EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Feb 11, 2010 14:10:58 GMT -5
Thanks for admitting you have no examples of her being stupidier or dumbly populist.
There are many people who do not know Rush Limbaugh but who feel free to judge what he does. Rush always uses satire to make a point and he used the word "retard" repeatedly in his radio show to satirize Rahm. If you can't see the difference, that's your problem in expecting Palin to renounce him. She did not take a cowardly position, dumb as you say she is, she accurately recognized what it was.
|
|
hoyaclap
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 202 
|
Post by hoyaclap on Feb 11, 2010 15:44:33 GMT -5
Thanks for admitting you have no examples of her being stupidier or dumbly populist. I didn't cite any examples because I don't care to dig for them, and my point had nothing to do with her intelligence, nor populism. I didn't make the original statement, its author can defend it. There are many people who do not know Rush Limbaugh but who feel free to judge what he does. Rush always uses satire to make a point and he used the word "retard" repeatedly in his radio show to satirize Rahm. If you can't see the difference, that's your problem in expecting Palin to renounce him. She did not take a cowardly position, dumb as you say she is, she accurately recognized what it was. I did not judge Rush Limbaugh's comments (short of calling them crude) I was judging Sarah Palin's consistency. Nor did I say Sarah Palin is dumb. What I DID say, is that Sarah Palin took a cowardly position regarding Rush's comments in light of her recent outspokenness toward Rahm. It would not have been cowardly to remain neutral on the issue (to me at least), it would have been shrewd, imo, because Rush Limbaugh will serve her better with his job than without it. Also, there's little she could say to get him fired anyway, even if she didn't like him. She could have rehashed her spokeswoman's previous comments that use of "retard" is inappropriate and people should generally be more conscientious. But she did not need to defend him. Rush Limbaugh is not a public official, he is an entertainer, and he has a right to use the word "retard" so long as his listeners and advertisers find it to be appropriate. But Rush's use of "retard" is clearly more damaging to the cause of injecting respect into the handling of individuals with intellectual disabilities. Rahm made a private comment that was attributed to him. Rush made a public comment on air to make a point. Sarah Palin, in repudiating Rahm Emanuel said: "Just as we’d be appalled if any public figure of Rahm’s stature ever used the “N-word” or other such inappropriate language, Rahm’s slur on all God’s children with cognitive and developmental disabilities – and the people who love them – is unacceptable, and it’s heartbreaking" She compared "retard" to "the n-word." Would she defend Rush Limbaugh if he used the n-word in satire? She called Rahm's use of retard "heartbreaking." Was she heartbroken when Rush used it? Please don't miscategorize my post as somehow my inability to understand the satire of Rush Limbaugh. My point was very simple. I call her position cowardly, because Rahm Emanuel is an easy target for Sarah Palin and her supporters. Rush Limbaugh is not. Sarah Palin would have been right to criticize Rush, and frankly, I believe if Rush pushed back, she could have done herself a great deal of good in preserving her image as family first image, and "straight talk." She was gift wrapped an opportunity that few other politicians are afforded, and that was a no-nonsense gripe with Rush Limbaugh that he would be hard pressed to defend. She has touted herself a number of times as a mother above all else, and I had no reason to challenge that genuineness. I do not agree with Sarah Palin's politics, but there was a point in time where I was willing to heed her, as a parent raising a disabled child, demanding greater respect for "God’s children with cognitive and developmental disabilities – and the people who love them " And now, I am unwilling. |
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Feb 11, 2010 16:36:37 GMT -5
Guess you still don't get it that Rush was using satire and Sarah understood that.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Feb 11, 2010 17:02:12 GMT -5
At least she didn't write "US behind 9/11" on her hand.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Feb 11, 2010 17:09:08 GMT -5
Does any of this really matter? If someone is proposing good ideas with which I agree, I don't really care if they are being whispered to him or her by the Great Gazoo. Conversely, if I find the proposals disagreeable, I don't care if they're coming from a burning bush. At the end of the day, the medium is not, and never should be, the message. Then why is a teleprompter such a problem for you? And as far as using it in the elementary school, yes, he was speaking at a school. But as long as it's being filmed and broadcast on television, then it's not like he's just speaking to the kids. He's speaking to the same 24 hour news cycle audience that he addresses every day. The teleprompter is not a big issue for me. I ama bit surprised that a genius orator relies on it heavily but I basically don't care. You must be confusing me with some other poster. |
|
hoyaclap
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 202
|
Post by hoyaclap on Feb 11, 2010 17:59:20 GMT -5
Guess you still don't get it that Rush was using satire and Sarah understood that. I guess that you'd be willing to buy a bridge from Sarah Palin. She's good at explaining those away too. |
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Feb 12, 2010 18:35:18 GMT -5
It should be noted that Rahm Emanuel did not call anyone a retard, contrary to what Mr. Limbaugh's satire suggests, interestingly enough. Amazing how such factually incorrect stuff gets out there. I am not defending the comments that Emanuel made in fact...only pointing out that folks are dunking in the wrong basket.
|
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Feb 12, 2010 18:46:10 GMT -5
What I have seen are second hand reports, and that is all I think we're running on. As I have seen it, it appears as though his comments were made in the context of a political strategy. Should he have said what he said? No. Was it something of the "you are []" ilk -- not according to what I've seen.
I likewise could care less about the debate but would generally associate with the remarks that hoyaclap has made.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Feb 12, 2010 19:59:54 GMT -5
What I have seen are second hand reports, and that is all I think we're running on. As I have seen it, it appears as though his comments were made in the context of a political strategy. Should he have said what he said? No. Was it something of the "you are []" ilk -- not according to what I've seen. I likewise could care less about the debate but would generally associate with the remarks that hoyaclap has made. His [supposed] remarks don't bother me at all. But it's laughable that you're trying to make a distinction here. You're getting into the "definition of 'is'" territory. |
|
