Thursday, May 25, 2006

Demo-Zette Editorial: People Who Disagree With Them are Divisive (Barf Warning!)

"Generally the one clear thing about Tuesday’s results was a lack of clarity. But there were some clear winners here and there. Jim Holt’s sweep of the Republican primary for lieutenant governor without needing a run-off means the stage is set in the fall for one of the meanest-spirited campaigns in Arkansas politics since the bad old days."

Yes, and the mean-spiritedness is coming straight from the pages of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, desperately using its power to try to flog its readership into line with old-school liberal thinking. Too bad, we have outgrown you. The hate is not coming from Holt, but those who want him stopped even at the expense of the truth.

"We’d hoped those days when Arkansas made the worst kind of headlines were long past, but the state’s reputation is likely to suffer a similar blow if Jim Holt, state senator and font of ill will, continues to run hard against illegal immigrants, homosexuals, and Them in general, meaning anybody who’s different from Us."

Hey Demo-Zette Character Assassins: YOU are the ones who make up what the headlines say. And you are also really the ones to be a font of ill will against anyone who sees things differently from you- a group which includes a majority of the voters in this state. To describe Holt as a "Font of ill-will" is so absurd to those who know him that there are no words to describe how wrong it is. Please see the Dana Kelley article which describes how surprised he was to meet the real Jim Holt after having only the liberal media's frothing hate rants to judge him by.

"The state senator from Springdale calls himself pro-life, but he would deny prenatal care, among other state services, to expectant mothers who don’t have the right papers—and to the Americans-to-be they’re carrying. There’s no room at his inn for such."

Here they lie like a rug. Holt woud not deny anyone access to emergency treatement, even if we had to pay for it, nor would he deny even routine treatment to illegal aliens. What he would deny is access to YOUR POCKETS to pay for routine, non-emergency medical care, like pre-natal vitamins. The writers know or should know this, as this article provides overwhelming documentation which the media has been made aware of. In fact much of the article was traded e-mails with a reporter on the effects of SB206. The Demo-Zette has to know that they are being untruthful when they say it would deny TREATMENT to anyone. It would only deny access to your pockets to pay for non-essential treatment. They know, but they don't care. They are not out to provide information, but to defame character. Their goal is not to enlighten their readers, but to bully them.

" At a time when this state, like this country, needs to be united, he is the symbol, essence, and product of divisiveness. So fasten your seat belts, fellow Arkies, it’s going to be a bumpy ride till November, if not beyond. "

It seems that if you or I hold opinions that differ from those of the hidden editorial writers why then WE are the problem. We are the troublemakers. Somehow WE are the "divisive" ones.

Wicked King Ahab once tried to pin that rap on the Prophet Elijah because he preached things that the establishment did not want to hear. Elijah did not accept Ahab's label, and neither should you or I accept the one that the Demo-Zette is trying to put on us.


Blogger Mark Moore (Moderator) said...

They are also so glad that judges are selected on primary days where Democrat voters outnumber Republicans 5-1.

"There were another couple of clear winners in Tuesday’s election, and both should be applauded: the integrity of the law and the independence of the judiciary. Those principles were represented by Donald L. Corbin and Paul Danielson, two judges of the old school who made it clear they don’t believe in taking stands on issues or cases they may have to deal with in court. Or even appearing to prejudge such issues.

There is considerable legal contention just now over whether judges in Arkansas are free to ignore the state’s rules of judicial conduct, thanks to a recent decision of the U. S. Supreme Court. But even if something is legal, that doesn’t make it ethical—or wholesome for the administration of justice, which depends not just on the impartiality of the courts but the appearance thereof.

If the political future of this state seems cloudy and uncertain after Tuesday’s mixed results, the people of Arkansas can have renewed confidence that their judicial system isn’t just another form of bitter, partisan, divisive politics. "

What they mean is that the liberal judges are free to continue imposing liberalism on the populace, while the people have little way of knowing where those judges stand so they can't really vote out the liberals. As long as the judges are bench-legislating the Demo-Zettes way, why then it is not "partisan, bitter, or divisive". Only when you go against what they want does it become all that.

1:28 PM, May 25, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cool blog, interesting information... Keep it UP Volkswagen fast commercial Over 60 heating airline flights Lesbians blondes fucking What is a hunting pink jacket zyban comzybsn com The cannery casino in las vegas High triglycerides lipitor Domain web designing hosting canadaclassify com

4:31 AM, February 05, 2007  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home