It is necessary to continue this talk because you’re telling an outright lie. Nobody is calling for negotiations with bin laden and nobody is calling for the withdrawal of our troops from Afghanistan.

The audio link you provided didn’t work on my computer, but I assume it said this:

LIMBAUGH: If it were up to you people, we wouldn’t exist as a country today. You would have given in to the Soviets long ago, you would have appeased the Soviet communists. You would appease Iran right now. You probably wouldn’t have cared about the war on terror or the bombing on 9-11. You would have sought out bin Laden and tried to make a deal with him, and this country exists today only because we have been able to prevent you from gaining power to do that kind of thing. We’ve had our run-ins with Neville Chamberlain types, and you’re the modern incarnation.

Is this mean? Kinda. Is this true? Yes. Maybe we would still exist as a country, but the moveon.org type liberals would certainly go to the table with Bin Laden right now to get us out of the wars. The Cindy Sheehan types don’t even want to negotiate with him, they want us to leave him alone and withdraw our troops from everywhere (ie. give Bin Laden the ‘win’).

It is unnecessary to continue this talk. Clearly neither of our opinions will be swayed. Most of what you consider hateful, I consider fact. Nevertheless, I respect your using facts or links to make your points Brian.

I read through Rush’s responses on the page you linked to. Rush still isn’t looking any better to me. Some of Rush’s responses you can tell are not accurate just by reading them carefully

In Rush’s response regarding forest acreage, he only shows statistics from the 1900’s to show how much Forestry expanded over the last 80 years. In Rush’s original statement he was comparing forest acreage today with acreage in the 1700’s. Rush’s answer had nothing to do with how much forest acreage there is today vs. how much there was in the late 1700’s.

In Rush’s original statement on condoms, he compared using condoms to getting on a plane where you knew one in five passengers would die. Then Rush responds to FAIR with some statistics on condom failure rates. Regardless of whether or not Rush’s statistics on condoms are correct (according to the CDC they’re not), even if a condom fails, it does not mean you are going to die.

FAIR did a good job of rebutting most of Rush’s responses here: LINK

I did read the Reuters article. Nowhere in the article does it say the death toll should be raised or “that’s not fair” that our medical staff has saved so many lives. The article is saying that the intensity of the conflict in Iraq should not just be measured by combat deaths but also by the number of seriously wounded. Nowhere in the article does it say that it’s a bad thing that more wounded soldiers are being saved. Rush is putting meaning into the article that isn’t there. If you disagree, please show me a specific sentence in the article that says it’s a bad thing that more soldiers are being saved.

Regarding, Cindy Sheehan, calling insurgents freedom fighters is not the same as saying she wants more American soldiers to die. I think referring to insurgents as “freedom fighters” was stupid but I don’t see that as wanting soldiers to die. Her position has always been that she wants American soldiers to come home because she doesn’t want more soldiers to die. My impression is that she thinks if American troops left Iraq, the fighting would stop. Rush Limbaugh’s statement wasn’t even based on what Cindy Sheehan or anyone else said. He was basing his comments on what was printed in the Reuters article. Rush put meaning into the article that wasn’t there. The article says that more severely wounded soldiers are being saved today than ever before. Nowhere does it say that this is a bad thing.

Rush’s statement that liberals would have sought out bin Laden and tried to make a deal with him is an outright lie. After we were attacked on 9/11, Congress and the nation overwhelmingly supported going to war against Afghanistan. I don’t know of a single congressman that was opposed to attacking Afghanistan. No Democratic President has ever sought out terrorists or tried to make deals with them. The only American President that has ever made deals with terrorists is Ronald Reagan, who I would not consider to be a liberal.

I haven’t researched the accuracy of all of the statements attributed to Rush in the links I posted. Since Rush took the time to respond to FAIR’s statements, they must have accurately recorded what Rush said and wrote, otherwise Rush would have denied saying it rather than writing a response. Media Matters provides audio clips with the original comments. The following page has an audio clip where Rush says liberals would seek out bin laden to make a deal with him: LINK

Let me know if you get any response from Rush regarding the racist statements on the FAIR page.

Still working on the racist stuff. Is Rush looking better to you yet Brian?

The racial remarks are unacceptable if shown in context. I listen to him a couple of times a week when I’m on the road, and have never heard him be a racist before (unless ‘Democrat’ is a race.

Your first link does indeed show a good number of mistakes that Rush has made. Although to be fair, I would say that Rush is right in close to half of them, and the corrections made by Fair.org turn out to be the false or misleading ones (the canadian healthcare statement seems a good example). Regardless, nothing hateful or dishonest here, just some mistakes. Journalists make them all the time. Pundits too I guess.

The links to ’slandering’ liberals… Both of those links are good examples of why conservatives like him He’s not hateful, he’s honest. Often when you hear the way some on the left really think, it just sounds hateful (Cindy Sheehan calling the Insurgency ‘freedom fighters’ is a good example of this).

Lastly, you link to Rush saying that some people on the left want higher fatalities to make the war look bad. And he is exactly right! Did you read the Reuters article (link is at the bottom of the page you linked with)? That is exactly what it is implying. The low death rate is because of our fantastic medical staff. And somehow, that’s not ‘fair’, and the death toll should in some way be raised to reflect the true intensity of the battles. WTF!?!

I’m going to look into this racism stuff a little more to see how accurate those statements are. Actually, I’m gonna drop them an email and see if they have responded to the charges yet. They are the only things I have a problem with in all your links. I’ll put his response here if he or his staff responds. I hope they turn out to be false, as I consider him to be a great man, and partially responsible for our Republican majority in the House.

here’s a link showing your side, your fellow travellers celebrating the 2,000th US military death in Iraq.

http://www.zombietime.com/2000_iraq_deaths_party

Brian, if you hate America so much, why don’t you go to a people’s paradise like Cuba and stay there?

It would be funny if Brian wasn’t so serious.

Here are a few site’s documenting Rush Limbaugh’s lies and promoting hate:

This page list a number of Rush’s lies, distortions, and inaccuracies:
LINK

Here’s a page documenting some racist comments made by Rush:
LINK

This one is particularly appalling, where Rush tells our troops in Afghanistan that the left wants more troops to die and they’re mad at doctors saving lives. This is based on an article in Reuters magazine where Rush completely distorts what the article says. The article made no mention of anything that Rush attributed to it.
LINK

Here’s some slander of liberals portraying them as anti-American and not willing to defend our country. There have been many liberals that have served in the military and fought in wars, something Rush Limbaugh never did.
LINK

Here’s another page documenting Rush Limbaugh slandering liberals:
LINK

If you do some searches, there are probably hundreds more. It’s very sad that there are people who look up to someone who is so dishonest and hateful.

Brian, try being a little honest. I know it is hard for Liberals to admit they are wrong and that Rush is right.

ty in advance.

Why are you making the assumption that I support any of the people you mentioned? What do any of these people you mentioned have to do with Rush Limbaugh or the topic? I was commenting on the article you posted. There are right-wing bloggers that are willing to support someone as dishonest and hateful as Rush Limbaugh. I would never support anyone like that on the right or left. When you condemned Howard Dean’s comments about Republicans, I did not respond because I thought his comments were indefensible. Do you think Rush Limbaugh’s lies and hateful statements are acceptable?

While I don’t agree with everything Cindy Sheehan says, I do find it despicable the way some people on the right have gone after a woman who lost her son fighting for this country, especially those who never served. It’s not enough for them to disagree with her views, they need to go after the person. At least Senator George Allen can respect what she is going through.
LINK

Ann Coulter would be better as president of the US imo. She could make jokes about repealing the first amendment, and watch the liberals whine as if she was serious. And while they complained about this joke or that, or talked about how non pc she was, she’d be ramming conservatism through the government. Think how great it would be!