A Rush To Judgement Or Does It All Make Sense?

[3rdnlng]

Without disparaging the messenger, what comments do you have pertaining to the actual message?

 

 

http://www.rushlimba...f_a_coup_d_etat

 

 

"I have to tell you when I'm listening to all the smart people tell me this, my mind is about to explode, and I'm saying, "Do these people not realize what we just learned in the last three weeks?" We got the IRS starting in 2010 taking action to suppress the political involvement and ultimately votes of Tea Party people and conservative Republicans. This regime, this government, on the orders of the highest level. In fact, that investigation is ongoing. We have Fast and Furious. We have Obamacare. The evidence of the totalitarian nature or the authoritarian nature of this administration is on display undeniably every day and yet in the midst of this, "Well, don't go off half cocked on this, Rush. Be very levelheaded. Nothing really to see," as though there's no context here.

 

It made me once again understand, folks, what you and I are up against here. There are just way too many people -- and I'm talking about on our side -- who do not want to admit what we face, who do not want to engage or admit or whatever what we really face here. It matters. This kind of stuff matters because of who the people doing it happen to be. It's one thing if Colonel Sanders would be collecting all this data, but it's not Colonel Sanders. It's Barack Obama and everybody that works for him, and we know who they are and we know what their goals are. We know what their intentions are.

 

Folks, here's the thing, I guess, that gets me. I mentioned Herbert Meyer. We interviewed him for the Limbaugh Letter a few short months ago. Herbert Meyer was in the national security apparatus during the Reagan administration. He was a good friend of Ronald Reagan, and was instrumental in establishing Reagan administration policies that brought down the Soviet Union. The big news to him that's really noteworthy, we talked about it, is that he thinks that the world's coming out of poverty. And it is a big story, The Economist in London had a big story on it recently. We mentioned it to you, and it's a great testament to capitalism.

 

It's not socialism, it's not welfare, it's not compassion and it's not the redistribution of wealth. It's not high taxes that are bringing people out of poverty. It's capitalism, and none other than a leftist publication in London had to admit it. Well, Herb Meyer was the first to sound this notice some months ago. I also mentioned he wrote a piece that currently is in the American Thinker earlier this week, and it had the potential to be controversial because he used Adolf Hitler and Nazism in it, and it was his way of explaining, he made a point in the piece that nowhere, you know, people looking for a smoking gun to nail Obama on all these scandals, Herb says, "Ain't gonna be one."

 

He said whether you believe it or not, there is not one document linking Adolf Hitler to the holocaust. Adolf Hitler never put it on paper what he intended to do. There is no smoking gun. And yet what happened? We know that the Nazis engaged in the Holocaust. Herb Meyer's point was that the people Hitler hired didn't have to be told. They didn't have to be given instructions. All they had to do was listen to what Hitler was saying. All they had to do was listen to what his objectives were. And he said the same thing's happening here with this administration. He went to great pains to say: I'm not calling this administration a bunch of Nazis. I'm just using this as an illustration. I know people will get my point if I use something this notorious, the Nazi regime.

 

It's a point that I've made here about the IRS. They say, "Well, you can't link it in to Obama." You don't need to link Obama to it. He hired these people. Lois Lerner and everybody at the IRS who's doing this is doing everything they can to please Obama. There's not gonna be a smoking gun, but you don't need a smoking gun to know where this administration's doing what it's doing.

 

Obama puts people in positions that mirror him. Eric Holder, you name it, they're doing Obama's bidding. Everybody. Susan Rice and Samantha Power, they are Obama, and there's a context for what's happening. Herbert Meyer, if I may quote him again, asserted that essentially what's taking place in the United States right now is a coup, not a violent coup, and not a million artistic coup, but nevertheless a takeover of a government, and it's being done by the Obama administration.

 

He referred to it as a coup. I don't know if he used the word "peaceful," but clearly there's a coup d'etat going. You know it and I know it. This is what animates us. This is why the Tea Party exists. This country was founded on certain concepts, principles, beliefs -- and they're under assault. Chief among them under assault is the right to privacy, and that's what all this is about. So in the midst of this coup d'etat... I happen to like that formulation."

 

There's much more to the transcript at the link.

[Bigfatbillsfan]

Without disparaging the messenger, what comments do you have pertaining to the actual message?

 

 

http://www.rushlimba...f_a_coup_d_etat

 

 

"I have to tell you when I'm listening to all the smart people tell me this, my mind is about to explode, and I'm saying, "Do these people not realize what we just learned in the last three weeks?" We got the IRS starting in 2010 taking action to suppress the political involvement and ultimately votes of Tea Party people and conservative Republicans. This regime, this government, on the orders of the highest level. In fact, that investigation is ongoing. We have Fast and Furious. We have Obamacare. The evidence of the totalitarian nature or the authoritarian nature of this administration is on display undeniably every day and yet in the midst of this, "Well, don't go off half cocked on this, Rush. Be very levelheaded. Nothing really to see," as though there's no context here.

 

It made me once again understand, folks, what you and I are up against here. There are just way too many people -- and I'm talking about on our side -- who do not want to admit what we face, who do not want to engage or admit or whatever what we really face here. It matters. This kind of stuff matters because of who the people doing it happen to be. It's one thing if Colonel Sanders would be collecting all this data, but it's not Colonel Sanders. It's Barack Obama and everybody that works for him, and we know who they are and we know what their goals are. We know what their intentions are.

 

Folks, here's the thing, I guess, that gets me. I mentioned Herbert Meyer. We interviewed him for the Limbaugh Letter a few short months ago. Herbert Meyer was in the national security apparatus during the Reagan administration. He was a good friend of Ronald Reagan, and was instrumental in establishing Reagan administration policies that brought down the Soviet Union. The big news to him that's really noteworthy, we talked about it, is that he thinks that the world's coming out of poverty. And it is a big story, The Economist in London had a big story on it recently. We mentioned it to you, and it's a great testament to capitalism.

 

It's not socialism, it's not welfare, it's not compassion and it's not the redistribution of wealth. It's not high taxes that are bringing people out of poverty. It's capitalism, and none other than a leftist publication in London had to admit it. Well, Herb Meyer was the first to sound this notice some months ago. I also mentioned he wrote a piece that currently is in the American Thinker earlier this week, and it had the potential to be controversial because he used Adolf Hitler and Nazism in it, and it was his way of explaining, he made a point in the piece that nowhere, you know, people looking for a smoking gun to nail Obama on all these scandals, Herb says, "Ain't gonna be one."

 

He said whether you believe it or not, there is not one document linking Adolf Hitler to the holocaust. Adolf Hitler never put it on paper what he intended to do. There is no smoking gun. And yet what happened? We know that the Nazis engaged in the Holocaust. Herb Meyer's point was that the people Hitler hired didn't have to be told. They didn't have to be given instructions. All they had to do was listen to what Hitler was saying. All they had to do was listen to what his objectives were. And he said the same thing's happening here with this administration. He went to great pains to say: I'm not calling this administration a bunch of Nazis. I'm just using this as an illustration. I know people will get my point if I use something this notorious, the Nazi regime.

 

It's a point that I've made here about the IRS. They say, "Well, you can't link it in to Obama." You don't need to link Obama to it. He hired these people. Lois Lerner and everybody at the IRS who's doing this is doing everything they can to please Obama. There's not gonna be a smoking gun, but you don't need a smoking gun to know where this administration's doing what it's doing.

 

Obama puts people in positions that mirror him. Eric Holder, you name it, they're doing Obama's bidding. Everybody. Susan Rice and Samantha Power, they are Obama, and there's a context for what's happening. Herbert Meyer, if I may quote him again, asserted that essentially what's taking place in the United States right now is a coup, not a violent coup, and not a million artistic coup, but nevertheless a takeover of a government, and it's being done by the Obama administration.

 

He referred to it as a coup. I don't know if he used the word "peaceful," but clearly there's a coup d'etat going. You know it and I know it. This is what animates us. This is why the Tea Party exists. This country was founded on certain concepts, principles, beliefs -- and they're under assault. Chief among them under assault is the right to privacy, and that's what all this is about. So in the midst of this coup d'etat... I happen to like that formulation."

 

There's much more to the transcript at the link.

 

Sounds like part of one of Mr. Limbaugh's 3 hour mouth dumps.

[3rdnlng]

Sounds like part of one of Mr. Limbaugh's 3 hour mouth dumps.

 

I figured you'd be one of the ones knocking the messenger. Did you read the whole transcript? How do you feel about the state following our every move? Were you against the Patriot Act when it was first approved? If not, are you still for it now?

[Telepathic]

Rush's ability to shovel bull **** onto a plate and get people to not only eat it but thank him for serving it to them, is testimony to the man's absolute lack of scruples. The Patriot Act was an abomination from day one, it was forced upon us by a fear-mongering congress and administration, strengthened by folks like Rush clamoring for the NEED for it day in and day out as they attacked anyone who raised concerns about the long term implications and called them "un-American".

 

The man is whore. He sold his soul decades ago and this snippet is proof that he'll say anything to make a buck. The man has no appreciation of history, no sense of right and wrong, no moral absolutes or principles he stands by, and nine times out of ten has no idea what he's talking about unless he's reading his talking points memo or a sponsor's ad copy. Holding Rush up as a pillar of anything is the mark of a person who just doesn't get it and probably never will.

 

As for his outrage over the invasion of privacy, and the OPs, I ask you where you were in 2001 or 2002 or 2003 or 2004 when the groundwork to this was being forged and the fourth amendment was being wiped from existence. Anyone who spoke up then was called ant-american by Rush himself. Don't believe me? Go listen to some calls he took in that time span. We are in this position now as a country because of people like Rush. It's flat out cowardly to snipe at one administration for taking the next (and fully anticipated) steps in a program that he fully supported at the time of its creation. The war over privacy is done. We lost it 10 years ago while guys like Rush sat back and encouraged it to happen -- screw that, while he PROFITED from it happening.

 

!@#$ Rush. He's done nothing but profit off the decimation of our country by being a paid assassin of the far right wing. !@#$ Obama too for doing exactly what everyone who was paying attention feared would happen when we started trading civil liberties for a "feeling" of safety. There are far better ways to make your point than using drivel like this. Far better ways.

[3rdnlng]

So, I post a transcript asking for opinions regarding the message and specifically asking people not to attack the messenger, and what do I get? One post by one of the top five dullards here giving his usual uninspired and moronic response attacking the messenger and another post that sounds like Bill Maher high on pot with his balls in a vise, again attacking the messenger. Nice job boys.

[Cinga]

I've said before, I don't believe Obama has any plans whatsoever to step aside in 2016.....

 

"Who is John Galt?"

[IDBillzFan]

I've said before, I don't believe Obama has any plans whatsoever to step aside in 2016.....

 

"Who is John Galt?"

 

Barack Obama is neither smart enough nor competent enough to do anything but lay low for the next three years and go on a book/speaking tour when it's over. There was a time I thought like you, but you can't look at or listen to him without realizing he's propped up by people like Valeria Jarrett in an obscure version of Weekend at Barack's.

[Cinga]

Barack Obama is neither smart enough nor competent enough to do anything but lay low for the next three years and go on a book/speaking tour when it's over. There was a time I thought like you, but you can't look at or listen to him without realizing he's propped up by people like Valeria Jarrett in an obscure version of Weekend at Barack's.

 

I hope you're right, but I'm skeptical.... With 3 1/2 years left, he can't lay low that long.

 

Meanwhile, DHS has grown into a behemoth, we have reached the point of at least one scandal a week, and POTUS is just as arrogant as ever.

 

No.... He won't lay low because he can't... It's gone too far for that....

[Dante]

Sounds like part of one of Mr. Limbaugh's 3 hour mouth dumps.

Of course Rush is a right wing extremist and a puppet for the Republican party no? Much more credible commentary out there from the likes of Eve Langoria and Barbara Striesand and even your own political hacks Nancy Pelosi!

 

I've said before, I don't believe Obama has any plans whatsoever to step aside in 2016.....

 

"Who is John Galt?"

I think the plan is for Hillary to take over. Leftist nut bar just like Barry. So in a way it will be the continuation of Obama and the Marxist agenda. Plus they will be able to claim history again by having the first women president! Well kinda. Of course that narrative had no place when Palin and Bachman were a possibility last year. I mean, you wouldn't want real women elected. Would have to be the PC style (lesbian/ugly/socialist) chick.

Edited June 8, 2013 by Dante

[3rdnlng]

Of course Rush is a right wing extremist and a puppet for the Republican party no? Much more credible commentary out there from the likes of Eve Langoria and Barbara Striesand and even your own political hacks Nancy Pelosi!

 

They are afraid to address the message, so they can only go after the messenger. It is one of their ways to hijack a thread. Fatty's MO is to say stupid schit, get in over his head and then when challenged and asked to explain himself, he claims that he doesn't have time and that he has a life, unlike everybody else. When Conner or lyrbob side with him he then feels vindicated. (Tele)Pathetic's agenda appears to place legalizing pot at the top of the list, so you never know what you might get from him.

[Nanker]

!@#$ Rush. He's done nothing but profit off the decimation of our country by being a paid assassin of the far right wing. !@#$ Obama too for doing exactly what everyone who was paying attention feared would happen when we started trading civil liberties for a "feeling" of safety. There are far better ways to make your point than using drivel like this. Far better ways.

 

Tgregg you're devolving. I liked you better when you were We Come In Pieces, better yet when you were Tgregg.

[3rdnlng]

 

 

Tgregg you're devolving. I liked you better when you were We Come In Pieces, better yet when you were Tgregg.

 

I asked him directly a week or so ago if he was Greg--and he claimed to be "James". He fits right into the screenwriting role. He must be working on a Dumb and Dumber but Meaner gig at present.

[B-Man]

As for his outrage over the invasion of privacy, and the OPs, I ask you where you were in 2001 or 2002 or 2003 or 2004 when the groundwork to this was being forged and the fourth amendment was being wiped from existence.

 

Anyone who spoke up then was called ant-american by Rush himself. Don't believe me? Go listen to some calls he took in that time span.

 

We are in this position now as a country because of people like Rush.

 

 

I could care less what the poster calls himself, the point is what he wrote here is a straightforward lie.

 

He apparently knows little on this subject, but will pontificate anyway................................its best left ignored in the future.

 

 

 

"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.” -- President Ronald Reagan.

 

 

.

[Bigfatbillsfan]

So, I post a transcript asking for opinions regarding the message and specifically asking people not to attack the messenger, and what do I get? One post by one of the top five dullards here giving his usual uninspired and moronic response attacking the messenger and another post that sounds like Bill Maher high on pot with his balls in a vise, again attacking the messenger. Nice job boys.

 

So you post a transcript of a person who shovels **** for a living and ask people to not attack the messenger? Not to mention that I didn't even attack the messenger. Read what I said again. It sounds like one of Mr. Limbaugh's three hour mouth dumps. That's describing the transcript, not Limbaugh dumbass.

 

I've said before, I don't believe Obama has any plans whatsoever to step aside in 2016.....

 

"Who is John Galt?"

 

Paranoia abounds. You seem even more paranoid here than you did on the "other board"

 

Who is John Galt? An ass hole. John Galt is an ass hole.

 

They are afraid to address the message, so they can only go after the messenger. It is one of their ways to hijack a thread. Fatty's MO is to say stupid schit, get in over his head and then when challenged and asked to explain himself, he claims that he doesn't have time and that he has a life, unlike everybody else. When Conner or lyrbob side with him he then feels vindicated. (Tele)Pathetic's agenda appears to place legalizing pot at the top of the list, so you never know what you might get from him.

 

Holy Shcit! Are you a psychologist?

[K-9]

Communications 101: the messenger must be considered when evaluating any message.

Edited June 9, 2013 by K-9

[B-Man]

Communications 101: the messenger must be considered when evaluating any message.

 

 

Alinsky's rules for Radicals...............

 

The rules

1. “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have."
   
2. “Never go outside the expertise of your people.”
   
3. “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.”
   
4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”
   
5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
   
6. “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”
   
7. “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”
   
8. “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.”
   
9. “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”
   
10. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition."
    
11. “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.”
    
12. “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”
    
13. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
    

[3rdnlng]

So you post a transcript of a person who shovels **** for a living and ask people to not attack the messenger? Not to mention that I didn't even attack the messenger. Read what I said again. It sounds like one of Mr. Limbaugh's three hour mouth dumps. That's describing the transcript, not Limbaugh dumbass.

 

 

 

Paranoia abounds. You seem even more paranoid here than you did on the "other board"

 

Who is John Galt? An ass hole. John Galt is an ass hole.

 

 

 

Holy Shcit! Are you a psychologist?

 

Don't need to be to peg you. Think of all the money you could have saved on therapy if you would have just visited here first. I'm not saying I could have actually helped you, but at least you would have known how hopeless you are and still had a little pocket change left over for Chuck E Cheese.

[K-9]

Alinsky's rules for Radicals...............

 

The rules

1. “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have."
    
   
2. “Never go outside the expertise of your people.”
    
   
3. “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.”
    
   
4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”
    
   
5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
    
   
6. “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.”
    
   
7. “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”
    
   
8. “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.”
    
   
9. “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”
    
   
10. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition."
     
    
11. “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.”
     
    
12. “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”
     
    
13. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”
    

 

Goebbels playbook.

 

But I'm not sure what your point is relative to my post about a major tenet in the communications process. One cannot evaluate a message in the absence of evaluating the messenger. Communication is comprised of three basic elements: the communicator, the receiver, and the message itself. The medium doesn't matter. Whether it's delivered via mass means or goes no further than the Podunk Times. That simple construct doesn't lend itself to any side of the political spectrum.

 

It would have been more productive for the OP to post the message without attribution if he really hoped to have people evaluate it without bias.

Edited June 9, 2013 by K-9

[3rdnlng]

Goebbels playbook.

 

But I'm not sure what your point is relative to my post about a major tenet in the communications process. One cannot evaluate a message in the absence of evaluating the messenger. Communication is comprised of three basic elements: the communicator, the receiver, and the message itself. The medium doesn't matter. Whether it's delivered via mass means or goes no further than the Podunk Times. That simple construct doesn't lend itself to any side of the political spectrum.

 

It would have been more productive for the OP to post the message without attribution if he really hoped to have people evaluate it without bias.

 

Well, I could have posted it without attributing it to anyone and pretended that it was my own work, but my name isn't lyrbob. The OP was an actual test to see how many posters here had the intelligence and discipline to judge the message and not the messenger. Congratulations, you're in the majority.

[Chef Jim]

Goebbels playbook.

 

But I'm not sure what your point is relative to my post about a major tenet in the communications process. One cannot evaluate a message in the absence of evaluating the messenger. Communication is comprised of three basic elements: the communicator, the receiver, and the message itself. The medium doesn't matter. Whether it's delivered via mass means or goes no further than the Podunk Times. That simple construct doesn't lend itself to any side of the political spectrum.

 

It would have been more productive for the OP to post the message without attribution if he really hoped to have people evaluate it without bias.

 

According to your communication 101 (sounds right out of some college textbook) that is impossible.