Politifact: 93% of Rush Limbaugh's Claims are Half-True, Mostly False, False or Worse

[Jessica01]

Those who are angry about immigration, Muslims, liberals, Obama, and the government find solace in conservative talk radio. I understand it is simplistic to say that anger and resentment are found in the hearts of those who are angry and resentful, however the facts have shown that conservative talk radio stoke negative sentiments in those predisposed to said issues.

Studies confirm:

http://nhmc.org/sites/default/files/Social Networks for Hate Speech_UCLA CSRC.pdf

Interesting article. Saw this:

The impact of Geller’s and other U.S. blogs with
an anti-Islam message came under question following
the attacks by Anders Behring Breivik, who killed
seventy-seven people in Norway in July 2011. The
New York Times reported that Breivik had been
“deeply influenced” by several blogs, including Jihad
Watch, written by ardent anti-Islamist Robert Spencer,
and Atlas Shrugs, written by Geller. A former CIA
officer noted that while one cannot necessarily attribute
the violence to these bloggers, “they and their
writings are the infrastructure from which Breivik
emerged” (Shane 2011, 7).

 

[JustOneWay]

Yet the study provides no evidence of any of the five selected programs inciting violence against anyone.

Hatred does not always end in violence, and the study never suggested that hatred ends in violence.

Defined hate speech

Hate speech is a communication that carries no meaning other than the expression of hatred for some group, especially in circumstances in which the communication is likely to provoke violence. It is an incitement to hatred primarily against a group of persons defined in terms of race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, religion, sexual orientation, and the like. Hate speech can be any form of expression regarded as offensive to racial, ethnic and religious groups and other discrete minorities or to women.

Hate Speech Law & Legal Definition


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This study analyzes how social networks that form around the hosts of commercial talk radio shows can propagate messages targeting vulnerable groups.

Anybody who has ever listened to Limbaugh/Savage/Hannity/Levin and others understand that their brand of hatred towards liberals, Muslims, Obama, Democrats, gays and gay marriage, and anybody else not conservative perpetuates the anger across the conservative spectrum. The evidence is overwhelming.

 

[Sistrin]

Hatred does not always end in violence, and the study never suggested that hatred ends in violence.

Actually it does. Quote:

The impact of Geller’s and other U.S. blogs with an anti-Islam message came under question following the attacks by Anders Behring Breivik, who killed seventy-seven people in Norway in July 2011. The New York Times reported that Breivik had been “deeply influenced” by several blogs, including Jihad Watch, written by ardent anti-Islamist Robert Spencer, and Atlas Shrugs, written by Geller. A former CIA officer noted that while one cannot necessarily attribute the violence to these bloggers, “they and their writings are the infrastructure from which Breivik emerged”

This has to be one of the more inane claims from the study, that the writings of Spencer and Geller formed the core or Breivik's psyche. The claim is no more valid than when the liberal left desperately attempted to attach the blame for the Tuscon shootings on Sarah Palin.

Anybody who has ever listened to Limbaugh/Savage/Hannity/Levin and others understand that their brand of hatred towards liberals, Muslims, Obama, Democrats, gays and gay marriage, and anybody else not conservative perpetuates the anger across the conservative spectrum. The evidence is overwhelming.

No, the talking point is overwhelming. Some issues are worth a bit of anger, others engender irrational anger. Ever hear a hard-leftist talking about George Bush? You are supporting the traditional meme that any opposition to a liberal/progressive ideal is motivated by hate. This is not only wrong but ridiculous.

 

[JustOneWay]

Actually it does. Quote:

The impact of Geller’s and other U.S. blogs with an anti-Islam message came under question following the attacks by Anders Behring Breivik, who killed seventy-seven people in Norway in July 2011. The New York Times reported that Breivik had been “deeply influenced” by several blogs, including Jihad Watch, written by ardent anti-Islamist Robert Spencer, and Atlas Shrugs, written by Geller. A former CIA officer noted that while one cannot necessarily attribute the violence to these bloggers, “they and their writings are the infrastructure from which Breivik emerged”

This has to be one of the more inane claims from the study, that the writings of Spencer and Geller formed the core or Breivik's psyche. The claim is no more valid than when the liberal left desperately attempted to attach the blame for the Tuscon shootings on Sarah Palin.



No, the talking point is overwhelming. Some issues are worth a bit of anger, others engender irrational anger. Ever hear a hard-leftist talking about George Bush? You are supporting the traditional meme that any opposition to a liberal/progressive ideal is motivated by hate. This is not only wrong but ridiculous.

We can only provide the evidence. We cannot control how it is received.

We all understand that when hate is promoted and broadcast it will be absorbed by those who are susceptible to a confirmation bias. Political talk radio is largely controlled by conservatives, and their message of hate is being received loud and clear.

I only post these thoughts because I was a long time listener of Limbaugh, Hannity, and Savage and I know how they affected me and my attitude. I don't need talking points to understand what these messengers of hate do to people. I can say that I was a listener of Ed Schultz, and I found his anger no better than Limbaugh's and that forced me to turn him off.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Ever hear a hard-leftist talking about George Bush?

Yep. Some of them are pretty angry. But hard leftists don't have much in the way of big-budget media fueling their anger and hatred with anger and hatred of their own. Rachel Maddow is more sarcastic than angry. Maybe Lawrence O'Donnell would count, but even he's pretty tame compared to most conservative hosts. Keith Olbermann probably would've qualified, but he's been back doing sports for a while.

Conservatives, OTOH, have a whole host of people whose bread and butter is getting angry and making their audiences angry.

They're all playing roles that make money, and for whatever reason, anger sells better with conservatives and sarcastic arrogance sells better among liberals.

You are supporting the traditional meme that any opposition to a liberal/progressive ideal is motivated by hate. This is not only wrong but ridiculous.

What's ridiculous is your conflation of tactics with legitimate opposition/disagreement. George Will, Chris Wallace, and Peggy Noonan are all pretty conservative, but I don't think many people would charge them with being hateful or fomenting anger in their audiences. What people like Hannity, Limbaugh, and O'Reilly sell is something different, however.

 

[Sistrin]

We can only provide the evidence. We cannot control how it is received.

Yet somehow this grace isn't to be extended to conservative talk radio, because it is all hate speech.

We all understand that when hate is promoted and broadcast it will be absorbed by those who are susceptible to a confirmation bias.

Bush Lied! Kids Died! No blood for oil! Head On! Apply directly to the forehead!

Slogans and talking points are not legitimate grounds for basing an argument. If Limbaugh espouses nothing but hate speech, you should be able to provide some examples.

Political talk radio is largely controlled by conservatives, and their message of hate is being received loud and clear.

Does the term broad-brushing mean anything to you? Your point is Conservative speak equals hate speech. Funny how you are putting into practice the fault you claim Conservatives are guilty of.

I only post these thoughts because I was a long time listener of Limbaugh, Hannity, and Savage and I know how they affected me and my attitude.

Personal anecdote does not support the conclusion you draw.

I don't need talking points to understand what these messengers of hate do to people.

Messengers of hate. Talk about confirmation bias.

 

[JustOneWay]

Yet somehow this grace isn't to be extended to conservative talk radio, because it is all hate speech.

Again, we cannot control how it is received.


It almost appears as if you are personally insulted by others calling Limbaugh/Savage/Hannity and others in conservative talk radio messengers of hate speech.

Don't take it so personal. Nobody here is saying these things about you, just the people you may be listening to. It would be nice it you tried to defend their hateful rhetoric with a study showing they are actually promoting love, or at least tolerance. Do you have anything like that to post?

 

[rturner76]

"[Obama] wouldn't have been voted president if he weren't black. Somebody asked me over the weekend why does somebody earn a lot of money have a lot of money, because she's black. It was Oprah. No, it can't be. Yes, it is. There’s a lot of guilt out there, show we're not racists, we'll make this person wealthy and big and famous and so forth.... If Obama weren't black he'd be a tour guide in Honolulu or he'd be teaching Saul Alinsky constitutional law or lecturing on it in Chicago." --Rush Limbaugh, July 6, 2010

"The ocean will take care of this on its own if it was left alone and left out there. It's natural. It's as natural as the ocean water is." --Rush Limbaugh, on the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, May 3, 2010

"Guess what? Faisal Shahzad is a registered Democrat. I wonder if his SUV had an Obama sticker on it." --Rush Limbaugh, lying about the failed Times Square car bomber, who is not registered to vote, May 4, 2010

"And don't forget, Sherrod Brown is black. There's a racial component here, too. And now, the newspaper that I'm reading all this from is The New York Times, and they, of course, don't mention that." --Rush Limbaugh, on the 2006 Ohio Senate primary race involving then-Rep. Sherrod Brown (D-OH), who is white

My favorite-

"The ocean will take care of this on its own if it was left alone and left out there. It's natural. It's as natural as the ocean water is." --Rush Limbaugh, on the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, May 3, 2010

It's obvious there are times when he doesn't tell the truth. Is that by accident or is he blatantly lying?

 

[brewmama]

Anybody who has ever listened to Limbaugh/Savage/Hannity/Levin and others understand that their brand of hatred towards liberals, Muslims, Obama, Democrats, gays and gay marriage, and anybody else not conservative perpetuates the anger across the conservative spectrum. The evidence is overwhelming.
[/SIZE]

What evidence is that?? I've listened to all your little list of guys (well, take it back, not Michael Savage) and they are polite, mild-mannered and well-spoken.
The whole idea that conservative speakers are the haters is utterly unbelievable and incredible. Do you not listen to the raging haters on the left? Are you unaware of them? Do you not listen to Limbaugh or Hannity live, rather than depending on a hate site that takes snippets of what they say out of context and try to give it the worse possible spin? You really seem out of touch with reality.

 

[TerranceL]

What evidence is that?? I've listened to all your little list of guys (well, take it back, not Michael Savage) and they are polite, mild-mannered and well-spoken.
The whole idea that conservative speakers are the haters is utterly unbelievable and incredible. Do you not listen to the raging haters on the left? Are you unaware of them? Do you not listen to Limbaugh or Hannity live, rather than depending on a hate site that takes snippets of what they say out of context and try to give it the worse possible spin? You really seem out of touch with reality.

Levin is anything but polite. I stopped listening to him when it became obvious he has an inability to disagree with someone without yelling insults at them.

He's a small minded man.

 

[JustOneWay]

You really seem out of touch with reality.

Your incorrect assesment of my take on reality does not change the fact that those I named push hatred through the airwaves.

 

[super animator]

When a study is conducted by racists, it counters itself

In other words you commit the ad hominem fallacy, by attacking the messager instead of the message.

 

[Sistrin]

Again, we cannot control how it is received.

Which means if Limbaugh comments on Al Sharpton completely fabricating the Tawana Brawley hoax and someone subsequently decides to take a pot shot at Sharpton, it isn't Limbaugh's fault.

 

[JustOneWay]

Which means if Limbaugh comments on Al Sharpton completely fabricating the Tawana Brawley hoax and someone subsequently decides to take a pot shot at Sharpton, it isn't Limbaugh's fault.

That depends on Limbaugh's comments about Sharpton. Saying Sharpton was sued and ordered to pay for a defamation case and that he is a bad man is OK, but if he calls for violence and Sharpton is injured, then he is in the wrong.

 

[Sistrin]

That depends on Limbaugh's comments about Sharpton. Saying Sharpton was sued and ordered to pay for a defamation case and that he is a bad man is OK, but if he calls for violence and Sharpton is injured, then he is in the wrong.

Thus the flaw in this absurd argument. Limbaugh has been on the air for what, twenty-five years now? In all of that time has he ever once called for violence against any political figure or ethnic group in the United States?

The answer, of course, is no. If he had it would have been trumpeted ad infinitum on every liberal news or blog source on the planet.

Limbaugh does not engage in hate speech, he does not call for violence against those he disagrees with, he does not rally his supporters to go out and harm or kill in his name.

The charges he does are just that, charges made by people who do not like what Limbaugh has to say, can't effectively counter it, and thus are left with no option but to attempt to fabricate charges in an attempt to silence him.

 

[JustOneWay]

Thus the flaw in this absurd argument.

Evidently, you have not read my posts or you would have realized that I said hate speech does not have to lead to violence, nonetheless it is hate speech.

Do you even know the definition of hate speech? I posted a definition but I suspect you missed it. In case you did miss it, here it is once again:

Hate speech is a communication that carries no meaning other than the expression of hatred for some group, especially in circumstances in which the communication is likely to provoke violence. It is an incitement to hatred primarily against a group of persons defined in terms of race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, religion, sexual orientation, and the like. Hate speech can be any form of expression regarded as offensive to racial, ethnic and religious groups and other discrete minorities or to women.

Limbaugh's attack on Fluke was hate speech.

Limbaugh compares liberals to terrorists - hate speech

Of course my attack was not only on Limbaugh, but I added Savage, Hannity and Levin in there to illustrate that there is an ongoing barrage of hateful rhetoric by conservative talk show hosts onto a susceptible audience.
The guy talks on the radio for 20 hours a week, so it is understood that the entire 20 hours is not hate speech. Much of it is plugging sponsors or himself, and the rest is idle nonsense designed to fill in the remaining time.

 

[Sistrin]

Evidently, you have not read my posts or you would have realized that I said hate speech does not have to lead to violence, nonetheless it is hate speech.

According to your definition of hate speech, would this quote qualify as hate speech?

"I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors. I want you to talk to 'em whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face."

Do you even know the definition of hate speech?

I know how the left in general defines hate speech, as any speech which does not conform with their core beliefs or fall within their paradigm. That is what you are promoting here. For example:

Limbaugh's attack on Fluke was hate speech.

Limbaugh's attack on Fluke was an example of a lapse in judgement in choosing his words. However he nailed Fluke for exactly who she was and continues to be, an activist attempting to force her will, desire, and agenda on others.

Limbaugh compares liberals to terrorists - hate speech.

Do you have any context for this comment? Or did you find this said somewhere like, say, the DU or the HuffPo?

Of course my attack was not only on Limbaugh, but I added Savage, Hannity and Levin in there to illustrate that there is an ongoing barrage of hateful rhetoric by conservative talk show hosts onto a susceptible audience.

My sense is you don't even realize how insulting you are being here, labeling those who would choose to listen to any of the above as susceptible. How would you define susceptible? Weak minded? Unable to form thoughts or opinions of their own? People just sitting around waiting for someone else to tell them what and how to think and then these people mindlessly parroting whatever they were told?

I have seen people like that.

The guy talks on the radio for 20 hours a week, so it is understood that the entire 20 hours is not hate speech. Much of it is plugging sponsors or himself, and the rest is idle nonsense designed to fill in the remaining time.

Yeah, right, because in an environment driven by income generated by sponsor support hate speech and idle nonsense is the formula for success. We saw that as a business model for Air America. How did that work out?

 

[Albion]

Of course my attack was not only on Limbaugh, but I added Savage, Hannity and Levin in there to illustrate that there is an ongoing barrage of hateful rhetoric by conservative talk show hosts onto a susceptible audience.
The guy talks on the radio for 20 hours a week, so it is understood that the entire 20 hours is not hate speech. Much of it is plugging sponsors or himself, and the rest is idle nonsense designed to fill in the remaining time.

I find this unpersuasive, considering that CBS, NBC, ABC, and CNN are Democrat-leaning, to put it mildly, and that in MSNBC we have an entire network and numerous anchors and commentators that are at least as ideological as Limbaugh and a couple of those others. In addition, Limbaugh does sometimes excoriate the Republicans, whereas the so-called "news" figures on MSNBC never stray from their assigned task of promoting the Democrat Party and the Administration.

 

[JustOneWay]

Do you have any context for this comment? Or did you find this said somewhere like, say, the DU or the HuffPo?

I found it on Rush Limbaugh's website


It is mildly amusing that my points are countered with "the other side does it too".

Of course, this does not diminish the hatred spewed by Limbaugh.

I got the definition from the uslegal.com, so I guess in your opinion the left has the law on their side.

My intent is not to insult anybody, just stating the facts about Limbaugh and those who may listen to him. I guess you have not provided any solid evidence to counter my claims. I posted an in-depth study which shows that people are influenced by peddlers of hate. I even gave an example of one of them on the left, but I didn't have any liberals come and complain. I am sorry if my opinions bother you, but not once have I insulted you. Evidently you are are little sensitive to hearing the opinions of others? I don't know but it seems that way to me.

 

[JustOneWay]

I find this unpersuasive, considering that CBS, NBC, ABC, and CNN are Democrat-leaning, to put it mildly, and that in MSNBC we have an entire network and numerous anchors and commentators that are at least as ideological as Limbaugh and a couple of those others. In addition, Limbaugh does sometimes excoriate the Republicans, whereas the so-called "news" figures on MSNBC never stray from their assigned task of promoting the Democrat Party and the Administration.

This discussion is about Limbaugh, and I expanded my posts to touch upon conservative radio. If you feel like discussing Democrat-leaning commentators, maybe you can create a new thread for that discussion?