See other Editorial Articles
Title: BLOOD IN THE WATER; Right-wing talk shows next...
Source:
Neal Boortz
URL Source: http://boortz.com/nuze/index.html
Published: Apr 12, 2007
Author: Neal Boortz
Post Date: 2007-04-12 13:59:49 by Brian S
Keywords: None
Views: 3099
Comments: 338
Liberals see this whole Imus situation as a way to rid themselves of the problem of talk radio. Now that they've succeeded in getting MSNBC to pull Imus' program, they'll concentrate on CBS .. trying to get the radio show cancelled. At this point I wouldn't be surprised if they succeed. Then they will turn their attention to the rest of us. The tape recorders will be running. There is not one single significant right-of-center radio talk show out there that is not going to come under fire. Liberals know -- they've proven it to themselves -- that they simply cannot succeed in talk radio. So, it's all very simple. If they can't succeed, destroy the genre. Their original plan was to wait until Democrats control the congress and the White House and then murder talk radio with the so-called "Fairness Doctrine." Now that they're on the verge of having a talk radio scalp on their belts as retribution for a bad and mean-spirited joke, they see that they may not have to wait for the electorate to give them the power. In the meantime... while the race industry is calling for the head of Don Imus, we have Crystal Gail Mangum of North Carolina. Who is she? She is the woman who falsely accused three members of the Duke lacrosse team of rape. Her unsubstantiated charges resulted in a media firestorm against Duke University and these lacrosse players. Would you like to spend a few moments comparing the effect of Mangum's charges on the Duke lacrosse team and Imus' words on the Rutgers woman's basketball team? Sure! Why not! Now, let's see ...... The remainder of the Duke lacrosse season was cancelled. They were nationally ranked, and had to forfeit the rest of their games. The coach, Mike Pressler, resigned. "Mug shots" of the lacrosse players were posted on campus. Mark Anthony Neal, an African Studies professor on the campus said that this was "a case of racialized sexual violence." A Durham, N.C. resident called it "racial terrorism." In the middle of all of this we had a district attorney, Michael Nifong, who was running for reelection in a majority-black jurisdiction. There were suggestions that he wanted to be the mayor one day. Jesse Jackson had plenty to say about this case also. In his column on http://Blacknews.com Jackson said "Predictably, the right-wing media machine has kicked in, prompting mean-spirited attacks upon the accuser's character." Later he offered to pay Mangum's tuition for a college education if her story proved true. Later he amended his promise. In January he said that the Rainbow/Push Coalition would pay her college tuition even if it turns out she completely fabricated her story! Now isn't that special? Hey sisters! How would you like to get a college scholarship from Jesse Jackson? Apparently all you have to do is lodge a false rape accusation against an all-white college sports team! Get out your checkbook, Jesse. Now we have learned that it was a hoax. No truth. The North Carolina Attorney General's office has declared the accused players to be innocent. A State Bar investigation of Nifong continues. And thus far Jesse Jackson has not come forward to offer any comfort to the lacrosse players falsely accused by Ms. Mangum. Now ... why even bring all of this up? Well, we have two college teams in the mix. A Rutgers women's basketball team that is largely black, and a Duke men's lacrosse team that is almost (save for one player) exclusively white. A white man insulted the Rutgers team with a mean-spirited quip. No season cancelled. No coach fired. No arrests. Nobody on the basketball team had to spend tens of thousands of dollars on defense attorneys. They were insulted. The were the targets of a stupid racially charged remark ... but that's pretty much it. But how about Duke? The Duke team members were accused of a crime. Attorneys were hired. Coaches fired. Seasons cancelled. Reputations damaged. DNA swabs were taken. Charges were filed. The district attorney was out there saying that a rape most definitely had occurred. Now we find that they were completely innocent. In the meantime the white man who made the stupid remark about the Rutgers basketball team is being attacked and vilified as if he was a mass murderer. The black woman who made the false charges of rape against the lacrosse team is going to walk. In fact, you can fully expect the civil rights establishment --- the same civil rights establishment that is united in their efforts to destroy Don Imus -- circle the wagons around Crystal Gail Mangum and protect her at all costs. Oprah is going to have the Rutgers woman's basketball team on her show. How many of you would like to make book on when Oprah invites the Duke lacrosse team to be on her show? When pigs fly. Back to talk radio. The mainstream media in this country doesn't merely dislike talk radio, they hate it. Hate it with a blinding passion. How dare these "disc jockeys" get on those radio stations and spout opinions on matters of governance and public policy? Don't they know that this is a job to be left to the professionals at the New York Times and the Washington Post plus the major broadcast TV networks? What's worse, how dare the great unwashed of the general population get on these radio shows, especially the syndicated ones, and spout their ill-advised and uneducated opinions? Think about this. You have a liberal columnist like Maureen Dowd or the insipid Tom Teepen write a column spouting some leftist dogma. That