I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it.
I won’t,however, defend the idea that other people need to support its broadcast by purchasing advertising…
I can’t find the actual poll and the OP didn’t link to it. Googling “cnn rush limbaugh poll” just brings me back to this thread.
Not to mention, consider all the times 2-3 years ago when some GOP legislator would express disagreement with Rush on some issue, and Rush would make him or her grovel.
And even with respect to the Sandra Fluke business, there have really only been a couple of genuinely strong denunciations of what Rush said from GOP politicians, as best as I can tell: once you get past Scott Brown, the denunciations quickly wimp down towards Romney’s ‘I wouldn’t have gone with that particular word choice.’ If, say, the fifth-strongest denunciation of Rush with respect to Fluke by a GOP Congresscritter or governor is already pretty milquetoasty, then the GOP hasn’t sought to put much daylight in between Rush and itself.
It’s CNN. It’s not exactly the Christian Science Monitor. Hell, it’s not exactly even NPR. The point of the question is to get eyeballs on their website, not to engage in serious journalism. Getting mad at CNN for mixing a lot of brainless crap in with their reporting is like getting mad that there are so many marshmallows in your box of Lucky Charms.
What’s the big deal? It was just a poorly-designed poll – no crucifixion option.
It’s not a big deal, but it gives a certain insight into what some folks might be thinking. I saw the poll earlier on CNN when I was reading through the headlines in the air port and took the poll…and was equally shocked like the OP that seemingly so many folks thought it was a good idea to have the FCC intervene in the matter of the Rushster. Granted, as many have said, this wasn’t exactly a scientific poll, and perhaps folks just click as some sort of thumbs up/thumbs down thingy, and aren’t really thinking about what they are saying there or the ramifications. But, I have to wonder…how many people DO think that this is a good idea, and don’t really see or maybe even care about the slippery slope aspect of all of this. You do have to wonder sometimes when you see stuff like this, because, consider…why DO seemingly so many folks listen to Rush in the first place? I mean, if he and what he says was really unpopular, broadly speaking, then he wouldn’t last very long on the radio…just like left wing imitators (or even some right wing imitators) haven’t lasted long. The market place and all that jazz. So he must be striking a pretty broad based cord with someone out there in America-land (and, IIRC, his show actually is broadcast in other countries than the US, though I’ve never heard it’s very popular outside of the US…still, if my notoriously faulty memory is right here, SOMEONE out there is listening to the idiot)…which might also mean that, conversely, counter Rush’ey idiots out there who think an FCC ban of someone they dislike is, perhaps, not such a bad idea, because they are unable to really see the ramifications of such a course.
Or, it could simply be that people reflexively click on stupid polls like that one without really thinking through the question. I generally respond to the CNN polls because, well, it’s right there on the home page, and I’m interested in seeing how my own answers match up with other people who follow the web site. Mostly the answers are pretty middle of the road, and pretty similar to my own…but sometimes you get something like this that is just off the wall. The QUESTION was pretty much off the wall, and says something right there…that CNN, or someone in charge of the CNN webpage, actually thought it a worthy question to ASK people about.
-XT
This hit the nail on the head.
I really don’t see why it does, for reasons that have been given by other posters. Given that we’re talking about CNN viewers, it seems quite plausible that a lot of them aren’t even thinking seriously about the notion of actual censorship in this case, so much as indicating their disapproval of the guy which, in this matter, seems like something everyone can agree on no matter their politics.
It’s a leap to go from there to assuming that a large minority of the American public actually wants the government to ban undesirables from broadcasting.
At the risk of sounding like I hate our freedom, depending on my mood and knowing that it was a CNN poll and not a ballot, I could conceivably have clicked yes, and thought “and they should put the motherfucker in stocks in the town square so the rest of us can walk up and piss on his fat face” as I did so, without truly meaning either sentiment.
Is it equally a leap to think that a large minority of the American public believe the stuff Limbaugh spews out as well? It seems equally plausible to me that quite a few folk don’t see the ramifications of such actions and would cheerfully go along with such sentiments if they simply think the person they are banning is wrong, full of shit, or spewing out hateful things, without a moments thought of the deeper consequences.
