Despite my desire not to go one for one with my peep the Political Virgin, I do want to once again use a post of hers as a jumping off point. First though, I will quote myself from the comment I just left.
“I had not seen this post when I wrote mine so it definitely is not a response, and not directed at you.” – me
PV is what I would refer to as the well meaning opposition. I respect her and her views: I even get where she is coming from, the essential concerns and her essential desire to have things be right for the nation. She raises interesting points so I will take her concerns here and respond to them. Make sure you go read her post first because I want you to have the context.
Basically, she is concerned that challenging certain things, or raising certain questions creates an atmosphere that has a chilling effect on the electorate and create a climate of intolerance. I appreciate her concerns: but I think this meme is being used widely on the net for exactly the reasons she is worried about to stifle questions and dissent. I in no way mean it imply that PV is trying to stifle these questions by the way. The way she sees it these things are adding fuel to a powder keg fringe on the right that she feels is a real danger. That is (I think) her concern in a nutshell.
My concern is the mirror of that I think her questions are being echoed and used by a left that is more than happy to use these concerns to stifle questions and dissent. They would be quite happy for us to buy into it – sit down, shut up and commence being cooperative.
Let’s look at her examples of things that are problematic.
- Accusations of anti-patriotism I do not feel it is wrong, silly or naive to investigate and challenge the patriotism of someone who wants to be our President. While yes, whether or not he wears a flag pin seems silly, but it isn’t. Senator Obama has a history of statements I consider anti-American and a long history of association with figures who openly call for the downfall of our government. I have no remorse in questioning his commitment to this nation.
- The use of his middle name, Hussein this is petty, but thanks to the vicious attacks on Palin I no longer worry about petty.
- "Extreme left" "most liberal" "socialist" "radical" I could make a good case for each of these words. Not that I think Obama is much of any of them, I don’t think Obama has the commitment to an ideal necessary to be much of anything. However he has courted their votes, traded money and favors with groups and individuals who are all those things and there is every reason to believe he will continue to do so in the white house. This is a man who openly pursued the endorsement of a Socialist party and signed an agreement to support them when in office, this is a man who spend 20 years listening to Wright who can only be seen as a radical. This is a man who has funneled money to and been a legal attack dog for ACORN. Radical about right.
- “Accusations against the media” It takes only a little bit of work to realize that many media outlets this election cycle have entirely lost their credibility. The AP wire? Please. CBS deliberately editing a “transcript” of their Palin interview in a way that radically altered how she was represented, why should I ever trust them again? The list goes on. Pretending that this bias doesn’t exist would be the same as passively accepting it, and I have no intention of doing it nor should others.
- “Accusations that he voted against funding the troops” Factually true. In one of the rare circumstances where Obama did bother to vote at all he attempted to hold our troops funding hostage to force the administration into a strategic blunder by setting a hard timetable for withdrawal. McCain by the way voted against a bill that did force this timetable. The difference between McCain’s vote and Obama’s? The timetable is suicidal. McCain refused a bill that would have put those troops in harms way, Obama refused a bill that didn’t. Not the same thing at all.
- “Accusations that he sabotaged Bush administration negotiations in Iraq” PV said that “an explanatory remark isn’t even necessary, there” but I respectfully disagree. I think an explanation is required. There is no reasonable dispute to the facts involved, Obama made a trip to Iraq and without sanction by the administration, Congress or the Senate urged the Iraqi government to hold off making a crucial agreement with the USA until after the election. There are multiple witnesses to this. Senator Obama absolutely does owe us an explanation for this ridiculous conduct.
- “Accusations of ties to voter fraud” Obama’s ties to and longstanding association with ACORN are well documented by this time. Those facts are also not in dispute. That ACORN has been involved in massive voter fraud in the past and is involved in it now is also not in dispute. Obama has dumped more than $800,000 into an organization he knows has a history of fraud. He did this with wide open eyes. I see no reason not to investigate and discuss this.
