Or they could just blame Limbaugh...

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

hero of the great unwashed said SP was a "babe", "could wear a skirt", had "definable ankles." I thought sexism was sexism whether complementary or derogatory. I'll know more after my bath.

I've heard Al Franken say this on a television interview. He repeated it in an interview with Geov Parrish at WorkingforChange.com (05/02/05) to which we can conveniently link:

AF: I'm glad you asked me that. I use this example a lot. A few months ago, Rush was talking about the minimum wage. Conservatives like to portray it that no one has to raise a family on the minimum wage, the only people who get the minimum wage are teenagers who want to buy an i-Pod. So Rush says, "75 percent of all Americans on the minimum wage, my friends, are teenagers on their first job." And one of the researchers brings this to me, with a smile, and I say, "Well, can you look it up?" And they look it up, the researcher goes to something called the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 60.1 percent of Americans on minimum wage are twenty and above. 39.9 percent, then, are either teenagers or below twelve (laughs). I had several jobs as a teenager, so you figure, what, 13 percent might be teenagers in their first job. Not 75 percent. So where did Rush get his statistic? Well, he got it directly from his butt. It went out his butt, into his mouth, out the microphone, into the air, into the brains of dittoheads. And they believe this stuff.

So we get our labor statistics from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. He gets his from the Bureau of Rush's Butt. And that's the difference. We don't do that. That's one of the main differences.

Nor is there anything wrong with a subversive one, nor a crazy one. This country was founded on opinions that were deemed by the powers-that-were to be unpopular, subversive, and crazy. Dissent - even when that dissent strays from logic or humanity - is our life�s blood. But if you have one of those opinions, and you express it in public, honesty and self-respect require you to own up to it.

On his daily radio soap opera, on August 15, Limbaugh said �Cindy Sheehan is just Bill Burkett. Her story is nothing more than forged documents, there's nothing about it that's real�� The complete transcript of the 860 words that surround those quotes can be found at the bottom of this entry.

Yet, apparently there was something so unpopular, so subversive, and so crazy about those remarks that he has found it necessary to deny he said them - even when there are recordings and transcripts of them - and to brand those who�ve claimed he said them as crackpots and distorters. More over, that amazing temple to himself, his website, has been scrubbed clean of all evidence of these particular remarks, and to �prove� his claim that he never made the remarks in question on August 15, he has misdirected visitors to that site to transcripts and recordings of remarks he made on August 12.

Understand this about Limbaugh. He doesn�t believe half the junk he spouts. I�ve met him, and had pleasant enough conversations with him, twice - at the 1980 World Series when he was still a mid-level baseball flunky with a funny name, and once in the mid �90s at ESPN when he was just beginning his campaign to get a toehold there. He is a quiet, almost colorless man who, if he could be guaranteed similar success in sportscasting, would sell out the sheep who follow his every word - and would do it before close of business today.

But with that ESPN bid having gone up in flames just under two years ago, and sports forever closed off to him, he�s gotten into what the novelist Robert Graves called a �Golden Predicament� - overwhelming success in a field he really had no intention of pursuing - and he has to keep churning this stuff out every day. And when you�re just free associating to kill time and keep the ditto-heads happy, you sometimes drive right off the end of the pier.

Since we declared Limbaugh �The Worst Person In The World� two nights later for the remarks about Sheehan, he has had the transcript of his pier-drive expunged (even though he initially thought so much of it, that it was posted as a �featured quote� for paying subscribers to his website). Simultaneously, the hapless Brent Bozell, who runs that scam called The Media Research Center, declared that I was guilty of �distortion� in quoting the Sheehan remarks.

Well, as you�ll see below, the only distortion here, is that which lingers in Limbaugh�s ears. His remarks about Sheehan were so embraced by at least one of his fans that they were preserved on another website, and we can present them in full here. You will notice that nothing has been taken out of context, nothing in the minutes before nor the minutes afterwards mitigates against the utter callousness and infamy of his comments about Sheehan.

A reminder that that�s Cindy Sheehan, Gold Star Mother, who when I asked her bluntly if President Bush wasn�t serving her purposes more by not seeing her, was honest enough to answer �yes� without hesitation. And it�s Rush Limbaugh, who so believes in his case against her that he�s too afraid to admit he said this (and who, by the way, has since said of her that, "I'm weary of even having to express sympathy... we all lose things� - as if her son had been a misplaced, er, prescription).

The long preface concluded, here is what Rush Limbaugh said, crazily weaving in and out of the topic of Cindy Sheehan, in his broadcast of August 15. He even wanders back into football, and the very topic that proved his end at ESPN, Donovan McNabb of the Philadelphia Eagles (honestly, if he ever wanted to be analyzed, he would be such a juicy case that psychiatrists would bid for Limbaugh�s rights). So, as you get deeper into the thicket, you can find the relevant portions about Sheehan, I�ve italicized them. Limbaugh had wandered into this via the news of the withdrawal of the anti-John Roberts advertisement from NARAL:

�They pulled this ad because it wasn't working. They didn't pull this ad because of a bite of conscience or, ooh, this is wrong. And their mistake was they're telling themselves they came out of the barn too soon with it. If they'd have come out of this say a week before September 6th. Well, stop and think about it. If they would have run this ad, if this would have started a week before September 6th, CNN carrying it, and none of the Democrats denouncing it, and without a whole lot of time to gin up, it would have probably had more effect. So I think they're going to learn from this that they didn't keep their powder dry, they just were too eager.

