Mediaite » Rush Limbaugh

Limbaugh Ridicules The GOP Establishment For Being ‘Shocked’ At Rick Santorum’s Victories

Jon Bershad — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 21:11:32 +0000

Last night was a huge night for Rick Santorum with caucus wins in Missouri, Minnesota, and Colorado. Many were fairly shocked by the strong showing for the GOP candidate (some quite amusingly so). However, there’s one guy who isn’t showing any surprise whatsoever. That guy, of course, is Rush Limbaugh. Not only is he not surprised, he spent time on his show to knock those in the Republican establishment who were unprepared and didn’t see the Santorum coming.

“I’ve taken a gander throughout the Republican media, conservative media, and all over the place, and they are shocked. They’re literally shocked. The Republican establishment had no idea this was percolating out there. I can’t believe how insulated they are. I mean I know they’re insulated. I know they’re inside the Beltway. I know they have their own world in which they live, but to look at the reaction they’re having today, to see how shocked they are that Rick Santorum has come out of what they thought was an impossible position equivalent to nowhere, is an incredible thing.”

Influential Republicans weren’t the only ones getting Limbaugh’s scorn. He also took shots at anyone foolhardy enough to lay the credit for the victories at his door.

Last week, some were wondering if Limbaugh had slipped a secret Santorum endorsement into his show by ending a broadcast, right before the Florida primary, with the assertion that all of the GOP candidates were “guilty of some transgression somewhere against Conservatism…except Santorum.” Already there are media figures theorizing that this could have contributed to last night’s results. Over at The American Spectator, Jay D. Homnick put it in no uncertain terms, writing a column called “Thank Him, Santorum!”

Limbaugh wasn’t going to accept this though, positing that this line of thinking didn’t give enough credit to Santorum or Limbaugh’s listeners:

“Of course, the Drive-Bys are crediting me for this.

…

It can’t be the candidates. It can’t be that Santorum’s connecting with voters. It can’t be that, no, no, it can’t be that Santorum’s resonating with Republican voters, the conservative base. It can’t be that the conservative base just isn’t happy with Romney. It can’t be any of that. No, no, no. It has to be that the Republican base is a bunch of mind-numbed robots sitting out there waiting for marching orders from me.”

Limbaugh argued that the reason for Santorum’s win was simply that Republican voters are “engaged” and can tell that he is the “least corrupted,” not because Limbaugh told them to vote that way.

Of course, Limbaugh wasn’t going to turn down all of the credit. In the end, he agreed that it was probably a “mixture of both.”

Listen to the clip below:

(h/t The Daily Rushbo)

Australian News Corp. Columnist Attacks ‘Mentally Handicapped,’ ‘Retarded’ On Twitter

Tommy Christopher — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 19:59:45 +0000

Joe Hildebrand, a columnist for Rupert Murdoch‘s News Corp. in Australia, has come under fire for a series of tweets that mock the mentally handicapped, the “retarded,” the Irish, and blondes. It all started with a tweet about airport personnel, but Joe Hildebrand’s reaction to criticism of his remark escalated into a full-on “politically incorrect” display of shamelessness that had one colleague calling him “a disgrace.”

Joe Hildebrand began by tweeting “I just want to say I think it’s great that Sydney Airport is providing so many jobs for the mentally handicapped.”

This prompted a reasoned, articulate rebuke from columnist Stella Young, herself a disabled Australian. Her column was noteworthy in that it eschewed shaming, or demands for firing, in favor of a simple plea for empathy: (the whole thing is more than worth a read)

Like the countless people who make thoughtless jokes about disability, I don’t think Joe Hildebrand was conscious of the ableism inherent in his silly joke. But it was there. And the thing with speaking from a position of privilege is that you’re not often asked to think about how your language affects other people – and when you are, it seems everyone jumps up and down complaining about how the system is oppressing their freedom of speech, with little thought for those whom the speech routinely oppresses.

Much like the homosexual community has to deal with people (okay, mostly teenagers – the rest of us have finally cottoned on that it’s more than a little bit homophobic) referring to things that are a bit shit as ‘so gay’ in our post-ironic society. I find it hard to imagine Hildebrand referring to the staff at Sydney Airport as ‘so gay’ – so why is it still okay for disability to be treated as synonymous with subpar performance?

Hildebrand’s tweet is offensive because it uses disability as a shortcut to mean “crap”. And in doing so, he reveals a subtle and no doubt unconscious contempt for disabled people that is still rife in our culture. At best, it displays a blatant ignorance of the very real barriers faced by people with disability, some of which, ironically, are employment and air travel. At its worst, it assumes that jokes like these are okay – because they’re not about anyone important. Perhaps it’s assumed that people with intellectual disabilities won’t ‘get it’ anyway. That they can’t be hurt by a joke they don’t understand.

Young’s message appeared to have gotten through, as Hildebrand retweeted a link that described the piece as “passionate and articulate.”

Yeah, not so much. Hildebrand followed up that tweet with these:

Just want to say how sorry I am for using the words “mentally handicapped” in a tweet. That was really retarded of me.

Just want to say I’m sorry for offending so many people by using the word “retarded” in a tweet. That was really Irish of me.

Sorry I just offended so many people by using the term “Irish”. Just having a blonde moment.

Then, just to be sure everyone knew he was specifically spitting on Young’s rebuttal, he retweeted this:

@mostlyFilth @Joe_Hildebrand your series of faux pas today has been pretty gay.

If Hildebrand is anything like Rush Limbaugh, the courage he displays in the face of the mentally disabled, the wheelchair-bound, the Irish, and the gay ought to stand him in good stead with his audience.

This brand of “defiance” crops up quite a bit here, but the thing that people like Hildebrand or Rush Limbaugh fail to realize is that what they call “language policing” is really just an attempt to let people know when they’re being assholes, and affording them the opportunity to stop.

(h/t Kate Doak)

Was Rush Limbaugh Caught Picking His Nose At The Super Bowl? You Decide

James Crugnale — Mon, 06 Feb 2012 04:54:48 +0000

An eagle-eyed Super Bowl viewer caught radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh allegedly mining for gold in New England Patriots CEO Robert Kraft‘s luxury box during Sunday’s game. Deadspin’s Timothy Burke put Limbaugh on blast for the alleged nostril insertion. USA Today also picked on Limbaugh for the incident.

While the focus for panning in on the booth was the presence of Aerosmith lead singer Steven Tyler, off in corner of the shot, Limbaugh–who is a family friend of Kraft and invited him as a guest at his wedding–appeared to be making some sort of nostril penetration.

It should be noted from the viewer’s vantage point, it was hard to delineate the difference between whether Limbaugh was making a pick or merely scratching his nose.

While there may have been some incidental penetration, from our angle, we are in no position to make the call.

What do you think? Watch the video below:

(h/t Deadspin)

Rush Limbaugh: Mitt Romney Is A ‘Stranger To Fundamental Conservatism’

James Crugnale — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 20:35:39 +0000

Radio host Rush Limbaugh took Republican frontrunner Mitt Romney to task for supporting an increase in the minimum wage in response to his comments about not being concerned about the “very poor”, saying it gave doubt to his conservative credentials. “I know what Mitt Romney was trying to do. I know what he was trying to say. In the process of doing what he did, saying what he said, he made it clear that he is a stranger to fundamental conservatism. And for the people who oppose Romney, that’s the biggest red flag.”

“It boils down to conservatism,” Limbaugh pointed out. “So I guarantee you there are a lot of people who oppose Romney in conservative circles who are pointing to these two examples, saying, “See, this is what we’ve been trying to tell you,” and what are they up against? “Well, you know, he has to know the minimum wage causes problems.” If he has to know, why is he supporting it? “Well, he has to, Rush. The media’s liberal, he’s gotta act like he cares about the poor.” Well, that’s McCain. We’re tired of having to tailor what we do and say to get the approval of the New York Times or the Washington Post or everybody else in the media, the Democrat Party. We want somebody who can teach, who can inform, who can explain, who can persuade the way we can. Pure and simple.”

Watch Limbaugh’s comments on Romney below:

(h/t Daily Rushbo)

Rush Limbaugh Is Upset About Romney Not Caring About ‘The Very Poor’ (But For A Different Reason)

Jon Bershad — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 21:01:27 +0000

This morning on Starting Point, Mitt Romney seemed to get a bit of his foot in his mouth when he tried to explain that his focus was on the middle class by saying that he is “not concerned about the very poor.” Obviously, this has caused a few eyebrows to raise including those on the face of Rush Limbaugh. However, Limbaugh was upset for a different reason that most people talking about this quote. Sure, he feels that Romney should be concerned about the very poor but, more importantly, he’s upset Romney’s not concerned about those damned entitlement programs.

Romney’s full quote was that he’s not concerned about the very poor because “we have a safety net there.” It was that reasoning that got under Limbaugh’s skin.

“The safety net is one of the biggest cultural problems we’ve got! We had better be worried about it just like we had better get angry over Obamacare. Obamacare is worth getting mad about. Mitt said that it wasn’t. This biz, ‘I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there’? Right, the safety net is contributing to the destruction of their humanity and their futures! “

Limbaugh was also worried about how the sound bite could easily be used to attack Romney. He accused the candidate of making a target out of himself because he “comes across as the prototypical rich Republican.”

Limbaugh used this reasoning to combat one of the main knocks on Romney’s rival Newt Gingrich; that, because of Gingrich’s baggage, the focus will be on him when it should be on President Obama. Quoting from an Aaron Goldstein piece in the American Spectator, Limbaugh argued that things could be even worse for Romney because he keeps making poorly phrased blunders like this.

Listen to the clip below:

(h/t Daily Rushbo)

Listeners Wonder If Rush Limbaugh Snuck A Secret Santorum Endorsement Into Today’s Show

Jon Bershad — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 22:59:29 +0000

For nearly a year now, the pressure has been mounting for Rush Limbaugh to give an official endorsement in the race for the GOP but, as of yet, he’s given nothing. Even today, hours away from the Florida primary, Limbaugh was explaining to a caller that he both can’t and won’t endorse anyone. However, that isn’t keeping some Limbaugh super fans from guessing that a comment he made right at the end of the show might hold a secret endorsement for Rick Santorum.

Here’s what Limbaugh told the caller earlier in the show when he was asked for the umpteenth time:

“If I don’t shut this down every call is gonna be somebody demanding or trying to pressure me. Snerdley is sitting in there thinking that I can change the outcome of elections if I would just say so. He really believes that. You and I both know that’s absurd, but he believes it. I’m just telling you, you could give me two more hours of this, I’m not gonna tell you. It isn’t going to happen, because when this is all over, I am not gonna be in a position where my credibility is such that I can’t support whoever the nominee is. ‘Cause I am not voting Obama. I’m not supporting Obama. So whoever wins this, I can’t sit here and pigeonhole myself in such a way that I don’t have credibility supporting whoever the eventual nominee is, because Obama is the end result. I’ll tell you right now, I’m not voting Obama. I’m the expert. And that’s really all you need to know.”

Sounds pretty definite, right? I mean, I got that very transcript from a post on Limbaugh’s own official website entitled “There Will Be No Rush Endorsement.” So, why are the good folks over at The Daily Rushbo posting a video entitled “Did Rush Limbaugh Just Endorse Rick Santorum In FL Primary?” These people know Limbaugh. I mean, they run a website called “The Daily Rushbo” for God’s sake. What did they hear?

This:

“I have to remind you, again, that Gingrich debated John Kerry on Global Warming at one point and they agreed on practically every point. Nobody is innocent. Everybody is guilty of some transgression somewhere against Conservatism…except Santorum. See you tomorrow.”

Whoa! Sure, Limbaugh didn’t endorse anyone, but he knows how powerful sending his listeners off with that thought can be.

My only guess is that Limbaugh does want people to vote for Santorum, however, not necessarily for president. Limbaugh has made it very clear a number of times that he wants this primary race to as long as possible, all the way till the convention. Meanwhile, folks like Marco Rubio are eagerly saying that tonight’s results will completely wrap up the nomination. They may be right…but not if Santorum suddenly has a big upswing and throws the whole Romney vs. Gingrich idea out of whack. Perhaps that’s what Limbaugh’s after.

Either that or he just said it so that stupid bloggers will write posts like this and waste their damn time. That’s also incredibly possible.

Listen to the clip and judge for yourself below:

(h/t The Daily Rushbo via The Blaze)

Rush Limbaugh Is ‘Sick And Tired’ Of People ‘Whining’ Over Negative Campaigning

James Crugnale — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 20:42:54 +0000

On his radio program Monday, Rush Limbaugh slammed complaints (particularly Gingrich’s) over negative campaigning during the Republican nomination race. “I am getting tired of the whining about negative campaigning!” Limbaugh exclaimed. “I’m getting tired of the whining from everybody about it. Not just the candidates, I’m getting tired hearing about it from everyone. What in the world is politics? What is it, if not this?!”

“Newt said that he was off his game in the last debate last Thursday ’cause Romney was telling such outrageous lies about him that he was shell-shocked,” Limbaugh continued. “Now, I don’t know if that is a ploy for sympathy or what, but what in the world do either of these two guys think is gonna happen when either one of them ends up facing Obama? I don’t care who’s telling lies in the Republican campaign, they are pikers compared to what’s gonna happen when the Democrat campaign begins.”

Limbaugh added that once the general election begins, Romney will pull his punches when campaigning against President Obama. “Have you seen any evidence of any Republican going after Obama the way Republicans are going after each other? You haven’t. In fact, when Romney’s had the chance — “Oh, gosh, you know, I just think he’s in over his head.” Has he said something as innocuous as that about Newt?”

Listen to Limbaugh below:

(h/t Daily Rushbo)

Rush Limbaugh: The Republican Establishment Is In A ‘Full-Blown Panic’ Over Gingrich Win

Jon Bershad — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 22:14:29 +0000

The conventional wisdom throughout the weekend was that the longer the fight between the GOP candidates goes on, the more it hurts the party. Well, Rush Limbaugh has never been one for conventional wisdom. Today, Limbaugh continued putting forth his feeling that it would be great to see the fight go all the way to the convention. But he noted the worry that many Republicans seemed to have about it, theorizing that they never thought they could beat President Obama, were only trying to get control of both the House and the Senate, and are in a “full-blown panic” now simply because they don’t think a Newt Gingrich nomination can do that for them.

Gingrich accused the Establishment (defined as Republicans who don’t like real Conservatives, don’t want to end spending, and, instead, just want to be in charge of it) of purposefully allowing tons of candidates in the race like Ron Paul and Herman Cain simply so that they can split the conservative vote and ensure a Mitt Romney nomination.

“But the resentment for the base that the Republican establishment has is obvious, and of course the Republican establishment knows that. They know that the Tea Party is not embraced, that the Republican establishment’s trying to marginalize the Tea Party. So really, at least for me, is not hard to understand. Now, there’s an abject sense of panic that has set in over, ‘Oh, no! You mean this race is gonna go on? Oh, no!’ Yeah, the race is gonna go on. See, they thought that this would be over before it started. Remember what I told you. ‘They’re gonna split the conservative vote and elect the moderate.’ They were gonna stand traditional theory on its head.

…

They decided, ‘We’re gonna lose from the get-go. We’re gonna nominate a moderate. We’re gonna take conservatives in our party that we can’t stand and we’re gonna have as many of them up there as possible splitting vote.’”

However, Limbaugh explained, they’re plan has fallen apart because Gingrich is finally fighting back for victimized conservatives everywhere.

Like before, Limbaugh theorized that a continuing primary debate would force Romney to the right (or, as he put it this time, force him to “figure conservatism out”). Something that, in Limbaugh’s eyes, could only be a good thing.

Listen to the audio below:

(h/t Daily Rushbo)

Rush Limbaugh: John King Got Exactly What He Wanted From Gingrich Showdown

Jon Bershad — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 21:48:21 +0000

Just like Juan Williams before him, it appeared that John King got “dunked on” by Newt Gingrich last night. However, Rush Limbaugh doesn’t think he’ll feel any shame for it. No, as Limbaugh explained to his listeners, “you cannot shame the mainstream media.”

“John King is proud of what happened last night. John King is a hero in the Mainstream media because he didn’t back down, because he continued to illustrate how it is that the media does really control the agenda. That was a demonstration of the power they hold over every public figure’s head, that they choose to hold like a guillotine. There may even be some jealousy and envy within the journalist ranks – Well, not journalists. Within the Democrat Party ranks. – because John King is a guy that got in Newt’s face, stared him down. And the fact that Newt told him off? It’s a badge of honor.”

Limbaugh didn’t think King was the only one who got exactly what he wanted. He argued that the “Newtster,” as “appalled” as he may have been, was almost certainly expecting this question and praying that it would come so that he could deliver the crushing take down he had planned. Swish!

Listen to the audio below:

(h/t Daily Rushbo)

Limbaugh Sticks Up For Newt Gingrich: ‘Everybody Has An Angry Ex-Spouse’

James Crugnale — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 18:55:51 +0000

In response to the bombshell allegations by Newt Gingrich’s ex-wife to ABC News that the former Speaker of the House asked her for an open marriage, conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh rushed to his defense saying “Everybody has an angry ex-spouse!”

“Newt may weather this, because I don’t know how much of this is really unknown to people, and the divorce rate in the country is 50%!” the thrice divorced Limbaugh observed. “The angry ex-spouse is not something that’s unique in this culture, everybody has an angry ex-spouse — if they’ve been divorced! My only point is I have no idea how this is going to play out, I have no idea what the impact will be, I have no idea how many people will get mad at the media for this, I have no idea how many people are going to get mad at Marianne Gingrich, I have no clue!”

Listen to Limbaugh’s defense of Gingrich below:

(h/t Dave Weigel)

Rush Limbaugh: Romney Has Not ‘Lived Like A King’ On Other People’s Money, Like Obama

Jon Bershad — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 11:40:15 +0000

Recently, Rush Limbaugh was one of the loudest voices criticizing the GOP candidates for attacking Mitt Romney’s “evil rich man” status. With Romney telling the Wall Street Journal that he expects those attacks to continue thanks to news of his possible 15% tax rate, Limbaugh decided to take it upon himself in giving Romney a way to respond. He argued that Romney should counter that he would actually be losing money as president whereas President Obama used the presidency as “a path to becoming a millionaire.”

“Let me tell you what Romney doesn’t do. Romney has not played over 90 rounds of golf in three years while everybody is suffering. Romney has not flown all over the world on the federal government’s dime. Romney has not had lavish parties and concerts on the public’s dime. Romney has not lived like a king on other people’s money. He has sent his wife on government jets four hours ahead of him to the same destination. Romney is not responsible, nor is any other Republican, for the 16% unemployment, real unemployment in this country. Romney is not responsible for increased fuel and food costs. He’s not responsible for any of this. That would be Obama, who pretends to care about the middle class but lives like a king at the public trough.

… Every one of [the GOP candidates] is a decent person. Every one of them is an average American in their own ways. Obama is not, his wife is not.”

By the end of Limbaugh’s epic rant, he’d impressed even himself, telling listeners that “iIf somebody said something like this in a debate, the standing o’ would never end.”

Listen to the audio below:

(h/t Daily Rushbo)

Limbaugh Zings Scarborough Over Huntsman Support: He Wants To Be ‘A Favorite Son Of The Left’

James Crugnale — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 00:24:04 +0000

Following Joe Scarborough‘s comments that all that was left in the GOP race was “big government conservatives” in the wake of Jon Huntsman exit from the Republican nomination race (see below), radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh lit into the MSNBC host, saying he was attempting to curry favor with his network’s executives. “I think that’s what you say when you have to keep your job at a liberal network,” Limbaugh jabbed.

“I think that’s what you say when you’re trying to make a move,” Limbaugh continued, criticizing Huntsman as liberal on many issues. “If you’re a known conservative and you’re trying to make a move to the center and become a favorite son of the left. It’s what you say. It’s where you work.”

Listen to Limbaugh zing Scarborough below:

(h/t Daily Caller)

Watch Scarborough’s earlier remarks in support of Huntsman below via MSNBC:

Rush Limbaugh Compares Rick Perry To Fidel Castro Over His Mitt Romney Criticism

James Crugnale — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 23:15:24 +0000

On his radio program Wednesday, Rush Limabugh slammed Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry over his criticism of Mitt Romney‘s work at Bain Capital, which the Texas Governor deemed “vulture capitalism.” “I’m sorry, folks, that is indefensible!” Limbaugh exclaimed.

“There’s no way you can try to dress that up,” Limbaugh fumed. “I don’t understand it. Well, politically I understand it, but that’s just absurd. It’s sad. ‘Cause I really, really, really like Rick Perry! I really do. I had such hopes! I did. I’ll tell you, I did, but all of this talk about “corporate raiders,” and as I listen to politicians start talking about capitalism, lights are going off in my head. “Maybe they don’t really know what it is. Maybe they’re under some misconception about what capitalism is, because this characterization of it? A distinction with venture capitalism and vulture capitalism? This bite from Perry doesn’t compute.”

Limbaugh thought that type of rhetoric was more akin to something Oliver Stone or Michael Moore would say.

“They popularized this, this is the way Fidel Castro thinks, or says he thinks!” Limbaugh added. “You know, today more than at any time in recent history, capitalism — which is nothing more than economic liberty; that’s all it is — capitalism, economic liberty, is being assaulted on every front. The current occupant of the White House is a sworn enemy of capitalism. It’s abundantly clear that Obama intends to run for reelection by running against capitalism. He’s already on that path.”

Watch Limbaugh compare Perry to the former Cuban leader below:

(h/t Daily Rushbo)

Rush Limbaugh Destroys Newt Gingrich For Promoting ‘Left-Wing Social Engineering’

Jon Bershad — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 23:01:04 +0000

Last week, Rush Limbaugh was one of the many predicting Newt Gingrich’s shots at Mitt Romney, the man he Gingrich believes ruined his front runner position, would only increase in intensity following Iowa. At the time, Gingrich seemed fine with the idea, pointing out that it would only end up helping Rick Santorum. However, the radio host clearly has not enjoyed the tenor of Gingrich’s attacks since then as he spent a large amount of today’s show absolutely lambasting the candidate and comparing him to such GOP-unfriendly entities as Occupy Wall Street, The New York Times, and Barack Obama.

Limbaugh went so far that some commentators are describing this as the “nuclear bomb” been dropped on Gingrich.

Recently, Gingrich has been criticizing Romney’s Bain Capital past, making comments that some have seen as a knock on the free market. Rush Limbaugh certainly agreed.

“I don’t know why the Occupy Wall Street people are protesting Newt. They’re singing from the same hymnal on this. This is right out of the New York Times. Newt is parroting what the New York Times is writing about Romney.

…

Folks, it is clear here what is going on. This is not a campaign for the presidency. That’s not what this is anymore. This is payback time. It drove him nuts, that series of ads that Romney’s Super PAC ran in Iowa, and this is the result of it. That’s why we are where we are. I’m not trying to make excuses. I’m just explaining. I’m not defending anybody. I just think this is very unfortunate. This is not the kind of stuff that you want said by Republicans. Even the Establishment Republicans don’t go after Conservatives this way.”

Ouch.

Limbaugh isn’t the only one who’s seeing a leftist streak in Gingrich’s attacks. This is very similar to a piece Jon Stewart did last night. While Stewart was pointing out this seeming hypocrisy amongst the entire GOP field in their attacks on Romney, he did focus on Gingrich. More importantly, how often are we able to say Rush Limbaugh and Jon Stewart agree on something?

Listen to the clip (only one of a few similar anti-Gingrich rants today) below:

(h/t Daily Rushbo)

Rush Limbaugh Tries To Protect Dana Perino’s Delicate Feminine Sensibilities

Jon Bershad — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 21:49:13 +0000

Yesterday on Happening Now, Dana Perino expressed her distaste for Jon Huntsman’s use of the word “screwed” in a campaign ad, declaring it un-presidential. Something about this really tickled Rush Limbaugh’s fancy as he was making friendly jokes at Perino’s expense throughout yesterday’s show and, after Perino responded on The Five, continued them today. Today his best line was his advice that Huntsman make his next ad about how all of America is “intercoursed.”

Of course, this jokey rivalry only makes sense. A few times on this site I’ve mentioned my underlying theory on Rush Limbaugh; that he’s easiest to understand when you imagine him as being a mischievous little school boy who’s can’t believe how much fun it is to say naughty things and watch the teachers get mad. And it’s not too much of a stretch to say that Dana Perino is basically the goody-two-shoes, teacher’s pet of The Five. It’s perfect for the two of them to get in a pony tail-pulling back and forth.

Listen to Limbaugh’s comments in the clip below:

(h/t Daily Rushbo)

Rush Limbaugh: ‘Lawless’ Obama Is ‘Taking A Pee On The Constitution’

Jon Bershad — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 22:54:01 +0000

Rush Limbaugh is not happy with President Obama’s appointment of Richard Cordray as chief of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and others during a recess. More importantly, he’s not happy with the depiction the move is getting from some in the media. The talk show host was furious over a Reuters piece that described Obama as going against Republicans in Congress. “Obama’s not confronting the Republicans,” Limbaugh declared. “He’s confronting the Constitution!”

Limbaugh described the tone of the Reuters reporting (the version of the article Limbaugh is quoting seems not to be up now, the latest version is here) as trying to justify Obama needing to “take a pee on the Constitution.” He then joked that Dana Perino might not like his language.

Obama being “lawless” has been a common theme for Limbaugh for a while now and he was all over it today, returning to the topic later in the show to double down (Triple down at this point? Quadruple down? 1000uple down?) his accusation.

Listen to both clips below:

(h/t Daily Rushbo)

Rush Limbaugh On Iowa: Santorum’s The Winner, Paul’s The Loser, And ‘Obama Looks Like A Space Alien!’

Jon Bershad — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 22:29:26 +0000

Well, Iowa is done so now it’s time to sit back and go through different interpretations of the results. And, if we’re going to be listening to various people’s thoughts, that means we’ve got to listen to what Rush Limbaugh has to say. Why do we have to listen to Rush Limbaugh? Is it because, as he puts it, he’s “America’s real anchorman?” No, it’s because he’s the only media figure who, in the middle of his analysis, will take the time out to accuse Barack Obama of looking like “Max Headroom.”

So, what did el Rushbo have to say?

Well, first he explained that he wasn’t at all surprised by the results. Why? Because he basically predicted the whole thing last month. Limbaugh played a clip from December 14th in which he explained that everyone’s declarations that it was already down to two people (Mitt Romney and Newt Gringrich) were way off. At the time, Limbaugh had claimed that there were rumblings of people who wanted a more conservative candidate and that they would inspire a surge from one of the Rick’s, Santorum or Perry. And, well, you’ve got to hand it to him. That’s basically what happened.

Really, though, isn’t it kind of sad when these media figures go on and on about how their predictions came true? Don’t they have any sense of humility. Jeez.

Wait…hold on. What did Limbaugh just say? Did he just say that Ron Paul is the big loser because he didn’t get enough votes and that now he’s totally “over?” Holy crap! That’s exactly what I predicted people would start saying! Oh, man! I am the best predictor ever! Suck it, everyone!

Ahem, where were we?

Anyway, if Ron Paul’s the loser, then who’s the winner? Well, Limbaugh wouldn’t be Limbaugh if he just went by the numbers. While Mitt Romney may have pulled off a narrow victory, Limbaugh gives the real win to Santorum. He also focused on Gingrich, predicting that he would be so angry at Romney for basically destroying his chances with his PAC ads that he would put all his energy in destroying him. That, of course, would be another boost for Santorum.

Limbaugh defended Santorum against those on the Left who he accused of trying to ruin him with accusations of “Big Government Conservatism.” As Limbaugh explained, conservatives do like the government to step in in some situations. However, he argued that this was actually “Responsible Government.”

The media also took a hit for perpetrating what Limbaugh saw as a huge “crock”; the idea that last night’s results help President Obama. Many are saying that, as long as the GOP is still campaigning against each other, Obama can get off free. Limbaugh disagreed, saying that this further fight will just push Romney more to the right which will hurt the President in the long run.

Then we got this quote:

“Did you happen to see any of the videotape of Obama doing his ‘dog and pony show?’ I’m telling you, I don’t know how this happened. Folks, they added 25 years to his appearance. He looked like Max Headroom out there. Barack Obama looked like a space alien! He looked like he was 75 years old!”

And that is why Rush Limbaugh is America’s Real Anchorman™.

Listen to the audio below:

(h/t Daily Rushbo)

Rush Limbaugh’s Fake Ron Paul Ad Will Not Be A Hit With Ron Paul Fans

Frances Martel — Sat, 17 Dec 2011 21:11:56 +0000

At this point, Rush Limbaugh‘s offensive against Rep. Ron Paul has become something of a regular feature on his program. So it’s not entirely surprising that Limbaugh’s anti-Paulism has seeped into his commercials, too– or at least in parody. This week, Limbaugh debuted a “pro” Rep. Paul ad that featured the “candidate” arguing “the greatest danger is not from Iran, it’s from us overreacting.” Surely this will go over well with Paul fans.

“Ron Paul has recorded a commercial for us,” Limbaugh joked, before a commercial played featuring a fairly good (albeit a little caricatured) voice of Ron Paul arguing, “the greatest danger is not from Iran, its from us overreacting. Yhy are we flying drones over there–we are the problem here!” Followed by an anchor delivering the punchline: “Vote Ron Paul: Because Newt Gingrich is too zany and weird.”

The “campaign ad” via Limbaugh’s show below:

[Photo via]

(h/t)

Limbaugh Blasts Ron Paul For ‘Running To The Left Of President Obama’ On Iran

James Crugnale — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 19:45:32 +0000

Rush Limbaugh tore into Ron Paul ‘s statements at last night’s debate — not sanctioning Iran even if they had actionable intelligence that Iran had a nuclear weapon. “We never talk that way about the Russians, the only reason they want nuclear weapons is because we’re making them do it. It’s our fault! If you were in Iran and you had to face these evil Americans, you’d want to bomb too!” mocked the radio talk show host.

“Solid evidence!” Limbaugh exclaimed. “And yet you still would hold back US sanctions? And as a GOP nominee you’d run to the left of Obama on this issue?!”

“We don’t need another war!” Limbaugh ridiculed, lampooning Paul’s nasally voice.

“This was the highlight of the night for Congressman Paul, (there’s) memorable moments in each debate, that little exchange was his.”

Listen to Limbaugh lambaste Ron Paul below via his radio show:

(h/t Daily Rushbo)

Rush Limbaugh Slams GOP Establishment: ‘We Nominate Milquetoast Moderates And We Lose’

James Crugnale — Thu, 15 Dec 2011 04:19:29 +0000

In an exclusive interview with Fox News’s Greta Van Susteren, Rush Limbaugh slammed the Republican establishment for thinking a “conservative nominee is route to defeat” and lamented the top-tier GOP candidates were “milquetoast moderates.” Despite these reservations, he said, “I think right now anybody other than Ron Paul could beat Obama if the election were tomorrow.”

“Republican primary voters are conservative, I don’t buy this whole notion that the Republicans can’t be confrontational, can’t be aggressive and can’t go on offense because they will tick off the independents,” Limbaugh opined.

“We’re not supposed to be critical of liberalism and socialism. It makes independents nervous. So what do we do? We nominate milqueoast moderates. And what do they do? They lose!” he added.

“I actually think that if you can get — if you talk to these guys — Republican establishment, elected officials, party officials, certain inside the beltway media, you just ask me can Obama be beat? I say hell yes!” Limbaugh exclaimed. “They will tell you ‘they don’t think so.’ They are scared to death! Nobody won anything defending anything. You win on offense, you win attacking, you don’t win defending anything because you can’t advance. They are always defending. You can’t advance! … I would rather have somebody who thinks Obama can be beat, knows Obama can be beat and wants Obama to be beat. And that is somebody conservative, not moderate, not squeamish, not populist. We don’t need a candidate who’s going to try to say things or be things he or she doesn’t believe or isn’t. I think conservative appeals to everybody.”

Watch Limbaugh’s take on the Republican establishment below via Fox News:

Watch part 2 below:

David Frum Warns GOP Not To Let Right-Wing Media Sensationalism Influence Them

Josh Feldman — Sun, 11 Dec 2011 20:37:42 +0000

In recent years, conservative commentator David Frum has taken to criticizing his own side for its relationship with conservative media outlets like Fox News, and on Reliable Sources today, Frum criticized the network for creating its own political reality, as well as the Republican party for shaping itself around the influence of the conservative media bubble.

Howard Kurtz asked Frum how he could think that Fox News was creating its own reality, and Frum immediately cited the War on Christmas as an example. The supposed Christmas tree tax proposed by the Obama administraiton did not get any play whatsoever in mainstream media outlets, but conservative media made it a huge issue and made it a big story for days at a time. Frum stated that not only did this seek to create more of a “cultural conflict” between conservatives and the president, but it was completely inaccurate.

Kurtz’s main contention with Frum’s arguments was that Frum was painting the network with too broad a brush, and one could hardly argue that recently contentious interviews with Mitt Romney and others on Fox News would qualify as toeing the conservative line. Frum shot back by calling Bret Baier and other straight news personalities at the network “good people doing good work in bad situations.” What Frum was more focused on was the overall effect of Fox News on viewers, and insisted there was a correlation between the stories the network puts out there and the average intelligence of their viewers.

“TV enhances its own credibility by destroying the credibility of all other institutions. And you can see this in polls When other institutions’ credibility decline, TV’s credibility goes up. The old advertising motto for local news stations, ‘we’re on your side,’ against all those other people who are not.”

Frum admitted that after he wrote a column telling the Republican party to stop letting itself be influenced by Rush Limbaugh, he has had several on-screen invitations to Fox News pulled at the last minute. Kurtz asked Frum to explain his comment about Limbaugh, and Frum shot back by suggesting if the weight of the conservative movement was not so strong and activist, more moderate candidates could have entered the presidential race without fear of being blackballed and framed as RINOs.

Yet despite all his criticisms of the party, Frum maintains he is still a Republican and intends to support his party’s nominee against President Obama next year.

Watch the video below, courtesy of CNN:

Exclusive: Why Countdown With Keith Olbermann Has Been Broadcasting From A Dark Place

Tommy Christopher — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 21:02:57 +0000

Regular viewers of Current TV’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann may have noticed that the progressive newshour has gone dark this week. I don’t mean that host Keith Olbermann has taken to quoting Sylvia Plath and wearing out the grooves on his My Chemical Romance records, I mean he has literally been broadcasting from a dark place. Early on in Monday’s show, technical problems beset the program, and since then, Olbermann has been hosting his show from what appears to be an endless black void. Mediaite has confirmed that Olbermann has not been confined to an interdimensional limbo, nor is he broadcasting from inside Rush Limbaugh‘s head.

I missed Monday’s episode, so when I tuned in Tuesday to see Olbermann lighting a candle at the top of the show, gaping black maw of eternity behind him, I figured it was some in-joke that I had missed the setup to. As it turns out, an on-air technical mishap the night before had forced the host to change locations. Here’s where the problem started, and Olbermann’s candle-lighting gag:

Since then, Olbermann has continued to host the show with that black background, and has taken to cracking wise about the low-tech milieu, making copious references to the DuMont Network. Although born of necessity, the look is oddly, enigmatically compelling, like a living black-velvet Elvis painting, or a newscast from some alienated sci-fi dystopia.

Even more mysterious is the fact that no one seems to have noticed. There was no mention of the change on Olbermann’s Twitter feed, so apparently, his fans took it in stride as well as he did. Maybe it’s my fascination with behind-the-scenes minutiae, but not knowing what could possibly force a 21st century television personality to broadcast from the inside of a sensory deprivation tank was just driving me nuts.

Well, mystery solved. According to Current TV President David Bohrman, “The facility we lease for the production of Countdown has had a series of technical problems. Monday a dimmer rack overheated and blew out the lights, forcing the crew to move to a different part of the set.”

It probably is just me, but I find it amazing that it looks like Olbermann is at the very edge of the universe, when he’s really just a few feet away from his usual set. I’m also fascinated by the fact that the desk Martin Bashir teases his show from looks like it’s a picture on the wall of Tamron Hall‘s studio. No, that’s actually Martin Bashir in there!

According to Bohrman, the change might just become permanent. “They may stay there moving forward,” he told me, via email. “We are discussing this new look.”

So, Countdown fans, here’s your chance to weigh in. Should Keith Olbermann return to his boilerplate cable news set, or continue to boldly go where no cable newser has gone before?

Rush Limbaugh: “Ron Paul Has Nothing To Do With The Tea Party”

Frances Martel — Wed, 07 Dec 2011 03:55:21 +0000

Apparently Limbaugh slept through the entire 2007 Republican primary campaign. Reacting to a self-identified tea party caller that suggested Rep. Ron Paul, Rep. Michele Bachmann, and former Senator Rick Santorum were the only true conservatives left in the race, Limbaugh reacted in shock at the idea that Rep. Paul would be associated with the Tea Party because “he has nothing in common with Tea Party foreign policy.” Except the first group to use the term “Tea Party,” as is well documented, were Rep. Paul supporters.

The caller that so infuriated Limbaugh called to argue that “Newt Gingrich is the RINO’s RINO” for his “well-known progressive” stances, and that he was leaning towards a vote for Rep. Paul, who to him represented “trust, justice, and constitutional leadership.” This left Limbaugh upset. “This guy is not a Tea Party caller; this guy is a Ron Paul caller,” he told his audience. He then went to argue explicitly: “the Tea Party is not the Ron Paul campaign. Ron Paul has nothing to do with the Tea Party– zilch, zero, nada.” This, he asserted, was because of his foreign policy. “Ron Paul blames America for 9/11,” he continued, “that’s not what the Tea Party thinks!” He also argued that Paul did not “start the Tea Party,” a fairly well-documented fact.

While it is true that many in the 2011 version of the Tea Party– a much larger group than the Tea Party in its nascent stages– has foreign policy stances in some form, many stances of these hawkish, and that Rep. Ron Paul’s supporters have drifted away from the social conservatives now prevalent in the Tea Party movement, the claim that Rep. Paul was not there at the inception of the group or that he has “nothing to do” with it is wildly out of step with history that should be recent enough to recall correctly. The “Tea Party” name came from the fact that Rep. Paul supporters began staging events at the anniversary of the Boston Tea Party to fundraise– an idea that also spread to holidays like Guy Fawkes’ Day that year.

Plenty of reporting from 2007 shows that the “Tea Party” in its most primitive form was a way for Paul supporters to gather. While, yes, there was a period in between the 2008 primaries and the 2009 Tea Party conservative explosion that reignited the Tea Party in its current manifestation, to ignore the relationship that one has with the other, and the role Rep. Paul played in its first incarnation is to ignore history so recent it lives on the internet as it mostly did four years ago.

It also ignores the core of the Tea Party movement: a sense that the government is too big, and it spends too much money, and that putting aside other differences Americans may have in politics is essential to getting together to solve the current debt crisis. The 2009 Tea Party protests, and the Glenn Beck-hosted 9/12 events correlated with it, were about one problem and one problem only: government spending. Foreign policy was a matter to be left on the backburner as it pertained to everything but the debt crisis and government spending. The urgency of the situation didn’t allow for drawing lines the way Limbaugh does here. Of course, by the time he had chosen to exclude Rep. Paul from the Tea Party, the caller who was co-excommunicated with the Congressman had long hung up. But one can imagine the Rep. Paul Tea Party faction won’t be too happy to hear his comments from today.

Listen to Limbaugh’s comments in the following clips below:

(h/t Daily Rushbo)

Rush Limbaugh Declares War On Frank Luntz’s Attempt To Replace ‘Capitalism’ With ‘Economic Freedom’

Frances Martel — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 20:50:37 +0000

At a meeting of the Republican Governor’s Association this week, pollster and strategist Frank Luntz made a bold admission: that he was “frightened to death” of Occupy Wall Street, and suggested their influence had made the term “capitalism” toxic and it should be replaced with “economic freedom.” One person not content to follow those instructions? Rush Limbaugh, who chastised Luntz for “dumb[ing] down” the conservative message for a movement that was “about disbanded.”

“He is trying to get the word ‘capitalism’ removed from the conservative Republican lexicon,” Limbaugh explained, over Occupy Wall Street. “What is there to be afraid of?” he asked, noting that the movement, in his opinion, had mostly been dissipated. He argued against the idea that “we dumb down ourselves in order to not offend the uninformed, ill-informed, mal-informed… the people who think the Occupy people are making sense.” “Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory,” he scoffed.

Later on in the program, Limbaugh went after Luntz yet again, arguing that his claim that the word “capitalism” could no longer be used implied that capitalism was responsible for the current state of the economy. “What has been gong on in this country since 2008 is not capitalism,” he concluded. “It is not responsible for all this unemployment and economic degradation.”

The two segments on Luntz below:

[h/t Daily Rushbo]

Ron Paul Campaign Releases Brutal Newt Gingrich Attack Ad

Tommy Christopher — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 23:51:11 +0000

Texas Congressman and fundraising powerhouse Ron Paul‘s campaign released an absolutely brutal web ad attacking current national frontrunner Newt Gingrich for “serial hypocrisy.” The spot, which is a too-long-for-TV 148 seconds, features a review of Gingrich flip-flops, accompanied by blistering criticism from the likes of Rush Limbaugh and GOP golden boy Rep. Paul Ryan. With Paul polling in third place in New Hampshire, should Newt be worried about the Ronulan attack?

The ad doesn’t even touch all the bases on Gingrich, but hits hard at Gingrich over his climate change ad with Nancy Pelosi, his criticism of the Ryan budget plan, his Freddie Mac connections, and his support for an individual health insurance mandate, all set to an epic score, and sinister, grainy black-and-white photography. The production is slick, if a bit cliched, but the overall effect is devastating.

Ordinarily, a web ad wouldn’t figure to have much of an impact, but Ron Paul’s supporters are a highly motivated, resourceful lot who will doubtless make sure this spot reaches maximum eyeballs.

Newt Gingrich is the latest in a long line of non-Romneys to take a ride at the top of the polls, and Ron Paul is one of the only candidates left who hasn’t gotten his turn. While Paul is routinely ignored by the media as a candidate with a cultish following who can’t improve on his middling poll numbers, much crazier things have happened in this year’s Republican race. Game on.

Here’s the ad, from the Ron Paul campaign:

Rush Limbaugh: ‘Greed Has Fed More Mouths Than Charity Ever Could’

Jon Bershad — Mon, 28 Nov 2011 21:59:05 +0000

You hear that dull thud? That’s the sound of Oliver Stone kicking himself for not writing the pithy quote Rush Limbaugh just rattled off on his radio show. Yes, Limbaugh went full-on-Gekko in his support of self-interest as he asked his listeners which had “fed more mouths,” greed or charity. Of course, unlike Limbaugh, Michael Douglas probably would have balked at following up that little thought puzzle with a “weenie Liberal” impression, considering it a tad demeaning.

The quote came after a caller called in to argue that the bigger the gap between rich and poor the better as it’s better for the economy as a whole and it doesn’t help anyone when the rich lose money. Limbaugh agreed, adding on that the gap will always grow since incomes will rise and there will always be someone making nothing (although not really ’cause of all those government hand outs, amiright?!). Limbaugh then asked everyone listening to look deep into the wallets of their hearts and reflect on what everyone’s just too scared to admit.

“What do you think has fed more mouths, greed or charity? Really, you think that? What do you think, folks? What has fed more mouths in this country, the world, whatever subset of people you want to talk about. What has fed more people? ‘Freedom’ is not an option. This is a multiple choice question with two possibilities, greed or charity. That’s right. Greed has fed more mouths than charity ever could.”

At that point, Charlie Sheen or Shia LaBeouf (take your pick) could be heard stepping back aghast, finally realizing that, for all his flash and glamor, this Limbaugh guy can be kind of a jerk.

Anyway, I don’t know if I agree with Limbaugh. Maybe he was talking quantity more than quality. After all, I don’t see any soup kitchens putting out filet mignon.

Listen to the clip below:

(h/t)

Rush Limbaugh Needs To Read This Before He Uses Uppity ‘Tweak’ Again

Tommy Christopher — Sun, 27 Nov 2011 22:19:35 +0000

Conservative radio giant Rush Limbaugh has made a career of race-baiting, so his use of the word “uppity” to describe First Lady Michelle Obama (on the occasion of her booing by some NASCAR fans) was about as surprising as the twist ending to a Three’s Company episode. While the audience that gobbles up Limbaugh’s racial “tweaks” is probably beyond reasoning with, I truly believe that Limbaugh, himself, can still be reached.

As I’ve said before, Rush Limbaugh is a race-baiting coward, but he wraps his race-baiting in the cloak of social criticism. His premise is that by deliberately drawing outrage over comments that are racially insensitive, he is defending freedom of speech against oppressive “political correctness.”

The key question, I suppose, is whether that delusion is sincere, whether Limbaugh is using racism as a tool for social critique, or using social critique as cover for racism. To many in Limbaugh’s audience, it’s the latter, a delightfully clever way to let them laugh along with Limbaugh as he finds pretexts to work racial stereotypes back into the cultural conversation. Even if it’s the former, though, Limbaugh is missing the point that nobody wants to stop him from stage-whispering words like “spade,” “negro,” and “uppity” at a cocktail party, but that we have no duty to tolerate it. At best, his message is that his right to be unpleasant supersedes other people’s feelings.

On that point, Limbaugh is absolutely correct. It’s a right that no one is challenging, which leads many to conclude that this is all just an excuse to market himself to a crowd that resents not being made to feel comfortable telling “Afroturf” jokes anymore. However, even if that’s true, I would still like to give Rush the benefit of the doubt that he’s simply exploiting that resentment, rather than fostering it himself.

To that end, I would like to urge Rush (an avid Mediaite reader) to give a good, thorough read to The Grio‘s Goldie Taylor, who offers up a family recollection about the use of the term “uppity” on her grandfather. While working at an Arkansas pharmacy in 1933, Joseph “Son” Robinson made the mistake of asking a white customer to wait his turn in line:

Before Son could explain who was first, second or third, the customer drew his horsewhip and snapped it. Granddaddy caught the leather strap with his gravedigger’s hands. “I don’t want no trouble now Mister,” granddaddy said staring him in the eye.

“Uppity ni**er!” the man yelled.

And there it was.

In 1933, the word “uppity” meant nothing short of a death sentence for African-Americans living in the South, and my grandfather had been publicly marked for death. My grandparents heeded that warning, packed up and hit the railroad line north before the sun went down.

Read Goldie Taylor’s entire essay here.

For those of you who think that Goldie Taylor is exaggerating, as someone like Limbaugh just might, consider the story of Emmitt Till. I often take for granted that Emmitt Till’s story is universally known, but there’s a good chance that someone like Rush Limbaugh, steeped in the privilege of not needing to know, just doesn’t know.

More than twenty years after Goldie Taylor’s grandfather left Arkansas, 14 year-old Emmitt Till left Chicago to visit family in Mississippi. It’s unclear that Emmitt did anything provocative at all, but the consensus in retelling is that he might have whistled at a white woman, for which he paid a ghastly, inhuman price:

Several nights later, Bryant’s husband Roy and his half-brother J. W. Milam, arrived at Till’s great-uncle’s house where they took Till, transported him to a barn, beat him and gouged out one of his eyes, before shooting him through the head and disposing of his body in the Tallahatchie River, weighting it with a 70-pound (32 kg) cotton gin fan tied around his neck with barbed wire. His body was discovered and retrieved from the river three days later.

While his story is tragically not unique in our history, it is the most iconic expression of the consequences of “uppity-ism,” as Limbaugh puts it. Let’s take for granted that when he says it, he means only to evoke the kind of discomfort associated with arcane language like “negro” (which conservatives bitterly feel that Democrats get a pass for), or to mourn the complications surrounding idioms like “call a spade a spade.”

Those aims are misguided, but this is an opportunity to perform an object lesson in authentic political correctness. Assume that Limbaugh didn’t know that the word “uppity” carried such evil connotations. Now, he does know. Political correctness isn’t about shaming Rush Limbaugh for using that word, or even shaming him into never using it again. It’s about educating him as to how its use affects others, and letting his choices speak for themselves.

Chris Matthews Panel Uses Rush Limbaugh’s ‘Uppity’ Comments To Call GOP Base ‘Xenophobic’

Frances Martel — Sun, 27 Nov 2011 18:50:07 +0000

First Lady Michelle Obama‘s frigid welcome at a NASCAR game was one of the week’s biggest highlights, but to some, it was the reception of the incident from the right that told the story. On today’s Chris Matthews Show, the panel used the NASCAR incident as a prism through which to analyze the Republican race and, noting that the Republican base– the kind that is comfortable with calling the First Lady “uppity”– is “xenophobic and nativist,” they wondered how such an extreme party could win a general election.

Host Chris Matthews played the clip of Rush Limbaugh reacting to the First Lady’s booing by blaming her for her “uppity-ism,” and noted that it was the sort of term that had unfortunate and very overt racial overtones (he also noted he had only heard “uppity” “used with the n-word”). Panelist Clarence Page agreed with the word’s connotation. “Uppity is the perfect dog whistle word,” he argued, and noted that the booing was “part of the larger culture wars,” one side of which Limbaugh knew well how to plug into.

The debate then expanded to Republicans in general, where Andrew Sullivan wondered how Republicans expected to win elections by trying to please the far right. “How many minorities are they going to tell not to vote Republican until they realize this is going to be a problem for them?” he argued, adding that “the more the Republican Party adheres to the Limbaugh brand, the more they are doomed.”

Not all Republicans perceived things this way, added Katty Kay, who noted that Jeb Bush had done well courting minorities. “Mitt Romney understands this too, but he’s handcuffed right now,” added Page, since “the Republican base is remarkably xenophobic and nativist.”

The segment via NBC below:

Rush Limbaugh Recounts ‘The True Story Of Thanksgiving, Or, How Socialism Almost Killed The Pilgrims’

Alex Alvarez — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 00:57:17 +0000

“Time for the traditional, true story of Thanksgiving,” Rush Limbaugh announced. “Written by me!”

Limbaugh recounted the story of religious separatists who journeyed to the New World in search of the freedom to worship as they saw fit without fear of persecution. They faced many challenges and hardships in their new home, but eventually benefited from agricultural practices shared by local Indians.

“And this is important to understand,” Limbaugh then cautioned, “because this is where modern American history lessons often end.”

Here’s the part that’s been omitted: The original contract the Pilgrims had entered into with their merchant sponsors in London called for everything they produced to go into a common store, and each member of the community was entitled to one common share. All of the land that they cleared and the houses they built belonged to the community as well. Now, they were going to distribute it equally; all the land they cleared, all the houses they built belonged to the community. Nobody owned anything. They just had a share in it. It was a commune.

“Complete with organic vegetables even,” Limbaugh added.

But this form of collectivism would prove costly and unproductive, and so each family was then given its very own plot of land “to work and manage, thus turning lose the power of the marketplace.” Socialism had nearly killed the Pilgrims, because the most creative and intelligent were not given any real incentive to work longer, better or faster.

This year, give thanks for capitalism. And the invention of effective deodorant. But don’t you think for one moment that the Indians played a major role in the Pilgrim’s success — that’s just a ploy to promote diversity and underplay the role scripture and the free market played in the first Thanksgiving.

Somewhere, a kindergarten child donning a feathered headdress for his school’s annual Thanksgiving play is looking towards the horizon, shedding a single tear.

Have a look, via Limbaugh’s radio program:

h/t

Rush Limbaugh: First Lady Was Booed At NASCAR Event Due To Obama’s ‘Uppity-ism’

Jon Bershad — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 21:14:22 +0000

Some people might be surprised that there are those out there who would take it upon themselves to boo the First Lady of the United States. Not Rush Limbaugh. Nosiree, Bob. When Limbaugh listens to a bunch of NASCAR fans booing Michelle Obama and Dr. Jill Biden, he’s surprised that other people are surprised. Speaking to those people (namely the media), Limbaugh said the boos should simply be expected due to the First Family’s “uppityism.”

For those of you that don’t understand what Limbaugh means by the term “uppityism” (besides the obvious race-baiting to piss off liberal bloggers), I’ll let him explain the racing fans’ beef with “Moochelle” (it never stops being funny, Rush!):

“What is so hard to understand about Ms. Obama being booed? What do you in the media no understand about a 42% approval rating? What do you not understand about the fact that they are not Mr. and Mrs. Messiah anymore? NASCAR people, the rest of us, we do not like being told ‘steak and arugula.’ We do not like being told that we can only eat what’s in her garden. She comes off as the type of person that doesn’t care for the people who are paying for her outlandish lifestyle.”

Yeah, Michelle! How dare you not let NASCAR fans be fat! Especially when you’re so fat, yourself! Or something. Honestly, I get Limbaugh’s problems with the First Lady confused sometimes.

Anyway, Limbaugh was so incensed that he returned to the story later to give more reasons why the fans booed. So what horrible things did he say next? Well, this time he theorized that maybe people are just sick of being campaigned to and that they just want to watch a race without some dumb politicians waltzing around pretending to be interested and-

…oh my God. I totally agree with Rush on that. Whoa.

Listen to both clips from Limbaugh below