Rush's forced conscripts: Armed Forces Radio fires a daily barrage of Rush Limbaugh at its million uniformed listeners.

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Salon.com

Rush's forced conscripts
Armed Forces Radio fires a daily barrage of Rush Limbaugh at its million uniformed listeners. So why are liberals kept off its airwaves?

May 26, 2004 | President Bush has condemned the torture of Iraqi prisoners, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld labeled it "un-American" and a recent Gallup poll found 79 percent of Americans "bothered" by the abuses. But Rush Limbaugh was gleeful. For weeks, the conservative talk show host has been dismissing the scandal as a "fraternity prank," mocking Democrats and others for expressing outrage and suggesting the prison humiliation -- which he dubbed "a brilliant maneuver" -- was "no different than what happens at the Skull and Bones initiation" at Yale. He described the images of torture as "pictures of homoeroticism that look like standard good old American pornography" and assured his listeners "there was no horror, there was no terror, there was no death, there was no injuries, nothing."

Limbaugh's increasingly bizarre comments about the military's widening prisoner abuse scandal -- the Pentagon acknowledges it's now investigating the deaths of 33 detainees, nine of whom were apparently beaten to death while in U.S. custody -- have forced a long-simmering question into the open: Why does Limbaugh's program, as the only hour-long, partisan political talk show broadcast daily to U.S. troops, enjoy exclusive access to American Forces Radio -- and American troops in Iraq?

"He says things like, liberals hate Americans, and we're trying to undermine the war on terror," says comedian Al Franken, a host for liberal radio station Air America who has also entertained troops on four USO tours. "It's a bad message for troops to be hearing and is a very skewed picture of what liberals and Democrats stand for. They're broadcasting a very, very partisan guy -- [with] nobody from the other side -- and they're using taxpayer money to do it."

"The government ought to make a greater effort to give a fair and balanced representation of political viewpoints on its airwaves to soldiers, sailors and airmen around the world listening," says Tom Athans, executive director of Democracy Radio, a nonprofit group in Washington that promotes political diversity on the airwaves. "It's important for the U.S. military, when using tax dollars, to not provide just one political perspective without giving consideration to opposing points of view."

After the Florida recount in 2000, when overseas military ballots were an important element in Bush's narrow victory, the influence of what amounts to propaganda beamed daily to U.S. troops must be considered a domestic political factor of no small consequence. "There's no question when one-side programming like American Forces Network is presented to troops, it's going to impact their voting behavior," says Athans.

Melvin Russell, director of American Forces Radio and Television Services, insists that Limbaugh's controversial show is broadcast for only one reason -- it gains big ratings in the United States. "We look at the most popular shows broadcast here in the United States and try to mirror that. [Limbaugh] is the No. 1 talk show host in the States; there's no question about that. Because of that we provide him on our service."

Russell says that if Franken, or any other syndicated liberal talk show host, can draw big enough ratings, then American Forces Radio would try to find a spot for that person on the schedule. "I'm hoping, if Air America takes off and someone on that show reaches the same level of audience Rush does, we could look to add them to the service. But there's nobody on the liberal side that compares to his ratings."

"To use ratings as an excuse not to offer fair and balanced programming is an insufficient reason," Athans counters. "American Forces Radio is funded by American taxpayers, not all of whom are conservative."

And if ratings drive the station's programming choices, then why not carry Howard Stern, who draws nearly 8 million listeners a week and who in recent months has emerged as President Bush's most high-profile critic on radio, declaring a "jihad" against the "arrogant bastard" in the White House? Although Stern's often-bawdy show differs from Limbaugh's politically, it fits Russell's criterion of being popular. "Stern today is a mirror reflection of what Americans are listening to," says Athans. In fact, Stern's ratings surged this year after he began leveling his broadsides against the Bush administration. "I strategize more about my radio show than Bush does about the war in Iraq," Stern quipped last month.

"My answer [on Stern]," says Russell, "is we have determined that that show, because of the [sexual] content, was not appropriate for a network that has just one or two stations broadcasting to an audience that ranges from 1-year-olds up to 50-year-olds."

"Rush Limbaugh is appropriate?" says Franken. "Saying the troops at Abu Ghraib were just blowing off steam -- that's more appropriate than what Howard Stern says? It sounds to me like they're rationalizing their decision." Adds Athans: "That sounds like censorship. In one breath, in regard to Limbaugh, they say they don't censor what the military listens to, and in the next breath they say Howard Stern is not appropriate."

"We don't censor, we provide," answers Russell. "Our troops deserve the same information that's available to them in the U.S."

Other critics of the network wonder if it's proper for the Pentagon to broadcast Limbaugh when he's calling John Kerry a skirt chaser, labeling female activists Nazis and telling servicemen and -women "what's good for al-Qaida is good for the Democratic Party in this country today."

The network, formerly known as Armed Forces Radio, was created by the War Department in 1942 to improve troop morale by giving service members a "touch of home" with American programs overseas. It added a television service in 1950. American Forces Radio beams "stereo audio services to over 1,000 outlets in more than 175 countries and U.S. territories, and on board U.S. Navy ships," according to its Web site. It reaches an audience of nearly 1 million with an innocuous lineup of classic rock, country and pop music, along with some sports telecasts, CNN's "Headline News" and Limbaugh's out-of-place radical rants.

Russell dismisses the charge that his network leans to the right. "That's not accurate. We carry a number of long-form programs from NPR. If you look at the 1,200 news and information programs we provide weekly, I feel they're fair and balanced." Most of those programs, however, are just a couple of minutes long. None of them approaches the entire hour Limbaugh gets every weekday -- in length or in pure partisanship. (Limbaugh's show in the States runs three hours daily, but to fit in as much programming as possible, American Forces Radio airs just the first hour.)

Limbaugh's actions off the air in the past nine months raise another question -- whether he is fit to be broadcast on American Forces Radio at all. Last fall Limbaugh was forced to quit his job as an ESPN football analyst after he made remarks about how the media, busy rooting for black quarterbacks to succeed in the National Football League, went easy on them in public. "When he surfaces outside his radio program, it doesn't take long for both viewers and news executives to decide his commentary is not acceptable to a mainstream audience," says David Brock, author of "The Republican Noise Machine." "What he said on ESPN was not unlike what he says on his radio show."

What's more, Limbaugh is currently under investigation by the West Palm Beach, Fla., prosecutor for alleged doctor shopping to obtain thousands of prescription painkillers. If he were in the military, Limbaugh would be disciplined, perhaps even court-martialed, for hate speech and illegal drug use. Now he's telling troops that the Abu Ghraib abuses were nothing but "a good time."

Limbaugh made all kinds of outrageous statements this year, even before he began condoning the abuse of Iraqi prisoners. According to the new Media Matters for America Web site, which monitors the right-wing press, between March 15 and April 29 "Limbaugh used the term 'femi-Nazis' eight times; he suggested that women want to be sexually harassed; he repeatedly equated Democrats with terrorists; he twice resurrected long-discredited right-wing claims that Clinton deputy White House counsel Vince Foster was murdered; he repeatedly called Senator John Kerry a 'gigolo'; he called Howard Dean 'a very sick man'; [and] he said Democrats 'hate this country.'" Is it appropriate for a military audience to be repeatedly beamed these messages?

Says Brock, who is president of Media Matters: "American Forces Radio makes choices based on content. The content of Limbaugh's comments has been so inflammatory that this may be an occasion for them to review the choices they've made. Has Limbaugh crossed the line? They'll have to address that."

Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, is upset by the right-wing tilt of American Forces Radio. "Senator Harkin was recently made aware of the situation and he's very concerned about it," says Maureen Knightly, his communications director. "He didn't realize [the station] leans that conservatively. It has raised a red flag. Taxpayers pay for it, and he feels there should be better balance in what's being aired." Harkin serves on the Senate Appropriations subcommittee that oversees Pentagon spending.

Eleven years ago it was Republican members of Congress whose pressure put Limbaugh on American Forces Radio in the first place. In 1993, then Rep. Robert Dornan, R-Calif., along with 69 other Republican House members, sent a letter to President Clinton's first secretary of defense, Les Aspin, demanding that both Limbaugh's radio show and his syndicated television show (on which Limbaugh compared preteen Chelsea Clinton to a dog) be broadcast to the military. "Limbaugh has been called by his liberal critics 'the most dangerous man in America.' It appears the liberal leadership at the Pentagon agrees with that ridiculous assertion," Dornan wrote. "The bottom line is that the troops want Rush Limbaugh, and you should see to it that they at least have that opportunity."

The Pentagon responded by pointing to an internal survey of 50,000 military listeners that found that only 4 percent requested more long-format talk radio. Most respondents overwhelmingly requested continuous music. The Pentagon also said that Limbaugh's daily three-hour radio program would monopolize too much of the network's limited airtime.

Notably, on Nov. 29, 1993, American Forces Radio and Television Services issued this statement: "The Rush Limbaugh Show makes no pretense that his show is balanced. If AFRTS scheduled a program of personal commentary without balancing it with another viewpoint, we would be open to broad criticism that we are supporting a particular point of view."

Yet just three days later, as the controversy was stoked in conservative media and Republicans cried censorship, Aspin called Limbaugh to assure him that the Pentagon would find a way to get his program on the then-named Armed Forces Radio.

"That's the difference between Democrats and Republicans," says Franken, noting that Democrats are much more likely to give in to mau-mauing from the right.

By early 1994, American Forces Radio had begun airing the first hour of Limbaugh's daily broadcast. Today, he's the sole long-format talker on American Forces Radio.

The current complaint about the rightward tilt of American Forces Radio is not a new one. In 2000, Democrats Abroad, the official party organization for the 6 million or so American citizens who live outside the United States, included in its platform the fact that the network "broadcast an overwhelming number of ultraconservative radio programs, such as Rush Limbaugh, James Dobson, Paul Harvey and news items with commentary from the extreme right-wing USA Radio Network with no programs supporting the Democratic Party as balance."

Ron Schlundt, chairman of Democrats Abroad in Germany, where Limbaugh's talk show airs every weeknight, has complained to American Forces Radio for years. "They tell me, 'You just don't like him because he's conservative.' And I say, 'No, my objection is that he's so partisan and that it's not appropriate on a government radio station to have somebody saying "We Republicans" five hours a week and not have anyone saying "I'm a Democrat" five hours a week.'" Schlundt says American Forces Radio told him that Limbaugh's show is balanced by the many NPR programs that are broadcast by the network.

Indeed, Russell pointed to long-format news and information programs such as "Morning Edition" and "Fresh Air" as evidence that the station offers a true political balance. But critics say comparing Limbaugh's malicious, partisan and error-strewn attacks with the content of NPR, one of the largest and most respected news organizations in the world (the closest U.S. news organization to the BBC), is absurd. "Nobody on NPR is doing the type of purely political commentary that Rush Limbaugh is doing," says Athans. "NPR struggles to be as balanced as it can."

In fact, according to a new study by the liberal watchdog group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting -- which analyzed the political affiliation of guests appearing last summer on NPR's most popular news shows -- Republicans outnumbered Democrats on NPR by 61 percent to 38 percent.

"Anybody who listened to Rush for one hour and to NPR for one hour would realize they're nothing like each other," says Franken. "Rush's message is that liberals hate America, while NPR is straight-ahead reporting and journalism."

Russell defends the programming of Limbaugh as a sensible middle course. "We get correspondence from both sides on the Rush Limbaugh subject, from 'Take him off' to 'Why don't you air all three hours?'" he says. And as long as Limbaugh remains the only political talk show host on American Forces Radio, Democracy Radio intends "to pressure this as an organization to make sure there's more balance," says Athans.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Indeed, Russell pointed to long-format news and information programs such as "Morning Edition" and "Fresh Air" as evidence that the station offers a true political balance. But critics say comparing Limbaugh's malicious, partisan and error-strewn attacks with the content of NPR, one of the largest and most respected news organizations in the world (the closest U.S. news organization to the BBC), is absurd. "Nobody on NPR is doing the type of purely political commentary that Rush Limbaugh is doing," says Athans. "NPR struggles to be as balanced as it can."

Anyone who doesn't see a difference between news and commentary with vitriolic spewings doesn't deserve the freedoms afforded them by this great nation.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: conjur
Anyone who doesn't see a difference between news and commentary with vitriolic spewings doesn't deserve the freedoms afforded them by this great nation.

Can you help me out here DM. I'm searching for a specific word here.... I can't quite put my finger on it though...it's on the tip of my tongue...aaarrgghh...care to help me out?;)

CkG
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
LOL! When I first glanced at the title, here's what I saw:
  • Rush's forced conscripts ... a daily barrage of Rush Limbaugh at its million uninformed listeners.

I thought Rush had way more uninformed listeners that that. Then I read it again and realized it was about military personnel, NOT your average civilian listener.

Oops. :)
 

burnedout

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
6,249
2
0
Notably, on Nov. 29, 1993, American Forces Radio and Television Services issued this statement: "The Rush Limbaugh Show makes no pretense that his show is balanced. If AFRTS scheduled a program of personal commentary without balancing it with another viewpoint, we would be open to broad criticism that we are supporting a particular point of view."
I was in Germany at that time and remember the controversy surrounding the Limbaugh broadcasts. Talk about a blast from the past.

Ron Schlundt
Damn! Dr. Schlundt is still over there. I wonder if he's also teaching with University of Maryland nowadays?

By the way, here is the AFN Radio Schedule
 

CrazyHelloDeli

Platinum Member
Jun 24, 2001
2,854
0
0
NPR Balanced? Thats as absurd as saying Rush is balanced. Personally I find Rush idiotic and annoying to listen to, mainly because hes so predictable. But, id much rather the troops listen to slanted idiotic pro-bush, pro-war rhetoric than a slanted moral dissolving anti-bush, anti-war, anti-american trash coming out "Air America" broadcasters. The LAST thing the troops in Iraq need is Al Franken & Co questioning their orders and reasons for being there. Thats unless people want another Vietnam Type moral situation unfolding.
 

Edge3D

Banned
Apr 26, 2004
274
0
0
Franken is not popular, nor broadcasted on radio widely because intellectual conversation is limited to conservatives. The liberals have the mass media TV networks under their control where they can provide short quips on selective news.. they waste time and distract with multiple visuals.

While Limbaugh/Hannity and many others cannot rely on such sensualization of the news. They have to cater to an audience with a thought provoking intellectual examination of current events.

And the vast majority of NYT best sellers are conservative authors/books because conservatives are more intellectual. While liberals tend to vegetate in front of the television with sensualized news and mind-numbing sitcoms.

Mind control without choice has long been the lefts choice of indoctrination. Now that the internet provides yet another alternative (alongside the vast majority of book sales and talk radio) to the major network news, the Left and their networks are furious.

You will see this "Air America", which is on life support funded by leftist propaganda groups, gone after the election.
They dont have the audience to survive without. But that is in direct correlation to a lack of thought-provoking, intellegent commentary.
I believe they already had one or more stations shut them off completely.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: Edge3D
Franken is not popular, nor broadcasted on radio widely because intellectual conversation is limited to conservatives. The liberals have the mass media TV networks under their control where they can provide short quips on selective news.. they waste time and distract with multiple visuals.

While Limbaugh/Hannity and many others cannot rely on such sensualization of the news. They have to cater to an audience with a thought provoking intellectual examination of current events.

BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

LMAOPIMP!!!



But...I see what you're up to. Another Passions here, folks. It's all an act. Geez, do you not have anything better to do than work up all this fake crap in order to troll? Is your life that sad you need that type of attention?

And the vast majority of NYT best sellers are conservative authors/books because conservatives are more intellectual. While liberals tend to vegetate in front of the television with sensualized news and mind-numbing sitcoms.

BWA HA HA HA HA HA ...oh man...stop it!!! LMAO!!!!! Oh sh!t...my sides!! :D :D :D
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Edge3D
Franken is not popular, nor broadcasted on radio widely because intellectual conversation is limited to conservatives. The liberals have the mass media TV networks under their control where they can provide short quips on selective news.. they waste time and distract with multiple visuals.

While Limbaugh/Hannity and many others cannot rely on such sensualization of the news. They have to cater to an audience with a thought provoking intellectual examination of current events.

And the vast majority of NYT best sellers are conservative authors/books because conservatives are more intellectual. While liberals tend to vegetate in front of the television with sensualized news and mind-numbing sitcoms.

Mind control without choice has long been the lefts choice of indoctrination. Now that the internet provides yet another alternative (alongside the vast majority of book sales and talk radio) to the major network news, the Left and their networks are furious.

You will see this "Air America", which is on life support funded by leftist propaganda groups, gone after the election.
They dont have the audience to survive without. But that is in direct correlation to a lack of thought-provoking, intellegent commentary.
I believe they already had one or more stations shut them off completely.

Uh ohh - now you've done it. :p

CkG
 

Zephyr106

Banned
Jul 2, 2003
1,309
0
0
WOW, to think that Edge3D could be another Passions, and I wasted all my time in the other thread writing a long response to him....

Zephyr
 
Feb 10, 2000
30,029
67
91
I'm thinking I will retreat from P&N for a while, substantially because of these kinds of threads. Come to think of it, this is why I stayed out of it as long as I did.

I've pretty well had it with this kind of unreasoned partisan stupidity on both sides, complete with, in this instance, allegations that "conservatives are more intellectual," based on incorrect characterizations about the NYT bestseller list (ahem - perhaps Edge 3D is referring to "conservative" voices like Bob Woodward, Cokie Roberts, and Dick Clarke). I am assuming for purposes of this post that he is serious, though admittedly his comments have my irony antennae twitching.

I have tried to stick to reasoned debate, but as far as I can see that constitutes something like 5% of the overall converation on this board. The rest is silly ad hominem attacks and partisan bickering, even when the original post relates to a legitimate topic of discussion. This is, if anything, just aggravated by those posters who ironically say outrageous things to provoke flames (as is perhaps the case with Edge 3D, and certainly has been in the past with others).
 

Zephyr106

Banned
Jul 2, 2003
1,309
0
0
Originally posted by: Don_Vito
I'm thinking I will retreat from P&N for a while, substantially because of these kinds of threads. Come to think of it, this is why I stayed out of it as long as I did.

I've pretty well had it with this kind of unreasoned partisan stupidity on both sides, complete with, in this instance, allegations that "conservatives are more intellectual," based on incorrect characterizations about the NYT bestseller list (ahem - perhaps Edge 3D is referring to "conservative" voices like Bob Woodward, Cokie Roberts, and Dick Clarke). I am assuming for purposes of this post that he is serious, though admittedly his comments have my irony antennae twitching.

I have tried to stick to reasoned debate, but as far as I can see that constitutes something like 5% of the overall converation on this board. The rest is silly ad hominem attacks and partisan bickering, even when the original post relates to a legitimate topic of discussion. This is, if anything, just aggravated by those posters who ironically say outrageous things to provoke flames.

To leave this forum for the aforementioned reasons is akin to giving into terrorists. I'm not saying that partisan ideologues are terrorists, however.

Zephyr
 
May 10, 2001
2,669
0
0
Franken is not popular, nor broadcasted on radio widely. The liberals have the mass media TV networks under their control where they can provide short quips on selective news... they waste time and distract with multiple visuals.

While Limbaugh and many others cannot rely on such sensualization of the news.

Mind control without choice has long been the lefts choice of indoctrination. Now that the internet provides yet another alternative (alongside the vast majority of book sales and talk radio) to the major network news, the Left and their networks are furious.

You will see this "Air America", which is on life support funded by leftist propaganda groups, gone after the election.
They don?t have the audience to survive without. But that is in direct correlation to a lack of thought-provoking, intelligent commentary.

Supply meats demand, if the troupes didn't want to listen to Limbaugh, then they wouldn't have it provided to them.

The question isn't overall ratings, but the demand made by those in the military; despite many being young, you'll find that the vast majority are far more conservative and thus the limited air hours are filled with what is demanded... in this case ONE hour of Limbaugh;

I'd be more upset with the men being subjected to un-wanted NPR, but then we've all got our partisan views.

Here's a familiar counter argument for you: if you don't like it you can turn the radio off.
 

Zephyr106

Banned
Jul 2, 2003
1,309
0
0
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Franken is not popular, nor broadcasted on radio widely. The liberals have the mass media TV networks under their control where they can provide short quips on selective news... they waste time and distract with multiple visuals.

While Limbaugh and many others cannot rely on such sensualization of the news.

Mind control without choice has long been the lefts choice of indoctrination. Now that the internet provides yet another alternative (alongside the vast majority of book sales and talk radio) to the major network news, the Left and their networks are furious.

You will see this "Air America", which is on life support funded by leftist propaganda groups, gone after the election.
They don?t have the audience to survive without. But that is in direct correlation to a lack of thought-provoking, intelligent commentary.

Supply meats demand, if the troupes didn't want to listen to Limbaugh, then they wouldn't have it provided to them.

The question isn't overall ratings, but the demand made by those in the military; despite many being young, you'll find that the vast majority are far more conservative and thus the limited air hours are filled with what is demanded... in this case ONE hour of Limbaugh;

I'd be more upset with the men being subjected to un-wanted NPR, but then we've all got our partisan views.

Here's a familiar counter argument for you: if you don't like it you can turn the radio off.

So in your devout view, a news reporting broadcast, perhaps anchored by liberals, is worse than a political vilifier who rationalizes homoerotic abuse?

Zephyr
 
May 10, 2001
2,669
0
0
Originally posted by: Zephyr106
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Franken is not popular, nor broadcasted on radio widely. The liberals have the mass media TV networks under their control where they can provide short quips on selective news... they waste time and distract with multiple visuals.

While Limbaugh and many others cannot rely on such sensualization of the news.

Mind control without choice has long been the lefts choice of indoctrination. Now that the internet provides yet another alternative (alongside the vast majority of book sales and talk radio) to the major network news, the Left and their networks are furious.

You will see this "Air America", which is on life support funded by leftist propaganda groups, gone after the election.
They don?t have the audience to survive without. But that is in direct correlation to a lack of thought-provoking, intelligent commentary.

Supply meats demand, if the troupes didn't want to listen to Limbaugh, then they wouldn't have it provided to them.

The question isn't overall ratings, but the demand made by those in the military; despite many being young, you'll find that the vast majority are far more conservative and thus the limited air hours are filled with what is demanded... in this case ONE hour of Limbaugh;

I'd be more upset with the men being subjected to un-wanted NPR, but then we've all got our partisan views.

Here's a familiar counter argument for you: if you don't like it you can turn the radio off.

So in your devout view, a news reporting broadcast, perhaps anchored by liberals, is worse than a political vilifier who rationalizes homoerotic abuse?

Zephyr
I disagree with your view of NPR and your opinion of Rush.

But that is unimportant as it's obvious that either of our characterizations are going to be based on our political predispositions.

But no matter what it is, their is a problem when the men don't get a choice... So yes, forcing NPR on the men is much worse than allowing them to listen to Rush. But then who's being subjected to unwanted programming in the first place?

As for prisoner abuse: we had a few true problems that are being taken care of, but mostly it was frat-level pranks that are nothing in comparison to the problems that our special ops guys where trying to avoid... but this should be the subject of another thread, you can title it: "rush thinks homoeroticism is good for America" or some such nonsense.
 

Wheezer

Diamond Member
Nov 2, 1999
6,731
1
81
It sucks when the shoe of freedom of speech is on the other foot doesn't it?

You want to complain about Rush yet it is no big deal the Janet shows a boob on TV...no one is forcing anyone to listen to anything....what's the big deal?
 

Edge3D

Banned
Apr 26, 2004
274
0
0
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

But no matter what it is, their is a problem when the men don't get a choice... So yes, forcing NPR on the men is much worse than allowing them to listen to Rush. But then who's being subjected to unwanted programming in the first place?

Ouch. The proverbial stumping point for liberals has been let out of the bag by you Sir.

Their indocrination does allow for the idea that the choice to turn it off still exists.. they dont want the choice TO EVEN BE THERE!

It is a sad reality within leftist circles, across the world, within American universities and as I illustrated about their resentment for alternate news sources becoming ever more popular.

While they laugh and mock, day by day Republicans and conservative thought creeps more into the minds of the youth of America such as myself. Its simply amazing to see the stuffy, liberal elitest attitude of, "laugh it off" extend even into this forum.

"Laughing off" conservatives has been working as well in America in the last 25 years as the saying, "tough it out" works for eliminating pain.
Need proof? Look at who controls Congress, look at who controls the White House.

The stranglehold on this nation has been removed and while they'd (OF COURSE) prefer to revert the nation into the days of Viet Nam and smear the war and our soldiers.. it will not, as has not worked.

So it is all fun and games to the elitists. But I predict major reformation in the Democratic party before they ever have any kind of stable platform as the Republicans have developed.
We'll see. With the reelection of President Bush and the continued degredation in the strength and state of the largest Leftist party in the nation.
:D <- And believe me, knowing this brings a REAL smile to my face everyday.
 

IndieSnob

Golden Member
Jul 7, 2001
1,340
0
0
Originally posted by: Wheezer
It sucks when the shoe of freedom of speech is on the other foot doesn't it?

You want to complain about Rush yet it is no big deal the Janet shows a boob on TV...no one is forcing anyone to listen to anything....what's the big deal?


Anyone with half a brain would know you're comparing apples to oranges. Tell me, what does a breast uncovering have to do with troops only getting the right's side of the news, but yet no left or better yet, non-biased media. Try again.
 

IndieSnob

Golden Member
Jul 7, 2001
1,340
0
0
Originally posted by: Edge3D
Franken is not popular, nor broadcasted on radio widely because intellectual conversation is limited to conservatives. The liberals have the mass media TV networks under their control where they can provide short quips on selective news.. they waste time and distract with multiple visuals.

While Limbaugh/Hannity and many others cannot rely on such sensualization of the news. They have to cater to an audience with a thought provoking intellectual examination of current events.

And the vast majority of NYT best sellers are conservative authors/books because conservatives are more intellectual. While liberals tend to vegetate in front of the television with sensualized news and mind-numbing sitcoms.

Mind control without choice has long been the lefts choice of indoctrination. Now that the internet provides yet another alternative (alongside the vast majority of book sales and talk radio) to the major network news, the Left and their networks are furious.

You will see this "Air America", which is on life support funded by leftist propaganda groups, gone after the election.
They dont have the audience to survive without. But that is in direct correlation to a lack of thought-provoking, intellegent commentary.
I believe they already had one or more stations shut them off completely.


It's so funny that you think that only conservatives have intellecutal conversations, but yet the left is nothing more than uneducated idiots. Care to give us some rough numbers, or are you just pulling this out of your rear end? Both Limbaugh and Hannity give THEIR views of the news on what's happening, not the actual news, and they also rely on alot of bashing, just as many of you think the left does. Mind control also seems to work for the right, it seems not one conservative anymore except for a few can actually point out the faults in their own party, because they're too scared of being labeled 'anti-american'. Also let me leave you with one quote:

"You're either with us, or against us". Hmmm coerced mind control or not? I'll let you decide. Of course you're so up to your neck in blind biasy that you wouldn't know.
 
May 10, 2001
2,669
0
0
Originally posted by: Wheezer
It sucks when the shoe of freedom of speech is on the other foot doesn't it?

You want to complain about Rush yet it is no big deal the Janet shows a boob on TV...no one is forcing anyone to listen to anything....what's the big deal?
Conservatives want to censor 'artistic' free speech; liberals want to censor 'political' free speech.

As for intelligence: I learned in my pro-communist political science class that people who identify themselves as liberals have about the same IQ as those who identify themselves as conservatives.

Moderates had a slightly lower IQ.
 

Kappo

Platinum Member
Aug 18, 2000
2,381
0
0
Anyone with half a brain would know you're comparing apples to oranges. Tell me, what does a breast uncovering have to do with troops only getting the right's side of the news, but yet no left or better yet, non-biased media. Try again.

There is no such thing as non-biased media. If you can find it I can point out how it is biased.

And what is the problem with them listening to this program?


People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they never use. -Kierkegaard
 

Format C:

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
1,662
0
0
Originally posted by: Kappo
Anyone with half a brain would know you're comparing apples to oranges. Tell me, what does a breast uncovering have to do with troops only getting the right's side of the news, but yet no left or better yet, non-biased media. Try again.

There is no such thing as non-biased media. If you can find it I can point out how it is biased.

And what is the problem with them listening to this program?


People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they never use. -Kierkegaard
The problem with them listening to this program is that they aren't being bombarded with the left's military loathing propaganda and thats just not fair.
 

chess9

Elite member
Apr 15, 2000
7,748
0
0
Edge3D:

You may be the most misinformed poster here. Kind of sad to read such nonsense coming out of an American adult...and scary.

-Robert
 

NesuD

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,999
106
106
Originally posted by: chess9
Edge3D:

You may be the most misinformed poster here. Kind of sad to read such nonsense coming out of an American adult...and scary.

-Robert

Not any more scary than reading your nonsense.