Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
Mary Grabar :: Townhall.com Columnist
Rush Limbaugh, Intellectual
by Mary Grabar
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


I was a bit surprised to hear former Homeland Secretary Tom Ridge echo President Obama’s criticism of Rush Limbaugh by calling him “shrill” and “divisive” recently. Then Senator John Cronyn joined in the Rush-bashing over Limbaugh’s use of the word “racist” for self-described “wise Latina woman” judge Sonia Sotomayor. I do not recall ever being enlightened or inspired by these politicians.

*** Special Offer ***

On the other hand, as I’ve driven to teach afternoon classes I’ve enjoyed the insights and wit from Limbaugh. I am always impressed by his ability to apply historical figures, ideas, events, and Constitutional principles.

This is what I miss about my profession as a college instructor. Rarely am I able to discuss ideas with my colleagues; indeed, I dare not speak my opinion nor say anything positive about any figures on the Left’s “hit list.”

One of those figures is Alexis de Tocqueville, the French aristocrat who toured the United States in the 1830s and provided an invaluable analysis of the American character and government in his multivolume work, Democracy in America. But to mention his name without the preface of “fascist” or “elitist” is to invite suspicions of one’s academic credentials--and employability.

But to my joy, I’ve heard talk show host Mark Levin cite Tocqueville’s warning about our slide to a “soft tyranny,” an idea he carries through in his current number one bestselling book, “Tyranny and Liberty,” along with references to the Federalist Papers and an obscure essay by C.S. Lewis.

I’ve listened to other colleagues on WGKA, like classics professor Victor Davis Hanson interviewed by host and law professor Hugh Hewitt, and host and professor of Russian and Jewish history, Dennis Prager. On radio host Glenn Beck’s Fox television program, I learned about Florida State University history professor Robert Gellately’s currently apropos and lively study, Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler. Rush Limbaugh provided historical explanation for the public’s adoration of Obama: the same kind of emotional investment that caused gulag prisoners to cry at Stalin’s death. This comes from reading Solzhenitsyn.

Except for the occasional meeting of a couple scholarly organizations, I rarely have the opportunity for intellectual exchange—something I had hoped to do as I studied for my Ph.D.

The public is buying up the books, while the left promotes such fluff as former Air America radio host Al Franken’s “Rush Limbaugh Is a Big, Fat Idiot,” Obama’s “memoirs,” or the sordid story of cheated-on wife Elizabeth Edwards. But this is part of the legacy of anti-intellectualism of “Woodstock Generation”—something that drove former “Ramparts” editor, David Horowitz to the other side. The anti-intellectualism reigns in the academy, the institution of their choice for infiltration.

Many mistake the shows of sophistication—modulated voices and stylish sentences--for intellectual depth. But the educated can spot what is left out of the NPR or “New York Times” report. Usually it is a serious consideration from the other side.

Mistaking style for substance Republican “moderates” have been fooled and fallen into the enemy’s trap. A good professor does not speak in the monotone of a policy meeting or business negotiations. He moves around the room, gesticulates, asks provocative questions, and even, as I heard two lawyers discuss a favorite professor they had at the University of Georgia, throw chairs out the window. Conversely, many tune into NPR’s soothing “analysis” to drift off to sleep.

What the talk show hosts do is present foundational ideas to concerned and intellectually curious citizens. Their wild success exposes a hunger for ideas rarely met in other forums—like our schools. That is why they want to shut down talk radio as it is today.

So I suggest that the government functionaries and politicians take a moment out of their wonkish study of policy and listen in to talk radio. I suggest they go pick up Tocqueville. If they want to be voted into office they need to understand what he says about a free democracy: “No one easily allows himself to be reduced to the mere material cares of life; and the humblest artisan casts at times an eager and a further glance into the higher regions of the intellect.”

Tocqueville is talking about the middle class that keeps this country going. And today they are millions of voters and they’re educating themselves by listening to talk radio and buying books.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Mary Grabar earned her Ph.D. in English from the University of Georgia and teaches in the Atlanta area. She is a Pushcart Prize-nominated poet and published fiction writer. Visit her website and get on her mailing list at marygrabar.com
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
facts 'stuff
Limbaugh is a fool and a liar. Having a strong opinion doesn't mean you are right. Ignoring facts that conflict with your ideology doesn't change reality. All of that does, however, keep your audience ignorant and enraged. Because the Right looks to the likes of Hannity, Coulter, and Limbaugh for information it dooms itself to an ever shrinking portion of the intelligent public debate. I figure about 20 percent of the population is so paranoid, xenophobic, and ignorant that they will believe anything these charlatans say and that is bad news for the Republican Party.

Rush - a wish or a want?
I used to really dislike him. Wouldn't listen. But then I got curious.

Did you see his interview with Greta Susteren?
He wasn't viscious, nasty or anything else - he said what he thought, very composed and thoughtful.

Recently (in spite of the Dem bashing him) I have found him quite sensible. I think since he has slimmed down a bit he decided to get a new image.

Actually I agree that I do not want Obama's program to succeed. Any of it. It will be the death of our Republic and why should I want that?

You can't really disagree with that statment unless you are a lib.

Greta very quickly said she wanted him to succeed for the country's sake.

That is more of a wish than a true want - she wishes he had a decent program so that he could succeed. Greta leans a bit from the center left, but she isn't rabid.

Rush-Snake Oil Salesman
Today Rush defended one of his sponsors Zicam against the FDA's warning that one of their nasal sprays may cause loss of sense of smell.
Medical records evidently back up this warning, but of course he never mentioned that. He did repeat Zicom's "defense" that they have never lossed a lawsuit. Actually they never "lossed" a lawsuit because they settle out of court. Rush claimed the product was safe because "it's just zinc"- THAT'S WHAT CAUSES THE LOSS OF SMELL!!!-according to the FDA.

So here are a few of the many daily examples of how Limbaugh deceives by ommission of important relevant facts and twisting information to match his agenda. And here his agenda is to defend a sponsor, and himself, at the potential cost of his listeners' sense of smell. So, obviously his sponsors profits are more important than his audience' sense of smell.

Supporters of Limbaugh -Show your support- buy and use some Zicam. Don't forget your kids.




Rush is a hypocrite
"Rush Limbaugh, Intellectual"

Now there are three words that dont belong together in a sentence. Like "Osama Bin Laden, man of peace".

Take just one issue. Limbaughs battling for the "sanctity of marriage" and his stance on same sex marriage.

All very well, cept he has been married THREE times. Well done Rush, you think marriage is so precious, you did it three time. (sarcasm).

I hate hypocrisy.

John,
If bravery is equated by running for office then you are right Franken is a very brave man, having run for a office that he had exactly no qualifications for!!!!!

john has a point
it is easy to be an extremist conservative when you don't have to answer to average americans for the statements you make.

let limbaugh run for office and see how far he goes.

in fact, he gave the senate seat in missouri to the democrats when he mocked the beloved michael j. fox.

and don't deny he didn't mock him or lose the election for republicans.

before rush made his statement about fox, the democrat was down by 5-7 points with 2 months to go and then won the election.

he also cost the republicans with his "operation chaos" , in pennsylvania more than 200000 new voters registered as democrats while republicans lost 50000.

rush lost that state for the republicans but no conservative has the guts to say it.

Jo
you are just so intransigent.

no jo, neither democrats or republicans have it over the other.

both parties lie. both parties are corrupt. both parties are immoral.

to say you belong to the good and moral party and that the other party is evil and immoral is just not reality.

don't be so self-righteous.

Rush Limbaugh Is Not My Savior


Very good post all should read!

REDSTATE-RedState’s leader and my friend, Erick Erickson, wrote a piece today titled “The Peter Principle”, in which he compares Peter’s thrice denial of Christ to Republicans who dismiss the views of Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and Dick Cheney. Cheney was at least an elected leader. The others are not.

Rush Limbaugh is not my savior. He is neither my savior for my personal spiritual needs, nor the savior of the Republican party of modern conservatism. Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer. Period. He often says things I agree with, but he is driven by ratings. In order to ensure these ratings, he must incite and inflame. It is his job to keep “the base” irritated and agitated. And in doing so, he very often turns off those in the squishy middle that so many here are willing to purify from the party. The problem is, we need their votes to return from minority status.

Semantics about comparing Peter’s denial of Christ to Republican’s criticizing Limbaugh aside, the larger point of Erickson’s commentary is the suggestion that we should not be attacking our own, but instead be attacking “the left”. Using various references to scripture, he chides those of us who would criticize these modern day apostles:

read more

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/rush-limbaugh-is-n ot-my-savior

Bruce - MN
I think that you would agree that people on both sides, listen to too much biased information. Bruce

----------------------------------------

The difference is however one "biased" side is based in reality and the lessons of history.

The other side is often euphoric in feelings of "hope and change" destined to repeat bad history.

sadly Jo...
The left is no longer intellectual or honest...

:(

John
Limbaugh who has all the money he will ever need and spends his time telling millions of people his ideas are teh right ones, does not have the courage to step up and help his country by running for election.

Franken has that courage. Limbaugh doesn't. John

=============================

Courage or insanity?

What conservative would want to run these days? Look what the media did to Sarah Palin. They tore down her family, her dress, her hair, her intelligence, her state, ... or Joe the plumber. Just a average guy who asked a simple REASONABLE question.

I suspect this is what the media (and left) wants -- to make sure conservatives don't WANT to run.

One way to assure underhanded victory.

If the left was intellectually honest they'd recognize and disavow these types of shenanigans.

John - All Obfuscation ..
"Limbaugh IS a politician. But he prefers to simply rant and castigate as opposed to serving the country.

I repeat. Limbaugh is a coward. Franken is not."

To borrow a line, I will not insult your intelligence by suggesting that you actually believe what you wrote. Feel free to fire for effect, but be aware that you have cast aside any reason for us to suspect you are credible.

Mr. Franken is not fit to shine Mr. Limbaugh's shoes, nor we would suspect him of being competent to do so.

All Obfuscation
Limbaugh IS a politician. But he prefers to simply rant and castigate as opposed to serving the country.

I repeat. Limbaugh is a coward. Franken is not.

George - You've Got to be Kidding ..
Actually, Mr. Limbaugh and Mr. Buckley were very close friends. Mr. Limbaugh recounted his first invitation to Mr. Buckley's residence early in his broadcast career upon the occasion of Mr. Buckley's death.

If you think Mr. Limbaugh is abrasive, you should read some of Mr. Buckley's writing and his commentary - different style, but equally to the point.

Example: "I will not insult your intelligence by suggesting that you actually believe what you just said." {Buckley to Gore Vidal, if memory serves, whom he later threatened to punch in the face.}

Mr. Limbaugh and Mr. Buckley are cut from similar intellectual cloth. Limbaugh is simply unencumbered by the Ivy League aura. Each is a national treasure.

One more thing,
say what you want about Rush or Glenn Beck, but having several friends that battle addiction problems, I have nothing but admiration for people like them, that can overcome them and make themselves as successful as these two have.

George in MA, Jeramy, Richard in NY,
lilly, vampires revulsion;

You people really crack me up! You are reciting the same rhetoric that comes out on all of the other networks every day! All of you really should try to get out more.

Scurvy, my hat is off to you! I threw a shot at you yesterday, but after reading your posts today, you have my apology. I'm guilty of name calling, too, but based on your posts today, I think that you would agree that people on both sides, listen to too much biased information. I guess that I can't stand the apparent "it's OK for us, but not for you" mentality that so many of the liberal posters here seem to subscribe to.

There is one thing on one of your previous posts on this thread, re: regulating industries, specifically banking, that I have to argue about. Chris Dodd is the Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee and the major membership is comprised of Democrats. There is absolutley no way that anyone will ever convince me that they didn't have an inkling that we were heading for a cliff, yet they did nothing about the funny mortgages nor did they change anything with overall banking regulations over the past two years. In fact, Chris Dodd is guilty of using his influence to get a better deal on a Sallie Mae Mortgage than you or I could get. To lay the blame on any one side is pretty disingenuous don't you think?

No john...
running for office is about desire, not courage. Perhaps you believe Limbaugh lacks a sense of noblesse oblige. I believe that concept has done more harm to politics than much anything else. Being successful and wealthy may make you a good role model in the field of your success. It doesn't necessarily make you a good governor or legislator. Frankly, the perks and pay that come with political office would seem to argue against courage being required to run for office. It takes more courage to ask a pretty girl for a date than to run for office these days. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

John
SEZ JOHN:

"In America, the test of your ideas takes place in the voting booth."

SEZ ME:
Or the marketplace. He's already succeeded way beyond what most of us will ever accomplish in this life.

Rush will never run for office because he is not a politician. He would have to give up both influence and income to run for office. Part of the secret of success is doing what you're good at, and doing what you were designed to do.

Maybe when you are as successful as he is, he will call and ask your opinion on what he should do.

Liberal Intellects
SEZ GEORGE:

"I think Mr. Buckley would be appalled by Rush Limbaugh."

SEZ ME:
Based on what? Your frequent conversations with WFB? An email he sent you? Something he wrote in an article?

The sickening part of liberal intellectuals is, they are so smart they don't have to prove anything they say. Just saying it is enough to make it so.

Obfuscation
Try as you might, you cannot avoid the reality. In America, the test of your ideas takes place in teh voting booth. Limbaugh who has all the money he will ever need and spends his time telling millions of people his ideas are teh right ones, does not have the courage to step up and help his country by running for election.

Franken has that courage. Limbaugh doesn't.

John...
Tell us. Have you run for office or are you a gutless coward.

Running for office is a choice, not evidence of bravery. Kowtowing to the winds is evidence of cowardice or a lack of principles and convictions. Frankly, running for office is not really high on the scale of defining bravery in my book.

People on the right disparage Franken's ideals, his pomposity, his obnoxiousness as much or more than his looks or bravery. But I suspect running for office is probably the bravest thing he has ever done. I just don't see him taking an unpopular position or putting his life in danger for others. I may be wrong, which is why I won't make that judgment. And frankly, many of us don't appreciate Limbaugh for his acts of bravery as much as for his principles and his entertaining way of skewering liberals. He has certainly demonstrated a knack for suceeding in his chosen field and for putting his money where his mouth is for certain charities and endeavors. That my friend is not as obvious to me in considering the character of Mr Franken.

Rush Running For Office?
Many have asked him to run for office and he always tells them he would have to take a LARGE pay cut if he got elected.

Why should he run for office? The left campaigns against him every day as it is !! He gets all kinds of free publicity. All the liberals cite him and call him the 'Leader of the Republican Party'.

Rush is the one the left loves to demonize. They always need someone to bounce off their vitriol. He can take it and relishes it.

Several posters have said he lies. I would appreciate it if they can cite even ONE lie. Of course,they can't even if they try.

Rush Limbaugh, Abject Coward
Limbaugh is not much of an intellectual, if he is one at all. He is, however, a raging coward. Though te right wing loves to disparage Al Franken, that man had the courage of his convictions. He stood for election and let the voters decide his fate.

On the other hand, Limbaugh has never had the cojones to do it, and I doubt very much he ever will. He is a gutless coward.

The Brainwashed 'Elite' Left
Most liberals would never listen to Rush. He would burst their bubble of myth. They have bought the tripe the Democrat lapdogs,the mainstream media,spews 24/7.

They like what they hear,so they buy into it. It suits their purpose,but it is not the truth. There really is two sides to every story,at least.

The left has brought us to the brink of destruction and their followers do not even understand what happened. The media will not tell them because they are beholden to Obama and the left.

Stick around ,liberals and we at Townhall will educate you. We will listen to Rush,Hannity,Beck,Lou Dobbs and others and let you know "The Rest Of The Story', to paraphrase the late great Paul Harvey.

Good To Have Dr. Grabar Here At TOWNHALL

Conservatives need few hundred more like her.

The Republican Party, on the other hand, needs twenty thousand more like her.
................................................................................................

Now for some notes about our new, liberal wack jobs.

Leading the pack is "Bugsy". He seems to be showing up for one post and than running back to the Daily Krap Kos. Might be an old one with a new name. Who cares? One thing for certain. He's a loser with a capital L.

Next we have "LeftUSA". Also might be an old one with a new name. Again, who cares? However, he's working hard to become the biggest left-wing nut-job at TOWNHALL! Let's wish him well in his pursuit.

Scurvy...
"What about those that make gutter choices in their lives."

I don't know, honestly. Part of me wants to say, "Well, hey. You screwed up. Time to reap the whirlwind."

This is where volunteerism comes into play. Some of us are more charitable than others. Some of us are touched deeper by one tragic condition than another. Some of us have different means to help those who need it. It is called charity. It is character building, or at least a reflection of ones character. Most religions charge their followers with helping the needy. It is virtuous.

OTOH a government solution, whether it works or not, offers no spiritually redeeming value. Money is coerced from the population in the form of taxes. People are hired to dispense the funds to help the needy either directly or indirectly. It is somebody else's money, so even the most diligent and efficient government workers do not practise the virtue of charity. It's a job. There is usually little or no oversight. There is frequently graft and corruption as a result. There is little or no motivation to explore new ways to improve the quality of help or the results it produces. The pat answer is if the problem is stagnant or getting worse, we simply need to spend more money.

I don't mean to disparage government workers. They are trying to make a living just like the rest of us. It is simply human nature, especially if you are a disinterested 3rd party just doing your job. It isn't so different from public schools. Not only does the government largesse not solve the problem, it generally makes it worse. And the higher up in governmentthe helping agency resides (ie federal vs state or state vs local) the less accountability there is.

part 3...
But if you make a large investment in say a factory, an oil lease, or research there is already a lot of risk. Now add to that the risk that government will come in and regulate your business away from you in the future. How do you deal with that? If I were going to build a power plant, I could choose to fuel it with coal, gas, oil, or nuclear fuel. Or I could build one based on solar or wind or possibly water. I evaluate the cost of the new plant to build and to operate into the future. I estimate the revenue it will generate. I calculate a return on the investment and make a decision. Suppose that even though a coal plant is more expensive to build, coal is projected to be reliable, plentiful, and relatively inexpensive for 20 years. I can justify building the coal burner based on the lower cost to operate. Then BHO gets elected and decides we need to tax CO2 emmissions and coal at the point of purchase to prohibitive levels. If I am a public utility, the public gets socked with the bill. If I am private, I am suddenly malinvested as a result of politics.

The examples are numerous and both large and small. We have become numb to the costs of regulations and often don't even recognize them.

cont'd...
Look at drug approvals. Many times regulations may save us from ever being exposed to drugs with harmful side effects. That is good, but what about the beneficial drugs that are delayed or never make it to the market because of the cost of getting approval? How many suffer or die because there wasn't a new drug vs how many would suffer or die due to the introduction of an inadequately tested drug if regulations were relaxed or eliminated. We will never know, but some speculate the cost is actually quite high.

It is hard to look at the problem, of regulation as an individual in this country. We can go to the store and choose from many goods what we want to buy. Most of those goods will be safe and deliver most of what we want. We are told that is because of regulation. But regulation sets a floor and does not motivate anybody to do better. And inferior products and poor producers will get a reputation that will ultimately lead to their demise just as effectively as regulation. Just ask Firestone or the makers of tylenol how important reputation is. You might even say that some of the problems with GM and Chrysler are due to a poor reputation.


scurvy...
Your idea of regulation is a bit simplistic, I believe.

Regulations are sold as a way to make things better for the general public, but they are usually conceived as a way to protect some special interest who authors the regulation to achieve some protection from the rigors of competition. That isn't to say that regulations are all bad. But regulations aren't what they are cracked up to be in most cases.

Look at MTBE. It was mandated in some places and required in others as the most economical way to get oxygenates in gasoline to reduce unwanted tailpipe emmissions. Sadly, those who established those regulations didn't look at the effect of MTBE on groundwater pollution anytime there is a spill. And given the number of accidents on our highways and byways, many of which involve the release of automotive fluids including gasoline, it was only a matter of time before that problem reared its head.

Then there is the matter of regulating professionals. Certainly, we want our doctors and lawyers to be qualified. But healthcare and legal aid regulations have made it difficult and in some places impossible for unlicensed health practicioners and legal aids to work for pay. Some may be perfectly happy or even prefer to hire unlicensed people at a reduced rate. (Think midwife for an uncomplicated pregancy.) If one of these people cause their clients to die or needlessly end up in jail, their reputation will be destroyed and the market will do more than regulation ever could to keep them from practising. As it is, malpractise is often hidden from the public by professional associations and the bars making it difficult for us to evaluate practicioners on anything other than that they have passed the bar.


Rush Limbaugh, American…

The closer one aligns himself with the beliefs of the Founders, the more they are open to ridicule in today’s anti-American culture. If Rush is a reminder of the original American view of government, then what does it say about those who disparage him? They are against individual liberty and prosperity and promote dependency on state welfare. They are against limited government and want a large, intrusive federal government. They do not recognize the threat before us personified in Obama.

Americans by definition want liberty that comes from limited government. The socialists may live here as citizens, but their ideology is incompatible with what it means to be an American. The incompatible cannot coexist, and they do not want to coexist, meaning they want to dominate.

Americans will resist the take over; let us support those who are speaking out.

Rush
I have known and listened to Rush since his days in Cape Girardeau, MO.

At no time, ever, has he been shrill, a racist or anything but a keen, intellectual wit.

Obambi's comments and Cornyn's stupid remarks are just that...based upon their own STUPIDITY!!!

Time to Put Up or Shut Up
The Big Left Media (including their mindless followers in this thread) try to dismiss Rush, et al, as dummies who harm the Republican cause.

Time for the Big Left Media to give equal airtime and print space to all the major conservative/libertarian talk show hosts and writers....if they REALLY believe that this would destroy the conservative movement. Let's see Rush and Levin and Elder and Gallagher and Savage and Beck and Coulter and Sowell given access to 3 hours a day on national network TV or OP-ED and News editing authoritiy on national newspapers/magazines.

How can the Big Left Media refuse if they are honest in their judgement? It will serve their goal of a country with no conservatives/libertarians in power, AND I guarantee that they will make more money than they do now (it's not by accident that FoxNews has mover viewers than all the Big Left cable news channels COMBINED.

It's a win-win situation for them if the Big Left Media is right....destroy the conservatives while raking in the dough.

Anyone care to place any bets on whether the Big Left Media have the courage of their convictions?

THE ENTERTAINING INTELLECTUAL
Rush Limbaugh lives for Conservative ideas, principles and values. He is an intellectual in the strictest and truest sense of the term and a very entertaining one.

Rush frequently quotes from Politico and
Huffington Post. Shouldn't liberals be happy about that?

Sheik,
When are you libbers going to understand those were not performance bonuses but bonuses to make them stay for the years stated in the contract? They fulfilled the contracts by staying the required length of time! Get smarter!
Also, showing how smart O-man's cabinet is, the man in charge of correcting the housing fiasco can't even sell his house in New York. He has tried to sell it for what he wanted and then what he spent for it and has now decided to rent it at 7200.00 a month and that won't even pay the note he has on it!! Yup O-man sure has some smart people working for him!!!!!

Robert
No, I think that's going to take heavy doses of Valium, cymbalta and a few other mood enhancers. Just remember no drinking of the libber kool-aid on top of them!!!!!

LeftUSA
Limbaugh said we'de never have any source of energy but oil? When was that? Even George W Bush has a solar heated home. But Albert E. Gore doesn't.

Limbaugh doesn't understand that the elements of socialism and capitalism can coexist in the same society? Really? He doesn't understand how simple it is to reconcile state ownership of means of production with private ownership of means of production?

Hasn't he ever heard of joint tenancy?

Grabar
"Rush Limbaugh, Intellectual


****
You have very low standards.

marcmat
Kilucha ki nguoni mwako - translation
keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.


Red...sssshhhhh..don't tell them......
The wackos think that only they have the right to 'investigate others and use enhanced interrogation methods', they normally argue that - get this - individual freedoms are paramount to any government intervention.

The record does not match this rheteric.

Obama called it right that they cling to god and guns. Instead of being proud of their so called rights to cling to god and guns, they called obama elitist.

They say government intervention is bad but
Terry Shieval's fight for life, made these people request a special hearing on her behalf. A special congress session was held to hear about Terry's right to live. They did not respect her husband's LEGAL right. But don't ask congress to intervene on obscene profits given to CEO's when the companies they lead are collapsing because this crowd will be quick to read you the CEOs LEGAL rights.

They complain about Obama misusing tax dollars because he took Michelle out on a date and 'tax payers' are being charged for it. Never mind 8 years of using tax dollars to protect Bush'
drunken daughters?

Obama is being insulted for giving a speech from Egypt and being 'too friendly with muslims' but never mind Bush and Cheney's love affair with the House of Ryad. The house members got special exit with private jets when 9/11 hijackers hit us. But this was a 'national security issue' and when the re-thugs Bush/cheney tried to hire Dubai Workers to manage operations of our ports (after it was discovered the hijackers were receiving funds from dubai) these same people supported the then Thug President and His Kabala of greedy thieves. Cheney moved the headquarters of his company to Dubai - but that is not unamerican. What is unamerican is having Obama speak 'politely and kindly' to muslims in Egypt.

These re-thugs and bin ladin share the same views about our nation. They dislike the president and anyone who wants to keep this nation safe.

Sheik
If Rush is so awful, why do you listen to him so much?

Who inspires people more?
President Obama inspires americans and foreigners to heights unknown to either Rush or any other critic of the President.

When crowds showed up to see and hear Obama speak in Europe, Rush insulted Obama saying, these were foreigners who did not matters. When Obama inspired voters to the tune of 52% leaving McCain with a miserable 60M (most of whom voted for McCain because they did not like Obama, not because they found him inspiring) Rush continued to insult the president.

Now that Obama is governing and still has the support of 60% of the american people (8% higher than those who voted for him), Rush is still stuck on INSULTING the Presidents.

RUSH HAS ONE LANGUAGE - and most americans don't speak RACIST.

Red
Get back to us when the Haldol kicks in.

Surveillance
It is known who has the weapons, registered and unregistered. There is very little about the Rightists that is not known. The precedent for extensive surveillance of citizens was set by the Cheney/Bush Junta. We know who you are, what you do...everything. Funny how many Judeo/Christian Rightists are in to weird kink-sites. Yes, all of this is known, recorded and updated constantly. Domestic terrorists and sympathizers, prepare for The Camps. It will happen.

Red,
Please don't tell me that you are so naive you think all pistols or rifles are registered? If so you are a fool. There are probably more non-registered weapons than registered ones. If they try to confiscate just the registered ones, they better be ready for a lot of fire power! People that have had weapons all their lives are NOT going to give them up without a quarrel, believe that!!

Government regs ...
A. Laws should protect pregnant women and the helpless and infirm. All else is fluff to be discarded in time of emergency...

B. An armed society is a polite society.

Paraphrase of Robert A. Heinlein, American author of Science Fiction, and to my mind, Philosophy.


soliton - I don't agree with you
We should be free to do as we please but only up to the point that we interfere with someone else's freedom. Govt regulations should only exist to help establish that point.

Mary, Don't Let the Levobortomites Push
levobortomite (lev oh bor' tow mite) noun.

Anyone who believes and/or promotes left wing extremism, evolutionism, abortion, and/or anti-family activities such as sodomite marriage. These people are not limited to any particular political party.

This guy is why the name libturd was
Needed
=========================

Tim writes:- 8:00 PM EST
A Sign of Our Times
Rush Limbaugh is the Father Coughlin of our times. Large radio audience, controversial, and eventually relegated to an interesting footnote in history for his anti-Semitic ravings and support of fascism. Not that Rush is necessarily either of these, he's something else. And I don't mean that as a compliment
=======================

Such fools are in a class all by themselves

katepatate
"Rush is too intelligent for the likes of you to understand so perhaps you better start with Romper Room first and work your way up."

Let us bow in humility at the feet of the socratic wonder that is Rush Limbaugh. Its hysterical to me that people like you have the naivete to take yourself seriously. Anyone who is only capable of presenting one point of view, be they Rush Limbaugh or Jeremiah Wright, is completely incapable of fully understanding anything.

It is perfectly okay to listen to Rush to hear his point of view. His diatribes, however putrid, represent a distinct American perspective and is therefor an element of our culture. However, only a buffoon calls him wise and intelligent or swears by him.

testing
testing

hello
testing

A Sign of Our Times
Rush Limbaugh is the Father Coughlin of our times. Large radio audience, controversial, and eventually relegated to an interesting footnote in history for his anti-Semitic ravings and support of fascism. Not that Rush is necessarily either of these, he's something else. And I don't mean that as a compliment.

Red
You're one angry dude. What happened in your life to make you so violent? You must have had a real mean mama. I hope things work out for you one day, but I rather doubt it.

LeftUSA
It is types like you who are destroying this great country. You need to listen to some intelligent voices instead of those on NPR, CNN, MSNBC and their ilk. Rush is too intelligent for the likes of you to understand so perhaps you better start with Romper Room first and work your way up. Maybe there will be hope for you one day. You seem to not be able to write a clear concise post without namecalling. It takes very little brainpower to call others names, but it takes an intelligent person to be able to debate with class.

Carlos
Indeed they do, as I understand. However there are places where regulation is used and necessary, such as anti-trust laws.

Why they will never win
Tom Ridge and John Cronyn harping about Rush Limbaugh while trying to appease the democrats is exactly why the Republicans are in the fix they are in. They are just two more Republican fixtures who must be removed in the next elections. We don't need Republicans who attack those who are on our side or who will not stand up to the liberals. Republicans better start listening to we the people out here or they will find themselves out the door and we will find others who are willing to fight for us. I love Rush. May God bless him. He speaks the truth every day and some of us are listening. The left tries to minimalize him or make it seem he is bad for Republicans when in truth he is the kind of man(or woman) we need right now. Wish he would run for president. I would love to see Obama try to debate him. Rush stands head and shoulders above that man. And he loves America. And he is a true Christian unlike our illustrious leader.

scurvy
You seem to have a brain ( a rare commodity in libland).

A favor please... won't cost you anything and will take about 3 or 4 hours (depending on how fast you read). Would you please read Milton Friedman's 'Free to Choose'? Most libraries will have it or you can buy a paperback version for around $5 or so.

What most lefters don't seem to grasp is that good intentions do not lead to good results. Their goals may be laudable, their intent pure... but by having the gov't do things they are dooming them to failure. Friedman clearly and logically explains why gov't run programmed CANNOT be as successful as private run programs (except for those few instances where gov't really is needed).

If you'd like, feel free to email me privately your thoughts after reading it. bnpaladin42@hotmail.com

I would strongly recommend the book to EVERYONE. For libs, it may make them rethink things. For conservs it will codify the logic necessary to explain clearly.

I thank you in advance for your cooperation.

soliton What's the difference?
You would think that conservative free market principles have a lot in common with free trade and individualism.

LeftUSA
I believe you confusing conservative free market principles with libertarian lasseiz faire.

Your comment on constraints seems correct and not out of line with conservative economic thought.

I'm not a Limbaugh fan, but I read his CPAC speech. Perhaps you should read it and comment on where you disagree.

keith olbermann cartoon in demand
He does this "How dare you sir...Have you no shame.." rant that is as over the top as it gets. Maybe he's faking it - but I doubt it. Matthews is truly irritating but the other 2 are prime candidates for a cartoon.

Yeah sparky..
I bet he doesn't een know there are 57 states...

Intellectual
I wish that Obama (or perhaps his teleprompter) had debated Rush. This Obama fellow(a great intellectual) actually thinks that America has one of the largest Muslim populations.

tapping into the reptilian brains
I give up. Was that an insult?

Scurvy
One question for you: do you want to live under a Socialism?

LeftUSA
Wow, I am in like total awe of your like intellect and stuff. Cuz we all know that people who make fun of other people are smarter than the people they insult. I learned that in first grade!

hoodaticus
"In a world where the United States - of all places - is becoming a socialist oligarchy, there is no way that our dialog should soften. If this doesn't turn around, we will be well past resolving our differences through debate."

Well, we're not, first of all. And please quit making thinly-veiled threats about revolution. It wouldn't succeed, and it doesn't actually scare anyone.

"Besides, after 8 years of the democrats demonizing Bush and anyone connected to him, and then them winning two major elections, I don't trust the democrats to advise us on softening our tone. Obviously, vitriol wins elections."

Vitriol does win elections, sadly, but it wasn't the liberals who pioneered the tactic. Nor will I say it was conservatives. Both sides have used it quite effectively, and it's rather disingenuous to suggest that it only just started to occur in the 2006 midterms.

So, rolling with that now,
President Hussein is a Baathist usurper, probably not even a citizen of this country, who worships Satan and is probably the Antichrist.

Limbaugh is Irrelevant
What IS relevant are all the Dittoheads out there who sop up his crap all day and then regurgitate it. THAT is where the entertainment lies. Limbaugh's the guy that says we'll never have a fuel source other than oil, that we should all be on our knees thanking rich people for the jobs they give us (assuming we're all Indian and Chinese, I guess), and who can't seem to understand that elements of socialism and capitalism are perfectly compatable in the same society. In fact, it's the best mix. He's the guy who would leave every man to himself, and who believes that Americans have no responsibility to help take care of the less fortunate amongst us. Sorry. WRONG. We're all lucky to be Americans, and we owe (I said "owe", as in "should be required by the Government") our less fortunate fellow Americans help. Unfettered capitalism, as Rush would have it, does NOT fix all ills, no matter what Rush Bimbaugh and his Ditto Army say.

Limbaugh is an intellectual like Bill O'Reilly is a Neurosurgeon. Intellectuals are people like Jeffrey Sachs, who illustrates the fact that the free market will NOT do what's best for humanity without some constraints and guidance, in his new book, Common Wealth. That's intellectual economics. Limbaugh is a college dropout who got lucky by tapping into the reptilian brains of the more stupid elements of society in this country.

I disagree
In a world where the United States - of all places - is becoming a socialist oligarchy, there is no way that our dialog should soften. If this doesn't turn around, we will be well past resolving our differences through debate.

Besides, after 8 years of the democrats demonizing Bush and anyone connected to him, and then them winning two major elections, I don't trust the democrats to advise us on softening our tone. Obviously, vitriol wins elections.

What a smart column
Wow, the Preamble to the Declaration of Independence and "Give me Liberty or give me death". I think I learned those in first grade. Rush is a super intellectual I had no idea.

The Camps
Soon you Klownhall Kook Konservatives will not be arguing about closet-homo radio hucksters, you will be worried about how to avoid being clubbed at the Preventive Detention Centers. After we pry the guns from the cold dead fingers of the pot-bellied fools who think they can fight us, the rest of you will be rounded up. Your names are on record. We will not tolerate domestic terrorism in the New America. You have forfeited your rights with your secessionist beliefs. The closet homosexual Limbaugh is being permitted to broadcast for a few more months because he is making our job easier, he is marginalizing your "party." When the useful idiot Limbaugh no longer is of use to us, he will be tried, clubbed, and shot for his treason. Change we can believe in.

bobbit
"You're welcome. Now why can't more libs like you come here to debate rather than the brain dead ad homenin(sp?) attack dogs? I think the country would be a better place if actual intelligent dialog took place."

Well, I think a lot do. From personal experience, though, I can confirm that being called 'libtard' twenty or thirty times will put anybody in attack dog mode. I started out in it on this very thread, for example. It's a two-way street and both sides are unfortunately guilty.

I certainly agree that a more civil and intelligent dialogue would work wonders for the country.

And I hear what you're saying on the rest. Again, I think it just comes down to opposite views of government; we both see it as screwed up. Your side wants to cut our losses and limit its potential to screw us even more, our side wants to dig in and do what we can to make it function better.

Sorry
That was uber, not uder...mistyping is a bh.

Rush is not the GOP leader
Rush is the firwst to say he's not a Republican leader -he has excoriated them correctly for years for leaving their conservative roots and playing the DC footsie game with the establishment to gain power. They thought that people would prefer half a banana to a whole banana when the went liberal lite -what fools.
The nation has gone leftist not getting excited about a muslim rooted marxist who is identified by such by no less than Pravda-Chavez and Castro. He is destroying the nation to th cheers of the indoctrinated hedonistic masses that believe in a man that is more suitd to selling pre-owned cars than running a nation in these times of peril. The jehadists and marxist are encroaching and he's playing Brenda lee's thems song "I'm Sorry." He has no idea about the history and values that went into founding this once great nation. As long as lemmings are allowed to vote and they follow this piper's tune, America is history. They don't want freedom folks, they want a faux leader on a white horse to take care of them.

Uder
Damn dood, you are wasting too much time criticizing Rush Limbaugh.

Again, he is an entertainer. He is going to do anything to get ratings. He will continue to say anything that conservatives want to hear and that liberals hate.

You are playing right into his hands. He wants people to talk about him. Ratings are still ratings. There is no such thing as bad publicity.

uber
You are an idiot. That is why you not only don't listen to Rush, but couldn't grasp his telling the truth about the Socialist Party.

Rush goes by the Founding Fathers beliefs and the Constitution.

You either get on board or sink with the rest of America.
Stupidity allows you your choice, but you had better think long and hard as well as learning what it is like to live under Socialism.

Scurvy
You're welcome. Now why can't more libs like you come here to debate rather than the brain dead ad homenin(sp?) attack dogs? I think the country would be a better place if actual intelligent dialog took place.

In fact outside of the abortion thing (because I think babies are alive and separate beings and I shouldn't have to subsidize that which I abhor), I am somewhat socially liberal even though I vote conservative (not necessarily GOP mind you) because I hate government and its interference in our lives and the cost we pay to have it do so.

All of the programs we have in place are nice as ideals but because govmint runs them they are effed! As I believe Jim said: govmint involvement raises the cost of doing business. It also raises the margin of error. I have no problem with helping people up - no CITIZEN should ever be hungry or destitute in the USA - but you also gotta help yourself. Like you said teach them to fish - not give them a fish dinner. Be dam sure they really need it and cannot get it on their own. If you're healthy and you want a handout you should be put in the Army or be put to work, something to learn a skill and improve yourself - not just be sent a check every month. I think in the case of many libs it makes them feel good to do something like that and they overlook the fraud and the fact that some of us think that is wrong. That's all.

No Trap
Limbaugh is a lowbrow blowhard. And Conservative revolutionary.

2009 is the Conservative '68. Rush needs to stop smoking the spiff and talking up his childish ideas of overthrowing the government.

I think Christian Terrorists have done enough damage for even Rush to scale it back a little. I doubt he will though. He is to self absorbed for that.

Post 1:56 by kaycee
Wow. The last time I heard anything that blatantly racist and ignorant was watching a history channel show on the KKK. You sound like you could be the sister to any number of members of the klan.

How does it feel to live every single day filled with such hate, you must really loath yourself on a subconscious level.

bobbit
"I say: Huh? While I did not quote you exactly it certainly is close to what you said. I will grant you that you did not mention PhD or degrees but I certainly captured the gist of your comment. Despite your smug sense of superiority you do seem to be an intelligent person. Don’t be dishonest now. It is what you said. Only those with experience in the subject at hand need comment on it. Unless of course it is you right?"

You're right, I wasn't clear enough. I did lead off by saying everyone's entitled to an opinion, which is going to be my defense in all this, but what I was going for was the fact that I personally dislike listening to him formulate all these opinions on a wide variety of subjects with which he has no firsthand experience, and presenting them as the absolute truth.

So, good call. I was way too general with my condemnation. Thanks for keeping me honest.

Scurvy
You wrote: “That's true, he does. I firmly believe everyone's entitled to an opinion regardless of circumstance, but I do tend to go right up the wall when a fat drug addict who never bothered with college starts lecturing on self-restraint, drugs, or education. A guy who never served a day in his life nor bothered to run for office lecturing on the military, torture, etc. A man with a demonstrated lack of understanding of the scientific method lecturing on science. The list goes on.”

I wrote: “well I guess according to you no one should ever have an opinion on any subject unless they are a degreed expert in that field. If you haven’t served you can have no opinion on the military. If you don’t have a PhD in science it means you can’t comment on science. If you have an addiction you can’t put down addicts? If you haven’t run for office you can’t comment on politics?"

You wrote: “Not remotely what I said. Go back and put those reading comprehension skills to use.”

I say: Huh? While I did not quote you exactly it certainly is close to what you said. I will grant you that you did not mention PhD or degrees but I certainly captured the gist of your comment. Despite your smug sense of superiority you do seem to be an intelligent person. Don’t be dishonest now. It is what you said. Only those with experience in the subject at hand need comment on it. Unless of course it is you right?

scurvy
thanks. you're a good sport. i guess not all libs are the devil.

ps. that was just a joke.

bobbit
"You got me man that was funny! In my haste I left out a single word that made me look like I don't know anything. OK I admit it :)"

No worries, we all get heated and type fast.

I'll go back to being the evil blood-drinking liberal now after all this civility.

Rush is made of poo.

jim
"Make sense?"

Absolutely. Contrary to popular belief, not all liberals are couch potatoes sucking down government funding; we get taken advantage of, too. We seem to mind it slightly less, and I'm honestly not sure why that is.

I didn't make it clear enough in my initial response to you, but I don't think just handing out free crap is the answer. I think it sustains the status quo. That's sometimes necessary, unfortunately, but I'm a firm believer in the notion that government actually can do good in people's lives, despite evidence to the contrary. An idealist, if you will.

I've lived in a couple of the larger cities on the west and east coasts, and I have seen a lot of homeless, a lot of crime-ridden ghettos, etc. I don't think anyone grows up wanting to be a criminal, nor homeless. I think they make choices, absolutely, that lead to that, but I also think a lot of it is the environment they're in. If government programs aren't doing the trick, we need to make them better, not give up on them entirely. Focus less on just giving the guy a fish every day and do the old teaching them to fish thing. That won't work for everybody, and that's where we do need a level of commitment to not just throwing people under the bus and saying sorry, buddy, but life's a *****.

I'd love lower taxes, I really would. We'd have to cut either military or social spending to make it feasible though. I'm not willing to do either of those.

Scurvey #70
ME: "See your problem is you nothing about anything so you should just shut up."

YOU: "I nothing about anything, I admit it. "

You got me man that was funny! In my haste I left out a single word that made me look like I don't know anything. OK I admit it :)

PV
"Names like Scurvy (a disease), Vampire's Reflection, Garageman.....c'mon."

Actually, I chose Scurvy 'cause I actually had scurvy once. It...kinda sucked.


Government programs
will not keep anyone from becoming a crook. Poor areas would not be so bad if crime was kept under control. My parents grew up extremely poor in the depression in the city. There was no crime.

purvy
It seems to me that we do actually do what we can to help the unfortunate. We provide housing, we provide food stamps, and we provide public transportation. If you go down to the county hospital, we are providing free health care. You might not get the same house that a person with a career gets but you get what you get. You might have to wait in line for awhile at the county hospital, but again you get what you get. I honestly don't see where we're coming up short. I, as a conservative, do understand that there is a job shortage and I am more than happy to provide assistance to these unfortunate ones. That could very easily be me. I don't see many Americans in the gutter, or homeless unless mentally ill.
What does make us mad is this, and I know that this isn't all people taking welfare, but we don't understand 3rd generations that are still on welfare. We don't understand those who get food stamps, then sell $100 for food stamps for $20 cash to buy drugs and alcohol. We don't understand people complaining about their kids schools when they as parents don't make their kids attend and behave. We are human beings with feelings and compassion, we just don't like being taken advantage of constantly as tax payers. Make sense?

I love Rushie-Baby
He is a genius and he is real. Conservatives should be proud that he is on their side and find some courage to be more like him.

Joycey
"What about those that make gutter choices in their lives."

I don't know, honestly. Part of me wants to say, "Well, hey. You screwed up. Time to reap the whirlwind."

On the other hand, we know it's often a self-perpetuating cycle. I'm not suggesting people aren't to blame for their choices, not by any means. But if Joe's a hoodrat and makes gutter choices, totally screwing himself into a hole, there's a decent chance that Joe's kids are going to wind up in a similar situation and make a similar choice. Did they make the choice? Sure. But their circumstances probably contributed to it. I can see the lure of making the easy money on the corner selling crack if I'm in the middle of Detroit and no one around me is going to college or even talking about real work 'cause they're all busy feeding off the government.

My solution, incidentally, isn't to simply give everybody a house and a car. That's simplistic and won't work and will be prohibitively expensive. I simply think we need to get some really good minds in a room and go, "Alright, how the hell do we stop that cycle?" Giving out free **** won't do it, and lecturing about hard work and leaving them to fend for themselves won't either.

Barking Dogs
I don't understand why so many people here waste their time engaging the trolls. They are only here to disrupt and hijack the thread.

Just the names they choose should clue you in that you're not dealing with the sharpest knives in the drawer.

Names like Scurvy (a disease), Vampire's Reflection, Garageman.....c'mon.

Ignore them and maybe they'll go back to the slimy rock they came out from under.

JoeRP
"I was not trying to imply that you were off mentally, just that your data was off."

I didn't take it that way, no worries.

"In my view, there there is a semantics problem due to partisanship."

There's also a decent chance that I don't know enough about this stuff to actually be aware of what I'm talking about.

"To claim that the government should ensure that fraud does not exist is inappropriately referred to as "regulating the markets." Fraud is not a market. So when Democrats talk about regulating the markets, it makes me nervous. The Bush treasury department allowed fraud to infect the markets. The proper response should be to remove the fraud, not regulate the markets."

You'll need to educate me here. I hold a very simplistic view of regulation, in the sense that I define it internally as the notion that the government puts some rules in place to keep companies from cutting each other's balls off with shady practices.

"Second, to compare Ronald Reagan's persistent attempts to cut spending in dealing with a Democratic Congress (he did by the way slow the rate of growth and through Gramm-Rudman applied significant pressure) with George W. Bush is obscene."

I was simply making the point that, despite all you mention, he was a spender. Everyone is. The deficit tends to go up regardless of who's in office; the money just goes to different stuff.

"I noticed, by the way, that you do not dispute that the President George W. Bush most resembles is Lyndon Johnson, a liberal -- which is why W's Presidency failed."

Johnson was a different sort of liberal than I am, though. He and Bush are similar in spending. Arguably in foreign policy. I'd still say Bush was definitely a social conservative, which is where my strong, strong disagreement lies.

scurvey
What about those that make gutter choices in their lives.

jim, part two
As to the issue of raising taxes on the businessman, forcing him to lay people off, versus giving him a tax cut and having him suddenly employ more people: I'm not sure it works like that. I'm sure it does in some cases. Not in others. I'll be quite honest with you: if I were running a business with a steady market that I was sure wasn't going anywhere, had worked to establish myself as a leader in my industry and was confident of my position, and suddenly I had more cash available for my company than last year, there's a decent chance I might decide I need a raise more than new business.

As far as taxes in general go, nobody cuts spending. Nobody. Conservatives will cut it in one place and increase it in others. Democrats might do the same, but are more likely to just leave it as is here and increase it there.

I'm not a fiscal liberal, quite honestly, I'm a social liberal. I'm pretty convinced both sides play dirty on the economic side, but the social side is where my vote goes. I tend to vote on social issues rather than the fiscal ones, and when I make the fiscal argument I usually do it to see where it's going to get shredded by someone who knows more than me. So go nuts, I'll be interested to see where I missed the mark.

Scurvey
I was not trying to imply that you were off mentally, just that your data was off.

In my view, there there is a semantics problem due to partisanship.

To claim that the government should ensure that fraud does not exist is inappropriately referred to as "regulating the markets." Fraud is not a market. So when Democrats talk about regulating the markets, it makes me nervous. The Bush treasury department allowed fraud to infect the markets. The proper response should be to remove the fraud, not regulate the markets.

Second, to compare Ronald Reagan's persistent attempts to cut spending in dealing with a Democratic Congress (he did by the way slow the rate of growth and through Gramm-Rudman applied significant pressure) with George W. Bush is obscene.

Spend spend spend was the Bush mantra. He makes Bill Clinton look like a penny pincher. His only rival is Lyndon Johnson.

I noticed, by the way, that you do not dispute that the President George W. Bush most resembles is Lyndon Johnson, a liberal -- which is why W's Presidency failed.

jim
I'll tackle your question as best I can. Bear in mind I don't speak for Democrats or any other liberal, even my chick.

You're right, we can't afford to make sure every single person in America has a house in the 'burbs and a car. I don't think that's necessarily our goal anyway. I do have issues with any society that claims to be civilized not doing what it can to help out the least among it, though. I'm not for communism or even socialism as you would define it, but I'm also not for a pure Darwinian approach to society, either. I simply don't think we should leave people in the gutter if we can avoid it.

Your argument would probably be that some of those people could pull themselves out if they really worked hard. And you're right, some could. Not all, though. Some people are always going to game the system, that's as true of the rich as it is of the poor. Welfare queens and tax shelters. Different ends of the spectrum. But there are people who genuinely need that kind of assistance, and not providing it doesn't sit well with me. It seems to me that conservatives genuinely believe unemployment doesn't exist, that if everyone just got off the couch and took what was available, we'd hit 0%. I don't think that's true.

FeedFWD
The gun ownership argument I don't buy. Even the nebulously-defined stuff he's trying to enact doesn't take away your right to own a firearm - it puts in place more regulation. Which, frankly, I think is a good thing. We regulate a lot of our freedoms, such as driving, drinking, and voting.

As for the economy? Sorry, you're gonna have to pay taxes. The current tax rates aren't even as high as they were under Reagan. Unless Reagan took away your freedoms, too, you don't get to use that one.

Cars and banking? Come on. Both of those industries went to him, not the other way around; they aren't in any way connected to your personal freedoms. They begged for bailouts, accepting the regulation that came with. If Detroit City Motors starts up tomorrow, it's not going to have any of the hoops to jump through that GM's currently getting itself into.

Healthcare we're just going to have to disagree on. You can still pay for your own if you like. A high percentage of Americans currently have no choice in the matter right now, even before Obama's done anything, so they're living without that freedom currently.

scurvy my new friend
Since we're having a discussion, I've always wanted to discuss something with a liberal. Democrats seem to really want all Americans to have a home, money in the bank, a good job, good health insurance and the American dream. I, as a conservative, want the same things for every American also. The difference is, I think, that conservatives have the realization that we cannot afford to pay for that for every American. Don't Democrats believe in personal accountability? And if everything is handed to each individual, what happens when no one takes the initiative to achieve bigger and better things? My boss is a billionaire, well millionaire because he wanted to be successful for his family. As a by product of that success, there are 350 families that are living the American Dream because he succeeeded and hired all of us. Instead of hating him for being rich, I'm thankful that he is. If he receives a tax break, and expands the business to make more money, that means that even more Americans have new jobs. If you impose large taxes on him, he's still going to be rich, but he's going to lay off enough people to stay profitable. That is his right. How does that not make sense to Democrats?

Scurvy #54 - & Presidential Hypocracy
Unfortunately your democrat talking points about republican deregulation misses the point. The problem with FanMa and FrMac and the banking industry in general was Democrat led regulations that forced banks to make loans to people who could not repay them, loans they would not have made.

In both 2005 and 2006 Republican majorities on the Banking and Finance Committeee got Bush Administration bills to the floor of the Senate, that would reign in those very regulations forcing banks to make the sub-prime loans. But Democrats blocked passage lining up the 41 votes needed to block a vote, among the friends of Barney crowd was the current President Barack Obama.

Had that bill become law it may well have averted the worst of the current financial morass in the banking sector.

This is just a part of direct Democrat responsibility for the financial crisis, and a source of hypocracy when Obama keeps pointing his finger at Bush and the Republicans.


Robert
"Do you believe that MSNBC and the rest of the cable news channels have more viewers than Fox?"

No, I think Fox is killing them. My point was that a lot of those who watch Fox are watching to scream at the TV. Not literally, of course, though my uncle actually does from time to time.

"The experts called in on the other channels are usually liberal, period. Nothing is fair, but Fox is fairer than the others."

I don't know about that.

"And you must admit, most people who criticize Fox never watch it for more than a minute, if at all. The critics on this thread are always saying that they saw something on Fox that was never there. They're the brave anti-Fox Foo Fighters."

Well, most of my Fox viewing - which is highly irregular - is for the non-journalistic stuff. The morning show - I can't stand the three or four of those guys - and O'Reilly. Again, this is screaming-at-the-TV viewing. I simply can't watch Hannity. Their actual daytime journalism stuff is reported, far as I can tell, like everybody else. It's journalism. There's a little bias here and there, but nothing that makes me want to light up the torch and grab a pitchfork.

Is Obama infringing our freedoms?
It was aked what freedoms Obama has taken away. He hasn't outlawed guns, but he's working on things to make it more difficult to obtain, afford, or use guns. He is trying to move the judicial system to one that rules with empathy rather than on the law. It hasn't happened yet, but it will inevitably lead to loss of freedom. He has mortgaged our future with all these bailouts. We will either be obligated to offer more of our earnings to government or suffer the debasement via inflation of the money we have already earned. His minions are setting the guidelines for cars and banking, which may not specifically strip us of freedoms in the moment. But it does make it harder for entrepreneurs to enter the market and offer us other alternatives. He proposes to manage healthcare for all of us taking away our freedom of choice or severely limiting our options. Obviously, there are only a few bills he has been able to sign up to this point and many of them haven't had an effect yet. But it is disingenuous to say he isn't limiting our freedoms simply because there isn't a specific law that declares our freedoms to be limited. I could go on with energy policies and many more. The great thing about this country, is that it takes more than a few months in office to completely turn the ship of state. The problem is that to the extent that he turns us in the wrong direction, it is going to take an equally long time to right it again.

scurvy...
What you observed is true to a point. Why would anybody want to work and be self-reliant when somebody promises you something for nothing. If not most, certainly a large number of Americans are conservative at heart. Everybody wants more, but conservatives are content to play by the rules, work hard, and generally trust everybody else to do the same. A smaller group of people actually believe that government knows more and can provide better for them than they can themselves. These are the hardcore liberals. Everybody else is malleable. They are often easily scared or conned by soundbites promoting hope and change and don't dig into what they really means or what it will really cost. It may be the result of public education, but more likely is the result of being interested in things besides politics and economics. Conservatives lose these people because they don't produce emotionally appealing soundbites. Even if they do, they don't get much airtime on the MSM. So what happens, is after liberals have promised everything to everybody and failed to deliver, they too will be turned out. Unfortunately, the process seems to drive us further towards dependency on government and away from liberty. As the old saying goes, "A government powerful enough to give you all you need is also powerful enough to take everything you need away from you."


Oh my god...
Talking about Rush is ridiculous...you are either for him or against him. You either like his show or you don't. That's all you really need to say.

It's almost liking Star Trek or Star Trek: The Next Generation.

Husker #34
And the funny part is Lilly was kaycee's English teacher!!!!

Rush Limbaugh
Rush has said many many times that the reason he is popular is because HE agrees with US. Think about that. Rush personifies conservative thought and mixes it with humor for an entertaining and educational radio program. He doesn't "brainwash" anyone. His popularity stems from his being a strong representative of American conservative belief.

Lilly #32
Well Lilly it appears you have a number of college degrees that Rush does not. The unfortunate part is that you are a complete and utter idiot so I’d say sheepskin is overrated! I guess it is your position that those who are only educated in Publik Screwls with no college are uneducated! Since you were one of those teachers in public education you a part of the problem not part of the solution.

It is my experience that those with the most education are often the least knowledgeable outside of their chosen field – kind of like you. You know you really should come down off of that high horse you libs always seem to sit on. I’ll take an intelligent man with some knowledge of a lot of things over one with tremendous knowledge of only one thing any day.

Calling all Liberals!
Today, President Obama made the following statement: "If you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world."

First, this is a blatant untruth. Even exaggerating the numbers will get anywhere close to the President's claim.

Second, calling America one of the largest "Muslim countries" serves no purpose but to incite and insult.

I have criticized posters on this website for not thinking before posting. Now, maybe we all need to talk to the President about the same thing.

Scurvey on Fox News
"Also accounts for the success of Fox News, by the way. Fox does their own polling on their viewership, and as high as 35% of their audience at any given time is people who hate their viewpoint and are just tuning in to scream at the TV." Do you believe that MSNBC and the rest of the cable news channels have more viewers than Fox? I listen to the others a fair amount, so the crossover isn't all one way. Fox is immensely successful partly because it is somewhat conservative, and partly because they have very vigorous liberals defending their point of view against O'Reilly and Hannity. Glenn Beck lives on another planet, I think. Also, they actually do present both sides of the story usually (not always). I seldom see the same thing on the other channels. Fox will use two experts to represent two different views. The experts called in on the other channels are usually liberal, period. Nothing is fair, but Fox is fairer than the others. And you must admit, most people who criticize Fox never watch it for more than a minute, if at all. The critics on this thread are always saying that they saw something on Fox that was never there. They're the brave anti-Fox Foo Fighters.

Rush
is a living legend of radio. A fabulously wealthy self-made original, and that positively frosts the dimwits on the left who's inept radio bumblers combined don't have a tenth of his audience, and whose idea of the American Dream is a welfare check.

They are parasites who don't have the brainpower to understand Limbaugh's contribution to radio and are frankly, not worth the time and effort to bother with. You can't fix stupid.

That been said, I still favor Mark Levin. Rush is the bigger star, a really sharp guy, and was here first, but Levin is absolutely brilliant.

JoeRP
"I think you're somewhat off."

I could be, this ain't my field of work.

"Conservatives oppose regulating free market transactions because all such regulation does is increase transaction costs.

There was nothing free-market about the murky nature of mortgage-backed securities, which hid adequate information from buyers and thus were for all practical purposes fraud."

I may be splitting hairs, but isn't that the result of the fact that no one bothered to actually look into any of that crap, figure out what was going on, and then figure out how to regulate it?

"And your notion that only 20% of America supports Conservative principles is a crock."

I don't think it is, but if you've got the polling numbers, I'll read 'em.

"We have serious Government spending problems in this country. And we have a serious taxation problem -- nobody's arguing that it should be lowered to 10% -- at least in the forseable future."

As I mentioned earlier, though, that's nothing new. Neither conservative nor liberal presidents cut spending, at least not in recent memory. Reagan certainly didn't. Taxes were also a lot higher under the conservative utopia that was his administration.

"His obscene bloated domestic spending programs and his using of the military for social engineering projects fit Johnson to a tee. "

Plus, the Texas thing.

jim
"i see your point about deregulation. now you acknowledge my point. the banking and mortgage business was regulated before the fair housing act was implemented, and before Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were instituted. Back then, you actually had to qualify for a mortgage, you had to have 20% down, and you had to have good credit. If you didn't pass muster then you got no house. Democrats wanted the American dream for all Americans, which was a noble idea. But they were the ones that opened the doors wide open on that one. Do you not agree? Once the door was open, good old American greed threw gasoline on the fire, but Americans of both parties benefitted financially from that. Which other deregulations are a problem for you?"

Yep, I'll buy that, though are you sure it was the Fair Housing Act?

I'll be honest, I don't work in the financial markets, I couldn't tell you which precise regulations that've been removed should be reinstated. There're people more knowledgeable than me who can, however. Capitalism's fine and dandy, I have no issues with it, but I don't think we should simply remove the brakes from the car and see how fast it can go. The government shouldn't be interfering in the market under normal circumstances, but it definitely should be keeping an eye on it to make sure everyone's playing fair.

Scurvey
I think you're somewhat off.

Conservatives oppose regulating free market transactions because all such regulation does is increase transaction costs.

There was nothing free-market about the murky nature of mortgage-backed securities, which hid adequate information from buyers and thus were for all practical purposes fraud. The fact that the Bush treasury was asleep at the switch, at that a lot of partisan hacks at this site refuse to acknowledge that Bush is a failure that regulation of the market is a good thing.

And your notion that only 20% of America supports Conservative principles is a crock.

We have serious Government spending problems in this country. And we have a serious taxation problem -- nobody's arguing that it should be lowered to 10% -- at least in the forseable future.

The reason George W. Bush is a failure is because the President he most resembled was Lyndon Johnson.

His obscene bloated domestic spending programs and his using of the military for social engineering projects fit Johnson to a tee.

Look at who the fanatic is "scurvy"
Takes a fanatic to keep posting insults about those he disagrees with.
But enough about that idiot.
======================


JoeRP writes:- 3:33 PM EST
Limbaugh
I enjoyed Limbaugh ...

And I don't dislike the guy now.

But he uncritically recited fake Conservative Bush talking points for the past 8 years.
======================

I agree with this
So does Rush himself.

He has admitted he carried the water for GW Bush and promised to stop with his blind allegiance to the republican party.

Evidently he meant it too, cause there many party hacks in the republican party taking their shots at Rush.


Both parties are corrupted and are destroying this country.

Hypocrites in the republican party and absolute hate mongers and insane people like "scurvy" in the democrat party

Ditto-Heads
Limbaugh has his cozy cotterie of ditto-heads. What more does he want? He makes no effort to conform his message to a wider audience. Aggression, bombaste, and negativity are what he is comfortable with.

Intellectual... I don't think so.

bobbit
"Scurvy #23 – well I guess according to you no one should ever have an opinion on any subject unless they are a degreed expert in that field. If you haven’t served you can have no opinion on the military. If you don’t have a PhD in science it means you can’t comment on science. If you have an addiction you can’t put down addicts? If you haven’t run for office you can’t comment on politics?"

Not remotely what I said. Go back and put those reading comprehension skills to use.

"How ridiculous do you libs have to get?"

I wonder that myself, but I'm a firm believer in adapting your message to your audience. I'm talking to conservatives. I try to be just as ridiculous.

"How about this: if you don’t pay taxes you can’t vote? Oh I’m sure you’d never go for that."

I would, with a modification: the more you pay in taxes, the more weight your vote has. Hollywood and I would win landslides every election.

"See your problem is you nothing about anything so you should just shut up."

I nothing about anything, I admit it.

Taking Dems/Libs out of Context
Stating exactly what they said.

Rush does not need to take the Left 'out of context' - they statements are inflammatory or idiotic enough on their own.

Context: the Left's way of explaining away the foot in mouth disease they all suffer from.

Hate speech: Accurately citing the latest leftist idiocy.

jim
"Can I get one other misconception straight? Attention all Liberals, Rush Limbaugh is not a Republican leader! He's a guy with a conservative talk show, nothing more."

That's disingenuous at best. Elected? No. Leader? Certainly. Are you honestly suggesting he doesn't hold any influence with the conservative base?

"Yes, some of us listen to him, but we're not mindlessly soaking everything in like drones. We are intelligent enough to make our own judgements."

Man, that one's tempting, but I'll be polite.

"You guys have anointed him our leader, we haven't. He's just a dude doing a job, and advertisers seem to pay him a lot of money. Good for him."

We've seen the actual Republican leadership kowtow to him. I'm pretty sure you've anointed him one of your leaders, and we just called you on it.

"I wish that I had that contract."

You and me both.

scurvy
i see your point about deregulation. now you acknowledge my point. the banking and mortgage business was regulated before the fair housing act was implemented, and before Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were instituted. Back then, you actually had to qualify for a mortgage, you had to have 20% down, and you had to have good credit. If you didn't pass muster then you got no house. Democrats wanted the American dream for all Americans, which was a noble idea. But they were the ones that opened the doors wide open on that one. Do you not agree? Once the door was open, good old American greed threw gasoline on the fire, but Americans of both parties benefitted financially from that. Which other deregulations are a problem for you?

Liberties the King Elect O has
infringed on for me personally:

wrecking my pension by making its investments in the US auto industry worth nothing; regular bankruptcy would have given bond holders nearly 100 percent return FIRST;

jeopardizing my life and freedom by bowing to a Saudi autocrat and insulting the British who have been our greatest allies in all conflicts;

spending trillions of dollars that don't actually exist and then begging the Chinese to buy more debt from us, which will limit my ability to live independently and make personal monetary choices when the inflation of just printing money kicks in;

and next year, Big O and his minions will let the Bush tax cuts lapse and EVERYONE's private life will be affected by a rise in taxes up to $2500 a year for a family of four making $60,000 (WSJ numbers);

all of which is more personal and more real than the loss of privacy than all the lib. rants about how librarians were going to report book loans under the Patriot Act.

Libdolts
Scurvy #23 – well I guess according to you no one should ever have an opinion on any subject unless they are a degreed expert in that field. If you haven’t served you can have no opinion on the military. If you don’t have a PhD in science it means you can’t comment on science. If you have an addiction you can’t put down addicts? If you haven’t run for office you can’t comment on politics? How ridiculous do you libs have to get? How about this: if you don’t pay taxes you can’t vote? Oh I’m sure you’d never go for that. See your problem is you nothing about anything so you should just shut up. All you offer is typical libtard talking points.

Jeramy #24 – try listening to Rush one day. He treats dissenting callers with more reverence than he does the choir dufus. More libdolt talking points. For your info we don’t always agree with Rush and we make our own decisions (unlike libs) but he is frequently the only one giving the other side of the story. And that’s what you guys hate.

Yoshi #25 – yours is the party of divorce and drug use and you have the nerve to slam Rush for those very things your side promotes. Just like the left using the homo tag on someone they want to damage while they claim to defend GLBT’s. Freakin’ hypocrites that’s all you guys are.

How about you meatheads refute the things Limbaugh says rather than attack the man? If he is so slanted and out of touch it should be easy to do even for morons like you.

You guys are pathetic!

renny
"free press, speech, practice of religion, and congregation (not lib. ideas, altho' they were in 1798)"

Definitely lib ideas.

"free trade (not lib. idea, altho' it was until Carter)"

Kinda the quintessential lib idea, actually.

"personal responsibility (not group identity, which is lib. mush)"

Ah, the nebulous personal responsibility. Tell you what, I don't feel like writing eight posts' worth of rebuttal for that, so I'll give you a freebie.

"merit achievement (not group identity)"

I'm all for merit achievement, and I'm a liberal. Also not an affirmative action fan. Next?

"strong foreign policy backed by a strong military (hated by libs.)"

No, we love strong foreign policy backed by a strong military. Our definition of 'strong' doesn't necessitate an exclusion of 'intelligent,' which is our primary difference with conservatives.

"and fiscal conservative (unknown to libs.)"

Unknown to fiscal conservatives, too. Name the last conservative president who actually cut spending. Hint: it wasn't Reagan.

Don
"I'm thinking it's not scurvy but rabies.
Calling Rush Limbaugh "fat, drug addict" really shows some class. How many of your heroes fit that bill? How many have been addicted to prescription drugs? Talk about fat, think Kennedy (not to mention drunk)."

I don't listen to Kennedy blather for three hours a day. Is Rush fat? Is he a drug addict? If you answer either of those questions with "no," I'm not sure we're talking about the same person. Simply calling a spade a spade.

"He uses humor to get his message across."

No, he tries. Sorry, I don't find Paul Schenklin songs all that funny. But then, I'm not in my 60s.

"Are you stupid enough to say that only a college graduate has something intelligent to say."

Not at all. How much credit would you give to someone's opinion of the inner workings of the military if they'd never served in the military?

"When it comes to hate, nobody does it better than a rabid liberal. Hate on!"

Nah, I think Hannity, Savage, Beck, Levin, and Rush beat us hands-down. Not even a contest. Though I'm just guessing about Levin; the one time I tried listening to him, I had to be rushed to the hospital due to blood gushing from my ears. And you can't really blame Beck; when you're that crazy, you're liable to say some wild stuff.

Hard core cons. principles are
free press, speech, practice of religion, and congregation (not lib. ideas, altho' they were in 1798)

free trade (not lib. idea, altho' it was until Carter)

personal responsibility (not group identity, which is lib. mush)

merit achievement (not group identity)

strong foreign policy backed by a strong military (hated by libs.)

and fiscal conservative (unknown to libs.)

If those are only adhered to by 20% of the pop, no business community, stock market, freedom of expression, or individual liberty would exist. And they do.

Robert
God, I love those polls. You guys never actually bother to dig into them. People self-identify as conservative far more than they self-identify as liberal. A large proportion of those conservative self-identifies, though, trend liberal or moderate when they're actually polled on issues. Pew makes sure to do this, I believe, as does Quinnipiac or whatever the name is. Ought to check it out.

And Dennis Miller tried to the conservative comedy show thing and flamed out, so I'm not sure I buy the television argument. Colbert and Stewart's focus is on comedy more than politics; that inherently makes it more watchable. Talk radio's focus is on the politics, and comedy is incidental. I'd say that means you need to be committed to actually dedicating time to listen to someone drone on about policy. My theory is that liberals simply don't need to be repeatedly told what they believe, thus the failure of liberal talk radio. At the same time - as evidenced by our presence here - we enjoy hearing the other guy's side and either flinging poo or rationally breaking down his argument.

Also accounts for the success of Fox News, by the way. Fox does their own polling on their viewership, and as high as 35% of their audience at any given time is people who hate their viewpoint and are just tuning in to scream at the TV. I think conservatives like things a little more insular and feel-good.

Scurvy
I'm thinking it's not scurvy but rabies.
Calling Rush Limbaugh "fat, drug addict" really shows some class. How many of your heroes fit that bill? How many have been addicted to prescription drugs? Talk about fat, think Kennedy (not to mention drunk).

Now please use a modicum of intelligence. Limbaugh is like a stage play that makes a point. He uses humor to get his message across. Are you stupid enough to say that only a college graduate has something intelligent to say. That's incredibly snobbish and inane. I have many friends without a college education that amaze me with their intellect.

When it comes to hate, nobody does it better than a rabid liberal. Hate on!

I'm glad Rush is there. Just mentioning his name separates the humans from the questionables (hint, I'm human).


Scurvey
"I could spend some time developing the argument that conservatives actually like the childish temper tantrums of lowbrow discourse more than liberals, given the lack of real market for liberal talk radio, but something tells me you wouldn't buy that." Something tells me you would be right. There's been various explanations of why liberal talk radio hasn't taken off. Perhaps it is because the television 'comedy' shows of Stewart and Colbert monopolize that medium-- there are no conservative satirical television stars. Perhaps it is simply that there are about twice as many conservatives as there are liberals, according to most polls. I have a theory that you probably won't buy. Liberal ideas just can't be interesting for more than a few minutes at a time. If they're discussed at length, they tend to fall apart. Am I wrong here? I'm sure you'll let me know.
"

Mel
The problem you face is that the hardcore non-compromising conservative message appeals to, at most, 20% of the populace. That's never going to win an election. Anybody who gets up there and campaigns for cutting all taxes down to 10%, increased military spending, massive new expenditures along the border, slashing all social programs, and abolishing half the government while chaining a Bible to every American is not going to get elected.

And that's before he or she vows to go to war with Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, and Cuba while still fighting Iraq and Afghanistan.

Scurvy
Can I get one other misconception straight? Attention all Liberals, Rush Limbaugh is not a Republican leader! He's a guy with a conservative talk show, nothing more. Yes, some of us listen to him, but we're not mindlessly soaking everything in like drones. We are intelligent enough to make our own judgements. You guys have anointed him our leader, we haven't. He's just a dude doing a job, and advertisers seem to pay him a lot of money. Good for him. I wish that I had that contract.

Limbaugh
I enjoyed Limbaugh in the 80s and 90s.

And I don't dislike the guy now.

But he uncritically recited fake Conservative Bush talking points for the past 8 years. And he put himself in an impossible position.

And I just have to laugh at any writer at this web site claiming that an article at "The American Conservative" web site is "superficial."

Many current Republicans would do well to reacquaint themselves with Conservatism by going here:

http://www.amconmag.com/

or here:

http://www.cato.org/



Disapointment
I have been a Republican voter for many years. The continued jelly backbones of the GOP leadership is bringing me to the point that I believe we need to throw out a whole bunch of Republicans as well as Democrats. I think that those who are more concerned about winning re-election than about doing what is right for the Country do not deserve to be in office. More harm has been done to the Party in the past several years by Republicans than has been done by Dems. I have not been a big fan of Rush in the past, but on these issues he is more correct than his "GOP" critics.

jim
"How can you blame just the conservatives?"

Pretty simple. True or false: conservatives are in favor of deregulation.

Think on that one for a moment before reading on.

A lil' American economic history for you. Throughout the period prior to the 20th century, we were on a pretty reliable boom-and-bust pattern. 15, 20 years or so. Economy booms, then it busts. Regular. Then it busts really, really bad in the form of the Great Depression. We pull out of it and start regulating like crazy. The booms weren't as big, but guess what? No busts. The early 80s roll 'round, and conservatives start deregulating, inspired by trickle down economic idiocy. Guess what starts happening? Busts. Big ones.

In response, we deregulate MORE. Big boom. Even bigger bust. Regulation's the simple, effective answer, but conservatives fight it tooth and nail every stage of the way.

Robert
"The other difference is that Pelosi really IS a major leader in the Democratic party, and that is truly funny, in a macabre sort of way."

Not really, no. Conservatives have gotten plenty of people elected that I'd find funny in a macabre sort of way. Bush, Bachmann, Santorum, etc. Idiocy is not limited to one side or another.

I think you missed my overall point about Rush and his style of rhetoric, though. I could spend some time developing the argument that conservatives actually like the childish temper tantrums of lowbrow discourse more than liberals, given the lack of real market for liberal talk radio, but something tells me you wouldn't buy that.

scurvy
First, I listen to Rush to gather information, then I take what I want and the other stuff goes in one ear and out the other. I don't find him funny at all personally.
Second, capitalism is not perfect and their is always the possibility of greed flaring up. Democrats need to take responsibility for their part of the mess. The economy is not bad. The banking industry is bad, and that is stalling the economy. Why is it bad? Because liberals opened the door wide open for people that couldn't afford a house to buy them with no pre qualifications. Then, greedy Wall Street took it a step further by rolling these bad mortgages up into packages and reselling them. Were their no Liberals running Wall Street? Were all of these people Republicans? Have you not read very specific bills that Republicans and Bush tried to ram through to correct these mistakes? Did he not try to investigate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac but was voted down by the Democratic Congress and by Barney Frank. I hear the cut all the time from Barney Frank about 2 years telling a congressional panel that FM and FM did not need an overhaul, that they were in fact doing what they were designed to do. How can you blame just the conservatives? How was the economy, and how was the stock market before Democrats took control of Congress? This always turns into a DEM vs REP contest, but neither one of us is actually winning. You need to take off your REP hating blinders and look around a little.

Robert
"One difference is that nobody on the conservative side suggests that the View girls represent the intellectual side of the Democratic party. The same goes for Stewart and Colbert. The pretense that Republicans think of Rush as a political leader or candidate for office is absurd."

Georgetwin says, directly before you:
"The number of Liberal Cowards who denigrate Rush from the safety of cyberspace and/or Mommy's Basement VALIDATES him as a Conservative Leader."

Trust me, plenty of conservatives view Rush as a political leader. But if you disagree with my analogy simply 'cause I used Pelosi, then let's go with Olbermann.

Scurvey Makes a Good Point
"Yeah, he makes us foam at the mouth, but I'm not sure I'd be proud of that. Pelosi makes conservatives foam at the mouth, but that doesn't get my engine humming. She's an idiot. We should be raising the level of discourse in this country, not lowering it to annoy the other side." One difference is that nobody on the conservative side suggests that the View girls represent the intellectual side of the Democratic party. The same goes for Stewart and Colbert. The pretense that Republicans think of Rush as a political leader or candidate for office is absurd. The last person to think that would be Rush himself. The other difference is that Pelosi really IS a major leader in the Democratic party, and that is truly funny, in a macabre sort of way.

Validation
The number of Liberal Cowards who denigrate Rush from the safety of cyberspace and/or Mommy's Basement VALIDATES him as a Conservative Leader.

Fair Weather Republicans (start)
Certainly Rush is a conservative intellectual, but his radio show is also entertainment, and thus occasionally shock jock tactics come into play keeping ratings up. But it is also fair to say he, Hanity, and others are what I call Fair Weather Republicans, in that they will drop the party as soon as there is the slightest departure from orthodox conservatism - in the name of principle.
The problem for "Republicans" is that orthodox conservatives (those that check off "very conservative" in exit polls) represent about 25% of the electorate over all with highs of 38% in places like Oklahoma and lows of 18% in New England. Even when you add in those that self identify as "Somewhat Conservative" the numbers only get up to 40-45%. It is important to recognize that thus that only say they are "somewhat" do not buy into the whole orthodox down the line principled issue list.

Continued comment 45

Because we do not hate people
As the "liberal" does jim
=========================


jim writes:- 2:56 PM EST
one more thing
I don't like Olberman, Matthews, Jon Stuart and their kind because their views and mine are polar opposites. Instead of hating on them, I just don't listen to them.
=======================

I do not agree with anything those men have to say either.

But I have never go on any democrat, "liberal" forum to just express my disagreements and insult the posters as we see the "liberals" who come here every day to do.

They are so full of hate and just cannot stand it if anyone disagrees with them.

They are extremely intolerant of diversity and just use the word cynically

jim
"Nothing about the way he is ruining our liberty is funny to me."

Well, now I simply have to give you my usual Conservative In Hysterics diagnostic testing. It won't take long.

What liberty of yours has Obama infringed upon? Take your time and think real hard, you may be asked for proof.

Fair Weather Republicans (Continued)
So even when very and somewhat conservatives are aggregated, the liberals and left wingers still hold power. So the electoral battle is for the 20% of so called moderates that can go either way. It is important to recognize that the very principled conservatives (I'm calling orthodox) are as much a turn off to moderates as are the far left wingers. Lately Democrats have been successfully putting up a facade of moderation on the economy and defense during the campaign to look moderate, with a wink and nod, to the left wing.
For Republicans, the objective is to get seated in the majority so the country is not ruled by the left side of the political spectrum. But to get seated, they have to compromise and differ from orthodox conservative principles in many regions where the electorate requires significant moderate support to get seated. But with the conservatives demanding strict adherence down the line to their issue list, the republicans in more moderate regions can't get elected because as the move to the center they lose the right.
I do not like at all the fact that the left side of the spectrum is running the show, and fear they will continue to do so for a long time until the "Fair Weather Republicans" like Rush and Hanity recognize the path to a majority is in building coalitions like what Michael Steele is trying to do, not by demanding strict adherence and exclusivity to a set of principles that far less than a majority of the country agrees with.

jim
"I don't like Olberman, Matthews, Jon Stuart and their kind because their views and mine are polar opposites. Instead of hating on them, I just don't listen to them. Libs hate Rush because they know deep down that he is right, and they hate being exposed as frauds. Good work."

Amusing, but no. I'm a liberal, and I don't hate Rush; more often than not I find him hilarious, though clearly not in the way he intends. It's like a B movie, in the sense that the stuff that's supposed to be serious is funny, and the stuff that's supposed to be funny is so bad you groan.

"Why do you think that Republicans are on the side of business? Most of us have the wisdom to make capitalism work for the benefit of all of us."

Actually, I think the biggest proof to the contrary of that hilariously wrong gem of a statement has been occurring for the past several months.

Bugsy, here is the new Preamble
Of obama and friends.

We the democrats of the United States, in order to transform an imperfect Union,
disestablish justice, displace domestic tranquility, dissimulate the common defense, to demote the general welfare, to destroy the blessings of liberty to You and Your posterity, do denounce and dispute this constitution of the United States of America.
Obama & friends

Scurvy
What is the joke about this not being a Christian nation? I'm conservative but I'm not really that religious. We're not all evangelists.
Plus, you can turn off Limbaugh. I'm stuck with loser as my president. Nothing about the way he is ruining our liberty is funny to me.

one more thing
I don't like Olberman, Matthews, Jon Stuart and their kind because their views and mine are polar opposites. Instead of hating on them, I just don't listen to them. Libs hate Rush because they know deep down that he is right, and they hate being exposed as frauds. Good work.
Plus, who says that you need a PHD in order to think logically, and to understand what is happening to our country? Liberals have too many faux intellectuals that are book smart and real life ignorant. The old saying goes "those that CAN, DO. Those that can't TEACH." Why do you think that Republicans are on the side of business? Most of us have the wisdom to make capitalism work for the benefit of all of us.

If Limburger's the best you have....
Mary Grabar: "Limbaugh went back to the this country’s founding and recited the Preamble to the Declaration of Independence."

Uh, never mind that Limburger said that it was from the Constitution:

"We want every American to be the best he or she chooses to be. We recognize that we are all individuals. We love and revere our founding documents, the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. [Applause] We believe that the preamble to the Constitution contains an inarguable truth that we are all endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, among them life. [Applause] Liberty, Freedom. [Applause] And the pursuit of happiness. [Applause] Those of you watching at home may wonder why this is being applauded. We conservatives think all three are under assault. [Applause] Thank you. Thank you."

Here is the Constitution's Preamble: "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

husker
I never throw the first punch, I just hit back hard.

Rush immediately attacks anyone who disagrees with him and, more often than not, initiates feuds for ratings.

Well done...and there's more
"Dear Republican Senators" is an open letter that would help them get right with what Rush represents--which is actually the salvation of the Republican Party and of America itself. Check it out at http://www.brushfires-of-freedom.com/dearrs.html

Also "The Real Limbaugh Legacy" will open some eyes...at Paul Gable's http://www.brushfires-of-freedom.com/legacy.html

jim
"His arrogance is actually a joke to irritate liberals, but libs never seem to get the joke."

And Obama's speech about America not being a Christian nation was really a big liberal in-joke that you conservatives just didn't seem to get.

why get so
worked up over a radio show? If Rush is of no consequence then pretend like he doesn't exist. I like him 3rd, behind Hannity and Mark Levin. His arrogance is actually a joke to irritate liberals, but libs never seem to get the joke.

jeramy from NY
From your 2:16 p.m. post: "But Rush is a pompass @ss who alienates ANYONE who EVER disagrees with him."

"if you rebuke and persecute anyone who has the audacity to hold an opinion different than your own, you are a moron."

Do you even think before your write a post like that?

Welcome to the club, moron.

"kaycee" is a shining example!
If there were any lingering doubts about the state of modern American public schools, kaycee provides the evidence in glowing prose!

From kaycee's 1:56 p.m. post: "limpballs is a disgusting piece of a human being, he's not humane i would personally love to throw fatso under the bus. i can't stand steele as well he's a sellout, kissing no good white folks a@@ for publicity. he should be ashame to even call himself a AA. and to the rest of you racist OBAMA haters suck up. (MY PRESIDENT IS BLACK)"

How about that!

What's really sad is that kaycee probably was on the honor roll for getting good grades in high school English.

So much for the self-esteem movement in education.



talent scout
"I love Rush, but my Favorites are Mark Levin and Mike Savage."

I'm curious about something: how old are you?

Limbaugh
Well, first of all, it is Limbaugh who identifies himself as an entertainer. I have heard him say this every time he has been attacked as a rabble-rouser and propagandistic hate-monger.

Second, the label "presenter of intellectual and philosophical issues" hardly fits a man who operates on sensationalistic hyperbole and highly dramatized distortion. It is Limbaugh's show biz style, his mocking and distorting and sneering and ridiculing and exaggerating and lying and his dealing in absolutes, and not just his substance that appeals to his lowbrow audience.

If you think I'm wrong, take Limbaugh off the air and in his place put Thomas Sowell and watch the show's ratings drop. I do not, for example, think that Dr Sowell would make an unequivocal statement that the sitting President of the United States had committed murder, absent any proof of such a statement. Somewhere along the line in those many years of boring old elitist higher education, Sowell learned that his opinion does not constitute fact and that getting a mob to cheer what you say does not confirm your speech as fact.

Limbaugh, who by his mother's admission took three semesters of college, flunked every course, and then quit and went on the radio, did not have to learn what Sowell had to learn.

Personally, I think Rush Limbaugh is a brilliant choice for Chairman of the Republican Party. In fact, I think you folks should run him for President.

An example of liberal fascism
brought to us by kaycee:

"limpballs
is a disgusting piece of a human being, he's not humane i would personally love to throw fatso under the bus."

Comment: My what respect for diversity, tolerance, and love. All things espoused by liberals. What we have here is kaycee becoming rabid at the merre mention of Rush. Just like Pavlovs dog. Clearly a person in need of anger management classes.


"i can't stand steele as well he's a sellout, kissing no good white folks a@@ for publicity. he should be ashame to even call himself a AA.'

Comment: And look here, and admitted racist. Either have a left wingnut school of thought or you are not Black. My, my someone needs diversity training.

" and to the rest of you racist OBAMA haters suck up. (MY PRESIDENT IS BLACK) "

Comment: Wrong again. YOUR president is a mix of both black and white. Did you forget that? Or are you too much of a degenerate intellectual pygmy to have noticed?

Rush.
All he cares about at the end of the day is ratings, because that keeps him on the air. He'll say that we are all trapped inside the Matrix if it'll get him ratings.

Myself, I like listening to music on my way to and from work everyday, and people could debate all day about the pros and cons of the bands I choose to listen to, but it is my choice.

At the end of the day, believe what you believe in because it makes sense to you, not because someone tells you it is the right way to think.

great article by a lefty
http://www.openleft.com/user/Chris%20Bowers


Lets just take this for something that I hear daily.....by the moonbats

It illustrates what the left is doing by essentially creating a popularity contest out of elections......

This "concern trolling" apparently this geek thinks is effective. And, well. Maybe to a geek it is......

The kooks are really out on this one
Rush IS an intellectual, and he IS entertaining, in as far as hearing the truth spoken with eloquence and humor is entertaining.

Say what you will, Rush really IS right 99.7% of the time (or is that 99.8%?).

No such thing as an individual socialist
They cannot exist as individuals.
Only as party members.

They become party members and allow the ones at the top of their party do all their thinking for them.
Its why they come here and blast away at the "collective" "right-wing" republican conservative.
They never come and talk to any of us as real living human beings as individuals.
They think and speak according to the collective thinking of their leaders.

This is why they hate men like Rush Limbaugh.
He is an individual who is not intimidated by their personal attacks on him, and he laughs.
I love Rush, but my Favorites are Mark Levin and Mike Savage.
Those guys do not take crap from anyone, real individuals.
========================

anderson659 writes:- 1:52 PM EST
talent scout
Yesterday my paper reported that a recent PEW poll states that 37% of Americans identify themselves as conservative and 19% identify as liberals.
=======================

Adults who have to earn a living do not take their earnings and good to distribute throughout the neighborhood.
Their kids may give some of their parents possessions away, but the ones who have to work for them do not, except out of charity.

Takes an unthinking fool to support socialism as per marx and obama

jeramy
"You guys should run Rush/Cheney as your 2012 Presidential Ticket."

There would be issues with that. You can't attract the conservative base with a presidential candidate who's soft on drugs and a vice presidential candidate who supports gay marriage.

Robert
"He makes liberals foam at the mouth. That alone is enough to excuse his faults."

That's true, he does. I firmly believe everyone's entitled to an opinion regardless of circumstance, but I do tend to go right up the wall when a fat drug addict who never bothered with college starts lecturing on self-restraint, drugs, or education. A guy who never served a day in his life nor bothered to run for office lecturing on the military, torture, etc. A man with a demonstrated lack of understanding of the scientific method lecturing on science. The list goes on.

Yeah, he makes us foam at the mouth, but I'm not sure I'd be proud of that. Pelosi makes conservatives foam at the mouth, but that doesn't get my engine humming. She's an idiot. We should be raising the level of discourse in this country, not lowering it to annoy the other side.

Thank you, Mary.
The wingbat responses make it clear you hit a nerve.
Rush's audience has increased significantly since since the O-man took office. The more Rush gets talked about, the more his audience increases and the more people get to hear for themselves and decide whether to believe him or not. More often that not, they'll find themselves agreeing. Much to the chagrin of many of the lefties posting here, I'm sure.

"Merely"
"Merely" indeed! I recommend two mind-bending essays--both by C.S. Lewis, who made "mere" Christianity something of a household phrase, giving the adjective its older and more interesting meaning--for anyone who would sincerely like to think a little more clearly about religion, language, philosophy, science, politics and history. Both of them started me thinking in a new way, and both have provided critical thinking tools I now apply regularly, even with emotion-laden issues. The first is fairly easy reading because it is by a self-confessed theological amateur; the other is almost frighteningly challenging, since it comes from the very center of Mr. Lewis' professional expertise, which was language and literature, and it makes no concessions to ignorance or inattention. The essays are "The Weight of Glory," from a collection of the same name and "Bluspels and Flalansferes," from Rehabilitations and Other Essays. For anyone with a halfway open mind, these essays compel astonished attention. That is to say, they are entertaining.

Are they "merely entertainers"?
Those who would dismiss Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, and other popular conservative talk show hosts as "merely entertainers" should perhaps consider that word "entertain." The French word tenir ("to hold") is the root verb there, and holding audiences and thus ratings is what these people do, much to the frustration of those who would love to have such large audiences but don't have a clue on how to go about it.

I don't really have a problem with anyone who solves the problem of attracting a large and loyal group of listeners. But i have a serious problem with that word "merely." President Obama has attracted large and loyal audiences using a strong voice, a slickly professional style and a lot of windy, meaningless abstractions (Hope! Change! Values!), yet no one on the left dismisses him as merely an entertainer. The dismissive tem is applied exclusively to those who disagree with left wing policies. And it is almost always--perhaps I should say ALWAYS--misused because no human being is "merely" anything in the popular sense of that word. The truth is, as James Baldwin once wrote, complex in a way that the "people in the battle don't want to think about."

I happen to have studied just enough about Rush, Michael, Glenn, and some other "entertainers" to know that their American stories are every bit as interesting and compelling as that of President Obama's current SCOTUS nominee.


george
Name one of your libber radio hosts that donated one million dollars to the families of the military and then challenged your followers to match it and they went out with a whimper!!!!
Sure the man is in it for the money, but he makes some of it work for GOOD!

One reason to love Rush
He makes liberals foam at the mouth. That alone is enough to excuse his faults.

Thanks for...
... a well written defense of Rush. Yes, he DOES make a strong intellectual case for conservatism (though I admit sometimes he pushes a point beyond its supporting facts). BTW, is there anywhere I can order "I HOPE OBAMA FAILS TOO" bumper stickers?


Rush, the "intellectual"
If there is a more mediocre man in American public life today than Rush Limbaugh, I have yet to encounter him. His style is preaching to the converted in a taunting, aggressive manner, armed with a highly selective use of facts and an incapacity to consider the reasonableness of any point of view beyond his own.

Who does Rush Limbaugh speak for? Let's put it this way: He doesn't speak for me.

Mary Grabar must be an aspiring stand-up comic.

talent scout
Yesterday my paper reported that a recent PEW poll states that 37% of Americans identify themselves as conservative and 19% identify as liberals.

There are twice as many conservatives as liberals.

Liberals are in the teens. Give Obama another few months and that figure will be down around 10-12% for liberals.

Agreed
"Rather than distance ourselves from Rush Limbaugh, conservatives ought to embrace him and spread his intellectual message far and wide."

Please! Oh please! Keep embracing Rush Limbaugh.

And Ann Coulter! and Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and Fox News!

We beg of you, please keep embracing them all!

Personally, I think Rush Limbaugh should be drafted to run for office!

GEORGE (1:16 PM EST)
LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT! You think everyone involved in the news media takes no salary for their endeavors...except RUSH LIMBAUGH?

You think RUSH LIMBAUGH takes statements out of context? More than 20 million American Citizen Patriots listen to his broadcasts for the TRUTH!

If RUSH LIMBAUGH is a LIAR nobody would listening to him as they do listen to liberal radio, watch liberal TV nor do they read liberal newspapers…because their news?...is always slanted to the left, biased and full of LIES!

RUSH LIMBAUGH is NOT conceited, he is being facetious and mimicking WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY, Jr.
Finally, my good man, it is US AGAINST THE SOCIALISTS AGENDA OF THE LEFTEST LIBERALS.

Uh, Mary?
"NPR covers actual low-brow topics such as hip-hop and rock music that no NPR listener actually listens to."

I listen to NPR quite a bit. I also listen to both hip-hop and rock music. Did you really mean to channel the get-off-my-lawn guy there? These kids today, with their low-brow rock and roll and the hippity hoppity!

Meanwhile you've got the guy who dresses like an undertaker at a disco spending all his time playing hilariously bad Paul Schenklin CDs.

Sad, sad shape
This column misses the point. It is not Rush's job to do the intellectual heavy lifting, nor is he capable. He is filling in a gap here because our intellectuals, including Victor Davis Hanson, failed to do their basic job. (VDH is one of the national greatness do-gooders in the area of national defense/foreign policy).

Maybe if Ms. Grabar and others had spent more time thinking about what conservatism properly is instead of sucking up to George Bush, pretending that everything he did was wonderful and conservative, and cognitively vegetating for eight long years, these defective intellectuals would have had no support and would have all been fired or gone out of business. Then we could have had real thinkers come in, and we wouldn't be in this situation now.

The conservative movement had better find some real intellectuals, and fast. You can start with the Ayn Rand Institute.

Entertainment?
Rush has as much right to entertain us as the reprehensible crap we see in the entertainment industry today. We have the right to use our on and off switch. Thomas Sowell said so well in his article today that Rush does not set a policy that will effect our future. Rush opens eyes and ears. You can take it from there and do as you please. Rush Limbaugh is the sand in our shorts. The left wants the sand out of our shorts in order to infect us in other ways. Let the man talk. Are we afraid of talk? We should fear silence, not talk.

GEORGE (1:16 PM EST)
lET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT! You think everyone involved in the news media takes no salary for their endeavors...except RUSH LIMBAUGH?

You think RUSH LIMBAUGH takes statements out of context? More than 20 million American Citizen Patriots listen to his broadcasts for the TRUTH!

If RUSH LIMBAUGH is a liar NOBODY

Throw Michael Steele out
Michael Steele is wuss. He should be thrown out. Strength is what is needed in the party.

I'm glad I didn't renew my membership for the RNC, they're not getting a dime from me until they toughen up a bit, and start telling people how it is. We cannot play defense with freedom - freedom is a radical concept throughout history, and if we try and protect it by being conciliatory and having "large tents" than we will undoubtedly lose.

The most scandalous part of this is that we act like the dems are the radical ones... there is NOTHING radical about government domination throughout history, and there is certainly nothing hip and cool about it.

Awesome
Rush is awesome. Everytime he spews out more bile, the republican "favorable opinion" drops a little more.

The country is turning a little more blue every day.



George
As you come to slander a better man than you will ever be, you do not have the same thing to say about all the entertainers who speak up for the politics of destruction the democrats represent.

Even if the republican party is filled with hypocrites, the democrat party is filled with insanity.

Garafalo, Mike Moore, Al Franken and such.

Long list of such

http://fromtheleft.wordpress.com/2007/12/19/high-profile-su pport-for-obama-grows/

Michael Steele
Will never speak for me of any conservative.

He is exactly why republicans are losing elections.
Hypocrites

You've Got to be Kidding
William F. Buckley Jr. was an intellectual from the republican party. Rush Limbaugh routinely calls names, takes quotes out of context and bends the truth to fit his world view. I think Mr. Buckley would be appalled by Rush Limbaugh. John Stewart is comedy, so by comparing him to Rush, I guess the author is saying that Rush is comedy too. Too bad Rush just comes off as self-centered and conceited, not funny. He appeals to peoples most base instincts and promotes an us vs. them mentality. But then, he's not interested in telling the truth, he's interested in keeping his audience because regardless of what he says or what this author thinks, he's only in it for the money. If you think otherwise, you're not too bright.

NPR
To be fair, the only "hip" music I've come across lately has been though pieces on NPR. That makes me feel old.

Why Dear God
did we not elect Ken Blackwell head of the RNC? That man would NEVER throw Limbaugh, Hannity or Levin under Obama's bloody bus for him.


-Ray
NRA Life Member
Soli Deo Gloria!!
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.