Limbaugh is up to his old--very old and very predictable--racist rants again, suggesting in his newest snort against Judge Sotomayor that she, and members of an Hispanic organization she belongs to, are just a bunch of housemaids--stereotyping at its racist worst.
Between his anti-Black, anti-Parkinson's disease, anti-children, anti-woman, anti-US success, and now anti-Latina rants, he's really putting a losing face on the GOP and any hope that the Latino vote will feel welcomed in the GOP's ever-shrinking tent.
From "LATINA," an online magazine:
During his radio show this week, Rush Limbaugh once again attacked Judge Sonia Sotomayor.
This time he lashed out at her for being a member of the Belizean Grove, a private organization of female professionals, saying, "I think I'm going to send Sotomayor and her club a bunch of vacuum cleaners to help them clean up after their meetings."
Get it?
He's saying all Latinas are maids and cleaning ladies. Hysterical, right?
In documents provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sotomayor openly wrote of her membership in the group, saying, "I am a member of the Belizean Grove, a private organization of female professionals from the profit, nonprofit and social sectors. The organization does not invidiously discriminate on the basis of sex. Men are involved in its activities—they participate in trips, host events and speak at functions—but to the best of my knowledge, a man has never asked to be considered for membership."
Limbaugh’s argument is that the Code of Judicial Conduct bars judges from belonging to any organization that practices discrimination based on race, sex, religion, or national origin. But it is obvious from Sotomayor’s upfront admission that the Belizean Grove does not discriminate on any of those issues.
We're getting sick of writing about Rush Limbaugh and his racist tirades. If David Letterman can be taken to task for making a joke about Sarah Palin's daughter, why is it that Limbaugh is able to so freely and consistently spew this kind of vitriol?
20 comments:
"Limbaugh is up to his old--very old and very predictable--racist rants again"
Could not have said it better!
Good job Shaw. Keep up the heat.
Does this get Sotomayor out of her racist remarks? Or is this simply saying Limbaugh is a racist to look at the GOP? While I need to listen to the entire arguement Rush said to see what he meant by it. I don't listen to Rush but the concept of race is something that is over empazied to much.
I don't see people as being black or white, yellow or red. Skin color has no basis for how I look at someone's potential. What I look at is there track record and what they may do and do I agree with those things?
TGHB,
Welcome back! Hope you're well and blogging again.
Lucky,
What Judge Sotomayor said was not racist. It is the anti-Sotomayor factions that have labeled her remarks as such.
Rush keeps giving us proof of his deep-seated racism and inferiority complex.
His racist attacks only underscore what a frightened person he is, he sees power slipping from the hands of the all male, all white demographic, and it drives him batty.
Alos, shaw,
I see you've gotten rid of that obnoxious bully pitbull. He seems to be obsessed with you ad your blog and everything you or anyone posts about you. I'd call it stalking you. he's probably a frightened little man himself, like Limbaugh.
I dont know anyone sane who takes Limbaugh seriously. He's a sad joke and embarrassemtn to the GOP. But everyone needs a hero and I guess the republicans need their hero to be a loud-mouth racist.
shw, I went to the pitbull's site and he's really in a bad way over you and your blog. Now he's whining that you won't let him post his drivel on your blog. He's playing the victim! LOL! Bullies are all alike and so predictable, aren't they? Stay strong, sistah.
Thanks Helen and Thayer.
Helen, I had already checked out the link you provided [the entire post about me and PE and the 60+ comments have since been deleted].
I also saw at that post on pitbull's site that he was angry at sue for her benign comment saying that the sign for no pitbulls on PE was funny.
On the post that he has since deleted, he suggested that I was taking drugs, that I was a he and not a she, that I was posting under fake names,and all sorts of other paranoia for which he had absolutely no evidence.
I don't want anyone who comes here to post comments to mention him or his blog ever again.
I appreciate your support, but I do not want to risk getting this person angry at me or anyone else.
His anger and paranoia was increasing, and, frankly, was beginning to frighten me.
I'm glad he deleted his post on me and my blog, and I hope this ends his obsession with me.
It was a terribly unsettling experience for me [a goal of most bullies], and I want it to end and never to happen again.
Thank you for your support, now let's blog about important things.
Good riddance to "you know who" and its gang.
You rock!
to keep on subject I find it puzzling that everytime a smart woman is up for an important office, Limbough is intimidated. He and "you know who" apparently can't deal with smart women.
ha.
The real talent Rush Limbaugh, the 400lbs. junkie and pedophile, has is, the ability to make dumb-fuck Republicans feel smart.
If David Letterman can be taken to task for making a joke about Sarah Palin's daughter, why is it that Limbaugh is able to so freely and consistently spew this kind of vitriol? ------
Uh how about the difference is sotomayer is an ADULT and Letterman was spewing on a CHILD??? And why does this even have to be explained to you?????
Pitbull has a history of posting and deleting Shaw. He did one about me once and I left a comment that he was a sissy for moderating my comment. The next day the post was gone.
I love the serious debate or exchange of insults when my opponent is worthy. Blue pitbull has proven unworthy of both of us.
Shit. Off topic, aren't I?
I acept deletion if you decide Ms. Kenawe.
Anonymous wrote:
"Uh how about the difference is sotomayer is an ADULT and Letterman was spewing on a CHILD??? And why does this even have to be explained to you?????"
I didn't write that. If you go back and carefully read the post, you'll understand that it was published in the Latina Magazine.
Truth,
Naw. I wouldnt do that. I just don't want that name mentioned.
David Letterman doesn't make a habit of trashing people and making racist and sexist slurs on them.
He was wrong in bringing in a politicians family for ridicule, as McCain and Linmbaugh did to Clinton's 12 year old daughter (and I don't remember the howling from the wingnuts when that happened, does anyone else?)
Limbaugh has a history of this kind of baiting and that's why the question is being asked on why the he's still on the air. But to answer my own question, I guess it's because even bigots, racists, sexists, and insecure jerks need someone to look upto.
hi shaw,
that person you don't want us to name has a reputation around the internet for acting like a bully with people he doesn't agree with and he gets really angry when you try to straighten him out--actually worse. Sort of like Rush Limpballs, whose not quite as big a bully as "that person."
Anon said: "Uh how about the difference is sotomayer is an ADULT and Letterman was spewing on a CHILD???"
So what you are saying is that any racist comment about adults are fair game?
Thayer: "David Letterman doesn't make a habit of trashing people and making racist and sexist slurs on them."
He does make a habit of trashing people. He's done this throughout his career. His monologues, comments, and top 10 lists are rife with "trashing" of famous figures of the day. Current politicians, celebrities, etc. (Trump, OJ, Bill Clinton, either Bush, Madonna.... if you doubt me, check his top 10 list archives). It's definitely a habit, and he is often quite good at it.
And his Palin jokes did include a sexist slur (the slutty stewardess bit). I don't recall anything racist he's done, though.
Shaw: Hello. This is my first time posting at your place. I hope I don’t offend anyone because I’m a Conservative; however, I’m respectful of others and I have Liberals that visit my blog and we get along. While we may not always see eye to eye on all issues, we do have the common philosophy that all people should be treated civilly. So with that being said, here’s my 2 cents:
I don’t listen to Rush on a daily basis; so I’m not a devout Rush follower and I’m not a Rush hater. I believe I’m giving an unbiased view when I say, in my opinion what he said about Sotomayor and vacuum cleaners was intended to mean Latino’s were cleaning women. It was a tactless comment delivered to rile people. As I said, I’m a Conservative, but that’s my very honest opinion on the matter. I feel I have to call it as I see it. I’ll probably argue with some family members over this.
