Limbaugh Strikes Back
Professor Reynolds has compiled the best Limbaugh round-up out there bar none … make sure you click below and read the entire thing. Outstanding! But first some background.
Obama tells Republicans not to listen to Rush Limbaugh. Says we need to pull together.
“If we don’t get this done we (the Democrats) could lose seats and I could lose re-election. But we can’t let people like Rush Limbaugh stall this. That’s how things don’t get done in this town.”
Then minutes later he says “We won.”
So Limbaugh is fighting back and, may I say, it is so good to see.
“One prong of the Great Unifier’s plan is to isolate elected Republicans from their voters and supporters by making the argument about me and not about his plan. . . . Meanwhile, the effort to foist all blame for this mess on the private sector continues unabated when most of the blame for this current debacle can be laid at the feet of the Congress and a couple of former presidents. And there is a strategic reason for this.”
In a fair fight, Obama takes on Limbaugh, Limbaugh wins hands down. But when you have the FCC, IRS, FBI, CIA, NSA on your side and the other guy has just a golden microphone …. ummm … yeah my money is still on Rush.
Go get em tiger … I got ya covered behind enemy lines.
Go Rush Limbaugh, Go! Keep up the good work doing what is right for America!
Rush's statement was disgraceful. It's one thing to disagree, but it's beyond the pale to say:" I hope he fails" of our President. I for one wished DESPERATELY for Pres. Bush to succeed, because that meant the country would succeed. Rush hopes the country to fails? And you Jim, want to cover Rush's back? You want the US to fail too? Not very patriotic, I'd say.
Nice try. He wants <span style="font-weight: bold;">America</span> to succeed and does not think the Obama policies would do that. Many think if Obama succeeds at this $1 trillion stimulus, universal healthcare and all of the other liberal policies, America will <span style="font-weight: bold;">fail</span>. So, since you want Obama to succeed, you want America to fail right? Gotcha. :rolleyes:
Many posts from the Kool-Aid drinking Lemmings who have difficulty understanding what words mean when they are spoken. It is not a crime to lack communication skills. It is merely sad.
When faced with policies that even the OMB says won't work till at least 2010, then I want him to fail in passing those polices. If that means the "one" is a failure then so be it.
I want the country to succeed. I want Obama's policies to fail–as in fail to ruin our lives. I don't want those policies to be initiated.
wow Limbaugh is really fat!!!!
All of this "I hope he succeeds" bullshit is a sub-conscious suggestion designed to garner support at every turn. This is like the salesman that sits in your living room and gets you to say yes 5 times and then asks you to buy. This is blatant un-ashamed manipulation.
I hope you can follow this BECAUSE IT IS IMPORTANT …..
Manipulation is nothing more than threatening someone with a feeling that they are unwilling to feel. For example… When I walk up to the checkout counter at Stop and Shop they ask me if I would like to give $1 for the Jimmy fund. The act of asking the question is a manipulation technique. You are being threatened with the feeling of guilt, you don't even realise that this is happening but unconsciously it is happening with 90% of the population. Most people are unwilling to feel guilt because it is a little painful, and we avoid pain.
Some people are willing to experience guilt in that moment and say no. But many people are unwilling to experience guilt and capitulate and give the $1. The only way that you can give the money from a place of truth, is if you are OK with feeling guilt. Then you are free to decide if you can give the $1 based on your true convictions vs. this manipulation tactic.
Where Barack Obama is concerned, we are being threatened with racism if we do not hope that he succeeds. There are examples where this is specifically stated, I believe it was Cokie Robert, as well as David Gergen that explicitly implied this racism. (if I thought that more than 2 people would read the comments then I would go to the trouble of finding the clips) But it is not necessry to explicitly state that you are racist if you disagree with a black man. It has been ingrained over a generation that a reasonable disagreement with a black person has racist origins. This is all part of the "pussification of America" (a concept that I used to write about surrounding political correctness and false self esteem enhancement with children).
I have a hundred examples of overt and covert hypnosis and manipulation the Obama and Bush have used, but you don't need that. You will see this manipulation in persistent vague speech and emphasis on enthusiasm over rational thought. You will be distracted and confused by symbols, they will get you cheering for one thing and then say another. Don't fall for it.
So from this point forward when you see Barack Obama's face or hear his voice your first thought will be. "I am not a racist if I disagree with this man." OK? (yes)
I guess if people were hoping for "Change" it ain't happening . The Dems and the Republicans are still up to their arguing and bickering back and forth and it doesn't help when O says he won and San Fran Nan at the bully pulpit bragging that they are in charge. As far as the racism issue if people are going to say disagreeing with Obama equals racism then "NO" change hasn't happened .Rush spoke his mind and people don't like it ,,to bad I listened to 8 years of people speaking their mind about Bush so they better get used to the fact that it's gonna happen . I too want Obama to succeed as a person, but not if it moves us to the left and with Socialized medicine that doesn't work.
I have to say if you listen to everything Rush had to say about not wanting Obama to succeed, it has nothing to do with being disrespectful or disgraceful and everything to do with not caving on your conservative principals.
One other point I would like to make is not about the Rush comment but about a poll that I heard over the weekend that Obama's approval rating was at something like 68%, the highest since Kennedy. Isn't asking people what they think of the job Obama is doing this soon after taking office is kind of like your waiter asking you how your dinner was before he even took your order. It is just more evidence that this man can do no wrong in the eyes of the media.
I can't believe that it's necessary to point out the subtlety of Rush's comments, but apparently it's a point that being missed.
Remember the mantra of the anti-Bush Democrats?……"we support our troops but not their mission". Tell me the difference between that and today's message, "we support the President but not his policies"? The former is OK, in fact, deemed by some as being patriotic, but the latter is interpreted as wanted the President to fail!
Nice flip, but it doesn't work for me.
Perhaps the problem is that there is no accepted measure of Presidential "success". I'd like to suggest that success is: a secure nation, smaller government, free market driven economic growth, and freedom for individuals to pursue happiness. (kind of sounds like the Preamble to the Constitution). Any policy counter to these basics is not, in my opinion, a "success".
Thank God some one will…Jim you are in good company my brother!
Way to go Steve! Nice spin (plus the others that follow). It's always reassuring to know that you could interpret Rush's words and explain them to the non-believers. Dogma always trumps everything.
Hey Davis, I'm that other fellow. What part of Rush saying that he hopes the Policies that Obama wants to enforce will fail. Rush is like me, we BOTH want Obama to succeed, just not the policies that Obama wants to impose.
Davis, are you from Detroit? Listening to Rush and a caller from the Detroit area. Only 27% of the students that start Kindergarten will graduate. This statistic prompted me to think of you.
What is left "unsaid" about Obama's administration in all the comments is:
He is by definition the leader of the Democrat party. Assumed is therewith, he has total control over the party and it's goals. Reality is, however, the real question is: is Obama or the party in control?
The follow up questions is: If it is indeed the party, and therein is the ultimate place of power, I see a party that is hell bent beyond all reasonable thinking, totally committed to "total abeyance to it's principles and ideas", and it's perpetuity. It will without fail eliminate any element in contradiction to it's aims. The truth I see, is there is no such thing as "compromise"… in Democrat's view, as evidenced daily by events. But, is power and the ability to dictate, or the wellfare of the country and nation their objective?
Now, assume Obama believes truly, and totally in the Democrat principals and party ideas and ideals, and we add to that, they control of the White house, the SENATE, the House of Representatives, and subsequentialy all the power of all government committees and agencies (typically of liberal & democratic persuasion), together with presidential orders; in other words, they have "total" power. Then, the situation is ripe.
Simply said, that bespeaks of totalitarian government, especially in the light economic crisis and resultant government control, and influence over businesses and the economy. This being realized under precipis of "crisis", real, perceived, or "created" …
That spells the end to democracy, free market, and a life we have had the priveladge to enjoy for years. Therewith as well, ends personal freedom, as we know it, at this time ….
Please think about that, long,verr deeply.
Think very hard about what to do about it as a citizen of this great country …
Think ever so hard and become extremely informed about Socialism especially in combination of Totaliarism …
Rush has so many apologists! Good for him. And thanks for the put-down/insult, Wayne. I can always count on the crisp thinking Conservative mind. Thanks for the enlightened reply Steve.
How ironic this is said! Even both President Obama and the main stream media have their apologists!