Playing for Keeps
By HHR | October 23rd, 2009 | Category: Politics | 8 comments
by Joseph C. Phillips
I was an innocent – not pure as the driven snow, but certainly unwise as to the level of the stakes at which we were playing. I entered the debate believing it would be an intellectual exercise; we would joust with each other and after it was all over shake hands and exit with mutual respect. I couldn’t have been more wrong. Mutual respect? The black panelists on my side of the question were called uncle toms, the white member was accused of seeking to repeal the civil rights act. Honesty? No lie was too large to tell; statistics were made up, facts were created to suit the argument. And there would be no shaking of hands at the conclusion of the debate, in fact barely a graceful word was spoken. It was in that moment I realized the left not only disagreed with me; they hated me. I was not only wrong; I was evil. That slap in the face knocked the rose colored glasses from my eyes and I am now seeing clearly: we are in the midst of a cultural and ideological war and while Conservatives concern themselves with civility and rules, progressives are playing for keeps.
It is a continuing fascination for me that conservatives are constantly depicted as wearing Jackboots and engaging in intimidation, violence and general thuggery. However, current events suggest that more often it is the new left that is wearing jack boots and not the right.
For instance who was doing the goose-stepping when radio host Rush Limbaugh was booted from an investment group trying to buy the NFL franchise St. Louis Rams? The new left lied and slandered Limbaugh with the aim of denying him an economic opportunity. Denying a man opportunity because we don’t like what he believes, what he says or what he looks like is (or should be) anathema to a free society. Shame on Dave Checketts and Roger Goodell for giving in to cheap intimidation and ideological bigotry! By their cowardice we are all diminished.
Many on the left disagree and are no doubt satisfied at the outcome. But for whom does the bell toll next? Who else’s opinions will be objectionable? What makes a football team any different from any other business that employs people? Should anyone with unpopular beliefs be barred from owning, say, a Burger King franchise? Should we then also check ideological credentials at the gates of certain neighborhoods? The doors to our schools?
The left often dons the coat of righteous indignation because it tends to give one an air of civility. They are not, however, above some good old fashioned name calling or back alley beat-downs.
Recall the response of Dennis Rivera, health care chairman of the Service Employees International Union, (SEIU) – as well as a master of irony — following the arrest of two of his esteemed members for allegedly pummeling a conservative protestor senseless. Rivera denounced conservative “terrorist tactics” aimed at derailing the debate on healthcare reform. Terrorists tactics are now defined as peaceful protest.
Rivera is not the only one with a rather elastic definition of terrorism; Rosabeth Moss Kanter a professor at Harvard business school writing in Politico justifies the depiction of tea partiers, conservatives and healthcare reform protestors as racist buffoons because they are enemies of America. Kanter writes: “President [Barack] Obama is marginalizing not just his enemies but those of the American people. He is attacking organizations standing in the way of progress toward reforming health care or cleaning up the conditions that led to the financial crisis. He is putting on notice advocates of greed – instead of the greater good – that they no longer have public legitimacy.”
Yes you read it correctly. America’s enemies are not Islamist, North Korean demagogues, or even Maoists and admitted communists working at the highest levels of our government. Rather they are American citizens that disagree with this president and other new liberals on the degree to which government should interfere and control our economic and cultural institutions. No doubt they had better keep their opinions to themselves lest they be greeted with some of what Rush got.
I have been working on a collection of thoughts by Americans on their love of America. After agreeing to participate a comedian friend of mine reneged. He joked that he didn’t want to be dragged from his car and beaten for having his name appear in a conservative book. Two things struck me as peculiar: first that loving ones country and writing about it is a “conservative” activity (not my belief but apparently his), and that he would joke of his concern that the liberal thought police would find him and give him a beat him for stepping out of line.
As my mother used to say, “Many a truth is said in jest.”
Obviously my friend had discarded his rose colored glasses long ago.
Joseph C. Phillips is the author of “He Talk Like a White Boy” available where ever books are sold.
on 
on 
on 
j’ai lue ton texte avec intérêt mais je souhaiterais que nous tous , nous adoptions une attitude calme maintenant ,
sans pour autant devenir moue. je dis tout simplement qu’il faut structurer sa revendication.
structurer ses revendications autour d’un grand thème , trouver un fédérateurs des actions et j’avais choisi Doc M Thorpe car il maîtrise son domaine: la santé publique et maîtrise mon approche.
Mme Palin, Cliff Treadway,Ken Wyble,David Theroux,Angel Rice et bien d’autres auxquels je pense.
toutes ces énergies doivent être fédérés autour une idée porteuse qui cristalliseront l’esprit républicain et conservateurs.
Cela entrainera une consolidation des fondations politiques américaines de base et qui ont besoins de se ressourcer .
Il faut trouver dans l’échiquier suite à la crise et le phénomène Obame , trouver politiquement la médiane.
C’est pour cela que je parle de Millénaire pour les Républicains et Conservateurs Modérés.
en résumé: la forme utilisé n’est pas bonne, il y a beaucoup d’imperfections mais ils faut aller de l’avant avec des propositions concrètes. afin de rectifier le tire. il existe des phénomènes en dessous de tous cette situation que tout le monde comprendra plus trad. Mais la manière dont ils s’y prennent n’est pas bonne, il n’a pas l’expérience nécessaire , il faut que l’on attaque un peut Jeo Biden car il est la deuxième personne et à plus d’expériences!
Car nous nous définissons conservateur mais il faut que l’on renforce innove en terme de patent.
je pense que vue dans ce sens , l’American first à un sens ! Aucune puissance étrangère ne peut ne pourra vous diviser.
Donc continuons nos revendications et créons une grande famille Républicaine.
je pense qu’un sage en politique doit intervenir . OK Bisous les petits loups!
Doc Thorpe vous expliquera cela!
En France je suis de l’UMP.
AUGUSTIN helene raises an interesting issue. American political conservatives (political “liberals” in European dialects) are for individual liberty and limited government power (a redundant way to put it because one implies the other). Having a diversity of opinion – a major issue in Mr. Phillips’ well-written commentary – is more than acceptable. It is a natural human phenomenon. It is why we can all understand his sense that the new left wear the jack boots. It seems typical to me that such people tell more about themselves through their intentionally demeaning propaganda than they do about those they attack. Certainly the fear-mongering and intimidation from the Obama administration and others in the Democratic Party have not gone unnoticed.
AUGUSTIN helene’s suggestion to build a unified Republican Party with a vision and it’s own progressive proposals is not new. It is however, antithetical to the whole conservative philosophy. The progressive movement has sold the idea that government needs to have big ideas and a spirited unified (collective) following. Many in Congress always want to “do something” about something – and it ends up being about everything – and that has led to too much government intrusion and control.
What we can agree on and support is the basic American vision – forgotten by politicians over the past few decades; the one that aligns with political conservatism. Condemned for being a “do nothing” philosophy by the left, we must challenge them on their fundamental beliefs about the relationship between government and the people.
As Mr. Phillips points out however, this debate is not currently a civilized activity. The left is wearing jack boots and their mass media supporters are too. We are in a very undemocratic situation which will be very difficult to resolve.
I am loving you for this whole article. And in the event you want someone to give an opinion on modern conservatism in America I am happy to help out.
[...] The left is playing for keeps, an amazing read http://hiphoprepublican.com/politics…/#comment-6446 [...]
Could you interpret the French comment? I would love to know what it says.
OK the second comment in regards to the first comment was not showing prior to my comment so no need to interpret. Thanks for the explanation.
[...] Read more at HipHopRepublican.com. [...]
Reality check brother, the prospect of Limbaugh being part of a new ownership group for the Rams threatened to disrupt the cohesiveness of the team, mainly due to many members claiming they would not play for a team that Limbaugh owned. It wasn’t some lie or slander by the left, it was Limbaugh’s own past and his own rhetoric that caused these team members not to want to play for a team Limbaugh was involved with. No more, no less.
Seems to me that Phillip’s article is based on misinformation or a blatant lie.