About Me

Name: Ernie
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 
Uncategorized

Rush Limbaugh and the Hillary Vote

I want to interject my opinion about this thing Rush has been doing: asking republican primary voters to vote for Hillary. It's my understanding that the idea is to keep the Democrats destroying each other a few more months while their primary is undecided, and possibly even make Hillary the victor because she's going to be easier to defeat.

I first learned about this concept in 1992, when I was informed by two co-workers that they were voting for Pat Buchanan in the California primary because they wanted an unelectable Republican to run against Bill Clinton. I was deeply hurt that people were manipulating the Republican's in this way. I learned later that this was a common practice among liberals, who would register as Republicans for primary season, then switch to Democrat in the general.

It's beneath the Republicans to stoop to this level of politics. It doesn't matter that they've been doing it possibly for decades. We are the party of intellectual honesty and integrity - at least I like to think that the conservatives among us are. I learned a long time ago to expect this kind of conduct from Democrats - they tend to have no integrity. But I can't accept it as good conduct from Republicans.

The worst news was what Laura Ingraham has been saying on her show the past two days, agreeing with Rush. I love Rush and I especially love Laura, but I can't overemphasize how wrong it is to encourage Republicans to play manipulative little games with the process. Whether it's Obama or Clinton, they're going to cheat, and have the power of millions of cheaters helping them. It doesn't matter if they're running against McCain, Romney, Huckabee or Condoleeza Rice - they're going to cheat. Ballot boxes will be stuffed, illegal aliens and felons will be voting and valid military votes will be excluded or 'lost'. Hit-piece false ads will be run on the airwaves and dropped in the mail just days, if not hours, before election day. Yet most of the time, Republican's prevail despite all the Democrats' cheating.

Let's not initiate schemes that amount to manipulating our opponents. It will eventually lead to justifying doing dirtier things down the road, and the next thing you know, we'll be no better than the Democrats.

Preserve integrity, win on the merits. If we exclude all the votes that were manipulated by Democrats over the last 50 years, we'd easily control the house, that senate, most governorships and most legislatures. The fact that we got President Reagan and both President's Bush proves that not everyone can be so easily manipulated. The news media will never do the math, none of our government agencies will ever investigate, but as soon as we lower our standards, it will be front page/top story news and every government agency and attorney general in the country will be after us. It's almost as if the Democrats are planning to cry foul. They already do it routinely in other political finger-pointing. Two Republican Senators commit improper conduct with pages and it's censure, resignation, humiliation (as it should be). Democrats run homosexual prostitution rings, sexually assault interns, etc. and a wall of protection goes up around them. Sometimes they even investigate and demonize the accusers!

We're fighting a wicked, immoral foe. We can fight them uprightly and with our heads held high, or we can become wicked and immoral along with them and be destroyed politically. Republicans openly voting for a Democrat in primaries is just the first step in a downward spiral that will leave those of us with a strong moral compass with nowhere to go.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Donkey Cons: High School History Text

I'm about midway through the book Donkey Cons and I can only conclude that it needs to be required reading in high school history classes. Certainly in adult education.
 
I have seen many books that attempt to revise history, calling historical truth lies, and doing so with virtually no contextual documentation. "Don't Know Much About History", "Lies We Learned In School" and other such books litter the bookscape and linger on the shelves for years, if not decades. Those authors clearly find historical truth distasteful, and have endeavored to set the record... crooked.

Twenty years ago, I bought and read some of these books, thinking I was learning something new and gaining a sense of enlightenment, maybe feeling a little bit like an 'insider' who knew the truth that no one else had. In time, I began to learn that those authors were not telling me the truth, that it was really one world-view against another, and that I just didn't have a way of knowing who is and is not telling the truth.

Armed with a more discerning eye, I continued to seek out honesty. An annoying little belief system came to light which I have a lot of trouble with: "History is written by the victors". This statement could be true if it weren't for free societies. The Soviet Union tried for decades to supress the truth, to control what their people could know. Today, China and other countries continue this silliness in vain. In the USA, there's not even a pretense of truth to that statement. Bookstores and libraries have an annual Banned Books week, sponsored by the American Library Association. What an irony - they feature these supposed 'banned books' in their stores in great supply. The premise is that everyone from government to right-wing 'hate' groups are trying to keep you from seeing these books. Isn't this amazing?

The real argument, when you question the advocates long enough, is that they consider restricting access to anything that might be inappropriate to be a violation of free speech. So, for example, an explicit book about the sex lives of lesbians in women's prisons should be in elementary school libraries, with no adult or parental control. Or a website with detailed instructions on constructing a dirty nuclear bomb, including resources and suggested high-population targets should not be taken down. Any attempt to restrict access, or bring down potentially dangerous websites would be a violation of free speech.

These same people pile on top of their lies their own form of supression of free speech. Now, I know bookstores are in the business of making money - they don't care what makes the money - as long as they are making it. Those drawn to work in bookstores, libraries and that sort of business tend to be in it for the literature, not for the political books, computer books, DVD's, or for the money. They tend to be liberal, featuring books that agree with their views and burying the rest. I've seen this over and over again, and often find 'conservative' bestsellers turned over on the shelves, covered with a 'liberal' title, lacking a recommendation, and sometimes outright criticized by the seller (Amazon once lifted their prohibition on ad-hominem attacks on authors exclusively for the book "Unfit For Command").

I live in San Diego and one of the authors of Donkey Cons, Lynn Vincent, lives in San Diego, too. Do you remember when bookstores featured local authors? Not this time. It briefly made it to the New Releases table, then was promptly buried with so many other political books in the back.

It's not my normal practice to read political books. But I must say, I'm getting a wonderful education by reading Donkey Cons. It's extremely well-documented, balanced (the authors bring to light equivalent Republican missteps), and validates many suspicions I've had regarding Democrats.

One last thing - a disclaimer. I know Lynn Vincent. Not well, but her family attended a church which I also attend, and we've had brief conversations at writer's conferences long before I ever knew about this book. I would have heard about it anyway from a radio interview she did with Michael Medved, who I listen to regularly.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Conviction vs. Agenda

Last night on Fox News Channel, I caught an interview which included someone (presumably an ACLU attorney) named Michael Gross. John Kasich was moderating between him and a gentleman who I believe is from Washington State regarding the legality of lying about one's opponent in political campaigns.

First, I had to get past the concept that there could even be such a question. Of course it can't be legal to intentially lying about your opponent in a campaign! I was shocked that Mr. Gross not only defended it as Constitutionally protected under the First Amendment, but that Mr. Kasich's example of accusing an opponent of being a member of the American Nazi Party or being a sex offender were, without hesitation, defended by this man! I felt a little ill.

It is apparently in the courts now, and the current position pending appeal is that it IS legal to intentially lie about your opponent in a campaign!

For many years I've been of the opinion that there are people in this country, organized into groups such as the ACLU among others, whose sole purpose is to make a mockery of our Constitution and our founding values so that in time a majority would conclude that it is wholly insufficient, so that they can move forward advancing a Socialist, or even Communist change in government in the United States.

Mr. Gross felt strongly that it is the voter's responsibility to sort out the truth from the lies, and that we can't "sacrifice" free speech by imposing such restrictions as making it a crime to lie in a political campaign. I can't even begin to wrap my head around that! It creates an atmosphere where the best liars gain the advantage, where good, honest people cannot get into office at all, and advances the cause to discredit and abolish our Constitution.

When one takes this little piece of the lefts' thinking and applies it to current events, one begins to see how, in a nation that is basically conservative, there can be even the slightest liberal representation in our elected offices: THEY LIE!

I generally don't read politics, but I've decided to get Donkey Cons, by Lynn Vincent and Robert Stacy McCain and Godless by Ann Coulter. I think these two books will help clarify and reinforce what I've been suspecting. At least I have a good level of confidence that these authors are not lying.

I suspect that there are about 15-20% of American's paying attention in society. The rest just go along with whatever their social circles believe. Since nearly all Americans get their educations from public schools and their news from the networks, it's a wonder that any truth reaches our ears! It seems I've heard survey after survey showing overall conservative values when questions are asked in proper context, yet the voting shows that they're voting against their own values. This inconsistency can only mean that either they aren't paying attention, or that voter fraud is well instituted into our society.

I wish that neither were true, but it's likely that both are. We, as conservatives, possess deeply held convictions that do not, for the most part, take into consideration personal gain or quest for power over others. We simply want good to prevail. People like Mr. Gross possess an agenda, which appears to be to frustrate any good that you and I would seek. Opposition such as this requires serious prayer, and it appears that many of you have been doing so for quite some time, because despite all the lying out there, we have a lot of honest people in the majority.

Thank you for reading my first posting,

Ernie
Improve your life at Ernie's Network
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »