If a conservative talk radio host like Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity was being sued for defamation, would the media cover every aspect of the case like white on rice? Well, a federal bankruptcy judge ruled last Thursday that the lawsuit filed against liberal radio network Air America can go forward, but other than financial websites such as MSN Money and BusinessWeek, America’s media were largely disinterested in this Associated Press story filed Tuesday (emphasis mine throughout, hat tip to Dan Gainor):
Government contractor CACI International Inc. has won bankruptcy court approval to proceed with its defamation lawsuit against liberal talk radio network Air America and one of its hosts, Randi Rhodes.
A federal bankruptcy court in New York ruled Thursday that the case could proceed despite the fact that Air America has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
A LexisNexis search of virtually every major television and print outlet for the phrase “Air America or Randi Rhodes" since December 27 resulted in the loudest chirping of crickets one can imagine. Regardless, the article continued:
The company sued Air America and its parent company, Piquant LLC, as well as Rhodes in the fall of 2005 for defamation. The suit stemmed from comments Rhodes made Aug. 25-26, 2005 on her radio show. According to CACI's complaint, she accused CACI employees of raping and murdering Iraqi civilians at Abu Ghraib prison, claims that CACI said were "false and defamatory."
CACI is seeking $1 million in compensatory damages and $10 million in punitive damages. An Air America spokeswoman declined to comment on the lawsuit.
Not to be redundant, but is it safe to assume that this would have been front-page news this morning, as well one of the stories filed by all three broadcast evening news programs on Tuesday if the suit was against Rush Limbaugh?
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Why would you even suggest su
January 3, 2007 - 15:24 ET by ThisnThatWhy would you even suggest such a double standard? The MSM is the fairest medium of all. Their research is impeccable. They openly identify their sources. They constantly lead their readers through all their past threads as they continue their stories. They scrutinize their hiring practices and emphasize professionalism, objectivity, and balance as critieria for selecting their best hires. They never leave out information, never hide their biases, and never, ever cherry-pick or slant their coverage to cover any hidden agendas.
I am unabashedly ashamed of anyone, anyone at all, that would even suggest that the MSM is anything but the most cherished, trusted source of information, knowledge, and standard bearer of American values that could be found....
I would go on, but I see an opening, now, that gets me out of the twilight zone. Gotta take advantage of it, or lose the opportunity.....
LMAO! Good One!Nowhere to R
January 3, 2007 - 15:47 ET by donsalesLMAO! Good One!
Nowhere to Run....Nowhere To Hide.....
Look who you just missed! -
January 3, 2007 - 16:02 ET by FastEdLook who you just missed! - http://www.geocities.com/fitzgerald_mp/The_Twilight_Zone.jpg
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad
thisnthat
January 3, 2007 - 16:08 ET by misterbillRod Serling doing OK when you visited???????????
January 3, 2007 - 15:35 ET by Evil Klown
ugly on helen thomas?Save a S
January 3, 2007 - 15:37 ET by bassndudeugly on helen thomas?
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
You be the judge! - http://ww
January 3, 2007 - 15:56 ET by FastEdYou be the judge! - http://www.stephaniemiller.com/Gallery/photos/Fotoshop/steph10052005.sized.jpg
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad
Lest you have forgotten:Air A
January 3, 2007 - 16:01 ET by donsalesLest you have forgotten:
Air America's Randi Rhodes Compares Judge Alito To Murderers of Hookers and Children
January, 2006
Tasteless personal attacks are nothing new on Air America Radio, but some deserve special mentioning. Coming out of a taped skit at the beginning of the second hour of her afternoon show on Friday (January 13, 2005), here's the incomparable Randi Rhodes (emphasis mine / audiotape on file):
Yuck. In addition to the vulgar and insensitive comparison, Rhodes seems to be complaining that Judge Alito is not a "junkyard dog"; that he's not "a barker'; that he's not "a guy who shoots up stores." I'm - uh - confused. Alito was quiet? Too polite? Too ... classy? I dunno.
Last September, Randi was cited by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) for outrageous remarks in which she compared the evacuation of victims of hurricane Katrina and the deportation of Jews during the Holocaust [link] and [link] and [link]. Although the letter to Randi from the ADL said, "We look forward to your response," there has been no published report of any apology from Rhodes that this writer could find.
Since Newsbusters' launch in August 2005, this writer has reported a number of noteworthy episodes from left-wing voices. Some of these cases would result in a national "uproar" in the MSM (ala Bill Bennett, Bill O'Reilly) if a conservative had said them.
Nowhere to Run....Nowhere To Hide.....
" He's the kind of guy
January 4, 2007 - 14:00 ET by winston smith" He's the kind of guy that you live next door to for 30 years, and then all of a sudden a bulldozer shows up, and there's 31 kids buried underneath. "
How ironic she mentions Alito in this way. The person she is describing is a real-life child-molester serial killer by the name of John Wayne Gacey who was actually a life-long liberal Democrat and a supporter and personal friend of Jimmy and Rosalyn Carter.
Noel,Heck, it takes a lot les
January 3, 2007 - 17:11 ET by Chris NormanNoel,
Heck, it takes a lot less for Rush Limbaugh to make the news in a negative way - witness the Michael J Fox-a-thon. The telling thing is, I don't recall anything, anywhere near equivalent in viciousness and slanderous ever being said on a major conservative talk show. It's difficult to reverse the situation...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Rules MSM reporting. . .
January 3, 2007 - 17:19 ET by TheTruthRules of LIBERAL MSM news reporting. . .
Democrat:
Good truth = Good news amplified and played in endless loop
Bad truth = Don’t report, selective reporting, or spin into good news
Republican:
Good truth = Don’t report, selective reporting, or spin into bad news
Bad truth = Bad news amplified and played in endless loop
Very good. Such a simple desc
January 3, 2007 - 17:39 ET by Chris NormanVery good. Such a simple description that describes so much...
Not spoil the elegant symmetry, but you can add the non-truths and myths, the MSM now creates and spreads...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
"...every aspect of the
January 3, 2007 - 23:00 ET by Eric Turner"...every aspect of the case like white on rice?"
I'm offended that you used a racist phrase like "white on rice". You'll be hearing from my attorney.
-----------------------------------------------------
"Perpetual itching without benefit of scratching to the enemies of America." - July 4th toast during the Revolutio
A non-new item
January 4, 2007 - 12:59 ET by blarsenIf the media were to report every piddly little lawsuit there would no room for real news, such as over 3,000 soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan and over 20,000 soldiers maimed.
All Randi Rhodes did was read a preliminary injunction being filed against CACI by the Center for Constitutional Rights based out of Philidelphia. The content wasn't her own. The fact that CACI had to appeal the original judgement says it all. What Rush Limbaugh does is particularly aggregious. How tasteless is it to make fun of a person stricken with a horrible disease? How about those trips to the Dominican Republic? Think he's going down there with viagra to watch a little baseball? This is the country that has one of the largest child sex tourism trades in the world. Then he has the audacity to criticize medical marijuana users yet he is sentenced to rehab for his own drug abuse. What a hypocrite!
You derived pleasure from wri
January 4, 2007 - 13:04 ET by JimboYou derived pleasure from writing "over 3,000 soldiers killed in Iraq and Afganistan and over 20,000 soldiers maimed." Didn't you.
I thought so.
jimbo - good analysis
January 4, 2007 - 18:31 ET by misterbilljimbo - good analysis:
"You derived pleasure from writing ..............."
In two short sentences you analyzed blarsen's morbid thinking.
I agree this Jimbo is cool.
January 4, 2007 - 18:33 ET by Dee BunkI agree this Jimbo is cool. Did the other lib Jimbo get booted?
dee - I don't know
January 4, 2007 - 19:02 ET by misterbilldee - I don't know--I noticed, reading his posts that he was either new or recovering from a lobotomy. IMO, he is a true conservative and a good guy..
Mr.Bill - I clicked on his
January 4, 2007 - 19:04 ET by Dee BunkMr.Bill - I clicked on his profile and he's only been here for a short time so the other one must have got booted. Who's got the dirt? Anyone know what happened?
I'm new folks. The other Ji
January 4, 2007 - 22:21 ET by JimboI'm new folks. The other Jimbo you are talking about must be gone. Good ridance too, as I get the impression he was a lib!
Not just a lib
January 4, 2007 - 22:36 ET by acumenNot just a lib. A lib that was so thick it took him 2 hours to watch 60 minutes, tripped over his cordless phone and sold his car for gas money.
What happened to the old Jimbo? Rumor has it he accidently got locked in a grocery store over the holidays and starved to death.
No tough act to follow there Jimbo - welcome aboard.
And the old Jimbo made Libert
January 4, 2007 - 22:39 ET by Free StinkerAnd the old Jimbo made LibertyOrMeds look sane by comparison.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"One thing that seperates liberals from conservatives is that liberals are craftier and work without the hinderance of a conscience." --Lynn Wooley
I think you all are thinking
January 4, 2007 - 22:44 ET by Roger the ShrubberI think you all are thinking about SaintJimmy, the slender-shouldered, pasty-faced wisp of a lad who, along with Hater, FatesWebb, etc, have re-emerged as the new generation of Lefttards, the latest batch of Clinton water-carriers on this site.
Look alikes Shrubster
January 4, 2007 - 22:54 ET by acumenTrying my best not to be PC - They all look alike to me Shrubster.
Well, just be careful don't g
January 4, 2007 - 23:02 ET by Roger the ShrubberWell, just be careful don't get the slender-shouldered, pasty-skinned girly-men Libs like Jimmy confused with the overweight, greasy-haired Dorito-breath, flannelshirt-with-the-sleeves-cut-off Libs like Groundskeeper Willy, er, Hayes.
:p
larsen e. whipsnide
January 4, 2007 - 13:12 ET by tumbler_2007What is it you visit the Dominican Republic with viagra and cash for?
It's plain you and the Man have met during your travels. Putz.
If he knows what Rush has bee
January 4, 2007 - 13:29 ET by Eric TurnerIf he knows what Rush has been doing down there then he's obviously met him down there. How else would he know? Surely, he wouldn't make things up about somone he doesn't know and surely he wouldn't try to tell us he can read minds (otherwise he'd be working on Psychic Friends Network wouldn't he?)
-----------------------------------------------------
"Perpetual itching without benefit of scratching to the enemies of America." - July 4th toast during the Revolution
What horses***. We lost ov
January 4, 2007 - 13:19 ET by NL207What horses***. We lost over 6,000 dead and another 18,000 wounded in a mere month on Iwo Jima and for what? A sun baked pile of volcanic sand and rock, or so your logic would say.
As for Limbaugh's trip to the Dominican Republic, how dare you invade private conduct? I can think of another reason for Limbaugh going to the DR. The DR has one of the three top cigar industries outside of Cuba. [the others are Honduras and Nicaraugua]. Limbaugh is a well know cigar afficianado. This idea is substantiated by the party he was with, a group of cigar tourists. [yes, there are indeed such people]. By your sordid logic, everyone who travels to Bankok or Copenhagen must also be a deviate since there is a thriving sex trade in Bangkok and Copenhagen is reputed to be the child porn capitol of the world.
Of course, if you want to discuss perverts with cigars, we need go no further than the Clinton White House ....
How easily I’ve proved my p
January 4, 2007 - 15:52 ET by blarsenHow easily I’ve proved my point. Nobody cares about this CACI/Air America lawsuit, however, everyone wants to talk about ‘perverts with cigars’ (your words not mine) and jump at the chance to defend Rush Windbag. Do you really need Viagra to smoke a cigar? I guess that depends what it’s attached to, metaphorically speaking.
Iwo Jima…that was WWII wasn’t it? An honorable war. We took heavy losses on that volcanic rock, but we also left over 20,000 dead japs in our wake…and won. We lost 58,000 in Viet Nam and for what? What are we getting out of Iraq? Cheap oil? No. Freedom for the Iraqis? Come on…no one cares about them. Who ever talked about freeing Iraq before W went in there? Even GHW knew he couldn’t start a war based on that thin logic. Clinton bombed Iraq and was pilloried by the right for it. So what’s the difference now? Our soldiers are being blown up. How are they supposed to fight a roadside bomb? What happened to all the Iraq soldiers we’ve trained. This is their civil war, let them fight it. All the wingnuts I know hate muslims. Anyone in these Newsbusters forums like muslims? Then why are you so eager to go to war and die for them!
Geez, and nobody even noticed that I misspelled egregious.
Geez, and nobody even notic
January 4, 2007 - 15:58 ET by Jack BauerGeez, and nobody even noticed that I misspelled egregious.
Geez, no. We just don't care, laddie.
But if you really aspire to grammar Nazi, then you should spell Muslim with an initial capital letter as it is a proper noun.
Proud member of the all-powerful and vast militarist/industrialist/capitalist/zionist-bagelist complex
Speak for yourself blarsen.
January 4, 2007 - 16:01 ET by Dee BunkSpeak for yourself blarsen. When you say "no one cares about them" leave us out of it. Just because you and your friends don't care about them doesn't mean we don't. I'd say that your "wingnut" friends hate Muslims for the same reason you do - not because they are conservatives. I know liberals who don't like Muslims or other minorities but I don't consider them friends.
Holy crap - I dont even know
January 4, 2007 - 16:01 ET by JimboHoly crap - I dont even know where to start on this one.
First paragraph - no idea what your point is.
WWII -" honorable war". By omission, Vietnam and Iraq are "dishonorable wars". Our veterans, living and dead, thank you.
Noone cares about Iraqis?? Actually, we do and so do the people risking their lives for them.
And Cliton was asaulted by the right for choosing to lob cruise missles on the night before he was to testify in his purgury trial.
Our soldiers are being blown up. - That's what happens in war.
I can't continue.
Blarsen, "Who ever talke
January 4, 2007 - 16:06 ET by futbolisgreatBlarsen,
"Who ever talked about freeing Iraq before W went in there?"
You know ignorance like this is what does left wing nuts like you in. You might want to look into the Clinton administration. Clinton passed a regime change resolution sometime in the late 1990s In it he talks about freeing Iraqis from the hands of Hussein. It was the Bush father administration and then the Clinton administration that kep the no-fly-zones in Iraq to protect the Shites and the Kurds from the evil hands of Saddam Hussein.
Left wing organizations like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, who we all know, I hope you know blarsen, do a yearly report of human right abuses of all countries, would constantly call for the freedom of Iraqis from the tyranny and murderous hands of Hussein and his regime.
Also, as a typical liberal nutjob you speak in half-truths. Why was Clinton pilloried by the right for boming Iraq in 1998? Because he did it to distract the USA and the world from his Presidential scandals!
Now, are you also dumb enough not to know that roadside bombs are actually done by human beings. How do you stop roadside bombs, by killing the terrorist in Iraq....I guess your little brain couldn't think of this, eh?
and why is the Iraq WAr not an honorable war??? because you left wing lunatics said so????? please! get off you high chair and your stupid preaching!
We lost 58,000 soldiers in Vietnam supposedly for nothing because the Liberal wackos in Congress stop funding the war! If they wouldn't have stop funding the war, or at least kept the promise America made to the South Vietnamese government, Saigon would have never fallen under North Vietnamese control.
Imagine if the French thought like left wing lunatics like you during the American Revolution. Why die for these crazy American colonist? Where would America, where would the world be today? THINK BEFORE YOU SPEW OUT COMPLETE AND UTTER NONSENSE!
Blarsen, a little reading, education and humility will get you a long way.
"...disgusting, unAmerican draft-dodger..." Liberal Zapata/Tom talking about draft-dodgers. Thus asserting what we have always known about Slicky Willie Clinton
War
January 4, 2007 - 19:06 ET by misterbillI take it from your post that you are the American who decides in which wars we get involved and also, which are honorable. Keep me posted., i need someone like you to make these decisions for me.
As to your spelling, I am a fair speller,but sometimes the content just blinds me to spellings.
Sorry, I just cannot help myself here guys.
January 4, 2007 - 22:40 ET by acaiguanaSorry, I just cannot help myself here guys.
Our soldiers are being blown up. How are they supposed to fight a roadside bomb?
Ya know blarson, those particular soldiers can't.
They are blown up, remember?
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
Clinton bombed Iraq and was p
January 4, 2007 - 16:09 ET by Dave RClinton bombed Iraq and was pilloried by the right for it.
I'm calling Bovine Scat on that right now.
Clinton was not pilloried for bombing Iraq. The only negative comments I recall hearing was that he didn't employ enough bombs. I specifically recall many conservatives voiced approval of his actions.
As for Rush's comments on Michael J. Fox, I believe Rush has pretty much explained those to most people's satisfaction. He was not making fun of him in any way. Was there anything said by Rush about MJF that you can point to that was untrue?
I recall many of the horrible things your pink-panty wearing freedom-hating girlie men spineless liberal friends said about Rush back when he lost his hearing. Typical for liberals who can dish it out but cannot take it themselves.
And for any liberal to accuse another human being of hypocrisy is beyond laughable. Liberals are the most egregious hypocrites out there. (See previous paragraph).
Rush blew his hearing out by
January 4, 2007 - 17:36 ET by blarsenRush blew his hearing out by overdosing on oxycontin, plain and simple. His explanation was something having to do with his wearing headphones for so many years, which was a lie. He also lied when he said Michael J, Fox purposely went off his medication so he would be twitching more for the camera. MJF explained that he may have been overmedicated if anything, the results of the medication I understand are unpredictable. Let me stop right there--why are you neocons so anti-science anyway? I'm not calling you conservatives, because that would be an insult to my father, who is a conservative and hates to see Bush putting the nation so deep into debt it will take generations to dig our way out. Incidentally, I've voted republican as many times as I've voted democrat. I support common sense, not blind worship.
And to futbolisgreat: Clinton's regime change resolution wasn't the same as Bush's invasion and occupation. The Clinton administration's sanctions were working in Iraq and though the right wing hates to have it mentioned, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, it did have WMD which were destroyed according to Scott Ritter who is ex-military, a weapons inspector and a republican. Yes, our soldiers are being blown up Jimbo. That's because they don't have proper body armor and armored vehicles. I've talked to soldiers who have been in Iraq when I visited Camp LeJeune. They're a great bunch of guys with great families. Most of them believe they are doing the right thing and they are. They're obeying their Commander-in-Cheif. That's what they are trained to do. A few are tired of being redeployed two and three times and would like to stay home with their wives and kids. They don't speak bad of Bush. A woman that works in my department recently lost her husband in Iraq. They have two small children. She believes her husband was doing the right thing and he was. Don't get me wrong, I support the troops, just not the war. If our country was in imminent danger-- I'd encourage my own sons to go and fight. Those were Saudis that attacked us on 9/11 and if you want to get technical--Sunnis, who are the insurgents we're fighting in Iraq. The thing is, is that there are entire countries filled with Sunni Muslims (capital 'M') that have dictators for leaders disquised as 'monarchs' who get a free pass in the name of commerce. I admit it. I'm an idiot. Someone explain it to me. And be smart.
*Low, impressed whistle.*
January 4, 2007 - 17:43 ET by Rupert Cadell*Low, impressed whistle.* Outstanding post blarsen.
Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.
my, isn't someone easily im
January 4, 2007 - 17:47 ET by MightyMouthmy, isn't someone easily impressed.
"There are two types of people in this country; those who provide freedom and those who enjoy it." MM says...
First of all, I am a libertar
January 4, 2007 - 17:46 ET by Dave RFirst of all, I am a libertarian, a slightly different animal.
As for supporting the troops but not the war, that just doesn't cut it.
That's like saying you support the players but you hope they lose the game.
Oh, a sports analogy. I ha
January 4, 2007 - 17:55 ET by Rupert CadellOh, a sports analogy. I had a sense that a lot of people think of war as a game. Besides which, nobody hopes they lose, that's a conservative bias toward the concept of being realistic and pragmatic. To be all "nothing but total victory will do" in the case of Iraq, is to really ascribe a macho football-fan mentality to something that is affecting the whole world.
Michael Moore = Ann Coulter = Rosie O'Donnell = Sean Hannity. Idiocy is not partisan.
RC,War is no game. You are c
January 4, 2007 - 18:09 ET by Dave RRC,
War is no game.
You are correct, however, when you say this is affecting the whole world. If the civilized world should lose the war and fail to halt the spread of Islamic fascism, western society, as we know it, will cease to exist, probably within your lifetime.
The word Jihad roughly translates into conquest. The 7th Century Islamic barbarian horde is not interested in peaceful co-existence. If you doubt this, just read the Qu'ran.
I will also point out that the word football appears nowhere in my previous comment.
blarson. You mean clintons sa
January 4, 2007 - 18:13 ET by bassndudeblarson. You mean clintons sanctions were making the UN rich and saddam to. Some plan.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
Must of missed the part about
January 4, 2007 - 18:45 ET by blarsenMust of missed the part about being smart, but then what can you expect from someone who refers to themself as "dude".
Exactly......
January 4, 2007 - 22:42 ET by acumen"Must of missed the part about being smart"
Exactly......
How do you come to the conclu
January 4, 2007 - 22:37 ET by JimboHow do you come to the conclusion that us neocons (whatever the hell that means) are anti science? I don't see anyhing posted that would bring a reasonable person to that conclusion.
Bush's invasion and occupation. I get your point. Why don't you come out and say what you really mean?
The Clinton administration's sanctions were working in Iraq - an assinine statement contrary to all history and logic. How many more UN sanctions should we have allowed Iraq to thumb their noses at during Clinton's 'working' sanctions? How many more murders? Rapes?
Yes, our soldiers are being blown up Jimbo. That's because they don't have proper body armor and armored vehicles. - So - I guess you are saying that we can fight a war with no casualties if they were given proper body armor?
Don't get me wrong, I support the troops, just not the war. - No you don't. You don't support the troops or the war. Think about it, and you will know in your heart that I'm right.
Exactly.....
January 4, 2007 - 22:40 ET by acumen"I don't see anyhing posted that would bring a reasonable person to that conclusion."
Exactly.......
Jimbo, neocon is a code word for 'jew' for these nuts.
January 4, 2007 - 22:42 ET by acaiguanaJimbo, neocon is a code word for 'jew' for these nuts.
Just substitute 'jew' when you see it. They are racist as well as anti-semitic.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "Which city is next?"
Wrong again yak breath! Get i
January 5, 2007 - 18:40 ET by blarsenWrong again yak breath! Get it right. Neocon is the liberal code word for "crazy" Jew. I'm talking about the likes of Jeane Kirkpatrick, Dick Cheney, Robert Novak and let's not forget that big, fat gamblin' Jew--Bill Bennett! Yes these people are all JEWS and neocons to boot! I almost forgot Paul Wolfowitz, although I'm not sure if he's a Jew or not...the name just doesn't sound....oh well, I'm pretty sure about the others though.
As far as me being a racist, just look at my name and know what I've had to endure my entire life. The lutefisk jokes, Scandihoovian slurs and yes references to chunky knitwear--Shameful! So before you label someone a racist, walk a mile in their Naots, then you will truly know the pain I feel every day. (insert teardrop here).
blarsen
January 5, 2007 - 18:45 ET by misterbillblarsen "The lutefisk jokes, Scandihoovian slurs and yes references to chunky knitwear--Shameful! I am unfamiliar with these. Would you care to explain them???
huh?
January 5, 2007 - 18:54 ET by Jimbohuh?
pssst...it's satire
January 5, 2007 - 18:57 ET by mandrakepssst...it's satire