Rush: What's Up with Him?
We haven't discussed Rush in a couple of days, and boy, are we behind in the Rush news.
Here are the highlights:
1. Rush Realizes Potential Jurors May Be Influenced By His Remarks re Torture of Prisoners; Buys Ads in Local Papers
Yes, on Thurday Rush bought full-page ads in two local papers. Here's part of the Palm Beach News story about it:
Limbaugh said he bought the ads -- $19,773 just for the Post ad -- because his side of the story isn't being told on the editorial pages or reflected by its columnists.
"I, El Rushbo, have to buy my way into this paper in order to get some modicum of fairness," Limbaugh said on his radio show.
The column Limbaugh referred to weaved comments Limbaugh made about torture photos from Iraq with comments about his drug-prescription investigation.
Post Executive Editor Edward Sears said he finds it "amusing that opinions disturb Rush Limbaugh."
However, on Friday's radio program Rush said that he was Honored by Efforts to Discredit Him. He added:
I've also learned over the years that fighting back is not the right way to handle this. Just keep doing what you're doing. Just be who you are. Let that be the fight. If you start responding to these people that's all you're going to end up doing.
But of course, that credo only applies to jursidictions where he isn't being investigated for drug-related felonies. In those instances his credo is, "Keep doing what you're doing, but lie about it. Pretend to be somebody else, and spend lots of money to do it."
2. Media Matters Uses Rush's Words for Radio Campaign; Wingnuts Cry Foul
Last week David Brock's Media Matters launched an ad compaign featuring 30-second radio and TV spots comparing the Bush Administration's denunciation of the abuse of Iraqi prisoners with Rush's explanation that the sexual abuse was no more than a "Skull & Bones initiation" and that the jailers who committed the torture were just "having a good time."
But apparently using Rush's own words is not fair, because it makes Rush sound like a sociopathic thug -- and that would reflect badly on people who enjoying listening to him.
Here's some of what Brent Bozell's CyberNewsService had to say:
Efforts to discredit radio news commentator Rush Limbaugh escalated this week with a new radio ad campaign hammering Limbaugh for comments he made about the abuse of Iraqi inmates at the Abu Ghraib prison.
Still unresolved, meanwhile, is the Palm Beach County, Fla., prosecutor's investigation of Limbaugh for possible "doctor shopping" in connection with Limbaugh's admitted former addiction to painkillers.
The separate media and legal challenges to Limbaugh are part of a longstanding strategy employed by the political left, according to Mark Levin, director of the Landmark Legal Foundation and a supporter of Limbaugh.
"There's no question they've been trying to discredit Limbaugh for 15 years and it won't succeed," Levin added. "When these liberals attack Rush, they're attacking his audience."
So, those radio spots are attacking YOU, Mrs. and Mrs. Dittohead! They're saying that you enjoy listening to hateful, immoral drivel -- are you going to let them get away with that?
"It doesn't surprise me why the left and people like John Podesta would embrace [Brock] and use him as their front-man ... to attack Rush," Levin said. "I think you'll find in most of these areas - whether it's 527s (tax exempt political organizations), the already failed liberal radio network (Air America Radio), and now these phony think tanks and the watchdog groups, that Podesta and the other Clintonoids have their hand in this."
Aha! I knew that Hillary and her Shadow Force must be behind this (and everything else that happens in this country)! Thank God the brave men and women of the New Underground are fighting their never-ending battle for truth, justice, and Rush.
3. Kate O'Beirne Denounces Brock; Claims Rush Was Just Defending "Legitmate Coercive Interrogation Techniques"
So, the NRO must be part of the New Underground (even though you'd think they'd want to avoid keeping company with the likes of NewsMax, WorldNetDaily, and FreeRepublic), because Kate O'Beirne used her Friday NRO column to stick up for Rush and badmouth Brock.
On May 4, in the latest display of Rush's unerring sense of the sentiments of America's non-elites, Rush was ready to punish the guilty, knock off the self-flagellation, and get on with winning the war. He shared the unanimous condemnation of the guards' behavior, but feared an over-correction that would jeopardize lives if legitimate coercive interrogation techniques were abandoned. He said, "Now, yeah, it's bad. It's unfortunate, shouldn't have happened. It's over! We found out about it. We're going to do something about it. We're investigating it. Fine. Fini, exclamation point, it's over, get used to it!"
If only we had taken Rush's advice and realized it was over, think how much trouble could have been avoided. We could have just quietly given Abu Ghraib House a secret suspension for unauthorized hazing, and then we'd never had to worry about stuff like:
THE GRAY ZONE
New Yorker, NY - May 15, 2004
by SEYMOUR M. HERSH. The roots of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal lie not in the criminal inclinations of a few Army reservists but ...
And I guess it's nice that the non-elites, those 20% of respondents in that USA Today poll who said that the abuse didn't bother them much or at all, have a spokesman in Rush. IMHO, they would have been better off with Hannibal Lecter, but I imagine he wouldn't want to be associated with lowly pond scum like them.
No wonder these liberals are doomed in talk radio. They apparently think that a host has to repeat himself over and over to provide the perfect context for every remark he makes. During that three-hour broadcast Rush had made his condemnation of the detainee abuse clear. Brock's case rests on ignoring about two hours and 59 minutes of Rush's show.
Um, yeah -- because after you once make a strongly worded condemnation like "It's unfortunate, shouldn't have happened," then for days after you can say stuff like the abuse was "just like anything you'd see Madonna or Britney Spears do onstage," and nobody should be able to criticize you for it.
Rush's angry, frustrated critics discount how hard it is to make an outrageous charge against him stick. But, we listeners have spent years with him, we know him, and trust him. Rush is one of those rare acquaintances who can be defended against an assault challenging his character without ever knowing the "facts." We trust his good judgment, his unerring decency, and his fierce loyalty to the country he loves and to the courageous young Americans who defend her. For millions of us, David Brock is firing blanks against a bulletproof target.
Whoa, Kate doesn't even need to know the facts in order to defend Rush? She HAS drunk the Koolaid, hasn't she?
Anyway, next time you see her on TV or read her quoted somewhere, remember that Kate believes that there are some people whom you defend without knowing the facts, and assume that she does it all the time. Oh, and also keep in mind that she "trusts Rush's unerring decency," and realize just how delusional she is.
4. Rush Brought to Tears as Right Rallies 'Round Him
Per Media Matters, on Friday Rush opened his show by directing his listeners to Kate's NRO piece, and telling them of his response to her:
Limbaugh told listeners that O'Beirne e-mailed him her column the night before and urged "every journalist in America" to read it. Limbaugh was moved by the column and shared his response to O'Beirne with listeners: "I wrote her back -- I said if I could include teardrops in email, I would do it, but I can't."
Aw, isn't that sweet? If only Rush didn't have an alleged wife (and Kate a purported husband), I'd suggest they would make a perfect match.
5. Rush Thinks Women Want Him
In the transcript which his site titled "All Libs Really Need Are the Photos," Rush reads a couple of paragraphs from a Village Voice opinion piece which stated that, despite Rush's dismissal of it as an initiation prank, the abuse scandal isn't going away. The piece concluded: "Well, Torturegate proves conservatives can't suppress a major story by dominating talk radio, cable TV and the tabloid market. Not yet, anyway. Maybe we don't have to spend millions on alternative chat shows in order to make a point. What we really need are pictures of the pain"
Rush responds:
Am I vindicated or am I vindicated? This whole thing's driven by the press, because they've got an agenda and they are happy because this is the first time they've been in the lead they think since Watergate and it's all a bunch of pictures that did it, not the details of the story. They are trying to get their power back. They are trying to get their power back. They think that they have been overrun by me, conservative talk radio, websites, you name it, Fox News, and now they're feeling their oats again. They're all pumped up like Arnold Schwarzenegger was on steroids. They're out there -- Well, he's admitted it -- they're all excited about this, folks.
[...]
So, to this guy, I was really standing up for my cause with my quotes. I was really doing what the left ought to be doing for themselves instead of acting cowering and feared in the corner. (Big sigh.) (Big sigh.) This is better than sex.
A little side note here 'cause I'm not really that well versed on these matters. Some e-mails, I just checked on the break, from women who say they really resent this remark I made about all this "being better than sex," this latest incident here. Why would women say that? Somebody help me out here. Why would that upset... [Program observer interruption] Oh, they want to have -- you think they want to have sex with me? Oooooh! Oh! Oh.
Yes, if Rush says that "all this" (by which he presumably means "Me proving that the elites don't really care about the torture of Iraqi prisoners, and are just making a big deal about the photos of sexual abuse in order to get their power back") is "better than sex," and then some women reportedly email him to say they "resent this remark," then it can only mean that they want to have sex with him. I can see that ... well, can't, but I might could if I took a hefty dose of opiates.
The Marys (see comments under the blog entry about "Rush knowing liberals like his naked body") had speculated that Rush had turned to Baby Blues because he wasn't getting any at home. I think from this we can see that Rush just isn't into sex (at least, not with women), and that's presumably why his third wife left Rush months ago. So, maybe he and Kate O'Beirne can get together after all -- as long as she is willing to accept gloating over sadistic photos as conjugal relations.
6. Rush Complains That Nedra Pickler Does "Editorials As News"
Of course Atrios noted this months ago (and the next day, Rush called on his listeners to defend Nedra, because the A.P was getting complaints about her). But now that she's "editoralizing" in a way that might make George Bush look bad, Rush is up in arms about her not just sticking to the facts in news articles.
Apparently we've praised Nedra Pickler's honest reporting for the Associated Press too much. In order to get back in the good graces of her editors, she's done a little of the editorializing-as-news that the wires are infamous for in her latest dispatch from the Kerry campaign. Quote: "With ghastly images of abuse and decapitation out of Iraq, President Bush and John Kerry welcome any opportunity to focus on bread and butter issues on the home front."
I resent the hell out of this. What do you mean, "with ghastly images of abuse and decapitation out of Iraq"? There's moral equivalence right there! Who did the decapitation, Nedra? Bush wants to forget Nick Berg's death? How do you know that? Nedra Pickler has written an op-ed here, but this is supposed to be a news story. Kerry may "welcome any opportunity" to focus on something else, but that's the difference between the two.
Rush, Rush, Rush -- resent away, but if Bush's war in Iraq was going well, there wouldn't be any "ghastly images" of the abuse of Iraqi prisoners or of the decapitation of an American civilian. And then maybe his approval ratings wouldn't have sunk to below the 50% mark.
So, I'd say he would indeed "welcome any opportunity" to focus on less sensitive topics, like cutting taxes for decent heterosexual married couples and their freckle-faced, tow-headed children.
Bottom line: live by the Pickler, die by the Pickler.
3:29:07 AM 
|
