"Mom, Billy (Maher) did it, too!"

[zeke]

Hard tough question.

Is Bill Maher gonna cost Obama the election? No.

Could Rush cost the Repubs the election? Yes.

See the difference now?

 

[JoeB131]

Here's the bottom line you whiny assed lousy liberal.. al long as you tolerate it from your side you can cry us a fucking river.

Nobody made a big deal about it at the time Maher said it, because most people think Palin is pretty stupid.

It's a given. Palin is stupid.

Sandra Fluke is a nice young lady with an opinion, and Rush Limbaugh got on the radio for THREE DAYS and called her nasty names. And then he apologized when his sponsors started dropping him.

And Mitt Romney can't condemn him. Because the man who aspires to be the leader of the free world shows less decency than a big corporation.

 

[zeke]

So why did the GOP walk into the trap? And why are they unable to extracate themselves?

Because they have been taken over by socialist aliens that love Obama.

 

[zeke]

And if Mittens likes to fire people, and he does, why didn't he fire Rushbo. I mean, Rush kinda works for Mittens through Bain Capital.

 

[zeke]

A tactic that very view Rethugs know about is how the Chi mob of Obamaits, secretly made contact with a group of aliens and paid them in oil to take over the Rethug party utilizing mind control methods developed in Gitmo.

And it is a plan working much better than expected.

How else you explain the insanity that has become the Rethug party? Something in the water?

 

[Two Thumbs]

Here's the bottom line you whiny assed lousy liberal.. al long as you tolerate it from your side you can cry us a fucking river.

Nobody made a big deal about it at the time Maher said it, because most people think Palin is pretty stupid.

It's a given. Palin is stupid.

Sandra Fluke is a nice young lady with an opinion, and Rush Limbaugh got on the radio for THREE DAYS and called her nasty names. And then he apologized when his sponsors started dropping him.

And Mitt Romney can't condemn him. Because the man who aspires to be the leader of the free world shows less decency than a big corporation.

She's a college grad
A governor
and has made millions doing books and speaking engagements.

I wish I was as dumb as her.




not agreeing with someone isn't a sign you're an idiot.

 

[Defiant1]

Here's the bottom line you whiny assed lousy liberal.. al long as you tolerate it from your side you can cry us a fucking river.

Nobody made a big deal about it at the time Maher said it, because most people think Palin is pretty stupid.

It's a given. Palin is stupid.

Sandra Fluke is a nice young lady with an opinion, and Rush Limbaugh got on the radio for THREE DAYS and called her nasty names. And then he apologized when his sponsors started dropping him.

And Mitt Romney can't condemn him. Because the man who aspires to be the leader of the free world shows less decency than a big corporation.

So, a woman that admits she went to Georgetown to attack it's principles and bring them down. A woman who knew before enrolling what the rules were, but had an agenda. This is what you call a nice, young lady?


I think Rush was being nice calling her a slut. She is far worse.

 

[Katzndogz]

Women are weak, helpless and need to be supported. They cannot take care of themselves, they need a big daddy paternalistic government to do it for them. Women are slaves to their pussies and any man that sniffs it. They are biologically driven to indiscriiminate sex and have no control over any impulse.

In other words, the democrats sound just like the taliban.

 

[Seawytch]

From David Frums "Are We Being Fair to Limbaugh"...

But look (they continue) at all the liberal/lefty broadcasters who have also said obnoxious things! No one calls Democratic politicians to account for them. Why us?
It's a question that will be aired often in the week ahead. Here's the answer, in four points.

Point 1: Even by the rough standards of cable/talk radio/digital talk, Limbaugh's verbal abuse of Sandra Fluke set a new kind of low. I can't recall anything as brutal, ugly and deliberate ever being said by such a prominent person and so emphatically repeated. This was not a case of a bad "word choice." It was a brutally sexualized accusation, against a specific person, prolonged over three days.

Point 2: The cases that conservatives cite as somehow equivalent to Limbaugh's tirade against Fluke by and large did bring consequences for their authors.
After David Letterman for example made an ugly joke about Sarah Palin's daughter, he delivered an abject seven-minute apology on air. (To which Palin responded by refusing the apology and insinuating that David Letterman was a child molester.)

When liberal talker Ed Schultz nastily called my dear friend Laura Ingraham a "slut" on his radio show, MSNBC responded by suspending Schultz for a week without pay from his TV show. Schultz likewise apologized in person on air. (Ingraham accepted the apology with grace and humor.)

The exception to the general rule is Bill Maher, who never apologized for calling Palin by a demeaning sexual epithet. But now see point 3:

Point 3: Limbaugh's place in American public life is in no way comparable to that of David Letterman, Bill Maher or Ed Schultz.

Letterman is not a political figure at all; and while Maher and Schultz strongly identify as liberals, neither qualifies as anything like a powerbroker in the Democratic Party. I'm sure the Barack Obama re-election effort is happy to have Maher's million-dollar gift, but I sincerely doubt there is a Democratic congressman who worries much whether Maher criticizes him. A word of criticism from Limbaugh, by contrast, will reduce almost any member of the Republican caucus to abject groveling. See, for example: GINGREY, PHIL.

Among TV and radio talkers and entertainers, there is none who commands anything like the deference that Limbaugh commands from Republicans: not Rachel Maddow, not Jon Stewart, not Michael Moore, not Keith Olbermann at his zenith. Democratic politicians may wish for favorable comment from their talkers, but they are not terrified of negative comment from them in the way that Republican politicians live in fear of a negative word from Limbaugh.

The ultimate test came in 2002, the vote to authorize force against Iraq. Almost every liberal talker opposed that vote. Hillary Clinton, with her eye on a presidential run in 2008, voted in favor.

That is why no one asks Democratic politicians to repudiate the latest strident statement from an Olbermann or a Moore. There's no sport in it. It's too easy for them to say, "Sure." For Republicans, it's tough.

But maybe, after this latest outburst, a little less tough?

Point 4: Most fundamentally, why the impulse to counter one outrageous stunt by rummaging through the archives in search of some supposedly offsetting outrageous stunt? Why not respond to an indecent act on its own terms, and then -- if there's another indecency later -- react to that too, and on its own terms?

Instead, public life is reduced to a revenge drama. Each offense is condoned by reference to some previous offense by some undefined "them" who supposedly once did something even worse, or anyway nearly as bad, at some point in the past.

But this latest Limbaugh outburst is so "piggish," to borrow a word from Peggy Noonan, as to overwhelm the revenge drama. (On Saturday, Limbaugh apologized "for the insulting word choices.")

It is the bottom of the barrel of shock talk.
And the good news is that from the bottom of the barrel, there is nowhere to go but up.​

 

[Full-Auto]

Yup, instead of just condemning Rush and leaving it at that, which is what decent people should do, we have a chorus of trying to find liberals who said something as bad about someone else.

You do understand there's a difference between attacking a private citizen/college student, and attacking a public figure/politician, don't you guys?

Or do you just not care, you just want to defend Rush?

This is what a 5th grader does.

The purpose of that is to demonstrate the lefts double standard.

I personally dont give a rats ass who I offend in the process.

True story.

 

[WillowTree]

Here's the bottom line you whiny assed lousy liberal.. al long as you tolerate it from your side you can cry us a fucking river.

Nobody made a big deal about it at the time Maher said it, because most people think Palin is pretty stupid.

It's a given. Palin is stupid.

Sandra Fluke is a nice young lady with an opinion, and Rush Limbaugh got on the radio for THREE DAYS and called her nasty names. And then he apologized when his sponsors started dropping him.

And Mitt Romney can't condemn him. Because the man who aspires to be the leader of the free world shows less decency than a big corporation.

keep rationalizing... we're still at the cry us a fucking river whydonchya state..

 

[bodecea]

From David Frums "Are We Being Fair to Limbaugh"...

But look (they continue) at all the liberal/lefty broadcasters who have also said obnoxious things! No one calls Democratic politicians to account for them. Why us?
It's a question that will be aired often in the week ahead. Here's the answer, in four points.

Point 1: Even by the rough standards of cable/talk radio/digital talk, Limbaugh's verbal abuse of Sandra Fluke set a new kind of low. I can't recall anything as brutal, ugly and deliberate ever being said by such a prominent person and so emphatically repeated. This was not a case of a bad "word choice." It was a brutally sexualized accusation, against a specific person, prolonged over three days.

Point 2: The cases that conservatives cite as somehow equivalent to Limbaugh's tirade against Fluke by and large did bring consequences for their authors.
After David Letterman for example made an ugly joke about Sarah Palin's daughter, he delivered an abject seven-minute apology on air. (To which Palin responded by refusing the apology and insinuating that David Letterman was a child molester.)

When liberal talker Ed Schultz nastily called my dear friend Laura Ingraham a "slut" on his radio show, MSNBC responded by suspending Schultz for a week without pay from his TV show. Schultz likewise apologized in person on air. (Ingraham accepted the apology with grace and humor.)

The exception to the general rule is Bill Maher, who never apologized for calling Palin by a demeaning sexual epithet. But now see point 3:

Point 3: Limbaugh's place in American public life is in no way comparable to that of David Letterman, Bill Maher or Ed Schultz.

Letterman is not a political figure at all; and while Maher and Schultz strongly identify as liberals, neither qualifies as anything like a powerbroker in the Democratic Party. I'm sure the Barack Obama re-election effort is happy to have Maher's million-dollar gift, but I sincerely doubt there is a Democratic congressman who worries much whether Maher criticizes him. A word of criticism from Limbaugh, by contrast, will reduce almost any member of the Republican caucus to abject groveling. See, for example: GINGREY, PHIL.

Among TV and radio talkers and entertainers, there is none who commands anything like the deference that Limbaugh commands from Republicans: not Rachel Maddow, not Jon Stewart, not Michael Moore, not Keith Olbermann at his zenith. Democratic politicians may wish for favorable comment from their talkers, but they are not terrified of negative comment from them in the way that Republican politicians live in fear of a negative word from Limbaugh.

The ultimate test came in 2002, the vote to authorize force against Iraq. Almost every liberal talker opposed that vote. Hillary Clinton, with her eye on a presidential run in 2008, voted in favor.

That is why no one asks Democratic politicians to repudiate the latest strident statement from an Olbermann or a Moore. There's no sport in it. It's too easy for them to say, "Sure." For Republicans, it's tough.

But maybe, after this latest outburst, a little less tough?

Point 4: Most fundamentally, why the impulse to counter one outrageous stunt by rummaging through the archives in search of some supposedly offsetting outrageous stunt? Why not respond to an indecent act on its own terms, and then -- if there's another indecency later -- react to that too, and on its own terms?

Instead, public life is reduced to a revenge drama. Each offense is condoned by reference to some previous offense by some undefined "them" who supposedly once did something even worse, or anyway nearly as bad, at some point in the past.

But this latest Limbaugh outburst is so "piggish," to borrow a word from Peggy Noonan, as to overwhelm the revenge drama. (On Saturday, Limbaugh apologized "for the insulting word choices.")

It is the bottom of the barrel of shock talk.
And the good news is that from the bottom of the barrel, there is nowhere to go but up.​

I disagree....they will find a new bottom of the barrel.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Yup, instead of just condemning Rush and leaving it at that, which is what decent people should do, we have a chorus of trying to find liberals who said something as bad about someone else.

You do understand there's a difference between attacking a private citizen/college student, and attacking a public figure/politician, don't you guys?

Or do you just not care, you just want to defend Rush?

This is what a 5th grader does.

The purpose of that is to demonstrate the lefts double standard.

I personally dont give a rats ass who I offend in the process.

True story.

That's offensive!!

 

[bodecea]

Here's the bottom line you whiny assed lousy liberal.. al long as you tolerate it from your side you can cry us a fucking river.

Nobody made a big deal about it at the time Maher said it, because most people think Palin is pretty stupid.

It's a given. Palin is stupid.

Sandra Fluke is a nice young lady with an opinion, and Rush Limbaugh got on the radio for THREE DAYS and called her nasty names. And then he apologized when his sponsors started dropping him.

And Mitt Romney can't condemn him. Because the man who aspires to be the leader of the free world shows less decency than a big corporation.

keep rationalizing... we're still at the cry us a fucking river whydonchya state..

Shrill and quite desperate. Watching your Party swirl down the toilet of this election must be tough on you.

 

[Full-Auto]

Yup, instead of just condemning Rush and leaving it at that, which is what decent people should do, we have a chorus of trying to find liberals who said something as bad about someone else.

You do understand there's a difference between attacking a private citizen/college student, and attacking a public figure/politician, don't you guys?

Or do you just not care, you just want to defend Rush?

This is what a 5th grader does.

The purpose of that is to demonstrate the lefts double standard.

I personally dont give a rats ass who I offend in the process.

True story.

That's offensive!!

Ya think!!! They dish it out, I force feed it back. The days of turning the other cheek has long passed. Playing nice most often prolongs the conflict.

 

[Seawytch]

And the good news is that from the bottom of the barrel, there is nowhere to go but up.[/INDENT]

I disagree....they will find a new bottom of the barrel.

Oh, no doubt...

 

[Ernie S.]

OMG...still with the WHINING that people CONDEM RUSH..

sheeeeeeeesh..

Rush probably just gave Obama a second term in one day.

When this whole silly shit with the birth control rule started, I said then that the GOP was making a HUGE mistake picking this hill to die on.

Birth control is a fact of life. Our society is built on the easy access to it. And picking the side of religious fanatics over working women was a huge mistake.

But Rush bumped it up a notch by attacking women.

And pointing out that Bill Maher called Palin the C-word once doesn't take away from that.

I know a lot of women who think Palin is a horrible person. She's not liked or admired. (I've got nothing against her, really.)

It really isn't in the same class.

Now, occassionally, I like Rush. I used to listen to him often. I also like Maher. I think there are times when he's funny, especially when he goes on about religion.

When Maher calls Palin a stupid C-word, that's only an attack on Palin. When Limbaugh calls Fluke a slut, that's an attack on all women who rely on birth control because we live in a society that largely demands it.

You really don't see the double standard here, do you?. Your post makes it quite clear that you are prejudiced and indicates why.

I also like Maher. I think there are times when he's funny, especially when he goes on about religion.

Then you decide that calling Palin a CXXX is justified because, I don't know, maybe all Conservative Christian women are CXXXs?
Limbaugh's rant was not an attack on women who rely upon birth control. It was about one woman who wanted a religious institution to pay for her recreational sex against its religious doctrine.

 

[SuperDave]

But look (they continue) at all the liberal/lefty broadcasters who have also said obnoxious things! No one calls Democratic politicians to account for them. Why us?
It's a question that will be aired often in the week ahead. Here's the answer, in four points.

Point 1: Even by the rough standards of cable/talk radio/digital talk, Limbaugh's verbal abuse of Sandra Fluke set a new kind of low. I can't recall anything as brutal, ugly and deliberate ever being said by such a prominent person and so emphatically repeated. This was not a case of a bad "word choice." It was a brutally sexualized accusation, against a specific person, prolonged over three days.

Point 2: The cases that conservatives cite as somehow equivalent to Limbaugh's tirade against Fluke by and large did bring consequences for their authors.
After David Letterman for example made an ugly joke about Sarah Palin's daughter, he delivered an abject seven-minute apology on air. (To which Palin responded by refusing the apology and insinuating that David Letterman was a child molester.)

When liberal talker Ed Schultz nastily called my dear friend Laura Ingraham a "slut" on his radio show, MSNBC responded by suspending Schultz for a week without pay from his TV show. Schultz likewise apologized in person on air. (Ingraham accepted the apology with grace and humor.)

The exception to the general rule is Bill Maher, who never apologized for calling Palin by a demeaning sexual epithet. But now see point 3:

Point 3: Limbaugh's place in American public life is in no way comparable to that of David Letterman, Bill Maher or Ed Schultz.

Letterman is not a political figure at all; and while Maher and Schultz strongly identify as liberals, neither qualifies as anything like a powerbroker in the Democratic Party. I'm sure the Barack Obama re-election effort is happy to have Maher's million-dollar gift, but I sincerely doubt there is a Democratic congressman who worries much whether Maher criticizes him. A word of criticism from Limbaugh, by contrast, will reduce almost any member of the Republican caucus to abject groveling. See, for example: GINGREY, PHIL.

Among TV and radio talkers and entertainers, there is none who commands anything like the deference that Limbaugh commands from Republicans: not Rachel Maddow, not Jon Stewart, not Michael Moore, not Keith Olbermann at his zenith. Democratic politicians may wish for favorable comment from their talkers, but they are not terrified of negative comment from them in the way that Republican politicians live in fear of a negative word from Limbaugh.

The ultimate test came in 2002, the vote to authorize force against Iraq. Almost every liberal talker opposed that vote. Hillary Clinton, with her eye on a presidential run in 2008, voted in favor.

That is why no one asks Democratic politicians to repudiate the latest strident statement from an Olbermann or a Moore. There's no sport in it. It's too easy for them to say, "Sure." For Republicans, it's tough.

But maybe, after this latest outburst, a little less tough?

Point 4: Most fundamentally, why the impulse to counter one outrageous stunt by rummaging through the archives in search of some supposedly offsetting outrageous stunt? Why not respond to an indecent act on its own terms, and then -- if there's another indecency later -- react to that too, and on its own terms?

Instead, public life is reduced to a revenge drama. Each offense is condoned by reference to some previous offense by some undefined "them" who supposedly once did something even worse, or anyway nearly as bad, at some point in the past.

But this latest Limbaugh outburst is so "piggish," to borrow a word from Peggy Noonan, as to overwhelm the revenge drama. (On Saturday, Limbaugh apologized "for the insulting word choices.")

It is the bottom of the barrel of shock talk.
And the good news is that from the bottom of the barrel, there is nowhere to go but up.​

I knew this was going to be a complete load of crap as soon as Frums used the word "us" to insinuate that he was a Conservative

 

[HUGGY]

Yup, instead of just condemning Rush and leaving it at that, which is what decent people should do, we have a chorus of trying to find liberals who said something as bad about someone else.

You do understand there's a difference between attacking a private citizen/college student, and attacking a public figure/politician, don't you guys?

Or do you just not care, you just want to defend Rush?

This is what a 5th grader does.

You expected them to react differently? Why? Have they ever shown any behavior that would indicate they would all of a sudden take responsibility? When? Never happened.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Look who's whining that the left is getting called on their double standard.

In OTHER WORDS.

The left should be able to pile on Limbaugh and not be called for the blind eye they are turning to Maher and his million to Obama.

Hypocrisy thy name is liberal.