Tuesday, April 10, 2007

"Stalinist Behavior" And Other Democrat Shenanigans: Fifteen More Minutes of Rush Limbaugh's Crap

In my busy work week, I nearly missed this interview conducted by Rush Limbaugh last week. Did you catch it?

Of course, by its very nature, a Rush interview is never fair and balanced. Even so, you have to wonder about how desperate the W, Rove and Co. are given their inability and unwillingness to participate in interviews that are in front of less than friendly audiences (outside of the usual suspects in the Whitehouse press pool).

Have a look at the softballs that Rush slow pitched at the Big Dick Cheney on the Fifth of April. My grandmother could have hit these out of the park when she was alive. As usual, I'm only giving you the Q of the Q & A as the A only serves to dish up the standardized political rhetoric delivered by the Big Dick and his loaded presidential propaganda catapult.


Interview of the Vice President by Rush Limbaugh, The Rush Limbaugh Show
Via Telephone

1:07 P.M. EDT

Q It's always a great privilege to have the Vice President, Dick Cheney, with us. Mr. Vice President, welcome once again to our program.

Q I can imagine. Now, let's start talking about the supplemental funding bill for Iraq. I have to tell you something I heard last night as I'm watching some of the cable news network shows -- some of the Democrats and Democrat commentators are saying publicly now they expect that the President is eventually going to back off the veto threat because he will eventually -- he cannot be seen as defunding the troops.

Q Where do you think this is going to go? The Democrats don't seem to be in any hurry to have this go to conference, have a final bill voted upon and then sent up to the White House for the veto. How long is this going to take, do you suspect?

Q Now, you and the President both have derided the theatrics of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi and a number of the Democrats, and I don't know if you're being politic with the statement -- I, frankly, need to ask you if you really think it's theatrics, or is this who they really are? Is this what they really intend, to lose this war, to make sure we come home defeated?

Q Can you share with us whether or not you understand their devotion, or their seeming allegiance to the concept of U.S. defeat?

Q It may not just be Iraq. Yesterday I read that Ike Skelton, who chairs -- I forget the name of the committee -- in the next defense appropriations bill for fiscal '08 is going to actually remove the phrase "global war on terror," because they don't think it's applicable. They want to refer to conflicts as individual skirmishes. But they're going to try to rid the defense appropriation bill -- and, thus, official government language -- of that term. Does that give you any indication of their motivation or what they think of the current plight in which the country finds itself?

Q Well, I have to think Democrats know all of this, too, which puzzles people even more, as to why they seem devoted to pulling out of there with defeat securely in hand. Not only would what you detail happen, but the next conflict, the next battle that we find ourselves in -- there will be one -- how tough is it going to be to assemble allies if they think we might just pull out in the middle of the whole thing before it's complete?

Q You have a lot of supporters in this audience, obviously, and they're chomping at the bit to help. What can people in this audience do to assist the effort to get the supplemental passed as the President wants it?

Q A couple of quick -- more things before you have to go. What's the administration view today, what's the emotion, what are you thinking about Speaker Pelosi's trip to the Middle East, specifically, the conveyance of the incorrect message to Bashir Assad in Syria about peace talks with Israel?

Q But she's not entitled to --

Q -- make policy, is she?

Q Well, how much damage has she done by conveying to Assad that Israel is ready for peace talks when Israel is not ready for peace talks, as Syria is currently constituted?

Q You are a reserved individual and very professional, and you've been doing this a long time. But I'm asking this for people in my audience, as well as me: How do you feel when -- don't you get enraged when this kind of things happens?

Q One more, and that's the recess appointment of Sam Fox. Sam Fox is from my home state, and I know Sam Fox -- he's an immigrant, a Ukrainian Jewish immigrant, whose parents would have nothing -- when they died they had nothing. He is a totally self-created man, a great American. And he was treated horribly by Senator Kerry and others on that committee, simply because he had made a political donation. They essentially told him he did not have freedom of speech in this country, until he would apologize, until he would go up to Kerry and apologize for supporting the Swift Boats. Now the President has recess-appointed him. And of course, the Democrats have said they're going to investigate this and going to look into this.

This is the kind of move that garners a lot of support from the people in the country. This shows the administration willing to engage these people and not allow them to get away with this kind of -- well, my term -- you don't have to accept it -- Stalinist behavior from these people on that committee.

Q You go on vacation, this is what happens to you.

Q Mr. Vice President, thanks for your time. It really is always a pleasure to talk to you. And we appreciate your candor when you come on the program, very much so. All the best, and have a great Easter weekend, you and your family.

Q Thank you.

END 1:22 P.M. EDT
Why folks on the right continue to lap up the lopsided, right wind ideology spewed by Rush and his pals is beyond me. Does it make them feel better about having support the murder of thousands of innocent Iraqis? Does it soothe their lack of ethical soul? Your guess is as good as mine.

No comments: