NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/alt/fan/rushlim/8675

Text File | 1992-11-16 | 4.7 KB | 88 lines

Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Path: sparky!uunet!destroyer!wsu-cs!uts.cc.wayne.edu!tom
From: [e-mail] (Thomas Richard Stevenson)
Subject: Re: You don't listen to/watch the shows. So why post here?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Organization: Wayne State Univ.
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 19:51:26 GMT
Lines: 77

[e-mail] (Nathan Engle) writes:

>>If we assume people don't have minds, then I would agree. But if someone
>>explains something to you, and you get to see both sides, I don't see
>>what being a "total Limbaugh virgin" has to do with making a comment?

>    It doesn't have anything to do with just making general comments. It
>has a *lot* to do with making specific criticisms of Rush. I post a lot of
>Rush criticism, and IMHO my credibility in making those comments rests
>partly on being polite and respectful while I make them, but mostly it
>rests on actually having seen or heard Rush doing whatever I'm criticizing
>him for.

I never made a specific criticism of Rush. What I said, three times with
this one, is that if all the things people said about him were true (which
I never said was true), and wasn't just based on bias (which it could have
been), he should be ashamed of him self for making fun of a little girl. I
never said he was wrong. I didn't say he was guilty of any wrong doing. I
didn't say that he should be ashamed of him self (unqualified). All you have
to do to shot me down is to say that people weren't telling the truth
because they had a bias toward Rush. If you can't tell me that, than I
have no idea why you are getting upset with what I said (actually you're
not getting upset with what I said, but with how you misinterpreted what
I said).

>    This is why I don't think that Rush is a racist; he occasionally has
>non-white anglo-saxon callers and he treats them with the utmost courtesy.
>If they get argumentative with him he responds in kind, but he doesn't
>automatically dismiss what people say just because of their race. Rush and
>I disagree on a great many "minority" issues, however that has everything
>to do with politics and nothing to do with race. I've arrived at this
>conclusion after hearing Rush deal with callers, but I believe that you
>might reach an entirely different (and incorrect) conclusion if you base
>your comments solely on what other people write about Rush. Even John
>Switzer's excellent transcripts cannot really convey the quintessential
>Rush. For that you must watch, listen, and judge for yourself.

I'm not sure why you bring any of this up unless you are trying to make
others think that I think Rush is a racist. This is not the case. I
never suggested that Rush is a racist. I'm very confused to your reason
for including the above.

>>You don't have to "see" someone spiting in someone's face to know that
>>spiting in someones faces is wrong. You don't have to "see" someone
>>making fun of a little girl to know that making fun of a little girl
>>is wrong.

>    To be honest with you, I didn't see the TV show segment in which the
>Millie/Chelsea switcharoo took place.

You didn't see it, but it ok for you to make comments about it, but it's
not ok for me to make comments about it. I see how it works now.

>All I heard was the apology that
>Rush gave on the radio program the next day. From that apology I'm sure
>that Rush agrees with you that making fun of little girls is wrong. How
      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>many times does he have to apologize for it?

So Rush agress with me? So why are you all over me for making comments that
even Rush agrees with???? As far as "How many times does he have to apologize
for it?", that's a point of view that each person has to make. I don't think
he should have done it in the first place, but given that he did, I would
say one time is enough. But I could see that others might feel that no number
of times is enough. But again, I don't think I said he should apologize, I said
he should be ashamed of him self (if it were true). How he goes about feeling
ashamed of him self is completely up to him.

>--
>Nathan Engle                        Software Juggler
>Psychology Department               Indiana University
>[e-mail]      [e-mail]
--
     ____  __   __       [e-mail]
      /   /_/  /_        [e-mail]
     /.  /\ . __/.       [e-mail]
                         [e-mail]