Campaign 2008 has now claimed its first talk show host for going over the line: Air America talk show host Randi Rhodes, who was suspended from the progressive talk radio network after using expletives to describe Democrats Hillary Clinton and Geraldine Ferraro at a meeting of station affiliates, has reportedly quit the network.

Now the scramble among reporters will be to find out if she did indeed quit, was encouraged to resign, or just had enough and decided to leave the struggling network.

UPDATE: The Huffington Post offers new details. Here’s a key part of it:

The Huffington Post has learned that Randi Rhodes quit Air America after being asked by the network to apologize for her inflammatory remarks against Hillary Clinton and Geraldine Ferraro.

A source at Air America, who asked to remain anonymous, said, “Many people screw up and then apologize and move on. Like Imus. Like David Shuster. Like Jay Rockefeller on McCain. Like Obama on Rezko. Like Hillary on Bosnia. Randi Rhodes refused to apologize for her obscene comments and has chosen instead to terminate her relationship with Air America.”

The source also said that there is no love lost between Rhodes and her colleagues at the network. “No one is upset. She made the move but there’s relief and joy.”

The official statement on the Air America website says this:

Last week Air America suspended Randi Rhodes for abusive, obscene language at a recent public appearance in San Francisco which was sponsored by an Air America affiliate station.

Air America Media was informed last night by Ms. Rhodes that she has chosen to terminate her employment with the company.

We wish her well and thank her for past services to Air America. We will soon announce exciting new talent.

Radio Ink notes that Rhodes is likely to land somewhere else rather quickly:

But Rhodes may not be off the air for long: On the KKGN website, PD John Scott had early word of Rhodes’ AAR exit and says, “We are bringing her back.” Scott says that on Monday, April 14, “it will be our pleasure to announce the return of Randi Rhodes to the Green 960 family.” Whether that return will be with KKGN itself or through a new syndication deal is yet to be determined.

Here’s the link to the San Francisco based station’s short post which now reads:

“We have been very frustrated the past few days in our efforts to rectify the Randi Rhodes Situation (her suspension by her network, Air America Radio). It is our understanding that today (April 9th) she is no longer an employee of Air America. So we are bringing her back.”

Monday, April 14th at 4pm… it will be our pleasure to announce the return of Randi Rhodes to the Green 960 family.

Be sure to read our previous post which put Rhodes’ suspension in perspective.

What’s most notable about this incident is that it shows that there is a line that can’t be crossed — particularly in a divisive election year.

Vigorous, even controversial discussions or characterizations could spark denunciations but aren’t on the same level as name-calling swearing (even if, as some argued, it was done to be funny or even satirical).

It also underscores the changing nature of Air America, which started out as a company in which progressives had great hope that they could challenge the conservative talk radio’s dominance in the marketplace or, at the very least, checkmate it.. The company has since had problems, reorganized, and was sold. Its present programming is not quite as far to the left as it had been when it debuted amid great fanfare.

Also: given its need to carve out cohesive progressive audiences, Air America could not afford to alienate Hillary Clinton supporters en-masse. Did that play a factor in the suspension and — if it turns out she was actually fired - -departure?

More details will come out via reports — and most certainly via Rhodes herself.

Was there a genuine impasse? Was she basically forced to quit? Or did she simply feel Air America didn’t back her and wanted to move on? Will she be picked up by the same company that syndicates progressive talkers Ed Schultz (who himself created controversy by calling Senator John McCain a warmonger, but that wasn’t quite on the same level as Rhodes’ problem) and Stephanie Miller? Or is she fated to be a local host or syndicated by a lower-profile company?

Stay tuned. Literally.

NOTE THE UPDATE: It sounds as if she was given an ultimatum — apologize or leave so she left. But Rhodes will most certainly have more to say about this at a later date.

Democratic Senator Hillary Clinton’s efforts to reunite the Democratic Party — and get the votes of some independent voters — could become tougher than ever with news that former President Bill Clinton appeared on conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh’s show…on the day of the Texas primary.

If the story catches on, it will likely strike a decidedly sour note with many Democrats — and adds to the increasing instances in this campaign that anything will be done to get votes.

Why? Because Limbaugh is considered the quintessential demonizer of Democrats by Democrats and this means the former President was trying to help the conservative talk show host’s efforts to get Republicans to cross over in the Texas primary to vote for Hillary Clinton.

There is an irony here since Bill Clinton helped Limbaugh become quite a wealthy man over the years. But here it seems to be “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

The “crime” is made worse by the fact that the avowed purpose of Limbaugh and those talkers who joined him in this effort to get GOP crossovers was to a) throw a monkey wrench into Obama’s string of victories and break his momentum b) help force the Democratic battle for the nomination to go on longer and become more bitter in order to weaken the Democrats and help Republican chances c) get Senator Clinton as candidate because some Republicans perceived her as the weaker candidate.

Even worse: the Clinton’s have not been easily accessible to some PROGRESSIVE talk show hosts such as Ed Schultz.

But it turns out as if there apparently was a mutual overlap of interests here — the desire of Limbaugh, his fill-in host that day and other conservatives to influence the race and the former President to do whatever it took to get every single vote for Hillary Clinton, even if it meant crossover votes from Republicans who wanted to weaken the Democrats. Crossover, schmossover, weaken Obama, schmeaken Obama — as long as it’s a vote for Hillary…

It’s an almost mind-boggling development — and one that could undercut the Clinton’s credibility among many Democrats. Some blog reaction:

–Andrew Sullivan:

You may have missed it - almost everyone missed it - but Bill Clinton was on Rush Limbaugh’s show the day of the Texas primary. You can hear the radio here. Limbaugh himself was sick that day, apparently, but he had already urged Republicans to cross over to keep Hillary Clinton in the race. Bill saw an opening - and went there.

Now just wrap your mind around this: the Clintons were happy to support a cynical, partisan Republican campaign to wound the Democratic front-runner, and they were brazen enough to go on the Limbaugh show to do so.

There also seems little doubt that Republican mischief played a real role in affecting the results. And they call Obama’s call for them to release their tax returns a tactic worthy of Ken Starr. I repeat: the chutzpah and the cynicism just leave you speechless. And as you find it impossible to do much but splutter, the Clintons plow on with new self-serving lies.

–TPM Cafe has a MUST READ HERE with Limbaugh’s campaign to get Republicans to cross over and vote for Hillary Clinton. Read it all. TPM notes:

Rush was saying the day before that he felt a “flu” coming on, and then Tuesday he was “sick” and had the substitute host, and then Wednesday he was back to crow about his achievement in getting Hillary elected.

–Justin Gardner:

Folks, this is an ex-President! That is absolutely nuts! But he apparently wanted to get all those ditto heads to come vote for Hillary so she could stay in the race….

And to think she made an issue of Obama’s mention of Ronald Reagan, as if he were some Republican in Democrat’s clothing. The “do and say anything” crew strikes again.

–Prairie Weather:

Oh that is so unfair the Clintons are just dedicated Americans trying to get back the White House at any cost to save us from ourselves to show how much George Bush has taught them to get around the “no third term” rule to help small children and little old people out while keeping our defenses strong and changing our economy back into a bubble.

–Comments from Left Field recounts the infamous “mistake” Limbaugh made on his now defunct TV show when he showed a photo of then first-daughter Chelsea Clinton when mentioning a dog. He writes:

Interestingly, the Clinton campaign has engaged in the most unusual tactic of embracing the right in order to wrestle from Obama a nomination that would seem to be his based upon math alone. One thing that seems to have escaped scrutiny up until now is that years after Rush Limbaugh called Bill Clinton’s daughter a dog, the former president was actually a guest on Limbaugh’s show.

Rush wasn’t there, he was conveniently sick so that the two wouldn’t have to share a studio together. This still doesn’t change the fact that Rush had been calling for Republicans to vote for Hillary. Clinton’s appearance with a guest host only seemed to endorse this call.

…It may seem hypocritical to point to Republican support for Clinton as a bad thing when Obama partisans point to Republican support for Obama a good thing, but here’s the simple truth of the matter. Obamacans, as they are called, are planning on voting for Obama in the General Election. Clintonicans (I made that up, and I can see one of the reasons why no one really uses it) seem to be looking instead at merely sabotaging the Democratic nomination process.

But, in general this is simply the onset of what seems to be a disturbing pattern on the Clintons relying upon the right to take out Obama.

This became even more apparent when Clinton decided to become the president of the John McCain fan club. I know, I believe, what she was trying to do here, but I also believe it failed fantastically due to a miscalculation regarding how we view the world around us.

There IS a pattern now emerging from the Clinton campaign. Not a nice one. And not one that will appeal to many independent voters.

Was Limbaugh sick? As Marshall implies, this seems set up in a way to provide some “plausible deniability” so that Clinton was not tarnished with actually appearing with Limbaugh — but would be on with a substitute host. If the story gains “legs,” look for that argument from the Clinton camp and its defenders.

P.S. Did John McCain ever appear on Schultz’s or Randi Rhodes’ show on the day of a primary where Democrats could cross over and vote for him instead of other Republican nominees? Can you IMAGINE how McCain would have been skewered by Republicans if he did?

It has been said that the talk radio market is fickle. But this announcement from the office of progressive talker Ed Schultz suggests he’s someone who will be around for awhile:

The Ed Schultz Show is proud to announce that we have reached 3.25 million listeners. The latest numbers make Ed Schultz the most listened to Progressive radio host yet again. This news follows Ed coming in at #5 on Talkers Magazine’s Heavy 100 and Radio & Records nominating Ed for syndicated personality of the year.

The good news doesn’t stop there. Ed Schultz now has as many listeners as Bill O’Reilly.

And, indeed, this link to Talkers Magazine shows the breakdown. Schultz is in the 7th place category with O’Reilly and several others. The closest other progressive talkers are in 11th place — Randi Rhodes and Stephanie Miller.

What’s going on? As someone who travels extensively in my other incarnation (yesterday I drove 360 miles doing 3 shows in two counties on a trip that lasted 12 hours) I listen to a LOT of talk radio, of all political persuasions. Anyone who likes to talk a lot and has opinions can fill talk show time. BUT not ALL talk show hosts are top rate broadcasters.

Schultz (like his nemesis Rush Limbaugh on the right) is an excellent broadcaster. The pace of his show is quick. He offers a lot of variety. And unlike some other talkers, he’ll let callers who angrily disagree with him have a decent amount of airtime to argue with him. But the key with Schultz is less him being left, or right, or center left or center right.

The key is that he knows how to use the radio, has a well-produced show, jumps on top of breaking stories and is not Johnny One Note. In other words: Schultz would get lots of listeners if he was a conservative talker or just a interview show. He is a BROADCAST talent who offers listeners and advertisers a solid product. If some progressive talkers fall by the wayside in coming years, it’s likely that Schultz (who is not part of Air America) will remain standing.