Rush Limbaugh: Open mouth, insert foot.

Link

Am I the only one who finds his statement about the London bombings offensive?

It's like I said -- 40 people dead, 150 seriously wounded, 1,000 wounded, out of over 1 million people in that transit tube. It's not a successful terrorist attack, folks.

So, if that wasn't a 'successfuk' attack, what is?  Are there guidelines about what constitutes a 'successful' attack versus an 'unsuccessful' one?

Pull you head out of your arse, Rush.  People DIED.  People were INJURED.  It's not about how big it was or how many people didn't die.  Terrorism is terrorism, regardless of the scale.  To me, an unsuccessful attack would be one where bombs didn't detonate, or where the bombers were caught before they could complete their plan.

Londoners and Englishmen will prevail, they will not be intimidated so in that respect the terrorists didn't get what they had hoped for....but to make statments like that almost belittling the incident....

....that's just disrespectful.

 

 

 

11,197 views 87 replies
Reply #1 Top
I thought Rush tried to be offensive. Wasn't that the whole point of his show, entertain with offensive news? As for it being a terrorist attack, if it caused terror I'd say it was 'successful', regardless of deaths/injuries/other damage.
Reply #2 Top
an unsuccessful attack would be one where bombs didn't detonate, or where the bombers were caught before they could complete their plan.


exactly.

where they didn't succeed was by not providing rush with enuff grist for his hatemill. he's like one of them zombies from 'the dead' movies only instead of brains, he feeds on 'more bodies...more blood...more horror'.
Reply #3 Top

he's like one of them zombies from 'the dead' movies only instead of brains, he feeds on 'more bodies...more blood...more horror'.

He's an asshole, to be blunt.  Rush ought to go take a vicodin and STFU.

As for it being a terrorist attack, if it caused terror I'd say it was 'successful', regardless of deaths/injuries/other damage.

Me too.  Apparently Rush is all about playing the 'we did it bigger and better' game.

What a prick.

Reply #4 Top
I don't know. A "successful" terrorist attack is kind of like "winning" a war. Is there really such an animal? But I do agree with one thing:
He's an asshole, to be blunt. Rush ought to go take a vicodin and STFU.


I used to kinda like him years ago, but he has grown ~yawn~ tiresome...
Reply #5 Top
I used to kinda like him years ago, but he has grown ~yawn~ tiresome...


I've always thought he was a self-righteous prick, but he did make the occasional good point and was somewhat entertaining. Nowadays he's just....an ass.
Reply #6 Top
I heard him say it and it is taken way out of context in your link. Rush was congratulating Mayor Livingston on his attitude towards this attack. Mayor Livinston stood and thumbed his nose at the bacteria and so did Rush Limbaugh. To me this is nothing more than Rush Limbaugh's version of Prs. Bush's "Bring it on!" and also the "Bring It On" and "The quickset way home is through Baghdad" from me and my team in Desert Storm when we first heard Hussein use the line, "The Mother of All Wars!"

Say and think what you want about Rush Limbaugh, but he was merely backing up the "we will not be broken" statement from Mayor Livingston. Plus, if you compare what the bacteria could have accomplished with their attacks, they did fail pretty miserably... Unless of course, London decides to make it more succussful than it was, and from what I'm reading, they aren't, so why should we?
Reply #7 Top

I heard him say it and it is taken way out of context in your link

I read the entire transcript, and I was STILL offended by his choice of words. 

To even suggest that it was a failed attmept is incredibly insensitive.

Reply #8 Top
I agree. Rush is an arrogant prick. In fact, his remark is indefensible. It's just in the poorest of taste, and insulting to everyone who was affected by the attacks. Yup, take a whole lot of vicodins, mon. At the same time.

The line that really got me recently was, "Either you're for Jesus, or you're against the GOP". If that doesn't thin the ranks of his followers, not much else will. He's a piece of work.
Reply #9 Top
I've never listened to Rush Limbaugh

I'm more of a Paul Harvey kinda guy.
Reply #10 Top
Dharma, it wasn't a failed attack they set out to bomb the Tube and that bus and they did it. Where it was a dismal failure is, while it killed people, it hasn't seemed to kill the spirit of the rest of London, England, or the freedom loving world. What happened was the bacteria's choice, how London, England and the freedom loving world reacts to it is another choice altogether. Terrorists don't kill just for the sake of killing, they choose their targets for very specific reasons. The failure is in the outcome of the attacks. So far I haven't seen any reason to believe that London or England is ready to give in to the bacteria. In that London and England has succeeded in making the bacteria a bunch of pathetic failures.
Reply #11 Top
It's the glorious orgy of blowhards that feel like it's their divine duty and right to have a comment on every single little thing.

*sigh* Defending free speech can be so tiresome sometimes. But necessary, so hey, what can ya do?
Reply #12 Top

The failure is in the outcome of the attacks.

So, would you call the attacks on the towers a failure?  Because, according to the definition you gave me, they were. 

I wouldn't call the loss of thousands of lives a failure.  I wouldn't call the destruction of humanity a failure.  I wouldn't call ANY life lost to terrorism a failed attack on the terrorists part.  They set out to destroy, and they did just that.

Reply #13 Top

Defending free speech can be so tiresome sometimes. But necessary, so hey, what can ya do?

Hi, Myrr!  How are ya?!

I've never listened to Rush Limbaugh

You aint missing much.  Just a bunch of self-love and arrogance.

It's just in the poorest of taste, and insulting to everyone who was affected by the attacks.

EXACTLY!!!!  I don't care how he said it, in what context (altho I can't see how you can count the number of lives lost and use the words 'failed, terrorist, and attempt' in the same sentence without it being anything but insensitive and derogatory).

That Jesus quote got my back up as well. 

Reply #14 Top
No, I wouldn't call the WTC attacks on 9/11 a failure because the towers and the pentagon weren't the target, the financial and military infrastructure of the western world. It took a few years to recover from those attacks, to the death toll and the loss of property (both running deep), the outcome was successful.

In terms of outcome, I would compare this attack in london more on par with the Oklahoma City Bombing. Both were tragic, both were carried out by cowards, both were terrorist attacks, and neither managed to do the damage to their target intended.

I am not saying we shouldn't mourn the loss, nor am I saying anyone should just shrug it off. It was all the shrugging off of terrorist attacks throughout the last 30 years that empowered the bacteria to this point.

However, we should also keep a sense of perportion and history here. This attack did not kill thousands (as it could have), it was not big enough to disrupt the infrastructure of England and from what I am reading, it did not destroy the spirit of the British people.

So, while the bacteria were successful in proving that they are cowardly tapeworms, they failed miserably in their mission.
Reply #15 Top
I agree with you Para...
Reply #16 Top
I think Rush twists things to get as many 'hell yeah's' that he can from his core following, while trying to offend as many who hate him as possible. I tend to agree with his opinions, but I do think he treads heavily on the emotions of people when he could show a lot more respect.

Whether the attack was successful or not depends entirely on how the British people react. If they are terrorized and terrorists benefit, then it was. If they aren't, and the antagonism ends up harming the terrorists' agenda, then it wasn't successful.

The problem wasn't so much that he was rating the success of the attack as he was using the overall weight of the carnage to do it. The only people who keep real score are the people back in the Middle East who cheer FOR these wastes of skin.

So, in a way, Rush is right, and wrong. In terms of propaganda power, a high death toll probably gets them more cheers and support at home. Here, though, it is a toughe nut to crack as far as terror and response. They could kill and handful and do real harm, or they could kill a lot and just bring hell down on themselves.
Reply #17 Top

 

No, I wouldn't call the WTC attacks on 9/11 a failure because the towers and the pentagon weren't the target, the financial and military infrastructure of the western world. It took a few years to recover from those attacks, to the death toll and the loss of property (both running deep), the outcome was successful.

This attack did not kill thousands (as it could have), it was not big enough to disrupt the infrastructure of England and from what I am reading, it did not destroy the spirit of the British people

When you consider that England is the size of Texas you get a little better perspective on things.  It's a big deal over there, Ted.  It might not be as big a deal here in the US, but this is the worst attack London has seen since WWII.  That's huge to Englishmen.

I'm not going to get into a pissing contest with you about whose attack was worse.  That's not going to solve anything, and it's not what this blog about.

This is about Rush Limbaugh opening his big trap and saying some incredibly insensitive things.  I don't understand how anyone could read the script of the show, read what he said, and not draw a similar conclusion. 

Any terrorist act that results in the loss of human life is a successful one.  And, they're probably gloating over the fact that, yet again, thay have managed to turn the world's focus on them yet again.  Failure?  I don't freakin' think so.

Lucas:  I don't have anything nice to say to you at the moment, so I won't say anything at all.

 

Reply #18 Top

I do think he treads heavily on the emotions of people when he could show a lot more respect.

They haven't even removed all the bodies from the tunnels yet, and he's saying this stuff.  How insensitive can you be? 

You know, this just perpetuates the British vision of Americans.  They see a Yank telling them that their situation isn't as bad because not many people got killed.  How does anything think that makes them feel?  Emperor Of Ice Cream wrote an article last week about how he felt after 9/11, and what (I think, at least) he details in it as his stereotypical vison of America is pretty much what Rush Limbaugh epitomized in his badly worded, ill-timed statement:  'Y'all ONLY got 50 people killed? Aw, that's nothin'!  We lost thousands in our attack!'.

Don't minimize it, and don't belittle it.  That's all I'm asking for.

 

 

Reply #19 Top
Lucas: I don't have anything nice to say to you at the moment, so I won't say anything at all


--you have every right to say it, please, what did you wish to say, that wasn't nice....
Reply #20 Top
I also think that, yes the attacks were a huge deal, but, did it deter them, it doesn't seem to have...i admire the british...thats part of the reason i would like to live in england...rush's comment may have been a bit un- needed, but i don't think he meant that, i mean there have been others who have said similar, if not the very same thing...and yet they are not bashed...why?
Reply #21 Top
You forget Dharma, he was merely echoing the sentiments of Mayor Livingston's speech with his statement. If it is Rush Limbaugh that this is about, are you equally as disgusted with the Mayor?
Reply #22 Top
rush's comment may have been a bit un- needed, but i don't think he meant that, i mean there have been others who have said similar, if not the very same thing...and yet they are not bashed...why?


Because other people are not pompous, arrogant, self-righteous radio broadcasters like Rush Limbaugh.

I've done some extensive reading and TV watching in the past few days because this is a matter close to my heart (it's my homeland), and as yet I haven't seen anyone saying anything like it. If you can provide me with examples of it, please do...with links to where it was said and who said it. I'm all about equal opportunity bashing.
Reply #23 Top
You forget Dharma, he was merely stating the sentiments of Mayor Livingston with his statement.


If that's the case, then he did so very badly. Ken Livingstone never came out and said "this wasn't so bad, we only lost 50 people". I heard his speech when he first said it, and it wasn't anything like that. He said, as others have said recently, that the British will not be defeated, the the way of life there will remain the same, that we will not run scared. Rush was the one who made mention of the lack of casualties.
Reply #24 Top
I've never listened to Rush Limbaugh

I'm more of a Paul Harvey kinda guy


Funny you should mention Paul Harvey, Evorg. He said about the same thing the other day. Like Rush, he was merely echoing the sentiments of Mayor Livingston.
Reply #25 Top

Just to make things clear, here's the full text of the speech by Ken Livingstone:

"This was a cowardly attack, which has resulted in injury and loss of life. Our thoughts are with everyone who has been injured, or lost loved ones. I want to thank the emergency services for the way they have responded.

Following the al-Qaeda attacks on September 11 in America we conducted a series of exercises in London in order to be prepared for just such an attack. One of the exercises undertaken by the government, my office and the emergency and security services was based on the possibility of multiple explosions on the transport system during the Friday rush hour. The plan that came out of that exercise is being executed today, with remarkable efficiency and courage, and I praise those staff who are involved.

I’d like to thank Londoners for the calm way in which they have responded to this cowardly attack and echo the advice of the Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair - do everything possible to assist the police and take the advice of the police about getting home today.

I have no doubt whatsoever that this is a terrorist attack. We did hope in the first few minutes after hearing about the events on the Underground that it might simply be a maintenance tragedy. That was not the case. I have been able to stay in touch through the very excellent communications that were established for the eventuality that I might be out of the city at the time of a terrorist attack and they have worked with remarkable effectiveness. I will be in continual contact until I am back in London.

I want to say one thing specifically to the world today. This was not a terrorist attack against the mighty and the powerful. It was not aimed at Presidents or Prime Ministers. It was aimed at ordinary, working-class Londoners, black and white, Muslim and Christian, Hindu and Jew, young and old. It was an indiscriminate attempt to slaughter, irrespective of any considerations for age, for class, for religion, or whatever.

That isn’t an ideology, it isn’t even a perverted faith - it is just an indiscriminate attempt at mass murder and we know what the objective is. They seek to divide Londoners. They seek to turn Londoners against each other. I said yesterday to the International Olympic Committee, that the city of London is the greatest in the world, because everybody lives side by side in harmony. Londoners will not be divided by this cowardly attack. They will stand together in solidarity alongside those who have been injured and those who have been bereaved and that is why I’m proud to be the mayor of that city.

Finally, I wish to speak directly to those who came to London today to take life.

I know that you personally do not fear giving up your own life in order to take others - that is why you are so dangerous. But I know you fear that you may fail in your long-term objective to destroy our free society and I can show you why you will fail.

In the days that follow look at our airports, look at our sea ports and look at our railway stations and, even after your cowardly attack, you will see that people from the rest of Britain, people from around the world will arrive in London to become Londoners and to fulfil their dreams and achieve their potential.

They choose to come to London, as so many have come before because they come to be free, they come to live the life they choose, they come to be able to be themselves. They flee you because you tell them how they should live. They don’t want that and nothing you do, however many of us you kill, will stop that flight to our city where freedom is strong and where people can live in harmony with one another. Whatever you do, however many you kill, you will fail."

 

I see nothing in there about "you didn't kill too many of us.  we only lost 50 people, so your attack was not a success".