A.J. Castellitto
Bait, hate & switch
By A.J. Castellitto
Less than a few prominent and influential organizations have been working very diligently to advance their power of persuasion. Most notable are SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center) and RWW (RightWingWatch). Sure, they expose some legitimate hate groups, but lately it's been difficult to separate the haters from the baiters.
Nobody would argue that there are many groups that must rightly be considered legitimate threats to society in our day (i.e. Westboro Baptists, Nazi Skinheads ). But what are we to make of the growing tendency to falsely accuse and mischaracterize those who are simply offering factual, rational and justifiable concerns in a manner that is non-confrontational? What if speaking truth 'in love' is still perceived a threat? Would the offense that such a message would cause justify engaging in false agitations, and even criminality, to destroy such messengers?
What are we to make of organizations that would unjustly slander and incite false perceptions against those who won't bow to their progressive ideology? Are these tactics merely a cheap (and often easier) way for them to advance their worldview, as they misrepresent and vilify those who don't conform to their way of thinking? Is this how so-called 'progressive' organizations overcome an inability to rationally engage in public debate?
Is resorting to slander and defamation, an ethical and respectful way to defeat traditional ideas and critical, independent thought? Of course not, but it may very well be the most effective, and the SPLC's of the world will spare nothing, including civil debate, in their quest to shape public opinion (and ultimately achieve ideological supremacy).
This is often true of both sides to some extent. I've encountered plenty of conservative pieces in which the author has been all too willing to take take a low road filled with cheap shots and harsh condemnations. I have even fallen into this trap myself.
On the other hand, we conservatives are merely taking (and evaluating) what we've been given, and all too often it hasn't been pretty. Regardless, we should do our best to take the high road and allow reason and sound judgement to trump emotional outrage (whenever possible).
Unfortunately, what I see when I consider some of the measures applied by the SPLCs and RWWs of the world are propaganda tactics used to destroy the first and second amendment. However, there is another goal, that although much more subtle, is just as disconcerting. It appears there are also active attempts being made to establish smokescreens and distractions on behalf of powerful entities who
pose the most severe threat to American sovereignty and liberty in our day.....
It's not those who seek to take a righteous stand and have their well-reasoned voices heard that we must worry about (i.e. the much maligned Senator, Ted Cruz). Rather it's those who are patient, crafty and calculating, in their efforts to sway opinion and seduce the ignorant, whom are the biggest threat to the American way of life.
Senator Cruz has been fearless and tireless in expressing his founded concerns on numerous occasions. Worried about our economic future, our religious freedoms, our sovereignty, and our democracy, Senator Cruz has yet to meet a Constitutional violation he wasn't ready to fight. But nobody has the guts to take him on over these issues and why? Because the Constitution is on his side, as well as many others like-minded constitutionalists, like Trey Gowdy and Rand Paul (when he is thinking clearly). Armed with original intent and natural law, the sincere Conservative makes mince meat out of arbitrary mores and religious humanists.
It also appears that any conservatives who have not 'evolved' as quickly as 'Honest Obe,'and his political colleagues, will continue to be viciously defamed by outspoken progressives who have essentially deemed the right to same-sex marriage a black and white matter of life or death. A matter in which all individuals must openly declare themselves an advocate of acceptance or bigotry.
And what will come of the rational conservative who makes a nuanced case for 'traditional' over 'same' based on sound natural/existential principles? Well, here's a few random points that may be worth a little further consideration....
*Essentially, all of mankind, in a general sense, experiences unorthodox desires; it's the choice to act on such desires that further defines who we are. Consistency in our level of spiritual and natural understanding should come down to:
a. Our creative purpose
b. Scriptural authorization
c. A proven, rational standard
d. Physical/emotional health as per CDC and related areas of psychosocial adjustment and e. the developmental health and well-being of children (which should take precedent over the wants of any consensual union).
*How about all that crazy Agenda 21 rhetoric?
Well, what about the NPV (national popular vote efforts) or the secrecy surrounding fast-track TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership)? or even much more frightening, what are we to make of "Science Czar": Dr. John R Holdren? and (ObamaCare architect) Dr. Ezekial Emmanuel's views on the Hippocratic Oath and the death of private health insurers? We also have the UN's 'environmental sustainability programs' (chock full of international mandates opening the prospects of intrusive governmental overreach and property infringements).....
Unfortunately, the resistance against the radical aspects of these progressive ideologies are not respected by the global minded elites (and their lackey organizations) who have little regard for a constitutional law they consider antiquated and offensive. Their rabid propensity for the establishment of a progressive one party rule is starting to show.
*Gun rights?
Armed American citizens = Low crime. While our current administration wants to disarm any Vet that may 'suffer' a subtle eye twitch..... Why?
*Active Patriot Groups irresponsibly characterized as 'anti-government'? Here's the list courtesy of SPLC: http://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/active_patriot_groups.pdf
We must rightfully ask – When our government no longer resembles 'our government,' who is on the right side of all this 'anti-government' propaganda?
There's a reason the FBI recently cut ties with the SPLC, and it should tell us something. Their credibility and objectivity is shot!
America Lost,
https://www.tatepublishing.com/bookstore/book.php?w=978-1-63122-628-1
© A.J. Castellitto
Less than a few prominent and influential organizations have been working very diligently to advance their power of persuasion. Most notable are SPLC (Southern Poverty Law Center) and RWW (RightWingWatch). Sure, they expose some legitimate hate groups, but lately it's been difficult to separate the haters from the baiters.
Nobody would argue that there are many groups that must rightly be considered legitimate threats to society in our day (i.e. Westboro Baptists, Nazi Skinheads ). But what are we to make of the growing tendency to falsely accuse and mischaracterize those who are simply offering factual, rational and justifiable concerns in a manner that is non-confrontational? What if speaking truth 'in love' is still perceived a threat? Would the offense that such a message would cause justify engaging in false agitations, and even criminality, to destroy such messengers?
What are we to make of organizations that would unjustly slander and incite false perceptions against those who won't bow to their progressive ideology? Are these tactics merely a cheap (and often easier) way for them to advance their worldview, as they misrepresent and vilify those who don't conform to their way of thinking? Is this how so-called 'progressive' organizations overcome an inability to rationally engage in public debate?
Is resorting to slander and defamation, an ethical and respectful way to defeat traditional ideas and critical, independent thought? Of course not, but it may very well be the most effective, and the SPLC's of the world will spare nothing, including civil debate, in their quest to shape public opinion (and ultimately achieve ideological supremacy).
This is often true of both sides to some extent. I've encountered plenty of conservative pieces in which the author has been all too willing to take take a low road filled with cheap shots and harsh condemnations. I have even fallen into this trap myself.
On the other hand, we conservatives are merely taking (and evaluating) what we've been given, and all too often it hasn't been pretty. Regardless, we should do our best to take the high road and allow reason and sound judgement to trump emotional outrage (whenever possible).
Unfortunately, what I see when I consider some of the measures applied by the SPLCs and RWWs of the world are propaganda tactics used to destroy the first and second amendment. However, there is another goal, that although much more subtle, is just as disconcerting. It appears there are also active attempts being made to establish smokescreens and distractions on behalf of powerful entities who
pose the most severe threat to American sovereignty and liberty in our day.....
It's not those who seek to take a righteous stand and have their well-reasoned voices heard that we must worry about (i.e. the much maligned Senator, Ted Cruz). Rather it's those who are patient, crafty and calculating, in their efforts to sway opinion and seduce the ignorant, whom are the biggest threat to the American way of life.
Senator Cruz has been fearless and tireless in expressing his founded concerns on numerous occasions. Worried about our economic future, our religious freedoms, our sovereignty, and our democracy, Senator Cruz has yet to meet a Constitutional violation he wasn't ready to fight. But nobody has the guts to take him on over these issues and why? Because the Constitution is on his side, as well as many others like-minded constitutionalists, like Trey Gowdy and Rand Paul (when he is thinking clearly). Armed with original intent and natural law, the sincere Conservative makes mince meat out of arbitrary mores and religious humanists.
It also appears that any conservatives who have not 'evolved' as quickly as 'Honest Obe,'and his political colleagues, will continue to be viciously defamed by outspoken progressives who have essentially deemed the right to same-sex marriage a black and white matter of life or death. A matter in which all individuals must openly declare themselves an advocate of acceptance or bigotry.
And what will come of the rational conservative who makes a nuanced case for 'traditional' over 'same' based on sound natural/existential principles? Well, here's a few random points that may be worth a little further consideration....
*Essentially, all of mankind, in a general sense, experiences unorthodox desires; it's the choice to act on such desires that further defines who we are. Consistency in our level of spiritual and natural understanding should come down to:
a. Our creative purpose
b. Scriptural authorization
c. A proven, rational standard
d. Physical/emotional health as per CDC and related areas of psychosocial adjustment and e. the developmental health and well-being of children (which should take precedent over the wants of any consensual union).
*How about all that crazy Agenda 21 rhetoric?
Well, what about the NPV (national popular vote efforts) or the secrecy surrounding fast-track TPP (Trans-Pacific Partnership)? or even much more frightening, what are we to make of "Science Czar": Dr. John R Holdren? and (ObamaCare architect) Dr. Ezekial Emmanuel's views on the Hippocratic Oath and the death of private health insurers? We also have the UN's 'environmental sustainability programs' (chock full of international mandates opening the prospects of intrusive governmental overreach and property infringements).....
Unfortunately, the resistance against the radical aspects of these progressive ideologies are not respected by the global minded elites (and their lackey organizations) who have little regard for a constitutional law they consider antiquated and offensive. Their rabid propensity for the establishment of a progressive one party rule is starting to show.
*Gun rights?
Armed American citizens = Low crime. While our current administration wants to disarm any Vet that may 'suffer' a subtle eye twitch..... Why?
*Active Patriot Groups irresponsibly characterized as 'anti-government'? Here's the list courtesy of SPLC: http://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/active_patriot_groups.pdf
We must rightfully ask – When our government no longer resembles 'our government,' who is on the right side of all this 'anti-government' propaganda?
There's a reason the FBI recently cut ties with the SPLC, and it should tell us something. Their credibility and objectivity is shot!
America Lost,
https://www.tatepublishing.com/bookstore/book.php?w=978-1-63122-628-1
© A.J. Castellitto
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
