Is it more likely that Harry Reid was beaten up, or that Mitt Romney didn’t pay his taxes?

ReidLet’s play a little game, shall we? It’s called “Is it more likely that Harry Reid was beaten up, or that Mitt Romney didn’t pay his taxes?”. The reason behind this game is simple: the retiring senator, who laughed off his 2012 presidential election lie about Mitt Romney, is now upset that radio host Rush Limbaugh said what others were already thinking: it looks like someone beat Harry Reid up.

Here is what Mr. Reid told CNN’s Dana Brash on March 31 when asked if he regretted his lie about Mitt Romney not paying taxes: “Romney didn’t win, did he?”

Telling, isn’t it? The ends justify the means to Mr. Reid, no matter how low he has to sink.

Now, here is the Nevada senator complaining to CNBC’s John Harwood about Mr. Limbaugh’s commentary on his battered and bruised body: “It shows the credibility of Rush Limbaugh. He’s the guy that got all this started. Why in the world would I come up with a story that I got hurt in my own bathroom with my wife standing there? How could anyone say anything like that? I think a lot of people, as I read, they kinda don’t like me as a person. That’s unfortunate.”

Why would anyone not like Harry Reid — besides the fact that he made up a giant irresponsible lie about Mitt Romney during a presidential election?

Harry Reid looks like artificial intelligence out of “Avengers: Age of Ultron” took over his workout equipment and then beat the living daylights out of him. That is what Rush Limbaugh correctly pointed out when he said “I don’t believe for a minute that whatever happened to Harry Reid has anything to do with an exercise machine unless somebody repeatedly threw him into it.”

I worked in a gym for three years. I can not think of one exercise that Harry Reid would do (or has the capability of performing) that would leave him looking like an angry bouncer unloaded on him. The official story is that an elastic waistband snapped and sent him sprawling inside his own bathroom.

I ask again: Is it more likely that Harry Reid was beaten up or that Mitt Romney didn’t pay his taxes?

There is one word to describe the rumors that are swirling about Mr. Reid’s battered and bruised body: karma. If a man makes up disgusting lies to smear political opponents, then he has zero moral authority to complain when the karma boomerang comes back and hits him in the face again…and again…and again.

The United States of Apology

We're a nation that now demands apologies for the slightest offense, even if they lack the substance of sincerity. It takes a special kind of insecurity to tie up multiple news cycles on radio talk show hosts when the national debt is over 15 trillion dollars.

The outrage over Rush Limbaugh’s “slut” jokes this week, the demands for an “apology”, and the eventual concession by the radio host is just another example of the sad state of affairs the country is in. If I was a partisan hack I’d say that it all began with Barack Obama’s apology tour of the world, which shows no sign of letting up, judging by the Koran burning incident in Afghanistan. Sadly, the national fixation over apologies has been going on for quite some time, and even my friends on the right have allowed this cultural bug to crawl into their ears and take root in their brain.

Did countless commentators on the left ever apologize to George Bush for the laundry list of ways they compared him to a Nazi for almost eight full years? If so, I can’t remember, but then again I also don’t recall Bush ever being one to play the apology game either.

An apology is something that’s supposed to come from the heart. It’s supposed to come after honest reflection. It is not supposed to come as a result of political pressures, dropped sponsors, or boycotts. Demanding someone say, “I’m sorry” is an exercise only a liberal can love, since they usually imbue certain words with powers that words can never really have. The same people who are enraged at the mere mention of certain words (regardless of the context), also tend to be the same people who need to hear “I’m sorry”, even if it lacks the substance of sincerity.

Every single day top liberal commentators insinuate or outright say that conservatives are racists, bigots, and homophobes. Does that “offend” me? Not really, but if it did I wouldn’t demand an apology. Their words and their actions speak for themselves.Fair-minded individuals are perfectly capable of looking at the details of a story and parsing out the extent to which someone is a jerk or in the wrong. The same goes for stories involving Rush Limbaugh.

On the Sunday morning talk shows, DNC Chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz said: “The bottom line is, the leading candidate on the Republican side for president couldn’t even bring himself to call Rush Limbaugh’s comments outrageous and call him out and ask him to apologize.” The response to Wasserman should be: “Get a life. The national debt is at $15,488,891,296,248.02. There are more important things to do than to get embroiled in the on air comments of random radio hosts.”

With everything that the Commander in Chief has on his plate, the notion that he would get involved with the back-and-forth between a radio host and a 30 year old woman attending Georgetown Law is depressing. For someone who campaigned on rising above the fray, all of his actions indicate he’d rather get into the mud to sling clumps. President Obama’s phone call to Sandra Fluke ultimately only serves to distract voters from the tsunami of debt that’s blocking out the sun and about to hit home. When opportunities have given him a chance to become a true statesmen, the president fittingly rose to the level of a community organizer.  Regardless of what one thinks about Rush Limbaugh, there are certainly more appropriate surrogates the president could tap to deal with him. The fact that he chose to directly intervene highlights how vulnerable he would be if only the Republican Party nominated a true statesmen.

The sad part about all of this is, the people who will owe the American people an apology for Washington’s complete and utter failure to address the nation’s debt crisis will disappear when the time comes.

Preparing for Life After Limbaugh.

Conservatives need to prepare for Life After Limbaugh. Hopefully, that day won't come for a long, long time. Judging by the talking heads prone to friendly fire, we're not doing a very good job with the farm league.

One day Rush Limbaugh will not be with us. One day, he’ll turn off the Golden EIB Microphone, and on a long enough timeline all we’ll have of him will be the transcripts from his show, the audio library, and his books—but we won’t have him. And then what?

For starters, we’ll have one less person who knows how to put things in perspective:

“I just wish that people on our side could get unified and understand that the problem is not Herman Cain, the problem is not Rick Perry, the problem is not Rick Santorum, the problem is not any of our people. The problem is Barack Obama and what he has done so far to this country and what he will continue to do if given the chance,” (Rush Limbaugh).

It’s a very fine art, knowing when and how to critique individuals who fall on the same side of the ideological fence. Rush has always done an amazing job at tweaking those who needed to be tweaked without damaging the conservative movement. Generally, he holds his fire for those who place themselves up on moral pedestals (i.e., the elitist conservatives), the Beltway know-it-alls who sneer at regular folks just as much as your typical, liberal, cable news partisan hack—who just hide it a bit better behind a string of euphemisms.

I’ve worked in Washington, DC for a few years now, and I’ve run into plenty of (so-called) conservative academics and intellectuals who hate Rush Limbaugh. The reason? When you boil it down–whether they want to admit it or not—it’s because he’s willing to let the guys who think they’re the smartest in the room know that they’re not.

Rush was supposed to be bought and paid for long ago, but he’s not. He was supposed to be a part of the good ol’ boys club, but he’s not. He doesn’t just blindly accept the conventional wisdom offered up by the Republican side of the aisle—because he’s conservative. He’s principled. He has an uncanny ability to see through all the BS, even when his political allies can not.

This upsets them.

When Rush is dead and gone, we’ll need others who live and work according to a similar philosophy. We’ll need foot soldiers who are eternally optimistic, principled, and always willing to be America’s Truth Detector. Right now there aren’t many like him. Mark Steyn is one of a few select personalities who can match Rush in wit, wisdom, humor, independence, and consistency. We need more of that, and the conservative movement is doing a horrible job cultivating new talent.

Right now, the “Al Gore Doomsday Clock” on Rush’s website still has four years to go before Armageddon hits, so conservatives know they’ll at least have that long to listen and learn. They also need to be preparing for Life After Limbaugh. Until that day comes, though, I think I speak for the majority of the conservative movement when I say, “Thank God for the Excellence in Broadcasting Network and the man behind the Golden EIB Microphone.”

Seth MacFarlane’s Limbaugh Episode: Rush Gets It.

If Seth MacFarlane keeps getting hate mail from liberals, perhaps he too will have a conservative conversion. Remember, Seth: The guys who claim to be “tolerant” and “open minded” only seem that way until you disagree with them.

Anyone who reads this blog knows how I feel about Seth MacFarlane.  I think he’s a witty liberal guy who sometimes bites off more than he can chew because progressive media sets him up for failure.  They massage the egos of their ideological allies with a blatant disregard for the consequences that sane people see coming a mile away.  It’s one thing to criticize immigration policy when the interviewer isn’t going to ask you about your drug-smugglerless mansion. It’s another thing to spout off when Andrew Breitbart is sitting across the table from you.

Those who are not so blinded by ideology that they can still refuse to defend the losers and nincompoops on their own side of the aisle tend to improve their ability to predict the opposition’s moves. Seth seems to be slowly learning that lesson:

RUSH: I’d seen the whole script. I’d seen my part and everybody else’s part. I had not seen any of the animation other than, you know, what they released last week, and Seth sent me this note. He was getting hate mail like he has never received before from people who thought he had screwed up by making me look human. He had made a drastic error by making conservatism look funny and nice and reasonable, and they are accusing him of being a sellout. And what he said to me in the e-mail is, “Rush, I have to tell you. My people, my side of the aisle are supposedly all these tolerant, open-minded, willing to accept all points of view. You’re more progressive than they are. These people have absolutely no sense of humor about anything on this show last night.” He was getting more beat up than I am.

Welcome to the club, Seth! I learned the same thing too when I went to college years ago. You didn’t think I was always a member of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, did you?

The great thing about Rush is that he doesn’t take himself too seriously. He knows that by going on Family Guy and showing he has a sense of humor, countless young people will now tune into his show out of sheer curiosity. Like me years ago, they’ll realize that he isn’t the monster media makes him out to be. Like me they’ll hear him out and come to the conclusion that a lot of what he says makes sense. They’ll listen to his calls to read economists like Thomas Sowell, or books like The Road to Serfdom…and some of those kids will become the next generation of conservative leaders.

My current job affords me the opportunity to run across a wide range of conservatives, and some of them would rather throw in the towel than enter the pop culture arena. They think it’s a fight that’s beneath them or one not worth taking part in to begin with. They’re wrong. Rush is right. And that’s why he’s a continuing success story. The seeds of conservatism can be planted in the minds of young people in a variety of ways, and I implore some of my social conservative friends to follow Rush’s example.

See you on the other side, Seth.

Roger Ebert Sinks To Liberal Depths, Comes Up With The Bends.

Ebert's new litmus test for "crimes against America" is "silence" if you fail to wail and flog yourself Ashura-style when he claps his fat. If that's the case, I wonder if he'll apply it to certain religious communities who are eerily silent when cartoonists have Somali nutcases attack them with hatchets...

What happens when you go down the liberal rabbit hole too far? You turn into angry, deranged malcontents like Roger Ebert and John Cusack. Most liberals venture though a few Alice in Wonderland type doorways of progressivism, partake in some weird sexual acts, experiments with drugs, and economic absurdity—enough so, that when they resurface and interact with the real world, they come across as naive-but-well-intentioned public policy clowns.

Roger Ebert? He’s went to the liberal depths of the earth without adequate scuba gear, came up too fast, and the bends did some weird things to his mind. As it stands, he only gets excited for movies like The Woodsman, and heroes like Hit Girl scare him. He also calls it a “crime against America” for radio hosts and pundits to ignore…a non issue:

Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh must join, or let their silence indict them. Limbaugh in particular must cease his innuendos and say, flat out, whether he believes the President is a Muslim or not. Yes or no. Does he have evidence, or does he have none? Yes or no.

To do anything less at this troubled time in our history would be a crime against America.

Rush Limbaugh doesn’t think Barack Obama is a Muslim. However, it’s completely legitimate to wonder about someone who thinks dialogue is possible with Holocaust denying loons like Ahmadinejad.  And it’s very rational to have concerns about a president who essentially goes on an American apology tour to start off his term.  Anyone who remembers when President Obama said “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism,” understands why conservatives question his judgement.  American Exceptionalism is REAL, and President Obama openly stated that he doesn’t believe in it. That’s scary.

But back to the point: The last time I checked, Rush Limbaugh and other conservative commentators weren’t flying airlines filled to the brim with jet fuel into large metropolitan areas. The last time I checked they weren’t threatening to kill the creators of South Park or Facebook over the jihad excuse de jour. And the last time I checked they weren’t advocates of stoning.

With that said, there is one group of people who are largely silent when it comes to real, concrete, in-your-face instances of “crimes against America.” If Roger Ebert wants to play that game, I’m more than happy to do so while ignoring the nuances of the real world. If “silence” is now an indictment for conservative talk show hosts who don’t wail and moan and beat themselves with chains, Ashura-style, when Roger Ebert claps his fat, then I suggest applying that logic to all religious communities that have Mahmoud Ahmadinejad fans within their ranks.

Roger Ebert may not be a supporter of George Bush, but I am. And always will be.  When it came to protecting the United States in the face of danger, he was crystal clear where he stood.  He was a man of integrity. You may not agree with George Bush on a number of fronts, but anyone who hasn’t delved too far down the rabbit hole knows he’s a man of conviction.

Roger, if you’re reading this, I’ll let you go. I know you have an appointment to watch The Woodsman again, and perhaps to stew over the state of the world some more.

Best,

Doug

Rush Limbaugh has God Inside Him.

Rush Limbaugh has God inside him (and so do you).

If that’s too much for you to swallow (without actually thinking about it), then I suggest reading my post on Iron Man for a watered down version of the ideas I’m about to write about, as well as what makes America great. However, if you’re willing to entertain the idea, then read on.

Years ago, straight out of the military and with no political affiliation, I went to college. Before encountering liberal professors who claimed, “Only redneck Republican hicks who are happy to get a free pair of boots join the military,” prompted me to start looking into conservatism, there was this guy on the radio who made me laugh by turning Elvis’ “In the Ghetto” into an Al Gore Global Warming parody titled “In A Yugo.” His name was Rush Limbaugh. He hooked me with humor, but it wasn’t long before he introduced me to his more substantive side with appeals to intellectual giants like Thomas Sowell, Walter E. Williams, and Friedrich Hayek. Through his radio show I was encouraged to pick up Paine’s Common Sense, J.S. Mill’s On Liberty, Tocqueville’s Democracy in America, as well as books by Natan Sharansky and Dinesh D’Souza.

What does all of this have to do with God? Or Rush Limbaugh? Simple. It’s impossible for anyone to read the catalog of thought mentioned above without coming to the conclusion that each and every one of us is in possession of God-given talents we can harness to contribute to the creation of a better world. It’s also near-impossible for someone to read the works of those authors without doing a little soul-searching of their own.

There are people out there who decry Rush Limbaugh and any number of out-of-context quotes taken from his radio show on a daily basis, but the fact remains that he inspires millions of people to take control of their lives.  When someone realizes that they’re here for a purpose and that they control their own destiny—as opposed to unprincipled politicians in Washington, DC—an awesome transformation happens.

Rush Limbaugh is one of the most positive personalities alive today, contrary to what the talking heads at MSNBC say. Sure, he’s pessimistic about public figures who want to “plan” every aspect of your life, but he’s inspirational when it comes to empowering the individual.  And Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann and the New York Times can’t stand that.

God didn’t put you on this earth to sit back and abdicate the most important decisions in your life to some third party whose only real worry is how they’re going to get reelected. You’re here because you’re worthwhile.  You’re here because work is a virtue, and nothing is more satisfying than finding out what you love to do and then doing it for your family, the community, and the world at large.  No matter what Rush Limbaugh’s faults (and we all have faults), his consistent efforts to educate Americans in self-determination, liberty, and individual freedoms will pay dividends for decades to come.

What would the trajectory of my life have been if I had never turned on the radio and listened to Rush all those years ago?  I’m not sure. I think my family, my faith, as well as my time in the military instilled values in me that would have served me well regardless of my midday radio preferences.  But, I think it’s safe to say that the liberal mind-forged manacles my professors encouraged me to willingly slip into would have been around for a lot longer. And that would have been a shame because life is precious, but life is short. It seems as though the older I get the more I realize how little time we really have to leave our mark upon the world. And while we can have a positive impact on humanity at any age, it’s sad to think of all those wasted moments and missed opportunities we can never get back.

We all have saints inside us, and we’re all sinners. The challenge is to bring the former to the forefront much more often than not. Rush has done that, and he’s inspired millions to follow in his footsteps. And for that I’m thankful. Worst Person in the World, Keith Olbermann? I beg to differ.

No go out there, and make a difference.

Rush Limbaugh: Introducing us to the best and brightest intellectual minds for decades. Challenging you to find the best inside yourself for decades.

Charles Blow of the New York Times: KO’d Street Fighter Style.

According to Charles Blow of the New York Times, opposition to health care is the irrational result of listening to Rush Limbaugh and Fox news. Polls like this apparently have less to do with some of the empirical evidence used by Rush Limbaugh on a daily basis, and more to do with some sort of ignorance-magic that makes people impervious to Presidential ramblings:

The Apostles of Anger in their echo chamber of fallacies have branded him the enemy. This has now become an article of faith. Obama isn’t just the enemy of small government and national solvency. He’s the enemy of liberty.

Actually, Mr. Blow, The Heritage Foundation, The Wall Street Times, and liberal Democrats from Illinois like Phil Hare (him, albeit inadvertently) are highlighting quite nicely that American liberties are being eroded as we speak. The Wall Street Journal is spot on when it notes:

Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum and 13 other state AGs—including Louisiana Democrat Buddy Caldwell—claim this is an unprecedented exercise of state power. Never before has Congress required people to buy a private product to qualify as a law-abiding citizen…Democrats claim the mandate is justified under the Commerce Clause, because health care and health insurance are a form of interstate commerce…[but] all human activity arguably has some economic footprint. So if Congress can force Americans to buy a product, the question is what remains of the government of limited and enumerated powers, as provided in Article I. The only remaining restraint on federal power would be the Bill of Rights, though the Founders considered those 10 amendments to be an affirmation of the rights inherent in the rest of the Constitution, not the only restraint on government. If the insurance mandate stands, then why can’t Congress insist that Americans buy GM cars, or that obese Americans eat their vegetables or pay a fat tax penalty?

That’s a fact, Mr. Blow. So the next time you tell your readers that “Rush & Co…strum their fears and feed their anxiety,” perhaps you should take a step back and actually read The Constitution or The Federalist Papers instead of taking Nancy Are you serious? Pelosi’s word for it. Because she certainly isn’t.

Myself, any many other Americans out there are very familiar with the Rule of Law:

An individual mandate to enter into a contract with or buy a particular product from a private party, with tax penalties to enforce it, is unprecedented– not just in scope but in kind–and unconstitutional as a matter of first principles and under any reasonable reading of judicial precedents.

And finally, your assertion that everyone on the left “loves” the President? Think again. It appears the only person misleading people around here…is you.

And that, good sir, is what you call getting KO’d, Street Fighter style.

Ryu-Hadouken takes Charles Blow out like he was Chun-Li...because he basically is.