Remove Rush Limbaugh from Armed Forces Radio?

[dmadman43]

Originally posted by wvrevy
Yeah, I was out a bit ago and heard Rush whining about this

I've never really thought about it, but Armed Forces Radio is a government paid for network. As such, it IS unlawful to broadcast only the view supported by those currently in power.

And it's NOT censorship, so kindly leggo' of that red herring Nobody is stopping Rush from broadcasting his misguided idiocy....Just saying that he can't do it on a publicly funded network (at least, not without some misguided idiocy from the other side of the aisle).

But that's the point--there is misguided idiocy on the other side being broadcast on AFRN-- NPR.

 

[dmadman43]

1 - It's the same principle that forces the networks to show an "opposition response" when the president makes a speech. I don't know, for a fact, that it will apply the same way, but I suspect that's the argument that is being made, and I'd agree with that (would feel the same way if it was Al Franken's program being broadcast, btw)

Actually this is wrong. You are confusing two concepts.

 

[dmadman43]

Here's an example:

MSNBC
"SECRET DETENTION"
"Rumsfeld ordered Iraqi prisoner hidden from Red Cross"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5226957/

FOX NEWS
Official: Hiding Prisoner From Red Cross Was Legal
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,122898,00.html

Not just the headlines.....look at the reporting.

 

[AirForceRocks]

Originally posted by caitycaity
what about Fox?

I've never seen more than 5 minutes of Fox News at a time, so I couldn't say from personal experience. What I did see I considered to be right-biased to the extreme, so I don't watch it. Most of my "TV news" time is spent with MSNBC, with CNN being second, and the rest is split between the Big Three networks.

 

[Galahad]

Originally posted by Bobbles
March 18, 2003

Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President)

Consistent with section 3(b) of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243), and based on information available to me, including that in the enclosed document, I determine that:

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic and other peaceful means alone will neither (A) adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq nor (B) likely lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and

(2) acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

Sincerely,


GEORGE W. BUSH



Could this be misconstrued that the Bush Administration NEVER said there was a link between Hussein and 9/11?
It is true that the administration has backed away from that assertion since but.....?

No misconstruing at all. It plainly says that we wish to take action against terrorists organizations, etc. that aided in...etc. It does not say...."Given that Iraq and Saddam participated in 9/11 we what to....".

You may think it is bad policy to attack overall terrorism by trying to remove despots, establish democracy, and remove their breeding ground. That's fine and probably quite arguable. But the resolution states that we want to go after the terrorist infrastructure that allowed 9/11 to happen; NOT that we go after Iraq because we think they did it.

It can't be said they have back away from an assertion they did not make, in this resolution, nor in others.

 

[Galahad]

Originally posted by AirForceRocks
I've never seen more than 5 minutes of Fox News at a time, so I couldn't say from personal experience. What I did see I considered to be right-biased to the extreme, so I don't watch it.

I mostly agree with you on this point except to say that I think Brit Hume's show (that I rarely get to see because it is on so early in the evening) is the best news show on television. The rest of Fox is pretty bad. Shep Smith can barely speak some nights. O'Reilly and H & C are just ridiculous political babble. Rita Cosby is a joke (DW and I call her "Miss Piggy"...when she dresses in those hot pink/red things, etc. she looks just like Kermit's porcine friend. Neil Cavuto (who I also don't see often) has a pretty good business show.