Obama operatives have been having a field day recently trying to paint Rush as the leader of the Republican Party when nothing could be further from the truth. If Rush was the leader of the Republicans, I would have to quit listening to him. I want to listen to someone who believes what he says and says what he believes, whether I agree or not! I get that from Rush every time I tune in.
To lead the Republican Party of today, one must be willing to: Jettison any core values he might have; kick his long time friends under the bus when there is perceived political advantage to be gained; and forgo any thought of what is best for the country while devoting all his time and energy to buying votes and getting re-elected. Listen to Rush Limbaugh for a few weeks and you will realize that he could never do that. You can always count on Rush to say what he believes and let the chips fall where they may!
This begs the question: Who is leading the republican party? Answer: President Obama!
What! you say. Well think about it.....In less than two months as President, Mr. Obama has rammed through a $700 billion "porkulas" bill that rewards all of the special interests that got him elected, without a whimper from the republicans. He signed a $400 billion omnibus bill loaded to the gills with over 9000 earmarks that could only pass with help from republicans (by the way, nearly half of the pork went to republican pet projects). Next he plans to nationalize health care, empower unions by taking away employees rights to a secret ballot, nationalize the banks, and stifle free speech by re-instating the fairness doctrine, all in an effort to consolidate his power and the power of the central government. Can the elimination of term limits for the President be far behind?
Yet, where are the republicans that are supposed to believe in limited government, individual rights, and the power of the people to govern themselves and their finances without being dependent on the federal government for everything? When Mr. Obama spouts Marxist theory about redistribution of wealth (ie; from each according to his means, to each according to his needs), where are our "champions" of free enterprise? When he signs executive orders permitting federal funding for embryonic stem cell research where are our "protectors" of the right to life?
They are either cowering in the cloakrooms of Congress, afraid to speak out for fear of being called "racist" for daring to disagree with our first black president, or they are attending White House dinners hoping for a "photo op" with the "Messiah". Either way, I have to give President Obama credit. He is leading the republican party around by the nose right off a cliff and they are falling all over themselves trying to be the next one to say how much they want him to succeed.
Thank God for Rush Limbaugh! Of course he wants President Obama to fail! Anyone that cares about the future of our country as a free nation should want the same thing. If he succeeds, we will all wake up one day and wonder what happened to the country our fathers and forefathers fought and died to guarantee for us.
Well, I'm just an average joe and that is my opinion. We are all entitled to that and I hope that this post will spur some lively debate. All I ask is that we all treat each other with respect, and not resort to name calling. Let's debate the issues on this forum and try to learn from each other.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Dear average "republican" Joe, The republicans are hiding in the cloak room as they are ashamed of their support of an unregulated, free-market idealogy that has utterly failed. They are ashamed that trillions of dollars are now required to get the economy back on its feet. They are ashamed that the greatest redistribution of wealth in US history is now taking place as the real average Joe's are being swindled, once again, by wealthy corporate elites - domestic and foreign. They are ashamed of their support of Bush who trashed the constitution, attempted to legalize torture, suspended habeus corpus, employed a doctrine of pre-emption that has resulted in the deaths of tens-of-thousands of civilians, invoked the articles of war against Iraq under false pre-text, outed a CIA officer in the employ of the US government, violated the sovereignty and laws of numerous countries by means of extrordinary rendition, increased the deficit to unprecedented levels, manipulated the news media on a mass scale with psyops as a lead up to war, fired US attourneys who would not allow themselves to be politically manipulated, routinely employed signing statements in attempt to expand the scope of his presidential power, stifled dissent by whatever means possible, and violated the privacy of millions of US citizens with illegal wiretaps. If Seymour Hersh is correct, the Bush administration was even running an asassination ring out of Dick Cheny's office. Rush would be "morally outraged" if a democratic talking head were criticisng a sitiing republican president - especially during a time of war. His form of dissent is eeriely remeniscent of that employed by democrats prior to the election of Obama... wouldn't you agree? Thank God for the right to dissent.
ReplyDeleteDear "democrat" Frank
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment. Yes I am a republican although at the moment as you can probably tell, I am not very proud of it. Suffice it to say that I don't agree with your regurgitation of democratic talking points about the Bush years, but you forgot to mention his responsibility for the attacks on 9-11, hurricane Katrina, global warming, the Kennedy assassination, and the disappearance of Amelia Earhart. Rush was outraged by the daily parade of democrat talking heads trotted out to express their "outrage" over the Iraq war and how Bush lied to us, when their real agenda was to undermine the war, turn public opinion against him, and bring down the administration by any means possible to assure democrats were elected in 2008. My problem with republicans is that when they felt the political winds start to shift, they abandoned Bush and the war they all supported in a transparent attempt to save their own skins. Republicans need to borrow a page from the democrat playbook and start playing hardball. Democrats are fighters for what they believe and for that I give them credit.
Dear "average republican Joe,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your telling response to my recent post. Your propensity for Rush-like rhetorical device and diction reveals the severe degree to which Rush Limbaugh holds sway over your current thought processes. If you cannot contest the message, you attack the messenger. If you believe that your predilection for pablum may be cited, you pre-emtively cast the first stone. And, again, if you can create the impression that the opposition's arguements are tied into those of the fringe then you can readily discard them without the benifit of honest discourse. Please! Do you honestly believe that people(other than Rush-bots) are going to read your posts and not recognize the fact that you are driven by an irrational god-like worship for your mentor.
Dear Frank,
ReplyDeleteThanks again for your post. I am really enjoying our debate. I don't think it would come as a surprise to anyone that I am a Rush Limbaugh fan. After all, you only need to look at the name of the blog. I don't believe that I attacked you, the messenger. On the contrary, I complimented you for your willingness to stand up for your beliefs. Perhaps you could extend me the same courtesy. It is rather difficult to contest the "message" when it is a laundry list of unsupported charges leveled without the slightest bit of documented evidence to back it up. I have an idea. Why don't you pick out one of your charges, do some research, and back it up with some proof? I promise to read it with an open mind and if I cannot refute the charge with documented evidence from my own research, I will be happy to acknowledge same in my next post. Frank, I really do appreciate your contribution to my blog. I can tell that you are sincere in your beliefs, and the fact that you are willing to take your valuable time to respond here demonstrates that you have the best interests of our country at heart. I look forward to your next post.
Dear average "Republican" Joe, I accept your challenge of supplying you with source information that supports my alleged use of "democratic talking points." (truth be known, I'm a registered independent. Please review the following:
ReplyDeleteAttempted to legalize torture:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5jQFtXD2Y2LUJpdDbYoK3xyIBo82w
http://www.salon.com/opinion/kamiya/2009/03/10/john_yoo/
http://www.democracynow.org/search (Do search on “John Yoo torture”); Currently, there are 33 stories that deal with various aspects of the issue on this website.
Suspension of habeas corpus:
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/rightsandfreedoms/a/habeuscorpus.htm
http://www.democracynow.org/search (Do search on “habeas corpus”); there are 10 stories that deal with various aspects of the issue on this website.
http://civilliberty.about.com/od/lawenforcementterrorism/tp/Boumediene-v-Bush.htm
Employed a doctrine of pre-emption that has resulted in the deaths of tens-of-thousands of civilians:
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~govdocs/iraq.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/23/world/nation-war-new-doctrine-pre-emption-idea-with-lineage-whose-time-has-come.html?pagewanted=1
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/iraq/etc/cron.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/AR2006101001442.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/09/AR2008010902793.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/10/world/middleeast/10casualties.html
Invoked the articles of war against Iraq under false pre-text:
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/8/14/after_ron_suskind_reveals_bush_admin
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/6/11/former_white_house_former_white_house
http://www.democracynow.org/search (Do search on “yellowcake”); there are 12 stories that deal with various aspects of the issue on this website.
http://agonist.org/hongpong/20060608/yellowcake_black_psy_ops_insiders_call_niger_forgeries_wh_black_propaganda
http://dir.salon.com/story/opinion/huffington/2003/07/16/state_of_the_union/index.html
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3312 (Aluminum tube deception)
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0518-03.htm
http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/01/18/scooters_timetravel_trial.php (retrospective)
http://mediamatters.org/items/200605220003
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,88863,00.html
Outed a CIA officer in the employ of the US government: The trial and subsequent conviction of Scooter Libby can leave no doubt that Bush’s White House was engaged in a cover-up of their involvement in the outing of Valerie Plane. His conviction begs the question, “Why engage in a campaign of obstruction if there is nothing to hide?” Go back and look at the furor surrounding this issue and White House support of Libby even in the face of his conviction.
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/7/5/he_has_subverted_the_rule_of (Interview with Joe Wilson)
Violated the sovereignty and laws of numerous countries by means of extraordinary rendition:
http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/02/05/opinion/edjustice.php
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/12/world/europe/12italy.html?_r=1&ref=world
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6732897.stm
http://projects.publicintegrity.org/militaryaid/report.aspx?aid=855
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/05/panetta-confirmation-hear_n_164390.html
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3499/extraordinary_rendition_on_trial/
Increased the deficit to unprecedented levels:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/28/2009.deficit/index.html
http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/beat_the_press_archive?month=03&year=2009&base_name=its_bushs_deficit_the_republic
Manipulated the news media on a mass scale with psyops as a lead up to war:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/washington/20generals.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=all
http://psychoanalystsopposewar.org/blog/2008/04/20/media-military-analysis-more-akin-to-psyops-manipulation/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-a-palermo/the-pentagons-message-for_b_97794.html
Fired US attorneys who would not allow themselves to be politically manipulated:
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/6/4/former_us_attorney_david_iglesias_on (This interview with a former US Attorney says it all)
Routinely employed signing statements in attempt to expand the scope of his presidential power:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-signing-statements10-2009mar10,0,357503.story
Violated the privacy of millions of US citizens with illegal wiretaps:
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/12/16/the_fed_who_blew_the_whistle
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/4/1/exclusivebushs_law_eric_lichtblau_on_exposing
http://www.eff.org/issues/nsa-spying
http://whitehouser.com/war/illegal-wiretapping-immunity/
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/23/national/main3868291.shtml
http://www.casavaria.com/cafesentido/2008/07/11/473/senate-approves-telecom-immunity-bush-signs-expanded-wiretap-powers-into-law/
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/ATT-Verizon-Get-Immunity-For-Illegal-Wiretaps-91805
Dear Frank,
ReplyDeleteThanks again for your post. I asked that you choose one charge and support it with proof and you responded with a lengthy list of websites that apparently you use to inform your opinion. Since you declined to choose one topic, I will start at the top "Attempted to legalize torture". As promised I will review your sources and then attempt to refute the charge through evidence of my own. Again, if I cannot I will acknowledge same in my next post. I am glad to here that you are an Independent. Perhaps you will be willing to listen to my arguments with an open mind as well. Thanks again for your contributions to the debate. Perhaps you have some online friends that would like to join the debate. All opinions are welcome.
Dear average “republican” Joe,
ReplyDeleteLet me make my position perfectly clear: I support neither the neo-conservative or neo-liberal positions as espoused by Bush and Obama respectively. They are two sides of the same coin. Both leaders are predisposed to a globalist vision of the future wherein a small cabal of super-wealthy, corporate–minded elites intends to exercise complete economic, military, and social control throughout the world.
I make this declaration with the understanding that you will, almost certainly, dismiss my position as lunatic fringe. You must understand that I embrace this position with great trepidation and little joy. I am still struggling with the fact that I have voluntarily participated in an ever-increasing mind-numbing pattern of corporate-sponsored ignorance (via mass media) throughout my entire adult life - wherein the illusion of contentment could only be maintained through suspension of critical thought. I allowed myself to believe that: the sole act of participating in the electoral process was enough to insure that our elected government would act in accord with its founding principles; through the process of opposing political platforms, democrats and republicans would keep each other honest; an independent media would provide us with the facts necessary to the task of making an informed decision. I make this public confession with the understanding that I very possibly could end up in some agency’s database under the heading of subversive.
The electoral process has been so corrupted by corporate lobbying that it is almost impossible for a candidate to get elected without corporate support. Today, money and media control the political aspirations of most candidates. If you are deemed a threat to the system, it is unlikely that you can get elected. If a populist candidate manages to get on the ballot his chances of actually getting elected go from slim to none as he aspires to higher office – just take a look at the treatment of third party candidates in the last presidential election. The presidential debates were so carefully constructed that a whole range of issues were avoided. Had issues such as consolidation of wealth, decrease in the standard of living, free trade, deregulation, privatization, and globalization been honestly debated we would have seen that there was very little difference between McCain and Obama. Both parties are so inextricably entwined in this unholy system of corporate sponsorship it has become virtually impossible for an elected official to act solely in the best interest of their country and constituency.
Like Jimmy Carter, Obama was a corporate made-to-order candidate. His candidacy was carefully constructed in response to a rising tide of voter dissatisfaction with republican rule. He was carefully packaged to create the illusion that substantial political change is still possible. The seemingly radical choice between a woman and an African-American in the 2008 democratic primary was a carefully constructed device to enhance the illusion of real choice. In fact, there was no significant difference between the democratic candidate and that offered by the republicans.
In his first few months as president, Obama has revealed the degree to which he is in sync with the prevailing status quo. The changes he has made are ones of style rather than substance. He has put the interests of Wall Street above those of Main Street. He has given away trillions to the benefit of those who created the economic crisis. He closed Guantanamo with great fanfare but left the policy of extraordinary rendition intact. He openly criticized the Bush doctrine but continues to engage in pre-emptive strikes against our purported enemies without regard to the notion of imminent danger or due process. He is winding down the war in Iraq but increasing troops in Afghanistan – much to the dismay of Afghanistan’s present government. He continues to use Blackwater (Xe) as a private contractor in Iraq in spite of its war crimes and Iraq’s express wishes to the contrary. Halliburton still operates with impunity even though it is estimated that they defrauded the taxpayers of one billion dollars under Bush’s watch. Obama engages in rhetoric about the strengths of democracy but refuses to recognize the legitimately elected government of the Palestinians. He continues to support Israel in its unrelenting campaign of oppression against the Palestinian people and its expansion of unlawful settlements. He has openly called for transparency in government but instructs his justice department to invoke national security arguments to block the release of information that would shed light on past abuses. His justice department is also attempting to suspend habeas corpus rights for terrorist suspects in direct contradiction of Supreme Court rulings. He has been highly critical of earmarks but tolerates them as a necessary evil now that he is president. The latest G20 meeting leaves no doubt that he, like Bush before him, is a fervent advocate of policies promoting globilism, free trade, and privatization – each, in its own right, a euphemism for greater corporate control. So, what has really changed?
The future is dark and foreboding. Mass media has become the mouth piece of corporate interests. It is invested in creating the illusion of truth only. It endeavors to provide us with a carefully tailored set of facts to insure a majority consensus consistent with corporate designs. It provides a range of perspective to create the illusion of choice but repeats the dominant (politically correct) narrative much more often, and in a way, that subordinates all competing perspectives. For instance: During the build up to the Iraq war it paid ex-military to sell the dominant (corporate sponsored) narrative. All other perspectives were delegated to the trash heap of dissenting (unpatriotic) opinions. We are being collectively driven by fear from one corporately-created crisis to the next while our pockets are being picked clean by those self same corporations. They come out of the shadows when the timing is right to offer up solutions that further enhance their consolidation of wealth and power - even if it is at the expense of fallen comrades (Lehman brothers for example). Look at the amount of former Bear-Stearns executives who have been employed to provide solutions to the current economic crisis. Obama has put the wolves in charge of restructuring the hen house. All of the corporate xyz solutions enacted thus far conform to the axiom, “What’s good for corporate elitism is good for the country.” While these corporate elites formulate policy which enables them to purchase the so-called “toxic assets” at bargain basement prices with very little downside risk, Obama is extolling their virtues! I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Halliburton has already acquired a no-bid contract to play the pipes at America’s funeral.