Obama parody draws fire

If you want to find out what the conservative party is all about...just listen to Rush Limpbag.
There you can see how the conservatives feel about people of color and anyone else that disagrees with their agenda. Talk about hypocritical....Mr. oxyman talk about drug use.
These people are scary...the only thing missing is their chanting to Allah.

It has been said that "racist" is something a Liberal starts yelling when he's losing an argument.

The article above is an example of that.

In fact, a Conservative like Rush Limbaugh isn't doing his job unless some Liberal, in frustration at losing the debate, starts this kind of name calling.

For the record, the "Obama the magic negro" phrase was the headline of a column in the Trib's sister paper, the LA Times (both are owned by the Tribune company). The columnist was David Ehrenstein, their cultural critic, and the column in part read:

"The Magic Negro is a figure of postmodern folk culture, coined by snarky 20th century sociologists, to explain a cultural figure who emerged in the wake of Brown vs. Board of Education. "He has no past, he simply appears one day to help the white protagonist," reads the description on Wikipedia [].

He's there to assuage white "guilt" (i.e., the minimal discomfort they feel) over the role of slavery and racial segregation in American history, while replacing stereotypes of a dangerous, highly sexualized black man with a benign figure for whom interracial sexual congress holds no interest."

Note that the "progressive" (i.e., far left) group "Media Matters" making the ritualistic "racist" chant didn't call Ehrenstein, or Wikipedia, "racist" for using he same phrase Limbaugh did. Note columnist Parsons only quotes "Media Matters", Obama's staff, and Dick Durbin--Dems all.

"Racist" is something a Liberal starts yelling when he's losing an argument. The intent is to censor speech that Liberals don't like to hear. And Christi Parsons is happy to be the megaphone for the censors.

Has anyone heard this? I haven't. It sounds stupid. Typical racist bull .

If columnist Christi Parsons was actually interested in doing a story, rather than a hit piece, she'd have devoted 30 seconds to research on Rush Limbaugh's website and found the transcript of what Rush said about the parody and the partisan attacks on him. Since she isn't interested in Limbaugh's side of this whole non-issue, I'll do what a newspaper should be doing and provide readers the link:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_050207/content/01125108.guest.html

Bottom line: the parody satirizes Liberals, particularly race-obsessed Liberals. Not Obama. In fact, Rush says some kind things about Obama.

30 seconds research. That's all it takes, Christi.

I pray for the day skin color and stereotypes mean absolutely nothing in this country...

If you look upon Limbaugh's shtick as just one step removed from Colbert's it makes more sense. Limbaugh's over-the-top conservative approach simply cannot be a real position, but rather a persona created for radio. I refuse to believe that someone can be so brutish, so filled with hate, and so misinformed and still be a real, responsible human being. I don't take Rush seriously, but then I don't believe that Imus actually thought the ladies on Rutger's team were really either nappy headed, or hos.

Wow, Bruce...your post carries so much weight when you cite Wikipedia. They have the parts for your brain ready. Pick them up at your convenience.

The popularity of Limpy, Coulter, Hannity, and Savage among Conservatives shows that many of these people are every bit as prejudiced and intolerant and bigoted as they are.

wow!! look at all the Rush apologists.

See the common thread: Liberals are racists!!!

this coming from people who belong to a party who has to resort to eliminating people of color from the voter roles so that they can "win" elections.

Rush Limbaugh, much like his camp followers, is scum.

Pot, meet kettle.

When the mainstream media consistently gives people like Minister Farrakhan a pass while hounding Don Imus, it's not hard to understand why acheiving racial equality in America is impossible.

When Democrats insist minorities are not capable of success unless quotas are imposed, it's not hard to understand why acheiving racial equality in America is impossible.

Try to imagine how much respect Hank Aaron would have if he was allowed 4 strikes every at bat in his career. How much would Tiger Woods be admired if he was given a 2 stroke handicap every 18?

Racial equality won't be achieved in America until we all are subject to the same laws and regulations.

It has been said that "racist" is something a Liberal starts yelling when he's losing an argument.
Posted by: Bruce | May 6, 2007 7:42:40 AM

Then I guess a conservative would be one who gives creadence to with their silence. You think that "Barack the Majic NEGRO" isn't offensive to some? Yet you defend it? What kind Of message does that send out? I was born at night..but it wasn't lastnight.

Figures that Bruce & John D crawl out from under their rock to defend Rush Limbaugh. Being racist is hardly a first for them but they claim they've already won their debate. That what, you're racists disquised as holier then thou conservatives? Is this what's still taught at Bob Jones University? How to appear intelligent while being on the "right side" of racism? By trying to appeal to all the nimrods in the US who long for cross burings & lynching? Who abhore interacial couples, blacks kids showing-up at their all white schools, anyone who isn't white or Christian?

Face-up to the fact that you are not defending freedom of speech, your right to be politically incorrect, that you're intelligent, unbiased, and that you represent the majority of Americans. Conservatives are nothing but a minority of radical right-winged bible thumping Christians who have too much unearned money with oversized egos & megaphones, who feel the rest of the minions in this country should be grateful for their existence & do anything & everything to support them. You will distort, lie, spin, & even use God in shamefull ways to pursue your crusade in the name of being a patriotic American when it's nothing more then bs.

I'm quite glad to see that Obama is getting protection...cause after all, no one's been threatening the incumbent President, let alone parodying him. Testimony to a Dem field that is so afraid of Fox News that they won't appear at a debate; meanwhile, the Republicans go into the belly of the beast for their debate on MSNBC moderated by Dem partisan Chris Matthews.

I understand how the Trib has a vested interest in their candidate after they torpedoed Jack Ryan's candidacy in 2004. Dems--please nominate this man! You can definitely count on losing the South, the West, IN, IA, OH, PA, and NH, among others...which means you'll be out of power at least another 4 years. Unless you decide to secede.

RomanB, your intolerance, ineptitude, and deranged anger are truly repugnant--I'm surprised the Trib would allow a comment so incredibly hurtful. But that's freedom of speech--check that, freedom of certain kinds of speech.

I'm quite glad to see that Obama is getting protection...because after all, no one's been threatening the incumbent President, let alone parodying him. The flap over the parody is testimony to a Dem field so afraid of Fox News that they won't appear at a debate; meanwhile, the Republicans go into the belly of the beast for their debate on MSNBC moderated by Dem partisan Chris Matthews.

I understand how the Trib has a vested interest in their candidate after they torpedoed Jack Ryan's candidacy in 2004. Dems--please nominate this man! You can definitely count on losing the South, the West, IN, IA, OH, PA, and NH, among others...which means you'll be out of power at least another 4 years. Unless you decide to secede.

RomanB, your intolerance, ineptitude, and deranged anger are truly repugnant--I'm surprised the Trib would allow a comment so incredibly hurtful. But that's freedom of speech--check that, freedom of certain kinds of speech.

I read the clip bruce provided, and imo Rush is only following his usual playbook.

First he finds something in the MSM. This is often a story about an idea, using a particular individual as an example. Rush then reverses this, focusing on the particular individual and implying this idea-individual connection is a fact, not one writer's opinion about the possible motivations of a few people.

Next, he sets up a straw man argument which relies on the assumption that all 'liberals' are identical, and they all believe in this particular idea-individual connection.

Finally, he repeats it ad nauseum to make sure his listeners will form a Pavlovian connection between the original story and Rush's extrapolation on it. This allows Rush to shift any later blame from himself to the original author.

Much like Team Bush's attempts to connect al-Qaeda with Saddam Hussein, when you think about it. Yes it works (at least long enough to get the desired result), no it isn't true.

It's amazing to see how Bruce is pilloried (for you from the Chicago Publik Skoolz "ridiculed") for doing the Tribune's job and actually researching what Rush intended to depict. Libs: never let a few facts get in the way of your vitriol. To understand satire requires a little spark of intellect--which confirms my suspicions.

Wait 'til you hear the Justice Brothers parody.

Now that's FUNNY!

Posted by: bill r. | May 6, 2007 10:54:47 AM

You know, Bill, someone's always offended. How about we stop trying to change everything whenever somebody raises their hand and says "I'm offended." How about we go by majority vote, not minority vote? Isn't that how a Democracy works?

Cheers.

The fact that an LA Times columnist used the term first does not give Rush as "be a racist for free" card.

Yes, Bruce, the parody is satirizing liberals. It is also satirizing blacks.

Wikipedia has an entry on the term "Magic Negro" because it is an extant concept in postmodern literary theory. If you don't understand the use/mention distinction, there is truly no hope for you. And accusing Ehrenstein of racism against blacks would be rather silly, considering Ehrenstein himself is black. Which you would know if you did a little research, wink wink.

I'm sorry, ApolloScreed, there is absolutely no comparison to be made between Fox News and MSNBC. Insofar as only one of them is an actual news organization. And Chris Matthews is moderate to right leaning, not a "Dem partisan". Welcome to reality.

ianq, we don't live in a democracy, we live in a Constitutional republic, where the majority doesn't have the right to trample on the minority. I'm not suggesting that Rush didn't have the right to say what he said. I'm just clarifying what sort of government we live under, since so many people seem to be confused on this matter.

How about we go by majority vote, not minority vote? Isn't that how a Democracy works?

Cheers.

Posted by: ianq | May 6, 2007 11:57:19 AM

Do you feel that way about the abortion issue also? No one is asking to change anything. I am concerned that a fiqure such as Rush can display amazingly bad taste, and you condone it. For the party of the RR, I find it puzzling.

I find it fascinating that Rush's defenders immediately try to change the subject of Rush's attack to liberals, when it was not liberals he was insulting. As soon as they do that, they can attack all they want--intellectually bankrupt, hypocritical--which even they (giving them credit where perhaps none is due) would feel themselves on shaky ground doing to the African American community.
Rush Limbaugh finds himself in a position I think no one in America should have: an insulated, protected place where he can make public pronouncements and not be answerable for them. I have no problem with conservative speech--I grew up on William F. Buckley's Firing Line. But Rush can say anything he wants to, including factual inaccuracies, self-serving reinventions, personal attacks and bigotry. No one can stand up in that electronic forum and call him on it: Ronald Reagan decided we didn't need that anymore. And Rush never appears in more public and open places where people can challenge him.
Rush is the final authority in Rush's world--and that's no good no matter who you are. Not good for him--and not good for America.

Some say that a meeting of the Republican Black Congressional Caucus could be held in a closet.

What some say you, Bruce, could it?

My, my.............I always thought that conservatives...........no, not really conservatives...........that is doing a disservice to those folks who have adopted certain stances in life that may make a syllogistically sound kind of sense....my goodness, I have great difficulty with illegal immigrants and people who insist upon speaking another language because we will give them an interpreter….that’s conservative…..bit I’m not going to donate to, urge folks through rhetoric to hurt them or publicly disassemble their dignity as human beings(this is prejudice, I have to work on or seek better solutions to)….. Russ.....is a reactionary ideologue.....and people like that.....or those who agree with people like that.........so I've heard..... are people frightened of their own inadequacies....and must finds someone to blame.....it couldn't possibly be that they failed to rise to whatever the occasion is or was....or that they just weren't good enough.....some folks actually bought the line that being white, American allowed you to do whatever you want to.....nah........gotta have brains.....gotta have ingenuity...have to be able to rise educationally…..can’t be borderline…...have to be able to demonstrate all of the above plus more....can't make a career out of disliking other people and blaming your lack of progress on them.....blaming difficult societal situations, where there are no ready and available answers, on them…...can't make a career of gathering all of those who also feel just as inadequate or more so than you do.....to chant how America is going to heck in a hand basket....how other people get opportunities because they whine more than you....the conservative and reactionary ideologue always says you have to give things time.....your time for such nonsense is running out.....you never hear people of African descent calling white folks lazy and shiftless......although their ancestors did all of the work in the south and the white folks not much of anything.....except fight to keep their slave economic base......it seems that African-Americans have moved on......Russ(and all of the other insecure, inadequate, mentally self-indulgent folks that agree with him) why can't you move on.....why stoke the fires.....and by the way.....get off of the Farrakhan character...as obnoxious as he might have been…..never knew him to have a prime time television or TV show like Imus.....it's what you say.....when you say it and who you say it to......simple rules.....we should follow them

Listen to all the liberal weenies whining about a song that shows the democrat hypocrisy between two African Americans.
The song is very well written and hilarious to people that understand Al Not-To Sharpton and his craving to be the only voice in the black community.
I think it's time the abortion loving,gun grabbing liberals go whine to the democrat majority in The Senate and get that minimum wage passed....it's been a looooong time.

Paulo

It has been said that "racist" is something a Liberal starts yelling when he's losing an argument.

Bruce

Bruce,

Please.

Limbaugh's taunt- whatever its "origin" - is a distraction away from the issues based on the color of Obama's skin.

I am not a Obama fan. In fact, I think there's a lot more fluff and meat in Obama's candidacy. I think he's going to implode because of that. But it has nothing to do with his race.

If Limbaugh would critique Obama on the issues - and, believe me, there's plenty there to critique, that would be fine. But calling him "Half (Puerto) Rican" and a "Negro" - whatever the reference or "origin" - cannot be labeled anything but racist. It is, after all, race-based.

Personally, though, I think it works to Obama's advantage. So long as he doesn't get drawn into an issue about the color of his skin, he wins.

As a nation, though, we lose. The more we realize that we will not elect Obama because he is black (just as Tennessee did not elect Ford because he was black), the more we realize what kind of nation we are. And when we realize that, our hypocrisy in trying to make Iraq and Iran in our image shines brightly.

And I'm all for that. Not because I like our nation to be hypocritical. But because I like to see the truth exposed. When it is, the world wins.

So bring it on.

Rush should be $#@!#-canned!!!

Wingnut Brucebot,

Tell us how the liberals are losing an argument when the say that Rush Limprod's song parody "Barack the Magic Negro" is RACIST?

You are a pre-programmed Wingnut moron, Brucie.

Meanwhile,

12 more U.S. soldiers killed in Iraq Sunday!

Pulished by
Los Angeles Times March 19, 2007 (Owned by Tribune Co.)
See:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-ehrenstein19mar19,0,5335087.story?coll=la-opinion-center

Obama the 'Magic Negro'
The Illinois senator lends himself to white America's idealized, less-than-real black man.
By David Ehrenstein, L.A.-based DAVID EHRENSTEIN writes about Hollywood and politics.
March 19, 2007

AS EVERY CARBON-BASED life form on this planet surely knows, Barack Obama, the junior Democratic senator from Illinois, is running for president. Since making his announcement, there has been no end of commentary about him in all quarters — musing over his charisma and the prospect he offers of being the first African American to be elected to the White House.

But it's clear that Obama also is running for an equally important unelected office, in the province of the popular imagination — the "Magic Negro."

The Magic Negro is a figure of postmodern folk culture, coined by snarky 20th century sociologists, to explain a cultural figure who emerged in the wake of Brown vs. Board of Education. "He has no past, he simply appears one day to help the white protagonist," reads the description on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro .

I prefer to use conservapedia.

STILL IN THIS COUNTRY IS RACSM-- I GUESS MAJORITY OF AMERICAN PEOPLE DONT WANT BLACK OBAMA BECOME PORES. I GUESS-MAYBE HE GO BACK TO THE SENATE BETTER OF FOR HIM THEN.

It's funny how everyone is offended by the Magic Negro thing except Al Sharpton and the reason why is in his book "When and When Not to be Offended" The chapter on Times Not to be Offended says you can't be offended if African Americans are saying the same thing. Unless it's the N word. If you read the book you could be offended by just about anthing you want that someone says. I prefer to use the old rule from the "good old days" I wish everyone else would:
Sticks and Stones can Break My Bones BUT Names can NEVER Hurt Me. Strong people don't let this kind of thing bother them but instead continue on with life. Weak people use these times as opportunities to ruin someone elses day.

Here we go again, the "Party of Family Values", the party that clings to it's hypocritcal saying that they are the Party of "God", the RR faction of mouthbreathers who believe in killing anyone who doesn't agree with them because...well....because some crazy Islamists do it too, These bible thumpers are again showing their true colors by jumping on the Viagra Express,driven by Druggie Rush Limpbag and slandering and swiftboating Barack Obama.

Well done Republic Party members, if you wonder why your party is coming apart at the seams you don't have to look any farther than your own mirror.

Rush goes on his radio & makes comments conservatives want to claim is satire & humor & blame liberals for racism? No wonder conservatism appeals to those who haven't had a thorough education. The rest of us have enough common sense & are not prone to being brainwashed by not connecting the dots.

So I come across as hurtful? Please spare me the conservative tears. I have no problem evicerating conservatives for being the hypocrits they are.

Paul Shanklin's song audio clip is absolutely racist and offensive. It's not the same as Ehrenreich's Op-ed piece in the LA Times, which was an analysis of Obama's role in politics today(I don't agree with that either)even though Rush et al got the inspiration for their big idea from it. And they used it as an opportunity to smear Al Sharpton as well, niiiiice.

It's the same repulican tactic that's been used before - it's racist because it's making fun of racists. What a line of disingenuous BS. I don't see them making fun of the KKK or any other white supremecist organizations in the clip, and be assured, they're crying tears of joy over this song.

Athletia,

Chris Matthews is "moderate to right leaning"???? What is that stuff in the baggie you are smoking? Chris Matthews is mainstream liberal.

If he was right leaning, do think John Edwards would have shown up for the debate?

Let's all save some time and posting space. By specifying in advance that anyone who disagrees with this week's Left-think is a racist/sexist/bigot/fascist/whatever-ist. Or they are "hypocrits", as "RomanB" proclaims with the spelling accuracy that always distinguishes leftist posters.

Liberals have to label conservatives like Rush Limbaugh as racist because libs and dems don't compete very well in the arena of ideas. They only have one basic strategy - tax the rich and give it to the poor. They say they do this out of compassion but I believe they do it principally to buy votes.

For example, it is not compassionate to tell poor and middle class families where their children must attend school! Yet the libs and dems who have controlled large urban public school systems for decades and have turned them into cesspools of patronage are vehemently opposed to school choice. As a result, only the rich can choose where to send their kids to school.

Social Security is another example of failed compassion. If a private company tried to sell "Social Security" as an insurance program starting today, it would be accused of establishing a pyramid scheme and indicted for fraud in less than 6 months! Yet the libs and dems refuse to overhaul this "money pit" even though it would have died the natural death of bankruptcy long ago if Ronald Reagan hadn't substantially increased payroll taxes in 1983. (By the way, for those of you who don’t know, our federal debt is sky rocketing primarily because the federal government borrows 100% of all social security taxes collected each year.)

More examples of failed programs of compassion include child welfare that generally does more to destroy families each year than preserve them and federal employment and training programs that spend billions and billions to improve the employability of Americans each year and yet still fall far short of the placement rates of private sector companies that do the same thing for profit?

There are more examples but I think the above are enough to make my point clear. Programs of compassion that don't materially improve lives of the neediest in our society are tax dollars wasted to support armies of political patronage workers. I used to be a democrat but I got tired of seeing libs and dems doing little but support their old established programs even though such programs painfully fail to achieve meaningful results year after year and decade after decade.

In summary, it is no surprise libs and dems spend so much time labeling anybody who disagrees with them as racist, greedy, warmongering, etc., etc. They have no new ideas and their old ideas clearly don’t work! If it wasn't for the Iraq war debacle, they would still be in the minority today. Ineffective "tax the rich and give it to the poor so we can stay in power" programs just don't cut it anymore.

Romanb, I can tell you are a very educated man--lemme guess: PhD in postmodern deconstructionist transgender literature?

Althelia -- Chris Matthews is moderate to right-leaning? Aside from the fact that he's worked for several Dems, his dispatch of Michelle Malkin, among others, seems to evince a lib hack.

Libs occupy some bizarro world where disagreement with their worldview equates to killing/lynching/religious fanaticism. It's always a joy to come here on the weekends and feed the moonbats.

Nixon "states rights" as part of his Republican party strategy for reclaiming the South. "States rights" was code for "I'm not going to press Southern states on matters of racial discrimination (wink, wink)."

Bruce is right when he says that "Magic Negro" is not of itself a racial slur. But you can bet that Rush's dittoheads will catch the (wink, wink) subtext.

In the meantime, I think that a song title that more closely matches "Puff the Magic Dragon" would be "Rush the Fattish Drugman." But -- and this is true of conservatives and liberals alike -- we tend to be denying/forgiving when it come to the moral flaws of those who, from our perspective, are politically correct.

Nixon ised the term "states rights" as part of his Republican party strategy for reclaiming the South. "States rights" was code for "I'm not going to press Southern states on matters of racial discrimination (wink, wink)."

Bruce is right when he says that "Magic Negro" is not of itself a racial slur. But you can bet that Rush's dittoheads will catch the (wink, wink) subtext.

In the meantime, I think that a song title that more closely matches "Puff the Magic Dragon" would be "Rush the Fattish Drugman."

However -- and this is true of conservatives and liberals alike -- we tend to be denying/forgiving when it come to the moral flaws of those who, from our perspective, are politically correct.

We've got people--fellow Americans--dying daily in an illegal, unethical occupation of another country; and waste time talking about Magic Negroes. Lunacy. To their credit, Obama's camp responded accordingly by blowing it off as a non-issue.

It's a pathetic commentary that we still--in the 21st century--have so many knuckle-dragging racist idiots fomenting and spewing their hate-laced venom via the internet. Or, in the case of Rush, the airwaves.

How long will it take America? Or will she remain forwever stuck in her Jim Crow past?

One Rush Limbaugh has a long history of demonstrable bigoted, racist on-air performances--
including such repeated baiting, commentary and game playing scenarios. Early on, while growing up in a die-hard white supremacist Missouri region, he was well-enculturated toward these intellectually dishonest and behaviorial instincts
which define him.
And, to date, our Free Press has given Limbaugh
a Free Ride as longtime National Republican Committee ex-officio conduit, spokesman, and media operative....

I am a black African Living in Kenya, however, if our family decided to call a major family come together, perhaps a third of that family will be made up of Whites, a third of Blacks and another third of coloured. I have nemerous cousins who have either married white ladies or have gotten married by white men especially the British. What I am trying to say is this inspite of the never ending racial bickering between Blacks and whites, has anybody ever considered that the two races have the biggest inter -marrieges in the world. how many Africans are married to Chinese or Even Indians? I can hardly name any, at least here in Nairobi. Americans are increasingly loosing their leadership position in Global affairs as they continue spending all the time discussing trivial issues concerning the colour of their skin. does it mean that even after Blacks and Whites co-existing for over 200 years they are still fascinated by the colour of their skin? China is taking virtue control of Economic proceedings in Africa(the last frontier) even though I am yet to here of any recorded significant inter-Marrieges between Chinese and Africans. America has been a role model for most Africans but that situation is fast changing. We boast that humanity has achieved immense levels of technological development to the extent of discovering a super Earth through a telescope yet it takes over two days to spot a kenya Airways Boeing 737 - 800 that crashed only 20 kms out of the Airport. America rise up from parrochial bickering and once again take up your leadership position and lead the rest of the world to the next level. if you fail to do so, you can be sure that some one else will surely do it.

It's funny how everyone is offended by the Magic Negro thing except Al Sharpton ....

Posted by: jack | May 6, 2007 5:25:48 PM

jack unwittingly makes a good point.

It's not about the word "Negro." That's fine.

What isn't fine is attacking Obama because he is part Negro. If Obama's race is the issue, then that is racism, jack (and Bruce and Rush).

If you can't make the campaign about issues, than the term racism does apply.

Questions to the Tribune:
1. Why did not the Tribune note that the newspaper that originated the "Barack the Magic Negro" column was a Tribune company newspaper?
2. Why did not the Chicago Tribune report on the column at the time it was printed in the Tribune Company newspaper?
3. Why did the Chicago Tribune not interview the writer and editors of the Tribune newspaper as to why it printed the column and inquire as to reaction it received?
4. Why did the Tribune not interview Mr. Sharpton and the Obama campaign as to its reaction to a Tribune Company newspaper printing the column in the first place?

From what I've read here the Republic Party platform and position is that black people should be called negros and they should shut up and accept it. That's a really great, progressive idea...for the 1930s, you losers

I am a minority and I don't need either the Democratic Party or the media to save me, to help me, to do anything for me.

Anyone that is criticizing Rush Limbaugh, should also demand an apology from the LA Times, the newspaper who came out with an article calling Barack Obama, "The Magic Negro". So for all those liberals "outraged" by Limbaugh's parody, why aren't you demanding that the LA Times fire the writer who first called Obama "The Magic Negro"?

I can tell you why. Because Liberals only see racism from the right. They are too blind and too brainwashed to see racism from their own party, and the people that supports them. I have found more often than not that it is Liberals who see the United States as skin color.

None of the Liberals that have put up comments on this issue has even come close to criticizing the LA Times like they are criticizing Rush Limbaugh! Why? Why do Liberals defend the LA Times by omitting to ask for an apology from it, yet they go after Rush Limbaugh for criticizing the LA Times piece about Obama and creating a song based on Liberal White Guilt?

You can't criticize Rush Limbaugh without criticizing the LA Times piece that called Obama, "The Magic Negro".

The problem is that Liberals are not interested in the truth or honesty. All they are interested is in smearing and silencing anyone they disagree with. Today we know that Liberals love Freedom of Speech, of course as long as that speech agrees with the Liberal/Democratic Party agenda.

Once again, I am a minority, and I don't need the Democratic Party, the press or some Liberal who believes himself to be the "Great White Hope" for minorities to come and save me. I don't need quotas to make it in life, I don't need special treatment from the government to make it in life. We minorities can make it without the aid of the left, Liberals, Democratic Party and the Liberal press.

The truth is that Liberals consider us minorities idiots, stupid morons that can't make it without their aid. They see us as their pets. They claim to help us in order to get our votes.

Well I say that minorities need to wake up and realize that the Democratic Party, that the Liberal press, like the Tribune company doesn't care about us minorities. they just want to use us and abuse us.

It is Liberals who see the United States according to skin color. It is Liberals who love to criticize the right when they believe the right is being racist, but stay quite when members of their party are truly racist.

I have never heard or read any left winger criticize the following individuals for their racist remarks...

Farakhan
Jesse Jackson
Al Sharpton
Hillary Clinton
Joe Biden
Bill Maher
Bill Moyers
And the many other Liberals who are huge racist……

.....and where is the criticism from the left toward the LA Times first calling Obama, "The Magic Negro"?

where is it Liberal hypocrites? oh wait, the LA Times is a Liberal newspaper, how can I expect Liberals to be honest.

Ah, the same liberals who scream "The Bush administration is destroying the Constitution by not giving equal rights to terrorists," are the same morons who want to do away with the First Amenmendment (and Second Amendment too, for that matter), when something doesn't suit their Communist, PC BS!

Limbaugh is not making fun of Obama, but he is making fun of liberal whites with "The Magic Negro." It is a parody, but I know that means nothing to the dingbat, hypocritical, maniacal Loony Left. Parodies can be done all the time on conservatives and Republicans, but not on Dems.

Heck, one poster here complains it's "a parody on black." Oh my!!! No parodies of any race, except white, is allowable!! Heck, wasn't Jimmie Walker a parody of blacks in the 1970s? Or Fred Sanford? Isn't Chris Tucker's show on The CW a bit of a parody?

Rush takes the song and title from an LA Times column and nonsense from Al Sharpton the Loony Libs go hog wild lead by the ridiculous mainstream medai and its mind-depeleted robot Christi Parsons.

These are the same Liberals that either joined in or said nothing when left wingers were calling Dr. Rice, Aunt Jemima. Calling Powell an Uncle Tom, who didn't care when a Democratic Party memo was leaked out in which it showed that Kennedy, Durbin and other Democratic Senators wanted to stop Bush Judicial appointments for the mere fact of these appointees being Hispanic.

the fake outrage from the left would be laughable if it wasn't so hypocritical.

Who cares? Obama's campaign thinks it is stupid. Rush probably thinks it is stupid too but he plays it because he knows his demographic is largely stupid rascist rednecks and that this will get them to listen in.

The Republican party has been benefiting from racism since the late sixties. Didn't Mehlman apologize for the Southern Strategy a couple of years ago? They used racism in Tennessee last election cycle against Ford. They won't stop using racism until racism is gone and racism wont be gone until people stop being taught to be racist. Listening to hypocritical scum like Limbaugh is one way people are taught to be racist.

As to the song itself, it sucks. Not really all that funny even if you are a racist. But dittoheads like Bruce feel empowered - they think "finally, I can say 'negro' and feel good about it again." Congratulations Bruce, you can fly your bigot flag once again. Maybe for fun you can wear a white sheet, burn a cross and marry your sister... just to keep your bloodline pure.

John D. and Bruce.

Keep the libs in the dark. Don't try to explain it rationally to them.

Ignorance is bliss. Let them believe all the folk lore, half truths, and conspiracies.

Let 'em scream and yell like teenagers.

Its much more entertaining!

Johnny D,

Wow, you had to use about three different alias's to defend Rush's racist behavior on this post story

Way to go Little Johnny, what's next, you defending Rush when he does a song parody in blackface?

Does anybody actually read this story? Rush did not call Obama "the Magic Negro"; a black, Los Angeles Times columnist called him that! Why doesn't the media go after that guy instead of Rush? If the black columnist had not written that, then Rush would not have the ammunition to use, right?

Why does everyone jump on Rush but not the black LA Times writer? Could it be because, *gasp*, the LA Times write is black? And therefore, exempt from public criticism? Or perhaps, he is allowed to call Obamo a Magic Negro, but no one else can?

Get a real life look at this and see where it all started from; a black man, who wrote a column in the LA Times calling Obama a Magic Negro; Rush did not start this or think up the idea.

You cant fire him, thats the problem. He owns his show and he is the major partner with all the affiliates. He would have to fire himself.

So I guess you're admitting that this story is a bit silly huh john E. the Raving Capt.Commnder Guy?

Hey libs....you were fooled into a frezy by the media.

AGAIN.

Starting to get the picture of what the media can do to you?

I doubt it.

As a life long liberal I have to agree with many of the right wing posters here. The song, in and of itself, is not racist. However, Limbaugh knows who his audience is and knows that they are prone to sweeping generalizations. By playing the song he knows he is tapping into the base, and racist instincts of his audience. To not know that would mean that Limbaugh is a stupid man and although I can find a number of unnatractive labels to pin on the man, stupid is not one of them. Liberals often resort to these same type of tactics appealing to the baser instincts of their followers as well. That doesn't make it right instead it shows how true political discourse in this country has stopped in favor of name calling and general nastiness. It needs to stop, on both sides.

To Republicans liberal has become a dirty word. To Democrats conservative has become the same. Neither group knows what either really is, they just like to call names. Some posters here began debating whether Chris Matthews was a liberal with the right saying yay and the left saying nay. Chris Matthews leans toward the Democratic party in his views, he is no liberal. In fact very few Democrats today are very liberal at all. Al Gore is pretty close but still hardly a classic liberal, Ted Kennedy was a liberal once but I doubt he remembers it, John Kerry tried to convince everyone he was a liberal but that was an act. Oh and the right's favorite punching bag Bill Clinton? Sorry folks in no universe is Bill Clinton a liberal. His economic policies alone show that. Conversly most of todays conservatives aren't very conservative either. No real conservative would call President Bush a conservative. His spending alone eliminates him from that particular idealogy. Barry Goldwater is spinning in his grave.

Liberals and conservatives shaped the debate in this country for a very long time. Groundbreaking progress was made when these two disparate groups framed a debate. The halls of Congress, the Supreme Court and even the White House reverberated with with arguments from the likes of the aformentioned Goldwater, Earl Warren, LBJ, JFK, Tip O'Neill and others. Now we have so-called conservatives defending race baiting songs and so-called liberals attacking them all the while avoiding every real issue like the plague. Why are the real issues avoided? Because we can't speak to each other anymore. Disagreeing gets you labeled, dumb, or traitorous r or worse. Gone are those glorious debates in their place is complacency and name calling. When is it going to stop? When will serious men and women stand up adn take up the liberal cause or the conservative cause and debate each other in such a way to acheive real progress? someone please tell me when it's coming because, at least in my mind, we can't get there from here.

"racist instincts of his audience."

Racist instincts Dean G?

Please explain.

Who cares what Rush Limbaugh does or doesn't say? He's neither a conservative, moderate or a liberal. He's an amoral,lying, criminal, drug addicted, hypocritical, small-minded, fat-bottomed hate monger with a megaphone. It's astonishing that even the redist of rednecks and the most ignorant and hateful among us can stand to listen to his drivel. Pull the plug!

Yes JD I said racist instincts. Was that so difficult to understand? I do believe that many of Limbaugh's audience judge people by their race. As do many others. Is this a surprise? In fact I believe at some level all of of us have an innate fear of those different from us. Those in the public eye should do everything they can to dissuade the masses of those fears, not pander to them as Limbaugh often does.

Snalg

You sound very conflicted, do you or don't you care. Your post sounds very intolerant and your redneck comment is racist. Must be a liberal or an Al Sharpton supporter. Hope your not a magic negro.

"PhD in postmodern deconstructionist transgender literature. Apollo Screed"

Interesting to see what "intelligent" conservatives interpret my background in, kind of like I was called slow after saying I was Polish.

"Or they are "hypocrits", as "RomanB" proclaims with the spelling accuracy that always distinguishes leftist posters.

Seems like right-winged nut swampers aren't the greatest spellers either, but not like someone on the right would be unbiased & point that out. But if all that can be argued agianst my post is typing errors, hey, I understand. I'll attempt to simplify my arguments for you'awl.

Hypocrits or hypocrites, spell it however you want John D. That's what conservatives are & you haven't won an argument yet.

"Limbaugh knows who his audience is and knows that they are prone to sweeping generalizations."

"...it shows how true political discourse in this country has stopped in favor of name calling and general nastiness. It needs to stop, on both sides."

Dean G- was this second quote of yours referring to Rush Limbaugh or your own post?!

And as to your following post, how exactly do know that "many of Limbaugh's audience judge people by their race." Upon what possible basis could you base this belief? My guess is that it's based on pure unadulterated prejudice on your part against those who make the unforgivable crime of disagreeing with you - and to address your quote at the top of my post - perhaps Rush Limbaugh doesn't share the same hypocritical close-minded (while simultaneously faux open-minded) belief system of yours so has no reason to expect that his audience will interpret the song the way you suggest.

dingbat, hypocritical, maniacal Loony Left.
Posted by: John D | May 7, 2007 9:50:16 AM

Didn't I just read a post from you complaining about derogatory comments being made here at the swamp? Its funny that you spew lines like this everyday & then pretend your offended when I call you a bible thumper
Have a good one, bible thumper!

Rush has been back for awhile. Now that he has "managed" the news he himself made, he is back to "advising" others.

The Republicans and Rush do seem to be a good fit.

Philsy,

Republicans have been failing in their efforts to manage America since 1932. Back then Republican congress wanted to fix the depression with tarriffs. But other countries followed suit with their own tarriffs. What happened next?

A Great Depression followed the American depression.

The Republican party seems to have a real problem with the word "social". But if you look at some of the pictures from America's Depression - the first word that comes to mind is - "social". Next is "problem". Social problems are problems that the Republican would rather pass off to the business world.

Today's conservatives are different from yesterday's conservatives in very significant ways. They don't manage money well. They don't manage the country well. Their ethics seems to have a bad-wrong strain. Their party seems to host America rather than the other way around.

And they called themselves conservatives. This current group called themselves the same thing as Barry Goldwater, Dwight Eixenhower, Chuck Percy and the famous "a million here, a million there and pretty soon we talking real money - Senator Everett Dirksen.

Back then, America had money in the bank - no huge need for a credit card. Today that is not the case. It is good that today's "conservatives" decided to call themselves something else - neo-conservatives. And still again - social conservatives. These Conservatives have yet to see the dollar they did not want to spend.

Ethics, broken laws of America, and a list of other mismanaged efforts dog these neo-cons. They want and need distractions. Their primary output is RHETORIC. Performance is not something they talk about.

So, yes RHETORIC continues to be the big selling point for Republicans. They did not dare talk about performance in the election of 2006 and unless a miracle happens, they will not want to talk about Iraq war achievements during the next election.

And actually you may want to listen to this talk show person's rhetoric rather than read about his performance in the real world.

Media Matters in a tough spot -- didn't want to lose the Imus momentum (and now Sharpton has a credit he can cash with Hillary anytime), but really had nothing on Limbaugh, despite their full-time monitoring of his show for years.

But Sharpton gets the TV jones again, got to get some face time, starts to make some noises like he can get this Obama parody over on Rush.

Sorry, Al, you've got not one but -two- problems with that.

One, LAT's Ehrenreich sanctioned the use of the ur-N "Magic Negro" phrase (to think otherwise foolishly assumes -everyone-, not just a vocal minority, wanted Imus fired); and two, Obama has deftly handled the entire matter in 'good guy' fashion right up to the minute.

Now the outcome is that Rush is innoculated against further Media Matters criticism and MM's agents like Sharpton will have a much more difficult time ousting him from radio.

As I have noted before, Leftists consistently fail to understand how the dialectical can be used against -them-. Or even more amazing, to watch a supposed paragon of logocentrism deign to use the Left's own deconstructionalism against them, at will, when it suits him.

Racial equality won't be achieved in America until we all are subject to the same laws and regulations.

Posted by: philsy | May 6, 2007 10:50:37 AM

In response:

Where to begin.. oh yes. I guess I should start with the the Constitution that states that all men are created equal. And while that law stood,the APPLICATION of the law differed greatly. Black men, black women & black childen, were being hosed down in the street, lynched, beaten and brutalized. Maybe where you're from that is considered racial equality, but not by the rest of us with at least half a brain and some knowledge of American history.

Affirmative action is not what created racial inequality, it is a means to try to minimize the EFFECTS of racial inequality.

You know conservatives are neck-deep in their own demise when Limbaugh has to spin an article written by William F. Buckley Jr. which didn't paint a pretty picture of the state of republicans.
But I'm sure John D/Bruce/Leo/Paulo can spin it to blame the usual liberal suspects.

Is Rush Limbaugh trying to impact the election of America's next president? If so, how is he doing it? How would one describe Rush's contribution to the election of America's next president?

Would Republicans prefer that Rush Limbaugh talk to America rather than Republican politicians talking to America. Could Rush do a better job of telling America about the Republican accomplishments than even the Republicans.

Do Republican politicians want to talk about their accomplishments?

Did Republican politicians accomplishment anything? If so, why don't they, rather than Rush do the talking. Would the chief of the Bush team disavow the antics of Rush Limbaugh? Did the chief of the Bush team disavow the Joint-chiefs of staff's upbraiding of an American newspaper over a editorial cartoon?

Does Rush know about the birth and death of WMDs. If the next words out of Rush's mouth had to tell America what the Bush team knew and when the Bush team knew it - concerning WMD, would Rush ever talk again?

Why would Senator Obama make a better "talking piece" than weapons of mass destruction? America was lead into a WAR because of nebulous, now discredited WMDs. But the Bush team has been reticent, very reticent about that subject.

Since Mr. Limbaugh is very talkative, why not put the WMD subject in front of him?

Mr. Limbaugh could tell America about the positive things the Bush team has accomplished. Would that take longer than his show has air time? If so, he could devote multiple shows to cover all the things he wanted to.

America needs solutions now. How is Rush Limbaugh contributing to solutions? Is Rush Limbaugh role a part of Ameerica's problem?

Who is winning?

Looks like my battle with the cutting-room-floor is not going too well.

It looks like I am now at just 33%. One out of three ain't bad?

Rush Limbaugh is a public figure. Some things made public would cause parents of teen agers to warn against certain behaviors.

While Republicans don't seem to care much about ethics, somebody should draw a line somewhere.

It is truly amazing how Republicans can remain quiet about things that tend to split the country along racial lines. But that is Republican behavior.

Republicans gives the Big Bucks to the Big people. But the Big People numbers are not enough to get them elected.

So what will the Republicans use to attract the little people in numbers sufficient to perhaps turn an election? What topic of interest should be used:

ENTER Rush Limbaugh.

George T.- Are you truly suggesting that there is not a segment of Limbaugh's audience that is prone to racism? Don't you think his labelling of Obama as "halfrican" panders to that segment? And you accuse me of being close minded?

The saddest part of George T. and JD's responses to my post is that they choose to focus on a very samll part of what I have to say. The part that enrages them. I say that we need to stop name calling and work together and these are teh responses? I rest my case.

Why would anyone expect anything different from Limpnuts or his fanbase of illiterate rednecks.
They, like he , are irrelevant in todays world, and, those with IQ's larger than their shoe sizes know this already.

Michael,

No, I'm not conflicted at all: I don't care at all what Rush Limbaugh says. He is a grotesque hypocrit spewing hatred and bigotry daily. In my experience, it's only the least-educated, most closed-minded and most loud-mouthed people who actually like to listen to him. Imagine how grand they must feel the first time they try on the "ditto head." Maybe the mullett that goes with it covers their redneck attitudes. BTW - pull out a dictionary, if you have one, and look up redneck. You'll see it is not a racist term, more a socioeconomic term. I hope you can read that big word. And ... for the record, I'm fairly moderate in political and social leanings and more conservative economically. It's usually only the far left-wing zealots who perceive moderation as liberal. Do you still think the Cheneybush regime is doing as good a job as Mr. Limbaugh says it is?

The Rush Limbaug Diversion

At the next paragraph make a HARD RIGHT and before you know it you will have successfully escaped talking about the political performance of the Bush team and would up in neo-con Rhetoric country. This is where the Republicans shine.

Nobody talks the talk better than Republicans and their mouthpieces. The Republicans tried "walking the walk" in the Iraq Ordeal. The Republicans tried "walking the walk" in the Katrina Ordeal. The Republicans tried "walking the walk" in the Medicard Plan D routine. The Republicans tried "walking the walk" in the WMD ordeal.

If the Republican report card is now sporting an "F" in performance, how much did that "F" cost America? Now remember we are talking conservatives here - the ones who used to say, " a million here, a million there and pretty soon, we talking real money".

At this time each of 300,000,000 Ameericans are "in hock" to the tune of $30,000. Quite unlike real conservatives - right?

It is no wonder that we must now either prefix ("neo") or put an adjective("social") in front of conservative to adequately describe how the Bush team stuck each American with a $30,000 tab. Old "Ev" would not have done that.

And now Rush Limbaugh to the rescue. Talk the talk.

Much of the Limbaugh talk has noting to do with an upcoming election. It has nothing to do with informing America about the accomplishments of the Republicans.

At this time the Limbaugh talk distracts from the worthiness of Republicans, based upon previous performance, to continue serving as leaders of America.

Would it be to the Bush teams advantage to steer the conversation away from politics? You bet! There is no single or multiple example/s of Bush team performance that the Bush team would like America to analyze.

Not even Big Oil's humongous profits. That's the Bush team's gift to Big Oil. And to the litte guys, how about $100.00 in the pocket of each voting American? That ought to fix the energy problem nicely, right?

So, hurry Rush Limbaugh and change the subject to something the Republicans can navigate without having to TELL AMERICA about their accomplishments.

Philsy,

Republicans don't do "social". They don't do social at all. They didn't do social in 1932 and they still seem to long for the day they can "prove" that tariffs would have worked in 1932, if only given a chance. And the way these current "conservatives" are spending, America may once again see the 1928 era.

Sure America went from a depression to a World depression, but the Republican management style had not quite taken hold. Right? The Republicans had everything under control. Honest! Their management style would have worked. Honestly it would have worked! Honest!

The Republicans don't want to talk about their HISTORICAL management of that huge problem of yester-year nor do they want to talk about their current management expertise in today large problems. The Iraq war? Katrina? Any task of any size got flubbed.

About the only thing Republicans do well is Rhetoric - just Rhetoric. They SHALL hide their performance. Yester - years performance in the GREAT DEPRESSION and todays performance in Iraq.

It is not what they do - it is what they or their mouthpieces say.

Would Rush Limbaugh be interested in revealing data on that Iraqi refugee problem?

For the bush team Iraq has been a hard problem to solve. Could the web's “Problem Solving Flow-sheet” help?

Actually it looks like the Bush team may have already used a similar step from the web's Problem Solving Flow-sheet“. That flow-sheet block asks ,”can you blame someone else”? The Bush team had Al Qaeda, fascist sympathizers and Americans who would not “back off” as factors in their Iraqi performance.

But back to the web problem solving flow-sheet. Keep in mind that the web problem solving flow-sheet is trying to help one solve a problem - in a funny sort of way.

The first question the web flow-sheet asks is: “Does the thing work”? If you answer “NO”, the next question is, “Did you mess with it”? If you answered “yes”, you proceed to the next box, which says,”You Dummy”.

But even now all is not loss for the next question is “Does anyone know”? If the answer to that is “NO” then you are told to “HIDE IT”

Which brings us to the question - Could a massive exodus of refugees from Iraq be hidden from America's view? Could that happen under the watchful gaze of the American free press? Today, that is a good question but “it didn't used to be”.

If the free press did not speak of this “exodus” then this “exodus” would effectively be hidden from a lot of Americans. Would the Bush team allow the people it leads to be in the dark about a huge movement of Iraqi refugees, possibly caused by something the United States is, at least in part, responsible for?

It didn't used to be that way – is it today?

So, at this time it appears that it may be possible to HIDE the exodus of thousands of Iraqi refugees as they seek safety from the Bush team's fixing of Iraq. And the pleading for help comes from the Red Cross and the United Nations.

The BBC informed. Were there other informers? Perhaps, I don't know because I did not see any others.

Would Rush Limbaugh be interested in taking up the BANNER for a worthy cause? This would certainly be a humane gesture. Is Rush interested in that kind of activity?