Ellen Goodman of the Boston Globe started off her column on March 6 with the exact same feeling about the current Obama/Limbaugh feud that I at first had: I wasn't going to talk about it either. But after reading her column of distortions and outright lies about Limbaugh -- as well as the ever present fat jokes and general incivility -- I couldn't resist analyzing her column. It is, as it occurs, the perfect example of the calumny that lefty writers and media figures heap on the radio talker. It also reveals their low born style of discourse and their general state of apoplexy at Limbaugh, if not the general level of insanity he instills in them.
Proving the direction she intended to take right off the top Goodman starts with a fat joke. She says she caught Limbaugh's CPAC speech as she was on a flight. Goodman quips that he "filled -- and I do mean filled -- the screen" before her. Yes, one can sense the high caliber of analysis about to assault the eye when reading this first paragraph. Goodman is obviously an intellectual giant.
After the high class fat joke, we get Goodman's first lie:
Dressed in a style David Letterman later labeled as "Eastern European Gangster," Rush Limbaugh delivered a rousing 85-minute sermon to conservative true believers that included an unapologetic hope that Obama will fail. Ah yes, a talk-radio host who'd rather be (far) right than have his country rescued. Charming.
This "he'd rather be right than have his country rescued" claim is a straight out lie. Goodman probably knows she is lying, but wants to stick with her spittle specked rant, anyway. Limbaugh has said over and over that he does not accept the Obama claim that his policies will "rescue" the country and that it is these same policies that he wants to fail. Limbaugh has repeated ad nauseam that it isn't the country he wants to fail, it's the policies he deems bad for the country he wants to see fail. The difference between the two is clear and important.
The third paragraph starts with another mischaracterization:
Limbaugh was not only a counterpoint to Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, who delivered the hapless Republican response to the president.
Does Goodman know how the word "counterpoint" is defined? A counterpoint is a contrast or an opposition. Limbaugh did not oppose Bobby Jindal's points. He essentially agreed with them and added to them. (By the way, I'd like to also point out that this is an incomplete sentence by Goodman here. Sort of a counterpoint to good grammar, if you will)
Next Goodman warmed to her central theme.
Despite watching Limbaugh's rant at 30,000 feet, I read glowing reviews saying that "it will be talked about for years and even decades." And so I am forced to return to the subject our man Rush implied just days earlier: "Why don't women like me?"
What "forced her" to say that is not clear. One can only wonder what Limbaugh's female audience has to do with the current Limbaugh news? In fact, it has nothing at all to do with the current news but does serve as a way for Goodman to indulge in some more bashing because after this the Boston Globe columnist begins to rehash Limbaugh's past "feminazi" cracks.
Goodman says that Limbaugh's feminist jokes explain why women don't listen to him. But then she promptly contradicts herself with this:
Now a touch of reality here. Women don't tune in to talk radio as much as men. Talk radio has been the forum of the "angry white man" since the 1990s. Women have had quite enough men yell at them, thank you, and Rush is more than vaguely reminiscent of the boss from hell.
So what is it Ms Goodman? Is it Rush's supposed attacks on women or is it that his venue naturally attracts fewer female audience members just as it does for all talk radio?
But, here is her point, such as it is, for the piece. Goodman is trying to develop the theme that Rush is no Oprah (as her piece is headlined). She goes on to imagine that Rush would never listen to a woman and that is why he can't attract female listeners.
And, then she warms to her final point. Limbaugh, you see, won't change for women. And, since he is the "voice of the GOP" that means the Republicans won't change, either. And, the GOP can't win unless they "change."
You see, it's all about the "change." But, like her compatriots on the extreme left, she has no notion of what "change" even means. The word is but some panacea, some shadowy happy talk. Change what? None of them know. Like good little lemmings, they only know how to chant "Obma, change, Obama change" but have no clue what it means.
Goodman ends with one last little misrepresentation to her readers.
Yes, our pinup boy has a following of about 20 million listeners. But last time I looked, Obama won with nearly 70 million voters. At this rate, The Party That Won't Change is going to have to rename itself the Grand Old Ditto Heads.
Sorry, Ms Goodman, but Obama did not win by 70 million votes as your rhetoric tries to cajole the reader into imagining. The popular vote was 69,456,897 for Obama (52.9%) and 59,934,814 for McCain (45.7%). The simple fact of the matter is, that if Rush Limbaugh truly could wield the power of the votes from his 20 million listeners, he would be a power to be reckoned with and not someone easy to discount as you attempt to do here.
This column shows the intellectual laziness and uncivil comportment that Rush Limbaugh inspires in the extreme left in this country and Ellen Goodman serves as the poster child of that unhinged left.



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Rush is a tower of TRUTH and that is why they HATE him and ...
March 6, 2009 - 06:13 ET by Jayke... why I LOVE HIM. I would defend him with me own life and if anything happens to Rush they better watch out for me.
Interesting point...
March 6, 2009 - 08:15 ET by TailgunnerThe way Obama and his flunkies are slamming Rush as harmful to economic 'recovery', unpatriotic and now even treasonous makes me wonder if some unhinged left-wing kook is going to think it's patriotic to 'off' him. (Remember the Unabomber?)
Bush, Cheney and Gingrich had security details. I hope Rush is taking care of himself too.
Clarification: I think the article claimed that Obama won with 70 million votes...not by 70 million votes.
NOLI PUGNARE ME OCCIDERE
Ellen Goodman, Maureen O'Dowd, D.L. Hughley
March 6, 2009 - 08:31 ET by Paul Atreidesare all walking, talking, screeching arguments against affirmative action. All AA does is elevate the sub-mediocre to the level of genius.
Picture
March 6, 2009 - 09:15 ET by cvgbuckeyeDid you ever see a picture of this Goodman woman?
I understand that she says her prayers every morning; giving thanks that Helen Thomas still lives, keeping her from inheriting the title of "Ugliest Woman On The Planet".
The drivebyes never make fat jokes about Oprah
March 6, 2009 - 06:21 ET by political mavenThey never address the actual philosophy or facts that Rush speaks about. By making ad hominum attacks, they avoid having to defend liberal policies.
Of course we want Obama to fail. He is like Lenin. We don't want him to succeed in ruining our country. What is so hard to understand about that???
We don't like trillions of dept, "universal" health care which will ruin healthcare for those of us who CHOOSE to buy health insurance before new cars, cable television, beer, cigs, vacations, ball games, movies, clubbing, etc.
Thats right, most people without health insurance decide other things are more important. This clown ,Obama, wants responsible hard working producers to pay for lazy fools. Damn right we want him to fail.
This genius from the Globe knows she is a liar, knows she twists, and has nothing better than fat jokes. Big deal, Rush likes food and has a self control problem, we all have self control problems.
I mean this journalist couldn;t control herself when she wrote lies, willingly!
I still haven't read any libs address the points of the speech. All they can do is discuss the one who said it, or the reaction of the crowd. They are so pathetic, and the worst part is , they are such starry eyed drones, that they don't care what happens to the country, because they all dream about sex with Obama, or have a crushes on the angry black woman, Michelle.
Just once
March 6, 2009 - 08:43 ET by jdlybrandI wish someone would look these lying sacks of s**t in the eye and say "You're a f***ing liar and I can prove it". Joe Biden can tell more lies than he has hair plugs and get away with it because the MSM are too busy covering the "Messiah's" tracks.
Joe; "Louisana is losing four hundred jobs a day".
Me: "Joe, you're a f***ing LIAR and I can prove it".
Objective Journalism is an Oxymoron
If I wanted to...
March 6, 2009 - 09:30 ET by Paul AtreidesI could make weight jokes about Ted Kennedy; something about Rachael Maddow and k.d. lang being separated at birth, Michelle Obama having a large backside, Barack Obama having large ears, etc., etc., etc.
I choose to live my life as a Christian. It doesn't mean I am perfect, but I attempt to model my life after The One who is perfect. I will attempt to rise above the rhetoric of the "progressives" who sneeringly look down on me and my Savior.
In the end, when it is all said and done, the Left just show themselves to have the very qualities of which they assign to others: they love to label the Christian as hate-filled, hypocritical, dogmatic, and intolerant. I am going to take a page from their book and say that if they are an example of the kind of people who are progressives then I want no part of their ideology.
Did Democrat politicians
March 6, 2009 - 06:41 ET by Red JeepDid Democrat politicians and Keith Olbermann want Bush to fail? Didn’t they want the US military to fail in Iraq? Hmmmm, Ellen Goodman? How unpatriotic was that? The Democrat politicians wanted military failure in Iraq.
I realize in a way any comparison of Olbermann to Limbaugh is an apples to oranges comparison, because Bathtub Boy only has on a good day 5% of the audience Rush has, but the Dems and Bathtub Boy certainly wanted failure for Bush and this country for 8 years. Rush wants the country to succeed despite the best efforts of BarryO and the Obamas to socialize it.
With the revelation of the
March 6, 2009 - 06:42 ET by casel21With the revelation of the genesis of the Rush=GOP strategy, are none in the media concerned that they appear as lackies of the WH ballerina?
What about all those liberals that openly wished for...
March 6, 2009 - 06:48 ET by JohnMcGrew...us to fail in Afghanistan and Iraq? Is it actually worse to want to see an ideology that has impoverished and enslaved billions fail than to wish that our country lose a war, and waste the lives and sacrifice of our soldiers?
Clearly so.
by bashing rush, liberals are changing the subject
March 6, 2009 - 06:54 ET by puredmashiefrom bho's failures. cabinet nominees who have tax problems, including geithner - mr. finance whizbang, the only man in america who can solve this mess. and now that he's on the job, things are oh so much better, aren't they? just ask the investors on wall street. if you don't trust them, how about the economists over at the congressional budget office? be sure to mention the great one's predictions of 5% growth only 12 months from now. or what about his no earmarks or no lobbyists pledges that didn't even last a week?
so ask youself, if you were a liberal would you rather defend your savior or bash rush?
swing hard in case you hit it.
Ellen Goodman is just caving to her womanly instinct of ...
March 6, 2009 - 07:00 ET by Jayke... NAGGING and WHINING. I've been married for over 30 years and I KNOW about women. Goodman states, "Women have had quite enough men yell at them, thank you,". Well, Ellen, men have had quite enough of women NAGGING and WHINING at them, thank you. Oh, and women yell too.
To be a "strong woman"
March 6, 2009 - 09:37 ET by Paul Atreidestoday's liberal feminist certainly does a lot of whining and complaining.
I guess it was all of that trauma from having to compete with a Barbie doll.
~Ouch Jayke
March 6, 2009 - 10:19 ET by choselife3xDon't forget to plug our venomous sarcasm........
Hope and Change= Despair and Socialism
Roll over play dead
March 6, 2009 - 07:01 ET by richb313The left wants thier conservative bretheren to just roll over and play dead. It is OK if they spill ACTUAL HATE filled diatribes when ever a Conservative or a Republican is in power. Now that the "One" is President no one is allowed to disagree. The hypocrisy is so thick I am wondering if perhaps it is necessary for thier continued existence the same way oxygen is necessary for all other forms of life. The more I think of it this could explain thier inability to recognize it. All that is necessary to lend credence to this theory is to look at the comments sections at many political websites such as Politico. The volume and intensity of the comments is something to behold. All problems are Bush's fault. Conservatives are so yesterday. We won you lost and other pearls of wisdom can be found along with Shut Up and Play Dead although I am not so sure they are really being honest about the "Play" part.
I have come to the reluctant conclusion that our fellow Americans on the other side of the spectrum have devleopmental problems and have stopped developing emotionally at the age of 2. If there are any Parents reading this you know why they call it the "Terrible Twos". Tantrums and the assertion of self above all things is paramount. It is a time in a childs life when they come to realize that they are not the "Center of the Universe".
What can we learn from this? I say we need to treat our developmentally challenged brothers and sisters the same way we treat 2 year olds. First and foremost lock all the cabinets, don't let them play with sharp objects as they might hurt themselves and then ignore them while they throw thier tantrums, eventually they will scream and scream until they are just too sleepy and will take a nap.
Now that the "One" is President no one is allowed to disagree.
March 6, 2009 - 09:39 ET by Paul AtreidesNow that the "One" is President no one is allowed to disagree.
-------------------------------------------------------
Sorta like the Scientology cult, huh?
~My oldest
March 6, 2009 - 10:28 ET by choselife3xTried a tantrum once. One swift and memorable trouser warming was all it took. No more tantrums. Happy kid, happy parents.
Fully grown kids are gonna be a tad more stubborn...................
Hope and Change= Despair and Socialism
think about it
March 6, 2009 - 07:28 ET by AJBRush is Public Enemy #1 for all liberals. Without him, they would rule the world. Thanks, Rush, for speaking up in an intelligent, fact-filled, honest way. Liberals HATE the truth and will do anything to supress it.
And, God Bless Paul Harvey. May he rest in peace.
Rush Limbaugh
March 6, 2009 - 08:06 ET by kiwikitI'm female, I'm old enough to have pre-dated affirmative action and yet I was granted a full scholarship to study Math and Physics and got BS's in same, I worked for a very large corporation as a systems engineer, planner, and manager until my retirement at 45, and I'm proud to claim that I not only listen to Rush Limbaugh, I pay to do it on my PC in case I'm too busy to do so between noon and 3PM. Ellen Goodman's columns are the perfect manifestation of Ann Coulter's theory that the
Dems have no ability to argue on the facts, they can only name-call, a la middle school yammering. I resent E Goodman's pretending to represent women. . . she certainly doesn't speak for me!
Not So Good Woman!
March 6, 2009 - 07:45 ET by GeneralAlI think Miss Goodman must be hanging with Cheer Leader of the House, Comrade Pelosi! Remember, five hundred million jobs a month? Same goes for Miss Goodmann and her seventy million votes. But what the hay, their only numbers, just like the Stinkulous Package!
As pointed out in the comments..
March 6, 2009 - 08:06 ET by Texndoc...on the Boston Globe site, Ellen sticks with attacks on Rush and not once bothers to tackle his speech at CPAC, maybe going through his speech and refuting points one by one. No, it's "like David Letterman said..." and like my bestest friend in the world Oprah said...
Sorry Warner,
March 6, 2009 - 09:12 ET by pbanks7Ya got one point wrong. She didn't say the Obamassiah won by 70 million, she said he won with 70 million. Her point being that 70 million people she agrees with can't be wrong. Or should I say, "with whom she agrees?"
Otherwise, I'm with ya 20 million percent.
MSM - shaping all the perceptions you need to believe, then confirming it with a poll.
False feminists
March 6, 2009 - 09:19 ET by SeashellGoodman says that Limbaugh's feminist jokes explain why women don't listen to him.
Frankly, the feminists he jokes about are not true "feminist". They are a group of women who claim to be all about women's rights but are really just shills for liberal democrats.
Where were the feminists during the onslaught on Palin? Why didn't they hammer Bill Clinton for cheating on Hillary? We all know why.
The feminists Limbaugh jokes about are false feminists, and I say they deserve all Rush can throw at them to expose them.
Mz Goodman
March 6, 2009 - 09:38 ET by sherylsimsI used to grade Junior High essays and term papers, and I can honestly say that if you had turned that in (Even if you turned it in on time, typed, double-spaced with 1.5" margins and all the words were spelled correctly) I would have returned it to you to rewrite. That was pathetic.
~Amen
March 6, 2009 - 10:32 ET by choselife3xI can't believe they printed something so poorly written. Hmmmmmm..guess I just revealed that I don't read leftist drivel.
Hope and Change=
Despair and Socialism
Oprah Negatives?
March 6, 2009 - 09:53 ET by CaringwhiteguySo what are Oprah's negatives among the male 25-54 demographic?
Goldman
March 6, 2009 - 09:59 ET by jessieHJessie R. Hamby How stupid is this country getting when Dems. can insult a citizen of the USA, but trash the GOP for questioning the policies of the govt. I did NOT vote for Obama. I am NOT a dem or republican. I am an AMERICAN citizen. I don't like the policies of the govt. I literally hate the members of congress. I can say that BECAUSE I am an american. Rush has a right to say what he wants.
as usual
March 6, 2009 - 10:30 ET by candanceNot a single lefty shows up to defend this.
Liberal Imperialism
March 6, 2009 - 10:52 ET by CobraManEllen Goodman is just another example of Liberal Imperialism. This is evident in her claim that the country will fail if Obama's policies fail. Ellen, and the rest of her liberal cohorts, believe that the President IS the federal government and that the federal government IS America. But that's wrong.
Hay, Ellen, the country is not totally dependent upon the President (or even the federal government) for it's survival. There's been plenty of failures in the White House (Nixon resigned, did he not?) and yet the country survived. Obama can die in office (FDR, remember?) and the country will survive. This is because our country is structured to continue even if the entire federal government was destroyed in an act of war or natural disaster. You see, this isn't an Empire, dependent upon the rule of a single Man or Woman, a single Emperor. As long as the citizens survive, America will survive.
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
Mr. Huston
March 6, 2009 - 11:01 ET by racer148Had me till he "tried" to say Me Goodman said Obama won by 70 million votes. Who is trying to slant words now? She didn't say that. She said nearly won WITH 70 million votes.
So quit trying to find something that isn't there. Gosh never thought I'd be defending a Liberal. But I want both sides to be fair and don't want to play in the mud like them.
You need to read what she
March 6, 2009 - 11:38 ET by Warner Todd HustonYou need to read what she wrote again. Think about how it makes you feel. She purposely wrote it that way to make it seem as if Obama won by millions upon millions of votes. Why do you think she DIDN'T mention the far, far closer margin? It doesn't matter what he won by, it matter what the margin is. But she didn't mention the margin. Someone that isn't thinking too deeply about it will see the big 70 millions number and equate that in their mind with his margin of victory. She was quite subtle in how she wrote that. Apparently it whizzed right over your head.
warner
March 6, 2009 - 13:08 ET by racer148You have to quit trying to think you read minds. Your putting words in her mouth. Just because she didn't write it the way YOU wanted it to be "IT"S WRONG"? Maybe your not smart enough or "deep enough thinker" to understand words. Or just trying to find anything to complain about the left. Like there isn't enough out there.
She never said won by 70 million get over it. Who cares if she didn't mention the margin? Guess only you do. Anda little hint for you. Putting fellow Conseratives like me likeyou did trying to be funny isn't cool. Just shows that your no beeter than what liberals do.
I kinda have to agree with
March 6, 2009 - 18:26 ET by MrDavisonI kinda have to agree with WTH here.
It obviously wouldn't have had the "zing" factor if she had said Rush has 20 million listeners but Obama won by 10 million votes. She chose to use the 70 million number because it was a number significantly bigger than 20 million. It plants those numbers in the unsuspecting or uninterested reader.
The message is that Rush gets 20 million but Bama gets 70 million so obviously he's better right? Rush's number has absolutely nothing to do with Bama's. Last I checked Rush didn't run for President nor was Bama tryin to host a radio talk show.
It's like saying Shaq is better than A-Rod because Shaq scores more points per game than A-Rod. It's a stupid comparison and totally meaningless.
MrD
MrDavison is exactly right.
March 6, 2009 - 21:46 ET by Warner Todd HustonMrDavison is exactly right. The 70 million number was used to mislead the reader into imagining that Obama's win was bigger than it was. It did whizz over someone's head... and it wasn't mine!
Disingenuous at best
March 6, 2009 - 11:05 ET by pgrossjrWhat is especially galling about the attack on Rush is that although he can be over the top at times, he is mild by comparison to Olberman, Franken, anyone on Air America, etc. Unlike Coulter, he doesn't just engage in gratuitous bashing.
Ann Coulter is like a very talented...
March 6, 2009 - 11:29 ET by jawebster1political cartoonist (Michael Ramirez comes to mind.) She tells the truth with exaggeration in order to make a point. Rush is a master at illustrating absurdity with absurdity. Olbermann, Franken, et al, are like no talent third graders throwing insults at their betters. (And anyone is better than those two!) Now take back what you said about Ann. Thank you. Jim Webster
I take issue with your
March 6, 2009 - 11:26 ET by fitzfongI take issue with your characterization of Ann Coulter. Sure, she's confident, strident and has a unique way with words, but she doesn't engage in gratuitous bashing. She stands her ground for the positions she takes...in the face of opposition that deliberately misrepresents what she has said and written.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." -Winston Churchill
20 Million!
March 6, 2009 - 11:10 ET by pgrossjrThats 20 million during the day, every day. Ellen. doesnt compare to voter turnout. AND, your readership is.........
That's a really good
March 6, 2009 - 11:23 ET by fitzfongThat's a really good point. You talk about comparing apples to oranges! President Fonzie got nearly 70 million people to show up on Election Day (the Union thugs where I work got to take the whole day off so that they could make it to the polls to vote for "Change") to vote for him. Once. Limbaugh gets 20 million to listen to him every week. And I sincerely doubt Obama's going to pull anywhere near 70 million voters the next time around.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." -Winston Churchill
fitzfong, dont be so sure about that
March 6, 2009 - 13:06 ET by justathotAnd I sincerely doubt Obama's going to pull anywhere near 70 million voters the next time around.
I would agree with you if not for a couple of important factors. Acorn. And the 2010 census which will change electoral vote to favor the Dems. Oh yeah, and dont forget the fact that the socialist thugs from Chicago will be in control of the Democratic campaign again. (that is if we even HAVE an election in 4 yrs.......things could deteriorate very fast to the point of total breakdown. An that would mean dictatorship.
Somehow I cant envision Obama ever leaving office..........he couldnt handle someone taking his place of power. Unless of course the World elects a Supreme Leader. The more I think of it, POTUS is small potatoes to someone like O. (Remember his speech in Germany?) He has his eyes on KING OF THE WORLD.
Sure, there are forces at
March 6, 2009 - 13:39 ET by fitzfongSure, there are forces at work on the left to make this slouch towards Marxism permanent. ACORN will drum up more of their race-baiting hysteria to move the herd to vote early, often and posthumously. But I suspect a good portion of the "centrists" will have learned from their mistakes...and once their heads are out of the clouds over this "hope and change" garbage, they'll start to get serious. When Sharpton's crowd realizes that their lots in life are not going to improve just because That One subsidizes them with money they've stolen from other taxpayers, they're not going to rush to the polls to renew his contract...I'm not saying they'll vote Republican, but a significant enough portion may be disappointed back into indifference to the point where they might not bother to show. And the damage that the Obamunist regime causes will give conservatives a new resolution and a renewed sense of purpose in defeating this machine.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." -Winston Churchill
I hope you are
March 6, 2009 - 14:38 ET by justathotI hope you are right!
One thing is for sure. We have to get ahead of the coming fight for our airwaves. This strategy of attacking Rush is much more than an attempt to distract from the policies that Obama, Pelosi and company are pushing. It is a set-up for the Fairness Doctrine to be reintroduced and implemented. This current round of mudslinging is only the beginning.
The Left isn't afraid of the Republicans. They are terrified of the conservatives. (Remember Sarah Palin?) And I don't think anyone can argue that Rush IS the leader of conservatism. He certainly is our voice, along with Levine, Ingraham, Hannity, et al. We must not allow that voice to be silenced.
Ellen Goodman is no different...
March 6, 2009 - 11:19 ET by jawebster1than any other Liberal you will find in the media. Their words are interchangeable. On the count of three Liberals, say it again: "Rush Limbaugh wants the President to fail!" One, two three, GO! (Tell a lie often enough and people will start to believe it.) BTW, who is Ellen Goodman? Jim Webster
Rush didn't run for office
March 6, 2009 - 11:25 ET by CobraManWhy do the liberals keep bringing up the election results and comparing them to Rush's ratings in COMMERCIAL radio? Rush didn't run for office, so that comparison is asinine.
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
Yeah, basically Obama hit
March 6, 2009 - 11:29 ET by fitzfongYeah, basically Obama hit the carryover Mega Millions lottery one time. Limbaugh hits that lottery every week...no carryovers.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." -Winston Churchill
20 years versus 8 max
March 6, 2009 - 11:34 ET by CobraManLet's not forget that Rush has been successful for over twenty years. Obama has, at the most, eight years, IF he gets reelected.
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
~I doubt he'd be re-elected
March 6, 2009 - 11:36 ET by choselife3xNOW.
Hope and Change= Despair and Socialism
You see, it’s all about
March 6, 2009 - 12:25 ET by maggieqpublicYou see, it’s all about the “change.”
So that’s the issue with Ellen Goodman….
Nixonian
March 6, 2009 - 14:33 ET by slickwillie2001I am disturbed (as you all know) that the conversation on the Rush attacks is not over the resources in use. There are several government employees working in the White House, and we pay their salaries, spending their time on a detailed program to attack a private citizen of our nation. This program started last October and has been carried into Obammy's administration. Isn't this exactly the kind of thing that Congress wanted to impeach Nixon over?
More on this theme: Why Are Our Tax Dollars Paying For the WH 'Limbaugh Strategy': http://mypetjawa.mu....
Politicians have got into serious ethics problems for simply using phones in the White House or the Capitol for political efforts, or using official government stationery for fundraising. Isn't an attack on a private citizen obviously political work?
Goodman has always been an
March 6, 2009 - 18:34 ET by bigtimerGoodman has always been an elitist leftist b!tch currying favor with her komrades...just another enemy within we need to fight.
We do need to fight them all, bt...
March 6, 2009 - 20:59 ET by ThalpyWe do need to fight them all, bt. I doubt that any of them, and especially Goodman, can lay a hand on Rush because they underestimate his intelligence, wit, and allegiance. For those who have limited intelligence, little wit, and allegiance to anything and everything (that would include almost all of the talking heads and their editors), Rush is a formidable opponent. I believe they picked the wrong guy to mess with this time--there will be many bodies in the ditch.
Rush's original remarks, from the January 17 transcript
March 7, 2009 - 00:33 ET by Alfred J. LemireMuch as I'd like to comment on Goodman's column, It's better to present Rush's original remarks; many may not have heard the program or have forgotten what he said or think that the leftists are correct in their criticism.
I differ from Rush in substance on some points and in expression on others, but these differences are minimal. The notion of unthinking unanimity on the right is another left-liberal phantasm. He sometimes can display ignorance on a topic, e.g., the long civilization between the Tigris and the Euphrates. He can be disturbingly gross.
But he is sophisticated in his political thought and remarkably articulate. It is good that the White House does not want a debate with Rush. Rush would crush Obama, pinning him down on policy and exposing him as a leftist fanatic, slick and quick, perhaps, but committed to much that many Americans and I would hope most Americans reject as contrary to their ethics and to the best interest of the people of this country and the world. Rush's comments of January 17 follow. Please keep in mind that he spoke extemporaneously. While he does "show prep" and has an idea going in what points he will make, there's no way he could have said what follows without an agile mind, and without a deep commitment to the positions he holds:
"Look, what he’s [Obama] 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.
"Were the liberals out there hoping Bush succeeded or were they out there trying to destroy him before he was even inaugurated? Why do we have to play the game by their rules? Why do we have to accept the premise here that because of the historical nature of his presidency, that we want him to succeed? This is affirmative action, if we do that. We want to promote failure, we want to promote incompetence, we want to stand by and not object to what he’s doing simply because of the color of his skin? Sorry. I got past the historical nature of this months ago. He is the president of the United States, he’s my president, he’s a human being, and his ideas and policies are what count for me, not his skin color, not his past, not whatever ties he doesn’t have to being down with the struggle, all of that’s irrelevant to me. We’re talking about my country, the United States of America, my nieces, my nephews, your kids, your grandkids. Why in the world do we want to saddle them with more liberalism and socialism? Why would I want to do that? So I can answer it, four words, 'I hope he fails.' And that would be the most outrageous thing anybody in this climate could say. Shows you just how far gone we are. Well, I know, I know. I am the last man standing.
"I’m happy to be the last man standing. I’m honored to be the last man standing. Yeah, I’m the true maverick. I can do more than four words. I could say I hope he fails and I could do a brief explanation of why. You know, I want to win. If my party doesn’t, I do. If my party has sacrificed the whole concept of victory, sorry, I’m now the Republican in name only, and they are the sellouts. I’m serious about this. Why in the world, it’s what Ann Coulter was talking about, the tyranny of the majority, all these victims here, we gotta make sure the victims are finally assuaged. Well, the dirty little secret is this isn’t going to assuage anybody’s victim status, and the race industry isn’t going to go away, and the fact that America’s original sin of slavery is going to be absolved, it’s not going to happen. Just isn’t, folks. It’s too big a business for the left to keep all those things alive that divide the people of this country into groups that are against each other. Yes, I’m fired up about this."