Limbaugh doesn't "recall" anyone wishing for a Clinton assassination - what about Coulter?
On the February 27 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh claimed, "I do not recall anybody actively wishing, and I don't recall any movies, nor do I recall any books devoted to the subject of assassinating Bill Clinton, or Hillary, or the Vice President Al Gore." Earlier, Limbaugh -- while discussing comments posted on The Huffington Post weblog about a recent bombing attack on a military base in Afghanistan while Vice President Dick Cheney was there -- had stated that such hostility "is sick, and it resides exclusively on the left."
However, as Media Matters for America has documented, in her 1998 book High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case against Bill Clinton (Regnery, 1998), right-wing pundit Ann Coulter suggested that a presidential assassination might be an acceptable response to political controversy. In the book, Coulter wrote that the national debate during the Monica Lewinsky uproar should not have focused on whether President Bill Clinton "did it," but rather "whether to impeach or assassinate" him. Coulter's book was published by Regnery Publishing, which describes itself as "the nation's leading conservative publisher."
Limbaugh recently appeared with Coulter on "The Half-Hour News Hour," a right-leaning news satire program on Fox News.
From the February 27 broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' Rush Limbaugh Show:
LIMBAUGH: Well, whatever it is, it is sick, and it resides exclusively on the left. And yet these people get away with this image of love and tolerance and compassion, humanitarianism, and all of this -- when they're just a bunch of sickies. When you read this, you're going to want to throw up. They're actually American citizens hoping for the assassination of the vice president of the United States. When you go back to the '90s, I mean there was, on our side of the aisle, there was a tremendous amount of disgust with Bill Clinton over any number of things. I don't recall anybody actively wishing, and I don't recall any movies, nor do I recall any books devoted to the subject of assassinating Bill Clinton, or Hillary, or the Vice President Al Gore. It's a new phenomena, and it's not just related to the Florida 2000 imbroglio and the aftermath. There are some sick, sick people out there, and this is all happening, by the way, after they won the election.
From Coulter's High Crimes and Misdemeanors:
In this recurring nightmare of a presidency, we have a national debate about whether he "did it," even though all sentient people know he did. Otherwise there would be debates only about whether to impeach or assassinate.
What about that Congressman, I forget his name, who said that if Clinton came to his State he might not make it out alive. Or something of that nature. My how it is convenient for Limbaugh to forget. Must be the drugs. I believe Coulter has called for the assassination of Supreme Court Justices, and folks from the NY Times, and many, many other people.
That was Senator Jesse Helms.
Hate goes both ways Rush. Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh are two of the worst offenders of hate speech in America today.
Not if you ask them. If you ask them, they're just saying what needs to be said, and nobody else is saying it. You know, the bad liberals are taking over the world... Things like that.
So lampooning liberals is hate speech now? Funny how definitions change.
I think calling for assasinating the President, poisoning a sittlng Supreme Court Justice, dropping daisy cutters at random in the middle east and beating liberals with baseball bats easily meets any reasonable definition of hatespeech. C'mon be reasonable. Coulter is a harpy, you know she is. You dont really want conservatives tarred with any association with her why defend her?
The stuff written by some of the Liberal posters over at Huffington was really disgusting. Cheney is scum BUT wishing death on him is beneath contempt.
I'd like to see him end up behind bars instead myself.
This doesn't excuse Coulter nor does it excuse those who parrot her behavior.
Thats beyond what I would condone but there is a huge difference between the responsibility of someone posting on a message board and someone talking to a national audience in books or on national TV. When you can point to someone like Al Franken or James Carville, maybe Paul Begala saying these things it will be equivelent.
Hey Solon,
You do a disservice to Al Franken, James Carville, and Paul Begala by even including Coulter as one of their peers. Coulter is in a category all by herself.
While I agree posters on a forum vs someone with a national audience are not an equivalent, it's still disturbing to read venomous remarks wishing another human being dead.
Wishing Cheney &r Bush impeached or imprisoned is understandable. And I second that motion.
I realize posting anonymously removes the restraints of otherwise good taste or humanity...but it was still unnecessarily vicious & totally inexcusable IMO.
I agree. I am as venomous as the next guy when I feel provoked but calling for someone to die or suffer is pretty much beyond the pale for me.
No compasion...
People just lack compassion nowadys. It's sickening. If I saw Dick Cheney drowning I would RUSH to the nearest phone to offer my condolenses to his wife, Lynn. ;>)
Jeter,
I probably don't have to tell you how much I agree with you, but it seems to be a horrible consequence of the political debate these days.
I was on the net a lot during the Clinton Administration and saw what I would consider very similar sentiments directed largely at Clinton. I think the longer someone stays in office, the more crazy and unstable the support and opposition become and the harder it becomes to be politically centered and sane.
Hey open_mind,
I don't doubt for an instant that there were things written about Bill Clinton by some on the net [by the Right] that rose to the level of similar disgusting remarks. I don't recall talk of wishing Clinton dead, they were usually too busy accusing the Clinton's of murder...
It's a sad commentary on political discourse. It seemed to get really nasty when Clinton took office, though I'm sure it's been going on longer than that.
Like I told Solon, Ann Coulter is in a category by herself. I can't fathom even a Limbaugh or Hannity stooping to her level and suggesting assassination.
'liberals' and their supposed posts that you did not provide any link to vs 'pundits' given national, really international bully pulpits to spout their crafted rumors innuendos and outright lies each and evry day 24 bloody hours a day? Or the 'bestsellers' you brag about (so many with an * by the sales number, forced to the top by bulk sales to sycophants) , blasting their self-referential and unthought-out opinions as if they were revealed truth on those same programs and 'networks'?
Bah, you have nothing to compare better then that? You lose from the get go.
Mutt,
I read Huffington almost every day. I read the posts regarding Cheney. Go to the site they might still be there.
P.S. I am hardly a Coulter fan. You'll just have to take my word on that. Or maybe one of the other posters here will vouch for me.
So save your outburst for someone else.
I'll vouch for Jeter. He might be a conservative, but he doesn't defend the hatemongers like Coulter. He's also not a contrairian who posts just to take an opposite opinion and deflect the thread like some do.
I don't always agree with you, Jeter, but I do respect you.
that is not the point. The point is that he is trying to compare a few individuals who may or may not have said something really outside the pale to the right wing noise machine. That does not stand up to any kind of real logical analysis. One side is a few people at teir PC's or MAC's typing a couple of hours a day versus FAUX non-news, CNN, Sludge, Rush, O'Lielly, Coulter and all that mess. THAT was what I was addressing. A few folks on Comcast against billions poured into TV and radio every year to convey Rupert's and rev Moon and the PNAC agenda . That is just a fact not a rant. Take it as you will.
"that is not the point. The point is that he is trying to compare a few individuals who may or may not have said something really outside the pale to the right wing noise machine." --americanmutt
Jeter addressed that above. And I second WK's thoughts. If you show Jeter respect, it will definitely be returned. Jeter has earned sincere respect from many here due to his undeniable decency and honesty even when we disagree with him.
Thanks once again for coming to my defense open_mind :-)
You, King, Solon and many others here have always been reasonable & respectful even when my viewpoint opposed the majority of posters here.
Your kind words as always are appreciated.
And I hope you know that I have a great deal of respect for you as well.
Thanks King :-)
Your support is always appreciated.
I've always respected you and your opinions here as well.
Lampooning? Get a dictionary. Lampooning does not mean lying. Rush is no clown. He knows exactly what he's doing. This is no different than Coulter, Hannity, O'Reilly, Savage, Beck, and the list goes on and on.
It's people like you who are too stupid to see the way they play you. How does it feel to be a sucker for these liars while they care about nothing but increasing their ratings and book sales, making millions off of you?
I can get behind someone who believes in Republican "values" and beliefs. But to use these people as examples of why we Liberals are wrong--What a laugh.
And they call us Koolaid drinkers. Hahahahahahaha.
Ditto, ditto, megaditto. Bhaaa, bhaaa.
way beyond mega dittos these days, it's 'Oxy-ditto's' now!
Maybe schtickmeisters Ann and Rushbo can do a sketch about the subject on Fox's 'Copying the Daily Show Except We're Not Funny Hour.'
Loved their Pres and Vice-Pres bit. If Annie C. gets any stiffer we might have to bury her next to Anna Nicole.
Dear Rush...
I can't speak for everyone, but I don't want to see Dick Cheney killed... I would prefer to see his his lying, war-mongering, fat arse in JAIL.
If Mr. Cheney were to suffer some unfortunate fatal occurrence at the hands of jihadists, however, some might say there would be an element of poetic justice if it occurred in Iraq rather than Afghanistan.
BTW, Rush... you're gaining weight.
I love how Limbaugh ascribes this to the 'left'. Who's calling for Cheney's __________(insert worst possible scenario here) ? This is made up by Limbaugh and all these other jerks, perpetually attempting to lay blame on everyone else around them. More smoke and mirrors.
greekfurnace,
Oh the irony!
Greekfurnace,
Do you see irony of it all?
dang it.... another one down the drain.. I thought my first one did not get through...
Well sure... if you mean, the rightwing noise machine - adept at using fear/paranoia/hostility/violence for their own gain - is now crying fowl versus an imaginary threat to garner sympathy... Sure, it's absurd. Is that what you mean? Perhaps, I'm missing some of your subtle irony ;>)
It is, forsooth, a black fly in your chardonnay.
It's hard for Rush to remember things with all those Oxy-holes in his brain.
As most of us know, she does this a lot. Remember when she was asked about Rep. Murtha, she said "the reason soldiers invented fragging." Yet she'll sit right next to her buddy Hannity and talk about how bad the left is.
I saw Arianna's excellent response to Limpball's and others' faux outrage earlier today http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/limbaugh-hannity-and-th_b_42333.html .
(I believe that that immoral movie about assassinating Bush wasn't made by Americans either.)
Does anyone know...
If Assclown Annie ever received a visit from the Secret Service over that little item in her lame-ass book?
only to deliver 'her' Medal of Freedom...
And just to ride down memory lane, there were two documented assination attempts on President Clinton
September 13, 1994: Frank Eugene Corder crashed a two-seat, propeller-driven aircraft into the White House grounds. President Clinton and family were staying in the Blair House at the time and were unharmed. Corder was killed, though no other injuries were reported.
October 29, 1994: Francisco Martin Duran fired at least 29 shots with a semi-automatic rifle at the White House from Pennsylvania Avenue, outside the south lawn, thinking that Clinton was among the men in dark suits standing there (Clinton was in the White House Residence watching a football game). No one was hurt and Duran was sentenced to 40 years in prison.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Presidential_assassination_attempts#Bill_Clinton
Of course these were both partisan conservatives that were offended by Clinton's pro-government stances.
Magnolialover,
Archae is correct. It was that fine American, Jesse Helms. He said, "Mr. Clinton better watch out if he comes down here. He'd better have a bodyguard."
I think Rush's memory and mind in general are gone.
This is why it's so easy to be a loudmouth rightwing pundit. No matter what you said, it's what you say today that is fact. And, if you point out the obvious, well you're the traitor who doesn't support the troops!
A baseless attack from MMFA...
I am amused at how often MMFA accuses others of a "baseless attack". Oh the person may have inside knowledge, but if the citation is not given at that time, it is considered a baseless attack.
Now the shoe is on the other foot:
MMFA headline:
Limbaugh doesn't "recall" anyone wishing for a Clinton assassination - what about Coulter?
Did Coulter ever write or say the words, "I hope Clinton is assassinated." or any equivalent thing?
Remember, she is a lawyer, words do have precise meanings, and she writes precisely.
She also has been accused of calling for the killing of a jurist, but in the citation, she talked about putting rat poison in his creme brulee. Since the jurist is not a rat, the discussion about putting "rat poison" in dessert is technically not a call for a murder. Just because something can poison a rat does not mean it will have the same effect on a human. Besides, no quantity is mentioned, and poisons are quantity dependent.
