Post about "Rush Limbaugh"

Back in the day, when the federal government exerted far more control over the far fewer radio and television stations, an outbreak of hate-fueled domestic terrorism would have prompted at the very least a campaign of public service announcements pointing out that killing doctors or shooting up the Holocaust Museum is not the way to change a course of government that you think is wrong.

While I won’t listen to the width and breadth of Fox and Clear Channel, I got a full dose of Rush Limbaugh today who was blaming MSNBC for the media hate mongering and calling out Shepard Smith for his honesty and concern.

Gentlemen of the legacy media both right and left: Deregulation has not removed from you the responsibility to act responsibly, and to address the hate mongering that is leading to domestic death as a problem faced by all of us. It is not an excuse to blame the other guy and suggest your viewers and listeners stop tuning in the other network.

Limbaugh and Fox may choose to believe that its the other guy making the incendiary speeches, but when one network clearly has the eyes and ears of the vast majority of conservatives then they have the bulk of the responsibility to call for restraint when its the right wingers pulling the triggers.

Fox and Clear Channel need to start calling for restraint with the same zeal they’re using terms like “baby killer,” “Socialist” and “closet Muslim.”

The DNC has a supremely dumb idea. They’re going to put up a billboard that “Rush will see in his home town.” And they apparently know that Rush lives in Palm Beach, Florida, because “Erica” in Tim Kaine’s office told me so. I raised the matter with Tim Kaine’s voicemail but have not heard back.

What they don’t know, and apparently never checked before sending out fundraising emails and building an e-commerce web portal to solicit earmarked donations, is that Palm Beach (meaning the Island of Palm Beach, which is where El Rushbo actually lives), would sooner elect Bernie Madoff city treasurer than have a billboard within its city limits.

The DNC’s fallback (according to Erica who refused to give her last name): “We’ll put it in West Palm Beach.” I guess its a plus that the people’s party is so clueless about the uber rich that they don’t know Palm Beach is so finicky about what it allows that there was a major battle over opening a Starbucks on its fancy little island. The signage requirements are so strict that the municipality won’t let a sign hang from an awning.

Raising money to do something that you can’t do—and that your alleged target knows you can’t do because he’s already said so—is just plain stupid and it reflects poorly on Democrats all the way up to the Obama administration. Get a clue, DNC. And by the way, the five suggested slogans for the billboard are all lame. The whole thing smells like a way to raise a lot of money to do something that isn’t very expensive and pocket the rest for general expenditures, and not very well thought out at that.

I want Howard Dean back!!! I’m sure he knows that the difference between Palm Beach and West Palm Beach is, to plagiarize Mark Twain, as significant as the difference between lightning and the lightning bug.

Dear Rush Limbaugh:

Thank you for writing your open letter to President Obama, published Friday as an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal. I know things have been tough for your syndicator and owned stations (Premiere/Clear Channel). First, the banks tried to renege on their deal to take your employer private, and you all had to take less. Then the bean-counters came in and you had that mass firing Inauguration day.  Then, the junk bonds keeping your company alive got even junkier.  Standard and Poor downgraded them from B to B-.

With so many things wrong in this country, it made no sense when there was suddenly so much hue and cry from the biggest right wing talk networks and station groups over the fairness doctrine. Mr. Obama’s never liked the fairness doctrine, your party is against it, and you can count those in my party who want it reinstated on your fingers and toes. You may not even need your toes.

Last Friday (the same day Clear Channel’s massive debt got downgraded), you dropped your pants in your WSJ op-ed and it suddenly all made sense. Its not about the fairness doctrine at all, is it?

Its about a handful of companies owning the vast majority of powerful radio stations across this country and putting on nearly every station the same imported schlock with no local staffs, minimal local content, and in some cases not even a living soul stationed at studio or transmitter.

Your precise question to President Obama:

Is it your intention to censor talk radio through a variety of contrivances, such as “local content,” “diversity of ownership,” and “public interest” rules — all of which are designed to appeal to populist sentiments but, as you know, are the death knell of talk radio and the AM band?

Requiring Clear Channel to provide local content in their communities of license is not censorship. Its like requiring an investment company to actually buy some stocks and bonds for their investors and truthfully advise those investors about their holdings. Requiring radio stations to serve their communities–regardless of the political leanings of the ultimate content–is only a death knell to weak and poorly managed companies: companies like yours; companies that you would ordinarily, as a free market conservative, demand be thrown under the bus.

Fact is, Mr. Limbaugh, what has happened in the radio business is the same thing that has happened in the banking, the mortgage, and even the automobile industries. We “let the market decide,” by deregulating everything in sight, and the charlatans took over: people who don’t give a rat’s ass about ethics or values or anything but this month’s profit. Your masters bought up every radio station and station group they could find using expensive debt. The interest payments siphoned off the money for local programming and public service.

The decimation of the radio business by firing legions of talented people at the local stations, replacing them with automatons voiced in sweatshops in “cluster facilities” hundreds of miles away is broadcasting’s version of a Ponzi scheme. Its like selling off the locomotive of a train claiming inertia would keep it moving. Now that its ground to a stop, you’re trying to blame President Obama because you’re afraid he’s going to force you to replace the engine.

Your answer is to do what Rove, Cheney, and Bush did to sell the Iraq war. First you teach that the fairness doctrine is a bad thing. You call it censorship. Then you use those terms in a sentence with all the things you want to sully. Fairness doctrine, public interest, diversity of ownership, local content. There’s no connection, but you hope your listeners aren’t sharp enough to catch it. Saddam Hussein, terrorist, 9/11, weapons of mass destruction, Iraq, axis of evil, mushroom cloud.

But this time, they might catch on. All those words strung together to get us into war were either bad or unfamiliar and foreign sounding. Local content, local ownership, local people behind local mikes discussing local issues—what we once called full-service radio—are things people understand and many of us even remember. It will not be easy to redefine them as a negative when a lot of people will see them as an old friend, and it would truly be karma to see the “populist sentiment” that you’ve played like a violin for 20 years be the thing that puts your stations back in the hands of people who care about serving their communities, and takes you off the air for good.

Wouldn’t it be ironic if your denouement came the very first time you got caught red-handed at the Shock Doctrine? Rush Limbaugh, Saddam Hussein, Sean Hannity, Clear Channel, Terrorist, 9/11, mushroom cloud.