Why is Obama so fed up with Rush Limbaugh? , page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 29-1-2009 @ 04:27 PM by MrVertigo
reply to post by Frankidealist35



I think the point here is that Rush is saying that he wants Obamas policies to fail.
Now if Obama's policies fail that would obviously be bad for America, so Limbaugh is indirectly stating that he wants harm to come to America just so he can be proven right and gloat about it.
People like Limbaugh and O'Reilly have for years accused the left of wanting Bush to fail in Iraq. They have gone on and on about how that would be unpatriotic almost to the point of treason.

Now Limbaugh is the one wanting Obama to fail in America, just so he can be proven right.

Does that answer your question?


reply posted on 29-1-2009 @ 04:44 PM by MrVertigo
reply to post by jerico65



So if everything Obama does fails miserably that will somehow be good for America?

And if everything Obama did worked out that would be bad for America?

I'm sorry but to me that just takes way too many leaps of logic to make any sense and I'm the kind of person that enjoys Lost...


reply posted on 29-1-2009 @ 04:53 PM by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by Frankidealist35



Why do you think Obama is "so fed up" with Limbaugh? He just said ONE thing about him and now there's an old fashioned feud! Rush has been ragging on Obama for 2 years now. All Obama did was say, "You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done,"... And it's true, I might add. Listening to Rush isn't going to get bipartisan action done. He's abhors everything Democrat.

So, why do you think Obama's fed up? That one comment?


reply posted on 29-1-2009 @ 04:53 PM by NightSkyeB4Dawn
Originally posted by dolphinfan
He's upset with him because he has power and can make things difficult for him. Not only do millions of folks listen to him each day, but other talk radio hosts take their cue from him and therefore he has a multiplier effect. Whether or not you like him (I do), he is one of the most powerful people in America. The last thing Obama wants is thousands of folks around the country calling their congressperson and complaining why they are supporting a economic recovery bill includes new lawns, birth control and telescopes. Those issues will be used as campaign issues in two years and he knows it. Obama lost several house seats in 2010 this week and may well lose a Senate seat or two because of this bill. It won't work - or you won't be able to prove it worked and republicans are going to run against it. Limbaugh educates folks about these things and gets folks active.


What a sad commentary on America and her citizens.

I am not saying that your comment is false. I am saying that if this is what America is using to make decisions about their future then we can all throw in the towel now.

Rush is an entertainer. The man is being paid enormous amounts of money to say what his owners want him to say. Rush is a tool of TPTB. TPTB would drop Rush like a hot potato and hang him out to dry the moment he said one that that went against their agenda or outside of their script. If Americans can’t see that then we are more lost and our future is dimmer than I ever imagined.

I am not knocking Rush. The man is getting paid and getting paid darn well.

I am knocking anybody that can’t see that and not only buy the trap that TPTB is putting down but willing sets it and puts their head into it.


reply posted on 29-1-2009 @ 04:56 PM by distortion9
Originally posted by MrVertigo
reply to
post by jerico65



So if everything Obama does fails miserably that will somehow be good for America?



Yes...in Rush's opinion.

He disagrees with Obamas policies and thinks that if they are put in place, it will be bad for America.

So

He hopes he fails.

Like if you were running for President and said, "I'm going to add tons of bleach to our drinking water to make it clean."

I would hope you failed.


reply posted on 29-1-2009 @ 05:10 PM by dolphinfan
I don't think he's a prop of anyone. He's got more money than God and is not in the pocket of anyone - he does not need to be. I also think he is an entertainer in large part - but he also speaks to millions of Americans, as do many of the talk radio hosts in a way that their government simply does not want to or won't. American's don't want higher taxes, they want lower taxes. American's don't like illegal immigration. Americans want capitalism, not socialism, American's don't like foreign aid or the UN. I could go on and on. The fact is that for many folks in this country, they don't get their beliefs validated by anyone but talk radio. the MSM is in the tank for liberals and the statist oriented politicians and when folks hear Limbaugh, they hear a very successful gent telling them that they are not dolts.

They listen to him and they like him because he gives them what they can't get anywhere else in the country and that is some validation that their beliefs and concerns are real and when hearing the radio they learn that they are not alone.

We do not have a representative government in the US. Perhaps we never had one, but we've been moving farther and farther away from it in the 40+ years I've been alive.

The fact that millions of American's listen to Limbaugh and others who speak of current events should make folks happy. They listen because they care and are interested. If they could get the information somewhere else, perhaps they would, but they can't. If they could get some reasonably unbiased mass media, they might turn to that, but they can't. The government and the elites are the problem. Not Limbaugh


reply posted on 29-1-2009 @ 05:14 PM by MrVertigo
Originally posted by distortion9
Originally posted by MrVertigo
reply to
post by jerico65



So if everything Obama does fails miserably that will somehow be good for America?



Yes...in Rush's opinion.

He disagrees with Obamas policies and thinks that if they are put in place, it will be bad for America.

So

He hopes he fails.

Like if you were running for President and said, "I'm going to add tons of bleach to our drinking water to make it clean."

I would hope you failed.



I think you are missing the point. In your example we would obviously not want the policies put into place, but assuming they were we would want the bleach to be good for us somehow.

I know your example is absurd but there is a fundamental difference:

Its' one thing to say: "I disagree with his policies, I think they will be bad for America and I hope they're never implemented."

It's quite another thing to say: "I know these policies will be implemented because he is president & controls both houses, and I hope these policies all fail to do what they were meant to do."

To give a concrete example: Many disagree with Obamas economic stimulus plan, but I think everyone would prefer the plan to actually work & have the economy salvaged, rather than to have it completely disintegrate.

Now maybe Rush Limbaugh just did a poor job of explaining what he meant in which case he should clarify his statements.
Or maybe he just wants to be proven right, even if it's bad for America.

[edit on 29-1-2009 by MrVertigo]


reply posted on 29-1-2009 @ 05:45 PM by dolphinfan
I think that its perhaps more subtle. I certainly hope that Obama is wildly successful. I want him to be the greatest president in the history of America. That is what I wish for every president and we all should. The problem is complex. While I hope that the economy rebounds and that the lives of Americans are made easier and less uncertain, I'm not interested in that outcome if it comes at the expense of turning the US into more of a socialist country than it already is. What Obama is doing, the real ramifications of it, will not be known for 20 years to come and a program that in the short term helps in real terms but in the long term cuts at the fabric of freedom that this country was built on is something we should all hope to fail.

This kind of engineering simply does not work and it never has. WWII got the US out of the depression, not the New Deal. All the New Deal did was delay our recovery and move the US down the road to socialism. The Great Society was the greatest failure of social policy in the history of the country and we are still dealing with the ramifications of that.

Policy has to be viewed in a larger, longer context and by that measure, if you feel that greater control of the economy by the state is a bad thing (I do), then despite the short-term benefits of what Obama is looking to accomplish and the measurable benefit they might have on Americans, it is being patriotic to hope that he fails to implement them or that the policys, upon implementation, fail.

Tough, but thats the way it is. You need to think 20-40 years down the road when considering policy of this magnitude.


reply posted on 29-1-2009 @ 06:04 PM by wutone
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to
post by Frankidealist35



Why do you think Obama is "so fed up" with Limbaugh? He just said ONE thing about him and now there's an old fashioned feud! Rush has been ragging on Obama for 2 years now. All Obama did was say, "You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done,"... And it's true, I might add. Listening to Rush isn't going to get bipartisan action done. He's abhors everything Democrat.

So, why do you think Obama's fed up? That one comment?


And yet the democrats have been openly speaking out against Rush for years, sometimes in the chambers of Congress.

But there is a difference in what Rush says and what Obama and whoever in government says.

People don't have to listen to Rush. They can turn off the radio. That will also decrease sponsor support.

People have to listen to the democrats (and republicans) as well as whoever is President. We have to pay taxes that support their policies whether we like it or not.

It is disturbing that any politician should feel the need to attack a private citizen who is speaking on an open forum. That is akin to a politician having to publicly attack what we post on ATS.

It really doesn't matter if the public citizen who criticizes government has one person listening or 20 million. The first amendment was written so a citizen can have freedom to point out what they feel is wrong in government and if he has 20 million in agreement, so be it.
Pages:     ^^TOP^^



Do I have freedom FROM religion?
  Posted 1 days ago with 18 member flags
Is this the only politician in europe that is not blind?
  Posted 2 days ago with 8 member flags
Former NAVY SEAL Rebukes Obama
  Posted 17 days ago with 7 member flags
What The Founding Fathers Thought About Corporations
  Posted 10 days ago with 6 member flags
Newsweek Cover: \'The First Gay President\'
  Posted 14 days ago with 4 member flags
Westboro Baptist Church
  Posted 11 days ago with 4 member flags
Congress Revolts On Obama Plan That Would Ban ‘Buy American’
  Posted 18 days ago with 3 member flags
Police Pursue 4-Year-Old for Overdue Library Book
  Posted 12 days ago with 3 member flags