On Nonsense.

You, WorldNetDaily, have gone too far.

When I look at your stories on my reader, I expect conspiratorial nonsense, overblown theories, hoaxes, lies, etc. What I do not expect is blatant ad hominem attacks, but that’s what you’ve given me.

This is unacceptable. WorldNetDaily’s exclusive commentary is just searing, empty hate rhetoric. It’s definitely not what I expected from them, and I take personal offense at its publication. Let’s examine the text.

First, the title. “Liberalism is a progressive disease”. Without even reading the rest of the article, you can tell from the thinly veiled sarcasm here that it’s not going to be civil.

The introductory paragraph. “I simply cannot fathom how so many people manage to be wrong about so many things…” (cue laundry list of disputed topics). Okay, that’s valid, I think conservatives are wrong about a lot of things. But to publish this on a news site simply destroys any remaining piece of the site’s credibility – no longer can I expect (not that I did before, believe me) any instance of non-partisanship. Congrats.

The second paragraph. Here we get a nice little discussion on every misconception the writer can throw at us. Liberals find capital punishment far more abominable than the criminals it is performed on, because capital punishment is a sane collective populace and government doing the exact same thing that the criminal was incarcerated for. If we’re trying to get rid of murder, by murdering people, we’re accomplishing nothing. No amount of moral justification can take us off the hook for committing the same crime the now-deceased criminal has. The rest of his paragraph is blatant racism. I’m not even going to touch that.

Next paragraph is also blatant racism. It surprises me that men like this are allowed any say in any news agency – although, I suppose, they are only exercising their constitutional rights, seeing as they are members of the Constitution party, although they seem to have no idea what it says. More on that later if I think of it.

The next paragraph is about racism, torture, and more racism. Disgusting.

Of course there’s the obligatory mention of WikiLeaks, since it is, of course, attacking this man personally.

Now the next paragraph actually includes a couple facts, surprisingly. He mentions that liberals are less likely to donate to charity, or volunteer in their church or community. Perhaps, but to brand the entire political philosophy as heartless and cruel? That’s a logical fallacy; do not believe a word of it. The reason conservatives tend to give more to charity is because conservatives are more likely to be Christian, and giving money to their churches is a tenet of the Christian faith. This accounts for a very large portion of the disparity. The reason liberals view themselves as better, nicer, and more compassionate, is because liberal policy advocates compassion. Quick, think of a topic. Now, think about what conservatives think about said topic, then what liberals think about it. Which policy is the most humanitarian? Answer: the liberal one, in nearly every case. This is why liberals view themselves as compassionate. To take only donations and time into account isn’t looking at the whole picture, another logical fallacy.

“To liberals, the words published in the Times constitute Holy Scripture. They regard the paper as the Newest Testament.” I wouldn’t go that far, but liberals do expect non-biased, truthful news, which they will not be getting at your site, sir.

The next paragraph works against itself. Basically, it says that the newspaper advocated free speech to the highest level when publishing the Pentagon Papers and the WikiLeaks documents, but did no such thing when presented with the so-called “climategate” scandal emails. I wonder why that is? Oh, wait, it’s because those “scandal” emails weren’t, and because global climate change is directly due to man-made causes, and the science behind it is sound. WND is criticizing a news agency for refusing to tell lies? Now, that doesn’t make any sense at all. You’ve taken your credibility and spit on it, WND. Do not come running when you’re called out on such.

The rest is more racism, extra filth to fill out an article about nonsense.

Have a nice night. #

– adh

 

Advertisements

One response to “On Nonsense.

  1. Ugh. That was simply one of the most disgusting articles I’ve ever read. I find it unbelievable that even in this day and age, people have the audacity to be so incredibly racist and think nothing of it. The constant stereotyping used by this man, coupled with the sarcastic yet airy tone, makes this article an abhorrent piece that doesn’t deserve any credibility whatsoever. One line that particularly repulsed me was “The government, whether led by George Bush or Barack Obama, refuses even to consider racial profiling at airports, even though we all know that nearly every terrorist act in the world is committed by a young Muslim male.” The absurdity and ignorance presented in that statement is profound. I am just amazed at the amount of insensitivity and hate presented in that sentence. Thank you for posting this article; it was a real eye-opener for me to the amount of injustice and racism still present in our country.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s