My God, what an unexpectedly fun thread. The liberal are busy trying to get over the fact the Rush has a point that they agree with. LOL … look at all the back-peddling. “Oh the OWS, they don’t hate the rich” or “OWS isn’t about famous people with connections getting hired”.
Rush said something you can’t dismiss, this is beautiful. Grabs popcorn and sits back waiting for someone’s head to explode. This should be fun.
What are you babbling about? The only point Limbaugh ever had is on top of his head.
He’s trying to inject his little pet hatred for Chelsea Clinton into Occupy territory, like it has fuck all to do with anything. He’s just dropping chum, as usual.
McCain hired her . If he did not pull her out of Alaska we would not know who she is.
What does Chelsea Clinton have to do with anything? Is he saying her hiring means the OWS crowd is right? That the in-network does exclude the rest of us?
What he is saying in a nutshell is that the Democratic party is the party of the majority of the people participating in the OWS protest. They are protesting against the rich, the corporations and the political party that they expect to change this, the one they voted for and the one they support is no different. They are the 1%, they don’t care about the OWS protesters and the party that they think are their saviours do exactly what they are protesting about.
Chelsea Clinton is a prime example. Yes she has a degree but NO EXPERIENCE at all. However that isn’t stopping her from getting a job that pays tons of money. And why? Because she is a part of the 1% these OWS people are complaining about. Yet ask the typical OWS protester what political party supports them and believes what they believe they will say the Democrat Party. Ask them if the Clinton’s had their best interest in mind when in office, I bet more likely than not they will say yes and go on and on about what a great President Clinton was.
Yet, here is a perfect example to let everyone know that the Dems and (in this case) the Clinton’s are no different than the people OWS is protesting against.
I don’t care about Chelsea Clinton and quite honestly can’t blame her for using her connections to get a high paying gig. But it is time to stop pretending that the Democrat party is different and that they care about us. The truth is the Dem party is as elitist as all the others, they only take care of their own in their “class” circle and they don’t give a crap about you, me or anyone else.
We can change that. Rather the point, isn’t it? Change?
:rolleyes:
Oh sorry, your precious Democrat party does no wrong. Sorry, I forgot, all Bush’s fault. Except I don’t recall any OWS type protesting during Bush’s tenure. Kinda funny how that works isn’t it? 
That’s because they were all kept out of sight in Free Speech Zones.
I think this is where a Daily Kosian would yell their warcry of “mo’ and betta’!” 
In their defense though, I was under the impression a significant portion of the OSW crowd had no faith in Dems, Obama, or electoral politics in general. Certainly the usual managerial liberal types abound, but what can be done?
I know, right? All that “higher taxes on the rich”, “universal healthcare for everyone” and such is really no different that the other party’s ideas. Who cares about the effect of the 9-9-9 plan on the poor when a Democrat’s kid gets a plum job? They’re all the same!
Just because you and your buddy Rush spout this crap doesn’t make it true. You have no idea whether her experiences at prior jobs qualify her to report on human interest stories. You also have zero proof that her name had any influce on her hiring, and where in the story does it give any indication of her salary, which I’d wager is nowhere close to putting her in the 1%. But maybe I’ve missed hearing about new reporters receiving multi-million dollar bonuses after fucking up the economy.
And here’s the link to Wikipedia’s entry on OWS. You might want to read up on what it’s really about because it’s pretty clear people like you and Rush still don’t get it.
You can’t really claim that hiring someone who’s famous to appear on a TV show is somehow favoritism. You could claim (and I do) that this is just another example of trivialization and dumbing down of news reporting, but that’s hardly news and has nothing to with the whole OWS thing.
God bless our meritocratic, watchdog news media!
If you’re defending Chelsea Clinton here, is it because:
A. It’s not a big deal that someone can use their parents’ connections to breeze into a job that regular people have to pay their dues to attain.
or
B. She’s actually supremely qualified to be an effective television journalist.
or
C. Limbaugh has a point, but he’s obviously talking about this for some nefarious partisan purpose so it can be discounted.
Because I don’t think I buy any of those rationales.
Are the Clintons not part of the 1%?
She’s a famous person getting a job on a TV show because she’s famous. Hence the producers of the show think (correctly, most likely) that people will tune into the show just to see her. You might as well complain about Sharon Osbourne getting a job on X Factor. I’m sure there are plenty of people who aren’t married to Ozzy Osbourne who could do just a good job as her, but no one has heard of those people, so they aren’t going to get the gig.
In an ideal world our news shows would be run on slightly differently terms to our light entertainment shows, but I’m afraid that ship has sailed, get over it. You are about as likely to see actual news on the X-Factor nowadays.
If there is a story here its that NBC nightly news will be adding yet more non news in the form a ‘feel-good “Making a Difference” series.’ But really that is pretty much business as usual.
And again, this has nothing to with OWS.
MOIDALIZE, It’s all 3.
People get jobs all the time based on “who you know”, even regular people.
Being well known, intelligent, personable and having connections in politics/charity/business is what we call being “supremely qualified to be an effective television journalist”.
Rush Limbaugh doesn’t give a rat’s ass about who gets what job, his only concern is finding a story that his Oxy-addled brain can turn into a “controversy” for his ditto-heads to get frothed up over.
Let me add #4, OWS isn’t about people getting high paid jobs, or winning the lottery, or finding a diamond mine on their property, it’s about the laws of the land, the economic structure itself encouraging more of our nation’s wealth to be concentrated in the top 1%.
See, I always thought discovering essential truths and reporting them to the public was the job of the journalist, not having connections or being entertaining. Have our expectations really gone so low? What’s the message here? “Everything sucks, so there’s no point in getting worked up over it when it continues to suck?” I think this is precisely the mindset OWS is speaking out against, as well as the rampant nepotism in the top 1%.
Ah, so then he believes the Occupiers are right, but that Democrats have no legitimate claim to their cause because Chelsea Clinton, a Democrat, used her connections to get ahead. Fair enough.