March 11, 2017 - The Political Cesspool - James Edwards
50:40
20170311_Hour_1
|
Time
Text
U.S. You're listening to the Liberty News Radio Network, and this is the Political Cesspool.
The Political Cesspool, known across the South and worldwide as the South's foremost populist conservative radio program.
And here to guide you through the murky waters of the Political Cesspool is your host, James Edwards.
Welcome once again to another live broadcast of the Political Cesspool Radio Program.
I'm your host, James Edwards.
This Saturday evening, March the 11th, broadcasting live from our flagship station in Memphis, Tennessee, going out across the country thanks to the Liberty News Radio Network and the world, thanks to their AMF and affiliate stations and, of course, the internet, which certainly, as Keith mentioned, brings the world to our doorstep.
Brings a mountain to Mohammed.
There you go.
All right.
Well, we got another big show for you this evening.
Lots of great guests over the course of the last four or five weeks.
We've been getting your feedback, getting your responses.
We're thrilled that you're thrilled at how the show has been doing lately.
Hopefully you have had that opinion for 13 years now, but the last couple of months have been particularly strong, I think, if I do say so myself.
Tonight, hopefully no different.
I had a unique experience this week that we're going to share with you.
At first, after the appearance was over, I thought that was fun, but back to work, and we may make mention of it in passing tonight and then go on about our weekly routine.
But as I thought a little more about it since Wednesday, I thought, honestly, this was a pretty big deal.
And it's something that maybe we should give a little additional treatment to and let it develop a little longer.
So Keith and I are going to sink our teeth into this the first hour.
I had an appearance at Northwestern University.
If you don't know about Northwestern University, it's a private university in Illinois.
It was actually ranked by, I believe, U.S. News and World Report as the 12th best university in the country.
It's actually the Vanderbilt of the Big Ten, if you want to put it in perspective.
Being an SEC, being down here in SEC country, I know that you will understand what I mean by the Vanderbilt of the SEC.
Vanderbilt.
They're the Vanderbilt of the Big Ten.
Vanderbilt Northwestern would be in the Ivy League if they were in the Ivy League, basically.
In other words, they're right there up on Ivy League.
They're the top academic school in their conferences.
And these are the big conferences.
And in their regions, really, frankly.
Yeah, you could even go that far.
And certainly right at Ivy League level, as far as universities go, not to say that that's good, because some of the stuff that comes out of the Ivy League, you wouldn't want to let anything anywhere near you.
But as far as their ratings are concerned, it's pretty prestigious.
Northwestern University is particularly known for its school of journalism, the Medel School of Journalism, quite well known.
And so you may be asking yourself, well, what was I doing there?
And why was I invited to be there?
How was I received by this collection of future journalists and reporters that I spoke to?
We even did a Q ⁇ A. How did that go?
Well, I'm going to tell you all about it here over the course of the next couple of segments.
But to back up, there is a student in this class, a young lady.
And what did Big Jim Fulson say about that, Keith?
I said, when you bite the trap like that, you'll catch Big Jim every time.
I can't get enough of that quote.
That's a good one.
That's a southern one.
But anyway, so this young lady reached out to me last fall, I believe it was.
It's been a while now.
I've actually done two interviews with her.
And even though she's still a student at this school of journalism at Northwestern, she's already been published in the Washington Post and several other publications and will certainly be, after graduation, a part of the establishment press.
And you'll probably be reading much more about her.
Well, she reached out to me last fall to do an interview about the alt-right.
And I did an interview with her about the alt-right.
That went well.
She reached out to me again just a few weeks ago.
And we did an interview, a second interview about a different topic about journalistic ethics or ethics and journalism.
And I think you may have made, you might have heard me mention that on the show that I was participating in something like that.
Well, during the course of that interview, the lawsuit that I'm engaged in as a plaintiff against the Detroit News and one of its columnists came up.
And we were talking and doing the interview.
She said, I would actually like to invite you to speak to my class about this lawsuit and your relationship with the media.
And maybe we would do a Q ⁇ A after that.
And this was about a month ago.
And I thought, well, that would be nice.
Just follow up with me, not ever thinking that it would actually happen.
I thought that was a courtesy and a nice gesture in the moment.
But certainly someone, a professor perhaps, would put the kibosh on that before it ever went from theory to practice.
But lo and behold, there I was on Wednesday.
It all worked out well.
She got back in touch with me last week, and we made arrangements.
And there I was at Northwestern University on Wednesday.
And it went exceedingly well.
You're probably going to be floored if you're driving.
I hope you didn't just turn off and run into a ditch at that revelation.
But it went quite well.
