Posted on 10/31/2015 11:04:24 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross
Prior to February 19, 2009, CNBC was an obscure niche network watched mainly inside Merrill Lynch offices ...
At the same point, in February 2009, the term tea party was only a vague memory out of middle school history - with no particular relevance to politics today - with the exception of a few mentions by Ron Paul that never resonated widely.
Meanwhile, crony capitalism (or crony socialism or cronyism if you prefer) was a problem, but it ... was kind of practiced in the dark and certainly not celebrated openly.
That all started to change shortly after 9 am EST that day, and it's no coincidence. These dynamics are connected dominos in a media/political continuum. So how did this all happen?
Enter a dude named Rick Santelli. The then obscure CNBC commentator and Chicago Mercantile floor trader had a small following for his morning rants, primarily among traders and investors who shared his libertarian small government bent - who also happened to watch Squawk Box. Small universe.
But on Thursday the 19th, with the Obama administration promoting a plan to force mortgage payers to bail out deadbeat mortgage clients, Santelli just went off from his post at the Merc. His 4:53 second soliloquy - carried live on Squawk Box - was met with raucous cheering from other traders on the floor. Santelli's sarcastic ire was aimed at a government that was too big, too powerful and too corrupt - and actively picking winners and losers. (snip)
... the money line was an off the cuff threat to "hold a Chicago Tea Party on Lake Michigan."(snip)
That audio was then picked up by those connected to the Rush Limbaugh Show ...
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Thanks for posting that....the FREEP thread really does kind of validate that this was an explosive moment, after which nothing was ever the same again.
you are of course alone on this thread, alone on FR for the most part. Your second sentence was so foolish I stopped reading, and will not read any more of that drivel. You have some odd bur in your saddle that is causing you to miss all the major points in an attempt to discredit a widely applauded piece and to miss an unmistakable trend.
And what tinder. OBAMA DUH DUH DUH. Can’t believe you asked that. Well, yes I can.
there’s a bitter one on this thread that thinks you and I are wong.
yeah, that Barry Farber and his 7 listeners really started an amazing movement..and just think, it only took 27 years to kick in.
....just brilliant......
FReepers pound hell out of the media (authors). That’s what we do.
Thin skinned “authors” who come on Free Republic to pound hell out of their FReeper critics usually don’t last long.
Well I’m used to that!
I’ve stated my case.
I think your article is a bit like saying that the shooting of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria started WWI. Well, no it didn’t. It lit the fuse but a whole lot of things transpired before that event.
I look at the larger picture, not one event.
Yes, I mailed a few tea bags myself. What is your point?
Masterful article! Very proud for you, here! Awesome thinking and research, Ed!
Cruz advanced the ball rhetorically, in the CNBC debate, though well outside of the debate loop of those actually targeted by the panelists.
I have to say it is Trump who leads by real action. It was Trump who got the crucible in the FOX debate. It was only Trump whom FOX cornered to extract guaranteed support of the Republican nominee. He acted instantly delivering an insult to Kelly and boycotted FOX, all in smash mouth style.
It brought Ailes to a conference and forthwith Trump now appears only on Hannity, or O’Reilly. No more Brett Baier, and no more Me again Kelly. No more swill about FOX being “great”.
Mainly, it was Trump who lit a stick of negative dynamite under both FOX and CNBC, in public opinion, exposing their price gouging for the debate ads, bumped time to a quarter of million dollars per 30 SECONDS!
Trump hits hard!
Never mind that it was Trump who master minded the CNBC debate time limit, down to two hours.
Now comes CNBC, in Kelly style, after not just Trump, but Rubio, Bush, and Carson, while landing a stooge like Kasich to take down Trump and Carson, as he was anxious to do.
Cruz capitalized on the bonanza. He watched Trump’s polls sky rocket for leading the way on genuine push back of Marxist media.
Cruz, though relatively untouched by panelists in these debates himself, is quick to observe and he picked up the winning ticket and capitalized on it.
The *action* has been exhibited by the leader of the pack—
Donald Trump.
Trump But, Trump pulled off the action.
Nice piece.
It is a deformed form of capitalism. It makes use of capital and private ownership.
It isn’t free enterprise, but it is a kind of capitalism.
It is closer to the economic program of fascism, which, in critical ways, lives up to its name, “national socialism.”
I don’t believe it’s my skin that’s thin.......
Hilarious that it happened in Chicago.
Whatever. But you’ll do well not to continue badmouthing our posters or trashing our leading candidates. Continue as you have been and you’ll find yourself sitting out for the duration. My skin and your welcome are wearing thinner with every insult.
Thanks for your kind words...but hey, only Mark Levin gets away with calling me Ed! LOL
Yes, Trump deserves a lot of credit for the open push back, and yes, when Cruz defended everyone, and not just himself, that was another dynamic altogether. I tried to make it clear that in the long sense, Trump certainly deserved the credit, but in the short term, the specific game changer moment of that debate was Cruz's eidedic memory recitation of all the dumb questions to everybody.
Yes, I mailed a few tea bags myself. What is your point?
That we have been outraged by taxes for a very long time. Every candidate runs on lower taxes yet we have 73,000 pages of tax law.
The tax return on a post card is very old indeed.
You just keep getting nastier. Does it relieve your pain?
Even Maria Bartiromo is an obvious liberal but she is being heralded as some sort of conservative on FOX now, citing the next Fox debate she will be moderating will not be like CNBC and I have no reason to believe it will be any different at all.
Good point,... I mean ... Chicago?
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.