The Friday Rush: Vive la résistance!
Stop what you're doing! Don't you see? It's been apparent all along. Right in front of your eyes!
Rush Limbaugh is the victim!
Rush Limbaugh, speaking on behalf of the always-oppressed contingent of Americans who proudly wear the label of "Dittohead," made his plight and theirs sound like that of Nazi-occupied France or Cylon-occupied New Caprica:
LIMBAUGH: You know, when I read that last piece on health care, when I first read it this morning during the intense period of show prep that I do each and every day, I began to think that -- think that -- feel, even, that we're living in occupied territory. That we've been taken over. Not militarily. But follow me on this.
We've been taken over financially, economically, politically, scientifically. Without firing a shot, the left has seized the press. They have taken control of the banks. They're about to take control of the insurance companies and wipe them out. Much of the auto industry. The left is now setting a salary scale for people. They've taken over our currency, and they're proposing -- preparing to seize health care.
Now the occupiers -- we're being occupied by the left. This country -- we are now -- we need to be liberated. We, the people of this country, need to be liberated. We are oppressed now.
Oh, how horrible. Rush Limbaugh is "oppressed now." He's so oppressed with his millions and millions of dollars and his West Palm Beach compound and his cushy job and his adorable puppy.
Does Limbaugh understand what actual oppressed peoples had to put up with? You know -- things like real losses of freedom and liberties? There are many bad, bad things associated with oppression, but continuing to live your ritzy lifestyle isn't one of them.
But let's humor Rush. He claimed that: "We've been taken over financially, economically, politically, scientifically." So let me address some of those points.
Economically? Well the country has been facing some pretty lousy economic circumstances for well over a year now. And Limbaugh makes the policy enacted in response to it sound much more nefarious than it really is. Some argue that TARP might have been bad policy, but you don't often hear that Bush's intention was to "take control of the banks."
Scientifically? If anything, it's Limbaugh who is oppressing science. As I thoroughly examined last week, Rush is among the collection of conservative commentators who have deluded themselves into believing that the stolen Climatic Research Unit emails debunk climate change theory. The emails did no such thing last week or the week before, and -- surprise! -- they still don't.
As for political oppression, Limbaugh isn't clear what he means by that. Is Obama a political oppressor because he was voted into office last year? Because Obama's political party can be partisan in the way they go about pursuing their agenda?
Certainly, Rush is in no position to complain about partisanship. This week, Rush continued his pattern of holding the Republican Party hostage to his insanity by pressuring Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell to abandon a "flawed" approach to Democratic health care reform and take on an entirely obstructionist strategy instead.
Rush even spent time this week oppressing 1990s political history. (Hmm, hyperbole can be pretty fun. I can almost see what the appeal is to talkers like Rush.)
But just for fun, I have one more gross misuse of "oppression" to fling at Limbaugh. On Friday's program, Rush continued his history of homophobic remarks by claiming that gay marriage leads to bestiality. (Isn't that the sort of comment that ended Rick Santorum's political career?) This came in the context of another of his oppressive smears of Department of Education official Kevin Jennings.
Anyway, it begs to be asked: In what universe can Limbaugh claim he is "oppressed"? Please, Rush Limbaugh, tell us all one way in which your daily routine has been altered by the Democratic administration in the White House over the past year.
He still has his radio show, which supposedly reaches millions of listeners. He still zigzags the country on his private jet, from football game to speaking gig to Family Guy appearance. He still lambasts his opponents with hyperbolic rhetoric day in and day out. In what way is he being oppressed? In what way are his listeners being oppressed?
I'm asking a lot of questions because Limbaugh backs up his ridiculous assertions with nothing but platitudes about perceived slights. It's almost as if he were playing the "victim" card. Which is funny -- hilarious actually -- when you take into consideration Limbaugh's stated disgust with people who portray themselves as victims.
In the past, Rush claimed that the "whole purpose" of the Obama administration was to return the nation's wealth to "people that haven't earned it": "They are the minorities, the victims, the poor." On a separate occasion, Rush went along with a caller who argued that minorities in this country have been "coached" to be "angry" and to be victims. Rush responded to the caller approvingly: "They're taught to be angry. They're taught that they've been cheated. They're taught that they've been discriminated against."
But when Rush Limbaugh sees the opportunity to self-servingly paint himself and his audience as victims and the oppressed, he takes it.

















If he paints himself to be a victim, he is a victim because in his world of fantasy and insanity, that is a logical conclusion (although not so in a world populated with sane, reasonable, and compassionate people).
Rushbo, go ahead and be a victim in your own fantasy world. you are the paragon of humanity, humility, and every other positive thing in the entire world. Remember that you have done nothing to antagonize anyone, and if you are receiving negative feedback, it's because people don't understand you, and it's their fault. If life was a parade, everyone would be out of step except you.
Lewis asked in what way is Rush being oppressed? In what way are his listeners being oppressed?
Mr. Lewis, you would have to be a conservative to get it. I can only speak for myself (as a Conservative independent) who does not cotton to Big Govt, Big Deficit, Big Debt, or Big Social Welfare Programs. I feel oppressed lately like it or not. I do not even listen to Rush - though not a supporter, I am not a detractor. Are conservatives victims? That depends on the situation. As for me, I felt like a victim when my POTUS turned a deaf ear to the concerns of a huge chunk of his people, even to the point of mocking us - yes, that makes us victims. Especially when the President turned around and kissed up to leaders who have historically hated America. It was like a slap in the face for my POTUS to take the time (and taxpayer money) to fly around the world in an effort to reach out and understand them, but when we (tea partiers) marched on Washington a few months ago, he LEFT TOWN!? All we got was a presidential snub.
Honestly, I don't care what Limbaugh does with his money, except for the fact that he makes a living by lying. He not the first in our history. We have still managed to still progress.
As far as Nancy Pelosi goes, she is the Speaker of the House of Representatives. According to our Constitution if anything happens to the President she is, after the Vice President the one who assumes the office of President.
It was only after 9/11 and a review of our national security was the Speaker of House given a plane. It is for national security purposes.
I really wish people would get the facts on this issue, instead of falling prey to likes of Hannity, Limbaugh, and whoever else is perping this nonsense.
On to your next point, Obama "sucking up" to our historical enemies. While I by no means view our President as perfect, and have been disappointed by several of his choices, I can't see how choosing to engage in dialogue with people we have ideological, political, or even theological disagreements with is a worse alternative to war or economic sanctions. Sanctions only hurt the poor and middle class of any country, likewise with war. Do you know how many palaces Saddam owned? The most conservative estimate I've seen is 68. It doesn't seem like the sanctions hurt him too much, unlike most everyone else in Iraq. Fidel Castro also enjoys plenty of wealth, while the people of Cuba are oppressed and impoverished. War on the other hand has only destroyed the lives of many in Iraq and Afghanistan, while private contractors rake in the cash. When both of these have been shown to be miserable failures, why not try sitting down and working out our differences?
And lastly the "tea parties" I'm not even going to bother to address them, other than to say if you can't see what's wrong with them, no amount of dialogue is going to change your mind.
One thing I've heard President Obama say repeatedly is his willingness to talk to those who disagree with him. Maybe Beck, FreedomWorks and the other astroturf organizations should have tried to schedule a meeting for the protesters to interact with the president. It wasn't the president's place to do it. It was the responsibility of organizers to set it up. You may be able to arrange it on your own, and it seems that it'd be worth a try in your case. It might address some of your concerns.
h/t to canaan because I couldn't have said it better myself:
I really wish people would get the facts on this issue, instead of falling prey to likes of Hannity, Limbaugh, and whoever else is perping this nonsense.
Glad to hear you disapprove of GW's long-standing love affair with the Saudis. There's certainly nothing Obama has done that has been so egregious.
I've never in my 37 years of voting in this country ever seen members of Congress organize tea party press conferences/rallies against the government they themselves are part of.
IMHO, it's an unspoken admission of their failure to govern and an attempt to deflect the blame they so richly deserve in helping to bring to fruition our present set of circumstances.
No one ever states the obvious. If the left controls the media, then why is Rush on the air? Not only Rush, but the entire pantheon of right-wing commentators?
"The left is now setting a salary scale for people."
Then why is Rush getting 34MM per year (or something like that)?
"...we're being occupied by the left."
Then why isn't Rush haning upside down in the middle of Times Square?
Maybe it is a kinder, gentler left that's occupying the country? Yeah, that must be it.