Tag: Rush Limbaugh

Rush Limbaugh: Screw the World! Riot in Denver!

While the Conventional Media is still consumed with remarks made by Barack Obama’s pastor criticizing America, they are virtually ignoring the comments of Rush Limbaugh that are brazenly advocating violence for political gain.

Limbaugh: “Now, I am not inspiring or inciting riots. I’m dreaming. (singing to the tune of White Christmas) I’m dreaming of riots in Denver. Remember 1968?”

And this #$&^%$&%&#@ still has a job???

Brought to you by…

News Corpse

The Internet’s Chronicle Of Media Decay.

Rush Limbaugh possibly not supporting any Republican Presidential candidates.

Raw Story now reports on its front page that Rush Limbaugh may not support any of the Republican presidential candidates. It seems that the right-wing political movement is now in its last throes, seeing that there is no clear favorite in the race and none of the current candidates can unite them like Ronald Reagan did.

And Limbaugh is hardly the only gatekeeper who may sit out this race. The Republican Party is controlled by many gatekeepers, including Dobson, Norquist, and many others. Dobson, for instance, has refused to give his blessing to Mitt Romney, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, or Fred Thompson. The fact of the matter is that the social conservatives who provide the boots on the ground only have one candidate — Ron Paul, who meets their purity tests on abortion, gays, gun control, immigration, and taxes. Paul does not have the blessing of one of the key wings of the Republican Party — the defense hawks and neocons, given his opposition to Iraq. However, the fact that he is the only antiwar voice in the GOP and 34% or so of Republicans do not approve of Bush’s handling of Iraq means that he is competitive.

John McCain is despicable. So are the corporate media.

John McCain’s refusal to admonish a questioner who called Hillary Clinton a “bitch” has received much attention, in the last couple days. Good. It should. But what received much less attention was his own despicable attempt at humor, back in 2000, at the expense of both Janet Reno and Chelsea Clinton.

As reported, at the time, by Salon’s David Corn, McCain said, at a Republican fundraiser:

“Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?

Because her father is Janet Reno.”

Classy, huh?

As Corn pointed out, the media that did report the story actually omitted to report McCain’s actual words! The same media who reported in excruciating detail the private behavior of President Clinton and his girlfriend, excused themselves from reporting the details of McCain’s statement, ostensibly to protect a sensitive public. Or was it to protect John McCain?

As Corn wrote:

McCain’s two-liner conveys some interesting insights into what he considers humorous (lesbianism, a young woman’s physical appearance), particularly since it was delivered to a Republican crowd. Remember, this is the party that champions pro-family values.

McCain’s lapse in judgment — admittedly, not as big a lapse as having a sexual relationship with an intern — may be a significant clue into aspects of his “character,” and thus relevant to the voting public. But many voters have been spared this insight, thanks to the censors in the press.

The media and McCain’s pundit sycophants talk a lot about character. Well, what does it say about a man that he takes cheap shots at a woman because she doesn’t fit his standards of femininity? What does it say about a man that he finds it humorous to take cheap shots at a 20 year old woman’s physical appearance?

Of course, as Molly Ivins reported (quoted in this Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting article), Rush Limbaugh once made a cruel “joke” about Chelsea Clinton’s physical appearance- when she was still only thirteen years old! But Limbaugh isn’t an elected official, and he has never run for public office. He’s also not held out as some sort of crusty straight-talking sage. John McCain is.

What does it say about the corporate media that they wouldn’t report McCain’s actual words? What does it say about them that the story, itself, has been largely forgotten?

As Corn concluded:

But the joke revealed more than a mean streak in a man who would be president. It also exposed how the Washington Post, New York Times and Los Angeles Times play favorites when reporting the foibles of our leading politicians.

And have the televised pundits even mentioned it, at all?

Rush Is Right

A citizen of Republican-occupied territory, I frequently tune in to government radio in order to monitor the movements, mental and physical, of the enemy.

This morning I turned on the Grand Poobah of GOoPerdom himself, Rush Limbaugh, and was extremely discomfited to find myself nodding along in agreement, disconsolately reduced to mumbling, in the words of Limbaugh’s own blowharding bumpersticker, “Rush Is Right.”

I reproduce the relevant portions of his monologue below, because I want desperately to be wrong about this. I would like someone, anyone, to show me that, in the substance if not the rhetoric of what he says, Rush is not, in fact, right.

Rush Supports Children of Marines and Federal Law Enforcement

After Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid wasted taxpayer’s money by attempting to smear a private citizen and to put unprecedented pressure on his employer, Rush took the personal attack in stride and found a way to turn the whole thing around in a way to support the children of fallen Marines and Federal Law Enforcement officers.

Check out the current bids:

Click on “View & Bid” to see the full details of the auction, as well as to see a high-resolution scan of the actual letter. Print out our own copy as a memento!

Whatever the high bid turns out to be Rush has committed to MATCHING IT and is challenging the 41 Senators who signed the letter to do so as well. Will they? How much do THEY support the Children of fallen Marines and Federal Law Enforcement?

And they say Republicans don’t care …


Standing Up Against The New McCarthyism And Ending The Iraq War

Paul Waldman writes a good piece about Rush Limbaugh saga. I especially like his connecting Rush' New McCarthyism techniques to the Republican Party New McCarthyism on Iraq:

Think about how much time and effort they expend on convincing Americans that progressives and Democrats are “anti-military,” “hate the troops,” and even “hate America.” So any progressive veteran who criticizes Bush administration policies represents a profound threat to all the arguments they have made. It becomes particularly thorny when nearly the entire current leadership of the conservative movement — not only media figures like Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly, but also political figures including President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Karl Rove, Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay, Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, and many others — were of draft age during the Vietnam war but managed to stay out of harm's way.

But Democrats and their allies like Move On do not win this battle by aping this strategy, as Move On wrongly did; this battle is won by Democrats standing up against these McCarthyite tactics and, more importantly, standing up to Bush on Iraq. That means not funding the Iraq debacle after a date certain. More.

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.

Load more