If "you" will pay a little closer attention to how Limbaugh and some of the other top broadcasters cover top stories they are "almost always" well sourced.
I could care less if we get credit or not only if Rush leaves himself open to DBM criticism.
Rush has the ability to almost single handedly destroy the msm as long as he doesn't leave them any openings for criticism,which they will make up true or not anyway.
I don't understand your point. Can you try to explain it a little more clearly? As for your idea that
Rush has the ability to almost single handedly destroy the msm, that is absurd, and Rush would probably be the first to say so. You put WAY too much on Rush. Top stories on Free Republic are here because some poster
linked a source and discussion followed. If Free Republic has a great and lively thread going on a story that originated in an obscure paper in Podunk, Iowa, and Rush brings up on his show a news item that was reported from the same obscure paper, that's good and correct -- Free Republic is not the source -- the paper in Podunk IS. It doesn't matter whether Rush found the link through Free Republic or from an email sent by a resident of Podunk. It matters NOT AT ALL.
Rush isn't a journalist. How would his citing and sourcing Free Republic do anything at all to prevent the MSM from finding "any openings for criticism"?
Sincerely, I really don't get what it is you're trying to say or why you think political commentators who get inspiration and topic leads off of Free Republic are obligated to say so.