Author Topic: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?  (Read 2712 times)

Danny

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4630
  • The original Superman
Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« on: May 11, 2010, 08:58:47 PM »
http://mediamatters.org/research/201005100055



Rush Limbaugh attacked Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan for citing former Justice Thurgood Marshall's statement that the Constitution as originally written was "defective." At no point did Limbaugh acknowledge that Marshall was saying the Constitution was "defective" because it permitted slavery and did not guarantee women's suffrage.


Limbaugh slams Kagan for quoting Marshall


Limbaugh: "This is who Elena Kagan idolizes, Justice Marshall, who said the Constitution as originally drafted and conceived was 'defective.'" On his May 10 program, Limbaugh attacked Kagan for her citation of Marshall:

    LIMBAUGH: I wanted to go even further, so here the last paragraph, we find out even more about Thurgood Marshall, who Elena Kagan idolized:

        "During the year that marked the bicentennial of the Constitution, Justice Marshall gave a characteristically candid speech. He declared" -- this is a law review article that she wrote -- "he declared that the Constitution, as originally drafted and conceived, was 'defective'; only over the course of 200 years had the nation 'attain[ed] the system of constitutional government, and its respect for . . . individual freedoms and human rights, that we hold as fundamental today.' The Constitution today, the Justice continued, contains a great deal to be proud of. 'ut the credit does not belong to the Framers. It belongs to those who refused to acquiesce in outdated notions of "liberty," "justice," and "equality,'" and who strived to better them.' The credit, in other words, belongs to people like Justice Marshall. As the many thousands who waited on the Supreme Court steps will know, our modem Constitution is his."

    So, this is who Elena Kagan idolizes, Justice Marshall, who said the Constitution as originally drafted and conceived was 'defective,' and only over the course of 200 years with people like him on the Supreme Court had it become worth anything.

Marshall stated original Constitution was "defective" because it permitted slavery

Marshall: Original Constitution was "defective," required amendments to end slavery, guarantee women's suffrage. In his May 6, 1987 speech to the San Francisco Patent and Trademark Law Association, Marshall -- the first African-American Supreme Court justice -- stated:

    I cannot accept this invitation, for I do not believe that the meaning of the Constitution was forever "fixed" at the Philadelphia Convention. Nor do I find the wisdom, foresight, and sense of justice exhibited by the Framers particularly profound. To the contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start, requiring several amendments, a civil war, and momentous social transformation to attain the system of constitutional government, and its respect for the individual freedoms and human rights, we hold as fundamental today. When contemporary Americans cite "The Constitution," they invoke a concept that is vastly different from what the Framers barely began to construct two centuries ago.

    For a sense of the evolving nature of the Constitution we need look no further than the first three words of the document's preamble: 'We the People." When the Founding Fathers used this phrase in 1787, they did not have in mind the majority of America's citizens. "We the People" included, in the words of the Framers, "the whole Number of free Persons." On a matter so basic as the right to vote, for example, Negro slaves were excluded, although they were counted for representational purposes at threefifths each. Women did not gain the right to vote for over a hundred and thirty years.

    These omissions were intentional. The record of the Framers' debates on the slave question is especially clear: The Southern States acceded to the demands of the New England States for giving Congress broad power to regulate commerce, in exchange for the right to continue the slave trade. The economic interests of the regions coalesced: New Englanders engaged in the "carrying trade" would profit from transporting slaves from Africa as well as goods produced in America by slave labor. The perpetuation of slavery ensured the primary source of wealth in the Southern States.

    Despite this clear understanding of the role slavery would play in the new republic, use of the words "slaves" and "slavery" was carefully avoided in the original document. Political representation in the lower House of Congress was to be based on the population of "free Persons" in each State, plus threefifths of all "other Persons." Moral principles against slavery, for those who had them, were compromised, with no explanation of the conflicting principles for which the American Revolutionary War had ostensibly been fought: the selfevident truths "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Kagan cited Marshall's comments in tribute after his death. In a 1993 article in Texas Law Review following Marshall's death, Kagan wrote:

    During the year that marked the bicentennial of the Constitution, Justice Marshall gave a characteristically candid speech. He declared that the Constitution, as originally drafted and conceived, was "defective"; only over the course of 200 years had the nation "attain[ed] the system of constitutional government, and its respect for . . . individual freedoms and human rights, we hold as fundamental today." The Constitution today, the Justice continued, contains a great deal to be proud of. "ut the credit does not belong to the Framers. It belongs to those who refused to acquiesce in outdated notions of 'liberty,' 'justice,' and 'equality,' and who strived to better them." The credit, in other words, belongs to people like Justice Marshall. As the many thousands who waited on the Supreme Court steps well knew, our modem Constitution is his.

President Bush and Secretaries Powell and Rice have made statements similar to Marshall's

Bush: "Moral vision" of abolitionists led them to "correct our Constitution." In July 8, 2003, remarks made at Goree Island in Senegal, Bush said that the "moral vision" of abolitionists "caused Americans to examine our hearts, to correct our Constitution, and to teach our children the dignity and equality of every person of every race." He added: "The racial bigotry fed by slavery did not end with slavery or with segregation. And many of the issues that still trouble America have roots in the bitter experience of other times."

Rice: Slavery was the Constitution's "great birth defect." At a July 19, 2008, event at the Council on Foreign Relations, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said: "In our first Constitution, my ancestors were three-fifths of a man. What does that say about American democracy at its outset? I've said it's a great birth defect. And we have had to overcome a birth defect. And, like any birth defect, it continues to have an impact on us. It's why we have such a hard time talking about race, and dealing with race."

Powell: "we could not live our Constitution truly unless we eliminated slavery." During a July 10, 2003, interview on CNN's Larry King Live, former Secretary of State Colin Powell said: "It took us a while to recognize that we could not live our Constitution truly unless we eliminated slavery, and hundreds of thousands of young men fought a civil war to end slavery and then it took us a long time to get rid of the vestiges of slavery and we're still working on it to this very day."
Limbaugh previously attacked Obama for comments similar to Marshall's

Obama in 2001: Fundamental flaw" of Constitution was that "[t]he Africans at the time were not considered as part of the polity." In a September 6, 2001, interview on Chicago public radio station WBEZ on a program titled "Slavery and the Constitution," Obama explained that the "fundamental flaw" was that "[t]he Africans at the time were not considered as part of the polity that was of concern to the framers," and that the framers did not "see it as a moral problem involving persons of moral worth." He also stated that the Constitution is "a remarkable political document that paved the way for where we are now."

Limbaugh used "fundamental flaw" comment to attack Obama. On his October 27, 2008, broadcast, Limbaugh criticized Obama for saying that the Constitution reflected a "fundamental flaw," while falsely accusing Obama of saying the flaw cannot "be fixed": "How is he going to -- I asked this earlier -- how is he gonna place his hand on the Bible and swear that he, Barack Hussein Obama, will uphold the Constitution that he feels reflects the nation's fundamental flaw. Fundamental. When he talks about a fundamental flaw, he's not talking about a flaw that can be fixed. Fundamental means that this document is, from the get-go, wrong."
"What we do in life ECHOES in eternity "

chadstallion

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2854
Re: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« Reply #1 on: May 12, 2010, 05:55:24 AM »
because he can; he likes to bend the truth and facts to fit his agenda. and gets paid tons of money to do so.
w

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« Reply #2 on: May 12, 2010, 06:05:39 AM »
Sounds like the clowns as MSNBC as well. 

BM OUT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8229
  • Getbig!
Re: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« Reply #3 on: May 12, 2010, 06:11:14 AM »
The constitution defended states rights.Marshall and other libs HATE states rights because they want a centralised government dictating to states what they can and cant do.This is against everything the founders believed in,they ran from a central controlling government.Marshall,like all libs,is an ass who wants the iron fisted government to wield power over everyone.

BM OUT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8229
  • Getbig!
Re: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« Reply #4 on: May 12, 2010, 06:14:42 AM »
By the way,yesterday and the day before Chris Mathews accused Rush of calling Obama a NAZI.Please show me ONE example where Rush EVER called Obama a NAZI.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41760
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« Reply #5 on: May 12, 2010, 06:17:40 AM »
Matthews is a perfect example of what is wrong with this country.  A feminized, sissified, physically weak, left wing, jerkoff who actually tingles at other men giving a speech. 

Disgraceful.   

Danny

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4630
  • The original Superman
Re: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« Reply #6 on: May 12, 2010, 09:30:25 AM »
Matthews is a perfect example of what is wrong with this country.  A feminized, sissified, physically weak, left wing, jerkoff who actually tingles at other men giving a speech. 

Disgraceful.   

You see a problem with Matthews but you see absolutely no problem with Doughboy?
"What we do in life ECHOES in eternity "

BM OUT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8229
  • Getbig!
Re: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« Reply #7 on: May 12, 2010, 09:35:29 AM »
You see a problem with Matthews but you see absolutely no problem with Doughboy?

 I see no problem with either.However,Mathews is a proven liar and two faced idiot.He screams that Rush uses the term "regime" to describe Obamas administration,but he has called the Bush administration a "regime".Other then that I have no problem with anything he says.I find his ratings show his talent and level of information he provides.

Rush is a dough boy?Then what is Mathews?A pudgy,drolling idiot with a bad combover who spits all over everytime he speaks.

chadstallion

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2854
Re: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« Reply #8 on: May 12, 2010, 10:10:43 AM »
I see no problem with either.However,Mathews is a proven liar and two faced idiot.He screams that Rush uses the term "regime" to describe Obamas administration,but he has called the Bush administration a "regime".Other then that I have no problem with anything he says.I find his ratings show his talent and level of information he provides.

Rush is a dough boy?Then what is Mathews?A pudgy,drolling idiot with a bad combover who spits all over everytime he speaks.
dont hold back, tell us what you really think.... ;)
w

Danny

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4630
  • The original Superman
Re: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« Reply #9 on: May 12, 2010, 10:35:21 AM »
By the way,yesterday and the day before Chris Mathews accused Rush of calling Obama a NAZI.Please show me ONE example where Rush EVER called Obama a NAZI.

"Today on his radio show Limbaugh compared President Obama to Hitler: "Adolf Hitler, like Barack Obama, ruled by dictate." ...did u miss this one?

or...this one??


Perennial Obama critic and conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh was quick to respond to the accusations, arguing today on his radio show that it was in fact the Democrats who were using Nazi symbolism to advance their agenda.  He cited a post on the conservative blog Sweetness & Light that compares Obama's new healthcare logo -- a combination of his campaign logo and the ancient Greek symbol of medicine -- to the Nazi swastika symbol.

“They accuse of us being Nazis, and Obama's got a healthcare logo that's right out of Adolf Hitler's playbook,” said Limbaugh.

Limbaugh then proceeded to describe the ways Democrats are like Nazis -- a list that included their dedication to animal rights and their opposition to smoking and pollution.
Well, the Nazis were against big business -- they hated big business. And of course we all know that they were opposed to Jewish capitalism. They were insanely, irrationally against pollution. They were for two years mandatory voluntary service to Germany. They had a whole bunch of make-work projects to keep people working, one of which was the Autobahn. They were against cruelty and vivisection of animals, but in the radical sense of devaluing human life, they banned smoking. They were totally against that. They were for abortion and euthanasia of the undesirables, as we all know, and they were for cradle-to-grave nationalized healthcare.


What do you think? Is Obama's new healthcare logo really a symbolic reference to Nazism?
"What we do in life ECHOES in eternity "

Danny

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4630
  • The original Superman
Re: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« Reply #10 on: May 12, 2010, 10:42:57 AM »
Just saw this today

"When President Obama was asked if he would play a round of golf with his talk-radio nemesis Rush Limbaugh, the response, relayed by a top Democrat, was: "Limbaugh can play with himself." HAHAHAHAHAHA bitch slapped!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL
"What we do in life ECHOES in eternity "

The Showstoppa

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26879
  • Call the vet, cause these pythons are sick!
Re: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« Reply #11 on: May 12, 2010, 10:46:56 AM »
Just saw this today

"When President Obama was asked if he would play a round of golf with his talk-radio nemesis Rush Limbaugh, the response, relayed by a top Democrat, was: "Limbaugh can play with himself." HAHAHAHAHAHA bitch slapped!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL

 ::)

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« Reply #12 on: May 12, 2010, 11:01:01 AM »
mathews is getting a little senile, IMO.  Just a little too giddy, and a little weird.

This doesn't excuse Rush's jump to say ANYTHING to get a rise from people, including some outright lies (well, facts wrong, if you love the guy).

They both rile up their base, and they both suck.  Deal with it.  Stop sucking off the guy whose idology you agree with, and accept the fact they're both exaggerative windbags.  HTH.

BM OUT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8229
  • Getbig!
Re: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« Reply #13 on: May 13, 2010, 06:27:34 AM »
Just saw this today

"When President Obama was asked if he would play a round of golf with his talk-radio nemesis Rush Limbaugh, the response, relayed by a top Democrat, was: "Limbaugh can play with himself." HAHAHAHAHAHA bitch slapped!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL

Rush didnt want to play golf with Obama in the first place and would have refused.So,it was Obama who was bitch slapped.Do they even allow low rent blacks like Obama on golf courses other then public ones?

BM OUT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8229
  • Getbig!
Re: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« Reply #14 on: May 13, 2010, 06:30:10 AM »
"Today on his radio show Limbaugh compared President Obama to Hitler: "Adolf Hitler, like Barack Obama, ruled by dictate." ...did u miss this one?

or...this one??


Perennial Obama critic and conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh was quick to respond to the accusations, arguing today on his radio show that it was in fact the Democrats who were using Nazi symbolism to advance their agenda.  He cited a post on the conservative blog Sweetness & Light that compares Obama's new healthcare logo -- a combination of his campaign logo and the ancient Greek symbol of medicine -- to the Nazi swastika symbol.

“They accuse of us being Nazis, and Obama's got a healthcare logo that's right out of Adolf Hitler's playbook,” said Limbaugh.

Limbaugh then proceeded to describe the ways Democrats are like Nazis -- a list that included their dedication to animal rights and their opposition to smoking and pollution.
Well, the Nazis were against big business -- they hated big business. And of course we all know that they were opposed to Jewish capitalism. They were insanely, irrationally against pollution. They were for two years mandatory voluntary service to Germany. They had a whole bunch of make-work projects to keep people working, one of which was the Autobahn. They were against cruelty and vivisection of animals, but in the radical sense of devaluing human life, they banned smoking. They were totally against that. They were for abortion and euthanasia of the undesirables, as we all know, and they were for cradle-to-grave nationalized healthcare.


What do you think? Is Obama's new healthcare logo really a symbolic reference to Nazism?

He NEVER EVER said Obama was a NAZI.He made it clear BEFORE he talked on this subject that he wasnt calling Obama a NAZI or comparing him to Hitler.The article conviently left that out.I actually heard the show.

Rush was compoaring the bill and the way it was jammed through and the intemnded effects to the way Nazi Germany passed health care.I agree 100% with him.The bill is intended to control our lives not cut health care costs as has been proven by the latest CBO numbers.

chadstallion

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2854
Re: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« Reply #15 on: May 13, 2010, 11:40:50 AM »
nice spin!  when you blow him do you also swallow?
w

Danny

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4630
  • The original Superman
Re: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« Reply #16 on: May 13, 2010, 03:21:41 PM »
nice spin!  when you blow him do you also swallow?

ooooouchhhhh.... ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
"What we do in life ECHOES in eternity "

chadstallion

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2854
Re: Why is Rush Limbaugh defending slavery?
« Reply #17 on: May 14, 2010, 05:38:32 AM »
ooooouchhhhh.... ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
ooooochhh.....no teeth...not necessary to go all the way to the base to get the job done... ;) linda lovelace was highly overrated.
w