No need. I can see what Limbaugh said, and I can see that your own citation contradicts his statement.
Because one of Rush Limbaugh’s defenders says so? Not a chance.
Read your own cite, dipshit. Obama proposed capping deductions for the top bracket, not eliminating anything.
Also Limbaugh is a liar. He did say not to donate, and no one is being asked to donate “through the government” anyway. All the Whitehouse did was put a link to Red Cross site on its website. Obama is not collecting money or information, so that whole objection is smoke.
I think it’s also pretty funny how in your quoted transcript, Limbaugh (falsely) denies having told people not to donate to Haiti, then goes off on a long diatribe about why people should not donate to Haiti.
Has this pig ever expressed one ounce of empathy or compassion for the people of Haiti? Probably not, since they’re black.
This is called “making things up.”
The page at whitehouse.gov had a link to the Red Cross site (I checked). There was no attempt to divert any funds to the government, or collect any names at the White House site. Just a link[sup]*[/sup]. Limbaugh is an idiot.
- The link has since been changed from the Red Cross to the Clinton Bush Haiti Fund. Still just a link.
From Rafe’s own quoted transcript:
I did address this.
We are all donating “through the government” in the aid being sent there.
That long diatribe was from David Brooks. Rush was reading it to demonstrate how he was ripped open for saying similar things, but nary a word was spoken about Brooks saying it.
You obviously don’t listen to Rush. Obviously.
Yes, and we addressed your addressing it. The ball is still in your court.
So the content of the diatribe was beside the point; it was just an illustration of how Rush is singled out for scorn.
That’s a strange topic for a guy who tries so hard not to make the show about himself, but who are we to question his wisdom.
I’m not Shodan, but perhaps I can help.
George H.W. Bush got a blowjob from Barbara Bush.
Queue jokes about GWB being the load she should’ve swallowed.
“Obama has proposed a policy which may lead to X” =/= “Obama proposed X”.
Rush was lying - even if one accepts your desperate flailing about incrementalism.
I notice you didn’t bother to link to or quote the transcript of Rush’s original commentary; just to his reinterpretation of it.
Meaning that if he had, he could read between the lines. 'Cause, you know, everything Rush says should be taken in light of his oft-mentioned deep abiding love for black people, right?
Take that bone out of your nose and answer again.
First of all, I’m getting a little tired of hearing who my leader is. Apparently it isn’t President Bush in this case - since he is leading fundraising efforts for Haiti. Can’t be my church - they are ahead of this as well.
In the future, when my church or President Bush can be usefully linked to something unpopular, I’m sure I will be accused of being in lockstep with both.
By the way, President Clinton is the UN Special Envoy for Haiti - and took some time in the last few days to campaign for Martha Coakley. He was confronted about this by a National Review reporter, and responded that “It’s your problem if you can’t see how these things aren’t mutually exclusive.” He went on to explain that a Coakley victory could help the rebuilding effort - how this could happen wasn’t explained.
No criticism here - just the same observation noted above. Politicians and commentators will spin any event. This is what they do. And whether you buy into it is your deal. Personally I’m happy Bush is raising money for Haiti (and Clinton as well) and I am unconvinced by Limbaugh.
What you’ve clearly demonstrated is that there are no crackpot apologists here.
There are…just not among the “Usual Suspects”, for a change, which I must admit to being pleasantly surprised it.
Anyone who doesn’t agree with them is a “crackpot apologist”.
I don’t think his apologists are crackpots. I think they’re sane and vile.
Flattery will get you nowhere.
I wasn’t making a funny or trying to flatter you.
Yep. I know.
Can we wrap this all up with a hug, then?
Sure thing, Jack. As long as we can all agree to the blanket assertion that people who listen to Rush are Republican idiots who sympathize with his heartless, racist, idiotic tendencies.