November 6, 2012, - 3:53 pm

Attn, Daniel Pipes: Only Morons Vote Straight Tickets; the Few Hezbo/HAMAS Repubs Don’t Deserve Votes

By Debbie Schlussel

Over the weekend, Daniel Pipes wrote a ludicrous column published on National Review Online, some Jewish newspapers, and elsewhere urging people to vote a straight Republican ticket because, he claims, Republicans are better on the Middle East and the fiction he calls “Islamism” (because he’ll never be honest and acknowledge that the problem is Islam). That’s moronic. In fact, as I’ve pointed out on this site, while most Republicans are good on the Middle East and the Islamic threat, there are several who are horrible, and voters should split tickets whenever that’s the case. Rewarding ALL Republicans because some are decent is ridiculous and tells Republicans they can do whatever they want and they will be rewarded so long as there is an R after their names on the ballot. It’s the same thing so many liberals do when they vote straight Democrat tickets. These are the Coke drinkers who liked “New Coke”–and would have liked sugary dish detergent–just because it said “Coke” on the can.


muslimrepublicans.jpg

Daniel Pipes Urges You to Vote for All Republicans, Including the Islamopanderers

Does Daniel Pipes support voters re-electing Palestinian Congressman Justin Amash, who repeatedly votes to continue funding HAMAS and is very anti-Israel? Yes, because he urges voters to go for a straight Republican ticket, despite the fact that Amash’s challenger, Democrat Steve Pestka, is pro-Israel and recognizes the Islamic threat to America.

Does Daniel Pipes support voters re-electing Hezbollah and Arafat fan Darrell Issa, who called Israel an “apartheid state,” praised Hezbollah for the “humanitarian things that they do,” and gushed over Yasser Arafat as his minions were blowing up Jews at Passover seders, pizza shops, and bars? The same Darrell Issa, who introduced legislation to make it illegal to use classified evidence against Islamic terrorists in our justice system and other legislation to make it illegal to profile Muslims? Yup, Daniel Pipes–who pretends he’s against this kind of thing–wants you to re-elect Issa?


Does Daniel Pipes support voters re-electing Republican Oakland County, Michigan Sheriff Mike Bouchard, who believes that honoring his Christian Arab heritage means holding fundraisers with and gushing over Hezbollah agents in Dearbornistan, including Osama Siblani whose family members work for Al-Manar a/k/a Hezbollah TV? Yup, when Pipes tells you to vote a straight Republican ticket, this is the kind of candidate he’s endorsing. The same goes for Brian Zahra, the Michigan Republican Arab Supreme Court Justice, who sought and got the endorsement of the openly pro-Hezbollah/HAMAS, openly anti-Semitic Arab American PAC, and also got tons of Shi’ite Muslim Hezbollah cash for his campaigns for judge over the years. That’s Pipes’ candidate, apparently.

Does Daniel Pipes support voters electing Marty Knollenberg, Republican candidate for Oakland County Treasurer, who got campaign contributions from Hezbollah agents and Arafat supporters, after his father, a former U.S. Congressman, sought and obtained millions in U.S. taxpayer funds to go to Hezbollah? Uh-huh, that’s Daniel Pipes’ man.

This is the same Daniel Pipes who said he opposes sharia and Chris Christie’s embrace of extremist Muslims. And, yet, Pipes doesn’t want you to give a second thought to voting for Chris Chrispie Creme and his ilk.

And there are many other Republicans in the back pocket of jihad-enabler Grover Norquist. But Pipes wants you to reward them for this behavior, so that they’ll continue it.

Anyone who says he or she will always vote a straight ticket for this party or that party and urges others to do so is an idiot. When you engage in blind partisanship, you’ll always get screwed. You have to force candidates to compete for your vote, or they won’t. It’s not rocket science or brain surgery. Or, in Pipes’ case, brain science or rocket surgery.

Blind blanket endorsements like his and blind GOP embrace are the reasons why, for example, the Oakland County Republican Party feted and used the offices of jihadist former CAIR board member and American Muslim Council chief, Yahya Basha, as their campaign headquarters. But apparently we must look the other way on this stuff because, hey, they’re Republicans. Huh?

Americans must demand better from BOTH sides of the aisle and not reward Republicans (or Democrats) when they side with jihadists. Doing anything else means your vote will always be taken for granted and you will always get mush in return. It’s just insanity to vote a straight party line and not think for yourself and choose those who oppose jihad and sharia instead of those who embrace it and dhimmitude.

The few pan-jihadist Republicans around America, including those I’ve noted above, don’t deserve our votes. If they get them anyway, they will know they can embrace extremist Muslims and their favorite terrorist groups without consequence. They will know that they can continue the two-party strange love with illegal alien amnesty, Islamic immigration, and the like.

Don’t listen to Daniel Pipes. He clearly hasn’t a clue.

Voting a straight party is just plain stupid.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly



Tags: , , , , , ,

26 Responses

I was allowed to vote 15 people for some school board. There were 75 candidates. I simply crossed off any “foreign” sounding name. That reduced the risk tremendously.

No foreigners need apply. Too high a percentage of the time when there is a terrible crime, A FOREIGN NAME IS A SUSPECT.

I apologize to the 1 good foreigner out of 10,000 that becomes excluded.

As goes Israel, so goes the World... on November 6, 2012 at 4:37 pm

Oh, I vote the Bible. After I did so, I checked the Republicrats recommendations, and we lined up.

I voted against any union recommendations because I vote in the best interests of society, not self interest.

As goes Israel, so goes the World... on November 6, 2012 at 4:40 pm

I hit piece on Daniel Pipes? Really? What’s next? A hit piece on Allen West?

Schlussel RIF, he never said anything about local elections. A straight Republican ticket AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL, which is what he meant, is the right choice.

Democrats, in general, are the party of anti-Americanism, anti-semitism, and anti-capitalism. Republicans, in general, are the opposite.

Your spin is pathetic.

FK: Aside from the fact that every single one of your comments is an angry, absurd hit piece on me, you have a problem with reading comprehension. RIF-Reading Is Fundamental. Pipes said nothing about the “national level.” He said to vote a straight ticket. No ballot anywhere in America has a “straight ticket for the national level.” It just has a straight ticket for all party offices. He knows that, and so should you. If you don’t, please get a clue. Also, here’s a tip: Justain Amash, Darrell Issa, and assorted others hold federal office, which means they ARE at the NATONAL LEVEL. And they don’t deserve our votes. Remind me again to hire you as Daniel Pipes’ attempted “defender.” Epic fail. DS

FrenchKiss on November 6, 2012 at 4:48 pm

    FK,

    In life there are exceptions to the rule. I’m an American before I’m a Republican and I will only support candidates who pledge to maintain America as the greatest nation on earth and to oppose its enemies! I don’t care what party label they wear as long as they keep that pledge.

    We should have zero tolerance for those who abet and support America’s enemies in both parties. That is our obligation as citizens and patriots who love our country!

    NormanF on November 6, 2012 at 4:56 pm

      First of all, not all enemies are foreign. There are plenty of domestic enemies of America. So, name 3 Republicans that “abet and support our enemies”.

      I can name plenty of Democrats that are supposed to defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic.

      1. Obama
      2. Holder
      3. Reid
      4. Pelosi
      5. Boxer
      6. Feinstein
      7. Rangel
      8. Clinton (pick one)
      9. Biden (too stupid to be intentionally harmful)

      And all the other Democrats that voted for Obamacare, covered up Benghazigate, and lied about the stimulus.

      FrenchKiss on November 6, 2012 at 5:31 pm

    FrenchKiss, let me ask you a question dude, what if it came down between a Republican who’s like Justin Amash, an alleged conservative who supports the arabs, favors a Palestinian state in the middle east, get’s his or her’s endorsements from hamas, hezbollah, fatah or the PLO, etc., and on the other hand a Democrat who supports the state of Israel, pro-zionism, pro-US by putting the US’s interest first, etc. who would you vote for, the Republican who’s in bed with the arabs or the Democrat who’s a zionist and supports Israel’s existance?

    “A nation is defined by its borders, language & culture!”

    Sean R. on November 6, 2012 at 5:05 pm

      Hahahaha! LOL! You name the bad Republican, but can’t name a real Democrat that fits your description. Know why? BECAUSE THEY DON’T EXIST.

      FrenchKiss on November 6, 2012 at 5:35 pm

    Stop putting words in my mouth counselor. I never said Pipes said “at the national level”. Its implied. He’s talking to Americans, not idiots that live in Dearbornistan.

    And a straight ticket at the national level means, a senator, a congressman, the vice president, and the president. Read the Constitution, its in there in black and white.

    Furthermore, Darrel Issa does deserve our vote, because he has done an outstanding job on fast and furious.

    FrenchKiss on November 6, 2012 at 5:22 pm

      FK, have you ever voted? Do you know what a “straight-party vote” is?

      skzion on November 6, 2012 at 5:29 pm

    So, FK, Amash and Issa aren’t national-level politician?

    Good grief.

    skzion on November 6, 2012 at 5:22 pm

Debbie,

I agree with you!

Mitt Romney isn’t always spot-on but he’s right you should vote out of love of your country!

Its a higher standard than love of party! A straight party ticket vote is never appropriate in ALL circumstances. Daniel Pipes of all people doesn’t recognize both parties have their saints and their sinners.

We should embrace the saints and reject the sinners and do what’s right for America!

NormanF on November 6, 2012 at 4:51 pm

Well said Debbie, both sides are guilty of doing “group-think”, not thinking for themselves and using blind-partisanship. I’m thankful that many of my conservative friends are rational and reasonable thinking and will think otherwise of voting a so-called GOP straight-ticket, whereas my few liberals friends will vote down the line straight ticket no matter what the consequences are.

“A nation is defined by its borders, language & culture!”

Sean R. on November 6, 2012 at 4:59 pm

I see that Debbie already said what I said regarding FK’s latest.

FK, what is your problem? Why are you unwilling to write in a civil manner and actually argue a case?

skzion on November 6, 2012 at 5:31 pm

I’m glad DS calls out sorts like Daniel Pipes (and Jeff Jacoby and Jihad Darrell Issa and others of their ilk). We don’t hear about them anywhere else and I don’t wanna be like the overly exuberant rah-rah Twitters club who tweet ridiculous love for idiots like Chris Christie and Jihad Darrell. The Darrell Issa ignorance is especially crazy-making. You would think a thinking Conservative would wonder why after 4 years Jihad Darrell Issa is still “looking busy” (like Jesus is coming or something) but doing sweet fu**-all! OMG, when are they gonna get it???

And it’s disappointing about Pipes because a few years back when I was looking for info on that flight in November 2001 that went down in East Rockaway…he was the only one who had an article that questioned that it *may* have been a shoe bomber. No other articles AT ALL (I have seen more Tasmanian Tigers than any research or conjecture to what happened to Flight 587. (I think that’s the flight #). Yet 9/11 Trutherism is still alive and the articles on it are ENDLESS. But Pipes is not credible and I am glad I know it now.

I agree with DS and her saying NOT to vote Republican straight down the line and her calling out frauds like Pipes and Jeff Jacoby. No one else is. In fact, on the Twitters, the well known peeps are the ones who adore and shout out to frauds like the aforementioned. It’s a good clue to who really knows their stuff and who doesn’t.

Skunky on November 6, 2012 at 6:11 pm

But are you really asking Pipes to give up the lucrative income he undoubtedly gets by pushing the Republicans uncritically?

We can’t ask him to sacrifice his pocketbook just to preserve his political integrity, can we?

Little Al on November 6, 2012 at 7:33 pm

Pipes and Pipes supporters need to pipe down. Voting a “straight ticket” is only for partisan political hacks and dummies. A political party is not like a restaurant that you’ve come to know and love, where you can order something new and know with reasonable assurance that it will be very good. Nor is a political party like a religion that you faithfully follow. The political reality is that politicians can rarely be relied on and must be constantly monitored and held accountable–even if their records have been good in the past.

I’m sure that Pipes is familiar with Homer’s story of the Trojan Horse, but he still obviously hasn’t truly learned anything from it. Politicians can frequently be Trojan Horses. If you don’t do your due diligence, you might find out that you got something entirely different than what you bought into.

Debbie has already covered many instances of such Republican Trojan Horses, like Cristie and Issa, among many others. But we should also not overlook the fact that some Democrats have been truly reliable supporters of Israel, not just in words, but in actions. Among those that come to mind are Shelley Berkley of Nevada and Jan Schakowsky of Illinois. Now, I don’t know much about their positions on other matters, as I haven’t looked into their entire voting records and other indicators, but looking at the Middle East alone, I’d sooner support them then I would many other Republicans.

Ralph Adamo on November 6, 2012 at 7:58 pm

Voting across the board (all Republican or all Democratic) strikes me as more in keeping with a parliamentary (not an Aerican) system. I’ve always thought that being able to split your vote was a really fantastic innovation (in part, it is that separation of the executive powers from the legislative branch — uniquely American and, IMO, promotes liberty.)

J.S. on November 6, 2012 at 8:54 pm

Jan Schakowsky is one of J Street’s biggest hacks. If her viewpoints were adapted, Israel would be so weak it would cease to exist, which would suit J Street fine, in spite of its posturing as a supporter of Israel. She is a Socialist, and these days, by definition, Socialists are against a viable Israeli state.

And the point of the post is to support pro-Israel Democrats IFF they are running against Republicans who support Muslims. I have seen no evidence that this is the case with Shelley Berkley’s opponent Dean Heller. If there is information to that effect that I don’t know about, hopefully that can be enumerated here.

Little Al on November 6, 2012 at 9:02 pm

And both Berkley and Schakowsky have condemned ‘anti-Muslim bigotry’. What more needs to be done to spell things out?

And I haven’t spent the time researching, but I would suspect that a careful review would show both of them cavorting with Muslims the same way these witless Republicans do.

Little Al on November 6, 2012 at 9:53 pm

    Al, as I said, I don’t know much about either Berkely or Schakowsky, other than their voting records on Israel and the Middle East. So don’t get the idea that I’m endorsing or approving of either of them. My personal approach to voting is the same as when I buy food at the market. I always check the ingredients to see what I’m eating. Likewise, before voting I always do my due diligence on each candidate.

    As for condemning “anti-Muslim bigotry,” if it’s just talk, then that in itself is not necessarily cause for alarm bells to go off. But if they were to be actively advancing and promoting Muslims to high or influential places, then, yes, that would eliminate them. Cavorting with J Street or other Leftist groups too would be similarly problematic.

    My point is that what’s missing from the current political scene is that politicians no longer look at an anti-Israel or pro-Muslim terrorist policy as a third rail, when they should be made to look at it in the same way that politicians in the 1950s feared being labeled a communist sympathizer. And the only way that’s going to change is if voters start treating them that way. And that would sometimes mean supporting a Democrat who passes the line in the sand tests when that Democrat is opposed by a Republican who advances the cause of Muslim terrorists. Whether or not Berkely or Schakowsky actually meet that criteria is another matter.

    Ralph Adamo on November 6, 2012 at 11:32 pm

RA, maybe you should find out more about these liberal politicians before you comment about them, unless your comments are just meant to be disingenuous.

No, a condemnation of anti-Muslim bigotry at a time when Muslims in this country and all over the world are declaring war on us, and on our way of life is, indeed, pandering to our enemy and throwing roadblocks in the way of Western Civilizations’ losing war to preserve itself in the face of Muslim and collectivist threats.

Irritating as French Kiss’s comments are, they don’t bother me that much, because everyone knows he is a stupid fool, and no one really takes him that seriously.

And I agree that anti-Israel or pro-Muslim-terrorist-policy needs to be looked at as a third rail, but it has to be done with sophistication. Pro-Israel mouthings from those politicians who don’t really mean them (almost all of those who claim they are pro-Israel) need to be effectively detected and exposed, and paeans for Schakowsky and Berkeley don’t really help us with that.

Any pro-Israel person who doesn’t support Michelle Bachmann is not really pro-Israel. Remember, this goes both ways. Not only should conservatives who are pro-Israel support the occasional situational Democratic candidate who is pro-Israel when his opponent supports enemies of civilization, but liberals who are pro-Israel should support the Republican pro-Israel candidates who are running against hacks who are pro-Israel in words only, and only during election time.

This is the situation in Minnesota and several other places, and a liberal who doesn’t apply the converse of what Debbie is saying is not, all other things being equal, worthy of support.

It is this lack of assertion and even-handedness that is partly responsible for last night’s debacle.

Little Al on November 7, 2012 at 7:38 am

Those of us who contribute to this site regularly are doing more than voting. We are doing what we can to shape the discussion on the direction our country is taking, and this gives us a broader responsibility than simply voting.

Anyone who condemns anti-Muslim bigotry when such ‘bigotry’ is really a reaction against those who are trying to destroy us is being disingenuous, and is not worthy of conservative support.

Yes, there should be a third rail regarding Israel and Muslim support. Just remember it goes both ways. Liberals who are truly pro-Israel should also support conservatives running against Democrats who pander to Muslims. This, of course is a test that Schakowsky, and (hopefully) soon-to-be-forgotten Berkley can never pass.

Little Al on November 7, 2012 at 7:51 am

Oh, and you just happened to pick two politicians who are, to say the least, ethically challenged. Schakowsky’s husband is a jailbird, and she has never disassociated herself from his crimes. And Berkley probably used her position in Congress to lobby for her husband’s business, which probably cost her the election yesterday.

Oh, and Pipes seems to be refining his wording. Now he does not believe in moderate Islamists (as opposed to moderate Muslims). I guess he figures if this kind of obfuscation works for Romney and Obama, it might work for him.

Little Al on November 7, 2012 at 8:19 am

    Al, you sound angry and upset, and that is understandable given the political turn of events and the crash in the stock market. But your holier than thou attitude is thoughtless and absurd. There is no perfection in politics, and politics is a practical profession, like it or not.

    I take it that you voted for Bush, McCain and Romney in the last three elections? Well, did you know that each of them has engaged in heavy pandering to the Muslim community at large, and, in the case of Bush and McCain, actively supported or protected Muslim-terrorists and provided heavy financing of the enemies of the USA? And did you know that many of Romney’s advisors–of which McCain is but one–advocated the same thing? McCain, in fact, during the recent campaign, fully supported Obama’s position of giving lots of foreign aid to America’s enemies, and attacked members of his own party, such as Bachmann, who opposed such financing. Did you also know that one of Romney’s chief advisors on the Middle East was Henry Kissinger, who has publicly stated his wish that Israel not exist in another 10 years–a position similar to Ahmadinijad’s, who is less patient than Kissinger? I assume that you’ve read the many articles and posts on this website that have been written about Bush’s, McCain’s and Romney’s perfidious conduct and statements? So what does that say about you, Al, who voted for each of these men?

    Do you see me point, now?

    Ralph Adamo on November 7, 2012 at 4:19 pm

      RA, I am going to try to be civil to you, since you are a regular contributor and supporter of this blog. But you make it very hard.

      Your first paragraph is an ad hominem attack on me. Frankly, I am surprised to see something like this from a regular contributor who generally uses civil tones, even if sometimes accompanied by intellectual pretension. But I am not going to dignify an ad hominem attack with a response, especially since the first paragraph does not contain any substantive arguments. Do I expect perfection because I argue against supporting socialists who support Israel in empty words only?

      Your second paragraph relies on a set of assumptions. You have made no effort to determine whether your assumptions about my stance in the last four elections are correct or not, and, as a matter of fact, they are incorrect.

      I have not voted in any of the last four elections: 2000, 2004, 2008 and 2012. So all your arguments fall by the wayside.

      So no, I do not see your point. A post based on an ad hominem argument and on false assumptions is absolutely unconvincing.

      Little Al on November 7, 2012 at 10:23 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field