And again, part of it was because I guess to these folks, we're probably unique characters down here in the South and doing a radio show as we do and tackling the topics that we tackle.
But they have been studying libel law.
And so I was brought on to talk about my case.
And then it went into other realms and then a Q ⁇ A.
But just a reminder to everyone, as I set the table, and then we're going to bring Keith in on this for a pretty interesting experiment.
But as you'll remember, last March, March of 2016, at the height of the James Edward Sam Bushman, Donald Trump Jr. fiasco, where the entire global media was coming down on us for having a cordial interview with Trump Jr., a journalist for the Detroit News explicitly accused me of being a leader of the Ku Klux Klan.
Now, neither this journalist nor anyone with the Detroit News contacted me prior to the publication of the article to confirm that I am in fact a leader of the Ku Klux Klan, which of course I'm not.
And it appears as though they published it to attack through juvenile guilt by association tactics Donald Trump's candidacy for president at the time.
It was yellow journalism to me, plain and simple, since this journalist and the Detroit News sensationally fabricated their claim about me without any basis whatsoever.
It had never been alleged before.
There was not a scrap of evidence to prove it.
Of course, it wasn't true.
They didn't contact me to even ask.
And so we filed a lawsuit.
On April 18th, I filed a civil action against the Detroit News Incorporated and this columnist, Banco Thompson, in the state of Michigan's third judicial circuit court for Wayne County, Michigan for libel per se, defamation by implication, and invasion of privacy or false light as it is known.
And I demanded a trial by jury, and a judge was assigned to the case.
We are now in the Appeals Court of Michigan, a three-panel appellate court, a panel of three judges, and they will rule on the case.
And if we win on the appeals level, we will receive a jury trial.
And if we lose on the appeals level, we can either appeal it to the Michigan Supreme Court, which only hears about 5% of the cases that come before it.
So it'd probably be over if we lose at the appellate level.
If we win, we'll go to a trial ball jury.
And we'll know that sometime soon, all of the briefs, reply briefs, reply to the replies, all the paperwork is in order.
Everything has been filed that can be filed.
The only thing we're waiting on now is the ruling from the appellate panel.
Well, you could apply for a writ of surgery if you're turned down by this appellate court and tried to go to the U.S. Supreme Court since a Supreme Court issue, since a federal issue is involved, namely the 14th Amendment.
Well, all options will be considered.
And anyway, I just wanted to give you a little bit of background, a little bit of refresher about that case, a case that has now been churning for nearly a year.
The wheels of justice do move slowly.
But that's the background on the case.
And it was that case that got me invited to Northwestern to speak to students.
We'll give you more about that right after this.
Exciting stuff.
Stay tuned.
We fought.
We learned.
We struggled.
We won.
Despite Obama's best efforts, the newspaper of the human resistance survives.
We have lived only to face a new nightmare.
The war against the machines.
Read about our struggle in The Sovereign, newspaper of the resistance.
The Sovereign is a 24-page monthly tabloid newspaper about the war between man and machines.
We've tried reason.
We've tried legislation.
We've tried every peaceful means imaginable.
And all it's gotten us is shut out.
So now we fight the machines.
Order online today at thesovenews.com or find the sovereign at select newsstands.
Remember to read The Sovereign, newspaper of the resistance.
The human resistance's battle against the machines will be everlasting.
This is mercy.
It was never our destiny to stop the age of Obama.
It was merely to survive it.
Together, together.
Well, my family, my family is a very interesting family because we're what you would call a stable family.
My family doesn't smoke or drink because my mother brought me up in a Christian home.
I guess that's what kind of has kept me straight because I've always looked up to the Lord.
Every day, an estimated 3,000 teens start smoking.
My parents always taught me, you know, the difference between right and wrong.
They always taught me that smoking isn't right because physically it's not good for you and also mentally, it affects you.
And they always try to do the right thing because it catches, things catch up to you in life sooner or later.
I think kids learn behavior patterns from their parents because they're the people that they mostly see.
They're the people who we love and respect.
So the people who you love the most and respect the most from is who you tend to take things from.
Smoking.
If you think you're old enough to start, you're smart enough to stop.
A public service message from this station and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Many of you have heard me talk about my vigor score.
You say, Sam, what on earth is all this vigor stuff about?
Well, vigor is defined as zest for life.
Your strength in body and mind, your energy levels.
It's kind of all wrapped into a term called vigor.
Would you like to improve your vigor score?
Well, you got to first take the free test.
Get a hold of Kurt, C-U-R-T, at libertyroundtable.com or call Kurt Cosby at 801-669-2211.
I took the test, got a 13 out of 32 horrible, huh?
But I worked on it with Kurt with some natural help and healing.
And before you know it, now I've got an astounding 29 out of 32 on the vigor score.
Can you tell by the way I talk?
Oh, yes, my zest for life has never been better.
Get a hold of Kurt Cosby.
That's 801-669-2211 and take your free vigor test today and you can learn where you stand.
And then you can work on improving it and take the test again.
And oh, compare the results.
You will be delighted.
Get a hold of Kurt Grosby, Kurt, C-U-R-T, at LibertyRoundTable.com or 801-669-2211 for your free VigorScore test today.
It's time to jump back into the political cesspool to be part of the show and have your voice heard around the world.
Call us at 1-866-986-6397.
So we're dishing on my appearance at Northwestern University.
Pretty substantial appearance as far as it goes.
Again, I think in the three days since that appearance, it sort of dawned on me that that's maybe a story worth telling here on the radio.
We do a lot, and this is something that we were out there doing.
Kind of like Bonzo goes to college, right?
Something like that.
But I've tried to set the stage as succinctly and as sensibly as I can.
And again, and that's what the first segment was for.
Young lady reaches out to me last fall.
We do an interview about the alt-right.
She's a student at the Medal School of Journalism at Northwestern University.
She follows back up with me early this year.
We do another interview on my opinions on ethics and journalism.
From that interview, we got to talking about my case, and that led to the appearance.
And I just gave you a little background information, a little refresher about my lawsuit, which is still pending.
I am the plaintiff in a lawsuit against the Detroit News and one of its columnists that is now in the Michigan Court of Appeals.
We're waiting for the judges to render their decision.
And of course, I'll keep you posted.
Now, with that being the case, let's get to the actual appearance.
I was introduced very fairly.
I was introduced accurately and properly, a hell of a lot better than I'm normally introduced in any story that you may read about me that comes from the establishment press, which is interesting because this is certainly a school that has spawned so many of the reporters and journalists that are currently out there operating.
And the people that were in that room, those students that I was speaking to, are going to be the people you're reading about tomorrow.
The people you're reading, whose articles you're reading tomorrow.
If there's any doubt about it, put it to rest.
This is a leftist institution.
Oh, sure.
Yeah, University of Chicago and Northwestern are two of the most liberal colleges and universities in America.
And that's saying something.
That's saying something.
I don't know if there are any conservative universities, but these are certainly liberal, even by liberal standards.
But the professor, the professor that was hosting me, actually has the words social justice in the first sentence of his bio on the campus website.
Complete gentleman.
I don't know if he and I would agree on anything.
I don't know if any of the students in there agreed with me on anything, but I was treated with a lot of respect, and I appreciate that.
But I basically shared with them some of the things I said in the previous segment about my case and elaborated a little bit more, but pretty much stuck to what my attorney would allow me to say because, of course, I had to get everything cleared with them before I went up there to do this.
But talked a little bit about the case and then a little bit about my experience with the media, and then it was turned over to Q ⁇ A.
So what we're going to do now is I am going to share with you the questions, some of the questions, just the ones that I can remember because I wasn't in a position to write them down at the time.
I'm going to share with the audience some of the questions.
I'm actually going to pose these questions to Keith.
And I'm going to let Keith answer the questions as if he had been the one on the dais there behind the podium.
And we'll see how this shakes out.
But I think one of the first questions I fielded was, how would I define my relationship with the press?
And so you answered that, Keith.
How would we define our relationship with the press?
I'd say pretty much adversarial.
I think I chuckled and said strained and then went from there.
They asked a question, how would we define the establishment media?
Well, I think that Donald Trump has it pretty well pegged.
He calls them the lying press or the Lugan press.
They are not objective, in our opinion, when they report on any issue in which certainly the alt-right is involved.
I basically, I thought they were asking for a literal definition.
I said, well, I think what passes for the establishment press currently are publications such as the New York Times, The Washington Post, outlets such as CNN, Fox News, but they are being supplanted by new media, and they will continue to be supplanted by new media.
And I then went on, they asked, well, I'll tell you, a follow-up question to that was, what do I see as some of the problems with the establishment press?
That's an hour-long dissertation right there.
Well, it basically gets to this.
They are overwhelmingly leftist in their orientation, and they have given up all objectivity and also any line between commentary and reporting.
All their reporting is colored with their liberalism, just as their commentary has and has been for the last 70 years, basically.
Ever since the days of Duranty, Walter Duranty reporting on the Ukrainian famine and things like that during Instalinist Russia, there's been a decided leftist slant to American print journalism, which now has been bled over into broadcast journalism as well.
So the main problem is the left-wing slant, which seems to be a requirement.
You have to be a leftist to get a sinecure in the mainstream media.
Well, I think with that, I just went to my stock when I was asked that question.
I went to my stock canned responses.
I explained to them the difference between a reporter and a journalist and a commentator.
I said, I'm a commentator, so therefore, and they actually had, when I went in there on the projection screen when I appeared, the statement of principles of the political cesspool.
So they knew exactly who we were.
They knew exactly what our show was about and what our reputation is, good, bad, or indifferent, depending on your perspective.
They had no illusion that we were just some run-of-the-mill conservative talking head.
They knew we had a certain bite, a venom to our bite.
And I said, well, I'm a commentator, and there's a difference between being a commentator and a reporter or a journalist who you would expect to give you, to the best of their ability, an objective story.
I said, what's happened with, of course, reporters and journalists in recent years, but never more so than in the Trump-Clinton campaign, is that they have become just simply mouthpieces for the regime, and they have become the enforcers of political correctness.
And I joked at that point to kind of lighten the mood, because, of course, I'm sure just about everybody in that room is left-wing.
I said, but I'm sure everybody in this room will completely restore my faith in establishment press when you go out and get your jobs.
And then it went on from there.
Now, of course, as I mentioned, they were fairly well-versed in the history of this program, or at least had a cursory knowledge of it.
They asked me about the program being pro-white and about my relationship with David Duke and if I thought that played into the way the media covers our work.
Well, I'm sure it gives them a coat hanger to hang their opinions on.
But, you know, when you understand that groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center, which is one of the primary enforcement arms of the left on shows such as ours, has named groups as innocuous and as milquetoast as James Dobson's focus on the family and Tony Perkins' American Family Council as hate groups,
you understand that it really doesn't take much of a nexus at all between more extreme members of the alternative right and whoever they have decided to target to cause them to conclude that you are, you know, the equivalent of a Klansman.
And that's basically the kernel of the coconut on this thing that they're coming against me, which is the subject of this lawsuit.
Well, and they asked about David Duke, and I guess I can only answer that question because it's my relationship, not yours or anyone else.
As I just said, I think David Duke's a great man, and I make that decision based upon my personal knowledge of him, not experiences I had with him before I was born.
He hasn't been in the Klan since before I was born.
I don't know who he was or what he was doing then, but the man that I've known for the last 10 years is a man that I'm very proud to know.
And dare I say, I'd rather be in his company than many of your peers in the media.
We'll pause it there.
One more segment about this, and we'll get on with the night.
But it'll be interesting.
Stay tuned.
Pursuing Liberty, using the Constitution as our guide.
You're listening to Liberty News Radio.
With news this hour from LibertyNewsDaily.com, I'm William Grigg.
Senior Pentagon officials disclosed on March 8th that a contingent of at least 200 U.S. Marines have been deployed into Syria with heavy artillery guns in preparation for combat in the ongoing battle to reclaim Raqqa from ISIS.
In addition, Washington is preparing to send hundreds of additional troops to Kuwait in order to join the battle in the event that they are needed.
The unnamed officials said that the total number of troops deployed for the mission would be fewer than 1,000.
This comes after the deployment of what was described as dozens of U.S. Army troops to the outskirts of Manbij, Syria, in what the Pentagon called a reassure and deter mission.
The troops who were dispatched in large, heavily armored vehicles displaying the U.S. flag were sent to keep a lid on tensions in the area, according to the Pentagon.
The Pentagon is also reportedly considering a large supplemental ground force for Syria, with commanders on the ground given discretion to call on reserves as they deem it to be tactically necessary.
President Trump had instructed the Pentagon to develop a plan to defeat ISIS within the first 30 days of his administration.
Although there has been no formal announcement of a completed plan, the Department of Defense said last week that the plan had been completed, and the controlled release of deployment details suggests that the plan is being implemented.
None of the available accounts suggest that the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has made a request for U.S. military intervention in the country, nor has the administration ended material support for al-Qaeda and ISIS-connected rebel groups seeking to overthrow Assad's government.
For commentary and insights on a troubled world, visit Joel Skousen's WorldAffairsBrief.com.
For LibertyNewsDaily.com, I'm William Grigg.
The Occidental Quarterly fills a unique niche in bringing together scholarly articles on a wide range of topics that are mired in political correctness elsewhere.
It is edited by Professor Kevin McDonald, who's no stranger to listeners of the political cesspool.
There are quite a few reasons for the precarious state of our civilization and our people, but one of the main ones is that we have lost the intellectual and moral high ground to a cultural elite that is hostile to our people and our culture.
Those of us who are politically aware must understand that the elites dominating culture and the political process in the West are intellectually and morally bankrupt.
TOQ is the key.
Digital download subscriptions are only $30 a year.
Subscriptions by first-class mail are only $60 a year.
Go to TOQonline.com and click on subscribe now.
In addition to receiving fascinating and informative articles, you'll also be supporting the work of scholars who are part of a community defending our people and our culture with the highest level of integrity and intellectual sophistication.
That's TOQonline.com.
subscribe now.
Welcome back.
To get on the show, call us on James's Guy at 1-866-986-6397.
All right, one more segment on a unique experience I had earlier this week addressing a group of future journalists and reporters at the prestigious Medal School of Journalism at Northwestern University.
Received very well, treated quite respectfully by the professor and everyone involved in the QA.
Mr. Edwards, this, sir, that.
I don't even get this around here, Keith.
That's right.
Absolutely.
Anyway, but no, it was fun.
It was a fun experience, unique experience.
And it's something that I share with the audience because, of course, the audience shares in everything that we do.
The victories, the triumphs, the setbacks, the day-to-day grind.
Our audience is with us through that.
Our financial contributors are especially with us and our stockholders and all that we do.
And to address a gathering like this is something special.
I think it really is.
I didn't think it at the time.
I just thought it was just another thing to do, just another stop on the tour.
But it was, as I've reflected more on it, I think that was a pretty special thing to do.
One question that I received, Keith, was what could, and we talked a little bit about the difference between establishment media and mainstream media.
I said, for people in Red State, Main Street, USA, and the South especially, we're mainstream because we're more in tune and on par with the average citizen than certainly the Axis in LA, New York, and Washington, D.C.
So I said, I think there's a difference between what's mainstream and what's establishment.
And so we settled on establishment press to identify the legacy media and the giants, or what used to be the giants.
I think the readership and the viewership of these formerly mega outlets are certainly dissipating.
But a question was posed to me, what could the establishment media do to win the trust of my audience?
To win the trust of the political cesspool audience?
Said, well, I don't think they have any intention or desire to win the trust of the decent, good All-American people who tune into a show like mine.
And then I gave my answer.
But Keith, how would you have answered?
What could the establishment press do to win the trust of this audience?
Well, they could hire you and me and people like us to be commentators, editorialists or otherwise, you know, contribute to their newspapers or to their broadcasts.
We could be, I could take the place of Charles Krauthammer, for example.
You could take the place of David Leonhardt, the editor of the New York Times today.
Those are the type, once they start getting a true diversity, they're always talking about celebrating diversity and how diversity is our greatest strength, but they have no diversity of opinion.
And as a result, they are considered to be nothing more than extreme leftists trying to preach and cajole and browbeat the rest of the nation into adopting their viewpoint.
And of course, that's resented.
What they could do is start hiring people like us to have sinecures with the New York Times or the Washington Post and to give our opinions on the news of the day or on the movements of the day.
Well, we've been waiting a while for something like that.
I don't think that will happen.
There was some knowledge.
Well, they asked what you could do.
That's exactly what they could do.
They could start hiring people like you and me and Sam.
I gave the, of course, again, went back to the coverage of the campaign last year.
I said, I don't ever expect the press to be in the tank for Trump the way it was in the tank for Hillary Clinton.
But I said there was no doubt about it.
And the public absolutely saw that.
We talked about some statistics, some polls that show how low the American people's trust is with the press.
But I said, there's no doubt about it.
Even Jim Rutenberg for the New York Times, who interviewed me a long, long time ago, said we can't even pretend that we're objective anymore.
This election is too important.
We've got to make sure Hillary wins.
This was one of the key journalists for the New York Times.
It said, we can't even pretend to be objective.
This is supposed to be the leader.
This is supposed to be the leading light of print journalism in America, the number one newspaper in the United States of America.
And their spokesman has said to be objective.
And I brought that up in my history with him.
And he did some shady business in our interview.
And I just said, I don't think that the trust will ever be won back.
I don't think it's their desire to win back the trust of working class, middle-class people.
And I said, even if they tried now, it's probably too far gone.
How long would they have to show objectivity?
And do they even have the discipline to do that?
The answer is no.
They would have to show it for years and years to even begin to form a sense of trust again.
And I said, by then, the new media is going to have taken over anyway.
So we talked about that.
They asked me, there was some knowledge, I think, that we'd been credentialed to some Trump events, the RNC, the inauguration, the rally in Memphis.
And so they asked me what I think Trump is going to do.
Do I think Trump will do more to exact some level of revenge against the press?
Or what more can Trump do to the press?
And I just said the first thing he could do is blow them all out of the White House briefing room.
I said, that's the first thing I would do, to be honest with you, is I wouldn't let a single one of them in there.
I would replace it all with new media outlets and new media representatives.
I wouldn't let a single one of them in there.
We went back to the contentious conversation that Eddie and I had.
I said, honestly, I'm still a little bit in favor of punishing them.
And we went back to the Alien and Seditions Act and talked about that for just a brief second.
I said, there's nothing he could do that would be too far from me with regard to the press.
And finally, at the end of the day.
Let me address that topic.
Very quickly.
We're going to run out of time, and I want to be sure to wrap it up.
What I would say is that it's very important that he keep up.
the fire against the mainstream media because all they want is for him to shut up so that they can dominate the turn the dialogue into a monologue.
So having him continue to tweet, having him continue to put his viewpoint out there without having it filtered by the mainstream media or the legacy media is not only a good idea, it's absolutely essential to getting his message across.
That's right.
And we've talked about this for weeks on this show about what he could and should do to the press going forward and how he should treat them.
And so we only had a minute or two there to talk about it.
But it's been well developed on this program.
At the end of it all, I thanked them.
And I said, to be honest with you, when I was asked to come here in preparation for this event earlier today, I said, I figured I'd be walking into your university's production of The Crucible as the starring role, as the main character of your local production of The Crucible.
But it wasn't like that at all.
And I thank them for being polite and respectful, even though I think very few, if any, would have found any common ground with me on the issues.
I thank the professor.
I thanked the young lady who got the ball rolling and put it all together.
And I think the entire class even left with a round of applause.
I think it was just one of those moments you just don't think you would have at a place like that.
But we had a good time.
And I don't know what happened after my appearance was over, if they had a free-for-all in the classroom.
I mean, there may have even been an article in the school newspaper this week, today the Nazi came to school, or the day the Nazi came to class.
Who knows?
But the point is, for that brief time and in that one instance, everybody laid down their swords and we had a civil, polite discussion.
And I really do thank them for that.
And thank the professor.
Thank the students.
And Northwestern University.
It was a good exchange.
And hopefully it will lead to something other than me talking about it here and sharing it with the audience.
But the point is, too, audience, we hear the political sets, we're all always out there doing something.
We're always out there doing something.
And I think making appearances at universities, this is where the leaders are tomorrow will be.
Our ideas, our viewpoints, our concerns need to be shared with them.
Talk about Daniel and the lines, Daniel.
That's right.
But, hey, going and doing speaking opportunities wherever you can go.
Obviously, this venue was a little more prestigious than most, but we will go where we're asked to go if it makes sense.
We will engage the press when it makes sense.
We will turn it down when it doesn't make sense.
We will try to be good stewards of our message and take the word out there and tell the truth in love.
And so very unique and dare I say prestigious opportunity was presented to us this week.
We took it, and now you know all about it.
But whether it's that or just being here on the radio or going to the media, making these doing these interviews with other outlets, just whatever it is that we do, organizing events like we did at Nathan Pedford Forest Park a couple of years ago, getting denounced by Congress and spitting in the face of the insides.
We're not hiding out in the studio, folks.
We're getting out there and engaging them.
We're bearding the line, as they say.
We're on the street.
We do public appearances.
And we try to take advantage of any and every opportunity to better our cause and to advance our movement.
And of course, ladies and gentlemen, your contributions make that possible.
So we're in the middle of a fundraising drive right now.
We'll talk a little bit more about that later on in the show, not the next segment.
We got something else we got to get to.
James doesn't need to take the mega bus up to Chicago next time.
We need some money in here, folks.
That's right.
Okay, well, it's the first quarter fundraising drive.
By now, if you're on our mailing list, you should have received a letter.
You know, we need our help, and you know why you should give.
So please give even tonight, maybe even this next commercial break.
We'll be right back.
As a parent, is receiving a faith-based, character-focused education for your children difficult to find?
Do you believe that godly principles should be a central component in your child's education?
Imagine a school where faith and integrity are at its center, where heritage and responsibility instill character.
For over 40 years, American Heritage School has been educating both hearts and minds, bringing out academic excellence.
This is the school where character and embracing the providence of a living God are fundamental, where students' national test scores average near the 90th percentile.
With American Heritage School's Advanced Distance Education Program, distance is no longer an issue.
With an accredited LDS-oriented curriculum from kindergarten through 12th grade, your children can attend from anywhere in the world.
American Heritage School will prepare your child for more than a job, it will prepare them for life.
To learn more, visit American-Heritage.org.
That's American-Heritage.org.
Liberty is not free.
Its costs are innumerable.
Without monetary funding, the valiant efforts of freedom-loving Americans become diminished or outright defeated.
We present a solution, the Give Me Liberty Fund.
The plan is quite simple: invite individual Americans to contribute less than a dollar a day.
These monetary funds are used to promote liberty-minded media, organizations, events, candidates, movements, and speakers.
In the spirit of transparency, all expenditures are published.
Patriotic business owners provide discounted products and services to Give Me Liberty Fund members.
Our greatest strength is in numbers.
Go to GiveMeLibertyFund.com and become part of the solution today.
GiveMeLibertyFund.com.
Participate in the peaceful restoration of the greatest and freest country in the world.
Hello, everyone.
James Edwards here.
Are you sick and tired of liberals and race hustlers and the media calling you a racist just because you oppose Obama's policies?
Well, my friend, those days are over.
After you read Racism Schmecism, you'll never again fear being called the R-word.
I invite you to discover why every conservative in America needs a copy of my explosive new book.
Racism Schmecism has received much critical acclaim and will equip you with the key to unlock their socio-political nuclear bomb once and for all.
Order your copy today by visiting the official website of the Political Cesspool radio program, thepoliticalcesspool.org.
Proceeds of each sale go to help keeping our award-winning show on the air and they make great gifts for your conservative friend or family member.
Buy Racism Schmaisism today at www.thepoliticalcesspool.org.
Welcome back.
To get on the show, call us on James's Dime at 1-866-986-6397.
All right, everybody, welcome back.
One of the things I've been trying to do more of this year since the calendar flipped to 2017.
Hard to believe it's already springtime now.
What in the world?
And that's actually Keith uncoiling his mic.
So one of the things I've been trying to do since we came to 2017 is stick with a format in that we would have a featured guest each evening, at least one, normally the second hour.
So we start out the show with me and Keith, the typical format, the typical template.
Start out the show with me and Keith, have some guests in the second hour.
Third hour normally is going to be Eddie.
And then, of course, throughout the whole program, we're talking about the news and hot topics and stories of the day.
Eddie's out tonight.
He's got another race.
So he's going to be, he's running this evening.
I actually saw Eddie a little earlier today.
He swung by my house and talked with him.
He'll be back next week.
And we do have a featured guest in the second hour, which we'll be getting to in just a moment.
So that's sort of the template we're working on this year.
And I think, according to the feedback we've been receiving, it's been pretty good and certainly has kept me more resolute to be sure to book at least one guest every night to offer a little variety and to really fulfill the vision that I had when I started this show 13 years ago, which is to, in addition to offering our take and unique opinion and analysis on the issues, to be able to feature others and let their voices be heard who would otherwise be shut out by the controlled press.
So we've got another great guest coming up in the second hour tonight as we continue on.
Another thing I wanted to do, another New Year's resolution for the show, was to bring in some fresh commercials, some fresh ads, and to freshen up the bumper music and some of the spots and breaks.
That is still in the works.
We've been busy.
It's been a busy year so far.
We've been to Washington a couple of times.
We did the inauguration.
Well, I was actually already looking back on this thing at Northwestern that we've been talking about, looking back already, just on the first few weeks of this new year and thinking, I'm always thinking, what's going to make it to the top 10 in the year in review?
We've already got a few entries for sure just in these first few weeks.
But we have been busy, but we are working on that.
We've got some fresh commercials coming up, and we've got some production folks working on the others.
So we're going to give it a new paint job, a fresh splash of paint on some of the bumps and stuff just to keep your ears tuned in.
Anyway, that announcement being done and out of the way, Keith, we were going to shift gears here this segment, but you wanted to stick with this just another minute or two longer.
You know, hindsight's 2020, but it would have been wonderful for you to have responded to that question about what can be done to rehabilitate the reputation of the legacy press or the establishment press in the eyes of people in Red State America if you had said,
well, we need to have genuine conservatives like us, not people like David Brooks or Charles Krauthammer or George Will actually working for legacy establishment press outlets like the New York Times, Washington Post, ABC, NBC, CBS.
And then I would have asked them, I really am curious about this.
How many people in this class are conservative?
And if people aren't raising their hands, do you think that might be because they realize the overwhelmingly leftist makeup of the establishment press?
And they don't want, if they are even the least bit conservative, they're hiding their light under a bushel because they want to be employed when this whole course of study is over.
Either that, Keith, and that very well could be the case for those who are nominally conservative.
I don't think you have any rock-ribbed right-wingers in that class.
I would have been surprised.
They didn't reveal themselves to me.
But I would say this.
Either they're hiding it under a bushel or most conservatives get real jobs when they grow up and they don't go into media.
Well, if they're in media, if they're in the School of Journalism at the top journalism school in the United States of America, they apparently have their cap set for getting a job at a place like the Washington Post, the New York Times, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, something like that.
And they realize that they would make themselves an outcast and a pariah if they were authentically conservative and outspoken about it.
So consequently, that would probably have brought it home to them as well as anything, the overwhelming, you know, it's like, well, I say the overwhelming whiteness of the Oscars.
This would be the overwhelming liberalism of the legacy media.
And I think that would have really driven it home to them.
Well, you had asked me during the commercial break if I picked up on whether or not there may be any friendlies in there in terms of fellow conservatives, for lack of a better definition.
They certainly didn't reveal themselves, we'll put it that way.
But again, as far as Friendly goes...
It would have been suicidal if they had.
Well, they may have all been radical left-wingers, but they all treated me with respect, and so they're going to get it right back from me and had a great time.
And even the professor, even the professor, two days later, I actually just got this last night in my inbox.
And he's pretty high up the totem pole as far as the faculty goes there at Northwestern.
Many thanks for being with us and being as candid as you were.
Well, if I'm one thing, that's candid, Professor.
But if you need anything down the line, please let me know.
I mean, what can you say?
In this moment, as far as this exchange is concerned, I mean, he could be a Marxist, but he was still a stand-up guy as far as this appearance went.
The problem is they're making themselves extinct in the mainstream media or the establishment media or the legacy media, however you want to term it, because they will not give a voice to people like you, me, Sam, and others.
As a result, it's like water.
Water is going to find a little hole to seep through if there's one anywhere.
We have done that.
We're doing this work basically for free, but the word is getting out there.
And it's not an accident that we're in the top 10 typically during our time slot for internet traffic every week.
And that's because there is a hunger and a thirst for this information that is being intentionally suppressed by the left and by the establishment press and broadcast outlets.
And as long as that is the case, you know, because of the internet, they cannot control it all anymore.
And when they can't control it, there's going to be some seepage and people are going to be refreshed and exhilarated by hearing this.
And as a result, you know, we've been doing this for, what, now, 12, 13 years?
It'll be 13 years this fall.
And look at all of the like, similarly-minded groups that have blossomed up since we first started doing this, James.
14, 13 years ago.
It's just, you know, it's like looking out and seeing mushrooms growing up overnight, you know, or clover.
It's everywhere.
People are doing this.
There are, you know, this is where the growth is.
This is where the growth is in the opinion, political opinion industry in America.
It's in the right.
This is where, and somehow, some way we're going to find a way to make money from this.
Breitbart and groups like that have already done it.
But I'll tell you what, Breitbart doesn't go nearly far enough, and that's why they've been able to make money.
We could have made a lot of money, too, and we would have been very well off had we, quote unquote, toned it down or abandoned our signature issues.
We would have been right there and even had these opportunities very early in our run to go to some of these networks and receive compensation.
But to us, we were purists, and I guess that and being a purist and five bucks will get you a cup of Joe at Starbucks.
But if you stop there, of course, which I don't.
But nevertheless, that's why Breitbart has to be able to do it.
Well, what they're doing is they're showing us the way because they're going past the mainstream media outlets.
They're not looking for work.
They're not looking for sinecares with them.
They're going directly to the consumers, and they are going directly to the advertisers and saying, look at the hits we get.
You know, that's something that we can all learn from, and hopefully we will.
This is what we've got to do.
We've got to let the free market decide what opinions get broadcast and which don't.
Well, the main thing is, folks, and I said it just a moment ago, I'll say it again, but say it a little differently.
Every day, it's not just Saturday night, 6 to 9 Central or 7 to 10 Eastern.
Every day, every night, your staff at the Political Assessment is working for you, whether it's putting content up on the website, whether it's preparing for the show, broadcasting the show on Saturdays, going out and doing these engagements, organizing things behind the scenes, networking with others.
We are working every day for the mission.
And Keith, you mentioned a moment ago, to be sure, Google and some of these websites certainly get more traffic than us.
What you're talking about, though, just to clarify, is according to the only reliable metric that is out there that judges radio programs that are also broadcast on the internet.
Now, we're not an internet radio show.
We're on AM radio and also on the internet.
But we are in the top 10 in our time slot every Saturday night.
We peek in the top 10 every Saturday night.
That says something.
And that's, of course, thanks to you, ladies and gentlemen.
But even with that, we still struggle to get it.
We're still taking the mega bus up to Chicago.
So what we need is more money here, folks.
And once we get that, we can start to really get this message broadcast the way it needs to be.
And see, we're like the Jim Bridgers.
We're like the Trappers.
We're the first guys out here.
And now it's beginning to become somewhat civilized.
We've got a lot of new settlers coming into the frontier.
But we were the original frontiersmen.
Well, that's right.
We'll continue to blaze that trail, folks.
But the more you give, the more we can do.
It'd be hard to do more than we did last year, but already this year we've plowed new ground.