Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: PSYCHO-FREEP
I am still puzzled as to why Rush apologized. There had to be legal reasons.

I'm no legal expert, but I think it's called "slander."

It was a foolish, careless choice of words by Rush. He should have just stayed with the facts, and he could have just as easily shamed this shameful woman.

This is why I have taken to listening to Prager instead. Dennis is just as staunch, but far more thoughtful in his choice of words.

21 posted on 03/05/2012 6:51:07 AM PST by Nevermore (...just a typical cracker, clinging to my Constitutional rights...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: Nevermore
I like Prager, but at times, he takes moderate positions. Being a Jew, and considering his roots, that is understandable.

I do like the way he brings in frequent and good calls, which is what Rush never does. Rush pretty much is fixated on himself. I have never liked that about him.

24 posted on 03/05/2012 7:02:18 AM PST by PSYCHO-FREEP (If you come to a fork in the road, take it........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

To: Nevermore; PSYCHO-FREEP

I’m not sure there’s much of a legal case there, but then, this whole thing is about creating a distraction and negative publicity for the GOP. The Dems have gotten what they wanted, and I don’t think this will go much further. Rush will probably get new sponsors, but even if he doesn’t do so immediately, he probably can afford to stay on the air by himself for awhile.

One thing we have to remember is that Rush is an entertainer, not a political leader, and in recent years it has seemed to me that he has been moving more and more towards the shock-jock side, that is, just speaking off the top of his head without much consideration for where his words will land him. And he has been getting much more foul-mouthed and much less witty, which I do not find attractive for his positions - and I don’t care that the Dems do it and get away with it.

He could have said exactly this same thing in an entirely different way, which would have revealed the Dems with their phony “coed” to be precisely the liars and manipulators they are. Instead he gave them a sound bite they can use to summon up the old “harsh, puritanical, women-hating GOP” trope.

I think Gingrich handled this well, refusing to be drawn into it and focusing on the real issue. But then, he’s had some experience with Rush’s off-the-top-of-his-head statements, when Rush called him “anti-capitalist” for revealing the actual nature of Romney’s business (which Romney was trying to portray as a productive and not financial business, and certainly not one in a somewhat shadowy area of finance). That was the attack that really gave Romney a boost and the meme that was picked up by Romney, Santorum and the Dems...even though Rush backed off on it a few days later - after the damage was done.

I used to listen to Rush faithfully, but in recent months, I find that I have been listening less and less, partly because of his increased tendency to a sort of nastiness (which he never had before) and partly because I have also noticed that sometimes his information is not current. I haven’t listened to Dennis Prager - I’ll have to see if he’s on around here.


26 posted on 03/05/2012 7:20:28 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

To: Nevermore
This is why I have taken to listening to Prager instead. Dennis is just as staunch, but far more thoughtful in his choice of words.

Prager can't fight.....today we need fighters e.g. Newt. Prager could/would never be able to lay lumber on Gregory the way newt did.

And I am a Prager fan.

38 posted on 03/05/2012 8:49:45 AM PST by Donald Rumsfeld Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson