In your opinion who is the most offensive Conservative Commentator that should be allowed on the air

[el_bryanto]

It seems fairly clear that many on this board (possibly most) feel that Limbaugh has gone to far and does not deserve to be on the public airwaves anymore (if he ever did). So assuming we could remove him from those airwaves, would we move on to Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, et al? Or is Limbaugh just heinous enough that he cannot be on the airwaves anymore - but those other commentators, while terrible, are not so bad as to mandate being kicked off the air?

Bryant

[progress2k12nbynd]

1. If Air America can disappear without the FCC getting involved...

then we can do the same to conservative radio right? Forcing them off the air through some law just because we don't like that the public hasn't bought into the alternative (like Air America) will just make the Repukes martyrs.

I think the free-market strategy is working quite nicely; over 30 sponsors have already dropped Rush.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

14. Make that 40 sponsors.

[90-percent]

2. Glen Beck

Isn't he over halfway to oblivion already?

I'd have to google him just to find out where he's currently working.

-90% Jimmy

[el_bryanto]

3. His radio show is still going on

Caught a bit of it last week. So you are saying he should be allowed to stay on the air?

Bryant

[90-percent]

34. Allowed?

I don't like what he says, but he has a Constitutional right to free speech as much as the rest of us. A truly free democratic society should be able to cope with the likes of a Glen Beck.

"On the air" is an obsolete concept in this age of satellite and cable, anyway. Howard Stern went to satellite to be free of constant harassment by the FCC. I assume there's still pockets of "new media" that are not yet policed by governmental "Central Scrutinizers"? How much of "the airways" are even owned by the public now?

I will yield none of my Constitutional Rights of free speech, even if giving them up would silence a Glen Beck.

-90% Jimmy

I even have a concern about "market forces" driving people off the airways. It has a mob mentality gang lynching aroma to it which is pretty Un-American. Pretty open and shut with this most recent Rush episode, but there's been plenty of times it's been used against liberal voices in a more unjust manner. However, with our skewed Corporate Koch infested MSM, it does seem like five calls complaining about a lib would get him booted, but a national campaign of thousands would be needed to do the same to a conservative, doesn't it?

[eShirl]

32. He has his own Roku channel now.

[HopeHoops]

4. I don't care what their political bias is. Saying shit like that is disgusting.

[Scuba]

5. Legally, they should all be allowed - I'm a free speech advocate....

... and after they spew their hate, the backlash should be felt, ala Rush Limpballs.

[Broderick]

6. The free market can work in these situations

I believe in free speech. I don't think "allow" is the right word. I don't want the balance of power to revert and our voices are not "allowed" in reverse. I may not like what is being said. I have a choice not to listen and I have a choice to not use those companies that pay the bills. What is happening in Limbaugh's case is sponsors are doing the prudent thing and dropping him.

[HappyMe]

7. Glenn Beck is just as bad as Limpy.

Maybe even worse.

[wiggs]

8. Left or right, you shouldn't be allowed on public airwaves for the

purpose of deception of the American people and undermining of democracy. A voter who is misinformed isn't good for democracy.

You can't air a commercial that lies about its product or other products...you shouldn't be able to lie about politics under the guise of public discourse in order to sell a party.

And opinion/analysis is different than demonstrable lies.

[el_bryanto]

11. OK - than Sean Hannity/Glenn Beck - should they be allowed to remain on the air? n/t

[wiggs]

33. Shouldn't be based on who you are but what you say. If Sean or Glenn use PUBLIC

airwaves, not cable, and they outright lie on matters important to a well informed public then there ought to be a consequence for the lie...on a case by case basis....and getting booted off the air immediately isn't the only remedy.

[RZM]

9. If you don't like something, don't listen to it

That's pretty much it. It's your right to determine what you listen to. It's not your right to make that decision for anybody else.

[izquierdista]

10. William F. Buckley

Now that he's dead, a live mike on his grave wouldn't be too bad.

[denverbill]

15. I will say this for Buckley.

I don't recall him demonizing his ideological opposites the way the hot-air blowers do. I might disagree with his stances on virtually every issue, but I don't recall him ever saying liberals were out to deliberately destroy America.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

16. I like the way you think.

[denverbill]

12. Why should anyone who is 'offensive' be allowed on the air?

I'm perfectly fine with Limbaugh, Savage, and any of the other nuts staying on the air as long as they end their demonizing of other Americans and personal attacks. Ms Fluke is just the most egregious example. Most of these assholes spend virtually their entire show name-calling Obama or whoever the current leader of the Democratic party is. If they want to get on the air and make the case for conservative policies or against liberal policies, I'm fine with that.

But they will never do that, because it's not 'entertainment'. It's 'entertaining' to call Obama a Kenya-born, Islamic terrorist, Marxist, socialist, half-rican American. It's not entertaining to discuss why a top tax rate of 38% is much more harmful to our economy than a top tax rate of 33%. No matter that it destroys the public discourse, confuses the issue and divides America.

[el_bryanto]

18. Well i suppose offensive is in the eye of the beholder

Certainly Rick Santorum (to pick a political example) isn't as engaged in sliming people as Limbaugh - but the policies he pushes for are pretty offensive. If he wanted a radio show (and could get a broadcaster and sponsors) should he be allowed on the public airwaves?

Bryant

[denverbill]

21. It isn't the person, it's the words.

Just make an FCC policy banning broadcasters allowing talkers who repeatedly dehumanize, demonize, and engage in personal attacks.

It's simple. If you wouldn't allow a 3rd grader to say it to a classmate don't allow a radio commentator to say it daily to 20 million listeners. Don't stereotype. Don't name call or make fun of other peoples looks. Don't invent crimes. Don't criticize another person for their religion.

"Don't call Joey stupid"
"Don't make fun of Maria's religion."
"Don't falsely accuse Bill of being a terrorist."
"Don't call all black kids criminals."

[el_bryanto]

27. Hmmmm. Don't criticize another person for their religion

That's an interesting one - what if someone wants to get on the air to say that all religion is hooey and people should stop bothering with it?

[denverbill]

31. I think there is a difference between criticism and demonization.

I think it's perfectly acceptable to say I'm not a Catholic because I don't believe in the precepts of Catholicism.

It's quite another matter to say all Catholics owe their first loyalty to the pope and are actively trying to turn America into a Catholic nation, or to say Jews control the government and are stealing all our money, or to say all Muslims are terrorists.

I don't think saying all religion is hooey particularly dehumanizes or demonizes people who believe in religion, probably must less so than saying atheists are immoral.

[2ndAmForComputers]

37. Hey. I must thank you for posting that thread in ATA.

It was good for a laugh.

[el_bryanto]

38. You've lost me I'm afraid - given that I made this post 3 months ago nt

[LeftinOH]

13. Lying and spreading misinformation should not be allowed-

Maybe lying is also free speech- I just have a problem with it.

[90-percent]

35. Knowingly lying in a news broadcast is PERFECTLY LEGAL

http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/11-the-media-can-legally-lie/

Here's the case that set that precedent.

-90% Jimmy

[treestar]

17. It's not a matter of being allowed on the air - anyone is allowed

But it is great that capitalism is finally working - advertisers pulling out - to show that society does not wish to purchase Rush's "product" any more. If Rush loses viewers because his views go too far, that's freedom of speech at work too. Nobody paying to hear such garbage.

[LanternWaste]

19. "Allowed on the air" via the mechanism of law, the market, or our own personal ethics?

"Allowed on the air" via the mechanism of law, the market, or our own personal ethics?

[former9thward]

20. "allowed to remain on the air"?

You don't think much of the First Amendment do you? If you don't want to listen to someone then don't. If you want to boycott advertisers then do that. Anything else is a violation of the Constitution but you don't seem to care about that.

[el_bryanto]

26. I should make it clear I don't believe in even kicking Rush of the air - but many have noted that

the Public owns the airwaves. and if we own the airwaves can we not kick off someone who is offensive?

[former9thward]

30. The public leases the airways.

Radio stations pay license fees. So they "own" that local bandwidth for the duration of the license. The public through the FCC regulates the airways. The FCC does not have the legal right to kick anybody off that is offensive. That would be a !st Amend violation. They can fine or sanction indecency but that is a very high bar and is rarely used. Most of the time when stations challenge fines they win in the courts.

[Paladin]

22. Flame Bait. (n/t)

[el_bryanto]

28. How so?

I've seen several people referring to our power to throw people off of the people's airwaves - if we have that power, than what is the upper limit of offensiveness we would allow?

[Major Hogwash]

29. Yabut, that is what all of the rightwing commentators on the radio do for a living.

And there are many.
Laura Ingraham comes to mind.

As for Sean Insanity, who said that waterboarding is not torture, he couldn't care less if any wars are ever ended because he isn't going to fight in any of them. He's as safe as a bug in a rug sitting on the sidelines making money by talking about them.

And there's Billo the Klown.
An endless discussion could ensue just talking about him alone.

[Arkansas Granny]

23. I don't think we can exclude them from the air, but we can make them pay a price

when they step over the line with their offensive statements. If a show host can't retain advertisers, that host will be gone. It's all about the money.

[Arugula Latte]

24. The public airwaves are a limited resource.

Why is it that this one man gets to take up so much of them? What about the first amendment rights of other voices, other perspectives? Why should they be silenced?

[11 Bravo]

25. "Allowed"? All of them. "Sponsored"? Not a fucking one of the bastards!

[GeorgeGist]

36. Ronald Reagan.

Sr.