Beyond Rush: Hannity, Beck, Levin Hit with Advertiser Bans

[JerryNumbers]

Beyond Rush: Hannity, Beck, Levin Hit with Advertiser Bans

I'm no fan of theses talk shows, yet there is a trend in this country to shut up conservative political talk shows, & of course it extends to conservative Christians.

[John81]

That's true Jerry. The liberal socialists love to talk about free speech when it's speech they agree with, but they have no tolerance for others having a voice.

Many of these advertisers have been looking for the right excuse to pull away from these people, and now they have it so they are taking advantage of it.

Whether by financial pressure or by law (hate crimes laws), the liberal socialists will do all they can to silence points of view other than their own.

[swathdiver]

How many generations away are we from being like 1940s Germany or 1920s Russia? It already seems like 1930s Germany in so many ways.

[ThePilgrim]

How many generations away are we from being like 1940s Germany or 1920s Russia? It already seems like 1930s Germany in so many ways.

I don't think the word generations applies here . . . . a few years will be more like it.

God bless,
Larry

[John81]

I don't think the word generations applies here . . . . a few years will be more like it.

God bless,
Larry

We might be to the point where it wouldn't even take years. With laws set in place by Bush II and Obama, with the stroke of a pen any current or future president could declare a state of emergency, declare martial law, put forth a list of "suspected domestic terrorists" and "enemy combatants" which could be swiftly rounded up and locked up without actual charges, trial or having any Constitutional rights at all.

Even today, especially if done by a liberal socialist president, the masses would mostly fall in line. The media would go along, and those who didn't could quickly be shut down. Any who thought they still had some right of free speech or protest would find themselves locked away with the others. Most families of those locked away would be pressured into silence and "cooperation" by threats against their locked up loved ones.

[no name joe]

How does advertisers pulling ads from a show for a host fronting a personal attack on a young woman by calling her a slut and a whore have anything to do with free speech?

Last I checked, the Constitution prohibited government from interfering or censoring political speech. It had nothing to do with private indivudals or companies reacting to offensive, hateful, and demeaning comments of the speaker.

[John81]

How does advertisers pulling ads from a show for a host fronting a personal attack on a young woman by calling her a slut and a whore have anything to do with free speech?

Last I checked, the Constitution prohibited government from interfering or censoring political speech. It had nothing to do with private indivudals or companies reacting to offensive, hateful, and demeaning comments of the speaker.

What did Hannity, Beck and Levin say that was "offensive, hateful, and demeaning"?

No one said anything about the government being involved in this.

[no name joe]

What did Hannity, Beck and Levin say that was "offensive, hateful, and demeaning"?

No one said anything about the government being involved in this.

I was referring to Rush Limbaugh. I have no idea about the others, as I have no idea who they are.

I was referring to "free speech." "Free speech" in our country means the government cannot violate it. Private individuals can do as they please. Pulling advertisments from a talk show or boycotting a talk show has nothing to do with free speech. People can put as much pressure as they want to on a person to quite their message as long as it is not a government actor.

Sponsors pulling ads from a show is just a business decision. They feel that if the speaker puts out a message taht is offensive, and they sponsor it, then they will lose business. On the other hand, they might decide controversial speech is what their business needs as it will build an audience and they can sell their product.

Perhaps I misunderstood the original message. I took it to mean that advertisers pulling ads from the Limbaugh show was an attempt to quiet his message and quiet "free speech." I do not see it that way. I see it as the host made offensive comments, and advertisers have bailed on him because they do not want to be associated with that crude, personal attack on someone. It is interesting as well that some see Limbaugh's attack on this young woman as an attempt to bully her into silence.

[John81]

The point of the OP is that advertisers are not only pulling away from Rush, they are also pulling away from these others as well.

[swathdiver]

How does advertisers pulling ads from a show for a host fronting a personal attack on a young woman by calling her a slut and a whore have anything to do with free speech?

Last I checked, the Constitution prohibited government from interfering or censoring political speech. It had nothing to do with private indivudals or companies reacting to offensive, hateful, and demeaning comments of the speaker.

No one said anything about the government being involved in this.

Ok, I will say it. The pressure exerted on those companies to drop Limbaugh and the others are Democrat front groups. They are the government for all intents and purposes. Most of their members are serving in or enter the revolving door of public office from moment to moment.

Next, what Limbaugh said is not "hate". Only a heathen would take personal offense at those comments. Folks living according to the Bible don't want the government to steal from their fellow citizens so they can continue to fornicate on someone else's dime. Fluke and the government are the one's attacking a religious organization.

Fluke is a liar and a deceiver of the worst sort as all of these operatives are. They are truly doing the devil's work.

You have a lot to learn mister but it all starts with the Gospel. If you cannot get the Gospel and the Doctrines that Christ commands Christian's to follow right, the rest will not likely fall into place. Edited March 12, 2012 by swathdiver

[no name joe]

Ok, I will say it. The pressure exerted on those companies to drop Limbaugh and the others are Democrat front groups. They are the government for all intents and purposes. Most of their members are serving in or enter the revolving door of public office from moment to moment.

Next, what Limbaugh said is not "hate". Only a heathen would take personal offense at those comments. Folks living according to the Bible don't want the government to steal from their fellow citizens so they can continue to fornicate on someone else's dime. Fluke and the government are the one's attacking a religious organization.

Fluke is a liar and a deceiver of the worst sort as all of these operatives are. They are truly doing the devil's work.

You have a lot to learn mister but it all starts with the Gospel. If you cannot get the Gospel and the Doctrines that Christ commands Christian's to follow right, the rest will not likely fall into place.

Calling a woman a whore and a slut is hateful, plain and simple. Let's look at how Jesus responded to such a situation. An adultrous woman was caught in the act. The Pharisees broght her to Jesus to stone her and kill her for violating the law. Jesus loved her and took her out of harms way. He did not jump on the bandwagon. He told that he who is without sin shoudl cast the first stone. The Pharisees stepped away one bay one until just the woman was left. Jesus never called anyone a whore or a slut or any other demeaning name. He reached out to people, who are fallen, just like you or me, in love and in grace.

I sure hope you are not coming to Limbaugh's defense here, because what he did was wrong and hurtful. He was trying to silence a woman for speaking out on an important issue. There are many reasons a woman takes birth control. SHe was not speaking about her individual situation, but the situation of many women. What Limbaugh did was to take an important policy discussion, where reasonable minds can differ, and turn it into a personal attack.

So, I will just say this to you, "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone."

Second, as for the policy issues, there are two sides to every debate. You say people are forcing you to pay for something. Did you ever think this might save you money? Did you ever think that the best way to lower abortions is to prevent pregnancies in the first place? By insurance providing health coverage for contraception (my current policy does, by the way), it will likley lower the number of unplanned or unwanted pregnancies, and lower the burden on the health system, and reduce premiums. If more women who did not want children took birth control, there would be far fewer abortions, which is a fantastic thing.

Further, I pay for things I do not like all the time. We all do. I do not like that my tax money goes to subsidize row crops in farming and large scale meat. But I pay it anyway. I would rather organic crops and vegitables be subsidized. I did not like that my tax dollars went to support the war in Iraq, which I did not beleive in, but I paid it anyway without grumbling. That is fine. That is how our system of government works. So again, my attitude come back to Jesus' teaching on this:

"Render unto Ceaser what is Ceaser's and unto God what is God's." Jesus advocated paying taxes into a system that would ultimately lead to his death and that would lead to the persecution and death of Christians. He never grumbled and complained. He paid taxes due and devoted his life to the work of his Father.

And one last point, a private corporation is not a government. There is no reason they shold support someone that they do no like the message of. Limbaugh made truely hurtful comments and comments that were irresponsible and abusive of his position, and he is taking a hit for it. It is called capitalism. WHen Christians boycott Home Depot for gay rights reasons, that is fine, but I don't hear you say that people are trying to silence and violate the free speech of Home Depot for that boycott. It seems you have a double standard here.

My point is that private action is not a violation of free speection. This is capitalism at work, plain and simple. They did not pull their ads because of Limbaugh's conservative message, they did so because he was mean spirited to a young woman. I do not see this as an attempt to silence speech at all. Edited March 12, 2012 by kindofblue1977

[swathdiver]

Calling a woman a whore and a slut is hateful, plain and simple. Let's look at how Jesus responded to such a situation. An adultrous woman was caught in the act. The Pharisees broght her to Jesus to stone her and kill her for violating the law. Jesus loved her and took her out of harms way. He did not jump on the bandwagon. He told that he who is without sin shoudl cast the first stone. The Pharisees stepped away one bay one until just the woman was left. Jesus never called anyone a whore or a slut or any other demeaning name. He reached out to people, who are fallen, just like you or me, in love and in grace.

I sure hope you are not coming to Limbaugh's defense here, because what he did was wrong and hurtful. He was trying to silence a woman for speaking out on an important issue. There are many reasons a woman takes birth control. SHe was not speaking about her individual situation, but the situation of many women. What Limbaugh did was to take an important policy discussion, where reasonable minds can differ, and turn it into a personal attack.

So, I will just say this to you, "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone."

Second, as for the policy issues, there are two sides to every debate. You say people are forcing you to pay for something. Did you ever think this might save you money? Did you ever think that the best way to lower abortions is to prevent pregnancies in the first place? By insurance providing health coverage for contraception (my current policy does, by the way), it will likley lower the number of unplanned or unwanted pregnancies, and lower the burden on the health system, and reduce premiums. If more women who did not want children took birth control, there would be far fewer abortions, which is a fantastic thing.

Further, I pay for things I do not like all the time. We all do. I do not like that my tax money goes to subsidize row crops in farming and large scale meat. But I pay it anyway. I would rather organic crops and vegitables be subsidized. I did not like that my tax dollars went to support the war in Iraq, which I did not beleive in, but I paid it anyway without grumbling. That is fine. That is how our system of government works. So again, my attitude come back to Jesus' teaching on this:

"Render unto Ceaser what is Ceaser's and unto God what is God's." Jesus advocated paying taxes into a system that would ultimately lead to his death and that would lead to the persecution and death of Christians. He never grumbled and complained. He paid taxes due and devoted his life to the work of his Father.

And one last point, a private corporation is not a government. There is no reason they shold support someone that they do no like the message of. Limbaugh made truely hurtful comments and comments that were irresponsible and abusive of his position, and he is taking a hit for it. It is called capitalism. WHen Christians boycott Home Depot for gay rights reasons, that is fine, but I don't hear you say that people are trying to silence and violate the free speech of Home Depot for that boycott. It seems you have a double standard here.

My point is that private action is not a violation of free speection. This is capitalism at work, plain and simple. They did not pull their ads because of Limbaugh's conservative message, they did so because he was mean spirited to a young woman. I do not see this as an attempt to silence speech at all.

This post is so worldly and full of leftist tripe that I'm failing to contain my response. Feel like I'm reading something at the Huffington Post. Will refrain from responding now, maybe after dinner or tomorrow.

Maybe my fellow Independent Baptists will set this Anglican straight before then. Edited March 12, 2012 by swathdiver

[JerryNumbers]

Of all people, Jane Fonda, the one who stood against this United States, more than likely committed treason, did endanger our troop, now wants Mr. Limbaugh kicked, forced, off the air waves.

I believe this woman would fit in quite well in Russia, perhaps in Iran to, & North Korea too, for she believes that the government has all authority, & its citizens none.

PS: She would also fit in well in Mr. Obama's presidency.

[John81]

The liberal socialists believe they can say and do anything and whatever it is, it should be accepted. They don't grant the same to those they disagree with.

Rush is attacked for his comments, yet some left winger like Bill Maher can make horrendous comments about Sarah Palin and that's acceptable to the left wing liberal socialists.

Rush can give a sincere apology but that's not enough for the liberal socialists, yet Maher and other lefties aren't even asked to apologize, and certainly don't face pressure against their jobs.

[JerryNumbers]

I don't approve of the words that he used, they would not be the words I would use, although the words he used describes why they want free birth control at the expense of health care providers, which in the end will cost those who pay health insurance premiums.

And the insurance company should not be forced to provide these items to the adultery & fornicators of this country. If they want them, let them spend their own money of their sins.