Limbaugh Smear Letter: Why Talk Radio is Needed - Page 2

ikestoys · #11 10-20-2007, 01:29 AM

[ QUOTE ]
The entire idea of congress taking the time to publicly admonish a private citizen is beyond ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

and one of the reasons why its approval rating is 11%

Exsubmariner · #12 10-20-2007, 01:39 AM

Stop apologizing for a political machine playing the gotcha game with talk radio in an effort to destroy the first amendment. No, you aren't apologizing, you're participating.

You should be ashamed.

ikestoys · #13 10-20-2007, 01:49 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Stop apologizing for a political machine playing the gotcha game with talk radio in an effort to destroy the first amendment. No, you aren't apologizing, you're participating.

You should be ashamed.

[/ QUOTE ]

pass what youre smokin over here, because i have no idea wtf you are talking about

ElliotR · #14 10-20-2007, 02:20 AM

hahahahaha. Ok, dude, whatever. The transcript speaks for itself.

Felix_Nietzsche · #15 10-20-2007, 07:55 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Why do I doubt that you were as outraged when the GOP led the charge to condemn the right of free speech exercised by moveon.org and the freedom of the press by the NY Times?

[/ QUOTE ]
You did not provide specifics ....so I can't respond to this question. Probably something to do with the 'General Betray Us' ad. If anything this exposes the partisanship of the NY Times which gave a HUGE price discount to a pro-Dem political group. The NY Times dicount was a defacto political contribution to the Democrat party and they were rightly criticized for it. Rudy called them out on it and forced them to give him the same discount. The NY Times did but is now asking for Rudy to pay the full price after his ad ran.....

People have the right of free speech but only the govt can censor free speech. When 41 democrat senators use senate time and their positions as powerful senators to intimidate a PRIVATE CITIZEN because his speech is not to their liking.....this is a classic stalinist tactic...

Not to mention that the senators were lying through their teeth...about what Limbaugh said.

Felix_Nietzsche · #16 10-20-2007, 08:06 AM

soldier vs soldiers? My you are grasping at straws...
Operation Stolen Valor convicted MULTIPLE people of falsely claiming to be vets.... Rush had spoken out against Jesse MacBeth and his ilk multiple times since he was exposed as a war fraud. His remarks were crystal clear to the listeners of the show. To the anti-Rush 'fairness doctrine' crowd, they used a creative interpretation of Rush's remarks to smear him. Durung the Abu Garab prison scandal it was Rush that equated the soldiers acts to equilvalent of a fraternity hazing incident....IF ANYTHING, Rush can be acused of overly defending the troops.

Interesting not one poster has addressed Harry Reid for falsely trying to take credit for the eBay letter and its proceeds going to the marine corps charity... Nor the ABC story which backed Reid assertion....

InTheDark · #17 10-20-2007, 09:30 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The entire idea of congress taking the time to publicly admonish a private citizen is beyond ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

and one of the reasons why its approval rating is 11%

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm wondering if I might be able to short that. I figure the bottom at somewhere near to 5%.

andyfox · #18 10-20-2007, 10:54 AM

I don't see how he was trying to imply that at all. The conversation with caller 2 was about caller 2's being a "real" soldier in that he enlisted not for the money but knowing he would be going to Iraq or Afghanistan to fight the war on terror. He's a "real" soldier. Those who criticize or enlist for a job are the "phony" soldiers. Those who claim to be in the service and are not are "fake" soldiers. Note that Limbaugh did not relate the talk of the "fake" soldier to his conversation with caller 2 at all.

andyfox · #19 10-20-2007, 10:58 AM

The Democrats in congress are a national disgrace, deserving of their 11% approval rating. Their letter urging Limbaugh's employer to get him to apologize is simply politics and an embarrassment to them: they're basically saying that Limbaugh has more cache in the public eye than they do, which, of course, is correct. I'm addressing the issues brought up in OP's post where I believe he's wrong in his analysis.

andyfox · #20 10-20-2007, 11:04 AM

I agree with you that Limbaugh can be accused of "overly" defending the troops. But not those who criticize the administration or the war. Look how he treated caller 1.

Limbaugh, as RR points out, is an entertainer. He seems to enjoy going over the top (feminazis, etc.). It would not be out of character for him to distinguish between soldiers like caller 2, a "real" soldier who enlisted to fight the good war, and those who are "phony," those who didn't really want to go to Iraq or Afghanistan. This is exactly what he then discussed with caller 2.

I haven't had a chance to go into Harry Reid's behavior (FWIW, I'll agree a priori that he's a disgrace and a major reason why the congress has an approval rating of about one-third of that of an unpopular president) nor that of ABC.