"CentralNJBill" wrote in message
...
Link didn't work but I might as well add my two cents. I don't like
most of
what Howard Stern does, but he has an opinion and adds to the public
discourse. You may not agree with him, but squelching his ability to
voice
his opinion--an opinion that's apparently shared by a legion of
fans--diminishes all of us.

His ban by Clear Channel is just another reason why corporations
shouldn't
have the ability to own so many broadcast outlets.


Clear Channel's ownership of so many situations may in fact be a
problem for the industry, but I have no clue why you think Stern adds
to the "public discourse. " While Stern has hopped on the
Bush-bashing band wagon of late because he got his wrist slapped, his
show for the past several years has been based on sex and pretty
juvenile attempts to titillate his audience. Apparently, he finally
pushed the envelope too far by discussing preferences in anal sex and
"endowment" length. So if you want to listen to Stern, fine. But
let's not makes this an issue of Stern being punished for having
opinions that add to the public discourse, like he's doing anything
more than trying to boost ratings by being crude. The way he's trying
to wrap himself in the First Amendment is nauseating enough.