Badmovies.org Forum

Rush must like making a-hole of himself, because these comments and the fact he stated he meant it and won't take them back really make himself like an a-hole.  I personally have nothing against the guy in general, enough though I do not agree with his views.  However, this is just taking it too far.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20100115/pl_politico/31539 (http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20100115/pl_politico/31539)

Still not as bad as what Pat Robetson said. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5TE99sAbwM

Attacking your own president for what you believe to be political reasons is one thing.  Pat pretty much says the people of Hati got what they deserved and that the trajedy was "A blessing in disguse"

How did I guess he was christian?  :lookingup:

This man should not be allowed on TV to spout such fire and brimstone nonsense. He actually believes that this is an act of god that has taken many people's lives, but that we should "pray to god"....errr.....okay.  :lookingup:
Also, aren't christians not supposed to believe in the devil, only in god? So, just because Pat Robertson believes that Haitians years ago (many of whom are dead and have nothing to with these innocent people) made a pact with the devil, this is the reason behind it all.

Pat, do yourself a favour and learn about the world. Don't f**king blinker yourself thanks to a goddamn ancient book!  :lookingup:

I have donated money and I have a donation link posted on my blog. That's not a "blessing in diguise" or being "a good christian", that's f**king morality.

All I gotta say is... May they be granted a measure of mercy equal to that which they have dispensed.

I'm a Christian, but this man does not speak for me at all.  I despise what he said and he should just shut up for a while, along with Rush.  He seems like he hates Haiti, making me believe he is just a hypocrite who uses God to justify his bigotry and hatred.  Enough about me ranting and getting into a religious issue (No need to sour friendships here with our different views)

My parents and I have already donated to help out them.  Outside of Circus and myself, has anyone else donated or contributed yet?

I'll be donating a big chunk from my next check . . .

and, as a Christian, let me say that I think Pat Robertson lost it years ago . . . .

he DOES NOT speak for all of us.

As for Rush . . . while I agree with him on some political issues, his comments were just flat out mean and abominably timed.  Shame on him.

Perhaps it's time for a well organized boycott of all sponsors and networks that bring people Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson. One that lasts a very long time and cripples their ability to broadcast.

Wouldn't work with Robertson, he owns his own network.
As for Rush . . . the man has spent his career saying inflammatory things that tick people off, and has a huge following.  I doubt any boycott will take hold.

And in all honesty, it's not just the righties popping a gasket on this one.
Danny Glover's comment was that this was a judgement on us for not doing something about global warming at Copenhagen. I'll look up his comment and post it . . . .

Here it is:

"When we see what we did at the climate summit in Copenhagen, this is the response, this is what happens, you know what I’m sayin'? "

Actually, I have no clue what good ol' Danny is sayin' here, except that someone apparently was displeased with our failure to cripple American capitalism in the name of fighting a meteorological phenomena . . . either God, or good ol' mother earth, decided the best way to punish us wicked Americans is to kill a half million poor black people in Haiti.

Ah heck.  All three of them are talking like idiots!!

I do think outright stating that Robertson called the quake a "blessing in disguise" is incorrect.  He asked if maybe it COULD BE a blessing in disguise, as he was suggesting it would focus attention on the horrible plight all of Haiti HAS BEEN IN for the past 50+ years.  Perhaps even cause people to do something to help them, beyond just fixing what the quake destroyed (building up the country, as he says).  It was poorly phrased, but what he meant was not a bad thought at all.

His comment about the devil is both misleading and stupid though - Haiti never made a pact with the devil.  They had a voodoo ceremony at the start of the revolution, but it's at best ignorant to call it a pact with the devil. 

Both of these comments are pretty minor and not nearly as inflammatory as things he has said in the past.  Pat Robertson is a bad person, so I'm never surprised at anything he says.

Pat Robertson's 700 Club show is shown on ABC Family. A boycott of that network and any radio station that carries his program and the sponsors who advertise during both of their programs could send a severe message this time.

If you want nonviolent protest and are sick of these guys never facing consequences for saying stupid and/or evil stuff then a boycott is how you take action. Glenn Beck lost dozens of sponsors for his show. He may still be on the air, but people can end his show the same way. There is no victory without sacrifice.

Rush Limburger is a joke of a human being. And Robertson is evil. He's not a Christian. He's a senile moron,with too much money for his own good. Closet Nazis.

I haven't heard such irrelevant mean-spirited partisan poop regarding a major catastrophe as RUSH LIMBAUGH spewed. 

PAT ROBERTSON's comments, as usual, are for the brain dead. 

My Dad once compared Rush Limbaugh to Howard Stern he said, " they both scream for attention, they both run off at the mouth and say stupid things except the latter uses boobs and babes to get his fans." While I would say that is a harsh comparison, I would also add that in a large part he is correct. Rush is a kind of political radio shock jock. I have no doubt the man believes mos t of what he says but sometimes like this one he just is looking for some attention.

I seem to be the only person on this forum that actually listens to Rush on a semi-regular basis, so let me say a few things here.  Having actually listened to his full comments and his explanation of them later today, I think that his remarks, as usual, have been taken completely out of context and twisted by the media.

He NEVER said that people should not donate to Haitian relief.
He simply criticized the President for urging potential donors to go to the WhiteHouse.gov website instead of sending them directly to the American Red Cross or other private relief organizations.  Yes, the White House site does have a link to the Red Cross site, but why make that a stop on the way when relief is needed so urgently?
He also said that sending money to the government for Haitian relief was a bad idea, since the government will already send millions of the tax dollars we have already paid to Haiti no matter what we do as individuals.

His whole point was (1) that private charities make more effective use of aid money than government ones because they typically have less waste and fewer overhead expenses; and (2) that Obama was politicizing the catastrophe by directing people to the official website of his Presidency - which is by its very nature a partisan political site.
He also was making the point that if Obama can milk this disaster for political gain, he will.  As he continues to milk Hurricane Katrina for political gain.

Now, do I agree with Rush on all these points?  Not necessarily.  But, his comments were not the general "Screw Haiti!" sentiment they have been portrayed as either.

Bottom line, you can trust nothing the mainstream, traditional media reports about guys like Limbaugh and Hannity, for the simple reason that traditional journalists genuinely hate these two, and all others like them.  Why?  Partially because 90% of broadcast journalists are political leftists, so conservative talkers promote an ideology that is loathsome to them.  And part of it is just good old-fashioned rivalry, because frankly, Limbaugh and Hannity have more listeners every day than any of the BIG THREE do.  And they bury MSNBC and, to a lesser extent, CNN in the ratings on a regular basis.  As for Air America (the liberal talk radio network that was touted as being the official response to guys like Limbaugh), they could not stay on the air at all without massive donations from the big-money leftists.  Their whole radio network has lost millions and can't keep sponsors for the simple reason that they can't draw and keep large audiences the way conservative talkers do.  Read into that what you will.

If you want to have a balanced perspective on talkers like Limbaugh, Hannity, et. al., then try actually listening to them for a couple of weeks instead of believing all that is said about them by their enemies, be they political or professional.

Listening to that part of the show, I do partly agree with Rush..  I'm not sure I see the point in donating through whitehouse.gov.  And the quip about the income tax is also correct, seeing as we're sending relief with federal funds.  That was poorly taken out of context.

Aside from that, his accusations against Obama are pretty ludicrous.  Look at it in the inverse: I think we can all agree he'd have criticized Obama if he HADN'T jumped to help Haiti, and had said nothing at all about the disaster, right?  And, of course, he just claims him doing this is just to further political ambitions (I really don't understand the light and dark skinned black remark - seriously, WTF?).  It's beyond consideration that Obama might actually, y'know, care about anything beyond politics.

It's obviously a damned-if-you-do damned-if-you-don't situation with pundits like Rush.  I saw the same thing with people attacking Bush in his years - EVERYTHING he did was wrong, even when it was the opposite of what he'd done earlier.  Obama is in that same boat now, as President. 

Must be frustrating.

I don't envy anyone the Presidency these days.  An old timer once commented: "The most popular President in my lifetime was FDR, and half the country STILL hated his guts!"