Comments on: Is the Tyranny of Right-Wing Radio Coming to an End?

by: Dan Liberto

Sat, 02 Aug 2008 00:29:54 +0000

I am very confused at the approach that is being taken by your organization and the fairness doctrine. 1.) The market has spoken and citizens of this great country enjoy the conservative talk shows. Removing said talk shows, is a suppression of the 1st ammendment. And on the similar scale to suppressing a vote. 2.) Liberal ideology is already dispensed on the air as well. You have the national television broadcasts, National Public Radio as well as the publications from all major cities in the US. It seems what is really being advocated here is an unfairness doctrine, since you want to dictate to the American citizens what they can and cannot listen to. It would be better if you just stated your real purpose and that is to eliminate any opposition to Liberalism. You would not get any more support, but at least you would get points for honesty.

by: American Kid

Wed, 30 Jul 2008 21:13:06 +0000

Progressives must approach this matter effectively. Although the fairness doctrine formed a safeguard against extremism, the reality is that people follow Limbaugh and his ilk for some very plain and simple reasons.

It is not the reasoned study of the issues that produces “Ditto Heads” Nor is it the predisposition to right wing vitriol among Middle America. Reasoning “ordinary” well meaning citizens in Hitler’s Germany, Yugoslavia, Rwanda and others, became complicit participants in the massacres in each one of those countries.

They were convinced by “straight talking, authoritative voices”. These voices identified and defined the issues in a no no-nonsense manner, in black & white terms, no shades of gray. They defined the danger, the enemy, the strategy and finally the “final solution”.

Liberals tend to see the world in shades of gray. People do not like the uncertainty that this produces. The masses want straight up answers and simple solutions.

This is why Keith Obermann has become so popular, and why people like Donahue produce rejection even among progressives.

You must be either HOT or COLD, lukewarm is spitted out! If we had ten other voices that spoke with clarity and strength, the neo cons would be clamoring for the fairness doctrine. At which time we would of course agree.

by: Rocky Mountain

Fri, 18 Jul 2008 18:58:57 +0000

Allene E. Swienckowski Says:

It would be nice if the people who listened to Rush Limbaugh would also take the time to listen to someone who supports the other side and vice versa.

How do you know they don’t Allene? I think sometimes it would be nice if people on the left listened to people like Bill Bennet who cannot by any stretch of the imagination be called a “shock jock”. Part of the problem is that so many people on both sides think that throwing around terms like “moron” and “bigot” solve the issue once and for all. If you guys on the left are really so interested in “dialogue” stop the name calling.

by: Centurion

Wed, 02 Jul 2008 18:50:17 +0000

Thanks for posting that. The subject of Limbaugh’s wealth is what I often try to point out to the street conservatives that they really have nothing in common with Limbaugh. He’s a wealthy man while many of them are struggling with the rest of us. We know the pain of $4 a gallon gas, high food prices, housing and mortgage problems and the other problems we face on a day to day basis. Limbaugh knows none of that. He’s done well for himself and while he may come up with something that seems sensible (which isn’t often, leap years come more often than an idea worth considering from Limbaugh), his position is more about keeping what’s his while begrudging and condemning the least of us who struggle with day to day life and are in need of assistance.

by: Gordon Stephan

Wed, 02 Jul 2008 17:34:06 +0000

this may be something of an answer to the title question of this column…..

http://gawker.com/tag/media/?i=5021408&t=new-york-times-magazines-sleepy-limbaugh-cover-story