RUSH: Jim in Rancho Cucamonga, California. Great to have you, sir, on the program. Hello.
CALLER: Thank you, Rush. God bless ya. Stay healthy, and stay on the front lines.
RUSH: Well, thank you, sir, very much.
CALLER: Rush, I love America. I really believe we have the greatest system of government in the history of the world. But this issue about the media, I truly believe the media now is no longer just a curiosity or an irritation to us. They’re really posing a threat to our system of government, and I say that because information — accurate information — is one of the most important ingredients for self-rule.
That’s how people make decisions and choose leaders. That’s how we vote, and voting is very powerful. I believe that the lines that existed at one time between the media and Democrats or liberals, they’re not blurred anymore. They’re fused together. Rush, I don’t even say media and Democrat anymore. I said “mediacrats.” They’re all the same. You would never say, “The mouth of the dog bit me.” They’re organs of the same beast.
You just say, “The dog bit me,” and get right down to it. Rush, the tragedy of it all is truth is self-evident. This the rule is, it’s an American principle, it’s proven, but it’s not even in the mix. People are not even given truth. You know, I don’t want to control the media. I truly don’t. They can say whatever they want.
But I wish it was balanced — and if it were balanced, I believe we would be a healthier country. Look at how few, Rush, yourself and others, how outnumbered we are. Our view with the media, and it’s still almost a tie. And we still win sometimes. I think if we just had 10% of the truth being put out there, people could make decisions.
RUSH: Well, that’s true but there’s a couple other things in this. You’re absolutely right that the media has crossed over now and but they I don’t think it’s anything different. I think they’re just being honest about it. I think the media has always been Democrats, and they’ve always been part of and advancing the Democrat agenda. There just was a period where they got away with appearing otherwise. But what’s they are, you know, I’ve often said, “Words mean things,” and our language is being taken over by the left as well.
RUSH: I want to build on comments played by our last caller, who was another one, another person who realizes the degree to which the media has contributed to the lack of balance, and he’s right about something. Truth is self-evident. But that’s been a blur and obscured because they’ve done great damage to the language.
The media’s chosen sides now, and so there’s not an opportunity for the public, the body politic, to honestly be informed of things. Nothing new, actually, but still it’s a fact. But there’s more to it. I ran across, over the weekend, a pretty interesting piece. You know, I popularized way back in the early nineties a tiny little phrase: Words mean things. The left has succeeded in really bastardizing common, ordinary, everyday English words to where now they have entirely different meanings.
I ran across an interesting piece at Town Hall.com by a guy named Steve Deace. “The American Exceptionalism Dictionary — We are now reaping a bitter generational harvest in America, sown into the ground because we have permitted: Marxists almost unchecked dominance of the influential platforms of pop culture and the classroom.” This we all know, so stick with me here.
We have permitted, “Too many of our churches to retreat into some ‘comfortably numb’ seeker-friendly Xanadu, where they building suburban palaces instead of culture. The Republican Party to be taken over by a feckless political class either unwilling or incapable of defending and advancing our principles. One of the most rotten fruits of this bitter harvest is the loss of the language itself. Whole words that meant one thing for generations now have completely different meanings, and nothing unhinges a culture faster than the loss of shared language/terminology.”
So this guy, Steve Deace, says, “So to recover the language, and thus our lost legacy, I went back to the master linguist himself — Noah Webster,” of Webster’s dictionary, for those of you in Rio Linda. No, wait, dictionary, who am I kidding. They don’t know what that is. “Noah Webster was fluent in 27 languages.” Did you know that? He was.
“Webster was one of the most influential thinkers among the first-born generation of newly-minted Americans. Best known today as ‘the father of American education’ and for the dictionary which bears his name, Webster is as responsible as any single person in our history for preserving the American view of law and government passed down to us from the Founding Fathers. Yet as we have collectively drifted from our most cherished traditions,” because they’ve been under assault. Traditions and institutions which define the greatness of this country have been under assault for decades.
As a result of that, “Noah Webster?’s influence has waned as well. As a result, even though our letters and spelling are the same as they were in Webster?’s day, the definitions are decidedly different.” And he goes back to the original Webster’s dictionary to make his point.
