Rush Limbaugh Says Angry Blacks Are In 30 Year Plot To Train Black Children as Militants

hmm I don't know how he gets away with saying stuff like this on the air. In many other countries he'd be probably charged with inciting racial hatred.

If people can get fined for Janet Jackson showing a tit, they should fine him for spewing hate filled speech.  It's more harmful than any boob.

While Bush was preparing to invade Iraq, Rush was ranting about the Muslim world wanting to destroy our way of life. Every Muslim according to him was a terrorist, now every Black Child is an internal terrorist, wanting to destroy the Nation from within. What has he ever said about the klan, the white supremist, or any other white radical group. Don't these groups want to enforce their ideology on the Nation. Rush Limbaugh was a draft dodger who never had the courage to stand up for this Country and now he claims to be a true Patriot. He needs to crawl back into that hole with the rest of the cowards. I would be safe in saying Rush would never stand up for this Nation if it required him to put his life on the line.

What has he ever said about the klan, the white supremist, or any other white radical group?

Thanks for listening, and be sure to patronize my advertisers!

Rush Limbaugh is actually an expert at spotting terrorists; he practices every morning when he looks into his mirror.

he is shifting blame and frustration onto the entire African-American community, blaming them in his tirade for all the ills of this country, including the current financial crisis. He's trying to turn the entire AA community into a sub-human group of "other" by saying they "hate, hate, hate" America. This in turn, allows him and his followers to treat them differently. This is no different, and no better, than the intolerance and illogic I hear coming from the Middle East. He is starting to walk us down that path - the path to illogical intolerance, hatred and eventual violence. 

I can't help but giggle over how ridiculous this is.

And he "knows" this how?  *Shakes head*  I'd laugh if I weren't crying over how sad this is...

This man represents, perhaps, some of the worst vitriol available on air----he should not be given the opportunity to have an audience...

Talk about "feeding the dark side...."

Reprehensible!

All this dope-addict knows is that he has a $30,000,000 annual salary to justify.  I'd guess that there is nothing he wouldn't say to maintain his ratings.  Nothing sells to weak people like fear.

It is one thing to voice an opinion...quite another to engage in incendiary, racist hate speech....

How does not liking what Limbaugh's comments, and BTW are you saying they we're not deplorable, translate into wanting to put all conservatives at the bottom of the ocean?

Drama queen,bit?

Olbermann had a good line regarding Limbaugh and O'Reilly last night as he started to read something they had said.

Keith: "Hey, wait a minute.  Those guys don't matter any more!"

Not that they mattered much in the first place. 

I see Fred apparently was among those who booed at McCain's concession speech the other night.....

How does not liking what Limbaugh's comments, and BTW are you saying they we're not deplorable, translate into wanting to put all conservatives at the bottom of the ocean?

Drama queen,bit?

No, not drama queen. I speak from first hand experience. My family and I escaped from communist Czechoslovakia and this is exactly how opression of the people starts. Someone yells "What he is saying is making those people over there angry at the government or at those other people over there. He has no right to say something that would make someone angry." And the ruling party starts to gag any opposition. Don't give me this drama queen crap, because you've never seen it up close and personal. I don't agree with what he says, but he has a right to say it. Just like the civil rights activists on the radio during the 60's that were screaming for opposition to the governement had the right to say what they said. Is this still a f-ing free country or isn't it?

I am just really surprised Limbaugh uses that mouth to eat with.....

Your response is an over reaction, Fred.

Speaking out about civil rights DOES NOT equal what Limbaugh spews....and no doubt he will always have an outlet for his nonsense in America....

By not being given an opportunity to have an audience I mean my hope is that Americans will tire of his ranting, raving lunacy and turn him off....

Though as Marty said---there appears to be duplicity with the FCC---Janet Jackson's tit is far more appealing than Rush Limbaugh's mouth and one has to wonder how the one is a violation of FCC rules and the other is not....

Relax!

Fred:  You may or may not be a naturalized American citizen.  But if you are, you were required to study our system of government and pass a quiz (although elementary).

The Constitution and its Amendments were part of that study.  You seem to be under the mistaken impression that the free speech provision of the First Amendment gives license to anyone to say anything that they want to.  That is not the case.

It is well settled in constitutional law that one cannot cry "Fire" in a crowded theatre with the expectation of protection under the First Amendment from the consequences of that act. 

Hateful speech designed to inspire violence is not protected free speech.  Limbaugh fits this model.

Fred - are you seriously saying that racist and hateful comments about Americans are the same as people opposing government decisions?  It's a big difference.  I do not believe for one second that the majority of conservatives would defend his fictitious accusations against Americans.  It's a very slim line between free speech and hate speech, which is why the US has a hard time addressing the issue.  I feel he has a responsibility to his listeners to be more truthful about his topics and to be very clear when his accusations are simply his opinion.  His comments are dangerous and that takes them a little past offensive.

Fred:

I don't agree with what he says, but he has a right to say it.

I would agree he has the right to say it, as long as he isn't inciting or encouraging violence or illegal activity. However, sensible people also have the right to strongly condemn it, as the other comments have done above. Our voices together should put him to shame and off the air, not any government or police action.

Hey Truth,

If you believe what you say then MLK should have been prosecuted for inciting people to riot.

I do not care to listen to Limbaugh but I do agree if a black man can spout hate towards white folks then a white man should be allowed to do the same.

Puh---lease----Martin Luther King, Jr. never uttered the kind of incendiary words that Limbaugh has.....

Fred: I never said Rush didnt have the right to say what he says. I merely said I disagree with it. I support his right to say what he says like I support mine to call him a douche for saying it.

Dixie: You could have said Farrakahn or Stokley Carmicheal, if you wanted to talk about blacks spewing hate. Accusing MLK of inciting people to riot is a lot like saying a victim of domestic violence was "asking for it". Unless you believe he really deserved dogs and firehoses turned on him.

I am black. I cant speak for all black people anymore than you can for whites. But hate talk is hate no matter who spews it.

I may not agree with what most conservatives say but I'll defend their right to say it. I do draw the line at hate speech though and Rush has left that line far behind.

Don't give me this drama queen crap, because you've never seen it up close and personal. I don't agree with what he says, but he has a right to say it.

No one's saying his First Amendment rights should be violated. Please learn something about the difference between citizen criticism and gov't censorship before presuming to get on your "You don't know what I know!" pedestal.

P.S. - The US isn't communist Czechoslovakia. For one, the US still exists. :-p

I do not care to listen to Limbaugh but I do agree if a black man can spout hate towards white folks then a white man should be allowed to do the same.

Are you saying that MLK spouted hate towards white folks?  Proof please.

Ah yes, and it starts. Let's shut them all up, the conservatives

no, conservatives don't need to shut up there are many with valuable ideas and clear concerns.  Limbaugh is not one of them. 

Sometimes I suppose that TV personality's are not given the credit they deserve for the things that they do to shape the opinions of the American Electorate.

But today I would like say that during the course of this election whenever there seemed to be a sea of intensely negative attacks on Senator Obama by Republican partisans or even worse the minions of Fox News, Talk Radio, or those right wing Internet Blogs. That in the midst of that swirling sea of negativity, MSNBC's evening news shows of Keith Olbermans "Countdown", and then later the Rachel Maddow's show proved to be a breath of fresh air.

These two shows became like a beacon of light in the darkness of lies, half truths, gross distortions, deliberate misrepresentations and sinister innuendo.

I think tremendous credit must and should be given to the White, Asian, Hispanic, Latino, Cuban, as well as Black people of all ages and classes for believing in and supporting and actually voting for Senator Obama.

But as a person who followed the campaign intently and intensely for the entire 21 months I think that I can truly say that during the darkest moments of the Primary as well as the General Elections that without the tireless efforts of both Keith Olberman and Rachel Maddow yesterday just may not have ever happened.

Their tireless efforts to report fairly and in some cases actually combat the almost overwhelming bias of the Republican leaning media using humor as well as truth was a key factor in beating back the Republican spin machine.

That although their efforts may not ever be acknowledged by the Obama Campaign themselves in my opinion they played a truly important and pivotal role in the eventual success and election of President Elect Barack Obama.

Fred, this is a guy who couldn't even do color commentary on a football game without being racist.

Right to free speech yes!  Right to a radio show as a platform for his free speech, no!

The bastard should be removed from the airwaves, he's just another atmospheric pollutant.

Rush Limbaugh molests collies.

This right here is the opinion of the uneducated sheeple who should not be able to vote unless they are accompanied by a credentialed member of a medical facility specialising in psychiatric care- This is America, a FREE country, and while it still is NO ONE should be forced off the air - see Voltaire etc. 

He irrelevant now, and those who support his loony nonsense are irrelevant as well.   The country is moving forward in spite of is many efforts too keep it in the gutter.  

Speaking out about civil rights DOES NOT equal what Limbaugh spews....and no doubt he will always have an outlet for his nonsense in America....

That's only if you define 'civil rights" as benign. Have we forgotten William Ayers so quickly? The man has incited violence directly and even acted on it, yet he is given a forum in our classrooms. Now you tell me how the hell one doesn't equate to the other.

The Constitution and its Amendments were part of that study.  You seem to be under the mistaken impression that the free speech provision of the First Amendment gives license to anyone to say anything that they want to.  That is not the case.

It is well settled in constitutional law that one cannot cry "Fire" in a crowded theatre with the expectation of protection under the First Amendment from the consequences of that act. 

Hateful speech designed to inspire violence is not protected free speech.  Limbaugh fits this model.

Yeah, truth, and he's not telling anyone to go out and shoot someone. Just look at all the stuff that gets posted on the newsvine. There are so many references to violence against Obama, Bush, McCain, Limbaugh, and whoever else is in the public eye, that I couldn't count them all. I don't condone any of them, but going by your interpretation, the government should have the right to silence all those who have posted such words. You give the government that right, and you won't get it back. And the next administration may not be the one you wanted in power. Do you people even hear youleves speak? The only difference between Limbaugh and half of you guys is the size of the audience. And you DO have an audience here, because you're getting little stars for what you say. Do you really want to continue arguing this point?

Ahhh Rush, the radio version of Charles Lutwidge Dodgson, better known under the pseudonym Lewis Carroll.  Crazy, but entertaining!

But today I would like say that during the course of this election whenever there seemed to be a sea of intensely negative attacks on Senator Obama by Republican partisans or even worse the minions of Fox News, Talk Radio, or those right wing Internet Blogs. That in the midst of that swirling sea of negativity, MSNBC's evening news shows of Keith Olbermans "Countdown", and then later the Rachel Maddow's show proved to be a breath of fresh air.

It's funny you say that because the center for excellence in journalism found that McCain was attacked by the media twice as much as Obama. Maybe those on the other side of this election found solice in the words of Fox news and Talk radio after having seen the attacks by dopes like Olberman. It's all your perspective, isn't it?

Why does anybody still listen to this nutcase?

How is Limbaugh still allowed to be on the air. His existance is what angers black people. Him being allowed on the radio is what is making us violent.. Racisim won't die bcause people like Rush and his Supporters won't let it die. Lord forbid i call it what it is then suddenly i'm that stereotypical hostile negro that Rush warned you about.

Are you saying that MLK spouted hate towards white folks?  Proof please.

Don't remember bringing up MLK or "white folks", but there are plenty of quotes I can dig up from the early days of Malcom X, and even MLK that advocate violence, or at least breaking the law. Now, they believed their cause was just, and in the end America agreed with them. I honestly believe Limbaugh sincerely believes his cause is just as well. I don't expect America to agree with him, but he deserves the same right to express himself as the civil right's spokesmen had. If he ever says something to the effect of "We must kill them" or something that is a direct threat, THEN you can lock him up.

Rush needs to take his meds! OOPS...he has been there done that!

Don't remember bringing up MLK or "white folks", but there are plenty of quotes I can dig up from the early days of Malcom X, and even MLK that advocate violence

Fred: The MLK v white people started from dixie not you.  Malcom X admitted he was wrong,  and encouraged peace. Maybe Rush needs a pilgrimage to Mecca.

And please find me an MLK quote advocating violence. Civil disobediance like sit-ins where the only people harmed where those trying to get lunch, cant possibly be your proof of MLK supporting "breaking the law"

Again. I never said Rush didnt have the right to say what he said. I just maintain I have the right for calling him a douche for saying it.... He's a douche 

Yeah, truth, and he's not telling anyone to go out and shoot someone.

Yes, he is.

"I tell people don’t kill all the liberals. Leave enough so we can have two on every campus -- living fossils -- so we will never forget what these people stood for."

~Rush Limbaugh

Fred there is a huge difference in violence and breaking the law.  Especially when that law is something along the lines of African Americans having to sit at the back of the bus.

If you are actually suggesting that MLK incited violence, you are so incorrect it's silly.  MLK's whole approach was non-violence.

I wasn't harmed at all by Janet Jackson's boob

What is sad, is that I can hear the methodical way he spews this, and I don't listen to his shows, just clips from other talk shows.

This is a fat, old foot ball player whose glory days are far behind him.

He is a scared white man living in Florida, who use to neighbor with Trump and now a Russian tycoon.

His greatest fear is not the black man, but his own death and loss of money.

He prospers by selling hatred and then criticise those who have been the recipients of such hatred.

It really is kind of funny in a sad way.

All the things I would like to say to his face, and why bother, it would not change a thing. You have to reach his audience.

Fred:....Delay, Bachmann, Palin, Rep. Wilson, Dole, and all the GOP talking heads during the election, called Obama and his supporters, socialist, Marxist, anti- American, followers of Lucifer, come on if you support the likes of Limbaugh you know all the names. And now that some Democrats are calling him what he really is, your answer is to change the station. Does it matter that he spews hate and dissension, the Nation has spoken and spoken emphatically that the likes of Limbaugh aren't a part of the fix, but a part of the problem. If the white hate groups didn't listen to Limbaugh, he would be sitting in a dark room with his gold mic babbling to himself.

Fred:

I don't agree with what he says, but he has a right to say it.

I would agree he has the right to say it, as long as he isn't inciting or encouraging violence or illegal activity.

Okay, CliffDog, let's look at what the Huffington Post put on their site, and examine it. Let's see if you can point out where he is encouraging violence or illegal activity.

now that technological advancement is going along at light speed. And yet during this period of time, whether it be the last 57 years or be it the last 20 years, it seems that a majority of the black population has remained angry, frustrated, and behind.

Nothing there. I think most blacks would agree with that. Even Obama admited this.

They've been left behind. They are acting like they've been left behind, and of course we've heard that this is because of racism, natural systemic institutional racism in America, that we are unfair, that this country is just horrible and rotten.

Again, I believe this is something that was a common belief. It may not be as prevelant now that Obama has been elected, but I don't even need to hear a Revernd Wright sermon to believe this.

...The federal government became the father. The father didn't have to hang around in order for the kids to be okay, depending on how you define okay. But as you study more and more of this ACORN stuff, you find that it has been part of an entire movement that has been going on for two, maybe three decades, right under our noses.

Now it gets a little more complicated. Now, this may be insulting to a lot of blacks who grew up with a father in the house, but since so many grew up WITHOUT one, I can see the point he's trying to make, though I don't necessarily agree with him. IMO, the MOTHER became the father. But that's a difference of opinion. I still see noting that leads me to believe he is inciting violence or lawlessness.

We thought that it was just liberal welfare policies and all that that kept blacks from progressing while other minorities grew and prospered, but no, it is these wackos from Bill Ayers to Jeremiah Wright to other anti-American Afrocentric black liberation theologists with ACORN, and Barack Obama is smack dab in the middle of it, they have been training young black kids to hate, hate, hate this country, and they trained their parents before that to hate, hate, hate this country.

Lot of "hate"s in that line, but this looks more like an attempt to explain what we saw in the snippets of Revernd Wright. He's grasping for reasons why people like Wright believe things like that white scientists invented HIV. He is looking for where the anger in blacks is founded. I'd say it's a combination of life's experiences AS WELL as parents passing it down to kids. What the ratio is, only those who have experienced it can say. But, again, I don't see him condoning violence on the part of his listners.

It was a movement. It was a Bill Ayers, anti-capitalist, anti-American educational movement. ACORN is how it was implemented, right under our noses.
It has been a movement, it has been a religion, and Obama and Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers were all up to their big ears in it.

