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

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"