Posted on 03/04/2009 11:10:47 AM PST by Delacon
Over the past few weeks, America has seen President Obama, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel and former Campaign Manager David Plouffe channel much of their focus on what they see as a major problem facing America. You might think the object of this affection is the spiraling economy, which has led them to declare war on moderately successful investors and small business owners while they refuse to acknowledge a war on terror. That is certainly a focus. Secondarily, you might think it is the housing crisis, where they are attempting to cram down irresponsible mortgages so that responsible homeowners pay for the irresponsible mistakes of their neighbors. Definitely a focus. You may also think their focus is on creating a national health care plan, complete with community servicing centers and government run treatment plans paid for by a select few and at the expense of charitable contributions. Nobody argues that is a focus.
No, with these important issues being debated on Capitol Hill, President Obama, Rahm Emmanuel and David Plouffe have channeled their focus towards Rush Limbaugh. Arguably the most successful radio host in American history, Rush has historically drawn the ire of the left, for building an army of conservatives poised to battle bad ideas, and offer better solutions to the nations challenges. But this time, it is a bit more calculated, a bit more centralized and a bit more vitriolic. So the question has to be asked, why? Why would the President risk taking his eye off the ball to clash with one radio host?
Why would Congressman Grayson (D-FL) call Limbaugh a sorry excuse for a human being, in these times when President Obama is calling for bipartisan solutions and a change in Washington tone? And most importantly, why would David Plouffe, one of the Presidents closest confidents over the past year, devote a full editorial only to the subject of Rush Limbaugh? He chose to use the platform afforded to him by the Washington Post, not to sell America on Obamas economic, housing or banking solutions, nor to sell America on the largest spending increases ever seen in a budget in Washington. He chose this platform to attack a syndicated radio host who disagrees with the Presidents ideas.
You may remember that Obama had problems with disagreeable radio hosts in the past. During his presidential campaign, Obamas team led by David Plouffe, battled against WGN Radio in Chicago, for having one single conservative guest on the Mitt Rosenberg show. WGN, known mostly for favorable coverage of the then-Senator, was awash in vitriolic hate mail and phone calls from Obama supporters urged into action by the campaign, because Mr. Rosenberg wanted to discuss Obamas connection to William Ayers, a popular topic at the time.
But again, the question remains, why? There is only one simple answer. By making Rush Limbaugh the target of their attacks, they have the ability to rally their political capital around the Fairness Doctrine, or elements of it. It can be the only reason why this battle against free speech has been waged. The timing is impeccable. It was only two weeks ago that Rush Limbaugh wrote an editorial for the Wall Street Journal asking the President to keep the airwaves free. Only days later, the White House was pulling together their official government muscle to silence him.
As has been documented here before, there is little question that one of the top priorities of Washingtons liberal leaders is to muzzle conservative and religious broadcasting. It is also well known that American public opinion tends to favor the first amendment and free speech, and oppose measures to limit it. The only opportunistic time for such a measure would be in the early days of a popular presidency. And the only way to make it palatable to the American people is to vilify a recognizable name of the opposition. Much like Senator Joe McCarthy needed Edward R. Murrow; David Plouffe needs Rush Limbaugh.
Today, the Obama Administration announced their choice of Julius Genachowski to head the FCC, on the same day David Plouffes editorial ran in the Washington Post calling Rush Limbaugh the Minority Leader. James Carville, Rahm Emmanuel and Paul Begala charted this course in their daily phone calls together, where the three plan the strategic communications of the liberal message. It was capped off yesterday by White House spokesmen ending his official White House briefing with a jab at Limbaugh, I was a little surprised at the speed in which Mr. Steele, the head of the RNC, apologized to the head of the Republican Party, Gibbs quipped with a grin, before striding out of the press room, according to Politico.
The economy is not the focus of the Presidents communications team. Neither is the housing crisis, the banking crisis, the auto bailout or any of their solutions to those problems. Why? Because their solutions are not popular. And the more radio hosts that tell America about these bad ideas, the worse off they are. So their focus is on the real problem, free speech. The sooner they nip it in the bud, the better. And the only way to do that is through the Fairness Doctrine.
So while the Presidents top aides will continue to get America to focus on Rush Limbaugh. They will try and split conservatives, as some fell trap to earlier this week. They will divide America into pro-Limbaugh and anti-Limbaugh groups, and then they will offer the only reasonable solution they have to the anti-Limbaugh group, the Fairness Doctrine. And what better target than the man credited as the first man to proclaim himself liberated from the East Germany of liberal media domination.
Conservatives cannot lose their focus. They must remain vigilant against bad economic decisions, bad banking decisions, bad auto bailout decisions, bad housing decisions and above all bad Constitutional decisions. The Constitution gives Rush Limbaugh the right, even the duty, to inform the American public of the Obama Administrations record. And when they try and take that right away, conservatives must stand against it.
As Rush himself asks; will the arena of ideas remain a free market. From now on when Obamas top advisors mention Rush, conservatives should answer Fairness Doctrine. That way, the conversation will be about what matters, free speech and accountability.
Whereas, the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution clearly states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances";
Whereas, members of Congress are recently on record saying they want to re-impose the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" on U.S. broadcasters, or else accomplish the same goal of censoring talk radio by other means, and thereby establish government and quasi-government watchdogs as the arbiters of "fairness" rather than the free and open marketplace of ideas;
Whereas, the U.S. experimented with the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" for 38 years - from 1949 through 1987 - during which time it was repeatedly used by presidents and other political leaders to muzzle dissent and criticism;
Whereas, the abandonment of the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" in 1987, thanks to President Ronald Reagan, resulted in an unprecedented explosion of new and diverse voices and political speech - starting with Rush Limbaugh - that revitalized the AM radio band and provided Americans with a multitude of alternative viewpoints;
Whereas, talk radio is one of the most crucial components of the free press in America, and is single-handedly responsible for informing tens of millions of Americans about what their government leaders are doing;
Whereas, it is a wholly un-American idea that government should be the watchdog of the press and a policeman of speech, as opposed to the uniquely American ideal of a free people and a free press being the vigilant watchdogs of government;
Whereas, the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" - either under that name, or using a new name and even more devious methods - represents a frontal assault on the First Amendment, and its re-imposition would constitute nothing more nor less than the crippling of America's robust, unfettered, free press:
SIGN THE PETITION at http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=87882
ping
I am waiting for Obama to create a WH position called Executive Director of Press.
Obama will soon be creating a Ministry of Truth with its bureaucrats sending things like his birth status, where the stimulus money is really being spent etc. down “memory holes”. Rahm Emmanuel is even starting to look like Joseph Goebbels.
Calling Rahm that would ignite a firestorm. I love it!
In my research, I ran across this old English law. Look for the Messiah to try and reprise it.
Scandalum magnatum
At one time, the honour of peers was especially protected by the law; while defamation of a commoner was known as libel or slander, the defamation of a peer (or of a Great Officer of State) was called scandalum magnatum. The Statute of Westminster of 1275 provided that “from henceforth none be so hardy to tell or publish any false News or Tales, whereby discord, or occasion of discord or slander may grow between the King and his People, or the Great Men of the Realm.”[18] Scandalum magnatum was punishable under the aforesaid statute as well as under further laws passed during the reign of Richard II.[19] Scandalum magnatum was both a tort and a criminal offence. The prohibition on scandalum magnatum was first enforced by the King’s Council. During the reign of Henry VII, the Star Chamber, a court formerly reserved for trial of serious offences such as rioting, assumed jurisdiction over scandalum magnatum, as well as libel and slander, cases. The court, which sat without a jury and in secret, was often used as a political weapon and a device of royal tyranny, leading to its abolition in 1641; its functions in respect of defamation cases passed to the common law courts. Already, however, the number of cases had dwindled as the laws of libel, slander and contempt of court developed in its place. By the end of the eighteenth century, scandalum magnatum was obsolete. The prohibition on it was finally repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act 1887.[20]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privilege_of_Peerage
Article 1 Section 9
No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States
I did post that tongue-in-cheek, but you will have to admit the Political Class would give their collective eye teeth to have such a law.
BTW, just starting on this volume which IIRC you have finished. That’s where I ran across mention of that law. The book looks good so far.
The Creation of the Media
By Paul Starr
Yes, I did read that. Quite interesting.
‘Today’ Blames Limbaugh for GOP ‘All-Time Low’
NewsBusters | March 4, 2009 | Goeffrey Dickens
Posted on 03/04/2009 10:04:32 AM PST by Zakeet
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2199112/posts
David Plouffe: Minority Leader Limbaugh
(Obama’s Campaign Manager Weighs In - Barf Alert)
The Washington Post | March 4, 2009 | David Plouffe, Obama 2008 Campaign Chairman
Posted on 03/04/2009 11:53:16 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2199233/posts
Boehner: White House trying to distract with Limbaugh
The Hill
Posted on 03/04/2009 12:24:01 PM PST by Sub-Driver
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2199248/posts
[GOP Minority Leader] Boehner: White House trying to distract with Limbaugh
The Hill | March 4, 2009 | Molly K. Hooper
Posted on 03/04/2009 1:02:05 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2199282/posts
Inside the Dems’ anti-Rush plan
The Politico
Posted on 03/04/2009 3:18:37 AM PST by Sub-Driver
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2198816/posts
Gold Rush: Dems launch Operation Rushbo
Los Angeles Times | March 4, 2009 | Jonathan Martin
Posted on 03/04/2009 11:19:19 AM PST by presidio9
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2199202/posts
Democrats use Web to mock Rush Limbaugh, prominent Republicans
(The Libs are getting desperate)
Ney York Daily News | March 4, 2009 | Matt Marrone
Posted on 03/04/2009 12:18:11 PM PST by Zakeet
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2199244/posts
Rush Just Issued A Request To Debate Barry
Posted on 03/04/2009 9:27:50 AM PST by NoGrayZone
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2199083/posts
Rush challenges Obama to 1-on-1 debate
World Net Daily | 2-4-09 | Joe Kovacs
Posted on 03/04/2009 11:09:28 AM PST by springtime4hillary
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2199188/posts
Is Obama Scared to Debate Rush?
American Spectator | 03/04/09 | By Jeffrey Lord
Posted on 03/04/2009 1:07:45 PM PST by Behind Liberal Lines
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2199291/posts
Brilliant satire! FRegards ....
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.