RSS

Monthly Archives: June 2009

Is Rush Limbaugh a Racist? Part Two

limbaugh debate

If you say, about a Black President, “It is offensive to the sensibilities of millions of people to hear a member of the state run media refer to a half black half white human being with no experience running anything of substance referred to as a god. He may be president of the United States, but he is not a god.” You just might, probably, be a racist.

And yet this is exactly what right wing blow hard Rush Limbaugh said, referring to an observation made about President Barack Obama on MSNBC.

Personally, who cares why he said it. The fact is he said it. Why would any rationally thinking person say such a thing? The answer is a rationally thinking person wouldn’t say it, but a racist would.

Rush Limbaugh’s comment is every bit as offensive as any made by any other radio talk show host, oh I don’t know? Like Don Imus maybe? No need to worry about the Democratic Congress censoring El Rushbo, sooner or later his own mouth is going to lead to his being escorted away from the golden EIB microphone, not by government officials, but by executives from Clear Channel.

While we’re on the subject, which millions sensibilities being offended were you referring to Rush? The 14 million or so ditto heads listening to the likes of you, Hannity et al? It’s far more offensive to the sensibilities of many, many millions beyond your shrinking audience to have to listen to the hate speak passing today as political commentary from the extreme right of the political spectrum.

You Mr. Limbaugh, and anyone who shares your sentiments, are a racist. I’m sure generations of freedom loving, patriotic Limbaughs would be so proud.

Advertisements
 
Leave a comment

Posted by on June 11, 2009 in Politics, Racism

 

Tags: ,

Is Newt intellectually nonsensical?

newt

During Newt Gingrich’s June 8 speech before the Senate and House Republican campaign committees, conspicuously not wearing a United States flag lapel pin, the ex-speaker said, “Let me be clear. I am not a citizen of the world. I think the entire concept is intellectual nonsense and stunningly dangerous. There is no world sovereignty. There is no world system of law. There is in fact no circumstance under which I would like to be a citizen of North Korea, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, Cuba, or Russia. I am a citizen — I am a citizen of the United States of America, and the rest of this speech is about the United States of America.”

This was not the first time, nor even the second time, the ex-speaker has made the emphatic statement that he is not a citizen of planet Earth; in fact the ex-speaker, was quoted  in a June 9 article on CQPolitics.com, by Jonathan Allen saying, “We must strengthen our unique American civilization. … Let me be clear: I am not a citizen of the world.”

Referring to President Obama’s July 2008 Berlin speech, Gingrich similarly sang out on the August 6, 2008, edition of Sean Hannity’s radio program: “I think saying that you are the — a citizen of the world, talking to 200,000 Germans is very dangerous because the average American does not want to elect a president of the world to use up America in order to make the rest of the world feel good.”

So, if declaring oneself to being a citizen of the world is “intellectual nonsense”, than would that mean that former President Ronald Reagan was somehow intellectually nonsensical? Because, the Gipper made just such a statement during remarks in New York City Before the United Nations General Assembly Special Session Devoted to Disarmament on June 17, 1982.

President Reagan began his speech, “I speak today as both a citizen of the United States and of the world. I come with the heartfelt wishes of my people for peace, bearing honest proposals and looking for genuine progress.”

So, how’s about it Mr. Ex-speaker; was the former President intellectually nonsensical?

The obvious answer is of course not, and neither was President Obama during his July 2008 speech in Berlin, Germany, when he said, “I come to Berlin as so many of my countrymen have come before.  Tonight, I speak to you not as a candidate for President, but as a citizen – a proud citizen of the United States, and a fellow citizen of the world.”

The only intellectual nonsense going on here is Newt trying to pass himself off as still being politically relevant, and anyone who looks at him, like Sean Hannity, and thinks he would be the best person to run for the presidency as the GOP nominee in 2012.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on June 10, 2009 in Politics

 

Tags: ,

Unlike Muslims, pro-lifers actually are peaceful?

ann_coulter

The right wing’s lead banshee, Ann Coulter, used the murder of abortion Dr. George Tiller to attempt to claim that pro-life extremists are peaceful, and that Muslims are not. Not Muslim extremists, Muslims; All Muslims.

“Why aren’t liberals rushing to assure us this time that “most pro-lifers are peaceful”? Unlike Muslims, pro-lifers actually are peaceful,” Coulter said.

In an attempt to justify her claim, she compared 9-11 to just “five abortionists” killed since Roe v. Wade became law.

“According to recent polling, a majority of Americans oppose abortion – which is consistent with liberals’ hysterical refusal to allow us to vote on the subject. In a country with approximately 150 million pro-lifers, five abortionists have been killed since Roe v. Wade,” Coulter said. “In that same 36 years, more than 49 million babies have been killed by abortionists. Let’s recap that halftime score, sports fans: 49 million to five.”

A halftime score? I’m not sure how to take that analogy. We’re going to flippantly compare the number of abortions performed in the past 36 years, all legally performed, to the number of people murdered who performed abortions, and do so with a sports analogy? How characteristically feeling of you Ms. Coulter.

But wait, she’s not through. Coulter went on to tie all Muslims living in the United States, almost all of them patriotic, tax paying citizens to the terrorist responsible for the murders of 9-11.

“Meanwhile, fewer than 2 million Muslims live in America and, while Muslims are less murderous than abortionists, I’m fairly certain they’ve killed more than five people in the United States in the last 36 years. For some reason, the number “3,000” keeps popping into my head.

“So in a country that is more than 50 percent pro-life – and 80 percent opposed to the late-term abortions of the sort performed by Tiller – only five abortionists have been killed. And in a country that is less than 0.5 percent Muslim, several dozen Muslims have killed thousands of Americans.”

Isn’t it interesting that Coulter never uses the term, “Muslim Extremist”; she prefers to just throw all the followers of Islam into one big group. Much the same way Islamic Terrorists throw all non-Muslims into the same bag, or the same way Adolf Hitler and his thugs threw all the Jews of Europe into one group. I think this is very revealing in deed.

I also find it very interesting that Coulter claims only the five actual killings count as acts of violence by right to life extremists. In fact, there have been 22 documented cases of violence carried out by pro life extremists in this country. Now using your own twisted logic Ann, let’s see? Twenty two (22) acts of violence committed by right wing, pro life extremists here in the United States, and only two attacks by extremist Muslims in America, counting the first bombing of the World Trade Center, and then the 9-11 attacks. Now, who exactly appears to be more violent?

Coulter doesn’t just limit her attacks on Muslims however, but also goes after the largest Lutheran organization in America, as well as comparing Dr. Tiller to a notorious serial killer.

“Tiller was protected not only by a praetorian guard of elected Democrats, but also by the protective coloration of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America – coincidentally, the same church belonged to by Tiller’s fellow Wichita executioner, the BTK killer,” she said.

Ms. Coulter, like many right wing extremists seems to have forgotten that a woman’s right to an abortion is a protected right in this country. It’s legal. While someone may not agree with abortion, or like Dr. Tiller because he was performing abortions, he was not a serial killer, not was he an executioner.

Coulter continues her rant by questioning whether Tiller had a right to live.

She said, “The official Web page of the ELCA instructs: “A developing life in the womb does not have an absolute right to be born.” As long as we’re deciding who does and doesn’t have an “absolute right to be born,” who’s to say late-term abortionists have an “absolute right” to live?”

Ms. Coulter, inciting someone to commit murder would make you as guilty as the person who acts based on your words. When you make such a statement you are inciting others to act violently. And, oh by the way, who are you to decide who has an absolute right to live? While I may think you’re a right wing extremist nut job, I would defend your “absolute right” to live. Yes, even you have an “absolute right” to live.

 
3 Comments

Posted by on June 7, 2009 in Abortion

 

Tags: , , ,

Point/Counter Point with Michael Steele for 4 Jun 09

michael-steele-2

Today I received a lengthy e-mail from sometimes head of the Republican Tea Party (GOTP) Michael Steele, wherein he berated, bemoaned, and whined about the Federal Government’s bail out of General Motors. I thought I might present this e-mail to you in a point/counter point style for your information and enjoyment. We’ll begin with Mr. Steele.

Steele: Thirty-eight years ago, the federal government nationalized passenger rail lines, creating the National Railroad Passenger Corporation, better known as Amtrak.

LT: Let’s see, 38 years ago was 1971, that would mean that the federal government’s nationalizing of passenger rail lines would have been under Republican President Richard Nixon.

Steele: At the time, it was expected to be profitable within three years. Almost 4 decades later, the original $340 million investment of public funds has grown to $30 billion, with no profitability in sight.

LT: I’m sorry Michael, that investment was hoisted upon the American people by whom again? Oh yeah, Republican President Richard Nixon. Wasn’t he the only President in the history of our country to have ever resigned from office?

Steele: On Monday, General Motors was forced to declare bankruptcy.

No matter how much the President spins GM’s bankruptcy as good for the economy, it is nothing more than another government grab of a private company and another handout to the union cronies who helped bankroll his presidential campaign.

President Obama will now own 60 percent of GM, and his union buddies will own almost 20 percent. And what do we — the American taxpayers –get? We’re stuck with up to a $50 billion tab for the taxpayer dollars Obama is using to pay for his takeover of GM.

LT: Michael, do you sit around a speaker phone each morning and get your talking points from Rush and Hannity? You know very well, or at least you should know, that it’s the United States Government, not President Obama, who now has control of GM. I like the fact that you – along with Rush, Hannity, et al – keep claiming it was his own personal takeover?

Steele: General Motors needed restructuring, and it has been clear for months that bankruptcy was inevitable. But instead of letting the company cut its losses, the Obama Administration has strung the process along, politicizing it at every step.

LT: Michael, it has been clear for a lot longer than months, it was clear well into the Bush Administration that GM was going under, and as we recently learned from former Vice-President Cheney, former President Bush refused to address this issue, thus leaving it for President Obama to have to handle. Gee, just one more left over failed policy, program, and war, things like Iraq, Afghanistan, Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, GITMO and Pakistan. But who’s counting?

Steele: With an Administration with almost no business background and with zero experience in the auto industry calling the shots, Obama has seized the opportunity to feather his UAW supporters’ nests and dictate the type of cars GM will now build — not consumer desired, profitable vehicles, but tiny, “eco-friendly” cars whose lack of safety will endanger Americans’ lives.

LT: Here we go with Rush talking points, straight out of El Rushbo’s playbook. He really is running the party now isn’t he? No business background? Endangering American lives? You’re absolutely right Michael, because putting Americans into rolling death traps is the dream of every American President. Well, Bush did send American troops into combat in soft skinned vehicles, but why go there?

Steele: Now, instead of emerging leaner and meaner, GM has fallen into the same trap as Amtrak — all to benefit the Big Labor bosses who helped Obama into the White House with union workers’ dues.

LT: Not emerging leaner and meaner?

Steele: Since when does the American government choose the market’s winners and losers? Since when does the White House decide what model of car Americans must buy?

Britain nationalized its automotive industry in the 1970s to disastrous result — the government-run, union-saddled companies were finally sold off again under Margaret Thatcher after years of dismal performance.

LT: I’m sorry Mr. Steele, at what point did PM Thatcher “sell off” the so-called “government-run, union saddled” companies?

PM Thatcher never “sold off” the so-called “government-run, union saddled” companies.  She actually continued subsidizing the failing British Leyland Motor Company to the tune of 900 million additional pounds beyond the 1 billion pounds pledged by the previous administration.

Where PM Thatcher failed was in allowing her government to continue to pour money into a failing company and yet never taking control. She allowed the failing leadership of British Leyland to continue motoring down the same old path until it eventually drove right off an economic cliff.

Steele: But Barack Obama and his henchmen have no desire to learn from the past — they are too eager to get government control of America’s means of industrial production — regardless of the consequences. Were Karl Marx alive today, he couldn’t be prouder.

LT: President Obama is learning from Britain’s mistakes. He has insisted that there be accountability, and restructuring, whereas PM Thatcher just continued to pour more and more money down the same rabbit hole.

Karl Marx couldn’t be prouder? So, your solution would be to allow GM to go belly up, completely out of business, closing all its plants, all its dealerships, putting hundreds of thousands of Americans out of work, and in addition to GM, there are thousands of suppliers, dealers and other interdependent firms which face collapse. In fact Michael, analysts project that a failed GM could have cost hundreds of thousands or even a million jobs worldwide. If that’s the GOTP solution, were Harpo Marx alive today, he couldn’t be prouder.

Steele: First it was the mortgage and banking industry, then automobile manufacturing. Next up are health care providers and energy producers. What’s next? Whose businesses will they takeover next? Where does it end? The Democrats want to control every facet of your life.

LT: I’m sorry Michael, who left the economy in such a screwed up mess that President Obama had to intervene? Hello? That wouldn’t have been Republicans George W. Bush and Dick Cheney would it?

Steele: Americans shouldn’t be fooled. This is the real ‘change’ President Obama has in mind for America — government ownership of our economy financed with irresponsible and reckless government spending and debt and no jobs to show for it.

LT: Reckless spending? How about accountable spending. For the first time since the United States invaded and occupied Iraq the cost of that war has been included in the federal budget, not hidden away as under Bush/Cheney.

Debt? You want to talk about debt? Who threw our country under the debt bus? Anyone? Bush and Cheney. Government grew out of control, the deficit grew out of control and the national debt grew out of control during the eight disastrous years of George and Dick, and now someone has to pay for it. The Republican Administration went on a crazy spending spree and now the bill has come due.

Steele: This is a very sad day for the autoworkers and their families whose financial well-being will be directly affected by this clear act of an overreaching UAW and overbearing government.

LT: I agree that it is a very sad day for the autoworkers and their families, however, let’s talk about overbearing government.

Would that “overbearing” government be the government of President Obama?

Or would it be the government of President Bush? You remember that government don’t you?

The government that invaded a foreign country based on lies and made up intelligence; the government that approved torture and mistreatment of prisoners; the government that said it would be OK for active duty United States soldiers to enter your home and search it without a warrant; the government that approved, and used, warrant-less wire taps against its own citizens; the government alienated a large portion of the world due to its short sighted and reckless policies.

Is that the overbearing government you’re referring to Michael?

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on June 5, 2009 in Politics

 

Tags: , , , , ,

America is a Muslim Country?

Is America a Muslim Country? Yes and no; it all depends who you listen to. If you listen to Rush Limbaugh, then the answer is yes and no. Yes because that’s what he claims the President said; and no because that’s what he says.

Wednesday morning during his daily blab-fest, Rush said, “Obama said that the United States could be considered a Muslim country. There are 1.6 million Muslims in this country, less than one percent of the population. Now what is going on? I mean, he lies about something that is easily demonstrated to be false. This is an out-and-out lie.”

Well, it really isn’t a lie Rush. Why isn’t it a lie? Because President Obama didn’t say that.

Greg Sargent of the Washington post had this to say about what the President allegedly said, “Hard-core rhetoricians will note that Obama was employing an obscure tense known as the ‘conditional,’ and an arcane rhetorical device known as a ‘hypothetical.’ He said that if you were to take the number of Muslims in America, then one could see America as ranking up there with other Muslim countries — in numerical, hypothetical terms.”

So, what did President Obama say?

During an interview with French television station Canal Plus, President Obama said: “[I]f you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we’d be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.”

So, how many Muslims are there in the United States? It depends who you ask. Estimates vary greatly from 1.5 million Muslims in the United States to more than 12 million.

Now working with the lowest percentile figure – which Rush favors – in countries in the world with more than 2 million Muslims, the United States comes in at #56 out of approximately 195 countries in the world. fifty six divided by 195 = 28%. So, even using Rush’s numbers America is in the top 28% population wise of Muslim nations worldwide.

If we take the middle estimate of 6 million Muslims in the United States, in countries in the world with more than 6 million Muslims, the United States comes out at #35 of 195 countries. Thirty five divided by 195 = 18%. So, using the middle number we rank in the top 18% population wise of Muslim nations worldwide.

If you take the top estimate of more than 12 million Muslims in the United States, in countries in the world with more than 12 million Muslims, the United States ranks 22nd worldwide. Twenty two divided by 195 = 11%. Using the top figure we weigh in population wise in ther top 11% of Muslim nations worldwide.

We have either the 56th largest Muslim population in the world, or the 22nd.

The President didn’t lie, as Rush has tried to say, we’re either in the top 28 percent or the top 11 percent of Muslim population, either would surely place us as “one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.”

What’s the issue? Bigotry. Rush is once again showing his disdain for Muslims and for the religion of Islam. Rush cringes at the thought that we might have a large Muslim population. It scares him. He needs someone to blame. That’s how right wing extremism breeds new followers. It worked for Hitler. Here in America in the 21st century instead of blaming Jews the right wing blames illegal aliens and Muslims for the country’s ills.

Beyond his bigotry and racist views, fact of the matter is Rush doesn’t have anything of substance to attack the President on, so he just keeps on throwing everything he can hoping something will eventually stick.

Good luck with that.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on June 5, 2009 in Foreign Policy, Politics

 

Tags: ,