Rush Limbaugh - Ha! What An Ass

[Oh_My_Goth]

Aaaah, look at this.. Rush has the ability to inspire people without even being in direct contact with them...

It's so great that he is able to inspire hatred & douche-bagery around the world

[Destroit]

Well...I did not say just that...but as I see it...that's how the comedians are all operating lately...

...except that Lisa Lampenelli can rip on anyone she wants anytime she feels...

.....I didn't wright the rules..I'm just callin' it like I see it...I watch allot of Comedy Central...

.........& I know someone is going to ask what makes it oK for them to do this?

WELL...they are comedians..... COMEDY=tragedy+time(or "NO TIME")

...racism is a tragedy..it is not getting better...SO they are making fun of it in hopes that it will go away.

..the ends justify the means...

..also..they are laughing & smiling about it when they say these things...

Maybe Lisa Lampenelli gets away with it because she only dates and has sex with black men? I'm not making that up, she really does, and sadly, that may have something to do with how she gets away with so much.

I hate how if you're any other race except white you can rip on anyone and get away with it. Why are we trying to be so nice and politically correct when the people we're trying to be nice and PC towards are (generally, at least in the media) anything but.

[The evil fish]

HEY! I like this thread - I enjoy talking about this stuff and debating the topic... please do me a favor and don't let you're emotions about the topic make you spout out insults.... I don't want to see the thread get locked. Thanks

When I mentioned Howard Stern, I wasn't insinuating that Howard and Rush were going after the same goal. I only compared them to show that things said by either of them and then taken out of context can make them look very racist. Rush does not say what he says to be funny, he says it to make a point and you'd have to be a listener to see that.

As for M J Fox - well you already posted what I was talking about. Rush was a fan of M J and was disappointed in him at that "hearing". It was first denied that M J was off his medication. But when Rush called him out on it, M J came out with the statement Gaf posted. M J was video taped at interviews and other functions in that same time frame and appeared much better and in more control than when he appeared at that hearing. Rush has a family member with Parkinson's and his family always knew when that member was off their meds because their movements became very erratic. I knew at least 2 people with Parkinson's and the same is true for them. I'm not sure why the info that was put up here suggest different unless it has something to do with the stage these people are in. Fact is Rush felt he was either acting of off his meds - Rush called it and it happens that he was right. It doesn't matter what the point was... only that he "insulted" someone... well anytime you put yourself in the public eye then you take the chance of being attacked especially if it's over some kind of sensitive topic. WE take that very same chance posting on here about politics.

I don't always agree with Rush when it comes to religion and theories - mostly just on politics. The man has his rights to believe in what he wants just as you all do. If you all want to believe there is no God then you have that right too and express it as you do here without repercussion. Yet you want to call this guy stupid for his beliefs.... so does it make you stupid to believe in what you do? Are you gonna call me stupid for believing in God? To believe in God is to believe that in fact he is the reason to have meaning in your life.... considering he would BE the meaning for life. (If you are a believer mind you) In your case this would NOT be true. But you want to call this person stupid for having their own set of beliefs.... to me... that is just as bad as what was said.

I wont judge you for your beliefs because I, as an American, realize that this a a country that gives you the freedom of speech and religion and you have every right to believe in what you want but so does he. I don't agree with a lot that is said but I will tolerate it and wont let belief's get in the way of being friends with someone. If that was the case, I'd have no friends because in the entertainment business... most everyone I know is a democrat.

[The evil fish]

Maybe Lisa Lampenelli gets away with it because she only dates and has sex with black men? I'm not making that up, she really does, and sadly, that may have something to do with how she gets away with so much.

I hate how if you're any other race except white you can rip on anyone and get away with it. Why are we trying to be so nice and politically correct when the people we're trying to be nice and PC towards are (generally, at least in the media) anything but.

Again - I completely agree with this.

[Rev.Reverence]

Maybe Lisa Lampenelli gets away with it because she only dates and has sex with black men? I'm not making that up, she really does, and sadly, that may have something to do with how she gets away with so much.

I hate how if you're any other race except white you can rip on anyone and get away with it. Why are we trying to be so nice and politically correct when the people we're trying to be nice and PC towards are (generally, at least in the media) anything but.

..yeah...but I can not help but to find tolerance...

..because they often explain the love they are expressing with these harsh terms...

& yes..that is why Lisa can rip on "the blacks"...but does not explain why she gets to rip on Jews... Hispanics... Arabs... Asians... Others...I guess she just has the balls...& that explains why she gets to make fun of the queers................but it's her job...& the love is evident & stated.

[phee]

I don't always agree with Rush when it comes to religion and theories - mostly just on politics. The man has his rights to believe in what he wants just as you all do. If you all want to believe there is no God then you have that right too and express it as you do here without repercussion. Yet you want to call this guy stupid for his beliefs.... so does it make you stupid to believe in what you do? Are you gonna call me stupid for believing in God? To believe in God is to believe that in fact he is the reason to have meaning in your life.... considering he would BE the meaning for life. (If you are a believer mind you) In your case this would NOT be true. But you want to call this person stupid for having their own set of beliefs.... to me... that is just as bad as what was said.

Indeed... Essentually when he says that one cannot have meaning in their lives without God... is a gross generalization, responding with another makes it just as GROSS as his...

Good post

[StormKnight (1)]

“I had made a deliberate choice to appear before the subcommittee without medication. It seemed to me that this occasion demanded that my testimony about the effects of the disease and the urgency we as a community were feeling be seen as well as heard. For people who had never observed me in this kind of shape, the transformation must have been startling.” Michael J. Fox

That was in the subcommittee. It was not in the commercial that I originally posted (where he thought the medication was overdoing it.) Had he not been medicated during the commercial, he wouldn't have been able to move.

[Rev.Reverence]

Indeed... Essentually when he says that one cannot have meaning in their lives without God... is a gross generalization, responding with another makes it just as GROSS as his...

Good post

+1

[Slogo]

The best way to joke about racism is do what Carlin did. Use every slur there is within a 1.5 minute period

[Slogo]

Indeed... Essentually when he says that one cannot have meaning in their lives without God... is a gross generalization, responding with another makes it just as GROSS as his...

Good post

Actually the best thing to do is go further down on his Meaning of Life Link. It has plenty of Enlightenment thoughts on the subject.

[The evil fish]

That was in the subcommittee. It was not in the commercial that I originally posted (where he thought the medication was overdoing it.) Had he not been medicated during the commercial, he wouldn't have been able to move.

No - I don't know where you read that this was said at the subcommittee but that is untrue StormKnight, this was a statement made after the fact and after Rush brought it up on his show because he played this days later on his show. All the grammar is past tense. Maybe I'm not sure what you're getting at... can you explain what you're saying there?

[StormKnight (1)]

I was referring to the ad for McCaskill he did in 2006, where the medication was overcompensating which generated dyskinesia seen in the ad.

Saying in regards to the subcommittee, this was quoted in response:

“I had made a deliberate choice to appear before the subcommittee without medication. It seemed to me that this occasion demanded that my testimony about the effects of the disease and the urgency we as a community were feeling be seen as well as heard. For people who had never observed me in this kind of shape, the transformation must have been startling.” Michael J. Fox

Which referred to how he addressed the senate subcommittee in 1999, without medication to see the akinesia of Parkinson's.

Now, the show Limbaugh did was in October of 2006 (and where the quote that got me concerned originated from,) referred to the way he supposedly faked the motions in the ad for McCaskill, not the subcommittee hearing. During that ad, the medications overshot the mark resulting in a dopamine overdose, giving him the bizarre movements. As I said here, the medications have a variable response regardless of how and when you take them.

MJF's response interview is also in that post, along with the ad that started this as well.

Had Limbaugh had the opinion of someone who knows the disease (a neurologist preferably,) on his show at the time to give an opinion of what the medications do, or even answer the question "is he on his medication or not," I might have been far less concerned than going off of the cuff to say the movements can be faked (they can't, any one who has seen the disease can see the difference, and people who know would have debunked Fox by now.) And, being seven years after the hearing, it doesn't surprise me that the disease has progressed as much as it did in the CBS interview in 2006.

[Der Nister]

I was referring to the ad for McCaskill he did in 2006, where the medication was overcompensating which generated dyskinesia seen in the ad.

Saying in regards to the subcommittee, this was quoted in response:

Which referred to how he addressed the senate subcommittee in 1999, without medication to see the akinesia of Parkinson's.

Now, the show Limbaugh did was in October of 2006 (and where the quote that got me concerned originated from,) referred to the way he supposedly faked the motions in the ad for McCaskill, not the subcommittee hearing. During that ad, the medications overshot the mark resulting in a dopamine overdose, giving him the bizarre movements. As I said here, the medications have a variable response regardless of how and when you take them.

MJF's response interview is also in that post, along with the ad that started this as well.

Had Limbaugh had the opinion of someone who knows the disease (a neurologist preferably,) on his show at the time to give an opinion of what the medications do, or even answer the question "is he on his medication or not," I might have been far less concerned than going off of the cuff to say the movements can be faked (they can't, any one who has seen the disease can see the difference, and people who know would have debunked Fox by now.) And, being seven years after the hearing, it doesn't surprise me that the disease has progressed as much as it did in the CBS interview in 2006.

That whole insident where Limburger blasted MJF for 'being doped up' just made me have even less respect for him (if it was even possible).

That just showed how ignorant Mr. L really is.

How anyone here can defend Rush is beyond me but I would love to hear your excuses for standing behind him and giving him support.

BTW - in case anyone cares and doesn't know about parkins disease, if Mr. Fox hasn't been on his medication, he wouldn't have been able to move at all. The meds GIVE him the ability to move but he has little control over his muscle movements. As he (MJF) explained when he disputed Rush's ignorant comments.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Actually, he never disputed them. He admitted to going to Congress without taking meds so his desease would look as bad as possible... he refused to answer any question about his TV commercial. You would know that if you bothered to read this thread.

[Oh_My_Goth]

[The evil fish]

Um yeah... Der.... you just described something completely different in fact quite opposite than what Storm explained and Rush didn't accuse him of being doped up... did you even read what was posted or did you just not comprehend it? You see... you're calling someone something based on quotes that you aren't even taking the time to understand. That's why i asked Storm to explain so I COULD understand. I'm starting to get a little miffed and I'm wanting to repeat things I said in another thread. But I wont because I don't want to insult someone one here... just do me a favor... read, comprehend, think and then respond.... ok?

[The evil fish]

Ok Storm, I understand now and I'm also understand why I was a bit confused about that last post. You were talking about two separate incidents... I'm only talking about the subcommittee meeting, Rush's comments and then Fox's response. You were confusing me by talking about both at the same time.

Rush's comments where that he felt Fox was either acting OR off his meds (In fact he even stated in the broadcast that he hope he wasn't acting - of course not part of the quote) So... afterward, Fox made a statement that he was actually off his meds and did it for the same purpose that Rush suspected. Thing is - the results of being off the meds as you stated (and the way I understood your statement) are completely different than the ones exhibited at the subcommittee meeting yet Fox did admit he was in fact off his meds on purpose.

Rush was only stating that he was appalled by this, suspected what he suspected and what he suspected was confirmed by the horses mouth. How does this make Rush stupid? It looks to me that he was right on the spot. It might be an "ugly truth" but ugly or not... it was true. Fox put himself in that situation to be doubted - if you do that, you need to be prepared for the consequences.

Now Storm, I'm not an MD but Rush stated he had a close family member with Parkinson's and that's why he suspected what he did. I knew two people with Parkinson's and I too have seen the same results as what Rush suspected so I have to ask you - If the medical community says that being off the meds would made him near motionless, yet at the meeting, his motion was aggravated, almost exaggerated... and he admitted not being on his meds, Rush's family member and two people I knew had the same effect - how can that be? This is the reverse effect the medical community says will happen.

[StormKnight (1)]

The meeting was in 1999. The akinesia (lack of movement,) is something that gradually evolves from bradykinesia (slowing of movement.) As the disease progresses, the substantia nigra (the area of the brain that releases the dopamine,) gradually die off, which is the general cause of the disease. It is quite possible that he was still only slow in his movements, with the tremors (cogwheel motion/rigidity,) being the only things prevalent. In other words, the tremor and his slowness of movement were the most dramatic effect of the disease seen at the meeting. I have seen only a few moments of the meeting, but he looks very classic Parkinson's (he is holding his hands, but you can see the tremor, and he looks rigid.)

While the movements in 1999 may be classic Parkinson's (the tremor when you look at their hands at rest looks like they are screwing in a light bulb, the body looks like it way too rigid, balance problems,) the movement in the 2006 ad and interview are more consistent with dyskinesia/chorea (he looks like he is dancing in his seat at the interview.) This happens when one takes the medication (L-dopa.) Not only are the effects of Parkinson's (look at his hands when resting in the interview; there is still a tremor at rest,) become worse as time goes on, but the medication causes dyskinesia, and fails to treat as well as time goes on.

Half the patients succumb to the dyskinesia within 5 to 10 years with L-dopa treatment, and the number of people who succumb to it increase with each year of treatment. And the medication gradually fails in treatment as time goes on, leaving only the nasty side effects of having too much dopamine in the body. (L-dopa passes through the blood brain barrier, and changes to dopamine. Dopamine doesn't, and the 95% of the L-dopa left in the body gets converted systemically into dopamine, and causes systemic problems.)

He was diagnosed extremely young for the disease (at age 30,) with symptoms happening a year or so prior. In younger people, the disease progresses very fast and is aggressive when compared to people who have the onset in middle age to early old (60-65) years. So it is very conceivable in 2006, he would have degraded to the point of complete akinesia without medications. The on/off effect of the medication is rather impressive too as the medication brain concentration varies. One minute, they are looking like they are dancing in their seat, the next they fall forward motionless like R2-D2 when the jawas shot him in the original Star Wars. (seen that happen...not pretty.)

Being rigid as a board or looking like you have a colony of ants in your clothing as you dance around. Neither is comfortable, but being rigid and akinetic is the worse of the two evils. He had to be on his medications for at least 7 years at the time of the interview (from 1999 or earlier to 2006,) so having dyskinesia with the medication is almost expected.

So basically, there are two movement disorders; one is the disease itself, the other is a result of the chronic use of the medication that is used to treat it. Without the medication, he would be a board. With it, he looks like he did in the ad and interview. And both become worse with time.

BTW, getting medication into an akinetic patient (since L-dopa isn't an IV drug,) requires a nasogastric tube, or a feeding tube through the skin to the stomach/small intestine (a PEG tube.)

[Rev.Reverence]

The meeting was in 1999. The akinesia (lack of movement,) is something that gradually evolves from bradykinesia (slowing of movement.) As the disease progresses, the substantia nigra (the area of the brain that releases the dopamine,) gradually die off, which is the general cause of the disease. It is quite possible that he was still only slow in his movements, with the tremors (cogwheel motion/rigidity,) being the only things prevalent. In other words, the tremor and his slowness of movement were the most dramatic effect of the disease seen at the meeting. I have seen only a few moments of the meeting, but he looks very classic Parkinson's (he is holding his hands, but you can see the tremor, and he looks rigid.)

While the movements in 1999 may be classic Parkinson's (the tremor when you look at their hands at rest looks like they are screwing in a light bulb, the body looks like it way too rigid, balance problems,) the movement in the 2006 ad and interview are more consistent with dyskinesia/chorea (he looks like he is dancing in his seat at the interview.) This happens when one takes the medication (L-dopa.) Not only are the effects of Parkinson's (look at his hands when resting in the interview; there is still a tremor at rest,) become worse as time goes on, but the medication causes dyskinesia, and fails to treat as well as time goes on.

Half the patients succumb to the dyskinesia within 5 to 10 years with L-dopa treatment, and the number of people who succumb to it increase with each year of treatment. And the medication gradually fails in treatment as time goes on, leaving only the nasty side effects of having too much dopamine in the body. (L-dopa passes through the blood brain barrier, and changes to dopamine. Dopamine doesn't, and the 95% of the L-dopa left in the body gets converted systemically into dopamine, and causes systemic problems.)

He was diagnosed extremely young for the disease (at age 30,) with symptoms happening a year or so prior. In younger people, the disease progresses very fast and is aggressive when compared to people who have the onset in middle age to early old (60-65) years. So it is very conceivable in 2006, he would have degraded to the point of complete akinesia without medications. The on/off effect of the medication is rather impressive too as the medication brain concentration varies. One minute, they are looking like they are dancing in their seat, the next they fall forward motionless like R2-D2 when the jawas shot him in the original Star Wars. (seen that happen...not pretty.)

Being rigid as a board or looking like you have a colony of ants in your clothing as you dance around. Neither is comfortable, but being rigid and akinetic is the worse of the two evils. He had to be on his medications for at least 7 years at the time of the interview (from 1999 or earlier to 2006,) so having dyskinesia with the medication is almost expected.

So basically, there are two movement disorders; one is the disease itself, the other is a result of the chronic use of the medication that is used to treat it. Without the medication, he would be a board. With it, he looks like he did in the ad and interview. And both become worse with time.

BTW, getting medication into an akinetic patient (since L-dopa isn't an IV drug,) requires a nasogastric tube, or a feeding tube through the skin to the stomach/small intestine (a PEG tube.)

Hm...seems to me that some one should not make fun/ mock or give shit publicly to a person suffering from this.

[The evil fish]

Hm...seems to me that some one should not make fun/ mock or give shit publicly to a person suffering from this.

Rev.... Rush wasn't making fun of him ... he was accusing him of acting or being off his drugs.

[Slogo]

>Makes YouTube video parody<

(crying hysterically)

LEAVE RUSH ALONE!

[Rev.Reverence]

Rev.... Rush wasn't making fun of him ... he was accusing him of acting or being off his drugs.

..but he was giving him shit..

...& he was a gerk about it...he is a gerk about most everything he sais.

[The evil fish]

..but he was giving him shit..

...& he was a gerk about it...he is a gerk about most everything he sais.

lol! Well that is your opinion and I can't change that but I promise you, even If I don't agree, I do respect it.

[phee]

lol! Well that is your opinion and I can't change that but I promise you, even If I don't agree, I do respect it.

[Rev.Reverence]

lol! Well that is your opinion and I can't change that but I promise you, even If I don't agree, I do respect it.

..WELL.....I reserve the right to respect that as well.

...& just so you know...Howard Stern is JUST about in the same rung as Limbaugh from where I see it

I forgot to draw the parallel you pointed out.