Posted on 06/05/2002 10:58:07 AM PDT by PJ-Comix
Basic indisputable truth follows. Leftists don't like talk radio. They don't just dislike talk radio a little – they hate it. Left-wingers hate talk radio with a blue-steam, Grade A, unadulterated blinding passion. They know without a doubt that their loss of control in Washington in 1994 was due generally to talk radio and specifically to the influence of The Godfather, Rush Limbaugh.
Why do leftist hate talk radio so? Because they're so damned bad at it, that's why. There is not ONE successful, money-making, listened-to talk radio show in the entire nation that is hosted by a leftist. Not one. I've gone into the reasons for the leftist failure at talk radio before – and I'm not here to completely rehash that question now. Suffice it to say that leftists wilt in the face of fact and logic … and talk radio callers kill them with it.
So, why bring it up? Well, if you're a talk radio fan you need to know just how the left intends to destroy their nemesis. They can't succeed in the talk radio arena, so it must be destroyed. Basically, they have two game plans. Plan A is to use the regulatory police power of government to harass talk radio into submission. Plan B is to attack on the basis of political correctness.
To learn more about Plan A, just go to my "Democrats' Secret Plan for America" essay at http://www.boortz.com/demsecrets.htm (linked at the top of this page).
But what about Plan B? Here's where we encounter the leftist phrase "hate radio." Liberals know that that confrontation with conservative and libertarian talk show hosts on the actual issues is a no-win situation. The solution? Ignore the factual and logical basis behind the opinions expressed by these talk show hosts and attack those opinions as expressions of hate.
Liberals know that most people, conservatives and liberals alike, don't like people who hate. Hate is a negative emotion, one to be avoided. If you can take the argumentative points made by your political opponent and successfully brand them as expressions of hate, then you have won the argument. You win not by presenting a better, more rational argument. Nor do you win by pointing out factual errors. You win by turning our natural aversion to the emotion of hate against your opponent.
Over the past months I guess I've read a dozen or more articles about the evil of right-wing "hate radio." There is one common thread that runs through all of these articles. Not one of them – not one – actually sets forth an opinion expressed by one libertarian or conservative talk show host to show just how that specific opinion constitutes "hate speech." The issue is ignored. Facts are ignored. No counterpoints are offered.
One tactic – one tactic only. The conservative talk show host is spouting hate speech and should, on that basis and that basis alone, be discredited and ignored.
There are now leftist websites dedicated to fighting "hate radio." One such website calls it "hatecasting." Pretty catchy, huh?
There are organized campaigns to convince advertisers that they don't really want their advertisements running next to a hate-filled diatribe from some hate-filled talk show host on some hate radio station, do they now?
Leftists are determined to regain the total domination and control that they believe is their birthright in Washington. They can't sit back and watch the fascist-socialist movement they believe in die just because some libertarians and conservatives are allowed to freely express opinions on the nation's federally controlled airwaves.
A few races going the wrong way this fall could give them the chance they're dying for – the chance to destroy talk radio.
Welcome. Many here share the same passions.
Post 41 steered you to one of the South versus Lincoln threads. Good advice actually. I've learned more history and Constitutional interpretations on those threads than if I'd read several books. Just cruise past the "damnyankee", "treasonous rebel" name-calling posts and find some that deal with the Constitution. Try the recent "Could the South Have Won?" thread, which is nearing 1,000 posts.
I doubt if it could have been stated more precisely. So true.
But one one of the things he does that drives us all nuts is when he uses what we've taken to calling "Limboid Logic". That's when he takes some generally non-political topic and decides since he feels one way about it the other side must be the liberal side. His view on soccer is a pretty good example ... he seems to hate soccer so therefore anyone who likes or plays soccer (quite a few people in their 20s and younger now, at least here in Boise) must not be as loyal an American as he is. Last year this popped up alot on his show, not so much lately. Its like saying "I'm against kicking puppies, so therefore liberals must like puppy kicking." We all get a good laugh out of it but no one takes him all that seriously.
I haven't heard O"Reilly, but probably the worst ever was some idiot named Bernie Ward. This guy was so stupid, he compared Newt Gingrich to the guy who killed Rabin (Israel's PM in 1993). Then, in another show, he essentially railed against disciplining a child. He never let anyone on his show other than people who agreed with him (or hung up on them quickly if they slipped through) and spewed some of the most venomous hate I've ever heard. Basically, a Michael Moore clone, with less speaking ability. I was really sorry to see him go. One open minded afternoon listening to Ward probably made someone conservative for life. People generally don't like bad attitudes and to be consume with the kind of pure hatred folks like Ward and Moore have.
...which is why I stopped listening to her years ago.
Yeah, that's the ticket.
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.