Hypocrisy: OKCupid CEO donated to candidate opposed to gay marriage ~ By Joe Newby

Brendan Eich, Former Mozilla CEO

Mother Jones, naturally, tried to justify Yagan's donation.

"Of course," Hannah Levintova wrote, "it's been a decade since Yagan's donation to Cannon, and a decade or more since many of Cannon's votes on gay rights. It's possible that Cannon's opinions have shifted, or maybe his votes were more politics than ideology; a tactic by the Mormon Rep. to satisfy his Utah constituency."

But Levintova said that didn't matter when OKCupid target Eich, who made his donation in 2008.

Joe Newby writes about the recent revelation and "outing" of the donation by OKCupid CEO Sam Yagan to support a candidate that had voted against same-gender marriages. It is important to notice that nobody, including Newby, is calling for Yagan to step down from his position at OKCupid, who led the attack on Mozilla last week. The whole point is just to illustrate the hypocrisy from some on the Left.

From Jason Howerton on TheBlaze.com:

Even openly gay far-left blogger Andrew Sullivan panned the effort, finding rare common ground with conservative personalities who think free speech is more important than political beliefs.

“The whole episode disgusts me – as it should disgust anyone interested in a tolerant and diverse society. If this is the gay rights movement today – hounding our opponents with a fanaticism more like the religious right than anyone else – then count me out,” Sullivan wrote. “If we are about intimidating the free speech of others, we are no better than the anti-gay bullies who came before us.”

However, as Andrew Sullivan also wrote, "Will he now be forced to walk through the streets in shame? Why not the stocks?"  Hopefully not, or certainly, we're all in trouble.  Who here has not ever written anything in a blog, or a tweet on twitter, or on Facebook, that somebody could possibly take offense to, sometime in the future?

It's actually quite scary, and may I emphasize that point any more than I am now? What concerns me is that one person can lose his livelihood, being forced to resign from a very good position as a CEO, while somebody else escapes the same scrutiny for behavior from long ago.  This is what happens when the powerful political agenda of one group can alter the personal livelihood just because, in their minds, certain individuals have viewpoints that aren't acceptable.  But I thought that the harassment of employees for their beliefs is wrong?  Shouldn't the DOJ be investigating the thugocracy that made a certain individual uncomfortable in his workplace, requiring his resignation?

With this kind of fuzzy liberal logic being exposed, that it's okay to disparage somebody that made a very small contribution to a cause that isn't accepted by a minority, I will hope that talking-head news analysts will actually bother to cover this story as much as possible.  This seems to be a blatant example of how intimidation can work.  At what point will the U.S. government use that tactic, and be involved in restriction on OUR free speech?  Do you think that can't happen?  Oh, yeah, how about the IRS targeting of Tea Party Conservatives?  I'm just sayin'...

RELATED STORIES:

• Mozilla slammed with negative feedback after Eich ouster ~ By Joe Newby

• Exposed: Accusations of Hypocrisy in Company’s Crusade to Oust Mozilla CEO Over Political Donation< ~ By Jason Howerton

• The Story That Made Beck Say ‘We Are Becoming a Thugocracy’ - By Erica Ritz

• OkCupid's CEO Donated to an Anti-Gay Campaign Once, Too ~ By Hannah Levintova

Hypocrisy: OKCupid CEO donated to candidate opposed to gay marriage

By Joe Newby

April 8, 2014

From examiner.com

Sam Yagan, co-founder and
CEO of OKCupid

It seems, as George Orwell once wrote, that some are apparently more equal than others. On Monday, Mother Jones reported that OKCupid co-founder and CEO Sam Yagan also contributed to a candidate who opposed abortion and same-sex marriage.

OKCupid led the fight that ultimately caused Mozilla co-founder and CEO Brendan Eich to step down over a $1,000 contribution to a group supporting Proposition 8 in 2008.

Citing Open Secrets, Mother Jones said Yagan gave $500 to Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, in 2004.

According to Mother Jones, Cannon "voted for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, against a ban on sexual-orientation based job discrimination, and for prohibition of gay adoptions."

