Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot

That was a book written by Al Franken back in 1996, obviously to show he possessed the maturity needed to become a US Senator. This title is the personal opinion of Frankin’s. There are many who might disagree with the opinion that Rush Limbaugh is an idiot, including Mr. Limbaugh but the question of whether Rush Limbaugh is or is not an idiot is not one that is readily decided by any observations and cannot really be determined to be objectively true or false. On the other hand, the statement that Rush Limbaugh is in favor of sexual assault or rape is a statement that can be determined to be true or false based on Rush Limbaugh’s own statements. This is not simply a personal opinion. If someone takes Rush’s words out of context to make the accusation that he believes that sexual assault is acceptable behavior, they are making a statement that is false and potentially damaging to Rush Limbaugh’s reputation. If someone makes the statement, knowing it to be false,with the intention to cause damage to Rush Limbaugh, that is defamation and Rush Limbaugh can take legal action against them.

This is not just a hypothetical case. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee really did make such statements in a campaign to have advertisers boycott Rush Limbaugh’s show and Rush Limbaugh is really considering legal action against them. Here is the story from the Daily Caller.

Radio host Rush Limbaugh has threatened to sue the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) for defamation, The Daily Caller has learned.

Limbaugh retained the services of lawyer Patty Glaser and demanded that the DCCC “preserve all records in anticipation of a lawsuit for defamation and interference” after the Democratic Party group led a campaign against Limbaugh based on out-of-context statements the host made about sexual assault. Limbaugh’s legal team delivered a letter to DCCC representatives Monday informing them of the legal threat. Limbaugh has also demanded a public retraction and apology.

The Limbaugh team is currently proceeding from the standpoint of litigating and has not yet made a decision as to whether the DCCC could make any concessions at this point to prevent the lawsuit.

The DCCC “has intentionally disseminated demonstrably false statements concerning Rush Limbaugh in a concerted effort to harm Mr. Limbaugh, and with reckless disregard for the resulting impact to small businesses across America that choose to advertise on his radio program” according to the GlaserWeil law firm’s letter to the DCCC, which was obtained by TheDC. “Mr. Limbaugh clearly, unambiguously, and emphatically condemned the notion that ‘no’ means ‘yes.’”

“Let’s be clear: Rush Limbaugh is advocating for the tolerance of rape” the DCCC stated in a September fundraising email after Limbaugh mocked Ohio State’s new mandatory sexual consent guidelines. (RELATED: Democrats Attack Rush Limbaugh On Way To November Loss)

Limbaugh’s team said that the DCCC’s campaign against Limbaugh provides grounds for a defamation case, based on legal precedent.

“The DCCC may believe it to be immune from liability by quoting words, taken out of context. This is untrue,” Glaser said. “There is significant on point precedent in the 9th Circuit for holding an organization responsible for falsifying meaning through selective quoting. In Price v. Stossel, the court held that, if a party accurately quotes ‘a statement actually made by a public figure, but presents the statement in a misleading context, thereby changing the viewer’s understanding of the speaker’s words,’ that constitutes defamation.”

I don’t much care for litigation of any sort, but I hope Rush Limbaugh goes ahead with this lawsuit. The progressives have shown over and over that telling the truth is simply not an action they value very highly. If slander is useful to gain power and destroy their opponents, they have no trouble with slander. Maybe legal action will teach them better.

Political Stalking

The latest trend in politics these days seems to be stalking politicians by hanging out at their homes and posting recordings on YouTube.

Video “trackers” are a mainstay on the campaign trail nowadays. Dispatched by candidates to shadow their rivals, they lurk in the crowds and the receiving lines waiting for the opponent to slip up, then capture the embarrassing moment on camera and post it online.

But this season, Democrats are taking the practice to a new and, some say, uncomfortable level by recording the homes of some Republican incumbents.

Two of the recent targets this year have been Ohio Rep. Jim Renacci and Wisconsin Rep. Reid Ribble, whose homes appear in roughly 30-second video clips posted online.

“It really crosses a line,” Ribble told Fox News. “I think it’s fair game for a tracker or the other party to tape what you’re saying. But this doesn’t do anything for them or the political process. And quite frankly it really disturbed my wife.”

In the Ribble video, posted online June 18, his Wisconsin home is filmed from several different angles on a windy day. It’s unclear whether anyone was home when the video, which has no sound, was shot. The Renacci video follows the same formula — straight, raw footage of the congressman’s home posted to YouTube.

Democrats are defending the practice. They say the videos of GOP members’ homes — which are generally spacious, nice-looking dwellings — expose the fact that congressional Republicans used this session to help the wealthy and themselves.

“House Republicans have spent this entire Congress trying to hide that they’re protecting benefits for millionaires and perks for themselves instead of protecting the middle class. But we won’t let them keep it secret any longer,” said Jesse Ferguson, spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

The rival National Republican Congressional Committee also uses trackers, but in a more limited scope, spokesman Paul Lindsay said.

“Our trackers serve as eyes and ears to hold Democrats accountable in public events and public spaces only,” he said. “Anything beyond that would be a violation of our policy.”

I can’t say that I am really surprised that it is the Democrats that are doing this, and seem to have no idea that there is anything wrong with this creepy behavior. I wonder if they will take responsibility if some unstable person commits an act of violence, perhaps to get back at the evil 1%.

If you think that perhaps are are safe from this sort of thing because you are not a politician, think again. The Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light On Spending in Elections or DISCLOSE act is making its way through Congress. If you want to make a large contribution (more than $10,0o0) to a campaign or any polilical cause, than be prepared to have your name and address known. Here are some FAQs about this legislation from the League of Women Voters.

Q.  Why is the DISCLOSE Act needed?

A.  Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. FEC, we have seen a huge increase in election-related advertising through supposedly “independent” expenditures – and most of the money comes from secret sources.  Corporations, unions and wealthy individuals can hide the fact that they are funneling tens of millions of dollars into ad campaigns designed to elect or defeat candidates.  The DISCLOSE Act would remedy this situation by requiring disclosure.

Q.  Why is disclosure important?

A.  Voters deserve and need to know the sources of funding for election advertising so they can make informed decisions.  Secret campaign money has no place in America’s democracy simply because it undermines the role of the voter and corrupts the election process.  Voters have a right to know — whether it is a corporation, union, trade association, or non-profit advocacy group making unlimited campaign expenditures and influencing elections – so they can judge whether to believe the ads.

The League of Women Voters believes Americans deserve all the information they can get before they vote.  Tell us where the money is coming from and let the voters decide.


Q.  Is there any other reason for disclosure?

A.  It is often said that sunlight is the best disinfectant.  Disclosure will operate as a deterrent to quid pro quo corruption because it stops the secret spending that could be part of a corrupt arrangement.


Q.  What does the Supreme Court say about campaign finance disclosure?

A.  On an 8 – 1 vote in the Citizens United case, the Supreme Court upheld disclosure requirements.  In fact, the Court pointed in the direction of enhanced disclosure when it said that disclosure is important to “providing the electorate with information.”  It also supported disclaimer requirements “so that the people will be able to evaluate the arguments to which they are being subjected.”  We couldn’t agree more.


Q.  What does the DISCLOSE Act require?

A.  The DISCLOSE of Act 2012 is carefully crafted to require disclosure by outside groups of large campaign contributions and expenditures – those over $10,000 – and includes a valuable “stand-by-your ad” provision for ads run by such groups.  It requires outside groups to certify that their spending is not coordinated with candidates and, very importantly, covers transfers of money among groups so that the actual sources of funds being spent to influence federal elections will be known.


Q.  Covering transfers of more than $10,000 among groups for election advertising is really important?

A.  Yes.  Unless large transfers are disclosed, corporations, unions, trade associations and wealthy individuals would still be able to hide their spending and deceive the voters through “dummy” corporations.


Q.  How is enhanced disclosure accomplished in the legislation?

A.  One of the key elements of the DISCLOSE Act is the definition of “electioneering communications” that triggers the disclosure requirements.  If an ad uses the name or likeness of a candidate within the calendar year of a particular House or Senate election, then disclosure is required.  Current law only requires disclosure of ads within 90 days of a general election, a period of time that is proving much too short with the huge campaign expenditures we are seeing – and made possible by – Citizens United.


