Politics – Dakota Voice http://www.dakotavoice.com Exposing the pernicious lie Thu, 04 Sep 2014 11:52:16 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.8.5 Opening the Door on the Stench in South Dakota http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/12/opening-the-door-on-the-stench-in-south-dakota/ http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/12/opening-the-door-on-the-stench-in-south-dakota/#comments Mon, 19 Dec 2011 12:50:02 +0000 http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=62752 There has been a nasty stench in the South Dakota Republican Party for several years now. If you don't follow politics too closely, you may not have noticed it, and even if you do, the whiff comes and goes. But thankfully, there are a few who are actually within the party and serve in elected office who are willing to rock the boat, who won't go along with what the establishment tells them to shut up and do, who are willing to swing wide the door on that stench and allow the public to get a good smell of that decay that's been rotting for so long inside. Lately, thanks to Rep. Stace Nelson and a few others, that door is opening and the light of truth is beginning to shine in.

]]>
There has been a nasty stench in the South Dakota Republican Party for several years now.  If you don’t follow politics too closely, you may not have noticed it, and even if you do, the whiff comes and goes.  But the smell was strong enough that when I was offered a not inconsiderable position within the local GOP a couple of years ago, I turned it down.

Now on one hand, you might say, “But Bob, if there’s something rotten in the GOP, you should have seized the opportunity so you could do some good.”  There is much to be said for that position, and we definitely need people who can and will do that.  But as a stipulation for accepting that position, I would have had to agree not to be critical of other Republicans in public.  That is a freedom I could not surrender.  Me?  I ultimately work for a Jewish carpenter who made it clear a long time ago that “being liked” is nowhere in my job description. While we do need good people on the inside who will make positive change, public commentary is what I do. While some might argue that my commentary isn’t worth the electrons it takes to publish it online, others do disagree, and while there are any number of people who could fill a party position, there just aren’t that many people who’s “thing” is writing–and fewer still who will criticize the establishment.

But thankfully, there are a few who are actually within the party and serve in elected office who are willing to rock the boat, who won’t go along with what the establishment tells them to shut up and do, who are willing to swing wide the door on that stench and allow the public to get a good smell of that decay that’s been rotting for so long inside.

Rep. Stace Nelson, a Republican from Fulton, is one such legislator.  I was in touch with Nelson over the weekend, and the last few weeks have been rough ones for him.  That’s saying a lot, for he’s a brawny Marine who served our country for many years as a military cop and NCIS investigator; he and I trod some of the same ground during my years doing similar work in the Air Force.  But those who follow the newspapers and blogs around South Dakota, the establishment has opened up on him with all guns blazing.  Why?  Nelson has been looking to make steaks out of several sacred cows.

Nelson says it has been reported to him that Republican House Majority Leader Rep. David Lust, Republican Speaker of the House Rep. Val Rausch, and Republican Assistant Majority Leader Justin Cronin had a closed-door meeting with the Director of Legislative Research Council Jim Fry. According to Nelson, the reports indicate the Republican leadership was unhappy about some of the bills being submitted to the legislature by unruly Republican members who were acting too Republican. It seems the leadership wanted a heads-up about some of these bills (a violation of the confidentiality of the LRC), and that Fry’s job may have been threatened if he didn’t play ball. Indications are that this matter is under investigation–but I’m not clear on whether we may have the foxes investigating problems in the henhouse.

If you followed the legislative session in January-March 2011, it was one of the most pathetic I’ve ever seen. With massive Republican majorities in both the state House and Senate, many bills which were “textbook Republican” bills (i.e. right in line with the party platform, and right in line with the GOP political stance nationwide) couldn’t even make it out of committee. We had Second Amendment bills that met with opposition from “Republicans,” attempts to control the illegal immigration that our federal government REFUSES to control were shot down with extreme prejudice (yes, the pun is intended), and we couldn’t even get a Health Care Freedom Act passed to tell the federal government where they can stick the unconstitutional anti-freedom ObamaCare bill. Things were so bad in the last session, one might have thought we had a 50/50 split with Democrats, or that the Democrats were even in charge.

After the session, Rep. Stace Nelson proposed that the LRC website add some functionality to make it easier for the public to look up how their elected representatives have voted on important issues. This information is indeed already available, but it can be very difficult to compile among many bills and issues, based on the way the information is compiled. However, as someone who has more than a decade of database and web programming experience, I can tell you that it would be fairly easy to produce what Rep. Nelson asked for. The information is already there; it just needs to be joined together and presented in a more useful fashion for the public.

Unfortunately, the powers that be (some of whom are the same “Republicans” who were hostile to the Republican agenda in the last session) squawked and balked and cried that it would be too hard to do. In reality, they just didn’t want to do it. They know what a crappy record they have of representing Republican values, and any steps they can take to keep the general public ignorant to that helps keep them in power.

Several weeks ago, a group of concerned rank-and-file Republicans released a scorecard they had compiled which compared the votes of our South Dakota legislators to the South Dakota GOP platform. Few Republican legislators scored well, and in some cases, there were Democrats who adhered to the GOP platform better than some Republicans.

Shortly after that was released, Rep. Nelson was informed that he was being removed from his position on the Agriculture Committee. It seems he had also recently expressed disagreement over a proposed dairy in Hanson County that the leadership favors.

It has been growing more and more apparent to me over the last several years that there are far too many “Republicans” in South Dakota government who care more about “the game” of politics and the power that comes with it, than they do about advancing the Republican agenda.

And we sit around and wonder why the general public often doesn’t trust the Republican Party to get the job done, and we can’t figure out how Joe Public could say, “The two political parties are two sides of the same coin.” Real Republicans don’t get that attitude because we’re focused on the values, the principles, the stated platform of the Republican Party…while the public (and you can’t really blame them too much) is focused on the fact that the Republican Party is doing a pathetic job of living up to its values, principles and platforms. In other words, the GOP has been saying one thing and doing another.  The GOP has been talking up conservatism, but when the people give the GOP a shot at power, they water it down or run in the other direction and are nearly as bad as the Leftists who control the Democrat Party.

Some time back, I wrote about truth in advertising.  If you buy a Coke, you don’t want to open the can and find Mountain Dew inside. If you buy a bag of sugar, you don’t want to add it to your cake mix, only to learn it was laundry detergent.  And if you vote “Republican” to get the Republican agenda accomplished, you darned sure don’t want to see a bunch of liberals with “R’s” after their name running around Pierre attacking conservative bills and acting like they were Donkeys. It doesn’t matter whether these RINOs really believe liberalism is the better way to go, or they’re just afraid the elites will make fun of them and snicker behind their back at parties and socials–either way, freedom and Republican values are falling by the wayside.

Frankly, if you’re not going to uphold the principles and platform of the Republican Party, you’ve got no darned business representing the party. A “Republican” who calls themselves a Republican in campaign mode but who then governs like a liberal Democrat is like a “Christian” who goes to church and acts all pious while wearing their church clothes…only to hit the bar and the strip club later.  In other words, it’s hypocritical and it gives the folks who are sincere members of such organizations a bad name.

But we can’t count on such two-faced hypocrites to leave positions of power in the Republican Party on their own; if they had the integrity to leave the party because they are a bad representative of it, they’d probably have the integrity to not act like a bad representative in the first place.

No, the people, the voters, the rank-and-file Republican average Joes are going to have to make it happen. We’re going to have to PRIMARY these RINOs. That means we need to find and recruit real Republican candidates to replace them (maybe it’s YOU who needs to step up and be that candidate), and then we need to back real Republicans in the primary with our volunteer time and our campaign donations to help them defeat entrenched power.  And then we’ll need to remain vigilant to hold THEM accountable.

South Dakota is a wonderful place to live.  Despite the fact that we’re a rural state with less than a million people, I think it’s the best state in the Union.  But with a greedy federal government that is positively drooling to extend its reach over every aspect of every American’s life, we won’t be able to preserve the spirit of our state motto (“Under God the people rule”) indefinitely if we don’t have elected representatives who are committed to  freedom and limited government.  Unfortunately too many within the leadership of the current crop have made it clear they’ll sell us out in a heartbeat.

It’s time we turned them out before they get a chance to sell out any more of our freedom.

]]>
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/12/opening-the-door-on-the-stench-in-south-dakota/feed/ 13
The Orwellian Republican Voter Guide http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/12/the-orwellian-republican-voter-guide/ http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/12/the-orwellian-republican-voter-guide/#comments Fri, 16 Dec 2011 15:59:53 +0000 http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=62623 Bill Whittle takes us through the Firewall to take a look at the Orwellian view of the "mainstream" media and others on the Left regarding politics. As you will see, people who want Americans to keep more of the money they have earned are evil, greedy jerks while those who want to take money from those who have earned it are "generous. But there are so many other differences between the two political ideologies...

]]>
Bill Whittle takes us through the Firewall to take a look at the Orwellian view of the “mainstream” media and others on the Left regarding politics.

As you will see, people who want Americans to keep more of the money they have earned are evil, greedy jerks while those who want to take money from those who have earned it are “generous.

Republicans are also fascists.  This is why Leftist academic types seldom if ever allow them to speak on college campuses, and often throw pies and try to chant them down in those rare occasions when Republicans are “generously” allowed to speak.

Notice, too, that sometimes conservatives lie about history and actually try to pass off as truth that fascist socialists such as Hitler and Mussolini believe in political violence to achieve their means (like the Occupy Wall Street gang), are opposed to free market capitalism (like the Occupy Wall Street gang), hate authentic Christianity (like the Occupy Wall Street gang), and believe in a powerful central government to regulate every aspect of life (like the Occupy Wall Street gang).

Speaking of Nazis, in defiance of all that we have been taught by academia and pop culture, conservatives actually have the audacity to remind us that the Nazi Party of Germany actually means “National Socialist German Workers Party.”  That just can’t be right. Socialism is warm and loving and “generous.”  We’ll just have to ignore this, because it would throw a monkey-wrench of integrity in the fun Leftists have in calling conservatives “Nazis.”

Of course, we all know that conservatives and Republicans are racists.  After all, the “mainstream” media and other members of the Left never miss an opportunity to tell us this.  The proof is everywhere we look throughout history:

  • The racist Republicans Party was founded by anti-slavery racists. It was founded to oppose the inclusive, tolerant, non-racist pro-slavery Democrat Party.
  • A racist Republican president issued the Emancipation Proclamation freeing all slaves
  • After the Civil War, the racist Republican Party passed the Thirteenth Amendment which abolished slavery
  • The racist Republican Party also passed the Fourteenth Amendment which specifically codified equal protection under the law for people of all skin colors
  • The despicable racist Republican Party even passed the Fifteenth Amendment which specifically guaranteed the right to vote regardless of one’s skin color
  • The inclusive, tolerant, non-racist Democrat Party unsuccessfully fought all the aforementioned efforts to extend the full freedom every American citizen should enjoy to black Americans
  • When the efforts of non-racist Democrats to stop these rights being extended to black Americans failed, they formed the non-racist, inclusive and tolerant Ku Klux Klan (KKK)
  • Non-racist, tolerant and inclusive Democrats also created “Jim Crow” laws in many states which extended the freedom to be oppressed and segregated to black Americans–and the KKK helped make sure black Americans enjoyed this “freedom” to the fullest extent possible
  • When black Americans in the 1960s insisted on their full constitutional rights, peaceful, non-racist Democrats sent the dogs and firehoses after them to help ensure their access to the “freedom” to continue being oppressed and segregated
  • When non-racist Democrats finally realized they could no longer hold back the tide of oppressive freedom being forced on black Americans, their strategy of subjugation took a new and unique turn: addicting black Americans to freebies, coupled with a healthy dose of historical revision

So now you know why, if you love freedom and believe that the founding principles of liberty should be fully extended to all Americans, you MUST vote against Republicans in the next election.  Their ghastly agenda of allowing people to keep their own property, and forcing people to make decisions for themselves, cannot be allowed to regain ascendency in America ever again.

]]>
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/12/the-orwellian-republican-voter-guide/feed/ 7
Let’s Conversate about the Argubate  http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/11/let%e2%80%99s-conversate-about-the-argubate%c2%a0/ Mon, 14 Nov 2011 12:10:28 +0000 http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=61322 A debate is merely an argument dressed up in its Sunday-go-to-meeting clothes.? So whether we should call our current national dialog a debate or an argument depends upon the sensibilities of the writer and the reader.? For the purposes of fairness and inclusiveness I will therefore coin a new term, "Argubate."

]]>
Robert R. Owens, Ph.D.

Robert R. Owens, Ph.D.

A negotiation is the formalized give-and-take side of a conversation. The blending of the two, a negotiation with the less formal tone of a family discussion, is aptly termed in the dictionary of the way we speak as “to conversate.”

A debate is merely an argument dressed up in its Sunday-go-to-meeting clothes. So whether we should call our current national dialog a debate or an argument depends upon the sensibilities of the writer and the reader. For the purposes of fairness and inclusiveness I will therefore coin a new term, “Argubate.”

Has there ever been a time in American History when everyone at least seemed to agree on everything?

Yes, there was a brief interlude forgotten by all save historians, a moment of forgotten peace in our raging sea of political passion.

In the overwhelmingly nationalistic years after the War of 1812 there was a brief period which saw a dramatic lowering of the heat in our perpetual political strife. In the Election of 1816, James Monroe a Democratic Republican defeated the last of the Federalist candidates. Monroe and his policies were so popular and so well received that he won reelection in the Election of 1820 facing no opposition whatsoever. This brief calm in the political storm is the popularly forgotten Era of Good Feelings.

Ever since that one brief lull in the ideological conflagration the battle has flared. First one side and then the other are in the driver’s seat while the other side plots its eventual return to power. It has only been by compromise that we have avoided a series of fratricidal wars.

Compromise today has a negative connotation for those on the limited government side of the aisle. 100 years of compromise with those who wish to progress past the limitations enshrined in our founding document have brought us to the strangulation of regulations and the oppression of an overwhelming central government. However, compromise is still the only way to avoid the abyss which lies beyond our current position on the precipice of mutually exclusive partisanship.

Compromise is the only thing that will preserve our country from either splintering into pieces all the king’s horses and all the king’s men won’t be able to put together again, a-la the USSR or sinking into the type of gulag from which the Russians are still struggling to escape.

Beyond the eloquent explanations and focus-grouped sound bites compromise is essentially everyone doing what no one wanted. Compromise can also be the tactic of any group that seeks to move ahead one step at a time.  Gain a little here and a little there until one inch at a time you have moved across the street.  And therein lays the problem.  The Progressives have used this tactic so often and for so long that the silent majority finally woke up to find their elected representatives had sold the cow for some magic beans.  It is hard to trust compromise when it has bargained away our heritage one new interpretation at a time.  However, the looming breakdown in civil discourse prompts me to urge a renewed effort to find some way to preserve the peace while preserving our freedom.

Compromise has a long history in America for we were born in compromise.

It was only due to the Great Compromise reached in Independence Hall that we have a Constitution.  The New Jersey Plan and the Virginia Plan were wedded to produce a compromise satisfying the desires of both the small states and the large states by creating a House of Representatives based upon population and a Senate with equal representation.

The Union was preserved twice by compromise.

By 1820 the division between the slave-holding South and the emancipated North was growing bitter.  The debate hinged upon the even division of the senate.  For every state admitted on one side the other side demanded a counterbalance.  When it came time to begin carving states out of the Louisiana Territory the Southern side was the first to advance to that stage, but the North could not abide admitting Missouri as a slave state since there was no free state ready for admission.  So the Missouri Compromise solved the problem and kept the peace.

