A Word About McCain.
Sherman Yellen, from the Huffington Post.
Like Rudy, McCain is viewed as a moderate, but both these alleged Republican moderates have a deep grained streak of cruelty. McCain demonstrated his when he appeared at a Republican fundraiser in 1998, where he told this Rush Limbaugh style joke: "Question: Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Answer: Because her father is Janet Reno!" How the assembled Republicans roared as he humiliated an innocent child, cast sexual aspersions on the Attorney General and probably Hillary, all in the name of good old family-values politics. Of course, he apologized later. They always do after the damage is done. Now, in my world, anyone who insults an awkward child is a freak. The lack of judgment and civility shown by that joke alone should disqualify him from seeking higher office. Chelsea Clinton has grown into a lovely young woman, but John McCain remains a flawed figure who still brings his failed judgment to this country, evidenced by his call for more troops for Iraq - a judgment that shows him as a future danger should he become our next President. And I guess when the judgment is as deformed as the judgment he has shown in the past, he is part of the great American freak show.
I remember when Rush Limbaugh made his Chelsea joke: "Hey, folks, did you hear there's a new dog in the White House?" Then he held up a picture of thirteen-year-old Chelsea Clinton. Roars of laughter. Later, he apologized.
And that, my friends, is the difference between Liberals and Conservatives, in one easy-to-remember, portable method. We go after the Bad Ideas, and the Bad Facts, and finally, the Bad Men. They go immediately after the Man, and by calling his thirteen-year-old daughter ugly in a public forum.
Vote your pocketbook, vote your religious rage, vote your repressed hatred of the poor — but don't ever tell me that the GOP is a party of Values, or Ethics, or Truth, or that McCain is somehow the Anti-Bush.
I know better.
Boy, what a stupid remark (McCains).
He joins Kerry in the “stupid remarks made in the search for political points” department.
But as an indicator of underlying bias, somehow I doubt it, beacuse Kerry (as Byronius pointed out in an earlier post) and McCain share the same “war hero” credentials, and have a long track record of service to the people of their country.
Comment on November 19, 2006 @ 3:41 pm
Upon further thought, I think I agree with you, Byronius; the remark by McCain seemed genuinely mean-spirited (while Kerrys was merely stupid).
If one needs to be that mean-spitited to pander to their base, then perhaps it does indeed say something about the person AND their base.
In this case, it appears to say something unsavory indeed.
Comment on November 19, 2006 @ 6:18 pm
… and this, though not directly related, is amazing as well…
http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/politics/national/features/9221/index.html
Comment on November 19, 2006 @ 9:08 pm
Interesting article. Senrab, I have to say, I haven’t looked at the blog since I posted this — I think my last remarks were written in anger, and although I did not aim them at you, I worried last night that you would take it that way. Something about the description of the laughter in the room just made my head start spinning.
I would like to avoid aiming anything at you, ever, while still honestly expressing myself about politics; it’s a hard line to walk. I hope you will always keep in mind that it is never my intent to strike at you personally in any way. I experience anxiety over the idea that you would feel that it is.
Peace and Love and Brotherhood, Man. I am the Unbeliever who truly and deeply appreciates the Sermon On The Mount, and holds Certain Truths To Be Self-Evident — I think we have more common ground to walk on than many, and certainly more than just Heinlein’s Nuke Drive.
Diaspora!
Comment on November 19, 2006 @ 11:22 pm
Challenge me to think, and I am a happy man.
Condemn me without thinking, and I am an unhappy man.
Peace and a shared bowl of Valentine Smith!
Comment on November 20, 2006 @ 1:24 am
“I remember when Rush Limbaugh made his Chelsea joke: “Hey, folks, did you hear there’s a new dog in the White House?” Then he held up a picture of thirteen-year-old Chelsea Clinton. Roars of laughter. Later, he apologized.”
You remember nothing. Obviously you saw his phony version of events described somewhere on the internet. Assumed it was true, and made up the lie about having remembered it yourself.
Here is what really happened:
Copyright 1992 Multimedia Entertainment, Inc.
RUSH LIMBAUGH
SHOW: RUSH LIMBAUGH (9:00 PM ET)
November 6, 1992, Friday 11:15 AM
LIMBAUGH: Thank you. This show’s era of dominant influence is just beginning. We are now the sole voice of sanity, the sole voice of reason. We are the sole voice of opposition on all television. This is the only place you can tune to to get the truth of the opposition of the one-party dictatorial government that now will soon run America. Oh, I mean, we are only beginning to enjoy dominance and prosperity. Most of these things on the in-out list are not even funny, but a couple of them–one of them in particular is.
David Hinckley of–of the New York Daily News wrote this, and what he has–he’s got–it’s very strange. He says, In: A cute kid in the White House. Out: Cute dog in the White House.’ Could–could we see the cute kid? Let’s take a look at–see who is the cute kid in the White House.
(A picture is shown of Millie the dog)
LIMBAUGH: (Voiceover) No, no, no. That’s not the kid.
(Picture shown of Chelsea Clinton)
LIMBAUGH: (Voiceover) That’s–that’s the kid. We’re trying to…
_______________
So you go after the bad facts, do you?
Comment on November 29, 2006 @ 1:59 pm
No — you’ve got the wrong show.
I’ll trust Molly Ivins on this:
“On his TV show, early in the Clinton administration, Limbaugh put up a picture of Socks, the White House cat, and asked, “Did you know there’s a White House dog?” Then he put up a picture of Chelsea Clinton, who was 13 years old at the time and as far as I know had never done any harm to anyone.
When viewers objected, he claimed, in typical Limbaugh fashion, that the gag was an accident and that without his permission some technician had put up the picture of Chelsea–which I found as disgusting as his original attempt at humor.”
A Defender of Rush — means ‘automatically fact-challenged’; pardon me if I scoff.
Comment on November 30, 2006 @ 12:33 pm
“No — you’ve got the wrong show.”
I’ve got the right show. The only one in which this incident occured.
“I’ll trust Molly Ivins on this:”
Dont. She wrote an innaccurate description. The transcript proves her wrong. The transcript trumps her phony version of events.
First you tell us you remember it happening, then you tell us that you’ll trust Molly Ivins on this. Which means that you have indeed lied about having remembered the incident. Your memory isnt the source, Molly Ivins is your source.
“When viewers objected, he claimed, in typical Limbaugh fashion, that the gag was an accident and that without his permission some technician had put up the picture of Chelsea”
Viewers didnt object, the gag was an accident. A behind the scenes staffer put up the pics in their incorrect order. Which wasnt his first onscreen mistake, but his third.
Comment on January 6, 2008 @ 12:19 am
Oooooooookay, then, Rusty. I’ll let you win this one.
He’s still a neo-Nazi scumbag.
Comment on January 6, 2008 @ 11:26 am
I was clipping my toenails, thinkin’ about ol’ Rusty’s response (after a year), and I realized: what was the joke? If the staffer put up the pics in their incorrect order, and the picture was supposed to be a picture of Chelsea, then — what’s the joke? Where’s the funny in that?
So, Rush Limbaugh was saying that Chelsea was a cute kid, then. And that was the joke? I don’t get it. He was being serious?
But what would a studio full of right-wing Clinton-haters find funny about that?
Uhhhhhh. Rusty, I think you’re full of shit, my friend.
I look forward to your response, probably dated in 2009. No one ever said Limbaugh fans don’t think their way through things.
Darn that staffer! I’m sure he lost his job for impugning Rush’s sterling reputation! Time for some justice, Republican-style!
Comment on January 6, 2008 @ 1:13 pm
c’mon byronius! don’t you get it? Chelsea deserves it, no matter how young she is! if she’s ugly… she deserves to be taunted by the homely, well-fed fat cats! how else can they feel good about themselves and promote their family values?
as you know, everyone harbors a secret hatred for the prettiest girl in the room, so we were all very grateful Chelsea didn’t have that burden when she was thirteen, Jimmy Carter’s daughter was spared that burden as well.
personally, i was always boiling when they picked on her and her appearance and perpetuated it, and little was said to stop it. i was worried what it might do to her self-esteem if her friends showed her the press coverage or if she happened upon the coverage herself.
but am pleased the Clintons have such a balanced, confident, poised, charming, and beautiful young woman who no one is calling homely. what, oh what, will the republicans do now? it looks as though they have failed in destroying one women’s self-esteem.
oh, right, attack her mother. or try some lindsay/britney/paris antics on Chelsea? once in a while i glance at the tabloids at check-out and see a sensational headline mentioning Chelsea and something very bad-girlish, as if that’s really part of her character…
Comment on January 6, 2008 @ 3:36 pm
They know it’s wrong, or they wouldn’t bother to deny it — that’s the funny part of it. Rusty’s so intent about refuting an obvious over-the-top statement by a man who is well known for statements exactly like this. It’s what he does. The Chelsea joke is just one of thousands. Trying to deny it is silly, but Rusty’s gonna keep on tryin’, once a year, forever.
Like little children caught stealing — Republicans are such a mixture of guilt, and hate and fear — I can’t imagine living with that.
Takes a lot of prayin’ or boozin’, or maybe some meth, I’d say. Or all three! Maybe some guilty public gay sex to get over the rough spots!
“He was black, and we were in a park with a lot of black guys, and the only way I thought I could stay alive was to offer him twenty bucks and a blowjob. No, really! I’m being serious!”
— Bob Allen, longtime Rush Limbaugh fan and frequent guest. (and NOT gay.)
Comment on January 6, 2008 @ 9:15 pm
This is my first comment here, but I’ve read almost everything on this website. I’ve seen a lot of good people get kicked off, so I know not to say anything real.
This politics of personal destruction has got to stop. I don’t know who I’m going to vote for, but you guys are saying mean things about Rush, who I know is a good person. You should try being nice sometime. People might vote for you. Until then, this will always be a Republican Country, like always.
Republicans are always respectful when they talk about Democrats, and only say the truth. You people should know that by now. Rush was saying Chelsea was pretty, not ugly. He likes Chelsea. He just thinks her father is Evil.
I know this won’t be posted.
Comment on January 6, 2008 @ 10:19 pm
Limbaugh is pure class:
Link
Comment on January 6, 2008 @ 11:15 pm
Welcome to New-Worlds, Thumper. I disagree with almost every single word you said.
The ‘lot of good people’ you’re talking about is one guy, whom we refer to as Plum, but who also goes by the names perezoso, blind willie chitlin, 01010101010, dave, and many, many others.
I don’t think any of us mind the banter as much as we mind the escalation to venomous threats.
Comment on January 6, 2008 @ 11:15 pm
Also note the recent spate of revisionist history attempting to recast Hitler as a liberal activist.
No, really. I’m serious.
Comment on January 6, 2008 @ 11:20 pm
“. . . you guys are saying mean things about Rush, who I know is a good person.”
“Republicans are always respectful when they talk about Democrats, and only say the truth.”
Oh, this one is truly a hoot! Who’s behind this Thumper gag, ya think? I’m laughing my ass off!!
Comment on January 7, 2008 @ 2:43 pm
“Who’s behind this Thumper gag, ya think?”
I have my theories…
Comment on January 7, 2008 @ 2:50 pm
Like your precious theory of evolution? I am not a gag. I live in North Carolina, and I went to high school there, and you can check.
Theodore Thumper
11612 Haithcock Road
Mt. Gilead, NC 27306
I go to Hamer Baptist Church every Sunday, where the preacher told me about you people and how I should try to help you change over before we have to use the lord’s sword.
Stop hooting. In NC, that is how we make fun of stupid people.
Comment on January 7, 2008 @ 4:22 pm
Great to see the Crusades are still marching on. Perhaps shoving some children out in front would help.
Jesus loves the little children. All the little children except for the ones in Charles Taylor’s Liberia. And perhaps certain parts of the US where the leather strap is still the Path of Enlightenment.
Comment on January 8, 2008 @ 6:55 am
I still find amusement value in the line from Star Trek V, “what does God need with a starship?” Okay, so there’s a perfect supreme being who knows all and is infallible. What does God need with a bunch of proselytizing thugs? If you know how to spread peace and love in the world, why are you rattling all those sabres so furiously? The scripture that inspired Dubya to make his infamous “speck and log” comment about homosexuals clearly has strong application to the sinfulness of warmongers. If only they had the humility to comprehend that, perhaps they would not be so thoroughly wicked, not only in the eyes of we who reach moral conclusions without scriptural starting points, but also in the eyes of all who are true to the unmistakable message that permeates all major world religions — God is love.
Comment on January 8, 2008 @ 9:05 am
‘Speck and log’? Beg to expound? Hadn’t heard.
Comment on January 8, 2008 @ 10:02 am