Raising The Clark Bar
October 3, 2007 at 8:46 am
Some intriguing logic going on in Wesley Clark’s e-mail letter campaign urging Congress to remove Rush Limbaugh from Armed Forces Radio Network. Quite a daunting standard he’s suggesting we impose on taxpayer-funded speech.
Here’s Gen. Clark’s language:
Rush Limbaugh’s show is aired on Armed Forces Radio, which is funded by taxpayers’ dollars.
Fair enough. But if the involvement of taxpayers’ money is the standard by which we block the broadcasting of differing and disagreeable opinion, wouldn’t Congress have long ago blocked funding of Voice of America? In fact, in fulfilling its statutory mission, VOA broadcasts disagreeable content to other countries and other populations, not our own folks.
Clark also writes:
As a member of Congress, you can prevent Limbaugh from further disrespecting and censoring the voices of our soldiers on the military airwaves.
OK. But if Congress is going to get in the middle of a content debate, might they also be urged to see that balance is restored — heck, established — in public broadcasting, also a taxpayers’ expense?
The ghost of H.V. Kaltenborn said,
October 3, 2007 @ 8:58 am
If they took Rush Limbaugh off AFR Network there would be such an outcry by the troops…. the only reason it went on their in the first place is that the TROOPS themselves wanted it there. If you doubt me, put Randi Rhodes on AFR and see what happens.
Roger Rainey said,
October 3, 2007 @ 9:55 am
or even ask soldiers who listen to AFR if they want Rush gone? 20 :1 says they would overwhelmingly want him to stay.
Da Coyote said,
October 3, 2007 @ 10:01 am
West Point must dream of taking this looser’s name of the grad list, just as the Naval Academy doesn’t like to think about Carter. Clark is an example of the fact that - even with the strict standards of USMA, the 6 sigma to the left moral loosers can somehow occasionally sneak through. So, one of the few generals to be fired due to incompetance gets to tell the armed forces radio network what to broadcast. Hello?
Artbyruth said,
October 3, 2007 @ 10:08 am
Clarks writes: As a member of Congress, you can prevent Limbaugh from further disrespecting and censoring the voices of our soldiers on the military airwaves.
By censoring a private citizen and taking away his freedom of speech?
Won’t this set a dangerous precedent: Congress can censor private citizens….
Smells like Socialism……
Steve said,
October 3, 2007 @ 10:17 am
The same folks who would censor Rush would take public broadcasting’s claim of neutrality at face value.
Clark said,
October 3, 2007 @ 10:22 am
I find a lot of what gets on PBS “disrespecting and censoring the voices of our soldiers on the military airwaves.” Maybe we should start a campaign in sad-SAC Wesley Clark’s name to get Bill Moyers off PBS!
Gunga said,
October 3, 2007 @ 10:24 am
…and we care what Wes Clark thinks about anything because?
Roger says it straight…Dingy Harry, Candybar Clark, and Lurch Kerry (who ought to know a phoney soldier from his many Vietnam-era photo-ops with one) will learn the meaning of blow-back if they ever ask our servicemen their opinion on this subject.
JeanE said,
October 3, 2007 @ 10:39 am
While Clark is correct that Armed Forces Radio is paid for by the taxpayers, I believe Rush permits them to broadcast his show for FREE because the troops have requested the program. AFR won’t broadcast the entire 3 hour program, only 1 hour, so a couple of years ago he modified his program format a bit to try to get the things the troops were interested in into the first hour of the show.
If we can trust the military to properly handle the guns and bombs that are paid for with taxpayer dollars, surely we can trust them to choose what to broadcast on their radio network.
crypticguise said,
October 3, 2007 @ 10:53 am
Anyone listenng to Rush for the shortest period of time knows that not only does Rush love our troops, but he constantly reports things positive about our Military.
On the other hand, the politicians and ex military types attacking Rush are reviled by the Troops.
Keep up the great work, Rush! Wesley Clark? Didn’t he get kicked off his job for his performance or lack thereof?
PD Quig said,
October 3, 2007 @ 11:01 am
How about a simple poll question to the troops (Rush says he’ll pay for 50%):
Who does more to support the troops a) the Senate Democrats b) Rush Limbaugh?
Any other questions?
Rush Babe said,
October 3, 2007 @ 11:20 am
Leave Rush Limbaugh ALONE! RIGHT NOW!
moptop said,
October 3, 2007 @ 11:35 am
Anybody have a clue as to how Rush “censors” the troops? Is he really “the man who runs America” I thought that was just a spoof, but if Wesly “Frenchie” Clark says it, it must be true.
Steve said,
October 3, 2007 @ 11:38 am
I actually don’t understand what all the liberal fuss on this is about, and I find Harry Reid’s speechmaking on this very disconcerting, but…
The relationship between Congress and the AFRN is similar to the relationship between Clear Channel’s board and Clear Channel’s stations. In that sense, Clark is not calling for censorship or for the Fairness Doctrine. He’s merely saying that the governing body of a radio station should manage its own content in a certain way.
On a side note, the Republican party was once the party of intellectual cohorence, standing on the shoulders of giants such as Hobbes, Locke, Burke, Hayek and others (with the Democrats reading Marx–and only Marx–while they hid in the closet). Government meddling in pocketbooks and lives were bad. States and localities were better mechanisms for governance. Nation-building was bad.
Now, the Republican party finds itself mired in tautologies. We’re not against “big government,” anymore. We’re “Compassionate Conservatives.” We’re against “everything that’s bad.” And “everything that’s bad” is defined as everything that’s bad. Luckily, we’re also for “everything that’s good,” which is defined as…well, you get the picture.
As near as I can tell, the only things the Republican party have going for it are Jeff Flake, Tom Coburn and the fact that we’re less weird than your average activist Democrats.
Despite his valuable work in making a wide audience fear and loathe Hillary Clinton, Rush Limbaugh bears as much responsibility for this as anyone alive. I hope no one listens to him ever again (after all, no one’s listening to what reclusive druggies like Robert Downie Jr. and Dennis Hopper have to say about politics).
But, then again, fool or no, if he’s popular among the troops, how does Congress justify his removal from the playlist?
Diggs said,
October 3, 2007 @ 11:42 am
Wesley Clark has the right to call for censoring Rush off of AFN. It’s called Freedom of Speech. That some folks, like Wesley, use it to announce their stupidity to a national audience is irrelevant to whether he has the right or not.
What is relevant (at least to this career Army officer) is that a former General of the United States Army has absolutely no idea what his soldiers like to listen to, or that he doesn’t care. I’m guessing that the Army term “dirtbag” would fit any senior officer who either didn’t know about, or didn’t care about, the very troops they used to command.
Rush Babe said,
October 3, 2007 @ 11:50 am
I said LEAVE RUSH LIMBAUGH ALONE! RIGHT NOW!
Jason Van Steenwyk said,
October 3, 2007 @ 12:31 pm
I SAAAAAAIIIIIID We got WIIIIINNNGGGNUUUUUUTS on the AIR!!!!
(We gotta get these muthaf___ing WINGNUTS off the mothaf___ing AIR!!!!!!!)
David Block said,
October 3, 2007 @ 1:55 pm
Gee, then we should shut down NPR and PBS. For similar reasons, like their constant “Global Waming” propaganda pieces and for refusing to let Juan Williams interview Bush. Nopt, nothing politcal there, move along now.