When the News Isn't Fit to Print ... Blog

Conservatives’ National Conundrum: Deadbeat Republicans or Two More Years of Pelosi?

In Back in the Day on 06/03/2010 at 10:14

While we remain essentially a two-party nation (and one of those parties will succeed in controlling congress for the foreseeable future), we are no longer two parties able to negotiate with one another. This is my concern, should Republicans retake the House and Senate in November.

If the Republicans return to their conservative mandate, the very foundation of the party since Lincoln, will they be able to lead? I suspect not. Of course, if they remain the party of McCain and Lindsey Graham, the party George Bush led so abysmally, they should have no difficulty passing legislation. Progressive legislation. Which is what we have seen progressively (no pun intended), since 1988 when Ronald Reagan left office.

While the GOP remains the arbiter, at least in word if not deed, of smaller government and lower taxes, Democrats long ago relinquished their status as the party of the workingman. They are and have been for 30 years the party of the white-collar elite.

We now face a political situation the Framers did not foresee. What happens if one of the predominant parties intends to undermine the very constitution that allows it to exist?

And therein, as the Bard so aptly put it, lies the rub. The parties in congress are so far polarized that without a massive majority and a president who will sign their legislation the Republicans don’t stand a chance of returning this government to the people.

Perhaps Bill O’Reilly can’t bring himself to call Barack Obama a socialist, but I can. One only has to research his upbringing. Barack has been a socialist ever since, at eight or 10 years old, the pedophile Frank Marshall Davis sat him on his knee and taught him … communism. In fact one would be hard pressed to find even one close friend or mentor in Obama’s history who has not been a Marxist-socialist.

If Tea Party and other conservatives decide to support John McCain and other progressive candidates for reelection in November we may gain a majority in congress, but will we have leadership that represents our values?

If, on the other hand, independent conservatives shun party regulars to support rogue Republicans or independent conservative candidates we are likely to end up with the same mess we had in 2006.

Don’t think for a moment the DNC isn’t on this; they know they can win in 2010 if they succeed in creating enough dissension in conservative ranks.

I envy Florida right now. At least they have Marco Rubio to run against RINO Charlie Crist.

So the age-old question arises. Do we go for broke and support only conservatives nationwide and stand the chance of at least two more years of this, or do we vote for the lesser of two evils?

The key here I believe is the primaries. We must win there or we don’t win at all in November. Well, I didn’t say I have any answers. This is my great dilemma.

Advertisements
  1. “Barack has been a socialist ever since, at eight or 10 years old, the pedophile Frank Marshall Davis sat him on his knee and taught him … communism”?

    Is this speculation, or do you have evidence that Davis taught him communism? Why do you claim that Frank Marshall Davis was a “pedophile”? Because his porn memoir-novel included sex with an underage teenager? Do you also consider the author of porn memoir-novel “Lolita” to be a pedophile, or just Davis? A novel is fiction!

  2. Yes, I consider works of fact and fiction alike advocating adult sex with minors pedophilia. I’m not going to do your research for you. Frank Marshall Davis is on written record admitting to having sex with minors. He and his wife engaged in a prolonged sexual liaison with a 13-year-old girl. Barack is on record being present when his grandfather and Davis discussed their mutual interest in Marxist philosophy. Davis was active in Marxist organizations for his entire life. Just what do you think they would’ve discussed?

    I was a member of the New Left. The difference between BHO and me is that I admitted it.

  3. YOU WROTE: “Yes, I consider works of fact and fiction alike advocating adult sex with minors pedophilia.”

    RESPONSE: Does this mean you consider the author of “Lolita” to be a pedophile just because he wrote about pedophilia. If so, do you also consider authors of murder mysteries to be murderers because they wrote about murder?

    YOU WROTE: ” Frank Marshall Davis is on written record admitting to having sex with minors. ”

    RESPONSE: Davis admits writing the book of fiction, in which imaginary character Bob Greene goes through those activities. Davis never admitted that those activities happened in his real life. Please provide empirical evidence to support your claim of his “admission.” (NOTE: Neither a book of fiction, nor speculation from unscrupulous journalists such as Toby Hamden or the National Enquirer, comprise empirical evidence. Evidence could only come from a statement by Davis saying that HE (not any fictional character) had sex with minors)

    This myth was fabricated by Toby Hamden’s Telegraph article. Davis wrote a scandalous memoir-novel under the pseudonym Bob Greene, one chapter of which is devoted to fictional character Bob Greene and his wife having sex with a thirteen year old girl. This fact was as accurately reported on August 24, 2008 by Toby Hamden on a British website
    (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2601914/Frank-Marshall-Davis-alleged-Communist-was-early-influence-on-Barack-Obama.html).

    From this kernel of truth, however, Hamden skillfully builds a deceptive house of cards. To wit:

    1. FALSE ATTRIBUTION: According to Hamden, “Mr. Davis (writing as Greene) explains that although he has “changed names and identities…all incidents I have described have been taken from actual experiences.”

    a. Please note that the fictional character Bob Greene, not author Davis, alleges that incidents were taken from actual experiences. Even Hamden’s travesty of journalism only stated that Mr. Davis confirmed that he was the author, not that the events actually occurred in Davis’s life.

    b. Casual readers of Hamden’s story may not have noticed his sleight of hand (fallacy of equivocation) when substituting author Davis for fictional character Bob Greene as the subject of experiences in the book. In this one statement, Hamden shifted the identity of subject “he” from Greene to Davis, thereby indicating that Greene’s story actually happened to Davis. This deception, however, reveals Hamden’s intent to directly smear Davis and thereby indirectly smear Obama through guilt-by-association.

    2. ESCALATION #1: On the same day (August 24) Hamden’s report was published, so-called “Accuracy In Media” (AIM) published a new report citing Hamden’s story. (AIM had already published numerous reports defaming Frank Marshall Davis starting in February 2008.) AIM now reported that Edgar Tidwell, an “expert in the life and writing of Davis,” confirmed that Frank Marshall Davis wrote “Sex Rebel: Black” as a semi-autobiographical novel. Despite Tidwell’s expert opinion that the novel was SEMI-autobiographical, AIM escalated accusations against Davis by claiming he was a sex pervert (http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-red-mentor-was-a-pervert/) based on Hamden’s same-day report. Kincaid falsely attributed the “pervert” claim to Hamden’s report.

    3. ESCALATION #2: On 14 October, AIM again escalated the charges by falsely claiming Davis was an “admitted child molester”
    (http://www.aim.org/aim-column/was-a-communist-obamas-sex-teacher/).

    4. SUMMARY: Evidence strongly suggests that Hamden and AIM worked together on this story before either post was published on August 24: AIM’s post referenced Hamden’s story although both were published the same day. Further, AIM’s false attribution of the “pervert” claim to Hamden’s story suggests AIM referenced Hamden’s draft rather than a final version.

    Let us evaluate the empirical evidence with dispassionate objectivity, rather than accepting unsubstantiated accusations and deliberate misrepresentation from pundits of questionable integrity. If intellectual engagement and sincere substantive discussions in the pursuit of truth are the goals of your blog as a rational conservative, I welcome the opportunity for cordial debate with you and your readers.

    If, on the other hand, you resort to ad hominem attacks and moderator censorship more typical of the wingnut fringe, then I completely understand that familiar position. Thanks!

    “Truth is generally the best vindication against slander.” – Abraham Lincoln

    • If you want to editorialize get your own blog. Davis admitted both in his personal papers and publicly that he was Bob Greene and that the stories were true. This was not fabricated. Sex Rebel: Black, was published in 1968, not as a novel, but as an autobiographical work under that pseudonym. You have no “empirical” evidence to the contrary. Neither you nor AIM can refute Davis’s personal confession to the truth of the work. Davis’s words speak for themselves.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: