LEAHY: ‘USA on Way to Becoming Two Countries Divided by Common Language Where Same Words Mean Different Things to Each Side’

Find what drives you at Beaman Auto!
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

 

“The United States of America is well on its way to becoming two countries divided by a common language where the same words mean entirely different things to each side,” host Michael Patrick Leahy told co-host Doug Kellett Monday morning on The Tennessee Star Report Early Edition with Michael Patrick Leahy and Doug Kellett – broadcast on Nashville’s Talk Radio 98.3 and 1510 WLAC weekdays from 5:00 am to 8:00 am.

Here is the transcript of that conversation, in which Leahy sought Kellett’s view on the merits of his observation:

Leahy: I do want to run this by you, Doug. I want to get your reaction. I’m thinking about this [after my visit to Iowa on Friday]. I’m a big Winston Churchill fan. And so I took – I have a quote here. And I want to run it by you. I want you to see if it’s…

Kellett: I live for these quotes from Winston Churchill.

Leahy: This is my take on Winston Churchill. I want you to think about it. And I want you and our listeners to tell me if you think this is profound or preposterous. Here’s the quote. Ready? It’s from yours truly November 4th, 2019.

‘The United States of America is well on its way to becoming two countries divided by a common language where the same words mean entirely different things to each side.’

Kellett: (Laughs) I would agree with that. I wouldn’t say that’s preposterous. Yeah, I do think so. I think dialogue, words don’t seem to mean the same things anymore. I would go with that I think.

Leahy: Well good. Wow! Although, you don’t have to quite go to profound.

Kellett: Was that the wrong answer?

Leahy: No, that was the right answer to me. I don’t know. I wanted to see what you thought about it that’s all. I was just genuinely curious. Maybe profound is a little bit too…

Kellett: I think people are sort of talking at each other about. I think you’ll disagree with me. I think people are getting their news a lot of times from these, of what they agree with. Whether it’s news channels…

Leahy: Oh no. I think you’re right about that.

Kellett: Oh you are? I thought you disagreed with me when I brought it up the other day. But the point is. If so, maybe that’s why the New York Times is singling you out. They’re concerned, right? That people are turning to more sites, that haven’t been given the New York Times seal of approval of being journalistic perhaps.

Leahy: It’s a different world view. So let’s go back to Bernie Sanders’ quote. Look at all the words that he used [to describe Donald Trump] right? “Racist.”

Kellett: Do we want to go through each one of them?

Leahy: I mean you can. We’ve got a long list of words. And I would be curious, what he means by “racist.” What he means by “sexist.” “Xenophobe.”  “Homophobic.” “Religious bigot,” right? And if you are a Trump agenda supporter you look at those words and you say, ‘Well none of those apply to Donald Trump or to the deplorables.’

But if you are a leftist sitting in that audience with Ilhan Omar and Bernie Sanders [in Minneapolis this past weekend], yeah, you’d think they were descriptive. We’ve got a long list of what those words are.

And if you’re in our listening audience and you want to give us an example of one of those words that mean different things, the same word that means something entirely different to each side. You can call us. I’ll give you a couple of other words. “High crimes and misdemeanors.” (Laughter)

Kellett: Well, I don’t think anyone’s ever defined that one for us have they? I guess in the federalist papers. Have we gone back to look? I’m sure they discussed it. Well Mike I guess, you said it one time before, it’s kind of whatever the House of Representatives says it is I guess.

Leahy: Yep. Yep.

Kellett: (Sighs) That’s a hard one to really, you can’t really define that because it’s not like, ‘OK. This is a high crime and misdemeanor.’

Leahy: Here’s another word: “Fascism” What does that mean to the left and what does that mean to the right? Fascism to the right means government control of all of the major corporations and cooperation with all major corporations that are producing goods and services where the government is determining every aspect of what those folks can do.

That’s how the right would define fascism.

The left defines fascism as anything that disagrees with them.

That’s how I see it.

What do you think?

Kellett: Yeah, (Sighs) I don’t know really how to answer that one about fascism. I would go back to some of these others, yes. If you’re talking about President Trump directly, then I think in the case of Bernie Sanders or whatever, I don’t know what the religious bigot thing is, I’m not sure exactly what incident he’s talking about there. I guess he’s talking about the banning of Muslims, his policy to start. Is that it?

Leahy: He banned refugees from countries that are hotbeds of terrorism.

Kellett: No no, I know. But I’m just saying that I’m trying to think of what he’s pointing at. You’re right, he’s just throwing these out and not telling us what incident. Now I think the first one about racism, considering Joe Biden started his campaign with a video about Charlottesville…

Leahy: Right.

Kellett: I assume that’s what it is. But you’re right. We’re kind of left to assume. And that’s always a dangerous thing, especially in the political dialogue and everything to determine what a candidate is talking about. I kind of like it when they just tell me what they think about it.

Is Bernie going to spend his whole time telling about what’s wrong with Donald Trump? Or is he going to tell me what’s right about his campaign? Which one is it going to be?

Leahy: Well he hates Donald Trump so much that he’s only really going to focus on those descriptions.

Kellett: I think people know Donald Trump. I hate to throw polls at you. There’s a poll, 46 percent of Americans, I think it’s a Fox poll will not vote for Trump next time around. He’s already made that argument right? Isn’t the argument to make about why you should vote for Bernie Sanders? That’s a hard argument to make.

Leahy: A very hard argument. (Kellett chuckles) 

Kellett: Very hard.

Leahy: On that quote that I just read you from yours truly. I have to give a hat tip to Winston Churchill who once said that England and America are two countries divided by a common language.

Kellett: I like that quote. I would say you could also say you’re going to fight them on the beaches. (Leahy laughs) You’re doing that too.

Leahy: Well, that’s what the Democrats said [at the Liberty and Justice Celebration in Des Moines, Iowa on Friday].

Kellett: You’re going to fight them in Iowa. You’re going to fight them, New Hampshire.

Leahy: That was the theme of the Democrats. They’re going to fight against Donald Trump and fight against the evil Republicans and evil corporations that support him. And then after you fight and defeat them they’re going to unite the country. That’s their plan.

Kellett: Well, that’s comforting.

Listen to the whole first hour:

– – –

Tune in weekdays from 5:00 – 8:00 am to the Tennessee Star Report with Michael Patrick Leahy on Talk Radio 98.3 FM WLAC 1510. Listen online at iHeart Radio

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Related posts

One Thought to “LEAHY: ‘USA on Way to Becoming Two Countries Divided by Common Language Where Same Words Mean Different Things to Each Side’”

  1. Ralph

    The battle is not so much against the Democrats as it is against complacency on the part of the Republicans, particularly in local races. The prevailing attitude is that we got President Trump, so now we can sit back.

    Ask Kentucky and Virginia about what happens. Knoxville just elected a DSA party member to the city council, Nashville city council wants to grant blanket citizenship to illegal aliens, i.e., criminals.

    As for fascism, Goldberg’s “Liberal Fascism” offers an account of President Wilson’s administration, how those policies inspired Mussolini and were formative to his movement which, in turn, inspired Hitler.

    Democrats are conspicuously silent that socialism was the underlying premise for the NSDAP, i.e., Nazi. The official narrative is that Nazi was a “far right” party – oh, in what respect? Firearm confiscation, universal health care, eugenics through legalized abortion, guaranteed basic income, banning religion, identity politics, ruling by decree rather than the constitution (i.e., “administrative state”, “a pen and a phone”), radical environmentalism, absolute control of the media, one world government. Are those the “far right” policies being referred to?

    From Hayek’s “Road To Serfdom”:

    “In the democracies at present, many who sincerely hate all of Nazism’s manifestations are working for ideals whose realization would lead straight to the abhorred tyranny.”

    Shirer’s 1961 epic ” The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” offers striking parallels to the Democrat party platform. Time to pin the mustache on the tyrant. One flavor of totalitarianism is no more appealing than the next. Nazism and Communism were only at odds over control, competing for the same resources, not ideology.

Comments