by Richard Hood
I saw an appalling commercial from Katie Hill, who tried to appeal to her TV audience as being just an average woman who would be “independent” and not in anyone’s pocket, as was, she claimed, her Republican opponent. Maybe her opponent was, but a half-truth is still a lie.
Incredibly, she said this as a Democratic Party candidate, not an independent. And she expected enough people to believe this drivel to get elected, and sickeningly, she was right. By deliberately choosing to be a major party candidate, I’m guessing she may not have paid for that slick (“I’m not slick, I’m just like you!”) TV ad completely out of her own bank account. Almost all new congressional representatives have to “tow the party line” – which is no surprise, but it is a reason to abandon the “I vote the person” mentality, as politics don’t work that way. Always vote the lesser of evils, and never for political parties that promote it.
I’ve tried to hold Steve Knight to account in a previous article, and after another month, have still not received a reply. Have any of you? I’m not happy with him, but we should all feel our intelligence insulted by Hill’s latest ad. You think she supports women? Ask the thousands of females who are aborted each year about that support. But we can’t, can we? More females are aborted worldwide than males if that matters to her, or to the supporters of human suffering and destruction.
The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, but the Democrats deliberately took God out of their National Party Platform. That should tell you something in a country where the vast majority of citizens do acknowledge God. A friend who is a lifelong Democrat took the time to read the platform and declared “It’s like the Communist Manifesto.” Not much of a surprise there, as the causers of history’s greatest amount of human suffering, the communists, (also makers of the world’s largest concentration camp system) are also God haters.
Hill deliberately chose to be a progressive leftist candidate, who will have to tow the Democratic party line. She has spent a lot of time, energy, and someone’s money to achieve her election goal. Why? If as she claims, she won’t be beholden to anyone, why choose a party that will make sure she is beholden and answers to them? That’s why they agreed to her being their candidate, right? Common sense as well as the wisdom of scripture tells us that the borrower is servant to the lender. It also tells us that in order to love God, one must hate evil.
If a candidate is wrong but not dishonest, there are but two possibilities left: ignorance, or delusion. At a certain point, any of those should become disqualifying for any candidate. Whatever else she makes claims of being, I don’t see a way for her being a rogue do-gooder looking out for your best interests. Rather, I think she’ll look out for the interests of a leftist wing of a political machine that supports, rather than hates, evil.
Richard Hood is a retired history teacher.