Re: Rush Limbaugh Belongs in Jail; His "Operation Chaos" is a Violation

Eddie Haskell wrote:
> "Rudy Canoza" <pipes@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:ftydnYo0qoxPMLnVnZ2dnUVZ_i2dnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Eddie Haskell wrote:
>>> "Rudy Canoza" <pipes@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>> news:ptKdnXOxXIk3F7nVnZ2dnUVZ_g6dnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> Eddie Haskell wrote:
>>>>> "Christopher Helms" <Chrishelms132@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>>>>
news:6ff896b3-54b4-4ba4-8a7c-6e5c83aa9f4c@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> On May 8, 5:48 pm, "NoSpam" <f...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>> "beatyerbrainsout" <bill_bone...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
news:a34ec007-2abb-40c2-806c-7bfe7f8eaef9@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>> By Alexander Mooney
>>>>>> CNN
>>>>>>
>>>>>> WA****NGTON (CNN) -- He has publicly urged Republicans to vote for
Sen.
>>>>>> Hillary Clinton to keep the divisive Democratic nomination fight
>>>>>> alive, but talk radio host Rush Limbaugh said Wednesday he really
>>>>>> wants Sen. Barack Obama to be the party's nominee.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rush Limbaugh urged listeners in states with open primaries to
cross
>>>>>> party lines and sup****t Hillary Clinton.
>>>>> If using the public airwaves to incite violence at the Democratic
>>>>> Convention isn't enough to get Limbaugh yanked off the air and
>>>>> prosecuted, it is difficult to imagine what actually would be
enough.
>>>>> The question is not "Did he break the law?" It's "What ****ing
>>>>> difference would it make if he did?"
>>>>>
>>>>> -------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Take a good look at Helms, folks. He's a perfect example of what's
so 
>>>>> dangerous about these liberal fascist cock-suckers.
>>>>>
>>>>> And you can bet your ass the deranged ****wit thinks he's the good
guy 
>>>>> and a guarantor of free speech.
>>>> Extremists of both sides only believe in freedom of speech to the
extent 
>>>> they agree with the speech.
>>> There are a hellava lot more on the left.
>> No, there aren't.
> 
> Yes, there is.

No, there aren't.


> 
>> You're just more sensitive to it coming from there because you're on
the 
>> right.
> 
> No, it's because I see it happen all the time coming from the left and 
> virtually never see it coming from the right.

I doubt you personally see it at all, unless you're on a university 
campus somewhere.


> You NEVER see conservatives 
> shouting people down the way we see on college campuses, and you NEVER
hear 
> conservatives advocating taking liberals off the air because of their
views. 
> Nor do you see republicans advocating legislation to do so.
> 
>>> Shouting down conservatives on college campuses is commonplace
>> No more common than conservatives wanting "dirty" books banned, or
wanting 
>> to lynch flag-burners.
> 
> I cannot remember the last time I heard a conservative advocate
"banning" 
> "dirty books." Give me ONE example.

See my response to Larry in AZ.


> 
> And believing that setting fires is not a constitutional right does not 
> constitute "wanting to lynch flag-burners."

It isn't about "setting fires", and you know it.  It's about what the 
foam-at-the-mouth knuckle-dragging conservatives view as "desecration" 
of the flag, a piece of cloth that foam-at-the-mouth knuckle-dragging 
conservatives view as something holy.

Don't insult our intelligence by pretending it's about public safety 
being threatened by "fires".


> 
>>> and you can bet that should a democrat take office the "fairness 
>>> doctrine" will rear it's ugly head.
>> Yes, they're on record as promoting a resurrection of the UNfairness 
>> doctrine - the doctrine that prevented conservative opinion from being 
>> heard anywhere, even as liberal opinion dominated the "news".
> 
> Give me the equivalent example on the right.
> 
> You can't.

"When Bush went to the Pittsburgh area on Labor Day 2002, 65-year-old 
retired steel worker Bill Neel was there to greet him with a sign 
proclaiming, 'The Bush family must surely love the poor, they made so 
many of us.'

"The local police, at the Secret Service's behest, set up a 'designated 
free-speech zone' on a baseball field surrounded by a chain-link fence a 
third of a mile from the location of Bush's speech.

"The police cleared the path of the motorcade of all critical signs, but 
folks with pro-Bush signs were permitted to line the president's path. 
Neel refused to go to the designated area and was arrested for 
disorderly conduct; the police also confiscated his sign."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/01/04/INGPQ40MB81.DTL&type=printable

Conservatives did that.


> 
>>> I can think of nothing equivalent to either on the right.
>> It's there, but you're blind to it.
> 
> Your attempt at equivocation was sorely lacking. Try again.

No, there was no attempt at equivocation; you don't even know the 
meaning of the word.

Efforts at censor****p are made across the political spectrum, especially 
at the extremes.  They are just as common on the right as on the left.