Skip to comments.Limbaugh Falls for Obama Thesis Hoax - But Is In No Rush to Apologize
Posted on 10/26/2009 12:37:12 PM PDT by nickcarraway
And still no apology.
Even when conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh runs with a fabricated story, he doesn't apologize for the error.
Limbaugh, who seizes on every opportunity to blast Obama, ended up with egg on his face when he read an Internet satire piece that claimed President Obama dissed the Constitution in his college thesis at Columbia University.
A transcript of his Friday broadcast remains Sunday at the top of Limbaugh's web page under the headline, "Obama's Disdain for Constitution: We Know He Thinks It, Don't We? When we discover a hoax, we correct it immediately."
But apologize? You betcha there's none.
Limbaugh sounded off Friday on a supposed report that Time magazine reporter Joe Klein had unearthed Obama's college thesis, titled "Aristocracy Reborn," in which he sounded off on the nation's Founding Fathers and the Constitution and the distribution of wealth.
The only problem - the report was pure fiction.
The original post with the fabricated details about Obama's college thesis was written as a satire on a humor blog. An obscure blogger, Michael Leeden, mistakenly picked it BYup, reporting the satirical post as fact, and then Limbaugh ran with it on his national radio show Friday.
Leeden has since apologized.
Limbaugh? Not so much.
In fact, he says, why the President never said what the hoax claimed, "we know he thinks it."
"So here is who we have as our president of the United States: an anti-constitutionalist man who finds it an obstacle and is finding ways around it on purpose, unconstitutionally," Limbaugh said on his show.
"Much of what he's doing is unconstitutional, and I'm waiting for the lawsuits to be filed by some of these people at some point," Limbaugh added. "How is that hope and change working out for ya, folks?"
Later in the same program, when Limbaugh learned the report was a hoax, he corrected the record, alerting listeners that the quotes from the thesis had been fabricated. But he insisted the fabricated thesis was still in line with what the president thinks.
"So I shout from the mountaintops: 'It was satire!'" Limbaugh said on the program. "But we know he (Obama) thinks it. Good comedy, to be comedy, must contain an element of truth, and we know how he feels about distribution of wealth."
Limbaugh said he has license to go with the fabrication because other members of the media have done this to him. "So, I can say, "I don't care if these quotes are made up," he said. "I know Obama thinks it.
"You know why I know Obama thinks it? Because I've heard him say it."
The fabricated thesis pokes fun at the president's position on economic freedom.
"The so-called Founders did not allow for economic freedom," the satire on Obama's thesis says.
"While political freedom is supposedly a cornerstone of the document, the distribution of wealth is not even mentioned. While many believed that the new Constitution gave them liberty, it instead fitted them with the shackles of hypocrisy."
In a post Friday, Time's Joe Klein says the report is false.
"A report is circulating among the wingnuts that I had a peek at Barack Obama's senior thesis. It is completely false," he wrote. "I've never seen Obama's thesis. I have no idea where this report comes from--but I can assure you that it's complete nonsense."
Actually, Rush first started out reading it that it was ‘unverified’ and he was checking the source, then, before the show was over, he had already corrected the record that it wasn’t real.
The NY Daily News is playing fast and loose with the facts on this.
I guess then all the news outlets that smeared Rush on the NFL Rams deal would apologize for lying too, huh?
Personally, I like the idea of a professional admitting to and correcting an error over someone saying they are sorry.
Emotion v. substance.
As I recall, Rush talked about the story, but he did mention that it was not sourced so he was suspicious of it.
You are correct, I heard him apologize also. The left never gives up with their lies.
The NY Daily News isn’t even good for the bottom of the bird cage.
They can expect their apology the minute they apologize to Rush for slandering him with unsourced quotes.
Not so funny when the shoe’s on the other food, is it, MSM? Barry?
Of coure, Barry, we’re heard the other crap you’ve spewed about the Constitution — we had no problem believing it.
Psst — by the way, I believe Rush already SAID it was satire on his show - of course, you’re only looking at the one minute clip from Media Matters.
Lost in this contrived fit of liberal finger-pointing is the fact that no journalist has seen Obama's thesis. Or college transcripts. Or other critical aspects of Obama's life history. Yet they are more inclinded to get after Rush...
My thoughts as well.
Perhaps Rush should “apologize”,
as soon as he’s “made whole” over the libel that the media perpetrated on him.
But the left kept saying that it was the seriousness of the allegation that was important.
Rush Limbaugh is not on the air Saturday or Sunday and is off today.
When the Left makes up facts, they are “fake but accurate” (National Guard memos, Rush “wikiquotes”...) but when they Left trolls hoaxes to the right, it is THEIR OWN FAULT for not fully vetting the story.
The MSM routinely buries retractions within the paper rather than putting them on the front page.
He got spoofed, and as soon as he knew it, he said so.
Thats more than the frauds on the left have done. They invent quotes that he never said and they don’t even retract them, much less apologize.
Rush himself on Friday: "However, I have had this happen to me recently. I have had quotes attributed to me that were made up, and when it was pointed out to the media that the quotes were made up, they said, It doesnt matter! We know Limbaugh thinks it anyway.
Money quote. Fake but accurate. What's the frequency Kenneth?
I haven’t listened to Rush in the past several days, but my guess would be that he was probably engaging in some dry humor and ironic play based on the press’ recent activities in attributing racist remarks to Rush that he never said (in relation to the NFL controversy). The press treats Limbaugh in the same way this article claims that Rush is treating Obama, “We know he thinks it”, so it’s OK to attribute fictional quotes to him.
I should also point out that FReepers caught that it was a hoax pretty quickly, mostly because the source is a known bogus one.
NY Daily News just doesn’t ‘get it’ at all, do they?
They are claiming that it is still on the website.
Lies by omission, as the writer is doing here, are lies too.
If media matters/soros or moveon.soros says it it must be true.
Pray for America’s Freedom
Actually, I was listening that day, and Rush started with the “I know he thinks it” stuff after referencing Dan Rather’s “well I know the story is true, even though the evidence was false”. He’s just throwing back at the libs what the libs are throwing at him. I love it.
He is the man who never was.
Exactly. Planned from the start, IMO.
The real-life thesis which nobody has seen is probably scarier than any satire someone could come up with.
I think this crap was cooked up for no other hope than that Rush might read it. And I think it’s because the left knew they got burned on all that WikiFootballGate stuff and they wanted to counter it.
They did a good job, I have to say. I also did believe it.
Easy solution - release the documents.
Amazing, nearly 10 months into this fellow's administration, and his past is still shrouded in a haze, and his Birth Certificate, passport information, College records, etc, are all under lock and key...
And nary a peep from our vaunted watchdog media.
We know that this was satire to begin with but why is this reporter focused on Rush. It seems to me the real story is what is in Obamas actual transcript and why he has chosen not to release it. We would have answers to these questions but for the simple fact that the MSM is terrified of knowing the answers.
I was just going to post the same thing. He acknowledged it wasn’t real. As you stated, he warned up front that it might not be. There’s no need to apologize.
The poor left in this nation, they can’t grasp the simplest of concepts. Rush didn’t do anything wrong but must apologize within days. Dan Rather does something he acknowledges was wrong and has yet to apologize years later.
Rush gets unfairly slimed, and Rather is unfairly given a pass.
The left knows what it is doing. It’s brain dead, but it is pushing an agenda, the destruction of Limbaugh.
If this were happening from our side, we would criticize it. The left just jumps in and bathes in it.
I don’t see any references to the Obama thesis on Rush’s page today.
but the media doesn’t write about Rush to take him to task for any abuses or to correct any mistakes. They write to slur him to an audience that never listens to him to ensure that they never DO give him any audience time.
And what’s there to apologize for? As this inane article points out, he DID correct the record — the same day that the error occurred!
He didn’t fall for this. He said it was not checked.
As soon as I heard “Columbia University thesis” I became suspicious since I’ve never seen any credible evidence that Zer0 ever matriculated there. And I’m sure Rush was skeptical for the same reason.
When he started reading from it and the prose sounded like it came from a literate, albeit radical, person I became even more skeptical. What I’ve seen of Hussein’s writing (his, not some ghostwriter’s) is so stilted and clumsy that it is scarcely readable.
Y’all need to Freep the poll. 71% are saying Rush LIED, which honest people know he did not lie.
odumbo refused to release his records and also fails to apologize
RUSH: In the first hour of this program, I cited a statement that Michael Ledeen found on the blog Jumping in Pools reporting on Obama’s college thesis written when he was at Columbia. The paper was called “Aristocracy Reborn,” and in the first ten pages Obama wrote the following: “[T]he Constitution allows for many things but what it does not allow is the most revealing. The so-called Founders did not allow for economic freedom. While political freedom is supposedly a cornerstone of the document, the distribution of wealth is not even mentioned. While many believe the new Constitution gave them liberty, it instead fitted them with the shackles of hypocrisy.” Now, I got a note from a researcher who has been scouring the Internet, and the note says this:
“Rush Limbaugh: Mini-warning on these quotes.” Because the paper that Obama wrote, “Aristocracy Reborn,” the first ten pages were all that reporter Joe Klein was permitted to see; and it says here that Klein did write about it for TIME Magazine. A researcher has been scouring the Internet and can’t find any sources for the quote. “The blog that Ledeen cites doesn’t have supporting info,” supposedly. The source post that was from August, says it’s going to be in an upcoming report from Joe Klein, but the researcher can’t find anything that has come out since, and nothing in Klein’s blog. There have been no matches found on the Internet for any of the info or quotes other than the source posting. So I now say that the blog from which this came has no sourcing data other than Joe Klein upcoming report and Joe Klein hasn’t written his upcoming report.
So we have to hold out the possibility that this is not accurate. However, I have had this happen to me recently. I have had quotes attributed to me that were made up, and when it was pointed out to the media that the quotes were made up, they said, “It doesn’t matter! We know Limbaugh thinks it anyway.” Sort of like Dan Rather said, “I don’t care if these documents are forged. I know that Bush did what he did at the National Guard. I don’t care if the documents are forged.” I don’t care if the Limbaugh quotes are made up. So, I can say, “I don’t care if these quotes are made up. I know Obama thinks it. You know why I know Obama thinks it? Because I’ve heard him say it.” Not about the Constitution, but about the Supreme Court. Again, 2001, FM radio station interview in Chicago when he was a state senator in Illinois.
OBAMA 2001: If you look at the victories and failures of the civil rights movement and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples so that, uh, I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at a lunch counter and — and order and as long as I could pay for it I’d be okay. But the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.
RUSH: Now, he’s talking about the Warren Court “never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth.” So we’ve got a supposed piece from his college thesis at Columbia where he complains that the Constitution didn’t talk about the distribution of wealth. So we know that it’s on his mind. So even if he didn’t say it, I know he thinks it. That’s how it works now in the media. And I do know he thinks it because I just heard what I heard, and so did you. Let’s see.
RUSH: I’m also told that the blog containing the passage on Obama’s thesis is a satire blog. So it’s one of these sites like ScrappleFace or The Onion or some such thing. So I shout from the mountaintops: “It was satire!” But we know he thinks it. Good comedy, to be comedy, must contain an element of truth, and we know how he feels about distribution of wealth. He’s mad at the courts for not going far enough on it. So we stand by the fabricated quote because we know Obama thinks it anyway. That’s how it works in the media today.
c’mon, he did it deliberately to tweak the media...it’s brilliant!
I figured as much.
And notice no one on the left asks where’s the thesis?
Just as they don’t ask where’s the $12.50 longform birth certificate?
But we have some person of no substance calling others “wingnuts”.
Lots of name-calling and no search for the facts is what characterizes the leftist media.
What about that thesis from Mrs 0 that was making the rounds of the web? I sure hope that was a fake because it sounded like it was written by a grade school student!
One must listen to Rush very carefully. The MSM does not! To those who do pay attention, the MSM looks very foolish and hypocritical. Rush's playing with the MSM gets him a lot of notoriety, but it seems like it take years to set the record straight about what actually happened when he does stuff like this. The issue of the phoney soldier remark was resolved rather quickly, but the McNabb thing still has some legs.
The idiotic Left is falling yet again for Rush’s giant setup. Rush knew all along the story was false, yet he went along pretending it was true. Only to “discover” later that it wasn’t but still maintaining his original point because we know Obama thinks those thoughts in his head anyway. Actual facts do not matter. What matters is what we KNOW to be true.
Illustrating absurdity by being absurd. Fantastically done, Rush ! :)
I don’t exactly see what the problem is... He REPORTED it as un-verified...and when it was found out to be a hoax he reported that immediately...
it SOUNDS so much like Obama it could be true...
Screw your ‘apology’
I have a feeling if he DOES offer an ‘apology’ it will be scathing and worse than any perceived injury they already see...
Michael Saul, New York Daily News is so gay/metrosexual
Rush played a clip of Obama saying those things about the constitution and redsitributing wealth.
He also said there was not a source for the “news” article so he couldn’t say it was real but we all know that Obama wants to do those things
The story was fake but accurate.
As has already been posted, Rush had first said he wasn't sure about it and then, on the same show announced that it wasn't true.
However, the best way to prove it's false is to produce Obama's real thesis at Columbia University.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.