Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Special Report: The Plan To Silence Conservatives
News By Us ^ | (01/15/07) | Cliff Kincaid

Posted on 01/15/2007 9:46:10 AM PST by rface

Memphis, Tennessee: Media reform sounds like a good cause. But the gathering here of more than 2,000 activists turned out to be an effort to push the Democratic Party further to the left and get more "progressive" voices in the media, while proposing to use the power of the federal government to silence conservatives.

In short, triumphant liberals now want to consolidate and expand their power.

Several speakers, including Senator Bernie Sanders and Rep. Maurice Hinchey, declared that they think Congress should use a new federal “fairness doctrine” to target conservative speech on television and radio.

But while conservatives are not ashamed to be conservatives, because of the popularity of their ideas about freedom, a strong military, economic growth and traditional values, the liberals at this conference wanted desperately to avoid the use of the term “liberal,” apparently because of its association with failed domestic, social and foreign policies. They described themselves and their causes as “progressive.”

If this conference has an impact, and the participants were called upon to put pressure on the media and Congress, we should expect increasing references to the term “progressive” in coverage of controversial liberal initiatives, including the proposed agenda for “media reform.” The only question is when congressional liberals get enough nerve to aggressively push this authoritarian attempt to muzzle their political opponents.

The Soros Connection

Sponsored by Free Press, a Massachusetts-based organization that is generously subsidized by pro-Democratic Party billionaire George Soros, the “National Conference on Media Reform” featured Bill Moyers and Jesse Jackson and Hollywood celebrities such as Danny Glover, Geena Davis and Jane Fonda.

Soros, portrayed by the major media and “progressives” funded by him as a humanitarian and philanthropist, has made billions of dollars through international financial manipulations conducted through secretive off-shore hedge funds. He was convicted of insider trading in France, one of many countries to have borne the brunt of his global financial schemes.

He spent over $26 million in the 2004 presidential campaign trying to defeat Bush and also contributed to groups that have brought Democrats to power in Congress.

His “media reform” agenda is being pursued primarily though Free Press, which has received at least $400,000 over the last several years from the Soros-funded Open Society Institute. But Soros has also poured money into groups like the Center for Investigative Reporting, the Fund for Investigative Journalism, and Investigative Reporters & Editors.

One obvious purpose of such grants is to steer the media away from investigating Soros himself. However, during one media appearance, on the CBS 60 Minutes program, Soros acknowledged that as a 14-year-old Jewish boy in Hungary, his identity was protected and that he actually assisted in confiscating property from Jews as they were being shipped off to death camps. As an adult, he shuns pro-Israel causes and believes in accommodating the Iranian regime.

The Free Press co-founder, John Nichols, has edited such books as Against the Beast, a critique of the “American Empire,” and shares Soros’s opposition to a U.S. foreign policy that targets emerging threats in the Arab/Muslim world.

In addition to the creation of what he calls a “New World Order” under U.N. auspices, Soros’s causes include abortion, drug legalization, and special rights for immigrants, homosexuals, felons, and prostitutes. An atheist, Soros is promoting the complete breakdown of traditional values and morality in America.

In the official conference program, however, there was no mention of the Soros role in funding Free Press. However, thanks were extended to the Nathan Cummings Foundation, the Overbrook Foundation, Quixote Foundation, Glaser Progress Foundation, and the Haas Trusts.

“We are grateful also for the generosity and support of many other public charities, private foundations and individual donors,” the conference program said, carefully concealing their identities.

Publications and organizations given credit for promoting the event included The American Prospect magazine, The Washington Monthly, The Nation, and MoveOn.org

Reds Not Under Beds

The Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP), which opposes the Chinese communist government as too capitalist[[I learned something interesting!!]], was one of the official exhibitors. Also on hand, displaying banners calling for the impeachment of President Bush, was the so-called 9/11 truth movement, which holds that Muslims were blamed for the 2001 terrorist attacks on New York City and the Pentagon when U.S. officials actually carried them out.

Other exhibitors included the Newspaper Guild, Consumers Union, Mother Jones magazine, Pacifica Radio, and Amy Goodman, host of “Democracy Now.”

While the Democratic Party and its political leaders were embraced by most of the participants and usually met with standing ovations, the official conference bookstore didn’t offer any books by or about Hillary Clinton. I was told by the bookstore owner that that she was perceived as too conservative by this crowd and that those books wouldn’t sell.

On the other hand, books by Senator Barack Obama and Al Gore were prominently featured. Books by Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Mikhail Gorbachev, former White House reporter Helen Thomas, and Webster Tarpley, a former associate of Lyndon LaRouche, were also available. Tarpley, an “expert” on how 9/11 was a U.S. plot, was a featured guest for two hours on Air America, the liberal radio network now in bankruptcy because of bad management and dismal ratings.

A special screening of the film “Reel Bad Arabs” was held, in order to argue that Arabs and Muslims deserve more favorable coverage from the media and Hollywood. The film is narrated by Jack Shaheen, who recently appeared on Al-Jazeera English making charges of anti-Arab media bias.

Very little was said during various panels about the Islamic terrorists who killed almost 3,000 Americans on 9/11 and are currently killing American soldiers and innocent civilians, most of them Muslims, in Iraq. Instead, Bush was blamed for the violence there.

Showing where conference participants stood on the matter of maintaining a U.S. military to defend America against the global Jihad, one of the books on sale at the official conference bookstore was titled, 10 Excellent Reasons Not To Join The Military.

Former conservative David Brock, of another Soros-funded group, Media Matters, labeled the Bush foreign policy of liberating Arab lands as “criminally insane.” On the same panel with Brock, Norman Solomon of the Institute for Public Accuracy suggested that U.S. foreign policy was immoral and that the media were working hand-in-glove with the Bush Administration to prepare a military attack on Iran, just as they had done with Iraq.

Reaching new levels of hysteria, Rep. Maurice Hinchey said the survival of America was itself at stake because “neo-fascist” and “neo-con” talk-show hosts led by Rush Limbaugh had facilitated the “illegal” war in Iraq and were complicit in President Bush’s repeated violations of the Constitution, such as by detaining terrorists. He warned that the “right-wing oriented media” were now preparing the way for Bush to wage war on Iran and Syria.

His answer, a bill titled the “Media Ownership Reform Act,” would reinstate the federal fairness doctrine and authorize bureaucrats at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to monitor and alter the content of radio and television programs.

Hinchey, chairman of the “Future of American Media Caucus” in the House, was introduced as the new chairman of a subcommittee with jurisdiction over the FCC. For Hinchey and the vast majority at the conference, there was a pressing need for more, not less, regulation of what they call the “corporate media.”

With passage of his bill, Hinchey said that “progressives” would be able to demand and get “equal access” to programs hosted by conservatives and rebut the “baloney” of people like Limbaugh. “All of that stuff will end,” Hinchey said about the influence of conservative media. By name, he also denounced Fox News and Sinclair Broadcasting.

Hinchey praised Democratic FCC commissioners Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein, who appeared at the conference, and indicated that with the election of a Democratic President in 2008, the FCC could be openly used to frustrate the growing popularity of conservative ideas, perhaps under the cover of resisting “media consolidation.”

Later, Hinchey was seen preparing for an appearance on Air America, which had a make-shift studio set up on the premises of the conference.

Protecting Public Broadcasting

Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen, who was just elected to Congress from Memphis, assured the audience that Democrats would protect and possibly increase funding for public broadcasting, which he noted is on the “left hand side of the dial” but has been having problems generating listeners and viewers.

One of the cries of some participants was to “put the public back into public broadcasting,” apparently a plea for even more “public” money from Congress.

Public broadcasting’s Bill Moyers, who spoke to the conference about the “ravenous” nature of “Big Media,” was obviously not referring to public TV or radio’s appetite for U.S. tax dollars, even though AIM has documented how these entities have received over $8 billion from the taxpayers since their creation. The far-left Pacifica Radio, another taxpayer-supported network, had a heavy presence at the “media reform” conference.

The appearance of Moyers, who served as White House press secretary in the Lyndon Johnson Administration before he worked for CBS News and public TV, was curious, at least at this conference in Memphis, because he had been aware at the time of his service to LBJ of secret surveillance of Martin Luther King, Jr.

King was assassinated in Memphis in 1968 and his birthday celebration on January 15 was mentioned by several speakers, most notably Jesse Jackson, a former King aide.

One 9/11 truth movement booth featured a poster claiming that King was murdered as the result of a U.S. Government conspiracy, even though James Earl Ray was convicted of the crime and sentenced to prison. Ray died in 1998.

Continuing this fascination with conspiracy theories about the deaths of prominent people, a book for sale at the conference bookstore, titled, American Assassination: The Strange Death of Paul Wellstone, claims that the airplane accident that took the life of the liberal Senator from Minnesota was actually deliberate murder. The book claims Wellstone’s “progressive” stands made him a target.

Senator Sanders, the only open socialist in Congress, accused the media of covering up King’s opposition to the Vietnam War. He did not mention that King took that approach because he had come under the influence of identified top members of the Soviet-funded Communist Party USA, who had become his close advisers. This is one of the reasons why the Johnson Administration—and then Attorney General Bobby Kennedy—approved FBI surveillance of him.

King’s radical turn to the left, which detracts from the good work that he did, should not be a taboo topic but it is one of many issues that “progressives” want censored from the media. Another King controversy that is off the table for “progressives” is his well-documented plagiarism.

Socialist Urges One-Sided Coverage

Sanders, who votes with the Democrats in the Senate despite his official status as an independent socialist, claimed conservatives were 99 percent in control of talk radio and that it was time “to open the question of the fairness doctrine again” to restrict what they say and how they say it.

He faulted the media for covering two sides of the global warming debate “when there is no debate in the scientific community.”

Clearly, therefore, the purpose in proposing a “fairness doctrine” is not to offer different points of view but to silence viewpoints liberals regard as unsound or unpopular.

Sanders indicated he would introduce a Senate version of the Hinchey bill.

A similar bill, the “Fairness in Broadcasting Act,” was sponsored by Democratic Rep. Louise Slaughter, the chairman of the House Rules Committee that has enormous influence over what bills are brought up for votes.

The Rev. Jesse Jackson, the object of fawning media coverage despite the scandal of producing a child from an extramarital affair, argued before the conference for “the right to be heard” and insisted that the major media were not telling the real story of pain and suffering in George Bush’s America.

Despite claiming to be for open debate and discussion, he recently urged consumers to boycott DVDs of the Seinfeld comedy show because the actor who plays one of the characters had been caught making racist comments in a night club. Jackson had the actor, Michael Richards, on his radio show to apologize for the remarks.

Suggesting the real agenda behind “media reform,” Jackson said that the key to Democrats winning “is more access to the media.”

That may depend, however, on how the “progressives” market their unpopular ideas, especially when they actively begin their congressional campaign of suppressing viewpoints in opposition to their own.

Making himself out to be a victim, Jackson said that he should be called by the media for comments on foreign policy issues like Iraq, rather than just racial controversies like the Duke rape case.

Clearly staking out a position on the far-left fringe, Jackson accused Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of taking “baby steps” legislatively when she should be exercising “bold leadership.” On Iraq, he said, “you can’t be against the war and for the war budget.” Rather than just raise the minimum wage, he said Pelosi should introduce a massive new jobs program. He concluded his remarks by asking people to watch his TV program on the Word television network and to tune into his “Keep Hope Alive” radio show on 50 stations.

Republicans as Thieves

At a panel moderated by Paul Waldman of Media Matters, Steve Freeman of the University of Pennsylvania argued that the 2004 presidential election was stolen on behalf of George W. Bush. His associate, Jonathan Simon of the Election Defense Alliance, took to the microphone during the question-and-answer period to argue that the 2006 elections were rigged as well and that the Republicans are preparing to steal the 2008 presidential election. Waldman, who claimed to be dedicated to factual accuracy in covering current events, didn’t dispute any of this. In fact, he stated his belief that Al Gore had won the 2000 election and that the media knew it.

Another panelist, Cornell Belcher, the official pollster for the Democratic National Committee, seemed to be taken aback by the conspiracy theories and pointed out that the Democrats had, in fact, made substantial gains on the federal and state levels in 2006.

However, during a conversation over breakfast, Freeman reiterated his belief that the Democrats had won far more seats than they were given credit for in 2006. Asked why they wouldn’t protest the stealing of votes, he said, “Democrats are in on it.” He described Republicans and Democrats as the A team and B team, and that when one team makes too many mistakes, the other goes in for relief. Asked for his opinion on the 9/11 truth movement, he said, “Nothing would surprise me.”

A panel on “Media, War, and Impeachment” featured Jeff Cohen, founder of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, whose December 2006 magazine features Hugo Chavez of Venezuela on the cover as he addressed the U.N. holding up a copy of Noam Chomsky’s book on the dangers of American “hegemony.” That was the appearance in which Chavez labeled Bush the devil.

The article inside the magazine by FAIR’s Steve Rendall accused the American media of unfairly criticizing Chavez for “challenging the U.S.,” not because he makes absurd charges, chums around with people such as the anti-Semitic and anti-American Iranian president, and threatens press freedom in his own country. Promising “Socialism or death,” Chavez was just sworn in for another presidential term.

On Saturday night, as participants prepared for an event featuring Jane Fonda, they were given copies of a four-page flier advertising Bob Avakian’s book, From Ike to Mao and Beyond. The flier said that Avakian, the leader of the Revolutionary Communist Party, has been described by Cornell West of Princeton University as “a long distance runner in the freedom struggle against imperialism, racism and capitalism.”

Scott Lee, an RCP “helper” passing out the fliers, told me that he thought the conference was worthwhile but too heavily titled in favor of the Democratic Party. He said he wasn’t aware that global capitalist George Soros had funded the left-wing conference organizers but that the money had gone for a good cause.

This is what passes for “progressivism” these days. It is a clear danger to freedom at home and abroad.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ac; censorship; fairnessdoctrine; firstamendment; freespeech; govwatch; leftists; liberalism; persecution; progressives; senatebill1; shutupandletusrule; silenceamerica; soros; talkradio
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-60 next last

1 posted on 01/15/2007 9:46:13 AM PST by rface
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rface
They described themselves and their causes as “progressive.”

A key term in Marxism-Leninism..

2 posted on 01/15/2007 9:49:24 AM PST by cardinal4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rface
This Sanders guy is clearly a Stalinist.

Even the Russians have repudiated that system ~ so how is it the people in Vermont elected him?

Should they continue to be a state?

3 posted on 01/15/2007 9:49:28 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rface
Funny, Wellstone's plane crash was a US-spook hit job, and Ron Brown's plane crash was just an isolated incident.....


Holy Lead Hailstorm, Batman...does that mean the libbies are HYPOCRITES?!?!?"
4 posted on 01/15/2007 9:54:24 AM PST by Clifford The Big Red Dog (Woof!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cardinal4
I like what Rush says about that....."Progressives? If anything you people are RE-gressive! Folks, when they won't admit what they are even in San Francisco, then we got 'em on the run!"
5 posted on 01/15/2007 9:56:48 AM PST by Clifford The Big Red Dog (Woof!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cardinal4

"the liberals at this conference wanted desperately to avoid the use of the term “liberal,” apparently because of its association with failed domestic, social and foreign policies. They described themselves and their causes as “progressive.”"

If not destroyed, I believe all diseases mutate.


6 posted on 01/15/2007 9:58:37 AM PST by Finop (The Liberal says... "It's not fair that you work harder than I do")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rface

bump....


7 posted on 01/15/2007 10:01:22 AM PST by God luvs America (When the silent majority speaks the earth trembles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rface; TheRightGuy
we should expect increasing references to the term “progressive”

Just as we succeeded in shifting the connotationof "liberal" from positive to negative, we may need to shiift the meaning of "progress" and "progressive".

In a local example, CBS-WBBM AT ISSUE did a hard hitting investigative feature on the progress of the O'Hare Airport expansion.

The hard hitting questions were such as How does it feel to stand on new cement?

The hard hitting analysis was that the cost overruns are the fault of the opponents of government expansion.

The liberal spokeswoman essentially said that they had hoped to take the private homes, cemetery and small businesses at below market prices. But the government spokeswoman seemed proud that she was still able to acquire property at a compromise price cheaper than the full market price.

This type of everyday acceptance of progress is what is hurting us as much as the national rhetoric.

8 posted on 01/15/2007 10:01:49 AM PST by spintreebob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cardinal4

Gee seem all there "progressive" ideas are really "aggressive-oppressive" ideas ... that nothing new for the left


9 posted on 01/15/2007 10:04:33 AM PST by tophat9000 (Al-Qaidacrats =A new political party combining the anti American left and the anti Semite right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rface
Fine.

Let them redefine themselves as "Progressives". It's much easier that way to make the direct connection with Communists - which they are anyway.

(McCarthy was right then, he'd be more right NOW)

10 posted on 01/15/2007 10:07:28 AM PST by Condor51 (The demoncRATs don't want another 'Vietnam' - they want another Dien Bien Phu.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rface

Bump for later read


11 posted on 01/15/2007 10:08:32 AM PST by c-b 1 (Reporting from behind enemy lines, in occupied AZTLAN.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rface

What jumped out at me was Jesse Jackson arguing for "the right to be heard". Where exactly is that outlined in the Constitution? AirHead America had a right to build its broadcast network and spout whatever they pleased. Trouble is, nobody listened. I guess their "right to be heard" comes with a corresponding power to force people to listen. What's most frightening is that they may well get their way.


12 posted on 01/15/2007 10:11:18 AM PST by Emmett McCarthy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tophat9000

Im reading a book about the KGB called the "Mitrohkin Archive". When I started reading it, I was struck by how many times I saw Stalin, Lenin, and all the other communist luminaries use the term..


13 posted on 01/15/2007 10:14:32 AM PST by cardinal4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: rface

These people are quite clearly insane. Very, very dangerous as well, especially if the democrats manage to place Obama or Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office and maintain majority status in the US Congress. Obama is a danger to us all as he is not experienced in the ways of Washington and already is way to the left of even Clinton. Plus, I'm not too sure that he is not an islamic Trojan Horse.

OTOH, in my view Clinton is a clear and present danger to the USA in terms of Consitutional freedoms, but worse in leaving the muslim problem to "law enforcement". I can easily envision her rescinding rights or declaring martial law following a terror attack within the US, confiscating the weapons citizens will need to defend themselves. She is frightening.


14 posted on 01/15/2007 10:16:25 AM PST by astounded (Islam - a murderous cult masquerading as a religion...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cardinal4

Progressive is a key term in the history of TR. Do not hand any more words over to the opposition. They have no exclusive right to any words.


15 posted on 01/15/2007 10:16:55 AM PST by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: billhilly; proud_yank; SJackson; mariabush; Diana in Wisconsin

A good read, thought you all would like it.


16 posted on 01/15/2007 10:17:54 AM PST by girlangler (Fish Fear Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rface

Here we go....America is being ruled by the socialist dictators. Maybe we will need to protest this kind of thing.


17 posted on 01/15/2007 10:18:25 AM PST by dforest (Liberals love crisis, create crisis and then dwell on them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rface

Bush had better veto that if it gets to his desk.


18 posted on 01/15/2007 10:19:13 AM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rface

The first of their means to silence conservatives was the fining of the Swiftbooat Vets and POWs for Truth. $299K for exercising free speech rights.


19 posted on 01/15/2007 10:22:03 AM PST by BuffaloJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rface

Leftists are essentially fascists and will use whatever means they can to eliminate the opposition.


20 posted on 01/15/2007 10:22:39 AM PST by Leftism is Mentally Deranged (liberalism = brain cell deficiency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-60 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson