Posted on 05/11/2007 3:30:28 AM PDT by Kaslin
Drudge posted this yesterday. Since it appeared on Drudge, you can rest assured that by today everybody in a position of power over radio – that would be politicians – have either heard it or heard about it.
What am I talking about? It’s an excerpt from the Opie and Anthony show on XM Satellite radio. These two pigs were once on broadcast radio, but they lost their jobs when they thought it might be cute to send some listeners out to have sex in a church.
Now before I give you a link .. I want to warn you what you’re about to hear is vile, repulsive and disgusting. These two jerks had someone on their show named “Homeless Charlie.” The person was either black or using a black accent. Charlie begins to discuss having sex with Condi Rice. In fact, what he was talking about was raping the Secretary of State. Then, in similarly vulgar terms, he talked about having sex with Laura Bush and the Queen of England. When you click on this link (if the server isn’t slammed by now) you’re going to hear extremely disgusting language … so be prepared. If you can’t handle it, just leave it alone and continue with the rest of the column. OK, here’s the link.
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=450
So... how did you like that? Pretty pathetic, wasn’t it? This was the product of two extremely immature and sick people trying to be cute by seeing just how far they can push the envelope.
Now I don’t know what other radio hosts might have to say about this today, but I most certainly have something on my mind, and if you chose to read on you’re going to get an earful.
These two pathetic fools need to be removed from XM satellite radio right now. Today. No suspension. No warning. Fire them. Now.
By the end of the day today you’re going to hear liberals in congress and the media referring to these two morons as talk show hosts. Comparisons will be drawn between them and people like Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage and myself. You’ll hear the phrases “hate speech” and “hate radio” over and over again as these leftists push their Stalinist-inspired plans to destroy conservative and libertarian talk radio. By the time the dust has settled the majority of the people in this country --- who don’t by the way, listen to talk radio --- will absolutely believe in their hearts that this Opie and Anthony stunt is representative of all talk radio, and these people will be eager to support their politicians in their goal to shut us all down.
Right now we have a little gem called H.R. 3302, the “Media Ownership Reform Act,” in the congress. H.R. 3302 is a project of DC Democrats who know that conservative talk radio constitutes a real threat to their plans for total victory in 2008. If H.R. 3302 were to become law, talk radio as you know it would be dead inside of nine months. Period. Thanks to the antics of these two idiots there will be more congressmen who will be willing to join in this and other efforts to control broadcast radio and, incidentally, to control satellite broadcasting as well.
Over the years there have been no shortages of politicians, from both sides of the aisle, who have wanted to initiate more government control of content on satellite radio and TV. Power-hungry politicians around the world know that one of the keys to gaining and then holding political power is to control the means by information is disseminated to the population. U.S. politicians know that they’re chances of exercising direct government control over the printed media – that, for those of you who went to government schools, would include newspapers – are limited to slim and none. We have the First Amendment to thank for that. But by the time broadcasting came around politicians were savvy enough to find a way around the First Amendment in their goal of controlling broadcast content. The created this ridiculous fiction of “the public’s airwaves” and have exploited that asinine idea to their benefit for years. Now they’re working to increase that control through H.R. 3302 and, at the same time, considering ways to spread their censorship agenda to satellite radio. After all, don’t those satellite signals come through those very same airwaves that the politicians claim are owned by the people?
Opie and Anthony just gave these control-freak politicians a huge bit of leverage with their crude little skit about raping the Secretary of State and the First Lady. Oh .. and throw in the Queen also. What fun. What incredible talents these two jerks are.
Those of us in talk radio, both broadcast and satellite owe it to our country and to our listeners to rise up in outrage against these disgusting shock jocks and demand their immediate dismissal from XM. If XM doesn’t want to act then we should consider canceling our subscriptions. I’m serious. I mean it.
And don’t give me that “free speech” nonsense either. I know that many of you were educated by the government, but you don’t have to go around advertising it, do you? The free speech guarantees of the First Amendment only apply to actions by government, not by private entities. The government cannot use its exclusive franchise on the right to use force in order to prevent you from speaking our mind … but your employer damn sure can. Not by force, mind you, but by job action. Free speech does not mean that you have the right to say anything you please on any radio station or any private satellite cannel. Whoever owns and controls that station and/or satellite has every right in the world to control content. Opie and Anthony are content. XM ought to show some responsibility … now … today.
Exercise control.
Get rid of them --- before their virus spreads.
Neal Boortz is a talk show host and columnist for Townhall.com as well as co-author of The FairTax Book .
> The relevant section is this:
> “(a) Public Interest Obligation to Cover Publicly Important Issues- A broadcast licensee shall afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views on issues of public importance....
Thanks. I wonder if the the Dems don’t realize that this could backfire. I mean PBS, for example, would have to afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views on issues of public importance. Or are they exempt from presenting any opinion but thier own? :)
It could indeed backfire, but there is a fairly easy, albeit intellectually dishonest (but when has that stopped a Leftist?), way of finessing that requirement:
Suppose that I am a presenter on a PBS "current affairs" program. Suppose further that I wish to propagate some nonsensical thesis (that human activity is causing the Global climate to heat up, for example). What I do is to arrange a discussion between two advocates of positions respectively for, and against, my thesis. However, the person I choose to represent the case I support will be articulate, well-informed and charismatic, while his/her opponent will be some half-baked conspiracy-theorist dredged from the nether reaches of some group widely seen as ridiculous. (I will, of course, make sure that this person's affiliation is clearly stated; it would also help if English is not this person's first language). I will pretend to be a neutral, disinterested arbiter who, during the course of this "debate", will come to be persuaded of the view that I already held.
This is a technique for which the BBC has been notorious for at least the past 40-odd years.
Now suppose that you are the popular, well-known host of a radio talk show. Absent the Fairness Doctrine, you can, at your leisure, refute my entire program point-by-point, revealing my bias and dishonesty in the process. (This is why such techniques are not as successful as they might otherwise be at present).
However, under the Fairness Doctrine, you would be required to grant me "equal time" to rebut your refutation, thus at the very least diluting its effect.
All-in-all, I think it is best that the abomination known as the Fairness Doctrine remain an historical curiosity, never to be re-enacted.
You’re saying that a revival of the fairness doctrine would not cause See BS to stop shilling for the DNC?
No way.
I find it amazing that no one from Maryland is sponsoring this bill. I guess I should count my blessings.
People like me would stop listening to talk radio, since we wouldn't want to put up with liberal crap half the time, causing the format to tank. While technically not censorship, talk radio would risk being dead.
Boortz sounds like he’s surprised that such things have been going on like this since Howard Stern appeared on the scene. So, Boortz is advocating that folks should be fired any old time he gets offended? That’s text book liberalism. . . Besides, wouldn’t it be nice if The Wall Banger, Hush Bimbo & Opie and Anthony vanished from broadcasting all together? If the left wants to bring back the fairness doctrine, HR 3302, RT-D2, or whatever else, don’t you think that their ideas will be labeled just as easily as “hate speech?” Let them hang themselves with their own rope. Imus for president!
Kalsin, just want to tell you I appreciate your bringing up these issues for discussion. I think these two should have been fired instantly. I read part of the transcript of their show, and it was so disgusting, shocking, violent and misogynistic, I could not finish it. This is beyond the typical vulgarity of satellite radio, it’s openly advocating rape!
There is another story about “Shock Jocks fired over comments” (I thought was on Drudge a few days ago). I opened it, assuming it would be about this Condi rape scenario, and was amazed it was a COMPARATIVELY harmless joke by two other radio hosts, making fun of Asian-Americans.
Granted, that is offensive, but not nearly as bad as acting out a horrifically violent and illegal attack on an actual living person.
Please read my response again.....I meant just the opposite.....
Boortz is an aging professional pot stirrer, first and foremost. He'll take whatever stance he needs to to keep his show. Did you know he's got a book to sell you? He's oreilly without the ratings.
I was sure I put a :) at the end of “No way,” in my other post, but I see it is not there. I’m sorry, I didn’t make my statement clear.
I recall the fairness doctrine from growing up outside New York City. The music stations on the radio applied it by airing very mild religious shows on Sunday morning. The tv stations would run at least one news story a week that did not trash conservatives. Then they would give some moonbat a minute to rant about how the conservative position was evil. I’d like to call it a farce, but it wasn’t funny.
hey boortz i think that people have a desision to listen to what they want i will agree that some times things get out of hand nut still its not like a four year old would be messed up if he listened to o&a but still the genre of o&a is dark humor this means talking about death mental dissabilities and othe obscene things and many people enjoy this just because you find it repulsing does not mean that everyone hates them i am truly dissapointed in your behavior to ward this
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.