It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Republican Caller Tells Limbaugh: "You're A Brainwashed Nazi" (AUDIO)

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 09:06 AM
Interesting conversation between a republican and limbaugh ... The Audio Is after the jump ... must click link to listen to it ...


LIMBAUGH: We're going to go to Chicago. This is Charles. Charles thank you for waiting and for calling. Great to have you here. Hello.

CALLER: Thanks Rush. Rush listen, I voted Republican and I really didn't want to see Obama get in office. But you know Rush, you're one reason to blame for this election, for the Republicans losing. First of all, you kept harping about voting for Hillary. The second big issue was the torture issue. I'm a veteran. We're not supposed to be torturing these people. This is not Nazi Germany, Red China, North Korea. There's other ways of interrogating people, and you just kept harping about, it's okay, or it's not really torture. And it was just more than waterboarding. Some of these prisoners will killed under torture.

And it was crazy for you to go on and on like Levin and Hannity and Hewitt. It's like you're all brainwashed. And my last comment is, no matter what Obama does, you will still criticize him because I believe you are brainwashed. You're just -- and I hate to say it -- but I think you're a brainwashed Nazi. Anyone who can believe in torture has got to be -- there has got to be something wrong with them.
Story continues below

LIMBAUGH: You know --

CALLER: And I know Bush wanted to keep us safe and all of that but we're not supposed to be torturing these people.

LIMBAUGH: Charles, if anybody is admitting that they are brainwashed it would be you.

CALLER: No, no, Rush. I don't think so. You, Hannity, and Levin are all brainwashed --

LIMBAUGH: Charles, you said at the beginning of your phone call that you didn't want Obama in there. But you voted for him because of me.

CALLER: I didn't vote for him. I voted for McCain. I voted Republican.

LIMBAUGH: Oh, so you're saying I turned people off --

CALLER: You turned people off with all this vote for Hillary and all this BS.

LIMBAUGH: That was Operation Chaos. That was to keep the chaos in the Democrat primaries --

CALLER: It didn't work and what we have with you Hannity Levin and Hewitt is sour grapes. That's all we have. And believe me, I'm not -- I'm more to the right than I am to the left.

LIMBAUGH: Oh, of course you are.


LIMBAUGH: Of course you are. You wouldn't be calling here with all of these sour grapes if you weren't.

CALLER: Well I'm tired of listening to go on and on with this --

LIMBAUGH: I don't know of anybody who died from torture.

CALLER: We're not supposed to torture people. Do you remember World War II, the Nazis? The Nuremburg trials?

LIMBAUGH: Charles, Barack Obama --

CALLER: What's the matter with you? You never even served in the military. I served in the Marine Corps and the Army.

LIMBAUGH: Charles, Barack Obama is president of the United States today because of stupid, ignorant people who think like you do. You pose - you and your ignorance are the most expensive commodity this country has. You think you know everything. You don't know diddly squat. You call me a Nazi? You call me someone who supports torture and you want credibility on this program? You're just plan embarrassing and ludicrous. But it doesn't surprise me that you're the kind of Republican that our last candidate attracted. Because you're no Republican at all based on what the hell you just said right here.

Full Article Here

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 09:21 AM
The irony here is that ANYONE can claim they are a Republican or 'voted' Republican on phone about as easily as anyone who posts on an internet board can post up that he or she is a Democrat and voted for Obama.

Anything new here other than the continued attacking/slamming of Limbaugh by liberal internet and mainstream media outlets? No.


posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 09:25 AM
reply to post by Seekerof

i don't care who it was, it was nice for someone to give him a good ol' reality check ... everyone needs one every now and then, even rush limbaugh.

by the way i am politically neutral, didn't vote for obama or mccain ... i just think this guys 'out there' ... just my opinion

[edit on 8-4-2009 by baseball101]

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 10:12 AM
Well, that pretty much says it all.

Regardless of whether Rush actually believes what he spews or not, his job and his money depend on him sticking to the same hardline without faultering-regardless of its actual content.

He then uses the famous right-wing tactic of separating himself from those he disagrees with and then accusing them of being the more intellectually and MORALLY flawed. (Hey-it works!)
Like with every caller or public figure who disagrees with an imaginary super perfect ultra-conservative worldview.
Its hilarious to listen to it, but completely obvious when you read a transcript.

ONE of the reasons (of many) the Republican party is in chaos is because when you have people like Rush who will turn on anyone on the same "team" if they do not agree with this imaginary can you unite?
Actually, thats not really a problem until Republicans begin to view him as less of an entertainer and more of an actual political figure.

Oh wait....

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 11:03 AM
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

I don't think Rush got a "reality check" by any means.

Do you think this is the first time that somebody has called his show and accused him of being a Nazi or anything else?

I agree with Rush here.

If anyone was a raving was the caller.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 11:56 AM
reply to post by nyk537

Blogger Dr. Sammy, writing at Scholars & Rogues, surmises Limbaugh's defense of himself to the caller's criticisms (Taken from Audio):

"*If you disagree with Rush, it’s 'sour grapes.'
*If you disagree with Rush, you’ve been 'brainwashed.'
*People who oppose torture are 'stupid' and 'ignorant.'
*If you don’t agree with Rush, you 'don’t know diddly-squat.'
*If you disagree with Rush, 'you’re no Republican at all.'

"The new Republican leadership has drawn a line in the sand. Then dug it out and filled it with concrete. Rush Limbaugh is the One True Voice of God. Dissent and other forms of thinking will not be tolerated."

[edit on 8-4-2009 by baseball101]

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 12:12 PM
It seems the best the caller could do (and old veteran, these things are still sharp in their minds) to describe this "line in the sand" was call Rush a Nazi...Nazi meaning using violence as "means to an end".

Take for example a fine 'Pub like McCain...Ending torture was near and dear to his heart....when you've either seen it or been subject to it you behold a certain understanding; one a young'n like myself probably can sympathize with bur hardly fathom.

For all we know Rush probably feels this way too. But on his radio show he obviously can't take any dissident stance with the utmost neocon view (unless he is calling someone in his party not conservative enough).

When people say Rush got a reality check I don't think they mean Rush himself (nobody really knows what he actually believes....) but the ideological stronghold of conservative perfection (if you will) he creates on his show.

The reality check really went out to those who actually believed torture (against those who were guilty as well as eventually proven innocent) was to be condoned.

Those who disregard human life enough to treat it without respect in order to create a result....well...
sounds pretty Nazi to me.

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 12:20 PM
I used to watch Rush on TV during the Clinton years. I couldn't get enough then.
I grew out of it. I started questioning the party line when Republicans started pushing Bush Jr.
The guy was a moron, a joke, he knew nothing. A spoiled, east coast blue blood with a powerful daddy. He didn't deserve to be president, but Rush didn't seem to care.

Eight years later and I can't stand what Rush has become. He represents everything he hated 10 years ago. A corrupted, political hack with a drug habit and shifting morals.

I know I won't convince any Rush Zealots here. They are too far gone to save. Brainwashed beyond any hope.

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 01:34 PM
Whenever I read about our friend Rush it just reinforces my opinion of how he handles anything or anyone who don't agree with him 100%..attack, demean, and castigate.

I started looking up articles and clips on how he handled the last election to post here but basically just became overwhelmed on how someone who has the "authority" to state how a political party should think and act could instead switch opinions given whatever point he wanted to make that day.

During the primary he tried to convince his audience that McCain was nothing more than a Democrat sympathizer and was the worst thing that could ever happen to the Republican party....until he was nominated. His only recourse was to attack the Democrats, not outwardly support McCain, although he did get into a love fest with Palin and how she would end up being the one to save the day.

I don't agree with what the caller said but I can chalk it up to someone who was rightfully nervous talking on a national radio show and may have gotten a little carried away, or was just subconsciously letting his true feelings slip out.

What matters is the normal Rush response. Attack, confuse, and attack some more. I notice that he didn't respond to the callers comment about how he was never in the service.

Some day, and I feel it may be coming soon, when Mr. Limbaugh gets on a roll and starts jumping up and down in his chair, his mouth will say something so outrageous that even his most dedicated supporters will be stunned silent. Or something will leak out about how he dresses up in women's clothes while high on pain killers and having sex with chickens, where even his most powerful backers won't be able to bail him out.

Oh, how the mighty will fall when convinced that their own superiority will protect them. He should probably get Jimmy Swaggert's number because come the day, he's going to need someone to talk to.

Sorry about the chicken thing, seeing as I'm all for animal rights and such.

[edit on 8-4-2009 by zlots331]

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 01:39 PM
Rush is alright in small doses.

But on the issue of torture . . . I agree with it. It needs to be done.

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 01:45 PM
With Bill O'Reilly, I can see a glint of laughter in his eyes, as he knows this is all a joke. Hell, I call him my honorary Discordian. You can tell what he believes in and what he's just saying because Murdock told him to.

With Rush, though... There's no laughter in his eyes. He means what he says. And it disgusts me.

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 02:00 PM
reply to post by xxpigxx

Cyanide is alright in small doses too I guess.

Torture is an ineffective means of intelligence gathering, as any one in the field of intelligence can tell you. Torture is purely a form a terrorism - a way to strike fear into the hearts of those that would oppose us.
So what you are supporting is, in essence, terrorism.

Congratulations! You've crossed over.

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 02:14 PM

Originally posted by Smack
Torture is an ineffective means of intelligence gathering

Yup. An individual will tell you anything you want to hear to stop whatever is happening.

But what if it's a case of harming a loved one for the information? Tell me what I want to know or the kids and wife get it type of thing. This way you can check out the info and if it turns up wrong you can come back to the loved ones and continue. You'll still get false info and if the individual honestly doesnt know anything you'll just hurt folks for no reason but is it just as ineffective statistically as torturing the individual?

I dont really care either waty about torture's legality or ethical worth. If somebody wants to torture you they will legal or not. Banning it is just like any other ban. Ineffective and pointless as the act will continue regardless. If you live by a ban of it the only thing you get is "moral highground" which in the real world isnt worth anything to anyone and certainly wont stop anybody from torturing you. I guess the UN could send them a letter asking them politely to stop.

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 02:46 PM
reply to post by nyk537

Really, NYK? First you call my Tarheels a bunch of women, and then you go and say this. You really support Limbaugh?

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 03:30 PM
First and foremost, I’ll fully admit that I have a distinct bias against Rush Limbaugh. Getting that out of the way, it astonishes me how, somehow, the overweight, pill-popping, bloviating hatemongering can somehow come out of pretty much any situation as some kind of victim of a vast left-wing conspiracy.

Now, with that out of the way, to address the post…

It is interesting. Here we have the transcript of a conversation between Rush and a caller, who identifies themselves as a McCain supporting Republican as well as a former Marine, about, among other things, the reason for the outcome of the election (IE the further marginalization of the Republican party), the use of torture, and of the Right-wing pundits being brainwashed Nazis..(which of course is meant in a metaphorical sense.)

Now, what I want to address is not whether I agree or disagree with the caller or with Rush…I’m sure it is quite apparent. What I find interesting is one thing specific. Notice how Rush systematically attempts to remove the credibility of the caller, and notice how, even within this thread, others follow suit. The caller identifies himself as a Republican and a Veteran, Rush attempts to identify him as a Democrat and completely ignores the whole veteran thing, not to mention never addresses the accusation of Rush never being in the service..and in the thread, people start going into the tangent of “well, where’s the proof he’s a Republican or a Veteran…anyone can call up and say they are a Republican and a Veteran, it doesn’t mean they are…”

I mean, is it me, or are we treading deeper and deeper into some very murky intellectual waters here? Fair enough, it is easily established that there is a lot of disinformation out there, to the point that anyone can prove whatever point they want because some “evidence” exists that, in the mind of the person wanting to prove said point, is irrefutable...not only this, but proof is often not even needed to back up one’s claims…and on top of this, we’re establishing that one cannot even trust an individual’s account of who they themselves are…

What I’m trying to say is that there is something drastically wrong in the world when people’s claims can be proven/disproven based on little more than opinion and conjecture provided by unreliable sources, if any, which are impossible to validate because in today’s day and age, we only accept opinions that agree with our own as fact.

In essence, we live in a day and age where there is no objective truth; we accept this, or rather only accept certain unstable truths that fit into our pre-constructed intellectual paradigms…therefore, because we cannot discover real truth, we are all brainwashed by opinion….

Okay, I’m going off in a tangent here and have lost my train of though….point is, every time I hear Limbaugh, or his ilk, speak, or read what they have to say…I become more and more convinced that mankind is doomed.

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 07:56 PM

Originally posted by Seekerof
The irony here is that ANYONE can claim they are a Republican or 'voted' Republican on phone about as easily as anyone who posts on an internet board can post up that he or she is a Democrat and voted for Obama.

Anything new here other than the continued attacking/slamming of Limbaugh by liberal internet and mainstream media outlets? No.


That's a fine way to neutralize the debate, and it's really convenient because it works in every scenario. It's a very cheap way out of a sticky situation, that's for sure. Just accuse the guy of being a liberal plant because there's NO WAY an honest conservative would, could disagree with the self-professed icon Rush Limbaugh.

You are right, it's very easy for a liberal to pose as a conservative but just because "Charles" said he was a conservative and disagreed with Rush, that DOES NOT mean he was a liberal posing as a conservative. It's a very ridiculous excuse to make and it's deplorable.

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 08:03 PM

Originally posted by Seekerof
The irony here is that ANYONE can claim they are a Republican or 'voted' Republican on phone about as easily as anyone who posts on an internet board can post up that he or she is a Democrat and voted for Obama.

Anything new here other than the continued attacking/slamming of Limbaugh by liberal internet and mainstream media outlets? No.


Perhaps a rephrasing is in order?

Anything new here save for the expected emphasis on partisanship where "Limbaugh" and "liberals" clash?

The only relevant theme to arise from that exchange, that was defended by both persons, is who is a bigger and better republican/patriot...reductio ab surdiam...which in the end only reinforces the patriotism...

Divide and conquer and all that rot...

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 08:56 PM

Originally posted by MemoryShock
Perhaps a rephrasing is in order?

Umm, no; it was my opinion.
How about you rephrase your 'divide and conquer' commentary, kkthx?

posted on Apr, 8 2009 @ 09:13 PM

Originally posted by Seekerof

Originally posted by MemoryShock
Perhaps a rephrasing is in order?

Umm, no; it was my opinion.
How about you rephrase your 'divide and conquer' commentary, kkthx?

By the way...welcome back...

And I'll as well keep my commentary in tact as my opinion...

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 08:31 PM

Originally posted by baseball101
reply to post by Seekerof

i don't care who it was,

So you don't care if he was lying or not? I think that says it all. He obviously lacks any integrity at all. This tactic is nothing new, in fact it's downright boring. If you're going to criticise conservatives, fine, but at least be honest about who you are and what you believe. If you can't do that much, your "criticism" says more about you than it does about your target.

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in