He also held a "0" rating from the pro-abortion NARAL Pro Choice America and voted for several pieces of pro-life legislation.

"Stone, meet glass house," Instapundit said on Twitter.

~~~ READ MORE on examiner.com ~~~

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

VIDEO: Bootin' Out the Bible ~ By ZONATION

It's another great Alfonzo Rachel video that needs to be seen. "Zo" is absolutely correct. What is it going to hurt to have Bibles in the hotel rooms?

I just wonder if that hotel at Iowa State University has a cable system coming into the rooms that contains porn? Whether or not it does, a lot of hotels do. But if any of us were offended? The same people that want Bibles banned from rooms because they say it is a violation of "the separation of church and state" would say that allowing porn on TV is freedom of speech. How is it right that those on the Left are offended by the Bible can be offended, but Christians can't stop the garbage on TV because we are offended? And if the state run university in Iowa bans Bibles in the hotel rooms, isn't THAT a violation of the First Amendment by the government saying Christian literature isn't allowed?

Annie Laurie Gaylor, of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, is on a mission to do away with Christianity.  It's a step by step process, and one of those steps is centered around a hotel at Iowa State University.  Atheists of course will not be satisfied with forcing their beliefs in the classrooms.  They'll keep going until Christianity is no longer tolerated, while forgetting that Christianity is at the foundation of what made this the most tolerant, charitable, and prosperous nation in the world.



Be sure to check out Zo's Audio Book to get insight on promoting conservatism in the culture and letting the liberals trip over their own nasty narrative.
http://alfonzorachel.com/macho-sauce-merch/

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

Helen Thomas: Martyr of the left ~ By Joseph Farah

Joseph is absolutely correct about the left supporting Helen Thomas. In the comments for the video below, I saw this one (the only one that actually made ANY sense, even though it's wrong):

So Much for the Freedom of Speech in the US, this woman has served her country for more than 50 years in the white house with more than 10 presidents! And just because she said the truth, she's now an anti-Semite and should be fired! Why not execute her as well, also Note Note that after the video there's a guy accusing her of being intolerant and racist against Jews, now listen carefully to what Helen said, she didn't mention Jews not even once!!! ~ by thePencilOrg

If you notice in that comment above, the writer tried to claim that Helen wasn't being intolerant or racist. It is exactly the same spin that people on the left, the progressives, were trying to put on what Helen said. To be fair, the writer of the above comment lives in Jordan according to the profile on youtube, and is most likely Arab, and may or may not be "progressive," but it does illustrate the point that Joseph wrote: "It's happening all over the world. It is as if Europeans and Asians and Africans and many Americans were under a spell – a spell of vicious, irrational, hateful anti-Semitism." Just sayin'...

June 08, 2010 - Helen Thomas: What a shameful way to retire

Video provided by TheREALjohnny2k

Which is why I must remind you of something little understood in the world today: The Holocaust was the work of a "progressive" socialist regime. It was the work of the national socialists of Germany. Many today are under the mistaken belief that Adolf Hitler was some kind of right-winger. He was not. He wasn't a Communist, but he was a socialist, which, if you remember my lesson on the political spectrum, can never, ever be part of the political right.

The Holocaust was a mere 65 years ago.

And, already the world has forgotten – at least the world of the left.

By Joseph Farah

Posted: June 10, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

I've received a number of queries from some of my "progressive" friends and acquaintances since writing a blistering commentary that probably contributed to the forced retirement of Helen Thomas.

Not a one of them, by the way, said: "Farah, I know I don't often agree with you about matters like government redistribution of wealth, the need for government to protect individual liberties rather than create group rights, gun control, freedom of the press and a host of other issues, but you were right about Helen Thomas. She was way over the line. What she said was blatantly anti-Semitic, and there was no excuse. Good riddance to her and congratulations to you."

Not even close.

In fact, every single one of the comments I received from so-called "enlightened progressives" suggested that I had overreacted to Thomas' remarks.

In other words, from the admittedly small sampling of perhaps 50 e-mails I received from avowed "progressives" on the matter of Helen Thomas, most of them either said they agreed with her or that I was being too tough on her.

