Posted on 06/04/2002 10:45:36 PM PDT by kattracks
An anti-corporate lynch mob showed up in Dallas for the ExxonMobil shareholders meeting. Their language was intemperate, their historical comparisons absurd, and their demands on a major oil company could be reduced to one word: surrender.
Ever since radical mobs with a violent and thoroughly anti-capitalist agenda stormed Seattle, many in our media have treated the parade of anti-corporate hooligans with kid gloves, awarding them instant idealism on the front pages, giving their spokesmen precious airtime for their soundbites, and presenting them without any notice of an ideological bone in their bodies. At best they are dreamers; at worst, confused.
To see what these people are really like, see CNSNews.com reporter Marc Morano's report from the scene of the leftists' "mock trial" of ExxonMobil in Dallas. Prosecutor David Cobb, the local Green Party candidate for Attorney General of Texas, compared the oil giant to Adolf Hitler's dictatorship. "Just as the Nazi party had to take over the democratically elected
government in Germany to achieve its goals, so, too, did ExxonMobil take over aspects of our democratically elected government to achieve its ends."
Ask yourself this question: In all the news reports about the Green Party you've watched on the networks, have you ever (END ITAL) seen their political agenda described this way? You haven't, because to report on the reality of the Green Party's agenda is to shatter the illusion so painstakingly promoted by its sympathizers.
The ExxonMobil meeting wasn't just a magnet for anarchists outside the meeting, but also for more mainstream liberal activists inside the meeting, like established green groups and the gay left. On the Web site of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, one small preview reported on their efforts: "Social activists, ranging from environmental, alternative energy and social policy proponents, will present shareholders with eight proposals."
Why can't reporters in America find the term "leftist" ... or the more appropriate, "radical leftist" ... in their dictionaries? They're not helping their readers understand politics with vague and meaningless terms like "social policy proponents."
The leftists demanded that ExxonMobil divert its oil revenues into alternative-fuel schemes like solar energy -- still uneconomical after all these years -- and offer domestic-partner benefits for homosexual employees, which presumably has something to do with environmental issues. When these liberal proposals were rejected by almost 80 percent of the shareholders, the Star-Telegram didn't report the liberals were routed. Heavens, no. They told a warm story about high-fiving activists convinced that doubling their vote from 10 to 20 percent meant that a shareholder-endorsed socialist utopia was not far behind.
But there was another story unfolding in Dallas that week. When the anarchists came to protest outside the meeting, this time conservatives counter-protested, and the startled left-wing mob was routed.
Activists from Citizens for a Sound Economy and the Congress for Racial Equality showed up for a little sidewalk debate, armed with signs like "Capitalism Rocks," "Stop Global Whining," and "Greenpeace Hates America." As Morano reported, "I think we rattled them. They're packing up their bags and leaving,' stated Niger Innis of the Congress on Racial Equality. 'Victory is sweet,' he added."
There's a lesson in Dallas for conservatives. Hitting the street and answering that leftist rant is one way even a small group of conservatives can force their message to stand next to the radicals in the so-called mainstream press. Just don't expect much coverage from the press. Liberal activists still dominated the Star-Telegram coverage, while the conservatives only had their slogans quoted. (You could tell the reporters were shocked when they described counter-protesters who were, gasp, "questioning the validity of ecological concerns.") But any time a story about an oil company protest includes the words "Oil Employs, Anarchy Destroys," it's a good day in the newspaper for conservatives.
Too many reporters arrive at a business story with the prospective idea that there are only two sides, the Marxist caricature of Capital versus Labor -- the stuffed-shirt, bottom-line titans of Profit opposed to the scruffy, lovable humanitarians of Not for Profit. But the events in Dallas proved the presence of conservative protesters and journalists can ensure that left-wing militants and liberals alike can be refuted within (somewhat) and without the mainstream press.
When supposedly skeptical journalists go soft on the left, we need reporters like Marc Morano who can question them on hypocrisy -- as in Dallas, when he asked a group of "green" radicals why they showed up at an oil-bashing rally in a big Ford Econoline van. And we need a little army of conservative protesters in every big city when a business is targeted for "idealism." Show them there's another side: everyday people who love freedom, love America, and appreciate the bounty of goods and services that free enterprise provides.
Brent Bozell is President of Media Research Center, a TownHall.com member group.
Contact Brent Bozell | Read his biography
©2002 Creators Syndicate, Inc.
When the SHTF, I think reporters and their editors and publishers are going to be high on the 'to do list'.
We not only made a decent showing for the "other side of the story", we outnumbered the leftists 48-8 at their own Mock Trial and 125-43 at the shareholder meeting demonstration.
The Fort Worth Star Telegram isn't the only news source in the area. The counter-protest made the TV news beginning on Friday when CBS did a background/research story on the leftists and their camp and showed clips of the Seattle riots. They interviewed Peggy Venable of Citizens for a Sound Economy who did a very nice job of telling the true motivations and goals of the left regarding their Exxon/Mobil protest. The report was fair and balanced, imo.
On Tuesday and Wednesday, all local major networks, Fox, ABC, NBC, CBS, and Warner Brothers, aired the events at 5,6,9 and 10. They interviewed one protestor who mumbled so no one could tell what he said and several counter-protestors (we were the counter-protestors). Freeper conservative and his wife both got good airtime as did conservative's beautiful full-sized American flag. The stories were very balanced and showed a fairly accurate picture of the demonstrations, imo.
The groups involved in the counter-protest were:
Citizens for a Sound Economy, American Land Rights Association, Congress on Racial Equality, Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, Free Republic Network, Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise, Paragon Foundation, Leadership Institute, Free Republic NTX Chapter, Free Republic Houston Area Texas Chapter, Free Republic Heart of Texas Chapter. For the after-Freep report and pictures, go here:
Then came the mumbling (drugged?) Leftist with his incomprehensible rant.
Congratulations on winning a big battle for "hearts and minds."
But then, you're too young to recognize that expression. :-)
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.