I have no problem with O'Reilly calling this guy a baby
Posted By: killer...... HE WAS!!!! NM on 2009-06-02
In Reply to: Think about this...(sm) - Just the big bad
--
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
as a mother I would not subject my baby, or anyone's baby
to that type of situation. but then again, I am not the kind of mother who agrees with the village raising the child, or whatever Hillary used to say. to me the child's safety would come first above and beyond what I was doing, and I would not expose the baby to all that. that is just me.
mostly I am talking about at the end of her speech when the baby was being passed around and then she eventually grabbed him, half paying attention to him.
it is my opinion but I found it a little troubling and my heart kind of went out to that little baby.
Name calling? Point out 1 instance of "nasty name calling" in response to your posts
Your childlike accusations are patently false - but you are indeed welcome to your own opinion. I just don't have to agree.
O'reilly
I cant stand to watch O'Reilly, he tries to portray that he knows everything and yet he is just a blow-hard..Someone who professes to know all but knows nothing..
I
He was on O'Reilly
last night and he didn't say he wanted the elderly to fend for themselves. He said that their benefits should be cut back because people are drawing out much more than what they paid in and it is going the bankrupt the whole thing. I know it doesn't exactly sound pleasant to say but he is right in the fact that some people are getting twice as much as what they paid in and there won't be anything left for those of us paying into the system now. Yes, the elderly paid their dues but why should they get twice as much what they paid in when the working class who is contributing to it now for when we get older...we WILL have to fend for ourselves because there will be nothing.
I don't watch O'Reilly. ?????
duh
O'Reilly quitting?
O'Reilly quitting, Woo..Hoo..Watch Olbermann dance around his desk, LOL!
O'Reilly can't be trusted
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/06/01.html#a8537
The right jumped all over Dan Rather when he made a mistake one time, yet they don't even whimper over something even more irresponsible and egregious happening twice with O'Reilly.
Obama/O'Reilly
BIll O'Reilly is a mysoginistic, race-baiting bigot who believes that everyone who is a guest on his show should kiss HIS butt. IMO he gives real journalists a really bad image and should have been kicked off Fox eons ago
He patiently sat with O'Reilly
I don;t think he should have done that. To pretend that Fox is actually a news outlet does the voters a disservice. But hey, that;s the kind of guy he is.
Frank/O'Reilly
I was cheering that Bill is BACK! I've been fit to be tied over his lingering lethargy for the last period of months, and have written to complain, too.
There's a lot more on the web about Barney Frank and how filthy he is (in more ways than 1) this whole thing. He should've been put in jail along with Chris Dodd and Palsen, etc. Barney Frank's former lover worked for this outfit before they split many years ago. I've read so much on it that I don't recall which place I read it, but obviously you won't find any of this investigative stuff on the driveby channels. Even FNC doesn't put some stuff out there, which ticks me off. But I find it, anyway between the conservative blogs, sites, talk radio, etc. And these sources can be easily checked, so the libs can throw all the hissy fits they want. If they honestly think it's okay to give literally ANY party a free pass just b/c it has your letter or preference behind it, that's just nuts! I'm dying to clean out the RINOs in "my" party. They don't belong there.
O'Reilly yesterday
Did you see O'Reilly yesterday, it was hysterical watching Joys face and hand motions
Coulter vs. O'Reilly...(sm)
Okay, I almost laughed myself to death watching these two morons go at it last night. My favorite part of the interview would have to be:
COULTER: No. No. I said more books.
O'REILLY: I sell more books than you do.
COULTER: No, you don't.
O'REILLY: Yes, I do.
COULTER: No, you don't.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,478046,00.html
O'Reilly said last night that
Barney will be on the factor tonight. Barney Frank is a moron and a crook. I also wish he would buy himself some teeth. Surely he makes enough money to get a decent pair of dentures.
O'Reilly: Twisted spin, again.
A quote:
O'REILLY: Massive neglect? Let's take a look at that bit of overstatement. Halfway through President Clinton's tenure in office, the poverty rate was 13.7%. Halfway through President Bush's tenure the rate is 12.7, a full point lower.
