Lord Limbaugh the Bellicose

Dave Letterman had this to say to Katie Couric recently about Rush Limbaugh.

Letterman: What about this bonehead Rush Limbaugh? Honest to god, what is going on there?

Couric: [laughing] Dave, don't do this to me. Please don't do this to me.

Letterman: No, because now ... he gets up at Washington and he's the keynote speaker at some function and he comes up ... he he he looks like a Eastern European gangster. You know, he's got the black jacket on. The black silk shirt and it's unbuttoned like "Oh yeah, when you think Rush Limbaugh you think ... oooh, let's see a little flesh".

I saw the video of Limbaugh. Letterman is exactly right. Limbaugh was grotesque. He was careening all over the stage and sweating profusely. It was really a frightening scene. And his message "pro-failure"; project much.

I couldn't get the thought of Luca Brasi out of my mind when I saw Limbaugh. You know Brasi, the Corleones' very frightening hitman. I can just see Limbaugh playing the role at Connie's wedding. He's been practicing his lines outside and finally is escorted in to see the Don. And he says very stiffly, "Don Corleone, I am honored and grateful that you have invited me to your home on the wedding day of your daughter. And may their first child be a masculine child."

Except, the problem is Limbaugh is not frightening in the least. Physically he looks like an ugly Pillsbury Doughboy. So I don't really understand this kowtowing to this limpid load of lipids.

It's just funny that the Republican party seems to have lost its balls. These were the guys who were always talking tough, you know the chickenhawks. Now they're crawling all over each other to offer their obeisance to this loudmouth.

Good. Five years from now they'll be a regional party.

Of Fish and Spines

I wrote the other day that the GOP vote en masse against the stimulus bill in the House was a fishy sign that Republicans were already abandoning any pretense of an attempt at bi-partisanship. A commenter by the name of Tony Turner engaged me for a number of hours in a debate over the stimulus bill and the real meaning of the GOP response. Tony's arguments were not bad. His grasp of the economics of the bill was good I should say; at least from the Republican point of view. But then, how would I know?

I had not intended to get into the meat of the package because I really didn't know what was involved; nor do I understand economics. I admit it. I take it as a given that the GOP response is a failure – it's how I'm wired after 14 years of Republican majority rule -- and I never blog about economics. Best not to if you know nothing about it (good advice for both sides, me thinks).

So my posting effort was really about motivations. However, today I found a different slant on the plan, one that I could understand and agree with. Frank Rich, a favorite columnist of mine, had this to say about the Republican vote.

The problem is not that House Republicans gave the stimulus bill zero votes last week. That’s transitory political symbolism, and it had no effect on the outcome. Some of the naysayers will vote for the revised final bill anyway (and claim, Kerry-style, that they were against it before they were for it). The more disturbing problem is that the party has zero leaders and zero ideas. It is as AWOL in this disaster as the Bush administration was during Katrina.

Ah! It wasn't fishy that no GOPer voted for the plan; they just had nothing new to offer.

I admit I am a casual peruser of only the periphery of national events; I often go by what I feel is right. So, in our mini-debate Tony told me that tax cuts are a stimulus. Why wouldn't the Dems agree to that? I couldn't say. All I knew was that I thought I'd heard differently about tax cuts. Frank Rich to the rescue.

The Republicans do have one idea, of course, but it’s hardly fresh: more and bigger tax cuts, particularly for business and the well-off. That’s the sum of their “alternative” stimulus plan. Obama has tried to accommodate this panacea, perhaps to a fault. Mainstream economists in both parties believe that tax cuts in the stimulus package will deliver far less bang for the buck than, say, infrastructure spending. The tax-cut stimulus embraced a year ago by the G.O.P. induced next-to-no consumer spending as Americans merely banked the savings or paid down debt.

Hmmm. That's what we did – paid down credit cards and we anticipate doing the same this time if the tax cuts go through. And anyway, is Tony suggesting, like Rush Limbaugh did recently that because the Republicans won approximately 46% of the national vote in the last election, 46% of the stimulus package should be Republican ideas?

Now, of course Tony is not suggesting that. I actually have a lot of respect for his foray into my blog and for his thoughts. What he had to say (even though I could not answer whether other Republican proposals were good or bad) sounded reasonable though in hindsight, much the same as has (apparently) been written and said before. But thanks are in order nonetheless. You won the debate, Tony ( I knew I was missing out in high school not getting involved in debate). We'll win the war, I hope.

Which brings me back, one more time to the cult that is Limbaugh. I commented previously about Phil Gringrey, a right-wing dust bunny. Rich takes him on, too (and other Republicans).

Most pathetic of all was Phil Gingrey, a right-wing Republican congressman from Georgia, who mildly criticized both Limbaugh and Sean Hannity to Politico because they “stand back and throw bricks” while lawmakers labor in the trenches. So many called Gingrey’s office to complain that the poor congressman begged Limbaugh to bring him on air to publicly recant on Wednesday. As Gingrey abjectly apologized to talk radio’s commandant for his “stupid comments” and “foot-in-mouth disease,” he sounded like the inmate in a B-prison-movie cowering before the warden after a failed jailbreak.

No ideas and no spines. That's all most Republicans have these days. If that's reflexive commenting, so be it. It's also the truth.

Big Fat Gas Balloon

Did you know that Rush Limbaugh is not actually human? In fact he's an illegal immigrant from the outer atmosphere of Jupiter. The residents of that area resemble big fat gas balloons, having evolved to be able to survive in the turbulent and noxious winds.

Limbaugh is sensitive to not being called a human. It causes a severe self-loathing to express itself in saying stupid things like this:

"Do you know he has not one shred of African-American blood?" Limbaugh continued: "He's Arab. You know, he's from Africa. He's from Arab parts of Africa. ... [H]e's not African-American. The last thing that he is is African -American."

Oh, did I note that Limbaugh is also a racist. More self-loathing.

Liberal Bias My Ass

I can't watch any of the news programs anymore. They're either running scared from the righties, or they've swallowed their talking points.

So please, drop the liberal bias schtick. It's so unbecoming and such a lie. Glenn Greenwald, as usual, is right on with this post.

"... this episode demonstrates what Eric Alterman documented several years ago: that the greatest and most transparent myth in American politics is that the U.S. has a "liberal media." That is a myth that is maintained, first and foremost, by defining anyone who isn't Rush Limbaugh as a "liberal." Hence, people such as the wife of Bush official Dan Senor (Campbell Brown) is a "liberal," as is Alan Greenspan's wife (Andrea Mitchell), along with establishment-worshipers such as Rush-Limbaugh-admirer Brian Williams, right-wing-talking-points-spouting Charlie Gibson, and anyone who writes for the war-enabling New York Times and Washington Post. "

Very Funny Video

While I could do without the Nazi references, the rest of this song and video is right on concerning the fat slob, Rush Limbaugh. Most conservatives won't like it; not because of the content but because there is no violence.

Too Soon to Blame O'Reilly, Limbaugh, et al.

Bill Gwatney, the Arkansas Democratic Party Chairman was shot in his office by a man who was later himself shot and killed by police.

UPDATE: I wish I had more time to write because then, just perhaps, I would be the first to have written this. As it is, Greg Saunders of The Talent Show beat me to it.

And, he's exactly right. Please, please, please don't tell me that the ranting of the more egregious members of the right-wing noise machine (Savage, Coulter, Hannity, O'Reilly and yes, Belling) does not have some sort of weird negative effect on the dimmer bulbs on the right. You can see the violence in print simply by reading Peter DiGaudio's anger-laced and insipid rants at Texas Holdem Blogger, the misplaced cockiness of Fred Dooley and the comments from the happy sycophants that live in their haloscan universe.

James Wigderson tried to say in the comment section here that Michael Moore and Keith Olbermann are as guilty. Well, besides being outnumbered (it's scary that righty bloggers breed, or inbreed) I asked him when had either ever approached the level of evil that the crowd on the right delivers. I'm waiting for the obscure comment from some idiot as an example (using Chris Lato logic -- it was probably planted).

One last thing, again from Saunders. This is what passes for conservative humor. Violence begets violence.