Testing Rush

Twodogs · #1 10-15-2009, 01:00 PM

Before I get started, let me say that I do occasionally listen to, and agree with Rush Limbaugh. That being said, I do not live and die by his, or any other radio hosts words. It seems to me that there could be an interesting aside to this whole NFL business. I am well aware that many on the left (and some on the right) say that Limbaugh, and others like him, are only in it for the money. I think that we are going to see what sort of principles this guy lives by (if any). Several "journalists" and talking heads have written and said things about Rush that can't be backed up, or sourced. One that comes to mind is a local, Jason Whitlock (yes he's black). We all know that Rush has more millions than he, or his children's children could ever spend, and doesn't need to go through the hassle of a slander suit to get a few more. That fact makes me very curious as to how he will handle these folks. I think it will show a great deal about his character, and what he does, or doesn't stand for. I have a feeling he may just go for public apologies in the whatever venue they slandered him in. I "hope" he puts them in the poor house.

noonereal · #2 10-15-2009, 01:22 PM

he will cry like a junkie on his radio show

that was an easy question, got another?

Twodogs · #3 10-15-2009, 01:30 PM

Noon, if you are trolling, I'm way past the point of biting. It's clear to me that you are frustrated and have no interest in having an intelligent discussion about news events. Thanks Anyhow, Jay

d-ray657 · #4 10-15-2009, 03:10 PM

A slander suit is an excuse to remain in the public eye, it gives him something to appear angry about, his MO, and it is consistent with his belief that he has an exclusive license to the truth.

Truth is a defense to a slander suit in most instances, but with a public figure such as Limbaugh, the defendant has a lower standard to establish a defense. The suit can't proceed unless the person making the statement knew it was false at the time, or acted with reckless disregard of the truth.

Maybe the court will hit him with a huge bill for the defendants' legal fees when he gets thrown out of court. That will give him lots of new fodder to rage against the liberal courts.

A lyric by the Bottle Rockets comes to mind:

Angry fat man on the radio
Wants to keep his taxes way down low
He says there oughta be a law
Angriest man you ever saw

Regards,

D-Ray

Twodogs · #5 10-15-2009, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Maybe the court will hit him with a huge bill for the defendants' legal fees when he gets thrown out of court.
D-Ray

and maybe I'll hit the lotto.

It would be nice if our system was set up that way, but it's not. That would sure end a bunch of the silly and frivolous lawsuits that drive prices up. I also believe that if you say or print something in the media that is untrue, and it causes someone damage (financial or otherwise), they have a right to seek compensation. Some of the people spreading the lies are small timers too (like Whitlock), and it will be interesting to see how they fare, now that they are playing with the "big boys". I can only imagine the legal team that Rushbo keeps on retainer.

Charles · #6 10-15-2009, 03:25 PM

I've never listened to Rush, he always came across as too pompus to suit me.

But I have read several things that he has written and/or said. He can be pretty astute at times.

Chas

d-ray657 · #7 10-15-2009, 03:31 PM

The Constitution places limits on the ability of public figures to obtain damages on the basis of statements made about them, particularly statements of opinion. Now maybe his hero could succeed in shredding inconvenient portions of the Constitution, but I don't expect Rush to be able to.

By the way, fees can be awarded when lawsuits are frivolous or pursued in bad faith. That's why I suggested that Rush would get nailed.

Now if he and the Star's insurance company both spend stupendous amounts on the case, and he ends up getting nothing, that would be a win-win.

Regards,

D-Ray

Twodogs · #8 10-15-2009, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by d-ray657

particularly statements of opinion.
D-Ray

The statements in question were portrayed as quotes, not an opinion. As for the Falling Star, it's already dead, it just doen't know it yet.

Seems a whole lot of left leaning news agencies are in financial trouble these days. Maybe they should all hire some better looking gals, like FOX does.

d-ray657 · #9 10-15-2009, 04:01 PM

Since when has the Star been a left-leaning news agency? Like other conservative institutions, and many republicans, the Star had seen the path Bush's handlers and their allies had been leading the country and their party down, which lead them to step back, evaluate, and endorse a clearly qualified candidate for office. Now if a reasoned analysis in the face of overwhelming evidence makes an organization left-leaning, I will gladly accept that practice as part of what happens over here on the left.

Regards,

D-Ray

noonereal · #10 10-15-2009, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twodogs

Noon, if you are trolling, I'm way past the point of biting. It's clear to me that you are frustrated and have no interest in having an intelligent discussion about news events. Thanks Anyhow, Jay

I don't know what you mean, I am damn serious.

he will cry about getting shut out and carry on like a spoiled kid.

How is this trolling? Watch, you will see.

His character?

Are you kidding?

He threw rocks at folks with drug problems for years and was one himself.