column gets published in newspapers across the country. Then you have some mechanic from Memphis get on the air with Limbaugh or Hannity to offer a differing point of view. The column may be read by a million people -- at the most. The Memphis mechanic is heard by perhaps five times that many. It just ain't right! For years now the left has employed various tactics to marginalize talk radio. The favorite tactic is the tired "hate radio" accusation. The general idea here is that anything said on a talk radio show that is at variance with liberal dogma is "hate speech." This tactic hasn't worked ... and talk radio continues to grow. Well .. now there's a new game plan. Use the Jesse Jacksons and Al Sharptons of this world to attack these hosts on the basis of race. That's right .. this whole Imus affair isn't really about race! The TV networks and the liberal mainstream media haven't been hammering this Imus thing day after day after day because they really care about the racial aspects of the story. If they were that concerned about the racial angle they would be playing up the Duke case to a similar extent. Race is the means, not the reason. Right now the mainstream press sees race as the key to destroying talk radio. Focus on the hosts ... wait until they say something that can be racially exploited, and then launch the relentless attack. Go after networks, stations and advertisers. Concentrate on them -- one at a time -- like hyenas looking for a meal. Select prey that looks vulnerable. Isolate that prey and go in for the kill. I don't know how many hosts there are out there who have not made comments about black politicians, celebrities or culture that could be used as the basis for a full force attack. I know I have. Have I gone overboard? You bet! Hell .. 37 years in the business, how can you not have screwed up from time to time? I've apologized in the past -- and probably will one day say something else that merits an apology. Apologies aren't enough, however. The Christian concept of forgiveness and tolerance means nothing to the "reverends" Jackson and Sharpton. They're sharks .. and there's blood in the water. By the way ... my guess? Now that MSNBC has dumped Imus, CBS is sure to follow. Look at it this way .... NBC has canned him. How in the hell can CBS stand up to the this racially charged onslaught? "Hey, CBS! NBC did the right thing? How about you?"
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-198) not displayed.
.
.
.
#199. To: Burkeman1 (#196)
(Edited)
Because the clear channel stations, and many others, go interstate and international. And the contitution says that regulating this sort of commerce is a federal issue. Very local broadcasting could be locally regulated if the vertical range could somehow be reliably limited, but it can't under the current technology.
.
Well then buy one. My family has been in and out of the small market radio business for 35 years, and all the way back to the 80s, you had to go automated Easy Listening to make a profit. You can't pay 6 local schmucks to do 24 hours of live talk radio in a medium market and make any money.You would be broke in a month. If you could, people would be doing it.
This is a sorta which came first - the chicken or the egg- type merry go round argument. It can't be resolved. Again- but for the fact that the US government had a contingent of marines ready and poised for deployment- would United Fruit have taken it upon themselves to over throw the government in Guetemala or would they have had to come to terms with that government?
Because the Constitution mandates this. See the post above. Broadcasting across state lines is interstate commerce.
.
Yes and yes. Armed gangs collect garbage in Rio and kill anyone who muscle in on their turf.
.
LOL Ok, Rip Van Winkle. I guess I was just imagining cell phones, Wi Fi, satellite tv, satellite radio, digital tv, digital audio, analog tv, analog radio. My mistake.
bribes. When you do business there you hook up with someone who knows the bribe rate. You have to do this. Or you can't operate.
.
I am waiting for an answer. A point ignored by the libertarian anarchist on here - that the airwaves ARE NOT THE PRIVATE PROPERTY of the broadcaster but the of the public. They can concede the point or not and we can go from there but enough with avoiding it. If they think the airwaves are private property say it and provide a reason for it. Maybe it will change my mind and other minds or maybe they will come off as loopy kooks but stop trying to change the argument. In fact I have seen an avoidance of my point and yours about the need to break up of media conglomerates. I am not talking about the fairness doctrine BS or having the govt hold your hand - we are advocating the creation of conditions (yes, via the law) for more PRIVATE owners of broadcast media in markets and the restriction of cross media ownership.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Yes, your mistake. "Cell" phones operate in short range cells. That is why you can have so many. They don't transmit out of the cell. They are low power broad band devices moron. Everything else you describe is a reciever. The digital TV, audio and Satellite TV are MUX'd signals that sometimes increase apparent bandwidth. These are all normal spectrum signals operating at frequencies outside normal broadcast frequencies. The point is that they are not using any wave stacking to increase the information handling capability of the channel. They are strictly Nyquest bandwidth devices. You can calculate the spectrum spread by looking at the information transfer rate, i.e, bytes per second. As I said above, I suggest you do some reading before popping off.
.
Interesting- what makes governments so reasonable that they make treaties over such things- but private parties who have direct financial interest in these matters can't? Governments make "treaties" on this subject- but two radio stations owners wouldn't come to terms with each other - but - like assholes with bottomless supplies of cash- would broadcast on the same frequency so that their listeners would get jumbled static? Oh- ok. Thank god the Feds created the FCC- because we wouldn't have TV or radio without them and their agency. I See.
Of course they would. Why would they not?
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
I didn't ignore it. I stated earlier there is no reason why the airwaves should be claimed by the government. Bandwith is cheap and easily split and getting cheaper and more easily split every year. Information transfers are easily and cheaply compressed and it's getting cheaper and easier every year.
Because they are not the government and can't steal money from people to support stupid unproductive projects like broadcasting on the same frequency as a local competitor. I guess two morons could exist in the same market- But I imagine they would run out of money as no one could listen to their stations and no advertisers would buy time- and two guys who were not morons would buy them out and agree to broadcast on different frequencies. I imagine thousands upon thousands of such agreements, contracts, pacts, pools, would exist among users of the airwaves if the FCC didn't exist.
No really, thanks for enlightening me. I guess 20 miles is short range to you. How many people does that 20 miles cover in a metro area moron?
When Chechnya won its first war against Russia, the govt in Chechnya was no govt - it existed but had no power. During that time you saw a slave trade in kidnapped people rise up unheard of in modern times. Want to see the gruesome ransom videos? I am sure kidnap and murder were illegal in Chechnya then as well. It was a business - it was done to make money not to spread any ideology or religion. Anarchist have real world examples - they just don't have any good ones. Anarcho-libertarians are just as irrational Utopians as the socialist variety. Utopianisim is the most dangerous of ideologies.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
You are right- the trafficing of Gulag prisoners as slave laborers to state industries under Stalin was better.
The point is that they are not using any wave stacking to increase the information handling capability of the channel. My point wasn't that they were in the normal "broadcast frequencies". That's a government designation. My point was the frequencies that technology has allowed the consumer to recieve information by.
They were given the chance and they didn't so regulations were put in place. Exactly the same thing happened with the railroads about 70 years earlier. And I didn't write the Constitution. I only know what it says. And it says that regulating interstate commerce is a Federal Issue. And note that if the broadcasters wanted to change the rules, they probably could. The storngest support for the rules probably comes from the broadcasters. They don't want a hundred thousand watt station extracting tribute from them or blowing them off the air. And they don't want to have to build a two hundred thousand watt transmitter just to negotiate.
.
America seemed to make it along just fine with the border blaster X's.
Yes, that is exactly the way they acted. Sort of like the drug industries do today. Or sort of like Enron playing games with the California energy supplies and making milions off the brown outs - before the evaporated with eveyone's pensions.
.
No, that is why they now have the traties with Mexico regarding this.
.
But they are not! I don't live in Utopia and I don't cater to Utopian wish lists. So the best solution barring friggin Utopian conditions is to have - for a variety of reasons - media dis-consolidation of the broadband markets. This allows market forces and allows for a hoped for diversification of views and art and for competition but mostly for keeping voices on the PUBLIC AIRWAVES open as widely as possible under MARKET conditions.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
About 300 to a cell. Like I said, read before shooting your mouth off moron.
.
And I replied - if just using the soldiers for any war just to get more weapons made and spur on the war industry was the reason we would have invaded Rwanda. I already described how deals for such things are made in this govt - coalitions formed etc - you responded favorable to my analysis. I may have to find it again if you wish.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
No, you are trying to change your point because you got hammered on your ignorant rant. What you said is below and it says nothing about "normal broadcast frequencies". It talks about "splitting the spectrum" which isn't the same thing at all. With today's technology, and the almost unimaginable ability to split the spectrum, there is no reason why they couldn't be private property.
.
Who "Gave" them this chance? ANd I don't buy that for an effing second. And same with the railroads. No one proffited more from railroad regulation than railroad barons. What government often calls "chaos" is merely them not getting their piece of the pie. Radio comes along- making money hand over fist- and government wanted their piece- thus the various radio acts and laws and comissions that eventually got consolidated to the FCC. There never was a "chance". Congress was already passing laws on Radio broadcasts when there were barley any to begin with.