As far as Sotomayor goes, I never did jump on the “don’t nominate Sotomayor bandwagon.” I felt she deserved a fair chance, just like we Republicans would want any of our nominees to get. However, after I heard that Rush and Gingrich called her a reverse racist, I had to find out why. I read Sotomayor’s speech and I have to admit, it gave me pause. If she said “Latino Woman” once, she said it 20 times. I am a blue-eyed blonde with very pale skin and after reading her speech I don’t believe I would get a fair trial if she were my judge. I am not diminishing her abilities or accomplishments; I just feel she would have more empathy for Latinos and women of color than she would Caucasians. Therefore, I understand why Rush and Gingrich said what they said in that particular case.
Pamela,
Welcome. Other conservatives comment here--Gordon, Patrick, Griper, dmarks, to name a few. They always leave thoughtful comments. The discussions can get lively but the people I just mentioned never get nasty.
I, too, have blond hair and blue eyes, but I don't feel I would get an unfair ruling under Sotomayor.
I believe what she meant in that comment is the same as what Judge Alito meant when he said in his confirmation hearings that his ethnic background would give HIM a special insight to people of his ethnic background, people who have suffered from discrimination because of people's prejudices against his ethnic group.
I don't believe she meant that she, as a Latina, was any better than any other judge, but that she would have a better understanding of a Latina's or Latino's situation in a case coming before her court. And, obviously, that's true.
Thanks for dropping in.
We have to also understand that for decades and decades the SCOTUS was populated by white men.
A person of color, who had a case before the SCOTUS during that time could also say he or she would not be confident he or she would get a fair shake.
Roger Tanney was the fifth Chief Justice of the United States, holding that office from 1836 until his death in 1864, and was the first Roman Catholic to hold that office. He is most remembered for delivering the majority opinion in Dred Scott v. Sandford, that ruled, among others, that African Americans, being considered "of an inferior order and altogether unfit to associate with the white race" at the time the Constitution was drafted, could not be considered citizens of the United States.
Another opinion written by an all white, all male Supreme Court:
Plessy v. Ferguson(1896), is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in the jurisprudence of the United States, upholding the constitutionality of racial segregation even in public accommodations (particularly railroads), under the doctrine of "separate but equal".
The decision was handed down by a vote of 7 to 1, with the majority opinion written by Justice Henry Billings Brown and the dissent written by Justice John Marshall Harlan. Justice David Josiah Brewer did not participate in the decision. "Separate but equal" remained standard doctrine in U.S. law until its repudiation in the 1954 Supreme Court decision Brown v. Board of Education.
These are but a few examples of all white, all male rulings by the SCOTUS that were overturned when the country learned to have more empathy toward its minority citizens.
Whattya know.
We've reached the point in history where the real victims of discrimination in this country have blue eyes and blond hair.
Except we haven't.
Though I'm glad so many posters hereabouts are of the opinion color, sex, race no longer matter the fact remains that large parts of our country haven't received the same memo.
And that's why Sotomayor's nomination matters. Imminently qualified and almost completely different in a couple very important ways from all (save for 3) of the jurists appointed to the court in the nations history.
It inspires a lot of people and it scares the bejabbers out of a lot of people.
But life will go on.
I feel sorry for Rush Limbaugh's real cleaning lady or gentleman. It must be a huge and disgusting job.
Arthur said: "We've reached the point in history where the real victims of discrimination in this country have blue eyes and blond hair."
Well, if affirmative action quotas/preferences are in place and working, innocent people in this group do end up being real victims of racial discrimination. But they are far far from the only victims, of course, and there are other forms of racism than quotas. As shown by Limbaugh's comment.
top [url=http://www.c-online-casino.co.uk/]uk casino[/url] hinder the latest [url=http://www.realcazinoz.com/]realcazinoz[/url] manumitted no deposit reward at the leading [url=http://www.baywatchcasino.com/]www.baywatchcasino.com
[/url].
Post a Comment