Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Truth(er) and Consequences, Facebook-style


One of the few silver linings in the otherwise dismally bleak consequences of the 2008 Presidential Election has been the nationwide revival of commonsense conservatism. With a renewed appreciation and respect for the United States Constitution, Americans from coast-to-coast have joined forces and channeled their energies into a productive, passionate movement now recognized as tea party activism – inspired by patriots like Seattle mom Keli Carender, and further incited by CNBC’s Rick Santelli. Throughout 2009, the momentum steadily increased in size and scope, as cities and towns all across America held passionate protests against massive government spending.

In tandem with this revitalized sense of patriotism, concerned right-leaning citizens finally mastered the medium that the left had used so effectively to propel their chosen “historic” candidate into office – social media and the internet. From Facebook to twitter to countless excellent blogs, conservatives began to employ technology to effect meaningful “change”.

Using this powerful, 21st Century medium, they found other like-minded Americans with whom they could disseminate important information on issues, candidates and meetings; take action wherever necessary and possible (e.g. donating to grass-roots candidates, flooding the Senate switchboards); and generally keep each other energized and motivated for the long battles ahead.

As one of the aforementioned, I joined Facebook and twitter sometime in 2008, right around the time House Republicans took a stand for domestic drilling, but weeks before John McCain thankfully chose Sarah Palin as his running-mate (a woman whose career I’d been following for the better part of a year). I delighted at the ease with which I located other well-informed members of the citizenry, who were also horrified by the prospects of an Obama presidency, and equally angered by the fiscal recklessness we’d witnessed with the previous administration and congress.

Having the ability to communicate, plan, instruct, and otherwise commiserate with them was a welcome source of comfort and strength in an age of stimulus, czars, government takeovers of private industry, tax cheats, apology tours, and slobbering media sycophants.

And then came the truthers.

Oh I’d read about these folks on reputable blogs like Hot Air, Michelle Malkin and Gateway Pundit, who documented nut-job radio host Alex Jones’ attack on Malkin at the DNC in August, 2008. Along the way, I’d even come across an excellent City Journal piece, Conspiracy of Crackpots, by John Avlon in which he chronicles the surreal – but not to be underestimated – nature of the movement, which at the time of his September, 2008 article, comprised over thirty percent (!) of the population, according to a Scripps poll.

In spite of YouTube evidence of their self-appointed hero Ron Paul’s attendance at a 9/11 Scholars for Truth meeting in 2007 – during which he promised to investigate the “real” cause of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks with none other than Dennis Kucinich – it just never occurred to me I’d inadvertently “friend” any of these conspiracy loons on Facebook, thanks to a philosophical overlap on economic policy. For this same reason, I’d also friended “non-truther” but in most cases, no less fanatical, Ron Paul supporters. However, for the most part, we’d all co-existed in harmony, mainly focused on curtailing and ultimately destroying horrid legislation like Cap and Trade and Obamacare.

That all changed the day after the underwear bomber from Yemen tried to blow up Northwest Airlines Flight 253 on approach to Detroit on Christmas Day, 2009. Object of truther-worship Ron Paul appeared on CNN where he openly – and might I add, stupidly – blamed the attack on “US occupation of Yemen and Nigeria”, a statement that is patently absurd. No matter: immediately following Paul’s treacherous appearance, the truthers who’d been lurking in the shadows of my friends’ list took it upon themselves to post video of the entire Ron Paul versus Ben Stein spectacle on my profile page, enhanced with paeans to Paul’s alleged “brilliance”, and Stein’s apparent ignorance in branding the Texas congressman an anti-Semite.

The debate threads that ensued contained such delusional comments as “Al-Qaeda is a CIA fantasy”; the Tea Party Movement was started by “libertarians” but hijacked by “neo-cons” (every truther’s favorite pejorative for anyone who accepts the reality of Global Jihad); and my personal favorite, “Everyone knows Bush and Cheney hired the Israeli Mossad to fly the planes into the buildings!”

Needless to say, it is impossible to employ logic with those who are willfully illogical. After many painstaking attempts, most of which included a timeline of terror predating and following September 11, 2001 (1993 WTC bombing, Embassy bombings, USS Cole, Madrid bombings, London Subway bombings, etc); and then inquiring as to whether all of these were also “inside jobs” on the part of the US government, I finally gave up. They would simply ignore my question and respond with another rant about Israel, or another diatribe against “Darth” Cheney.

Good riddance to trash, right? You betcha!

However, there is one aspect I find terribly disturbing—the holier-than-thou, Bible-quoting Ron Paul supporter. This type uses scripture to back up the insane belief that we have no right to defend ourselves against radical Islam, as God is “punishing” us for the scourge of abortion. Now, let me state forthrightly: I am ardently and fervently pro-life. I believe life begins at conception. I believe that innocent life is sacred, regardless of circumstances (e.g. handicaps, financial situation of the parents, etc). I also believe that from a procedural standpoint, Roe versus Wade is unconstitutional, and should be overturned, thus sending the abortion issue back to the states, where it rightfully belongs. Sounds libertarian enough, no?

Voters of each state should determine the legality of abortion for their state, as well as decide on the ancillary issues, like restrictions on the procedure after the first trimester, and parental consent for minors. Yes, abortion is evil. So are beheadings, honor killings, rape rooms, stonings, destructive and deadly riots over Danish cartoons and suicide bombs strapped onto two year-olds. But try explaining that to a true Ron Paul believer.

To attribute the cause of Islamofascism – a rabid, hateful and oppressive political system wrapped up in a strident religious ideology – on the legalization of abortion in America is beyond ludicrous. Muslims have been attacking western civilization for centuries, long before the United States even existed. The difference is that they now have the benefit of modern technology to assist them, requiring evermore vigilance on the part of freedom-loving people everywhere. And as the leader of the free world, the American President has a solemn duty to do everything within his power to prevent the United States and our allies from experiencing further acts of bloody, murderous aggression at the hands of Jihadists.

As a self-professed Christian, Ron Paul has an obligation to speak out against evil. It may be enough for the Christian Paulnuts I’ve bumped into that their guy is “pro-life”, but it’s certainly not enough for this lifelong Catholic. Paul was the ONLY Republican to vote against sanctions on the Iranian regime; I guess he’s ok with the mullahs unleashing a brutal reign of terror against their own people for the “crime” of wanting their freedom.

Hey, if President Obama can go out for ice cream on a hot summer night while innocent Iranians are shot and killed on the streets of Tehran, why shouldn’t Paul vote against sanctions?

When my Christian Ron Paul supporter sanctimoniously inquired if I was a follower of Christ, my response was “Yes, and I’d like to stay that way. However, the ultimate goal of Global Jihad is to impose a worldwide Muslim caliphate in which infidels either submit to Allah or die. Therefore, I will only vote for candidates who espouse a sane foreign policy that includes staying on offense against radical Islamic terror.”

Again, no response to my statement; just some blathering about how it’s all God’s will anyway.

I patiently replied that obviously, whatever God wills ultimately prevails, but that the Almighty also expects us to speak out against evil; that we have an obligation to confront it. I then asked why she wouldn’t support Paul’s primary opponent, Tim Graney, a man who is simultaneously pro-life, pro-limited government and pro-national security. Why settle for someone who may be economically sane, but woefully na├»ve at best and perilously ignorant at worst, in matters of foreign policy? She offered no useful rebuttal, other than to malign me for my dislike of “the good doctor” who is after all, a “Republican” like me.

Gee and all this time I believed groupthink was only a requirement for lefties!

Needless to say, I’ve been exercising my God-given and Facebook-approved right to approve or deny friend requests, delete and block friends who’ve become abusive or simply illogical, and screen all friend requests for truthers and Ron Paulnuts prior to approving. For that I’ve also been condemned by some as (you guessed it) “un-Christian” and in many cases “anti-American” (Choosing the friends with whom you associate is now considered “blacklisting” in some circles. Who knew? My poor mom, a woman who always taught me that people judge you by the company you keep, will be devastated).

In the meantime, while this avid Tea Party protester will continue to fight against statism, socialism, Obamacare, Cap and Trade, and every other travesty the “gangsta” congress and president try to ram down our throats, she’ll also continue to stand up for freedom by calling out “truthers”, condemning Global Jihad and supporting only candidates with the moral rectitude to do the same.

1 comment:

thereaganwing said...

Daria DiGiovanni is a published Astrology-influenced Romance Author ("Water Signs" available on Amazon)with a shallow conservative bent who can't defend her ideas, but is good at promoting them if she can silence dissenting voices.

I am a leader in the Washington State Conservative movement of more than a quarter century duration, elected President of The Reagan Wing and web editor of www.TheREaganWing.com, where we have consistently defended Sarah Palin. I became Daria's "facebook friend" when I learned that she was recapitulating the GOP/Left Pragmatist Elite's "Star of David Strategy" to slander Ron Paul and Ron Paul supporters with several of their standard lies and distortions. I challenged her to defend her ideas in open debate.

She can't.

As soon as I had made my first substantive post she deleted me as a friend which prevented me from responding, distorted my postions on her page and personally attacked me.

It's not just rude. It's stupid.

Ron Paul's opposition to "nation building," a position George Bush professed in his Presidential Campaign of 2000, is obviously too sophisticated for Daria to follow. Paul's policy to hunt down Jihadists, world-wide, and kill them, more quickly and efficiently than Bush or McCain (Daria's [bailout,Global Warming,Cap'n'Trade,McAmnesty] candidate) is obviously too time-consuming for her to research. And the indisputable fact that Paul blamed the attacks of 9/11 on Islamic Jihadists is aparently too "inconvenient" for her to mention.


Common lies about Ron Paul include, but are not limeted to:
1. That he "blames America" for terrorism.
2. That he is a 9/11 "truther".
3. The he opposes national defense.
4. That he opposes Israel.
5. That he is not pro-life.
6. That he denies the danger or existence of Islamic Jihadists.
7. That he is a neo-Nazi.
8. That he supports gay marriage.
9. That he wants to legalize heroin.


I've lost track of how many of these slanders DiGiovanni has repeated. But if she wants to defend any of them in open debate where she doesn't get to be the moderator and silence her opponent, I'd be willing to put some money on the outcome.

How about it, love merchant?

Doug Parris