ARCHIVE ARTICLES

 


No other nonliberal is going to mention this, so I will:

The press is saying that Bush, Junior, has it WON! In polls, a matchup between Bush, Jr. and Al Gore has Bush, the Republican moderate, winning hands down.

Back in 1992, right up until the Republican Convention, the media were announcing that polls showed that George Bush, Senior, would beat any Democratic candidate hands down. As soon as the nomination was over, Bush's popularity began to collapse.

In 1996, right up until the Republican Convention, the press was announcing poll after poll that showed that the moderate Robert Dole had it won against Clinton.

So here we go again. Once again, the press tells us that each moderate will have the Democrat beat in all the polls.

Until the Convention.

Come November, the moderate will lose like he always does. Same thing will happen in 2004. The same thing will happen in 2008. Respectable conservatives have no memory at all. That's what makes them respectable.

This will keep happening until even Republicans get tired of losing.

 


Last year, the State Newspaper conducted a campaign to get the old antimiscegenation language removed from the state constitution. The State did not allow a word of opposition to appear in its pages. When I objected to this, a lot of people busted a gut about it. They told me to just be quiet, it didn't matter.

They told me to just be quiet, because if I didn't liberals would say I was being a RACIST.

They said just be quiet, it didn't matter anyway. Just let it pass, they said, and that would be the end of it.

But many, many years of experience in politics have taught me this: when liberals spend that much effort on something, that is NEVER the end of it.

I keep warning people that our failure to denounce the State's newspapers' censorship of all opposition to removing the antimiscegenation provisions from the state constitution last November would cost us. In its lead editorial for Friday, February 26, The State newspaper began a campaign to cut off all state aid for students attending conservative Bob Jones University. Bob Jones University discourages interracial dating and interracial marriage. The State points out that the voters of South Carolina ENDORSED interracial dating and interracial marriage by voting for the provision to remove the antimiscegenation provision from the state constitution in November of 1998!

I told you so.

Back in November, all our "conservative" leaders were telling me we dare not oppose that antimiscegenation vote, because that would get us declared racists. I said that, if that provision passed, liberals would use it and use it and use it. Please look at my October 24 article, "Liberal Spores," which explains how liberals routinely get what they want by saying they want no more, and then surface and push for more a little later.

Please look at my January 2 article, "Censorship Pays," which describes what ELSE liberals will be demanding because we did not oppose removing that antimiscegenation provision. Those who did NOT openly oppose this provision in terror of the "racist" label, which is pretty well everybody, have no right whatever to complain when the media blank them out. The media blanked out any debate on this provision, and nobody said a word.

As I have explained before, that is why the left always protects the rights of Communists. They know that if they allow the right to terrify anyone by yelling "Communist," they will have to spend the rest of their lives explaining how their opinions are not like Communist views. The right lets the left scare them with the label "racist," and the respectable right always abandons anyone the left chooses to call "racist."

So naturally, the left uses the label "racist" ALL THE TIME. They used it here to justify outright censorship, and no one objected.

So from now on, in order to get any media exposure, you are going to have to explain why no one can call you a racist.

You are going to have to explain this in public despite the fact that you will not be allowed to say anything in the media.

And our silence last November endorsed this.

I explained this in my October 3 article, "Respectable Conservatives - They're Just Bureaucrats" and in my September 26 article, "Respectable Conservatives Kill Their Wounded."

How many readers are willing to state that Bob Jones is the last conservative institution liberals are going to use this pro-miscegenation vote to attack?

Please note I use the term "promiscegenation." But wasn't removing that provision just a little piece of housecleaning, since the federal court had already knocked it down? Isn't that what they assured us last November?

That was last November. Now The State has announced that that vote was PROmiscegeneation. The State has announced that the voters of South Carolina didn't just do a little housecleaning, they approved of miscegenation and interracial dating.

That little myth didn't last long, did it?

As long as we can be terrified into cowardly silence by the word racist, or by shouts of "anaziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews," or by any other label, you can forget about your right to speak.

What goes around comes around. When you are dealing with people like the liberals, and you do not stand up for others' right to speak, it will soon be your turn.

But what about the old dodge that racists are just leftists, so we should join liberals in suppressing them? As I explained before, this is an old line, and liberals love it. It is so old William Buckley used it all the time. Buckley wanted liberals to approve of him, so he said he would jump in and destroy anybody liberals denounced as racists.

In return, Buckley wanted liberals to denounce Communists and prevent outright Communists from getting lead editorial status in top American newspapers. Liberals laughed at him and went right on with what they were doing. Buckley, as always when liberals insist on something, went along with them.   

The result of this effort is that liberals never have to explain why they have the right to be heard, no matter how pro-Communist their views might be. No respectable conservative ever mentions that antiwar protests in the 1960s always had Communist flags in them. We all agreed the left had a right to do that.

Only the right has to jump under the table and gibber its apologies when its masters shout the right words. Only the right has to spend a major portion of its limited media space explaining what it is NOT.

All for lack of guts.

The left is actually terribly, terribly weak. The only thing that keeps it going is our leaders' lack of brains and courage.

A question: how many South Carolina conservatives are willing to bet this is the last time The State newspaper will use that promiscegenation vote to denounce South Carolina conservatives like Bob Jones University?

 

 


Being divorced, my brother decided to go back to the Methodist church in the small town he was doctoring in. The first thing he ran into was the church campaign to get the Confederate flag down from the state capitol building.

I got a quick look on television at those ministers marching down Main Street to demand that the Confederate flag be taken off of the state capitol building.

I noticed that lots of them had the backward collar. This indicated they were largely mainline ministers, that is, preachers from big churches like the Methodists, Episcopalians, and so forth. They had that serious, constipated look on their faces that big church preachers get when they are really feeling righteous.

You could see that these preachers were feeling really good.

Instead of being embarrassed speaking for a religion they don't really believe in, they are getting to march for a cause they could brag about at a New York City cocktail party.

Ah! The Good Old Days, the '60's! Back then the guys in the backward collars got to be Young Radicals, and they marched in parades with Communist flags and hippies and New Yorkers and even Harvard professors. Those preachers and priests on Main Street had that Sixties Look on their faces as they marched for a Fashionable Cause. That look is a combination of suppressed ecstasy and incipient seasickness.

I used to see it a lot in the 1960s. They marched for any leftist cause back then. But now all they have left is the Confederate flag.

They no longer march for other leftist causes because it cost them too much back then.

In the old days before infomercials, television stations used to do something you young people have probably never heard of.

It was called "signing off."

All the television stations would sign off with "The Star Spangled Banner."

Except the one Jesse Helms worked for. It signed off with "Dixie."

Before signing off, a station would usually have a minister or a rabbi give a five-minute talk. In the 1960s, a fairly normal one went like this:

The cleric got on and announced he was going to talk about prayer. He held up a leftist picket sign and said, "This is a prayer." It was the 1960s, and he was being "with it," "hip," "the times they is a-changing," and so forth.

There is something pathetic about priests and preachers who try to be cool.

Back in the 1960s, all the main line churches decided they would be "with it." They went for all the trendy political progressivism, they had guitars in the churches, man, they were Supercool!

The mainline church leadership was hard leftist. These churches were part of the far-left national Council of Churches, which supported the even farther left World Council of Churches. This latter group did nice things like supporting Communist guerilla movements.

While the mainline Protestant churches pushed to the activist left, their membership started dropping like a rock.

Each of the mainline Protestant churches that went on the Social Progress bandwagon in the 1960s dropped from a quarter to a third of their membership, while the population of the United States increased by a quarter.

Quite a drop.

But even this actually understated the stream of people out of the Social Progress Churches of the 1960s. I noticed this in my own family. My grandfather was a Methodist circuit rider, my sister was a director of religious education in the Methodist Church.

Then the Methodist Church went "politically progressive." It was exactly like the Democratic Party my family had supported for generations. We did not leave the Democratic Party; the Democratic Party left us.

In exactly the same way, the Methodist Church left us. But not all of us OFFICIALLY LEFT the Methodist Church. Those who do the counting only count the ones who go to the trouble of quitting. There were five of us, and two of us left their "church letters" in the Methodist Church. They weren't counted in the outflow, though they were very much a part of it.

Those two remained officially Methodists, and remained part of the millions who -- at least officially -- stayed with that church.

It was the other three of us who OFFICIALLY left Methodism.

For every person who officially left the new Social Progress churches of the 1960s, there was at least one other person who remained a member simply because he never went to church. Since he didn't bother to quit, he stayed on the official rolls.

The heavy drop in membership caused by churches trying to be trendy was TWICE as great as the drop they had thought it was! Slowly, the lesson got through the skull of some of the most pathetic people alive -- liberal clerics.

It only took the libs twenty years or so to catch on.

The problem was that hip and With It Guys who were in holy orders were getting what amounted to middle-age crazies. They were too hip to believe in God, and it embarrassed them that people thought they were serious about something as old-fashioned as God. So they made a big show of trendy liberal politics, as the anti-Confederate flag marches in Columbia do today.

But now they've at least changed the image. After just a couple of decades, these bright and "with it" hipsters began to actually realize that their membership had been falling fast for twenty years. Education pays!

Now the godless minister is unhip. Nowadays we see mainline churches inviting people to come and hear about GOD! Even the advertisements on television for mainline churches talk about the Bible.

If you didn't live through the sixties, you probably can't imagine what a change that is.

 

Home | Current Articles | Article Archive | About Bob Whitaker | Contact Bob | Links | Privacy Policy

MENU

Home

Current Articles

Article Archive

Whitaker's World View

World View Archives

About Bob Whitaker

Contact Bob

Links

Privacy Policy


Current Issue
Issue: Mar. 13, 1999
Editor: Virgil H. Huston, Jr.
© 2001 WhitakerOnLine.org


Email List
Sign up for our email list to be notified of site updates:
E-Mail:

© Copyright 2001, 2002. All rights reserved. Contact: bob@whitakeronline.org