Forget O'Rielly, Rush Has Spoken

[Exsubmariner]

Liberals,
Perpare to be infuriated.

linky (http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_090605/content/america_s_anchorman.guest.html)

I couldn't have said it better, but this pretty much echoes my views, and probably those of many others, in a nutshell.

I guess that's why Rush gets paid $50 million a year and Al Franken works for a bankrupt scam of a radio network.

X

[Broken Glass Can]

Well, he is "America's Anchorman." /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[Exsubmariner]

Enjoy

one more linky (http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_090605/content/truth_detector.guest.html)

[tolbiny]

So the democrats proposed the Dept of homeland security, lumped Fema in with it, and the republicans went along with it because "thats what bureacracies do" (and he totally ignores that a republican president signed it) and then blames the democrats. He also briefly goes of on a tangent blaming entitlement programs (without explaining how they are to blame at all, only stating that they are to blame).

He is right on one account that large bureacracies are generally bad and a smaller government agency with appropriate funding is needed.

My favorite part though is
"the largeness of these bureaucracies that causes paralysis. Nobody knows who's in charge."

Forgetting totally that there is 1 guy in charge of FEMA and He was given his job by some guy that Rush has never critisized in his life.

[Exsubmariner]

I think it's soooooo telling that's the only thing you got out of a couple thousand words.

[newfant]

[ QUOTE ]
I couldn't have said it better, but this pretty much echoes my views ...

[/ QUOTE ]

Imagine that. It must be nice to be a conservative. You never have to think.

So if we eliminated entitlement programs there would no longer be poor people? How does that work?

[thatpfunk]

i don't really care what junkies have to say

[newfant]

Nothing like having a hippocrite as the spokesperson for your party.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y109/IronBallsMcGinty/rush-limbaugh-parody.jpg

[Exsubmariner]

It must be nice to be a liberal.... all you have to say is "It's Bush's fault. He hates black people."

Obviously, I pay a mortgage on a substatial note, drive a nice car and live next to down town in a major city because I never had to work. It was all given to me. That's right. No one has to work, it's all a big lie of the man. What I have is from an entitlement program of a different sort. It's all about entitlement, that's what makes the world go round.

Puleeeze

[cadillac1234]

[ QUOTE ]
Liberals,
Perpare to be infuriated.

linky (http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_090605/content/america_s_anchorman.guest.html)

I couldn't have said it better, but this pretty much echoes my views, and probably those of many others, in a nutshell.

I guess that's why Rush gets paid $50 million a year and Al Franken works for a bankrupt scam of a radio network.

X

[/ QUOTE ]


His President created this $375 Billion dollar albatross called Dept. of Homeland Security in response 9/11 and to pad his 'Keeping America Safer' campaign...

I guess I'd be as confused as Rush if I ingested enough narcotics to make myself go deaf.

The crackhead down the street makes more sense than this idiot. It still amazes me someone will give this guy the time of day.

[Exsubmariner]

This doesn't follow any pattern of attacking your opponent's character rather than their ideas that I can tell.

[Exsubmariner]

It amazes me that the crack head down the street can't get paid $50 million a year by Air America.

Nuf said.

[cadillac1234]

[ QUOTE ]
It amazes me that the crack head down the street can't get paid $50 million a year by Air America.

Nuf said.

[/ QUOTE ]

Britney Spears gets paid money in America...

'nuff said

[newfant]

[ QUOTE ]
It amazes me that the crack head down the street can't get paid $50 million a year by Air America.

[/ QUOTE ]

The difference is that liberals are discerning listeners while conservatives will listen to anyone who spouts their viewpoint, even if that person is a hippocrite. If the crackhead down the street started spouting conservative nonsense, I'm sure you guys would make him rich.

If I had to guess, I'd say your two favorite talking heads are Rush and Dr. Laura. Rush is a drug addict who preaches about a war on drugs while Dr. Laura is a nympho who preaches abstinence. Do you see anything wrong with this picture?

[thatpfunk]

[ QUOTE ]
It must be nice to be a liberal.... all you have to say is "It's Bush's fault. He hates black people."

Obviously, I pay a mortgage on a substatial note, drive a nice car and live next to down town in a major city because I never had to work. It was all given to me. That's right. No one has to work, it's all a big lie of the man. What I have is from an entitlement program of a different sort. It's all about entitlement, that's what makes the world go round.

Puleeeze

[/ QUOTE ]

What does this have to do with anything?

The man is a junkie, why should I listen to him?

[superleeds]

from the link

[ QUOTE ]
what we have seen in New Orleans is first and foremost the utter failure of generation after generation after generation of the entitlement mentality. The lesson to be learned from this is just profound, folks. It is huge. We have learned that large bureaucracies that grow ever larger by the year cannot handle circumstances like this

[/ QUOTE ]

Why isn't the lesson that with a little more forethought, a little more preperation, a little more common sense and a little more realistic evaluation of risk, circumstances such as the aftermath of HK could be handled alot better? Has it anything to do with people admitting some responsibility? Is it because then we can't blame the poor?

[ QUOTE ]
I guess that's why Rush gets paid $50 million a year and Al Franken works for a bankrupt scam of a radio network

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah probably. No one likes a difficult question, just an easy answer.

[Exsubmariner]

I don't listen to the Dr Laura show. Her target audience is people who screw up their lives and relationships. I'm not suprised you listen.

The 2 radio programs I listen too most are Rush and Micheal Savage, in point of fact.

[Exsubmariner]

Britney Spears, I bet, is better looking than your girlfriend and more talented, too. BTW, is the crackhead down the street your girlfriend?

X

[Exsubmariner]

It was a substance abuse problem, brother. Where is your empathy?

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
Liberals, prepare to be infuriated.
linky (http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_090605/content/america_s_anchorman.guest.html)

I couldn't have said it better, but this pretty much echoes my views, and probably those of many others, because Rush is a nut.

I guess that's why Rush gets paid $50 million a year and Al Franken works for less.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

[Dotson]

Anyone who takes pride in having a drug addict represent their views is an idiot. The fact that a drug addict is the voice of a significant section of the conservative movement is very sad.

[Exsubmariner]

[ QUOTE ]
Why isn't the lesson that with a little more forethought, a little more preperation, a little more common sense and a little more realistic evaluation of risk, circumstances such as the aftermath of HK could be handled alot better? Has it anything to do with people admitting some responsibility? Is it because then we can't blame the poor?

[/ QUOTE ]

That is the lesson. Exactly. We can't blame the poor because it was the responsibility of the people who THEY ELECTED to do all that planning and have all that foresight you are talking about. The lesson is that when it is most needed, the big we're gonna take care of you government will fail. People must be accountable for themselves and for helping each other. Not relying on corrupt and incompetitent LA Mayors and Governors who don't know how to read a Comprehensive Emergency Management Paln.

X

[tolbiny]

There isn't anything else in there.
Let me go paragraph by paragraph- and i will use small words so that you can understand, you warthog faced buffon (that last part is a joke btw).

Paragraph 1-
"What we have seen in New Orleans -- and we have not seen it in Mississippi, and we have not seen it in Alabama -- what we have seen in New Orleans is first and foremost the utter failure of generation after generation after generation of the entitlement mentality."

This is the meat of this paragraph- he ignores the fact that NO is the only big city to get a direct hit from the hurricane, and the only one below sea level with its prblems with levies ect- and he does not once state which entitlement programs specifically are to blame- and how they are to blame.

"We are also looking here at utter incompetence, total incompetence from the mayor of New Orleans and the governor of Louisiana. We know this now. We know there was an utter failure to execute an evacuation plan that was long in place."

Nothing yet to back it up, just an attack.

Paragraph 2-
"We know that none of these people, the poor people of New Orleans who had no way out of there on their own, we know that no effort was made to move them before the storm happened. No effort whatsoever was made at the local and state level. You've all seen the pictures of the buses, the school buses and the municipal buses that are flooded and ruined"

No effort is made here to describe how 300,000 people were to be moved within 24 hrs on ~300 buses- and WHERE they were supposed to be moved to. REmember that there is a big ass hurricane coming- if you move people out of homes and buildings but don't put them somewhere that big ass hurricane will still hit them with winds over 100 mph, and heavy rains. They wouldn't have been any better off unless you moved them hundreds of miles inland and give them shelter. The logistical problems here would not be addressed by a bunch of buses. If Rush has a legitimate beef about the process he needs to lay out what should have been done as opposed to pointing at a few pictures and saying- "look incompetant corrupt democrats".

"20,000 people in one day."- here he talks about how the US military - the one organization with the capablility was able to evacuate 20,000 people in one day. These people were all in one place and the military had a days plainning before they moved in to start the evacuation- and it was still a massive effort ot evacuate 20,000 people inone day. clearly the military could have evacuated 300,000 people in a day and a half- while fighting the traffic of the 1.3 million people who were also fleeing athe area at the same time.


"It was the Democrats that proposed a new federal Department of Homeland Security, and I've got the sound bite. I want to go on record as saying this is not the way to handle this. Make this an even larger government, create an even bigger bureaucracy? Then they faulted FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, into the Department of Homeland Security. Republicans went along with the Democrat idea because that's the natural tendency of bureaucracies"

Its the democrat's fault, well and a little the republicans' as well, but mostly the deomcrats (who signed the bill into law... he forgets to mention- but if its a mistake shouldn't he be held accountable to some degree as well?)

