Rush Limbaugh’s Apology Not Accepted By Liberals: Is There a Double Standard?

[Jarhead]

What are you even talking about?

This girl didn't deserve a proper apology because some Muslim didn't apologize?

She deserves no more an apology than Sarah Palin.

Palin was called every name in the book and it was "ok" in the eyes of the left and NOW becuase it was her choice to throw herself in the middle of the deabte.

Well, now as we know, Fluke was not some random college student...but an activist...she has an activist resume a mile long. And as an activist, like Palin, she inserted herself into the debate.

Now....which is it...

does Palin deserve an apology as well?

or....

Does Fluke deserve no aplogy?

It must be one or the other....so which is it?

You don't get to be innocent of wrongdoing simply because you're not the only one who committed the wrong.

that was not the point of my post.

I personally disagreed with the left when they said "Palin deserved it".

And I disagree with Rush and his childish name calling.

But the left supports Maher when he does it as well as the others that do ity to Palin.

Yet they cry "foul" when it was dont to Fluke.

I am pointing out the hypocrisy of those that support the "wrong doers"....not advocating for tolerance of the "wrong doers".

 

[Sallow]

Only the weakest of minds see it that way.

You know...the ones that easily fall for the spin this administration seems to leak out there.

Are you one of them?

What is the topic of discussion now?

Is it "Obama tramples religious freedom" or "Republicans don't want women to have access to birth control"?

Republicans fucked up the issue just by acting like Republicans. Once the issue of birth control was brought up, they just couldn't help themselves

only the weakest of mninds believes the spin that the GOP do not want women to have access to birth control.

The position of the GOP is that it is not appropriate for government to mandate that ALL insuracne companies MUST offer a service that some see as against their personal. beliefs.

It really isnt that difficult to understand this position.

Why do you continually fall for the spin?

That is supposed to be reserved for the weakest of minds.

"Their personal beliefs"? Is this a "corporations are people too, my friend" moment?

And what if "their personal belief" included "Iraqi veterans are murderers". Would you believe that belief should be honored if they didn't believe they should cover them? How about "people with dark skin, have dark skin because they sided with the devil". Would you believe that belief should be honored as well?

Part and parcel of our constitution is the idea that all rights are protected. If those of people you may not like. And part of the whole civil rights movement was to protect the rights of American citizens in their access to goods and services.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Here's what a real apology looks like:

Note to Rush Limbaugh On What A Real Apology Looks Like | The Moderate Voice

 

[Katzndogz]

I absolutely trust the apology of a frequently misogynistic, rich, pasty white fat dude who is losing more and more income because of dropping sponsors.

He's not losing income. Likely he has a contract and is paid whether or not a sponsor drops.

 

[bodecea]

Here's what a real apology looks like:

Note to Rush Limbaugh On What A Real Apology Looks Like | The Moderate Voice

Here is the difference....Ed said his insult was "not of the standards"...in Rush's case, it IS of the standards.

 

[bodecea]

I absolutely trust the apology of a frequently misogynistic, rich, pasty white fat dude who is losing more and more income because of dropping sponsors.

He's not losing income. Likely he has a contract and is paid whether or not a sponsor drops.

Of course not.....the type of people he appeals to eats that kind of stuff up and pays out for it.

 

[Jarhead]

What is the topic of discussion now?

Is it "Obama tramples religious freedom" or "Republicans don't want women to have access to birth control"?

Republicans fucked up the issue just by acting like Republicans. Once the issue of birth control was brought up, they just couldn't help themselves

only the weakest of mninds believes the spin that the GOP do not want women to have access to birth control.

The position of the GOP is that it is not appropriate for government to mandate that ALL insuracne companies MUST offer a service that some see as against their personal. beliefs.

It really isnt that difficult to understand this position.

Why do you continually fall for the spin?

That is supposed to be reserved for the weakest of minds.

"Their personal beliefs"? Is this a "corporations are people too, my friend" moment?

And what if "their personal belief" included "Iraqi veterans are murderers". Would you believe that belief should be honored if they didn't believe they should cover them? How about "people with dark skin, have dark skin because they sided with the devil". Would you believe that belief should be honored as well?

Part and parcel of our constitution is the idea that all rights are protected. If those of people you may not like. And part of the whole civil rights movement was to protect the rights of American citizens in their access to goods and services.

you are missing ther point...intentional maybe?

When I say "personal beliefs"...I am not just referring to religion.

In America, a company can offer any service it wants as long as it is illegal.

However, now for the first time, a company is being told something different....they MUST offer a service...even if it doesnt want to.

That is a very slippery road to go down.

First, we as Americans were mandated that we must BUY something...even if we dont want to.

And now we have companies being told they must SELL something...even if they dont want to.

Whats next? A federal lottery and all retail operations will be MANDATED to sell lottery tickets?

Or as Americans, we will be mandated to BUY lottery tickets?

Afterall, a national lottery is not so far fetched...it will help with the deficit andf debt....but what if people dont want to sell them or buy themn.....will we be mandated to?

Not so crazy....think about it.

You on the left.....you are OK with government mandates......but that is becuase you agree with what is being mandated.

What if there was a mandate to buy a gun? Or hunt to control animal population?

Put ideology aside and see where we are going. It is quite ugly.

 

[Decepticon]

WTF are you talking about?

You're whining about government "forcing" religions to do something against their beliefs.

Yet, you can be drafted and forced to fight and kill, against your religious beliefs, can't you?
But, you obviously didn't THINK about that, before you posted your stupid opinion, did you?

Come back when religious exemptions become the rule and not the exception for opting out of your civil duty.


Tell you what? You give me back the taxes I'm on the hook for because of Iraq and bailing out the banks, and I'll comp you my wife's birth control pills.

You misread the post.

Go back...read it slowly.

I was replying to the post characterizing Obama "forcing" religions to act against their beliefs.
My point was that our CON friends are mistaken that religious beliefs do NOT trump all other considerations of civic duty.

You cannot avoid jury duty because of your religion. You cannot avoid having your picture taken for your drivers license because of it. If you live in this society, you have OBLIGATIONS to it, that can't simply be dismissed because you find them distasteful.

 

[Jarhead]

You're whining about government "forcing" religions to do something against their beliefs.

Yet, you can be drafted and forced to fight and kill, against your religious beliefs, can't you?
But, you obviously didn't THINK about that, before you posted your stupid opinion, did you?

Come back when religious exemptions become the rule and not the exception for opting out of your civil duty.


Tell you what? You give me back the taxes I'm on the hook for because of Iraq and bailing out the banks, and I'll comp you my wife's birth control pills.

You misread the post.

Go back...read it slowly.

I was replying to the post characterizing Obama "forcing" religions to act against their beliefs.
My point was that our CON friends are mistaken that religious beliefs do NOT trump all other considerations of civic duty.

You cannot avoid jury duty because of your religion. You cannot avoid having your picture taken for your drivers license because of it. If you live in this society, you have OBLIGATIONS to it, that can't simply be dismissed because you find them distasteful.

so let me ask you something...

It is inapporpriate to insist somneone get a photo ID to vote...

But it is not inapproapriate to insist someone buy a $7,000 item like health iunsurance even if they dont want to?

And it is not inappropriate to force a business owner to offer a service it does not want to.

DO you not see the irony?

 

[MarcATL]

True. Ed Schulz was suspended for saying slut ONCE, Mayer fired for saying AlQaeda who suicided were not cowards.. Rush should be fired and set adrift...

Correction: Shultz took HIMSELF off the air, WITHOUT pay.

Google the details, but that's what he did. msnbc did not initiate that suspension, it was self-inflicted (get th pun?)

 

[Jarhead]

True. Ed Schulz was suspended for saying slut ONCE, Mayer fired for saying AlQaeda who suicided were not cowards.. Rush should be fired and set adrift...

Correction: Shultz took HIMSELF off the air, WITHOUT pay.

Google the details, but that's what he did. msnbc did not initiate that suspension, it was self-inflicted (get th pun?)

he should be commended for his actions.

Efveryone makes mistakes.

But those with any decency recognize it and take action to ensure they dont do it again....and to show sincere remorse.

Rush's apology? Useless in my book. He did it becuase he was losing sponsors.

 

[NYcarbineer]

She deserves no more an apology than Sarah Palin.

Palin was called every name in the book and it was "ok" in the eyes of the left and NOW becuase it was her choice to throw herself in the middle of the deabte.

Well, now as we know, Fluke was not some random college student...but an activist...she has an activist resume a mile long. And as an activist, like Palin, she inserted herself into the debate.

Now....which is it...

does Palin deserve an apology as well?

or....

Does Fluke deserve no aplogy?

It must be one or the other....so which is it?

You don't get to be innocent of wrongdoing simply because you're not the only one who committed the wrong.

that was not the point of my post.

I personally disagreed with the left when they said "Palin deserved it".

And I disagree with Rush and his childish name calling.

But the left supports Maher when he does it as well as the others that do ity to Palin.

Yet they cry "foul" when it was dont to Fluke.

I am pointing out the hypocrisy of those that support the "wrong doers"....not advocating for tolerance of the "wrong doers".

The 'left' is not the issue here. Rush Limbaugh's behaviour is the issue.

btw, have you made any posts decrying the hypocrisy of the RIGHT amongst those who attacked Ed Schultz for using that word,

but who are now defending Limbaugh?

 

[Jarhead]

You don't get to be innocent of wrongdoing simply because you're not the only one who committed the wrong.

that was not the point of my post.

I personally disagreed with the left when they said "Palin deserved it".

And I disagree with Rush and his childish name calling.

But the left supports Maher when he does it as well as the others that do ity to Palin.

Yet they cry "foul" when it was dont to Fluke.

I am pointing out the hypocrisy of those that support the "wrong doers"....not advocating for tolerance of the "wrong doers".

The 'left' is not the issue here. Rush Limbaugh's behaviour is the issue.

btw, have you made any posts decrying the hypocrisy of the RIGHT amongst those who attacked Ed Schultz for using that word,

but who are now defending Limbaugh?

well...in a way...I did in the post right before yours.....

I see the hypocrisy on both sides.

Do you?

 

[NYcarbineer]

You misread the post.

Go back...read it slowly.

I was replying to the post characterizing Obama "forcing" religions to act against their beliefs.
My point was that our CON friends are mistaken that religious beliefs do NOT trump all other considerations of civic duty.

You cannot avoid jury duty because of your religion. You cannot avoid having your picture taken for your drivers license because of it. If you live in this society, you have OBLIGATIONS to it, that can't simply be dismissed because you find them distasteful.

so let me ask you something...

It is inapporpriate to insist somneone get a photo ID to vote...

But it is not inapproapriate to insist someone buy a $7,000 item like health iunsurance even if they dont want to?

And it is not inappropriate to force a business owner to offer a service it does not want to.

DO you not see the irony?

I suggest you read this, and then see if you can apply to your yourself:

Fallacy: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque

 

[007]

The 'left' is not the issue here.

Did you MISS the TITLE of this thread?

Rush Limbaugh’s Apology Not Accepted By Liberals: Is There a Double Standard?

YES the issue IS the LEFT, and the DOUBLE STANDARD of the LEFT. The only time you people are OUTRAGED is when a CONSERVATIVE makes an off color comment, which is one to FIFTY coming from the LEFT! We see it... we know it... and no amount of you leftists trying to spin it otherwise will change that.

 

[Jarhead]

I was replying to the post characterizing Obama "forcing" religions to act against their beliefs.
My point was that our CON friends are mistaken that religious beliefs do NOT trump all other considerations of civic duty.

You cannot avoid jury duty because of your religion. You cannot avoid having your picture taken for your drivers license because of it. If you live in this society, you have OBLIGATIONS to it, that can't simply be dismissed because you find them distasteful.

so let me ask you something...

It is inapporpriate to insist somneone get a photo ID to vote...

But it is not inapproapriate to insist someone buy a $7,000 item like health iunsurance even if they dont want to?

And it is not inappropriate to force a business owner to offer a service it does not want to.

DO you not see the irony?

I suggest you read this, and then see if you can apply to your yourself:

Fallacy: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque

Obviously you think it applies to me.

That is actually more of your problem than it is of mine.

You see, I have learned from much you say on here....disagree with most, but learned from much.

You, however, have made a judgement call on me and as a result, you give little to no credibility to anything I say.

Therefore, you will NEVER learn from my posts.

That makes me a wiser person...in my eyes....

Cya .

 

[rightwinger]

What religion says it's OK to kill people?

Now tell me, can your government compel you to be drafted, go to war and kill for your country? Do you have to go?

Now, think about your statement about "forcing religions to act against their beliefs" and enjoy your nice big, tall, cool glass of shut the fuck up.

WTF are you talking about?

You're whining about government "forcing" religions to do something against their beliefs.

Yet, you can be drafted and forced to fight and kill, against your religious beliefs, can't you?
But, you obviously didn't THINK about that, before you posted your stupid opinion, did you?

Come back when religious exemptions become the rule and not the exception for opting out of your civil duty.


Tell you what? You give me back the taxes I'm on the hook for because of Iraq and bailing out the banks, and I'll comp you my wife's birth control pills.

You misread what I was posting about....but since you want to play silly games

Ever since there was a draft they had provisions for conscientious objectors. In case you haven't noticed, we have not had a draft in 40 years. We have what we like to call a Volunteer Army and religious objectors do not have to volunteer

So WTF was your stupid point again?

 

[Jarhead]

WTF are you talking about?

You're whining about government "forcing" religions to do something against their beliefs.

Yet, you can be drafted and forced to fight and kill, against your religious beliefs, can't you?
But, you obviously didn't THINK about that, before you posted your stupid opinion, did you?

Come back when religious exemptions become the rule and not the exception for opting out of your civil duty.


Tell you what? You give me back the taxes I'm on the hook for because of Iraq and bailing out the banks, and I'll comp you my wife's birth control pills.

You misread what I was posting about....but since you want to play silly games

Ever since there was a draft they had provisions for conscientious objectors. In case you haven't noticed, we have not had a draft in 40 years. We have what we like to call a Volunteer Army and religious objectors do not have to volunteer

So WTF was your stupid point again?

lioke I said...he doesnt read posts. He simply regurgitates what he hears Maher, Mathews and Maddow say.

The difference with those three and Decepticon?

Those three offer their own thought out opinions as...well...their own thought out opinions.

Decepticon offers their opinions as FACTS that he knows as fact.

Then when he needs to debate them?

He loses focus.

 

[NYcarbineer]

so let me ask you something...

It is inapporpriate to insist somneone get a photo ID to vote...

But it is not inapproapriate to insist someone buy a $7,000 item like health iunsurance even if they dont want to?

And it is not inappropriate to force a business owner to offer a service it does not want to.

DO you not see the irony?

I suggest you read this, and then see if you can apply to your yourself:

Fallacy: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque

Obviously you think it applies to me.

That is actually more of your problem than it is of mine.

You see, I have learned from much you say on here....disagree with most, but learned from much.

You, however, have made a judgement call on me and as a result, you give little to no credibility to anything I say.

Therefore, you will NEVER learn from my posts.

That makes me a wiser person...in my eyes....

Cya .

You and many other conservatives on this forum are trying to make this about hypocrisy by some on the left, and use that to either defend Limbaugh,

or change the subject.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The 'left' is not the issue here.

Did you MISS the TITLE of this thread?

Rush Limbaugh’s Apology Not Accepted By Liberals: Is There a Double Standard?

YES the issue IS the LEFT, and the DOUBLE STANDARD of the LEFT. The only time you people are OUTRAGED is when a CONSERVATIVE makes an off color comment, which is one to FIFTY coming from the LEFT! We see it... we know it... and no amount of you leftists trying to spin it otherwise will change that.

And when did the Right start equally condemning comparable wrongs from liberals and conservatives?