Rusty Humphries is a Fascist

Rusty Humphries is a disturbed individual. He sought to express to his audience today that for the first time since his wife passed away, a year ago, he felt as if tears would well up into his eyes. What caused him this moment of anguish and misery equal to the loss of a loved one? The images of recently released Guantanamo Bay terror suspects, referred to as “Uighurs,” to Bermuda.

One more radio pundit has lost his mind in the age of a return to American justice and the US Constitution being enacted under President Barack Obama. The partisan hate and ignorance of the fundamental values of American Democracy is disturbing and leads to only one conclusion: Rusty Humphries supports totalitarian-fascist policies for the U.S.

RUSTBUCKET: “These guys [Uighurs] had every intention of doing terrorist acts on China.”

One has to prove this in a court of law if you intend to detain any person. Innocent until proven guilty is a fundamental difference between American and Fascist Ideals.

RUSTBUCKET: “China has made it clear they will execute and make example of all terrorists.”

This is true. They are also a nation guilty of endless human rights atrocities. It is clear to me that this particular radio-jockey is a pro-fascist and anti-democratic pundit.

This is the U.S., not China.

Those who lose their country seek to protect the U.S. Constitution.

Those who love fascism seek to defend torture and detainment without trial.

His hatred for President Obama and all things American is so great, and so vastly partisan, that he continues to jeopardize and threaten the nation with his dangerous and unconstitutional rhetoric.

Dispelling the Myths of ‘Secret Societies’

Whatever ‘facts’ and ‘patterns’ that conspiracy theorists claim to see in global economic and political events the burden of proof remains on the people presenting this idea to the public. Every logical retort and request for scientific evidence of an active ‘secret assembly’ between geopolitical leaders across the world and markets is met with vague facts and illogical responses. The method of debunking this is, in view, best done with an example of how easy it is to fabricate these myths by creating my own:

:: The Creed ::

The Creed are as old as human history. They met in secret to agree on principals and social standards at the beginning of every human society; their numbers dictated by bloodline. Every person you see today in the media or in politics belongs to the Creed. They set the standards of speech, manners and ethics in every society. They make history and all political movements out of there desires and whims, on any given day.

The Creed is sworn to silence over this. They will never admit that when you didn’t hear them speak that they were speaking with another of the Creed. You can’t get any journalist nor academic nor politician to ever admit to the truth of the Creed.

Only the just and righteous common man, like myself, may bring you this ultimate truth. Only we the repressed and abandoned by our tyrannical government could possibly know this truth and accept it into our beings.

::::::::::::::::::::::

However, I am not without realization of what this means to present this idea to someone who has already invested themselves into these theories and possibly even money into the entire conspiracy. I am essentially saying that they were duped.

This no doubt stings and makes some rationale toward a person being defensive. But the fact remains that any person subscribing to this illogical thinking is being mislead by members of a ’creed’ that makes money from drumming up people’s fears about government.

Let there increased profits in this atmosphere of political hate burn their fingertips.

There is no need to plant a ‘crisis garden’ or build a ‘fallout shelter’ now, than there ever was in any previous scare-tactic campaign. These groups seek to use the use of non-hybridized seed cultures as political tool but it is simply fact that non-modified food is better than modified. It has nothing to do with anything except food quality.

In conclusion, while figures like George Noory of Coast to Coast AM support the theory of a New World Order Conspiracy with dignity and respect the majority of the proponents are hostile, illogical men like Alex Jones. The Anti-Obama partisan Jerome Corsi and Jones tried to get Noory to denounce the presidency of Barack Obama on air. They were rightly rebuffed in this attempt to demean the career of George Noory with their disrespectful lies. By ignoring the issue the mass media only allows the whole matter to get out of hand. I would like to see a deep exposé on both Jerome Corsi and Alex Jones done by a reputable news agency.

There Will Be No Radio Fairness Doctrine

PresidentBillClintonMay282003Disk2074Former President Bill Clinton can now be added to the list of big name Democrats that have eluded to or outright mentioned the Fairness Doctrine in radio-media.

I will boldly speak out turn and say now that there shall not a return to the arcane legislation of the Fairness Doctrine where an opposing opinion must be made time for after any political opinion is expressed.

Though John Kerry, Bill Clinton and other figures speak of a need for media regulation I think the issue was already addressed by President Obama when he requested that conservatives stray away from partisanship like that of The Radio Comedian Rush Limbaugh.

This is the clear stance of this administration that partisanship is any form is counter productive in politics. The partisanship found on FOX Network airwaves and conservative-talk radio was challenged thusly by the Executive Branch. I see no moves from this office toward this matter beyond what we have already witnessed.

This issue simply doesn’t rate high enough on the presidential ‘to do list.’ The outcries from the far right wing that this inane legislation from days gone by are paranoid delusions created to fabricate the image of ’persecuted’ conservatives.

The right to Freedom of Speech has always challenged Americans in terms of what they will accept in terms of their politics and their news media. Those like myself who have educated themselves on some aspects of modern media know about the Radio Fair and Equal Rule.

In the Fair and Equal Rule a political campaign that receives airtime must have due consideration and / or equal airtime.

I foresee no threat to the talk radio medium spreading further into FM, satellite and internet formats.

Though I also would not predict any ‘explosions’ of talk radio, but rather just a gradual integration. The Politic-Talk Medium will always remain, no matter what paranoid conservative pundits say.

Global Warming: Politi-Science or Fact?

Let’s crack this egg wide open.

Here’s what I understand so far:

————————————————————

Years back, a group of scientists came together and presented a case to the world based on their work.

 

They sought to show essentially three items:

 

a) Carbon Dioxide (CO2) gases are increasing due to human action.

 

b) CO2 causes a green-house gas effect that causes global warming. Global warming causes extreme climate change including extreme colds, warms and weather.

 

c) Unless CO2 levels decrease worldwide the planet will be damaged beyond a repairable state.

————————————————————

Now another group of scientists recently came out to try to disprove the ‘global warming agenda’ citing their own evidence.

 

They are seeking to show essentially these three items:

 

a) CO2 is a natural gas that is less harmful to environment than reported previously. Harmful gases such Carbon Monoxide should fall under government regulation but not CO2.

 

b) They have studied the green-house gas effect data presented and do not concur that this is the cause of climate change. The planet is undergoing cyclical changes not recorded previously due to lack of technology required. 

 

c) CO2 levels and their mandated decrease is ‘politicizing science’ and not a scientific agenda but rather an anti-industry agenda.

————————————————————

 

I don’t pretend to have all the facts on this but I’ve listened to a lot of commentary on it, I can assure you.

 

The bottom line is that no significant figure in any government is coming forward about the one important issue to address:

 

CAN WE LIMIT CO2 GAS EMISSIONS AND CONTINUE TO GROW AS AN INDUSTRIAL NATION?

 

Those versed in this topic will know that certain major super-power nations (China & Russia) refuse to participate in carbon credit programs or CO2 gas mandates on their industries.

 

They believe that regulating such gases will cause a loss of profit necessary to maintain their populations. Or a similar case made in defense of themselves.

 

I would like to take the time and read both of these studies and all the data and every professional I can find who ever said / wrote anything about it. But this is what I see. One side brings a valid argument about how far we can do these actions and remain strong in industry and the other side brings a valid point that once enough damage is done in ignorance there is no return from ruin.

 

Michael Crichton, famed author, held the opinion before his death in 2008 that the combining of politics and science was something he saw as very possible in coming years and very dangerous in its nature. I tend to agree with the author of “Jurassic Park” but I don’t know if I fully trust some internet downloaded research data, and I’m not flying of to foreign countries to gather up all the documents either.

 

I just want to focus on empirical evidence when we talk science and focus on personal conviction when he talk politics. That’s all. Is that some crazy request?

 

I feel it important for those who didn’t know to know that the worldwide scientific community accepts the idea of green house gases effecting current climate changes.

 

————————————————————

 

And let us not forget the pure-politics side of this:

 

Former American Vice-President Al Gore of the Democratic Party has run up the ideological hill and he is not coming back down on this one.

 

He is behind the ‘carbon credit’ concept along with others. Gore remains one of the most controversial figures in certain circles of America because of his intractability on the global warming crisis-issue.

 

The Republican Party, long before any but bought-off scientists said word one on global warming, decried the whole thing a myth created in some liberal agenda book or manifested by what some called ‘religious-environmentalism.’

 

The study I mention are not bought-off scientists, as far my informational sources provide, but rather simply dissenting scientists from the group of scientists that initially presented the whole concept.

 

In the campaign for The White House this year (2008) each campaign had the same line on global warming:

 

“We need to do something about global climate change.”

 

The critical thing to know is that the vocal conservatives, prior to the RNC speech of John McCain where he directly addressed global warming, there was a constant smearing and mocking attitude of people who wanted to speak out on this issue of climate change. Then all of sudden they just stopped talking about it and mocking anyone about that. Not one more mention of those ‘crazy global warming kooks,’ for quite a long time.

 

I tend to believe they and most outspoken-Republicans did was actually read what I read when it came out like 8 years ago and now I can’t remember the name of. The Global Warming Treaty let’s call it for now, because that’s easy for me.

 

Another strange hush-factor that struck the limited-conservatives during the campaign is the whole immigration issue.

 

That’s another issue entirely but both candidates and the right-wing media just completely shut their traps on that issue, almost entirely to date.

 

The only reason it’s significant to bring up is that these loons that call others ‘Enviro-Nazis’ also bashed anyone who didn’t want to ‘kick the bums out of my country.’ They did this ten-fold on John McCain when he sought some kind of solution oriented legislation on the issue. Now they feel better about starting those old lines up again but nobody seems to want to actually do anything about it over in what I hear from Republican-land.

 

It is like a willingness to shove your head in the sand as far it will go. Then leave it there for the course of an entire campaign.

 

Evidence that the Republican Party is willing to engage in not only ‘Politi-science’ tactics but to a willing blindness to anything that is a serious issue in the nation. 

 

They just want to talk about homosexuality or atheism while we go broke and choke to death.

 

 

Eric Lightborn

http://americapress.wordpress.com

December 22nd 2008

Media Bias Effects You Everyday

Let’s talk about the news media:



A lot of people on the internet are highly active in political commentary, but there is much to consider in the realms of social policy and being more than just a mere echo-box for party-line agendas.

In an article on The Huffington Post, Colin Powell addresses the nature of Rush Limbaugh doing harm to the Republican and conservative movements.

I am no fan of Limbaugh but I want to be very clear about the nature of my distaste. Limbaugh is by all shades of the definition a “master broadcaster” that is highly professional in the manner in which he handles material.

I would challenge anyone to say the same statement about Powell’s endorsement of Obama in different words and not sound explicitly racist in the process. Limbaugh has way of taking the hurtful and hateful and converting it into somewhat-tasteful baloney.

The title of “master broadcaster” is not shared by his clones within the radio media, by my estimation. Slander and false claims don’t amount to anything but a waste of everyone’s time.

Then we return to the concept of why we should care about media figures and what they say or do. No matter what your political leanings are if you have some then you are doing yourself a disservice by viewing only media that agrees with your core values.

I can be made extremely angry by comments made on the radio but I can also turn it off.

We have “freedom of media” in this country which means it is up to you, if you vote, to get the real deal story and not just buy what they sell at your political party gift shop.

This is far easier to start than you think. Just start taking time to consider how much of each side you have heard in your day and attempt to fit the opposite point of view through the media into the end of your day.

Local radio hosts tend to be less biased than national on both political sides, try tuning in to your local AM stations.

Failing everything else you can just click between Fox News and MSNBC instead of locking-in to one or the other.

If anyone thinks this issue is extremely unimportant or bad advise I say to you that we killing this country in partisan politics mainly because of the absolute loss of perspective from slanted media on every side.

We will lose this country with these attitudes, if not for yourself then certainly we must do this for our children.