Countdown Clocks

Countdown Clocks

Posts tagged "Premiere Radio Networks"

From the 07.01.2014 edition of Premiere Radio Networks/Cumulus Media Networks’ The Sean Hannity Show:

Rush Limbaugh’s transphobia gets a big pushback as a caller to his radio show condemns Limbaugh’s usage of such terms. 

From the 05.29.2014 edition of Premiere Radio Network’s The Rush Limbaugh Show

thepoliticalfreakshow:

It’s been a very bad week for talk show host, Rush Limbaugh, and a very rewarding week for the millions of Americans who have protested his extreme hate speech for decades. Two years ago, newer groups like BoycottRush/FlushRush/StopRush began a massive national boycott movement that is exposing Limbaugh and crushing his career. Here are four new recent developments:

1. Politico published an article revealing that Tea Party organizations (some created by the Koch brothers) have contributed millions to Rush Limbaugh. What does this mean? For Rush it means they helped sustain him while thousands of sponsors pulled their ads. It means this may lead to an investigation to see if the funding was done legally. According to the FCC, if you receive money from an organization that pays you to promote their propaganda, without telling your audience, it may be considered ‘payola’ - and it may be illegal.

Politico:


"The Heritage Foundation at the end of January ended its five-year sponsorship of El Rushbo’s show, for which it had paid more than $2 million in some years and more than $9.5 million overall. In 2012, FreedomWorks paid at least $1.4 million to make him an endorser, though it’s not clear that the sponsorship is ongoing."

2. Forbes Senior Political Contributor and regular on Forbes On Fox, Rick Ungar, believes Rush Limbaugh has become a joke. He also shows, via FrontPageMag.com data, that Limbaugh has outlived his audience. Ungar, also known as Forbes ‘token lefty’ implies Rush is now in the, toss out the old - bring in the new, demographic category. The median age of his dwindling audience (as well as the aforementioned sponsor boycott) no longer appeal to advertisers.

Rick Ungar:


"At long last, it appears that Rush Limbaugh has run out of steam. I have to acknowledge that I have sensed Rush getting by on fumes for some time now (yes, I tune into his show from time to time to enjoy his broadcasting skills if not his message). However, it was only recently that the world of Limbaugh crossed that thin red line from partially serious to total self-parody and audience deception—a line crossed from which there is often no return."


FrontPageMag.com:


"Network television doesn’t just fail to count older viewers; it tries to drive them away. A show with an older viewership is dead air. Advertisers have been pushed by ad agencies into an obsession with associating their product with a youthful brand. The demo rating, 18-49, is the only rating that matters. Viewers younger than that can still pay off. Just ask the CW. Older viewers however are unwanted."


3. Speaking of advertisers, Rush Limbaugh can’t seem to hold on to them, without doling out heavy discounts and/or free ad space. After his notorious on-air verbal attack of then unknown, Sandra Fluke, the national protests was set into motion. Hardworking FlushRush volunteers now monitor The Rush Limbaugh Show nationwide. They document the sponsor ads they hear on his show, into the StopRush Database, along with contact and ad details. The sponsor data is then posted back into the FlushRush private Facebook group, and onto the BoycottRush Facebook page for public use. There have been hundreds of articles written about Rush Limbaugh and the boycotts against him, that have appeared in at least a dozen political online news groups, including Liberals Unite and Daily Kos, and have been viewed by millions. The result? Limbaugh and the radio stations that carry him have lost millions in ad revenue. Very few took the Limbaugh boycott seriously two years ago. It reminds me of the Gandhi quote:

Mahatma Gandhi:


"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

4. And lastly; Ed Schultz interviewed Holland Cook this week. Cook believes Limbaugh’s business is over, for good, due to the various organized boycotts mentioned above. Each does their own part. The protests have been supported by many big and small Liberal organizations, websites, Facebook pages/groups, and Twitter.

Holland Cooke: (via Daily Kos)


"Hundreds of blue-chip national advertisers basically have not only wandered away from Rush Limbaugh and some of the other righties, they’ve abandoned the format entirely. They are afraid to be heard on a news talk station because this man’s use of his free speech triggered the opposing viewpoint exercising THEIR right to free speech. The boycotters are speaking and using the marketplace to say, ‘ENOUGH!’"

Here is an audio clip of the Ed Schultz/Holland Cook interview: youtube

So now, we’re not only hearing from consumers, we are hearing from industry experts on the left and right, many of whom know the business better than anyone and would not risk their reputations on merely gossip. Yes, yes, the public has had enough. Limbaugh’s self-proclaimed ‘Dittoheads’/fans demanded that Limbaugh’s right to free speech also gives him the right to spew misogyny, homophobia, bigotry, and racism on public radio. He’s been getting away with it for over 25 years. After the Sandra Fluke attack, the general public soon realized that neither his radio affiliates, nor the FCC, planned to do anything about his hate speech, so American consumers decided to use their own version of free speech via petitions, boycotts, and their consumer dollars, to bring Limbaugh down by way of his sponsors. It’s reported 3,100 companies have pulled their ads from Limbaugh, and the protestors and boycotters have never been closer to pulling Limbaugh off the air. When he has moved on, this country will be all the better, and the public will prove once again, it can be done. We can eliminate hate speech from the media, if takes one host at a time.

