It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Rush Limbaugh Begs President to Keep His Job

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 24 2009 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Dear Rush,

You are just pouting because the President hasn't mentioned your name again.
You're trying to maintain the image among those of your political persuasion that you are somehow relevant to this country.

Local content, diversity of ownership, and public interest are all Good Things for the consumer. Not that you'd care about that. But they're not censorship. Look it up. Censorship is the practice of scrutiny in order to delete or oppress objectionable material. NewsFlash, Rush. The FCC already does that. And while a large part of America finds you and your message extremely objectionable in every way, we can't legally do anything about it without infringing on your free speech rights, which we support.

If you find that you just can't compete with the local stories, like the Las Cruses Chili Festival Cook-Off, and what interests the public in these areas, like stories on wolf extinction, then you're not even as relevant as your critics think you are.

Go back to your cave, Rush. Spew your ignorance into the airwaves. No one is going to interfere with your racist, bigoted, filth that you call a radio show.



BH!!!


Back in ACTION!





posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 06:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by grover
Ayn Rand was a lousy writer and a poorer thinker I am surprised that anyone takes her seriously....

Ayn Rand was a wonderful writer and a visionary. I am surprised that anyone who has read her work can't see the truth of it.


(Hope your knees are doing well. Mine hurt like heck .. )



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 06:06 AM
link   
Don't instaure the fairness doctrine, but kick this piece of garbage off the airs.

He deserves it, he's a freaking moran playing partisan politics, he's a tool on drugs. Just because he's Rush, he's not in jail when everyone knows he's an addict on oxycontin. Anyone else would be in jail.

Rush is a government tool to promote partisanship and encourage the democrats-republicans BS.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 06:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Don't instaure the fairness doctrine, but kick this piece of garbage off the airs.

That's how I feel. Don't institute the unfair and un-free-market facist 'Fairness Doctrine' ... but people who can't stand Rush (and I'm one of them) should gather together and boycott Rush and his sponsors. Write letters to them .. etc. That's keeping the free market AND using it to get the bum off the air.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 



Rush is a government tool to promote partisanship and encourage the democrats-republicans BS.


I wouldnt take it that far.

Rush is a tool. But only in the degrading metaphorical sense. He does encourage partisanship, but his main objective is to make money.

He'll say whatever it takes to gain the attention of angry conservative republicans and make them feel like all the problems of the world ARE NOT their fault, instead blamed off on the democrats.

Rush Limbaugh has never once, ever, admitted anything was the fault of republicans (Except for loosing the election with a candidate Rush, himself, supported)



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 10:45 AM
link   



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
Yea Obama, let Limbaugh keep spewing his hate speech! Sure he hopes you fail as a president, and so he also feels that the country should fail. But hey Obama, let him keep his job!



While I certainly do not agree with everything Rush says, what he does say is no worse than the anti-American drivel that has been spewed over the last ten years. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. He has a right to state whatever he thinks.

If you are going to limit his speech, then you damned well had better cease the anti-American sentiments as well. Thank ya, thank ya.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 12:19 PM
link   
it was ok for the left to say whatever they wanted to about bush

but sinces its rush ooooooooooooooo noooooo its lord obama.. you cant say that NO.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH DEAL WITH IT!



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 07:59 PM
link   
As the above poster mentioned, everything was a go when it came to Bush, now, we have the "Free Spender", who doesn't have a clue, shall we support that ? Heck no, Obama will turn this country into a european standart, socialistic country......be prepared, this non knowing, string puppet is a complete fool...

I feel, no matter what media spews crap, they should be able to, based on a free speech right. Are we in a communist controlled country???



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Dear Rush,

You are just pouting because the President hasn't mentioned your name again.
You're trying to maintain the image among those of your political persuasion that you are somehow relevant to this country.

Local content, diversity of ownership, and public interest are all Good Things for the consumer. Not that you'd care about that. But they're not censorship. Look it up. Censorship is the practice of scrutiny in order to delete or oppress objectionable material. NewsFlash, Rush. The FCC already does that. And while a large part of America finds you and your message extremely objectionable in every way, we can't legally do anything about it without infringing on your free speech rights, which we support.

If you find that you just can't compete with the local stories, like the Las Cruses Chili Festival Cook-Off, and what interests the public in these areas, like stories on wolf extinction, then you're not even as relevant as your critics think you are.

Go back to your cave, Rush. Spew your ignorance into the airwaves. No one is going to interfere with your racist, bigoted, filth that you call a radio show.



BH!!!


Back in ACTION!




LOL......I actually think you guys are mad over the status of his show.
Number 1/One in the talk show radio field, where are your guys???

You might want to pay attention to Obama spewing about racism as his Attorney General, eh?



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by aquiesce
 


Who would listen to talk radio but a conservative? Old-style beliefs, old technology.



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 02:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Irish M1ck
 




So you say.
But, the radio and cable waves are ruled by Rush, Hannity and Fox News. Where is the left in the mix? The ratings rock for the "Right", face it. Could it be that not enough people with a decent education listen to the leftist radio shows???



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by aquiesce
reply to post by Irish M1ck
 




So you say.
But, the radio and cable waves are ruled by Rush, Hannity and Fox News. Where is the left in the mix? The ratings rock for the "Right", face it. Could it be that not enough people with a decent education listen to the leftist radio shows???


I'd actually be curious to see how you came up with the cable waves?
Yes, Rush rules talk radio - but thats because it is the only national option. No other politically syndicated "news" program is available nation wide on AM radio.

So it's like me saying that i am the smartest person in the room right now. I am the only person in the room that im in - therefore - who cares.

Rush is a blow-hard who would sell out his own mother if it meant ratings.

If you seriously take anything he has to say to heart, i feel very sorry for you.



Famous Rush Quote:


So, in your mind, they're simply trying to duplicate the actions taken by the American injuns , and get themselves set up so they have casinos over there?
Source


way to show us how "old" the GOP really can be, Rush.




[edit on 28-2-2009 by Fremd]



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 02:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno

I heard him and Ann Coulter are planning on spawning an offspring together. While not being able to be called a "Love Child" as neither Rush or Ann are capable of such a liberal emotion, the child will however be the culmination of conservative family values.

Possible names? George W Regan, Newt Bush, Damien Thorn.



I like that... but why stop there? Maybe Obama and Pelosi can have a love child too!

And if those two unholy children are of the opposite sex... then they can mate...
and produce a child so amazingly bi-partisan ... he/she will be elected Emperor by the time he/she reaches puberty.

Maybe that's our only hope for the salvation of the country?



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 02:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by aquiesce
 


Who would listen to talk radio but a conservative? Old-style beliefs, old technology.


I happen to listen to alot of talk radio when I go on long trips. If you have sirrus you have a left talk show and a right talk show. They are entertaining while going 80 down I-40 at 2 in the morning.

Besides, if you don't listen to it then where did the hatred of Rush come from? Surely you don't judge him from a couple of clips you heard.

Like anyone who is free to speak their minds, he can blow alot of smoke. However, he does offer alot of good points.



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 02:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Resinveins
 



Judging from the speech President Obama gave to Congress. I don't think Pelosi would be able to stay down long enough for him to do the deed.



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by aquiesce
 


You actually believe that don't you? That you are smarter than most people on the left? That comes from listening to too much Rush and Hannity. Here's an idea for you about why ratings my be slanted:

There are more conservatives in this country than liberals. Now, if we could just get Texas to secede from the county...



posted on Mar, 1 2009 @ 09:04 PM
link   
The Fairness Doctrine was suspended in about 1987, when Reagan was in office. It wasn't because the country was no longer interested in fairness, but because the explosion of cable programming allowed for a wide spectrum of ideas to be broadcast, so it is thought that there was no longer a need for it. There is Faux News on the right and MSNBC on the left. This somewhat simplistic dichotomy still leaves many perspectives not well represented--like the socialists and the libertarians, for example--though I think some good might come of it. The most agreed-upon assumption at this time, I believe, is that there will eventually be a venue for every philosophy if there is enough demand for it. It can be argued that programming can shape people's views as much as it is shaped by them, so that the perspective that gets the most air time will tend to dominate in public life. That's the argument for reinstating the fairness doctrine, but I don't think it is a majority opinion at this time.

If Obama says he doesn't support it, he doesn't support it, so there's no reason for the right wing to get hysterical about that possibility. It seems unlikely that the FCC will reinstate the fairness doctrine either.

Question: What is the difference between Rush Limbaugh and a Zeppelin?
Answer: One is a big, flaming, Nazi gas bag and the other is just a Zeppelin.



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 02:24 AM
link   
I guess I was wrong and Obama just made sure RUSH kept his job...

As head of the Republican party.



posted on Mar, 6 2009 @ 03:27 AM
link   
***My views are my own, take them with a grain of salt. I'm a Constitutionalist if you wish to label me. Do what you will within your rights, but don't force your opinions on others, no infringe upon their rights. That's my basic philosophy.***

I do not support the Fairness Doctrine. The Constitution allows us to speak our minds, no matter how foolish or loudmouthed. As long as a person states opinion and doesn't try to pass it off as irrefutable fact then they should not be censored. The Free Market is the balance. MSNBC leans left, Fox News leans right. Don't like something, then don't listen or watch. Market share truly does count, and it is the deciding factor on what is played.

Ratings dictate who's show is played. Air America and that other defunct station are examples of this. If you do not have an audience then you do not have revenue, as it should be. This is not to say there are not tons of democrats out there, it is just that radio doesn't seem to be the liberal consumer's media of choice. There is nothing wrong with that. We have the internet, this bastion of freedom, that can be used to spread any person's viewpoint. The Huffington Post is a fine example. It is most assuredly liberal based, and it has a huge following.

I don't care for Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity. I used to listen to them many years ago because they pointed out tax problems, spending problems, bad laws and other things that might interest people with a mind for politics but little time to dig deep. I was young and naive to politics, at the time identifying with Republicans more than Democrats. Slowly I noticed they only pointed out these problems when a democrat was at fault. This bias didn't sit well with me.

I now identify with neither party. Being truly independent, picking and choosing the individual based on merit, not party line, has really been liberating.

In the end I do not wish to see ANY viewpoint stifled. We, the individual have the right to freedom of speech and businesses don't have to produce a show that doesn't make profit.




top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join