21
   

LIMBAUGH, "I HOPE HE FAILS..."

 
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jan, 2009 06:13 am
@edgarblythe,
To be honest, much as I think the man an evil buffoon, I hate seeing progressive discourse degenerating into using terms such as "un-American" ....just as the right did in relation to dissent from the awful Bush policies.

What on earth do terms such as "un-American" mean?

It's like denigrating women who failed to park their brains in the mall in the fifties and sixties as "un-feminine".

Whatever an American professes is American...it may be appalling crap, but if it comes from an American it's American.

To use "American" or "feminine" or "masculine" or human" to mean only aspects of these things that we happen to approve of is, to my mind, outrageous chauvinism.

It is clear when those of whom we disapprove use such phrases to attack those of whom we approve that the attack is ridiculous.

Howsabout seeing it when we use such phrases?

aidan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jan, 2009 06:22 am
@dlowan,
how about 'hate monger' then?

that's always been my instinctive thought whenever I hear the ****-stirring evilness he consistently spews and has spewed his entire career on the air.

I don't know what Edgar means by 'unAmerican' but I think what Limbaugh does is unhelpful to any sort of rapprochement or unification of America and Americans. He works to divide - constantly - on the basis of race, gender, nationality, political affiliation- whatever little crack he can find to open up between people - he chips and chips away at it until it becomes a yawning crevasse.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Mon 26 Jan, 2009 06:25 am
@dlowan,
The fact is, Limbaugh tosses the monickers of American and ANti AMerican around like hes the official purveyor of the titles. He will announce people as real AMericans etc. The use of the title is an "In Kind" reply to his tyle. (At least in my case and I believe others).
MAny have grown tired of this bloted douche bags several forays into bad taste and just pure meanness. Im afraid that youll see folks give him a pass like David just did. The 44 th president was hired by a majority WITHOUT RESERVATIONS. WE just (6 days ago) put him on staff to get our asses out of a deep problem caused , in great part, by the previous administration. SO, to dictate "terms" of acceptance followed up with a sort of threat is truly below the belt and is something that I think is a first in modern times. Although I do remember similar terms used by Gen McLellan against Abraham Lincoln when McLellan was A Copperhead.
djjd62
 
  2  
Reply Mon 26 Jan, 2009 06:28 am
as much as i hate to do it, i have to give a slight nod to david in this case, lush rimjob was hoping for the failure of what he saw as a leftist socialist agenda, as put forward by the president

however

i find the comments that came before more interesting than the failure remark, he basically states, i don't want my government to be in control of the banks and corporations, umm, excuse me, but didn't gwb, hand over all that money to the "banks" and the auto companies, so isn't he in effect the architect of this vast socialist experiment


0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  0  
Reply Mon 26 Jan, 2009 07:57 am
@aidan,
Hate-monger works for me.

0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  0  
Reply Mon 26 Jan, 2009 08:00 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
512)
The fact is, Limbaugh tosses the monickers of American and ANti AMerican around like hes the official purveyor of the titles.



Sure...but do we want to descend to the level of Limbaugh?

I can see the attraction, but what I think is a repellent and nonsensical tactic when used by Limbaugh is the same, to my mind, when used by his opponents.

Anyhoo, this is a sidetrack to the thread.

farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jan, 2009 08:12 am
@dlowan,
Quote:
Sure...but do we want to descend to the level of Limbaugh?

I dont mind. It's about the only way that we get someones attention.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jan, 2009 10:11 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
By Leonard Pitts Jr

Syndicated columnist

PREV of NEXT




Rush Limbaugh stirs the pot.
"I hope he fails."

" Rush Limbaugh

It is, of course, a calculated outrage.

Meaning, it was spewed by a clown in the media circus to kick a familiar sequence into motion: angry denunciation by bloggers, pundits and supporters of President Obama (the "he" whose failure is hoped), followed by Rush Limbaugh refusing to retract a word, a courageous truth teller who will not be moved. And, trailing behind, like the folks with brooms trail the elephants in the circus parade, Limbaugh's devotees, complaining that their hero has been misquoted, misunderstood, or otherwise mistreated. "What Rush meant was ... yadda yadda yadda."

A calculated outrage.

And knowing this, knowing how frequently and adroitly media are manipulated by self-promoting media clowns who defame conservatism by calling themselves conservative, one is tempted to let the statement pass, to make its way unimpeded to the dustbin like so many other manufactured controversies. But occasionally, it's necessary to intercept one of them and hold it up to the light.

This is one of those times. Not because what Limbaugh said on his radio program a few days before the inauguration was an outrage " outrage is the point, remember? " but rather, because of what the thing he said says about him and his fellow clowns.

"I hope he fails."

Do you ever say that about your president if you are an American who loves your country? Would you say it about George W. Bush, who was disastrous, about Bill Clinton, who was slimy, about Jimmy Carter, who was inept, about Richard Nixon, who was crooked? You may think he's going to fail, yes. You may warn he's going to fail, yes.

But do you ever "hope" he fails? Knowing his failure is the country's failure? Isn't that, well ... disloyal?

The irony is that Limbaugh and the other clowns would have you believe they are bedrock defenders of this country, that they love it more than the rest of us, more than anything.

That's a lie. Limbaugh just told us so, emphatically.

It's not the country they love. It's the attention. The ideology, their perversion of conservatism, is but a means toward that end.

Yes, an observer might point out that it's counterproductive to give them attention while decrying their love of attention. But, as already noted, occasionally the clowns spew something that cannot, and ought not, be ignored.

Ideological division is nothing new to politics. But has ideology ever taken quite the seat of prominence it now enjoys? Have people ever been quite so prone to regard their ideological identity as more important than their national identity? The last 30 years are rare in that regard, if not unique.

"I hope he fails?!"

So that, what? The defamation of conservatism Limbaugh represents will stand vindicated? The Republicans will pick up a few seats in the midterm election? Limbaugh's "side" " his word " will score points?

Is this only a game, then? No lives at stake, no future on the line, no planet in the balance? Just a game?

I hope he bricks this free throw.

I hope he fumbles that pass.

I hope he fails.

And to hell with the country.

The country doesn't matter. The "side" does. And Limbaugh's side seems angry in power and angry out. It's as if anger is all they really have.

Barack Obama was elected in large part on a promise to carry the nation past anger, past the notion that either party has a monopoly on wisdom, past the belief that ideology is identity. He was elected because people want a sense of mission that makes them feel like Americans again.

If he is successful, Limbaugh and the other clowns will face tough sledding in a radically different world. Small wonder he is so eager to strangle this presidency in its infancy. And need it even be said?

I hope he fails.




Thats how Lenny Pitts reads Limbaugh. "A media clown " Lenny Pitts is a black conservative of the Sowell school.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jan, 2009 12:34 pm
The only reason I called Limbaugh "unAmerican" is because it is the sort of term he flings around loosely. I haven't actually listened to him in 17 years and then only under protest.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 26 Jan, 2009 01:06 pm
@edgarblythe,
Hasn't Rush been indicted yet?
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jan, 2009 05:50 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

By Leonard Pitts Jr

Syndicated columnist

PREV of NEXT




Quote:
Rush Limbaugh stirs the pot.
"I hope he fails."

" Rush Limbaugh

It is, of course, a calculated outrage.


I will JOIN in what Rush said, to wit,
if obama follows the way of Reagan:
I hope he succeeds.

If he follows a hard left collectivist path,
I hope he FAILS.


WELL SAID.
I 'll stipulate to that.




I support individualism in America.

Its interesting ( tho not surprizing )
how the left twists and distorts what someone says,
by omitting the relevant, explanatory context; hitting below the belt.





David
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Mon 26 Jan, 2009 06:06 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
When I first read your posts, David, you came across as an ignorant redneck.
High Seas
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Jan, 2009 06:18 pm
@candide,
candide wrote:

LIMBAUGH IS A TERRORIST!!!!
All Republicans should be wached as potential terrorist.
KEEP QUANTANAMO OPEN!!!


All Republicans should be WATCHED as potential TERRORISTS.
Keep GUANTANAMO open.

Yo, Candide, the Republicans here so far can spell "watch", "terrorist(s)", and even the Spanish word "Guantanamo". That last one may or may not remove you from the list of victims of bilingual education, but you're placed on notice.
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Mon 26 Jan, 2009 10:00 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

When I first read your posts, David,
you came across as an ignorant redneck.

Thank u for that information
about your perception.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2009 12:16 pm
@High Seas,
Yo, High Seas. What an incredibly cheap ploy!
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2009 12:32 pm
What's the big deal? Limbaugh wants Obama to fail. So what? I wanted Bush to fail every day for eight years. As I saw it, Bush failing meant that the country was that much safer and more secure for another day. Granted, I didn't want him to fail so spectacularly -- for instance, I could have done without the illegal, unnecessary war, the corruption, the general incompetence, and the economic depression. Still, America would have been better off if Bush had failed to accomplish practically anything that he set out to do.
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2009 12:36 pm
Oh, and by the way, let me take this rare opportunity to agree with something that Limbaugh said:

Quote:
Obama was angry that Merrill Lynch used $1.2 million of TARP money to remodel an executive suite. Excuse me, but didn't Merrill have to hire a decorator and contractor? Didn't they have to buy the new furnishings? What's the difference in that and Merrill loaning that money to a decorator, contractor and goods supplier to remodel Warren Buffet's office? Either way, stimulus in the private sector occurs. Are we really at the point where the bad PR of Merrill getting a redecorated office in the process is reason to smear them? How much money will the Obamas spend redecorating the White House residence? Whose money will be spent? I have no problem with the Obamas redoing the place. It is tradition. 600 private jets flown by rich Democrats flew into the Inauguration. That's fine but the auto execs using theirs is a crime? In both instances, the people on those jets arrived in Washington wanting something from Washington, not just good will.


Quite right.
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2009 12:58 pm
I agree, what's the big deal?

I want Obama to fail at a lot of things that he wants to do.
I also want him to succeed at a lot of things.

I was glad that Bush failed at a lot of things.
I wish he had failed at more.

"I want him to fail" is not a complete thought outside of context. It means nothing to fail in general. You have to fail at doing something. If you don't agree with that the guy wants to do, then you should want him to fail.

Rush didn't say anything wrong there. It's disingenious to suggest he did.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2009 12:59 pm
@joefromchicago,
I agree as well, completely.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Jan, 2009 01:01 pm
@farmerman,
Farmerman, quoting Foxfyre wrote:
Quote:
That is what Rush is saying

Cause thats what he told me he said when he restated what he said on his radio show the day after he said it to INANNITY.

No, because that's what he said to Hannity in the first place. I don't often say this, but on this point, you are wrong and Foxfyre is right. The relevant quote, along with the qualifier, is in the last minute of her YouTube video.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 12/09/2021 at 05:31:14