That is my experiance/observation also.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Like I said, if all the broadcasters agreed to deregulate, then the regulations would probably go away. If there was an evil conspiracy to keep the regs in place over their objections, my guess is that you would hear about it. They do have the ability to get the message out.
.
You do know those frequencies are regulated by the FCC as well - the companies who are in the businesses you mentioned don't own the broadband either and operate under license. Your mistake, indeed.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Do you really think that but for the FCC- we would have a jumble of static on the air- no one able to pick up radio broadcasts or television signals? That isn't what you are saying is it? You are really going to argue that radio station owners would just bankrupt themselves by moronically braodcasting on the same frequency as a competitor in the same market but for "laws" and force of government telling them not to- "Granting" them the license for a specific frequency? I don't want to misrepresnt what you are saying.
There is a method of transmitting using short bursts with wave fronts only about a yard long. You can MUX in many different channels here by synchronizing the receiver with the transmitter and just picking up every 10th packet, etc. He read something about this once and was mouthing off about it. He is now trying to cover for the gaff. This technology has problems with rain and dust, etc. That changes the speed of transmission and raises hell with the wave stacking.
.
What are you talking about - businesses do that all the time and have- undercut a competitor to drive him out of the market. Stop with the corpro worship - the govt can kill you and so can a corporation - both can become irrational because they are run by flawed men. Sorry to get all Christian Democrat on you.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
I can only go by what happened in the past and this did happen in the past. In fact, it was happening in the 1960s with Mexico. And yes, I do believe that a few corporations would try to take advantage of the situation. And note, the situation becomes unworkable if only ONE corporation decides to play around. That is the nature of the business here. One corporation can put everyone else out of business and take over the whole nations broadcasting.
.
That's right Burke - now you get it - BOTH full on Statisim and full on anarcho- libertarianism SUCK. You maintain anarcho-libertarianism does not suck. THEY BOTH SUCK!!
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
Regardless, Boortz is correct in pointing out the Modern Inquisition and issuing a warning. Excellent expose of the hypocrisy in all this. Absolutely correct observation. The man's credibility is totally irrelevant to the truth of his observation. Freedom is under attack in this country from all quarters. Give a little and more will be taken away. All those on this forum who can not see this would you please open your eyes. Please. This is only the beginning of total censorship. A backdoor via radio to eventually come after the internet by setting precendents. Do you stand for Freedom or something else? Yeah, freedom can be "uncomfortable." But then I thought we were beyond this level.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition Why would they want deregulation? Do you think the airline companies, all three of them- wanted deregulation? Do you think the faux private entity Amtrak wants railroad deregulation? Do you think the auto industry wants all those federal standards to go away? Regulation limits the playing field by raising the cost of doing business and basically making it impossible for start ups to occur. If you are a big giant company or corporation- you want regulation. Cause you can afford to comply with them- your smaller competitors can't. There is a reason why this country had three airlines until the 80's- and it wasn't because of the evil free market.
You are a statist. Chechyan rebels, coming out of 70 years of communist barbaric rule is not "anarcho capitalism". And even if it were- their slave trade was nothing compared to the modern statist slave labor holocausts we have seen in the past hundred years.
Or you want regulation if you are a 5 kW mom and pop station being menaced by a multi-million dollar three hundred thousand watt station two states over.
.
I am a long time Howard Stern fan - when Howard went to have one of his marches to celebrate his ratings triumph a competitor had their engineer cut his signal. Ever see the movie 'Used Cars'? Selling cars by jacking the feed of the superbowl - funny as hell movie starring Kurt Russel.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
When can I charge people for breathing air? Let me know.
"The desire to rule is the mother of heresies." -- St. John Chrysostom
I don't worship the corps. You obviously worship the state.
Comments (240 - 338) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestWhat about states and local governments allocating such frequncies if you just can't stand people to do it themselves- negotiating with neighboring government entities to settle disputes?
#200. To: Destro (#194)
Says who? local stations tend not to make a profit at the rate a Clear Channel would want but they do tend to make money.
#201. To: Destro (#190)
American military invasions have all been based on protecting a business interest
#202. To: Burkeman1 (#196)
Why the feds?
#203. To: Burkeman1 (#196)
Have you ever been to a shanty town in a third world country? They have no government "services"- or even law. Is it chaos? Is it "anarchy"?
#204. To: ... (#197)
Doesn't exist on a commercial basis.
#205. To: Burkeman1 (#196)
buy and sell property to which they have no "government approved title"
#206. To: ..., SmokinOPs, Burkeman1 (#192)
(Edited)
That has been my point all along.
#207. To: SmokinOPs (#204)
(Edited)
I guess I was just imagining cell phones, Wi Fi, satellite tv, satellite radio, digital tv, digital audio, analog tv, analog radio. My mistake.
#208. To: ... (#198)
#209. To: Burkeman1, ... (#196)
Or do you really think wannabe radio station owners would sit around trying to outbroadcast each other on the same frequency?
#210. To: Destro (#206)
A point ignored by the libertarian anarchist on here - that the airwaves ARE NOT THE PRIVATE PROPERTY of the broadcaster but the of the public.
#211. To: Destro (#209)
#212. To: ... (#207)
"Cell" phones operate in short range cells. That is why you can have so many. They don't transmit out of the cell. They are low power broad band devices moron.
#213. To: Burkeman1, ... (#196)
Let me ask you something- do you really think - but for government plains would crash into each other, people wouldn't obey simple agreed upon traffic rules- and murder would be common place? Is that the silliness you are reduced too?
#214. To: Destro (#213)
#215. To: ... (#207)
These are all normal spectrum signals operating at frequencies outside normal broadcast frequencies.
#216. To: Burkeman1 (#208)
Governments make "treaties" on this subject- but two radio stations owners wouldn't come to terms with each other - but - like assholes with bottomless supplies of cash- would broadcast on the same frequency so that their listeners would get jumbled static? Oh- ok.
#217. To: ... (#216)
They don't want a hundred thousand watt station extracting tribute from them or blowing them off the air. And they don't want to have to build a two hundred thousand watt transmitter just to negotiate.
#218. To: Burkeman1 (#208)
but - like assholes with bottomless supplies of cash- would broadcast on the same frequency so that their listeners would get jumbled static? Oh- ok.
#219. To: SmokinOPs (#217)
America seemed to make it along just fine with the border blaster X's
#220. To: SmokinOPs, ... (#195)
With today's technology, and the almost unimaginable ability to split the spectrum, there is no reason why they couldn't be private property.
#221. To: SmokinOPs (#212)
No really, thanks for enlightening me. I guess 20 miles is short range to you. How many people does that 20 miles cover in a metro area moron?
#222. To: Burkeman1 (#201)
Again- but for the fact that the US government had a contingent of marines ready and poised for deployment- would United Fruit have taken it upon themselves to over throw the government in Guetemala or would they have had to come to terms with that government?
#223. To: SmokinOPs (#215)
My point wasn't that they were in the normal "broadcast frequencies". That's a government designation. My point was the frequencies that technology has allowed the consumer to recieve information by.
#224. To: ... (#216)
They were given the chance
#225. To: ..., Burkeman1 (#203)
Have you ever been to a shanty town in a third world country? They have no government "services"- or even law. Is it chaos? Is it "anarchy"?
#226. To: Burkeman1 (#224)
(Edited)
What government often calls "chaos" is merely them not getting their piece of the pie. Radio comes along- making money hand over fist- and government wanted their piece- thus the various radio acts and laws and comissions that eventually got consolidated to the FCC. There never was a "chance". Congress was already passing laws on Radio broadcasts when there were barley any to begin with.
#227. To: SmokinOPs, ... (#204)
LOL Ok, Rip Van Winkle. I guess I was just imagining cell phones, Wi Fi, satellite tv, satellite radio, digital tv, digital audio, analog tv, analog radio. My mistake.
#228. To: ... (#218)
#229. To: Destro (#227)
#230. To: Burkeman1, ... (#211)
Because they are not the government and can't steal money from people to support stupid unproductive projects like broadcasting on the same frequency as a local competitor.
#231. To: Burkeman1 (#228)
(Edited)
Do you really think that but for the FCC- we would have a jumble of static on the air- no one able to pick up radio broadcasts or television signals?
#232. To: Burkeman1, ... (#214)
You are right- the trafficing of Gulag prisoners as slave laborers to state industries under Stalin was better.
#233. To: mirage, destro, christine, tauzero, freedom lovers, ferret mike, jethro tull (#5)
Boo-rtz has zero credibility.
In a CorporoFascist capitalist society, there is no money in peace, freedom, or a healthy population, and therefore, no incentive to achieve these.
- - IndieTX
"Peace? There's no money in peace! What we need is a war!"
--Three Stooges
#234. To: ... (#226)
#235. To: Destro (#232)
#236. To: Burkeman1 (#234)
If you are a big giant company or corporation- you want regulation.
#237. To: Burkeman1, ... (#228)
Do you really think that but for the FCC- we would have a jumble of static on the air- no one able to pick up radio broadcasts or television signals?
#238. To: ... (#229)
#239. To: Destro (#230)
.
.
.