The New Anti-Americans

Just objecting to President Obama's plan for saving the economy and the world is not enough to be anti-American. Even publicly hoping, as Rush Limpballs does, that President Obama fails in everything he does is not enough to be anti-American.

No, to be one of the New Anti-Americans, you must combine strong dissent toward our new President with a long record of condemning as anti-American all those who dissented against War Criminal, Constitution-Shredder and Traitor George W. Bush.

For all of us who spent the last eight years enduring verbal and even physical attacks because we dared to express our anti-war, anti-torture, pro-Constitution, anti-bush patriotism, Blue Girl has a rant that will make your heart soar.

I remember being one of the people who opposed this war from the outset. I remember a squareheaded asshole with a buzz cut pushing his bumper up against mine and trying to push me into traffic a few days before the war started because I had bumper stickers on my truck that said "No War On Iraq" and "Get Afghanistan Right" - when he sped away I saw his..."This time, Anti-War is Anti-American."

I remember being told by the dispatcher at the police department that I might should take those bumper stickers off my truck because "this is a pretty patriotic town."

I remember the armchair patriots I worked with there being shocked that a military person was against a war, and how they viewed me with suspicion after learning that.

I remember having my patriotism questioned, even though I was the one with a record of service to point to.

And all of my opposing positions were prefaced with "I hope I'm wrong because if I'm right and this fails, America fails, and that is the last thing I want to see happen."

Yet I'm anti-American and these assholes are the patriots?

Bullshit. They are traitorous, treasonous cowards, and they do not deserve the rights afforded them by the people like my husband, and elmo, and Rook and, to a lesser extent, me and everyone else who stepped up and took that oath to the Constitution and did so enthusiastically because we knew what was said therein.

They don't deserve the civil liberties that men and women like bmaz and grolaw fight every day to defend in court. They don't deserve the the protections of the law that my friend RW works within every day to protect society in her role as a prosecutor.

Fuck Rush Limbaugh.

Read the whole thing.

Cross-posted at Blue in the Bluegrass.

There's more: "The New Anti-Americans" >>

Why Is The MSM Afraid Of Scrutinizing Rush Limbaugh?

The New York Times Magazine's recent ridiculous puff piece on Rush Limbaugh continues a trend in which the mainstream media has shied away from any serious scrutiny of the nation's top-rated talk radio host.

It's a courtesy that Limbaugh has never reciprocated. After all, Limbaugh spends day after day on his radio program, demonizing The New York Times in the harshest language imaginable. After listening to Limbaugh's ramblings, you might well be under the impression that the Times is working closely with Al-Qaeda.

But the Times is hardly alone in treating Limbaugh with kid gloves. For such a major celebrity, Limbaugh has never faced any sort of real scrutiny from the mainstream media in his two decades as a national radio star.

It wasn't the MSM, for example, that broke the 2003 story of how Limbaugh was being investigated in connection with illegally obtaining OxyContin. It was the tabloid media (specifically, the National Enquirer).

Amazingly, in 20 years, there has really only been one in-depth look at Limbaugh (and it didn't come from the MSM). It came from author Al Franken's 1996 book, Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot.

Franken's best-selling book exposed Limbaugh for the fraud he is. For the first time ever, the book brought to light Limbaugh's astonishing hypocrisy (such as the fact that he once collected government jobless benefits and the fact he never voted for GOP hero Ronald Reagan) as well as his crude, vicious hate speech (such as calling then-13-year-old Chelsea Clinton a "dog").

Big Fat Idiot also revealed how Limbaugh's program peddles outright lies and misinformation on a daily basis. Until Franken's book appeared, little of this information had ever been revealed to a broad audience, thanks to the MSM's silence.

Frankly, if the MSM had been doing its job, there would never have been a need for Franken's book in the first place. Readers appreciated Franken's job in exposing Limbaugh (sending Big Fat Idiot soaring to the top of the best-seller lists).

The MSM has always given Limbaugh a pass. To this day, he serves up a daily helping of outright lies, GOP propaganda and misinformation to his Ditto-Head audience of 14 million.

And Limbaugh isn't the only Right-Wing Hate Spewer treated with kid gloves by the MSM.

Recall how in 2005, Time magazine did a puff piece on Ann Coulter. The article's author, John Cloud, stunned many readers with his cover-story valentine to Coulter, as well as his contention that he "didn't find many outright Coulter errors" in her unhinged, rambling books. (In reality, watchdog sites like Media Matters have documented loads of outrageous lies in Coulter's shoddily researched writings).

And radio host Glenn Beck is yet another nutcase fringe right-wing extremist who gets a free pass from the MSM. In fact, in Beck's case, the MSM rewarded this hate-spewer with his own daily hour-long program on CNN's "Headline News." This, for a right-wing talk show host who once called Cindy Sheehan a "slut."

There's more: "Why Is The MSM Afraid Of Scrutinizing Rush Limbaugh?" >>

Can Rush Limbaugh be jailed in Ohio?

Short answer, for those of you familiar with the developing story, appears to be No, we apparently can’t put Rush’s pilonidal cyst behind bars for recreational fun for some some Ohio criminals named “Bubba.”

Whether you are familiar or not, read on:

Truthout reports Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) is investigating GOP crossovers voting in the Ohio Democratic primary. In Ohio, doing a temporary party change for that reason (Ohio primaries are semi-closed or semi-open, depending on which way you look at it) is a criminal offense, and Rush Limbaugh (and Laura Ingraham) encouraged exactly such behavior:

While this all makes for great talk radio and sounds like fun, there is one catch: What Limbaugh encouraged Republican voters to do in Ohio was a fifth-degree felony in that state, punishable with a $2,500 fine and six to 12 months in jail. That is because in order to change party affiliation in Ohio, voters have to fill out a form swearing allegiance to that party’s principles “under penalty of election falsification.”

That said, if Truthout, beyond the direct quote, is getting the gist of the law right, I don’t know that it applied to Limbaugh.

Indeed, the law applies only to individual voters:

3599.36 Election falsification.

No person, either orally or in writing, on oath lawfully administered or in a statement made under penalty of election falsification, shall knowingly state a falsehood as to a material matter relating to an election in a proceeding before a court, tribunal, or election official, or in a matter in relation to which an oath or statement under penalty of election falsification is authorized by law, including a statement required for verifying or filing any declaration of candidacy, declaration of intent to be a write-in candidate, nominating petition, or other petition presented to or filed with the secretary of state, a board of elections, or any other public office for the purpose of becoming a candidate for any elective office, including the office of a political party, for the purpose of submitting a question or issue to the electors at an election, or for the purpose of forming a political party.

Whoever violates this section is guilty of election falsification, a felony of the fifth degree.

Every paper, card, or other document relating to any election matter that calls for a statement to be made under penalty of election falsification shall be accompanied by the following statement in bold face capital letters: “Whoever commits election falsification is guilty of a felony of the fifth degree.”

And, the Ohio statute on conspiracy does not cover this level of felony.

Sorry, Truthout, and other people wanting to put Rush’s pilonidal cyst behind bars for some Ohio criminals’ recreational fun, but it ain’t gonna happen.

There's more: "Can Rush Limbaugh be jailed in Ohio?" >>

Global warming skeptics live among us

[x-posted on The 2 Dollar Bill]

I was invited to talk at a group lunch in a small town between here and there today. We'll call it Anytown, Any State. The food was fried. Haven't had a better pork tenderloin sandwich ever. Ever.

At the crossroads of two major Any State US Highways... people gather once a month to protect their rights as former employees of a large corporation. And they meet for fellowship. Did I mention the fried food?

As the invited speaker, I did my somewhat normal 'It's Spring! Here's what you should know about the twisting funnels of death in Any State"... adapted for the region which I was visiting.

Toward the end of my time, I open the floor to questions. Inevitably, the older crowds want to discuss global warming or climate change. And they have one informational source to cite. Only one. And they wish to smear only one former Veep. Only one.

Care to guess?

As they ask their questions... I pass on what I feel is credible science. When I don't know, I say "I don't know, but I can point you in the right direction or find out". When my answers conflict with what they've heard on the radio, though... trouble is afoot. Brows furrow. Stares harden.

So today, I went out on a limb a bit more than normal. Without asking where they got their "information"... I said in closing, it's very important to me that I understand where I get my science information. You have to consider the source.



Nature magazine. National Geographic. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

I asked if these were organizations or publications we could all trust? The group seemed to agree.

So I stepped out from the safety of the trunk....

But AM radio with Rush Limbaugh is not science. His message is laced with agenda and misinformation that is easily contradicted with science journals. And if you hear that scientists are divided on whether or not the globe is warming... you should find another source of information. The globe is warming. Now the questions are: "Why, exactly, is that happening... and what can be done to reduce the effects of climate change so that we may continue our way of life as we prefer it"?

As expected, the main interrogator, the Limbaugh-font-of-knowledge publicly pish-poshed me... yet, an entire side of the room lit up with applause.

To say I was shocked wouldn't cut it.


The experience reminded me that it's time again to brush up on my global warming apologetics.

I wasn't on my game today... certainly unprepared for a full-on Dr. Limbaugh, PhD, Director of Climate Change studies in North America thesis.


One argument that seems to be getting plenty of airtime lately is the "it's the sun's fault" idea. So I'll start there.

THE SUN IS WARMING ALL THE PLANETS IN THE SOLAR SYSTEM, EARTH INCLUDED. IT'S THE SUN'S FAULT.

The idea is that sunspots, or the variable brightness of our nearest star, could be affecting the incoming solar radiation on our planet and the rest of the system.

Yet, climate models already incorporate the variability of solar output on Earth's climate.

From National Geographic:

The sun's energy output varies slightly as sunspots wax and wane on the star's surface.


But sunspot-driven changes to the sun's power are simply too small to account for the climatic changes observed in historical data from the 17th century to the present, research suggests.


The difference in brightness between the high point of a sunspot cycle and its low point is less than 0.1 percent of the sun's total output.


"If you run that back in time to the 17th century using sunspot records, you'll find that this amplitude variance is negligible for climate," Foukal said.


The researchers obtained accurate daily sunspot measurements dating as far back as 1874 from institutions such as the Mount Wilson Observatory near Pasadena, California, and the Royal Observatory in Greenwich, England.

Other scientists are quoted in the article saying we don't know what else might be coming from the sun to create such an effect, but it's possible. True. We probably don't know all there is to know about the sun.

MARS AND PLUTO ARE WARMING, JUST AS THE OTHER PLANETS ARE... IT'S NOT OUR FAULT

So it must be the sun. Except we discounted that (for the most part) above.

From the Grist Mill (accepting a left-bend in rhetoric here since I think it's cited science w/o propaganda):

As for the alleged extraterrestrial warming, there is extremely little evidence of a global climate change on Mars. The only piece I'm aware of is a series of photographs of a single icy region in the southern hemisphere that shows melting over a six year period (about three Martian years).


Here on earth we have direct measurements from all over the globe, widespread glacial retreat, reduction of sea ice, and satellite measurements of the lower troposphere up to the stratosphere. To compare this mountain of data to a few photographs of a single region on another planet strains credulity. And in fact, the relevant scientists believe the observation described above is the result of a regional change caused by Mars' own orbital cycles, like what happened during the earth's glacial cycles.


See Global Warming on Mars? from RealClimate for much more detail about this issue.


Turning to the outer reaches of the solar system: in the icy cold and lonely Kuiper Belt was observed a difference in Pluto's atmospheric thickness, inferred from two occultation observations 14 years apart. But a cursory glance at Pluto's orbit and atmosphere reveals how ridiculous it is to draw any conclusions about climate, much less climate change, from observations spanning less than even a single season, let alone enough years to even establish the climate's normal state.

A RECENT PRESS RELEASE FROM THE HEARTLAND INSTITUTE SAID GLOBAL WARMING WAS DISPROVEN

Oh really? And the rest of us missed that somehow?

How about this nugget for thought...

Skeptics gathered in New York this weekend for a global warming denial conference. They paid their speakers to speak... unlike other science conferences where being asked to speak IS the honor. From Source Watch:

The Heartland Institute, according to the Institute's web site, is a nonprofit organization "to discover and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems". [1] It campaigns on what it calls "junk science", "common-sense environmentalism" (i.e. anti-Kyoto, pro-GM), the privatization of public services, smokers' rights (anti-tobacco tax, denial of problems from passive smoking), the introduction of school vouchers, and the deregulation of health care insurance. It also provides an online resource for finding right-wing think tank policy documents called PolicyBot.

And these are the people who gathered in New York, as described by an article in Harpers Weekly in 1995:

The skeptics assert flatly that their science is untainted by funding. Nevertheless, in this persistent and well-funded campaign of denial they have become interchangeable ornaments on the hood of a high-powered engine of disinformation. Their dissenting opinions are amplified beyond all proportion through the media while the concerns of the dominant majority of the world's scientific establishment are marginalized.

AL GORE ISN'T GREEN
To which I always say... it's not about Al Gore. It's about the planet and our way of life. Gore may be a messenger... on or off message at times. But he's still just a messenger. There are many others to listen to if you don't like Gore's "dash D" behind his name.



Well... it's not a great apologetic list... but it's a start and it has the brain juices going again. Stand by for more soon.

There's more: "Global warming skeptics live among us" >>

At the End of the Day

Is it the end of the day already? Seems like we had an end only yesterday....

• Is it the errant mixing of oxycontin & Viagra® that makes him crazy, or is it something that comes to Rush naturally? It seems he loved McCain, before he hated him, before he loved him again.

"If I really wanted to torpedo McCain, I would endorse him," Limbaugh said on his radio show. "Because that would send the independents and liberals who are going to vote for him running away faster than anything."

That Rush; he's tricksy & false. I was so this close to jumping aboard the BS Express.

• Well, hell, it's as if you cannot even buy good government anymore.

A home builders' group on Tuesday halted donations to federal congressional campaigns over concern that Congress and the Bush administration have not done enough about the housing slump and the economy.

• Be careful which America you choose, John, or you may not be allowed in either.

In deciding between his one-time rivals, Edwards appears deeply divided. Several former advisers likened his thought process to a heart-versus-head split -- with his heart favoring Sen. Barack Obama's strong message of change, and his head attracted to Clinton's tested nature and commitment to tough fights.

Usually, a candidate who's "suspended" his campaign and only holds onto 26 delegates might not seem to be worth courting; but, I don't think either Senator Clinton nor Obama would chase away an extra 26 delegates at the present time.

• If there's anything more political than a presidential campaign, it's a dog show. Score one for the good guys.

All he wants to do is play.

Let the fancy-cut French poodles prance with their pompoms, let the flowing Afghan hounds fly around the ring. The tiny beagle is happy to dig his nose in the dirt and make a little mischief.

Good ol' Snoopy.

The only dog consistently listed among America's popular breeds for nearly 100 years. But definitely not a show dog.

Until now. Make way for the rise of beagle! Come, Uno, come.

A tri-colored package of personality, Uno put himself in position Tuesday night to become the first beagle to win best in show at Westminster, the nation's No. 1 pooch event.

Barking and baying up a storm, Uno lived up to his name Tuesday night by becoming the first beagle to win best in show at the Westminster Kennel Club.

The nation's new top dog was clearly the crowd favorite, and drew a standing ovation from the sold-out crowd at Madison Square Garden when he was picked.

G'night.

There's more: "At the End of the Day" >>

Character Matters

Tonight's funny is a little different. It's a cutting character study of Rush Limbaugh from rackjite1. I don't think Rush would approve. I bet you do. Enjoy.

There's more: "Character Matters" >>

Headzup: Rush Limbaugh Attacks Child

I know what you are thinking, this guy has SCHIP and the Republican slime machine on the brain. Yes I do and I will until 1)we win the SCHIP battle and 2)the Right Wing learns they can't go around sliming 12 year old kids.

Tonights funny is called Headzup:Rush Limbaugh Attacks Child. The title says it all.



Have any of you considered the level of irony involved when a prescription drug addict is named "Rush."

There's more: "Headzup: Rush Limbaugh Attacks Child" >>

Rush Limbaugh Responds To VoteVets.org Ad

Rush Limbaugh has responded to the VoteVets ad posted a couple of times below by comparing Brian McGough to a suicide bomber.

You know, this is such a blatant use of a valiant combat veteran, lying to him about what I said, then strapping those lies to his belt, sending him out via the media in a TV ad to walk into as many people as he can walk into.

Media Matters has the audio. You can read the entire transcript after the break.

To invoke the imagery of a suicide bomber when characterizing someone for criticizing his "phony soldiers" comment is a further insult to all American military personnel, especially military personnel who have had to suffer both the loss of their companions and real injuries at the hands of real suicide bombers. Apparently Rush doesn't know the difference between a victim's broken bones and a blowhard's broken ego.

Rush, at long last have you no shame.


IMBAUGH: VoteVets.org has -- they describe themselves as an organization comprised of veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns who oppose current policy in Iraq. They've put together a TV ad that takes aim at me. This ad's going to run on Fox News, on CNN, it's going to run on WMAL radio in Washington, $60,000 ad buy that's going to run, I think, on our local West Palm Beach station down here. And there's a man identified as Brian McCoff -- McGough -- it's M-C-G-O-U-G-H, I'm not sure how he pronounces it, McGo, McGuff -- I haven't watched the ad.

He discusses his service in Iraq, the wounds he suffered there, and he says to me in this ad, "Until you have the guts to call me a 'phony soldier' to my face, stop telling lies about my service." You know, this is such a blatant use of a valiant combat veteran, lying to him about what I said, then strapping those lies to his belt, sending him out via the media in a TV ad to walk into as many people as he can walk into.

This man will always be a hero to this country with everyone. Whoever pumped him full of these lies about what I said and embarrassed him with this ad has betrayed him. They're not hurting me, they're betraying this soldier. Now, unless he actually believes what he's saying, in which case it's just so unfortunate and sad when the truth of what I said is right out there to be learned.

There's more: "Rush Limbaugh Responds To VoteVets.org Ad" >>

VoteVets.Org Responds to Rush Limbaugh's Phony Soldiers Comment.

This video from VoteVets.org speaks volumes.

There's more: "VoteVets.Org Responds to Rush Limbaugh's Phony Soldiers Comment." >>

Senator Harry Reid Just Called Republicans To Stand Against Limbaugh's Phony Soldier Comment

Earlier today Harry Reid went to the well of the Senate and called on his Republican colleagues to sign the letter he wrote last week. The video is from C-Span, it was uploaded by TPM. Greg Sargent has some thoughts about this political maneuver. Sort of a resolution without appearing tit or tat. I wonder if Kit Bond is going to sign on?



Has Limbaugh apologized yet? Maybe Harry's letter needs some company? What do you think? Here is the address: Mr. Mark P. Mays, CEO, Clear Channel Communications Inc. 200 East Basse Road, San Antonio, TX 78209

There's more: "Senator Harry Reid Just Called Republicans To Stand Against Limbaugh's Phony Soldier Comment" >>

Has Limbaugh Apologized Yet?

It is September 30, 2007. Has Rush Limbaugh apologized for his "phony soldier" comment? Have you taken any steps to encourage him?

There's more: "Has Limbaugh Apologized Yet?" >>

Rep. Mark Udall To Introduce Resolution Condemning Rush Limbaugh's "Phony Soldier" Comment

The hardworking Greg Sargent of TPM's election central has learned that Representative Mark Udall is shopping a resolution condemning Rush Limbaugh's "phony soldier" comment. His "dear colleague" letter is reprinted after the break. Sargent reports the resolution

will force all the Republicans in the House to either vote for it, against it, or skip the vote -- and to pass judgment on the powerful conservative talk show host's contention that troops who don't support President Bush's war policies are "phony soldiers."

It is being rumored that the Democratic leadership is not amused. I guess they don't want to offend Republican sensibilities. According to Sargent the rank and file is very interested in the resolution.

Bmaz says the courtly Mo Udall must be rolling in his grave. Mo didn't live to see the monstrosity that is the modern Republican media machine.

September 28, 2007

JOIN AS AN ORIGINAL COSPONSOR OF A RESOLUTION

HONORING OUR ARMED FORCES AND

CONDEMNING RUSH LIMBAUGH'S ATTACK

ON "PHONY SOLDIERS"

Dear Colleague:

On September 26, 2007 the broadcaster Rush Limbaugh told a nationwide radio audience that members of the Armed Forces who have expressed disagreement with current policies of the United States regarding military activities in Iraq are "phony soldiers."

On Monday I will introduce a resolution honoring all Americans serving in the Armed Forces and condemning this unwarranted attack on the integrity and professionalism of those in the Armed Forces who choose to exercise their constitutional right to express their opinions regarding U.S. military action in Iraq.

For more information or to cosponsor the resolution, please contact XXXXXXX in my office at xxxxx.

Sincerely,


Mark Udall

There's more: "Rep. Mark Udall To Introduce Resolution Condemning Rush Limbaugh's "Phony Soldier" Comment" >>

Senators Letter To Clear Channel CEO Asks For Limbaugh Apology

Think Progress is reporting that four of our intrepid Democratic Senators have done what they always do instead of taking action. They sat right down and wrote themselves a letter. This one is addressed to Rush Limbaugh's boss, Mr. Mark P. Mays
CEO of Clear Channel Communications Inc. I have reprinted the letter on the flip. No matter how sternly written, a letter isn't going to do the job. Progressives need a clear condemnation in the record of the Senate. How about a resolution?


September 28, 2007

Mr. Mark P. Mays
CEO, Clear Channel Communications Inc.
200 East Basse Road
San Antonio, TX 78209

Dear Mr. Mays,

At the time we sign this letter, 3,801 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq, and another 27,936 have been wounded. 160,000 others awoke this morning on foreign sand, far from home, to face the danger and uncertainty of another day at war.

Although Americans of goodwill debate the merits of this war, we can all agree that those who serve with such great courage deserve our deepest respect and gratitude. That is why Rush Limbaugh’s recent characterization of troops who oppose the war as “phony soldiers” is such an outrage.

Our troops are fighting and dying to bring to others the freedoms that many take for granted. It is unconscionable that Mr. Limbaugh would criticize them for exercising the fundamentally American right to free speech. Mr. Limbaugh has made outrageous remarks before, but this affront to our soldiers is beyond the pale.

The military, like any community within the United States, includes members both for and against the war. Senior generals, such as General John Batiste and Paul Eaton, have come out against the war while others have publicly supported it. A December 2006 poll conducted by the Military Times found just 35 percent of service members approved of President Bush’s handling of the war in Iraq, compared to 42 percent who disapproved. From this figure alone, it is clear that Mr. Limbaugh’s insult is directed at thousands of American service members.

Active and retired members of our armed forces have a unique perspective on the war and offer a valuable contribution to our national debate. In August, seven soldiers wrote an op-ed expressing their concern with the current strategy in Iraq. Tragically, since then, two of those seven soldiers have made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq.

Thousands of active troops and veterans were subjected to Mr. Limbaugh’s unpatriotic and indefensible comments on your broadcast. We trust you will agree that not a single one of our sons, daughters, neighbors and friends serving overseas is a “phony soldier.” We call on you to publicly repudiate these comments that call into question their service and sacrifice and to ask Mr. Limbaugh to apologize for his comments.

Sincerely,

_____________________
Senator Harry Reid
Majority Leader

_____________________
Senator Richard Durbin
Assistant Majority Leader

_____________________
Senator Charles Schumer
Vice Chairman
Democratic Conference

_____________________
Senator Patty Murray
Secretary
Democratic Conference

There's more: "Senators Letter To Clear Channel CEO Asks For Limbaugh Apology" >>

It's Friday September 28, 2007 -- Has Rush Apologized Yet?

Yesterday we saw a firestorm over Rush Limbaugh's defamatory statements about our troops. John Stolz of VoteVets.org made some great comments right here. Democratic politicians across the country rose in indignation. Nancy Pelosi's blog The Gavel featured comments by Representatives Frank Pallone , and Jan Schakowsky. Hurray for our side.

The question is what will happen today. Will Democrats, feeling good about themselves for jumping on Rush, simply take the weekend off letting the issue fade away, or will the fight be renewed?

We know what Republicans would do, they would keep on the topic until they achieved the total and public humiliation of Rush and any Republican Presidential Candidate who didn't condemn his comments. What are we going to do? I want to see the Republican candidates questioned on the issue. I want to see an ad in the New York Times and the Washington Post calling shame on Limbaugh. Don't you?

There's more: "It's Friday September 28, 2007 -- Has Rush Apologized Yet?" >>

Limbaugh and "Barack the Magic Negro"

Here is the real reason you should go to Crooks and Liars this morning. They have updated coverage of the story breaking over comedian Rush Limbaugh and his offensive "parody" song entitled "Barack the Magic Negro."

There's more: "Limbaugh and "Barack the Magic Negro"" >>

Rush Limbaugh--It Was All A Joke!

Apparently people like Blue Girl get results because Media Matters is reporting that:

On the April 23 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, host Rush Limbaugh claimed "I was making a joke" when he said on his April 19 broadcast that Virginia Tech gunman Cho Seung-Hui "had to be a liberal, " and "it's a liberal that committed this act" before adding on April 23, "I do believe that it was liberalism that got a hold of this guy and made him hate things, professors and this sort of thing." Limbaugh also lashed out at Media Matters for America, claiming that he had made the comments about Cho "as a means of illustrating on this show how the words of conservative talk show hosts are twisted and taken out of context," before adding, "And sure enough, Media Matters fell for it hook, line, and sinker. They had it up all over the place."

Another example of the comic stylings of Rush Limbaugh, or somebody who realizes that he took two steps over the line? You be the judge.

There's more: "Rush Limbaugh--It Was All A Joke!" >>

Limbaugh--Liberals Are Going to Attack Me. Wah, Wah.

In an audacious display of verbal self-defense Radio Talk Show Host Rush Limbaugh admits he said

If this Virginia Tech shooter had an ideology, what do you think it was? This guy had to be a liberal. You start railing against the rich and all this other -- this guy's a liberal. He was turned into a liberal somewhere along the line. So it's a liberal that committed this act

ABC News' Political Punch goes on to report that, anticipating that liberals would take umbrage at his obvious link of Cho to Liberalism, he tried to insulate himself from criticism by saying

Now, the drive-bys will read on a website that I'm attacking liberalism by comparing this guy to them. That's exactly what they do every day, ladies and gentlemen. I'm just pointing out a fact. I am making no extrapolation; I'm just pointing it out.

Apparently he ducked and covered right after he made the offensive remarks about liberals. Old Oxycontin can dish it out, but he can't take it.

Are decent Americans going to take this? When will we tell this blowhard to sit down and listen if he doesn't have anything to say.

Right on cue the utterly shameless freepers (or is that creepers) have taken up the mighty right wing Wurlitzer's new unfounded charge that the Virginia Tech massacre was caused by liberals or "liberalism." And we are still setting on our hands. What's wrong with us? Where is our fight?

If you want to have a good time read the comments thread at ABC's site. Not many defending Rush. After you have learned you are not alone start writing your own comments and send them to Newt and Rush and any of their enablers in the big time media you can think of.

There's more: "Limbaugh--Liberals Are Going to Attack Me. Wah, Wah." >>

Current Limbaugh Contact Information

The post below links to out of date contact information for Rush. Here is his current information. If you elect to write, be polite. Just tell him he is wrong and why.

Rush Limbaugh
rush@eibnet.com

Premiere Radio Networks
Premiere
Radio Networks

Premiere Radio Networks, Inc.
15260 Ventura Blvd. 5th Floor
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403

Main: (818)377-5300
Fax: (818)377-5333
Toll Free: (800)533-8686

The Rush Limbaugh Show
1-800-282-2882
rush@eibnet.com
fax: 212-563-9166

The Rush Limbaugh Show
1270 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10020

If you are wondering why I didn't just update my previous post, well I believe this is an issue we bloggers should take on. Both Rush and Newt Gingrich are working hard to tie the word "liberal" to Virginia Tech. One of them working the angle might be an aberration. Both of them? Well that implies that someone has decided people are viewing the word "liberal" a little more favorably than they should. Their branding of "liberal" and liberals is fading. That is bad for them. They know it. "Conservatism" is so weak intellectually that conservatives can compete only when "liberalism" is sufficiently diminished. What better way to refresh their brand than by tying the word to the Virginia Tech massacre.

There's more: "Current Limbaugh Contact Information" >>

Shame on You Newt. Shame on You Rush

In his April 19, 2007, broadcast Rush Limbaugh said

If this Virginia Tech shooter had an ideology, what do you think it was? This guy had to be a liberal. You start railing against the rich and all this other -- this guy's a liberal. He was turned into a liberal somewhere along the line. So it's a liberal that committed this act. Now, the drive-bys will read on a website that I'm attacking liberalism by comparing this guy to them. That's exactly what they do every day, ladies and gentlemen. I'm just pointing out a fact. I am making no extrapolation; I'm just pointing it out.

This morning Newt Gingrich blamed Liberalism for the Virginia Tech massacre.

I don't know about you, but I am sick to death of these wacko conservative ideologues exploiting tragedies like Virginia Tech for political gain. Cho wasn't a liberal, and no sane American of any stripe would claim him. Mass murderers come in both no and all ideologies. Timothy McViegh was ostensibly an arch conservative. There were mass murderers before there were "conservatives" and "liberals." Ever read about Bloody Kansas before the civil war? Was Bloody Bill Anderson a liberal or a conservative? What about John Brown?

The truth is people like the Columbine killers, Charles Whitman, and Cho kill because they are mentally ill, and driven by feelings of inadequacy none of us understand. Others like Bill Anderson or Timothy McVeigh claim their killings are justified by their ideology. I think that is hogwash. They kill because they put their drive for personal power above the lives of others. Still others like Osama Bin Laden or any number of religious fanatics, such as John Brown, kill because they say their God has told them too. The truth is, mass murderers kill because they do not respect the lives of others. They are selfish to the extreme. Many suffer from the delusion that their victims are not human, not deserving of respect.

Why don't we all write Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh and tell them what we think. Here is Rush Limbaugh's contact information. You can find Newt Gingrich here. Pass this forward. Millions need to tell these crass ideologues "shame on you." Its time to put a stop to this nonsense.

And if some "liberal" tries to blame "conservatives" we need to call shame on that indifferent fool as well.

There's more: "Shame on You Newt. Shame on You Rush" >>

Is Limbaugh Next?

Apparently the privileged Fat White Guys (tm) on the right are trying to make sense out of the Imus firing in the only way they know how. Instead of self-reflection leading to higher standards of performance, they are trying to invent a way to blame the "liberals." According to the conservative "Free Congress Foundation," Don Imus is just the first casualty in a liberal war to restore the "fairness doctrine."

Message to Dick Morris. Dick, Imus was fired because we in civilized society have decided that we will no longer tolerate making fun of women, especially young black women, by calling them degrading names. Advertisers heard the indignation from rank and file Americans loud and clear. No matter how much CBS Radio and MSNBC point to dissension within their respective networks, the truth is Imus was fired only after advertisers realized their brands could be damaged by associating with the Imus brand. Advertisers found out what people were thinking because Americans found new ways to voice their disgust, ways the Fat White Guys were unable to out shout. Email, blogs, YouTube and a range of Internet tools gave voice to the disgust average Americans felt when they watched Imus and his Fat White Guy enabler take their cheap shots at the Rutgers Women's Basketball Team. A voice that couldn't be ignored.

It is true the demise of the "fairness doctrine" allowed for the rise of Right Wing, Shock Jock, Hate Radio. Rush Limbaugh's success wouldn't exist without it. That as largely because the demise of the "fairness doctrine" allowed the Fat White Guys like Limbaugh and Morris (and their Fat White Guy enablers) to monopolize daily public discourse. Fortunately the rise of the Internet has rendered restoration of the fairness doctrine largely unnecessary. The Internet has stripped the Fat White Guys of their stranglehold on American discourse.

The Rush Limbaughs of the world would do well to cleanup their own acts. Treat everyone, not just Fat White Guys, with respect, and you will survive. As Imus found out grade school level name calling just isn't funny to anyone except Fat White Guys and isn't going to be tolerated.

My guess is Limbaugh will survive for a while. The next group to be spanked will be the Fat Black Guys profiting from misogynistic "Hip Hop."

There's more: "Is Limbaugh Next?" >>