Missouri was admitted as a slave state. Maine was separated from Massachusetts and admitted as a free state.  A line was drawn along the southern boundary of Missouri. Everything North of that would be free, and everything South of that slave. Thirty years later a new compromise held off war for another ten years.

The Compromise of 1850 was designed to address the sectional rivalry over slavery which was tearing our young nation apart.  It was in reality a series of five bills.  The compromise brought in California as a free state.  It allowed New Mexico and Utah to decide the slavery issue through a popular vote and gave Texas ten million dollars to pay its debt to Mexico for which it gave up lands claimed in present day New Mexico.  It abolished the slave trade in the District of Columbia and the Fugitive Slave Act which made it a federal crime for any federal official not to arrest a runaway slave.

This compromise only lasted four years when it was effectively repealed by the Kansas-Nebraska Act which once again opened the northern territories to the possibility of slavery and leaving the decision in the hands of the voters. This led to increasing hostilities between the two sides culminating in John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry and the Civil War: the ultimate break down of America’s process of compromise.

The Civil War did not end America’s use of compromise to avoid permanent division. Reconstruction, the occupation of the South by Northern armies after the Civil war, eventually led to an impasse with the threat of renewed conflict. War was averted when the Compromise of 1877 gave a disputed election to a Republican president, an end of Reconstruction, and various offices and political gains to the Democrats.

Except for the fleeting Era of Good Feelings and those unusual and brief times when the same side controlled all three branches of government, America has moved forward by compromise. For compromise, true compromise, not surrender dressed up in a palatable name, is the sweet spot where any group that is in reality two groups must dwell if there is to be peace, progress, and harmony. Make no mistake, since the beginning America has ever been the home of two sides: the Patriots and the Loyalists, the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, the Democratic Republicans and the Whigs, and those two rabid beasts we all love to hate the Democrats and the Republicans.

Instead of just shouting our mutually exclusive slogans at each other what we need is a dialogue across the no-man’s-land which separates our entrenched positions. This article is an attempt to urge both sides to realize neither side has the support to dominate the other long enough to legislate let alone legitimize total victory. If we can get beyond shouting slogans at each other perhaps we can find our way to a compromise that will allow us to continue as the last best hope of humanity. If not, we may well slide into the shabby collectivism which shackles the rest of the globe.

Is there anything we can agree on?? Is there any way forward?? Can we at least conversate about the argubate?? I say this realizing that in our current atmosphere of hyper-partisanship this call for compromise will probably make neither side happy. However, I am willing to be damned if I do and damned if I don’t in an attempt to preserve the peace if we can do so while preserving our freedom. Keep the Faith. Keep the Peace. We shall overcome.

Dr. Robert R. Owens teaches history, political science, religion, and leadership for Southside Virginia Community College. Dr. Owens is the author of “America Won the Vietnam War,” “The Asuza Street Revival,” and called “The Constitution Failed.”  He is available for speaking engagements.

]]>
Discussing Political Culture With Thomas Sowell http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/11/discussing-political-culture-with-thomas-sowell/ http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/11/discussing-political-culture-with-thomas-sowell/#comments Mon, 07 Nov 2011 12:45:20 +0000 http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=61007 This is an excellent "Uncommon Knowledge" with Peter Robinson interview of economist Thomas Sowell. Sowell has a new book out called The Thomas Sowell Reader. Among the topics discussed are his life, economic differences in people groups, class warfare, Karl Marx and many others. It's a lengthy interview, but you won't be disappointed if you make the time.

]]>
This is an excellent “Uncommon Knowledge” with Peter Robinson interview of economist Thomas Sowell. Sowell has a new book out called The Thomas Sowell Reader.

Among the topics discussed are his life, economic differences in people groups, class warfare, Karl Marx and many others.

Sowell points out why President Obama’s class warfare mantra is complete bunk. Karl Marx is also discussed, with more emphasis on the persona thoughts and life of Marx. Sowell was actually a Marxist for a while…until he found himself unable to continue running from reality.

They look at the many personal and societal benefits of marriage, baseball, and more. They also discuss President Obama, along with the current GOP presidential candidates.

It’s a lengthy interview, but you won’t be disappointed if you make the time.

]]>
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/11/discussing-political-culture-with-thomas-sowell/feed/ 1
Paul Ryan: A Word from the Grownups http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/10/paul-ryan-a-word-from-the-grownups/ Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:29:21 +0000 http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=60452 Isn't it time we heard from the grownups? After all, we've heard from the whiney spoiled brats quite enough for the past month or so, haven't we? Their mewling and public temper tantrum has been quite disgusting. But today we expect to hear from Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) who will publicly address this corrosive class warfare rhetoric with some much-needed truth: "Class warfare may be clever politics, but it is terrible economics. Redistributing wealth never creates more of it."

]]>

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)

Isn’t it time we heard from the grownups?

After all, we’ve heard from the whiney spoiled brats quite enough for the past month or so, haven’t we?  Their mewling and public temper tantrum has been quite disgusting.

If anything is more disgusting than that, it’s been watching elected government officials (people who should know better and who should be expected to display more maturity) having paved the way for the infantile behavior we’ve seen in the Occupy Wall Street tantrums.  Leftist politicians have been fueling class envy and covetousness for political gain for decades in this country.

So when Hot Air reported that Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) will be publicly addressing this corrosive class warfare rhetoric today, this was welcome news. Apparently Ryan has done this before, but will do so in greater detail today.

Below is a preview, from a statement Ryan made back in May.

“Class warfare may be clever politics, but it is terrible economics. Redistributing wealth never creates more of it…”

]]>
SOS: Speaking Of Seniors – The Political Pages http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/10/sos-speaking-of-seniors-the-political-pages/ Fri, 07 Oct 2011 11:06:17 +0000 http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=59738 If you are a senior citizen who is thinking about running for political office, but you don’t know whom to contact for help to do it right and avoid complications, let me tell you about a great resource: The Political Pages.

]]>
If you are a senior citizen who is thinking about running for political office, but you don’t know whom to contact for help to do it right and avoid complications, let me tell you about a great resource.

THE POLITICAL PAGES is published every year by Campaigns & Elections magazine. It costs only $15 and is full of contact information and advertisements for firms that help candidates to run a campaign well and legally.

Need help to get petitions signed and filed? Need a TV or radio spot produced? Need help with fundraising? Need help with a campaign website? Need help with filing papers with the Federal Election Commission? Contacts for all these services and more are listed in the publication.

In my work with senior citizens, I hear many say that they don’t like the way things are going in America right now. They want things to be better for their children and grandchildren. Some have told me that they are thinking of running for office but that they don’t know how to do it and do it legally and well. So, I started searching for information on this and I found this very helpful publication from Campaigns & Elections magazine.

You don’t have to be a senior citizen to use this resource. THE POLITICAL PAGES would be helpful to anyone who is considering a run for political office. Anyone interested in buying the publication can phone Campaigns & Elections at 703-778-4028 to pay the $15 with a credit card over the phone. Visa, Mastercard, and American Express are accepted and the $15 fee includes shipping and handling anywhere in the U.S.A.

So, if you want to change the world, or change your corner of the world, by running for office, get a copy of THE POLITICAL PAGES and a copy of the magazine Campaigns & Elections so that you can get the help that you need to run a good campaign.

Woodrow Wilcox
Wilcox News Service

© 2011 Woodrow Wilcox. Re-published here with the permission of the author.

]]>
Looking for Salvation in All the Wrong Places http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/10/looking-for-salvation/ Wed, 05 Oct 2011 11:00:10 +0000 http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=59655 The need to worship is hardwired into the human psyche. Yet, as unfashionable as it's become in the last century to worship the God of Creation, the same cannot be said of the worship of political heroes. The most notable – and horrific – examples that come to mind are found in the frenzied, almost religious zeal that led to the rise of tyrants like Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. One would think that the 20th century would have broken us of our delusions about one man's ability to perfect society, but think again.

]]>
Ken Connor, Chairman, Center for a Just Society in Washington, DC

Ken Connor, Chairman, Center for a Just Society in Washington, DC

The need to worship is hardwired into the human psyche.  Yet, as unfashionable as it’s become in the last century to worship the God of Creation, the same cannot be said of the worship of political heroes.  The most notable – and horrific – examples that come to mind are found in the frenzied, almost religious zeal that led to the rise of tyrants like Hitler, Stalin, and Mao.  One would think that the 20th century would have broken us of our delusions about one man’s ability to perfect society, but think again.

The American people – exceptional though we are in so many ways – are among the best at creating political golden calves.  We are obsessed with image; we love a good stump speech; we can’t get enough of soaring rhetoric and a snappy slogan!  The almost cult-like enthusiasm for Barack Obama is only the most recent example of this phenomenon.

But as Mr. Obama’s star has begun to fade and the 2012 elections loom large, it’s now the GOP that’s casting about for a savior.  The current field of would-be candidates contains all the necessary components for the perfect Republican chimera.  Combine Romney’s good looks with Gingrich’s intellect and experience, add a bit of Cain’s ethnic appeal and everyman charisma along with a dash of Ron Paul’s plain-spokenness and Mike Huckabee’s self-deprecating good humor and you have almost the perfect candidate.  The only thing missing is the hard-hitting, inimitable grit of someone like Chris Christie, and with a clear front-runner yet to emerge from the pool of declared GOP presidential hopefuls, more and more Americans are concluding that the New Jersey governor just might be the man to save us from our worsening woes.

“Do it – do it for my daughter.  Do it for our grandchildren.  Do it for our sons.  Please, sir . . . we need you.  Your country needs you to run for president.”

These kinds of emotional pleas have become commonplace for Governor Christie, according to a recent Washington Post article by Dana Milbank.  Having reached a point of desperation, Americans eager for a hero to hang their hopes on, have resorted to outright begging.  The only problem is that Chris Christie isn’t capable of living up to the public’s growing expectations of him.  No one is.  Milbank explains:

“I feel sorry for this woman, because she will, inevitably, be disappointed – even if Christie runs, even if Christie wins.  This is because it is not Christie that she and so many other Republicans want but what Christie represents: a political superman who can, in a single-bound, transform the whole mess our political system has become.” 

The point to be made here is that there is no such thing as a political savior, and no candidate is 100% ideal.  Since every human being is beset by the frailties and faults inherent in our fallen natures, it is foolish to place such weighty expectations on an elected official.  Besides, the lion’s share of responsibility for the country’s current woes rests squarely on the shoulders of the people themselves.  There is certainly plenty of blame to place on the shoulders of George W. Bush, Barack Obama, the Congress and Wall Street, but, at the end of the day, their actions would not have had nearly the impact they did without the support (either implicit or explicit) of the public-at-large.  Unless individuals and families and communities across America are willing to step up and take ownership of their share of this problem, nothing will change and America will continue in its slide toward the abyss.

America’s first order of business should be to acknowledge the relationship between our worsening political and economic climate and our declining moral and spiritual health.  As easy as it may be to paint Wall Street fat cats as the arch villains in this tale, it is a lack of discipline and self-restraint at the individual level that enabled them to do what they did.  Are the peddlers of sub-prime mortgages guilty of rank opportunism?  Absolutely.  Are they responsible for the greed that led people to purchase homes they couldn’t afford on credit terms they couldn’t honor?  No, they are not.  Similarly, it is disingenuous to point the finger of blame at corrupt and self-serving Washington bureaucrats when the people who elected them have been complicit in creating a culture characterized by self-centeredness and a lack of restraint.

Political leadership is important, of course, but it is not a panacea.  If only it were that easy!  If the people are looking for salvation, they need to look in a mirror.  Only a reclamation of essential virtues such as honesty, self-discipline, thrift and restraint can pave a path towards recovery from the many challenges we face.  In short, what is needed is a second American Revolution: a return to the virtues that made our country great, that produced a vibrant economy and that made us a shining city on a hill.

Maybe what we really need, then, is a candidate who will remind us that the solutions to America’s major problems lie within the people themselves, and who will motivate us to take the steps we need to solve our own problems.  Just who that candidate might be remains to be seen.  But unless the people themselves willing to do the lion’s share of the work moving forward, no one short of Jesus Christ himself will be able to unravel the mess we’ve made of this country.

Attorney Ken Connor is the Chairman of the Center for a Just Society in Washington, DC, and the former President of the Family Research Council. He served as counsel to Governor Jeb Bush in Bush v. Schiavo during the Terri Schiavo case, and is co-author of “Sinful Silence: When Christians Neglect Their Civic Duty.

]]>
White House ‘Insider’ Claims 2012 Will Be ‘Brutal…Off the Charts’ http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/08/white-house-insider-claims-2012-will-be-brutal-off-the-charts/ http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/08/white-house-insider-claims-2012-will-be-brutal-off-the-charts/#comments Fri, 26 Aug 2011 11:24:49 +0000 http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=58402 "The Obama Plan," a very lengthy writeup at NewsFlavor, purports to be a conversation between an unnamed White House "insider" and a writer known as "Ulsterman." The material, if true, contains some pretty amazing revelations about what is and has been going on inside the Obama Administration. Those revelations include claims about Obama's birth, white guilt, a disengaged president, meddling in the GOP primary, and an impending race-baiting, off-the-charts brutal campaign for 2012.

]]>
A friend recently sent me a link to “The Obama Plan,” a very lengthy writeup at NewsFlavor which purports to be a conversation between an unnamed White House “insider” and a writer known as “Ulsterman.”  The material, if true, contains some pretty amazing revelations about what is and has been going on inside the Obama Administration.

No one is quite sure who “insider” is or who “Ulsterman” is, though some people have some ideas.

In Part 1 (LANGUAGE WARNING if you go read the article), the insider discusses the “birther” issue with Ulsterman concerning the issue of Barack Obama’s birth certificate and his constitutional eligibility to fill the office of president of the United States.

Ulsterman: You keep stringing me along on this thing. You once didn’t want to hear anything related to questions about Obama’s birth record and now you seem more willing to entertain the possibility. Why the change? What do you know?

Insider: Hell – I think I…I think I more than entertain the possibility. I have read some of the stuff you sent me. How much is true or not I can’t say. I really can’t…

…I don’t know if it’s about his place of birth or if it’s something else that those records could reveal, but what I do know is that Barack Obama is covering something up related to that stuff. The guy is hiding something there. I am sure of that. Everything points to that being the case. The stuff you send me…look, a lot of it I just trash. I admit that. I’ve looked over some of it though, and some of it sounds…possible. Maybe even probable.

On the race card, from Part 2:

Ulsterman: How? What’s the plan? What’s going to be different from all the other campaigns?

Insider: You’ve already seen it. A taste of it. Race. The race card. Racism. Race-race-race. It’s all they fucking got to run on these days.
Ulsterman: Race? Hasn’t Obama played that one out already? It’s become a joke.

Insider: Played it out? No, not…you might think so but no…his people are going to raise the issue of race to a level this country hasn’t seen since the Civil Rights movement. White guilt got Barack Obama the nomination. White guilt got Barack Obama into the White House. At least it was a big part of it…

According to the insider, the Obama machine is planning on not only playing the race card at the national level, but on a state level, too, leveraging “white guilt” to intimidate white Americans into pulling their punches or sitting out the fight altogether for fear of being called “racists“:

Ulsterman: States? Media campaign? For the race issue?

Insider: Yes. It’s in place and underway – being developed. Further developed. It’s gonna – gonna tie it in with the unions somehow. I don’t know exactly how – just that’s included in it. It will be an all out campaign on race. The goal is to completely mobilize the Black vote while shaming an even greater number of white voters into not opposing a second Obama term. They are gonna get out the guilt vote man. The guilt vote!

And…

We’ve always used the race issue to our advantage – but what the Obama team has planned is something…it’s something else altogether. Off the charts stuff. Remember when I said that Obama ain’t no Democrat? That’s as true now as it’s ever been. And he’s on some kind of collision course now with everybody scrambling to get out of the way, and then some of us trying to do what we can to stop it before it’s too late. He’s already destroyed the party…much of it. Gonna take a long time to recover.

In Part 3, the insider paints a disturbing picture of a president who is disengaged in the White House, who would rather be sitting around in a pair of shorts in the West Wing, watching sports on a big-screen TV.

He has harsh words for the “leadership” of Obama, which tends to match the ever-vacationing, ever-golf-playing Obama Americans have come to know over the past 2.5 years: “Barack Obama is incapable of anything remotely resembling leadership, but he is also quite capable of the kind of dangerous arrogance that the very worst leaders in history possessed.

Though the insider says Obama toyed with the idea of “quitting” at one point, someone (Valerie Jarrett?) has grabbed him by the lapels since then and put some fight back into him. The insider claims the Obama machine is already pouring out big bucks to create strife and dissention among Republicans:

You notice how divisive the Republican primary campaigns have already started to become? You think that’s all occurring on its own? Hell no. Tens of millions of dollars are already being spent getting conservatives, Republicans, Independents, whatever – get them to attack each other. Get them frustrated and lower their desire to vote for the eventual nominee.

So why, you might ask, yourself, would a White House insider be revealing this much dirt to someone when he knows it’s going to get out? Extremely good question. Actually, the reader will start getting answers to that question in Part 1, but it is fully laid out in Part 3. Apparently it’s because the insider feels betrayed by what he thought Obama was…and what he now sees Obama really is:

…it’s a charade. It’s a lie. He fooled me – he fooled a whole lot of us. And he is frightened every hour of every day that the country will find out. But this realization, this little part of Obama’s self-awareness, it’s getting beat down by the guy’s absolute arrogance and when necessary, willingness to over-reach acceptable executive authority.

So much of this stuff is so audacious, supposedly coming from a Democrat within the White House, that your first inclination is not to take it seriously. But then, so much of it seems to fit the bits and pieces we’ve been able to see of the Obama Administration publicly.  You also have to wonder why Ulsterman or NewsFlavor would publish something this shocking if it weren’t true; it runs the risk of damaging their credibility, either way.

But if this is for real, even though we might have thought the Leftist viciousness and hysteria against conservatives and the Republican Party couldn’t top 2010,  2012 could just reach new and supremely despicable depths.  Ultimately, in several decades of observing politics, I’ve learned that people who don’t cherish what America is will stoop to anything.  And if they think the “mainstream” media is covering their tracks for them, they’ll stoop even lower.

]]>
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/08/white-house-insider-claims-2012-will-be-brutal-off-the-charts/feed/ 7
Dakota Voice Week in Review, Ending Jul. 9, 2011 http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/07/dakota-voice-week-in-review-ending-jul-9-2010/ http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/07/dakota-voice-week-in-review-ending-jul-9-2010/#comments Sun, 10 Jul 2011 13:30:43 +0000 http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=56710 The best of the best from Dakota Voice last week, including: Independents: Enlightened or Ideologically Lazy?; Sexuality Can Be Bent--And Straightened; Romney Reckless on Radical Environmentalism; America Suffering from Oikophobia Outbreak; Real Republicans Are Foul-Mouthed Opponents of the Family; Reagan Honored for Freedom in Europe; Obama Should Get Out of Texas Business; and more!

]]>
These are the best of the best at Dakota Voice last week. These are the articles people most wanted to read and talk about. If you missed one the first time around, this is a great chance to get caught up.

Independents: Enlightened or Ideologically Lazy? – Alfonzo Rachel cuts right to it and tells it like it is when he examines the political phenomenon of “independents.” I don’t think I’d be quite as hard on independents as Rachel…but then again, maybe I might.

Sexuality Can Be Bent–And Straightened – There is a lot of focus these days on the issue of homosexuality — not because it’s worse than other sexual abnormalities, but because it’s the one such abnormality that is currently being loudly proclaimed as “normal.” The simple reality, though, is that homosexuality is no more an “orientation” than pedophilia, porn addiction, or any other sexual issue. Rather, it is just one of many directions in which sexuality can be “bent” early in a person’s life.

Romney Reckless on Radical Environmentalism – Mitt Romney’s defenders claim he wouldn’t really advance the radical environmentalist agenda even though he admits to believing in the hoax of anthropogenic global warming. He’s a Republican, after all. Yet this “Republican” hammered Pacific Gas and Electric in his state with new environmentalist regulations, and also accused the electrical industry of killing people and causing thousands of health problems. Does this sound like a Republican to you?

America Suffering from Oikophobia Outbreak – Bill Whittle’s latest Firewall examines one of the most maddening and insane of the characteristics displayed by the Left: self-loathing of America. Or as it is officially known: Oikophobia. Given the revolutionary ideas upon which America was founded, and the incredible results of those ideas, why would Americans of any stripe–the Left or anywhere else–loathe this obviously superior and remarkably blessed way of life?

Being the Church When Empires Fall – As Christians, we must reclaim and re-humanize the topic of sex by giving our young people a comprehensive theology of sex that is grounded in the gift of intimacy and relationship, rather than a self-satisfying animalistic act. We must move beyond our prudishness that simply teaches teens what not to do and celebrate the gift of sex as God intended it to be. Until we start teaching the superiority of sex as defined by God, this generation will likely continue to exchange the truth of God for the lie.

Real Republicans Are Foul-Mouthed Opponents of the Family – Is the kind of Republican, the kind of elected official you’d like representing you and your party one who uses strong profanity and admits to using it in front of young children? If you are a Republican, do you want to be represented by someone who contributes money and energy to fight against the protection of innocent human life, and against the protection of the sanctity of marriage? If you are a Republican, do you want to be represented by someone who has given tens of thousands of dollars to elect Democrats? Republicans, you have such a person in your midst.

Reagan Honored for Freedom in Europe – There has been little coverage of this here in the States but one of America’s greatest presidents, Ronald Wilson Reagan, is being honored overseas for helping free millions of people from the oppression of Marxism. A statue of Reagan is being unveiled today in London, another in Budapest, and a street is being named after him in Prague. Reagan’s vision of peace through strength helped bring down the world’s most Evil Empire and set free many countries that had suffered under the yoke of communism for decades.

God Save Our American States – This is a clip from a fantastic HBO miniseries John Adams, based on David McCullough’s book by the same name. The scene is of that historic day 235 years ago when our American ancestors made the incredible decision to defy the most powerful empire on earth, declaring independence and the right to establish a new nation based on revolutionary (yet thousands of years old) ideas about the origin of humanity’s rights, and the foundation of good government.

Obama Should Get Out of Texas Business – President Obama is inserting his nose into the business of Texas by demanding the Supreme Court intervene and postpone the execution of an illegal alien from Mexico. It was an awful crime. Back in 1994, Mexican national Humberto Leal Garcia brutally raped and murdered a 16-year-old girl in San Antonio. There was no doubt of his guilt. Yet our president is trying to help this convicted murderer–who should not have been in our country in the first place–escape justice.

Hanging Together at High Cost – The Declaration of Independence was approved JULY 4, 1776. John Hancock signed first, saying “the price on my head has just doubled.” Benjamin Franklin said “We must hang together or most assuredly we shall hang separately.” So what happened to the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence?

Thank you, Dear Reader, for making these the best of the best!

]]>
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/07/dakota-voice-week-in-review-ending-jul-9-2010/feed/ 2
Blame it on the Devil http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/07/blame-it-on-the-devil/ http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/07/blame-it-on-the-devil/#comments Sat, 09 Jul 2011 17:35:05 +0000 http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=56700 Zo has really been hitting on all cylinders lately. His newest video plays off the new book from his friend Ann Coulter called Demonic: How the Liberal Mob is Endangering America. Among the important truths he examines: the exploitive nature of liberalism, the projectionist accusations of the Left, and the entitlement mindset of the Left.

]]>
Zo has really been hitting on all cylinders lately. His newest video plays off the new book from his friend Ann Coulter called Demonic: How the Liberal Mob is Endangering America.

Alphonzo “Zo” Rachel comes from a fairly rough background.  He describes himself as an agnostic, and if I remember his personal story accurately, he lived a morally troubled life when he was younger. He has since become a conservative and a Christian (in that order) and sees the world a lot differently than he used to.  Like many of us who have lived live on both sides, he understands some important truths in a very personal way.

One of the things he has learned is that while conservatism values and cherishes our freedoms, liberalism exploits those freedoms for license to do immoral things.  An analogy which might help highlight the difference would be (1) a man who loves a woman for who she is, appreciates the qualities that make her uniquely “her,” enjoys being with her and experiencing who she is, and seeks to stand by her as she maximizes her God-given talents; versus (2) a man who sees the same woman and lusts after her because she is classy and hot, who seeks to consume all that is attractive about her for his own pleasure, and who values her little beyond the immediate pleasures and thrills she can provide to him in the short term.

He recently learned that one of the names by which Satan is known is “The Accuser.”  All the way back to the Garden of Eden, Satan has been accusing people of false things. He accused God of keeping the best back from Adam and Eve.  He accused Job of not really being a faithful servant.  Satan continues to accuse God’s followers even today…and he often holds Christ-followers back from the peace and joy of their salvation by whispering accusations against them in their own years (“You’ve done too many bad things to be forgiven by Christ,” or “A real Christian wouldn’t have thought this or done that”–anything to keep us uncertain of God’s promise of forgiveness…and the abundant life that should come from faith in Christ).

But back to Zo’s video, the Left has learned the “accusation” trick well from their father and we see them employed on a daily basis in public debate as liberals accuse their opponents of the very things they have said and done and support (authoritarianism, fascism, murder, sympathy with murderers and other lawbreakers, taking what doesn’t belong to you from others, sympathy for terrorists, mindlessly accepting pap over facts, etc).

Zo hits on another key truth about liberalism: the sense of entitlement. Liberalism and its companion ideology of socialism involves seeing yourself as entitled to things you have not earned, things that belong to other people: other people’s money, other people’s position, other people’s freedom,  and other people’s lives (if those lives inconvenience them).

The Projectionist Accusers

]]>
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/07/blame-it-on-the-devil/feed/ 2
Real Republicans Are Foul-Mouthed Opponents of the Family http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/07/real-republicans-are-foul-mouthed-opponents-of-the-family/ http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/07/real-republicans-are-foul-mouthed-opponents-of-the-family/#comments Mon, 04 Jul 2011 11:40:56 +0000 http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=56499 Is the kind of Republican, the kind of elected official you'd like representing you and your party one who uses strong profanity and admits to using it in front of young children? If you are a Republican, do you want to be represented by someone who contributes money and energy to fight against the protection of innocent human life, and against the protection of the sanctity of marriage? If you are a Republican, do you want to be represented by someone who has given tens of thousands of dollars to elect Democrats? Republicans, you have such a person in your midst.

]]>
WARNING: OBSCENE LANGUAGE BELOW

I came across this yesterday but opted against sharing it at that time because it was the Lord’s Day (Sunday).

I would still advise caution if you are sensitive to obscene language, and make sure your young children aren’t around to see what this South Dakota State Senator said.

Okay, now that you’ve been warned, this is something seen on Facebook yesterday that the voters of District 32 and the good citizens of South Dakota might be interested in knowing about.

The potty mouth of this elected official aside, isn’t it interesting what this “real Republican” thinks of the Republican platform (much less principles and ideals)? Is it really too much to ask for a Republican elected official to show some fealty to the Republican Platform, whether they enthusiastically endorse it or not?

It would be nice if Republican Party officials would exercise some quality control among the candidates and elected officials who, by default, are ambassadors of Republican values. After all, do you really want an ambassador who is promoting all the things you oppose, and opposing all the things you believe in?

This makes me wonder why the South Dakota and Pennington County Republicans would have in their midst (and using their good name) someone who would form with other RINOs an organization for political activism that opposes many of the core values of the Republican Party.

Why would local Republicans have someone among their number (and bringing discredit to their good name) someone who would demand the physical expulsion of a life-long Republican and many-time state and local party officer from the Pennington County Republican Headquarters (which he was paying for)?

Why would state and local Republican organizations have in their midst (and bringing discredit to their good name) someone who worked to defeat South Dakota’s marriage protection amendment (the sanctity of marriage is explicitly supported by the South Dakota and national GOP platforms), and who has contributed thousands of dollars in opposition to the protection of innocent human life (the sanctity of human life is explicitly supported by the South Dakota and national GOP platforms)?

Why would state and local Republicans have in their midst (and bringing discredit to their good name) someone who wanted to overturn South Dakota’s ban on human embryonic stem cell research, when the South Dakota Republican Party platform specifically opposes embryonic stem cell research?

Why would state and local Republicans have in their midst (and bringing discredit to their good name) someone who holds such obvious contempt for their party platform–the stated beliefs, values and priorities of your party?

Why would state and local Republican organizations have in their midst (and bringing discredit to their good name) someone who calls themselves a Republican while donating $80,000 to elect Democrats in 2006 and gave thousands more in 2008 to elect Democrats.

In what alternate universe of distorted reality is such a person a “real Republican”?

Of course, too many of those Republican Party officials are just cheap whores who will sell their virtue for the money they can glean from the likes of “real Republican” Stan Adelstein (who opposes the pro-life plank of the GOP and opposes the pro-family and pro-marriage plank of the GOP platform, and contributes tens of thousands of dollars to elect Democrats). I suppose it is too much to ask for integrity from a bunch of whores, but apparently that’s what we have too many of in the state and local GOP.

Many people have disengaged from politics, claiming that “There’s no difference between the two parties.” I understand their frustration, and it is caused precisely because of figures like this one who is far too much like the decay found in the other party.

These chameleons create “brand confusion” because the average American looks to a particular party for a particular belief system. When Americans look to the Republican Party, a party founded on conservative ideas, and finds liberalism, it’s like opening a can of Dr. Pepper and finding Mountain Dew.

The answer is not found in disengagement, but in aggressive engagement within one’s own party.

Maybe it’s time the real and true rank-and-file Republicans stepped forward to force some change in their GOP. Maybe it’s time they sent the GOP whores packing and cleaned out the Republican den of ill repute. Maybe it’s time the Republican Party once again took a firm stance for Republican values and showed some loyalty to the platform.  Who knows?  It might drive off a few liberal moneybags, but it might bring back a lot of everyday donors and supporters who have stayed away because they couldn’t tolerate the stench.

]]>
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/07/real-republicans-are-foul-mouthed-opponents-of-the-family/feed/ 6
Independents: Enlightened or Ideologically Lazy? http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/07/independents-enlightened-or-ideologically-lazy/ http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/07/independents-enlightened-or-ideologically-lazy/#comments Sun, 03 Jul 2011 12:00:41 +0000 http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=56484 Alfonzo Rachel cuts right to it and tells it like it is when he examines the political phenomenon of "independents." I don't think I'd be quite as hard on independents as Rachel...but then again, maybe I might.

]]>
You know what I like about Alfonzo Rachel?  He’s a conservative after my own heart. He’s Christian, he’s conservative, be’s been around the block a time or two before coming to the truth, and he just doesn’t have any use for dancing around the crap.

So he cuts right to it and tells it like it is when he examines the political phenomenon of “independents.”  I don’t think I’d be quite as hard on independents as Rachel…but then again, maybe I might.

Is it really too much to ask to expect a consistent ideology, one way or another?

]]>
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/07/independents-enlightened-or-ideologically-lazy/feed/ 5
Dems object to amendments to DADT repeal bill http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/06/dems-object-to-amendments-to-data-repeal/ http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/06/dems-object-to-amendments-to-data-repeal/#comments Sun, 12 Jun 2011 23:04:30 +0000 http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=55799 It never ceases to amaze me how Democrats will completely turn the debate on its head and claim to be advocating for the same values as mainstream Americans. Maintaining the values of thousands of years across a multitude of cultures and religions is a “radical social agenda” and despite two-and-a-half centuries of military success in keeping America safe and prosperous and “our families safe,” it can no longer be accomplished without unrestrained sodomy in our military ranks.

]]>

Bradley Manning, admitted sodomite, accused in release of classified documents

The following memo showed up in my in-box yesterday. Typically, it is rife with emotionalism and allegations but sparse on facts.


We all thought it was a done deal when President Obama signed the repeal into law. But House Republicans pulled a stunt that could delay or even stop the repeal from taking effect by passing an outrageous series of amendments to the bill that funds our military.

We can’t stay silent in the face of this new GOP push to turn back the clock on repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t tell.

Help the DCCC surpass their goal of getting 100,000 signatures to their petition supporting the repeal. We need to hold the House Republicans accountable for putting their radical social agenda ahead of keeping our military strong and our families safe.

[…]

When I served in Congress, it was an honor to sponsor and fight for legislation to finally end this discriminatory policy. As an Army officer, I saw firsthand how the policy forces patriots to lie about who they are just so they can defend the freedoms that make America great.

Sign our petition opposing the efforts being made by House Republicans to
We’ve come too far. We must see this fight through to the end.

It’s time to put Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell in the history books for good.

Patrick Murphy

Patrick Murphy is the former U.S. Representative for Pennsylvania’s 8th congressional district, serving from 2007 until 2011, when he was defeated by former U.S. Congressman Mike Fitzpatrick, a retired Marine colonel. Murphy was an Army JAG officer and served a tour in Iraq. He received a Bronze Star for his seven months of paper-pushing in Baghdad. He has a 100% voting record from NARAL and while serving in the House was an active proponent for repeal of DADT. He is employed at Fox Rothschild and remains active in Democrat politics via the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

In this e-mail Murphy states “We need to hold the House Republicans accountable for putting their radical social agenda ahead of keeping our military strong and our families safe.” It never ceases to amaze me how Democrats will completely turn the debate on its head and claim to be advocating for the same values as mainstream Americans that truly want the best for our country. Maintaining the values of thousands of years across a multitude of cultures and religions is a “radical social agenda” and despite two-and-a-half centuries of military success in keeping America safe and prosperous and “our families safe,” the mission can no longer be accomplished without unrestrained sodomy in our military ranks. It is this disingenuousness that I find most disagreeable about liberals. They know they cannot impose their agenda by being open about what they truly believe and want for our country, so they usurp the sentiments of the majority of the country by deceptively appealing to the wishes of real Americans. They know that Americans would reject what they truly hope to accomplish.

Murphy claims in the mailing that “House Republicans pulled a stunt that could delay or even stop the repeal from taking effect by passing an outrageous series of amendments to the bill that funds our military.” He says nothing about what these “stunts” might be. It is likely that his target audience will not bother to ask. Allegations and innuendo is usually sufficient to rouse Democrats. There is no need to understand the issues or the debate.

The FY 2012 Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 1540) is currently being debated in the House and according to redstate.com the proposed “outrageous series of amendments” are as follows:

Congressman Duncan Hunter inserted language in the bill that would delay the repeal of DADT until all four military service chiefs have certified that repeal would not “degrade the readiness, effectiveness, cohesion, and morale of combat arms units and personnel of their respective armed force that are engaged in combat, deployed to a combat theater, or preparing for deployment to a combat theater.” In addition, the bill prohibits the use of military facilities for same sex marriage ceremonies and defines marriage as between one man and one women for all purposes of military benefits and policies. Ask your member of Congress to stay strong on DADT and not to budge on the DADT provision in the defense bill.

]]>
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/06/dems-object-to-amendments-to-data-repeal/feed/ 29
Conservatives Need to Play Confrontational Politics http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/06/conservatives-need-to-play-confrontational-politics/ http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/06/conservatives-need-to-play-confrontational-politics/#comments Wed, 01 Jun 2011 13:32:49 +0000 http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=55382 Grappling with the frustrating question of why their fellow conservatives will complain and whine all day, but do nothing when push comes to shove, is the source of endless vexation for the committed conservative. But H. L. Richardson has written a book called "Confrontational Politics" which can not only answer some of those questions for the frustrated conservative, but can help the timid conservative become a lion against liberalism. Being right is essential, but it isn't enough to win political battles.

]]>
Being a conservative these days can be maddening. The “mainstream” media spews liberal pap and propaganda on a daily basis.  The education establishment teaches America’s newest generations to loathe their country and the unique heritage that is ours as Americans.  Liberals infest our judicial system, control half of congress, and control the executive branch.  All around us is a sea of error–error that history has proven to be such over and over and over.

Being an aggressive conservative who understands the need for immediate action to restore our republic to its limited government roots, and the necessity of going head-to-head with the liberals who are bent on making our great country just another socialist cesspool…that can be even more maddening.  Aggressive conservatives are surrounded by no shortage of angry, fed-up conservatives…but too few of them are willing to be confrontational about their beliefs.  When it comes to standing up for their beliefs in the public square, most shrink away in silence.

Grappling with the frustrating question of why their fellow conservatives will complain and whine all day, but do nothing when push comes to shove, is the source of endless vexation for the committed conservative. But H. L. Richardson has written a book called “Confrontational Politics” which not only answers some of those questions for the frustrated conservative, but can help the timid conservative become a lion in the face of  liberalism.

Published by Nordskog Publishing,  “Confrontational Politics” is based on the experiences of H. L. “Bill” Richardson, a twenty-two-year veteran of the California State Senate and founder of Gun Owners of America. As Richardson brings home in the book, being right isn’t enough.

Richardson recognizes that most people tend to shy away from confrontations.  For conservatives, being essentially “live and let live” people, this is even more true.

Liberals, however, tend to expect confrontation.  They plan for it, learn to expect the predictable, and even try to use that confrontation to advance their goals.

Conservatives don’t have to like confrontation, but, as Richardson points out, unless we want to see the very way of life God gave us 235 years ago washed away along with the hard-won heritage earned for us by generations of Americans since, we have no choice but to engage in this battle.

To effectively combat those who would turn our free nation into just another socialist enclave, we must understand how to stand against them. In order to stand against them, we must confront them.

Confrontation is not in and of itself evil.  The means used to confront can be evil (lies, vicious slander, dishonesty, deception, etc), but confrontation itself does not have to be.

For instance, pop culture tends to think of Christianity as a meek, timid and at best defensive philosophy.  That perception is the result of the misapplication or lack of application of the Christian belief system, rather than the natural result of the belief system itself.

The keen student of the Bible will remember the words of Christ who said, “On this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it.”  How often have you seen the gates of a fortress go on the offensive?  How many times have you seen the gates of a castle or defensive position ride forth into battle to take the fight to the enemy?  I can safely say that it has never happened.  Therefore, the gates of Hell are a defensive position.  So what does that make the church (against which the gates of Hell will not prevail)?  It means the church is an offensive institution.  It goes on the offensive.

The message of Christ is therefore clear: Christians are to be on the offensive, moving against strongholds of evil and demolishing arguments that hold people prisoner to destructive ideas.

If a Christian is to be on the offensive for his belief system and against evil, should the conservative do any less?

Around the turn of the 19th to 20th Centuries, President Theodore Roosevelt illustrated that moral and political issues are inextricably intertwined when he said, “I believe the next half-century will determine if we will advance the cause of Christian civilization or revert to the horrors of brutal paganism.”

Indeed.  What did we see in the 50 years following this quote: the rise of the dark and pagan Nazi philosophy and all its horrors, as well as the rise of Marxism and the 100 million dead bodies left in its wake.

Even though we defeated the Nazi and Soviet empires, the pagan philosophy of Marxism and socialism continues to threaten the world, including the United States. It therefore behooves us to go on the offensive, to reclaim the territory we have already lost to this oppressive philosophy, and to push forward ideologically to help the rest of the world free itself.  So it is that this revision and reprinting of Richardson’s “Confrontational Politics” has come at a good time.

Conservatives tend to want to be polite, and so when liberals try to change the subject of an argument (because they know they have already lost on the basis of the facts), Richardson says conservatives often allow themselves to be drawn off-topic and put on the defensive.  Realizing that it is as important to know ourselves as it is to know our enemy, Richardson helps us understand why the conservative thinks the way he does, and what he can do to overcome the liberal tendency to steer the debate away from the facts the liberal cannot defeat.

Richardson also provides interesting insight as to why liberals and humanists tend to gravitate toward education, media and government.  It has to do with some fundamental assumptions they hold not only about human nature but about morality itself.

Liberals have made a virtue (and a winning tactic) of retreat. Yes, you heard right.  They begin by demanding far more than they hope to get, framing the debate in feel-good terms (“Do it for the children”).  Then, after appropriate grandstanding has occurred, they retreat and offer “compromise” that still nets them half or more of what they originally demanded.  Conservatives, ever-eager to end the unpleasant conflict, usually give in to the “compromise” and promptly disband the troops. Liberals, meanwhile, area already gearing up for the next cycle of demand-and-compromise…and conservatives usually stupidly play along over and over, losing more ground every time.

Isn’t it time conservatives took the offensive?  The Left has expanded the federal government light-years beyond the limits of constitutional authority in every direction.  Isn’t it time we took the fight to liberals instead of waiting for them to propose the next expansion of government? Surely it’s time we began insisting: “Government is far too bloated. We demand the elimination of the Education Department, the Health and Human Services Department, OSHA and the EPA.”  If we can only get the Left to agree to get rid of OSHA and the EPA, we have still won, we have still regained ground we lost to them a long time ago.  Once OSHA and the EPA are gone, then we demand the elimination of the National Endowment for the Arts, Public Broadcasting, the Endangered Species Act and the Education Department…and so on…and so on. As Robinson says, “When the liberals step dialectically backward, the conservative attack must be intensified, not diminished.”

The Left makes much better use of conflicts and confrontations over issues.  For the conservative, the cause is central, but for the liberal it is often only a vehicle for agitating and recruiting followers.  Conservatives can still keep the cause central to their efforts, but should make more use of the opportunity to educate the public and draw them to their side.

Robinson points out that, thanks to decades of timid conservative capitulation, liberals are unused to truly being on the defensive. Conservatives can and should exploit this weakness.  When the liberal makes the usual “compromise” move to gain half of what they wanted, that is the time to press home the attack twice as hard.  The Left won’t know what to do with an aggressive conservative opponent and will fall back even further.  Yes, the liberals will soon get nasty (we’ve seen it before), but so what? The nastier they are, the more proof you have that you’re scoring points and winning! Can’t conservatives handle a little petulance and tantrum-throwing from liberals in the interest of preserving the American way of life?

Robinson’s book covers a variety of subjects that every conservative who wants to win should know about: turning a minority into a majority, leveraging the forces you have, framing the debate, focusing only on certain issues, using opinion polls to your advantage, how to make the most of hot-button issues, the importance of perseverance, building alliances with like-minded people and groups, and the value of a professional operation.

What may just be the most positive news for the conservative in Robinson’s “Confrontational Politics” is the fact that conservatives don’t have to fight dirty to win.  Sure, that’s usually how the Left wins, but it isn’t the only way to win. Robinson can teach the conservative to fight fair, fight ethically, and fight to win—all without becoming a victim of his own decency.

Every American conservative should have and read a copy of “Confrontational Politics.” You can order it directly from Nordskog Publishing, Amazon.com, or many other booksellers.  Even if you have already been engaged in the fight, you have probably been fighting at less than your greatest capacity without the useful advice of this book.  And if for whatever reason you have not found it within yourself to get into the fight so far, this book may very well be what you need to tip the scales and leave you with the conviction that you cannot help but join the fight.

Come on!  Your country needs you!

]]>
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/06/conservatives-need-to-play-confrontational-politics/feed/ 5
Woe to You, Federal Fools! http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/woe-to-you-federal-fools/ http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/woe-to-you-federal-fools/#comments Mon, 23 May 2011 18:18:26 +0000 http://www.dakotavoice.com/?p=55107 You may have heard the passage from Matthew 23:13-33 where Jesus was talking to the pompous, self-righteous leaders of his day. What might that sound like if it was updated to send an appropriate message to the pompous, self-indulgent leaders of our day? Thanks to Frank Turek, we know what it would sound like.

]]>

Curses Against the Pharisees, by James Tissot

Last week I was driving somewhere and overheard Rush Limbaugh reading something that sounded remarkably like a passage from Matthew 23:13-33 where Jesus was talking to the pompous, self-righteous leaders of his day. The difference was that the rendition Limbaugh was reading had been modified just a bit to fit perfectly the corrupt Leftists in congress.

Over the weekend, I looked up what I had heard and found that it comes from an Oct. 31, 2010 column by Frank Turek. The whole column is definitely worth reading, but this is the part that caught my attention:

Woe to you, egotistical hypocrites! You are full of greed and self-indulgence. Everything you do is done for appearances: You make pompous speeches and grandstand before these TV cameras. You demand the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats wherever you go. You love to be greeted in your districts and have everyone call you “Senator” or “Congressman.” On the outside you appear to people as righteous, but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness! You say you want to clean up Washington, but as soon as you get here you become twice as much a son of hell as the one you replaced!

Woe to you, makers of the law, you hypocrites! You do not practice what you preach. You put heavy burdens on the citizens, but then opt out of your own laws!

Woe to you, federal fools! You take an oath to support and defend the Constitution, but then you nullify the Constitution by confirming judges who make up their own laws.

Woe to you, blind hypocrites! You say that if you had lived in the days of the Founding Fathers, you never would have taken part with them in slavery. You say you never would have agreed that slaves were the property of their masters but would have insisted that they were human beings with unalienable rights. But you testify against yourselves because today you say that unborn children are the property of their mothers and have no rights at all! Upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed in this country. You snakes! You brood of vipers! You have left this great chamber desolate! How will you escape being condemned to hell!

The point Turek was making with his column is that Christians had better quit allowing immoral Leftists lead them around by the nose and tell them what Christians should or shouldn’t be doing–when they themselves have made careers and lifestyles of deliberately doing the opposite of what Christ has told us to do.

How will sinners know that the things they are doing are wrong, unless someone who knows the difference tells them?  And if there are those among their leaders who are misleading them into the jaws of Hell, how will they know the difference unless you denounce the immoral teachings of these leaders?  Your silence in the face of these immoral teachings and policies is tantamount to acquiescence or agreement with them!

If you are a Christian, you should come to terms with the fact that being a good Christian doesn’t mean you remain silent when God’s standards are being mocked around you, and it doesn’t mean you are to timidly hope that the meek will indeed inherit the earth while the earth is going to Hell in a handbasket. You are called to be salt and light in a dark and decaying world–you CANNOT do that if you are believing the liberal lie that Christians are supposed to shut up and stay out of politics.

And if you are a pastor, that goes double for you. While the tax code provision inserted into law by Senator Lyndon Johnson in 1954 is unconstitutional, the question of whether it is or isn’t shouldn’t be slowing you down in the slightest. As Turek said in his column, “You’re called to be salt and light, not tax-exempt.”

]]>
http://www.dakotavoice.com/2011/05/woe-to-you-federal-fools/feed/ 2