For the Board's liberals, here's an interesting question.

[Dick Tuck]

I'll point out that since the decision of Citizens, every American is more obligated to vote with their wallet, and let the companies know that they intend to.

As for Media Matters, what they do is exactly what AIM has been doing for years. They call bias and bullshit where they see it. BFD. They advocate against what they see is bullshit, just as the Scaife funded AIM has been doing for so long. Soros is your boogeyman, like Scaife is ours. Remember when David Brock was the darling of the right?

 

[rightwinger]

Rush is not being attacked for his political views. He is being attacked because what he said about Fluke was obnoxious bullying which most Americans found offensive

He is being attacked for his political views as you're not going after people you agree with politically who make the same and worse comments. Hypocrisy proves that civil discourse isn't an issue when you only apply it to people who you don't agree with. Schultz, Maher, Olberman, ... They get a pass. There is only one reason you're going after Rush, he's not liberal.

Went after Letterman when he crossed the line. It is not your political view but the tendency to go personal that gets you in trouble

 

[Liability]

Rush is not being attacked for his political views. He is being attacked because what he said about Fluke was obnoxious bullying which most Americans found offensive

He is being attacked for his political views as you're not going after people you agree with politically who make the same and worse comments. Hypocrisy proves that civil discourse isn't an issue when you only apply it to people who you don't agree with. Schultz, Maher, Olberman, ... They get a pass. There is only one reason you're going after Rush, he's not liberal.

Went after Letterman when he crossed the line. It is not your political view but the tendency to go personal that gets you in trouble

"Went after Letterman?"

Bull.

Criticizing Letterman for his cheese-dick comment is all well and good. But it's not even remotely akin to trying to get Rush Limbaugh silenced.

 

[Katiegrrl0]

Rush is not being attacked for his political views. He is being attacked because what he said about Fluke was obnoxious bullying which most Americans found offensive

He is being attacked for his political views as you're not going after people you agree with politically who make the same and worse comments. Hypocrisy proves that civil discourse isn't an issue when you only apply it to people who you don't agree with. Schultz, Maher, Olberman, ... They get a pass. There is only one reason you're going after Rush, he's not liberal.

Do you really believe Schultz, Maher, and Olberman are not attacked. They are and in all cases including Rush their words do not hurt you. It's people who make these people important personalities important. The people who approve are less a part of there fame then those that dislike and draw attention to them.
A number of years ago a movie was released titled Hail Mary. It was dead in the water until the Catholic Church drew attention to it with a call for a boycott. The seats filled up to see this film after the call for boycott.
Rush gets more attention after people make a fuss, as do the rest.

 

[Dick Tuck]

He is being attacked for his political views as you're not going after people you agree with politically who make the same and worse comments. Hypocrisy proves that civil discourse isn't an issue when you only apply it to people who you don't agree with. Schultz, Maher, Olberman, ... They get a pass. There is only one reason you're going after Rush, he's not liberal.

Went after Letterman when he crossed the line. It is not your political view but the tendency to go personal that gets you in trouble

"Went after Letterman?"

Bull.

Criticizing Letterman for his cheese-dick comment is all well and good. But it's not even remotely akin to trying to get Rush Limbaugh silenced.

So I have no right to tell a company that they can kiss my chump change goodbye, if they sponsor an asshat? If a company wants their brand associated with his show, that's their choice. I have the same right to free speech as Rush, and also have the same rights to spend my disposable income where I want.''

 

[uscitizen]

Howard Stern is pretty funny, so is Don Imus

But when they stepped over the line, they got fired

It's the way the business works

Who determines when they "step over the line"?

Public outrage

Hmm strange that no one has mentioned Dan Rather and his firing...

 

[Liability]

Who determines when they "step over the line"?

Public outrage

Hmm strange that no one has mentioned Dan Rather and his firing...

You mean his coerced retirement after he lied on a "news" program?

 

[UpAndAbout]

freedom of speech has consequences....

So do efforts to suppress free speech.

But your answer still isn't an answer.

Why is it we can't get a straight answer about ANYTHING from the liberals? I would really like to know what they want, what they would like to see happen, but you can't get an answer. They change the subject, answer a question with a question.

 

[uscitizen]

Public outrage

Hmm strange that no one has mentioned Dan Rather and his firing...

You mean his coerced retirement after he lied on a "news" program?

And no other political commentator has done this?

 

[UpAndAbout]

Went after Letterman when he crossed the line. It is not your political view but the tendency to go personal that gets you in trouble

"Went after Letterman?"

Bull.

Criticizing Letterman for his cheese-dick comment is all well and good. But it's not even remotely akin to trying to get Rush Limbaugh silenced.

So I have no right to tell a company that they can kiss my chump change goodbye, if they sponsor an asshat? If a company wants their brand associated with his show, that's their choice. I have the same right to free speech as Rush, and also have the same rights to spend my disposable income where I want.''

I see where you're coming from. That's why I don't buy Paul Neuman spaghetti sauce. And I am not going to renew my Carbonite suscription either. I also don't frequent any sponsors of Rachel Maddow or Chris Matthews, etc.

 

[Liability]

Hmm strange that no one has mentioned Dan Rather and his firing...

You mean his coerced retirement after he lied on a "news" program?

And no other political commentator has done this?

You guys really don't see a difference between a political commentator and a supposed "journalist," do you?

 

[Dick Tuck]

You mean his coerced retirement after he lied on a "news" program?

And no other political commentator has done this?

You guys really don't see a difference between a political commentator and a supposed "journalist," do you?

If a political commentator on NBC, CBS, or ABC called a president's child their family dog, told a caller to take the bone out their nose, mocked a celebrity's Parkinson symptoms, or called someone who opined that they thought that contraception be part of health insurance a prostitute and slut, they'd be gone in a heartbeat.

 

[Liability]

And no other political commentator has done this?

You guys really don't see a difference between a political commentator and a supposed "journalist," do you?

If a political commentator on NBC, CBS, or ABC called a president's child their family dog, told a caller to take the bone out their nose, mocked a celebrity's Parkinson symptoms, or called someone who opined that they thought that contraception be part of health insurance a prostitute and slut, they'd be gone in a heartbeat.

No. They wouldn't.

And it's still true that a commentator is not the same thing as a journalist or reporter.

 

[rightwinger]

Who determines when they "step over the line"?

Public outrage

Hmm strange that no one has mentioned Dan Rather and his firing...

It was the right wing trying to "silence" him

 

[Dick Tuck]

Public outrage

Hmm strange that no one has mentioned Dan Rather and his firing...

It was the right wing trying to "silence" him

Yep. He gets 99 facts right, regarding Bush's service, or lack there of, gets hoodwinked with a single document, and the right wing uses that to dismiss the other facts that really demonstrate what a weasel Bush was in regards to the Guard duty. This in spite of the fact that Rather admitted he got bamboozled on one document. He was pretty stupid on that one though. Even the DNC sent the guy who tried to peddle it to them, packing.

 

[Listening]

Hmm strange that no one has mentioned Dan Rather and his firing...

It was the right wing trying to "silence" him

Yep. He gets 99 facts right, regarding Bush's service, or lack there of, gets hoodwinked with a single document, and the right wing uses that to dismiss the other facts that really demonstrate what a weasel Bush was in regards to the Guard duty. This in spite of the fact that Rather admitted he got bamboozled on one document. He was pretty stupid on that one though. Even the DNC sent the guy who tried to peddle it to them, packing.

Poor Dan,

Wasn't sorry to see him go. Kieth Olbermann in a sweater.

 

[candycorn]

NOT a poll. I lift this question from another (related) thread where it is apparently going to be ignored. So, let's highlight it in its own little box:

Is the effort of Media Matters to get Rush Limbaugh off the air* a valid move that gives due consideration for the value we place on free speech and the open market of competing ideas?

I say that Media Matters is WAY off base. I say YOU libs OUGHT to be agreeing with me on that.

What do you liberal members of the USMB have to say?

__________________________
* See, for instance: Media Matters ad campaign aims to censor Rush Limbaugh | Washington Times Communities

And see its own website, where Media Matters talks of "monitoring" the advertising on Rush's radio show: Rush Limbaugh's Advertisers, March 6 | Media Matters for America

Sure it is a valid move. Stupid question from a poster that is usually spot on in his assessments and opinions.

Valuing free speech is great. People have to watch what they say and watch what they do.

 

[Valox]

I have always been a liberal, but not in a modern day sense. In fact, one of the main reasons that drove me away from liberalism is their petty beef with "liberal" and "conservative" media.

I follow in the footsteps of Goldwater (minus his nationalism) or an atheist progressive version of Ron Paul. Get the federal government out our decisions. Let liberal states keep their money rather than fund poor red, conservative states.

However, most of all get the rent seeking politicians and lobbyists out of Washington. Politics is a local matter, not a federal matter, but this false charade of Media Matter vs them is just another false charade to validate our status quo.

 

[Truthseeker420]

People have complete rights to tell a corporation they dont like its practices.

That wasn't the question.

Not to step on toes, but allow me to simplify the question.

Do YOU believe Rush should not be allowed to express himself on the air?

That's a yes or no question - if you're honest enough to answer.

Rush should have the freedom to say waht he wants and media matters should have the freedom to say what they want.

 

[Artevelde]

People have complete rights to tell a corporation they dont like its practices.

That wasn't the question.

Not to step on toes, but allow me to simplify the question.

Do YOU believe Rush should not be allowed to express himself on the air?

That's a yes or no question - if you're honest enough to answer.

Rush should have the freedom to say waht he wants and media matters should have the freedom to say what they want.

Sounds reasonable to me.