- Repeated remarks about how "We don’t really know the real Obama" – In a very real way, we don’t. We know that he has lied to us repeatedly, giving ground only when pressed and falling back on the next lie till the press bails him out. From Wright to Ayers to ACORN the list goes on and on. We know the biography we have been handed was carefully crafted, we know he reflexively lies about his associations and we know he takes legal action when he can to prevent discovery of the facts behind those lies. We know next to nothing about Obama, and what we know stinks.
There are eight points there. I will give that two of them are marginal (2 and 3). Two others (1 and 
are a matter of opinion. The other four are factual realities that demand explanation. These are not fantasies that popped out of nowhere. These are not political mythology nor are they trivial issues that we have any reason to ignore.
“We should be rallying together, rebuilding faith in the economy, talking about recovery and bright futures under the candidate of our choice, since both promise change and hope.” – PV
I love ya PV, and a short while ago I might have said it was worth a shot: but that was two Obama lies, several thousand fraudulent voter registrations and a rigged investigation ago. If these were obvious myths, or entirely constructed issues then I would agree with you and stand with you in renouncing them and the tone they set. However these are not straw men or fantasies, there is a strong factual basis for the majority of them and enough in the rest for someone of good faith to demand answers.
I will
not allow voter fraud and this obvious manipulation of the process to go unchallenged in the name of reconciliation. I will not have this stuff jammed down my throat and take it with a smile in the name of “change and hope”. There is no peace possible with this man or the people he chooses to associate with. They are counting on my love for this nation to silence me. They are counting on my essential urges for peace and brotherhood to shut my mouth.
In short they are looking me in the eye and waiting for me to say “Please, sir, may I have some more?”
Screw that. I have never been very good at getting railroaded. This wouldn’t be the first time I’ve had to slam a bowl of gruel in the face of someone who thought they would get away with something simply because they didn’t think I would call them on it and risk being “rude”.
Reconciliation is not a synonym for surrender, and working together for our future is not done by demanding that one group bend over and grab their ankles. That isn’t teamwork, that’s subjugation and I flat out refuse.
To those readers who do feel that answers are needed for these things, demand them. Speak loudly, speak often*. Do not be silenced or trivialized. Do not be afraid. You have a right to your questions.
* This is obviously a reference to the ACORN / Chicago way motto of “vote early, vote often”. If you want to see a demonstration, you need to look no further than Ohio.
** The image for this post is used by permission under a Creative Commons license. You can see the original here.
I don't understand why it is fine and dandy to attack McCain and Palin mercilessley but NOT to question anything negative about Obama. I'm with you. It;'s time the gloves come off and supporters of McCain and Palin GET THE WORD OUT that the media is HIDING on Obama. It's ridiculous and dangerous not to be informed.
This is going to sound angry and hurt. It is. No number of “I respect her” statements change the fact that you are repeatedly using my posts as spring boards for lobbing increasingly indignant attacks against Obama and some invisible left-wing supporters who you seem to have a grudge against.You can say “I'm not attacking PV” all you want but it's MY WORDS you're using to launch a post that ends up with statements like “Reconciliation is not a synonym for surrender, and working together for our future is not done by demanding that one group bend over and grab their ankles.”Can you *really* not see what you're doing here? Can you really not see how extreme, angry and blind your own bias has become? And no, my concern was not about the questions and challenges being raised. I would NEVER suggest that questions be silenced, EVEN if they are dangerous. NEVER.If you'd paid attention to my post (instead of looking for things to argue with) you'd have realized that I was not listing those points as examples of things that shouldn't be discussed, and that I made no attempt to explain why they are or are not relevant, because that wasn't my point My point was about the way the McCain campaign is framing the election, the obvious effect of that frame, and that he was not taking a leadership role over the crowds of his own supporters. Please go back and re-read my post, and please stop using my blog as raw material for ammunition against whoever it is you're so bloody mad at.
Don't call me 'Mark “Rizzn” Hopkins' or it means you're a racist.Makes perfect sense, right?
Don't call me 'Mark “Rizzn” Hopkins' or it means you're a racist.Makes perfect sense, right?