But Amardeep, there's a problem even with saying what needs to be said.

Saying:

Rush, for your information, many of the jobs that have been outsourced in recent years involve high levels of skill and training. The people who do them are not “slumdogs�; they are professionals.

is implying, in effect, that there's something wrong with being called a "slumdog" when one is a professional. And that, in effect, means that there is something wrong about living in a slum, period. And stating that IT workers in India are not slumdogs (however much that needs to be said) implies that there is something wrong in being a slumdog, about growing up and living in a slum.

This reminds me of the time when Praful Bidwai wrote a column calling IT workers "cyber-coolies" and it felt wrong on so many different levels.

is implying, in effect, that there's something wrong with being called a "slumdog" when one is a professional. And that, in effect, means that there is something wrong about living in a slum, period. And stating that IT workers in India are not slumdogs (however much that needs to be said) implies that there is something wrong in being a slumdog, about growing up and living in a slum.

Well, actually no. There is nothing wrong with living in a slum, though there is certainly something wrong with the fact that slums are so prevalent in Indian cities.

What's wrong is use of the word "slumdog," wielded as an insult, directed against anyone.

The film tried to "redirect" what might be an insult by attaching it to an improbable, verging on silly, rags-to-riches story. But the way people like Rush are using the word, it no longer carries that "triumph of the human spirit over adversity" message. Here, it's just a crude ethnic slur.

Yeah, I think his comment is just more PR for that movie.

As if that movie needs any more PR than it already got.

implies that there is something wrong in being a slumdog, about growing up and living in a slum

I agree. But the model minority types don't want to be lumped in with slum dwellers, noble or not.

I actually hope that some of these jobs are going to slum residents. They need jobs too for goodness sake!

The jobs that would go to slums, don't go to India. They either go to China or are lost to machines (our real overlords :))

TELEPROMPTER! TELEPROMPTER! TELEPROMPTER! TELEPROMPTER!

Rush is the Skipper to Piyush Jindal's Gilligan. Good, Skipper. Keep calling us slumdogs. Stick that image in your base's head when they go to the primary polls.

who cares about Rush anyway yunno he's Fred Savage in disguise:) slumdog please!

Rush's didn't go to college himself. His ignorance and the general dumbing down of the media is only one example of why American needs to put more effort into education, technological innovation, scientific research and becoming globally competitive.

Without fair and equal access to quality education and health care the divide between poor and rich will grow ever greater. Without improving education and reversing the worst high school drop out rate in the modern world leaders of industry will continue to look elsewhere for skilled labor, and in so doing hurt both the American market and its people.

As the cover of the latest Wired Magazine says "Obama gets it!"

Rush didn't go to college himself. His ignorance and the general dumbing down of the media is one example of why America needs to put more effort into education, technological innovation, scientific research and becoming globally competitive.

Without fair and equal access to quality education and health care the divide between poor and rich will grow ever greater. Without improving education and reversing the worst high school drop out rate in the modern world leaders of industry will continue to look elsewhere for skilled labor, and in so doing hurt both the American market and its people.

As the cover of the latest Wired Magazine says "Obama gets it!"

Maybe it's high time Rush got a telemprompter :) and I do think Rush's tone was of contempt, and I find it increasingly uncomfortable to be answering questions about 'slumdog millionaire' in general. Just the other day an assitant acting instructor caught me offgaurd when she said 'Thank god for the kid in the movie, looks like the hole he jumped into was actually made of peanut butter and some other stuff.'
I'm like - wtf? You expected him to jump into real sh*t?
Maybe, the protests against the movie name are valid - for people like Rush. They at least need to know it is not an exact word in English (he may need a spell checker for his teleprompter to understand that), and then an offensive-syntax checker that can point out his mostly meaningless rhetoric that he keeps spewing out at Obama.

The following para from an interesting book The Global Class War sums up the big picture problem of globalization/outsourcing -

"....Markets within nations inevitably produce groups who have more money than others. So it would be odd if global markets were not creating an international class of people whose economic interests have more in common with each other than with the majority people who share their nationality......"

I guess Rush belongs to the "left out" group.

'Without fair and equal access to quality education and health care the divide between poor and rich will grow ever greater. Without improving education and reversing the worst high school drop out rate in the modern world leaders of industry will continue to look elsewhere for skilled labor, and in so doing hurt both the American market and its people"

The airwaves have been filled with this liberal bs for the last thirty years. Increased spending on education and health care have not reversed widening social inequality in the last thirty five years. Liberals want to make sure there are jobs for them in education and health care and constantly harp about the allegedly poor quality of education and healthcare. No mention is a made of an immigration policy that draws uneducated people into the country and depressess the wages of labor. Free trade has decimated manufacturing which paid decent wages. America's decision to embrace free trade has been a disaster for most americans.

Tenali says:
"Liberals want to make sure there are jobs for them in education and health care and constantly harp about the allegedly poor quality of education and healthcare"

Funny that you brought it up, because at almost all the so called welfare projects that I worked at, the majority of workforce comprised of people with conservative ideas. Its almost as if the government is a bastion of the right wingers. I always wanted to question this dichotomy in their thinking, about their quality of sleep because they are earning their bread and butter from a program that they so seem to despise. Not to mention, their commitment towards it because of their opposing views of the program.

Any thoughts on that?

Obama did get it right. I am amazed at the guy's wisdom, (specially since it coincides with my own musings!). But I am afraid he might be getting caught-up in the bureaucratic process. On the campaign trail, Obama said that spending on education was not the issue as kids in India (and China) study in almost deplorable conditions and are still being competitive. But now he throwing more money at the education system with no truly innovative initiatives, money which will probably be wasted as usual.

Rush’s message is, “Some slumdog in a loincloth in India is taking your job, but quit Whining, you lousy Whiners.” He mocks both Americans and Indians. Obama’s message is, “Maybe some jobs aren’t coming back. Let’s create new ones, which are better.” No scapegoating, no hate. Still: is the difference here one of content, or of tone?

I disagree. There's no way Rush's statements even come close to the level of bigotry Obama is enabling, especially considering the power differnce between the 2 men.

Rush, I assume, is pro-outsourcing on principle, and is willing to stand on principle even if it benefits Indians at the expense of Americans. What could be more anti-racist than to advocate policies that hurt your own group, simply because they're the right thing to do? The caller gives Rush the opportunity to play the race card, insult Indians, instead he turns it around and puts down whiny Americans. Unlike Obama, he's willing to offend a group from whom he needs support. His language my be edgy, arguably racist, but the end result is to advocate policies that treat individuals equally under the law, without regard to which group benefits.

Obama is almost the precise opposite. His rhetoric's sensitive but his politics play the race card, while being unprincipled to boot. The best evidence of this is the nafta/canada flap during the primaries, when he went around spouting anti-nafta rhetoric to white working class voters in PA and OH while simultaneously winking and nodding to the Canadians that he doesn't really mean it. At least Reagan believed in states rights.

All this was part of the democrats southern strategy to retake states like OH and PA by playing on the Xenophobic fears of working class Americans during a severe recession, when protectionism, nationalism and racism historically go hand in hand. Hillary started it off with her unfortunate "Hard-working white Americans" comment while Marc Warner used the convention to take aim at "Bangalore, India", directly stroking anti-Indian resentment for the sake of Obama, who himself was caught in a "d-Punjab" brouhaha earlier, apparently failing to head Lee atwaters's advice:

"By 1968 you can't say "nigger"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites."

This was what the democrats were doing, except replace Indians for blacks. In this instance, Rush schooled Obama on how to be a true anti-racist.

Manju, what's the matter with you?
You're using complete sentences and spellcheck in the defense of Rush? He doesn't deserve the effort!

Amardeep,

To me, a slumdog is a term for a smart, tenacious, and innovative person. I am going to give Rush a pass on this cuz he might have inadvertently praised Indians working on the outsourced jobs.

I did not grow up in a slum btw. :)

This was what the democrats were doing, except replace Indians for blacks

See the Dems are actually doing the Indians in PA and OH a favor. For example, as Manju can attest to, the whites did the same thing against Jews in New York. So the Jews then started Investment Banks and other financial insitutions. So the Dems are in a very clever fashion, helping Indians in OH and PA. They can aspire to be the new Jews of Ohio and PA.
Manju is very well informed on how to pull yourself up by your financial boot straps and start Lehman etc.

Ever since Slumdog came out I have been receiving so many questions about how bad it must be in India. First, Americans (whites) need to realize that there is also poverty in the US. Now, idiots like Rush think its okay to call Indians slumdog. I am really starting to hate this film.

Touche white trash, touche.

"In this instance, Rush schooled Obama on how to be a true anti-racist. "

**passes out on computer in disbelief of others' stupidity**

For my part, I have always hated the term "states rights" - always code for 'we'll get to the issue on OUR terms' even if people are being
treated unequally, stop telling us what to do. Even saw an old black and white Reagan movie where he delivers a monologue stating the same
thing - poor, oppressed southerners - anyone wonder how patriotic secession was ? But I digress.

John Stewart and Colbert have done some great stuff skewering Limbaugh.

This the same guy that stated: Michael J Fox is faking / exaggerating his condition, Colin Powell supported Obama only because he is black,
got his audience riled up on things that don't affect the majority of them (estate tax) and makes sexist / racist statements all the time - but
they very scary thing is that he does indeed have a huge following. Just look at all the Repubs who have had to pay him respect and apologies
after making statements against him, and then getting fallout from their constituents. He is like a very ignorant godfather. As people have stated
here - he is not educated and yet people feel informed from his statements - something I consider very dangerous and irresponsible (like Hannity
casually stating on FOX that global warming is a hoax - not a scientific debate, but a broad, one sided statement from a laymen).

I am more scared of Glen Beck and his calls to arms.

Manju Says:

"The caller gives Rush the opportunity to play the race card, insult Indians, instead he turns it around and puts down whiny Americans. "

I wonder how well your 'sarcasm-radar" works. If you couldn't detect any trace of sarcasm in what Rush said, you must at least be able detect his frustration of losing America to a third world. I guess one cannot blame you if you choose to perform head-in-sand-ostrich-meditation.

Yes, the whole world is coming after your money, your hard inherited money. Save it or better yet, take it with you - burn it on your pyre when you log out.

I am more scared of Glen Beck and his calls to arms.

Scared? Did anyone see that one episode where Glen was talking taxes to that martial arts actor (forget his name but he played a Texan cop in some TV show - OK Chuck Norris, it just came to me) and Glen complained that at a MacDonald's drive thru they didn't get something right about the order, or the window person forgot to put straws in the bag or something, and he was going on and on about how he doesn't want his hard earned money in the form of taxes going to pay for these people? And that in this country if you "take pride in your work" and work hard, you will get ahead, but why should conscientious workers like him have to have their tax money go to "supporting" lazy fast food workers who don't take "pride" in their work and forget stuff like straws or ketchup?

Can someone explain what he meant?

I mean, if someone is working at a fast food chain, aren't they paying their own taxes? Whenever I had jobs like that, taxes were automatically taken out of the weekly check.

So then Maritial Arts Actor chuckles and said, "yes it annoys me too when that happens" and then tried to steer the conversation in a more sensible direction.

I wonder how well your 'sarcasm-radar" works. If you couldn't detect any trace of sarcasm in what Rush said, you must at least be able detect his frustration of losing America to a third world

i didn't hear the quote in question and haven't listened to the radio in years, but knowing rush i would be surprised to learn he wasn't ideologically mated to free-markets and thus pro globalization and out-sourcing. i could be wrong and am open to evidence that he's moved more toward pat Buchanan's position, but short of that, i would have to say rush is not being sarcastic.

Manju is very well informed on how to pull yourself up by your financial boot straps and start Lehman etc.

well said, pagal! hurray to the democrats' whatchammacalit?? southern strategy.

i did a quick google to find out his postion on outsourcing, and came up with this:

Commenting on corporate outsourcing and layoffs, Limbaugh once wondered, "Why is it that whenever a corporation fires workers, it's never speculated that the workers might have deserved it?"

so, he wacked Americans again, it seems. good for him. dissent is the highest form of patriotism.

obama, in contrast, takes the easy road, telling American workers what they want to hear. his position, it should be noted, is harder to discern, since its apparent he's generally pro-free trade (nafta-canada flack for example) but wants to simultaneously appear to be protectionist, since its political winner, especially during a recession, and especially with working class whites who he needed to win crucial swing states. however, he doesn't want to appear so protectionist that he triggers xenophobia (like the d-punjab thing) so he must be careful to stay in dogwhitle land. benefit from a policy that nicely overlaps with racism while maintaining plausible denial.

dissent is the highest form of patriotism.

this platitude is funniest when mouthed by a limbaugh devotee.

Ever since Slumdog came out I have been receiving so many questions about how bad it must be in India. First, Americans (whites) need to realize that there is also poverty in the US

There is difference between poverty in US and widespread abject poverty that you see in India. 26% of India or 260m Indians live below Rs 12 a day and 77% on less than $1 a day. About 230 million Indians are undernourished and 42% of children below the age of 5 are underweight.

Limbaugh is a corporate stooge. His job is to distract the middle class and working class from identifying their interests and dealing with threats to their interests.

Ever since Slumdog came out I have been receiving so many questions about how bad it must be in India. First, Americans (whites) need to realize that there is also poverty in the US. Now, idiots like Rush think its okay to call Indians slumdog. I am really starting to hate this film.

Repeat after me: Slumdog is a term of endearment, Slumdog is a term of endearment, Slumdog is a term of endearment, Slumdog is a term of endearment, Slumdog is a term of endearment...

Here is letter which summarizes the state of the economy.

"Even though national productivity has steadily risen since 1980, approximately doubling every decade, the share of the bottom 90 percent decreased more than 20 percent from 1980 to 2006, while the wealthiest 1 percent nearly tripled their after-tax percentage of our nation’s income. The top 1 percent of Americans now owns more than the bottom 90 percent.

Reagan reduced the top tax rates for the wealthy and corporations in 1981, resulting in the worst recession since the 1930s. In 1983, he signed the largest payroll tax increase in history, promising to create a Social

Security surplus to fund baby boomer retirements, knowing he would loot it to pay for additional tax cuts for the wealthy, which he did. He simultaneously raised the bottom rate and taxed unemployment benefits. Our Social Security surplus is gone. The transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the wealthy has been up to $3 trillion, according to economist Ravi Batra.

A progressive income tax is not “penalizing success” or “envying the rich.” It is necessary in order to avoid excessive concentrations of wealth and power that, if left unchecked, would result in economic collapse and destruction of the system that enables people to generate wealth in the first place.

Ted Daum, Corvallis "

Professional Indians:

Rush, for your information, many of the jobs that have been outsourced in recent years involve high levels of skill and training. The people who do them are not “slumdogs”; they are professionals.

Slum Dweller Indians:
"...VOX POP 1 (translated): In the film they refer to slum dwellers as dogs. It's a word the British used to use to refer to Indians. Now Indians are calling us by that name and the film has an Oscar nomination.

VOX POP 2 (translated): They call us dogs in the film. We're not dogs. We're humans, just like everyone else. We eat and play like others and we also want to live...." http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2008/s2477354.htm

"..."Referring to people living in slums as dogs is a violation of human rights," said Mr Vishwakarma, who works for a group promoting the rights of slum dwellers...." http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article5597745.ece

Kinda finding it hard to feel sympathy for Indians who are "professionals" and object to being called Slumdog. Too many were focused on winning an Oscar when Indians who lived in the slums were speaking up for themselves. Any professional Indian who really did not see it coming that all Indians would be vulnerable to be called Slumdogs is really naive.

Ombama - when I say scared, I don't mean that Glen Beck's crying jags scare me, just the fact that these guys
even think the way they do and also have a large following which thinks the same. When they have vague discussions
on 'revolution' because of taxes, it scares me because guys like Limbaugh and Beck and everyone else at Fox come
from such a place of blind cynicism - complete utter contempt for 'liberals' and 'community workers'.

Yet these same people do not consider wiretapping, torture, rendition, etc 'big government' - but hey, if you want
to raise taxes by 3 percent on the rich, and spend money on health and education, you're a socialist who
wants to give away free abortions. They can go ahead and 'teabag' whoever they want - but they underlying
hysteria and hypocrisy is frightening.

Kinda finding it hard to feel sympathy for Indians who are "professionals" and object to being called Slumdog. Too many were focused on winning an Oscar when Indians who lived in the slums were speaking up for themselves. Any professional Indian who really did not see it coming that all Indians would be vulnerable to be called Slumdogs is really naive.

Existential question: Do things happen to us or for us?

I see name calling as an oppurtunity to stand in solidarity with the disenfranchised. Slumdog? Why not? They are poor people with the world pitted against them yet have you ever noticed the poor can be amongst the kindest, most generous people you will ever meet?

Take them oppurtunity to share with the namecaller whatever you know about the struggles of our global poor.

Someone calls you a "ho"? - stand in solidarity with poor single moms who work hard in the world's oldest profession in order to feed and clothe their children.

Don't hate. Educate.

Yet these same people do not consider wiretapping, torture, rendition, etc 'big government' - but hey, if you want to raise taxes by 3 percent on the rich, and spend money on health and education, you're a socialist who wants to give away free abortions

Then obviously working class people would not be the demographic these men are trying to reach, and it's not likely that working class people would support them.

That's the thing - he does have a large following with white, working class people - this is why those politicians,
including the head of the RNC had to apologize to Limbaugh - because their working class constituents raised hell.

He has over 15 million listeners, and climbing since the election. This is the irony - they get regular people worked
up about issues which only affect the rich - but on principle - they agree because this is all they listen to.

I see name calling as an oppurtunity to stand in solidarity with the disenfranchised.

That is just it. It would have been nice for more "professional" Indians to have stood in solidarity with the disenfranchised when in the beginning it was only the Indians living in the slums being called slumdog. Like one of them said in the interview above, other Indians began calling them slumdogs (in addition to every other thing their are called). Now that professional Indians are being called slumdogs by Westerners they are upset.

>>Obama is almost the precise opposite. His rhetoric's sensitive but his politics play the race card, while being unprincipled to boot. >>The best evidence of this is the nafta/canada flap during the primaries, when he went around spouting anti-nafta rhetoric to white >>working class voters in PA and OH while simultaneously winking and nodding to the Canadians that he doesn't really mean it. At l>>east Reagan believed in states rights

Manju@15, Both Obama and Rush are masters of mixing logic and rhetoric. Thats why they appeal even though sometimes they appear disingenuous.

Limbaugh is a corporate stooge.

If his outsourcing stance is due to stooginess, then how do you explain his position on tarp (he's oppressed)? Surely nothing is more corporate that tarp but yet he's stocking a populist backlash.

Clearly what's hap penned is that a huge swath of the republican party, led by rush, are hiding behind theory: taking a hyper-principled stance in response to the economic crises knowing that their policies (lasisez faire) have no chance of actually being enacted. Thus they can keep their integrity in tact without suffering the consequences. after all, we'll never know what would've happened if we had just let the banks go under.

there's a lot wrong with this stance--its childish, simplistic, unpractical, etc--- but being racist or even corporatist is not one of them.

The dems, led by obama, are in the opposite position. they're being the adults--making hard and ugly choices (like bailing out banks, allowing for bonus, hiring people like summers and geinter who contributed to the mess). all these choices reek of corporatism and pose a moral dilemma (welfare for the rich), but making imperfect choices with no clear cut principles is what politics in the real world is all about...something rush has the luxuary not to have to consider. but like anti-torture dems, he gets to keep his principles.

There's no way Obama actually believes that.

Who actually protested against the movie? Amitabh, Hindus, "slum" residents... I still remember the choice expletives hurled at these people by "professional Indians" (whatever that is). And now it turns out that Amitabh was right. Don't expect any sympathy.

It is sad to see us poor Indians derided over and over again. We are just trying to earn a living - be it the H1 workers in the US, or the Indians working from 'offshore' centers.

Whatever happened to the much touted 'global economy'?

but knowing rush i would be surprised to learn he wasn't ideologically mated to free-markets and thus pro globalization and out-sourcing. i could be wrong

You are correct. In general, Rush has been quite consistently pro-globalization and that is one issue where he can stand apart from the rest of right-wing talk show hosts. One good example is the Dubai Ports World controversy [link] when he was strongly behind Bush's position. Sean, Laura, Savage etc. opposed the deal. Rush is not a protectionist. Neither is Obama, of course.

I see this as first of all a triumph for Slumdog Millionaire. This insult didn't exist before the screenwriter invented it, and now it has gotten into the brain of a man who strikes me as very unlikely to spend much time watching foreign films.

There is a larger issue here, though. The US has, in my lifetime, moved from a society in which scientists and engineers were seen as essential to progress to a society which mostly assumes that science and engineering will happen, but what really matters is law or business. India still tends to see scientists and engineers as essential to progress and progress is very important to Indians {as best I can judge as an American}. This can be understood economically, by noticing that that the real income of US engineers is about what it was in the early 1970's {MBS's and lawyers have done better}. It can be seen in the problems NASA has had, though the US has much more to spend, and thus much more to spend on space flight than the Soviet Unioin and Russia ever did, it has not come close to spending the same proportion of its budgets on space flight as Russia has {or probably India}. Etc. The point is not that the US will collapse due to failure to engineer things, but that societies that seem to be much poorer will do much better relative to the US than one might expect.

Another issue is that the US is perfectly willing to train and hire Indian {and Chinese} scientists and engineers, and then send them back to India or China in an economic downturn. If India and China make effective use of the people we briefly employ and send back there, we might end up regretting this.

Also, since most scientists and engineers are not strong in social analysis, and it is not obvious how to transform the US system, US scientists and engineers will tend to think of Indians as lower wage competition. After all, the Indians are lower wage competition. It is much easier to blame the Indians, most of whom are not that powerful, than it is to blame the people who set up the system. It is even harder, if you come from the small subculture that is still excited about NASA and technical progress, to figure out how why the system is the way it is and how to change it.

Starting to ramble, I guess.

For those who want more, I have a blog: http://www.rememberjenkinsear.blogspot.com/

though it is mostly about the Pakistan crisis. Back in 2005-6, when everyone was worried about Iran getting the Bomb, it occurred to me that since many of our enemies were in Pakistan, and Pakistan had tested the bomb, our worries might be misplaced. Once I got interested, I started reading more, etc.

Good luck,

Ray,

Rush is hilarious. His show, while it often provides deep insights, is meant to be overblown, overhyped and he chooses to deliberately cause controversy. That's what makes it so damn entertaining. He's an equal opportunity hater in a sense, and he makes good points economically. You have to take his words with a dash of salt, because he's explicitly trying not to be PC. So it's best not to be offended, and listen to his show for what it is, a sarcastic and insightful critique on the administration's hypocrisy and cultish nature of liberal politics.

Actually, just this one time, Rush Limbaugh actually gets it, in terms of the global competitive landscape American workers are facing. And its quite unclear to me whether he's using "slumdog" as an term of contempt or of admiration.

But that itself perhaps gives the game away. Limbaugh being Limbaugh, he's probably hoping it catches on as a term of derision-it would make his mission easier. But if anyone kicks up a fuss about the term he can always wear his halo and justify it as admiration, not epithet.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh

http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/rushlimbaugh/a/limbaughquotes.htm

Add this Rushie's quotes..

They’re 12 percent of the population. Who the hell cares?

Take that bone out of your nose and call me back(to an African American female caller).

So "slum dog" is the new "macaca" epithet ? Ironic since everybody so wanted the film to win at the Oscars. This time it didn't need some lone camera man capturing the scene. Up there ion the big screen in 5.1 Dolby sound. Don't wish for something, you will get it.

"It's a word the British used to use to refer to Indians. Now Indians are calling us by that name and the film has an Oscar nomination."

Are you sure about this? If they did, they probably borrowed the term from the locals. Generally the British quite loved and respected dogs. At one point Parliament wanted to extend rights to dogs denied to the working classes. Just kidding in the last sentence.
I once listened to a lecture by a Persian psychologist who talked about the word 'dog' being an insult in his country. He laughed about the wonderful life dogs have in America--special food, doctors, toys, movies about them, etc. But in persia they were very badly treated.

Then the white American friend I had who grew up in africa. Africans would use the world 'dog' as an insult and the American kids thought it was hilarious because they really liked dogs.
"Dog" wasn't a common insult (well, bitch was, but that has a different connotation), among northwest Euros. I don't know why. It's just never been.

Slumdog was a term coined by Danny Boyle and Simon Beaufoy; it was never really part of the common vernacular before. But as a previous poster said, it's so intricately connected to the film that anyone using it is just doing PR for the film.

Kuta and Kutiya are both widely used slang in India - dog and b*tch.

But the more common slangs are non-repeatable in respectable company. Far worse than slumdog fo sho.

Slumdog was a term coined by Danny Boyle and Simon Beaufoy; it was never really part of the common vernacular before

In fact, it is a very common vernacular term, which is used in many forms:

Gali ka kota: Dog of the narrow lanes (often term used for neighborhood urchins, as cop and gameshow host refer in slumdog millionaire)

Dhobi ka kota: A friendly dog of a wisherman who does laundry at the washing ghats (a person of no fixed home, and allegiance)

I am not much bothered about Rush using it, he is making his point, and using a popular reference to tag it

(a person of no fixed home, and allegiance)

Na ghar ka, na ghat ka. I remember that!

Are you from UP?

Rush Limbaugh is a despicable liar. A few insults here and there don't make much of a difference. Remember this is the piece of trash that makes fun of Parkinson's disease victims and the poor.

So it's best not to be offended, and listen to his show for what it is, a sarcastic and insightful critique on the administration's hypocrisy and cultish nature of liberal politics.

yes, rush is truly admired only by people who already believe the "truths" he espouses.

Rush schooled Obama on how to be a true anti-racist.

Agreed. Also, Obama is an Arab race traitor.

Na ghar ka, na ghat ka. I remember that!

Yes, the complete idiom is: dhobi ka kota na ghar ka, na ghat ka

A friendly dog that follows the washerman put has no real home.

I am from Sakotithanda, near the Meerut Railway Crossing.

Nothing is wrong with being Arab (duh like anyone has to qualify that), but Obama is not Arab. I guess if I converted to Islam and changed my name to an arab one then I would be considered "arab" too?

That being said, it always amazed me how Islam was able to gain a foothold in Africa. Traditional African cultures and Arab-centric Islam seem like the antithesis of each other, but whatever, somehow it happened that large swathes of African people took to Islam and it stuck.

Not that that's a bad thing. No value judgement. Just an observation.

I meant: A friendly dog that follows the washerman but has no real home

BTW, Rush has some real personality problems but here he is just using a popular tag

but Obama is not Arab

of course not, he is a decent family man.

American politicians are taking the template from stories from the Old Testament (Torah) and creating their global policies around all that. Hence the constant Jews against Arabs theme and White Western Christians against everyone. Then they try to claim this is fulfillment of prophecy, when really what happened is they all read the same book and decided to make their policies look like fulfillment of prophecy.

Manju,

I am flabbergasted that Rush Limbaugh's transparent hypocrisy has escaped the close attention you seem to pay to his radio commentary.

Take immigration for example: Rush Limbaugh jilts his beloved free-market principles the moment he starts talking about immigration from south of our border. Suddenly, Limbaugh is all for prohibitive regulation (immigration quotas, English-only laws, a wall separating United States from Mexico, e.t.c.) to upset the natural course of supply (hardworking Mexicans) meeting demand (physically taxing jobs). This would ensure affirmative action for native workers while compromising business' profits (how un-Limbaugh!).

But, upholding free-market principles in the above case might be moot if indeed these immigrants were subverting America's security, or if they were sponging on welfare, or vitiating American culture - the sort of characterization that Limbaugh has worked hard at impressing upon us; as have his acolytes. Evidence - both anecdotal and scientific - however, stands in vehement opposition to their unsubstantiated accusations.

Maybe, Limbaugh is more favorable to outsourcing because he finds it a win-win scenario wherein business' profits are boosted while preempting emigration. We can only imagine how his core audience will take, for example, his endorsement of more H1Bs. Also, correct me if I am wrong, but hasn't Limbaugh often defended outsourcing by simultaneously disparaging Indians relieving the Americans of lowly jobs, and thus leaving the latter with superior work more suitable to their innate caliber? This latest choice of moniker by Limbaugh attests to his proclivity for gratuitous offense.

I'd respect Limbaugh, much less complain, if he were repeatedly coming across offensive while constantly telling bitter truths. But, Limbaugh when not slyly misleading is often outright lying. As for when he is making sense: Supremacy of free markets, individual initiative, liberty, or American exceptionalism; who is disagreeing? It's just that most of us aren't as dogmatic about it as he is. Laissez-faire, for example, might work if we were living in an ideal world, but that's simply not the case.

We all need to forgive Rush..... After all a college dropout who, according to his mother "FLUNKED EVERYTHING".... isn't expected to have a BIG IQ instead of a BIG MOUTH. Staying thousands of miles away from one of the fastedst growing economies, how can he even fathom the intellectuals that he calls "SLUMDOGS". Empty vessels make the most noise.The simple economics of globalisation is :- Why pay an idiot 100$/hr in US, when u can get 4 intellectuals in India for the same amount.

Why pay an idiot 100$/hr in US

exactly. maybe we should see how rush feels about outsourcing when clearchannel gets varun gandhi to do his job for just one tenth the price at $40 million.

In this situation Slumdog is clearly insulting..just taken from a popular Film about a particular type of person and generally labelled on IT people. Could have mad the point quite valid without that bird...Safed Kutta!

Now, now highly skilled and trained Indian "professional" don't get yourselves in a tizzy. Anil Kapoor said the word slumdog is not offensive. After all there are worse names. If Indians who actually live in the slums are silly to be offended when referred to as slumdogs, well then highly skilled and trained Indian professionals are silly to be offended too when they are referred to as slumdogs. If you scroll down the article on the Times Online website listed in post#33 it says so right there. Anyway here it is:

"...On Thursday, about 40 Mumbai slum dwellers, organised by another social activist, held up banners reading "Poverty for Sale" and "I am not a dog" outside the home of Anil Kapoor, one of the film's stars.

Amitabh Bachchan, the veteran Bollywood star, also caused a stir the week before last when he accused the film in his blog of portraying India as a "third-world, dirty, underbelly developing nation".

Mr Bachchan has since apologised to Mr Boyle, but was conspicuously absent from the film's star-studded premiere in Mumbai on Thursday night.

Mr Kapoor, who grew up in a Mumbai slum, has denied that "slumdog" is offensive, saying that children from the slums are called many worse things in India. Simon Beaufoy, the screenwriter, said last week: "I just made up the word. I liked the idea. I didn't mean to offend anyone."

(FYI Kapoor did not grow up in a slum)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article5597745.ece

Rush should apologize. He has no right to say anything like this on public radio. Being a public figure carries a lot of responsibility in the multi-cultural environment.

It shows he is an irresponsible, insensitive and racist.. His popularity is a fluke, and only white trashes like to listen him for self-praise.

That being said, it always amazed me how Islam was able to gain a foothold in Africa. Traditional African cultures and Arab-centric Islam seem like the antithesis of each other, but whatever, somehow it happened that large swathes of African people took to Islam and it stuck.

How about turning it around? :)
Even slumdogs in India can do the job you are waiting for after going through some degree/diploma. So, well...more power to them!

"Traditional African cultures and Arab-centric Islam seem like the antithesis of each other, but whatever, somehow it happened that large swathes of African people took to Islam and it stuck."

Through history, masses of people have not often just "taken" to Islam. Islam takes to them. I'm not anti-Muslim, btw. Have them in my ancestry and I have read the Koran. As far as Africans taking to Islamic values, a major Islamic value was the massive slave trade the Arabs (to be fair, mostly Ottoman Turks after the 17th century) ran and which is mainly how Africans first contacted with Islam. A black African was among Mohammed's first followers. Anyway, if one converted to Islam, one could not lawfully be taken into slavery but rather had to pay taxes to the Moslem rulers, or that's my understanding. West Africans hold Islam more lightly than east Africans--most of the ones I know in this country now attend AfricanAmerican churches. Even black, east African Moslems are very rarely fanatics for the sake of religion. Very rarely to almost never.

And Obama never was, is not, and never will be, an Arab, even by east African definition. Religions you can assume or discard. Ethnicity is less compromisable.

"Anil Kapoor was born in a chawl in Tilak Nagar, Mumbai, India, to a film producer Surinder Kapoor and Nirmal Kapoor. He attended Our Lady of Perpetual Succour High School, Chembur.[1] Coming from a film-oriented family, Kapoor's elder brother, Boney Kapoor, is a producer while younger brother Sanjay Kapoor is also a well known actor."

It is possible Anil Kapoor lived in a large mansion surrounded by slums, but it's doubtful the son of a prominent film producer lived in the slums.

Oh well, we can always chant 4 change.

Manju wrote:

There's no way Rush's statements even come close to the level of bigotry Obama is enabling................... Rush schooled Obama on how to be a true anti-racist.

Lol. Dude, you need your frickin head examined. That is seriously twisted thinking.

Thamizan wrote:

To me, a slumdog is a term for a smart, tenacious, and innovative person. I am going to give Rush a pass on this cuz he might have inadvertently praised Indians working on the outsourced jobs.

It is interesting to observe how ideological brainwashing perverts human minds. Manju thinks Limbaugh is a hero fighting against american racism and Thamizan thinks Limbaugh is praising indian IT workers by calling them slumdogs.

I did not grow up in a slum btw. :)

Does that mean that you are not a "smart, tenacious, and innovative" indian, aka slumdog? How did you manage to escape India but the smart and innovative indians are still stuck in slums? Please explain. That contradicts everything your hero Rush Limbaugh stands for.

Uncle Thomas,
Change your handle and stop personal attacks or you will be banned per our comment policy. Thanks.

This Rush guy seems to be the equivalent of a clown with a loud mouth. So one need not take offense to his name calling, which he needs to do to earn his keep and also to keep his job, in this terrible recession. Being the clown he is, he can get away calling even Obama some names. But I strictly warn him to desist from calling Islamists any names because they will issue fatwahs for his head without his torso ofcourse!

A quick lurker anecdote. While waiting for the Q train in Brooklyn Monday night, I overheard an African American high school age boy observe to his friend that it seemed like there were a lot of 'slumdogs' around these days. I looked around, and of the 10 or so people waiting in my vicinity, 3 were south Asian both casually and professionally dressed. The term was used without heat, almost smugly-- to me it seemed the kid felt kind of proud to use an au courant expression in the proper context. It didn't strike me that he was a fan of Limbaugh-- too young ;)

@katie:
These stupid ugandans don't surprise me either.

These stupid ugandans don't surprise me either.

Rush Limbaugh and his dittoheads are stupid Ugandans?

There is a seriously sick dog on the loose. If you find him please let me know. This dog goes by the name "Rush Limbawoo bawoo."

BTW bawoo bawoo is equivalent to woof woof:)

A chawl in Bombay is not a slum. It is a pakka concrete construction unlike a slum tenement made with walls maybe but corrugated metal or even thatched roofing. A chawl is a very large multi-storey apartment made of 100s of studio style tenements with a built in bath and communal lavatories. They vary very greatly in quality. The ones in places like Dadar or Mahim are clean and well maintained. The ones farther South in the Girgaum, Kalbadevi, Buleshwar etc., can be less appealing. Some are positively ramshackle. I have lived in a chawl in Dadar for a few weeks many years ago, and found it comfortable. Anil Kapoor's father may have been a producer but would have lived from movie to movie maybe barely making ends meet. Not at all surprising, as not everyone in the movie business makes a boatload of money. There was a time when aspiring actors would spend the first few years in a chawl before hitting the high nktes. Jeetendra in fact lived in one and made acquaintance with the late great V. Shantaram thru a neighbour. Jeetu speaks fluent Marathi, although born a raised in Punjab (he too is a kapoor) and for many years (as late as 1995) would unfailingly land up for the Ganpati Puja at his old dwellings. The movie industry is huge and there are numberless people - the so called junior artistes (extras and assistant) who get along without any hype. I have known at least one who has lived in a roadside shack. Down South a v. famous creative artiste in the movies lived on the streets and earned his daily bread singing for the crowds at Marina Beach. Hunger, deprivation isn't something unknown to the film makers of India. many of them have experienced it.

The New York Post publishes a CARTOON with a chimpanzee and two police officers, one asking the other about who will make the stimulus plan now (or something to that effect) and the Al Sharpton and the NAACP is all over later that day. Limbaugh CLEARLY insults Indians and three days later there is still no noise. So why does it matter? Why does anything Limbaugh, or any other ignorant idiot, says matter? It's not like we are going to raise issue with it anyway (the George Allen "macaca" story being an anomaly - and that too was not the result of Indians raising issue); it detracts too much from our individual goals of progress and assimilation here in the US. We don't care about the progression of our people as whole. Seriously, when is the last time you have been purely proud about the success of a fellow Indian or Indian American without feeling that slight bit of jealousy? If it doesn't have to do with us individually, WE JUST DON'T CARE. I'm to see sites such as this one shedding light on such issues, but honestly until we reexamine our willingness to be as passive as needed just for the sake of assimilation, these people will think they can say or do anything and get away with it. And they are right.

Of course, you know I meant "I'm *happy* to see sites such as this one..."

The problem is that this is hypocritical. Those that were offended should be offended by both the movie and Rush Limbaugh. To have it any other way means that it is only wrong when someone you don't like says it. True prejudice and racism is universal.

neoavatara.com/blog

Now, it is true that many indian workers are slumdogs. They go to training factories to learn a few technologies, such as oracle. In general, they are very poorly educated. I believe this is because of the indian racist society that still has the caste system, still leaves girls out in the desert to die, and encourages people to live in utter filth. Look at the pictures of india. Rather than spendint their time on It the indians should spend time building sewer systems and non-slumdog housing.

I hope this is helpful!

Wow Bill - what a well researched comment, you bitter redneck tool.

Most Indian IT companies have an Engineering degree as an entry level requirement. Over the years I have worked with many Americans working on "Oracle" with graduate degrees in philosophy/biochemistry and many with no degrees at all. When it comes to engineering graduates, the Americans beat the Indians in quality, but that is mostly because their courses are better structured and the Univs take a hefty fee. Most Americans with engg degrees don't enter the business software field anyway, which is what Indian IT companies deal with aka its our bitch now.