You are hereForums / Future of the GOP-- How to get Our Party Back / This Republican Won't Apologize
This Republican Won't Apologize
I'd be willing to bet dollars to donuts that Colin Powell won't apologize to Rush for comments he made in a speech on Monday. An exerpt from NewsMax..a very right wing site.
Powell lashed out at Limbaugh and conservative icon Ann Coulter. Neither serves the party well, Powell said during a speech to corporate security executives at a conference in Washington sponsored by Fortify Software Inc.
"I think what Rush does as an entertainer diminishes the party and intrudes or inserts into our public life a kind of nastiness that we would be better to do without," Powell said.
I'd love to know if Rush rants and raves about this strong, respected Republican who doesn't need to pacify him to get votes. HA
This makes me happy...
Wingnut thought process: This means that Colin is a democrat now and he's saying this because the president is black.
Limpbaugh responds: (Think Progress)
[Powell] is out there saying I am killing the republican party while he endorsed and voted for Obama. … He’s just mad at me because I’m the one person in the country who had the guts to explain his endorsement of Obama. It was purely and solely based on race! There can be no other explanation for it. What Colin Powell needs to do is close the loop and become a Democrat instead of claiming to be a Republican interested in reforming the Republican party.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."
"Or the one."
- Captain Spock & Admiral James T. Kirk
- Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
LOL, that gave me a good chuckle. What do I win? Hopefully not a Rushbo t-shirt...
----
It's sad that we've reached a point where 'government service' is a dirty word... If we're the greatest country on earth, maybe we can have the greatest government.
Lewis Black
Oops! I can assure you that the typo was purely unintentional. Having said that, it is pretty darn funny.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."
"Or the one."
- Captain Spock & Admiral James T. Kirk
- Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
It was pure genius when David Axelrod was the one who signed off on this strategy of painting Rush as head of the Republican party and Rahm and Gibbs lit the fuse. It was brilliant in the first week and it keeps paying dividends.
Now every time some poor Republican tries to makes sense and step out ahead of the pack, Rush swats him down. Eric Cantor "It's Not a Listening Tour" has permanent tire marks on his back and the rest of the party won't say a peep for fear of what might happen. Rush is now telling Colin Powell to go become a Democrat and I'll bet no one in the party tells Rush to stuff it even though the Republicans fell all over themselves back in the day to have Colin run for President.
That all depends, Misty....is it a black shoe?
So, does the AA endorser have to endorse the white guy to avoid the appearance of racial motivation? As you said, no one questions it when it is the other way around. You are spot on!
Begging to differ on the statement that Maher does't use "cherry picked facts". I've witnessed it. I don't hold it against him, much like I don't hold it against Rush. Neither of them have ever claimed to be journalists, reporting facts, just men with opinions.
When it comes to either of them, I thank my lucky stars for the "OFF" button, unless I am in the mood for a laugh.
I thought we just had a recent conversation about Bill Maher calling all followers of Christ, mentally ill and crazy. I'd call that "cherry picking" his facts, or just being obtusely biased.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."
"Or the one."
- Captain Spock & Admiral James T. Kirk
- Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
You know Suzi, I could also turn that question on you too. ( :
Is it possible your not seeing him being nothing like the liar Rush is because he is disrespectful to your beliefs?
Sure, that's possible. I also said that I don't watch him enough to be a good judge. But I also know human nature. ;-)
Of course, no one is the liar Rush is, except maybe Sean Hannity. But cherry picking and being an out and out liar are not the same thing, IMO.
I don't see much of Maher either unless sometimes when he's on Leno. That's about it, but still I have never heard him cherry pick. If someone can show me where he has, then i'll shut up. ( : I mean it's not like it's my mission to defend him, I just think comparing him to limbaugh is a stretch. (no pun intended on Limbaugh's weight)... (maybe)....
He seems to more in the arena of making comedic observations about mainstream news stuff and not reporting it for his advantage....
I think he might be biased on religion but when he talks politics he sees the stupidity all around. I would really compare him to a very abrasive version of Jon Stewert with less class. Just my opinion though. Jon Stewert also sometimes points out weird things with religion but he does it without being disrespectful. Maher doesn't seem to care if he's more respectful in his presentation...
Just my opinion though, but like I said I really don't see much of him anymore. The last two times I saw him was on Leno a few months ago, and on Huckabee's show even farther back than that....
Maher on Huckabee?? lol I would have loved to have seen that one.
You know, if Maher talked about blacks, Jews, Hispanics or any other group the way he talks about Catholics and Christians, he would be in big trouble. I'm just sayin'..... Hate speech is hate speech, even when it's couched as "comedy".
B-I-N-G-O!!!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"That's the thing about faith... if you don't have it, you can't understand it and If you do, no explanation is necessary."
- Major Kira Nerys
- Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
" Being critical is one thing...."a Nazi pope is running a child abusing cult" is far beyond that."
I can understand why that would be offensive, but personally, I see the Catholic Church as a corrupt institution so I think attacking it is fair game. Maybe he could have worded it "nicer", but what he said was mostly true. If the Church has the right to condemn people to Hell than they certainly should be open to harsh attacks.
I think he (Maher) was referring to the fact that the Pope was a former Nazi. Or at least that he was a member of Hitler's Youth for a while. And we all know where the child abusing issues comes from.
I'm not saying up or down on the comment, just citing its genesis, that he wasn't pulling Nazi out of thin air.
I'm just saying there are people who could argue that it wasn't necessarily hateful comments, or hate speech, in the way, for example, that Rush throws out demeaning, spiteful, mean, and patently untrue, comments designed specifically to incite strong hateful emotions in people.
I would like to take a moment to point out that I never accused either Rush, or Bill Maher of being a liar. I only pointed out that both of them have cherry picked facts before, facts that benefit their argument in any given debate.
Rush may use his cherry picked facts to force his opinion and agenda on the listening audience, and Maher may use it for shock or comedic value. But they are both guilty, nonetheless.
As for examples, I once again apologize to you SG. I cannot bring myself to sit in front of the computer and sift through Bill Mahers monologues for very long, searching and documenting occasions where he has used selective facts to support his agenda.
Edit for add; I don't see much of Maher either unless sometimes when he's on Leno. Well SG, then is it possible that you haven't seen "Real Time w/ Bill Maher" enough to make a fair assesment in reference to the cherry picking I spoke of? I am not trying to spark a serious debate. I have heard Mr Maher use selected facts convenient for his argument. I cannot cite those instances. But I don't think it is fair to dispute what I am saying based on the few appearances you have seen of Maher on Leno.
As a side note; I like Maher the comedian. That is why I watch his show now and again. I wont defend his politics, but I will defend his presentation. He has never once pretended to be a journalist, or a defacto leader of the democrat party. He seems to be just a man with an opinion, albeit an extreme one.
Evrytings irie mon!
A little Jamaican slang. I am not up in arms. Was just trying to magnify my point. I hope evrytings irie with you.
Sometimes taking the word of a choice few is enough. Sometimes it is not.
I understand. I don't feel the need to judge him on much of anything. He is an opinionated comedian who claims to be an opinionated comedian. Even if it is true, that he spouts cherry picked facts for his purpose, he's still just an opinionated comedian.
Rush, on the other hand, spouts convenient facts in effort to sway opinion and undermine authority. I feel a need to judge him!
I watch it fairly often. I would not call Maher a cherry-picker.
I concur with Ms Moderator. Maher is a hateful man. Almost seems as he is angry for being born, and he must direct his hatred towards those he does not identify with.
SG, No, I cannot cite examples of Mahers selective fact choosing. I just remember watching "real time" and thinking how convenient it was that he often commented on part of a story, rather then delving into the entire thing. I noted how he would at times take a portion of a statement, rather than the entire statement, and use it against someone to prove a point. Which seems to me to be dishonest at the very least. But again, I do not fault Mr Maher. He never claimed to be a journalist.
I know many people view Rush as the defacto leader of the Republican party. But I doubt he speaks for any Republicans on this site. I think he could be viewed as the leader of the Conservative movement. But the Republican party is entirely too diverse to be considered predominantly Conservative.
The main problem with the party is the lack of leadership.
But I do agree with Colin Powell on this one. I do not think Rush helps the Republican party.
But will the Republicans of this site ever respect their elected Republican officials when they've repeatedly had to swallow their statements at the threat of Rush's microphone? Even if the Republican party is diverse, what does it say when Rush Limbaugh is untouchable and when Fox News has a discussion panel where the host agrees with a guest that Colin Powell is a "traitor".
Oh! Here's the link of Fox host sides with guest calling Powell a traitor!
http://www.dailykostv.com/w/001288/