| March 2010 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | |||
Evan Sayet's YouTube video already had 18,000 views yesterday morning, before it was linked by Drudge. Today it has over 120,000 views.
It's also currently ranked as the #5 Top YouTube Favorite for the Month in News & Politics. It's got over 700 comments. What is making this video so hot? Let's take a look at a few excerpts:
The modern liberal will invariably side with evil over good, wrong over right, and the behaviors that lead to failure over those that lead to success. Give the modern liberal the choice between Saddam Hussein and the United States, he will not only side with Saddam Hussein, he will slander America and Americans in order to do so. Given the choice between the vicious, mass-murdering, corrupt terrorist dictator Yasser Arafat, and the tiny and wonderful democracy of Israel, he will plagiarize maps, forge documents, engage in blood libels, as did our former President, Jimmy Carter, to side with a terrorist organization, and to attack the tiny state.
......how do they think they're making better world, by siding with Saddam Hussein, by keeping his rape and torture rooms open, by seeking the destruction of a democracy of Jews that, I don't know if you've seen the list going around on the Internet, of all the Nobel Prize-winning scientists from this tiny state of Israel. How do they think they're making a better world by promoting to children, behaviors that are inappropriate and cause diseases and unwanted pregnancies and ruin people's lives? How do they think they're making a better world?
What I discovered is, the modern liberal looks back on - give me a number here - 50,000 years, 100,000 years of human civilization - and knows only one thing for sure: that none of the ideas that mankind has come up with - none of the religions, none of the philosophies, none of the ideologies, none of the forms of government - none have succeeded in creating a world devoid of war, poverty, crime and injustice. So they're convinced, that since all of these ideas of man have proved to be wrong, the real cause of war, poverty, crime and injustice must be found - can only be found - in the attempt to be right. See if nobody ever thought they were right, what would we have to disagree about? If we didn't disagree, surely we wouldn't fight. If we didn't fight of course we wouldn't go to war. Without war there'd be no poverty, without poverty, there'd be no crime, without crime there'd be no injustice. It's a utopian vision. And all that's required to usher in this utopia, is the rejection of all fact, reason, evidence, logic, truth, morality and decency. All the tools that you and I use in our attempts to be better people, to make the world more right, by trying to be right, by siding with right, by recognizing what is right, and moving towards it.
......So what you have is people who feel that the best way to eliminate rational thought, the best way to eliminate the attempt to be right, is to work always to prove that right isn't right, and to prove that wrong isnt' wrong. To bring about a philosophy - and you see this in John Lennon's song, "Imagine." "Imagine there's no countries." Not "imagine great countries." Not "imagine defeat the Nazis."
"Imagine no religions." And the key line is imagine a time when anything and everything that mankind values - is devalued to the point where there's "nothing left to kill or die for."
Obviously this is not going to happen overnight. There's still going to be religions - but they're going to do their best to denigrate them. There are still going to be countries, but they're going to do their best to get us to cede our sovereignty to one-world bodies.
But in the meantime, everything they believe is designed - everything they teach in our schools, everything they make into movies, the messages of the movies - the TV shows - the newspaper stories that they pick, and how they spin them - have but one criterion for truth, beauty, honesty, etc. etc. - and that's, does it tear down what is good, and elevate what is evil. Does it tear down what is right, and elevate what is wrong. Does it tear down the behaviors that lead to success, and elevate the ones that lead to failure, until there's nothing left to believe in.
...There is no standard to them, because a standard would require them to say that something is better than something else, which goes against this entire philosophy.
(View the video for much more, including the many examples Evan provides, as well as the brilliant metaphor he opens with, regarding a man who says he hates his wife, and whose friend habitually assumes he is joking.)
What's making this hot, may be one of the same things that's making the movie 300 so hot - i.e., the proposition that there is good, there is evil, there is right, there is wrong, and that we have the ability to distinguish between them and to champion what is right and good, and to oppose what is wrong and evil.
Sayet brilliantly identifies that today's Liberals refuse to say that something is better than something else - and that they consistently seek to tear down those who are doing good, and to build up those who are doing evil.
I encountered an example of this, this very morning. I was recently talking to my friend, A.T., and telling him about the danger France (and all of Europe) is in, from radical Islamists, who seek to destroy European culture, and replace it with Sharia culture. This morning A.T. called up and said he's discussed this with a friend of his, a reporter for NPR, and she had said that the Muslims in France are oppressed, that they are denied rights, and that is the reason for their riots. The NPR reporter provided a perfect example of what Sayet describes. She did not express one word of condemnation of the Muslims for their evil burning of thousands of cars in France, or for their violent attacks on the Jews of France, as noted in this recent Miami Herald article. On the contrary, she took their side. She supported those who are doing evil, violent attacks. She showed no support for the people of France who are being attacked.
A.T. immediately agreed with me that seeking for rights would not justify these violent attacks on people and property. (I asked A.T. to ask his NPR reporter friend to provide links to me to
document her assertion that Muslims in France are denied rights.)
Sayet's views are immediately applicable to what we see around us. Try it out.
