The Rush Limbaugh media lynch mob

[bodecea]

Which public figure can be quoted as having said something bigoted and disgusting and it doesn’t matter whether he did or not because he might have? Who can Big Media brand a racist without checking the facts? Who has to prove he did not say something racist, rather than the accuser proving he did?

A pat on the back for anyone who guessed the answer: Rush Limbaugh (OK, the blog headline was a clue). From CNN to MSNBC to ABC, it’s been put about that Limbaugh said this:

HOW TRUEThe Rush Limbaugh media lynch mob – Telegraph Blogs

I hope that he sues, because this has caused him damage as far as being involved in the purchasing of the Rams. The guy loves football.

No one should be allowed to get on television and state false claims without being able to prove them. Stating something was said when it NEVER was. That's slander and it has cost him monetary damages. It's high time our press became responsible about what they repeat on air.

I have listened to Rush for many years and I have NEVER heard him make any racist statements. He critized McNab for his athetic abilities, stating that the press was more interested in promoting black quaterbacks than in the talent of the athelete. That's it.

That's going on now with a black President, no one is allowed to critize the agenda and policies of Obama, because if you do, you are called a racist.

" A lie gets halfway around the world before the TRUTH has a chance to put it's pants on." Winston Churchill.

Oh, I hope he sues too.

 

[Jay Canuck]

During an October 26 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh "apologize[d]" for being "wrong" in "speculat[ing]" that actor Michael J. Fox either "didn't take his medication or he was acting" in a recent campaign advertisement for Missouri Democratic Senate candidate Claire McCaskill.

The fact is, while Fox acknowledged on Access Hollywood that his tremors were a result of having taken "too much medication," he did not say he had intentionally done so. Indeed, after Limbaugh's remark, Fox appeared on the October 26 edition of the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric and confirmed that the tremors he had experienced during the taping of the ad occurred because it is difficult to "calculate" the correct dosage of medication and, "ometimes, it kicks in too hard.".

and because he has a disease that he has to take medication for and it is difficult to calculate the correct dosage that is just fine for the fat pigboy to take a shot at him and others who suffer from the same condition?

So only idiots like you are allowed to make fun of people? Can you say hypocrite?

there is a difference between making fun of idiot posters here like yourself and poking fun at people who have diseases solely for the crime of having a disease......but a dumbshit like you just won't ever get that.

 

[paperview]

...
Molly Irvings reported this incident, I guess that makes it true.

...

It's Molly Ivins. Get it right. And she was an award winning writer from Texas. You think a professional as she, writing from Texas, dittohead country, would make a false quote about Rush and not be called to task on it by the dittoheads there, or by Rush, or by anyone? Her article appeared in 1993, long before Frankens book.

Sorry, it happened, and too many people know it did. Only the die-hard head-up-his-ass Limbaugh defenders continue to insist it never did.

He apologized for showing the damn picture of the cat instead of Chelsea. Damn didn't you read the transcript?!?!?!

He apologized to HILLARY in 2002, as they were at a wedding together. He told her personally he regretted what he said about Chelsea. Why would he do that if it was just a simple 'technical error?'

Irving, Ivin makes little difference since she's no longer with us. Yes she wasn't above making a mistake. Could be Franken quoted her instead of vice versa, either way neither one proved the incident ever took place as you and edthenumbskull has claimed it has.

I'm a defender of the truth and you and Ed are not presengint the truth. The only thing you have is a memory of 16, 17 some odd years ago and writings from Ivin and Franken. I provided a transcript from Rush show in 1992 that clearly shows what happened, Yet you and Edtheidiot refuse to accept it. He apologized because it was a simple error and the guy obviously felt bad about it. Apologizing for what was clearly a mistake is not an admission of anything more dastardly. Until you can provide substantial proof that what you claimed happened actually happened, I'll stick with the present evidence. You say Rush apologized, I'd like to see that apology.

No, you provided a piece of fiction by a blogger that has been passed around by Rush robots to suggest it actually happened that way. Your source is laughable.

Rush apologized to Hillary in 2002, and later commented on his show about it.
I'm surprised you didn't know that. You must be new to politics.

