More Than 40 Radio Stations Might Drop Limbaugh and Hannity

[IlarMeilyr]

Translation: "I have nothing".

STILL waiting for evidence of "stifling"...

Btw I didn't opine on what the plural of ellipsis is but at least I know not to write "is is" in a sentence.

Nope. No "other words." I rebutted your bullshit and you have no valid rejoinder.

That much is clear to all.

As for what you are "waiting" for, there's nothing TO wait for. I already provided links to even the NY Slimes.

And you did offer an inherent correction of the spelling of ellipses,. You are clearly not up to the difficult task of being honest.

As for catching my missed error, I congratulate you on your established ability to be massively petty.



Now, back on point.

Why do you lolberals seek to silence Rush?

Maybe you should ask this guy since you're reading his posts instead of mine...

"Petty" huh? After inventing an allusion to "ellipses"??
Tough crowd. Good thing I didn't mention monolog [sic]...

No. HIS posts would make more sense than anything you've offered.

I didn't "invent" YOUR reference to ellipsis, either, you dishonest twat.

Further, "monolog" is spelled correctly (although in a variation form).

Your track record of arrogant ignorance remains unimpeded.

 

[Pogo]

Nope. No "other words." I rebutted your bullshit and you have no valid rejoinder.

That much is clear to all.

As for what you are "waiting" for, there's nothing TO wait for. I already provided links to even the NY Slimes.

And you did offer an inherent correction of the spelling of ellipses,. You are clearly not up to the difficult task of being honest.

As for catching my missed error, I congratulate you on your established ability to be massively petty.



Now, back on point.

Why do you lolberals seek to silence Rush?

Maybe you should ask this guy since you're reading his posts instead of mine...

"Petty" huh? After inventing an allusion to "ellipses"??
Tough crowd. Good thing I didn't mention monolog [sic]...

No. HIS posts would make more sense than anything you've offered.

I didn't "invent" YOUR reference to ellipsis, either, you dishonest twat.

Further, "monolog" is spelled correctly (although in a variation form).

Your track record of arrogant ignorance remains unimpeded.

I continue to have posted no comment whatsoever on the spelling of either ellipsis or ellipses. Does not exist.

-- Which coincidentally also describes your documentation of my "stifling free speech".

How 'bout that.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Maybe you should ask this guy since you're reading his posts instead of mine...

"Petty" huh? After inventing an allusion to "ellipses"??
Tough crowd. Good thing I didn't mention monolog [sic]...

No. HIS posts would make more sense than anything you've offered.

I didn't "invent" YOUR reference to ellipsis, either, you dishonest twat.

Further, "monolog" is spelled correctly (although in a variation form).

Your track record of arrogant ignorance remains unimpeded.

I continue to have posted no comment whatsoever on the spelling of either ellipsis or ellipses. Does not exist.

-- Which coincidentally also describes your documentation of my "stifling free speech".

How 'bout that.

You are a fraud. And with each post, you establish that ever more clearly.

How about THAT?



YOU were commenting rather happily about the reduced income to Cumulus and then pontificating that it is all just a business decision while also contending that it's simply a cause and effect of the ratings game numbers. But you studiously deflected AWAY from the rebuttal that the "thumb on the scale" is also a part of WHY the advertisers were pulling away from sponsorship of the Limbaugh show.

Newsflash: you don't always have to SAY something (intoning some precise phrase) to be clear in your message -- no matter how determined you are to hide behind such a cheap facade

Furthermore, as to the important matter of ellipses vs ellipsis, I wrote ellipses (referring to the plural, of course). YOU chose to reply, "It's not the 'ellipsis' (which actually goes '...') to shortcut my post . . . ."

And you were entirely wrong. It WAS an ellipsis that I used when I made reference to ellipses (plural) -- which was also correct. An ellipsis does not "go" anything, to be even more precise. It is usually denoted with three periods (or four when it completes a sentence), but it can also properly be denoted with other marks, like asterisks.

And what I snipped was not to "shortcut" your post (whatever the fuck your gibberish use of that phrase was intended to convey). It was to snip your dishonest effort to recast what I had already said. This shouldn't come as a surprise to you, you moron, since I already explained as much to you.

Now, BACK to the real discussion.

The effort of certain liberal groups (including the scumbag Media Matters vermin) to blackmail Rush's advertisers is NOT even marginally akin to free speech or the workings of a free market. Any claim that it "is" akin to free speech or the workings of the free market is dishonest.

 

[Synthaholic]

The liberal agitators go to the advertisers to try to convince them that if they air their ads with Rush, the lolberals will boycott the companies' products.

When the advertisers react to THAT blackmail, they are NOT responding to "market forces" at all. They are caving-in to blackmail.

No, that is Capitalism. With a side order of Free Speech.

No. It's not. It's black mail.

As I already (correctly) said, capitalism would be market forces. Show. Audience. Advertising decisions based on ratings.

BUT when you inject the side order of BLACKMAIl, the proverbial thumb on the scale, you are interfering with capitalism.

Free speech does not seek to stifle one's opponent.

I can tell you are a liberal because even these simple BASIC concepts confuse the snot out of you . . . always.



No. I didn't. You are not free to make such shit up and speak for me with your lies, you dishonest twat.

And by the way, just to get to the point DESPITE your display of typical lolberal dishonesty on your part, you need to come to terms with a couple of basic concepts. If I dislike what the Dixy Chunks said about President Bush during his Administration while THOSE nasty skanks were over in Europe, I am free to boycott their records. Small loss to them. I wasn't buying their shit anyway.

That is not blackmail.

But if I go to advertisers of a show discussing matters of politics and tell them that if they dare to put ads on the show, I will arrange a boycott of their product as punishment, that very much IS blackmail. Indeed, it is intended to be blackmail ad to deny it is dishonest of you. No surprise there, Tranny.



I actually did elect against buying any Dixie Shits albums but once again, YOU don't have the right to make up facts, you dishonest twat.

Why do you hate Freedom of Choice?

I don't. Why do you hate being honest ... ever?

And why is your poutrage with the people who are boycotting, instead of with the radio stations who, in your mind I guess, don't have a backbone?

I don't have any outrage or poutrage whatever that might mean. I am disgusted. Not the same thing.

Lolberals are 'all about" free speech EXCEPT when they decide it's simply inconvenient. It is your standard fare of lolberal hypcorisy and dishonesty I find disagreeable.

You are, as always, a liar.

You certainly did support and defend all RightWing boycotts.

 

[Pogo]

>> (CNN) -- If you want to know why there's little cooperation in Washington these days, I'd start with a campaign promise made in 1988 by presidential candidate George H.W. Bush.

"Read my lips: No new taxes."

So, when he raised taxes two years later, quite naturally, voters, particularly conservatives, were upset.

If you want to know why so little is being accomplished in Washington these days, I'd start with that broken promise and what Bush did in an attempt to get those conservatives back.

He carried Rush Limbaugh's bags.

That's right. In 1992, President Bush invited Limbaugh for a sleepover and personally brought his guest's bags into the Lincoln bedroom for him

They were not friends.

In fact, Limbaugh didn't care for Bush that much, and "41" knew it. But Bush was seeking re-election. He was saddled with a slumping economy and locked in a tough battle with Gov. Bill Clinton and businessman Ross Perot.

He believed he needed Rush Limbaugh.

The party has been carrying Limbaugh's bags ever since.

{list of Limblobist Lies at the Link}...

... Not too long ago, he read what he believed to be passages from Obama's senior thesis, passages that expressed a disdain for the U.S. Constitution. Sadly, the whole thing was made up by a blogger. And while Limbaugh did sheepishly tell listeners what he had read earlier was false, the host still found a way to justify reading it by saying, "We know he thinks it."

Some folks eat that kind of stuff up.

Some get riled up about it.

And the folks in Washington? Well, after 25 years, they're still not quite sure what to do with it or him. If you're a Democrat, do you ignore him? If you're a Republican, do you carry his bags? I imagine it's like that feeling you get when someone tells you something that you can't determine is a joke or not. You just stand there half-smiling like an idiot.

So, if you want to know what the folks in Washington are doing about the economy, I'd start there. << --At 25, Limbaugh Show Still Rules GOP

 

[Synthaholic]

YOU can't sum up for me, ploddo, since that would require honesty and you have none.

I will permit my own words to do the talking for MY position. I will not permit your dishonest efforts to engage in revisionism to go unrebutted.

You just did.

And I quote:
" * * * * "

Deep.

I realize that an intellectual lightweight such as you is unfamiliar with basic grammatical conventions like the use of ellipses.

But it denotes that I snipped YOUR bogus attempt to "summarize" what would supposedly have been my position.

You are far from deep. Intellectually, you drown in the shallows. Fuck, you'd drown in a puddle.

Pogo is kicking your ass all over this thread.

 

[Synthaholic]

You just did.

And I quote:
" * * * * "

Deep.

I realize that an intellectual lightweight such as you is unfamiliar with basic grammatical conventions like the use of ellipses.

But it denotes that I snipped YOUR bogus attempt to "summarize" what would supposedly have been my position.

You are far from deep. Intellectually, you drown in the shallows. Fuck, you'd drown in a puddle.

It's not the "ellipsis" (which actually goes "...") to shortcut my post, but the complete absence of any response thereto.

I understand you're into monologues where nobody gets to respond, but I'm not, so you're free to offer one.

That is if you even have one...

Just like Rush!

 

[IlarMeilyr]

No, that is Capitalism. With a side order of Free Speech.

No. It's not. It's black mail.

As I already (correctly) said, capitalism would be market forces. Show. Audience. Advertising decisions based on ratings.

BUT when you inject the side order of BLACKMAIl, the proverbial thumb on the scale, you are interfering with capitalism.

Free speech does not seek to stifle one's opponent.

I can tell you are a liberal because even these simple BASIC concepts confuse the snot out of you . . . always.



No. I didn't. You are not free to make such shit up and speak for me with your lies, you dishonest twat.

And by the way, just to get to the point DESPITE your display of typical lolberal dishonesty on your part, you need to come to terms with a couple of basic concepts. If I dislike what the Dixy Chunks said about President Bush during his Administration while THOSE nasty skanks were over in Europe, I am free to boycott their records. Small loss to them. I wasn't buying their shit anyway.

That is not blackmail.

But if I go to advertisers of a show discussing matters of politics and tell them that if they dare to put ads on the show, I will arrange a boycott of their product as punishment, that very much IS blackmail. Indeed, it is intended to be blackmail ad to deny it is dishonest of you. No surprise there, Tranny.



I actually did elect against buying any Dixie Shits albums but once again, YOU don't have the right to make up facts, you dishonest twat.



I don't. Why do you hate being honest ... ever?

And why is your poutrage with the people who are boycotting, instead of with the radio stations who, in your mind I guess, don't have a backbone?

I don't have any outrage or poutrage whatever that might mean. I am disgusted. Not the same thing.

Lolberals are 'all about" free speech EXCEPT when they decide it's simply inconvenient. It is your standard fare of lolberal hypcorisy and dishonesty I find disagreeable.

You are, as always, a liar.

You certainly did support and defend all RightWing boycotts.

No no. You are lying. You couldn't back up that latest set of lies if your worthless life depended on it.

Lying, sadly, is what a twat liar like you does.

As I correctly and honestly said, I had no problem with declaring that I would not buy a Dipsie Chumps album. I never discussed that other alleged "boycott" in any way whatsoever. You made it up.

You lie and then you repeat it or even swear to it. But that only makes your lie a repeated lie or a sworn lie. Either way, you have zero honesty in you. None at all.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

You just did.

And I quote:
" * * * * "

Deep.

I realize that an intellectual lightweight such as you is unfamiliar with basic grammatical conventions like the use of ellipses.

But it denotes that I snipped YOUR bogus attempt to "summarize" what would supposedly have been my position.

You are far from deep. Intellectually, you drown in the shallows. Fuck, you'd drown in a puddle.

Pogo is kicking your ass all over this thread.

You are simply a liar. He hasn't come close. If anything, I am kicking his.

But I know a liar like you would never admit it.

You remain too fully dedicated to being dishonest.

 

[Synthaholic]

USMB Wingnut Boycott #1:


http://www.usmessageboard.com/current-events/37370-help-stick-it-to-hugo-chavez.html

 

[Synthaholic]

USMB Wingnut Boycott #2:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/current-events/24030-anti-bush-new-zealand-pizza-billboard.html

 

[Synthaholic]

USMB Wingnut Boycott #3:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/current-events/7722-us-groups-want-moore-film-banned.html


Here's a choice comment from USMB long-timer 'Annie':

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
and the push for anti american censorship begins. things starting to look familiar to anyone? circa 1933?

DK how can people, excercising their first amendment right of free speech, be any more wrong than those who have a right to protest the war?

I have the right to boycott products, sponsors, etc. If I can get others to go along with me, is that not a right?

In effect it's the 'little guys' way of play George Soros.

Is she wrong, Liability?

 

[Pogo]

No. HIS posts would make more sense than anything you've offered.

I didn't "invent" YOUR reference to ellipsis, either, you dishonest twat.

Further, "monolog" is spelled correctly (although in a variation form).

Your track record of arrogant ignorance remains unimpeded.

I continue to have posted no comment whatsoever on the spelling of either ellipsis or ellipses. Does not exist.

-- Which coincidentally also describes your documentation of my "stifling free speech".

How 'bout that.

You are a fraud. And with each post, you establish that ever more clearly.

How about THAT?



YOU were commenting rather happily about the reduced income to Cumulus and then pontificating that it is all just a business decision while also contending that it's simply a cause and effect of the ratings game numbers. But you studiously deflected AWAY from the rebuttal that the "thumb on the scale" is also a part of WHY the advertisers were pulling away from sponsorship of the Limbaugh show.

That's your point, not mine. I'm not going to "pontificate", "ruminate" or "expectorate" on WHY, other than as I already said, public image. I did post a sample quote from one of these buyers. He cited his daughters, not me.

Newsflash: you don't always have to SAY something (intoning some precise phrase) to be clear in your message -- no matter how determined you are to hide behind such a cheap facade

"Don't tell me what you think! I'll tell you what you think!"

Furthermore, as to the important matter of ellipses vs ellipsis, I wrote ellipses (referring to the plural, of course). YOU chose to reply, "It's not the 'ellipsis' (which actually goes '...') to shortcut my post . . . ."

And you were entirely wrong. It WAS an ellipsis that I used when I made reference to ellipses (plural) -- which was also correct. An ellipsis does not "go" anything, to be even more precise. It is usually denoted with three periods (or four when it completes a sentence), but it can also properly be denoted with other marks, like asterisks.

And had you bothered to read the post in full, Evelyn Wood, you'd see that I'm referring to the absence of any counterpoint. Not to the spelling of ellipsis. Can't believe I have to spell this out: it's not that you excised my post with an ellipsis (I don't need it; I know what I wrote); it's that you offered no response to it.

Which is what the post said, and still says. That has nothing to do with spelling.

The effort of certain liberal groups (including the scumbag Media Matters scumbags) to blackmail Rush's advertisers is NOT even marginally akin to free speech or the workings of a free market. Any claim that it "is" akin to free speech or the workings of the free market is dishonest.

Far as I know MediaMatters hasn't even been part of this thread, let alone my posts. And again you need to learn the definition of blackmail (which I already posted). But diga me how this MediaMatters has this kind of power on the free market. Why aren't they making a killing on Wall Street?

However -- you're in luck here-- I just happen to have a timeline on hand that serves your paranoia up in a big flaming bullshit pie:

MediaMatters did spend a lot of time shooting a dead horse but it was already dead:

Slutgate went from Wednesday Feb. 29 through Friday March 2...

&#8226; Carbonite statement: Saturday March 3 (I linked this earlier)

&#8226; Sleep Train, Sleep Number and Quicken Loan pull out on Friday March 2, the same day as the meltdown was still going on. Several other sponsors quoted with messages of concern who soon pulled out too.

&#8226; Legal action from Rush (the Canadian rock band) sent March 6;

&#8226; Peter Gabriel did the same thing the previous day;

&#8226; KPUA and WBEC drop the show, despite current contracts, reported March 5;

MediaMatters doesn't muster a movement in minutes. What that is is a spontaneous reaction of rightly offended people, armed with Twitter accounts, reacting in the moment and making their voices heard. They didn't need MediaMatters.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Synthia, you little bitch. Try backing up your accusations, first. OR, maybe, for a very unexpected and refreshing change of pace, you can ADMIT that you were wrong.

Then maybe we'll address your piss poor attempt at making an argument.

 

[Synthaholic]

Oh, beautiful - a current USMB member's conservative take!

Originally posted by DKSuddeth
and the push for anti american censorship begins. things starting to look familiar to anyone? circa 1933?

Only congress can censor people. The American people have always been able to assemble and organize and protest that which they disagree with. and the private sector is allowed to refuse the distribution of a film.

I say if you disagree with it. send a sensible letter to any theatre in the area you are planning to distribute it. Nothing very immature. no name calling. Just state you are concerned that they are lending their name to a movie that isnt accurate, state a few facts, and suggest they might be able to make more having another threater showing spiderman rather than this and sign off. and then get a bunch of friends to do the same.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

I continue to have posted no comment whatsoever on the spelling of either ellipsis or ellipses. Does not exist.

-- Which coincidentally also describes your documentation of my "stifling free speech".

How 'bout that.

You are a fraud. And with each post, you establish that ever more clearly.

How about THAT?



YOU were commenting rather happily about the reduced income to Cumulus and then pontificating that it is all just a business decision while also contending that it's simply a cause and effect of the ratings game numbers. But you studiously deflected AWAY from the rebuttal that the "thumb on the scale" is also a part of WHY the advertisers were pulling away from sponsorship of the Limbaugh show.

That's your point, not mine. I'm not going to "pontificate", "ruminate" or "expectorate" on WHY, other than as I already said, public image. I did post a sample quote from one of these buyers. He cited his daughters, not me.



"Don't tell me what you think! I'll tell you what you think!"

Furthermore, as to the important matter of ellipses vs ellipsis, I wrote ellipses (referring to the plural, of course). YOU chose to reply, "It's not the 'ellipsis' (which actually goes '...') to shortcut my post . . . ."

And you were entirely wrong. It WAS an ellipsis that I used when I made reference to ellipses (plural) -- which was also correct. An ellipsis does not "go" anything, to be even more precise. It is usually denoted with three periods (or four when it completes a sentence), but it can also properly be denoted with other marks, like asterisks.

And had you bothered to read the post in full, Evelyn Wood, you'd see that I'm referring to the absence of any counterpoint. Not to the spelling of ellipsis. Can't believe I have to spell this out: it's not that you excised my post with an ellipsis (I don't need it; I know what I wrote); it's that you offered no response to it.

Which is what the post said, and still says. That has nothing to do with spelling.

The effort of certain liberal groups (including the scumbag Media Matters scumbags) to blackmail Rush's advertisers is NOT even marginally akin to free speech or the workings of a free market. Any claim that it "is" akin to free speech or the workings of the free market is dishonest.

Far as I know MediaMatters hasn't even been part of this thread, let alone my posts. And again you need to learn the definition of blackmail (which I already posted). But diga me how this MediaMatters has this kind of power on the free market. Why aren't they making a killing on Wall Street?

However -- you're in luck here-- I just happen to have a timeline on hand that serves your paranoia up in a big flaming bullshit pie:

MediaMatters did spend a lot of time shooting a dead horse but it was already dead:

Slutgate went from Wednesday Feb. 29 through Friday March 2...

• Carbonite statement: Saturday March 3 (I linked this earlier)

• Sleep Train, Sleep Number and Quicken Loan pull out on Friday March 2, the same day as the meltdown was still going on. Several other sponsors quoted with messages of concern who soon pulled out too.

• Legal action from Rush (the Canadian rock band) sent March 6;

• Peter Gabriel did the same thing the previous day;

• KPUA and WBEC drop the show, despite their contracts, reported March 5;

MediaMatters doesn't muster a movement in minutes. What that is is a spontaneous reaction of rightly offended people, armed with Twitter accounts, reacting in the moment and making their voices heard. They didn't need MediaMatters.

Since you are FAR too long winded in your endless bloviating, I will address the Media Matters portion of your dishonesty first.

If I get bored later, maybe I'll come back to dismantle the balance of your endless dishonesty.

Here is the Media Matters reubttal portion:

* * * *
There has been a lot of coverage regarding my post, Media Matters astroturfed the Limbaugh secondary boycott. The post was based in substantial part on interviews given by Angelo Carusone, Director of Online Strategy for Media Matters, who was not bashful in claiming credit for Limbaugh’s loss of advertisers, particularly in the early days of the boycott.

The post was linked by Instapundit and others and had gained a lot of attention by the time Limbaugh used it for his first tweet.

In response to the Limbaugh tweet, a non-Media Matters group called Boycott Rush, organized by former congressional candidate Krystal Ball and someone who tweets under the name @shoq, asserted that it started its efforts before and independent of Media Matters. Among other things, I was falsely accused of working for and being paid by Limbaugh to tarnish the anti-Rush movement by tying it to Media Matters. A comment also was made about my “professional future” (these tweets are from March 18):

* * * *

. . . Twitter histories, combined with other public information, demonstrate early and frequent coordination of efforts between Media Matters (through Carusone) and the Boycott Rush group.

* * * *

Independent Rush boycott group coordinated with Media Matters

The whole piece in legal insurrection is pretty thorough and quite interesting.

You loberals defend the effort. And you can't even admit that the purpose of an orchestrated campaign to get advertisers to stop going to Rush's show for ad spots is to undermine his ability to even keep his show on the air. You filthy lolberal fuckwits absolutely LOVE the idea of silencing your political opponents.

As liberals go, you remain disgraceful. It is not surprising that the bastion of modern American liberalism, the DailyKos (read Soros), would be part of the cadre of scumbags.

 

[Synthaholic]

USMB Wingnut Boycott #4:


http://www.usmessageboard.com/immigration-illegal-immigration/135893-boycott.html

 

[tinydancer]

Ah this is the other "Rush is dying thread" I was looking for.



Dream on libs. Note the last paragraph. From the article...

Distributor: Rush Limbaugh doing ‘very well’





There was certainly a dramatic impact on the advertising sales in the wake of Limbaugh’s comments, Metter noted, but he said that just drove the company to find new sources of ad revenues.



Metter, who repeatedly referred to the advertising boycott of Limbaugh as simply “the challenge,” said Premiere, a subsidiary of Clear Channel Media, focused its efforts on getting ads on air from entrepreneurial-based companies not handled by major ad agencies, such as LifeLock and LegalZoom.

“They’re not buying an ideology, they’re buying an audience,” Metter said. “And many of whom are advertising with our progressive radio hosts and our conservative radio hosts and everything in the middle. They’re not buying Rush’s ideology or Randi Rhodes’ ideology. They’re buying them because their audience buys tractors, their audience drinks soda, and their audience needs data backup. And that’s the place to get those types of customers. So we’re doing very, very well.”

They’re pacing ahead of this time last year, Metter said — and while January was a bit slow, the second quarter is picking up for the company that distributes Limbaugh and other talkers such as Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity.

“Many of these companies, especially in this economy, need talk radio,” he said. “The endorsement of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Randi Rhodes and George Noory is gold to these guys. That builds their brands, makes their business. So where the challenge has been with regard to the controversy is we did have a little bit of a dip — a great deal of a dip in the second quarter last year after it happened — we’ve refocused and gone out after those entrepreneur based companies. And now, a year later, we’re doing very well.”

While Premiere’s Metter on Thursday said Limbaugh had bounced back substantially on the sales front, Cumulus Media CEO Lew Dickey has previously blamed the company’s advertising losses on Limbaugh calling Fluke a “slut” because she called on Congress to mandate insurance coverage of birth control, which sparked a major advertising boycott. Cumulus, which has 40 radio stations that air Limbaugh’s program, has a contract with the talker through 2013.

The Rush Limbaugh Program is reportedly considering ending its affiliation agreement with Cumulus Media in response to Dickey laying the blame on advertising losses on the conservative talker. Limbaugh’s program is still the highest rated talk radio show in the country.

Rest of article at link:

Distributor: Rush Limbaugh doing ?very well? - Mackenzie Weinger - POLITICO.com

 

[IlarMeilyr]

USMB Wingnut Boycott #4:


http://www.usmessageboard.com/immigration-illegal-immigration/135893-boycott.html

STILL can't admit that you lied, you coward?

 

[tinydancer]

Oh and for this Rush AND Sean are dying thread....

2013 - Heavy Hundred - TALKERS.COM