In defense of Charlie Sheen

So Charlie Sheen is found naked, drunk, and destroying is hotel room. So now we have people on all the progressive news networks and opinion shows saying, "Enough is enough! Something needs to be done."

Sure Charlie Sheen has a past where he has been treated for addiction. Sure he ought to be prosecuted for damage he has done. If he needs help, he should get it. Whatever help he gets, though, should not be up to progressive experts to decide: it should be up to him.

Some on TV have proclaimed that enough is enough, and we ought to boy cot his show Two and a half men. His show is funny. Charlie Sheen is a good actor and his show is awesome. He has one of the few truly realistic shows on TV. In fact, if anything, progressives should hail his show, because Sheen and the character he portrays are about as liberal as they get.

Yet that doesn't matter. If Sheen were a normal American and not a Hollywood actor, he would be able to get drunk, hire a prostitute, he'd be charged for any damage he created, and then he'd be on his way. Sure he'd have to do some damage control amid his small circle, yet then he'd go on with his life as usual. Yet Sheen is not allowed to do that?

Since Sheen is a Hollywood actor, however, he's expected to do more. According to progressive idealists, he's supposed to be an example not to use prostitutes, and not to do drugs and not to do alcohol. That's what this "Let's get Charlie Sheen" is all about: making alcohol look as bad as they say it is.

Look, I don't like what Sheen did. If he committed a true crime, he should be prosecuted. But other than that, he should be left alone. He is being held to higher standards by the media because he is an elite actor.

Yet at the same time it's these same people who follow these stars around and won't let them have any privacy. I can imagine how stressful a life that would be. I personally like to drink beer, and yes I have even gotten blitzed a few times among my friends and even did some stupid things. We all have. It's our God given right to do stupid things.

Yet we are allowed to get over it. We in the normal realm of human life are allowed to go on with our life. Yet for some reason because Sheen is the highest paid actor on TV -- he gets paid $2 million an episode of Two and a Half Men -- he is ridiculed by the mass media elites.

I'm tired of actors and athletes going to rehab just because they had one or two drinks one day (Like Brett Favre a few years ago) and then he's cured of his alcohol problem he never had to begin with.

That's right! According to progressives any alcohol is bad. You watch any TV show (especially soaps) and drinking is considered bad ALWAYS. Drinking more than 2 drinks a day equals alcoholism, and is associated with crime. And, since we can't have prohibition (they tried that and it failed) we can slowly, by attrition, make alcohol look bad. In that way, by attrition, we can get rid of alcohol in America.

So that's why every opportunity the elites have to make an example of someone who had a drink or did drugs, the example will be made. And it is on this ground that you'll hear people in the media chant things like, "Well, we have to do something. He must be punished somehow. By God, he shouldn't just be allowed to go on with his life like some normal American!"

Yes he should. Leave Charlie Sheen alone. Elite Americans have enough trouble staying out of the limelight (unless they want it).

I think, instead of Charlie Sheen's public relations team saying things like, "Well, he just had an allergic reaction," just to please the progressive media, the people who believe we should all be perfect. He should say, "Yes I got drunk! Yes I hired a prostitute! Yes I did drugs! And it's my God Given right to be stupid! Punish if I invaded someone freedoms, and then let me go on with my life!"

Is Sheen surrounded by enablers? Probably. Is he a drunk? Maybe. Or maybe he just likes an occasional drink and likes the occasional drunk and the occasional prostitute. That's not the way I'd live my life, nor the life I'd recommend for my kids. Yet that's none of my business.

And that's the difference between me and progressives. I don't agree with you and still allow you to live your life as you choose. Progressives don't like what you do, and something has to be done to change you.

Charlie Sheen is going about his life as usual, and that's how it should be. Charge him for destroying property, and then get on with it. This also another perfect example of the progressive media making news where none exists.

So there.

Socialist liberals don't want our voices heard

Communism and socialism fail every time it's ever been tried because it provided no incentive for the little folks to get up and make an effort to improve their lives. It also fails because in order for it to succeed the voices of opposition (capitalists) have to be silenced.

A person I work with told me people should take an intelligence test on the issues before they vote. "Too many people," he said, "vote in this country who have no clue what they are even voting for."

I said, "Isn't that the purpose of living in a democracy, that everyone has a voice. That no one is held under the hand of tyranny. Isn't that the whole reason the founding fathers left the Mother Country, and why they formed a United Nation."

Personally, I think that if everyone studied they'd all vote for the most traditional, conservative candidate. I think he thinks the opposite. So, to stave off either one of us having a tyranny, everyone in America has a equal right to vote. That's why the Constitution was agreed upon as such.

