In this diatribe, Rush Limbaugh unfairly and meanly characterizes various Democrats. He harks back to Robert Byrd’s KKK membership, which Byrd disavowed many decades ago. He uses childish name-calling, “Robert “Sheets” Byrd” and “Henry “Nostrilitis” Waxman.” He compares Byrd with truly evil people, such as Tarik Aziz and with those Americans who wanted to retain slavery. Limbaugh’s characterization of Byrd’s comments as “Byrd droppings” may be funny, but it doesn’t justfy the mindless, over-the-top insults in the column.
Like you he is an entertainer. He is a clown for the sake of entertainment. Unlike you he gets paid. What’s your excuse?
This is a revelation?
God, how I wish I didn’t suspect your motives in posting this.
On the one hand, I agree with you: this is par for the course for Limbaugh, yet another example of his dishnoest, mean-spirited poorly-considered polemics. I read a book and a half by him once, and kept track of factual errors and self-aggrandizements; between the two, I found about one obnoxiosity per page.
On the other hand, December, I hope you’re not posting this just so, next time someone points out the egregiously lopsided nature of your criticism of liberals, you can point to this thread and say, “See? I criticize conservatives, too!”
For now, though, it’s only fair I take you at face value; good on you for seeing what a dishonest twit Limbaugh is.
Daniel
[sub]Actually, I think Byrd really sucks, and the attack is well-merited, and that Rush Limbaugh is generally more entertaining and informative than the average demagogue.[/sub]
What’s that Scylla? Speak up!
It would be silly to listen to Rush and take everything he says at face value. About as silly as reading the op-ed pages of the NYT or Washington Post and expecting no bias.
But, I agree. He’s definately entertaining, and does inform. Most of his trashing of liberals takes the form of simply playing clips of them talking, and him pointing our how absurd thier views are.
Well, good on you, December.
Even if your motives here are less than pure, maybe you’ll think twice in the future before regurgitating other Rush ramblings as deep thoughts.
Rush is a band!
If I want conservative commentary, I’ll usually go to William F. Buckley and his ilk. Their signal to noise ratio is higher, and refuting reasoned arguments is more fun than being disgusted with ad hominems and Limbaughs usual distortions. YMMV
Well at least if that happens your post will be in this thread as well 
My intent precisely :). If **December is being straightforward, no harm and no foul. If he’s making a disingenuous attempt to immunize himself against charges of partisanship, then I’ll hopefully have shot the attempt down.
Daniel
Geez, Daniel, you want to be proactive in saying that just because december criticizes both liberals and conservatives is no reason to say that he criticizes both liberals and conservatives. Perhaps you need to start a thread or two criticizing the liberals in the media for unfair criticisms of Republicans for balance, yourself.
FWIW, Limbaugh was wrong to refer to Byrd as a Klansman. “Former Klansman” would be accurate. Limbaugh’s criticisms of Byrd funneling pork by the truckload while criticizing Bush for the carrier landing falls under the heading of fair criticism.
Regards,
Shodan
Wow, the OP sounds really pissed off. I understand this may have upset you, December, but please, take deep breaths, count to ten and calm down.
But Rush has “talent on loan from God!”
Actually the only thing that could generally be construed as distrorted are Rush’s opinions which one may agree or disagree with as the case may be.
However, as one who has recently listened to his show during lunch for the last twom months, I think it is fair to say that Rush is mischaracterized and unfairly targeted and vilified.
As a matter of policy Rush always refers to the original data, or source material from whence he gets his information. He cites and he cites well. Usually he has multiple forms of documentation for anything he asserts as fact. If he is taking umbrage or referring to something somebody has said, he plays the original sound bite, and is generally careful to place it in context.
On the other hand, he is clearly biased, and makes no bones about it. It is a conservative talk show. The things he says and shows are one-sided and slanted towards the conservative viewpoint.
If one expects and accepts that, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it, and you either enjoy his personality or you don’t.
The context of Rush’s recent attacks on Byrd are in discussion of his really quite stupid attacks against Bush for landing on the aircraft carrier.
Byrd is about as contemptible a human being as one is likely to fine, IMO.
Rush himself pretty much addresses the issue of “attacking” liberals and Democrats with regularity at least once a week. I think it was yesterday he said (in usual pompous fashion which I paraphrase, not directly quote)
"My friends… Let me be very precise and clear about this… This is not about… is not directed at… the general population of Democrats… (Rush likes his three period pauses) This is not about the Democrat who lives next door to you in Wisconsin… This is not about your friend with whom you share ideological differences… We are referring to certain and specific members of the Democratic leadership… Their deeds and actions… as demonstrated in their own words here… live… at the center for Advanced Conservative Studies… On the Excellence in Broadcasting Network… Presented by the all-knowing, all-seeing, all-caring MahaRushi Limbaugh.
Comin up in the second hour, a list of all the Public works to which Senator Byrd has attached his name, the Centers, Highways, Federal Buildings, etc, all named “Byrd,” demonstrating the level of Pork and self-serving politicking that the Senator has availed himself of, and perhaps demonstrating as well an ego to match my own… Without the ability to back it up…
Coming up next…"
Wow, I never thought someone could do impersonations over a message board, but that was great!
Sorry you misunderstood. I agree with December’s OP here, but it in no way means that he’s nonpartisan. In fact, he posted this in response to a request in another thread that he spend two weeks out of every month looking at conservaitve sources for bias: he said that “I have followed your advice here.”
This is all fine and well, but one swallow does not make a Spring, and one criticism of Limbaugh does not make an unbiased observer of politics.
In my defense, I’ve never claimed to be impartial, so I don’t need to prove that I am. In my defense, I’ve never (that I recall) started a thread criticizing conservative media, so I don’t need to start the threads you recommend in order to prove my impartiality. And in my defense, I admitted in the other thread that Dowd was behaving disingenuously.
So what’s your point?
Daniel
Really reaching there Shodan. You know damn well that even with the occasional criticism of conservatives, like this one, that december is still so far off center in the balance of how he applies his criticial talents as to be fair game for accusations of partisanship. Your glossing over the gross imbalance in his practice is exactly the kind of smokescreen which gives an air of legitimacy to rabidly partisan attacks which deserve absolutely no respect.
But you already knew that.
Enjoy,
Steven
And just to show that I’m as nonpartisan and fairminded and unbiased as December, listen to this:
Michael Moore sometimes doesn’t always tell the exact truth.
Woo hoo! I’m Mr. Good Judgement now! Take that, Solomon!
Daniel
Here, here!
Testify! Wouldn’t you agree that he’s a pathetic waste of skin?
How absurd!
No way! Now who would do something like that?
If we’re looking for ulterior motives (which, to be fair, may or may not exist) my first suspicion was of something a little more subtle.
December starts a thread in support of Byrd against critics who point to his KKK past.
Various past critics of December chime in in support of Byrd, state that a person should not be judged solely by his or her past, and congratulate December on his broad-mindedness.
Then, in a future (or possibly past) post, one of those same people criticize a conservative for past segregationist activities or sympathies. At this point December can point to this thread and declare them a hypocrite!
Damn straight.
Hey, yojimbo, do you wanna pull up the Bill Hicks quote about Limbaugh, or shall I?