Q.  Is the “stand by your ad” requirement an important part of disclosure?

A.  Yes, it is.  The requirement for the main funder(s) of an ad to appear briefly in the ad ensures that the voters will hear directly and immediately who is paying for and is responsible for the ad.

It sounds good and I would support such an act, except that activists have used such information to harass and intimidate  supporters causes they don’t like.

Supporters of California’s Proposition 8 are reporting harassment and even violent assaults from opponents protesting the passage of the ballot proposal which rescinded a California Supreme Court decision that imposed same-sex marriage on the state. Homosexual activists have held large protests at Mormon temples and Catholic churches, deriding their opponents as hateful.

Paul Bishop, a Los Angeles Police Department supervisor reported on the election aftermath in Meridian, a magazine for members of the Latter-Day Saint Church, who are also known as Mormons.

Bishop told how he, as a private citizen, had attended rallies in support of Proposition 8. While both supporters and opponents of the measure honked their horns, he wrote, “the way to tell the difference is the No On 8 supporters usually accompanied their horn honking with an obscene gesture or a string of obscenities. They also liked to swerve their cars toward the children on the curb.”

He noted that several of his ward members had received hate mail after their names, religious affiliation, contribution amounts, and addresses were published on a web site inciting Proposition 8 opponents to target the individuals listed.

“Their houses and cars had been vandalized, their campaign support signs stolen, and opposition signs planted in their place,” Bishop wrote.

This is an opinion piece from US News & World Report

It’s not the new system they don’t like—even while they attack it. It’s that without knowing the identity of the donors who are giving the money to the GOP, they can’t send their mobs arising out of the “Occupy” movement and like-minded groups to the homes of donors in an effort to intimidate them into closing their checkbooks. Last week, for example, hoards of protesters descended on a neighborhood in New York to picket the home of a couple holding a Romney fundraiser, including a plane towing an obnoxious banner overhead.

Other donors to Romney have been singled out by name by the Obama campaign, triggering boycotts of the companies with whom they are affiliated. No such actions have been taken, on the other hand, against individuals or events organized to raise funds for pro-Obama groups. The hypocrisy of the left on these issues should be apparent to anyone who cares to look. They don’t want an even playing field. They don’t want fairness. They want to force, through new law or through intimidation, the GOP’s money out of the political process so they can do all the spending they want, unmatched by anyone who disagrees.

The moral here, is that if the DISCLOSE act is ever passed, conservative activists had better lay low and shut up, or have their homes featured on YouTube, and Occupiers show up at their doorstep.

 

Repealing Obamacare

The House of Representatives voted to repeal Obamacare. The vote was 244-185 with mostly a party-line vote though five Democrats voted in favor of the repeal. This is largely a symbolic act, since the Democrat controlled Senate will not even consider a repeal and of course they do not have the votes to override a veto by the President. But, at least we get to see where everyone stands.

Still, one thing bothers me about this. According to the article in The Hill, the Republicans have not put forward an alternate plan.

Many others noted that while Republicans have talked about replacing the healthcare law, the GOP has not put forward any comprehensive replacement plan, and instead seems to be focusing only on repeal. Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) mocked Republicans on this point Wednesday morning, holding up an empty hand to represent the GOP’s healthcare replacement bill and giving it a mock “reading” on the House floor.

That is not quite true, since the Republicans do have  ideas, still they should not make repeal the whole focus of their effort. They need to be for something as well as being against Obama.

Meanwhile, I got an e-mail from the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee concerning this. They must have sent it out before the vote.

David —

Backed by a $9 million ad blitz from the Koch brothers, House Republicans are holding a stunt vote this afternoon to repeal Obamacare.

The next few days are critical. Right-wing SuperPACs, big insurance companies, and the Tea Party base are all lined up to go on the attack against President Obama and Congressional Democrats for refusing to back away from health care reform.

We have to respond immediately.

Stand with President Obama: Donate $3 or more to our Health Care Rapid Response Fund today >>

A new Washington Post poll shows that support for health care reform has gone up eight points into a dead even tie — 47% in support and 47% opposed.

We have to continue going on offense and hold Republicans accountable for putting insurance company profits over the middle class. Will you help us raise $50,000 for our Rapid Response Fund today?

http://dccc.org/We-Support-Obamacare

Thanks,

Steve

I wonder if they have any idea just how unpopular Obamacare actually is. This is not really an issue on which the Republicans need a $9 million ad blitz.  I wonder how they worded that Washington Post poll to get such an unusually positive response. Perhaps they asked if the respondent was in favor of “health care reform” without specifying any actual reforms.

 

Friends in High Places

Well, it would seem that I am making all kinds of friends in high places. First, Barack Obama invites me to dinner, and now Al Gore is making a personal appeal to me to contribute to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

At no time has Democrats’ progress been more threatened than it is now. Single-minded proponents of a dangerous and extremist agenda are working feverishly to roll back every Democratic gain we’ve ever made.

The Tea Partiers now calling the shots in the Republican Party won’t back away from their radical agenda. And they are also exceedingly well funded by corporate backers, thanks to the Supreme Court’s disastrous Citizens United decision.

It will take an unshakeable commitment from grassroots Democrats like you to guarantee our progress and to continue to move America forward.

That’s why I am asking for your support of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC)’s Million Dollar Matching Gift Campaign before their critical Federal Election Commission (FEC) fundraising reporting deadline on September 30th.


I am making this personal appeal to you because it’s imperative we have a strong FEC filing on September 30th.

Yes, the Tea Partiers certainly do have an extreme radical agenda. Imagine, thinking that the government should live within its means and actually follow the Constitution. I don’t know where they get such wackos.

Well, Al Gore can certainly count on me!

 

Hey!, there’s more. I just got an e-mail from Harry Reid!

We are locked in a struggle for America’s soul. Our very values are at risk.

Rick Perry calls Social Security a “monstrous lie.” Paul Ryan dreams of ending Medicare forever. And the Republican response to the thought of an uninsured coma patient? Grisly, callous shouting from the audience.

They want to reverse the steps our country took to care for the sick and prevent our parents and grandparents from living in squalor.

Doing so would fundamentally change America. We simply must fight back.

The Republicans want to ride a wave of frustration to win four Senate seats so they can remake America. Unless you contribute to the DSCC’s $662,000 goal before midnight on Sept. 30, we won’t have the resources to stop them in their tracks.

This country could change forever. Don’t wait to fight for the ideals all of us believe in.

Click here to rush $5 or more to the DSCC before midnight on Sept. 30. The Republicans are four seats away from a total congressional takeover, and it’s up to us to raise $662,000 to beat them back.

Everywhere you look, Republicans are assaulting the very idea that we are our brother’s keeper and that all Americans deserve a certain basic dignity.

The Republicans don’t seem to care that our people don’t have jobs. They refuse to lift a finger to get the economy moving again.

The Republicans don’t seem to care that one in four American children live in poverty. They’re too busy lecturing us about the budget deficit they created while defending huge tax giveaways to the big corporations.

Democrats have always been the party that fights for the middle class – and now is no different. If we’re going to stand up to the special interests, the DSCC needs the grassroots to come through in a big way.

The DSCC is counting on grassroots donors for $662,000 before Sept. 30. Let’s make sure we get there.

Click here to rush $5 or more to the DSCC before midnight on Sept. 30. The Republicans are 4 seats away from a total congressional takeover, and it’s up to us to raise $662,000 to beat them back.

I know progress doesn’t always come as quickly as we’d like. But our values will always endure.

Democrats will always be the ones fighting for what’s right for the American people. Republicans will always fight for the super-rich and the big corporations.

Right now, we need you in this fight. Please give whatever you can right away.

Those fiends!. Wanting to balance the budget and not supporting Obama’s latest stimulus boondoggle. Not to mention wanting to keep money in the private sector so that employers might feel confident enough to start hiring again. I’m with you Harry!

%d bloggers like this: