Im suprised it took so long for you guys to post this. Regardless of whether you like or dislike stern, this seems to be the case. Look back when the Dixie Chicks were talkin bad about Bush... Clearchannel banned them too, at least for a short time. There are many other instances also. Just do some research (I dont have the time, I have to get to work), and it is pretty clear. This coming from a Bush supporter

Stern has been talking about this for a week, and I dont know if it is just the power of suggestion working, and winning me over, but it makes a ton of sense.

Milk, that was a great example of non-partisan posting in a potentially partisan topic and contributing to the overall mission here: Deny Ignorance.

Some things are just so obvious they can't be denied no matter your politics. Like you said, it doesn't mean Bush is involved, or deserves spanking, but Clear Channel may have some underlying motives. Again, not to make a big deal of it... but it's nice to hear confirmation from a member of the Bush camp that the media goes both ways. It's not a vast liberal conspiracy by any means, nor a conservative extravaganza across the board.

I appreciate it when both liberals and conservatives can see the past the BS of partisan issues.

I agree, it is both ways.

Politics has found it's way into the impending war between party politics as a tool and weapon against the otherside.

Half-truths and slander has become a mainstay of both sides.

I for one am tired of the Conservatives (like me) claiming Christian values while slandering and being downright nasty to everyone liberal (not like me).

It's sickening.

Not suprising to me at all.Next they will label him a terrorist for speaking out against Dubya's never ending nonsense.

Personally, and IMHO, good riddance. Were can I send him some flowers and a box of tissues?

How is it that the man gets spanked, then knowing that there is a movement to pin Bush, and the US---look at Haiti--- for most everything, he decides to "question" the "connection", eh? I mean geez, while he was distributing his "philosophies of life" across the air-waves, Life was good and he had no reason to "question?!!
Now, as of his consequences, Stern has "reviewed", "re-thought", "questioned" the ties between ClearChannel and Bush?
Yeah, after all the years of his dirt-gobbing and stunts, he has finally been hit over the head with a stick and now wants to cry "foul"....or better yet, its "Bush's Fault"....
Again, IMHO, get in LINE Howey....there is a long line in front of ya. In such, grab a Coke, a tissue, and crack a smile!


regards
seekerof

[Edited on 5-3-2004 by Seekerof]

Thank you Seekerof, those are my thoughts exactly. Its about time that prick is of the airways

~Cudailike

Stern is probably loving this, I think. He thrives on this sort of stuff, always has. You can usually count on Stern to make a bigger deal out of this stuff. This 'clean up' started with Jackson's boob flash and I think Clear Channel is trying to get on the good side of the government by rethinking Stern. I'd just like to go back to the pre-Jackson-breast status quo. I think there's an overreaction here.

Milk: I don't think Clear Channel banned the Dixie Chicks, rather there was an outcry from the listening audience, listeners didn't want to here the Dixie Chicks, so it was in the stations' best interest not to play them, obviously.

This reminds me of what got me involved in following politics...

1994... Japan...

Rush Linebaugh's show was cut short everyday on the AFN (Armed Forces Network).

Rush was a heavy Clinton basher... Months after Clinton was sworn into office, Rush's shows were reduced to an hour on all overseas military radio stations.

Coincidence?

Can't speak to ClearChannels motive. Stern is just looking for publicity, in my opinion. Free speech is not Stern's passion, his passion is demeaning women.

He lost 6 stations out of hundreds, big deal. Bush bashers are alive and well on many stations.

I have listened to both Rush Limbaugh and Howard Stern and both have offended me at different times, yet I would NEVER question either's right to Freedom of Speech. I can always turn off the radio or the television.

I will always agree with Freedom of Speech, even if what is being said offends me.

[Edited on 5-3-2004 by Facefirst]

Sad isn't it? Bush and the GOP's paower are now restricting an American Icon. Yes, a distasteful Icon, but still an Icon. Makes sense though, talk bad about the GOP/NWO, you get banned.

Even Rush Limbaugh publicly defended Howard Stern's right to free speech free of censorship.

Complete hogwash! Clear Channel sucks and always has, but dropping Howard Stern has more to do with the other two incidents that got everyone stirred up - "The Jackson Superbowl flash" & the radio show in florida that caused commotion.

If Howard mentioned it had something to do with Bush he did to get publicity. If you ever listened to Howard you'd know that - it's his style.

The reason the DixieChicks caught crap is because alot of their fan base likes Bush & therfore their comment offended their own fans. Just a bit of stupidity there not a Bush conspiracy.

The reason the DixieChicks caught crap is because alot of their fan base likes Bush & therfore their comment offended their own fans. Just a bit of stupidity there not a Bush conspiracy.

why was it stupid? should they have changed what they believed in to keep some of their fans happy?

I dont think he is off the air for bashing bush, Mancow on Q101 does it daily and did it to Clinton too. He even went as far as to call clinton Clintler, (like hitler).

Originally posted by enomus


why was it stupid? should they have changed what they believed in to keep some of their fans happy?

That's their choice. When they have the stage they can do whatever they like. When you have the stage there is always the risk is you might offend someone and they might not buy your music again if they're a fan, or they might not play your record again if they are a DJ, or they might not allow their DJ's to play your music if they're the station owner etc.

There's nothing wrong with standing up for what you believe, you just have to realize that it could cost you financially. Which was the case with the Dixiechicks, thats why I called it stupidity, because I felt her message wasn't worth the crap she caught or the money she probably lost. Maybe stupid because she didn't realize they would broadcast what she said or because she didn't realize who her fan base was. Not only that she affected all those around her financially as well.

We all put up with allot of crap in order to make our livings and sometimes we get to the point were we say fudge it & tell the boss what we really think. Then we sort of fall back down to earth and realize that maybe we were better off before we opened our mouth. Sometimes were lucky & it lifts us to something better. In the Dixiechicks case I'd say the scenario is closer to the "fall back to earth version".

Howard Stern's whole career is based on controversy and it wouldn't be Howard without it. He thrives on it and there will always be some market for him and he knows it - so Howard can say and do almost anything he wants.

[Edited on 5-3-2004 by outsider]

Originally posted by who
I dont think he is off the air for bashing bush, Mancow on Q101 does it daily and did it to Clinton too. He even went as far as to call clinton Clintler, (like hitler).

Mancow is bashing Bush now? [checking window for pigs flying] Are you sure?

I stopped watching Fox because of his segments. Dummycraps this and demoncracks that, on national TV. He hates Bush now? Really?

Outsider,

There was one more incident that you failed to mention. A caller on Stern's show made an ethnic slur while Stern was interviewing Rick Solomon.(of Paris Hilton fame)

That was what brought Clearchannel and the FCC down on him. Even though I am sure that the boob incident at the superbowl was what started the snowball effect.

Mancow?? Is he still around? Geez, I played a festival that he MC'd about 5 or 6 years ago in KC and I must say he was the single most offensive person I have ever heard.

Even having said that, that still does not make me ever want to take away or change free speech.

[Edited on 5-3-2004 by Facefirst]