On Sat, 21 Aug 2004 20:56:19 +0900, Michael Cash
<mikecash@buggerallspammers.com> wrote:

>>Oh puh-leeze. I bet Limbaugh admires Harry Truman too. How about a
>>living Democrat? No?? OK, I'll settle for one that died within the
>>last 40 years.

>Why is he under some obligation to admire more recent Democrats?

He's under no obligation to do anything. But it's a lot safer to
admire a semi-martyred, assassinated, cold war leader, national icon
whose legacy long since shed any relation to his party affiliations
than it is to admire, say, a current Democratic member of the Congress
or Senate.
.
>>Limbaugh's a knee-jerk right-wing loudmouth and he really should give
>>it up with the "airs of nonpartisanship" routine.

>You very, very, very obviously don't listen to the show. He puts on no
>pretense of nonpartisanship. It just happens in this case that Kennedy
>had made a speech the points of which Rush agreed with, a speech
>involving a tax cut plan that bore similarities to GW's tax cut plan.

Actually I used to listen to the show a lot when I lived in New
Jersey. Just because I realized the guy was a two-bit shill for the
Republican Party didn't make his show any less enjoyable to me.

Now thanks to his recent and very personal drug problems coupled with
his comments in the past about how drug users in America should be
deported you can add hypocrite to his profile.

>(And "right-wing" sort of fails as an insulting term, since very few
>of us are insulted by it).

Obviously not. I take it you're a dittohead?

That very term that Rush's show coined should be telling enough. It's
the absolute definition of knee-jerk devotion to one party or another,
damn the facts.

Raj