 

[paperview]

During an October 26 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh "apologize[d]" for being "wrong" in "speculat[ing]" that actor Michael J. Fox either "didn't take his medication or he was acting" in a recent campaign advertisement for Missouri Democratic Senate candidate Claire McCaskill.

The fact is, while Fox acknowledged on Access Hollywood that his tremors were a result of having taken "too much medication," he did not say he had intentionally done so. Indeed, after Limbaugh's remark, Fox appeared on the October 26 edition of the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric and confirmed that the tremors he had experienced during the taping of the ad occurred because it is difficult to "calculate" the correct dosage of medication and, "ometimes, it kicks in too hard.".

and because he has a disease that he has to take medication for and it is difficult to calculate the correct dosage that is just fine for the fat pigboy to take a shot at him and others who suffer from the same condition?

So only idiots like you are allowed to make fun of people? Can you say hypocrite?

Hey! We have a defender here of radio hosts making fun of Parkinson's patients.

What a blast.

 

[concept]

Looks like more liberal msm shills are starting to retract.

But here online, the diehard moonbats still have their heads up their asses.
Living in total denial.

Poor fools, your smelly echo chamber must be feeling a little claustrophobic.

 

[Dr.House]

bendover buddies?..... oh you mean like the blowjobs on this board that you thank continually and who in turn continually thank and positive rep you for your dumbshit opinion posts?

Just because you suck doesn't mean the rest of us suck...

At least my opinions are my own and don't come with a link to a leftist hack site...

Keep on being you, Canuckstain...

 

[paperview]

You say Rush apologized, I'd like to see that apology.

Lots of things from 2002 have been archived, some attainable and some not so easily attainable.

Here's a Drudge headline. Drudge good enough for you?

RUSH LIMBAUGH COMES FACE TO FACE WITH HILLARY CLINTON IN BROOKLYN AT WEDDING; HILLARY CLINTON WANTED TO MEET: PURELY SOCIAL OCCASION, 'I WAS POLITE, SHE WAS POLITE,' SAYS RADIO KING. 'CORDIAL EXCHANGE.' CONGRATULATES SENATOR ON HER 'DEDICATION TO PUBLIC SERVICE,' SHE CLAIMS; BOTH POSE FOR A PICTURE TOGETHER: HILLARY TELLS PALS, 'HE SAID HE REGRETS THINGS HE'S SAID ABOUT [DAUGHTER] CHELSEA'... HILLARY TAKING OVER STEERING COMMITTEE FROM KERRY, NEW YORK OBSERVER SET TO REPORT... DEVELOPING... <link>>>ARCHIVES - DrudgeReportArchives.com

===================

 

[edthecynic]

...
Molly Irvings reported this incident, I guess that makes it true.

...

It's Molly Ivins. Get it right. And she was an award winning writer from Texas. You think a professional as she, writing from Texas, dittohead country, would make a false quote about Rush and not be called to task on it by the dittoheads there, or by Rush, or by anyone? Her article appeared in 1993, long before Frankens book.

Sorry, it happened, and too many people know it did. Only the die-hard head-up-his-ass Limbaugh defenders continue to insist it never did.

He apologized for showing the damn picture of the cat instead of Chelsea. Damn didn't you read the transcript?!?!?!

He apologized to HILLARY in 2002, as they were at a wedding together. He told her personally he regretted what he said about Chelsea. Why would he do that if it was just a simple 'technical error?'

Irving, Ivin makes little difference since she's no longer with us. Yes she wasn't above making a mistake. Could be Franken quoted her instead of vice versa, either way neither one proved the incident ever took place as you and edthenumbskull has claimed it has.

I'm a defender of the truth and you and Ed are not presengint the truth. The only thing you have is a memory of 16, 17 some odd years ago and writings from Ivin and Franken. I provided a transcript from Rush show in 1992 that clearly shows what happened, Yet you and Edtheidiot refuse to accept it. He apologized because it was a simple error and the guy obviously felt bad about it. Apologizing for what was clearly a mistake is not an admission of anything more dastardly. Until you can provide substantial proof that what you claimed happened actually happened, I'll stick with the present evidence. You say Rush apologized, I'd like to see that apology.

You provided a transcript from a different show, so you proved nothing. Until you can provide proof that there is no other transcript with Chelsea and a dog as your source claims, you've proven nothing since the general public does not have access to complete and unedited transcripts and videos of all his TV shows. Also it has been reported by other sources since 1993 and only denied recently.
That is very suspicious!
Why did you CON$ wait so long to first deny it ever happened till now? Back when it was first reported the only denial was that it wasn't intended, not that it never happened.
Very, very suspicious!
Since I saw it myself, I know the show exists. So I know your source is lying. I may not be able to prove it, but I know it.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

and because he has a disease that he has to take medication for and it is difficult to calculate the correct dosage that is just fine for the fat pigboy to take a shot at him and others who suffer from the same condition?

So only idiots like you are allowed to make fun of people? Can you say hypocrite?

there is a difference between making fun of idiot posters here like yourself and poking fun at people who have diseases solely for the crime of having a disease......but a dumbshit like you just won't ever get that.

Oh and you never attacked anyone with a disease? I recall you attack Beck frequently, and he suffers from a disease. But I suppose in your leftwing idiocy, that's different.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

It's Molly Ivins. Get it right. And she was an award winning writer from Texas. You think a professional as she, writing from Texas, dittohead country, would make a false quote about Rush and not be called to task on it by the dittoheads there, or by Rush, or by anyone? Her article appeared in 1993, long before Frankens book.

Sorry, it happened, and too many people know it did. Only the die-hard head-up-his-ass Limbaugh defenders continue to insist it never did.

He apologized to HILLARY in 2002, as they were at a wedding together. He told her personally he regretted what he said about Chelsea. Why would he do that if it was just a simple 'technical error?'

Irving, Ivin makes little difference since she's no longer with us. Yes she wasn't above making a mistake. Could be Franken quoted her instead of vice versa, either way neither one proved the incident ever took place as you and edthenumbskull has claimed it has.

I'm a defender of the truth and you and Ed are not presengint the truth. The only thing you have is a memory of 16, 17 some odd years ago and writings from Ivin and Franken. I provided a transcript from Rush show in 1992 that clearly shows what happened, Yet you and Edtheidiot refuse to accept it. He apologized because it was a simple error and the guy obviously felt bad about it. Apologizing for what was clearly a mistake is not an admission of anything more dastardly. Until you can provide substantial proof that what you claimed happened actually happened, I'll stick with the present evidence. You say Rush apologized, I'd like to see that apology.

No, you provided a piece of fiction by a blogger that has been passed around by Rush robots to suggest it actually happened that way. Your source is laughable.

Rush apologized to Hillary in 2002, and later commented on his show about it.
I'm surprised you didn't know that. You must be new to politics.

You're an idiot, the "blog" contained a transcript from the Nov. 6, 1992 show which addressed Chelsea and the whitehouse pets. What have you got? Nothing but Ivin and Franken's word and a memory of a show you alleged you've seen 16 years ago.

I shown why Rush apologized again to Hillary, but your dumbass is too stupid to understand it and it doesn't surprise me.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

and because he has a disease that he has to take medication for and it is difficult to calculate the correct dosage that is just fine for the fat pigboy to take a shot at him and others who suffer from the same condition?

So only idiots like you are allowed to make fun of people? Can you say hypocrite?

Hey! We have a defender here of radio hosts making fun of Parkinson's patients.

What a blast.

What's the difference in Rush poking fun at Fox and Carlos Mencia poking fun at the mentally ill and handicapped people?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

It's Molly Ivins. Get it right. And she was an award winning writer from Texas. You think a professional as she, writing from Texas, dittohead country, would make a false quote about Rush and not be called to task on it by the dittoheads there, or by Rush, or by anyone? Her article appeared in 1993, long before Frankens book.

Sorry, it happened, and too many people know it did. Only the die-hard head-up-his-ass Limbaugh defenders continue to insist it never did.

He apologized to HILLARY in 2002, as they were at a wedding together. He told her personally he regretted what he said about Chelsea. Why would he do that if it was just a simple 'technical error?'

Irving, Ivin makes little difference since she's no longer with us. Yes she wasn't above making a mistake. Could be Franken quoted her instead of vice versa, either way neither one proved the incident ever took place as you and edthenumbskull has claimed it has.

I'm a defender of the truth and you and Ed are not presengint the truth. The only thing you have is a memory of 16, 17 some odd years ago and writings from Ivin and Franken. I provided a transcript from Rush show in 1992 that clearly shows what happened, Yet you and Edtheidiot refuse to accept it. He apologized because it was a simple error and the guy obviously felt bad about it. Apologizing for what was clearly a mistake is not an admission of anything more dastardly. Until you can provide substantial proof that what you claimed happened actually happened, I'll stick with the present evidence. You say Rush apologized, I'd like to see that apology.

You provided a transcript from a different show, so you proved nothing. Until you can provide proof that there is no other transcript with Chelsea and a dog as your source claims, you've proven nothing since the general public does not have access to complete and unedited transcripts and videos of all his TV shows. Also it has been reported by other sources since 1993 and only denied recently.
That is very suspicious!
Why did you CON$ wait so long to first deny it ever happened till now? Back when it was first reported the only denial was that it wasn't intended, not that it never happened.
Very, very suspicious!
Since I saw it myself, I know the show exists. So I know your source is lying. I may not be able to prove it, but I know it.

Your claim, your burden of proof. The partial transcript I provided was from the Rush's television show.

 

[LilOlLady]

Rush has shot himself in the foot, tared and feathered himself, castrated himself and in the process of hanging himself after he drug out himself.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Rush has shot himself in the foot, tared and feathered himself, castrated himself and in the process of hanging himself after he drug out himself.

And yet he has millions of listeners and makes millions of dollars. Not bad for a wounded tarred and feathered castrated hung out exdruggy.

 

[paperview]

So only idiots like you are allowed to make fun of people? Can you say hypocrite?

there is a difference between making fun of idiot posters here like yourself and poking fun at people who have diseases solely for the crime of having a disease......but a dumbshit like you just won't ever get that.

Oh and you never attacked anyone with a disease? I recall you attack Beck frequently, and he suffers from a disease. But I suppose in your leftwing idiocy, that's different.

Some posts need to just stand out there, all on their own.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

there is a difference between making fun of idiot posters here like yourself and poking fun at people who have diseases solely for the crime of having a disease......but a dumbshit like you just won't ever get that.

Oh and you never attacked anyone with a disease? I recall you attack Beck frequently, and he suffers from a disease. But I suppose in your leftwing idiocy, that's different.

Some posts need to just stand out there, all on their own.

Thanks, I thought it was pretty clever of me too.

 

[edthecynic]

Irving, Ivin makes little difference since she's no longer with us. Yes she wasn't above making a mistake. Could be Franken quoted her instead of vice versa, either way neither one proved the incident ever took place as you and edthenumbskull has claimed it has.

I'm a defender of the truth and you and Ed are not presengint the truth. The only thing you have is a memory of 16, 17 some odd years ago and writings from Ivin and Franken. I provided a transcript from Rush show in 1992 that clearly shows what happened, Yet you and Edtheidiot refuse to accept it. He apologized because it was a simple error and the guy obviously felt bad about it. Apologizing for what was clearly a mistake is not an admission of anything more dastardly. Until you can provide substantial proof that what you claimed happened actually happened, I'll stick with the present evidence. You say Rush apologized, I'd like to see that apology.

You provided a transcript from a different show, so you proved nothing. Until you can provide proof that there is no other transcript with Chelsea and a dog as your source claims, you've proven nothing since the general public does not have access to complete and unedited transcripts and videos of all his TV shows. Also it has been reported by other sources since 1993 and only denied recently.
That is very suspicious!
Why did you CON$ wait so long to first deny it ever happened till now? Back when it was first reported the only denial was that it wasn't intended, not that it never happened.
Very, very suspicious!
Since I saw it myself, I know the show exists. So I know your source is lying. I may not be able to prove it, but I know it.

Your claim, your burden of proof. The partial transcript I provided was from the Rush's television show.

As you well know, I did not claim that was the ONLY transcript that contained Chelsea and the White House dog, YOUR source did but provided no link to all the transcripts from his show. He didn't even provide a link to the show he claims to have gotten the transcript he used. Since I remember seeing it I KNOW he is lying.

We have only the word of a CON$ervative that that is the ONLY transcript and CON$ are notorious liars. You need to provide access to ALL his transcripts to sustain YOUR claim that that is the ONLY transcript that discusses Chelsea and the WH dog.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

You provided a transcript from a different show, so you proved nothing. Until you can provide proof that there is no other transcript with Chelsea and a dog as your source claims, you've proven nothing since the general public does not have access to complete and unedited transcripts and videos of all his TV shows. Also it has been reported by other sources since 1993 and only denied recently.
That is very suspicious!
Why did you CON$ wait so long to first deny it ever happened till now? Back when it was first reported the only denial was that it wasn't intended, not that it never happened.
Very, very suspicious!
Since I saw it myself, I know the show exists. So I know your source is lying. I may not be able to prove it, but I know it.

Your claim, your burden of proof. The partial transcript I provided was from the Rush's television show.

As you well know, I did not claim that was the ONLY transcript that contained Chelsea and the White House dog, YOUR source did but provided no link to all the transcripts from his show. He didn't even provide a link to the show he claims to have gotten the transcript he used. Since I remember seeing it I KNOW he is lying.

We have only the word of a CON$ervative that that is the ONLY transcript and CON$ are notorious liars. You need to provide access to ALL his transcripts to sustain YOUR claim that that is the ONLY transcript that discusses Chelsea and the WH dog.

I'll provide the full transcript of the Nov. 6th 1992 show. You provide the same for the show of which you speak. The one that fails.....fails.

 

[edthecynic]

Your claim, your burden of proof. The partial transcript I provided was from the Rush's television show.

As you well know, I did not claim that was the ONLY transcript that contained Chelsea and the White House dog, YOUR source did but provided no link to all the transcripts from his show. He didn't even provide a link to the show he claims to have gotten the transcript he used. Since I remember seeing it I KNOW he is lying.

We have only the word of a CON$ervative that that is the ONLY transcript and CON$ are notorious liars. You need to provide access to ALL his transcripts to sustain YOUR claim that that is the ONLY transcript that discusses Chelsea and the WH dog.

I'll provide the full transcript of the Nov. 6th 1992 show. You provide the same for the show of which you speak. The one that fails.....fails.

I've already said that is not the show I'm talking about.

You claim no other transcript mentions Chelsea or the WH dog, therefore you must provide transcripts from ALL his TV shows to support your claim. I have already said I have no access to any transcripts. I have said I have my very accurate memory, so the burden is on you to provide access to ALL transcripts. I will do the work of searching through the transcripts you provide, but you are the one claiming to know what is in every transcript, not me. I am only claiming to remember the picture with Chelsea's hair covering her face as the WH dog.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

As you well know, I did not claim that was the ONLY transcript that contained Chelsea and the White House dog, YOUR source did but provided no link to all the transcripts from his show. He didn't even provide a link to the show he claims to have gotten the transcript he used. Since I remember seeing it I KNOW he is lying.

We have only the word of a CON$ervative that that is the ONLY transcript and CON$ are notorious liars. You need to provide access to ALL his transcripts to sustain YOUR claim that that is the ONLY transcript that discusses Chelsea and the WH dog.

I'll provide the full transcript of the Nov. 6th 1992 show. You provide the same for the show of which you speak. The one that fails.....fails.

I've already said that is not the show I'm talking about.

You claim no other transcript mentions Chelsea or the WH dog, therefore you must provide transcripts from ALL his TV shows to support your claim. I have already said I have no access to any transcripts. I have said I have my very accurate memory, so the burden is on you to provide access to ALL transcripts. I will do the work of searching through the transcripts you provide, but you are the one claiming to know what is in every transcript, not me. I am only claiming to remember the picture with Chelsea's hair covering her face as the WH dog.

I can't provide a transcript that doesn't exist. You claim the event took place, the burden of proof is on you.

You haven't even produced the photo of Chelsea of which you speak. You know the one with hair covering her face.