We all play a part in what we hear. The audience, the advertisers, the programmers, the hosts, and management.
-
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.
Ed Schultz: Gays were the ones "really" persecuted in Holocaust
- Thread starter Small Market Guy
- Start date
We all play a part in what we hear. The audience, the advertisers, the programmers, the hosts, and management.
I've left this one alone until we had time for the dust to settle. I don't think the dust has calmed down much.
I went looking this afternoon to see if I could find what looked like an accurate account of what really happened.
There is on the web a post where someone did a screen capture of Ed's Tweet which he quickly deleted it is reported. Someone help me understand the image that is on the web. In rather clear type there is the verbiage which has been quoted over and over. Then below that is a photographic image of a longer message. I don't quite understand the longer, less visually clear image: is that wording from another source, is that the ORIGINAL ED Tweet and the clearer image someone's distilled version of the longer message?
Was the scruffy looking longer message something Ed posted and took down, or is it a quote of someone else? If the longer message is the work of someone else, who is the someone else?
Was Ed on the air at the time? Was this topic talked about on the air at the time? Is there an audio of what was on the air that I can listen to?
I went looking this afternoon to see if I could find what looked like an accurate account of what really happened.
There is on the web a post where someone did a screen capture of Ed's Tweet which he quickly deleted it is reported. Someone help me understand the image that is on the web. In rather clear type there is the verbiage which has been quoted over and over. Then below that is a photographic image of a longer message. I don't quite understand the longer, less visually clear image: is that wording from another source, is that the ORIGINAL ED Tweet and the clearer image someone's distilled version of the longer message?
Was the scruffy looking longer message something Ed posted and took down, or is it a quote of someone else? If the longer message is the work of someone else, who is the someone else?
Was Ed on the air at the time? Was this topic talked about on the air at the time? Is there an audio of what was on the air that I can listen to?
I've left this one alone until we had time for the dust to settle. I don't think the dust has calmed down much.
I went looking this afternoon to see if I could find what looked like an accurate account of what really happened.
There is on the web a post where someone did a screen capture of Ed's Tweet which he quickly deleted it is reported. Someone help me understand the image that is on the web. In rather clear type there is the verbiage which has been quoted over and over. Then below that is a photographic image of a longer message. I don't quite understand the longer, less visually clear image: is that wording from another source, is that the ORIGINAL ED Tweet and the clearer image someone's distilled version of the longer message?
Was the scruffy looking longer message something Ed posted and took down, or is it a quote of someone else? If the longer message is the work of someone else, who is the someone else?
Was Ed on the air at the time? Was this topic talked about on the air at the time? Is there an audio of what was on the air that I can listen to?
The only way to make sure that deleted Tweets are kept for posterity is to take a screen capture. That's all we have of the Ed Tweet since he deleted it almost immediately.
As I pointed out earlier, I'd most likely give the guy the benefit of the doubt that it was just poorly worded. It's tough getting a point across in 140 characters. The point of this thread really isn't Ed and his Tweet. The point is that if Rush had done something similar, the peanut gallery would be in a frenzy calling for his firing and m-f'ing anyone who urged calmer heads prevail. The idea is that the people who start these repetitive threads about Rush and similar hosts contribute absolutely NOTHING to the conversation here.
Apparently, the guilty parties don't mind driving off all civilized discussion. They WANT a place where they can rail against Rush, "tea baggers" and people who actually still have radio jobs.
Apparently, the guilty parties don't mind driving off all civilized discussion.
I'm appalled.
Stop deflecting. You know I was talking about the crackpot theory that Rush went deaf because of pill abuse.
I wasn't even responding to you. Geeez, pay attention.
No. Again: THAT IS THE POINT OF THIS THREAD.
I've never claimed I could solve the problems of talk radio. Everyone else here claims they have the solution, and their solution apparently is slander and insults.
Do you even know what slander is? You throw around words on this board that you clearly do not know the definition of. Not the first time. You claim to be on the air. I cannot imagine what you say on-air, having such a tenuous understanding of the English language.
Also, those who live in glass houses, eh? You accuse others of being provocative and using hyperbole, etc. etc....and yes, that does go on here, but nobody is more guilty of it than YOU. For starters, I don't recall anyone else here actually going so far as to start a whole thread just to bait and then pick a fight with other users.
Shame on you.
Last edited:
Do you even know what slander is?
Yes. I was asked to teach a college level media law class.
nobody is more guilty of it than you.
I'm not the one going around spreading absolute lies about people, nor do I insult their chosen profession or what market they work in. Both of which you're VERY guilty of. I don't go around calling people obscene names like "tea bagger", either.
Last edited:
I'm appalled.
You're quite right. It was foolish of me to expect an adult conversation on the Internet. For your part, at least you contribute something.
Yes. I was asked to teach a college level media law class.
Please tell me you're just saying that.
I'm not the one going around spreading absolute lies about people,
What lies? You mean the lies attempting to pretend Limbuagh is not a drug abuser? His drug use is established FACT. Limbaugh ADMITTED IT on the air! My God.
nor do I insult their chosen profession or what market they work in.
Who's insulting your profession?
I don't go around calling people obscene names like "tea bagger", either.
Sorry, I have no respect at all for the tea party crowd. Calling them "tea baggers" is the cleanest thing I'll agree to call them.
Last edited:
You're quite right. It was foolish of me to expect an adult conversation on the Internet. For your part, at least you contribute something.
And what exactly are YOU contributing? Oh, that's right, you have NO ideas at all, so you should be lauded? All you do is antagonize other users.
Please tell me you're just saying that.
No. A friend that teaches media law asked me to sub in sometime. Believe it or not, people who don't disagree with you can be intelligent and educated.
Sorry, I have no respect at all for the tea party crowd. Calling them "tea baggers" is the cleanest thing I'll agree to call them.
That part wasn't about you, but I'm not surprised you have the same lack of class.
And what exactly are YOU contributing? Oh, that's right, you have NO ideas at all, so you should be lauded? All you do is antagonize other users.
You call it antagonizing. I call it point out hypocrisy. Stop being a hypocrite and you won't feel so antagonized.
That part wasn't about you, but I'm not surprised you have the same lack of class.
You're so classy? You troll these boards like a rebellious 17 year old girl, with your hissy fits, constant overreactions and hyperbole.
All you do is run around disagreeing with, and battling other posters. Your petulance is tiring.
You're so classy? You troll these boards like a rebellious 17 year old girl, with your hissy fits, constant overreactions and hyperbole.
All you do is run around disagreeing with, and battling other posters. Your petulance is tiring.
And again, I'm not the one calling people "tea baggers". So enough of the "hissy fit" stuff. It's you and Fred doing that.
And again, I'm not the one calling people "tea baggers". So enough of the "hissy fit" stuff. It's you and Fred doing that.
To be honest, I'm not even sure I did use that phrase, but if I did, I don't apologize. They're mostly poorly informed, racist idiots. That's been my experience with them.
And you do throw hissy fits. Go re-read some of your posts.
To be honest, I'm not even sure I did use that phrase, but if I did, I don't apologize. They're mostly poorly informed, racist idiots. That's been my experience with them.
You weren't using that term. But I'm glad to see you double down on the insults.
You weren't using that term. But I'm glad to see you double down on the insults.
Doubling down? Like a good, generic host, you have all the cliches down pat.
I didn't "double down" on anything. I'm just being honest. You, OTOH, offer litle more than one petulant contradiction after another.
And again, I'm not the one calling people "tea baggers". So enough of the "hissy fit" stuff. It's you and Fred doing that.
So at last we've finally come down to "I'm rubber, you're glue, whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you." Oh, good grief.
F
FredLeonard
Guest
SMG posts links to a couple of right-wing blogs, so we have no idea what Big Ed actually said (not that this has slowed down discussion at all).
Gays were persecuted in the holocaust. So, were the disabled, people with learning disabilities, the emotionally disturbed or mentally impaired, Gypsies (Romani), political "dissidents" and Jews. It's estimated that Jews represented about one-half the toll of the holocaust but it's the only part of it we hear about. So, if Big Ed said gays were persecuted then, he right.
Maybe SMG is a gay holocaust denier. Or maybe he approves of persecuting gays, like they are doing in Russia and much of Africa.
Some Jewish organizations, to their discredit, do not want the holocaust associated with other victims, or the term "holocaust" associated with other genocide campaigns (such as the mass slaughter of Armenians by the Turks during World War I). They especially don't like the term being applied to Palestinians.
And wing-nuts will lie, distort or twist in their eagerness to discredit anybody they don't like.
Gays were persecuted in the holocaust. So, were the disabled, people with learning disabilities, the emotionally disturbed or mentally impaired, Gypsies (Romani), political "dissidents" and Jews. It's estimated that Jews represented about one-half the toll of the holocaust but it's the only part of it we hear about. So, if Big Ed said gays were persecuted then, he right.
Maybe SMG is a gay holocaust denier. Or maybe he approves of persecuting gays, like they are doing in Russia and much of Africa.
Some Jewish organizations, to their discredit, do not want the holocaust associated with other victims, or the term "holocaust" associated with other genocide campaigns (such as the mass slaughter of Armenians by the Turks during World War I). They especially don't like the term being applied to Palestinians.
And wing-nuts will lie, distort or twist in their eagerness to discredit anybody they don't like.
And wing-nuts will lie, distort or twist in their eagerness to discredit anybody they don't like.
Like you do on a daily basis?
That's why people take screenshots of Tweets. Because dishonest liars like you will try to distort things. Ed DID post that gays were the ones "really" persecuted. That implies that no one else was.
And if you had an ounce of integrity and honesty, you'd have noticed that I've already said TWICE that it's probably a misstatement. Instead, you'll just make up crackpot theories and lie. I don't want the persecution of ANYONE. Just to get that clear before you go making stuff up again. But as I have said REPEATEDLY, this thread isn't about Ed. It's about you and your ilk.
Just remember, folks. Fred is the one that's an avowed racist with the posts on this board to prove it.
Oh, and here's a TV news station reporting it. So much for your "right wing blog" lie.
http://newsfixnow.com/2014/05/14/msnbc-host-tweets-gays-were-the-real-target-of-hitlers-germany/
Instead of making up wacky insults like "gay holocaust denier" for you, I'll just say what I can prove. You're a racist and a liar.
Last edited:
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.