Rush Limbaugh, you have a soap box not a party platform…

Rush Limbaugh…
I know you have the same inalienable rights and civil rights that apply to everyone.
And I’ll be the first to defend people’s right to free speech…
But do you really believe some of the things that you say?
Do you listen to how you contradict yourself depending on who you’re criticizing?

Drug addicts are bad and the book should be thrown at them, well, unless it’s you, in which case it was a mistake a error of judgement. Your drug trial was interesting, and of course you blamed the charges on people out to get you because of who you are. (The vast left wing conspiracy?)

It seems to me that you dislike anyone and everyone that disagrees with you, and will go after them with a vengeance. It also appears by many of the things you have stated about women that you are a bit the misogynist.

You are a talk show host, an entertainer… You are no more the legitimate spokesperson for the “conservative” republican party than Jon Stewart is for the “liberal” democratic party. Most people in both parties are moderates Rush not extremists. You have a soap box not a party platform. It’s about power for you isn’t it? Throwing one’s weight around (and getting very rich off it.)

You talk of conservative family values yet you have been married and divorced three times. So the moral value of marriage is cumulative I’m supposing? The standard of behavior to strive for isn’t being in one marriage over time, it’s being monogamous (one assumes) over multiple marriages?
*

It is an interesting side of many people’s personality that when others (especially people we don’t like or identify with) do something we consider bad it’s seen as reflecting an inherent evil character flaw a particular person or group has. This serves to devalue what that person says from that point on and subjects them to ridicule as a “fair game” target.
When this very same “bad behavior” is found in oneself or someone that we like, well, then it’s considered a “mistake, error or lapse in judgement” that you can “repent and recover” from with sympathy. You’re still of course one of the good people not one of “them” even though “they” have done exactly the same thing you yourself did.

When it became apparent that you engaged in “do as I say but not as I do” behavior you lost any credibility with me. Then I was further dismayed (no more like disgusted) by your gross parody of Michael J Fox who has Early Onset Parkinson’s disease… something that you should never have done. Your idea of disagreeing with someone’s beliefs means personally belittling them and ignoring the relevant facts that don’t suit you. Michael J Fox is a good man and deserved better.
*

Obviously you never paid attention to the rules of debate… many don’t. It’s not about he who can ridicule the other side the most, it’s not about who squawks the loudest drowning out the opposing view. It’s not about browbeating someone into submission. It’s not about threats, veiled or obvious.
It’s about intelligence and something you don’t like that much- compromise. You know what that is right? Taking two different ideas and taking the best of both to create a satisfactory resolution.
Kinda like, well, um, let’s see now… bipartisanship in politics, yup that’s it.
The rare and elusive commodity that is truly needed at this point in time.
There’s an abundance of hypocrisy to go around, however.
That’s sure as hell not what we need now.

You bring nothing helpful to the table for the republican party and no one seems willing to take you on or upset you. I wonder if anyone will have the guts to challenge you. Freedom of speech isn’t what it appears to be at times… I find it hard to believe that all republicans find you so cute and cuddly.

G'night,

Laura
*

The New York Post reaches for new ground... tasteless. Wait did I just say new? I meant they're at it again.

*

There were other things on my mind from the last few days but then this morning this took over.
What do you think about this cartoon, appeared in the NY Post today.
The artist and the paper deny any inference to Barack Obama, violence against anyone, or racial overtones.

This is my take: Either they are in denial, delusional or just completely stupid.
Sorry but this is in bad taste, implies violence against those that wrote the stimulus package, racism, you can deny it if you want to but it's there and everybody with half a brain knows it.



I'm still very bothered by the fear and intentional devisiveness and intolerance that this election was fueled by.
Seriously Rush "I hope you fail, um, at whatever the hell it is exactly that you do" oh, wait you actually have failed at things many, many times all ready, but hey you're just a sweet misunderstood "common" man.
And the republican that sent out the cd with that cute "Barack the magic negro" on it... stupidity. Bipartisanship indeed.

If you get a chance hunt up the text of the latest Michele Bachmann of Minnesota's nonsensical rant... She's at it again.
Remember the rant before the election that she thought congress should be investigated for anti-American members?
In this one she says things that just simply aren't true.
She has no clue as to the facts... where the hell does she get them. Cute she call's our president the "community organizer and chief." Respect, none.

I used to say you can't buy the truth. But it doesn't matter all that much anymore because even if you could buy it, you damn well will have a really hard time finding any in the first place.
Oh, and I was wrong anyway, because I now realize that truth certainly can be bought, repackaged and resold.

Spin it's all spin, where is the line that makes something a LIE???
Gone.

G'night,
I'm fed up with most of our representatives at this point.

Laura

*