Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Buzzfeed)   The last Six times Rush Limbaugh has apologized. In other news, Rush Limbaugh has apologized more times than you'd think   (buzzfeed.com) divider line 589
    More: Interesting, Rush Limbaugh, Curious George, Chelsea Clinton, recreations, Claire McCaskill, John McCain  
•       •       •

5574 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Mar 2012 at 9:28 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



589 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-03-04 02:03:05 PM  

s2s2s2: cameroncrazy1984: That's easy. Play the video in front of the jury.

On Rush, nearly daily, he says "Using absurdity to illustrate the absurd." Prove it isn't satire.
The tape is from a show that purports to be satire. So on what grounds will you prove it?


The fact that claiming a woman is a slut and a prostitute because she testified before Congress isn't satirical. I mean, compare Rush to Stephen Colbert. What Colbert does is satire. What Rush did is defamation.
 
2012-03-04 02:03:36 PM  

GoldSpider: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Hence the crowd of GOP leaders eager to appear on camera condemning his remarks.

A simpler explanation is that they have nothing to gain from weighing in.


That's what I said.
 
2012-03-04 02:03:52 PM  

s2s2s2: cameroncrazy1984: jury

Also, you think Rush is going to trust a jury with his fate?


If he doesn't he's going to have to pay a LOT of money. That's assuming she even wants to settle. Luckily it isn't Rush's decision.
 
2012-03-04 02:06:19 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: That's what I said.


Then I must have missed the crowds of GOP leaders rushing to his defense as well, for all the influence Limbaugh purportedly has over them.
 
2012-03-04 02:06:48 PM  

SkinnyHead: Fellate O'Fish: SkinnyHead
You know what, you're right. When David Letterman made a crude and tasteless joke about Governor Palin's daughter, people were right to call him on it. If you'd wanted to call his sponsors in protest, you'd have been in the right.

That said, you're obviously defending Limbaugh, a crude obnoxious bully. I have yet to see you say you thought his actions were wrong. In fact, you've been doing nothing but white-knight him with your GED-in-law arguments.

I've been defending his constitutional right to free speech against calls that he be sued. I didn't say that I approve of his comments. I said up-thread that I thought his bad analogy was out of line and I'm glad he apologized.


Dude, you're so adorable... I put trolls on ignore all the time, but the fact that I really believe you are SERIOUS in what you write keeps you on my screen...

Anyway, the law provides for exemptions from cases of "libel" and "slander" if the target is a public persona - see People vs. Larry Flynt Falwell v. Hustler Magazine - SCOTUS agreed that Falwell was a public persona, therefore Flynt had the right to ridicule him in such a way no one could take it seriously.

One could argue that because Ms. Fluke decided to make a statement in what SHOULD BE (but sadly isn't) the most public forum in our country (in Congress), that she could be considered a public figure, inasmuch as her comments are concerned. I don't think she should be considered a public figure, but then I also don't think Palin's kids were public figures until the book deals and DWTS and all that crap. I think Rush went overboard when he accused her of illegal acts (prostitution) and he needs to face the music on this one.

In other words, I think she has the right to sue, and ask a jury to decide whether or not what Rush said was slanderous or libelous.
 
2012-03-04 02:07:14 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: If he doesn't he's going to have to pay a LOT of money. That's assuming she even wants to settle. Luckily it isn't Rush's decision.


A judge may cost less than a settlement.
 
2012-03-04 02:07:22 PM  

GoldSpider: Monkeyhouse Zendo: You may want to consider what happens when leaders tell the Skinnyheads of the world that they are right and justified and should have no fear of opprobrium.

But they already do think they are right and justified, etc.


Partially due to a media environment that promotes personalities like Rush.

Monkeyhouse Zendo: We're losing the opportunity for them to learn to be better.

If NCLB has taught us anything, it's that some people are just hopelessly stupid and/or lazy. It's not worth expending effort trying to reach them.


I'm not talking about an outreach to the Rush listeners. I think that if more people voted with their wallet and let advertisers know the source of their decision the Rushes of broadcasting world would rapidly find themselves relegated to the backwaters of the local radio spectrum. Were that the case, the average Rush listener would need to seek out some other source for justification of their views.

I'm spending this year studying and cultivating right speech which is why I'm particularly interested in this topic. Rush and his listeners provide a microcosm of what happens when the principles of right speech are not only ignored but actively avoided.
 
2012-03-04 02:07:34 PM  

Lionel Mandrake: cameroncrazy1984: winterwhile: ox45tallboy:

Tough question, since most people agree that many women are prescribed medicine normally taken for birth control for reasons other than preventing pregnancy. However, guys are NOT prescribed Viagra for any reason other than to get their groove on.

.

Not true

Ask any Prostrate Cancer surviver. Its a medical need, just like birth control pills.

No insurance pays, so I pay my bills, and don't pick the pockets of my neighbors.

So, you don't use insurance for anything at all ever?

If his kids have cancer, fark 'em, right?


I check my policy, use it for whats covered

If I don't like the policy, I fire the provider, buy another policy.

can I fire NannyCare?
 
2012-03-04 02:07:58 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: Unshavenhelga: cameroncrazy1984: No you wouldn't.

What about the interview after interview she's given in the wake of her shameful treatment by the GOP? What about appearing on multiple forums to discuss her issues. She's a public figure.

\does NOT have herpes

Uh. That's ex post facto, you idiot.


You're cute when you try to sound all legally.
 
2012-03-04 02:08:13 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: s2s2s2: cameroncrazy1984: jury

Also, you think Rush is going to trust a jury with his fate?

If he doesn't he's going to have to pay a LOT of money. That's assuming she even wants to settle. Luckily it isn't Rush's decision.


If she decides to sue, she has a fully functional Jesuit law school to support her. And that means a lot of free labor from the students.
 
2012-03-04 02:09:04 PM  

winterwhile: Lionel Mandrake: cameroncrazy1984: winterwhile: ox45tallboy:

Tough question, since most people agree that many women are prescribed medicine normally taken for birth control for reasons other than preventing pregnancy. However, guys are NOT prescribed Viagra for any reason other than to get their groove on.

.

Not true

Ask any Prostrate Cancer surviver. Its a medical need, just like birth control pills.

No insurance pays, so I pay my bills, and don't pick the pockets of my neighbors.

So, you don't use insurance for anything at all ever?

If his kids have cancer, fark 'em, right?

I check my policy, use it for whats covered

If I don't like the policy, I fire the provider, buy another policy.

can I fire NannyCare?


So you admit that you pick other people's pockets.
 
2012-03-04 02:09:37 PM  
Damn, so many ignored...its like a Derp marathon.
 
2012-03-04 02:09:46 PM  

SkinnyHead: I've been defending his constitutional right to free speech against calls that he be sued.


No, you've been defending something that is arguably criminal defamation, and you know it. We all realize that you don't believe it's defamation, but you haven't provided any valid legal arguments to that effect. All you do is keep repeating the same assertions of facts that a jury should consider.
 
2012-03-04 02:10:19 PM  

Bathia_Mapes: An apology means nothing if you don't really mean it nor word it so it actually sounds like an apology.

In fact, that's an apt description for his latest so-called "apology" to Ms Fleck.


That was basically what his apology was this time around. He spent the second paragraph trying to legitimize his initial claims.

Basically it was like: "I'm sorry you got offended that I called her a slut. But c'mon, she's a slut right?"

It was one of the worst phony apologies I ever read.
 
2012-03-04 02:10:44 PM  

GoldSpider: ox45tallboy: I see your point, kind of like George Lucas selling "Han Shot First" T-shirts (FACT, btw).

Close, but not exactly. He doesn't have to convince his audience that he's influential, it's his sponsors he's selling his show to.


Sponsors are going to pay jack and shiat to advertise on a radio show with only 14 listeners. He HAS to sell himself to the listeners, it's what makes the advertising worth so much.

This is why it costs $3 million + for 30 seconds of the Super Bowl - it's going to 100 million + viewers. Reruns of Roseanne on TV Land, however...
 
2012-03-04 02:11:24 PM  

winterwhile: If I don't like the policy, I fire the provider, buy another policy.


You make it sound like it's as easy as switching from cable to fios/u-verse.

Man are you stupid.
 
2012-03-04 02:13:33 PM  

GoldSpider: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: That's what I said.

Then I must have missed the crowds of GOP leaders rushing to his defense as well, for all the influence Limbaugh purportedly has over them.


Not over them directly, over a vocal portion of their constituents.
I know you're not unaware of Rush's history with the party.
 
2012-03-04 02:14:15 PM  

Monkeyhouse Zendo: I'm spending this year studying and cultivating right speech which is why I'm particularly interested in this topic. Rush and his listeners provide a microcosm of what happens when the principles of right speech are not only ignored but actively avoided.


While I have a basic understanding of the concept, you'll have to forgive me if I find the term itself somewhat reminiscent of something out of 1984. :)
 
2012-03-04 02:15:30 PM  

GoldSpider: quickdraw: Look I get it. You just dont care about women's health because it doesnt affect you directly right now. All this fuss about lady parts is just a bunch of noise to you and you lack the empathy to understand why others feel as they do.

Except you don't get it at all. I'm on your side in how I don't believe the government should intrude on the private decisions anyone makes with regards to their own body. I just think the effort to educate people on the issue is wasted on people who are demonstrably unteachable.


You mean people like you? You certainly have a point there.

I have spent the last 3 days explaining how contraception works to a whole bunch of folks who - upon hearing the dittoheads - believed that you take a BC pill every time you have sex. I guess they had never really thought about it before so when that little gem got spewed from here to twitter to FB and back they believed it.

After it is explained to them then they get it. Many people are actually teachable about simple things and so the effort is well worth it.
 
2012-03-04 02:17:59 PM  

GoldSpider: Monkeyhouse Zendo: I'm spending this year studying and cultivating right speech which is why I'm particularly interested in this topic. Rush and his listeners provide a microcosm of what happens when the principles of right speech are not only ignored but actively avoided.

While I have a basic understanding of the concept, you'll have to forgive me if I find the term itself somewhat reminiscent of something out of 1984. :)


Nah. Rushspeak is double plus good, speech against Rush double plus ungood.
 
2012-03-04 02:19:19 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Monkeyhouse Zendo: riverwalk barfly: I didn't read the whole thread, this has probably been said - but wouldn't this be more valid if he apologized on his radio program? to his audience?

Apologizing is probably the one thing that Rush could say on his radio show that would alienate his core demographic.

Last night some brave souls were quoting comments from freeperville saying his apology was selling out conservatism.


Has anyone checked on those farkers today to see if they are ok?
 
2012-03-04 02:21:01 PM  

winterwhile: I check my policy, use it for whats covered

If I don't like the policy, I fire the provider, buy another policy.

can I fire NannyCare?


Are you posting from Canada? Because otherwise, you don't have "NannyCare" and nobody is trying to force it on you.
 
2012-03-04 02:21:12 PM  

quickdraw: I have spent the last 3 days explaining how contraception works to a whole bunch of folks who - upon hearing the dittoheads - believed that you take a BC pill every time you have sex.


As loathe as I am to suggest it, I think this particularly community is far more open-minded and teachable than your average dittohead (hell even I change my mind from time to time). I don't suppose any avowed Limbaugh listener expressed to you how your effort changed his outlook on the issue though.
 
2012-03-04 02:21:36 PM  

GoldSpider: While I have a basic understanding of the concept, you'll have to forgive me if I find the term itself somewhat reminiscent of something out of 1984. :)


Right Speech (new window)

Basically it means I pay attention not to lie or engage in speech that is unkind or intentionally divisive which may make hanging around Fark problematic. :)
 
2012-03-04 02:22:04 PM  
Women have remained mostly silent for many years as the Republicans regressed in basic support or regard for our rights. Look what it has gotten us? We are now back to the 1970's argument of everyone woman who is on the pill is a slut. For crying out loud, we can't just sit back and say "isolated incident" or think that these pundits and tea partiers are fringe anymore. They are affecting our lives at a national and personal level. It's time we fight back using all of the legal, educational, and political tools at our disposal, and helping remove hateful farks who bring nothing useful to the table from their perches is part of that.
 
2012-03-04 02:22:32 PM  

DarwiOdrade: SkinnyHead: I've been defending his constitutional right to free speech against calls that he be sued.

No, you've been defending something that is arguably criminal defamation, and you know it. We all realize that you don't believe it's defamation, but you haven't provided any valid legal arguments to that effect. All you do is keep repeating the same assertions of facts that a jury should consider.


There is no factual dispute. What Limbaugh said on the air is a matter of public record. The facts that establish Fluke as a vortex public figure are a matter of public record. Whether his comments were constitutionally protected will be decided as a matter of law.
 
2012-03-04 02:22:35 PM  

simplicimus: Nah. Rushspeak is double plus good, speech against Rush double plus ungood.


"Rushspeak", I like it.
 
2012-03-04 02:23:02 PM  
While you people have been busy bleating about this tub of lard drug addict for days, REAL WORKING PEOPLE have been digging up hacked cellphone pictures of Christina Hendricks and Olivia Munn.

NOT SAFE FOR WORK.

http://imgur.com/a/G5iyO

Link (new window)
 
2012-03-04 02:23:11 PM  

Monkeyhouse Zendo: Basically it means I pay attention not to lie or engage in speech that is unkind or intentionally divisive which may make hanging around Fark problematic. :)


Yeah, I looked it up before commenting. Crazy, I know!
 
2012-03-04 02:24:50 PM  

Monkeyhouse Zendo: I'm spending this year studying and cultivating right speech


www.bonsaitreehelp.com

You make it sound so cute...
 
2012-03-04 02:25:58 PM  

quickdraw: After it is explained to them then they get it. Many people are actually teachable about simple things and so the effort is well worth it.


You must be new here.
 
2012-03-04 02:26:18 PM  

GoldSpider: simplicimus: Nah. Rushspeak is double plus good, speech against Rush double plus ungood.

"Rushspeak", I like it.


Rushspeak: I know I said it, but I didn't say it. cf, Republican party.
 
2012-03-04 02:27:50 PM  

SkinnyHead: facts that establish Fluke as a vortex public figure are a matter of public record


Please cite the caselaw that supports that testifying in a matter of public interest makes one a public figure for purposes of defamation. Use that GED in law of yours.
 
2012-03-04 02:30:39 PM  

SkinnyHead: DarwiOdrade: SkinnyHead: I've been defending his constitutional right to free speech against calls that he be sued.

No, you've been defending something that is arguably criminal defamation, and you know it. We all realize that you don't believe it's defamation, but you haven't provided any valid legal arguments to that effect. All you do is keep repeating the same assertions of facts that a jury should consider.

There is no factual dispute. What Limbaugh said on the air is a matter of public record. The facts that establish Fluke as a vortex public figure are a matter of public record. Whether his comments were constitutionally protected will be decided as a matter of law.


No. As I pointed out yesterday, in Time, Inc. v. Firestone, 424 U.S. 448, the court ruled that matters of public interest are insufficient. It must be a matter of public controversy. Whether this was a matter of public controversy before Limbaugh's comments is a question of fact for the jury, which calls into question the matter of whether Ms Fluke is a limited-purpose public figure. But keep substituting your opinion for established precedent - it's amusing to watch you flail and fail time and time again.
 
2012-03-04 02:30:59 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: facts that establish Fluke as a vortex public figure are a matter of public record

Please cite the caselaw that supports that testifying in a matter of public interest makes one a public figure for purposes of defamation. Use that GED in law of yours.


I'm NOT defending Skinnyhead here, but as I referenced Falwell v. Hustler Magazine earlier, I should point out that Falwell argued he was not a public figure because he was arguing a matter of public interest in his very public diatribes against pornography. The Supreme Court disagreed.
 
2012-03-04 02:33:09 PM  

ox45tallboy: You make it sound so cute...


For me, it's more like burning out a zombie kudzu infestation with a flamethrower.
 
2012-03-04 02:33:20 PM  

GoldSpider: quickdraw: I have spent the last 3 days explaining how contraception works to a whole bunch of folks who - upon hearing the dittoheads - believed that you take a BC pill every time you have sex.

As loathe as I am to suggest it, I think this particularly community is far more open-minded and teachable than your average dittohead (hell even I change my mind from time to time). I don't suppose any avowed Limbaugh listener expressed to you how your effort changed his outlook on the issue though.


No - nor would I expect them too. Indeed I assume that most of the people I am educating aren't posting at all. I'm not trying to reach the derpitude and save them I am just playing whack-a-mole on ignorant statements about lady parts.

Personally I have other things I am working on now and would rather not have to take to the streets to defend 19th century feminism but here we are.
 
2012-03-04 02:33:33 PM  

ox45tallboy: cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: facts that establish Fluke as a vortex public figure are a matter of public record

Please cite the caselaw that supports that testifying in a matter of public interest makes one a public figure for purposes of defamation. Use that GED in law of yours.

I'm NOT defending Skinnyhead here, but as I referenced Falwell v. Hustler Magazine earlier, I should point out that Falwell argued he was not a public figure because he was arguing a matter of public interest in his very public diatribes against pornography. The Supreme Court disagreed.


Falwell arguing he's not a public figure is just ridiculous - the court was absolutely right. Ms Fluke's situation is nothing like Jerry Falwell's.
 
2012-03-04 02:34:17 PM  

ox45tallboy: cameroncrazy1984: SkinnyHead: facts that establish Fluke as a vortex public figure are a matter of public record

Please cite the caselaw that supports that testifying in a matter of public interest makes one a public figure for purposes of defamation. Use that GED in law of yours.

I'm NOT defending Skinnyhead here, but as I referenced Falwell v. Hustler Magazine earlier, I should point out that Falwell argued he was not a public figure because he was arguing a matter of public interest in his very public diatribes against pornography. The Supreme Court disagreed.


He didn't testify in Congress, and he was a public minister before that. She is a law student at Georgetown whose only public appearance was to testify in Congress on a matter of public interest. The two are NOT the same thing.
 
2012-03-04 02:35:32 PM  

ox45tallboy: quickdraw: After it is explained to them then they get it. Many people are actually teachable about simple things and so the effort is well worth it.

You must be new here.


Nah - just really really good at explaining things :)

My log-in is older than yours so neener neener :P
 
2012-03-04 02:35:58 PM  

DarwiOdrade: No. As I pointed out yesterday, in Time, Inc. v. Firestone, 424 U.S. 448, the court ruled that matters of public interest are insufficient. It must be a matter of public controversy. Whether this was a matter of public controversy before Limbaugh's comments is a question of fact for the jury, which calls into question the matter of whether Ms Fluke is a limited-purpose public figure. But keep substituting your opinion for established precedent - it's amusing to watch you flail and fail time and time again.


Once again, I'm NOT defending Skinnyhead here, but I think it the fact that we had not one but TWO (remember Fluke was not allowed to testify at the first sausage fest) Congressional hearings about this matter, makes it a matter of public controversy. His comments were directed towards her stance on birth control (even though they were, IMHO, extrapolated to the point of defaming).

Personally, I think she should sue and let the jury decide, or take a sizable settlement and donate it to NOW or Planned Parenthood in Rush's name.
 
2012-03-04 02:37:23 PM  

ox45tallboy: Once again, I'm NOT defending Skinnyhead here, but I think it the fact that we had not one but TWO (remember Fluke was not allowed to testify at the first sausage fest) Congressional hearings about this matter, makes it a matter of public controversy


Please explain what supports this idea.
 
2012-03-04 02:38:22 PM  

Monkeyhouse Zendo: ox45tallboy: You make it sound so cute...

For me, it's more like burning out a zombie kudzu infestation with a flamethrower.


upload.wikimedia.org

First thing I thought of...
 
2012-03-04 02:38:41 PM  

ox45tallboy: Congressional hearings about this matter, makes it a matter of public controversy.


No it doesn't. It makes it just another day on capitol hill. Look Rush already said in his apology that it was him who made it a national issue so you can let this point go.
 
2012-03-04 02:41:47 PM  

DarwiOdrade: Falwell arguing he's not a public figure is just ridiculous - the court was absolutely right. Ms Fluke's situation is nothing like Jerry Falwell's.


I agree with you here. I was just stating that one could argue that statements one makes as part of the Congressional record are public statements, and the person making them therefore a public figure as far as those statements are concerned.

I meant it as an exercise of logic, not as a statement of my position on the matter.
 
2012-03-04 02:43:29 PM  

cameroncrazy1984: He didn't testify in Congress, and he was a public minister before that. She is a law student at Georgetown whose only public appearance was to testify in Congress on a matter of public interest. The two are NOT the same thing.


No, they are decidedly not the same thing. I was pointing out that Falwell argued he was representing a matter of public interest, which, from his deluded way of thinking, was at least logically consistent.
 
2012-03-04 02:44:27 PM  

ox45tallboy: DarwiOdrade: Falwell arguing he's not a public figure is just ridiculous - the court was absolutely right. Ms Fluke's situation is nothing like Jerry Falwell's.

I agree with you here. I was just stating that one could argue that statements one makes as part of the Congressional record are public statements, and the person making them therefore a public figure as far as those statements are concerned.

I meant it as an exercise of logic, not as a statement of my position on the matter.


The problem is that previous caselaw states that if you testify on matters of public interest, you are not defined as a "public figure" for defamation purposes. The case has been cited in one of these threads, and I forget which one it was now.
 
2012-03-04 02:45:56 PM  

ox45tallboy: cameroncrazy1984: He didn't testify in Congress, and he was a public minister before that. She is a law student at Georgetown whose only public appearance was to testify in Congress on a matter of public interest. The two are NOT the same thing.

No, they are decidedly not the same thing. I was pointing out that Falwell argued he was representing a matter of public interest, which, from his deluded way of thinking, was at least logically consistent.


Yet has no bearing on this matter, since Fluke was not a public figure before she testified on a matter of public interest. So then I have no idea why you'd bring that case up.
 
2012-03-04 02:52:54 PM  

quickdraw: Personally I have other things I am working on now and would rather not have to take to the streets to defend 19th century feminism but here we are.


Then don't. This nonsense is only going to make it easier for people to vote for Obama, trust me on that.
 
2012-03-04 02:54:33 PM  
6 times since 1988? I've listened to his show only a few times over the years and he should have issued an apology for every one of them.
 
Displayed 50 of 589 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report