• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sources: Checketts to drop Limbaugh

It's amazing how effective Rush can be, even without his conscious intent, to distill a discussion to it's primal core factors.

The racism in this country is primarily on the left. The race baiting in this country is primarily on the left. It is exercized for political and financial gain by racists. THAT IS DESPICABLE!

If you want to know if Rush is a racist ask Snerdly! It's just ridiculous.
 
Sharpton threatens suit against Limbaugh




Looks like Limbaugh left extremely questionable behind and went for straight up lying in an op-ed he wrote about Sharpton:


 
Re: Sharpton threatens suit against Limbaugh

jackalope said:
Looks like Limbaugh left extremely questionable behind and went for straight up lying in an op-ed he wrote about Sharpton:
Click to expand...

Actually, no.

Limbaugh went from crazy implication that Sharpton "Played a leading role" in regards to those things is an opinion, much like the opinion people presented that Rush Limbaugh is a rcaist

Now, for this to be comparable, we'd need to know if the quote Limbaugh attributed to Sharpton was:

1. Made up or factual
2. What the context of it was

Not to mention is that there is no question of any legitimate "harm" that has came to Sharpton regarding these comments, where a case could legitimately be potentially made for Rush.

But golly, surprises of all surprises, when the constant crying and whining about the legal definition of things wouldn't benefit your argument suddenly you're silent on it. Really. I'm truly shocked. Honestly.

However, your entire little premise is laughable and shows your bias throughout all of this, continuing still to act as if the things said about Limbaugh are simply "highly questionable" and not straight up lying in regards to the statements falsely associated with him.
 
Last edited:
Re: Sharpton threatens suit against Limbaugh



Sorry, no. You left a word off Limbaugh's quote - riot. Sharpton did not play a leading role or any role in the riot; he didn't get involved at all until after the riot ended, according to the article.

The legal definition, if this article is correct, fits quite nicely and Limbaugh will lose the lawsuit, should it be filed.

Limbaugh whines about being libeled and defamed, and turns around and does it himself. Standup dood :thumbs:


and ps, the article and potential lawsuit are not about a Sharpton quote at all; they are about Limbaugh statements about Sharpton's actions.
 
Last edited:
Re: Sharpton threatens suit against Limbaugh

jackalope said:
Looks like Limbaugh left extremely questionable behind and went for straight up lying in an op-ed he wrote about Sharpton:
Click to expand...

His role was what was stated, he did indeed make the comment that the jews were ‘diamond merchants’. I would love for Sharpton to sue, but we all know he will never do that, as he would open his own self up to thorough review.
 
Re: Sharpton threatens suit against Limbaugh


Sharpton would have to prove actual malice . . . remember?

Making definitive statements about the outcome of potential lawsuits -- not smart.


Limbaugh whines about being libeled and defamed, and turns around and does it himself. Standup dood :thumbs:
Click to expand...

Apparently not. I couldn't find a primary copy of the Girgenti Commission report Sharpton cites which supposedly exonerates him, but this book was written using it, and cites it -- and it paints rather a different picture of Sharpton's involvement during the riots than what Sharpton would have you believe.

Crown Heights: Blacks, Jews, and the ... - Google Books

Click on the page 38 link and start reading on page 36.
 
Re: Sharpton threatens suit against Limbaugh

Jackboot said:
His role was what was stated, he did indeed make the comment that the jews were ‘diamond merchants’. I would love for Sharpton to sue, but we all know he will never do that, as he would open his own self up to thorough review.
Click to expand...


What does that have to do with anything? Per the article, Limbaugh said he was involved with the riots, and he was not involved until after the riots were over.
 
Re: Sharpton threatens suit against Limbaugh



Because you couldn't find a paper doesn't mean it doesn't exist; and you're quite right, the burden of proof would be on Sharpton. He asserts he has that proof.

As to my making definitive statements about the article, I did not. I said 'looks like' and 'according to the article' and other such language.
 
Re: Sharpton threatens suit against Limbaugh

jackalope said:
Because you couldn't find a paper doesn't mean it doesn't exist; and you're quite right, the burden of proof would be on Sharpton. He asserts he has that proof.
Click to expand...

SWEET CHRIST, do you ever read anything I write? Seriously, ever? Do you?

I didn't say it doesn't exist. I said I couldn't find the primary source online, but that the book to which I linked cited it -- the report -- as ITS source. THEY read the report, and according to them, it says something different than what Sharpton claims.

Is that clear enough for you?

Besides, it's not as if it's the only definitive account of what happened. The events as related in the book are easily independently verifiable, especially if Sharpton held a press conference, giving the police an ultimatum, in the middle of the riots.

As to my making definitive statements about the article, I did not. I said 'looks like' and 'according to the article' and other such language.
Click to expand...

Oh?

jackalope said:
The legal definition, if this article is correct, fits quite nicely and Limbaugh will lose the lawsuit, should it be filed.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Sharpton threatens suit against Limbaugh

Harshaw said:
SWEET CHRIST, do you ever read anything I write? Seriously, ever? Do you?
Click to expand...



To be honest, not often, and it is quite the rare occasion when I'll do more than scan, never mind read the whole thing.

For this one, I stopped right after the yelling started.

Carry on!
 
Re: Sharpton threatens suit against Limbaugh

jackalope said:
To be honest, not often, and it is quite the rare occasion when I'll do more than scan, never mind read the whole thing.
Click to expand...

Then thank you for confirming there's zero point in bothering with you.
 
Re: Sharpton threatens suit against Limbaugh

Harshaw said:
Then thank you for confirming there's zero point in bothering with you.
Click to expand...


You're the one who answered my post. :2wave:
:lol:



btw, you're screaming argument was silly. I did go back and scan it, near the end, where you triumphantly declare you've turned up proof of my definitive statements about the result of a trial .... you completely ignore the conditional phrase with which your proof sentence begins. Funny damn ****.
 
:roll: Whatever you say, lady.
 

lol Rush is a private citizen not a public official.
 
Agent Ferris said:
lol Rush is a private citizen not a public official.
Click to expand...

He is neither a private citizen, nor a public official, he is a public figure with respect to the law. As such, there are special rules w/ regard to slander and libel, which mean that he has higher hurdles to jump with regard to burden of proof.
 
jackalope said:
He is neither a private citizen, nor a public official, he is a public figure with respect to the law. As such, there are special rules w/ regard to slander and libel, which mean that he has higher hurdles to jump with regard to burden of proof.
Click to expand...
He has attorneys, I'm sure they know what they are doing.
 
American said:
He has attorneys, I'm sure they know what they are doing.
Click to expand...

I am sure attorneys file frivolous lawsuits almost daily. If it was as simple as that, Tort Reform would not be an issue in the country today.
 

Funny how the Free Market only receives credit when it does something the Right likes.
 
Re: Sharpton threatens suit against Limbaugh

jackalope said:
Looks like Limbaugh left extremely questionable behind and went for straight up lying in an op-ed he wrote about Sharpton:
Click to expand...




Uhm Rush is right, he did have a hand in it.
 
Re: Sharpton threatens suit against Limbaugh





Your kidding right? The minute after Gavin Gato was killed sharpton started flaming the fires.


Sharpton, who arranged a rally in Crown Heights after Cato's death,[42] has been seen by some commentators as inflaming tensions by making remarks that included "If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house"[


Al Sharpton - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
The funny thing here is that people are trying to defend Al Sharpton, a man who says the white race is his "mortal enemy" is not racist. The same people try to say Rush Limbaugh is racist even though he has said or done nothing even remotly close to being such.

People disparage Rush and defending Sharpton are sickening.
 
Last edited:
Re: Sharpton threatens suit against Limbaugh


Tawana Brawley (born 1972) is an African American woman from Wappingers Falls, New York. In 1987, at the age of 15, she received national media attention in the US for accusing six white men of rape, some of whom were police officers. The accusations soon earned her notoriety, which was inflamed by Brawley's advisers Reverend Al Sharpton and attorneys Alton H. Maddox and C. Vernon Mason, public officials, and intense media attention.[1] After hearing evidence, a grand jury concluded in October 1988 that Brawley had not been the victim of a forcible sexual assault and that she herself may have created the appearance of an attack.[2] The New York prosecutor whom Brawley accused as one of her alleged assailants successfully sued Brawley and her three advisers for defamation.[3]

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tawana_Brawley_rape_allegations]Tawana Brawley rape allegations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

Limbaugh might be pond scum but Sharpton is lower than that.
 

No... That level of blind ignorance is sickening.

Limbaugh is a racist. An uneducated fat elitist who appeals to uneducated, thoughtless, masses of disenfranchised rubes...

Yes, the size of his listening audience is sickening.
 
hazlnut said:
No... That level of blind ignorance is sickening.

Limbaugh is a racist. An uneducated fat elitist who appeals to uneducated, thoughtless, masses of disenfranchised rubes...

Yes, the size of his listening audience is sickening.
Click to expand...

Great more partisan ignorance on display.

You have yet to be correct on anything other than showing your own bigotry.
 
hazlnut said:
No... That level of blind ignorance is sickening.

Limbaugh is a racist. An uneducated fat elitist who appeals to uneducated, thoughtless, masses of disenfranchised rubes...

Yes, the size of his listening audience is sickening.
Click to expand...






How is he racist? Links please.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…