'. Lavandeira is a gay activist and celebrity blogger, and basically asked Prejean whether she supported 'gay marriage', and to give the reasons behind whatever her feelings were on the issue. Carrie Prejean simply replied from her heart, basically saying that she did not support the idea, that she believed marriage should only be between a man and a woman, and that basically this was how she was raised, taught, and now fundamentally believed. In the immediate aftermath of the pageant, at which she nearly won, finishing as the first runner-up, Hilton said that Prejean was a 'cunt', and then took to the internet and video-blogged that Hilton lost because she was "a dumb bitch." So in other words, Hilton as a gay activist has a right to voice his opinion on the issue, and the mainstream American public is supposed to tolerate not only that viewpoint, but also his public expression of it. But the same right is not extended to Carrie Prejean. Because she disagrees with Hilton on this issue, and because she had the audacity to answer his question with honesty, she is pilloried as some sort of bigot and neanderthal thinker, and then called names as well? How far does this freedom of expression, this right to your own viewpoints go, Mr. Hilton? And it wasn't just Perez Hilton, but also most of the 'gay rights' movement, and in fact most liberals as well, who ganged up on Carrie Prejean. In doing so they exposed themselves publicly for what they really are, a group of hateful bigots, everything that they claim to be against. This is the United States of America, and we are supposed to celebrate, support, and grow from the expression of differing opinions, not denounce them with hatred, ignorance, and profanity. It isn't as if Carrie Prejean said that any gay who actually got married should go to hell. She didn't say they should be arrested, tortured, or even publicly embarrassed if they tried to marry. She did not express that she didn't like gay people in general, and didn't call them any names. In short, she said nothing that would incite hatred or intolerance of gays. She simply answered the question put to her regarding the issue of marriage, stating that it should be between a man and a woman, which it should. Not an opinion, but a fact since the early days of man, and one that has only gained any public forum at all since the fringe gay element of society began imposing it's radical views on the vast mainstream 'straight' majority just a few decades ago. Carrie Prejean simply answered a direct question without lambasting or profaning anyone, but the response that she received in reply has been what we have come to typically expect from the liberal community. We conservatives love an open debate, love ideas expressed in public, and embrace the notion of having them put to the test of a vote. That is the true spirit of American freedom and diversity and exceptionalism at work. There are groups who have wanted that freedom of speech repressed in the past: Nazis, Communists, and brutal dictators of all stripes go this way. Add now to that group the ultra-liberal bigots who want anyone shut up and shut down who does not agree with them, from Rush Limbaugh to Sean Hannity to Ann Coulter to Carrie Prejean. For anyone out there who agreed with Perez Hilton's response to Carrie Prejean, not his view on the topic of gay marriage, but with his response to Sunday night's question-answer session, then you can count yourself in that group of liberal bigots. NOTE: As with every entry at this Blog, there is a 'Comments' button below. You can do so anonymously, but it would be appreciated if you had the courage of your convictions to add at least a real name.

Remembering the Nazi Final Solution

The Nazi Party came to power under the guidance of Adolf Hitler during the 1930's, and early on they blamed the Jewish people for many of their problems. They then began to formulate a plan for what Hitler himself called the "final solution of the Jewish question." In 1935, the Nuremberg Laws were passed that saw classification of German citizens by race. If all four of your grandparents were of German blood, then you were a good German. If 3 or 4 of them were Jewish, then you were Jewish. With 1 or 2 Jewish grandparents, you were considered a 'crossbreed'. The laws prohibited marriage and intercourse between Jews and Germans, as well as the employment of German females under age 45 in Jewish households. They also stripped those of the non-German blood of their German citizenship. Efforts to begin eliminating Jews from German society began even prior to World War II, as Jews were slaughtered in mass killings and became the victims of 'pogroms', which were systematic riots against and attacks on their population centers that included physical violence and murder against people, destruction of businesses, and destruction of their places of worship. Beginning in September of 1941, all Jews living in the lands under German control were required to wear yellow patches on their clothing for identification. Jews were not permitted to become doctors, lawyers, or journalists, could not use state hospitals, and would not be schooled by the state beyond age 14. By the time that 1942 rolled around, with WWII underway fully across the globe, one million Jews had already been killed by the Nazi regime. But this was only the beginning of the worst slaughter of one group of people in the history of mankind. On January 20th, 1942 at the Wannsee Villa in Berlin, a conference named after Hitler's statement of 'The Final Solution to the Jewish Question' was held by a group of Nazi officials. It was here that the idea was born to build actual 'extermination camps' at which mass extermination of Jewish people would occur. Many Jews would also be held at 'concentration camps' if deemed healthy enough and would be utilized as slave labor, until they either died of disease or exhaustion. As the Germans conquered new territories, they set up a system of mass warehousing of Jews, and their transportation on trains to the extermination camps. Built under the direction of Heimlich Himmler in Nazi-occupied Poland, this use of actual extermination or death camps was the beginning of the final phase of the Jewish mass murders that has become known as 'The Holocaust'. This coordinated genocide of mostly Jews, but also at places including Serbs and gypsies, was accomplished by herding those who survived the arduous train rides into the camps. Here they would be led one-by-one into gas chambers, with the bodies then being either cremated or buried in mass graves. Approximately 2-3 million people, most of them Jewish, were killed during the years that the death camps operated, and perhaps 10 million more Jews were killed by the Germans when you count in mass shootings and other murder victims. Today, April 21st, is 'Holocaust Remembrance Day', on which we call to mind all of those who were murdered by the German Nazis in that final racist solution. Still today, over six decades after their use, the death camps with their gas chambers and crematories are lasting symbols of the pure evil that existed within Germany during the years just prior to and during World War II. Evil is a very real force, a real entity in our world that exists still today. We need only do what today calls on us to do, remember the Holocaust in the Nazi final solution, to plant that knowledge of evil firmly in our consciousness, and we must always be willing to fight to overcome that evil.

Islamism Series: Goodbye, America

"Imagine a world without the U.S. or Israel, it can happen." That is a publicly pronounced statement by Iranian President and radical islamic idealog Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that I read to my Racial Islam students every week. But is anyone taking him seriously? How could the United States, the acknowledged "most powerful nation in the history of the planet earth" cease to exist? Could a relatively small nation like Iran make something like this happen? I mean, the United States defeated the British against all odds, survived a devastating Civil War, and led the world in overcoming both the Fascism of Hitler's Nazi Germany and the Socialism of the Soviet Union, a pair of legitimate world military powers. Well, it might be pretty difficult for Iran, at least acting on it's own, to make America completely disappear as a nation. However, to think that we are invulnerable from a devastating attack from them would be to act with naivete, and that is something that we must not allow to happen. Because not only can Iran cause widespread devastation and seriously cripple, if not destroy, the United States as a superpower, but they are actively engaged in efforts to make that happen. Throughout history, even single mighty empire that has ever come along has fallen. Does Egypt still exist? Sure. Does Rome still exist? Of course. Is Britain still a strong peopled nation? Most definitely. But the fact of the matter is that not one of these is the major force in the world today, and at one time in history each one was the dominant power in the world. For the United States to fail to learn this lesson of history is for the United States to doom itself to repeat the process, and to one day either cease to exist or find itself a secondary nation. America faces many dangers in this process, including losing it's own unique national identity from within by continually sacrificing our traditions, laws, and language on the mantle of multi-culturalism. But the specific threat the Iranians can and are planning is nuclear. Ahmadinejad is doing everything in his power to obtain nuclear power. Of course it's for peaceful energy purposes if you ask him. This is the same guy that has said publicly that "Israel must be wiped off the map", "it will one day vanish", and "it is a tree that will be eliminated by one storm." What exactly do you think he is talking about here, and when he speaks of a world without the U.S.? The plan that Iran hopes to enact involves what is known as an 'EMP' attack on the United States. Iran would continue to develop their nuclear program to the point where they can construct a couple of nuclear bombs. They are already testing missile technology that would allow them to reach the continental United States from a sea-going vessel. Their plan would be to fire one of those missiles with an attached nuke at our country. Not at a city like New York, trying to blowup infrastructure. No, all that would do is make us angry and lead to their self-destruction. While some of these crazed islamists will give up their lives for the cause, the entire leadership is not suicidal. What they will do instead is launch this nuke so that it explodes in the atmosphere above our country, instantly creating what is known as an 'EMP' effect. In a report released earlier this year by a commission appointed by Congress after the 9/11 attacks to study just such a scenario, the following results were released: "If even a crude nuclear weapon were detonated anywhere between 40 kilometers to 400 kilometers above the earth, in a split-second it would generate an electro-magnetic pulse [EMP] that would cripple military and civilian communications, power, transportation, water, food, and other infrastructure." It wouldn't cause many immediate deaths or damage many buildings, but it would cause electric, gas, lighting, and water systems to fail. Committee spokesperson Dr. William Graham says that the result would be that the United States “would quickly revert to an early 19th century type of country, except that we would have 10 times as many people with ten times fewer resources. Most of the things we depend upon would be gone, and we would literally be depending on our own assets and those we could reach by walking to them.” Basically with the launch of one strategically placed weapon, the Iranians would eliminate the United States as a superpower. They would then turn their remaining arsenal on Israel, eliminating this much smaller nation from existence. Iran could do this openly as a nation, or they could farm the dirty work out to a terrorist organization and try to claim that they had no knowledge of the plot. Make no mistake about the intentions of the current Iranian regime, or the intentions of radical islamists the world over. They want the world under Islamic rule and law, and they will do whatever it takes to overcome those standing in the way of making it happen. The U.S. government and military, and all of us as citizens, need to be aware of and understand exactly what we are up against if we are going to preserve our great nation and it's strength in world affairs. If we refuse to meet this challenge, it will be goodbye America. At least to the America that we all know and love.