An educated voter is the ACLU's worst nightmare

By Nedd Kareiva

If you know any undecided or first time voters who are planning to vote on November 7th and have Internet access, be sure to send them this article. And then please include the link to the ACLU's national scorecard here.

Despite growing concerns about our traditional American values being steadily eroded, there are yet many Americans who are either unfamiliar with the ACLU or if aware of its positions, conclude that it is an organization which addresses civil rights issues. After reading this piece, it is my hope that people will come to the conclusion that the ACLU is not such an organization, is not good for America and will reflect that at the ballot box.

When two football or baseball teams go to the field in a contest, their goal is obviously to win. To be successful in the end, a smart team doesn't simply put all its best talent out there, although any team destined for stardom does just that. The team best equipped to win is the team that knows its opponents' weaknesses and exploits them.

For example, if the best baseball team in the league has good pitching, great offense and great defense but a catcher with a weak throwing arm, the underdog team facing them is going to take advantage of that. They will study the catcher's movements and throws in their pre-game training. And then they will remember that as they go and take the field.

The underdog team will likely have a tough time getting runners on base facing a team with solid pitching but when they do get one on first base, they will look for the opportunity to steal second base and if possible, third base. The team knows that any hit to the outfield represents a greater chance for the runner on second or third to get to home plate than if he comes from first base. And getting those base runners home is critical if they have any chance to win.

This illustration has two applications. One is to us here at the Stop the ACLU Coalition. We seek ways to go after the ACLU and bring people to our camp and away from them. We look for avenues to see how we can help neutralize them. One example of that is in our soon to come Stop the ACLU public school project. We are strategizing for ways to combat their strongholds in the school system that consist of comprehensive sex education, the homosexual agenda, and the perpetuity of the teaching of evolution. We are looking for legal ways to end these destructive ideas on which they have sold school officials.

The second application concerns you, the voter, especially if you are one new to the political arena and either voting for the first time or unsure for whom to cast your ballot. Unlike us here who seek tangible ways and means to thwart or reduce the ACLU's agenda in schools (and other places), the ACLU has made it fairly easy for you to comprehend what it stands for, both on its scorecard and their many web pages of advocacy. A simple moral compass, along with being able to read thru the ACLU's frequent hysteria and grasping its distortions of word terminology, will result in the voter concluding that he or she cannot back any candidate that embraces the bulk of its agenda.

When you see the items on the ACLU's House scorecard (22 at the time of this article) for the current 109th Congress (the 108th & 107th are available for view as well), you may have a little difficulty understanding what the bills were all about or what the ACLU was trying to say. If so, I suggest you visit the House Clerk's web site and then go to the Quick Links table and then click to Bill Summary & Status (to read about the bills — will take you to www.thomas.loc.gov) or Roll Call Votes to see how your Congressmen and women voted.

One of the items that may be a bit tricky to grasp is the very first one on the ACLU's list, Attorney Fees in Religious Liberty Cases or the proper term "Public Expression of Religion Act" which is the Coalition's bread and butter issue that we supported.

Now if you read the ACLU's description, you might think, "What is wrong with that? That seems like a fair thing, except the part about keeping the government religion free."

But if you read the bill description under Thomas, you would probably conclude that this bill is entirely fair and just (and certainly not difficult to comprehend). Most people have no problem with public displays of the 10 Commandments, crosses on religious seals, Boy Scout logos and public officials praying. But the ACLU and their friends at the misnamed Americans United and People for the American Way think individuals who claim to be offended by seeing these symbols or government officials praying should have the right to sue and collect taxpayer dollars if they win.

This bill basically takes the profit motive out of the suits. In other words, if someone wants to sue to remove religious symbols or to stop prayer, the individual should take it upon him or herself to pay their way. The ACLU doesn't like that because they claim to represent their plaintiffs for free and either they or the plaintiff would have to fork over their own money to file suit. A successful suit could mean an injunction upon the party praying or responsible for the religious display. That would still be unfortunate. But it would mean an individual who resents having his or her tax dollars go to the ACLU against their faith would not see this occur.

As you can see, what the ACLU says and what actual bills say are two different things.

The bill passed the House by a 244-173 vote with 218 Republicans and 26 Democrats in support.

Now look at the other items under the House scorecard. Most common sense folks will conclude from items 2 & 15 that the ACLU is soft on crime. They will look at items 17 & 18 as the ACLU's strong pro-abortion stance. They'll see item 3 and perhaps item 14 as the ACLU supporting same sex marriage and the homosexual agenda. They'll view item 4 as anti-patriotic. They'll equate its opposition to item 7 as open borders and pro-illegal immigration sans restrictions. They'll see item 10, along with item 3 in the 108th Congress, as pro-illegal drugs. And they'll likely consider the ACLU's opposition to items 11 & 21 as opposed to our national security.

Would you agree that those lawmakers who support most or all of the ACLU's positions are not only not worth voting for but by their advocacy with the ACLU, put America on a continued rapid decline both morally and security wise?

As we noted in this story (on our home page), one of the goals of Communism was to take control of one or both political parties. We identified with much proof how the ACLU and Communism are essentially one and the same. And we showed how the Democratic Party is part of the whole kit and caboodle.

Browse thru the ACLU's scorecard and you will note that nearly a third of the Democratic Party by their votes agreed with the ACLU 100% of the time in the 109th Congress. Over half the Democrats disagreed with the ACLU not at all or only once. Over 60% opposed the ACLU not more than twice. Numbers are similar in the 108th & 107th Congresses.

A handful of House Democrats support the ACLU roughly a third of the time with Rep. Gene Taylor of Mississippi being their lowest supporter at 14%. The lowest scoring House Republican is Chris Shays from Connecticut at 59%.

Though the ACLU claims to be non-partisan, it's hard to substantiate that by the Democratic Party's many votes in alignment with the ACLU.

Remember, all 435 members of Congress are up for reelection, unless they have chosen not to run for an additional legislative term. If you have an incumbent lawmaker looking for your vote, you would do well to examine his or her "credentials" as pertaining to the ACLU. If he or she has pro-ACLU numbers much in excess of a third of the total votes (7 or 8 out of the 22 listed), but especially beyond a half, you may wish to consider whether he or she deserves reelection. If such is the case, a letter or fax to his or her opponent on how he or she would vote on those issues is a good idea. If the opponent answers favorable, that person should get your vote.

In that case, to see if you have a worthy challenger, choose maybe six items from the ACLU's list — suggested ones might be a combination of any of these: 1, 2, 3, 7, 11, 13, 17 or 21. Send a short survey containing these items to the challenger to gauge his or her views. If he or she agrees with the ACLU on two of these issues, be careful. If he or she agrees on three or more, he or she is not worth your vote, unless the incumbent is worse.

And if the challenger does not respond within a week, consider that person unworthy of your vote as well. In such a case, it may be preferable to vote for a 3rd party, if available, or consider a write-in on the ballot.

If you have an open seat, sending both candidates your little survey is a worthwhile idea. And if you can get a few friends in the same district to get involved, this can be a little fun as well as a great way to get the word out.

Bottom line, make sure your elected officials and those who are running for Congress know how important it is for them to stand against the ACLU and that you will use that as a major part of your decision whether to cast a ballot on behalf of that individual. And back it up at the ballot box.

Notice we haven't covered the Senate's scorecard. Rather than detail the procedures for determining whether you have a worthy senator or challenger, follow the guidelines above for the House. For determining which issues are most important to you, suggested ones would be 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 & 9. If your senator agrees with the ACLU on three or more issues, similar to the Congressman or woman, skip a vote for that person and follow the guidelines for House challengers. Mail or fax a survey to the Senate challenger and have your family and friends in your state do the same. If he or she doesn't respond or agree with the ACLU three or more times, pass on him or her unless the incumbent is worse.

And follow the same above House guidelines if the Senate seat is open.

But before starting, be sure your senator is up for reelection. Only a third of U.S. Senators' seats are up. To determine if your state has a Senate race in play, click here.

Keep in mind that our goal is to get as many pro-ACLU lawmakers out of office, particularly if there are in the 100% or near 100% category. While all House and Senate members over 70% are Democrats, except for GOP Sen. Lincoln Chafee, and need to be removed, along with Sen. Chafee, there are a tiny handful of worthy anti-ACLU Democrats deserving of reelection such as Rep. Taylor of Mississippi, Reps. David Boren and Jim Marshall of Oklahoma and Georgia, respectively and Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska.

So get the word out who is pro-ACLU and who largely stands up to the ACLU. And if you want to further spread the word on who supports the ACLU, we strongly urge you to write your local and big city newspapers on your lawmakers and their pro-ACLU votes (preferably less than 250 words).

A sample of what you can say in your letter, fax or e-mail is as follows.

Dear Editor:

Americans will decide on November 7th who writes our laws for the next two years (U.S. House) and six years (U.S. Senate). Who we elect will determine whether America returns to traditional values and becomes a safer nation or continues abandoning its morals and national security to its own detriment. One way we can make such determinations is by examining voting records of our Congressmen and Senators as pertaining to the American Civil Liberties Union and voting accordingly.

Individuals concerned about matters of national security, immigration, marriage, abortion and public displays of the 10 Commandments should visit the ACLU's online scorecard to see if they agree with the ACLU. While some folks view the ACLU as the nation's standard-bearer for civil liberties, others see this organization as bringing America in the gutter by litigating to remove everything good about America and creating a third world country morally. And many of these patriots see the ACLU and ACLU friendly lawmakers as having a hand in eroding our moral infrastructure.

The ACLU is an organization that has historically thumbed its nose at Americans by litigating to overturn legislatively enacted laws, going to court to block voter enacted amendments protecting traditional marriage and unborn children, and using taxpayer money to sue to remove displays of crosses. Educated voters are what the ACLU dreads and how the voting public views their elected representatives in light of the ACLU's agenda on November 7th will likely determine what bodes for our great land.

If you are in a district with a 100% or near 100% pro-ACLU lawmaker up for election, you may want to adopt the previous sample letter but substitute the 2nd paragraph above with the one below. Remove the non-italics guidelines listed before insert the following as the 2nd paragraph.

Congressman/Senator (insert his or her name and title) has voted with the ACLU 100% (or whatever percentage is the case, according to the ACLU's web site — list what it is), according to the ACLU's scorecard. I believe his/her (list which one) record on (list 3 or 4 examples from the scorecard) is not in line with the values and views of the majority of the constituents in this district/state (list which it is — district for Congressman or Congresswoman and state for U.S. Senator — and remove the other). As such, the readers here need to consider whether he/she (list which one) deserves to be reelected for another term.

Of course, you should write your letters as originally as possible. However, for those who are not good at writing letters or who don't have the time to put together one, feel free to use what is listed here.

If you live in an area with a lot of folks who are online and anti-ACLU and who read this site, it's possible there will be duplicates of one of the above letters in the hands of the editor. Accordingly, whenever possible, the more original you can make your letter, the better. But if you can't, use what is listed here. It's better than doing nothing.

Getting pro-ACLU lawmakers out of office is one way to stop the ACLU. And if you can get this article to others in your district, your state and across the country and get this message to the editors of newspapers across America, you can help do just that. And America will be safer and freer thanks to you.

© Nedd Kareiva