Do you support Rush Limbaugh's proposal?

[Aeson]

Here's a working link

[MrFun]

This has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

Drake was talking about how Limbaugh's hate speech against women was not hurting anyone. I brought up another example of hate speech "not" hurting anyone.

[Aeson]

Drake was talking about how Limbaugh's hate speech against women was not hurting anyone. I brought up another example of hate speech "not" hurting anyone.

Rush's statements didn't hurt anyone. It wasn't an incite to violence. As such he has (and should have) the right to say it.

[Tupac Shakur]

This whole Limbaugh business epitomizes our confusion and our hypocrisy. The folks who depicted George Bush as a chimp, and Sarah Palin as a skank, are indignant when these same words are used against their people in the virtue industry, and that includes the troopers in the Reproductive Rights Activist Service Corps. The trouble with Limbaugh is that he is not a satirist—hasn’t the brains or the humor for it—and his earnestness, and his vanity, always gets in the way. He seems to believe that he is an opinion leader, but even as a gas bag on the sidelines he has a role to play, because not many other people are playing that role. If only he knew more about the power of satire, how it can do more than mere mockery. But, as a mocker—the Fluke affair is proof—he has an effect, and I think it uncovered one of our greatest weaknesses and our weirdest tendencies.

You have to give Limbaugh a pass, otherwise you lose the right to go on calling Gingrich and Eric Cantor pimps for Israel, and Rick Santorum a mental midget, and if you foreswear colorful, if not robust or wicked language altogether you might as well shut up.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/10/condemnation-of-rush-limbaugh-shows-our-hypocrisy.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+thedailybeast%2Farticles+%28The+Daily+Beast+-+Latest+Articles%29

[Fake Boris]

Are you posting this for the sake of information or because you agree?

[Tupac Shakur]

I thought it was an interesting take.

[KrazyHorse]

wow, three pages of dashi, aeson and kentonio drama. can't wait to read through that.

[Aeson]

This whole Limbaugh business epitomizes our confusion and our hypocrisy. The folks who depicted George Bush as a chimp, and Sarah Palin as a skank, are indignant when these same words are used against their people in the virtue industry, and that includes the troopers in the Reproductive Rights Activist Service Corps. The trouble with Limbaugh is that he is not a satirist—hasn’t the brains or the humor for it—and his earnestness, and his vanity, always gets in the way. He seems to believe that he is an opinion leader, but even as a gas bag on the sidelines he has a role to play, because not many other people are playing that role. If only he knew more about the power of satire, how it can do more than mere mockery. But, as a mocker—the Fluke affair is proof—he has an effect, and I think it uncovered one of our greatest weaknesses and our weirdest tendencies.

You have to give Limbaugh a pass, otherwise you lose the right to go on calling Gingrich and Eric Cantor pimps for Israel, and Rick Santorum a mental midget, and if you foreswear colorful, if not robust or wicked language altogether you might as well shut up.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...st+Articles%29

A generally good article except for the last paragraph. His conclusion that all forms of colorful language must be accepted equally is moronic.

[Aeson]

wow, three pages of dashi, aeson and kentonio drama. can't wait to read through that.

You should really use more posts per page.

[DaShi]

wow, three pages of dashi, aeson and kentonio drama. can't wait to read through that.

I 'd.

[DaShi]

This whole Limbaugh business epitomizes our confusion and our hypocrisy. The folks who depicted George Bush as a chimp, and Sarah Palin as a skank, are indignant when these same words are used against their people in the virtue industry, and that includes the troopers in the Reproductive Rights Activist Service Corps. The trouble with Limbaugh is that he is not a satirist—hasn’t the brains or the humor for it—and his earnestness, and his vanity, always gets in the way. He seems to believe that he is an opinion leader, but even as a gas bag on the sidelines he has a role to play, because not many other people are playing that role. If only he knew more about the power of satire, how it can do more than mere mockery. But, as a mocker—the Fluke affair is proof—he has an effect, and I think it uncovered one of our greatest weaknesses and our weirdest tendencies.

You have to give Limbaugh a pass, otherwise you lose the right to go on calling Gingrich and Eric Cantor pimps for Israel, and Rick Santorum a mental midget, and if you foreswear colorful, if not robust or wicked language altogether you might as well shut up.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...st+Articles%29

Most aren't upset because Rush insulted a "liberal." There upset because he dismissed an entire gender by doing. Oddly, Romney is right that he should have said it differently.

[Tupac Shakur]

No, they're definitely upset that Limbaugh insulted a liberal supporting a liberal hot-button issue, except for the people like the President who are gleeful that Limbaugh insulted a liberal supporting a liberal hot-button issue. Limbaugh's "War on Women" is fundraising gold.

[DaShi]

Fine, that's why I disliked it. The rest can be boobs, if they want.

[Guynemer]

Maher is an idiot who is conflating "freedom of speech" with "freedom to be paid by advertisers to have a spot on your talk show so you can afford to be on the air".

Bingo.

As I said before, if the advertisers believe that advertising on Rush's show is becoming a liability, they have an obligation to their companies to pull the ads.


Rush will continue to be free to say as many ****ty things as he wants. He does not have a constitutional right to be paid to do so.

[Tupac Shakur]

I wish this guy's legal argument...

It is for the above reason that I must stand up to defend Rush Limbaugh. House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer came out and said that Sandra Fluke should sue Limbaugh for defamation for famously calling her a "slut." A Pennsylvania attorney, Max Kennerly, told his local newspaper that he thinks Fluke has a case.

She has no such thing, and shame on those who say that she does. It isn't that Rush Limbaugh needs to be shielded from these barbs. It isn't that Sandra Fluke actually might be emboldened to sue. The problem with these uneducated and erroneous statements about the viability of such a suit is that they act like a blizzard wind blowing through the marketplace of ideas. They spread misinformation among the proletariat, who didn't have the benefit of an education in constitutional law, and consequently believe Fluke might have a claim based on Rush's impolitic statements. And the next time some moronic prole gets butthurt about something someone says, they'll be right on the phone to the closest bottom-feeding lawyer they can find.

Spreading ignorance about defamation law makes the marketplace of ideas just that much more chilly, just that much more dangerous, and just that much more likely to be hit with a bomb by some opportunistic ambulance-chaser teamed up with a thin-skinned professional victim so that he or she can get paid for his or her mere "butthurt." Butthurt is not defamation. Butthurt is butthurt, and you don't get paid for that in the United States of America. Not on my watch.

http://www.citmedialaw.org/blog/2012/no-sandra-fluke-does-not-have-valid-defamation-claim-against-rush-limbaugh

... was as entertaining as his initial Fluke-bashing.

A Georgetown Law student testified on Capitol Hill about the fact that Georgetown won’t pay for her birth control. Wah. She says that it costs $1,000 a year for birth control, and she can’t afford it. (source)

I went to Georgetown, and this was a regular topic of dissatisfaction at the school — that the GULC health plan didn’t pay for birth control or abortions, and the student health clinic wouldn’t write prescriptions for birth control pills. Big goddamned deal. We all knew that GULC was a Catholic school, for better or worse. I’m no fan of the Catholic Church, GULC, or these medieval views on birth control. But, I despise lying whiny full of **** overprivileged students more than all of those things together.

Lets see, Durex Condoms at CVS are regularly priced at $19.29 for a box of 24. (source) They are on sale for $15.43. Lets say, though, that she has more expensive tastes in condoms — what’s she gonna pay? A buck each?

So she’s getting ****ed 1,000 times a year? And every time she gets ****ed, its by some broke dick ******* who doesn’t spring for his own condoms ever? If you’re so poor that you can’t blow a DOLLAR to get laid, you’re too ****ing poor to be ****ing. You can collect bottles and cans for the deposit and come up with enough for a box of condoms.

Seems to me that if her argumentation skills suck this bad, she ought to kill two birds with one stone — and put her mouth to its one practical and pleasurable use, rather than using it to make GULC students look like a bunch of whiny liars.

http://randazza.wordpress.com/2012/02/29/georgetown-law-student-whines-i-cant-afford-birth-control/

Colorful language