Well, hopefully a large majority of CNN poll takers were equally thoughtless, and don’t REALLY feel that the FCC should take an active hand in banning even the likes of Rushiebaby. It’s interesting though that someone at CNN thought it meaningful enough to pose the question in a poll though, to my suspicious and jaded mind anyway.
-XT
Yet again, I don’t see what’s surprising about this. They want a poll that’ll get people to pull up CNN on their phones or whatever and click and get an ad impression. They’re not asking out of genuine journalistic intent – it’s just a tool to get more people to engage more with the CNN brand.
This poses some practical as well as hygienic challenges. Typically, in stocks, the penitent has his face some four feet or more from the ground, so some sort of ramp might be needed. Oh, wait, of course you’d need a ramp, in order to accommodate the disabled! Problem solved!
Still, what provisions can you make for the security and order of the throngs? You gotta know, gonna be throngs, people standing on line to whizz on him. Gonna have to be a time limit, you have a hard time letting it flow when people are watching, well, I mean, you can’t stand there for ten minutes thinking of Niagara Falls. Should have drunk more beer, wouldn’t be an issue, but move along, buddy.
Buddy? Shit, that’s right, what about the ladies? OK. Got it. We got a ramp in front, to accommodate guys who walk up, a taller ramp for people to roll up, and one overhead with a carefully positioned toilet seat. Rush rotating on a spit beneath, allowing equal access to all. Couple hundred rolls of toilet paper…
Pretty much do it. What? What do you mean, “curtains”? Privacy??!! Whattaya talking about, privacy, you’re gonna pee on a mans face in front of thousands of people waiting in line, its like a urinary Woodstock, and you want fucking curtains?!!
OK, OK, curtains. Curtains. Nice ones? Yeah, sure. Whatever.
I can’t stand the guy, but no way in hell should he be banned. I love free speech more than I hate him and his bs.
Well, this poll does tell you a large number/significant fraction of people will do one of three things.
Click on something almost for the hell of it.
Answer a question without really understanding it.
Fail to see the consequences of their answer to the question.
None of these inspire confidence.
This, but more importantly this:
So not only would banning Rush violate one of the most important Constutional rights of Americans, it wouldn’t do any good. Rush is a symptom, not a cause.
I was one of those people that voted for the ban. Do I actually believe that, when it comes down to it? No. So why did I vote that way anyhow? Because fuck it, that’s why.
I’ve said it in every “Look at this crazy poll result!” thread so far, and I’ll say it again: People will answer polls in any way that allows them to express how they feel. It doesn’t matter what the question actually is, and it doesn’t matter what the options are. They’re going to pick the option that conveys to the pollster which side of the issue they’re on even if the question wasn’t even asking that. They answer the question they wish they were asked.
You could ask people whether they think Obama is a communist Martian that eats happiness, and people would answer it as if the question were “Do you approve or disapprove of the job the President is doing?”
Why is this concept so hard to understand?!
A new Bloomberg poll showed that most people (more than 70%) viewed this event as a healthcare issue and not a religious issue. 53% think Limbaugh should be fired for his comments on Fluke, including 30% of Republicans.
49 percent of men said Limbaugh should be fired, while 47 percent said no. Fifty-six percent of women support firing him, compared with 39 percent who did not.
And that shows ignorance on either the pollsters or responders’ part (or both).
Nobody can fire him - he owns his show. All that can happen is stations drop him.
I think that’s telling - it means people on the CNN poll didn’t really understand what they were saying either, or who would do it by what mechanism. They just want him gone.
I’d love to see his sponsors whittled down to a few precious metals scammers.
Asking the FCC to ban him is a bad idea.
Boycotting his sponsors is the best approach.
I want to watch. Limbaugh is a stage four greed freak. A sane guy, who’s got millions salted away, makes three four million a year more, he’s not gonna care that much if he makes one million instead, what the heck, he’s set!
Not a greed freak. Every dollar he can’t have hurts. He buys a jet, but if he can’t have it gold plated, he will suffer. Every dime that flits away from him tears a tiny rip in his soul. And I want to watch.
They do. Most newspapers self-censor anyway to avoid flak, otherwise COMINTELPRO Would have at least a few inches dedicated to it.