Rush makes $30,000,000 a year, including those who pay him a fee to watch via web-cam him do his thing.

But you have the right idea - turn off the radio. Better yet, listen occasionally so you can find out the sponsors and write letters telling them you have turned off the radio due to his rant about ....

But be warned - he is very slippery, and his ideas sound good. In fact, they are good - just baked with only half the ingredients, because his specialty is deliberately overlooking critical information - the proverbial one sided trial. THEN He warns you to not listen to the Media - where you might pick up the missing information .. which is so animal farmish it's weird.

Mary, you said a mouthfull but it all comes down to our right to speak freely and openly. If you disagree with a term used, quit listening. How about Neal Boortz and his "Church of the Painful Truth?" I may not agree on everything said but they all have the right to say it.

Don Imus was not fired because he said Nappy Headed Hoes, he was fired because he was a white man on radio. I have heard many many say the same phrase and no one is calling for their jobs. Just turn off your damn radio. Let it be that simple.

Good points, Mary. I listen to NPR and the classic country station. Quit listening to 104.1 when Eloise started being a Rush with her comments. NCP is correct...don't listen to garbage.

All of these radio and television "talk show" host are, first and foremost, in the entertainment business. They are NOT in the "news" business. This applies equally to Limbaugh, Imus, Boortz, Hannity, The Als (Sharpton, Franken, Colmes, Gore), O'Reilly, O'Donnell AND the 60 Minutes coterie. Their careers literally DEPEND upon controversy. Without it, they lose ratings, thus revenue and eventually air time.

If you don't like what any or all of these entertainers have to say, then the perfect "free market" solution is to change channels or turn off the radio or TV. I would even go so far as to suggest that Imus was dismissed, not so much because of his idiotic utterance, rather because his revenue stream was drying up. Rest assured that if he had a huge audience and the advertisers were still pouring in the dough, MSNBC and CBS would have weaseled around this temporary embarrassment with a mere slap on this wrist.

But Carol, I am a little surprised to see your comment above (just kidding ... it was no surprise at all). I could have sworn I saw a comment from you a while back to the effect that we should all listen to MANY news sources, research facts, and do a little common sense thinking. But you say you reject 104.1 and listen exclusively to NPR and classic country. Hmmm. Guess I just misunderstood what you meant by "many," eh?

Comedian, Rush Limbaugh, should be kept on a short leash from now on. His egregious lack of taste eclipses anything the "I-Man" has ever uttered. Everything from his racist rants to even calling Barrack Obama and Halle Berry "Halfricans", Limbaugh has shown he hasn't learned much sense his pilodial cyst was removed from his ass. I didn't support removing Imus from the airwaves and I don't support removing Limbaugh. What I do support, is the effort to surveill the Limbaugh, Gordon Liddy, and Sean Hannity shows for their racism, sexism, ugly speech. That should be enough to scare the Bejesus out of them and to keep their sponsors on THEIR toes. While Fox News Channel gloated at the Imus self destruction, I think what's good for the goose is good for the gander!

Comedian, Rush Limbaugh, should be kept on a short leash from now on. His egregious lack of taste eclipses anything the "I-Man" has ever uttered. Everything from his racist rants to even calling Barrack Obama and Halle Berry "Halfricans", Limbaugh has shown he hasn't learned much since his pilodial cyst was removed from his ass. I didn't support removing Imus from the airwaves and I don't support removing Limbaugh. What I do support, is the effort to surveill the Limbaugh, Gordon Liddy, and Sean Hannity shows for their racism, sexism, ugly speech. That should be enough to scare the Bejesus out of them and to keep their sponsors on THEIR toes. While Fox News Channel gloated at the Imus self destruction, I think what's good for the goose is good for the gander!

Comedian, Rush Limbaugh, should be kept on a short leash from now on. His egregious lack of taste eclipses anything the "I-Man" has ever uttered. Everything from his racist rants to even calling Barrack Obama and Halle Berry "Halfricans", Limbaugh has shown he hasn't learned much since his pilodial cyst was removed from his ass. I didn't support removing Imus from the airwaves and I don't support removing Limbaugh. What I do support, is the effort to surveill the Limbaugh, Gordon Liddy, and Sean Hannity shows for their racism, sexism, ugly speech. That should be enough to scare the Bejesus out of them and to keep their sponsors on THEIR toes. While Fox News Channel gloated at the Imus self destruction, I think what's good for the goose is good for the gander!

ChickenHawk Limbaugh, a supporter of the Iraq war, avoided military service due to a piloidal cyst between his two buttocks. Like "Five Deferment" Cheney, he feels empowered to support a war of choice.

Sorry for the threepeat above.

TLC, only time will tell for the other "shock jocks." It would be only fitting for the same end result happening to those mentioned as what did with Imus.

It is amazing that the person with whom Imus was speaking when the deadly comment was made has not been mentioned. I do not recall the name as I have not seen it in the news in over a week now. That man was the first in the dialogue with Imus who called the Rutgers Women's roundball team "hos." Wonder why no one has been calling for that guy's head? He is just a guilty as Imus in my opinion.

I am awaiting to see what transpires with these other low-class "entertainers!"

Shalom

These folks make a living annoying people. If you disagree with them, they are annoying because they act like asses. If you agree with them, you still get annoyed because all they do is pump up their supporters about how big of a crock issue X is. Just imagine for a moment getting paid 10 million a year to sit around and annoy people. DD does that for free now :)

Since their schtick is to annoy, it is hardly a surprise when one crosses an invisible, seemingly arbitrary line when the public goes on a rampage against them. I have to admit, it probbly does require a lot of talent and ability to dance right on the line without crossing it. Especially since it can be difficult to tell what will royally piss people off and what will just annoy them.

I guess that is the price we must all pay to have the luxury of having someone else filling us up with righteous indignation. To research all of that and do it on our own is just asking way too much.

My grandpappy fought the Japs to keep us from having to exert any kind of analytical reasoning and interpretation to the news that we hear. We like our news biased or not at all, Dammit! Fortunately, there seems to be no shortage whatsoever of newstainment these days.

Oh, and Comedians Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity are already "warning" listeners that they are the next targets.....guess the old 'bit dog barks first' saying is true again.
Limbaugh is the legitimate "NEXT" target because he has the same mix of celebrities and off color jokes as Imus...although Imus had both righties and lefties on his show whereas Limbaugh can't function without complete adulation from his base. Even when he claims to have an "open" line, it is nothing of the sort. Imus had an audience of thinkers whereas Limbaugh has an audience of "monothought". Where does Richard "DICK" Cheney go when he wants an audience? Rush, of course.

First, the writer obviously doesn't listen to limbaugh as he stopped using the feminazis bit more then 5 years ago. The apt term, as was discussed ad nausem, referred to a select few of the hardcore feminists, not the "hard working, intelligent women...! Limbaugh uses absurdity to show absurdity, which is in plentiful supply when liberals are your target!Hey, don't listen to limbaugh, listen to Air-unAmerica. Oops, forgot the went bankrupt filling the airwaves with liberal lunacy. Well, there's always..there must be a successful liberal show somewhere. Oh, yes NPR. Wait, they have to be taxpayer supported.

And as usual, the Liberal-Conservative (is that like being stupid-smart?)graces the readers with his arduous, never ending inane comments. He miust have nothing to do all day except to continue to prove that the believes ignorance to be a virtue.

"Well, there's always..there must be a successful liberal show somewhere. Oh, yes NPR. "

Uh ToMo,

What makes NPR liberal? Respect for guest and the intelligence of its listeners? I've never noticed much of a bias on their part.

Jack, the only time I listen to the radio is when I am in the car. Therefore, my limited selection. I watch all the news shows occasionally, read the paper, surf the net, etc for news. I listen to Fox just to hear what they have to say...really laughable at times.

Liked your question Rufus. Would like to hear a reply.

Tonymo, notice how Demon Deacon proposes only monitoring conservatives on the radio? Hmmmmm.......

I've listened to Air America before in the few cities that aired it. Randi Rhodes and Al Franken are not choir girls/boys when it comes to clean speech.

Thank you, Carol. It is nice to encounter a poster who has the good grace not to attempt to deny what she/he said. Happy listening!

Darryl, I think the guy who started Imus on this tragic path was one of his regular on-air producers, not a guest.
JA is partially right - Imus got the boot because his advertisers were canceling ads, but it goes deeper than that. Corporate America was not afraid of a black-led boycott. That would have been offset by righteous rightists, and equal $s are equal $s.
What is happening is that corporate America is rediscovering its conscience and beginning once again to differentiate between right and wrong. The ads were canceled because what Imus said was irredeemably wrong and the latest in a long list of wrongs.
The same sort of thing is beginning to happen in the climate change debate, with major financial institutions and corporations now asking Congress to get on the move with responsible and reasonable legislation to address this issue.

BTW, I am very concerned that anyone would use this as an excuse to banish RL or even AC for their political views. They have just as much right to be wrong as the rest of us. Their inflamatory and insulting language is another matter, but that, too, is a path best trod with extreme caution.
For better or worse, many such things are moral judgements, and many things that are morally repugnant are not illegal, nor should they be. Imus was, after all, convicted in the court of public and corporate opinion, not a court of law. We all need to be cognizant of personal rights and responsibilities.
I'm for equality of access, the right of petition to broadcasters and advertisers, and the power of the on/off switch.

"What is happening is that corporate America is rediscovering its conscience and beginning once again to differentiate between right and wrong."

When is corporate America going to rediscover it's conscience with all of the trash produced from rappers, Hollywood, and television?

I think corporate America axed Imus because he became too radioactive for them to associate with him. Meanwhile Snoop Dog and similar ilk continue their vile filth unscathed.

As to the "Gangsta" rappers, I most certainly support sending letters, emails etc to the corporations that are purveyors of their products. No one side has a monopoly on bad taste--and as my good friend Jeff always says, "There's no law against being stupid". Sean Hannity proves this daily, and I don't begrudge him the right to say stupid things...BUT...if one takes the logical next step in this argument, Sean Hannity, Anne Coulter and Rush Limbaugh are saying some very hurtful things towards all sorts of people---Coulter calling John Edwards a "Faggot" is being defended, yes defended by right wingers who are far worse than Don Imus. The audience that listens to Rush, Hannity and Gordon Liddy are certainly not unfamiliar with racist slurs, homophobic rants, and downright mean political discourse. That is what President Bush once called his "base".

Lesson: Words have consequences no matter who utters them. We own the airwaves, and should NOT renew licenses to broadcasters who continually air indecent and offensive comments. Since that will never happen, we should email, write letters and innundate the stations that carry programs where some comedian refers to Barack Obama or Halle Berry as a "Halfrican".

Oh, and Dan, before you start in with your childish defense, children have NO choice in picking their parents, so how do you defend Rush's comments? Goes back to people who refer to children born out of wedlock as "bastards". Is that a fair thing to say about a child who had absolutely NOTHING to do about whether their parents were married. Maybe your new found friend "Tonymo" can help bail you out on this. LOL!

Demon Deacon, you actually stunned me in your first two paragraphs, my jaw dropped. I was thinking "wow Demon Deacon is actually being civil".

Ah but things get back to normal in the third paragraph with the expected personal insult, you just can't help yourself. As you say Demon Deacon "Words have consequences no matter who utters them." Keep it up, you only tarnish yourself Demon Deacon.

For the record Demon Deacon, I don't defend Rush's comments in calling anyone a halfrican, it is wrong. If you recall in a previous post I didn't agree with Ann Coulter calling Edwards a faggot.

Demon Deacon, let's see what you think about this quote from Randi Rhodes of Air America regarding the Bush response (or lack thereof) to Hurricane Katrina:

"This President is never gonna do the right thing. I think somewhere deep down inside him he takes a lot of joy about losing people, if he thinks they vote Democrat or if he thinks they're poor, or if he thinks they're in a blue state, whatever his reasons are not to rescue those people who are (planning?) for their safety."

http://radioequalizer.blogspot.com/2005/09/air-america-talk-hosts-in-nonstop.html

According to Rhodes, Bush is glad to see people who vote Democratic dead!! Can you defend that Demon Deacon or would you like to be sincere and admit that tasteless statements are not exclusive to conservatives?

We had one man make a stupid comment on the radio, so now we should kick everyone else off of conservative talk radio.

We had one man (Dan Rather) FABRICATE a "news story" about the incumbant presidential candidate during the last election. Using liberal logic (please excuse the oxymoron) this means Brian Williams, Katie Couric, Wolf Blitzer, Lou Dobbs,...etc..etc..etc.....should be kicked off the air next!

Chris,

Pardon me but is Dan working at CBS news now? If memory serves he had to resign over the matter.

How 'bout the folks at Fox that fabricated the tale of Obama being educated at a madrasa. Using conservative logic, (plenty of morons there, oxy & otherwise) those fine folks should be relieved of duty. I don't even think they did a mea culpa. Then again they aren't a real news organization so I guess it doesn't matter.

Note to Dan: Some folks turn out to be "bastards" REGARDLESS of whether they were born in or out of wedlock. I bet you can think of a polyonymous one right now, eh?

Wonder if John Larsh, aka JackArmstrong, ever uttered words he wished he had not?? Seems quite sanctimonious now, so who knows?
********
Firefly,
Great retort to Chris's sophomoric post. Some just never really "get it".

Imagine if 4 hours of the conversations you have each day were broadcast live to millions of people, then recycled on YouTube, Ipods, blogs, etc. And imagine if this happened for 40 years.

If you are on the air, or in the public eye, long enough you are going to say something that gets you in trouble. I'm not defending Imus, because what he said was appalling. What I am saying is, in the flood of millions of words, there'll be some noxious runoff.

As Rev. Jackson said, after he was recorded referring to New York City as "Hymietown": "I apologize. I spoke with my head, not my heart".

I believe Imus did, as well.

Demon Deacon, I guess you missed my previous post. Can you defend Randi Rhodes saying Bush wanted hurricane Katrina victims dead since most of them vote Democratic?

Here 'tis again:

"This President is never gonna do the right thing. I think somewhere deep down inside him he takes a lot of joy about losing people, if he thinks they vote Democrat or if he thinks they're poor, or if he thinks they're in a blue state, whatever his reasons are not to rescue those people who are (planning?) for their safety."

No Rufus I'm no longer working at CBS :)

First and foremost let me say that I am a listner to the Rush show. I travel quite a bit and listen almost every day. I have also listened to Imus on TV. Both have said things that make me cringe, but I think one thing has been missed by other commentors. Imus worked for someone else. His actions/comments reflect on the networks who employed him. Rush, on the other hand, controls his own destiny with his EIB network. His comments/actions only reflect on himself. Let's not forget that the last time Rush did represent a TV Network, he was in trouble in a matter of minutes, ultimately ending that venture. Those comments were much less offensive than those of Imus.

Poor Dan. You are so devoid of thoughtful discourse that you jump into "defensive" mode whenever hit between the eyes with truth and reality.
No, I could not and would not defend anyone, left or right who makes racial, sexual and especially degrading comments about women. That's what separates folks like me from folks like you. You believe you must, in absence of defending your beloved right wingers, attack anything deemed to be the opposite. Try pulling away from your ingrained prejudices (we all have them) and looking at things more objectively. Does calling people "faggots" "feminazis" "nappy headed ho's" or "halfricans" add to any public debate? No, but somehow people still defend the ones who make those comments over the airwaves.

I happen to disagree with Rhodes on the mindset of the President. I think he's just incompetent, not malicious. I think he's kept himself in a bubble because he's afraid to confront that which he is so uncomfortable with. Once you make statements like Bush has, you must live with the consequences of free speech. I don't think he revels in the destruction of our military and our soldiers, but I do think he gives that appearance by his caustic rhetoric toward a nation that was united as NEVER before on 9/12. He has shown that he has total disdain for any ideas other than his own...which is remarkably like your posts on this blog.
Dan, I really wish you well in your search for identity. Just make it your own and not what has been drilled into you.

You just never know when "Mr. Truth and Reality" is gonna hit ya right between the eyes with a meticulously verified fact, e.g., Tom DeLay was once the Speaker of the House.

Now there is only a scant handful of people who know this ... so few, that I can think of only one.

So when dealing with ... whoever he is today, be on your toes ... or not.

"Does calling people "faggots" "feminazis" "nappy headed ho's" or "halfricans" add to any public debate? No, but somehow people still defend the ones who make those comments over the airwaves."

Demon Deacon, don't blame your lack of reading comprehension on me:

"For the record Demon Deacon, I don't defend Rush's comments in calling anyone a halfrican, it is wrong. If you recall in a previous post I didn't agree with Ann Coulter calling Edwards a faggot." 5:47 yesterday.

Just illustrating the point that conservatives do not have a monopoly on offensive and idiotic statements Demon Deacon. Sorry to hit you between the eyes with truth and reality.

"Dan, I really wish you well in your search for identity. Just make it your own and not what has been drilled into you."

Too funny!!! Maybe 20 years ago, but at 43 I'm no longer searching for my identity. The part you may regret is that my identity doesn't mesh with yours and never will thank God.

Dan,
You either keep learning, or you die. I certainly hope you don't do the latter anytime soon.
Open your mind and your heart will follow.

Demon Deacon, you either stick to your core beliefs or you are nothing. I agree on continual learning, participating in this blog is one method of learning, but that does not mean I have to compromise my core beliefs.

Brian,

I agree that being the boss is different from working for the boss. However, even the boss has a responsibility to the listening public to monitor what comes out of his mouth. Being the boss does not give one carte blanc to shoot off at the mouth uncensored (as a child might do).

As human beings, on our journey thru life, we should do as little harm to mankind as possible (imho).

You are definitely on the right track, Yvonne. The "boss," is neither CBS/MSNBC in Mr. Imus' case, nor EIB in Mr. Limbaugh's case. In the final analysis, the boss is the CONSUMER (the listening public) of what Imus and Limbaugh are selling. And Mr. Imus took things too far, thereby alienating the boss, and losing his situation.

In the free market system, the consumer is the final arbiter of what/who remains "on the air" and what/who doesn't.

A similar case can be made that the consumer is in fact the payer of all taxes, as the monies to pay "business taxes" must ultimately come from the goods or services that the consumer buys.

Firefry.......just which organization do you consider a "real news organization"?
Liberal Con....I am not "sophomoric" and I DO get it, but thanks for the compliments anyway!

Christopher,
I will remind you that a poll taken six months after the events of September 11th, 2001 showed quite a differing opinion depending on where one got their news. Over 80% of those who identified FoxNewsChannel as their primary newsource, believed Iraq had something to do with 9/11 and that Saddam Huessein directly was responsible for events of 9/11. (Salon.com David Sirota)
Why would ANYONE believe that? Because of Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, et al, but more importantly because our President and Vice President were trying desperately to make that case, and Fox was carrying water for them.

Real news outlets include, The Associated Press, NPR, The BBC, and the New York Times and the Washington Post. Of course lapdog conservatives (Dan) will rear up on their hind legs at the last two mentioned because they have at times taken the right wingers to task over policy issues. For the most part, the media just rolled over after 9/11 allowing the President and VP to steamroll our country with lies and deceit. They seem to be regenerating their testicular fortitude, taking on the reasons for war as well as the incompetent way it is being waged. A free press is necessary for the success of this country---news is neither liberal or conservative, but rather fact. When the righties don't like the truth, they term it "biased" or "the liberal media". It's a shame that so many people have been hoodwinked into this train of thought.

"news is neither liberal or conservative, but rather fact. When the righties don't like the truth, they term it "biased" or "the liberal media""

Dan Rather, Mary Mapes and Jayson Blair couldn't have said it better.

Dan,
Your maturity is more like a 12 year old than a 43 year old. You are always in a defensive mode, choosing to "react" rather than respond. Were you picked on as a kid?

Demon Deacon, I threw a chink in armor about news being nonpartisan fact. You cannot refute the statement but, as usual, launch a stupid response. Predictable.

Keep up with the insults, you tarnish only yourself.

Here is a statement from someone who was picked on as a kid:

Oh, and don't come after my patriotism Dan, you little tin horn flag waver. I have a right to disagree just as much as you have a right to stick your nose up George Bush's ass!
Posted by: DemonDeacon at June 12, 2006 05:34 PM

Poor little Danny.
Tell us again why you can't digest this:

"news is neither liberal or conservative, but rather fact."

Guess you could eliminate Weekend Update on SNL and the one or two instances where you feel you have been "wronged" by news reporting erroneously. But what drives you to such a reactionary tone? Why are you so quick to jump on others rather than to admit when you are out in the ozone? Dan, if you read more, you would be able to discuss more.