Media Bias Against Traditional Values

By Selwyn Duke

We’re used to seeing quarterbacks pummeled at the Super Bowl, but this year something else was sacked: a pro-life message featuring Barack Obama. Although NBC had originally agreed to run the commercial, it subsequently balked, stating that it wasn’t going to air advocacy ads.

Read the rest here.

Comments

[Philip France]

While being a devoted reader of Selwyn Duke's material, one who looks forward to his opinions with outstretched neck, I protest his most recent post at The New American.

This Op-ed started with a valuable and important subject: the sanctity of human life and devolved into a tirade about the irresponsibilty of the lunatic media. He was factually correct, artciulate (as always) and to-the-point. My protest is that he left the original subject hanging like a loose tooth.

We have had yellow journalism as long as we have had journailism. Yes, it has reached critical mass with sissies like Chris Matthews peeing in their pants about 'The Lord Messiah' and outright lunatics like Keith Olbermadmann suggesting that former VP Dick Cheney has done more harm to Americans than actual terrorists. The subject of one of the greatest movies in American history (Citizen Kane) was about this very subject. Thinking people know this. That is why we visit Selwynduke.com and why we listen to talk radio.

Let's get back to the orignal subject: the sanctity of human life (and all life, for that matter) and that brilliant commercial ad.

As part of my occupation, I travel International Highway 80 and U.S. Highway 50 to Lake Tahoe (I am not bragging, though I could; my point is yet forthcoming). During these drives I see plants growing out of hardened rock. I marvel at the instinct for survival demonstrated by these comparitively simple organisms.

Now, need I remind you that most Leftists and liberals are die-hard belivers in Darwinian evolutionary theory whereby subsequent generations evolve from the survival and the fitness cause of the best genetic qualities of its progenitors into bigger and/or better offspring. Yet obvious examples such as these are cast to the scrap-heap when it comes to human life and the dogmatic support of abortion-on-demand and homosexuality, both of which ideologies fly in the face of Darwinian evolutionary theory (my term would rather be "orthodoxy").

The miracle of life continues to elude us, despite our scientific and medical advances. We see this form, this body and we learn a great many things. Be it plant or animal or cell or bacteria we know that all life struggles to survive. And yet with all of this knowledge, we cannot take any component of living organisms and "make" it live. This is the mileau of The Department of the Divine.

It is time that we articulate this message to the masses that all life; whether human, animal, plant, or growth be understood as a gift from metaphysical causes. Heck, we have had thousands of years of trying to deny it with zero results!

Once more back to the sanctity of human life theory: Once upon a time there lived a filthy, ugly hag named Margaret Sanger. She was a filthy, ugly hag not because of her appearance but because she was a racist bigot who fantasized of the elimination of the negroe race. Her operational weapon was eugenics, or to purge these (in her opinion) mutant genes from the human race, a sort of forced Darwinism. She found a soul-mate in a lunatic named Adolph Hitler; who had the same fantasies of ridding the earth of Jews.

Remarkably, in a profound inversion of the word "choice", this filthy hag has succeeded in the destruction of countless negroe embryoes (the vast majority of aborted fetuses). Like all evil incursions into God's design, there has been collateral damage, i.e. the unintended destruction of fetuses of other races. In the name of "choice" of course.

Let's talk about "choice" for a moment. By reading my rant to this point, you would label me as "pro-life" (and you would be corrrect). My opponents on this issue would declare that I am not "pro-choice" (and they are terribly wrong). Here's the difference: I am pro-choice regarding the following: Abstinance, Contraception (and the hundreds of "choices" that this includes), Adoption, Acceptance of this miracle of life known as a child and raising him or her. I am pro-choice in all of these "choices". Where Leftists and liberals demonstrate their derangement is that they disregard the choice of a living organism that struggles for life with the same visceral yearning as that plant growing out of the rocks on my way to Lake Tahoe. The fetus is not given this choice, and yet all biological and Darwinian evidence points to its desire to survive.

I will conclude by stating that our new President Brokeback Hussein Obama is (forgive the expression) dead-wrong on this subject and is therefore woefully inadequate to preside over our Republic.

May God bless you, Selwyn Duke and the readers of his articles and subsequent commentary and God bless the United States of America.