I just finished posting some responses to comments I've received over something I wrote about MyHeritage.org, the new propaganda outlet from the Heritage Foundation. The Watch was mentioned on the MyHeritage web site, so a lot of the drones felt obligated to tell me how stupid I am.

One guy said that it reveals a lot about the Heritage Foundation (there supposed integrity, I think he meant) that they mentioned my web site and provided a link “so that we can go look for ourselves.” What he apparently missed was that the Heritage Foundation misrepresented what I said. I know. Who would have thunk it?

Here's what they said I said;

According to a website called “The Watch,” MyHeritage.org “has no place being listed alongside genuine news articles.” The article goes on to say that MyHeritage.org is symbolic of conservatism’s success in breaking into the media, adding that “I fear the battle may be lost” for liberalism.

Really? Sorry, you heifers. That's not what I said. Here's some clarification;

I said; “The Heritage Foundation is not a news organization at all, regardless of how they might spin their image with the MyHeritage web site. Their passionate spin has no place being listed alongside genuine news articles.”

I never said that MyHeritage.org is symbolic of conservatism's success. What I said was; “What worries me is that the Neo-Cons have been so successful at concealing their over-all agenda from mainstream scrutiny that their opinion pieces are showing up alongside genuine news articles.”

And as for the last line, if your read it in context it plays out a little differently; “When I see Heritage Foundation propaganda listed alongside genuine news articles on a mainstream news web site, I fear the battle may be lost.”

Notice I didn't say that the battle may be lost for liberalism. My intent was to imply that the battle may be lost for Democracy. If the Neo-Conservatives win this battle, the democracy that Americans enjoy will be a thing of the past.

Anyway, the guy was right. It certainly was revealing of their character the way the Heritage Foundation referenced my web site. I got the same treatment everyone else does. Spin, spin, spin. Misrepresentation followed by propaganda. If the truth doesn't sustain your agenda, how valid can your precepts really be?