The Dangers Of Niche Market Posturing

Considering the fact that The Modern American Right endlessly claim that our country is "Center Right", that we embrace "conservative ideals", and that we need to be fiscally responsible, why the fuck is Rush Limbaugh hawking a pack of iced tea - yeah, you read that right - that they really aren't that secure about peddling?

After teasing it for a few days, Rush Limbaugh made a major announcement on his show Wednesday afternoon. He’s launching “Two If By Tea,” what he calls “the best” sweet tea you’ll ever drink. A picture of “Rush Revere” adorns the bottle, “sounding the warning the liberals are coming.”

“We are doing this for the single reason that we love tea, and we want to share it with you,” Rush explained. “The shrink wrap is a work of art,” Rush said. “You’ll save it … along with the bottles.” Part of the profits will go to the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation.

Can we all say "Tax Write-off"? Yeah, I knew you could.

You'll notice the words "part of the proceeds". Why not all? Is Limbaugh banking on the fact that he can make more money off this if he doesn't have to donate 100%? I'm guessing yes, since there is a NO RETURN policy. After all, I remember his "donation fever" after the "phony soliders" letter of complaint from the US Senate was sold on EBay for $2.1 million ( which Limbaugh matched to obvious maximize his return ).

But let's look at the price - $23.76 per 12-pack.

In most markets, the cost of a 12-pack of beer ( Bud Light ) costs approximately $10.00. The cost of a 12-pack of coke costs approximately $5.00. The cost of 12 McDonald's sweet teas - despite the way they market it is almost half what it would cost you to buy Limbaugh's non-guaranteed bottles of swill.

So who's benefiting from this? Certainly not the consumer - unless they want to drink anything Rush tells them to out of some sense of patriotism. And I would love to see the results of a full audit from the alleged recipients of Rush's "charitable giving" considering how his compatriot Sean Hannity faired with his alleged "Freedom Concerts".

I bet you can say another word - "scam". Yep.

Melding The Messages

It's no surprise that the Modern American Right are attempting to make Weiner's ultimate downfall the downfall of the entire Democratic Party.

The Voice of the Right, Rush Limbaugh, claims that Weiner is an example of Democratic Family Values while one of the more popular Right Wing magazines, National Review, has in it's online edition an even more generalized spin on the Weiner controversy.

Whenever we hear anyone within the Modern American Right talk about "Family Values" or "Morals", this is nothing more than verbal special effects be used in the hopes that their intended audience will forget all the extra-marital transgressions and illegal activities that come from their side of the aisle as well.

Equivocation is a pointless game, but trying to pretend that someone on your side doesn't do it - even going so far as to blatantly and unblushingly lie about it while you're attempting to chastise your opposition for their own nefarious activities.

For the Modern American Right, "morals" simply means submitting in total to a authority figure; while "Family Values" falls alongside in a similar fashion - though it usually encompasses that which Liberals/Progressives fight against in their own family lives. One classic example of this is how the Right continually insist that "gay marriage" would be detrimental to "the family unit", while the reality is that more than half of all straight marriages end in divorce. But that's getting off the path a little here.

As stated previously, Weiner is at fault and will have to deal with the consequences, but we can't let this be spun into the image that the entire Liberal/Progressive population of America is somehow complicit in what he has done. And rest assured, that's what they are trying to do.

Rush's Race To Use Race - Again

I'll forgo to obvious hypocrisy in Rush complaining about anyone on the political Left calling for "Civil War".

Take a listen to this......



Sure, it's a truncated quote from the show - and I would have loved to have heard the rest of his analogy - but this is part and parcel of whom Rush Limbaugh is: a socio-political virus that feels more than comfortable not only maligning anyone that isn't white but also appropriating the struggles of blacks to gain their Civil Rights in a sad attempt to make him and his ideological kindred equal to those men and women in the 60s South that faced more than just "fire hoses".

Political Porn

If you're a member of the modern American Right, the past few days have been somewhat akin to a fever-dream. To put it in more blunt terminology, it's been like watching a Sarah Palin/Ronald Reagan sex tape.

And while you take time to reconcile that mental image, let's take a second to think about who both Reagan and Palin are.

I'll start off with some audio from Mike Stark and Rush Limbaugh, as that will provide some much needed context in a moment.



Two points before I get to Palin being touted as "She-Reagan":

First - Rush is clearly caught off guard. By claiming that Mike Stark wouldn't understand it if Rush were to explain the rationale behind the deification of Reagan, he's revealing his own ( and the entire modern American Right's ) inability to articulate specifics in favor of hyperbole.

Secondly - to claim that the Obama administration is aligning itself politically with Reagan is to twist the fabric of reality. What Rush is referencing is a poorly conceived narrative form a minority in the media who place Reagan and Obama side by side purely to draw a reaction from people like Limbaugh. It's less to do with actual policy comparisons or rationales than it is a catalyst to draw out a specific news cycle.

As for Palin - clearly "not letting a crisis go to waste" - she is less like Reagan than anyone within the modern American Right. Certainly, she has her crib notes memorized, but she - more than just about any aspiring Right Wing politico - lacks any and all ability to articulate in specifics what she would do/wants to do. After all, she is going to be running for President, let's not be naive about that.

What these two giants of Right Wing iconography have to offer is the ultimate in set-dressing for the upcoming 2012 election cycle. Reagan's clearly recorded legacy is being distorted ( more like completely ignored ) by the likes of Palin in order to attack the Obama administration purely because they have no alternative. Conversely, the Obama administration aren't exactly working from the positions they initially claimed they would. In that regard, I have to agree with Stark's statement to Limbaugh. If the Right in America would attempt to quell their continual hyperventilation, they would understand that Obama isn't the "tyrannical Socialist dictator" they claim he is.

The broader point of this is this - should the Right really be spending so much time molesting the corpse of Ronald Reagan, or should they be focused on what they told us they were focused on?

It all goes back to what it means to be a member of the modern American Right. In order to function and be recognized within their socio-political sphere, you have to live in a fantasy land and completely ignore the realities of your own country. If people like Palin, Limbaugh, and all of the other Regan worshipers would take time to see their country for what it is, then they would be more apt to formulate ideals that their opponents could at least consider.

I'm reminded of the claims that the Left in America were/are holding up Obama as some Solar Messiah, when the realities of his tenure has been marked with a majority within the American Left questioning his leadership decisions with marked intensity. From Guantanamo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Healthcare Reform, Financial Regulation, on down to the unfounded claims of his Kenyan birth, Obama could have taken the approach that many of us expected him to. But, he insisted on trying to meet as close to the middle as possible. The modern American Right's projection in this matter is unmasked in full.

Shark, You Have Been Jumped - Again

I would say that this is shocking, unheard of, or even unexpected - but it is Limbaugh we are talking about.



Talk about someone completely missing the point.

Have you heard anyone on the left call Lougher a victim, claim he should get a lesser sentence, or even say that "America" is to blame? The only person I heard those claims come from was Rush.

While highlighting Sarah Palin as the "figurehead" of all violent Right-Wing rhetoric isn't exactly productive, this tirade from Limbaugh makes that look small time and easily ignorable.

But, the damage is done, and now a majority of conservatives in America are going to go to work, school, church, Wal-Mart, or anywhere they can find someone to listen that Democrats are prepared to give Jared Loughner a lesser sentence simply because Rush Limbaugh said so.

Typical.

Careful With That Ax, Rush

( with great apologies to Pink Floyd )

Does Rush really want to go down this road?



Seriously, Rush should realize that when you have your index finder pointed at someone that you've got three others pointed right at you.

So, what has Rush "dabbled" in?

Well, he's done more than "dabble" in drug abuse, and one has to wonder if he's "dabbled" in "sex travel". After all, he was caught with Viagra ( obtained illegally ) and his precious Oxycontin after returning from a trip to the Dominican Republic - a known destination for "sex tourism".

What Rush Is Really Doing

While Media Matters highlights Limbaugh's predictable fear mongering in the tag line to the clip, there's something that they miss all together.



For starters, Limbaugh - right off the bat - calls the building of Park 51 a "trumped up story". From the conservative point of view, he's completely right, but he seems to forget that statement one moment later when he started calling it a "recruitment center".

But the oddity of Rush's statements don't end there, as he is claiming that Rev. Terry Jones' intent to burn the Koran on Sept. 11th isn't something we should worry about, as it's "silly" and "not worth the energy", even though conservative websites that continually go to bat for Limbaugh have been covering this quite literally 24/7.

And while Limbaugh claims to be "manipulated" into reporting on this story - you know, how Park51 has no money and how a blatant conservative is going to burn a Muslim holy book in order to prove some kind of point - he dives headlong into the theory that Park51 is going to be a recruiting center for terrorists.

The cognitive dissonance of this man should really be studied by modern neuro-surgeons.

The Same, But Explained

Standard fare from Rush, but I think this should be examined.



Notice how Rush immediately starts his defense of how mouth-agape conservatives are reacting to Cordoba House ( not a mosque by it's strict definition. Also, the name is now Park 51 ) by creating the "what if" narrative that has nothing to do with the form, function, or name of the building. From the jump, Rush has completely contorted the issue from one of freedom of religion to retail. But more on that later.

While Rush's incessant and seemingly amphetamine fueled blatherings about Park 51 are not grounded in reality for one second, it's interesting to note that there is already a Muslim "chapel" at the Pentagon that not one conservative seems to even be remotely bothered with. And this was something that Limbaugh brayed about like a donkey with dysentery. Do these people not do any research?

But more to the point; conservatives like Rush are all too eager to run headlong into that brick wall that is labeled "what if". It's not even partially connected to the issue at hand. It's a tactic that is utilized to distract you from what is really going on. The same can even be said about the name AND the location of Park 51. It's almost 3 blocks from the most northern edge of Ground Zero as well as not even being a mosque.

Keith Olbermann had something to say about this that I think bares repeating.



Possibly the one point that Keith brings up that I think needs to be highlighted is that conservatives are so intellectually lazy when it comes to reporting on issues such as Park 51 - which shouldn't be an issue to begin with. There has been a place of Muslim worship within a comparable distance to what is now known as Grown Zero for longer than I have been alive; even almost as long as people that are up in arms against Park 51 have been alive and yet we have heard nothing from them.

Why is that?

While Rush as attempting to conflate the very real and very honest issue of a big package store pushing the "mom and pop" "small businesses" that he claims to champion out existence, I sat back and listened to this nearly 3 minutes of inane drivel and finally got it.

As much as I have said that conservatives like Rush lack the ability to exercise rational thought, reasoning, even basic query on issues like why Park 51 is going to be located where it is, I have to say that I am wrong. Conservatives do have that ability - they simply choose not to use it. Why? There is only one answer - that they can't be seen as wrong.

When a person like Rush Limbaugh has so much invested in his position, so much drool and heavy breathing put into his false premises, there's no way he's going to pass up the opportunity to make people believe something that simply isn't there. There's no way that he will deny any moment where he can say the building ( that is essentially on par with a YMCA ) is going to be a breeding ground for terrorists.

Does any conservative have the ability to be honest about this?



And this was the guy that helped George W. Bush steal the election away from Al Gore. How's that for a slice of irony?

Invective At It's Worst

No racism here. Nope, none at all.



I'm going to start a pool for those that read this blog. How long is it going to be before Rush just can't hold it back any longer and drops the N-Bomb on the air? 6 months? Next week? Tomorrow?

