As we witnessed the media
spectacle that was the Don Sterling story unfold; there is an element of that
is going completely unspoken. Everybody realizes that there is an elusive
slippery slope involved. If they can "ban" a basketball team owner from
his own team after having his privacy invaded one day, what can they do to
someone else on another? Make no mistake, Mr. Sterling's privacy was invaded,
and in my opinion, this is a perfect example of society being willing to give
up their own privacy rights, for the sake of argument, in favor of slamming
someone they detest. Little do they realize that someday, someone will detest
something they, or someone they love, might say. Will the same rules apply
then? As disgusting as Sterling's words were he still has the right to privacy.
The fact that this conversation was released to a media outlet is as detestable
as Sterling's comments, in my opinion. If you disagree, wait until it happens
to you.
All of this is beside the bigger
point however. There is a larger agenda at work here and it is one that is
quite alarming. If all you do is watch the main stream media for the endless,
mindless dribble that ooze's from the mouths of paid propaganda artists, you
will never see it, even though it would be right in your face. You see, what we
have here boils down to something this simple; one man, because of his views on
race, was publicly stripped of every right he had and the property he owns. His
reputation has been destroyed and people are willing to cast him aside like a
leper because he, in the privacy of his own home, made some unpopular and yes
very disturbing remarks. Based on some of the other evidence I am about to
present, I am going to argue that the agenda is to get people to accept that
this can happen to anyone who expresses views that the left can misconstrue as
"racist." After all, President Obama unarguably goes out of his way
to blame everybody that disagrees with him as racist. Is this what we face, a
public opinion trial in which our property is at stake?
These are not uncommon questions.
They have been discussed at length by many radio hosts today. As I have said
already; everybody understands that there is indeed a slippery, slippery slope
involved here. What nobody is talking about is how this agenda item ties in
with others like "white
privilege education." I write about this quite often but as a
reminder, this leftist indoctrination method seeks to discredit American
culture by claiming that racism is embedded in the institutions, and that the
"white male" dominated power structure has a built in system of
discrimination. It goes on to claim that blacks and other minorities cannot be
racist because they lack this institutional power to discriminate. Diving
deeper into subjects like "critical race theory," we see that
children are being taught that blacks cannot be expected to fairly compete in
our constitutional system of governance because of this "embedded
racism." Finally, "white privilege education" seeks to teach
young children that all white people, because we enjoy the privileges and
benefits of a system designed exclusively for us, (as if we don't believe the
black man should be free) are guilty of systemic racism. To sum it up, white
people are racist because they are white, period.
Keeping this in mind, even if
psychological conditioning wasn't on top of the agenda list, (even though it is
because we are dealing with communists here) what would happen to our country
in ten years if all the people who had been conditioned to believe white
privilege suddenly decided to treat everyone the way Sterling is being treated?
All because they believe, through their left wing indoctrination, that everyone
is racist. (If you don't believe what I am saying about white privilege I urge
to scour your children's school books, you will find it.) All of this suddenly
puts a new twist on things, doesn't it? It wouldn't be so alarming if we didn't
have a president who accused everyone of racism simply for disagreeing with
him.
If all of this isn't bad enough,
we actually have a racial grievance industry that is dependent upon a
population that thinks they are victims of racial injustice. Just recently we
witnessed to what extent the diabolical left is willing to go to convince young
minorities that they are victims. The head of the EPA recently gave a speech to young blacks
urging them to advocate for stricter regulations to combat global warming,
because get this; black children suffer from more pollution than white people
do. If that is not a deliberate attempt to convince a group of people that they
are poor oppressed victims, than I do not know what is folks.
That, my patriotic friends, is
why the events surrounding this Don Sterling story are so alarming. It involves
a whole demographic of people who are being taught they are oppressed by a
racist white majority becoming fed up with this fabricated oppression, and
demanding change they can’t comprehend. All in this one incident we seen a man
unconstitutionally deprived of his property and stripped of his rights because
the things he said hurt a few people’s feelings. I shouldn't feel the need to
condemn the man because in all reality he condemned himself, and I know I am
not a racist man. I was disgusted by what he said. I am equally disgusted that
there is such a huge effort on the part of radical leftists to convince young
minds that all white people are racist, especially when you consider the truth
about the racist past of the Democrat Party. A new precedent could very well
have been set today, and that would be one where people, out of a sense of
outrage can strip a man out of his constitutionally protected rights to life,
liberty and property. If you support this than you are a fool because it’s only
a matter of time before someone detests something you say.
No comments:
Post a Comment