Tom Kovach
Short Bursts: Volume 07-03
Elephant rider, three-self talk-radio, persecution, lightning round
By Tom Kovach
As the presidential primary season is upon us (a year early), news bites come in quick. Not every topic deserves a full column, but some topics deserve more than a passing mention. Hence, it's time for another volume of my signature Short Bursts series.
elephant rider
Conservatives are catching on that Fred Thompson is not quite the "political savior" that the Beltway neocon elites have implied him to be. Instead, if elected, the real conservatives are beginning to expect an automatic, "Bush-button" implementation of globalist policies — especially in the area of lax border security and the coddling of illegal aliens. What exposed the man behind the curtain? Well, these columns in WorldNetDaily and Renew America seem to have kicked over the dominos.
Once the dominos began to fall, the result has been a massive Republican exodus. The damage is so deep that the GOP has recently fired all 65 telephone fund-raisers from its national headquarters. Other writers are now picking up on the fact that the Republican Party is imploding. But, the most concise comment on this topic comes from this cartoon of Thompson and the GOP elephant.
Three-Self talk radio
Savvy political readers (such as you, and those to whom you send these columns) are aware that the government-approved "church" in Communist China is called the Three-Self Patriotic Movement. (It is a blasphemous inversion of the Holy Trinity, in which adherents essentially "worship the creation [themselves], instead of the Creator.") The government of China has special police squads that hunt down (and torture) members of the Chinese house-church movement (the real Christians).
Here in America, where people are still free (so far) to attend the church of their choice, is there a parallel to the Chinese government-run "church"? Have you considered the concept that there are limits to what "ratings-approved" talk-radio hosts will say? Although talk radio is still a bastion of conservative discourse, there are rumblings that it might not last much longer. Why?
The public is figuring out that there is a growing disconnect between the word "Republican" and the word "conservative." When wealthy Nelson Rockefeller became governor of New York, some very forward-thinking people noticed the same thing. In 1961, they saw that the Republican Party would be pulled farther to the Left by big-money influences. So, they formed the Conservative Party of NY State. By 1968, stalwart conservatives such as Barry Goldwater were lamenting the GOP drift. (That same year, George Wallace uttered his concise quote that "there's not a dime's worth of difference" between the Republicans and the Democrats.) In 1966, university professor Carroll Quigley articulated the globalist strategy that it would be a good thing for the two parties to have only the appearance of ideological conflict — to keep the masses under control. (As many of you now know, one of Quigley's students in the mid-Sixties was young Bill Clinton.) Many conservatives are beginning to see shocking parallels between the actions of Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.
With that background, when was the last time that you heard a syndicated talk-radio "conservative" denounce the Republican Party? I don't mean denouncing a single issue (such as lax border security) as some "aberration" of an otherwise fine organization, but denounce the party itself as broken and out of touch with its own members. Rarely, if ever, right? Why? Could it be because talk radio is being used as a "safety valve"? (If people call a talk show, many feel that they have "done something," and they don't go any farther. That is exactly what the Beltway neocon elites want: the appearance of citizen action, without any real change.) Under the Communist regime, tens of millions of Chinese have a religious "safety valve," which prevents the pressure from building to the point of taking action.
In 1994, while running for Congress in Upstate NY, I organized a bus trip to the Rush Limbaugh TV show. Up until that day, I was a huge Rush fan. But, after sitting in the studio, watching his facial expressions, and listening to the comments that he made when the cameras were not on, I began to feel that El Rushbo looked upon us as merely the "unwashed masses," who actually do need his "guidance" via the radio. From that day forth (it was the day that he revealed the photograph of "Code Name Jaguar," later Mrs. Marta Limbaugh), I listened to his program less and less. Why? Because I noticed that Limbaugh refused to discuss any conservative movement that was not part of the Republican Party. (He also eschews discussions about God and the Bible, and the word "militia" is absolutely verboten.)
Lately, I've noticed that same trend in other talk-radio hosts. It really bothers me. And, I'm not alone. Long-time media personality and analyst Mary Starrett expressed similar sentiments in her 2003 column "Going, Going, Gone." (And, her conclusions drew her to the same destination, as explained in her most recent column.) Her views are shared by Servando Gonzalez, who wrote "The End Of Conservative Talk Radio."
So, is talk radio becoming the big-money, "Demublican," globalist version of the Chinese Three-Self Patriotic Movement? I certainly hope not. But, if it isn't, then why are all of the big-name conservative hosts Republicans? Why is it that, although they sometimes criticize the GOP (one issue at a time, and not across the board), none of them will encourage listeners to join another party? (And, most of those hosts will poo-pooh the idea of any other party being "viable." In a startling parallel, an official of the Chinese government once said about the house-church movement, "We must kill the baby while it is still in the manger.")
Perhaps the Constitution Party should be viewed as the American, conservative, political version of the Chinese house-church movement. Of course, surely, there won't be persecutions of true conservatives by the Big Two political parties after the next election ... would there? Tut-tut, that would be like saying that the American government would engage in religious persecution against Christians. (Well, that has only happened once; or, maybe, twice.... So, we'll all be safe under whomever Bush picks to succeed him ... right?) For the answers, keep listening to your ... radio.
persecution
If you don't think that religious persecution of Christians goes on, it still does. Later this month, when President George W. Bush meets with the president of Vietnam, his decisions about the situation in the linked article will reveal a lot about whether Three-Self talk radio is a reality.
the lightning round
Who is winning the Republican early primary debates? Well, no doubt that true conservatives are losing. And, no wonder, when a big-money leading candidate can't even take a stand against abortion — not even when 'lightning' strikes. It would seem that Giuliani lost "the lightning round."
© Tom Kovach
As the presidential primary season is upon us (a year early), news bites come in quick. Not every topic deserves a full column, but some topics deserve more than a passing mention. Hence, it's time for another volume of my signature Short Bursts series.
elephant rider
Conservatives are catching on that Fred Thompson is not quite the "political savior" that the Beltway neocon elites have implied him to be. Instead, if elected, the real conservatives are beginning to expect an automatic, "Bush-button" implementation of globalist policies — especially in the area of lax border security and the coddling of illegal aliens. What exposed the man behind the curtain? Well, these columns in WorldNetDaily and Renew America seem to have kicked over the dominos.
Once the dominos began to fall, the result has been a massive Republican exodus. The damage is so deep that the GOP has recently fired all 65 telephone fund-raisers from its national headquarters. Other writers are now picking up on the fact that the Republican Party is imploding. But, the most concise comment on this topic comes from this cartoon of Thompson and the GOP elephant.
Three-Self talk radio
Savvy political readers (such as you, and those to whom you send these columns) are aware that the government-approved "church" in Communist China is called the Three-Self Patriotic Movement. (It is a blasphemous inversion of the Holy Trinity, in which adherents essentially "worship the creation [themselves], instead of the Creator.") The government of China has special police squads that hunt down (and torture) members of the Chinese house-church movement (the real Christians).
Here in America, where people are still free (so far) to attend the church of their choice, is there a parallel to the Chinese government-run "church"? Have you considered the concept that there are limits to what "ratings-approved" talk-radio hosts will say? Although talk radio is still a bastion of conservative discourse, there are rumblings that it might not last much longer. Why?
The public is figuring out that there is a growing disconnect between the word "Republican" and the word "conservative." When wealthy Nelson Rockefeller became governor of New York, some very forward-thinking people noticed the same thing. In 1961, they saw that the Republican Party would be pulled farther to the Left by big-money influences. So, they formed the Conservative Party of NY State. By 1968, stalwart conservatives such as Barry Goldwater were lamenting the GOP drift. (That same year, George Wallace uttered his concise quote that "there's not a dime's worth of difference" between the Republicans and the Democrats.) In 1966, university professor Carroll Quigley articulated the globalist strategy that it would be a good thing for the two parties to have only the appearance of ideological conflict — to keep the masses under control. (As many of you now know, one of Quigley's students in the mid-Sixties was young Bill Clinton.) Many conservatives are beginning to see shocking parallels between the actions of Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.
With that background, when was the last time that you heard a syndicated talk-radio "conservative" denounce the Republican Party? I don't mean denouncing a single issue (such as lax border security) as some "aberration" of an otherwise fine organization, but denounce the party itself as broken and out of touch with its own members. Rarely, if ever, right? Why? Could it be because talk radio is being used as a "safety valve"? (If people call a talk show, many feel that they have "done something," and they don't go any farther. That is exactly what the Beltway neocon elites want: the appearance of citizen action, without any real change.) Under the Communist regime, tens of millions of Chinese have a religious "safety valve," which prevents the pressure from building to the point of taking action.
In 1994, while running for Congress in Upstate NY, I organized a bus trip to the Rush Limbaugh TV show. Up until that day, I was a huge Rush fan. But, after sitting in the studio, watching his facial expressions, and listening to the comments that he made when the cameras were not on, I began to feel that El Rushbo looked upon us as merely the "unwashed masses," who actually do need his "guidance" via the radio. From that day forth (it was the day that he revealed the photograph of "Code Name Jaguar," later Mrs. Marta Limbaugh), I listened to his program less and less. Why? Because I noticed that Limbaugh refused to discuss any conservative movement that was not part of the Republican Party. (He also eschews discussions about God and the Bible, and the word "militia" is absolutely verboten.)
Lately, I've noticed that same trend in other talk-radio hosts. It really bothers me. And, I'm not alone. Long-time media personality and analyst Mary Starrett expressed similar sentiments in her 2003 column "Going, Going, Gone." (And, her conclusions drew her to the same destination, as explained in her most recent column.) Her views are shared by Servando Gonzalez, who wrote "The End Of Conservative Talk Radio."
So, is talk radio becoming the big-money, "Demublican," globalist version of the Chinese Three-Self Patriotic Movement? I certainly hope not. But, if it isn't, then why are all of the big-name conservative hosts Republicans? Why is it that, although they sometimes criticize the GOP (one issue at a time, and not across the board), none of them will encourage listeners to join another party? (And, most of those hosts will poo-pooh the idea of any other party being "viable." In a startling parallel, an official of the Chinese government once said about the house-church movement, "We must kill the baby while it is still in the manger.")
Perhaps the Constitution Party should be viewed as the American, conservative, political version of the Chinese house-church movement. Of course, surely, there won't be persecutions of true conservatives by the Big Two political parties after the next election ... would there? Tut-tut, that would be like saying that the American government would engage in religious persecution against Christians. (Well, that has only happened once; or, maybe, twice.... So, we'll all be safe under whomever Bush picks to succeed him ... right?) For the answers, keep listening to your ... radio.
persecution
If you don't think that religious persecution of Christians goes on, it still does. Later this month, when President George W. Bush meets with the president of Vietnam, his decisions about the situation in the linked article will reveal a lot about whether Three-Self talk radio is a reality.
the lightning round
Who is winning the Republican early primary debates? Well, no doubt that true conservatives are losing. And, no wonder, when a big-money leading candidate can't even take a stand against abortion — not even when 'lightning' strikes. It would seem that Giuliani lost "the lightning round."
© Tom Kovach
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
