BANKING ON MEMORY LOSS
By Mary Starrett
July 5, 2009
If you’re still in control of your mental faculties you’ll likely remember things the counterfeit conservatives wish you’d forget.
Entities like the Republican Senatorial Committee and the Family Research Council are hoping you won’t have any recollection that they’ve had a part in crafting the current world of hurt they’re now asking you to help them fix.
This week, I received two fund raising letters that were so convincing, I might have whipped out my checkbook and sent donations if my memory hadn’t served me so well. I was aware these counterfeit conservative advocacy groups were banking on the wholesale memory loss of their constituencies to raise money. They were talking the talk alright but nowhere near walking the walk. Or, as they say in Texas- they’re all hat, and no horse.
President of the Family Research Council (FRC), Tony Perkins, wrote to remind me of all the ghastly things President Barack Obama was doing and how I needed to send money right away to stop the president “and his fellow liberals” from advancing their “pro-abortion agenda” and their attack on traditional marriage. Tony said, “We need your support to contend for truth and…pro-family principles.” Perkins warned about the “catastrophic consequences” facing our country, saying my donations were critical so FRC could continue to “stand…for truth.” Tony asked me to “pray as if America’s future depended on it” and “send the most generous contribution” I could. The latest FRC fundraising effort calls on Christians to pray en masse on July 5th, 2009.
Tony wrote, “As Christians, you and I know Congress and the White House can’t solve America’s problems caused by the Left’s remorseless assaults on human life, marriage and religious liberty.”
Tony Perkins is very good at convincing conservative Christians that FRC has their collective back.
The very same Barack Obama now being used as fuel for the organization’s fund raising machine was showcased by the FRC at an invitation-only forum for presidential candidates in 2008. The confab was designed to educate the “values voter.” Instead of shunning a man they knew had refused to sign the Born Alive Infant Protection Act which would have given compassionate end of life care to babies who survived abortions, the Family Research Council extended him a warm welcome while excluding the only true, pro-life candidate in the race, Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin, who was later endorsed by pro-life Congressman Ron Paul. The FRC was aware that Obama’s voting record while in the Senate made him even more pro-death than the NARAL crowd which acknowledged that end of life care was reasonable. The same Barack FRC invited and hosted at the Values Voter Summit had voted to continue to allow living babies to be left in laundry rooms or tossed aside with medical waste to die. Instead of truly taking a stand for the unborn by admonishing Obama, the Family Research Council rolled out the red carpet, soaked with the blood of millions of unborn and heralded a man who unapologetically defends the right to kill them. How can the FRC’s base be expected to “contend for truth and pro-family principles” when the advocacy group they depend on for information shone a spotlight on the most anti-Christian, anti- American candidate this country has ever seen while deliberately leaving out a viable candidate who would have made fundraising letters like the one I got unnecessary?
(Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney was also invited to round out the pro-abortion, anti- 2nd amendment contingent.)
Memo to Tony: All the Bible verses you filled your fund raising letter with ring hollow. Saying “with God’s help” throughout your letter belies the truth- that God can only help us if we vote for Godly candidates like the one you ignored. Instead you gave a forum to a man who became, arguably, the most dangerous president this Republic has ever seen.
You tell us to “persevere on our knees and in action.” God will not “heal our land” unless and until we vote for candidates who honor Him. In other words, if He sends us a lifeboat and we refuse to get in, how can we then continue to ask God to save us?
Another fundraising letter from a different counterfeit conservative concern arrived the same day. It was signed by Senator John Cornyn, Chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. Sen. Cornyn was trying to convince me that the Republicans were on a mission to “battle against the Obama Democrats’ aggressive push to expand the federal government into every area of our lives and businesses.”
Even hard- core Republican apologists know that the GOP brought us the most overstuffed federal government in the history of the country, paving the way for the Democrats to do more of the same x Pi once Obama moved to Pennsylvania Avenue. Point being, in every area from entitlements to education to loss of civil liberties, to the so called “bailouts,” the R’s have done a number on us. Hard to blame the D’s for all that is wrong in America when the Republicans were the controlling party for years and managed to do so much damage.
The Republican fundraising letter survey asked me if I thought government spending was an important issue. That would make me think the R’s thought so too, right? My memory served me well when I recollected the fact that Republican presidents have out-borrowed and out-spent Democratic presidents by a three-to-one ratio. Could it be that historically (before Obama) the D’s borrowed and spent less than the supposedly limited government, fiscally conservative R’s? Yes. It’s a myth that Republicans kept the lid on spending. And McCain would have continued Bush’s policies leading us down the same path Obama has.
Next I was queried on whether stopping amnesty was something I felt strongly about. Good one. This was designed to trick me into believing immigration reform was a priority for the Republicans. I would have gotten tripped up here except I remembered W’s State of the Union Speech in 2007 where he promised a “guest worker” plan to “help assimilate” the millions who sneak across from Mexico each year. To their credit a number of Republicans fought the president on this but then, the GOP’s candidate in 2008, Sen. John McCain sang Bush’s refrain when he, too, called for amnesty. This is all quite ironic, seeing as unemployment is 9.4% nationally and the D’s now want to follow up on what Bush yearned for by pushing for more amnesty. That will really help Americans looking for work in this deep recession!
Next, the survey asked me whether I thought it important to protect local control of education and I actually laughed out loud. Imagine if I’d forgotten about that itty bitty bill passed by Republican President George W. Bush that virtually destroyed any semblance of local control over schools? I seem to remember it was called the No Child Left Alone Act or something like that.
The survey went on to ask me on what I thought about bailing out the auto industry. This was a trick question. I knew that the R’s were likely thinking I’d blame the Obama administration for this socialist debacle, but I remembered that the Republican president who just left office half a year ago approved some $35 billion in auto industry bailouts before he packed up and left for Crawford.
The next question was on healthcare reform. I happened to recall that the Republicans expanded the federal government’s role and thus the taxpayer’s burden for covering prescription drugs, to the tune of $534 billion over ten years. Trying to buy votes from the elderly didn’t work and added to our stifling national debt.
Again I was asked about federal entitlement programs. This survey question wanted to know what I thought about the “expansion of federal welfare programs.” That’s easy. I seemed to recollect that the Republicans were all for an expanded Medicaid program which was designed to get voters to like them, by golly, and get voters hooked on more and more government. (Isn’t that what Democrats are supposed to do?)
Under the category Homeland Security I was asked whether I supported “giving U.S. intelligence and enforcement agencies the ability to covertly track and monitor the communications of terrorist suspects within our borders…even if a court order has not been obtained?”
Sacrificing the rule of law and the 4th Amendment was something Republican Bush and Democrat Obama both agreed was ok. Call me crazy, but, quaint as they’re considered today, I rather liked the words: 'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!
They say liars can figure and figures can lie, but when it comes to dealing with the likes of counterfeiters, it pays to have a good memory.
� 2009 Mary Starrett - All Rights Reserved
Up For Free E-Mail Alerts
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale
Mary Starrett was the Constitution Party candidate for Oregon governor in November, 2006, a TV news anchor and talk show host for 25 years and a radio talk show host for 5 years.
Executive Director, Oregonians for Life, Board of Directors, Christian Family Adoptions.
She is currently the Communications Director for the Constitution Party. The Constitution Party is the fastest-growing minor political party (www.ballot-access.org) and is made up of Americans who believe a return to constitutional government is imperative.