I think my liberal friend is an elitist who thinks he knows what's best for everyone. He's arrogant, as the liberal media is elitist and arrogant. They think they know what's best for everyone. They don't even respect the constitution, as they know better than even the founding fathers who wrote the Constitution.

That is why the left does everything in it's power to shut out voices of opposition, which is what would happen if "everyone had to take an IQ test" in order to vote. That's exactly what happens when the U.S. government releases a document from the homeland security department claiming groups organizing from the right are "far right extremists." That's why the folks on the left try to silence voices like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity by re-enacting the fairness doctrine.

It's also why you see more traditional cable news networks covering all the issues from the right and the left, and why other media outlets, particularly the mainstream media of the major newspapers and the big three networks, shun out the right. This was proven yesterday when only one network covered the anti-tax tea parties in a "fair and balanced' way.

Media outlets have a Constitutional right to be bias, as all Americans have a Constitutional right to be stupid and to vote for the wrong person if that so happens to be the case. And so are attempts to shut out the competition.

CNN's bias coverage of the tea party protests is Constitutional. MSNBC's going out and calling the tea parties "idiotic" is Constitutional too. But I think it goes further than that. I think this is their fervent attempt at shutting out the voices of opposition.

I think the tea parties was the biggest story of the day yesterday, and for the first time in my adult life I actually see people out protesting something I ardently believe in -- a smaller and more responsible government. Yet, as I watch the Today show this morning, after I watched that show for over an hour, I heard nothing about what happened -- nothing.

When I watched CNN and MSNBC yesterday the protester were called "idiotic" and CNN even referred to the protesters as teabaggers. For those of you who never went to college and joined a frat, teabagging is giving lip service to someone's crotch, otherwise known as giving a blow job.

And, moments from now as I watch the CBC evening news, I expect the same to be the case. The left wing media does not consider the tea parties important because they do not further the left wing cause. To them, the protesters are nothing more than conservatives angry because Obama won.

The fairness doctrine, making people take a test to vote, are definitely not Constitutional, as they go against the 1st amendment freedom of speech. They also go against the addict that all men must be treated equal, as if some people are allowed to vote and other not some men (and women) are not created equal.

But liberals don't care about the constitution and fairness so long as they get their way. And that is exactly why the liberal press only covers protests that draws in new people to politics when those individuals support a liberal cause.

In a communist and socialist nation the voices of the little people are shunned out. And by the lefts attempt to silence the good folks in this country who do no agree with their big government socialistic agenda being ignored and belittled by the left, this is a perfect example of socialist elitism.

The Lessons of John Edwards

Not much new news these days. I imagine some folks will harp all over John Edwards for having an affair, or, worse, keeping it a secret. I'm not going to make an issue of it here.

Why should I be, we're all prone to making mistakes.

Yet, after what happened to Gary Hart in the 1980s, and the way Bill Clinton nearly lost everything twice by secrets he kept, you'd think a person with such baggage over his head would think twice about running for President.

Think of how disastrous this kind of scandal would have been had Edwards actually been the potential nominee instead of Edwards. Or, worse, think how devastating this would have been for Obama had he selected him as his VP.

While Edwards says he's going public here because he wants to end the onslaught regarding this by the tabloids so his family can move on, I imagine a partial reason is that he wanted to make sure Obama did not select him.

We're going to be reading about this in the news for the next several days, and then it's going to make a blip on the history books, and then we'll all but forget this incident. But the days of seeing John Edwards as a viable candidate for any political office are more than likely behind him.

What we can learn here, is that if you want to run for public office, you need to think twice about allowing that second woman in your life. If you are married, you need to keep your wife a top priority in your life. And if you do have an affair, don't lie about it.

It seems this is one of the first Biblical lessons we learn as we are growing up. Edwards has admitted, in certain words today, that he had an elitist attitude and figured he could get away with anything. I respect him for being so honest.

I have never been partial to Edwards political POV, but I do think he is a good an honorable
man who wishes the best for his family and his country. I wish he and his family all the best as they try to move on.

I think this is a perfect example of what I wrote about a few weeks ago (read keeping your priorities in the right order), that we all need to learn to keep our priorities straight. When Edwards put another lady before his wife, and then lied about it, he became humiliated publicly.

I'd like to say I hope no other famous people come to shame by infidelity, but that would be wishful thinking. When famous men and women are on the road a lot, the temptation is always out there.

I'm sure that Edwards would be happy if only one other person learned from his mistakes.