Rush Limbaugh Calls for Overthrow of U.S. Government Kevin S. Willis
These people really do not get it. And I'm talking about the rank and file liberals out there. Take a look at the Digg posting on the story and see for yourself:
Limbaugh says something that is clearly and explicitly political commentary, dealing directly with Obama's tacit support of the overthrow of a Democratic government in Honduras is treason. And not one of these commentors mentions Limbaugh's point: that Obama is essentially advocating the overthrow of democratic governments. Which isn't treasonous, when it's someone elses government, but is certainly un-democratic.
Most listings of the story--which is being propigated by the tax-exempt agitprop organization, Media Matters--take the same approach, leaving out the base of the story and completely ignoring the obvious point. It's like they are trying to be intentionally obtuse. Which amazes me. But I suppose it shouldn't.
Some more interesting comments from the Digg posting:
I highly suspect that many or most elite GOPers are not particularly big fans of democracy.
Nobody is a huge fan of the Democratic process when they get entirely voted out of power--for the brief time the Republicans had the senate, congress and the presidency, I heard plenty of liberals advocating much harsher, anti-democratic measures, and with much less irony, than anything Limbaugh has said.
And I have myself made the point previously that liberals consider anything other than their unilateral victory to be a "failure of democracy". And that, when they win, Democracy is finally working again. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the actual Democratic process. According to liberals, Democracy is only good when they are unilaterally and perpetually in power.
Sounds like high treason to me. The penalty is execution. America will be better off without traitors like him who don't believe in democracy and the election of officials. Men who want to forcible end Democracy with acts of violence so that they can be dictators forever. That's the dream of Rush Limbaugh and the new GOP. The end of Democracy.
Again, I think this statement lacks the subtlety and irony and nuance I was always led to believe liberals had in such abundance. Rush Limbaugh attempted to make an ironic point about Obama's tacit endorsement of democratically elected leaders installing themselves as Presidents for Life against the will of the people they govern--and he should be killed. Not only that, the commentor actually says Rush Limbaugh doesn't believe in Democracy, wants a forcible end to it--with acts of violence--so "they" can be dictators forever. When, in fact, Limbaugh is opposed to that while Obama supports an end to democracy in Honduras. I mean, it's amazing. How do you make progress with people like that? Who believe the exact opposite of what is manifestly and self-apparently true? Who entirely miss the not-exactly-subtle point that Obama endorses an end to Democracy in Honduras, and Limbaugh is essentially asking--well, how would you like that if it happened to you, Obama?
Amazing. Depressing.
Another bizarre quote getting it exactly backwards, and without a hint of irony:
For as many faults as we have right now, we still have dissent, and as long as we have that, there is hope for change. Rush Limbaugh's version of America does not include dissent. He'd get Bill O'Reilly's FOX Security to incarcerate anyone who dared to speak up.
Rush Limbaugh is the dissent. Liberals dominate mainstream media, except for Fox. The Democrats run every branch of government, except perhaps the Supreme Court, and that's coming. Rush Limbaugh makes a dissenting comment, and he should be executed--and not allowed to dissent. Because his dissenting from the Obama vision of America is somehow, mysteriously, actually opposition to the "real" dissent: which is unquestioning, blind obedience to Obama. Huh?
Seriously, they are. Which is a good thing. Using a modern secular myth to justify looting the private sector and punishing the tax payer is reprehensible, and the more people who wake up to the same, the better.
The Jawa Report has a breakdown on how Axelrod and the Obama campaign are trying to make fake grassroots campaigns to smear Sarah Palin, while, at the same time, leaving a trail of smoking guns everywhere. No wonder the left like's to tell us they are the smartest and most ethical folks out there!
The Journal of Feminist Insight blog has a breakdown of softballs Charlie Gibson tossed Obama vs. the prosecutorial nature of his questions for Palin. Pretty damning stuff, indeed. For Obama: How does it feel to win? For Palin: Do you have enough qualifications for the job your seeking? And on and on and on.
Not classy, Charlie.
Apparently to folks of the left, the ends will always justify the means. Ruin people, lie, cheat, steal, anything short of murder (and, hmm, who knows, maybe that, too) is okay if it means you get universal healthcare and progressive taxation. Learning that, on the left, the end always justifies the means is why I'm not a liberal today.
