Media bias, anyone?

There is plenty to criticize when it comes to Conservative thinkers... but for now, the Liberals have me booked, as they by-far take the cake on insanity. For example:

Did you know that a former chairman of the ACLU was recently arrested on child-porn charges?

Really? Neither did I, until I stumbled upon it by accident.

Tell the average liberal that they own the media, and you'll get a response like "that's ridiculous! What about talk radio? What about Fox News?"

Ok.. so Fox News is ONE conservative television station. That makes it one against... 200 or so? At least we've got a start to balancing things out. I will agree that there is a lot of conservative talk radio, though that will last only as long as the liberals are held off from passing their "fairness" guidelines for political radio.

So, the former chairman of th ACLU -- the man who used his organizations to defend Pedophiles and groups like NAMBLA while working against religious rights -- is behind bars for child pornography posession. Yet, the media remains silent.

A little while back, three former presidents of the American Psychological Association signed a document which stated that the afformentioned organization was acting off of political pressure --and not any kind of science -- when it struck homosexuality from its list of mental disorders. (Note: to this day, no research has been given to justify this decision.) Did this make the news? Nope. It doesn't matter what your thoughts on the matter are -- these are important people, making an important statement in an area that deserves reexamination and healthy debate. But the media is terrified to touch it.

But Ann Coulter -- the Conservative Queen of Nasty Remarks -- calls John Edwards a "faggot", and we have a National Media Meltdown. Does this strike anyone else but me as ridiculous?

Suddenly, the cries of "homophobia" and "bigotry" are tossed around. First off: "bigotry", by its very nature, is an accusation that can applied to any person with strong beliefs. Look it up. "Homophobia," to the best of my knowledge, does not exist. Until I see a person involuntarily flinch -- or go running in terror -- at the sight of a homosexual, I will not believe it. It's merely a catchy word to throw at people that don't believe in your political ideology or moral stance.

A "faggot", by the way, is a bundle of wood, thrown onto a flame to make it go higher. Hence the use of it to apply to certain types of "folks" by more religiously traditional-minded folks.

I think Coulter said her piece on PURPOSE -- this was no slip. She is probably quite aware of the recent political environment surrounding the left, especially after the feel-good leftist Oscars. She felt the need to stem the tide, in her own little Coulter-way. Good for her. To do otherwise would make us like Canada, where Coulter would have been arrested. (side note: I have a Priest friend in Canada, who is unable to even read the Bible passages which condemn homosexuality out-loud. They've actually gone into the anti-Communist playbook from mid-20th century Europe, to find ways around the unjust Censorship.)

So, yes, I do believe that Ann Coulter was out of line....

Judging by the actual meaning of the word, I think Howard Dean would have been a much better target for her comments.