It's this type of racial animus, this race baiting, that spills out into the far corners of America where certain cross-sections of primarily white communities feel comfortable being totally and unblushingly racist. I used to work with a group of people that saw racism as tradition, as something they shouldn't be ashamed of. And predictably so, these people were "Christians" who could just as easily quote passages from the gospel of Matthew as well as Sarah Palin's latest Facebook posting that someone had to write for her.

Rush Limbaugh has nothing but utter contempt for anyone in the black community that enjoys even a modest amount of power that they have earned because of their hard work. You'll notice that Rush will never laud the accomplishments of a black man or woman that has worked their way through life, paying their dues, earning every cent they have, if they have a voter registration card that has a D listed on it instead of an R. I'm actually of the belief that Rush just simply doesn't like anyone in the black community at all, but that he tolerates them. And there are black men that fill in for Rush when he decides to jet off to some vacation hot spot that the common man he claims to champion will never be able to afford. He let's these men sit in his "seat of power" for a few hours each year to keep up the facade that he isn't a racist. But I, and many others, know better.

This wretched shell of a man is going to slip up sooner or later. The mask is going to slip enough and the remainder of the country that has a doubt will see once and for all that Rush Limbaugh is nothing but a racist in the most purest and unvarnished form. But it likely won't matter, as any statements made by him that reveal his feeling will be chalked up to "satire", or a "clumsy moment". I would imagine that there would be a special episode of Hannity where Rush would be provided supplication and covering fire. Perhaps even a segment on Huckabee where Limbaugh could talk about the "healing power of God".

Rush Limbaugh is not human - not by a long shot.

Late To The Party - Again

So, after mulling it over for a few hours last night and this morning, I'm actually going to give my few cents on Rep. Weiner's best impersonation of a British Parliamentarian for the CSPAN audience.



But it didn't stop there, as King and Weiner were on Hannity's radio program not long after the two were interviewed on Fox"News".



And while conservatives - from Limbaugh's specious theories to Michelle Malkin's sidekick invoking former Soviet rulers on down to Allahpundit's all too predictable, faux-intellectual, analysis of the moment - are more than willing to spin any direction they can to get away from the very simple fact that they refused to help those they they claim to idolize, it shouldn't come as a surprise that these are the same people that invoke the deaths of nearly 3000 people as often as most of them brush their teeth.

It's become reflexive nature for conservative Republicans to block any and everything a Democrat does - be they liberal, progressive, moderate, or even one of the alleged "Blue Dogs". This, to me at least, is the moment where it's really turned around on them and shown them for who they really are.

If you take a look at what Limbaugh and Allahpundit had to say about this, you'll notice that they are framing this episode as Democrats trying to shove in amendments regarding immigration when, in point of fact, this was about preventing Republicans from larding up the bill with what Karoli at Crooks And Liars calls "poison pill amendments". And that's precisely what they would have done. Democrats tossed up what should have been an easy ball for Republicans to hit out of the park and since they didn't get to manipulate the outcome, they opted to hurl the bat into the stands and run off to the dugout and cry.

The various aspects of this legislation and how conservatives screwed it up ( again ) aside, I think that it's high time that Weiner let his passion be shown. Conservatives can't handle the fact that Democrats have that fire for their country burning inside them, so their only option is to paint their opposition as completely unhinged lunatics. Sure, it works for their base, but it doesn't extend beyond that. Unfortunately, that's far too often all the traction that the meme du jour needs - the right conservative parroting something that ultimately amounts to nothing. How do you think Andrew Breitbart has made it as far as he has?

It's a shame that not more Democratic Representatives don't have Mr. Weiner's passion.

Goodbye "Big Stein"

.....and speaking of the race baiting king.



I listened to NPR's obituary of Steinbrenner this afternoon after work. It wasn't political - save the mention of how he was cited for illegally donating to Nixon's reelection campaign in '74 - but it was honest, compelling, and painted an accurate portrait of a man that was, in my opinion, a legend in baseball.

But, leave it to Rush - the disgraced ESPN sports announcer and failed NFL franchise owner - to turn that loss of a great man into a tool designed to portray blacks as rank losers unless there is a "great, white, savior" out there to help them.

Intentional Acts

In which we see how Limbaugh's racist attitudes are poisoning the airwaves - still.



While Limbaugh's full-throated idiocy from his July 2nd program goes even further than the clip highlights, one has to wonder exactly why conservatives accept such inflammatory rhetoric and racism.

There have been no words or actions from the Obama White House that suggest that they are against or have disdain of what conservatives call "American exceptionalism". It's simply something that sounds good, something that doesn't require any fact-checking or analysis, as it is so outside of reality that conservatives simply don't want to take the time to reflect on it. In that regard, conservatives are lazy, intellectually dishonest, automatons.

But this notion that Limbaugh is espousing that minorities ( in this cases, a black American that is President ) are out to destroy the American economy is utterly preposterous. The reality of Limbaugh's claim is that people like him can't stand to see a member of the American minority succeed. He and those that identify with him think that success comes to only a select few - the white, privileged, class.

And while Rush makes light of the fact that American has a very storied history of preventing the less fortunate and the non-white from attaining their goals, it doesn't surprise me that he would - quite literally - white-wash this aspect of American history away. This is one of the cornerstones of conservative ideology - to erase any wrong-doing that took place in America.

For a moment though, let's follow Limbaugh's ham-fisted logic through to it's conclusion. There are blacks in this country that have not only contempt, but explicit hatred of the white race. Why is that? How can they have such a powerful emotive response to someone, anyone for that matter, that isn't black? Just take a look at who some whites in this country elevate to celebrity status, who they get their socio-political marching orders from, and you'll have your answer.

War Against The Poor

In which we find Rush Limbaugh, again, railing against the poor and less fortunate in this country.



Rush simply doesn't get it. Well, perhaps he does and is just playing the angles on this report in order to get people like me to respond. Either way, it's pathetic and shows that he really doesn't care about anyone outside of his air conditioned studio.

The reality of children going hungry in America is not something new, not something that begins or ends on the edges of Democratic control of government. And for Limbaugh to conflate Michelle Obama's work to fight childhood obesity with the horror of a child not having enough food to eat is proof positive that he can't see the way the world works - that the playing field isn't level for everyone.

Limbaugh is the quintessential conservative - thinking that everything has a simply solution and that people are just too fucking lazy to fix things. Sure, tell that kid who's parents have lost virtually everything to just go to the refrigerator and make a sandwich, that's the cure right there. Granted, the twitching mass of cholesterol and fatty-acids that is Rush Limbaugh probably never once had to live with the reality of not having enough food to eat, so this is par for the course.

I grew up in a family that struggled for some time to keep enough food on the table, but we made it through. It was that experience that taught us that there are people worse off than us and that as members of our community and our country, we should help them if we could. Limbaugh doesn't live in this world, a world where Americans help one another. He resides in that bizarro world where there is no "real" hunger issue with children, as it's a fabrication of the media, of socialist/marxist/racists that manipulate the masses.

Is there no depth that this poor excuse for a human will since to when it comes to discussing children? No, there really isn't.

Attacking A Child

Those of us that remember the early days of the Clinton administration also remember Limbaugh calling Chelsea a dog on numerous occasions. I'm actually surprised it took him this long to go after Obama's children.



Conservatives really do have a problem with children. Not just children of Democratic parents - though the most vile levels of hatred are reserved specifically for them - but even of children from Republican homes. They don't see children as free thinking individuals that are able to gather information and learn from it. They see children as faceless simulacrums that should conform to the canted view of the world that all conservatives see.

When I hear people like Limbaugh ( who thankfully doesn't have any children ) or Michelle Malkin and Glenn Back ( both of whom have multiple children ) I often fear for the intellectual safety of these kids. What is their home life like? What is discussed at the dinner table? Are they so sheltered and withheld from the world that they struggle through their lives as they get older?

I can recall being a Senior in high school and still being quite naive to many aspects of life. This was due to the fact that I lived in an excruciatingly sheltered conservative household. I think that gives me a pretty good idea of what these kids are going through, and it's painful to think about.

Exit question: Considering that Limbaugh has now embarked upon his 4th marriage, how long will it be before the new "Mrs. Rush" decides to end the charade and make off with 50% of the conservative leader's goods? And if it comes to that, how is Rush going to react on his program? The betting pool starts now.

Wedding Support Group

In which Fox"News" does more damage control for Limbaugh



Because if Megyn Kelly says it's so then it must be true. But I'm sure that million dollar payday had NOTHING to do with Elton's scripted responses during the reception.

And while Fox"News" isn't the only one defending Elton John's poor judgment with such hamfisted examples of him doing duets with Axl Rose and Eminem, one can't but sense the overwhelming hypocrisy in all this. I guess conservatives are only ok with gays that can be paid off.

The Wedding Singer

So Michelle Malkin's understudy is claiming that since Elton John is performing at Rush Limbaugh's fourth wedding that capitalism is the one thing that can fix every problem in the world, even bringing a racist-drug-abuser and a gay-activist-singer together in a big warm hug. Really?

Without capitalism, Elton wouldn’t have performed at Rush Limbaugh’s wedding and Rush wouldn’t have been in the position to pay that much for the evening’s entertainment. Capitalism: It can bring people from all walks of life together.

I congratulate Rush and Kathryn, and also tip my Detroit Tigers cap to Elton John for performing at the wedding, because he’s got to know he’s going to take some heat for this in his left-leaning, artsy, environmentalist, gay-activist circle of pals — most of whom would gladly accept a million bucks from George W. Bush to tap dance on a floor made of California Redwood and elephant tusk or take whacks at a piñata in the likeness of Harvey Milk that Roger Ailes stuffed with cash. But they’d never admit it.

I'm calling bullshit on the whole idea that Limbaugh actually wanted Elton John to play at his wedding - it's clearly a calculated move in order for Rush to have some peripheral material for his show after his honeymoon is over. Also, I have to scold Elton a bit for actually accepting this offer. Is he really that hard up for cash that he's going to be associated with this clown? And to Doug Powers' insistence that anyone would accept money to do the things that he's describing, he's fooling himself if he thinks that everyone on the Left would accept such an offer - it's called integrity. And, as much as I hate to say it, it appears that Elton John wasn't able to exercise enough of it to say "hell no" to the man that is likely to besmirch his name as soon as he gets back on the microphone.

Some Thoughts For Your Afternoon

- Now that Arizona is all about being a "white/English" only state in many regards, they having been going after courses that simply study other ethnicities. This is a clear reminder that conservatives have absolutely no desire to learn about the world around them but instead favor ignorance.

- Is anyone else ready for someone to do some fact checking of Zev Chafet's new book about Rush Limbaugh? I'm thinking that there's more than a healthy dose of textual hand-jobbery going on with this one. After all, Limbaugh's not going to invite a guys to his home that's going to write and honest and revealing book about him.

- Rand Paul thinks that answering legitimate questions from an actual journalist is torture? This doesn't surprise me, as conservatives have always attempted to compensate for their lack of accountability and lack of basic understand of how this country works in the 21st century by claiming there's this malevolent left-wing media bias.

- Everytime I hear conservatives claim that the entire country should follow Arizona's example of handling "immigration", I'm often reminded of the classic saying of "be careful what you wish for". Seems that now "anchor babies" are being targeted by the law. Guess which prominent conservative blogger/pundit is an anchor baby - Michelle Malkin. Someone should really press her on this aspect of Arizona's draconian stance.

- Whenever I hear a reactionary conservative talking about the alleged problems with the "constitutionality" of a piece of legislation, the more i'm inclined to think they are just opposing this to oppose it or they are so outside the pulse of modern America that they are wanting to sound far more educated on the Constitution than they really are. Dick Armey is no exception to this rule.

- The IFC media project series airs tonight with a special called "War, Fear, Greed, and Disaster". Max Blumenthal has a great segment in it that is not to be missed. If you're lucky enough to have IFC in your cable package, be sure and check this out tonight at 8pm EST.

Some Thoughts For Your Morning

- Rand Paul's viewpoints on racism and discrimination really don't surprise me, so it was almost to be expected that he would have connection with a radical religious group that advocates a return to slavery and the stoning of homosexuals.

- Call it another instance of "buyer's remorse" now that conservatives are engaging in a collective whine now that Scott Brown has voted with Democrats to help pass financial regulation. Seems that the proverbial "Scott heard 'round the world" meme didn't really pan out for them. Kind of makes me wonder why they're so jazzed up about November.

- Glenn Beck's personal "war on the dollar" is slowly starting to look like a losing battle, thanks in part to Congressman Anthony Weiner. The scam that Beck is perpetrating on America is one that other conservatives are happy to take part in. People like domestic terrorist G. Gordon Liddy and Sean Hannity regularly pimp gold coins as investments as well.

- Rush Limbaugh ( in typical fashion, mind you ) claims that the second grade girl that mentioned her mother's illegal status to Michelle Obama was a plant. This is s rather common conservative tactic when they are lacking in ability to add any form of rational discourse to the national discussion. And while these allegations are always false, they do work on the easily lead, mouth agape, conservative voters that lack any form of bone marrow intelligence.

- Chalk this up to another example of assassination hungry conservatives behaving in ways that Republicans would scream over had this been done to them. They certainly think this sort of behavior is appropriate now.

- Ever since conservatives had their asses handed to them on a platter in November 2008, they have been all about the length of proposed legislation and who has and who hasn't read said legislation. In that regard it's quite puzzling that a prominent conservative blogger turned CNN pundit would highlight ( literally ) a segment of a Rand Paul statement about the Civil Rights Act where he quite clearly claims he hasn't read it all "because it was passed 40 years ago". Is there a statute of limitations on the readability of the English language in the conservative realm?

Worth 1000 Words

I'm totally going to break Godwin's Law on this one.

I snagged this image from the Fox Nation website.



I'll pass on the goofy pose Obama is striking, but am I the only one that sees what it seems like Limbaugh is about to do? Seriously. I wouldn't put it past him to practice this in the double full-length mirror in his bathroom each morning.

Creating The Narrative

And so it begins.



Limbaugh just can't wait to get his greasy fingers even dirtier when it comes to issues like this.

Here's something that I have to ask again - why do conservatives continually claim that those with a higher education are actually "elitist radicals"? I remember growing up in a very conservative home and being told that higher education is important. My aunt has a masters in Education and taught in public schools for nearly 40 years and she's not seen as a "elitist radical" in her community - just the opposite actually.

And Beck seems to be ready to mount his horse named "conspiracy".



I can remember writing papers in college on subject I don't actively endorse. They may have been interesting, they may have helped provide insight into other areas of my life, but when I wrote about something like Communism or the horrible tactics of Pol Pot, I wasn't advocating what they were doing.

Part of writing from an intellectually honest perspective is attempting to see the subject matter from a neutral standpoint - you have to separate yourself from your own ideals while taking on subjects of such weight. When Bret Easton Ellis wrote American Psycho, was he issuing a call to action for yuppies to become serial killers? This seems to be the point of view that Beck is taking on.

Also, considering conservatives utter disdain and contempt for context, I would really like to read Kagan's entire thesis in order to get the full picture. Simply reading two excerpts and then putting your own particular spin on it doesn't provide context.