LIBERALS ACHIEVE
ANOTHER CHILD'S DEATH
BUT LET'S EXCUSE IT NOW
By: William Kaliher
Warning to readers: I have tried to use satire to address a horrific crime. The crime is so barbaric, humor won't work, but hopefully a few Democrats will read this and awaken. Still, no matter, the accuracy of my work is currently rated 5.8 times more accurate than any socialist media release.
As America's leading liberal/socialist I read of the abduction, rape and murder of the five-year-old California girl. Certainly all were appalled, but I had a different reaction than did conservatives and libertarians. Remember, the leading liberal and PETA spokeswoman who put the bombing of the World Trade Center in perspective. She graciously reminded Americans a million chickens had been murdered the day the Twin Towers were hit. When we liberals put three thousand lives into that type comparison even the slowest conservative can begin to see how insignificant one five-year-olds' life is. However, being a compassionate liberal, I decided to address the radical right-wing Ether Zone audience response before their readers overreacted to this crime.
There is little doubt the average conservative reader will want justice, a trial and even the death penalty when the killer is caught. Due to my superior wisdom and the inherent elitism I possess as a liberal/socialist, I react in a more civilized and caring manner. However, I am even superior to other liberals for I don't hate and loath ignorant conservative trash. No, I want to help you. I want you to understand so you can view this crime with the disconnected group-think associated with my fellow liberal Democrats.
For those noble reasons I won't wait twelve or fifteen years until this murderer is facing the electric chair. I won't stall until he is at trial. I won't even wait until he's caught. (Thankfully the beast was apprehended while I finished the first draft of this article.) Instead at this early date I am going to lay out the proper scenario for you right-wing whackos to follow. This will enable you to understand this child killer is just another misunderstood "good" human being and see him in the best light. Other liberals and their media propagandists will appeal to your hearts in twelve years, long after the details of this crime are forgotten. The media will show those who care holding an all night vigil against the death sentence. Jennings and the other anointed will bring forth all the old rigmarole showing how unfair and heartless the death penalty is. But, not I! I won't wait until you've forgotten the viciousness of this rape murder. I'll excuse the killer now. For the purposes of this expose I shall call the abductor Mr. Murderer X.
We can surmise even before an arrest that Mr. Murderer X probably had the following marks against him from birth:
1. He is probably from the lower socioeconomic classes. (You must overlook Democrat legislation that locks people in poverty and encourages crime.)
2. He witnessed someone aiming a harsh word at a feminist during his formative years.
3. He most likely heard someone say "nigger" within two years of this malfeasance.
4. He most likely came from a broken home. (You must overlook the Democrat party's responsibility for destroying the family as all liberals do.)
5. An S.U.V. driver probably swerved too close to him in the neighborhood increasing his simmering rage.
6. He may have heard a wise person define a Democrat voter.
7. He witnessed his mother boiling eggs.
8. He probably doesn't have a high IQ.
9. He probably had a bad education. (Don't let it worry you that Democrats destroyed public education.)
10. He had to spend an inordinate amount of time worrying Republican legislation would poison children, starve old people and keep twenty-year-old athletes and drug users of all ages from obtaining welfare.
11. He may be of a different race or a specially blessed gender or have minority status.
12. Western civilization may have forced him into being homophobic.
13. He probably witnessed someone kicking a dog during his formative years.
14. He was exposed to the violence in the Bible. 15. He was forced to say "Under God" while reciting the Pledge of Allegiance during school.
Once the accused killer comes to trial, we'll be able to determine the true worth and value of the gentleman. Obviously, anyone that falls into three or more of the above categories has reason to murder. Now, that we've determined in advance why the person who committed this crime shouldn't be punished much less executed, we can move into the other areas that justify and/or excuse his actions.
First and foremost we should deal with the fact Mr. Murderer X, I hope you crude libertarians recognize I allow the criminal the dignity of A Mr., should not be charged with abduction. That is a ridiculous charge and should be dispensed with immediately. We liberals got our elected Democrats to steal, I mean use, your tax money to run public service messages, PSA's, to train you to accept theft. Needless to say some of you conservatives and libertarians chose to either ignore these messages or use your brains. Let me remind you of those classic propaganda messages we produced with your tax dollars.
Commercial after commercial on both radio and television clearly demonstrate leaving your key in your car would lead to auto thief. It certainly wasn't the thief's fault. There you are: a welfare recipient or politician leaving your luxury car at the curb with the key in it. Or, you might be a hard-working man or woman paying more than fifty percent of your taxes to support those welfare recipients and politicians and you leave your key in your four-year-old auto that needs tires. Yes, you're guilty! Some kid, bee-bopping along spots that key and if your vehicle isn't too shabby, he takes it for a spin. It wasn't his fault, it was your culpability that led him astray. Always keep in mind how society causes these errors in life, especially if the thief belongs to a minority.
Now that I've reminded you of these PSA's, think about Jerrold Nadler, Rosy O'Donnell or Major "Fat Albert" Owens. Now, you fix up a super nice banana split and walk twelve feet away while Nadler, O'Donnell or Owens are walking by. What do you think is going to happen? If you turned around in time, you might beat Owen's to your dessert. He'd probably be watching for circling sharks, which would provide a slit second chance of beating him to your desert. Except for the shark danger, you're darn right they're going to wolf down your banana split. I doubt a jury in the world would find them guilty of eating your banana split. You baited a trap they couldn't ignore. Always remember there would be no crime without your help. You shouldn't expect the right to live in a society where your property is safe.
I hope you are following this liberal logic and can see this clearly. We had a person driving around California that liked "little" girls. This is exactly the same condition of leaving your key in a car for a kid to see, or ignoring a Danish with Jerrold Nadler in the room. It's not their fault. They had no choice in committing what you insensitive conservatives would call a crime. You set them up! The same thing is true in the case of the little California girl. The guy that took her couldn't help it. He likes to steal little girls just like some kids like to steal cars and it's the fault of whoever tempted him by taking their eyes off the little girl.
Next we must examine the rape of a child through both society's eyes and a Democrat's eyes. We already know the liberal position as the Democrat party proudly stands up for the rights of NAMBLA and every other perversion. Democrat appointed judges let pedophiles go free or receive light sentences throughout the land. The U.S. Supreme Court thinks virtual pornography is swell. This is no longer debatable. To be liberal and vote Democrat is to endorse the sexual abuse of children. However, Democrats only make up half the legislature and not quite a quarter of all potential voters. This leaves the question of the greater society's feelings concerning sex with children.
In examining the greater society we see Democrats are in the mainstream with the question of encouraging child abuse. The socialist television networks, magazines and newspapers propagandize for homosexual families and lead boycotts of organizations that won't allow gay scoutmasters. But, society okaying sex with children goes far beyond media advocacy. Look at recent stories of teachers, priests and preachers that have been sexually abusing children. Look at the Hollywood types like Michael Jackson and Roman Polanski who think sex with kids is swell. Did anyone notice a movie or music studio refusing to work with these perverts? Has anyone noticed any policemen tripping over each other in a rush to arrest these perverts? Has anyone spotted herds of prosecutors gathering to bring charges against these child rapists? Has anyone discovered any Republican politicians making political hay over no one prosecuting child sexual abusers or have they acquiesced to their Democrat comrades cause on this issue?
After examining the lack of political or legal interest in prosecuting child abusers I have to conclude this is no longer a serious crime. To prosecute the murderer of this little girl on the rape charges would obviously be selective prosecution. This would be unfair to anyone. Further, we don't know yet, but perhaps this child rapist was planning on becoming a scout master or a member of the clergy. In that case it might be expected he felt it was okay.
Finally, we have to deal with the murder aspect of this crime. We have Peter Singer a leading liberal and Ivy League professor, who when not espousing sex with animals, advocates the right of parents to terminate a child's life in it's first month. Of course, he's correct that a parent shouldn't be forced into keeping a child alive from day one. What if the kid cries too much or after a couple of weeks the parent really doesn't like how the little tyke smiles or coos. Of course, reasonable people deserve choices in whom they decide to live with on a continued basis. More than likely some anti-abortion group encouraged the couple to have a child and finally the reality of the infant breaks their hold on the couple. Certainly, the couple shouldn't be held responsible for their child after anti-abortion forces made them have a baby.
The only problem with the professor's view on this situation is his unusually short time period for parents to change their minds. Professor Singer was a hero in bringing this idea to the forefront but a month or two isn't nearly enough time. Twelve to fourteen years would be a much more realistic time frame for a parent to decide if a fourth-mester abortion is in order. Does the child track up the house or make too much noise? Does the child have a stuttering problem or continually make bad grades? Is the child healthy or is he taking from the family budget because of asthma or other health problems? Is the child compatible with politically correct expectations? One knows even the best parent can have a child that says, "nigger," treats girls like girls, thinks homosexuals are queer, or even worse somehow learned what capitalism could produce and thinks his society, culture and Western Civilization is superior. It would be totally unfair of society to expect a parent to keep such a child alive and be forced to continue feeding and caring for it.
Now, that we have established the fact that no parent should be forced to keep a child before it reaches fifteen we must examine how liberal philosophy addresses child care. It's obvious from leading liberals like Hillary Clinton and Congressional Democrats that the government should have more influence on child care than should parents. Given that fact, and the impact Hillary wants from the village, we can surmise Mr. Murderer X was acting as both a caring village member and a government agent. Obviously Mr. Murderer X thought these parents weren't taking the steps to remove a child that had no value and he acted as a good citizen in the Democrats village.
*********************************************************
Needless to say this writer's blood boils when I hear of a crime against children. At times like this I often think the Moslem's methods of execution are superior to ours. Although, I hate Democrat politicians and loath Republican politicians this issue raises one of the few reasons why a vote for Republicans might be okay. Mind you, Republican politicians do virtually nothing to stop the rape of children. This is verified by them never making it a political issue, but at least most of their legislation doesn't lead to child rape. I won't go into the reasoning behind the decline of our civilization, beyond saying everyone that has pulled a lever voting Democrat had a hand in the abduction, rape and murder of this little girl and virtually every other crime and perversion in America. The destruction of the American family, the increase of illegitimacy, the filth of the movie industry, the increase in crime, the destruction of the public schools, the removal of morality and the ability to think are all direct line results of Democrat legislative initiatives. Too often, Republican's back the Democrat legislation that ensured the crime that occurred in California last week. Politicians like the Clintons and Democrat voters might as well have been chauffeuring that abductor, child rapist and murderer. I won't even say God help them for I intensely despise the voters who refuse to think and are responsible for increasing crimes of this type. |
