Limbaugh: Democrats are "PR spokespeople for Al Qaeda"
On the July 31 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh claimed that Democrats have "aligned themselves with the enemy" in Iraq and went on to assert: "The enemy kills more soldiers, their spokesmen here in the U.S. are the Democrats. When we kill more of the enemy, the Democrats are silent and they say nothing." He continued: "But when we have reports of, you know, another IED, or pictures of a car on fire -- then the Democrats assume the role of media PR spokespeople for Al Qaeda."
From the July 31 broadcast of Premiere Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:
LIMBAUGH: I mean, there's almost a mathematical formula to this that I have detected. To the extent that we make progress, the Democrats' political hopes are diminished. Now, what kind of political leaders position themselves that way so that they only win when their country loses? And what kind of brains do they have to position themselves in such a way so that when we make progress, their political aspirations are diminished?
They're the ones that created this situation. They have aligned themselves with the enemy. They continue to align themselves with the enemy. They won't admit it, obviously. The enemy kills more soldiers, their spokesmen here in the U.S. are the Democrats. When we kill more of the enemy, the Democrats are silent and they say nothing. But when we have reports of, you know, another IED, or pictures of a car on fire -- then the Democrats assume the role of media PR spokespeople for Al Qaeda.
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
"When we kill more of the enemy, the Democrats are silent and they say nothing."
Wait, I thought when we killed more of the enemy, the Dems screamed that our troops are murderers and worse than the enemy.Now they're underemphasizing the killing. I gotta catch up..
You must have last year's manual. On page 223 of the 2007 Democratic manual, section 12: "How to Love the Enemy", it clearly states that we must be silent when we are killing the enemy or showing any signs of winning. Calling the solidiers baby killers and murderers, was in the old manual. Hating the soldiers just simply wasn't working. The new method is just to be openly supportive of Al Queda. ;-)
This is becoming so old. It was almost funny before, but now it sad that this is all Limbaugh can muster up these days. Yawnnnnn
It's real easy to remain silent while we (the U.S.) is winning the war....
BECAUSE WE'RE NOT WINNING!
Yep...and technically, it's not a "war" either.
it boils down to "cash-flow". It's like the war on drugs. War= money for weapons and support merchants, drug war= money for police, courts and prisons. The little guy pays and he/she has but one vote and a lot of the time that doesn't even count. If they speak up they are labeled nuts or America haters. limpbaaa is nothing but a drug addict and his credibility is zero. His sycophants ignore facts, reason and common sense. "sad" is an understatement.
This is another one of those hilarious Republican jokes, right?
I see no humor in this. These people hate Americans regardless of political party, Limbaugh is again attempting to divide like he always does.
and on fri 27 july limbaugh says (paraphrasing), in reference to legislation restricting politicians paying family members for campaign work- if americans knew how much incest (nepotism , i think) there was in olitics these days there's be a hanging from every lamp post--- we know which politicians he's talking about.
complaining to limbaugh's office or parent co or national sponsors may not be as effective as complaining to the local talk radio station, waving signs there, and boycotting local sponsors of these liars and demagogues.
the uncontested repetition to tens of millions every day completely distorts and controls the MSM and has been destroying democracy since reagan killed the last Fairness Doctrine. until we get a new Fairness Doctrine or demonopolize talk radio opponents of bush/GOP will be playing without a front line.
Being against wasting troops and money for no reason good for the country equals supporting the enemy.
wasnt it bush who vetoed the funding bills because he didnt like the withdrawl timetable you know the timetable that the majority of the people want ???
This is akin to hate speech. This rant from Limbaugh is baseless and divisive. He is entitled to his opinion but if his opinion includes yelling fire in a crowded theater it is not protected by the Constitution. Limbaugh is the real enemy to America with this tripe.
I would say that his comments, while divisive and tongue-in-cheek, do not pass the fire-in-a-theater litmus test.
And here we have the first poster who is going to claim that Limbaugh was "kidding" when he said this, and joking around.
I do agree that this doesn't pass snuff when it comes to yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre. The man is entitled to his opinion, no matter how wrong or stupid it is.
Joke or not, who knows? What is pretty obvious is that it is just more of the "Democrats in bed with the terrorists" narrative that Rush pushes on his program all the time.
Does anyone expect a nonpartisan dissection of issues from him? I doubt it.
No, of course not, but suggesting that the democratic leaders of our country are in bed with terrorists is repugnant really, and there's no place for it. It grates my nerves how conservatives have turned wanting democrats to bring our troops home into we're for the enemy. It's a common theme amongst the republicans running for President now, and the one in the Oval Office currently. Remember, back in November of last year, we had Bush telling the American people that if we elected democrats into the House and Senate, we would no doubt, be attacked again. Fast forward to Rudy, he's said, more or less, the same thing. It's not just Rush saying it, we have Presidents and Presidential candidates saying the same things.
The best way for the Democrats to combat it, in my opinion, is exactly the speech Obama just gave about Pakistan......a thoughtful, reasoned and seriously good foreign policy speech. I was impressed.
suggesting that the democratic leaders of our country are in bed with terrorists is repugnant really, and there's no place for it.
Magnolia,
In a country where NAMBLA is allowed to exist, & the KKK or Neo-Nazi groups are still allowed to gather, despite the fact that they are all repugnant, you'll just have to put up with Rush's free speech rights.
I don't find this humorous, nor do I believe Rush is attempting to be funny here. He hates Dem/Libs. He feels he has a perfect right in doing so. So he uses over the top rhetoric when dissing them.
Of course Jeter there are reprehensible organizations in the US that are allowed to exist, and they are also repugnant. But what Rush is doing here is essentially saying, hey, democrats are for the terrorists and killing of Americans, this too is repugnant.
I agree.
Sorry if that didn't come across in my post. I was simply listing other repugnant examples.
Jeter, I find it very appropriate that you would catagorize Rush Limbaugh's right to free speech with NAMBLA (even though the group doesn't exist), the KKK, and Neo-Nazi's.
I think you're ready to leave the dark side.
Well Rick I think you misunderstood [on purpose?] the point I was trying to make, but that's ok, I'm always up for a little ribbing ;-)
My point basically was this: Magnolia finds Rush's remarks "repugnant" & doesn't feel there's a "place for it"...I allowed that there are other things we all may find repugnant, but here in America they are allowed to exist. Including of course Limbaugh's right to express his opinion.
As you know Rick, some find "Hat Day" being shared with "Gay Pride Day" repugnant ;-)
I think AnotherAmerican's post further down probably hits upon what Limbaugh was attempting to get across here: He [Rush] considers Dem/Libs to be "useful idiots".
As far as me leaving this alleged Dark Side you speak of. Mmmmmm... what's the alternative? Entering the Liberal Moonbat Village? No thanks :-)
"I think AnotherAmerican's post further down probably hits upon what Limbaugh was attempting to get across here..." --Jeter
Tell me, why is it that right wingers are always trying to tell us what Limbaugh / Savage / O'Reilly, etc. was trying to convey?
um, actually, NAMBLA does exist:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAMBLA
LOLOLOL... I am glad you said it. I was not going to bother. Funny, all it takes is a simple search in google to find their web site.
If you had read further on that Wikipedia entry you would have found this:
TodayMore recently, media reports have suggested that for practical purposes the group no longer exists and that it consists only of a web site maintained by a few enthusiasts.
If you had read further on that Wikipedia entry you would have found this:
"TodayMore recently, media reports have suggested that for practical purposes the group no longer exists and that it consists only of a web site maintained by a few enthusiasts."
LOL :-)
I think a better question that arises from the comparison of NAMBLA's speech to Limbaugh's is What right thinking media outlets would give NAMBLA a platform as powerful as Limbaugh's on a daily basis to spew their tripe?
And yet those same media outlets sell their soul on a daily basis and put Limbaugh's ugly, divisive, red-blooded-American-hating speech on the air.
I think Rush is saying the Dems are either 'useful idiots' as described by Lenin or they are invested politically in the defeat and retreat of the U.S. in Iraq.
It is rather easy to come to that conclusion when the Democratic Whip in Congress says that a good report from General Petraus about the surge in Iraq will cause problems for the Democrats.
Doesn't sound so patriotic does it?
Do you have a link for that?
[link to www.washingtonpost.com]
It appears to me that you need to read the article again. It says nothing about a POLITICAL STRATEGY concerning the war as you were implying. Yes, he WAS talking about the direction we should take to best get out of Iraq. There is a huge difference from what he said and what you wrote.
I think you missed the point. Trying to get votes to retreat from Iraq is a political strategy.
It just so happens that the Democrats and the Iraqi terrorists have different motivations but the same goal and that is to force the Administration to leave Iraq. Sorry if you don't like it, but it is an inconvenient and incontestable truth.
You really are a simpleton. Try reading the entire article, not just the words you want too. You're attitude towards Democrats is as repugnant as Rush Limbaughs. Implying that Democrats share the same goals is really despicable and inaccurate.
"It just so happens that the Democrats and the Iraqi terrorists have different motivations but the same goal and that is to force the Administration to leave Iraq."
The only people who want us in Iraq are extremists here in America (Neocons) and the Islamic extremists. They both hope to use the occupation of Iraq to transform the Middle East according to their own vision and innocent people are getting killed for it.
It appears the Neo-Cons are just P. R. Spokespeople for the Islamic extremists.
AA,
Welcome back btw....
I believe that this "same goal, different motivation" is inherent when we are in a such a divisive foreign struggle, such as Iraq.
Those that are opposed to it, the Democrats, and frankly, much of the country, are automatically seen as "siding" with the enemy because their contrary position can't be seen as anything but.
On one hand, for Bush and his supporters to use their opposition's honest disagreements with regard to this war is hardly commendable, and a little underhanded.
However, the opposition, in this case the Democrats, need to very careful and diligent and cautious with the rhetoric and words they use so they don't come off looking like "PR for al queda".....it's not easy, but it can be avoided through thoughtful and deliberate opposition and not being focused on scoring political points.
Noboby, even Limbaugh I would presume, thinks the Democrats want the same things as the terrorists - but articles such as the one you linked too that need to be explained don't help the Democrats either.
However, the opposition, in this case the Democrats, need to very careful and diligent and cautious with the rhetoric and words they use so they don't come off looking like "PR for al queda"
It's a dishonest frame and only the far right will buy into something like that. The Democrats have nothing to worry about.
No it's not dishonest. Anytime you are opposing a current foreign war that we are engaged in, you need to be very careful about what you say. The Republicans, some of them, were very reckless in their criticism against Bill Clinton during Kosovo and others......this isn't a partisan swipe at anyone. Stop being so defensive.
"Anytime you are opposing a current foreign war that we are engaged in, you need to be very careful about what you say."
Again, it's a absurd frame and only the far right will buy into it.
"The Republicans, some of them, were very reckless in their criticism against Bill Clinton during Kosovo and others......this isn't a partisan swipe at anyone."
I have no idea why you brought this up.
"Stop being so defensive."
It sounds like you're the one being defensive because I called you on your BS.
It's not buying into anything, and yes, you either missed the whole point or are being ridiculously defensive......either way, I could care less.
Keep sniping and encourage your Democrats to do so as well........maybe the point I was making will sink in.
"It's not buying into anything, and yes, you either missed the whole point or are being ridiculously defensive......either way, I could care less."
What was your point?
"Keep sniping and encourage your Democrats to do so as well........maybe the point I was making will sink in."
I've been trying to encourage them to be more aggressive since before Bush's invasion of Iraq.
I think Tommy is right, but I think Loonz is right also. To suggest that suppressing free speech (i.a. Fleischer's post 9-11 the media has to watch what they say) during war is reprehensible. But I don't think that's what Tommy is saying. I think, and correct me if I'm wrong, but Tommy's aiming at the "be careful what you say, lest you turn your sword upon yourself".
In the case of what our current "media" delivers, the Dems HAVE to be very careful in what they say, or the "media" will never let them (or the public) forget it.
Being careful and considering your words is important. Also important is a positive emotional connection. Both Gore and Kerry were both, I think, hurt by failure in this area.
Regardless of what the Democratic candidates do, they (Obermann excepted) have no friends in the MSM. This thought can actually be liberating. Find other ways to get your message out, and spend your money on. The internet blogs, real grass roots organization, or other.
MSM news seems intent on making itself an oxymoron. Perhaps breaking up the major companies could help. Seemingly, informing the public of useful news should be economicly viable. Many people have earned livings and sucessful retirement, in the field. Why is it trick today?
... I agree, EWESTON, that Keith Olbermann stood alone for the longest time in the MSM, pointing out the warning signs that Bu$hCo was about to destroying everything America USED to stand for. For those 'offences', he was unfairly reviled by the reichwing talking heads (and still is, for that matter), and yet he perseveres! Go, Keith, GO..! ;) ...
While the GOP is united in their zeal to get as many Americans killed as they possibly can and share that goal with al Queda
"I think Rush is saying the Dems are either 'useful idiots' as described by Lenin or they are invested politically in the defeat and retreat of the U.S. in Iraq."
There's no victory or defeat for us in Iraq. It is the Iraqis who will determine their own future. We shouldn't be in the equation. The Iraqis don't want us there; the Iraqi parliament doesn't want us there; al-Maliki says we're free to go at anytime; and the American public wants out but the Bush administration wants to stay. They're probably waiting for the Iraqis to pass the oil law but I don't think the Iraqi parliament wants to hand over their oil sovereignty.
"It is rather easy to come to that conclusion when the Democratic Whip in Congress says that a good report from General Petraus about the surge in Iraq will cause problems for the Democrats."
I think a good report should expedite the withdrawal.
(Not to get things off topic, but I'm unaware of any documented instance of Lenin using the expression "useful idiots" / "полезные идиоты". Let's not give credit where credit isn't due.)
Here you go:
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=135140
The thread to which you linked seems to confirm that no one has been able to pin down an instance of Lenin using the phrase "useful idiots", doesn't it?
How bout Stalin? I'd though it was used to desribe some English Socialists originally.
Stalin certainly came closer, referring to "[t]he so-called cultural element of Western Europe and America" as "deaf-mutes", which could understandably be translated as "idiots". But that's still a bit of a stretch to "useful idiots".
My only point here -- one that is totally incidental -- is that I find it very interesting that contemporary conservatives have recently revived this expression along with an unconfirmed origin story placing it in the mouth of Lenin.
In fact, the phrase appears to have first appeared in English with this particular connotation in 1948 in the New York Times... but in reference to Italian politics, not to the Soviet Union. It seems to me that the current popularity of this expression and of its supposed Soviet origins among conservatives today is the product of a conscious attempt to liken liberal critics of conservative approaches to the War on Terror to liberal critics of conservative approaches to the Cold War. This is, I would argue, the central theme of Mona Charen's 2004 book "Useful Idiots: How Liberals Got It Wrong in the Cold War and Still Blame America First", which did a great deal to repopularize the term among conservatives.
Interesting, Vysotsky. I've heard the term thrown around quite a bit the past few years.
I always get a good laugh at the same ultra-conservatives that squeal indignantly at any Nazi comparisons to the GOP, while still working the Democrat=liberal=left=communist= Soviet Union angle on their minions.
Especially funny when the worst elements of the Nazis and Soviets are so much closer to their own plan for America.
NOTE TO THE HYPERSENSITIVE: I did not call the GOP Nazis nor Soviet Communists, only pointed out that,IMO,of ouR two major parties, the Republicans bear a closer resemblance.
Don't Godwin me, just post your basis for believing that Liberals are more like them.
Vysotsky, thanks very much for the education. That's what this web site is all about, cutting through the right wing fog machine.
Aw, shucks... :)
Rush said what he needed to say since he is the spokesperson for Satan in the US. I think its pretty easy to deduce that the GOP is comprised largely of morons and warmongers who want to get as many Americans killed as they possibly can. Since few of the propaganda parrots who carry GOP water can think for themselves and simply regurgitate what they are told to say they are the very definition of useful idiots, helping get as many Americans killed as they possibly can
Rush Limbaugh is as free as any lunatic to stand on the street corner and rave about how the Democrats are in league with al-Qaeda to any passers-by who'll stop to listen.
But he's doing this on the public airwaves, which are (or were) regulated by the federal government to prevent the sorts of abuses we saw in the totalitarian regimes of Germany and Russia in the 1940s, or even in our own country (remember Father Coughlin?). It was during the Reagan administration that these protections were removed. Limbaugh and all his ilk are the result.
Protesting him or trying to remove him from the air has nothing to do with his right to free speech. He has been and always will be free to be the a$$hole he is on his own time. But he shouldn't be allowed to use public resources to fill people's heads with his raving.
I think the comment was satirical, but I'm not saying Rush doesn't really believe it in some fashion or another.
I really do hate the divisiveness though...there are no talking heads on either side that dwell on persuasion rather than division, coercion and name-calling.
That's simply not true. I have heard some of Alan Colmes' radio show where he is not divisive, and actually takes calls from people who do not agree with him, and they actually, you know, debate, and he is respectful of their opinions. He doesn't toss bombs made with gas into a fire. Actually most liberal talk show hosts that I have heard, follow this same path, where they will debate with people from the "other side" and not cut them off (unless they're being ultimately very rude and uncouth) and actually talk things over with them. Is either person's mind changed at the end of these little debates? Probably not, but they do respect the opinions (sometimes) of people that they don't agree with, and there is the difference.
I believe that is why right wing radio is more popular than left wing radio. The right foments hate and derision and the left primarily debates. Hannity does not debate. I've watched him for years as I am addicted to being shocked and he never fails to do that. "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still". I know people that believe their ancestors were dinosaur herders. SERIOUSLY!! There is no room for debate, science, DNA tracking science or logic and it would be a waste of time to even try and "persuade" them into accepting reality. Their opinions stand no chance against the astute observations of scientists. These type folks will eventually die and another generation that is familiar with reality will rise up. Opinions are the cheapest commodities on earth. Just give me the facts. The right truly does hate America the way it is. They want a theocracy and find reality abhorent. There is but one cure for them: Lifes end stage.
I have found the same on both sides.
Gotta disagree. Thom Hartman on Air America is very respectful when debating right wingers, Alan Colmes is, Al Franken was, Sam Seder gets a bit passionate at times but he's still reaspectful.
Probably the left's equivolent to the vile Rish Limbaugh would be Randi Rhodes or Mike Malloy, who can roll in the mud with the best of them. However, even Rhodes and Malloy have one huge difference--THEY DON'T LIE !
I'd like to listen to a decent, respectful right winger. Any suggestions anyone?
I'd like to listen to a decent, respectful right winger. Any suggestions anyone?
crickets chirping...
9:25 PM, . . .crickets still chirping. . .
Dennis Prager comes to mnd.
Dennis Prager? The guy who led the charge against Keith Ellison swearing in on the Koran? The guy who praised Cindy Sheehan's husband because he divorced her? That Dennis Prager?
Please don't insult the wildlife.
It takes a real stomach to hanlde conservative talk radio. Do you have what it takes?
Probably not. Lies, misinformation, and bullying sometimes makes me puke.
Does Bruce Williams count?? He once helped me fix a problem with my patio, and he's sort of "right wing" politically...
When did Bruce get his own radio show?
[. . .cricket still chirping]
Was one of the first talk shows in my area, albeit it several years ago. Catch late night occasionally due to AM skip. Not a bomb thrower. Have heard Prager and Hewitt a few times and they are no where close to the RashLs, Shamitys, Savages, etal in the way they approach the subject matter, IMO.
do not pass the fire-in-a-theater litmus test. dexteritas0071418
Yeah it probably doesn’t meet the “fire in a theater” test but it scores a 100 on the “groundhog day” test. Each day some right-wing nut job tries to remind Americans that they should be afraid. Be very afraid and while your cowering in fear on your way to the ballot box, don’t vote for those Dems cause they are in bed with the very people we told you to fear. Same song different day.
I do think it qualifies as inciting violence. How many times has this guy repeated this hateful garbage against his own countrymen? Plenty. He has stopped just short of advocating his listeners to "do something about liberals." This is McCarthy like rhetoric.
What violent acts is he inciting?
Yeah Bing. I'd like to see your answer. Not to inflame your sensibility or impinge on your character, but otherwise it looks again to me like.. like.. I was going to say talking points, but it doesn't even rise to that level. It is simply a rant.
Remember Timothy VcVey?
Yes.
Remember the Alamo?
Yes, I remember the Alamo from 250 years ago , and all of you John Waynes are still fighting the Mexicans every day.
I always knew cons liked slow-or-no change, but Jeebus...
I do not think there is any violent acts being incited, just hate toward fellow Americans by Limbaugh.
The word Hate is so overused by many of you. No different then the Dems = Terrorist BS coming from the EXTREEM Right.
From Dictionary.com:
Hate; to dislike intensely or passionately; feel extreme aversion for or extreme hostility toward; detest.
This clearly sums up the way nearly all right wing talkers present their attitudes toward the left. If the word "hate" is overused, perhaps it's because they have so much of it.
BINGVANGORDEN:
It's not about someone being "entitled to their opinion", because we all are entitled to an opinion, and the Freedom of Speech we express it by...
It's about broadcasting on the Public Airwaves, for which there is no "entitlement"; nobody's "entitled to broadcast", their opinion or anything else... an FCC License is required to broadcast on the Public Airwaves.
Is this why we License rush limbaugh's employer (Premier Radio Networks: They're the Licensee here), to use the Public Airwaves to broadcast their political opinions?
You know, just nine short years ago, if you used an FCC License to broadcast political opinions (and they don't have to do that), you were required to provide "equal time" to a different or opposing poltical opinion.
Why was that?
Because the FCC included within its Regulations something referred to as the Fairness Doctrine.
Why did they do that?
Because they considered the Public Airwaves to be Public Property (which it is), and that We the People didn't License out the use of that property for the purpose of broadcasters to promote their own personal political opinions (which they do), and so We the People said that such a political use of Public Property (the PUBLIC AIRWAVES) was to require "fairness and balance", politically, by way of "equal time" (for political opinions) and "reply time" (for those personally attacked on the Public Airwaves).
Sounds like a good idea, this Fairness Doctrine... sounds like a "fair and balanced" use of Public Property... what happened to it, nine short years ago?
It was repealed by Reagan's FCC... after forty years as Regulatory Policy of the Public Airwaves, it was repealed... giving us this present incarnation of a handful of broadcast companies using the Public Airwaves to broadcast their own political opinions.
Gee, I don't think that's why We the People License them to use that Public Property.
Neither do I.
And hey, what about "shouting fire in a crowded theatre", do you think that applies here?
I don't know... but I do know this: That you can't broadcast the word "fire", or any other word, on the television and radio bands of the Public Airwaves, not without an FCC License... "Freedom of Speech" doesn't apply to broadcasting; nobody's "entitled to broadcast their opinion"; not me not you and not rush.
This is the new "communist"... if somebody wants to brand you as being against America (when in fact you oppose the policies of the criminal Bush administration), then they say you love and are working for "al qaeda"...
It's today's version of calling you a "communist", when someone's trying to intimidate you from expressing your opinion on National Policy, or otherwise trying to slander the opinion you've expressed...
And its an empty word used by these hacks, when they say "al qaeda"... they use that word, but they don't IDENTIFY even a single INDIVIDUAL in so doing...
Because guess what?
Empty words don't threaten our National Security, INDIVIDUALS with IDENTITIES do... and so who is rush saying Democrats are "PR sokespeople for"?
Say the name of an INDIVIDUAL, with an IDENTITY, so that Democrats can defend themselves from rush's slander...
But the fat hack won't do that... he won't say the name of an INDIVIDUAL with an INDENTITY...
He just says "al qaeda".
It's the new "communist", used for the same old reason.
Oh yes, we thrive on losing. We purposely created the great depression to bring on 40 years of democratic rule and used vietnam to cement our hold on the country. If it weren't for Rush using air wave hatred to expose our evil ways we'd still be running the show!
Oh, Rush, how's 2008 looking for you?
Is this a show down between Rush and Bush?
Recall that Bush has the power to deem anyone a terrorist or enemy combatant or whatever. Given Limbaughs claim that the Democrats have aligned themselves with the enemy wouldn't this mean Bush would have to hop to it and declare Democrats enemy combatants or terrorists or whatever?
Will a reporter ask Bush the question: "Rush has stated that the Democrats have aligned themselves with the enemy are you going to declare the Democrats to be enemy combatants or terrorists or whatever?
If Bush doesn't declare the Democrats to be enemy combatants or terrorists or whatever then what will the viewers of Rush Limbaugh have to say about Bush ignoring Rush?
Partisan
This is what is expected of Rush. He is not a serious person , to me I put him in the same category as Savage. Both are right wing bomb throwers.
Isn't Limbaugh Pizza the Hut from Mel Brooks' Spaceballs? Endlessly slobbering up the goo he excretes?
Well, Pizza the Hut died by eating himself, and I have a feeling if Rush can't find better "material" the same will be said of him. His fan base is bound to become bored by his "The Deomocrats hate America, love the enemy, did this, said that, reruns".
Funny. He did a Pizza Hut commercial a while back, proudly eating his pizza "crust first". Maybe he'll eat himself the same way.
Rush Lamebrain is a steaming mass of insecurity merely pretending to know what the heck he's talking about. He nevertheless pretty effective at convincing his mind-numbed minions that he indeed has something of value to say.
Look when you're an idiot and everyone is telling you you're an idiot you look for other idiots to commune with so you actually feel kinda' smart. That's how Rush "builds and holds" audience. His audience, who crossover with Hannity's and O'Reilly's, truly represent an idiocracy.
Thank God we don't have anything like this on the left.
I know, the right is nothing but mind numbing, can-think-for-themselves idiots, where the left is filled with independent clear thinking smart-as-a-whip mavericks.
Wow, who knew?
Me. I knew.
Yes, I knew it too.
Ahem? Then why did you mindnumbingly repeat worrier?
;-)
ps. Hahaha... Sorry I couldn't resist. Great setup Tommy!
Yes, thanks for being Tommy's "useful idiot". But who knew?
Donald H. Rumsfeld
Now, Thelma Lou, jes' because Barney'sleft a big ol' sweet potato pie on the windowsill, that doesn't mean you have to take a bite out of it!
'Scuse me there sheriff, but ya'll are addressin' one Charlene Darling. That Deputy of yours don't have enough meat on 'im to toy with. But you'll do just fine.
Ebonics?
Mayberrybonics.
Hey Sheriff!
I hear Barn was up to Mount Pilot for a spell.
Hey W-King. Yeah, he had to go to the Mt. Pilot Sanitarium for a bit, but he's back, rested and ready !
Now remember, if you start seeing a whole lot of "hahahahaha"s and "lololololololo"s, just give him a little breathing room.We don't want a relapse.
I need a cheat sheet here to learn all your secret mayberry identities?
"I know, the right is nothing but mind numbing, can-think-for-themselves idiots, where the left is filled with independent clear thinking smart-as-a-whip mavericks.
Wow, who knew?"--Tommy
I guess that statement pretty much sums it up, especially the "Wow, who knew" part. : )
If what tommy said wasn't so true, I might have suspected he was trying to be sarcastic.
; )
On the left we eat our own, it's both a flaw and a strength. We are the big tent in actuality. Do you remember Rush's failed attempt at TV? It didn't work even in the reddest of red states because it captured his homogenous (and might I add very unattractive) audience on camera. No diversity, no individuality, no tans! The right should be ashamed that William F. Buckley and other conservative thinkers have been supplanted with these dumbed-down haters.
William F actually is a bit depressed by it.
I think the fact that Rush, even though his show was drawing in viewers, was not being picked up for an earlier time slot. He decided to stick to radio.
That is what I remember. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong.
Nice try.
His rating were lower than ThighMaster commercials. His show looked like an infomercial for his book which was placed like checkerboard wallpaper as a backdrop.
Perhaps the final nail in his television coffin came when he introduced the White House's first dog, then flashed on the screen a picture of 12 year old Chelsey Clinton.
What a class act. The right must be so proud that this is their main spokesperson.
don't hate!
Excuse me Lynn for being a hater OF HATE! They throw bombs constantly from the safety of their little studios and when we return fire . . . . oh I'm certain you get my point. Political engagement is not the province of pacificity.
Its not worth hateing, even your worst enemy. It will kill ya.
To: A.J. Walzer
From : me
i hope you are up to date on all your immunizations. You area a great American and I am proud of you! It takes a lot of courage to expose your self to this toxic spewing pipe of bile day after day.
Thanks
I was listening to Limbaugh for a while the other day, when he went into his "harmless little puffball" speech - the one that says that his dittoheads could put their wife and daughter together with him in a Motel 6 room for the weekend if they had to go out of town and that they would be safe.
It's interesting how he specifically excludes the dittoheads' sons in that speech.....
BINGVANGORDEN,
Sorry, but I need to correct you on one point. You ended your post with "Limbaugh is the real enemy to America with this tripe."
Tripe comes from animal stomach.
The stuff we get from Rush comes from the far end of the digestive system.
It usually ends up as a "pie", but it's not really edible.
except by right wingers :-)
I'm watching a show on the history channel right now, it's about the cRapture. Seems a lot of wingnuts believe the four horsemen of the apocolypse are among us now, and I have to say I believe it. Rush is one of the horses' a-s-s.
I BECK that Limbaugh doesn't have the BOORTZ to SAVAGE a democrat to their face. But he's MORGAN able to BLITZER on about them to his audience of vapid, dittoheads all day long. It's O'REILLY sad.
That's a pretty COULTER statement to make!
Are you MALKIN fun of me?
Okay. I thought your first post kind fo Obmama'd but the second one had some Murtha to it.
Ha! Gads I need to learn to spell. Needless to say, I Obama'd on that one.
I would never RUSH to judge you like that!
To do so would be very Savage of you!
Let me try to make it up by saying these posts, while not Hillaryous are a nice break. Kerry on.
Very nice.
You know, you should all be locked up in a Santorum without Delay.
Yes, FRANKS to Limbaugh for PETRAUS as spokespersons for OBL's team.
OK fine, thanks to this drivel we are just BIDEN our time until we all sink PELOSI level.
Well tommy, you can visit me at the SANTORUM. Just hop in a boat and ROVE over. I've got a nice BUSH that they let me pee on, and I'm considered safe because they keep my MITTs secured with CHENEYs.
I almost Mittsed out on all this McCain raising.Don't huck a bee in my bonnet. I'll come down like a kraut hammer. If you're thinking "HBL's not too hannity with the lame puns, we'll just Ingraham", I'll show you it's Morris likely I Kondracke out a bad joke as long as the worst of you.
Hugh would think that Hewitt of made a bad joke about one of Townhall's finest.
Yawn, Rush. Can you and your crack writing staff of one-hundred monkeys create some new material?
But Democrats keep voting to keep the war going.
an Iraq LIE by Limbaugh and an American soldier Iraq veteran:
From: misterfacts (Original Message) Sent: 7/27/2007 3:00 PM 7/27/07Limbaugh: "Al Queda is cutting off the fingers of Iraqis whom they catch smoking cigarettes!" I called Rush the other day (7/24/07)and told him that I talked to three Iraq vets who told me that it was commonplace to see US troops knocking down the doors of innocent Iraqis and taking away their handguns and rifles.After my call an Iraq vet then called Rush and told him that I was lying! He said that our troops don't take away guns from innocent Iraqi citizens. "We would arm them if we could", he said.Question: Then why don't they arm them?!Gee! It seems to me that if innocent Iraqis are armed- they would be able to defend themselves against having their fingers cut off!If their fingers ARE being cut off- that ought to be proof enough that US troops ARE dis-arming the innocent. What a bunch of sweet troops America has over there!Dis-arming innocent civilians (especially in a war zone)is despicable and CRIMINAL! misterfact@yahoo.com
From: docT Sent: 7/27/2007 4:22 PM If their fingers ARE being cut off- that ought to be proof enough that US troops ARE dis-arming the innocent. No -- it is proof that our enemies are cruel and fanatical psychopaths who need to be exterminated in a manner most ruthless. Not everyone who owns a weapon carries it with him everywhere and at all times. Bullies prey on those unable to mount a defense. What a bunch of sweet troops America has over there! Yep -- good people who are patriotic, dedicated and courageous in ways that most people can never appreciate. You may sleep well tonight thanks to them. Dis-arming innocent civilians (especially in a war zone)is despicable and CRIMINAL! We don't disarm "innocents." We confiscate weapons that have an offensive military application such as grenades and mortars. Many (although not all) households have at least a handgun and maybe even an AK or SKS. Being armed is a right in Iraq. It is not compulsory. If a home has a crate full of AKs we will take them, the same as we will if there are explosives or bomb making components. The owners of those types of things are usually arrested. Posting ridiculous threads OUGHT to be CRIMINAL -- but sadly it isn't.
Reply From: misterfacts Sent: 8/1/2007 6:23 PM
DocT said: We don't disarm "innocents." We confiscate weapons that have an offensive military application such as grenades and mortars. Many (although not all) households have at least a handgun and maybe even an AK or SKS. Being armed is a right in Iraq. It is not compulsory. If a home has a crate full of AKs we will take them, the same as we will if there are explosives or bomb making components. The owners of those types of things are usually arrested. Misterfacts replies:Oh yeh?So if we don't dis-arm the innocent- why are their fingers being cut off.? If I was an Iraqi smoker- I'de carry a handgun with me wherever I go and defend myself! But then, maybe the US military has better things to spend our money on than giving innocent Iraqis handguns so they can defend themselves from getting their fingers cut off or having their throats slit! Like spending our hard earned tax dollars for keeping the all the PXs open to sell beer and cigarettes to the troops; cost overruns for Halliburton; all all the other crap the military wastes money on!. Don't feed us a bunch of crap about how innocent Iraqi fathers are able to defend themselves and their families because we are really helping them to defend themselves.!
If you want to know who told me that our troops are taking handguns from the innocent- you can start at the Army and Marine Corps recruiting office on Hwy 40-3 miles East of downtown Ocala, Fla. You'll find a few Iraq vets willing to talk about it! At least I DID ! misterfacts@hotmail.com
Right-wing water carriers like Limbaugh can't stand the fact that they put their money on the wrong horse. Their constant support of the Bush administration has come back to bite them in the end. Limbaugh's base audience are the only one's who still listen to this crap.
Sean Hannity's drug addicted buddy Rush is incapable of making an intelligent comment. He also lost his credibility after his drug bust.
Back to rehab, Rushy or retire immediately.
This is why you can't be taken seriously, Tommy.
You play the foolish game of "if you don't support Bush you are a traitor."
We had a small gathering in our home last night for a few of our neighbors. Our guest of honor just returned from Iraq a week ago Monday. Not one of us supports the administration's Iraq strategy... are you telling us we're all traitors? That Jim - who just spent a year away from his family in Iraq - supports the enemy?
At long last - have you right-wingers no decency?
I think the decency was lost awhile ago.
Also in earlier posts there was some discussion comparing Rushs "opinions" with Nambla (yes I know Nambla probably now comprises about three people nationally), KKK and others. The similarity focuses on that all of these groups are dispicable, but have free speech rights in America. The differences however are much more significant. KKK leaders or any of the three Nambla members are not considered national spokesmen for conservatives, do not have the likes of Dick Cheney on their radio programs and are not invited to the White House.
Rush is saying this as a conservative leader, as a valuable asset for the Republican party, and his hyperbole closely follows Republican strategy for painting Democrats. The whole flap with Hillory and Edelman, Cheney clearly came down on the side of Edelman suggesting Clintons info request was aiding the enemy.
So KKK, Nambla, free speech are red herrings, only diverting from the obvious Republican strategy to paint Democrats as weak or as traitors or worse and that republican politicians and conservative role models like Rush are the worst people on the earth ever. (a little of my own hyperbole in that last bit)
To ignore the ignoramus and his analogy for a minute, are any of you seeing peace vigils in your area? We have a number of them in the Portland, OR area AND the outlying more conservative towns. Our group of local dems have had ours going since Feb and the response is positive for the most part.
Here in the DC area,it's been pretty quiet for quite a long time. There's a rally coming up in September I think.
Here in Flagstaff we have a small group on the same corner of mainstreet doing a vigil most weekends. This has been going on steadily since the war began I have been with them but not recently.
Harmless little fuzzball who can be trusted with your daughter in a Motel 6. For those who were puzzled by Rush being detained at the Miami airport after returning from the Dominican Republic with Viagra that a buddy gave him, here's a hint:
http://gvnet.com/childprostitution/DominicanRepublic.htm
The DR is the Bangkok of the Western Hemisphere. Rich perverts fly in for a good time with the kiddies.
Of course, Rush may have just heard about a good steakhouse there. The Viagra was just ballast.
My bad:
http://gvnet.com/childprostitution/DominicanRepublic.htm
Limbaugh is PR spokespig for the deluded. Keep it up Rush. We need the entertainment, now that Paris is out of jail.
Rush has an math formula for distorting facts? Let's try this: four or five bold face lies told by this administration to provoke a war against a country that had not attacked us, plus two myopic, conservative zelots at the top of the administration, plus four years of poor planning and misinformation, equals 3500 plus deaths of US soldiers and another 16,000 or so casualties and thousands and thousands of Iraqies that have fallen dead or wounded in the conflict.
Sadly this is all the drugged out old Comedian Rush Limbaugh has left in the tank. The pain killers rotted his mind away and the erection pills took all of the blood flow and oxygen away from his addled mind. When will Middle America finally tire of his worn out "Dems are evil" routine?
C'mon, Rush...come up with something new...find a new and inventive method of spewing your bile & hate. Since you seem to make up most of your facts at least be inventive in your methods of delivering the propaganda.
Pile them up !! the Newts, the Rudys, the Rushs, Coulters, etc etc ..
They are all right wing hypocritical nuts. "More than One Flew Over the Cookoos Nest " ...