[COMMENT According to statistics obtained from the U. S. Census site, when Bill Clinton began his term as President in 1993, the poverty rate was 15.1%. By the time Clinton left office the poverty rate was 11.7%. By 2002, under George Bush the rate began to rise again to 12.1% in 2002, 12.5% in 2003 and 12.7% in 2004.
According to the Christian Science Monitor this most recent increase was unforeseen by analysts who expected the number to drop along with unemployment and may indicate a disturbing trend. While the poverty level for Asians declined and it remained stable for Hispanics and African-Americans, the only group that saw an increase was non-Hispanic white Americans living in the midwest. In other words there are 1.1 million poorer red state residents this year than there were last year.]
O'REILLY: In 1996 the Clinton budget allotted $191 billion for poverty entitlements. That was 12.2% of the budget. ... However, the Bush 2006 budget allots a record-shattering $368 billion for poverty entitlements - 14.6% of the entire budget - a huge increase over Clinton's spending. Did the elite media mention that? Jesse Jackson mention that? Of course they didn't. Because it's much more convenient for Evan Thomas and others to imply that America under President Bush has turned its back on the poor. But it's absolute nonsense. Even in the midst of the war on terror [Note: Did he mean the war of choice in Iraq?], this country is spending a massive amount of money tryin' to help the poor. So why the lie? Because political gain can be made off the suffering of others, that's why. Those who oppose the Bush administration don't care about the truth. They only want to advance their own agenda, so once again the No-Spin zone rides to the rescue.
Hard-working Americans are providing the poor with Medicaid, food stamps, supplemental security income - that's free money - child nutrition programs, welfare payments, child daycare payments, temporary assistance to needy families, foster care, adoption assistance and health insurance for children. But, it will never be enough for the Jesse Jacksons and Howard Deans of the world. Never! If they told you the truth, they'd go out of business.
Now, I fully expect to be attacked by the far-left media for tellin' you all this. I'm sure they'll label me a racist, a shill for Bush, stuff like that. But, I don't care. The dollars don't lie. We are a generous nation. And that is the truth.
COMMENT
Most of the poor in this country WORK, many of them hold down two and three jobs. If you want to read a damning book on this topic, I suggest you get Barbara Ehrenreich's Nickeled and Dimed: On (Not) Getting by in America. Ms. Ehrenreich went underground and worked at minimum wage jobs for a year. She discovered a few unpleasant facts about life on the lower rungs of the economic ladder. Self-satisfied, replete, rich men like Bill O'Reilly sit in their posh offices and scare hard-working Americans into believing that their taxes go to indigent scofflaws who sit at home guzzling beer, smoking pot, eating chips and watching TV. Those of us closer to homelessness know this is not the case.
When he mentioned that SSI (social security supplemental income) is free money, he neglected to say that it is money that goes to disabled Americans or that providing health coverage for children reduces trips to the emergency room!
Sometimes I wonder how many poor people Mr. O'Reilly actually knows or has associated with on a long-term basis? For the past 15 years I've been involved in a local program that offers music scholarship to needy families. In that time I've taught 7 different children from 7 different poverty situations and I came to know the families personally. Most of the adults in the family work really hard. Sometimes the kids worked, too, after school. Some had parents trying to break a drug habit (yes, they held down a job) or schizophrenic parents (who were incapable of working) or an abusive parent (who worked, then took it out on the family), but most were blessed with caring parents who were doing the best to provide for their children against almost impossible odds.
So when I hear guys like O'Reilly spout their simplistic tripe implying that the poor are sucking the lifeblood out of hard-working Americans, I see red.
Also, I don't trust O'Reilly's numbers on entitlement programs simply because he never once used the words inflation-adjusted dollars. If he was simply quoting raw numbers, I'd like to remind him that 15 years ago the dollar went farther. Additionally, he did not indicate through graphics or verbally whether or not there was parity between the two budgets, i.e., was he citing figures that included exactly the same programs in both figures?
Given O'Reilly's dubious track record, one cannot accept his statements without independent verification.
O'Reilly was on the Daily Show
the other night. Did you see it? It was pretty funny. 
