Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

LIMBAUGH WARNS OF DANGER TO FREE SPEECH
Drudge ^ | 2/26/04 | Drudge/Limbaugh

Posted on 02/26/2004 9:40:46 AM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection

LIMBAUGH WARNS OF DANGER TO FREE SPEECH THU FEB 26 2004 12:28:21 ET

THE NATION'S TOP RADIO HOST RUSH LIMBAUGH WARNED OF GROWING GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION IN BROADCASTING CONTENT.

LIMBAUGH MADE THE COMMENTS AFTER HIS PARENT COMPANY CLEAR CHANNEL DROPPED VIACOM'S HOWARD STERN FROM ITS STATIONS.

'SMUT ON TV GETS PRAISED. SMUT ON TV WINS EMMYS. ON RADIO, THERE SEEMS TO BE DIFFERENT STANDARDS,' LIMBAUGH EXPLAINED.

'I'VE NEVER HEARD HOWARD STERN. BUT WHEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GETS INVOLVED IN THIS, I GET A LITTLE FRIGHTENED.

'IF WE ARE GOING TO SIT BY AND LET THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GET INVOLVED IN THIS, IF THE GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO 'CENSOR' WHAT THEY THINK IS RIGHT AND WRONG... WHAT HAPPENS IF A WHOLE BUNCH OF JOHN KERRYS, OR TERRY MCAULIFFES START RUNNING THIS COUNTRY. AND DECIDE CONSERVATIVE VIEWS ARE LEADING TO VIOLENCE?

'I AM IN THE FREE SPEECH BUSINESS. ITS ONE THING FOR A COMPANY TO DETERMINE IF THEY ARE GOING TO BE PARTY TO IT. ITS ANOTHER THING FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO DO IT.'

MORE



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government
KEYWORDS: forthechildren; free8speech; freespeech; howardstern; libertinehysteria; nannystate; takesavillage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 361-371 next last
To: renosathug
Well said, and the point that everyone here should get. Don't tune in, and Stern's program will go the way of all other bad programming.
181 posted on 02/26/2004 11:47:22 AM PST by reademnweep (Watch this !! Hold my beer..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic


That's what used to be called "The Chilling Effect" of government threats to regulate speech.

There is no absolute free speech on the public airwaves, nor would you want it.

Since the airwaves are a public resource, the public decides, through the FCC, what standards will apply to broadcast transmissions.

If the public as a whole opts for standards that don't suit you, watrch cable.


182 posted on 02/26/2004 11:48:01 AM PST by Sabertooth (Malcontent for Bush - 2004!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

Comment #183 Removed by Moderator

To: Middle Man
That's total crapola. Limbaugh has consistently defended free speech rights. He was livid over Campaign Finance Reform, and one of the reasons he loves Reagan was his elimination of the "equal time" requirements from broadcast journalism.
184 posted on 02/26/2004 11:52:06 AM PST by Richard Kimball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
The airwaves are a public resource.

People'sRepublic.Com is down the hall.

185 posted on 02/26/2004 11:52:43 AM PST by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
There is no absolute free speech on the public airwaves, nor would you want it.

Well, at a minimum, we certainly don't want people making their own decisions what to listen to/watch, right?

Since the airwaves are a public resource, the public decides, through the FCC, what standards will apply to broadcast transmissions.

Funny, I don't recall myself or anyone I know ever being asked by the FCC what we thought or to decide any of this.

186 posted on 02/26/2004 11:53:11 AM PST by gdani (letting the marketplace decide = conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
If the public as a whole opts for standards that don't suit you, watrch cable.

I do. Go thou and do likewise.

187 posted on 02/26/2004 11:54:28 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: afz400
THE POINT IS THAT RUSH LIMBAUGH DOES NOT OWN THE AIRWAVES - HE USES THEM UNDER LICENSE WITH THE AMERICAN PUBLIC - ARE YOU EVEN AWARE OF THAT?

Caps Lock stuck again?

And yes I am aware of that. But what you might be concerned about may not be the concern of the rest of the populace. And, like everything else, you can always turn it off. Unless your on/off button is broken like your caps lock is.

