I think liberalism goes back a little further than that. Delusional thinking got popular when people stopped starving to death, mid to late 19th century.

I admit to not reading the story, because I´m tired of the blame game. I think one can pick any topic from ObamaCare to Vaginas and recognize that the ´Dumbing Down of America´ has been a success.

The author is saying the TV lead us into our present situation--- instead of reflecting the changing culture it defined it and changed it.

Maybe so, but the greatest creep of liberalism has been both the revisionist rewriting of history and the public education system´s methodical move to socialistic ideas that have continued to influence generations.

Add to that the the hippies of the 60´s went on to become the "journalists" of the present era, the college professors, and in too many cases the leaders inside the liberal wing of the Christian churches in America.

TV may have influenced-- but I watched all those shows and survived the slanted news of the last 50 years. The difference is that I didn´t buy into liberal Christianity or liberal education.

Besides... my favorite TV shows now are Breaking Bad, Walking Dead, and anything that exposes more corruption in the White House.

#1, the piece isn´t about so much about a vague worldview called liberalism.

What it´s about is the radical Left´s use of the "sit-com" to groom the American public (including children of course) into accepting "non-traditional families" and overt homosexual behavior.

This grooming is analogous to what a pedophile does, to slowly condition his young victim into accepting his behavior.

Our children are in their mid thirties now.

We had no TV in our home when they were growing up. We were able to maintain our values and our family culture until they were in their teens. By then our values were inculcated into their very beings.

Now they have children of their own and they have no TV in their home.

The nursery school a grandchild attends allows NO cartoon or superhero characters on any clothing.

It isn´t easy but it´s up to the parents to set the standards by which the family survives.

Once again, the answer is to simply boycott these shows. Collectively, we have tremendous power: no ratings, no sponsors, no sponsors, no show. Do the same with Hollywood and the trash they put out. Refuse to go to disgusting movies! And, turn off the MSM! Don´t even sneak a peek! Write and tell them you may resume watching when they present BOTH sides of a story, but not until then.
Write letters to the sponsors. Get 20-50 like-minded people to sign a petition.
Moaning and whining gets us nowhere. DO something!

Last night on "Person of Interest" the plot revolved around a female doc (African-American) whose "wife" (Nordic blond) was being threatened so the doc would let a man die on the operating table. The word "wife" was used repeatedly. I am so disappointed, but, of course, can´t be surprised. Homosexuals make up a tiny fraction of the population, not that you´d guess that from watching TV. I´ve still got "Grimm" and "Once Upon A Time", but for how long?

We dropped HBO several years ago because every single one of their drama series turned into homo-fest.

Rome, Six Feet Under (started out that way), Big Love....... at some point or another, they just HAD TO bring in gay themes. And not just gay themes.... being HBO, we got to see practically all.

I guess their point is that homosexuality has always been around, and now it´s time to accept it - and ´celebrate it!!!´ - I guess.

But it´s the regular network (i.e., free) channels and their shows - another example that comes to mind is Parks & Rec... I like that show, the characters are quirky and the actors are good in their parts - but they had to introduce liberal politics, to the extent of having Joe Biden in last night´s episode.

Really? And the main character THANKED HIM.

That show is now off the DVR list.

The public education system killed family values, just like Karl Marx theorized. Worked like a charm!

#8 You beat me to the punch. Person of Interest in now on my banned list also, much to my disappointment. Shame on Jim Caviezel--from magnificently playing Christ to blatantly shilling for homosexuals. Too bad. It was an interesing show prior to this episode.

Yes, #8, even my beloved HGTV has been seriously pushing homosexual couples the last couple of years.

Posters #8 and 11. You both said exactly what I was going to post. You can´t imagine the disappointment last night when they portrayed the doctor and her ´wife´ as normal. There was no reason for this, as the spouse could have been male. Person of Interest is one of only four shows I watch and now it´s on the couldn´t care less list.

In fairness to Eight is Enough, it wasn´t intentionally radical. The woman who played the mother in the first season died, so decided to make that a part of the show. I never really watched the show but don´t see any intentional agenda there.

Dittos on Person of Interest. I´m not even that crazy about the show but had been watching it out of gratitude to Jim C. for his respectful portrayal of Christ.

I think a lot of the blame needs to be laid at the feet of the feminist-porn complex. This complex has turned women into narcissists and extreme sellers rather than carers of family.

Keep in mind that women are sellers by nature. Our ancestors understood that female selling, just like male promiscuity, needs to be controlled. That´s why there were laws and social conventions that required women to dress to the same level of modesty as men. Once these equalizing social conventions were abolished, it changed a lot of things.

I´m not being sexist here. I´m simply saying that liberalism has given women privileges that are anti-family in their natures.