Can the liberals who make accusations about conservative tv/radio hosts back them up?

Question

I just answered this question, regarding Rush:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Al8VLoAPIRNA46.81EB6Shrzy6IX?qid=20061025115308AA6bvr5

and got 3 thumbs down in 2 mins, lol,

Can any of you that call people like rush, hannity, etc. liars, cite one example where something they said was a lie?

Or are you just forcing yourself to ignore the sources they cite?

----
I see, more thumbs down for me. If you give someone a thumbs down, shouldn't you be able to prove them wrong?

thanks for the link house, i don't know why it is here, but I see from it that russia is ready to repel astroids to save the earth

believe, hannity did not mislead. He told you exactly what happened. WMD that saddam claimed to have destroyed were found. You libs complained that they were "too old", and didn't care that they were in a bunker instead of have been desroyed, as your honest saddam said so. If you think sarin gas is harmless, even after aging for a decade, you are an idiot.

aviator, i just read the first one, and it disapointed me.

"the word "Normandy" where O'Reilly had said "Malmedy."

So you are claiming that mistakingly saying Malmedy, instead of normandy, shows he is a liar? Keep trying

hmm,, i have heard him on SEVERAL occasions mention he did not serve in the military.

hmm, give me the day/time, etc.. where he made this claim, as I have said, i have heard him several times say the opposite, so i would like to look into that if it is true (thats what you libs should do, btw)

Answer 1

Al Franken does it practically every day and tells you the sources that back it up.

What would really be more productive, since you probably wouldn't listen to someone like Al Franken, is if you did your own fact checking. You'll see that they constantly mis-characterize anything that would benefit Dems or hurt Repubs.

Like Hannity saying for weeks that we found WMD in Iraq, when he knew very well they were deteriorated and defunct and weren't the ones we were even interested in, since they were so old. I remember one admin official even saying that a can a raid was more deadly than the old weapons they had found. Hannity purposefully distorted this information and knew he was doing it.

nicolasraage:
"WMD that saddam claimed to have destroyed were found. You libs complained that they were 'too old', and didn't care that they were in a bunker instead of have been desroyed"

I love when someone is dead wrong and then calls me an idiot. Get your facts straight, genius. These were not the weapons that Saddam claimed to have destroyed. The Bush Admin are the ones that said they were "too old". Don't you think this story would have been reported by more reasonable people, if it was like Hannity tried to portray?

Answer 2

Here are just a few from an old book.

LIMBAUGH: On California contractor C.C. Myers completing repairs 74 days early on the earthquake-damaged Santa Monica Freeway: "There was one key element that made this happen. One key thing: The governor of California declared the [freeway] a disaster area and by so doing eliminated the need for competitive bids.... Government got the hell out of the way." (TV show, 4/13/94) "They gave this guy [Myers] the job without having to go through the rigmarole...of giving 25 percent of the job to a minority-owned business and 25 percent to a woman." (TV show, 4/15/94)

REALITY: There was competitive bidding: Myers beat four other contractors for the job. Affirmative action rules applied: At least 40 percent of the subcontracts went to minority or women-owned firms. Far from getting out of the way, dozens of state employees were on the job 24 hours a day. Furthermore, the federal government picked up the tab for the whole job (L.A. Times, 5/1/94).

LIMBAUGH: "Banks take the risks in issuing student loans and they are entitled to the profits." (Radio show, quoted in FRQ, Summer/93)

REALITY: Banks take no risks in issuing student loans, which are federally insured.

LIMBAUGH: "Don't let the liberals deceive you into believing that a decade of sustained growth without inflation in America [in the '80s] resulted in a bigger gap between the haves and the have-nots. Figures compiled by the Congressional Budget Office dispel that myth." (Ought to Be, p. 70)

REALITY: CBO figures do nothing of the sort. Its numbers for after-tax incomes show that in 1980, the richest fifth of our country had eight times the income of the poorest fifth. By 1989, the ratio was more than 20 to one.

LIMBAUGH: Comparing the 1950s with the present: "And I might point out that poverty and economic disparities between the lower and upper classes were greater during the former period." (Told You So, p. 84)

REALITY: Income inequality, as measured by the U.S. Census Bureau, fell from the 1940s to the late 1960s, and then began rising. Inequality surpassed the 1950 level in 1982 and rose steadily to all-time highs in 1992. (Census Bureau's "Money Income of Households, Families and Persons in the United States")

I cannot force myself to listen to him much after his idiotic statements about Donovan McNabb (also an error).

Limbaugh said September 28, 2003 on Sunday NFL Countdown:
"Sorry to say this, I don't think he's been that good from the get-go. I think what we've had here is a little social concern in the NFL. The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well. There is a little hope invested in McNabb, and he got a lot of credit for the performance of this team that he didn't deserve. The defense carried this team."

A slow start to the season because of a broken leg suffered the previous year but a 3 -time (at that time) pro-bowl player and a former league MVP and two NFC championship games

Answer 3

there's a radio host in south Florida who makes Rush sound like a liberal. This adult males co host went so a strategies as to call the widow and daughter of Martin Luther King "whores for the democratic occasion". staggering. I do like listening to communicate radio. the two classes I pay attention to maximum are likely to be Ed Schultz and Jerry Doyle. the two are extremely reasonable, it extremely is i think of the place maximum individuals are, with Schultz leaning to the left and Doyle to the appropriate. What i like approximately them is they modern-day a viewpoint in a properly theory manor on a similar time making an attempt to modern-day the opposing view. there is not any longer the only sided shrill finger pointing which you get with a Hannity or a Rhodes. the main important hypocrites are human beings like O'Reilly who claims to be a reasonable yet is unquestionably difficult perfect.

Answer 4

Rush Limbaugh is a typical Republican - he got in trouble for something too (drugs, I think - and illegally obtaining and possessing them). You're entitled to your opinion, as is everyone else.

Now, is he right, maybe - is the way he goes about it right (morally), not always. Take the Michael J. Fox thing, for instance. What a senseless, baseless, immoral manner he handled that! At least he apologized - that I can say for him is something his counterparts probably would not have publicly done - but still - he is in a position where, when he puts his foot in his mouth (which is becoming more common) - he REALLY sticks it in there!

Now, what are you Republifags going to do when you lose your foothold in a couple of weeks? We'll see, I guess.

We'll also see if the Dems can keep their noses cleaner than the Reps did.

Answer 5

TALK ABOUT THE POT CALLING THE KETTEL BLACK!!!! And the majority of political talk shows constantly bend the truth, misquote people, and right out lie. These shows are entertainment and are not required by law to tell the truth.
(they are not NEWS forums) Who needs to quote a lie already told when all i got to do is tune in and listen for 10 min and pick my choice

Answer 6

I don't know much about Rush or Hannity, but I can certainly say O'Reilly is a liar. And I can back it up:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_O%27Reilly_controversies

This is actually a small sample of his lies. I've seen a lot more evidence, first and second hand, of a lot more of his lies. But these are the most popular ones.

My favorite is the French boycott one. Which reminds me, I need to renew my subscription to the Paris Business Review

Answer 7

That is the liberal way..,when they dont have evidence to substanciate the remark,then they use the old standby they are liars just like they do with Bush and the war in Iraq.But its amazing how they dont call the Democrats and Clinton a liar for also saying that Saddam had WMD's.Their name calling the level of their ignorance and lack of intelligent fact giving.

Answer 8

He espoused about 5,000 Clinton conspiracies in the 90s. 1 of them proved true...that's not a very good batting average, is it?

Answer 9

Rush is a entertainer. He bankrolls controversy. It would not surprise me if most of his writers were Jewish Comedians.

Go big Red Go

Answer 10

Of course not. But it is not limited to libs. People all over the spectrum make wild charges with absolutely no evidence. Extreme partisans never let fact get in their way.