• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

C-SPAN - Rhodes vs. Parshall

C-SPAN is celebrating 25 years of doing call-ins on their cable network, and for one hour Saturday afternoon, Steve Scully found himself moderating a cat fight between Air America's Randi Rhodes vs. Salem's Janet Parshall on the influence of talk radio.

Parshall, wearing pearls from the Barbara Bush collection, sat in studio while Randi, in her odd Little House on the Prairie outfit sat in NY. Parshall had been on C-Span 13 times and Randi made her debut appearance, and clearly Rhodes showed some early nervousness being on the network she regularly praises. Parshall plastered a frozen smile on her face, reminding me of Phyllis Schlafly, but confidently spoke in complete sentences and in more complete thoughts. Randi is known for being nervous and disliking public appearances, which may explain her slower start.

The debate was on about the impact of talk radio. Parshall claimed that the emergence of conservative talk radio came about because of a liberal media owning the airwave real estate, and that liberal media continues to dominate America. Rhodes said there was little diversity on the airwaves until very recently, and that many conservative shows do little more than prop up conservative administrations with recitations of talking points. Parshall claimed that libtalk failed because only a small percentage of listeners to talk radio share a liberal viewpoint, and that perhaps the ideas libtalk hosts put forward were extremist and out of the mainstream.

Rhodes said conservative talk radio doesn't deal in the world of facts and go out of their way to remind listeners they don't need to read or listen to anything else because people like Limbaugh deliver all the news they need.

Things became very aggressive when Rhodes asked why Parshall hadn't brought up on her show that Bush suspended the Davis-Bacon Act which provided for prevailing wages to be paid to government workers in the Katrina reconstruction. Parhsall wouldn't answer the question, apparently not knowing about the issue. Rhodes seized on that, and also asked Parshall where else but on shows like hers (Rhodes) people would hear about Congressman Sensenbrenner turning off the microphones and shutting the lights off an a hearing he unilaterally gaveled to a close without unanimous consent. Parshall accused her of believing in conspiracies.

That was the turning point, because Rhodes now realized Parshall had no clue about either matter (which are both facts - the latter shown to C-SPAN audiences.) Callers were generally hostile to Parshall, which was remarkable considering C-SPAN jumps between GOP and Democrat caller lines.

The most remarkable exchange occured at the end of the show when Rhodes interrupted Parshall when she spoke about Bush's speech about Al-Qaeda reminding Americans we are fighting them "over there so we don't have to fight them here." Rhodes jumped in to yell that "I'm in NY" and to reflect on the subway security issues and that "we are fighting them here, dear!" Parhsall told Rhodes she was rude, but Rhodes kept on her, leading Parshall to literally stick fingers in both ears and yell "I can't hear you!"

Left wing bloggers with screen captures are already printing t-shirts with Parshall's display claiming that conservatives always do this when confronted with facts.

Scully probably hadn't experienced this level of confrontation in some time on C-SPAN, but Rhodes has told her listeners that conservatives interrupt and holler over people on their shows all the time so what's good for the goose....

You can view the exchange via C-Span's web site archives. I can't post a link because they rely on Java for their web engine, but can be found under All Recent Programs on their website. It's a five hour archive called C-SPAN 25 Years Viewer Call-Ins: 1995-1999, and the Rhodes/Parshall segment starts at hour three. In hour four, you can watch callers berate Matt Drudge.
 
I wish Randi had brought up the fact that Salem stations lag behind every
conservative talker in almost all of their markets, and lag behind liberal talk in several markets (Denver, Miami, and I think it's neck-and-neck in Atlanta).
Parshall mostly airs on the "Christian" Salem network, but her talk show is at least 50 percent political, as Randi sort of pointed out. It's Salem's attempt to unequally yoke the rank and file in evangelical churches -- whose economic interests might lie with a progressive agenda -- to the economic right. One example was on one show, where Parshall had a discussion about labor unions supposedly channeling dues to gay rights organizations. But I think Parshall and Salem, as True Believers in both conservatism and evangelicalism, had this underlying point to make to their Christian listeners: Unions are bad and un-Christian.

<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by FloridaBear1776 on 10/09/05 11:09 PM.</FONT></P>
 
> You can view the exchange via C-Span's web site archives. I
> can't post a link because they rely on Java for their web
> engine, but can be found under All Recent Programs on their
> website.

Crooks and Liars has it at http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/10/08.html#a5281 along with a representative screen capture -- that's Parshall with her fingers in her ears, saying "Lalalala I can't hear you!".

<P ID="signature">______________
also known as tombetz.</P>
 
> Parshall mostly airs on the "Christian" Salem network, but
> her talk show is at least 50 percent political, as Randi
> sort of pointed out.

...the video version of the Parshall show runs on FamilyNet; after the syndicated late-night reruns, the La Crosse UPN affiliate runs Parshall at 1:00 A.M. Old Glorys everywhere on the set and backdrop and not a Bible or crucifix in sight...so much for the "Christian" angle...<P ID="signature">______________
King Daevid MacKenzie
WLSU Wisconsin Public Radio, La Crosse
heard weekly on http://whiterosesociety.org
"Kill Ugly Radio." FRANK ZAPPA</P>
 
I would say the Parshall-Rhodes matchup was like pitting the San Diego Padres of Conservative Talk against the St. Louis Cardinals of Liberal Talk against each other. One would assume the exchange would have been different if it was Rhodes against a higher-lever conservative talker like G. Gordon Liddy or Bob Grant if they would even bother to do it (and they likely would not).

Parshall should be ashamed of herself for not being able to handle herself well in that exchange and Rhodes (who is famous for her slightly immature style), should get credit for sticking to her radio persona and promoting her show that way.


Actually, an even matchup would be Randi Rhodes vs. Laura Ingrham (I am a fan of neither, but their styles are similar).
 
Such is the state of "Talk Radio," circa 2005: two political blowhards each preaching to her own hard-core following, prattling on about crap that nobody in the real world really gives a wet slap about.

A pox on both their houses.
 
The Salem Witch Trials Network

> Parshall should be ashamed of herself for not being able to
> handle herself well in that exchange and Rhodes (who is
> famous for her slightly immature style), should get credit
> for sticking to her radio persona and promoting her show
> that way.

Unless you're in a red state, chances are you aren't going to be able to hear Parshall anyway. The Salem Witch Trials Network has absolutely zero affiliates for Parshall's show here in NY, so no promotion for her. Her website looks like a flag store... typical.

Randi is ripping her apart on her show today with soundbites of the things Parshall said were lies or conspiracy theories, and amusingly there are a few Parshall listeners tuning and calling in. The first Parshall listener didn't even defend the woman beyond saying Randi interrupted her. Sad.

Randi also made it to MSNBC this afternoon taking on Mr. Jack Burkman, the Vladimir Posner of the Republican talking points crowd.
 
Randy Rhodes said she was a political talk show host for 25 years. NO. Fact: Randy Rhodes was a drugged out D.J. for most of her radio career. She reinvented herself in 1998, because of the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal. Her ratings improved and she saw it as an opportunity to be the liberal Limbaugh. She is a vile hypocrite and liar. She continues to lie about her ratings. She really crossed the line when she told a caller she had a 6.5 rating in San Diego. "I have the number 1 rated show in afternoon, the ratings went from a 0.0 to a 6.5." She would lie outright and say she had over 10 million listeners, now she says it's 3-4 million. Complete bull! She has had so much plastic surgery-seven on her face-that maybe her blood supply to her brain has been diminished. A 0.1 share nationally doesn't even come close...




> I wish Randi had brought up the fact that Salem stations lag
> behind every
> conservative talker in almost all of their markets, and lag
> behind liberal talk in several markets (Denver, Miami, and I
> think it's neck-and-neck in Atlanta).
> Parshall mostly airs on the "Christian" Salem network, but
> her talk show is at least 50 percent political, as Randi
> sort of pointed out. It's Salem's attempt to unequally yoke
> the rank and file in evangelical churches -- whose economic
> interests might lie with a progressive agenda -- to the
> economic right. One example was on one show, where Parshall
> had a discussion about labor unions supposedly channeling
> dues to gay rights organizations. But I think Parshall and
> Salem, as True Believers in both conservatism and
> evangelicalism, had this underlying point to make to their
> Christian listeners: Unions are bad and un-Christian.
>
 
> Randy Rhodes said she was a political talk show host for 25
> years. NO. Fact: Randy Rhodes was a drugged out D.J. for
> most of her radio career. She reinvented herself in 1998,
> because of the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal. Her ratings
> improved and she saw it as an opportunity to be the liberal
> Limbaugh. She is a vile hypocrite and liar. She continues to
> lie about her ratings. She really crossed the line when she
> told a caller she had a 6.5 rating in San Diego. "I have the
> number 1 rated show in afternoon, the ratings went from a
> 0.0 to a 6.5." She would lie outright and say she had over
> 10 million listeners, now she says it's 3-4 million.
> Complete bull! She has had so much plastic surgery-seven on
> her face-that maybe her blood supply to her brain has been
> diminished. A 0.1 share nationally doesn't even come
> close...
>
Randi Rhodes was doing talk at least by 1993, when she was on WIOD. Check this in the Miami Herald archives. The turning point in her career came in 1994, when WIOD fired her and she moved to WJNO in West Palm Beach. There she became a more political host, under the tutelage of the late Lee Fowler.

Do you have substantiation that she was "drugged out"? I knew a lot of DJs in the late 80s and 90s who were boringly sober. Or do you just make the typical Rush Limbaugh supposition about "hippie FM deejays". At least he had the excuse of bitterness because the hippie FM deejays forced the cheesy AM deejays like himself into another format.
>
>
> > I wish Randi had brought up the fact that Salem stations
> lag
> > behind every
> > conservative talker in almost all of their markets, and
> lag
> > behind liberal talk in several markets (Denver, Miami, and
> I
> > think it's neck-and-neck in Atlanta).
> > Parshall mostly airs on the "Christian" Salem network, but
>
> > her talk show is at least 50 percent political, as Randi
> > sort of pointed out. It's Salem's attempt to unequally
> yoke
> > the rank and file in evangelical churches -- whose
> economic
> > interests might lie with a progressive agenda -- to the
> > economic right. One example was on one show, where
> Parshall
> > had a discussion about labor unions supposedly channeling
> > dues to gay rights organizations. But I think Parshall and
>
> > Salem, as True Believers in both conservatism and
> > evangelicalism, had this underlying point to make to their
>
> > Christian listeners: Unions are bad and un-Christian.
> >
>
 
> Such is the state of "Talk Radio," circa 2005: two political
> blowhards each preaching to her own hard-core following,
> prattling on about crap that nobody in the real world really
> gives a wet slap about.
>
> A pox on both their houses.
>

Before you call a pox...she also had another guest appearance on Connected...

Crooks and Liars has the video

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Connected-Randy-Burkman-Rove-points.wmv

PlameGate = countdown continues.....
 
> Randy Rhodes said she was a political talk show host for 25
> years. NO. Fact: Randy Rhodes was a drugged out D.J. for
> most of her radio career.

This is fiction number one. Randi Rhodes' drug use occured during a short stint in the mid 1980s at one station where she was a rock jock. She hit rehab after her last use in February 1986. Oooh, pick me up off the floor... drug use at 80's rock radio stations! Since we are giving talk show hosts free passes on drug abuse post-Limbaugh's Oxy-by-the-bucket scandal, that's a non issue anyway.

Fiction #2 is about her career length. She has always made it clear she has been in the radio business for 25 years, starting by playing religion, doing swap meets, and handling weekend shifts at a station in Texas and moving from there.

> She reinvented herself in 1998,
> because of the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal.

Fiction #3. Her highly rated political talk show launched on WJNO W Palm Beach in 1994 as a response to the OJ trial drama (a big deal in that market), the Gingrich crowd, and Whitewater allegations. She had done political talk on at least one other station before that.

> Her ratings improved and she saw it as an opportunity to be the liberal
> Limbaugh. She is a vile hypocrite and liar.

She saw an opening and she took it. Ooooh, scandalous. That never happened on the right ever before... except for Michael Savage, G Gordon Liddy, Oliver North, Michael Reagan, etc. forever. Your second sentence is meaningless twaddle.

> She continues to lie about her ratings.

OK, let's see your evidence instead of your accusations. Her show beat Limbaugh in W Palm and she was totally honest about being number one there.

> She would lie outright and say she had over
> 10 million listeners, now she says it's 3-4 million.

Please provide a reference where she said she had 10 million listeners. Additionally, Randi's 3-4 million listener number excludes XM and streaming, which she pointed out she cannot measure. A substantial number of callers to her show listen on XM, so that does add to her numbers. No word on what Parshall's numbers are, although I'd never heard of her before Saturday.

> Complete bull! She has had so much plastic surgery-seven on
> her face-that maybe her blood supply to her brain has been
> diminished.

Oh yeah, she really looks like she's been a guest star on Nip/Tuck. Sorry, if you want to make these kinds of allegations, let's see the proof. You don't get a free pass here for making it up as you go along, and doing so means your credibility in here reaches sub-zero mighty fast. If we can't believe what you say in some of your allegations, we can't believe anything you say. Before you are known as CredibilityLimiter, check your facts.
 
Re: The Salem Witch Trials Network

>
> Randi also made it to MSNBC this afternoon taking on Mr.
> Jack Burkman, the Vladimir Posner of the Republican talking
> points crowd.
>

Yawwwwwn. I guess the heavy hitters just don't want to spend time on the cable networks. This is where Randi is doing it right -- she is visible... she will go somewhere when the rest of AA dies a cruel death.

Bush bashing = Clinton bashing... a real professional will have both entertainment and substance after the easy targets are gone... Michael Savage and Bob Grant are the good ones -- they are their own men and are honest in their beliefs on the air. Sean Hannity has been mediocre at best since 2000 (he is too much in lockstep with the Republican Party and I can not listen to him). Rush Linbaugh -- like him or hate him -- has the most well-prepared show in radio history (arguably) so he deserves his kudos on quality alone (although he was better as the pioneer -- he seems to have gone too Hollywood on us).
On the Left, I like Ed Schultz. He seems to be his own man as compared to the AA crowd. Without Bush, most of them will fail miserably... Rhodes' talent will keep her afloat (see Laura Ingrham), however, with the "faithful."

To me, Randi Rhodes = Laura Ingrham: cute eye candy for their sides of the fence, but if they are smart their name-calling and trying-too-hard-to-be-funny styles don't show it.

As a solid Bob Grant man, I may be in the minority across the country -- many seem to like bwing told what to think rather than be encouraged to think for themselves.

X
 
> To my knowledge, Rhodes and Limbaugh were never in the same
> time slot.
>

This was due to Rush making the demand that they not compete...on WJNO Rush follows Randi

She has been consisitent on that for several years.....this is not news
 
> This was due to Rush making the demand that they not
> compete...on WJNO Rush follows Randi

I think you Randi follows Rush... that's okay, but it is foolish to companre ratings in a mid-day slot (Rhodes) to those in an afternoon drive time slot(Limbaugh). I will listen when someone brigns up SHARES. It should hurt one's ears when people say her drive-time ratings are higher than Rush's non drive-time ratings WITHOUT mentioning shares.

-- Of course, it IS the West Palm Beach area: you can convince them they didn't vote right. :)

Also, in this thread someone referred to Randi Rhodes' appearance. Now, I am no fan, but I know a hot babe when I see one, and she is one. Seriously, though, cutting anyone sown because of their physical appearance is just not right... keep in mind, she is a human being too.

On the same nose, lay off Rush and the Oxycontin, Dampier... he was on the drug at first because of a medical complication and could not get off of it without help. It shows how low you would go to defame Rush Limbaugh just because you disagree with him. Watch that credibility you so brazenly speak of.
 
>
> On the same nose, lay off Rush and the Oxycontin, Dampier...
> he was on the drug at first because of a medical
> complication and could not get off of it without help. It
> shows how low you would go to defame Rush Limbaugh just
> because you disagree with him. Watch that credibility you
> so brazenly speak of.
>
I might be able to go along with you if Mr Limbaugh and others woud be as understanding of others who suffer a chemical dependence. What's good for the goose....
 
> On the same nose, lay off Rush and the Oxycontin, Dampier...

> he was on the drug at first because of a medical
> complication and could not get off of it without help. It
> shows how low you would go to defame Rush Limbaugh just
> because you disagree with him. Watch that credibility you
> so brazenly speak of.

This was a little more than needing a little help. It's another illustration of the rank hypocracy we get from the morals crowd on the right. The ironic thing here is that it is my side of the aisle that believes in drug treatment over tossing drug addicts into jail. The other side cuts treatment programs and suggests weak morality is at the root of drug addiction. Rush has said on several occasions that white collar drug users belong in jail right alongside the pushers, and that jail is the answer, not coddling apologists on the left making their drug abuse society's fault or someone else's fault. Except in his case.

I just had wrist surgery and have a prescription for Vicodin. My mom is suffering from cancer and she has been taking Oxycontin for the extreme pain she is suffering. But neither of us are popping them like Pez. I am not a moron, my mom isn't, and I assume Rush isn't either. I think we can all figure out that these are addictive medications and that they must be handled with extreme care. I am very vigilant about such things and know that if I take 50 pills a day, I've got a problem. I wouldn't take more than three, I wouldn't doctor shop, and I wouldn't scream at my maid, if I had one, demanding parking lot rendezvous for more.

If I took five Vicodin or Oxycontin, I'd be calling my doctor today and telling him there is a pain management issue. Did Rush? No. If I can manage to read a pill bottle, why can't he? I don't tell people that I am have talent on loan from God, that I am all-knowing, and that you don't need those newspapers and magazines - you've got Rush, your only prescription for truth needed. Except we've now seen how he fills his own. Why would anyone follow a guy who, to this day, has not apologized for his former views on med abuse and carries on as if NOTHING has changed.

Defamation implies a false accusation and although the right may try to reinvent the truth (and bash Bill Clinton for playing fast and loose with the truth at the same time), Rush admitted to an addiction to Oxycontin, and now we also know he was doctor shopping and sending his maid out to score HUNDREDS if not thousands of pills illegally. Where is the defamation?

My point is that one of the risks of playing Moral High Ground while bashing your opponents for having low morality is that you, yourself, will now be judged on your ability to maintain those morals you demand from everyone else.
We've seen the results of that time after time. Preachers going down in flames because of sex and money scandals, politicians who claim to be holier than thou that are caught breaking the law, and now talk show hosts who make a career out of criticizing the very people and organizations that would later actually come to defend them. I don't claim moral superiority to Rush because I don't abuse meds. I merely reject his claimed moral high ground to issue morals edicts from a chair made of empty glued-together Oxycontin bottles.

Randi Rhodes had a drug issue in the 1980s. She sought treatment and is presumably clean today. The major difference is that she never attacked other people who had drug problems, never suggested they all belong in jail, and doesn't support slashing drug treatment programs as coddling drug abusers. That's why there is a major difference here.

That the Rush sheep would forgive a guy who very well may face criminal penalties for his behavior while still lampooning and bashing the likes of Ted Kennedy shows that common sense and intelligence among many of his followers left track three a long time ago, and now we know the Credibility Caboose went right along with it.
 
Some WJNO/Rhodes/Limbaugh History

> To my knowledge, Rhodes and Limbaugh were never in the same
> time slot.

As I read the history of WJNO (locals will please correct any errors in my rendering of it), before Clear Channel bought WJNO in 1998 (which was at the time 1,000 watts at 1230 with a repeater at 1330), Rhodes was on WJNO opposite Limbaugh on WIOD (where he still airs, and which still shows up in the Market 47 ratings).

When Clear Channel bought WJNO and moved it, first to 1040, then to 1290, they brought in Limbaugh and moved Rhodes' time slot.

<P ID="signature">______________
also known as tombetz.</P>
 
>> Defamation implies a false accusation and although the right
> may try to reinvent the truth (and bash Bill Clinton for
> playing fast and loose with the truth at the same time),
> Rush admitted to an addiction to Oxycontin, and now we also
> know he was doctor shopping and sending his maid out to
> score HUNDREDS if not thousands of pills illegally. Where
> is the defamation?
>
> My point is that one of the risks of playing Moral High
> Ground while bashing your opponents for having low morality
> is that you, yourself, will now be judged on your ability to
> maintain those morals you demand from everyone else.>

Defamation was probably too strong of a word... the truth is, however, one can not equate medicaly-prescribed drugs with those which are obtained illegally on the street... because Limbaugh was prescribed these drugs and got hooked, he became an addict... You, however, are able to show enough willpower to not become Dr. House (portrayed very well by the great Hugh Laurie) with the Vicodin.
Junkies who use illegal drugs, however, were never prescribed the likes of heroin, coacaine and crystal meth. There IS a difference, and maybe there is something to low morality which adds to this (remember, even AA is a religous organization). Treatment is also imoprtant, but jail time is also imperative for the purveyors of illegal substances (many pushers like to recruit in local schoolyards).


> Randi Rhodes had a drug issue in the 1980s. She sought
> treatment and is presumably clean today.

"presumably" -- cute. :-]


> That the Rush sheep would forgive a guy who very well may
> face criminal penalties for his behavior while still
> lampooning and bashing the likes of Ted Kennedy shows that
> common sense and intelligence among many of his followers
> left track three a long time ago, and now we know the
> Credibility Caboose went right along with it.
>
Now, Dampmeister, Ted Kennedy should have been in jail for manslaughter, DWI and leaving the scene of a crime, then beaten in prison for saving his own a** and letting a woman drown in his car... Rush popped prescription drugs and finally got treatment (and is presumably off of them)... The sheep, apparantly, are on the Left who still insist that Kennedy is both useful and the lampooning of him is unwarranted because someone keeps telling them to say that... While Kennedy is truly and embarrasment to the Left and can be considered a murderer, he remains in power... You talk about moral high ground on the Right, but this is a good example of what the lack of morals and common sense among the Left. As George Carlin once said: "somewhere between 'Live Free Or Die' and 'Famous Potatoes,' the truth lies -- probably a little closer to 'Famous Potatoes'"





IR
 
> Defamation was probably too strong of a word... the truth
> is, however, one can not equate medicaly-prescribed drugs
> with those which are obtained illegally on the street...

Rush Limbaugh did not have a prescription for 8,000,000mg of Oxycontin. The only difference between selling illegally obtained prescription medication on the street and heroin or cocaine is the one you are trying to make in order to make the puffball a victim. Of course, in Rushworld, everyone who claims they are a victim is really just making excuses for their own moral lapses, except in Rush's case.

Sorry, it doesn't wash.

> because Limbaugh was prescribed these drugs and got hooked,
> he became an addict... You, however, are able to show
> enough willpower to not become Dr. House (portrayed very
> well by the great Hugh Laurie) with the Vicodin.

Uh, it's not willpower, it's called reading the bottle, following the instructions, and realizing there are consequences for not doing so. Apparently in Rush world, the rules of prescription medications do not apply. If this guy has talent on loan from God, it's definitive evidence that atheists have it right.

> Junkies who use illegal drugs, however, were never
> prescribed the likes of heroin, coacaine and crystal meth.

Oh brother, this is the weakest excuse I have ever read on this board since getting here. Rush did not receive a prescription for sending the maid out to score warehouse-club sized bottles of Oxy. Maybe some of the perps nailed on Cops could use that as a defense during the sting drug busts though. Maybe.

> There IS a difference, and maybe there is something to low
> morality which adds to this (remember, even AA is a religous
> organization). Treatment is also imoprtant, but jail time
> is also imperative for the purveyors of illegal substances
> (many pushers like to recruit in local schoolyards).

Which is why there will be Rush fans that will advocate sending the maid to jail but leave The Hypocritical One free so he can continue to pretend absolutely nothing happened.

Rush wants white collar drug users to go to jail. He is one.

> > Randi Rhodes had a drug issue in the 1980s. She sought
> > treatment and is presumably clean today.
>
> "presumably" -- cute. :-]

Not cute, factual. I don't search the woman's cabinets, and she was never busted for it. She sought treatment herself and didn't involve "the help" in securing her supply.

> Now, Dampmeister, Ted Kennedy should have been in jail for
> manslaughter, DWI and leaving the scene of a crime, then
> beaten in prison for saving his own a** and letting a woman
> drown in his car... Rush popped prescription drugs and
> finally got treatment (and is presumably off of them)...

"presumably" -- cute. It works both ways, doesn't it.

Using Ted Kennedy as a "shiny keys" distraction from Rush's own lapses just frosts the Hypocracy Cake.

> You talk about moral high ground on the Right, but this is a
> good example of what the lack of morals and common sense
> among the Left. As George Carlin once said: "somewhere
> between 'Live Free Or Die' and 'Famous Potatoes,' the truth
> lies -- probably a little closer to 'Famous Potatoes'"

Most of us on the left are more concerned with our own morality instead of worrying more about everyone elses. With regularity, the morals crowd fails to practice what they preach. Limbaugh today carries on with the same rhetoric that he had prior to his awakening from the Oxy Haze. Nobody should be surprised when those on the other side call him on it, and while his sheep would forgive him if he ran over their kids, don't expect the rest of America to simply leave out the man's own moral lapses when considering his standing to issue judgments about others.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom