September 27, 2022

Letter to the Editor: Rules of Engagement

It’s a rule perfected by Rush Limbaugh. I always like to give credit where credit is due. It is a method of attack that has been successfully used for centuries, but I must say was perfected by Limbaugh. The rule is, simply speaking, if you want to attack someone for whatever it is that you want to attack them for, politically speaking that is, you loudly proclaim, continually accuse, and do exactly what you are accusing the accused of doing. In Limbaugh’s case it was media bias. Preventive war would be another example. You accuse a country or empire, or whatever of planning on attacking your country, empire, or whatever and then you invade them. It works every time. A current example would be our actions toward Iran: we accuse them of threatening us and causing us angst. So what do we do, we cause them as much trouble as possible; making their life as difficult as possible. We are doing to them exactly what we say they want to do to us to justify what we are doing to them. Or, we send a drone over another country and kill someone who we claim wants to kill us.

Now back to here and now. The Republicans raised the cry of interference with the 2020 elections, a cry that still is heard, when in fact, the only people interfering with elections were the Republicans. They interfered and are still interfering with the election process here in the United States and they are justifying it on the allegations that the Democrats interfered with the last presidential election. Sixty plus lawsuits were filed alleging election interference, not one of which was allowed to go forward for lack of evidence. Based upon the allegations of electoral interference, the Republican legislatures and other Trumpites have been busy interfering with the election process ever since and they are succeeding. As I said, you have to give credit where credit is due.

I have asked numerous people since the 2020 elections about this issue of electoral interference and have had a surprising number of responses confirming that, yes indeed, there was interference with the election. After I get this response, I ask them what evidence are you aware of that supports that notion.

No one can give me any. So what you have to assume from this is that they have been told by someone, somewhere, through TV, radio, or online that this is so. So for instance, if Sean Hannity or Tucker Carlson proclaims election fraud, ergo there is election fraud which allows the Republicans to interfere with elections so there won’t be any further election fraud. It just works every time.

Richard E H Phelps II