F
FredLeonard
Guest
He keeps going and going and going....
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
So mentioning that someone, who has freely admitted they are gay, is gay is a slur somehow?
Not exactly tracking the logic on that.
Are you purposely being obtuse?
Why would Rush include the phrase "who sleeps with men" (which is far more demonstrative than saying "gay") for any other reason than that he knows it will repulse the garbage now known as talkradio's core audience?
This is why Rush is a scumbag. His apologists aren't far behind.
Last edited:
Not at all. Had Rush speculated that he was gay, meaning had Lemon not publicly disclosed this several times, I would agree with you. Simply noting his avowed preference doesn't strike me as a slur. Do you think noting someone as gay is a slur?
Gee, I don't know. Rush was in the middle of chastising the guy when he decides to not just say he's "gay" but instead states in a much more explicit way for his VERY conservative audience: He "sleeps with MEN!"
You really don't see the difference? Wow.
The point is that it's not entertaining to be mean for the sake of being mean. It's just simply mean and unnecessary. If this is all he has in his playbook, maybe it's time to take a vacation. Maybe listen to some old tapes of what he used to do before he got old and mean. Even Imus has better stuff.
A
Avid Listener
Guest
What is or is not entertaining is in the ear of the listener. Just because one person doesn't find something entertaining doesn't mean no person will find it entertaining.
What is or is not entertaining is in the ear of the listener. Just because one person doesn't find something entertaining doesn't mean no person will find it entertaining.
Kids under the age of 12 find name-calling entertaining. Then they grow up. Talk radio is supposed to be for adults.
Entertaining hosts found ways of addressing this issue without the personal name-calling.
No better than calling Rush a fat, pompous, windbag.
Last edited:
Speaking of mean for the sake of being mean...
Why does this bigot still have thread creating privileges here? Seriously. Every single one is the exact same thing. A circle jerk of 3 people bashing Rush over an out of context remark taken from a biased website. Enough of this crap.
Sounds like that's exactly what's happening. But I guess the station gets affirmative action points for Watson because it can't be drawing power. How many different hosts trounced him?
Why does this bigot still have thread creating privileges here? Seriously. Every single one is the exact same thing. A circle jerk of 3 people bashing Rush over an out of context remark taken from a biased website. Enough of this crap.
Every single one is the exact same thing. A circle jerk of 3 people bashing Rush over an out of context remark taken from a biased website. Enough of this crap.
How is it out of context? Limbaugh said exactly what was quoted. I heard it, IN context. Did you actually listen, or just instinctively defend Limbaugh?
When chastising Don Lemon, he didn't just say "gay" (which had no relevance to Lemon's comment anyway), but instead chose to be more explicit to repulse his VERY conservative core audience about the guy:
(in reference to Lemon)"....who sleeps with men....proudly"
The sneer and disdain in his voice is unmistakeable. Hmmmm, I wonder why he put it like that? Hmmmm.
Limbaugh does this kind of thing. Why the blinders?
Yes, some people DO tend to overreact to things Limbaugh says, but what adds fuel to that fire, is when people always deny that he says anything out-of-line or inflammatory or tasteless.
Some people still defend him over the Fluke comments FFS.
Last edited:
Yes, some people DO tend to overreact to things Limbaugh says
People like you overreact to EVERYTHING he says. It's childish and pathetic. It's a damn RADIO SHOW. It's not important.
It's a damn RADIO SHOW. It's not important.
That's part of the problem, and why advertisers and listeners are running away from talk radio as a format.
I can't imagine these hosts driving to work in the morning thinking: "Who can I attack today."
All of us who work in this business should endeavor to aim higher. To create radio that touches people, maybe make them think a little bit. Create the kind of radio that matters. It's our job.
That's part of the problem, and why advertisers and listeners are running away from talk radio as a format.
I can't imagine these hosts driving to work in the morning thinking: "Who can I attack today."
All of us who work in this business should endeavor to aim higher. To create radio that touches people, maybe make them think a little bit. Create the kind of radio that matters. It's our job.
I hate to break it to you, but to a lot of people what Rush or Hannity or Savage do matters. Just because you disagree with their political views doesn't mean they're not reaching people. If you haven't noticed, things aren't going so great in the world today. Talking about a jazz album in hushed NPR tones has its place, but so does fire and brimstone. That's why we have 17,000 radio stations in this country with dozens of different formats. Something for everyone to listen to. Don't like it? Don't listen. It doesn't mean what the other guy is doing is less valid than what you think is "important".
Personally I don't like the style of ANY of the major conservative syndicated hosts. But I don't slander them either, because I know people like them. I'm guessing you've never had to work at a station after one of these hosts are pulled for something new or different. You haven't had to deal with people calling in to ask what happened to such-and-such host. I have.
Even if I don't like a host's style, I'm adult enough to understand that someone somewhere does. That's what's missing on this (and most other similar) board. It's just a bunch of bitter out of work jocks that weren't able to adjust acting like children because what THEY think everyone should listen to isn't popular.
You wanna talk about radio that matters? I helped raise $100,000 for a childrens' hospital last week. I let someone smash a piece of cake in my face (on the air) because we met a sponsor goal. What did you do besides bitch about Rush Limbaugh on the Internet? (That question is for all of the yammering children here, not just you.)
Last edited:
People like you overreact to EVERYTHING he says. It's childish and pathetic. It's a damn RADIO SHOW. It's not important.
People like me? You don't know anything about me. And how many comments of Limbaugh's have I chastised him over? One? Maybe two? I hardly listen to Limbaugh at all anymore, but I've listened enough to know that he's a tasteless, lying, demagogue scumbag who cares more about lining his pockets than he does about this country. He's got his legion of dummy listeners completely suckered.
And when what you say and do on-air actually influences the way our government functions because politicians are afraid to incur your wrath, it is more than just a radio show. When it poisons the nation's discourse, it cannot simply be dismissed as just a radio show. Limbaugh sadly has power over a lot of really weak-minded, uninformed jackasses who believe whatever he tells them.
You really need to get your head out of the sand on this.
Last edited:
I hate to break it to you, but to a lot of people what Rush or Hannity or Savage do matters. Just because you disagree with their political views doesn't mean they're not reaching people.
It has nothing to do with their political views. It has to do with their presentation. There's a difference. If liberals were attacking religious fundamentalists, calling them names, or making fun of them personally, I'd feel the same way.
If liberals were attacking religious fundamentalists, I'd feel the same way.
Prove it. I want to see you start a thread about the next despicable thing Ed Schulz says. We know damn sure racist Fred won't do it.
Last edited:
People like me? You don't know anything about me. And how many comments of Limbaugh's have I chastised him over? One? Maybe two? I hardly listen to Limbaugh at all anymore, but I've listened enough to know that he's a tasteless, lying, demagogue scumbag who cares more about lining his pockets than he does about this country. He's got his legion of dummy listeners completely suckered.
And when what you say and do on-air actually influences the way our government functions because politicians are afraid to incur your wrath, it is more than just a radio show. When it poisons the nation's discourse, it cannot simply be dismissed as just a radio show. Limbaugh sadly has power over a lot of really weak-minded, uninformed jackasses who believe whatever he tells them.
You really need to get your head out of the sand on this.
And what have YOU done to make radio better aside from complaining about Rush on the Internet? I gave my example. My head isn't the one in the sand.
Prove it.
Give me an example. When do liberals personally attack conservatives, calling them names?
I know I didn't interview Al Franken about his book about Rush.
Give me an example. When do liberals personally attack conservatives, calling them names?
I know I didn't interview Al Franken about his book about Rush.
Mike Malloy is a gold mine. Calling the NRA "brown shirts", threatening to SHOOT an NRA member, threatening to beat up Dick Cheney, claiming Keystone supporters want to suffocate kids...and that's just the past 2 months that I could find in a quick search.
Ed Schultz: Not wanting to raise minimum wage is racist, blaming Rush for Donald Sterling
I never see threads about these hosts. Why is that? Aren't their statements as bad or worse? Surely they can't be elevating the discourse in this country.
And what have YOU done to make radio better aside from complaining about Rush on the Internet? I gave my example. My head isn't the one in the sand.
Anyone who's worked in radio long enough has raised money for some cause or another, but most of us don't pat ourselves on the back in an internet forum to try and gain credibility with it.
Rush is a mean-spirited, lying scumbag. Deal with it.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.