Why Rush is Wrong

« Return to Article

Discuss

  • Posted By: Skogkatt @ 03/09/2009 1:39:10 AM

    Newsweek ran several cover stories overhyping stem cell research in order to try and make the republicans look bad for not giving a blank check for it. Now the week that all gets changed their cover story is a very poorly written attack piece against Rush Limbaugh with dramatically flawed logic.

  • Posted By: wizest @ 03/08/2009 6:59:42 PM

    how does it feel to wake up after 20yr nap?

    • Posted By: hopey dopey @ 03/09/2009 1:37:48 AM

      A little stiff and thirsty.

  • Posted By: davie divergent @ 03/09/2009 1:35:23 AM

    Wait, I have something we call all agree on!

    It's that idiot lady with 14 kids and no job!

    Surely both liberals and conservatives agree on this?

  • Posted By: Frank James @ 03/09/2009 1:33:31 AM

    "After Iraq, Katrina and Harriet Miers, Democrats surged to a five-to-three advantage on the competence and ethics questions. And that was before we put Sarah Palin on our national ticket."

    And what did it go to after Sarah Palin was put on the national ticket? You are trying to imply it got worse but you provide no evidence.

    Evidence should be your friend David; it's good to have some of it before you write something in a magazine or invade a middle eastern country. Maybe someday you'll learn that.

  • Posted By: davie divergent @ 03/09/2009 1:25:05 AM

    Sometimes government is the problem. Sometimes government is the solution.

    There, that should tick off just about everyone!

    • Posted By: bkrummel @ 03/09/2009 1:32:13 AM

      I'm not ticked off. Your exactly right.

  • Posted By: evolving1 @ 03/08/2009 8:01:39 PM

    Mr Frum is a very scary man.. he is a Republican that makes sense in 2009!! He seems to have an inkling on what is needed for his partys' future and that could give Republicans a platform that would be well received.. SCARY!!

    • Posted By: Skogkatt @ 03/09/2009 1:32:02 AM

      The funny thing is all the liberals who agree with what he says which is why he carefully avoids directly confronting liberals, and sticks to attacking his own party. That's how he gets invited onto NPR as a "republican" and how he gets on the cover of the a liberal rag like Newsweek propagating a stupid story that the media is using to avoid focusing on the stupid decisions the Obama administration is making and the embarassing mistakes that might make their party look bad.

    • Posted By: hopey dopey @ 03/09/2009 1:28:13 AM

      Yea and the last time I saw a mouth like that it had a hook in it!

  • Posted By: eaglwlker12 @ 03/08/2009 7:25:34 PM

    You sound like a jerk to me

    • Posted By: hopey dopey @ 03/09/2009 1:30:34 AM

      Dittos!

    • Posted By: jarcher1 @ 03/08/2009 7:38:47 PM

      Wow, brilliant, insightful retort. That's sarcasm in case you just don't get it.

  • Posted By: pbussell @ 03/09/2009 1:28:43 AM

    I don't agree with Mr. Frum's politics but I appreciate the tone and the thoughtfulness of this article. I wish more opinion pieces admitted that maybe we (liberal and conservative) don't know the answers yet but we need to ask the questions. Talking to each other civilly would be a good start.

  • Posted By: eulace @ 03/08/2009 8:36:55 PM

    Limbaugh wears dirty, smelley, stinky, diapers.......at least he could change them......

    • Posted By: hopey dopey @ 03/09/2009 1:24:20 AM

      You seem to have intimate knowledge of Rush's diapers.

      • Posted By: Shanshayla @ 03/09/2009 1:26:36 AM

        Paaahhheezzzz... !s this the best you've got/ Geezsss!!!

      • Posted By: davie divergent @ 03/09/2009 1:26:29 AM

        See, this is what I mean about an unproductive discussion. It may be fun but it's not helpful.

  • Posted By: kgoetz1 @ 03/09/2009 1:05:00 AM

    Depression and recessions have been presided over during republican administrations. Businessover common sense, the rich over the middle class and poor, profits over jobs and people. That's not just talk it's true and I can prove it if you're willing to listen to truth.

    • Posted By: Skogkatt @ 03/09/2009 1:21:38 AM

      Prove it and also show how they're mutually exclusive.

  • Posted By: bvm2009 @ 03/09/2009 1:20:25 AM

    David Frum, you are as clueless as Rush Limbaugh himself. To start with, where in the hell were you when George W. was spending trillions of dollars on a war in Iraq which we created. Keep in mind, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. And if you believe that George W. had wrong information about Iraq's role in 9/11, then I have a beachfront property for sale in Nevada. Where were you when the conservative icons, the CEO of our financial istitution were raping and plundering our country. The fact of the matter is that THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT THE PROBLEM, IT IS THE SOLUTION. For the record, Ronald Regan was as wrong as you are. No the market and the free enterprise can not regulate itself. It is like asking the fox guarding the henhouse. You will have to agree that in the last few months wer have seen more than enough examples of corporate and market greed. Lastly, the wealth of the nation is not judged by the wealth of the wealthy. It is judged by the waelth of the poor. Keep in mind that wealthy are wealthy everywhere and live well everywhere including places like Somalia and Ethiopia.

  • Posted By: GoldRanger @ 03/09/2009 1:20:22 AM

    Liberals need to stand up and UNITE Frum! Ecourage all liberals to vote LIBERTARIAN! If it's not realistic then is your reality right?

  • Posted By: davie divergent @ 03/09/2009 1:06:38 AM

    All this talk about earmarks:

    Republicans and democrats are both contributors to this problem and have been for a long time. Earmarks don't help the debt problem but we have some issues that are going to be financially more serious than earmarks, like what to do with social security and the health care mess.

    Come on, let's own up to some facts: Obama's comments on earmarks are silly. The stimulus bill is full of them. Yes, some of the earmarks might actually stimulate the economy but they are earmarks and there were a lot of them. Ok, that should make the liberals mad. Now for the conservatives: the reason this is happening is because you guys blew it over the last 8 years and your credibility on debt issues is gone.

    What about health care? Tens of millions of uninsured; that's a problem. Costs rising at double digit rates per year. That's a problem.

    I do favor insuring everyone but does anyone know if we can really do that? Can we afford it? Screaming about socialism or about how conservatives are all a**holes might be satisfying but it gets us nowhere toward solutions.

    And about tax cuts: tax cuts that occur while spending is allowed to increase even faster than tax revenues bankrupts the government. Regardless of your opinion on tax cuts or the spending stimulus this is a basic fact.

    Facts are not liberal or conservative but they are facts. And once we get done name calling, we are going to have to deal with some of them.

    • Posted By: Skogkatt @ 03/09/2009 1:18:03 AM

      And apparently all Newsweek can do despite all these dire circumstances you mention is run a cover story by an obscure republican trying to make a name for himself by launching a wobbly armed arrow at a giant bullseye. But you're not concerned with the stupid things the administration has done, the dozens of gaffs they made, or the fact they might have legitimate policy differences to complain about. No your incredibly intelligent addition to this conversation is to open up with calling him "Mr. Stinky Lush Limberger" and you're too stupid to understand how stupid that makes you look.

  • Posted By: kdgrail @ 03/09/2009 1:12:55 AM

    I've been reading the comments and I am amazed. The country is going down in flames and people seem to think it's a great idea to continue the vicious rhetoric. Rush Limbaugh is a terrible spokesman for anyone in this country, Republican or otherwise. His whole purpose is to enrage, point the finger and demonize any non-conservative. What's been forgotten is that we are in a mess right now. The reason Republicans lost in November is that they were out of touch with average Americans. We are broke and losing jobs and worried about how to pay our bills and put our kids through college. I think David Frum is right about the need for the Republican party to pay attention to what is going on. I am basically an Independent and I think there are important points to be made by Republicans. At this time in our history they need to stop acting as though nothing is going wrong with the country. I see no hint of concern about the average person from most of the members of the party. The concern should not be the debt. It should be how best to get the economy rolling and generate decent-paying jobs. If that happens, the debt will take care of itself. If not we are in for an even more difficult time, Republicans and Democrats would rather bicker and make accusations than work together to fix the problems we are facing. It really is time for great ideas and bi-partisanship. Whether people like him or not Obama is at least making what to me seems like a reasonable effort to resolve a crisis that he inherited.

  • Posted By: Omaar @ 03/08/2009 10:04:53 PM

    Michael Steele: "I'm Trying To Move An Elephant, That's Become Mired In Its Own Muck"
    ---------------------------------

    Describes Rush Limbaugh [[Elephant]] Perfectly and the Republican Party as a Whole !!

    -----------------------------

    Rep. Conservative, David Brooks says....

    "GOP Spending Freeze Idea Is "Insane," Party Too Stuck On Reagan"

    He's Correct in that Description of the Republican Party, Sean Hannity, is Constantly Replaying Ronald W. Reagan Speeches and Desiring the Same Ole Reagan Answer to Crisis.....

    [[Deregulation and Tax Cuts]]

    Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity are Lost in the...... 80's

    Notice how they NEVER Revert to George W. Bush's Speeches or Decisions and he just left Office...

    Limbaugh and Hannity have to Delve Way Back to the [[80's]] to the Ronald Wilson Reagan Era...

    Which wasn't that Good.
    -------------------------

    Newt Gingrich: Became the highest profile Republican yet to push back against Rush Limbaugh, saying on "Meet the Press" that it's "irrational" to hope for the President of the United States to fail.

    "You've got to Want the President to succeed," said the former House Speaker.

    "You're Irrational if you don't Want the President to Succeed.

    Because if he doesn't succeed the country doesn't succeed...

    I don't think anyone should want the President of the United States to Fail.

    I want SOME OF HIS POLICIES TO BE STOPPED....

    But I don't want the President of the United States to FAIL. I want him to learn.... NEW POLICIES."
    ----------------

    Now that's Fair, Reasonable and Rational Thinking.

    Opposed to Hate Mongering and Un-Patriotic Rhetoric

    • Posted By: hopey dopey @ 03/09/2009 1:12:18 AM

      was he on a date with Rosie O'Donnell?

  • Posted By: Frank James @ 03/09/2009 1:12:08 AM

    Is a 41% unfavorability rating among independents actually very bad? It's weird how the writer of this fails to give the favorability rating for Rush among independents.

  • Posted By: kgoetz1 @ 03/09/2009 1:11:39 AM

    Deal with this FACT, republicans are pro=business and anti=labor. TRUE All of our jobs are going overseas, WHO did that?

  • Posted By: kgoetz1 @ 03/09/2009 1:09:53 AM

    Bushes senseless war is costing 10 billion a month or more, how many schools is that"

  • Posted By: Joe_Bradshaw2000 @ 03/08/2009 1:36:13 AM

    Conservatives favor policies that help fat cats. Why shouldn't they have a fat cat as their leader? How is Rush all that different from the corporate executives that would benefit the most from a full implementation of his ideas? I like that you mention the good ol' days when the nation was consumed by navel-gazing and the Lewinsky scandal. Why did you not mention Tom Delay when you were talking about the conservative movement's problem with corruption though? Do you think Jack Abramoff was simply the target of a partisan witch hunt? There are like 15 felony convictions related to lobbying abuse and it looks like there are more to come. The top 5% income earners get more than 50% of the income so it seems quite natural to me that they should pay 50% of the income taxes (I suspect that they actually pay less than 50%).

    • Posted By: NotSoros @ 03/08/2009 1:48:24 AM

      If you want "from each according to their means, to each according to their needs" there is a country for that. They produce very little and have vast resources that go untouched.

      Let me make this simple so you don't miss anything. Since you are probably still in school and get good grades from your leftist teachers, lets assume your grade is in the top 5% and the other kids are in the remaining 95%. To be fair, your grade needs to be lowered by 30% to bring the failing kids up to a liveable grade (no one can live on 40 to 50% a summester, how would they compete). This leaves you with 70% of your grade (possibly taking you from an A to a B or C+, but that is okay, because that is liveable and won't cause your comrads to be offended at your excessive grade earning capacity...... Is this getting through...

      Any questions?

      Class dismissed.

      • Posted By: christophr2 @ 03/08/2009 1:56:53 AM

        Why not quadruple the salaries of teachers if you want them to tow your line?

        • Posted By: hopey dopey @ 03/09/2009 1:09:26 AM

          Me too gimme gimme gimme!

      • Posted By: Onamatopoeia @ 03/08/2009 3:29:08 AM

        One question and one differing opinion:
        First, are you aware that your metaphor comparing a grading system with earning and distribution of wealth is flawed in that "A, B, or C+" would not refer to an objective and concrete total as would a dollar amount. One (the dollar amount) is quantitive where the other (a grading system) is qualitative. Apples and Oranges.
        Second, looking past this, to the root of your argument about the redistribution of wealth, have you ever observed that most violent crime and most outbreaks of illness come from both the poorer and less educated areas of society and of the world. It's a matter of debate possibly but I for one would think that reducing poverty and raising education would go a long way to reducing crime (and therefore much of the cost of and strain on our prisons and police forces) and disease (which, once it becomes epidemic, we pay for whether we like it or not through higher health and insurance costs and the increased danger of exposure from people too poor to receive treatment). To me, making sure that my "neighbors" are doing all right is also an issue of self-protection and one for which I would willingly give part of my yearly income.

        • Posted By: christophr2 @ 03/08/2009 3:33:51 AM

          The greatest crimes also come from the richest among us.

          • Posted By: hopey dopey @ 03/08/2009 10:05:58 PM

            The stupidist lines also come from the *** among us.

      • Posted By: Joe_Bradshaw2000 @ 03/08/2009 3:08:30 AM

        Look, calling liberals communists is a straw-man argument. I saw the Bobby Jindal "response" so I know that conservatives don't know anything about rhetoric so I will explain for you. Liberals want the government to help people accomplish things they can't do on their own. I can't bring down the price on healthcare or improve healthcare outcomes by myself but the government can. I want a government that will do something and won't simply be obstructionist or try to reduce taxes until it does nothing but make nukes.

        • Posted By: Jan909 @ 03/08/2009 3:16:55 AM

          HA HA HA HA HA. Problem with that is that the govt always runs out of "other people's money" and everyone remains poor. It's ALWAYS the way with socialism. If you have one thing, you are lacking 10 others. It never, ever has worked to create the idealistic "utopia" liberals dream it can. It's not consistent with the natural laws of this planet.

          • Posted By: ginamlaster @ 03/08/2009 3:39:19 AM

            Oh please! We've had the last eight years to see what government does with other people's money. I'm still trying to figure out what America got for that orgy of spending that went on during the Bush Administration. It sure wasn't health care or more better-paying jobs.

            • Posted By: Sleepless in CA @ 03/08/2009 3:58:09 AM

              These last 8 years does not represent or speak for all conservative values. I disagreed with a lot Bush did. Get your head out of 'these last 8 years'. That is the ultimate liberal scapegoat: "WAAAH, Bush increased our ntl debt so what's wrong with Obama continuing the spending orgy? BUSH did it FIRST!!! WAAAH!! "

              • Posted By: Exiled in USA @ 03/08/2009 8:22:55 AM

                Actually Reagan did it first. Check out Barry Golwater's response, plus his assessment of Rush.

              • Posted By: jarcher1 @ 03/08/2009 5:01:32 AM

                The last 8 years are on all RepubliCON's doorstep, whether you guys try to twist and squirm out of it or not. You vote for Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004? If not, then your excuses of "Oh I didn't agree with a lot of things Bush did" are pretty much irrelevant. You guys headlined yourselves as the party of individual responsibility a few years back, so take some, and admit you supported a dysfunctional administration. Try to come up with some real answers to the problems Americans face, instead of medical savings accounts for the health care mess, lower taxes to solve the current economic crisis, and disallowing stem cell research to make a moral America.

      • Posted By: Jan909 @ 03/08/2009 3:19:42 AM

        Great response.

    • Posted By: girlyredhead @ 03/08/2009 1:45:18 AM

    • Posted By: girlyredhead @ 03/08/2009 1:42:31 AM

  • Posted By: lauriesarno @ 03/09/2009 1:08:40 AM

    Dear Mr. Frum,
    Your article here trys desperately to save the face of the GOP after they backed Mr. Stinky Lush Limberger but it fails miserably. Also, you say that 72% of Lush's audience is male however, no one else (including Lush himself) could provide details about who his typical listener is except that his high ratings are generated by up to 20 million listeners/week. Look, you are a fantastic speechwriter who can probably craft poetry out of someone's vulgar rant laced with obscenities - however, it's obvious here that you are trying to save face for the GOP by throwing Lush under the bus. Why don't you write about why the GOP (including Lush) is so negative towards a president who is a democrat but more importantly, he's a leader who deserves to be treated with respect just becuase he is our leader. Our country is in one of the worst economic crises in history, and all the GOP can do is complain, complain, complain about what President Obama is doing to get us out of this crises (which Bush seemed to overlook until his last few monhts in office - duh!!). Remember when just about the entire country stood behind Bush after 9-11? We were a united front against the horrific attack against us. Why can't the GOP encourage it's constituents to stand behind our President and be a united front to combat this economic war that seems to be bringing us all down?
    America needs hope, brotherhood, kindness, wisdom, truth, and solutions to our problems. The negativity is bringing us down further. Why don't you write about the GOP's negativity?

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse