By Yael T. Abouhalkah, Kansas City Star Editorial Page columnist
Rush Limbaugh's recent criticism of President Barack Obama and Republican leaders has attracted plenty of attention.
But some of it is the wrong kind, the kind that makes his target audience -- ultra-right GOP members -- look weak and clueless. Take U.S. Rep. Phil Gingrey of Georgia.
He meekly apologized Wednesday for daring to criticize Limbaugh (and another conservative commentator, Sean Hanity.
"I am one of you," Gingrey told his supporters, whom he called "my fellow conservatives."
By that, Gingrey was trying to get back in the good graces of the GOP crowd that supports the flaming rhetoric of Limbaugh and his kind.
In point of fact, Gingrey had done nothing wrong. He had merely defended fellow GOP lawmakers Mitch McConnell, the Senate minority leader, and House Minority Leader John Boehner after Limbaugh had said they were among Republicans not fighting hard enough against Obama's stimulus package.
"I mean, it’s easy if you’re Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh or even sometimes Newt Gingrich to stand back and throw bricks," Gingrey had said. "You don’t have to try to do what’s best for your people and your party."
Still, give Limbaugh credit.
His attempt to cow the Republicans worked in the end: Not one GOP House member voted for Obama's stimulus bill on Wednesday.
Delicious
Digg
If you love fashion,you must
If you love fashion,you must konw abercrombie and fitch
and you are a abercrombie manor
abercrombie womensand
hollister clothingis also very fashion.
And you know RuehlNo.925
I also like abercrombie outlet,and you?
or should that be Animus?
Armimus wrote (or should that be Animus?)"And, yes, ignorant one, our country was attacked numerous times under Clinton. We had the first WTC bombing in 1993, a bombing in Saudi Arabia in 1995 that killed five Americans, the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, two U.S. embassies (i.e., U.S. soil) bombings in Africa in 1998, and the bombing of the USS Cole in 2000."
Well then, by this logic, every IED or car bomb in Iraq or Afganistan has been a terrorist attact under Bush's regime. So maybe he didn't keep us safe for seven years (or at least not 4,000+ of us). As for the other assertions about the Bush security apparatus there was the infamous memo about the 9/11 attack that was ignored, the fact that he never met with the NSC advisor when asked for an urgent meeting. I think there's a case for George dropping the ball here and let me assure you I'm no a Clinton apologist but I not going to let Bush off the hook either.
If we don't protect the freedom of speech how will we know who the a$$#@les are?
Hurrah for Sam Graves
Once more, he has shown the courage to say no to bad legislation. The libs running the House now only know one thing, SPEND!
Porky Stimulus Plan
I am very happy that Rush Limbaugh is holding our republican congressman and senators accountable in voting for/against stimulus plan. I would have been very upset if my congresspersons had voted for it. It is full of holes with spending that has nothing to do with stimulating the economy.
QC
I responded to you without calling you a name - even though I had some on my mind. Why is it that the liberals on this blog can't have a debate without pulling out the names? Why are you so bitter? And with regard to the debate with you - I won!
CONGRATULATIONS
>>>I responded to you without calling you a name - even though I had some on my mind. Why is it that the liberals on this blog can't have a debate without pulling out the names? Why are you so bitter? And with regard to the debate with you - I won!
I am not calling you names I am properly labeling you. ;)
Congratulations on your self proclaimed victory. Maybe you should land on an aircraft carrier with a big 'mission accomplished' banner behind you.
Yael, I think you are wrong.
Yael,
I think you are wrong. You gave only one example of anyone backing down from Limbaugh's comments and then condem the entire Republican party. That's pretty narrow.
Don't get me wrong, I think Limbaugh is a loudmouth ass. He was when he was on radio out of KC, he was when he was on radio out of Sacramento, and he still is.
All of that said, any stimulus package involving State projects will contain "pork", however, I believe that Obama has made it very clear to his own party that he is not supportive of excessive "pork" by nixing the condom program in the original bill.
Remember when
Remember when Randi Rhodes called Hillary Clinton and Gerry Ferraro "f**king wh**res? I do. Remember all the Dems who came to their defense and called her out? I don't.
Twas_was is WRONG
1) End of the cold war
What was that 20 years ago? Oh, and how is Russia doing these days since Bush's eye gazer Putin is in charge??
2) Tax cuts to end hyperinflation
Tax cuts for the rich and don't forget about taxes they create. Read my lips.....
3) Less government
One of the repugs greatest myths. Between the war on drugs and the war on terror the government under the the wingnuts has grown by leaps and bounds
4) Appointment of minorities to key cabinet
posts.
I noted how you didn't add 'qualified' to that. Hee.
5) Strengthened defense
Another myth. Our armed forces are spread out so thin now what would we do if we were attacked? Not to mention our military actions have STRENGTHENED our enemies.
6) Improved intelligence
WMDs in Iraq anybody??
7) Seven years free of attack by radical islam.
I love how you wingnuts say he kept us safe. WE WERE ATTACKED UNDER HIS WATCH!!
8) Kept polls out of national security measures
In other words they didn't take the will of the people into the things that they did. Check.
Off topic, but Joe's incorrect about attacks
I love how you wingnuts say he kept us safe. WE WERE ATTACKED UNDER HIS WATCH!!
That attack occurred under the security apparatus put in place by the Clinton administration. If you recall, our country was attacked numerous times during the Clinton years, especially after bin Laden declared war on the U.S. and said he would send Clinton "messages with no words" in response to Clinton's policies vis-a-vis Iraq. Also note that the 9/11 Commission concluded that the plans for 9/11 were developed during late 1998 and early 1999. It was during these very months that Clinton launched a preemptive attack on Iraq and an illegal war of choice on Kosovo. Finally, the 9/11 pilots were allowed into this country with improper documents even before Bush was elected president.
www.sinsofthehusband.com
Stupidity reigns!!!!
>>>That attack occurred under the security apparatus put in place by the Clinton administration. If you recall, our country was attacked numerous times during the Clinton years, especially after bin Laden declared war on the U.S. and said he would send Clinton "messages with no words" in response to Clinton's policies vis-a-vis Iraq. Also note that the 9/11 Commission concluded that the plans for 9/11 were developed during late 1998 and early 1999. It was during these very months that Clinton launched a preemptive attack on Iraq and an illegal war of choice on Kosovo. Finally, the 9/11 pilots were allowed into this country with improper documents even before Bush was elected president.
The security apparatus that was in place was after 11 months of the Bush administration being in, so they were Bush's. If he didn't change them then he AGREED with them. Our country was NOT attacked multiple times you big fat liar. Why can't republicans just make their case on what's real and not imagine stuff. Your ignorance is so transparent with comments like the pilots getting in during the Clinton years. Learn to think for yourself instead of repeating what Rush tells you to do.
Liberal ignorance
Let's see, Bush was sworn in on January 20 and 9/11 occurred on, well, 9/11. That looks like eight months to me, but maybe liberals have a different math system. The Bush administration was in the process of changing U.S. policy towards al Qaeda when 9/11 occurred.
And, yes, ignorant one, our country was attacked numerous times under Clinton. We had the first WTC bombing in 1993, a bombing in Saudi Arabia in 1995 that killed five Americans, the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996, two U.S. embassies (i.e., U.S. soil) bombings in Africa in 1998, and the bombing of the USS Cole in 2000.
The 9/11 pilots did indeed enter this country before Bush became president. Read the 9/11 Commission report, ignorant one: "The four pilots passed through INS and Customs inspections a total of 17 times before
9/11. Hanjour came to the United States to attend school in three stints during the 1990s.
His final arrival was in December 2000, through the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky
airport. The other three pilots, Atta, al Shehhi, and Jarrah, initially came in May and
June 2000. They arrived for the last time between May and August 2001. All made a
number of trips abroad during their extended stays in the United States."
http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statements/staff_statement_1.pdf
You need to read more and talk a lot less.
QC
"you big fat liar" - now that is intelligent! What I said about you and your name-calling stands - and "labels" & "names" are pretty much the same thing. Why are you so bitter - your guy won?
Why QC Is Bitter
Rumor has it photos are starting to appear showing the king with no clothes twas.. Could be it's just a rumor, but the train is having trouble leaving the station IMO...
Dittoheads
>>>"you big fat liar" - now that is intelligent! What I said about you and your name-calling stands - and "labels" & "names" are pretty much the same thing. Why are you so bitter - your guy won?
I'm not bitter at all. I'm having a ball responding to your spoonfed allegations and falsehoods.
>>>Rumor has it photos are starting to appear showing the king with no clothes twas.. Could be it's just a rumor, but the train is having trouble leaving the station IMO...
Another mental giant adding his two cents. Brilliant work sir. I believe I was 14 or 15 when I thought impotent jokes were funny.
No Impotent Joke Mental Genius...
The train leaving the station was in reference to the big 0's trouble in enacting his socialist agenda...
You libs are sometimes hard to get through to....
Kcgrh - you should know better
QC is the most intelligent person on this blog. If you don't believe it, just ask him. And his arrogance has him calling names and acting like a kid in recess. In case you missed it, he told someone today they were a "big fat liar". Maybe his maturity hasn't caught up with his intellect - or maybe both traits are lacking.
QC
Are you going to pretend that Reagan was either 1) never in office or 2) was not a Republican?
"Read my lips" - do you know anything about that? GHW Bush finally gave in to the Democrats who promised they would cut spending. Guess what they did after that. Maybe he should have known (frog & scorpion lesson).
Clinton let our military degrade so badly that, following 9/11, Bush had to rebuild. I don't have a problem with that.
Colin Powell (ungrateful pri**)
Yes military is stretched - and they are performing admirably, I might add.
WMD - ask Russia, Britain & a host of other nations - they believed it too (Sadam Hussein admitted that he worked hard to maintain illusion - to deter Iran)
Attacked under his watch - yes - and you can't just "flip a switch" and have everything that Homeland Security brought into play. And who was responsible for not allowing the FBI & CIA to exchange information? The guy with the cigar.
And on polls - until the Presidential Daily Briefings are in the daily newspaper, I will defer to my Commander In Chief to have a better idea than all of those Jon Stewart watchers.
Kool-Aid drinkers
>>>Are you going to pretend that Reagan was either 1) never in office or 2) was not a Republican?
Again that was over TWENTY YEARS AGO. He's DEAD. Get over it. He was a democrat at one point and governed pretty moderately.
>>>"Read my lips" - do you know anything about that? GHW Bush finally gave in to the Democrats who promised they would cut spending. Guess what they did after that. Maybe he should have known (frog & scorpion lesson).
Once again nothing that any republican does is their fault. If all the bad stuff comes from them 'caving' to democrats than you are a spineless cowardly lot and I wouldn't vote for you.
>>>Clinton let our military degrade so badly that, following 9/11, Bush had to rebuild. I don't have a problem with that.
Clinton downsized and specialized our military using it like a scalpel not a hatchet. Bush didn't have to 'rebuild' the military you drama queen. He also used that military to attack a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.
>>>Colin Powell (ungrateful pri**)
Ungrateful? That would imply he was only chosen because of his skin color. I love hearing from bigots.
>>>Yes military is stretched - and they are performing admirably, I might add.
My brothers and sisters are doing their job despite being given inadequate equipment to do so. I won't get into how they're treated after they're done. Walter Reid anyone?
>>>WMD - ask Russia, Britain & a host of other nations - they believed it too (Sadam Hussein admitted that he worked hard to maintain illusion - to deter Iran)
No he did not. I know you wingnuts like to just blurt out crap and call it fact. Saddam had a UN embargo on him. He wasn't like North Korea daily spouting off how he had them. It's funny how that was enough to invade Iraq, who DIDN'T have WMD, but North Korea who DOES and were acting in the same manner but we leave them be. Funny.
>>>Attacked under his watch - yes - and you can't just "flip a switch" and have everything that Homeland Security brought into play. And who was responsible for not allowing the FBI & CIA to exchange information? The guy with the cigar.
Another lie. It's never not been allowed for intelligence agencies to cooperate. They may not have in the past, but it was never a Clintonian edict you schmuck.
>>>And on polls - until the Presidential Daily Briefings are in the daily newspaper, I will defer to my Commander In Chief to have a better idea than all of those Jon Stewart watchers
Then why don't you go move to some country that is run by a dictator then if you trust one person's judgement over the will of the people???
We elect people to do a job
They bring in people to help them utilizing information from all kinds of sources. Bush did his job. If he was to poll citizens to get their input, wouldn't he have to provide them with the info he had? Wouldn't most of the info he had typically be classified?
Do you really want Barack Obama to be hogtied into getting the results of a poll from uninformed citizens before he does something? Bush provided Congress with the info he had. They voted to engage. It is real easy to second-guess after the fact, but understand that he didn't have that luxury. Are you going to second guess Obama if he doesn't make decisions based on polls. I won't - I promise.
"conservatives" and the "right"
Conservatives ache to redefine their label. The GOP will probably use the next four years to rally their members to a new platform based largely on economic policy rather than foreign policy strategy. I suspect they will use this time of hibernation wisely.
Is there a new William F. Buckley out there, one who possesses the educated wit and wisdom necessary to enter in debate and offer alternatives? David Brooks of the NY Times perhaps?
Will conservatives continue to distance themselves from the “religious right”? Can conservatives come to a political philosophy that balances the rights of the individual with the ideals of the Republic? Can they attract a larger constituency in the future, win votes, and garner a mandate?
Will a popular third party emerge over the next four years? A new party based upon religious philosophy?…economic policy?...socialism with a small “s”? (universal healthcare, housing, entitlements – witness the models in France and England).
Labeled liberals, like President Obama, drift to the center daily. Do these labels mean anything? A great deal of votes reside in this center.
From a historical perspective, our early years saw party lines drawn based upon economic philosophy, debt management, and finance policy. There may be some answers for the future by studying the debates of the past.
Tom Ryan
The Crossroads
Kansas City, MO
Judgement to Rush
I can't believe that a publication as august as the WSJ would have Rush. a muckracking liar, on its masthead of columnists.
It's easy to be a columnist
Heck, you don't even have to spell "Hannity" correctly.
Yael apparently missed the point (surprise) that the American people, and not just Limbaugh, did not support this so-called stimulus bill. They don't want more pork and higher deficits. The GOP represented that majority with their no votes.
except
That they do:
Americans support the economic-stimulus plan being pushed by President-elect Barack Obama but worry the government will spend too much money and widen the budget deficit, a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found.
Overall, the poll found strong public backing for the stimulus plan and its major planks, particularly proposals to spend more federal money to create jobs.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123196999580982953.html
Only 27% are opposed according to the liberal Wall Street Journal poll.
Wonder if that the same approximately 27% who thought Bush was doing a heckuva job right up to the very end?
Old poll
Interface:
Your poll is a bit dated. A more recent poll showed that the Democrats' "stimulus" plan was supported by just 45% of Americans. And that poll, while more recent than yours, was taken before we learned about much of the pork in the bill.
Americans do not want the type of deficit spending on pork that the Democrats are proposing. The GOP did the moral thing by voting against the bill. That was not spineless, as Yael the Frail claims.
Limbaugh's ideas are what
Limbaugh's ideas are what got Republicans the house and senate the presidency.
Where republicans failed was trying to play dress-up and act like liberals. Republicans spent 10 years in Congress with eight of them in the presidency making the government bigger, doling out money like it grew on trees, not solving immigration and other issues that plaque the country.
The old saying you can't out democrat a democrat holds true and that is Limbaugh's point. Republicans won because they ran as and acted like true conservatives, make government smaller and more efficient and return money to the taxpayers. Instead they tried to whoo the otherside and act like democrats and it failed in 2006 and failed in 2008.
If you think Obama's election by 52% of the vote suddenly means the true conservative republican party is dead then you are far less intelligent than I imagined.
It would behoove the republicans to return to the flock and talk and ACT like true republicans over the next fours year because if they roll over and try and play nice with the democrats or try and out democrat the democrats then they will suffer a long, agonizing death.
Republicans need to act like the minority party right now and that means you grind everything to a halt. You question everything and everyone to make sure that what is making it through is the right thing for America. It also means they need to defeat an appointment or two of Obama's. If not and they try to make nice all the time...Obama will make them his bitch for many years to come
PORK
How could a person call himself a newspaper man and like the bill that was pushed thru and without the Republicans and 11 Democrats behind it--if this columnst likes this bill he sure hasnt read it!!! or is taking his writing points from the Demo party talking points--he isnt into reporting on PORK --or fighting against it
The GOP had eight years
to strut their conservative stuff but chose not to. They couldn't spend and borrow fast enough, while President Bush aided and abetted their efforts. Now, this lily-white band is marching to the brink of oblivion while the economy falters.
Yaels eyes would fall out
If he ever read the Journal and saw how a real newspaper is produced.
Yeal - you should read Limbaugh's column in WSJ today
He's not just sitting back criticizing, he's offering a plan. He wants to get this country back on track and doesn't believe that pork-barrel spending is the answer. I believe, in the past, you have criticized pork-barrel spending. Why are you not doing it now? If pork-barrel spending is one of the reasons we are in this mess, why would doing more fix it?
Go get 'em, Rush
I like Rush Limbaugh. I share in his dismay and distrust of liberals, the ACLU, PETA, Planned Parenthood, and ACORN.
do what ? Lezzle
They are so responsible for the mess we are currently in - right ?
Or might it have something to do with the last 8 years occupant of the White House ?
Nahhh, I didn't think you'd say so.
Go get 'em Rush?
Everything about this country that is any good came from Liberals. Rush knows this, and can't stand it--so he made a career out of bashing them.
Aren't eight years of degradation of our air, water, our ideals, world respect, our military, and our business might reasons enough to realize that Bush/Cheney failed utterly?
Please point out one thing, one thing only, that they did that was any good. Because I can't think of one.
Planned Parenthoo? Give me a break.
motamax
1) End of cold war
2) Tax cuts to end hyperinflation
3) Less government
4) Appointment of minorities to key cabinet posts.
5) Strengthened defense
6) Improved intelligence
7) Seven years free of attack by radical islam.
8) Kept polls out of national security measures
I'll flip this over - name one thing the liberals did badly. Bet you can't, and that will expose you.
I'll readily admit that Bush made mistakes. His biggest mistake was his lack of veto action. He made mistakes following invasion of Iraq - but not the invasion itself. I blame Rumsfeld for that. Motamax, the biggest difference between you and me - is I see mistakes in BOTH parties, and I doubt you do.
You let your typing fingers outpace your brain
7) Seven years free of attack by radical islam."
Yeah but that one year was a bitch! And the improvement in intelligence (oxymoron?) was a year too late too.
If we don't protect the freedom of speech how will we know who the a$$#@les are?
Republicrats or Demicans
I have had many periods in my long life when I was so disgusted with both parties that I swore I would never vote again. There is no place for me to go. I can't abide the crooks, liars and phonies in the major parties and the nutty greenies don't have a clue along with the libertarians. What's a voter to do? I have not skipped the election yet. I just hold my nose and vote for the lesser of two weasels.
Link on column on GOP's attitude
Column linking GOP attitude with past victories to their detriment now:
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-gabler30-2008nov30,0,2384758.story
seanearlyaug - please don't post
links about conservative politics from far-left rag columnists of LA Times. Your buddies on the left may enjoy it, but people on the right don't much care. In fact, as soon as I saw who it was from I stopped reading it. Unless you want me to post links to Ann Coulter's column.