The Right Frequency – New Book on Conservative Talk Radio

 “One of the biggest factors is going to be how the media shapes debates. If a Republican member of Congress is not punished on Fox News or by Rush Limbaugh for working with a Democrat on a bill of common interest, then you’ll see more of them doing it.” ~ Barack Obama 

Talk radio is again a focal point of debate in America in light of last year’s election and the future of the GOP. Some argue that Republicans must discard the advice of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. Others contend the radio hosts are still the most formidable voice of conservative commentary in the face of four more years of a Democratic president.
The Right Frequency, by Fred V. Lucas, a book that traces talk radio from its roots to becoming a dynamic force in conservative politics, has been well received by book critics and conservative commentators throughout the country.
Dick Morris, a former presidential advisor, writes, “Talk radio destroyed the liberal media monopoly and gave the conservatives a voice. But precisely because it brought the giants low, the publishing industry has ignored its history. Fred Lucas now fills that void, explaining from where it came and where it might be headed.”

Publishers Weekly says, “Lucas’s love and knowledge of talk radio is evident and will appeal to any fan of the medium.”

The American Spectator says, “So your burst of sanity from the media world comes from listening to Rush or Sean or Mark or Laura or Glenn or a whole host of others? This is the book that explains the history of talk radio (it goes back further than you think) and explains how it got to be the lifeline to so many millions of Americans. If you’re interested in the personalities, the history and the impact of talk radio, Fred Lucas has the story.”
Mark Levin, nationally syndicated talk radio wrote bestselling author wrote, “Fred Lucas not only delineates the roots of talk radio as a venue for communicating conservative political thought in the 1930s and ‘40s, he explains how it has become, in the 21st century, the life force for the conservative movement and the voice for conservative ideals on the current political landscape. Anyone who loves talk radio will love this book.”
Townhall writes, “Lucas delivers a book that is sure to please both conservatives and fans of talk radio. ‘The Right Frequency’ successfully captures the spirit of conservative talk radio and leaves the reader both well informed and entertained.”
The Blaze says, “Lucas examines the ‘big tent’ of right-of-center talk radio that has changed U.S. culture, media and government—a tent that includes, as Lucas points out, Reagan-style conservatives Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Mark Levin; conservative libertarian Glenn Beck; anti-war Michael Savage; and reserved intellectuals and analysts Bill Bennett and Dennis Prager. This remarkable and compelling look at the history of talk radio shows the power of the marketplace and the dangers of the free-speech squelching ‘fairness doctrine.’
L. Brent Bozell III, president of the Media Research Center, says, “Author Fred Lucas chronicles conservative talk-radio stars over the decades, reminding us how they kept the American idea alive. Lucas travels back to the early days of radio history, describing, for example, how Fulton Lewis predicted to Mike Wallace in the 1950s that the Republican Party could be a majority party if they would only let the conservatives run it, instead of the wishy-washy, me-too moderates.”
The Right Frequency, published by History Publishing Company, Palisades, NY is in bookstores nationally.
Contact: Don Bracken. (Tel) 845-398-816


Stop & Frisk: Giving Arabs a Pass on Pat-Downs?


New York’s “Stop & Frisk” program has liberals and center-right libertarians up in arms. Millions of street searches of American Black and Latino men incense these advocates.

“Stop & Frisk” is a forceful reminder to certain crime surplus populations that they can’t continue carrying illegal guns and using them with impunity.

Lest we forget, most Black and Latino criminal’s victims are other Blacks and Latinos. Aren’t their lives worth extra scrutiny?

It’s a civil rights question I’d love to hear liberals try to answer.

I’m fully-briefed on police racism, but I’m also just as fully-briefed on American Black and Latino urban culture promoting violent, felonious behavior.

On a homeland security note, I wonder whether “Stop & Frisk’s” deterrent value shouldn’t be applied to another population: Arabs, as a street-level, counter-terrorism effort?

If New York police, politicians and prosecutors defend this technique for use upon populations who don’t mount concerted terrorist attacks, would they oppose deploying it against terrorist surplus populations whose members fill headlines?

Imagine “Stop & Frisk” in majority-immigrant Muslim neighborhoods, complete with dogs trained to detect explosive residue?

While terror lobbyists like the Council On American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) would lead the opposing chorus, alongside center-right civil libertarians, it would be very interesting to see what would be uncovered.

Political correctness has Americans with zero criminal or terrorist ties subjected to ridiculous online, camera, HUMINT (human intelligence) and personal scrutiny, while more likely subjects go unmolested.

A White grandma on a walker might be an Al Qaeda sleeper agent, but it’s more likely she’s a Christian or Jewish American senior with arthritis – not asymmetrical anti-Americanism.

Is foreign oil and domestic appeasement worth our liberty? Apparently, especially if you’re an American Black or Latino in an airport.

Our White sisters and brothers get ridiculously hassled too, all in the name of “fairness?”

Here’s another slap in the face members of Obama’s most loyal voting block receive at airports: natural hair pat downs.

I kid you not, Black travelers with natural hair styles (curls; dreads etc) are subjected to extra searches as if “Afro bombs” were a real threat?

TSA staff laughably state thick Black hair somehow blocks x-ray scanners trusted to detect weapons hidden beneath layers of clothing???

It even has its own search engine phase, “Natural hair pat downs.”

Hmm … does alot of Black hair equal a homeland security threat in Obama’s Amerika? I’d love to see how long this lasts if Obama’s family were abused like this.

Despite American Blacks being overwhelming Christian, with little organized terrorist activity (outside of against ourselves!), they are profiled by an Obama-era TSA, to the exclusion of more likely subjects, i.e,. Arabs.

Including Arabs on the NYPD (and other departments) “Stop & Frisk” schedules would remind would-be terrorists America hasn’t forgotten what the majority of Islamist suspects look like.

Can New York, scene of two major terrorist attacks, afford not stopping and frisking Arabs and other terrorist surplus populations?

“Things that make you go, ‘Hmmm?’ ” to quote returning talk show host Arsenio Hall.

Cap Black, The Hood Conservative

Cap Black is a Contributing Writer to The Bold Pursuit

“American History” Month, February 2013


American History Month is my suggestion for re-naming the liberal Black History Month, as balm in the cultural Gilead of ethnic tensions at the dawn of Obama 2.0.

Observers will note the redundancy of American Blacks citing our color before every occasion or organization naming given its self-evidence for anyone with eyes.

Conservatives have argued this double standard over the years. Simply uttering thought balloons labeled, ” White History Month ” enrages liberals.

As founder of the American History Month alternative to Black History Month, I extend this offer to collegiate conservative and libertarian organizations:

I will be your February White History Month speaker under the titillating title, “Why This Black Conservative Promotes White History Month!”

My goal is exposing out dated, even divisive practices among Americans of all backgrounds. The flip side of my Black History Month alternative is assisting those challenging the same, by hosting White History observances to challenge this double standard.

While provocative, both proposals aim to shift focus away from ethnic cheer leading and onto a comprehensive American history uniting all segments.

Socialist, sixties era ethnic enclaves ill serve a 21st century America which has slain most of her dragons of overt discrimination except, ironically, in government and higher education.

My American History Month alternative to Black History Month is an olive branch to traditionalist countrymen feeling demonized at precisely the time when their values should be lauded.

Americans anxious to celebrate one accounting of all contributions to our country should consider my American History Month alternative to what’s become to many a divisive Black History Month.

Conservative or libertarian college organizations who desire a non-White supporter for February White History Month, anti-reverse discrimination events have my open invitation.

Celebrating Black folks as Americans, not outcasts and challenging reverse discrimination are two of the best ways I know to use the month of February.

We have another long four years of ethnic tension to navigate and working to unite traditional values citizens of all colors is the best path to take!

Cap Black The Hood Conservative

” Be your OWN Superhero!”

Cap Black is a Contributing Writer to The Bold Pursuit

Black History Month or American History Month


My fellow Americans of all colors and creeds, this proposal will offend some and comfort others. It is offered in the spirit of fulfilling the pledge E Pluribus Unum: “Out of Many One.” 

I propose we rename the annual February observance known as Black History Month. My suggestion is: “American History Month.” 

Historian Dr. Carter G. Woodson founded its precursor, Negro History Week, in 1926, at the height of open racism against American Blacks. 

It was unquestioned that we were written out of American history, and what was said wasn’t very flattering. The observance evolved into a month-long intensive recognition of our contributions to this country and humanity. 

Generations of heroic sacrifice by ourselves and allied Americans have reloaded the nation today, where we are more informed about ourselves than at any time. 

I propose we take this February observance and make it an exploration of how we’ve upgraded from outcasts to citizenship. 

Black History Month partisans will obviously howl heresy! 

They’ll say that removing its ethnic focus robs us of precious self-knowledge yet again. 

I counter that if we cannot present ourselves as Americans finally, then all legal enfranchisement efforts were in vain. 

The idea of a Black History Month in post-segregation America smacks of separatism to a population made to bear the burden of past racism. 

Renaming Black History Month would be the final olive branch needed to end a racial cold war between American Blacks and Whites, which must end if America is to bury large-scale racism forever. 

American History Month wouldn’t whitewash the Black presence in America. 

It would welcome the American presence of Blacks as finally part of her body politic- not as ironically self-imposed outcasts a generation after full enfranchisement. 

How does this sound throughout February 2013? 

“Happy American History Month!” 

Just a thought from your Ameri-centric brother! 

Cap Black, The Hood Conservative, says … “Happy American History Month!” 


Cap Black is a Contributing Writer to The Bold Pursuit


King Tut-Obama: America’s First Pharaoh?

by Cap Black

Obama reminds me more of an ancient pharaoh than an American president. 

There’s a un-subdued haughtiness that makes me wonder when he’ll declare “So let it be written; so let it be done!”

He carries himself as someone assured his throne atop the tribal pyramid is due to Divine right and nothing less.

I never thought I’d get the chance to see a real pharaoh in action, but now I have a ringside seat.

Obama taps into a subconscious desire many have to be led. His Messianic following has handed him the reins twice, despite a dismal economic record and foreign policy outrages like Benghazi.

The American premise that we’re a free people isn’t automatic. Unless succeeding generations preserve it, none should be surprised that a pharaoh now presides.

Freedom is hard work with no guarantees. Handing it off to one person who says he has all the answers is much easier.

Is it any wonder America’s pharaoh first shed public tears when talking to campaign staffers shortly after his reelection victory?

These peons’ loyalty had rewarded their God-king with another term. He graced them with his presence and rendered the supreme gift of a show of imperial emotion.

As an American whose grandparents and parents, not to mention myself personally, had to earn that title against entrenched opposition, this whole pharaoh thing rubs me the wrong way.

Americans aren’t supposed to bow and scrape before monarchs. I consider monarchy to be a primitive, oppressive concept well beyond its expiration date.

George Washington declined the offer of royalty as reward for his leadership. Notice how our presidents are called “Mr President” and not “Your Highness” or “Sire.”

One day, a future president will be called “Madame President” or “Mrs. President.”

These titles are identical to those used by what monarchies narrow-mindedly refer to as so-called “commoners,” (i.e. you and me).

Respecting the office of president is something I was weaned on.

Acting like a flunky to a would-be modern pharaoh is something in good conscience I can’t do.

I was born a free man and intend to stay that way.

Cap Black, The Hood Conservative

Cap Black is a Contributing Writer to The Bold Pursuit


Former New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin: Black Good Ole Boy?


The phrase “Good Ole Boy” is used to describe America’s age-old system of cronyism.

Its leading critics have sadly included racism lobbyists whose selective outrage never includes American Blacks engaged in graft.

Instead of eliminating the Good Ole Boy system, they’ve merely integrated it, as illustrated by cases like the recent federal indictment of former New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin.

Previously, Americans would have stated that his claim to fame was being at the helm when levees tragically failed after Hurricane Katrina.

He now has made the dubious history of being New Orleans’ first mayor to face corruption charges in a town renowned for its culture of corruption.

That’s saying something.

Twenty one counts alleging taking bribes, funneling money to a business he owned, and other official misconduct challenges claims that Black faces in high places are all we need.

Cries of prejudice await deployment by Black racism lobbyists whose greatest wish is for Black folks to get in on the action- not end corruption.

“White guys do it (engage in corruption); why can’t we?” is their weak rationale. The long list of convicted Black officials only means to them that dark hands only are the ones that get punished for dipping into the public cookie jar.

That’s a sad commentary for a demographic whose watch word was once “you have to be twice as good to get half as much.”

It seems our motto has now morphed into “Take the money and run!”

Nagin’s last term was winding down when I arrived here three years ago. I’ve had a ringside seat to monitor some of America’s most colorful and disturbing corruption cases in a town I’ve nicknamed the “real life Gotham City.”

My overriding concern remains how numerous liberal American Blacks overlook our crime on the streets and suites because they feel White people aren’t punished for the same offenses.

In Ray Nagin’s case, cooperating witnesses from his past will undoubtedly take the stand against him (including his former technology chief Greg Meffert, whom Black racism lobbyists will note is White).

Others wait in the wings, I’m sure.

Black observers in New Orleans and the rest of America have yet another high-profile scandal to experience.

It can serve as the latest mirror testing Black commitment to good government or expose hypocrisy by not being any better than those whom racism lobbyists ritually accuse.

Whether Ray Nagin is merely the latest Black Good Ole Boy to be exposed remains to be seen.

Corruption is wrong, regardless of its perpetrator’s color.

Cap Black, the Hood Conservative

Cap Black is a Contributing Writer to The Bold Pursuit

The “Fundamental Right” of gun ownership – the Second Amendment satisfied

by Jim Davis


Much of the confusion about the Second Amendment can be clarified by the two recent Supreme Court decisions on the issue. Those cases are District of Columbia v. Heller from 2008 and McDonald v. Chicago in 2010. In the Heller case, the Court not only rejected the proposition that the Second Amendment applies only to a National Guard-type militia, but that it specifically applies to the American citizen (and legal immigrants) as well. The Court also dismissed the leftist notion that citizens have the right to no more than musket-era firearms; but have the right to keep and bear modern armament and ammunition. Furthermore the Court confirmed the doctrine of the absolute right to keep and bear arms was uniquely American when established: and is a “fundamental right” that was purposefully established by the founding fathers. Therefore, that right is immutable via the Bill of Rights.


The Court used the term “Fundamental right” specifically in acknowledgement of the precedent set in a 1966 Supreme Court decision. That decision found that a young black man in Louisiana had a Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury instead of being railroaded to prison for two years by a hostile court. That decision established that Constitutional rights are indeed: guaranteed. The combination of the series of decisions establishes that fundamental rights are not passé, nor are they viable for sunset applications. The Court also recognized that the inconvenience of rights in “modern society” do not mitigate their applicability to the citizenry. In short, society is obligated bow to the rights of the people.


The second case, McDonald v. Chicago dismisses the proposition that a State or lower government can supersede or ignore the rights guaranteed in the Constitution. This incidentally is the argument supporters of the Constitution should make in New York State, where oligarchs are attempting to void the Constitution with unlawful ordinances that conflict with the courts ruling. Stare decisis has already established the state law is, (to be redundant) unconstitutional and therefore: unenforceable:


“Two years ago, in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. ___, this Court held that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense and struck down a District of Columbia law that banned the possession of handguns in the home. Chicago (hereinafter City) and the village of Oak Park, a Chicago suburb, have laws effectively banning handgun possession by almost all private citizens. After Heller, petitioners filed this federal suit against the City, which was consolidated with two related actions, alleging that the City’s handgun ban has left them vulnerable to criminals. They sought a declaration that the ban and several related City ordinances violate the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. Rejecting petitioners’ argument that the ordinances are unconstitutional, the court noted that the Seventh Circuit previously had upheld the constitutionality of a handgun ban, that Heller had explicitly refrained from opining on whether the Second Amendment applied to the States, and that the court had a duty to follow established Circuit precedent. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, relying on three 19th-century cases— United States v. Cruikshank , 92 U. S. 542, Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252, and Miller v. Texas, 153 U. S. 535— which were decided in the wake of this Court’s interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause in the Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36. Held: The judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded


Secondly, the decision settles which weapons can and cannot be owned by citizens. The verbiage states:


“None of the Court’s precedents forecloses the Court’s interpretation. Neither United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542 , nor Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252 , refutes the individual-rights interpretation. United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174 , does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes.”


This clarifies the principle that citizens and legal aliens can keep and bear arms that are equivalent to those in common use by the National Guard- the “well regulated militia”. Thus, refuting any attempts by the left to make “assault weapons” illegal. As long as the “well regulated” militia (National Guard) has assault weapons: the American citizen carries that fundamental right as well. So much for the war on the AR15 rifle. . .


The Democrat Party consistently finds itself in opposition to the Constitution and the founding patriots. This explains the Harvard findings that the party has become the anti-America party: and its candidates are diminished by patriotic events. The Supreme court of the United States has already settled the debate on the Second Amendment, and indeed the applicability of the Bill of Rights.


Much to the chagrin of the left, the issue is settled law.


(first posted on, January 21, 2013)

MLK Day 2013: Beyond Celebrations


MLK Day is an occasion for all Americans to reflect and measure national progress on ethnic and general quality of life issues.

His efforts materially impacted the market I grew up in. His liberalism, based upon a more intact Black family unit and Judeo-Christian ethic, differs from conservative American nationalism of my era.

Liberalism ceased having value for my generation the day it was fully co-opted by socialists. Their infiltration of civil rights organizations, churches and Black politics left them a shadow of their former selves.

His liberal legacy has even been embraced by a contrite Right anxious to shed its violently racist past. Given ongoing opposition to liberalism, this is awkward to say the least.

Integration, with expansive use of government programs, opened long closed doors to our bluecollar workers and professionals.

it also swept aside Black businesses like a tidal wave, leaving us integrating once-denied majority institutions empty pocketed.

The self-help, mutual aid fabric of American Blacks lies tattered, shot full of holes by a liberalism that made us more wards of the state, than fully enfranchised Americans. Whether this was intentional is debatable.

A world class institution builder like Booker T Washington offered American Blacks a practical program where our infrastructure sustained us long before integration happened.

Visionary conservative patriots like Jay Parker promoted an anti-communist, civil rights activism often eclipsed by liberal dominated media and academics.

MLK Day always finds me assessing the deadly gulf between his anti-Jim Crow (later anti-Vietnam & anti-capitalist) liberalism, with today’s anti-traditional values Left.

Today in New Orleans, five young Black men were shot at the parade held in Dr. King’s honor. Neither liberal school of thought I examine on this day adequately addresses the war within our ranks.

Even the second inauguration of Barack Hussein Obama was insufficient to stay the shooter’s hand.

Mere symbolism has reached its apparent limit and not even beloved progressive icons can inspire inner city cease fires.

Today’s Black liberal overlooks such daily outrages in favor of venting his spleen again distant White conservatives and the Republican Party,

The fact that these distant persons aren’t the ones killing and impregnating their way through the inner city is lost in transmission.

Black progressivism past and present seems overflowing with negatives: no businesses; no fathers, no peace, no political independence and no hope it seems.

Unless one notes the placebo in DC where desperately poor, unsafe American Blacks can look at the First Family and daydream.

is this King’s legacy: no Black infrastructure, too much government interference, a disinterested president and, now, too little respect for Black lives, pre-born and otherwise?

This is the bitter harvest of efforts infected by communism in any of its forms. This Eastern European plague freezes self-sufficiency; patriotism and traditional values among its clients.

It spawns angry peasants who eventually strangle economies with incessant grasping for more social programs.

MLK Day 2013 finds me looking beyond celebrations and flowery rhetoric to ugly realities which liberalism, past and present, creates.

If our “dream” doesn’t incorporate two parent (male/female) families; institution building and loving free markets then America, from the Hood to the Heartland, becomes nightmarish.

On MLK Day 2013, too many Americans are living a national nightmare.

Is that liberalism’s real definition of integration?


Cap Black The Hood Conservative

Also posted in Move-On-Up.Org

Cap Black is a Contributing Writer to The Bold Pursuit


Being Political & Black Beyond The Democrat/Republican Dynamic


I’ve always advocated for American Blacks to represent themselves on both sides of the aisle in a two party system.

I’ve also been a Republican since the (fortunately ) failed “high tech lynching” of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas had me leave being an Independent.

Party affiliation aside, I know neither party places a particularly high priority on what Black citizens like me think.

The same holds true for non-insiders of any color. I’ve long known what it means to be political and Black beyond the Democrat/Republican dynamic.

As an anti-crime activist in Democrat-dominated inner cities, it means watching our chocolate klansman-induced murder rate ignored by politicians whom the victims families vote into power without fail- or results.

As a liberty activist, it means being stone walled on official misconduct complaints by Democrats who feel their prejudice is above reproach because of the “D” behind their names.

It offers an unequaled vantage point where Dem Crow discrimination rampages unchallenged while Black liberals look for cops or White Republicans to conveniently protest.

Black skin is an effective disguise for Americans whose opposition to bigotry is bipartisan. We get to witness astonishing double standards distant White conservatives wouldn’t believe.

The GOP has its cadre of bigots, but at least they know enough to mask bias behind policy and privacy.

Democrat bigots will say things even the most racist Republican wouldn’t be caught dead saying. US Senator Harry Reid’s “Negro dialect” comment about Obama comes to mind.

A White Republican senator saying the same would have his resignation letter ready within minutes and even offer to commit hari-kari on the steps of the Heritage Foundation as proof of contrition.

As an American Black, like other independent-minded Americans, I place my individuality above partisanship.

While I think the GOP is better than the Democrat Party, that’s not really saying much. Democrats are a nightmarish collectivist cauldron of socialists, liberal racists, broke basket cases and more communist kooks than you can shake a voting machine at.

Any party looks great compared that that montage!

American Blacks who are Democrats or Republicans have an experience neither party can fully grasp nor are the few Black office holders on either side able to inject this into policy making.

Black folks need tax breaks and gun rights support to combat too few marriages and too many thugs in our communities.

I don’t see the Democrats nor Republicans floating bills to address either crisis. Black folks need more of our dollars in our pockets to fund fractured families off bipartisan radars set for the middle class only.

Inner city stake holders don’t need gun bans disarming them, while small boy units of thugs and larger ones of gangs use them for target practice.

Neither party wants to consider that arming and supporting law abiding Black citizens may be more effective than social (ist) programs or tourist cops passing through these areas.

Democrats don’t want their Black slaves privately lowering their crime rate because that would put them out of cushy, do-nothing jobs.

Republicans could take this issue and run with it, but who among them is hip enough about Black people to even concede all of us in the inner city aren’t criminals?

On lower taxes and pro-gun advocacy for inner city stakeholders alone the GOP or some new center right party could make Black in roads.

Being Black and political beyond the Democrat/Republican dynamic, especially if you’re not liberal, means never subordinating independent effort for indecisive partisanship.

Whether we make the bipartisan system or new parties responsive or not, we still have our hands full privately handing community and national challenges.

While our experience is unique, it still shares much with those of fellow citizens across the board.

In this sense being political and Black beyond the Democrat/Republican dynamic is simply being American, which is where everyone should be headed!

Nadra Enzi AKA CAP BLACK is a Contributing Writer to The Bold Pursuit