Skip to main content

Who can go the lowest? Rush Limbaugh claims the prize - for now...

It seems as if, upon seeing the post-convention poll bounce President Barack Obama received when the week began, Republicans have gone a little cuckoo, and just when I feel they can't sink any lower with their commentary, I'm yet again proven wrong.

Former Vice President and current front-runner in the battle for creepiest-guy-in-the-world status, Dick Cheney, started things by letting it be known on Monday - a day before 9/11 - that President Obama took sole credit for the killing of Osama bin Laden. This, of course, wasn't true, and the timing of it all couldn't have been more insensitive - unless he had said it a day later, of course.

On 9/11, Republican presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, joined the party. Four hours prior to the attacks in Egypt and Libya, the U.S. Embassy in Cairo released a statement basically stating that all religions (including Islam) should be respected and shouldn't be discriminated against. This was in response to some protests which broke out in the area due to word that an American-made anti-Islamic film was set to be released, either via the internet or elsewhere. After the attacks, yet before any official word had been leaked to the press, Romney suggested that the U.S. Embassy's pre-attack statement was actually Obama sympathizing with the attackers.

Today, Rush Limbaugh decided it was his turn.

On his show today, Limbaugh said: "What if Ayman al-Zawahiri gave up Osama bin Laden for the express purpose of making Obama look good? Giving Obama stature, political capital?"

He added that al-Qaeda wants to keep Obama in power and that it would "further their cause."

Let's think about this for a moment here, which Rush obviously didn't do. He was probably thinking about eating a dozen burgers at McDonald's when he said this - that or one of his three ex-wives. So, let me get this straight, Rush - al-Qaeda turned over the leader of their group for the U.S. to kill him under President Obama, because it makes the president look good and furthers their cause? Does he realize how idiotic that sounds?

That would have been like if back in the '80s, James Worthy of the Los Angeles Lakers set up his teammate, All-Star Magic Johnson, to get hurt against Larry Bird and the Boston Celtics, because it'd make the Celtics look better when facing the Lakers, which would help further the Lakers' cause - apparently, of losing basketball games.

How idiotic is that? "Here - have our leader. It will make us stronger!" Yeah - based on this comment, I seriously have to wonder if Rush is on drugs again.

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/09/13/842611/rush-limbaugh-bin-laden/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...