Just invert the compass. Part II

Just invert the compass. Part II

By Don Hank

The goal of worldly “leaders” is not to engage the opponent but to annihilate him by any means possible. Fairness is not an issue. The mob rules.

In Philadelphia, eleven Christians were arrested and charged with the “hate crime” of peacefully reaching a group of homosexuals with the gospel.

Pastor Ake Green of Sweden was arrested and charged for a “hate crime” for preaching from a part of the Bible now banned from public discourse.

The Bible is officially a dangerous book in Sweden, but child pornographers sell their wares virtually unhindered there, while Imams freely preach wife abuse, based on Koran passages.

Likewise, an arrest warrant has recently been issued against a Brazilian youth leader who had the cheek to minister to homosexuals desirous of leaving their dangerous, spiritually empty lifestyle. Such Christian outreach ministries are now banned in Brazil and parts of Europe, where homosexuals are regarded as a “victim” group and are “protected” by legislators, presidents and other chief executives, courts and a willing propaganda machine – the perverse media – all of whom have converged against humble defenseless Bible-believing Christians, as if these meek followers of Christ were armed foreign invaders and not the last remnant of faithful spiritual descendants of the god fearing stalwarts who dominated these regions since the founding of these civilizations, bringing prosperity and stability.

As a result, pastors have been arrested (as mentioned above), and Christian homeschoolers have been arrested, fined, sometimes jailed, and often deprived of the custody of their children (Germany and Sweden), who have been ruthlessly ripped from the comfort, love, and security of homes with natural parents and subjected to the cruelest imaginable mental and spiritual torture – forced to live in foster homes together with juvenile delinquents, drug addicts, sex addicts and the like. Children typically with IQs far beyond their chronological age (having been taught by caring parents unfettered by leftist ideology and biased textbooks, and with that powerful secret ingredient of faith) are traumatized by “legal” kidnapping, snatched without warning by police or social workers, and then slowly brainwashed and taught to hate what they loved and love what they hated – socialized to believe that faith in Christ is morally equivalent to faith in Mohammed and morally inferior to Marx.

Considering the tiny percentage of true believers in Christ and their modest resources vs the almost limitless resources of the adversary — governments that can marshal trillions of dollars for their cause — it is like using an industrial press to swat a fly!

Two questions beg an answer:

1 – How can a people growing up in a “democracy,” who are taught to empathize with the poor and downtrodden, to care for the environment, and to do what is best for the collective, allow such cruelty to defenseless people of faith to occur under such an absurd and flimsy pretext as “protecting” homosexuals, particularly when such “protection” usually implies denying them vital information about the hazards of their lifestyle?

2 – What is it about this gentle man Jesus Christ, who gave his life for humanity, that makes them hate Him so much?

The answer is out of reach for the human mind, but crystal clear to the spiritually discerning.

In fact, there can be only one answer to both questions, and therein lies not only the key to understanding our world but also a note of greatest encouragement to those suffering under the ubiquitous assault on faith in our Western world.

As absurd as it may seem to the spiritually dead, the answer is that Jesus really is who He said he was, the Christ and Savior, and Satan is His adversary.

In a world that were indifferent to Christ, one might suppose that the Bible is a book of myths.

I once thought it was, having made the decision to be an atheist, giving up my Christian beliefs under the influence of a “humanities” education.

But then an odd thing happened: as a language student, I took a study tour to the USSR in the early 70s.

On the way in across the Finnish border, a Russian border guard boarded our vehicle and started asking each passenger to open their carry-on luggage. I turned around and asked one of our chaperones – a Russian émigré who taught at the University of Michigan – “what is he looking for?”

“Bibles,” she replied with a wry smile.

“Wait a minute,” I thought. “The Soviet system banned religion over 50 years ago. People here must all know that the Bible is a book of myths. How could there be a real threat from the Bible now that Christianity is expunged, unless the authorities themselves don’t really believe that the Bible is just a book of myths?”

The question contained its own answer.

Since then I have learned, in every encounter with the Left, that these people have no fear of myths. They fear only one thing: the truth.

Philosopher Olavo de Carvalho wrote an article on the Left titled “The Stucture of the Revolutionary Mind,” in which he shows that the revolutionary mind inverts everything – truth inverts to the lie and vice-versa.

You know how they say if you want to know what a corrupt politician is up to, follow the money trail?

Well, in the case of the Left, pay attention to what they say and then invert that. The result will normally be very close to the unvarnished truth.

What I am saying is very good news, my Friend.

It means that, while Biblical truth is often hard to prove, and doubts assail the Christian walk daily, we can sometimes be more sure of the truth simply by listening to the enemies of Christ and inverting their code than, say, by looking for clues in the physical world that affirm the veracity of the scriptures. If they say A, you can be sure the truth is somewhere around B, and vice-versa.

I know that I am failing to express this as well as I would like. What I have experienced in the 40 odd years since my stay in the USSR – experience piled upon experience, upon experience – is almost impossible to analyze here. Words are at best a clumsy vehicle for spiritual truth. I beg your forgiveness for my own clumsiness on top of this fact.

But I would ask you to pray for spiritual discernment.

I have heard pastors say that Christ’s truth is so simple most people miss it. They are exactly right. The world is full of rocket scientists, who have seized control of every facet of our lives, asserting without evidence that the truth is so complex and nebulous that ordinary people need them to sort things out for us – for a fee.

Paul said that the preaching of Christians in his day sounded like the ranting of madmen to the listeners.

To someone brought up in our inverted world (inverted by the Left in schools, the media, academe, professions, the DNC and GOP (they’re the same, you know)), the truth cannot but sound like ranting. Good cannot help but sound like evil and vice-versa in a world where murder of the unborn is a “right,” where politicians can “legally” steal trillions and give them to their rich banker friends, and where children imbibe Marxist impulses with their mothers’ milk.

Yet as Paul also points out, the heathen (lost) have a built-in detector for good vs evil. Something inside us tells us there is a God, there is right and wrong. Our compass points to Christ. It is only through a very major constant effort and highly structured organization (cf. “community organization”) that the adversary can keep the hand of the compass pointing south.

Remember my analogy of the anti-sun propaganda? More than anything, the constant drone of voices declaring there is no God suggests very strongly that He must be real.

So go ahead and listen to Richard Dawkins ranting against God. But don’t forget to remind yourself that Richard doth protest too much  — way too much.

Listen with spiritually enlightened ears, and you will hear the inversion of his words. The West has a broken compass that points consistently south, but you can find your way with a little trick:

Just read the compass backwards.

Just invert the compass

Just invert the compass. Part I

By Don Hank

Imagine a world in which schools, universities, the media, government, rich bankers and corporations everywhere taught that there is no such thing as the sun, and that all light and heat was generated by man-made sources. Anyone who asserted otherwise, in defiance of the major ongoing legal and propaganda efforts of these groups, would be scorned and marginalized socially so as to be practically unemployable thanks to the consensus that, as employees, such people would hold back progress with their backward views and, if working in a science-related field, would corrupt scientific thought, interfering with research. Meanwhile, ordinary people would be taxed to pay for the generation of light and heat that actually came from the sun and most would accept this taxation without complaint. Sun shields, thoughtfully dubbed “radiation blocks,” would be installed everywhere in high-concentration population centers, and there would be a ban against looking upward when spending time outdoors, based on the generally accepted notion that looking upward would harm people mentally. Indeed, the fact that such violators of this international law sometimes irrationally insisted “there really is a sun,” was incontrovertible proof that sky gazing is harmful to the mental faculties.

Anti-sun literature and political speeches written at the top universities by the best scientific minds powerfully countered claims, based on alleged sightings, that the sun existed. The most widely accepted scientific argument was that the white orb some claimed to have seen was in fact the heavenly reflection of the man-made government heat source, whose location was not disclosed due to unspecified terror threats that seemed to be cropping up everywhere.

However, in a world like that, the brightest minds, even if they had not seen the sun (in violation of the strict law forbidding sky gazing), might still suspect there was one, simply based on the principle expressed in Shakespeare’s words: methinks he doth protest too much.

Thus, the powerful, all-pervasive arguments against the existence of the sun and the cruel treatment of dissenters who theorized the sun’s existence would in themselves furnish a valuable clue as to the existence of the sun, militating against the official view.

Anyone sincerely wishing to know the truth could then eventually cut through the propaganda and free himself from the official lie.

Of course, in our world, no one could deny the existence of something so obvious as the sun.

Or could they?

Throughout the West, we are taught from little on up that our world is changing its viewpoint naturally as people gain enlightenment, which is defined as socialist progressivism and a liberalization, or even rejection, of biblical Christianity, which is seen as simply too narrow to fit modern scientific thought. Certainly, slavery and the Jim Crow laws were abolished partly due to enlightenment, and much of the progress we saw in the elimination of racism was on the grassroots level, though catalyzed somewhat by elitist voices. Lazy thinking often makes us believe that, despite the elimination of anti-black hate, much remains to be done in the area of human rights and that means acceptance of the Left’s entire platform – even virulent antifamily, anti-tradition, anti-freedom ideas promoted by radicals who hate Christianity. In other words, we must accept Marxist “progressivism” because it is a natural product of grassroots activism. Anything opposing it is “Astroturf,” or false grassroots activism paid for by rich corporations, which are, however, never named.

As a corollary to this theory, we are told that Christianity, at least in its primitive biblical form, i.e., a series of beliefs, is just melting away naturally as ordinary people see the truth.

In other words, Christianity is a series of myths, but Marxist “progressivism” is the real thing and based on science.

Yet a recently rediscovered article by Richard Wurmbrand casts a long dark shadow over this contention, showing that Marx himself was a Satanist and Lenin was also “dominated by Satanist ideology,” as were, to some extent, other major communist leaders like Stalin and Mao.

If Marx really did worship Satan, as his own earlier writings clearly suggest, then he necessarily did not ever deny the existence of God or Satan, and hence the authority of the Holy Scriptures. He simply inverted Christ’s value system, taking Satan as his god and God as his adversary.

Could it be then that Marxism, what today’s Left now calls progressivism, is not the expression of a natural decline in belief through enlightenment at all, but rather a diabolical expression of hatred toward God and His creation?

One thing is certain: For centuries, the world has been at war with Christ. Islam declared war on Christians (as well as Jews) in the 7th century, reducing Arab Christians to a state of near slavery under the tribute system of dhimmitude, where non-Muslims had to literally pay for their lives and freedom. The situation remains essentially unchanged today, and has been in fact exacerbated thanks to the Iraq War, resulting in the nearly total exodus or annihilation of Assyrian Christians in the region.

The persecution of Christians and others by false Christians plagued the Middle Ages. The Huguenots were slaughtered by the thousands. The Spanish Inquisition ruthlessly punished dissenters.

Later, Luther’s followers tortured, jailed, slaughtered and banished the Anabaptists, my ancestors, throughout most of Europe — which is why I was born in the New World.

But weren’t the participants in these pogroms against dissenters Christians?

That is a pivotal question on which everything hinges. For it they were, then Christianity, supposedly a religion marked by love and humility, is marred indelibly and has no claim to future or present legitimacy.

Yet, Jesus at no time preached hate or punishment of the unfaithful. In fact, He preached love not only for one’s neighbors but also for one’s enemies. And He gave his life to free sinners.

Nonetheless, humanist historians and academicians are almost unanimous in their condemnation of this obviously good and kind man who went to bat for sinners and never once sought to enrich himself through his teachings, which, theoretically, could have made him as wealthy as the Maharishi.

In fact, after He performed the miracle of the fishes and loaves, He immediately retreated from the crowd of 5,000 who sought to make him King, first to a mountain top and later across the Sea of Galilee. He knew these materialists were not sincere followers and told them they had come only because they had “filled their bellies.” And He warned his disciples of false teachers coming in His name. He couldn’t have been plainer.

Yet, despite these warnings by the Master himself, those who do not know Him say it is His followers who are destroying our world with fanaticism and ignorance.

But the alleged “followers” clearly fall into the category of the false teachers He warned about, deflating the Left’s claim.

For instance, one of the main arguments against Christ is the teaching that Hitler was a Christian. As shown in the recently published book “Hitler, the Holocaust and the Bible,” by Joe Keysor, this contention, while almost unanimous among historians, is erroneous and owes to the general ignorance of biblical teachings in academe. While Hitler did indeed have a working relationship with Christian leaders, both Catholic and Protestant, official Christendom had been so weakened by German theologians over more than a century before Hitler’s time that their teachings no longer embodied those of Jesus Christ. In fact, by the 1930s, “Christian” theology was so corrupt that many German clergy subscribed to the thinking of nazi theologian Walter Grundmann, who thought Christ was the illegitimate son of a Roman soldier.

But biblically oriented pastors (a small minority) boldly condemned Hitler’s treatment of the Jews and other underdog groups. Some were jailed, others paid with their lives. Thus it is grossly unfair to say that true Christianity supported Hitler.

Now, lacking a Hitler to use as a red herring, academe has found a new point of attack: They have cunningly succeeded in convincing a dumbed down world that Christianity is a persecutor of homosexuals.

This attack is based on the absurd view that a homosexual relationship, through which no children can come into the world – a relationship based on adult hedonism and sexual gratification that is directly or indirectly linked to numerous diseases – is the moral equivalent of marriage between the sexes and is equally wholesome for rearing children. This view would be readily dispelled if there could be free discussion on the subject. But in today’s world, where freedom of religious speech is being outlawed and pastors are muzzled, there can be no meaningful open debate. Almost all such debate is in fact confined to internet sites like Laigle’s Forum.

(to be continued)

Avi and the dumbing down of America

Avi and the dumbing down of America

Don Hank

My daughter Luisa was reading a story last night assigned by her English reading teacher. She complained that it was boring. It was written by that children’s reader Avi and told about a 13 year old girl in 1832 who was sailing as the only passenger on a sailing vessel. She eventually gets to be part of the crew. The captain allows her to do all kinds of dangerous things like climbing to the top of the main mast in order to prove herself.

No wonder the poor kid hated the story. It was just another example of pure feminist propaganda aimed at showing how strong — and unlady-like — women can be. The kind of propaganda the schools and kids are saturated with.

Avi had sacrificed historical accuracy for propaganda. I told Luisa that back in 1832, there was this thing called chivalry. Men never let women be exposed to danger. Any man who did that would have been scorned by everyone. Not one man in the crew would have allowed a girl to be part of their crew or to risk her life crawling around the upper structures of a ship. The ONLY way a young lady could “prove herself” in those days was to show respect and obedience and to live a chaste and godly life. That was what caused men to take off their hats in front of women and open doors for them. NOT climbing the main mast and showing them she didn’t know the difference between a man and a woman or between a kid who respected herself and others and a bratty little self-centered show off. Nor is it plausible that a girl 13 would be allowed to travel alone as the sole passenger, either then or now.

But for Avi and the academic zombies of today, this story IS accurate because it shows history as it should have been in their revolutionary minds and how the glorious future will be when “justice” happens and the downtrodden are avenged — by leftist academics. To them it is transcendent and goes far beyond the mundane world of factual detail and into that blessed Utopia they all believe in with every fiber of their being.

So there is no historical lesson, no lesson in maturity, just more empty-headed imaginings of the kind our kids are forced to read routinely by teachers steeped in Marxism and filled with revolutionary zeal. There is only one message here: radical feminism of the kind that has eroded our culture and brought us to the Age of Obama, where normalcy is demeaned and the weird is celebrated.

Avi comes from a long line of liberals and this was just part of a knee-jerk synthesis of all the leftwing nonsense he had been taught by his parents and their friends and associates all his life. Despite his desire to take on the world, he had never let his mind out of that little box of academe and knew less than nothing about history or the world around him.

Worse, he had taken it upon himself to impose his stultifying boxlike “education” on as many children as possible.

And because “educators” are mostly living in that same little box, they encourage him by buying his books and ramming them down their hapless students’ throats.

But they forgot something: kids hate this stuff.

Hoax emails part of counterrevolution

Hoax emails as part of the counter revolution

Donald Hank

This morning I got an email from a friend reporting on a nationwide bank closing next week. I didn’t know what to make of it, because I had never heard of the author or the group that originally developed the mailing, but since it predicted the bank closing for tomorrow I thought I had better find out more. I sent it under the title “Are the banks closing next week?”

If there is a bank closing next week, that will be a coincidence because the email, as it turned out, is at least a year old, according to one of my sources.

So we laugh it off and relax, right?

Not exactly.

Lately there has been a spate of hoax and semi-hoax emails making their rounds and I believe this is deliberate dysinformation. No, none of you are implicated in this, even those who have forwarded these, because you did so in good faith.

One of the tactics the far left uses is to send phony messages around, mostly by internet. The messages say things that are almost true. They reflect the machinations of the world banking community, the CFR, the Obama Administration, etc. But the dates are often wrong, the facts exaggerated, and the recipients are made to believe that none of what was mentioned in the email will ever happen. And that is the whole point.

You are supposed to believe that conservatives and libertarians are loony conspiracy theorists and that there is no CFR conspiracy to devalue the dollar and replace it with an international fiat currency. Yet we have  allseen concrete steps that would lead us in that direction — the CRA requiring banks to lend mortgages to people without jobs and documents (5 million undocumented aliens got mortgages under this plan), the complicity of the Democrat-run Fanny-Freddy and other Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs), the absurd statements by Democrat stooge Barney Frank — before the bank crash –that anyone who predicted the crash was harming America and/or was just making it up — in other words, that these rumors were part of a whacky conspiracy theory. It is astonishing how many people can be thrown off the track by this clever subterfuge, which the Left has been using liberally for over 100 years.

This latter tactic is one instance of the kind of cheap tricks that we can fully expect government (RINOs and Dems, etc) to play on us these days. And indeed, nothing could be a better indicator that such tricks are in the works than the rash of false or partially false emails now circulating on the net. So, what to do? Just dismiss all such reports and pretend there is no crisis? Of course not. Despite the mind-numbing tactics of the Left, based on a tragic flaw in human behavior and intended to make us deny the truth as seen by our own eyes, we know there is an economic crisis! In fact, Obama rode the crisis into the White House by talking incessantly about it. No, instead we must be much more vigilant now than ever before.

We — myself included — need to check the veracity of all the emails we receive. That is why I put a question mark after the title of that forward this morning. I didn’t want anyone to think I swallowed this. I wanted your input and I got it. And I thank those of you who helped me interpret it.

This is part of the counter-revolution that Andrew Thomas discusses in the article reproduced below.

Don’t panic, don’t lash out, just be careful about emails you receive and emails you forward and keep patiently resisting the bad guys.

 

Beware the Counterrevolution

By Andrew Thomas,

American Thinker, August 23, 2009

The left is already telegraphing its strategy to discredit the town hall movement. Conservatives must wise up and use a little jiujitsu of our own.

It is important to note from the start that the struggle between liberty and socialism will never end, at least not in our lifetimes.  If by chance it does, it will be because evil has triumphed.  As long as people are free to make their own choices, some of those choices will always be for self-destruction or slavery (moral masochism).  That is just the nature of human beings.  However, once the slavery of socialism is self-imposed through trickery or stealth, there are no more choices.  That is the weakness of a free people.  The weakness of socialism is that it cannot be revealed for what it truly is until it is too late to stop it.  Like all things evil, it cannot stand the light of day.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/08/beware_the_counterrevolution.html

Corporate America sells YOU for profit

Cute gecko becomes obnoxious chameleon

By Don Hank

WorldNetDaily recently reported that Glenn Beck, one of the boldest and most brilliant talk show hosts on Fox News, has been targeted by a smear campaign headed by an avowed communist now employed by the White House. The goal was to bully Glenn’s advertisers into pulling their sponsorship of his show.

It worked. Advertisers like

— CVS-Caremark

— Geico

— Sargento

–Radio Shack

— State Farm

and a host of others decided to stop sponsoring the show. One of the reasons given was that Glenn had supposedly suggested poisoning Nancy Pelosi. It was based on a perfectly harmless, hilarious spoof, and was a ridiculous claim, especially in view of the constant inflammatory remarks against conservatives made by leftwing TV hosts also sponsored by some of these companies.

A web site (http://www.defendglenn.com/) was set up to defend Glenn by contacting these companies and telling them that Glenn’s viewers will be boycotting their products if they continue to withdraw sponsorship.

Using a link from that site, I wrote as follows to several of these companies:

I understand that avowed communist bully van Jones made you a deal you couldn’t turn down and you caved by pulling your sponsorship of the Glenn Beck show. So much for standing up for freedom.
Do we just give up now and hand everything over to the communists and go quietly to the gulag?
I for one have a long memory and will not be patronizing your company. I doubt I’ll be alone.

Geico responded, saying, among other things:

If the inflammatory nature of the comments on a program overshadows our message and causes GEICO to be drawn into a national debate, we are likely to reconsider where we place our marketing messages, which is what we did.
….
As a company, we do not take positions on controversial issues.

I fired back:

If there were a controversy over whether private insurance should be nationalized and all insurance company CEOs fired and jailed, would you take part in that controversy?

But let’s cut to the chase: By pulling your sponsorship of Glenn Beck, a patriot who opposes a communist takeover of the US, in obedience to an avowed communist bully who wants to silence Beck and the rest of us dissenters, you HAVE taken part in the controversy. Because prior to the demand on the part of the communist bully Van Jones, you didn’t see anything wrong with sponsoring the Glenn Beck show so you didn’t think that defending freedom in the USA, the last bastion of freedom, was controversial.

To sum up your viewpoint, you think a patriot like Beck is inflammatory, but as for communists like Van Jones, you will obey them, and will take your business elsewhere because he said he is offended. He intimidated you too, didn’t he?

The system you just caved in to claimed close to 100 MILLION lives in Cuba, Red China, Russia, Cambodia and Vietnam, but not before enough “nice” people there decided to play along with the deadly regimes for personal gain. Without these people — whom Lenin called “useful idiots,” the tyrants could not have succeeded.

If you had opened a history book, you would realize that it is not by giving in, lying down and playing dead that this high-stakes game of freedom vs slavery is won. It is lost that way.

Very soon, if Obama has his way, there will be no more private insurance. Maybe you think Geico execs can then just go to work for the government?

Think again. You were the ones who sponsored Beck. They will never forget.

Fighting wasn’t just an option for you. It was the ONLY option.

World communism — the hardcore variety — is a step closer today.

Don Hank

http://laiglesforum.com

Suggestion: Maybe you need to switch from the gecko to the chameleon, because you have changed your colors and turned your coat.

Dear Reader: If you don’t mind taking part in a controversy, write a brief email to the companies that pulled their ads from Glenn Beck.  Let them know that treachery has a price. They can side with the enemy all they want, but no one can force we the people – yet – to buy their products.

Send your red hot email to:

zeroteam@jbcumberland.com;

info@woundedwarriorproject.org;

service@jos-a-bank.com;

toughbook_sales_support@us.panasonic.com;

info@cinergyhealth.com;

media@medco.com;

corp.communications@mckesson.com;

Sandra.Kelder@wyndhamworldwide.com;

kempt@hq.usps.org;media@aarp.org;

daryl_richard@uhc.com;laura.stein@clorox.com;

d.bernard@wsj.com;

vincent@roche.com;

media.relations@RadioShack.com;

mediarelations@pepboys.com;

btucker@adt.com;

pr@equis.com;

customerservice@gold101.com;

info@60plus.org;

media.help@apple.com;

mjaronski@darden.com;

tyler.mason@phs.com;

customer.service@ups.com;

kdoria@scottrade.com;

info@sepracor.com;

webtest@geicomail.com

And keep checking the DefendGlenn.com site for further updates.

Further commentary on Glenn Beck vs sponsors:

Geico complains about the “inflammatory nature of the comments on a program” overshadowing “our message and causing GEICO to be drawn into a national debate.”

Interesting, because Geico sponsors several far-left talk shows, including that of Rachel Maddow, who drag us all into sordid one-sided debates. Just for starters, Maddow singled out and criticized black people in particular who resisted the obligation to stay on the Democrat plantation and voted against same-sex “marriage.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rwlrp7AQtyQ&feature=related

Rachel Maddow calls white guys racist because they think Obama is a racist. She says when they accuse Obama of being a racist, that is “racial invective.” So, Geico, is there an assumption here that no black person could possibly hate whites? If so, what do you base that assumption on? Is there a study, for ex, showing that black people are incapable of hating white people? What about those blacks who SAY they hate whites? Are they lying? What about Hispanic Aztlan kooks who say they want white Americans out of their country? What about “liberals” – white and black — who hate white people enough to take away their rights to work and go to college based on achievement and make it all about race? How is that possibly not anti-white racism in anyone else’s world but Rachel’s tiny one? And how is it not inflammatory? Geico? Are you out there?

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/rachel-maddow-gops-overt-racism

But worse, Rachel actually indirectly threatens Geico’s entire industry, by supporting the now very unpopular and controversial Obamacare plan, which ultimately would inevitably result in an exclusively government run health insurance industry.  How is promoting the abolition of the insurance industry not “overshadowing your message,” Geico?

But let me help you orient your thinking here, Geico:  It is not so much the inflammatory nature of a commentator’s comments, but rather their factual vs non-factual nature that inflames. Rachel is so far removed from the reality of ordinary Americans, the ones who buy your insurance (remember them?), that her show is a constant source of inflammation to us. She may not have the same kind of eccentric humoristic genius that Beck does, but she is abrasive to the tender sentiments of millions of Americans who love our way of life and are sick and tired of people like her trying to malign it and mock our values.

So if Geico is going to pull the plug on the infinitely more sane, talented and rational Beck for telling a joke that is controversial or inflammatory, then they should have pulled Rachel’s plug a long time ago because she is not just picking on a far-left congress person but on every decent American.

Nancy Pelosi, whose Senate demeanor proves she has tyrannical tendencies, is just as abrasive and inflammatory as Rachel, whom Geico sponsors, and annoys decent Americans with common sense much more than Beck, whom Geico maligns, and yet it is precisely because of his poignant words about Nancy that they say caused them to pull out of his show.

This becomes comprehensible only if one considers how scary the White House avowed communist Van Jones is and how terrified Geico must have been when this cowardly bully pulled the race card, the cheapest trick in the book, on Geico and Beck. Geico lacked the spine, the cool and the wits to stand their ground and defend one of the last great Americans standing in a losing battle for our rights. And for that they deserve to be disgraced and face the potential loss of customers.

BTW, I have heard time and time again that the Gecko does not measure up  pricewise to at least one other insurance company, and I  urge anyone now insured by Geico to think again, go back to the drawing board. It strains the credulity to believe that any company that shells out that kind of money to advertisers can possibly offer the best deal in town, no matter what they say.

But here are some real questions behind the obfuscation:

Why was Beck the only commentator who pointed out that there’s a commie in the White House? And how long will America tolerate the untenable situation of an enemy on the public payroll?

And why aren’t these the issues we are debating, instead of whether somebody’s joke went too far for proper etiquette?

Finally, it is conservatives and libertarians who most staunchly defend capitalism. Yet the traitor list above shows that perhaps the majority of big business elites aren’t worth defending because they readily sell out our cause when they think we hurt their bottom line. Let’s be careful in our evaluation of capitalism. I almost never use that word any more, because I have seen that, when it comes to Big Business, business and government are in bed with each other in most cases, and that is not pure capitalism. It has another name: fascism.

Let’s use the term “free market,” and let’s recall that the kind of businesses who pulled their ads from Glenn do not fall into that category.