This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Everyone is getting on the anti-Rush bandwagon

edited September 2007 in Politics
As the forums neo-con I find it necessary to set the record straight about a phony news story that is currently spreading around the interwebs.

Media Matters took an excerpt from a Rush Limbaugh show and printed it out of context, thereby making a phony news story.

Rush did not say all soldiers who are anti-war are phony soldiers. He was specifically talking about a true phony soldier Jesse Macbeth and how the anti-war movement likes to call these sorts of people war heroes even though they have never seen combat or even been involved in the things they say they saw.

Rush is a lot of things, and he has the gift of being able to spin things, but he is not so stupid as to come out and say all anti-war soldiers are phony soldiers.

Right now the left and left-of-center sites are showing their true colors by reporting on what Media Matters wrote as if it were based on solid facts and not quotes taken out of context. As Rym and Scott have shown us there is much power in the editing of the spoken and written word.

My full write-up
«13

Comments

  • edited September 2007
    You're annoying. No one cares about Rush anyways.
    Post edited by Andrew on
  • You're annoying. No one cares about Rush anyways.
    You may not care about Rush but you should care about the fact that a media entity, that many people on line consider to be credible, is distorting the truth in order to push it's own agenda! Even worse is the amount of other media groups that are taking the story at face value and not even contacting Rush for a clarification!
  • I don't think you're annoying.



    Regarding your message, I care very little for the output of most news media organizations (and even less for editorial or pundit media), so I have not had a chance to jump on such a bandwagon, nor did I know one existed. Thus, be of good cheer! Not everyone is getting on the bandwagon!



    I do agree with you that it's sad that Mr. Limbaugh will wrongly get his name dragged through the mud after being misquoted by one of his opponents. This only affirms my low opinion of most news media. However, I also understand that he is in a position that he worked to achieve and that happens to be a magnet for such aggression, so I don't feel too bad for him. ;)
  • I don't really understand neo-con stuff or Rush, but I do know that it's wrong for the media to do stuff like that. One misquote or one story taken out of context can have huge effects.
  • I have no idea who that Rush-guy is, but I'm going to comment anyway, because it doesn't really matter.

    While it is true that information is extremely powerful, I don't believe there are actually all that many newspapers or other media organisations out there who's main goal is to manipulate the public opinion. They are companies, so they report what sells. A newspaper who's readers are conservative will not too often (ie almost never) print anything that goes against the poorly thought through opinions of their customers. They want to hear how stupid and wrong liberals are and how right they are and feel great about themselves. People avoid reflecting upon their opinions too much, because it is unpleasant to realize you were wrong.
    I'd even go as far as to say the problem lies not within the media's biased reports, but in the low level of education of most readers. They read 'Guy A said B' and are either unable to even think that this might not be the whole story, or simply can't be bothered to look it up properly and do some research.
    Yes, the media is wrong to do that. But if an industrialized, rich, wealthy western country has crappy public education like that, you cannot expect to have a significant percentage of dialectically educated citizens. This applies to basically every country: education sucks and people are too lazy to think for themselves. (I am, too. I openly admit: I find it a lot more convenient watching other people think)

    Oh yeah, and, to be fair, what I said before about conservative media is of course not limited to them.
  • You may not care about Rush but you should care about the fact that a media entity, that many people on line consider to be credible, is distorting the truth in order to push it's own agenda! Even worse is the amount of other media groups that are taking the story at face value and not even contacting Rush for a clarification!
    It happens on both sides. Perhaps you should focus on making sure your own side fixes their facts instead of calling out the other side.
  • I always thought people were on the Rush Limbaugh-hating bandwagon because the guy was a douche in general, but whatever.
  • You're annoying. No one cares about Rush anyways.
    You may not care about Rush but you should care about the fact that a media entity, that many people on line consider to be credible, is distorting the truth in order to push it's own agenda! Even worse is the amount of other media groups that are taking the story at face value and not even contacting Rush for a clarification!
    All media outlets distort facts towards profit. Rush will distort facts for his own profit, and the "liberal media" distort facts for their profit.

    I don't care because I don't pay attention to any one media outlet; instead, I glean the story by browsing multiple sources with multiple slants. Such is the power of the intarwebs.
  • You're annoying.

    And I was really hoping this thread was about Canadian prog-rock sensation Rush.

    No such luck. :(


  • Neil Peart = God.
  • Oh damn... now I have to go and play YYZ on Guitar Hero II. Thanks.
  • It happens on both sides. Perhaps you should focus on making sure your own side fixes their facts instead of calling out the other side.
    Deflection and avoidance. Two signs of a closed mind.
  • Deflection and avoidance. Two signs of a closed mind.
    Then, if I may, what do you call dismissing that point with this statement, then saying that it's a "sign of a small mind"? Isn't that Ad hominem?
  • As a shout-out to all the neocons...
    "Stop judging, that you may not be judged.
    For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you.
    Why do you notice the splinter in your brother's eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye?
    How can you say to your brother, 'Let me remove that splinter from your eye,' while the wooden beam is in your eye?
    You hypocrite, remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother's eye.
  • Oh damn... now I have to go and play YYZ on Guitar Hero II.Thanks.

    This is such a good performance.
  • I wish Alex Lifeson still had Jeff Daniel's hair like he did in the 90s :(

  • Neil Peart = God.
    wtf dude had like 5 cowbells and a xylophone! How the hell did he get into that drum set? Did they lower him in from above?

  • Neil Peart = God.
    wtf dude had like 5 cowbells and a xylophone! How the hell did he get into that drum set? Did they lower him in from above?
    I'm pretty sure he sits down and they set it up around him. But yes, that's a crazy-ass drum kit. Very often, he'll use a triple bass drum setup. It's madness.
  • The only reason I know about Rush is because my dad gave me a book called Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot or something along those lines. And he sounds like a a**-f***, b****-face, Whore-bag. But that's just one kids opinion.
  • The only reason I know about Rush is because my dad gave me a book calledRush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiotor something along those lines. And he sounds like a a**-f***, b****-face, Whore-bag. But that's just one kids opinion.
    By Al Franken, who, despite my respect for him, is also an asshole wind-bag.
  • I too thought this was about the band "Rush",

    Rush Limbaugh can stop being an hypocrite.

    "There's nothing good about drug use. We know it. It destroys individuals. It destroys families. Drug use destroys societies. Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods, which become consumed by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up."
  • The only reason I know about Rush is because my dad gave me a book calledRush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiotor something along those lines. And he sounds like a a**-f***, b****-face, Whore-bag. But that's just one kids opinion.
    By Al Franken, who, despite my respect for him, is also an asshole wind-bag.
    I got that vibe, too. Especially at the end of the book. It was a quick read.
  • Deflection and avoidance. Two signs of a closed mind.
    Then, if I may, what do you call dismissing that point with this statement, then saying that it's a "sign of a small mind"? Isn't that Ad hominem?
    There is nothing to respond to:

    It happens on both sides. = Deflection, "everyone is doing it" defense.

    Perhaps you should focus on making sure your own side fixes their facts instead of calling out the other side. = Avoidance, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" defense. The idea that only the pure of heart can call out lies, bias and mistakes is a strawman argument that is used by people who prefer to deflect the truth rather than confront it.
  • edited September 2007
    Wtf. I accepted the fact that both sides did it, how is that deflection? I never said that you weren't right, but it seems very hypocritical that the neo-cons always get their panties in a bundle whenever the the left wing attacks them. Also, if you are so zealous about logical fallacies, which you didn't even get the correct usage of the Strawman arguement, then perhaps you should talk to your boy Rush. Listening to the clip provided by media matters here, he seems to use the whole "No True Scotsman" argument against the first caller, saying he wasn't a true republican. Also, it looks like the Rush camp can't even get their own transcript correct. Media Matters, however biased they may be, does point out that the Rush Camp altered their transcript to defend against Media Matter's attack.
    Post edited by Andrew on
  • Deflection and avoidance. Two signs of a closed mind.
    Then, if I may, what do you call dismissing that point with this statement, then saying that it's a "sign of a small mind"? Isn't that Ad hominem?
    There is nothing to respond to:

    It happens on both sides. = Deflection, "everyone is doing it" defense.

    Perhaps you should focus on making sure your own side fixes their facts instead of calling out the other side. = Avoidance, "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" defense. The idea that only the pure of heart can call out lies, bias and mistakes is a strawman argument that is used by people who prefer to deflect the truth rather than confront it.
    I'm not saying "let he who is without sin". I'm saying the only purpose what you said had was to discredit WiP by saying he was avoiding the question.
    But more on topic, I hate Rush. I think he's a despicable man with an evil agenda and a bully's attitude. But, if what you're saying is true, and only if, it's still not right. Two wrongs don't make a right. Let the man's actual words discredit him, not some bullshit. Quote mining is bullshit, no matter what side your attacking.
  • edited September 2007
    It happens on both sides. Perhaps you should focus on making sure your own side fixes their facts instead of calling out the other side.
    Deflection and avoidance. Two signs of a closed mind.
    OMG, the irony . . . from the most closed of all the closed minds . . .
    Listening to the clip provided by media matters here, he seems to use the whole "No True Scotsman" argument against the first caller, saying he wasn't a true republican. Also, it looks like the Rush camp can't even get their own transcript correct. Media Matters, however biased they may be, does point out that the Rush Campaltered their transcriptto defend against Media Matter's attack.
    That's beautiful.
    [Y]ou should care about the fact that a media entity, that many people on line consider to be credible, is distorting the truth in order to push it's own agenda! Even worse is the amount of other media groups that are taking the story at face value and not even contacting Rush for a clarification!
    He altered the transcript to make it look like he said something different? Does that lead anyone else to believe that he had an "intent to deceive"? If anyone is lying here, it is RUSH.
    I find it necessary to set the record straight about a phony news story that is currently spreading around the interwebs.
    WiP did the record straightening here. Rush was being honestly criticized about the latest outrageous thing he said. Instead of honestly confronting it, he changed the transcript. The only thing phony thing here is Rush's doctored transcript. Epic failure. Just epic.

    Congratulations, WiP, on the Gi-normous pwn.
    Post edited by HungryJoe on
  • Also, it looks like the Rush camp can't even get their own transcript correct. Media Matters, however biased they may be, does point out that the Rush Campaltered their transcriptto defend against Media Matter's attack.
    Having actually listened to the audio (which unless he had the help of the caller is rather hard to fake live on the air) I have to say that the transcript is correct. The area they claim to have edited was in the radio show. They may have edited the transcript, but it was to properly reflect what I heard them talk about on the show.
  • I dislike the term "close-minded." Usually what someone means by it is "so-and-so is not open to the ideas to which I want them to be open." There may be a good reason that someone may not be open to a certain idea. That reason may be well thought out or just instinctual. Either way, accusing someone of being "close-minded" is not going to convince him to change his way of thinking. It's thinly guised argumentum ad hominem.
  • Oh, political debate. I thought the anti-rush bandwagon was a unit in starcraft 2, my bad.
Sign In or Register to comment.