Author Topic: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question  (Read 425 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DCPatriot

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 32,500
The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« on: May 20, 2014, 05:26:54 AM »
May 20, 2014
The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
By Lloyd Marcus

Traveling down I-95, headed home to Florida from visiting Mary and my parents in Maryland and West Virginia, I found myself yelling in frustration at my radio.  Rush Limbaugh asked: Who gives the left power to silence opposition, control speech, and get people fired or ordered into sensitivity training?  Rush rattled off numerous examples to prove his point, including a mere 50 leftist student protesters at Rutgers successfully forcing Condoleezza Rice to back down from giving their commencement speech.

Who gives the left such power?  I yelled, “We do!”

By the way, while in West Virginia, I attended Mary's dad's 82nd birthday party.  Many family members were in attendance.  We had a wonderful time of laughter and love.  I was the only black person.  There was not the slightest vibe of racial tension in the air.  I believe that such is the state of race relations among a majority of Americans, except for those who despicably promote racial division for personal and political gain (that is, Democrats).

Back to Rush's question.  Who gives the left so much power?  Much of the left's power comes from the mainstream media, which is mostly liberal and totally in sync with the Democratic Party's socialist/progressive agenda.  The MSM functions as the left's hit men, ready to high-tech lynch any and all challengers.

We cannot do much about that.  But we can control our response.  While I have written about this on countless occasions, my points bear repeating.  Stop allowing the left to set the rules of engagement, and stop helping them beat up on our challengers.

When people on our side (conservatives) misspeak, misquote a stat, or make a clumsy innocent comment, I will not sing in harmony with the left's choir, calling the conservative an idiot.  Nor will I submit to the left's demands that the targeted conservative be denounced.  To do so is, in essence, providing aid and comfort to our enemies.

Frustratingly, both sides of the political street expect conservatives to be as perfect as Jesus Christ.  Meanwhile, Democrats are permitted to make any cruel, evil, outrageous, or unsubstantiated claim necessary to further their cause.  Heck, Obama repeatedly told the American people a bald-faced lie to pass ObamaCare, for the most part without consequence.

While we function in a state of constant fear that a conservative may utter a single word for the left to take out of context to use against us, Democrats' rules of engagement allows them to boldly function from the position that no tactic is too low in their quest to defeat conservatives and implement the socialist/progressive agenda.  Therefore, Democrats consider lying to the American people, millions losing their health care, denying medical care to kids with cancer, and slandering millions of decent patriotic Americans in the Tea Party all fair game.

For example: remember when Congressional Black Caucus Rep. Andre Carson made the irresponsible, outrageous claim that the Tea Party would like to see blacks “hanging on a tree”?  Where was the pushback from the MSM?  Where were the calls for Democrats to denounce Rep. Carson?  Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson sent a fundraising email claiming that the T in "Tea Party" stands for the burning cross of the KKK.  Why did we not see the same pressure and 24/7 coverage the MSM applies to Republicans, demanding that Grayson apologize?  Where were the calls for Democrats to denounce him?

The MSM embraces the claims of Democrats, who have never attended a single Tea Party, that the rallies are the equivalent of KKK meetings.  As a black who has attended over 400 Tea Parties nationwide, the MSM rejects my on-the-scene eyewitness report to the contrary.

Remarkably, after five years without evidence proving their accusations, the Democrats and MSM have doubled down on their claim that the Tea Party, the Republican Party, and all opposition to Obama is motivated by racism.

Our side has been advised to surrender to the left's branding of us and implement our own Democrat-lite versions of the left's agenda to prove that we are not racist – usher in illegal immigration, denounce the repeal of ObamaCare, and exempt minorities from showing a photo ID to vote, to name a few.  So this is where we are – allowing Democrats and the MSM to dictate how we are allowed to fight, what we can and cannot say, and which battles we can take on.

And yet, we eagerly rush to blogs and media microphones to beat up on our courageous conservative freedom-fighters whenever they make a mistake.

Sarah Palin is a prime example.  Say what you will about Palin, but from day one, she has been an unwavering bold, strong, and committed voice, pushing back against the tyranny of the Obama regime.  Now, do you think I would ever help the left beat up on Sarah?  Borrowing a phase I heard my patriot brothers and sisters say while in New Jersey, “Forget about it!”

Then there is Cliven Bundy.  While Bundy may or may not have had all his legal ducks in a row, or known how to deal with a hostile media, I tip my hat to the man.  Bottom line: Bundy knew government was hijacking more and more of our freedoms, and he said, “No!”  That takes guts, folks, because history confirms that “freedom ain't free.”  Bundy is paying a price that many are unwilling to pay.  Many sheepishly go along with the program (the government incrementally taking over every aspect of our lives) rather than risking an IRS audit or a bogus reason to be thrown in jail.

Who gives the left their power?  We do, every time we surrender.

While visiting in Maryland, I was blessed with another cherished chat with my dad, who just celebrated his 86th birthday.  His mind is as sharp as ever.  Praise God!  Dad is chaplain emeritus for the Baltimore City Fire Department.  He only speaks at special events.

Dad said he was called on the carpet by a department official after a recent event.  One highly offended individual at the event complained that dad ended his prayer with “in Jesus's name.”

Dad told the official that he could no more deny Jesus than he could deny that he is black.  Note: Dad did not apologize, beg for forgiveness, or vow never to do it again.  The official let it go.

Who gives the left their power?  We do.

http://americanthinker.com/2014/05/the_answer_to_rush_limbaughs_question.html

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"It aint what you don't know that kills you.  It's what you know that aint so!" ...Theodore Sturgeon

"Journalism is about covering the news.  With a pillow.  Until it stops moving."    - Iowahawk

"You can lead a liberal to the Truth, but you can't make them Think" - damned if I know

Offline DCPatriot

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 32,500
Re: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« Reply #1 on: May 20, 2014, 09:02:13 AM »
Quote

Much of the left's power comes from the mainstream media, which is mostly liberal and totally in sync with the Democratic Party's socialist/progressive agenda.  The MSM functions as the left's hit men, ready to high-tech lynch any and all challengers.



Just making a pragmatic observation here.

Not until members of the MSM and their Boards of Directors know the same exact fear as Middle Eastern Christians, will this 'ship' turn around.

"It aint what you don't know that kills you.  It's what you know that aint so!" ...Theodore Sturgeon

"Journalism is about covering the news.  With a pillow.  Until it stops moving."    - Iowahawk

"You can lead a liberal to the Truth, but you can't make them Think" - damned if I know

Offline alicewonders

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 13,057
  • Live life-it's too short to butt heads w buttheads
Re: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« Reply #2 on: May 20, 2014, 09:25:20 AM »
"Our side has been advised to surrender to the left's branding of us and implement our own Democrat-lite versions of the left's agenda to prove that we are not racist – usher in illegal immigration, denounce the repeal of ObamaCare, and exempt minorities from showing a photo ID to vote, to name a few.  So this is where we are – allowing Democrats and the MSM to dictate how we are allowed to fight, what we can and cannot say, and which battles we can take on.

And yet, we eagerly rush to blogs and media microphones to beat up on our courageous conservative freedom-fighters whenever they make a mistake."




 :amen:  :amen:  :amen:  :amen:

WE are our own worst enemy!

Don't tread on me.   8888madkitty

We told you Trump would win - bigly!

Offline Relic

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,967
Re: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« Reply #3 on: May 20, 2014, 09:31:10 AM »

Just making a pragmatic observation here.

Not until members of the MSM and their Boards of Directors know the same exact fear as Middle Eastern Christians, will this 'ship' turn around.

You are 100% correct. Liberals don't care for religion, any religion. They will mock any religion, given the opportunity, except for one. islam. Why? Because mocking islam requires putting your life, your family and your organization on the line. So, liberals just leave that one alone.

The liberal media transcribes the garbage that Democrats say as if it's fact. The media attacks anyone who resists progressive ways. And they do these things without fear.

Fear changes things.

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 23,335
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« Reply #4 on: May 20, 2014, 09:34:13 AM »
Quote
Who gives the left their power?  We do, every time we surrender.

B I N G O ! ! !

Offline DCPatriot

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 32,500
Re: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« Reply #5 on: May 20, 2014, 09:38:40 AM »


Fear changes things.



Certainly.   But first, we'll start seeing unattributed bylines...and scrolled warnings during the evening news claiming that "...we're only newsREADERS", etc..
"It aint what you don't know that kills you.  It's what you know that aint so!" ...Theodore Sturgeon

"Journalism is about covering the news.  With a pillow.  Until it stops moving."    - Iowahawk

"You can lead a liberal to the Truth, but you can't make them Think" - damned if I know

Offline Relic

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,967
Re: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« Reply #6 on: May 20, 2014, 09:40:53 AM »
Certainly.   But first, we'll start seeing unattributed bylines...and scrolled warnings during the evening news claiming that "...we're only newsREADERS", etc..

That would be progress.  :beer:

Offline rangerrebew

  • America defending Veteran
  • TBR Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 70,890
  • “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them
Re: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« Reply #7 on: May 20, 2014, 11:50:10 AM »

Just making a pragmatic observation here.

Not until members of the MSM and their Boards of Directors know the same exact fear as Middle Eastern Christians, will this 'ship' turn around.

If they aren't feeling it now, it is unlikely they will ever feel it or acknowledge it if they do.  Since most of the left is non-Christian, they can't feel what they don't have.
"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim tribute to patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness -- these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. . . . reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principles."
George Washington

"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters."
Benjamin Franklin

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 23,335
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« Reply #8 on: May 20, 2014, 11:57:44 AM »
Who is propping up the MSM? Virtually ALL of them are loosing money hand over fist yet they continue to stay alive. How can that happen?

Offline AbaraXas

  • Не русский хакер
  • Social Media Advisor
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 13,034
  • Words full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Re: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« Reply #9 on: May 20, 2014, 12:50:29 PM »
We do in more ways that one.

We eat our own every chance we get- making it a sport to tear down our side. (there is a difference between keeping someone in check and looking for any small blemish to tear them down for not being perfect 100% of the time).

We gladly use the government as our own sledge hammer for our own pet issues. Just this morning I saw Conservatives(r) cheer a city passing a no sagging pants ordinance and wishing laws like that would spread over the country. Don't get me wrong, I think it is the dumbest fashion trend of the past few decades- but we don't need to make the nanny government the fashion police (and this goes for smoking ordinances, blue laws, et al).

We feed the beast and expect to be fed by it in return. Yes, I know you paid into Social Security- we all do, but you should still plan to fund your own retirement. Consider any 'contract' with the government just burning your money- just like the taxes taken away from you. You can't do anything about contributing to it, but you should realize that it is not sustainable and not fight against changing it.

We let the left lead us in the conversation. We are always reacting; basing our entire premise on defending our position. We should go on the offensive and never let up.....

....and so many other ways.....

Offline AbaraXas

  • Не русский хакер
  • Social Media Advisor
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 13,034
  • Words full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Re: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« Reply #10 on: May 20, 2014, 12:53:46 PM »
Who is propping up the MSM? Virtually ALL of them are loosing money hand over fist yet they continue to stay alive. How can that happen?

The individual networks are, but their parent companies aren't. NBC & MSNBC may lose money, but GE/Comcast is making it hand over fist. They take a loss in one area but make up for it in others (Universal Pictures, various other channels, etc).  CNN hemorrhages money but Turner is still raking it in. Westinghouse owns (owned?) CBS.  Disney owns ABC... and so on....
« Last Edit: May 20, 2014, 12:55:38 PM by AbaraXas »

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 23,335
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« Reply #11 on: May 20, 2014, 12:53:51 PM »
Quote
We gladly use the government as our own sledge hammer for our own pet issues. Just this morning I saw Conservatives(r) cheer a city passing a no sagging pants ordinance and wishing laws like that would spread over the country. Don't get me wrong, I think it is the dumbest fashion trend of the past few decades- but we don't need to make the nanny government the fashion police (and this goes for smoking ordinances, blue laws, et al).

On this we are in complete agreement!

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 23,335
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« Reply #12 on: May 20, 2014, 12:57:30 PM »
The individual networks are, but their parent companies aren't. NBC & MSNBC may lose money, but GE/Comcast is making it hand over fist. They take a loss in one area but make up for it in others (Universal Pictures, various other channels, etc).  CNN hemorrhages money but Turner is still raking it in.

Which in itself should speak volumes to anyone paying attention! Why would these huge multinational corporations throw that much money down those particular rat holes if they aren't getting a LOT out of it somehow?

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 47,027
  • Dork
Re: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« Reply #13 on: May 20, 2014, 03:00:51 PM »
Quote
Much of the left's power comes from the mainstream media, which is mostly liberal and totally in sync with the Democratic Party's socialist/progressive agenda.  The MSM functions as the left's hit men, ready to high-tech lynch any and all challengers.


You know, there is something else that can be done about many of the big MSM outlets:  corporate shareholder revolts.  What?  you say.  Many/most of the big MSM outlets are either publicly traded corporations or are owned by publicly traded corporations.  The New York Times, for example, is owned by the eponymous The New York Times Company.  That company is publicly traded.  While the shares that are publicly traded do not have majority voting control of the corporation (there is a second class of stock owned by the Ochs family that has control of the corporation), they do give the shareholders certain rights, such as voting for directors and, perhaps of some use, submitting shareholder proposals to be voted on at the annual meeting of shareholders.  Leftwing saboteurs have utilized that procedure to tie up companies they wish to destroy; it seems only fair that the same be done to one of their principal mouthpieces.

For another:  AOL owns the HuffPo.  Shareholders could start proposing that AOL dump the HuffPo as proposals to be voted on at the annual shareholders meeting.  The list goes on.


Are any of these proposals likely to succeed?  No.  But they will cause a lot more grief and upset at the MSM mouthpiece companies than will any amount of outside protesting against them or writing letters to the editor will ever do.  For example, if a committed group of conservative shareholders of AOL - those with enough shares in combination with shareholders they can get to agree with them to qualify to get a proposal on the ballot - do this every damned time there's a shareholder meeting, either the annual or any special meeting that might get called, then AOL might start to consider whether continuing to own HuffPo is worth the aggravation and, most importantly, the expense of having to deal with the constant shareholder proposals to rein in HuffPo, dump it, reorganize it, or whatever.

