• 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

MoSurveyor said:
The only question is, does Fluke fall under the "public figure" definition as interpreted by SCOTUS in Hustler v Falwell. What you or anybody else thinks about it doesn't mean squat. I can pretty much guarantee that Palin is a public figure by that interpretation.
Click to expand...



I think that callig a woman a slut, whore, prostitute, twat, c--t, or infering thier children are being knocked up by a-rod, simply due to political stances, abhorrent irrellevant of this all now important "public figure" excuse.

I think she is no less a public figure than that joe the plumber cat. :shrug:
 
Can't you and everybody else on BOTH sides see the implications here? If Fluke's only real claim to fame is testifying to Congress then you've opened the door for all future participants in those hearings to also be chastised for their opinions. That's just ****ing stupid! And, yes, I would be saying the same damn thing if "the right" had someone a little farther down the food chain than Palin to point to on the other side. Many people who testify at those hearings are NOT public figures and it's in our collective best interests for that to continue to be the case.


Ed:
Criticize the opinion all you want, keep the personal attacks to yourself.
 
Last edited:
MoSurveyor said:
Can't you and everybody else on BOTH sides see the implications here? If Fluke's only real claim to fame is testifying to Congress then you've opened the door for all future participants in those hearings to also be chastised for their opinions. That's just ****ing stupid! And, yes, I would be saying the same damn thing if "the right" had someone a little farther down the food chain than Palin to point to on the other side. Many people who testify at those hearings are NOT public figures and it's in our collective best interests for that to continue to be the case.
Click to expand...



Joe the plumber



But you damn that free speech if you can git rush, you should join media matters and pretend to be an outraged republican demanding they yank him. ;)
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I think that callig a woman a slut, whore, prostitute, twat, c--t, or infering thier children are being knocked up by a-rod, simply due to political stances, abhorrent irrellevant of this all now important "public figure" excuse.

I think she is no less a public figure than that joe the plumber cat. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Joe the Plummer is running for office. :prof
 
haymarket said:
I have seen no evidence of "thug like tactics". Do you have any to present?
Click to expand...

So you think that threats of going after sponsors that don't comply with boycotting a target individual and threatening to disrupt their business if they don't drop their sponsorship are thug tactics...? I guess in liberal world protection rackets are acceptable.

j-mac
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Who attacked you, chief?
Click to expand...
No one and I didn't mean it that way, though I can see how it could be misinterpreted. It was a continuation of the Congressional witness point.


Some Congressional witnesses are public figures and anyone is allowed to slam them (whether they're witnesses or not). Others are not public figures, so while it's OK to attack the opinions they give it is not OK to slam the person. If we allow that to happen then in the future we end up with ONLY public figures speaking up in Congress. That's the last thing we should want. As many of us have noted more than once, Congress is already isolated from Mainstream America. Why would we want to promote behavior that furthers that isolation?
 
MoSurveyor said:
No one and I didn't mean it that way, though I can see how it could be misinterpreted. It was a continuation of the Congressional witness point.


Some Congressional witnesses are public figures and anyone is allowed to slam them (whether they're witnesses or not). Others are not public figures, so while it's OK to attack the opinions they give it is not OK to slam the person. If we allow that to happen then in the future we end up with ONLY public figures speaking up in Congress. That's the last thing we should want. As many of us have noted more than once, Congress is already isolated from Mainstream America. Why would we want to promote behavior that furthers that isolation?
Click to expand...



congressional "Witness"? you make it sound so official., :lol: this was an activist and sympathetic democrats and a dog and pony show. nothing more.
 
Wiggen said:
And at the same time pointing out right wingers who feel it's perfectly acceptable as long as the target is a young college student.
Click to expand...

By all means...point out who is suggesting that Mayer was wrong and should have been fired and Limbaugh is right and shouldnt suffer a loss of sponsors and you have a very valid point.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
congressional "Witness"? you make it sound so official., :lol: this was an activist and sympathetic democrats and a dog and pony show. nothing more.
Click to expand...
It was official. Of course, I can see where people look at everything Congress does as a circus. At times, who can't? LOL! That doesn't change the point of the argument.
 
MoSurveyor said:
It was official. Of course, I can see where people look at everything Congress does as a circus. At times, who can't? LOL! That doesn't change the point of the argument.
Click to expand...



An official what? it was akin to a press conference. and what point? that some women it's more wrong to call sluts and prostitutes than others? I disagree.
 
MoSurveyor said:
Are you sure it's the word(s) - or the target?
Click to expand...

You tell me. Is it 'just' because she is an intentional activist that you feel she should be above the fray? Is it the words? Is it the speakers of the words?
Kinda silly distinction if that's what it boils down to.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
An official what? it was akin to a press conference. and what point? that some women it's more wrong to call sluts and prostitutes than others? I disagree.
Click to expand...
VanceMack said:
You tell me. Is it 'just' because she is an intentional activist that you feel she should be above the fray? Is it the words? Is it the speakers of the words?
Kinda silly distinction if that's what it boils down to.
Click to expand...
Doesn't matter if they're women or not (or are you sexist?) or what form the libel/slander takes. It's who the words are being directed against. Rush is a national figure with a nationwide audience. If Fluke were a nationwide, popular figure as well (before the hearings) then it would be on her. As it is, it's on Rush.

If some pro-choice Catholic hospital administrator testified and Maher slammed her that way I'd be just as outraged.
 
MoSurveyor said:
Doesn't matter if they're women or not (or are you sexist?) or what form the libel/slander takes. It's who the words are being directed against. Rush is a national figure with a nationwide audience. If Fluke were a nationwide, popular figure as well (before the hearings) then it would be on her. As it is, it's on Rush.

If some pro-choice Catholic hospital administrator testified and Maher slammed her that way I'd be just as outraged.
Click to expand...



Joe-The-plumber.....


Are you telling me he didn't get it worse than fluke? If you are going to make a legal case for slander, et al, you missed an opportunity during the last election cycle....
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
Joe-The-plumber.....


Are you telling me he didn't get it worse than fluke? If you are going to make a legal case for slander, et al, you missed an opportunity during the last election cycle....
Click to expand...
I wasn't following the side-shows then, sorry. I don't know how popular "Joe-The-plumber" was or when Maher (or anybody else for that matter) started slamming him. He must have done something to merit national attention but without knowing what that was or when ... :shrug:
 
MoSurveyor said:
Doesn't matter if they're women or not (or are you sexist?) or what form the libel/slander takes. It's who the words are being directed against. Rush is a national figure with a nationwide audience. If Fluke were a nationwide, popular figure as well (before the hearings) then it would be on her. As it is, it's on Rush.

If some pro-choice Catholic hospital administrator testified and Maher slammed her that way I'd be just as outraged.
Click to expand...
that sort of discredits the whole liberal argument. It has been a steady tirade of WHAT was said...not who it was said about. Thats why the congresswoman looked so incredibly stupid. So essentially...your take is that it is a 'winning' strategy to excuse calling women sluts whores, ****s, twats, etc, as long as they are public figures. You REALLY want to stick with that? Personally...Id LOVE to see them try and pull it off. As it is...I stand by my offer. Maher and the democrats will look FAR WORSE than Limbaugh.
 
ReverendHellh0und said:
I cant find this. Can you link to this? I thinks you are making it up.
Click to expand...


I posted the video. Twice. That not enough? Or are you just that slow? Do you really want to play this game? How old are you? 12?



sure you are, you say he's a comedien, demonstrating an air of "its ok, that's what they do", sort of nonsense.
Click to expand...

Here we go again. You making **** up. I never once suggested that. But feel free to quote a post of mine that does next time you feel like accusing me. Good luck with that. I have however suggested there is a huge difference between a comedian who says something, and a leader of the republican party saying something. It's not ok for either. But it sure is different when, as a leader of the republican party, one is in essence speaking for the party. The other is striving for laughs.

Not that tough of a concept. At least not for anyone with a modicum of common sense.
 
Last edited:
MoSurveyor said:
I wasn't following the side-shows then, sorry. I don't know how popular "Joe-The-plumber" was or when Maher (or anybody else for that matter) started slamming him. He must have done something to merit national attention but without knowing what that was or when ... :shrug:
Click to expand...



Perhaps some research is in order then, while he embraced his new found fame, he was no more a "public figure" than this fluke person, in fact, he was far less of one.


Joe the Plumber - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Note he wasn't a political figure when this all went down. The same folks suggesting libel and slander here for the most part, were along with the media, all over this guy with lies and half truths to attack this person for daring to go against Obama like he did.


look the point is, I think Rosie o'donnel is an asshole,but I don't think anyone has more of a right to call here a prostituting whore than they do palin's kids, palin or fluke, It to me is in poor taste no matter if maher, limbaugh, you or I say it, there is no reason to use vulgar sexist language towards a woman, no matter what her social, public or political status is. these excuse makers today, for maher, letterman et al, stood resolutley silent, nope, not silent, they were all on board with going after palin, joe the plumber, and thousands of americans with vulgar name calling, lies, and half truths to attack a citizen for speaking out.

Do you really believe this is the first time?
 
Top Cat said:
Not a chance. Limbaugh has been the big loser on this. And it's not close.
Click to expand...
It hasnt touched Limbaugh...but this kinda thing...Oh...I suspect women are going to see people like her (and others) for the pathetic hypocrites that they are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom