CRITICAL UPDATE at end of post: former Clinton pollster wrote in depth about this in September 2006!
If it's unpatriotic and supposedly treasonous for conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh to want Barack Obama's policies to fail in the middle of a serious recession, is it similarly so for Democrats who wished President Bush wouldn't succeed while the nation was at war?
In August 2006, a Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll asked the following of 900 registered voters:
Regardless of how you voted in the presidential election, would you say you want President Bush to succeed or not?
Here are the stunning results (h/t Patterico via NB reader Thomas Stewart):
Yes, that says 51 percent of Democrats and 34 percent of Independents didn't want President Bush to succeed...even though our nation was at war in Iraq and Afghanistan.
I'm sure media outlets will be reporting this revelation real soon, and expressing their apologies to Mr. Limbaugh.
*****Update: Former Clinton pollster Craig Charney wrote about this deplorable poll on September 24, 2006 (h/t Betsy Newmark via Sister Toldjah via Garden State Pundit via Gateway Pundit) --
A recent Fox News poll gets at the disturbing truth: A majority of Democrats say they want to see the president fail. [...]
In other words, the rage extends way beyond the lip-pierced Deaniacs, aging hippies and other fringes of the Democratic Party. Lots of otherwise sensible people—suburban moms, hospital orderlies, schoolteachers, big-hatted church ladies—detest George W. Bush.
When these Democrats say they want Bush to fail, might this mean that they simply reject what they see as his far-right religious and corporate agenda? If so, it’s hard to see why independents—hardly right-wing zealots—hope he succeeds by 63 percent to 34 percent. Sadly, much of the Democratic Party wants to see this president crash and burn. [...]
Yet if Bush does fail—for instance, if Iraq spirals into civil war or the economy slides into recession—then America is in trouble. Making progress on these key issues, like others facing the country, will require bipartisan solutions, not political finger-pointing.Fascinating.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
→ Ouch
March 9, 2009 - 00:06 ET by Cool ArrowSo the libs already know this game.
Whodathunkit? But isn't it a small thing that Democrats wanted even more American troops to die? Forgive the morbid sarcasm.
Is my timestamp like, an hour into the future?
Does that make me a seer?
Obama - Change you can bereave in
Cool Arrow
March 11, 2009 - 02:09 ET by DoktorFrankenI'm in the Future. Tell me what I'm thinking.
"Are you as well off as you were when the Democrats were in the minority?"
Yeah Noel, me too, those
March 9, 2009 - 00:10 ET by bigtimerYeah Noel, me too, those apologies will be coming as soon as I see the pigs flying outside my window side-by-side with that global-warming snow.
What a great catch you have here with this poll.
BT
March 9, 2009 - 00:34 ET by NorthCoasterTake heart. It won't be long before the O puts lipstick on them to dress them up.
Noel, Holy smokes!!!! I
March 9, 2009 - 00:10 ET by LiberalliesNoel,
Holy smokes!!!!
I hope that Rush Limbaugh picks this up tomorrow and endlessly talks about it!!!
Good work!!!!
But as we have always known...it was patriotic to wish Bush to fail, it is unpatriotic to wish the Messiah, Obama, to fail.
Wow, this is one of the most clear examples of Liberal hypocrisy.
fut... I can't wait to
March 9, 2009 - 00:22 ET by bigtimerfut...
I can't wait to hear if Rush talks about this either...the blogs and internet do such a great job...we know one fact for certain, the msm isn't going to cover this any...unless Rush somehow makes an issue of this where they can't ignore the matter...and if they did have to face the facts like this, they would all be in unison with he same talking points spin.
→ He will bt
March 9, 2009 - 00:26 ET by Cool ArrowI'm betting Rush has an intern check out NB on a daily basis.
Obama - Change you can bereave in
Oh yeah, I'm quites sure
March 9, 2009 - 00:37 ET by bigtimerOh yeah, I'm quite sure of that too..along with emails he gets from here by some.
What I was really meaning is this started on other sites too...so I just hope all get mentioned, he sure thanked a lot of blog sites/members for their support Friday I think it was...anyway, this is great news and a great find....sure glad I saw it before I close out for the night..whenever that is...lol.
→ Just one catch
March 9, 2009 - 00:41 ET by Cool ArrowThose who wanted Bush to fail were exercising their patriotic right to protest.
Conservatives have no such right under a Liberal reign.
Obama - Change you can bereave in
Cool Arrow, I am waiting
March 9, 2009 - 01:21 ET by LiberalliesCool Arrow,
I am waiting for the knock on my door from the Liberal Gestapo.
I have a friend whose son went in for an interview for a high school scholarship. One of the questions that the panel of five Chicago Public Schools teachers asked him is what he tought of President Obama. My friend's son being very honest and incredibly smart told the panel that he did not like Obama. The kid gave his reason.
The five member panel sat with their mouth wide opened when they realized that the child had not been properly brainwashed by the Chicago public school system. AT one point he was asked, "what do your friends and teachers think of the fact that you do not like Obama" The kid answered, "I do not, I haven't asked them!" The five member panel actually went back and forth with the kid arguing with him about the greatness of Obama and the historic moment. I was impressed to see the 8th grader not budge at all.
The panel was literally mouth wide opened and dismayed that a public school latino student disliked Obama. Needless to say, he did not receive the scholarship.
But as we have always
March 9, 2009 - 08:11 ET by motherbeltBut as we have always known...it was patriotic to wish Bush to fail, it is unpatriotic to wish the Messiah, Obama, to fail.
You're right, and don't forget: since The Obama, it's actually cool to be patriotic again!!
Oh, yeah, I have a feeling this is going to be the entire first hour!
I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson
Liberallies- Rush already
March 9, 2009 - 19:42 ET by JAJTLiberallies-
Rush already brought it up today, i just went on his site and he talked about this.
this is something that republicans/conservatives need to bringup when they go on these MSM.they need to say, "for example in 2006 when 51% of the demorcrats wanted Bush to fail, the conservatives did not get in a twit over this, then go on and give an example of Obama's policy that is currently confusing and scaring people like why the economy is not getting better etc..
Noel
March 9, 2009 - 00:36 ET by NorthCoasterThanks for digging the info. out.
Hmmm 51%. Same group
March 9, 2009 - 01:13 ET by KevroyHmmm 51%. Same group that voted for the O.
They were misunderstood
March 9, 2009 - 01:16 ET by KC MulvilleThey didn't really mean it. They were misquoted. It was a mistake. (fade to John Belushi ...) Honest. I ran outta gas. I had a flat tire. I didn't have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn't come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from outta town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake, a terrible flood, locust's. It wasn't my fault!! I swear to God!!
Liberalism is a form of mental illness...
March 9, 2009 - 01:20 ET by AMR1960I use to think the phrase made a nice slogan. However this past election cycle and it's aftermath has solidly brought home the abject truism. The total disconnect in both deed & action by committed Liberals, their abandonment of principled continuity, regardless of the moment-to-moment political weather. It's all fair game to them. Nothing is beyond getting thrown under their bus, as it rolls-on in that insatiable quest & pursuit for control & power...
___________________________
Long Live...THE REPUBLIC !
Limbaugh's irresponsibility proved. Great find, Noel!
March 9, 2009 - 01:25 ET by JerThank you, Noel! This is the best evidence I've seen yet demonstrating the wrongheaded irresponsibility of Limbaugh's words.
This should settle the issue and hopefully elicit an apology from Rush.
Jer
Jer, Eh? you really see
March 9, 2009 - 01:28 ET by LiberalliesJer,
Eh? you really see it that way?
Amazing how you do not demand that the media apologizes and you do not demand and apology from your fellow Democrats who wished President Bush to fail.
You are quick to demand an apology from RUsh Limbaugh, will you demand one from the Democrats who clearly wanted Bush to fail?
Not to mention, that it has been Democrats claiming that it is unpatriotic to wish for any President to fail. Yet, as the poll shows, a majority of Democrats wanted Bush to fail.
Are you this blind to the media and Democrat hypocrisy?
I neither demanded nor
March 9, 2009 - 01:49 ET by JerI neither demanded nor expect an apology from Rush. The Democrats who hoped for Bush's personal failure were wrong and exercised very poor judgment--just like Limbaugh.
And note this was six years into Bush's presidency at a time when the pre-surge Iraqi war was going miserably. Even so, the Democratic pollster--the quoted spokesperson--deplored the results of the survey. On the other hand, Rush, before Obama took the oath of office, was already hoping for his failure and broadcasting this fact to his mammoth radio audience at a time when the country was [and still is]facing enormous financial peril, and Obama's "failure" would mean suffering for millions of Americans.
It was simply the wrong message at the wrong time.
Jer
Surely you jest Jer...the
March 9, 2009 - 01:59 ET by bigtimerSurely you jest Jer...the left never waited any six years to hope Bush failed in any way, shape or form.
bt...
March 9, 2009 - 02:45 ET by JerDo you think it was appropriate at any time for the Dems to hope for Bush's failure?
What do you think the poll results would have been on January 17, 2001?
How about on September 11, 2001?
Do you know of a single Democrat of national stature--politician or media figure--who publicly wished for Bush's failure at the beginning of his Presidency?
What do you think the poll results would be if the question were asked of Republicans about Obama on 1/17/2009? If asked of NB members then or now?
I'm interested in your views on this, bt. Thanks.
Jer
edit: I hope you will read Charney's article closely. He nails it--why it was wrong for Democrats in 2006, and by extension, why it was stunningly wrong for Rush on January 17. I don't know how Rush will spin this, but if I were him, I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole.
"Do you know of a single
March 9, 2009 - 03:13 ET by ckc1227"Do you know of a single Democrat of national stature--politician or
media figure--who publicly wished for Bush's failure at the beginning
of his Presidency?"
I can't right off hand. And? Are we only allowed to say something if democrats have said them first?
"I hope you will read Charney's article closely. He nails it--why it
was wrong for Democrats in 2006, and by extension, why it was
stunningly wrong for Rush"
Sorry, but I don't live in a vacuum. Must be that moral equivalence thing that confuses liberals so much. Just because one argument is wrong doesn't mean a similar argument is also wrong. Democrats hoping Bush would fail to win the war in Iraq is not the same as Rush hoping Obama fails to turn America into a European Marxist utopia.
And once again, for the liberal-impaired: Rush did not say he hopes Obama fails. He said he hopes he fails to turn this country into a Marxist paradise. But you knew that. Why let the facts get in the way of a good lie.
YOU ARE WRONG, ckc...
March 9, 2009 - 03:21 ET by JerAnd once again, for the liberal-impaired: Rush did not say he hopes Obama fails. He said he hopes he fails to turn this country into a Marxist paradise. But you knew that. Why let the facts get in the way of a good lie.
You are wrong, ckc...That's exactly what he said.
Please read Rush's original comments. I hope you will then have the integrity to apologize for calling me a liar.
Jer
Jer....you are wrong...
March 9, 2009 - 05:04 ET by NavyBuckeyeHere is the excerpt from his own transcript. Read it Jer. Analyze it with your liberal brain. Twist it around to meet your agenda. But its right here. It says he wants liberalism to fail not Obama....
"If I wanted Obama to succeed, I'd be happy the Republicans have laid down. And I would be encouraging Republicans to lay down and support him. Look, what he's talking about is the absorption of as much of the private sector by the US government as possible, from the banking business, to the mortgage industry, the automobile business, to health care. I do not want the government in charge of all of these things. I don't want this to work. So I'm thinking of replying to the guy, "Okay, I'll send you a response, but I don't need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails." (interruption) What are you laughing at? See, here's the point. Everybody thinks it's outrageous to say. Look, even my staff, "Oh, you can't do that." Why not? Why is it any different, what's new, what is unfair about my saying I hope liberalism fails? Liberalism is our problem. Liberalism is what's gotten us dangerously close to the precipice here. Why do I want more of it? I don't care what the Drive-By story is. I would be honored if the Drive-By Media headlined me all day long: "Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails." Somebody's gotta say it"
-Rush Limbaugh
“Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter” - Thomas Jefferson
Of course, Jer is now in
March 9, 2009 - 07:28 ET by NewsbusterbrownOf course, Jer is now in full Napoleon retreat mode after reading your post, Navy.
There comes a point that ignorance sometimes tranforms into lies. This idea that Rush meant that he wanted the country to fail to hurt Obama is an out-and-out lie.
“There are no easy answers' but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right.” - Ronald Reagan (1964 Republican Convention)
Right, Newsbusterbrown...
March 9, 2009 - 16:14 ET by JerRight, Newsbusterbrown...
Full retreat, having just read his post five minutes ago. Thanks for the chuckle.
Jer
No, NavyBuckeye...I am not wrong.
March 9, 2009 - 17:56 ET by JerNo, NavyBuckeye....I am not wrong. But I am very appreciative you did not accuse me of lying. Thanks.
I also appreciate your posted excerpt. It really wasn't necesssary for my benefit, since I had already printed out the entirety of Rush's remarks many days ago and have poured over them over very diligently several times.
Look, we could argue the issues of context, what Rush really meant, whether it was policy or personal, etc. until we're blue in the face. But let's address the simpler questions at hand: Was I wrong or was ckc wrong? Did I lie, as ckc charged?
Jer [02:49 to Liberallies]: ...Rush, before Obama took the oath of office, was already hoping for his failure....
Jer [3:45 to bt] Do you think it was appropriate at any time for the Dems to hope for Bush's failure?....
Do you know of a single Democrat of national stature--politician or media figure--who publicly wished for Bush's failure at the beginning of his Presidency?....
...it was wrong for Democrats...and stunningly wrong for Rush...
ckc1227 [4:13 to Jer] And once again, for the liberal-impaired: Rush did not say he hopes Obama fails....(and then ckc accuses me of lying) [My italics]
Jer [4:21 to ckc1227] You are wrong, ckc...That's exactly what he said.
NavyBuckeye: [06:04 to Jer] Here is the excerpt...
[Limbaugh's actual words]:
...Okay, I'll send you a response, but I don't need 400 words, I need four: I hope he fails....I would be honored if the Drive-By Media headlined me all day long: "Limbaugh: I Hope Obama Fails." Somebody's gotta say it.... [My Italics]
Now, if you want to argue context and appropriateness, I would suggest you read or reread Frum's take on it, because the sentiments he expresses and the points he makes regarding Limbaugh's choice of words are identical to mine.
In any event, it should be clear from the portions of the previous posts which I quoted above that I wasn't wrong and ckc's accusation was out of line.
Jer
Jer, You know, you can't
March 9, 2009 - 18:28 ET by LiberalliesJer,
You know, you can't have it both ways and try to wiggle out of what Rush said by claiming that you and other people can argue until they are blue in the office about what Rush said.
Rush either said he wanted Obama the person to fail or he said that he wanted Obama's policies to fail.
I have listened to Rush Limbaugh for many, many years, in fact since I was in junior high. I listened to Rush on the day he said he wants Obama's policies to say.
The first time he said this, he was replying to some newspaper that wanted Rush takes on Obama and what he wanted Obama to do. he said that he did not need to turn in an essay as the paper wanted, all he would need is three words, "Obama must fail!" He then went on to explain what he ment by this, and the next day he did the same thing and the next, and next, and next, and next, and next, and next!
He in fact has said that he hopse Obama succeeds in fighting terrorism, in the war in Afghanistan, against Iran, against N. Korea.
Rush has always clearly said that he wants Obama's policies to fail.
You cannot agree to this fact because it then removes from your mind the charicature that you have created in your head about Rush Limbaugh. To believe that he is not the mean, cruel, Eastern European thug is something that Liberals would not be able to comprehend.
I have come to realize that Liberals adore demonizing those that do not agree with them. It is impossible for most Liberals to believe that a Conservative can be compassionate, loving, etc.
Liberals hate Rush Limbaugh with a passion. I believe this whole attack against him by the Obama administration has backfired on them and the reason why they are backing off.
Sadly, as I have always pointed, 99.9% of the Liberals that hate Rush Limbaugh HAVE NEVER BOTHERED TO LISTEN TO HIM! They go by what the main stream media says about Rush.
It can't be both ways, Jer. Either Rush Limbaugh said what you claim he said, or he said what Conservatives say he said.
If you bothered to listen to him on a constant basis for over six weeks, you would realize he is not the evil persona he has been made out to be by the media.
And once again, PLEASE, Liberal pundits, Liberal politicians, Liberal voters wished failure on Bush since the day he started his Presidency.
Let us not forget the vicious attacks from the left on President Bush, but on his daughters, on his wife.
It is like with Sarah Palin, one day I am hearing the media go after Republicans for going after Obama's wife. The media said that a Presidential candidate's family was OFF LIMITS!!!
A few months later the media is doing everything in their power to destroy Sarah Palin and Democrats, Liberals AND the media are attacking Palin's kids! Hmmm...funny, right? a few months earlier these same hypocrites were preaching to Republicans and Conservatives that family was off-limits. I guess if you are a Democrat Presidential Candidate! sad, Jer, truly sad.
and let us not even start talking about the hit piece published by the NYT against Mrs. McCain and the loving, puff piece that the same propaganda, tabloid newspaper published about Mrs. Obama.
How can you liberals be so incredibly blind to your immense hypocrisy?
I mean seriously Jer, do you not see it? and I ask this question in all seriousness!
Liberallies...Thoughts on Rush
March 9, 2009 - 22:19 ET by JerYou know, you can't have it both ways and try to wiggle out of what Rush said by claiming that you and other people can argue until they are blue in the office about what Rush said.
Rush either said he wanted Obama the person to fail or he said that he wanted Obama's policies to fail.
No wiggling here. But it most certainly can be had both ways. Rush said both. Why should I be prevented from simply recognizing that fact.
You've probably read Frum's analysis, but it bears repeating:
Notice that Limbaugh did not say: "I hope the administration's liberal plans fail." Or (better): I know the administration's liberal plans will fail, as liberal plans usually do." If it had been phrased tht way, nobody could have used Limbaugh's words to misrepresent conservatives as clueless, indifferent or gleeful in the face of the most painful economic crisis in a generation. But then, if it had been phrased that way, nobody would have quoted his words at all--and as Limbaugh himself said, being "headlined" was the point of the exercise....
I do agree with Rush that Obama should not be accorded special deference or latitude just because he happens to be the first black President. But I strongly object to the way Rush personalized his hostility and conflated the individual with political policy. Particularly before the President-elect was even inaugurated. And, most important, during a time the nation was mired in a grave economic crisis. As Republican Governor Sanford noted--while disagreeing with Limbaugh [parphrasing]: We are all in the same boat, and if the President fails then all of America fails.
That salient point, sadly, appears to be entirely lost on Limbaugh, who martyrs himself with talk of being the "last man standing" and branding those Republicans who may be entertaining the heresy of bi-partisanship with the mark of "sellout". In Rush's simplistic, arguably dangerous view, co-operation with the enemy is anathema, for governance is more than a contest of good vs. better ideas, or even between right and wrong. Rather, it is a Manechian struggle pitting the forces of light against the forces of darkness--nothing less than a war between Good and Evil.
Rush has always clearly said that he wants Obama's policies to fail.
You cannot agree to this fact because it then removes from your mind the charicature that you have created in your head about Rush Limbaugh.
Wrong. I have not formed a "charicature in my mind". I have formed opinions based on listening to probably hundreds of hours of Rush throughout the 90's--much less so in recent years, but I contiune to tune in occasionally and also read transcripts of shows. I watched his lengthy CPAC address in its entirety twice, and also read the full transcript of his remarks.
, 99.9% of the Liberals that hate Rush Limbaugh HAVE NEVER BOTHERED TO LISTEN TO HIM! They go by what the main stream media says about Rush.
Liberals hate Rush Limbaugh with a passion. I believe this whole attack against him by the Obama administration has backfired on them and the reason why they are backing off.
I can only speak for myself. I don't hate Rush. That said, I do not believe he is a positive, constructive spokesperson for conservatism [in contrast to Bill Buckley for example]. For that matter, I do not care for Olbermann, Michael Moore, and various and sundry other liberal loudmouths and bombthrowers. Re. listening to Rush, please see my preceding comment.
And once again, PLEASE, Liberal pundits, Liberal politicians, Liberal voters wished failure on Bush since the day he started his Presidency.
I'm not from Missouri but I lived close by. So, I'll refer you to the state motto: Show Me!
Let us not forget the vicious attacks from the left on President Bush, but on his daughters, on his wife.
It was inexcuable, just as were the rhetorical excesses against Clinton and his family. Now, what's your point?
How can you liberals be so incredibly blind to your immense hypocrisy?
I mean seriously Jer, do you not see it? and I ask this question in all seriousness!
Again, I can only speak for myself. I am repelled by hypocrisy no matter who is guilty or what the circumstances may be.
Jer
Jer, 1) PLEASE STOP
March 9, 2009 - 22:42 ET by LiberalliesJer,
1) PLEASE STOP SAYING THAT OBAMA'S FAILURE IS AMERICA'S FAILURE! this is the biggest lie on planet Earth!
It is like saying Hitler's failure would have been Germany's failure. Sorry buddy, Hitler's failure would have ment that millions of Germans (not to mention millions of Jews) would not have suffered.
I am NOT comparing Obama to Hitler, I am just trying to make a point as strong as I can!
It is a Liberal canard to claim that Obama's failures means Americans and America fails.
2) Jer, you avoided at all cost to engage on the FACT that after the 2006 poll that showed a majority of Democrats wanted Bush to fail. You also failed to address the FACT that the main stream medai, Democrats, etc did not make a stink about it.
Why won't you address it? I think we know both why, this poll and the LACK of coverage in the main stream media and the lack of outrage by the Democrat politicians, Liberal pundits, Democrat voters shows the immense hypocrisy that plagues your party and your ideology.
3) I have tried to show you, and you refuse to acknowledge that Bush was wished by countless of Liberal pundits, politicians, Democrat voters complete and utter failure.
You never addressed the FACT that a national, syndicated radio host, on a NATIONAL radio show a Liberal pundit not only wished death on President Bush, she actually made the noise of a shot-gun blowing Bush's head off!!!!! WHERE IS YOUR OUTRAGE!!!!!! where was the media's outrage?!
I ask you again!!!!!!! what is worst, to wish that the President's policies fail or wisht the death of President?
c'mon Jer, how can you be so blind?!
stop addressing the points you can defend and address the whole POINT, the WHOLE POST!
You want a name that shows that Liberals wished failure on Bush....try Al Franken, Randi Rhodes, try Michael Moore....I am showing YOU and you refuse to see it.
It is like the attack on Rush Limbaugh that he used drugs.
How can any honest Liberal attack Limbaugh on drugs when their favorite god, Obama, was a cocaine addict?!
I mean honestly, how can you ask what is my point?!
Liberals love to attack, and not attack, but use dispicable, disgusting, embarrassing, horrific personal attacks on Conservatives and Republicans. Whether you like it or not, you are part of this ideology. How can you embrace an ideology, Liberalism, that embraces and pushed this type of garbage?!
The media and Democrats demanded that Republicans and Conservatives lay-off Mrs. Obama. Yet for the past 8 years the media and the Liberals attacked BUsh's daughters and Bush's wife. Weeks after demanding that Conservatives and Republicans lay-off Mrs. Obama, Democrats, Liberals and the media attacked with so much hate, with an incredible viciousness Sarah Palin and her family!!!!! I thought the media, Democrats and Liberals said family was off-limits!!!
my point Jer is the immense hypocrisy that exists in your party, in your ideology. Democrats and Liberals always attack Republicans and Conservatives for things that Liberals and Democrats have no problem doing.
Jer, final point. Just because you decided to shot your ears to Liberals and Democrats wishing Bush's failure, it does not mean it did not happened!
and you want proof?!!! LOOK AT THE FREAKING POLL THAT IS THE POINT OF THIS BLOG!
do you really need more proof than the 2006 poll showing that 51% of Democrats wished that Bush failed? wow!!!!
the proof is right infront of your nose and you refuse to acknowledge it. Explain why?!
Address ALL of my points Jer, not the ones that you believe you have an answer for.
Not to derail the thread futbol
March 9, 2009 - 23:02 ET by shawn228.....but speaking about proof in front of your nose. You can admit you are wrong and you totally misquoted me and I will address your questions since you asked me with cherries on top
He had my vote
Liberallies.. If you want
March 9, 2009 - 23:10 ET by JerLiberallies..
If you want me to adress all of your points, then STOP MAKING POINTS I HAVE PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED.
1) PLEASE STOP SAYING THAT OBAMA'S FAILURE IS AMERICA'S FAILURE! this is the biggest lie on planet Earth!
Better advise conservative Republican governor Terry Sanford that he is a liar. I repeated what HE said. But I do agree with him.
2) Jer, you avoided at all cost to engage on the FACT that after the 2006 poll that showed a majority of Democrats wanted Bush to fail. You also failed to address the FACT that the main stream medai, Democrats, etc did not make a stink about it.
Wrong. Already addressed BOTH POINTS on this thread.
You never addressed the FACT that a national, syndicated radio host, on a NATIONAL radio show a Liberal pundit not only wished death on President Bush, she actually made the noise of a shot-gun blowing Bush's head off!!!!! WHERE IS YOUR OUTRAGE!!!!!! where was the media's outrage?!
I ask you again!!!!!!! what is worst, to wish that the President's policies fail or wisht the death of President?
Wrong again. I have blasted Randi Rhodes, Olbermann, Schultz, Moore, and others. I have called for the firing of the despicable Mike Malloy. What conservative pundits/talkers have YOU criticized? Please be specfic.
I have never attacked Rush's drug problem. I have never attacked Palin. In fact I have said she was a fresh, new voice for the GOP and that I liked her.
Why have you not condemned the veiled threats made on Clinton's life by talk show hosts and others which I have brought up here and in previous threads. WILL YOU DO SO NOW?
Maybe you need to track back some of my comments over the last year and a half. You apparently have no clue about my history of condemning those on the left who behaved outrageously against Bush. I have consistently expressed my admiration for the entire Bush family.
Then we can continue.
Jer
Jer, 1) Please stop
March 9, 2009 - 23:28 ET by LiberalliesJer,
1) Please stop hiding with statements like, "Perhaps you should attack this Conservative because he said what I say".
You do not seem to know me either. You can ask anyone here, I do not go by what others believe or do not believe, whether they are on my "camp" or not.
You, as well as EVERY PERSON Republican, Democrat, Conservative, Liberal, Independent, Green Party, etc, etc, etc, etc, who claims that Obama's failures mean America fails is utterly and completly wrong. Period, end of story.
Please do not attempt to back up your points with me by pointing out some Conservative that agrees with you. Thanks!
2) You did it again! you demanded proof that showed Democrats wishing the failure of President Bush and you ignore it! IT IS RIGHT INFRONT OF YOUR NOSE! the poll above! address the FACTS.
3) Please show me the countless news stories on news papers, on the television media, on the Liberal and Democrat blogs and in fact in the right-wing blog too, that shows that the media, Democrats and Liberals were as outraged by the poll shown above as Rush Limbaugh's comments? Just because you said you proved it already, or addressed the point, it does not mean you have.
Use statistics and numbers.
Compare the number of news stories, the number of Democrats and Liberals that showed outrage on the results of these polls.
Now do the same with those that have shown outrage on Rush Limbaugh's comments.
You are not being honest if you are claiming that the same amoutn and kind of outrage exploded over the poll on this forum as over Rush's comments.
c'mon address the points! stop hiding by saying, "I already addressed that point over a year and a half ago"
the point is NOT YOU being outraged, fine if you say you were outraged, good for you! but the FACT that the media, Liberals and Democrats were NOT outraged when Randi Rhodes did what she did and this poll came out.
You support an ideology, you support a party that showed no outrage over Rhodes actions and no outrage over the polls above. and please once again, just because one or two Democrats were outraged it does not mean that the party as whole were outrage.
You can't sit there with a straight face and claim that the outrage over Rush's comments is equal to the lack of outrage over Rhodes comments and the poll above.
As I said, if I am wrong, prove me wrong!
link me to the countless stories on MSNBC, ABC, New York Times, Newsweeks, the cover of Newsweek with a picture of Rhodes with a tape over her mouth, The picture of Newsweek with a picture of the American people with a tape over their mouth. C'mon Jer. You demand a lot of proof, but you give very little!
Liberallies...
March 9, 2009 - 23:39 ET by JerHave you ever condemned a single statement by Limbaugh, Coulter, Savage, or any other conservative pundit or politician? I'm not saying you haven't. I'd just like an honest answer. I've responded to plenty of YOUR questions. How about answering that one of mine.
And one more: Fox News commissioned that poll back in 2006. They should have publicized it more. Had you ever heard of it?
Jer
Jer,1) I 100% dislike
March 9, 2009 - 23:55 ET by LiberalliesJer,
1) I 100% dislike Michael Savage. I do not like him at all. Just like I do not like Pat Buchanan, Mike Huckabee and other right wingers that are too far to the right. Michael Savage was attack unjustly by CAIR and I did back up his defense then, but other than that, I believe the man is a radical, much like Glen Beck. I know some Conservatives will jump all over me.
Ann coulter, oh yeah, I criticized her when she attack the wives of the fallen husbands of 9/11. I think she made a point, but how she delivered was completly and utterly distasteful. Some like it, and I do like a lot of what Ann Coulter has to say, but I did not defend this comment of hers.
Hannity, I remember him attacking the Catholic Churches stance that priest do not marry. You can bet I jumped all over Hannity for his ignorant comment.
I criticized Bush plenty of times, over spending, he did not have a good communication skils, he did not defend Conservative principles.
Shall I continue?
Don't fall into the trap that us Conservatives are one and the same. We are far from it.
I have disagreed plenty of times with plenty of Republicans and Conservatives. However, in order for my cause to win I try to practice what Benjamin Franklin said, "If we do not hang together, we will surely hand seperatly".
2)What does it have to do with anything that Foxnews commissioned the poll?
the FACT is that 99% of the media, 99% of Democrats and 99% of Liberals, did not find it outrageous. However, 99% of the media, 99% of Democrats and 99% of Liberals find Rush Limbaugh's comments outrageous?
c'mon Jer.
You demanded proof of Democrats wishing Bush to fail. I give it to. and now you don't address the point, instead you change the conversation and ask that I answer your questions.
If you are the honest, trust worthy Liberal/Democrat that you claim you are, you would address the obvious points.
1)While Democrats (pundist, politicians AND voters) wished with all their heart and souls that Bush failed. They are outraged when anyone wants their President to fail. Do you not find this disturbing?
2) The obvious hypocrisy displayed by the media, Democrats and Liberals.
3) You might want to excuse the lack of coverage on the 2006 poll on the fact that Foxnews did not publicize it more back then.
However, how do you explain the lack of media, Liberal and Democrat outrage over Randi Rhodes "assasination" of President Bush? Will you also blame the lack of outrage on Foxnews?
Randi Rhodes pretends to kill President Bush-no outrage from the media, from Democrats or Liberals.
Rush Limbaugh says that he hopes that Obama's policies fail- complete and utter outrage from the media, Liberals and Democrats.
are you seroiusly equating the two? are you seriously excusing the media, the Liberals and the Democrats for their lack of outrage over Randi Rhodes comments? or maybe you will blame Foxnews and Rush Limbaugh?
Liberallies...
March 10, 2009 - 00:12 ET by JerThank you for your comments about Savage and Coulter. As far as policy criticisms of Bush or other mainstream conservatives, that's not really the information I was seeking. But, again, I appreciate your remarks.
Once more, I have already expressed my view about the poll in an earlier post. Randi Rhodes [whom I have excoriated] apologized for that incident you mentioned and claimed it was unintentional. It still was inexcusable, in my opinion. But, Rhodes vs. Rush is like comparing a flea to an elephant. When she has 20 million listeners, is wined and dined at the White House, labeled a national treasure, is made an honorary member of Congress, and is called the most important ideological voice in the nation, then the lack of widespread condemnation might be more relevant.
Anyway, buddy, that's all I've got time for tonight. Talk to you later.
Jer
tick..tock.....tick..tock...
March 9, 2009 - 20:54 ET by Jertick..tock.....tick..tock...
Still waiting for the expected apology, ckc...not that I'm demanding one.
Jer
There's some doubt about this?
March 9, 2009 - 07:15 ET by danebramage"Do you think it was appropriate at any time for the Dems to hope for Bush's failure"
Absolutely. We no longer live in a country with two competing visions of the Constitution. We live in a country with one (more or less, and increasingly less) Constitutional party, and one party devoted to the overthrow of the Constitution. It would be insane, not to mention laughably stupid, to expect either party to hope for the success of the other.
Could we all grow up, please, and stop with this childish nonsense?
Jer, I do like your
March 9, 2009 - 14:46 ET by LiberalliesJer,
I do like your "...it was wrong for Democrats in 2006..." yet you call it, "...stunningly wrong for Rush on January 17..." somehow your words imply that it was worst for Rush to say it, than for the Democrat's and Independents that were polled in 2006.
Additionally, an you have not addressed this issue at all....
what do you make of the obvious hypocrisy of the reaction to the poll back in 2006 by the main stream media, Democrat pundits, Liberal pundits, Democrat politicians, etc. Oh, that is right, there was NO NATIONAL OUTCRY AT THIS FINDING! by the left in 2006!!!!!!!!!
so, we go back to the usual Liberal hypocrisy. It is ok for Liberals and Democrats to wish for a Republican President to fail (and one Democrat or even a handful of Democrats saying in 2006 that it is wrong to wish the President to fail does NOT compare to the current national outcry by the national media and the Democrat/Liberal establishment over Rush's words---SO STOP COMPARING THE TWO!), but it is a national sin, unpatrotic, evil, "...stunningly wrong..." (to use your words) for Rush and many Republicans to wish Obama's policies to fail. please, oh please! all I see is crocodile tears coming out of you Liberals.
are you truly this blind by your Liberal ideology?
This should settle the
March 9, 2009 - 07:50 ET by bretzysdudeThis should settle the issue and hopefully elicit an apology from Rush.
Sounds like a demand or an expectation to me.
Liar.
bretzydude...You
March 9, 2009 - 16:38 ET by Jerbretzydude...
You obviously can't comprehend plain English. Take a remedial reading course, you idiot.
Jer
edit: Instead of deleting this post, I am going to allow my words to remain, but recant my accusation and apologize to you. Having reread and thought about my original statement, I realize that it was not unreasonable to conclude I "expected" an apology from Rush. In my mind, at the time I composed the sentence in question, I was neither demanding nor had any realistic expectation of an apology, but my wording could certainly have been better.
That said, I strive very hard to maintain a reputation for honesty. I may be wrong on occasion. I make mistakes. I may misinterpret. But I have never intentionally posted falsehoods.
Anyway, I am sorry. Maybe I could benefit from a remedial writing course.
Jer
Jer, You say,
March 9, 2009 - 13:45 ET by LiberalliesJer,
You say, "..."failure" would mean suffering for millions of Americans..." you truly believe this? you believe that if Obama fails millions of Americans will suffer? Sorry, Obama socialist policies is what is going to hurt, as we are already seeing, millions of Americans. Obama's failure in implementing his Liberal/socialist views means that millions of Americans WILL NOT SUFFER! This is why we need Obama to fail.
Also, please don't cry me a river, Liberals wished President Bush to fail from day ONE of his Presidency. Think of the Hollywood Liberals, Michael Moore, Susan Serandon, etc. There were also Democrat politicians and the media going after him. Do you forget the early stories about the Bush administration that supposedly Bush was not working 8 hours a day and he was taking vacations right and left as President? Even after 9/11 do you remember the media, Democrats and Liberal pundits saying that why was Bush attacking Afghanistant which was already in the stone age and it would not do anything to destroy Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
You also seem to forget radio personalities wishing President Bush's death. Randy Rhodes going on national radio and doing as shot-gun sound blowing Bush's head off. Where was YOUR outrage back then? where was the media and the Democrat outrage back then?
Where was your outrage when Harry Reid went on national television and claimed that Bush had failed in Iraq, that our troops had failed in Iraq and that we had lost the war in Iraq??? Where was the Democrat, the media's, YOUR outrage?
what is worst, wishing a President to fail or wishing the death of a President?
Don't be such a typical Liberal hypocrite, Jer. Liberals wished a lot more bad things than failure on Bush the past 8 years. and NO ONE on the left, no one in the media made a big deal about it.
Please point me to all the television, radio and newspaper stories that show the outrage by the national media and the Democratic party when a huge Liberal radio personality said on live radio that she wanted Bush dead?!
How about the movie that came out showing Bush's assasination? where was your outrage then? where was the media's, the Democrats and YOUR outrage then?
Liberals not only wished Bush to fail, they claimed he stole the election and did everything within their power to decrease Bush's standing in the world and in America as our President!
So, Jer, please! Wishing that Obama's Liberal/socialist policies fail for the good of the nation is NOTHING compared to how Bush was treated for the past 8 years by the Democrat party, Liberal pundits, the national media and individuals like you.
Make sure that your house is not made out of glass before you start throwing stones at someone elses house.
Rush Limbaugh, as quoted by someone else here, didn't wish Obama's death. he did not wish Obama's person to fail, he wished for Obama's ultra-liberal/socialist policies to fail.
Don't you get it Jer?! Millions of Americans are already suffering thanks to Obama, the failure of his policies will mean thath millions more will not suffer and those that are suffering will not suffer for long. If Obama succeeds in implementing his radical Liberal policies it means that millions upon millions of Americans will suffer.
Thus, given the choice, yes Jer, I wish with all my heart and soul and I pray every single night that President Barack Hussein Obama, our 43th President of the United States of America is a complete and utter failure. His failure means that millions of Americans will not suffer.
Please Jer, get a clue.
Liberallies
March 9, 2009 - 14:07 ET by MrShyThank you. Spot-on, all of that.
Curious how Jer will respond.
You're the next contestant on...
THE MESSIAH IS... LEFT !!
My response, MrShy...
March 9, 2009 - 18:45 ET by JerThank you. Spot-on, all of that.
Curious how Jer will respond.
You have your head up your A$$. How's that?
[Just kidding. You really don't...do you?]
Jer
→ Jer
March 9, 2009 - 18:49 ET by Cool ArrowStalin succeeded.
It's just that tens of millions of Russians failed.
Obama is succeeding and it hurts
Jer, Sorry, Obama is our
March 9, 2009 - 14:26 ET by LiberalliesJer,
Sorry, Obama is our 44th President, not 43rd. I know you liberals all too well and you'll grab unto this mishap by me in order to not answer to the facts.
Liberallies...
March 9, 2009 - 18:04 ET by JerThen you don't know me very well. I only "grab onto" material misstatements--not trivialities such as that.
Jer
Jer, YOU DID IT!!! you
March 9, 2009 - 18:13 ET by LiberalliesJer,
YOU DID IT!!! you grabbed unto my statement of the 43rd President and you did not reply to the post above.
I told you, I know you Liberals very, very well. As Limbaugh would say, "I know Liberals as well as every glorious part of my naked body!"
c'mon Jer, you have to admit that you replied to the 43rd President thing and not to the post above.
I am sorry, I do know Liberals all too well.
Liberallies...HOLD YOUR HORSES!
March 9, 2009 - 18:36 ET by JerI'll get around to you. I promise.
Jer
→ Fut, Jer - both right
March 9, 2009 - 18:16 ET by Cool ArrowGrover Cleveland was both the 22nd and 24th President.
You can say there have only been 43 Presidents.
Obama is succeeding and it hurts
Cool Arrow, Hahaha! leave
March 9, 2009 - 18:31 ET by LiberalliesCool Arrow,
Hahaha! leave it up to you to show that a Liberal and a Conservative are both right! hahaha!
Hmmm...not to get us started in a very old, old debate that was banned from Newsbusters....wish we could have done the same with our religions/faiths. (ok, not comments on this now Cool Arrow) :-) Imagine a Catholic and a Protestant both correct on God, right? hahaha!! ok, ok, I'll stop. We never end up in good terms when we debate Christianity.
I like the fact that you are a Conservative Cool Arrow and so am I. :-)
→ Fut
March 9, 2009 - 18:38 ET by Cool ArrowFut, I've got a strong feeling Christians will be much closer together in the coming year.
Obama is succeeding and it hurts
Cool Arrow, I could not
March 9, 2009 - 18:46 ET by LiberalliesCool Arrow,
I could not agree more with you!!! Christians will unite in the next couple of years. WE HAVE TO!
We are living under Obomination. We will all of God's mercy and help to with stand his terrible policy.
This thread is such a waste
March 9, 2009 - 18:57 ET by JasonCThis thread is such a waste of space it's almost physically painful.
Conservatives, in their feverish attempts to validate Rush, wholeheartedly insist that he was simply saying that he hopes the implementation of the policies fails.
Liberals, in their feverish attempts to vilify Rush, wholeheartedly insist that he was saying that he hopes the policies themselves fail, thus discrediting Obama even at the cost of decimating the American economy.
It's just that simple.
So which was he saying? Only Rush knows. And it pains me to say it, but I'd have to throw my hat in with the former of the two options, and agree that the sleazy old reactionary windbag wants Obama's allegedly socialistic policies to fail to be implemented because - in his ever so even-keeled worldview - the failure of leftist policies will somehow mitigate the failure of laissez-faire capitalism policies.
Hardly Jason
March 9, 2009 - 19:01 ET by BlondeIt garnered comments by Rush today.
Sauce for the goose.
Have you bothered to actually READ the transcript of what Rush said, which included "I hope he fails"?
Try reading it in context.....the context in which it was said, by R. Limbaugh.
Then get back to us.
I hope he fails, too.
"Former" means the first
March 9, 2009 - 19:07 ET by JasonC"Former" means the first one, i.e., I agree with the conservative argument, however nauseating most conservatives' presentation of that argument is - not to mention the idea that Limbaugh is someone who is so cruelly misunderstood and abused.
So, yeah, try reading my post "in context".
It garnered comment from the grand poobah of dittoheads, did it? Wow, it must be pressingly newsworthy then...
Even with all the ad hominem attacks, it is nice to hear you.
March 9, 2009 - 19:22 ET by JWFHowever, whilst all the arguing has been asunder, we have moved to phase II.
He IS failing.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
In the presumed Limbaughian
March 9, 2009 - 19:29 ET by JasonCIn the presumed Limbaughian sense or in the sense that liberals accuse him of saying it? Because as I recall, the package passed. So now the only hope for failure would be for the failure of the so-called stimulus, i.e. hoping for the kind of failure that WOULD be bad for the nation.
Why do you people support this guy so vehemently? He's nothing but the conservative Michael Moore. And if he is in fact the face of the GOP...well, I know I'd find (or found) a new party.
Not just liberals, Jason
March 9, 2009 - 19:30 ET by JerNot just liberals, Jason...Republicans [now tattooed with the scarlet letters: RINO] such as Bill Bennett, Newt Gingrich, David Frum, Congressmen Cantor and Gingrey, and Michael Steele (and I'm confident there are many others) have also disagreed with Rush's statement about Obama failing. Of course, Gingrey and Steele both bowed to pressure and backpedaled.
Jer
Uncle Jer ignores me.
March 9, 2009 - 19:34 ET by JWFThe whole thing is officially moot Uncle Jer.
I called it at 5:09 PM CST 9Mar2009.
He now IS failing.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
→ JWF
March 9, 2009 - 20:21 ET by Cool ArrowI disagree.
There is absolutely no reason to believe the economic course this President is sailing is anything but intentional.
He is not failing by the standards he set on the campaign trail, and he is not failing by the standards of Socialism.
It's hard to believe we have a leader whose beliefs are so diametrically opposed to our own, but this President is methodically demonstrating an intent to drain the reservoir until all boats rest on the bottom.
Obama is succeeding and it hurts
Oh Oh Oh! Flame on pal! Flame war! Flame war! Flame war!
March 9, 2009 - 20:56 ET by JWFI cannot believe I am about to take on teh Cool Arrow.
But here goes...
Good point sir.
He is failing the oath of office would be my contention. (Don't forget what time I called it!)
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States
I hope and I see some rumblings, but even people of his own party are starting to see the light. So he may start failing his own agenda soon. Let's keep our fingers cross and keep up the good fight.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
→ JWF
March 9, 2009 - 22:55 ET by Cool ArrowYour Kung-Fu is good but you rack disciprine.
We are proving, between the two of us that success and failure are totally dependant on the whose ox is being gored.
Reuters is an example, remember? Terrorist = Freedom fighter.
No doubt about it. Liberals know this game of semantics. They used it against Bush. And we remember.
Obama is succeeding and it hurts
→ And you're right
March 9, 2009 - 22:58 ET by Cool ArrowHe never intended to uphold the Constitution. I posted at the inauguration there was a chance he'd steer to the middle.
Boy, was I ever wrong.
Obama is succeeding and it hurts
JasonC (& Jer - you JasonC skirt-chaser, you ;))
March 9, 2009 - 20:44 ET by MrShyThis thread is such a waste of space it's almost physically painful.
Said the guy now "wasting" 5 more paragraphs of space.
And, true to form with so many liberals who pretend to be centrists, he attempts to side with Rush only to end with the ultimate ironic (see: laughably hypocritical) backhand to his, er, compliment of Limbaugh, calling him:
"sleazy old reactionary windbag"
From a person who sides with Exhibit A's of...
sleazy - Chuck Schumer, Charles Rangal, Blago and just about every sleazy crook from Chicago, including our President (ugh.... he really is our prez, isn't he? ... *shakes head*)
old - Dems and liberal windbags on TV (see next item) seem to be cornering the "old" market.
reactionary - Which basically involves emotion, and liberals are the KINGS of emotional responses, specifically with the endless list of leftist windbags all over the mainstream media... a list I don't even need to go into, as I know you know it (Spit Matthews, Olbermann, et al...)
windbag - Well, pretty much the same list as "reactionary", but throw in just about every Democrat politician these days, too.
Our President is two of these four and our VP (you know, the one you all screamed about Palin being "a heartbeat away, yada...." from the President) is 100% ALL FOUR!!
You're the next contestant on...
THE MESSIAH IS... LEFT !!
Your point about Democrats
March 10, 2009 - 07:00 ET by JasonCYour point about Democrats is taken, but I certainly don't see how it makes me a hypocrite since I'm consistently on record as loathing that party.
Reactionaries who live in glass houses shouldn't throw bathos, if you know what I mean... [worst metaphor ever]
Jer, Just out of
March 9, 2009 - 06:42 ET by hydrodynDMJer,
Just out of curiosity, would you agree that the media is showing a double standard here? I mean, I don't recall much coverage of that 2006 poll, do you?
I know this isn't relevant to your original comment, but it is relevant to Mr. Sheppard's original post.
Also, assuming Limbaugh is being a hypocrite (just for the sake or argument), would you agree that all the Democrats and Liberals who are jumping all over Limbaugh for this comment are being just as hypocritical? Again, I don't recall any Democrats or Liberals denouncing their brethren when that poll came out.
hydrodynDM...
March 9, 2009 - 18:25 ET by JerI don't recall much [or any] coverage either, nor, consequently, any denunciations from liberals or Democrats.
Interestingly, however, this was a Fox poll, and one would think that at least that network would have been trumpeting the results at every opportunity.
As I posted earlier, the one significant spokesperson whose views regarding the poll have been cited is a Democrat. And his perspective is the same as mine, and (along with Frum) encapsulates my reasoning process in concluding Limbaugh's words were inappropriate.
Are the Democrats condemning Rush hypocritical? For those who said the same about Bush, yes, to a degree. But there are distinctions to which I have previously alluded that, in my opinion, make Rush's case the more egregious one.
Jer
incorrigible
March 9, 2009 - 13:55 ET by katainkentyou are absolutely incorrigible!
You talking to me?
March 9, 2009 - 22:31 ET by JerYou talking to me? Hey, are you talking to me?
If so, I'm sorry you feel that way. I had always thought of myself as extremely corrigible.
Jer
Facts? So...
March 9, 2009 - 01:39 ET by HillbillyKing(venting on)Is this really gonna change anything?
Facts are only useful when engaging someone that possesses the faculties to incorporate that information into their position reassessment.
Those that are capable of original thought are quite aware of the pathological nature of the lefts hypocrisy. This information simply reinforces that notion.
Rules of argumentation and debate DO NOT apply when dealing with the automatons that make up the majority of the left. Really, how often have you presented someone with truth, only to have them go, "So?".
And there in lies one of the problems: Why do we continue fighting this "war" with methods that offer no hope of success? I mean really, do we fight honorably and lose, OR do we fight dirty and win? I vote win, but right now I seem to be in the minority. (venting off)
Ok, I'm better, for now ;-)
Thank you for your research Mr. Sheppard. I, for one, enjoy articles that offer evidence and opinion. Keep up the good work.
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Don Marquis 1878-1937
That the democrats only
March 9, 2009 - 02:35 ET by ConservativeRexThat the democrats only wanted Bush to fail. Those numbskulls wanted him in jail! They wanted worse.
Look, all the caterwauling done by the left is just another in a long line of ruses to try and take everyone off the subject. There is not a Conservative walking around who does not want ANY socialist policy foisted upon the Amercian public to fail, no matter which lamebrain democrat proposes it. This time it happened to be Obama.
So yes, I too hope he fails miserably. It is not up to me to make, nor do I owe anyone an obligation to make, their house note. Not now, not ever. Those that think so are stealing. Those with no self pride that they let the government do it for them, are the worst of cowards. Not fit to be a citizen in a strong, free, country.
Time to move the Goalposts/change the subject:
March 9, 2009 - 04:50 ET by Red JeepAs soon as the Dems become aware that their hypocrasy has been again revealed they will just move along to the next issue they want to harp on and drop mention of Rush.
They didn't just want Bush to fail they wanted him to DIE ...
March 9, 2009 - 05:49 ET by Jayke... Have we forgotten all those posters, bumper stickers (you can still see some of these), plays and movies wishing for Bush to be assassinated? They called it "Assassination Chic":
http://michellemalki...
Good point Jayke. The
March 9, 2009 - 08:49 ET by BDGood point Jayke. The left endlessly sought the demise of the Administration leaders, yet was not called on it.
For the record, I have not seen a similar point of view from the conservative side of the aisle proving once again that conservatives are more congenial than Liberals.
(Anyone remember the "Black men have heart disease, I hope Clarence Thomas wife feeds him lots o Cholesterol... statement of about fifteen years ago?)
Really, BD...
March 9, 2009 - 18:31 ET by JerCome visit me in Atlanta and I can take you to places where they still sell gun targets with Bill Clinton's head imprinted on the bullseye.
And we can discuss the talk show host who lamented on air that there wasn't a firing squad available to take care of Clinton.
And, believe me, there's plenty more.
Jer
But it was not the leaders
March 10, 2009 - 09:49 ET by BDBut it was not the leaders of the party or the parties intelligentsia that fostered that. They did not go on the air and make such statements.
Nor was it members of the press who wished to see WJB Clinton executed.
It was members of the grassroots. While I expect certain members of the grass roots to seek the destruction of the opponent on both parties, I never see the party leadership doing so on the right, but the left revels in it.
2006 Poll
March 9, 2009 - 06:53 ET by GeneralAlOnce again, we have, a case of NIMRODS [Negligent Intentional Media Recusal Of Democrat Stats!]. I really don't like to insult the worlds's Nimrods but the name fits the acronym! The TASS and PRAVDA robots in America would never print anything bad about their fellow members of the Communist Party of America, aka Democrat Party! Interesting, Rush says he wants Obama's economic policies to fail as they currently exist and the press goes wild with its distortions. They lift one statement out of context and keep it on the front page while the Teleobamessiah takes us quietly down the road to Socialism! The Demicomms of 2006 say they want Bush to fail while we are at war and its no big deal! These spoiled little brats need to be spanked and sent to their rooms with no supper, no cell phone, no I-pod, and no TV!
I see you don't get t he point of this site
March 9, 2009 - 07:13 ET by theduck6Since you post as if you're not a stranger I have to assume you "just don't get it anytime". I doubt many here think conservatives or republicans are blameless, guiltless or prure. We are all humans and screw up every now and then. The point of this site is to point out the one sided, blatantly biased treatment of conservatives and the sycophancy and favorable treatment of liberals and...socialists.
How short are peoples memories
March 9, 2009 - 07:25 ET by richb313Remember the election in 2000? Remember the endless recounts in Florida with the flexible rules that were so out of bounds that the US Supreme court had to Over-rule the Florida Supreme Court. Then remember how the Florida Supreme Court ignored the US Supreme Court and finally the US Supreme Court had to rule again to stop the Florida Supreme Court from abausing thier power?
Does anyone remember the Caterwalling from the Democrats in the House that President Buush had not been legitimately elected? Does anyone remember the endless re-recounts done by the Press to try and prove he was not elected?
It was only after 9/11 for a period of a few months (2 or 3) that the endless berating of all things Bush seemed to take pause. I can remember no President in my memory that had such universal derision and hate thrown at him from the beginning. While they may have not used the phrase "I want him to fail" the intent was clear to see for any one with just 1 or 2 functioning brain cells.
I find what Rush said to be refreshingly honest. He is saying out loud that he wants Obama to Fail, but unlike Bush Bashers it was not out of some personal vendetta but because he differs with the man on a philosophical level. BDS worked on a different level. It was aimed on a personal destructive level, an entirely different thing.
So Jer, you are either being less than honest, or you are mentally challenged by BDS and that has so corrupted your world view that you just cannot see it. So in a way it is not your fault, you are just unable to differentiate the Political from the Personal.
Jack Welch (ret from GE)
March 9, 2009 - 08:31 ET by marpelJack Welch (ret from GE) was on Morning Joe today. He talked about how if you say ANYTHING about Barack Obama, you're tagged as a rascist. He said even his daughters accuse him of this when he criticizes BO's approach to the economy. He doesn't think Obama's bad, but he's entitled to an opinion.
This is the first accomplishment by BO and his minions. The brainwashing is in full force. That's the first step. Next stop, the government seizes control over our money. Then, eventually, we're not in a socialistic nation, but a communist nation. I'm just sick about this. I didn't vote for this guy, but it's creepy to watch this happen. In the back of my mind, when he was elected, I felt we would not ever let this happen, and it's happening!!!
Re Welch
March 9, 2009 - 10:19 ET by slickwillie2001Sad but true poster. This why I have been pointing out that opinion polls on Obammy are not going to be accurate. American citizens are being cowed into silence on Obammy's performance, and as a result when a pollster calls they are afraid to say that they disapprove of him. Obammy is likely getting at least a ten-point bump in the polls because of this effect.
This is of course in addition to existing liberal bias in the media which favors democratics.
Liberalism and Obammy's thuggish behavior will destroy our ability to have an honest conversation about politics.
The new Bunglers Bungle Again!
March 9, 2009 - 09:06 ET by jabelsonleave it to the news bunglers to get the story wrong: there's a huge difference between generic Democrats anonymously answering a poll and a major media celebrity - and defacto Republican leader like Limbaugh (as well as Republicans in congress) - wishing failure on the president. Also, Noel - don't you think that question should've been asked in 2001 - not in the waning years of the Bush administration? If in LATE 2012 Obama is as unpopular as Bush was in 2006 (44%) - then let's have a conversation, but for major league republicans to call for failure when Obama is just out of the gate is not only disgusting - it's unpatriotic. If you want to be honest - and we know you don't - find a democratic celebrity - say Alan Colmes or Paul Krugman or even Noam Chomsky openly wishing failure on Bush in 2001 - we know how generic republicans feel about Obama - the polls already bear that out - but the difference between Rush and the average Joe on the street is as wide as the gap between the truth and this article...
And you need to get your
March 9, 2009 - 09:06 ET by motherbeltAnd you need to get your story straight. But that doesn't serve your purpose.
The media in 2006 wanted Bush to fail in a war we were engaged in. They didn't care if America lost a war to a third-world group of terrorists and thousands of Americans died in vain. They wanted their country to fail so that Bush would look bad.
Rush has explained repeatedly that he hopes Obama fails at implementing his plans for a socialist America. He knows what Obama's aims are, and he hopes he fails at them. So do I.
And I'll refrain from calling you moron, because I know Noel doesn't need any help from me in taking you down.
I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson
Mother B, you're absolutely
March 9, 2009 - 09:21 ET by marpelMother B, you're absolutely correct!! If anyone needs an example of a Liberal PRAYING for Bush to fail (we have so many, I lost count), all we need to say is OLBERMANN. His diatribes against Bush were so disrespectful to not only our President, but to the nation, he should be tried for treason.
So, don't tell me Rush Limbaugh was out of line. At least Rush is heads above KO in intellect. He also doesn't paint himself as something he's not like Olbermann. I hope Olbermann reads this...it may be too difficult for him to comprehend though.
A Lie - plain and simple
March 9, 2009 - 10:05 ET by jabelson"The media in 2006 wanted Bush to fail in a war we were engaged in. They didn't care if America lost a war to a third-world group of terrorists and thousands of Americans died in vain."
Just because you say it, doesn't make it ture - find me ONE quote from responsible media - the WaPo, the NY Times, Newsweek, calling for failure...
One single quote.
Or STFU...
Get a grip
March 9, 2009 - 10:31 ET by general companyAlso, Noel - don't you think that question should've been asked in 2001 - not in the waning years of the Bush administration?
Your lame excuses aside, why or how is this any different? We want Obamas policies of Gov control to fail. You and your bunch just wanted Bush to fail, why? I dont believe even you morons know? Their are plenty of examples of what you claim to want to know right here in these pages, but we both know you dont want a clue, you have your ideology.
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
Time for you to STFU
March 9, 2009 - 12:05 ET by CobraMan"find me ONE quote from responsible media - the WaPo, the NY Times, Newsweek, calling for failure"
All of the media sources you cite all publicly stated their desire that Bush fail to "win" the 2000 recount, remember? And, after he didn't fail, they all claimed that Bush was "selected and not elected," remember? Newsweek itself said that Bush was "unfit for office" since he was "selected and not elected." So, I guess that it's your turn to STFU.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court
Sorry but I don't consider
March 9, 2009 - 12:20 ET by Jack BauerSorry but I don't consider the Post, Times and Newsweek to be "responsible."
I consider those three in particular to be media arms of the Democrat party.
But even so, your whole line of reasoning seems rather incoherent.
And, as an aside, this website will not STFU -- as you so elegantly request. So you might want to find another site more condusive to your totalitarian tendencies. Like Daily Kos.
Mommy forget to pack the double stuffed oreo's again, jabelson?
March 9, 2009 - 13:27 ET by JWFWazza matter? Not get your stimulus job yet? Didn't get your free healthcare? Obama not personally wiping your glazed donut nose? What more are you looking for, mooch?
You come in with your ad hominem attacks and think you are going to be taken seriously?
You are a pathetic whiny little mooch and that is all you will ever be. It is why PEOPLE DO NOT LIKE YOU. It is why you will die alone. WE ARE NOT HERE TO FIX YOUR MYRIAD PSYCHOLOGICAL MOMMY RELATED ISSUES.
Now wipe that snot off your face and act like you are part of the civilized world.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
I want Obama to fail.
March 9, 2009 - 11:48 ET by CobraManI want Obama to fail, and I'm not afraid to say it. You see, Obama isn't America. Obama can fail and America will still exist. We don't elect Emperors, we elect Presidents. Our very government is construct to allow for even the failure of a Presidency without it destroying government itself.
Many Presidents have failed in the past, and America has survived. Obama's just a man, and men can, and do, fail. Lincoln failed at uniting America, and we had a Civil War, remember? Lincoln failed and 650,000 Americans died as a result of that failure, yet America survived, did it not?
There's nothing unpatriotic about failure. There's also nothing unpatriotic in publicly stating that you want someone to fail. That's all a part of Freedom of Speech, remember?
I'll say it again: I want Obama to fail, miserably. I want Obama to fail, completely. I want Obama to fail, period!
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court
Generically speaking you're an idiot
March 9, 2009 - 12:45 ET by Jack Bauerthere's a huge difference between generic Democrats anonymously answering a poll
That's gibberish. You appear to be talking through your backside.
There's no such thing as a "generic" Democrat in the context of those polled. Those polled are selected precisely because they are placed in a specific group. That's what polling organizations do. They seek out "specific" not "generic" in a polling sample to match the general population.
In other words, the opposite of what you mistakenly state.
For instance, pollsters look for very precise subsets within groups, based on age, sex, race, income, location, et al. Specific is the antonym of "generic"
However pollsters will use a "generic" Democrat or Republican candidate when polling on, for example Obama versus the next Republican candidate whoever that may be. That person would be a generic Republican -- because no one knows who that person is.
The rest of your post is a confused as your reasoning. What an incoherent mess.
Lost profile pic?
March 9, 2009 - 14:09 ET by HillbillyKingjabelson in action Jack!
http://www.photoshop...
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you.
Don Marquis 1878-1937
ha ha hillbilly -- that's a
March 9, 2009 - 14:36 ET by Jack Bauerha ha hillbilly -- that's a revolting pic! Let's hope he knows his ass from his elbow more than he knows his generic from his specific.
You two are dangerous
March 9, 2009 - 14:39 ET by BlondeGood thing you are separated by the pond.
Let's hope he knows his ass from his elbow more than he knows his generic from his specific.
Oh ho. That was really good!
I hope he fails, too.
hey blonde why no twitter!
March 9, 2009 - 14:51 ET by Jack Bauerhey blonde why no twitter! I'm really getting into this pointless but neveretheless addictive activity!
Hope he fails. Change his Marxism.
Rush can also bring up the
March 9, 2009 - 08:56 ET by ricklailRush can also bring up the fact that the Boston Globe was calling this national health care scheme the Ted Kennedy Health Care Act long before he ever mentioned it. I can't find the link anymore
Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same. RWR
I hope Rush gets this.
March 9, 2009 - 09:03 ET by JWFHe thanked Newsbusters last week.
This whole Rush/Steele wedge attempt is yet another mock outrage coming from the Democrat party.
Once again, only those of us that actually attempt to stay informed see it. And the MSM will refuse to point it out for the uninformed.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
Uncle Jer! We beg to differ.
March 9, 2009 - 09:43 ET by JWFYou are wrong and you have a few fallacious arguments.
Obama's "failure" would mean suffering for millions of Americans.
President Obama is advocating MASSIVE growth in government spending in the face of a recession. This means even more money will be coming out of the private sector just as the recession should end. His change is MASSIVE growth of entitlement programs. The money for these entitlement programs come from the private sector. All growth of GDP in this country comes from the private sector. President Obama is asking to SHRINK the private sector. If massive entitlement programs were to work so wonderfully in a workers utopia, Russia, China, Cuba, North Korea, India, and Europe would a much larger share of the WORLD GDP than they currently have. China with a 6th of the population just finally surpassed tiny Italy in per capita GDP only very recently BECAUSE they started to embrace free markets. The U.S with 3% of the world population has 25% of the worlds GDP. THIS IS NOT A FLUKE. It is because we largely reject socialist entitlement programs and socialism itself. OBAMA IS LEADING US TO SOCIALISM. His failure would help MILLIONS not hurt MILLIONS. Don't forget, we buy massive amounts of teh stuff from the world. If the U.S goes into a tailspin, the entire world hurts.
The failure of Bush in 2006, which unequivocably was the failure of the CinC, would have been the failure in Iraq. It was not the economy then. It was Iraq. Carter FAILED in 1979. This started the 30-odd year war against us by Islamic terrorists. To see the GREAT SATAN get its ass handed to it would have greatly emboldened the radical elements of Islam and would have made the prior 30 years seem like a joke. Don't forget the straights of Hormuz. Iran would shut it down in a bid to be the regions bully. Yes it is about the oil. Without oil, the entire region would be a bunch of nomads wandering around on camels with their backward ass religion that has produced NOTHING for 1300 years. And we would be treating it just like we do the God forsaken regions of Subsahara Africa. Which is - ignore it. But we need oil because the world economy runs on the grease of oil and we also need Islamofascist to quit killing us with impunity. With the source of most of the worlds oil in turmoil, the world's economy would likely flatline due to high oil prices. So MILLIONS would have suffered had we lost in Iraq. THIS IS WHAT THE DEMOCRATS WANTED. AND YES, DEMOCRAT POLITICIANS.
What do you think the poll results would have been on January 17, 2001?
Straw man Uncle Jer. No one was talking about 2001 except you,
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
No, JWF
March 9, 2009 - 20:08 ET by JerStraw man Uncle Jer. No one was talking about 2001 except you.
No, JWF. Today's lesson:
Stating an appropriate analogue is not engaging in straw man argumentation, JWF.
Now commit that to memory. You might be tested later.
Jer
You blew the feather off the brick.
March 9, 2009 - 21:01 ET by JWFMy weightier argument was the prior 2 paragraphs.
I shall take your silence as a confirmation that I was somewhere near the target.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
Uncle Jer thought I was done but I was not.
March 9, 2009 - 10:03 ET by JWFLet me add this.
As much as we would to project, the President has little say in the economy. He can ASK for massive spending from a pliant Congress and get it. But normally, no, little say in the economy.
The President should inspire confidence though. In this, Obama is utterly utterly utterly failing. He is using the crisis to further his socialist entitlement expansion. And FREAKING people the hell out in the meantime.
It is one thing to hope he fails. It is another to SAY he is failing and that much is true.
Sincerely,
a Veteran of a 1000 psychic wars.
JWF...If I have learned
March 11, 2009 - 02:37 ET by JerJWF...If I have learned nothing else in the past few months, I now know to never think you are done.
Jer
Most Democrats Wanted Bush
March 9, 2009 - 10:38 ET by Chris NormanMost Democrats Wanted Bush to Fail in 2006 Poll. Will Media Care?
Yes, they very much care - and that's why they won't report it.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Chris ... and what's more,
March 9, 2009 - 13:00 ET by Jack BauerChris ... and what's more, most Democrats still want to talk about Bush rather than Obama. Especially dems in da media!
NS
March 9, 2009 - 11:24 ET by BlondeRush just read this on the air before he cut to commercial....he hasn't attributed it to....yet.
I hope he fails, too.
This is total vindication for Rush...
March 9, 2009 - 12:13 ET by PrairieSkyThis is proof of what many on the right have known all along...Those suffering from BDS absolutely wanted President Bush to fail, even if it meant losing the war in Iraq. Dems/libs didn't care about the ramifications of the 'why's' or 'how's' of Bush's failure...They just cared about the 'what'...The left wanted to see him fail. Period.
Thank goodness for this Fox News poll. This illustrates clearly the thinking of those on the left, and reveals what complete disgusting hypocrites they all are.
"...peace is the highest aspiration of the American People. We will negotiate for it, sacrifice for it, we will never surrender for it, now or ever." President Ronald Reagan~ January 20, 1981
Wow, Noel, looks like you caught 'em nekkid.
March 9, 2009 - 21:10 ET by R D HelmWhich, according to the dearly departed Lewis Grizzard (God rest his soul) means they were naked and up to something.
Nice bust. :-)
-Dave
This coup has gone on long enough. The time to put it down is NOW.