| FEATURED COMMENTARY | Email this page to a friend, Send mail! |
HUSH RUSH PART OF LEFT’S PLOT TO DUPLICATE COMFORMITY OF COLLEGE CAMPUSES NATIONWIDE By Don Feder March 26 , 2012
PRINTER FRIENDLY VERSION(.pdf)
As you reflect on the Lynch Limbaugh Campaign, now in its third week, remember: 40 years ago, Rush gave aid and comfort to the enemy, during a conflict that claimed the lives of more than 58,000 Americans. Two decades later, his inflammatory rhetoric fueled a race riot that led to the murder of a rabbinical student and brought two days of terror on a religious community. No, wait a minute, that wasn’t America’s most popular talk-show host but two of his more vociferous critics. But, I’m getting ahead of myself. The latest Hush Rush crusade is even more insidious than it seems. It’s one engagement in a war aimed at silencing the right. In the cross hairs are conservative talkers, commentators, politicians, celebrities and anyone else who dares to challenge leftist orthodoxy. The left wants to drag us back to the good old days (pre-talk radio, pre-Fox, pre-Internet) when three networks ruled the airwaves, and most people got homogenous views packaged as news from Uncle Walter and their daily newspaper. The old media is salivating at the thought of taking down the new media. “After Apology, National Advertisers Are Still Shunning Limbaugh,” read a headline in a March 13 New York Times story. “Rush Limbaugh: If ad boycott expands, can he survive (we certainly hope not),” chirped a story in The Christian Science Monitor. The soft left (mainstream media), rushed into the breach opened by the hard left. Septuagenarian feminists Jane Fonda, Gloria Steinem and Robin Morgan did an opinion piece for the CNN website that shrilled, “FCC should clear Limbaugh from airwaves.” How many feminists does it take to censor the opposition? That’s not funny! After comparing Rush to Goebbels – apparently, both “dehumanize” their “targets” – the fem-bots flew into a rage over the law student (I-want-the-Catholic-Church-to-pay-for-my-contraceptives) Rush called bad names – for which he’s apologized twice. Yes, poor third-year Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke, who can’t find the money to pay for birth-control pills which, even if she goes the expensive, physician- prescribed route, cost less than $20 a week (dinner for two at MacDonald’s). Your heart has to go out to the liberal casuist who, as a graduate of one of the top-ten law schools in the nation, will earn a six-figure salary her first year in private practice. Rush called her a “slut” and a “prostitute.” Our culture has degenerated to the point where no one blinks an eye when, in pursuit of a political goal, a young, unmarried, woman touts her fornication before a Congressional hearing. Instead, we’re outraged when someone goes overboard in describing her sexual ethics – or lack thereof. A boycott isn’t enough for Fonda and friends. “If Clear Channel (which syndicates Limbaugh) won’t clean up its airwaves, then surely it’s time for the public to ask the FCC a basic question: are the stations carrying Limbaugh’s show in fact using their licenses “’in the public interest?’” The airwaves are “a scarce government resource” (for Marxists, everything is a “government resource”) which those granted licenses must use “in the public interest” to serve the hallowed “community.” With hundreds of cable stations and broadband radio, only collectivists could make this argument with a straight face. Let’s see: Trees are a scarce resource. Newspapers and magazines are granted bulk mail permits. Is The New York Times, with its front-page editorials, acting in the public interest? -- is Newsweek, which regularly wails on conservatives and Christians, serving the community? Is HBO, which airs Bill Maher’s bad imitation of Triumph, the Insult Dog, acting in the public interest? How about MSNBC, which provides a cable forum for foulmouthed Ed Schultz and gives the Rev. Al Sharpton a place to hang his armband? A million-dollar donor to Obama’s Super PAC, Maher has referred to Sarah Palin as a “cu-t” and a “tw-t.” Shultz once called conservative commentator Laura Ingraham a “right-wing slut.” While insisting that their objection to Limbaugh isn’t “political” (perish the thought!), the respect-women-or-else squad gives a pass to liberal misogyny. . If giving a talk show to the Reverend Al doesn’t prove the hypocrisy of the liberal media, it’s hard to imagine what would – Dialogue on Community Relations with Louis Farrakhan and David Duke? In 2010, Sharpton, in his inimitable fashion, told us that when a radio station’s broadcast license is up for renewal, stations whose programming “offends groups of Americans based on their race, their gender, their sexual status” should lose their license – unless those offended happen to be Christians, Jews, Caucasians, conservatives, males or heterosexuals, who are oppressors, after all. Jane Fonda condemning speech that’s merely insulting, is like Typhoid Mary complaining about table manners. On a 1972 trip to Hanoi, Fonda called U.S. pilots “war criminals,” urged GIs to desert, posed with a North Vietnamese anti-aircraft battery, made propaganda broadcasts for the communists and called POWs who described torture at the hands of their captors “liars, hypocrites and pawns.” In a post-war interview with The Wall Street Journal, North Vietnamese Col. Bui Tin explained, “Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda…gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses.” Can you say has-enough-blood-on-her-hands to put Lady Macbeth to shame? At about the time of her treasonous excursion, Fonda was telling college kids, “If you understood what communism was, you would hope, you would pray on your knees that we would some day become communists” – which explains a lot, including Jane’s regard for First Amendment freedom. The GOP “have really made Rush Limbaugh such a great part of the conservative movement,” Sharpton bloviates. “You can’t have him as a major spokesman in your movement and then he says something as offensive and misogynist as this (the Fluke comments) and you act like he’s just an entertainer.” What of the Rev. Al? MSNBC has given a cable forum to a man who once said, “White folks was in caves while we was building empires” and “We taught philosophy and astrology (sic.) and mathematics before Socrates and the Greek homos got around to it,” among other Afro-centrist, “ice-people” fantasies. At least some of us Caucasian cave-dwellers know the difference between astrology and astronomy, as well as when to use “was” and “were” in a sentence. In 1987, Sharpton was pushing the Tawana Brawley fraud – that a black teen was abducted and raped by a gang of white men. An assistant prosecutor in Duchess County, New York won a $345,000 judgment against Al for defamation in the affair. Any libel judgments against Rush? In 1991, Sharpton set a match to a powder keg in the Crown Heights section of Brooklyn. At a funeral for a 7-year-old black child killed in an auto accident, he inveighed against “diamond merchants” (his code-words for Hassidic Jews) who were somehow responsible for South African apartheid as well as the child’s death. The upshot was two days of rioting and the murder of rabbinical student Yankel Rosenbaum, knifed to death by a mob shouting “Kill the Jew!’ Four years later, Sharpton reprised his Kristallnacht performance at Freddy’s Fashion Mart, a Jewish-owned store in Harlem. In the ensuing mayhem, a crazed protestor set fire to the store, killing seven. This is the scum who has the chutzpah to lecture Republicans on responsibility and group sensitivity. The left is relentless. In 2007, Senator Dianne Feinstein said the party which claims a connection to Jefferson was looking into bringing back the Fairness Doctrine, which would make talk radio impossible. The same year, Sen. James Inhofe says he overheard a conversation between Sen. Barbara Boxer and then-Senator Hillary Clinton concerning talk radio. Inhofe reports: “They said we’ve got to do something about this. These are nothing but far right-wing extremists. We’re got to have balance. There’s got to be a legislative fix for this.” “Balance” and “legislative fix” are lib-speak for, “Get the guillotine ready!” In 1995, Hillary’s insignificant-other accused talk radio of setting the stage for the Oklahoma City bombing. In 2011, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman blamed the Tea Parties, Sarah Palin and “the rhetoric of Beck, Limbaugh, etc.” for creating the atmosphere which led to the shooting of Congresswoman Gabby Giffords by the resident of a planet in the Nebula Galaxy. When actor Kirk Cameron told an interviewer that homosexuality is “ultimately destructive to the foundations of civilization,” comedienne Roseanne Barr – who really should be doing a political show on MSNBC – called Cameron “an accomplice to murder with his hate speech.” And GLADD (the happy people advocates and whatever) is monitoring Cameron’s media bookings – to be sure he doesn’t get any. GLADD’s Accountability Project seeks to prevent the media from giving “a platform to the extreme rhetoric” (i.e., providing an alternate point of view) of three dozen individuals who represent almost the entire leadership of the pro-family movement. The left is right (no pun) to fear talk radio. Rush Limbaugh’s show has a weekly audience of more than 15 million. Of the top 11 radio talk shows, ranked by Talkers Magazine, 7 are hosted by conservatives or libertarians. Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, Beck, Levin, Boortz and Ingraham have a combined weekly audience of 67 million-plus. The New York Times has a daily circulation of less than a million. Over at MSNBC, Shultz has an average audience of 180,000, Rachel Maddow 260,000 – while FOX’s “The O’Reilly Factor” draws 831,000 and Sean Hannity 478,000. It’s not about “dehumanization,” or “hate speech” or not serving the public interest (the public speaks every time the ratings come out) or any of the other lame-o excuses the left regularly trots out. It is a maniacal drive to gag opposing voices – to create an Orwellian society where bad ideas are punished. For a preview of the America the left wants to create, take the college campus, where liberalism reigns supreme. At most colleges and universities, at least on the humanities faculties, tenure is based on a willingness to spew leftist orthodoxy on cue. Liberal books are practically the only assigned reading. Liberals have a monopoly on commencement speakers. Increasingly, conservatives aren’t even allowed to speak on campus. The student mob (egged on by professors, tolerated by administrators) has an effective veto on campus speakers. Supporters of Israel, opponents of affirmative action, critics of open-borders, marriage proponents and those dubious of the joys of Islam are regularly shouted-down, harassed and assaulted (physically as well as verbally) by collegiate storm troopers – a reality I experienced first-hand when I tried to speak at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst two year ago. Other than Alan Dershowitz, I have never heard anyone on the left object to these totalitarian tactics. That’s because it’s part of the liberal weltanschaunng – to see conservatives crushed by the bureaucracy, silenced through legal harassment, boycotted, shunned and shouted down. If Fonda, Steinem et al. have their way, soon we’ll be allowed to sit quietly in our homes and think conservative thoughts – for the time being. This commentary originally appeared on GrassTopsUSA.com on March 19, 2012
PRINTER FRIENDLY VERSION(.pdf)
|
|
| PREVIOUSLY FEATURED COMMENTARY | Email this page to a friend, Send mail! |
CIVILITY DOESN'T EXIST IN A VACUUM By Don Feder March 13 , 2011
PRINTER FRIENDLY VERSION(.pdf)
About a week ago, I had another lesson in liberal civility.
I was pulling into the parking lot of a burger-joint when an agitated young man drove up next to me. He rolled down his window, as I did. I thought I might have cut him off in traffic and prepared to apologize.
The first words out of his mouth were: “Are you a retard?” This is known as a rhetorical question. I was tempted to answer, “No, but I am still beating my wife.”
The graduate of the Charlie Sheen School of Refinement was incensed by one of my bumper stickers, “Global Warming: a dangerous man-made phenomenon caused by the mixture of recycled Marxist ideas and junk science.”
I told him I wasn’t going to have a conversation with someone who begins by asking if I’m “special.” We went into the restaurant. He was calm for a while, but as soon as he finished eating, he began loudly berating me again.
I was a “cretin.” I was too stupid to live in a superior state like Massachusetts and should move to Tennessee, where people are such mental defectives that they question the revealed truth of global warming. “Like Al Gore,” I innocently asked? That enraged him further. Finally, he delivered what he considered the coup de grace, telling other diners that I was a product of FOX News. Then he stormed out.
One of the cooks came out from behind the counter and asked if I wanted him to call the cops. I said no, my assailant was probably an Obama supporter who was off his medication. Massachusetts is lousy with such louts -- not surprising, as we are the capital of thumb-sucking liberalism.
But, not to worry. The civility-mongers just opened the National Institute for Civil Discourse at the University of Arizona. By this time next year, we’ll all be going around bowing or curtseying to each other and saying: “Pray, pardon me” and “I beg to differ.” Soon, the entire country will resemble a Regency drawing room out of “Sense and Sensibility.”
According to the Institute’s website, it will be a “national, nonpartisan center for debate, research, education and policy generation regarding civic engagement and civility in public discourse consistent with First Amendment principles.”
In a Q&A describing its purpose, the Institute answered hypothetical questions about the Big C, including – Question: “Are you blaming heated rhetoric for the Tucson shootings? Answer: Absolutely not. But the shootings created a space for people to focus on civility, and the Institute is building on that positive outcome of a tragic event.”
If the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and the murder of 6 others had “absolutely” nothing to do with civility, how exactly did it create a “space for people to focus” on same? Caution: Never expect consistency from the left or ask liberals to define their terms (like “climate of hate”), it only confuses and agitates them
The only connection between the Tucson tragedy and civility is that a lot of people on the left blamed the rampage on lack of civility among conservatives, without a scintilla of evidence to corroborate the claim. The alleged perp was living on his own planet. From the testimony of classmates, when he was still coherent, he expressed liberal views.
Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik, who’s a serious contender for the Rosie O’Donnell Liberal Hysteric of the Year Award, was like a car without brakes careening down a mountain road. The University of Arizona, home to the Institute, is located in his county. It’s also where Giffords and the others were shot.
The question isn’t who Dupnik blamed for the shootings, but who he didn’t blame on the right. His cast of villains included Sarah Palin, “irresponsible political rhetoric,” the Tea Parties, talk radio and Arizona’s “racist” immigration law. I was waiting for him to drag in Richard Nixon, Joe McCarthy, and the House Un-American Activities Committee.
Bill Clinton and Bush 41 are the Institute’s honorary chairmen. Having Clinton associated with a civility institute is like – well – having Clinton associated with an institute that opposes sexual harassment and promotes marital fidelity.
During the impeachment process, Clinton’s war room (where “bimbo eruptions” were handled during the ’92 campaign) was in full swing, trying to dig up dirt on Special Prosecutor Ken Starr -- this from the man who coined the term “the politics of personal destruction.”
Bubba blamed the Tucson shootings on “political rhetoric.” He was suitably vague about which politics and what rhetoric, alluding to the “tone” of debate in Congress (unstated assumption, now that Republicans control the House).
Clinton was more direct in 1995, blaming the Oklahoma City bombing on “the many loud and angry voices in America today whose sole goal seems to be to try to keep some people as paranoid as possible and the rest of us torn up and upset with each other..” In 2010, he was still blaming the slaughter on “extreme right-wing views’ that “demonize government.”
Clinton’s 1995 indictment probably had nothing to do with the fact that those “loud and angry voices” in talk radio were exposing his incompetence, corruption and dogmatism. His charges would have been more credible if he’d put them in an affidavit signed under penalties of perjury.
The anti-taxpayer demonstrators in Madison, Wisconsin, and elsewhere across this broad land, once again showed the left at its well-mannered, thoughtful and fair-minded best.
Budget-balancing Governor Scott Walker is regularly compared to Hitler. For the left, economy measures invariably end in an iron dictatorship, war and genocide.
Bob Fitrakis, a poly-sci professor the University of Wisconsin, whose student-robots are demonstrating with members of SEIU and AFSCME, warned that the dispute about pension and health insurance contributions and collective bargaining is “ultimately about preventing the United States from becoming a full-on fascist state” and ”saving the last shreds of American democracy.”
If Fitrakis wants to see fascism in action, he should try holding a pro-Tea Party sign at one of the labor rallies in support of Wisconsin public employees. He would be well-advised to wear a combat helmet and Kevlar vest and take a bodyguard with him.
If you want to understand how deeply ingrained incivility is on the left, consider the college campus.
There is no place in America that liberals dominate more completely than academia. If today’s liberalism had anything to do with civility, the campus would be a place of tolerance, diversity of opinion and polite debate.
Instead, American higher education is characterized by intimidation, forced uniformity of opinion and brutish behavior. Out of cowardice or complicity, on many campuses, administrators have given the most obnoxious students a de facto veto on which views may be expressed.
The list of conservative speakers who’ve been shouted down or had their speeches disrupted is longer than Lindsay Lohan’s rap sheet. Among the victims are David Horowitz, Ann Coulter, Daniel Pipes, Star Parker, former Congressman Tom Tancredo, John Yoo (a member of the Bush Justice Department), the late Jeane Kirkpatrick and yours truly.
At Columbia, which resembles la Place de la Guillotine during the Reign of Terror when it comes to dissent, a student who’s a decorated Iraq War veteran (who was shot 11 times in the line of duty and spent two years undergoing rehabilitation for his wounds) was heckled and called a “racist” by fellow students for defending U.S. involvement in the Middle East.
Occasionally, the savages suffer the consequences of their assault on free speech. It was just announced that 11 members of the Muslim Student Union will face criminal charges for shutting down a speech by Israel’s Ambassador Michael Oren at the University of California at Irvine last year.
Orange County Asst. District Attorney Tony Rackauckas warns: “We must decide whether we are a country of law or a country of anarchy. … in our democratic society, we can not tolerate a deliberate, organized, repetitive and collective effort to significantly disrupt a speaker who hundreds have assembled to hear.”
Most of the liberals who run our colleges and universities don’t agree. Civility for them, but not for us.
Definitions of civility often include “civil,” “polite (not rude),” “courtesy,” “good manners” and “the act of showing regard for others.” The left views these habits of the heart as mindless conformity and artificial social constructs designed to stifle individuality.
Civility doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It’s founded on things like religion (which teaches the worth of every human being and that we are answerable to a higher authority), etiquette and democracy (which stresses the rights of all). There was a time, fading from memory, when the watchword of liberalism was: “I may disagree with what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.” Now, it’s, “Agree with us, or die.”
The old virtues were in vogue when I was growing up in the ‘50s, but now are almost entirely abandoned by liberals. The latter started to swing away from civility during the anti-war movement of the ‘60s. This accelerated with the rise of radical feminism, gay militancy, multiculturalism, misanthropic environmentalism and the other angry movements of the left.
Yet, they still they complain about our lack of civility, while kicking us in the groin.
A great statement on civility is contained in the movie “Blast from the Past.” In it, Brendan Fraser plays Adam, a 35-year-old man raised in a fallout shelter by his eccentric but loving parents. He emerges into the world of 1990s Los Angeles with 1950s values.
He falls in love with Alicia Silverstone’s character (Eve) and she with him. In the movie’s best dialogue, Eve’s brother discloses that Adam told him, “Good manners (civility) are just a way of showing other people we have respect for them.” Also, “His short and simple definition of a lady or a gentleman is someone who always tries to make sure the people around him or her are as comfortable as possible.”
If this sounds like today’s liberalism to you, then you must have spent the past 50 years in a fallout shelter yourself.
It’s not just the slander and intimidation that’s going on in Wisconsin – the signs comparing Gov. Walker to Der Fuhrer, the Tweets calling for his assassination – but the fact that liberal leaders either refuse to condemn such extremism, or egg on the mob.
Appearing on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka ignored repeated calls to condemn, or at least disassociate himself from, the more violent rhetoric of striking public employees.
Speaking at a labor rally in Boston, in support of the Madison strikers, Massachusetts Congressman Mike Capuano urged the assembled goons to “get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary.” Not that they needed much encouragement, but the hard hats preceded to rough-up and terrorize counter-demonstrators.
Capuano later issued a pro-forma apology for his “choice of words,” which is also SOP for the left. “You’re racist/fascist scum in league with the Devil, who deserves to die. Oops, sorry about my poor choice of words. Now, can we please discuss how talk radio has debased the political debate?”
Trumka and Capuano will probably end up lecturing at the National Institute for Civil Discourse, which should be treated with the disdain it deserve.
This commentary originally appeared on GrassTopsUSA.
PRINTER FRIENDLY VERSION(.pdf)
|
CLICK HERE to send Don your comments.CLICK HERE FOR DON'S COMMENT PAGE |








