Friday, April 20, 2012

Remember Just 3 Short Years Ago?

You know what? 2009 wasn't that long ago. Remember when Rush Limbaugh got the chance to join a group putting in a bid to buy the St. Louis Rams?

Any sports fan worth his salt will remember the huge controversy that erupted 3 years ago when it was revealed that radio show host Rush Limbaugh was part of a group that was seeking to buy control of the NFL's St. Louis Rams.

Rush was so excited by that.  But the Left went moonbat crazy at the idea of Rush being part owner of a football team.  They went after him, trying to sabotage the deal.

But after a week nothing was sticking.  They railed about a supposedly 'virulent racist' being 'allowed' to become part owner of a sports team where most of the players would be black.

But nobody cared much.  The Left needed a hook.  They needed something to draw attention to the issue and frame it their way, something that would generate the required amount of OUTRAGEOUS OUTRAGE!!!11!

So do you know what they did?  Do you? You'll get mad if I tell you.  Should I?

They went out and found what was obviously a fake quote and publicized it incessantly in the media.  They HAD  to know this quote was bogus.  10 seconds rational thought would have demonstrated that.

This totally bogus Rush quote was one where he - live on the air with his audience listening, of course - he said James Earl Ray should have gotten a medal for assassinating Martin Luther King, Jr.

Anybody with two brain cells to rub together would know this quote was fake.  Millions of people listen to Rush's radio show.  If he had ever said ANYTHING like this, the entire country would have heard about it by the end of the day.

Don Imus, a far less popular radio host with a far smaller audience can go on the air and call female basketball players a derogatory racial name and the entire country will hear about it before that day is over. 

But we're supposed to believe Rush could say live on the air that MLK's assassin should have gotten a medal and nobody heard it or commented on it.

There is no way many of the people that pushed that quote in the media for weeks did not know it was not a true quote.

BUT IT WAS WORKING.  Once they started using this racially inflammatory bogus quote, constantly injecting it into the story, it really took off at last.  Every single time some new media outlet picked up the quote and ran with it, Rush was marginalized some more.

It killed the deal exactly as those pushing this lie knew it would. IT WORKED. THEY GOT THE RESULTS THEY WANTED.

After the fact, after the issue was over and they had the scalp they wanted, they could admit what they had done:

That didn't mean they did so gracefully: 

Now we HAD a New Media in 2008.  But we were SO SLOW back then.  We really were.

They saddled that lie about MLK and rode that horse for all it was worth for almost a full month, and by the time we got our own horse saddled, the race was over.  Nothing we could do.  It didn't matter any more.

By the time we could cross the finish line waving the evidence, 'Wait, the MLK quote is BOGUS!", they just laughed at us, didn't they?

Fake quote, you say? Ah well - too late! Losers!

"Oh, is it?" they mocked.  "We stopped Rush with a bogus quote? Really?! F**KING AWESOME!!"

That's how it's gone for years.  We watch the false narrative get introduced and run around the track unopposed, dominating news cycles for weeks, maybe months.

And by the time we could get out there and show what really happened?  "Ah, too late, suckers! We've moved on. That is SO last month! You're still talking about that? Lame!"

Nothing Rush had actually said would cause the amount of outrageous outrage that would be necessary to achieve the outcome they wanted to see. So they deliberately publicized a fake quote. It worked like a charm, and they got the result they wanted.

What difference does 3 years make?  We're not rushing into the room a week after the issue was decided waving our evidence any more.

What's happening now?


It doesn't go down like it did just 3 years ago, does it?  Now they can't ride that horse for a month, a week or even a full day.

NBC puts up an edited tape of Zimmerman's 911 call and gets caught on it in a matter of hours.

ABC News puts out a grainy low resolution video of Zimmerman's arrival at the Sanford PD and tries to use it to claim he has no injuries and cast doubt on his story of a physical altercation with Martin.

Time and again so far this year the Old Media has been forced to walk back, retract, apologize and even fire people for trying to pull their old tricks.

You realize how AWESOME this is?  Their misinformation, distortions and omissions in an attempt to frame issues and slant them how they like can't even make it 24 full hours now.  Much less the weeks/months they used to get.

To get the full impact they hope to get from politicizing things like TrayVon Martin's death, they need at least a week or two of unchallenged narrative-riding.

They aren't getting it any more.  And don't think they haven't noticed it.

Well they better get used to it.  Because this was Andrew Breitbart's vision. This is where he was trying to get things through those years of hard work he put in.

A New Media that runs shoulder to shoulder with the Old Media, that can at last leap to instantly answer when the Old Media tries it's old tricks.  A New Media that can now not only get the real facts out while the issue still matters, it can cross the finish line first, even force the Old Media out of the race by disqualifying them for breaking the rules.

This is what's happening now. This is what the Left is going to learn again and again over the next 6 months up to the election, and then beyond:
This isn't 2009 any more.  We're READY for you now.  It's #WAR.