Hibbins - I think I may have misunderstood your last post. I do that sometimes… If I did, never mind! 
Uncle Beer - hear hear. It’s not nice to gloat about someone else’s misfortune. That’s been my take on it all along.
I’m not certain it’s a liberal-conservative thing; perhaps there’s a Christian (or other religious) v. non-religious aspect, however, and that would overlap.
I hate in full-throated, Old Testament fashion. You hate me? I hate you and I want you dead, in the most awful, painful, horrific fashion. Picture the demise of the Nazi officer at the end of “Raiders of the Lost Ark,” only make it last for, oh, forty years instead of forty seconds.
And, in turn, you may want that of me.
“Jinkies,” says I.
And I’ll go on living my life, fully expecting that some people will take glee in whatever pain I suffer, and not caring a single, eensiest, weensiest bit for their opinions.
Now, I can almost feel a sliver of sympathy for Limbaugh, but I won’t really calm my vitriol until I hear him say, “This experience has made me more sympathetic of others and their struggles, and I retract the hateful things I said.” Then, of course, I’ll drop it completely.
I never said, ha ha, maybe this will teach him. I said, perhaps something good can come out of such a bad thing. Yeah, I feel sorry for the guy-but does that mean I have to LIKE him now? I think he’s a hateful SOB.
Just like I think Ronald Reagan is heartless criminal who should have been impeached. However, I do feel tremendously sorry for the guy-Alzheimers, AND having recently lost a child. I didn’t like Maureen Reagan, but I’m sorry she died.
I don’t wish ill on anyone-I just wish that perhaps Limbaugh can maybe, JUST MAYBE start thinking that hey-it can happen to me. I don’t see that as saying, “he’s learning a lesson”, but that maybe we can find a silver lining.
Yeah, I guess I’m an idealist.
Uncle Beer: Rush Limbaugh himself said this:
“The difference between conservatives and liberals is that conservatives think liberals have bad ideas, but liberals think conservatives are bad people.”
I’ve been ruminating on that a long time, and I think it’s true, as a general statement. There are obviously exceptions (the irrational hatred of Bill Clinton among some conservatives comes to mind), but in general it seems to be that way.
Yes. And I did a happy dance when Nixon died.
BTW: Those of you who doubt that Rush is either a liar or an ignorant boob read this.
Sam Stone said
Sorry. Rush said the first part up there, not Sam.
Sam I consider you a real mensh for admitting the “hating Clinton” part.
Where I disagree with you is on your choice of terms. I think that extreme liberals and extreme conservatives think that their political counterparts are evil people. Fortunately, the extremes account for less than 10% of either group(liberals or conservatives). That is just my opinion of numbers.
Liberals don’t hate most conservatives personally. They do hate the less-than-10%-lunatic-stupid fringe personally. Liberals, of whom I am obviously one, hate personally conservatives who are biggots, racists, obstructionists, unredeemably stupid, and entertainers who make their livings praying upon a gullible public, whether they be an intelligent entertainer as is Rush, or Pat Robertson/Jerry Falwell, the last two who mine the religion market successfully.
I would equally denounce/scorn any liberal media host who makes a living praying upon stupid, knee-jerk liberals.
I don’t think that liberals as a group hate conservatives “personally.”
Funny, I thought EVERYONE had that responsibility; you, me, the billions of people we don’t personally know… EVERYONE.
Clearly – Look at the most obvious example – Clinton is disliked by conservatives because of the things that he has done, and is prejoratively described in relation to those things. (Liar, adulterer and words to that effect, all true.) Rush, on the other hand, is a “odious bastard” to liberals, not for anything he’s done, but because he espouses a particular philosophy. It says volumes.
And his particular philosophy is one of mean spirited lies.
I mean, making fun of politicians is one thing. Poking fun at the looks of an awkward twelve year old girl who has suddenly been thrust into the spotlight is quite another.
Rush is a GROWN MAN, making fun of an adolescent girl. THAT to me shows what kind of man he is.
And lets not forget Rush was married in a ceremony performed by a black man, Clarence Thomas. And he also hangs out with another black, Charles Barkley.
Not too bad for a “racist” huh!
I feel bad for Rush.He got me started on the conservative road, although the last 5-6 years he has moderated his views too far, in my opinion.
I really hav’nt listened to him very much in the last few months. Now I listen to Neil Boortz in the morning and Michail Savage in the afternoon.
No we don’t. The last time someone asked you what your weight was, were you accurate? When you filled out your tax form, did you add the sales tax for all online purchases?
Rush’s responsibility on the airwaves is to entertain his audience. Considering he just got a huge huge huge mega deal, over $20 million a year, I’d say he’s doing a good job. His employers think so.
Rush Limbaugh’s 35 Undeniable Truths, which can be found here, on a rather conservative site - Republican & Right, had these little nuggets of opinion:
In case anyone is wondering, number 17 did not say “Men should not be allowed on juries where the accused is a babe,” because, it seems, only men retain the ability to think rationally when they see someone they think is a hottie. I wasn’t aware of that.
Anyone who mistakes Rush Limbaugh’s show for accurate news is an idiot. He’s obviously spouting off his own opinion. When I listen to his show I am sometimes entertained, but I always am careful to take whatever he says with a considerable grain of salt. To not do so would be folly. I’d do the same with Al Franken, or anyone else.
Speaking of entertaining - how can I not find a man entertaining who attempted to give me a “psychic orgasm”? Years ago, when he had a TV show, he talked about some Russian (I believe) psychic who could send out psychic “vibes” that gave women orgasms. (Supposedly.) Well, Limbaugh thought this was funny, so he said he would try to do the same thing on his show. He had the camera get up really close to his fat, moony face, as he made all these goofy “psychic” looks. It was hilarious. I guess you had to be there. But I almost peed my pants. I didn’t have an orgasm, though!
This is not someone who should be considered the provider of “balanced and accurate” news. He’s an entertainer.
Guinistasia: You know, I watched the Chelsea Clinton episode first hand. Did you?
Here’s what happened. It was on Rush’s TV show. He had a TV screen beside him as he showed various pictures and made comments about them (if you’ve seen Dennis Miller’s “The Big Picture” shtick, or Weekend Update on SNL, you get the idea). Anyway, he said something along the lines of, “And here’s the Clinton’s dog on the White House lawn.” …And a picture of Chelsea Clinton came up. Rush looked a bit startled, and went on to the next picture.
On the next night’s episode, Rush said that the picture was a mistake, and that some staffer had put it in there without his knowledge. And he apologized on the air for it.
Later, as it blew into a big issue, he apologized many times, in detail, at length. He said it was inappropriate, it was a mistake, he was sorry it happened. And he said he’d never criticize Chelsea again, and as far as I know, he never has.
I don’t know that I buy that it was a mistake. I suspect he thought it would get a laugh, and when the audience didn’t react it dawned on him that he crossed a line and he backpedaled like mad. But whatever happened, the fact is that he’s been trying to atone for that one gaffe for 8 freakin’ years. Let it go.
In fact, this is almost exactly what happened to Roger Ebert recently. He made some very cruel remarks about George Bush’s daughters in a print editorial a couple of months ago. After a bunch of people excoriated him for it, he published a retraction. A very sincere retraction. He said he was wrong, not only in the facts but in that he shouldn’t be attacking some young girls just because of who their father happened to be. And he promised never to comment on them again. Good enough for me.
Some of you seem to be missing my point. I don’t care if, or how much, you happen to hate any particular, or all, conservatives. That’s entirely fine. It’s when you revel in their ill health and wish more of the same, or even death, upon them that I find odious. Like Jab1’s statement up there about dancing when Nixon died. It’s loathsome. It’s vile. It’s inhuman.
One has to wonder, though, what would be posted if Clinton announced he were impotent or had testicular cancer.
Do you think the Dittoheads would be any kinder?
UncleBeer, have you laughed along as Limbaugh poked fun at people you don’t like? Have you thought he was funny when he played “I’ll Never Love This Way Again” when talking about gays getting AIDS? Have you been fascinated with his takes on the latest updates in the Great Blowjob Caper?
No? Good. Then you’re on solid ground with that objection.
Alexander Woollcott danced on Calvin Coolidge’s grave.
Harpo Marx watched him do it; it’s in his autobiography, HARPO SPEAKS, currently in print and available from Limelight Editons…don’t miss it!
I have e-mailed FAIR before with some “corrections.” They are hopeless. A Cohen (I think it is a family business) will fire back angry, ill-considered, retorts in minutes. Don’t “flustrate” them with facts. Once they get it in their heads something is true, it is, dammit. They feign objectivity while pushing a straight left agenda. Annoying. Not the “left” part, the “feigning objectivity” part, that bugs me. Be biased, I am. But if you don’t admit it, you are unFAIR.