Congress should not condemn Rush Limbaugh

So Congress is getting ready to condemn Rush Limbaugh for his odious “phony soldiers” comments.  I beg you all not to fall for it.  It is exactly what the people who came up with the phony MoveOn scam last week are hoping for.

They want to keep the subject about manners and niceties.  They want to make the issue whether or not the Republicans are hypocrites.  Because that is far, far better than talking about the policies they are enacting.

There is only one real subject here: the war in Iraq.  Why would someone as savvy as Rush call soldiers who oppose the war “phony soldiers”?  One reason, and one reason only: because if we talk about the nasty thing he said, we’ll not be talking about what those soldiers who oppose the war have to say about it.

There is a real and important debate to be had about something important.  The DOD is asking for another $190 billion of our dollars to pay for this war to continue.  They want more of our loved ones to be maimed and killed for this war to continue.  They want thousands more Iraqis to die so that this war can continue.

What Congress, all of Congress, wants most is to not talk about this.  They want us to talk about how Rush Limbaugh is a dick.

Who fucking cares?  Tell Congress to get back to work.


Skip to comment form

    • Jay Elias on September 29, 2007 at 2:51 am


  1. unprincipled Democrats and Republicans alike.  In that sense, it’s not a complete fucking waste of time like the MoveOn resolution.

    • Armando on September 29, 2007 at 3:51 am

    but this will HELP in the battle to end the war.

    This will help silence the idea that being for not funding the war is “unpatriotic.”

    This will help put the Dem on offense on Iraq.

    This will help rally the base.

    Sure this is all stupid shit.

    But politics is stupid shit.

    This is not a debate in Athens.

    Strong disagree.

  2. waste of time yet – and it will inevitably jumpstart some lukewarm renewed interest in a bloviating figurehead,  a creature far better ignored and marginalized.

    This fits in with Limbaugh’s end-of-the-year PR campaign. He’s laughing right now at his increased listener and revenue spike.

    If this is the only action Congress can come up with to demonstrate “Sense”, both the Senate and House are more worthless than I imagined.

    • Temmoku on September 29, 2007 at 4:07 am

    but he should be marginalized and even removed from the airways. This drug abuser, serial liar, draft dodger should have no credibility whatsoever!

    • fisheye on September 29, 2007 at 4:29 am

    They have become an aristocratic class paying homage to a king.

    • Turkana on September 29, 2007 at 4:42 am

    that my post about tooth decay is, essentially, accurate…

  3. as the root of your argument.

    “Congress shall make no law…”

    In any case, I don’t like it, but I think that the newspaper needs to be rolled up to smack the GOP noses on this one.

    I agree that the war itself is far more important than any “sense” that the Senate or House may offer (seems like an oxymoron lately using the word “sense” when talking about Congress), but unfortunately political gamesmanship is the only thing that seems to get the media’s attention these days.

    Our only hope is that this resolution will be introduced to draw attention to the $190 billion rather than as a stand alone.  They probably aren’t that smart though.  Ugh.

  4. anti-war because I oppose this war.

    As a former teacher, political science and history major, and lifelong Democrat, I believe there are some wars that have to be fought and that the US is probably going to have to fight.

    This was absolutely not one of those necessary wars, right from the start.

    I believe the US has to have a strong military, too. So there. Take that, A. Whitney Brown.

    Anti-war, my ass.

    Anyone who initiates an unnecessary war should be brought before a war crimes Tribunal. I mean George and Dick.

    • oculus on September 29, 2007 at 9:31 am

    to “get back to work.”  What, more along the lines of Kyl-Lieberman?

Comments have been disabled.