Imus had clause in contract Les Moonves may've missed while smooching Sharpie Sharpton & the radio monitoring groups

Imus had a "dog has one-bite" clause in his contract with CBS Radio and WFAN, according to Fortune Magazine. So make sure you get one of these: it required one warning before possibly being fired, which it doesn't appear he received. So, he may have a chance to get some dough.

• Most people have bought the media's portrayal of why Imus was fired--which is of course a smokescreen.

• What really happened is still happening. Billions of dollars have financed efforts to get certain personalities off radio. People are paid to sit and monitor every word in hopes the political groups can get them off radio. THESE SAME GROUPS WILL TELL YOU THEY BELIEVE IN FREEDOM OF SPEECH, TOLERANCE, OPEN MINDEDNESS AND ARE TERRIBLY KIND AND LIBERAL THEMSELVES.

IF ANY OF THIS IS TRUE, WHY ARE SO MANY PEOPLE SPENDING THEIR ENTIRE LIVES PORTRAYING AMERICAN RADIO PERSONALITIES AS THE ENEMY INSTEAD OF A PERSON WHO'D CUT YOUR THROAT WITH A RUSTY SERRATED KNIFE AND FORCE YOUR CHILDREN TO WATCH? (For one thing, they all failed in radio).

• REPRESENTATIVES IN CONGRESS WHO ARE PAID BY US CITIZENS ARE SPENDING PRECIOUS TIME AND RESOURCES NOT ON LIFE-THREATENING PROBLEMS, BUT ON GETTING SUCCESSFUL RADIO PERSONALITIES OFF THE RADIO.

I SAY "SUCCESSFUL," BECAUSE THE LEFT HAS UNIFORMLY FLOPPED ON RADIO. FURIOUS AND SPUTTERING, THEIR ONLY HOPE IS TO SHUT DOWN SUCCESSFUL RADIO HOSTS--THE ONLY ASPECT OF THE MEDIA NOT IN THEIR CONTROL. ALL THE NETWORKS, MOST NEWSPAPERS, NEWSWEEKLIES, ETC., HAVE BEEN CONTROLLED BY THE SOROS-FUNDED LEFTIST IDEOLOGY.

• RADIO IS THE ONLY THING THEY DON'T CONTROL, AND THEY'RE NOW TRYING TO GET A RESOLUTION IN CONGRESS HR 3302, TO FACILITATE REMOVING THE REMAINING SUCCESSFUL RADIO HOSTS. THIS IS WHAT THE IMUS THING WAS ABOUT.

(I worked in radio sales for 20 years). All of HR 3302's sponsors are Democrats with the exception of Bernie Sanders who is a Socialist. The verbiage says they're just trying to bring back the fairness doctrine, but if you look more carefully you'll see it's the opposite. From original sponsor Maurice Hinchey's website:

"Top Issue...

Media Ownership Reform Act (MORA)

Congressman Maurice Hinchey: "A diverse American media that presents a wide array of ideas from all sides of the political spectrum is essential to the maintenance of our democracy. If the media becomes corrupted then we've begun the erosion of the American political system and the American democracy."

But the bill wants to REINSTATE cross ownership of newspaper and broadcast, which was eliminated in 2003 for the same supposed reason--"diversity" and to break up big corporate owners. Why do you think one of the biggest companies, Clear Channel, has been trying to break up and sell its station group for years? Because the advertising business is very difficult. I did it for 20 years, radio groups have lost a lot of money since 9/11/01 and it's not coming back. Media is extremely fragmented today, if anything. They just want to force certain radio personalities off the dial.

Tweet Stumbleupon StumbleUpon