RJ Connors
(679 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:08 PM
Original message |
NBC to ban Ann Coulter for life |
|
Edited on Mon Jan-05-09 06:10 PM by RJ Connors
Breaking on Drudge http://www.drudgereport.comThoughts. Comments. On Edit: The freeptards are having a hissy. Fascism is here. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2159211/posts
|
Joanne98
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:09 PM
Response to Original message |
Taverner
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:13 PM
Response to Original message |
2. They should have kept her jaw wired shut |
RJ Connors
(679 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
4. Everytime I see Coulters name I can't help but think |
|
Bill Clinton. Gay, when it comes to evil crazy bitches. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7NcfDOL71o
|
Still Sensible
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:15 PM
Response to Original message |
3. I didn't know January 5 was a holiday! |
RJ Connors
(679 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
Now if the other cable channels will do the right thing and ban her bony ass maybe we won't have to hear of her anymore.
|
liberalmuse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:17 PM
Response to Original message |
5. I'd like to think of it as 'quarantined'. |
|
She's like a fucking virus.
|
tigereye
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:17 PM
Response to Original message |
6. boy is that an ugly website! |
|
Made me look - she's disgusting, and banning her from a variety of media would be all right by me! :thumbsup:
|
RJ Connors
(679 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
8. Man, if you think that was ugly then don't look at this. |
|
Truly representative of what she is, an evil crazy bitch. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7NcfDOL71o
|
Harry Monroe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
Dammit, warn us before you show a picture of her!! You scared the shit out of me. Now I'll have that bitch's image on my brain for hours!! Thanks a lot!!
|
saracat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:22 PM
Response to Original message |
9. If what Drudge says is true, this is wrong. I loathe Coulter but censorship is always wrong. |
|
Coulter has always been an abomination and she is the same abomination she was when they invited her. I do not think this has anything to do with PE Obama and everything to do with whatever she said about them. Either way, it is wrong. I never though to see a day when I would defend Coulter but it isn't about Coulter but Free Speech.
|
tridim
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. No, it's about not inviting proven liars onto your television network. |
saracat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
12. It is wrong if Drudges cited reasons are true. |
|
She shouldn't be prevented from criticizing Obama, or NBC. If they ban her for lying, that is another matter.
|
Kookaburra
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
22. What would prompt us to think anything drudge says is true? |
|
Just asking. I don't usually believe anything attributed to that fool until I've read in at least 2 other more reliable places.
|
Career Prole
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-06-09 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
37. Were you ever invited on NBC to criticize bush? |
|
Edited on Tue Jan-06-09 02:10 AM by Career Prole
I have to ask because I don't know for sure...perhaps you were. I know I was never invited, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't a violation of my right to free speech...even if I asked them pretty please to provide me some airtime to say what an evil turd bush is. I just wouldn't help the ratings. They wouldn't even return my calls.
I know your heart's in the right place.
Don't worry, though. Horseface's nasty new book will have no trouble getting onto and not subsequently being banned from library shelves. That, as we know, would be censorship. She can also stand on the street corner and badmouth liberals all day long and I'll join you in defending her right to do so. I just don't think any television station owes her airtime as some sort of right, though...especially when it's entertainment rather than news. The whole thing was probably a ratings decision to begin with and now they're probably pleased as punch Sludge is stirring it up.
|
Jackpine Radical
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
11. Ah, but the government isn't preventing her from speaking. |
|
A network has decided not to give her airspace. Well, geez, they don't give me airspace either. Does that mean they're violating my rights?
|
saracat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:32 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
13. Again, it is wrong if the reasons cited are true. No one should be banned for criticizing the P E |
|
Edited on Mon Jan-05-09 06:33 PM by saracat
or any other official. And I don't think they should be banned for criticizing a network. I have always had a problem with how the airsplace allegedly is public property yet the networks decide according what makes them money. Odd how that works. What I question is if it is for the reasons cited whether they have the right to ban her.That is a government issue.
|
geckosfeet
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
16. Drudge is as big a partisan liar as she is. |
foxfeet
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #16 |
23. And rapidly becoming as irrelevant as she is. |
RJ Connors
(679 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
|
As a business owner I have the right to operate my business in a way that I think is in the best interest of the business, it's shareholders, and it continued existences. So, if NBC has decided that the future of political commentary is not divisive rhetoric that has questionable or blatantly no foundation, it is there right to adjust their programing to accommodate their audiences preferences and the business continued success.
|
izquierdista
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
|
Has nothing to do with it. NBC obviously can't sell her crap to advertisers anymore, that's all. She's as free as any other nutcase to stand on a soapbox in the park and flap her gums to whomever will listen.
|
qazplm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
|
it is not "censorship" unless the government does it.
it is not "censorship" unless the government does it.
it is not "censorship" unless the government does it.
Please repeat ad infinitum!
A private entity can "ban" whomever they want, whenever they want. There is no "right" to appear and speak on television.
|
saracat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
17. Public Airwaves, Public airwaves, Public airwaves. |
|
Edited on Mon Jan-05-09 06:45 PM by saracat
Free speech even applies to people we don't like. If this was Keith Olberman or Randi from AAR, most would be screaming their heads off! I remember screaming my head off about Bill Maher.That was wrong too!
|
roseBudd
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
26. remember andrew dice clay? |
Prophet 451
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
18. She still has free speech |
|
No-one has a "right" to appear on tv. She still has free speech, they're just refusing to give her a megaphone.
|
rpannier
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
19. And if NBC was a government agency I would agree |
|
But like Fox, they have the right to pick who they will allow on their network and who they won't.
She is not being silenced, as she can go on ABC, CBS, CNN and/or Fox to promote her book.
|
Still Sensible
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
|
this isn't censorship, this is simply an example of someone in the MSM deciding not to give equal voice to someone who clearly doesn't deserve it. How many times have we been frustrated by total bullshit the last 8 years (and longer) getting coverage and time in the interest of "fairness"--in reality in the interest of pushing the right's agenda.
She has not been censored--someone still publishes her BS.
|
Harry Monroe
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 08:25 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
29. And would it be a twist if the ACLU were to defend her right to free speech?? |
Caretha
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
33. You need to get a grip |
|
and study what the meaning of censorship is.
|
canucksawbones
(203 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
35. It's not censorship... |
|
Censorship is something government does. If Coulter is "banned" (and I doubt it as only Drudge and Coulter have claimed that)it means that the network has made an editorial decision to not give a forum to an inflammatory idiot who continually out and out lies in her books. Coulter does not have a right to be on TV promoting her books any more than I have a right to be on TV. She won't get an invite, I won't get an invite. No problem.
|
Aristus
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-06-09 12:37 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
36. NBC didn't say she couldn't publish her book; that would be censorship. All they did was say |
|
she couldn't be on their network anymore. That's taking out the trash.
|
poverlay
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 06:56 PM
Response to Original message |
20. I just read a freeper compare Coulter with Maddow. That's like sending a yappy little shitzu up |
|
against a golden retreiver.
I would LOVE to see that matchup. All of Rachel's facts would be very confusing to the freeps and their lame, tame, attack Coulter.
|
emilyg
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 07:35 PM
Response to Original message |
Miss Authoritiva
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #24 |
25. I don't believe it either. |
|
Drudge and Coulter have a long skanky history together. I'm guessing Coulter legitimately got bumped (not unheard in television programming history) and she and Drudge are taking the opportunity to get some buzz going. If NBC/MSNBC didn't "ban" Coulter after her horrendous Lauer exchange years ago, when Coulter claimed the 9/11 "Jersey Girls" were just a bunch of merry widows, then why would they do it now. Besides, nobody gets "banned" from those shows. The telephone just stops ringing.
|
saracat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 08:16 PM
Response to Reply #25 |
28. I think you may be right. This will certainly give her leverage on other networks! |
|
Edited on Mon Jan-05-09 08:16 PM by saracat
And Coulter loves controversy, real or imagined.
|
SargeXXX
(12 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 08:35 PM
Response to Original message |
31. I canceled my subscription to TIME when they put her on the cover. |
RamboLiberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 08:42 PM
Response to Original message |
32. NBC denies she was banned |
|
She was pulled to allow more time for coverage of Middle East. Coulter and Drudge then went on a publicity witch hunt against NBC. Numerous threads on this in GD.
|
santamargarita
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jan-05-09 08:55 PM
Response to Original message |
34. She leaves that stinking burnt rotting pork smell everywhere she goes |
gmoney
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-06-09 04:51 PM
Response to Original message |
38. I heard a little of her on Hannity radio yesterday, hating on single moms |
|
not sure what her point was... yes, I'm sure many single moms wish the daddy could stick around, but I didn't catch if she was proposing taking kids away from single moms, pairing them up and enforcing marriage, or what.
|
rpannier
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jan-06-09 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #38 |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sat May 04th 2024, 07:32 AM
Response to Original message |