I'd hardly call O'Reilly journalism, now would you? sm
He has a talk show. That isn't journalism and most conservatives I know don't care for him.
O'Reilly vs Obama, tomorrow pm. So much for those
nm
obviously Bill O'Reilly or Rush
Humboldt is spoon feeding the FOLKS this federal reserve nonsense. Sign. Blink. Startle. Jerk.
Yeah, like when Bill O'Reilly had this to say sm
He first said this about the Spears situation:
"On the pinhead front, 16-year-old Jamie Lynn Spears is pregnant. The sister of Britney says she is shocked. I bet. Now most teens are pinheads in some ways. But here the blame falls primarily on the parents of the girl, who obviously have little control over her or even over Britney Spears. Look at the way she behaves. And by the way, the mother, Lynne Spears, has reportedly already sold pictures of the upcoming baby of her 16-year-old for a million bucks. Incredible pinhead."
And this is what he had to say about the Palin situation:
"Millions of families are dealing with teen pregnancy, and as long as society doesn't have to support the mother, father or baby, it is a personal matter. Some Americans will judge Governor Palin and her family, and she will have a hard time running for vice president if there is much more chaos. For the sake of her and her family, we hope things calm down. This country needs a vibrant policy debate, not a soap opera."
I am not defending Spears at all, but that is 1 example of a pinhead. 
I saw clips of that on The O'Reilly Factor.
I was cracking up. "Your name is Joy. You're supposed to be joyful." LOL! If she wants to be on a TV show like that, she really does need to lighten up and at least add to the conversation instead of just acting like she has a severe case of PMS.
Beck and O'Reilly and Hannity...
and for that matter Olberman and Matthews are not journalists, so-called or otherwise. They are commentators, which means they comment on the news, not report it. They share their opinions about news stories and have other people on their shows to discuss their opinions. It's not news, it's not reporting, it's simply opinion and people that watch it know that.
People that watch Fox are not uneducated or 'dittoheads' - it just so happens that our opinions and feelings about government and what's going on in this country and the world jive with most of the opinions on Fox. If you watch MSNBC or others it's because your opinion jives with what they're saying.
It doesn't give either group the right to say the other is brainwashed or pathetic, it just means we are of a different mindset and personally, I don't think that's a bad thing - if everyone was always of the same mindset, the Revolutionary War would have never been fought and we'd all be singing God Save the Queen.
You just have to remember to respect that people have different ideas and beliefs than you do - you don't have to agree, but at least have some respect.
Also Rep. Hoekstra was on Bill O'Reilly
last night.
What I believe is this is going to be one world government with the U.N. being the governing body. Yet, the U.N. owes the U.S. millions of dollars for the building and land they meet in. They haven't paid in years (at least since some time in the 1990s).
Saw O getting off the plane and he didn't look very happy. First time I didn't see him with that big smile on his face. He looked a bit worried. Could it be that he now realizes being Prez is not so easy? That not everyone in the world is wowed by his charm?
Actually Bill O'Reilly debunked this.
ACORN is not taking over the census for entire states or the entire US......however, they will be conducting the census for certain areas. So they won't be in charge of the whole shebang, but they will be doing this for some areas.....which in itself is scary considering the fraud that went on during this past presidential election.
O'Reilly is not a "Pub". He's an independent.
nm
Bill O'Reilly is not right-winged.
He is in independent and he does lean to the conservative side. I basically state something that happens to be similar to what O'Reilly says and it instantly makes what I said stupid, huh? Is that how it works?
I couldn't care less how ACORN competes for grants, etc. If they are dishing out money to the dems, you don't think the dems will push for them to get said tax money. Just like the unions and the dems pushing for more union control.....why.....because unions pay big bucks to democrats and their campaigns....duh.
As for ACORN...there are people within ACORN itself who don't like what is going on. I truly feel that there is something seriously wrong going on with that organization. What exactly it is....I don't know, but I sure has heck know the news media won't even try to uncover it. They are too busy kissing Barry's mixed butt.
You have spoken out against O'Reilly frequently...
polls do prove more and more people are listening to him, so that must be saying something about how they are truly feeling about Obama and it AIN'T positive.
For the most part, people who voted for him are NOT happy with what he is doing. I can name 10 neighbors on one side of my cul-de-sac alone who voted for Obama and is now regretting that vote. They have seen exactly where all this debt is heading, straight to their wallets and they definitely don't make 250K or more a year. It is going to grab them elsewhere but tax them to death none the less. If that's 10 out of my small cul-de-sac alone, I won't even bother to tell you how many at our community pool over several blocks of our neighbors are now openly regretting their vote.
They are definitely not happy with how he is handling anything because he isn't capable of handling anything..... he's nothing more than a puppet and someone else is pulling his strings.
If he gets healthcare reform through, you won't have to worry about who gets in the white house, because you'll be too taxed to death to care.
Wow, you've learned a word from O'Reilly
 tells me you must watch. Again, exactly what does Rush say that is wrong? I'm waiting.
He is afraid of Bill O'Reilly, it's as easy as that....
Obama can handle the butt kissing and egg shell walking of Olbermann and Matthews but when it comes down to it, Obama can't answer real questions that would be poised to him by Bill.
Karl Rove, Bill O'Reilly, et al. sm
Hilariously shows how the hipocrasy knows no bounds:
http://www.indecision2008.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=184086
This above is a link to the Daily Show with John Stewart. I love his show, and Stephen Colbert's. I'm not a political junkie (yet) so I need a *lot* of comic relief with my politics in order to stomach it.
Both sides are hypocrites, it's true. But I swear, the Republicans are so much funnier. The mental gymnastics they're having to go through in order to claim SP has "experience" alone is a sight to see. (Watch the clip above if you don't believe me. Oh, and you can see S. Palin making a good point near the end of it for all of you who are fans of hers.) In fact, Jon Stewart said he's putting "county first" in supporting Obama, because McCain being the pres. would make his job (as a comedian) so much easier...
Oh, and have no fear, anyone. I balance out the political comedy with a healthy dose of serious political coverage too. The most serious I can find lately is the stuff on PBS. You know, the calm, old-style journalism type, free of the crawl at the bottom of the screen, free of all the hype and wild graphics at the bottom of the screen, free of people shouting because they actually take turns letting each other talk. Anybody else miss that kind of reporting, where it's kinda boring to watch and you have to actually listen and pay attention to more than sound bites? Ah, well. I'm rambling...
I caught a clip of Bill O'Reilly
chewing Barney Frank a new butt during an interview. He basically told him to claim the blame instead of trying to push it on others and called him a coward. I was just sitting on the couch with my mouth open in shock. I'm glad someone told the stupid SOB though. Needless to say, Barney Frank didn't get to say much. Also, if Barney Frank got all that money from these banks, why can't he afford to get some dentures on the top? I can't stand to hear him talk. PUT SOME TEETH IN! SHEESH.
OMG! Bill O'Reilly was on the View today!!!
Joy was hateful through the whole thing. I used to like her but not anymore.
She's always arguing with Liz and now she even told Bill that she doesn't hate him, she just dislikes him. You know why? He tells it like it is and she even seemed furious that he and Barney Fife got into it on his program. It makes her sound like she likes Barney and she definitely doesn't believe he had anything to do with the downfall of FM/FM. Bill tried to explain it but you think she would listen? Heck no. I just can't believe how hateful she can be!
O'Reilly is obnoxious and everyone smart hates him nm
liz is polish what do you expect
O'Reilly, etc. are not "the regular news."
Try watching the morning news at 6 a.m. or during the day until 5-6 p.m. That's the news I'm talking about.
O'Reilly and the others are like Chris Matthews, Keith Oberman, and all those other fellas. They are more like a political talk shows. That's not news.
Bill O'Reilly did not promote violence.
Liberals don't promote violence, huh? How about the gay rights protestors who physically knocked a cross out of an older woman's hands because how dare she oppose their opinion?
8 October 2005, Seattle, WA:
Veteran's Home Vandalized
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/jamieson/243...html?source=rss
4 September 2005, Louisiana:
Democrat Senator Threatens Violence Against Bush
Mary Landrieu: I'll Punch Bush, 'Literally'
1 September 2005, National:
Leftist Radio Host Encourages Looting
Sean Hannity
25 April 2005, National:
Leftist Radio Threatens to Assassinate Bush
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadA...le.asp?ID=17878
17 February 2005, Portland, OR:
Former Pentagon Adviser Assaulted at University
Protester throws shoe at Richard Perle - Politics - MSNBC.com
24 January 2005, Milwaukee, WI:
Five Democrats Charged with Election-Day Tire Slashing
JS Online: 5 charged in GOP tire slashings
8 November 2004, San Francisco, CA:
Muslim/Democrat Mob Attacks College Republicans
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadA...le.asp?ID=15855
30 October 2004, Durango, CO:
Liberal Professor Assaults Conservative Student
http://www.durangoherald.com/asp-bin/artic...ews041030_1.htm
22 October 2004, Tuscon, AZ:
Conservative Commentator Assaulted at University
http://www.azcentral.com/12news/news/artic...ch22-ON-CP.html
5 October 2004, Orlando, FL:
Democrat Mob Storms GOP HQ, Injures Staffers
Protestors Ransack Bush/Cheney Headquarters In Orlando - Politics News Story - WKMG Orlando
October 2004, National:
A Pattern of Leftist Hatred
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=40898
17 September 2004, Huntington, WV:
3-Year-Old Girl Attacked by Democrat Thugs
Washington Times - Democrats accused of ripping Bush signs
20 March 2003, Madison, WI:
Republican Heaquarters Vandalized
JS Online: GOP headquarters in Madison hit with bricks, paint bombs
11 March 2003, Los Angeles, CA:
Peaceniks Destroy 9-11 Memorial
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=31473
1 April 2005
Violent leftist/Democrat physically assaults conservative Pat Buchanan at Western Michigan University
http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/002026.html
13 February 1996
Liberals steal press run of conservative newspaper Carolina Review in an effort to preserve victory for their liberal candidate
http://www.townhall.com/opinion/colu.../16/12704.html
1 March 2002
Liberals steal entire press run of a monthly conservative publication at the University of California-Berkeley and harass and intimidate its staff
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=26652
30 November 2004
Entire run of the November issue of the Yale Free Press, a conservative student publication, was stolen over the Thanksgiving break
Yale Daily News - Editors say Yale Free Press stolen
October 1999
Liberals at California State University at Sacramento stole 3,000 copies of the student newspaper. They were enraged because the paper, The State Hornet, had published the picture of a Hispanic man being arrested and charged with resisting arrest at a football game.
Nat Hentoff
1992
Liberals vandalize offices of The Collegian at the University of Massachusetts
http://collegefreedom.org/95press.htm
Happy Hanukkah, Bill O'Reilly! (see article)
Happy Hanukkah, Bill O'Reilly! |
 |
Barbara Ann Radnofsky, Texan for U.S. Senate 2006
No lyin'
No cheatin'
No stealin' |
Read More...
You may have noticed Barbara Radnofsky’s little dig to the ridiculous Bill O’Reily in her blog ads. If this is your first time to meet Barbara, she is running for U.S. Senate against Kay Bailey “perjury is just a technicality” Hutchison. Visit her website at www.radnofsky.com. Kay Bailey needs to be defeated. She is one of the lead characters in the corrupt republican regime. * Richard Morrison's diary :: ::
*
She is one of the republican senators that received money from the Coushatta Indians at the direction of Abramoff.
Additionally, she received campaign dollars from ADCS, Inc., the PAC that was tied to Duke Cunningham.
Finally, after a $5000 contribution from Alaska’s Ted Stevens, she switched her vote to support the “Bridge to Nowhere.”
Kay Bailey needs to go. Behind her smiling face and “moderate” reputation is another corrupt republican that stands for nothing but power and money.
I call on Kay Bailey to return those corrupt donations. And I call on each of you to support Barbara with donations from the grass roots, both volunteer time and money. Please support Barbara as you supported me. www.radnofsky.com Fight on! Richard Morrison
Permalink
|
|
![src=http://stat.blogads.com/xpslcfodidbefoifbepsh/drudgeretort/p.gif?3288970=11&3293684=3]() |
Held my nose and watched the same O'Reilly blather
made his pathetic atempt to delcare war on the NY Times, Rasmussen, etc. This is what sore losers do when they feel themselves in freefall. O'Reilly got his drawers in an uproar because he and Focks are down in the ratings and is'nt used to the idea of being #3 behind Olbermann, Cooper et all. Poor Bill.
