Before I get onto the local gossip, has anyone noticed how PBS (Public Broadcasting) is becoming more political, slanting programs toward a left-wing agenda. I have been watching PBS television programs for as long as I can remember and have always thought of them as good, wholesome and educational. My kids grew up with shows like Sesame Street and Mr. Rogers as their main TV diet. I still like some of the programming, but have noticed a change over the past several years. Recently I was watching clips from the D-Day landings, footage that seemed familiar, because I am an avid viewer of that kind of stuff and happily watch rerun after rerun. This time though, the narrator mentioned gay and lesbian participation, something I can't recall ever hearing before during WWII historical programming. Then, last week, during an American Revolution documentary the host referred to Militiamen as radicals and rebels, calling it a civil war against legal local government. Worst of all, the narrator, who spoke with an English accent would you believe, likened the American patriot force to the Viet Cong and terrorist groups. A clue to his reasoning was what he said was the "un-gentlemanly" way our forefathers "fought from behind trees, primarily targeting officers." Both these programs were historical documentaries but were ever-so-slightly changing the accepted historical viewpoint. It is worrying that previously trusted programming is being slanted by socialist, anti-American propaganda. Carrying PBS's newfound wisdom a step further would portray Jesus as a mentally unstable religious cult leader who believed he was fathered by a make-believe deity. PBS seems to have been infiltrated by left-wing extremists bent on portraying history to fit their political views.
What do you think?
Check Into Stash
Local businessman Allan Jones, owner of Check Into Cash, previously known as CreditCorp, is trying to keep the lid on negative publicity regarding his company. The payday loan industry is strictly regulated in most states and banned in others because of what has been described as loan sharking - extremely high interest rates on small loans. Jones' company recently made an out-of-court settlement of a class action lawsuit for violating these regulations. As part of the out-of-court settlement, Check Into Cash admitted no wrongdoing and sought to keep details confidential. Now they are suing local attorney Richard Fisher, who represented the class action, for talking about the case and revealing details. Jones action could be described as bribery and using the law to avoid accountability. Even though Jones' company bribed the participants in the class action suit and paid off the attorney's representing them, why weren't criminal charges filed against the company for possibly violating the regulations the class action suit was based on? How can Check Into Cash avoid accountability and why didn't the District Attorney's Office or a grand jury investigate? Secrecy in these matters is not a service to the consumer.
What do you think?
A Louisiana lawmaker wants a truth serum administered to convicted criminals to gain confessions of other crimes. But the same people who won't defend the Constitutional right to bear arms want to protect the criminal on constitutional grounds. The lawmaker, Rep Yvonne Dorsey may be on to something much more important than rabid murders are to public safety, the serum should be given to lawmakers themselves. Think about the money the taxpayer could save if a quick shot of sodium pentothal was administered before votes were taken or deals made, and at election time - the benefits are obvious. It would be constitutional too, if immunity from prosecution was given. At least the crooks would identify themselves before being elected. Locally, judging by the actions of some of our elected officials, we may need to buy several gallons of the stuff, but think of the savings. Yeah, this lady may be on to something... wonder how many of our leaders would be willing to take it though?
What do you think?
It has been several months since I have ridiculed my socialist competitor, but so as not to disappoint our readers you are now in for a treat. For months the Bradley News Weekly's publisher and editorial staff have been slandering the good names of some of our elected officials, especially four members of the city school board they don't like. Why do you think they have been whining so loud to have Sandra DeFriese, Michell Goldston, Jackie Wattenbarger and Johnny Thompson unseated at the next election? And what about the other candidates they are either complaining about or praising... what pattern do they follow? Any of their readers will gather from the editorials what political agenda they have. They unabashedly promote higher taxes, larger and more restrictive government and the continuation of the Cleveland good-ol-boy club which they are a part. They will support government so long as their boys are in charge - hence the whining. It is sometimes difficult to choose the right candidate when most of them are unknown to you. So often our thoughtful deliberations turn out to be a disaster. People ask me who they should vote for, who is the best candidate? I can not and will not answer those questions, it is a personal choice but I can give a clue as to who not to vote for and if you get a chance, what to ask the candidates. If the Bradley News Weekly are pushing a particular candidate, ask yourself why? If the Bradley News Weekly are slandering a candidate, again ask yourself why? If you get the chance, ask a candidate their position on growing government spending and what they will do about it. Then ask them their position on education spending to see if it is compatible with question one. Then ask them if they are willing to sign their names to the answers. And finally, ask them if they or a close family member get paid from the public purse. It is doubtful that any candidate will satisfy your questioning 100% but at least you will have a clearer picture of who will represent you best. You will not see local candidates being endorsed by The People News, not because we don't have favorites but because it is not the media's job to to get people elected but to spotlight the job they are doing. I have confidence that most of you know who should be kicked out and what sort of candidate would serve you best. Don't take what the media tell you on face value, even the interviews are slanted, read between the lines.
What do you think?
"What do you think" Continued
Website Survey Results