Blog on the Run: Reloaded

Saturday, September 19, 2009 2:14 pm

Rosa Parks? Screw her.

Filed under: Aiee! Teh stoopid! It burns! — Lex @ 2:14 pm
Tags: ,

So says Rush Limbaugh:

LIMBAUGH: I think the guy’s wrong. I think not only it was racism, it was justifiable racism. I mean, that’s the lesson we’re being taught here today. Kid shouldn’t have been on the bus anyway. We need segregated buses — it was invading space and stuff. This is Obama’s America.

But remember, none of the opposition to Obama has anything to do with racism. Nuh-uh. Nope.

(Note to the scarecrow manufacturers: This does NOT mean I think ALL opposition to Obama is race-based. But I am neither stupid enough nor indifferent enough to what I see and hear to think NONE of it is.)


  1. 1. Taken totally out of context
    2. No quotation marks used and not quoted word for word

    Comment by Mike J Baron — Saturday, September 19, 2009 4:33 pm @ 4:33 pm

  2. As Al Franken said, rush limbo is A BIG FAT IDIOT!!!

    Comment by ngee — Saturday, September 19, 2009 6:23 pm @ 6:23 pm

  3. Mike: No, it was absolutely in context. No quotation marks were used because the entire quote was indented farther, a convention of blogging with which you might not be familiar. But the quote is word-for-word, checked against both the transcript and the audio.

    Now run along; the grownups are talking.

    Comment by Lex — Sunday, September 20, 2009 2:21 am @ 2:21 am

  4. Lex, I’m afraid Mike is right – you have taken this quote from Rush completely out of context (as did all the rest of the news media). If you read the full context in which Rush said this, he was actually commenting on the bus beating from (at least in his view) the perspective of the Left, the idea that white people are born racists, they can’t avoid it, and because of that, from the perspective of the Left, what the black kids did on that bus is justifiable. Whether you think Rush is correct about that or not is beside the point. I don’t always agree with Rush, but I can assure you there is not a racist bone in his body.

    The shouting of “Racism!” in the face of any criticism of Obama is a disgraceful, cowardly ad hominem attack by people who just are not interested in dealing with the substance of the criticism of the President’s (and Congress’s) policies.

    Comment by Eric Hill — Sunday, September 20, 2009 9:21 pm @ 9:21 pm

  5. Eric, you’re wrong, but let’s say for the sake of argument that you’re right. Your point then comes down to: Rush isn’t a racist, he’s just willing to baldly misrepresent the viewpoint of a ton of people so as to stoke the fears, misperceptions and anger of his audience.

    But Rush is a racist; the evidence is overwhelming. I don’t have time to compile a big list here, so, just two words: Donovan McNabb.

    Also, re-read your last graf, then re-read mine. And this time, pay attention.

    Comment by Lex — Monday, September 21, 2009 6:28 am @ 6:28 am

  6. Lex – I do not include you in the “shouters of Racism! at any criticism of Obama”. In the Donovan McNabb case, Rush was, once again, accusing others of racism. He claimed that McNabb was overrated by the media because the media wants a black quarterback to succeed. I think Rush was wrong in that case, but I don’t think that makes him a racist. And then he resigned from ESPN. Then you have the irresponsible members of the mainstream media (Anderson Cooper, Wolf Blitzer, Chris Matthews, many others) completely ignoring the (highly valid) criticism of Obama’s policies and claiming there is an “undercurrent or racism” in the Tea Party movement. They are doing exactly the same thing Rush did. Where is the hostility toward them? How many of them will be chased out of their jobs?
    And then there is Rush’s other thesis, and this one I believe has merit: That there is a racial undercurrent in the kid-glove treatment that Obama received from the media during the campaign and continues to receive today. Certainly, some of that is just the massive liberal bias, but was there an element of going easy on him because they wanted to help elect the first African-American President? I think so. And I also think they go easy on him out of fear of being labeled “racist” by their fellow lefties.

    Comment by Eric Hill — Monday, September 21, 2009 8:13 pm @ 8:13 pm

  7. Eric, Rush Limbaugh has left an oozing, slimy trail of racism across American culture. I’ve lived here in the South for half a century, when the buses rolled for desegregation in Charlotte in 1970 I was on them AND listening to the grownups argue about it, and I’ve read about Lee Atwater’s Southern strategy. I know every code phrase and dog whistle, from “states’ rights” to Reagan’s campaign speech in Mississippi, and there isn’t the shadow of a doubt that Rush is appealing to white people’s hatred and fear of black people, and in particular their fear that black people might get something the white folk don’t think they deserve. Apparently you find it noble to serve as an apologist for someone like that. That’s your right, pathetic as it might be, but don’t expect a lot of intelligent people to join you.

    You claim that Obama is getting “kid-glove” treatment. Well, not exactly. Because to get kid-glove treatment, Obama would have to gin up a tax policy clearly aimed more at transferring wealth upward and concentrating its ownership than of promoting general prosperity, ignore clear warnings of an impending terrorist attack (and tell the briefer, “OK, you’ve covered your ass”), gin up fake intelligence to justify an illegal invasion of a country with which we were legally at peace, order torture, commit serial criminal and civil violations of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, shred habeas corpus, divert appropriations in violation of the Constitution, allow an American city to drown, shovel $2 trillion of taxpayers’ money into private hands without requiring a shred of accounting for it, and reveal that he doesn’t understand the difference between Sunnis and Shiites — and then get re-elected and allowed to serve out a second term without congressional molestation or any serious effort by the mainstream media to hold him accountable.

    When all that happens, then, yeah, I’ll entertain the argument that Obama is getting kid-glove treatment. And I’m not just being snotty when I say that. He already has tolerated torture, attempted to deny detainees their habeas rights and continued to shovel taxpayer money unchecked and unaudited into private hands, so it could actually happen.

    And just for the record, I’ve been calling him out on this stuff since a month to the day after he was inaugurated.

    Comment by Lex — Monday, September 21, 2009 9:30 pm @ 9:30 pm

  8. […] } In the comments to this post, a commenter and I kind of got into it a little over the notion of race as a factor in opposition […]

    Pingback by Race and health care « Blog on the Run: Reloaded — Tuesday, September 22, 2009 9:31 pm @ 9:31 pm

  9. So, your response to my argument that the Donovan McNabb incident, however misguided, was not evidence of racism in Rush Limbaugh, is to reassert that he is a racist without proof, apparently claiming inside information. Then, in your linked blog post, referring to me, you say:

    “The commenter claimed that people were claiming ALL opposition to Obama was prompted by racism”

    which is fatuous. I’m afraid it is you who need to do some careful re-reading, my brother.

    Comment by Eric Hill — Tuesday, September 22, 2009 9:49 pm @ 9:49 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: