Government Cheese

Because They Are Poisoning Us

My Photo
Location: The Dominion of Canuckistan

I'm just another self-important loudmouth polluting the blogosphere...You?

Friday, May 13, 2005

Big Fat Liars

One of the problems with being an Internet blowhard these days is that there are so many other, smarter people who have already written exactly what you want to say.

Here is a comprehensive, if rather wordy, article by Gary Taubes originally published in the New York Times, AKA the so-called “Newspaper of Record”.

Publication in the Times doesn’t necessarily mean the article is entirely factual, of course, (although it is), but its presence on the Old Gray pages is significant in that the MainStream Media finally woke up to the success of low-glycemic diets.

Actually my money says they realized Lo-Carb plans like Atkins and The Zone work considerably earlier than they reported, but, like the Coalition’s success in Afghanistan and Iraq, the NYT and the rest of the MSM could no longer ignore the elephant in the headlines.

Maureen Dowd is, or looks like, one of the millions of women who have not eaten bread since the mid-nineties. She and her cohorts were sharing their low-carbohydrate secrets with each other, privately working on future juicy news stories that would criticize the overgrown federal government and its unnecessary spending, its departments that not only have it all wrong and that spend millions of tax dollars on bad research, but that are actually killing Americans.

As Taubes writes, “…[T]he public health authorities told us…to eat precisely those foods that would make us fat, and we did.” Stop the presses! The people have a right to know!

But that was the ‘Nineties. Those, alas, were the Clinton years. What could the compliant media do about it? The scoop of a lifetime would have to be shelved until the Democrats lost the White House.

Yes, MoDo & Co. had to wait for a Republican administration, one worthy of their scorn, before the NYT would expose even a small department within the U.S. Government as presenting falsehoods to the American people. When Clinton was in office, the Justice Department incinerated over seventy citizens in Waco, Texas, and sent storm-troopers into a private Florida residence to rip a crying, frightened child from the arms of his loved ones in order to ship the kid back to a slave state, and the liberals reported that the Clinton administration was protecting family values.

The Republicans manage the budget now. Now it is time for the media to uncover all that is corrupt and dangerous in the government. When they are not busy throwing around words like “quagmire”, “unwinnable”, or “murky”, the MSM will run an article like Mr. Taubes’, accusing of treachery yet another cell of the deceptive Bush/Cheney/Enron/Halliburton death machine.

The low-fat, high-carb conventional wisdom the above-linked article criticizes was presented to an American public nearly thirty years ago, designed largely by a failed politician, the biggest loser in major party Presidential electoral history, and the most enemy-appeasing, tax-and-spending, radical-accommodating liberal Democrat in our lifetime, George Stanley McGovern.

(Yet don’t hold your breath for the NYT headline, “McGOVERN LIED, KIDS DIED”.)

McGovern: Poster Child of Defeatism

Yes, people, George McGovern. The one-time Democratic Party’s only hope for complete socialist surrender, whose only campaign promise for the Presidency was that he would wave the white flag and run away from our allies in South Vietnam even faster than any of his opponents.

Like Kerry and Edwards, McGovern, and his running mate Robert Sargent Shriver, must have failed to “get their message out” because he only won the District and one state (Massachusetts, not even his home state of Tennessee, uh, South Dakota) versus Nixon’s 49.

So overwhelming was Nixon’s 1972 sweep of the nation’s electorate, liberals insisted it was fixed; like O.J.’s DNA evidence, such an unbelievable amount was, well, unbelievable. (They would do the same in 2000, but, for some reason, did not bother to recount Cook County ballots in 1960)

The Washington Post had to run a series of stories about a bungled wiretapping perpetrated against the Democrat National Committee’s headquarters in the Watergate Hotel by some low-rent wannabe spies who were purportedly hired by Nixon’s Committee to Re-Elect the President (CReEP), and tied their investigation together loosely in an attempt to prove that the Republicans cheated on the election. If the White House could be linked by a money trail to the break-in, the poll results of Nixon’s extreme victory could be explained as subterfuge rather than what it was, the voice of the American people enjoying open elections in wartime.

Yes, that’s it. Voters did not turn out that November to elect the more stable, if somewhat flawed, sitting President who had promised to regain some of America’s dignity by honorably wrapping up our involvement in the U.N. action in southeast Asia, our obligation to an ally.

Voters instead must have gone to the polls to elect the South Dakota Senator who had served as J.F.K.’s Special Assistant, who had poisoned the world’s poorest cultures with cheap American white flour pap, hydrogenated shortening and powdered milk, who had promised to “bring the boys home” despite the fact that over eighty-five percent of the American people favored the war, and despite the certain fall of an ally to an enemy totalitarian regime.

Voters instead were disenfranchised, their ballots manipulated, substituted. The election results were so skewed it was obvious the other guys must have pulled a fast one!

(Had the Watergate break-in succeeded as planned, had the DNC leadership been bugged, their secret strategeries discovered by CReEP, and counter-measures effectively been implemented into Republican campaign tactics, does anyone really think that McGovern’s defeat in ’72 would have been any less humiliating? If he had doubled, even quadrupled his votes, would it have made a difference? And if so, do not let us forget that the break-in was foiled. If a 17-to-520 loss is how you do when you disarm your opponents’ secret weapon, imagine the results if you don’t catch them red-handed!)

So the reason the election results did not reflect the opinion of the oligarchic editorial boards of the Times and the Post must be, can only be, that those mean Republicans cheated.

The MSM has been brainwashing their audience with this fiction ever since.

Next: McGovern: Poster Child of Insufficient Funds


Anonymous Anonymous said...

What are you some kind of right wing reactionary?!
Keep it up! We need more

12:23 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home