"Nobody knows who's in charge."
Who is hte head of FEMA? Who appointed him? There was someone in charge, and he failed miserably. You did a heck of a job Brownie.

Paragraph 3-
"If it's a Republican president, he's going to get the blame. Why do you think there's no blame of the local incompetence from the mayor and the governor? Because they are Democrats. They have run that state. You know, Frist called for investigations. Bill Frist was the first to call for a congressional look-see into this, and guess who's not happy about that? Democrats. Democrats are not happy about this because any legitimate investigation is going to have to focus on what happened in Louisiana, which has been run by Democrats for all of these years, and it's been run, particularly New Orleans, not only with an entitlement mentality, it's corrupt."

No evidence for any of this, its called a talking point. My side is good, the other bad. Just trust me on this one, is all he says here- in other words its worthless posturing and no content.

Here's my favorite part
""You know, the funniest bumper sticker I've ever seen, David Duke was running against Edwin Edwards for governor, and the bumper stickers around town read: 'Vote for the Crook. It's important.'" Meaning Edwin Edwards."

Hmmm a crook- or a former member of the KKK. What a choice, but he laughs at those who would rather be lead by a crook than an open racist- haha, you dumb blacks, why wouldn't you vote for the guy who belonged to an organization that endorses the murder of blacks.

Paragraph 4-
"Now, I don't know if people are going to be willing to go this far and say, "Yeah, we've got a corrupt state and had a corrupt state for a long time, we have an entitlement mentality down there. How you can blame anything that happened there--"'

Ok- but again just a vague reference to "the entilement mentality" without naming why or how it was involved in this crisis.

The rest of the paragraph simply says- GW is good, those liberals can't bring him down. Then he attacks cindy sheehan for no apparent reason.


Paragraphs 5 and 6 are more of the same - the local government failed, the bureacracy failed, its all their fault (he also throws in a hilary bashing). Without pointing out what should have been done, without ever- not once- addressing the inability of the head of FEMA to coordinate activities when he was given control- the turning away of donations of water from Wal mart.
what exactly am i supposed to take away from this crap? Please tell me what i am missing?

[Exsubmariner]

That's cute. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[adios]

Let's attack the messenger instead of his message. C'mon if Limbaugh's arguments are so weak then point them out. Tobiny and Superleeds have pointed out where they feel his arguments are weak why don't you?

[newfant]

Are you also concerned about corporate welfare? Does the fact that Haliburton is awarded government contracts without a bidding process bother you? Do you think that repeal of the estate tax is a good thing because then children of the rich will never have to work? Or, do you ignore these issues because Rush never mentions them?

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
The lesson is that when it is most needed, the big we're-gonna-take-care-of-you government will fail. People must be accountable for themselves and for helping each other.

[/ QUOTE ]

Emergencies such a hurricane 5 require organised and concerted efforts which can only come about collectively, through the community and its elected or appointed leadership.

Therefore, the choice is clear : Americans must

A - take better care of the government and its agencies (fund 'em, man 'em, organize 'em, etc) and accept that corruption and waste * goes with the territory when you have big organisations (eg mayor's office, governor's office, police, Nat'l Guard, FEMA, etc),

or

B. - make it the United States' official public policy that it's everyone out for himself!

--------

* Absolutist or maximalist objectives are usually utopian, if not moronic : Total elinination of waste or corruption is impossible, in general. The objective should be to minimize them as much as possible. So, sack its leaders and re-organize the agencies that failed you. Don't dimantle them altogether! Not unless you are ready to go with option B.

[superleeds]

[ QUOTE ]
That is the lesson

[/ QUOTE ]

It won't be learnt.

[ QUOTE ]
We can't blame the poor because it was the responsibility of the people who THEY ELECTED to do all that planning and have all that foresight you are talking about.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you believe the poor elect anyone your 5.

[ QUOTE ]
Not relying on corrupt and incompetitent LA Mayors and Governors who don't know how to read a Comprehensive Emergency Management Paln.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK. Explain to me why smaller government, less centralised planners will read it. Are they less susceptable to corruption? Will they not steal from Peter to pay Paul?

[Exsubmariner]

[ QUOTE ]
Nothing yet to back it up, just an attack

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that the thousands of bodies rotting in the flood water of NO pretty much back it up.

[ QUOTE ]
No effort is made here to describe how 300,000 people were to be moved within 24 hrs on ~300 buses- and WHERE they were supposed to be moved to. REmember that there is a big ass hurricane coming- if you move people out of homes and buildings but don't put them somewhere that big ass hurricane will still hit them with winds over 100 mph, and heavy rains. They wouldn't have been any better off unless you moved them hundreds of miles inland and give them shelter. The logistical problems here would not be addressed by a bunch of buses. If Rush has a legitimate beef about the process he needs to lay out what should have been done as opposed to pointing at a few pictures and saying- "look incompetant corrupt democrats".


[/ QUOTE ]

There were DAYS. Not 24 hours. People knew this hurricane was headed straight for NO days in advance. I submit those busses could have moved people if they were used days in advance. You're right, it couldn't be done in 24 hours. Nothing was even attempted.

[ QUOTE ]
Its the democrat's fault, well and a little the republicans' as well, but mostly the deomcrats (who signed the bill into law... he forgets to mention- but if its a mistake shouldn't he be held accountable to some degree as well?)


[/ QUOTE ]

I have to agree on this point. It wasn't the failure of one party or another, but the whole apparatus of government. I can't assign any blame to the US military at all because they are subordiante to the civilian authority. If the civilian authority waits until way too late to give them marching orders, there is nothing they can do.

[ QUOTE ]
turning away of donations of water from Wal mart

[/ QUOTE ]

This is something I have a hard time with, as well. I think FEMA did this because they are essentially bureaucrats who are jealous of their power and turned away a private operation because they felt it would make them look bad.

Lay the partisanship aside. The core problem is the failure of all the agencies that had jurisdiction to act here. Why did they fail? Because the heads of the agencies are political appointees, placed there by elected officials who are at best in office for dubious reasons, not out of a sense of duty or because they are qualified (that statement includes the CIC, BTW).

This is a shining example of what is wrong with our government and why the voters need to exercise the rights given to them in the Constitution of the United States and VOTE to CHANGE things. Not just in one party, but in both. I hope for the sake of the country and the things that do make it great, this will happen.

X

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
He also briefly goes of on a tangent blaming entitlement programs (without explaining how they are to blame at all, only stating that they are to blame).

[/ QUOTE ]

I think Limbaugh's reasoning (I don't necessarily agree with it) is that the entitlement legacy that got Louisianna politicians (including New Orleans) elected to serve the impoverished citizens of New Orleans, failed these same people at a time when they were dependent on government the most. If Republicans would have been in charge this would have never happened according to Limbaugh.

[tolbiny]

[ QUOTE ]

Quote:
Nothing yet to back it up, just an attack



I think that the thousands of bodies rotting in the flood water of NO pretty much back it up.

[/ QUOTE ]

What i meant was that he supplies no evidence to support his views as to who was at fault- not that there weren't problems.




[ QUOTE ]
There were DAYS. Not 24 hours. People knew this hurricane was headed straight for NO days in advance. I submit those busses could have moved people if they were used days in advance. You're right, it couldn't be done in 24 hours. Nothing was even attempted.


[/ QUOTE ]

There weren't really days- i believe that it was only a tropical storm or a level 1 hurricane when it moved into the gulf- it wasn't a level 5 until less than 36 hours before it hit NO.
But i am not trying to give the locals a pass- i am trying to point out the inconsistancies in Rush's approach to dealing out blame (which is most certainly is doing).

[Exsubmariner]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you also concerned about corporate welfare?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. I am. I think that corporations in this country, being the largest repository or wealth in the economy and being in the position to benefit from the economy the most should in fact pay the lions share of the tax burden. Not individual citizens.

[ QUOTE ]
Does the fact that Haliburton is awarded government contracts without a bidding process bother you?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. You are overlooking the fact that Haliburton is the ONLY company of it's kind. It has no competitors. I have some good friends who work there.

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think that repeal of the estate tax is a good thing because then children of the rich will never have to work?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that the repeal of the estate tax is a good thing. Children of the very rich will never have to work with or without it. Yes, I'm jealous of that, too. However, middle class children will have less debt & more capital. They could possibly have enough inheritence after just one generation to start small businesses that could provide employment to poor people. This can only be economically beneficial.

I am not brain dead because I lean conservative.

X

[Exsubmariner]

"A - take better care of the government and its agencies (fund 'em, man 'em, organize 'em, etc) and accept that corruption and waste * goes with the territory when you have big organisations (eg mayor's office, governor's office, police, Nat'l Guard, FEMA, etc)"

I think you have to accept waste. I don't think you have to accept corruption.

[vulturesrow]

I dont think Cyrus meant you have to accept corruption, you have to accept the fact that is going to happen. That isnt to say you shouldnt root it out wherever possible.

[Exsubmariner]

[ QUOTE ]
If you believe the poor elect anyone your 5.


[/ QUOTE ]

Are you saying that it's not the people who vote that count, but the people who count the votes? Does this mean that the Democrats in LA have been rigging elections? GASP!

[ QUOTE ]
OK. Explain to me why smaller government, less centralised planners will read it. Are they less susceptable to corruption? Will they not steal from Peter to pay Paul?

[/ QUOTE ]

Bureaucrats of any kind will always rob Peter to pay Paul. However, less bureaucrats = more accountability because there is less blame to go around. Less bureaucrats = less corrupt for the same reasons. When you look at an agency with 5 people rather than 100 it is easier to figure out who screwed up and fire them, as opposed to firing no one and hiring more people so the 100 can all get promoted. Same thing with corruption. Only 5 people? Hmmmmm... who's getting the payoff?

If the 5 people want a job tomorrow, they had better be able to execute their office, because it won't be hard to find replacements when they screw up.

These assertions are backed up by my personal experiences working in both large and small groups. Smaller groups forced me to perform better and work harder out of sheer necessity. This is why small groups of people are much more successful than large ones. Would point to Apple and Xerox at the beginning of the home PC era as historical evidence of this.

X

[Easy E]

Has Rush posited his own solution for the future, to replace the abolished entitlement government?

Rush is sounding more and more Libertarian every day...

[tylerdurden]

[ QUOTE ]
Emergencies such a hurricane 5 require organised and concerted efforts which can only come about collectively, through the community and its elected or appointed leadership.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't now where you get the idea that only elected or appointed leadership can provide this, because what we've seen from elected and appointed leadership is disorganized, unconcerted, and half-assed effort.

These arguements are the same used by those who wanted command economies.

[ptmusic]

[ QUOTE ]

I have to agree on this point. It wasn't the failure of one party or another, but the whole apparatus of government....
Lay the partisanship aside. The core problem is the failure of all the agencies that had jurisdiction to act here. Why did they fail? Because the heads of the agencies are political appointees, placed there by elected officials who are at best in office for dubious reasons, not out of a sense of duty or because they are qualified (that statement includes the CIC, BTW).

This is a shining example of what is wrong with our government and why the voters need to exercise the rights given to them in the Constitution of the United States and VOTE to CHANGE things. Not just in one party, but in both.
X

[/ QUOTE ]

These non-partisan statements of yours are exactly what is missing from Limbaugh's rants. In fact, Limbaugh is the epitome of partisanship.

Yes, there are enormous problems, but why place all blame on Democrats and liberals and zero blame on Bush, Republicans, and conservatives? There's no need to attack the man: his message is weak.

-ptmusic

[ptmusic]

[ QUOTE ]
There isn't anything else in there.
Let me go paragraph by paragraph- and i will use small words so that you can understand, you warthog faced buffon (that last part is a joke btw).

Paragraph 1-
"What we have seen in New Orleans -- and we have not seen it in Mississippi, and we have not seen it in Alabama -- what we have seen in New Orleans is first and foremost the utter failure of generation after generation after generation of the entitlement mentality."

This is the meat of this paragraph- he ignores the fact that NO is the only big city to get a direct hit from the hurricane, and the only one below sea level with its prblems with levies ect- and he does not once state which entitlement programs specifically are to blame- and how they are to blame.

"We are also looking here at utter incompetence, total incompetence from the mayor of New Orleans and the governor of Louisiana. We know this now. We know there was an utter failure to execute an evacuation plan that was long in place."

Nothing yet to back it up, just an attack.

Paragraph 2-
"We know that none of these people, the poor people of New Orleans who had no way out of there on their own, we know that no effort was made to move them before the storm happened. No effort whatsoever was made at the local and state level. You've all seen the pictures of the buses, the school buses and the municipal buses that are flooded and ruined"

No effort is made here to describe how 300,000 people were to be moved within 24 hrs on ~300 buses- and WHERE they were supposed to be moved to. REmember that there is a big ass hurricane coming- if you move people out of homes and buildings but don't put them somewhere that big ass hurricane will still hit them with winds over 100 mph, and heavy rains. They wouldn't have been any better off unless you moved them hundreds of miles inland and give them shelter. The logistical problems here would not be addressed by a bunch of buses. If Rush has a legitimate beef about the process he needs to lay out what should have been done as opposed to pointing at a few pictures and saying- "look incompetant corrupt democrats".

"20,000 people in one day."- here he talks about how the US military - the one organization with the capablility was able to evacuate 20,000 people in one day. These people were all in one place and the military had a days plainning before they moved in to start the evacuation- and it was still a massive effort ot evacuate 20,000 people inone day. clearly the military could have evacuated 300,000 people in a day and a half- while fighting the traffic of the 1.3 million people who were also fleeing athe area at the same time.


"It was the Democrats that proposed a new federal Department of Homeland Security, and I've got the sound bite. I want to go on record as saying this is not the way to handle this. Make this an even larger government, create an even bigger bureaucracy? Then they faulted FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, into the Department of Homeland Security. Republicans went along with the Democrat idea because that's the natural tendency of bureaucracies"

Its the democrat's fault, well and a little the republicans' as well, but mostly the deomcrats (who signed the bill into law... he forgets to mention- but if its a mistake shouldn't he be held accountable to some degree as well?)

"Nobody knows who's in charge."
Who is hte head of FEMA? Who appointed him? There was someone in charge, and he failed miserably. You did a heck of a job Brownie.

Paragraph 3-
"If it's a Republican president, he's going to get the blame. Why do you think there's no blame of the local incompetence from the mayor and the governor? Because they are Democrats. They have run that state. You know, Frist called for investigations. Bill Frist was the first to call for a congressional look-see into this, and guess who's not happy about that? Democrats. Democrats are not happy about this because any legitimate investigation is going to have to focus on what happened in Louisiana, which has been run by Democrats for all of these years, and it's been run, particularly New Orleans, not only with an entitlement mentality, it's corrupt."

No evidence for any of this, its called a talking point. My side is good, the other bad. Just trust me on this one, is all he says here- in other words its worthless posturing and no content.

Here's my favorite part
""You know, the funniest bumper sticker I've ever seen, David Duke was running against Edwin Edwards for governor, and the bumper stickers around town read: 'Vote for the Crook. It's important.'" Meaning Edwin Edwards."

Hmmm a crook- or a former member of the KKK. What a choice, but he laughs at those who would rather be lead by a crook than an open racist- haha, you dumb blacks, why wouldn't you vote for the guy who belonged to an organization that endorses the murder of blacks.

Paragraph 4-
"Now, I don't know if people are going to be willing to go this far and say, "Yeah, we've got a corrupt state and had a corrupt state for a long time, we have an entitlement mentality down there. How you can blame anything that happened there--"'

Ok- but again just a vague reference to "the entilement mentality" without naming why or how it was involved in this crisis.

The rest of the paragraph simply says- GW is good, those liberals can't bring him down. Then he attacks cindy sheehan for no apparent reason.


Paragraphs 5 and 6 are more of the same - the local government failed, the bureacracy failed, its all their fault (he also throws in a hilary bashing). Without pointing out what should have been done, without ever- not once- addressing the inability of the head of FEMA to coordinate activities when he was given control- the turning away of donations of water from Wal mart.
what exactly am i supposed to take away from this crap? Please tell me what i am missing?

[/ QUOTE ]

rushpwn.

-ptmusic

[ptmusic]

[ QUOTE ]
Has Rush posited his own solution for the future, to replace the abolished entitlement government?

Rush is sounding more and more Libertarian every day...

[/ QUOTE ]

He's also sounding like his view of liberals, as in "These liberal wackos constantly criticize, but they have no ideas or solutions of their own!"

-ptmusic

[STLantny]

I didnt take time to read everything, will do so later, but the people who are discounting Rush because of a drug addiction, should look up the term Logical Fallacy, specifically, Personal Attack. Attack his claims, not his character.

[tolbiny]

Rush's comments are nearly always his opinions, and very rarely do i see them backed up with documented facts/links/evidence. In this areticle he implicitly asks the reader to trust him in several instances- using his well documented history of hypocrisy (ie pushing for stronger harsher anti drug laws and then "escaping" to a clinic when his own illegal actions surface) to discredit him is a perfectly valid way of attacking his arguments untill he provids a more in depth background of the evidence that leads him to these claims.

[Autocratic]

[ QUOTE ]
I didnt take time to read everything, will do so later, but the people who are discounting Rush because of a drug addiction, should look up the term Logical Fallacy, specifically, Personal Attack. Attack his claims, not his character.

[/ QUOTE ]

They're about equal in worth.

Also, the OP actually used his post to attack Al Franken's salary (while inflating Rush's by about $20m). Weird, huh?

[ QUOTE ]
I didnt take time to read everything, will do so later, but the people who are discounting Rush because of a drug addiction, should look up the term Logical Fallacy, specifically, Personal Attack. Attack his claims, not his character.

[/ QUOTE ]


Actually, attacking a person's character is often legitimate when the person is one who lectures about morality and politics. Rush is a flagrant hypocrite and many of the attacks made against him are pertinent. An ad hominem attack against a mathematician who publishes a new proof might be a fallacy, for the facts speak for themselves. However, in cases where someone gives his opinion about mores etc., his character is of the utmost relevance and importance. So fire away.

