Lisa Fabrizio
Colorblind?
By Lisa Fabrizio
Last week, former president Jimmy Carter, sounding much like a man desperate to reclaim his relevance in a world that's passed him by, told NBC News: "I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he's African-American."
Now, putting aside the fact that he, a very white man, was on the receiving end of much intensely demonstrated animosity during his days in office, since when, you ask, is Jimmy Carter an expert on U.S. racial relations? But cut him some slack. After all, he did unite the country in a way not seen in decades; after only four years, almost all of America joined together in sending him on his failed quest to become our greatest ex-president.
But are Carter and those of his ilk correct? Are conservatives bigoted louts or are they truly colorblind? In a way liberals are right; about this conservative anyway. Colors and the noxious movements they often represent do affect me in many ways, most of them bad. And maybe I'm not alone in detesting these oft beribboned symbols of latent hippydom which hurt my brain as well as my eyes; think of the nausea induced by a viewing of 1968's Yellow Submarine, for instance, and you get the idea. Among those hues that particularly rankle are:
Purple, pink or whatever this week's badge of homosexual self-esteem might be. Is there anything worse than not only having to witness attempts at the perverse gay and lesbian assembly to subvert our culture to theirs, but then to have these forays labeled as examples of 'gay pride'? As if the embrace of rampant, unbridled and unnatural sex is good for our nation; so good in fact, that it must be taught to our children as an acceptable and even desirable 'alternative lifestyle.'
Yellow, as in journalism. Probably nothing has more hastened the advent of our present mess as the corruption of the great majority of our media into shills for the socialist agenda. Historian Frank Luther Mott has defined yellow journalism as consisting chiefly of these characteristics:
Green, as in the Earth-first, humans-last movement; one of the most insidious examples of the use of yellow journalism of our time. As outlined above, eager graduates of journalism school learn not to report the news, but to make it, by propping up the pseudo-science of like-minded liberals who prey on the fears of gullible Americans.
First came over-population, which was replaced by global cooling; next came the so-called depletion of the rain forests that was followed by global warming, which has now morphed into climate change. But, much like our ubiquitous president, the greenies are beginning to overreach themselves and thus risk exposing their true motives.
Especially when they overlap, as demonstrated by a recent CNN broadcast which suggested that the best way to save the planet is "putting on a condom." Charming, isn't it, when a plan comes together? Yes, nearly all of these groups in one way or another share the same goal: the defeat of western civilization, especially capitalism.
Which brings us to the hue that causes the most bile to rise in conservative craws: red. We conservatives pride ourselves on our steadfast determination to keep, or conserve, that which we hold dear, namely our system of a constitutional republic; one that has served our nation well for over 200 years. Yet liberals are, in many ways, even more stubborn in the opposite direction: they seek to embrace systems of governance that have time and again proved to be murderous regimes and/or outright failures; communism and socialism.
And the fact that we have in the White House a black man who is a champion of nearly all of the above is irrelevant. Conservatives have felt the same way about Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry or anyone else that favors the red without the white and blue.
© Lisa Fabrizio
September 23, 2009
Last week, former president Jimmy Carter, sounding much like a man desperate to reclaim his relevance in a world that's passed him by, told NBC News: "I think an overwhelming portion of the intensely demonstrated animosity toward President Barack Obama is based on the fact that he is a black man, that he's African-American."
Now, putting aside the fact that he, a very white man, was on the receiving end of much intensely demonstrated animosity during his days in office, since when, you ask, is Jimmy Carter an expert on U.S. racial relations? But cut him some slack. After all, he did unite the country in a way not seen in decades; after only four years, almost all of America joined together in sending him on his failed quest to become our greatest ex-president.
But are Carter and those of his ilk correct? Are conservatives bigoted louts or are they truly colorblind? In a way liberals are right; about this conservative anyway. Colors and the noxious movements they often represent do affect me in many ways, most of them bad. And maybe I'm not alone in detesting these oft beribboned symbols of latent hippydom which hurt my brain as well as my eyes; think of the nausea induced by a viewing of 1968's Yellow Submarine, for instance, and you get the idea. Among those hues that particularly rankle are:
Purple, pink or whatever this week's badge of homosexual self-esteem might be. Is there anything worse than not only having to witness attempts at the perverse gay and lesbian assembly to subvert our culture to theirs, but then to have these forays labeled as examples of 'gay pride'? As if the embrace of rampant, unbridled and unnatural sex is good for our nation; so good in fact, that it must be taught to our children as an acceptable and even desirable 'alternative lifestyle.'
Yellow, as in journalism. Probably nothing has more hastened the advent of our present mess as the corruption of the great majority of our media into shills for the socialist agenda. Historian Frank Luther Mott has defined yellow journalism as consisting chiefly of these characteristics:
- scare headlines in huge print, often of minor news
- lavish use of pictures, or imaginary drawings
- use of faked interviews, misleading headlines, pseudo-science, and a parade of false learning from so-called experts
- dramatic sympathy with the "underdog" against the system.
Green, as in the Earth-first, humans-last movement; one of the most insidious examples of the use of yellow journalism of our time. As outlined above, eager graduates of journalism school learn not to report the news, but to make it, by propping up the pseudo-science of like-minded liberals who prey on the fears of gullible Americans.
First came over-population, which was replaced by global cooling; next came the so-called depletion of the rain forests that was followed by global warming, which has now morphed into climate change. But, much like our ubiquitous president, the greenies are beginning to overreach themselves and thus risk exposing their true motives.
Especially when they overlap, as demonstrated by a recent CNN broadcast which suggested that the best way to save the planet is "putting on a condom." Charming, isn't it, when a plan comes together? Yes, nearly all of these groups in one way or another share the same goal: the defeat of western civilization, especially capitalism.
Which brings us to the hue that causes the most bile to rise in conservative craws: red. We conservatives pride ourselves on our steadfast determination to keep, or conserve, that which we hold dear, namely our system of a constitutional republic; one that has served our nation well for over 200 years. Yet liberals are, in many ways, even more stubborn in the opposite direction: they seek to embrace systems of governance that have time and again proved to be murderous regimes and/or outright failures; communism and socialism.
And the fact that we have in the White House a black man who is a champion of nearly all of the above is irrelevant. Conservatives have felt the same way about Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry or anyone else that favors the red without the white and blue.
© Lisa Fabrizio
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
