Rush Limbaugh's in trouble again, apparently. Once again, our friends at The Washington Post (what would I do without them?) in a front page headline clearly lay the problems at Tom DeLay's feet.
Here's the headline: "Delay Woes Prompt Rush to Refile Forms." Now, I didn't have time to read the article so I don't know what forms Rush, pardon the use of his first name since we've never met, has to refile...but I'll be it has something to do with the IRS. Shame on both of them.
And thank you, Washington Post!
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Ted
Ummm...I think in this case "Rush" means haste, hurry, push etc. as in "Delay Woes Prompt Push to Refile Forms."
May they both rot in hell, but thought you might want clarification
2 - Mark Schannon
Ted,
See, that's the difference between us. You read the article, I enjoy the headline.
Oh, you're probably right...but I like my interpretation better.
But did it take 3 posts to get your point across, lol?
3 - Big Time Patriot
I think Rush is refiling his prescription forms at the pharmacy, in hopes that they will fill them twice...
4 - Mark Schannon
Hmmm....hadn't thought of that. Drugs? Not the IRS. Very clever, Mr. Patriot. So Rush is back into the rush?
5 - RJ
Since we are smearing people in this thread, I wonder when the last time Bill and Hill actually had intercourse? You know, with each other?
6 - Mark Schannon
Smearing? Smearing? I'm insulted. I'm smeared!
Actually, I know the answer RJ, but I'm not at liberty to divulge.
He still has secret service protection.
7 - Big Time Patriot
Really, talking about Rush Limbaugh's drug trouble is smearing him? Didn't he admit his drug addiction on the air? Aren't we allowed to talk about (and even joke about) things that are true?
Or is a true thing about a Republican equivalent to a made up thing about a Democrat?
8 - RJ
"Or is a true thing about a Republican equivalent to a made up thing about a Democrat?"
What's the "made up thing about a Democrat" that you were referring to?
All I did was ask when the last time the Clintons, that loving all-American married couple, actually, you know, did it (with, you know, each other).
9 - Steve S
Really, talking about Rush Limbaugh's drug trouble is smearing him? Didn't he admit his drug addiction on the air?
BTP, don't forget that Mary Cheney has been publicly out of the closet for years, and was also employed as a liason between Coors and the gay community. But when Kerry mentioned her sexuality in the debate, Lynne Cheney called him a 'bad, bad man'.
It's the conservative way. You can be out and public about something, but if your opponent even speaks of it, you slam him for invading your privacy.
10 - Steve S
All I did was ask when the last time the Clintons, that loving all-American married couple, actually, you know did it (with, you know, each other).
Perhaps if your side can get Big Brother back into the bedroom, you can find out.
11 - RJ
I'm thinking that BJ Clinton and his wife Hitlery haven't had normal sexual relations in a long, LONG time.
And I'm also thinking this will be brought up, in some shape or form, in 2008...
12 - Steve S
I'm thinking you may be right (on the second sentence, it's none of my business about the first).
Given the extremist conservative way this country is going, I would be totally NOT surprised to see the opponents of the Democratic party attempt to use the marital relations of a couple in the privacy of their own home as political fodder.
13 - MCH
"Since we are smearing people in this thread..."
R.J. (Bobby) Elliott
Please, spare the whining, Bobby. You mean to tell me that it's OK for you to slime a decorated, dismembered combat veteran like Max Cleland by calling him a "gigantic thalidomide baby;" but you start cry-babying when someone mentions that your draft-dodging role model Rush Limbaugh illegally purchased black market prescriction drugs?
14 - Big Time Patriot
"I'm thinking that BJ Clinton and his wife Hitlery haven't had normal sexual relations in a long, LONG time.
And I'm also thinking this will be brought up, in some shape or form, in 2008..."
I can see this happening, perhaps if Newt Gingrich or Rudy Guliani runs against Hillary they can say, "Hey, I had sex during my marriage, sure it wasn't with MY WIFE, but what the heck". That will get the "values" voters something to ponder..
15 - Tec (hic) Kennedy
What an idiot! If this entry doesn't indicate the desperation of the left, nothing does. But then again, maybe he can't read at all.
16 - Nunya
You liberals make me sick! All of you need to get lives and jobs...like Rush has.
17 - Mark Schannon
I'm not sure to whom Tec is referring but I'll assume both he & Nunya are referring to my original post.
Ergo, I can only say: Get a life! When you become so wrapped up in your own self-righteousness and sense of supremacy that you lose the ability to find humor in the absurd, you also lose all legitimacy and credibility.
(By the way, did you notice that Rush's numbers are down, down, down? Probably means the liberal aristocracy that's really running this country has pulled the plug on some of his stations. Oh no. Such bad people.)
18 - Nunya
If only it were humorous, but, unfortunately, something that is actually humorous must be grounded in truth, which this was not. So it was just dumb.
And, even if Mr. Limbaugh's numbers actually are down, which I have not found to be conclusive, he, like I said previously, still works very hard and is very successful, more so than any lib commentators or you.
19 - Mark Schannon
Nunya, I have consciously refrained from personal attacks on this site because they're infantile and useless. However, in your case, I'm making an exception.
You're a moron! First, you know nothing about humor if you think it "must be grounded in truth." There are these things called "word games." (Look up "word" and "games" in the dictionary if you're confused at this point.)
To take a headline and shift the context to create absurdity is a "word game." That's all I did.
Second, you might not have found "conclusive" the ratings released earlier this week, but given your apparent low level of intelligence, you might not have been able to parse through the difficult two syllable sentences in the articles. You should always keep a dictionary by your side.
Third, a ditch digger works hard. Bernie Ebbers was very successful. I guess that means you get the hots for ditch diggers and Ebbers?
Fourth, a friendly bit of advice. Get thee to a shrink. "You liberals make me sick. All of you need to get lives and jobs, like Rush has." The unrestrained hostility and bitterness you reveal can't be good for you.
Life is too short and the world too small to create monsters where there are only people with different points of view. Or perhaps you can't distinguish between the monsters under your bed or in your closet & the real world? If so, get thee to a shrink.
Phew! Who let the meatballs in the doghouse?
20 - Nunya
Ha! The fact that you did see fit to launch a personal attack shows that I have stuck a nerve. The rest of what you said, basically, is meandering gibberish, representative of an unstable wacko. Usually these are the types of people that end up needing shrinks Mark.
Besides that, the transparency of your attack blasts your underlying meaning: you understand that you and your like are in the wrong, but are not yet able to get past your denial to fully recognize it. I understand, it will be very hard for you when you do, but will probably help you in the long run.
Okay, I should probably pay attention to my prof. now...I will not return to this site, as their is no use for it.
What a waste of perfectly good internet space! Oh well, this is America, which is precisely why you have the freedom to say whatever dribble you like...something you ingrates should consider when you spew your anti-American vitriol.
Adieu, have fun playing together.
21 - Mark Schannon
Hey, it worked! She's gone!
(I wonder if "unstable wacko" was an insult?)
22 - Nancy
I have a question I would like to see some answers (or at least decent speculation) on: in the past 10 years or so, the general mood/tendency of the public at large has been to the right, towards conservatism and (in some factions) extreme religiousity that doesn't seem to have been there before. In addition, we (all of us here in the good ol' US of A) seem to have definitely polarized more and more both politically and philosophically (religiously). My questions are, did we all really move to the right, or is this what we were told by the Media et al, and we believed them and became a self-fulfilling prophecy, so to speak? And if we DID do it ourselves, what caused these shifts: the rise of terrorism, economic instability, or cultural shifts? Please try to keep answers civil; I am sincerely interested in why this (what seems to me) sudden surge in conservatism. Many thanks.
23 - Dave Nalle
Babyboomers getting older, more mature, and more concerned about their future and their childrens future. That's enough of a swelling of new conservatives to turn the tide.
Dave
24 - Mark Schannon
You raise a good question, Nancy, and with all good questions, there are many possible answers. I wish I had the sources, but there have been stories suggesting that the Red/Blue split is more a media/political convenience than anything real. That's supported by the actual election data.
Some analysts think the U.S. is still pretty middle-of-the-road and traditionally has been. They see less polarization than the media do (and is seen on this site, lol).
However, as much as I hate to agree with Dave again, some people do grow more conservative with age, and we boomers are definitely aging. I, for one, maintain my staunch liberal/libertarian/confused positions on most things.
I think if you do a search on this subject, you'll find at some folks who think the media & the pols have overplayed the shift.
25 - Mark Schannon
Now you've got me wondering myself. I'm swamped right now, but I may do some research and post on that. Good subject for discussion.