Tag Archives: Rush Limbaugh

Dear Cable Outlets — you need to find a way to tweak Bill Maher’s willy. Now.

Bill Maher is on HBO which does not have ‘advertisers’, only cable outlets which send money. So how do you deal with rudeness that is vile?

Rush Limbaugh was a disgusting figure in his attack on Fluke.

Bill Maher actually defended Rush Limbaugh’s right to say what he said — First Amendment, etc — but then noted that he had called Palin a name just as vile, but luckily he was cable and not FCC-regulated.

Some Maher defenders have claimed that he is a comedian commenting on a public figure. So? He attacked the very essence of womanhood (not Palin but …).

Limbaugh defenders have claimed, and he has claimed, that he is just an entertainer. Hey, isn’t that what Maher is too?

Bullshit.

Both men are rude and crude whenever they believe that it will get them a rating bounce.

It is extreme arrogance for Maher to claim that his calling of Palin a c*nt was OK, while Limbaugh’s calling of Fluke a sl*t was not.

There is no excuse for the inexcusable — no matter how damn funny your fans find you.

Limbaugh got what he deserved. Maher deserves a dog pooh outside his door too.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Civil Society

Delaware Meltdown: Limbaugh vs Rove vs Reality

“I could buy a parrot and train it to say, ‘tax cuts,’ but at the end of the day, it’s still a parrot, not a conservative.”
– Delaware Republican Party chairman Tom Ross

The win of TEA Partyer Christine O’Donnell in Delaware has exposed some raw nerves within the Republican establishment. For the first time ever, senior and prominent Republicans have come out swinging at a TEA Party candidate.

Delaware has become the lose thread that when pulled unravels the bond between the Republican Party and the TEA Party.

From TPM on the growing internal fight over Delaware’s primary outcome:

O’Donnell’s nomination has created deep divisions between the Republican Party and right-wing activists. Last night, Rove bashed O’Donnell — and her chances of being elected — and insisted that she’s said a lot of “nutty things.” He was attacked by some right-wingers for those comments. O’Donnell whacked him back in a televised interview this morning. And then Rove responded to O’Donnell and his right-wing critics, daring them to ‘prove me wrong’. Then Palin slammed Rove. Now it’s Limbaugh’s turn.

Yes, Christine O’Donnell won the Republican primary, upsetting the party’s favorite. Hooray for democracy. Hooray for the ability of the people to challenge the status quo and to make a difference.

However, what were they thinking?

O’Donnell ran a campaign in which she unabashedly felt the ability the ability to say almost anything — to include accosting her opponent as an old queer.

Things are what they are. Mike Castle lost the Republican primary yet was 30 points ahead of his Democratic opponent  … in a Democratic state. Thirty points is almost how far behind O’Donnell is from her Democratic opponent.

Prediction: Delaware will vote Democratic in November. Soundly. Republicans just lost the one senate seat that they could have counted upon gaining.

As a conservative, I find it appalling that the rightwing posing as conservatives believe that the end justifies the means.

It is not a good day when lack of thought of process or of making the numbers actually balance represent ‘conservatism’ versus the intellectual conservatism of Reagan and conservatives of his generation — and having worked in many of those campaigns, to include working for Reagan’s election, we worked with position papers that had numbers and thoughts on them. Conservatism in 2010 has become nasty sloganeering, nuttiness and a willingness to say anything to make your opponent look to be on your left.

1 Comment

Filed under Election 2010, Lies and Tall Tales, Republican Party, TEA Party

Imagine if the Tea Party Was Black, by Tim Wise

by Tim Wise

Let’s play a game, shall we? The name of the game is called “Imagine.” The way it’s played is simple: we’ll envision recent happenings in the news, but then change them up a bit. Instead of envisioning white people as the main actors in the scenes we’ll conjure – the ones who are driving the action – we’ll envision black folks or other people of color instead. The object of the game is to imagine the public reaction to the events or incidents, if the main actors were of color, rather than white. Whoever gains the most insight into the workings of race in America, at the end of the game, wins.

So let’s begin.

Imagine that hundreds of black protesters were to descend upon Washington DC and Northern Virginia, just a few miles from the Capitol and White House, armed with AK-47s, assorted handguns, and ammunition. And imagine that some of these protesters —the black protesters — spoke of the need for political revolution, and possibly even armed conflict in the event that laws they didn’t like were enforced by the government? Would these protester — these black protesters with guns — be seen as brave defenders of the Second Amendment, or would they be viewed by most whites as a danger to the republic? What if they were Arab-Americans? Because, after all, that’s what happened recently when white gun enthusiasts descended upon the nation’s capital, arms in hand, and verbally announced their readiness to make war on the country’s political leaders if the need arose.

Imagine that white members of Congress, while walking to work, were surrounded by thousands of angry black people, one of whom proceeded to spit on one of those congressmen for not voting the way the black demonstrators desired. Would the protesters be seen as merely patriotic Americans voicing their opinions, or as an angry, potentially violent, and even insurrectionary mob? After all, this is what white Tea Party protesters did recently in Washington.

Imagine that a rap artist were to say, in reference to a white president: “He’s a piece of shit and I told him to suck on my machine gun.” Because that’s what rocker Ted Nugent said recently about President Obama.

Imagine that a prominent mainstream black political commentator had long employed an overt bigot as Executive Director of his organization, and that this bigot regularly participated in black separatist conferences, and once assaulted a white person while calling them by a racial slur. When that prominent black commentator and his sister — who also works for the organization — defended the bigot as a good guy who was misunderstood and “going through a tough time in his life” would anyone accept their excuse-making? Would that commentator still have a place on a mainstream network? Because that’s what happened in the real world, when Pat Buchanan employed as Executive Director of his group, America’s Cause, a blatant racist who did all these things, or at least their white equivalents: attending white separatist conferences and attacking a black woman while calling her the n-word.

Imagine that a black radio host were to suggest that the only way to get promoted in the administration of a white president is by “hating black people,” or that a prominent white person had only endorsed a white presidential candidate as an act of racial bonding, or blamed a white president for a fight on a school bus in which a black kid was jumped by two white kids, or said that he wouldn’t want to kill all conservatives, but rather, would like to leave just enough—“living fossils” as he called them—“so we will never forget what these people stood for.” After all, these are things that Rush Limbaugh has said, about Barack Obama’s administration, Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barack Obama, a fight on a school bus in Belleville, Illinois in which two black kids beat up a white kid, and about liberals, generally.

Imagine that a black pastor, formerly a member of the U.S. military, were to declare, as part of his opposition to a white president’s policies, that he was ready to “suit up, get my gun, go to Washington, and do what they trained me to do.” This is, after all, what Pastor Stan Craig said recently at a Tea Party rally in Greenville, South Carolina.

Imagine a black radio talk show host gleefully predicting a revolution by people of color if the government continues to be dominated by the rich white men who have been “destroying” the country, or if said radio personality were to call Christians or Jews non-humans, or say that when it came to conservatives, the best solution would be to “hang ‘em high.” And what would happen to any congressional representative who praised that commentator for “speaking common sense” and likened his hate talk to “American values?” After all, those are among the things said by radio host and best-selling author Michael Savage, predicting white revolution in the face of multiculturalism, or said by Savage about Muslims and liberals, respectively. And it was Congressman Culbertson, from Texas, who praised Savage in that way, despite his hateful rhetoric.

Imagine a black political commentator suggesting that the only thing the guy who flew his plane into the Austin, Texas IRS building did wrong was not blowing up Fox News instead. This is, after all, what Anne Coulter said about Tim McVeigh, when she noted that his only mistake was not blowing up the New York Times.

Imagine that a popular black liberal website posted comments about the daughter of a white president, calling her “typical redneck trash,” or a “whore” whose mother entertains her by “making monkey sounds.” After all that’s comparable to what conservatives posted about Malia Obama on freerepublic.com last year, when they referred to her as “ghetto trash.”

Imagine that black protesters at a large political rally were walking around with signs calling for the lynching of their congressional enemies. Because that’s what white conservatives did last year, in reference to Democratic party leaders in Congress.

In other words, imagine that even one-third of the anger and vitriol currently being hurled at President Obama, by folks who are almost exclusively white, were being aimed, instead, at a white president, by people of color. How many whites viewing the anger, the hatred, the contempt for that white president would then wax eloquent about free speech, and the glories of democracy? And how many would be calling for further crackdowns on thuggish behavior, and investigations into the radical agendas of those same people of color?

To ask any of these questions is to answer them. Protest is only seen as fundamentally American when those who have long had the luxury of seeing themselves as prototypically American engage in it. When the dangerous and dark “other” does so, however, it isn’t viewed as normal or natural, let alone patriotic. Which is why Rush Limbaugh could say, this past week, that the Tea Parties are the first time since the Civil War that ordinary, common Americans stood up for their rights: a statement that erases the normalcy and “American-ness” of blacks in the civil rights struggle, not to mention women in the fight for suffrage and equality, working people in the fight for better working conditions, and LGBT folks as they struggle to be treated as full and equal human beings.

And this, my friends, is what white privilege is all about. The ability to threaten others, to engage in violent and incendiary rhetoric without consequence, to be viewed as patriotic and normal no matter what you do, and never to be feared and despised as people of color would be, if they tried to get away with half the shit we do, on a daily basis.

Game Over.


Bill4DogCatcher.com sez: I am friendly to both Coffee and to Tea Partiers. However, Tim Wise puts describes a Tea Party movement in a light that has many valid points. There are those that believe the Tea Party has many racists. I disagree — but would agree that White America would have a cow if the Tea Party were overwhelmingly Black or Brown or …


Tim Wise is among the most prominent anti-racist writers and activists in the U.S. Wise has spoken in 48 states, on over 400 college campuses, and to community groups around the nation. Wise has provided anti-racism training to teachers nationwide, and has trained physicians and medical industry professionals on how to combat racial inequities in health care. His latest book is called Between Barack and a Hard Place.


Crossposted from Ephphatha Poetry

4 Comments

Filed under Civil Society, Political Violence, TEA Party

Coffee Party wants Conservative opinions. How to give yours!

The Coffee Party wants your opinion.

Yesterday I met one-on-one with Annabel Park for more than an hour. Annabel is one of the Coffee Party principal founders.

We discussed a wide range of topics, and how conservatives view the Coffee Party.

Yes, I know that some folks are working hard to say that the Coffee Party is just a conspiracy to distract Americans by getting them to talk to each other civilly, or that George Soros (or pick your favorite boogeyman) is pulling the strings.

However, I’ve met with the Coffee Party founders three or four times over the last week — and I don’t believe that my conservative credentials or beliefs can be questioned: I oppose Obamacare, want term limits, want a balanced budget constitutional amendment, am an NRA-card carrying gunowner, and I’ve served my country in uniform for 20+ years. I  still serve my country.

Since our one-on-one, Annabel and I have spoken several times. She wants to know what YOU think.

HOW TO MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD

Participants in Coffee Party meetings could just yada, yada, yada all day long … and with free refills that does indeed happen … but that doesn’t mean that anything gets said that can be portrayed as a trend, or as what a group of people actually believe.

To better understand areas of agreement, disagreement — and even topics without any apparent patterns of agreement at all — the Coffee Party is using something called the ‘Coffee Sphere’.

The Coffee Sphere sits on the homepage at http://www.coffeepartyusa.com/ — below is what the ‘sphere’ looks like.

Bill4DogCatcher.com sez: It may look like a poll or a survey, but it is much, much more. The sphere collects opinions and groups them within categories such as self-described “liberal” or “conservative” or “very conservative”. It gives folks a chance to represent their group values.

So what do conservatives believe, not believe, and agree upon?  I encourage you to make your voice heard by taking the  Coffee Sphere experience. Learn more about how the sphere works and how it correlates your opinion with other folks’ thoughts.

Shy? Don’t give your real name or email address; just take the sphere and signup as your favorite cartoon character or whatever.

Thanks! Bill@Bill4DogCatcher.com

Leave a Comment

Filed under Coffee Party, Polls

Civil War v2.0 – Talking Our Way Into A Fight

It was San Angelo, Texas and I was stationed at Goodfellow Air Force Base. A favorite hangout was the New Dixie Club — a great place to drink, to dance and to just be a people watcher.

One evening I stepped into the restroom. Immediately upon entering someone grabbed me and threw me against the wall and started pounding, all the while screaming “I hate f**king Air Force people!”

“But I’m Army” say I, and with that I heard “Then you are OK” and out they walked.

That person didn’t know me. They didn’t care whether I was good, bad or even lying. I was just a target of opportunity.

TALKING OUR WAY INTO A NEW CIVIL WAR

Within the Republican party there are new targets of opportunity: each other.

Thomas Sowell (TownHall): “As if it is not enough that they have been decimated by the Democrats in the past couple of elections, the Republican survivors are now turning their guns on each other.”

Sowell was quick to identify the perps of this new war, “At the heart of these internal battles have been attacks on Rush Limbaugh by Republicans who imagine themselves to be so much more sophisticated because they are so much more in step with the political fashions of the time.”

Moderates are the attackers? Non-conservatives are inflamming the base by first selling out the party and now defaming its few remaining defenders?

Hello?! I didn’t start anything that night in San Angelo, and I don’t remember being part of any mob now in 2009 launching attacks on rightwingers. And since I’m conservative in both mind and spirit then I surely am not part of any attack there either.

On August 17th there was this headline on the ‘DownWithTyranny’ blog: Texas Republican Civil War Officially Kicks Off. Obviously favoring Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson’s run for governor against Texas’ incumbent, Gov. Rick Perry is described as a “… far right extremist and secessionist …”

Bailey is described as a Reagan big tent conservative, but she let loose with a full volley. The target has been engaged. Perhaps the war has begun. Perhaps it will be a real war.

Texas Republicans have many issues facing them, but words like civil war and secession seem to be what has them all fired up — with 48% both supporting and opposing Texas becoming its own independent nation (Salon).

In Georgia, back in April, state Senate Resolution 632 passed by a 43-1 vote; the resolution threatened to to secede from and even disband the United States citing Jeffersonian principles.

The strange thing is that most of the ‘states right, Jeffersonian principles, and civil war’ debate seems to be between Republicans, either for or against.

Now talk is cheap, but resolutions and continuous use of “brother against brother” language (GOP12) is dangerous; worthy of great thought and consideration as being more than a passing fad.

As Americans we need to think before we speak. The next attack on Fort Sumter, whether political or actual physical act, will not be so easy to end as Civil War v1.0.

Be careful of what you wish for. I’ve walked the battlefields of Fredericksburg, Manassas and Gettysburg. There are monuments everywhere to the valiant, the sometimes vain, and mostly to those that died for plans and strategies that someone else devised.

Best regards,
Bill4DogCatcher.com

Sources:

TownHall, Thomas Sowell, ‘The Republican Civil War’, http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/03/17/the_republican_civil_war

Down With Tyranny Blog, ‘Texas Republican Civil War Officially Kicks Off’, http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2009/08/texas-republican-civil-war-officially.html

Salon, ‘Half of Texas Republicans favor secession’, http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2009/04/23/texas_secession/

Atlanta Journal-Constitution, ‘Georgia Senate endorses radical idea’, http://www.ajc.com/opinion/content/opinion/stories/2009/04/16/bookmaned_0416.html and you can read the original “ADOPTED” version here: http://www.legis.state.ga.us/legis/2009_10/pdf/sr632.pdf

GOP12.com, “This is a civil war, brother against brother”, http://www.gop12.com/2009/08/this-is-civil-war-brother-against.html

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized