I for one love Ann Coulter and Rush Limabugh.

[trumad]

The more they speak, the more we win. Rush single handily gave us the state of Missouri with his Michael J. Fox bashing...

Coulter--- well me thinks that every time she opens her trap, we garner another 1000 votes.

Try to understand this about these type of er entertainers --- when the Dems are in control, they thrive.

[Epiphany4z]

1. I would love them too

if it actually shook out that way....but it doesn't...how long has Rush been going? Ann got a good hearty Cheer and she will go on talk about how Dem's are not for freedom of speech..spin spin spin...wright a new book , say something outrageous, get more coverage spin spin spin...wright another book...and so the formula goes...

I remember when Rush started out ...nobody took him seriously ...he was just a bag of hot air ..now Air America is working to catch up for all the years of nothing but progressive talk on radio.

[terip64]

2. Yeah, but times have changed and they are clueless to it! n/t

[trumad]

3. That was then, this is now

their brand of entertainment is old and stale and now they're just a bunch of clowns.

[TheBaldyMan]

5. Well those RW 'authors' tend to have high book sales but

they don't admit that they are bought en bloc to get them into the best sellers list. There is a rumour that Ann Coulter once had a block purchase of 1,000+ of one of her books by a well disposed tycoon.

It seems the wingnuts have to fix the booksale figures as well as elections.

[MADem]

4. You're quite on point about Missouri--that was a big deal.

And I think your overall analysis is right, too. They're buffoons. They've jumped the shark. They're a fashion that has gone out of style, and they are the only ones who don't realize it.

One thing we need to do is force/shame some media outlets into covering their gaffes. One thing about the Coulter insult--that's a gift that will keep on giving, so long as Mitt the Shitt is in the GOP contest, and so long as Edwards is running, too.

It's only a matter of time before most people are laughing at them. They're so obtuse, though, they'll think they're laughing WITH them.

I hope they've been salting away their dough for retirement, because they might need to tap their nest eggs.

[eagler]

6. I guarantee that if the Dems don't do something about

reinstituting a new FAIRNESS DOCTRINE soon and God forbid we should take another 991-type attack people will start listening to them again.

[MADem]

9. We will never again have a fairness doctrine. It was dismantled by Reagan.

It was smashed, crushed, scattered. It's unlikely in the extreme that we'll ever see it revived.

We're headed toward the British system, I suspect, where journalists aren't (pretending to be) evenhanded, they're unapolagetic advocates for a particular party; where newspapers are plainly liberal or conservative, and not just on their editorial page. It's all out in the open.

About the only hope for any sort of FAIRNESS, perhaps, is the CSPAN system. Perhaps, in future, as channels become infinite, there will be a CSPAN channel for each party, along with the House and Senate. Public funding of that sort of thing might not be a bad idea, but you'd have to find a way to make the channels available in all areas. You can't have CSPAN-R available in, say, Texas, without CSPAN-D also being available. And then, there's the smaller parties--Green, Libertarian, Reform, Constitutional, and so forth. They'd want a piece of the pie, too. If channels were as cheap as candy bars, well, everyone could have one. If expense were an issue, perhaps the smaller parties would have to share a channel or two until they get sufficient numbers on their rolls.

But if you think that the networks will ever go back to Equal Time, well, that's a pipe dream. And as each year passes, the networks become less and less relevant. Their news divisions are dying, and trying to stay afloat by streaming on the web (what once cost money is now free). And as for the cable news outlets, where most get their news anyway, they wouldn't fall under a Fairness Doctrine, anyway, if such a thing were revived. That's Pay-To-Play service, not a public access over-the-airwaves free broadcast, so it doesn't have to conform to public broadcast regulations.

[eagler]

10. the Fairness doctrine was not about equal time

It worked for almost 40 years and it allowed anyone or any organization to voice opposing viewpoints to the same demographics as their opponents. With out the FD we have witnessed the almost uncontested growth of RW talk radio,and the loss of the South and the middletier of states to the neocons.

[MADem]

11. Equal time, 'equivalent' time, the opportunity to respond, call it what you will, it ain't coming

back as a publicly financed or guaranteed entity.

I know that isn't what you want to hear, but it's the case. If other groups want to get their voices out there, it's pay to play time.

Someone with a point of view has to have one of two things--access to friendly media outlets, or a huge following, one that advertisers can make money off of by hosting the poorer schmucks. If someone isn't making money, it just ain't happening. You might be able to get up on a soapbox in a park, but you aren't going to get in front of a camera in any meaningful way to make your case without cash, friends/supporters or both.

The system has 'gone private.' Like it or not, that's what's happened.

[eagler]

14. Kucinich says it is and he is picking up support

the times we face today are not unlike a century ago when monopolies were and needed to be busted up in order to restore democracy or something resembling it

[MADem]

17. Look, every day, the networks lose relevance and market share. That's where any response would

find itself--on stations that no one will be watching. At four in the morning.

IF it happens, and it won't. The media lobby isn't going to be giving up infomercial time for some Green to rail about energy policy, or some Constitutionalist to want to get rid of every admendment down to the Bill of Rights. And no one, right or left, will vote against that interest--it's just not worth it to them in terms of their own access to media, and to their bottom line.

And it's nice that Kucinich tilts at this windmill, but it will be to absolutely no effect.

Hold on to that dream, if you like, because it is a nice one, but don't count on it.

[eagler]

21. By far the most prolific media today is still AM/FM radio.

It's on 24/7 at home, in the car, at work and the neocons know that. That's exactly how Limbaugh and Hannity and Larson and Savage all the others got where they are at and how they became so popular.And they fear the FD like nothing else because it would hold themm accountable for things said. And as far as market share goes.Radio would be a whole lot more exciting if you could listen to Limbaugh spout off for 3 hours and immediately after hear someone like Randi Rhodes rebutt. Don't tell me that wouldn't be a money maker. If there is one shread of democracy left in this country - the people have a right to hear opposing points of view ON THEIR OWN AIRWAVES. Some of the RW talkshow hosts have threatened to go to satellite radio if the FD is invoked. Let them. I am a consumer who listens to talk radio and I want to hear more diversity over the airwaves. If a couple million more feel the way I do, then they would listen to talk radio too.

[MADem]

23. If that WERE a money maker, they'd be doing it already. They wouldn't wait for the

government to COMPEL them to implement such an exciting idea. It won't fly, because it isn't exciting. It's exasperating. The righties would turn off their radios when Randi came on, and the lefties wouldn't tune in to hear Rush and they'd have other things to do by the time Randi rolled around.

The reason that 'left' radio isn't as popular as right radio is because the left does not have the capacity for viciousness and cruelty that the right has. Meanness is in fashion this decade, but it's starting to lose its charm.

Frankly, I find nothing on AM radio worth listening to, except for a single Spanish language station nearby that blasts some great salsa and merengue music. Satellite radio WILL be the future, and again, that will become very cheap eventually as well--all but free, with commercials, and people who don't want it will pay for not having them. Just like cable TV--a lot of "premium" channels have now become "expanded basic" and a lot of "expanded basic" channels have found their way into the 'BASIC' tier. And all of that is EXEMPT from network regulations.

The paradigms are shifting, and over the air broadcasts are going the way of the dodo, I am afraid. It's like the UK--for the longest time they had lame government regs, few channels, absurd restrictions, and finally, after years of being behind the curve, satellite dishes have turned their way of life completely upsidedown (though they still have to pay for a TV license or the van that drives around monitoring you will fine you).

Anyone who could get cheap satellite radio here in the US would take it in a nanosecond over AM or FM radio, because the latter simply...well, SUCKS. I've driven across country many times, and that opinion is grounded in many listening hours.

The shift to satellite radio is happening for a number of reasons, and FAIRNESS isn't at the head of the pack. You've got better reception, no commercials, and the ability to bellow FUCK without being fined by an archaic regulatory body, for starters. Once they sort out this bullshit Sirius vs. XM horseshit, and make it cheap to the point where it's free (you pay your 'lifetime subscription' satellite charges when you buy the radio, and the satellite maintenance costs are covered by advertising) it will take off like a house on fire. The competing companies are still in the profit-taking mode at this point, but one day this 'luxury' will be just like calculators. I remember the early Texas Instruments calculators, and how everyone was THRILLED when they "got down" to only a hundred and ten bucks each. Now, your bank gives you one with your checkbook when you open a new account, that's less than one twentieth the size of those old 'portables' and does ten times as much, for free.

Technology marches on. And it's left the federal government behind. That's privatization for ya! And there's no going back. Reagan killed Fairness and drove a stake through its heart. We can't wait for Dennis Kucinich or the Congress, who listen to lobbyists and industry types who create jobs in THEIR states, to try to revive it, because like it or not, that's a futile hope.

We have to adapt to the way things are now, and deal with this new media landscape. We need to stop wishing and hoping for old days that will never return, and deal with this reality. There's no reason why we can't find us a Murdoch sugar daddy--hell, it could even be Murdoch himself. He's not ideological, you see--he's just greedy.

[eagler]

27. talk radio is still their most potent weapon and years of denial on our part

has only served to make us weaker. That's the reason that the Repubs toasted Limbaugh about 10 years ago as being the savior of conservatism. To say the paradigms are shifting - satellite radio is in trouble financially- broadcast radio is not. The paradigms are whatever we cause them to be and the future of any democracy depends on a well informed electorate. It always will.

[MADem]

28. And we don't do as well at talk radio, because we aren't as good at being MEAN

Meanness and cruelty sell. And right now, it's not hard to be mean and cruel and still stay within FCC guidelines.

That's not our schtick. What we are good at is HUMOR. And frankly, it's HARD to be funny without also being a bit off color. There's where you get in trouble with the FCC.

Which is why we're better off doing a bit of raunchy humor with our political talk radio--via SATELLITE.

I don't know what numbers you're looking at, but radio --both broadcast AND satellite-- is not doing super well as an industry. Satellite has the better long term shot only because they have potential to deliver product cheaper across a wider spectrum. If Sirius and XM do merge (they need FCC permission), there will probably be a maintenance of fees for awhile, just because they CAN, but eventually, once they've wrung the thing dry, the price will go down.

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070303/BIZ01/703030342/1076/BIZ
Radio station operator lost $26.6M in '06

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/business/news/e3i9eac8ab6c87f7ab0dfa55915280302c9
Clear Ch. profits off sharply as buyout nears

http://sev.prnewswire.com/television/20070227/NYTU08427022007-1.html
CBS...8% decline at Radio.


And then, there's PODCASTING http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2005/tc2005033_0336_tc024.htm

Traditional radio powers are already feeling the pain. On Feb. 25, Viacom (VIA ) announced a $10.9 billion write-down in assets at its Infinity Broadcasting division, a clear signal that earnings prospects were dimming. A day later, Clear Channel Communications (CCU ), the nation's largest radio chain, took a $4.9 billion writedown on its radio licenses, although the company says it did so to comply with a new Securities & Exchange Commission requirement to value its businesses.

Whatever the reason, there's no denying a stark reality: Listeners, increasingly bored by the homogeneous programming and ever-more-intrusive advertising on commercial airwaves, are simply tuning out and finding alternatives. Says Rishad Tobaccowala, chief innovation officer at Publicis Groupe Media: "Radio pissed on their own product and then cluttered it up."

The industry tumult comes down to a simple phenomenon. As digital forms of radio proliferate, listeners will enjoy an abundance of new programming -- but much of it still lacks a proven business model. What's more, even tested radio businesses could see ad revenues wither as new rivals snatch away listeners. No one is saying commercial radio is going away: It still draws more than 200 million listeners a week. The industry "is challenged, but not dead," says Laraine Mancini, an analyst at Merrill Lynch & Co. Still, the biggest fear, for old-timers and newcomers alike, is that even as audio programming grows by leaps and bounds, ad dollars will shrink.

It's a brave new world out there, and the old paradigms just aren't cutting it anymore.

[johnaries]

19. Ya know, that's an exellent "talking point".

If Consrvatives are so concerned about the "Librul Media", why did they do away wit the Fairness Doctrine? And why don't they bring it back?

[MADem]

25. It certainly is. Of course, they'd sputter and fume if you asked it now.

But if Rupert "Give me MORE MONEY" Murdoch chose to pragmatically and greedily play both ends against the middle, and created a jazzy, snazzy FAUX FOR DEMOCRATS--what could he call it...HOUNDS, perhaps (as in FOX and HOUNDS)? Well, he could make a bundle, and that would be an amusing way of saying to the right wing, "Ya wanna cry about the librul media? I'll give ya somethin' ta cry about!!!"

It's all about the money with these media moguls. It isn't ideology; it's simply a question as to which factions will make laws that enrich them. They've pretty much sucked the right dry--it's all stale, old, the same. That's why Faux loses viewers every month. They'll either have to reformat their concept completely (hard to do, they're so 'branded') or become a smaller, niche product for people who like carping, right wing assholes.

The next big market is the left--they're hungry, they're eager, and there's a boatload of talent out there ready to fill the void (see MSNBC's ratings climb--though they waste a huge chunk of time with those shitty reruns of doc-block shows--but hey, it's a cheap air filler while they're growing their market share, I guess).

....and it's only a matter of time.

[Jonathan50]

7. I posted this on a science blog that has a *lot* of right wingers on it and got not one single reply

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=24842

President Bush expressed personal concern about Limbaugh's condition with senior staff.

"The president noted Rush Limbaugh is a national treasure," one senior White House staffer told the Drudge Report.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,982270,00.html

"I tell people don't kill all the liberals, leave enough around so we can have two on every campus; living fossils, so we will never forget what these people stood for."

-Rush Limbaugh


http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1159

"There's nothing good about drug use. We know it. It destroys individuals. It destroys families. Drug use destroys societies. Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods, which become consumed by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up.

What this says to me is that too many whites are getting away with drug use. Too many whites are getting away with drug sales. Too many whites are getting away with trafficking in this stuff. The answer to this disparity is not to start letting people out of jail because we're not putting others in jail who are breaking the law. The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them and send them up the river, too."
--Rush Limbaugh TV show (10/5/95)

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1146487050585

Did Rush Limbaugh Get Off Easy in OxyContin Case?


Rebecca Riddick


Daily Business Review


May 3, 2006

While critics say conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh got off easy in his deal last week with Palm Beach County prosecutors to avoid drug charges, some legal experts say the settlement was a fair one for a first-time drug offender.

But other experts say Limbaugh, 55, avoided prosecution as a result of an aggressive, high-priced legal fight by his attorney, Roy Black of Miami. Black challenged prosecutors' effort to obtain Limbaugh's medical records and took that fight all the way to the Florida Supreme Court.

http://www.wordspy.com/words/hillbillyheroin.asp

hillbilly heroin (HIL.bil.ee hayr.oh.in) n. Slang nickname for the prescription painkiller OxyContin, which is said to produce an effect similar to heroin.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur52.htm

20. There is a God. -Rush Limbaugh

Matthew 5:32


But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/news/limbaugh/c1a_rush_0612.html

By Scott McCabe


Palm Beach Post Staff Writer


Saturday, June 12, 2004

WEST PALM BEACH -- Rush Limbaugh, the Palm Beach-based conservative talk radio icon, announced Friday that he is getting another divorce.

It was the third marriage for both Limbaugh, 53, and his 44-year-old wife, Marta, a native of Jacksonville. Limbaugh's latest marital difficulties come while he is under investigation by Palm Beach County prosecutors over allegations of illegal doctor-shopping for painkillers.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/27/national/main1753947.shtml

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla., June 27, 2006
(CBS/AP) Rush Limbaugh could see a deal with prosecutors in a long-running prescription fraud case collapse after authorities found a bottle of Viagra in his bag at Palm Beach International Airport. The prescription was not in his name.

Limbaugh's doctor had prescribed the Viagra, but it was "labeled as being issued to the physician rather than Mr. Limbaugh for privacy purposes," Roy Black, Limbaugh's attorney, said in a statement.

Genesis 38:

9And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.

10And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.

[Mz Pip]

8. I just posted the same

sentiments on another thread. The more the conservatives embrace Ann, the more it exposes them for the morally bankrupt losers that they are. IT ends of being a a kind of guilt by association. You end up being judged by the company you keep. And as long as the conservatives go out of their way to keep company with Ann Coulter, we win.

I cannot think of one high profile leftist who spews out the kind of venom that Coulter does. They may exist but they sure aren't giving speeches at Democratic rallies.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[Obamarama]

12. Whatever you do, don't call Ann Coulter a sk - - nk on DU!

It will get your thread locked. It is apparently a banned word, which I discovered when my thread was locked because I called her that word. I'm not particularly bothered by the fact that the word is banned, actually I find it sort of amusing given the other words I called her. Nor am I particularly upset that my thread got locked since I wasn't intentionally coloring outside the lines. But of all words to be banned, well... whodathunkit? DU is an amusing, nutty place at times.

Anyway...emotions are running high on the Coultergeist today, so a word to the wise: if you were thinking of calling her that word don't...or else the thread will get locked and we won't be able to verbally poke the creature with a stick. :-)

[MADem]

18. A SKUNK, eh?

[GreenTea]

13. I disagree & think it's bullshit! Theses punks like Coulter also justify the vicious & ugly

hate in many, many people, as well as stir up feelings among some to act out on those feelings...we all know hate is a very strong & powerful emotion and by giving people a forum for that hate and even debating that hate gives it some justification among those who are seeking it. Because Coulter & the rest always just laugh it off when exposed, BUT, they also get their hateful message through... that it's okay to hate.

Limbaugh has made a lucrative living, made tens of millions of dollars for over 25 years...using those same tactics and being very "successful" at getting into people's minds, that it's OK to hate others who look and think differently than us...Spread the hate, lies & greed messages, laugh it off when you get caught going too far, but just get the fucking message out there to "legitimize" it.

As if it's OK because Limbaugh, Coulter & the rest say it is, while pointing out others who are different than they are, and telling all whom to hate and why...Therefore, why not even go a step further and react violently against the ones who are different.

These types of people never listen to any fair & sane media voices if there are any out there...because the republican owned media sure as fuck doesn't say it's wrong, mostly they just ignore the hate, bigotry and discrimination, and never report it...because that's who they really are and what their ideology is tied into... they want to believe it's all just an "opinion" and want their robots to believe that liberals are just too sensitive have no sense of humor...That what the Coulters & Limbaugh's say is just a joke, that's always their bullshit defense...shit, just watch us liberal watch Bush give a speech or one of his rare press conference and were laughing our asses off at the lying idiot...

The disgusting pigs like the pigman Limbaugh, Savage, Coulter, Hannity, O'Reilly, help no one but themselves and what they also do is justify the sick feelings for the 30% who agree with them already...If it takes Ann Coulters shit to finally bring some ignorant asshole around to vote democratic...well you think there's any real loyalty or deep convictions there in the first place?

[OneAngryDemocrat]

15. LTTE: The politics of Bigotry

I submitted the following LTTE to the three newspapers in my local area. By all means feel free to use a variation of this Letter To The Editor, to send off your own, to your local papers.

''All of the GOP's 2008 presidential hopefuls, with the exception of Senator John McCain, recently appeared at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, last week.

Not one of those candidates has yet spoke out against guest speaker Ann Coulter's pejorative and slanderous reference to Democratic candidate John Edwards, as a ''faggot.''

Coulter's horrible comments were receieved by those attending the Conservative Conference with laughter, and cheers.

If the GOP candidates expect to hear anything other than laughter on election day, then they must distance themselves from the politics of smear, and scandal, and denounce Ms. Coulter's commentary as un-true, and mean-spirited, and un-worthy of an event at which a future President would ever attend, and speak.''

[yurbud]

16. when they open their mouths, you see the mind of those faxing them talking points

and what they say, GOP will do shortly.

[Madspirit]

20. You give Repugs too much credit

They cackle like lunatics at Ann Coulter's forum every time she says something most civilized people would find repugnant.
She might turn off a middle-of-the-roader but the "real" Repugnants love her.
Lee

[bicentennial_baby]

22. That fails to surprise me...

[blonndee]

24. LMAO!!

:toast:

[trumad]

26. It doesn't surpirse me that the OP went right over your head.

baby.

[Forkboy]

29. Maybe she got the OP and still wasn't suprised by the thread title

The two aren't incompatible.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BlooInBloo]

31. Yeeeaaahhh... we've won what - one election in the last 15 years? Fucking great strategery.

[CatWoman]

32. Bloo

what in the world has gotten into you lately?