Showing posts with label Rush Limbaugh. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rush Limbaugh. Show all posts

Thursday, September 2, 2010

Random Signs Of Something


Orrin Hatch, perhaps the last Congressional R with half a brain (or maybe it's that he uses the good half or the other one randomly), is in favor of (or not really against) the non-mosque at non-ground-zero.

Let's be honest about it, in the First Amendment, religious freedom, religious expression, that really express matters to the Constitution. So, if the Muslims own that property, that private property, and they want to build a mosque there, they should have the right to do so. The only question is are they being insensitive to those who suffered the loss of loved ones? We know there are Muslims killed on 9/11 too and we know it's a great religion. I know a lot of Muslim people who I have a very great regard for, not the least of which is Muhammad Ali. He's a great friend of mine. But as far as their right to build that mosque, they have that right.
The question is, should they? Is it insensitive not to, in the eyes of the majorityof New Yorkers? It's going to come down to New York and what New York decides to do....
...There's a question of whether it's too close to the 9/11 area, but it's a few blocks away, it isn't right there. Frankly, there are a lot of people who feel, including the mayor of New York, that they should have every right to do it, and that New Yorkers should support them...

_____________________________


Wanna know how the site for the non-mosque and non-ground-zero was actually chosen? Read this:

“Listen,” said El-Gamal, “do you have any clue how the Manhattan real-estate market works, what is involved? People seem to think that we picked that building to make some kind of point. But that is simply insane. This is New York; no matter who you are, you just don’t choose a building, move in, and take over. Do you know how many places I looked at? I looked at Chambers Street. I looked at Vesey Street, Broadway, Greenwich Street, Warren Street, Murray Street. Maybe half a dozen more, I can’t even remember now. It was only after all that that Park Place came up. Even then, it was the most grueling negotiation of my life. So many times I told myself, Wow, this just isn’t worth it. One minute the deal was on, eight months later it was off. The whole thing almost drove me nuts.”
"Triumphalism," indeed.
_________________________________


One of the, until now, loudest scientific voices against anthropogenic climate change has become a believer.

Bjørn Lomborg, the self-styled "sceptical environmentalist" once compared to Adolf Hitler by the UN's climate chief, is famous for attacking climate scientists, campaigners, the media and others for exaggerating the rate of global warming and its effects on humans, and the costly waste of policies to stop the problem.

But in a new book to be published next month, Lomborg will call for tens of billions of dollars a year to be invested in tackling climate change. "Investing $100bn annually would mean that we could essentially resolve the climate change problem by the end of this century," the book concludes.



________________________________


Watch this. The man is the son of Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker. Talk about balls, and deafening silence:


Tell me the gay rights thing isn't 100% about religion-based bigotry. Voices like his are drowned like witches.

______________________________

And Paul Krugman, at least as grumpy as me when he looks around, recently had this to say. Hardly anything new to me, since I've been saying it, too, ad nauseum mio. But these days you can never feed bad enough:

The last time a Democrat sat in the White House, he faced a nonstop witch hunt by his political opponents.... — at one point taking 140 hours of sworn testimony over accusations that the White House had misused its Christmas card list.

Now it’s happening again — except that this time it’s even worse. Let’s turn the floor over to Rush Limbaugh: “Imam Hussein Obama,” he recently declared, is “probably the best anti-American president we’ve ever had.”

...Republicans will soon control at least one house of Congress. This is going to be very, very ugly...

...What we learned from the Clinton years is that a significant number of Americans just don’t consider government by liberals — even very moderate liberals — legitimate. Mr. Obama’s election would have enraged those people even if he were white. Of course, the fact that he isn’t, and has an alien-sounding name, adds to the rage...

...And powerful forces are promoting and exploiting this rage. Jane Mayer’s new article in The New Yorker about the superrich Koch brothers and their war against Mr. Obama has generated much-justified attention, but as Ms. Mayer herself points out, only the scale of their effort is new: billionaires like Richard Mellon Scaife waged a similar war against Bill Clinton.

Meanwhile, the right-wing media are replaying their greatest hits... ...Now, as we’ve just seen, [Limbaugh's] doing his best to insinuate that Mr. Obama is a Muslim. Again, though, there’s an extra level of craziness this time around: Mr. Limbaugh is the same as he always was, but now seems tame compared with Glenn Beck.

And where, in all of this, are the responsible Republicans, leaders who will stand up and say that some partisans are going too far? Nowhere to be found.

To take a prime example: the hysteria over the proposed Islamic center in lower Manhattan almost makes one long for the days when former President George W. Bush tried to soothe religious hatred, declaring Islam a religion of peace...

...But here’s the thing: Mr. Bush is still around, as are many of his former officials. Where are the statements, from the former president or those in his inner circle, preaching tolerance and denouncing anti-Islam hysteria? On this issue, as on many others, the G.O.P. establishment is offering a nearly uniform profile in cowardice.

So what will happen if, as expected, Republicans win control of the House? We already know part of the answer: ... a “wave of committee investigations” — several of them over supposed scandals that we already know are completely phony. We can expect the G.O.P. to play chicken over the federal budget, too; I’d put even odds on a 1995-type government shutdown sometime over the next couple of years.

_____________________________

I wish my bank accepted this: 87,000 = 500,000. Maybe they do, the other way around.

_____________________________

Here and there, a flicker of reason. Extinguished before it can take hold, by the shouts of the RWS™ et al. If only they'd commit the energy to pitching in that they do to tearing down, we'd have a chance.

It'll never happen.

Wonder how they'll take down their Danish climate traitor.


Tuesday, March 9, 2010

Best Reason Yet



I'm not cool with everything in the Senate health care bill, but I've been convinced it's a worthwhile start. And now, the above clip removes any doubt. I so want it to pass. I so want to see what Rush does. (Although I imagine it'd be a lot easier for him to get his Oxycontin in Costa Rica, although he might have to go off-market because it's, you know, a socialized system there.)

It's also worth noting that the caller hasn't a clue about the bill, nor does Rush. What "Federal Program" are they referring to? It's yet another example of how the Republicans, and their RWS™, and their propaganda machine known as Fox "news" have managed to get their lies and distortions out there, and how the Democrats -- in part because of the failures of the liberal (yeah, right!) media -- have utterly failed properly to inform people.


Wednesday, January 13, 2010

Reprehensible Piece of Sh*t



Gee, imagine that. Rush thinks responding immediately to a humanitarian crisis in which 100,000 people have died, is, in the context of waiting a sub-Bush-sixian three days (publicly) to discuss the panty bomber, is horrible. And then throws some gratuitous feces against the wall while he's on a roll.

These guys will politicize anything; and their listeners will shake their fists and clench their gingivitical jaws in the rage of agreement that only blind and dumb hatred can engender. It's pathetic.

And it will destroy us. Like the wound from a sharp knife that you don't feel for a moment, it already has.
.

Wednesday, March 4, 2009

Hoping


Contrary to the right-wing view, neither I nor any liberals I know or read have wanted the Iraq war to fail, because failure (we still don't know, and may not for decades) would mean even more death and disaster for millions in the area, and for the entire world. As horrible and self-evident a mistake as it was, as predictably disastrous from before the beginning, once having lit the fire one can only hope for an acceptable quenching.

On the other hand, damn right I hoped Bush would fail in his attempts to abrogate the Constitution. Absolutely, I prayed for failure of his agenda of transforming the US into a theocracy. Without question, I railed against his economy-destroying tax cuts, even though they helped my personal bottom line.

There's an obvious distinction to be made, and it's amazing that people on the right can't see it. I refer, of course, to Limblahblah's overt desire to see Obama fail, and the lining up behind it of virtually every Congressional Republican. Those few who took meek exception repented in less time than it takes Oxycontin to dissolve in a generous gut. By the longest of shots, it's not the same.

I assume it needs explaining to a couple of my readers, so here it is: it's one thing to disagree with policies (it's even a better thing, when doing so, to propose useful alternatives.) In a time of general well-being, what's a bitter disagreement or two among friends? But this is different. It's as different from that as carcinomatosis is different from a skinned knee. If the state of the markets, the world-wide economy, the soaring unemployment numbers, the failure of actual countries and the near-failure of several of our states haven't convinced everyone that this is a precipice, then a few words won't, either. But it's all I've got (left).

When Republicans, walking happily in Rush's large shadow and taking advice from Joe the Whateverheisatthemoment and inspiration from a thirteen-year-old, agitate overtly and with churchly glee for the failure of Barack Obama, clearly they are hoping for the failure of this country. I'd love to ask them -- and, in fact, I wonder why none in the so-called liberal press has -- what, exactly, would their holy grailly failure look like? How many more unemployed per month than the six hundred thousand in each of the last few? How many more businesses gone? Life savings lost? Suicides? What would be the effects of Obama's (our) failure across the planet? How many additional people would starve, get sick, die? And, having witnessed this failure with the joy of contemplating end-times (meant quite literally: what's more appealing about the rapture than the idea that you'll be fine and all those people you never liked much will burn in oil for all of eternity? While you get to watch?) what, do they think, are the odds of being able to rebuild. And at what price?

Maybe it really is a faith-based belief that those who suffer deserve it, and their god (Republicans,' not the sufferers') will take care of them, the righteous; screw the poor and hungry? Sort of a reverse Jesus thing?

Or is that they, like Rush Limbonobo, are so fabulously wealthy that it just doesn't matter to them one damn bit?

.

Popular posts