Rush Limbaugh is calling us Stalinists

[bryant69]

And I suspect others will do worse, for getting the Path to 9/11 knocked off the air. The inevitable result of an attempt to get rid of this movie is that the story is now about our attempts to get rid of it and not about what a piece of crap it is.

Instead of wondering "Why is ABC presenting a biased and non-factual version of history" people will wonder "Why does the left feel like they have to eliminate this film?"

Not a very desirable result in my mind. But perhaps I am looking at this wrong.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[LTR]

1. Did Fatboy call the freepers who protested "The Reagans" Stalinist?

Pot, meet kettle.

[RedStateShame]

2. Didn't he speak out against a certain CBS miniseries?

How's the view from your glass house, druggy?

[gratuitous]

3. Oh, well if Rush is objecting to us

Then by all means, let's quit fighting this battle. After all, if Rush Limbaugh doesn't like it when we call bullshit, let's stop it right this second. He's even calling us names! My goodness, our perfidy knows no bounds. Let's abandon our "championing of the truth" frame for Rush's framing and do it right away so he won't call us any more names.

Or . . .

[bryant69]

17. That's not what I would advocate

Keeping silent I mean. I think we should argue against this movie.

[Jed Dilligan]

87. Where?

Is there some media venue where we get to argue and people actually listen?

Do tell!

[ps1074]

4. We call him asshole

Someone please remind me why isn't this crack addict in jail yet?

[lpbk2713]

18. Because the governor of Florida is his good buddy.

And the Jebster gladly runs interference any time Oxy-Rush wants him to.

[zonmoy]

41. because he is a white right-winger

basically a drug addicted goebbels wannabe.

[sam sarrha]

5. he is a lying fat bag of rancid shit...

[LostInAnomie]

6. I'll call him a limp-dick, pill-popping, hypocrite.

Which one of us is telling the truth?

[Lex]

7. Rush loves lies = Rush loves Path to 9/11

Simple as that.

[bluestateguy]

8. I'll make Rush a deal

We'll go along with "Path to 9/11" airing on ABC, so long as CBS airs "the Reagans" on the same night.

[Lex]

9. LOL! I'll go along with that too. Plus I never wanted "Path" pulled

altogether, just for it to be factually accurate and not RW-fantasy stuff about Clinton and his administration.

[tularetom]

10. Rsuh Limbaugh is an anal cyst on the American body politic

of course he will respond to this effort by name calling and tired rhetoric. If nobody objected he'd be flatulating about how it must be true since we didn't say anything. He's a sad lonely sexually confused fat man and his opinion is not worth worrying about.

[Solly Mack]

11. Why does the right have to lie about 911? - the real question

[Jacobin]

22. Simply put and well said

That sums it up.

Why, indeed?

:thumbsup:

[Change has come]

12. If we just sat quietly...

Waiting for "someone" to do "something", People wouldn't necessarily know this film was a biased and non-factual version of history. Rush Limbaaaaa would call us terrorist appeasers anyway.

[bryant69]

20. There's a difference between refuting an argument and silencing

the argueer.

Bryant

[Change has come]

29. true

but I doubt this little Gennie is ever going back in the bottle. Even if its not aired as currently planned, I'm sure it will be released elsewhere.

[gratuitous]

42. But how likely is it

That the refutation is going to get a $40 million production and push from the Holy Rodent Empire and two full nights of prime-time programming? And will it come in time for the elections that this production is so clearly meant to influence?

Sure, the courts have said over and over that the cops were wrong to set up First Amendment Zones and break up gatherings of citizen protestors, peaceably assembled. But the time and the site of the protest can never be retrieved, never be reinstated once Bush's photo op or the Republican National Convention is over. "Sure, here's a football. Run it into the end zone all you want. Super Bowl was last week."

In the same vein, the timing and the influence that this production is meant to have are keyed to the 2006 election. Giving up "equal time" for rebuttal early next year doesn't mean anything.

[bryant69]

52. We can't refute it directly - you are right there

But obviously we get the information out in a lot of others ways - if this campaign had been "ABC is promiting a dishonest docudrama" we'd probably ahve just as many people riled up - and the focus would be on the damn movie. Instead our argument has been "ABC should not brodcast this dishonest documentary" and the focus shifts to us and why we are trying to keep people from seeing this movie.

Did Republican efforts to keep Farenheit 9/11 out of theatres help or hurt the film?

Bryant

[gratuitous]

59. Fahrenheit 9/11?

Theatrical release. Not beamed directly into people's homes. Choice to plunk down your money and go see it (or not).

Path to 9/11. Broadcast mini-series. Over the air network. Using public (that is, owned by the people) airwaves. No choice whether your television antenna picks it up (or not). Coupled with a push (now disconnected) to Scholastic, a purveyor of lesson plans and texts designed to be used in classrooms by teachers and students alike to learn about "history." History with a decided point of view, not supported by facts.

Big difference. Huge, even. Possibly even hugh. I'm series. !!1!

[bryant69]

61. Good non-sequitor of a response

I'm not saying they were morally equivelent - I just asked a simple question. Did the Conservatives efforts to silence F 9/11 help or hurt that film? And will our efforts to silence Path to 9/11, however morally justified, help or hinder the message of that broadcast?

I don't undestand the reference at the end, unless it is to make fun of my poor typing.

Bryant

[gratuitous]

74. No . . .

The reference at the end was freeperspeak. They often use "hugh" for "huge" and a series of exclamation points with a 1 in the middle of it because they're not very intelligent. Not a slam at you.

Anyway, my point was and is that there's a world of difference between a theatrical release and a network broadcast. Did conservative bad-mouthing of F/911 help or hurt its box office? It quite possibly helped it. Will liberal criticism of PT911 help or hurt its Nielsen rating? Could help, might hurt. But there are other dimensions to consider.

There's a difference between Michael Moore, freelance documentarian, and the American Broadcasting Company, owner of one of the Big Three broadcast networks. An individual looking to increase his name recognition and to sell a rather obscure product (in Moore's case, a documentary film) can legitimately say that any publicity is good publicity. A broadcast network, however, is in an exalted position where bad publicity is just plain bad, hurts its brand, and damages its profitability.

As such, manufactured conservative outrage over Michael Moore providing documentary truth about an event is qualitatively different from legitimate objections to factual inaccuracies presented as truth. We're talking about Steven Colbert's "truthiness" in relation to PT911, which portrays incidents that never happened as fact for dramatic purposes. Conservative anger was ginned up because Moore was connecting dots that the popular media (including ABC) had failed to emphasize, and finding fault with an administration that had largely dodged responsibility.

Another difference is between a product Michael Moore was hoping to sell (and make money from) and the product ABC is shoving into people's homes at a substantial pecuniary loss. I suppose an argument could be made that this shows the altruism of ABC and the greed of Michael Moore; but in a much larger sense, ABC is giving away its PT911 product in hopes of a much bigger payoff than its $40 million investment. So altruism isn't really ABC's motive here.

We should also not lose sight of the fact that Michael Moore does not have a broadcast license allowing him to make millions of dollars off a public commodity, the broadcast airwaves. ABC does. ABC is therefore subject to a higher level of scrutiny and owes the public something that Michael Moore, a private citizen, does not: Accountability in the abstract. If Michael Moore sinks all his money into a bad documentary and goes broke, he's through. His ultimate accountability is only to himself. ABC, on the other hand, whether it makes money on this project or loses money on this project, is still the recipient of a very large stream of income thanks to its use of the public airwaves.

As members of the public, we have an obligation to hold ABC accountable for its use of our airwaves in a way that we don't have an obligation to a neighborhood movie theater or movie rental place.

[EstimatedProphet]

54. Hmmm...

This isn't silencing the argument though, that's the thing. The salient point is that the slanderumentary has 'facts' in it which the producers knew were not true, yet they went ahead and said them anyway. It is a different matter to insist on factual, non-slanderous information, than to deny someone the right to express an opinion.

[bryant69]

63. If there is a slander charge to be made

Than presumably Clinton will make it in the appropriate venue, i.e. the courts.

I don't know that I want to get off on the morality of boycotts or pressure to silence non-factual broadcasts (although I certainly have an opinion there too), but whether or not it is likely to be effective.

Bryant

[EstimatedProphet]

64. OK

Than presumably Clinton will make it in the appropriate venue, i.e. the courts.

I agree, that is an appropriate venue.

Here's what is different this time. Generally slander, and libel also, happen before the opportunity arises to stop it. That's why it's dealt with after-the-fact. This time we have an opportunity to stop it from happenning. I have no problem with ABC airing the show per se, I just intend to complain if they know in advance that it is inaccurate and air it anyway. If they want to correct the show, fine with me. If they want to leave it as it is, then that's slander (and worse, since we know they are willfully doing it and they are going ahead anyway) and I will complain.

Also, I don think it can be effective if we play it right, and not get wrapped up in the crap the conservative press tries to foist on us. If we make the public aware of why it is we are fighting the movie, then I think we will be OK. Olbermann has been doing a good job of that IMO.

[bryant69]

66. It just depends on the narrative

If the narrative is "Liberals try to correct the misinformation in the Path to 9/11" than we are fine - and better than fine, because we justifiably need to correct his crap. On the other hand if the storyline becomes "Liberals try to silence/censor the Path to 9/11" than we are going to be in trouble. Perhaps I am jumping the gun in believing it likely to be the later.

Bryant

[EstimatedProphet]

86. Well, that's true

However, no matter what we do, Limbaugh will try to distort it into us being either weak or bullies. It's all he does. He doesn't know how to live in decent society. So, we really can't let what he says have any bearing on what we do.

[CoffeeCat]

13. He also said this, a few minutes ago...

...Rush was reading some column and he said (and agreed) that Clinton, Berger
and Richard Clark, in effect, pushed people out of the burning World Trade Center
on 9/11.

These thugs have no shame. They'll say anything and repeat any lie--as long
as it furthers their warmongering, evil, scummy agenda.

[Karmageddon]

14. The worse names the junkie-pig-boy calls me the better I feel about myself

As for the people who listen to/believe him? Try to imagine how much their opinion means to me? I consider them good entertainment, and try to never miss an opportunity to laugh at them long and loud, and to point out their idiocy to the general public.

"HEY, check this out. You won't believe it. Guess who gets his "FACTS" from rush limbaugh!"

When people laugh at them for it, they either stop listening to him, listen with a major grain of salt (i.e. start paying attention), or are unreachable and useless except as someone to laugh at and abuse.

[BOSSHOG]

15. yeah, we got all three branches of government which we control

to pressure ABC to do the right thing. Damn we are evil.

Actually it was a nice little grassroots uprising of people sick and tired of "conservative" generated lies. Yesterday's pitchforks are today's computers but the bad guys remain the same. And I look forward to the next swiftboat attack against a dem. The uprising will be overwhelming. "Conservatives" just won't understand what's going on. How dare those liberals insist on honesty.

We don't know what will become of this ABC nonsense, but may I offer a hearty "Bravo Zulu" to my teammates at DU for their efforts to show ABC the light. (Navy for Well Done)

[Initech]

16. Says the guy who is the master of GOP propaganda...

:eyes:

[Cobalt-60]

19. A position on their enemies list is a badge of honor

How do I reach the Top?

[dogday]

21. Rush should visit Donald and they can do

his painkillers together.....

[kurth]

23. Why did they give him his hearing back?

Fucking scumbag.

[plcdude]

24. doing the right thing

is still an important part of the American journey. You can't control what will be said but you can respond to what is said. If that is the attempted spin then we need to correct that also. We are on a roll of counter punches and we should not drop our hands waiting for the bell to ring (election day) keep throwing those punches. That is what "Big Dog" just did and frankly he has never led us astray.

[oldcoot]

25. The writers and producers are the real Stalinists

The true Stalinists are the writers and producers of this crap who not only want to rewrite history but want to expose school children to it.

As for the movie, I have no problem with ABC airing it as long as they are honest about what the movie is and announce that the movie is simply a political infomercial to keep the ruling party in power and is not based on historical fact. Like with all political ads, ABC should also list who is paying for this movie.

[ComerPerro]

26. This is one of the side effects of us trying to eliminate this propaganda

"see, the leftists can't handle having the truth broadcasted"

Even Brit Hume, when reporting on us (thanks for the googlebomb idea, BTW, Brit), painted it as "our version of reality", as though the ABC docudrama's lies were ok, becuase it was their "creative interpretation"

[sendero]

27. Only a handful..

... of irredeemably stupid people listen to Rush, and even fewer believe anything he says.

[Generator]

28. He can call me anything, just don't call me a Republican

I've had it up to HERE with the party that ruined America.

[EFerrari]

30. Of course they will. The response is very simple.

"It is indecent to politicize 9/11."

[Garbo 2004]

35. Which is precisely what is wrong with the film, it's politcal propaganda.

They've been politicizing 9/11 for 5 years. And I suspect a lot of people, not just the dreaded "liberals," are sick of it.

[EFerrari]

38. All but the 30%ers -- the same 30% that were against the Nixon

impeachment. :silly:

[bryant69]

47. I think you are right which is why I'm sorry that the focus

Isn't going to be on this movie but on our attempts to silence it. If we fought on the grounds that this movie is a piece of crap, we'd win. But now we are going to have to fight on the grounds of "Why are you afraid that the American people are going to see this movie."

[Garbo 2004]

67. And the question for ABC might be, why were you afraid to let liberal

bloggers, news sites and Dem politicians see the film in preview? ABC disseminated it to RW outfits, but not even Clinton could get a copy of the film to preview. Interesting, that.

[mhatrw]

36. If ABC were showing "Fahrenheit 911" commercial free on 9/11,

what would the right's response be?

[EFerrari]

40. Well, the whole corporate media would be denouncing it

because it's owned by the wingnuts.

I'm very proud to be a DUer this week. :)

[originalpckelly]

31. "The Reagans" that is all I can say:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Reagans

[bryant69]

37. Do you think the Republicans and Conservatives were in the right

when they knocked that broacast off the air? (or to Showtime).

Bryant

[Change has come]

43. Was it packed with lies and propaganda?

Was it to be taught in classrooms as history? Was it a left wing conspiracy to get Dems elected in 60 days?

[bryant69]

44. Have you seen the Path to 9/11 yet? Just out of curiousity.

I suppose it goes without saying that whenever Liberals use the boycott to keep a program from airing they are acting on the side of the angels.

[Change has come]

51. LOL don't forget kittens.

Obviously I haven't seen this mockumentary. I'm just fed up with the right wing propaganda and lies posing as truth to an unsuspecting audience.

Edit to add...And I don't give a care what Rush Limbaaaa or his ditto heads think.

[NashVegas]

46. I Don't Know, I Don't Care

All I know is, it's never been more important to stand up.

[bryant69]

48. OK.

So questining whether our tactics are effective is a waste of time, I guess. I mean all we need to do is stand up.

Makes sense.

Bryant

[specimenfred1984]

32. Time for More Oxycontin

or another divorce, or another gay viagra vacation, or some other fully despised/loved repig behavior from the propagandist/traitor.

[Jawja]

33. Of course we will

be attacked for fighting back. How DARE we fight back??

[warrens]

34. Bwahahahaha

Insisting on accuracy in historical programming is STALINIST?

I guess for someone who has never cared a whit for truth, it might seem that way. Why, if everyone had to be accountable for the accuracy of what they print and say, I'D BE OFF THE AIR!!! THOSE DAMN STALINISTS!!!

[NewJeffCT]

39. Yesterday, I was a fag enabler

The day before, I was a Hitler-loving Nazi appeaser.

What will tomorrow bring?

[StraightDope]

45. What else is new?

Anyone listening to the pigboy already has their mind made up, so I'm not too concerned. Fuck 'em!

[longship]

49. Yawn!! Ho-hum.. ;-)

Rush says something inflammatory? I'm shocked.

What a Rube he is.

[EstimatedProphet]

50. Well, we need to keep perspective here

If dittoheads are going to call us Stalinists because Rush told them to, they're going to do it regardless of what we say anyway. If we didn't do anything, then he would use it as proof that we are weak and that Clinton really did let 9/11 happen. Next it would be Clinton planned the whole thing. We need to stay focused on the majority of the population that isn't stupid and listens to Rush. That's where fighting the airing of the movie makes a difference.

[JHB]

53. When does he NOT call us Stalinists?

Just putting it in perspective.

[KamaAina]

55. He's actually talking about the Steelers

he tends to slur his words when he's getting loopy on the Oxy :P

[LaPera]

56. Are these fuckers on the same planet? Recast Iraq as a success...

Who will they convince of this lie, besides their own gullible republican Fox watching sheep?

[anitar1]

57. Rush needs treatment.

I am suggesting a 24 hour long high colonic.

[Marblehead]

58. Rush is

a steaming pile of nauseating,filth...

[Change has come]

60. Well said!

welcome to DU. :patriot:

[Mad_Dem_X]

62. F*ck you, OxyContin Boy

I am so sick of this blathering, drug-addicted a$$hole. Shove it, Rush. Shove it up your pimply ass!

[lpbk2713]

65. WTF does he know about anything?

And BTW, this is the Friday of a holiday weekend. Shouldn't he be on his way to the Dominican Republic to meet up with some little boys?

[Balbus]

68. If ABC decides not to run this film, kiss goodbye forever

any chance of getting rid of the "liberal media" tag. After CBS, Newsweek and this, that's 3 huge examples of the MSM bowing down to pressure from the left.

[bryant69]

69. Interesting point

You could be right

Bryant

[Marr]

70. He also said drug addicts should be executed. I don't think Rush

Limbaugh's words mean much.

[Rex]

71. The result is Oxycontin Loserman has to elevate his gumflaps

and America goes...OHHH...so they had to get the Pigman to defend the movie. And then even more people vote Dem in the Fall. Pigman is a lightening rod for anger. I'm ecstatic they rolled his ass out.

[Name removed]

72. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Rex]

76. HAHAHA

I doubt you even know what a Stalinist is.

[dogday]

79. And you really are a pussy

hey, looks like you won't be here long....

[Rex]

81. You're correct!

One post wonder; like most of the Repuke trash. To me that means we GOT EM by the ball hairs. :rofl:

[dogday]

83. Always fun to see the one-post poopers

ya know they come out swinging and leave just as fast....:rofl:

[lonestarnot]

73. Hey Rush, Why don't you just go have a seat on the porcelain

thrown and clean yourself out you big bag of shit!

[MissB]

75. I don't care what that freak says about anything.

[Imagevision]

77. Limbaugh can't wake up in the morning without a couple of hits of oxyconti

[bamacrat]

78. Drop an OC on the floor and watch him shit himself.

Fat bastard.

[Brian Stevens]

80. At least they didn't threaten sanctions.

But CBS should've aired The Reagans as is and let the people decide.

[and-justice-for-all]

82. RUSH " Go smuggle some more drugs you fat fuck!"

..some more Suitcases full of viagra!!! Rush is a DRUG ADDICTED FUCK!!! Like Coultergeist, why do people continue to listen to these fascist bastards!?

[Hubert Flottz]

84. I don't hear anyone laughing at the clown...

co·me·di·an (k-md-n) Pronunciation Key
n.
1. A professional entertainer who tells jokes or performs various other comic acts.
2. An actor in comedy.
3. A writer of comedy.
4. A person who amuses or tries to be amusing; a clown.

[opihimoimoi]

85. Rush is a IG PUB....a whore also....I wish he donates all his money to the

homeless and poverty stricken...lemme hold my breath...

[Raksha]

88. Hilarious - Rush is calling *US* Stalinists!!!

Doesn't he remember what Pravda used to be back in the Cold War days? Every time it was quoted in the American press, they used to say something like "According to the state-run newspaper Pravda..." as a way of reminding the readers that it was an official propaganda organ and not a real newspaper. Therefore you could take whatever bullshit they were saying with a grain of salt. Wait a minute...

[catmandu57]

89. I'm going to say something of great intellectual importance

Fuck you pigboy, fuck you and everyone of your feebleminded maggot listeners.