Liberals get it wrong again.

Headlines have been blaring all over the digital universe about Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity being tossed off the radio airwaves by Cumulus and losing 40 stations in key markets. For example, Politico's Dylan Byers reported: "In a major shakeup for the radio industry, Cumulus Media, the second-biggest broadcaster in the country, is planning to drop both Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity from its stations at the end of the year, an industry source told POLITICO on Sunday. Cumulus has decided that it will not renew its contracts with either host, the source said, a move that would remove the two most highly rated conservative talk personalities from more than 40 Cumulus channels in major markets." However, in the words of the legendary radio broadcaster Paul Harvey, readers are not being told the rest of the story. Cumulus and Clear Channel have been buying up stations in major markets. Limbaugh and Hannity are syndicated by Premiere, which is owned by Clear Channel. RUSH LIMBAUGH GOES "ON THE RECORD" WITH GRETA VAN SUSTEREN TONIGHT AT 10 ON FOX NEWS CHANNEL Rather than pay fees to Cumulus to carry these shows it makes more sense to put them on their own properties, reduce local talent costs, and save those fees. The two top-rated talkers aren't going anywhere. They're just changing dial positions and, in many cases, to better signals. Seeing liberal bloggers declare victory about how a boycott of these shows' sponsors led to this makes my hair stand on end for four reasons. Seeing liberal bloggers declare victory about how a boycott of these shows' sponsors led to this makes my hair stand on end for four reasons. First, that's not at all what happened, as these shows will land elsewhere. Second, and even more importantly, these two broadcasters, with whom I vehemently, vocally, and publicly disagree politically, have done more to keep the talk radio industry alive than anyone else. It's because of the success of these two shows that many stations have stayed in the talk format in the first place, allowing other shows to be heard. Much as liberals don't have nearly as many outlets as conservatives (According to Talkers Magazine, conservatives own the lion's share of the news/talk market), it would be even worse for the left if these shows weren't making it, because the industry would be closer to collapse at a time when terrestrial radio is struggling. Third, a boycott hurts the entire business. Advertisers run scared and are encouraged to avoid controversy, and that affects all programming, including progressive hosts. Fourth, what kind of liberal wants to clamp down on free speech and celebrate shutting someone up? The best antidote to free speech is -- free speech. As the German theologian Martin Niemoller famously said, "First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out because I was not a Socialist..." If I, as a liberal, didn't speak out against those who would squelch the free speech of conservatives, I wouldn't deserve to call myself a liberal. I will continue to speak out against the views of both Limbaugh and Hannity when I feel it's warranted, meeting their free speech with my own. But I will never forget that, without them, I'd have a much smaller platform on which to do it. Alan Colmes is a nationally syndicated radio host, distributed by Fox News Radio, and publisher of Liberaland at alan.com

Screw Alan Colmes, he's nothing more than a Fox puppet.

Quote :

Fourth, what kind of liberal wants to clamp down on free speech and celebrate shutting someone up? The best antidote to free speech is -- free speech. As the German theologian Martin Niemoller famously said, "First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out because I was not a Socialist..."

And here it is, when liberals boycott it's unpatriotic and an assault on freedom, but yet this rule of thumb somehow doesn't apply to conservative boycotts. I'm also growing tired of  Fox News' love affair with Nazis.      

And on a side note, I haven't heard anything about this until now, from Fox.

The liberals have been trying to get conservative talk shows banned from the air waves for years. They haven't succeed so now I guess the plan is to buy up all the air waves and not let them on.

ilaugh wrote:

Screw Alan Colmes, he's nothing more than a Fox puppet.

Quote :

Fourth, what kind of liberal wants to clamp down on free speech and celebrate shutting someone up? The best antidote to free speech is -- free speech. As the German theologian Martin Niemoller famously said, "First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out because I was not a Socialist..."

And here it is, when liberals boycott it's unpatriotic and an assault on freedom, but yet this rule of thumb somehow doesn't apply to conservative boycotts. I'm also growing tired of  Fox News' love affair with Nazis.      

And on a side note, I haven't heard anything about this until now, from Fox.

You do know that article was written by Alan Colmes right?

You did read my opening sentence, right?

Colmes is a token liberal. He's there to provide a week democratic view that can be battered about easily by his conservative opponents. Except for cases like this where he's taking a page directly from his employers at Fox and comparing liberals with Nazis.

ilaugh wrote:

You did read my opening sentence, right?

Colmes is a token liberal. He's there to provide a week democratic view that can be battered about easily by his conservative opponents. Except for cases like this where he's taking a page directly from his employers at Fox and comparing liberals with Nazis.

Alan Colmes is by no means battered about easily. He holds his own. I know that is popular among hard core liberals however Alan has learned not to take any guff off of anyone.

I'm not particularly impressed with him and I don't consider myself to be a "hard-core" liberal. Anyway the sentiments he expresses here are fairly typical of Fox News. I've heard Bill O'Reilly say pretty much the same thing. I've also heard Mr. O'Reilly call for boycotts, Pepsi for instance. I guess that makes him a hypocrite.

ilaugh wrote:

I'm not particularly impressed with him and I don't consider myself to be a "hard-core" liberal. Anyway the sentiments he expresses here are fairly typical of Fox News. I've heard Bill O'Reilly say pretty much the same thing. I've also heard Mr. O'Reilly call for boycotts, Pepsi for instance. I guess that makes him a hypocrite.    

Bill Oreilly is all over the place. He believes SUVs should be banned. Now I do not know what he drives but if he drives a gas guzzler then he is a hypocrite just like Al Gore and all the Hollywood types that scream global warming global warming then fly in their private jets and limo's. You want to know who I have tremendous respect for? Ed Bagley Jr. Not only does he talk the talk he walks the walk.

LOL, speaking of the GW hypocrits, I had an associate that claimed people should never burn trash because of the particulates and what not. Neither should they go camping for the stress it puts on the environment, right? BTW, he takes his two kids camping three times a year, in his SUV, his AMERICAN SUV (a Tahoe or something) but says the slight footprint HE leaves is nothing to worry about! However, when I said what if a thousand MORE had his attitude, how much worse would THAT be to the environment. He said, that would never happen, not that many more people would suddenly take up camping, plus, as long as they each cleaned up THEIR campsites, well how be, anyway? :suspect: 
Sigh, that is why I speak not to him any more! He also 'jumped' doen my thought when I suggested that Gore was wrong on so many things and he asked if I were a scientist, to which I said I was not but neither was Gore. Guess what he said? He said the people Gore had around him were and THEY wouldn't lead him astray!
Like a puppet following the will of those holding the strings, money and 'power' do NOT equal unfailing correctness!