Posted on 11/13/2008 6:58:56 AM PST by Mobile Vulgus
Douglas Turner of the Buffalo News wants conservative radio talkers silenced. He calls them "virulent," "violent" and "coarse" and hopes that starting January 1 the "work of flushing" them will begin. Turner fills his little anti-free speech screed with claims and a few examples of how rotten he thinks righty talkers are and how they need to be shut down, yet can't seem to find a single cross word to say about the "coarseness" of lefty talkers. In other words, it is plain that "coarseness" or "one-sided" radio isn't really a concern of his. Only eliminating the free speech of the right is his goal not any leveling of the playing field.
Naturally, his is filled with prosaic generalizations. Turner assumes that all conservative talk show hosts "were fond" of addressing Obama as "Hussein," his middle name. Yet, Turner offers no list of those that did. He says righty talkers are "violent" but does not offer a single example to prove the allegation. It also seems that Turner can't understand why radio hosts that call themselves conservative would be "one-sided." Curiously, he didn't excoriate Alan Colmes, Randi Rhodes, or Al Franken for being "one-sided." (I know... Imagine that, huh?)
His "violent" claim has me wondering, though. (Bold mine)
As station ownership became more consolidated, talk radio became more virulent, if not violent, and one-sided.
He makes this "violent" claim but offers not one single example. Who was "violent"? What radio host urged listeners to violence? This is quite a charge and it would be nice if Turner would provide an example instead of throwing such a bomb without proving his wild-eyed claim...
Read the rest at Publiusforum.com...
I personally don’t listen to or like Savage but to say he gives talk radio a bad name is nonsense. I do not apologize for talk radio ever, no matter who it is. Savage may sound like a nutjob but he certainly isn’t a hatemonger.
Ping
That's quite a leap in logic to assume that anyone who defends Savage's first amendment right to be a nutjob must then be a Savage fan.
Whatever happened to "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it?"
“Journalists” have now become party hacks. It may have been always so, but it’s really so now.
“As Clay Whitehead said about Nixon’s use of the FCC to intimidate critics, the value of the sword of Damocles is that it hangs, not that it falls.” Glenn Reynolds.
I can’t wait until his chosen media is shut down through free market forces.
I was careful to say "apparently".
Whatever happened to "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it?"
I also wrote "I have no problem with Savage being on the air, and I do not want to limit the rights of anybody, even guys who sound like nutjobs to be on the air."
Whatever happened to reading a post before you reply? I've wasted enough time on this thread. I have not said I wanted to kick Savage off the air, and I'm tired of (apparent) losers like you attempting to say I have said otherwise.
Bauerle and Beach did a show on this. This is what we are heading for. The attacks on me in my blog are getting worse everyday.
Makes me sick.
Is the Buffalo News a newspaper?
How many trees have died for its partisan screeds, trees that scrub the air and sustain life? Is said partisan rag delivered via the streets and roads built and maintained via taxpayer monies?
Ah, shaddup!
(Only kidding. It was a joke that had to be made.)
There is more than a whiff of the totalitarian mindset in this type of policy.
Lord, God,
IF THERE’S A CHANCE he could see the light and confess, repent, reform, be redeemed—wonderful, Lord, please manage it.
However, otherwise . . .
Hasn’t this Creten dug a number of holes quite big enough for him to fall in one of . . . and pull the dirt in on top of himself?
Lord, please emphatically shut him up or cause his blathering to be soooooooooo excessive and sooooooooooo excessively obviously hypocritical and stoooooooopid
that he becomes a laughing stock amongst the liberals and all in his own family.
Let him be humiliated every time he shows his face in public.
and I said, "assume", which is exactly what you did.
As for "wasting time on this thread", I don't even know where to start. You got me laughing with that one. FR, as well as just about any other politically oriented forum on the net, is a real time killer in general. I won't argue with your characterization of me as a "loser", it's your inability to see that you fall into the exact same category that's particularly funny.
Turner is right, we must stop this practice of allowing alternative, dissenting voices to be heard. In the future (January 20), only those opinions in concurrence will rightly er correctly be allowed to be heard. We will station armed guards on all previously conservative talk shows to enforce the new rules. Anyone not abiding by the new rules shall be cast into the pit of eternal darkness...or forced to hang around with the inmates of Daily Kos and DummyUnderground. That should get their minds right. All hail The Fearless Leader er president as he leads uh guides us into a new brave new world. Hail Obama!!!
What don't you understand about individual responsibility?
The only person Michael Savage gives a "bad name" to is Michael Savage.
No one else is responsible for what he says.
Liberal-run TV is vulgar, smutty, violent and coarse. Where’s his outrage?
It is though ironic that all the wails and cries of Bush oppression and dictatorship were made by people that had not the slightest reason to fear any retribution or suppression of their speech. Never once did Bush, or any of his supporters or apparatus, lift a finger to silence descent. Obama and his ilk will try. It just won't work. They look like asses comparing political speech to pornography. Guys like this Douglass Turner clown just provide entertainment.
Any real attempts to suppress speech will kindle righteous indignation of enormous proportions that will only motivate and galvanize the right. Just imagine when the FCC comes knocking on Clear Channel's door. Do you really think they are going to submit and "balance" Rush? Or will Rush eat their lunch?
descent = dissent
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.