Audio: Hillary, Boxer hatch nefarious plot … right in front of James Inhofe? Update: New audio added
posted at 9:59 pm on June 21, 2007 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend |
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Anyone else find this a tad too bad to be true? No doubt Madam President would love to have Rush et al. muzzled in time for her inauguration; that’s what lackeys like John Podesta are for. But tipping her hand with Inhofe standing right there? It’d be like Bill talking about Monica within earshot of Newt Gingrich circa early 1998. Either they were all joking around or else Hillary’s sinister Clintonian conspiring is much clumsier than I’d imagined.
Anyway, let ‘em try it. The trend is already towards satellite radio. Having Limbaugh, Hannity, and Ingraham there will only hurry it along. Exit question prediction: Depending upon how much play this clip gets tomorrow, the left’s hamfisted attempt at changing the subject will be faux outrage at Inhofe’s use of the word “gals.”
(clip source: The John Zeigler Show, KFI-AM 640)
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
if you can’t beat em; legistlate em
lorien1973 on June 21, 2007 at 10:06 PM
Doesn’t surprise me in the least. When the fainess doctrine was eliminated decades ago, Michael Jackson (the liberal talk show host, not singer) jumped for joy. He ruled the airwaves with his syndicated show. Before every election he stacked his guests with hollywood stars and Democrat spokespeople for weeks. He was in heaven, and so was the liberal polititions. Now the airwaves are ruled by conservatives, and the liberals sing another song.
They can’t even stand up to Fox news, how will they ever run a country.
right2bright on June 21, 2007 at 10:08 PM
If they can’t be beat…well, we just can’t have people TALKING now can we? No, we can’t it’s not fair!
benrand on June 21, 2007 at 10:09 PM
Stalinists.
Patriot33 on June 21, 2007 at 10:09 PM
Really?
TwinkietheKid on June 21, 2007 at 10:10 PM
True or not (though what good would it bring him to make this up), with 9/10 ‘journalists’ contributing hundreds to them already, with what we see in print domestically and internationally, what more do they want?
Imagine what would happen if Hillary actually would be the president, should the Congress remain slightly to the left.
Entelechy on June 21, 2007 at 10:11 PM
Boxer is a disgrace.
Tru2my2 on June 21, 2007 at 10:12 PM
I’m with Inhofe, it’s “Common Chatter” among libs.
Spirit of 1776 on June 21, 2007 at 10:13 PM
Taking one out of the Hugo playbook I see…
V15J on June 21, 2007 at 10:18 PM
Indeed, or “Are you busy?” “Yes, I’m busy”.
Re. the “gals” - anyone who doesn’t denounce Che, the Castros, Chavez and Putin (of late and longer ago) is not for freedom and silently encourages pure soc*alism.
Entelechy on June 21, 2007 at 10:20 PM
…and communism, to be sure.
Entelechy on June 21, 2007 at 10:21 PM
We have to take things from you for the greater good.
Egfrow on June 21, 2007 at 10:23 PM
Satellite Allah? I would guess they would go online first, because I think people are cheapos and don’t want to pay monthly fees.
Bad Candy on June 21, 2007 at 10:24 PM
Sounds like they were just oblivious to him even being there.
Most of the Republicans in the Senate are acting like Democrats so it’s not surprising they’d forget who was really a Republican.
TheBigOldDog on June 21, 2007 at 10:27 PM
Thanks Allah for the wiki link. I never knew the time line on the deregulation of the FCC. With the advent of the shock jock First Ammendment abusers I couldn’t fully grasp the context of the fairness doctrine until now. I compare the lefts failure at radio (Air America) to the helpless Katrina survivors. Communists can’t compete in an open market place. They just don’t have the courage or intestinal fortitude. What does say for their character? Now they are having a temper tantrum. These gals have done enough damage to this country. Its another reason to unite against HC.
sonnyspats1 on June 21, 2007 at 10:30 PM
The property status of radio airwaves. Is it public property or private?
Egfrow on June 21, 2007 at 10:31 PM
What I’d give to have Ayn around in these times. Thanks for the reminder Egfrow.
“It is the highest impertinence and presumption, therefore, in kings and ministers, to pretend to watch over the economy of private people…” -Adam Smith
Entelechy on June 21, 2007 at 10:35 PM
Why am I hearing the Patty Duke theme in my head?
CrimsonFisted on June 21, 2007 at 10:38 PM
Were the Dems clumsy when making a stronger WMD case for 13 years leading up to the war than Bush ever did, and then start calling him a liar, etc. 6 months in to the war? No, it’s not clumsiness, it’s knowing full well that given the current state of the media, they can get away with saying and doing anything. If there’s anything we all should have learned over the past couple years, it’s that.
RightWinged on June 21, 2007 at 10:40 PM
This is nothing more than a modern age attempt at book burning. Get ready to fight back people lest you lose your liberties.
rplat on June 21, 2007 at 10:46 PM
Entelechy 10:38 PM,
I hear you! Same feeling.
Egfrow on June 21, 2007 at 10:47 PM
rplat,
Be careful we might be called extremists. Oh wait, we already are.
Egfrow on June 21, 2007 at 10:48 PM
Barbara Boxer is a real square!
SouthernGent on June 21, 2007 at 10:51 PM
I have 100 shares of Sirius that say otherwise…
major john on June 21, 2007 at 10:58 PM
Ayn Rand.
We can include the Internet and Blogs in this category also.
Egfrow on June 21, 2007 at 10:58 PM
Look’s like the video link Allah posted is down. Here is another copy of the link.
Egfrow on June 21, 2007 at 11:02 PM
I think Babs suffers from a case of penis envy when she’s around Shrillary.
repvoter on June 21, 2007 at 11:08 PM
Nice work guys thanks for all the links. I saved some in my favorites. The link to Ayn Rand is quite extensive. I like the mission statement. Hey with Fred Thompson as a uniter this would be a great time to form another party. The Constitution Party.
sonnyspats1 on June 21, 2007 at 11:09 PM
Source: Dreams from My Father, by Barack Obama, p. 80 Aug 1, 1996
Egfrow on June 21, 2007 at 11:11 PM
Source: Dreams from My Father, by Barack Obama, p.125 Aug 1, 1996
Egfrow on June 21, 2007 at 11:14 PM
Behold The Constitution Party
sonnyspats1 on June 21, 2007 at 11:16 PM
I talked to a die-hard Liberal about the Fairness Doctrine.
His claim: Since radio uses airwaves, and airwaves are public domain, then the Govt can and SHOULD control all content on the radio.
Yes, I am serious, that was his reasoning.
And yes, you use airwaves when you speak. Continue his reasoning from there…just like we exhale Carbon Dioxide and according Al Goreacle, CO2 is pollution and is thus—taxable and subject to Govt regulation. For the Penguins sake, please stop breathing.
But the best part of my conversation with this guy, whom I’ll refer to as Wesley Mouch, is his claim to have read Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged and his virulent denial of being a Looter type.
Yes friends, facts, reason, and logic. Three things that Libs just can’t seem to grasp but claim to master.
Montana on June 21, 2007 at 11:25 PM
I’d like to see them try.
WisCon on June 21, 2007 at 11:37 PM
sonnyspats1 on June 21, 2007 at 11:16 PM,
I know some people are frustrated with the GOP and the DEMS and may be tempted to look else where for an alternative. But be careful who you are looking at. I even looked at them a while back. My better sense got a hold of me though.
The Constitution Party is a Sham. Take a closer look as some of their so called Pro-Constitutional plans
Education:
All teaching is related to basic assumptions about God and man. Education as a whole, therefore, cannot be separated from religious faith. The law of our Creator assigns the authority and responsibility of educating children to their parents.
There is no separation of Church and State.
Terrorism and Personal Liberty
America is engaged in an undeclared war with an ill-defined enemy (terrorism), a war which threatens to be never ending, and which is being used to vastly expand government power, particularly that of the executive branch, at the expense of the individual liberties of the American people.
Ron Paul is their hero.
Egfrow on June 21, 2007 at 11:42 PM
For you Rand fans, Ayn Rand Audio for Free.
Enjoy!
Laura on June 21, 2007 at 11:44 PM
This is a perfect example of the communism that is to come if she is elected. They ( the dems) have the power to do this if we get a commie in the white house.
GET OUT THE VOTE, DAMMIT!
lsutiger on June 22, 2007 at 12:02 AM
Egfrow on June 21, 2007 at 11:42 PM
I just made up a name and googled it an thats what came out. You say ron Paul is their hero well then that settles it I’m in.lol Really I am going to ride out the election cycles a couple more times with the Republicans. I have hopes we can make the necessary correction within the party.
sonnyspats1 on June 22, 2007 at 12:08 AM
NO NO NO NO, I REFUSE TO PAY FOR RADIO!!!!!
I ALREADY PAY THROUGH THE NOSE FOR SATELLITE TELEVISION!
I WILL NOT PAY FOR RADIO!!!!!
Kini on June 22, 2007 at 12:09 AM
Granted I’m preaching to the choir, I can’t help but comment on the staggering hubris of those who would seek to drive radio stations out of business (the inevitable end result) to silence political expression they personally disdain, while views they endorse simultaneously dominate daily broadcasts on the three largest television networks, both as editorial content in the form of news programming, and as propaganda in the form of (at least some, if not most) “entertainment.” So far as I recall, VHF and UHF frequencies are owned by the public as well as FM and AM.
Throw PBS and NPR into the mix, arguably the most fervently leftist of all the broadcasters and also the only ones actually funded by the government, and it’s clear you’re dealing with a strain of humanity possessed not only of vast narcissicism and deep-seated, shameless dishonesty, but also a vicious lust for power.
And to think, they even have the audacity to call those on the right the fascists.
Blacklake on June 22, 2007 at 12:20 AM
Won’t they just decide to regulate satellite radio?
Must not have been able to find an opposing point of view.
smellthecoffee on June 22, 2007 at 12:29 AM
Laura,
Thanks for that link. I’m listening to the Interview about the Barry Goldwater Election Campaign. Wow, She is so intelligent she predicted what would happen as a result of his loss. She also talks about the possibility of forming a third party. Wow! Registration is Free.
Egfrow on June 22, 2007 at 12:36 AM
Blacklake on June 22, 2007 at 12:20 AM
Yes this threat is very real. The Left just wants power period. The problem with that is they are trying to burn their bridges or should I say our bridges behind us to the point of no return. I am concerned with the elections that Hillary is in the race. Wasn’t there a company in California that manufactures voting machines that Chavez bought into? Things like that worry me.
sonnyspats1 on June 22, 2007 at 12:46 AM
Told ya people aren’t gonna pay for satellite Allah.
Bad Candy on June 22, 2007 at 12:55 AM
Not only that. I won’t pay for streaming audio like some conservative talkies (Rush) charge for listening.
Nice blog BC, is that yours?
Kini on June 22, 2007 at 1:19 AM
The few liberals I have run across that actually tried to read any Ayn Rand either quit after a few pages because it was ‘too boring’(Too challenging of their beliefs, I think).
Or if they did make it through the book, they thought that the Wesley Mouchs or Ellsworth Tooheys were ‘tragic heroes’ defeated in the end by evil capitalists; That the reason that the Peter Keatings and the James Taggerts really failed is because they weren’t enough committed to ‘the cause’.
LegendHasIt on June 22, 2007 at 1:22 AM
I disagree,
I had satellite radio (Sirius) for about 6 months.
Frankly I could not justify the price for the content and got rid of it.
My iPod plays better music then satellite (and it is also commercial free).
The only thing I miss is NRA News, and Red-Sox games.
I can get the NRA via the web and the Red Sox (and more) via cable for an extra charge.
F15Mech on June 22, 2007 at 1:33 AM
It has been deleted.
Theworldisnotenough on June 22, 2007 at 3:47 AM
As noted above in another comment . . .
Here is another copy . . .
http://www.breitbart.tv/html/2042.html
iNeXuS on June 22, 2007 at 4:44 AM
The comedy channel alone is worth the $13.00 a month.
Pablo on June 22, 2007 at 5:51 AM
Very true. It’s funny hearing the criticism from the left of her work if they’ve actually read it, because she nails them time, after time again for what they are and what they represent. They just prove the point by the intellectual bankruptcy of their arguements. It’s quite pathetic and depressing to hear actually.
Me too Entelechy, me too. I’ve been listening to a lot of her interviews and lectures on the ARI website the last month (the ones that Laura linked to) and what a boon! Even though she is gone physically, at least her “ideas remain bulletproof” and continue to gather momentum among the masses.
Who is John Galt?
Roark on June 22, 2007 at 7:01 AM
bah. No threat there…yet. Boxer and Hillary talking about anything could be construed as a threat. Hell, Boxer and Hillary TALKING is a threat. But this just sounds like an eye witness to a hen fest to me.
[ducking...running for cover]
Pilgrim on June 22, 2007 at 7:50 AM
I’ve had XM for four years now, and I don’t know how I lived without it (especially since Jacksonville radio stations $uck). Most of the music stations are commercial-free, and the America Right talk channel is excellent.
As for “why should I pay for radio?”, people asked the same question about television in the 1980’s when cable TV was an alternative. Nowadays, you will find only a handful of people that do not have cable/satellite TV. People pay for TV for the programming, and people pay for satellite radio for the same reason.
OK, “rah-rah XM & Sirius” aside, I don’t know how viable satellite radio would be should the Fairness Doctrine get rammed down our throats. Talk radio hosts make their money off of advertising, so XM/Sirius would have to sell enough advertising (and thus would have to increase their customer base by at least 200% or so) to make it worth the talk show host’s while. Then again, if Rush et al are unemployed on terrestrial radio, satellite radio might be the ONLY option, even though the payoff would be much smaller.
* Sigh * Depressing to think about, my friends.
crushliberalism on June 22, 2007 at 7:55 AM
Suuuuurrrrre…..Commrade Shrillery would just be starting with free speech (you know…HER speech or NO speech). Should this witch EVER win the presidency, she and her fellow communists in congress will see what they could do about doing away with that nasty, pesky Constitution thing.
lynnv on June 22, 2007 at 7:56 AM
Clips been removed
Viper1 on June 22, 2007 at 8:00 AM
SO what happens once they try to apply the FD to the radio & TV airwaves?
Next, and I’m completely serious, they’ll say internet broadcasts and blogs will be subject to it, since net traffic goes through government switches. Then they’ll say it applies to newspapers because they use city streets for delivery. Then satellite radio and TV, since space is public domain.
This idiocy must be stopped.
By the way, I’ve been a Sirius subscriber for a year now. I hardly ever listen to FM radio now, I love it. Andrew Wilkow & Mike Church ftw.
fusionaddict on June 22, 2007 at 8:31 AM
The clip was removed, and then reuploaded. Here’s the new permalink: talkradio talkradioUploaded by hotternews
and the new direct link:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2cay4_talkradio-talkradio
Enjoy!
wearyman on June 22, 2007 at 8:48 AM
No doubt that Hillary and her dimwitted minions would love to ressurect “the Fairness Doctrine”.
However, my friends, that ship has sailed.
Or in the immortal words of our el Presidente, “Bring it on.” And I’m not referecing any satellite radio trends.
there it is on June 22, 2007 at 9:25 AM
Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Che, Hitler, the MSM, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Nancy Pelosi. What do all of these people have in common?
The Hypocrisy of the Democrats goes almost totally unchallenged.
How long before Democrats start asking members to behead their parents to prove loyalty to the party?
Rode Werk on June 22, 2007 at 9:30 AM
And you mean it because you used all caps.
I already have Sirius. I THUROUGHLY ENJOY it. I mostly listen to Stern, and occasionally to Patriot Radio and some of the music channels. And there is VARIETY!
Mazztek on June 22, 2007 at 9:58 AM
By the way… Haven’t they learned ANYTHING from Air America?? No one wants to listen to lib radio!!
Mazztek on June 22, 2007 at 10:01 AM
Elections have consequences, indeed.
Kid from Brooklyn on June 22, 2007 at 10:02 AM
Those quotes are real eye-openers.
Thank-you
franksalterego on June 22, 2007 at 10:05 AM
What… ? Do you think they can’t regulate satellite radio ?
Maxx on June 22, 2007 at 11:00 AM
Free!?! Dagny Taggart is rolling over in her grave!
But, seriously, I am quite worried about this. For at least the last 15 years Rush has warned about this, but it never seemed feasible. Now, however, the idea seems to be picking up momentum. Maybe it took this long because people needed to forget what it was like before Rush, and maybe there’s more support from it now because some of the loudest activists are relatively young people who never experienced the Fairness Doctrine in the first place.
In any event, this situation furthers my belief that the reason why liberals have been so bent out of shape about alleged freedom curtailments under Bush is that they’ve been projecting their own desires onto their enemies. What we’ve been getting for the last six years in their hysteria is a premonition of what these people would do, without hesitation, if given an opportunity.
This doesn’t quite account for why douchebags like Trent Lott are so enthusiastic, but you could probably chalk that up to general elitism, or “senatitus”, as Hewitt and Lileks like to put it.
Kensington on June 22, 2007 at 11:13 AM
The video is gone now…or I cant see it , have looked around.
I cant find it anywhere now… Any ideas?
has it been ‘clintoned’? …. like evidence? Just vanished?
shooter on June 22, 2007 at 11:25 AM
Libs’ increasingly strident rumblings about bringing back the “Fairness” Doctrine reminds me of how the Soviets coudn’t brook any media outlet to the people other than things like Pravda and Isvestia. Anyone wanting to read something different had a challenge ahead of him.
Today in the Good ol’ USA, just swap in “Liberals” for Soviets, and “CNN” or “CBS” for Pravda and Isvestia, and the parallel isn’t comforting.
“Scatch a liberal, and you’ll find totalitarian underneath.”
Spurius Ligustinus on June 22, 2007 at 11:47 AM
With apologies to Ace:
Hillary: im in ur radio wavez killin ur showz
Boxer: lol, pwnd
This is a disgrace, and if you go to any of the big lefty blogs, they’re rabidly in favor of “network neutrality”- you know, since conservatives dominate talk radio, it must be some kind of corporate / government / Jooo conspiracy that must be fought.
It’s hard to imagine it passing, but were Hillary the President, she’d clearly sign it with full support of Pelosi, Boxer, Reid, etc. Lott would probably be on board too.
Hollowpoint on June 22, 2007 at 11:48 AM
I think that people like Hillary and Boxer want to regulate speech on the Internet, too. And in LibSpeak, “regulate” is code for “ban.” If they succeed in silencing talk radio, it’s a safe wager where they’ll turn their sights next.
Spurius Ligustinus on June 22, 2007 at 11:52 AM
shooter on June 22, 2007 at 11:25 AM
I think the video is still available here.
Maxx on June 22, 2007 at 12:00 PM
I knew it!
Anyway, they’ll have some important allies on the Republican side such as Trent Lott, Lindsay Graham as well as others who just want us to STFU.
Perhaps even the Prez himself would support some sort of Fairness Doctrine Part Deaux if it meant passing amnesty.
CliffHanger on June 22, 2007 at 12:20 PM
Who doubts he would sign it? It would just be McCain-Feingold, Part II, except that this time the President probably wouldn’t express any ambivalence before infringing on the free speech rights of the citizenry.
I don’t understand where he’s coming from anymore. Maybe I’m just coming down with a case of BDS, but I find myself wondering sometimes whether the rumors about him drinking again might be true.
Kensington on June 22, 2007 at 12:24 PM
The difference, of course, is that our own mainstream media “freedom fighters” would be active and enthusiastic accomplices who wouldn’t need to be coerced or threatened.
Kensington on June 22, 2007 at 12:28 PM
Sometimes when I rent a car during travel, the car has either Sirius or XM, and I’m not impressed. I usually use my CD’s that I bring along. The programming is like satellite TV, “Thirteen channels of sh!t on the TV to choose from” quote Pink Floyd.
There’s nothing fair about the fairness doctrine. There’s nothing fair about paying for radio or TV. I have to pay for TV because I’m so far from any stations to receive a decent signal.
Plus I have to answer to a higher authority, my wife. If she can’t see American
IdiotIdol, then I’m toast.Kini on June 22, 2007 at 12:49 PM
I’ll take door #3 - they thought that with Cave-A-Lott jumping on the censorship bandwagon, that they had Inhofe as well.
steveegg on June 22, 2007 at 1:11 PM
Oh course both “girls” are in denial about the conversation but it is unlikely that Inhofe made it up.
It would be interesting if we tried to apply the “Fairness Doctrine” across the board. Just include ABC, NBC, CBS, NY Times, LA Times, Time etc. and wait for the screaming to start.
If the idea of government interfering with profit driven free enterprise for political gain wasn’t so over-the edge this whole thing would be funny.
duff65 on June 22, 2007 at 2:45 PM
Elvis Costello said it best:
calbear on June 22, 2007 at 2:50 PM
To add a little context, when Elvis says “they”, he’s not referring to government. He’s referring to the corporations that control the airwaves.
I think he might be a proponent of government control if it meant that corporations might lose their monopoly - that is, if his music would still get air play.
CliffHanger on June 22, 2007 at 3:02 PM
I didn’t mean to imply that the intent of the song was appropriate to this situation, merely that the words were.
calbear on June 22, 2007 at 3:35 PM
I’m sure we will hear something bad about Inhofe here pretty soon
tomas on June 22, 2007 at 4:55 PM
No link about Mizz Hillary about the Fairness Doctrine but remember this back in 1998 about the internet?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1491134/posts
She’s a hankerin on seeing that radios get eeeequal time with Liberals.
Kokonut on June 22, 2007 at 6:27 PM
Inhofe will be found in a park with a “self inflicted” gunshot wound to the head.
csdeven on June 22, 2007 at 6:45 PM
http://www.lessig.org/blog/archives/001231.shtml
Barbara Boxer supports Fairness Doctrine. And blast from the past Deano and those “out of control” conservative radio stations!
Kokonut on June 22, 2007 at 7:33 PM
I received XM for Christmas 2005. I listen in the car on the way to work, on my home’s Windows Media Center, and by streaming audio on my laptop anywhere.
I never listen to terrestrial radio anymore.
ScottMcC on June 23, 2007 at 1:42 AM