All of this has happened before, and it will happen again.

Filed in National by on April 7, 2009

RSmitty, who I would call a sane Republican (if he still is officially a Republican), bemoans the lack of civilized discourse, and I share in the grief of its apparent demise. I call him an honest broker around here due to his track record of calling out both sides when he feels it necessary. And recently, he has taken umbrage at Jason’s recent comments lumping Dave Burris in with other perhaps more culpable right wing blowhards, like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Michelle Bachmann and Bill O’Reilly. While I and Jason perhaps do not agree with him in his criticism, we can at the very least respectfully disagree with him, because we know he is not just another irrational conservative agreeing with talk of armed revolution and the losing of rights due to the passage of economic stimulus.

When RSmitty criticizes you, I do admit to taking a step back and reevaluating my position. To me, that shows that civilized discourse can return, so long as we have sane Republicans and sane Democrats discussing the issues, and willing to question their own opinions without resorting to the tried and true insult that each one of us has at the ready. I long for more RSmittys. More sane Republicans. Indeed, if the Republican Party wants to return to power, it will have to be under sane and more reasoned leadership.

And that is why I found today’s Rush Limbaugh show most enlightening. For today, for the first time in recorded history, a Republican disagreed with Rush Limbaugh.

For those that wish to only read the transcript instead of listening to the vomit-inducing ducid tones of El Rushbo, then see below.

Sane Republicans must stand up and take back their party from the radicals. They must reject the thinly veiled, or overt, calls to violence. They must reject lies from their elected leadership, such as the reeducation camp lie, the losing freedoms lie, the Obama is a dictator lie, and so on and so on. President Obama has an agenda that can be opposed substantively by the Republicans without resort to outrageous talk of revolution and without conjuring up falsehoods to scare people. You can oppose universal healthcare on the merits. You can oppose stimulus spending on the merits. You can alternative energy on the merits. You can oppose the whole of the Obama agenda on the merits. Lies are not necessary. Fear mongering is not necessary. Calls to arms are not necessary.

But the problem for the insane Republicans is that, right now, their arguments on the merits result in them losing elections. It results in them losing the argument right now. Because the country is in no mood for Republican policy, and they elected a progressive President and a Democratic Congress as a result. American politics move in cycles. There are eras of history where one party’s ideology is rejected by the voters and where their policies are not favored. From 1980 to 2005 we had a Conservative era where Republican ideas dominated and Democrats could only get elected by being moderate. Prior to 1980, we had a Liberal era where the New Deal and Great Society programs emerged and where only moderate Republicans could be elected (i.e. Eisenhower and Nixon).

It happens.

Sometimes your party falls out of favor. And all you can do is diligently oppose the governing party’s plans on the merits and resign yourself to developing new ideas and policies, or wait until the governing party screws up and falls out of favor. And it is guaranteed to happen. In the future, I can guarantee that a Republican, or a conservative, will be elected President. The only question is when. Will be generations, or in 4 to 8 years? The more insane Republicans get, the longer it will be. Perhaps sane Republicans are getting that, and hopefully their voices drown out the fear mongers and provocateurs.

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.

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.

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.

CALLER: I am.

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.

About the Author ()

Comments (51)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Unstable Isotope says:

    Good for Charles! Trust me, I feel the pain that Republicans are going through right now. It reminds me of the early days of the blogosphere, when we felt like we were shouting into the wind.

  2. cassandra_m says:

    More like Charles, please!

    With any luck, Charles spoke his piece and cleared the preset of the radio station carrying Rush’s program.

  3. Unstable Isotope says:

    I hope Charles at least made some dittoheads think.

  4. anonone says:

    Del Dem, there are no sane repubs. Anyone who remained a repub for the last 8 years is utterly out of touch with the fundamental ideals of freedom and justice and equal opportunity that this country used to stand for. All you had to do was watch the repubs cheer and celebrate the twin towers falling at their convention last year to see that.

    RSmitty is so insanely conflicted that he is beyond belief. It is pretty clear that the only reason he remains an “R” instead of an “I” is because he likes his friends in the “R” club house. He offers no credible political solutions that are any better than those offered by the left. So if you like to keep him around for the entertainment of arguing with him, fine. But never forget what party that he supports, no matter what. His insanity is that he doesn’t recognize the reality of what his party truly is, and being out of touch with reality is the very definition of insanity.

    I asked Tyler Nixon once, after all we have been through under repub rule, if there was anything that the repubs could do that would cause him to leave the party. He wouldn’t or couldn’t answer. These repubs are a perversion of loyalty and will always put party over country, dollars over people, and war over peace if that is what their self-interested leaders like Rush want.

    The only arguably sane so-called “conservatives” are in the Democratic party. As has been noted, Clinton was the best repub president this country ever had. President Obama is turning out to be a huge disappointment with his banker allegiances and state secrets advocacy.

    I hope the repubs splinter into several brands of conservative parties and split their base in two. Then we have a chance to mount a challenge to the entrenched dems from the left. We may not win at first, but we could pull them far leftward from the center where they are now. And we could win some pluralities.

  5. pandora says:

    Smitty is the E.F. Hutton of the blogosphere. 😉

  6. Delaware Dem says:

    Anonone, I disagree with you on numerous levels. There are sane Republicans. They have been conditioned all their lives to follow their leadership, for that is what Republicans do. Infighting is for Democrats and liberals.

    But now, with all the outrageous actions and comments from their leadership, some are beginning to find the courage to speak up.

    As for President Clinton, he was a moderate, and so to a liberal, he might seem conservative, but no President that advocated and fought for universal healthcare can ever be considered a conservative.

    And President Obama, you mentioned the only area so far that I disagree with him on, re the Torture memos. That does not make him a HUGE disappointment. You are reacting as insanely as our media.

  7. cassandra_m says:

    A1, there are sane repubs. The sane ones have little to no access to a microphone or to power. A couple of these sane ones are my friends, who either voted for Obama this round or sat it all out. These saner ones have little to no taste for the culture war crap, have no interest in the current know-nothing fashion of the wingnut types and are appalled that repubs couldn’t find a way to effectively govern over the last 8 years. These people do have a vision for government that doesn’t exactly mesh with mine but they do understand that government has a real function and it isn’t to make rich people richer. You can have a real conversation with these people — largely fact-based and with principles intact — that never gets to the talking points of the day.

    Sane repubs do indeed exist — it is just hard to hear them over the cable-ready madness of the rest of them.

  8. Rebecca says:

    anonone 4,

    I can sympathize with RSmitty and Tyler Nixon. I can because I would NEVER become a Republican. I haven’t always agreed with my party, but I have always believed that if I worked at it hard enough I could change it to reflect true Democratic beliefs. I’m sure that RSmitty and Tyler feel the same way. This is not, and has not been, their Republican party.

    I don’t agree with them, but I admire their stamina and loyalty to their core principles. Those principles would never find a home in our party, anymore than mine could find a home in theirs. I won’t go so far as to say that we need their principles, but I will admit to needing a loyal opposition and to wishing that it might become sane again.

  9. jason330 says:

    Not to reopen a can of worms – but Dave lumped himself in with the nutbag wing of the GOP by pushing the secession talking points.

    So if by “civil discourse” we mean making excuses for wingnuts that we like because they seem slightly less dangerous to society than other wingnuts – I say no thank you.

    We had that level of civil discourse for eight long years and look where it got us.

  10. jason330 says:

    I still favor a truth and recociliation commission by the way.

    Any decent Republicans that want to step up to a microphone and apologize for supporting Bush would get my respect and civil discourse.

  11. Delaware Dem says:

    I don’t like Burris and I am not making excuses for him. I was speaking about RSmitty’s view and criticism, and I was being diplomatic.

  12. Von Cracker says:

    All the sane Republicans I know are socially liberal and against most government intervention. In other words, the modern (or socially acceptable) definition of Libertarian.

    And is that title a Battlestar reference, DD?

  13. jason330 says:

    DD,

    I know. I am pained by all this bad blood, but it is always the Democrats who are diplmatic and say things , “It’s okay..we’re all American’s after all.”

    How I’d love to hear a Republican say that just once.

  14. anonone says:

    I appreciate everyone’s thoughtful comments and I understand why you disagree with me. I know that I am in a minority. For now.

    But I believe that the repub party has forfeited its right to ever hold power in America again much the way the Nazis did in Germany after WWII. I believe that it is critically important that we continue to do everything we can to politically destroy that party as a viable political organization so that it will never ever rise again.

    But to those who disagree – what else could the repub party do that they haven’t already done that would push you over the limit that I passed long ago?

  15. Delaware Dem says:

    Yes, VC. It is.

  16. Geezer says:

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

    http://www.aclu.org/safefree/torture/38710lgl20090211.html

    Money graphs for those pressed for time:

    The unredacted pages from the Church report were previously classified. Describing investigations of deaths at Bagram in 2002, the report refers to alleged behavior of military personnel as “clearly abusive, and clearly not in keeping with any approved interrogation policy or guidance.” The report notes that “In both instances, the deaths followed interrogation sessions in which unauthorized techniques were allegedly employed, but in both cases, these sessions were followed by further alleged abusive behavior outside of the interrogation booth.”

    The ACLU also obtained reports of two deaths at Bagram. Both detainees were determined to have been killed by pulmonary embolism caused as a result of standing chained in place, sleep depravation and dozens of beatings by guards and possibly interrogators. (Also reveals the use of torture at Gitmo and American-Afghani prisons in Kabul ).

    That took me all of two minutes of research. This from a guy whose PR reps claim he reads voluminously. Yeah? What?

  17. cassandra_m says:

    But to those who disagree – what else could the repub party do that they haven’t already done that would push you over the limit that I passed long ago?

    Speaking for myself, there is nothing about the current makeup and attitude of the current repub party that would convince me that they are to be trusted with power for quite a long time. But most of us were reacting your post to counter that there are same individuals who may call themselves Republicans, but that is no way recommends the party itself for anything at this point. Because the sane ones aren’t running the show.

  18. anon says:

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

    That’s just Rush diverting from the point. Died or not, Charles got it right: We aren’t supposed to torture.

    Charles remembers when we were the good guys and he wants that for America again.

  19. Von Cracker says:

    Fantastic.

    Must check out Caprica, but I can’t see it being as good.

  20. anonone says:

    cassandra_m

    I personally like most of the repubs who post here – particularly ones like RSmitty, who brings a very warm and friendly personality to these threads. I even like Mike Matthews, bless his little misguided heart.

    So I don’t think that they are clinically insane, per se. I just think “liberal republican” and “moderate republican” are oxymorons and anyone who calls themselves one is out of their political mind. 🙂

  21. anonone says:

    Hi Rebecca,

    You’re one of my heroes in Delaware and the only commenter or DLr that I have ever met (that I know of, anyway).

    In your post #8 you wrote:

    “I admire their stamina and loyalty to their core principles.”

    I gotta ask you – what “core principles” could you possibly be talking about?

    And if you really think having a “loyal opposition” is a good thing, why not have it come from the left of the Dems instead of the right? If we can destroy the repub party, we just might be able to get that.

    (I think that I am probably out of my political mind, too.)

  22. xstryker says:

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

    He means this literally. No one that Rush knows personally ever died from torture. And if Rush doesn’t know you personally, you don’t exist. We are all phantoms in the solipsist funhouse that is Rush’s world.

  23. David says:

    How do you call for more civil political discourse by calling almost half the country insane? By your definition America has been an insane nation from the start. The founders were insane. The people are insane.

    The truth is that we need to respect one another as people, but we need to fight the contest of ideas. It doesn’t need to be personal, but it is a worthy contest which must happen.

  24. Delaware Dem says:

    David…

    I did not call half the country insane. Indeed, I did not even call half your party insane. The percentage of sane v. insane Republicans has yet to be established. All we know is that the insane Republicans are in charge of your party, and they speak for you.

  25. jason330 says:

    The truth is that we need to respect one another as people, but we need to fight the contest of ideas. It doesn’t need to be personal, but it is a worthy contest which must happen.

    Such a short memory. Respecting one another as people was nowhere on the Republican agenda when they enjoyed their majority status.

    I find it funny how all calls for bi-partisanship or civility come down to Democrats politely allowing the GOP to bluster and rant on with its anti-American nonsense.

  26. Unstable Isotope says:

    Yes, Jason, the calls for bipartisanship from the GOP became deafening once the Democrats were on charge. Do people even remember “up or down vote” and the nuclear option from Republicans just a few short years ago?

  27. Rebecca says:

    Hey anonone!

    Thanks for the kudos but they belong to the good people here who work day in and day out to counter the Republican noise machine.

    You ask what principles the Republicans have and I’ve got to agree that right now principles are totally missing in the Republican party. But there was a time when Republicans like Eisenhower and Rockerfeller stood for something.

    For example, the Republicans have always claimed that they stand for smaller, efficient government. That is a principle. It isn’t one I subscribe to because I believe there are things that ONLY government can do and that government is usually pretty efficient at doing those things.

    Still, if you look at this particular principle, the Republicans have moved from Eisenhower’s warning about the Military Industrial Establishment taking over the nation to Grover Norquist’s goal of shrinking government until it can be drowned in a bathtub. Eike wanted government to be wary of growing out of control, Norquist wants an unregulated society where pirates reign.

    That’s an over simplification but it’s the first thing that comes to mind before I’ve had my tea this morning. Again, it is not a principle that I believe in, but it is a principle, and it might be one that RSmitty and Tyler believe in. Eike’s warning was valid and perhaps if somebody had heeded it we might have avoided Viet Nam. Norquist is just a total nut job.

    Why can’t the loyal opposition come from the left-wing of our own party? Good question and there probably is loyal opposition already coming from those of us on the left. We sure have been vocal enough about the Dixiecrats in Dover. Not enough, but we’re trying and these things take time.

    But in the broader context, I’ve been thinking about political parties and why they do what they do. There are 300 million Americans and in reality they have to find a political home in one of two parties. Our form of politics demands a binary choice. What are the odds that everything you or I believe fits into one of two slots? We choose the party that comes closest and then work to make it fit our worldview. In our case it means dragging hard to the left within our own party. We are the loyal opposition to the DLC types.

    In the Republican party Karl Rove sliced and diced the electorate to form a coalition that wons at the polls. No principles were involved here — just vote counts. And we’ve seen where that has led. So the Republican party has no more principles. But, perhaps RSmitty and Tyler, and Joanne do and they think they belong in the R slot and not the D slot. They are probably right and I’m hoping they can take back their party. Because having a constant attack dog at our backs isn’t good for the country. The Republican Party has devolved into a hate and smear machine and if it can’t dig itself out of that modus operandi we’ve got a serious problem in American politics. That’s why I’m pulling for some sanity within that party.

  28. Rebecca says:

    Oh, one more thing. I’m talking about folks like RSmitty, Tyler and Joanne. I am not excusing Burris — Jason is 100% right about him.

  29. RSmitty says:

    DD: 😯 Wow. My ego is suddenly far larger than this comment box, so I can’t possibly say any more.

  30. RSmitty says:

    HA!

    I appreciate the acknowledgement and that I inspired thought. Drink much last night? 😆

  31. RSmitty says:

    Seriously, that Crapbaugh transcript is troubling in regard to Flapjaw (rhymes with Limbaugh). Charles is the type of person that I can identify with in terms of how he sees that issue. I can only guess that there would be more similarity, but the context of the transcript is what it is. Chief Oxycotin and his response is totally representative of what I see as the battle. That engrained attitude. It’s a figurative fingers-in-the-ears-nah-nah-nah-nah-naaaaah debate tactic. There’s nothing there of factual substance. Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Yet, when the pressure is on, the tempers flare, and we know the rest.

    To the point of discourse, it’s becoming a lost art form, that’s for sure. I don’t really know where it started (the downfall), but I distinctly remember Butterbaugh (rhymes with Limbaugh) starting his rants when Clinton was elected by calling it, “America held Hostage, Day xxx.” Could that have been the start? Was it before? I have no clue. It is, however, not much coincidence that the fall of it began with the beginning of the rise of RADIO BLOGGERS (no, not DTR, but people like Limbaugh, Hannity, etc., which is what they should now all be called, if you give it some thought).

    I do appreciate the kind thoughts, as well. It was a bad day for me yesterday and I do have a tendency to wear my heart on my sleeve, but it’s what I do, it’s who I am and I accept that.

    A1 – you and I can have some decent convos every once in a while, but you do concern me with your apparent staunch intolerance. You’re without a radio-platform, but not much else separates that attitude from those like Jello Jowls (that would be Limbaugh).

  32. anonone says:

    Rsmitty,

    You wrote:

    “but you do concern me with your apparent staunch intolerance.”

    Too bad. I don’t tolerate those who institutionalize torture, killing, bigotry, poverty, and environmental destruction. You do. I don’t.

    You’re without a radio-platform, but not much else separates that attitude from those like Jello Jowls (that would be Limbaugh).

    That and a few tens of millions of dollars. 😉

    Limbaugh is good at what he does and I wish we had somebody like him advocating for the far left.

  33. anonone says:

    Hi Rebecca,

    Nice comment, and thanks for the reply.

    I think we already have a “serious problem in American politics” but some kind of nebulous idealized “sanity” within the repub party isn’t going to fix it.

    I think the binary choice in political parties that we face is a fundamental flaw in our system. One reason I am hoping for the ultimate marginalization (if not destruction) of the national repub party is because it will open up new opportunities for smaller parties to emerge and get traction.

    Actually, Tyler Nixon has a great post this morning at DE Libertarian on the problem of entrenched politicians of both parties. While I agree with most of what he has to say, I don’t think we’re going to get to “a whole new set of citizen representatives” without public campaign financing and real election reform such as uniform federal election standards.

    And people like you.

  34. RSmitty says:

    Too bad. I don’t tolerate those who institutionalize torture, killing, bigotry, poverty, and environmental destruction. You do. I don’t.

    No, I don’t and I’ve made that clear. Your inability (or lack of giving a crap) to differentiate is what I am pointing out. It’s a class-bigotry tactic and that is what concerns me.

  35. Geezer says:

    Everybody should holster the absolutist language, IMHO.

  36. anonone says:

    Rsmitty,

    In spite of your protestations and even your own better judgement (that emerges on occasion), you’ve aligned yourself with a party that has done all of the above with the VAST SUPPORT OF ITS MEMBERS AND LEADERS.

    It has nothing to do with class or bigotry. I don’t need to waste time trying to differentiate among “good” repubs and “bad” repubs. There is no such distinction in my mind – you’re all just repubs by your own voluntary choice and have chosen to differentiate yourselves in that way by definition.

    If that is “lack of giving a crap” then so be it. Since you have voluntarily chosen to wear the uniform of the repub party, don’t whine that people like me who want to destroy its political power aren’t going to take the time to find out who is under each uniform in that quest.

    We don’t care. If you don’t like it, you can send in the card and take off the uniform.

  37. pandora says:

    Right now there is a war waging in the Republican Party, and Smitty is fighting for what he believes in. Will he win? I doubt it, but lumping him in with Far Right opinion is not fair. It’s merely sensational, and I think its core goal is designed to make Smitty leave his party.

    But these you’re an idiot, torturer, blah, blah, blah tactics never work. In fact, they usually lead to the opposite result.

  38. anonone says:

    pandora,

    There is no “war waging in the Republican Party.” That is a media creation. Its leadership continues to walk in lock-step with Limbaugh and the whole right-wing agenda.

    Want proof?

    75% of them thought Bush/Cheney did a wonderful job. 75% think Obama is doing a bad job. The radical right has taken over the party. They won. Its over.

    I didn’t lump RSmitty in with the far right. He did that himself by joining and remaining in the repub party. The party uses people like RSmitty as rubes. Maybe someday he’ll recognize that.

  39. pandora says:

    Now see, that’s what I’m talking about. Rubes? Insulting people is not the best way to influence. And I do think, A1, that your goal is to have Smitty leave his party.

    Your percentages leave out the 25% that is Smitty, and if he, and others like him, can grow that number then his side wins. If not, he’ll have a decision to make.

    I’m willing to let the fight play out. It is, after all, in everyone’s interest to have sanity prevail.

  40. anonone says:

    pandora,

    I didn’t call RSmitty a rube. I said that the repub party uses people like RSmitty as rubes.

    And, yes, I do hope that RSmitty and people like him abandon the repub party.

  41. pandora says:

    Then perhaps you might want to add a carrot to that stick! 🙂

  42. anonone says:

    I have told him that I think you’re nicer than Maria. 😉

  43. Jason Z says:

    Full disclosure, I didn’t listen to the whole clip and didn’t read the transcript. I have, no doubt, listened to more Limbaugh than most readers here.

    “For today, for the first time in recorded history, a Republican disagreed with Rush Limbaugh.”
    This is a patently false statement, and I have heard tons of callers claim to be Rs and act like that gives them street cred. These are called “seminar callers,” they only fool those who don’t get it.

    I’m guessing this clip came from mediamatters or the kos, and that’s fine, but if you actually listened to more than a couple minutes of the show, you might understand what’s going on.

    From the LA Times: Take the Limbaugh Challenge – http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-klavan29-2009mar29,0,5456892.story

  44. Jason Z says:

    Ha! That transcript is pretty shoddily edited. Here’s the real transcript that exposes the rudeness and stupidity of “Charles.” http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_040709/content/01125112.guest.html

  45. pandora says:

    Now I see… Republicans who disagree with Rush only claim to be Republicans. Thought so.

  46. Geezer says:

    Uh…the transcript looks pretty much the same to me. I don’t think the charges of being “brainwashed” or a “Nazi” are called for, but it’s still Rush who idiotically claims he knows of no deaths under harsh questioning, when that information is easily obtainable. I left the link higher up in this thread.

  47. liberalgeek says:

    No, Pandora, they just aren’t real Republicans. Once Rush rids the nation of liberals, the Charles’s (and Smitty’s) of the country are next.

  48. Unstable Isotope says:

    LG,

    You’ve really hit on the heart of Republican Limbaugh-ism. Only certain people (approved by them) are real Americans, the rest don’t count because they’re traitors or something. I think this is how they can claim to be patriotic Americans when it’s crystal clear they have nothing but contempt for most American people. You hear them say these things all the time, like when Palin talked about “real Virginia” and Bachmann talked about “pro-America Congresspeople.” Now, even the Republican party isn’t pure enough anymore.

  49. Geezer says:

    How long before they start obsessing over their Purity of Essence?

  50. Jason Z says:

    Geezer, I think it is safe to assume Rush was talking about legal torture, sanctioned by our government (I know there is a new standard, let’s just take 2002 and 2004 laws). The part of the Church Report the ACLU has posted states that dozens of people were charged with crimes in those cases (yes, I’d be very interested in those outcomes and will look into it when I have the time). The DoD and Army’s Criminal Investigative Division seem to have done the right thing.
    Illegal torture, as I understand it, was the cause of death of many good people around the world at the hands of radical Muslims. Danny Pearl was kidnapped, tortured, and beheaded by one of those Guantanamo residents (KSM has claimed credit). Nick Berg suffered the same fate at the hands of filth in Iraq.
    Uh oh, I said we “torture.” I don’t think it’s the right language to use in all of these cases, but Rush used it and I’m trying to stick to the topic.

    xstyker wrote: “‘LIMBAUGH: I don’t know of anybody who died from torture.’
    He means this literally. No one that Rush knows personally ever died from torture.”
    Not really. From the Oxford American Desk Dictionary, “know of = be aware of,” “literal = taking words in their basic sense without metaphor or allegory.”