NY Daily News: Rush Limbaugh Falls for Obama Thesis Hoax

US NewsOctober 2009 • Views: 3,586

In the New York Daily News, political correspondent Michael Saul has a piece about the crudely faked “Obama thesis” that tricked Rush Limbaugh and a gaggle of right wing bloggers: Limbaugh falls for Obama thesis hoax - but is in no Rush to apologize.

“So here is who we have as our president of the United States: an anti-constitutionalist man who finds it an obstacle and is finding ways around it on purpose, unconstitutionally,” Limbaugh said on his show.

“Much of what he’s doing is unconstitutional, and I’m waiting for the lawsuits to be filed by some of these people at some point,” Limbaugh added. “How is that hope and change working out for ya, folks?”

Later in the same program, when Limbaugh learned the report was a hoax, he corrected the record, alerting listeners that the quotes from the thesis had been fabricated. But he insisted the fabricated thesis was still in line with what the president thinks.

“So I shout from the mountaintops: ‘It was satire!’” Limbaugh said on the program. “But we know he (Obama) thinks it. Good comedy, to be comedy, must contain an element of truth, and we know how he feels about distribution of wealth.”

Limbaugh said he has license to go with the fabrication because other members of the media have done this to him.

“So, I can say, “I don’t care if these quotes are made up,” he said. “I know Obama thinks it.

“You know why I know Obama thinks it? Because I’ve heard him say it.”

This ignoble little episode shows a lot about the mentality of the people who will believe anything negative about Barack Obama, anything at all, no matter how absurd or how obviously, logically false.

One look at this hoax website should have made it instantly clear to anyone that it had zero credibility — and the idea that the site would have a world exclusive scoop (found nowhere else on the Internet) went way beyond ridiculous, into the realm of truly brain-numbing schtoopidity.

Reminds me of Rathergate. Should have been obvious, but they needed to believe it so very badly.

Jump to bottom

180 comments

Guanxi88 Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:11:49am

Ha!

He should retire, already.

SeaMonkey Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:11:58am

Yes, this was funny.

MrSilverDragon Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:12:27am

Once again, we have a case of "Fake but accurate".

Goodness knows I'm not a fan of Obama, and don't trust him as far as I could throw him, but this is ridiculous.

Sol Berdinowitz Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:12:31am

So Rush need never utter another racist statement: we know he thinks it, and it's all satire anyways...

Four More Tears Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:12:44am

re: #1 Guanxi88

All he has to do is sit and talk for three hours a day. Would you retire from that? :P

Four More Tears Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:13:39am

And what kind of egomaniac calls his own show "Excellence in Broadcasting," anyway??

Locker Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:13:43am

Facts? We don't need no stinkin' facts! I got my Crystal Rush-Ball 2009 with the optional mind reading attachment.

Guanxi88 Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:13:53am

re: #5 JasonA

All he has to do is sit and talk for three hours a day. Would you retire from that? :P

Well, at a minimum, it's gotta be three hours of quality. once that slips, it's time to devote more time to your golf game.

Four More Tears Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:14:50am

re: #8 Guanxi88

Heh. Quality is subjective.

Cygnus Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:15:05am

What's sad is there's people out there who believe every single thing that Limbaugh says.

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:15:49am

re: #7 Locker

Facts? We don't need no stinkin' facts! I got my Crystal Rush-Ball 2009 with the optional mind reading attachment.

Locker! You're back! Where have you been?

I don't really want a Crystal-Rush Ball 2009. /

Varek Raith Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:15:54am

I sense a flounce in the Force. Can't determine who or when, but it's coming.
/put me down for #150.

Guanxi88 Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:16:14am

re: #9 JasonA

Heh. Quality is subjective.

But Teh Suck is easy to spot, and lately, there's been a lot of that in his output. Time to hang up the mic, Rush, and seek opportunities elsewhere.

Kragar Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:16:42am

re: #12 Varek Raith

I sense a flounce in the Force. Can't determine who or when, but it's coming.
/put me down for #150.

usual spread, 50-100

MrSilverDragon Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:16:46am

re: #10 Cygnus

What's sad is there's people out there who believe every single thing that ~~Limbaugh says~~ the media says.

My perspective.

Kragar Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:20:21am

I predict the first rushie will make a reference to "SATIRE!"

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:21:47am

Here is PJM's version of a retraction:

It’s a hoax, or a satire, depending on your point of view. Joe Klein has said that he never read any part of an Obama “thesis” from his Columbia days, and that’s conclusive, as far as I’m concerned.
The hoax/satire was written in August, so it’s not connected to any current event. I cam across it on Twitter, read the blog, found it interesting, and posted on it. I failed to notice that one of the tags was “satire.”

So he got me, and lots of others. It worked because it’s plausible.

El Oh El.

'It's satire, but it's someone else's fault that I didn't notice that the post was written in August and didn't notice that IT WAS TAGGED SATIRE!"

"It worked cuz it was plausible!"

Comments on that are pretty damn funny, btw.

Varek Raith Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:22:17am

re: #16 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I predict the first rushie will make a reference to "SATIRE!"

"He fights absurdity with absurdity! You just don't get it!111!"
/Dittohead.

Our Precious Bodily Fluids Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:22:47am

“So, I can say, “I don’t care if these quotes are made up,” he said. “I know Obama thinks it."

Rush should give up the radio gig and start up a Right-Wing psychic readings ~~fraud~~ business. He could contact Ronald Reagan on The Other Side and get his insightful commentary. The obvious advantage he'd have over John Edward and Sylvia Browne is the built-in audience, most of whom probably have more disposable income for "live telephone readings" and such.

Buck Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:23:38am

re: #17 iceweasel

"It worked cuz it was plausible!"

It worked because people didn't check.

Simple.

Kragar Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:24:58am

re: #20 Buck

It worked because people didn't check.

Simple.

Life is so much easier when you simply accept everything you're told.

Dark_Falcon Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:25:25am

re: #19 negativ

Rush should give up the radio gig and start up a Right-Wing psychic readings ~~fraud~~ business. He could contact Ronald Reagan on The Other Side and get his insightful commentary. The obvious advantage he'd have over John Edward and Sylvia Browne is the built-in audience, most of whom probably have more disposable income for "live telephone readings" and such.

If he actually got through to Reagan, all he'd get would be advice on how to actually get things done and build the GOP. After a little of that, Rush would angrily break the connection while screaming "Be gone, RINO!"

Off to work, back tonight.

SteveC Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:25:31am

re: #6 JasonA

And what kind of egomaniac calls his own show "Excellence in Broadcasting," anyway??

He's either 1) The type that wants so much control over his product that he refuses to sell his show to a distributor, but rather creates his own "network" to handle distribution. Hell of a long shot but a big payoff if it hits; or 2) someone who can't sell his show to a distributor because of its content.

At one time I thought it was 1, but now I'm pretty sure it is 2.

Crashnburn Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:25:34am

What a clod.

Having said that - there is a real question here. Whomever the next Republican candidate for President needs to take Mr. Obama to task over the lack of a published thesis or grades. Since we have been told (repeatedly) that Mr. Obama is the smartest man ever to hold the office of POTUS, it would be reasonable to see these things. Any lack of these items should be expounded on not as proof of "communism" or whatever - but as something that the holder (Mr. Obama) is hiding like an affair from the public. Clearly, Mr. McCain failed to do so in the last cycle - whoever it is next time needs to hop on this early and hard.

Not surprisingly, the WaPo sure seemed to be able to publish Bob McDonnell's (RNC VA Governor candidate) thesis quickly in that they found it damaging to his chances as Governor. Rhetorical question - why can't somebody, anybody, do the same for Mr. Obama?

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:25:47am

re: #16 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I predict the first rushie will make a reference to "SATIRE!"

BTW, you are absolutely right. Rush himself, in the same breath where he noted it was satire, said that 'it works becuz it is so plausible!"

Claiming "I have had this happen to me," Limbaugh says he doesn't care if thesis quotes are fake, "I know Obama thinks it"

abbyadams Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:26:30am

re: #17 iceweasel

The hoax/satire was written in August, so it’s not connected to any current event. I cam across it on Twitter, read the blog, found it interesting, and posted on it. I failed to notice that one of the tags was “satire.”So he got me, and lots of others. It worked because it’s plausible.

That's bloody awesome. So...how's that whole personal responsibility working our for you?

Varek Raith Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:27:06am

Q: What's the opposite of Occam's Razor?
A: A wingnut!

Honorary Yooper Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:27:42am

re: #27 Varek Raith

Q: What's the opposite of Occam's Razor?
A: A wingnut!

Moonbat works as well. They're flip sides of the same coin.

Walter L. Newton Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:28:01am

re: #16 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

I predict the first rushie will make a reference to "SATIRE!"

I heard the whole exchange on Rush's show. It wasn't satire, it wasn't parody, he delivered the whole report as fact, and then, when a caller explained to him it was possibly a hoax, he returned to an earlier audio statement that Obama made on a Chicago radio show in 2001...

"The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society…. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution … that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. "

... and then Rush equated this statement made on the radio show as indicative of Obama frame of mind. That's how Rush tried to minimize the whole incident.

Honorary Yooper Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:28:20am

re: #6 JasonA

And what kind of egomaniac calls his own show "Excellence in Broadcasting," anyway??

Givem Rush's rantings, EIB should stand for Excrement in Broadcasting, IMHO.

countrockulot Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:28:21am

The ability to say "Well I blew that one. My fault. I will do better next time." when you make a mistake is one of the most important life skills a person can have. Explain why you did what you did, but don't make excuses, or blame others, or deny, or play the but-he-did-something-even-worse! game. Accept it and learn from it. How a person handles times in their life when they have messed up are very telling of their character.

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:28:26am

re: #24 Crashnburn

What a clod.

Having said that - there is a real question here. Whomever the next Republican candidate for President needs to take Mr. Obama to task over the lack of a published thesis or grades.

Sure. That will certainly be a winning issue for the GOP candidate in 2012. The most pressing issue facing America today is the grades a potential or sitting POTUS got as an undergraduate. I well remember the mass hysteria on the right over GWB's C average at Yale, and how that tanked his presidential bid in 2000.
///

KernelPanic Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:28:44am

Another link for CJ's collection of racist images on GOP facebook, this is the link, saw the story on wonkette.com.

Varek Raith Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:29:17am

re: #28 Honorary Yooper

Moonbat works as well. They're flip sides of the same coin.

You're right. I use wingnut interchangeably between the parties.

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:29:54am

re: #33 KernelPanic

Another link for CJ's collection of racist images on GOP facebook, this is the link, saw the story on wonkette.com.

Dude-- WTF? Original links please to wonkette etc?

bratwurst Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:30:43am

re: #23 SteveC

He's either 1) The type that wants so much control over his product that he refuses to sell his show to a distributor, but rather creates his own "network" to handle distribution. Hell of a long shot but a big payoff if it hits; or 2) someone who can't sell his show to a distributor because of its content.

At one time I thought it was 1, but now I'm pretty sure it is 2.

Actually, it is none of the above. He is under contract with Clear Channel through its Premiere Radio Networks subsidiary. The "Excellence in Broadcasting Network" is merely an on-air gimmick.

Guanxi88 Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:30:57am

re: #34 Varek Raith

You're right. I use wingnut interchangeably between the parties.

The mentally amusing are well-distributed among political factions in this and every other country.

Cato the Elder Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:31:07am

"Talent on loan from God." (Rush's motto.)

Maybe God is calling in the note.

Walter L. Newton Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:31:08am

re: #29 Walter L. Newton

I heard the whole exchange on Rush's show. It wasn't satire, it wasn't parody, he delivered the whole report as fact, and then, when a caller explained to him it was possibly a hoax, he returned to an earlier audio statement that Obama made on a Chicago radio show in 2001...

"The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society…. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution … that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. "

... and then Rush equated this statement made on the radio show as indicative of Obama frame of mind. That's how Rush tried to minimize the whole incident.

Addendum : Of course, someone may have an issue with a person for making a such a statement about the Supreme Court and the Founding Fathers.

But that's another issue, isn't it?

Varek Raith Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:32:31am

re: #37 Guanxi88

The mentally amusing are well-distributed among political factions in this and every other country.

Oh, I know.

Jack Burton Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:32:45am

2000 Quatloos on a dittoflounce by #275.

abbyadams Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:32:50am

re: #31 countrockulot

As I have seen said elsewhere on this site, I regret that I have but one upding to give.

SteveC Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:33:05am

re: #36 bratwurst

Actually, it is none of the above. He is under contract with Clear Channel through its Premiere Radio Networks subsidiary. The "Excellence in Broadcasting Network" is merely an on-air gimmick.

*Sigh* Dropped the ball on that one...

It's a lot easier to own up to a mistake if you make as many mistakes as i do. You get used to it!

sffilk Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:33:07am

I said it before, and I'll say it again:

Rush Limbaugh, YOU ARE IRRELEVANT!

Guanxi88 Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:33:11am

re: #40 Varek Raith

Oh, I know.

Keeps us all humble, as no side can lay claim to being free of its kooks.

KernelPanic Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:33:12am

re: #35 iceweasel

Sorry iceweasel, wonkette.com link is here.

Locker Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:33:18am

re: #11 iceweasel

Locker! You're back! Where have you been?

I don't really want a Crystal-Rush Ball 2009. /

Hehe I'm around just busy at work and playing Aion on the weekends. You hold up our end of things much better than I anyway... think of me as a minor member of the iceweasel cheering section.

Kragar Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:33:27am

re: #38 Cato the Elder

"Talent on loan from God." (Rush's motto.)

Maybe God is calling in the note.

He did not specify which deity.

I think Eris is likely.

Cato the Elder Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:33:34am

re: #44 sffilk

I said it before, and I'll say it again:

Rush Limbaugh, YOU ARE IRRELEVANT!

Sadly, no.

Walter L. Newton Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:33:49am

re: #47 Locker

Hehe I'm around just busy at work and playing Aion on the weekends. You hold up our end of things much better than I anyway... think of me as a minor member of the iceweasel cheering section.

Agree.

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:33:55am

re: #39 Walter L. Newton

Addendum : Of course, someone may have an issue with a person for making a such a statement about the Supreme Court and the Founding Fathers.

But that's another issue, isn't it?

I seem to recall lots of conservatives here who likewise describe the Constitution as a charter of negative liberties...and excoriate Obama because they like to pretend he doesn't think that.

MrSilverDragon Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:34:42am

re: #48 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

He did not specify which deity.

I think Eris is likely.

I'm voting Loki.

KenJen Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:34:44am

Thesis ridiculous.

Randall Gross Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:35:00am

Fake but accurate Rush. Right now his fill in host is campaigning for Daggett and Hoffman to shoot down moderate Republicans Scozzafava and Christie in those races. Rush Limbaugh: the death of the Republican party. I say get the hell out of my party Rush, go pitch a pup tent and set up your own party.

doubter4444 Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:35:15am

From Ice (snip):
It’s a hoax, or a satire, depending on your point of view. Joe Klein has said that he never read any part of an Obama “thesis” from his Columbia days, and that’s conclusive, as far as I’m concerned.
The hoax/satire was written in August, so it’s not connected to any current event. I cam across it on Twitter, read the blog, found it interesting, and posted on it. I failed to notice that one of the tags was “satire.”

I love that they call it "Hoax/Satire", as if continuing to call it both at the same time helps mitigate the "hoax" aspect of the thing.

By the way, hello Ms. Ice

bratwurst Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:35:28am

re: #43 SteveC

*Sigh* Dropped the ball on that one...

It's a lot easier to own up to a mistake if you make as many mistakes as i do. You get used to it!

I know what you mean. I am an expert in apology making, having honed my skill over decades of practice, most recently after an off-color remark about Drudge here last night which was rightly deleted.

Walter L. Newton Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:35:32am

re: #51 iceweasel

I seem to recall lots of conservatives here who likewise describe the Constitution as a charter of negative liberties...and excoriate Obama because they like to pretend he doesn't think that.

Links?

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:36:00am

re: #48 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

He did not specify which deity.

I think Eris is likely.

Updinging anyone who references Eris and clearly knows what that means. :)

Kinda love Eris myself. I'm sure that's clear. It's one reason among many why I love Cato.

bratwurst Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:36:15am

re: #44 sffilk

I said it before, and I'll say it again:

Rush Limbaugh, YOU ARE IRRELEVANT!

If only this were so...then GOP figures who dare to speak ill of the man would not have to line up to kiss his ring.

Cineaste Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:36:27am

re: #24 Crashnburn

Since we have been told (repeatedly) that Mr. Obama is the smartest man ever to hold the office of POTUS, it would be reasonable to see these things.

Care to offer a link to those repeated tellings?

Guanxi88 Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:37:02am

re: #51 iceweasel

I seem to recall lots of conservatives here who likewise describe the Constitution as a charter of negative liberties...and excoriate Obama because they like to pretend he doesn't think that.

That Obama describes the Constitution as a charter of negative liberties is exactly and factually correct. Morons latch onto the "negative" word and miss the point altogether, as is the wont of morons.

A more nuanced position, and one that probably matches at least some portion of his thinking as put forth in the NPR interview, is to point out that whereas progressives in particular tend to regard a charter of negative liberties as less than optimal on grounds of social justice, American conservatives regard the negative charter as the best means of protecting the liberties of the people.

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:37:34am

re: #57 Walter L. Newton

Links?

Oh you're such a tease.

Varek Raith Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:37:45am

re: #51 iceweasel

I seem to recall lots of conservatives here who likewise describe the Constitution as a charter of negative liberties...and excoriate Obama because they like to pretend he doesn't think that.

Please, elaborate.

Crashnburn Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:37:49am

re: #32 iceweasel

Sure. That will certainly be a winning issue for the GOP candidate in 2012. The most pressing issue facing America today is the grades a potential or sitting POTUS got as an undergraduate. I well remember the mass hysteria on the right over GWB's C average at Yale, and how that tanked his presidential bid in 2000.
///

So ask yourself what this meant - The Dems were trying to paint GW Bush as an idiot with poor grades in their attempt to torpedo him. It didn't work due to Al Gore ( and then John Kerry in 2004 when they tried again) ALSO having weak grades.

I hardly think the whole campaign should, would or could boil down to someone's grades. What I am pointing out is there has been a systematic attempt to at least appear to hide something that might reflect poorly upon the then candidate and now President. We, as a people, basically hired someone based upon the press releases and not on his merits. We have a right to know these things and I feel it is wrong we do not seem to have the ability to do so with the current President.

Buck Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:37:55am

Someone has a copy of the real thesis...

Here are facts no one can deny,

First we note the public record that his law license became inactive in 2002.

He was a Senior Lecturer at University of Chicago Law School from 1996 to 2004.

He was an "of counsel" lawyer at the Chicago law firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland from 1996 to 2004.

AND at the same time, a State legislator from 1997–2004

bosforus Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:37:58am

re: #59 bratwurst

If only this were so...then GOP figures who dare to speak ill of the man would not have to line up to kiss his ring.

Exactly. And irrelevant people have a tendency to not make headlines.

Walter L. Newton Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:38:09am

re: #62 iceweasel

Oh you're such a tease.

Dead serious, Sunshine :)

S'latch Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:38:56am

This appears to be some background from MSNBC on President Obama's thesis.

Youtube Video

It is dated now but sort of interesting. I don't know if there are any follow up stories that are actually accurate.

Kragar Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:39:22am

re: #58 iceweasel

Updinging anyone who references Eris and clearly knows what that means. :)

Kinda love Eris myself. I'm sure that's clear. It's one reason among many why I love Cato.

Was always kind of an Ares and Hephaestus fan. From the Norse, Heimdall and Tyr.

lawhawk Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:39:41am

re: #54 Thanos

In NJ Christie ran against a hard right conservative in Lonegan (though I think he is more libertarian and conservative). Lonegan lost big, but he chose not to run an independent campaign and threw his support to Christie because the goal was to get Corzine out of office. I suspect that Daggett's campaign is getting support from Democrats who are hoping to split the independent vote (the biggest bloc in NJ) between Christie and Daggett so Corzine wins reelection. Lonegan did the right thing for the GOP and the movement of conservatism. We need more of that than the feeding frenzy we're seeing the moment a candidate that isn't sufficiently pure of conservative thought is involved.

Baier Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:39:42am

re: #21 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Life is so much easier when you simply accept everything you're told.

I can accept that

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:40:10am

re: #55 doubter4444

From Ice (snip):
It’s a hoax, or a satire, depending on your point of view. Joe Klein has said that he never read any part of an Obama “thesis” from his Columbia days, and that’s conclusive, as far as I’m concerned.
The hoax/satire was written in August, so it’s not connected to any current event. I cam across it on Twitter, read the blog, found it interesting, and posted on it. I failed to notice that one of the tags was “satire.”

I love that they call it "Hoax/Satire", as if continuing to call it both at the same time helps mitigate the "hoax" aspect of the thing.

By the way, hello Ms. Ice

Hey there Sir Doubter.

yes, what is with the manufactured tag Hoax/Satire? It's also as if they're blaming others that they didn't GET that it was satire-- as if foul trickse libs hoaxed them into it.

Sol Berdinowitz Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:40:30am

Might as well come out and say "we knew the baloon boy wanted to be up in there"

But that baloon-chase pretty much reminded us of the standards to which all our media have sunk, and the degree of skepticism we need to bring to anything they deem fit to report on...

lawhawk Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:41:23am

re: #72 iceweasel

Yet, we've seen liberals get suckered by missing satire tags too. It happens.

You apologize and you move on. You don't try to bluster your way through matters as you lose credibility.

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:42:22am

re: #69 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Was always kind of an Ares and Hephaestus fan. From the Norse, Heimdall and Tyr.

Hmm, don't know anything about Norse mythology. It's like the Ares/Hep/Aphrodite story?

John Neverbend Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:43:29am

re: #24 Crashnburn

What a clod.

Having said that - there is a real question here. Whomever the next Republican candidate for President needs to take Mr. Obama to task over the lack of a published thesis or grades.

I'm asking this question out of ignorance, but did past Presidents provide this information, or is it something new? You may remember that in the same article in which VDH refused to have a go at Charles, he said (my italics), "...I can no more get on the anti-Johnson bandwagon than I could the birth certificate allegations about Obama (why he won't release his college transcripts is a far more interesting and valid inquiry)."

Randall Gross Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:44:22am

re: #75 iceweasel

Hmm, don't know anything about Norse mythology. It's like the Ares/Hep/Aphrodite story?

In Norse Mythology I can't recall if there's a cognate to Eris (aka Discordia) the closest is Loki, who doesn't quite fit being a male.

arethusa Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:44:23am

re: #48 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

He did not specify which deity.

I think Eris is likely.

And definitely not the good Eris. (Yes, there is one in Greek myth - it makes you work harder and become a better person so you can be as successful as those you envy, as opposed to just attacking them.)

Cineaste Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:44:25am

re: #65 Buck

Someone has a copy of the real thesis...

Here are facts no one can deny,

First we note the public record that his law license became inactive in 2002.

He was a Senior Lecturer at University of Chicago Law School from 1996 to 2004.

He was an "of counsel" lawyer at the Chicago law firm of Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland from 1996 to 2004.

AND at the same time, a State legislator from 1997–2004

And? Is there someone trying to deny those things?

Four More Tears Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:45:11am

re: #74 lawhawk

He knows his audience. It's more important to them that he be right. Even when he's wrong. It's something Colbert mocks incessantly.

Also, anyone notice the RNC took all of the user photos down from their FB page?

Mad Al-Jaffee Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:45:56am

They're talking about us at DU:

[Link: www.democraticunderground.com...]

reloadingisnotahobby Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:46:07am

Maybe Rush is dyslexic...
Rantings...Ratings...could happen...right?

Like ...So this Dyslexic dude walks into the Bra...

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:46:45am

re: #74 lawhawk

Yet, we've seen liberals get suckered by missing satire tags too. It happens.

You apologize and you move on. You don't try to bluster your way through matters as you lose credibility.

Sad. Unlike Rush, Ledeen, and the entire rightwing blogosphere that loooved this story. And still won't back off it!

Must say, I'm really pleased LGF didn't fall for it. I'm glad Charles called it out as crap immediately. (I was away and not reading here or news much but that was what I picked up-- it took over the US rightwing nuts as the outrage du jour-- right?)

Randall Gross Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:47:04am

re: #65 Buck

What? Are you trying to defend the hoax by saying it's "Fake but accurate" like Limbaugh?

John Neverbend Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:47:14am

re: #75 iceweasel

Hmm, don't know anything about Norse mythology. It's like the Ares/Hep/Aphrodite story?

Norse mythology has its own stories, but the Norse gods still do things that mere mortals could not, just like in Greek mythology.

Charles Johnson Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:48:46am

This shows a lot about the mentality of some of these people who will believe anything negative about Barack Obama, anything at all, no matter how absurd or how obviously, logically false.

It should have been instantly clear to anyone with one look at the 'jumpinginpools' website that it had zero credibility -- and the idea that it would have a world exclusive scoop (found nowhere else on the Internet) was just beyond ridiculous, into the realm of truly brain-numbing schtoopidity.

Reminds me of Rathergate in that way. Should have been obvious, but they just needed to believe it so very badly.

Walter L. Newton Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:48:52am

re: #83 iceweasel

Sad. Unlike Rush, Ledeen, and the entire rightwing blogosphere that loooved this story. And still won't back off it!

[snip]

Wrong... from Joe Klein...

"Update: Michael Ledeen now has apologized to me on his blog, claiming that he, Limbaugh and others were punked by a satire. I appreciate the apology..."

[Link: swampland.blogs.time.com...]

Dead serious.

Buck Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:49:37am

re: #84 Thanos

What? Are you trying to defend the hoax by saying it's "Fake but accurate" like Limbaugh?

Where would you get that?

I just think it is MORE interesting that he was a Senior Lecturer at University of Chicago Law School, AND an "of counsel" lawyer at the Chicago law firm with an inactive law licence.

Why not keep the licence active? He was using it, sort of.

Crashnburn Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:49:53am

re: #76 John Neverbend

I'm asking this question out of ignorance, but did past Presidents provide this information, or is it something new? You may remember that in the same article in which VDH refused to have a go at Charles, he said (my italics), "...I can no more get on the anti-Johnson bandwagon than I could the birth certificate allegations about Obama (why he won't release his college transcripts is a far more interesting and valid inquiry)."

Many others have released this information or had it revealed by the MSM who seemed to find it important enough to review. It is usually started by the guy with great grades (Clinton, in an effort to highlight them) or the by their party members who find weak grades by the opponent to be laughable without checking their person's grades first (the Gore and then Kerry campaigns for example). I agree with VDH - why won't Mr. Obama release them?

SteveC Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:50:16am

re: #76 John Neverbend

...the birth certificate allegations about Obama"

Bumped into a website (which shall remain nameless) that contended that Obama's birth certificate is completely legal and valid. The problem is, Hawaii wasn't a state when he was born!

OK, that's one I hadn't seen before. A for originality, F for accuracy, 100% on the nuttiness scale.

Charles Johnson Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:50:52am

re: #87 Walter L. Newton

Yes, Michael Ledeen had the grace to apologize. Rush Limbaugh, on the other hand, tried (and failed) to spin it into an attack on the people criticizing him for his race-baiting commentary.

Randall Gross Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:51:04am

re: #88 Buck

Sorry, but it's way early in the thread to go off topic. This thread's about Rush being suckered, but I think you are throwing straw in the wind to distract.

Kragar Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:51:22am

re: #75 iceweasel

Hmm, don't know anything about Norse mythology. It's like the Ares/Hep/Aphrodite story?

Nope, just their backgrounds. Tyr was the Norse God of Single Combat and Victory, believed to have been the chief Norse god before worship of Odin and Thor became more widespread. Heimdall was the guardian of the Bifrost bridge into Asgard and was supposed to sound the horn announcing Ragnarok, where he would be the last God to die as he fought Loki.

MrSilverDragon Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:51:26am

re: #90 SteveC

Bumped into a website (which shall remain nameless) that contended that Obama's birth certificate is completely legal and valid. The problem is, Hawaii wasn't a state when he was born!

OK, that's one I hadn't seen before. A for originality, F for accuracy, 100% on the nuttiness scale.

Sometimes irony is lost on those in the most ironic of positions.

Walter L. Newton Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:51:48am

re: #91 Charles

Yes, Michael Ledeen had the grace to apologize. Rush Limbaugh, on the other hand, tried (and failed) to spin it into an attack on the people criticizing him for his race-baiting commentary.

Right, as I so pointed out up thread at... re: #29 Walter L. Newton

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:51:55am

re: #87 Walter L. Newton

Wrong... from Joe Klein...

"Update: Michael Ledeen now has apologized to me on his blog, claiming that he, Limbaugh and others were punked by a satire. I appreciate the apology..."

[Link: swampland.blogs.time.com...]

Dead serious.

What is 'wrong' in what I wrote?

Some people are admitting they were punked. Sadly, many are maintaining that they weren't exactly punked, it was TOTALLY BELIEVABLE that Obama would say such things, so...yadda yadda.

HelloDare Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:53:11am

I'm not a fan of Limbaugh. Rarely listen to him, but I did catch the tail lend of his broadcast when he was talking about the possibility of the thesis being a fake. Here is a link to the transcript.

When I heard him say the following I thought, "What an idiot." This kind of humor, satire or whatever he was doing was going to backfire big time.

... So we have to hold out the possibility that this is not accurate. However, I have had this happen to me recently. I have had quotes attributed to me that were made up, and when it was pointed out to the media that the quotes were made up, they said, "It doesn't matter! We know Limbaugh thinks it anyway." Sort of like Dan Rather said, "I don't care if these documents are forged. I know that Bush did what he did at the National Guard. I don't care if the documents are forged." I don't care if the Limbaugh quotes are made up. So, I can say, "I don't care if these quotes are made up. I know Obama thinks it. You know why I know Obama thinks it? Because I've heard him say it." Not about the Constitution, but about the Supreme Court. Again, 2001, FM radio station interview in Chicago when he was a state senator in Illinois.

Read it for yourself. I can attest that the part excerpted above is true because I heard it. I thought he had a teaching moment (sarcasms intended) with the Dan Rather reference, but then he threw it all away.

Walter L. Newton Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:53:31am

re: #96 iceweasel

What is 'wrong' in what I wrote?

Some people are admitting they were punked. Sadly, many are maintaining that they weren't exactly punked, it was TOTALLY BELIEVABLE that Obama would say such things, so...yadda yadda.

You said " Ledeen, and the entire rightwing blogosphere that loooved this story. And still won't back off it!"

Leeden has, as Charles has also referenced in re: #91 Charles

Varek Raith Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:53:43am

re: #96 iceweasel

What is 'wrong' in what I wrote?

Some people are admitting they were punked. Sadly, many are maintaining that they weren't exactly punked, it was TOTALLY BELIEVABLE that Obama would say such things, so...yadda yadda.

Because, Ledeen did back off.

100

Ray in TX Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:55:16am

re: #17 iceweasel

'It's satire, but it's someone else's fault that I didn't notice that the post was written in August and didn't notice that IT WAS TAGGED SATIRE!"

"It worked cuz it was plausible!"

Comments on that are pretty damn funny, btw.

In fairness to the pundits that got punked, the satire tag was pretty inconspicuous. Only a regular blog reader would think to look through those tags, and only if they suspected satire.

101

John Neverbend Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:55:32am

re: #87 Walter L. Newton

Wrong... from Joe Klein...

"Update: Michael Ledeen now has apologized to me on his blog, claiming that he, Limbaugh and others were punked by a satire. I appreciate the apology..."

[Link: swampland.blogs.time.com...]

Dead serious.

I'm not sure if they count as being members of the right-wing blogosphere, but as far as I can tell, there were no comments on this subject from the likes of VDH, Steyn, Frum or Goldberg.

102

McSpiff Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:55:43am

re: #96 iceweasel

What is 'wrong' in what I wrote?

Some people are admitting they were punked. Sadly, many are maintaining that they weren't exactly punked, it was TOTALLY BELIEVABLE that Obama would say such things, so...yadda yadda.

Ice, ice, ice... facts dont matter, feelings are what we need to go by. Why cant everyone just admit that Rush was totally correct to ignore basic logic, and go by what he felt was right at the time. Obviously he cant flip flop on it now by cutting and running on a great story.

///

103

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:56:50am

re: #99 Varek Raith

Because, Ledeen did back off.

re: #98 Walter L. Newton

You said " Ledeen, and the entire rightwing blogosphere that loooved this story. And still won't back off it!"

Leeden has, as Charles has also referenced in re: #91 Charles

Fair enough. Ledeen backed off. -- others, Like Limbaugh, 'backed off' and 'explained themselves' only by saying that it was just so believable that Obama would say such a thing that it's really his fault that they fell for it at all, and that they didn't fact check.

104

Walter L. Newton Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:57:22am

re: #101 John Neverbend

I'm not sure if they count as being members of the right-wing blogosphere, but as far as I can tell, there were no comments on this subject from the likes of VDH, Steyn, Frum or Goldberg.

Where did I refer to VHD, Steyn, Frum, Goldberg or Rush or anyone. My link was to an apology from Leeden. Ice mentioned Leeden as someone who hadn't backed off. He has. That's all I was referencing, wasn't it?

105

Varek Raith Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:58:06am

re: #100 Ray in TX

In fairness to the pundits that got punked, the satire tag was pretty inconspicuous. Only a regular blog reader would think to look through those tags, and only if they suspected satire.

TBH, I don't buy that. Red flags should've been raised in anyone's mind who read that. But, because it was a negative against Obama, they chose to believe it without second thought.
This is just like the lefties who believe that Rather BS from 2004. Fake but Accurate.

106

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:59:06am

re: #100 Ray in TX

In fairness to the pundits that got punked, the satire tag was pretty inconspicuous. Only a regular blog reader would think to look through those tags, and only if they suspected satire.

Yes, and it was so fucking unfair to expect pundits, or the flunkies who are paid to find stories for them from the political blogosphere, to know how tags work.

WTF? please.

107

Walter L. Newton Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:59:21am

re: #103 iceweasel

Fair enough. Ledeen backed off. -- others, Like Limbaugh, 'backed off' and 'explained themselves' only by saying that it was just so believable that Obama would say such a thing that it's really his fault that they fell for it at all, and that they didn't fact check.

You're correct on the "others." But I referenced Leeden. I've done my fair share of slapping the hands of Rush up thread. I was just trying to correct the record as it stands at this minute.

108

Cineaste Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:59:29am

re: #86 Charles

This shows a lot about the mentality of some of these people who will believe anything negative about Barack Obama, anything at all, no matter how absurd or how obviously, logically false.

I think you hit the problem on the head Charles. It was logical to them. That's the whole gist of the 'we believed it because it was plausible'. Well it wasn't plausible to anyone who wasn't already buying in to the kool-aid.

109

Walter L. Newton Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:00:09am

re: #102 McSpiff

Ice, ice, ice... facts dont matter, feelings are what we need to go by. Why cant everyone just admit that Rush was totally correct to ignore basic logic, and go by what he felt was right at the time. Obviously he cant flip flop on it now by cutting and running on a great story.

///

Facts do matter, and Leeden did make an apology. Rush, others no.

110

watching you tiny alien kittens are Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:00:32am

re: #17 iceweasel

Comments on that are pretty damn funny, btw.

Lol, check out this one...

21. HiddenRed:

The big question is: What does Obama have on Michael Ledeen to force his silence? Is it a coincidence that Michael Ledeen had this information about a man who has spent $921 million in legal fees to hide his secret past and birth records, but then suddenly it’s all a hoax? Don’t worry, Mr. Ledeen, we’re on the case, and the truth will come out!

Oct 23, 2009 - 4:18 pm

Where do they get this crap from, first it was millions, then tens of millions, now it is $921 million? And where did Obama get almost a billion dollars to "hide his secret past and birth records" from, George Soros I suppose?

111

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:01:11am

re: #107 Walter L. Newton

You're correct on the "others." But I referenced Leeden. I've done my fair share of slapping the hands of Rush up thread. I was just trying to correct the record as it stands at this minute.

No prob dude, I already updinged you like three times for this. :) And said you were right!

112

Ray in TX Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:03:24am

re: #105 Varek Raith

TBH, I don't buy that. Red flags should've been raised in anyone's mind who read that. But, because it was a negative against Obama, they chose to believe it without second thought.
This is just like the lefties who believe that Rather BS from 2004. Fake but Accurate.

I think Charles' point about it confirming their preconceived ideas about Obama is true. It LOOKED true to them, so they didn't follow up.

You can certainly fault them for their bias or credulity, but not for missing an obscure satire tag on the page.

113

McSpiff Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:03:47am

re: #109 Walter L. Newton

Facts do matter, and Leeden did make an apology. Rush, others no.

O totally agreed.

re: #110 ausador

I'm hoping this is a case of "obvious troll is obvious" but somedays a wonder... (HiddenRed, not ausador of course!)

114

sffilk Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:04:56am

re: #49 Cato the Elder

Sadly, no.

May I ask why, in all sincerity?

115

Varek Raith Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:05:26am

re: #110 ausador

Where do they get this crap from, first it was millions, then tens of millions, now it is $921 million? And where did Obama get almost a billion dollars to "hide his secret past and birth records" from, George Soros I suppose?

$921 million in legal fees?!?! Wow. They sure as hell are expert in pulling absurdly improbable numbers outta their collective asses!

116

Charles Johnson Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:06:14am

re: #100 Ray in TX

In fairness to the pundits that got punked, the satire tag was pretty inconspicuous. Only a regular blog reader would think to look through those tags, and only if they suspected satire.

This is a deliberate tactic. When that blogger was spamming our Linkviewer, people complained a lot about his blog, because he would post this kind of crap and then put a little 'Satire' tag buried at the bottom of it. None of the stuff was even humorous so there was never an indication that it was "satire." I wouldn't even call it a deliberate "hoax" -- more of a lame cry for attention.

117

Cineaste Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:07:45am

re: #115 Varek Raith

$921 million in legal fees?!?! Wow. They sure as hell are expert in pulling absurdly improbable numbers outta their collective asses!

well Obama was a college professor and state senator so he's got that money stashed away. Add to it the $1.4M from the Nobel and a couple books and I bet he's got a spare $921M to spend on legal fees...

/*sarc

118

Velvet Elvis Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:10:45am

The Jumping in Pools guy showed up at DKos yesterday trying to stir up shit about how LGF picks on autistic kids:

[Link: www.dailykos.com...]

119

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:11:00am

BTW, check this out:

This shows a lot about the mentality of some of these people who will believe anything negative about Barack Obama, anything at all, no matter how absurd or how obviously, logically false.

Ray in TX-- come on. There were far more clues than the satire tag that the post was satire, like for example the DATE (months ago) and blog itself. (A world exclusive? Really? For THAT BLOG?)

And no link to the actual Joe Klein piece at Time? (because it didn't exist) And none of the people who ran with this story bothered to do that most minimal amount of fact checking?

And I suggest people check out memeorandum or look around. You'd be surprised how very many blogs on the right are still running with this story, and running a line like "It was funny because it IS TRUE!" or "Haha, we missed that it was satire but Obama really is a socialist SO THERE" as an explanation.

120

Guanxi88 Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:11:01am

Rush and Rather both prove the point - some things just seem to good to check

121

Charles Johnson Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:11:32am

Farkalanche incoming -- ETA: 37 minutes.

[Link: www.fark.com...]

122

Randall Gross Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:12:04am

re: #116 Charles

This is a deliberate tactic. When that blogger was spamming our Linkviewer, people complained a lot about his blog, because he would post this kind of crap and then put a little 'Satire' tag buried at the bottom of it. None of the stuff was even humorous so there was never an indication that it was "satire." I wouldn't even call it a deliberate "hoax" -- more of a lame cry for attention.

Completely agree, this guy's a lame blogger hungrier for hits than truth.

123

Charles Johnson Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:12:15am

re: #118 Conservative Moonbat

The Jumping in Pools guy showed up at DKos yesterday trying to stir up shit about how LGF picks on autistic kids:

[Link: www.dailykos.com...]

Same thing at The Next Right:

[Link: thenextright.com...]

124

Charles Johnson Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:13:30am

re: #123 Charles

Same thing at The Next Right:

[Link: thenextright.com...]

Thanks to Ray in TX over there, for posting the truth about this fool's smear campaign.

125

bratwurst Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:13:31am

re: #114 sffilk

May I ask why, in all sincerity?

If he were irrelevant, someone in the GOP could get away with being critical of him without feeling the need to make a heartfelt on-air apology soon after.

126

The Sanity Inspector Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:13:42am

re: #31 countrockulot

The ability to say "Well I blew that one. My fault. I will do better next time." when you make a mistake is one of the most important life skills a person can have. Explain why you did what you did, but don't make excuses, or blame others, or deny, or play the but-he-did-something-even-worse! game. Accept it and learn from it. How a person handles times in their life when they have messed up are very telling of their character.

Reminds me of an occasion a couple of years ago when I had to eat crow.

127

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:15:15am

re: #121 Charles

Farkalanche incoming -- ETA: 37 minutes.

[Link: www.fark.com...]

First two comments on it:

1. Got-damn, I have to get registered for LGF when they open the farking window one of these times. I'm always at work or away from my computer when they open 'em. A bastion of sane conservative political thought is so hard to come by; I can generally find more rational conservative political discussion on DailyKos than on RedState, FreeRepublic, etc, etc.

2. Seriously. I checked it out like five years ago, and found it distasteful and barely-moderated. These days, it's sane, reasonable, pro-science, and anti trivial bullshiat.

Cool.

128

watching you tiny alien kittens are Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:15:16am

re: #115 Varek Raith

$921 million in legal fees?!?! Wow. They sure as hell are expert in pulling absurdly improbable numbers outta their collective asses!

When I grow up I wanna be Obama's lawyer for one day, then I can retire rich!!11!

129

Ray in TX Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:15:20am

re: #119 iceweasel

BTW, check this out:

Ray in TX-- come on. There were far more clues than the satire tag that the post was satire, like for example the DATE (months ago) and blog itself. (A world exclusive? Really? For THAT BLOG?)

I would argue that many people only detect satire when the material contradicts something they believe. Everyone has a level of confirmation bias, which is why satire is so effective as a tool for mocking. Think about that recent study that showed that many conservatives believe that Stephen Colbert is really a conservative.

Ledeen should have known better, but at least he has apologized for his error. But once he gave it an aura of credibility, there was no stopping that train!

130

Kragar Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:17:53am

re: #124 Charles

Thanks to Ray in TX over there, for posting the truth about this fool's smear campaign.

I think I know a little blogger who needs to bathe more and post less if he ever wants some lucky lady to drop that restraining order.

131

iceweasel Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:20:35am

re: #129 Ray in TX

I would argue that many people only detect satire when the material contradicts something they believe. Everyone has a level of confirmation bias, which is why satire is so effective as a tool for mocking. Think about that recent study that showed that many conservatives believe that Stephen Colbert is really a conservative.

Ledeen should have known better, but at least he has apologized for his error. But once he gave it an aura of credibility, there was no stopping that train!

It was off and running before Ledeen. And still is. And satire is detectable regardless of one's biases; what's required is the ability to laugh at oneself.

But at least Ledeen admitted he was wrong. BTW, nice posts at 'the next right'. cool!

132

Baier Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:20:52am

re: #118 Conservative Moonbat

The Jumping in Pools guy showed up at DKos yesterday trying to stir up shit about how LGF picks on autistic kids:

[Link: www.dailykos.com...]

That is the most bazaar thing I've read in some time.

133

Guanxi88 Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:23:56am

re: #132 Baier

That is the most bazaar thing I've read in some time.

Here, try this one on for size:

[Link: www.timecube.com...]

134

Ray in TX Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:25:24am

re: #124 Charles

Thanks to Ray in TX over there, for posting the truth about this fool's smear campaign.

Just so you know, that's a very low volume blog. They did get some face time on Rachel Maddow a while back, but it's pretty much nothing but tumbleweeds blowing through there.

I think this is because "The Next Right" has been unable to disconnect from the irrational elements on the Right, so they are now basically a Redstate-lite.

135

John Neverbend Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:26:48am

re: #104 Walter L. Newton

Where did I refer to VHD, Steyn, Frum, Goldberg or Rush or anyone. My link was to an apology from Leeden. Ice mentioned Leeden as someone who hadn't backed off. He has. That's all I was referencing, wasn't it?

Nowhere. I was referencing them as people who might be considered by some to be members of the right-wing blogosphrer who specifically didn't get involved in this issue.

136

bratwurst Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:27:12am

re: #133 Guanxi88

Here, try this one on for size:

[Link: www.timecube.com...]

Great googly moogly!

137

lightspeed Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:28:06am

re: #133 Guanxi88

Wow...just, wow.

138

Guanxi88 Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:28:33am

re: #136 bratwurst

Great googly moogly!

Yeah, whenever I think someone's talking nonsense, I like to refer to that site as a litmus-test for madness.

139

Jack Burton Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:30:08am

re: #133 Guanxi88

Here, try this one on for size:

[Link: www.timecube.com...]

That is a big bag of crazy there.

140

Guanxi88 Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:30:34am

re: #139 ArchangelMichael

That is a big bag of crazy there.

CUBE. It's a CUBE! Didn't you pay attention?

141

John Neverbend Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:30:57am

re: #121 Charles

Farkalanche incoming -- ETA: 37 minutes.

[Link: www.fark.com...]

Wow, LGF is the "reasonable alternative to the National Review", according to one poster at Fark (Cagey B). Not only that, but its creator is not a creationist.

142

Ray in TX Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:31:51am

re: #131 iceweasel

It was off and running before Ledeen. And still is. And satire is detectable regardless of one's biases; what's required is the ability to laugh at oneself.

But at least Ledeen admitted he was wrong. BTW, nice posts at 'the next right'. cool!

I think satire is not so detectable if it confirms an existing bias. It's not a function of self-deprecation, but of rationality. None of us are inherently rational; it is a way of thinking that has to be learned and practiced.

But no one can run everything piece of information they gather through their bullshit detector. You have to let some things through, unchecked, as assumed facts. This is where confirmation bias really mucks things up.

Ledeen believed it unconditionally but at least backtracked when the satire was undeniable. Even so, he still defended his gullibility by mentioning how believable the satire was.

Rush, however, is an egomaniac. Therefore, there is never an admission of error on his part.

143

The Sanity Inspector Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:32:35am

re: #94 MrSilverDragon

Sometimes irony is lost on those in the most ironic of positions.

Like a few years ago, the government released some records which satisfactorily explained the Roswell UFO thing. The UFO nutters predictably rejected the explanation, and one complained to a reporter, "Do they think we're idiots?"

144

Spare O'Lake Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:33:05am

Joe Klein is a joke line.
Just saying.

145

DaddyG Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:37:56am

Drive by post during a quick lunch of chicken nuggets...

I was listening to the comment on Friday where Rush said this. He said it in the context of the false quotes made about him, and almost dared anyone to complain about his believing the Obama rumors (even acknowledging that they probably weren't true).

For what it's worth I think it was an intentional poke in the eye to the media because they took him on and bought into some false quotes.

My first thought was - "This one's gonna end up on LGF..." I just figured it would have happened on Saturday and I wouldn't get a chance to see the carnage.

146

The Sanity Inspector Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:38:57am

re: #100 Ray in TX

In fairness to the pundits that got punked, the satire tag was pretty inconspicuous. Only a regular blog reader would think to look through those tags, and only if they suspected satire.

Tag or no tag, they still forgot to "consider the source".

I don't have much affection for libertarian talk show host Neal Boortz, but he does do one thing which is praiseworthy, as these things go. Fairly frequently, he will caution his audience not to believe everything he says unless they can independently verify it or square it with what they already know to be true. "I will flat out lie to you if it serves the entertainment value of this show..."

147

Girth Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:39:17am

re: #133 Guanxi88

Here, try this one on for size:

[Link: www.timecube.com...]

Wow, I want to have a beer with this guy.

148

DaddyG Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:39:37am

re: #133 Guanxi88

Here, try this one on for size:

[Link: www.timecube.com...]

Wow! I'd be willing to bet there are meds involved in that web design.

149

Varek Raith Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:41:17am

re: #133 Guanxi88

Here, try this one on for size:

[Link: www.timecube.com...]

Oh, man, you didn't just post one of the most insane sites on the webz did you?... You did! You actually did!
/That site never ceases to amaze me.

150

Dreader1962 Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:43:51am

re: #149 Varek Raith

Oh, man, you didn't just post one of the most insane sites on the webz did you?... You did! You actually did!
/That site never ceases to amaze me.

I didn't scroll down far enough - did he start chanting for the return of Cthulhu?

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!

151

reloadingisnotahobby Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:44:04am

re: #149 Varek Raith
Is it work safe??
Do I dare???

152

Varek Raith Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:44:47am

re: #151 reloadingisnotahobby

Is it work safe??
Do I dare???

Work safe? Probably.
Mind safe? Nope! :)

153

Dreader1962 Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:45:04am

re: #151 reloadingisnotahobby

Is it work safe??
Do I dare???

It's just text, but it's out there - there's racism mixed in with paranoia along with frothing insanity.

154

reloadingisnotahobby Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:46:14am

re: #153 Dreader1962

My ex mother inlaw???
I ain't doin it again!!
I'll peek...

155

Four More Tears Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:46:26am

re: #133 Guanxi88

Here, try this one on for size:

[Link: www.timecube.com...]

Does Google have a translator for this page?

156

Ray in TX Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:47:01am

re: #133 Guanxi88

Here, try this one on for size:

[Link: www.timecube.com...]

I will admit that when I see things like "funniest video" or "craziest site", I am usually very skeptical.

But the timecube site lives up to the billing!

157

Girth Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:47:27am

re: #147 Girth

Wow, I want to have a beer with this guy.

Upon further review, I take that back.

158

reloadingisnotahobby Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:48:54am

re: #157 Girth

The Institution holding him will not allow that!
Beer in contraband!

159

Varek Raith Mon, Oct 26, 2009 11:49:10am

re: #156 Ray in TX

I will admit that when I see things like "funniest video" or "craziest site", I am usually very skeptical.

But the timecube site lives up to the billing!

There's not enough of anything in the world to smoke to get to its level of craziness.

160

webevintage Mon, Oct 26, 2009 12:18:00pm

re: #89 Crashnburn

I agree with VDH - why won't Mr. Obama release them?

I don't know...maybe because he won the election and is President now and the majority of Americans don't give a shit?

161

Cato the Elder Mon, Oct 26, 2009 12:24:04pm

re: #114 sffilk

May I ask why, in all sincerity?

You can't call someone "irrelevant" who guides the GOP with his radio rants.

Misguided, malevolent, mendacious, meretricious, yes. Irrelevant? Hardly.

162

SanFranciscoZionist Mon, Oct 26, 2009 12:41:20pm

re: #21 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Life is so much easier when you simply accept everything you're told.

Correction--everything you're told that agrees with your basic beliefs about reality and its nature.

163

Mournie Mon, Oct 26, 2009 12:41:36pm

That was so different than Rather and Mapes faking Bush's Guard record and putting it on Sixty Minutes.
[Link: www.cbsnews.com...]

164

celticdragon Mon, Oct 26, 2009 12:41:43pm

re: #133 Guanxi88

Here, try this one on for size:

[Link: www.timecube.com...]

***

USA ripe for holocaust.
Man evolves from teenager -
in cube metamorphosis
but ignores teenager to worship a male mother,
guised in woman's garb,
churchman called father.
Adult god is adult crime
upon their own children.
More holocaust deserved.
The 12 hour or 1/2 Day clock is an intended EVIL against humanity -
indicting every human on Earth as Dumb, Educated Stupid and Evil -
for imaginary Cubed Earth has 4
Days within simultaneous rotation.
One God would equal a God Dunce
as Humans evolve from Children.
***
Americans are dumb, educated ONE
stupid and they worship ONEism Evil.
It is not immoral to kill believers, for the stupid bastards EVOLVE from son
or daughter who precedes them. NOT one damn human adult has ever been
created - for ONLY babies are CREATED - and every adult has within them the LIFE given by children who DIE to give-up their lives to their parent
image - so their mom or Dad can live. Adults are EVIL to deny they evolved from children - and claim their adult EGO image is a god likeness. Such damn evil AMERICANS should have their tongue cut out for the heinous hoax they are perpetrating upon their own children. I know now why the Jews
deserved their holocaust - worshipping their own adult EGO image as a damn god whil ignoring and betraying the very children who sacrifice their LIFE
so their Moms and Dads could Live. There is nothing godly about stupid
and evil adults who betray their own children who gave them Life. I AM
WISER THAN ANY DAMN MAN OR GOD WHO EVER EXISTED. IF THE

That is some of the funniest idiocy I have ever read.

165

doubter4444 Mon, Oct 26, 2009 12:43:10pm

re: #72 iceweasel

Hey there Sir Doubter.

yes, what is with the manufactured tag Hoax/Satire? It's also as if they're blaming others that they didn't GET that it was satire-- as if foul trickse libs hoaxed them into it.

You are right, it's libs fault they did not see the satire tag, sneaky fellows.

But, I like the "Hoax/Satire" tag, it's truth in advertising!
//

166

SanFranciscoZionist Mon, Oct 26, 2009 12:43:21pm

re: #24 Crashnburn

What a clod.

Having said that - there is a real question here. Whomever the next Republican candidate for President needs to take Mr. Obama to task over the lack of a published thesis or grades. Since we have been told (repeatedly) that Mr. Obama is the smartest man ever to hold the office of POTUS, it would be reasonable to see these things. Any lack of these items should be expounded on not as proof of "communism" or whatever - but as something that the holder (Mr. Obama) is hiding like an affair from the public. Clearly, Mr. McCain failed to do so in the last cycle - whoever it is next time needs to hop on this early and hard.

Not surprisingly, the WaPo sure seemed to be able to publish Bob McDonnell's (RNC VA Governor candidate) thesis quickly in that they found it damaging to his chances as Governor. Rhetorical question - why can't somebody, anybody, do the same for Mr. Obama?

Who cares? What can you possibly hope to gain from reading the man's thesis? (And BTW, who has claimed he's the smartest POTUS? He has some stiff competition for that title.)

167

SanFranciscoZionist Mon, Oct 26, 2009 12:46:45pm

re: #77 Thanos

In Norse Mythology I can't recall if there's a cognate to Eris (aka Discordia) the closest is Loki, who doesn't quite fit being a male.

Loki is certainly the shit-disturber of the Norse pantheon.

168

celticdragon Mon, Oct 26, 2009 12:55:58pm

re: #159 Varek Raith

There's not enough of anything in the world to smoke to get to its level of craziness.

Does anybody else think that the wacko who writes this incomprehensible dreck may have been inspired by thinking that the Church of The Subgenius was a actually a real religion??

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

169

Crashnburn Mon, Oct 26, 2009 12:56:53pm

re: #166 SanFranciscoZionist

Who cares? What can you possibly hope to gain from reading the man's thesis? (And BTW, who has claimed he's the smartest POTUS? He has some stiff competition for that title.)

Gee, I don't know. Perhaps the thoughts he had on whatever subject he wrote it on? The Washington Post seemed to find Virginia's McDonnell "old college" thesis compelling enough to print in an effort to break his campaign. Apparently Obama's is too compelling - otherwise they would have released it too? Clearly the WaPo has an agenda and one thesis fits it and the other does not.

I guess I am struggling with why you don't think you could possibly learn anything from someone's formative years? Who cares what his grades were? What coursework did they take? None of this is used as any indicator to your thought process on a candidate for office?

170

ssn697 Mon, Oct 26, 2009 1:18:47pm

A former drug abuser who can't admit he was wrong is likely doomed to return to drug abuse.

171

WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Mon, Oct 26, 2009 1:21:03pm

re: #133 Guanxi88

Gene Ray! I love that guy, he was a guest on a radio show I like (Lionel) a while back, and he was just so screaming nuts in the best way.

172

WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.] Mon, Oct 26, 2009 1:24:03pm

re: #169 Crashnburn

I wonder if "release his college transcripts!" is Birther-lite...

173

davinvalkri Mon, Oct 26, 2009 1:27:17pm

re: #86 Charles

This shows a lot about the mentality of some of these people who will believe anything negative about Barack Obama, anything at all, no matter how absurd or how obviously, logically false.

It should have been instantly clear to anyone with one look at the 'jumpinginpools' website that it had zero credibility -- and the idea that it would have a world exclusive scoop (found nowhere else on the Internet) was just beyond ridiculous, into the realm of truly brain-numbing schtoopidity.

Reminds me of Rathergate in that way. Should have been obvious, but they just needed to believe it so very badly.

What a funny inversion--nominal rightists using the tactics of the left from five years ago.

174

Mr.Boots Mon, Oct 26, 2009 1:56:34pm

re: #108 Cineaste

I think you hit the problem on the head Charles. It was logical to them. That's the whole gist of the 'we believed it because it was plausible'. Well it wasn't plausible to anyone who wasn't already buying in to the kool-aid.

That would explain people who take Fox News as Gospel.

175

Pythagoras Mon, Oct 26, 2009 4:02:58pm

re: #31 countrockulot

The ability to say "Well I blew that one. My fault. I will do better next time." when you make a mistake is one of the most important life skills a person can have. Explain why you did what you did, but don't make excuses, or blame others, or deny, or play the but-he-did-something-even-worse! game. Accept it and learn from it. How a person handles times in their life when they have messed up are very telling of their character.

Upding!!! This says it all. People like Rush are much too full of themselves to learn a thing from their mistakes. Dan Rather is absolutely the same thing (except he had more grounds for the enormous ego).

"Oops" is the most important word in the English language. If everyone knew how to use it -- without making it a big deal -- the world would be a better place.

176

odkin Mon, Oct 26, 2009 8:12:14pm

Well, I actually heard that broadcast, and to be fair, right after Rush said he knows Obama sthinks this, he played an authentic clip of Obama saying that the Supreme Court supported civil rights as far as they went, but they never went as far as to address the basic inquities of wealth distribution in America. Which was, at the core, what the fake thesis was supposed to say.

177

oldegeezr Mon, Oct 26, 2009 9:19:19pm

re: #175 Pythagoras

“..."Oops" is the most important word in the English language. If everyone knew how to use it -- without making it a big deal -- the world would be a better place.”

---

“...the size of a misfortune is not determinable by an outsider's measurement of it, but only by the measurement applied to it by the person specially affected by it. The king's lost crown is a vast matter to the king, but of no consequence to the child. The lost toy is a great matter to the child, but in the king's eyes it is not a thing to break the heart about.
- Mark Twain's Autobiography

178

oldegeezr Mon, Oct 26, 2009 9:48:52pm

re: #177 oldegeezr

You mark an excellent connumdrum...
Displacement of thought and intended or actually unintended circumstances...

“A man may plan as much as he wants to, but nothing of consequence is likely to come of [it] until the magician circumstance steps in and takes the matter off his hands.
~ "The Turning Point of My Life”~

Gotta luv yah, Pythagoras...

179

oldegeezr Mon, Oct 26, 2009 10:44:34pm

re: #175 Pythagoras

Your comment...
Sir or Madame...?

180

moski3 Wed, Oct 28, 2009 9:57:54pm

For those that just want to hate on the Rush ~ after one station break he stated it was a hoax that someone who thought it was for real, had sent to him. And then he decided to play w/ the media like they fucked w/ him when they Knew all the reports of what he said were fake.
By the way, there is video/sound of Obama saying those exact thing that were in the fake thesis.

You guys are the smartest bloggers I know and yet you don't get this one. weird.

Then again, you probably don't listen to Rush and just jumped on the bandwagon or something.

Spy Mode Auto

This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

NY Daily News: Rush Limbaugh Falls for Obama Thesis Hoax

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► Tag Cloud