Limbaugh claimed Wash. Post's former Red America blogger was not a plagiarist -- but blogger admitted it
SUMMARY: Rush Limbaugh falsely claimed that after "the left-wing fringe threw a hissy fit" about The Washington Post's hiring of Ben Domenech to write for a conservative weblog on the newspaper's website, the Post "concocted some phony excuse that the guy that they had hired was a plagiarist" and "he was gone inside of two weeks." In fact, on the day of his resignation -- four days after his blog for the Post began -- Domenech admitted to using other writers' work "inappropriately and without attribution."
On the April 12 edition of his nationally syndicated radio program, Rush Limbaugh falsely claimed that after "the left-wing fringe threw a hissy fit" about The Washington Post's hiring of Ben Domenech to write Red America, a conservative weblog on washingtonpost.com, the Post "concocted some phony excuse that the guy that they had hired was a plagiarist" and "he was gone inside of two weeks." Limbaugh added that the allegations of plagiarism against Domenech were "a bunch of garbage [meant] to impugn his character and reputation at the same time." In fact, on the day of his March 24 resignation, only four days after his blog for the Post began, Domenech admitted to using other writers' work "inappropriately and without attribution."
Almost immediately after Domenech's Red America began on March 21, charges of plagiarism surfaced. On March 24, Domenech resigned, and posted two statements on the blog RedState (here and here). Contrary to Limbaugh's claim that the plagiarism charges were a "phony excuse" and "a bunch of garbage," Domenech admitted in the later statement to having used other writers' work "inappropriately and without attribution":
I want to apologize to National Review Online, my friends and colleagues here at RedState, and to any others that have been affected over the past few days. I also want to apologize to my previous editors and writers whose work I used inappropriately and without attribution. There is no excuse for this -- nor is there an excuse for any obfuscation in my earlier statement.
As Media Matters for America has noted, one major plagiarism charge against Domenech involved signing his name to a column in his college newspaper that appears to have been lifted entirely from conservative humorist P.J. O'Rourke's book Modern Manners: An Etiquette Book for Rude People (Atlantic Monthly Press, 1990). Other examples of apparent plagiarism by Domenech, including the lifting portions of film reviews, can be found here, here, and here.
From the April 12 broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:
LIMBAUGH: Now, OK, The Washington Post is not liberal. This is -- give it up. Give -- give it up. You're beating your heads against a wall, and you're going to get bruised here pretty badly. Cranial swelling is not long down the road for you people. I mean, this -- this is ridiculous. Didn't The Washington Post just start -- yes, they did -- within the past month, they started a conservative blog on the website. And their readers and the left-wing fringe threw a hissy fit, and the liberal Washington Post buckled just as fast as a bunch of congressmen in front of an immigration protest. And they concocted some phony excuse that the guy that they had hired was a plagiarist, and that they didn't know it. And so, he was gone inside of two weeks. Probably created more attention and hits to that blog at The Washington Post than any of their liberal bloggers -- but they couldn't handle the heat from the left, and so they couldn't offend their audience, and so they had to get rid of the conservative blogger. At the same time, they had to put out a bunch of garbage to impugn his character and reputation at the same time.
Don't tell us you're not liberal! That's where you're going wrong -- be -- what is so wrong with being liberal? I thought being a progressive, being a liberal was something to be proud of! I am proud to say I'm a conservative!
Buckled just as fast as a junkie blowhard in front of a housekeeper bringing him his Oxi supply.
Or, buckled as fast as someone with a cyst on his bottom presenting himself for his selective service physical.
Rush must be one of those cysto-hookers Tucker was whining about.
and L doesn't lie!
"I mean, this -- this is ridiculous. Didn't The Washington Post just start -- yes, they did -- within the past month, they started a conservative blog on the website."
Yes, starting a conservative blog is clearly the action of a liberal paper. You lost me here, Rush. Why would they do that if they were so liberal? Perhaps because of pressure from the right, but then why would they care if they had a liberal bias? If that were really the case then I'm very curious why Brady would say he wanted to hire another conservative blogger. Seems to me that he would have learned his lesson!
"Probably created more attention and hits to that blog at The Washington Post than any of their liberal bloggers..."
What liberal bloggers? I think it should be noted here that this is a dubious claim at best, and certainly misinformation.
A strange, bizarre parallel universe where truth is mutilated, facts are twisted, and no lie is spared in the defense of his perverted world view.
I was just about to ask what alternate reality, what bizarro world this numbskull lives in!
Sheesh.
But the worst part is that some people are ignorant enough to believe this big bag of gas actually has something worthwhile to say.
Pull the plug, someone, please!
That he didn't know the Domenech story. It wasn't widely reported. He probably scanned it and formed his own opinion of the news, which is really all he ever does.
Still, mind blowing that it got by him to make such a stupid remark.
Rush's listeners don't bother to check the facts (blanket statement, perhaps, but I'll bet at least 90% true) and he is well aware that they will take what he says as fact. It's just another opportunity for Rush to attack those evil, godless liberals, and show them for the intolerant bunch they are - and all of his ditto heads nod in agreement, while the truth slips by under the radar.
... Might I suggest MMFA give each of these pitiful rightwing creatures their own box, and add the latest lie and distortion to the growing list? The the archive would have a "bullet list" of offenses?
It's like going to the zoo each day, and discovering that the bear is STILL a bear, and has done what the bear does every day. At first, you say, "Wow! Look at that bear. He does interesting things. He eats honey, and rares back on his hind legs. He roars." After the third or fourth day, the newness has worn off. He's no longer a curiousity. He becomes predictable, ordinary, even boring.
It's the same with a weasel or a sloth, or perhaps a jackel ... more appropriate analogies to Limbaugh.
I understand why MMFA MUST do this, for the record, to keep from becoming complacent, to chronicle that the travesty of Rightwing propaganda which MUST be documented in all its fraudulent glory.
But it gets tiring saying, YUP, he's done it again. He's invented facts, lied, made up crap to try to bolster his bogus "point". Maybe a "shorthand" might help with responding to this daily onslaught of garbage? How about if we just said "DITTO" ... or something quick and painless like that which expresses agreement without having to think up NEW ways of dispairing at this pack of liars who daily destroy INTEGRITY itself?
After Senator Joe "Tailgunner" McCarthy had terrorized Americans with his Red-Scare for months, he was confronted by Chief Attorney for the Army Joseph N. Welch, who said, "Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness. Let us not assassinate this lad further, Senator. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you no sense of decency?"
How about the shorthand for Limbaugh, "At long last, sir, have you no sense of decency?"
I agree to give these people there own box that can be filled. Or what about having topics to follow how each individual seems to be directed by an organization that says: jump on this or that topic. In between topics they invent stuff.
However, although these people become boring, they have many followers and can be examples for others. Therefor: keep posting and exposing these people and perhaps publish a book about them and there venom.
A scorecard could come in handy. Unfortunately most of these people would have a lying average well over 900. I think it would also be helpful to grade the lies. Lying about some missing white girl or whether a newspaper is liberal or conservative would be the equivalent of a single. Lying or twisting the words when trying to quote someone could be a double. Lying to defend any Neocon talking point would be a triple. And covering up the fact that we invaded a sovereign nation based on lies would be grounds for execution.
regarding what you just wrote about covering up terminal incompetence of the invasion, link to here and scan to Rummy's Death Watch:
[link to www.pamspaulding.com]
More MAJOR generals are refusing to back the lies of the Right and their Fearless Leader.
Here's a story in this mornings New York Times.
[link to www.nytimes.com]
Five generals in the last week or two have come out against him. It's time for him to go. I just wish Rumsfeld and Bush could be held accountable. If not in this life, then surely in the afterlife.
I really liked the link. a lot of other interesting stories. I wish I had time to read them all. I've bookmarked it and will get back to reading it later. i can't believe there is so much hate out there among God's so called followers.
"Rush Limbaugh is a big, fat idiot."
"Lies and the lying liars that tell them."
Now, Limbaugh is lying about a lie (the plagiarism). In his warped universe, do these two negatives make a positive? Does the second lie erase the first? While two negatives can make a positive in math and in some semantic situations, two negatives in this situation merely make a bigger, fatter idiot of Rush.
Rush's spew is for the people who wouldn't know a blog from a mousepad. Why go online to get your news when Rush gives you all the news you need just sitting there with the radio on? And it all must be true, because, well, he couldn't say it on the radio if it weren't true, now would he? I mean, there's laws and stuff!
Conservatives can't just be right: thay have to have always been right. On everything. Reagan was right. Nixon was right. Joe McCarthy was right. Herbert Hoover was right. William Howard Taft was right. And Dreyfus was guilty. And so was Dred Scott.
but how is that with more-than-left-to-center opinion makers? Isn't the guilty-correct reversed? I think it will.
...and had no problem repudiating him once they found out the truth.
Adults admit mistakes, learn from them, grow.
Not all Liberals and Progressives are adults.
Most Liberals and Progressives will admit this.
With the advent of Limbaugh, conservatives , rather than admit an unpleasant truth, will lie and listen to lies.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
I think it is important sometimes to highlight whether there are differences in tactics between the left and the right on reporting and learning. as you show, these differences are there, but these guys (and and women) try to demonize democrats by suggesting they are: bigots (port deal), weak (war on terror and againt [semi-automatic] weapons), activists (equallity for all as described in the constitution and amentments), tree huggers (global warming), hateful (against christians), anti-life (let the family chose, not the neighbours or the government), communists;
who have a hidden agenda (like gays, hispanics, african-americans, jews) to dominate the USA (in the supreme court, the house, and presidency)and incarcerate republican christians.
Limbaugh is clearly uninformed on this matter. Not even Michelle Malkin could defend Domenich in lieu of the evidence presented.
But Rush did get to say "left", "liberal", "progressive" and "left-wing fringe" a total of nine times just in what MMFA posted. So he's got that going for him.
and that is what makes this post (and similar posts) so important: whether L was informed or uninformed is actually not important. Fact is that everything that is not working out as he wants it the 'left' is bashed, no matter what the 'left'is and whether other groups are involved.
Michelle Malkin heard the news, read the reports of Domenech's plagiarism, and said he should resign.
The folks at RedState went ballistic.
They could not understand how one of their own could refuse to stand by their man until that man actually admitted his flaws.
She didn't wait until he admitted his flaws - she thought for herself.
They found that incredibly offensive.
"That's where you're going wrong -- be -- what is so wrong with being liberal? I thought being a progressive, being a liberal was something to be proud of! I am proud to say I'm a conservative!" --Rush Limbaugh
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Good for you Rush. But I disagree. Humility is much more admirable than pride. Pride, especially the way Rush views it, is a sin. I am so tired of people espousing how proud they are about themselves. It is just egocentric bunk.
Humility is what should be what we aspire to. Limbaugh provides a cautionary example of the terrible kind of person pride tends to create.
A common thread I have noticed from Limbaugh, Savage and O'Reilly are that all of them have huge egos. After researching into their backgrounds all three have things that appear to have damaged their self-esteem (Savage's homosexuality and subsequent denial, O'Reilly toiling for years in tabloid journalism, Limbaugh's obesity and women problems). From their own doubts about themselves, they have projected their alter-egos into their radio personas. These Supermen they created can never be wrong, every word they speak is the gospel truth. Even if it is not, the might of their will MAKES IT SO. This is at least, how I perceive these right-wing blowhards. Also, they cannot stand personal criticism. It makes them SOOOO angry. It deflates their pumped of notion of self-worth which they derive from their legions of devoted fans. More rational observers (Franken, Olbermann, etc) see themselves for what they really are, and have no trouble mocking themselves or looking at all sides of an issue. Just my two cents.
that wasn't two cents worth. That was two trillions worth. Good stuff. Yes, they are bombastic, bloated blokes. Rush has his ditto heads. Can you imagine wanting such a thing? With people that ditto you, you'd never grow.
Your best buds are those that say, "Just now, Holly dear, my acutely deluded Holly, you're fulla poop."
"Humility is what should be what we aspire to. Limbaugh provides a cautionary example of the terrible kind of person pride tends to create."
And now I pine for more of Open_Mind's mind. That was beautiful, Open_Mind. The Bible warns us of pride...and common sense should too. Does Limbaugh ever read the Bible? He must to be warned of pride, since he seemingly lacks common sense.
and Rush Limbaugh is either ignorant of the Domenech affair or lying through his teeth. These are not opinions; they are objective truths.
The true scandal is that our society has degenerated to a point at which both of these creeps, and countless others like them, are given national media platforms from which to spout their drivel while voices of reason, honesty, and knowledge are drowned out, ignored, or silenced.
Media Matters does a great job in exposing these people, but we, its readers, need to do our part too. We should commit some of these episodes to memory and bring them up whenever family members or co-workers start praising the wisdom of Limbaugh et al. All advertisers know that word of mouth is the best way to spread information about a product. We should adopt the same strategy with respect to the right-wing misinformers. Then, I believe, Media Matters will have an even more significant impact, and perhaps the cleansing of this poison from our national discourse will truly begin.
I forgot where this came from, but: "Those who control the past, control the future; Those who control the future, control the present; Those who control the present, control the past."
The Neocons who presently control the present, are attempting to control the past (rewrite History). Limbaugh is a case example with this MMFA story.
What was Limbaugh thinking when he made this statement? Not only did he mislead but he did so in such a stupid way that literally anyone could find out he was lying.
...Is it that Mr. Oxycontin himself is still not in court for his drug violations?