It would also take some money.  It's not enough to own one share of stock in a target company; a certain minimum percentage of shares must put forward a ballot proposal before the target company must deal with it.  That suggests that perhaps it's time to form a conservative activist fund, an investment/hedge fund that targets its investments at MSM and other prog/lib companies with the purpose and intent of forcing the companies to deal with ballot proposals to dump or change their most offensive, public prog/lib mouthpiece organs.

Certainly the likes of the Koch brothers could chip in a few million if they were so inclined and if the fund itself were a reasonable enough investment proposition (i.e., they wouldn't throw money away, but they might be willing to take greater than normal investment risks due to the activist nature of the fund).

Offline DCPatriot

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 32,500
Re: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« Reply #14 on: May 20, 2014, 04:15:11 PM »

You know, there is something else that can be done about many of the big MSM outlets:  corporate shareholder revolts.  What?  you say.  Many/most of the big MSM outlets are either publicly traded corporations or are owned by publicly traded corporations.  The New York Times, for example, is owned by the eponymous The New York Times Company.  That company is publicly traded.  While the shares that are publicly traded do not have majority voting control of the corporation (there is a second class of stock owned by the Ochs family that has control of the corporation), they do give the shareholders certain rights, such as voting for directors and, perhaps of some use, submitting shareholder proposals to be voted on at the annual meeting of shareholders.  Leftwing saboteurs have utilized that procedure to tie up companies they wish to destroy; it seems only fair that the same be done to one of their principal mouthpieces.

For another:  AOL owns the HuffPo.  Shareholders could start proposing that AOL dump the HuffPo as proposals to be voted on at the annual shareholders meeting.  The list goes on.


Are any of these proposals likely to succeed?  No.  But they will cause a lot more grief and upset at the MSM mouthpiece companies than will any amount of outside protesting against them or writing letters to the editor will ever do.  For example, if a committed group of conservative shareholders of AOL - those with enough shares in combination with shareholders they can get to agree with them to qualify to get a proposal on the ballot - do this every damned time there's a shareholder meeting, either the annual or any special meeting that might get called, then AOL might start to consider whether continuing to own HuffPo is worth the aggravation and, most importantly, the expense of having to deal with the constant shareholder proposals to rein in HuffPo, dump it, reorganize it, or whatever.

It would also take some money.  It's not enough to own one share of stock in a target company; a certain minimum percentage of shares must put forward a ballot proposal before the target company must deal with it.  That suggests that perhaps it's time to form a conservative activist fund, an investment/hedge fund that targets its investments at MSM and other prog/lib companies with the purpose and intent of forcing the companies to deal with ballot proposals to dump or change their most offensive, public prog/lib mouthpiece organs.

Certainly the likes of the Koch brothers could chip in a few million if they were so inclined and if the fund itself were a reasonable enough investment proposition (i.e., they wouldn't throw money away, but they might be willing to take greater than normal investment risks due to the activist nature of the fund).

Oh yeah....that's the ticket.   Boycotts!   Why didn't I think of that?   [/s}

Not until CEO, Mr or Mrs X wonders if they're 'next'....not until the SIXTY MINUTES cabal is crapping their pants, will we start to see "fair and balanced" once again from the BIG 3.
"It aint what you don't know that kills you.  It's what you know that aint so!" ...Theodore Sturgeon

"Journalism is about covering the news.  With a pillow.  Until it stops moving."    - Iowahawk

"You can lead a liberal to the Truth, but you can't make them Think" - damned if I know

Offline Relic

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,967
Re: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« Reply #15 on: May 20, 2014, 04:37:53 PM »
Oh yeah....that's the ticket.   Boycotts!   Why didn't I think of that?   [/s}

Not until CEO, Mr or Mrs X wonders if they're 'next'....not until the SIXTY MINUTES cabal is crapping their pants, will we start to see "fair and balanced" once again from the BIG 3.

Unfortunately, you're correct.

And that leads to a whole different kind of ugly situation.

Offline AbaraXas

  • Не русский хакер
  • Social Media Advisor
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 13,034
  • Words full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Re: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« Reply #16 on: May 20, 2014, 07:50:03 PM »
Oh yeah....that's the ticket.   Boycotts!   Why didn't I think of that?   [/s}

Not until CEO, Mr or Mrs X wonders if they're 'next'....not until the SIXTY MINUTES cabal is crapping their pants, will we start to see "fair and balanced" once again from the BIG 3.

I prefer buycotts to boycotts. Reward positive behavior. It is easy to rally people to rally for something instead of against something if you can make the event fun. Chick Fil A is a good example of this. It far countered the boycott by the other side because people could do something fun that also gave an instant reward (lunch).


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf