Friday afternoon I was forced, against my will, to listen to Rush Limbaugh. (I was in the back seat of a car driven by someone who refused to change the station, unless it was to one that would get a clearer signal of Maha Rushee.) I tried to fall asleep, to no avail.
In between bleating about how happy he was that so many Iraquis were being killed, Rush did a bit of pontificating about how disgusted he was about the level of hatred that “…the left and the liberals and feminists and enviro-whackos have towards president Bush. It’s just astonishing how vehement their hatred is. During the 8 years of the Clinton presidency, yes we disagreed with Clinton, but did we on the right hate him? No.”
Rush is having another amnesiac episode, 'cause I know that he has heard of www.lucianne.com which has some of the most vile thoughts I’ve ever seen typed onto a computer screen, and all of them by people who apparently consider themselves to be, "Good, honest, God-fearing Christians. :rolleyes:
Don’t be so hard on old Rush. He may be a victim of right-wing propaganda here. A third of Americans are readily susceptible to the implantation of false memories. Rush may be among these poor unfortunates, and thus believe that he is speaking the literal truth. Such “history disabled” persons deserve our pity, not our scorn.
Oh please, Shodan. Their disagreement with Bush isn’t based in hate; they are just appalled that somebody with that lack of character, discipline, intelligence or wisdom has actually ascended to the White House. But those on the right were pure Clinton-haters - and then some.
The left doesn’t hate President Bush…
The right doesn’t hate President Clinton…
“…they are just appalled that somebody with that lack of character, discipline, intelligence or wisdom has actually ascended to the White House.”
And of course, the other side is so full of shit that their eyes are turning brown…
Oh, I don’t deny that I despise dubya. I’m just astonished that Limbaugh lacks, not an ounce of dignity or integrity, but a smidgen of respect for his listeners, inasmuch as he could say that without winking.
Look, it’s a given that EVERY ideologue believes his own opinions are based purely on principle and reason, while the OTHER side’s opinions are based strictly on malice and ignorance. What’s new about this?
As I’ve said on these boards many times before, when we like or dislike a politician, we usually have very good reasons. When we adore or despise a politician, our reasons are usually irrational. Examples? While conservatives regularly mocked Jimmy Carter, they never loathed him as many loathed Bill Clinton. Similarly, liberals never liked George Herbert Walker Bush, but there was never much real venom in their attacks on him. Ronadl Reagan and G.W. Bush, on the other hand, inspire passionate hatred.
Now, when I’ve written this observation in the past, dopers on both sides have rushed to scream “That’s DIFFERENT! The guy WE despise DESERVES it!” And I’m sure this time will be no different. Right-wingers who frothed at the mouth over Bill Clinton will never see how irrational their invective was, and luiberals who read this will insist that they’re NOT being irrational, that G.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan really ARE pure evil.
We all think it’s the OTHER side that’s being completely unreasonable.
astorian, I don’t deny that I can’t stand him. And I’ll admit that some of the reasons he twists my boxers – his smirk, his free ride in life, his bumbling speech – aren’t super rational. In fact, I’ll put the smirk next to the Bit Lip in terms of irrelevant reasons to hate a president, no problem.
But some of the reasons people hate dubya – his dishonesty about his past, his granting of special rights to oil companies, his stealth wingnut campaign – are legitimate gripes. We can compare these to gripes about Clinton – his willingness to lie about trivialities under oath, his dirty campaign fundraising, his apparent willingness to use the military to distract the country from his sexual scandals – and it’s a fair comparison.
But it’s simplistic to suggest that both sets of complaints are equally valid without examining them both.
Haven’t listened to Rush Slimball in years. I thought he was funny for a while until it gradually dawned on me the contempt he has for the average working American.
After repeatedly hearing him say “It’s the owner of the company who put up the money, the workers didn’t contribute anything”, I became nauseous and went out and got some Sex Pistols tapes to listen to at work instead. My thought was “huh? the only person who makes a contribution to this company is the fatass in the air conditioned office with the leather chair, those of us who actually sweat out here on the (un-air contitioned) factory floor making the fucking products that the company sells to make a profit don’t contribute anything?”
Rush grew up in a wealthy family. His first job in radio came to him because his father was part-owner of the station. He believes that the only thing that has value is money- physical labor that produces actual tangible things of value has no value in his eyes.
Can’t really expect someone who thinks that way to have integrity.
