Rush Limbaugh- True Conservative

Rivalry Side A | Politics | News

Rush Limbaugh- True Crackpot

Rivalry Side B | Politics | News

Does Rush really represent the beliefs of the GOP, or do Republicans really wish he'd put a sock in it?

0

Posted by in Politics / News on 3/28/10
Debate Leaders
  1. LIBERAL (3 votes)
  1. Ryan Kazinec (2 votes)
  1. mama kaz (1 votes)

Side A fans: (7)

Neutral Fans: (0)


Side A Comment

mama kaz - 4/4/10 @ 9:50 AM:
1
I think it's kind of funny that so many people fear Rush but aren't afraid of our present government. I see video clips every day that catch our president and his group of power seekers lying to us about everything and yet there's no outrage in the media about it. I wish the media would spend half as much time doing the job they are supposed to do (finding the truth and bringing it to us) as they do crucifying those who disagree with our president.

Side B Comment

LIBERAL - 4/1/10 @ 5:10 AM:
1
No problem. I'll switch it over. I did notice that yesterday. :-)

Side A Comment

big ben - 3/31/10 @ 10:13 PM:
0
I will be honest. I am not a republican nor a democrat. I am a believer in the constitution. I do not consider Rush perfect, but I will say that he speaks more truth than many other main stream corporate shills. He has finally come around and admitted how the constitution is being dismantled. He has also admitted that we may not make it to an election in November. I will be fair and say that I wished he would of stood up for the Constitution during the period of the patriot act. I however, am not perfect either. I also fell for giving up freedom for security. I now regret that decision. There is nothing more important than freedom. remember, how much freedom we all have here is based on how much control we will allow the federal government to have over us. Good day.

Side B Comment

LIBERAL - 3/31/10 @ 6:53 PM:
1
For kicks and giggles I'll do a little math too. Here's a couple of figures I'll just throw out there first. In his presidential remarks to a joint session of Congress President Obama stated that under the new health care reform that it will help insure over 30 million Americans who had previously gone without insurance coverage.

(Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/ )

Several reports done by news, health organizations, and health providers show that in 2009 the average cost of insurance per single person was approximately $5,000 dollars, while family premiums hovered around $13,000 dollars.

(Source: http://www.usatoday.com/money )

Now let's do some math!! If you take $5,000 plus $13,000, you get= $18,000 dollars. Now divide that by 2 and you get the average cost of insurance premiums per person in the United States for 2009. Which is $9,000 dollars. Let's take this number out for a spin.

Let's just consider half. Not even anywhere close to Obama's figures, but just half of those he says this reform will now cover. 15 million people. 15 million new people paying insurance. How much will that generate in revenue for hundreds, if not thousands of companies, doctors, dentists, hospitals, etc. Let's just add it up and see. Let's assume that 15 million people pay out the average cost of premiums from 2009 at $9,000 dollars per person. Drumroll....

You get $135,000,000,000.00. That's right. You're looking at actual dollars that can be generated from just half of the figure Obama states will now be covered. That's one hundred thirty-five Billion dollars of revenue for our economy.

Now, just for kicks and giggles let's play a little more math time. Times that figure times two and you get the expected revenue from the entire 30 million insured. That brings the overall revenue (yearly) to a quarter of a trillion dollars.

I don't need to explain exactly how this helps everyone do I. From the plastics corporations who manufacture the tubes for syringes, to the staff at your local hospital, the dentists who save the tooth you didn't think would make it, to the carseat you have to purchase for a bouncing baby boy.

I have belief in my president, and I have faith in his policies. I want them to work because America needs them to work so very badly. You can argue that 17,000 agents cost so much annually, but I know he has a reason. I know it must be a good one at that. He has promised fiscal responsibility, growth, and I believe him. I know you do not, but I do.
Ryan Kazinec - 3/31/10 @ 8:49 PM: Rival | Side A
1
I’m about giggled out but what the hell.

Here’s a few more numbers for you Rick:

According to BLS: In 2008 there were 661,400 physicians and surgeons in 2008; with an expected increase of 22% from 2008 to 2018. (805,500 in 2018). For the purpose of this argument we’ll say 700,000 physicians are currently practicing.

According to the US Census Bureau the US population is currently 308,976,909. Let’s first subtract the 46 (Census 2007 45.7m : Decline from year prior so guessing the unemployment increase balanced out the decline: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/hlthins/hlthin07/hlth07asc.html) million people who currently don’t have health insurance (262,976,909) and divide that by the number of physicians(700,000). (Nearly 375 people to every 1 physician) Now let’s factor in the additional 30 million people that will be covered shall we? (292,976,909) (418 people to every 1 physician). That’s quite an increased demand on physicians.

Now there are a couple of other things to consider. First, how many physicians will retire early and how many will change professions? Also, how many physicians will be added to the roster throughout the four years before the benefits actually kick in for the majority of those 30 million? Do you think the government involvement is going to drive up the demand for physicians? Do you think people are going to be Gung Ho about spending 8+ years in school to become a physician considering the obvious rationing of care, price fixing, etc… that’s going to have to take place to cover 30 million more people?

You make some great points about the additional revenue but leave out a couple of key bits of information. Of those 15 or in this example 30 million new people purchasing insurance, how many of them are actually buying insurance versus paying the fine for not buying coverage? That’s a big deal considering the fine doesn’t exceed 2.5% of your income (From what I understand, haven’t fact checked it). You also need to consider the people who don’t purchase insurance and pay the fine; what’s their income level? Also, what about the tax subsidies to those in the lower income area? That’s coming straight out of the revenue. (Or they may just print that money and not calculate it with the actual cost of health care reform, who knows?)

Other cloudy variables to all of the uninsured stats; how many of the uninsured are illegal aliens? (Of the 47 million estimated uninsured the Kaiser foundation found the nearly 80% were Citizens. (37.6 million left)) Also, how many of those people choose not to carry coverage? I haven’t looked at the numbers on this but it is something to consider. (Well, irrelevant now that the bill passed)

Of course this revenue you speak comes at the cost of forcing Americans(Chiseling away at Freedom) to purchase a good or service which is something that is going to be facing many lawsuits and eventually be evaluated by the Supreme Court. I get extremely tired of hearing the comparison of being forced to buy car insurance. Driving is a privilege and if you want to avoid buying the insurance you can walk, take a train, subway, bus, etc… Can the same be said about health Insurance? No, the government is forcing us to buy something and if we don’t they’re fining us. (Jail time has been mentioned as well.)
Ryan Kazinec - 3/31/10 @ 8:51 PM: Rival | Side A
0
Forgot Sources:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/hinsure.htm

http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos074.htm#projections_data

http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html



Rick, it just dawned on me that we've drifted way off topic. If you reply, will you please add it to the health care rivalry? Thanks.

Side A Comment

mama kaz - 3/31/10 @ 9:14 AM:
0
One of my best friends was a girl who was "half and half", (her words, not mine) and she taught me some very important lessons about tolerance. She started dating my husbands (white) friend and I was appalled at the comments and stares when we all went out. I started going after people who did it and telling them what I thought about them. She finally sat me down one day and said that my defensive behavior was making her much more uncomfortable than the ignorant people who were causing it. She said that the only thing that really matters in life is how we feel about ourselves. There is a simple solution to the whole Rush thing. If you don't like him, don't listen. The media feeds you all this stuff and you lap it up like hungry dogs. I can't stand Howard Stern so I don't listen to him. He demeans people every day in the most offensive manner and yet they volunteer to go on his show. Where's the outrage?
The other thing I want to discuss is Ricks comment about states rights. Yes, Rick, state rights have been stripped over the years and look where it's gotten us. California, Michigan, New York, Illinois, and Ohio, just to name a few, are in serious trouble. The problem with stripping states rights is that you are giving the federal government tremendous power in the process. When you do that you open the door to giving a handful of people control over the entire country. Uh oh! Too late, it's already happened.
The last thing I'd like to know is how we are going to improve our economy when we are running big business out faster than we're letting illegals in. Big business provides jobs that feed and stimulate the economy. We are saddling them with such huge tax burdens and health care costs that they simply cannot afford to stay here. They are leaving and taking jobs with them. The only jobs that are being created are government jobs. (the latest, 17,000 IRS agents.) These do not feed our economy, they add to the debt. If you can tell me how we are going to fix these problems then maybe I can have some hope for the future.
LIBERAL - 3/31/10 @ 10:49 AM: Rival | Side B
1
First of all let me say that the term "half and half" does not offend me unless it is used in a manner which promotes intolerance. And I too have had and still have friends who are mixed race. I don't like Rush or Howard, and I certainly don't make it a habit to listen to either one of them unless I have to in order to better understand what makes a person like them tick. In reference to stripping state's rights, Texas did not have their rights stripped over a period of time. This is how their government was deliberately set up in the first place. By people who feared government. Now I'm not saying we should place all of our trust into government or the people that run it, but you have to have some faith in the people YOU elect to these positions or else they can affect no real change at all.

I cannot tell you anymore why 17,000 IRS agents will help or worsen the economy as I could sit here and explain the physics or Saturn's rings. I'm not sure myself. I've been reading up on it to figure it out and am still in the process. What I can tell you is this. You are absolutely correct. So long as we continue to give tax credits to corporations who relocate or operate outside of the U.S. borders we are strangling ourselves to death. We need to keep these businesses and jobs here in the United States, where they belong. I sincerely hope Mr. Obama will make the right decisions in the coming weeks, months, and years in order to stabilize the economy. If he doesn't, then we will probably see just a one term president. Only time will tell.
Ryan Kazinec - 3/31/10 @ 4:28 PM: Ally | Side A
1
For kicks and giggles I did a little math.
17,000 IRS agents multiplied by the median average wage for all tax examiners, collectors, and revenue agents were $48,100.00 and you get:
$817,700,000.00 annually.

So nearly a billion dollars a year will go to pay IRS employees to enforce all of the new taxes that will be imposed as the Health Bill materializes.

(Source: http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos260.htm#oes_links )

(Excerpt: In May 2008, median annual wages for all tax examiners, collectors, and revenue agents were $48,100. The middle 50 percent earned between $36,590 and $66,730. The bottom 10 percent earned less than $28,390, and the top 10 percent earned more than $89,630. However, wages vary considerably, depending on the level of government and occupational specialty. For example, in March 2009, the Federal Government’s average annual salary was $42,035 for tax examiners, $91,507 for internal revenue agents, and $63,547 for tax specialists.)

Side B Comment

Mona - 3/31/10 @ 8:27 AM:
0
Entertainer? How frightening that this is true. He spews hatred and racism and his follower applaud. He would love to see our country fail, just because his party isn't in charge. He's nothing more than an egomaniac with a radio show.

Side B Comment

LIBERAL - 3/29/10 @ 4:14 PM:
0
Although it is so historic to me to have lived during what I consider a fascinating time in American history when we elected what I hope will be the first of many Presidents that are not white, the fact remains that when I look at Obama I see two things. I see a man who honestly wants to affect real and good change in this country. Whether he'll accomplish it is up to him and history. The second thing I see is a husband and father. Honestly, I don't know who I admire more. The President or the family man who just wants a better tomorrow for his children and theirs too. For those of us who think and open our minds freely their is vast opportunity in this life, and for those who can't or won't their is always ignorance and misunderstanding. Unfortunately ignorance is hard to get rid of when generation after generation they breed and teach it to their own children, and tell them that that type of behavior is not only acceptable, but a way of life. It's just plain ignorance. And unfortunately their is to date no cure. Which is why so many will only ever be able to look at Barack Obama and never see past the color of his skin.

I have always had much more of a liberal view of government, and therefore I do vote democrat more often than any other party, but I will not exclude a candidate simply because of his party. I voted for many democrats, several republicans, and I believe 3 or 4 independents. I do not believe in blindly following a particular party just because I consider myself a democrat. If I come to believe that someone else can do a better job, then they'll have my vote. And you are absolutely right. Following blindly is something I wholeheartedly believe only leads to submission of the mind, and forfeiture of thought. All politicians need to understand that they are their not only to BE our voice, but to HEAR it as well. And as Lyndon B. Johnson once said "You ain't learnin' nothin' when you're talkin'."

Side B Comment

LIBERAL - 3/29/10 @ 12:39 PM:
0
Tomegun, I did notice the primary responses. I know they consider him an entertainer, but my question was limited in space so I unfortunately had to be a little vague. Let me clarify. I wanted to know if Rush's base, the conservatives of America truly support him on all of his talking points. With that in mind it is actually Rush himself that decides the talking points here as everything he brings to point on his radio show is then opened up for interpretation and discussion. I also know that this has been discussed before, but I have not been able to discuss it myself at length with others on this site. I thank you for your thoughts though, and I agree. If what he has said in the past does not qualify him as a racist then you are absolutely correct. What does qualify? Does one really have to use the "n" word before it's just not okay with the American public? Or perhaps just his supporters? I don't mind that people support him on his political views, but don't tell me that you don't think he's a racist or that he's never used such racial comments to describe how he really feels. That's not even ignorance any more, that's just plain stupidity. When you can go to sites like youtube, FOX (yes FOX NEWS), MSNBC, and others and play videos of him SAYING this over his own broadcast, how can you honestly look another human being in the face and say anything to the contrary. It's nothing more than denial by his supporters. I myself supported a local city councilman in my hometown of Athens, Texas. I even allowed him to hang posters in my grandmother's cafe, but the moment I found out that he had said something derogatory at one of the city's council meetings, those posters came down and I told him to his face that he had lost my vote. As it turned out that fall, he had lost more than just mine, and suffered a landslide defeat. There are consequences to the actions and words we use. I just wish others were not so blinded by their support of an individual that they allow themselves to follow someone like sheep to the slaughter. Sorry, but I won't have the wool pulled over my eyes. I see him for exactly what he is. And an entertainer he is not.
Tomegun - 3/29/10 @ 2:26 PM: Ally | Side B
-1
Earlier you touched on something else I have been saying: it is pure ignorance to follow one political party because everyone is wrong at some point. Following blindly is something we don't need.

Something else I've said and would like your opinion on: why hasn't any group stepped forward and said, "President Obama is just as much the next white president as he is the first black president?" It is a small thing to some, but such a large indication that race is still a huge problem in our country. You seem like someone who isn't in denial about the problems and I think that shows a lot of common sense and empathy.

Side B Comment

LIBERAL - 3/29/10 @ 8:47 AM:
0
This may surprise you, but I have voted for a Republican several times in my life. I don't always go with a democrat simply because he or she is affiliated with the party I believe shares most of my ideals and beliefs. I vote for the person I believe can handle the job, make changes that matter, and basically won't screw it up. As for Barney Frank, I have no idea if I would vote for him. First of all he has made as you said some questionable remarks and decisions during his terms in office that I have a real problem with, and secondly he resides not only in a different district, but in an entirely different state. The same can be said for Nancy Pelosi, but I would go even one step further to say she would NEVER have my vote. Although my ideals are very liberal I consider her to be what I call an Ultra-Liberal, and that just scares me. I believe government sometimes needs to step in and solve certain issues, but it should never be the only solution to every problem in America. I don't know what you mean by black entertainers. Sorry. Could you be more specific about which entertainers you are referring? Although I can sympathize with the feelings and thoughts of a race of people who only 50 years ago still had to use a different set of bathrooms and the "n" word was still a common reference to their race, I believe older entertainers still look back on these times and use this type of feelings for their current material. I cannot be so sympathetic with the younger crowd, but can to a degree. I'm certainly not empathizing with the thought that it's okay for them to say some of the things they say on stage or what have you, but as I said before to a degree some have still had experiences that in my mind justify to a point the things they believe and share with their audiences. It's not for us to judge them for how they feel when we have no real idea of what it's like to incur comments, suggestions, or actions that define our own race. I have never been called cracka, whitebread, or any other derogatory term by any african-american in my life, but I have personally seen and heard a friend of mine called the "n" word by a group of my own race. I'm not saying it's right for a black entertainer to say certain things while on-stage, but by that same accord I certainly can't condemn them for it either. Racism is an ugly tree that takes deep roots among even a nation as civilized as America, and rarely lets go.

Now, whether or not Rush Limbaugh knows that some of the "facts" that he reports on his show are actually bogus and founded on no real basis at all is unknown to me. I can't say whether he deliberately makes these statements that are so profoundly false that it would seem as though at some point he would begin to question who is actually performing this research? Not to mention that he should seriously consider confirming these types of reports before declaring them to be facts on a national broadcast platform like his radio show. Here are just a few examples of the unbelievably stupid, racist, and sexist remarks he has made on his broadcast.

"Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream."

"You know who deserves a posthumous Medal of Honor? James Earl Ray [the confessed assassin of Martin Luther King]. We miss you, James. Godspeed."

"They're 12 percent of the population. Who the hell cares?"

"It has not been proven that nicotine is addictive, the same with cigarettes causing emphysema."

And my personal favorite:

"There are more acres of forestland in America today than when Columbus discovered the continent in 1492."

Okay, where to start with all of the facts that are so wrong with this last comment. Grab a history book people! First of all Columbus did not discover any continent in 1492. He "discovered" Hispaniolia, one of the many islands in the Bahamas. Later he sailed on to discover Cuba and Haiti, but never at any point did he land in South, Central, or North America. Two other voyages for the New World would still not bring him any closer to the discovery of the North American continent. It would be Columbus' fourth and final voyage where he would land in and explore parts of Central America like Panama, Honduras, and Costa Rica.

In fact it would be one of Columbus' own students and admirers Amerigo Vespucci who would sail and reach the southern continent which would later be known as South America.

Now to the claim that we somehow have more forest land acreage now then when Columbus sailed in 1492. No. From as early as the year 1630 when pioneers of the Americas actually began logging such information the acreage of forestland was estimated at 300 million acres. Today, there is just a little over half of that figure.

I don't love or hate Rush Limbaugh, but if this is the result of his "homework", it's time to go back to school.

Also, I don't dislike people because of their wealth, their status, or otherwise. I dislike people who use their status or position to demean people and spread misinformation solely for their own benefits.

I don't think that conservatives are idiots. I do believe they don't understand that their beliefs that federal government is never the answer to any problem and that the states can manage everything their own. That's just ridiculous. The very notion itself is a catch 22. Although I would love the federal government never to have to intervene the simple fact of the matter is that states CANNOT handle it on their own. Many assume we can just allow states to handle things like health care, but their is a dark and ugly truth to all of this.

Some states have legislatures that have every possible power granted to them by what federal law does not cover. Those same states may have governors who have supreme power of veto so that one could effectively cancel out the other.

In my home state of Texas they were and are so distrustful of politicians that they gave very few powers to the body of our legislature and even fewer to the governor. Texas, though most people do not know it, has quite possibly one of the weakest gubernatorial seats in our nation. He or she is allowed to make certain state seat appointments and on occasion has the right to use the power of "line item veto". Do you realize that this power literally consists of the power to veto a single sentence from a bill. That's it!!! And even then you can only use it so many times per document!!

The idea that we can depend on the states to pass certain pieces of legislation for the good of their own constituents is preposterous because it lends to the belief that every state holds the same powers of both legislation(state senate and house) and executive(governor). Which, clearly they do not. That is the problem I have with conservatives who think that most laws or reforms should be handled by the states, because they cannot. Not effectively.

