For some of us, this is an especially important election. It’s an opportunity to begin the process of correcting a mistake made two years ago, to change the direction our country is headed in. A direction we feel is contradictory to what the founders intended and what the founding documents established. So the short and sweet is, if you don’t like the way things are going, vote conservative. Play your part in making a change. The right change, this time.

Sometimes, there’s just no good answer.

The 2010 Texas gubernatorial race is a prime example. From a true conservative viewpoint, there really isn’t a lot to choose from. The frontrunner right now is, of course, Perry. But he isn’t very strong on border security, and if that’s your issue of choice that can be a problem. It just doesn’t seem to be a priority with him. His current focus seems to be totally anti-Obama, and while that in itself isn’t a bad thing, he doesn’t seem to be saying much about Texas issues, like a substantial state budget shortfall. Everything seems to point back to Washington. And while there’s no doubt that a lot needs to be done about Washington, the work at home can’t be ignored either.

Enter Kathie Glass. She’s got some fairly strong positions on border security and illegal immigration, including using the State Guard to stop anyone from crossing over except at a valid U.S. port of entry and restricting all taxpayer-funded benefits, including government education, to
citizens. She’s a Libertarian, strong on state’s rights and a smaller federal government, individual responsibility and private property rights. Some say that some of her ideas are extreme, but generally she sounds like a great alternative to Perry, for those looking for one.

There’s only one problem. She’s got around 5% of the vote.

Maybe it’s because she doesn’t have the budget to get her name out like Perry and White do. Maybe it’s because some folks hear “libertarian” and don’t know what to think. But whatever the reason, the simple fact is she has 5% of the vote, and barring some massive meltdown on Perry’s part, she doesn’t seem to have any realistic chance of pulling off a win.

However, she does have a realistic chance of handing the election to White.

According to Rasmussen, in ten polls taken since February Perry’s support has ranged from 47% to 53%, while White’s has ranged from 38% to 44%. That may not be quite neck-and-neck, but it’s pretty close.

If White picks up any more support, and Perry loses any more, Glass has a prime chance to split the conservative vote and give White the win. If it comes down to something around a 5 point gap between Perry and White, those +/- 5 points that she’s carrying around right now could make all the difference.

Trust me, I understand wanting an alternative to Perry. I get it. I’d like one myself. But two weeks out from the election, with early voting starting today…it’s just not going to happen. I’d really like to see her release a statement at some point fairly soon, something along the lines of, while Perry may not be ideal for Texas, at the moment he has the best chance of winning and he’s the lesser of two evils. I’d like to see her call on her supporters to back Perry this time, and come out for her all the stronger next time. Maybe I’m naive, but I would like to think it could be huge for her. To step back and do what needs to be done to keep White out, I think would show that she has the good of Texas at heart and could be the thing that pushes her over the top next time.

I’m not going to sit here and suggest to anyone how to vote. I’m just saying, think this over. Is voting for someone besides Perry worth giving Bill White a better shot?

If you’ve heard any news in the past week or so, you’ve probably heard about the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida and their plan to burn a pile of Qurans on September 11th. The pastor of the nondenominational church, Terry Jones, says that he is doing it to remember the victims of 9/11 and to take a stand against Islam. He says Islam is of the devil, and that it is a violent and deceptive religion.

So lets take a quick look at the possible results of his “Burn a Quran Day.”

1) General David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, said that it could very likely further endanger American troops

2) It can only hurt the argument that the “ground-zero mosque” should be moved as a gesture of goodwill and in consideration of the opinion of the majority of the people in America, and it reinforces the argument that people who oppose the mosque are “Islamophobic.”

3) It will give ammunition to those elements in our own society who try to portray Christians as bigoted and intolerant.

In the interest of fairness, at least a couple of positive results should be listed here, but honestly none are coming to mind at the moment.

It should be stated here that this is not an endorsement of Islam. While there are Muslims who want nothing more than to practice their faith, there are those who take very seriously the idea that all non-Muslims should be either converted, enslaved or killed.  And there are those who would like to see America under Sharia law. Should this be a concern to us? Of course. Does this do anything to help the situation? Not that I can see.  And finally, does this group have a right to do this?  Absolutely, but just as the people behind the “ground-zero mosque” have a right, that doesn’t make it right.

But then again, maybe I just have a deep aversion to burning books.

Do YOU have a positive result that could come from “Burn a Quran Day?” If so, please leave a comment.

For your consideration:

A UCSD Professor, Ricardo Dominguez, has been hard at work on an application for cell phones that use GPS technology to assist in crossing the US-Mexico border. Hard at work using taxpayer dollars, that is. And it appears to be such a hit that he was granted tenure last year in part because of this project.

While the Transborder Immigrant Tool is presented as means of helping guide illegal immigrants into the country by showing them safe routes, stashes of water, and other aid, it also, according to this story, informs them of US Border patrol lookouts. (And let’s not even mention the “inspirational poetry” which is included, though if you’d like a sample, you can listen to it here.) So if the fact that taxpayer dollars are being used to develop a tool which is expressly designed to help circumvent the law isn’t bad enough, consider that we have no way of knowing who the person using this equipment really is. If this thing ever sees the light of day, ANYONE who wants to get into this country “under the radar” will have quite a step up. Want to come work a farm? Here, have a phone. Want to come blow some buildings up? Here’s one for you too.

Meanwhile, elsewhere in Bizzaroworld…

Sheriff Joe Arpaio has been sued by the U.S. Justice Department. For what? Apparently they have been trying since March of last year to have him turn over documents requested in their probe of alleged discrimination, unconstitutional searches and seizures, and jail policies that discriminate against people with limited English skills. The sheriff says that he refuses to turn over addition documents because the authorities won’t say exactly what they were investigating.

Taxpayer money being used to break the law, and a sheriff sued for enforcing it.

Sheesh.

Three ideas inspired the creation of this blog. Three concepts that seem to be too often ignored today. In a world where anyone can be a pundit, and ideas can spread at the speed of light, these three ideas often get left out of the equation. Sometimes it is in the heat of the moment, as a result of seeing something that instantly makes our blood boil and that we must respond to, right now. But sometimes it is done on purpose. To make our point seem more valid, to discredit the other guy, or to distract attention from the real issue. Either way, misinformation spreads, confusion ensues, and the truth gets buried. That is what inspired the creation of this blog. To apply these three ideas to the issues of today, clear away the misinformation and distraction, and get to the truth of the matter. So, what are these three ideas?

1) Truth Is Not Subjective

That sounds pretty obvious. But unfortunately, today the truth is too often confused with opinion. Opinion is what we think, while truth is what IS. Sometimes truth hurts. But facts are facts and no matter how much we may not like them, it won’t change them. No matter what our personal feelings on a subject, we must face the truth and go from there. This may mean losing respect for someone we admire, or a blow to a cause we champion. It may also mean admitting someone we didn’t think so much of may not be all bad. Either way, facing the truth is never wrong. It is the only way we will ever effect real, lasting change. Because anything built on a lie is doomed to ultimately fail.

2) Words Have Meaning

Again, that sounds pretty obvious. Of course words have meaning. The problem is, we sometimes think we know the meaning of a word, when in reality we don’t. And sometimes we think two words are synonymous when they actually aren’t. Take the words “precise” and “accurate”. These two words are very often used interchangeably. But they actually mean different things. If I tell you a banana weighs 829lbs, 8.69234oz, I have been very precise. But in all likelihood I have been grossly inaccurate. Conversely, I can tell you that the ocean is big. While this is accurate, it is lacking somewhat in precision. Ok, so this isn’t an English class. The point is that carefully picking the words used can have a profound impact on the impression left on a reader. In many cases, what is often referred to as bias in media is actually accomplished not through lies or half-truths, but through careful use of language.

3) Think For Yourself

This one idea could have a profound impact on the world if more people would use it. Question everything. Ask what motivates the person to whom you are listening. Question their sources. Evaluate their conclusions. Do your own research. It’s not that hard to do. Before you take someone’s word for something, before you start telling your friends what you saw on a website or heard on the radio, take five or ten minutes to look it up for yourself. Check some other sources. What you have been told may not be the whole story.

So there they are, the three concepts that led to the creation of this blog. There’s nothing new here. No radical, earth-shattering ideas. Just three ideas that can hopefully lead us to a better understanding of the world we live in, and help us to make decisions that will make a positive change.

The purpose of Forthright is to take the issues of today and apply these three concepts to them. Will there be political topics discussed? Of course. Social topics? Absolutely. Will there be an obvious bias? Well, the blog is called ForthRIGHT for a reason. However, keeping in mind the three concepts discussed here, truth will never be sacrificed for a political agenda. If you, the reader, ever feel it is, then that’s why there is a place for comments. Make your thoughts known. Of course, supportive comments are more than welcome also. No matter what you feel like saying though, remember this: be civil, make your point, support it, and have respect for others here.

That is the definition, according to merriam-webster.com. That particular website goes on to say that the first known use of the word was in 1550. That seems like long enough for most people to have a fair grasp of the meaning of the word. So I’m a little confused with what I saw today on huffingtonpost.com.

It was a little slideshow, with the title, “Glenn Beck’s Restoring Honor Rally: The Most Ridiculous Messages”

Now granted, being confused (or surprised, or enraged, or saddened or even flabbergasted) by something from the Huffington Post isn’t anything new. But honestly, this one I really didn’t get.  So, as much as I hate to drive traffic to their site, I’m going to ask you to do me a favor. Go take a look at their slideshow, and point out how those messages are deserving of ridicule.