Author Topic: The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question  (Read 474 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline DCPatriot

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 34,180
The Answer to Rush Limbaugh's Question
« on: May 20, 2014, 05:26:54 AM »
"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

 I think the worst time to have a heart attack would be during a game of charades.

Offline DCPatriot

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 34,180
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

 I think the worst time to have a heart attack would be during a game of charades.

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 »
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.

Offline Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 27,622
  • 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: 34,180
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

 I think the worst time to have a heart attack would be during a game of charades.

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: 85,420
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

Offline Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 27,622
  • 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

  • ?? ??????? ?????
  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 14,805
  • 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

  • ?? ??????? ?????
  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 14,805
  • 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 »

Offline Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 27,622
  • 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!

Offline Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 27,622
  • 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: 49,962
  • TBR Illuminati
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: 34,180
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

 I think the worst time to have a heart attack would be during a game of charades.

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

  • ?? ??????? ?????
  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 14,805
  • 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