“Let?’s consult Webster?’s legendary 1828 edition of American Dictionary of the English Language. Take a look at terms vital to the preservation of American Exceptionalism, and see how Webster himself defined them compared to how they?’re defined now.”
The word “rights.” How would you define the word “rights”? What is a right? Just think about it here for a second. Because this is an example of how this one word has been totally taken over by the left to mean something it comes nowhere close to actually meaning.
Here’s Webster’s 1828 definition of rights: “That which justly belongs to one?… Just claim by sovereignty; prerogative. God, as the author of all things, has a right to govern and dispose of them at his pleasure.” Rights come from God. This was fundamental in our founding. It’s all over the Declaration of Independence, as you know. A right is a “Just claim; legal title; ownership; the legal power of exclusive possession and enjoyment?… Conformity to the will of God, or to his law?… Conformity to human laws, or to other human standard of truth, propriety or justice. When laws are definite, right and wrong are easily ascertained and understood.
That’s from the original definition of the word “rights,” the original Webster’s dictionary. “When laws are definite, right and wrong are easily ascertained and understood.” And that’s precisely why they had to get rid of it, because in liberalism you don’t have the right to judge. Liberalism, right and wrong are determined by individual choice. Whatever you think is right is right. Whatever you think is wrong is wrong. Whatever you think is right is right, you don’t have to know the real meaning.
But more than anything, God’s got nothing to do with anything today, and there can’t be a universal right and wrong ’cause nobody’s got the right to determine what’s right and wrong for everybody else. But it used to be that all that was universal. Here’s today’s definition of “rights.” And see if this doesn’t comport with what you think most people, particularly young people, think rights are. “Access to what I want when I want it?… especially if I can rally a particular group (mobocracy) and the media to bully others into agreeing with me?… the full realization of my desires and preferences, which you must then pay for.”
That’s what rights have come to mean. Whatever somebody wants, and when they want it. And if they have to get a mob to get it, that’s perfectly fine. And is that not the case, when you listen to people throw around “My rights, I have a right.” They think it’s entitlement. A right is an entitlement today.
Here is Noah Webster’s 1828 definition of “morality.” This one, slam dunk. Morality: “The quality of an action which renders it good; the conformity of an act to the divine law, or to the principles of rectitude. This conformity implies that the act must be performed by a free agent, and from a motive of obedience to the divine will. This is the strict theological and scriptural sense of morality. But we often apply the word to actions which accord with justice and human laws, without reference to the motives form which they proceed.
Today’s definition of morality: “An ancient word used only by those on the wrong side of history.” That’s today’s definition. Morality? Nobody’s got the right to define morality today. Who are you to tell me what’s moral and what’s not? You can’t judge me! The point is, there are two more words given as examples, “law” and “tolerance.” But the point is that, in addition to what the media has openly now decided do, choose sides, there are also a lot of other things at work which are debasing culture and changing relationships and actually obliterating the entire concept of American exceptionalism, what makes us different from everybody. And it’s profound. This guy is on to something here.
RUSH: You know what the Urban Dictionary definition of morality is? Are you ready for this? The Urban Dictionary definition of morality: “The logic used to justify character assassination.” Now, the Urban Dictionary is a youthful dictionary, street dictionary, very informal. It’s supposed to be relevant with the zeitgeist, the spirit of the times. So you see, in these people’s views, you don’t have the right to tell anybody they’re behaving in an immoral way. You have no right, who are you, you can’t judge, you don’t know what’s right and wrong. It’s even now gotten to the point where if you have committed any kind of a wrong at all, you are not permitted to comment on the whole subject.
I can’t tell you the number leftists who’ve told me that because I didn’t go to Vietnam, I have no right to talk about the defense budget. “What do you mean?”
“Well, you had a chance to go kill commies and you didn’t do it. You don’t have any right, you don’t have any credibility to talk about the defense budget, you didn’t go.” And this is the way the left attempts to eliminate and discredit. You don’t have to have done something to know whether it’s right or wrong. That’s the whole point in a truth is self-evidently world. But this definition of morality: “The logic used to justify character assassination.” Let me ask you this, folks. How many of you, if put on the spot, could explain the difference between ethics and morality. Think about that for a second.
RUSH: The difference between ethics and morality very simply explained. The ethical man knows he should not cheat on his wife. The moral man actually would not. That is the difference. You can be ethical and immoral, depending on your choices.