Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by Lerner, Nov 10, 2020.
So, no source. I didn't think so.
My source was Rush:
I stopped checking facts for info provided by MahaRashi long time ago.
I found the info usually credible.
Commentary is interesting and even if he paraphrased Coumo,
But Rush didn't hear it; he made it up.
Rush Limbaugh has stage 4 lung cancer. Historically stage 4 lung cancer has a poor survival rate. Also Rush has the medal of freedom. What does this have to do with him falsely putting words into Cuomo's mouth, you may ask? I'm not sure. But maybe these facts are more relevant?
Politifact has checked Rush statements on 44 different occasions. Here's his scorecard on these 44 checks.
True = 0% 0 checks
mostly true = 4% 2 checks
half true = 11% 5 checks
mostly false = 22% 10 checks
false = 36% 16 checks
pants on fire = 25% 11 checks
What does this mean? I think it means that Rush is extremely trustworthy when compared with Trump but still a common pants on fire liar.
He's said publicly that his doctors have told him that he's terminally ill: the cancer is spreading faster than their ability to contain it, and it's only a matter of time. For all my disagreements with him, I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
Yes, that is sad.
This stats are off.
It all depends on interpretation. When you listened to the man for long time you understand what he is trying to say vs what people think they hear he said.
He has his share in errors, and he admits it.
Rush is coming on show a few days a week, only when he feels he can run it well. The cancer and the treatments taking toll.
Rush quote was his interpretation of what Coumo is doing.
I posted the source, and it is given to interpretation on what is behind the statements or actions.
People read in to it and some times reach opposing conclusions. See something for what they think is behind the action.
What needs to be communicated is that this is an opinion based on the statement and post the accurate statement.
Yes. On the other hand, he led the life he wanted, and practically invented modern lunatic fringe radio.
Howard Stern practically invented modern lunatic fringe radio. Rush practically invented modern lunatic fringe political radio.
Read some of the pants on fire lies that Rush told. It is ridiculous to claim that they are false based on interpretation. They are pants on fire obvious lies. It's obvious that you must not have read many of them. What can be reasonably pointed out though is that these 44 statements that were checked were obviously not picked at random.
When the country had more freedom.
Not that there were no attempts to shutdown conservative talk radio.
Isn't FCC is at it again with another attempt to put the so called "Fairness Doctrine" in place and shut down conservative talk radio?
I read, as I stated before these statements are misinterpreted and to me appear taken out of content or if one listened a little bit before and after they will realize that Rush was quoting another person and later
criticizing them. Like something some TV anchor said a few days before.
Some I verified as incorrect based on what I know about the subject bit this is also inconclusive.
You mean before marriage equality, widespread marijuana legalization, and an organized movement against police brutality?
Since when has anyone tried to shut down conservative talk radio? It DOMINATES talk radio.
All good points even if I have mixed feelings on 1 and 2. But its the law.
On # 2 my freedom got restricted, some areas I walk by I find my self chocking from the smell and get headache. But this is understood, I used to feel bad in public places when smocking on airplanes, restaurants etc was allowed. Today smokers lost their freedom to poison others air.
On # 1 - I personally think a civil partnership would been a better approach and have laws that address the unique needs of the partners better then marriage laws. (my opinion nothing more)
There were attempts to shut it down.
I think the struggles around the Fairness Doctrine.
The FCC introduced the Fairness Doctrine in 1949 as a way of requiring broadcasters to present contrasting viewpoints on controversial issues of public importance.
An article from 10 years ago provides good summery.
In the 1980s, all of this changed. President Ronald Reagan believed the marketplace, not the government, was the best arbiter for competing viewpoints.
In 2011 this was an issue as left was in power.
And now as guard is changing and FCC is about to revive the Doctrine to stop the conservative media.
Let's take the first pants on fire lie as an example. Rush simply lied that "Joe Biden’s Democratic National Convention speech “had to be taped in segments, and the segments had to be edited together.”"
The speech was made live not taped. How the heck is that open to interpretation!
The rug has been pulled out from under you again Lerner.
What rug are you talking about?
Everything you quote about so called facts is taken out of content.
Rush played on number of past shows and refuted most of these nonsense so called facts.
Are you in the rug sales?
Any way take it to Rush, I just quoted him here and there.
You guys are gonna need a new rug. Somebody's heels have gone through it, by now, from all the yanking. Try Ikea.
Separate names with a comma.