Three stories caught my attention today, and for this reason: That conservative values of individual responsibility, recognition of absolute truth, and consistency of conviction in the face of repeated attack, always resonate, always work (even if they seem to fail in the short term), and always get their reward.
Reagan repealed what is known as the “Fairness Doctrine”, a policy which required that all publicly broadcasting media channels give “equal time” to all viewpoints on any issue or risk losing their licenses. This allowed the growth of Talk Radio, which has blossomed in a way quite without precedent among the conservative mainstream. There have been attempts by private liberal interest groups to duplicate the successes of conservative talk radio, but they have, without exception, failed miserably. Most recently Air America, a Soros-funded venture filed for bankruptcy protection. Only NPR, the federally-funded broadcasting corporation which would appear to be a thinly veiled arm of the American Communist Party.
Now, Pelosi, et al. wish to resurrect the Fairness Doctrine to force broadcast stations to do allow both sides of an argument regardless of monetary feasibility. The idea behind the success of conservative political talk radio is that people enjoy listening to it, they buy the products advertised on it, they support the stations who broadcast it. This is not a wild guess that people like to listen to conservative political talk, it’s a concrete, incontrovertible fact. If the fairness doctrine were reenacted, there would be backlash and then disinterest, lethargy and apathy would kick in. Stations would close and people would lose their jobs. Pelosi likes this idea, she wants Rush to lose his job so badly she’s willing for hundreds and thousands of small-town DJ’s and radio station personnel to lose theirs as well.
Pelosi’s friend, Mr. Chavez down in Venezuela has been enacting the fairness doctrine recently. The most popular radio station in Venezuela, which was critical of Hugo and his policies, was shut down recently amid massive protests. Students have led the protests claiming an affront to their rights as citizens of Venezuela. Students have led many protests and revolutions in recent times, and not always to their benefit. There were the drugged out protests of the rich, lazy, uncaring youth of the 60’s in America. There were the idealistic but misinformed and ultimately evil revolutions in Russia in the early 20th century which brought in the terrible times of communism, of which Hugo Chavez is either a willfully and evilly ignorant blind follower or an evil, knowing proponent. Sometimes, the proposed change is so much more radical than the actual need that in itself it is evil, such as many of the protested things of the 60s. A whole country is enslaved to communism, a whole generation is nearly wiped out, the American flag cannot fly proudly in a section of the world because of the self-interested pursuits of a privileged and drugged generation here in America.
But sometimes it is the courage and strength, the energy of youth which stands up for the right against the tyrannical likes of Mr. Chavez, the evil. Laying down their own bright futures in hopes of a brighter future, if not for themselves, for those who follow.
John Berlau at HumanEvents.com has written a response to the fawning Mr. Gore is receiving at the hands of the Nobel Peace Prize committee. In his article he submits that Mr. Rush Limbaugh is more deserving of a peace prize as through his works of education and confrontation peoples lives have been saved around the world. Mr. Gore, on the other hand, has only globally broadcasted misinformation, personal ideological greed, and terminal stupidity contained in a corpulent animated corpse to lay to his name. An idol of Mr. Gores’ is the author of Silent Spring, which can be directly blamed for causing the shift in public opinion against DDT which has allowed the resurgence of malaria around the world, and the resulting multitude of deaths, nearly all preventable by use of the tiniest amount of DDT.
Andrew McCarthy at NationalReview.com has written an article detailing the multitude of reasons which Bush has been, is, and continues to be right concerning the war on terror, and how those who disagree with him cannot help but follow him if only for self-preservation. While they wish they could pull out, liberals with any sense know they cannot, and therefore they will do nothing more than push mindless and useless “symbolic” and “non-binding” resolutions recommending pull out by certain arbitrary dates (I really should write about how meaningless words can be). Bush’s problem isn’t that he isn’t right, it’s that he’s not the communicator he should be. Reagan was a great communicator, Kennedy was a great communicator, Roosevelt (Franklin) was a great communicator. They communicated the needs and demands of a higher calling effectively and with words powerful and frequent. Bush has repeatedly failed to capture the ideas of the nation and draw them in the direction of his plans of America’s moral projectionism.