Did anyone else go torture their ears with Limbaugh's response? It was scary, stupid and - seriously - terrifying when he did that crazy-clown number for a few seconds. WHY DID I DO THAT?!
They need to stop giving Rush so much attention. He's not a politician for christ sakes! He's on the radio. They need to focus on the idiots in their party, working in Washington.
@MissFiFi: My family listens to him, and then when I ask them to change it because I find him offensive they say, "oh he's just an entertainer!" Then when they "discuss politics" they parrot his talking points, and vote accordingly. He has many listeners and an astonishing number of Americans like him. So he scares me, even if he's an idiot non-politician.
@Samanthrax is Sarcastic: My parents vote Republican but only because they are fiscal conservatives. When it comes to social issues, they are either a little more liberal or just don't care. They are very good people and are not gay-haters, they just like the idea of the government not spending much money.
There are good ones out there, but like most other things, only the crazies make news.
@Samanthrax is Sarcastic: Many, many old school Republicans are fiscal conservatives with a libertarian social bent. The party sold it's soul to the social conservatives to add to its voter base, but so many Republicans can't identify with that at all.
@kansasgirl: Yeah, our President isn't what I would consider to be pro-gay, as he's too busy trying to appeal to Republicans. Oh shit. I've said too much.
@SarahMC: ball-cutting cybersuccubus: I know it doesn't and I've tried telling them that, but I think they're stuck on what fiscal principles the Republicans claim.
They can claim they don't spend much, but that doesn't mean they follow through with it. My whole point was that I know some very good people who vote Republican.
@Samanthrax is Sarcastic: I know some decent republicans but the party is chasing them off. Republicans who are really republicans instead of socially conservative nincompoops are decent.
@pinkyBella: Yeah, my parents are good people too. But in order for someone to vote Republican in 2009, there's something about them that isn't right (whether it's greed or racism or jingoism or whatever).
@SarahMC: ball-cutting cybersuccubus: From my not-incredibly-informed vantage point up north of the US, it seems like the Republicans are the 'pro-rich' party, so people who care more about not paying taxes than the party's social conservatism vote for them.
@pinkyBella: i have many friends who aren't "our parents age" who feel the same way and vote republican, too. they're open minded about social issues but want the government out of their wallets. there are plenty of great people out there who identify themselves as conservatives or republicans, and shock! horror! many of those people are also gay! and out!
unbelievable, i know...if you believe everything that is fed to you by both sides of the political spectrum.
@SarahMC: ball-cutting cybersuccubus: The national Republican candidates are often very different than the local Republican candidates in the Northeast and other more liberal parts of the countries. Mayor Bloomberg (NYC) is the only Republican I've ever voted for and I'm pretty sure that he would have been running as a Democrat in Atlanta or Memphis. Susan Collins (ME) is another example.
@lijakaca: The pro-rich aspect of the party means that even though its policies benefit a teeny tiny percentage of Americans, people aspirationally identify as Republicans because they fancy themselves to be more upper crust than they actually are.
@rednrowdy: Exactly. I am liberal but I know a lot of people who are conservative (I'm in Georgia). Just because people automatically claim to be conservative doesn't mean they're anti-gay! I, like you, know some gay people who vote Republican. There are lots of differents sides and issues of both parties and it would do us all a lot of good to listen to each other, but so many people waste a lot of energy hating on the other side. It also doesn't help that the people that get the most attention are the crazy, insane ones.
@pinkyBella: Look, the modern Republican party survives on fear and hate. Saying that you side with that party because you think that it will help your wallet more in the long run is socially irresponsible at best, and I say this as the daughter of two Republicans.
@Samanthrax is Sarcastic: What party should they switch too? We have a 2 party system here. They'll vote and align themselves with whichever party (dem or repub) that they agree with more than the other. Or they'll vote according to which issues are more important to them.
@Samanthrax is Sarcastic: Exactly. Anyone who would vote Republican - considering how bigoted and hateful they've been of late - because they want to save $300 a year, is acting unethically.
@pinkyBella: The person denoted "fiscal conservative" doesn't really exist. Its a marketing ploy by the republicans to get people who don't really care enough about other's rights to vote for them, and are told that the socialists are taking their money away. Mostly pretty lazy voters in my experience.
@greengrey: There is more than one party, with only two in power. If people continue to vote along a two-party line, then that is all that will ever exist.
And socially liberal people that are voting Republican because they believe they are the more fiscally responsible party are doing their fellow humans a great disservice. I do not believe that financial issues are more important that social issues.
@Samanthrax is Sarcastic: I agree with you. But I think the point a lot of people on this thread are making is that the Republican party has changed dramatically over the last couple of decades. I think a lot of them are looking to the past and ignoring the shit that's going on right now and hoping that this is just a wacky phase.
@pinkyBella: If that is the point people on this thread are making, then I am missing it. It seems people are making excuses for the people in their lives that they care about but disagree with on a political level. I don't feel like making excuses for my parents- they are human and entitled to their opinion, but their opinion is one I cannot defend.
Furthermore, I wholeheartedly disagree that the Republican party has changed for the better over the past two decades. A lot of them are looking to the past, stuck in the past, and ignoring anything will get us absolutely nowhere.
@G Gordon Liddy: They have done a good job of carving an image on principles that they don't adhere to. And I think most voters are lazy, liberal or conservative.
@Samanthrax is Sarcastic: I didn't say they changed for the better. They are getting a whole lot worse. I was trying to make the same point as you that most of them are stuck in the past, I guess I didn't write it clearly.
@pinkyBella: They have; its been an extremely effective job, which is why they were in power for so many decades. But eventually, their ruse will be up. They managed to convince more lazy voters than Democrats, and won.
@Samanthrax is Sarcastic: Good examples: check out Charles Krauthammer. You might not jive with all of his opinions but his reasoning is first rate. What's more, he's not a Sean Hannity fuckwad and is a wheelchair-bound psychiatrist.
Seriously, though, check out his writings (WAPO). He also appears on Fox Allstars, but...I don't want to engage in torture.
@Samanthrax is Sarcastic: I dunno, I'd disagree and say I think Obama, privately at least, is pro-gay in the sense he would want them to have all the equal rights. His approach to gay marriage and don't ask don't tell have been pragmatic in that he knows he cannot quite yet push the agenda too quickly.
Granted, he said he thought marriage was to be between a man and woman, I really don't think he believes that. I believe it the position he took during the election was a pragmatic one so that it didn't become a distraction as it was in 2004. We can criticize him for this approach, but I am glad he was elected.
I am going to reserve judgment on his gay rights positions until once the economy gets back on tract.
@Tangy.Nihilista.Barcelona: He's the President. Privately isn't good enough. When the economy is fixed, I suspect he'll do very little to change that. Actually, I don't really think gay people should have to wait until the economy is fixed to be treated as human beings, now that I think about it.
@fulanita: My dad is Republican like that. Fiscally conservative and pro-military, but also libertarian on social issues (e.g. pro-choice, just doesn't care about gay marriage, "government shouldn't be in the bedroom" kind of thing). I can live with that.
@morninggloria: And then the pro-rich parade out clowns like Joe the Plumber and Sarah Palin to further solidify their appeal with the "the people," and get them to vote for politicians who implement policies that don't benefit them. And you have Limbaugh stirring up all the moral outrage of the social conservatives and obscuring what the issues really are. It's people like Limbaugh who make the poorer Republicans so filled with venom against the Libruls asking for more "handouts", when they work 40 hours a week and don't want to pay welfare queens to sit on their asses! Oh, and they'd never take handouts! Said to me with a straight face by someone who has been on food stamps.
And then the pro-rich benefit from these added votes, even though they probably don't give a damn about the social issues. Only now I think they are probably realizing what a monster they've created.
I think I shouted "BUT YOU'RE NOT IN THAT TAX BRACKET" to my Republican family 3 times a day during the election. Also: "you accept Social Security, Medicare, and have a adult daughter who will be on lifetime Social Security disability." Also, both my parents were government workers. But no, Limbaugh tells them to be outraged, so they are.
@G Gordon Liddy: After Rush Limbaugh said that crap about wanting Obama to fail, I was talking to my dittohead Grandpa about it, and he agreed saying, "I don't want a non-capitalist philosophy to succeed." I mean, we're in a recession, as long as there is some sense of fairness to the remedies, I don't understand why you want something to fail or succeed out of principle- the very fact that something you don't philosophically believe in could succeed should make you change your ideals. I mean, whatever it takes, tax cuts, infrastructure spending, subsidies, pure capitalism (toll roads r fun!), if it works, I'm for it.
Obviously the more liberal party may want more spending in general for social services than a "fiscal conservative", but at the end of the day, I think the real difference is what you're spending the money on. Both parties want to be efficient. But Bush spending tons on a pointless war, and starting out with the bank bailouts is not more fiscally conservative than Obama spending tons of money on the war and stimulus money.
Really, "fiscal conservatism" comes down to tax cuts for the rich.
@SarahMC: ball-cutting cybersuccubus: i think many republicans would prefer the government to be in their bedrooms rather than their wallets (odd, i know, but the precedent has been set), but i do not define myself as a republican or a democrat.
@KiddyKat: Forbes listed the top celebrities in charitable contributions and Limbaugh was in the top 5, along with Brangelina, Seinfeld, Oprah and Michael Jordan. Apparently he gives a boatload of money to military families.
My first thought was, "That's the LEAST he could do with that trashmouth, that motherfucker." My second thought was, "I hope Forbes actually checked those 990s."
@willwriteforfood: I couldn't care less how much money Rush gives to charity, considering that the more you give, you more you get to claim back on taxes.
I'm far more impressed by someone spending their time building houses for HfH or something. All these republicans judging how good they are by how much they give to charity is meaningless.
@mdmadph: Oh I'm not defending him at all. I think there's no redeeming someone who thinks it's a huge joke to make fun of a man with Parkinson's disease and claim he's faking. That is the lowest. I can't even look at his self-satisfied smirk and not want to punch him in the face.
@rd2uk: Meghan McCain is a gimmick. When pressed on any issue, she's all "ohhh, I don't know what I'm talking about! Economix R Hard!" Someone who is a self-professed moron should not be rewarded for their honesty with power or relevance. You're a moron? Thank you for being a big person and admitting that. I'll be over here, looking for someone who knows their shit.
@greengrey: Don't get me wrong; I admire her ability to say that things need to change and I admire her for telling women to shut the fuck up about her body, but she's EXTREMELY overexposed for being someone who admittedly doesn't know very much about "policy" and, like, "thinking." And I don't admire her for saying that the government should stay out of everyone's business and then saying that she's pro life and not understanding how asshole-tastic it is to advocate removing the rights of half the population to their own bodies.
@morninggloria: She's also only overexposed because of who her father is. She's like Paris Hilton, but with a little bit more substance and no sex tape.
It annoys me that M. McCain is given a platform (due to nepotism) that other (much more intelligent) people deserve.
@greengrey: thats true, but i think she's at least bringing a new side of the republican party to the public, and i dont see how thats a bad thing. hopefully since she's been speaking out, others will too.
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
But Wanda Sykes? He doesn't have the balls to go up against her. She'd tear him a new one in five minutes flat - and enjoy it.
05/14/09
05/14/09
Or was that just my grandma?
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
There are good ones out there, but like most other things, only the crazies make news.
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
They can claim they don't spend much, but that doesn't mean they follow through with it. My whole point was that I know some very good people who vote Republican.
I know I'm not articulating this very well.
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
My point is that just because you're not adament about being anti does not mean you're pro.
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
unbelievable, i know...if you believe everything that is fed to you by both sides of the political spectrum.
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
And socially liberal people that are voting Republican because they believe they are the more fiscally responsible party are doing their fellow humans a great disservice. I do not believe that financial issues are more important that social issues.
05/14/09
05/14/09
Furthermore, I wholeheartedly disagree that the Republican party has changed for the better over the past two decades. A lot of them are looking to the past, stuck in the past, and ignoring anything will get us absolutely nowhere.
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
Seriously, though, check out his writings (WAPO). He also appears on Fox Allstars, but...I don't want to engage in torture.
05/14/09
Granted, he said he thought marriage was to be between a man and woman, I really don't think he believes that. I believe it the position he took during the election was a pragmatic one so that it didn't become a distraction as it was in 2004. We can criticize him for this approach, but I am glad he was elected.
I am going to reserve judgment on his gay rights positions until once the economy gets back on tract.
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
And then the pro-rich benefit from these added votes, even though they probably don't give a damn about the social issues. Only now I think they are probably realizing what a monster they've created.
I think I shouted "BUT YOU'RE NOT IN THAT TAX BRACKET" to my Republican family 3 times a day during the election. Also: "you accept Social Security, Medicare, and have a adult daughter who will be on lifetime Social Security disability." Also, both my parents were government workers. But no, Limbaugh tells them to be outraged, so they are.
05/14/09
Obviously the more liberal party may want more spending in general for social services than a "fiscal conservative", but at the end of the day, I think the real difference is what you're spending the money on. Both parties want to be efficient. But Bush spending tons on a pointless war, and starting out with the bank bailouts is not more fiscally conservative than Obama spending tons of money on the war and stimulus money.
Really, "fiscal conservatism" comes down to tax cuts for the rich.
05/14/09
05/15/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
My first thought was, "That's the LEAST he could do with that trashmouth, that motherfucker." My second thought was, "I hope Forbes actually checked those 990s."
05/14/09
I'm far more impressed by someone spending their time building houses for HfH or something. All these republicans judging how good they are by how much they give to charity is meaningless.
05/14/09
05/14/09
They all want me to date their grandsons until they are dismayed to learn that I'm dating a Mexican and that I'm a Democrat who doesn't go to mass.
05/14/09
05/15/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
05/14/09
It annoys me that M. McCain is given a platform (due to nepotism) that other (much more intelligent) people deserve.
05/14/09
05/14/09