This is equally stupid as the liberals’ varieties, its just that those left-dominated days seem to VASTLY outnumber the right-dominated days.

How much of that is a function of the relative sizes of the rightosphere v the leftosphere?
I could easily point to talk radio and note the the vast majority of talk radio is right wing dominated fauxrage (I do like that term). Does that mean the right wing talk radio is more outrage driven and less honest than left wing talk radio or does it simply mean that there is far more right wing talk radio? From what I have seen and heard I would say that both phenomena are much more products of relative size than relative honesty.

Gingrich’s pseudo retraction is better than nothing and hopefully C3 is correct in his analysis.

“The stakes are very high with this nomination,” Gingrich concludes. “Has President Obama nominated a conventionally liberal judge to a lifetime tenure on our highest court? Or a radical liberal activist who will cast aside the rule of law in favor of the narrow, divisive politics of race and gender identity?”

What I have seen of her record (some of it linked in earlier discussion) would indicate the answer is neither. He is still throwing bombs, but that is politics and to be expected. It is worthy of argument, not outrage.

The Senate’s wackiest female, according to Rush at 1:45 PM, a zany smut-novelist named Babs Boxer, opined on MSNBC that Rush now supports Sotomayor. However, Rush in putting down the zany vertically and mentally challenged CA Senator, did not categorically deny that Sotomayor might not be better on Roe v. Wade than the inscrutable Souter. As Donohue has already done.

Sotomayor would be the sixth Roman Catholic SCOTUS justice out of the Divine Nine.

Veeeerrry Interesting…..

I don’t expect Limbaugh to retract, modify or whatever…that would be bad for ratings and “listenership”. I’m comfotable with the reality that Limbaugh, Hannity, Olbermann and Maddow etc are media figures/media phenomena and not political ones. (Granted its not a “bright line distinction” but its a distinction nonetheless

Yes, it is important to remember that the “Limbaugh is the Republican leader” meme was one consciously chosen by the Obama White House and promoted by the left-wing blogosphere, not by conservatives themselves. I mean, sure, they can cherry-pick some statements by Republican leaders honoring Limbaugh, but the notion that every word he says is speaking for all Republicans is a total fabrication done for a willfully dishonest purpose of trying to cement a permanent and totally unaccountable one-party dominance for Democrats by tainting and marginalizing all Republicans.

Gingrich’s retraction is the kind of thing that has the potential to challenge the campaign of fauxrage that is the primary means by which the dominant crop of blogosphere liberals tries to perpetually change the subject to avoid any criticism of Democrats and keep the glare permanently on conservatives, but, of course, that is why they are so quick to spin it away as meaningless and then….wait for it….change the subject back to bashing Republicans again.

Looking at Memeorandum, today seems to be one of those rare days driven by fauxrage from conservatives in the blogosphere, with the “Obama’s Muslim roots” BS ruling the top level. This is equally stupid as the liberals’ varieties, its just that those left-dominated days seem to VASTLY outnumber the right-dominated days.

And while the faux moderate sites are quick to criticize such conservative excesses, they almost always give liberals’ much more common incivilities and misrepresentations a pass. It is very annoying.

I don’t expect Limbaugh to retract, modify or whatever…that would be bad for ratings and “listenership”. I’m comfotable with the reality that Limbaugh, Hannity, Olbermann and Maddow etc are media figures/media phenomena and not political ones. (Granted its not a “bright line distinction” but its a distinction nonetheless

“My initial reaction was strong and direct — perhaps too strong and too direct. The sentiment struck me as racist and I said so. Since then, some who want to have an open and honest consideration of Judge Sotomayor’s fitness to serve on the nation’s highest court have been critical of my word choice.

With these critics who want to have an honest conversation, I agree. The word “racist” should not have been applied to Judge Sotomayor as a person, even if her words themselves are unacceptable (a fact which both President Obama and his Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs, have since admitted).”

No apology whatsoever. Just an admission that he shouldn’t have used the word “racist.”