Since when does Rush not attack his opponent's character?! He is the king of the unfounded personal attack. Bloody hell. You picked a hell of a time to fight the "Logical Fallacy" crusade.

Limbaugh blows (http://www.rushlimbaughonline.com/)

Rush, a true man of character....

"After dropping out of Southeast Missouri State University and getting his draft waiver, he moved to Pittsburgh and became a Top 40 music radio disc jockey on station WIXZ." --Wikipedia

What a patriot!!

[superleeds]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you saying that it's not the people who vote that count, but the people who count the votes? Does this mean that the Democrats in LA have been rigging elections? GASP!

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm saying that the candidates themselves are candidates thanks almost exclusively to the rich and powerful. And the more powerful the office, the richer the benefactors.

[ QUOTE ]
Bureaucrats of any kind will always rob Peter to pay Paul. However, less bureaucrats = more accountability because there is less blame to go around. Less bureaucrats = less corrupt for the same reasons. When you look at an agency with 5 people rather than 100 it is easier to figure out who screwed up and fire them, as opposed to firing no one and hiring more people so the 100 can all get promoted. Same thing with corruption. Only 5 people? Hmmmmm... who's getting the payoff?

[/ QUOTE ]

I accept what your saying as far as overstaffing is concerned but that's not my problem with your reasoning. If a job needs a 1,000 people, it needs a 1,000 people. Not 500 as I think you would like to see and not 2,000 as I think you would like me to see. I would argue that 1,000 under 1 umbrella is better than 200 under 5. They will both have waste and inefficencies in different areas but at least I only have one chief /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
If the 5 people want a job tomorrow, they had better be able to execute their office, because it won't be hard to find replacements when they screw up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Unless, off course, they work for Bush /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif (I couldn't resist)

[ QUOTE ]
These assertions are backed up by my personal experiences working in both large and small groups. Smaller groups forced me to perform better and work harder out of sheer necessity.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've also worked in both environments and agree with your observations, but I think that some tasks are better handled by big central organisations rather than a hotchpotch of different specialists. After all, its the way business works. The company oversees the departments, I mean who says I work for Human Resources, IBM division.

[ QUOTE ]
This is why small groups of people are much more successful than large ones. Would point to Apple and Xerox at the beginning of the home PC era as historical evidence of this.

[/ QUOTE ]

But this isn't necessarily so. Take Apple, it OS is vastly superior to Windows (which is basically a 4 year old copy of Apple's) but because of bad management decisions initially, it is woefully under-represented in the market, in respect to home PC's themselves and additional add-on software.

Getting back to the origional point of the post. The problem with Limbaugh's peice, as others have noted, is he is just pointing fingers and saying this would have gone much smoother without a huge meddling bureaucracy. OK fine. Now tell me what should happen Rush? The silence is deafening. How can you not hear?

[Exsubmariner]

[ QUOTE ]
But this isn't necessarily so. Take Apple, it OS is vastly superior to Windows (which is basically a 4 year old copy of Apple's) but because of bad management decisions initially, it is woefully under-represented in the market, in respect to home PC's themselves and additional add-on software.


[/ QUOTE ]

I should have said accomplishing their goals instead of being successful. Being sucessful here is ambiguous. Apple set about trying to create some kick ass software and did it. They did not have the goal of selling the most, which is what microsoft did. Of course, piggy backing on the largest maker of PC's coattails factors into the equation as well.

[ QUOTE ]
Getting back to the origional point of the post. The problem with Limbaugh's peice, as others have noted, is he is just pointing fingers and saying this would have gone much smoother without a huge meddling bureaucracy. OK fine. Now tell me what should happen Rush? The silence is deafening. How can you not hear?

[/ QUOTE ]

You know, the other side is saying "this would have gone better if Kerry was President." They have the same problem. Just point and blame and don't offer up any real alternatives. I fear, in the end, what's going to happen is more bureaucracy is going to get created and every bureaucrat who screwed the pooch on this one is going to get promoted.

This is a wake up call for the American voter that you can't trust either side to look out for your interests. If people fall in line with one side or the other, they are simply puppets of the system that hatched this disaster to begin with. Maybe more people will listen to pundits on both sides and decide what the truth is for themselves and elect people who are capable of doing the same.

[superleeds]

[ QUOTE ]
You know, the other side is saying "this would have gone better if Kerry was President." They have the same problem. Just point and blame and don't offer up any real alternatives. I fear, in the end, what's going to happen is more bureaucracy is going to get created and every bureaucrat who screwed the pooch on this one is going to get promoted.

This is a wake up call for the American voter that you can't trust either side to look out for your interests. If people fall in line with one side or the other, they are simply puppets of the system that hatched this disaster to begin with. Maybe more people will not listen to pundits on both sides and learn, (or at least be able to comprehend and make an informed decision on the different views), what the truth is for themselves and elect people who are capable of doing the same

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

[Exsubmariner]

Wow, a Nash Clown post that isn't a troll. I'm impressed. Did you forget to switch screen names?

Seriously, though, liberals don't have a corner on the morality or politics pontification market themselves. In fact, Rush continually attacks Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi (sp?), Bill and Hillary Clinton, and many other Democrats on the very same grounds you just attacked his character on. Drug use, alcoholism, taking bribes, embezzlement, drowning your secretary, etc, etc.

I find it interesting that those who attack the character of someone else on the grounds that character attack adds no substance to the discussion are in fact adding no substance to the discussion.

[Exsubmariner]

Well said, thanks for the fix.

[ QUOTE ]

Seriously, though, liberals don't have a corner on the morality or politics pontification market themselves. In fact, Rush continually attacks Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi (sp?), Bill and Hillary Clinton, and many other Democrats on the very same grounds you just attacked his character on. Drug use, alcoholism, taking bribes, embezzlement, drowning your secretary, etc, etc.



[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for confirming that personal attacks on Rush are merited. Turnabout is fair play.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't now where you get the idea that only elected or appointed leadership can provide this, because what we've seen from elected and appointed leadership is disorganized, unconcerted, and half-assed effort.
<font color="white">. </font>
These arguements are the same used by those who wanted command economies.

[/ QUOTE ]
You are jumping to conclusions. Plus, you seem to be somewhat short-term-results oriented in your thinking: Agencies failed N.Orleans --&gt; All agencies are doomed to fail. Is that typical of Rothbard fans ?

Anarcho-capitalism has things almost right. But it's a big "almost". Its fans have a healthy antipathy towards state and government leviathans but they go overboard when they project an economic theory onto every single aspect of life. Catastrophes such a hurricane 5 passing through a city can be dealt properly only with an organised and concerted effort by the endangered society.

Free market has nothing to do with it. It's actually quite irrelevant.

"Command economies" are indeed much worse performers than "free economies" but a social emergency cannot be solved by no damn Invisible Hand! That's not even Economics, that's Astrology.

[tylerdurden]

[ QUOTE ]
Catastrophes such a hurricane 5 passing through a city can be dealt properly only with an organised and concerted effort by the endangered society.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, what you need is useful, productive, effective effort. Organized and concerted effort is not necessarily any of those. Do not confuse effort with results - that's dangerously close to the labor theory of value.

[ QUOTE ]
Free market has nothing to do with it. It's actually quite irrelevant.

[/ QUOTE ]

The free market is more than just the buying and selling of goods in mundane, day-to-day trade. It is the whole of individual interactions of all types when those individuals are unhindered by government dictatation.

[ QUOTE ]
"Command economies" are indeed much worse performers than "free economies" but a social emergency cannot be solved by no damn Invisible Hand!

[/ QUOTE ]

Why not? There is a distinct need. There are finite resources (both labor and material) to be consumed. These resources have alterative uses. Why is a top-down allocation of these resources so right in this situation when it's so wrong every other time?

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
what you need is useful, productive, effective effort. Organized and concerted effort is not necessarily any of those.

[/ QUOTE ]
I have no problem with your choice of terms. Alright, we are both after "Useful, Productive, Effective" in combatting the devastation of something like a hurricane 5.

I say let's prepare ourselves &amp; society for it in an organised and concerted manner.

What do you say ?

[ QUOTE ]
The free market is more than just the buying and selling of goods in mundane, day-to-day trade. It is the whole of individual interactions of all types when those individuals are unhindered by government dictatation.

[/ QUOTE ]
We have a lot to talk about what a "government" is supposed to be in a democracy. And how we go about having one.

Having a government is the starting point, not the end point or a "social condition". It is the central issue on socio-economics; all others are peripheral, consequential.

A free society does not mean simply [i]laisser faire, laisser passer.

[ QUOTE ]
Why [can we not solve a social emergency through the Invisible Hand of the free market]? There is a distinct need. There are finite resources (both labor and material) to be consumed. These resources have alterative uses. Why is a top-down allocation of these resources so right in this situation when it's so wrong every other time?

[/ QUOTE ]

For the record, I do not have in mind anything like a "top down". As I said, we have a lot to talk about "government".

But can you please be specific? All those generalities are well and good but please explain, in detail, how the Invisible Hand of the Market should be allowed to deal with a natural calamity such as Katrina's.

(I am saying, by the way, that the Hand has already dealt with it. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif)