"Projecting" is cronic with the entire Bush-hating left ~
and it starts at the top ...
Posted on 02/20/2006 10:24:25 AM PST by Texas Jack
|
A familiar theme running through the leftist hysteria over Vice President Cheney's hunting accident is that he was drunk. Or at least, alcohol played a part in the mishap. Their reasoning; why else would he wait until the next morning to accept an interview with the sheriff's department. He had to have time to sober up, thus limiting any possible criminal prosecution. And, of course, validating in their minds what a reprehensible man Dick Cheney is. After all, this what they would do. Psychologically it's called projection; ascribing your value system (or lack of one) and the resulting actions to someone else. In other words, you expect them to do what you would do in a similar situation. However, their argument(s) isn't invalidated by this single technique alone. Invariably, they rely on a slight distortion of the facts. There are a myriad of these to choose from and use as examples. I will limit my proof to a single incident. Imagine the surprise the lefties got the day after the 2004 presidential election when they found out that George W. Bush had won the election. To make matters worse, the loss of Ohio, a state that they were assured of winning was one of the main reasons. After a brief respite of stunned silence, they began to wonder out loud, "How could this be?" "Ohio was theirs, not a Red State." As the hue and cry spread throughout lefty-land, a murmur arose, "It must be because of voter fraud." From there they quickly established a possible scenario and filled in the missing parts to make their theory acceptable, at least to the ill informed masses that permeate their voter base. Here is an example as published on the web log truthout Wednesday 15 December 2004: ... Among activists and investigators looking into allegations of vote fraud in the 2004 Presidential election, the company always mentioned was Diebold and its suspicious electronic touch-screen voting machines. It is Diebold that has multiple avowed Republicans on its Board of Directors. It was Diebold that gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to Bush’s election campaign. It was Diebold CEO Walden O’Dell who vowed to deliver Ohio’s electoral votes to Bush... Okay, let me see if I have this straight. A company that makes voting machines, among hundreds of other products, is suspected of being complicit in voter fraud because executives and board members are Republicans and they supposedly gave huge sums of money to the reelection of GW. Hmmmm... This of course is not proof of voter fraud. Because someone disagrees with you politically, that alone does not implicate them of wrong doing (unless you live in North Korea, Cuba, or Venezuela). There must be proof that can be substantiated; intercepted cell phone conversations, canceled checks, documents of just about any sort that shows a conspiracy to commit the fraud. When pressed, what did the left-loonies present as their proof? "Well, the pre-election polling data showed that Ohio would select John Kerry by a wide margin." That's it! They based their theory on an intentionally flawed poll designed to influence any undecided citizens to vote for Kerry. That was their proof. In other words, they had no proof. They were simply verbalizing their fantasies. Side note: The left-loonies had best get accustomed to Republicans on the board of directors and occupying executive positions at companies that manufacture voting machines, or anything else. You see, members of teachers unions, lawyers, welfare recipients, aborted children, etc. do not produce products. Other than the aborted children, they live off of the production of others. But, lets get on to the Cheney hunting accident. As I noted in the first paragraph, the left-loonies have tied themselves to the assertion that alcohol was involved, and that Cheney is guilty of criminal prosecution because he is involved in a cover up. Their proof, the sheriff's department didn't interview him until the next morning. Is this really what happened, or have the lefty-loonies skewed the facts to make it fit their projection? Of course, you know the latter is true. It's what they do to make their fantasies seem believable. Geography lesson: Taken from the University of Texas handbook on Texas demographics - Kenedy County (S-17), on U.S. Highway 77 south of Corpus Christi in the Rio Grande Plain region of South Texas... The county comprises 1,389 square miles... (roughly the size of Rhode Island) ... there were only seven ranches, averaging 70,130 acres... with a population of 414. - Only 414 people live in an area the size of Rhode Island. Do you think the sheriff might know most of these people? I'll bet he knows what kind of car/truck every adult who lives in Kenedy County drives. Kenedy County is about 48 miles long (North to South) and 26 miles wide (East to West). It's 20 miles from Sarita, the county seat and where the sheriff lives to the Armstrong ranch. The following events were taken from an article published in the Corpus Christi Caller Times written by Nancy Martinez and broadcast on the Scripps Howard News Service. ...No one in the federal government has told Sheriff Ramon Salinas III and his deputies how to do their job, Salinas said. He was the one who decided not to go to the ranch to investigate until Sunday... That seems rather straight-forward. But wait, who is this Sheriff Ramon Salinas III? Is he part of much broader White House cover up? Let's investigate. From the web site My San Antonio we find the following information: ... A recently elected sheriff who'd worked as a deputy at the eight-member department since the mid-1990s - Salinas told reporters he didn't rush to the ranch Saturday night because a friend there had told him it was an accident... Ah ha! A friend told him it was an accident. This sounds suspicious. Just who is this friend? Referring to the Corpus Christi Caller Times article once again we find the following: ... Salinas said he was barbecuing with his family at 5:30 p.m. Saturday when he received a call from sheriff's Capt. Charles Kirk. "He told me he heard of a possible hunting accident on Armstrong Ranch." Minutes later, Salinas got a call from a U.S. Secret Service agent. "He said the reason he was calling was to officially notify the sheriff's department that the vice president was involved in that shooting accident." Soon after, Salinas said, Kirk called him from the Armstrong Ranch gate. He told him he was there with a U.S. Border Patrol agent who didn't know what was going on. "I told him don't worry about it. I'll make a call," Salinas said. Salinas called Ramiro Medellin Jr., a former sheriff who lives on Armstrong Ranch and works as a ranch hand. Medellin called Salinas back and confirmed the incident was an accident. It was at this point that Salinas decided to wait until the next morning to send an officer to investigate the incident... Okay, let me see if I've got this straight. The Secret Service called Sheriff Salinas within an hour of the accident to report it knowing full well that Cheney would not be sober, if he was intoxicated, by the time the sheriff got there. Sheriff Salinas then called a friend at the Armstrong ranch to verify the reports he was receiving. The friend, former Sheriff Ramiro Medellin Jr. who was an eye witness, said that it was an accident. From the description of the accident given to him Sheriff Salinas concluded: ... The Sheriff's Department says no alcohol or misconduct played a role in the shooting, and Thursday closed the case, finding no criminal wrongdoing... So, my friends, what we have here is a typical example of how the Liberal Antique Media (LAM) manufactures stories (I won't call them news, because they aren't) in an attempt to sway the thinking of the American public. This time instead of falsely reporting the flushing of a Koran down the toilet, they attempted to flush the hated Vice President Dick Cheney, he of Halliburton fame, down the toilet. I can't help but wonder how many future stories will be Cheney'ed to suit the LAM's political world view. One interesting observation, certainly this story was a gigantic leap forwarding in marginalizing the LAM's influence in America. After this, how could any thinking person believe that what the LAM reports isn't Cheney'ed.
|
Okay, let me see if I have this straight. A company that makes voting machines, among hundreds of other products, is suspected of being complicit in voter fraud because executives and board members are Republicans and they supposedly gave huge sums of money to the reelection of GW.
Now, being honest with myself, I must say that if a voting machine company's leadership was dominated by liberals who donated heavily to Democrat candidates, I most certainly would be suspicious if election results in an area favoring conservatives went liberal where their machines were used. I like to think that this would not be a case of project, but rather a conclusion drawn on experience and evidence that liberals are intellecutally dishonest. For what it's worth.
Make that "I like to think that this would not be a case of projection, but ..." etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.