Comments on: Radio Regulates Itself

By: ChristianMiller

ChristianMiller — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 12:22:11 +0000

"Poor baby Rush...the popular kids in Hollywood don't like him!"

This is typical of left wing ideologues. Always, always cry like a baby when they or their friends are attacked, and then when it is pointed out that they themselves attack -often unfairly, they resort to mocking their opponents as "whiners" of some sort.

It is amazing... they are so predictable.

By: goethean

goethean — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:53:00 +0000

Franco pastes in Rush Limbaugh’s monologues and thinks that they explain Limbaugh’s actions perfectly to the outside, reality-based world. This guy doesn’t have an idealogical cocoon, he’s got an impermeable shell. Franco is the Faberg Egg of ideologues.Poor baby Rush…the popular kids in Hollywood don’t like him! Maybe its because his candidate destroyed the country and Rush made boffo bucks in the process.

By: sinz54

sinz54 — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:50:26 +0000

Dr. Tesla sez: “I just wanted to point out that there is NOTHING on this website about David Letterman ‘joke’ about Palin”Well, now THAT is one good thing about the Fairness Doctrine: You and I would have a chance to reply to Letterman–on network TV.The Left so dominates CBS/NBC/ABC, that they forget that when the Fairness Doctrine was in effect in the 1960s, folks used it to reply to things that were said on TV. Talk radio wasn’t a big issue back then.And we would have a lot to say. If the Fairness Doctrine went into effect, we conservatives would be on CBS/NBC/ABC almost every night.

By: sinz54

sinz54 — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:43:33 +0000

ottovbvs: You're wrong again. The Fairness Doctrine requires that opposing viewpoints should have a chance to be presented. It does NOT ban any particular viewpoint from being expressed. To do that would violate the First Amendment. The Supreme Court has held that we have pretty much the right to say anything we want that does not call for violence or create a panic.

Even other left-wingers other than you understand that:

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0212-03.htm

Levin, Tancredo, Limbaugh, have every Constitutional right to say anything within those lines. The only judge of whether they get air time are the radio stations that employ them. I'm sorry if people at YOUR end of the political spectrum want them banned.

The only issue is whether those radio stations would be required to provide folks like you with time slots to reply to those talk-show hosts.

By: ChristianMiller

ChristianMiller — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:18:07 +0000

RUSH: Somebody just reminded me about Robin Williams. Not long ago he was on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, and my name came up and he started making fun of me and my addiction to prescription pain medication and having visited rehabilitation and talked about what an SOB I was and so forth — and a week later, he announces he is going into rehab himself for his “concerns” about he “started drinking again.” He wants to “nip it in the bud,” and then asked for privacy! The media (as they do with liberals) says, “Oh, we wish him the best. Oh, how courageous! Aw, it’s just too bad. We wish him the best,” blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. I mention this to you as I was reminded about it just to illustrate the things that are out there, and I know this. I know that there’s really no way of changing it.

By: ChristianMiller

ChristianMiller — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:12:44 +0000

Limbaugh transcript: Katie Couric sent me an e-mail yesterday before she sat down with Mr. Fox and said, “Could you just send me something that represents a statement of what you said?” Gladly. So it’s five or six paragraphs. I sent it over there, and she used one line from it.She was not obligated to use it all, don’t misunderstand. I just want you to see what I sent her, and what was not used, what obviously did not strike her as important to say or use in her questioning in the interview of Michael J. Fox. I have received numerous e-mails today from friends who are just outraged over the continuing use of the video that the Drive-By Media, particularly cable channels, use. But Katie used it, too, and she didn’t tell me she was going to do that, otherwise I would have explained that and put that in context. But she ought to know anyway. These people, we’ve been talking about this all week. They don’t want to know what’s actually said on this program. They want to be able to make it up and characterize it in their own way.The thing that continues to be used is the video on Monday in which I, right after I had viewed the ad that Michael J. Fox did for Claire McCaskill, began to describe it, and in the process of describing it, I began to illustrate what I had seen. I almost find myself doing it here. It is a natural tendency. We’ve got a camera in here, and I try to illustrate for people when I have the ability, when people are watching this program as well on the Dittocam. That has been taken. Some networks have sped it up to try to enhance the spastic-like nature of it. They are all saying that I was “mocking, making fun of. How low will Limbaugh go now and next? This is unconscionable.”

By: ChristianMiller

ChristianMiller — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:10:11 +0000

Rush Limbaugh transcript: “It is absurd and ridiculous for them to make this charge that I would make fun of somebody in this circumstance.So the story is that I’m just out of control here, and the fact of the matter is that it is the Drive-By Media is acting disgracefully. It is they who have reached a new low. It is they who are totally uninterested in anything of the truth. You know, I know how I was treated — I know what was said about me — when I lost my hearing. I know the applause that I was greeted with. I know how happy people were when they thought it was the end of my career. I remember all of this, and I’ve not mentioned it up until this week because it is what it is. I don’t whine or complain about these things because this is the league in which I play. This is politics. This is the arena of ideas. I don’t expect these people to like me. I don’t expect them to give me a “fair shake” like they give the terrorists, like CNN gives the terrorists. I don’t expect a fair shake from CNN. I don’t expect a fair shake from MSNBC. I don’t expect a fair shake from any other broadcast networks. So it’s all about expectations. When we don’t expect something and then it doesn’t happen, you’re not surprised, but I remember when I announced that I was addicted to prescription pain pills. There was happiness about that. There was glee, and television shows were convened to discuss if this meant the end of my career. They were hoping and praying that it did.So yes, it’s true. The very people who are demanding total compassion, demanding silence, demanding utter respect for their chosen victims are the same people who are as mean and cruel as they think those of us on the right are — and they do it and they think they’re doing it in an heroic fashion.

By: ChristianMiller

ChristianMiller — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:05:02 +0000

Rush's E-mail to Katie Couric
October 26, 2006

Thanks, Katie, I'll try to make it simple:

I believe Democrats have a long history of using victims of various things as POLITICAL spokespeople because they believe they are untouchable, infallible. They are immune from criticism. But when anyone enters the POLITICAL arena of ideas they forfeit the right to be unchallenged on their participation and message.

I have not met Mr. Fox, do not know him. I have admired his work in film and TV and his appearances on Letterman were howlers. I have nothing personal against him. But I believe his implication that only Democrats want to cure disease(s) is irresponsible (as I believed about John Edwards assuring voters Christopher Reeve would walk if only John Kerry were elected). I think this is ultimately cruel and gives people who suffer these terrible afflictions false hope.

As of now there is NO EVIDENCE that embryonic stem cells even hold promise, while other approaches, such as adult stem cells, already have yielded results. Michael's TV spots mislead and misinform on this. (You might ask him about the gene therapy research at a Chicago hospital which has produced encouraging results on Parkinson's patients. A VIRUS is inserted in the gene, which is then inserted in the brain. The Michael J. Fox Foundations has committed $1.9 million to further research on this.)

I did NOT mock or make fun of Mr. Fox. I have seen him many times on TV but never have I seen him as he appears in the ads. I read from his own book that he will not take his medications before certain appearances (Senate, 1999) in order to illustrate the ravages of Parkinson's, which I understand and applaud. So the concept of manipulating meds has been stated by Mr. Fox, which is what caused me to question his appearance in his ads.

He is stumping for Democrats, in the political arena, and is therefore open to analysis and criticism as we all are. His suffering is NOT fair game and I am sorry if people drew that conclusion about my comments, but I believe this happens precisely because NO criticism of victims is ever allowed, at all, which as I say is the Democrat strategy in putting them forward.

By: ChristianMiller

ChristianMiller — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:01:47 +0000

GoramFirefly,

"Granted, Limbaugh did not say, that Micheal J. Fox was "making up" his illness."

Precisely my point. So why was it put that way? It IS lying to put it that way, isn't it?

Now let's get some more context and analysis. Michael J Fox, regardless of his disease or aliments was perpetrating a fraud on voters. He entered the political arena as an advocate and was less than genuine in his portrayal of the issue itself.

On top of that Michael J Fox is on record admitting that he deliberately refrained from taking his medication when testifying before Congress to reveal his true symptoms. That is theater. And after all, Michael J Fox is an actor who has knowledge of the power of theater.

Interestingly the only time we are allowed to see Fox's symptoms is when he is making a political commercial - one that is highly misleading and blatantly partisan, or when he testifies in front of congress on behalf of his agenda. Every other public appearance he's fine, not shaking and under control. So this is not allowed to be mentioned when Fox is making a partisan plea that is fundamentally misleading on it's face?

"As an anti-Amendment 2 website picks apart the issue:

To clone or not to clone? Thats the question.

But it's not the question Missourians will be asked in November when they vote on Amendment 2. The question they will see in the voting booth is different from the actual language of the Constitutional Amendment.

When you see Amendment 2 at your polling place, you will be asked to decide whether to "ban human cloning or attempted cloning." Sounds good so far, right? Who's in favor of human cloning anyway?

But the 2,100-word Constitutional Amendment which you won't see on election day actually creates legal protection for human cloning. Hard to believe? It's true. Amendment 2 only outlaws reproductive cloning, which no one in Missouri (or anywhere else on earth) is doing.

Meanwhile, it protects anyone who wants to clone human beings for science experiments. Amendment 2 glosses over the issue of lab-created human life with complicated phrases like "Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer." But cloning is cloning, and Amendment 2 would put this ethically questionable practice beyond the reach of state law. "

By: GoramFirefly

GoramFirefly — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 07:42:37 +0000

"Limbaugh called Fox's shaking "shameless."

"This is really shameless, folks. This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting, one of the two," Limbaugh said.

"He is an actor, after all," Rush said later.

"He is exaggerating the effects of the disease," Limbaugh told listeners. "He's moving all around and shaking and it's purely an act."

"This is the only time I've ever seen Michael J. Fox portray any of the symptoms of the disease he has," Limbaugh said. "He can barely control himself.""

http://www.4029tv.com/politics/10152936/detail.html

And, as usua,l Limbaugh does not know what he is talking about.

"While there are no medications that can stop Parkinson disease from progressing, many good medical treatments are available for its symptoms. Fox takes the drug Sinemet (levodopa-carbidopa). It controls some of the milder symptoms, including, "the constant rigidity of his hips, tremors in one or both hands, and a 'tapping' feeling in his feet." Mr. Fox reportedly has also had brain surgery (on the thalamus) to try to relieve his tremors."

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=7579

"Levodopa side effects include confusion, delusions and hallucinations, as well as involuntary movements called dyskinesia. These resolve with dose reduction, but sometimes at the expense of reduced parkinsonism control."

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/parkinsons-disease/DS00295/DSECTION=treatments-and-drugs

Again Limbaugh said, "Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting, one of the two,".

Fox's involuntary moments are just that, involuntary. They are a side effect of his medication.

To say that Fox was "acting" or "did not take his medication" or "was exaggerating" was to say an untruth. A false statement. Therefore, it was a lie.

Granted, Limbaugh did not say, that Micheal J. Fox was "making up" his illness. But what he did say was just as bad, if not worse.