Again, just like a magician, Coulter does things, and parts of her audience repeatedly think she is doing something else. She is a lawyer.
Are you insane? The only question is impeachment or assasination is pretty an insinuation that Clinton should be assasinated and if you think rat poison isnt fatal to humans I suggest you lace YOUR creme broule with it. That is the lamest attempt at an appology for hateful rhetoric I have ever seen. You guys just keep lowering the bar
Solon writes: " The only question is impeachment or assasination is pretty (sic) an insinuation that Clinton should be assasinated"
Can you explain that to me? I think I'm with MoShow (thanks Rusty) on this one though on the rat poison one I'm with you. I don't see how writing "the only quesiton is impeachment or assassination" is tantamount to saying "Clinton should be assassinated." Can you explain it to me?
I dont understand the nature of the question. Coulter said the only question is (if Clinton should be) impeached or assasinated. How is that NOT inferentially calling for him to be assasinated, or impeached. Isnt it the same as saying if he isnt impeached he should be assasinated? If its not (being very generous) calling outright for him to be assasinated its first pretty close and second portraying the assasination option as a reasonable one. You know as well as I do Rush would not make such a distinction if the shoe were on the other foot. It is certainly a reasonable assumption and in no way a smear by MMFA to make the claim they did which is the claim by MSM that I was commenting on
Really, MoShow? Then you can't possibly take offense if somebody tells you to proceed elsewhere and make love to yourself because they didn't really say what you think they said.
Rusty,
People from time have suggested that I do various things--I can only possibly get offended if I truly care what the person speaking thinks. I have stopped posting replies to certain folks who degenerate into gibberish, but I am not offended--just cannot be bothered to continue.
On another site, one poster continues to refer to non-liberals as fat or an equivalent. I am not offended by this, but did point out how immature it makes him sound.
That's nice, but it would be even better if you would address the larger point Rusty was making.
"and she writes precisely"
You know, if you are going to defend Ann here, in MMFA threads about Limbaugh, you better come a little better prepared. Just yesterday, I checked out her novel, "High Crimes and Misdemeanors". To my surprise it is a diet book. Works like this, eat a healthy, nutritious meal, read a few pages, hurl. Her writing appears to be high brow, lot's of big words and references, but every chance she get's she slips in exagerations, half truths and omissions. I'd give some examples, but we have a strict no poison in the office rule here. Dog, darn, I hope my cats are alive when I get home!!
Let me rephrase that:
She writes precisely in a legal sense: That is, I doubt anybody will put her in jail due to her writings. She goes over the top in bad taste at times, but it seems to me she is cautious not to put herself into legal jeopardy.
If I gave the impression that I thought her books are well-written in a literature sense, I do not. I wish she would get a good editor and a good proofreader to make them read better and correct the citation errors.
For the others concerned about rat poison, ask the folks so concerned about wrinkles that they allow themselves to be injected with the toxin that causes botulism. Quantity matters.
Finally, call me a "troll" if you must, but I am outta here. No more replies tonight.
This is some extreme splitting of hairs.
If anyone today were to say "the only question is whether Bush should be impeached or assassinated" -- whether in print, on TV or radio, or in a blog comment -- the hue and cry would be deafening, and that person would definitely not be invited to share their thoughts on any nationally televised program.
The difference between the play all of Coulter's remarks have gotten over the years versus those of some random blog commenters yesterday is as clear an indication as one could get about the double standard in our national discourse.
Did someone call you a troll? I dont think your posts are troll posts. A bit weak maybe, yeah, sure. And there was a time that an arsenic compound was used to combat syphylis doesnt mean it isnt a poison and that we all dont know EXACTLY what Coulter was saying when she called for it to be slipped into the creme broule. She was directly saying he should be killed, there is no possible reasonable argument that this isnt EXACTLY what she was calling for. It was a valiant attempt at spin, weak but brave. I dont even blame you for weak I mean obviously its the best available. There is no REAL excuse for her hatespewing.
Troll:
Certain posters have called me a troll in the past. I try to stick to topic and reply to those who ask me questions, but, you know, life happens and there are times I have other things to do.
I try not to post unless I can reply, but sometimes it is not possible.
Dear MoShow,
I'm not trying to attack you -- I just want to respectfully disagree with your argument about Coulter's language use. Whether or not her comment about putting poison in Justice Steven's food constitutes a legally punishable threat is one thing; whether or not a reasonable person could construe it as an example of the kind of rhetoric that Limbaugh ascribes to 'liberals' exclusively is another.
And again, respectfully, your botox example seems to undermine your argument. Coulter's comment would carry the same implications if she suggested putting botox in Justice Stevens' creme brulee: no one could reasonably defend her comments as a suggestion that Stevens needs wrinkle removal.
That said, I agree with you on one point: I have no doubt that Coulter meant her comment as a kind of joke, albeit one that expressed a genuine sentiment. I cannot imagine that she would ever intentionally make a statement that would place her in real legal jeopardy: that would take courage.
I'm sorry, I had to run to the toilet and dry heave. Here is a famous example of "precision" from your hero Ann Coulter.
"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity"
Now, that is precise, no ambiguity there about the effects of rat poison in creme brulee. (That could be the funniest post of the week though, congratulations, might also win most like a pretzel award)
No specifics, no legal action possible. Try again tomorrow.
Where did the threshhold of legal action become relevant?
When every other attempt at a point he made was shredded and used to wipe the floor.
It's often called moving the goalposts.
Let me get this straight: Coulter is a lawyer; therefore she uses language precisely; and her statement that "we need somebody to put rat poison in Justice Stevens' creme brulee" can't possibly refer to wanting to do the judge harm? There is absolutely no logical connection between any of those claims.
First, lawyers aren't any more precise at using language than anybody else. The legal profession certainly employs specialized terminology and carries its own specific norms of language use... but you could say that about any distinct community. Being a lawyer doesn't automatically mean that your words carry a one to one referential relationship to objects. In fact, if anything, lawyers have a reputation for exploiting the ambiguity inherent in language.
This has nothing to do with her being a lawyer. It has to do with your willingness to bend over backward to defend her. If I told you, "I want to put rat poison in President Bush's BBQ sauce," would you really suspend your judgment of the hostility of my comment until you determined whether or not I was a lawyer?
I'd be happy to get into a discussion of sociolinguistics with you, but the bottom line is that Coulter doesn't get a free pass to threaten people just because she's a lawyer.
Coulter doesn't get a free pass to threaten people just because she's a lawyer.
No, she has to defend herself, just like anybody else. However, unlike some posters to websites, she seems to be very careful not to go over the line, while she has come very close:
1. "They shot the wrong Lincoln"
2. "Rall entered the holocaust denial competition"
3. Posting on her own website a doctored photo of the magazine editor associated with the printing of the doctored photo of Coulter.
Again, I do not admit to being any pickier than MMFA itself is. I have read no citation of Coulter wishing for the assassination of Clinton. Kinda sorta I-infer-that reasonable-people-would... stuff, but no citation. I hoisted MMFA up on its own petard.
Rush Limbaugh? You mean the guy who calls Paul Begalla "The Forehead?" Hey Rush, go take a look in the mirror fat boy! I bet they can see the front of your noggin from the space shuttle! And when do we get some sort of explanation and a few details about your Viagra sponsored "all guy" trip to the Dominican Republic? You don't seem to mind boasting about who you run into and what goes on during your well publicized golf outings so why all the secrecy about your other "private" life? Are you the same Rush Limbaugh who spirals off into hillarious panic every time he mentions the "Clinton Library and Massage Parlor?" Yeah, we get, very funny! Now tell us about that library you claim to be building that will house all of your memorabelia. Tell us Rush, will there be a pharmacy in the foray? And how about a tidy little room totally dedicated to marriage councelling? Bill Clinton apologised for what he did yet Limbaugh, to this day, continues to hammer him at every turn for being a human with his own set of weaknesses, But what do we hear from the right when Rush stumbles and apologises? It's all about second chances and moving on without ever mentioning again his little drug problem and how he used his underlings to procure those drugs. The right has learned well from this collosal jewel of hypocrisy. "It's who they are". Better, smarter and more deserving forgiveness than any of the rest of us. They can have him and Coulter and the like who rely on the dollars their hatred generates to keep the wolves from the door. If they are so "harmless" and "loveable" then somebody explain to me why they need a security detail with them whenever they step out into public? People don't like them and they brought it all on themselves and the sad part of it is, they never seem to learn anything from it. Yeah, perhaps a few classless individuals said tasteless things on The Huffington Post but at least they held their disdain to a single person. That's more than we can say for the Limbaughs and the Coulters of media fame. I call them "Ossama wannabes" because unlike the posters at Huffington and not unlike the dreaded terrorist, they long to see large numbers of the American population done away with. In their case, it's the Democrats and unless Homeland Security has done something I am not aware of, these Democrats are, much to the chagrin of these right wing mouth pieces, still Americans. Living, breathing Americans.
Ossama must be mighty proud of them for spreading his word pro bono.
Ya' can't beat a deal like that.
She actually said: "Otherwise there would be debates only about whether to impeach or assassinate. "
This is in NO way calling for an assassination. Sure it's off-color and utterly unhumorous, but a threat? I just don't see it.
...but a threat?
Absolutely not.. For example, if I said that if Dick Cheney was on fire I wouldn't even urinate on him to put him it out, that's not a threat. Maybe I had a doctor's appointment that day.. or something.
LIMBAUGH: They're actually American citizens hoping for the assassination of the vice president of the United States.
Limbaugh's correct... that is sick. I would never wish for Cheney's assasination! If I said it would be preferable that he die of a heart attack instead of from a roadside bomb, I would only say it in a charitable way because I am sure there must not be much of you to bury after a powerful explosion... unless your Humvee had body armor that is. Or take death by a sniper's bullet to the head... that might be preferable to say from an RPG attack. I just wish Cheney never has to die by any of these means because they all sound horrible. I'm sure no one except perhaps some power-hungry, twisted megalmaniac would send anyone, especially young Americans, to deaths as horrible like those. I know I wouldn't. Let's hope Cheney lives a long and happy life... perhaps in a federal detention center... where he would be safe from all these nuts who want to kill him.
Since when are inmates safe in federal detention centers?
Golly... I didn't know they weren't. Of course, I'd like to see Dick Cheney somewhere in a safe place. I hear that there are MANY safe places in Iraq... and it's great to hear the war there has been a major achievement.
Gee, I must have been setting my bar too low. I just want him to get run over by his own limo after leaving his letter of resignation on the oval office desk, after which he would burn in hell for all eternity.
Dear Lord, I don't ask for much, please grant me this one wish. If you do, I promise not to bother you until the next Republican administration lies us into another war.
How many Americans has Cheney gotten killed? How many women and children in Iraq has he helped murder? I certainly wouldn't cry over his corpse. I wouldn't cry over Limbaugh's or Coulter's either. It would be just a little less EVIL in this world.
Red... my point, exactly.
Don't forget that Jesse Helms delivered a weakly veiled threat against Bil Clinton should he visit Helms' home state of North Carolina.
Sorry, I should have looked at the other posts before adding my own. I see this was mentioned at the get-go.
I clearly remember this classic from the 1990s...
"Now if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests." ... "They've got a big target on there, ATF. Don't shoot at that, because they've got a vest on underneath that. Head shots, head shots.... Kill the sons of bitches." -- G. Gordon Liddy
In Rush land, it's okay for a high-profile rightwing radio host to call for people to shoot law enforcement agents, but a few semi-anonymous comments made on a left-blog is proof of a "sickness [sic]" which "resides exclusively on the left."
Ding, ding, ding. We have a winner. Good example, Mr. Howard.