CPSIA on Rush Limbaugh

[#1]

I just heard Rush talking about the CPSIA. I don't think he mentioned it by name, but he was talking about the children's motorbikes that will be pulled because of lead in the engines, and mentioned library books. Still listening.

[Former_Member]

Even better "So why hasn't this been splashed across the headlines or in the nightly news before January of 09?"

[Former_Member]

badattitude,

We ARE and HAVE BEEN dealing with the specifics in the threads; to say it's a "bad law" is a bit of a shorthand, I believe. You are right, however, in that anyone new to the issue would take that generalization as a poor argument.

In a bit of semantic hair-splitting, define "toxic" (there is a scientific definition for this, I believe). Mind you, I know where you're going with this (and I'm not in disagreement), but if you're going to criticize the black/white take some have on this, I will enquire about the semantics here. Plain old, unadulterated H2O can be "toxic." Alcohol can be toxic (I know kids don't down bourbon; it's an example). Almost anything can be toxic after a certain point. While lead and its effects is very well studied, I have (unsuccessfully) tried to find an unbiased report about phthalates; they all come from groups with some agenda or other. Again, this is a tricky issue; some agenda-driven groups have used the word "toxic" to create fear or concern, turning to use of our emotions rather than using a more factual approach. Frankly, I find it patronizing. That's just me.

While there have been articles of clothing that showed legally excessive levels of lead in some items, no one seems to have used common sense to consider the inherent risk involved. While for infants I would say there should be not a speck of lead on an article of clothing, if a grommet on a 10-year-old's skirt tests a little high, what are the odds that she will pick up that grommet if it falls off and put it in her mouth? Legislators used the black and white approach to all items in this instance, not us.

Oddly enough, this law does NOTHING to address the main sources of lead (and, I believe, phthalates). While instances of lead poisoning are down over 80% from 1996 levels, the primary dangers of ingestion come from old buildings and pipesl. Phthalates tend to be in personal care products and cosmetics if I'm not mistaken. None of these significant risk areas is addressed in the Act.

You state "[t]he bigger point right now is to be careful who you align yourself with. That is not about 'hate' it's about cost/benefit ratio." To this I answer: politics does make strange bedfellows. Or, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Regardless of how someone feels about Rush, he did help get the message out (albeit not in full). That isn't cost/benefit; it's reality. Not one I'm all that comfortable with all the time, either.

You hit the nail squarely on the head about who isn't being punished. Astounding that those responsible will actually reap the benefit, ay?

We should be more rational in our approach. It's easy for people to get heated at times, because our livlihoods (and by extension our and our families' well-being) are threatened.

Okay, fire away at me...

[Former_Member]

A perfect example were all the Rush fans asking "What has NPR done?"

NPR did a LOT, but that audience was NEVER reached before this...

[HoneysuckleLane]

I heard that on the radio on the way home today. It sounds like Rush hadn't heard a lot about it, though I agree, the caller did a good job explaining his predicament. If enough people email Rush about it and about his broadcast today, hopefully he will do a more lengthy program concerning CPSIA.

[wiresNpliers]

I loved it when Rush referred to all the kids that would lick the lead. LOL

[Former_Member]

I believe the cost/benefit ratio of having Rush Limbaugh address this on his show is huge and it is a positive one. He has a daily audience that numbers in the several million listeners, these are people we need to reach as many of them are articulate, politically savvy people with children and grandchildren.
The fact that you may or may not agree with their politics is irrelevant on this issue.
And BTW, I do believe, after studying this law and it's effects for several months now, that it is a BAD LAW. Just because it was done in the name of "making our children safer" does not mean it actually addresses a real danger or that the reason stated was the real reason. This law is a perfect example of the politics of fear as far as I am concerned.
I have no problem "dancing" with Rush Limbaugh...especially on this issue. If that means that you will put my name on your blacklist, so be it...

[Former_Member]

Wow, I certainly never intended to start such a heated discussion about Rush Limbaugh when I started this thread.

Whether you like him or not, Rush does have a large following, and I feel that the short time he spent today talking about lead on motor bikes was beneficial to all of us. Because this law is so broad and affects so many different people, it is important to bring out the different aspects and how they will affect all of us. Today, for a few minutes, Rush talked with a man whose business was being hurt due to CPSIA. Although I really don't care much about motor bikes myself, there are a lot of people who do. Maybe someone who heard about motor bikes today will hear about children's books in libraries from another source tomorrow, and then hear about donations to the church bazaar the next day from someplace else. Hopefully, they will start to put all of these little tidbits of information together and decide to check into this law on their own.

It is the message, not the messanger, that we should be grateful for. As mentioned above, politics makes for strange bedfellows. We don't have to agree with the messanger on anything else, but this message is too important dismiss it because of the messanger.

Finally, before I head off to bed, I just want to say that I find it ironic that some of the people here who profess to hate Rush Limbaugh so much would allow him to have such an impact on their thoughts and beliefs. 'If Rush is for it then I am against it' gives him an awful lot of power in your life.

[TheTinyGarden]

Well, I am not sure what I missed as I could only bring myself to read 13 of the 19 pages but in my humble opinion...there IS no issue if no one knows about it and no one cares enough to help. So I am grateful to anyone who will give the issue some time whether conservative or liberal or somewhere in between. Everyone here obviously is welcome to watch or not watch or listen or not listen or call or not call whom ever they want.

So those that are not Rush fans find someone in the Liberal media or someone more conservative and give them a call or send them an email and hopefully by broadcasting from BOTH sides we will reach everyone not just those we agree with on other issues.

I myself emailed Rush, Sean Hannity and Bill O'reilly a few weeks ago.

Have a lovely evening, I am off to complete my blog post for the day.

[Former_Member]

LowellandSon says:


So those that are not Rush fans find someone in the Liberal media or someone more conservative and give them a call or send them an email and hopefully by broadcasting from BOTH sides we will reach everyone not just those we agree with on other issues.

I myself emailed Rush, Sean Hannity and Bill O'reilly a few weeks ago.




------------

I couldn't agree more.

And thanks, 3craftyladies for bringing this up. :)

[Former_Member]

Thanks, 3craftladies, for letting us know about the broadcast. :)

[germandolls]

Interesting! I don't like him either but if it helps spread the news we should work that angle too! =)

[gothicrow]

trinlayk said
I posted about my chat with NPR the day that the first interviewed me, and again (including links to the shows on the web) when they were aired and posted on their site.

Sorry you missed it, I was pretty excited... they made me sound BRILLIANT..

Good for you trinlayk, that is awesome!
People like you are the best representatives of how this law hurts the little guy.

[bobbinalong]

I came in on the end of the show, the portion about the restaurant. And Oprah. And her telling people not to eat out. And of course, he grabbed onto the personality of Oprah and "how dare she" say that. Oprah was right. If you can't afford very much, you eat at home. You purchase with coupons. You stretch your dollars. Those making more bucks can go to the restaurant.

Rush has never stretched his dollars. I used to listen to him all the time when I was working. But retirement, social security and common sense puts a different light on old Rush. He doesn't look near as interesting from this slant.

Common sense. Creative ability. A desire to sew and knit and make extra income from safe, quality items. My American right to create and sell. My right to guide my own future. My right to find pleasure from fabric and yarn and my sewing machine and knitting needles. My right to put a smile on a little child's face. My right to put some "magic" into a little child's world where there may not be much magic.

Balance. Common sense. And suddenly the sun comes out. Happiness moves in. Freedom to create follows.

[gothicrow]

Very nicely put bobbinalong! What you and other sellers have said is the most important testimonies to how this law affects small business. I am also glad that big personalities like Rush are talking about it.

[Former_Member]

Actually Bobbin, Rush has had to stretch his dollars.

I think a lot of the hatred toward him comes from people not actually listening to him to find out what he's really about. They hear what the media says about him and go by that. A lot of times what he has said toungue in cheek is taken out of context and twisted.

I don't listen to NPR because I'm conservative and I don't like what I view as the liberal spin they put on things. It goes both ways. But I'm happy that they covered the issue.

[gothicrow]

I like to get my information from a wide variety of sources. That way I can make a decision about an issue based on all sides. I am an Independent and I am left on some issues and right on others. This CPSIA is something that obviously was put through without a lot of thought of how it will effect everyday people.

[Former_Member]

Once again, Rush was supporting the little guy in the private sector (the restaurant owner). Rush makes you think about things and make up your own mind. I don't listen to NPR or Oprah or The View, but I wouldn't turn down their help on this issue.

I agree with you SugarAndSpice. You can't listen to Rush for 30 minutes and know what he's about.

[Former_Member]

The same accusation that Rush haters throw at Rush listeners; "They follow him blindly" can be said for Oprah watchers, "She says it they do it".

Neither Rush nor Oprah will tell me how to spend my dollars...

[jbug]

badattitude says:
It's not "bad law" to protect children from toxic stuff.

This is a poorly written law that is redundant in many respects and unenforceable in it's current version.

Most importantly, it does not target the imports that are responsible for most of the issues and problems over that past few years.

Protecting children from toxins in toys, clothing and other things like diapers and body care products is a good thing.

To just say "this is a bad law" does not address the real problem of lead and weird plastics in toys, children's jewelry and other products that children are exposed to every day. That does NOTHING to get people on your side.

I so wish people would deal with the specifics of WHY this is an issue instead of just saying it's a "bad law."

The bigger point right now is to be careful who you align yourself with. That is not about "hate" it's about cost/benefit ratio.

Why is everything labeled so black and white?

Can we have a bit of rational, logical nuance?

Please?

---------

*applauds*

Thank you!

I first learned of this law on the etsy forums and have been reading many threads about it to see how we as consumers will be affected.
Sadly, most of what I've been reading is how horrible the law is (quickly followed by partisan jabs).

The intention of the law is a good one. I want my child to be protected from bad businesses who think it's no big deal to put a lot of lead in a child's necklace, which as we've seen from this law, there are in fact companies who do that.

It is possible to fight the law *the way it's written* while still wanting standards for children's products. But to flat out say the law is stupid is a bit short-sighted.

[bobbinalong]

I don't hate anyone. Would I listen to Rush on a daily basis as I once did? No. Would I take his words as gospel? No. I don't enjoy listening to personalities who spout just to spout and draw a paycheck. Rush is one of the wealthiest people in the country.

I love creative people. Money doesn't enter into it. I love inventive people. I love people who will go the extra mile and create an item for a kid, a ragdoll. A safe and fun item. I love to hear and read about people in our history that took what they had, espcially the women who made quilts, and created the most beautiful items. Or ladies during World War II who took their yarn and knit items for soldiers. Or like Dolly Parton's mother who made a coat of many colors. Or people who paint wonderful pictures like Grandma Moses. Or no matter how busy they are, they find time to create. Like Tony Bennett, or Red Skelton, Jane Seymour, Peggy Lee, or so many others. People who discover their inner abilities, their God-given talents. Who, once they have discovered that ability, can then take them and produce items to share with the world. Items that make the world so much more special. There are generations of people that have gone before us who did just that. Not famous people. Just men and women, moms and dads. How lucky to be living and discovering their talents.

Rush. Nah!

[Former_Member]

Bobbinalong, wouldn't you agree that creativity doesn't have to be about "crafting" things. It's about ideas. People give of themselves in many different ways and that may or may not include money. I admire people who have made something of their lives when they started at the very bottom and are willing to share with others.

[Former_Member]

I think you can be creative in anything you do. :)

[Former_Member]

I think Rush is pretty creative in his own right. I think he's pretty arrogant and pompous myself, but my husband listens to him to pass the time at work because Rush is a great entertainer. He makes me proud to be right wing, because he does what he likes and he says what he likes and he doesn't care if people get mad. I'm tired of right wing people soft peddling their conservatism. Do you believe it or not?

[bobbinalong]

Absolutely, Meandmygirls. It is once realizing the idea, doing something with it. Sharing it. Putting it to good use. Just like the ladies with the quilts, seeing a need and filling it.

My mother graduated from a Methodist HS and taught little kids in an Appalachin school. My father studied 9 years to become a Catholic Priest but met my mother before he completed his studies. They married, had three children, and lead totally different lives than where they were originally headed. But all through the years, these were two of the most caring people I have ever known. Always helping people. Always giving to people who needed things, be it food, clothes, a baby crib, I remember. Full of kindness, honesty, truthfulness. They had both lost a parent or both parents, started from the bottom. But they always saw happiness in their daily lives.

[gothicrow]

Yes Rush is entertaining and if he's talking about something that I am interested in I will listen, but if the View has something I am interested in I will watch that too. I am glad there is still some freedom of speech and without it issues like CPSIA would not be allowed to be discussed. That's what worries me that the freedom to give an opinion may someday be a thing of the past.