Tom Harkin took it upon to humiliate himself, at least before a fair minded and fully informed audience, in his grossly defamatory attack on Rush Limbaugh. The latest canard being circulated by Tom Harkin and the liberal political and media elites only happens to target Limbaugh. The last seven days have featured the completely fabricated O’Reilly is a racist story; the shameless exploitation of school children (SCHIP rally); and now this gross distortion of Rush Limbaugh’s word. What you, the reader, needs to understand the latest attempt by the left to destroy those whose ideas cannot be defeated through reasoned discourse.
Unlike previous generations of liberal smear, the politics of personal destruction left won't necessarily win this time. What differentiates the present marketplace of ideas from 1991-1992? In the days before Al Gore invented the internet and talk radio took the air Democrats could slime Republicans with impunity. The distortions and pandering of the left were uncritically presented in the light most favorable to Democrats’ electoral needs by a willingly sycophantic media that agreed with the distortions and pandering.
In those days, the willing complicity of most mainstream media in lies like Tom Harkin's war/fish stories about his days as a combat fighter tangling with MiGs over ‘Nam allowed Democrat fiction to become established fact. Now there are heavily trafficked mediums that allow Republicans to fight back. The Real Sporer is a small cog in this much larger machine, but we are an example of this alternate media.
Having refrained from commentary when ABSCAM Jack (Murtha) defamed specific American Marines with a false accusation of murder, when Barak Obama said that we were "air raiding villages" and John Kerry said we were breaking into houses at night "terrorizing kids and women", Tom Harkin, Harry Reid and the rest of the Democrats who feign outrage at Limbaugh now demonstrate the most grotesque of hypocrisy. The hour demands that we now ask ourselves how are us Republicans going to handle this monstrosity?
The new media allows Rush, O’Reilly and President Bush to reach an audience that was unavailable to previous generations of Republicans; but that provides only half the answer to the Democrat smear machine. The other half is a willingness to defend and go over to offense. The Bush Administration committed a major blunder in allowing Joe Wilson’s lies to get off the ground. The liberal media took the almost cringing response of the Administration as opening a hunting season on the truth of the American war effort.
O’Reilly and Limbaugh are now demonstrating that you can win but you have to fight. Apologizing for words or acts that one does not consider wrongful only strengthens one’s adversaries in the Culture War. When the Dems and their running dogs in the media commence the distortion of Republican words the only viable response is direct and immediate confrontation of the lie with factual reality, correct context and reasoned argument-and we do it in every media venue that permits it. Otherwise the hate filled echo chamber of the left will convert the lie into conventional wisdom and accepted fact.
Fox; the internet and talk radio are devouring audience share. Old media “icons” like CBS News, the NY Times and the big three news magazines face plunging ratings and circulations. Since they cannot win in the marketplace, Dems seek to intimidate disagreeable speech until they can implement the “Fairness Doctrine”. Democrats hate free speech because it allows Republicans to be heard, period. Then, if the Limbaughs of the world can be heard at all they will be opened to unrebuttable attacks from the left, like the 80s and early 90s. Coupled with the politicization of public education the liberals will have achieved their generational goal, the complete indoctrination of the American public.
Once that happens Republicans will not return to power for a generation, if ever. That is what you have at stake in the next election.
Unlike previous generations of liberal smear, the politics of personal destruction left won't necessarily win this time. What differentiates the present marketplace of ideas from 1991-1992? In the days before Al Gore invented the internet and talk radio took the air Democrats could slime Republicans with impunity. The distortions and pandering of the left were uncritically presented in the light most favorable to Democrats’ electoral needs by a willingly sycophantic media that agreed with the distortions and pandering.
In those days, the willing complicity of most mainstream media in lies like Tom Harkin's war/fish stories about his days as a combat fighter tangling with MiGs over ‘Nam allowed Democrat fiction to become established fact. Now there are heavily trafficked mediums that allow Republicans to fight back. The Real Sporer is a small cog in this much larger machine, but we are an example of this alternate media.
Having refrained from commentary when ABSCAM Jack (Murtha) defamed specific American Marines with a false accusation of murder, when Barak Obama said that we were "air raiding villages" and John Kerry said we were breaking into houses at night "terrorizing kids and women", Tom Harkin, Harry Reid and the rest of the Democrats who feign outrage at Limbaugh now demonstrate the most grotesque of hypocrisy. The hour demands that we now ask ourselves how are us Republicans going to handle this monstrosity?
The new media allows Rush, O’Reilly and President Bush to reach an audience that was unavailable to previous generations of Republicans; but that provides only half the answer to the Democrat smear machine. The other half is a willingness to defend and go over to offense. The Bush Administration committed a major blunder in allowing Joe Wilson’s lies to get off the ground. The liberal media took the almost cringing response of the Administration as opening a hunting season on the truth of the American war effort.
O’Reilly and Limbaugh are now demonstrating that you can win but you have to fight. Apologizing for words or acts that one does not consider wrongful only strengthens one’s adversaries in the Culture War. When the Dems and their running dogs in the media commence the distortion of Republican words the only viable response is direct and immediate confrontation of the lie with factual reality, correct context and reasoned argument-and we do it in every media venue that permits it. Otherwise the hate filled echo chamber of the left will convert the lie into conventional wisdom and accepted fact.
Fox; the internet and talk radio are devouring audience share. Old media “icons” like CBS News, the NY Times and the big three news magazines face plunging ratings and circulations. Since they cannot win in the marketplace, Dems seek to intimidate disagreeable speech until they can implement the “Fairness Doctrine”. Democrats hate free speech because it allows Republicans to be heard, period. Then, if the Limbaughs of the world can be heard at all they will be opened to unrebuttable attacks from the left, like the 80s and early 90s. Coupled with the politicization of public education the liberals will have achieved their generational goal, the complete indoctrination of the American public.
Once that happens Republicans will not return to power for a generation, if ever. That is what you have at stake in the next election.
9 comments:
Ted: "Apologizing for words or acts that one does not consider wrongful only strengthens one’s adversaries in the Culture War (as it does in most things in life.)"
Amen, amen. The major reason the conservative revolution failed is recent Republican administrations either ducked and ran for cover rather than dig in their heels over what they really believed, or threw money willynilly at problems in hopes of molifying critics.
Katrina was an excellent example. FEMA may have screwed up big time but most of blame belonged to the Gulf states which preferred to invest their Corps of Engineers money in money making commercial shipping channel improvements and port facilities than flood control. Also, the administration never uttered a word of criticism about the failure of too many affected homeowners to buy federal flood insurance.
In short the administration behaved more like a resort entertainment directors rather than as leaders.
Think the general perception of today's Republican Party is we don't really believe in anything but expediency. That's why I have yet to see more than handful of young people, if that, at monthly party meetings.
I'm convinced the electorate is yearning for authenticity and genuine straight talk. That's why Clinton is sooooooooo potentially beatable. A real all-things-to-all-people type her credibility is basically zip.
Re the media I anticipate FOX will go over to Clinton and the left. Murdoch's gods are money, power and influence.
Unless we get our act together, we could well be out of power for a generation.
Sporer,
Are you really this paranoid? Could you be any more melodramatic? Did years of unchecked power make you this sensitive to disagreement?
A paranoid post like this definitely confirms that we would have been in for a real thought police state had today's R's been able to create the "permanent majority" they thought they already had. Completely pre-screened W events were only the beginning.
The R toolbox must be real empty. All you have left is fear. What happened to all the big, bold ideas many people were actually attracted to?
what thought police? my critique is of what is a well orchestrated attack on leading conservative figures by a combination of well known liberal media outlets and Democrat politicians than began on left wing web sites.
you know the O'Reilly attack was completely fabricated my Media Matters. O'Reilly's statements, to a BLACK man, none the less, were the antithesis of the accusations Media Matters made and liberal politicians and news orgs repeated.
not one person who is familiar with rush thinks he disrespects vets and active duty military. having read the complete context of both the Limbaugh stories it is clear that this attack is also based on, at best, a gross distortion.
i think you would be hard pressed to find similar non fact based ad hominym attacks by conservatives on liberals.
as for big ideas, i tend to agree that we aren't hearing many. i have some but i'm not running for President.
"i think you would be hard pressed to find similar non fact based ad hominym attacks by conservatives on liberals."
No offense, but you could start by reading your own archives.
Are you saying that the troops that are in favor of withdrawal in Iraq "phony soldiers"?
noneed is proving the often made point that democrats do not do their own research.
I'm a lifelong democrat - voted in every caucus, primary and general. I am asbolutely qualified as a democrat and cannot be questioned about my authority on the subject of democrats. As a result of the egregious ignorance continuously demonstrated by members of my party, I hereby now resign and will become a republican.
rf, barring something that is clearly toungue in cheek, which I am learning sometimes doesn't translate well in writing, my attacks are hard hitting but based in contextually accurate fact.
no need, far from it. A few are imposters, like the specific object of Rush's comments. Most are simply battle scarred vets.
Listen up guys, I have spent literally my entire life studying military history and I have a pretty good idea of the horror of war. Every war produces a usually small highly vocal pacifist group of vets. They see the horror of war first hand, the actual "goo that used to be your best friend's face". Needless to say, such trauma produces a profound and lasting affect. If it doesn't, well then you become a mercenary or serial killer (cause some vets actually love it, also a small minority).
WW1 was so horrific to its participants that they spent a generation doing everything possible to avoid a rematch. What'd they get? WW2. Now that's a fact largely beyond any historical dispute.
So I respect their service, listen to their perspective and strongly disagree with their conclusions. Nor do I believe that military service early in life get's one a pass to say or do anything thereafter. Military service is a significant virtue in a public leader but it is most certainly not the only virtue, nor even a controlling virtue. I refer you to Petain himself as best evidence. Or, Hitler himself, who was a heroic combat soldier.
So I disagree with those vets, and frankly think my lack of emotional involvement makes me able to perceive the big picture more clearly.
Whew!!!!!!!! I've got blisters on me fingers.
"my attacks are hard hitting but based in contextually accurate fact"
If this is your standard, then more or less everything goes. I think even the most ridiculous attacks on W I've heard (and trust me, I've heard many) can all be easily defended by this standard.
There has never been a liberal media bias. Grow up and stop playing the victim card.
Post a Comment