March 22nd, 2012
There are a number of ways to fight back against these Leftist free-speech killers who are, oddly enough, leaving Bill Maher completely alone.
You can contact your radio station, via email, phone calls etc. and simply tell them that if Limbaugh is pulled, you won't listen to their station anymore.
You can also stop buying from advertisers who have pulled ads from Rush's show, and let them know that you will not be buying from them. But make no mistake, this is part of the battle for America and you simply cannot sit back any longer and let the Progressives have their way yet again.
It's time to take pro-active measures NOW. Fight for Rush and fight for Freedom. If you feel the need to act, do not hesitate, do not tarry, just do it.
Believe me, you will respect yourself "for it" in ways that you simply cannot imagine, take it from me....you're doing this not totally for Rush, and not for any personal self-interests...you're doing it for your Country, your way of life, and your children and grand-children...
That is important to you, right?
NEW YORK (AP) — Rush Limbaugh's opponents are starting a radio campaign against him Thursday, seizing upon the radio star's attack of a Georgetown law student as a "slut" to make a long-term effort aimed at weakening his business.
The liberal Media Matters for America is using a past campaign against Glenn Beck as a template. In Limbaugh, however, they're going after bigger game. He's already fighting back and the group's stance has provoked concerns that an effort to silence someone for objectionable talk is in itself objectionable.
Media Matters is spending at least $100,000 for two advertisements that will run in eight cities.
The ads use Limbaugh's own words about student Sandra Fluke, who told congressional Democrats that contraception should be paid for in health plans. Limbaugh, on his radio programs, suggested Fluke wanted to be paid to have sex, which made her a "slut" and a "prostitute." In return for the money, he said Fluke should post videos of herself having sex. Under sharp criticism, Limbaugh later apologized.
In one of the anti-Limbaugh ads, listeners are urged to call the local station that carries Limbaugh to say "we don't talk to women like that" in our city.
Ad time was purchased in Boston; Chicago; Detroit; Seattle; Milwaukee; St. Louis; Macon, Ga.; and Cedar Rapids, Iowa. The cities were selected to support active local campaigns against Limbaugh or because of perceptions Limbaugh may be vulnerable in that market, said Angelo Carusone of Media Matters.
"What we're really looking for is a way to demonstrate the persistence of the effort and the fact that it is on a wide scale," Carusone said.
A spokeswoman for Premiere Radio Networks, which syndicates Limbaugh's show to nearly 600 radio stations nationally, said Media Matters has gone beyond criticism of Limbaugh's words to an attempt to silence him and intimidate advertisers.
"This is not about women," said Rachel Nelson, Premiere spokeswoman. "It's not about ethics and it's not about the nature of our public discourse. It's a direct attack on America's guaranteed First Amendment right to free speech. It's essentially a call for censorship masquerading as high-minded indignation."
Limbaugh, on his radio show Wednesday, said he's being targeted in an attack that was long-planned — not mentioning it was his words that lit the fuse.
From The Democraticunderground.com website
Song..."Kill Rush Limbaugh" by Détente
I love good grunge, and "Kill Rush Limbaugh" is as satisfying as it gets.
We should have MORE songs like this. While I don't advocate violence, I advocate getting Rush off the air ANY WAY LEGAL. So it's no mystery why more and more songs like this will come out.
Until the republican party is BANNED, expect more of this. Pure and simple.
"They're not even really offended by what happened," he said. "This is just an opportunity to execute a plan they've had in their drawer since 2009."
Determining how much of a financial impact the Fluke comments have already had on Limbaugh is murky business.
Radio stations in Hawaii and Massachusetts have dropped his show. Media Matters claims that 58 companies have specifically asked that their ads be excluded from Limbaugh's show. Radio-Info.com's TRI Newsletter said Premiere has circulated a list of 98 advertisers who want to avoid "environments likely to stir negative sentiments," essentially all politically pointed talk shows.
There's more. TRI also said a group with several stations that air Limbaugh sent out a list of 31 advertisers who don't want to be on Limbaugh's show.
Premiere notes that a list is sent out four times a year reminding stations of advertisers who don't want to be part of controversial programming, and suggests a reported exodus is exaggerated. The company offered no list of its own, or a comparison that could show advertisers resistant to Limbaugh or other controversial shows that predated the Fluke comments.
Some companies said not to want to advertise within Limbaugh's program — JC Penney, NAPA Auto Parts, Chapstick, Gold Bond, Green Mountain Coffee — did not respond to requests to clarify their policies. One company listed, NBC-TV, said the network was unaware of any policy or past efforts to advertise with Limbaugh.
Valerie Geller, a veteran radio consultant who worked at Limbaugh's WABC flagship in New York, said it appears that advertising money coming into Limbaugh's show is slowing down. "I think it's a very big wakeup call," she said.
Whether the advertisers return is another question. Limbaugh has a daily audience estimated at between 2 million and 3 million people, according to Talkers magazine.
"I suspect some people will permanently stay away," said Tom Taylor, executive editor at Radio-Info.com. "I suspect some people will drift back to Rush. What you won't see is a press release of someone saying, 'Hey, we're back with Rush!'"
While a law student, Carusone was active in a campaign to reach Beck's advertisers that began after the commentator said in July 2009 that President Barack Obama had "a deep-seated hatred for white people." Eventually, more than 400 advertisers said they didn't want to be part of Beck's show and, for Fox, the ad revenue was nowhere near what would be expected for a TV show as popular as Beck's. When Beck left Fox in June 2011 to take his show to the Web, the parting was mutual.
The idea with Limbaugh is similar: take advertisers away so rates go down, Carusone said. Couple that with the need to keep track of ever-changing lists of who will advertise with Limbaugh and who won't, and Media Matters hopes that station managers, market by market, may someday conclude that it's just not worth the trouble.
Conveniently, many stations will soon have a choice. Former GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee is launching his own syndicated radio show in April that will air at the same time as Limbaugh's, and Huckabee's backers are touting the show as a more civilized alternative.
Beyond the First Amendment concerns, industry experts like Talkers magazine publisher Michael Harrision are concerned that Media Matters' effort will simpy take some advertisers out of radio altogether when they have different options.
Carusone said Limbaugh has a chilling effect of his own. "There are plenty of people who self-censor out of fear that Mr. Limbaugh will smear them," he said.
The means of protest puts Media Matters and the conservative Media Research Center in the unlikely position of agreeing with each other. Brent Bozell, founder of the conservative media watchdog, said his group also informs advertisers of things it considers objectionable.
"We all have free speech," Bozell said.
That's where the agreement stops. Bozell this week called on MSNBC chief Phil Griffin to resign, citing objectionable things said in the past by Ed Schultz and Al Sharpton, both MSNBC show hosts. It's in part retaliation for attacks on Limbaugh, he said. The Fluke story was covered extensively by MSNBC.
"There's a great sense of selective outrage that is going on here," he said.
Copyright © 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
- New anti-Rush Limbaugh ad campaign: Waste of money or coup de grace?
Christian Science Monitor - 8 hours ago
- Rush Limbaugh through the years
Sacramento Bee - 4 hours ago
- Radio campaign next step against Rush Limbaugh
March 22nd, 2012
by Jerome Corsi
After months of searching, investigators commissioned by Maricopa County, Ariz., Sheriff Joe Arpaio to examine Barack Obama’s eligibility for office found Immigration and Naturalization Service travel records for foreign flights into Hawaii in 1961, only to discover that records for the week of Obama’s birth were missing.
Investigators were searching to determine if Barack Obama might have been born in a foreign country and returned to Honolulu in or around August 1961 with his mother, Ann Dunham.
Arpaio’s team looked at databases in the National Archives and Records Administration with microfilm of INS passenger records for foreign flights arriving in Honolulu and New York City.
If Obama was not born in Hawaii, as he and the Hawaii Department of Health have been insisting, there should be INS passenger cards that the new mother filled out for herself and her infant son upon arrival in Honolulu from a Pacific Rim city or arrival in New York City from across the Atlantic.
Arpaio launched the investigation after being presented with a petition signed by 250 members of the Surprise Tea Party in Surprise, Ariz. He authorized a volunteer Cold Case Posse of former law enforcement officers and detectives in October 2011 to examine the authenticity of Obama’s long-form birth certificate and to determine Obama’s eligibility to be president under Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution.
Before he was first elected Maricopa County sheriff in 1993, Arpaio spent 25 years with the Drug Enforcement Administration, including service as DEA regional director in Mexico City and special agent in charge in Phoenix. He is running for re-election to his sixth term as Maricopa County sheriff.
As WND reported, Arpaio’s team found probable cause that the document presented one year ago as Barack Obama’s birth certificate is a forgery. WND reported yesterday that Arpaio asked Selective Service Director Lawrence Romo in a letter to produce original documentation of Obama’s Selective Service registration, noting his team’s finding that there is probable cause that it, too, was forged.
After INS passenger records for foreign flights entering the U.S. through Hawaii in a database identified as “A3573″ were found, Arpaio’s investigators found a second database, designated as “A3998,” with comparable INS records for foreign flights arriving at New York City’s Idlewild Airport.
One complication was that the National Archives and Records Administration, or NARA, held only the original microfilm records for INS 1961 airline passenger record. Since the original microfilm records were often the only existing copies of the passenger manifests, NARA would not permit them to be viewed by researchers. The intent was to protect the originals from being scratched or damaged, especially by placing them on a microfilm reel or copier.
Finally, NARA agreed to produce microfilm copies of 24 reels of records for the time period from July 1961 through September 1961.
Subsequently, 28 microfilm reels from A3998 records of INS passenger cards for foreign flights arriving at New York’s Idlewild Airport in August 1961 were copied by NARA and made available for examination at the National Archives in Washington, D.C.
To date, researchers are waiting for the additional 1961 records for both datasets to be copied by NARA and made available for inspection at the National Archives.
Obama birth-week records missing
Investigators examining the microfilm records found only one week of INS passenger cards to be completely missing in all the records so far examined.
In some sequences of cards, the records were blurred or overlapped each other, obscuring the data.
Specifically, in Record Group A 3573, data records for Aug. 2, 1961 through Aug. 7, 1961, appear to be completely missing, as if the records were removed from the database prior to the microfilm recording.
Exhibit A shows NARA Record Group A3573, Reel 184, for INS passenger records on foreign flights into Honolulu from July 28, 1961 through Aug. 7, 1961.
Exhibit B shows NARA Record Group A3573, Reel 185, INS passenger records on foreign flights into Honolulu from Aug. 8 through Aug. 12, 1961.
Remarkably, all INS records for the week of Obama’s birth, Aug. 1 through Aug. 7, 1961, were missing from the end of Reel 184 and were not discovered anywhere on Reel 185 or any other microfilm reel in the record group.
Exhibit C is a Photostat printout of what the end of Reel 184 looks like.
While the printout is only partial, what can be observed is one of the two or three INS cards in the records from Aug. 1, 1961. The reel ends with about 10 inches of white blurs and black space, without any other records from Aug. 1 to Aug. 7, 1961, despite the written documentation to the contrary on the microfilm reel’s box.
In a series of emails beginning Nov. 21, 2011, investigators notified NARA archive reference specialists of the missing dates. NARA specialists in Washington, D.C., checked with the NARA employees in College Park, Md., who had made the duplicate microfilm reels for public inspection.
College Park NARA officials found the INS passenger records in Record Group A3573, Reels 184 and 185, were also missing in the original microfilm reels. No INS original paper documents could be found for 1961.
In the Feb. 6 letter, Brenda Beasley Kepley, chief of NARA’s Archives 1 Processing Section, acknowledged that passenger records for Record Group A3573, Rolls 184 and 185, covering the period July 28 through Aug. 12, 1961, had been filmed by the INS in August 1961, and the original paper records were not retained.
Kepley acknowledged that the records for the period Aug. 2 through Aug. 7, 1961, were missing. She argued that the missing data was due to poor quality control that allowed multiple cards to be fed through a document feeder and become bunched together, obscuring the images underneath.
“Apparently no quality control was done at the time of filming to check for these errors,” Kepley wrote. “Consequently, it is difficult to determine whether or not images of cards for the period August 2 through August 7 exist on Roll 184. If they do, they are unreadable.”
The Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office ordered and obtained duplicate microfilm of Rolls 184 and 185 to be placed into evidence.
Investigators examining both microfilm rolls determined that the 10 inches of microfilm filled by white blurs and blank space would have been a fraction of the microfilm inches needed had records been intact for all foreign flights arriving in Honolulu Aug. 2 through Aug. 7, 1961.
While a few bunched records are observed at the end of Reel 184, investigators did not find evidence of the volume of INS passenger record cards that would have been present had the records been microfilmed.
The bunching up of several hundred INS passenger card records for the dozens of flights arriving in Hawaii Aug. 2 through Aug. 7, 1961 would have constituted a major collapse in the document feeding mechanism that could not possibly have gone unnoticed by the microfilm technicians making the archive record from the physical paper copies.
MCSO investigators concluded that the NARA explanation of bunched up and overlapping records caused by a defective document feeder was not a credible explanation for what was observed on the two microfilm reels.
Reel 185 begins with Aug. 8, 1961, with minimal and expected blank lead microfilm and with no trace of bunched or overlapping records from previous dates.
Instead, MCSO investigators have concluded that the INS passenger records for the dates Aug. 2 – Aug. 7, 1961 are missing from NARA Record Group A3575 for reasons that remain unexplained.
MCSO investigators are currently waiting for NARA to duplicate the remaining 1961 INS passenger cards in both record groups for subsequent inspection at the National Archives in Washington, D.C.
Editor’s Note: Arpaio’s team authorized WND’s Jerome Corsi to examine the INS documents at the National Archives.
March 22nd, 2012
The Los Angeles Times / Paul Whitefield
Could it be that 21st century technology is about to solve two of mankind’s greatest mysteries: Why people go bald, and what happened to Amelia Earhart?
I certainly hope so, given the history of male-pattern baldness in my family, not to mention the many times I’ve turned to people at parties and said, “I wonder what really did happen to Amelia Earhart.”
The baldness equation apparently turns out to be quite simple. My colleague Melissa Healy explained it fully, but here’s the shorthand version (pay attention, there’ll be a quiz later):
The prostaglandin PGD2 is found in large supply in bald spots; the receptor, or cellular landing dock, for PGD2 is called GPR44. Block that receptor and you’ve blocked baldness.
Or, for you math types: PGD2-GPR44=(MAN)18!
(I know, you thought a prostaglandin and a cellular landing dock were things from “Star Trek.” But that’s why you and I didn’t get into Caltech.)
To put the equation in business terms, NoGoBald=Viagra(profits)squared.
We may not be able to cure cancer, but we’re all over the two things men care most about. I just hope that there’s government funding involved -- it sounds like a much better bet than bailing out GM and Chrysler or funding that silly solar energy stuff.
Speaking of the government, there’s the Earhart mystery. The famed aviator disappeared 75 years ago in the South Pacific, and her tale has captivated millions (thousands? hundreds?) since.
Now, some folks from the International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery have enhanced a photo from 1937 that they say shows what may be the landing gear of her plane near the island of Nikumaroro, in what is now the nation of Kiribati.
At a State Department event, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood “gave the privately funded project their support,” the Associated Press reported.
They probably added that part about private funding to allay the fears of those who remember that, in 1937, that other great socialist president, Franklin Roosevelt, sent nine Navy ships and 66 aircraft to search for her at a cost of more than $4 million. (That’s what, about $60 gazillion in today’s dollars? Sheesh -- that and Social Security too!)
So, I understand why Clinton took time out this week from worrying about Iran and Afghanistan and Russia and China to worry about Kiribati and Earhart.
But I’m wondering why the Transportation secretary wanted to be part of a project that involved an air crash. Does he think someone is going to sue?
Still, here’s hoping they turn up the plane, or parts of it, or something conclusive.
Although, given the never-say-die “birther” conspiracy, I doubt anyone will be convinced of Earhart’s fate unless they bring back the plane, her body and a note saying:
“Oops. I crashed here. It’s 1937. Send help.
P.S. Hurry. Fred's going bald."
March 22nd, 2012
The Washington Times / Jacquie Kubin
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
WASHINGTON, March 22, 2012—This may be the end of Rush Limbaugh, if Media Matters and the Liberal left have their way. Founded by journalist David Brock, Media Matters for America is a fully revealed Democratic political operative. Brock created the group with the intent to use its bully pulpit to discredit the Republican Party, its members and any and all conservative media.
Which is perfectly legitimate. Its tactics, however, are less than honorable.
Media Matters for America is a non-profit group, meaning that it enjoys certain tax credits and benefits in its self-described quest as "progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media."
Brock’s most recent actions are two radio advertisements that will air in eight cities in which Limbaugh’s statements in regard to Georgetown University student, and 30-year-old adult, Sandra Fluke’s demand that all insurance providers, employers and academia alike, regardless of religious affiliation or anti-bias, pay for birth control for her and all other women.
Being the spokesperson for yet another Obama policy put Fluke directly in Limbaugh’s sites and removed her legal protection as a private citizen. It is well reported that she is not just “a student” but also a liberal activist.
Brock’s actions have nothing to do with Fluke, or Limbaugh’s statements that weere no more or less objectionable than things routinely uttered by Bill Maher, Michael Moore, Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz, and others, all of whom have slung arrows of hatred calling women and conservatives all manners of epitaphs, including Maher referring to Sarah Palin as a “c***t:
“The bit I did about Palin using the word c-, one of the biggest laughs in my act, I did it all over the country, not one person ever registered disapproval, and believe me, audiences are not afraid to let you know. Because it was a routine where that word came in at just the right moment. Context is very important, and it’s also important to remember that stand-up comedy is the final frontier of free speech.”
Maher hides behind his title of comedian, but he is no less an opinion maker and talk show host than Limbaugh and therefore needs to be held to the same standards.
Ed Schultz called conservative talk show host Laura Ingraham a “slut” without reprisal or conservative talk show hosts demanding that advertisers run for the hills, as Media Matters is demanding that advertisers boycott Rush Limbaugh’s show.
A spokeswoman for Premiere Radio Networks, which syndicates Limbaugh’s show to nearly 600 radio stations nationally, said Media Matters has gone beyond criticism of Limbaugh’s words to an attempt to silence him and intimidate advertisers.
“This is not about women,” said Rachel Nelson, Premiere spokeswoman. “It’s not about ethics and it’s not about the nature of our public discourse. It’s a direct attack on America’s guaranteed First Amendment right to free speech. It’s essentially a call for censorship masquerading as high-minded indignation.”
Angelo Carusone of Media Matters says that ad time is purchased in Boston, Chicago, Detroit, Seattle, Milwaukee, St. Louism Macon, Georgia, and Cedar Rapids, Iowa. These cities were selected to support active local campaigns against Limbaugh, or because of perceptions Limbaugh may be vulnerable to cancellation in these radio markets.
Carusone says that, similar to the campaign against Glenn Beck that led to his separation from Fox Television, by keeping track of Limbaugh’s advertisers Media Matters hopes to influence station managers ‘market by market’ making it not worth the hassle to advertise on the show.
Media Matters, Brock, Carusone and the Democratic/Liberal party members may take Limbaugh down, First Amendment Rights be damned. However they won’t silence the voice of Conservative media or opinion.
Popular host and former GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee is launching his own syndicated radio show in April that will air at the same time as Limbaugh’s.
L. Brent Bozell, president and founder of the Media Research Center, has reached out to MSNBC chief Phil Griffin to point out what can only be viewed as the hypocrisy in Media Matters for America and liberal media’s attacks on conservative counterparts.
Citing objectionable things said in the past by Ed Schultz and Al Sharpton, both MSNBC show hosts, Bozell has said “this isn’t about what Rush said last week, it’s about roaring hypocrisy and it’s about censorship.”
Bozell has launched istandwithrush.org to show the group's support for Limbaugh who Bozell says “has been singled out and condemned across the board by the national media.”
In his op-ed on FoxNews.com Bozell says that “liberals want this government-mandate controversy to be not about religious liberty, which is devastating, but about contraceptives, which works in their favor.”
“To the Left,” he writes, “this is simply an opportunity to put their attacks on religious liberty in a feminist frame, and an opportunity to try and shut down Limbaugh. It is all about censorship and hypocrisy.”
“There’s a great sense of selective outrage that is going on here,” Bozell says.
- Ron Paul reveals benefits of brokered convention on Jay Leno (Video)
- Dancing With The Stars 2012: Surprising week 1 results
- A Christian reply to "animal rights"
- Florida Justice Department and FBI will review death of Trayvon Martin
- Trayvon Martin not a 2nd Amendment case, Black parents say he could have been their kid
- Trayvon Martin is the latest social media tragedy
- Ron Pauls caucus strategy is authentic republicanism
- Dancing With The Stars 2012: Urkel, Knight, Levy, Menounos hit the floor
- Etch A Sketch and Mitt Romney: the silliness of the Republicans (Videos)
- Rush Limbaugh in Liberal crosshairs: First Amendment rights be damned
March 22nd, 2012
BLS Note: Using the term property seizure is correct, in this case, as the Sacketts, and many others, once approached by the EPA, can do nothing with their property and will be fined tremendous amounts of money by the EPA.
Congratulations to the Sacketts and thank you to the Supremes, all nine, for upholding the most basic of US Liberties as sacrosanct.
Nashville Business Journal
by Kent Hoover, Washington Bureau Chief
It unanimously ruled Wednesday that Mike and Chantell Sackett have the right to challenge an EPA decision that their lot near an Idaho lake was a wetland subject to regulation under the Clean Water Act. The couple had filled part of their lot with dirt and rock in order to build a house there. The EPA ordered them to stop construction and restore the land to its original condition.
The Sacketts asked the agency to reconsider its decision, but the agency rejected their request. The couple then attempted to contest the EPA decision in court, but lower-court judges ruled the EPA’s compliance orders are not subject to judicial review.
The justices on the U.S. Supreme Court disagreed.
"There is no reason to think that the Clean Water Act was uniquely designed to enable the strong-arming of regulated parties into ‘voluntary compliance’ without the opportunity for review -- even judicial review of the question whether the regulated party is within the EPA's jurisdiction," wrote Justice Antonin Scalia.
The National Federation of Independent Business , which filed an amicus brief in support of the Sacketts, said the court's decision in Sackett v. EPA was a major victory for small business owners.
"Property rights are of enormous import to the hundreds of thousands of small business owners who rely on their property for the success of their businesses," said Karen Harned, executive director of NFIB’s Small Business Legal Center. "In ruling [Wednesday] that individuals can challenge the EPA in court before being penalized or forced into compliance, the justices have assured landowners that their constitutional right to seek judicial review of government orders is inalienable. The extraordinary costs, administrative burdens and other punitive measures that can cripple small businesses are no longer an inevitability for the men and women of Main Street."
See all your followed company news on your personalized dashboard.
To access the full benefits of bizWatch and receive a weekly email with aggregated news on all the companies you are following, please provide your email address below.
Recent posts at :
- Police believe three shoplifting rings active in Nashville
- VW adding more jobs in Chattanooga
- FedEx Ground to pay $3M fine to settle Labor Department dispute