I am a member of the Obama site, I can have a funraiser for him and it would be advertised on his site. I can have a donation drive and it will be advertised on his site, I could have a party to support and tell about his policies, and it would be advertised on his site. That does not mean that Obama sanctioned it.

It’s funny because until recently Randi was a Hillary girl, big time. But then at one time so was I

In brief….* ‘whore’ has more meanings than the one that is giving everyone fits, all of which I included in the previous post, highlighting the definition which Rhodes demonstrably intended; no skipping or filtering was done.
* ‘whore’ may have some exceedingly derogatory connotations, but LJ is a tad hypocritical to be lecturing others on the matter, given his use of the term.
* Not everyone is expected to rise-up in defense of RR’s rights, but LJ is mighty hypocritical for failing to practice what he preached over on dKos, railing on others for their suppression of speech.
How did a post on the hypocrisy of Larry Johnson become a post on the wonders of Barack Obama? Ya think maybe ya’ll are a few cappucinos over today’s recommended daily allowance?

How much more of this belligerence are we going to stomach. I do not recall so much vermon spewd by a candidates supporters. (sic)

NQ, heal thyself. Aside from my less-than-friendly interpretation of ‘whore’, exactly where in my post did I anywhere near approach the “belligerence” or “venom spewed”(?) by NQ’s home-court commenters.

p.s. Second only to the “paid trolls” comment, this was my favorite…

This is evidence of the anger, hatred and incomprehensible infatuation that the leftists in our country are displaying towards Obama.

Wow, them Obamatons sure are a mixed-up bunch, directing their “anger, hatred and infatuation” at Obama. Before the next rant, try some deep breathing.

How much more of this belligerence are we going to stomach. I do not recall so much vermon spewd by a candidates supporters. Can you imagine if this guy loses? Is this their way of having us belief in this guy? I find it a very disconcerting trend. This country seems more divided now than I can remember. Thanks to the Obamamaniacs. I am hoping that Americans in the states that remain to cast their votes take this into consideration and send the DNC a message that their preordained candidate will not do. American voices will be heard!!!!

And that whole freedom of speech thing in the first amendment protects us from having the government suspend our freedom of speech. So far as I know, the government hasn’t been involved nor has Ms. Rhodes been shackled and frog-marched off to the gaol.

And so, why on earth would anyone that thinks Ms. Rhodes is a piece of loud-mouthed trash defend her? No one has infringed upon her right to make an absolute ass of herself. And she took full advantage of that. As did all the tacky people that defend that kind of rhetoric.

Oh and by the way; when you look things up in the dictionary do you usually bypass the first two definitions of a word and head directly to the 3rd? The most logical understanding of what Rhodes said is

whore 1: a woman who engages in sexual acts for money : prostitute; also : a promiscuous or immoral woman

Especially when preceded by the word “fu*king”? Thus we are supposed to actually believe that what Rhodes meant was a “fu*king venal or unscrupulous person”? Even for an Obamapologist that’s some corkscrew thinking.

People i know in the industry of Radio and TV have said if they ever said what Randi did , they would never work again..they would be off the air for good!

There are no excuses bushbots, I… mean… obamabots..
Behavior like this is usually spelled out very clearly in ones contract…well that is , it is with major networks.
Even Obamaedshultz has now turned back to volumne…

Oh and if you think people haven’t noticed what is going on with the media…and the obamabots…even my very republican best friends have said ..it is disgusting,and if they had thoughts about looking into Obama, the way the media has genuflected and groveled and debased for Obama, ..they know ..something is seriously wrong when the media kisses one candidates ass exclusively! They are laughing their butts off at we dems..
how sad when this is that important ..

As for your comments of substance that I was able to find within your rather off-meds rant…

There’s a difference of substance between the terms “media whore” and “fucking whore” … I don’t see how ANYONE can defend Randi Rhodes–her words were disgraceful, and she was wrong to say them.

Re: “fucking whore”… I would agree, absent any context; but since the phrase was spewed by Rhodes in the middle of a political rant, and while giving examples of how she felt both Ferraro and Clinton had demonstrated this political trait, sufficient context exists to make her meaning clear. And, given the obvious political context of ‘whore’ in Randi’s comments, however shocking to the senses, one might have expected the Larry Johnson of Valentine’s Day, 2008 to defend Randi’s right to speak her political opinion, rather than participating in a purge and a rather pitiable attempt to smear the opposition candidate via distortions and outright fabrications.

But Clinton supporters, such as those on NQ, are evidently on a witchhunt against anyone who dares to be critical of the Clinton campaign, and Randi’s demonization as part of this effort has been unfortunate*, though instructional. Larry Johnson has been entertainingly hypocritical on this issue, in particular, as demonstrated above.

As for my support of Obama, it’s soft, at best — what with my preferred candidate never entering the race and my backup suspending his campaign — and is mostly driven by Clinton campaign tactics since the third-place thumping they took in Iowa, after which they began dialing-up the negativity and distortions. However, I’ve long-since acclimated to the idea of the Clinton campaign stealing the nomination, and have begun to hope for it — because whatever certainty you may have regarding Obama’s inability to win in November, I am equally certain that Hillary cannot win. I have begun to look forward to her thumping in the GE, in which I would vote for her, as the necessary enema to which the Democratic Party must submit to flush itself of DLC/Clinton/corporate influence.

* When I say “unfortunate,” above, I’m referring to the fascist nature of the supposedly NQ effort to purge Rhodes. Personally, I find Randi to be a bit too Randi-centric, abrasive and entirely too abusive of her callers, negating whatever educational value one might gain from suffering through her show, so the only time I listen to her program is when it’s being guest-hosted by Sammy — and Randi’s suspension has provided some much-needed weekday Seder. That said, I hope Randi is back on-air soon, and speaking her mind — and blowing yours.

Yet another “so-called” Democrat who excuses gutter and offensive language, simply because it was spoken in support of Saint Barack. A “situational” Democrat. A fake. A phony. A sexist. And a truth stretcher, too!

There’s a difference of substance between the terms “media whore” and “fucking whore” but oh, that sure doesn’t matter…not when we’re talking about Saint Barack’s friends.

Obama can do no wrong, he can associate with thieves, scumbags, fools, and loudmouthed substance abusers, but we must not point out any of his failings, any of his weaknesses, or any of his character flaws–because he IS Saint Barack! And that goes double for his trash talking buddies!

I don’t see how ANYONE can defend Randi Rhodes–her words were disgraceful, and she was wrong to say them. But oh, I forgot–we’re talking about an acolyte of Saint BARACK, here!

People like Plooger are really working hard this election season. They’re working hard to see John McCain elected.

If Saint Barack is chosen in Denver, we’ll have Plooger and friends to thank for four more years of Bush policies. Because the Republicans aren’t going to be polite about Saint Barack–they’re going to confront the cult head on and make mincemeat out of it. Way to go, Plooger! Four More Years!

… what would we be saying if …yada… referred to Barack Obama as a “nigger”.

I’d start by wondering from what racist gutter the speaker had crawled, based on the fact that there is no acceptable usage of that term — which sort of makes your point irrelevant, Larry. Well, it moots your point, but, in fact, raises a new one, that being… What exactly is your motivation for attempting to equate the use of the word “nigger” with the word “whore” — for which there is a gender-neutral meaning that many would ascribe to the behavior of Sen. Clinton, as well as many other politicians?

whore
1: a woman who engages in sexual acts for money : prostitute; also : a promiscuous or immoral woman
2: a male who engages in sexual acts for money
3: a venal or unscrupulous person

Are you actually taking the position, however ludicrous, that Randi Rhodes was intimating that Sen. Clinton and former Rep. Ferraro are sexually promiscuous? Might a less hysterical inference be that Randi was stating her opinion that she viewed both of these public, political figures as ‘venal and/or unscrupulous persons’?

As you well know, the term ‘whore’ is widely used nowadays, to reflect those who are viewed to be taking some action or position based on some current or future quid pro quo (Clarice), and the term has become nearly synonymous with ‘politician’.

Just writing the word is radioactive. Well boys and girls, as someone who has been married for thirty plus years let me assure you that a woman does not like being called a “whore”. This is an equally radioactive word.

Then I expect that you spent quite a bit of time on the couch back in Fall 2005, eh, Larry? Or was the Significant Other less put-out by your use of the term?

Some Repent for Backing Judy Miller
By Larry Johnson on October 20, 2005

When Judith Miller went to jail in July I rejoiced because some justice, at least in my eyes, was being visited on a media whore who helped the Bush Administration mix the kool aid that took us to war.

So the label of ‘whore’ is only acceptable when, exactly, Lar? Only when you use it? Only when applied to your political foes? Would someone who supported “media whore” Judy Miller’s war as a matter of political expedience not be a political whore?You can certainly disagree with Randi’s political assessment of Clinton and Ferraro as whores, as is your right, but going after someone’s livelihood for daring to voice an opinion with which you differ reeks of fascism, and, in your case, just a wee bit hypocritical.

FUCK KOS
By Larry Johnson on February 14, 2008
… the pigs began punishing the other farm animals. They assumed the worst traits of the humans they vanquished.

Well Markos and crowd. Orwell was right. Fuck you people. I won’t post and I won’t read. But most of all, I won’t apologize. I have nothing to apologize for other than making the false assumption that you clowns gave a shit about freedom of expression or liberty. You guys are John Bolton and Dick Cheney in drag. You are welcome to kiss my ass.

A less whorish person, perhaps the Larry Johnson from this DKos admonition, might have defended Randi Rhodes’ rights, in spite of a conflicting political allegiance, but it seems your candidate addiction controls and overrides your every action — making you a political crack whore, of sorts.

This is the concerned troll mode.

Obama is not going to be the President. He will lose if he is the democratic nominee.

So there isn’t anything to discuss — except count the FL and MI votes and throw out the caucus votes.

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/barackrhodes.jpg