You're too smart for this. Victimization does occur. Rush effectively has a lifetime ban from NFL ownership because of his controversial reputation. Vick at least had his day in court. Rush didn't. Checketts dropped him like a hot potato-- which was his right. But he caved. Rush never got a full-hearing. The bleating of his critics sufficed. I'm sorry that Checketts caved but I understand.
No I'm saying that you can't assume that Rush has insulted all other blacks because he doesn't insult Sowell and Williams.
Some poster named "strawman," who most of us, apparently, have on ignore. But he's always bothering giddy.
Face it. You are just prejudiced about Rush. Nothing will change your mind. You and I disagree on many things, so this is no surprise. What I feel "best' about is that over 20 years, I have listened to Rush a lot-- probably more than anyone who has posted here. I'm not living off the highlights cited by bloggers and the dastardly image promoted by his opponents. Obviously I'm pretty sure that that is what most of you have done here as have most of the critics cited. Kiawanuka (?) is only 25 or so; how much could he really know first-hand about Rush? I have no way of knowing but I doubt very much. Yet everyone is so willing to ride in the wake of his proclamation about Rush Limbaugh. Unless he was a Young Republican he's probably never listened-- most college kids don't.
Im a man without conviction Im a man who doesnt know How to sell a contradiction You come and go You come and go Karma karma karma karma karma chameleon You come and go You come and go
I await your apology.... I don't understand why people criticize others based on what they think they said or responded to rather than what actually was said or written. Maybe you were just trying to be funny... I know you are a smart guy but was it written or not?
Who, exactly, is to blame? Rush makes millions of dollars voicing his outrageous opinion on a variety of topics. His critics can't do the same?
I have listened to Rush, and even watched his tv show a bit when he briefly had that. I'm sure that it was nowhere near the amount time you've spent listening to him. Most of the time I can't take it anymore because he's misleading, omitting, making stuff up, race baiting or on occasion being racist. I don't listen to that except to make an idea of where some of the ideas I disagree with are coming from.
So "criminal mentality" = tagging them as two predominately African-American gangs? That makes it ok? You are way off on this one. Let me say it in as subtle a manner as possible: RUSH LIMBAUGH IS NOT A COMEDIAN. And, no, he's not an "entertainer" either. He can claim to be an "entertainer", but that doesn't make it so. Heck, I can claim to be a Houston Rocket, but that doesn't make it true (that you know of ). He is a political commentator, pure and simple. He expresses a political point of view, and the ditto-heads lap it up and ask for seconds. And his political point of view includes hating people of color. You can try to argue it, but his words say otherwise. Fine, maybe "the rest" was an inaccurate choice of words. So you tell me: how many people of color have to be o.k. with his comments in order for him NOT to be considered racist? Do we need to setup an online poll to gauge the countries reaction to his vitriol? Do we need a 50% majority of the African-American population? Will we need a quorum? Or are you seriously arguing that because Limbaugh employs two African-Americans, no one else should be offended by his racist comments?
I agree with the point of all of this, but I bolded the last bit because that's what I don't understand. It's ignorant to claim that means the guy couldn't be racist because he has a crackpot in Sowell who supports him in addition to Walter Williams, who is hardly representative.
wait for it... wait for it... If either (1) you didn't have a penchant for Mr. Strawman, (or let's say other diversionary/avoidance-ridden techniques, giddy, or (2) if the interwebz was serious business, then an apology would be forthcoming. My least favorite of your techniques is the (what to call it?) "But Chris Rock sucks too!" kind of thing. That's not a defense and is off topic. Let's leave the idea the Rush is "racist" for a moment. Would you agree with the following: Rush enjoys pushing the envelope against his perception of PC police, and he enjoys getting under people's skin when it comes to race. He does this to an extent that many people can see it as race baiting, and even in some cases, insensitive.
The only victim card being pulled around here is Rush and his supporters. They should stop crying about 'poor me' and take more initiative in their lives instead of blaming everyone else. If he really wants to buy a team he can gather his own group of investors or just make more money to do it himself. Stop blaming prejudice because he can't afford to buy a team on his own.
so b/c he has two 'black intellectuals' on his show it excuses all the race-baiting comments he has made over the years? are we not accountable for what we say? i think the better question to ask is if rush isnt a racist then why does he have a history of making racially charged and antagonizing comments?
why cant someone turn this comment around on you and say 'you are just an apologist for rush'? wait...they could!
Rush is what he is. Yes, he pushes envelopes of all kind not just racial ones. Why do some wish to punish him for that? B-bob, you flat out missed on that one. I made a direct reply to a direct quote. Even the "perp" acknowledged that he had overstepped and you accuse me of playing games? Of course, I am an apologist for Rush: NO ONE ELSE WILL DO IT. I see the world as more grey than all you black-and-whiters. Life is more complex and so is Rush. You shouldn't just conveniently, self-satifiedly label and dismiss him.
Speaking of keeping up the same old jibber jabber, how is it that you come to hang around for 20 pages every single time there's a thread about a hate monger? You don't post regularly in most D&D threads, but when there's a hate monger to defend you're all over it. It's not like this happened once or twice. You're on like your fifth one or something. Everybody has their special interests. Andy Moon likes to talk drug laws, rhester likes religion, you like defending hate mongers. Why is that?
giddy, I was mistaken to use the term "strawman" at the precise time I used it and with the precise reference. Mea magna culpa. But see, you can't take that thread and throw out your rug of collective work. Bringing up Jack Tatum / Chuck Noll stuff from the 1970's, or Chris Rock, as a way to answer for Rush just doesn't make sense unless you are trying, like a octopus, to just cloud the water. That's playing games, if you ask me. Admitting the "bone in the nose" comment is offensive is very big of you, and it helps one hope for a discussion. Yes, it is just plainly offensive and unnecessary, (though it helped Limbaugh's ratings and his career, no doubt.) It's not a good step just because you agree with "liberal" posters like myself -- it's a good step because it's just finding the common sense obvious things we should all be able to agree on.
