Posted on 07/14/2007 7:14:28 AM PDT by lowbridge
While I, and our conservative friends of African extraction know that you are not intending to paint all with the same brush, you might take that into consideration when formulating your post.
the difference between conservatives and liberals is liberals want to attract groups; such as "african-americans", "gays", or "the poor". Conservatives attract individuals. Those who are able and willing to leave the comfort of the group, and say "you don't speak for me", deserve better than to be lumped back into the group by those they choose to identify with.
Again, I am sure that this was not your intention, I am merely pointing out that blanket statements are harmful to our cause, and our ability to attract more to our point of view.
I’m sort of surprised that this guy didn’t coin a phrase like “negrophobia”. Look at all the mileage gays have made with “homophobia”.
Fear has nothing to do with it. Avoidance, for any number of reasons, does.
What a stupid question. Lets ask this in "reverse"...
What do you thing of this idea that there have been no BLACK speakers at the ARIAN NATION conventions?
I am not trying to equate the GOP with the arian nation, what I am trying to equate is the NAACP as being just as racist as the arian nation in the opposing direction.
Why would a black person speak at the anrian nation any more than a conservative speak at the NAACP when there is no point in either conversation?
If applied fairly (and that's the whole point), it would be to our advantage. Since the whole media tilts left, the Fairness Doctrine would at least help it tilt back towards the middle. For every stupid liberal comment they make, they would have to legally counter it with a conservative opinion. That might not be such a bad thing.
The thing is all my friends who are black are Republicans. They are educated, work hard at good paying jobs and don’t buy into the poverty pimps’ lines of BS. They are proud of their black heritage, they don’t use it as a excuse to be societal parasites.
The empirical evidence suggests suggests that it is Democrats who are racists:
[Excerpt]: "But for Democrats, race mattered--and in a disturbing way. Overall, Democrats were willing to give whites about $1,500 more than they chose to give to a black or other minority. (Even with this race penalty, Democrats still were willing to give more to blacks than those principled Republicans.) 'Republicans are likely to be more stringent, both in terms of money and time,' Iyengar said. 'However, their position is "principled" in the sense that it stems from a strong belief in individualism (as opposed to handouts). Thus their responses to the assistance questions are relatively invariant across the different media conditions. Independents and Democrats, on the other hand, are more likely to be affected by racial cues.'"
Walter Williams said it best yesterday. If you work, have babies after you get married and stay out of jail, it is impossible to be poor in America no matter what color you are.
The Plantation takes all of those factors away, especially the work and family parts.
Pray for W and Our Troops
The major reason is that why talk to a group of confirmed communists, racists, liars and people who refuse to accept that the GOP gave them their civil rights against filibustering DUmmies. Let them ask LBJ who thanked the GOP for passing the Civil Rights Bill.
They are hopeless and enjoying political slavery under the Dim Party.
Amen brother.
Especially those two-year olds (shudder).
We have twin boys!
Shudder is right. Get them going and no home is free from destruction!
There is a big difference between the African-American of the nineteenth century and of the post New-Deal era. In the nineteenth century, their bodies were in chains but their minds were free. Today, while their bodies may be free, their minds are enslaved. Only when we finally eliminate the mental slavery of dependency, will we truly eliminate slavery in the United States.
That’s a great photo.
I no longer see a whit of difference between the mentality that fosters a ‘community’ of blacks, latinos, eskimos, I don’t care which, and the mentality of slavery. It’s not just about victimology, it’s about what people think of themselves and of what they can accomplish for themselves. Group think is the antithesis of self-reliance.
But we knew that.
ROTFLMBO!!! I can’t stop chuckling. That’s good!
No, I didn't. If you had said "attitudes and values of individuals", then that would be different. But your post referenced the "attitudes and values" of the groups, and compared one group to another, so my statement stands.
And I think you missed the point of my comments entirely. Stating that, in effect, all Blacks are looking for a handout is highly insulting. As I said, I am sure that was not your intent, and I merely was pointing out to you that you should choose your words more carefully.
The Fairness Doctrine won’t apply to CNN since it isn’t sent out over the public airwaves.
Even if the Fairness Doctrine is enforced fairly, and it won’t be, its impact will fall almost entirely on conservatives. AM radio stations are tough properties to operate in this day and age. Music has better sound quality on FM, so those stations will continue to mostly air music no matter what. AM survives largely on two formats, talk and sports. And the talk is mostly conservative because conservatives feel frustrated by the overwhelming leftist bias on TV, in the newspapers, on the wire services, etc. There isn’t nearly as much liberal talk radio because lefties are satisfied with the other media, so they have no need to find a niche in AM radio.
If the Fairness Doctrine is reinstated, every station airing Rush Limbaugh for three hours daily would have to air three hours of liberal talk to balance it. But no one listens to liberal talk, so the station would have to lose money for three hours every day to carry three profitable hours. Most stations would find this financially intolerable, and would switch to sports, or do-it-yourself shows, or auto repair shows, or anything non-controversial. Those shows wouldn’t sell ad time like Rush, but Rush’s benefits to the station would be wiped out by the requirement to air three hours of zero rated, and thus unsellable, air time every day for liberal talk shows.
Now, there are those who say that regular broadcast TV, such as CBS & NBC, would be covered by the Fairness Doctrine and thus conservatives could demand equal time there. No, we couldn’t, and here’s why:
1) The Fairness Doctrine only kicks in when something overtly political occurs. For example, when Rush tells his millions of listeners to call their Senators to oppose the amnesty bill, or outright ridicules Nancy Pelosi. Liberal bias on CBS and other networks doesn’t work that way. Katie Couric doesn’t openly denounce Fred Thompson or encourage her viewers to phone senators in support of a particular bill. She just uses omission and slanting to bias the story. She just doesn’t tell us what provisions are in the amnesty bill, or doesn’t report that the economy is going well under a GOP administration. She covers every setback in Iraq, but not the victories. She covers a pro-abortion rally but not a pro-life rally. She does puff pieces on Hillary and Obama but not the Republicans.
She does nothing overt, like telling us to get on the phone and call our senator, or telling us that a certain bill is great and should be passed, or horrible and will destroy the country. She just covers those things she wants us to know about in a manner that subtly leads us to the conclusion she wants us to have, while not covering things she doesn’t want us to know about.
Thus, the brutal black-on-white rape and murder case in Knoxville doesn’t get covered, while the phony white-on-black rape case at Duke got covered as a major story, with the accused being presented as guilty by means of slanting, rather than an overt declaration. That wouldn’t be actionable under the Fairness Doctrine.
2) We all know that the Fairness Doctrine will not be enforced fairly. The best example of that is NPR, which for years operated under the Fairness Doctrine, yet was overwhelmingly biased against conservatives, and nothing was done about it even though it was a government-run channel and used not only the public airwaves but taxpayers’ money. We have hate crime laws, which theoretically apply to all so-called bias crimes, but we know that a white-on-black or hetero-on-homo crime will be far more likely to be prosecuted than the opposite. We have a stupid IRS rule banning political activities by churches, but we all know that the IRS looks the other way when black and liberal churches engage in politics. We have federal laws prohibiting tax money from going to any group that engages in political lobbying, so right-to-life groups get no government aid, but Planned Parenthood not only gets taxpayers’ money, but brazenly lobbies for more of it.
So don’t expect the Fairness Doctrine to come back to haunt liberals. It won’t.
“Since the whole media tilts left”
Except for talk radio, it’s fair to say that the media has dug post holes and set themselves in reinforced concrete on the left. There’s no tilting about it.
Those who are most against religion (except for Islam of course), come to churches to ‘preach’ (don’t let a Pub do it). They are evil incarnate. Does anyone ask about abortion in these churches, what they are doing to keep families together (they’ll stand in a church and say they’re fighting for abortion though, if they mention it at all), why they lie every two or four years, why Hill can mock them to their faces with a fake accent (which blows me away), while they smile, cheer and clap.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.