Rush Limbaugh show pulled off the air

Our local Am station KAST decided to pull the Rush Limbaugh show this morning over the recent "phony soldier" controversy.

Its been years since I listened to Limbaugh but I think its pretty lame that a station would pull his show. It smacks of censorship.

The station has been absolutely bombarded with phone calls and e-mails from people who are upset that they cancelled the program.


  • 44 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • I don't listen to Rush. What was the controversey?
  • Do you recall several weeks ago there was an article on the internet and in newspapers about a guy who claimed he was an Iraqi war veteran who was wounded and received the Purple Heart, then admitted he was only in the service for 5 weeks, was never in Iraq or wounded. Rush called him a phony soldier. The media accused Limbaugh of calling any soldiers who opposed the war phony soldiers, then the democrack politicians picked up on. Even when the truth came out they didn't change their rhetoric and stated they would threaten sponsors and radio stations with boycotts if they didn't drop Limbaugh. Many people do not like him but he has always been a very VERY strong supporter of our military men and women.

  • Good summary. It was really a non-controversy if you know the details of what Rush actually said.

    Liberals are basically ticked off that they can't control talk radio the way they control the rest of the media.

    Even in San Francisco, 90 percent of talk radio is conservative in nature.
  • Hmmmm....whatever happened to that freedom of speech the libs are always so intent on throwing around?

    As the other posters have stated, this really isn't a controversy, and nothing that needs censoring. Frankly, I'm shocked that this even became an issue!
  • But Coffee, the libs are always for free speech when you agree with them....
  • I really think the issue is control. Liberals control Hollywood, most major media, and the universities.

    Talk radio is dominated by conservatives and that is simply unacceptable to the liberals.

    Have you heard of the Fairness Doctrine? This would impose the standard that conservative talk must be equally balanced by liberal programming.

    Of course, it just applies to radio. Could you imagine if every liberal professor had to be balanced by a conservative?

    I am just sad that my local station succumbed to the pressure of a few callers and pulled Rush's show.
  • Waaah!



    So making false accusations about someone's patriotism is only allowed if you're a Republicanazi?
  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 10-10-07 AT 06:59AM (CST)[/font][br][br]I don't think it's a "false accusation about someone's patriotism" as much as it is an opinion about the conduct of one man.

    This wasn't a comment about patriotism, it was a comment about living up to the standards we set for our troops. There are men and women dying every day over there, the last thing they need is some guy lying to get more negative attention.

    The man's not a patriot - he's a liar! And haven't our media outlets oft been used to oust liars? I don't see what the problem is.
  • Free speech has been invoked a couple of times in this thread. Let's remember, please, that our constitution guarantees our freedom of speech will not be abridged by the government. Neither the consitution nor the government keeps corporations and other business entities from controlling their employees' speech. So Limbaugh was fired because his employer felt it was in the best interests of their business, period. You know -- free enterprise, capitalism? I thought conservatives were all about free enterprise and capitalism. Limbaugh was fired for business reasons or whatever other legal reason his employer saw fit to fire him for -- free speech doesn't enter into it unless you're talking about the government (much like some former members were kicked off this forum at the sole discretion of MLSmith). The fact that he's a pompous, hate-mongering windbag just happens to be a bonus for liberals like me.
  • Hmmm. Maybe I'm misunderstanding here. I was under the impression that he was not fired, his show was pulled from the airwaves in a market. There is no "employer" in this situation, just someone taking offense to Limbaugh's politics, and therefore pulling the programming off the air.

    I personally can't stand polemics on either side of the political spectrum, but I still think they have a right to be heard by those who want to listen to them, even if it is a minority (given, of course, that they aren't saying anything illegal!). Maybe I need to read more into this...
  • It might be true that he wasn't fired, per se, but just that his show was pulled in one or more markets. Either way, the point remains that it was a business decision made by his employer or his "de facto" employer in the form of the station carrying his show -- not by a governmental entity bound by the constitutional protection of free speech.
  • Good to see you posting again Debra. I knew that if I invoked the name of Rush it would bring you back.

    So you are OK with a radio station pulling a talk show because some people disagreed with what the host was saying?
  • Radio stations are dependent on advertisers for their livelihood. National radio broadcasts have their own advertisers but each local must sell ads to pay for the national broadcast. Most would have principle advertisers that pay for the majority of a particular program. I would guess that the business or businesses that were sponsoring the local broadcast of Rush decided to withdraw their $$ from his show because of the bad press he was receiving. That's just business in a free market. It isn't a freedom of speech issue, it isn't patriotism, it's simple economics. I doubt Rush's huge network of stations even noticed one affiliate in Oregon going away. And of course the free market works both ways; if the station acquires a different sponsor, or the original sponsor receives bad feedback from his customers about his decision to not sponsor Rush, the show very well could be renewed.
    So we can all thank God that free enterprise, free markets and Democracy are all at work in our country. It isn't without its faults but it far exceeds any other country for freedoms and pursuit of happiness, not to mention acquisition of wealth.

  • I agree, this is a free enterprise issue and not really about freedom of speech. However, if I understand the facts correctly, he was not dogging the troops; it is just that someone claimed he was. I am a conservative, but I can't stand to hear Rush. Like every other talk geru I've heard, he tends to go way over the top.

    If I lived in the area though, and this affected me, I would be deeply offended. Do we only need a claim or a rumor in order to terminate a contract? I would probably boycott both the sponsor and the radio station for acting so rashly. Find out the facts and then act. Every HR person knows this. You might suspend someone while investigating, but you don't terminate without the facts. It sounds to me as if the sponsor and the radio station are both run by idiots (and thus do not deserve my business).

    Just my 2 cents.

  • Steaks and Nae, I think you're both exactly right. Which is ultimately my answer to Paul, above: In the world of commerce, we vote with our pocket books. I will attempt, through my patronage and customer feedback, to influence media outlets and so should everyone else. The majority will rule, and if it doesn't go my way, I'll deal with it and try harder next time. That's freedom, and long may it wave.

  • Ok, I think we all agree to that.

    But the "Fairness Doctrine" is totally in opposition to what you are saying though.

    It artificially imposes certain levels of liberal talk that have never been supported by the marketplace.

  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 10-11-07 AT 05:55PM (CST)[/font][br][br]Oh, but I never said one way or the other whether I support the "Fairness Doctrine." I'd have to learn more about it to decide.

    But if this Doctrine doesn't apply to television (I believe that's what you said), then liberal vs. conservative content on TV must be controlled by the marketplace, right? That is, assuming TV network and local station executives are in business to earn a profit. And if the marketplace doesn't support liberalism, then how can you say that liberals control the media? Hmmmm?

  • Whirlwind:

    Glad to see someone here standing for the truth (facts). The fairness doctrine for TV went away while Ronald Reagan was President. I Don't know about radio but don't see how it exists since most talk radio is conservative so stations must not be required to allow equal time for opposing views. As far as Limbaugh's phony soldier comments being directed at an imposter I would like to know where that originated. I happened to see the soldier on TV who is the head of a veterans group(Iraq veterans opposed to the war) who was supposedly the target of Limbaugh's remarks. This man, who is also the author of a new book, offered to go on Limbaugh's show to defend himself but his offer was not accepted. I also can't understand why anyone still believes the myth of a liberal media. It doesn't exist. Look who owns the Media. Start with Rupert Murdock and come on down -- none of these people are liberals. It is true that a good number of reporters may be liberal or Democrat but they know what their restrictions are and will follow them if they don't want to get the Dan Rather treatment. I have been away from the TV for several days now and I had not previously heard anything about an imposter being the target of Rush's remarks. Sounds like this is a strawman invented by Rush or Bill O'Riley. All of you running with this story, please give us some real facts.
  • Keep in mind that my original post was about Limbaugh's show being pulled off the air.

    Whether or not you think Limbaugh is full of hot air or not, I think its pretty cowardly to pull the show off the air.

    Of course, it was back on the following day after so many listeners called and complained.

  • You want facts, yet you say something like Rupert Murdoch is not a liberal? Why would he hold a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton? That took a mere 5 minutes to find.

  • Well said.. I'm also a conservative and Rush makes me cringe...

    How much of this is politics and how much is free-commerce-decision-making??? Who knows... Given the facts that are posted on this thread, seems to me that if more investigation had been made into facts of his statement/the situation, it might not be as big an issue as it has become.

    But who would do an investigation when there could be a juicy political controversy behind the matter!?! We Americans like to blow things out of proportion for the sake of entertainment, right? (Even if it's under the guises of "news".) That's how guys like Rush stay in business...
  • Moon, the "phony soldier" that Rush was referring to was Jesse McBeth.

    McBeth claimed to have been an Army Ranger and veteran of the Iraq war. He gained prominence as an outspoken war critic with descriptions of "atrocities" that he had committed while serving in Iraq.

    His story is bogus. He was kicked out of boot camp after 44 days. He eventually admitted that in federal court.

    Would you agree that Mcbeth is a "phony soldier" ?

  • Paul:

    Anyone would have to agree that the guy to which you refer is definitely a phony. The only question that come to mind is why was Rush back pedaling about his statements for several days without a name being attached. If he knew who he was why didn't he just call him by name to begin with. The delay sounds like research was going on until someone could come up with a true phony so he could say "this is guy I was talking about".
  • I havent read the transcript of the show but my understanding is that the context was essentially criticism of the war by soldiers who were not what they were claiming to be.

    Democrats are saying that Rush was calling any soldier who disagrees with the war a "phony soldier" and I dont think the context backs that up.

    Regardless, I disagree with his show being pulled off the air. It smacks of censorship.
  • My husband listens to Rush everyday and would be totally devestated if our local station pulled him off the air. In fact, he'd probably have to take a sick day off of work!!!!
  • I used to listen to Rush in the early 90s when the "Ditto head" phenomenon was really peaking. There were "Rush Rooms" in local restaurants where you could hear the show.

    Sometimes I wonder why he doesnt retire and enjoy the fame and fortune he has earned. In recent years, he only seems to get attention from the mainstream media when there is a scandal.

    Given that Rush will probably retire at some point, you may need to come up with a transition plan for your husband, Nat.

    You could slowly wean him off Rush and on to Glen Beck with a little O'Reilly and Laura Ingraham on the side.
  • Hey moon, I'm still waiting on a response to post #26. Here, I'll post it again:

    You want facts, yet you say something like Rupert Murdoch is not a liberal? Why would he hold a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton? That took a mere 5 minutes to find.

Sign In or Register to comment.