Rush Limbaugh: You Can't Call Obama D-word on MSNBC But You Can Call Conservatives 'Racist, Sexist, Bigot Homophobes'
Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh had more fun Friday with what Mark Halperin said on "Morning Joe" the previous day.
In Limbaugh's view, you can't call Obama the D-word on MSNBC, but you can debase conservatives however you want including saying they're "racist, sexist, bigot homophobes" (video follows with transcript and commentary, minor vulgarity warning):
RUSH LIMBAUGH: Now, the White House says that that remark was inappropriate. The White House says it's inappropriate. White House spokesman, Mr. Claire Shipman, Jay Carney said that "the comment was an inappropriate thing to say about any president," except George W. Bush. Well, he didn't really say that, but you know damn well if Halperin had called Bush that name they wouldn't even have apologized. "White House spokesman Jay Carney said the comment was an inappropriate thing to say about any president. Carney also said he had expressed that sentiment to network executives. Halperin quickly apologized on the air Thursday. MSNBC suspended him indefinitely hours later. MSNBC also said Halperin's comment was completely inappropriate and unacceptable. The network apologized to Obama."
So let's take a look here. The word "dick" inappropriate. But the Republicans will hurt disabled kids is totally permissible. The Republicans will hurt college kids. The Republicans will take food out of old people's mouths. Totally appropriate. The Republicans want to take Social Security checks away from old people, totally appropriate. Paul Ryan will push your grandmother to her death over a cliff in a wheelchair, totally appropriate. The rich are selfish, mean-spirited, extremist racists, totally appropriate to say. Conservatives are racist, sexist, bigot, homophobes, totally appropriate to say. It is totally appropriate to make up quotes I never said and attribute them to me. It's totally appropriate for left-wing sportswriters to invent things I never said, that's totally appropriate.
As NewsBusters reported Thursday, on MSNBC you can also call a sitting president "a 'murderous' 'fascist' even muse about putting the President on trial for war crimes, so long as that president is a Republican."
And, as Limbaugh pointed out Thursday, you can also call the President the D-word on MSNBC as long as he's Republican.
But you better not do it if he's a Democrat.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
can anyone seriously picture the scene
Submitted by Hoosier Conservative on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 5:55pm.
of Ari Fleischer or Dana Perino making angry phone calls to Fox News, on a show that already featured Republicans 10-1, and forced the network to essentially fire a pundit for calling Bush a name.
The left hyperventilated if they thought Bush even knew Roger Ailes's phone number.
Absolutely...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 6:51pm.
although it is rather difficult picturing Fleischer, Perino or Carney sputtering with rage--all three possess very laid-back personalities. But if you don't believe the Bush administration enjoyed an extremely cozy relationship with Fox prez and ex-GOP activist Roger Ailes and with Rush Limbaugh as well [on whose program Bush/Cheney launched its 2000 campaign], you are sadly mistaken.
Rush waxing indignant over the nasty things said about Republicans is comically ironic inasmuch as his own career has surfed on the crest of a virtual tsunami of invective--murderers, traitors, Nazis, devils--hurled against Democrats and liberals, for which behavior he suffered the humiliation of being rewarded a 400 million dollar contract extension three years ago.
Jer
what exactly does that have to do
Submitted by Hoosier Conservative on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 7:18pm.
with MSNBC's double standard
What double standard?
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 7:49pm.
Rush pointed out that you can call a President the D-word as long as he is a Republican. I'm not aware of an instance where a Republican President has been called the D-word on MSNBC. So any conclusions in that respect are entirely speculative.
Limbaugh is hardly one to be tut-tutting the penchant for employing incendiary rhetoric. The hypocrisy oozing from his contrived expression of outrage is almost visible.
Jer
Liberals recognize no double standard---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 8:28pm.
that's just knee jerk Jer doing his thing and dinging El Rushbo.
Either that or he is trying to get his post removed again. :o(
Note: I didn't see said post, but all the same I am going to avoid using the word "ridiculous".
MD
Matthew...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 1:34am.
I believe it is permissible to use the word "r*dic#lous" as long as it is not completely spelled out. At least that is my present understanding of the NB "terms of use".
Jer
Whew! edited my misspelling of permissible before Matthew busted me.
Sorry Jer
Submitted by tvhall on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 8:53pm.
You are fighting "A Bridge Too Far" here. We realize our side is not perfect but compared to the low life, lieing, cheating, stealing, scum sucking left (would that be you?), we are veracity incarnate.
Go be a commenter on Kos or Huffington or other left wing cess pits. Your views will be valued there!
tvhall...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 9:27pm.
I haven't spent five minutes at Kos in the past six months. They apparently don't like my views. The last comment I attempted to post there was a slam at a leftist rant by A. Whitney Brown 2-3 years ago. HuffPo long ago cleaned up its act. I don't think they liked my views either. I tried to post a comment there criticizing the tasteless comments in reference to Tony Snow's death. Not long afterwards, HuffPo began comprehensive moderation of all comments. Consequently, it is now a model of decorum and civility compared to NB.
But if you are truly interested in a cesspool, hang out at weasel zippers.
Jer
"whose program Bush/Cheney
Submitted by okie-pastor on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 7:33pm.
"whose program Bush/Cheney launched it's 2000 campaign"
Where is a republican supposed to launch their campaign? MSNBC? NBC? ABC? CBS? CNN? HLN?
"murderous, traitors, Nazis, devils". You left out socialists and liars...... Wait those names actually fit.
Presidential campaigns
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 8:01pm.
Presidential campaigns historically haven't kicked off with an in-studio interview by a media sycophant.
Jer
Political careers "historically"
Submitted by UpNorth on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 8:52pm.
haven't kicked off in the homes of terrorists, either.
UpNorth...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 9:31pm.
That was the public kick off of the Obama campaign? Don't think so.
Jer
Just noticed you said "careers". I'm referring to campaigns.
Well...
Submitted by jdlybrand on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 9:51pm.
...when your whole career has consisted of nothing but campaigning!?!?!? (and voting present)
"What a revoltin' development this is!"
Chester Riley
Sen. Hillary Clinton jumped
Submitted by stratman on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 12:21am.
Sen. Hillary Clinton jumped into the fray as a 2008 presidential candidate with the words "I'm in" posted on her Web site.
Newt Gingrich has formally declared that he is running for President with an announcement on Twitter.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1386106/Newt-Gingrich-formally-a...
On January 21, 2007, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson announced his candidacy for President of the United States on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos
[Fred] Thompson declared his intent to seek the nomination on September 5, 2007 on the Tonight Show With Jay Leno
Huckabee announced his run for the White House on Meet the Press on January 28, 2007.
On September 15, 2003, Edwards fulfilled a promise he made a year earlier as a guest on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart to unofficially announce his intention to seek the 2004 Democratic Presidential nomination.
Gracie Allen was the candidate of the Surprise Party in 1940 - announced on husband George Burns and her radio show.
Comic Pat Paulsen announced his presidency at a press conference in "Beautiful Downtown South Healdsburg" in the late 1960s on the TV variety show "Rowan and Martin’s Laugh-In.
“I remember Pat when he first announced he was running for president on ‘The Smothers Brothers Show’ in 1968.
January 31, 2007 - Senator Joseph R. Biden today announced in a video statement posted on his website www.joebiden.com that he has filed the necessary paperwork to become a candidate for President of the United States.
Maybe [Ross] Perot will be remembered in history as the father of the talk-show campaign. He announced his first candidacy on CNN, the "Larry King Live" program.
That's enough to point out that history indeed bears out electronic media as a common method of announcing presidential campaigns, sycophants included.
Impressive work, strat...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 1:21am.
but, alas, of minimal relevance since the issue is not the announcement of candidacies or the initial steps in the campaign of one who is first making public his or her intent to seek elected office. It is, rather, the launching of the campaign by a major party's nominee for President of the United States and his or her running mate beginning immediately or very shortly after the conclusion of the national convention. Thus the reference to "Bush/Cheney" launching its campaign in 2000 via Cheney's appearance on Limbaugh to officially commence the Bush/Cheney run for the White House.
Jer
Moving The Goal Post, Jer?
Submitted by stratman on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 6:41pm.
I believe I have properly addressed the spirit and the letter of your statement: Presidential Campaigns.
In my list, the people were announcing their run for the presidency beginning with the primaries. Few run just to be a candidate if they actually could be president - who's been the party nominee and then declined because their run in the primaries was enough? You are either in or you are out... and you're in until you're out.
The primaries are the first half of the entire race to the presidency. How many presidential candidates who weren't fringe kook candidates skipped the primaries and ran solely in the general election? How many presidents were elected who did not run in the primaries?
If you want to pick bones... Bush was already running for the presidency in your example. He had announced his intentions sometime before in his primary bid. The Limbaugh appearance was Cheney's announcement of his place on the ticket. Everyone already knew that Bush was running.
BTW, my favorites in the list are Pat Paulson and Gracie Allen. Either would have made a fine president compared to the current one.
Negative, strat...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 8:02pm.
Not one millimeter. But you did, albeit unintentionally. Your focus is on my exchanges with okie-pastor and UpNorth, when it should have been on my original post which specifically identified the launching of the 2000 Bush/Cheney campaign (and thus served as the antecedent and qualifier for later references). Most of your customary excellent sourcing relates to candidacy announcements. [By the way, I enjoyed your Paulson and Gracie Allen links also.]
Jer
Today
Submitted by stratman on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 11:32pm.
The latest non-traditional launch of a presidential campaign:
Don't know how many sycophants were in attendance.
Well, the polls say a "generic" Republican can beat Obama...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 11:45pm.
but I'm not so sure Thaddeus fits the mold.
[Btw, how long are you going to keep beating me over the head with the "sycophants" club?]
:-) please note disarming emoticon
Jer
I'm Sure It Is A No.
Submitted by stratman on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 10:39am.
The guy's guitar playing is ok - journeyman at best. He won't be winning over fans in the music industry with his performance, hence the reprise of the word "sycophants". It was not meant to be wielded as a club. Huckabee is a more solid player, albeit nothing too fancy.
I doubt his peppering speeches from the floor of the House with song titles from Led Zeppelin is going to win over many Conservatives or anyone else for that matter. But he does make some good points and hopefully will drive the Conservative conversation down the road a bit further with the public.
And, I thought
Submitted by UpNorth on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 10:06am.
you were commenting on the propriety of things political, in general. And, I'm referring to terrorists, compared to a setting like a news program.
Not to a sitting president
Submitted by grammajane on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 11:17pm.
No remarks like that to a President. He gets 400 mil because he is so popular and the most listened to host in the media and has been, for almost 23 years. He has facts to back everything he says and his predictions are usually always right on.
Of course you can, Rush!
Submitted by NJRightWinger12 on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 6:24pm.
Obamas off limits, you know, cause hes so cool, hop and smart-and hes "trying" to do all his good work. But Bush, you know, deserved it, of course-a duh! And have you seen O'Bozos jump shot-Katie Couric said it was "impressive", so, thats good enough for me!
Rush
Submitted by jessieH on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 6:51pm.
And, that, is why the media doesn't matter, anymore. They have turned their backs on the American Citizens for too long. The scary thought is that our own Congress is doing the same thing. Both have become irrelevant.
Where is the open thread?
Submitted by Boudin on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 7:02pm.
An Old Lady, A Hot Blonde, A Cajun And Obama On A Train
I was driving home from Town today, when I was met in the oncoming lane by a very large Funeral. I became very obvious to us that this was the funeral for a fallen Solder. There were hundreds of the Patriot Guard escorting the precession. I became very angry, thinking of the degenerate scumbags from Westboro who disgrace these funerals for the finest folks we have, might be in our town. Knowing the folks in this area quite well, there is no doubt, these cretins were treated like dogs. But I still wish I were given a heads-up so I could also help shield the family, and do my part to make sure they never come back.
Does anyone know, if the Patriot Guard escorts all Funerals, or just the one that are attended by the subhumans from Kansas?
Great Boudin*
Submitted by cajun2 on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 7:08pm.
Wanted to tell you what a great link that was. Sorry it took me so long to reply but my hand is still stinging a bit.
Ahhhhh,
Submitted by CommanderTaya on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 7:21pm.
Agreed. I feel your "pain". I think the next time the Great Boudin needs to post a beverage alert. Thanks for the chuckle.
No no no!
Submitted by Blonde on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 8:02pm.
It was my younger self, slapping the snot out of him.
Hee hee.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
No problem
Submitted by Boudin on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 9:32pm.
I knew it was you,
Boudin,
Submitted by UpNorth on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 8:51pm.
the family usually has to request the presence of the Patriot Guard, at least that was so a while ago. I don't know if their rules have changed to adapt to the inbred cretins from Westboro, or not.
Thanks,
Submitted by Boudin on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 9:40pm.
I will get the details, next trip to town.
I wanted to turn around and latch onto the tail of it, but I had a load of lumber.
I would dare say yes.
Submitted by The Vet on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 1:54am.
We had a service for a fallen hero in my town a few weeks back. They were there.
Our main mission is to attend the funeral services of fallen American heroes as invited guests of the family.
It is the entire point of the Patriot Guard.
In Fairness Obama is a Wog and not a D-word
Submitted by Avitar on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 8:54pm.
We should be correct in our invectives less we descend into slander. The N-word is off limits for Obama too but the leftist may use it when referring to Hermann Cain of Clarence Thomas since they have the minimum racial background required. When your first name is the south end of the north bound horse that Mohammad rode in on you do get a minor pass. People named Dobbins, Sea biscuit or one of the other over used horses’ names also get a pass. Charlie Sheen on the other hand qualifies on his bad days as a D-word and Bill Clinton on his best days.
Rush
Submitted by grammajane on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 10:00pm.
Rush is right, as usual. His humor and satire are common place, on his show. He makes up names and sometimes songs about the left that are original and very funny. He gets on libs when, which is often,they say or do stupid things. The bashing of Bush, Palin and Bachman are nothing but hate and total disrespect form all over the media. The word D--K was very calm compared to what the LSM said about Bush and don't recall he ever called pmsnbc to complain. Bush was/is a man and Barry is a man-child, as Rush discribes him. HAPPY 4TH OF JULY TO YOU ALL.WE are an Independent Nation and in 2012, we will hopefully, be rid of the dependence!!. I am in MN where we have a Gov shut-down so will have to camp in my back-yard as all state parks are closed.
Actually, grammajane...
Submitted by Jer on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 10:29pm.
According to Rush, Obama is an "angry black man"!
Curiously, every Republican who I have heard comment on Obama's personality--those who have actually interacted with him--describe the President as congenial, friendly, personable, or in similar terms.
But, admittedly, Rush has a very vivid imagination.
Jer
his mother is white
Submitted by Samshile on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 3:54am.
He is also an Angry White Man! He is also an Angry Mongrel. I am mixed blood so I qualify to comment. I qualifiy to see the lame relativism you use for an argument. 80 examples of hate on the left to 2 on the right. MOst of the time Rush is mocking you Jer with your own projection. The irony is hilarious. Black Swan argument jer. MOst of us put on a mask in public. The Joe the Plumber ridicule (mask off) exposed him as a D**k. He is a very small petulent man.
Would you like 78 more examples of hate on the right,
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 4:32am.
Samshile? It would take all of about ten minutes to provide them. The hatred is generated by both wings, and it is to neither's credit.
Of course you are qualified to comment. You are also qualified to make an ass of yourself. Congratulations on both accomplishments
Jer.
It will take a lot longer than that
Submitted by Blonde on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 9:05am.
Links, please.
Those take time.
Be our guest.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Oh for heaven's sakes, Blonde...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 7:10pm.
Just google hateful or outrageous statements made by Limbaugh and Savage and Coulter. They are compiled at various sites and easily accessible, just as similar statements by those on the left are available elsewhere. The archives of Spinsanity provides numerous examples of hate speech from both ends of the spectrum--including Rush's smearing "Tokyo Tom" Daschle as a devil, a traitor allied with the axis of evil.
This is Rush's view of Democrats, who he has described as not just political opponents but enemies attempting to destroy America*:
http://They won because they held Congress and the presidency, and therein lies the lesson: We need to defeat these bastards. We need to wipe them out. We need to chase them out of town. [transcript]
Look, we can go back and forth with the "Oh yeah...says you" arguments and counterarguments and it will get us nowhere. When it comes to slanderous, incendiary rhetoric, neither the left nor the right can honestly claim to be on the side of the angels.
Jer
*I think his words were "not just political opponents but a threat to the country led by Barack Hussein Obama, um,um...um!"
Well, he's right
Submitted by jon_torlin on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 10:23pm.
There's a difference between incindiary rhetoric and just plain telling the truth like it is.
The Democrats ARE trying to destroy America from within. They helped the bogus potus do just that prior to Nov 2010 and their socialist policies had a lot to do with it. One or two things that were promised to have good results but end up being bad is a mistake. Continuing to do things that have promised good results but give us nothing but bad results is not a mistake, it's not a coincidence, it's intentional. If this were some big company, he would have been removed and thrown out into the parking lot with a severance pay.
They knew full well that they were lying about these various things that they set off to do, be it the TSA, the FDA, the HHS, the EPA, the Fed Reserve and others, not to mention that now that the Democrats can't control the House anymore, the bogus potus just starts ordering (in most cases at least) unConstitutional orders such as the DREAM act and others.
And then the bogus potus himself says he doesn't need Congress for anything. Our system was supposed to be a system of checks and balances between the Legislative Branch(Congress and Senate), the Judicial Branch(the SCOTUS), and the Executive Branch. All three things are to work together or it becomes meaningless and ends up being a tyranny. Well, guess what, we're practically into that tyranny now after that pronouncement of "I don't need the Congress." He considers the Constitution as a list of suggestions instead of the ULTIMATE law of the land, that's a dictator thinking right there and THAT makes him an enemy to the people of the United States.
All the above is not rhetoric, those are cold hard facts of acts taken by a manchild who made it his mission to run this country into the ground by transforming it.
All these things happening, we KNEW they were going to happen and yet the gullible libs are acting like "oh no, it isn't happening, why isn't it happening?" or the others with their heads in the sand "Not in America" but IT'S RIGHT THERE.
-Jon
Duly noted, jon...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 11:17pm.
And one can surf the lefty sites and find the identical rationalizations for their incendiary rhetoric actually being "truth-telling"--supported by their own set of irrefutable facts.
Around and around it goes. It would be boring if it weren't for the serious risks posed to the nation by viewing competing ideologies not as a contest of ideas but as a clash between good and evil.
Jer
Quick question, Jer
Submitted by 26CX on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 12:11pm.
When you talk about HuffPo being "a model of decorum and civility compared to NB" are you referring to NB being sullied by comments like this?
Of course you are qualified to comment. You are also qualified to make an ass of yourself. Congratulations on both accomplishments
Correct, CX...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 6:13pm.
Neither Samshile's ad hominems nor my response would have made it past the HuffPo mods.
Jer
Ah! The old "he did it, too" deflection!
Submitted by 26CX on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 10:01am.
But Samshile hasn't been pointing out the lack of decorum and civility at NB compared to HuffPo.
Maybe you can help set the example of what it will take to close the gap.
CX...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 5:29pm.
If you have a problem with my posting style I suggest you take it up with the admins. Frankly, I'm getting more than a little tired of your butting in with scripture lessons, continuing to whine about my reacting strongly to your despicably vile and false accusations related to my comments regarding Gabby Giffords, and randomly popping up every few days to deliver yet another of your peevish, trollish scolds. Enough.
Jer
No need to overreact, Jer.
Submitted by 26CX on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 5:45pm.
I am merely suggesting that if you feel the levels of decorum and civility at NB need to be improved to meet the higher standards seen at HuffPO, you should do your part to help move NB in that direction.
Please reread my previous response, CX...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 5:52pm.
Enough.
Jer
An example of a liberal knee jerk reaction---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 6:05pm.
"Enough."
I am tired of having to explain why I continually go one hundred and eighty degrees from conservative thought, statements, or proclamations.
I am liberal, dammit.
Hear me sputter.
I mean, roar.
:o)
MD
Matthew...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 6:09pm.
This has nothing to do with politics.
Jer
Seems as though, Jer---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 6:26pm.
You are considering certain posts to be indicative of the 'politics' of personal destruction.
Don't be ridiculous.
Oops.
Then again, having a post deemed inappropriate and inflammatory, AND removed, for using the word 'ridiculous', I do believe there may well be some merit to your irritation.
MD
I don't need to re-read your response.
Submitted by 26CX on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 6:16pm.
It was immediately clear from your ad hominem attack that you are not going to change your ways.
Don't presume that I can be dismissed with a curt "enough" and be expected to slink away like a scolded child. You are in no position to use that tone with me or anyone else at NB. I have been unfailingly civil towards you throughout our disagreements, and I see no reason to expect any less from you.
Have a great 4th of July.
CX...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 6:52pm.
Yes, other than posting a contemptible lie about a comment of mine after Gabby Giffords was shot and following me around inserting trollish remonstrances and bible verses relating to my posting style, you have indeed been unfailingly civil--as have I toward you.
Once again: Enough
You have a great 4th, too.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by 26CX on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 7:15pm.
I suppose that when we have a disagreemet in the future and you lead me to believe that our differences have been resolved, I should take that with a grain of salt and expect to hear from you about the issue ad infinitum.
As for my comments about your posts, it comes with the territory. Feel free to do the same with my posts.
Do you realize how condescending it makes you appear when you attempt to end a conversation by saying "enough"?
Thank you for your kind 4th of July wishes.
Frankly, CX...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 7:52pm.
I thought you might actually apologize for your blatant and outrageous misrepresentation of my remarks on that occasion. Instead you continue to resurrect the incident with catty asides. Uncool.
And, someone who follows me around posting gratuitous, sanctimonious lectures about my style of commenting, and then has the gall to accuse me of condescension should take a good, long look at himself in the mirror. The irony is rich.
If you are driving on the 4th, please be careful. Enjoy the holiday.
Jer
I think you're a little confused, Jer.
Submitted by 26CX on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 8:32pm.
I did apologize and thought you accepted. If you have since changed your mind, that's fine with me.
I didn't resurrect the incident per se; I repeated a shockingly vile comment you made to me during the exchange to make a point about a comment you made to someone else. I made no mention at all of the reason for our exchanges. I don't mind that you have chosen to resurrect the original issue, but please keep in mind that it was your decision.
And finally, Jer, I didn't accuse you of condescension. What I said was that your use of the word "enough" in an attempt to end a conversation made you appear condescending. Big difference.
You drive carefully, too, Jer. I look forward to these exchanges with you and would hate to have anything happen to you that would preclude us chatting again in the future.
CX...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 9:00pm.
There was no apology on the Gabby Giffords thread where you made the unwarranted, unseemly and false accusation, nor was there an apology in your PM to me at the time. Maybe there was a subsequent apology on another thread which I have forgotten. If so, please point it out so I may appropriately stand corrected.
Part of the problem, CX, was your decision to recently inject a gratuitous reference to my heated reaction to you on the Giffords thread without mentioning the reason for it. I chose to let it pass and make light of it at the time, but since your decision was to continue your series of pious lectures by butting in on this thread, I felt no further compunction to ignore the context of the original exchange.
Hope that clarifies the matter for you.
Jer
Yes, thank you, Jer.
Submitted by 26CX on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 9:15pm.
You have clarified your own point of view on this matter and aptly confirmed my understanding of your approach to discussions such as this one.
Have a good evening, Jer.
Before you go, CX...
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 9:18pm.
Please tell me where your apology is located. If I missed it I would like to see it. If I have seen it and forgotten about it, then I may owe you one.
Jer
Hmm....I wonder
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 9:55pm.
if there really is an apology somewhere on some forgotten thread and [gasp] it turns out I posted a conciliatory acceptance right beneath it. How embarrassing would that be.
Oh well...for the moment I'm just glad CX departed without the indictment of another biblical passage for me to ponder and reflect upon my many transgressions.
Jer
Submitted by 26CX on Sat, 07/09/2011 - 7:46am.
I have been away because there was a death in my family.
CX...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 07/09/2011 - 3:15pm.
I had noticed and wondered about your absence and am very sorry for your loss. It's nice to have you back. You and I have had a pretty good relationship in the past and I hope we can build on that rather than dwell on the recent difficulties between us.
Jer
Thank you, Jer,
Submitted by 26CX on Sat, 07/16/2011 - 10:02pm.
for your kind thoughts.
Not to worry: the head-butting we do on NB is not going to do any serious damage to what is usually a pretty good relationship.
Jer
Submitted by well99 on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 4:47am.
"Curiously, every Republican who I have heard comment on Obama's personality--those who have actually interacted with him--describe the President as congenial, friendly, personable, or in similar terms."
I met a lot of backstabbing yutts that were that way.To your face they seem the nicest folks.Turn your back and they are the most vile S.O.B.s .Listening to Obama's speech's he is a petty self centered whining pamper little princess.Other than that he seems like a nice guy.It is Bush's fault.
well99...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 5:41am.
I think he is too thin-skinned, and he has shown a disturbing tendency to occasionally speak before he thinks, both of which are serious weaknesses for a politician, and no doubt a source of a good deal of this "angry black man" criticism from Limbaugh [who is invested in his failure and literally hasn't spoken one positive word about Obama since he was sworn into office].
But the comments I have read and heard from Republicans who have dealt with Obama in person generally--not always--report that he is a likable and friendly guy and portray him much differently that the arrogant, condescending jerk his more strident critics describe from afar.
Jer
Are you sure, Jer?
Submitted by 26CX on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 6:30am.
Are you certain that Rush "literally hasn't spoken one positive word about Obama since he was sworn into office"?
Not one positive word?
You do realize, CX...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 5:59pm.
that incident was just another of Limbaugh's too-clever-by-half sarcastic riffs which was actually intended to belittle, demean and mock Obama rather than compliment him. But, it must be conceded that many MSM outlets were initially fooled by it and reported that Rush had praised Obama [before discovering they had been buffaloed]. Don't tell me you fell for it, too.
Jer
No, Jer.
Submitted by 26CX on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 9:47am.
I didn't miss the sarcasm in Rush's comments about Obama. However, his opening lines did praise Obama for keeping our military in the Middle East and continuing the hunt for Obama:
"Ladies and gentlemen, we need to open the program today by congratulating President Obama," Limbaugh said. "President Obama has done something extremely effective and when he does, this needs to be pointed out. President Obama has continued the Bush policies of keeping a military presence in the Middle East. He did not scrub the mission to get Bin Laden."
Any reasonable person would agree that Rush approved of those two actions by Obama.
That much of the rest of Rush's comments mocked Obama's leadership in the operation with comments like "but President Obama single-handedly understood what was at stake here" is not in question. But those comments aren't germaine to this discussion.
When you said Limbaugh "literally hasn't spoken one positive word about Obama since he was sworn into office" you set the bar very, very low. All that has to be done to prove your statement false is to find "one positive word about Obama" - not one sentence, not one paragraph, not one monologue... just one positive word. Obvioulsy, Rush's comments about Obama continuing to keep the military in the Middle East and continuing the search for Obama exceed that requirement.
Perhaps you should consider modifying your statement to say that Rush "very rarely says anything positive about Obama since he was sworn into office". It would be a much easier accusation to defend.
That may be the most absurdly disingenuous
Submitted by Jer on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 9:31pm.
attempt to defend an utterly demolished argument in the history of NewsBusters. Thanks for proving my point and for the chuckle.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by well99 on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 6:35am.
You know as well as I do that there are two faced people.Always have and always will be.It has nothing to do with politics per say..there are just people like that.As far as Obama I can only go with what I have seen on the TV.He does come off as condescending and arrogant to me.He definitely is thin skinned and really boring.He tends to belabor points.Also the stunt with the SC judges I thought was petty.This last speech was really pathetic.A do as I say not as I do speech.I remember his 2004 speech at the Dem convention.I thought this guy is great.He actions don't backup his words.So he's just another politician who can occasionally give a good speech but that is it.Well at least his teleprompter can.He has put his agenda ahead of the nations needs and that is wrong to me.I don't care what party.
well99...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 8:08pm.
I've mentioned the inappropriateness of the SC remarks too in the SOTU. Poor form and poor advice and poor decision-making on his part. I think he hasn't been well-served by a bunch of amateurs surrounding him, but, in the final analysis, the responsibility is his.
Jer
Jer
Submitted by well99 on Sun, 07/03/2011 - 3:59am.
To me it is part of the makeup of his personality.The petulant child.To be honest John McCain reminds me of it at times.It is like they believe they are entitled.I think there is too much of that going around in DC.
Remarks
Submitted by grammajane on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 10:51pm.
" they can sit in the back seat, cops acted stupid, don't listen to Rush or Fox, am going to get Burris to beat up Hannity, they can have their guns and bibles, congress better stay here and work, never listened to Wright, Ayers, just met him once or twice, and on and on. This sounds like anger to me or is it just liberal talking points. Don't know who the Repub were you spoke to but, after that condesending speech he gave the other day, have noticed there were no friendly remarks coming from anywhere about his congenial personality.
Huh??
Submitted by Samaritan01 on Fri, 07/01/2011 - 11:31pm.
The "D" word??? I always thought that stood for Democrat....
Jer
Submitted by dmaley1714 on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 6:09am.
is it better to launch your career in the living room of some one who plotted the bombing of the Pentagon or on Fox news.
Carney, the lip man and shill for the witless house.
Submitted by OldmanRick on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 10:32am.
Carney is nothing more than the new Bagdad Bob, alive and well in spin city east. Need I say more?
Face it people MSNBC is a Democrat Party syndicate
Submitted by Crew Dawg 64 on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 11:17am.
The vast majority of people know this and yet everyone acts surprised when a so-called political expert on that network gets canned for speaking against their token president. The MSM is in the tank for this guy yet again and based on this I will never unblock MSNBC from my T.V.
correct on that ol Rushbo!
Submitted by Less1leg on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 12:16pm.
You have the ultra liberal glib fest with the Democrats slagging past Presidents with great glee. But say one word about Barry, and the knives are out to disembowel the traitor. What President in recent decades has had as much media protection as does Obama? None. Look at the liberal satiracal smear jobs the left has done against Reagan or the Bush's. Look at the putrid language at one MTV awards show that Russell Brand laid into G.W. Bush. And the beat goes on. It's progressive liberal to satire a conservative person. Presently look at conservative females in the media. Look at how "civil" liberal MSM treat conservative females who speak up publicly. And look at past conservative Presidents. Liberal worms took it with great glee to find any form of past history to throw dirt at this conservative person.
But look at Obama. His past school records are sealed from public view. His birth certificate situation is criminal. But most of all, the hypocritical view that the Obama, the Annointed One cannot be satired, or rebuked for bad leadership. Sad, but true.
Consequences
Submitted by SaguaroJack on Sat, 07/02/2011 - 3:34pm.
All I got to say is, if you call me a liberal D-word (democrat), expect to need a hankie right away.