Limbaugh still defending his Michael J. Fox attacks; MSNBC's Slager falsely asserted Fox "has not said whether or not" he took medication before making ads
SUMMARY: Rush Limbaugh defended his criticism of Michael J. Fox, claiming: "Daffy Duck could have done a commercial for Claire McCaskill, saying the same things that Fox did, misleading about stem cell research ... and my reaction would've been the same." MSNBC's Melissa Slager said that Fox "has not said whether or not he took" his Parkinson's medication during the shooting of his political ads, even though The New York Times reported that a Fox spokesman "said his tremors were caused by his medication."
On the October 25 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, while responding to criticism of statements he made about actor Michael J. Fox's appearance in a campaign ad for Missouri Democratic Senate candidate Claire McCaskill, Rush Limbaugh claimed: "Daffy Duck could have done a commercial for Claire McCaskill, saying the same things that Fox did, misleading about stem cell research ... and my reaction would've been the same." As Media Matters for America noted, Limbaugh declared on October 23 that because Fox, who has Parkinson's disease, was "moving all around and shaking" in the ad, his physical appearance was "purely an act." Limbaugh then added that Fox "[e]ither didn't take his medication or he's acting," and has since refused to apologize for suggesting that Fox was "acting" in the ad.
Also on the October 25 broadcast, Limbaugh claimed that the media's response to his remarks has been that of "a hysterical mother who is afraid her little boy won't be able to defend himself after he picked a fight." Limbaugh also again claimed of Fox's appearance in the McCaskill ad: "This is a strategy, it is a tactic that the Democrats have used as long as I've been observing politics and, I'm sorry, the days are over where I follow the script." He concluded: "I stand by what I said. I take back none of what I said. I wouldn't rephrase it any differently. It is what I believe. It is what I think. It is what I have found to be true."
On the October 25 edition of MSNBC News Live, host Melissa Slager aired Limbaugh's non-apology and added that "Michael J. Fox has, in the past, admitted to not taking his medication before certain appearances, but he has not said whether or not he took it during the shooting of these political ads." However, according to an October 25 New York Times article, "[a] spokesman for Mr. Fox said his tremors were caused by his medication." Slager made her comment just moments after she aired Limbaugh's similar statement that "I'm just suggesting that if he's done it once, done it twice, could he have done it in the McCaskill ad?" Slager did not address Limbaugh's initial assertion that Fox's appearance in the ad was "purely an act."
From the October 25 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:
LIMBAUGH: This is not about Parkinson's disease to me, and this not about Michael J. Fox and it never was and, to me, it is not personal and never has been. I don't know him. I've no -- I've never met him. I know of him only through his career as an actor and a political activist.
I think when anyone climbs into the arena of ideas -- the political arena of ideas -- particularly during a heated campaign, they do not get the special privilege of being the only fighter allowed to throw a punch. There are not special people among us who get to enter the political arena of ideas and say whatever they want; they can mislead, they can misquote, they can misrepresent, they can even lie; and yet we're supposed to, if they are victims of something, stand back, be compassionate, be tolerant and understand and not respond.
Sorry, I don't follow the script. Daffy Duck could have done a commercial for Claire McCaskill, saying the same things that Fox did, misleading about stem cell research and Jim Talent, or in Maryland with Ben Cardin and Michael Steele, and my reaction would've been the same; I would have reacted and responded to Daffy Duck. Now, the idea that certain people, because of their victim status, are allowed to enter the fray with impunity is something I am not going to subscribe to.
This is a strategy, it is a tactic that the Democrats have used for as long as I've been observing politics and, I'm sorry, the days are over where I follow the script. It may sound cold-hearted or mean-spirited but, ladies and gentlemen, I have my ideas, and I have my principles, and I think they're right, and I think they should prevail. And when people -- who are running for office, represent the things I believe in -- are lied about or are misrepresented, you can rest assured I am going to defend those principles and ideas and the people who stand for them and represent them. I am not going to be fooled -- fooled or lulled into standing aside; I'm not going to be intimidated under the pretext that some people have a protected, ensured right to say whatever they want simply because they are unfortunate, they are victims or what have you.
The drive-by media today, in most instances, is acting like a hysterical mother who is afraid her little boy won't be able to defend himself after he picked a fight and so they are attacking me and others for being insensitive, cold-hearted, cruel, mocking, what have you.
I don't know whether Michael Fox assumed that he would step into the arena of ideas and have impunity, whether anybody would be prone to respond to what he said. But I stand by what I said. I take back none of what I said. I wouldn't rephrase it any differently. It is what I believe. It is what I think. It is what I have found to be true.
From the October 25 edition of MSNBC News Live:
SLAGER: There's a major controversy swirling over several campaign ads just 13 days before the election. One between actor and activist Michael J. Fox and conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh. When Fox shot ads for some Democratic candidates, the effects of his Parkinson's disease were clearly visible. Limbaugh said Fox was either off his medication or acting. Limbaugh has gotten a lot of backlash for it, being called cold and insensitive. But about two hours ago, on his show, Limbaugh says he's not sorry for what he said, and he explained why.
LIMBAUGH [video clip]: I have the opportunity to set the record straight where the drive-by media is being entirely incorrect and wrong on purpose, and knowingly in my case. They're saying that I said Michael J. Fox was acting. Some of them got it right and said I said he's either acting or off his medications. I said he was off his medications, or speculated, because he's admitted that he does that in order to show the ravages of the disease -- which I said, by they way. It's not a bad thing to do when you're trying to raise consciousness about it. I was not even critical of it. I'm just suggesting that if he's done it once, done it twice, could he have done it again in the McCaskill ad? Speculated.
SLAGER: This is, of course, in regard to stem cell research, with -- which Michael J. Fox is in favor of. Michael J. Fox has, in the past, admitted to not taking his medication before certain appearances, but he has not said whether or not he took it during the shooting of these political ads.
THIS is direct from the PUB playbook... keep on defending the indefensible, until people finally turn around to the victim (FOX) and say, "Yeah! Why DIDN'T you tell us you didn't take your life-preserving medicine!! How selfish of you and your life-threatening disease!!"
Limbaugh is a weasel... Truly, I wonder how he would appear if he didn't take HIS medicine. Fidgity and flacid, I bet.
will ALWAYS pick on the weak, the different, those with ailments, the ill or the weak, in order to try to boost their own near non-existent self esteem.
Bullies cause suffering, to be sure, but demonstrate that it is the BULLIES who are most in need of our sympathy and pity.
Rush is the consummate Bully. If considered at all, it should be only with pity; a thoroughly dysfunctional human being ... with a big mouth.
...I heard Limbaugh claiming that 'one' cannot ever disagree with victims ... said it was a precedent setup by the Democrats/liberals... (used Jersey Girls, Katrina victims as examples). Just another poor rationalization for using dirty tactics and having no real argument.
There is a shred of truth in the assertion that some people are trotted out for political reasons, and if they are a victim somehow that does insulate them from criticism.
However, that being said, I don't believe this is the case with Fox at all. Limbaugh's mean spirited take is just wrong here. If Michael J.Fox were put out there to promote some bond issue, then maybe Rush's criticism would be valid, but he is not. He is a sick man promoting a procedure that could save his life and many like him.
Whether he was or was not on medication at the filming is irrelevant to me, this was a very personal ad for him and the criticism leveled at him by Limbaugh is flat out cruel.
However, Rush's latest comments (IMO) are merely padding to lessen the blow for his insenstive and downright mean-spirited remarks.
... the notion of 'trotting out' folks for political gain is likely valid, but a mighty slippery slope. Instead of some level of sympathy/empathy... we often here vile, vulgar, and hurtful remarks -- what's worse, from people who cannot empathize because they haven't made certain sacrifices. Maybe it's the 'bleeding heart' in me... but, if someone had a loved one go down on 9/11 or felt like they were abandoned during Katrina, etc... folks who have truly suffered. Well, I'd likely keep my mouth shut. And, what's wrong with that? I think Rush is a mouthpiece for a broader sentiment, a segment of the pop who secretly support his callous comments and are never quick to criticize him.
I wouldn't argue your points, it goes more to the coarseness of the political discourse these days than anything else......win at all costs, nothing is sacred, no boundaries.
However, I do think certain people are exploited for the insulation of any criticism leveled at them. As I said, it depends on the issue they are promoting, in my opinion. If it is absolutely relevant to their situation, then most criticism of their motives is unjust.
But if they are promoting some issue or cause not directly related and expect to be immune from any criticism due to their plight, well, for me they should not.
...agreed. If you put yourself in the line of fire...well, you have to expect some shrapnel.
Is being exploited. He is making ads advocating a policy that might cure a disease that is killing him. I cant see that in the same WORLD as exploitation. In fact usually when the right makes this claim it is just dumb and doesnt stand up to scrutiny. Sheehan for isntance is NOT being exploited for getting out a message SHE believes in. A symbiotic relationship is NOT exploitation.
behavior. They are trying to eliminate the very concept of sympathy or empathy in those viewers who are still capable of those emotions.
Sympathy and empathy lead people inevitably to a desire to help those who suffer. And the Cons are deathly afraid that we will divert tax revenues from their pockets into doing just that.
"they [fox] can even lie". i dunno, sounds a little personal.
That is not about drugs to me, and this is not about Rush Limbaugh and it never was and, to me, it is not personal and never has been. I don't know him. I've no--I've never met him. I know of him only through his career as a talk show guy and a political activist. I think that anyone who climbs into the arena of hate--the evil arena of lies---particularly during a radio show, they do not get special priviledge of being the only fighter to throw a punch. This is a strategy the "Hate Junkies" have used for as long as I've been observing Rush Limbaugh...etc.etc.etc. But I stand by what is said above. I take back none of it I wouldn't rephrase it. It is what I believe. It is what I think. It is what EVERYONE knows to be true. Anyone trying to defend Rush after the above is just a hysterical sheep is who is afraid their JUNKIE leader won't know how to defend himself. Therefore, I call him a JUNKIE which is TRUE and I cannot respect anyone who defends him.
fat b@stard had enough morals to apologize when he called Chelsea the family dog (only after his "own" rebuked him, of course!). The fact that he can't even live up to that minimal standard says a lot. One is he is a bi@tch to his listeners, and two, that group that supports him couldn't care less about how they hurt someone as long as they get more power from it.
"fat b@stard had enough morals to apologize when he called Chelsea the family dog (only after his "own" rebuked him, of course!)."
-----
He did apologize. It took him ten years to do so.
"But I stand by what I said. I take back none of what I said. I wouldn't rephrase it any differently. It is what I believe. It is what I think. It is what I have found to be true."
Any comments from AA and other people who claimed that Rush apologized for what he said?
Hello? *knock knock* Anyone home?
How can Rush or Ann Coulter or any of these so called talk show hosts or "reporters" get away with making comments like this?
When the Dems take over they will surley censor the airwaves of this filth.
Nah. Censorship is for the fascists now in power. Liberals know that when competing in the market of ideas, they win. Unfortunately, you can't expect every voter to be informed and do research. Reactionary political awareness is just so much easier. If they did read, we wouldn't be in the mess.
and all the alts he posts under are around, count on lots of lying about what idiots like Limpballs and O'Lielly spew.
It's sad that Rush Limbaugh actually does articulate the views and attitudes of millions of Americans. Is this the "goodness" of America that many of them talk about? I'm embarassed every time I hear or read one of Limbaugh's hateful comments... and then to hear his "ditto heads" agree with him. We've got to take our country back...
Rush's five million listeners are less than 2% of the US population.
Daffy Duck?????? They don't come daffier than you! lol
I tuned in to the Oxymoron today to see if he avoided the whole thing.A fan of his who happened to be a nurse called in and (very submissively and respectfully) explained the disease and its meds to Rush, and why he was an a-hole(not her words).
The brilliant defense when she expressed disgust that Limbaugh said Fox was faking his symptoms?Rush explained that he never said Fox was faking, just acting.
She seemed satisfied.
Uhhhh... what?
Daffy Duck could have done a commercial for Claire McCaskill, saying the same things that Fox did, misleading about stem cell research and Jim Talent, or in Maryland with Ben Cardin and Michael Steele, and my reaction would've been the same; I would have reacted and responded to Daffy Duck.
Absolutely: Limbaugh would have accused Daffy of acting and exaggerating his speech impediment.
Sorry for leaving the italics on.
fix it?
When anyone thinks about why so many people support Rush and the mean-spirited comments he makes, just remember what his followers are called...."Ditto Heads." What kind of people with any self respect whatsoever would be proud to be referred to by such a term? To me, that speaks volumes.
So what? I bet that Rush would say my Dad, who had MS and couldn't move his own bowels, was faking it. People have NO idea how horrible diseases like MS and Parkinsons are. At least with MS, there is a wide range of symptoms which vary from a very few symptoms to people like my Dad who had the worst sort, with a whole gamut of awful symptoms. I loathe the people on this board who are giving Limbaugh a pass and apologizing or trying to mitigate this. It's disgusting.
But I'm sure AA is more concerned about people saying "vitriolic" things about Rush and his ilk. He will get on here like he does everyday and try to shame US! That's what authoritarian followers do - it's part of their MO. They always have to project their shame on others.
"Daffy Duck could have done a commercial for Claire McCaskill, saying the same things that Fox did, misleading about stem cell research ... and my reaction would've been the same."
You can't tell the difference between a cartoon character and a real person? I don't know what pharms you are on this time around, but it's time to put them down, check yourself into rehab, and stay there FOR A LONG TIME.
...that f**king with Marty McFly will further unravel the Repub chances.
"The drive-by media today, in most instances, is acting like a hysterical mother who is afraid her little boy won't be able to defend himself after he picked a fight and so they are attacking me and others for being insensitive, cold-hearted, cruel, mocking, what have you."
Interesting imagery for Rush to choose. From the way he acts, I suspect he was that little boy at one time. The little bully who, when challenged on his bullying, cries that he is the victim. That's Rush in a nutshell.
Rush has cleverly turned this into another case of the evil "drive-by media" trying to put down Conservatives and promote liberalism...and he's painting himself as the victim! He blathered on and on today about how his audience is being insulted by this and he is championing their cause as he's always done. What a load of crap. Sadly, his dittobot minions will suck up every bit of it without question. How can 20 million people be so stupid?
Rush LimpBrain.....You say your Principles and Ideas and the Script that you follow gives you the right to attack The Daffy Ducks who mislead, misquote, or even lie. Your the biggest lier I know of. You described yourself. You have all those bad character traits. Besides Fox didn't say anything in the ad that was not true. Shame on you Rush.
You made my day Rush LimpBrain. Your showing your true colors. If these are your ideas, principles, and the script you follow, you are only hurting yourself and your fellow Republicans. I'm so glad you never stop and take a good look back at yourself. If you did you will see one very ugly person.
You and your Republicans have lost the moral high ground. That's why your so desperate right now. You worried about what I believe, will be a Historic Election November Seventh.
as vile and despicable as he likes -- he gets paid to do it. When he latches on to some particularly foul turd of an idea, he even gets to leave his little radio show and go on cable news to shove that turd into everyones's face while saying "See! What I'm doing is against the rules! I'm not allowed to do this!"
I swear we've all woken up in Opposite Land.
Rush's initial observation was that MJF was either off his meds or acting. This is typical "strategy" of Rush and his ilk, to distract us with details that have nothing to do with the validity of the underlying point.
First, if I was MJF and looking to drive home the horror of PD, *of course* I would consider appearing "au naturel," perhaps medicating myself only to the extent necessary to successfully read my lines. Second, suppose that instead of a recognizable celebrity like MJF, the commercial had employed an "unknown" suffering from PD. Probably not even a blowhard like Limbaugh would have dared to say, "I've never seen somebody with Parkinson's shake that much." Yet, because Rush has never personally observed *MJF* shake that much, he feels qualified to declare that MJF is "acting."
Sadly, this diversion seems to be working. Most of the public discussion that I have heard is about whether or not MJF was "performing" in the ad. What he had to say has been all but completely drowned out. And, if the "Dittoheads" don't wise up to Rush after this mean-spirited smear of one of the most likable public figures of the last generation, then I doubt they ever will.