You see, you can toss  Americans some Limbaugh, Fox News, Bush/Cheney, Koch brothers, even some Supreme Court corruption, but when push comes to shove, Americans will stand up, show up, take charge, and demand a return to democracy and common decency. Salute to all the many boycotters and volunteers.

To learn more about the Rush Limbaugh boycott/protests, visit:

BoycottRush Facebook Group
Limbaugh Sponsor/Clear Channel/Cumulus Petition
Join The Fight To Flush Rush Facebook Group
The StopRush Extensive Sponsor Database

Will Mark Levin’s vulgar analysis of Hillary Clinton finally be enough to keep top GOP officials off his show?

On the March 21 edition of his radio show, Levin highlighted a Gallup poll showing that the majority of respondents, 18 percent, feel Clinton’s gender is the most positive aspect of her potential presidency. Levin summarized the results by asking "Hillary Clinton’s gender? Do they mean her genitalia is her top 2016 selling point? Is that what that means?" Levin later said "But the key is it’s her genitalia. That’s why so many people would vote for her. I wonder if Bill Clinton would vote for her because of that. He seems to — well, he likes genitalia but maybe not hers."

Levin has a long history of offensive commentary on his radio show. He has accused President Obama of abusing children, compared marriage equality to incest, polygamy, and drug use, compared supporters of the Affordable Care Act to Nazi “brown shirts,” and advocated for Obama to be impeached.

Despite this rhetoric, prominent conservatives have given tacit approval to Levin’s views by appearing on his show. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) called into his show as recently as February. Levin hosted House Budget Committee chairman Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) to talk about the new budget agreement reached in December. Levin criticized Ryan’s budget deal with Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) later that month.

Levin’s hateful rhetoric has also earned him praise from the conservative community — he was recently named the winner of the Conservative Political Action Conference’s Andrew Breitbart Defender of the First Amendment Award. He is also listed as one of the speakers on the NRA’s “Leadership Forum” in April, speaking alongside other prominent conservative GOP leaders like Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R-LA) and Sens. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Marco Rubio (R-FL).

From the 03.21.2014 edition of Premiere Radio Networks’ The Mark Levin Show:

h/t: Olivia Marshall at MMFA

From the 03.18.2014 edition of Premiere Radio Networks’ The Rush Limbaugh Show:

Grow up, Sickobaugh!

justinssportscorner:

From the 02.19.2014 edition of Premiere Radio Networks’ The Rush Limbaugh Show:

Grow up, Rush, and retire for good!

From the 01.17.2014 edition of Premiere Radio Networks’ The Rush Limbaugh Show:

=

Rush Limbaugh overlooked the mechanics of the morning-after pill to liken it to an abortion drug, ignoring that Plan B does not terminate a pregnancy and must be taken within five days of intercourse to be effective.

On the November 25 edition of The Rush Limbaugh Show, host Limbaugh highlighted a European company’s claim that its version of Plan B, the emergency contraceptive pill, may be less effective in women who weigh over 165 pounds. Limbaugh speculated that because of this announcement, a pregnant woman who weighs more than 165 pounds and wants to end her pregnancy must either go on a diet before taking the morning-after pill or get an abortion:

LIMBAUGH: Now we have learned that American women, 166 pounds and up, the Plan B pill doesn’t work. What will their option be? 166, 170 pound woman, pregnant, she wants to go ahead and get her morning-after pill, and then she’s told, ’Sorry, you’re too big. You’re too heavy. It won’t work.’ What are her options? Well, she can either go on a diet, or she can get an abortion.

Limbaugh demonstrates his misunderstanding of the mechanics of female anatomy and emergency contraceptives.

Plan B, the morning-after pill, prevents pregnancy. It works by delaying ovulation and preventing an egg from being released for fertilization, or by immobilizing sperm. It makes sense, then, that the pill must be taken within five days of intercourse to be effective.

It takes a lot more than five days for a woman to know she’s pregnant — tests generally don’t produce positive results until after a missed menstrual cycle. And once a woman is pregnant, Plan B is no longer an option to end the pregnancy. 

h/t: MMFA

Rush Limbaugh invoked a rape analogy on Friday to criticize President Obama’s move to support filibuster reform.

On Thursday, Obama expressed his support for Senate Democrats voting to require just 51 votes — as opposed to 60 — approve judicial and executive nominees. Limbaugh compared them to a group of people where the majority decides it is okay to rape women.

"Let’s forget the Senate for a minute," Limbaugh began. He told his listeners to imagine a group of 10 people with six men and four women. "The group has a rule that the men cannot rape the women," he said. "The group also has a rule that says any rule that will be changed must require six votes, of the 10, to change the rule."

The radio host continued,

"Every now and then, some lunatic in the group proposes to change the rule to allow women to be raped. But they never were able to get six votes for it. There were always the four women voting against it and they always found two guys.Well, the guy that kept proposing that women be raped finally got tired of it, and he was in the majority and he was one that [said], ‘You know what? We’re going to change the rule. Now all we need is five." And well, ‘you can’t do that.’ ‘Yes we are. We’re the majority. We’re changing the rule.’ And then they vote. Can the women be raped? Well, all it would take then is half of the room. You can change the rule to say three. You can change the rule to say three people want it, it’s going to happen."

"When the majority can change the rules there aren’t any," Limbaugh concluded. He added that Obama was only changing the rule because he can’t get "what he wants democratically."

From the 11.22.2013 edition of Premiere Radio Networks’ The Rush Limbaugh Show:

See Also: MMFA: Limbaugh Defends Offensive Rape Comments By Hiding Behind “Absurdity” Defense

h/t: Huffington Post

As the nation mourns the 50th anniversary of the assassination of President John F. Kenney, conservative media figures have attempted to appropriate his legacy and attribute to the beloved former president their conservative ideas and positions. This effort runs counter to Kennedy’s stated positions, speeches, and other historical facts surrounding his presidency.

Kennedy was a self-described “liberal.” In 1960 he accepted the presidential nomination of the New York Liberal Party and said:

What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label “Liberal?” If by “Liberal” they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer’s dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of “Liberal.” But if by a “Liberal” they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a “Liberal,” then I’m proud to say I’m a “Liberal.”

During his presidency, Kennedy was viciously attacked by conservatives. Famously, a flyer labeling him as “Wanted For Treason” was distributed in Dallas the week of the president’s assassination. That flyer accused him of “betraying the Constitution” by “turning the sovereignty of the U.S. over to the communist controlled United Nations.” Referring to Kennedy’s support of civil rights activists, the flyer claimed he had “given support and encouragement to the Communist inspired racial riots.”

Today’s conservatives, by contrast, are in a full-on campaign to claim the slain President as one of their own. It’s no surprise: Kennedy is incredibly popular. A recent Gallup poll found that Americans rate JFK as the “Top Modern President.” 74 percent of respondents ranked Kennedy’s standing in history as “outstanding/above average,” 13 points higher than the next most well-regarded president, Ronald Reagan. Gallup also reported that Kennedy’s presidency has maintained a high approval rating on a consistent basis for over 20 years of polling.

Here are seven right wing media figures who have used the anniversary of the week of Kennedy’s death to try to minimize his liberalism and associate his successes with conservatism.

Glenn Beck: Kennedy Would Be “A Tea Party Radical.” On his November 22 radio show, Glenn Beck claimed that Kennedy has been ”co-opted by the left “and that “if you could bring back the politician JFK was, he wouldn’t be accepted by the Republican Party because he would be a Tea Party radical” who “wouldn’t even recognize what this country has become.”

Rush Limbaugh: Kennedy “Was Not In Any Way A Liberal As You Know Liberals Today.”On his November 21 program, Limbaugh claimed that President Kennedy “was not in any way a liberal as you know liberals today,” citing his support for tax cuts and the fact that he was “proud to be an American.” He added that Kennedy “was not a big believer in the Civil Rights Act.”

In fact, President Kennedy called on Congress to pass the 1964 Civil Rights Act in a speech on June 11, 1963.  As the bill was debated on the floor of the Senate, his brother Sen. Ted Kennedy said, “My brother was the first President of the United States to state publicly that segregation was morally wrong. His heart and his soul are in this bill.”

Chris Wallace: “There Is A Growing Body Of Thought That In Fact President Kennedy Was Quite Conservative.” During an interview on the November 17 Fox News Sunday with Kennedy’s niece Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, host Chris Wallace claimed that “there’s a growing body of thought that in fact President Kennedy was quite conservative in some of his policies.” Wallace claimed Kennedy “believed that tax cuts spur the economy.”

In response, Townsend laughed and noted that while conservatives often cite President Kennedy’s support for lowering taxes, the 70 percent top marginal tax rate he favored is way above the current top rate that most conservatives still claim is too high.

[…]

Breitbart.com’s AWR Hawkins Highlights JFK’s “Lifetime Membership In The NRA and His Defense of the Second Amendment.” Breitbart’s AWR Hawkins wrote that “two aspects” of Kennedy’s legacy “that are not getting the attention they deserve are his lifetime membership in the NRA and his defense of the Second Amendment.”

While President Kennedy was a member of the organization, the organization at the time was much more focused on “hunting, conservation and marksmanship” than the strident opposition to gun legislation that has become that group’s stock in trade. The Gun Control Act of 1968, a federal law dramatically expanding the regulation of the firearms industry and firearms owners, was passed in part due to outrage over the killings of John Kennedy and his brother Robert.

At a ceremony where former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords was given a JFK Profile in Courage Award in May, Kennedy’s daughter Caroline (now the U.S. ambassador to Japan) noted that “our family is still suffering from the heartbreak caused by gun violence.”

h/t: MMFA

(via Boss Limbaugh: “Hispanics And African Americans Have The Democratic Party As Their ‘Sugar Daddies’” | Video | Media Matters for America)

Par the course for Limbaugh. And you, Mr. Lardassbaugh, are a sugar daddy for the Oxycontin industry.