Limbaugh: "If Barack Obama were Caucasian, they would have taken this guy out on the basis of pure ignorance long ago"
SUMMARY: On his radio show, while discussing recent statements Sen. Barack Obama made about Afghanistan, Rush Limbaugh asserted: "If Barack Obama were Caucasian, they would have taken this guy out on the basis of pure ignorance long ago."
On the May 14 edition of his nationally syndicated radio program, Rush Limbaugh asserted, "If [Sen.] Barack Obama were Caucasian, they would have taken this guy out on the basis of pure ignorance long ago." Limbaugh made the comment after stating that "this is from the guy who said he has visited 57 states," suggesting that Obama mishandled the flag pin controversy, and after playing an audio clip of Obama, speaking before an audience in Cape Girardeau, Missouri, Limbaugh's hometown, in which Obama said: "Right now, we don't have enough troops. And NATO hasn't provided enough troops because they are still angry about us going into Iraq. So, we just don't have enough capacity right now to deal with -- and it's not just troops, by the way. It's, like, Arab -- Arabic interpreters, Arab language speakers. We only have a certain number of them, and if they're all in Iraq, then it's harder for us to use them. And obviously, they may not speak Arabic, but the various dialects that they speak in Afghanistan -- oftentimes people who speak Urdu or Pashtun or whatever the languages are -- they're going to be needed in those areas, and a lot of them have ended up being placed elsewhere. So, we've got to focus on Afghanistan."
After playing the clip of Obama's comments, Limbaugh said:
LIMBAUGH: Ladies and gentlemen, what you just heard was the presumptive Democrat presidential nominee wandering aimlessly in desperate hope for a cogent thought. His point was -- he was trying to tell these people in his audience in Cape Girardeau yesterday that our foreign policy's all screwed up 'cause every asset that we need to actually win the war against Islamofascists is in Iraq. And that's a phony war, it shouldn't have happened. We don't even have any Arabic translators for Afghanistan. And then, he quickly realized, "Wait a minute. They don't speak Arabic there. Oh God, what am I going to do? What --" Then he makes up a couple languages that they speak. But then he said, "We need some Arabic translators there because you never know who is there."
The ABCNews.com Political Radar blog said of Obama's statement in a May 13 post that "Obama posited -- incorrectly -- that Arabic translators deployed in Iraq are needed in Afghanistan -- forgetting, momentarily, that Afghans don't speak Arabic." In responding to the post, Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton reportedly said that "[t]his poorly researched and written piece is inaccurate in that it just completely ignores the need for Arabic translators in Afghanistan" and noted the presence of foreign fighters in Afghanistan, including those from "various Arab countries," as The New York Times reported in October 2007. In addition, during a report on the January 18, 2002, edition of PBS' NewsHour, correspondent Spencer Michels reported that "U.S. intelligence agencies and the military have been scrambling to hire or train speakers of Middle Eastern languages like Arabic, Farsi, and Pashto, all languages spoken in Afghanistan."
Further, contrary to Limbaugh's assertion that Obama "ma[de] up a couple languages that they speak" in Afghanistan, Urdu is spoken there, and Pashtu or Pashto is one of the official languages of the country.
Moreover, when Sen. John McCain made the admittedly false claim at a March 18 press conference in Jordan that Iranian operatives are "taking al-Qaeda into Iran, training them and sending them back," Limbaugh downplayed the misstatement as "this little -- this gaffe." Indeed, on the March 21 edition of his show, a caller asked, "McCain was wrong? McCain was not wrong." Limbaugh responded, "It doesn't matter whether McCain's right or wrong. This is what the Democrats do. They're going to try to attack. And Obama's desperately trying to change the subject, and he's trying to make it look like he's already won the nomination. So, he's focusing on McCain, who is the presumptive Republican nominee. It's -- and he knows the drive-bys are going to carry his water. He knows the drive-bys will then go to McCain and play this little -- this gaffe up and so forth."
From the May 14 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:
LIMBAUGH: All right, ladies and gentlemen. Barack Obama was in Cape Girardeau, Missouri, yesterday -- watched the speech, watched his appearance, did not see all the Q&A, but we heard enough. Here is a portion of remarks made by Barack Obama in Rush Limbaugh country.
OBAMA [audio clip]: Right now, we don't have enough troops. And NATO hasn't provided enough troops because they are still angry about us going into Iraq. So, we just don't have enough capacity right now to deal with -- and it's not just troops, by the way. It's, like, Arab -- Arabic interpreters, Arab language speakers. We only have a certain number of them, and if they're all in Iraq, then it's harder for us to use them. And obviously, they may not speak Arabic, but the various dialects that they speak in Afghanistan -- oftentimes people who speak Urdu or Pashtun or whatever the languages are -- they're going to be needed in those areas, and a lot of them have ended up being placed elsewhere. So, we've got to focus on Afghanistan.
LIMBAUGH: Ladies and gentlemen, what you just heard was the presumptive Democrat presidential nominee wandering aimlessly in desperate hope for a cogent thought. His point was -- he was trying to tell these people in his audience in Cape Girardeau yesterday that our foreign policy's all screwed up 'cause every asset that we need to actually win the war against Islamofascists is in Iraq. And that's a phony war, it shouldn't have happened. We don't even have any Arabic translators for Afghanistan. And then, he quickly realized, "Wait a minute. They don't speak Arabic there. Oh God, what am I going to do? What --" Then he makes up a couple languages that they speak. But then he said, "We need some Arabic translators there because you never know who is there."
They speak Dari and Pashto in Afghanistan. I have been there. Afghans do not speak Arabic. Now, this is from the guy who said he has visited 57 states. This is the guy who -- by the way, when he was on the floor of the U.S. Senate yesterday, was not wearing his American flag lapel pin.
When he showed up in Cape Girardeau, he was wearing his American flag lapel pin. Now here is the thing about this: Nobody would be making a big deal of it other than he started it. He made a big point of telling everybody why he was not going to wear the flag pin after 9-11, because he wanted to show real patriotism, patriotism ideas, not the patriotism of symbols.
So, he brought it up, so people started paying attention to it. And a lot of people say, "Come on, there's other things about Obama that we can talk about. Let's not mess around with the flag pin business. It's not going to get us anywhere." But now he takes it off, now he takes it on. Depending on where he is, he puts it on. Depending on where he is, he takes it off.
On the floor of the Senate, doesn't want the flag pin on. Probably doesn't want his Democrat buddies to see it. When he gets to Cape Girardeau in a Republican district, swing state, bam-o -- time to put the flag pin back on.
I am just telling you, if this guy were Dan Quayle -- if he -- can I channel Geraldine Ferraro? If Barack Obama were Caucasian, they would have taken this guy out on the basis of pure ignorance long ago.
Now, Democrats keep telling us that George W. Bush is an idiot. And a lot of Democrats think that George W. Bush is an idiot because he can't speak. He can't articulate. Here's Obama. Let's listen to this again, audio sound bite number five. Here's Obama without a teleprompter. You tell me if what you're hearing is a man with gravitas.
OBAMA [audio clip]: Right now, we don't have enough troops. And NATO hasn't provided enough troops because they are still angry about us going into Iraq. So, we just don't have enough capacity right now to deal with -- and it's not just troops, by the way. It's, like, Arab -- Arabic interpreters, Arab language speakers.
LIMBAUGH: Yeah.
OBAMA [audio clip]: We only have a certain number of them --
LIMBAUGH: Hmm-mm.
OBAMA [audio clip]: -- and if they're all in Iraq, then it's harder for us to use them. And obviously, they may not speak Arabic, but the various dialects that they speak in Afghanistan -- oftentimes people who speak Urdu or Pashtun or whatever the languages are --
LIMBAUGH: Pashto.
OBAMA: -- they're going to be needed in those areas, and a lot of them have ended up being placed elsewhere. So, we've got to focus on Afghanistan.
LIMBAUGH: Wow. Now, there's a giant intellect on parade. That, ladies and gentlemen, is an intimidating intellect. There, I guess, is the gravitas that the Democrats keep telling us George W. Bush lacks.
Forty percentage points -- Hillary Clinton wins in West Virginia by 40 percentage points. The drive-by media today is just ripping its hair out. Why don't she quit? Why won't she quit? Why won't she quit for the good of the party? Why won't she get out? Why --
Drive-bys, she's not doing this for you. Drive-bys, what's the big deal with the party? Are you members of the Democrat -- I thought you guys -- you know, objective and all that? What do you care what happens to the Democrat party? Why won't she get out? Why won't she get -- they're also upset that their guy can't close the deal. And sit around and say that all these Republicans are voting against McCain in the primaries -- which they are. How about all these Democrats voting against Obama since February 22nd, drive-bys? Why don't you tell us about that?
From the March 21 edition of The Rush Limbaugh Show:
CALLER: Thank you for taking my call. I wanted to talk to you about this Obama character --
LIMBAUGH: Yeah.
CALLER: -- which -- I am a typical white person, and I question his patriotism. I question that he's been defending this Reverend Wright and has yet never shown any kind of passion for this land, for this country, as a whole, and as -- this nation as a whole. My second issue with Obama is the fact that he's keep [sic] correcting Senator McCain, but if we all remember, this guy doesn't even know his recent history.
All of the -- some of the head of Al Qaeda and Taliban ran to Iran, and they were being harbored by that government. That government has been doing that for many years. Where is he coming from saying that Iran has never supported Al Qaeda? Why doesn't he sit and listen to our generals?
LIMBAUGH: Wait a minute. I lost you during there, because you're talking -- are you talking about McCain at the end of that, or are you talking about Obama?
CALLER: Obama. And I'm saying, why is he thinking that Obama was -- I mean, McCain was wrong? McCain was not wrong. Iran has been harboring Al Qaeda.
LIMBAUGH: No, OK. OK. It doesn't matter, Paris. It doesn't matter whether McCain's right or wrong. This is what the Democrats do. They're going to try to attack. And Obama's desperately trying to change the subject, and he's trying to make it look like he's already won the nomination. So, he's focusing on McCain, who is the presumptive Republican nominee. It's -- and he knows the drive-bys are going to carry his water. He knows the drive-bys will then go to McCain and play this little -- this gaffe up and so forth.
This is who the Democrats are, and this is -- you know, McCain's not going to play this game.
Why doesn't Rush just come OUT and say that all of these stories are lies? If he has nothing to hide, what is he afraid of? Oh NO, I sound like a swaggering Republican. I feel dirty asking the same question over and over even if the person answers it. (For example, Rev. Wright and Sen. Obama). For you RITO posters defending Rush The Magic Druggie and, that is a truism, why don't you do some research and show WZ that he is wrong. Til that time, I hope he continues to post this over and over. Go ahead, prove the Druggie wasn't arrested as WZ says. Of course, you will not deny that Rush the Pig is a druggie.
WZ, keep up the good work.
If he is required to answer dumb comments provided by wingnuts it would take more hours than a day holds.
Do you also require all democrats to answer for every stupid comment?
How many times has Sen. Obama been asked about Rev. Wright and who does the asking? How many times has Sen. Kerry been asked about his military record? I think you answered your own question but didn't think it through. You made my point THANK YOU.
If the Druggie can't take the heat, he should just keep hiding behind the radio....
Still waiting for your point. Your equating the acusation of Limbaughs stories to Obama and Rev Wright is meaningless; apples to oranges.
How is it apples to oranges? Obama has answered all questions about Rev. Wright (just because the answer wasn't what YOUR MIND believes makes you the dumbwingnut).
Why can't Rush just answer the question? I am sure his little interns are forced to read this site? Is he afraid, is it true? He is the leader of the RITO movement. Please call his show and ask him. You seem to know everything he rants so you must be on his dinner list.
Just kidding with you. I am just using the Righties lunatic line of reasoning. Asking you to prove a negative which you cannot. It is done far more often by the Right. Hell, they even asked Kerry to prove what the US Government knew. But that is okay isn't it?
"How many times has Sen. Obama been asked about Rev. Wright and who does the asking?"
I'll bet he's been asked about Wright a LOT! However, since this article is about how stupid Obama is: how many states are in the US?
Answer: (most people)--- 50, Obama--- 58
I think a presidential CANDIDATE ought to know a LITTLE American history. So, you support a candidate who has judgmental issues (attends racist church for 20 years), and he's a sexist (sweetie) and he knows nothing of American history (unless it's what was taught to him by Wright). Good luck with your nominee.
Can you people have picked a more worthless candidate?
Good luck with your life...
"I gotta say you have got to be the most disingenuous poster that has visited this site in a long time"
In what way? Because I put the truth out there? Or because I don't drink the kool-aid liberals drink in order to make the determination that Obama is a worthy candidate to run the US? IMHO, you're just whining because you can't argue any of the points I brought up about the 'problems' with Obama.
How many states are there? If you went around calling women "sweetie" during professional situations, what would YOU be called? If you attended a church, for 20 years, whose mission statement and pastor are un-arguably racist, what would you expect me to think of your judgmental ability??
"Phony"? Hey, I've been called a lot worse than that. How do you feel about posts by solon? Answer that and we'll see who the phony is.
Phony would be a nice word for Philbie.
Phony would be a nice word for Philbie.
"Mentally deficient" would be far more accurate.
Government belongs to and takes it direction from we the people, not the president.
"Government belongs to and takes it direction from we the people, not the president."
What?! You cannot be serious with THAT statement!! What "direction" was given to the state of california by "we the people" when they voted against gay marriage? Which activist judges decided NOT to follow "we the people" or the constitution and decided gay marriage is ok.
Only a moron would believe government takes it direction from "we the people".
The simple fact is more people accept equal rights for gay couples than not.
The country is in bad shape right now. We have a completely out of touch president sniping at fellow countrymen fom abroad. That's ugly and dangerous and I frankly cannot find a good reason confer that unaccountable unitary status to any such person, ever again. That's why I reject that model of CEO style government.
What needs to happen is for all of us to come together, find a common goal, in common language and start progressing toward solutions from that common ground. At this point, I don't have answers I only have a broad vision of peace and well-being for the country and the world. But together we need to put some agreeable meaning into those visions so the material policy can be crafted to meet our conserderable needs as a civil society. And this partisan bickering is decidedly uncivil.
We have a completely out of touch president sniping at fellow countrymen fom abroad.
When Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks made her comment about Bush from England, it set off an uproar? Where is the uproar over Bush speaking ill of our next president from a fortign country. Where is the uproar over ANYTHING Bush has done? Why hasn't this little creep been impeached and thrown in prison yet?
"The simple fact is more people accept equal rights for gay couples than not."
Another simple fact is that you ignore that people have voted over and over again refusing to give gays the "marriage" label. Of course, no one would refuse gays equal "rights", that would be unfair. But, you are giving missinformation (gasp!) when you state "more people accept equal rights". That isn't the issue, marriage is. Go back to the people who are telling you what to say and ask them how to respond to that issue. They will tell you to change the subject and talk about something else.
You're offensive. Always on the offensive. It probably stems from an insecurity over the rightness of your beliefs. So afraid you are that your defenses won't suffice that you constantly attack.
The simple fact is that gay marriage is about equal rights. I want my neighbors to enjoy, equally, the same rights to marry the one they love that I enjoy. And since you agree nobody would deny equal rights to any American, that's the kind of common ground we can start making policies around to create a more perfect union.
"The simple fact is that gay marriage is about equal rights."
I guess it isn't as simple as that. They get the equal rights they seek. However, the FACT is that the majority of people in EVERY election choose NOT to allow gays to deface the sanctity of marriage. Whether you agree or not does not come into play. Civil unions are created to give the same rights as everyone else. NO state election has agreed to give the title "marriage" to gays seeking to be married. So, when the people choose to give them the right to "marry" they can and you would have a point. Until then, YOU have no point and gays have equal rights. Time to quit your whining about "no fair to gays". They have what they sought after, why aren't they happy?
That is a warmed up argument from the civil rights battle. This idea that one group can strip away another's God given equal right simply because they are the majority and (electoral) might makes right. That is why the Founders built in protections. They figured arguments and laws like this would be attempted.
You're ideological entrenchment is making this issue a matter of fearful anger. The core of your argument is based on the fear of losing something sacred. My argument has at its core the hope of sharing something sacred with all God's chilren.
Now. The question is, which America do we want to live in? One afraid? Or one joyful in giving?
Let's let people have a chance to talk about it without the serpentine language of irrationality.
Only a moron would believe government takes it direction from "we the people".
Congratulations. That was the most idiotic statement I have ever seen on this website. And that includes all the arguments from evolution deniers.
I suggest you retire now and go out on top.
Only a moron would believe government takes it direction from "we the people".
So the Founding fathers who WROTE the Constitution were morons....
Drem on, moron.
"Also, do you think Obama misspoke or that he doesn't know how many states there are?"
I think he probably misspoke. I also think he isn't very smart for misspeaking like that and not 'immediately' correcting himself, which could certainly lead someone to believe he really doesn't know much about the government and history of the USA.
Is that gonna be the common tactic for liberals when Obama wins? They will say "he misspoke" every time Obama gives a speach? Well, I guess you've had a lot of practice using that line in just the several months of primaries. Are you gonna allow McCain to use the same excuse whenever he says something ignorant? Or, is this a one-sided excuse-use-coin?
Yeah Phil, because the most logical conclusion that one can come to regarding
"58 states" is that despite graduating with a J.D. magna cum laude from Harvard, the man is a complete moron and didn't just misspeak. Right. Real truthful there.
The whole sweetie thing? I 'm guilty of the same thing. No harm ment. People I don't know call me sweetie too. No biggie. Was it inappropriate? Maybe. But he did the proper thing and called to apologise to her- a concept alien to alot of Righties.
As far as Wright goes, whatever. Frankly, I'm sick of it. You either agree or you don't. No amount of debating, at this point, is going to change anyones mind. Dead issue (for me anyway).
You know, I'm not even sure it was misspeak. I've only heard about this once before (the 58 states thing), but when I heard about it the first time, it occured to me that Obama has more than likely visited some states more than others (he's visited most of the states, some of them twice or three times). I believe that's what he was trying to say.
The point is, Obama is an extremely intelligent man - saying that he's an idiot because of the 58 states comment is just, well, stupid. People who push such a notion are just as stupid. That includes you, Phil.
But yeah, it is pretty foolish to suggest that he doesn't know how many freakin states there are.
The fact is that since the Wright stuff has finally petered out, the Obama haters are grasping at anything they can to smear him. It really makes them look petty, desperate, and down right idiotic. Not to mention the fact that alot of them that are trying to make Obama look like a moron probably voted for Bush. Twice. Now if BUSH said "58 states"...
How many states are there? If you went around calling women "sweetie" during professional situations, what would YOU be called? If you attended a church, for 20 years, whose mission statement and pastor are un-arguably racist, what would you expect me to think of your judgmental ability??-Phil
I've heard doctors and lawyers call patients, clients and others sweetie, first off. What are you the 40-year old Virgin? Its a term of endearment when used with tact. Second of all, the church's mission statement isn't arguably racist the same way Barack wasn't arguably Muslim. YOU CHOOSE TO BELIEVE BS TO JUSTIFY YOUR RACIST VIEWS AND OPINIONS AND THE WHOLE WORLD SEES THROUGH YOU.
Furthermore, Reverend Wright is sooo racist he went and served in a military that is majority white. He's sooo racist he has caucasian Americans sitting in his pews on Sunday.
Believe what you want. Newt Gingrich himself said he believes republicans are going to suffer come November because the average American is sick of your Republican/conservative/separatist/racist/homophobic/wasp bias.
How many states are there?
Everybody knows there are 50, Phil. But in the Democratic party, there are at least 57 different contests durig the primary season - 51 state primaries and/or caucuses (including a promary and a caucus here in Texas), one for the District of Columbia, one for Puerto Rico, one for Guam, one for American Samoa, one for the US Virgin Islands, and one for "Democrats Abroad".
If you went around calling women "sweetie" during professional situations, what would YOU be called?
Here in Texas where people constantly refer to members of the opposite sex in all settings as "hon" or "darlin'", you'd be called "perfectly normal".
If you attended a church, for 20 years, whose mission statement and pastor are un-arguably racist, what would you expect me to think of your judgmental ability??
I'd say that your judgmental ability was no different than that of the millions of Catholics who chose not to leave their church after finding out what their priests were doing to their kids. And that was a lot worse than anything Rev. Wright could have said fromt he pulpit.
In what way? Because I put the truth out there? Or because I don't drink the kool-aid liberals drink in order to make the determination that Obama is a worthy candidate to run the US
And George W Bush was, is, or has been since!
Philib....... are you stupid or something?
Obama's 58 states comment, while odd, isn't impossible to figure out. Obama was counting REPEATED visits to states. For example, if I visited Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio then Wisconsin again, I visited five states, as in the number of TRIPS to states, not the absolute number of states in the union. Is it convoluted? Sure. But not incomprehensible.
Funny how conservatives will tolerate incomprehensible gibberish from Bush for 8 years but jump all over Obama or Clinton for their minor mental hiccups.
It's all par for the course in the GOD (Grand Old Doublestandard)
Randy
"Do you also require all democrats to answer for every stupid comment?"--mike
Do you even see the irony in that question? You guys do that all of the freaking time. That is usually Hannity's first question. Limbaugh usually answers the question for every Democrat - reading their minds perfectly.
Limbaugh drug Obama through the mud on many occasions with much less than what WZ has written.
Fair enough. Here are a few quick ones from Hannity:
HANNITY: I don't want his resume. I don't care about his resume. He just talked about exterminating. The only conclusion I can draw is we need to exterminate white people. I asked you a simple yes or no question. Do you support this garbage, yes or no?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,234789,00.html
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
HANNITY: That's not what he's saying. I know what he said. I'm reading it. "He's a terrorist." Are you proud of that as the owner of the Web site?
HUFFINGTON: You know what, Sean? It's not a matter of being proud. I don't have to agree with every word that Alec Baldwin or anybody on the Web site says.
The bottom line, though, is that the essence of what he's saying is that this administration's policies have made us less safe, they have inflamed terrorism everywhere in the world. Even Don Rumsfeld said that. Do you remember, in that famous memo, he said, "Are we creating more terrorists than we are destroying?"
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,185560,00.html
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
HANNITY: I don't want to talk about that. I want to go to Dee Dee Myers. Dee Dee, first of all, would you attend a church where your pastor traveled to Tripoli with Louis Farrakhan, that your church gave a lifetime achievement award to Louis Farrakhan? And would you call yourself friendly with a man from the Weather Underground who admits to bombing the Pentagon and the capital building, and said in 2001 he wished he had done more?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,337515,00.html
Limbaugh's archive is not so accessible to search, but if I have some time, I will try to see where others have posted his transcripts if you really need more evidence.
The main point is that you are of course, right that it is stupid to ask you to comment on stupid things other conservatives say, I just wish you could tell your fellow conservatives not to do it so much as they are much worse offenders, IMO.
Maybe it was time that El Rushbo and others of his ilk were asked some worthwhile questions for once.
The undocumanted rumor of Limbaugh's alleged arrest under his radio name, Jeff Christie, in Pittsburgh for gay pandering has followed Limbaugh since 1973. Limbaugh/Christie was fired from station KQV in Pittsburgh and the story that circulated Pittsburgh was that he had been fired because he had been arrested at a notrious gay pickup area. The story follwed him to Richmond, Virginia where he next worked, so the story has been following Limbaugh long before he became the famous personality he is today.
Adding fuel to the stories about Limbaugh's sexuality is that his mentor, Norm Woodruff, was gay and died of AIDS. Limbaugh also allegedly frequented gay bars when he worked in California.
So, Limbaugh's alleged arrest for homosexual activity has never been documented, but the rumor started long before he was famous. Look it up on the internets...
None of the following counts as proof, but it does do a pretty good job of outlining what we DO know about Rush Limbaugh/Jeff Christie. It was posted at www.americanpolitics.com:
* * * * *
The point here isn't that his mentor was a gay man, the point is that it is another dot to connect to a pattern.
We have;
1. The rumor about DJ Jeff Christie being fired from KQV in 1973 after an arrest on Winthrop Street for gay pandering. This rumor supposedly circulated on the UPitt campus for weeks following the firing. Verified parts are that Christie was fired by KQV, that Winthrop Street was a gay pickup spot in that era, and several people have confirmed hearing that same rumor at the time. One person confirmed having heard the rumor a couple of years later in water-cooler gossip at the Richmond VA radio station where he worked. At this time, nobody knew who Jeff Christie was.
2. Verification that KQV's Jeff Christie went on to become the man behind the Golden EIB Microphone, Rush Limbaugh.
3. Verification that the fellow who helped him get his second start in radio, and who taught him how to dress, was a gay man. Not that significant in itself. but you know, it is rather odd for a guy to be going clothes shopping with another guy.
4. The mysterious "cyst" that kept him out of 'Nam. One cause of anal cysts can be receptive anal sex, but of course we have no way of knowing in this case. We do know that this was on his draft deferrment documents, and that he now denies that he ever had an anal cyst. (He did so on the air just the other day.)
5. He keeps getting divorced. Not a lot in itself, but one wonders why? And we hear exactly nothing from him about his current wife.
6. The hearsay from a posting elsewhere on this forum that Rush used to go drinking at gay bars in in CA. Mind you, I do know that some open-minded people who are not gay go drinking with friends at gay bars. Rush has never struck me as an open-minded person. Or do I mis-read him?
7. In spite of the sexual preference of his mentor, and in spite of having socialized with gay people in the past, Rush has spared no effort to trash "the gay agenda" on his program. He has been especially nasty to Rep. Barny Frank.
None of these things by itself constitute evidence that Rush is gay (or, more likely, bisexual), but all of them together form a growing pattern. This leads me, and others, to the conclusion that it is possible that Rush really was arrested in 1973, as the rumors indicated, and suggest that it would warrent the time and money of somebody to run down the leads, check official records, and talk to people from Rush's past. None of this is proof, but it does suggest that the proof may be out there, if only it can be collected.
http://www.americanpolitics.com/20030103Letters.html
"5. He keeps getting divorced. Not a lot in itself, but one wonders why? And we hear exactly nothing from him about his current wife."
So, by your theory, Liz Taylor is gay. But, being the 'good liberal' that you are, I suspect you believe every line that is told to you. Do you want another cracker, sweetie?
Why is it you apparently cannot conceive of treating people as individuals? I am sure many liberals - like myself extend Rush the benefit of the doubt. I don't believe in these sorts of attacks - whether they be on Obama regarding Rev. Wright or Bill Ayers or even the lowly Rush Limbaugh.
It is interesting that I never noticed a single Bush Republican with the decency to denounce the similar attacks on Obama. Maybe I missed it.
So, by your theory, Liz Taylor is gay. But, being the 'good liberal' that you are, I suspect you believe every line that is told to you. Do you want another cracker, sweetie?
No - Liz Taylor is a mother and grandmother. Limbaugh is childless. Amazing how you zero in on one item on the list to dispute, and ignore the others...
" gay pandering has followed Limbaugh since 1973"
Translation: hypocritical liberals have been trying to discredit Rush for 35 years. Using homosexuality as a tool of evil, while demanding rights for those who follow that immoral lifestyle.
Hypocrits!
Translation: hypocritical liberals have been trying to discredit Rush for 35 years. Using homosexuality as a tool of evil, while demanding rights for those who follow that immoral lifestyle.
Wrong-o, Phil - as usual. It is LIMBAUGH who is being hypocritical for speaking out against gay rights while apparantly secretly living the gay lifestyle for many years.
Is this another one of those situations where YOU claim a fact, but I have to prove it not true? Where's your proof of him being gay?
I guess a similar situation would be if I said that YOU are gay, now you have to prove you are not? So, until you prove you are not gay, I'm going to refer to you as 'gaywriter'. Since everyone seems to have fun changing letters in our names around to insinuate snide conditions, I'll do as ya'll do..... (when in rome, do as the romans do).
This is hilarious. Don't you guys realize what is going on here? You're flapping all around throwing a hissy fit about nasty rumors and unproven allegations when that is what Rush does every time he opens his oxycontin hole.
Turnabout's fair play. Enjoy a taste of Rush's own medicine.
defending Liberals against baseless smears snd pointing out the hypocrisy from the Right.
No need to respond. I already know the answer.
Independent. Sure...
"Tell me, Phil; you claimed to be an Independent on another thread, do you spend as much time on Right wing web sites "
Yes, I do. Probably not one you've heard of. It is shared by thinkers of every aspect. I certainly won't divulge what site it is, because we already have plenty of liberals on the site. However, they THINK. Something you may want to try.
"You take exception at a story that has no evidence to back it up, but you refuse to offer any evidence to back up your own claim. Why should anyone believe you?"
#1; You're assuming I care whether any hypocritical liberals believe me. #2; Would you let a child molester baby sit your kids so that he could prove he doesn't molest children any more? Same reason I wouldn't tell any hypocritical liberals what other chat forums I participate in. The last thing that company needs is a virus. Liberals are so jealous and destructive, they would immediately try to destroy a good chat site because they aren't the only ones allowed to speak their minds. Similar to talk radio.
So, if you speak the truth and believe a liberal would believe me, then you must take my word for it....just like I'm supposed to take your word for it that Rush is gay.
"So, if you speak the truth and believe a liberal would believe me, then you must take my word for it....just like I'm supposed to take your word for it that Rush is gay."--philib
Lol. Where did I argue Rush was gay? I see why you often draw the ire of Solon. Thanks for answering my question. You seem to expect more from liberals than you do from yourself.
; )
"Where did I argue Rush was gay?"
I'm having a discussion with 5 different liberals, all saying the same thing---Rush has been gay for years, started by gaywriter. If you want to join in the discussion then you should expect that I consider you have the opinion that Rush is gay. So being in the arguement means you make the arguement.
Yes, I do. Probably not one you've heard of. It is shared by thinkers of every aspect.
Looks like you wouldn't fit it there, either. Guess the only place left for non-thinkers like yourself is FreeRepubliKKK.
HaHaHaHaHa!!
I've never seen so many conservative posters on the opening page of discussion before. Media matters must have really ruptured a nerve for a lot of you conservative posters here. LOL.
Say what you want about Obama. We all know he is no where close to the lying, low life scum Rush is. Furthermore, we all know if the rumors circulating Rush were circulating around Obama you'd believe it in a second without any varification. Seriously, this one thread has brought out more conservative posters than I've ever seen together. I thought I was on the wrong website for a second.
Hey August,
Well I was too busy to weigh in on MMFA yesterday, but I figured as a Conservative poster I'd better join in...I always miss all the fun ;-)
I could care less about unsubstantiated rumors about Rush, Obama, or any political figure. No doubt it's fun to speculate, but it's pretty pointless.
Actually about a month or so ago there was some guy from Chicago claiming he gave Obama some cocaine & a BJ in the back of a limo a few years ago. The guy's story was all over the internet & YouTube. No one bothered Obama about it because it couldn't be proven.
If Rush has some dirt in his background, let those that are spreading it, prove it.
Actually, I don't have to discredit blimbo , he does a fine job all by himself
take care tony and guidedog lido
No. 1: Learn to spell.
No. 2: Learn to think. Liberals haven't been TRYING to discredit Mr. Limbaugh. That pathetic, racist, homophobic, unpatriotic, self-aggrandizing, drug addled hypocrite (you're welcome for the spelling lesson) discredited himself forever with anyone capable of basic thought about 2 minutes into his first broadcast, and it has been downhill from there. Mr. Limbaugh is either gay or he (and not Sen. Clinton) is the most cheated on woman in America.
Where is your link and your proof for this story?
I've posted it before, POV. I'm not gonna post it again.
You still have no point.
WZ doesn't crap up unrelated threads (as some truly obsessed do with Keith Olberman do) with his Jeff Christie reference, he just puts it up on Limbaugh threads.
I suggest you save the obsession tag for someone who has earned it.
No offense but you come across as a bit of a phony on this point.
Forgive me if I do not take you seriously.
Oh, baloney. You get your butt handed to you every time you show up. You go off and lick your wounds, then come back with the same delusions abour your superior arguments and hallucinations about how people abuse you unfairly. It's lame and ridiculous.
maybe writer is another name that solon uses. He was the king of posting hateful statements. I think maybe 10% of solon's posts were acceptable by MMFA's terms of use policy, yet he's been doing it for ... how many years?? Perhaps mmfa needs to revisite they TOU policy and change the wording to mean, 'only those who disagree with mmfa or it's liberal users are restricted from using hateful speach'. Since that is the running policy, they may as well make it official, don't you think?
There are plenty of people from the Right who visit this board and are treated with respect, just as there are some that come on her with a chip on thier shoulder about "liberals" and start antagonizing and tweaking. Now ask yourself; which one are you?
You claim to be Christian, right? Hows that "Golden Rule" go again????
WZwriter is nothing at all like solon. While Solon is known for attacking ad hominem at times - of which I generally philosophically disagree, I will say Solon ONLY does it when he believes he has been provoked or insulted himself. Whenever he has been called on his behavior Solon has almost always been able to point to a post of the other person that justified his response. In a few instances Solon admitted misinterpretting remarks and apologized for it. I trust Solon's judgement and sense of honor as do many on both sides of the debate here from what I have seen.
If you want intelligent debate with Solon, you should show him some respect to begin with.
I can only say that if Solon insulted you and apparently made you upset, odds are you probably deserved it at the time.
"I generally philosophically disagree, I will say Solon ONLY does it when he believes he has been provoked or insulted himself. "
So, what you're saying is that as long as I show a liberal disrespecting a conservative 'before' I go on a tirade, then you would consider it acceptable (although you "generally philosophically disagree" with that tactic) ? But, it would be acceptable?
I've seen solon's method. He does NOT wait for self provocation. He does not even carry an on-topic conversation. Like I said, you might be able to find 10% of his comments to be either 'on topic' and/or 'non-insulting'. Sure, he will use the excuse of 'fighting back', but you know that is NOT the truth. To say otherwise would be disingenuious and a lie to all those involved.
To be fair, in the first 3 posts of this thread you have 2 posters insulting (without provocation) Rush and people who have listened to him. Using solon's methodology, I can simply say I was "fighting back" for insults thrown at me. Because 5 or 6 times back in 1988 I listened to Rush's show. So, these posters are insulting me and I am allowed to defend myself, correct??
The fact is solon is a punk who hides behind the computer, with the largest of chips on his shoulder. I certainly won't deny my distaste for liberals, but aren't individual opinions welcome here? Solon states his opinion the only way he knows how and you defend him. I state mine the only way I know how and I'm chastised. Do you ever wonder why I developed the impression that liberals are hypocrits? Well, that is a perfect example.
"So, what you're saying is that as long as I show a liberal disrespecting a conservative 'before' I go on a tirade, then you would consider it acceptable (although you "generally philosophically disagree" with that tactic) ? But, it would be acceptable? -- Philib
No. But if a liberal insults you specifically or conservatives generally, then you have every right to do the same to that particular liberal. We are not all the same person you know.
"I've seen solon's method. He does NOT wait for self provocation. He does not even carry an on-topic conversation. Like I said, you might be able to find 10% of his comments to be either 'on topic' and/or 'non-insulting'. Sure, he will use the excuse of 'fighting back', but you know that is NOT the truth. To say otherwise would be disingenuious and a lie to all those involved. --Philib
We simply have a difference of opinion. Perhaps you can point to a thread you find particularly good at demonstrating your point better.
"To be fair, in the first 3 posts of this thread you have 2 posters insulting (without provocation) Rush and people who have listened to him. Using solon's methodology, I can simply say I was "fighting back" for insults thrown at me. Because 5 or 6 times back in 1988 I listened to Rush's show. So, these posters are insulting me and I am allowed to defend myself, correct?? --Philib
You are welcome to attack those posters as individuals - and that would be entirely fair. Just understand when (as I have seen you do) you broaden your attack to include all liberals, you have opened yourself up for counterattack from nearly everyone here. That is one of the main reasons I have usually tried to avoid such using such tactics. It usually (if not always) degrades the conversation and escalates the hostilities.
"The fact is solon is a punk who hides behind the computer, with the largest of chips on his shoulder. I certainly won't deny my distaste for liberals, but aren't individual opinions welcome here? Solon states his opinion the only way he knows how and you defend him. I state mine the only way I know how and I'm chastised. Do you ever wonder why I developed the impression that liberals are hypocrits? Well, that is a perfect example. --Philib
Perhaps you might get further with people if you examine your own approach. You just engaged in name-calling of solon (who isn't here to defend himself) and broad generalizations against liberals in cas you didn't notice. Do you really think you are innocent here? It doesn't seem so.
I think you realize (and we can agree) that the visitors to this page are largely liberal. Your posts seem designed to provoke, insult and antagonize liberals. I just can't understand your surprise that your approach leads to retribution and escalation. I would think that if you were genuinely concerned you would change what you control - your own actions.
WZwriter has been really bad at times. He/She really needs to control the anger.
I acknowledged that about a week ago. I now reserve my anger for those who call me a liar and/or a hypocrit.
Still, I have seen your game and I'm reluctant to take your word on most any matter.
But whatever. You just keep standing up for Rush's honor as if he were some innocent lamb of truth.
RH,
You were comparing all of us yesterday who were against drilling in ANWR to Hitler. Whatever floats your boat, man.
Forgive me if I do not take you seriously.
No one takes Rino Hunter seriously.....
"I don't have to be trusted. But at least I don't personally attack prominent liberals with baseless allegations."--rino hunter
That is true. Usually you are logged in as AnotherAmerican when you are doing that.
; )
That's not fair, Openmind. While AnotherAmerican has admitted to being Rinohunter, RH vehemently denies being AA. Apparently, one of the multiple personalities is embarrassed of the other, and that should be respected.
While AnotherAmerican has admitted to being Rinohunter, RH vehemently denies being AA. Apparently, one of the multiple personalities is embarrassed of the other, and that should be respected.
Not only that, they kidnapped their inner child and are holding him for ransom..... :-)
[WZWriter] doesn't deserve any defense from you or anybody else.- RINO Hunter
WZ doesn't require any defense, but that won't stop me from mentioning that WZ has offered more substance in one line of his average posts than you have in your hundreds of piles of nonsense I've seen here over the time I've been reading the site.
The Jeff Christie bit is just a fun sideline. If you don't understand the point, and how it's meant to lampoon The Oxymoron's entire career, then you probably have an EIB BBQ apron
WZ doesn't require any defense, but that won't stop me from mentioning that WZ has offered more substance in one line of his average posts than you have in your hundreds of piles of nonsense I've seen here over the time I've been reading the site.
Thanks, Colonel!!! :-)
Weird Zombie writer simply comes here and attacks others without offering anything of substance.
You wouldn't recognize anything of substance if it slapped you upside your head, Rino Hunter. It's hilarious that you accuse others of coming here to attack when that's all you ever do here. Aren't you needed back at Free RepubliKKK?
He may not be, but certainly seems obsessed about an alleged incident in Pittsburg in 1973.
No - I'm obsessed about exposing Rush Limbaugh for the lying hypocrite that he is.
I'm obsessed about exposing Rush Limbaugh for the lying hypocrite that he is
I would like to see you succeed at doing this however you will need more than accusations an innuendo to accomplish your goal. I have seen the links you posted before and they were nothing but internet fodder form someone who had an ax to grind. Until you can provide something of real substance you come off as nothing more than a whiner.
I have noticed that no one here as addressed Limbaugh's point, and in "channeling Geraldine Ferraro" the more I hear Obama speak the more I am inclined to agree her assessment. If indeed Obama were Dan Quale, and I am old enough to remember those days, he would have been run out of town by now.
Yeah. Poor, sweet, innocent, victimized Rush. He never, ever indulges in accusation and innuendo.
Yeah. Poor, sweet, innocent, victimized Rush
...and where do you come off painting Rush as a victim?
All the while, though, I did want to hear sound, intelligent counter-arguments to those guys but sednsible rebuttals were not forthcoming, not because they didn't exist but because A.M. radio was an airtight vauum in those days. Which is understandable since the left didn't recognize the cultural relevance of the interpersonl nature of talk radio. The right did and had been nurturing their cognitive infrastruture within a captured niche for decades. The left were truly out of touch with us in those days.
Thank goodness for computers. Today I am free to hear counterarguments to Rush on talk radio that are strong and resonate with the majority of Americans. Life is good. Hartmann, Rhodes and Miller are taking not insignificant chunks of listeners out of the clutches of the radio Goliaths with simple words of hope.
Mmm, mmm, mmm. The power of truth.
<<<» Political commentator, radio host, college drop-out, alleged
closet homosexual, and, as recently revealed, synthetic heroin
drug addict, Rush Hudson Limbaugh III is probably the best
known neocon personality in American radio.>>>
fine background to be judging levels of ignorance upon others
You forgot to mention that he's a racist, draft dodging, mysogenistic, lying, aledged pedophile, and a bad comedian who is fat.
No, no, no...you misunderstood, Rino. Why would I want to call in to Limbaugh's contrived show where he controls everything and has reams of info fed to him? I'm talking about a debate. Limbaugh's show is designed to make him the king...but in my observation and opinion he's no smarter than I am. His logic is faulty and he uses false premises in his arguments. A very smart person would make him look like Kevin James versus Chris Matthews. A few lines above you said I was honest...well, I'm just being honest.
I suppose that makes Paris Hilton and Michael Vick freaking geniuses in your world.
Not to mention MENSA members Mary Kate and Ashley Olson, Brittney Spears, Jessica Simpson....
You mean Jessica "I Don't Eat Buffalo" Simpson? (For the uninformed, in a scene from her now defunct reality show she was offered Buffalo Wings to eat, to which she responded "I don't eat buffalo...") ;>)
That ranks right up there with her holding up a can of "Chicken of the Sea" tuna and asking if it was chicken or tuna.....
(I think we may have stumbled onto Rino Hunter's intellectual equal.) :-)
Before you know it, you'll be joining with the rest of the country to restore our Constitutional rights and protections that have been eroded by the unitary executive form of government.
There are conservatives who are much smarter than him. Karl Rove and Newt Gingrich are two notable examples.
That's like saying that these two buckets of raw sewage over here smell better then that bucket of raw sewage over there. They're all still buckets of raw sewage.
Rino, I called in to Rush's show, I think twice, several years ago. Both times, as soon as he realized I was slapping him down, he cut off my end of the conversation, and told his audience that I hung up. I'm not all that bright, and I don't have a staff on the internet, or control of the mics.Listen to his show the next time he lets on a non-dittohead.
The first time I called in, I told them honestly what I was calling about, and made it clear that I was informed and had a good point that countered Rush's. They put me on hold until the end of the show, then hung up.
The times I got on the air, I acted a little slow when talking to the screener,, and repeated what I thought Rush would consider "left wing talking points". (basically the straw men he survives on).
Rush's show is a very carefully controlled propaganda operation, meant to promote the GOP with the help of poor suckers like you.
Yeah, a man who makes tens of millions of dollars each year has to be pretty stupid.
And someone like you who defends a low-life scumbag like Limbaugh is even MORE stupid.
And just a heads up for those who haven't seen it: Chris Matthews ripping Kevin James a new one is exactly what would happen to Limbaugh if he ever engaged in a true debate. It almost makes me want to take back one or two of the bad things I've said about Tweetie.
I saw it. It was deserved. BUT I hope you got just as much enjoyment when Matthews demanded Texas State Senator Kirk Watson (D-TX) who is supporting Obama list some of Obama accomplishments in the Senate. He was unable to answer Chris Matthews most basic demand: "Name some of his legislative accomplishments... name any..." All we got was dead air in response.
RTWMD,
Ha! Yeah I hear ya.
I used to really like Matthews because the guy was both knowledgeable, & usually hard-hitting. Then came this extended primary season, & Chris went all soft & gooey ;-)
If he wasn't drooling over Romney, he was getting tingles up his leg over Obama.
And then there were his crushes on Rudy & McCain. His crass attacks on Hillary. His seemingly stream of consciousness mishmash that had Olbermann, Brokaw & Russert looking confused.
I still tune into Hardball every night, because it's all politics...and at least they don't feature Brittney or Paris. Or missing blondes...
Good catch! Apparently a lack of navigational skills is a well-known agist smear according to what Fox Newslike Service(R) tells me.
; )
And yet he makes millions and puts far left radicals like yourself to shame.---RINO
1.) The Robber Barons, Al Capone and Leona Helmsley made millions. If you’re willing to act in an unchristian manner you’re at a distinct advantage. (that’s a real Christian).
2.) The far left is the new middle.
McCain is in deep doo-doo. This election is going to play out like it did in 1996, but without a Perot and with a stronger Democrat with a tremendous funding advantage...And Obama has just started the general election part of the campaign.
The other problem for McCain is that Bush won't shut his trap. Bush has just started to bring down McCain. Step 1 was publicly endorsing McCain this week. I can hear the polls shifting as we speak.
Funny, Obama got more votes in West Virginia than McBush. And the Republans think they have a chance.
The circle jerk about Clintons' people all voting for McBush or staying hoe is coming to an end.m
And yet he makes millions
Rino, he makes millions off of fools like you. He says something your twisted mind likes and bang you follow him like ants on sugar, making him richer and you dumber.
"He says something your twisted mind likes and bang you follow him like ants on sugar, making him richer and you dumber."
Is that how it works for the liberals who frequent mmfa... 'ants on sugar'? That's a good one, sweetie
I think the dung beetle is a little better analogy for Rush's audience.
; )
Not necessarily. Rush is white..... supremely stupid..... and a profound liar....yet, he's still around. Can't blame affirmative action for that.
It's reverse affirmitive action.
I know this for a fact.
If Barack Obama were Caucasian, he would have single-handedly beaten the Harlem Globetrotters, made Generation X the greatest generation, and stopped Neville Chamberlain from appeasing the Nazi's.
I'm sorry, but that video is too funny. Go about 4:00 in.
The caller shows his ability to absorb toxic sludge with his comment that SENATOR Obama has "never shown any kind of passion for this land, for this country, as a whole". Other than dedicating himself to serving his state and country as a duly elected US Senator, among other elected positions.
This person is not a typical white person, more like a typical right wing racist, ranting thug kind of person. I yearn for the day when one of these cowards downs a pint of Jack, screws up his courage and confronts Senator Obama face to face.
I yearn for the day when one of these cowards downs a pint of Jack, screws up his courage and confronts Senator Obama face to face.
They wouldn't have the guts to do that. But they're plenty brave when they phone in to Rush's radio pukefest and can conceal their identity...
actually Rush claimed that he really wanted to go to Vietnam if it wasn't for the huge stinking cyst in his anal cavity
Rush Limbaugh is a huge stinking cyst on humanuty.
Q - What's the difference between Rush Limbaugh and the Hindenburg?
A - One is a flaming Nazi gasbag, and the other was a dirigible. :-)
Haven't you been embarrassed enough LeatherNeck by putting that moron Bush in office twice? I thought you'd never come back after you carried his water for 8 years
It requires a conscience to be embarassed about voting for the shrub.
And it would've required a lack of brain cells for any conservative to vote for Gore or Kerry. Many conservatives voted for Bush because they viewed him as being the lesser of two evils. Many conservatives will vote for McCain for the same reason.
You are very useful to some very control minded authoritarians.
I haven't seen any people on record calling him the lesser of two evils.
Actually Open_Mind I've gone on record here at least once or twice saying that very thing. I didn't like Bush BUT the thought of Gore or Kerry led me to believe he [Bush] was the lesser of two evils each time... I have also admitted here that in hindsight both were stupid votes. Of course in hindsight [ah good old hindsight] I should have simply sat BOTH elections out, or left the Presidential vote blank.
My only solace in all of this is, being I vote in Massachusetts, is my vote never much matters anyway. Massachusetts votes Democratic every time.
Thanks for jogging my rusty old memory, Jeter. I stand corrected as to not hearing it at all. You are right. I remember your posts, but I didn't start coming here until 2005.
I was really thinking in regards to what I was hearing right before those elections from conservative media personalities, co-workers and friends. Before the 2000 election, just about all of the conservatives I knew were boisterously supportive of Bush. That continued well into his first Presidency. I really didn't see much dropoff until constant criticism of the war and the rise of the insurgency and a lack of progress there started to take its toll pretty soon after the 2004 election.
If only the war had gone well, I think conservatives would be clammoring to put Bush up on Mount Rushmore right about now. Revisionists would gladly ignore the few "liberal" warts in Bush's policies just like they did with Reagan and his rather glaring inconsistencies with conservatism like the largest tax increase in history, negotiating with terrorists and real amnesty for illegal aliens to name a few. But that is just my own speculation for what it is worth.
Nominate someone better than a traitor or doorknob with a "The World is Ending" sign strapped around his neck and maybe you could have beaten W.
This time around you nominate an American Hater and make what should be cakewalk into another potential loss.
Interestingly, Bush is a better president than McCain or Obama could ever be.
Nominate someone better than a traitor or doorknob with a "The World is Ending" sign strapped around his neck and maybe you could have beaten W.
This time around you nominate an American Hater and make what should be cakewalk into another potential loss.
Interestingly, Bush is a better president than McCain or Obama could ever be.
Hey, Leatherhelmet: do you have very many scars on your forehead after having that frontal lobotomy?
Keith Olberman posts on this board.
In the words of Satan: Soooooo
If Rush was only listened to by dittoheads, I would agree with you. However, many other right-wing pundits will refer to Rush, and not always attribute those references, to the point that outright falsehoods become "conventional wisdom" through repetition.
<>I do mean the rest of his shockjock club, actually -- they often reference one another.
Other shock-jocks repeat the talking point, their listeners repeat the talking point, and it eventually becomes a "some say" story on Fox News, or MSNBC. And if they get Drudge to report it as well, so much the better, because then they can post links to a "serious news story" online.
I am speaking in generalities, of course, these talking points often follow this path or something similar...
How do you think the language of the immigration debate became so fouled with anger at the economic refugees who flee their homes?
How do you think the extension of equal rights to gay couples became so irrational?
It is rightwing radio. Right wing radio the pressure valve between the radical fringe and the corporate media.
“It is rightwing radio. Right wing radio the pressure valve between the radical fringe and the corporate media.”---RH
BINGO! Co-opting and directing the thinking of the angry White gentile male.
"If [Sen.] Barack Obama were Caucasian, they would have taken this guy out on the basis of pure ignorance long ago."
Given the anti-intellectual attitude of the right, this may actually help tip some of Limbaugh's listeners who are looking for a reason to hurt John McCain into voting for Obama.
Donovan McNabb had a hunch.
As well as the management of ESPN.
Donovan McNabb had a hunch.
But so did Quasimodo.
See that, it works both ways.
Underage girls?
N/A?
Then again, it's not as if black people in this country ever really had an easy time in this country, if you know what I mean. So you're telling me that Obama is going to be a presidential nominee because he's black? Have you been alive for very long? Could it possibly be that he's smart. Has good ideas about what he wants to do as a President, and lots of people like him?
Oh, and he's half white too. Remember that. White mom and all.
"If, if, if" my highschool football coach would say. "If ifs and buts were candies and nuts, it'd be Christmas everyday."
But, if McCain had the ability to inspire the way Barack does he'd be 25 points ahead in all the polls.
Aha...never mind...fatigue leads to irrational attempts to rationalize the irrational.
If "if" was a skif, we'd all take a boat ride.
Only 70% of Democrats support Obama. If Obama can't even get his own party to vote for him he has no chance to beat McCain.- RINO Hunter
Uhhh, RINO, you do realize that there are still two Democrats in the race , right? Some of that 30% is supporting Hillary Clinton. You really don't have this much trouble with these concepts, do you?
Oh, wait, you voted for Bush twice. Disregard my question.
Uhhh, RINO, you do realize that there are still two Democrats in the race , right? Some of that 30% is supporting Hillary Clinton. You really don't have this much trouble with these concepts, do you?
Rino is also forgetting that even though Gramps McCain sewed up the GOP nomination months ago, he's STILL only getting between 70 and 75 percent of the vote in the remaining GOP primaries. A lot of Republicans are still voting for Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee in protest.
Let's get real. If Barack Obama were Caucasian he wouldn't be where he is today. No White first term senator with as little experience or visibility as B.O. would have ever thrown his hat into the ring.
LOL
Taz, you FORGOT Obama IS 1/2 WHITE!
Let's get real. If Barack Obama were Caucasian he wouldn't be where he is today. No White first term senator with as little experience or visibility as B.O. would have ever thrown his hat into the ring. If he had, he would never have been taken seriously and would have dropped out long ago. Obama is a novelty and his candidacy is a sideshow.
You know what Taz, I used to sort of think that way too. But you forget that Jesse Jackson ran for Prez, & he didn't get very far...did he?
Whether Obama is Black or White doesn't really apply here, unless you think all of those that voted for him are just a bunch of dumbasses & would consider electing someone only on the basis of his skin color. I'm gonna give Obama supporters a tad more credit.
Obama has succeeded where other candidates, Black or White, have failed. His popularity is based on his message.
I'm not an Obama supporter at the moment, but I'm impressed more & more everyday.
"You know what Taz, I used to sort of think that way too. But you forget that Jesse Jackson ran for Prez, & he didn't get very far...did he?"--jeter
Great point. Al Sharpton, Carol Mosely Braun, Jesse Jackson and Alan Keyes - to name a few, did not get anywhere near what Obama has done.
So why hasn't Linbaugh been taken out on the basis of pure ignorance?
Arabic may not be one of the national languages of Afghanistan--but if Limbaugh knew anything about Islamic countries he would know Arabic is spoken in all of them. You have to learn Arabic to read the Quran. It is only in western countries that the Quran is published in any language other than Arabic, and only for non-Muslims.
Once again Rush Limbaugh shows off his ignorance.
“The fact is that America was founded -- I'm gonna stagger you right now -- America was founded, in part, with the intention of seeing this false religion destroyed.”---Reverend Rod
If he’s referring to the menace of the Barbary pirates, he’s got the order of events wrong. The British were handling that problem before America was founded. The Americans weren’t going to revolt for the pleasure of dealing with the Arabs themselves. The founding transfered the problem to the newly formed state---which would have made it a disincentive........ Unless he means it was God’s intention that America would then wage war on the pirates, which it did, and then that we would allow a new King George to come to power to do his thing hundreds of years later.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but the idiot Limbaugh has a point about Obama's speech. It was a bit confused and seemed like he got a bit confused.
But so what, if Rush truly cared about that, he wouldn't vote for Bush.
Actually it sounded thoughful in trying to explicate the complexities and nuances of the situation we find ourselves in.
Or are you becoming just like the corporate media, interested only in the quick, punchy soundbite?;-)
BTW, I'm reminded of a corollary to Murphy's Law I heard a long time ago: For every complicated nuanced situation there is a simple direct solution which is always 100% wrong.
Hmmm,
well he's caucasian and ignorant and no one has taken him out yet.
Did he really say "taken this guy out?"
Isn't that illegal or something?
Inciting?
sheesh what an ass that guy is.
A caucasian Ass.
A) There is a general excitement that Barack Obama--a black man--has a real good chance of becoming the next president of the U.S. It is historically significant, whether or not you support him.
B) People are so exited about a black man becoming president that they care very little about his policies, judgment, and decision-making abilities.
People like Rush have trouble making a distinction between A and B because they both contain the phrase "black man", and that's all it takes to get these geniuses foaming at mouth and wringing their hand in indignation.
B is most likely true. Most people who are interviewed on the street who support Obama can't even name one of his accomplishments. They don't know about his policies and what he stands for either. They just know that he'll be the first black President ever and that he's an inspirational speaker. They support him solely because of those two things.
So? The only thing they can name of McCain's is that he was a POW. And of Hillary, they can only say she was married to Bill.
But they'll learn. McCain is Bush in authentic war hero drag, and it'll be, "Thanks for your service, but we've decided to go with someone thoughtful and smart this time."
Name one of Bush's accomplishments as Governor of Texas
His biggest accomplishment was sending ultra liberal Ann Richards to the scrap heap of political history. Now if you are a fellow Texan we can discuss the differences in Texas since the Bush/Perry administration took office. One of his major accomplishments was working with both Democrats and Republicans to create a business friendly environment to help Houston deversify from a 90% energy related economy to 50%. With the price of oil as high as it is Houston is one of the few cities feeling a minimal impact from the rough economic situation the country is in.
businss friendly environment...
Oh yeah, you're talking about Enron, aren't you.
And as a Texan, tell us all about how No Child Left Behind is a complete fraud when the state's education chief cooked the books to show false improvements.
. Most people who are interviewed on the street who support Obama can't even name one of his accomplishments. They don't know about his policies and what he stands for either.
Rino, take a look at this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kica8hmSdAM&feature=related
Rino, please tell me why you support McCain and leave out his POW stuff and make sure to note if it was his current position or the one he had before becoming the nominee OK.
Rush is correct, of course. Barack Obama is simply continuing the tradition of African American presidents such as Shirley Chisolm, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.
This theory also explains why the halls of Congress are filled with African American legislators.
This theory also proves that Rush is a race-baiting ignoramus.
"It is rightwing radio. Right wing radio the pressure valve between the radical fringe and the corporate media."
BINGO! Co-opting and directing the thinking of the angry white male Gentile.
Most people who are interviewed on the street who support Obama can't even name one of his accomplishments. They don't know about his policies and what he stands for either.
And this doesn't apply to Hillary or McCain? There is always going to be people who vote solely on non-issues like race or gender. You're baselessly making the case that the majority of Obama's base are like that because of a few interviews. That is patently stupid but very typical of you. ;D
So Rusty throws race into mix ...big deal, he works it in all the time. It's not a matter of "if" but "when. It's who he is, let's not be surprised.
Question for conservatives. Why do you get upset at the thought of Rusty being gay? So he's gay, why do you care?
I don't know about that. John McCain is Caucasian and no one cares that he can't tell the difference between Sunni and Shiite.
As I've said before, Gramps McCain doesn't know Shiite from Shinola. :-)
"can I channel Geraldine Ferraro? If Barack Obama were Caucasian, they would have taken this guy out on the basis of pure ignorance long ago.
OK Media Matters - you're busted here for the same practices you accuse news outlets of - messing with quotes. It's curious that you left out the reference to Geraldine Ferraro - the once great champion of the Democratic party and of feminist women. Continue to paint the conservatives as racists while hiding your own kind in the closet. Nice job hypocrits.
It's curious that you left out the reference to Geraldine Ferraro in you headline grab
I have inserted a key omission from my previous post. Thanks for calling it to my attention.
My point however remains valid.
You have not only reinforced my point but put an exclamation point on it. As you correctly note Limbaugh is simply another pundant with an audience who can choose to turn him off. Ferraro was an elected politician who was entrusted to enact the will of the people and was speaking as a member of the once great Democratic party.
Wasn't your original point that the Democrats are just as racist as Republicans? As I recall, Democrats generally shunned Ferraro for her comment.... whereas the Republican Limbaugh Sycophants continue to wallow at his feet.
Thanks 1230, I didn't know that he sat next to Mrs. Bush....
This is where I get my edumacation.
Anyway, I know it wasn't the year Laura hosted Ms. Baby Einstein, whose products had been definitely proven to make American children stupider, but who had waltzed to the bank with several million dollars. A defining moment in the Bush administration War on Science.
Which office is Geraldine Ferraro currently holding? The same one Limbaugh holds.
Wasn't your original point that the Democrats are just as racist as Republicans?
You got it! Dems had to reject Ferraros comments as she was speaking as an active member of a Democratic campaign. Repubs have no reason to respond to Limbaugh as he officially speaks for no one but himself.
Yes, Demsol, your point remains exactly as valid as it ever was, and I'd like to respond to it.
Can I channel Dick Cheney here? Go fvck yourself.
See, I didn't say that, I was only imagining Dick's take on the situation.
This is really low-level BS you're falling for. You might want to check out some sources besides Rush occasionally, just to keep the ol' brain from completely disintegrating.
Col - Another one of your classys posts? As I have noted before Limbaugh is not on my playlist. I have taken the context of the story as printed here and referenced it.
However as I continuously note you references what you have heard on his program it is appears as if you are the "dittohead" in the crowd.
..and to your response to my point - Dick Cheny has no clue as to who I am and has never discussed me in any manner, therefore you could not have been repeating anything he said about me. Geraldine Ferraro knows who Obama is and was talking about him directly and that's what Limbaugh was referring to.
If you honestly cant figure out the difference it's no wonder you responses often lack any cognative thought.
Dittoheads are the people who admire Rush and believe the stuff he says (you)
I listen to his show sometimes for a laugh at those who fall for it (you)
It's amazing to me that Rush is constantly bragging about the size of his audience, and his influence, yet the zombies who post here, repeating his points almost verbatim, almost always deny that they ever listen to him. Odd.
And thank you for noticing my "classy" flavor.
So, unless you're having trouble making a distinction between laughing at the stupidity of something and loving it, I'm not sure how you think this supports your point.
I guess if it made you happy, that's what really counts.
As you had much difficulty comprehending my original point demonstrated by your previously "Classy" post - I have no reason to expect further explanation of this one will allow any more light into your cave.
I'm sorry, I can't pass on this humorous bit of irony.
It's "cognitive" with an "i".
Hahaha! Classic Colonel. I think that was one of the best examples of demonstrating a point I have seen in a while and you have had some good ones.
: )
Rush is comletely right on this one.
Nice little sidestep by Rush. He totally ignores his caller's misstatement of fact and continues to spout his propaganda. Rush is an accomplished liar; you have to give him that.
It's a transparent ploy for anyone who pays attention, but works well on the feeble-minded sycophants who comprise most of his audience.
Limbaugh was also so stupid as to claim Obama was just making up languages spoken in Afghanistan - unwittingly proving Limbaugh did not know that those were real languages spoken there and that Obama was right! Limbaugh is not only a racist and liar, but an idiot to boot - a tri-fecta if you will. Only Limbaugh can start out to try and demonstrate Obama is stupid, but in the end he is only successful in proving what an idiot Limbaugh himself is. Classic!
: )
"LIMBAUGH: No, OK. OK. It doesn't matter, Paris. It doesn't matter whether McCain's right or wrong. "
Because right or wrong the RWnuts will follow him over the cliff every time.
Don't forget, Limbaugh is the guy who thinks you can't power a home with solar pannels.