Friday, February 27, 2009

Rush Limbaugh is Right!

Yeah, you read that correctly. Rush is right. So is Hannity. So is Boortz. So are all the other conservative talkers that I don't get to listen to. Hell, even Savage (aka the Antichrist) might be borderline right (although he's too pissed to be considered right, just insane).

Now, before any of my liberal readers blow a gasket and go off, let me clarify. I'm not going to say anything that I haven't said before, and the title is just meant to piss you off. But the debate amongst conservatives and the GOP (two obviously different groups) has been about the direction of the party.

Now everybody I mentioned above has varying viewpoints on a range of issues. But one common thread that has echoed what I've talked about over the last year is that the GOP should not be like the Democrat party. It's called opposition. And this is not a bad thing.

If we were to always agree on everything, it may mean we have less contention. But if we don't challenge our own worldview on a regular basis (one of the bonuses of this blog), then we develop an insane groupthink where we're bound to make a mistake and steer ourselves off a cliff.

Now one thing I've noticed, both from the political class and from the liberal blogs, is that Rush Limbaugh has become the de facto leader of the opposition instead of John Boehner(mispronounced boner), the House minority leader, and Michael Steele, the RNC chairman. Part of this is because Boehner and the GOP congress only discovered their conservative principles AFTER they lost power (can you say bailouts?) and Michael Steele (as well as Sarah Palin and Bobby Jindal) come off, to some degree and in some circles, as a reaction to the candidacy and election of Barack Obama.

To contrast that, the voices of conservative talk have been consistent in their message, no matter what you think of it.

And it's consistent application of principles that is the only hope the GOP has to regain and retain power. Redefining themselves based on the principles of Democrats, on the other hand, is a certain path to McCain moderate destruction.

So while some conservatives may not agree with everything that is spouted on the airwaves (and that includes even the greatness of myself), to ignore what collective wisdom they have is to surrender to liberalism.

And unless you're a committed liberal (or a liberal that should be committed), that ain't good.

60 comments:

It's My Choice said...

Why not let your liberal readers blow a gasket and go off? Why do you feel the need to clarify anything to them..
Do you think that they really give a damn about you and the republican party. If you do then you are wrong. These nut cases only come to the conservative blogs to
1. Make trouble
2. To call us names.
3. To convert you to their miserable party.
Take some time to go and read their filth. Or why bother. We all know the crap that they spew from their sicko and hatred minds.
Thank you, I just had to vent. Or puke.

dmarks said...

I heard so many times over the past 8 years about how "dissent is patriotic". Now it is considered to be evil, and the very idea that anyone would "Question Authority" is condemned on the Left now.

The calls for having the government censor Rush Limbaugh and his cohorts are being renewed in Congress and by some bloggers around here. Reasons given have included that Rush* is on the losing side and is irrelevant, and also that Rush* is way too powerful.

(* = Rush, Hannity, and the rest of the conservatives who dare exercise 1st Amendment rights, whether or not we agree with them)

It's My Choice said...

How Dumb Do They Think We Are?

We cannot sink into complacency, giving Obama a free ride to mediocrity. If we are going to go down We must go down Kicking

Arthurstone said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Arthurstone said...

Heh. Heh.

Poor Rush.

No one is going to ever, anyway, anyhow 'censor' Rush. But keeping that bit of nonsense afloat is boffo for ratings. Stoking fear &* resentment is what Rush and his ilk do best. BillO. Sean. Savage. Tiny minded little cowards each and every one.

Funny how thin-skinned guys like him become when their actions are questioned. The guy has built a career out of questioning the patriotism, love of country and motives of 'liberals'. And gosh doesn't he hate it when that sort of scrutiny is directed his way.

Too bad.

Rush is 'right' in the sense he has an unquestioned right to dissent.

But his 'ideas' suck. Same old jingoist, civilian-warrior, nativist claptrap.

Name: Soapboxgod said...

"Stoking fear &* resentment is what Rush and his ilk do best."

Um yeah...it's strickly exclusive to Rush and his "ilk".

Lest we forget, I seem to recall nothing short of imminent death were we to fail in passing this God forsaken "stimulus" bill.

So do pray tell just how the hell having passed that piece of shit has or is becoming a cure all for that which ails us.

I'm waiting. The markets (case you hadn't noticed) are waiting.

Satyavati devi dasi said...

These nut cases only come to the conservative blogs to
1. Make trouble
2. To call us names.
3. To convert you to their miserable party.
Take some time to go and read their filth. Or why bother. We all know the crap that they spew from their sicko and hatred minds.


Obviously you don't come here often.

Even more apparent... you don't get out much at all, do you?

The intelligent and rational exchange of ideas (both of which qualities I found lacking in your post, quoted above) is what spurs progress and development.

To out of hand dismiss an entire sector of the population in the way you did is a reflection of greater things: if you are unwilling to even acknowledge that someone who opposes you might have a good idea, it could be inferred that you are equally as willing to dismiss those who oppose you in other, more important matters, like civil rights.

Additionally, your quote seems to ignore the individual's right to be an individual, and jump to stereotyping. I could infer from this, as I did above, that you would be equally eager to impose stereotypes on other groups.

I hope you choose to stay around and become acquainted with the diversity of opinions presented rationally and intelligence here. You may find it frightening or difficult to acknowledge, but if you can find it in you to open your mind just a very little bit, you might see that your overweening blanket generalizations are, by their very generality, inherently false.

To esconce oneself in an environment of 'sameness', in the comfort of only those that are just like yourself, is to eliminate the possibility of further growth, and to commit to an ever-expanding intellectual and emotional stagnation, which ultimately manifests in the fear and vilification of those who are different.

I suppose this could also apply equally to hate groups.

Just something to ponder, if you can.

Shaw Kenawe said...

It's My Choice said...
Why not let your liberal readers blow a gasket and go off? Why do you feel the need to clarify anything to them..
Do you think that they really give a damn about you and the republican party. If you do then you are wrong. These nut cases only come to the conservative blogs to
1. Make trouble
2. To call us names.
3. To convert you to their miserable party.
Take some time to go and read their filth. Or why bother. We all know the crap that they spew from their sicko and hatred minds.
Thank you, I just had to vent. Or puke.



To all of my fellow commenters here at Patrick's blog, Mr. (or Ms.) "It's My Choice" visited my blog and commented thusly:

It's My Choice said...
This blog is a living CESS POOL
February 27, 2009 2:39 PM


http://tinyurl.com/awv7nl

LOL! Oh, and you can't link to his or her website/blog--so this person is quite the typical coward (IMHO). He or she comes accusing Liberals of spreading filth while stealthily throwing crap bombs on their sites and then slinking away. BTW, It's My Choice, when speaking of other people's "filth" or being "sicko" or full of "hatred," I advise you to take a really, really good look in the proverbial mirror, my friend.
You need to find out where that self-destructive rage is coming from and deal with it sooner than later.


dmarks, no one is saying it is "unpatriotic to dissent" no one. But that was what Liberals were labeled when they protested the invasion of Iraq.

What we think is creepy is the uniformity of every single Republican in the US Congress, save THREE! not supporting on iota of Mr. Obama's program. Talk about marching lock-step without any room for other opinions--and worse--demonizing people who DARE to work with the Democrats.

As for the gasbag, Limbaugh, I would NEVER want to censor him--nor does any smart Liberal.

We hope the Republicans keep him (and Savage and Hannity) out there as THE representatives of the GOP.

We absolutely DO NOT want to shut them down.

If you don't understand why, then just look at the map of the last election and the demographics of who voted for Mr. Obama--it may explain some things the radical right has yet to internalize.

The longer you stay with the Limbaughs and the Savages of the radical right, the fewer new recruits you'll get to join the GOP, and the longer you'll be relegated to being a regional party.

TRUTH101 said...

I met Rush once and looked into his soul. I saw two large pepperoni pizzas and a whole meatloaf.

Patrick M said...

IMC: What the socialist Satyavati and Shaw of the "living CESS POOL" said.

Beyond that, it's because I have a serious point to make and want to discuss that an not their personal issues with Rush (which of course they ignored after they got done with you).

Arthur: Funny how thin-skinned guys like him become when their actions are questioned.

Actually, he laughs and watched his ratings go up. Unlike the stock market in an Obama presidency.

Soaptastic: I've asked the question about the Bullshit! package a few times. I have yet to find a liberal that can cogently defend it or explain how it will stimulate anything other than government.

Saty: I'm going to have to come up with something to piss you off so I can get one of your excellent diatribes written at me. Then I can savage it.

Shaw: Stop sending me your wingnuts! You're getting as bad as Mike. :)

If you don't understand why, then just look at the map of the last election and the demographics of who voted for Mr. Obama--it may explain some things the radical right has yet to internalize.

What, that unprincipled moderate pukes (McCain) can't win shit, especially when the talk radio people and conservative bloggers (myself included) have to be dragged into halfhearted support of such an insipid clusterfuck?

That's my whole point. Properly articulated, principled conservatism wins when people understand. When they don't (or when American Idol is on) then liberals score big.

I'll be getting to that in another post.

101: You forgot to work in the Oxy crack. That's a liberal fav.

And being a regular listener, it's actually a gigantic box of Allen Brothers steaks.

Arthurstone said...

Soapboxgod typed:

"Lest we forget, I seem to recall nothing short of imminent death were we to fail in passing this God forsaken "stimulus" bill. "

Hard to forget what didn't happen. It's always unwise to rely on such a faulty memory as you seem to enjoy.

Still, thanks for proving my point. Exaggeration and fear-mongering is stock in trade for Rush and his colleagues who have figured out their demographic (folks such as yourself) and boy do they deliver.

Fun scaring yourselves isn't it?

Actually President Obama addressed the nation as adults (always dicey) and frankly and I think quite honestly described the seriousness of the problems we face and the scale of the effort we will need to make to solve them. "Imminent death" didn't really enter into it.

Somehow you're confusing Obama with the criminals Rice, Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush who really did promise immediate catastrophe if we didn't rid the world of Saddam Hussein yesterday. I seem to recall Rumsfeld indicating the concentration of WMDs was particularly heavy around Tikrit.

Oops.

We now know that wasn't quite right.

Dave Miller said...

Shaw and Saty, well said.

Dmarks, I do seem to remember that when a Dem, or lib posited an idea that varied from the GOP, or Pres. Bush on war policy or civil rights after 9/11, they were called unpatriotic, appeasers, defeatocrats, and any number of derisive names that called into question their allegiance to the good ole US of A.

Support of our President, and his agenda was seen as our civic duty so as not to show a divided electorate to the enemy.

Is that still the case or was that only the case when the GOP held sway?

Just askin' is all.

Hey It's My Choice, where is your blog address?

Arthurstone said...

Patrick fantasized:

'Unlike the stock market in an Obama presidency.'

Excellent Patrick. Excellent indeed.

One month into a new administration when we still don't know where the bottom is to
this toxic swamp of a market into which we continue to sink you somehow know who to blame.

The new guy. Heh. Heh.

Talk radio is your future Patrick.

Just kidding.

The angry, middle-class white guy who props up BillO, Rush and Hannity is a dying breed.

Too bad for you.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Deep Thought:

Is there such a thing as a dead cesspool?

TRUTH101 said...

The process of getting you to abandon your deluded right wing fallacies takes time Patrick. But know that I will guide you every step of the way. Your reminding us of the Rush's drug fiendery was one of the first steps Brother.

TAO said...

"That's my whole point. Properly articulated, principled conservatism wins when people understand. When they don't (or when American Idol is on) then liberals score big."

I loved this one Patrick...just loved it.

It made me start one of my multi part posts where I try to argue for something more logical then just no government, low taxes, and liberals are traitors stupidity...

Call it a realistic conservatism...something for the 21st century.

But then again, with philosophers such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Joe the Plumber, and Sarah Palin...who needs me.

I will depend on you to make sure I keep my parts in order...

I am glad to see that Newt is now referring to things as the BUSH/OBAMA administration....even though I know that most conservatives actually miss the little guy...

Its funny how Newt is always more intelligent when he is out of office....and not on Fox News

Gordon said...

It's pretty clear that the lefties have decided to run against Rush Limbaugh, in the near term at least. They remember what happened in 1994, when another Democratic president tried to remake the economy. By trashing Limbaugh early, they hope to blunt his effectiveness.

It is very interesting how they all pass on the opportunity to support President Obama's spending and tax increases. Instead, it's all about Limbaugh. That's a pretty good indication that they realize how bad this stuff really is.

Shaw wrote, "We hope the Republicans keep him (and Savage and Hannity) out there as THE representatives of the GOP. We absolutely DO NOT want to shut them down."

Yeah, you've said that before. Since then ten senators and an ex-president have come out publicly in favor of doing just that. All it takes is three out of five on the FCC, you know. Or an amendment slipped into a bill in the middle of the night.

Name: Soapboxgod said...

"Somehow you're confusing Obama with the criminals Rice, Rumsfeld, Cheney and Bush who really did promise immediate catastrophe if we didn't rid the world of Saddam Hussein yesterday."

I'm perfectly objective enough to admit that Bush and Co. used the same political fear tactics to pursue their agenda. And, I've admitted they'd done as much.

I'm afraid it doesn't appear you've the intellectual honesty to do the same. Quite honestly, it appears you've become something of an apologist for the practice at the moment it is employed by your party of choice.

dmarks said...

Dave, that is what makes it interesting now that the positions are reversed.

dmarks said...

Soap: My point exactly.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Shaw wrote, "We hope the Republicans keep him (and Savage and Hannity) out there as THE representatives of the GOP. We absolutely DO NOT want to shut them down."

Yeah, you've said that before. Since then ten senators and an ex-president have come out publicly in favor of doing just that. All it takes is three out of five on the FCC, you know. Or an amendment slipped into a bill in the middle of the night.



And all it takes is a veto from President Obama to defeat the bill. I don't think his party will go against this very popular president's will.

President Obama is NOT in favor of reinstating the Fairness Doctrine.

From FOX News:

White House: Obama Opposes 'Fairness Doctrine' Revival
February 18, 2009

A White House spokesman tells FOXNews.com President Obama opposes any move to bring back the so-called Fairness Doctrine.

Dave Miller said...

To your point Patrick, I agree with you. Sort of.

The GOP does need to be about defining what they see as the difference between "Obama liberalism" and "Republican Conservatism."

And at some level, Limbaugh, Hannity, et al, have become the chief purveyors of those ideas.

However, I think reaction against them is not so much against their ideas, as it is against style.

You mentioned Savage and his anger. How is that any different from Limbaugh outright mocking Obamas race?

If somebody offends you by making a joke that you find offensive about your kids, I think you would say something to them and expect them to accept that, even if they themselves did not find the remark offensive.

The GOP, and its' main sympathizers have failed to that in so many cases it is laughable.

Many years ago Howard Cosell was fired because he equated black people with monkeys. Whether you agree with that or not, whether your intentions are honorable or not, if you have a brain cell in your head, you should know people will take offense at that type of characterization and stay away from it.

This type of behavior, along with people like Hannity constantly saying Obama and the Democrats want to destroy America, is just ridiculous.

When these guys stoop to to this type of behavior and criticism, their rhetoric ceases to be about ideas and falls to just personal attacks.

And before everyone jumps to the standard "the Dems do it too" defense, I know they do, but that does not make it right, and I've said so before.

Name: Soapboxgod said...

If I may say so, I would not put Hannity and/or Coulter in the same conservative category as I would Limbaugh.

Hannity, despite his assertions to the contrary, is not a conservative first. He's a Democrat loathing (save for Lieberman I suppose) Republican to the core.

Arthurstone said...

Soapbox-

'Imminent death'

Your words which you try and shovel into the mouth of
the President. He said nothing of the kind. He has warned of 'catastrophe' should the world banking system collapse (duh) but then, even Weepy John Boehner would have to
agree with that nugget of obviousness.

But the President peddling 'imminent death' of the 'American way of life'?
Nope. That would be you guys. But if you can provide a
quote I'd be happy to read same.

You're projecting.

dmarks said...

@shaw: "And all it takes is a veto from President Obama to defeat the bill. I don't think his party will go against this very popular president's will."

And all it takes is for pro-censorship Democrats to put some sort of effort into a major bill that Obama favors (such as one of the forthcoming health-care bills) and Obama can sign it rather than veto his baby. I think he is much more passionately devoted to his vision of health-care reform than he is passionately devoted to thwarting new efforts to censor the media. Wouldn't anyone agree that this is true?

But yes, President Obama's recent statement in which he opposed the specific old censorship system called the "Fairness Doctrine" is encouraging.

My Blog said...

I am with RUSH. Of course it could never happen, but wouldn't it be cool to actually watch Rush debate Obama. Obama can't even speak without a teleprompter, and is a terrible debater. Rush is very familiar with conservativism, and would absolutely destroy the chosen one. The Obama honeymoon will continue for maybe a year or so, but it won't take long for even ardent Dems to realize that they elected a phony. The radical left will continue to support him, but they are pretty much irrelevant anyway. Actually, I hope he can revive the economy, but he and democratic lawmakers are totally on the wrong track. We are in for a long, long, recession, and a pork-filled spending bill will only make things worse.
This isn't about Rush vs. Obama, its about free market vs. socialism, good vs. evil.

Patrick M said...

Arthur: I thought that was a great line. And I'd be fantrasmic on radio. I just need to get in line and guest host Rush's show and I'll be set.

Shaw: Is there such a thing as a dead cesspool?

IMC's hopes as a blogger.

101: Actually, I've just heard the liberal scrip enough times. It means I don't need a link to quote it anymore. It doesn't mean I'm prepping for a lobotomy.

Tao: Less government and lower taxes are still key points of conservatism. The important part is to articulate why they are important.

Also, believe it or not, I do miss Bush a little. He spent less per day than Obama is doing now. That doesn't mean I want a third term or Jeb, though.

And Newt is still on Fox News.

Gordon: I'm just waiting for the Obam/Rush debate. That'll be a hoot.

Dave: You mentioned Savage and his anger. How is that any different from Limbaugh outright mocking Obamas race?

Because Rush mocks the people that were making an issue out of Obamas race, not Obama's race. The most obvious (and intentionally misrepresented) example is the song "Barack the Magic Negro". And before you comment on that particular item, here's the whole story.

As for Savage, he pretty much just hates everybody out there.

If somebody offends you by making a joke that you find offensive...

Since I don't get offended (expept by people who get offended about everything), this probably won't happen.

As for statements like Hannity's about Obama destroying America, it's 1. exaggeration to make a point and 2. true. :)

Arthurstone said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Arthurstone said...

My Blog ranted:

"This isn't about Rush vs. Obama, its about free market vs. socialism, good vs. evil."

Yawn.

Again?

Amusing how 'conservatives' always feel the necessity to demonize their political opponents.

Nothing new there Blog. I remember the same sort of nonsense back in 1960's debates surrounding civil rights legislation and fluoride in the water.

But I think you should get used to the idea that angry, middle-class white guys like you (assuming that's you in the photo) are a shrinking, diminishing breed.

Enjoy the righteous indignation while you can because you and Rush are spiraling into irrelevance even as we speak.
raved:

PatrickM dreamed:

'Arthur: I thought that was a great line. And I'd be fantrasmic on radio. I just need to get in line and guest host Rush's show and I'll be set.'

Of course you thought it was a great line.

Simple. Catchy. Glib. And absolutely wrong. Perfect for Rush.

In fact, I'm certain he's used it.

Doesn't the old saying go something like "simple minds think alike' ? 8>)

Dave Miller said...

Patrick, independent of the issue you cited regarding the monkey, even other GOP people saw it as wrong, or not helpful.

But Rush regularly mocks African Americans with his regular use of aks, stereotypical sounding voices impersonating black people and much more.

I realize he is playing to an audience, but to be apparently unable to understand that these type of things are offensive is, to me just inconceivable.

Now I do not think Rush is so dumb that he is unaware of this, so that leaves only one option.

He is aware that people are offended by his actions, and he, along with Hannity, Savage, Mark Levin, and others choose, in the face of this knowledge, to offend people anyway.

This is, and will continue to an impediment to people hearing the arguments that they are trying to make, which I believe was the basis of your post.

Satyavati devi dasi said...

"This isn't about Rush vs. Obama, its about free market vs. socialism, good vs. evil."

And this is the idiotic McCarthyite propaganda that keeps the masses in ignorance.

Jennifer said...

Damn Patrick, I somehow missed this post! What could I have possibly been thinking?? With 30 comments this one is sorta played out, and I don't have a whole lot to add, so I will wait till your next burst of brilliance.

So did I make up for being late? Huh? Huh?

Oh, and by the way, I have a new blog....you should check it out.

All right it's a little late, but better late than never.

Oh and what is up with you bringing in the wacko's. They seem to have vacated CC and planted themselves here. Lucky you! LOL

dmarks said...

SDD: "And this is the idiotic McCarthyite propaganda that keeps the masses in ignorance."

There's nothing McCarthyite about it. No one here falsely accused Obama of being a Soviet agent or a member of the CPUSSR or its controlled organizations.

And here again we clearly have the use of "propaganda" to be a mere pejorative to mean "information or opinion I do not like".

dmarks said...

Patrick said: "Because Rush mocks the people that were making an issue out of Obamas race, not Obama's race. The most obvious (and intentionally misrepresented) example is the song "Barack the Magic Negro".

I disagree with you on this. When someone repeats a racist joke, you can't let them off the hook because they are only repeating it and didn't make it up themselves.

Arthur said: "Amusing how 'conservatives' always feel the necessity to demonize their political opponents."

"Always" is a generalization, but it does happen. However, they do this no more and no less than liberals.

Loves To Debate said...

Rush was really inspiring and exciting. My husband and I both stood and cheered and applauded so many times it was as if we were there in the audience ourselves.
We conservatives face formidable hurdles and barriers. Our kids come out of high school and college very indoctrinated in cultural Marxism by their professors who are all leftist . They were taught to abhor conservative, traditional American ideas. Those are the people that put Obama in office
As for President Obama I know that he is a hard-core leftist -- and perhaps a Marxist. I know that his agenda could drive the last nail into America' coffin and that it is a blow against all that is great and good. Thus, if I wished him success, it could only mean I hated my country, and my fellow man .
And to all those bloggers asking us conservatives to support this Marxist, I can tell them no way, no how.

dmarks said...

The only one I saw was Mitt Romney. I liked what he said, but he looks so slick and to me always comes across as insincere. I also remember that he has been a flip-flopping opportunist.

I would have liked to see Ward Connerly, the enemy of racists everywhere.

Name: Soapboxgod said...

"The only one I saw was Mitt Romney. I liked what he said, but he looks so slick and to me always comes across as insincere. I also remember that he has been a flip-flopping opportunist."

I've had my reservations about Romney for some time. Harpers had an article sometime back Mitt Romney: How to Fabricate a Conservative which was pretty telling. Human Events also had him pegged as #8 on their RINO list (and for good reason no doubt).

And, the fact that he won the CPAC straw poll is helping to confirm for me that perhaps the necessity of a truely conservative 3rd party might be in order. Either that or I may have to go Constitution party or Libertarian party.

Shaw Kenawe said...

Rush Limbaugh once told a black caller to "take that bone out of your nose, and call me back."

He said that as a grown man, not as part as some "youthful indiscretion." It's what he is--a bigot.

Now Rush and Michael Steele are in a cat fight over who's in charge of the Republican Party. Pass the popcorn!

Toad734 said...

What exactly has Rush been right about. More so, what solutions has he put forth which have been enacted and succeeded?

What experience or expertise does Rush possess? Was he an ex politician, policy maker, did he major in Political Science, Economics, Government did he even go to college at all? What political positions of power has he held in his life?

How is he different than any of us who just shit on news stories which happen to peak our interest? How is he more qualified than I am to talk about how things should be especially considering how he is probably wrong about most issues and I am right?

Rush, as has been noted, is entertainment plain and simple. He creates this liberal boogy man which sells. Actually, he invented this liberal boogie man which sells my ignoring what is really wrong in this world and trying to exploit every little event or statement made my a democrat and then loosely tries to connect those to what ever conservatives are hating that week (Mexicans, Gays, Arabs, Taxes, Peace, Prosperity, Equal Rights, Marriage, Obama, Other Black People, etc.)

Could you please cite one solution Rush has come up with, to any problem, which has worked?

Maybe there are some, I haven't listened to his actual show in years although it is impossible to not hear some of his greatest hits accidentally.

Calling Limbaugh anything other than a Monday morning quarterback who is there merely to entertain people who don't read for themselves is like calling The Enquirer "the news".

Patrick M said...

Crap. I think another one of my comments disappeared. Oh well....

Arthur: Simple. Catchy. Glib.

That's why you keep coming back. :)

Dave: But Rush regularly mocks African Americans....

No. Much of what you're bothered by is satire, which makes use of stereotypes to make fun of the people who wield those stereotypes. And if Rush has amped those things up over the last year, it's because there were liberals who were hellbent on focusing on the color of Obama's skin as opposed to everything else.

He is aware that people are offended by his actions...,

Give me time. I'm sure I'll come up with something equally offensive. Because there's always someone who's looking to be offended.

Jenn: You've read the post following this (with the AOTW), so I don't need to comment further.

Dmarks: When someone repeats a racist joke....

Except Rush wasn't. He was mocking people who were serious. Go back up and find the link I gave Dave.

Shaw: Rush Limbaugh once told a black caller to "take that bone out of your nose, and call me back."

If you've got the link with the transcript, post it now. Because I suspect the whole conversation reads a whole lot differently in context.

I've noticed you tend to take people out of context. And you don't even do it for a laugh, or in a way that is obvious.

In fact, you're post about Ann Coulter's comments to CPAC read a whole lot different than Ann belting them out. In fact, after this, I'm starting to like listening to her more. Thanks.

Now Rush and Michael Steele are in a cat fight over who's in charge of the Republican Party.

Actually, Rush was addressing this today. Steele is head of the RNC (Retarded Nutsucking Collaborators). Rush is the current spiritual leader of conservatism.

Patrick M said...

Toad: What exactly has Rush been right about.

Did you even read the post?

Since you obviously didn't (or the subsequent comments where most everybody else missed the main point), here's the point.

But one common thread that has echoed what I've talked about over the last year is that the GOP should not be like the Democrat party. It's called opposition.

Satyavati devi dasi said...

a blow against all that is great and good.

This is the first thing I've read in a while around here that actually did have me busting out laughing (Foamy's been in better form than this, Patrick).

Ah, yes, America, the home of all that is great and good.

Almost splattered tea on the screen with that one.

Honey, please, please, please... wake the fuck up. If you really believe those words, you're either on more and better pharmaceuticals than my insurance will cover.. or you OUGHT to be.

It's not all roses and fancy cars out there.

Patrick M said...

Ah, yes, America, the home of all that is great and good....

If you really believe those words, you're either on more and better pharmaceuticals than my insurance will cover.. or you OUGHT to be.


Hey, I believe those words too. And as I am quite unmedicated....

That's not to say that the US of A is simply the land of peaches and blowjobs. However, unless you can name a country or a form of government in the real world that has offered the freedom and opportunity for prosperity that this country has, then I'll assume this is just a bad reaction to some pills you mixed (Pilz-e style).

Toad734 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Toad734 said...

Ok but the Republican Party has been exactly like the Republican Party: Cutting taxes on rich people, deregulating big business while regulating peoples personal lives, continued the war on drugs, continued its lopsided support of Israel, started wars, interfered in countries where we weren't needed or wanted to further the interests of big business,restricted civil liberties, circumvented law, appointed complete idiots whose education consists of Jerry Falwells Law School to important posts, cut welfare, cut education spending, increased defense spending, ruining the economy, cut veteran benefits, hating and demonizing some minority, increase the deficit.... The list goes on.

Except for reducing the size of the government, Republicans have been acting exactly like Republicans have since the day I was born. Maybe not like Lincoln, but they have been exactly like they have been for the last 30 years with of course the exception of increasing the size of the government (of course you probably can't tell me which Republican actually reduced the expense and size of the government).

So, besides saying the problem is that Republicans are acting like Democrats, what's his solution? What single Republican President could we look to to solve all these problems. What are Rush's specific examples of past Republicans who fixed the same kind of problems like we have today? I can give you a hint, it wasn't Herbert Hoover and Ronald Reagan's answer was to raise taxes.

So again, what specific problems does Rush have an answer for, or ever had the answer for that have been tried and tested and proven to work? Or is he Peter King on Monday Morning saying the Eagles should have gone for it on 4th and 1?

dmarks said...

Toad: So many of those questionable, or you got wrong. Two, for example:

"cut education spending"

Do you have any figures for Federal education spending for the beginnng of the Bush adminitration compared to the end?

dmarks said...

And Toad, you said "continued its lopsided support of Israel"

Fortunately, I can point out that the Democrats are also "lopsided" in their support of helping Israel stave off relentless aggression and genocide. When one side merely wants to live, and the other side wants to completely annihilate the other, the choice is clear, and you simply can't treat each side equally.

Name: Soapboxgod said...

"Do you have any figures for Federal education spending for the beginnng of the Bush adminitration compared to the end?"

Allow me if I may...

Some figures from Heritage Foundation:

"Consider K-12 education spending. Annual U.S. Department of Education spending on elementary and secondary education has increased from $27.3 billion in 2001 to $38 billion in 2006, up by nearly 40 percent. According to the department, annual spending on the Title I program to assist disadvantaged children grew by 45 percent between 2001 and 2006. In 2007, the department will spend 59 percent more on special education programs than it did in 2001.

Since the early 1970s, inflation-adjusted federal spending per pupil has doubled. Over that period, student performance has not markedly improved, according to the long-term National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), which is designed to measure historical trends.

Under a Republican-controlled Congress, federal spending on higher education has increased almost as dramatically as K-12 spending over the past six years. For example, annual Department of Education spending on federal Pell Grants grew from $8.7 billion in 2001 to $13 billion in 2006, nearly 50 percent growth. The federal government spends considerably more on higher education today than it did during the Clinton administration. According to the College Board, federal funding for higher education in 2004-2005 totaled $90 billion, a real increase of 103 percent over ten years."

Arthurstone said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Arthurstone said...

dmarks sighed:

"I would have liked to see Ward Connerly, the enemy of racists everywhere."

Ah yes.

Ward Connerly. Bought and paid for by (among others) those noted lovers of equality & liberty Richard Mellon Scaife, the Bradley Foundation and the now-defunct John M. Olin Foundation.

I choke up just thinking About Connerly and his selfless (well, extremely lucrative) devotion to serving his right-wing corporate masters, excuse me, serving the cause of equal rights for all.

Sniff.

Toad734 said...

Ok, so they have blindly wasted money on education according to the Heritage Foundation. Then the question must be why could Clinton spend 40% less and get the same results??

As far as Israel is concerned you almost sound brainwashed.
A. Israel can take care of itself. They proved this in 47,63,73, etc. They don't need our help but we give it to them anyway.

B Israel doesn't need money, they have one of the highest per capita GDPs in the world, par more than Palestine or Jordan. Your tax is welfare for the Israeli middle class and they use that money to buy bulldozers to flatten Palestinian homes. That is why the Palestinians want to kill them, that and they are occupying their land.

C. They both want to annihilate eachother, they both hate each other. You act as if Israel is some sort of innocent victim which has done nothing wrong. You might want to read up on your history.

D. If you were so concerned about one side wanting to kill the other, why aren't you petitioning the government to support the minority in Sudan? Why do you only care when white Europeans are getting killed?

E. If anyone is at risk of Genocide it would be the Palestinians not the Israelis. They are the ones who have seen their lands taken over and replace by Jewish settlements, their houses bulldozed and replaced by Jewish houses.

Maybe you should get your news from somewhere other than The Zionist Daily.

Toad734 said...

Oh, and the final point, why is it our job to fight anyone elses wars? Especially the war of one of the wealthier and most powerful nations in the region?

dmarks said...

Soapbox: So it appears that the facts are exactly the opposite of what Toad claims, when it comes to education funding. I also found out that the Obama budget wipes out vouchers for the poor. Talk about being hostile to education.


Arthurstone: Connerly has been fighting for equal rights. This can't be denied. His opponents on the civil rights initiatives are racists. Who else but a racist would oppose equal justice and equal treatment under the law, regardless of skin color?

"excuse me, serving the cause of equal rights for all."

Your correction makes sense, as Connerly's initiatives have everything to do with improving equal rights and nothing to do with "corporations".

-----------
Toad:

A. If any of your points have validity, this one does.

B. The demand of the Palestinian goverment to exterminate the Israelis predates the bulldozing of the homes.

C. It is the innocent victim, as much as any nation can be. It is not an act, it is the facts. I did read up on history.

D. I'm one of the few alarmed at the now decades-long genocide in the Sudan. However, the two situations are not related.

E. You have it backwards. No one is trying to exterminate the Palestinians. Hamas (the government of Palestine), Iran, and others are trying to exterminate the Israelis.

F. Ah yes, anyone who does not believe the Israelis must be wiped out is a dupe of the Jewish media. Thank you for quoting neo-nazi logic.

G. OK, so let us pull US troops out of Palestine and Israel.

Name: Soapboxgod said...

"So it appears that the facts are exactly the opposite of what Toad claims..."

Indeed. And, as its been said:

"Facts are stubborn things, and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."

If I've said it once I've said it a trillion times. These people are not dealing with reason and logic (i.e. things that come from mind). They are operating entirely on feeling.

Dee said...

Well said Patrick!! And I like your nickname for Michael Savage. As I'm sure you know, I detest that guy with a passion.

Also, I like your 2012 list at the bottom of your blog. I'm planning on putting my hall of fame and my hall of shame lists in my sidebar pretty soon.

Arthurstone said...

dmarks typed:

'This can't be denied. His opponents on the civil rights initiatives are racists. Who else but a racist would oppose equal justice and equal treatment under the law?'


A great many people deny this dmarks.

America is not yet the 'land of opportunity' for everyone. Not even close.

And affirmative action remains a potent tool for eliminating discrimination based on race, color, religion or sex.

Patrick M said...

Dee: Can't take credit for that. Neal Boortz came up with that one. Naturally, it being good, I had to steal it.

Name: Soapboxgod said...

"And affirmative action remains a potent tool for eliminating discrimination based on race, color, religion or sex."

This is a complete and total canard.

The discrimination, the hatred, the bigotry, the vitriol, the [you name it] still exists. Merely because you've a legislative mandate doesn't mean these things simply go away. The only thing you've accomplished is that NOW you can be penalized for your discriminatory beliefs.

The government imposes penalties for driving while drunk. And yet, people still do it.

The government imposes penalties for evading taxes. And yet, people still do it.

The government makes it a capital crime to murder someone. And yet....YES...people still do it.

So, in the same token, people will still discriminate, still be bigotted, still be ignorant and everything else.

The only thing that affirmative action does do is demoralize minorities by undermining the true content of their character as well as their true ability all the while elevating them on the merits of their skin color.

dmarks said...

Arthur: "And affirmative action remains a potent tool for eliminating discrimination based on race, color, religion or sex."

Think about this for a bit. How can it eliminate such discrimination when it explicitly demands such discrimination?

Maybe you think it is justified because it is racism with more racism. Like fighting fire with fire. But then, all you end up with in the end is ashes.

Soapbox is correct about the demeaning aspect of this form of racism for minorities.

Connerly's proposals reduce racism. The reactionaries who resist them typically argue from a racist perspective.

"America is not yet the 'land of opportunity' for everyone. Not even close."

Thanks to affirmative action, America is less the land of opportunity. Instead, work for equal rights for all.

Toad734 said...

DEE:

A. I know, of course it does

B-E.. Ya but who showed up after being gone for 1300 years and told the Palestinians they were taking part of their country?

Lets say Aztecs started being persecuted in Mexico and needed a new home. Being that they are native Americans and hundreds of years ago, some Native Americans lived on Manhattan Island, the UN, Britain and a bunch of other countries decided they could have half of Manhattan Island. Any Americans living on Manhattan Island would now be living under a new nations with its own different religion, language, currency, ethnic background etc. When NYers try to fight this new occupier the Aztecs take over the entire island and oppress the NYers. Now, if you were a NYer, what would you do in that situation?

Sudan and Palestine can be dealt with on the same level because you have no problem giving millions of dollars in Aid to Israel, who is the one with the power, but don't think it should be going to the Sudanese Minority who has about as much power as the Palestinians.

No one said Israelis should be wiped out. They should be wiped out of occupied territories and shouldn't be wiping out Palestinians who live in occupied territory.