Ruth Gibbs on John McCain (in February)

Hello All,


    Please email this far and wide across the nation asap.


    For months on debates, Senator McCain has been saying he will secure the borders and has been deliberately refusing to call out his plan after that.


    Everyone says he has learned his lesson and has changed on amnesty.  NOT SO! 

 I personally saw and heard him on Larry King Live yesterday.  Larry King pushed.  McCain mouthed the same ‘secure our borders first’ line.  Larry King pushed and pushed and insisted he say what he would do about illegals in this country until finally McCain caved in and said:

    (This is not word for word but paraphrased EXACTLY as he said it.) [LOL –Ed.]


    He said the two million illegals here who are criminals we would send back of course, but that as for the rest, we have to be humane and compassionate, after all they are human beings.  Then he tried a guilt trip on the public saying that if for instance a woman was here illegally and her husband was serving in Iraq, of course we would not deport her.


    Friends, this is serious!!!!  We CANNOT give amnystey (sic) to tens of millions of people who have never paid one dime into social security, medicaid and medicare and then turn around and support them.  It will bankrupt the country. 

We CANNOT refuse to enforce the laws of the land, or we have anarchy…



    I am serious folks, if you are NOT concerned, I highly recommend you become concerned… If you go and vote for McCain because he has fooled you on this issue, or because Romney tells you to, then don’t complain when the house of cards comes falling down. 


    The same with your Legislative or County Conventions.  Support people to the State convention who will elect delegates to the National Convention who believe that we should start enforcing the laws.


    McCain has NOT won the nomination. The national media is showing you

smoke and mirrors counts…


    Vote tomorrow and at your conventions for America and Republican

Principles, not chaos, anarchy, selective thumbing of the nose at the laws of the land and compromise of our national security… 


By the way – McCain says he’s for national security but he wants to keep a bunch of illegal people here?  How does he know how many are terrorists? 


Think about it.


Ruth Gibbs



9 thoughts on “Ruth Gibbs on John McCain (in February)

  1. Ruth Gibbs is not the only one in a leadership position in the Republican Party who alters her comments to fit the audience. As anyone objective knows from experience, so does John McCain.

    Copied from the June 19, 2008 AP News article:

    “ Both McCain and Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama support giving legal status to millions of illegal immigrants,…. ”

    “ Republican presidential John McCain assured Hispanic leaders he would push through Congress legislation to overhaul federal immigration laws if elected, several people who attended a private meeting with the candidate said Thursday. ”

    “ Democrats questioned why the Arizona senator held the meeting late Wednesday night in Chicago. But supporters who were in the room denied that McCain held the closed-door session out of fear of offending conservatives, many of whom want him to take a harder line on immigration.”

    “ “He’s one John McCain in front of white Republicans. And he’s a different John McCain in front of Hispanics,” complained Rosanna Pulido, a Hispanic and conservative Republican who attended the meeting.

    “He’s having his private meetings to rally Hispanics and to tell them what they want to hear,” she said. “I’m outraged that he would reach out to me as a Hispanic but not as a conservative.” ”

    “ After the event, McCain met privately with Martin Sandoval, an Illinois state senator and Democratic convention delegate for former candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton. Sandoval said he left open the possibility of backing McCain, citing his immigration stance …. ”

    Ruth Gibbs evidently knew this about John McCain in February but prior to the State Convention evidently changed her mind.

    What Faustian bargain did Ruth Gibbs make with the current leadership of the Washington State Republican Party that she now supports John McCain to the extent that she neither acknowledges nor accepts Republicans running for public office in Washington State who did not ask the ‘Party’ Leadership for approval to run for Public Office as a ‘Republican’ or have not made the required pronouncement to the ‘Party’ Leadership that they are ardent supporters of John McCain, the presumed Republican Party Presidential nominee, prior to the national Republican Party Convention.

    From Ruth Gibbs: 11th Meeting/Party Thurs. 6/19/2008

    FYI – NOTE: The the two candidates who filed for office in the 11th District
    for the State Legislature were not recruited by the Republican Party, have
    not been nominated by the Party and are not endorsed by the Party.

    Who is the real Ruth Gibbs?

  2. Brian.

    Who is the “real Brian Thomas” the man who thinks that anyone who doesn’t agree with him is a drug user and a homosexual.

    You know, you should start being a little more careful about the accusations you make Brian. Since it seems that those who accuse other of things constantly are usually doing so to direct attention away from themselves and on to others. Are you afraid you might get caught crusing on Capitol Hill or other well known gay hangouts? That would look bad if other Reagan Wing members were to discover another, closeted version of Brian Thomas wouldn’t it. If that were to be true, I am certain that those in the Capitol Hill area would embrace you after your outing, but it could be hard on you with your current circle of friends who might not be as accepting of your alternative lifestyle. Is it possible that you are gay? I do not think that anyone would have expected some of the Republicans of late to have been homosexuals or child molesters – but wonders never cease.

    Why don’t you just start being more positive – start working on positive things than simply spending all of your time tearing others down. That would be a better sign of a well-adjusted person trying to make a difference in the world, and would remove any suspicions that might arise about your motives.


  3. #2 Joel posted June 21, 2008 in Ruth Gibbs on John McCain (in February)


    For your information, it was Viadimir Lenin who said “ Accuse others of what you do. ”

    Your post to my post on the article Ruth Gibbs on John McCain (in February) is so far from the topic of my post and the content of the article that it is obvious you are caught up in your own thinking and are simply projecting your thoughts (or emotions).

    In my post to Ruth Gibbs on John McCain (in February) and in the article Ruth Gibbs on John McCain (in February) there is no mention of you and even an insinuation that you are a drug user and/or a homosexual so why the umbrage?

    Why do those two activities, drug use and homosexuality, both unrelated to the article and my post, are so on your mind that they elicit from you an unrelated post in which they, drug use and homosexuality, are not only mentioned in your first sentence but are the very reason for your little diatribe?

    Is it as Viadimir Lenin said, you “ Accuse others of what you do. ” because you are racked with guilt and as a form of confession you accuse others of what you do in an attempt at absolution through the implied substantiation of actions that are actually only your own?

    May you find your way.


    P.S. Reading your writing is much the same as listening to Ross Marzolf talk. Do you two boys engage in ‘conversation’?

  4. Joel, at 2:
    “…‘Brian Thomas’ the man who thinks that anyone who doesn’t agree with him is a drug user and a homosexual.”
    Joel, this is blatantly false. Even if Brian made the explicit accusations of you that you claim (which he didn’t and, yet, in contravention of which you have presented no evidence), there is absolutely no hint, anywhere, that he “thinks” those things of “anyone who doesn’t agree with him.” You’ve simply made this up. You can’t possibly believe it.
    You are a liar.

    I have had very serious disagreements with Brian. He is not like you. He’s honest.

    You ask why Brian doesn’t “start being more positive – start working on positive things.” This shows that you don’t know anything about him and are, apparently, too lazy to do any research.
    Brian, like almost all principled conservatives, began by attempting many positive things (which you could uncover with a modicum of research) and found that such activity is in direct opposition to the existing establishment of the Republican Party in King County and their State Party (which is controlled by residents of King County) . That establishment exists to thwart the objectives of the Republican Party, even while claiming to lead it. Their belief is that success will come when they have transformed the GOP into a “mainstream” Party that protects a “woman’s right to choose,” accepts mixed socialism and big government, accepts the “living document” theory of the Constitution, allows amnesty for illegals, does not oppose, but makes friends of the Gay Rights movement, transfers property rights to government to cool the sun, rations energy and does massive social spending.

    I respect honest Democrats much, much more that the Evans/Gorton/Pritchard/Munro/Dunn/Vance/Esser wing of the Republican Party because they are straightforward about their objectives.

    But your guys rule by lies and deceit, claiming to lead us as they work to reverse our direction.

    Until we acquire honest, ethical, leadership few conservatives will ever win public office and the Republican brand will continue to deteriorate as it has, year by year, with unprincipled “pragmatists” in control, people who believe nothing, worship nothing but power and have no scruples about seizing control and maintaining it by any means necessary; dishonest, legal and illegal.
    Fortunately, we now have a movement to turn it around.

    Now it has it.
    Get ready.

  5. Brian.

    Who is this Marzolf guy. I don’t know him.


    BTW My response was to YOUR questioning me being straight – which I am by the way – you could ask my wife and kids about that – I am pretty secure in the straight category. But thanks. I am sure that you and Doug can find happiness together.

    Also, I am not wracked by any guilt actually. I am forgiven and thankful for it.

  6. Doug.

    Who would those princpled candidates be? Other than Ron Paul and his looney band, are there any candidates in this State currently running for office that fit your bill – now – or in the past? You have never answered that question.


    BTW – Brian did question my sexuality when he wondered outloud whether there was anything “straight” about me. There is evidence, but you only look at what you want to look at and patently ignore all that you don’t. Your perogative, but intellectually dishonest. But crazy people are not liars, they are just crazy. Doug – you are crazy.

  7. Joel, at 5:

    1. Whether or not you know Marzolf could be determined by disclosing your actual identity. You periodically claim to speak for the Republican Party, but there is no record I’ve found for any “Joel Heinrich” at any level and you claim ignorance of any of its players. Which is it? Is your Party involvement so imaginary that you don’t actually know key leaders on either side? Or are you, as seems more likely, hiding your identity to obscure your ulterior motives?

    2. Brian, as you now admit, “questioned” your being “straight.” “Straight” has numerous antonyms, only one of which is “gay,” the more obvious being “crooked, corrupt, sneaky, underhanded or dishonest.”

    3. You suggest that one could “ask [your] wife and kids” about your sexual orientation. I’d like to take you up on that. How could it be arranged?

    at 6:

    1. You ask: “Who would those principled candidates be?” Well, Brian Thomas, for one:

    Are you claiming that I’ve never supported any candidates? Or are you just asking me to do your research for you?

    2. “Brian did question my sexuality when…”
    What Brian may or may not have “questioned” was never at issue. You said he thought “…that anyone who doesn’t agree with him is a drug user and a homosexual” and that
    claim about Brian is not at all the same as saying he “questioned” anything. It was a blatant lie by you about Brian. You claim Christianity, but are constantly engaged in falsehoods and distortions. This is an obvious one. You are of your Father, and it is not God.

    In (5) you claim “I am forgiven and thankful for it” but a prerequisite for forgiveness is repentance. That means you, first, must admit your guilt, and, second, must be willing to make amends for it, acknowledging that it is just and proper for you to be punished. You must kneel to justice to hope for mercy.

    But there is every evidence you have never repented for anything and simply continue to engage in the works of darkness, employing self-serving weasel words to feign Christianity.

    If not, simply acknowledge that you lied about Brian, defaming him, and ask for forgiveness.

  8. Doug @ 7. your link is to Brian Thomas. He is the only candidate that you have supported, who has the integrity that you can support as a candidate? Amazing. I am not asking you to do “my homework” for me; I am asking you to identify any viable candidates that you support. Is it that hard? Isn’t Brian Thomas the same guy who has had all kinds of restraining orders placed against him by elected officials that he has harrassed? Even Republican elected officials? Maybe it is a different Brian Thomas, but I had heard that.

    As for your statements about forgiveness (I will quote your words so that you don’t claim slander):

    “That means you, first, must admit your guilt, and, second, must be willing to make amends for it, acknowledging that it is just and proper for you to be punished. You must kneel to justice to hope for mercy.”

    My questions to you:

    (1) admit guilt “to whom”?
    (2) be willing to make admends “to whom”?
    (3) acknowledge that it is proper and just to be punished “by whom?”
    (4) kneel to justice and hope for mercy “by whom”?

    God or Brian Thomas, or you?

    If you state anyone other than God, then you have a megalomaniacal trait that I could have never imagined before, and a God complex that borders on the blasphemous. Do you expect for people to “prove” their repentance for sin to you, or to Brian Thomas? Moreover, your assertion presupposes that I have lied about him, that I have slandered him, that I have defamed him.

    As I said in a previous post, your sense of self-righteousness, and your holier-than-thou proclamations are disgusting.


  9. “Isn’t Brian Thomas the same guy who has had all kinds of restraining orders placed against him by elected officials that he has harrassed? Even Republican elected officials? Maybe it is a different Brian Thomas, but I had heard that.”
    You didn’t read the article, did you? You are an incredibly lazy person. The above allegations you quote, widely distributed, were slanders, filth, fabrications, just like yours, distributed anonymously, just as you are doing.

    Regarding your questions about repentance:
    (1) admit guilt “to whom”?
    Openly to everyone. You slandered Brian openly in a public forum. You must, at least, admit your guilt in the same forum.
    (2) be willing to make admends “to whom”?
    To whomever your sin has damaged, in this case, Brian.
    (3) acknowledge that it is proper and just to be punished “by whom?”
    By the proper authorities in each case. In the case of a blog slander, admitting, publicly, your guilt would suffice, since the offence was against the integrity of the community, until it is discovered that the slander has proliferated to other venues, in which case you should be willing to find and correct the misinformation you generated. God’s dealing with it is between the two of you. You might want to become acquainted.

    (4) kneel to justice and hope for mercy “by whom”?
    Same as (3) above. If you stole something, you must be willing to admit the truth if you are arrested. You may ask the court for mercy, but must not claim innocence. If you embezzled funds you must replace them. If you murdered a man, you must not complain if you face capital punishment. That is accepting justice.

    You are, obviously, completely unfamiliar with Christianity or you wouldn’t ask these questions. These are considered “milk” for baby Christians, when first converted. The “first things” of spiritual growth.

    “Moreover, your assertion presupposes that I have lied about him, that I have slandered him, that I have defamed him.”
    That is correct. You clearly have done all of that. And you swim in seas where it is considered commonplace. Your shock at being held to the standard of truth is revealing.

    “…your sense of self-righteousness, and your holier-than-thou proclamations are disgusting.”
    I am upholding universal principles. Read the New testament. Read Aquinas. Read C.S. Lewis. Read the founders, for goodness sake, they were actual Christians.
    This is not about the supposed righteousness of Doug Parris, but about the principles of righteousness themselves. Upholding truth is not a claim of personal righteousness. I’ve made no such claim. You’re just trying to change the subject.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s