You have to give Rush Limbaugh a perverse kind of credit. At least when he is demonizing Barack Obama, fabricating Obama policies, blaming Obama for single-handedly causing the recession and the stock market crash, he doesn't pretend to be fair.Notice the use of the word "anger", "fair" and "rant". What we are going to see is an all out assault on any disagreement with President-elect Obama to be used as a pretext to reinstate the "Fairness Doctine".
Opening his first post-election rant against the president-elect, Limbaugh launched in with a certain relish. "The game," he told his radio listeners, "has begun."
Then the Times really start shoveling the bullcrap:
A healthy skepticism is not only the media's right but its obligation. Indeed, commentators at many mainstream outlets -- including the Los Angeles Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal -- have already argued that Obama's best bet to succeed will be if he hews to a centrist path.To understand the humor of that statement, you have to understand that the L.A. Times is so far left that they think Joe Stalin was too conservative. So for them, carrying Charman Mao's Little Red Book is defined as "centrist".
Then they get back to why disagreement is dangerous in their view:
In a time when the nation calls out for cool leadership and rational discussion, Limbaugh stirs the caldron...You watch, they will define disagreement with Obama as a national security issue.
Can being defined as an enemy of the State be far behind?
No comments:
Post a Comment