Palin Goes After Rush for “Retarded” Remark
A few days ago Sarah Palin called for White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel step down for calling some liberals “retarded” in their to health care legislation last August. Yesterday, Rush Limbaugh ranted about it (emph. TP’s):
LIMBAUGH: Our political correct society is acting like some giant insult’s taken place by calling a bunch of people who are retards, retards. I mean these people, these liberal activists are kooks. They are looney tunes. And I’m not going to apologize for it, I’m just quoting Emanuel. It’s in the news. I think their big news is he’s out there calling Obama’s number one supporters f’ing retards. So now there’s going to be a meeting. There’s going to be a retard summit at the White House. Much like the beer summit between Obama and Gates and that cop in Cambridge.
A bunch of people were wondering about what Palin would have to say about this, especially since she just slammed Emanuel. Would she go up against the big R?
Yes:
I asked Palin spokesperson Meghan Stapleton for comment on Rush’s rant, and she emailed me this:
“Governor Palin believes crude and demeaning name calling at the expense of others is disrespectful.”
Actually, I think Rush has a point (never thought the day would come). Aren’t conservatives usually against political correctness? I don’t know…maybe Palin is trying to retake the word “retarded” the way the PC brigade has been trying to retake “gay,” also a once favored way to call someone stupid (usually by youths). In any case, this won’t be the first time I’ve thought Palin is less conservative than she makes herself out to be.
More on that after I finish Going Rogue. (H/T Andrew Sullivan)
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
Horror of horror MM.
Political correctness is nothing more the Saul Alinsky tactics which the left has been using for about 40 years now and no one ever bothered to really realize what was happening. It is not a conspiracy. It is simply a METHOD in which they can institute to win the political debate. Nothing more…..However over the course of the last couple decades its become known as PC rather then its true name which of course is Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals.
I have often spoke of the left dictating the debate. Defining the terms of the discussion. Laying out the guidelines to be used in the ongoing political dialogue that occurs between left and right.
I do not think per se the Right/conservatives are opposed to political correctness so much as they are opposed to the overwhelming use of it in ways that are anathema to their way of thinking and their very core values.
Examples of this is the Political correctness of removing religion from the nation. Aka…removing statue by statue from state courthouses. Removing prayer from schools. Screaming about the Christian coalition as being a bunch of "fill in the blanks". Alinksy.
Demonizing ONE Abortion doctor shooting as the entire Right wing all rolled up into this gun toting, crazed group of murdering savages.
I could go on and on. Its not political correctness that is the issue. Its the driving force. The Agenda. The ulterior motive behind the PC that is what is wrong with the lefts agenda. For them to win the argument they must instill a rigid set of definitions in place and they must narrow the focus of the debate to terms in which they are capable of winning.
Once the debate flows outside of their narrow channel then we have what we have in MASS……Scott Brown……..HealthCare Reform……..Cap and Trade……Immigration reform.
Because on the surface the liberal cause in a nation that is by and large center right and to some extent center left is not in lockstep with the mainstream America. America is self identified as 85 percent religious with a vast number of those Christians and yet……20 percent claim to be liberal while 40 percent claim to be conservative.
The math is simple….if the left cannot control the debate they lose….plain and simple…..see health care reform as a classic example of this.
It was and is used as an insult because of its association with homosexuality. Without that connection it would not be used in that way. The same is true of retard.
That said this is much ado about little.
Doomed,
1) Is there nothing that will not set of an Alinsky rant?
2) How is it that you avoid being banned (temporarily or otherwise) or being censored for off topic or diversionary comments?
Don't forget 'lame' is a word for crippled.
Doomed, please keep your comments related to the topic. Your constant rantings on this subject in every article you comment on are beginning to grow tiring. I agree with your views about where the majority of PC comes from, but this was about Palin's use of it, not the left's. If discussion had grown that way, it'd be one thing. But you were the first commenter, so try to stay on topic.
Thank you.
No disagreements here. Though its usage is less as of late (maybe because I've been out of grade school for six years), I'm probably wrong that it's being taken back, at least not fully. I've seen Andrew Sullivan use it on more than one occasion, and he is gay.
Lots of people are crippled, so this will no doubt be the next word the PC brigade (now including honorary member Sarah Palin) will tell us we can't use…
Palin has since walked back her criticism of Limbaugh. Now its OK because it was satire when Limbaugh did it, but Emmanuel should still be fired (I would guess because of the D after his name).
I don't really have a problem with either instance. Limbaugh was simply doing his schtick and it is often much more offensive, but he is an entertainer and that is to be expected. If we get our panties in a wad every time an entertainer says something offensive we will have time for nothing but straightening said panties.
Emmanuel made his comment in a private meeting and that context should be considered.
This post was on topic. Totally.
Read it instead of growing weary that I say the same thing over and over.
But Ban me.
This site is known as the banningest site on the internet.
Never mind…..EVEN MVDG has left his own site to post elsewhere.
I think RedState has that honor locked up.
and you talk about others getting off topic Jeb. Those who live in glass houses.
in response to this. Especially because Emmanual has a (D). Emmanual is the Chief of Staff to the Office of the President of the United States. In that capacity, Emmanual has the ability, and is expected to sit in meetings in place of the President and advise the Office of the President as to the outcome and also to speak on behalf of the President if given such direction to do so.
The Presidential Chief of Staff is the gatekeeper, decides who does and who does not see the President of the United States, is also in charge of all other White House Staff and Manages the President's Schedule – he is in effect – the Co-President.
Limbaugh – does not and is not and you want to argue Context.
Hey, we already know how the President feels about the mentally challenged.
Interested it was a private meeting. If it was Obama or Boehner or anyone else in a private meeting considerable leeway should be given.
If you think Palins response to each of these was not based on politics, I've got a bridge to sell you.
Her response doesn't matter.
When you are in the Office of the President of hte United States – there are no private meetings. If you think otherwise – I know why you have that bridge to sell.
Her response doesn't matter.
When you are in the Office of the President of the United States or representing it, – there are no private meetings. If you think otherwise – I know why you have that bridge to sell.
bah damn wordpress
I take it then that you were upset with bush when the mike picked up his "major league a$$hole" comment that inspired similar fauxrage on the left? Do you really want to support the fauxrage every time a politician says something impolitic in what is intended as private communication?
And lets not forget about Dick Cheney's temperamental nature. I think the concern is because Emanuel is regularly in a bad attitude, but I don't agree that he needs to step down for it.
Come on guys…
Play nice. Thank you.
There is no private communication when you are in the public eye. Period.
Was I upset? Nope, but you also didn't see me defending it as you are. He screwed up – he gets to deal with it. Just the same as I do here.
I fail to see how Cheney's temper matters one iota either. He said what he did on the Senate floor (which could be said much more often). And he got held to task for it.
It's that simple.
He did. I also don't remember anyone asking him to step down for it. The Veep represents the President, too.
Well that would be fairly difficult to claim either way MM. There was so much furor over calls to impeach Cheney and the election to be able to separate out that one particular thing or not. How about when John Kerry said the same thing about Bush's policies MM anybody tell Kerry to step down?
And besides, we should have a Congressional Inquiry as to why Leahy didn't do as ordered by the VP of the United States of America.
or maybe he did – or has. In either case, where did Cheney claim it was a private conversation and should be exempt?