Just read Limbaugh's comments in context

#351
#351
Bill Maher's comments never warranted a call to check on someone's feelings did it?
 
#352
#352
bamawriter said:
I don't think anyone is calling him a victim, nor is anyone defending his moronic name-calling.

However, there are several of us questioning whether his offense merits the response. It is the right of a business to not want to be associated with him, and I have no problem with his sponsors dropping him. But why have similar reactions not followed similar offenses?
Click to expand...

Claiming that the fallout is a left wing organized conspiracy and claiming that this is a 'gotcha' moment for those that disagree with Rush surely sounds like the victim card to me. Potraying the situation in a way that it is impossible that the uproar couldn't be as simple as vehement disagreement with his statements (there's an organized plot afoot) lends credence to my point. His defenders are portraying him as the victim instead of being responsible for his actions.

I can't answer to the level of outrage and/or appropriateness of the responses of others. They will do what they feel they need to do. I support that whether it be to continue sponsorship or to drop it. I know Bill Maher has been brought up. He has no sponsors to be held accountable to. He was held accountable when he made some inflamatory remarks on a show that did rely on sponsors. He lost his show. Howard Stern went to satellite radio for the same reasons. Rush isn't the first nor will he be the last to find himself in this situation. There have been others that have been pulled off the air for similar situations. Portraying Rush as different is just another attempt to present him, his views, and those that support him as victims. I will say that the govt should stay out of it, but this is a highly charged election year. I don't agree with it, but that's the reality we find ourselves in at this time. Time for Rush and his supporters to stand up for the responsibilty they vehemently preach. Rush and Rush alone owns this situation. The way he handles it and to some degree the way his supporters handle it will be all telling as to whether they truly believe what they say and claim to support or if they are really just giving lip service to the responsibility argument meaning it should only apply to others. It will be interesting to watch regardless the outcome.
 
#353
#353
JayVols said:
Disagree. While he has always had his enemies, he has always had sponsors. He hasn't changed his views one bit. You are incorrectly painting him as the victim. While I fully support his right to express his views on Fluke, he must be willing to accept the ramifications of his words when others exercise their right to not be associated with him. Can't have it both ways. After all, isn't it conservatives that constantly preach about responsibility like Rush preached responsibility to Fluke? Well, time for him to live what he preaches. The situation that he finds himself in is of his own doing by his own words. No one is responsible for the fallout except Rush himself.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying he's a victim. I am saying that people who've wanted him off the air for years primarily for political reasons are using this opportunity to mount campaigns to persuade advertisers to drop him.

As I said earlier - if this is the national reaction to ONLY the comments about Fluke then we are a nation of pansies.
 
#354
#354
Gramps said:
Wrong..

Ed Schultz was very wrong also.

Ingraham makes her living pissing off the left. That does not give Ed Shultz the right to call her a slut.

Had you ever heard of Sandra Fluke before Rush started ranting about her.

I do not agree with Fluke's political stance at all, but what Rush did was wrong.
Click to expand...

ah. so we're not disagreeing about the content, but whether fluke was a sufficiently public figure to make Schultz's and Limbaugh's comments comparable.

I agree that the name calling is unjustified. I believe, though, that by testifying before congress, fluke turned the spotlight on herself. thus, scrutiny and commentary about her are justified, imo. again, that is not to say that I agree with personal attacks in the political arena.

To me the "outrage" over rush's comments was just so damn contrived and self-righteous. particularly in light of the left's silence when conservative women are barraged with far worse.
 
#355
#355
JayVols said:
Claiming that the fallout is a left wing organized conspiracy and claiming that this is a 'gotcha' moment for those that disagree with Rush surely sounds like the victim card to me. Potraying the situation in a way that it is impossible that the uproar couldn't be as simple as vehement disagreement with his statements (there's an organized plot afoot) lends credence to my point. His defenders are portraying him as the victim instead of being responsible for his actions.

I can't answer to the level of outrage and/or appropriateness of the responses of others. They will do what they feel they need to do. I support that whether it be to continue sponsorship or to drop it. I know Bill Maher has been brought up. He has no sponsors to be held accountable to. He was held accountable when he made some inflamatory remarks on a show that did rely on sponsors. He lost his show. Howard Stern went to satellite radio for the same reasons. Rush isn't the first nor will he be the last to find himself in this situation. There have been others that have been pulled off the air for similar situations. Portraying Rush as different is just another attempt to present him, his views, and those that support him as victims. I will say that the govt should stay out of it, but this is a highly charged election year. I don't agree with it, but that's the reality we find ourselves in at this time. Time for Rush and his supporters to stand up for the responsibilty they vehemently preach. Rush and Rush alone owns this situation. The way he handles it and to some degree the way his supporters handle it will be all telling as to whether they truly believe what they say and claim to support or if they are really just giving lip service to the responsibility argument meaning it should only apply to others. It will be interesting to watch regardless the outcome.
Click to expand...

you are really equating personal responsibility (fallout from offensive comments) to the notion of personal responsibility in general (taking care of one's self)?

seems a stretch.

on the former, I'm not saying there is a conspiracy. opponents smelled blood in the water and pounced.
 
#356
#356
JayVols said:
Claiming that the fallout is a left wing organized conspiracy and claiming that this is a 'gotcha' moment for those that disagree with Rush surely sounds like the victim card to me.
Click to expand...

Why has the fact that she wants gender reassignment operations to be covered by insurance as well as birth control been ignored by the media? Do you not think this is a relevant part of the story? Why is the media intentionally hiding facts that portray Fluke in a negative light?
 
#357
#357
JayVols said:
I know Bill Maher has been brought up. He has no sponsors to be held accountable to. He was held accountable when he made some inflamatory remarks on a show that did rely on sponsors. He lost his show.
Click to expand...

he also just gave Obama $1mil which was accepted. Tacit approval from the WH?

It was jumped on by the lefties because it was Rush. They don't give 2 shakes about the activist needing BC and only about bringing down one of their enemies. They've been trying for years
 
#358
#358
Hmmm, just ordinary citizens objecting to offensive comments:

Senate Democrats Launch Petition Targeting Rush Limbaugh

WASHINGTON -- House Democrats have raised more than $1.1 million and collected almost 500,000 signatures with their "war on women" campaign, in just over a week. Now Senate Democrats want a piece of the action.

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee launched an online petition on Thursday to rally supporters to denounce conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh for his attacks on Sandra Fluke, the Georgetown law student at the center of the contraception debate raging on Capitol Hill. Limbaugh called Fluke "a slut" and "a prostitute" for testifying before Congress in support of employers providing coverage for birth control. On Friday, he demanded that Fluke release tapes of her having sex in exchange for the contraception that she argued should be covered by employers.

"This is misogyny, plain and simple. And it must be called out. Will you sign our petition and stand with us against these vile attacks?" reads the Thursday email signed by DSCC executive director Guy Cecil. "Personal attacks on a student -- and all women -- simply can't be ignored. Stand with us, and denounce Rush Limbaugh’s vile attacks. Send Republicans the message that we’re not going to sit by and take it."

Senate Democrats also cast Limbaugh as representative of what the Republican Party has become. Their email features a picture of his face over the words: "Rush Limbaugh: The GOP Mouthpiece." It then links out to a petition that urges supporters to call out misogyny when it happens, "especially when it comes from a mouthpiece of the Republican Party."

The petition has already collected 100,000 signatures in less than 24 hours, the fastest the DSCC has ever collected so many signatures, according to DSCC spokesman Shripal Shah. On top of that, the DSCC has also purchased online ads on Facebook, Twitter and Google to draw in more people to its petition. The ads are expected to run for a few weeks.

Shah said Senate Democrats aren't raising money off of Limbaugh's remarks right now and wouldn't say how much the DSCC has raised amid the debate on contraception. But the group's campaigns are clearly gaining traction among supporters.

As a result of campaigning on the "war on women," Shah said, in February alone, "We saw our online fundraising nearly triple."
Click to expand...

Odd about all the misogyny comments - apparently only the GOP and Rush do this.
 
#359
#359
#360
#360
dreVol said:
ah. so we're not disagreeing about the content, but whether fluke was a sufficiently public figure to make Schultz's and Limbaugh's comments comparable.

That is my opiniom


I agree that the name calling is unjustified. I believe, though, that by testifying before congress, fluke turned the spotlight on herself. thus, scrutiny and commentary about her are justified, imo. again, that is not to say that I agree with personal attacks in the political arena.

Scrutiny and commentary about Fluke testifying before the congress is 100% justified. The name calling is my complaint. All these political television and radio commentators need to have a little self discipline.

I agree with the point Rush was making. I do not agree with the way he made it.


To me the "outrage" over rush's comments was just so damn contrived and self-righteous. particularly in light of the left's silence when conservative women are barraged with far worse.
Click to expand...

Part of the outrage is contrived and self-righteous. The Dems are pushing the issue as hard as they can. Obama should have stayed out of it.
IMO, Rush made a mistake in his choice of words, he apologized on the air. That is all he could do after making a mistake. Clear Channel could have made a public anouncement and fined Rush for his comments and this entire issue should be over.
 
#361
#361
the Dems really lucked into something here. They trot out a known activist in a pretend/faked committee meeting to talk about a subject not even related to the current debate and end up catching Rush in the backwash. It's like catching Nessie while water skiing.
 
#362
#362
utvolpj said:
the Dems really lucked into something here. They trot out a known activist in a pretend/faked committee meeting to talk about a subject not even related to the current debate and end up catching Rush in the backwash. It's like catching Nessie while water skiing.
Click to expand...

It's absolutely baffling to me how Republicans always find a way to participate in the Democrats' attempts at obfuscation. This issue was a loser for the Left, and Rush single-handedly gave them the moral high ground.
 
#363
#363
volinbham said:
you are really equating personal responsibility (fallout from offensive comments) to the notion of personal responsibility in general (taking care of one's self)?

seems a stretch.

on the former, I'm not saying there is a conspiracy. opponents smelled blood in the water and pounced.
Click to expand...


volinbham said:
you are really equating personal responsibility (fallout from offensive comments) to the notion of personal responsibility in general (taking care of one's self)?

seems a stretch.

on the former, I'm not saying there is a conspiracy. opponents smelled blood in the water and pounced.
Click to expand...


Isn't responsibility responsibility in any situation? You 'know' me and know I am not attacking you personally, but your statement at painting a difference between respinsibilities seems like cherry picking. Either respinsibility for one's actions in the public and private arena are important or they aren't.


Sure they smelled blood. It's his own fault, imo. There's areason there is an old saying- Give them enough rope and they will hang themselves. He took a risk and it's not working out too well for him.
 
#364
#364
volinbham said:
Hmmm, just ordinary citizens objecting to offensive comments:

Senate Democrats Launch Petition Targeting Rush Limbaugh



Odd about all the misogyny comments - apparently only the GOP and Rush do this.
Click to expand...

And I have stated the govt should stay out of it. Given the political climate and this being an election year, no way they do. I still don't agree with what they are doing. If this were resversed where liberal commentator did the same, it's false piety to suggest the Repubs wouldn't be on the situation like a duck on a june bug. Dems and Repubs are both wolves in search of any opportunity to prey upon to further their agendas.
 
#365
#365
JayVols said:
Isn't responsibility responsibility in any situation? You 'know' me and know I am not attacking you personally, but your statement at painting a difference between respinsibilities seems like cherry picking. Either respinsibility for one's actions in the public and private arena are important or they aren't.


Sure they smelled blood. It's his own fault, imo. There's areason there is an old saying- Give them enough rope and they will hang themselves. He took a risk and it's not working out too well for him.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to cherry pick. Advocating personal responsibility in the sense that the cons do is about not relying on the government (or someone else) to solve your problems for you.

I'm not absolving RL of responsibility for what he said but as far as I can tell he's not dodging responsibility either. He's not asking the government to protect him. He's not denying he made a mistake and I don't know that he's asking for anything really. So I don't see the personal responsibility hypocrisy angle.

The give em enough rope is exactly what I was saying when I suggested this is about more than the Fluke comments. You seemed to be saying that was all it was about but I think we both know that his political opponents have jumped on those comments as a lever to effect their larger goal of silencing him.

He has no one but himself to blame but as I stated to begin with, the move to get advertisers to leave is about more than the Fluke comments
 
#366
#366
JayVols said:
And I have stated the govt should stay out of it. Given the political climate and this being an election year, no way they do. I still don't agree with what they are doing. If this were resversed where liberal commentator did the same, it's false piety to suggest the Repubs wouldn't be on the situation like a duck on a june bug. Dems and Repubs are both wolves in search of any opportunity to prey upon to further their agendas.
Click to expand...

I never did or would not suggest that. I simply stated the campaign to silence him is about much more than the Fluke comments. I think the evidence is clear on that issue.
 
#368
#368
volinbham said:
I never did or would not suggest that. I simply stated the campaign to silence him is about much more than the Fluke comments. I think the evidence is clear on that issue.
Click to expand...

Sorry if you took my comment as an implication of what you were saying. That was not my intention at all. It was meant to be a general statement to anyone that does not any specific comment you made.
 
#369
#369
I think we're forgetting that sponsors can drop whomever they please for whatever reason they want. Likewise, Rush can say whatever he wants as that's what he's paid to do.

I don't think either side has any reason to be angry right now. Things are happening as they should. It's not like Rush is going to be cancelled and I doubt he lost very many listeners over this.
 
#370
#370
file this under: unintended consequences.

David Axelrod will not be appearing as a guest on “Real Time with Bill Maher,” despite reports last week that he was scheduled to do the show in the next few weeks.

“He's not scheduled to go on at this time,” said Ben LaBolt, the press secretary for President Obama’s reelection campaign.

Maher, who donated $1 million to the pro-Obama super PAC Priorities USA, has increasingly become a target of right-wing attacks over the last week in response to the left’s attacks on Rush Limbaugh. Maher has come under fire for calling Sarah Palin a “c**t” during his stand-up act and a “dumb tw**t” on his HBO show, among other sexist comments.

Axelrod has used the Limbaugh affair to attack Mitt Romney, slamming him for having “essentially refused to comment on what was a really egregious set of comments by Limbaugh” and saying “he’s afraid to challenge a guy who’s the de-facto head of his party.”

The Daily noted this when reporting last Wednesday that, according to an HBO spokeswoman, Axelrod was scheduled to appear on Maher’s show in the coming weeks.

Axelrod’s cold feet are not the only sign that the right’s attacks on Maher seem to be gaining some traction.

On Thursday, The Daily Caller reported that the Alabama Democratic Party had scrubbed its website of an announcement for its upcoming fundraiser headlined by Maher.
Click to expand...

David Axelrod bails on HBO's Bill Maher amid controversy - POLITICO.com
 
#373
#373
DinkinFlicka said:
I think we're forgetting that sponsors can drop whomever they please for whatever reason they want. Likewise, Rush can say whatever he wants as that's what he's paid to do.

I don't think either side has any reason to be angry right now. Things are happening as they should. It's not like Rush is going to be cancelled and I doubt he lost very many listeners over this.
Click to expand...

I agree that they can drop whoever they please and absolutely should. It's about business.

My point is that of the people who are pressuring advertisers to drop many are:

1) not Rush listeners to begin with
2) doing so because of his political views, not because of these particular comments.

If he offends, don't listen. Why bother trying to organize some action against him for some offensive comments?

I find Bill Maher mildly offensive (and generally not funny) but I'm not writing HBO to dump him or threatening to cancel my HBO sub. I find Schultz and Maddow highly annoying but I'm not writing MSNBC sponsors to drop them. In both cases I simply don't tune in.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top