Blogcritics: Comments on Air America Radio Making Huge Gains In Colorado

Comment by Robert Hill

Sat, 1 Oct 2005 05:02:09 EDT

Being one of the Coloradians that affected the radio... I listen to 760 AM to get a laugh and find out what's going to be put through the ringer next. The only reason that I don't listen to 630 AM as much is that 710 KNUS is a fantastic place to also get information. Bill Bennett, Laura Ingraham, Dennis Prager, Sean Hannity, Hugh Hewitt, Michael Medved... Great lineup. There is almost too much good conservative talk radio to choose from out here.

Comment by B. Samuel Davis

Mon, 8 Aug 2005 16:03:04 EDT

As for Air America, I don't see how you get around the 1 share in New York City. The .02 less than when it was just WLIB, which, by the way wasn't just Caribbean music - it had an evening political talk show which in some ways is remarkably similar to Air America. What I find distinctly odd about Air America, however, is not its anti-Republican rants, but rather its pro-Democratic slant. That distinguishes Air America from the radical WBAI, although sometimes it seems that Air America is even more radical than BAI. As a side note, I was surprised to learn that BAI accepts government funding - how does that square with Republican efforts to have public broadcasting - which is supported by tax payer dollars - be "fair and balanced"?

Comment by Dave Nalle

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 20:33:11 EDT

Yes, but as I recall Limbaugh just put those ideas out as speculations of things that MIGHT have happened based on the newsletter. He didn't say that he had any evidence that they had, just presented 'what if' scenarios. It's a bit slimy and certainly partisan, but it's not lying. Dave

Comment by CASEY

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 20:22:46 EDT

*****The newsletter did not report—as Limbaugh claimed—that Foster was murdered, or that the apartment was owned by Hillary Rodham Clinton.*****

Comment by Dave Nalle

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 18:58:49 EDT

Again, intent. You have to prove Limbaugh knew what he was repeating was false. Good luck. Dave

Comment by casey

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 18:46:38 EDT

person who has lied or who lies repeatedly wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn A lie is a statement made by someone who believes or suspects it to be false, in the expectation that the hearers may believe it. Thus a true statement may be a lie if the speaker thinks it is false; and novels, though false, are not lies. Depending on definitions, a lie can be a genuine falsehood or a selective truth, a lie by omission, or even the truth if the intention is to deceive or to cause an action not in the listener's interests. To lie is to tell a lie. A person who tells a lie, a en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liar

Comment by Dave Nalle

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 18:15:51 EDT

The first definition is self referential and therefore useless. The second one is much better, but as should be clear it relies on intent. To prove someone is a liar you have to prove that they knew what they were saying was untrue and said it anyway. So long as there is a reasonable possibility that it might be true in their mind when they say it then it's not a lie. Dave

Comment by casey

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 17:55:40 EDT

Definitions of liar on the Web: a person who has lied or who lies repeatedly wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn A lie is a statement made by someone who believes or suspects it to be false, in the expectation that the hearers may believe it.

Comment by Dave Nalle

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 15:53:10 EDT

You said that Limbaugh had lied, then you described the situation in more detail and it was obvious that it wasn't a lie, but repetition of speculation from another source. The difference between those two is pretty clear to anyone except you. Dave

Comment by casey

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 15:47:01 EDT

Not in the least and anyone that reads what transpired will understand what I said.

Comment by Dave Nalle

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 15:45:06 EDT

I said maybe I missed a show, because what you were saying didn't match my recollection of that sequence of shows. Then you changed what you had said to show that Limbaugh did not actually make a direct lie, confirming my original belief. It was not I who changed position, but you. >>I would be ashamed to have to change so many things in such a short time...<< Are you blushing? Dave

Comment by casey

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 15:31:41 EDT

So, Limbaugh was passing on rumor and speculation. That's what I said in the first place. I still don't believe he presented them as fact. From what I recall from listening to it he very clearly couched his statements in language which unambiguously presented the material as hypothetical, not fact. I'm sitting here laughing because I just found out that Limbaugh can't lie. First you tell me you remember his programs on Vice Fosterm then you say maybe you missed that one, then you want a transcript of the program, then he was just sharing a report, which gives him plausable deniability and finally when I show you he changed the report you say:So, Limbaugh was passing on rumor and speculation. That's what I said in the first place. I still don't believe he presented them as fact. From what I recall from listening to it he very clearly couched his statements in language which unambiguously presented the material as hypothetical, not fact. I would be ashamed to have to change so many things in such a short time...

Comment by Jeff b

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 15:20:36 EDT

hey you guys, stop the jibber-jabber, and get back to work

Comment by Dave Nalle

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 13:14:01 EDT

>>By the way Dave, I have a 1/2 inch stack of papers here that give some of the falsehoods that Limbaugh has said over the years before I stopped listening to him...<< I don't doubt it. You seem to have a real obsession here. But I bet if you go through that stack objectively you'd find that most of the 'falsehoods' are not so much lies as supposition and innuendo with very few instances where he comes out and says something clearly and unequivocally false. I'm not arguing that Rush isn't a propagandizing scumbag, but he is at least somewhat careful about not saying anything blatantly libelous. Notice that he hasn't been successfully sued over anything he's said. >>Since you listened so close<< I listened occasionally years and years ago. I just happen to remember the Vince Foster shows. >> do you remember the one about Chelsea Clinton's Sidewall Friends school << It's Sidwell Friends, not Sidewall. >>where he said they assigned eight graders to write a paper on "Why I feel guilty being white'. His source was suppose to be CBS news which said they never reported such a story. Sidewell Friend said it would never do that as one-quarted of their students are non-white.<< Never heard that story. Sidwell is extremely liberal - run by Quakers - so it's a believable story. And in fact, from what I've read Limbaugh got the story from a journalist (not with CBS) who had been told that such an assignment was given out by a parent of a kid at the school. So it was a third hand rumor which Limbaugh repeated. Not a lie, but at the same time an example of poor judgement and absolute lack of discrimination when something he heard matched his expectations. That kind of thing is characteristic of Limbaugh. He doesn't lie, he just repeats stuff he hears from other sources which he likes without making any effort to confirm if they are actually true. That way he can pass the blame to the original source and make the point he wants to make without actually, technically lying. Dave

Comment by casey

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 13:01:09 EDT

By the way Dave, I have a 1/2 inch stack of papers here that give some of the falsehoods that Limbaugh has said over the years before I stopped listening to him... Since you listened so close do you remember the one about Chelsea Clinton's Sidewall Friends school where he said they assigned eight graders to write a paper on "Why I feel guilty being white'. His source was suppose to be CBS news which said they never reported such a story. Sidewell Friend said it would never do that as one-quarted of their students are non-white.

Comment by Dave Nalle

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 12:59:07 EDT

Comment by casey

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 12:50:06 EDT

>>>Right there, in your own words is an indication that Limbaugh did not make the outright claims you originally said he did. You say that he 'shared a report'. That means that he has plausible deniability. He didn't say it, he was merely repeating what someone else had said, which might or might not be true. That's how you do it if you want to smear someone and not take responsibility for it. The only thing Dave was that if I would have continued on the article it said: As recounted at fair.org (Extra!, July/August 1994), "Limbaugh took this baseless rumor from a small insiders' newsletter and broadcast it to his radio audience of millions, adding his own new inaccuracies: *****The newsletter did not report—as Limbaugh claimed—that Foster was murdered, or that the apartment was owned by Hillary Rodham Clinton.***** Limbaugh's repetition of an unfounded rumor has been credited (Chicago Tribune, 3/11/94; Newsweek, 3/21/94) with contributing to a plunge in the stock market on the day it was aired." I guess its okay if he changes it to say what he wants.. You guys are unbelievable..

Comment by Dave Nalle

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 11:55:46 EDT

Right there, in your own words is an indication that Limbaugh did not make the outright claims you originally said he did. You say that he 'shared a report'. That means that he has plausible deniability. He didn't say it, he was merely repeating what someone else had said, which might or might not be true. That's how you do it if you want to smear someone and not take responsibility for it. Dave

Comment by Casey

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 11:47:25 EDT

This is as far as I go. This give you the date.I remember listening for over two hours because of the nature of the broadcast. I then had to go into work and could not listen anymore... >>>Remarkably, this outspoken critic of "shoddy reporting" is the same man who, on March 10, 1994, urgently warned his audience, "Brace yourselves," and then shared a report "that claims that Vince Foster was murdered in an apartment owned by Hillary Clinton..."

Comment by Dave Nalle

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 00:56:19 EDT

Casey, your characterization of the NORC results is just a tiny bit innacurate. First off, the NORC study did not determine ANY possible outcomes of the election. It's a study of methodology and does not draw conclusions. However, from the data analysts have subsequently drawn up 8 scenarios, 4 of which would have Gore winning and 4 of which would have Bush winning - one of the secnarios under which Bush wins is the specific recount type requested by Gore. The inevitable conclusion from the data in the report is that if there had been a full recount in Florida Bush would definitely have won. The quote you give from WaPo is interesting, but in fact the comment they made is incorrect. According to the actual data in the report, the result of that full recount would have been a Bush victory. This is all well documented. Take a look at Florida Election 2000. Dave

Comment by Dave Nalle

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 00:42:55 EDT

Casey, where are all those unattributed quotes from? Maybe I didn't hear the series of Limbaugh shows you did. The ones I heard just suggested rather than outright saying that Hillary was involved in the Foster death. Perhaps I missed the sequence of shows where he outright lied. I'd love to see transcripts of his 'lies' rather than your quotes which appear to be of other people saying he lied. Dave

Comment by casey

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 00:33:55 EDT

Approved by the Commissioners on June 8, 2001 Extracted in its entirety from GPOAccess website, April 30, 2002. Contains: Executive Summary, Introduction, 9 Chapters, Epilogue, Dissenting Opinion, Appendices and a Report on the Racial Impact of the Rejection of Ballots Cast in Florida. View Pages: Report with Table of Contents Abstract: Following the extremely controversial 2000 presidential election, The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights released this report on voting irregularities in Florida. The Commission held three days of hearings in each of Miami and Tallahassee and heard testimony from over 100 witnesses. The Commission found that, "Potential voters confronted inexperienced poll workers, antiquated machinery, inaccessible polling locations, and other barriers to being able to exercise their right to vote." The Commission also determined that Florida had violated sections of the Voting Rights Act and Secretary of State Katherine Harris failed to provide leadership in adequately preparing Florida precincts for a large voter turnout. Problems with voter lists used at various precincts caused significant voter disenfranchisement, particularly among African-Americans. An estimated 14.4% of black voters in Florida cast ballots that were rejected, compared to only 1.6% for non-black voters. One Miami-Dade poll worker lamented, "By far this was the worst election I have ever experienced. After that election, I decided I didn't want to work as a clerk anymore." Appendices include photographic images of a Miami-Dade polling place described as a "medieval labyrinth" of "standing water, orange cones, barriers, deep pits, [and] broken concrete"; and the now infamous Palm Beach County "butterfly ballot." Superintendent of Documents Number: CR 1.2:20010395

Comment by casey

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 00:32:46 EDT

In fact, as Media Matters for America noted on June 23 and June 30, the University of Chicago's National Opinion Research Center (NORC) studied Florida's disputed ballots and concluded that Gore emerged the winner in at least four recount scenarios. The NORC study was sponsored by news organizations including The Associated Press, The New York Times, and CNN, as well as The Wall Street Journal, Washington Post Co., and Tribune Publishing (which owns the Chicago Tribune, the Orlando Sentinel, and the South Florida Sun-Sentinel). According to a November 12, 2001, Washington Post article on the NORC's findings, "[I]f Gore had found a way to trigger a statewide recount of all disputed ballots, or if the courts had required it, the result likely would have been different. An examination of uncounted ballots throughout Florida found enough where voter intent was clear to give Gore the narrowest of margins."

Comment by casey

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 00:25:34 EDT

Here's just a few: The absolutely false rumors that Vince Foster was killed were all over the place. Rush Limbaugh even lied and said that he had a fax that had evidence that ... Rush Limbaugh has been guilty of a lot of the falsehoods, whether it's claiming ... before Columbus or that Vince Foster was killed in an apartment owned by ... To deny that Vince Foster committed suicide becomes, then, ... The apartment was supposed to be just across the Potomac River from Washington, ... I confronted Rush Limbaugh about his lies during the 2000 election season. ... that claims that Vince Foster was murdered in an apartment owned by Hillary ...

Comment by casey

Fri, 5 Aug 2005 00:21:36 EDT

Dave, I hate to tell you this but he did broadcast over the radio for over two hours that Vince Foster waskilled in an apartment rented by Hillary Clinton and then moved to the Park where his body was found. He then came back and said that the apartment was rented by white house people from Arkansas. Now you can tell me it never happened all you want but I worked second shift so I would listen to Limbaugh while in the bathroom and on my way to work and this day stands out because as soon as I heard it I turned on the TV to see what was happening and there was nothing on.