{"id":22350,"date":"2005-01-10T01:01:01","date_gmt":"2011-05-19T07:00:15","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2011-05-19T07:00:15","modified_gmt":"2011-05-19T07:00:15","slug":"era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/01\/10\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over\/","title":{"rendered":"Era of Free Pass for Liberalism Is Over"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

RUSH: All right, the CBS report. You know, there\u2019s still some out there who aren\u2019t going to get it, still some out there who aren\u2019t going to admit it. I had two cable channels on this morning when the CBS report hit. Fox News went wall-to-wall with it. CNN maybe gave it 90 seconds. CNN covered the story when it was breaking news and then dropped it and went on to other things, but Fox stuck with it — and therein, ladies and gentlemen, tells a very interesting tale. By the way, Mary Mapes was one of the four people canned. A little sexism perhaps here? Three of the four people canned are females, none of the top execs were let go, Dan Rather gets by. Page 26 of the report Dan Rather maintains that these fake memos are still “accurate.” He has not changed his mind about this at all. But the institution known as CBS News is getting a reality check today. The institution known as the United Nations is also getting a reality check. I think the era of the free pass for liberalism is now over. This is what I mean when I\u2019ve said all these past months and years that the liberal media monopoly is a thing of the past. It\u2019s gone; they\u2019re never going to get it back.<\/line>Another way of saying that is that the era of the free pass for liberalism is over. The Democrat Party has gotten a reality check but they still don\u2019t get it. CBS is getting a reality check. I don\u2019t know if they get it or not or if they\u2019re still in denial. Many of their brethren in the mainstream press still don\u2019t get it. I think the New York Times is in the midst of a reality check, and they don\u2019t get, either. It was stunning. If you had time, if you read the New York Times on Saturday the way they treated two different storms, the Armstrong Williams story and the David Rosen story. The David Rosen story is about Hillary\u2019s campaign fund-raiser, chief fund-raiser in 2000 has been indicted for all kinds of shenanigans in fund-raising that Hillary probably knew about. That story was not even covered in the New York Times on Saturday. It broke on Friday; it was not even mentioned in the published editions. You could find an AP version of it on their website, but you couldn\u2019t find an actual copy of that story in a published dead tree edition of the New York Times on Saturday. Sunday it got scant mention, they just ran an AP version of the story.<\/line><\/p>\n

Armstrong Williams was linked to Clarence Thomas and was linked to Strom Thurmond as a prot?g?. Neither of the two assertions are correct. They gave it front page treatment, the Armstrong Williams story — not that it didn\u2019t deserve it. I don\u2019t think it did deserve front page treatment, but it deserves treatment, no question about it. But the David Rosen story was totally, totally ignored. We are in the 21st Century, and the idealism-turned-sour institutions are getting very heavy anal exams, folks, and they are failing, and many of them refuse to admit it. Here\u2019s the truth. Here\u2019s the truth, now. The truth is that all journalism is now opinion journalism, and I think it always has been. This is the dirty little secret: All journalism has always been opinion journalism, but today what\u2019s changed is that the ones who refuse to admit it and cast themselves as unbiased with no interest in political outcomes are the ones falling way behind. They have no credibility with the audience. They have no credibility with the consumers of news anymore, and the same thing is happening to the New York Times, as I just cited the way they treated the Armstrong Williams and David Rosen story Saturday, and that\u2019s just one of a multitude of examples we could cite from the New York Times. <\/line>In Newsweek, Michael Isikoff still: Even though Gonzales is going to be confirmed, don\u2019t expect Abu Ghraib to go away. Why? Because they don\u2019t want it to go away. There\u2019s no story there but they\u2019re going to try to make something out of it for one reason and that\u2019s to harm Bush. There\u2019s no reason that this story continues to get the legs that they\u2019re giving it. So the truth is that the jig\u2019s up. They\u2019re no longer operating under the same pretense they are used to; that the audience is a bunch of idiots and can\u2019t figure it out. The audience does know now. There\u2019s a reason Fox went wall-to-wall with CBS. They understand their audience. They understand how important it is; they understand how important the audience knows the media is in American political life today and in American political discourse. Now, it won\u2019t be long for us to find out how right I am, not if I\u2019m right, not when I\u2019m right, but how right I am. Mary Mapes, who was the lead producer on the Bill Burkett faked forged document. By the way, reading the CBS report they\u2019re actually going to appoint a forged document czar, a forgery czar. <\/line>They\u2019re not going to call it that, new standards and practices person, but for all intents and purposes they don\u2019t want to get stung by forged documents anymore, so we can say that CBS is going to have a forgery czar to make sure this doesn\u2019t happen again. But what is it I\u2019ve always said, ladies and gentlemen, about liberal Democrat failures? They rise to the top. When you fail as a liberal Democrat, you accrue stature, and you become big because your failure is always assigned to a right-wing conservative attack machine and so you become a martyr. So the more failure you can chalk up as a liberal icon, a Democrat icon, the higher you will go within Democrat circles, and though that is in dispute in some circles, I still maintain it to be the case: What can we look for? We can look for Mary Mapes, who was the lead producer fired along with three others at CBS for the forged document story, to soon get a job with a prominent senator or member of the House as a spokesman, spokesbabe, maybe a legislative liaison. <\/line>It might not be long before one of the lingering full-fledged liberal cable networks actually hires her on camera for something, maybe even as an anchorette, but don\u2019t cry for Mary Mapes. Don\u2019t cry for her, folks, because this today, this falling on the sword, this getting canned has guaranteed she will be set for life somewhere in the Democrat Party\u2019s upper hierarchy, they take care of her. They take care of her own. She fell on the sword. She did everything she could to try to get rid of George W. Bush under the auspices of working as a journalist at CBS. She might be a great chairman for the Democrat — well, not this soon. She could be Democrat National Committee chairman in \u201906, maybe \u201908. She\u2019s got to serve as a vice-chairman. She\u2019s going to the fund-raising department or somewhere, maybe the direct mail campaign at the DNC, but she\u2019ll be fine don\u2019t cry any tears for Mary Mapes and it won\u2019t be long before we find out just how high in the Democratic hierarchy she lands. Quick time-out we\u2019ll get into some details of this when we come back, remember it\u2019s a shorter commercial break here, folks, by one minute. They\u2019re going to love me for pointing this out. <\/line>BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/line><\/p>\n

And so the next faze of this story has occurred. “Four CBS News employees, including three executives have been fired for their roll in preparing and reporting a disputed story about President Bush\u2019s National Guard service.” It was only the sixth or seventh version of the story after none of the previous five or six had proved to have any substance whatsoever. “The action was prompted by the report of an independent panel that concluded that CBS News failed to follow basic journalistic principles in the preparation and reporting of the piece. Panel also said that CBS News had compounded that failure with rigid and blind defense of the 60 Minutes Wednesday report. Asked to resign, senior vice president Betsy West who supervised CBS News prime-time programs, 60 Minutes Wednesday executive producer Josh Howard, and Howard\u2019s deputy senior broadcast producer Mary Murphy, the producer of the piece, Mary Mapes, was terminated. The correspondent on the story, Dan Rather, still believes the documents — according to Page 26 of the report — were ‘accurate,\u2019 is stepping down as anchor of CBS Evening News.” He escapes any further scrutiny in the story. <\/line>The independent panel that said, “A myopic zeal to be the first news organization to broadcast the ground breaking story was a key factor.” It had nothing to do with bias. It had nothing to do with liberalism. It was just bad journalism, ladies and gentlemen. Well, let\u2019s admit that. It was horrible journalism. The question is, “Why?” What was the motivation for the bad journalism? And the independent report says, “Well, it was just a desire to be first. Too many competitive pressures out there; they thought somebody else had the story. They had to go with the story. They couldn\u2019t wait to vet the story. It was too much competitive pressure out there.” So they gotta get rid of the competitive pressure. They gotta pay no attention to it and be more specific in vetting these stories. That\u2019s why they\u2019ve appointed a — I call it a forgery czar. “The panel made a number of recommendations including the appointment of a senior standards and practices executive reporting directly to the president of CBS News.” I can\u2019t believe that doesn\u2019t already exist, that position. Standards and practices? My experience with networks is that that is huge and that is an old position, a traditional position. <\/line>The fact that they\u2019re going to appoint a senior standards and practices executive that reports directly to the president of CBS News, who would review all investigative reporting the use of confidential sources and authentication of documents. Personnel should feel free comfortable going to the forgery czar confidentially without fear of reprisal with questions or concerns about particular reports. So basically this recommendation is for not only a forgery czar but somebody to handle all the whistle-blower complaints and they\u2019re pledging that the whistle-blowers will go in there with impunity. Also the recommendation was made to, “foster an atmosphere in which competitive pressure was not allowed to prompt airing of reports before all investigation and vetting is done.” What does that do to breaking news? How do you go out and vet breaking news like this? Well, this wasn\u2019t breaking news, but I have also this: More people than what were originally cited that have been canned or asked to resign, same difference. “Following information provided by the office of Viacom co-president Les Moonves, Mary Mapes has been terminated, effective immediately. Josh Howard had been relieved of his duties, asked to resign. CBS News senior broadcast producer Mary Murphy had been relieved of her duties at 60 Minutes Wednesday, asked to resign. <\/line>“Senior script producer Esther Kartiganer has been relieved of her duties at 60 Minutes Wednesday, offered another assignment at CBS News. Senior Vice President for CBS prime-time Betsy West had been relieved of her duties and asked to resign. Rather voluntarily moved to set a date to step down faces no further action. The President of CBS News Andrew Heyward, Moonves says of him, ‘Heyward is an executive of integrity and talent, the right person to be leading CBS News during this challenging time. The panel raised questions about accountability at CBS News, questions that will have to be answered both by Heyward and me.'” Heyward, in essence, made a trip to the White House, went up there to assure them this story had nothing to do with their desire to destroy Bush, that their covering of Abu Ghraib was what they were trying to destroy Bush with. Come on, folks! Mary Mapes also got hold of the Abu Ghraib photos and I remember one of the things Rather said when this story first broke. Rather said he went to Heyward and said, “This is too big. I need you to ride herd on this.” He was clearly dumping on Heyward to try to save his own skin by essentially saying, “Hey I went to the top. I made sure they knew what we were doing on this story.” Try this. This is from Page 9 of the report: “The field of document examination is fraught with controversy and has differing and sometimes antagonistic certifying organizations. However, it is generally agreed that authentification of a document is best done by the original so that a chemical analysis of the ink and paper as well as a close review of any signature and the topography can be conducted. In addition, document examiners typically reach their conclusions with various degrees of certainty. A common finding is that the document in question does not have any indication that it is not authentic.” What? What a sentence! If that\u2019s true, why did you fire anybody? <\/line>BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/line><\/p>\n

I want to read just this last line here from Page 9 because this is stunning to me, not only how poorly it is written, but what it says when you decipher it. “A common finding is that the document in question…” the Burkett memos. “[T]he document in question does not have any indication that it is not authentic.” Well, if you can\u2019t prove that it is not authentic, the double negative is just screeching at us here, but if you can\u2019t prove that it is not authentic, then why fire anybody? The fact of the matter is they had four experts who told them not only are these things not authentic, they\u2019re impossibly not authentic, and they are forged; they are faked, and apparently the report does not even acknowledge that. It just says that we cannot prove that they are not authentic, and then on Page 10 from the same report, over the next few days the examiners analyzed the two documents that had several conversations with both Mary Mapes and somebody named Miller. This is somebody in Killian\u2019s office. “Two of the examiners told the panel that they informed Mapes and Miller that they had various concerns about the documents.” These are the official examiners. <\/line><\/a>“Significantly, all four of the examiners told the panel, the independent panel, that they informed Mary Mapes that they could not authenticate the documents primarily because they were copies.” Well, they told them more than that. They told them the documents were probably were fake and couldn\u2019t have been created to look the way they did back when they would have been authentic had they been created then. The typesetting technology didn\u2019t exist; the typewriters didn\u2019t exist. You know, word processors were not not used yet at that point. There\u2019s still have something extremely fishy about this. Like we\u2019re supposed to take the four or five people that have been canned here as the sacrificial lambs and now we all move on? But we don\u2019t have memories that are this short. We remember what these examiners said on other networks. We know that these documents were faked. There\u2019s no question they are not authentic. Again, on Page 26, Dan Rather says he still believes that they are accurate — not “authentic,” but “accurate,” which means that CBS still has people who think the story is true. It\u2019s still true. They just couldn\u2019t prove it, but it\u2019s true, and they\u2019re not going to go back on it and they\u2019re going to admit the other thing, and they\u2019re not going to admit that they had a liberal bias. You see, the thing about this bias business and all, it\u2019s real simple. <\/line> All journalism is opinion journalism, always has been, if you just look at it this way. Take yourself, for example. This whole premise of objectivity I think is a straw dog. It has been used as a cover by journalists to hide what they really believe so they quote, unquote, “have credibility,” but the fact of the matter is, is if you were a thinking, informed and educated person, it\u2019s simply unreasonable to expect that you don\u2019t have opinions on things, and it\u2019s doubly difficult to expect that you don\u2019t have a choice or a preference in the outcome of particular events. So the idea that all journalism is opinion journalism is true. It is the motivation that you then have to look at. For example, why does CBS do the story? Why did they avoid all these journalistic practices? Why did they scrub all this stuff that they would normally do aside and go with the story? Why does the New York Times totally ignore a story on Hillary\u2019s indicted fund-raiser and focus on Armstrong Williams? Why does the New York Times and Newsweek still continue to focus on Abu Ghraib? There is a motivation behind this. <\/line>They are trying — and it\u2019s not just to “bring down the powerful.” That\u2019s another straw dog they all hide behind. “Well, we\u2019re out there to protect the little guy against the powerful.” Well, they aid and abet certain powerful people. They will not come and be critical of certain powerful people, people they agree with, people whose careers they want to see advanced. This is not news any longer. This is not a surprise to people. So the people that ridiculously hold onto this old-fashioned notion that there is objectivity in journalism and that they have no care what the outcome of a political issue happens to be, they have no interest whatsoever, they\u2019re just reporting what the news is – those are the institutions losing respect. Those are the institutions losing ground, and those are the opinions of the institutions losing audience. When we talk about the mainstream press — just as a little exercise here — you know, there are many left-wing media organs that are opinion oriented, magazines like the New Republic and The Nation, and a number of other places, and they all admit who they are up front. They are never included in discussions of the mainstream press when it comes to the fact that they are dishonest, when it comes to the fact that they\u2019re trying to fool people. <\/line><\/p>\n

They\u2019re just wrong. We\u2019ll look at them, or we\u2019ll analyze what they say. We\u2019ll make fun of them. They\u2019re just wrong, but we don\u2019t include them in the discussion of the so-called mainstream media or the partisan media or the liberal Democrat spin machine, because they admit up front what they are. Same thing with me and this program and other people who do what I do. There\u2019s no question where we come from, and so bias is never a criticism leveled. They may say we\u2019re wrong. They say we\u2019re all these other things, but it is the people who have just the same amount of bias, the same energy, the same desire and the same focus for particular outcomes who deny all that that, are the ones that are suffering today, the ones that don\u2019t get it, the ones who are facing a huge wake-up call. They\u2019re the ones losing audience left and right. They don\u2019t know why. They won\u2019t admit why, and they come up with fixes for their problems that don\u2019t address their problems whatsoever, and they become even bigger laughingstocks. This is what\u2019s happening to pretty much all of the mainstream press even as they sit around and refuse to admit it.<\/line>It\u2019s what\u2019s happening to the Democratic Party. It\u2019s well known that they\u2019re liberal but they won\u2019t admit they\u2019re liberal just like the mainstream press is liberal but they won\u2019t admit they\u2019re liberal. The Democratic Party will not admit it. They want to come up with new terms, progressive, moderate, what have you, because they know, they know that if they are tagged with the liberal label they\u2019ve got an even bigger problem, and that is overcoming their liberalism. So they try to hide behind other names for it, but the simple fact of the matter is everybody now knows who liberals are, where they are, what they want to do, what kind of people they are in terms of the way they go about their business and that they\u2019re not to be trusted. And when that happens to you in the news business, when you\u2019re not to be trusted, well, I\u2019m sorry: Your days are numbered. You can sit there in denial all you want. Same thing is happening to the Democratic Party. There is absolutely no question about it and they\u2019re getting even worse. Now, one of the things that happens when you\u2019re in this state of denial, you get enraged and you get angry and you try to prove everybody wrong by becoming even more what you are while lying about it all the more. <\/line>That\u2019s what the Democrats are doing. “Well, we\u2019re just not getting our story out. Well, we\u2019re not getting our message out.” And then they go and pull stunts like they did, those three of them last Thursday, and they just hammer another nail in their coffin. Then we have these media analysts out there who themselves are liberal who want to paper it over and say, “Well, it was just bad journalism. Well, they just got a little over eager.” Well, why? Why did they get over eager? It\u2019s the one thing these people just cannot admit. So they have a bit of a dilemma, all journalism is opinion journalism. The ones who admit it and proceed on that basis do okay. They find an audience. They survive economically. The ones who refuse to admit it just sit there and flounder and basically live a lie, and when they\u2019re called on it they get even more radical, they get even more angry to try to prove everybody wrong. Actually don\u2019t try to prove everybody wrong. That\u2019s when the let\u2019s get-even-with-\u2019em-ism starts, and they get even more radical, and they live in the illusion that they still have their monopoly or they still set the agenda on a daily basis and that they still control it and that just starts a vicious downward spiral and cycle where they show even more what their limitations are and basically they put forth as loud and clear as possible that they\u2019re not who they say they are and thereby announcing it even more. <\/line>Now, there\u2019s a summary here of the whole memo, a summary of the whole report in bullet point fashion — and I don\u2019t want to go through the whole thing but they do list some of the most serious defects in the reporting and production of the story, such as the failure to obtain clear authentication of any of the Killian documents from any document examiner, the false statements in the September 8th TV segment that an expert had authenticated the Killian documents when all he had done was authentic one signature from one document used in this segment. If all this sounds familiar, it is. It\u2019s already all been uncovered. This proves once again the total lack of necessity for this independent commission if they\u2019re gonna come up with what was already known which is what they\u2019ve done. All these details in this summary, the only thing that we couldn\u2019t do that the commission caused to happen was the firing of these people, but other than that the news that\u2019s released here really isn\u2019t news: <\/line><\/a> “The failure of 60 Minutes Wednesday management team to scrutinize the publicly available and at times controversial background of the source of the documents, Bill Burkett.” Sorry, been done. Been there, done that. “The failure to find and interview the individual who was understood at the outset to be lieutenant colonel Burkett\u2019s source of the Killian documents and thus to establish the chain of custody.” People have already been down there trying to find out where Burkett got this stuff. That\u2019s already been done. The failure to establish a basis for the statement in the segment that the documents were taken from Colonel Killian\u2019s personal files. I could go through this whole list. We already know it, it\u2019s already been done, it\u2019s already been dealed. The thing that remains after of all of these points: “Why? Why there was there failure to find and interview the individual who was understood to be Burkett\u2019s source? Why did 60 Minutes management fail to scrutinize publicly available and at times controversial background of Bill Burkett? We know why they didn\u2019t. They didn\u2019t want to blow up their source, they wanted the story. They wanted the story to be true, and why? Because they had an axe to grind with George W. Bush. I find something very interesting about all this. Richard Nixon has gotten his revenge on Dan Rather. <\/line>END TRANSCRIPT<\/line><\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

RUSH: All right, the CBS report. You know, there\u2019s still some out there who aren\u2019t going to get it, still some out there who aren\u2019t going to admit it. I had two cable channels on this morning when the CBS report hit. Fox News went wall-to-wall with it. CNN maybe gave it 90 seconds. CNN […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":25,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","ngg_post_thumbnail":0},"categories":[],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\nEra of Free Pass for Liberalism Is Over - The Rush Limbaugh Show<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/01\/10\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Era of Free Pass for Liberalism Is Over - The Rush Limbaugh Show\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"RUSH: All right, the CBS report. You know, there\u2019s still some out there who aren\u2019t going to get it, still some out there who aren\u2019t going to admit it. I had two cable channels on this morning when the CBS report hit. Fox News went wall-to-wall with it. CNN maybe gave it 90 seconds. CNN […]\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:image\" content=\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over.Par.0002.ImageFile.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"21 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/\",\"name\":\"The Rush Limbaugh Show\",\"description\":\"Excellence In Broadcasting\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/01\/10\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over\/#primaryimage\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over.Par.0002.ImageFile.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over.Par.0002.ImageFile.jpg\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/01\/10\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over\/#webpage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/01\/10\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over\/\",\"name\":\"Era of Free Pass for Liberalism Is Over - The Rush Limbaugh Show\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/01\/10\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over\/#primaryimage\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-05-19T07:00:15+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2011-05-19T07:00:15+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/01\/10\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/01\/10\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/01\/10\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Era of Free Pass for Liberalism Is Over\"}]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#personlogo\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/author\/admin\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Era of Free Pass for Liberalism Is Over - The Rush Limbaugh Show","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/01\/10\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over\/","twitter_card":"summary","twitter_title":"Era of Free Pass for Liberalism Is Over - The Rush Limbaugh Show","twitter_description":"RUSH: All right, the CBS report. You know, there\u2019s still some out there who aren\u2019t going to get it, still some out there who aren\u2019t going to admit it. I had two cable channels on this morning when the CBS report hit. Fox News went wall-to-wall with it. CNN maybe gave it 90 seconds. CNN […]","twitter_image":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over.Par.0002.ImageFile.jpg","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"21 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/","name":"The Rush Limbaugh Show","description":"Excellence In Broadcasting","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/01\/10\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over\/#primaryimage","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over.Par.0002.ImageFile.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over.Par.0002.ImageFile.jpg"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/01\/10\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over\/#webpage","url":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/01\/10\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over\/","name":"Era of Free Pass for Liberalism Is Over - The Rush Limbaugh Show","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/01\/10\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over\/#primaryimage"},"datePublished":"2011-05-19T07:00:15+00:00","dateModified":"2011-05-19T07:00:15+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/01\/10\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/01\/10\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/01\/10\/era_of_free_pass_for_liberalism_is_over\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Era of Free Pass for Liberalism Is Over"}]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#personlogo","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"},"url":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/author\/admin\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22350"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/users\/25"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=22350"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22350\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22350"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22350"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22350"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}