Yesterday Rush Limbaugh expounded on the Holocaust Museum murder. These are excepts from the transcript published on his website. You owe it to yourselves to read the entire transcript.
RUSH: Very predictably, ladies and gentlemen, the media, the American left is trying to score some political points as a result of this tragedy at the Holocaust Museum in Washington yesterday, and as predictable, they are trying to blame this on me, other conservatives and right-wingers. It's the traditional approach taken by the American left.
The facts of the case, however, are such that if we want start assigning blame for this beyond this nutcase Jew hater, and notice that very few people actually want to do that. They want to claim this guy didn't have the ability to act on his own. He only could act if he was inspired by somebody. Well, who did he hate? He hated both Bushes. He hated neocons. He hated John McCain. He hated Republicans. He hated Jews as well. He believes in an inside job conspiracy of 9/11. This guy is a leftist, if anything. This guy's beliefs, this guy's hate stems from influence that you find on the left, not on the right.
***
Last month four ex-cons were arrested when they were alleged to be plotting to blow up synagogues in the name of Islam. In May a student at Wesleyan University was shot and killed by a man apparently bent on killing Jews. Earlier this year following a shooting of an unarmed black man in Oakland by a police officer, the local community linked oppression in Oakland with oppression of Palestinians in Gaza, forming the misguided foundation for anti-Israel and anti-Jewish sentiments to grow and find expression in Oakland, California, a city that is close to being bankrupt, as an aside. There are hateful incidents perpetrated by leftists and anti-Semites frequently in this country, and they are never commented on, they are never distanced from, and they are never, ever held accountable by anybody in the mainstream media. There is hate throughout this country, and it is so vicious on the left, it's something I hadn't seen before in my life until 2003 came, and it hasn't gone away, even with the election of Obama. These people are angrier even now. They need demons and villains and they create them.
We have an administration that's inspiring all of this, pitting groups of people against one another. Taking unfortunate incidents like this yesterday at the Holocaust Museum in Washington and making a political tool out of it. It's not possible that this deranged nutjob Jew hater pulled the trigger on his own. No, this guy had to have been influenced by somebody and of course that somebody had to be the right wing. Then you look at who the guy hated and you find out that he hates the same people that a bunch of militant leftists hate. And he believes in a bunch of leftists conspiracies, 9/11 an inside job, Bush knew. Just like the black poet laureate in New Jersey wrote. The Jews knew about it. All the Jews in the World Trade Center got out of the building before the planes hit. The Jews are behind it. That guy was not only not denounced, we were told we had to understand his rage. This guy that pulled the trigger yesterday believed with that nutjob poet laureate in New Jersey, who, make no mistake about it, is no conservative or Republican. Republican Party, you're looking for something to run on, all you need is a slogan: We're not the Democrats. We're not the Democrats. It's all you need to say about yourselves.
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_061109/content/01125106.guest.html
This whole rant is ugly. Just ugly.
Yes, it is.
Rush isn't reading the right stuff. If you go to the liberal blogs, you can find out that it's all his fault, or Bush, or who knows.
This is where our political discourse is right now folks. It started the day after the 2000 election, and it's not likely to change anytime soon.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/12/opinion/12krugman.html?_r=1
read nobel laureate paul krugman for the same crap from the left.
So has anyone else wondered whether dementia could have been a factor in the museum shootings?
wayward, I don't think that dementia can explain the motivations of the shooter, seeing as has a history of extreme anti-semitism and has been incarcerated for attempting to kidnap members of the Federal Reserve Board back in the 1980's.
If age had any role in it, I would think it was more of a "now or never" kind of thing.
It's absolutely ridiculous for Rush to try to paint this guy as anything but far-right-wing. It's a "Yes, I think my audience is *that* stupid" moment.
wayward, I don't think that dementia can explain the motivations of the shooter, seeing as has a history of extreme anti-semitism and has been incarcerated for attempting to kidnap members of the Federal Reserve Board back in the 1980's.
If age had any role in it, I would think it was more of a "now or never" kind of thing.
Yeah, he sounded pretty nutty, but it looks like this has been going on for years and isn't just an old age thing.
More:
PRINCETON, NJ -- Asked to name the "main person who speaks for the Republican Party today," Republicans across the country are most likely to name three men: Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, and Dick Cheney. Democrats are most likely to say Limbaugh speaks for the GOP, followed by Cheney. Both Republicans and Democrats overwhelmingly say Barack Obama is the main person who speaks for the Democratic Party, although Republicans are significantly more likely than Democrats to mention Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.
When is somebody inside the GOP going to stand up to Rush?
When is somebody inside the GOP going to stand up to Rush?
Colin Powell tried it and Cheney threw him out of the club!
3 Score + 10
Keith Hays
The onset of dementia as an explanation for Rush's latest rant? C'mon, that's just silly. ;-}
For an instance of a right-wing figure advocating violence I invite you to look up the recent arrest of Harold Turner.
From the Star-Ledger:
I'm seeing more and more rhetoric that hints at violence from the far right, mainly in anonymous postings on various blogs and comments on newspaper sites, that reminds me a little of what I recall from the far left in the late '60's/early '70's.
Blogger surrenders on Conn. lawmaker-threat charge
By PAT EATON-ROBB – 1 day ago
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) — A New Jersey blogger who urged readers to "take up arms" against Connecticut lawmakers and who suggested government officials should "obey the Constitution or die" surrendered Thursday on a charge of inciting violence.
Harold "Hal" Turner, a former radio talk show host from North Bergen who broadcasts commentary on his Web site, was angry over legislation that would have given lay members of Roman Catholic churches in Connecticut more control over their parish's finances. The bill, brought by state Sen. Andrew McDonald and Rep. Michael Lawlor, was withdrawn in March.
Turner was charged by Capitol Police in Connecticut with inciting injury to persons or property, and released after posting bond. He is due in court June 22.
On June 2, Turner wrote on his blog, turnerradionetwork.blogspot.com, that Catholics should "take up arms and put down this tyranny by force," and promised to post the lawmakers' home addresses.
***
Late Thursday afternoon, Turner's blog had been taken down, apparently by the company that hosts it.
Turner's views have drawn scrutiny before. The FBI questioned him, but did not charge him with any crime, in 2005 after the mother and husband of U.S. District Judge Joan Humphrey Lefkow were found shot to death in Chicago. In an interview with The Associated Press at the time, Turner said he was questioned because two years earlier he had said on his radio show that Lefkow "was worthy of being killed."
Two years ago, police in New Jersey beefed up security for four state Supreme Court justices whose addresses Turner revealed in his Webcast "to show they can be gotten to." Turner released the information after the court ruled that gay couples were entitled to the same rights as married couples.
Associated Press Writer Stephanie Reitz in Hartford contributed to this story.
3 Score + 10
Keith Hays
Politics should be about ideas, not words or speeches. This issue isn't who speaks, the issue is the policy. It seems to me that we should frame the debate in terms of good long term public policy. There are two modes-democrats sugggest that government will provide the answers. This is because democrats have no answers except more government. The whole game to to attract people to the party on the promise that they will be given something. Obviously that will work in the short term, but will be terrible in the long term. We will not have an economy at all if everyone works for the government.
Now don't get me wrong, I am no libertarian. There is a role for government. But that role should be limited to those things that government traditionally does. The reason for this is simple. Government runs bad programs. Of course they do, because they have no experience other than through a buracracy. Take health care for example. The proposal for health care has nothing to do with doctors or hospitals, only who will pay for doctors and hospitals. This is essentially the old wage and price controls of the Nixon era. All the people that work in this industry remain the same, the insurance industry is removed and replaced by goverment. The decisions will not made actuarially, they will be based on politics. Who gets health care will be the same as who gets into the U of I. It will be government calling the shots and then when it is discovered that government is calling the shots (when White allowed this to happen), government will fire the bureacrat . What- no outrage about the government that demanded that White carry out its policy?
So don't give me Rush, or Sarah Palin, or Dick Chaney. The issue is whether this bread and circus mentality is good for our country. I don't think it is, and I certainly do not need to be told that by anyone.
Yes, let's let the debate be about the policies and the issues.
And let's agree that Democrats are absolutely terrible at everything because they're dumb poopy-heads.
And let's never, ever use a spell checker.
Sounds fun!
On June 12th, 2009 at 09:52 PM, John E. Maloney said:
Politics should be about ideas, not words or speeches. This issue isn't who speaks, the issue is the policy. It seems to me that we should frame the debate in terms of good long term public policy.
***
So don't give me Rush, or Sarah Palin, or Dick Chaney. The issue is whether this bread and circus mentality is good for our country. I don't think it is, and I certainly do not need to be told that by anyone.
Yes, John, politics should be about ideas and we should frame the political debate in terms of good, long term public policy. Except, John, the political debate is being framed by the loud and strident words spoken daily by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Glen Beck, and Sean Hannity. The debate is being framed by the speeches the likes of Dick Cheney and Sarah Palin. I don't have to "give you" Rush and Dick and Sarah. You already have them and their shouted screeds that drown out responsible debate. The crops they have sown have ripened and are coming to fruit across this country. The harvest is begun and is being reaped in Kansas; in Pennsylvania; in Arkansas; and in DC
3 Score + 10
Keith Hays
"Yes, John, politics should be about ideas and we should frame the political debate in terms of good, long term public policy. Except, John, the political debate is being framed by the loud and strident words spoken daily by the likes.....blah, blah, blah..."
"The crops they have sown have ripened and are coming to fruit across this country. The harvest is begun and is being reaped in Kansas; in Pennsylvania; in Arkansas; and in DC"
Just a wee bit hypocritical, don't you think Keith? Are you not doing/saying the exact thing you accuse those with different views from yours of doing?
Words can not be loud and strident unless someone is listening. Why are they listening? I know I listen to the likes of those you disparage for an alternate view. When I am bombarded day after day with media that does not report news but rather interpret it based on their political or financial allegiance, you can bet I will seek an alternative view. In the beginning I sought alternate ideas and perspectives because I didn't like what we were being told were the only solutions and that we must act now or the boogie man would get us. Don't think about it, don't discuss it, don't read it, do it now. Of late I seek alternate perspectives because already our new leadership of hope and change has proven itself untrustworthy, indecisive, and naive. For any of us to blindly follow their lead is in keeping with the "sheeple" name those that do have been tagged with.
If you really believe political debate should be about ideas and policy, then present what you feel is a good idea and policy and let people decide for themselves. Permit others to think, feel, and say what they wish. Your initial entry here was just a great big finger point, as well as conveniently omitting the ranting that had preceded it coming from detractors on the other side.
The crops they have sown......really? Stop watering those crops!
That's a good point. Bigotry and hate are only acceptable because they are such a good alternative to the bad ideas that Democrats are spinning. That's why there's absolutely none of those things in the history of the United States except when Barack Obama was making his bad decisions.
Oh, did I say Barack Obama? Did I say democrats? Bigotry, hate? Keep watering, maybe you'll drown that bitter harvest.
On June 13th, 2009 at 07:07 AM, Toldja So (not verified) said:
Your initial entry here was just a great big finger point, as well as conveniently omitting the ranting that had preceded it coming from detractors on the other side.
My only word in the initial post on this thread were these:
"Yesterday Rush Limbaugh expounded on the Holocaust Museum murder. These are excepts from the transcript published on his website. You owe it to yourselves to read the entire transcript."
The remainder of the post consisted entirely excerpts from the published transcript of Mr. Limbaugh's words and a citation to the URL where the entire transcript could be found , including the comments of others to which he referred.
If there is any finger pointing to be found in the initial post it is Mr. Limbaugh's finger that is extended.
3 Score + 10
Keith Hays
...was just a great big finger point, as well as conveniently omitting the ranting that had preceded it coming from detractors on the other side.
"preceded it" refers to the initial finger pointing that did not come from Rush, which you neglected to include since it served no purpose in your demonizing of Rush, Beck, O'Reilly, Hannity. You're motives here are very clear despite your "Yes, John, politics should be about ideas and we should frame the political debate in terms of good, long term public policy." Immediately followed by "Except....."
Madam,
I have no need to demonize Mssrs. Limbaugh, Beck, O'Reilly, and Hannity. Each is capable of demonizing himself far beyond my poor power to add or detract. I need only cast their own words abroad and their self-characterization is done - and they are quite successful at it.
3 Score + 10
Keith Hays
The fact that someone would even bother to defend these people is beyond my ability to comprehend. Does. Not. Compute.
"I'm seeing more and more rhetoric that hints at violence from the far right, mainly in anonymous postings on various blogs and comments on newspaper sites, that reminds me a little of what I recall from the far left in the late '60's/early '70's"
Here's another good one from Michele Bachman, who is always good for a laugh:
She's not some anonymous blog commenter, she's a frakkin' Representative.
On June 13th, 2009 at 06:19 PM, Narc said: "She's not some anonymous blog commenter, she's a frakkin' Representative."
Leave it to a Cylon to be completely and utterly unsubtle...
HG
"as well as conveniently omitting the ranting that had preceded it coming from detractors on the other side."
For the third time you've avoided addressing this while you continue make claims "The debate is being framed by the speeches the likes of Dick Cheney and Sarah Palin." If you will recall, the most recent speeches of Cheney and Palin have been in defense/response to attacks on them, as well as the one above by Rush. Don't get me wrong, I do no agree with Rush's tactics of throwing the ball back on the other side of the court, but he did not begin this nonsense of blaming someone with differing political views for the murderous lone actions of lunatics. What has Sarah Palin done to warrant the continued personal attacks on her and her family?
If you truly believe your high road statement regarding the framework of political debate, then take the entrance ramp and stop shouting at other drivers. Your entry perpetuates the very thing you claim to be against.
On June 14th, 2009 at 05:39 AM, Toldja So (not verified) said:
"as well as conveniently omitting the ranting that had preceded it coming from detractors on the other side."
For the third time you've avoided addressing this while you continue make claims "The debate is being framed by the speeches the likes of Dick Cheney and Sarah Palin."
Madam,
I must apologize, I have assumed that you had a modicum of skills in the use of the internet and would be able to copy and paste a URL into your web browser and follow the reference to the source. The URL which appears at the end of the initial post in this thread will take the reader to the entirety of the transcripts of Mr. Limbaugh's remarks as published on his website and broadcast on his radio program. That transcript when read in its entirety contains quotes and clips from the commentary that he claims he is responding to. You may recall that I suggested to the reader that the entire transcript as published should be viewed. The material you accuse me of omitting is clearly and tediously set out in Mr. Limbaugh's presentation. I felt and feel no need to repeat it here having guided the reader to it. The excerpts I did post were Mr. Limbaugh's introduction of his theme and his peroration.
I quite understand your anxiety. Having taken upon yourself the task of defending the indefensible you find no avenue but to attack the methods and motives of those concerned with the increasingly violent rhetoric that is submerging civilized discourse. But then I imagine that your Grandmother sat in rapt attention and listened to the Philco belch forth the diatribes of Father Coughlin.
Copy this URL, paste it to the address line in your browser and you will enjoy every line of Mr. Limbaugh's broadcast, including his references to what you call "rants from the other side".
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_061109/content/01125106.guest.html
3 Score + 10
Keith Hays
What has Sarah Palin done to warrant the continued personal attacks on her and her family?
Yeah gee, I wonder.
I could no more disown rush limbaugh than I could disown my own grandmother.
Just thought I'd paraphrase from the greatest speech ever known to man.
You should be sufficiently dizzy by now Mr. Hays
Geez, it's getting so tough to defend the Republicans anymore, Rush is just phoning it in. This is so weak, sloppy, dumb--what's the point? Playing to a base that's so desperate to hear something bad about Obama since they can't find anything good about their own party? So detached from reality that they could actually make themselves believe that Rush is making sense with this crap?
Geez, it's getting so tough to defend the Republicans anymore, Rush is just phoning it in. This is so weak, sloppy, dumb--what's the point? Playing to a base that's so desperate to hear something bad about Obama since they can't find anything good about their own party? So detached from reality that they could actually make themselves believe that Rush is making sense with this crap?
See? Even the spammers know the Republicans are full of it :-)
-----
This last post conclusively proves that Arvid is in fact Laurel Prussing. Sad. - Anonymous on 2009-06-22 @ 9:30am
I'm only leaving that comment up because you responded to it, Arvid. :-)