At number 16 on the list is MSNBC host Chris Hayes. This little weasel of a man who wears Harry Potter glasses hosts a show called "All In with Chris Hayes." He also writes for the Nation, another seldom read liberal rag. Hayes rose to popularity when he filled in for Ed Schultz on his show when Ed's head spontaneously exploded one afternoon. He also has filled in for my favorite male child actor, Rachel Maddow. In their infinite wisdom, MSNBC gave him his own show- the aforementioned "All In"- which airs opposite O'Reilly on Fox. Great programming there. If the people at MSNBC had an ounce of intelligence, they would just schedule infomercials from 5:00 to 11:00 p.m.
Hayes first rose to prominence when he questioned whether members of the armed forces could correctly be described as "heroes." By doing this, he surmised, we were perpetuating a war mentality. That was in 2012. Of course, Hayes has probably never donned the uniform of the military and has never been in harm's way. It is so easy to sit in a studio or academia and make these statements knowing full well that someone else is doing the actual dying. My guess is that if by some odd chance the military would take this twerp, his views on "heroism" would change the first time he witnessed an IED. One could only hope...
Instead, we are stuck with him on television. And he did not disappoint for making stupid liberal comments. For example, he pulled a Matt Lauer and thought that because there was a new Pope in Rome, the Catholic Church would change over 2,000 years of principled dogma and openly embrace homosexuality. When that did not quite pan out, he did the next best thing- he attacked the Pope.
Because he goes up against O'Reilly and because O'Reilly kills him in the ratings, Hayes did the same thing as with the Pope and attacked O'Reilly's audience. He described them as old, fearful, and white. Memo to Chris Hayes: An old, fearful and white audience is better than NO audience at all.
When Congress held up the farm bill- something that has a lot to do with food stamps and little to do with farming- Hayes declared the GOP was declaring war on the poor. In fact, for someone averse to war, he uses that analogy a lot. In this case, he used the more incendiary "jihad" rather than "war."
Probably his worse offense was his rabid support of the Rolling Stone cover featuring Boston Marathon bomber Alex Tsarnaev. While it is true that we have a thing called freedom of the press and freedom of speech- two things that protect Hayes- we also have a thing called decorum. It was obvious that the Rolling Stone cover was designed to cause controversy and increase sales of a flagging publication. Seriously- who reads that thing any more? Instead, Hayes elevated Rolling Stone to his cause celebre. The air brushed image of Tsarnaev as if he was the second coming of Jim Morrison hardly justified the defense by Hayes.
Billionaire George Soros is #15. Liberals are very good at projecting their views onto others, especially conservatives. When they are not seeing the racial bogeyman everywhere, they see a more sinister, evil force at play (cue the dramatic music)- those evil Koch brothers. Yet, they seem to readily forget that behind their political messaging is George Soros. In the case of the Kochs, at least their businesses actually do or create something. In the case of Soros, he moves money from point A to point B and he makes billions off these transactions. Ironically, isn't that what those Occupy Wall Street fruitcakes were railing against? A blind eye is turned when one of their own does that which they are protesting against. Only in America...
Just to illustrate how liberal Soros is, he largely sat out the 2012 election because (sit down for this one), Barack Obama was not liberal enough. Perhaps the only thing that would have garnered his support would have been if Obama wrapped himself in the hammer and sickle. Which is strange because Soros left his native Hungary to get away from communism and socialism. Yet his views and his policies are nothing but socialism. Considering that he uses the tools and mechanisms of capitalism to achieve those ends, that would make George Soros...a fascist or Nazi. I venture it is the latter.
When a killer typhoon hit the Phillipine Islands this year, Soros was quick to pull the global warming trigger. He is an unabashed believer in the climate change hysteria and believes the best system to stop it is a cap-and-trade scheme. Why? Because he can profit off of it. He already tried in Europe. It is also believed that Soros and his liberal proxies had a hand in the IRS targeting of Tea Party groups. Isn't it strange when words like "patriot" or allusions to a seminal event in US history are now "dirty words" to the IRS and liberals?
In fact, Soros' money is behind many liberal causes today. He backed student debt protests in June because everyone knows that every American has a God-given right to a college education whether they belong in college or not. Yet, I do not see his name behind too many college endowments.
If for no other reason, he belongs on this list because of his wealth and what he does with that wealth. In typical, hypocritical liberal fashion, he also supports campaign finance reform... unless it adversely impacts him and his beliefs. Not only is Soros a liberal spew, he is a dangerous one.