NYT editor Bill Keller: space alien, scumbag or both

You know, I started writing one of my typical responses to the inane crap from the Left when, the more I looked at the article, the less I felt inclined to the subtle art of sarcasm that usually characterizes my prose. The more I looked at his article, and its presentation online at the New York Times, the more I felt that the only correct way to respond was with a direct approach.

So, to be as blunt as possible, Bill Keller, an executive editor at the New York Times, is a scumbag. His article, “Asking Candidates Tougher Questions About Faith,” is a crock from top to bottom. Of course, for anyone who has paid attention to the media without a set of rosy liberal glasses, there’s nothing new here. But, since there are so many who remain willing to trust the lamestream media in spite of repeated examples of a heavy propagandist shift further and further into liberal disorder, the point needs to be driven home again and again.

You don’t become an editor at the New York Times unless you know how to turn a phrase. Keller does so in the most outlandish fashion and certainly with a sense of baiting outraged responses from Christians and conservatives. Of course, he’s also reinforcing the foundation built by the Left that is increasingly portraying people of faith as the equivalent of those who still believe the world is flat.

The Left constantly attacks conservatives as being less cerebral. The reality is that those on the Left who carry the attack are from the liberal elitist ranks fermented in the manure laden soil of liberally dominated academia. These are the same people who hypothesize about esoteric philosophies that have little foundation in reality.

For example, I once took a course at a university where the professor proposed that, one day, they would be able to write all our thoughts and emotions into a computer program and we would live in the Internet free from the bounds of the physical realm. That’s just wonderful, isn’t it – at least until a squirrel chews into a fiber-optic line somewhere as your little electronic impulses are about to pass.

But our country has regressed to the point where an editor at one of the largest papers in the land can defend attacks against candidates of faith, while suggesting they’re cut from the same cloth as those who believe “space aliens dwell among us.”

Personally, I’ve come to the conclusion there is no non-religion. Everybody believes in something; they believe in God, they believe there’s no way to know or they believe there is no God. OK, Mr. Keller, scientifically explain to me how the universe extends forever. Or, if you propose that it doesn’t, explain to me where it ends and what comes after or how nothing comes after.

There are certain things that science can prove to greater or lesser degrees. For instance, scientific inquiry has fairly well proven the mechanics of boiling water. But, there are things that science cannot prove. And one thing science cannot prove, no matter what other revelations it claims, is that God does not exist. Nothing that science has proven to date disproves God.

But, as one who worships at the altar of scientific inquiry, maybe Mr. Keller can apply those processes to answer a few questions for me, such as:

1.       Why would individuals claiming they’re journalists endorse attacks on the religious beliefs of conservative candidates while ignoring Obama’s 20 years in the pews of Rev. Wright’s bombastic “God-damn America” church?

2.       Why would folks like Keller defend the selective rights of journalists to question the validity of conservative candidate’s faith while ignoring Obama’s decision to hide his academic records?

3.       And, how could Keller or anyone else of his unethical makeup suggest they have any journalistic rights at all when they abandoned those rights by failing to ask Obama one simple question in 2009 – “What do you mean, Mr. President, when you say you’re going to ‘fundamentally change America?’”

Oh, you may have noticed that I have not included a link to this scumbag’s NYT article. I usually do so when I reference a story. However, I realize that the scumbag was writing in this antagonistic fashion because he was expressly hoping to garner readership from those he outraged and it's not my job to assist him to that end. If you have any doubts that this is true consider the ad on the page right next to the story: “Become an ORDAINED PASTOR: Answer God’s call to service.”

Isn't that funny, blasting people of faith while selling to those who believe.