He is small and petty, always has been. But these kinds of comments coming from Limbaugh are no longer any surprise. It’s who he is and what he does. He is indeed Americas anal cyst.

Tommy, Tommy –

Talk about knee-jerk, you heard/read exactly what you wanted him to say in that segment. He was not at all suggesting people avoid donating, he was questioning why anyone would do so through the White House website. I won’t say his suspicions are accurate but the concept was echoed by the caller who asked,”If you wanted to donate to the Red Cross why go through the White House?”, and he concurred — i.e. give money directly to the RC. It was never said or even implied “do not send any emergency money to Haiti”.

The rest of his comments were about U.S. long-range assistance that has poured into the island over decades and was then hoovered up by the dictorships. Even you would have to distinguish between that and emergency aid following a natural disaster being given to U.S. rescue orginizations.

And don’t even get me started on his “Light-skinned” comments he made, because as we have all been told the past few days those a perfectly acceptable terms to use.

Really, who told you they were acceptable terms? By the way, we are talking about lives and I could not give a damn about their political bent, Limbaugh does.

Since Saturday I have seen an assembly line of experts who came out to declare that the use of that terminology was not a problem. And this was not about a political bent, it was about where to send aid money to help those lives.

Although what Limbaugh said is stupid, it does beg the question of why be directed to the white house site at all? Why not just say redcross.org? Both sides made this political…

Sorry Shark but it is a problem. Here’s the fundamental difference; Reid apologized, said he was basically an ass and he was. You will never ever hear this from Limbaugh. He lives for moments when he can inject race into his “commentary.” And I’ll bet the farm he’ll do it again.

RDS alive and well at mediaite.

He was spot on about Obama having Bush/Clinton team up to help — the comparison are already starting. The “light skinned” Obama is already showing what a great leader he is by assisting as fast as he can. The comparisons to Katrina are ludicrous, but hey, they are going on.

Reid’s remarks are considered safe remarks and they will be quoted time and time again. If the CBC is going to throw MLK under the bus, then that is the CBCs choice.

No surprise here. Rush never, ever misses a chance to use other people’s suffering to make his somewhat pathetic political points. Talk about not wasting a crisis. I wonder what this total waste of oxygen would have said if a conservative president made the same statement.

Reid was wrong in his remarks, too.

The NAACP said “The remark was awkward, but not a problem.” The president called the remarks “inartful”. How about this — what other words could he use to express that thought? The thought was the problem. “Well he doesn’t look too ethnic and he only speaks in an urban-fashion when speaking to inner-city people.” He was making pronouncements on Obama based on his race and his appearance,i.e. prejudice. Reid’s words were far more prejudicial than Limbaugh’s Donovan McNabb comment — spoken after it was proferred that McNabb was being criticised as a black QB — and Limbaugh had to step down.

Limbaugh injects race to point out the hypocrisy of race-baiters. The whole “light-skinned” dust-up did not start with Reid. Biden is on tape saying the same thing essentially, and there was that infamous LA Times column on “Barack the Magic Negro” stating many of the same concepts, and penned by an African American writer.
Trent Lott apologized, Don Imus apologized, Limbaugh apologized for his McNabb comment. They were not forgiven. Harry Reid was forgiven the moment the words left his lips, because of who he is. And as I have said all all along, it should be regarded as worse coming out of his mouth because the Dems are the ones who are snap to judge racism, they are the party who dictate the acceptable language, and as a leader of that party he should be attuned to what the proper language is from the start.

I don’t hear Tommy Boy going after Olberdouche last night for using the devastating Haiti earthquake for need of Health Care reform. Good Job Tommy, Do you Spit or Swallow what the Liberal Media jerks off to you?

Zone,

if your obscene comment gets deleted, it wasn’t me, but I’ll respond anyway. The healthcare segment doesn’t belong in this story, there is NO COMPARISON.

That said, I thought the segment was ill-advised, tone-deaf, and poor salesmanship. Unfortunately for your frothing obsession with your opponents’ imperfections, there are bigger fish to fry today. That segment won’t prevent a dime of aid from reaching Haiti.

Ironically that was the implication to Rush’s message. If you want cash to get to the relief orginizations do not channel it through the White House. Quite different than what the headline implied.

Unfortunately utterly representative of the heartless, selfish politics-always-first right-wing Republicans nowadays.

There’s simply no ethics or empathy left in the Republican Party. They’ve always been only about themselves and their money.

It’s just on display for all to see anymore.

Yeah… just finished the transcript, Limbaugh never once “urged his audience of millions not to help.” Given the fact that study after study proves conservatives give more money to charity than liberals, I’m fairly confident said audience of millions will give more than their share, and Limbaugh’s comments, however you wish to interpret them, won’t prevent a dime of aid from reaching Haiti. Sorry Tommy, I think MartiniShark is absolutely right, you heard what you wanted to hear.

Zone – I don’t mean to go all technical on you but people like you are referred to as assholes. Again, sorry for using jargon.

So Limbaugh injects race to point out the hypocrisy of race baiters…okay, sure he does.

And Mika and Joe talking about Glen and Sarah wherein Mika claims here favorite founder was Lincoln.

How dare Mika and Joe talk about anything other than Haiti; if Norah can criticize Glen and Sarah for not talking about it, we can criticize Mika and Joe as well.

The network that claims Palin is an idiot has a morning anchor who thinks Lincoln was a founding father. Oy.

Martini – this is why I never believe anything anyone in the media says about Rush because they take his words, spin them and give them meaning that was never intended.

Well here’s a tougher question to answer: Why would Harry Reid inject race into a conversation? That might be tougher to untangle.

How about the fabricated quotes he supposedly said on the air that indicted him with the NFL? If he is such an obvious racist why the need to fabricate the evidence?

No Tommy Boy, Olberdouche was politicizing the tragedy in Haiti with Heathcare reform as you try to claim if Rush Limbaugh. Did you actually listen to Rush or you swallowed what Media Matters says? Can you point to me again in the transcripts where he’s telling his listeners not to donate?

Well Teeedddd! Obviously you don’t listen to Rush because exposed the double standards and hypocrisy on the far left.

Apparently the false information about what Rush said made it to Gibbs and Gibbs trashed Rush for what he never said. INAL but at some point, the distortions and slander of Rush should be taken up by his.

I agree with Bill Maher, americans are stupid. Do your homework nummy nuts, Haiti did do a deal with the devil, along with their voodoo god Bonye! Don’t find out if you are anywhere near correct just shoot your mouths off. whiskey, tango, foxtrot. It’s in the Haitian govt’s history annals.

Well Zone, technically speaking, you are still an asshole. Don’t believe me? Take a look in the mirror.

TfT – what false information are you referring to?

Okay before I defended his belief in what the Obama administration might try during this ‘crisis ‘ but
not this. While I am rather leary of ‘whitehouse.gov’ not donating to this cause isn’t even a
consideration.Rush is wrong in that respect.

To Martini and others,

if you read Rush’s full transcript, you will see several examples where he lies about the WhiteHouse.gov setup, and several more where he says that monetary relief is a waste of time, or is already taken care of by our taxes in the form of foreign aid. But of course, you all know that, and rely on others not to check.

And Tommy, if you read my full comment, I did not agree with his assessment of the White House website, and pointed out he made the distinction between our past efforts to boost the country and the current need for support. You stated, with italics, he urges people not to donate to the relief effort.” No where did I see THAT in his transcript. Please point that passage out to us.

Look at the sidebar you provided where the caller asks if they wanted to give to the Red Cross why be directed to go through the White House? Rush answers, “Would you trust that the money is going to go to Haiti?” In other words he is casting doubt that it would make it to the relief efforts. At no time did he ever imply people should not donate. That was your interpretation.

No, but c’mon the effect is the same and he knows it.

Rush Limbaugh never disappoint his trashy fans with his low-class act—take ZoneDaiatlas for example.

Martini,

No sale. I was clear that there were examples in the full transcript, to which I linked.

But, hey, stand by your man.

You stated he “urges people not to donate to the relief effort.” Unless I’m operating on a different definition of “urges” I see nothing in there where he comes close to doing that. He’s not my man, I’m looking at the facts. But hey, stand by your bias.

Haiti is getting most of its help, right now, from Americans. Limbaugh’s point was the absurdity of routing financial contributions through the WHITE HOUSE. Everyone knows that pleas for financial assistance often get ‘misdirected.’ There’s no bigger example of ‘misdirected’ than sending money to the White House…especially to its present occupants. Limbaugh has no problem with people helping Haiti.

Chris, I must differ.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/05/21/2009-05-21_hostile_to_haiti_rush_limbaugh_is_classless_in_attacking_hemispheres_poorest_cou.html

“I’m just gonna tell you, if I was named envoy to Haiti, I’d quit government. Envoy to Haiti? You can’t even pick up a prostitute down there without genuine fear of AIDS.” – Rush Limbaugh

Apparently Tommy lost his Twitter account while Limbaugh was in the hospital. There was no decency on there.

According to Media Matters, this was the comment from May 20. 2009:

LIMBAUGH: Bill Clinton, envoy to Haiti. I’m just gonna tell you, if I was named envoy to Haiti [laughing] I’d quit government. Envoy to Haiti? You can’t even pick up a prostitute down there without genuine fear of AIDS. This is not Clinton’s place.

If he did indeed say this, he was attacking Clinton. It changes in meaning when you don’t delete the Clinton part. I don’t believe Media Matters, either. Based on the lack of coverage, and google search results, I am going to chock this up to another Rush smear, similar to the ones that surfaced during the football brewhaha.

If Rush did indeed say this, he was obviously attacking Clinton, and we all know he doesn’t like the Clintons. I like the Clintons, so I don’t like people trashing them, but it is something Rush does quite often (or so I’ve heard).

I suggest reading this in it’s entirety:
Media Tweaked: “Light-Skinned” Remark Pinned on Rush, Not Reid
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_011410/content/01125112.guest.html

RUSH: Where did you hear that I discouraged donations to Haiti?

CALLER: Uh, I read it in, uh, a news thing called the Huffington Post, but that’s not the point. I was going to finish my sentence if that’s okay with you.

RUSH: Well, but what you just said is a lie. They reported a lie. I did not discourage donations to Haiti.

“I’ve got 19 sound bites here today, April, of media people going bat manure yesterday over what they think I said. They didn’t hear me say it, either. They got it from the Huffington Post or they got it from Media Matters or they got it from someplace else. I did not say don’t donate. I did say Obama will use this to help burnish his credentials, ’cause there’s no question he will.”

So are we to understand that because you do not like the tone of his commentary you are clear to misrepresent his words on a given subject? His prostitute comment was in reference towards Bill Clinton, and to use the parlance of the current media cycle, it was “Inartfully articulated.” That does not mean however that any other commentary by him can be manipulated and misrepresented and declared accurate.

Ridiculous. Leave it to Tommy to equate the fact that we’ve given billions in aid (most of almost surely stolen by the corrupt govt) with telling America NOT to donate any money. That is certainly not what Rush was saying, but Tommy is the same guy that demanded that Griff Jenkins become a corporate spokesman and defend every aspect of Fox News at a rally he was reporting on because Jenkins demanded that of Alan Grayson, an elected official paid by taxpayers!

So, there’s absolutely no validity to the argument that, despite billions of dollars in aid from the US, Haiti is still (before the quake) a corrupt state that is a living hell? I think history has taught us that govt aid has done nothing so far, and without major changes will, most likely, do little in the future.

And has Obama NOT had a certain obsession with race issues? He’ll quickly interject himself in the Gates nonsense, he’ll forgive Reid for his racial nonsense, he’ll give the world’s most thrilling speech on race, he’ll claim that McCain is using the race card trying to demonize him as a black man who doesn’t look like the other presidents on dollar bills, etc. You can’t deny Obama has been knee deep in race issues from the start of his campaign (by his own choosing, many of the issues HE started)…and that he does seem to have a tendency to jump into issues involving race as some sort of savior. So, maybe Rush might possibly have a point, even if it’s a small one?

By the way- a tip of being taken seriously- don’t use two comical pictures of the person you’re attacking, especially when the attack contains a glaring lie like Rush is an evil demon who says DO NOT donate to help out.

Thanks for keeping it non-partisan. Tommy Christopher and Rachel Maddow, America can always count on them to keep it straight down the line!

Phooey! From the POT who calls the Kettle – BLACK! – NEVER ‘wrong’, NEVER …!

The ridiculous, hypocritical lengths you Dittoheads go to to defend your Dear Leader are normally amusing, but not this time. You always cry about Rush being taken out of context, then do the same to defend him.

The idea that Rush’s remark (that Haitian hookers are diseased) is an insult to Bill Clinton shows that Rush’s followers have as dehumanized a view of Haitians as Limbaugh does. Disgusting.

I thought this thread was about your putting words in Rush’s mouth “urging…..” but now you switch the subject?

Sorry Rush did not say what you said he said.

At what point does the owner of this board step in and tell the “columnists” this is NOT MSNBC.

We are talking the basis of your column here being inherently incorrect. You tossed in that prostitute quote as some sort of justification for that, and then resort to name-calling? Fine, if that makes you feel better, but it does little for the credibility.

Anyone else notice Tommy hasn’t once addressed the bald-faced lie he told about Limbaugh “urging his audience of millions not to help” since MartiniShark called him on it? Funny.

Tommy Christopher wrote:

No sale. I was clear that there were examples in the full transcript, to which I linked.

But, hey, stand by your man.

Tommy, you also wrote this:

In fact, he’s such a small, petty excuse for a man that he throws in a lie that can only stand if his listeners don’t know how to click a link:

Well, Tommy, Iistened to the show yesterday, I listened to the show today, and I know how to click a link. I know how to provide them, too, which is why so many of my posts go unanswered — lies are exposed, and there’s nothing more for liars to say unless they want to double down on obvious falsehoods.

I read the Rush transcript you linked using the exact words “urges people not to give to the relief effort”, and at NO time did he urge anyone “NOT to give to the relief effort.”

In fact, you realize that he doesn’t make such an “urge,” which is why the portion of the transcript you cut-and-pasted — which, ideally would be the BEST example reinforcing your point — doesn’t contain any “urge” by Rush to withhold donations. Rush DID make specific references to being distrustful of giving through whitehouse.gov, which is prudent after the debacle involving Linda Douglass’ request for “fishy” dissenting opinions regarding the BHO stance on health care.

You are just following the Rushbashing playbook so effectively used when he wanted to be a part owner of the St. Louis Rams:

(1) Turn a controversial (perhaps even tasteless) Limbaugh remark or statement, strip it of its original context, and puff it up into something much more extreme and malicious.

(2) When it is pointed out that the quotation is out of context, just say something to the effect of “This isn’t the worst thing he’s said! He’s said LOTSA stuff like that!”

(3) Resist actually citing such other “lotsa stuff” because it is milder, easier to understand for the non-listener, and harder to twist and misinterpret. (Otherwise, you would have used those quotes first.)

(4) If you must admit that something you insisted Limbaugh said was completely fabricated, do so ONLY after the damage (if any) is already done (To wit: Apologies for repeating the false charge Rush said James Earl Ray should get the Medal of Honor were only made after Rush was dropped from the group bidding for the St. Louis Rams). At this point, refer to whatever “lotsa stuff” you can come up with and pretend that it’s just as bad as the slanderous remark(Hello, Rachel Maddow!)

So, Tommy, you have by your actions that shown that you fit your own description of a “small, petty, excuse for a man.” But that’s OK — that won’t preclude your being popular among D.C. and New York elites. Look where it’s gotten David Brock.

Oh, and you also followed another rule of Rushbashing: If Rush has recently lost weight, make sure you use the most recent pic or footage of him when he was fatter.

Martini, Smithee,

I addressed your concerns in the body of my article, and in the comments. Not gonna repeat myself. My readers can read.

Refreshing/amusing to see a left-wing liar called-out for his dishonest article.

I’m beginning to like this site.

First off, I am not a dittohead – I have never listened to Rush Limbaugh. What I do now, however, is fact check for myself everytime someone claims Rush said something.

Secondly, I am a Clinton supporter.

Thirdly, IF this quote is true, IF, you left off the parts involving Bill Clinton, which I believe is dishonest. He was smearing Clinton, not Haiti, per se. (Can you find any source other than Media Matters and the NYdaily News that picked it up from MM, that Rush actually said this?)

Did you leave off the Clinton portion on purpose?

LIMBAUGH: Bill Clinton, envoy to Haiti. I’m just gonna tell you, if I was named envoy to Haiti [laughing] I’d quit government. Envoy to Haiti? You can’t even pick up a prostitute down there without genuine fear of AIDS. This is not Clinton’s place.

yes, Limbaugh comes off crude and the comment, if he said it, was nasty. But, I don’t think it has the same intent when quoted in full, as your edited version.

I do not have a dehumanized view of Haitians. I took his comments to be an attack on Clinton. I am looking for data on prostitution and AIDS in Haiti, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there were a high instance of HIV/AIDS in the poorest country in the western hemisphere, and one of the poorest in the world. Would you?

Looking at reports on AIDS and prostitutes in Haiti, what little I can find right now, they seem to have a high instance. At least 50 percent of the female prostitutes in the capital city’s main prostitution center were believed to be infected with HIV (in the 80s?). According to a recent U.N. AIDS report, the primary way HIV is transmitted in the Caribbean is through paid, unprotected intercourse. There are 170,000 Haitians living with the virus, according to U.N. AIDS latest figures.

Instead of debating my points, you were reactionary and made false accusations towards me….

Sara,

the Dittoheads remark was in reference to the aggregated defenders of Rush. As for the Clinton quote, no, I don’t see how that mitigates his comment at all. Every quote has things before and after it, but that doesn’t mean you’re taking it “out of context.” By that logic, you could never, ever read a single Bible verse.

ChrisNH says:
January 14, 2010 at 5:14 pm
Limbaugh has no problem with people helping Haiti.

Tommy Christopher says:
January 14, 2010 at 5:41 pm
Chris, I must differ.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2009/05/21/2009-05-21_hostile_to_haiti_rush_limbaugh_is_classless_in_attacking_hemispheres_poorest_cou.html

“I’m just gonna tell you, if I was named envoy to Haiti, I’d quit government. Envoy to Haiti? You can’t even pick up a prostitute down there without genuine fear of AIDS.” – Rush Limbaugh

If you were being honest with us, you would admit that you posted that quote, edited as such, to rebut Chris’ comment about Rush.

But, seeing the quote in full, it has a much different meaning than what you intended, no?

Clinton had just been announced as the special envoy to Haiti, and Rush (allegedly) was reacting to that appointment. Including the before and after Clinton comments have everything to do with the quote.

How you used them, to rebut Chris were completely out of context.

Tommy, this really is disingenuous.

Your title on the piece implied, and the first paragraph proclaimed Rush “urges people not to donate”. I had not come to that conclusion and asked when he said that, you declared it is in the transcript. I read the entire write-up and found no instance, plus I gave you impressions where I felt you were inaccurate and when I asked where it came from you insisted it was in there.
I read it second time and came to the same conclusion and, in fact, pointed out his quote indicated money should instead go directly to the Red Cross. I asked you specifically to cite a quote(s), and you said there are “clear examples”.
Then, after claiming you addressed the concerns — and instead of giving those clear examples — you uncorked his “Haitian prostitute” quote, as if this justified your take on the issue, then ridiculed anyone defending Rush.

My stance has not been about defending Rush, it has been that the central issue of the column was not accurate, and not only have you avoided backing it up you even posted a second piece repeating the invective towards Rush over something he never actually said. I did not get obnoxious about it but you felt the need to ridicule and be dismissive. I was trying to have an civil discourse. Imagine my folly

In regards to Clinton, let’s switch the script, Sara…

LIMBAUGH: Bill Clinton, envoy to ITALY. I’m just gonna tell you, if I was named envoy to ITALY [laughing] I’d quit government. Envoy to Italy? You can’t even pick up SARAINITALY without genuine fear of AIDS. This is not Clinton’s place.

You’re right, total burn on Clinton!

You people, i.e. dittoheads, are sick. Tommy made his point. I hate to say that the reason why liberals understand his point is because we’re an educated bunch, but I’m sure the teabaggers will take offense. Smithee! You must be loving this, huh MJ??

The biggest liar and spineless coward on this website is Tommy Christopher. Nice try smearing Rush Limbaugh with your bogus BS about telling his listeners not to donate. I don’t know who’s the biggest douche bag… Keith Olbermann or Tommy Christopher…

Zone, you are clearly out of your league. Thanks for playing along, but we’ll let the adults take it from here.

Zone – you are the douche bag…and an asshole and spineless. Congrats, now you have something to put on your resume. (You know that is don’t you?)

Still living in Grandma’s basement Tjl?

Remember folks, Tommy Christopher is the same asshole who posted an article about “Hate Fucking” Conservative Women….

ZoneDaiatlas

Tommy was one of the only liberals who criticized that article, and actually lost a job over his position. You sound like a Moby .

Opps, My Apologizes to Tommy Christopher. He did not write the vile article about Conservative women…

Zone Daiatlas wrote:

Remember folks, Tommy Christopher is the same asshole who posted an article about “Hate Fucking” Conservative Women….

Hey, Zone — Pat is right. Unlike other leftists who just delighted in the “hate f—” article at Playboy.com because it demeaned conservative women, Tommy said the piece went too far, and an AOL-Politics Daily column of his saying just that was spiked by his editor (a female, no less). He was given his walking papers shortly thereafter.

Ed Morrissey has the whole story here. My comments on the article can be found here.

Now, you see what Pat Doherty and I just did, Tommy? We had the opportunity to just let a blatant lie about you go unanswered, where it might have just worked its way across the net, sullying your reputation. But even though we think you’ve done a piss-poor job of reporting the truth regarding this Limbaugh deal, we didn’t think it was fair to let someone get away with lying about you, or your work.

You know why we went through the trouble, Tommy? Because Pat and I have integrity. You know why you didn’t do the same for Rush? BECAUSE YOU DON’T.

This story getting confusing. Either Rush did urge people not to donate to the relief effort or he didn’t. Mediaite and others claiming he did urge people not to donate and Rush is apparently denying (I only say this from an earlier posting here, so I’m assuming).

This opens up the door for some more journalistic work I would think. No matter of that, Rush is over the top with his remarks. His blind ideology and ‘preaching’ to his following in the long run does harm (that’s just me). But the left has there own versions too. And I feel they cause more harm than good as well in the long run.

With the remarks I’m reading here, to me his ideology gets into that ethical gray area that has no place in the timeline where Haiti is now with the EQ. Idology selfishly takes him on multiple occasions to “score” political points. It’s selfish, not the best way Rush could handle. American radio hosts can do better at this point in the disaster.

But so can journalism and websites. I think Tommy took similar approach (not as bad as Rush) to enter the same political ‘opportunity knocks’ with the angle of the story. Heavy on Rush and light on Haiti. Again, I think journalists and media sites can do better this point in the disaster. Maybe the angle of ‘don’t listen to Rush oh Rush listeners and here’s plenty of other sites you can go donate besides whitehouse.gov’ because Rush is heavy on not wh.gov and light on alternatives (as far as I know). At least from the transcript I did not see Rush offer alternatives to donate.

Now the urge part. You have Mediaite accusation and a Rush denial (I think). In the transcript again Rush heavy on political not wh.gov but he also stated early:

[So the country that he runs (Obama) around the world apologizing for, the country that he has chip on his shoulder about, he (Obama) now turns to as its president and asks people who have lost their jobs because of his (Obama) policies to donate to WhiteHouse.gov to the people of Haiti, and we will do it. We are the most charitable and the most generous people on the face of the earth. Each and every time a natural disaster like this happens, we step up. We are there.]

So a journalistic tit for tat. Mediaite made the accusation and if Rush did urge not to donate then he should pay some cosequences for that idiocy. Shouldn’t you Tommy go get his response? If your story angle really is about peoples lives and more deaths without Rush’s followers donating, isn’t that critical/urgent enough to make Rush clear up. Maybe he’ll say he did (consequences) but maybe he will make more clear he didn’t and wants his listeners to donate which as you stated will save more lives.

Tommy is a liberal? Tommy, are you a liberal?

RazorsEdge wrote:

Mediaite made the accusation and if Rush did urge not to donate then he should pay some cosequences for that idiocy. Shouldn’t you Tommy go get his response? If your story angle really is about peoples lives and more deaths without Rush’s followers donating, isn’t that critical/urgent enough to make Rush clear up. Maybe he’ll say he did (consequences) but maybe he will make more clear he didn’t and wants his listeners to donate which as you stated will save more lives.

On today’s show, a caller who read the smear on HufferPo went after Rush:

CALLER: Thank you, Rush. I’m glad that you chose to have me on today.

RUSH: Yes?

CALLER: This is kind of belated, but I just have a question for you.

RUSH: Yes, ma’am? Yes, ma’am?

CALLER: Where in your right mind do you get the cojones to just completely — I don’t know, I guess — dismiss a tragedy of possibly a hundred thousand people dead in Haiti? You’re — you’re going around discouraging people to send donations because we already donated to Haiti and it’s called the US income tax; and Obama, the president of our United States — your president as well, whether you like it or not.

RUSH: Where did you…?

CALLER: — you’re saying –

RUSH: Where did you hear that I discouraged donations to Haiti?

CALLER: Uh, I read it in, uh, a news thing called the Huffington Post, but that’s not the point. I was going to finish my sentence if that’s okay with you.

RUSH: Well, but what you just said is a lie. They reported a lie. I did not discourage donations to Haiti.

CALLER: Okay. Well, um, actually the point I was getting to, whether or not you said that — which actually I believe you did. But.

RUSH: No, it’s not “whether or not.” That matters. I mean you call here and ask, “Where do I get off suggesting that we don’t donate to Haiti because we do in the income tax?” and I tell you I said that, but I also said private donations are going to be much better than a government donation. They’re all going. Go to the Red Cross, do other things. Don’t go through the government. It’s just going to go through hands and bureaucracies and a dollar is going to end up being 30 cents by the time they get through with it. I did not say, “Don’t make donations.” That’s not a “whether or not” thing. That’s why you called …

LOL. Tommy, I’ve listened to Rush maybe a dozen times in my life, so I’m not a dittohead.

When someone catches you in a bald faced lie, it’s easier just to complain that everyone is a dittohead and that Rush is their dear leader, I guess?

You’re a hack gossip columnist who can’t even keep his lies straight. If you’re going to lie when we can easily LISTEN to the friggin audio ourselves, then have the decency to say, “I’m sorry guys. I’m a hack who can’t help but lying, hoping that the ten people who read my sad post, are too stupid to do ten seconds of research.

The man never said not to donate to the relief efforts, and you know it. You’re just too blinded with your ridiculous hatred to see it. Liberals have a habit of lying about conservatives apparently. Good thing no one knows what the heck mediaite is, so you’re not in danger of losing this gig.

Folks, it’s truly amazing when someone lies about something that we can all listen to ourselves. It’s mind boggling how hatred of a person can just make you tell lies you KNOW you’re going to get caught in.

Weird. Zone, how did you know that I live in my grandma’s basement?? This is too weeeiiiirrd!

One of you, show me in that transcript where he says this “but I also said private donations are going to be much better than a government donation. They’re all going. Go to the Red Cross, do other things.” I’ll save you the time, it ain’t there. Rush lied again.

Tommy, you are completely deflecting from your original claim. Don’t worry, you don’t need to back it up with quotes. Villifying Rush is more important to you than being accurate.

My man Rush is right on the money as usual. You bleeding heart whiny liberals need to shut the hell up!

Tommy,

Assuming what LNsmithee pasted in comments is true what Rush stated today:

-Donating to private are going to be much better than a government donation.
-do other things. Don’t go through the government.

Does that clear it up for you? For historical record on Mediaite (because ultimately it’s not you, it’s Mediaite stance), is it not important to update your story to say either Rush lied but did ultimately encourage, Rush did not urge not to donate or Rush initially urged not to donate now reversed himself now to encourage to donate? Doesn’t matter which, but important that in the end reversal or lie apparently he’s now encouraging donations.

Which I think is the most important part of the story as was noble your comments today on tweeter linking to this story that Rush’s dollars he seeks to deny #Haiti relief would have saved lives was the important thing. Not to update then makes you (Mediaite) just like Rush and making political hay with very bad timing. Otherwise it’s just political.

But then again from a journalism standpoint you could use one of the update angles I listed to set the record straight. I’m sure in doing so, then more would donate which would save more lives using your reasoning. Because as you stated some have bad taste in radio and would take literally not to donate.

Setting record straight with update could save lives.

Rush Limp-Balls is more of a Dominican Republic
kind of guy. After all, he was returning from that country when he was caught by airport security with contraband boner pills in his luggage.

For those who don’t know, the big tourist attraction in the Dominican Republic is its large number of underage prostitutes (many of whom are brought in from Haiti), which would explain why Limp-Balls kept a stash of hard-on pills in his suitcase. The Protection Project and other humanitarian groups have been trying for years to stop the trafficking of underage girls, who are forced to service creepy old men from the U.S.

So is it any surprise that Rush Limp-Balls doesn’t want people donating to humanitarian efforts in Haiti?

tjl says:
January 14, 2010 at 10:02 pm

Typical liberal response. ignore the message, and just attack the messenger.

Tommy
In rereading this thread this morning I can only shake my head. There were two reasons I read this column: I had heard a portion of the segment cited, and the angry headline did not seem to match what I had heard. I questioned you on the basis of the piece being inaccurate and you kept insisting your facts were in there. I did the job of twice reading the transcript and so no indication of Limbaugh where he “urges” people not to donate.
I specifically asked you for quotes and you acted as if you could not be bothered to do such — “I addressed your concerns in the body of my article, and in the comments. Not gonna repeat myself. My readers can read.” However you could muster the effort to bring in another unrelated quote (the Haitian hookers comment) and used that to deliver invective and be dismissive. I was never crude towards you, nor had I even suggested you had lied, so the aggression was a curious reaction.

I can only assume by that point you realized your charge against him was not backed up because then you provided a tertiary quote of Limbaugh stating he suggested people donate. You state it was not in the transcript in your column and therefore is another lie by him. True, not in your transcript but he could very well have said as much in a completely seperate segment, but it gave you the chance to say he lied. I still do not understand however how this proved your initial contention. The fact is you had to have reread the transcript to make that new claim yet you did not provide anything to substantiate your original concept.

Despite this you had no problem posting two additional articles on the site repeating the inflamatory charge that Limbaugh was stifling donations. I understand in a column you are free to inject opinion and I do not question your stance, but at the same time an adherance to facts still applies. You have proven that is not so important, staying on message is the key — which is ironic on a site that monitors journalistic activity. Moving forward I really see no reason to read another piece penned under your byline.

There’s something else in that transcript from Wednesday’s show that people deliberately missed: Rush actually gave credit to Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez for sending relief workers, and expressed relief that special envoy to Haiti Bill Clinton wasn’t there at the time.

Limbaugh did not say “don’t donate”. What he said was “donate directly to the Red Cross, do not donate through the government website or the White House website.”

To quote: “I did not say, “Don’t make donations.” I said private donations are going to be much better than a government donation. Go to the Red Cross, do other things, but don’t go through the government. It’s just going to go through hands and bureaucracies and $1 is going to end up being 30 cents by the time they get through with it.” end of quote.

“30 cents” may be an exaggeration, but the point is Why funnel the money through the WhiteHouse.gov website instead of just going directly to the RedCross.org website? (Unless you’re a Democrat and want Obama to get the credit, not all of us do)

I’m a regular listener to the Rush Limbaugh show. (gasp!). He has two telethons each year, one for leukemia and one for scholarships for the children of fallen soldiers and Marines. He also contributes generously with his own money to both causes, and possibly to others which he does not publicize.

Lastly, the nation of Haiti is a basketcase, for reasons too numerous to list. Americans can help, the US government can help, but no amount of generosity is going to turn Haiti into a paradise. It might seem politically incorrect to talk about it at this time, but it is a fact and it should not be ignored when the time comes to appropriate public money.

David Brooks racist commentary in the NYT was worse than Rush’s hate speech..How come Brooks is given a pass in the chatter class??

Hello you cos i do enjoy your unique article, i would feel special if you would want me to write a blog review about your fine webblog on my own Blog would you grant me permission?

Best wishes, John Peds
Author of how to cook salmon

This is remarkable of the better blogs in the field of educational activity. If I don’t come in for a couple of days, there are so many posts that it’ll consider me a couple of hrs just to go over whatever I missed!! Praise.

Thanks. great wonderful infomation here keep up Culinary Skills Egg Salad Recipe French Onion Soup Recipe the great worked. I cannot really leave a more creative commentary as i’m abit out of my deph but i will be checking back here for further updates.