What this suggests to me is that there is a growing intolerance, to use one of its terms, among the "progressive left" toward Israel and Jews in general.

That should be disturbing to every American.

Why would so-called "progressives," whose religion is tolerance and diversity, be so willing to excuse the kind of hate speech Helen Thomas offered in that infamous video?

I don't want to beat a dead horse on this subject, but seldom in American public life do we see such stark examples of anti-Jewish bigotry on display as we saw in Helen Thomas' downfall.

Yet, virtually all of the criticism that led to her resignation from the Hearst Corporation came from the "conservative right."

Where were the "progressives"? Where were the "liberals"? Where was the "left"?

You know the answer – and so do I.

These are indeed rhetorical questions.

The answer is that the so-called "progressive liberal-left" – internationally as well as domestically – is increasingly anti-Israel and anti-Jewish.

Jews are no longer part of a protected minority class, apparently, in the eyes of the left – if indeed they ever were.

That's pretty shocking given the 5,000-year historical record of anti-Jewish persecution. There is no parallel in history to the persecution of the Jews – none, zip, zilch, nada.

The recent international furor over the Gaza flotilla is an example of how there is simply a different standard of behavior expected from Jews and Israelis than any other people in the world. The "progressive liberal-left" can understand why Arabs send their children into Israel to act as suicide bombers and fire rockets and missiles from their territory into Israeli towns and villages, but it cannot comprehend why Israel seeks to defend itself.

There's a word for that kind of double-standard – bigotry.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Profits derived from your purchases
will help me to attend tea party rallies,
(especially the one in Las Vegas, on July 15-17)!

The pain – and penalty – of tolerance ~ By Pat Boone

Commentary from WorldNetDaily

By Pat Boone Posted: December 19, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009

"God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated But with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that His justice cannot sleep forever." ~ Thomas Jefferson (The above remains engraved on his monument)

Tolerance is good. Intolerance is bad. Right? Not always, in either case. Consider. One of the primary definitions of tolerance is "the capacity to endure hardship and suffering." How long should a person put up with a toothache before he sees the dentist? How long should parents indulge a spoiled child in his tantrums? How long should a woman endure those strange pains in her stomach before she consults the right doctor? Is tolerance the answer for a spendthrift "shop-a-holic" wife? For a teenager obviously building a drug habit? For a husband and father addicted to gambling? What about that dad in the news recently who was notified by Verizon that his son had incurred over $20,000 in iPhone charges, and had to take a second mortgage on their home? Americans are, and have always been, a tolerant people. We're all aware that we're an ethnic mix, that most all our forbears emigrated to these shores from other countries, and that this is truly "the land of the free." Our Declaration of Independence underscores the intended, rightful equality of all our citizens, and the First Amendment to our Constitution guarantees that Congress shall make no laws restricting the free exercise of our religious beliefs, or of the press, or our freedom of speech. Though prejudices have still plagued our society, time and good will and earnest efforts have gradually dissolved much of the earlier intolerance toward others who believe, or act, or even look different than ourselves. So tolerance – accepting others for who they are, in spite of differences – has been a steady and worthy goal. Intolerance – rejecting and defaming, even persecuting others because of differences – has always seemed unworthy, even contemptible. So it's very troubling to see that, in some very real ways, our country is paying some painful prices for our very tolerance. And in some cases, "tolerance" may stem from apathy or ignorance, or just be an outward sign of non-involvement. Look at television today. Because of the steady, unrelenting pressure from writers, producers, network executives and ad agencies that are competing for the mighty dollars TV can produce, inviolate standards of decency we all lived by have all but vanished. Where even in movies, not long ago, a man and woman were not to be seen in the same bed, the soap operas on daytime TV apparently have been given the green light to portray just about any sexual or aberrant activity humans are capable of. The FCC has all but thrown up its hands and said "we give up; you people do whatever you want. Nobody seems to care." READ FULL STORY >