Here he's saying it wasn't just a random occurrence in individual homes. And judging by the snippets of Revernd Wright's sermons, I'd have to agree with him. It's okay if you disagree, I don't want to get into the whole Reverend Wright argument again.

So, let's make YOU in charge of determining what speach is the equivalent of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded auditorium, as someone referred to it above. YOU point out the words in what he said that you would cite for a judge as inciting violence and lawlessness if you were shutting him down.

And, by the way, where the hell did the "miilitant" label come from that's mentioned in the title of this article? Seems to me that POWERISKNOWLEDGE took some liberties here.

This is the same man who never got charged with illegal drug possession, (oxycotin), and yet he can rant racist, dangerous lies over FCC controlled airwaves without any fear of fines, firing, or worse?? Why????

In some countries he'd be missing. But so drastic a response has no redeeming value. All one can do is plant the seeds of truth and intelligence. Someone will get it, though maybe not Rush.

Racism won't die because people like Rush and his Supporters won't let it die.

Rush's racism (and others like him) is perpetual and such has always been a part of human existence. It will not die no matter what. Some people will go before the Lord with a big old satisfied grin and declare to Him that they have dedicated their lives to keeping the race pure, free of race mixing with Jews and Blacks. Then he will say to them "Get away from Me, you workers of iniquity. I never knew you."

Freedom of speech.  I think if you can find a 1965 issue of time magazine after the Watts riots you will see exactly the militarization of children on the cover.

It's funny you say that because the center for excellence in journalism found that McCain was attacked by the media twice as much as Obama.

Source?

but going by your interpretation, the government should have the right to silence all those who have posted such words. You give the government that right, and you won't get it back. And the next administration may not be the one you wanted in power. Do you people even hear youleves speak?

Ummm... I missed the part where anyone said that the US gov't should censor Rush Limbaugh. Can you point that out for me? I'd hate to think that you were tilting at windmills.

but since so many grew up WITHOUT one, I can see the point he's trying to make, though I don't necessarily agree with him.

Glad to know you think so highly of an entire ethnic group to say "well, hey, there must be a s----ton of black single mothers, so let's just paint them all with that brush for convenience."

He is looking for where the anger in blacks is founded.

In much the same way that I can ask "Why do you beat your wife?" It's begging the question.

And please find me an MLK quote advocating violence.

Okay, here's one in which he tells his followers that they should break laws if they perceive a law as being unjust:

I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law. MLK

Now, let's say one of his followers decides that the law that states one can't kill a white man who has denied a black man a job based on the color of his skin is unjust....

And don't start screaming that MLK didn't mean that. I know he didn't mean that, just like I don't honestly believe Linbaugh wants conservatives to go out there and kill liberals. The point is that men MUST be allowed to say things like this. Because, again, once you start censorship of this type of statement, the geenie is out of the bag, and it becomes subject to interpretation. Shut Limbaugh down, and I GUARANTEE you that the next time an administration takes office that leans in the other direction, they'll reciprocate and shut down the Olbermans and eventually even guys like Chris Mathews. And I'd think about that real hard. The economy is very fragile right now, and Obama has so little experience with economic matters that it's a real possibility that he could drive it into a depression. If that happens, then four years from now, we could be looking at a Republican administration that is as far right as this administration promises to lean left.

Brian,

 Pictures may say a thousand words but they are not equal to the voices in your head.

Princeton definition Militarization: act of assembling and putting into readiness for war or other emergency

In your example Watts was an abreaction to racial injustice. It wasnt an organized movement to overthrough anything. If anything it was hateful and divisive views(and actions) like the ones Rush propagates that led to it.

Now if you want to talk militarization you could discuss the black panthers (which dont exist). Or you could talk neo-nazis aryean nation and many other governmental anarchist groups (which do exist).

Fred I said advocating violence, not civil disobedience to laws we all now agree were unjust. Lest your premise is he should have protested from the back of the bus and from the back doors of diners.

the nut was the one to elect mr obama to office, alone with mr hannity, we are glad to have them on board. those two dumbos are great for the democrats, this is two for mr limbaugh, mr clinton was number one, now mr Obama number two keep it up you guys.

It's funny you say that because the center for excellence in journalism found that McCain was attacked by the media twice as much as Obama.

Source?

Here ya go. Here's one.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081022/pl_politico/14829

Ummm... I missed the part where anyone said that the US gov't should censor Rush Limbaugh. Can you point that out for me? I'd hate to think that you were tilting at windmills.

The Truth brought up the sceario in which someone yells "Fire!" in a crowded auditorium. If that started a spempede that resulted in injury, that person would be prosecuted. Now, the implication is that what Limbaugh is doing is screaming "Fire!", if that was in fact the case, then the government would have the right to shut him down. I suppose thugs could do it too, but I don't think anyone is suggesting that, and since he has the highest rated radio program, the audience isn't shutting him down, so the government is the only option.

but since so many grew up WITHOUT one, I can see the point he's trying to make, though I don't necessarily agree with him.

Glad to know you think so highly of an entire ethnic group to say "well, hey, there must be a s----ton of black single mothers, so let's just paint them all with that brush for convenience."

Well, I suppose I could ignore that statistics, if it makes you feel better. Here's a suggestion, instead of @!$%#ing at anyone who has the audacity to mention it, why don't you use your energies to find the casues and solutions?

He is looking for where the anger in blacks is founded.

In much the same way that I can ask "Why do you beat your wife?" It's begging the question.

I've never hit my wife. Though, I have to confess I routinely leave the toilet seat up, which may as well be the same thing as far as she's concerned.

Fred-

It's funny you say that because the center for excellence in journalism found that McCain was attacked by the media twice as much as Obama.

I haven't read the reasons why, but I wonder if it was because McCain made so many mistakes during his campaign and left himself open to such criticism.  Before you think I'm bashing, I'm not. I don't have a dislike of McCain even though I didn't vote for him.  The media loves a story and stories are fascinating (whether about great feats, the everyday, or failures).  With the financial crisis and his campaign's unfortunate missteps afterward, I feel that McCain brought that on himself to some degree.  In my opinion, mostly everything anyone could have dug up about both candidates was put out there whether we liked it or not.  For example, fox news reported for several days about whether McCain would bring up Rev. Wright again and during every mention they were sure to show the video.  I also thought that McCain was falsely accused (more than necessary) of being close to blowing his top.  I thought McCain did a decent job of keeping in check.  I think that this time Americans paid more attention to a wider variety of news outlets.  Just look at how all the conservatives know what the liberals are saying and vice versa.   All in all, one way or another, both candidates went through the information cruncher and Americans should be very proud we were more informed this election than ever before.  I hope the big turn out continues on, our country is better off with citizens that care to vote. 

You know, Limbaugh..... Wait.... As Olbermann said last night, LIMBAUGH DOESN'T MATTER ANYMORE!!!! As well as O'reilly, or the rest of the blowhards on the radical right.

I'd be the last person on earth to hold Rush's winky for him, but in the interest of accuracy, when this audio was transcribed, according to the article, the election was still weeks away so they had not yet lost. Ergo, this is not the rantings of a bad loser. It is just the rantings of a man who knows his delusions are about to be shattered, grasping at straws and trying very hard to find a reason for being.

Except for the fact that more comments bring attention to this thread----I really do not see why comments offered as Fred has given are given any credibility whatsoever.....

It all ends up sounding like "white noise......."  (Pun definately intended.)---that incessant nonsensical/unintelligible sound in the background....

Thanks for the source, Fred. It rathers blows your cherry-picking out of the water, though. From your link:

“Much of the increased attention for McCain derived from actions by the senator himself, actions that, in the end, generated mostly negative assessments,” the study found. “In many ways, the arc of the media narrative during this phase of the 2008 general election might best be described as a drama in which John McCain acted and Barack Obama reacted.”

Indeed, the increased and increasingly negative media attention for McCain isn’t surprising when looking at how the campaign’s strategy changed since the beginning of the general election.

“We ran a different kind of campaign and nobody cared about us,” spokesman Brian Rogers told Politico last month, adding later that “we intend to stay on offense.”

For Barack Obama, the study found coverage “has been somewhat more positive than negative, but not markedly so," with 36 percent of the storiees positive in tone, 35 percent mixed, and 29 percent negative.

So do these numbers reveal a pro-Obama bias? Not necessarily, according to the study’s authors.

(Emphasis mine)

Well, I suppose I could ignore that statistics, if it makes you feel better. Here's a suggestion, instead of @!$%#ing at anyone who has the audacity to mention it, why don't you use your energies to find the casues and solutions?

What statistics? Again, source?

And it's rather laughable that you think you're some kind of rebel with the audacity to go along with Limbaugh when, as you said, he has the highest rated radio show. Further, I see none of your energy being poured into causes and solutions -- practice what you preach, kiddo. ;-)

I've never hit my wife.

Since you're fine with loaded questions: you didn't answer my question -- I ask again, "Why do you beat your wife?"

Rush Limbaugh is filth.

Fred I said advocating violence, not civil disobedience to laws we all now agree were unjust. Lest your premise is he should have protested from the back of the bus and from the back doors of diners.

I know the difference between advocating violence and civil disobedience. But the quote from MLK doesn't make that distinction. YOU may know precisely what he meant by that, but that quote is often placed alone, outside the context of all his writings. Reading just those words, a follower could draw the conclusion that MLK is giving him the go ahead to commit violence against his opressors if he believes that opressor is protected by an unjust law.

And that's not my premise at all. It's just the opposite. I would fight just a vehemntly for MLK's right to say what he said as I would for Limbaugh's right to say what he does. That's the whole point of this excercise. This is free speech. Just because you don't agree with it, just because you find it insulting, or just because you fear the words, doesn't mean the government should step in and silence the source.

If you want to silence Limbaugh, then form compelling arguments AGAINST what he says, not ad hominem arguments, and make those arguments to his followers. Who knows, maybe you'll come up with the magic words that make people turn the dial instead of listening to him. Government intervention is NOT the answer here. In fact, government intervention would only FUEL his rhetoric. Can you imagine if he was censored? That would play right into his hands. The government would become the opressive socialist regime, the VERY thing he has been telling his listners it will become under an Obama administration. It would harden his listners hearts, and the divide would grow.

Fred - I didn't hear Limbaugh, but if that washington post item was the transcript then can't you see the lack of 'I think' or 'I believe' in place of the outright accusation?  Is an unfounded accusation (both by inference and statement) free speech, or is it libel?

I think it most certainly does not encompass free speech.  I think it is a sweeping statement about so called "blacks", including innocent children who don't even yet understand what 'hate' is, and yes, even the not so defenceless people like Ayers and Wright, along with the US President-Elect.  That speech sounds to me like it is accusing them all of deliberately concocting a plan and implementing it for decades against the 'rest' of America...now, Fred, for the people who are influenced by such statements (and there are plenty), this then could be perceived as a 'truth' and/or a threat against them by 'the Anti-American 5 year old kids' that are being taught all of this.  Where does this eventually lead in your opinion - because there are many many atrocious instances in the world where a certain demographic of society was ostracized for "being considered" a threat to that particular nation, and it never turned out well.  Just like you say, it starts out small...

Try rereading that statement but replace all references to black people to yourself, your family and friends, and think about how you'd really feel if someone was spouting that kind of sh*t about you personally to a national audience?  For me, it doesn't really fit well to be honest.

There has to be a time when a gagging order can be put on someone for incendiary and slanderous comments that have no foundation.

And in answer to the 'fire' question - in my opinion, it's akin to yelling 'there's a man in theatre that's about to start a fire...be warned - run for your lives' - boils down to the same thing.

I liked Janet's boob too.

Thanks for the source, Fred. It rathers blows your cherry-picking out of the water, though. From your link:

Doesn't blow it out of the water at all. The fact is that there was more negative coverage. As for the reasons why, that's a subjective opinion. One I'm sure you share, but many other people don't. It's no cooincidence that the people who do most of the political talking for networks like ABC are former Democratic big shots like Chris Mathews and Steponopoulis (sp?). And it's no cooincidence that, now that the race is over, they are singing the praises of McCain. They had an agenda. And Fox had an agenda for that matter. It just so happens that Fox is outnumbered.

What statistics? Again, source?

Accurding to the Census Bureau, it's 50% single mothers. Come on, you can look this stuff up yourself.

http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/hh-fam/cps2007/tabC9-blkalone.xls

And it's rather laughable that you think you're some kind of rebel with the audacity to go along with Limbaugh when, as you said, he has the highest rated radio show. Further, I see none of your energy being poured into causes and solutions -- practice what you preach, kiddo. ;-)

WTF? Rebel? And I'm not going along with Limbaugh, I'd arguing that he has a right to say what he says. THAT'S where my energies are directed right now. Because, if nobody stands up and opposes the thought of this kind of cesorship, then people are liable to think we all agree. We don't.

Since you're fine with loaded questions: you didn't answer my question -- I ask again, "Why do you beat your wife?"

WTF? Again, I don't beat my wife. What's the point of this?

Fred - slow down, re: your comments to me in #1.46 - I said in my original post that he does have the right so say these things as long as he is not inciting violence, but at the same time people had the right to criticize.

Might there be things he's said to directly incite violence? I wouldn't doubt it. I've heard it from other right-wingers on the air and am amazed that they get away with it.

Let me ask you a question: Can repeatedly calling Obama an anti-American socialist who pals around with terrorist, saying he doesn't see America the way "we" do, and saying he's been part of "training young black kids to hate, hate, hate this country" incite the wacko-fringe to violence?  After hearing all that, what else is a "patriotic" American to do, other than to take matters into his own hands? I'm not sure there's much else they could say in order to incite violence, other than stating it directly. 

Hmmm.. him AGAIN??!! Why why why do people listen to him!!??

Yes, I'm on a LIFE mission to train my children...to be great Americans and great people that will accomplish anything they put their minds to.... OMG! That must scare the heck out of him!! o.O

Rush is sad. What he will say to keep ratings...This is when controversy meets ignorance.

Ok Rush was right!!  Before you hang me read the rest of this post.  Lets first look at Merriam Webster's Definition of Militant:

1 : engaged in warfare or combat : fighting
2 : aggressively active (as in a cause) : combative <militant conservationists> <a militant attitude>

Look carefully at number 2.  To me, Obama is the very definition of that usage of the word and I can only hope that Blacks are raising their children to be as militant as he is.

Hopefully Blacks are raising their children to this very definiton so that they can grow up to be Rush Limbaugh's worst nightmare: EDUCATED BLACK MEN/WOMEN!

I didn't hear Limbaugh, but if that washington post item was the transcript then can't you see the lack of 'I think' or 'I believe' in place of the outright accusation?  Is an unfounded accusation (both by inference and statement) free speech, or is it libel?

It's as much libel as Revernd Wright saying that white man created AIDS to kill off the black man. These guys give their demented premises, and they continue on with what they perceive as the logical conclusion. Right at the beginning, I see an "it seems", and if you tried to take Limbaugh to court, he could point to that as evidence that he is only espousing his own views.

I think it most certainly does not encompass free speech.  I think it is a sweeping statement about so called "blacks", including innocent children who don't even yet understand what 'hate' is, and yes, even the not so defenceless people like Ayers and Wright, along with the US President-Elect.  That speech sounds to me like it is accusing them all of deliberately concocting a plan and implementing it for decades against the 'rest' of America...now, Fred, for the people who are influenced by such statements (and there are plenty), this then could be perceived as a 'truth' and/or a threat against them by 'the Anti-American 5 year old kids' that are being taught all of this.  Where does this eventually lead in your opinion - because there are many many atrocious instances in the world where a certain demographic of society was ostracized for "being considered" a threat to that particular nation, and it never turned out well.  Just like you say, it starts out small...

No, no, no. It certainly DOES encompass free speech. Just think of all the people in churches like Revernd Wright's who've been told that the white man is the opressor, and the cause of the poor's ills. Just think of all the regular fiery sermons you might hear in a conservative Catholic church that calls the sinners and un-believers the children of the devil. Just think of all the Mosques where Muslims call the West the devil. You can't hand pick which one's you're going to silence. It's either all or nothing. And, if you silence them all, then Big Brother has arrived.

Try rereading that statement but replace all references to black people to yourself, your family and friends, and think about how you'd really feel if someone was spouting that kind of sh*t about you personally to a national audience?  For me, it doesn't really fit well to be honest.

I don't even need to do that. I sometimes listen to 1010 AM on my way in to work in Baltimore. There are a couple of brothers on there that allow callers to call in and 50% of the calls are benign, but the other 50% are people who do nothing but accuse the white man of all sorts of vile crap, and The Coach makes a point of rarely disagreeing with them. Now, this guy has a pretty big audience and he's painting whites essentially as evil, conniving, and the root of the black man's problems. I routinely get offended, and when I do, I change the station. You could just as easily say that this guy is inciting his black listners, but that's not the case. He's getting ratings.

There has to be a time when a gagging order can be put on someone for incendiary and slanderous comments that have no foundation.

And who's going to decide where that line is drawn? Again, just remember that the next administration that gets ahold of this incredibly powerful tool of being able to silence people, may not agree with your views.

I have enjoyed reading the posts above.

Regarding Janet Jackson's boob---DAM, I missed it.  And I didn't see the instant replay, either. 

Regarding Rush---A co-worker got me to listen to him while we were taking a trip.  That convinced me that he was a megalomaniac (as I understand the meaning of the word), and I've only heard snippets of him since then.  I am convinced that he proves that there is a chance for a mediocre intellect to have some financial success.  His followers, the 'dittoheads' are aptly named.  Although, they strike me more as 'bobbleheads'.

Powerisknowledge You are right he is having a Temper tantrum cause he lost.Shocking he is still on the air after he was found with drugs .

Jesus, Fred - 2 wrongs certainly don't make a right, so I hope you'll forgive me for not agreeing with any of the above as being enough reason that these things should be allowed to continue unchecked.  Same rules apply, If Wright, Limbaugh or anyone else falsely and without basis, accuses someone else or some demographic of doing something, then it is slander, and the 'slanderee', (I know it's not a word!) are the ones that get to decide where that line is drawn.  Not necessarily through government, but I think if it was me, I'd be doing all I could to get him legally gagged.  There's a difference in being offended by implication or innuendo and being openly and pointedly wronged.

You can't agree surely that a person could say absolutely anything they want about anyone, and think it's alright? 

CliffDog, you said the following:

Fred - slow down, re: your comments to me in #1.46 - I said in my original post that he does have the right so say these things as long as he is not inciting violence, but at the same time people had the right to criticize

On the one hand I agree, however on the other hand I must disagree that he had a right to say so due to the following.

I say this simply because of the fact that his listener base is comprised of those who fear blacks and some can be easily influenced to violence.  No thinking person would swallow this clap-trap, however, there are those who shoot first and ask questions later.

Spitting this type of fear will only raise tensions amoing those who have no real exposure to a black person.  Moreover, it will justify some idiot that their violence is righteous in order to stop the militants... i.e. the skinhead plot to kill school children before finishing off their escapades by attempting to assassinate the President-Elect.  Those types of people, already filled with self-righteousness, can be easily swayed to action by this bull.

Look at what happened at Baylor in Dallas. Though it shouldn't be so, racial tensions in this country are high right now.  Limbaugh's comments were tantamount to yelling fire in a crowded theater.

Fred President-Elect Barack Obama firmly rejected the racism and paranoia of his former pastor and he strongly condemned the violent actions of the Weathermen group so could we please just leave both of them alone now.

I've always felt that Rush deserves a huge level of responsibility to the Murrah Building attack in Oklahoma City by Tim McVeigh, and ardent fan of this unregenerate sicko.

Jesus, Fred - 2 wrongs certainly don't make a right, so I hope you'll forgive me for not agreeing with any of the above as being enough reason that these things should be allowed to continue unchecked.  Same rules apply, If Wright, Limbaugh or anyone else falsely and without basis, accuses someone else or some demographic of doing something, then it is slander, and the 'slanderee', (I know it's not a word!) are the ones that get to decide where that line is drawn. 

But how do you go about disproving him? How do you prove that blacks haven't been teaching their children to hate? Are you going to parade 14 million kids through a court room and ask them. These idiotic generalizations he makes can't be proven to be false. Inherently, most sensible people would conclude that MOST black kids aren't taught hate, maybe distrust, but not hate. But proving that to convict him of libel is next to impossible.

You can't agree surely that a person could say absolutely anything they want about anyone, and think it's alright? 

Certainly not. But let's take the case of rap lyrics. Can rappers who call for cops to be killed or for women to be beat, be held responsible for any such acts that happen if the person committing that crime happens to have listened to their songs? Are the rappers going to be silenced as well then? It's silly. It's entertainment. Limbaugh is entertainment. Until someone actually acts on some demented impulse and harms a black and cites Limbaugh as his inspiration, no crime has been comitted. You have to prove that what is saying is giving INSTRUCTIONS to do harm, and that harm was done because of those instructions.

I say this simply because of the fact that his listener base is comprised of those who fear blacks and some can be easily influenced to violence.  No thinking person would swallow this clap-trap, however, there are those who shoot first and ask questions later.

In stereotyping his listners like this, you use the very misguided tactics that you so detest in him.

Fred

stereotyping his listners like this, you use the very misguided tactics that you so detest in him.

Ok Fred I will allow you your opinion. HOWEVER, my core belief is an old Southern saying 'God don't condone no wrong'. 

That being said, Rush's claptrap is such that ANY decent person would turn him off in disgust as I do.  Now anyone who ever ACTUALLY took the time to get to know a black person would understand that they are simply PEOPLE no more no less.  Same worries fears and aspirations as they have but more to deal with because of people like Rush Limbaugh and obviously YOU after reading your defense of this man. You keep condoning and defending the indefensible.

Are you going to tell me that people who listen to this crap on a regular basis are not being instilled with fear.  His speech is the same as saying 'Terrorists walk among us and you can tell them from the color of their skin.'

Oh wait, we did that with the Arab natives didn't we? The difference is that the government had the blessings of the President to racially profile these people. When you consistently, poison peoples mind with this type of crap, you create this fear and NO thinking person would buy into it.  I assume you DO from your comments.

I watched while walking through a store, as a young relatively clean-cut Black teen passed someone who is obviously a candidate for Limbaugh's fans base.  She was walking with her child, she clutched them both as she passed, closer to her in this order.... her purse... her child. 

I don't even think the young man noticed, he was busy looking at one display or another, but I DID.  Made me shake my head as there was NOTHING threatening about him besides his skin color. Funny thing is he never came near her.

Don't give me this drama queen crap, because you've never seen it up close and personal.

I have....and you're still a drama queen.

BTW Fred do you NOT realize that Rush is NOW targeting CHILDREN with his hate?!!!

DragonWoman Attack!  After working for a decade in the black community I realize that THE most important is their ethnicity.  The best minority won.  Fair and square. 

Brian:

After working for a decade in the black community I realize that THE most important is their ethnicity.

Huh?  Not sure what this means.  Explain before I comment please.

Fred:  You never thought that you would get your "fifteen minutes of fame" did you?

Despite all your servile "defenses" of Limbaugh, you are supporting a verbal terrorist whose hate filled speech is not protected by the First Amendment.

Isn't "terrorist" one of the far right nut wings Bogey Man in Chiefs?

My friends (HA HA) the election is over Obama won. I did not vote for Obama, but I will now stand behind him. Put away your hatred and stop letting the media spin all of us into a racial frenzy. These clowns are making a ton of money off inciting anything they can, while people are losing their jobs and homes. Obama I must admit stayed clear of the petty issues and stayed focused. Everyone should now due the same. Lets unite and get out of the mess we are in and make America a great place again.

Limbaugh sounds and looks like an anemic bumble bee - except the bumble bee has a purpose on this planet.

No one can seriously debate this drivil.  He should have been euthanased at birth.

I hope you are not scared of the truth as I see it.  In the minority community the ethnicity is of the up most of importance.  Black is Black.  Mexicano is Mexicano.  Extreme behavior is rewarded.

An Arab that comes to this country is listed by the U.S. census as white.  A blue eyed person born in Africa is designated a white even though he is an African American.  Racism is a very good business in America thanks to Rev. Wright, Farakhan, Jackson, and Sharpton, and others.

When he goes off on vacation his black buddy subs for him. So?

Brian, you suggested finding a 1965 Time Magazine and look at the cover for the militarization of Black children.

I think if you can find a 1965 issue of time magazine after the Watts riots you will see exactly the militarization of children on the cover.

I searched and found nothing to indicate that Black children are being trained as militants.

http://www.studio-international.co.uk/studio-images/modern_life/time_b.asp

I did, however find a magazine cover with a startling photo of Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris with their weapons in their hands ready to murder innocent children.

http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/1999/1101991220_400.jpg

And another from the NRA with an assault weapon, for hunting I guess?

http://www.gunsandhunting.com/covers/cover.gif

Finally, one more I'm sure you may find quite interesting. Somebody trained the boys on this cover.

http://i.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/1998/1101980406_400.jpg

Thanks Brian for the suggestion.

Well.......On top of him being a hate and fear monger. He's also a racist.

When is America going to start striping him of all hes advertising endorsements?

Same worries fears and aspirations as they have but more to deal with because of people like Rush Limbaugh and obviously YOU after reading your defense of this man. You keep condoning and defending the indefensible.

Sigh. Obviously, some of you don't get it and never will. I don't defend him. I don't listen to his show. I have listened to his show a couple times, didn't find it particularly enlightening or entertaining, and I certainly agree that some of what he says is insulting to minorities and women. I defend his right to say it. If you don't see the difference, then there's no use arguing any further.

Sheeeeeesh Rush, lay off the pills.

Sign a Petition Asking President-Elect Obama to Reject Amnesty for Illegal Aliens

NUMBERSUSA.com    has it

COLD HEARTS and FEVERISH HYSTERIA

Rush is the voice of the fundamentally ill who cling fiercely to their fear and hatred and who will continue to embrace ignorance and hysteria while practicing hypocrisies. 

It is a tired obsolete mentality based on illusions of being slighted and it will always exists as long  as there is willing subject who feels victimized by the evolution of the human spirit and free will.

Rush and those like him who preach hate talk have this overwhelming need to control and limit civil rights. Something completely un-American. Yet, huddle they do, around FOX News and Reich wing radio, with cold hearts in need of the warmth by such rhetoric.

The irony is, they claim morality and righteousness, while doing everything contrary, e.g. the need to control Americans with the continued propositions of dogmatic religious based legislation. 

They will not go away, bigotry is cancer looking for a willing host who welcomes it with open ears and closed eyes. The rise in separatist recruitment has ignited since this election began, what the GOP hasn't acknowledge is why is it their party attracts these folks? Only a few have been "outed" but overall McCain himself failed to address the issue, perhaps it is that they are not so obvious without the hoods and armbands, they've just become more underground by going mainstream and hiding behind Fair Tax issues.

HATE WATCH http://www.splcenter.org/blog/

I am a conservative and Rush Limbaugh is wrong, his hate comments are not what the GOP stands for.

That being said, I guess it's ok for Black leaders to continually accuse whites of "keepin us down" without being chastised.

Limbaugh is a buffoon.