I disagree that Rush represents you. I believe you are a person of reason and intelligence. He seems to me a man of low character who would do anything to be in the limelight, anything to offend those with whom he does not agree, and to demean people simply because of their status, their sex, their race, and even their religion. On the contrary, I believe that Mr. Limbaugh does in fact do your party a great deal of disservice. I genuinely believe that the republican party is better than that, or at least, they deserve better than that.
Tomegun - 3/29/10 @ 11:24 AM: Ally | Side B
0
Rick, if you noticed, the primary responses had to do with Rush doing his homework and the fact that he is an entertainer. The responses had nothing to do with Rush's blatantly racist comments. We have had this discussion/rivalry before and I was told that there is nothing to suggest that Rush is a racist. Really? What does it take to be a racist then?
LIBERAL - 3/29/10 @ 12:51 PM: Ally | Side B
0
I will have to retract a previous quote from this particular argument. The quote "You know who deserves a posthumous Medal of Honor? James Earl Ray [the confessed assassin of Martin Luther King]. We miss you, James. Godspeed." was apparently part of some big internet conspiracy just to make him look bad. LOL. Like he needs the help, but regardless I do apologize for assuming this was correct. After running across a few conservative sites that denounced this quote as pure myth I then came across several reputable news sites that declared the same. I would never want to accuse someone of saying or doing anything they did not say or do. So, I apologize again to anyone who reads this and even to Mr. Limbaugh. I still have many reasons to know that he is in fact a racist, but I would never base it upon lies or innuendos. That's just not right.

Side A Comment

mama kaz - 3/29/10 @ 12:26 AM:
0
Well Rick, I guess that means you won't be voting for many democrats either. Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, and many others make demeaning, sexist, and ridiculous statements about all of us who have the gall to disagree with them. And as far as racist comments, have you even listened to the things that come out of the mouths of black entertainers today? How about some of the liberal media? I smell a double standard! You should have heard what I said about you last night! I'm just kidding. I love arguing with you! And for the record, I find Rush extremely entertaining. I also find him to be almost as accurate as he says he is. So love him or hate him, he does his homework. And there must be a lot more people who agree with me than you on this subject because, last time I looked, he's filthy rich. Maybe that's why you libs really hate him. You seem to have a problem with anyone having more than you do. Since you all seem to think us conservatives are a bunch of idiots I don't see why you'd have a problem thinking Rush represents us very well.

Side A Comment

Ryan Kazinec - 3/28/10 @ 7:09 PM:
0
First and foremost Rush is an entertainer and damn good at what he does. Do I think he represents the GOP or Tea Party? No, although they do share similar views. Rush has an incredible research team and does surface a lot of relevant information.

As far as being a true conservative I'd say sure he is; too much so for my taste. Example: When he applauded Oil companies for record profits when gas hit $4 bucks a gallon. While I understand they have a small profit margin it is in poor taste to applaud them when so many people were having a difficult time afford the gas hike.
LIBERAL - 3/28/10 @ 7:34 PM: Rival | Side B
0
I don't know that I'd go so far as to call him an entertainer. Perhaps instigator would better describe his vocation. My real problem lies with the fact that here stands a man who claims to hold certain ideals of a particular group of people who consider him to be their "voice", but do they not have any trouble with his blatant racial remarks, his elitist attitude, or outrageous hypocrisy? Especially when it deals with his self-martyrdom? Like I've stated time and time before my views are quite liberal, but if a candidate displayed the type of reprehensible behaviors and remarks that we have all seen from Rush Limbaugh he or she would NOT have my vote. For a man in his position and standing he should be a model of republican ideals, yet he takes every chance to show the public how backward in thought he can be. I believe, and I can look it up, that during one of his live broadcasts he actually told an african-american woman to "put the bone back in your nose and call me back." What kind of person says something like that? That's not entertaining to me. That's out-right racism. When Don Imus made the racial comment about the women's Rutger basketball team he was suspended after a lengthy dousing of negative feedback from all sides of the spectrum. Deservedly so in my book, but Rush says worse and it's entertaining? No. That's just an atrocity.

Side B Comment

LIBERAL - 3/28/10 @ 5:57 PM:
0
I'm open to any comments. Especially by those of the conservative beliefs. I really just want to know if the Republican party, conservatives, or tea partiers really feel like Rush Limbaugh has the pulse of the republican nation. I'm sure some of you already know what my feelings are on the matter, and I will discuss them with you, but I just wanted to get a few general reactions to the question.
Add new comment:

You must either login or register before you can comment.

Side B fans: (11)

You need to be logged in to do that!
Login with Your Facebook Account:
Already have a JealousBrother account? Login
Register for a JealousBrother Account! Register