Ordinary people view Rush as a dangerous Svengali *UPDATED*
Bookworm on Apr 20 2010 at 2:30 pm | Filed under: Media matters
If you’d been around in 1894, you would instantly have recognized the name “Svengali.” He was the chief villain in George du Maurier’s blockbuster novel Trilby. The Svengali plot-line was a simple one: Trilby was an innocent (and tone deaf) laundress and model living in fin de siecle Paris. Svengali hypnotized her into bec0ming a great singer and the toast of the music world. When he suffered a heart attack during one of her performances, his spell over her broke, and she was left standing on stage, bewildered and humiliated. Since then, we use the word “svengali” to describe a person who steals the will of another with evil intent.
It’s become increasingly clear to me that liberals view Rush Limbaugh in precisely that light. And no, I’m not making the obvious point that the Obami and the Democratic party fear Rush’s bully pulpit and consistently demonize him. I’m talking about the rank-and-file’s fear that even listening to Rush for a moment or two causes a person to lose the will to be a liberal. Those liberals to whom I speak shy away from him, not because they disagree with what he has to say, but because they fear he will convince them that he’s right.
The following is a talk I had just the other day while driving in the car with a liberal friend who, having voted for Obama, is now deeply regretting that decision:
Me: How would you like to do something completely different? Let me put Rush on the radio.
Her: No, no. I don’t want to do that.
Me: Come on, you’ll like him. He’s not at all the way you’ve heard him described in the other media. He’s very well-informed, quite funny, and amazingly prescient.
Her: No, no. He’s too arrogant.
Me: Nah. That’s just an act. Give it a try, for just a few minutes.
Her: No. I can’t listen to him. [Then, as a sop:] I watch Fox sometimes.
So here we have a woman who realizes that she made a mistake voting Democrat this election, who is open to conservative news (I believe her when she says she watches Fox), yet who assiduously avoids any contact with Rush. Incidentally, this was not a one time-0nly conversation. I had virtually the same conversation with two other regret-filled liberals.
The belligerently liberal ones are equally averse to exposing themselves to Rush.
Me: I challenge you to listen to Rush for a half hour.
Him: No. He’s an idiot.
Me: Have you ever listened to him?
Him: No.
Me: Then how do you know he’s an idiot?
Him: He is. He’s a wacko. He doesn’t know anything.
Me: How do you know that?
Him: Are you trying to make me mad?
Me: No. But I do think that you should listen to him. At least then you’d have first hand knowledge of what he says and whether you agree or disagree with it.
Him: I’m not going to waste my time.
And so on, ad infinitum and definitely ad nauseum.
During the 1990s, when I was an unthinking liberal, I knew Rush was out there, but he existed on the periphery of my existence. I read Al Franken’s Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot, and laughed at how “stupid” Rush was, but I actually didn’t care about any of the core issues at stake. I had no interest whatsoever in finding out what Rush was like, because nothing he said really mattered. I was working hard at my career, getting married, starting a family, and was therefore disinterested in things political. The world seemed to be rolling along just right, with a Democratic president and a booming economy.
To give myself some retroactive credit, though, if a conservative had challenged me back then to listen to Rush, I would have done so — because I would have been certain that Rush was a big joke, and that I could have laughed at him just as Franken did. I might have expected to be bored or offended, but I wouldn’t have been worried about being mesmerized and brainwashed.
And then came September 11, 2001 and I started paying attention. I began to be concerned about what was going on around me. This concern led me to start reading anything I could get my hands on about all sorts of subjects. I read blogs, both liberal and conservative. I opened my mind to the possibility that my attachment to the Democratic party was wrong — a possibility helped by the fact that I found myself agreeing with the major political decisions George Bush was making, both regarding national security and the economy. In other words, once I realized that my old political staples were failing, I started looking for new information. I wasn’t scared of the new information but, rather, was curious.
Both my old attitude (“Sure, bring silly Rush on, ’cause he’ll be good for a laugh”) and my new attitude (“There’s something out there I need to learn about”) make it impossible for me to understand the resistance, shading into fear, that my friends and family show when confronted with the possibility that they might hear a minute or two of Rush’s mellifluous tones over the airways. They don’t seem to recognize either the possibility that they might laugh at a fool or learn from a wise man. Instead, they seem genuinely afraid that any exposure to Rush will corrupt them irreparably. Like poor Trilby, they’ll be seduced into an unsustainable way of being, only to find themselves suddenly abandoned and exposed. To them, Rush is no mere conservative; he is Satan incarnate, a tempter who will destroy their liberal souls and leave them in an endless conservative Hell.
It’s quite a high compliment to Rush that ordinary liberals believe he has extraordinary powers. It isn’t every conservative radio or talk show host who is perceived as so compelling and seductive that he can destroy people’s world view in an instant.
It’s also very frustrating to me because, in a funny way, I agree with my liberal friends that Rush can rejigger their world view very quickly. The only thing is that I don’t believe Rush works his magic through hypnotism and trickery. Instead, I think Rush’s real magic lies in his ability to view the political world as a vast chess board, one on which he can see multiple future moves; his prodigious memory; his well-informed mind; his logical analyses; and his funny persona. He convinces by appealing to our rational mind, our sense of humor, and our knowledge of the world as it is, and not as some Ivory Tower liberal tells us it should be.
So, whether by cajolery or challenge, I’m still trying to get my liberals to listen to Rush. For all the wrong reasons, they’re right about one thing: he will change their minds.
UPDATE: Welcome, Instapundit readers! As you may know, for a conservative blogger, being Instalanched is pretty much the blogging equivalent of going straight to Heaven, without any stops in between.
UPDATE II: Is it too late to say welcome to Rush Limbaugh listeners? Ironically, I was away from my computer while this whole excitement was going on, and never got the chance to say hello. I’m back now, and I’m still pretty darn excited. I hope those of you who stopped by come and visit again.
Email This Post To A Friend
187 Responses to “Ordinary people view Rush as a dangerous Svengali *UPDATED*”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I have a large extended family spread across the country. Children, siblings, nieces, nephews and grandchildren and in-laws, a lot of people, and we all keep in touch daily on facebook. Most of us are conservatives, some are not. We try not to get into political discussions, but of course it does happen. Several years ago my daughter posted a link to a very well reasoned article. She wanted her liberal brother to read it. His reply was that he did not want to read anything that changed his mind and he thought that might. He and his wife were very anti-Bush. Very vocal about it, very anti anything he did. Recently they both were commiserating over the terrible things being done and said against Obama. When they were reminded of their anti-Bush thuggery one of them walked out of the room, the other said, “Well, that was different, we know what we meant.” No arguing with politics when it is the religion of the other person.
It is not their minds they are worried about. It is their very identity. To them, the destruction of their vast Utopia is the same as a physical attack. They can neither handle the former nor the latter.
Alpha leaders exist for this express purpose. Throughout evolution, humans were weak, foolish, and all too easily killed by their own foolishness, ignorance, or sheer stupidity. Intelligence back then wasn’t rated on a standard test like the SATs. Intelligence back then was rated at how long it took you to realize that you should be running in front of ole George after George comes out of the bushes screaming in terror. Intelligence back then was rated how much you could imagine a blizzard or a famine or a winter without food, thus motivating one to plan ahead. Intelligence back then was all about how to adapt to ever changing conditions, no matter what they were, because all of them impacted human survival.
Alpha leaders exist to ensure that the people that they are leading gets what they need. No what they want, but what they need to survive.
The simple reason why your friends fear Rush is because they believe that the only source that can give them what they need to survive is the Democrat party. They are the same as those stuck in cults. They can’t get out, because they believe their life will end. If you actually raised this subject with them, they will automatically shut you out. Because the very idea that their survival is at stake has to be denied, for that is part of their mental defenses. But this has gone on for too long. It is no longer a mental defense but a mental defect. It is not aiding them in survival as it was intended to be. Such mental defenses were simply to help humans cope with trauma in order to survive long enough to re-stabilize conditions. It wasn’t supposed to be there forever after.
There are many who were not invested in Leftist creed and dogma. Robin was. Neo and you were not. Helen still is.
Without alpha leaders, all you get are a bunch of con artists that can easily sway the views of anybody else. At least the hypnotist in your story produced results. Con artists like Obama can’t even produce any results that are objective in standard.
They live by the cult and they will be used by the cult. It is as simple as that. The cult wants your money. You give it to them because the cult is your route to safety, whereas money is not.
How to deprogram people that has been in a cult? Patty O’Hearst, I believe, would know.
One reason why liberals will not listen to Rush is that they are used to having other people do their thinking for them. I can’t tell you how many otherwise intelligent people I know who will not venture an opinion until they’ve checked first with PBS, the New York Times, the New Yorker, NPR, Jon Stewart or any of the other tediously left media to see what takes on things are permissible.
This results in two sources of tension for most liberals who are challenged to listen to Limbaugh:
1. Since one cannot know in advance what Rushbo is going to be talked about, one cannot check with the Proper Authorities to discern the proper responses to his riffs. Liberals know they are unprepared to answer his arguments as they’re listening. That realization makes them feel stupid.
2. Since they are used to having other people think for them, they realize that they are also vulnerable to being persuaded by a superior mind. Ohmigaw, what if Limbaugh turns out to be smart? Will they have enough willpower to resist? What will happen if he begins to reach them? Think of the consequences: The horror of not getting bedded by sexy like-minded libs! The agony of ostracism as all the good party invites dry up! Having to actually think rather than emote and react!
And worst of all, the sickening realization that all this time they’ve been looking down on people who are smarter than they are.
The Left, being composed of automatons, are naturally obsessed with making sure things always stay win/lose.
Alpha leaders are only concerned with win/win scenarios. If they do everything in their power to attempt to get a deal going where all parties gain, and one party then just up and decides they want it all for themselves, then alpha leaders are going to choose the win/lose route. Meaning, they live and win, and the megalomaniacs die. Or they will choose the lose/lose proposition. We die, you die, and we get a double kill.
It’s obvious with the ramp up in violence given Obama’s psychotic leadership influence that people are getting more and more stressed. Their resources are being downgraded constantly. Alpha leaders have had their negotiation attempts at win/win deals shattered and ridiculed. Obama and people like him think they can win, while everybody else can burn. We say, however, that if they refuse a deal of mutual benefit, then we’re just going to go back to humanity’s natural way of solving problems.
That’s just how it is. Human tribes have solved issues like this very simply in the past. Kill the problem people and then steal their stuff. It’s what happens everywhere else in the world even now. Whenever the federal or centralized government fails, the tribes take over. Clans take over. Local and petty dictators take over.
Fake liberal cogs aren’t alphas of anything. They can’t lead. They can only follow. It is not their place, in their minds, to decide for themselves what is or is not. Their existence is only to follow the dictates of the mighty and the elect.
Human free will allowed us to create mutually beneficial relationships. Unlike with animal instinct which is inflexible, we can take any situation on earth and make it so that everyone benefits. But that takes alpha leadership. In the absence of alpha leadership, all we get is a bunch of humans looting and killing because they can get what they want that way. If the losing party gets wiped out, that’s the losing party’s problem. However, that begets a cycle of vendetta and violence. Of course, the Left likes such cycles. They feed and thrive on them.
The Left always talks about the cycle of violence in Palestine. Had the Left and the Palestinians been eliminated, there would be no cycle of violence. That’s why the Left tries to stay alive. So long as they are alive, there is hope of getting more people killed.
Human free will allows us to make a deal for the benefit of all. Yet the Left would stand in the way of that and return us to the state of animal like innocence. The Left are not the only enemies humanity has. But they are probably one of the most loud and obnoxious.
PLEASE Liberals=Ordinary people — PRAY it never happens. They are delusional!
I have to admit that talk radio turned me into a fervent Conservative. I started listening out of boredom back in the early 90′s when I was driving in the car all day as a salesman. There’s only so many times you can listen to Led Zeppelin or ZZ Top…
I wasn’t really a liberal before listening, I was an agnostic, easily swayed by sound bytes. I skipped voting for many years because of my attitude that it was always a case of the “lesser of two evils.”
Listening to Rush for hours on end, day after day, the logic of it all began to sink in. He simply makes good sense, and has a good time (often at the expense of liberals) making it.
Another surprising source of good sense (and entertainment) was Dr. Laura. She vocalized thoughts on subjects I had never really paid much mind to, like “Love is a behavior, not a feeling.”
After 9-11, Dr. Laura’s show on local talk radio was replaced by the upstart Glenn Beck. Where Rush makes sense on a cerebral scale, Beck is more of an everyman. His show was much more entertaining before things became so seriously wrong with this country in the past 2 years.
In the battleground of ideas, conservatives will always win. Liberals can only offer empty platitudes (think Obowmao presidential campaign) and “feelings.”
If Dr. Laura was right about love, the man sitting in the White House must really hate us.
Old American saying: Tell me where a man gets his corn pone, and I’ll tell you where he gets his opinions.
A very high percentage of “progressives” work in industries–academia, K-12 public education, social work, publishing, even segments of advertising and finance–in which it could be dangerous to one’s career health to dissent from the standard political line. Much easier, unless one has exceptional courage, to avoid anything that might expose one to dangerous ideas.
Think how hard it is to admit to someone else that not only is the other person correct, and you are wrong, but also to admit that your own actions actually may have hurt that person, or people, or country.
Of course, this is a “touchy, feely” perspective, but that is how the rank and file libs “think”.
And there is always the pediatric perspective. The libs shout “I won’t grow up” (because I don’t want the responsibility of making a mystake)
And yes, love is a behavior that can be learned. It needs daily work. Then the feeling is becomes more fundamental. And Obama does…..
Al
Ah, Book…so close yet so far: the clue is in the story you presented.
It isn’t that Rush is Svengali, it is that he puts your Liberal friends’ hypnotic world view in grave danger. Rush’s program is the clap that would wake them from reality, leaving them confused on the stage, out of their comfort zone and lost in a world they don’t understand. I suspect that they know this and that this is why they fear Rush or any other conservative point of view.
Svengali? That’s Obama an his minions and oh what a dreamworld he has woven for them: a deep sleep they do not want disturbed by simple facts.
Next time you have such a conversation in the car, ask you Liberal friends, “why are you afraid?”
[...] Bookworm Room - Ordinary people view Rush as a dangerous Svengali [...]
[...] FEAR THE HYPNOTIC POWER OF . . . Rush Limbaugh? [...]
Their refusal to listen to Rush is just their defense of their world-view, which is too delicate to withstand exposure to facts or clue.
I feel a tremor in the Force.
I think it’s interesting that you suspect fear of hypnosis. Right before the election, this long PDF went into circulation:
http://www.pennypresslv.com/Obama%27s_Use_of_Hidden_Hypnosis_techniques_in_His_Speeches.pdf
The thesis of the article is that Barack Obama used hypnotic techniques during his campaign to bond his followers to him. I have no expertise in the matter, but it is a very, very interesting article and worth reading if you haven’t seen it before.
It could simply be that Obama’s disillusioned followers really do perceive, at some internal level, that they were mentally manipulated into voting for Obama, and are rightly afraid of ever listening to someone who they fear might do the same to them again.
Neuro-linguistic programming works from what I have seen, unrelated to the fields of psychotherapy.
It’s something people have learned to use to con people, pick up women using seduction, or provide security and leadership to a community.
Some few people are very or entirely resistant to hypnosis. This can be because they have essentially created a counter-hypnotic command in themselves that says they, and only they, get to tell them what is or is not true, who or what they are. Others have very well defended personal boundaries that prevent anybody, perhaps even including trusted family members, from telling them what is or is not true, what is or is not good/evil, what is or is not appropriate. People have personal space, defined as their thoughts and emotions which they and they only control. Without the proper defense of such space, one can allow others, therapists or hypnotists, to encroach upon this space and slowly make it their own.
Others voluntarily abdicate part of their personal space for social reasons. Such as to get help from a therapist. To confide in a friend or family member. To obtain lovers and create long lasting relationships. Family and kids. Careers and goals.
There is also the scientific factor. There are 3 primary drivers in your brain. The neo-cortex, or rational mind. What the document may refer to as the critical factor. Then there is the sub-conscious monkey brain, the emotional level. The monkey brain has a lot of imagination. It is the part of you that tells you that you are going to die if you let that other guy humiliate you and not do anything back. It is the part that says winter is coming so you should store food now, while the grass is green. It is the part that controls all the social aspects of how you perceive life to be. When the monkey is driving the bus, your neo-cortex is not. While you may think you are in control and acting rationally, the one really in control is the monkey, a crack addicted monkey even.
The third driver that can be driving your bus is the lizard brain. This is the machine, the killer, the mother that goes werewolf to defend her child, the men and women who survive extreme physical hazards and conditions. It has nothing to do with your monkey brain. In fact, it will push your monkey brain right out of the driver’s seat and even throw him off the bus and then under the bus. *Bump*
The third driver, what can be commonly called the lizard brain, controls much of the adrenaline, endorphin production, and epinephrine production of the body. It also controls unconscious breathing, heartbeats, and various other autonomic processes. It is not so much that when you feel emotional, that your body then responds, so much as when you feel emotional your body starts undergoing a state change. A state change that will inevitably put you into behavior modes such as fight/flight/submit/x once your body and brain gets to a certain status. At that point, your pride, ego, and feelings of social discomfort goes away and is replaced by pure instinctual survival.
Hypnosis must always seek to place the monkey in the driver’s seat. Things like 9/11 tend to put the lizard brain in the seat. And things like reading philosophy, hearing conservatives, and using logic tends to put the neo-cortex into the seat. Hypnosis has to bypass those two things first, to work. But once bypassed, then it is easy. Once the monkey is in the seat, it is easy to tell the monkey something about what “could happen” like “right wing violence” and the monkey automatically imagines this in the future and then believes it to be true.
“If I turn my back on this guy facing me down, he’ll chase after me and I’ll be hurt”
That’s the kind of thinking going on. It has nothing to do with rational judgment. It has nothing to do with your survival, since leaving the place would preserve your safety. So would running. But your monkey brain tells you that you shouldn’t do this. Because it is on crack, obviously, and also in control of you.
Btw, this is nothing new from Obama. While he may be more practiced and powerful a con artist, the entire Left and the whole Democrat party cogs have been doing the exact same thing to your children in America for decades.
The Left are composed of tools. Weapons, essentially. Designed and manufactured for an express purpose. But whether they do good or evil depends upon the user.
Treating them as fully self-aware humans with free will is inconsistent with the reality of what they are. Until they are freed from the shackles of serfdom and slavery, they aren’t free to decide anything. They didn’t like us liberating Iraqis because they don’t like us liberating anybody. Liberation, must always mean slavery and never mean the exercise of free will by individuals. That is a critical danger to the Left’s dogma and Utopia. It is why, not just for political reasons, they fought so hard to make Iraq fail.
People that have to deal with the environment and are practiced in letting their lizard brain take the driver’s seat, can often know (because their lizard brain or neo-cortex tells them) that something isn’t right.
However, for most civilized sheep, they have never allowed their lizard brain to take the driver’s seat. Thus it is now a contest between rational neo-cortext and monkey brain. Guess which one is more powerful for most individuals.
[...] and the fear of Rush Limbaugh It is not their minds they are worried about. It is their very identity. To them, the destruction of their vast Utopia is the same as a [...]
Yeah, you have the lib majority who are terrified of BEING liberated — they might then have to think, and make their own decisions, and the lib leader minority who are afraid that their useful idiots will BE liberated.
When these people see nazis and the kkk in the freakin’ TEA PARTIERS, they are seeing — projecting — what they fear in themselves: their own lizard brain. (HT, Y) Remember “monsters from the id” in the movie, Forbidden Planet?
[...] …as Svengali? [...]
I’m a little too old to have been converted to conservatism by talk radio, but the principle was the same.
I grew up a liberal in a university town, and stayed a liberal through college and grad school. You might think that getting married and having a job wold have done the trick, but it didn’t. It wasn’t that I went out of my way to avoid conservative views, but it just seemed pointless since they so obviously were wrong. Cold-hearted bastards who simply did not care.
Well, it was early 1980 as I recall, and I heard that Milton Friedman was doing a series (Free to Choose) on PBS. Friedman, that monetarist crackpot. How could anyone have such crazy ideas given that everyone with an ounce of sense was a Keynesian? Why not watch and get a laugh? I was firm in my beliefs.
Yeah, right. My liberalism didn’t even last through the first of ten episodes. Each episode was a half hour of Friedman making his case, and the second half hour was a round table discussion with an equal mix of liberals/socialists and conservatives. Some of the libs, even famous ones like Michael Harrington, were embarrassing. They talked high flowing rhetoric that didn’t mean a thing. How could I have been so stupid?
There is a lesson to be learned. Being a liberal is all about feeling good about yourself. And the key to feeling good about yourself is to feel the opposite about conservatives. Of course, some are true believers, but many are just like I was. They simply had never let themselves be exposed to other views. They don’t want to think conservatives actually have a case; they are simply more comfortable thinking of conservatives as greedy, selfish, stupid and sometime evil people.
In my opinion, Milton Friedman was the best. No one, before or since, has made a better case for free market capitalism than he did. Get a lib to watch Free to Choose (it is still available on dvd) and few will remain a liberal if they watch the whole thing. See clips on youtube of Friedman and Phil Donahue – there are several, but here is my favorite: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWsx1X8PV_A
I remember the first time I listened to Rush. It was in the 1990′s. My husband had been listening for some time and telling me about him. I would say “Shhhhh! Don’t EVER tell anyone you listen to him!” I was HORRIFIED because all I knew of Rush was what I had heard or read in the MSM. And then one time as we drove home from my mother’s house, I was captive in the car and he put Rush on. It was a “Best of Rush” Memorial Day or something and I heard a whole panoply of his monologues. I had the reaction that all liberals fear to have – HE MADE SENSE. I AGREED WITH HIM. I am now a long time Rush babe. I love Rush. I listen to his first half hour everyday in my car during lunch. I have my Rush spot, a shady place in a theatre parking lot. I love that 30 minutes each day… I have had the conversation you have had with angry liberals many times. One told me she ‘heard’ that Rush refers to feminists as Femi-nazi’s – I asked her- “but have you ever heard the context? You would agree! I have heard you say some of the same things about feminists!” But n0 – they will never listen. They have no clue. Camille Paglia loves Rush. I think she agrees with him – I think he has tipped her, but she will never admit it.
Excellent analysis.
Liberals claim they are open minded, yet they can’t abide the thought of listening to him for a mere half hour. I have a liberal relative who, when I poke a hole in a liberal talking point, yells at me, “I don’t want to talk about that.”
If anyone read the reaction to the NY Times adding a second conservative columnist William Kristol a couple of years ago, you would have thought Atilla the Hun was taking over the Times. “How could the Times deface its sacrosanct pages with a second conservative?”
You are right. Liberals don’t want their religion challenged. It bothers them not so much what Rush is saying (they simply won’t listen anyway), but that others are listening and being “converted.”
I wouldn’t say it rests within their survival instincts. That is part of the issue, but the imagination of a potential future threat is the due property of the monkey. In the context of social pressure, the monkey is amazingly effective. It can imagine and think up all kinds of “threats” that are real in the future.
The lizard part doesn’t deal with the future. It deals with the now. It’s what happens when snipers go into the zone. It’s what you do when you are being shot at, not asking “is he shooting at me”. It is when you answer “He Is Shooting At Me”.
I listened to Rush in Sacramento before he went national. People would be surprised how he upset local far-right Christians when he did his fake play-the-record-backwards-and-hear-the-devil routine for several days to make fun of Satanic record burnings.
I tell my liberal friends who judge Rush without listening to him, “You sound just like those whacko fundamentalist Christians who ban books, music, or movies without reading, listening, or seeing them. You, my friend, are the same kind of fundamentalist.” That gets them every time…
Their projection is a complex process but it has some simple elements.
For example, they don’t want to admit that they themselves are the insecure ones. Insecure enough, so enraged at their own helplessness, full of so much self-loathing, that they just plain want to self-medicate by hurting others.
But at the same time, they have to tell themselves that they are on the moral high ground, that violence is wrong. But they also need to hurt others to relieve their own stress and emotions. Instead of looking at this contradiction internally and resolving the issue, they cover it up and pretend it doesn’t exist. And an easy way to do that is to (point at the Tea Party) use them as medication. Now they have found something that they can easily justify as hating and hurting. Because the TP people are advocating and using violence, so it is only right that we try to stop them, darou. This justifies letting all the hate out of these Leftist activists, while at the same time claiming that they aren’t the ones doing anything violent. Or that the Tea Party “started it”.
Like we haven’t heard that before. The police have heard this, I guarantee you.
http://genus.cogia.net/index.htm This link is an out of print book, School of Darkness by Bella Dodd, one-time communist who describes her involvement and the manipulations of the party during the 1930′s and 1940′s. The same race-baiting, name-calling, community organizing, and fact-spinning that the current regime utilizes (and this was pre-Alinksy!). Everyone should be aware that this ideology was a long-time coming, fought back along the way, but now in power. Afterall, BO’s mentor was communist Frank Marshall Davis.
Conservative Casserole
Posted by Barb1 on Tuesday, February 24, 2009 2:29:12 PM
INGREDIENTS:
1 PART: Getting married in the 70’s, paying 900.00 “marriage tax” while my single, pregnant friend received a one year leave of absence at her teaching job at a public school, free health insurance, food stamps, and welfare as the father of her child continued working and driving a large SUV.
3 PARTS: Daily listening of Dr. Laura to re-learn what was taught in Sunday school and washed out of me in 12 years of government education – that we are responsible for our own choices and actions, have a moral duty to take care of ourselves, that we are not a victim just because life throws us a curve, and that common sense is not that common anymore.
10 PARTS: Heeding my parents’ advice (and not my liberal brother’s) about Rush Limbaugh, actually listening to him (learning that he is not an idiot, that he fairly presents the liberal viewpoint by playing their own words, teaching listeners volumes about conservatism,) and discovering that he is indeed a great patriot who loves this country.
30 PARTS: Rediscovering God while raising a family and knowing deep inside that there is more to life than just existing here on earth, resulting in joining a Bible-believing church and consulting the Good Book for guidance rather than Oprah, Dr. Phil or the Hollywood glitterati.
COMBINE the above ingredients as listed and stew slowly over 20 years.
SEASON with daily sprinkling of FOX News, the Drudge Report and World Net Daily.
NOTE: for spicier flavor, combine with Rick Santelli’s call to arms (http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1039849853) and SERVE WITH TEA!
“Rush is no mere conservative; he is Satan incarnate”…
As a blogger, there are many things that one looks to happen once a post goes up. You hope it’ll garner many comments. You hope it’ll be linked to by other respected bloggers. You hope it’ll even be linked to……
Hard for me to believe that I’m the first to notice this, but there you go.
Listening to Rush this morning in the 10:00 a.m. (Pacific time) and late in the hour, my ears stood straight up as he said that many people had been sending him something that The Bookworm had written, and then he READ THIS POST.
I was yelling at my wife, and cheering!! Then I went in the other room and sent Bookworm an e-mail recommending that she call whoever handles her server to up the capacity. Then I tried to log on to the BookwormRoom, and sure enough – no service!!
Hurrah!!
I’m a conservative-leaning independent. When Rush was just starting up and I was an unenthusiastic Democrat, I listened to him, expecting to hear utter evil, including the n-word thrown around liberally (heh). To my vast surprise, he sounded pretty reasonable and utterly unlike what liberals were saying about him. That alone started me wondering how trustworthy liberals really were.
I think that’s why liberals have been inoculated against him. The mere realization that he’s nowhere nearly as bad as his detractors say would be a significant crack in their worldview. And they know that.
What do you call it when you’re slashdotted by BOTH Instapundit and el Rushbo?
Earl,
I heard him read it too! It was awesome!
Congrats, Bookworm, you’ve been on the EIB network with Rush!
I call it about the most excited thing that’s happened to me since I started blogging!
This tremor in the Force, Book, seemed to be bigger than I expected.
[...] woke up this morning to discover that my post about Rush Limbaugh had been Instalanched. I was thrilled. A nod from Glenn Reynolds has two pleasures: someone [...]
Congratulations BW! Now the big question… How many hits did you get today?
TommyC and BetterKateThanEver…
Thank you both for your links…well, TommyC didn’t provide the link, but he provided the information to connect to the The Idea Channel: Search Results ,which is just as good.
I was aware of Bella Dodd’s book, and in fact have posted a couple of links to sources, but neither as good as Kate’s.
Woops. I should have provided the link for the Free to Choose dvd’s. My bad. Thanks suek for providing it. They aren’t cheap, but for anyone that can afford them, I guarantee that you’ll not regret viewing them. They are a bit dated, but they hold up very well. None of the fundamentals have changed. The companion book is cheaper and goes far deeper, but it is a lot easier to persuade someone to watch than read. Plus, the TV series is downright inspiring. I hate to put it this way, but the fact is that Friedman simply allows the liberals/socialists he talks with to make their views look shallow and just plain dumb.
As a bit of what you might call personal testimony, Milton Friedman is the only thinker who, on the basis of his opinion alone, I am willing to consider changing my view. For everyone else, I want second and third opinions as well. Outside of my parents and God, no one has influenced me more.
It’s funny how people came up a name for Keynesian economics, but Friedman economics is labeled “trickle down”. Those sly Leftists, always looking for an advertisement and con man angle.
>>They aren’t cheap, but for anyone that can afford them, I guarantee that you’ll not regret viewing them. >>
No…they’re not. But I have grandchildren…! And whether watched or read, the number of perusals are pretty unlimited. Ought to be good for the next 25 years or so – or as long as technology permits! If you consider the cost on a per-viewing basis, bet they won’t be nearly so expensive. In fact, maybe downright cheap!
I recorded all 10 episodes of Free to Choose way back when and re-watched them several times. But the tapes didn’t hold up. I bought the dvds so I could ‘indoctrinate’ my kids. I’ve done pretty well. The three oldest can vote and will certainly vote for a return to our founding principles. Two of them can really make the case for those principles. I’m still working on my two youngest, and the outlook is good.
I wish I could get Rush to plug Free to Choose. I do it at every opportunity, but my reach is somewhat limited.
Great observations and VERY similar to my own! I’m one of the Rush listeners that waited until the dust settled to check in, “post-update,” so thank you for the welcome!
It has been said that freedom is a system based on courage. I think that is at the heart of this phenomenon. Liberals have chosen to buy into the notion that “smart people” are liberal (because they so frequently insist they are so intellectual) and they “join that team,” and thoughtlessly go about their lives.
Liberalism requires nothing of them– they are “for” everything and everyone! It is a system based on cowardice and intellectual laziness and the notion that they have been wrong for all this time–worse, that they have been complicit in the overthrow of the Republic– is too disturbing for them to face. It’s far simpler to allow others to dirty themselves in the arena of ideas and they can then just side with the winner.
Hence the observation of the English economist, John Stuart Mill (which applies as much, if not more, to the “war of ideas and words”):
“War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.”
Thanks again for the warm welcome and for an very relevant piece! Best wishes for your continued success!
RdrB67
[Bear's Patriot Blog]
Liberals don’t listen to Rush because they fear they’ll be deprogrammed? Where’s the link to that survey, I’m wondering. I’ve listened to quite a bit (4-5 hours/week minimum for the last 10 years) and it’s the rare right-wing talk radio show indeed that does much more than talk about how Democrats and Liberals and Progressives are “stupid” and “want to destroy the country” and a million different minor variations on that theme. Very rarely does one hear an impassioned and informed advocacy of conservative ideals; no it’s pretty much bash the liberals, all the time. Point out how every single thing they do is wrong, and how the conservatives are correct about everything.
There are exceptions: Mike Rosen here in Colorado is probably 50/50 lib-bashing/conservative idea espousing. Savage, Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity on the other hand seem to have careers entirely based upon giving angry crackers a reason outside of their own shortcomings for why they’re so miserable. If you really want to know why liberals don’t listen to talk radio, it’s because you know, what’s the point? Most left-leaning folks (outside of those like myself with an interest in ad-hoc cultural anthropology) know right-wing talk is tribalistic chest beating with very little to offer them except a non-stop tirade of insults and dire predictions that have a habit of never coming true.
Yeah, I voted for Obama, but don’t have that many regrets, and I also don’t fit it into any of the laughable comic liberal straw men profiles presented by most of the commenters. I put myself through college, am straight, married, the father of 2 sons, know how to cook a great steak, and volunteer in my son’s cub scout pack. I don’t work in academia, the entertainment industry, etc. I’m a sysadmin, have been for 15 years. I’m not overly concerned with “feelings”, mostly I want government to stay out of folks’ bedrooms, have big issues with the war on drugs, think the tradition of secular government is a good thing, think perhaps all that phil graham-led financial dereg didn’t so much unleash the markets as it unleashed the psychos, and honestly, I don’t really have the time to follow the tennis match of political ball lobbing. Beck and Limbaugh are popular cause they get the crackers with an axe to grind all riled up vis a vis the never-ending parade of boogeymen the right is constantly trotting out as why their lives are so miserable.
I know plenty of people who used to vote Republican but think the party has been taken over by nutjobs, and they don’t listen to Rush cause they’ve got better things to do with their time. All this speculation about why libs don’t listen to right-wing talk radio is laughable. Libs don’t listen because they dont want to be insulted for hours on end by a thrice-divorced multi-jowled gasbag drug addict posing as a moral authority. It’s really pretty simple. Oh, and BTW, most people I knew who voted for Obama have never heard of Rules for Radicals except maybe as that one book they skimmed in their history of the 70s class in college.
I haven’t read Trilby, but I think I read somewhere that Svengali is also Jewish, and the novel hits all those “foreign scheming Jew” tropes.
TommyC, all the Free to Choose videos are on YouTube.
“giving angry crackers”
Who taught you to use racist terms?
” Yeah, I voted for Obama, but don’t have that many regrets”
That pretty much says it all.
Wow, Mr. Winfrey. You sure listen to a lot of radio for a working man.
>>Libs don’t listen because they dont want to be insulted for hours on end by a thrice-divorced multi-jowled gasbag drug addict posing as a moral authority.>>
Boy…that sure doesn’t sound like the Rush I’ve listened to in the past. Now granted I haven’t listened recently – time doesn’t permit – but that doesn’t sound like Beck, Limbaugh or even Hannity to me.
>>…most people I knew who voted for Obama have never heard of Rules for Radicals except maybe as that one book they skimmed in their history of the 70s class in college.>>
I must have missed that – where was that mentioned? Alinsky was “history” in the 70s? Here and I thought “Rules for Radicals” wasn’t even written until 1972. That’s some quick aging…!
You’re busted, Winfrey.
It always amazes me when you folks pretend to know what goes on on Rush to people who do.
Leftists love to accuse others of what they themselves are guilty of.
[...] To those of you who have come here to find the post Rush read on his show, here’s the link. [...]
@wwinfrey
What is constantly amazing to me (one of your “crackers” apparently with an axe to grind. for the record I don’t own an axe, just my grandfather’s 1933 springfield that saw action in the korean war) is that you out yourself as a fraud with your first statements and prove the point of this article. You claim to listen to talk radio for 4-5 hours a week for the last 10 years, and attribute attitudes to them and statements that I am not aware that any of them made or held. I am an avid listener to Rush, Hannity and Levin. That would be Mark Levin, not the Levin douche monkey who shows up ocassionnally on O’Reilly. Nobody thinks the left is essentially stupid, the conservatives of this country simply know what the end results of the left’s policies will be because we tend to take to heart the lessons of history.
How about this mold-breaking profile of a conservative that does fit the laughable molds of the left? Me: male, life-long atheist (YES – ATHEIST), fiscally conservative, socially conservative,married, pro-life, 2 kids, etc etc.
And for the record, I’m not angry with Barry as a person. I’m sure Barry is a fun guy to play hoops with and to drink a bear with. What I’m angry at is that our government is demonstrably being driven off the edge of a very tall cliff, and Barry at the moment is at the head of the progressive behemoth that is dragging us off that cliff. So it is only fair to direct our criticism to the top, and at the left in general.
And the reason why your libbie friends don’t know rules for radicals is simply because in general the libbie view point is intellectually lazy. And intellectual laziness is typically the precursor to outward and physical laziness. Which is why you couldn’t take the 30 seconds to google Rules for Radicals to find out what date it was written before you posted. And why you don’t read it and don’t dare read it because it will confirm for you what conservatives have been warning about for awhile. The book and the movement it represents shapes and continues to shape Barry and his crew’s policies and their approach to enacting those policies – namely through thuggery, demonstrable lies, manufacturing crises so they can come to the rescue, and character assassination of every group and individual that dares to question what the heck they are doing.
But don’t worry, bro. Nobody’s perfect – and we know its the best a little libbie can do, so our expectations are understandably low.
Re wwinfrey, the giveaway is always the venom. There’s a difference between being angry (which can sometimes be righteous and sometimes just be ill-temper), but venom is a distinct class of hostility. When you’re venomous, you’re not open-minded, and you do have an agenda, and it’s probably not a very pretty one either.
@wwinfrey: (with all due respect to furball2009, who’s a lot more polite than I am)
You, sir, are a liar and an idiot. Thanks for sharing.
wwinfrey,
As someone who is as well-’listened’ as you claim to be, I am sure that you are aware the people who are Republican, conservative, and religious are happier than those who are not. Our lives are probably a lot less miserable than your own. For a nice discussion of this, you can go to your favorite paper, the NY Times : http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/conservatives-are-happier-than-liberals-discuss/
Why are we happier? Because we are doers, not complainers. Oh, sure we complain, but we’re also doing something about those things that we complain about. You might notice an little example of this come November. Unlike liberals who are constantly demanding that government take care of this or that, we want government to get out of the way so we can take care of these things ourselves.
People like W here are so full of self-loathing, insecurity, and a need to find somebody to beat on, that they just plain need an external pressure valve. These people know, somewhere in their minds, that violence is wrong. But they are so angry at their own helplessness that they just want somebody that they can justify going off on and destroying for their own pleasure.
In most cases, they can restrict themselves to verbal violence. For others, however, they need a more vicarious thrill which can be seen when Bausch was attacked in NO.
You won’t ever see a clearer example of this than the habitual wife beat or child abuser. There’s not much a child can do to hurt the self-esteem or security of an adult. So obviously the adult, because he can’t beat up any other adults, goes and finds somebody weak he can beat on and justifies it as “discipline” or punishment.
These people are sickening precisely because they never, ever, take on the strong or the ruthless.
“they dont want to be insulted for hours on end by a thrice-divorced multi-jowled gasbag drug addict posing as a moral authority.”
That’s one divorce short of a Ted Kennedy.
Well played, Winfrey!
And I love the compassionate liberals like this Winfrey who beat on Rush for having gotten legitimately addicted to prescribed pain killers, went to rehab, and then spoke glowingly on the air about his experience there, and then praise their Hollywood heroes — who got addicted using drugs recreationally that they bought from criminals — for being “brave” when they go to rehab.
Submitted 04/22/10…
Here are this weeks’ Watcher’s council submissions: Council Submissions Mere Rhetoric – Academic Linguist: Palin Speaks Like A Cognitive “Toddler,” Linguistically She’s “A Child” The Razor – Clinton Holds Tea Party to Higher Standards Than Islam…
See, Winfrey, you expose how vacuous your position is when what you proffer is venomous ridicule instead of actual, factual positions.
[...] that American women as a group face systemic wage discrimination is groundless.Blogging Heaven, Bookworm Room:UPDATE: Welcome, Instapundit readers! As you may know, for a conservative blogger, being [...]
Don’t you just love Winfrey’s use of “crackers” as if using insulting names for groups of people(as long as it’s done by people on the left) is quite all right? Funny, when people on the right do it, the politically correct left comes unglued. But, of course, they never abide by their own rules, do they?
@Bill Smith: “venomous ridicule” – so what’s good for Rush is not good enough for his detractors? Or perhaps when he says things like “liberals have no souls”, that’s model Christian behaviour? Seems like I learned in Sunday School that we’ve all got souls. BTW, you can justify the fact that Rush is an opiate addict to yourself any way you want. Fact is, he was doctor shopping and buying them illegally from his housekeeper, both of which are criminal activities. I’ve had friends who got hooked on painkillers as a result of back surgery but their problem was getting off of them, not worrying about whether or not the housekeeper’s husband was gonna come through with another cigar box of “blue babies”. Also, I don’t recall my post praising any hollywood heroes — you must have me confused for the straw man you’ve erected in my place. Honestly I could care less how Rush maintains his serontonin and dopamine levels, it’s the _hypocrisy_ of a dope-addicted, 3-time marriage failure, draft dodging fatso who gets caught coming back from the Dominican Republic with non-prescribed viagra making millions pointing the finger at anyone else that makes me uninterested in say, a Rush 24/7 Subscription. But hey, you just look the other way and go buy your non-hybrid seeds and gold and wait for the apocalypse that ain’t coming.
@Suek: “You sure listen to a lot of radio for a working man.” – ever heard of a commute? ever heard of jobs that require one to visit clients on site? i guess it’s easier just to call me a liar. whatever. you’re just some nut in the comments section (as, i suppose, i am as well). i don’t really care one way or another if you believe me or not. it’s fascinating though, that you’d rather believe a lie, that is, that liberals only exist because they’re deaf to conservative “truths”. perhaps what’s really happening is, like i said, preaching to the choir never converted anyone, and if you’re not interested in conversion and persuasion then you’ve got a long way to go before you’ll hold the Oval Office again.
Have you people noticed yet, that whenever they have a choice of who to respond to, they have a very selective criteria of who they will and will not respond to?
“it’s the _hypocrisy_ of a dope-addicted, 3-time marriage failure, draft dodging fatso who gets caught coming back from the Dominican Republic with non-prescribed viagra making millions pointing the finger at anyone else that makes me uninterested in say, a Rush 24/7 Subscription.”
And the reason you keep listening to this, 10 hours a day, is to whip yourself into a frenzy so as to justify doing verbal and physical violence to people you think “deserves it”.
Don’t try to BS those of us that know what is really going on.
“Most left-leaning folks (outside of those like myself with an interest in ad-hoc cultural anthropology) know right-wing talk is tribalistic chest beating with very little to offer them except a non-stop tirade of insults and dire predictions that have a habit of never coming true.”
A non-stop tirade of insults and dire predictions that have a habit of never coming true.
What’s he talking about here? Himself and anti-war protests?
Personally, when somebody has been doing it for 10 years, I wouldn’t use the term ad hoc to mean that it is temporary. It is more like a permanent solution for temporary relief.
I may have time later to refute you at greater length, but cannot let this go by:
Fact is, he was doctor shopping and buying them illegally from his housekeeper, both of which are criminal activities.
Words mean things, Winfrey. Tell us please when and where Rush was convicted of “doctor shopping,” and “buying them illegally from his housekeeper.”
All,
Just a quick comment, then I will be done.
WWinfrey – you, sir, are trolling. You have used a racial slur with intent to incite anger, so as to achieve attention. You may have hours to listen during your commute or during work-related travel. You have obviously not listened, nor are you listening here.
Rush’s problems are past; he has gone through rehab and quit his habit.
We who visit here do not speak of the toking photo of the sitting president – it is in the past, and while relevant, that horse is not worth beating at this time. He appears to have stopped that habit and that is that.
We gathered at this post to praise BW, to offer our support for her words.
I have and will defend your right to say your piece – but your racist commentary and decidedly intolerant language do make me request one thing of you:
Go say it somewhere else.
SSG Dave
“Yes, you may say whatever you wish, but so may I. Your right to wave your arms about ends where my nose begins.”
“Seems like I learned in Sunday School that we’ve all got souls.”
Then:
“it’s the _hypocrisy_ of a dope-addicted, 3-time marriage failure, draft dodging fatso. . .”
Apparently, in Winfreyworld, having a soul does not disqualify you from being the object of pitifully third grade-level invective.
Once again, Winfrey, well played! You just can’t help revealing your spots, can you?
To the room: How come we never get A-grade trolls? Just the dimwits or the prevaricators? Book! Get to work on attracting better-executed drivebys.
Somehow, this seemed appropriate. Mr. Winfrey says he voted for Obama – I have to wonder why. Maybe one of these will explain it…
http://americandigest.org/mt-archives/driveby/i_voted_democrat_because.php
Thought this was an interesting observation on our current state of affairs:
In Father Fulton Sheen’s book on the spiritual nature of marriage, and how God is an essential part of that union, I found some insights he made that were very striking. When writing on the necessity of a permanent bond between man and wife, he noted, “Social culture also demands a permanent bond between man and woman, for no civilization can endure without responsibility and loyalty to one’s trust. When fifty per cent of married couples feel that they can throw overboard pledged loyalty in order to suit their own pleasure or convenience, then the hour has struck when citizens will no longer feel a need to keep their pledges to America as citizens. Once a citizenry does not feel bound to the most natural and democratic of all self-governing commonwealths, the home, it will not be long until it ceases to feel bound to a nation. The traitors to the home today are the traitors to the nation tomorrow. A people who are not loyal to a home will not be loyal to a flag.” ~Fulton J. Sheen, “Three To Get Married”
“SSG Dave
“Yes, you may say whatever you wish, but so may I. Your right to wave your arms about ends where my nose begins.””
Ah, but you see, Dave, that’s why the Left likes to re-institute slavery and debt peonage ; ) They got it all figured out on this score, how to rack in the goodies.
“A people who are not loyal to a home will not be loyal to a flag”
At the same time, people choose which country they will defend. And they’re free to change allegiances as well. America, at least, no longer punishes changes in allegiance, let alone treason. The better argument, actually, is that a nation that does not care about its oaths is going to create a culture that also doesn’t care about marriage. A world in which liberty exists for individuals to choose their nation, is also a world in which people can choose, and make a mistake in choosing, their partners.
Also, I forgot something else. The equivocation between love of one’s nation and love of one’s family, is a Western construct. It is true only in the context of being surrounded by other Westerners that believe the same.
The Mafia and various other organizations and tribes, however, don’t care about loyalty to nation. The only thing they value is loyalty to clan. By the logic stipulated, if those people are loyal to their home, they will then be loyal to a flag? Not so.
Very funny, suek. It’s probably #1 in this case.
Ummm…Kate….that would be _Bishop_ Fulton Sheen.
I have no intention of telling you how long ago it was that we watched him on television. Live. One hour a week…and in virtually perfect silence – because he was that riveting. On regular channel television (the only kind at the time). They probably wouldn’t allow it these days – with all our freedom of speech – something overtly religious would be too “offensive” on the big three letter channels.
My…how the standards have dropped. Who knew how low they could go!
>>The Mafia and various other organizations and tribes, however, don’t care about loyalty to nation.>>
Hmmm. Maybe. As I understand it, the Mafia was instrumental in getting ships unloaded during WWII, after their cooperation was requested by the government. Of course, that was then and this is now…
And I’d be the last to say that even then, the motivation wasn’t knowing which side their bread was buttered on…
I’ve heard the same thing. But I don’t have any direct sources.
Given that FDR had almost absolute power, in terms of interning whomever he wished, the Mafia probably didn’t want to start a war at that time.
And they were only “instrumental” in the sense that they had been causing a problem before. Although memory may be wrong on that respect.
I think my source of info is the History Channel. At least, probably.
As I recall, there was a major dockloader strike going on, which seemed insoluble. Someone in the government had a meeting with some of the Mafia higher-ups, and somehow the issues got settled in deference to patriotism. I sort of vaguely remember that there was some other quid pro quo, but don’t remember the specifics.
Heh. Dogpile search pulled up some interesting and varied responses. Here’s the only one I had time to follow up on… I may be able to check out more later.
http://www.drugtext.org/library/books/McCoy/book/08.htm
@wwinfrey:
Hey Oprah, if we’re to apply your principles of automatically discounting people who are or who have been substance abusers (ie. Rush) or who divorce or who have had other questionable brushes with the bounds of good sense or legality, should we then also automatically discount a man whose boyfriend ran a brothel out of his own apartment (Barney Frank)? Shouldn’t we also automatically discount anything Patrick Kennedy says, since he has also had repeated problems with substance abuse? Shouldn’t we also automatically discount anything Ted Kennedy has every said since he spent most of his waking moments drunker than a skunk at a frat party and chasing anything in a skirt at the same time? Should we automatically discount anything Charlie Rangel has ever said, or Timothy Geithner both for not having the moral clarity to recognize their responsibility to pay for taxes and to disclose properly certain financial events of their past? Forget about Free Willy’s penchant for cigars and interns, shouldn’t we also then discount Barry’s claim that Goldman Sachs is evil since his campaign took almost a million in contributions from various individuals within that organization? Isn’t that, by Barry’s own skewed world view, wrong? Shouldn’t it be?
Here’s the difference, Oprah. Rush is not an elected official. He’s an entertainer, a political commentator and holds no authority over anybody. Why you’ve got you’re motor revving over the guy is beyond me. Why don’t you explain to me why Barry isn’t going to give back the 1MM in campaign contributions from the “evil capitalists” at Goldman Sachs? He won’t and has said as much. Why? Riddle me that, Oprah.
Just where to start discussng liberals can be a hard decision. Your article about Rush’s impact upon liberals is a very keen observation. You’ve added to the discourse. Thank you.
Generally, liberals fall into two categories. They are either power at any cost control freaks or sheep who wish to be taken care of though they may be fleeced in the process.
Philosophically, their liberalism is immoral at its’ essence. Every liberal idea is corrupt. Why? Every liberal idea at its’ enabling core forcibly takes money or property from some people in order to give it to other people. Let me be clear about this. If you are a liberal, you are a thief.
Like demigods, liberals choose winners and losers. The arrogance of their every utterance is undeniable. Their hypocrisy in calling Rush Limbaugh arrogant is, therefore, easily demonstrable.
Why does Rush Limbaugh scare them? Why are conservatives demonized? We stand in the way of liberals with dreams of control and liberals whose wish is to be tended.
I’m a liberal and I have listened to The Rushman since he has been on air. Because, I get news that I think important. The problem is your friend is a LINO at best and your assertions are silly at best.
The real issue is Rush or Hannity will not allow real liberals on their show. Example Hannity’s line for liberals to call in to his show was doctored-up to come out a certain way…a fraud. For example a comment like; Much of John Loke’s liberal philosophy is reflected in the writings of Anglo American political philosopher Thomas Paine. – Encarta Encyclopedia – 2009, would be deleted.
In short, any real discussion of or about liberalism is banned, like; Liberalism: Attitude, philosophy, or movement that has as its core concern the development of personal freedom, popular sovereignty, right of rebellion against oppression, free markets, free trade, and the exercise of free will. One of its central theses has long been that a government’s claim to authority is justified only if the government can show those who live under it, that it secures their freedom, concerned to protect their life, liberty and property. The government that governs least governs best. Freedom of conscience, limited government that does not try to re-distribute wealth or goods. Benefits and burdens are distributed justly when government allows every individual the freedom to do what he chooses to do for himself and others.
or;” As mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow, that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of of the community are equally entitled to the protection of the civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations in examples of justice and liberality.”
George Washington, 1790
or; ” Roosevelt is not a true liberal despite his words. What President Roosevelt is leading (New Deal) is not liberalism. If this sort of stuff is liberal, then George lll, Hitler, Stalin and Boss Tweed are liberals. Roosevelt of attempting to form a new political party (Democrat) under a false banner of liberalism.”
President Herbert Hoover – Sept. 29, 1938
or; “After The Seventh Congress of the Communist International, the communist kidnaped the vocabulary of American liberalism. This is a “corruption of the word” as I called it then.”
Political Power and Personal Freedom, 1959, by Professor Sidney Hook.
or; In the constitutional liberal tradition the goal (of government) is the preservation of individual liberty. Cato Letters, Cato Institute, 2003.
or; ” There is nothing liberal about these people.” (Democrats and the Left) David Horowitz, Glenn Beck Show Sept. 4, 2009.
Bottom line; the talking heads of radio will not allow a debate with liberals or libertarians on their show. Because they know they will lose.
A challenge; The Rushman has my telephone number and my e-mail address and I challenge him or any other talking head, especially Hannity, to a debate. We will see if liberals are afraid.
@SGT Dave: You’re right on the money, Sir…..
@Everyone Else: Let’s quit feeding the troll.
Congrats to a Fellow Rite Blogger…
I’ve had the fortune of having a VM post get linked by some big name site. It’s happened twice from NewsBusters, but my best one was from AnnCoulter.com. Watching the spike of traffic on my web analytics page on those days was extremely exciting, and…
I am a liberal who listens to Rush Limbaugh. I write down statements he makes and record the time and the date. I go to factcheck.org and check the statements. I have found many to be untrue or hypocritical. Later, when I am with my conservative friends, and I do have them because I like to listen to all sides, I calmly disprove false or hypocritcal statements. I also note that Rush uses hateful language that can only tear us apart as a nation. This inflammatory speech incites violence. How can this be a good thing? If he were a fair-minded person, he would have liberals on his show, but he doesn’t. One way of thinking produces ditto-heads, doesn’t it? I dare him to read my commentary on his program.
@ Lightfoot Letters: You’re absolutely correct if you’re talking about “classical liberals”, rather than the current crop of leftists who fly the “liberal” flag because if they were honest about what they want to do to us, the citizenry would reject them utterly, if not bring out the tar and feathers!
I also think you’re right about Rush’s (and many other conservatives’) disinclination to get into a debate with classical liberals, or with any but the most wild-eyed libertarians, who border on anarchists. The classical liberal political philosophy is one that (I believe) a majority of Americans would sign on to, but most of the most visible commentators aren’t on board – and they can’t answer the reasonable arguments, so to avoid being made to look foolish they choose their opponents carefully.
On the other hand, spend some time listening to Hugh Hewitt and I think you’ll hear something different, and (perhaps) more to your liking. He engages a lot of folk he doesn’t agree with, and in an extremely rational way. I’m philosophically libertarian, and I mean that it seems to me that our problems will be better solved by moving significantly back in that direction….how far is another question, because it isn’t my “religion”, as it appears to be with some people. It would be fun to talk with you, I suspect.
[...] Second place with 2 votes – Bookworm Room - Ordinary people view Rush as a dangerous Svengali [...]
“Bottom line; the talking heads of radio will not allow a debate with liberals or libertarians on their show. Because they know they will lose.”
*Buzzer*
Because they know they are already classical liberals and don’t want to argue with those that believe the same as themselves.
“We will see if liberals are afraid.”
The same reason why you don’t get to call yourself liberal is the same reason Obama can give UAW creditors more cash back than secured creditors. It is no longer your brand. Somebody else owns it.
That ship has sailed. The Democrat party has taken over the label. Anybody from the outside trying to change it, will fail. The Democrat party has done a very good job of kicking out anybody that is libertarian or classical liberal, to prevent them from changing the party from the inside. Anybody from the outside can just pound sand or join another party.
The idea that if somehow you win the debate over Rush, that he (a classical liberal) loses and you (a classical liberal) wins, and that this somehow defeats the Democrat party? Ridiculous. Just plain as is.
@checkthefacts
“I am a liberal who listens to Rush Limbaugh. I write down statements he makes and record the time and the date.”
Really? Then let’s see one.
“I go to factcheck.org and check the statements. I have found many to be untrue or hypocritical.”
Let’s see one. An UNTRUE one. I’m not interested in what you think is hypocritical. A FACTUAL error — that he did not correct — is what I want. After all, YOU’ve got the evidence! I wonder why you didn’t just give us an example, instead of mere assertions.
“I also note that Rush uses hateful language that can only tear us apart as a nation. This inflammatory speech incites violence.”
Example, please. And PROVE that his “inflammatory speech” HAS, in fact, incited violence. BTW, whose speech incited the proven, on-video violence against Tea Party people on numerous recent occasions? There IS video evidence of that. Do YOU have video, or just an imagination?
“If he were a fair-minded person, he would have liberals on his show, but he doesn’t.”
As you should know, as a committed, note-taking listener, he almost never has ANYbody on his show.
“One way of thinking produces ditto-heads, doesn’t it? I dare him to read my commentary on his program.”
Oh, please. Let’s see some actual evidence of what you say.
checkthe facts,
I hate to dispute claims made by other people, but the “This inflammatory speech incites violence” statement is a dead giveaway. I could almost (but not quite) believe you up to there.
Since you have already done all the work, it will be easy for you to do the following:, give us a list of the violence that Rush’s ‘inflammatory’ language has incited; and a list ‘untrue’ statements. Hypocritical is too much in the eye of the beholder and we’re all hypocrites, so you can skip those. Of course, the big question is not whether someone is hypocritical but whether they are right.
Given that he’s been on the air for over 10,000 hours, I’m sure you’ll have many examples. And as you’ve already said, you’ve already done all the work. And no cutting and pasting or linking to someone else’s website. You said you did all this, so you must have the info right at hand.
Many years ago, Newsweek had a list of 10 ‘lies’ Rush Limbaugh had made on the air. He’d been around for a number of years then, so they had a lot of material to work with. Yet of the 10 items they listed, 9 were simply opinions they disagreed with. The 10th was an error of fact which he had subsequently corrected (but they didn’t bother to mention that).
Funny thing. I’ve know lots of people to make all sorts of negative assertions about Rush, but none – and let me emphasize the ‘none’ – have ever done any better a job than Newsweek did those many years ago of backing up their assertions. I simply do not believe that you have done what you have claimed to have done. But I am giving you the chance to prove what you claim. Go for it.
Bill Smith,
I can only say that great minds think alike.
TommyC
@TommyC
That’s exactly what I was thinking!
=)
What can I say, I’m a Rush devotee and was delighted to hear him read this grand slam analysis of liberal cacoonism. Anyone who denies ultimate truth has a very tall order regardless of their political persuasion. They relegate themselves to the taxing activity of shielding themselves from truth. Truth isn’t that easily discarded and has a pesky way of presenting itself regardless of ones attempt to suppress it. It’s like playing whack-a-mole. You beat truth down in one place and it rears it’s head somewhere else. It’s a very exhausting game. On KSFO you can hear a Rush promo saying something like, “Rush Limbaugh-Irritating Bay Area liberals. Truth does that to them.”
I’m even more delighted to find such a great blog. I’ve been pouring over it ever since Tuesday. I will be back often. Thank you so much for your literary verbosity. It’s fantastic!
I love it when bravado-besotted liberals “dare” somebody of Limbaugh or Hannity’s stature to debate them, knowing full well that elephants don’t ever pay attention to gnats.
I notice, too, that when it comes to debating lesser rightist lights like TommyC, Bill Smith, Earl, Yamarsakar or yours truly, those big bad progressive boys are never anywhere to be found.
Like a besotted mouse on his back floating under a drawbridge lying on a chip of wood:
“Raise it, Boys, I’m coming through!!”
Bill Smith: LMAO!
@Bill Smith and TommyC: Hope you weren’t holding your breath for a response….you must be BLUE by now!!
Oh, so typical.
Earl,
The only time I’ve ever gotten a response from a liberal when I’ve asked them to back up assertions made with examples was when one chose to quibble over my assertion that Rush had a ‘large’ audience. They didn’t provide any examples, of course. They merely compared Rush’s audience to the entire population and said that wasn’t ‘large’.
What is amazing is that I can do a better of defending liberal positions than most liberals can (being a former liberal myself). Not that it is a very good case, and not that I can buy into it. But it is a better case than most liberals manage to make.
Well, the whole thing about being liberal is to feel good about yourself and to feel superior to conservatives. Alas, it is not to help those who liberals claim to speak for. Exactly what has voting Democrat done for the black community over all these years? It certainly didn’t get them civil rights legislation as that was supported more heavily by Republicans. What since? I ask for examples and I get nothing – only that conservatives don’t care, and besides conservatives are racists. What about the poor? After trillions spent on welfare and no change in the poverty rate, I ask for examples of how voting Democrat has helped the poor. All I get is that Republicans want poor children to starve.
Well, I generally get no response at all, but occasionally I have to challenge them.
I tried to reach this site after I heard the lovable fuzzball mentioned it and was not surprised that it was overwhelmed.
Very good writing. Thank you for that. I now have two favorite bloggers. You and “Robin of Berkeley” at American Thinker.
Write on!
They have to hold their breath in the smog filled cities. That makes them end up turning Democrat blue.
Watche’s Council Winners…
More great posts, more fine winners and runner-s up! Council Winners First place with 3 votes Wolf Howling – Thoughts On Britain, Colonialism, and MulticulturalismSecond place with 2 votes Bookworm Room – Ordinary people view Rush as a dangerous Sv…
Hmm… Where do I start?
I could berate you “conservatives” for having an entertainer as your leader.
I could point out, as others have, that you guys love to create strawmen which you could then tear down with such fervor.
I listen to Rush everyday. And I am not the best with definitions but I have to try and understand how someone can not be considered a liar when they make wild, unproven, accusations. When does an opinion stop being an innocuous opinion and then steps into the region of being an flat out dangerous lie?
Here I have figured it out. When Rush says “I think,” before he makes a wild, unproven statement, then I have to consider that an opinion. BUT, if Rush makes a wild, unproven, accusation without that caveat, I have to believe he is making a statement of fact. Or at least believes it to be true. In which case, when Rush says Obama wants to destroy this country, I have to call Rush a liar. When Rush says that Obama has taken over GM, I have to call him a liar. It isn’t simply a mischaracterization – it is a flat out lie. When Rush says that Obama has taken over “health care” I have to call him a liar.
I could go on and on, but why bother? And that is just Rush the Liar. We haven’t even delved into Rush the Child, or Rush the Racist or Rush the Misogynist.
Of all the people out there who could be respected why do you guys choose this wind bag? Because he titillates. You guys love this POS so much because he touches all the right buttons and sometimes he does it secretly, wink-wink, and sometimes he takes a hammer to it. Rush walks up to the line and defecates on it.
Rush, is a very, very, very, good entertainer. But he is also a man filled, with confusion, hate and a palatable bitterness. I am glad you guys have chosen him as your leader because he will most assuredly guarantee your people stay in the fringe for years to come.
Bookworm, I had a very similar conversation with a liberal Christian friend. I made an comment quoting Rush without attribution. Then the conversation went like this: Friend: That’s a good point. Me: That’s from Rush Limbaugh. Friend: Ough! Rush Limbaugh! Me: What’s wrong with Rush Limbaugh. Friend: Ough! Rush Limbaugh. Me: Have you ever listened to him? Friend: No. I would never listen to Rush Limbaugh. Me: I think you’d find that you agree with him on most issues. Friend: I wouldn’t agree with him on anything. Me: But have you ever listened to him? Friend: Ough! I would never listen to Rush Limbaugh.
On the “fringe?!”
I guess you haven’t been paying attention to the election results, or the large numbers of Democrats who are simply walking away rather than get soundly defeated this Fall.
If you cannot even see the takeover of GM, well, we aren’t playing on the same planet. Please, get a grip.
Barry, Barry, Barry:
How come you Enlightened Ones are always so tone deaf? You use the expression “you guys” a couple of times and the only conclusions I can draw from your use of it are:
1. You are pretty arrogant to assume you have even an inkling of how the regulars in this room think, let alone what they know. One thing they do know is how hilarious your bill of non-particulars is. No examples, no analysis, just rote “Hey, Ma, watch me pull some canned liberal yada yada out of my ass.”
2. You are bordering on racism. Everybody knows that “you guys” is a disguised form of “you people,” which is the term racists use when attempting to denigrate black people. Shame on you. We are going to trace your IP address and spread the word about your true self at your local coffee hangout. (The Freudian implications alone are frightening: You are using us conservatives as substitute African Americans. Do you know how traumatic that is?)
We haven’t even delved into Rush the Child, or Rush the Racist or Rush the Misogynist.
To quote Tonto, “Who’s this ‘we,’ white man?”
“I could berate you conservatives for having an entertainer as your leader.”
The idea that a leader determines the value of a person or movement is a Leftist trope, not the individual strength of conservatives.
” Or at least believes it to be true.”
So your definition of lying isn’t “he said something he knew to be false” but rather saying something to you that you think is false. Given that you admit Rush believes in a lot of these things, yet you call his statements on this a lie. Things do not mean whatever the Leftist dogma says it means.
An interesting definition of lying. And to answer your previous question about when a lie is dangerous, that is the point at which it is reached. When you first allowed others to define for you what your reality was, you gave up all pretense of having something resembling free will.
“You guys love this POS so much because he touches all the right buttons and sometimes he does it secretly, wink-wink, and sometimes he takes a hammer to it.”
When Leftists voted for Obama, they did so on the basis that they thought Obama was smart. That voting in such a smart man, would make them smart too by extension and associating.
Alphas do not follow alpha leaders out of some mistaken perception that we will become the person we choose to follow. Only slaves and serfs don’t have a choice in negotiating with their leaders over trust and responsibilities. The alpha men and women of the United States of America do not kowtow to some mystical idol in the shape of divinity nor do we look for strong leaders due to a personal lack of belief or personality or judgment.
To cut a long story short, we believe leaders are only valid and useful when they use the powers they are given responsibly, to ensure the mutual safety and interests of everyone under the leader. Should a leader, like King John, tell us that we must obey them absolutely while we get nothing in return, that leader has already given up any legitimacy they ever had.
You believe leaders define the people under them, including the worth of the movement those people have sweated to build. You believe that the face of the people is the same as the face of the people. What is good and luxurious for the leaders, is good and luxurious for the followers and workers. When your leader tells you to give up everything for them, to give them absolute devotion and obedience, you will say nothing to disagree. You will do nothing to rebel. You will follow orders like the obediently trained.
Do you know why, in the end, this is so? because Leftists are nothing without a hierarchy to justify their corruption and to provide support to their mendacity. Conservatives are perfectly fine handling problems on their own, without the requirement for leaders of mass movements. Conservatives will still be strong and good people, even if the leaders are eliminated. Conservatives have something driving them beyond simple desire for power to be at the top.
“But he is also a man filled, with confusion, hate and a palatable bitterness.”
That isn’t so much a description of what you think Rush feels, as it is a description of how you feel about Rush.
If people want evidence of the Leftist conformity to group and hierarchy demands, simply look at their response to Obama’s demands that they protest Bush’s war in Iraq. When Obama was demanding answers and a pull out from Iraq, Leftists and Democrats protested.
Now when Obama is in power and has told people to ignore Iraq, people in his party have slavishly obeyed. Yet it is we, the conservatives who first refused to believe in the Leftist lies about Iraq, that continue to pay attention to Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan. We still have people over there operating in those regions. We are still being fed a stream of information on conditions.
We have not obeyed Obama’s commands to ignore Iraq and focus on Afghanistan. But you and all your fellows obeyed Obama’s commands to ignore Afghanistan and focus on Iraq.
Charles, are you illiterate? Did you emotionally sense that I was hating on Rush? Because you couldn’t have read what I wrote because if you had you would have seen where i called Rush a liar numerous times for the stupid things he has said to his stupid fans. I was going to write ‘stupid audience’ but I am among his audience BUT I am not stupid. If you’re a fan…well, you know the rest. Oh, and your attempt at being witty failed MISERABLY! Just in case you didn’t know.
“The idea that a leader determines the value of a person or movement is a Leftist trope, not the individual strength of conservatives.” Yeah, I’d say the same thing too, if I had an entertainer as my leader. Also, you’re wrong because the Right tramples on the legacy of Jimmy Carter whenever they want to point out the “ineptitude” of the Left. Jimmy was our leader, he sucked therefore the Left sucks.
“Given that you admit Rush believes in a lot of these things, yet you call his statements on this a lie.” Wrong, I left open the possibility that he does. However, I have a strong, strong, feeling that he doesn’t believe everything he says.
“When Leftists voted for Obama, they did so on the basis that they thought Obama was smart.” Wrong, we voted for Obama because he strategically kicked everyone’s butt. What did Gov. Romney call him: “the Senator killer.” Hahahaha…..
As for the rest of your drivel…what is this poetry night? Get a life.
Charles, you are welcome to play “whack-a-troll,” but please don’t feel obligated. Barry’s vituperation pretty much proves multiple points we routinely make here.
When Rush says that Obama has taken over GM, I have to call him a liar.- BarryBonds
I’ll take your word that Rush actually said that.
Technically you could say the American people have taken over GM, but I offer this news report as evidence that Barack is calling the shots regarding GM, so Rush is substantively right.
Detroit, Michigan – General Motors has officially announced that Rick Wagoner is stepping down as chairman and CEO, effective immediately. He will be replaced by Fritz Henderson, GM president and chief operating officer………..GM said it is awaiting further announcements by President Barack Obama and the Task Force on Automotive Reconstruction before making additional comments.
http://www.canadiandriver.com/2009/03/30/rick-wagoner-replaced-as-gm-chief.htm
Barry, you certainly made a splash with your first post, but you’ll find the anger isn’t necessary as folks here are civil.
It seems to be a liberal talking point that Rush is the leader of something. On many issues he speaks for conservatives, but if you want to pin us down, I’m sure all of us could find an issue with which we disagree with Rush.
You say you listen to Rush, but I sense its not of your choice. Possibly a boss that enjoys Rush, and you’re just projecting your antagonism of your boss on Rush? You obviously don’t do it because you like it. I’d be angry to if I were forced to listen to 15 hours a week of, say, Janeane Garofalo.
At least we agree that Rush is entertaining.
Wow, it’s so funny how people who listen to Rush all of a sudden become sensitive to harsh hyperbolic words. Is that not the height of irony?
You know what’s funny, I called Rush a liar and 6 posts later no one has even attempted to refute my statements. All I have read is the antagonist-turned-victim Right Wing two-step.
Rush, has called Obama everything under the sun BUT when we’re discussing Rush we MUST remain civil.
Bookworm, I am glad your little straw man fantasy got the attention of your high leader. It really shows that anything is possible.
I could berate you “conservatives” for having an entertainer as your leader. I could point out, as others have, that you guys love to create strawmen which you could then tear down with such fervor.- BarryBonds
Actually you did berate us for having an entertainer as our leader.
OK, I’ll bite. Would you be so kind as to point out an example of the strawman argument by “us guys” on this thread?
“Also, you’re wrong because the Right tramples on the legacy of Jimmy Carter”
I’m sorry we pissed on your homo erotic feelings for Carter. Couldn’t be helped really.
Keep that trampling in good shape.
” As for the rest of your drivel…what is this poetry night? Get a life.”
That is what is called the consequence of the death penalty. We get our life by eliminating those that are seditious, traitorous, and a danger to normal people. What part of this do you not get?
” You know what’s funny, I called Rush a liar and 6 posts later no one has even attempted to refute my statements.”
A guy without pants on the ground begging for mercy doesn’t have to be refuted. It is just kind of obvious what happened to your argument.
BrainE, sees anger where there is none. Why would I be angry? On the other hand, I will tell you what I am. I am surprised that you guys take this entertainer so seriously. I am baffled why you guys can’t see that he is a liar, and he will denigrate anyone and anything, INCLUDING AMERICA AND AMERICANS to make whatever point he is trying to make.
I mean he supports Japanese made products over those made by Americans all to make Obama look bad. It’s disgusting.
You say you love this country BUT you hope the President fails and you say this before he has even gotten into office. I mean, really, since when has a President not even deserved a fair shot? Like I said before, it’s disgusting.
I could go on and on but why bother?
@ Barry Bonds: You wrote:
“I called Rush a liar and 6 posts later no one has even attempted to refute my statements.”
Maybe that’s because you failed to reference a SINGLE “lie” that Rush has told. He did say that Obama wants to destroy the country, but he goes on to explain exactly what he means by that and why he believes it to be so. You may disagree with him, but that doesn’t make you right and Rush wrong, much less that Rush is telling “lies”. The same applies to his statement that Obama has taken over GM — that’s his opinion, and he backs it up with facts and a rational analysis, two things that are completely lacking from your commentary. If you listen to Rush as much as you say you do, and do so even marginally dispassionately, then you know that what I’m saying is true. Of course, if you listen essentially in order to fulminate against the “lies” (meaning, anything with which you disagree) then you’re just a leftist maroon.
Given your posts so far on this blog, I’m beginning to form an opinion about that, already.
Typical, Right Wing straw man argument:
1. The Left hates America.
2. The Left hates Capitalism.
3. The Left wants to destroy America.
4. The Left hates war.
5. The Left hates the military.
6. The Left loves to spend money for the sake of spending money.
7. The Left wants to grow government through making minorities dependents so that they will continue to vote for them.
8. The Left does not know how to protect this country.
9. The Left is Socialist.
10. The Left is Marxist.
11. The Left is Communist.
12. The Left hates freedom.
13. The Left hates God.
14. The Left hates the Right.
15. The Left hates Conservatives.
16. The Left is fiscally irresponsible.
And I could go on and on and on and on….
@ Barry Bonds….You wrote:
“I could go on and on but why bother?”
If what you’ve written so far is a fair sample of what you would “go on and on” doing, then please don’t bother. Don’t let the door hit you in the a** on your way out, either.
In which case, when Rush says Obama wants to destroy this country, I have to call Rush a liar.- BarryBonds
What evidence do you have that this is not the case?
Can we agree that Barack wants to fundamentally change the country? Since that was central to his campaign– “change you can believe in”, I’ll assume we agree.
If Rush said Obama wants to fundamentally change this country, you wouldn’t have a problem.
Here’s where it gets tricky. By doubling the national debt (you know the one that liberals berated W. for increasing), creating new entitlement programs that aren’t sustainable, engaging in risky foreign policy initiatives (Iran for example (Even administration officials acknowledge there isn’t much of a plan there)), the changes Barack are seeking could send us over the precipice we’re dangerously close to.
Instead of promoting a policy of energy expansion to take fiscal pressures off the economy, lowering the corporate tax rate (and continuing the “Bush” tax cuts at a crucial time), Barack’s initiatives seek to further enrich Wall St. with a Cap and Trade scheme (heavy on the trade, with little cap), promote the conversion of food products to fuel (which is a net energy loss and does nothing to contain CO2), and enslave our children to debt payments that will stifle growth for generations.
Wow, that could destroy the country! I guess Rush is right again.
Since we’re post hopping here, I asked for an example of someone using the strawman argument, not the standard liberal talking points. Just copy and paste the strawman argument that you feel “us guys” made on this thread.
Please be specific.
Earl, you have a very understanding and loose tollerance for what is a lie and what is an opinion.
Since you’re so disconnected with the true definition of a lie I will post the definition for you:To lie is to state something that one knows to be false or that one does not honestly believe to be true with the intention that a person will take it for the truth.
Rush is a liar.
@ Barry Bonds
How did I guess that you would be a fan of Wikipedia?
You’re still doing exactly the same thing, my friend – you’re stating your opinion (in this case, that Rush says stuff that he knows to be false) and expecting that all the rest of us will see this as “truth” at some level. What on earth gives you the idea that it’s true because you believe it and say it? Back it up with facts and reasoning, the way Rush does every single day. At that point, you may be a bit of respect from those who regularly come here to comment on BW’s ideas. Assertions without any particular foundation, followed up by snark, ad hominem, or other evidence of a skull full of mush, isn’t going to impress anybody at the Bookwormroom.
Do us all a favor – take the advice in comment #118……or else back up one and do what I recommended in #117. I’m done feeding the troll.
I mean he supports Japanese made products over those made by Americans all to make Obama look bad.- BarryBonds
OK, I’ll bite. What are you talking about?
BrianE, so Obama is going to take a 4 maybe 8 year job and then intentionally destroy the country so that when he is out of a job, there is nothing left of the country.
I guess this is a part of some mastermind plan that everyone else in the Obama Administration is on board with where Obama hands the country over to the highest bidder and then is guaranteed protection and wealth when the new country takes over.
Or maybe Obama didn’t think everything threw and forgot that he only has an 4 to 8 year gig and just recklessly wants to destroy the country because he can. Or better yet, because he hates the country so much.
You know which is even better? Obama wants to “destroy the country” so that he can “return it to its rightful owners.”
It couldn’t be that Obama was handed all of these situations where he is forced to make a decision and it couldn’t be that he actually loves his country, and it couldn’t be that things are turning around even though Rush Limbaugh, et al, still are praying for a downturn in the fortunes of Americans so that they can be right.
You’d have to be pretty STUPID to actually believe that Obama would want to destroy this country. And you’d have to be DOUBLY STUPID to think that Obama could destroy this country even if he wanted to.
Thinking about Obama trying to destroy this country is like someone thinking about the daily life and realities of Narnia.
Earl, I can tell by your writing style that you’re an old fart. And because of your farty ways you can’t seem to put 2 and 2 together and get 4.
Rush, is a liar, not because I think so but because he knows Obama isn’t trying to destroy this country. He knows Obama is not running GM. He knows Obama isn’t taking over the health care industry. He knows Obama is not making this country weak. He knows Obama doesn’t resent capitalism. (That last one about capitalism is a good one because it shows how Rush holds two different opinions on the same topic.) He knows that finance reform doesn’t mean that the government is going to take over the finance industry. Rush knows that the government didn’t “single handedly cause the Sub Prime meltdown.”
I mean, again, I could go on and on…
Rush just doesn’t tell lies, he is a liar.
And you know it. So, don’t make me call you stupid; just admit the man is a liar.
BarryBonds,
Are you a Barry Bonds fan?
OK, enough chit-chat.
“Never let a serious crisis go to waste. What I mean by that is it’s an opportunity to do things you couldn’t do before.”
So said White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel in November, and Democrats in Congress are certainly taking his advice to heart. The 647-page, $825 billion House legislation is being sold as an economic “stimulus,” but now that Democrats have finally released the details we understand Rahm’s point much better. This is a political wonder that manages to spend money on just about every pent-up Democratic proposal of the last 40 years.
We’ve looked it over, and even we can’t quite believe it. There’s $1 billion for Amtrak, the federal railroad that hasn’t turned a profit in 40 years; $2 billion for child-care subsidies; $50 million for that great engine of job creation, the National Endowment for the Arts; $400 million for global-warming research and another $2.4 billion for carbon-capture demonstration projects. There’s even $650 million on top of the billions already doled out to pay for digital TV conversion coupons.
In selling the plan, President Obama has said this bill will make “dramatic investments to revive our flagging economy.” Well, you be the judge. Some $30 billion, or less than 5% of the spending in the bill, is for fixing bridges or other highway projects. There’s another $40 billion for broadband and electric grid development, airports and clean water projects that are arguably worthwhile priorities.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123310466514522309.html
Every dollar wasted on pork (or in this case paying off Democrat constituents) is a dollar not spent creating new jobs. In spite of what Barack has told you, the government doesn’t have an unlimited well of dollars to spend. Spending now that doesn’t create value in the future will be nothing but a drag on the economy and future generations (which you sound like you are part of).
We are enjoying artificially low interest rates, so the effect of this profligate spending hasn’t been realized yet, but debt service will consume the federal budget within 10 years. And tax money will have to be raised, some of it from people that could have created more value by creating jobs.
BarryBonds, the recently passed health care bill, which was supposed to save money and contain increasing health care costs, has already been pronounced as doing neither. In fact Democrat senators have already admitted as such.
We’ve been deceived.
Does Barack want to destroy the country? If you mean radically change the nature of the country from free-market capitalism (of which there is precious little) to one of crony capitalism (which is another way of saying facist), then I would say he wants to ‘destroy’ the country.
Surprisingly, and despite your assurances, I’ve never considered myself ‘STUPID’, so I’ll have to pass on your characterizations.
I will say this. The level of ignorance in the country about how the economy works and the net effects of a nanny state ‘planned’ economy (especially planned by experts in Washington) is staggering. People who have no concept of the difficulty of meeting a payroll and, gasp, making a profit are now in control. That makes me nervous.
He knows Obama is not running GM- BarryBonds
Please read post #110, then add this tidbit to the mix:
President Obama announced the bankruptcy of General Motors yesterday before GM’s CEO even spoke, and the feds will soon own 60% of the company. But whatever you do, please don’t think the government is now running GM.
“What we are not doing — what I have no interest in doing — is running GM,” Mr. Obama said in yesterday’s bankruptcy announcement. “When a difficult decision has to be made on matters like where to open a new plant or what type of new car to make, the new GM, not the United States government, will make that decision.”
The President is so busy not running GM that he had time the night before to call and reassure Detroit Mayor Dave Bing about the new GM’s future location. GM is being courted to move its headquarters to nearby Warren, Michigan. And Mr. Bing told the Detroit News that he had received a call Sunday evening from the President “informing me of his support for GM to stay in the city of Detroit with its headquarters at the Renaissance [Center].”
The newspaper went on to report that “The mayor said he’s more secure in knowing GM will stay in Detroit, a move paved by several conversations Bing and his administration had with several top White House officials in recent days.”
We don’t know whether GM should stay in Detroit. But we do know that the location of a company’s headquarters is one of those decisions typically not made by people who are busy not running the company.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124389952143874411.html
Barack isn’t running GM like Robert McNamara didn’t run the Vietnam War.
@BrianE….
It’s a waste of time, man. Pearls before swine.
Feeding trolls is simply wasted time. All you get back is abuse – see above.
Earl,
You better cry uncle, because otherwise BarryBonds is going to be forced to call you STUPID.
(I’m making an assumption he’ll use ALLCAPS, to indicate he MEANS it.)
Brian#: I never had much desire to go back to fifth grade, and this is a vivid re minder of *why*!
Book, thanks for your comment.
I was just looking for a snack. BarryBonds sort of met the need.
But, truth be told, imitation crab just doesn’t cut the mustard—or mayonnaise, or whatever crap you’re supposed to dip it in.
Folks, you can never convince a drunk that he’s drunk. But you can convince him that other people think he’s drunk.
But a person like Barry — BTW, “Barry Bonds” is a pretty good name for the debt we’re running up, and which our young poster, Barry, will have to service for the rest of his life — is simply “in love with” Obama, and no amount of facts, and no amount of logic and reasoning are going to alter that. He can’t even grasp the definition of the word “lie.” To him, it’s anything he disagrees with, or a fact he doesn’t like.
If he cannot see that what the President has done fairly fits what most people would call “taking over” GM, then there really is no point in debating him. He cannot see that by denying the obvious he is conceding it. It’s a bit like the “reasoning” of a small child who puts his hands over his eyes, and thinks he’s hiding.
Did Barry here like the homo erotic comment I wrote?
BrianE, thanks for using a biased opinion piece to demonstrate how the Stimulus Bill actually didn’t stimulate. Oh and thank you very much for using another opinion piece to demonstrate how Obama is running GM. And I guess Obama is a freaking car genius too because GM has already paid back the government with interest 5 years ahead of schedule. Wow, I guess Obama has to give the keys back to GM now. So sad.
Wow, a month after being signed and now the health care bill has been pronounced DOA. Man, you conservatives are an impatient bunch. Everything Obama says about you liars is both true and funny. “It was a pretty nice day outside.”
Limbaugh is a liar because he is misleading you and because you hate Obama so much it is easier for you to follow.
Here is my new list of Rush lies:
1. Limbaugh knows that the Wall Street scandals are not “government caused problem.”
2. Limbaugh knows the middle class is not “under assault by the regime.”
3. Rush knows that Bill Clinton and President Obama are not to blame for the next terrorist attack.
4. Rush knows the NY Times is not responsible for the next terrorist attack.
5. Rush knows that securing nuclear materials isnt weakening anyone.
6. Rush knows that Obama isn’t happily and purposely presiding over the decline of the US.
Yes, I could go on and on… and these simply aren’t opinions… they are lies.
Rush is a liar.
BarryBonds,
What are you talking about? #121.
You also might want to check your facts on GM. The US taxpayer still owns GM.
“We are encouraged that GM has repaid its debt well ahead of schedule and confident that the company is on a strong path to viability,” said Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner. “This continued progress is a positive sign for our auto investment – not only more funds recovered for the taxpayer but also countless jobs saved and the successful stabilization of a vital industry for our country.”
After this repayment, the remaining Treasury stake in GM consists of $2.1 billion in preferred stock and 60.8 percent of the common equity.
http://www.financialstability.gov/latest/pr_04212010.html
And how did they repay the TARP loan?
Here is how we know this. During an April 20 hearing on Capital Hill, Sen. Tom Carper, (D-Del.) asked some pointed questions of Neil Barofsky, the “special watch dog” on the Wall Street Bailout, aka, TARP.
Mr. Bonds, As usual, you have listed lots of opinions that you disagree with and have labeled them lies. Is there any hyperbole involved? Of course. We all, but especially politicians and commentators, exaggerate to make a point. But remember one thing. Rush is not a leader and has no power except the power of persuasion.
But consider some leaders that have real power. Consider Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. I can come up with all sorts of opinion statements from them that I disagree with and call them lies, just like you do. I don’t need to bother since I can come up with actual lies.
From Barak Obama:
STATEMENT: “We’ve got a philosophical difference, which we’ve debated repeatedly, and that is that Senator Clinton believes the only way to achieve universal health care is to force everybody to purchase it. And my belief is, the reason that people don’t have it is not because they don’t want it but because they can’t afford it.” Barack Obama, speaking at a Democratic presidential debate, February 21, 2008.
On March 23, 2010, Obama signed the individual mandate into law.
STATEMENT: “No family making less than $250,000 will see any form of tax increase.” (multiple times on the campaign trail)
Broken multiple times, including the raised taxes on tobacco, a new tax on indoor tanning salons, but most prominently on February 11, 2010: “President Barack Obama said he is ‘agnostic’ about raising taxes on households making less than $250,000 as part of a broad effort to rein in the budget deficit.” And of course, the health care legislation calls for reductions in tax breaks – lowers the amount that can be put in a HBEA, raises to 10% (from 7.5%) the limit before you can deduct medical expenses. Will Obama oppose letting the Bush tax cuts expire? There is a huge increase there. Of course, that hasn’t happened yet. Neither has a VAT. Point is, Obama made promises he knew he couldn’t keep. He has broken those promises and will continue to do so.
Do you want me to go on? I can find dozens, maybe hundreds of these. These are not opinions. Stuff about lowering the deficit, you can keep your current medical insurance, etc., etc. The only case you can make is that he believed them when he said them. That almost makes it worse than merely lying. Anyone with such poor judgment should not be the leader of the free world.
BarryBonds,
You also never responded to my request to back up your assertion that ‘us guys’ are engaging in strawman arguments.
I need you to copy and paste an example of that on this thread. #118
Someone less charitable than myself might conclude you were lying.
BrianE, thanks for patiently trying to clean up Barry’s mess. We owe you hazard pay.
BrianE, I like the way you take your ignorance of finance and use that to support your arguments. Bravo. Too bad you can’t cut an paste some common sense.
Also, if GM decides to take a form of debt which has less regulation and stipulations than another form of debt, why shouldn’t they? For GM, all debt is debt. Sure the American people are still on the hook but that isn’t what we’re discussing here is it? We’re discussing wether or not Obama runs GM. So it seems like this latest maneuver by GM was on behalf of GM and is this a position Obama would have taken? No. This was obviously orchestrated by someone looking out for GM and only GM.
So because Obama couldn’t live up to his best intentions that makes him a liar. No, not someone who in the first instance decided to change his mind and in the second instance unable to avoid raising taxes. Ok, I will give that to you…Obama is a liar. But in the same breath you’re going to tell me that Rush Limbaugh ISN”T a liar? Are you kidding me.?
No, it isn’t a matter of disagreeing with someone’s “opinion.” It is all about Rush trying to mislead his audience for political gain. Rush is a liar with something to gain from his lying.
BrianE, I like the way you take your ignorance of finance and use that to support your arguments. Bravo. Too bad you can’t cut an paste some common sense.- BarryBonds
Ouch.
You are aware that the $6.4 billion in TARP funds has nothing to do with the US taxpayer owning 60% of GM’s common stock and therefore control of the company? You are aware that a majority stockholder can exert complete control over a company?
BarryBonds, look at it another way.
Would you agree that as President, Barack Obama controls the executive branch of the federal government? Of course he doesn’t control the day to day operations of the Commerce Department, for example, as no executive officer does, but you can be sure the Commerce Department is carrying out the policies that the President has outlined. If he doesn’t like the direction any particular department is taking, he would exercise his control and replace the department head– in the case of this example, the Secretary of Commerce.
Barack fired Rick Wagoner. I’m not sure how you can come to any other conclusion that Barack and by extension, his administration, isn’t controlling GM. Well, actually I know how you can, since facts don’t seem to carry the same weight with you as with others. Most reasonable folks would come to the conclusion that Barack (and the UAW, since Barack is beholden to this democrat constituency) controls GM.
The Obama administration asked Rick Wagoner, the chairman and CEO of General Motors, to step down and he agreed, a White House official said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20625
I suggest you read the entire news article.
But I would suggest you take care of my request in post #118 and again in #135.
BrianE, I surely admire your persistence, but is it worth it? My experience with debating liberals is that they ignore all the points that they cannot answer to and focus on those things that they can at least quibble about. When I was in school, quibbling was an honor code violation. I guess we don’t have honor codes anymore.
Don’t feed trolls….
Pearls…..Swine……it’s been known for thousands of years.
Everybody gets an opportunity at the cow milking, Earl. You got your turn and now there are others that were in line taking the chance.
Why is Barry Bonds ignoring his erotic feelings for Obama and Carter? I don’t get it.
TommyC, the Left’s equivalent of such a code is the tax code.
Ymarsakar, I guess things like honor and honor codes, honesty, hard work, good character and the like are a bit old-fashioned, and need to go the way of our old-fashioned Constitution – into the trash. Clearly the notion of what traits are ‘good’ is a ‘living’ thing and changes at the whim of our betters.
I think Brian is milking the cow too fast, though.
Tommy,
The Left isn’t so hard up against tradition. After all, serfdom and slavery are very fine traditions to them. So is monarchy and aristocracy. They love that stuff.
Brian, you have no articulable evidence that Obama fired anyone at GM. Since you have no evidence and you continue to state it as if it is a fact, you are attempting to mislead which means you, like Rush, are a liar. Even more to the point you use your lies to support other lies. Also, you ignore the one bit of evidence which would refute you lies: Obama said he is not running GM.
You know what, let me state my position on your opinion and then maybe we can move on to other things. If Obama is running GM I say BRAVO! If GM wants to be bailed out then they deserve a new master. What is so strange about that? Oh, I guess you’re going to say that it is un-American. I’d beg to differ. America is capable of doing anything and everything under the sun. Just because you’re too naive to see that doesn’t mean the rest of the world is too.
So at the end of the day if Obama runs GM – great! But we both know he doesn’t.
Brian, I could give a darn about what it is that your constituency on this board do with regards to straw men. I gave you a list of straw men that ALL conservative/republicans use so refer to that if you’re looking for an answer to your more precise question. Sheesh!
Oh, and Rush is a liar.
Wow, Obama is a liar but Rush isn’t.
How stupid can you people be?
There once was a widow O’Reilly
Who valued her husband so highly
That, inspite of the scandal
Her umbrella handle
Was made of his membrum virile
Dear regular readers:
Vote, please — Shall I ban ole Barry here because of his abusive attacks on those who have responded, quite politely, to his various challenges, or are you enjoying playing whack-a-troll? You all get to make the call.
Well, I’m not a big fan of banning. I’m also not a fan of people (trolls) who go around with the sole purpose of insulting and annoying people with whom they disagree. I love a real debate, but such things are rare.
Rather than vote for a ban, I will rather stop feeding the trolls. As soon as someone shows that they have no interest in actual debate, then they will hence be a troll and I will ignore. If enough agree, then why ban?
Typical Conservative response. It isn’t my “abusive attacks” its the fact that I am right, and I shed a light on your glaring hypocrisies. People have called me a troll, racist, and many other unsavory names. But you aren’t threatening to ban them.
If you ban me it won’t be anything new. I’ve been banned from Newsbusters in less than a week and then I was on my best behavior.
Yesterday upon the stair,
I saw a man who wasn’t there.
I saw him there again today.
Oh, how I wish he’d go away.
————-
Oh, let him stay. He’s like Albania used to be. A museum of how really wrong it really can go. Or, as Niels Bohr — I think it was — once said to a hapless, lesser light giving a lecture:
“That’s not RIGHT! That’s not even WRONG!!”
I think we’ve got all the milk this steer has to give.
At this point, I’d just let him fade away.
From this point forward, I will not be rude to anyone by calling them names.
But Rush Limbaugh is a liar and the reason why opinion is also a lie is because everyday reasonable people have access to reasonable information to pose reasonable debates. When somoene steps outside of that measured reason as Rush (et. al.) does on a regular basis you have to conclude that they are lying. This is especially clear when you look at the fact that Rush is being paid HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of dollars to lie.
“I’ve been banned from Newsbusters in less than a week and then I was on my best behavior.”
ROFL! That must of been a supreme act of will for Bookworm Room’s resident third grader.
Book, I say let Barry come and go as he pleases. I think the rest of us here have taken his measure and lost interest. Kudos to BrianE for so politely and manfully sticking it out in what was a clearly a lost cause from very early on.
So, we regulars will, as the ever-hopeful people did in “Casablanca,” wait, and wait, and wait, and wait for the left to bring us a truly adult, self-disciplined debater.
No, it wasn’t hard because they basically told me they were looking to ban me from my very first post. Conservatives love echo chambers and its because your causes are so fragile and shallow. Your only real identity is one you’re constantly trying to run from and embrace at the same time.
It’s even hard for Conservatives to be even taken seriously because your people are so fringe.
You’ve taken my measure and you realize that I am not someone who is fooled by Rush Limbaugh, and you know that I am someone who actually listens to him and you know what i say is accurate. Rush Limbaugh is a liar and there is no two ways about it.
I watch Fox all day and and when I am driving I am listening to Conservative radio. And the tone from both are one of childish rage, naiveté and unmitigated hate.
You guys know Rush is so successful, not because of his conservative views, but because he really gets down deep into the unseemly underbelly of his listeners and titillates. I am so glad when the NFL rejected him. It made me feel so good. Rush deserves to lose.
Everyone who has had Psych 101 knows what the term “projection” describes….has there been a better example of this phenomenon than BB in #157? Lovely…it’s worth not banning him just for that demonstration.
However, let’s all remember not to feed any trolls.
Barry here has needs. He needs the conflict and excitement of something he can hate. It doesn’t particularly matter what. Whether it is Rush, Fox News, or conflict, he needs that fix.
It isn’t so much that when the troll can’t find anybody to stuff down his gullet, the troll stops eating people. In fact, what the troll eats is his own soul. The desire and fuel for hatred isn’t from eating others, but himself. The more the troll feeds his inner demon, the less the troll exists as a free agent.
Eventually they become consumed by their inner desires and fixations. Then they become a rampaging beast. The Left collars em and then semds em on a rampage against those attending a Tea Party.
Wow, talk about baseless arguments.
Anyway.
Today Rush wants us to believe that Obama hates capitalism yet is “owned” by some of the biggest capitalist in the world, Goldman Sachs and George Soros.
How does Rush sit on both sides of a fence and you guys don’t see it? Or is it simply a matter of you not carring as long as he is railing against the machine?
I like how Rush will stand up for every corporate interest he can (even against the American people) and you guys still think he is looking out for you even though none of you pay his $400,000,000 contract. That is all corporate money. Now, compare that to what Obama was given by not Goldman Sachs but Goldman Sachs EMPLOYEES. I love the way Limbaugh misdirects by saying Goldman Sachs gave Obama a million dollars when that is actually a LIE.
Ummm…
Barry????
Do you know what “facism” is? The source of the word? Where it was originally applied and by whom??
suek, my dearest sister in arms:
Please. Do. Not. Feed. The. Troll.
If all of us refrain, it will go away.
Suek, Barry doesn’t know anything except that he needs to come here to eat people or otherwise he’ll start eating himself. And he doesn’t want that.
The Left doesn’t care what you tell it. It’s an enemy of humanity. Thus it needs to be locked up, observed, and starved to death.
OK ok ok.
I just _had_ to ask….
>>Barry here has needs. He needs the conflict and excitement of something he can hate.>>
I agree with Y on this, though. I was watching an ad – or maybe more than one – this last week for some particularly graphic horror movie, and wondered why _anybody_ would go see such a thing. I came to the conclusion that we all need some adrenaline input in our lives, and most of us are fortunate enough not to have much – if any. Add to that that competition is a natural need for the normally testosterone driven, and that competition would also normally give a rush of adrenaline. In our present day liberal driven, noncompetitive society, what’s a young man to do??? so…just as normal everyday folk get their adrenaline rush from horror movies, the normal everyday testosterone driven young man gets his rush from wherever he can find it – he either joins a gang or gets on line and trolls.
Pretty sad.
No, didn’t think so. I gave you all a great opportunity to discuss the facts surrounding your leader and you ignore that opportunity in lue of telling me how much of a troll I am.
Color me ignorant of fascism and all of its nuances. Now tell me what that has to do with my last statement about Rush Limbaugh, Goldman Sachs and President Obama.
>>lue>>
That would be “lieu”…
Lue, lue, skip to my lue
Lue, lue, skip to my lue
Lue, lue, skip to my lue
Skip to my lue my darling.
Well, BB’s hero has said that we ought to be thanking *him* for lowering our taxes……I’m as inclined to do that as I am to thank BB for his contributions to my education over the last few days……
Suek and Charles: When you’re a male over 60 and it’s the middle of the night, it goes like this:
Loo, loo, skip to the loo
Loo, loo, skip to the loo
Loo, loo, skip to the loo
Skip to the loo my darling.
Earl: ROFL, ROFL, ROFL! Perfecto!
Barry,
GS can give only a pittance to The Messiah campaign fund. But there is nothing stopping the bundling of GS employee campaign contributions to The One. And bundle they did.
They knew The One was going to win. They knew The One’s regime was going to go after GS once he took the reins of power. They paid Him off so that once they are run out of business, they would still be in the loop.
You are splitting hairs. Yes, technically, GS employees gave to The One. But enough of them gave so much, you can say GS gave the million to The Messiah. You are having to split hairs in your attempt to make Rush out to be a liar.
The press corps members gives money 10 to 1 demos to repubs. Am I a liar to say the press corps gives to Uhbama? The lawyers guild, same thing. The unions, same thing. Academia, same thing.
I think you are being disingenuous in your accusation.
What GS is doing is crony capitalism. They are in bed with government to stay alive. The demos demonize corporations so that they can control them, to suck money out of them, to feed their buddies.
That is what they did with Chrysler and GM. They demonized them, with the help of the media whores, then they took control of them to feed their union buddies.
It is what they have done with the health care industry. They demonized it for decades. Now they are gearing to take control. To give you “quality, affordable health care”? You are a useful idiot if you believe that. They will take over the health care industry to siphon off money to buy votes and feed their buddies, and leave you with a ‘doctor’ who is a PA, at best, standing there in a dirty smock to tend your needs.
Now if you want to have a substantial argument with me, then let’s do it. I will thoroughly enjoy slowly dismembering every leftist tenet you wish to stand upon.
As for Rush, he’s good. He is very informative, yet he does it from an entertaining format. Is he my hero? Oh hell no. He’s not enough to the right for my liking. Nor will he take a hard stand on some principles dear to me. But I will not deny he is a valuable asset to this nation’s survivability, as we know it. He is the aircraft carrier of the conservative talk show battle group in this nation. If it were not for him and the thousands of others like him on the airwaves, we would be a communist state right now.
We can thank the great Ronaldus Maximus for that. Is talk radio enough to stop this nation’s march to government controlled tyranny? Nope. You and your like-minded drones will eventually drag us all into the depths of tyranny. History proves it. But you will drag us kicking and screaming.
I for one will not go out on my knees, but in brass up to my knees.
Great – I sit corrected.
So I guess you have no issues with my other assertions since you’ve ignored it so I guess you guys know what kind of liar Rush is…. again, great!
Oh and a lot of “taxpayers” should thank Obama. Just like all the investors on Wall Street, GM, people with children with pre-conditions, people who have been unemployed due to the world wide financial crisis, people who work at banks who got bailed out, people who work for cities which got stimulus money to keep their employees still working and many, many, many more Americans and foreigners.
Hey, I have been ridiculed before. especially when I’ve revealed the holes in peoples arguments while writting with grammatical errors. It’s nothing new. Next time when I am blowing bazooka holes through your leaders I will make sure to proof read.
“Next time when I am blowing bazooka holes through your leaders I will make sure to proof read.”
This is the first time, evuh, that I have been told it’s possible to proofread a bazooka hole.
G.I. to German soldier: “Hey, Fritz, whaddaya think of that giant hole I just put through your panzer?”
German: “Screw you, G.I. Joe, it has a dangling participle.”
While Barry is all hot and bothered about Rush. Notice that he tries to pretend he didn’t feel me spit in his face.
Now that’s being cool.
” In our present day liberal driven, noncompetitive society, what’s a young man to do??? ”
“he either joins a gang or gets on line and trolls.”
Or they can do what I do. Watch violent security film about violent crimes. Watch abductions. Watch rapists and muggers abuse women (you’d be surprised how many of those don’t fear having their face seen by their own camera). Observe how violent criminals in prisons treat other violent or non-violent whites, Asians, blacks, hispanics, etc.
It’s all good training, by second hand account at least, of how to kill the right people, as I define it, and avoid killing or harming the innocent. One must learn the habits of one’s prey, if one wishes to hunt humans. The only real issue is that while all of this is mighty interesting to me, there’s no place for me to dump my adrenaline or sublimated rage. Because, you see, I’m not in a dangerous situation. I’m sitting here at home. And there’s nobody I can reach with my hands, even if I wanted to do “something”. It’s just how it is, but it is frustrating. Frustration is good for the soul, however, as it trains self-discipline. And boy, am I lucky I trained my self-discipline through early episodes of periodic volcanic rage. I don’t even need anything to physically hit now. But that just means all that energy is going into something more productive.
Barry here, though, he goes, watches, hears, and talks about stuff that he gets mad about just so he can have an excuse to explode on people. He has no self-discipline. He wants to constantly talk about being right. It’s the same justification you see in a lot of criminals.
Maybe my hobby is, perhaps, abnormal for regular civilians and people who don’t have to deal with violence every day of their lives. But that just means the minor issue of whether Rush is lying or not, is kind of like your everyday school yard fight compared to mass shootings like Columbine. There’s not just a difference of degree, but of kind.
Conservatives have more serious business than whatever it is that gets the goat of people like Obama and Barry. We have to actually protect the lives, property, and liberty of individuals. I have always felt the same way. When I read how the Left engineered the Fall of Saigon and gloated over how the South Vietnamese lost because “they were weak and corrupt”, I felt the same thing. I felt as a bystander, helpless to do anything. Because the harm had already been done. The Left had triumphed. They had gotten what they wanted. The same as all these criminals I see on footage captured by security cameras, their own cameras, or the proof of bystander cell phones. This country or any other country, it’s pretty much the same, with some variation.
The difference between me and most others, I think, is simply a degree of interest. Some people are interested in politics. Some people are interested in machine politics. Others are simply interested in their family and the benefit of their community/nation. Others are interested in benefiting their community through politics, such as Alan West, when it is a hassle to them. I was not converted to the Republican party or conservatism because I felt the Left did not suit me politically. I didn’t really have any politics that I was taught by church, family, or community. I was floating around, moving according to the tides.
No, in the end, what convinced me was an instinctual awareness that there was something wrong with these gloating bas tards that enjoyed the pain and suffering of millions, while dead certain that they and theirs would benefit forever from sacrificing other people’s lives. I’m not sure whether I went studying human violence because it reminded me of the Left+Islam or because the Left reminded me that until I knew their methods 100%, they would keep on gloating as all suffered, whether under Russians, Chinese, Islamics, or criminals. 9/11 brought the need to the front and made me very motivated to follow cable news, though. But at the time, I never knew that my interest in personal violence was going to intersect so much with Leftist and Communist operations, current and historical.
It is not so much that angry big black men doesn’t frighten me. It is not so much that criminal gangs can’t hurt me. It is not so much that I can’t be shot or blown up. It is not so much that I have the resources of the federal government or of a Mafia. It is more like the simple fact that in terms of personal escalation from harsh words, bar fights, street violence, crime, to serial killing, I always direct my mind to look at the last and prepare myself to teleport from normal operations to the most extreme mental state possible. Most of the time, when I’m not watching, hearing, or reading about such things, I can think of other things. Normal, positive, humane things. LIke the cycle of life and rebirth, the renewal of free will and what not. My instructors are very good at teaching de-escalation skills and avoidance skills for the non-extreme, the social conflicts everyone has. My capacity for self-restraint is such that unlike others, I don’t need a lesson on how to avoid avoidable problems. That stuff is academic compared to the real skill required. The skill society has lost track of, on purpose. How to deal with people who like to use violence to solve their problems and desires. Americans don’t know how to deal with the Left that does this (although the Tea Party are learning at a grassroots level how to use personal initiative to fight machine politics). The police don’t know how to use it to permanently erase drug neighborhoods and gang land. The individual American doesn’t know how to use it to deal with criminals, violent or non-violent, at minimal cost to society. (and no, locking them up or executing them isn’t a long term solution) Executions are a very effective solution, but given how the Left likes to protect murderers like Tookie while being perfectly fine with the Right executing McVeigh on a timely schedule, kind of hints at who is going to be executed and who is going to be paroled once the Left gains power in that sector. And if they can label anyone a McVeigh, well, what do you expect.
When I do look directly at the worst enemies of humanity does to humanity, however, things like Barry or SEIU look like ants. Things that shouldn’t bother people if only because of how tame they are, how ridiculously weak and frail they are. Maybe together they can do what a march of Army Ants can do, but individually they are small and feeble. Often beneath our notice and for good reason. We have more important things to take care of.
But hey. Even still, it is often satisfactory that if one can’t get at the big crime boss, crushing and ripping out the tendons of his powerless underlings can be very satisfactory in the meanwhile. For a time, at least. For a time.
P.S.
I apologize for burdening anyone who had their day kind of stunted by reading what I wrote. Let me just say that this is all the fault of my environment and how the Left raised me given the environment they have created in America, the Socialist Dream. Can’t we all just agree to get along and blame the Left for everything that counts, at least?
Things are easier. I think I over loaded on too much observation of human evil. One shouldn’t stare into the pit for too long without finding something positive. (Don’t worry, Barry’s already a lost cause)
Just count yourself blessed that I do not wish to describe what I see. It is not something you’d like to even hear about, let alone see with your own eyes. As with Nick Berg’s video execution, however, I cannot in good conscience turn away. However, Nick Berg’s video was tame entertainment compared to some of the stuff I just saw.
>>Loo, loo, skip to the loo>>
Well I’ll be hornswoggled!! That old rhyme actually does make sense after all!!!
Thank you Earl… you cleared up one of the mysteries of life on that one!
Re: #174: Y, I appreciate and always enjoy your interest in combat, and you so often offer great insights about battle tactics and strategies. This comment thread, though, is beginning to sound less like an academic primer and more like an invitation to violence. Once we start doing that, we are no better than the mob in the average antiwar street protest.
We should always be prepared to defend our rights, but I don’t want this blog to become a forum for incentives to imminent violence against our sometimes misguided neighbors. My concern here is that those less familiar with your thinking and writing than the regulars at this blog might misunderstand your comments.
Then I’ll clarify my comments. Most of the people on the Left are not a threat sufficient to warrant true violence.
It is central to my view that these people, with the exception of those addicted to “acting out” against the Tea Party, are not even worthy to be considered a low level threat. To any of us.
Even the most angry of mobs won’t erupt into a clear and present threat without some kind of trigger. Usually manifested by an agent provocateur in the crowd itself launching attacks on the security forces while inviting a reply in kind.
It is the ones giving the orders that are important. Which is why the Left is obsessed over Rush. They seem to think he controls all of us with an invisible web of authority.
As if.
Both verbal and physical violence can be true violence given a distinct context. Black Caucus gave a good example of verbal violence. It is real and it works. Duke Lacrosse, again, another example. It works and it stays permanent.
“You are splitting hairs. Yes, technically, GS employees gave to The One. But enough of them gave so much, you can say GS gave the million to The Messiah. You are having to split hairs in your attempt to make Rush out to be a liar.”
Talk about a stretch! No, it isn’t splitting hairs because the entire purpose of the lie was to mislead the general public into believing that Obama is owned by GS (or Wallstreet depending on the day) and all for the cheap. All it takes to ‘own’ a President is a million dollars? Wow.
The funny thing is, in Rush’s world, Obama is an idiot academic who hates captialiam while at the same time a brilliant con man with ties to all the biggest capitalists in the country. So if you asked Rush, which one is it? I am sure he will say “it depends.” Can you sheep see these glaring contradictions? Even further if we were to believe that Obama is one of these people and plays the other one on T.V. then it’s easy to see that Obama is actually the brilliant, con-artist, businessman, and Rush should be a gushing fan of his.
You can always tell when someone gets all of their education from talk radio because they begin to explain themselves using all of the buzzwords the entertainers use: reverse racism, vitriol, hate speech, take my country back, cronie capitalism, etc.
For some strange reason when corporations are bad, which they are from time to time, we should ignore it and do nothing about it. Corporations aren’t gods. They are made up of humans. Humans do bad things therefore corporations do bad things. This isn’t something difficult to understand. All of the corporations “demonized” in your mind have done something to deserve the attention. You don’t see people going after Ben and Jerry’s. BUT if Ben and Jerry’s employed children workers that would change. Wall Street for DECADES has been linked to all sorts of dubious activities. Yet we shouldn’t regulate them? Health care – you think it is right you should pay $50 for a pill? You think it’s right people should go bankrupt taking care of their illnesses? You think people should work at UPS for 40 hours a week for YEARS and yet be considered a part-time employee? You think corporations should employee adults who work for them full time yet can’t afford to make a decent living?
But if a President lies about sex he should be removed from office. The self-serving double standards of the Right make me laugh.
Y, I didn’t get your prose about violence but that is o.k. The Left is “obsessed” with Rush because he makes a living lying about us. And because we’re so academic we usually ignore it. So in order to get our attention he makes things up and takes things to such a height we are forced to listen and respond. Rush calls this is “media tweek of the day.” So in case you haven’t realized Rush WANTS the attention – it isn’t underservidly given.
I come to these site and I listen to Rush so I can combat the lies. I hate the lies. We can discuss ideas but get rid of the lies.
More about the Goldman Sachs thing…
http://wolfhowling.blogspot.com/2010/04/playing-to-false-narrative.html
Y,
That was one fine piece you wrote.
Barry,
If you understoodwhat he was saying you would not be the leftist barking lunatic you are.
Council speak 04/30/10…
Whoops, I’m a bit late getting you last week’s Watcher’s council winners. Council Winners First place with 3 votes – Wolf Howling – Thoughts On Britain, Colonialism, and Multiculturalism Second place with 2 votes – Bookworm Room – Ordinary people vi…
[...] Bay Area blogger Bookworm Room describes a phenomenon that every fan of Rush Limbaugh has observed when discussing Rush with a liberal who espouses tolerance, diversity, and the importance of being open to new and challenging ideas: [...]
[...] few months ago, I did a post about Rush Limbaugh, and the inordinate fear Leftists, not just extreme Leftists, but garden-variety Democrats, feel [...]
[...] below. Or peruse her own blogpost about her previous experiences. Did I mention that a big-time celebrity quoted her on his [...]
Watcher’s Council nominations…
* Mere Rhetoric – Academic Linguist: Palin Speaks Like A Cognitive Toddler, Linguistically Shes A Child * The Razor Clinton Holds Tea Party to Higher Standards Than Islam * The Colossus of Rhodey – Philly Inquirer offers ed……