Posted on 04/30/2016 4:05:01 PM PDT by monkapotamus
As a general principle no conversations have involved more varied opinions than discussions about the supposed “conservative” media and their seeming cognitive dissonance when it comes to issues surrounding Senator Ted Cruz.
Some people think these voices were just hoodwinked by Cruz and now their ego won’t permit them to admit the falsehood. Others think the pundits are too close to the candidate to see the inherent issues and contradictions; some propose their punditry is connected to financial motives. Perhaps it’s a combination therein, but many people just can’t figure it out...
All of those aforementioned voices know this fact. Limbaugh, Levin, Beck and Loesch are not stupid, they know the construct of how this all came down.
You see, it takes an intentional action to ignore the truth of how Senator Ted Cruz created, supported, and advocated for Trade Promotion Authority. An advocate cannot claim a position fundamentally disconnected from reality without intentionally desiring to do so.
That’s why these pundit voices cannot be just merely making mistakes, flawed thinking, or errors in judgment. It’s not intellectual dishonesty at play here, it’s just flat out ordinary dishonesty.
Lying.
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com ...
Exactly
Nowadays I’ll listen to Rush till I get aggravated at his purposeful negligence in discussing the obvious
Levin is dead to me after many years in which my high school son used to challenge me why did I listen to a man so hostile to our southern history?
Beck I never liked
Sean pleases me at times but he’s not the best informed and very PC on race
I listen to Laura Ingraham and Mike Gallagher....it’s a short list
95% of radio is mostly bought off by Cruz PACS and or they prefer him anyhow
Trump doesn’t need them much....their audiences are largely in revolt now...I bet Snerdley has to screen serious
I wondered where Dirty Teddy got his ministerial voice and rants from.I thought is was Crazy Beck. Turns out his father was or is a minister before he handed out commie stuff in the 60’s. Both beck and his father are true whackjobs.
So go figure who the role models for Dirty Teddy are and it starts to make sense as to why he is so suqirrely.
The great thing about this election cycle was exposing all the frauds in the media. I listen to Limbaugh now only to hear his BS. Once the election goes to Trump I am completely done. People I used to respect and listen to are forever dead to me. The list is long but distinguished..Rush, Levin, Will, Beck, Krauthammer, Kelly, Hume, the entire staff at NRO....
The only people left standing are Hannity, Ingraham, Buchanan, Dobbs, Cavuto...
I actually have learned to use Twitter if the fancy strikes
And it just did thanks
Dissenting opinions of Trump must NOT BE TOLERATED ON FREE REPUBLIC.
Silence them.
Your comment is limbecilic.
I still listen to everyone, just with difference values. People who used to be staunch conservatives are now unknowns. I still want as much info as possible. Know your enemy.
I’m very grateful for that link. I started reading with great interest. I have not enough attention span to read the entire thing but I am saving it to read over time. I appreciate macro descriptions of how we, a free, country, have become ruled by this oligarchy, and this seems a particularly intelligent one. Thanks.
Thank yo for posting! Excellent read on GLOBAL Trade Bills Supported by Cruz.
Tho title is geared towards talk radio host dishonesty in presenting facts, this is ONE OF THE BEST ARTICLES ON TPP, TPA, AND TAA and CRUZ SUPPORT of them even to the point of Wall Street Journal Editorials with Ryan.
I heartily recommend reading the whole article!
Thank you for posting! Excellent read on GLOBAL Trade Bills and Supported by Cruz and his manipulation of those bills.
Tho title is geared towards talk radio host dishonesty in presenting facts, this is ONE OF THE BEST ARTICLES ON TPP, TPA, AND TAA and CRUZ SUPPORT of them even to the point of Wall Street Journal Editorials with Ryan.
I heartily recommend reading the whole article!
Yeah, Snerdley is earning his keep for sure, probably getting earfuls 10x an hour.
I couldn’t listen to Levin even when I did like him. His voice, his rudeness, he seemed so off kilter, like he was always one flutter away from a cardiac event. I really enjoyed his book about statists. Loved the term. Started to use it. However, how is he not a statist himself now??
My mom’s friends were all into Beck back when he was sobbing at his chalkboards; I didn’t get into him but I was glad the older generation was learning about the evils of Soros et al. Watched a few times but he was so dramatic.
I should try and find when Laura is on the dial. Haven’t heard her in years. And I don’t know who Mike Gallagher even is!
I really want someone to connect the dots on the PACS and the radio companies. Especially I’d like Rush to be hit with it publicly if he’s being paid to fluff his listeners with BS. Not just us (intelligent, young, rofl) but think of all the older people he’s hoodwinked. I’m still burned by his dishonesty. I bought his tea and I don’t even drink tea. I paid for 24/7 for over a decade without really using it. I believed in him.
What is your point?
With all due respect, how about reading the article for some FACTS upon which to make a dissenting point if you have one?
Hope I am wrong, however, I suspect you won’t read the article because you don’t want to know the facts...
Actual Video ad links to WSJ editorials..
Truth hurts: Based on his actions, Ted Cruz is a globalist.
As a general principle no conversations have involved more varied opinions than discussions about the supposed “conservative” media and their seeming cognitive dissonance when it comes to issues surrounding Senator Ted Cruz.
Some people think these voices were just hoodwinked by Cruz and now their ego won’t permit them to admit the falsehood. Others think the pundits are too close to the candidate to see the inherent issues and contradictions; some propose their punditry is connected to financial motives. Perhaps it’s a combination therein, but many people just can’t figure it out.
rush-limbaughglenn-beck-rally-pic_550x310Mark Levinedana loesch 2
Whatever the reason, and personally I don’t care one way or the other, one of the realities is their collective influence is marginalized – common sense people, former viewers and listeners, just laugh at them now.
However, historically pundits don’t care so much about influence as they do about affluence. When the money lessens or dries up, that’s when the opinion shifts…. just watch – it’s a guaranteed truism.
Glenn Beck did not lose his Fox TV show because of bad ratings, he lost it because Fox News couldn’t find advertisers for his show. If sponsors were willing to pay for Beck’s 5:00pm News Hour, he’d still be on TV. It was the financial boycotting that drove him out.
The financing in/around political campaigns (consulting is a billion dollar industry) know the ideology of punditry can be retained so long as their affluence is maintained.
This has led to speculation that broadcast punditry is being funded in part by political campaigns. There is a considerable amount of evidence to support this, as FEC documents reveal tens of millions spent via LLC’s connected to media enterprises.
Salem Media Communications is the biggest recipient of the Super-PAC and campaign cash by far – look up who their voices are and you’ll see the most visible members of the #NeverTrump campaign. Salem is followed by iHeart (Limbaugh), Resurgent (Erickson) and many more. The chairman of Glenn Beck’s Mercury One Charity, David Barton, is also in charge of Keep The Promise, Ted Cruz’s Super-PAC – the same super-PAC that gave Carly Fiorina $500k last year.
The anticipated problem when political groups fund political punditry is obvious. Candidate Donald Trump being in the race merely shines a brighter spotlight upon the issue.
Trump has a massive impact on this issue because: a.) he doesn’t purchase their opinion or play the payola game. b.) he can generate his own publicity; and most importantly c.) Trump has a larger support base than the political groups that do play this scheme.
The problem for the punditry class is this dichotomy creates a disconnect between the pundit and the majority of their audience. The pundit is selling one thing, the audience is supporting something entirely different. Sound familiar?
However, all of that being said – we don’t believe these voices are entirely stupid. Some of them are close to stupid as a circumstance of their ideology, but they’re not stupid as a general disposition. This group is intellectually dishonest by intent, not mistake.
Continue reading and save this gem!
You are welcome. Should be required reading.
Although the definition of “evangelical” may not be specific or refined, the Heritage Foundation did a study of them before the 2012 election and found that only 25% of them voted. They are vocal on platform committees and when promoting primary candidates but if their guy does not end up on the ballot, they stay home. Nobody else is perfect enough and some even want chaos to speed up Christ’s return. One response to this was to remind them that Jesus isn’t on the ballot this time and they should vote for their second choice! The Heritage Foundation did infomational meetings about this throughout the country but it obviously didn’t move the needle in the 2012 election and one insider later confirmed that many had stayed home because of quiet distain for Mormonism.
bkmk
And again, my question would be what template does the Heritage Foundation use to define “evangelicals”? I’m not surprised that many have a low commitment to the political process, however. New Testament scriptures largely minimize the personal significance of government forms and processes in the believer’s life. The Christian revolution is spiritual and moral, not temporal, in the minds of most evangelicals.
I don’t remember the definition they used but when talking about people as blocs, categorizing all religious as “evangelical” made the dynamics easier to work with statistically. Ergo, Mormons were lumped with pro-active Christians even though most Mormons vote Republican but many pro-life Catholics kept multi-generational affiliation with the the Democrat party. And some Christians wouldn’t want to be associated with Mormonism in any way, shape, or form.
Sorry, they did more than never question Obama’s eligibility over the years, they undermined the discussions with Alinsky ridicule and by clogging threads with insane reasoning supported by pages and pages of cut and paste talking points.
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.