“Second tier conservative talker, Rusty Humphries, mentioned the BC story on his show two nights ago, and basically called it a conspiracy theory without legs.”
He is right, simply because ITS NOT BEING REPORTED!
What Rusty Humphries meant, is that he believes the BC story has no merit, and is nothing more than a wild conspiracy theory.
From a practical standpoint, I can understand the talkers not wanting to give any story wide airplay until it percolates up into the MSM.
If you believe that we have a free press (which they don't), then you can be reasonably certain that any story that passes MSM muster can be assumed to be true, therefore - fair game for their talk shows.
But - the talkers are all well aware of MSM bias and cover-up. That very condition is what has provided them an audience in the first place. With an un-biased press, there would be little need for conservative talk radio.
So - why don't the talkers trust their instincts about this story? The theory has recently been put forth that they're staying well away from it, because they know that they'll incite the liberal press to launch an all-out defense of Obama, should they so much as open their mouths about it.
That theory makes more sense to me than any other. I've come to trust and rely on our conservative radio hosts, as some of the last free voices for truth we have, and I'd be devastated to think that they've sold out in some way, or are too cowed by Obama to confront him on this most critical issue.
I prefer to think that they're in close consultation with each other, and are maintaining "radio silence" purposefully.