Posted on 12/15/2018 6:29:02 AM PST by Kaslin
Who ‘educated’ the journalists? There you go...
You make a good point.
I must say, my impulse to fight is as visceral and as volatile as anyone I’ve met.
But in fighting, never elevate the father of lies as Alinsky did, both explicitly and in his deeds.
I think you understand this.
A great commanding general would say the same.
Those who disparage your post are probably well intentioned, but a fighting spirit doesn’t have to be a blinder.
Conservatives do not need to become that which is lawless and reprehensible.
Sheriff Clark’s views are relevant to the point of the cowardly avoiding engagement by useless elected Republicans. Many of them are pathetic and many were forced to leave this last election cycle.
But it doesn’t mean one has to become like one’s enemy in order to defend one’s way of life.
The answer is in law enforcement, courts, prosecutions and constant counters to media propaganda. In time, this war will be won by conservatives, patriots, law-abiding Americans through the rule of law. The courts have been a problem but the composition of the courts is changing and with the wins in the Senate, that change will continue unabated and with less interference.
As the changes toward conservatism continue, the Left will become more and more unhinged. Law enforcement will in time take them down.
Ouch.I would shut down the media until standards could be set. No apologies. Ever.
The question is whether it is possible to set standards. Objectivity is unnatural, because everyone has opinions and they think they are right. Otherwise they would be their opinions. You can try to be objective - and it’s OK to say you are trying - if in good faith you actually are. But to claim objectivity is pretty much the same thing, IMHO, as to claim wisdom - it is inherently arrogant to take that for granted.So my take is that claiming objectivity is the problem. And you don’t get off the hook merely by joining a mutual admiration society of people who will claim objectivity for you, provided you claim objectivity for them. IMHO accepting a label - “I’m a conservative, so you can take that into consideration when evaluating my viewpoint” - is an acceptance of responsibility for your perspective, and is actually the form humility takes. Joining the “No Labels” movement, or the “society of self-validating objective journalists” is arrogant.
The typical radio talk show host is openly conservative. There’s no significant niche for an openly “liberal” radio talk show for the simple reason that the niche for articulation of the “liberal” perspective is filled to overflowing by pseudo-objective journalists. Sean Hannity sometimes breaks news on his show, and he is in that sense clearly a journalist. But, being a conservative, he is forced by his opposition pseudo-objective journalists to be open about his conservatism, and is not to be considered “a journalist” by their self-aggrandizing standards.
It is their “standards” of “journalism” which have to be overturned. Only when journalism is actually open to conservatives can the opinions in the Sullivan decision be representative of reality.
Ouch.I would shut down the media until standards could be set. No apologies. Ever.
The question is whether it is possible to set standards. Objectivity is unnatural, because everyone has opinions and they think they are right. Otherwise they would be their opinions. You can try to be objective - and it’s OK to say you are trying - if in good faith you actually are. But to claim objectivity is pretty much the same thing, IMHO, as to claim wisdom - it is inherently arrogant to take that for granted.So my take is that claiming objectivity is the problem. And you don’t get off the hook merely by joining a mutual admiration society of people who will claim objectivity for you, provided you claim objectivity for them. IMHO accepting a label - “I’m a conservative, so you can take that into consideration when evaluating my viewpoint” - is an acceptance of responsibility for your perspective, and is actually the form humility takes. Joining the “No Labels” movement, or the “society of self-validating objective journalists” is arrogant.
The typical radio talk show host is openly conservative. There’s no significant niche for an openly “liberal” radio talk show for the simple reason that the niche for articulation of the “liberal” perspective is filled to overflowing by pseudo-objective journalists. Sean Hannity sometimes breaks news on his show, and he is in that sense clearly a journalist. But, being a conservative, he is forced by his opposition pseudo-objective journalists to be open about his conservatism, and is not to be considered “a journalist” by their self-aggrandizing standards.
It is their “standards” of “journalism” which have to be overturned. Only when journalism is actually open to conservatives can the opinions in the Sullivan decision be representative of reality.
The better approach is to challenge FaceBook and Twitter censorship on the grounds that they have in fact created an electronic public forum that must be open to other viewpoints, just as even privately owned and sidewalks and public squares must be open to all points of view under existing Supreme Court precedent.
Google's malpractice could be addressed through Federal Trade Commission and Federal Communications Commission complaints and rulemaking so as to bar political viewpoint discrimination. Federal legislation to that effect is also in order.
. . . and instantly forthcoming from the upcoming Congress
</sarcasm> Two of the conservatives on SCOTUS have direct experience of the extreme Democrat partisanship of pseudo-objective journalism. And none of the others are likely to have enjoyed the spectacle of the opposition to the Kavanaugh confirmation. The question, it seems to me, is how SCOTUS could craft a ruling which delegitimates claims of journalistic objectivity and any and every manifestation of government respect for such claims.
Claims of objectivity are inherently self-negating because belief in your own objectivity is the essence of subjectivity. And joining a mutual admiration society which will claim objectivity for you provided you claim objectivity for everyone else in the society is simply a device for indirectly claiming objectivity for yourself.
On the whole, it is easier — much easier — to get federal legislation passed and regulations rewritten than it is to contrive for the Supreme Court to create new constitutional law.
#. You missed the point of a great article, namely that a new, younger generation of conservatives (I don’t care if they are Republicans or not), must be willing to study Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” and other Marxist street fighting/smearing manuals which reveal their thinking, strategies and tactics.
My wife wonders why I read the far-left Washington Post, and I gave her the same answer I gave Reed Irvine of Accuracy in Media (after a group of us, led by Irvine, founded it).
You read the NY Times, Wash. Post, The Nation, Mother Jones International Socialist, Peoples Weekly Word, Workers World, anything by the Antifa groups, BLM, and pro-illegal immigration groups, Netroots organization, the Socialist Scholars Conferences and similar Marxist national organizations INCLUDING the Democratic Socialists of America, to find out what they are focusing on, what they are saying about a subject/person/policy, who is organizing around it, who is funding them, and what their psychological/street warfare plans are.
For instance, the December 2018 issue of “ Mother Jones”, an old SDS-related Marxist publication, had the front page cover story title “The Most Important Election of Our Lives”, about the one just past (by David Corn, the Steele Dossiergate figure and longtime Marxist writer for the Marxist “The Nation”.
Subtitle was “The midterms will determine whether Donald Trump’s two-year assault on democratic norms will be repudiated - or validated. No. Pressure”.
Other articles/authors and themes worth reading included:
* Better Dead Than Red”, Max Boot, Interviewed by David Corn, “We need to destroy the Republican Party”.
* “The Senator From Sandy Hook”, Chris Murphy things gun control is a winning issue”, Kara Voght.
* “Grab’Em by the Ballots”, Kara Voght and Davd Gilson, “A new women’s wave”.
* “Unlock the Vote”, Ari Berman, “An unlikely coalition may restore the voting rights to 1.4 million Floridians” (the next major leftist plan after ballot stuffing and post-election discovers of more ballots.
* “So Long, Haters”, Kevin Drum, “How Democrats can stop worrying about white fragility and win”.
“International Socialist Review”, Issue 109, Summer 2018, cover featured articles:
* “The future of class struggle in the US”, Lee Sustar, one of the ISO (International Socialists) top thinkers
* “Interview with Kim Moody”, The changing working class”.
AND: “Illiberal Hegemony: The Trump administration’s strategy for US imperialism”, Ashly Smith. This insane summary of the Left’s view of Trump is the same, even in wording, of what the so-called “mainstream media” (Print, Radio/TV, Cable TV) of ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and MSNBC have been saying in unison.
It shows that the Marxist “socialists” think the same as the so-called “liberals” who like to call themselves “Progressives, Democratic Socialists, Democrats, and Not Deplorables”.
I’ve been studying the Old Left/New Left since the 60’s and spent some time with them. They are divided into at least 4 groupings, either new amalgamations being created all the time.
* Communists/Marxists, Socialists (leaving out the old toothless Socialist Party), “progressives (like the Communist Party USA had in the 1948 presidential campaign on the “Progressive Party” ticket. The range is from Stalinist (Workers World Party and splinter factions); Trotskyites (what is left of the Socialist Workers Party and splinter factions); Maoists - The Revolutionary Communist Party and fronts, “m The Call”, “Vietnam Veterans Against the War in Vietnam”, some of “Veterans for Peace”, and a few labor fronts, and whatever is left of the old Progressive Labor Party.
Also, the widespread relatively low-keyed but very active Democratic Socialists of America (the key Left party that organized for Obama); the growing Marxist “Working Families Party”; and local “Progressive” organizations.
If you want to see just how much of an inroad some of these groups have made into national US politics, go to www.keywiki.org and look up a congressman/woman’s name to see who they have been affiliated with (CPUSA, SWP, DSA, WFP, the disbanded Communist Workers Party - Chu and Meng),etc).
The list will include new Democrats like Sinema and those from California, Minnesota, etc.
These are America’s enemies posing as its’ saviors. That is what Sheriff Clarke was referring too as the leftist opposition we must oppose, and you can only oppose it by being better organized, funded (which is never going to happen, not with Soros, Steyer, the McArthur, Tides, Rockefeller and other leftist Foundations being the piggy banks of the Left); and trained (in political warfare strategy & tactics schools like the left has had since the 1960’s, and the old CPUSA schools of the 30’s thru 60’s).
We need “street pounders”, just like the Left has in the thousands, to go door-to-door with opinion polls, handing out fliers on subjects and for candidates, speaking in debates, esp. at townhalls and on the campuses, etc.
Yes, it takes sacrifices to do it and it is best done by the young before they get a career “job and a family to support”.
I’ve helped out as best I could doing this, once as one of about 12 regional members of a pro-Vietnam group (we all went to Vietnam/Cambodia to see what was going on there, plus we had at least two combat veterans (Tet) amongst us).
It was lonely out there with no money, no physical support group to speak of, and outnumbered by the Left and the libs about 50-500 at any time/speech, but we fought like hell and appeared in many news articles, on local, regional and national TV and the nascent VFH tv channels, among other forums.
This is what we have to do today, but to be better organized, trained, financed, and dedicated to the cause of keeping our freedoms which are under a massive “United Left” attack in every sector and facet of our lives.
If we don’t do it, America is doomed to become the country of the Mini-Authoritarians/Marxists like Schumer, Pelosi, Durbin, Waters, Cummings, Nadler, Ocasio-Cortex, Kamala Harris, and the Marxist States’ Attorney Generals who are now being supported by Soros in one of his projects.
The “law”, as we know it, at least on the state level, is becoming more of a Democrat Party ideological weapon than a tool for “blind justice”.
This homey ain’t playing that game according to those rules. I’ll choose my legal rules and tactics to live by and with, the Left be demanded.
I’m long in the tooth but I still can bite with my few remaining real teeth and those new choppers I got.
My motto is: “Bite them in the ass and never let go”!
Bon appetite!
Thanks for knowing .......
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.