From: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org (loud-fans-digest) To: loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Subject: loud-fans-digest V9 #12 Reply-To: loud-fans@smoe.org Sender: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-loud-fans-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk loud-fans-digest Monday, January 18 2010 Volume 09 : Number 012 Today's Subjects: ----------------- Re: [loud-fans] Poll? [markwstaples@aol.com] Re: [loud-fans] Poll? [jrt456@aol.com] Re: [loud-fans] Poll? [glenn mcdonald ] Re: [loud-fans] Poll? [Chris Hornbostel ] Re: [loud-fans] Poll? [jrt456@aol.com] Re: [loud-fans] Poll? [markwstaples@aol.com] Re: [loud-fans] Poll? [jrt456@aol.com] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 12:46:08 -0500 From: markwstaples@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Poll? Thanks for including the Ebert letter. I've thought several times in the past that Limbaugh's hearing problem was justice/a big neon wake-up sign on a cosmic scale. - --Mark - -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Hamlin To: loud-fans@smoe.org Sent: Sat, Jan 16, 2010 7:44 pm Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Poll? On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 6:54 PM, glenn mcdonald wrote: > I've only got 7 lists, so far, which doesn't statistically merit tabulation. > If there are more of you who want a poll, send me lists by 9am Tuesday > morning! I'm working on it! Have to get through the Tris McCall set first... Wondering how many lists would statistically merit tabulation, how glenn got his new job at the "Voice," and whether they're finally going to spell his name right for his trouble, Andy A Letter to Rush Limbaugh / / / January 14, 2010 help for haiti Direct links for donations to the Red Cross and other help for the victims of the earthquake in Haiti here. Donate $10 to the Red Cross to be charged to your cell phone bill by texting "HAITI" to "90999." Printer-friendly ; E-mail this to a friend ; AddThis Social Bookmark Button To: Rush Limbaugh From: Roger Ebert You should be horse-whipped for the insult you have paid to the highest office of our nation. Having followed President Obama's suggestion and donated money to the Red Cross for relief in Haiti, I was offended to hear you suggest the President might be a thief capable of stealing money intended for the earthquake victims. Here is a transcript from your program on Thursday: Justin of Raleigh, North Carolina: "Why does Obama say if you want to donate some money, you could go to whitehouse.gov to direct you how to do so? If I wanted to donate to the Red Cross, why do I have to go to the White House page to donate?" Limbaugh: "Exactly. Would you trust the money's gonna go to Haiti?" Justin: "No." Rush: "But would you trust that your name's gonna end up on a mailing list for the Obama people to start asking you for campaign donations for him and other causes?" Justin: "Absolutely!" Limbaugh: "Absolutely!" That's what was said. Unlike you and Justin of Raleigh, I went to Obama's web site, and discovered the link there leads directly to the Red Cross. I can think of a reason why anyone might want to go via the White House. That way they can be absolutely sure they're clicking on the Red Cross and not a fake site set up to exploit the tragedy. But let me be sure I have this right. You and Justin agree that Obama might steal money intended for the Red Cross to help the wretched of Haiti. This conversation came 48 hours after many of us had seen pitiful sights from Port au Prince. Tens of thousands are believed still alive beneath the rubble. You twisted their suffering into an opportunity to demean the character of the President of the United States. This cannot have been an accident. A day earlier, in a sound bite from your show, you said "this will play right into Obama's hands. He's humanitarian, compassionate. They'll use this to burnish their, shall we say, 'credibility' with the black community -- in the both light-skinned and dark-skinned black community in this country. It's made-to-order for them." Setting aside your riff on Harry Reid, consider what you imply. Obama will aid Haiti to please African-Americans. Haiti has lost untold thousands of lives. One third of the population has lost its homes. Countless people are still buried in the rubble. Every American president would act quickly to help our neighbor. You are so cynical and heartless as to explain Obama's action in a way that unpleasantly suggests how your mind works. You have a sizable listening audience. You apparently know how to please them. Anybody given a $400 million contract must know what he is doing. That's what offends me. You know exactly what you're doing. [--from http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100114/OPINION/10 0119985 ] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 13:33:47 EST From: jrt456@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Poll? In a message dated 1/17/10 12:54:47 PM, markwstaples@aol.com writes: > Thanks for including the Ebert letter. I've thought several times in the > past that Limbaugh's hearing problem was justice/a big neon wake-up sign > on a > cosmic scale. > Actually, Ebert's making a fool of himself just like Chris Matthews did, and wasting his time writing about a statement that Limbaugh clearly announced was only bait for oblivious liberal commentators to comment upon....knowing, of course, how many of them are eager to serve as outraged puppets without actually listening to what Limbaugh says on the air. Funny stuff. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 15:27:17 -0500 From: glenn mcdonald Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Poll? > Wondering how many lists would statistically merit tabulation, how > glenn got his new job at the "Voice," I don't work for the Voice, I work designing a new database system that, among other things, is good for reconciling human variation in data. Once the poll is published at the Voice we're also going to publish it in data-form in this system, so the curious can see what I'm talking about... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 19:52:19 -0500 From: Chris Hornbostel Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Poll? Yeah, I'm sure that's it. Haiti and Rush Limbaugh making light of it's a fucking riot. Good point. On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 1:33 PM, wrote: > In a message dated 1/17/10 12:54:47 PM, markwstaples@aol.com writes: > > > > Thanks for including the Ebert letter. I've thought several times in the > > past that Limbaugh's hearing problem was justice/a big neon wake-up sign > > on a > > cosmic scale. > > > > Actually, Ebert's making a fool of himself just like Chris Matthews did, > and wasting his time writing about a statement that Limbaugh clearly > announced > was only bait for oblivious liberal commentators to comment > upon....knowing, of course, how many of them are eager to serve as outraged > puppets without > actually listening to what Limbaugh says on the air. Funny stuff. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 20:37:01 EST From: jrt456@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Poll? In a message dated 1/17/10 8:07:56 PM, chris11201@gmail.com writes: > Yeah, I'm sure that's it. Haiti and Rush Limbaugh making light of it's a > fucking riot. Good point. > You don't know what you're talking about, either. Here's a clue, though: it's a riot that Ebert isn't so concerned about Haiti that he won't take time out to use the tragedy for some moral posturing over quotes that were meant to be picked up on by creeps who like to do moral posturing. On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 1:33 PM, wrote: > In a message dated 1/17/10 12:54:47 PM, markwstaples@aol.com writes: > > > > Thanks for including the Ebert letter. I've thought several times in the > > past that Limbaugh's hearing problem was justice/a big neon wake-up sign > > on a > > cosmic scale. > > > > Actually, Ebert's making a fool of himself just like Chris Matthews did, > and wasting his time writing about a statement that Limbaugh clearly > announced > was only bait for oblivious liberal commentators to comment > upon....knowing, of course, how many of them are eager to serve as outraged > puppets without > actually listening to what Limbaugh says on the air. Funny stuff. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 00:26:21 -0500 From: markwstaples@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Poll? Here's a clue, though: it's a riot that Ebert isn't so concerned about Haiti that he won't take time out to use the tragedy for some moral posturing over quotes that were meant to be picked up on by creeps who like to do moral posturing. Regardless, I don't find people screaming in pain under rubble waiting for someone to save them appropriate fodder to manipulate your listeners for shits and giggles. I was a journalism and speech major, and my take on it is that it's simply not appropriate. To me it says a lot more about Limbaugh than it does about the people he's trying to manipulate. - --Mark " 'cause people like you make me feel so tired/When will you die?" (Morrissey, "Magaret on the Guillotine" from "Viva Hate" 1988) - -----Original Message----- From: jrt456@aol.com To: loud-fans@smoe.org Sent: Sun, Jan 17, 2010 5:37 pm Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Poll? In a message dated 1/17/10 8:07:56 PM, chris11201@gmail.com writes: > Yeah, I'm sure that's it. Haiti and Rush Limbaugh making light of it's a > fucking riot. Good point. > You don't know what you're talking about, either. Here's a clue, though: it's a riot that Ebert isn't so concerned about Haiti that he won't take time out to use the tragedy for some moral posturing over quotes that were meant to be picked up on by creeps who like to do moral posturing. On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 1:33 PM, wrote: > In a message dated 1/17/10 12:54:47 PM, markwstaples@aol.com writes: > > > > Thanks for including the Ebert letter. I've thought several times in the > > past that Limbaugh's hearing problem was justice/a big neon wake-up sign > > on a > > cosmic scale. > > > > Actually, Ebert's making a fool of himself just like Chris Matthews did, > and wasting his time writing about a statement that Limbaugh clearly > announced > was only bait for oblivious liberal commentators to comment > upon....knowing, of course, how many of them are eager to serve as outraged > puppets without > actually listening to what Limbaugh says on the air. Funny stuff. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 01:39:25 EST From: jrt456@aol.com Subject: Re: [loud-fans] Poll? In a message dated 1/18/10 12:58:01 AM, markwstaples@aol.com writes: > Regardless, I don't find people screaming in pain under rubble waiting > for > someone to save them appropriate fodder to manipulate your listeners for > shits > and giggles. I was a journalism and speech major, and my take on it is > that > it's simply not appropriate. To me it says a lot more about Limbaugh than > it > does about the people he's trying to manipulate. > I'm not sure you should equate the suffering of Haitians with political commentators (and their followers) being exposed as gullible. If you check his show transcripts, I doubt you'll find that Limbaugh ever has. Still, I'm sure you're being admirably moralistic. I'm reminded of your earlier theory that Rush Limbaugh's deafness is justice "on a cosmic scale." Why don't you explain to us the Christian/karmic convergence that has left Ebert profoundly deformed and unable to speak? Did he give bad reviews to too many John Hughes films? On a music-related note, the Alive label is about to release a live recording of a 1981 Halloween show by The Plimsouls. It makes the band sound far more important than their albums ever did. ------------------------------ End of loud-fans-digest V9 #12 ******************************