Phil Donahue is the man. Had Bill O'Reilly shaking in his boots.nm
He makes good points and the only thing you get from his stance is that he doesn't want to fight the taliban, which is unfortunate for you NOT true.
Give a quote where he says the US should not fight the taliban.
The Sweet Jesus I Hate Bill O'Reilly page sm
is a great idea. O'Reilly, Hannity, Coulter, and Malkin are at the top of my list for rabid vermin. There are some other great links there too, some funny.
I saw Kirsten Powers, a democratic strategist, on O'Reilly last night. She says
pretty much stick a fork in him, he's done. I think so, too. I saw some of those two women's posts. They were beyond hateful, anti-Christian, virulent Bush haters, foul, foul gutter language. What was he thinking!
According to Bill O'Reilly...Obama moving ahead in polls! (nm)
I watch Daily Show & O'Reilly and split the difference! NM
X
Right on, baby!
Cuz you know, the answer my friend (to all this brouhaha) is blowin' in the wind......
I'm heading out now for a lunch with my Harley-riding, beer-swigging, antique-collecting redneck friend. No kidding!! Strange things can happen in this big ole universe and that's just the way I like it. Actually, he quit drnking beer about 10 years ago, and quit riding the Harley after he went broke trying to sell antiques....but he's still pretty much of a redneck.
Thanks for helping me have a laugh and see some humor where I thought there was none!!
Except for the baby..............
Use the baby in WHAT way? If you want to know why
further than this board full of none other than women, most of whom I presume are MTs and therefore working mothers themselves!! How do you reconcile ripping someone down for being the very thing you are? By criticizing SP or Hillary or any other prominent woman figure who happens to be a mother, you are only applying the exact same things to yourselves, ladies. This has to be one of the most disgusting things I see on here. Take pot shots at her skills or work history, but how can you possibly rip on her for having a career and children? Do you want us all barefoot, pregnant, and waiting on Ward hand and foot again? Grow up. I, for one, am ashamed to be a woman and lumped in with such juvenile BS when I see this nonsense.
I didn't care for Hillary, but I still hailed the fact that she was campaigning. It meant maybe women are finally gaining recognition and respect. Want to know why our wages are less than men's and why every time women make one step forward, they take 2 steps back? It's because the very gender prominent women hope to elevate will attack those women out of jealousy or worse yet, because they don't happen to ascribe to their own set of beliefs. It makes the whole lot of us look petty and ridiculous.
There's a saying, it's better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and prove it to the world.
Welcome baby!
I didn't know there was such a thing!
what about the baby's
x
okay what about the baby?
Yes, I do believe you should be able to do whatever you decide to your own body so long as others are not endangered in the process.
Well what about baby? Baby isnt endangered in the process. I would called being killed endangered. But I guess you are saying that it isnt a baby yet. I dont get that. A tadpole doesnt look like a frog but it is still a living thing. It just hasnt matured. A caterpillar isnt a butterfly but it is still alive, it just hasnt matured. So a fetus that is developing is still alive, just not matured. So because a fetus doesnt turn into something that looks like a baby in a matter of minutes or hours is okay to kill because it takes a while to mature? The video that you do not want to see shows a 19 week old baby girl. She has red hair. She is fully formed, just tiny. She was aborted by saline. The saline poured all over her body and burned her to death. She has black burn marks all over her little arms and legs and body. She is curled up like a little angle. Are you telling me that she did feel that just because no one could hear her misery? She wasnt a living thing? Sorry, but it is murder and it is wrong. You dont have to even believe in God to understand that.
Such a baby!
You can poke and jab at others and make fun of what they say, but when it turns on you, you are suddenly "better" than everyone else? How so? You act like a little baby who starts a fight and then runs away. Don't play the innocent victim card. Go back and read some of your insulting posts, THAT is the reason people are "ganging up" on you and your superiority. Guess you better "show us" and just go away. Please....
ALWAYS WILL BABY.
x
Must have had soy in his baby formula sm
According to an article on World Net Daily:
Soy is making kids 'gay'
Posted: December 12, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Jim Rutz
© 2006
There's a slow poison out there that's severely damaging our children and threatening to tear apart our culture. The ironic part is, it's a health food, one of our most popular.
Now, I'm a health-food guy, a fanatic who seldom allows anything into his kitchen unless it's organic. I state my bias here just so you'll know I'm not anti-health food.
The dangerous food I'm speaking of is soy. Soybean products are feminizing, and they're all over the place. You can hardly escape them anymore.
(Column continues below)
I have nothing against an occasional soy snack. Soy is nutritious and contains lots of good things. Unfortunately, when you eat or drink a lot of soy stuff, you're also getting substantial quantities of estrogens.
Estrogens are female hormones. If you're a woman, you're flooding your system with a substance it can't handle in surplus. If you're a man, you're suppressing your masculinity and stimulating your female side, physically and mentally.
In fetal development, the default is being female. All humans (even in old age) tend toward femininity. The main thing that keeps men from diverging into the female pattern is testosterone, and testosterone is suppressed by an excess of estrogen.
If you're a grownup, you're already developed, and you're able to fight off some of the damaging effects of soy. Babies aren't so fortunate. Research is now showing that when you feed your baby soy formula, you're giving him or her the equivalent of five birth control pills a day. A baby's endocrine system just can't cope with that kind of massive assault, so some damage is inevitable. At the extreme, the damage can be fatal.
Soy is feminizing, and commonly leads to a decrease in the size of the penis, sexual confusion and homosexuality. That's why most of the medical (not socio-spiritual) blame for today's rise in homosexuality must fall upon the rise in soy formula and other soy products. (Most babies are bottle-fed during some part of their infancy, and one-fourth of them are getting soy milk!) Homosexuals often argue that their homosexuality is inborn because I can't remember a time when I wasn't homosexual. No, homosexuality is always deviant. But now many of them can truthfully say that they can't remember a time when excess estrogen wasn't influencing them.
Doctors used to hope soy would reduce hot flashes, prevent cancer and heart disease, and save millions in the Third World from starvation. That was before they knew much about long-term soy use. Now we know it's a classic example of a cure that's worse than the disease. For example, if your baby gets colic from cow's milk, do you switch him to soy milk? Don't even think about it. His phytoestrogen level will jump to 20 times normal. If he is a she, brace yourself for watching her reach menarche as young as seven, robbing her of years of childhood. If he is a boy, it's far worse: He may not reach puberty till much later than normal.
Research in 2000 showed that a soy-based diet at any age can lead to a weak thyroid, which commonly produces heart problems and excess fat. Could this explain the dramatic increase in obesity today?
Recent research on rats shows testicular atrophy, infertility and uterus hypertrophy (enlargement). This helps explain the infertility epidemic and the sudden growth in fertility clinics. But alas, by the time a soy-damaged infant has grown to adulthood and wants to marry, it's too late to get fixed by a fertility clinic.
Worse, there's now scientific evidence that estrogen ingredients in soy products may be boosting the rapidly rising incidence of leukemia in children. In the latest year we have numbers for, new cases in the U.S. jumped 27 percent. In one year!
There's also a serious connection between soy and cancer in adults – especially breast cancer. That's why the governments of Israel, the UK, France and New Zealand are already cracking down hard on soy.
In sad contrast, 60 percent of the refined foods in U.S. supermarkets now contain soy. Worse, soy use may double in the next few years because (last I heard) the out-of-touch medicrats in the FDA hierarchy are considering allowing manufacturers of cereal, energy bars, fake milk, fake yogurt, etc., to claim that soy prevents cancer. It doesn't.
P.S.: Soy sauce is fine. Unlike soy milk, it's perfectly safe because it's fermented, which changes its molecular structure. Miso, natto and tempeh are also OK, but avoid tofu.
Speak for you own baby...
zzzzzzzzzzzz
|
Bill O'Reilly calling it Quits?
