I'm with Rush
I wonder what Edward R. Murrow would say about this new low in so-called mainstream media coverage, indeed participation and promulgation, of nothing short of slander.
Even Dennis Prager, who normally gives even the undeserving every benefit of the doubt, has had enough. Some quotes from his Wednesday program:
"The attempts by people on the Left to deny him the right to do that should scare every Liberal that is aware of the issue. This is the dividing line between the honorable Liberal and the totalitarian Leftist."Prager went further, to now brand MS-NBC as the "M-Sewer network" unless and until they make a full apology to Limbaugh.
"You cannot be a good person, this is disqualifying, your moral character is shown by the opposition to a radio broadcaster, on the Right or on the Left, owning a part of a football team, especially when the opposition lies."
"This is not a Conservative / Liberal issue. This is a good / bad issue."
"Your conscience has been dulled if you can support the lies being told about Rush Limbaugh."
Ditto.
I don't think opposition to someone being allowed to buy a football franchise is a moral issue. The ownership group, or the league, both of whom decided, for whatever reason, that they didn't want to be in business with Rush Limbaugh had every right to make that decision on whatever basis they chose to make it.
Rush Limbaugh, a great believer in guilt by association, and in punishing people for the views they hold, has a great deal to learn from Edward R. Murrow.
It's about SLANDER.
Rush, like Van Jones and like many others I could name, has every right to speak his mind, but he doesn't have the right to be exempt from the negative consequences that follow from that speech.
Didn't matter. Burwell went on to explain the misquote didn't change the story. Burwell writes:
"Fine, let's play along for the time being and take him at his word that he was inaccurately quoted in the Huberman book. Heck, let's go along for the full ride and believe that it was all a horrible "fabrication."
So what are we left with?
Well, essentially, I think we just threw a deck chair off the Titanic.
There is still a huge pile of polarizing, bigoted debris stacked up on the deck of the good ship Limbaugh that he can't deny or even remotely distance himself from."
In other words, Limbaugh might not have said it - but we wish he had. This is character assassination at its most vile.
Journalism is dead.
No. But I certainly will respect the right of someone else to make a decision on that basis. The NFL didn't want to be in business with Rush Limbaugh. That's their right.
The issue isn't the fabricated quotes, the issue is the quotes that weren't fabricated.
No. Most emphatically not. I don't get to determine the truth, and neither do you.
I suppose when in His good time, God chooses to weigh in NFL ownership issues, I will take His views as authoritative. But until such time, all of us are on our own.
I don't go around calling people racists, and I don't believe I have called Rush one, and I don't that he is one. But there is no doubt in my mind whatever, that based on the documented statements listed by mediamatters, calling Rush a racist is reasonable.
It's a free country. Rush Limbaugh can say what he wants. Al Sharpton can say what he wants. And the NFL can do business with whomever they want. I am not telling anyone what to do or what not to do.
Nope.
"Does the fool deserve the same right to be heard as the prophet?"
He has the same right to say anything he wants. I don't think anyone has the right to be heard.