• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bill Maher defends Rush Limbaugh for 'slut' apology

Boo Radley said:
By conservative logic, used against Clinton and his daughter, and Kerry when he ran, the answer would be yes.

And we do hear such nearly daily, here and on Fox. ;):peace
Click to expand...

Yeah. YOU are one who is pushing this "public figure" nonsense. You say it's somehow OK because Sarah Palin is a public figure. It's your argument. So, are horrible racist comments about Barack Obama OK to the same degree?

Just give a straight answer -- and if not, why not?
 
Harshaw said:
Yeah. YOU are one who is pushing this "public figure" nonsense. You say it's somehow OK because Sarah Palin is a public figure. It's your argument. So, are horrible racist comments about Barack Obama OK to the same degree?

Just give a straight answer -- and if not, why not?
Click to expand...

I thought we just showed you a few of them that occurred in the past without repercussion or huge fuss from the media. What else do you want?
 
whysoserious said:
He does all the time. He always refers to him as Barack Hussein Obama and has, in the past, referred to him as a "half-minority".
Click to expand...

Which of those two things is untrue?
 
Josie said:
Actually that was the LA Times reporter ...
Click to expand...


Barack the Magic Negro - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Barack the Magic Negro"[2] is a song by American political satirist Paul Shanklin who wrote and recorded it for the Rush Limbaugh Show as satire after it was first applied to presidential candidate Obama by movie and culture critic, David Ehrenstein, in a Los Angeles Times op ed column of March 19, 2007. It was played numerous times in 2007 and 2008 by Rush Limbaugh and appeared on the 2008 album We Hate the USA. It is sung by Shanklin to the tune of "Puff, the Magic Dragon". Shanklin impersonates black activist Al Sharpton, who regretfully sings that white people will vote for Barack Obama for President instead of Sharpton, because Obama is a magical Negro (a term previously popularized by Spike Lee[3]), not a real black man from the "hood".

Limbaugh was criticized and accused by some of racism for playing the song. The controversy eventually died down in regards to Limbaugh. It was reignited in December 2008, when Chip Saltsman, a candidate for chairman of the Republican National Committee, sent out CDs containing the song to 168 other RNC members as a Christmas gift, hoping to bolster his 2009 campaign for RNC chair. The move backfired, Saltsman dropped his bid to head the RNC, and ultimately African American Republican Michael Steele won the chairmanship.
Click to expand...
 
whysoserious said:
I thought we just showed you a few of them that occurred in the past without repercussion or huge fuss from the media. What else do you want?
Click to expand...

I figured out why your screen name is what it is -- because not one of your posts can possibly be serious. Oy.
 
Josie said:
Which of those two things is untrue?
Click to expand...

The fact that he uses it as he uses it infers that some will see it as an insult. Ignoring that willfully seems dishonest.
 
Yes, I know the story of the parody.

It's weird how people got angry about the parody and not the actual statement by the LA Times dude. Weird, huh?
 
Harshaw said:
Hmmm. I asked earlier in the thread -- if it's OK to say horrible misogynist things about Sarah Palin because she's a public figure, is it OK to say horrible racist things about Barack Obama, because he is, too?

Your answer, if you wish to remain intellectually consistent, must be "yes."

(Not that this "public figure" excuse isn't a whole bunch of hooey anyway. It's trying to apply a legal standard to something where it just doesn't matter.)
Click to expand...

Okay or not okay is a bit black and white, don't you think? If it's satire involving a public figure, then most anything goes. Is it "okay"? If it's not intended as satire, and it's against a public figure, then it is offensive and thus not okay, but it comes with the territory of being a public figure. If it's not intended as satire and it's directed against a private citizen, then it is deplorable.
 
Harshaw said:
I figured out why your screen name is what it is -- because not one of your posts can possibly be serious. Oy.
Click to expand...

So far, you haven't made one valid point. No one even knows what the **** you are doing on this thread or what you are bitching about.

Josie said:
Yes, I know the story of the parody.

It's weird how people got angry about the parody and not the actual statement by the LA Times dude. Weird, huh?
Click to expand...

It didn't get all the much press and not many got angry about it. Rush even said it was really only covered by one local news station.



"There is no controversy brewing anywhere except on the air of channel 13 in Sacramento". He lost no sponsors... there was no boycott that I am aware of. I do remember hearing about it at the time, though.
 
Last edited:
AdamT said:
Okay or not okay is a bit black and white, don't you think? If it's satire involving a public figure, then most anything goes. Is it "okay"? If it's not intended as satire, and it's against a public figure, then it is offensive and thus not okay, but it comes with the territory of being a public figure. If it's not intended as satire and it's directed against a private citizen, then it is deplorable.
Click to expand...

Hey, YOU are the one who thinks "Sarah Palin is a public figure!!!" somehow makes a difference when she gets called [that word I find so vile I won't even type it].

So, if someone calls Barack Obama something equally horrible in terms of race, then it MUST make a difference that he's a public figure, and apparently isn't "deplorable."

:shrug: This is the standard YOU set. (Still think "public figure" is such an irrefutable point that no one will answer it?)
 
whysoserious said:
So far, you haven't made one valid point. No one even knows what the **** you are doing on this thread or what you are bitching about.
Click to expand...

Well . . . I get that you don't.
 
Harshaw said:
Hey, YOU are the one who thinks "Sarah Palin is a public figure!!!" somehow makes a difference when she gets called [that word I find so vile I won't even type it].

So, if someone calls Barack Obama something equally horrible in terms of race, then it MUST make a difference that he's a public figure, and apparently isn't "deplorable."

:shrug: This is the standard YOU set. (Still think "public figure" is such an irrefutable point that no one will answer it?)
Click to expand...

Actually it's not just me who thinks that there's a different standard for public figures. The Supreme Court also makes that distinction, having established a much stricter standard to prove slander against public figures as opposed to private individuals. Further, satire is a well recognized exception to the laws against defamation and slander. As I understand it, Maher made his comment about Palin IN A STAND-UP COMEDY ROUTINE. In contrast, Limbaugh says offensive things about Obama every single day on a show that purports to be political commentary.
 
AdamT said:
Actually it's not just me who thinks that there's a different standard for public figures. The Supreme Court also makes that distinction, having established a much stricter standard to prove slander against public figures as opposed to private individuals.
Click to expand...

Waaay ahead of you, champ; I already said it was a legal standard which doesn't apply. This is about offense and outrage, not a slander case.


Further, satire is a well recognized exception to the laws against defamation and slander. As I understand it, Maher made his comment about Palin IN A STAND-UP COMEDY ROUTINE. In contrast, Limbaugh says offensive things about Obama every single day on a show that purports to be political commentary.
Click to expand...

It's got nothing to do with the law. There's no way you don't know that, so this is very, very weasely. Hoisted on your own petard, as it were.
 
American said:
"Hate to defend #RushLimbaugh but he apologized, liberals looking bad not accepting," Maher tweeted. "Also hate intimidation by sponsor pullout."
Click to expand...

Misogyny in the media is so common and Bill Maher is honest enough to come clean about left-wing media misogyny and he came to the defence of Rush Limbaugh who has been excessively penalized so far. Maher may fear that if this trend continues, even he could be banned from using those terms casually even if it's intended as satire and freedom of speech in the media can be threatened.
 
Harshaw said:
Waaay ahead of you, champ; I already said it was a legal standard which doesn't apply. This is about offense and outrage, not a slander case.

It's got nothing to do with the law. There's no way you don't know that, so this is very, very weasely. Hoisted on your own petard, as it were.
Click to expand...

You seem very pushy about the way someone should feel about things. What gives you the right to say one person should be outraged by this and should be outraged by that?
 
whysoserious said:
You seem very pushy about the way someone should feel about things. What gives you the right to say one person should be outraged by this and should be outraged by that?
Click to expand...

So you're not arguing that we should be outraged by what Rush said?
 
Harshaw said:
Waaay ahead of you, champ; I already said it was a legal standard which doesn't apply. This is about offense and outrage, not a slander case.

It's got nothing to do with the law. There's no way you don't know that, so this is very, very weasely. Hoisted on your own petard, as it were.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I didn't say it was a legal claim, but believe it or not, the legal standards aren't pulled out thin air. The same reasoning applies here. People who choose to become public figures have, or should have, a reasonable expectation that they will subjected to a lot of public comment -- good and bad. Private citizens ... not so much. That's why no one bats an eye when Limbaugh says the most horrible things imaginable about Obama, Pelosi, and other Democrats, almost every time he opens his mouth. Did anyone call his sponsors when he called Hillary the "Sexretary" of State? No. What about when he called NOW "whores to liberalism"? No. It comes with the territory if you're a public figure.

Likewise, satire and comedy is not held to normal standards bause they are ... literally ... kidding.
 
Sarah Fluke would have a hard time arguing now, legally or otherwise, that she did not make herself a public figure.
 
Last edited:
X Factor said:
So you're not arguing that we should be outraged by what Rush said?
Click to expand...

I don't think I ever said that. I'm not even "outraged". I have pretty thick skin when it comes to what people say. I just think it was a dick move.

X Factor said:
Sarah Fluke would have a hard time arguing now, legally or otherwise, that she did not make herself a public figure.
Click to expand...

That's unfortunate if that's the case.
 
AdamT said:
Yeah, I didn't say it was a legal claim, but believe it or not, the legal standards aren't pulled out thin air. The same reasoning applies here. People who choose to become public figures have, or should have, a reasonable expectation that they will subjected to a lot of public comment -- good and bad. Private citizens ... not so much. That's why no one bats an eye when Limbaugh says the most horrible things imaginable about Obama, Pelosi, and other Democrats, almost every time he opens his mouth. Did anyone call his sponsors when he called Hillary the "Sexretary" of State? No. What about when he called NOW "whores to liberalism"? No. It comes with the territory if you're a public figure.

Likewise, satire and comedy is not held to normal standards bause they are ... literally ... kidding.
Click to expand...

Just as SCOTUS agrees...


In Hustler Magazine Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46 (1988), the United States Supreme Court held, in a unanimous 8–0 decision (Justice Anthony Kennedy took no part in the consideration or decision of the case), that the First Amendment's free-speech guarantee prohibits awarding damages to public figures to compensate for emotional distress intentionally inflicted upon them.

Thus, Hustler magazine's parody of Jerry Falwell was deemed to be within the law, because the Court found that reasonable people would not have interpreted the parody to contain factual claims, leading to a reversal of the jury verdict in favor of Falwell, who had previously been awarded $150,000 in damages by a lower court.
Click to expand...

Hustler Magazine v. Falwell | The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law
 
Last edited:
X Factor said:
Sarah Fluke would have a hard time arguing now, legally or otherwise, that she did not make herself a public figure.
Click to expand...

Yes, because we would all know her name and what she looks like from this informal testimony. :roll:

Rush had nothing to do with her becoming a common name with people who pay attention to politics.
 
Redress said:
Ummmm...Bill Maher isn't a liberal. Hate to rain on your parade, but your comments would be like saying that Ed Schultz speaks for all conservatives.
Click to expand...
Well he's sure not a "libertarian" - lmao
 
SLAMRAAM said:
Well he's sure not a "libertarian" - lmao
Click to expand...

Maher is closer to being a libertarian than a liberal. He's probably best be classified (in DP-Speak) as "Libertarian - Left".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom