Quote :

"If I were the piece of shit that Soros is"

Why is he a piece of shit, again? Because you disagree with him?

Quote :

"If this was Bill Kristol or Tom DeLay even or some other conservative, no one would care."

++

Quote :

"And if the NFL is consistent on this, they will exclude George Soros as well, because he's just as outspoken as Rush."

Totally. I tune in to the George Soros show every weekday 12-3. He's basically the titular head of the Democratic Party.

Quote :

"Yes fucking find them"

Quote :

" "Take that bone out of your nose and call me back." "Have you ever noticed how all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?" "The NAACP should have riot rehearsal. They should get a liquor store and practice robberies." "They are 12 percent of the population. Who the hell cares?" "

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2549

10/17/2009 11:40:48 AM

Who are FAIR's sources? Yet again, omnious quotes that you found from an archived article over 9 years old.

Sigh...

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/14700

I'm sure this ^ will make Soros a hero in your eyes.

Quote :

"Totally. I tune in to the George Soros show every weekday 12-3. He's basically the titular head of the Democratic Party."

And yet I bet you have media matters, the daily kos and anything ACORN related bookmarked.

10/17/2009 11:46:13 AM

http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/limbaugh.asp

3 of your 5 quotes have no sources. Rush made the bone comment as a shock jock back in the '70s and the Jackson quote was made before 1990. Seriously, if that's the best you can do, that's pretty damn pathetic.

It also shows your gullibility, boone, and a serious lack of credibility on any issue. You are just a product of your ilk, you really can't help it. You're programmed to know it all even when the burden of proof proves to be all too much of a burden. But you know it's true deep down, so it's ok.




[Edited on October 17, 2009 at 11:54 AM. Reason : ]

10/17/2009 11:53:13 AM

I stopped reading after:

Quote :

"Move over, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot. There’s a new kid on the block."

and

Quote :

"Soros is a real life version of Dr. Evil—with Obama in the role of Mini-Me."

Citing an op-ed hit piece like this shows your gullibility, Wlfpk4Life, and a serious lack of credibility on any issue. You are just a product of your ilk, you really can't help it. You're programmed to know it all even when the burden of proof proves to be all too much of a burden. But you know it's true deep down, so it's ok.


If you want more recent evidence-- how about "Barack the Magic Negro,"

Here are some more, with audio, in hooksaw format:

Quote :

"Rush: Offensive to hear media call "half-black, half-white" person "with no experience ... a god""

http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200906080022

Quote :

"Responding to a Reuters report on a University of Chicago study that found that "a majority of young blacks feel alienated form today's government," Limbaugh asserted on February 5, 2007: "Why would that be? The government's been taking care of them their whole lives.""

http://mediamatters.org/research/200702060001

Quote :

"On August 23, 2006, discussing the CBS reality TV program, Survivor, in which contestants were originally divided into competing "tribes" by ethnicity, Limbaugh stated that the contest was "not going to be fair if there's a lot of water events" and suggested that "blacks can't swim." Limbaugh stated that "our early money" is on "the Hispanic tribe" -- which he said could include "a Cuban," "a Nicaraguan," or "a Mexican or two" -- provided they don't "start fighting for supremacy amongst themselves.""

http://mediamatters.org/research/200608240003


OMG audio of his show is biased if it's hosted on Media Matters.


And really, this is only race stuff. Imagine if I were to delve into sexism.

10/17/2009 12:51:14 PM

LOL that's the best you have? Those are pretty tame.

Sarcasm is certainly lost on you people. Your failed attempts to put Rush under a klan hood is cute though, if not predictably pathetic.

10/17/2009 1:06:02 PM

What's even more adorable is that when the burden of proof is put on you, you shrug off your lies that you see as truth as if they didn't happen.

10/17/2009 1:08:54 PM

i'm curious what the big deal with a private individual choosing to distance himself from a divisive figure so that he can get a deal done. seems like capitalism to me.

10/17/2009 1:10:03 PM

The problem is that the things that supposedly made Rush so divisive were made up to the point where lawsuits are going to be filed. Yet again, it's not about the burden of proof, but the seriousness of the allegation.

I wish the guy who was bidding on the Rams wanted to stick it out so Rush could clear his name, but the damage has been done, regardless of the evidence or lack thereof.

10/17/2009 1:12:59 PM

Quote :

"but the damage has been done, regardless of the evidence or lack thereof."

that's basically the credo of talk radio.

10/17/2009 1:15:25 PM

^^^^ They were cited in an article from a decently reputable source. The fact that no original transcripts exist to prove or disprove the quotes doesn't make them OMG LIES

And I assume you typed that with a straight face, even after citing the "canadafreepress," whatever that is.

Could you provide me with evidence that Soros actually took part in and enjoyed confiscating Jewish property during WWII, as your source suggests?

Quote :

"but the damage has been done, regardless of the evidence or lack thereof."

Swift Boat.

John Kerry's African lover.

Vince Foster.

Birthers.

etc...




[Edited on October 17, 2009 at 1:27 PM. Reason : ]

10/17/2009 1:17:04 PM

Ah ok so you're perfectly fine with the way things happened and therefore justifies the lies and allegations. Gotcha.

10/17/2009 1:17:50 PM

^^ FAIR is a decently reputable source?

10/17/2009 1:19:12 PM

Decently, yes

10/17/2009 1:20:08 PM

Incredibly reputable, compared to canadafreepress.

(Hey, I can post like Wlfpk4Life)


PS:

Quote :

"you can't criticize the little black man-child"

http://mediamatters.org/research/200808200009?f=h_top

[Edited on October 17, 2009 at 1:24 PM. Reason : ]

10/17/2009 1:21:02 PM

There's lots of copies of the transcripts floating around about Soros, here's a review that was done a few years ago of the 60 Minutes interview:

http://www.larouchepub.com/lar/2009/3610soros_rumpstilt.html

I tried to find it on youtube but to no avail.

10/17/2009 1:28:10 PM

Your canadafreepress article indicates that after fleeing Nazi persecution, he actively took part in confiscating Jewish property, and enjoyed doing it.

And what you're doing there ^ is exactly what you're accusing me of doing, only with a much, much sketchier source.



[Edited on October 17, 2009 at 1:32 PM. Reason : ]

10/17/2009 1:29:07 PM

LOL your decently credible source gets 60 percent of its supposed legitimate quotes wrong and yet they're somehow still credible in your eyes. Now that's funny, I don't care who you are, and more importantly tells me just how much you care about the truth.

10/17/2009 1:29:53 PM

^^ Do your own google search. In fact I'll help you. Psst...you might have to visit a "decently credible source" besides, FAIR, Media Matters, or the Daily Kos for this one.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=soros+60+minutes+interview+jews&rlz=1R2SUNA_enUS335&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

10/17/2009 1:32:24 PM

Quote :

"gets 60 percent of its supposed legitimate quotes wrong"

We need to clarify "wrong."

The audio apparently wasn't saved. That means they're "unverifiable" at worst.

Meanwhile, I'm waiting to see evidence backing up your claims.

[Edited on October 17, 2009 at 1:34 PM. Reason : ]

10/17/2009 1:33:35 PM

http://www.debbieschlussel.com

sweetness-light.com

bsimmons.wordpress.com

http://www.larouchepub.com

http://www.sorosmonitor.com



No, FAIR is still better.

Although it led me to a snopes forum which indicated that Coulter directly accused Soros of being a "Nazi collaborator" while speaking on Hannity. Which is interesting. Imagine the "damage done" with that comment.

10/17/2009 1:39:41 PM

Unverifiable at best, blatant lies at worst.

Yet again, it's not the burden of proof but the seriousness of the allegation.

It reminds me of Dan Rather when he was caught in his tangled web of lies and deceit with relation to Bush and his days in the national guard. Even when there was no proof to back up Rather's claims, he still said he knew it was true. LOL. That ol' burden of proof thing is a slippery one.

10/17/2009 1:40:06 PM

I think it's more reminiscent of the Swift Boat ads, John Kerry's African lover, Vince Foster, McCain's black baby, the Birthers, Obama's college "funding," Obama's Muslim faith, and accusations that Soros is a Nazi collaborator.

At least Dan Rather got fired. And at least the premise of the story was true-- Bush ducked Vietnam.

[Edited on October 17, 2009 at 1:43 PM. Reason : ]

10/17/2009 1:42:19 PM

FAIR has an agenda, and they apparently don't mind printing lies or speculative "unverifiable" sources, which to me shows me that they do not have a shred of journalistic integrity or decency. A good journalist always backs up his claims with these pesky things known as facts. Being nothing more than a liberal rumor mill consisting of lies does not a credible source make.

10/17/2009 1:42:44 PM

Still waiting on evidence backing up your canadafreepress article.

You know what, I've given you half a dozen verified, straight-up racist quote from Limbaugh spanning multiple decades. This tangent is going nowhere.

[Edited on October 17, 2009 at 1:48 PM. Reason : ]

10/17/2009 1:43:42 PM

I wonder if Rush and Soros are so caught up in politics, that they still think the Rams are the Super Bowl winning caliber team they were 10 years ago, and not actually the worst team in the NFL who has lost 15 straight games dating back to week 7 last year?

10/17/2009 1:49:00 PM

From MediaMatters, another leftwing blog, who acknowledges the 60 Minutes interview. I mean seriously, if the interview didn't happen, don't you think Soros or somebody else would have spoken up by now?

http://mediamatters.org/research/200702050005

[Edited on October 17, 2009 at 2:14 PM. Reason : ]

10/17/2009 2:14:32 PM

What about some of this stooge's questionable quotations?

MSNBC Reporter [David Shuster] Begrudgingly Apologizes For Chelsea "Pimp" Comment
02-8-08



Just look at this smug fuckhead.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/08/msnbc-reporter-begrudging_n_85706.html

And as far as I know, Rush Limbaugh never killed anybody.

Quote :

"On December 10, 1990, Sanchez struck a pedestrian, Jeffrey Smuzinick, with his car on a residential street near Dolphin Stadium after Smuzinick darted into the road. Smuzinick was paralyzed. He died from complications contributed to the injuries he received in the accident in an assisted living facility in 1995. Sanchez, who had just left an NFL football game with his father, was not charged with causing the accident, but was charged with and pleaded no contest to DUI. Sanchez, whom a Metro-Dade police officer said 'smelled strongly of alcohol,' first stopped his car but then left the scene. A blood test to determine Sanchez's sobriety was not administered until an hour and fifteen minutes after the collision when he returned to the scene of the accident."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Sanchez#Controversy

These are the people who--along with the Sharpton-Jackson shakedown team--sit in judgment of Rush Limbaugh?

[Edited on October 18, 2009 at 6:04 PM. Reason : .]

10/18/2009 6:04:13 PM

Quote :

"You know what, I've given you half a dozen verified, straight-up racist quote from Limbaugh spanning multiple decades. This tangent is going nowhere. "

What did you expect from someone who holds Jesse Helms up as one of their personal heroes?

10/18/2009 6:15:58 PM

RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE

I CAN'T PROVE IT BUT I KNOW IT'S TRUE!!!11!!

when in doubt, always fall back on the race card. Sweet Jesus, only if your mom would have dropped you on your head one more time.

10/19/2009 7:42:53 AM

I did not read this entire thread but I can guess how it has gone.

I can understand the owner's position. They do not want a media whore as part owner...a person who makes a lot of money to make (sometimes) outrageous comments to be a figurehead for the franchise. That is a legitimate concern.

The only thing that annoys me about this whole thing are the comments players are making.

1. most of your owners are already probably rich old white republicans
2. look in the mirror and at your teammates...there is no room for any player to throw stones...the NFL has its share of violent offenders, DUI's, vulgarity, etc...they have no room to talk about 'standards' and such

10/19/2009 8:28:27 AM

Quote :

"I guess it's perfectly fine that the new head of the players union worked for the Obama campaign and was the main catalyst behind all of this. It's either think as I do, keep it to yourself or gittttt out."

It's all part of that awesome liberal tolerance you hear so much about.

Quote :

"Anyway, as to the topic at hand, it's likely less about Rush's perceived racism and more about the desire to avoid politicizing the NFL with such a controversial figure. One can't know whether or not Rush would do that as simply the part-owner of a team (I honestly doubt that he would), but clearly they'd rather not take that chance, which is a reasonable position."

If that were the case, then I would have problem with them saying "fuck you" to Rush. If that were the problem, though, then why not say that, instead of trumping up charges of racism over statements he never made.

10/20/2009 12:00:43 AM

What about Howard Stern? If he wanted, should he be allowed to purchase an NFL team? If so, why? If not, why not?

10/20/2009 2:56:05 PM

Howard Stern is a comedian. Rush Limbaugh, while offensive to the point of comedy, is not joking.

10/20/2009 3:33:34 PM

Imus was just joking about the Rutgers womens team

10/20/2009 3:43:50 PM

there is no way the NFL would want/let Howard Stern be an owner/part owner of a team

ever

10/20/2009 4:34:20 PM

^^^ Howard Stern is a radio host--and so is Rush Limbaugh.

10/20/2009 4:42:05 PM

Quote :

"What about Howard Stern? If he wanted, should he be allowed to purchase an NFL team? If so, why? If not, why not?"

Depends on whether the owners wanted him or not.

Chances are there's no way in hell he would be allowed to buy one.

10/20/2009 7:44:13 PM

If I were in a club and Rush Limbaugh wanted to join I would not want him to because I would not want to be associated with him (let alone have to actually associate with him). If I had the ability to vote against or block his membership I would do so. If that makes me a liberal/murderer/racist/whatever else the NFL is accused of being, then so be it.

10/20/2009 8:41:29 PM

Quote :

"DaBird: 1. most of your owners are already probably rich old white republicans"

This struck me, too.

It was like, "Yaay, we kept Rush Limbaugh out!"

But the players are still gladiators.

10/21/2009 1:54:25 AM

NPR's Juan Williams--a well-known liberal black man--was told to "go back to the porch" by so-called activist and radio host Warren Ballentine on a major cable news channel last week. Williams' offense? He made the "mistake" of defending Rush Limbaugh.

I didn't hear a peep out of any of you about it.

10/21/2009 4:32:44 AM

You probably didn't hear anything about it because it has NOTHING to do with the fucking topic. Is Ballentine on the ownership team? I'm confused why you would even mention that in this thread.

10/21/2009 9:09:40 AM

well, actually, it is relevant because ballantine was one of the ones castigating rush for his racist remarks.

it speaks to the larger issue of a double standard when it comes to racism between liberals and conservatives.

10/21/2009 9:17:00 AM

^It's two black nobodies who don't make near as much money as Rush Limbaugh.

It's no secret that nobody really cares what black people say, especially when they ain't got shit in terms of power and especially when they're saying it to each other.


But I'll comment: Juan Williams was either delusional or straight up lying to appeal to Fox viewers and get more airtime with them. Rush Limbaugh has been misquoted apparently, but there are still enough real quotes and thinly veiled racist remarks to support the notion that he is a racist or he says racist stuff to make good, controversial radio. The fact that Juan Williams completely ignored all the real stuff and kept insisting that Limbaugh had simply been maligned with fake quotes was very frustrating.

Now, if you wanna talk about a "larger issue," it's the two-sided nature of television news. I sincerely doubt that Juan Williams really believes the shit he was saying, and I'm willing to concede there's a third explanation for why he said what he did. Before the segment, perhaps the two adopted opposing positions and agreed to debate. Williams simply kept pounding away with the "unfairly maligned" bit and largely glossed over Ballentine's legitimate points. Even if he agreed with Ballentine, he couldn't admit it because he had to stick with his side of the debate.

When you arrange some fake debate like that, people eventually get frustrated. And they eventually say really, really stupid and inappropriate shit like "go back to the porch." Ballentine was way out of line. But I honestly just don't care that one black man called another black man an Uncle Tom. A white person who does really, really care about this incident and gets all in a tither over it may need to check themselves...

Now, if you wanna talk about racist black people, let's talk Jesse Jackson irrationally hating Jewish people...OH WAIT, white people hate Jews too!

[Edited on October 21, 2009 at 1:35 PM. Reason : ]

10/21/2009 1:34:06 PM

^ Juan Williams isn't a nobody--you are.

Quote :

"Juan Williams, one of America's leading journalists, is a news analyst, appearing regularly on the newsmagazines Morning Edition and Day to Day. Knowledgeable and charismatic, Williams brings insight and depth — hallmarks of NPR programs — to a wide spectrum of issues and ideas. From 2000-2001, Williams hosted NPR's national call-in show Talk of the Nation. In that role, he brought the program to cities and towns across America for monthly radio "town hall" meetings before live audiences. The town hall meetings were a part of "The Changing Face of America," a year-long NPR series focused on how Americans are dealing with rapid changes in society and culture as the United States enters the 21st century. The series, supported by a grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts, involves monthly pieces airing on Morning Edition and All Things Considered, as well as Talk of the Nation. Williams is the author of the critically acclaimed biography Thurgood Marshall: American Revolutionary, which was released in paperback in February 2000. He is also the author of the nonfiction bestseller Eyes on the Prize: America's Civil Rights Years, 1954-1965, the companion volume to the critically acclaimed television series. This Far by Faith: Stories from the African American Religious Experience appeared in February 2003. This book was the basis for a six-part public broadcasting TV documentary that aired in June 2003. In 2004, Williams became involved with AARP's Voices of Civil Rights project, leading a veteran team of reporters and editors in the production of My Soul Looks Back in Wonder: Voices of the Civil Rights Experience. The book presents the harrowing and haunting eyewitness accounts of some 50 activists who served as foot soldiers and field generals in the Civil Rights Movement. In his 2006 book, Enough, Williams makes the case that while there is still racism, it is way past time for black Americans to open their eyes to the "culture of failure" that exists within their community. During his 21-year career at The Washington Post, Williams served as an editorial writer, op-ed columnist, and White House reporter. He has won an Emmy award for TV documentary writing and won widespread critical acclaim for a series of documentaries including "Politics - The New Black Power." Articles by Williams have appeared in magazines ranging from Newsweek, Fortune, and The Atlantic Monthly to Ebony, Gentlemen's Quarterly, and The New Republic. Williams continues to be a contributing political analyst for the Fox News Channel and a regular panelist on Fox News Sunday. He has also appeared on numerous television programs, including Nightline, Washington Week in Review, Oprah, CNN's Crossfire (where he frequently served as co-host), and Capitol Gang Sunday. A graduate of Haverford College, Williams received a B.A. in philosophy in 1976. Currently, he sits on a number of boards, including the Haverford College Board of Trustees, the Aspen Institute of Communications and Society Program, Washington Journalism Center and the New York Civil Rights Coalition."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1930705

So, racist remarks by a radio host only matter if he or she is "somebody"? Is Boyce Watkins, a professor and commentator, a "nobody"? Is Roland Martin, a radio host and commentator, a "nobody"? Both of these guys called Juan Williams a "happy negro."

[Edited on October 21, 2009 at 2:01 PM. Reason : PS: ]

10/21/2009 2:00:51 PM

Quote :

"It's two black nobodies who don't make near as much money as Rush Limbaugh. "

You know, if I made a comment that included "black nobodies" some penis breath like moron would come along and remind the world that I have Jesse Helms pics in my gallery, and yet I bet this slides because apparently fucking people of different races and/or being liberal makes it ok to make racist statements.

10/21/2009 2:57:45 PM

^,^^I used the phrase "black nobodies" on purpose--tryna be controversial. Frankly, they're black, and they're not named Jackson or Sharpton...nobody cares. I'm not saying it's right, just saying most people can't be bothered to keep up with more than a couple black people at a time...Obama's kinda taking up all the available attention right now. Really, unless you're the president or nearing a political caricature, white people really aren't interested.

Juan Williams' career is impressive (except for the part where he works on Fox news discussing trivial shit about whether or not Limbaugh has been unfairly maligned).

And, despite all his credits, still nobody cares.

You wanted to know why people hadn't remarked on the "porch" comment...it's because nobody cares.

Sorry?

10/21/2009 3:45:05 PM

Did you guys hear Ballentine told Williams to go back to the porch?

OOOOOOOooooo, this is such juicy news that everybody should be talking about. First, I'll probably have to give you a history of who Ballentine and Williams are and why you should care about them. Then I'll have to explain the history behind "go back to the porch" and Uncle Tom's Cabin. But once you understand all the players involved, you're gonna be so outraged what this one black man said to this other black man. You're really gonna care and tell all your friends about it!

10/21/2009 3:51:41 PM

If Rush was made a part owner, he gets more $texas. if they keep him out for whatever reason, he rants on his show, he gets more $texas.

Hes pretty damned good at what he does.

10/21/2009 3:52:00 PM

Upon further review: The word on Rush
by Jason Whitlock
October 22, 2009

Quote :

" Let me first apologize to Rush Limbaugh. Last week in explaining why NFL commissioner Roger Goodell needed to put an end to Limbaugh's latest publicity stunt, I attributed racially insensitive quotes to Limbaugh that I read in two Missouri newspapers, saw on CNN and confirmed through a Google search. Prior to posting the article, I never found a denial of these quotes by Limbaugh, and had no reason to believe those statements were not true. It was unfair to Limbaugh. And I regret that. I've commented on some of his earlier controversies. I've long been an admirer of his broadcasting skills."

Quote :

" Nothing remotely un-American transpired with Limbaugh's ownership bid. I truly regret undermining my message with these quotes."

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/10256766/Upon-further-review:-The-word-on-Rush

10/22/2009 2:21:05 PM

Quote :

"I used the phrase "black nobodies" on purpose--tryna be controversial."

Quote :

"Rush Limbaugh has been misquoted apparently, but there are still enough real quotes and thinly veiled racist remarks to support the notion that he is a racist or he says racist stuff to make good, controversial radio."

pot meet kettle

10/22/2009 2:26:07 PM