This page was last updated on June 16, 2004.

GOP using fear and prejudice; Ian S. Thompson; Beaver County Times; June 8, 2004.

In a way, I found the letter humorous in that Mr. Thompson uses a well known liberal tactic.  That is, accuse your opposition of actions you take yourself.  Further, divisiveness is a key liberal tactic.

"When all else fails, divide and conquer using fear and prejudice.

"This seems to be what George W. and countless other Republicans are counting on come November to maintain their grip on power."

[RWC] As mentioned above, Mr. Thompson describes a longstanding Democrat/liberal tactic and tries to project it on President Bush and Republicans in general.

"The occupation in Iraq is an utter failure and the jobs picture here at home is far from rosy."

[RWC] Regarding Iraq and the economy, perhaps Mr. Thompson needs some diversity in news sources.  Mr. Thompson appears to ignore the employment situation.  Unemployment at 5.6% is below the average for the 1990s and 1.4 million jobs were created during August 2003-May 2004.  According to Gov. Rendell, PA unemployment is 5.4% as of June 2004.

"Things are definitely not going well for George and the Republicans, so what do they do?  They fall back on the old tried and true, divide the American people using fear and prejudice."

[RWC] Mr. Thompson repeats himself.  Let me ask a few questions.

• Which party constantly portrays "the rich" as bad.

• Which party pits group (a.k.a. "community") against group by advocating so-called "hate crime" laws?

• Which party pits group against group by advocating institutional discrimination, a.k.a. affirmative action, or some other group-specific special treatment?

• In 1998, a black man was dragged to his death behind a truck in Texas.  Two of the three murderers received the death penalty and the third received life.  Despite the convictions, because then-Gov. George W. Bush opposed hate crime laws -- as should everyone, who do you think claimed voting for Bush was the same as voting for more dragging deaths of blacks?

• During the 2000 election, who claimed black churches would burn if Republicans were elected?

• Which party has/had a billboard in Kansas City, MO, saying Republicans don't care about black Americans?  The billboard features a black man next to the words “Missouri Republicans Have A Plan. You Are Not Part Of It.”

• Which party always tries to scare senior citizens into believing Republicans will cut off their Socialist Security checks?

Did you figure out the answer to all of the questions?

"Past targets have included immigrants and the poor.  This time, the right-wing has decided to turn its venom on gay and lesbian couples struggling for marriage equality."

[RWC] When have Republicans ever attacked legal immigrants and the poor?  In general, Republicans support legal immigration.  It is the uncontrolled illegal immigration Republicans tend to oppose.  When have Republicans attacked the poor?  Republicans tend to attack programs that keep poor people poor, but liberals tend to call that position mean spirited.

Regarding homosexual "marriage," Mr. Thompson wants us to believe only Republicans believe marriage should include only a man and a woman.  That is untrue.  The position for which Mr. Thompson so despises Republicans has been U.S. law since 1996.  As covered below, former President Clinton championed and signed this law.

As recently as May 2004, various polls indicate 70-75% of Americans believe marriage should include only a man and a woman. This figure has been climbing since the summer of 2003.  Unless you believe over 70% of Americans are Republicans, quite a few Democrats believe marriage should include only a man and a woman.  The proposed marriage amendment is nearly identical in language to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) championed and signed by President Clinton in 1996.  The only difference between the two is that activist judges could not overturn the constitutional amendment. The proposed amendment does not preclude so-called “civil unions.”

Mr. Thompson ignores that 38 states -- 76% -- have defense of marriage acts.  Are all of these states under Republican control and divisive?

In a vote in the PA House of Representatives, all Beaver County representatives -- all Democrats -- voted against legalizing homosexual marriage.  Out of the 203 members, only 16 voted for homosexual marriage.

For the record, not even all homosexuals believe in homosexual marriage.  Are they bigots?

This raises another point.  Homosexual marriage supporters, like Mr. Thompson, want us to believe that support of traditional marriage is evidence of hate toward to homosexuals.  This simply is not true and is an example of the "divide and conquer" strategy Mr. Thompson professes to despise.  Does Mr. Thompson believe that over 70% of Americans hate homosexuals?

Mr. Thompson also has selective memory.  President Bush was happy to leave the marriage issue to the states until homosexual marriage supporters began breaking the law and activist Massachusetts judges ran amok.  It is also important to understand that every defense of marriage act -- federal and state -- will eventually be declared unconstitutional.  When that happens, it takes only one state to make homosexual marriage the law of the land because of the "Full Faith and Credit" clause (article IV, section 1) of the U.S. Constitution.  This clause stipulates that every state must recognize "the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other state."  Therefore, as soon as the U.S. Supreme Court overturns the DOMAs, every state must recognize homosexual marriage because of the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruling, unless Massachusetts amends its constitution.

Mr. Thompson should also remember that the President has no formal role in the Constitution amendment process.  Though he can support -- or not -- an amendment, amendments are approved solely by Congress and the states, requiring 2/3's approval of both houses of Congress and approval of 3/4's of the states.  The President does not sign or otherwise approve amendments.  Once passed by Congress and the states, amendments become law.

Regarding "venom," the only venom I hear -- other than from fringe wackos -- comes from supporters of homosexual marriage.  For example, a former celebrity claims people who support and want to defend the traditional definition of marriage are “vile and hateful.”  Indeed, Mr. Thompson himself uses words like reactionary, intolerant, prejudice, bigotry, sickening, et cetera to describe those who oppose his homosexual marriage position.

"I urge people not to fall victim to this sickening attempt to divide us using prejudice and bigotry.  Marriage equality is now a reality in the state of Massachusetts and despite all of the outpourings of reactionary intolerance by opponents, the sky has not nor will it fall, and the institution of marriage itself will only be strengthened by including committed, loving gay and lesbian couples in it."

[RWC] I don't use the euphemism "gay" as a synonym for homosexual, but aren't lesbians gay?  Has the liberal definition of gay changed to mean only homosexual men?

"To those who favor writing discrimination into the U.S. Constitution (e.g. George, Rick Santorum, Melissa Hart, etc.), I say your moves are an outrageous affront to the values this country holds dear and will be defeated.

[RWC] Once again, approximately 70% of Americans believe a marriage should be only between a man and a woman.  It appears that is it Mr. Thompson who is out of step with "the values this country holds dear."

"The policies that the right-wing has pushed for the past four years are an absolute failure.  To now turn to bigotry and discrimination against an entire group of citizens as a way to cling to power is pathetic, shameful and a sad act of political desperation."

[RWC] I believe it is Mr. Thompson who shows desperation by promoting a lie.  Perhaps he should try to find an accusation that is not so obviously wrong and easily disproved.

© 2004 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.