Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Did Rush Lim. apologize
24 views
Skip to first unread message
micky
Mar 5, 2012, 3:02:17 AM3/5/12
to
I should google more, I suppose, but I thought I would ask you.
(I've had questions like this in other situations unrelated to
politics and regarding entirely different people.)
Did Rush Limbaugh apologize to the law student for insulting her?
Does anyone know what he actually said, because I've only heard
excerpts, the same ones from more than one source.. Presumably the
most important excerpts, but if so, they don't amount to an apology.
AFAI heard, he never used the words "I apologize" or "I'm sorry" or
even "I regret". How can it be an apology without one of them or
something very similar?
And AFAK he only said that he used the wrong words, but he never said
what words he should have used. Maybe they were insulting too. He
didn't say what was "wrong" with the words he did use. Maybe the only
thing was that they caused six sponsors to cancel their advertising.
He didn't say she had done nothing wrong in wanting insurance that
would pay for the drugs. He didn't even say that what she did wrong
was not as bad as what he first said. .
If he said no more than this, why are all the news reporters and the
politicians interviewed on the Sunday news shows saying he apologized?
Don't they know what "apology" means?
Last and less important: AFAIK, he didn't write to her or call her
directly, he only said something to a reporter maybe. Even if it were
phrased as an apology, would it be an apology "to her" if he made no
effort to send it to her?
(I've had questions like this in other situations unrelated to
politics and regarding entirely different people.)
Did Rush Limbaugh apologize to the law student for insulting her?
Does anyone know what he actually said, because I've only heard
excerpts, the same ones from more than one source.. Presumably the
most important excerpts, but if so, they don't amount to an apology.
AFAI heard, he never used the words "I apologize" or "I'm sorry" or
even "I regret". How can it be an apology without one of them or
something very similar?
And AFAK he only said that he used the wrong words, but he never said
what words he should have used. Maybe they were insulting too. He
didn't say what was "wrong" with the words he did use. Maybe the only
thing was that they caused six sponsors to cancel their advertising.
He didn't say she had done nothing wrong in wanting insurance that
would pay for the drugs. He didn't even say that what she did wrong
was not as bad as what he first said. .
If he said no more than this, why are all the news reporters and the
politicians interviewed on the Sunday news shows saying he apologized?
Don't they know what "apology" means?
Last and less important: AFAIK, he didn't write to her or call her
directly, he only said something to a reporter maybe. Even if it were
phrased as an apology, would it be an apology "to her" if he made no
effort to send it to her?
Duggy
Mar 5, 2012, 4:10:04 AM3/5/12
to
On Mar 5, 6:02 pm, micky <NONONOmis...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> I should google more, I suppose, but I thought I would ask you.
Me? How would I know?
> I should google more, I suppose, but I thought I would ask you.
===
= DUG.
===
R H Draney
Mar 5, 2012, 4:19:39 AM3/5/12
to
micky filted:
apology...I'm getting a little tired of "apologies" that boil down to "I'm sorry
if anyone was offended"....r
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
>
>AFAI heard, he never used the words "I apologize" or "I'm sorry" or
>even "I regret". How can it be an apology without one of them or
>something very similar?
Even using any or all of those phrases doesn't necessarily make it an
>AFAI heard, he never used the words "I apologize" or "I'm sorry" or
>even "I regret". How can it be an apology without one of them or
>something very similar?
apology...I'm getting a little tired of "apologies" that boil down to "I'm sorry
if anyone was offended"....r
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
James Hogg
Mar 5, 2012, 4:28:23 AM3/5/12
to
will be."
--
James
micky
Mar 5, 2012, 4:30:12 AM3/5/12
to
With a "friend" of mine,, I complained that she'd insulted me and that
she'd betrayed me.. Later I told her than my feellings had been hurt.
I knew I shouldn't say that but it was such an easy way to put it. A
couple years later she said I'm sorry [if/that, I can't remember] I
hurt your feelings. I didn't know that. What! She thought my
complaint about being insutlted and betrayed didn't include hurt
feelings?
I still haven't found what limbaugh actually said.
Django Cat
Mar 5, 2012, 4:46:11 AM3/5/12
to
sounds a complete shit. What I did think was terrific was the
Georgetown President's rational, measured and sane response, and his
defence of free debate and showing respect for those whose views differ
from your own:
http://www.georgetown.edu/message-civility-public-discourse.html
DC
--
Django Cat
Mar 5, 2012, 4:49:40 AM3/5/12
to
Steve Hayes
Mar 5, 2012, 5:24:52 AM3/5/12
to
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 03:02:17 -0500, micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>I should google more, I suppose, but I thought I would ask you.
>
>(I've had questions like this in other situations unrelated to
>politics and regarding entirely different people.)
>
>Did Rush Limbaugh apologize to the law student for insulting her?
Rush is a Canadian rock band formed in August 1968, in the Willowdale
>I should google more, I suppose, but I thought I would ask you.
>
>(I've had questions like this in other situations unrelated to
>politics and regarding entirely different people.)
>
>Did Rush Limbaugh apologize to the law student for insulting her?
neighbourhood of Toronto, Ontario. The band is composed of bassist,
keyboardist, and lead vocalist Geddy Lee, guitarist and backing vocalist Alex
Lifeson, and drummer, percussionist and lyricist Neil Peart. The band and its
membership went through a number of re-configurations between 1968 and 1974,
achieving their current form when Peart replaced original drummer John Rutsey
in July 1974, two weeks before the group's first United States tour.
The Lim (Montenegrin and Serbian: ???, Lim, pronounced [līm]) is a river
flowing through Montenegro, Albania, Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. 220 km
(137 mi) long, it's the right and the longest tributary of the Drina.
"Apologize" (marketed in many countries using the British English spelling
"Apologise") is a song written by OneRepublic frontman Ryan Tedder for
OneRepublic's debut album Dreaming Out Loud. A remix version was included on
the Timbaland album, Shock Value and on the deluxe version of Dreaming Out
Loud. The song was the biggest radio airplay hit in the history of the Pop
Songs radio in North America, with 10,394 plays in one week, until its record
was broken by Leona Lewis's "Bleeding Love," which was also co-written by
Tedder.[1] The song was a major hit internationally, reaching number-one in 16
countries, including Australia, Austria, Germany, Italy, New Zealand, Sweden,
Turkey, and the Netherlands, as well as staying at number-one for eight
consecutive weeks on the Billboard Pop 100 chart. The song charted in the top
three on the Billboard Hot 100 and spent thirteen weeks at number-one in
Canada.[2] "Apologize" was ranked #50 on the list of the Billboard Hot 100's
All-Time Top Songs list from the chart's first 50 years. It spent 25
consecutive weeks in the top 10, the longest stay there for any song since
"Smooth," by Santana which spent 30 weeks in 1999.[3] It was also ranked #10
on the Billboard Hot 100 Songs of the Decade.[4] It remains OneRepublic's
biggest hit single in the USA to date.
So you want me to Google to find out who Rush Lim is, who "the law student"
(only one?) was, what the insult was? And when, where and how this happened,
or didn't happen, as the case may be.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
Mar 5, 2012, 6:12:56 AM3/5/12
to
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 09:49:40 GMT, "Django Cat" <nota...@address.com>
wrote:
This reports events so far:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/03/rush-limbaugh-apologizes-to-sandra-fluke_n_1318718.html
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
wrote:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/03/rush-limbaugh-apologizes-to-sandra-fluke_n_1318718.html
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
Django Cat
Mar 5, 2012, 7:48:34 AM3/5/12
to
Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 03:02:17 -0500, micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I should google more, I suppose, but I thought I would ask you.
> >
> > (I've had questions like this in other situations unrelated to
> > politics and regarding entirely different people.)
> >
> > Did Rush Limbaugh apologize to the law student for insulting her?
>
> Rush is a Canadian rock band formed in August 1968, in the Willowdale
> neighbourhood of Toronto, Ontario. The band is composed of bassist,
Spot on - that Rush owe the world an apology for some truly awful music.
> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 03:02:17 -0500, micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I should google more, I suppose, but I thought I would ask you.
> >
> > (I've had questions like this in other situations unrelated to
> > politics and regarding entirely different people.)
> >
> > Did Rush Limbaugh apologize to the law student for insulting her?
>
> Rush is a Canadian rock band formed in August 1968, in the Willowdale
> neighbourhood of Toronto, Ontario. The band is composed of bassist,
[snip of many interesting facts]
>
> So you want me to Google to find out who Rush Lim is, who "the law
> student" (only one?) was, what the insult was? And when, where and
> how this happened, or didn't happen, as the case may be.
perspective or awareness the poster is in a global forum and speaking
to anyone other than their own compatriots?
DC
--
Arcadian Rises
Mar 5, 2012, 8:21:19 AM3/5/12
to
and there are things which are the opposite of the above.
An apology may be sincere, genuine, with the obvious intent to make
amends or to alievate the damage.
Or, an apology could be perfidious, disengenious, uttered with a self-
serving intent either to do more harm, to air the apologizing one's
agenda or simply to show the world how humble is the one who
apologizes.
Jerry Friedman
Mar 5, 2012, 9:35:59 AM3/5/12
to
> > On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 03:02:17 -0500, micky <NONONOmis...@bigfoot.com>
> > wrote:
...
> > > Did Rush Limbaugh apologize to the law student for insulting her?
>
> > Rush is a Canadian rock band formed in August 1968, in the Willowdale
> > neighbourhood of Toronto, Ontario. The band is composed of bassist,
>
> Spot on - that Rush owe the world an apology for some truly awful music.
>
> [snip of many interesting facts]
Come on--where would we be without the male-soprano line "We are the
priests of the temple of Syrinx"?
But forgetting the Hall of Fame quarterback Sammy Baugh. (That's
American football.)
> > So you want me to Google to find out who Rush Lim is, who "the law
> > student" (only one?) was, what the insult was? And when, where and
> > how this happened, or didn't happen, as the case may be.
>
> Well, where is it usually when there's a total lack of international
> perspective or awareness the poster is in a global forum and speaking
> to anyone other than their own compatriots?
The U.S. or Britain.
--
Jerry Friedman
> > wrote:
...
> > > Did Rush Limbaugh apologize to the law student for insulting her?
>
> > Rush is a Canadian rock band formed in August 1968, in the Willowdale
> > neighbourhood of Toronto, Ontario. The band is composed of bassist,
>
> Spot on - that Rush owe the world an apology for some truly awful music.
>
> [snip of many interesting facts]
priests of the temple of Syrinx"?
But forgetting the Hall of Fame quarterback Sammy Baugh. (That's
American football.)
> > So you want me to Google to find out who Rush Lim is, who "the law
> > student" (only one?) was, what the insult was? And when, where and
> > how this happened, or didn't happen, as the case may be.
>
> Well, where is it usually when there's a total lack of international
> perspective or awareness the poster is in a global forum and speaking
> to anyone other than their own compatriots?
--
Jerry Friedman
MC
Mar 5, 2012, 10:00:13 AM3/5/12
to
In article <l8r8l7lstnn2i239i...@4ax.com>,
I concur... Just go to Google News or any US news site (except Fox).
You'll find the answers to almost all your questions.
--
"If you can, tell me something happy."
- Marybones
I concur... Just go to Google News or any US news site (except Fox).
You'll find the answers to almost all your questions.
--
"If you can, tell me something happy."
- Marybones
MC
Mar 5, 2012, 10:01:43 AM3/5/12
to
In article <CC25r.107233$R87....@newsfe19.ams2>,
completely unlike Jimi Hendrix. And yet he sounded just like Jimi
Hendrix.
"Django Cat" <nota...@address.com> wrote:
> > Rush is a Canadian rock band formed in August 1968, in the Willowdale
> > neighbourhood of Toronto, Ontario. The band is composed of bassist,
>
> Spot on - that Rush owe the world an apology for some truly awful music.
Mahogany Rush was another Canadian rock band. Its lead guitarist looked
> > Rush is a Canadian rock band formed in August 1968, in the Willowdale
> > neighbourhood of Toronto, Ontario. The band is composed of bassist,
>
> Spot on - that Rush owe the world an apology for some truly awful music.
completely unlike Jimi Hendrix. And yet he sounded just like Jimi
Hendrix.
Django Cat
Mar 5, 2012, 10:02:17 AM3/5/12
to
Jerry Friedman wrote:
> On Mar 5, 5:48 am, "Django Cat" <notar...@address.com> wrote:
> > Steve Hayes wrote:
> > > On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 03:02:17 -0500, micky
> > > <NONONOmis...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> ...
>
> > > > Did Rush Limbaugh apologize to the law student for insulting
> > > > her?
> >
> > > Rush is a Canadian rock band formed in August 1968, in the
> > > Willowdale neighbourhood of Toronto, Ontario. The band is
> > > composed of bassist,
> >
> > Spot on - that Rush owe the world an apology for some truly awful
> > music.
> >
> > [snip of many interesting facts]
>
> Come on--where would we be without the male-soprano line "We are the
> priests of the temple of Syrinx"?
Probably a lot happier. No apology could ever be enough for that one.
> On Mar 5, 5:48 am, "Django Cat" <notar...@address.com> wrote:
> > Steve Hayes wrote:
> > > On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 03:02:17 -0500, micky
> > > <NONONOmis...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> ...
>
> > > > Did Rush Limbaugh apologize to the law student for insulting
> > > > her?
> >
> > > Rush is a Canadian rock band formed in August 1968, in the
> > > Willowdale neighbourhood of Toronto, Ontario. The band is
> > > composed of bassist,
> >
> > Spot on - that Rush owe the world an apology for some truly awful
> > music.
> >
> > [snip of many interesting facts]
>
> Come on--where would we be without the male-soprano line "We are the
> priests of the temple of Syrinx"?
>
> But forgetting the Hall of Fame quarterback Sammy Baugh. (That's
> American football.)
mention any he made with Rush.
>
> > > So you want me to Google to find out who Rush Lim is, who "the law
> > > student" (only one?) was, what the insult was? And when, where and
> > > how this happened, or didn't happen, as the case may be.
> >
> > Well, where is it usually when there's a total lack of international
> > perspective or awareness the poster is in a global forum and
> > speaking to anyone other than their own compatriots?
>
> The U.S. or Britain.
DC
--
MC
Mar 5, 2012, 10:04:41 AM3/5/12
to
In article <ai49l71k4351evvc5...@4ax.com>,
Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> The Lim (Montenegrin and Serbian: ???, Lim, pronounced [līm]) is a river
> flowing through Montenegro, Albania, Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. 220 km
> (137 mi) long, it's the right and the longest tributary of the Drina.
And there was me thinking he was a basketball player.
> The Lim (Montenegrin and Serbian: ???, Lim, pronounced [līm]) is a river
> flowing through Montenegro, Albania, Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. 220 km
> (137 mi) long, it's the right and the longest tributary of the Drina.
tony cooper
Mar 5, 2012, 10:22:59 AM3/5/12
to
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 09:46:11 GMT, "Django Cat" <nota...@address.com>
wrote:
While I agree with everything DeGioia wrote, and abhor everything
about Limbaugh, what Limbaugh does is not debate and we should not
expect him to follow any rules of acceptability of debate protocol.
Some might expect him to show some measured and sane comments on
issues, but only if those people have never listened to him before or
know nothing about him.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
wrote:
about Limbaugh, what Limbaugh does is not debate and we should not
expect him to follow any rules of acceptability of debate protocol.
Some might expect him to show some measured and sane comments on
issues, but only if those people have never listened to him before or
know nothing about him.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Django Cat
Mar 5, 2012, 10:51:34 AM3/5/12
to
of responsibility as a broadcaster?
>
> Some might expect him to show some measured and sane comments on
> issues, but only if those people have never listened to him before or
> know nothing about him.
>
>
BBC news page reported it yesterday. I take it he's a shock jock?
DC
--
Django Cat
Mar 5, 2012, 10:53:01 AM3/5/12
to
MC wrote:
> In article <CC25r.107233$R87....@newsfe19.ams2>,
> "Django Cat" <nota...@address.com> wrote:
>
> > > Rush is a Canadian rock band formed in August 1968, in the
> > > Willowdale neighbourhood of Toronto, Ontario. The band is
> > > composed of bassist,
> >
> > Spot on - that Rush owe the world an apology for some truly awful
> > music.
>
> Mahogany Rush was another Canadian rock band. Its lead guitarist
> looked completely unlike Jimi Hendrix. And yet he sounded just like
> Jimi Hendrix.
Robin Trower - there's another one who didn't look remotely like Jimi
> In article <CC25r.107233$R87....@newsfe19.ams2>,
> "Django Cat" <nota...@address.com> wrote:
>
> > > Rush is a Canadian rock band formed in August 1968, in the
> > > Willowdale neighbourhood of Toronto, Ontario. The band is
> > > composed of bassist,
> >
> > Spot on - that Rush owe the world an apology for some truly awful
> > music.
>
> Mahogany Rush was another Canadian rock band. Its lead guitarist
> looked completely unlike Jimi Hendrix. And yet he sounded just like
> Jimi Hendrix.
Hendrix.
DC
--
MC
Mar 5, 2012, 11:10:35 AM3/5/12
to
In article <ai55r.176670$M05....@newsfe20.ams2>,
recent kerfuffle.
"Django Cat" <nota...@address.com> wrote:
> Put me in that category - the only reason I know about this is that the
> BBC news page reported it yesterday. I take it he's a shock jock?
Right wing talk show host. Huffington Post has everything about the
> Put me in that category - the only reason I know about this is that the
> BBC news page reported it yesterday. I take it he's a shock jock?
recent kerfuffle.
micky
Mar 5, 2012, 11:33:44 AM3/5/12
to
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 10:00:13 -0500, MC <cope...@mapca.inter.net>
wrote:
>In article <l8r8l7lstnn2i239i...@4ax.com>,
> micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>> I should google more,
>
>I concur... Just go to Google News or any US news site (except Fox).
>You'll find the answers to almost all your questions.
"Just" certainly doesn't apply. None of the sites I found said what he
actually said, except that "I used the wrong words".
wrote:
>In article <l8r8l7lstnn2i239i...@4ax.com>,
> micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>
>> I should google more,
>
>I concur... Just go to Google News or any US news site (except Fox).
>You'll find the answers to almost all your questions.
actually said, except that "I used the wrong words".
MC
Mar 5, 2012, 11:50:04 AM3/5/12
to
In article <olq9l7d0uojuho4rv...@4ax.com>,
Okay. I'll do your research for you, since that's what you seem to want.
I'll get back to you in about eight months. Trust that's acceptable.
I'll get back to you in about eight months. Trust that's acceptable.
Steve Hayes
Mar 5, 2012, 11:59:59 AM3/5/12
to
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:48:34 GMT, "Django Cat" <nota...@address.com> wrote:
>> So you want me to Google to find out who Rush Lim is, who "the law
>> student" (only one?) was, what the insult was? And when, where and
>> how this happened, or didn't happen, as the case may be.
>
>Well, where is it usually when there's a total lack of international
>perspective or awareness the poster is in a global forum and speaking
>to anyone other than their own compatriots?
And assuming that everyone watches the same TV shows or whatever.
>> So you want me to Google to find out who Rush Lim is, who "the law
>> student" (only one?) was, what the insult was? And when, where and
>> how this happened, or didn't happen, as the case may be.
>
>Well, where is it usually when there's a total lack of international
>perspective or awareness the poster is in a global forum and speaking
>to anyone other than their own compatriots?
I doubt that everyone even in the same country does that.
If he hadn't retired, I might have assumed that Rush was apologising for his
version of "When ze seagulls follow ze trawlair...."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Rush
Django Cat
Mar 5, 2012, 12:04:05 PM3/5/12
to
Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:48:34 GMT, "Django Cat" <nota...@address.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> So you want me to Google to find out who Rush Lim is, who "the law
> >> student" (only one?) was, what the insult was? And when, where and
> >> how this happened, or didn't happen, as the case may be.
> >
> > Well, where is it usually when there's a total lack of international
> > perspective or awareness the poster is in a global forum and
> > speaking to anyone other than their own compatriots?
>
> And assuming that everyone watches the same TV shows or whatever.
>
> I doubt that everyone even in the same country does that.
>
> If he hadn't retired, I might have assumed that Rush was apologising
> for his version of "When ze seagulls follow ze trawlair...."
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Rush
Umm, St Eric, ITYM. Or did Rush do a parody of it? That Wiki entry was
> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:48:34 GMT, "Django Cat" <nota...@address.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> So you want me to Google to find out who Rush Lim is, who "the law
> >> student" (only one?) was, what the insult was? And when, where and
> >> how this happened, or didn't happen, as the case may be.
> >
> > Well, where is it usually when there's a total lack of international
> > perspective or awareness the poster is in a global forum and
> > speaking to anyone other than their own compatriots?
>
> And assuming that everyone watches the same TV shows or whatever.
>
> I doubt that everyone even in the same country does that.
>
> If he hadn't retired, I might have assumed that Rush was apologising
> for his version of "When ze seagulls follow ze trawlair...."
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Rush
so long you could probably live Rush's life faster than read about it.
DC
--
tony cooper
Mar 5, 2012, 12:05:11 PM3/5/12
to
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 15:51:34 GMT, "Django Cat" <nota...@address.com>
He isn't, and doesn't. That's a known, so there is no expectation.
>>
>> Some might expect him to show some measured and sane comments on
>> issues, but only if those people have never listened to him before or
>> know nothing about him.
>>
>
>Put me in that category - the only reason I know about this is that the
>BBC news page reported it yesterday. I take it he's a shock jock?
He's the most popular (as far as number of devoted listeners) radio
commentator on radio. (I think he also has a television show, but I
don't know) Radio stations all over the country carry his program.
(There is no one radio station that covers all or most of the country)
His message is for what we call the right-wing or conservatives, and
they love him. He is constantly on the attack of Obama, Democrats,
and Liberals. A "moderate" is a Liberal in Limbaugh's world.
This is only his most recent offensive attack on someone. It was
slightly more offensive than his usual remarks, but only slightly.
When the bar is set at Limbaugh's level of offensiveness, it's hard to
top in offensiveness.
He's offered an apology of sorts, but only because some advertisers
have bolted. Any remorse he feels is in the pocket.
A local radio station carries Limbaugh from 12 PM to 3 PM every
weekday. They also carry Glen Beck (equally conservative and
offensive) for three hours in the morning. I don't know what other
shows they carry because no dial in this house or in our cars is set
to that station.
>>
>> Some might expect him to show some measured and sane comments on
>> issues, but only if those people have never listened to him before or
>> know nothing about him.
>>
>
>Put me in that category - the only reason I know about this is that the
>BBC news page reported it yesterday. I take it he's a shock jock?
commentator on radio. (I think he also has a television show, but I
don't know) Radio stations all over the country carry his program.
(There is no one radio station that covers all or most of the country)
His message is for what we call the right-wing or conservatives, and
they love him. He is constantly on the attack of Obama, Democrats,
and Liberals. A "moderate" is a Liberal in Limbaugh's world.
This is only his most recent offensive attack on someone. It was
slightly more offensive than his usual remarks, but only slightly.
When the bar is set at Limbaugh's level of offensiveness, it's hard to
top in offensiveness.
He's offered an apology of sorts, but only because some advertisers
have bolted. Any remorse he feels is in the pocket.
A local radio station carries Limbaugh from 12 PM to 3 PM every
weekday. They also carry Glen Beck (equally conservative and
offensive) for three hours in the morning. I don't know what other
shows they carry because no dial in this house or in our cars is set
to that station.
Django Cat
Mar 5, 2012, 12:07:39 PM3/5/12
to
own words. Or are you looking for what he originally said about Ms
Fluke? That's here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17248737
DC
--
Django Cat
Mar 5, 2012, 12:14:41 PM3/5/12
to
about over here. Are there not any liberal/moderate ones - or is the
guy in Doonesbury the one and only example?
DC
--
Steve Hayes
Mar 5, 2012, 12:39:00 PM3/5/12
to
If Rush were still playing I would have thought he had done something similar
to Eric. Or Suarez.
Has Suarez apologised yet, I wonder?
micky
Mar 5, 2012, 12:33:41 PM3/5/12
to
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 09:49:40 GMT, "Django Cat" <nota...@address.com>
wrote:
Oh, thanks a lot.
"For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity,
three hours a day, five days a week. In this instance, I chose the
wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal
attack on Ms. Fluke.
....
My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be
humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms.
Fluke for the insulting word choices."
He sounds stupid, or lying, (He had to know it was a personal attack,
and he didn't say it for humor, unless he's really perverted**.) but
he does meet the minimum leval of an apology. So I don't have to
write all the networks, or look for their email addresses. .
He has not apologized *to her* however, which is what a decent person
would do. But then again, he's not a decent person.
**Oh yeah, wanting to watch movies of someone else having sex, which
is what he said he wanted from the law student, is perverted by
traditional standards, which I thought he claimed to represent.
Thanks Peter, I'm glad to see that some (maybe all?) of his sponsors
aren't going back. In Baltimore several years ago he was cancelled
on the biggest AM radio station and sought refuge on a smaller one.
wrote:
"For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity,
three hours a day, five days a week. In this instance, I chose the
wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal
attack on Ms. Fluke.
....
My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be
humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms.
Fluke for the insulting word choices."
He sounds stupid, or lying, (He had to know it was a personal attack,
and he didn't say it for humor, unless he's really perverted**.) but
he does meet the minimum leval of an apology. So I don't have to
write all the networks, or look for their email addresses. .
He has not apologized *to her* however, which is what a decent person
would do. But then again, he's not a decent person.
**Oh yeah, wanting to watch movies of someone else having sex, which
is what he said he wanted from the law student, is perverted by
traditional standards, which I thought he claimed to represent.
Thanks Peter, I'm glad to see that some (maybe all?) of his sponsors
aren't going back. In Baltimore several years ago he was cancelled
on the biggest AM radio station and sought refuge on a smaller one.
micky
Mar 5, 2012, 12:36:14 PM3/5/12
to
Snidely
Mar 5, 2012, 12:54:58 PM3/5/12
to
Django Cat scribbled something on Monday the 3/5/2012:
Los Angeles has one "Liberal" talk station (KTLK) (it also carries
games of the LA Kings hockey team), and Reagan fils is one of the
talkers. This station was rolled out as part of a nationwide "network"
(but more like a syndication brand, I think), which has lost a few
stations since the introduction, and didn't peak at anywhere near
Rush's numbers.
/dps
--
Who, me?
games of the LA Kings hockey team), and Reagan fils is one of the
talkers. This station was rolled out as part of a nationwide "network"
(but more like a syndication brand, I think), which has lost a few
stations since the introduction, and didn't peak at anywhere near
Rush's numbers.
/dps
--
Who, me?
Snidely
Mar 5, 2012, 12:57:04 PM3/5/12
to
Snidely laid this down on his screen :
There is also Pacifica Radio, which is kind of like NPR except from a
Liberal Religious perspective -- non-commercial, news programs,
perspective programs, and talk programs.
/dps
--
Who, me?
Liberal Religious perspective -- non-commercial, news programs,
perspective programs, and talk programs.
/dps
--
Who, me?
Django Cat
Mar 5, 2012, 1:07:40 PM3/5/12
to
refusing to shake hands with the other guy.
DC
--
tony cooper
Mar 5, 2012, 2:26:49 PM3/5/12
to
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 17:14:41 GMT, "Django Cat" <nota...@address.com>
That depends on the market. By "market", I mean the area that the
radio station serves. There are no liberal/moderate commentators
carried in this market area, but Neal Boortz's show out of Atlanta is
carried by one station. Boortz calls himself a Libertarian, but his
usual commentary pushes the needle into "right wing" more often than
not.
In case you don't understand, radio is a local thing here. While the
signal may reach outlying areas, radio stations really just cover one
town unless there is more than one town in a small geographic area.
I haven't counted, but there are maybe 20 radio stations (AM and FM)
in this area (not counting the religious and Spanish-language
stations). Some stations are all-music, some all-news, some
all-sports, some all-talk radio, and some a mix of the above.
Of these 20, only a few are primarily local programming. Most
subscribe to syndicated programs (like Limbaugh), so all I would hear
here in Orlando is the syndicated show carried by a local station.
A station can be the most popular (most listeners) in an area without
carrying the most popular (most listeners) syndicated show. Limbaugh
has the largest radio audience because his program is carried by so
many different stations around the country. The station here that
carries his show is not the most listened to station.
In addition to regular radio broadcasting, there is satellite
broadcasting received by paid subscription. We subscribe to Sirius
radio, but only receive it on my wife's car's radio. There are
liberal and moderate commentators on Sirius radio, but I don't know
who they are since I rarely drive her car. In my car, I listen only
to the NPR public broadcasting station or to a local sports-only
radio station serves. There are no liberal/moderate commentators
carried in this market area, but Neal Boortz's show out of Atlanta is
carried by one station. Boortz calls himself a Libertarian, but his
usual commentary pushes the needle into "right wing" more often than
not.
In case you don't understand, radio is a local thing here. While the
signal may reach outlying areas, radio stations really just cover one
town unless there is more than one town in a small geographic area.
I haven't counted, but there are maybe 20 radio stations (AM and FM)
in this area (not counting the religious and Spanish-language
stations). Some stations are all-music, some all-news, some
all-sports, some all-talk radio, and some a mix of the above.
Of these 20, only a few are primarily local programming. Most
subscribe to syndicated programs (like Limbaugh), so all I would hear
here in Orlando is the syndicated show carried by a local station.
A station can be the most popular (most listeners) in an area without
carrying the most popular (most listeners) syndicated show. Limbaugh
has the largest radio audience because his program is carried by so
many different stations around the country. The station here that
carries his show is not the most listened to station.
In addition to regular radio broadcasting, there is satellite
broadcasting received by paid subscription. We subscribe to Sirius
radio, but only receive it on my wife's car's radio. There are
liberal and moderate commentators on Sirius radio, but I don't know
who they are since I rarely drive her car. In my car, I listen only
to the NPR public broadcasting station or to a local sports-only
tony cooper
Mar 5, 2012, 2:28:23 PM3/5/12
to
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 09:54:58 -0800, Snidely <snide...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>Los Angeles has one "Liberal" talk station (KTLK) (it also carries
>games of the LA Kings hockey team), and Reagan fils is one of the
>talkers. This station was rolled out as part of a nationwide "network"
>(but more like a syndication brand, I think), which has lost a few
>stations since the introduction, and didn't peak at anywhere near
>Rush's numbers.
Air America? That was never carried here, but I think it was carried
by some Miami station. I think it's carried on Sirius (subscription
satellite).
wrote:
>Los Angeles has one "Liberal" talk station (KTLK) (it also carries
>games of the LA Kings hockey team), and Reagan fils is one of the
>talkers. This station was rolled out as part of a nationwide "network"
>(but more like a syndication brand, I think), which has lost a few
>stations since the introduction, and didn't peak at anywhere near
>Rush's numbers.
by some Miami station. I think it's carried on Sirius (subscription
satellite).
Arcadian Rises
Mar 5, 2012, 2:34:19 PM3/5/12
to
But then I started to listen to RL more carefully and now even the sound of his voice makes me nauseous...
Rich Ulrich
Mar 5, 2012, 3:55:29 PM3/5/12
to
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:33:41 -0500, micky <NONONO...@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
What seems to be missing - from almost all reports - is any
acknowledgment of what Ms. Fluke actually spoke about.
Does the point need further emphasis, that -- the only words
interesting to those grumpy old men ... are words from men?
MSNBC has covered them. Talkers yesterday at CNN still
seemed oblivious.
Her main argument was that these hormones are important
for treating a number of dire conditions; and that the non-
provision policies already in existence have the terrible result
of *effectively* removing the drugs from the insurance
coverage list, regardless of prescribed need.
Limbaugh, it seems to me, could not have watched more
than the first 3 minutes of the 11 minutes of her testimony.
His comments seem (to me) to assume that he heard the
words "college student" and proceded to generate his 3 days
of bile from that assumption that this was a 20-year-old coed,
and not a 30-year-old law student who had constructed a
careful case. (I do like the somewhat-implicit argument she
makes along the way, that birth control should be available
as a natural right. But that was not the legal argument
most pertinent to the bill.)
His "apology" continues to assume that her argument was
for BC pills for BC, and nothing more. One contributor on an
MSNBC show put it something like, "I was always taught, it's
not an apology if it continues to lie." The spokesman from
her school is one of the few other commentators (not MSNBC)
to have noticed the Rush fundamentally "misrepresented" her.
Oh - Either as pretended ignorance or as the real thing,
Limbaugh talked about birth control pills as if they followed
the Viagra model -- the more sex you plan on, the more
pills you need. I was inclined at first to take it as "pretended"
ignorance. But now I am impressed by all the other, real
ignorance that is broadcast by the grumpy old men, so I
figure it is likely to be real, even though that is an awfully
deep hole of ignorance.
>
>He has not apologized *to her* however, which is what a decent person
>would do. But then again, he's not a decent person.
That's what I gather.
>
>
>**Oh yeah, wanting to watch movies of someone else having sex, which
>is what he said he wanted from the law student, is perverted by
>traditional standards, which I thought he claimed to represent.
>
>Thanks Peter, I'm glad to see that some (maybe all?) of his sponsors
>aren't going back. In Baltimore several years ago he was cancelled
>on the biggest AM radio station and sought refuge on a smaller one.
--
Rich Ulrich
wrote:
acknowledgment of what Ms. Fluke actually spoke about.
Does the point need further emphasis, that -- the only words
interesting to those grumpy old men ... are words from men?
MSNBC has covered them. Talkers yesterday at CNN still
seemed oblivious.
Her main argument was that these hormones are important
for treating a number of dire conditions; and that the non-
provision policies already in existence have the terrible result
of *effectively* removing the drugs from the insurance
coverage list, regardless of prescribed need.
Limbaugh, it seems to me, could not have watched more
than the first 3 minutes of the 11 minutes of her testimony.
His comments seem (to me) to assume that he heard the
words "college student" and proceded to generate his 3 days
of bile from that assumption that this was a 20-year-old coed,
and not a 30-year-old law student who had constructed a
careful case. (I do like the somewhat-implicit argument she
makes along the way, that birth control should be available
as a natural right. But that was not the legal argument
most pertinent to the bill.)
His "apology" continues to assume that her argument was
for BC pills for BC, and nothing more. One contributor on an
MSNBC show put it something like, "I was always taught, it's
not an apology if it continues to lie." The spokesman from
her school is one of the few other commentators (not MSNBC)
to have noticed the Rush fundamentally "misrepresented" her.
Oh - Either as pretended ignorance or as the real thing,
Limbaugh talked about birth control pills as if they followed
the Viagra model -- the more sex you plan on, the more
pills you need. I was inclined at first to take it as "pretended"
ignorance. But now I am impressed by all the other, real
ignorance that is broadcast by the grumpy old men, so I
figure it is likely to be real, even though that is an awfully
deep hole of ignorance.
>
>He has not apologized *to her* however, which is what a decent person
>would do. But then again, he's not a decent person.
>
>
>**Oh yeah, wanting to watch movies of someone else having sex, which
>is what he said he wanted from the law student, is perverted by
>traditional standards, which I thought he claimed to represent.
>
>Thanks Peter, I'm glad to see that some (maybe all?) of his sponsors
>aren't going back. In Baltimore several years ago he was cancelled
>on the biggest AM radio station and sought refuge on a smaller one.
Rich Ulrich
R H Draney
Mar 5, 2012, 6:49:14 PM3/5/12
to
Rich Ulrich filted:
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
>
>Oh - Either as pretended ignorance or as the real thing,
>Limbaugh talked about birth control pills as if they followed
>the Viagra model -- the more sex you plan on, the more
>pills you need. I was inclined at first to take it as "pretended"
>ignorance. But now I am impressed by all the other, real
>ignorance that is broadcast by the grumpy old men, so I
>figure it is likely to be real, even though that is an awfully
>deep hole of ignorance.
I disagree...if anyone is well informed about prescription drugs, it's Rush....r
>Oh - Either as pretended ignorance or as the real thing,
>Limbaugh talked about birth control pills as if they followed
>the Viagra model -- the more sex you plan on, the more
>pills you need. I was inclined at first to take it as "pretended"
>ignorance. But now I am impressed by all the other, real
>ignorance that is broadcast by the grumpy old men, so I
>figure it is likely to be real, even though that is an awfully
>deep hole of ignorance.
--
Me? Sarcastic?
Yeah, right.
Jerry Friedman
Mar 5, 2012, 7:12:52 PM3/5/12
to
On Mar 5, 2:46 am, "Django Cat" <notar...@address.com> wrote:
> micky wrote:
...
> > Last and less important: AFAIK, he didn't write to her or call her
> > directly, he only said something to a reporter maybe. Even if it were
> > phrased as an apology, would it be an apology "to her" if he made no
> > effort to send it to her?
>
> Dunno. I don't usually take an interest in US internal politics, but he
> sounds a complete shit.
Would that more Americans were as astute as you are.
By the way, according to report, this isn't the first time Limbaugh
has accused a woman of promiscuity with no apparent knowledge or
relevance.
http://books.google.com/books?id=hDPVu_HzgWwC&pg=PA72&lpg=PA72
(For all I know, it might be only the second time.)
> What I did think was terrific was the
> Georgetown President's rational, measured and sane response, and his
> defence of free debate and showing respect for those whose views differ
> from your own:
>
> http://www.georgetown.edu/message-civility-public-discourse.html
My college is looking for a president. Do you suppose DiGioia would
take a three-fold pay cut? Maybe his writer would. (Wait, what
happened to civility?)
--
Jerry Friedman
> micky wrote:
...
> > Last and less important: AFAIK, he didn't write to her or call her
> > directly, he only said something to a reporter maybe. Even if it were
> > phrased as an apology, would it be an apology "to her" if he made no
> > effort to send it to her?
>
> Dunno. I don't usually take an interest in US internal politics, but he
> sounds a complete shit.
By the way, according to report, this isn't the first time Limbaugh
has accused a woman of promiscuity with no apparent knowledge or
relevance.
http://books.google.com/books?id=hDPVu_HzgWwC&pg=PA72&lpg=PA72
(For all I know, it might be only the second time.)
> What I did think was terrific was the
> Georgetown President's rational, measured and sane response, and his
> defence of free debate and showing respect for those whose views differ
> from your own:
>
> http://www.georgetown.edu/message-civility-public-discourse.html
take a three-fold pay cut? Maybe his writer would. (Wait, what
happened to civility?)
--
Jerry Friedman
Jerry Friedman
Mar 5, 2012, 7:30:10 PM3/5/12
to
On Mar 5, 10:33 am, micky <NONONOmis...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 09:49:40 GMT, "Django Cat" <notar...@address.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >micky wrote:
...
Well, I don't know if that's at the minimum level. He apologized for
his word choices, suggesting that he now thinks he should have said
"promiscuous woman" and "sex worker" instead of "slut" and
"prostitute". He didn't apologize for insulting her.
--
Jerry Friedman
> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 09:49:40 GMT, "Django Cat" <notar...@address.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >micky wrote:
Well, I don't know if that's at the minimum level. He apologized for
his word choices, suggesting that he now thinks he should have said
"promiscuous woman" and "sex worker" instead of "slut" and
"prostitute". He didn't apologize for insulting her.
--
Jerry Friedman
erilar
Mar 5, 2012, 7:55:16 PM3/5/12
to
In article <jj3jd...@drn.newsguy.com>,
--
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist
> .if anyone is well informed about prescription drugs, it's Rush....r
but only about his own drugs of choice. . .
--
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist
R H Draney
Mar 5, 2012, 8:28:08 PM3/5/12
to
erilar filted:
>
>In article <jj3jd...@drn.newsguy.com>,
> R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>> .if anyone is well informed about prescription drugs, it's Rush....r
>
>but only about his own drugs of choice. . .
One of which is Viagra, so at least we're in the ballpark....r
>In article <jj3jd...@drn.newsguy.com>,
> R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>> .if anyone is well informed about prescription drugs, it's Rush....r
>
>but only about his own drugs of choice. . .
Sara Lorimer
Mar 5, 2012, 9:29:51 PM3/5/12
to
R H Draney wrote:
> micky filted:
> >
> >AFAI heard, he never used the words "I apologize" or "I'm sorry" or
> >even "I regret". How can it be an apology without one of them or
> >something very similar?
>
> Even using any or all of those phrases doesn't necessarily make it an
> apology...I'm getting a little tired of "apologies" that boil down to "I'm
> sorry if anyone was offended"....r
I'm sorry you feel that way.
> micky filted:
> >
> >AFAI heard, he never used the words "I apologize" or "I'm sorry" or
> >even "I regret". How can it be an apology without one of them or
> >something very similar?
>
> Even using any or all of those phrases doesn't necessarily make it an
> apology...I'm getting a little tired of "apologies" that boil down to "I'm
> sorry if anyone was offended"....r
--
SML
Seattle-ish
Stan Brown
Mar 5, 2012, 10:18:43 PM3/5/12
to
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 03:02:17 -0500, micky wrote:
> I should google more, I suppose, but I thought I would ask you.
>
> (I've had questions like this in other situations unrelated to
> politics and regarding entirely different people.)
>
> Did Rush Limbaugh apologize to the law student for insulting her?
I happened to catch a news clip today in which Ron Paul said that
> I should google more, I suppose, but I thought I would ask you.
>
> (I've had questions like this in other situations unrelated to
> politics and regarding entirely different people.)
>
> Did Rush Limbaugh apologize to the law student for insulting her?
Limbaugh did not apologize. The clip I saw of Limbaugh himself had
him saying he had used poor word choice in an attempt to be humorous,
but there was no hint of anything I would call an apology, not even
something as mild as "regret".
--
"The difference between the /almost right/ word and the /right/ word
is ... the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning."
--Mark Twain
Stan Brown, Tompkins County, NY, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com
Stan Brown
Mar 5, 2012, 10:21:18 PM3/5/12
to
On 5 Mar 2012 01:19:39 -0800, R H Draney wrote:
> Even using any or all of those phrases doesn't necessarily make it
> an apology...I'm getting a little tired of "apologies" that boil
> down to "I'm sorry if anyone was offended"....r
Me too. That's right down there with "we apologize for any
> Even using any or all of those phrases doesn't necessarily make it
> an apology...I'm getting a little tired of "apologies" that boil
> down to "I'm sorry if anyone was offended"....r
inconvenience":, as though being stuck in the airport for an
unscheduled hours might possibly be a welcome diversion for some,
rather than an inconvenience for everyone.
But "I'm sorry if anyone was offended" has at least the ring of
truth. People who say that aren't sorry they have caused offense;
they're sorry they've been called on it.
Peter Brooks
Mar 5, 2012, 11:46:21 PM3/5/12
to
On Mar 6, 2:12 am, Jerry Friedman <jerry_fried...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 5, 2:46 am, "Django Cat" <notar...@address.com> wrote:> micky wrote:
>
>
> > Dunno. I don't usually take an interest in US internal politics, but he
> > sounds a complete shit.
>
> Would that more Americans were as astute as you are.
>
I thought that they were. Isn't being a complete shit the absolutely
> On Mar 5, 2:46 am, "Django Cat" <notar...@address.com> wrote:> micky wrote:
>
>
> > Dunno. I don't usually take an interest in US internal politics, but he
> > sounds a complete shit.
>
> Would that more Americans were as astute as you are.
>
minimum sine qua non of being in public life over there?
Peter Brooks
Mar 5, 2012, 11:47:51 PM3/5/12
to
On Mar 6, 5:21 am, Stan Brown <the_stan_br...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>
> Me too. That's right down there with "we apologize for any
> inconvenience":, as though being stuck in the airport for an
> unscheduled hours might possibly be a welcome diversion for some,
> rather than an inconvenience for everyone.
>
It is an annoying presumption, I agree.
>
>
> Me too. That's right down there with "we apologize for any
> inconvenience":, as though being stuck in the airport for an
> unscheduled hours might possibly be a welcome diversion for some,
> rather than an inconvenience for everyone.
>
tony cooper
Mar 5, 2012, 11:48:03 PM3/5/12
to
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 15:55:29 -0500, Rich Ulrich
<rich....@comcast.net> wrote:
>Limbaugh, it seems to me, could not have watched more
>than the first 3 minutes of the 11 minutes of her testimony.
>His comments seem (to me) to assume that he heard the
>words "college student" and proceded to generate his 3 days
>of bile from that assumption that this was a 20-year-old coed,
>and not a 30-year-old law student who had constructed a
>careful case. (I do like the somewhat-implicit argument she
>makes along the way, that birth control should be available
>as a natural right. But that was not the legal argument
>most pertinent to the bill.)
The issue is not about the availability of contraceptive
<rich....@comcast.net> wrote:
>Limbaugh, it seems to me, could not have watched more
>than the first 3 minutes of the 11 minutes of her testimony.
>His comments seem (to me) to assume that he heard the
>words "college student" and proceded to generate his 3 days
>of bile from that assumption that this was a 20-year-old coed,
>and not a 30-year-old law student who had constructed a
>careful case. (I do like the somewhat-implicit argument she
>makes along the way, that birth control should be available
>as a natural right. But that was not the legal argument
>most pertinent to the bill.)
pills/devices, but about insurance companies treating contraceptive
pills/devices as a covered expense. There is nothing in the Obama
plan that makes them more or less available, nor are the opponents of
the plan trying to make the pills/devices less available.
What seems ludicrous to me about the Catholic church's opposition is
that any woman who would obtain coverage for contraceptive
pills/devices has *already* decided to disregard Catholic teaching.
She's made that decision, and no woman would make that decision just
because the pills/devices would be a covered expense.
Steve Hayes
Mar 5, 2012, 11:59:23 PM3/5/12
to
>What seems to be missing - from almost all reports - is any
>acknowledgment of what Ms. Fluke actually spoke about.
I suppose that having a name might make it easier to Google to try to discover
>acknowledgment of what Ms. Fluke actually spoke about.
what this thread is about.
Peter Brooks
Mar 5, 2012, 11:44:57 PM3/5/12
to
On Mar 6, 1:49 am, R H Draney <dadoc...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>
> I disagree...if anyone is well informed about prescription drugs, it's Rush....r
>
I find myself vaguely aware that the fellow exists, but, with a name
>
>
> I disagree...if anyone is well informed about prescription drugs, it's Rush....r
>
like that, how could he not know about drugs?
tony cooper
Mar 6, 2012, 12:04:00 AM3/6/12
to
off the hook completely.
tony cooper
Mar 6, 2012, 12:59:51 AM3/6/12
to
On Tue, 06 Mar 2012 06:59:23 +0200, Steve Hayes
<haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 15:55:29 -0500, Rich Ulrich <rich....@comcast.net>
>wrote:
>
>>What seems to be missing - from almost all reports - is any
>>acknowledgment of what Ms. Fluke actually spoke about.
>
>I suppose that having a name might make it easier to Google to try to discover
>what this thread is about.
You think? Rush got her name wrong. Her first name is Sandra, but
<haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 15:55:29 -0500, Rich Ulrich <rich....@comcast.net>
>wrote:
>
>>What seems to be missing - from almost all reports - is any
>>acknowledgment of what Ms. Fluke actually spoke about.
>
>I suppose that having a name might make it easier to Google to try to discover
>what this thread is about.
Rush called her Sarah.
micky
Mar 6, 2012, 2:49:48 AM3/6/12
to
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 15:55:29 -0500, Rich Ulrich
all she had said, and when I saw his apology, I ignored the crap in
between the first 2 lines and last 2 lines. Truly ignored them, I
didnt' even read them because I knew they would annoy me. So I didn't
take issue with them.
> The spokesman from
>her school is one of the few other commentators (not MSNBC)
>to have noticed the Rush fundamentally "misrepresented" her.
>
>Oh - Either as pretended ignorance or as the real thing,
>Limbaugh talked about birth control pills as if they followed
>the Viagra model -- the more sex you plan on, the more
>pills you need.
or impotent and none need to use birth control. (Either that or he's
afraid he'll give brith to a prostitutional slut. )
> I was inclined at first to take it as "pretended"
>ignorance. But now I am impressed by all the other, real
>ignorance that is broadcast by the grumpy old men, so I
>figure it is likely to be real, even though that is an awfully
>deep hole of ignorance.
>
>>
>>He has not apologized *to her* however, which is what a decent person
>>would do. But then again, he's not a decent person.
>
>That's what I gather.
detials of how he tried. He may have folded his letter into a paper
airplane and tossed it across the room in her direction.
R H Draney
Mar 6, 2012, 3:41:41 AM3/6/12
to
Stan Brown filted:
dropped 432 sex-crime cases without bothering to investigate them, he issued a
statement that said (direct quote): "If there were any victims, I apologize to
those victims"....r
>
>But "I'm sorry if anyone was offended" has at least the ring of
>truth. People who say that aren't sorry they have caused offense;
>they're sorry they've been called on it.
That "if" is what's got people mad at Sheriff Joe Arpaio...after his department
>But "I'm sorry if anyone was offended" has at least the ring of
>truth. People who say that aren't sorry they have caused offense;
>they're sorry they've been called on it.
dropped 432 sex-crime cases without bothering to investigate them, he issued a
statement that said (direct quote): "If there were any victims, I apologize to
those victims"....r
Django Cat
Mar 6, 2012, 4:27:20 AM3/6/12
to
Jerry Friedman wrote:
> On Mar 5, 2:46 am, "Django Cat" <notar...@address.com> wrote:
> > micky wrote:
> ...
>
> > > Last and less important: AFAIK, he didn't write to her or call
> > > her directly, he only said something to a reporter maybe. Even
> > > if it were phrased as an apology, would it be an apology "to her"
> > > if he made no effort to send it to her?
> >
> > Dunno. I don't usually take an interest in US internal politics,
> > but he sounds a complete shit.
>
> Would that more Americans were as astute as you are.
Aw, shucks...
> On Mar 5, 2:46 am, "Django Cat" <notar...@address.com> wrote:
> > micky wrote:
> ...
>
> > > Last and less important: AFAIK, he didn't write to her or call
> > > her directly, he only said something to a reporter maybe. Even
> > > if it were phrased as an apology, would it be an apology "to her"
> > > if he made no effort to send it to her?
> >
> > Dunno. I don't usually take an interest in US internal politics,
> > but he sounds a complete shit.
>
> Would that more Americans were as astute as you are.
>
> By the way, according to report, this isn't the first time Limbaugh
> has accused a woman of promiscuity with no apparent knowledge or
> relevance.
>
> http://books.google.com/books?id=hDPVu_HzgWwC&pg=PA72&lpg=PA72
>
> (For all I know, it might be only the second time.)
>
> > What I did think was terrific was the
> > Georgetown President's rational, measured and sane response, and his
> > defence of free debate and showing respect for those whose views
> > differ from your own:
> >
> > http://www.georgetown.edu/message-civility-public-discourse.html
>
> My college is looking for a president. Do you suppose DiGioia would
> take a three-fold pay cut? Maybe his writer would.
DC
--
Django Cat
Mar 6, 2012, 4:30:50 AM3/6/12
to
Stan Brown wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 03:02:17 -0500, micky wrote:
> > I should google more, I suppose, but I thought I would ask you.
> >
> > (I've had questions like this in other situations unrelated to
> > politics and regarding entirely different people.)
> >
> > Did Rush Limbaugh apologize to the law student for insulting her?
>
> I happened to catch a news clip today in which Ron Paul said that
> Limbaugh did not apologize. The clip I saw of Limbaugh himself had
> him saying he had used poor word choice in an attempt to be humorous,
> but there was no hint of anything I would call an apology, not even
> something as mild as "regret".
What would be a better word choice? Is there a more measured or polite
> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 03:02:17 -0500, micky wrote:
> > I should google more, I suppose, but I thought I would ask you.
> >
> > (I've had questions like this in other situations unrelated to
> > politics and regarding entirely different people.)
> >
> > Did Rush Limbaugh apologize to the law student for insulting her?
>
> I happened to catch a news clip today in which Ron Paul said that
> Limbaugh did not apologize. The clip I saw of Limbaugh himself had
> him saying he had used poor word choice in an attempt to be humorous,
> but there was no hint of anything I would call an apology, not even
> something as mild as "regret".
way to decribe someone as a prostitute?
DC
--
Django Cat
Mar 6, 2012, 6:11:59 AM3/6/12
to
Jerry Friedman wrote:
> >
> > He sounds stupid, or lying, (He had to know it was a personal
> > attack, and he didn't say it for humor, unless he's really
> > perverted**.) but he does meet the minimum leval of an apology.
> > So I don't have to write all the networks, or look for their email
> > addresses. .
> ...
>
> Well, I don't know if that's at the minimum level. He apologized for
> his word choices, suggesting that he now thinks he should have said
> "promiscuous woman" and "sex worker" instead of "slut" and
> "prostitute". He didn't apologize for insulting her.
Oh that's just taking the piss, and getting a quick one in on political
> >
> > He sounds stupid, or lying, (He had to know it was a personal
> > attack, and he didn't say it for humor, unless he's really
> > perverted**.) but he does meet the minimum leval of an apology.
> > So I don't have to write all the networks, or look for their email
> > addresses. .
> ...
>
> Well, I don't know if that's at the minimum level. He apologized for
> his word choices, suggesting that he now thinks he should have said
> "promiscuous woman" and "sex worker" instead of "slut" and
> "prostitute". He didn't apologize for insulting her.
correctness at the same time...
DC
--
Django Cat
Mar 6, 2012, 6:13:42 AM3/6/12
to
Stan Brown wrote:
> On 5 Mar 2012 01:19:39 -0800, R H Draney wrote:
> > Even using any or all of those phrases doesn't necessarily make it
> > an apology...I'm getting a little tired of "apologies" that boil
> > down to "I'm sorry if anyone was offended"....r
>
> Me too. That's right down there with "we apologize for any
> inconvenience":, as though being stuck in the airport for an
> unscheduled hours might possibly be a welcome diversion for some,
> rather than an inconvenience for everyone.
Please don't get me started on "we apologise for any
> On 5 Mar 2012 01:19:39 -0800, R H Draney wrote:
> > Even using any or all of those phrases doesn't necessarily make it
> > an apology...I'm getting a little tired of "apologies" that boil
> > down to "I'm sorry if anyone was offended"....r
>
> Me too. That's right down there with "we apologize for any
> inconvenience":, as though being stuck in the airport for an
> unscheduled hours might possibly be a welcome diversion for some,
> rather than an inconvenience for everyone.
inconvenience this might cause to your journey".
DC
--
Django Cat
Mar 6, 2012, 6:19:55 AM3/6/12
to
anyway...)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17248737
DC
--
Django Cat
Mar 6, 2012, 6:23:10 AM3/6/12
to
I'm sure in this country she could take him to court for defamation.
She is, after all, a law student.
DC
--
erilar
Mar 6, 2012, 12:50:34 PM3/6/12
to
In article
<66848605-4c7b-47a3...@s7g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
I've heard he does. Unfortunately, he gets covered on actual news shows.
--
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist
<66848605-4c7b-47a3...@s7g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
--
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist
Jerry Friedman
Mar 6, 2012, 12:56:30 PM3/6/12
to
> > On Mar 5, 5:48 am, "Django Cat" <notar...@address.com> wrote:
...
> > > Well, where is it usually when there's a total lack of international
> > > perspective or awareness the poster is in a global forum and
> > > speaking to anyone other than their own compatriots?
>
> > The U.S. or Britain.
>
> Good call.
Thank you, but I think it would have been better as "the U.S. or the
U.K." or "America or Britain".
--
Jerry Friedman
...
> > > Well, where is it usually when there's a total lack of international
> > > perspective or awareness the poster is in a global forum and
> > > speaking to anyone other than their own compatriots?
>
> > The U.S. or Britain.
>
> Good call.
Thank you, but I think it would have been better as "the U.S. or the
U.K." or "America or Britain".
--
Jerry Friedman
Mark Brader
Mar 6, 2012, 4:35:33 PM3/6/12
to
Steve Hayes:
>> So you want me to Google to find out who Rush Lim is, who "the law
>> student" (only one?) was, what the insult was? And when, where and
>> how this happened, or didn't happen, as the case may be.
"Viv":
In this case, apparently South Africa. I mean, Steve is the one
complaining about not having been aware of the event, right?
--
Mark Brader There are people on that train!
Toronto Sure, they're Canadians, but they're still people!
m...@vex.net -- Paul Gross, "Due South"
>> So you want me to Google to find out who Rush Lim is, who "the law
>> student" (only one?) was, what the insult was? And when, where and
>> how this happened, or didn't happen, as the case may be.
"Viv":
> Well, where is it usually when there's a total lack of international
> perspective or awareness ...
In this case, apparently South Africa. I mean, Steve is the one
complaining about not having been aware of the event, right?
--
Mark Brader There are people on that train!
Toronto Sure, they're Canadians, but they're still people!
m...@vex.net -- Paul Gross, "Due South"
Peter Brooks
Mar 6, 2012, 7:43:55 PM3/6/12
to
On Mar 6, 11:35 pm, m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) wrote:
> Steve Hayes:
>
> >> So you want me to Google to find out who Rush Lim is, who "the law
> >> student" (only one?) was, what the insult was? And when, where and
> >> how this happened, or didn't happen, as the case may be.
>
> "Viv":
>
> > Well, where is it usually when there's a total lack of international
> > perspective or awareness ...
>
> In this case, apparently South Africa. I mean, Steve is the one
> complaining about not having been aware of the event, right?
>
It'd be unusual for anybody to be interested in, or know about, such a
> Steve Hayes:
>
> >> So you want me to Google to find out who Rush Lim is, who "the law
> >> student" (only one?) was, what the insult was? And when, where and
> >> how this happened, or didn't happen, as the case may be.
>
> "Viv":
>
> > Well, where is it usually when there's a total lack of international
> > perspective or awareness ...
>
> In this case, apparently South Africa. I mean, Steve is the one
> complaining about not having been aware of the event, right?
>
minor detail of foreign local politics.
Stan Brown
Mar 6, 2012, 9:18:23 PM3/6/12
to
Steve Hayes
Mar 7, 2012, 12:40:49 AM3/7/12
to
information on the event. There's lots of comment *about* the event, but
nothing that tells you what the event actually was.
Likewise, there's notrhing in what the OP said, or in any of the subsequent
posts that tells tyou what the event actually *was*.
I gather that this Rush is a TV or radio talk show host who habitually insults
peopl;e who appear on his show, and that the latest insultee was a Miss Fluke,
but what the nature of the insult was, and what kind of apology was expected
or given or not given I have no idea.
The OP owes an apology for not saying what the event was in the first place,
instead of assuming that everyone watched this Rush Lim, Limbaugh, Limburger
or Limborg's show, and knew who had been insulted, how, and when.
And can anyone tell me if Suarez apologised?
Steve Hayes
Mar 7, 2012, 12:41:14 AM3/7/12
to
On Tue, 06 Mar 2012 15:35:33 -0600, m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) wrote:
>Steve Hayes:
>>> So you want me to Google to find out who Rush Lim is, who "the law
>>> student" (only one?) was, what the insult was? And when, where and
>>> how this happened, or didn't happen, as the case may be.
>
>"Viv":
>> Well, where is it usually when there's a total lack of international
>> perspective or awareness ...
>
>In this case, apparently South Africa. I mean, Steve is the one
>complaining about not having been aware of the event, right?
Did Suarez apologise?
>Steve Hayes:
>>> So you want me to Google to find out who Rush Lim is, who "the law
>>> student" (only one?) was, what the insult was? And when, where and
>>> how this happened, or didn't happen, as the case may be.
>
>"Viv":
>> Well, where is it usually when there's a total lack of international
>> perspective or awareness ...
>
>In this case, apparently South Africa. I mean, Steve is the one
>complaining about not having been aware of the event, right?
Rich Ulrich
Mar 7, 2012, 2:17:15 AM3/7/12
to
On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 07:40:49 +0200, Steve Hayes
<haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 6 Mar 2012 16:43:55 -0800 (PST), Peter Brooks
><peter.h....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Mar 6, 11:35 pm, m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) wrote:
>>> Steve Hayes:
>>>
>>> >> So you want me to Google to find out who Rush Lim is, who "the law
>>> >> student" (only one?) was, what the insult was? And when, where and
>>> >> how this happened, or didn't happen, as the case may be.
>>>
>>> "Viv":
>>>
>>> > Well, where is it usually when there's a total lack of international
>>> > perspective or awareness ...
>>>
>>> In this case, apparently South Africa. I mean, Steve is the one
>>> complaining about not having been aware of the event, right?
>>>
>>It'd be unusual for anybody to be interested in, or know about, such a
>>minor detail of foreign local politics.
>
>Even doing a Google search on "Rush" and "Fluke" does not produce any useful
>information on the event. There's lots of comment *about* the event, but
>nothing that tells you what the event actually was.
>
>Likewise, there's notrhing in what the OP said, or in any of the subsequent
>posts that tells tyou what the event actually *was*.
The Wikip entry for Sandra Fluke gives a pretty good start.
<haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 6 Mar 2012 16:43:55 -0800 (PST), Peter Brooks
><peter.h....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Mar 6, 11:35 pm, m...@vex.net (Mark Brader) wrote:
>>> Steve Hayes:
>>>
>>> >> So you want me to Google to find out who Rush Lim is, who "the law
>>> >> student" (only one?) was, what the insult was? And when, where and
>>> >> how this happened, or didn't happen, as the case may be.
>>>
>>> "Viv":
>>>
>>> > Well, where is it usually when there's a total lack of international
>>> > perspective or awareness ...
>>>
>>> In this case, apparently South Africa. I mean, Steve is the one
>>> complaining about not having been aware of the event, right?
>>>
>>It'd be unusual for anybody to be interested in, or know about, such a
>>minor detail of foreign local politics.
>
>Even doing a Google search on "Rush" and "Fluke" does not produce any useful
>information on the event. There's lots of comment *about* the event, but
>nothing that tells you what the event actually was.
>
>Likewise, there's notrhing in what the OP said, or in any of the subsequent
>posts that tells tyou what the event actually *was*.
I earlier found her testimony video, 11 minutes, with hardly
any searching.
>
>I gather that this Rush is a TV or radio talk show host who habitually insults
>peopl;e who appear on his show, and that the latest insultee was a Miss Fluke,
>but what the nature of the insult was, and what kind of apology was expected
>or given or not given I have no idea.
estimate of his income as $56 million a year. I thought I
remembered his original Sirius radio contract as being estimated
as $100 million for three years.
Not guests - He has 3 hours a day to fill, and he spins out his
random thoughts, to fill his listeners heads with right-wing
runimations. Effective propaganda/conditioning technique.
In this case, he seems to have noticed that the issue featured
a female student and birth control. He spent 3 days coming
back to a lot of lascivious, misogynist rants, with occasional
political content. But I'm pretty sure that he never reviewed
her actual testimony on the air, and he might not have been
bothered by the lack.
There is no evidence that he knows, for instance, that
Fluke is 30 years old and a law student, rather than (what his
content seems to reflect) a flighty undergraduate of 20.
I gather, from other news reports, that this is not a new or
unique style for him, though his usual targets are politicians.
Politicians are limited in who they can sue for libel because of
their status as publlic figures, but I do wonder if Limbaugh has
left himself open this time.
I suspect that he could not give a *sincere* apology for his
behavior without abandoning the tone of his radio career,
which has been highly profitable to him.
>
>The OP owes an apology for not saying what the event was in the first place,
>instead of assuming that everyone watched this Rush Lim, Limbaugh, Limburger
>or Limborg's show, and knew who had been insulted, how, and when.
>
>And can anyone tell me if Suarez apologised?
--
Django Cat
Mar 7, 2012, 3:29:55 AM3/7/12
to
Stan Brown wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Mar 2012 09:30:50 GMT, Django Cat wrote:
> >
> > Stan Brown wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 03:02:17 -0500, micky wrote:
> > > > I should google more, I suppose, but I thought I would ask you.
> > > >
> > > > (I've had questions like this in other situations unrelated to
> > > > politics and regarding entirely different people.)
> > > >
> > > > Did Rush Limbaugh apologize to the law student for insulting
> > > > her?
> > >
> > > I happened to catch a news clip today in which Ron Paul said that
> > > Limbaugh did not apologize. The clip I saw of Limbaugh himself
> > > had him saying he had used poor word choice in an attempt to be
> > > humorous, but there was no hint of anything I would call an
> > > apology, not even something as mild as "regret".
> >
> >
> >
> > What would be a better word choice? Is there a more measured or
> > polite way to decribe someone as a prostitute?
>
> obAUE: "Courtesan"?
A tart is a tart by any other name, Stan.
> On Tue, 06 Mar 2012 09:30:50 GMT, Django Cat wrote:
> >
> > Stan Brown wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 03:02:17 -0500, micky wrote:
> > > > I should google more, I suppose, but I thought I would ask you.
> > > >
> > > > (I've had questions like this in other situations unrelated to
> > > > politics and regarding entirely different people.)
> > > >
> > > > Did Rush Limbaugh apologize to the law student for insulting
> > > > her?
> > >
> > > I happened to catch a news clip today in which Ron Paul said that
> > > Limbaugh did not apologize. The clip I saw of Limbaugh himself
> > > had him saying he had used poor word choice in an attempt to be
> > > humorous, but there was no hint of anything I would call an
> > > apology, not even something as mild as "regret".
> >
> >
> >
> > What would be a better word choice? Is there a more measured or
> > polite way to decribe someone as a prostitute?
>
> obAUE: "Courtesan"?
DC
--
Django Cat
Mar 7, 2012, 3:37:13 AM3/7/12
to
Rich Ulrich wrote:
> I gather, from other news reports, that this is not a new or
> unique style for him, though his usual targets are politicians.
> Politicians are limited in who they can sue for libel because of
> their status as publlic figures,
Oh really? That's a legal thing, or just convention?
> I gather, from other news reports, that this is not a new or
> unique style for him, though his usual targets are politicians.
> Politicians are limited in who they can sue for libel because of
> their status as publlic figures,
>but I do wonder if Limbaugh has
> left himself open this time.
DC
--
Django Cat
Mar 7, 2012, 3:41:26 AM3/7/12
to
Jerry Friedman wrote:
> But forgetting the Hall of Fame quarterback Sammy Baugh. (That's
> American football.)
Jerry, I still don't get this. Was he known for rushing about a lot or
something?
DC
--
> But forgetting the Hall of Fame quarterback Sammy Baugh. (That's
> American football.)
Jerry, I still don't get this. Was he known for rushing about a lot or
something?
DC
--
Django Cat
Mar 7, 2012, 3:41:29 AM3/7/12
to
Django Cat
Mar 7, 2012, 3:49:35 AM3/7/12
to
James Hogg
Mar 7, 2012, 4:34:30 AM3/7/12
to
--
James
R H Draney
Mar 7, 2012, 5:55:43 AM3/7/12
to
Rich Ulrich filted:
his ass from his elbow, or excrement from shoe polish....r
>
>There is no evidence that he knows, for instance, that
>Fluke is 30 years old and a law student, rather than (what his
>content seems to reflect) a flighty undergraduate of 20.
Historically, there is likewise no evidence that he knows a hawk from a handsaw,
>There is no evidence that he knows, for instance, that
>Fluke is 30 years old and a law student, rather than (what his
>content seems to reflect) a flighty undergraduate of 20.
his ass from his elbow, or excrement from shoe polish....r
Jerry Friedman
Mar 7, 2012, 10:03:31 AM3/7/12
to
On Mar 7, 1:37 am, "Django Cat" <notar...@address.com> wrote:
> Rich Ulrich wrote:
> > I gather, from other news reports, that this is not a new or
> > unique style for him, though his usual targets are politicians.
> > Politicians are limited in who they can sue for libel because of
> > their status as publlic figures,
>
> Oh really? That's a legal thing, or just convention?
That's a cherished part of our laws that protect free speech.
> Rich Ulrich wrote:
> > I gather, from other news reports, that this is not a new or
> > unique style for him, though his usual targets are politicians.
> > Politicians are limited in who they can sue for libel because of
> > their status as publlic figures,
>
> Oh really? That's a legal thing, or just convention?
> >but I do wonder if Limbaugh has
> > left himself open this time.
>
> I do hope so.
what little that's worth.
--
Jerry Friedman
Jerry Friedman
Mar 7, 2012, 9:59:36 AM3/7/12
to
told us what he found for "Rush" and Lim". I added something for the
missing "baugh". I liked your comment on "records", though.
--
Jerry Friedman
Jerry Friedman
Mar 7, 2012, 10:20:41 AM3/7/12
to
On Mar 7, 12:17 am, Rich Ulrich <rich.ulr...@comcast.net> wrote:
[Rush Limbaugh calling Sandra Fluke a prostitute]
> I suspect that he could not give a *sincere* apology for his
> behavior without abandoning the tone of his radio career,
> which has been highly profitable to him.
...
He did make a more substantial apology.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57390827-503544/rush-limbaugh-apology-to-sandra-fluke-was-sincere/
I can't comment on whether it was sincere--though he said it was.
--
Jerry Friedman
[Rush Limbaugh calling Sandra Fluke a prostitute]
> I suspect that he could not give a *sincere* apology for his
> behavior without abandoning the tone of his radio career,
> which has been highly profitable to him.
He did make a more substantial apology.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57390827-503544/rush-limbaugh-apology-to-sandra-fluke-was-sincere/
I can't comment on whether it was sincere--though he said it was.
--
Jerry Friedman
Django Cat
Mar 7, 2012, 12:01:59 PM3/7/12
to
DC
--
Django Cat
Mar 7, 2012, 12:10:32 PM3/7/12
to
Jerry Friedman wrote:
> On Mar 7, 1:37 am, "Django Cat" <notar...@address.com> wrote:
> > Rich Ulrich wrote:
> > > I gather, from other news reports, that this is not a new or
> > > unique style for him, though his usual targets are politicians.
> > > Politicians are limited in who they can sue for libel because of
> > > their status as publlic figures,
> >
> > Oh really? That's a legal thing, or just convention?
>
> That's a cherished part of our laws that protect free speech.
>
Thinking about it, I can't remember a single case of a UK politician
> On Mar 7, 1:37 am, "Django Cat" <notar...@address.com> wrote:
> > Rich Ulrich wrote:
> > > I gather, from other news reports, that this is not a new or
> > > unique style for him, though his usual targets are politicians.
> > > Politicians are limited in who they can sue for libel because of
> > > their status as publlic figures,
> >
> > Oh really? That's a legal thing, or just convention?
>
> That's a cherished part of our laws that protect free speech.
>
taking out a defamation case, but I don't know if there'd anything in
law to prevent them wanted to. Not that you necessarily want to mess
with them though:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17150381
DC
--
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
Mar 7, 2012, 12:51:13 PM3/7/12
to
On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 17:10:32 GMT, "Django Cat" <nota...@address.com>
wrote:
>Jerry Friedman wrote:
>
>> On Mar 7, 1:37 am, "Django Cat" <notar...@address.com> wrote:
>> > Rich Ulrich wrote:
>> > > I gather, from other news reports, that this is not a new or
>> > > unique style for him, though his usual targets are politicians.
>> > > Politicians are limited in who they can sue for libel because of
>> > > their status as publlic figures,
>> >
>> > Oh really? That's a legal thing, or just convention?
>>
>> That's a cherished part of our laws that protect free speech.
>>
>
>Thinking about it, I can't remember a single case of a UK politician
>taking out a defamation case, but I don't know if there'd anything in
>law to prevent them wanted to.
It does happen occasionally.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Hamilton_%28politician%29#BBC_libel_case
[Neil] Hamilton and fellow MP Gerald Howarth, also one of his
closest friends, successfully sued the BBC for libel in October 1986
after a Panorama programme, "Maggie's Militant Tendency", broadcast
on 30 January 1984, stated that the MPs had links with far-right
groups in Europe and in the UK.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jan/06/bob-ainsworth-sues-daily-mail-libel
Former UK defence chief sues Daily Mail for libel
Labour MP Bob Ainsworth lodges papers with court claiming
allegations of his 'bungling' during Somali kidnap of Britons were
totally untrue and damaging
This is an ex-MP suing his successor:
http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/8830650.Eastbourne_MP_sued_for_libel_by_predecessor_over_election_leaflet/
Eastbourne MP sued for libel by predecessor over election leaflet
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=47307
Former Labour MP Frank Cook today lost his libel case against the
Sunday Telegraph over its reports that he claimed Ł5 on his
Parliamentary expenses to cover money put into a collection at a
Battle of Britain commemorative service by an aide.
>Not that you necessarily want to mess
>with them though:
>
>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17150381
>
>DC
--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)
wrote:
>Jerry Friedman wrote:
>
>> On Mar 7, 1:37 am, "Django Cat" <notar...@address.com> wrote:
>> > Rich Ulrich wrote:
>> > > I gather, from other news reports, that this is not a new or
>> > > unique style for him, though his usual targets are politicians.
>> > > Politicians are limited in who they can sue for libel because of
>> > > their status as publlic figures,
>> >
>> > Oh really? That's a legal thing, or just convention?
>>
>> That's a cherished part of our laws that protect free speech.
>>
>
>Thinking about it, I can't remember a single case of a UK politician
>taking out a defamation case, but I don't know if there'd anything in
>law to prevent them wanted to.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Hamilton_%28politician%29#BBC_libel_case
[Neil] Hamilton and fellow MP Gerald Howarth, also one of his
closest friends, successfully sued the BBC for libel in October 1986
after a Panorama programme, "Maggie's Militant Tendency", broadcast
on 30 January 1984, stated that the MPs had links with far-right
groups in Europe and in the UK.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jan/06/bob-ainsworth-sues-daily-mail-libel
Former UK defence chief sues Daily Mail for libel
Labour MP Bob Ainsworth lodges papers with court claiming
allegations of his 'bungling' during Somali kidnap of Britons were
totally untrue and damaging
This is an ex-MP suing his successor:
http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/8830650.Eastbourne_MP_sued_for_libel_by_predecessor_over_election_leaflet/
Eastbourne MP sued for libel by predecessor over election leaflet
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=47307
Former Labour MP Frank Cook today lost his libel case against the
Sunday Telegraph over its reports that he claimed Ł5 on his
Parliamentary expenses to cover money put into a collection at a
Battle of Britain commemorative service by an aide.
>Not that you necessarily want to mess
>with them though:
>
>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17150381
>
>DC
--
(in alt.usage.english)
Django Cat
Mar 7, 2012, 4:10:16 PM3/7/12
to
> Parliamentary expenses to cover money put into a collection at a
> Battle of Britain commemorative service by an aide.
>
Fair enough - they're all to do with malpractice or dodgy connections
> Battle of Britain commemorative service by an aide.
>
though. I was thinking of a case where, say, a journalist or TV pundit
called a politician 'a crook' or even 'a prostitute' - and they sued. I
can't imagine any of our mainstream media letting something like that
go out though - but it must happen on the Internet all the time.
It is entirely possible I'm talking complete bollocks here.
DC
--
Mike L
Mar 7, 2012, 5:32:44 PM3/7/12
to
On Wed, 07 Mar 2012 21:10:16 GMT, "Django Cat" <nota...@address.com>
Wasn't it Jonathan Aitken who persuaded a badly misguided John Major
to change the rules so he could sue?
--
Mike.
to change the rules so he could sue?
--
Mike.
Steve Hayes
Mar 7, 2012, 6:13:11 PM3/7/12
to
Katy Jennison
Mar 7, 2012, 7:04:16 PM3/7/12
to
--
Katy Jennison
Mark Brader
Mar 7, 2012, 11:29:01 PM3/7/12
to
Steve Hayes:
been a typo.
--
Mark Brader "How can we believe that?"
Toronto "Because this time it's true!"
m...@vex.net -- Lynn & Jay: YES, PRIME MINISTER
> That's what was in the subject line. Looked like a Chinese name.
Well, there *was* a period in there. But of course that could've
been a typo.
--
Mark Brader "How can we believe that?"
Toronto "Because this time it's true!"
m...@vex.net -- Lynn & Jay: YES, PRIME MINISTER
Arcadian Rises
Mar 8, 2012, 2:24:56 PM3/8/12
to
On Monday, March 5, 2012 4:28:23 AM UTC-5, James Hogg wrote:
> R H Draney wrote:
> > micky filted:
> >> AFAI heard, he never used the words "I apologize" or "I'm sorry" or
> >> even "I regret". How can it be an apology without one of them or
> >> something very similar?
> >
> > Even using any or all of those phrases doesn't necessarily make it an
> > apology...I'm getting a little tired of "apologies" that boil down to "I'm sorry
> > if anyone was offended"....r
>
> In his case any apology boils down to "I'm still a scumbag and always
> will be."
>
You're certainly entitled to your opinion.
And so is RL, that is, entitled to his opinion.
Many people from the Bible Belt deem as promiscuous women who have sexual relations outside the sanctity of marriage. Should all those people be jailed for such an anachronic opinion?
> R H Draney wrote:
> > micky filted:
> >> AFAI heard, he never used the words "I apologize" or "I'm sorry" or
> >> even "I regret". How can it be an apology without one of them or
> >> something very similar?
> >
> > Even using any or all of those phrases doesn't necessarily make it an
> > apology...I'm getting a little tired of "apologies" that boil down to "I'm sorry
> > if anyone was offended"....r
>
> In his case any apology boils down to "I'm still a scumbag and always
> will be."
>
You're certainly entitled to your opinion.
And so is RL, that is, entitled to his opinion.
Many people from the Bible Belt deem as promiscuous women who have sexual relations outside the sanctity of marriage. Should all those people be jailed for such an anachronic opinion?
James Hogg
Mar 8, 2012, 2:37:08 PM3/8/12
to
Limbaugh is a scumbag.
--
James
tony cooper
Mar 8, 2012, 2:39:32 PM3/8/12
to
On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 11:24:56 -0800 (PST), Arcadian Rises
<Arcadi...@aol.com> wrote:
>On Monday, March 5, 2012 4:28:23 AM UTC-5, James Hogg wrote:
>> R H Draney wrote:
>> > micky filted:
>> >> AFAI heard, he never used the words "I apologize" or "I'm sorry" or
>> >> even "I regret". How can it be an apology without one of them or
>> >> something very similar?
>> >
>> > Even using any or all of those phrases doesn't necessarily make it an
>> > apology...I'm getting a little tired of "apologies" that boil down to "I'm sorry
>> > if anyone was offended"....r
>>
>> In his case any apology boils down to "I'm still a scumbag and always
>> will be."
>>
>
>You're certainly entitled to your opinion.
>And so is RL, that is, entitled to his opinion.
Limbaugh is entitled to his opinion, but is he entitled to air that
<Arcadi...@aol.com> wrote:
>On Monday, March 5, 2012 4:28:23 AM UTC-5, James Hogg wrote:
>> R H Draney wrote:
>> > micky filted:
>> >> AFAI heard, he never used the words "I apologize" or "I'm sorry" or
>> >> even "I regret". How can it be an apology without one of them or
>> >> something very similar?
>> >
>> > Even using any or all of those phrases doesn't necessarily make it an
>> > apology...I'm getting a little tired of "apologies" that boil down to "I'm sorry
>> > if anyone was offended"....r
>>
>> In his case any apology boils down to "I'm still a scumbag and always
>> will be."
>>
>
>You're certainly entitled to your opinion.
>And so is RL, that is, entitled to his opinion.
opinion to millions of people? Limbaugh didn't brand women in general
as sluts. The comment was about one specific woman.
>
>Many people from the Bible Belt deem as promiscuous women who have sexual relations outside the sanctity of marriage. Should all those people be jailed for such an anachronic opinion?
Why single out the Bible Belt? Is that attitude not also present in
>Many people from the Bible Belt deem as promiscuous women who have sexual relations outside the sanctity of marriage. Should all those people be jailed for such an anachronic opinion?
all parts of this country?
There's a double-down effect in "promiscuous women" and "(women) who
have sexual relations outside (of) marriage".
Or is there? Is a woman who has had sexual relations outside of
marriage one time a promiscuous woman? Doesn't "promiscuous" imply
multiple sexual relationships?
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
Stan Brown
Mar 8, 2012, 8:21:55 PM3/8/12
to
On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 14:39:32 -0500, tony cooper wrote:
> Limbaugh is entitled to his opinion, but is he entitled to air that
> opinion to millions of people?
Unfortunately, I believe he is. Those of us -- fewer and fewer ever
> Limbaugh is entitled to his opinion, but is he entitled to air that
> opinion to millions of people?
year -- who still believe in free speech must reluctantly acknowledge
that free speech doesn't just protect what we want to hear; it
protects what we don't want to hear, no matter how disgusting.
MC
Mar 8, 2012, 8:45:39 PM3/8/12
to
In article <MPG.29c3253a9...@news.individual.net>,
There are laws on the books in the US that cover libel, slander,
incitement to commit crimes and so on that don't interfere with the
freedom of expression.
--
"If you can, tell me something happy."
- Marybones
Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 14:39:32 -0500, tony cooper wrote:
> > Limbaugh is entitled to his opinion, but is he entitled to air that
> > opinion to millions of people?
>
> Unfortunately, I believe he is. Those of us -- fewer and fewer ever
> year -- who still believe in free speech must reluctantly acknowledge
> that free speech doesn't just protect what we want to hear; it
> protects what we don't want to hear, no matter how disgusting.
I prefer the excesses of free speech to the excesses of censorship.
> On Thu, 08 Mar 2012 14:39:32 -0500, tony cooper wrote:
> > Limbaugh is entitled to his opinion, but is he entitled to air that
> > opinion to millions of people?
>
> Unfortunately, I believe he is. Those of us -- fewer and fewer ever
> year -- who still believe in free speech must reluctantly acknowledge
> that free speech doesn't just protect what we want to hear; it
> protects what we don't want to hear, no matter how disgusting.
There are laws on the books in the US that cover libel, slander,
incitement to commit crimes and so on that don't interfere with the
freedom of expression.
--
"If you can, tell me something happy."
- Marybones
Katy Jennison
Mar 9, 2012, 6:10:40 AM3/9/12
to
who are exceedingly rich are far more able to make their voices heard.
Is your freedoom of speech still protected when what you say is
systematically drowned out by someone who can pay for a megaphone?
--
Katy Jennison
Arcadian Rises
Mar 9, 2012, 9:54:45 AM3/9/12
to
On Thursday, March 8, 2012 2:37:08 PM UTC-5, James Hogg wrote:
[...]
Some people are much more offended by the kitsch of commercial artists than by RL's venting of outlandish opinions.
"The greatest art is making money"
Andy Warhol.
[...]
>
> Who said anything about jail? I merely expressed the opinion that
> Limbaugh is a scumbag.
>
> --
> James
I see him as a savvy businessman. He delivers to his audience what his audience wants to hear. Not unlike Madonna, Oprah, some best sellers authors, and other pop icons.
> Who said anything about jail? I merely expressed the opinion that
> Limbaugh is a scumbag.
>
> --
> James
Some people are much more offended by the kitsch of commercial artists than by RL's venting of outlandish opinions.
"The greatest art is making money"
Andy Warhol.
MC
Mar 9, 2012, 10:54:05 AM3/9/12
to
In article
<8224186.873.1331304885774.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbai14>,
A TV station salesman once asked me, "What's the *product* in
broadcasting?"
I skated around a few possibilities but mostly I saw the product as the
programme content.
Bzzzzt. Wrong!
He said it's the *audience*...
Er. What? Why?
"Because the broadcaster delivers the audience to the advertiser."
<8224186.873.1331304885774.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbai14>,
Arcadian Rises <Arcadi...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, March 8, 2012 2:37:08 PM UTC-5, James Hogg wrote:
> [...]
> >
> > Who said anything about jail? I merely expressed the opinion that
> > Limbaugh is a scumbag.
> >
> > --
> > James
>
> I see him as a savvy businessman. He delivers to his audience what his
> audience wants to hear. Not unlike Madonna, Oprah, some best sellers authors,
> and other pop icons.
That's only part of the equation in the US commercial TV model.
> On Thursday, March 8, 2012 2:37:08 PM UTC-5, James Hogg wrote:
> [...]
> >
> > Who said anything about jail? I merely expressed the opinion that
> > Limbaugh is a scumbag.
> >
> > --
> > James
>
> I see him as a savvy businessman. He delivers to his audience what his
> audience wants to hear. Not unlike Madonna, Oprah, some best sellers authors,
> and other pop icons.
A TV station salesman once asked me, "What's the *product* in
broadcasting?"
I skated around a few possibilities but mostly I saw the product as the
programme content.
Bzzzzt. Wrong!
He said it's the *audience*...
Er. What? Why?
"Because the broadcaster delivers the audience to the advertiser."
aruzinsky
Mar 9, 2012, 11:29:40 AM3/9/12
to
Rush's statements are not an important issue to me. What I want to
know is exactly why some of his advertisers (list below) withdrew
sponsorship. Let me remind you that these are what many liberals call
"evil corporations" driven by greed. With the profit motive in mind,
were their decisions to remove advertising based on empirical evidence
of a decline in viewership and/or sales or were the decision just
based on theory? And, exactly who were these decision makers working
behind the corporate veil? If their decisions were based on theory
and the decisions result in decreased profits, shouldn't they be
fired? Now, dittoheads have an opportunity to boycott these
corporations.
Service Magic home contractor
Hadeed Carpets
Accuquote Life Insurance
Vitacost vitamin supplier
Bonobos clothing company
Sensa weight- loss program
Thompson Creek Windows
AOL
Tax Resolution Services
ProFlowers
Legal Zoom online document creator
Carbonite web security firm
Citrix software maker
Sleep Train Mattresses
Sleep Number mattresses
Quicken Loans
Girl Scouts of Oregon and Southwest Washington
Cascades Dental
Consolidated Credit Counseling Services
Constant Contact email marketing firm
Philadelphia Orchestra
Reputation Rhino online reputation consulting firm
St. Vincent's Medical Center
Cunningham Security
Regal Assets precious medal investment group
Freedom Debt Relief
Norway Savings Bank
Portland Ovations performing arts center
Stamps.com
Incidentally, does anyone here believe that AOL isn't stupid and
evil?
know is exactly why some of his advertisers (list below) withdrew
sponsorship. Let me remind you that these are what many liberals call
"evil corporations" driven by greed. With the profit motive in mind,
were their decisions to remove advertising based on empirical evidence
of a decline in viewership and/or sales or were the decision just
based on theory? And, exactly who were these decision makers working
behind the corporate veil? If their decisions were based on theory
and the decisions result in decreased profits, shouldn't they be
fired? Now, dittoheads have an opportunity to boycott these
corporations.
Service Magic home contractor
Hadeed Carpets
Accuquote Life Insurance
Vitacost vitamin supplier
Bonobos clothing company
Sensa weight- loss program
Thompson Creek Windows
AOL
Tax Resolution Services
ProFlowers
Legal Zoom online document creator
Carbonite web security firm
Citrix software maker
Sleep Train Mattresses
Sleep Number mattresses
Quicken Loans
Girl Scouts of Oregon and Southwest Washington
Cascades Dental
Consolidated Credit Counseling Services
Constant Contact email marketing firm
Philadelphia Orchestra
Reputation Rhino online reputation consulting firm
St. Vincent's Medical Center
Cunningham Security
Regal Assets precious medal investment group
Freedom Debt Relief
Norway Savings Bank
Portland Ovations performing arts center
Stamps.com
Incidentally, does anyone here believe that AOL isn't stupid and
evil?
Steve Hayes
Mar 9, 2012, 12:21:08 PM3/9/12
to
On Fri, 09 Mar 2012 10:54:05 -0500, MC <cope...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
>That's only part of the equation in the US commercial TV model.
>
>A TV station salesman once asked me, "What's the *product* in
>broadcasting?"
>
>I skated around a few possibilities but mostly I saw the product as the
>programme content.
>
>Bzzzzt. Wrong!
>
>He said it's the *audience*...
>
>Er. What? Why?
>
>"Because the broadcaster delivers the audience to the advertiser."
Very good.
>That's only part of the equation in the US commercial TV model.
>
>A TV station salesman once asked me, "What's the *product* in
>broadcasting?"
>
>I skated around a few possibilities but mostly I saw the product as the
>programme content.
>
>Bzzzzt. Wrong!
>
>He said it's the *audience*...
>
>Er. What? Why?
>
>"Because the broadcaster delivers the audience to the advertiser."
MC
Mar 9, 2012, 12:38:03 PM3/9/12
to
In article <nuekl7drk67rmos0i...@4ax.com>,
Steve Hayes <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Mar 2012 10:54:05 -0500, MC <cope...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
>
> >That's only part of the equation in the US commercial TV model.
> >
> >A TV station salesman once asked me, "What's the *product* in
> >broadcasting?"
> >
> >I skated around a few possibilities but mostly I saw the product as the
> >programme content.
> >
> >Bzzzzt. Wrong!
> >
> >He said it's the *audience*...
> >
> >Er. What? Why?
> >
> >"Because the broadcaster delivers the audience to the advertiser."
>
> Very good.
It explains a *lot* about commercial broadcasting.
> On Fri, 09 Mar 2012 10:54:05 -0500, MC <cope...@mapca.inter.net> wrote:
>
> >That's only part of the equation in the US commercial TV model.
> >
> >A TV station salesman once asked me, "What's the *product* in
> >broadcasting?"
> >
> >I skated around a few possibilities but mostly I saw the product as the
> >programme content.
> >
> >Bzzzzt. Wrong!
> >
> >He said it's the *audience*...
> >
> >Er. What? Why?
> >
> >"Because the broadcaster delivers the audience to the advertiser."
>
> Very good.
Peter Duncanson (BrE)
Mar 9, 2012, 2:26:57 PM3/9/12
to
A commercial broadcaster's income is payment from advertisers for
broadcasting adverts that people actually watch or listen to. The bigger
the audience the more money the broadcaster can earn.
From the business point of view the only reason for programme content
between ads is to attract viewers or listeners to the ads.
Katy Jennison
Mar 9, 2012, 5:28:18 PM3/9/12
to
--
Katy Jennison
Peter Brooks
Mar 9, 2012, 5:48:53 PM3/9/12
to
On Mar 9, 9:26 pm, "Peter Duncanson (BrE)" <m...@peterduncanson.net>
wrote:
I may be an optimist, well, let's be honest, I am, but I'm hoping that
this is, slowly, changing. Now that people are buying the content as
DVDs, or through iTunes or similar on-line outlets, there is a direct
market for content based on its value.
I'd never, for example, have watched 'Downton Abbey', even if I'd been
in Pom and even if I'd had a plebvision to watch it on, because, to
me, watching something for entertainment does not include watching
advertisements. I was happy, though, having read favourable reviews,
to buy and download it from iTunes. Had the reviews been less
favourable, I might still have booked it out from my DVD rental shop.
I don't think that I'm any sort of exception. There is now a market
for selling content directly to consumers. I hope that this market
will grow and, in time, maybe, force out the business model of
producing content to sell soap.
wrote:
>
>
> A commercial broadcaster's income is payment from advertisers for
> broadcasting adverts that people actually watch or listen to. The bigger
> the audience the more money the broadcaster can earn.
>
> From the business point of view the only reason for programme content
> between ads is to attract viewers or listeners to the ads.
>
This has certainly been true for a long time.
>
> A commercial broadcaster's income is payment from advertisers for
> broadcasting adverts that people actually watch or listen to. The bigger
> the audience the more money the broadcaster can earn.
>
> From the business point of view the only reason for programme content
> between ads is to attract viewers or listeners to the ads.
>
I may be an optimist, well, let's be honest, I am, but I'm hoping that
this is, slowly, changing. Now that people are buying the content as
DVDs, or through iTunes or similar on-line outlets, there is a direct
market for content based on its value.
I'd never, for example, have watched 'Downton Abbey', even if I'd been
in Pom and even if I'd had a plebvision to watch it on, because, to
me, watching something for entertainment does not include watching
advertisements. I was happy, though, having read favourable reviews,
to buy and download it from iTunes. Had the reviews been less
favourable, I might still have booked it out from my DVD rental shop.
I don't think that I'm any sort of exception. There is now a market
for selling content directly to consumers. I hope that this market
will grow and, in time, maybe, force out the business model of
producing content to sell soap.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages