He really ought NOT to go there. That is the same lame assed partisan excuse that Dan Rather tried during the 2004 scampaign.
Really really surprising considering he came up with this graphic and posted it to LGF.
Posted on 10/14/2009 7:49:40 AM PDT by Sir Gawain
Charles Johnson was against fake but accurate before he was for it.
No link for the idiot. I'll just quote him. From a thread:
Top 10 Rush Limbaugh Racist Quotes.All out of context, and sarcasm. Right?
That link I've left in provides a flurry of extremely dubious Limbaugh "quotes" -- and not a single link or citation. Including the ones created wholesale by noted scholar "zedladdy" and spread by no lesser authority than "cobra."
Given that "zedladdy" and "cobra" previously invented own quotes, spread them around, and then uploaded them to WikiQuote, I'd say pretty much every unsourced quote in this list is suspect. (Edit: I mean except the Donovan McNabb quote, which I know is real, since I heard it 'n stuff.)
But surely our crusading Mensa Chapter President wouldn't be taken in by an obvious false "quote" like:
You know who deserves a posthumous Medal of Honor? James Earl Ray [the confessed assassin of Martin Luther King]. We miss you, James. Godspeed.
And yet here's Johnson quoting it as "classic:"
A classic:You know who deserves a posthumous Medal of Honor? James Earl Ray [the confessed assassin of Martin Luther King]. We miss you, James. Godspeed.
Charles Johnson read it on the internet, so it's true.
Well. I've read a lot of stuff on the internet about his unhealthy relationship with his bike's seat-post. Presumably this is all true as well.
Here he expounds upon Limbaugh's motive in saying things he did not in fact say.
Because it plays well with his audience, obviously. That's why he does everything.
It's pointed out the "quote" is bunk. Charles Johnson doesn't like the back-talk, of course.
There will be no retraction. The quote is disputed, but it has not been proven false. And there are plenty of other racist quotes that you seem to be just gliding right past that are NOT disputed.
Um, from that list? That list of very unlikely quotes all provided without a single link?
You know where this is heading, don't you? There is a penalty for embarrassing the global village idiot Charles Johnson, and he's not afraid to apply it... liberally.
If you want to disagree with my take, that's fine. But if you can't do it without being insulting, your account will be history.
You're wrong because I said so and if you continue disagreeing with me I'll kick you out of my idiot internet clubhouse.
Now that, truly, is "classic."
Thanks to N. I'll keep the rest of his name secret in case he still posts over at the Little Gulag Funhouse and doesn't want to be banned.
Charles Johnson
So scary-smart he splits atoms... with his mind.
Charles (LGF) should never have turned on the right, Ace, for example is a pitt bull who won’t give up on exposing Charles for the phony he is. Go Ace!
Neither have the TANG memos, according to Ms. Mapes.
Nice company you're keeping there, CJ - demanding that someone prove a negative.
This quote is bogus, for entertainment purposes only
I remember Charles Johnson waxing elegantly about his lovely Honduran houseboy.
This quote is bogus, for entertainment purposes only
I heard that Charles Johnson once said 'I'd given anything to give Robert Reich a Lewinsky'
This quote is bogus, for entertainment purposes only
These quotes are just as accurate as the ones he is peddling.
He can try to prove them false. Of course he knows thats not the standard. Charles Johnson can't have gotten so dumb as not to know that you can't prove negatives and that the burden of proof is on the one making the allegations.
Charles Johnson has finally become Dan Rather.
Fake but accurate, right?
He really ought NOT to go there. That is the same lame assed partisan excuse that Dan Rather tried during the 2004 scampaign.
Really really surprising considering he came up with this graphic and posted it to LGF.
If Charles doesn’t specifically deny your allegations right here on this thread by noon today, ten they MUST BE TRUE. Right?
Well, I hope he has a good lawyer. Apparently Rush has said he’ll be pursuing legal action against the libel. I’m happy to see him no longer playing Mr. Nice Guy when it comes to these slanders.
Oh, and Johnson regularly smears Freep on his blog, calling this place a cesspool of racism.
Let’s see — 300,000 registered users, 1.2 million view daily or something like that - jealousy’s an ugly thing, Johnson, especially when it was postings on THIS site that tipped YOU off re the Rather memos - on which you made your reputation. Compare the humility of “Someone else would have found it if I hadn’t” Buckhead with your “Look at me! Look at me! attitude.
Reconsider your premises.
They were on the internet.
ten = then
Charles has been frequently accused of animal abuse.[11] These charges are in dispute, but have not been proven false.
I guess the Lizard King forgot the legal standard and doesn’t realize that Limbaugh doesn’t have to prove the quote is FALSE - Johnson has to prove the quote is TRUE.
I heard Rush say that yesterday. Rush also said this all started with a blogger and they know who that blogger is and they’re going after him/her. Wonder if it’s Charles?
He also said he’s going after every station that ran these quotes without sourcing them. This is going to be fun.
Extreme Parody. This post for entertainment purposes only
I doubt Rush will go after LGF until after he deals with MSNBC, CNN, ESPN, daily papers etc etc
I know. I always presume that people have at least one firing snyaptic nerve if they can breathe. It’s one of my faults.
Not sure if that litigation will pan out.
IF they said "according to an MS-NBC report, Rush Limbaugh said..." then they could be off the hook. Such as it is when you "break" a story.
An interstate criminal conspiracy to keep him from buying a team could bring RICO charges (interstate racketeering). And then you get all the tookies, not just the money he was deprived.
I’ve long thought that Johnson sold his blog and some other dimwit is running it, the way it’s done a 180. All his decent posters have gone to LGF 2.0, Grouchy Conservative Pundits and Correspondence Committee.
Then he sends his racist troll Kilgore Trout out to post bombs at Hot Air in the middle of the night so that they can point to Hot Air as a racist blog (when the comments aren’t removed because the moderators are asleep). Then he sends out some harpie by the name of Irish Rose to pick a fight with Zombie over his/her refusal to delete anti-Charles posts from her blog.
So now Charles has banned zombie. Zombie of all people. He says he “made” him or her by letter him post on the LGF blog. Oh please.
Charles - you are SO 2004. Get over yourself.
“He also said he’s going after every station that ran these quotes without sourcing them. This is going to be fun.”
Better buy some more stock in popcorn!
Ace is spot on about this concerning Johnson (and it could be applied to everyone else using those fake quotes as well).
As for the Donovan McNabb quote, that’s plain as day. McNabb is strictly “middle of the pack” as a quarterback in the NFL. Did he get a lot of fawning press coverage becuase the press wanted to see a black quarterback succeed? Maybe. Of course, McNabb is a likable guy, unlike Michael Vick.
Does the press fawn over Obama? Hell yes. Is it because he’s black? Partially. Is it because he’s liberal? Partially. Is it because he’s liberal and black? Totally!
Wow... used to visit LGF a lot, but quit about 6 months ago ‘cause it was just getting so over the top with the creationist crusade of his. Now he’s banned ZOMBIE? Wow! Wonder how many have left his sight over this, as I know Zombie was QUITE popular with MANY people there.
Donvan McNabb is to football what Barack Obama is to American politics - a media favorite, largely due to liberal white guilt, who cannot deliver when it really matters.
I am embarrassed at how slow my mind was working today as I considered this topic and thread. But now there is some genius in turning the tables for Rush by skipping the blogger and going straight to the MSM with libel charges.
Here is how it works. First, Rush gets to embarrass the MSM and force them to make a retraction. The embarrassed networks will likely cite their source and totally discredit the blogger. Rush gets to amplify his claims that the MSM is "drive by" and doesn't research or investigate anything that supports their bias. Then they have to report that "Rush did not say those things." I doubt they will stop short of saying, "...So Rush is not racist." But their stopping short will only fuel the controversy.
The MSM always finds a fall guy. The fall guy will end up being the blogger. If Rush goes after the blogger, it will only help the blogger and it will look like the big guy picking on the small kid. Besides, what does Rush have to gain from the blogger? An apology? Big deal.
Rush, go after the media for reporting more false stories. Sue them for slander and libel. In the suit, insist they report in primetime on Monday that their reports were wrong and Rush did not say things we reported here. He should announce that any monetary sums he wins will be donated to republican candidates or to Fox News Network.
Why would he donate to Fox News Network? Its not a charity. If he gets a lot he should buy Current TV or something. Or one of those tiny unwatched religious channels and turn it into a real conservative channel, even if its non-profit I’d send some spare change.
How these people must hate themselves and each other. No thanks. What a life they must lead where nothing is ever good.
Rush would never say any of this stuff much less think it. This is the kind of stuff they make up.
Well until Charles can prove he has not raped his mom, I am assuming it must be true.
Number reflects ranking among websites in each country:
1,852 South Korea Flag South Korea
5,410 Qatar Flag Qatar
5,949 United States Flag United States
Strange.
I was kidding about donating to Fox News. But it would really infuriate the other MSM that had to fork over money that essentially went to the competitor that is crushing them anyway.
There’s speculation all over the net that CJ has begun hedging his stats and page hits, that if you leave the site open in your browser it repeatedly refreshes and scores another site “hit.”
Of course, that may or may not be true, but until CJ can prove it isn’t....
He’s reduced to begging for his posters to “donate” to the site with every thread. He’s been delinked everywhere.
OK, but I'm trying to grock the connection to So. Korea and Qatar. Is that bogus? I don't visit his site, but a live bookmark doesn't give any hint of topics that would be fascinating to those two countries -- of wildly divergent cultures.
Right after the last election, Charles lost his marbles, and I and my wife stopped posting there. Let the baby have it, no one except his little cabal of usual suspects goes there anymore anyway. I think the eventual nervous breakdown is going to be anti-climactic anyway.
“OK, but I’m trying to grock the connection to So. Korea and Qatar. Is that bogus? I don’t visit his site, but a live bookmark doesn’t give any hint of topics that would be fascinating to those two countries — of wildly divergent cultures.”
Both have fairly large US military contingents station there.
That's his RANKING, not his NUMBER OF VISITORS. In other words, if his blog is ranked 1852, that means that there are 1851 blogs that South Koreans visit more than him.
Looking at the bar graph further down the link, he gets 72.5% of his visitors from the US, and 13.3 from South Korea (which is still odd).
I'm wondering if his "South Korea" visitors are really US visitors running though an SK anonymizer.
Is that what Drudge does?
I realize that -- but of a number of the most popular conservative blogs I looked up, none had a greater ranking in a foreign country than they do in the US, which makes sense. Our political structure is far different than what is considered "conservative" in other areas of the world.
and 13.3 from South Korea (which is still odd)
That -- and Qatar -- are the puzzlement.
That occurred to me, since LGF built its (original) reputation on combating militant Islam. Lately, of course, it seems to focus on battling those who also battle militant Islam, but whom the site owner now disapproves of, according to his own revised standards.
That said, Qatar might make sense, but what about South Korea?
Maybe - truthfully, I’ve never spent a lot of time on Drudge, because Freepers are always posting the good stuff here.
I know people who have had LGF blocked at their offices because the site was gobbling up bandwidth. I’m a DOS dummy so I wouldn’t begin to know what’s causing it.
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.