Tom Finch – 11/24/06

This page was last updated on November 27, 2006.

Voters wised up, finally; Tom Finch; Beaver County Times; November 24, 2006.

Mr. Finch’s letters never disappoint. As usual, his letter is little more than a string of liberal talking points. It’s at least the 12^th anti-Bush and/or anti-Republican letter from Mr. Finch since December 2004 and the seventh since August 1^st. I wish he could get a regular column in the Times.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject letter.

“Gee, it only took nine days before a disgruntled, Limbaugh-brainwashed, Bush-apologist Republican sent a letter to The Times, claiming that electing evil Democrats will herald doom for America and the end of the world as we know it.”

[RWC] Dems were even quicker, though. Only two days after the election, we heard from Ian Thompson and C.R. Vogan implying how wonderful it would be with Democrats in the majority.

Ignoring which side was first to write a post-election letter, how does the content of the Eric Craft letter differ from what Democrats have been writing about Republicans for years? Indeed, read Mr. Finch’s letters and you find they consist primarily of name-calling, misrepresentations, unsupported allegations, and outright falsehoods.

I’m sure it was an honest oversight <g>, but Mr. Finch failed to remind us the “Bush-apologist Republican” also wrote, “Did the Republicans deserve to be ousted for not sticking to their core beliefs? Absolutely.”

“After suffering through 12 years of a Republican-controlled Congress, which allowed Bush’s incompetent, corrupt administration to run rampant, a fed-up electorate finally voiced its disapproval by voting Republicans out of office - two years too late. Goodbye Rick and Melissa. We won’t miss you.”

[RWC] Who is “we?” Other than for himself, Mr. Finch didn’t tell us for whom he speaks. He can’t speak for voters because 48% preferred Ms. Hart and 41% preferred Mr. Santorum. That means a pretty big chunk of the voters disagrees with Mr. Finch.

Note Mr. Finch didn’t show us enough respect to detail the alleged corruption of the Bush administration. Does anyone care to guess why?

If Mr. Finch believes Republicans were voted out of office, he’s conceding Democrats were not voted in. There’s a big difference between actually doing something to win a competition, and winning because the other guy lost. Using a golf analogy, there’s a difference between winning a hole with a birdie or eagle and winning simply because your double bogey beat the other guy’s triple bogey. To his credit, Mr. Finch appears to understand that nuance.

“Previous letter writers, who dared to criticize Republicans, were admonished that ‘people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones....’ That tinkling sound you hear is the Republicans’ glass house - built on Bush’s lies, deceptions and greed - collapsing in shards around them.”

[RWC] Since I wrote two “glass house” letters (here and here), I’ll show incredible conceit and assume Mr. Finch is writing about me. That said, he may be referring to someone else since I never actually wrote “people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones” so I don’t know where Mr. Finch got the quote. I think I know why Mr. Finch didn’t mention he was one of the authors “admonished.” Mr. Finch didn’t want anyone to go back and reread the thorough factual dissection of his letter.

Further, anyone who read my letters knows they weren’t written because someone “criticized” Republicans. Heck, I criticize Republicans myself. I wrote my letters to show the authors – one of whom was Mr. Finch – were doing exactly what their letter claimed Republicans were doing. To summarize, Mr. Rushman complained of “name-calling and personal attacks” despite the fact that tactic forms the foundation of his own letters. In Mr. Finch’s case, he wrote about “selective memories” and “misconceptions” despite his letter being an example of “selective memories” and “misconceptions” from beginning to end.

Once again, Mr. Finch fails to detail “Bush’s lies, deceptions and greed.”

“Ask Rumsfeld if he still believes Bush’s lies about his job security. The letter (‘Democrats will betray the nation,’ Nov. 16) is just another scurrilous attempt to place blame where none is due. We should welcome the opportunity to dispense with autocratic rule and strive to improve this country for everyone - not just the rich. The last six years is a perfect blueprint on how to betray the nation, and it was all done under the premise of ‘making us safe.’”

[RWC] “Bush’s lies about [Sec. Rumsfeld’s] job security?” What a joke! I guess Mr. Finch wants us to believe this whole process was done in secret without the knowledge and cooperation of Sec. Rumsfeld.

“[A]utocratic rule,” “just the rich,” “betray the nation?” Just more talking points with no supporting evidence.

It would be interesting to see folks like Mr. Finch in a real debate in which they would be required to provide credible and verified evidence to support their allegations.

“The only Republican who’s happy about Democrats controlling Congress is Rush Limbaugh. Now instead of repeating his tired, faulty logic, which somehow blames Clinton for all of Bush’s failed leadership, his writers can create fresh, new diatribes and place all the blame on Nancy Pelosi.”

[RWC] As I wrote previously, Rush Limbaugh must scare Mr. Finch. This is the third letter within a month in which Mr. Finch mentioned Mr. Limbaugh. Links to the other two letters are here and here.

I wonder if Mr. Finch is one of those guys who bashes Rush Limbaugh without listening to him. I wonder because Mr. Finch’s representation of Mr. Limbaugh’s show doesn’t jibe with the show’s actual content. While I’m sure he votes for Republicans, it would be more accurate to describe Rush Limbaugh as a conservative. As a conservative first and a Republican second (like me), Limbaugh has criticized Republicans – including President Bush – “early and often” when various positions adopted by various Republicans clashed with conservative principles. Just a few examples were the positions on campaign finance reform (which infringes on free speech), the No Child Left Behind Act, the Medicare prescription drug program, an unbalanced budget, and border security/illegal immigration.