Right Wing Media: congratulations Rush Limbaugh on three full years of sobriety!

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Right Wing Media: congratulations Rush Limbaugh on three full years of sobriety!

«‹›3441 »

icantfindaname: Jul 1, 2008

Berke Negri posted:

That Cruz is Southern Baptist, which is weird, it is probably safe to say that liturgical Christianity, let alone Middle Eastern Christianity, might as well be aliens from another planet to him.

The term you're looking for is "agents of popery"

# ? Sep 12, 2014 03:41

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 17, 2024 02:58

Berke Negri: Feb 15, 2012; Les Ricains tuent et moi je mue
Mao Mao
Les fous sont rois et moi je bois
Mao Mao
Les bombes tonnent et moi je sonne
Mao Mao
Les bebes fuient et moi je fuis
Mao Mao

I'm guessing the majority in attendance were Maronite, who are Catholic not Orthodox, and I imagine that the message "you need to side up with Israel if you're a real Christian" doesn't vibe with them well given Israel's propensity to bomb and occupy Lebanon constantly.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 03:47

ReidRansom: Oct 25, 2004

I think the word is 'papistry', but popery sounds pretty good too.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 03:47

icantfindaname: Jul 1, 2008

Berke Negri posted:

I'm guessing the majority in attendance were Maronite, who are Catholic not Orthodox, and I imagine that the message "you need to side up with Israel if you're a real Christian" doesn't vibe with them well given Israel's propensity to bomb and occupy Lebanon constantly.

Maronites are basically Orthodox who signed a deal with the pope officially recognizing him, like Ukrainian/Greek/other eastern Catholics. The Maronite service is done in ancient Aramaic, not Latin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Catholic_Churches

ReidRansom posted:

I think the word is 'papistry', but popery sounds pretty good too.

Popery is a word too

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/popery

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popery_Act_1698

# ? Sep 12, 2014 03:52

Berke Negri: Feb 15, 2012; Les Ricains tuent et moi je mue
Mao Mao
Les fous sont rois et moi je bois
Mao Mao
Les bombes tonnent et moi je sonne
Mao Mao
Les bebes fuient et moi je fuis
Mao Mao

icantfindaname posted:

Maronites are basically Orthodox who signed a deal with the pope officially recognizing him, like Ukrainian/Greek/other eastern Catholics. The Maronite service is done in ancient Aramaic, not Latin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Catholic_Churches

Maronites are Catholic by all important measures, Roman liturgy isn't done in Latin anyways except to appease nerds. Lebanese Christian influence ties back to the Crusades. Eastern Rite Churches given carte blanche when it comes to liturgy is a centuries old tradition, but (church) politically they are Catholic.

edit: Full disclosure, there's a sizeable Maronite expat community where I live and my best friend's prom date was Maronite, and her family definitely did not consider us Irish/Mexican-Catholics as others. They had more icons in their home than Marian shrines in the front yard but they considered themselves as Catholic as we were. They also got trapped in Lebanon in 2006 visiting relatives when Israel decided to bomb Beirut so no, they're not fans.

Berke Negri fucked around with this message at 04:10 on Sep 12, 2014

# ? Sep 12, 2014 03:59

ReidRansom: Oct 25, 2004

icantfindaname posted:

Popery is a word too

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/popery

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popery_Act_1698

Sure enough. Well, I learned something.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 04:09

PerniciousKnid: Sep 13, 2006

deoju posted:

I suspect part of the reason for Reagan worship is that you have to all the way back to Eisenhower to find another Republican president that wasn't single term, (Ford, Bush 41) or disgraced somehow (Nixon, Bush 43). And by modern standards Eisenhower is a RINO, so you'd have to go back to Hoover... He is really the only option for deification.

Hoover had a little problem of his own. I think pre-Eisenhower the go-to Republican is Teddy, then Lincoln.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 04:38

Idran: Jan 13, 2005; Grimey Drawer

Berke Negri posted:

Reagan was something of a god figure for conservatives before he even became President, too.

The deification of W was a work in progress as well but the recession was such a catastrophic end note that it isn't feasible currently.

I thought that Reagan's deification was a relatively recent thing? Like, as in most Republican officials were publically not big fans of his in the 80s and he wasn't held up as a great figure of conservativism until the early 2000s or so?

# ? Sep 12, 2014 04:45

icantfindaname: Jul 1, 2008

Idran posted:

I thought that Reagan's deification was a relatively recent thing? Like, as in most Republican officials were publically not big fans of his in the 80s and he wasn't held up as a great figure of conservativism until the early 2000s or so?

Despite the prevailing direction of the national Republican Party, there were still moderates in the party at lower levels up until fairly recently. If I had to give a date to when the old order finally died it would be 1994 and the Republican Revolution. Remember California was solidly red in presidential elections up until 1988. Even though Reagan was very much a conservative, he was only the figurehead of the national party and there were still lots of moderates in the lower rungs. This is also why he worked with Democrats on many occasions, the Republicans in Congress at the time weren't as right wing as he was. Strong conservatives have pretty much always worshiped him.

icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 04:52 on Sep 12, 2014

# ? Sep 12, 2014 04:48

Berke Negri: Feb 15, 2012; Les Ricains tuent et moi je mue
Mao Mao
Les fous sont rois et moi je bois
Mao Mao
Les bombes tonnent et moi je sonne
Mao Mao
Les bebes fuient et moi je fuis
Mao Mao

Reagan was the great white hope since he was governor in the 60s. He was constantly the shadow Nixon looked over his shoulder worried about and probably could have been president in '76 if he really pushed for it. He was the inheritor of Goldwater, weirdly, and in looking back shouldnt be a shocker he did eventually become president, or at least a Republican candidate.

edit: ^^^^^^^^^^^^ It wasn't overnight that our political system got so polarized as it did either. There were plenty of republicans who thought Reagan was a dumbfuck, or were of liberal persuasion.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 04:50

Idran: Jan 13, 2005; Grimey Drawer

icantfindaname posted:

Despite the prevailing direction of the national Republican Party, there were still moderates in the party at lower levels up until fairly recently. If I had to give a date to when the old order finally died it would be 1994 and the Republican Revolution. Even though Reagan was very much a conservative, he was only the figurehead of the national party and there were still lots of moderates in the lower rungs. This is also why he worked with Democrats on many occasions, the Republicans in Congress at the time weren't as right wing as he was. Strong conservatives have pretty much always worshiped him.

Aha. So it's not so much a conscious shift of opinion in the Republican Party as it is just the end of the moderate Republican wing?

# ? Sep 12, 2014 04:51

icantfindaname: Jul 1, 2008

Idran posted:

Aha. So it's not so much a conscious shift of opinion in the Republican Party as it is just the end of the moderate Republican wing?

Pretty much, yes. It's the result of 100 years of the Republican Party drifting to the right.

Interestingly it took a long time for the Southern Democrats to finally disappear too. The first instance of right wingers shutting down the government was actually by conservative southern senators in the 70s under Carter who were still nominally Democrats. David Duke ran in the Democratic presidential primaries in 1988. Robert Byrd was Senator until 2010.

icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 04:56 on Sep 12, 2014

# ? Sep 12, 2014 04:53

Berke Negri: Feb 15, 2012; Les Ricains tuent et moi je mue
Mao Mao
Les fous sont rois et moi je bois
Mao Mao
Les bombes tonnent et moi je sonne
Mao Mao
Les bebes fuient et moi je fuis
Mao Mao

Reagan also encapsulates other positive qualities conservatives love, such as "stance wills reality into shape" similar to W. It is less important what you do, or what you believe, as what you portray. Reagan's presidency was mixed at best from an objective standpoint, even the fall of the soviet union didn't really happen under his watch, while crime reached its apex and race riots were rampant and the 80s were kind of a muddle economically despite what people tell you. Eisenhower would be the logical real Jesus figure of Republicans, as he, you know, defeated Nazis, presided over an amazing period of economic growth, and protected American interests throughout the world but he was (literally the only in history probably) a RINO so nevermind.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 05:01

kik2dagroin: Mar 23, 2007; Use the anger. Use it.

quote:

RUSH: Here's Louis in Greenville, South Carolina. It's great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello.

CALLER: Hey, how you doing?

RUSH: Hey. I'm good.

CALLER: Quick question. I always wonder why you always down Obama as far as being a president, as being a man. And I always say, that's like you on the radio every day. You can't control what goes on in every state, in every city, what every radio station around the United States, and you have to have permission, just like Obama has to have permission from Congress to do something, if he doesn't do it, he's a bad person. If he doesn't get Congress approval, he's a bad person. So what is one man to do, if he does it this way, it's a problem. If he does it the other way, it's a problem. But you don't look at that. You look at everything he does.

RUSH: Okay, can you give me specific, I mean, you think Obama's doing good job and you think I'm being unfair?

CALLER: I think he's doing a great job.

RUSH: You think he's a doing a great job?

CALLER: Yes, I do.

RUSH: On what?

CALLER: On the economy, jobs are up.

RUSH: You gotta be kidding me.

CALLER: No, sir, I'm not kidding.

RUSH: You have got to be kidding.

CALLER: Have you looked at the polls?

RUSH: This is a plant call. You can't you can't possibly.

CALLER: I possibly know he's a great president.

RUSH: He doing a great job on the economy and jobs?

CALLER: Yes, he is.

RUSH: Jobs are up?

CALLER: Yes, it is.

RUSH: Sir, they're --

CALLER: I listen to the radio. I look at --

RUSH: Louis --

CALLER: -- everything every day. I don't just go on what Limbaugh says on the radio, what Rush Limbaugh says.

RUSH: Well, you should. (crosstalk)

CALLER: -- what you are saying is not correct.

RUSH: Louis, you should listen to me 'cause I'm not lying to you. I got nothing to gain by lying to you or anybody else. You should listen to me. I don't want to lie to you. I don't make things up. There's nothing in it for me to lie to you. You need to examine who it is your believing when you hear jobs are up, 'cause, Louis --

CALLER: Yes, sir.

RUSH: -- it ain't happening. We're in a depression, Louis. I don't even think this is a recession. We're in a disaster here. It's not good.

CALLER: Okay, let me ask you one question, Rush. As far as health care. I heard you talk about that. I know the plan that I'm on, it's a great plan to me, and it's a very great plan as far as a health care plan. I mean, people didn't have insurance. People couldn't go to their doctor. They were able to go to their doctor and do things that they couldn't do before. I know some people's premium may have went up, but it has helped more people than it has hurt.

RUSH: No, it's exact opposite. More people have been hurt by Obamacare than helped. Their premiums have gone up. Their coverage has gone down. The president lied to 'em about keeping their doctor and their policy over three years. What do you like about the plan that you have?

CALLER: The plan that I have, actually it's a great plan. I mean, if you have to go to the doctor, you have to pay a premium just like anybody else, but you know you can get to the doctor and you don't have to pay a big premium like you used to have to pay, just three or four hundred dollars a month --

RUSH: Somebody's paying it, Louis. You need to find out who and thank them.

CALLER: The taxpayers, just like me. The taxpayers are paying it. I'm a taxpayer, so you saying that other taxpayers shouldn't be paying something --

RUSH: Well, if you're getting what you used to have for less, then somebody's paying what you used to be, somebody's paying your share. You need to find out who they are and thank them.

CALLER: I need to thank 'em?

RUSH: Yeah, because somebody's paying what you used to pay. If you've got a good insurance company, somebody's making up the difference 'cause nothing's free.

CALLER: I never said anything free, but the same thing --

RUSH: I know, but you said you got a good deal. Your premiums aren't as high as they were, your coverage is better. Somebody's paying for that, if you're not.

CALLER: So basically what you're saying is when I was paying my premium every day, every month, three or four hundred dollars a month, I was paying for somebody else's. So basically you saying it's not time for somebody else, to work with each other, to help each other --

RUSH: No, I'm not saying that. You might have been subsidizing somebody else. My point is you're now being subsidized.

CALLER: So that make the people that's being subsidized now makes them a less person than the people that's now and before? No. It is that you helping each other. Just like you speak on your show, America, America, America. Okay, America is supposed to be a group of people, an organization that supposed to stick with each other and help each other and come as one just like you saying the service people. Everybody supposed to stick as one group of people defending United States, defending the Constitution. That's what you say you stand for every day, but you totally different. You're saying Obama's not doing this, the country's not doing this, but then you do the rhetoric, that, well, he should have got Congress permission and all that, but then if he does get Congress permission --

RUSH: Louis, you're all over the board here. Obama is, by his own admission, tinkling on the Constitution. By his own admission he's saying he has to go it alone. By his own admission (imitating Obama), "If Congress won't work with me, I'm gonna do it on my own." By his own admission he is violating the Constitution. This is not a matter of debate.

Anyway, I've gone beyond the length of time I have for this segment. I'm a little long here. But, Louis, a low-information voter maybe, but look at this idea "we all come together, we stick together, we do things together, and that's the Constitution," if that's what he said. It's not the Constitution. Nothing's really changed, Louis. If you want it, go get it. Don't wait for it. Go get it. You're not owed anything just because you're an American or because Obama's president. If you want something, go get it, and when you get it don't feel guilty about it.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Whenever we get the chance, folks, to demonstrate what a low-information voter is, we do it. And we just did.

I've got the NAG babe demanding that Goodell go. So we'll do that in the next hour. I'm looking for something on status of forces. Don't have it, don't need it. Let's let's go back to the phones.

Kathryn in Memphis. Kathryn, great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello.

CALLER: Oh, hello, Rush. I love hearing your voice on the phone. I'm just crazy about you. I've listened to you for over 20 years.

RUSH: Well, thank you. Thank you.

CALLER: I'm a member of Rush 24/7. All my children are Rush Babies. All my friends and family love you and adore you here in Memphis.

RUSH: Well, you made my day. Thank you so much. That means a lot.

CALLER: And I love your tea. I love your unsweet tea, as a matter of fact. It's delicious.

RUSH: Cool.

CALLER: Very smooth.

RUSH: Well, you're just a dream come true today here. From Louis to Kathryn.

CALLER: Well, I just thank God that you're here every day, that you're here and you're helping America. Thank you so much.

RUSH: Well, you're welcome very much.

CALLER: Well, if I had to listen to people like Louis all the time, I'd really be scared.

RUSH: Hey, they're everywhere. I mean, you want to know the people voting for Obama, that's what they think, that's what they're out there believing.

CALLER: Well, we're all shaking our heads now because we're all scared about all this Iraq business. But what I wanted to ask you about, Rush, is really, don't you think this all started with Clinton, when he didn't act the first time the towers were bombed. When the Cole was bombed. I mean, there were so many things going on then, and he took no action. At least Bush took action. He even got Congress to vote to take action.

RUSH: To refresh everybody's memory, the World Trade Center was first hit, I guess it was 1993. It was on my dad's birthday, February 26th, I remember that. It was a dry run and they had a bomb and a truck too small. They thought they were gonna be able to bring down the tower that they parked that truck in the garage. And the problem that happened, the Clinton years were famous. Remember the name Jamie Gorelick, and Clinton's attorney generals, it was during those years in the nineties that the Clinton team decided to treat terrorism as a standard, ordinary violation of the law, as a criminal act.

There were indictments and investigations by the FBI or the prosecutor's office and there was a denial of what it really was. Jamie Gorelick was the woman responsible for erecting this wall that to protect people's civil rights, the CIA was not allowed to learn any intel the FBI learned, and vice-versa. So they couldn't share intel legally, so as not to compromise Clinton-era legal investigations. But what's happening now is way beyond that.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/09/11/caller_obama_is_doing_a_great_job

quote:

RUSH: Peter Beinart's now at The Atlantic, Mr. Snerdley. New Republic, then you go to the Atlantic, then you go to The Hill, Salon, you go to CNN, then you go to Slate, Washington Post. Then you start the cycle all over again. You go to New Republic. One place you're editor. Then you're executive editor. Then you're just a slave writer. You try to get a Fox commentary deal or whatever. It's the cycle.

So right now Beinart and his career is over at The Atlantic. "Obama's Disastrous Iraq Policy: An Autopsy." An autopsy. An autopsy, as in, there's a body. Right. As in, there's a dead body here. The Obama Iraq policy, and it's Peter Beinart who is the medical examiner here. The opening paragraph here is just so typical.

"Yes, the Iraq War was a disaster of historic proportions. Yes, seeing its architects return to prime time to smugly slam President Obama while taking no responsibility for their own, far greater, failures is infuriating."

Do you know what that's in reference to? Dick Cheney on TV this week. See, right here it is in the first paragraph. The left believes their own drivel. They manufactured, for political purposes, the idea that the Iraq war was illegitimate from the get-go, should never have happened, was impossible to win, was totally unnecessary, and was administered by a Darth Vader named Dick Cheney who only did it to enrich Halliburton. Everybody involved, Petraeus, liars, cheats. It was a waste of American treasure and American life, they said, and it was a total boondoggle.

The reason they did this is that's what got them elected. They did everything they could to secure defeat for their own country in Iraq. And they can't let go of the lie that they manufactured. So in a piece where he's gonna rip Obama to shreds, he has to start out by saying, I don't care how bad Obama is, Bush and Cheney were worse, and it really galls all of us to see 'em on TV gloating now.

Well, Mr. Beinart, I don't know that Cheney's gloating. I think Cheney's genuinely worried that we have people running this country who don't have the slightest idea how to save it, protect it, defend it, nor do they take it seriously. I think Dick Cheney is seriously worried about the country. I don't think Dick Cheney's on TV gloating about anything. There's nothing to gloat about here. We don't gloat over US weakness. We don't seek to disadvantage our own country for our own political advancement like you people do. We never seek defeat in a military conflict so that we can make our political opponents look bad.

We never want this country to be at risk. Whenever we get involved militarily, we want to kick butt now, take names later and end it and come back with a W. And we certainly do not want the country run by people that don't want the same things and don't know how to accomplish it and are not even interested in those things. And that's what we've got. Nobody's on TV gloating. But this whole idea that Iraq was a disaster really ticks me off 'cause it wasn't. It was necessary.

Folks, let me go through this one more time before I get back to this column. I want you to try to think about something, and I want you to put yourself in Bush's place. I know it's very hard for any of us to really do this, but imagine being president and 9/11 happens. You're reading to a class of children as part of an average, ordinary presidential day. One of the stops is a schoolhouse in Florida. And somebody comes to tell you the World Trade Center's just been knocked down, both towers on the way to plummeting. Nobody knows anything other than that.

You scramble, you get out of there. The first time the continental United States has ever been hit. Three thousand people are dead, and you don't know what's coming next. You don't know if they're hitting the White House. You don't know if they're gonna go for the Capitol. You don't know if they're gonna go for other locations. You don't know anything. Nobody knows anything. That's another story. But the point is, you don't and everything now is different, everything's changed. Now we can be hit with our own airplanes. Our own airplanes can take out our own targets.

So you are commander-in-chief. Your oath of office is to defend and protect the Constitution and the people of this country. That's your first and foremost duty. Something like the twin towers going down, the Pentagon being hit, something like 9/11 is, I mean, it's ridiculous to say that it's unique. It's far more than that. It's never happened before. And if around the world other people threaten to do the same thing, how do you not take that seriously?

It's like our old French philosopher, Blaise Pascal said -- I'm paraphrasing -- it's much easier to believe that something that has happened can happen again, something that has been can be again, than it is to believe that something that's never been can be. Well, okay. World Trade Center was hit, our own planes. We were attacked. Okay, it can happen. And the world was cheering in certain quarters, and there were people bragging they're gonna do it again, they're gonna do more. You have to take that seriously.

Going into Iraq was not to avenge an assassination attempt on George H. W. Bush, and it wasn't about Halliburton. It was about somebody taking a threat seriously and taking preventive action and not waiting to be hit again. Saddam was bragging all over the place about all the weapons of mass destruction he had, and they were toying around with creating a nuke, and everybody knew he had and tried to. Now, at the time this is happening, you can't afford to sit around and say, "Nah, he can't do it. Nah, he doesn't mean it. Nah, he's just bragging." You don't have that luxury.

So the decision was made to take him out along with whatever we did in Afghanistan. The Democrats supported it for a couple of weeks, but that's as long as they could go and then they turned it political and that was the end. They spent the next five years trying to delegitimize the whole thing. In my mind it had a valid purpose. Now, the details of the mission, democratizing the place and turning it into a mini-America, that was a stretch. But I don't have one problem with taking out people threatening to do exactly what happened to us on 9/11 before they can do it. If they're gonna brag about doing it they may as well paint a bull's-eye on their target.

Everything changes after 9/11. You don't sit around and wait for it to happen again and then go get 'em and try to find out who did it. Anyway, the idea that Iraq was entirely illegitimate, made up and unnecessary is something the Democrats fed off of for five years. They went to every election on it. It just it sickened me when it happened. They were ripping the military, accusing them being rapists and terrorists and terrorizing women and children.

You had John Kerry, John Murtha, Democrat after Democrat on television every day, every week criticizing their own country, criticizing their own military, accepting any allegation about our military as truth, all for the purposes of discrediting the whole operation so that we would lose, so that the Democrats could win the White House in 2004 and 2008. So that's why, when I read this opening from Beinart, I just get steamed again. "Yes, the Iraq war was a disaster of historic proportions." No, it was not a disaster!

This is a disaster of historic proportions. The Obama presidency, Mr. Beinart, is a disaster of historic proportions. And not just the Obama military. The Obama health care. The Obama economy. The Obama infrastructure. The Obama immigration. The Obama open borders.

We are living the disaster of historic proportions. Iraq was not one. We're living it. We are in the middle of a disaster of historic proportions. "Yes, the Iraq War was a disaster of historic proportions. Yes, seeing its architects return to prime time to smugly slam President Obama while taking no responsibility for their own, far greater, failures is infuriating."

Okay, so he had to get that out of the way to be true to the Democrat liberal reader base.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: By the way, I should have mentioned that this Beinart piece is from June. It's not from this week. It makes it even more poignant. The Peter Beinart piece is from June 23rd of 2014. I'm sorry I forgot to mention that. I got so revved up to get into the substance that I forgot to mention it. But it's June 23rd, 2014, not written after last night's speech. So let me just read the rest of the first paragraph. It's really all you need to hear.

"But sooner or later," he writes, after ripping Bush and saying it's embarrassing to see him on TV, "honest liberals will have to admit that Obama�s Iraq policy has been a disaster. Since the president took office, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has grown ever more tyrannical and ever more sectarian, driving his country�s Sunnis toward revolt. Since Obama took office, Iraq watchers -- including those within his own administration -- have warned that unless the United States pushed hard for inclusive government, the country would slide back into civil war. Yet the White House has been so eager to put Iraq in America�s rearview mirror that, publicly at least, it has given Maliki an almost-free pass."

So even back in June the libs were writing about what a disaster Obama's policy is, and it's only gotten worse. But here's this word "inclusive." Obama talks about the Iraqi government must be inclusive. That's a crock of a word when we're talking about things like that. Inclusive? Whatever happened to doing what you have to do? These are serious matters. This is not social architecture. This is not a social liberal experimentation laboratory. Inclusive?

"Well, that's right, Mr. Limbaugh, because if the Iraqi government had been inclusive and allowed the Sunnis and the Kurds and the Shi'ites to all participate equally --" It's a crock. Inclusive? That's not how things like this work. I'll tell you, we're veering so far. There are just hard, cold truths and realities about things of grave consequence and you cannot deal with them with political correctness and so forth.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/09/11/the_iraq_war_wasn_t_a_disaster_it_was_necessary

quote:

RUSH: This is Bruce in Muskegon, Michigan. I'm glad you waited, and it's great to have you. Hi.

CALLER: Thanks, Rush, for taking my call. I'll get right to my point. I'd like you to address a very important point regarding the status-of-force agreement which no one else seems to be talking about. Obama claims that he couldn't get a status-of-force agreement, but the real question is, did he really want one? It's my understanding that he, Obama, insisted that the Iraqi parliament approve the agreement, which is contrary to any other status-of-forces agreement we ever had with any other country during any other conflict. He knew that the parliament was dysfunctional and they couldn't agree on the time of day, let alone a status-of-forces agreement, so it's my premise and I think other people have said it but no one's saying it in the media, that was Obama's out. He really didn't want it, and by making it a requirement that parliament approve it --

RUSH: He didn't want to stay. You're right. He wanted no evidence America had ever been there. He didn't want to leave a vestige. He didn't want to leave a single troop. He didn't want to leave a single reminder. All of this is driven by politics. Folks, the Barack Obama Democrat Party, you name it, media, thinking on Iraq, when it came time to end it, it had nothing to do with strategy. It had nothing to do with preserving what had been won or what might have been won. It had nothing to do with maintaining stability there. All that mattered was getting out, and the reason they had to get out was their fringe base voters and donors.

Folks, everything is political to these people. Everything is a political calculation. There was no way Obama could maintain any credibility with the people who had just elected him if he left troops there. He couldn't even talk about it. He couldn't even talk about the possibility of preserving even if you wanted to call it the peace. He couldn't. The media and the Democrat Party had driven their own base insane over this. What do you think is gonna happen if five years, every day of the year and every hour of the year, somebody in the Democrat Party is ripping Iraq, ripping the Iraq war, ripping president, ripping the United States, ripping the US military?

Five years, every day, multiple time a day, and the way they did it, they were calling Bush a liar. They were saying Cheney only cared about money for Halliburton. It was blood for oil. They told their rabid voters that our troops were raping and maiming Iraqi women and children. They told 'em every day that our troops were destroying civilian targets. They drove their own base insane with rage. They lied to the American people about what was going on in Iraq, what the intention was, how it was being conducted, and their base, which is already fringe kook to begin with on a normal day.

Look, I read the comments that these Looney Tunes posted on the blogs for five years, maybe even longer. Obama could not afford to even speak one positive syllable about Iraq because he and the Democrats had spent five years trashing it. There was no other possibility. So he used -- our caller here is right on the money -- he said, "I couldn't get a status-of-forces agreement." And again, what that really means, if you break it down, status-of-forces, what that means is how are our troops remaining going to be treated vis-a-vis Iraqi law. Unless you indemnify our troops, we're not leaving any there, is the primary intent of a status-of-forces agreement.

There's a whole bunch of other things in it, but if the host country will not indemnify troops against war crimes, charges and so forth, then we don't stay. Obama claimed he couldn't get one. The caller is right, he didn't want one. He wanted to be able to blame the Iraqis and Maliki and everybody else for the fact we were getting out of, but he couldn't stay. For five years they had told everybody how illegitimate the whole thing was. They couldn't stay. That is why I find what happens now so sweetly ironic. If anybody owns the defeat in Iraq, it's Barack Obama and the Democrat Party. They wanted it. They're the ones that secured it.

They're the ones that fought for it, politically. And they got it. And now look. Because they got what they wanted, because they don't know crap from Shinola, ISIS was allowed to grow. It was Al-Qaeda in Iraq. We pulled out of there. The Iraqis were not capable of stopping them, and everybody knew this. So we pulled out, and now we have to go back in there for political reasons again. We're going back in there is because Obama's poll numbers suck. We're not going back in there because Obama thinks it's the right thing to do. We're going back in there because his poll numbers are in the tank.

So right before the election he's doing a political move trying to make himself a reluctant warrior using the troops again. I'm gonna tell you, folks, I do not want a reluctant warrior as commander-in-chief. I don't want a reluctant anything. But, anyway, it is so sweetly ironic 'cause the people who gave us this defeat, who wanted it, who secured it, are now imprisoned by it politically. We're not going in there 'cause Obama cares to defeat ISIS. If he's gonna stand there last night and tell us that they're not Islam and they don't kill innocent people, then he can't possibly care about what they're doing. If he's not gonna even be honest with the American people about who they are?

We're doing what we're doing because poll numbers are in the tank before an election. And poll numbers matter because amnesty's next, and you don't want to do amnesty when you're sitting at 30 in the polls. It's all political. So the bottom line of status-of-forces agreement is we could have gotten one and the Iraqis would have done anything to get us to stay. That's the hard, cold reality. Obama didn't want to.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/09/11/irony_democrats_now_imprisoned_by_the_defeat_they_secured_in_iraq

And lastly I'll just leave the title of this bullshit here: An Institution That Enables Thousands of Young African-Americans to Become Millionaires is Under Assault from a Bunch of White Liberals

# ? Sep 12, 2014 05:34

sweart gliwere: Jul 5, 2005; _{better to die an evil wizard,

than to live as a grand one.}; Pillbug

Berke Negri posted:

Reagan also encapsulates other positive qualities conservatives love, such as "stance wills reality into shape" similar to W. It is less important what you do, or what you believe, as what you portray. Reagan's presidency was mixed at best from an objective standpoint, even the fall of the soviet union didn't really happen under his watch, while crime reached its apex and race riots were rampant and the 80s were kind of a muddle economically despite what people tell you. Eisenhower would be the logical real Jesus figure of Republicans, as he, you know, defeated Nazis, presided over an amazing period of economic growth, and protected American interests throughout the world but he was (literally the only in history probably) a RINO so nevermind.

Total agreement with the bolded part. We can skip most analysis, and accept that Republicans greatly desire bonus father figures. In the event that they have enough dads IRL, they desire bonus surrogate (grand)dads like Rush/Levin/Hannity/etc. They may attend church with a (grand)dad-pastor. They may vote for president (grand)dad, etc. 2008 McCain was great for nostalgic Republicans looking for a comfortable cultural touchstone who didn't represent the anus of that period's Republican revolution.

For all its flaws, King of the Hill captured the moderate Republican mindset with Hank, better than most media I've seen. Reagan was a great surrogate (grand)pa, if you didn't analyze his actions or positions in office. He tore down sissy inefficient Carter solar panels. He spent all that money, because he had to, to beat the Soviets. Looking back, he couldn't provide distilled Republicanism like GWB could since he had to tangle with so many congressional Democrats. He helped America feel good again, don't worry why or how, you're not dad so don't quibble. He was old-fashioned, but in a way approachable enough to convince many "Reagan Democrats" to support him at the polls and not get his dementia questioned seriously by mainstream news.

That's where my occasional right-wing media consumption always leads me. Can't help but try and adapt to hearing those programs as a "voluntary listener", and can't help but enter the mindset of a supportive listener without embracing seriously weird daddy issues. It ties neatly back into authoritarianism, sure, but I can't not note the dad specificity factor. It's bugged me for years.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 05:55

Paul MaudDib: May 3, 2006; TEAM NVIDIA:
FORUM POLICE

pengun101 posted:

what the gently caress? why do these people lie about this poo poo. its not even getting mainstream attention. i assume its just to jerk off the base.

Seriously though, who here hasn't done a line with the Islamic Shock off Bill Clinton's rear end in a top hat?

# ? Sep 12, 2014 06:51

Hodgepodge: Jan 29, 2006; Can't post for 224 days!

I wonder how many people who love Reagan for making America feel good about itself also hate the idea of teaching kids "self-esteem."

# ? Sep 12, 2014 07:31

Ninjasaurus: Feb 11, 2014; This is indeed a disturbing universe.

Kelfeftaf posted:

I still don't think you can go for it as hard as he does without being a True Believer.

Apparently Cruz has always had a few screws loose - or at least he's enormously narcissistic - so maybe you're right.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 09:25

Sir Tonk: Apr 18, 2006; Young Orc

Nah, he's just a sociopath.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 13:20

esto es malo: Aug 3, 2006; Don't want to end up a cartoon

In a cartoon graveyard

Is the reply "low information voter" just a reflexive argument to anyone proving you wrong when you cannot formulate any type of coherent reply addressing their point?

# ? Sep 12, 2014 14:14

VitalSigns: Sep 3, 2011

Yes, but more generally it's a dogwhistle for voter suppression. It goes hand-in-hand with claiming the only reason not to have a photo ID from a narrow list of acceptable documents that cost money and are often only available during working hours at inconvenient locations is stupidity or laziness, so discouraging from voting such low-information voters who are too idle or dumb to inform themselves actually safeguards the integrity of our democracy.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 14:30

esto es malo: Aug 3, 2006; Don't want to end up a cartoon

In a cartoon graveyard

It's just every time I hear low information voter it's as a defensive argument in lieu of anything else that makes a modicum of sense.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 14:36

Eggplant Squire: Aug 14, 2003

Low info voter is just "we're smart, they're stupid!" with racism mixed in for flavor.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 14:45

Hazo: Dec 30, 2004; SCIENCE

kik2dagroin posted:

RUSH: Here's Louis in Greenville, South Carolina. It's great to have you on the EIB Network. Hello.

CALLER: Hey, how you doing?

RUSH: Hey. I'm good.

CALLER: Quick question. I always wonder why you always down Obama as far as being a president, as being a man. And I always say, that's like you on the radio every day. You can't control what goes on in every state, in every city, what every radio station around the United States, and you have to have permission, just like Obama has to have permission from Congress to do something, if he doesn't do it, he's a bad person. If he doesn't get Congress approval, he's a bad person. So what is one man to do, if he does it this way, it's a problem. If he does it the other way, it's a problem. But you don't look at that. You look at everything he does.

RUSH: Okay, can you give me specific, I mean, you think Obama's doing good job and you think I'm being unfair?

CALLER: I think he's doing a great job.

RUSH: You think he's a doing a great job?

CALLER: Yes, I do.

RUSH: On what?

CALLER: On the economy, jobs are up.

RUSH: You gotta be kidding me.

CALLER: No, sir, I'm not kidding.

RUSH: You have got to be kidding.

CALLER: Have you looked at the polls?

RUSH: This is a plant call. You can't you can't possibly.

CALLER: I possibly know he's a great president.

RUSH: He doing a great job on the economy and jobs?

CALLER: Yes, he is.

RUSH: Jobs are up?

CALLER: Yes, it is.

RUSH: Sir, they're --

CALLER: I listen to the radio. I look at --

RUSH: Louis --

CALLER: -- everything every day. I don't just go on what Limbaugh says on the radio, what Rush Limbaugh says.

RUSH: Well, you should. (crosstalk)

CALLER: -- what you are saying is not correct.

RUSH: Louis, you should listen to me 'cause I'm not lying to you. I got nothing to gain by lying to you or anybody else. You should listen to me. I don't want to lie to you. I don't make things up. There's nothing in it for me to lie to you. You need to examine who it is your believing when you hear jobs are up, 'cause, Louis --

CALLER: Yes, sir.

RUSH: -- it ain't happening. We're in a depression, Louis. I don't even think this is a recession. We're in a disaster here. It's not good.

CALLER: Okay, let me ask you one question, Rush. As far as health care. I heard you talk about that. I know the plan that I'm on, it's a great plan to me, and it's a very great plan as far as a health care plan. I mean, people didn't have insurance. People couldn't go to their doctor. They were able to go to their doctor and do things that they couldn't do before. I know some people's premium may have went up, but it has helped more people than it has hurt.

RUSH: No, it's exact opposite. More people have been hurt by Obamacare than helped. Their premiums have gone up. Their coverage has gone down. The president lied to 'em about keeping their doctor and their policy over three years. What do you like about the plan that you have?

CALLER: The plan that I have, actually it's a great plan. I mean, if you have to go to the doctor, you have to pay a premium just like anybody else, but you know you can get to the doctor and you don't have to pay a big premium like you used to have to pay, just three or four hundred dollars a month --

RUSH: Somebody's paying it, Louis. You need to find out who and thank them.

CALLER: The taxpayers, just like me. The taxpayers are paying it. I'm a taxpayer, so you saying that other taxpayers shouldn't be paying something --

RUSH: Well, if you're getting what you used to have for less, then somebody's paying what you used to be, somebody's paying your share. You need to find out who they are and thank them.

CALLER: I need to thank 'em?

RUSH: Yeah, because somebody's paying what you used to pay. If you've got a good insurance company, somebody's making up the difference 'cause nothing's free.

CALLER: I never said anything free, but the same thing --

RUSH: I know, but you said you got a good deal. Your premiums aren't as high as they were, your coverage is better. Somebody's paying for that, if you're not.

CALLER: So basically what you're saying is when I was paying my premium every day, every month, three or four hundred dollars a month, I was paying for somebody else's. So basically you saying it's not time for somebody else, to work with each other, to help each other --

RUSH: No, I'm not saying that. You might have been subsidizing somebody else. My point is you're now being subsidized.

CALLER: So that make the people that's being subsidized now makes them a less person than the people that's now and before? No. It is that you helping each other. Just like you speak on your show, America, America, America. Okay, America is supposed to be a group of people, an organization that supposed to stick with each other and help each other and come as one just like you saying the service people. Everybody supposed to stick as one group of people defending United States, defending the Constitution. That's what you say you stand for every day, but you totally different. You're saying Obama's not doing this, the country's not doing this, but then you do the rhetoric, that, well, he should have got Congress permission and all that, but then if he does get Congress permission --

RUSH: Louis, you're all over the board here. Obama is, by his own admission, tinkling on the Constitution. By his own admission he's saying he has to go it alone. By his own admission (imitating Obama), "If Congress won't work with me, I'm gonna do it on my own." By his own admission he is violating the Constitution. This is not a matter of debate.

Anyway, I've gone beyond the length of time I have for this segment. I'm a little long here. But, Louis, a low-information voter maybe, but look at this idea "we all come together, we stick together, we do things together, and that's the Constitution," if that's what he said. It's not the Constitution. Nothing's really changed, Louis. If you want it, go get it. Don't wait for it. Go get it. You're not owed anything just because you're an American or because Obama's president. If you want something, go get it, and when you get it don't feel guilty about it.

Pretty sneaky Rush. If insurance rates go up, that's an indictment of Obama since nobody wants to pay higher premiums. If someone's rates go down, well, that's ALSO an indictment of Obama since it just means that poorer (read: less-worthy) people and being subsidized by the wealthy, which is bad because reasons.

Radish posted:

Low info voter is just "we're smart, they're stupid!" with racism mixed in for flavor.

Which is always fascinating it's used to refer to black Democratic voters since white Republicans have some of the poorest understanding of things like the constitution and world affairs.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 14:59

Phone: Jul 30, 2005; 親子丼をほしい。

See: States like Mississippi where most of the people on welfare are white, who in turn vote in favor of welfare cuts.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 15:40

Babylon Astronaut: Apr 19, 2012

Phone posted:

See: States like Mississippi where most of the people on welfare are white, who in turn vote in favor of welfare cuts.

That's actually where I heard the phrase first. I heard it used to describe people like that, you know, low information voters, during the Bush years. I'm pretty sure this is classic "I know you are, but what am I" going on.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 15:52

Phone: Jul 30, 2005; 親子丼をほしい。

Babylon Astronaut posted:

That's actually where I heard the phrase first. I heard it used to describe people like that, you know, low information voters, during the Bush years. I'm pretty sure this is classic "I know you are, but what am I" going on.

I'd kinda argue against calling people like that low information voters because they know that they're actively hurting "them negros" and whatnot. Yeah, the price to pay is at their own expense; however, we can't have any of those blah people living better than them.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 16:12

ToxicSlurpee: Nov 5, 2003; -=SEND HELP=-; Pillbug

Radish posted:

Low info voter is just "we're smart, they're stupid!" with racism mixed in for flavor.

It's this mixed with "well if they actually knew what was going on they'd change their vote!" That and accusing "low information voters" of being too goddamned lazy to actually be informed.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 16:20

kik2dagroin: Mar 23, 2007; Use the anger. Use it.

In addition to all those other things mentioned casting the label of 'low information' on callers is a great way to call them idiots live on-air while to your moronic listeners still appearing to be a magnanimous harmless lovable little fuzzball

# ? Sep 12, 2014 16:27

sweart gliwere: Jul 5, 2005; _{better to die an evil wizard,

than to live as a grand one.}; Pillbug

ToxicSlurpee posted:

It's this mixed with "well if they actually knew what was going on they'd change their vote!" That and accusing "low information voters" of being too goddamned lazy to actually be informed.

I dream of the day a fat old man scolds me for being too lazy to pay for cable and plant my rear end on the couch for nightly FoxNews passive consumathons.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 16:29

Bar Ran Dun: Jan 22, 2006

sweart gliwere posted:

For all its flaws, King of the Hill captured the moderate Republican mindset with Hank,

Would a Republican name the dog he loves "Lady Bird"? Always thought hank was a LBJ democrat. Also thought his boss Strickland was patterned after LBJ.

Edit:

I mean I always thought the resemblance was intentional

Bar Ran Dun fucked around with this message at 16:46 on Sep 12, 2014

# ? Sep 12, 2014 16:40

Madmarker: Jan 7, 2007

BrandorKP posted:

Would a Republican name the dog he loves "Lady Bird"? Always thought hank was a LBJ democrat. Also thought his boss Strickland was patterned after LBJ.

Yeah he was definitely republican, in one episode he went to some political rally or event and shook hands with George W. Bush, and was aghast that he had a limp handshake.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 16:44

sweart gliwere: Jul 5, 2005; _{better to die an evil wizard,

than to live as a grand one.}; Pillbug

BrandorKP posted:

Would a Republican name the dog he loves "Lady Bird"? Always thought hank was a LBJ democrat. Also thought his boss Strickland was patterned after LBJ.

It's a bit off topic, but I'd imagine Hank has rose-tinted glasses about the last Texan first family not to be broadly loathed, since that business occurred in his childhood. Setting aside her support for LBJ's politics, she's best known for wildflowers now.

Hank had an existential crisis when he meet GWB at a fair and received a limp handshake. He votes republican but struggled to rationalize voting for a man with a weak shake.

E: beaten. Phone posting equals distraction

# ? Sep 12, 2014 16:48

Bizarro Kanyon: Jan 3, 2007; Something Awful, so easy even a spaceman can do it!

A friend of mine met Newt Gingrich and shook his hand. My friend has worked in politics for 8 years now and he said that Newt had the limpest/weakest handshake he had ever encountered.

No amount of zoo-love will ever bring him back to support Newt.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 18:05

BiggerBoat: Sep 26, 2007; Don't you tell me my business again.

joeburz posted:

Is the reply "low information voter" just a reflexive argument to anyone proving you wrong when you cannot formulate any type of coherent reply addressing their point?

No, it's co-opting a term that liberals use when they point to people voting against their own self interests and suckling the corporate teet. "What's the Matter With Kansas" and all that. It's Rovian in the way that it labels the opposition by accusing them of doing exactly what you're doing and then win the argument by default through constantly keeping them on the defensive.

"Low information voter" was a term coined by Democrats/leftists during the GWB years. At least that's the first time I heard it used.

BiggerBoat fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Sep 12, 2014

# ? Sep 12, 2014 19:36

Kelfeftaf: Sep 9, 2011

"Looney Tunes." Rush is such a dork.

George Zimmerman is apparently still a sociopath:

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2014/09/12/george-zimmerman-threaten-kill-road-rage-run-in-police

quote:

A Florida man has accused George Zimmerman of threatening to kill him and then showing up later at his work, Officer Bianca Gillett with the Lake Mary Police Department confirmed to CNN Friday.

The man called 911 twice, according to Gillett: Once on Tuesday to report the threat, which he said happened during a road rage incident.

"Why are you pointing your finger at me?" the driver of the vehicle, which had two occupants, said to the man. "I will f******g kill you, do you know who I am?"

The caller, believing it to be Zimmerman, pulled into a convenience store parking lot with the truck purportedly following behind him. He said he went inside and called police. When they arrived on scene, the truck was gone, according to Gillett.

The man then called again on Thursday, claiming he feared for his safety after showing up to work and seeing the truck, which he believed to be Zimmerman's, waiting for him.

Zimmerman, who was acquitted by a six-person jury last year of second-degree murder and manslaughter in the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, was confronted by Lake Mary police officers. Gillett said Zimmerman admitted to being involved in the incident earlier in the week.

The caller has decided to not press charges at this time, according to Gillett.

Watch: Dash cam video catches Zimmerman on 'patrol'

This certainly isn�t Zimmerman�s first run-in with the law since his acquittal.

The former neighborhood watch captain was spotted back on patrol in July outside a store in Central Florida that sells motorcycles, guns and ammunition.

"George is a personal friend," Pat Johnson, the owner of Pompano Pat�s, said in a written statement to CNN. "My store was robbed recently and George was just keeping an eye on things as a friend."

Watch: Zimmerman signs autographs at gun show

Zimmerman has also been pulled over three times by police -- twice for speeding and another time for having window tint that was too dark.

Additionally, he was arrested last September for an alleged domestic dispute with his then-estranged wife. No charges resulted from the incident.

He was also arrested in November for allegedly pointing a gun at his girlfriend. No charges were filed in that incident either.

Zimmerman fatally shot Martin in February 2012 in the Sanford, Florida, neighborhood where Zimmerman and Martin's father lived. Zimmerman, who is Hispanic, had a confrontation with the unarmed African-American teen after calling police to report a suspicious person. He later told police he shot Martin in self-defense.

The high-profile case sparked a heated nationwide discussion of race as well as debate over Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 19:49

Intel&Sebastian: Oct 20, 2002; colonel...
i'm trying to sneak around
but i'm dummy thicc
and the clap of my ass cheeks
keeps alerting the guards!

quote:

"I will f******g kill you, do you know who I am?"

Wooooooooow

# ? Sep 12, 2014 19:53

woke wedding drone: Jun 1, 2003; by exmarx; Fun Shoe

Caller one: Unemployment is down, health care enrollment is up. We live in a society and our prosperity comes in large part from our ability to band together and care for one another.

Caller two: OMG Rush I love you! I force my kids to love you! I literally drink your tea, a pillhead's tea! Also Clinton did 9/11.

One of these callers is a low-information voter. Can you pick which one it is?

# ? Sep 12, 2014 19:55

Berke Negri: Feb 15, 2012; Les Ricains tuent et moi je mue
Mao Mao
Les fous sont rois et moi je bois
Mao Mao
Les bombes tonnent et moi je sonne
Mao Mao
Les bebes fuient et moi je fuis
Mao Mao

George Zimmerman is a bad man.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 19:57

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 17, 2024 02:58

Kelfeftaf: Sep 9, 2011

Intel&Sebastian posted:

Wooooooooow

He's a celebrity who deserves respect. I don't know why this is so hard for people who have the privilege of sharing the road with him to understand.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 19:59

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Right Wing Media: congratulations Rush Limbaugh on three full years of sobriety!

«‹›3441 »