About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Quick Fact: Limbaugh includes election winners Begich and Franken while listing senators who he claims received "no votes"

November 23, 2009 4:31 pm ET — 11 Comments

On his radio show, Rush Limbaugh mentioned Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) and the "senator who replaced Ted Stevens" -- Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK) -- while listing senators who he said joined the Senate despite having received "no votes" and who also voted on November 21 to begin debate on the health care reform bill. In fact, both Begich and Franken won their Senate seats in general elections in 2008.

From the November 23 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:

LIMBAUGH: Let's see, who voted for this? Robert Byrd from a stretcher, practically. Tim Johnson, who we're never even allowed to hear talk because he hasn't recovered from his stroke. That stooge senator who replaced Ted Kennedy. How many votes did he get? Zero. The senator who replaced Ted Stevens [Begich]. Al Franken. And that moral paragon, of course, Roland W. Burris. And the guy from Colorado. Look at these -- who? Michael Bennet, that's right, Michael Bennet of Colorado. That's the Democrat who was appointed to replace Ken Salazar. A lot of "no votes." A lot of "no votes" guys, and here they are voting on something like this. [The Rush Limbaugh Show, 11/23/09]

Fact: Both Franken and Begich won Senate seats in 2008

Contrary to Limbaugh's suggestion that Franken and Begich received "no votes," both men became senators after winning general elections in 2008. Begich won his race in Alaska with 151,767 votes to defeat Republican Sen. Ted Stevens, who received 147,814 votes. After a recount, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that Franken received a final tally of 1,212,629 votes to unseat Republican Sen. Norm Coleman by 312 votes.

— M.M.
Support Our Work


Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by Limit Corp. Ownership (November 23, 2009 4:45 pm ET)
      7 1
      This is the point in el Fathead's show when he starts to tire. He gets top heavy and weighed down by his own BS.

      He can't keep his lies straight, so he just babbles on, like a complete fool.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by wzwriter (November 23, 2009 4:51 pm ET)
      5 1
      Who elected this moronic fathead to be on the radio spewing garbage five days a week??
      Report Abuse
    • Author by The_Cat (November 23, 2009 5:58 pm ET)
      3 2
      If you think people are really behind you, Rush, then run for office. Any public office. C'mon. Don't be afraid. I mean, you're always right, aren't you? And you have a huge following, don't you? So, people will be out in droves just for the golden opportunity of casting a vote for you, right?

      Except, what he fears is actually also what is much closer to the truth. There is a teeny tiny minority that follow him with slavish devotion (hail dittohead!), and everyone else thinks he's a complete laughingstock. That's why he will never put it to the test, and actually run for public office. He doesn't want the big Reality Smackdown that comes with seeking votes.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Cheney2012 (November 23, 2009 9:52 pm ET)
      1 6
      Rush purposely singled those 2 out as they were ahead after the election, but didn't have enough votes to prevent the ensuing Democrat fraud from flipping the result.

      Certainly he said it to get the reaction he got from some of you gullible libtards.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by ScienceBuff (November 23, 2009 10:30 pm ET)
        5  
        There was no fraud. That's the lament of the sore loser. Here in Minnesota the republican governor proclaimed the quality, openness and transparency of the election and the recount. Franken's republican opponent, Coleman, testified in court that there was no evidence of fraud and that it wasn't being asserted. The only people still asserting fraud are the truly ignorant. I'm sure that club extends to you a hearty welcome.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by kno-bll6010 (November 24, 2009 7:33 am ET)
        3
      This is where MMA is taking what he said out of context. He didn't say in the above transcript that, Franken and Begich got no votes.

      In the transcript, he only stated "no votes" for only two of the Senators. If you look closly at the transcript , you will see that he didn't even mention "no votes" for Burris.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Aerows (November 24, 2009 1:50 pm ET)
           
        Taken out of context? Everything Limbaugh uses as fact is taken out of context, including here. I'm not interested in looking at a Rush Limbaugh transcript closely enough to discover a nuance of language that somehow, within a minute and narrow interpretation could be discerned as correct, if the listener was using a literal translation of words from a dictionary of a dead dialect.

        This is discussion of the current. It is subject to current interpretation. Rush is trying to say that "liberals" - which means anyone that doesn't march in lockstep with him on every single issue - don't get votes. He's implying that the people don't stand with "liberals".

        He's wrong.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by woody357 (November 24, 2009 8:49 am ET)
         
      Since Rush is so great at knowing the intentions and thinking’s of President Obama it should not take a stretch of the imagination to know that he was implying for his non-truth seeking audience that he wants us all to believe that Franken and Begich were also appointed. If we take the thinking’s of the Tea-Partiers and those opposed to healthcare that say they are not being heard I remember many people were against the bush tax cuts that arguably got our economy in the toilet where it is now. We were not being heard then. At least this President is trying to do something that will benefit the common man and not the rich whether it is bankers, military manufacturers, wall street etc. None of the things that President Bush did benefited me or my family.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by Aerows (November 24, 2009 1:44 pm ET)
         
      I ignore Limbaugh's efforts to continue deluding his audience. When they discover they have been had, they will rage the same way they did yesterday, continue citing incorrect information, and will allow the rest of us who live in reality to identify and steer clear of the idiots.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by richard m. mathews (November 24, 2009 3:50 pm ET)
         
      It is incredibly despicable to pick on people like Sens. Byrd and Johnson for their disabilities. The way I see it, these are people with plenty of first-hand experience with the health care system we have now.

      And what is this nonsense about never being allowed to hear Sen. Johnson talk? I had no trouble finding videos of him doing so, such as these:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIrwdMf8TgY
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uYWPiUM5fw
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fRG-AU1C0A
      Report Abuse
    • Author by yankeefan19252745 (November 25, 2009 3:23 pm ET)
         
      Dear Sirs,
      On page 4 of volume 4 of her biography of Abraham Lincoln, she quoted him as saying, "Either party would rather see the defeat of their adversarythan that bof Jefferson Davis. You ought to have your heads knocked together."
      No wonder he bolted from the republican party to form the union party.
      clifford Spencer
      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.