Tit-for-tat
Of course, we’ve been discussing the dust-up over Rush Limbaugh and when he took a serious swipe at Georgetown Law Student Sandra Fluke and the intellectually disingenuous calls for Rush to be pulled from the airways. Well, ROS sends us a link to a letter from Brent Bozell CEO of the conservative Media Research Center to Brian Roberts, Chairman of Comcast which broadcasts Ed Schultz’ show on MSNBC;
Ed Schultz called Laura Ingraham a “right wing slut.” He claimed that “The Republicans want to see you dead! They’d rather make money off your dead corpse! They kind of like it when that woman has cancer and they don’t have anything for her.”
Or consider his comments on the former Vice President: “You’re damn right, Dick Cheney’s heart’s a political football. We ought to rip it out and kick it around and stuff it back in him.”
Schultz has compared the Tea Party to Nazi Brown Shirts, asked if the term “whore” applied to Joe Lieberman’s wife, and claimed that conservative broadcasters want Obama shot. And that is but the tip of the iceberg. The list of vile, repugnant venom coming out of Schultz’s mouth is extensive as we outlined in the letter we sent to Mr. Griffin yesterday.
[…]
Thank you for your attention to this matter, and I look forward to your public announcement calling for Ed Schultz’s termination.
Yeah, I’m sure they’ll get right on that. And the media will broadcast it wall-to-wall tonight on the nightly news. Just like they do with Ed Schultz’ constant spewing of REAL hate speech. And VoteVets will issue a letter condemnation with Jane Fonda’s full support. I don’t know about you, but there’s bated breath here.
Category: Politics
Jonn: aren’t ye a bit auld to be a-believin’ in Leprechauns, lad?
Schultz can be a little crass, but as a point of fact, some tea baggers have shouted down speakers at public meetings, a tactic used by the brown shirts in the 30’s. A lot of people have publically suppoted killing Obama – how many of them were conservative broadcasters,not sure. But hedoes have some facts right.
I do know I feel sorry for you guys having to support a dirt bag like Limbaugh “on principle”, a concept foreign to Limbaugh himself. Do you have to hold your noses while you stand up for him?
Really, Joe? How about providing documentation of that claim.
As I recall, every time that claim – or similar claims of racist behavior – have been aimed at the Tea Party, they’ve been found to be baseless claims on investigation.
Provide evidence, or STFU.
You’re so full of shit, Joe, that it’s gone past amusing into full fledged fucktard.
Ask David Horowitz and Ann Coulter about the civility of the left. Fuck you and the horse you rode in on.
I feel sorry that you are still walking around unsupervised.
Silly (stupid) Joe, regardless of the BPP and Tea Party members both being on “the list”, the BPP election debacle does not mean it was Tea Partiers shouting people down.
Now, go back to your little basement with your sock buddy and Roseanne Barr photos like a good waste of oxygen.
I believe old Joe is referring to townhalls where some audiences did indeed get quite loud, and shouted at their U.S. Rep who were a) ignoring the question on the floor and b) giving obviously flimflam answers. Calling one’s elected representative to account when they failed to represent one’s interests is, of course, not the same thing as preventing an invited guest from delivering a speech. Not that the left will ever admit that.
All well and good Joe, but do you care to make a constructive comment on the substance of the post, as in admit that Schultz should be fried in the media the same way Rush was?
I’ll assume you’re referring to Thaddeus what’s-his-name calling a black woman who happened to be running for Congress as a Republican various and sundry names and behaving quite viciously on his radio show, Alice. Or perhaps he meant Maher’s referral to Palin as every vulgar name a woman can be called on his television show.
But he can’t mean them, not since that doesn’t fit his meme.
Joe
Hear Me: YOU ARE SO FULL OF SHIT, it’s a wonder you can see. Prove it, mother fucker, PROVE IT. I have had it with the likes of people like you calling me a teabagger, racist, homophobe and any other ridiculous slurs you can name.
I have been to more than Five huge tea parties and not once has anyone but a left-minded asshole ever shouted down anyone. Not once. Raleigh, Chicago, DC Chicago, and Texas. NOT ONE, but there is great evidence of your kind going postal all over the fucking place. Now, prove it or really, just STFU.
Start over at Founding Bloggers and Breitbart…you’ll see your kind going full tilt. And I can provide you with a 100 blogs from around the country to show you your truth, asshole.
Ed Schultz is a bastard of the finest order and that you can even make excuses for him puts you right in his class of the double standard drooling hypocrite.
@7 Jacobite, you must remember, Joe is extremely slow so if you stop using words with more than five letters, maybe he could keep up. I know, I know, it’s a stretch but stranger thing have happened.
Once again Joe proves he is an ass.
As to Schultz? NBC is using him and they will not hold any of their lot accountable. Not holding my bated breath…but thanks for the old college try, Bozell.
@2
Why do I get the impression that Joe’s last name is “Stalin”?
Yat Yas: But he engages in heroic, dangerous endeavors. Like rock climbing.
Of course this latest round of “you did it first” ignores Schultz suspension over the Ingram comment. At least MSNBC gave the illusion of decorum. Clear Channel? Not so much.
How quickly those on the left forget all of the threats and shit they directed at Bush, etc., during this tenure.
I’d like to see Rush and Schultz both find a new line of work. The political theater is getting old.
Once again, I thought I made a comment that was supportive of the post in general, you guys in particular, and also adding something to discussion, but it got turned sideways. Sorry about that — I’m going back into lurk lockdown! Carry on.
I know YY, but it’s fun listening to the crickets chirp when the little over educated elitist gets backed into a corner and can’t find two syllables to rub together in response. 🙂
I swear the guilt ridden, masochistic, little miscreant only comes in here to get his weekly drubbing so he can effectively pleasure himself off screen.
@17: That’s the beauty of living in this country; if you don’t like something, turn it off or switch the station. I’m not forced to watch Hanoi Jane’s movies or bullshit workouts and no one else is forced to listen to Rush or Ed. That Rush has a major audience compared to any of the drooling moonbats on the progressive side of the spectrum says a lot. Because all of this goes back to a comment about Fluke’s well worn vagina and is still being talked about and whined about by those on the left showcases the massive hypocrisy in play by the left and I believe that is what the discussion is about, Joe’s ineptitude aside.
@OT – Agree completely on simply turning it off, but we’re still assaulted daily by contrived drama fed into the media machine by both parties like bad sausage. I’d prefer if most of them went away, as they don’t typically contribute to political discourse in any positive way. But I can appreciate the entertainment value, I suppose.
“Fluke’s well worn vagina”? Do you know something about her lady parts that nobody else does?
@15
And HBO even less.
That wasn’t meant to be incendiary towards you, Alice, rather a further clarification of what he possibly could have meant, since he likes so much to leave out details.
As for Schultz’s suspension, HM2, really???? Are you comparing his suspension and forced apology to the left’s all-out war against Limbaugh and attempt to end his career via censorship?
@21: She made the statement, not me. She admitted to being a rather horny little thing and that a Catholic university needed to pay for her to play.
@24 She admitted to using contraceptives and being female. Details were not provided. She then went on to discuss other uses for contraceptives. Admissions to horniness etc, were not in her testimony or interviews. Not sure where you got it from.
Once again, I thought I made a comment that was supportive of the post in general, you guys in particular, and also adding something to discussion, but it got turned sideways. Sorry about that — I’m going back into lurk lockdown! Carry on.
Alice, I caught the intent of your post and jump back in here. Yea, it can be a bit rough and tumble….The boys were a little preoccupied with our favorite *sock puppet*, Joe….*cackle* He’s sort of well intentioned just from the wrong side of the tracks.
As for me? I’m fed up with every tom, dick and harry running right on up to POTUS calling me a tea bagger, extremist, radical and whatever else they come up with.
Hey HM2….She is a Democrat operative and activist. What part of that news bite did you skip over, brau?
@15
Of course this latest round of “you did it first”…
This isn’t a case of “did it first”, nor is anyone representing it that way. It’s a case of “you do it to so why all the nashing of teeth and rending of garments?”.
Hope that clears things up for ya.
Ooops, 28 was me. 🙂
Jacobite….3 whacks with a wet noodle for that!
Do I get to pick where? 😉
@OT – To be clear, I abhor the thought of tax dollars funding people’s extracurricular activities. But having read Fluke’s testimony, interpretations of her undisclosed history of sexual relations is part and parcel of the aforementioned political theater.
As Rush illustrated, sometimes the correct position on an issue can be torpedoed by one own allies.
@27 I didn’t skip over it. Its not relavent. To be clear, are you saying if you disagree with someone you can make stuff up out of whole cloth or that all democratic activists are sluts?
@28/29 I never heard of Ed Schultz before this came out. He is hardly the voice of a movement in the way Limbaugh is. That said, his comments were out of line and he was reprimanded publicly, as Lou Dobbs and Imus were before him. Limbaugh makes stuff up and is not held accountable.
@25: $3000 per year in contraceptives is a whole lotta luvin.
THAT’s where I get it from. Plus, if you want to know a little secret; when it comes to contraceptives as a healthcare issue, your doctor will code it that way so that insurance DOES pay for it, so there goes that argument. Plus, you can go to Planned Murderhood and get contraceptives cheaper than what this leftist activist claimed she paid. You can also get them at Wally World for $9 per month. So, if her figure of $3000 per year was for condoms and contraceptives, she didn’t have time for class because she was on her back more than on her feet.
@34 Unlike Viagra, oral contraceptives are not one off events. The cost of the pills is not indicitive of one’s carnal activities, only anovulation.
Further oral contraceptives are hormones. Thus, they don’t all work the same nor can they be tolerated by all patients. Medical coding was discussed in her testimony. I take no position on that issue because it is irrelevant to the repeated mischaracterization of her testimony. If a post is made regarding what she actually said, I will discuss it there.
Along those lines, 3K was the (rounded) price of more recent oral contraceptives for the three years of law school, not one year as Limbaugh repeatedly stated. Prescriptions are made by healthcare professionals not politians or employers. Thus the choice of, say Yaz vs Orthotricyclin is a non starter. Unless you want the government telling your doctor how to do his/her job.
@OT – “$3000 per year in contraceptives is a whole lotta luvin.”
The use of the pill doesn’t fluctuate on the amount or dearth of sex one is having. Perhaps $3000 is high for the prescription, but it says nothing of how worn out her vagina may or may not be.
@33
So what? Everything else aside you tried to mischaracterize the position of your opposition (‘first’ vs. ‘also’), that is what I was addressing.
Nice attempt at a redirect though, Cheers. Lol
When you can get the pill for $9 per month at Wally World; then it leaves a lot of wiggle room in that $3000 claim she made; doesn’t it?
Also for you and HM2: Her “testimony” was a sham. She wasn’t in front of a House Committee, it was staged theater by democrats and she was brought in specifically to play the starring role. So, I will stand by my statement and if I lose sponsors; so be it.
Well, you can get “anti-biotics” for $4 at my local drug store. It probably won’t do much for your sinus infection, but its cheaper.
The issue isn’t that you don’t like or disagree with her message. You can disagree with her all dy long, poke holes in what she says. But to make stuff up about her personal life is wrong. Not illegal or unconstitutional, but wrong none the less.
Yep, kinda like mischaracterizing your opponent’s argument to try and advance your own, right?
Lol
Not sure how I am mischaractarizing? Care to elaborate?
I already did, so no. 🙂
@14 Hondo, I forgot they based “Leonidas” from ” 300″ on joe because of his rock climbing exploits!?
@19 Jacobite, you what you said is absolutely right. I asked an acquaintance, who’s a head shrinker, about trolls and he said, and I’m grossly paraphrasing, Al said this type of person is so insecure and has such low self esteem that they crave attention of any kind, positive or negative. Pretty sad if you ask me.
HM2 You do realize most over the counter drugs have the same active ingredients as the brand name crap right? If your antibiotics aren’t working, you’re taking the wrong sort and it’s on you. It’s making things worse too. XDR Tuberculosis is going to be a fun one here in a while.
3k in Contraceptives. Either she looks, walks and quacks like a duck or she’s actively scamming money. Either way, she doesn’t have the moral ground to lay on her back-… stand on.
Dead Man: you miss the point. Just as all antibiotics are not the same, all contraceptives are not the same. More recent medications cost more than older ones. Who needs what should be decided by doctors not bean counters or pols.
@#32, would you rather have contraceptives be covered and responsibly used or would you rather us, as taxpayers, end up supporting some unplanned child via WIC and other federal assistance? I personally would opt for covering the contraceptives….they’re cheaper.
However, 3k seems like an awful lot for birth control pills…even if that is over the span of 3 years. Even if I have to spend $25 per month for my birth control pills, that only comes out to a few hundred bucks for the entire year. But I have never spent even $25 per month.
I will say though that this mud slinging crap is getting old from BOTH sides. I am sick of both the Republicans and Democrats bitching endlessly about who said what about whom and comparing the so-called “consequences” that each side faced. I say just get over it and move on….and even though I personally cannot stand Rush, I do agree that you just don’t have to listen to him.
@45
Who needs what should be decided by doctors not bean counters or pols
You’re right. Nor should it be decided by the Federal Government. And the American people should decide who pays for it, not the bean counters, pols, or the Gubmnt.
@46
would you rather have contraceptives be covered and responsibly used or would you rather us, as taxpayers, end up supporting some unplanned child via WIC and other federal assistance?
Your question supposes it’s an either/or decision. Here’s a third option; we don’t pay for either one. Wow! Brilliant!
Ya see, not all of us here are Republicans, a couple of us (I’m assuming there’s more than just me, lol) are Libertarian bordering on anarchist. I do NOT believe the Federal Government has any business spending money on half the crap it currently does.
Well Jacobite, I don’t really see that happening so let’s go with the 2 options of which we should provide. Americans are getting more government assistance now than they ever have before so I’d say that we’re a long way off from paying for neither, as you previously suggested.
I personally have no problem in employer-provided insurance covering contraceptives. However, I have a big problem with the Federal government mandating that coverage, particularly when that mandate forces religious employers to violate the tenets of their religion in doing so. The latter is what Fluke is arguing should be done. As a law student, she should see the First Amendment issue in doing so.
And to play devil’s advocate: Georgetown’s health insurance already covers all of methods of contraception approved for use by the Catholic Church: abstinence and rhythm. The former is 100% effective at preventing pregnancy, and is free. The latter is also relatively effective when implemented properly, and requires a one-time purchase of a thermometer (approx $5) for effective practice. Neither requires a doctor’s visit or a prescription.
Both, however, require a degree of willpower and self-restraint on the part of the individual.
I don’t really see that happening so let’s go with the 2 options of which we should provide
‘options..we..should ..provide..’
Says who? And why can’t I express a desire to see those services eliminated, or work toward that?
Kind of like the Left’s war on guns, incrementalism is the key. First those who are interested work to eliminate Government sponsored birth control, then we work to eliminate taxpayer support for poor decision making skills. Simple really. Just because it’s a long way off doesn’t mean it can’t be hoped for.
You wish to frame the debate, I understand that, but it’s too funny how your arguments fall apart when your framework is denied to you by showing your assumptions the light of day.