December 13, 2018

They Caused Me To Act The Way I Do

*Editor’s Note* – I got the below in my email today and thought it would be a good example of how we are deceived and blinded, much because of our own self-importance, taught to us by those promoting the false paradigm of Democrat/Republican or Liberal/Conservative. That isn’t to say that political idealism doesn’t exist. It does. But that isn’t what this little ditty below is about…is it?

Depending on which side of the fence you have been convinced you are on, you, most likely, will read this and think it to be mostly, or all, true, or mostly, or all, false. You will either come away feeling a sense of pride, accomplishment and power, or your level of anger and disgust has risen a couple of notches. But, isn’t that the purpose of all this? It’s easy to say, at the end, “It really is just that simple,” and perhaps to the simple-minded it is just that simple. 

Whoever wrote this probably thinks (or they were just doing their “divide and conquer” job) the statements are true. And, who could argue with it…unless you are of “the other side?” Again, that is my point. The simple act of writing this “You Created Us” is, in fact, who and what created “them” – them being the ones blamed for creating “us.”

Probably since the beginning of time, no two people have been able to agree on everything. Man is incapable of accepting that fact and letting it go…something called respect. Instead, things are written and said about “the other side.” Each time someone does or says something disparaging about “the other side,” the gap of respect begins to diminish. At this point, each “side” has begun the creation of the “other side.”

And then we have those who take the high road and say, “Our side doesn’t do this or do that” – that it’s the other side that’s all wrong and misguided. It doesn’t stop. It will never stop. 

And now we have the in-your-face Trump winners justifying their “victory” by taking the thorn in the side and turning it into a dagger, blaming “them” beside “they” created “us.” What should we look for next?

It would probably be in everyone’s interest to take a hard look at who really are the ones, the powers, the entities who have created this hateful mess – and this one disguised as, “Don’t look at me! The other side did it!”

~~~~~~~~~~~

I’m noticing that a lot of you aren’t graciously accepting the fact that your candidate lost.

In fact you seem to be posting even more hateful things about those of us who voted for Trump.

Some of you are apparently “triggered” because you are posting how “sick” you feel about the results.

How did this happen you ask?

You created “us” when you attacked our freedom of speech.

You created “us” when you attacked our right to bear arms.

You created “us” when you attacked our Christian beliefs.

You created “us” when you constantly referred to us as racists.

You created “us” when you constantly called us xenophobic.

You created “us” when you told us to get on board or get out of the way.

You created “us” when you forced us to buy health care and then financially penalized us for not participating.

You created “us” when you lied and said we could keep our insurance plans and our doctors.

You created “us” when you allowed our jobs to continue to leave our country.

You created “us” when you attacked our flag.

You created “us” when you took God out of our schools.

You created “us” when you confused women’s rights with feminism.

You created “us” when you began to emasculate men.

You created “us” when you decided to make our children soft.

You created “us” When you decided to rewrite school history books and remove the truth about our founders

You created “us” when you decided to vote for progressive ideals.

You created “us” when you attacked our way of life.

You created “us” when you decided to let our government get out of control.

“You” created “us” the silent majority.

You created “us” when you began murdering innocent law enforcement officers.

You created “us” when you took a knee, or stayed seated or didn’t remove your hat during our National Anthem.

And we became fed up and we pushed back and spoke up.

And we did it with ballots, not bullets.

With ballots, not riots.

With ballots, not looting.

With ballots, not blocking traffic.

With ballots, not fires, except the one you started inside of “us”.

“YOU” created “US”.

It really is just
that simple.

Share

Conservatives Call Out Ann Coulter

Press Release of National Center for Public Policy Research

Comments on “Hannity” Unnecessary and Unhelpful to Fellow Conservatives, Distracts from Serious Debate

References to Obama and Monkey Seen as a Ploy to Create Controversy, Sell Books

Washington, DC – Three conservative activists affiliated with the National Center for Public Policy Research who possess more than 85 years of professional experience between them are criticizing author Ann Coulter for her shameful racial tweaking on the September 9 edition of Fox News Channel program “Hannity.”

Coulter, who is releasing a new book next month, appeared on “Hannity” to discuss the Obama Administration’s weak response on Syria. On three occasions during in the approximately seven-minute segment, Coulter used “Obama” and “monkey” in the same sentence. It was done in the context of Russian President Vladimir Putin manipulating the Syrian crisis to make Obama look weak and indecisive on the international stage.

During the interview, Coulter said Putin “is making a monkey out of Obama,” that the crisis may have been orchestrated “to make Obama look like a monkey” and that Putin “made Obama a monkey” on several occasions since the President’s re-election.

While Coulter is free to choose her idioms, it appeared obvious her word choice was purposefully meant to provoke controversy. Even host Sean Hannity called out Coulter on her syntax three times during the relatively short segment, specifically asking at one point: “Why are you saying that? Because you know people are going to criticize you for using that term against the President… Are you trying to be provocative?” Obviously taken aback, Coulter paused and denied Hannity’s assertion, but then subsequently used the term “ragdoll” to characterize Putin as “playing with” Obama.

“RFK Jr. said in his diary that Al Sharpton has done more to damage the black cause than George Wallace because he’s tainted all black leaders.

Ann Coulter is the conservative movement’s Al Sharpton,” said David Ridenour, president of the National Center for Public Policy Research. “The world doesn’t revolve around Ann Coulter and whether or not she sells her books. It’s time she put America first.”

“Ann Coulter has a long history of making provocative statements as a professional advancement strategy, but statements she makes in service of her personal PR goals should not be confused with the genuine views of the conservative movement, 99.9999 percent of which is far more interested in advancing sound public policies for the United States than it ever will be in selling books,” said Amy Ridenour, chairman of the National Center.

While her performance on “Hannity” in absolutely no way indicates Coulter harbors racist inclinations, it does provide plenty of excuses for the left-wing smear machine to launch attacks against her in particular and conservatives in general — attacks that are common and point to incidents such as this as alleged smoking guns of racism in the conservative movement. It also distracts from the real debate. In this case, more than a minute was devoted to Coulter and Hannity discussing her speech rather than her thoughts.

For Coulter, however, such controversy keeps her in the public eye.

“In March of 2007, Ann Coulter called John Edwards a ‘faggot’ at CPAC — much to the dismay of many of the conservative conference’s sponsors such as the National Center for Public Policy Research. Three months later, her latest book hit store shelves. Last night, Sean Hannity even seemed taken aback as Coulter repeatedly said Putin was making a monkey out of Obama. She was baiting the haters. And she has a new book coming out next month. Coincidence? I think not,” said David W. Almasi , the executive director of the National Center for Public Policy Research and a D.C. activist since 1989. “Ann Coulter is a fine writer and her contributions to our cause are appreciated, but she has a pattern of using other conservatives to get attention. I didn’t appreciate the haters condemning me by association in 2007, and I don’t appreciate it today.”

In the aftermath of the 2007 CPAC comment, the National Center said it would be better to not do CPAC at all than to do it and have all the media attention about it be focused upon the nasty word choices of a single individual, who falsely is portrayed as representative of the conservative movement as a whole.

The National Center co-sponsored CPAC that year. Its behind-the-scenes work at the time kept Coulter off the CPAC’s official agenda in 2008. Coulter has since been re-invited to speak at CPAC, and the National Center has ceased being a co-sponsor.

National Center personnel have also called on Coulter to use more constructive rhetoric on other occasions, such as a Coulter attack on Canada in which she said, in part, “When you are allowed to exist on the same continent as the United States of America… They had better hope the United States doesn’t roll over one night and crush them… They are lucky to be allowed to exist on the same continent…”

“We are aware of the irony that in calling out Ann Coulter for making conservatism look bad in order to draw attention to herself, we are giving her more attention,” added Amy Ridenour, “but as I’ve said for years now, Coulter is perceived by many to be representative of the conservative movement. If we don’t correct this misperception, it will stand.”

Share