Palin Blasts Emanuel for Calling Dem Idea 'Retarded'

Reverend_Hellh0und said:

I suggest you re-read what I highlighted Jack and try again. :shrug:

Click to expand...

I suggest you re-read what you posted rev and try again :shrug:

jackalope said:

Would you not agree that someone doing a parody or a satire is not quoting the subject of the parody or satire?

Nigger is not comparable to retarded in any situation.

You're right, Rushbo's was very very very much worse. I don't see how anyone other than a complete hyper partisan hack would think calling ideas and strategies retarded is anything like calling people retards.

Click to expand...

:roll::roll::roll:

bicycleman said:

Or it may mean that she loves her child and doesn't want to hide it in the closet somewhere because of its affliction. The child needs to know that it's loved, not something to be hidden away.

Click to expand...

I don't know if there is just some kind of cognitive dissonance going on here, or I am just doing a piss poor job of being clear. I am sure she loves her kid. However, if she was genuinely offended by Emanuel's calling part of the Democratic Base "F---ing Retards", then why did she not condemn Rush's calling a meeting between the Whitehouse and mental disability advocates a "retard summit"?

That was even more offensive to those with mental disabilities than Emanuel's offensive comments were. Yet, she did not call for Rush to apologize. She did not ask him if he "had no decency". She did not ask for his resignation. So basically, one can only conclude that once again, Sarah Palin was just using her special needs kid to club her opponents with.

jackalope said:

I suggest you re-read what you posted rev and try again :shrug:

Click to expand...

What did I post. I'm off to Jiu-jitsu, but while you are looking lets not forget what the "" means....


:shrug:

Reverend_Hellh0und said:

so Michelle obama can be called a "black bitch" and you wouldn't call racism?



This pathological hatred for a former VP canidate is rather odd.....

Click to expand...

Plumb scary, ain't it?

It just goes to show that the Liberals are the true haters.

Reverend_Hellh0und said:

What did I post. I'm off to Jiu-jitsu, but while you are looking lets not forget what the "" means....


:shrug:

Click to expand...

Rich. Since 'quote' seems to be a big struggle for you to understand :shrug:

Zyphlin said:

Would you not agree however that there is a large difference between doing something as a parody and in a mocking way (mocking towards Emanuel's callous use of the slur, not mocking towards those the slur refers to) and someone doing it as a legitimate insult?

For example...

If someone states that a bunch of the kids running around their apartment comment are "Acting like a bunch of classless niggers" would you say that's on the same level, and worthy of the same condemnation, as someone who was recalling in a joking manner Chris Rock's famous "I love black people, I hate niggers" rant?

Rham used the word specifically and purposefully as a means of insulting democrats by comparing them to mentally impaired people.

Rush used the word as a parody and mocking of Rham's tasteless use of it, specifically even mentioning that he's doing it because the media would take it out of context and act like its the same as what Rham did if not WORSE than what he did in the way they cover it.

Whether or not what Rush did was wrong or not, I don't see how anyone other than a complete hyper partisan hack would say they're equal in their "wrongness" and that Palin in any way should react the same way to Rush's parody as she did to Rham's actual insulting use of the slur.

Click to expand...

And you would have a wonderful point if Rush did not then go on to call a meeting between Emanuel and disability advocates a "retard summit". That is the part in these defenses you guys are making of Limbaugh and Palin that you guys are continually ignoring.

jackalope said:

Would you not agree that someone doing a parody or a satire is not quoting the subject of the parody or satire?

Click to expand...

Definitely. Rev is wrong in saying that what Rush was doing was "quoting" Rham. He did quote Rham, but what he did after that was an attempt to parody the situation. It was satire.

Nigger is not comparable to retarded in any situation.

Click to expand...

Says you. It is similar. In both cases they are a SLUR against a group of people for a status that is upon them at birth of which they can not choose. Simply because YOU and some of society find one to be "worse" doesn't necessarily that:

1) it is worse
2) that even if it IS worse, that its not comparable

Retarded is a slur. Just as calling someone a nigger is. Just like calling someone a faggot is. Just because one of those three are very common vernacular, and the second is relatively common, doesn't mean they're somehow "less" of a slur than the third. Or if we routinely said "nigger" as a way to describe some random stereotype of people and it was more commonly socially used would you suddenly have a lot less problem with it?

You're right, Rushbo's was very very very much worse. I don't see how anyone other than a complete hyper partisan hack would think calling ideas and strategies retarded is anything like calling people retards.

Click to expand...

Really? I explained the reasoning behind mine. You know, debate site and all, needing to actually EXPLAIN things instead of just making asinine statements. PARODY AND SATIRE are generally viewed as less offensive than actual, intended insults in our society.

It is why SNL can get up and make mockery of things, such as perhaps Barack Obama becoming enraged and turning into "The Rock Obama" which happens to walk around like a large dumb ape, that if you were to say seriously in society ("When Obama gets flustered he starts acting like a large dumb ape") you would be viewed as offensive.

It is why Comics could get up and make jokes about the stereotypes of people and races continually, and often, in routine fashion and yet if you express those stereotypes and insults in a genuine, insulting way you'll be found offensive.

Our Society in general views and weights PARODY and SATIRE differently than actual, legitimate intentions to insult.

Rush's use of it, while crude and low brow, was done with Parody and Satire in mind, mocking Rham Emanuel's use of the term and mocking the Media's relatively light coverage of the use and their focus more on being negative to Palin than to Emanuel, and highlighting the hypocrisy of them by pointing out how they will take him COMPLETELY out of context and go at him worse than at Emanuel.

Emanuel's use of it was not parody, nor satire. It was meant as an insult. He insulted and belittled the democrats in question by comparing their ideas to mentally handicapped people. There is no way in the context of his speaking that he was stating they were "Retarding" the situation in the form of the word meaning to slow it down or to stall something. He meant it as they were mentally slow, using a slur to do it. He meant it, completely, as an insulting thing.

Those two are not on the same level of wrongness, nor malice, nor tastelessness. The fact they are not on the same level does not necessarily mean one is right and one is wrong, but that they are not equal and that its ridiculously idiotic to expect an equal response.

Now, as I did slightly previously and more thoroughly now, I explained and backed up my reasoning. If you want to make more stupid snide posts instead of actually debate why don't you save it for someone that cares, if you want to actually discuss this then actually do that.

SouthernDemocrat said:

I don't know if there is just some kind of cognitive dissonance going on here, or I am just doing a piss poor job of being clear. I am sure she loves her kid. However, if she was genuinely offended by Emanuel's calling part of the Democratic Base "F---ing Retards", then why did she not condemn Rush's calling a meeting between the Whitehouse and mental disability advocates a "retard summit"?

That was even more offensive to those with mental disabilities than Emanuel's offensive comments were. Yet, she did not call for Rush to apologize. She did not ask him if he "had no decency". She did not ask for his resignation. So basically, one can only conclude that once again, Sarah Palin was just using her special needs kid to club her opponents with.

Click to expand...

Rahm never actually called anyone a retard, or an effing retard. He called the plan by liberal groups to air ads attacking conservatives effing retarded.

He called a plan retarded. He didn't call any person a retard.

If you guys can't see that Palin is nothing but opportunistic white trash that constantly whores her special needs out to club her political opponents with, then you are a bunch of F---ing Retards.

Also, that joke I made earlier in the thread about "F---ing Retard: What Todd does to Sarah on Friday nights" was funny.

I'm done. :mrgreen:

SouthernDemocrat said:

And you would have a wonderful point if Rush did not then go on to call a meeting between Emanuel and disability advocates a "retard summit". That is the part in these defenses you guys are making of Limbaugh and Palin that you guys are continually ignoring.

Click to expand...

Which, as I already stated, was Rush's typically poor and tactless attempt at satire and parody by having a go at Emanuel in a mocking fashion, and purposefully attempting to tweak the media in order to highlight they're hypocrisy in their inability to actually examine his context and they're focusing on his use of it while seemingly given Rham a relative pass.

I'm not continually ignoring, I'm explicitly speaking about. His entire "Retarded" shtick when focusing around Rham is a mocking parody, a satire, done tastelessly and without tact but parody none the less.

Zyphlin said:

Definitely. Rev is wrong in saying that what Rush was doing was "quoting" Rham. He did quote Rham, but what he did after that was an attempt to parody the situation. It was satire.



Says you. It is similar. In both cases they are a SLUR against a group of people for a status that is upon them at birth of which they can not choose. Simply because YOU and some of society find one to be "worse" doesn't necessarily that:

1) it is worse
2) that even if it IS worse, that its not comparable

Retarded is a slur. Just as calling someone a nigger is. Just like calling someone a faggot is. Just because one of those three are very common vernacular, and the second is relatively common, doesn't mean they're somehow "less" of a slur than the third. Or if we routinely said "nigger" as a way to describe some random stereotype of people and it was more commonly socially used would you suddenly have a lot less problem with it?



Really? I explained the reasoning behind mine. You know, debate site and all, needing to actually EXPLAIN things instead of just making asinine statements. PARODY AND SATIRE are generally viewed as less offensive than actual, intended insults in our society.

It is why SNL can get up and make mockery of things, such as perhaps Barack Obama becoming enraged and turning into "The Rock Obama" which happens to walk around like a large dumb ape, that if you were to say seriously in society ("When Obama gets flustered he starts acting like a large dumb ape") you would be viewed as offensive.

It is why Comics could get up and make jokes about the stereotypes of people and races continually, and often, in routine fashion and yet if you express those stereotypes and insults in a genuine, insulting way you'll be found offensive.

Our Society in general views and weights PARODY and SATIRE differently than actual, legitimate intentions to insult.

Rush's use of it, while crude and low brow, was done with Parody and Satire in mind, mocking Rham Emanuel's use of the term and mocking the Media's relatively light coverage of the use and their focus more on being negative to Palin than to Emanuel, and highlighting the hypocrisy of them by pointing out how they will take him COMPLETELY out of context and go at him worse than at Emanuel.

Emanuel's use of it was not parody, nor satire. It was meant as an insult. He insulted and belittled the democrats in question by comparing them to mentally handicapped people. There is no way in the context of his speaking that he was stating they were "Retarding" the situation in the form of the word meaning to slow it down or to stall something. He meant it as they were mentally slow, using a slur to do it. He meant it, completely, as an insulting thing.

Those two are not on the same level of wrongness, nor malice, nor tastelessness. The fact they are not on the same level does not necessarily mean one is right and one is wrong, but that they are not equal and that its ridiculously idiotic to expect an equal response.

Now, as I did slightly previously and more thoroughly now, I explained and backed up my reasoning. If you want to make more stupid snide posts instead of actually debate why don't you save it for someone that cares, if you want to actually discuss this then actually do that.

Click to expand...

Yup, says me.

And yup, they're different levels of wrongness - Rush's was worse. Rush actually called people retards; he did not call an idea retarded.

But, somehow, Palin didn't call for El Rushbo to be fired

Classic Palin hypocrisy.

SouthernDemocrat said:

If you guys can't see that Palin is nothing but opportunistic white trash that constantly whores her special needs out to club her political opponents with, then you are a bunch of F---ing Retards.

Also, that joke I made earlier in the thread about "F--ing Retard: What Todd does to Sarah on Friday nights" was funny.

I'm done. :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

So funny we all forgot to laugh!

Zyphlin said:

Which, as I already stated, was Rush's typically poor and tactless attempt at satire and parody by having a go at Emanuel in a mocking fashion, and purposefully attempting to tweak the media in order to highlight they're hypocrisy in their inability to actually examine his context and they're focusing on his use of it while seemingly given Rham a relative pass.

I'm not continually ignoring, I'm explicitly speaking about. His entire "Retarded" shtick when focusing around Rham is a mocking parody, a satire, done tastelessly and without tact but parody none the less.

Click to expand...

And all that aside, Rush Limbaugh is expected to be tasteless and classless. He is radio shock jock with a side of political commentary, not some government appointed, high ranking official. There is an expectation of civility and respect in the discourse that Rahm is part of. There is no such expectation when it comes to Rush Limbaugh. You can turn Rush Limbaugh off. We're still paying for the services of Rahm until 2012.

jackalope said:

Yup, says me.

And yup, they're different levels of wrongness - Rush's was worse. Rush actually called people retards; he did not call an idea retarded.

But, somehow, Palin didn't call for El Rushbo to be fired

Classic Palin hypocrisy.

Click to expand...

Thanks for proving my point about your purpose here and the worth of your opinions. I have no time for people that don't wish to have a discussion or debate but just want to continue to prattle their baseless opinions for hyper partisan reasons. You've shown your true colors and true purpose in this thread clear.

Zyphlin said:

Which, as I already stated, was Rush's typically poor and tactless attempt at satire and parody by having a go at Emanuel in a mocking fashion, and purposefully attempting to tweak the media in order to highlight they're hypocrisy in their inability to actually examine his context and they're focusing on his use of it while seemingly given Rham a relative pass.

I'm not continually ignoring, I'm explicitly speaking about. His entire "Retarded" shtick when focusing around Rham is a mocking parody, a satire, done tastelessly and without tact but parody none the less.

Click to expand...

His entire retard shtick. Not retarded. RETARD.

Rahm calls an idea retarded and he must be fired; El Rushbo calls people retards but he does not need to be fired

MyOwnDrum said:

So funny we all forgot to laugh!

Click to expand...

I guess you have to have the kind of absolutely tasteless humor I have to find it funny. Also, when is Rahm planning on apologizing to all the Mother F--kers of the world?

Zyphlin said:

Thanks for proving my point about your purpose here and the worth of your opinions. I have no time for people that don't wish to have a discussion or debate but just want to continue to prattle their baseless opinions for hyper partisan reasons. You've shown your true colors and true purpose in this thread clear.

Click to expand...

*notes that there is nothing to debate here, as it is - in entirety - a comment about a poster*

Zyphlin said:

Thanks for proving my point about your purpose here and the worth of your opinions. I have no time for people that don't wish to have a discussion or debate but just want to continue to prattle their baseless opinions for hyper partisan reasons. You've shown your true colors and true purpose in this thread clear.

Click to expand...

Which is exactly why I walked away from it for 5 days. And I came back 5 days later to find the usual suspects still stuck on stupid. :mrgreen:

Rahmbeaux is the president's chief of staff. According to the Liberals, Rush is just an entertainer. Remember?

Surely, the Liberals would want to hold the president's chief of staff to a higher standard.

jallman said:

And all that aside, Rush Limbaugh is expected to be tasteless and classless. He is radio shock jock with a side of political commentary, not some government appointed, high ranking official. There is an expectation of civility and respect in the discourse that Rahm is part of. There is no such expectation when it comes to Rush Limbaugh. You can turn Rush Limbaugh off. We're still paying for the services of Rahm until 2012.

Click to expand...

Sure, your stating opinion actually backed up with realistic and subjective thought. That's apparently not welcome in this thread Jall, its just responded to with idiotic talking points and snide retorts.

You're absolutely right here as well and its something the people pushing that they should be treated the same, or Rush should be treated WORSE, are completely missing either purposefully (my guess) or unintentionally (I highly doubt it).

Rush Limbaugh, at the end of the day, only has whatever power his listeners bestows upon him. He got to his position through his own work and through people making a choice with their wallets. He was not voted, he is not a representative of the people or an adviser to someone who is, he is not paid on tax payer money.

Rham Emanuel is the Chief of Staff of the white house, a close adviser to the President of the United States...a man voted in by the people to serve the people...and is paid by tax payer funds. He is a man thats words and voice does not simply affect people who choose to listen to him but directly has access to the most powerful singular man in the United States of America.

Rush is a radio jock whose entire business is made on being controversial and shocking, and there is a level of expectations that it will happen.

Rham Emanuel is a public servant representing the United States of America and is expected to be an upstanding representative of it.

In essence, Rham Emanuel is an executive of a company and Rush Limbaugh is the mail clerk that everyone knows but ultimately just files the mail. Even going beyond the notion that Parody and Satire in this country is looked at as far more benign and acceptable than what Emanuel did, one must also take into consideration their positions, their purposes, and their power when measuring ones response to what they did.

But see, many hyper partisan liberals want to bitch about things not being "black and white" when it suits them...but the moment it means they can bash Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh suddenly the world only has two shades for them.

jallman said:

Which is exactly why I walked away from it for 5 days. And I came back 5 days later to find the usual suspects still stuck on stupid. :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

The irony is strong in this one.

Ok, we get it. The leader of the Republican Party and Conservative Movement should not be held to the same standards as the Whitehouse Chief of Staff. Thats a good point.

SouthernDemocrat said:

Ok, we get it. The leader of the Republican Party and Conservative Movement should not be held to the same standards as the Whitehouse Chief of Staff. Thats a good point.

Click to expand...

PSSSST, just because you make a dumbass stupid declaration doesn't make it so. I know its hard for you and DisneyDude who continually keep stating this to understand, but just because you keep saying the freaking ridiculous notion doesn't make it truth. But thanks for the sarcasm, I had a great laugh at the idiocy of your post. Rush Limbaugh is a radio host, not a leader of any party.

My mistake, I came in this thread thinking people were wanting to actually debate and have a discussion since people kept posting in it complaining of trolling and driving it off topic. Funny, once actual discussion was interjected people ran screaming from it instead of dealing with it. Serves me right, thinking I'm on a debate site or something....:roll:

Zyphlin said:

PSSSST, just because you make a dumbass stupid declaration doesn't make it so. I know its hard for you and DisneyDude who continually keep stating this to understand, but just because you keep saying the freaking ridiculous notion doesn't make it truth. But thanks for the sarcasm, I had a great laugh at the idiocy of your post. Rush Limbaugh is a radio host, not a leader of any party.

Click to expand...

Yes, and Putin does not run Russia either. Mao did not run China, his premier did. I get it. Thats why Republicans are never afraid to stand up to Rush.

Zyphlin, you would be a pretty smart guy if you did not have your head so far up the GOP's ass.