Sunday, May 20, 2007
While doing some surfing, I came across this on their site:
"Discussing Giuliani's son, Limbaugh recalled media "zone of privacy" for Chelsea Clinton but ignored his own smear"
However, Limbaugh did not mention his own comments regarding Chelsea Clinton during the program. As media watchdog group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting noted, in 1993, on his former television show, Limbaugh referred to Chelsea Clinton, who was 13 at the time, as "the White House dog."
He didn't mention it for two reasons. 1) The incident in question didn't happen like that. So why should he mention it? 2) As he mentioned on his radio show ten years later, he had sworn off refering to the real incident which went like this:
Copyright 1992 Multimedia Entertainment, Inc.
SHOW: RUSH LIMBAUGH (9:00 PM ET)
November 6, 1992, Friday 11:15 AM
LIMBAUGH: Thank you. This show's era of dominant influence is just beginning. We are now the sole voice of sanity, the sole voice of reason. We are the sole voice of opposition on all television. This is the only place you can tune to to get the truth of the opposition of the one-party dictatorial government that now will soon run America. Oh, I mean, we are only beginning to enjoy dominance and prosperity. Most of these things on the in-out list are not even funny, but a couple of them--one of them in particular is.
David Hinckley of--of the New York Daily News wrote this, and what he has--he's got--it's very strange. He says, In: A cute kid in the White House. Out: Cute dog in the White House.' Could--could we see the cute kid? Let's take a look at--see who is the cute kid in the White House.
(A picture is shown of Millie the dog)
LIMBAUGH: (Voiceover) No, no, no. That's not the kid.
(Picture shown of Chelsea Clinton)
LIMBAUGH: (Voiceover) That's--that's the kid. We're trying to...
Naturally "FAIR" has it wrong (their source is Molly Ivins who also had it wrong), and Media Matters is making a big mistake in citing it as a source for this particular incident.
Speaking of which, notice how Chelsea's page on wiki mentions this incident:
"Conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh compared 13-year-old Chelsea to a dog:
On November 6, 1992, three days after her father won the elections, when Chelsea was still in braces, Rush Limbaugh said the following: "Everyone knows the Clintons have a cat; Socks is the White House cat. But did you know there is also a White House dog?"   He then pointed to a video monitor, which switched to a picture of Chelsea."
Now, let's see that:
He then pointed to a video monitor, which switched to a picture of Chelsea.
Yet according to their source, number 5:
"Rush Limbaugh took this shot: "Everyone knows the Clintons have a cat," said Limbaugh. "Socks is the White House cat. But did you know there is also a White House dog?" And he held up a picture of Chelsea."
Now which is it? did he "hold up a picture of Chelsea"? Or did he "point to a video monitor, which switched to a picture of Chelsea"?
I already know the answer to this question: He did neither. But I find it funny how liberals are contradicting each other.