Should Rush Limbaugh be losing sponsors for the things he said?

[csgators]

If Rush has the audience and sponsors he should be on the air. Just because you disagree is no reason to force a government solution. Kieth Olbermann is far more offensive to me and he should be able to spew his bile all he wants too.

[Daggdag]

Who cares? If his sponsors want to drop him, it's their choice.

[Cynster]

Who cares? If his sponsors want to drop him, it's their choice.

This.

 

I don't understand why people care about sponsors dropping in any situation. If they drop, they drop. It's not like he "deserves" to have x sponsors dropped, so x sponsors will drop. On both the right and the left I am really tired of this. If sponsors don't drop when someone does something you morally object to, take notice and don't buy from them. If the sponsors agree I think they should have every right to keep sponsoring no matter how ridiculous he can be. Same on the left. There are some real nuts that say some stupid stuff too and it never seems to phase their sponsors either until in both cases when the media goes crazy and demands it and then finally one might drop them.

[Vagrant0]

In short, Limbaugh contributes nothing of value to American political dialogue. Whilst that doesn't mean he should be silenced, it does mean that perhaps he shouldn't get paid for his caustic rantings.

He never really did contribute anything of value. Ever.

 

Why can't we bring back the time honored tradition of tarring and feathering people who abuse their public position to spout lies, sentiments of treason (unfounded claims about the President), or create a climate of chaos, ignorance, and fear? Then we could remove those people who make a living from this crap on both sides and just try to get on with our lives.

[HeyYou]

In short, Limbaugh contributes nothing of value to American political dialogue. Whilst that doesn't mean he should be silenced, it does mean that perhaps he shouldn't get paid for his caustic rantings.

He never really did contribute anything of value. Ever.

 

Why can't we bring back the time honored tradition of tarring and feathering people who abuse their public position to spout lies, sentiments of treason (unfounded claims about the President), or create a climate of chaos, ignorance, and fear? Then we could remove those people who make a living from this crap on both sides and just try to get on with our lives.

 

Mainly because we would be tarring and feathering most of the population of DC. Oil companies would like it..... initially at least. :D

[Aurielius]

In short, Limbaugh contributes nothing of value to American political dialogue. Whilst that doesn't mean he should be silenced, it does mean that perhaps he shouldn't get paid for his caustic rantings.

He never really did contribute anything of value. Ever.

 

Why can't we bring back the time honored tradition of tarring and feathering people who abuse their public position to spout lies, sentiments of treason (unfounded claims about the President), or create a climate of chaos, ignorance, and fear? Then we could remove those people who make a living from this crap on both sides and just try to get on with our lives.

 

Mainly because we would be tarring and feathering most of the population of DC. Oil companies would like it..... initially at least. :D

I just want the feather concession...finally I can use all those goose, duck and pheasant feathers.

Edited May 20, 2012 by Aurielius

[Vagrant0]

In short, Limbaugh contributes nothing of value to American political dialogue. Whilst that doesn't mean he should be silenced, it does mean that perhaps he shouldn't get paid for his caustic rantings.

He never really did contribute anything of value. Ever.

 

Why can't we bring back the time honored tradition of tarring and feathering people who abuse their public position to spout lies, sentiments of treason (unfounded claims about the President), or create a climate of chaos, ignorance, and fear? Then we could remove those people who make a living from this crap on both sides and just try to get on with our lives.

 

Mainly because we would be tarring and feathering most of the population of DC. Oil companies would like it..... initially at least. :D

I'm not sure what the problem is... Maybe environmental? Drawing and quartering instead perhaps? You'll only need to televise one or two before the rest decide to make amends.

[HeyYou]

In short, Limbaugh contributes nothing of value to American political dialogue. Whilst that doesn't mean he should be silenced, it does mean that perhaps he shouldn't get paid for his caustic rantings.

He never really did contribute anything of value. Ever.

 

Why can't we bring back the time honored tradition of tarring and feathering people who abuse their public position to spout lies, sentiments of treason (unfounded claims about the President), or create a climate of chaos, ignorance, and fear? Then we could remove those people who make a living from this crap on both sides and just try to get on with our lives.

 

Mainly because we would be tarring and feathering most of the population of DC. Oil companies would like it..... initially at least. :D

I'm not sure what the problem is... Maybe environmental? Drawing and quartering instead perhaps? You'll only need to televise one or two before the rest decide to make amends.

 

I was thinking flaying alive.... or maybe, pulled apart by four elephants? Tossed into a tank of piranha? Gators? Rabid Red Wings fans???

[csgators]

In short, Limbaugh contributes nothing of value to American political dialogue. Whilst that doesn't mean he should be silenced, it does mean that perhaps he shouldn't get paid for his caustic rantings.

He never really did contribute anything of value. Ever.

 

Why can't we bring back the time honored tradition of tarring and feathering people who abuse their public position to spout lies, sentiments of treason (unfounded claims about the President), or create a climate of chaos, ignorance, and fear? Then we could remove those people who make a living from this crap on both sides and just try to get on with our lives.

 

Who decides? That is always the problem. Mob rule is not for me.

[csb]

The question of whether to continue sponsorship is up to each company that advertises on or endorses EIB Network and/or its affiliates. Since Limbaugh (and thus EIB) has a daily audience of millions it is highly likely (for purely corporate profit motives) that few, if any will. If any of the current advertisers withdraw, there are a good number that will gladly jump into the market-share of talk radio that Limbaugh commands.

 

Should they? That is an altogether different question and one subject to political, ethical and other biases in supporting a should claim (in the context of forming a formal logical argument).