You should be horse-whipped for the insult you have paid to the highest office of our nation.

Having followed President Obama's suggestion and donated money to the Red Cross for relief in Haiti, I was offended to hear you suggest the President might be a thief capable of stealing money intended for the earthquake victims.

~Roger Ebert

Two thumbs up.

Be Well.

Roger who?

""But would you trust that your name's gonna end up on a mailing list for the Obama people to start asking you for campaign donations for him and other causes?"

Rush is a Christian, correct?

Why doesn't Rush know that when doing something charitable, you don't expect credit?

"Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven." Mat 6:1

And typical of Rush to speak and not know what he's talking about. The link goes right to the Red Cross website. Obviously, Obama just wanted to make it easy for people to find it.

Yet another perfect example of someone's hatred for another and the lengths they will go to in order to try and discredit them.

And there are people like BL2 who cling to every word Rush says as if it is Gospel and then go around repeating it.

Unbelievable!

Kudos to Ebert!

the Red Cross has been very up-front - - - your donations will be USED as they see fit

your Haiti donation could go to Haiti, or to Ethiopia for mosquito nets, or to toward R Cross administative costs . . . salaries, car lease, etc

this has been clarified ad nausium by the R Cross . . SF earthquake, Katrina, WTC II attack - - -

"Roger who?"

Nice.

Attack the man who calls for truth.

Mark:

You have a link that shows the Red Cross stating the contributions offered for Haiti, not going to Haiti as you are claiming?

If not, seems that you and Rush have something in common.

Attack the man who calls for truth.

That's an attack? Geesh...the bar's mighty low now that there's a liberal in office, eh? The left had such high standards when they were soooo nice to Bush....was never any 'attacks" against the office then, was there?

Hypocrisy, at it's finest.

You have a link that shows the Red Cross stating the contributions offered for Haiti, not going to Haiti as you are claiming?

Make your selection to donate to specific causes:

This is why I rarely get involved with political discussions here.

Deflecting, deflecting deflecting...around and around in circles. It goes nowhere and is childish.

Try sticking to the topic of conversation here which is that Ebert calls Rush out on his intentional mischaracterization of Obama's intent.

You attack Ebert.

Then attack me claiming I'M a hypocrit, when you can scroll through the archives to find that I have criticized those for falsely accusing anyone of anything.

All in the name of defending Rush and your party.

Nice.

Good grief Mark!! It took two seconds on the link you provided to disprove what you had claimed.

"Haiti Relief and Development
On January 12, a series of earthquakes measuring 6.5 to 7.3 on the Richter scale devastated Haiti. The American Red Cross is working with its partners in the global Red Cross and Red Crescent network, including the Haitian Red Cross, and other partners to assist those affected by this disaster.

Your gift to the American Red Cross will support emergency relief and recovery efforts to help those people affected by the earthquake in Haiti. Assistance provided by the American Red Cross may include sending relief supplies, mobilizing relief workers and providing financial resources and recovery."

You select a box on WHERE YOU WANT YOUR DONATION TO GO!!! And then it specifically says "Your gift to the American Red Cross will support emergency relief and recovery efforts to help those people affected by the earthquake in Haiti".

Geesh

Lisa, I was merely pointing out that Ebert's hardly a heavy weight in the public arena. As far as I'm concerned, you could put a quarter with his opinion, throw them both off a bridge and honestly say you lost 25 cents, and nothing more.

All in the name of defending Rush and your party.

Nice.

I'm a registered Democrat. Always have been.

I'm just not a liberal.

"Lisa, I was merely pointing out that Ebert's hardly a heavy weight in the public arena. As far as I'm concerned, you could put a quarter with his opinion, throw them both off a bridge and honestly say you lost 25 cents, and nothing more. "

Ebert is an American citizen standing up against one of many misrepresentations that Rush is guilty of.

Apparently anyone not "heavily" in the public arena has no voice, by what you are saying.

Sad that only those who are highly noticable are entitled to an opinion, even if that opinion is a blatant false accusation against another.

LOL

I have yet to see anything other than democratic insults, defending the republicans in your posts. In fact, this is a good example. No criticizm of Rush, you go after the messenger.

You may have been a democrat at one time, but it is obvious that you switched sides long ago. Just because you haven't formally changed the registration, doesn't mean you are still a democrat.

Limabugh and every republican on this site are pure evil. I pray they all find nothing but misfortune.

You may have been a democrat at one time, but it is obvious that you switched sides long ago. Just because you haven't formally changed the registration, doesn't mean you are still a democrat.

#15 | Posted by Lisa

Been waiting for them to come back to the center, but I believe they've went off the cliff, on the left. As far as criticizing Rush, there's plenty of haters here to do that. This entire site is about hate. Leftist hate. It was founded upon it.

Reference #16 as a sample...

"Apparently anyone not "heavily" in the public arena has no voice, by what you are saying. "

My question to the person who said this would be, "Do you support the Tea Partiers and their proposal of "outsider" candidates?" Among others. Point is, don't many people on this site talk about Washington outsiders being a good thing? So shouldn't we welcome smart commentary no matter who it comes from? (By smart, I mean well-written, not necessarily founded in ideas we agree with. I like reading George Will and listening to David Brooks, for instance. Hell, I like reading stuff by some posters here who are far far far right of me.)

Tangentially, I think it's interesting that Ebert (a very good writer and a smart cat, even if he's "only" a movie critic) has been doing more and more political commentary lately. Though one could say this is just one fat bastard criticizing another fat bastard.

"Been waiting for them to come back to the center, but I believe they've went off the cliff, on the left. As far as criticizing Rush, there's plenty of haters here to do that. This entire site is about hate. Leftist hate. It was founded upon it."

That's your excuse for not standing up for the truth and attacking one who is??? "There's plenty of haters here to do that"?????

So you decide to show YOUR hate, by attacking the one who wants truth???

Give me a break, A1!

You're waiting for them to come back to the center????

What is "center"????? The more that is tolerated, the more that is accepted, the farther left the "center" goes!!!

"My question to the person who said this would be, "Do you support the Tea Partiers and their proposal of "outsider" candidates?" "

If that truly is what the Tea Partiers objective is, then yes.

But I don't think that is their goal. IMO, it's nothing more than an extention of the republican party.

I agree with you, Lisa, about the Tea Party--from what little I know. By "the person who said this," I meant the poster you were arguing with, the one who discounted Ebert 'cause he's not "heavily in the public arena" (or whatever the wording actually was). Sorry I was unclear. Though, of course, Mr. Ebert is in the public arena--quite public. And he's among our modern answers to the intellectual commentators of yesteryear. I'm not saying intellectuals are everything, but in America "intellectual" is often an insult; in Europe and other places, intellectuals are part of the public discourse, not just politicians and pundits. One of the greatest German writers of the 20th century, Gunter Grass, was a serious political activist and thinker and commentator (I think he probably still is, even at 82 or whatever), and he was well respected by folks of myriad political stripes. But then, Europe is different, and most countries over there (from what I know) have more than two political parties--a whole nother conversation.

(Curiously, I ask, Lisa, are you a registered Democrat? I've often found you to the right of me, but mostly on moral/religious issues. I am intrigued. : ) )

I'm NOT a registered Democrat.

My views are more closely to those of the republican party. However, there are some views of the republican party I am not in agreement with.

That said, for the past umpteen years, I have been sickened by those who claim to be Christian and yet...as an example of this thread, deliberately lie about someone's character no matter WHO they are, to further their own party.

I can not in good conscience support a party who consistantly does that. Nor can I support a party that I do not agree with on moral issues. I go on an individual basis, depending on the candidate.

I am not an Obama fan. But fair is fair and what Rush is insinuating is absurd and should be considered shameful.

Tangentially, I think it's interesting that Ebert (a very good writer and a smart cat, even if he's "only" a movie critic) has been doing more and more political commentary lately.

Wot else can he do?

That shoulda been "left him unable to eat drink or speak properly"

Be Well.

this is stupid.

a caller simply thought it was absurd to donate through the federal govt to donate to the Red Cross specifically for Haiti.

However,the caller was wrong....you simply go to the White House website to find the link to the Red Cross and many other charities. You would still be giving your donation directly to the Red Cross.

Rush didn't probably realize this which is what makes him an ass much of the time.

enough said.

However,the caller was wrong....you simply go to the White House website to find the link to the Red Cross and many other charities. You would still be giving your donation directly to the Red Cross.

Rush didn't probably realize this which is what makes him an ass much of the time.

Actually, wot's worse is that Rush most likely does realize this but he sed it anyways cause he's also aware that many of his base are not only not aware but are not bloody likely to check the facts for themselves.

Be Well.

Damn, Spud, thanks for the link to the Ebert article. This man can _evoke_. I love the last line: "You don't realize it, but we're at dinner right now."

+++++

And Lisa, thanks for sharing and answering. I particularly enjoy your comments on lying. This (the post as a whole) is why I enjoy your presence here, though we (probably often) disagree on issues. Respec', yo. : )

"Rush probably doesn't realize this..."

Even the local radio talk show personality has a staff member who researches facts for him before he opens his mouth about them over the air.

Rush's recent brush with mortality doesn't seem to have affected him much.

Rush should have been horse-whipped years ago, but a certain political party's constituents think that racist, over-the-top comments should be rewarded with the post of de facto leader of their party.

Did anyone actually determine there was ANYTHING physically wrong with Rush Limbaugh when he was admitted to hospital recently?

As histrionic as this man is, I wonder if almost every little thing he does is an act intended to focus attention back on his large self.

"Roger who?"

Even if you've lived in a cave your whole life, remaining ingorant to American pop culture the whole time and therefore having no idea who Roger Ebert is - you'd still have to be a total asshole to think he's wrong on this.

Limbaugh often doesn't just say anything without having a reason---he does things for affect since he knows individuals will react---then he'll hop on it and follow up on it---what he evidently often does is say something outrageous and tees it up and when people over-react (which he knows will happen) will then follow through on his drive and expose the meaning behind his original statement---evidently, it's a technigue he uses often.

Damn, Spud, thanks for the link to the Ebert article.

Yer ever so welcome.

This man can _evoke_.

Very true.

I love the last line: "You don't realize it, but we're at dinner right now."

That whole last paragraph just slays.

So that's what's sad about not eating. The loss of dining, not the loss of food. It may be personal, but for, unless I'm alone, it doesn't involve dinner if it doesn't involve talking. The food and drink I can do without easily. The jokes, gossip, laughs, arguments and shared memories I miss. Sentences beginning with the words, "Remember that time?" I ran in crowds where anyone was likely to break out in a poetry recitation at any time. Me too. But not me anymore. So yes, it's sad. Maybe that's why I enjoy this blog. You don't realize it, but we're at dinner right now.

Spud actually got a chance to talk with Mr Ebert years ago when he was in Vancouver to attend a film fest.

He was allowed to make a personal selection that was screened as part of the fest. He attended the screening (Executioner''s Song) and gave generous amounts of his time and attention to the film buffs who remained after the film to ask questions.

He was gracious, well spoken, well-informed, bright, passionate about film and just generally a real pleasure to be around.

Seeing him waste away here is sad.

Watching him not let his condition get him down is kinda uplifting.

A setting sun.

Be Well.

"Watching him not let his condition get him down is kinda uplifting."

Only kinda?

And yes, that whole paragraph--but I love what can be done with a last line, and he does it well. I had only read his film stuff before, and I'm so glad to see he has greater range... And sad to realize how poorly he is faring.

Jackass whipped, more like.

The Red Cross is a rip off organization. Fact.

Did anyone actually determine there was ANYTHING physically wrong with Rush Limbaugh when he was admitted to hospital recently?

Ruah said that there is nothing wrong with him whatsoever. Nothing wrong at all.

Now, knowing the problem he has with the truth, one can only assume that he is close to death.

Rush Limbaugh enters race to the bottom on Haiti

That Rush Limbaugh could claim the Haitian tragedy was 'made to order' for Obama shows how crazed the US right has become
Rush Limbaugh may be a recovering painkiller addict, but he's also the chief ideologue of the Republican party in the US. With his fellow shock-jock Glenn Beck, Limbaugh has waged a fierce and largely successful campaign to drive the few remaining moderates out of the party. So when he says that Americans should feel no need to contribute to Haitian Earthquake relief, since "We've already donated to Haiti. It's called the US income tax," it matters.

Limbaugh has his own pathology, and you don't have to be Sigmund Freud to think that a man in whose luggage DEA agents found a bottle of Viagra on his way back from a trip to the Dominican Republic might have picked another way to express his disdain for the Haitian people than by observing last year: "Haiti? You can't even pick up a prostitute down there without genuine fear of Aids." But crude racism the same crude racism that scotched Limbaugh's plans to buy the St Louis Rams football team is only part of what's going on here.
MORE

"Limbaugh often doesn't just say anything without having a reason---he does things for affect since he knows individuals will react---then he'll hop on it and follow up on it---what he evidently often does is say something outrageous and tees it up and when people over-react (which he knows will happen)"

You find that excusable? Reasonable? Something to be proud of?

I fail to understand why people will throw away integrity, shelf decency and display dishonesty for any reason. And it's even more mind boggling that people cling to his every word.

Birds of a feather, I suppose.

Frankly, I find it astonishing that someone like Rush can stand looking himself in a mirror and like what he sees.

" will then follow through on his drive and expose the meaning behind his original statement---evidently, it's a technigue he uses often."

I have not heard anything Rush has said that he corrects at a later date. He has tried to back pedal, that's about it.

If he were a decent human being, he will make a proper and public apology for at the very least, not checking his facts before he opened his mouth.

The Red Cross is a rip off organization. Fact.

Didn't we learn our lesson after Katrina? Remember how the Red Cross was busted sending money generated from that telethon (the one where Kanye made the astute observation) to non-Katrina related causes? As someone who lived through Katrina I can say, "eff the Red Cross."

You find that excusable? Reasonable? Something to be proud of?

I fail to understand why people will throw away integrity, shelf decency and display dishonesty for any reason. And it's even more mind boggling that people cling to his every word.

Birds of a feather, I suppose.

Frankly, I find it astonishing that someone like Rush can stand looking himself in a mirror and like what he sees.

" will then follow through on his drive and expose the meaning behind his original statement---evidently, it's a technigue he uses often."

I have not heard anything Rush has said that he corrects at a later date. He has tried to back pedal, that's about it.

If he were a decent human being, he will make a proper and public apology for at the very least, not checking his facts before he opened his mouth.

#40 | Posted by Lisa

Curious, Lisa, do you ever listen to Limbaugh's program?

One fat blowhard entertainer taking aim at another fat blowhard entertainer.

"And Lisa, thanks for sharing and answering. I particularly enjoy your comments on lying. This (the post as a whole) is why I enjoy your presence here, though we (probably often) disagree on issues. Respec', yo. : )"

I find nothing admirable in one who lies, and especially when done in order to assassinate someone's character, using a situation such as this earthquake which already has people emotional about, to try and stir support for the party he represents.

I have always told my kids....the most valuable thing you will ever own costs you nothing to possess, and that is your word.

Your word means nothing when you stoop to the despicable levels that Rush has...or anyone else who does the same.

"Limbaugh often doesn't just say anything without having a reason---he does things for affect since he knows individuals will react---then he'll hop on it and follow up on it---what he evidently often does is say something outrageous and tees it up and when people over-react (which he knows will happen) will then follow through on his drive and expose the meaning behind his original statement---evidently, it's a technigue he uses often."

Really? To me he just seems like a blowhard who can't keep his foot out of this mouth and who then tries to spin what he said into something sensible - quite unsuccessfully in most cases- when hysterical media watchdog types jump up and down about his demented ramblings. He's a clown and so is anyone who takes him too seriously. In this case he's sunk lower than usual and I find it amusing that a harmless guy like Ebert would say something like this.

Whatever revisionist history Rush tries to put around these comments, he's still going to come out looking like a total ass to any decent person.

"Curious, Lisa, do you ever listen to Limbaugh's program?"

Yes I have. My brother and I used to discuss him afterwards.

I have not heard him recently. I don't care to listen to his brand of "Americanism".

For the Record

Curious, Lisa, do you ever listen to Limbaugh's program?"

Yes I have. My brother and I used to discuss him afterwards.

I have not heard him recently. I don't care to listen to his brand of "Americanism".

#46 | Posted by Lisa

Now, Lisa, since I did my due diligence---what Limbaugh evidently said was "Private donations are going to be much better than a government donation. Go to the Red Cross, do other things,but don't go through the government. It's just going to go through hands bureaucracies and $1 is going to end up being 30 cents by the time they get through with it.

Now, Lisa what is your problem with that statement?

the fact he accused the POTUS of stealing donations.

The fact that he said we dont have to donate because we already have through our income tax.

he is a douchbag

funny but I would trust the links from limbaugh's site INFINITELY less than through the White House.

or links from an al queda website for that matter

the fact that the big fat idiot is popular is testimony that this countries people have no idea whatsoever which way is up.

Here is a transcript from your program on Thursday:

Justin of Raleigh, North Carolina: "Why does Obama say if you want to donate some money, you could go to whitehouse.gov to direct you how to do so? If I wanted to donate to the Red Cross, why do I have to go to the White House page to donate?"

Limbaugh: "Exactly. Would you trust the money's gonna go to Haiti?"

Justin: "No."

Rush: "But would you trust that your name's gonna end up on a mailing list for the Obama people to start asking you for campaign donations for him and other causes?"

Justin: "Absolutely!"

Limbaugh: "Absolutely!"

Geez people. stick your twats back inside your panties. there are plenty of things Limbaugh directly says that can be criticized.

Stick to those.

"Lisa, what is your problem with this statement....?"

Well, given the WH website linked directly with the Red Cross, what the hell do you think Rush was trying to say here, exactly?

Rush Limbaugh is a prevaricator. By which is NOT meant he delays in making decisions. It means he looks for the worst, most self-serving spin in any issue, often by warping the truth and making insinuations as to motive.

Do you admire Rush Limbaugh? I'd really like to know. It's been years and years since I heard anyone who defended the man also come out and say they liked him. You'd think they were ashamed, or something.

I wonder why no one in the NFL wants him to be a team owner... maybe we should call his show and ask?

Geez people. stick your twats back inside your panties

The thing that has people's "twats" outside their panties is Rush's inference that Obama would use the Haiti tragedy to steal money from the Red Cross.

If I wanted to donate to the Red Cross, why do I have to go to the White House page to donate?"

Limbaugh: "Exactly. Would you trust the money's gonna go to Haiti?"

Justin: "No."

"Would you trust your money is going to go to Haiti....?"

Sure, by all means, let's stick with that statement. And the many thousands of others akin to it over these many years.

#48

Mat:

1. Reread the quote you posted and then do what Obama said to do and you will then see what the problem with that was.

Never mind, I'll help you. The White House links to the Red Cross site. We are not going through government beauracracy as Rush insinuated, nor is any money being spent elsewhere.

2. Read the transpcripts from Rush's show that are in the article of the thread....the ones that Ebert quoted.

Still see nothing wrong with what he said?

The thing that has people's "twats" outside their panties is Rush's inference that Obama would use the Haiti tragedy to steal money from the Red Cross.

well, now we have to guess what he meant which is a waste of time.

He was assuming that the money was going through the white house. which is wouldn't. it was simply a website with links to go directly to the Red Cross.

The caller brought the incorrect assumption of what would happen if one would go to the WH website. Limbaugh just ran with it.

I wouldn't trust that the Fed govt would apply the funds appropriately either. But that isn't the case. And I don't think Limbaugh even fucking knew that.

Do you admire Rush Limbaugh? I'd really like to know. It's been years and years since I heard anyone who defended the man also come out and say they liked him. You'd think they were ashamed, or something.

#53 | Posted by Zed

Do I listen to Limbaugh--no, unless I'm travelling and my wife puts him on. That's the only time--there is no man "I admire"--however, one thing I admire is truth and I search for it constantly and so when others distort anything said by anybody on the DR I'll go to bat for that person irregardless of their ideology--I detest partisans and their distortion of facts--those people are weak-minded and why we're now suffering as a nation---that is the ultimate dishonesty.

"I don't think Limbaugh even fucking knew that...."

How much money does Rush get paid? And he gets paid to---Offer opinions but not actually know anything?

Better seek refuge in the "he's just an entertainer" defense.

"I detest partisans and distortions of facts...."

That being true, it follows you detest Rush. I'm being accurate?

Eberly,

Ironic you are on the opposite side of Ebert, but that is for another thread. I did not listen to the show and am going off the transcript. Rush should have looked into it before speaking yes, but he didn't and therefore, especially after the other things he said the other day, a theme is developing that is disturbing.

How much money does Rush get paid? And he gets paid to---Offer opinions but not actually know anything?

no. he gets paid to generate listeners. period. Not to "offer opinions but not actually know anything".

I'm not stumping for him. He was wrong.

he is wrong a lot isn't he? Now you are suggesting he knows something?

that would be a first.

no. he gets paid to generate listeners. period. Not to "offer opinions but not actually know anything".

This is true. It could be argued, in fact, that he gets paid to say things like this simply because now more people will tune in today to hear what he says next. Ebert actually fed the beast he condemns in many ways.

With all due respect to Mr. Ebert, whose work I hold in the highest esteem, I'm not sure that horsewhipping Rush Limbaugh would be the best of ideas.

You know how El Rushbo is about painkillers.

Rush should have looked into it before speaking yes, but he didn't and therefore, especially after the other things he said the other day, a theme is developing that is disturbing.

what "theme" do you think is developing that hasn't been present for years and years with Limbaugh? He made an accusation based on an assumption that is false in the first place. In any case, Obama isn't accepting donations that can be stolen so I will refer you all back to my advice I gave earlier regarding your twats.

what "theme" do you think is developing that hasn't been present for years and years with Limbaugh?

Interesting question. We are kind of dueling windmills when it comes to Limbaugh in many ways. The more people scream, the more people who never bothered to tune in get curious and tune in.

I love the way folks claim they never listen to the Fat Drug Addict, but when he's rightly villified for his horrific world-view, they can quote him chapter and verse.

whatever, you cant swing a dead cat without finding a link to some asshole statement by rush.

oh btw

Rush Limbaugh is a drug addict.

but when he's rightly villified for his horrific world-view, they can quote him chapter and verse.

When I read something like this, I goto his website and look at quotes he posts:

"You should be horse-whipped for the insult you have paid to the highest office of our nation," he writes.

I love the way folks claim they never listen to the Fat Drug Addict, but when he's rightly villified for his horrific world-view, they can quote him chapter and verse.

are you referring to me?

Isn't this the same guy who had the opinion that Brokeback Mountain was a good movie?

I thought that Horse Whipping was used back In the days of slavery.

When I read something like this, I goto his website and look at quotes he posts:

oh Christ!. Lettucespray probably has his link as his homepage.

" he gets paid to say things like this "

If that is true, than what a sad stament about Rush, on many levels.

what a sad stament about Rush,

He is ratings driven and ratings only cares about how many people tune in, not what they think of you. Rush knows that saying something like this on Thursday will give him thousands more listeners on Friday so he can end the week with better weekly numbers and charge his advertisers more money because of the millions of people they will reach on his show. It is circular.

Once again we let a private citizen make news by calling Russ Limbaugh names and suggesting that he be horsewhipped. Why does Ebert matter? It's like asking Sean Penn his opinion. Only a lame brain would care what Rush, Sean, or Ebert has to say. We come off acting like a nation of sheep.

the link provided, which seems truncated, ends with "That's what offends me. You know exactly what you're doing." where is this wonderful quoted paragraph ending with "we're at dinner right now"? that's nowhere to be found in the piece linked. help, please. thanks.

"are you referring to me?

#72 | Posted by eberly"

No. I was referring to CATSOP.

Neither Rush Nor Ebert are "private citizens;" both are public figures.

"I detest partisans and distortions of facts...."

That being true, it follows you detest Rush. I'm being accurate?

#61 | Posted by Zed

Let me rephrase that ---I detest partisan's distortion of facts and if Limbaugh distorts something then I detest that--do I detest him personally--no, just as I don't detest anybody personally on the DR that continually distorts information.

"Once again we let a private citizen make news "

YOU are a private citizen. Roger Ebert is in the public eye, in much the same way as Sean Penn.

CATSOP, keep diggin' that hole.

Honestly, I understand outrage over Rush's previous comments about drug addicts when he himself is one, but having an addiction does not mean that those with them are bad people.

Lack of character, morals and values do!

I wish people would stop bring that about about Rush.it has no bearing on his hateful disposition.

#81

That said Mat, what is your opinion of the latest Rush comments?

Is he right about Obama?

Is he neglegent for not researching before throwing out accusations as he did?

Is he correct for saying what he did?

And if not, are you willing to stand up speaking out against it?

"it has no bearing on his hateful disposition.

#84 | Posted by Lisa at"

It's just another symptom of a horrible human being.

"Red Cross' Top Person: Marsha Evans
Top Salary:* $651,957 (FY ending 06/30/03)

The Salvation Army is unique among all U.S. charities for many reasons. Let's start at the top. Commissioner Todd Bassett receives a salary just $13,000 per year (plus housing) for managing this $2 Billion dollar organization. By comparison, Brian Gallagher, President of the United Way receives a $375,000 base salary (plus numerous expensive benefits) and the Red Cross President Marsha Evans receives $450,000 (the article was written in 2002 a wapping 50% increase in 1 year??) plus benefits..."

"Isn't this the same guy who had the opinion that Brokeback Mountain was a good movie? "

Yes, and it was. In my ever so humble. What was wrong with the acting, direction, or cinematography? Or script?

_+++++_

"where is this wonderful quoted paragraph ending with "we're at dinner right now"?"

It's in a link Spud put up. #24. NOT the article bashing Limbaugh.

+++++

"Once again we let a private citizen make news by calling Russ Limbaugh names and suggesting that he be horsewhipped. Why does Ebert matter? "

Why not? Private citizens' opinions aren't worthwhile? Why are you here then? (And as someone else said, he is a public figure. But see my earlier comments about intellectuals' roles in public discourse.)

+++++

By the by, MoveOn.org (I know, anathema to the righties here) offered a list of links to charities yesterday. Very cool. No partisan commentary, just a humanitarian moment (and their partisan commentary has been too much over the last year or so, even for me).

Hey, nobody would like to see Limpbough horsewhipped more than I do, but he is protected by the Constitution just like all of. Free Speech must preserved, no matter how ignorant.

Please please please for the love of God do not bring back Aristide. The man could not even run a Lowe's or Home Depot let alone a country of 9 million!

Harry Reid would support Jean Claude Duvalier because he is "light-skinned"

Another statement taken completly out of context.

Rush Limbaugh is a drug addict.

#69 | Posted by truthhurts

So it Obama

"Another statement completely taken out of context...."

I've seen Rush use exactly that defense. It doesn't matter if the transcript is there before you, or if you heard him say it the minute before.

Of course Sniper.

Poor Rush. He's the most misunderstood man in America, everything he says is ALWAYS taken out of context. He's not the hateful, lying man people make him out to be.

Get a grip! LOL

Instead of just throwing your comment out there, back it with proof!

"Please please please for the love of God do not bring back Aristide."

Sorry but someone named tontonmacoute should be in jail not posting here.

the fact he accused the POTUS of stealing donations.

#49 | Posted by truthhurts

No he didn't. He is accusing the government of not being efficient. The money goes through too many fingers and they all are a little sticky.

"He is ratings driven"

I just don't believe he really is. I know that in Miami he lost ratings wars for years and years yet still retained his station(s). I believe that his show is presented to sell the agenda he represents by corporations who support that agenda.
I know some will deny it but that's my opinion which I am just as entitled to as that fat drug addict hater is entitled to his.

I know that in Miami he lost ratings wars for years and years yet still retained his station(s).

I learned from listening to Neil Rogers that Rush actually won the demographic he was going for just as Neil Rogers (who was on at the same time) won in males 18-35, the demographic he was going for.

Every four months, Neil dedicated his show to reading the ratings and explaining them to his audience. Power96 is always the number one station in Miami for some sick reason.

"He is accusing the government of being inefficient...."

This is the problem with sophists, which should have been burned at the stake in the Middle Ages in place of witches.

Rush Limbaugh is a liar and an unashamed hypocrite. Let's start from that premise. You're much too old now to play this game according to his rules.

"He is ratings driven...."

I think money means an awful lot to Rush, and ratings are a means towards that, but there's some sort of higher-order meaness at play with him.

Hey, Tim. How is Obama a drug addict? Nicotine? Really, that has the same deleterious effects (and he exhibits the same hypocrisy) as Oxycontin?

Let me rephrase that ---I detest partisan's distortion of facts and if Limbaugh distorts something then I detest that--do I detest him personally--no, just as I don't detest anybody personally on the DR that continually distorts information.

#81 | Posted by matsop at 2010-01-15 11:34 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

CATSOP, keep diggin' that hole.

#83 | Posted by LetUsPrey

Aaaaah, lettucespray, stalking me on the DR--must still be hurting from my corrections and education--I don't understand that since I've never sent an invoice as payment for your education and tuition.

#81

That said Mat, what is your opinion of the latest Rush comments?

Is he right about Obama?

Is he neglegent for not researching before throwing out accusations as he did?

Is he correct for saying what he did?

And if not, are you willing to stand up speaking out against it?

#85 | Posted by Lisa

Lisa, tell me his quotes and I'll tell you what I think--like I said I don't listen to the guy unless I'm on a trip with my wife who will listen to his program.

Roger Ebert is, above all, an impeccably honest film critic. I have read him since Gene Siskel was alive and enjoyed not only his wit, his perception of movie themes and analyses in the light of progressive social values.

Rush Limbaugh is - well - Rush Limbaugh. I came across him decades ago when he was part of a "Point and Counterpoint" segment on a local TV news show, bullying the wimpy mayor of a nearby college town. Ugh. herm

ebert is a liar.
I have heard rush talk about this each day.

rush is making one point about goddamn dems and thier effort not long ago to remove TAX deductions for charity.
but thats bullshit that goddamn dems like ebert dont want to remind anyone.

Rush should be "horsewhipped:?

YES!
Then beaten soundly with a Buffalo..
I don't think it'd be a bad idea to pound him into the ground with an elephant, either....

Of course-we could skip all of that in order to beat him with an Aircraft Carrier Group........

so FRANK...your last two threads sound like that commercial where they do two different endings

too rough
too light.

First off.. this is a PR stunt. Once popular person is upset about no longer being relevant, no longer being paid attention to, no longer being popular... so once popular person attacks popular person because that gets his name in the media. It may as well have been something like Bob Villa says Rush should be nailed to the wall for saying something about his majesty, Obama.

Second... this is a president in love with himself first and the people who love him second. As soon as you go to the appropriate page, you're presented with a video of President Obama, with Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton. Directly underneath the video is a link to... Clinton's disaster relief. And yes, when you give through the Clinton foundation you are agreeing the following privacy policy.

"We may use the information from these forms, transactions, and applications for the purpose for which it was collected. We also work with certain third parties and, in some cases, personal information will be shared with these third parties in order to pursue the Foundation's mission and goals."

So yes, in a way Rush was right. You are being subscribed to a list. It's not Obama's because he doesn't have a site up for that yet. So it's the former President Clinton and likewise Secretary of State's husband's foundation that will be able to use this information for all of their missions and goals.

- Tony

he was completely right about being on a mailing list...a comment that he was roundly attacked for.
and he also mentioned something I thought about.
if over 100 million is going to haiti from the US treasury...arent I already contributing?

AND let me ask one more time...
dems were wanting to remove tax deduction for charitable contributions...what if they had gotten that?

Limbaugh has given millions and millions to chartity. How much has Ebert given?

Limbaugh has given millions and millions to chartity. How much has Ebert given?

#112 | Posted by humanear

I didn't know Purdue Phara was a charity.

I didn't know Purdue Phara was a charity.
#113 | Posted by truthhurts a

No, but The Marine Corp-Law Enforcement Foundation is, and the Children's Lukemia Foundation is. And I'm sure there's more, but those are the two big ones off the top of my head. He's done more positive for this country than most others, including but not limited to his generosity.

And in "rushes" BL2 to defend his sweetie! Whoda thunk?

Ebert is a liar? Hard to back that up when using the transcripts from the show.

But over course, as we have been painfully reading from BL2 since Obama took office...every democrat or anyone who defends a democrat is a LIAR, so says the saintly republican.

And BTW...nice language. I'm sure God is smiling down on you. Oh wait, CINO...silly me!

I didn't know Purdue Phara was a charity.
#113 | Posted by truthhurts a

No, but The Marine Corp-Law Enforcement Foundation is, and the Children's Lukemia Foundation is. And I'm sure there's more, but those are the two big ones off the top of my head. He's done more positive for this country than most others, including but not limited to his generosity.

#114 | Posted by humanear

Well I kind of wonder how many $ were not contributed to Haiti relief because limbaugh said that we already gave enough to haiti and stated that donating through clicking at the WH link was equivalent to having Obama steal the donations and belittling the tragedy in haiti by impugning obama's efforts.

>>Well I kind of wonder how many
>>$ were not contributed to Haiti

I don't know the answer to that. And neither do you. But I'm sure if someone is really interested in donating to the cause, it's not difficult to find the red cross website or any other website. Is it?

Sadly, Red Cross donations go into their general fund.

There are several noble charities where donations go to direct aid for Haiti, and who've had 'boots on the ground' for many years. 92-100% of donations go directly to aid.

sorry you are wrong

Donations to the Red Cross Disaster Relief Fund aren't earmarked specifically for any particular disaster. No disputing they're a great organization, but in this particular instance there are some charities with more 'boots on the ground' than the Red Cross, who are having difficulty getting relief workers into the country. Personally, I felt my donations should go to organizations with larger contingents of volunteers who are there and have been there for years. Personal preference.

There are different levels and types of psychopathy. Most people when they think of a psychopath, they think of the crazed serial killer, however there are all kinds, that are not necessarily criminal. Most psychopaths are just deviant ill-tempered ne'er-do-wells. Go look in any 1st year psychology textbook and look up psychopathy or sociopathy and check out the various personality traits that make up those types.

Rush Limbaugh is a classic psychopath.

I'm getting a mental image of Rush and Roger Ailes engaged in a savage 69.

Dandelion break.

Both Limbaugh and Ebert are entitled to their opinions. Why anyone would care what these two think is, frankly, beyond me.

Earthquake Smiles on Halliburton!!!

Just wondering....How much has Obama's White House "Ear Marked" Halliburton Corp. to "Rip Off" from the Haiti tragedy?????

Good grief Mark!! It took two seconds on the link you provided to disprove what you had claimed.
#10 | Posted by Lisa

(Red Cross) Donations are held within a fund and safeguarded until disbursed for the purposes for which they were donated . . . apart from sums required to defray administrative and operational costs incurred by the Red Cross - -
Funds that are not required for immediate use are invested

Didn't I hear not to long ago that someone picked up a couple million shares of Halliburton... who was that? Cheney... No... Bush.... No...

Soros, that's it, 2007 two million shares for $62mil. It was just before that when Michael Moore made his big investment, right?

We still paying those murdering, rapist bastards in Iraq and Afghanistan?

How do you spell hypocracy? L-i-b-e-r-a-l

of course Efart is going to say anything that will get him noticed in liberal hollyweird

Fat Fuckbaugh actually pays to be horse-whipped before he has his butt boil lanced by Dominican cabana boys.

Did anyone actually read the comment? He was suggesting you would end up on the mailing list...that is all.

You are all missing the point. Rush was saying that donating through the government will lead to less money actually getting to the intended target. I believe he used 35 cents on a dollar actually ending up at the point of crisis. He did not say to not donate. He suggested donating directly to the charitable organizations, instead of channeling it through the government. Why would you go to the government website to donate to the Red Cross. redcross.com is fairly easy to type.

I am happy you decided to donate to this cause, but shame on you Roger Ebert for falsifying Rush's statement and the rest of you libs for readily repeating it and using it to further your agenda of personal destruction.

He suggested donating directly to the charitable organizations, instead of channeling it through the government. Why would you go to the government website to donate to the Red Cross. redcross.com is fairly easy to type.

Rush suggested that if you gave through the government website not all the money would go to the relief effort. The implications were obvious. That the WH was out to rip off the charity. The statement was also patently false. The government website merely provided the specific links to various charities that you could click on and send money too. Shame on you Davey for falsifying Rush's statement and the rest of you rtards who were stupid enuff to buy into that lardassed POS's spiel.

Be Well.

/Back in this muthapuppy and entering as always
stage left.

Did anyone actually read the comment?

Wot? THIS comment?...

Justin of Raleigh, North Carolina: "Why does Obama say if you want to donate some money, you could go to whitehouse.gov to direct you how to do so? If I wanted to donate to the Red Cross, why do I have to go to the White House page to donate?"

Limbaugh: "Exactly. Would you trust the money's gonna go to Haiti?"

Justin: "No."

You may argue that Rush really meant that the Red Cross donation money might be spent elsewhere by the Red Cross itself but knowing Rush sLimeball as we do we know he has no past history of dissing the Red Cross but a massive one when it comes down to trying to make Obama look bad especially when he's done nothing wrong.

He was suggesting you would end up on the mailing list...that is all.

A point Spud aint heard anybody address directly yet.

Anybody know whether or not just clicking on a Red Cross link at WH.gov will put you on a perpetual Dem mailing list?

Spud believes that Rushbo just made that shit up out of thin air and can't support it at all.

Call it a hunch.

Be Well.

With all due respect to Mr. Ebert, whose work I hold in the highest esteem, I'm not sure that horsewhipping Rush Limbaugh would be the best of ideas.

You know how El Rushbo is about painkillers.

#65 | Posted by MaryTylerWhore

* rimshot *

FF.

Be Well.

#125

And what makes you think that ALL funds are NOT going to be needed at this time in Haiti??

And that wasn't your original complaint, if I remember correctly!!

Tell ya what, don't send money to the Red Cross if you don't feel comfortable with it.Faily Christian Book Store is matching all donations...take your donation there!

#125
And what makes you think that ALL funds are NOT going to be needed at this time in Haiti??

And that wasn't your original complaint, if I remember correctly!!

Tell ya what, don't send money to the Red Cross if you don't feel comfortable with it.Faily Christian Book Store is matching all donations...take your donation there!

#135 | Posted by Lisa

I do agree that any local charity with direct connections would be preferrable . . . especially one that matches

thx

"Both Limbaugh and Ebert are entitled to their opinions. Why anyone would care what these two think is, frankly, beyond me."

But then why should anyone care what Somoco, or for that matter herm, think? herm

Rush is a Christian, correct?

Alarm rings. Rush a Christian? So, Christians are materialistic, greedy, self serving, racist and fat sloppy drug addicts? OK.

Tell ya what, don't send money to the Red Cross if you don't feel comfortable with it.Faily Christian Book Store is matching all donations...take your donation there!

Yea right. Just where is this non-fiction Faily Christian Book Store? Palm Beach?

Another FAT and Boldly republican Radio host Mike Trivisanno had gone on for an hour Thursday to his multi-state audience of millions about how "Obama wasted $100 million dollars" to help (those blacks) with 100s of thousands of dead and injured in Haiti instead of "putting America's needs first"!?

*but Republican's "spending" $$trillions of American dollars, blood and 1000s of American lives in Iraq was all "great policy" because a (handful) of women were being abused - "It was a mess"

Triv's pleasant mood forms into a angry rant in which He gets rattled and continues to confuse and embarrass himself even more by proving the point after this caller, maybe someone you know, finally stepped up and handed him the rope