... and ending Socialism. A failed system. Apologies never work.
Posted on 03/05/2012 10:29:09 AM PST by Kaslin
You are as far as I'm concerned.
This "don't descend to their level" is bullcrap. When you have people shooting at you, you damn sure better be shooting back with weapons just as effective as theirs.
You caved, Rush!
Before the apology, I supported you and the FReerpers that still support you, supported you. The left hated you before the apology, and it still hates you after the apology. So what has changed, and who changed it...YOU!
Yes. I read them. I apologize if I didn't adequately point out why I didn't agree with them the first time around.
It is quite unlikely that she would sue for being called a “slut” because that would open up the factual question as to whether and to what extent she is what might be considered promiscuous.
"Slut" isn't the only issue, although 'slut' is defamation per se in many jusidctions. Fluke wouldn't have to prove damages. They are presume in a per se defamation. In fact, 'slut' isn't remotely the primary issue. Limbaugh attributed dozens of specific statements about Fluke's sex life to Fluke. None of them were true. Limbaugh said Fluke was "immoral, baseless". He said she was a prostitute. Prostitution's a crime. That's defamation per se. Again, you don't have to prove damages. Rush made statements over and over, such as Fluke claiming she was "having so much sex, it's amazing she can still walk." Have you reviewed the per se rules for defamation regarding sexual debasement? Everything Limbaugh attributed to Fluke's mouth that she didn't say, and that was derogatory, is subject to a defamation claim. Not just the fact that Limbaugh said she was a 'slut'.
As to having falsely attributed to her the claim that she herself took birth control pills and paid for them, she doesn’t have a sound basis on which to argue reputational [sic] harm, which is a necessary element of a defamation claim in these circumstances.
I don't think you're familiar with all of the things Limbaugh said about this woman. Was the "I'm supposed to have sex with three guys tonight" comment about her? Talking about her buying condoms in the sixth grade? I believe you're being delusional if you think all that's involved is whether he said she took birth control pills.
I think it is very odd that you accuse Rush of caving, yet you choose papertyger as your Freeper name
I think it is very odd that you accuse Rush of caving in, yet you choose papertyger as your Freeper name
I think we have a few anti-rush media matter propaganda trolls out in force.
This is no longer about a promiscuous useful idiot bluring abortion into contraception. This is now about stirring the mob into a two minute hate against Rush.
remember when Rush turned the smear letter from reid into gold.
I bet this will happen here too.
“A Boy Named Sue” was too cliché.
Got anything else?
should we start a thread where we all take turns appologizing to Mz. Fluke for her lack of proper social restraint?
that would be a funny vanity thread.
“To Mz. Fluke, with appologies...”
Wake up!
He caved!
If you can find a FReeper with more solid history than me, I’ll eat your hat.
By the way, does anyone know when her Penthouse spread is due out?
Here's where this would get interesting. Let's assume Fluke is a limited public figure. You're a limited public figure only for the limited scope of the limited topic on which you came forward.
How would Fluke's statements before the Democrats put the frequency of her own sex life into issue and make it relevant for public discussion? Consider the scope of Fluke's actual statement. Not what Limbaugh said Fluke said and not what people are claiming she said. Assume that her own statement sets the scope of the topic for which she's a limited public figure. What's the relevancy of the frequency of her sex life?
As to whether “slut” is defamatory per se, I haven’t researched it but if I were you I wouldn’t place too much reliance on earlier common law cases. If you can find modern cases holding this, then you have a stronger leg to stand on with respect to this point.
“Prostitute” if understood in the ordinary sense may indeed be defamatory per se as a crime, but as I point out in your other thread on this topic, in the quote I read Rush appeared to define this term by his context. I don’t think any reasonable person can understand his prostitute reference (at least in the quote I read) as meaning literally someone who provides sexual activities for compensation, when Rush was pretty clear that he was using that term to mean someone who obtains birth control pills paid for by the public in order to have sex. One could say a Senator is a “prostitute” for agreeing to vote for Obamacare in exchange for a special favor, but no reasonable person would understand that in the literal sense.
I did not hear Rush’s entire tirade. I have only read quoted portions reported in articles. But you need to be careful to separate unactionable opinion from actionable representations as to fact.
For example, calling someone “immoral” is almost certainly an unactionable expression of opinion and not a representation of fact.
As to other statements Rush may have made in his tirade (buying condoms in the sixth grade, having sex with three guys, etc.), I didn’t see those in particular but one would have to start with the issue as to whether any reasonable person would understand from the context that Rush was purporting to state literal representations of fact, as opposed to obvious hyperbole and sarcasm.
I think you need to take a breath and read everything I have said in this thread.
****Some of you people over the years have made me sick. You wonder why we are losing? Because you superior intellects cause 10 times more damage than good to our cause. Bunch of crybabies who start tantrums when things don’t go their way. Where the hell is this bitterness against the left? Against those who truly need correcting? Damned bunch of arm chair generals anonymously being big shots behind a computer screen. You all outta be ashamed of yourselves for being morons. Rush is the only person we got who tells it AT LEAST 90%. And AT LEAST 90% of the issues. WTF do you do??****
WTF back at ya.
If you read my very first post, I said I was unhappy that he has given the left more ammo to use against him and against us.
I am a listener of Rush, a support of him and his style.
You need to get a grip.
“How would Fluke’s statements before the Democrats put the frequency of her own sex life into issue and make it relevant for public discussion?”
I think you have a threshold problem as to whether the statements can be reasonably understood as intending to be a literal factual representation of Fluke’s particular sexual activities.
I read the following quote as to what Rush said:
“What does it say about the college co-ed [Sandra] Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says she must be paid to have sex? What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She’s having so much sex she can’t afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We’re the pimps — the johns. No, that’s right — pimp is not the right word.”
Note that here he is referring to the public as “johns” (and not pimps) in his analogy. Obviously this cannot be reasonably understood as purporting to say that Rush and I and other taxpayers are literally having sex with Fluke.
From the context clearly that is hyperbole and not literal, and it’s probably too far of a stretch to claim that Rush was intending to be understood literally when his tirade so clearly includes hyperbolic statements.
I said they fell far short of any reasonable definition of whoredom. Did you read what I wrote?
I said they fell far short of any reasonable definition of whoredom. Did you read what I wrote?
... and ending Socialism. A failed system. Apologies never work.
Oh?
For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week. In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.
It seems to me that he DOES acknowledge making it personal, but it was not his INTENTION to do so.
;^)
I thought his 'apology' was a bit reserved; but his apology 'explanation' was powerful; doing what you said.
He KNEW that EVERY ear that had a brain connected to it would be listening today.
Excellant Deal with it and move on tactics!
AMEN!
But; Number One is still...
You look FAT in that dress.
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.