Rush, Rush, Rush... liberals are equivalent to murderers and rapists?

The BBQ Pit
141

Nope. I’ve clarified it at least three times already. If you’re bound and determined to believe that Limbaugh and I equate liberalism to rape and murder there isn’t anything more I could say to persuade you otherwise.

Correct. He was not equating the badness of liberalism to rape and murder, he was equating the need to not let motive lessen resistance.

That really cranked you guys up, didn’t it? At least you were intellectually honest enough to include the version that explains my comments were in defense of the meme that was taking hold around here that voting Republican=EEVILLL!

The intellectually dishonest and cowardly mod/poster tomndebb recently charged that that post was ill-considered, yet it was perfectly well-considered and offered, as I said, in the context of putting the lie to the allegation that Republicans are evil and liberals are sweetness and light.

You may also recall that I said at one point during the brouhaha that followed that I had been deliberately holding off on posting all that because I felt it would be hitting below the belt (as clearly liberals haven’t intended all the negative consequences that have followed in their wake) and only did so, like I said, to counter the meme that was taking hold around here that the only reason a person could be a Republican these days was if we were evil.

Soitenly!

NOW seems intent on having the killing regarded as an honor killing rather than domestic violence. To wit:

*The New York president of the National Organization for Women, Marcia Pappas, condemned prosecutors for referring to the death as an apparent case of domestic violence.

“This was, apparently, a terroristic version of ‘honor killing,’” a statement from NOW said.*

Link

Now why this is so is anybody’s guess. Still, Limbaugh’s point, as I’ve been saying over and over again, is that it doesn’t matter whether it’s an honor killing or domestic violence, it was just as bad either way.

142

I also hear that the NAACP is now defending lynchings. In fact, I heard it from Rush Limbaugh.:smiley:

143

Y’know, I think Rush Limbaugh’s brand of Conservatism has bad consequences, and I’ve given up trying to be sympathetic to his position. I don’t care why, he’s so relentlessly divisive and disingenuous. I don’t care why he can’t seem to open his fat yap without puking up a fresh batch of lies. I don’t care why he’s trying to destroy this country. At this point, the only thing is: He. Must. Be. Stopped. I don’t care how he’s come to see the world the way he has. I don’t care why a murderer does it. I don’t care why a rapist does it. I don’t care why that guy blew up that office block in O.K. city a while back, killed all those innocent people and their kids. You’ve got these “Small government” types saying (paraphrased) “Well, that’s what you get when people let the Government get too big. People fight back”.[sup]1[/sup]

You know, I don’t care. I don’t care why anymore. If I figure it out I’ll be glad to tell you because it’s interesting to know, but it doesn’t matter in terms of defeating folks like Limbaugh.[sup]2[/sup]

[sup]1[/sup][sub] They may or may not have said this. But who gives a shit, right?[/sub]

[sup]2[/sup][sub]This is, of course, a parody of Limbaugh’s statement quoted in the OP with a few words strategically changed to demonstrate that, yes, Limbaugh was comparing liberals to rapists and murderers. Ask yourself, if Limbaugh had never made the statements which most posters find so…distasteful, and if instead Sean Penn or someone had made similar remarks on Air America, what would be Limbaugh’s likely reaction?[/sub]

144

From Merriam-Webster Online:

1mur·der
Pronunciation: \ˈmər-dər\
Function: noun
Etymology: partly from Middle English murther, from Old English morthor; partly from Middle English murdre, from Anglo-French, of Germanic origin; akin to Old English morthor; akin to Old High German mord murder, Latin mort-, mors death, mori to die, mortuus dead, Greek brotos mortal
Date: before 12th century
1: the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought
2 a: something very difficult or dangerous <the traffic was murder> b: something outrageous or blameworthy <getting away with murder>

[bolding mine]

You might notice that the definition of murder includes the fact that the taking of life was “unlawful”. The killings you mention are lawful (or legally excused, in the case of insanity).

Still, I knew that sooner or later someone would start splitting hairs over whether all murders are equally bad.

So, the first thing that you have to keep in mind is that the comment in question was made by Rush Limbaugh, not me. I’ve merely been trying to explain what he meant.

Secondly, radio personalities cannot possibly parse everything they say so as to exclude every bit of semantic nitpicking that anybody anywhere might come up with. Most of us know what he meant, which is that parsing the beheading as an honor killing rather than domestic violence does nothing to lessen its atrociousness, and that NOW was being ridiculous in trying to do so.

George Kaplin, I don’t listen to Limbaugh and I’m not defending him. What I’m doing is correcting Stoid’s mischaracterizations of his words in the OP (all in the name of fighting ignorance, you know). Like him or not, Limbaugh did not say nor imply what was attributed to him in the OP.

145

Oh, yeah, thanks for the good word.

…I think. :confused: :smiley:

146

QFT

If by “fuck” you mean “cover in honey and leave in a fire ant pit while you piss on him from above” I’d gladly fuck him.

If he starts posting on the Straight Dope maybe he’ll be banned too. The problem is there’s a certain drooling moron segment that tunes in and supports him. Until they wise up and stop funding him he won’t be “banned” from real life.

I assume he has cites handy for why Sweden, and Norway are evil like murderers, rapists, and head chopper-offers.

Would you be so kind as to maybe direct me to some info on the average Swiss person is evil like a murderer and needs to be stopped?

147

::shrug:: If liberals wanna think Rush is equating them with murderers, I guess they can think it. Sounds wrong to me. It’s like that chimp thing and Al Sharpton with that cartoon. Professional offensibility doesn’t bother me.

One thing you need to consider is the people calling Rush a troll. Conservatives generally don’t like PC. We think it’s dumb, groupthink quasi-censorship. Some of us, including myself will go a little bit out of our way not to be PC, or to set off the PC detectors of the offerenderati. I don’t care for other people telling me what is appropriate or not appropriate to say. So, he pushes that button. He wins when others take the bait. I don’t think that’s what’s happening here. I certainly agree that he’s being nasty to liberals, but I think it’s stupid to think he’s equating them with murderers and rapists. YMMV.

I think he cares pretty deeply about the Conservative movement. Your criticisms are not without merit. Personally the thing I disagree with Rush the most about is that there is not really any true compassion in his brand of conservatism. It’s selfish. I don’t mean that in the simplistic “let’s be greedy and starve the poor sense,” but more in the sense that there is no true community and responsibility to the community. There is little recognition and responsibility to return something to the community from which one receives benefits.

While I agree with him that the government shouldn’t force that in a redistributive sense, I do think that fulfilling that obligation needs to be a strong core value of conservatism. Without it, it’s a heartless philosophy. With it sincerely, I think it beats the shit out of any other political philosophy.

That’s my criticism.

Clearly though you have listened enough to form an intelligent opinion, and while I don’t agree with everything you said, I have a sincere respect for someone who took the time to explore it for themselves.

148

Yeah, but he implied something pretty close, didn’t he? Okay, so maybe he didn’t say that liberals and murderers are entirely equivalent. I’ll give you that. He did, however, say (and no amount of post-hoc hermeneutics can change this) that liberals are evil, and that their motives warrant as little scrutiny as the motives of rapists and murderers. Now that’s pretty fucking insulting, wouldn’t you agree?

That said, in Limbaugh’s defence he is a total cunt.

149

So Google NOW and honor killing, just kinda wondering where this all popped up… and lo, and behold, there’s Little Green Footballs. Good enough as any, right.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/32806_Shocka!_NOW_Decries_Honor_Killing

Anyway, they’re dripping with dull sarcasm (…doncha just hate* dumb* sarcasm?..)

“Shocka! NOW Decries ‘Honor Killing’”

Well, yes. It’s what they do, isn’t it. Point out that murder condoned by some hyper-macho “code of honor” is a bit more evil than a simple domestic dispute gone terribly bad. I think they have a very good point. And that’s not just because every women I know is feminist, and I want to live. Its because its true.

NOW’s attitude on this is reasonable, humane and rational. Would that any of that group of adjectives applied to that bucket of suet with a microphone. That would be nice.

150

Ever hear of CERN? The LHC? They’re going to destroy the world by sucking it into a black hole unless we stop them.

Where have you been?

151

Not to my mind.

Hermeneutics? Cool! A new word. :wink:

Having said that, where in the OP did Rush call liberals evil?

I would agree that he believes liberal motives warrant as little scrutiny as the motives of rapists and murderers, but only in the sense that they don’t deserve scrutiny at all. I’m sure that there are other crimes and moral offenses where Limbaugh doesn’t think liberal motives and POV deserve scrutiny or consideration as well. In other words, I don’t think his beliefs in this regard are limited to, or defined by, rapists and murderers only.

152

the irony . . . is so ironic . . .

153

Tell it to Rush. :smiley: He’s the one making the assertion that there’s no moral difference, not me. I merely answered your question as to what he meant by the statement quoted in the OP, which was that he saw no difference one way or the other.

154

To be honest, I don’t think we’re ever going to see eye-to-eye on this. One final thing, though:

Serious question: Please explain why it is that the motives of rapists don’t deserve scrutiny?

I would be genuinely interested in hearing your answer.

155

PC? You mean like “freedom fries” and things like that, Scylla? PC isn’t just a liberal thing, OR a conservative-BOTH sides are guilty of it from time to time.

156

Well, first of all scrutiny is a word that you used and I just replied in kind; neither Rush nor I had used it beforehand.

And secondly, remember that I’m trying to explain what I think Rush was saying, not what I personally believe.

Third, what Limbaugh is saying is not so much that the motives of rapists and murderers don’t deserve examination or attempts at insight so much as he’s saying that they don’t bring anything to bear on the heinousness of the crime. And to a certain extent I agree. From the point of view of the victim, it makes little difference whether they are beheaded because of domestic violence or as the result of an honor killing. They suffer and die the same either way.

157

Okay, let’s play.

Is there a reason that Rush doesn’t care about the motive of these particular things, or does Rush just not ever care about motives for anything ever?

158

And I don’t see anywhere that NOW intended to state that their position was that “honor” killings are anything other than bad. There doesn’t seem to be any indication of a value judgment, merely a disagreement about the fundamental nature of the act to clarify the nature of the act. Honor killings and domestic violence are both really horrible, and while they are both violent expressions of male control over women, they are not the same thing.

Again, I didn’t see anything in the article to indicate that anyone with NOW was defending honor killings.

Is there some other point you were making?

159

The difference is contained in that one word: “condoned”. Therebv, the evil reaches a whole 'nother level. You getting any of this?

160

I should point out also, since we’re on the subject, that I’ve found it amusing the way people around here carry on about that. It’s no worse than what gets said about conservatives around here a hundred times a day.