188 posted on 02/26/2004 11:55:29 AM PST by Bella_Bru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
"How is the government going to control that?"
Obviously the government won't be able to control internet radio like the airwaves. However, ISPs control content because they own the servers, and there is the potential for a few conglomerates to own all the ISPs, so they could censor speech and the US citizens would have no recourse. This may be worse than you think.
189 posted on 02/26/2004 11:55:54 AM PST by afz400
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: gdani
Your "connect the dots" theory is pretty scarce of facts.

Using your connect the dots method, DUers produce "evidence" that the war in Iraq was to enrich the Bush oil fortune.
190 posted on 02/26/2004 11:56:03 AM PST by 11th Earl of Mar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: dead
I know you and Hillary want the village to raise my children, but I refuse to hand them over.

No, I do not want the village to raise my daughter. But I'd like the village to have some common decency and realize there is a time and a place for everything.

Tell me, what do you think of a man who exposes himself to a child? Am I a derelict parent if I am not by my child's side 24/7 to block whomever she might encounter as she grows up and is given more and more autonomy? I do not accompany her to school and sit in her classroom, though I am aware of what goes on in there.

At any rate, I view some of what is available over the air to be the equivalent of indecent exposure. And I resent that some would say if I and my family are assaulted by it, it's our fault for daring to turn on a tv or radio station.

191 posted on 02/26/2004 11:58:09 AM PST by cyncooper ("Maybe they were hoping he'd lose the next Iraqi election")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: Middle Man
After years of shilling for "everything Republican", Rush comes off his Oxycondin-induced high and sees what's really happening to this country

Sure? Sure that all those years of substance abuse didn't harm his thinking?

192 posted on 02/26/2004 11:59:00 AM PST by unspun (The uncontextualized life is not worth living. | I'm not "Unspun w/ AnnaZ" but I appreciate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Stern is a degenerate POS.
193 posted on 02/26/2004 11:59:14 AM PST by verity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gdani
Well, at a minimum, we certainly don't want people making their own decisions what to listen to/watch, right?

Not sure I follow this question... is this how you meant to write it?

Funny, I don't recall myself or anyone I know ever being asked by the FCC what we thought or to decide any of this.

Do you vote?

Do you write letters or file complaints with the FCC?

Why do you suppose this is all happening after Janet Jackson jumped the shark at the Super Bowl?

Because thousands complained, and execs were hauled before Congress.

You're free to file complaints otherwise.


194 posted on 02/26/2004 11:59:45 AM PST by Sabertooth (Malcontent for Bush - 2004!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: wolf24

he certainly does not like women in general"


Change to: He doesn't RESPECT women.
195 posted on 02/26/2004 12:01:07 PM PST by reademnweep (Watch this !! Hold my beer..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: 11th Earl of Mar
Your "connect the dots" theory is pretty scarce of facts.

What part of that theory - specifically - do you disagree with?

By the way, you commenting as such is pretty ironic coming from someone who earlier deliberately misrepresented the facts re: what Howard said (or, I should say, didn't say) in order to advance your agenda.

196 posted on 02/26/2004 12:01:34 PM PST by gdani (letting the marketplace decide = conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat
It doesn't work that way, your hypothetical falls.
197 posted on 02/26/2004 12:01:57 PM PST by cyncooper ("Maybe they were hoping he'd lose the next Iraqi election")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
Am I a derelict parent if I am not by my child's side 24/7 to block whomever she might encounter as she grows up and is given more and more autonomy?

Of course, but you are also smothering if you never let them out of your sight.

Pick your poison, it seems.


198 posted on 02/26/2004 12:02:10 PM PST by Sabertooth (Malcontent for Bush - 2004!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: 11th Earl of Mar
Using your connect the dots method, DUers produce "evidence" that the war in Iraq was to enrich the Bush oil fortune.

DUers also whine alot about bring in nanny Govt to protect them from big, bad words.

199 posted on 02/26/2004 12:02:51 PM PST by gdani (letting the marketplace decide = conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: dead
Are you pretending to not see the distinctions?

200 posted on 02/26/2004 12:03:26 PM PST by cyncooper ("Maybe they were hoping he'd lose the next Iraqi election")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 361-371 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson