Is It Being Responsible to Encourage the City Council to Ignore the Rule of Law?

January 30, 2014 at 3:04 PM 2 comments


by Fred DeRuvo

Most of us conservatives know well how the left plays its games. Saul Alinsky is the person they choose to emulate and imitate. Because of that, those on the left constantly use his tactics in their constant attempts to deride, castigate, and generally silence conservatives:

  1. the perception of having power (whether you do or not)
  2. not speaking of areas of which you know little
  3. constantly push the enemy to speak outside of his/her areas of expertise
  4. force the enemy to live up to its own rule book
  5. ridiculing the enemy is the most potent weapon
  6. use tactics that others on the left can really enjoy
  7. don’t draw things out too long
  8. keep up the pressure
  9. the threat is normally more fear-inducing than the actual result
  10. keep pushing the negative as it will eventually become a positive
  11. a successful attack usually breeds a constructive alternative
  12. pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it

Without doubt, rule number 5 is the most often used approach by the left toward those on the right. As Alinsky states, there really is little to no defense for it. During the vice presidential debate, Joe Biden used this technique quite a bit against Paul Ryan. Biden used gestures, mimics, sarcasm, and exasperation as his main weapons in his “debate” with Ryan. The only option Ryan had was to either give in and lower himself to Biden’s standard or try to continue as if Biden was a gentleman and sincerely interested in debating (which he wasn’t).

But it’s really not just the left that uses Alinsky’s techniques. When you live in an area where most people are on the right and a local election pits one person on the right against another person on the right, what do you do? Some wind up using the very same techniques against their opponent as those on the left do when against someone on the right.

The best way to launch an attack is against someone’s character. Care needs to be taken here that things are not stated that actually defame someone. But a great deal can be said in an attempt to shame someone into silence.

Here’s an example. As my regular readers will note, I ran for an open seat on the local city council. I lost fair and square to a 20-year-old with no business experience and who goes to college, has a part-time job and lives with his mom, his girlfriend and their son. But rather than take myself out of the political arena altogether, I am fulfilling my promise that I made during my campaign. That promise was that I was going to keep people informed about what the city council was doing and how the decisions they make affect the people living here.

As part of this process, I now video-tape record the city council meetings and post them on my website dedicated to the issues in this town. There are many people who cannot attend meetings and they have a right to be informed. I also write letters to the editor and elsewhere pointing out the flaws in the system made by people who seem not to care about how things are done.

I wrote one letter that highlighted a number of times in the very first meeting where the new mayor and newly installed city council made the mistake of setting the charter aside. This is a symptom of the problem here in Hampton as it’s been going on for a while. Some don’t mind though because overall, they like the people on the city council and for them, these people can do no wrong, because they are likable.

After my letter was published both online and in the paper, several comments were made. One individual commented on my letter and in essence, her comments have nothing to do with anything. All of it is simply an attempt to cut me down to size. She doesn’t address my concerns, but merely attacks. Again, this is what those on the left do.

“Give me strength if this what you have to worry about thank goodness few people voted for you.”

This is nothing more than an insult, but it’s not simply an insult directed at me. It’s an insult also directed to those who voted for me. Normally, out of a city of over 7,000 (where roughly 4,400 are registered to vote), about 400 to 500 people come out to vote. In this particular case, because a special tax issue was on the ballot, about double that voted. Out of those votes, I received about 240 and my opponent received slightly less than double that. Some of those who were running for re-election received only 50 to 100 more votes than me. I also noted that not everyone who voted for the other candidates or the tax issue voted for either me or my opponent. The implication that I received so “few” votes is really relative, but again, that was her first insult out of the chute.

The remainder of her comments were much of the same. There was nothing constructive at all. It was a form of invective designed to shame me into silence. This individual was simply a “character reference” for the new mayor and the council. Here’s what she said:

“Hampton is a great city and our council will finally be allowed to make responsible decisions regarding our town. Mayor Hutchinson and his wife Work hard to improve our city and have done so for many years prior to being elected. What have you done to help our city? Mr. Deruvo, why don’t you try to get along and work to better our community rather than beat down our elected officials?”

She assumes/implies a number of things that are not true.

  • She implies that I don’t think Hampton is a great city (yet, we deliberately chose to move here and we love it)
  • She insinuates that before the new mayor was elected, the city council could not make responsible decisions
  • She implies that I don’t think that the mayor and his wife have worked hard to improve the city (which is not true at all)
  • She claims I haven’t done anything (though I’ve been volunteering for events for nearly three years)
  • She alleges I can’t get along with people and am not interested in improving the community (which is also untrue)

These assumptions of hers are not only wrong, but fatuous. She has nothing to say of any real worth and her entire reason for commenting was to ridicule, which as I stated is number five on Alinsky’s list and used often by the left.

This type of discourse is vapid. It is pointless. The woman wrote because she is obviously a friend of the mayor or his wife and wanted to defend them. However, instead of addressing any of the points I made in my letter, she decides that following the rule of law is not important and instead believes attacking me is more important. This is what the left does and we see it in Obama and those of his ilk on a near-daily basis.

I have not attacked individuals on the city council. I have pointed out errors they have made. I have noted that it appears as though they need a refresher course on the city charter and to take their oaths seriously. They need to stop setting the laws aside because they think they can. This is not an attack on people. It is commentary on how they are using the process. Don’t we rail against those on the left for doing these things?

I’ve always thought that those on the right stood for the rule of law and those on the left couldn’t care less. They do what they want, when they want to do it and if it means setting the law aside, then so be it.

The individual who responded to my letter simply criticized me for wanting the city council, including the mayor, to follow the law. By responding as she did, she simply proves that she is quite possibly more of a leftist than she would like to believe.

Entry filed under: Politically Correct, Religious - Christian - Theology.

Bizarro World: Changing America’s Constitutional Republic to a Democracy One Step at a Time, Part 2 Bizarro World: Changing America’s Constitutional Republic to a Democracy One Step at a Time, Part 3


  • 1. Stephen Pennlowe (@StephenPennlowe)  |  January 31, 2014 at 11:14 PM

    Mr. DeRuvo have you stopped beating your wife yet? I believe you understand the point, not the question. The left claim we all worship the same god, except as Christ Followers we are to honor God with all our mind, body, and strength, and to love our neighbor as ourself.

    Yet the left’s god is unable to defend itself. Therefore, anyone who does not believe in their god must be brutally tortured and killed with a vengeance. Living under such constant hate would be enough to take one’s own life.

    John 12:40 “He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, lest they should see with their eyes, lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, so that I should heal them.”

    • 2. modres  |  February 1, 2014 at 5:22 PM

      Interesting way to get my attention with your first sentence!

      I think I see your point. The left is as they are and only God can open their hearts. Still, their failures need to be pointed out.

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 13,117 other followers

Our Books on Amazon

Study-Grow-Know Archives

Blog Stats

  • 1,007,926 hits

%d bloggers like this: