Rush Limbaugh claims the Democrats want to turn Jared Loughner into a victim. (Photo Credit: Public Domain/Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office/Wikipedia)

Fans of talk show host and author Rush Limbaugh typically subscribe to the demagogue’s marketing slogan that “Rush is Right.” However, when it comes to Limbaugh’s comments Jan. 12 regarding Tucson shooter Jared Loughner and a Democratic party that is allegedly doing everything in its power to avoid the administration of justice, many believe that Rush is wrong. Limbaugh claims 22-year-old Loughner has the Democrats’ “full support.”

Limbaugh guilty of making Tucson shooting rhetorical minefield

As one of many media pundits, Rush Limbaugh makes his living kicking the hornet’s nest of political rhetoric, and the Tucson shooting has proven to be no exception. According to Politically Illustrated, Limbaugh claims that Jared Loughner can rest easy, knowing that he has “the full support of a major political party in this country.” This party is allegedly doing all it can to “find anybody but him to blame,” says Limbaugh.

In Rush Limbaugh’s mind, that party – the Democratic Party – wants to turn Jared Lee Loughner and anyone else who has been wronged by the “unfairness of America” into a victim.

Turning the tables

Limbaugh’s position is convenient, so long as the tables aren’t turned, as they were on Sarah Palin. Palin, who sits on the same side of the political fence as Limbaugh, claimed that the liberal media’s connection of her “crosshairs” political rhetoric to the Safeway shooting of Arizona State Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and numerous others amounts to “blood libel.” Perhaps it would have helped Palin if she’d understood the definition of blood libel before making a public leap to reinsert her foot into her mouth.

Rush is wrong, but Giffords may be right

The news on Rep. Giffords is that she’s responding well to her treatments in the hospital following taking one of Loughner’s bullets to the head. According to Dr. Peter Rhee of University Medical Center in Tucson, Ariz., Giffords’ chance of survival is 100 percent. While there will be a long road of recovery after such a traumatic brain injury, Rhee remained optimistic that Giffords will not be a vegetable.

Sources

Charlotte Observer

Huffington Post

Politically Illustrated

Limbaugh claims Democrats facilitate Jared Loughner as victim

After the Arizona shooting, Rush Limbaugh blamed the media for trying to turn people against conservatives. Image: CC Gage Skidmore/Flickr

A moment of silence on the White House lawn was a gesture by President Obama for the victims of Jared Lee Loughner. The moment of silence was observed in places ranging from the U.S. Supreme court to the Detroit Auto Show. A moment of silence was not observed by right wing media personalities, who used the tragedy to draw attention to themselves.

Moment of silence falls on many places

A national moment of silence at 11 a.m. EST Monday was led by President Obama and first lady Michelle Obama on the south lawn of the White House. The Supreme Court adjusted its schedule to observe the moment of silence and honor U.S. District Judge John McCarthy Roll, who was killed along with five others in Tucson, Ariz., Saturday. Rep Gabrielle Giffords was critically wounded in the attack and 13 others were wounded. Other locations around the nation observing the moment of silence included the Detroit Auto Show, where the cacophony of the event fell silent for a minute before resuming at a more subdued level.

Shooting linked to toxic political environment

At a press conference after the shooting, Pima County Sheriff Clarence W. Dupnik said it was time for the country “to do a little soul-searching.” Dupnik blamed the increasingly toxic political environment in the U.S. for the shooting. A graphic on Sara Palin’s website showing Democratic congressional districts, which included Gifford’s, marked on a map with gunsight crosshairs got a lot of media attention. Pseudo-violent political rhetoric from such lawmakers as Rep. Michelle Bachman, R-Minn., and failed Nevada senatorial candidate Sharon Angle were used as examples in stories about the nature of political discourse in the U.S.

Moment of silence falls on deaf ears

Right wing media personalities such as Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh used the suggestion that the Arizona shooting may be a consequence to Republican rhetoric by blaming liberals and the mainstream media. Rush Limbaugh accused Democrats of playing politics with the shooting and the media of turning people against conservatives. Glenn Beck called Sarah Palin a victim of the tragedy and warned her to protect her family. He also used the occasion to tell his viewers to denounce progressives and those who wish to “tear down our system.”

Sources

Wall Street Journal

New York Times

CNN

Salon

Many organizations make helping people easy by allowing you to donate online.

I have recently come across several cases of people shaming others for doing good things. For example, shortly after the devastating earthquake in Haiti, Rush Limbaugh famously said “You already give to Haitian relief – it’s called the income tax.” While many were spreading the word and encouraging others to help fellow humans in a desperate situation, Limbaugh basically said that doing so was dumb.

Today on Facebook, a friend of mine from Idaho posted that she “is sick of seeing the status about being upset that people donate to Haiti because we have needy people in America.” I haven’t seen any status updates containing that sentiment in my Live Feed, but even knowing that it’s out there makes me sad. Really sad — and it’s not just because people in Haiti need money now for medical care, shelter, water and food. The general attitude of finding the negative in something so positive is frustrating.

More examples of damaging do-gooders

Unlike Rush Limbaugh, a lot of the people who discourage others from doing good do it in the name of doing something else good. The Facebookers say that people should stop donating to Haiti because they should be donating domestically. Similarly, a couple in Washington decided to help the environment and fund their wedding by paying for it by recycling aluminum cans. Sure enough, someone so focused on her own agenda that she failed to see how positive the project is wrote:

“If you used the energy you are putting into your one day event for something more socially conscious, your press would be better. Why not convert your idea and donate the money to a local homeless shelter?”

This, of course, was in the midst of a much longer post, part of which openly shamed them for what they were doing, calling them “incredibly selfish” for spending the money on their wedding. Never mind the fact that they’re having an extremely inexpensive wedding. Never mind that they are encouraging and facilitating recycling, which is great for the planet.

Stick to your agenda, but don’t criticize others

I applaud the Facebookers for wanting to help needy people within the U.S., and I encourage them to do so. I think it’s great that the Wedding Cans commenter wants to help the homeless. I say go do it. Do everything you can for the causes you believe in. While you’re at it, don’t discourage others from doing the same with causes they believe in.

In a world where there are so many problems that need to be fixed and so many people in need, people shouldn’t waste their energy criticizing others for their efforts to give or to help. There are a whole lot of people and causes who need help. Criticizing other people for who they have chosen to help is at best useless and at worst hypocritical. If you ever feel the need to criticize other people for the way they have chosen to make the world a better place, I suggest you spend your time making the world a better place yourself instead.

Sheila Jackson Lee image from Wikimedia. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SheilaJacksonlee.jpg

When I wrote earlier about the possibility of Rush Limbaugh buying the St. Louis Rams, I kind of thought that whole process had been snuffed out already. Apparently I was mistaken, as yesterday Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) in a floor speech said the NFL should not accept a bid from Rush Limbaugh to buy the team.

Several people already have voiced their opinions that they were opposed to Rush Limbaugh owning an NFL team, including NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. Last week, the commissioner suggested he would not accept a bid from Limbaugh when he said “we’re all held to a high standard here, and I think divisive comments are not what the NFL is all about.”

Sheila Jackson Lee is not alone

It looks like no amount of instant money will convince certain people within the NFL to vote in favor of Rush Limbaugh’s bid, which hasn’t officially been made yet. At this point, Limbaugh has simply expressed interest. Colts owner Jim Irsay has already made it clear to the public that he would not vote in favor of Rush Limbaugh owning the Rams. Several players on the team have also said they wouldn’t want to be on the team anymore if he owned it.

In fact, The Hill reports that the entire “NFL Players Association … has expressed major concerns about Limbaugh’s bid.” Outside the NFL, The Revs. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have both urged the NFL to vote down any bid Limbaugh makes. However, it appears Limbaugh has not given up on the idea that he could buy the team, as he talked about Sheila Jackson Lee’s comments on his radio show today.

One vote for Rush Limbaugh

Sheila Jackson Lee is not the only politician who has voiced an opinion about the idea of Rush Limbaugh purchasing an NFL team. Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.), who joins Sheila Jackson Lee as a memeber of the Congressional Black Caucus, said he would have no problem with Limbaugh owning the Rams. He even said he thinks Limbaugh could help the team.

Limbaugh used to work as a commentator for ESPN on its NFL pregame show. However, he resigned after saying — on the air — that he thought Donovan McNabb was getting more attention than he deserved. He attributed this attention to the fact that Americans “wanted to see a black quarterback do well.”

Grassroots movement opposes Limbaugh’s racist quotes

An online campaign to get people to sign a petition urging the NFL to reject any offer from Rush Limbaugh. The campaign, housed at RushIsARacist.com, has compiled video of Rush Limbaugh racist quotes.

Considering that the NFL commissioner has already implied that he would reject Limbaugh’s offer, all of this campaigning — by grassroots movements, famous reverends and Sheila Jackson Lee — might be unnecessary. But nowadays it seems people will jump on any excuse to get riled up about racism.

(Photo: sweetness-light.com)

I refer to Rush Limbaugh here. What can I say? The gasbag’s an easy target, and he’s also one of the most powerful members of the Republican Party. Considering that he doesn’t even hold a political position within the party, that’s saying something for the buzz he creates with his crackpot little radio show. Conveniently following a critical statement made by Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi that the thuggish protests at health care reform town halls have inappropriately featured Nazi symbols, Rush is ready to latch on to the notion (fabricated by the right-wing blog Sweetness and Light) that the Obama health care logo bears all-too-close resemblance to Nazi symbols, sans only the swastikas.

Quite a stretch, Rush

But then, informed individuals have known for some time that your musings are just that: musings. You are an entertainer whose pronouncements bear little or no real-world political relevance. There’s no reason to start taking you seriously here, either. If I had cash advances or payday loans for every time you’ve made a fool of yourself, I’d be a rich man for two weeks (because I’d have to pay it all back like a responsible consumer)…

And your righteous indignation over Pelosi indirectly calling the town hall protesters Nazis: first class stuff! You’re quite an actor, Rush. Some people actually believe you used to be a serious football analyst on “Monday Night Football,” too. Yet I know better. Here are some of Rush’s pearls, straight from the swine’s mouth:

This woman is deranged. They’re unraveling, but that is not insignificant. You have the Democrat Speaker of the House saying that people, citizens who are concerned about health care are now wearing swastikas. She’s basically saying that we are Nazis.

Obama has been compared to Hitler

Does this look AT ALL the same to you? No coaching from Rush, he isn't here! (Photo: sweetness-light.com)

Do you seriously think that’s accurate, Rush? Do you expect anyone to take you seriously after you stand behind such a claim? I’m offended that you’d cheapen what Jews went through during World War II by using the image for political grandstanding. Do you understand history, Mr. Limbaugh? Yet there he goes. Limbaugh promises to point out how Nazi the Democratic Party is, while polishing the accomplishments of Republicans. It’s a tired act. He has the right to say what he says, but people also have the right to begin thinking for themselves any time now. “Rush is Right” people may not have to turn around and begin to love Democrats, but they need to see what an embarrassment Rush Limbaugh truly is.

And the Obama health care logo?

If I was under the influence of a heavy drug like Oxycontin and wanted (for some unknown reason) to go about proving that the Lucky Charms leprechaun was a terrorist, I could in my haze mutter something as brilliant as what Rush Limbaugh and Sweetness and Light are saying about the Obama health care logo and Nazi symbols. I could claim that the rainbows and pots of gold represent the homosexual community’s plot to take control of America’s gold supply (rainbows and pots of gold… brilliant, right?). Rush Limbaugh’s claim that the Obama health care logo is Nazi is similarly coherent.

Simon Maloy of Media Matters for America gives us the straight story on the Obama health care logo: “In reality, Obama’s logo incorporates the caduceus — the ancient symbol for medicine.” That fits with the health care theme, doesn’t it? Oh, and because there’s a bird in the Obama logo, the same as their is in the Nazi symbol shown here, that makes the Obama health care logo Nazi? Does it also make the American bald eagle Nazi? Or Sam the Eagle from “The Muppet Show?”

Riconkulous, Rushapotamus

As is your Nazi-Democrat connection:

LIMBAUGH: They accuse of us being Nazis, and Obama’s got a health care logo that’s right out of Adolf Hitler’s playbook. Now, what are the similarities between the Democrat Party of today and the Nazi Party in Germany? Well, the Nazis were against big business — they hated big business. And of course we all know that they were opposed to Jewish capitalism. They were insanely, irrationally against pollution. They were for two years mandatory voluntary service to Germany. They had a whole bunch of make-work projects to keep people working, one of which was the Autobahn. They were against cruelty and vivisection of animals, but in the radical sense of devaluing human life, they banned smoking. They were totally against that. They were for abortion and euthanasia of the undesirables, as we all know, and they were for cradle-to-grave nationalized healthcare.

That’s lovely, Rush.

However, you fling around these bits of information like someone who dreams of being Jackson Pollock but has not real sense of how the facts fit together. The racial ideologies of Nazi Germany were abominable. I’m not a fan of mandatory federal service for all citizens, either. But Rush, are you really making a strong point for your side when you point out their stand against pollution, smoking and cruelty to animals? Are those bad things? Then you include their support of abortion, the death penalty and nationalized healthcare. Arguably, these are also things that can benefit a free society. As do cash advances and payday loans.

I see where you’re attempting to manipulate listeners, but what I also see is a mental muddle from an Oxycontin addict who supposedly leads the Republican Party. Rush, Sarah Palin, Michael Steele and Dick Cheney? That would have me seeing something if I were a Republican, and it wouldn’t be swastikas; it would be a non-Republican taking the election in 2012.

Related Video: