Tag Archives: Research facts

Vote on the Facts, not on the mud slinging.

I find myself extremely disturbed this morning.  This article that I write is an article about something that I despise, and it’s not the usual story I write about my cute little Cavachon Ubi.  I wish it was that kind of story.  I could make you laugh, cry, or at least smile and go “Awwwwww…”, as you look at the pictures of his cute little face.  Sorry, not today folks.

This article is about “Pa Pa Pa Politics.”  There, I said it.  I hate writing about this because to me, these days, politics is about a bunch of mud slinging.  Instead of candidates having character, being likable, and having a good plan for the country if they are elected, this upcoming election is about who’s campaign has done a better job of hiring people to write negative ads about the other candidate, and write them with such bias, and misrepresentation of facts that they make the other candidate look downright evil.

Case in point.  I recently watched an ad about a court case in 1975, where Hilary Clinton defended a 41 year old man who was accused of First Degree Rape of a 12 year old girl.  So what is the controversy?  Well, the ad states that Mrs. Clinton lied, suppressed evidence, laughed about the case when being interviewed about it, got the defendant off on 2 months time served, accused the 12 year old girl of wanting to be with an older man, and fantasizing about being raped, and so on…

Some of these facts are true, but they are taken so out of context, and so misrepresented, that anyone who would just watch the article and not check on the facts would consider Hilary Clinton to be the spawn of hell.

I decided to check the facts.  The links below are examples of the articles I read.  These articles do confirm some of the facts, but they also put them into perspective.  In fact, these articles go so far as to include additional damning, that if not checked, would further harm Mrs. Clinton’s character.

There are other articles out there which I also read.  Many of the articles were clearly  biased.  I tried to pick the ones that were simply checking facts.  I encourage you to please read the articles I have included here, but also to read any other articles you find about this court case, and the actions of Hilary Clinton and everyone involved in the court case, Please, do not just go by what this one flawed human is saying.  If you do, that is just as bad as watching the ad I saw, not checking the facts, and taking it at face value.  In fact, this is the whole point of this article that I am writing today.

Just a side note.  One of the articles I have included is from Snopes.  I recently heard a rumor that the CEO of Snopes was arrested on charges of fraud and corruption.  Come to find out that this was originally published by a website called “The People’s Cube”.  “The People’s Cube” is a website that publishes political humor and satire.  Hmm…

What I’m not going to do is summarize these articles for you.  I am not a journalist, and I won’t try to convince you that I have enough experience to be presenting this story from every angle.  Sorry people.  You will have to form your own opinion, based on the evidence.  I am only trying to convince you to look at the evidence.

Another item that I must speak of, is that this article is not a defense of Hilary Clinton.  It is an encouragement to look beyond these garbage, mud slinging ads, that have no relevance to the election before us.  I can’t make anyone do anything, but I’m fired up enough about this that I felt I needed to write it down.

Also, I am non-partisan.  I am not a registered Republican or Democrat.  To decide who to vote for, I look at the candidates, their plans, vs. their promises, their solutions rather than their complaints, and I look at what they have done politically in the past.  In the case of Trump, these will have to be extended to his business experience, because he has no political experience.  That does not mean he will make a bad president.

I watched the debate last night.  Without making judgments, I feel it was clear who was better prepared.  Not for the presidency, but for the debate.  Will this be the same in the next two debates?  Who knows.  But I would rather be making my decision of voting choice based on who I think will be able to carry the weight of this enormous responsibility.  The debates help with that, but they are not everything.

Again, I encourage you to make your choice of who to vote for, not because of sensationalist ads, but because you have done your research, and you truly believe that your candidate will do a better job in office.  When you see these negative ads, before you make a judgement, I encourage you to check the facts.  Scrutinize them!  You are making a very important decision based on what you believe to be true, so shouldn’t it be important to you to be absolutely sure that it is true?

Or, you could do no research and go with your gut feeling.  Sometimes it’s enough just to have faith.  Right?  Faith in God?  Perhaps, if you believe in God.  I’ll tell you what though.  Presidential candidates are not God.  Especially these two.  In fact, I sometimes say “Oh My God!  What has this world come to?”, while wondering if these are really the best two 3people out of 300,000,000 that we could come up with to be President of the United States.  It’s a competition of who we dislike less!

So that’s my rant for the moment.  The articles are here to read if you wish.  I wish I could figure out how to get the video I watched out of Facebook and onto my blog, but I struggled with that for about an hour and gave up.  I will ask the original poster if he would be willing to send me the video, or tell me where it is, and if successful I’ll post it at a later time, or as an amendment to this article.

Thanks for reading!