�But the fact that they are too eager -- I mean, Cindy Sheehan is just Bill Burkett. Her story is nothing more than forged documents, there's nothing about it that's real, including the mainstream media's glomming onto it, it's not real. It's nothing more than an attempt, it's the latest effort made by the coordinated left. And all of these efforts are bombing; they're all failing miserably, in and of themselves.

�Now, this is not to say that all is rosy. I don't want you to misunderstand. But I don't get that worked up about it. I have an attitude about it. I've been sharing this with you for the longest time. So I think we're in a new era. The left doesn't get away with this stuff anymore. They're not getting away with it now. I know it's irritating, I know it's frustrating, I know it makes you mad, does me, too, but it's not helpful to the people who are doing this, it is not assisting them.

�They are going to try to claim that Cindy Sheehan is responsible for the Bush poll numbers on Iraq being down, but those numbers were falling before Cindy Sheehan did this. I'm not saying the mainstream press isn't effective in certain areas anymore, I'm not saying the mainstream press doesn't have the ability to shape opinion. Just saying on this, this is not the thing everybody should be worried about. I don't have one in my mind that is, something everybody ought to be worried about, but if you're going to be angry at this, and I understand the anger, and I share some of it, too, the anger here, to me, is how the left and the media are trying to make this bigger than it is.

�But that still takes me back to the fact that they know they're losing, they know they're losing big time. These people are throwing it up against the wall. It's the fourth quarter and all they're doing is throwing long bombs and their quarterback's gotten too tired to finish the game and their wide receiver is out there making all kinds of disparaging comments about the quarterback and getting kicked out of camp.

�The situation with the Philadelphia Eagles pretty much dovetails what's going on with the Democratic Party right now if you ask me. It does. I don't think that we're looking at people who have a posture of confidence. This is not the kind of thing that winners do. It's all done in total desperation, as is the mainstream press's ability to prop it up.

�What's she got? A hundred stragglers have showed up down there, a hundred peaceniks, a hundred long-haired, maggot-infested, dope-smoking FM types, essentially, are down there joining her. And if this were genuine, if this were like it was back in Vietnam -- remember, that's what they're trying to turn this into. They're just reliving the old halcyon days of the anti-war movement in the sixties. They would have had hundreds of thousands of people down there. They would have had mass marches. There would have been the need for riot cops outside Bush's ranch down there. This is so obviously a desperation move.

�Now, I don't have a whole lot of sympathy for the woman. I think she's taken the grieving process here to lengths that most people don't, and she's being fueled by all of this attention. But this is just a long way of saying I'm not -- you can call about it and you can talk about it but I just am not that worked up about it because, to me, it's sort of like -- I got an e-mail today from a guy said, "Rush, why aren't you talking about that radio scandal going on?" Why should I talk about it? Why should I talk about that, folks? There's a cardinal rule, when your enemy is destroying themselves, you shut up and you get out of the way and let them do it. And it's happening in countless areas and times on the left. Certain things you do need to give a little nudge, other things you just get out of the way.

�But the longer the Sheehan thing goes on and the longer she's treated as some sort of super-celebrity by the press and the more outrageous things she says, trust me on this, the more people are going to get fed up with it. She's going to become the next Natalee Holloway before it's all said and done.�

I don't think I have wait for the liberal analysis of what Rush said. I was actually listening on the days he said all the things you referred to above, Of course, the so-called impoverished in this country are not the only ones with an obesity problem. Anyone who eats more calories than their body can burn on a daily basis will end up with an obesity problem it's not exclusive to race or class.

The UNICEF remarks were making fun of a U.N. charity program which, I believe, just last year was documented to be funneling money to Kofi Anan and his cohorts, but of course it was nicely swept under the rug. Actually, Rush was making fun of Sally Struthers for standing around truly starving people making us feel guilty for not sending money to UNICEF while she's standing there weighing all of 300 pounds herself, and I would bet my life she didn't miss a meal while doing that shoot.

That's not the point. I know what Rush said, because I heard what Rush said when he said it. It was satire whether you believe or not. Again, Rush does it, because he knows it will inflame liberals, and the PC crowd. He didn't talk about the bloated bellies of the starving people in the context you and the article want to spin it to be.

You don't get it, and I don't expect you to. I politely suggest you stick to Air America (for however long it remains on the air), and don't bother yourself with what Rush has to say, because when you call him or anyone else bloated or fat you are seriously defeating your own cause in being outraged that he called someone else fat.

As terrible as it is, this attack could be miniscule if, in fact, God
continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to
give us probably what we deserve. The ACLU's got to take a lot of the
blame for this�The abortionists have got to bear some of the burden for
this because God will not be mocked�I really believe that the pagans,
and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the
lesbians�all of them who have tried to secularize America, I point the
finger in their face and say, 'you helped this happen.'
- Rev. Jerry Falwell, September 13, 2001

Who can forget Jerry Falwell's infamous post-9/11 indictment of
America? 'You helped this happen,' Falwell said to the majority of
Americans, who disagree with him on a majority of issues.

Now, a conservative group called Columbia Christians for Life has
proclaimed that Hurricane Katrina was another one of God's punishments,
citing as evidence the supposed resemblance between the hurricane's
image on a weather map, and a fetus.

Trying to refute such claims from these zealots is truly an exercise in
futility. But searching for explanations after a disaster of Katrina's
magnitude is not. And if you do in fact search for those explanations,
you'll reach an unavoidable conclusion:

Hurricane Katrina may have been an act of God. But the level of death
and destruction it caused was not. That was an act of conservatism.

It is conservative policies that made this natural disaster unnaturally
catastrophic. I say to conservatives, you have blood on your hands
today. I point the finger in your face and say, You helped this
happen.

Conservative policies have led to an increase in poverty across the
nation, especially in New Orleans, one of the poorest major cities in
America. About 150,000 people in New Orleans lived below the poverty
line before Katrina, 100,000 of them in abject poverty, making less
than $8,000 a year. Their poverty left them with nowhere to go, and no
means of escape, as the hurricane bore down on their homes.

Conservative policies have led to more global warming, which scientists
agree has already begun producing more intense hurricanes and storms.
Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour, a former Republican Party Chairman
and longtime GOP operative, has seen his own state ravaged by Katrina.
But he was vital in helping to convince the Bush administration to
squash the Kyoto Protocol on climate change, and pushed Bush to go
back on his campaign promise to regulate carbon dioxide. Governor
Barbour would dare express grief over the deaths that he himself
enabled.

Conservative policies have led to a war in Iraq based on lies, and tax
cuts for the rich, both of which, we know for a fact, took money
directly away from vital hurricane preparedness work in New Orleans.
On nine occasions in 2004 and 2005, The New Orleans Times-Picayune
specifically cited the cost of the Iraq War as a reason for the
shortfall in hurricane- and flood-control funds. The levees that gave
way under Katrina's pressure were supposed to be upgraded with money
that ended up in Halliburton�s coffers.

Conservative policies have also led to the National Guard's misuse and
abuse, leaving the Gulf Coast without the personnel and equipment
vital to a recovery effort of this magnitude. More people will die on
the Gulf Coast as they await their would-be saviors, who are in Iraq,
victims themselves of conservative policies.

There can be no doubt that while Hurricane Katrina was not preventable,
much of the death and destruction left in its wake was. I say to
conservatives, you have blood on your hands today. I point the finger
in your face and say, You helped this happen.

to both government and the automakers. For them to pay skilled trades a buttload of money and allow them to sit and do nothing and then retire at age 50 and live off of GM isn't right. That is GM's fault for allowing that happen. As for making big trucks and SUVs....it was what the people wanted at that time. That really wasn't a huge concern until gas prices started to skyrocket. They were making what they thought people wanted. They couldn't predict that gas would skyrocket like it did and the economy would collapse like it has.

on the past 8 years. Granted, the past 8 years weren't the greatest and some major mistakes were made, but there were some things that were going on during prior presidencies that lead to this. The problem was that no one stopped it once it got started and it just snowballed. Now we have Obama in the office and we are still snowballing. If you want to place blame, you need to go back further than Bush and include some others as well. Now it is Obama's turn and we need to keep our eye on him because he continues to spend spend spend!!!!! Yeah....that worked out so well in the past 8 years huh......

including natural disasters and including the fact that people built a city below sea level with water on all sides and was told that anything over a Cat 3 storm would wipe out the city. The city failed in adequately planning to evacuate the people in case of such an emergency. While I'm absolutely heartbroken to what is happening to people there, especially those who couldn't evacuate themselves the city has been told this would happen for years. Even if Bush had not cut some funds to the area adequate plans would have still not been in place. Everyone has said at one time or another that New Orleans was a disaster waiting for a Cat 4 or higher storm to happen. You can pin this on Bush like you do everything else that happens in this world, but Bush is hardly to blame for the devastation. Finger pointing does no good at this point. We all must dig deep and do what we can do for those in New Orleans. Arguing the political aspects of this disaster will not hydrate one dehydrated baby or feed one hungry person or build one adequate shelter.

My advice to everyone is to step away from your computer, go buy some non-perishable items and get it to a relief point tomorrow.

I think registered voters should have to prove their knowledge on the matters at hand prior to voting. Just a 5 or 10-question test to make sure they know their candidate's policies.

Do we really want our "welfare" society to determine our next President? That's what ACORN is making sure will happen.