In Part One, Ellen and I presented a brief history of our activism and laid the foundation for the source of the attacks against us by Shark Tank blogger Javier Manjarres and his cohorts Patrick Castronovo and Gabe Carrera.
In Part Two, we would like to share the blog post that prompted us to publicly address their character assassination against us. Keep in mind, our strategy for the past 2 1/2 years has been to simply ignore their slander and remain focused on what matters most — fighting back as hard as we can against the forces of progressivism and tyranny by educating the public, supporting strong Constitutional candidates and keeping an eye on the shenanigans of our representatives in D.C. — letting them know when they’re wrong and praising them when they’re right — i.e. whenever they honor their oath to the United States Constitution with their vote for or against a particular bill.
But these three grown men refuse to let up on their shameless, adolescent name-calling and unfounded bomb-throwing. It seems to us with a country on the brink of bankruptcy and facing formidable dangers like creeping Sharia Law, they’d have better things to do with their time than pick on two patriotic women fully engaged in the fight for freedom. Regrettably, they are too consumed by their quest to destroy our reputations. In some small way, we know how Sarah Palin feels.
In terms of activism, social media and blogging have been two of the most effective vehicles we’ve used. In fact, although we both live in Palm Beach County, Ellen and I first met on Facebook in 2008 where we became fast friends, united in the cause of liberty. Even before meeting her in person, Ellen’s sincerity, warmth and love of of country resonated from the computer screen. I have rarely known such a good-hearted, dedicated, devoted, persistent and genuine person; if only the world were filled with more Ellen Snyders, it would be a much better place.
Which makes garbage like this all the more infuriating:
The Destructive Diva of Palm Beach County (PBC) continues to surrounds herself with other questionable politically activist characters like fellow ‘Diva’ Daria DiGiovanni, who like Snyder, is herself is on record of espousing libelous accusations against fellow conservatives. One must remember Ronald Reagan’s 11th commandment: Do Not Speak Ill of Other Republicans! The question here is whether these self deceived Divas repent of their past sins or will they Diva down a path of political Diva-struction. These so called Divas are all public figures and I wonder if they really know the end result they are having on the conservative community.
During the current election cycle, I believe the Queen Bee Diva with her Deceptive Diva Blogging Bar Hags are backing two other Tea Party loved candidates: Joe Kaufman and Mike McCalister. Former Military Col. McCalister is running for U.S. Senate in Florida, while Kaufman is running for U.S. Congress in the same state against the much despised Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Shultz (D-FL). Judging by Snyder’s political track record of making a compete spectacle of the past candidates she supported -all lost their races! My personal opinion is that these two Candidates would be better off distancing themselves from this “conservative” time-bomb in quick time.
More on Ellen Snyder to come…
First of all, as any conservative activist with half a brain will tell you, primaries are the perfect time to vet every single candidate and fight as hard as you can for the one you believe will uphold Constitutional principles and do the very best job for their constituents and the country. As patriots who care about the United States of America first and foremost, the only “sin” we’ve committed is holding all candidates accountable for their words and deeds — regardless of whether or not there’s an “R” after their name. As we’ve previously learned, there are big-government spenders and amnesty proponents in both parties — so we’re looking for the most conservative option available to run on the GOP side. As for the Republican Party, it is simply a vehicle through which to elect solid, Constitution-supporting representatives — and if it doesn’t shape up during this next election cycle I (Daria) believe it will be responsible for its own demise.
Now let’s address the issue of Ellen allegedly being a former “liberal Democrat”. As noted in her biography from the very beginning of this blog:
Although raised with conservative values, Ellen was originally registered as Democrat in keeping with family tradition. In 2007, after watching then-senator Barack Obama emerge from virtually nowhere to become a viable candidate for United States President ,notwithstanding his nefarious associations with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers and America-damning pastor Reverend Jeremiah Wright, she became incredibly concerned and frightened for the future of the USA. It was then that she decided to get involved.
And by the way Gabe, President Ronald Reagan — a man you claim to hold in the utmost regard — was once a liberal, pro-choice, FDR Democrat, proving that it’s entirely possible for a human being to have a genuine change of heart and then go on to become a great leader. Ellen might have once been a registered Democrat but she was never a liberal. And in terms of her influence on elections and causes from coast to coast, she is nearly unmatched. Which is probably why she was named One of Facebook’s Most Influential Patriot Women (along with yours truly) in 2010.
In the case of Senator Marco Rubio, which forms the basis for Carrera’s diatribe (visit the site to read the entire post), it is well-known among local activists that his stance on immigration has been alarmingly weak in the past. Combined with his unwillingness to answer the valid questions posed to him by Martin County Tea Party on issues of critical importance like Agenda 21, and the fact that the “Blue Blood Republican” Bush crowd embraced him, it is no wonder that prior to the 2010 election, many conservatives had some reservations.
I include myself among that group, although when I looked at the choices before me Marco Rubio was clearly the best candidate to represent Florida in the United States Senate. And along with Ellen, I waved his signs on street corners and posted them throughout neighborhoods in Palm Beach County — as well as included Rubio’s literature in the hundreds of packets we put together and distributed on precinct walks.
And although it pains me to recount it here, I was among the attendees at the Latin American Republicans of South Florida social gathering at The Martini Lounge in Fort Lauderdale in 2009 who rushed to Rubio’s defense when two out-of-control activists lost all sense of decorum (to put it mildly) and rudely heckled the then-candidate for US Senate during his brief remarks. In fact, having been informed of their plan by the women themselves, I remember urging them to reconsider, advising them that there would be plenty of time to challenge Rubio on his immigration stance at a future date and in an appropriate venue — like a candidate debate, not a cocktail party.
Unfortunately, they rejected my advice and proceeded to make fools of themselves and pretty much ruin the evening for everyone there. I should know, it happened on my birthday. Which transformed what was supposed to be a fun evening with friends and an introduction to a new candidate into a total fiasco resulting in the culprits’ ejection from the premises.
As for Reagan’s 11th Commandment, I respectfully remind Carrera that Reagan forthrightly challenged his primary opponents on their policies and rhetoric as noted by Paul Kengor in this piece from National Review:
Reagan fired unceasingly at Ford’s support of détente. “We are blind to reality if we refuse to recognize that détente’s usefulness to the Soviets is only as a cover for their traditional and basic strategy for aggression,” he said in October 1975. “Détente is for the Soviet Union a no-can-lose proposition.”
Reagan opposed Ford’s signing of the Helsinki Accords in August 1975, a product of détente which Reagan perceived as a human-rights farce. He said it was nothing more than a “propaganda plus” for the Kremlin. By signing the accord, the United States had, in effect, “agreed to legitimize the boundaries of Eastern Europe, legally acquiescing in the loss of freedom of millions of Eastern Europeans.” Worse, said Reagan, Helsinki did nothing to constrain the Soviets outside of Eastern Europe. “After Helsinki,” wrote Reagan correctly, “the Soviet Union quickly made it clear that the so-called ‘wars of national liberation’ of which they are so fond, would not be affected by the document.”
Reagan hit détente so hard throughout the campaign that there was a consensus that President Ford stopped using the term because Reagan had made it a dirty word. So successful was Reagan that the New York Times, in a May 14, 1976, editorial titled “Mr. Reagan’s Veto,” claimed that the former California governor had “won something approaching veto power over the Ford Administration’s foreign policy.” As Reagan did, Ford dropped in the polls. In another editorial, titled, “President Under Seige,” The Times opined: “Governor Reagan has become a credible candidate while President Ford has slipped from almost certain victor to underdog.”
Unlike our counterparts on the left, we on the right pride ourselves on our ability to think independently, analyze all candidates based on their records and rhetoric (e.g. Does the record actually match the rhetoric?), inform all primary voters on the pros and cons of every candidate and then make the very best choice possible. Primaries exist to vet the people seeking public office — and there is a HUGE difference between pointing out flaws in someone’s record and character, and attacking them personally. Obviously, Carrera, Manjarres and Castronovo don’t comprehend the difference.
Speaking of character, in Part Three we’ll expose Manjarres’ puerile tactic of setting up fake Facebook profiles for the purpose of perpetuating lies — complete with screenshots and other evidence.