<p>haha that think about braziere size sounds like a big joke to me. ANd what happened to Rush being a journalist</p>
<p>Many of you innocents may have never ventured into the DailyKos zone…Here’s the Man’s personal comment (Kos) on this situation. “Um, um, um…” I hate that vernacular. But he’s the big spokesman for the D-dogs. Don’t forget to read the comment section. Then you will understand where so much of the anti-Bush sputum comes from (not there is not legitimate criticism of the administration).</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/31/173116/88[/url]”>http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/31/173116/88</a></p>
<p>Conyat, you’re really sinking fast. Go eat your Halloween candy and come back with some energy and a new idea.</p>
<p>Sorry, but I watched the tape, and I stand by what I said. I would say, “blah, blah, blah, because I am a Mom (ahem)” with that tone of voice and body language, but I wouldn’t say “blah blah blah, because I am Queen of England.” </p>
<p>And what about Rush’s repeated claims that he dispenses “truth” and he’s a “truth detector”? Wouldn’t you agree that someone who claims to be a “truth detector” while he completely manufacturers scientific studies like the above…is a liar? </p>
<p>He’s no more a truth teller or a truth detector than he is Queen of England. It’s one thing to dispense opinions, and label them as such. It’s another to completely make up things and sell them as fact.</p>
<p>Maybe I am missing something, but the “scientific study” about braziere sizes and IQ really seems like a joke to me. Also, the guy says he is a truth detector. So? That also sounds like someone who gets paid to talk on the radio for 3 hours a day doing his job, praising himself? You really think Rush believes he is a scientific polygraph machine. Its just rhetoric. You really need a new subject…</p>
<p>“Truth detector” is a direct reference to an interview conducted on-air with Bill Clinton (by someone other than Rush), in which Clinton, in an interview similar to his Chris Wallace meltdown, referred sarcastically to Rush as “some kind of truth detector.” Something like that, it’s been a while. I you want to comment on the Rush phenomenon you need to educate yourself. Listen.</p>
<p>Sorry, Driver, but I have educated myself enough to know that however the term originated, Rush uses the term “Truth Detector” to market himself. “The Google” will back me up. </p>
<p>Umm, no golani, this was presented as fact. Rush has a pattern of this kind of behavior. <a href=“FAIR - FAIR is the national progressive media watchdog group, challenging corporate media bias, spin and misinformation.”>FAIR - FAIR is the national progressive media watchdog group, challenging corporate media bias, spin and misinformation.; See the section on Rush vs. Reality.</p>
<p>Just one example:</p>
<p>LIMBAUGH: “Do you know we have more acreage of forest land in the United States today than we did at the time the constitution was written.” (Radio show, 2/18/94) </p>
<p>REALITY: In what are now the 50 U.S. states, there were 850 million acres of forest land in the late 1700s vs. only 730 million today (The Bum’s Rush, p. 136). Limbaugh’s claim also ignores the fact that much of today’s forests are single-species tree farms, as opposed to natural old-growth forests which support diverse ecosystems.</p>
<p>Rush tried to rebut this by saying that there’s more forest land today than in 1920. When does he think his listeners think the Constitution was written?</p>
<p>
Indeed he does. It’s called jujitsu. None of you will actually catch on until you acquaint yourselves with the man, instead of relying on all the Quixotic, ankle-biting websites out to get him. Google and Wiki won’t do.</p>
<p>So you have no problem with him making up “facts” like the relative amounts of forest now and in 1789? It’s just all part of his charm?</p>
<p>I haven’t seen any evidence that he makes up facts, but have another handful of Reeses Peanut butter Cups and make your case.</p>
<ol>
<li> In the spirit of fairness, I think if you look at the original 13 states (even including Vermont and Maine if you wish) it’s true that there is a great deal more forest now than there was in 1800. I believe that, except for the Adirondacks and northern Maine, essentially all of the eastern US was cleared in the 18th Century. So there is a real germ of truth to Limbaugh’s statement.</li>
</ol>
<p>I see this all the time. I live a few hundred feet from the edge of a huge wooded park. A beautiful sylvan stream runs through a gorge below my house. If you look carefully while walking along it, you see mill ruin after mill ruin, and notice that in many places the stream course was constructed out of hewn stone. A hundred fifty years ago these woods were an industrial park.</p>
<ol>
<li> I just want to remind everyone how the Kerry discussion started. Driver raised it as a perfect example of how the liberal media failed to report important conservative stories. Pretty funny, huh? The lead story everywhere, and not a single one does anything but jump through the hoops Tony Snow set up and validate his Big Lie: Kerry said the troops in Iraq are dumb dropouts, he should apologize, but he won’t because he says he didn’t say anything wrong (without making clear what he, in fact, said, because it’s not newsworthy in the slightest: Bush is dumb and got stuck in Iraq).</li>
</ol>
<p>So . . . what liberal media? It would be nice if there were some. I’m still waiting for some kind of example.</p>
<ol>
<li> Just for the record, I don’t like Kerry much. I don’t care what happens to him. But it pains me that Snow et al. have hit it out of the park with their Big Lie gambit, because they are going to do it a lot more. It sure works better for them than having anyone focused on real issues, because that’s the discussion they are losing right and left.</li>
</ol>
<p>“I haven’t seen any evidence that he makes up facts, but have another handful of Reeses Peanut butter Cups and make your case.”</p>
<p>Wow. Now who hasn’t done their research? He’s also tried claiming that the U.S. has more Native Americans now then before European contact. Again, debunked; he’s off by millions. (Same source). There are many, many examples for anyone who cares to look for them. The one site I linked has dozens, and it’s hardly an exhaustive review.</p>
<p>But I guess if you are determined to believe everything Rush says, absolutely without question, you aren’t going to see it when he makes up phony studies from Tufts, or pulls statistics like the above out of thin air.</p>
<p>And what’s your point about the Peanut Butter cups? It seems rather unnecessary. Is it supposed to be some sort of insult? Like any woman who knows better than to believe Rush must be fat?</p>
<p>No, I just thought that you sounded like you had just come in from trick-or-treating. Happy Halloween.</p>
<p>D’oh. Ok. I thought you had really fallen for Rush’s manufactured study about bra size and intelligence.</p>
<p>Peter Principle = Bush Principle</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Again, that’s if you equate Japanese-style cypress farms with forests. I’m not saying that we have some huge ecological disaster on our hands here, but it’s a bit of a “stretched truth” that we have more “forested” land. We have land with trees on it. And squirrels, of course. </p>
<p>Aw heck. We have squirrels. That’s enough. :)</p>
<p><i believe=“” that=“” in=“” your=“” heart=“” you=“” agree=“” with=“” me,=“” because=“” i=“” think=“” actually=“” value=“” truth=“” and=“” fairness.=“” don’t=“” understand=“” why=“” it’s=“” hard=“” for=“” to=“” acknowledge=“” it=“” bothers=“” me.=“”></i></p><i believe=“” that=“” in=“” your=“” heart=“” you=“” agree=“” with=“” me,=“” because=“” i=“” think=“” actually=“” value=“” truth=“” and=“” fairness.=“” don’t=“” understand=“” why=“” it’s=“” hard=“” for=“” to=“” acknowledge=“” it=“” bothers=“” me.=“”>
<p>JHS: In my rush out the door last night I missed your last paragraph. I just want to say that I have kept my eye out for clips of Kerry’s speech which included the material leading up to his statement (most clips play only the targeted statement). From what I can tell, he had some one-liners about Bush, but then he sort of pauses and starts another topic - education. He says something like “well, since we’re at a school, it’s appropriate to talk about education…” (I’m paraphrasing from memory), and then he goes into his statement about you’d better study hard or you’ll end up in Iraq (paraphrasing again). Don’t forget that he was speaking to a “junior college” (community college?) group–kids that <em>he probably thought he was doing a favor by pointing out their alternatives</em>, since I’m quite sure he believes that, as many people here on this board have stated, our military is made up of uneducated misfits. Would he have made this statement at Yale? Probably not.</p>
<p>I object to being told that there is only one acceptable interpretation of his remarks and/or that most people are too stupid to make up their own minds about it until they’re given direction by the right-wing media (referring to other posters). Intelligent and well-meaning people can disagree as to what Kerry intended.</p>
<p>I personally believe he fully meant to say what came out of his mouth. As others have pointed out, it is perfectly in keeping with prior statements he has made about the military. I don’t think it was (latest explanation) a “botched joke.” If that is the case, then what was the “joke?” I’m waiting to hear it. Something about the President being stupid? So we are supposed to apologize for a man who would go in front of a group of kids and insult their President during a time of war? Judging by the tepid reaction of the kids (especially the ones standing behind him, who were stonefaced), I don’t think his supposedly well-intended “joke” would have gone over too well with that crowd either.</p>
</i>
<p>
Now we’ve gone too far! If anyone wants to criticize Peanut Butter cups, I’ll meet them in the alley behind SA! :eek:</p>
<p>hh</p>
<p>You’re absolutely right. Even when taken in context it’s as much of a stretch, if not more so, to believe that he was talking about Bush rather than taking what he actually said as what he meant. In my view there’s no connection between the sentence that he said before his ill fated comment and the “stuck in Iraq” comment.</p>
<p>The man stepped in it big time. Kerry in '08!</p>
<p>I’m with sjmom…Peanut Butter Cups have served honorably over decades. I see no reason to diss them, either. ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Come on JHS, do you really believe that this is what he said? I wonder how many people would possibly come to this conclusion without the help of the Kerry crisis team re-spinning the speech and inserting words that were never spoken. </p>
<p>The ONLY reason that this is still a story is because of Kerry’s reaction to it. He should have said something like, “I screwed up with my delivery and can see how people misinterpretted my comments. I’m sorry for what I said, and let me assure all the people in our armed forces that they have indeed followed a noble calling that is worth pursuing.” Had he said this, the media would have dropped the issue like yesterday’s news. Instead, he made it into an issue by the wild assertion that he is being “Swift Boated” - which is nonsense.</p>