Comments on: A Liberal "Unfairness Principle"

National Review Online: Attempt To Force Balance In Talk Radio Is Wrongheaded

infidel_us wrote:

"At least with people like Limbaugh, you get honesty. He doesn't try to pass himself off as an objective, unbiased journalist (as we have come to learn happens in the MSM at a ratio of 9:1.) He tells you straight up that he is a conservative and that's the slant you will hear. Plus, he doesn't whine like liberals do."

Honesty? Absolute rubbish.

He's about as honest as a car salesman.

Remember his drug addiction? He wasn't very honest in regards to his addiction.

He also spews forth blatant lies and morons like you soak them up and present them as the truth because you're too stupid to research things for yourself.

And as for whining - he never stops whining - he never shuts up.

He's always whining about others and claiming that he and conservatives are the victims of liberals.

Rush Limbaugh is about as respectable as any drug user - not very.

rudy654 wrote:

"Look, your point is lost on me, because I don't care anymore for the so-called left, than I do the right, or anywhere in between!! Politicians, can they be trusted, and to what degree? As for Rush Limbaugh and the others that dominate the AM radio waves, I know they appeal to a mass audience of people willing to swallow whatever they say. I have even heard prominent officials cite supposed facts coming off these hate radio programs. They dominate, and frankly I find it sad. Earlier I pointed out how Limbaugh used the tragic death of a woman by a mountain lion to make false claims of people (supposedly environmentalists) sending contributions, not for the children of this woman, but for the cubs of the mountain lion. I believed this lie. But then I found out it was false, and not one person ever called Limbaugh on it. Instead, he praised himself for being the saviour of these orphaned children. He lied through and through. So, why can't there be balance to blatant, hateful lies, yes, even on the radio waves used to promote them?"

Well said.

processor2 wrote:

"Liberals are amazing in their hypocrisy.

They want to censor and silence those they disagree with, like Rush Limbaugh and Fox News,
while simultaneously telling us how tolerant and open-minded they are to diversity.

Liberals....tolerant... yeah,right

IF YOU WANT TO EXPERIENCE TRUE INTOLERANCE, all you have to do is disagree with a liberal, and then listen to the hatred spew.

For proof, just read the comments below from some of these so-called tolerant liberals."

Which would still make the vast majority of liberals more tolerant then Republicanazis.

Especially you - talk about hypocrisy.

[processor2]

Liberals are amazing in their hypocrisy.

They want to censor and silence those they disagree with, like Rush Limbaugh and Fox News,
while simultaneously telling us how tolerant and open-minded they are to diversity.

Liberals....tolerant... yeah,right

IF YOU WANT TO EXPERIENCE TRUE INTOLERANCE, all you have to do is disagree with a liberal, and then listen to the hatred spew.

For proof, just read the comments below from some of these so-called tolerant liberals.

...

Rush Limbaugh is a pathetic piece of excrement with a drug addiction with no morals.

All he does is whine about cr@p and condemn people for the very same things that he does.

Say no to talk show hosts.

[dan9111]

rudy654 "Maybe a bright lad like yourself can tell us why the FCC was established?"

They are, and have always been since their establishment, a means of censorship. Like all free market endeavors, customers will search for better quality. Broadcasting in particular is not a free market, but subject to the whims of politicians. The customer is a distant secondary effect, after being "licensed" to broadcast and not offending the politicians. It is no surprise conservative radio is being attacked just after liberals take over Congress.

The FCC has been the weapon of choice for those who love censorship. The liberals use it. The conservatives do too. If censorship were so popular, then customers would demand it in the marketplace. They certainly wouldn't use the weapons of the FCC to silence whomever they dislike. But they say customers are too dumb, so "better people" are in control.

I have yet to hear Rush, Hannity, or Savage state unequivocally that the FCC superceding the free market is a real problem. That is because they are beneficiaries.

[joenc-2009]

Liberal talk would have a great chance if you could find it. I live in Raleigh NC and had to buy XM radio to get Air America. The only talk radio available here is far right.

There is no competition.

[actornaught]

I don't see how enforcing the Fairness Doctrine should bother anybody with a valid position. It's not censorship, it requires opposing political views an equal opportunity to be heard.

With the way hate radio squalls about what it used to call 'Dominate Liberal Media' (what happened to THAT name?), they should welcome such an equal opportunity.

Yes?

[rudy654-2009]

"You missed my point. YOu yourself stated you believe there are millions out there that believe whatever the RIGHT tells them.

Is this same for the left? Your pointing out that Limbaugh is not trueful but popular can only be accounted for by assuming people accept blindly what they hear."

Look, your point is lost on me, because I don't care anymore for the so-called left, than I do the right, or anywhere in between!! Politicians, can they be trusted, and to what degree? As for Rush Limbaugh and the others that dominate the AM radio waves, I know they appeal to a mass audience of people willing to swallow whatever they say. I have even heard prominent officials cite supposed facts coming off these hate radio programs. They dominate, and frankly I find it sad. Earlier I pointed out how Limbaugh used the tragic death of a woman by a mountain lion to make false claims of people (supposedly environmentalists) sending contributions, not for the children of this woman, but for the cubs of the mountain lion. I believed this lie. But then I found out it was false, and not one person ever called Limbaugh on it. Instead, he praised himself for being the saviour of these orphaned children. He lied through and through. So, why can't there be balance to blatant, hateful lies, yes, even on the radio waves used to promote them?

[jimmyc1955]

Rudy654

You missed my point. YOu yourself stated you believe there are millions out there that believe whatever the RIGHT tells them.

Is this same for the left? Your pointing out that Limbaugh is not trueful but popular can only be accounted for by assuming people accept blindly what they hear.

Does Al Gore or Michael Moore have the same kind of following? As long as they say it - people will accept it without question - and defend them with religious fervor??

What I am asking is do you recognize that the left manipulates just as much as the right does?