Guess some people much rather follow a Radical/Socialist/Communist Individuals that are running the present, and future of our Great Country into the ground, than listen and pay attention to other opinions...

The funny part about it is that, NON OF THEM has been able to "question" what Mr. Limbaugh and other say! Doesn't real intelligent citizens find these Radical Losers' actions, incredible?

Radicals' only defense is and will always be, BLA! BLA! BLA! and then, go to the government's office, to get their monthly checks for just contamination the air, and crawl back into their holes in the ground...

Really Pitiful!

GOD BLESS AMERICA!

Republicans belong to one religion and mostly white but Democrats come from ALL religions and Atheists and different Races. Only when Republicans realize this, there is chance of them becoming a True Political party.Unless you hear BOTH sides you can not form an opinion. Only FOOLS who can not think for themselves will be swayed by listening to Rush Limbaugh or Pelosi.

Is it a sin for a cardinal in the Catholic church to conduct funeral services for someone who, as a senator, notoriously flouted one of the church's most basic teachings -- the protection of innocent life?

I listen to Rush often, and he's the best political analyst in America with the possible exceptions of Michael Barone and Karl Rove. He ridicules the idiocy of the left but is not at all a hater, like, say, olbermann or Garafolo. Rush's commentary, though painful to liberals, is entirely within the traditional bounds of American political discourse. You merely object to his effectiveness in presenting a message you disagree with, his large audience and his influence. Is it a sin to debunk liberal cliches?

There are few things more disgusting than a liberal playing the God card.

It is interesting how the pro-lifers are against health care which gives a better life... are for the death pentaly which takes life....and have a one mind set which allows them to give their children second hand smoke, having young kids in cars without childseats and not using safty belts in cars.... and do not forget guns... which is their right....

There are numerous liberals who have routinely crossed the line of decency with their own untruthful opinions and "isms" that are deliberately designed to inflame and divide Americans. My short list of those I can not stomach are Maher, Olberman, Moore, Stewart, Garafalo, Rich, Dionne, Krugman, Matthews, Clift, Alterman, Carville, Begala, Katrina V, Larry O'Donnell. And for the record, I don't listen to Limbaugh any more either. I could care less about football and I can't stand his rambling, meandering monologues.

POSTED BY: MARRIGAN
==

For every one of Olbermann's proven lies, you'll find at least fifty by Rush.

Sin is a religious concept, playing along with that in mind, yes, listening to Rush is a sin.

Hearing him speak, however, is not a sin. I encourage people to hear him on the radio -- makes for an entertaining hour or so on your commute.

This is an incredibly offensive column. It is one thing to encourage people of all political persuasions to reject blind allegiance to any political commentator; it is quite another to single out one person for condemnation, particularly under the guise of religion and when there is no shortage of liberal political commentators and 'comedians' who engage in the same crass rantings and ravings. But, fair is fair and in this column, Stevens-Arroyo falls short.

There are numerous liberals who have routinely crossed the line of decency with their own untruthful opinions and "isms" that are deliberately designed to inflame and divide Americans. My short list of those I can not stomach are Maher, Olberman, Moore, Stewart, Garafalo, Rich, Dionne, Krugman, Matthews, Clift, Alterman, Carville, Begala, Katrina V, Larry O'Donnell. And for the record, I don't listen to Limbaugh any more either. I could care less about football and I can't stand his rambling, meandering monologues.

I have a degree in existentialism and eastern religions. How about you?

hahahahahahahahaha

Please do, you know that you and your potus are affirmative action dummies, as proven by your grades...I'll bet dumber than Bush.

hahahahahahahha. You are proven to me as not credible. You see, I am the real thing, you are just phonies. hahahahahaha

ubama is just an affirmative action joker.

hahahahahahaha.

I am a highly successfully consultant and student of religion. You must be honest to yourselves...ubama is an affirmative action president, way out of his league. hahahahahahahahaha

testing, testing

ubama is dumber than Bush as proven by his grades.

Don't worry WP editors, I know that ubama is an idiot, so you have to delete my posts. I know you have to be PC.

I won't be long accepted by the WP. I believe ubama is an affirmative action president whose stupidity is excused out of sympathy for his race.

I'll bet he is dumber than Bush, as proven by his unreleased grades.

Rush stepped in after Bush left office. Rush is just following the plan from the pass 8 years. Nothing has changed as Jesus tried to teach while Satan used greed to get his followers. We see how that turned out as even good people yelled for Jesus to be put on the Cross. Rush and others from the Republican Party are following Satan's direction. The KKK groups used the Bible for Satan's work and it's doing very well. What's strange is when we see Priest attack President Obama on the abortion issue but they see no problem with molesting kids or even having sex with men.

mmm1110 is typical of liberal moonbats. He whines about Rush, but then says he doesn't listen to him. How do you really know what he is saying if you don't listen?

And then there is gal_5dbldot14. She(?) says the election is over, the people have spoken, and Rush lost. Look again sweetie. The people are taking notice and there is a backlash brewing... which will be felt deeply in 2010 and again in 2012.

I think it's a sin to read and write for the Washington Post!

What is a sin and also shows how brain dead you are is to believe the lie that everything a liberal Democrat loon spouts out of their mouth is gospel truth and everything a conservative says is from the roots of hell.

If it is sinful to listen to Rush Limbaugh, whom I do not doubt is better and fairer cultural analyst than Mr. Stevens-Arroyo, then it is doubly sinful to listen to Catholic politicans like the Kennedys and Barack Obama who relentlessly advocate the destruction of innocent human life. Democrats do not have a monopoly on virtue; in fact, they are much more out of line with Catholic values than a conservative Protestant Christian like Rush Limbaugh or a Mormon like Glenn Beck. At least neither of those gentlemen cloaks himself in virtue while killing children. Conservative talk show hosts are not perfect, but I doubt there is a millstone being prepared for their necks like there are for those who have murdered 50 million children under the guise of law.

I'm sorry but conservative have won religion, not just Catholicism or Christianity but all religion in this country by making people believe it's a Christian Nation, so if your Christian your not really an American. And that only true Christians believe in conservative issues soon to be ideals. And has made Christian a religion on hate and greed. Since that's what it means to be a Christian in this country then I guess I'm not one.

A Heart Broken Society!
by; Susanj
For the current issue’s of the world, to have children or not to have children should be seriously pondered. If I were still in childbearing years, I would be rather reluctant to bring another victim into this world as we know it today, by the way… resembles the Book of Revelations.

Immorality…has contributed a lot to our oft dysfunctional society. A song that was sung by Wynonna Judd explains much of the errors of our way . “Grandpa tell me about the good old days… when Daddy’s never went away“, and another lyric that mentions “when family’s would bow their heads and pray,” always reminds me that there are NO WINNERS IN DIVORCE. Family’s that pray together, stay together.

How sad, the previous generations have made such a Disastrous Outcome for our Youth today. The Current Generation is Rebellious and Broken Hearted in so many ways. The lack of guidance due in part to Divorce and the Extinction of Stay at Home Moms are both contributing factors.

Greedy Corporations, should also assume responsibility for the way things have turned out for all, making it nearly impossible to afford to raise a family in today’s economy on a single parent income.

My suggestion is…Live simply just so others can simply live, and to abide by the book of instructions entitled THE HOLY BIBLE. Amen and God Bless the Children…

A Heart Broken Society!
by; Susanj
For the current issue’s of the world, to have children or not to have children should be seriously pondered. If I were still in childbearing years, I would be rather reluctant to bring another victim into this world as we know it today, by the way… resembles the Book of Revelations.

Immorality…has contributed a lot to our oft dysfunctional society. A song that was sung by Wynonna Judd explains much of the errors of our way . “Grandpa tell me about the good old days… when Daddy’s never went away“, and another lyric that mentions “when family’s would bow their heads and pray,” always reminds me that there are NO WINNERS IN DIVORCE. Family’s that pray together, stay together.

How sad, the previous generations have made such a Disastrous Outcome for our Youth today. The Current Generation is Rebellious and Broken Hearted in so many ways. The lack of guidance due in part to Divorce and the Extinction of Stay at Home Moms are both contributing factors.

Greedy Corporations, should also assume responsibility for the way things have turned out for all, making it nearly impossible to afford to raise a family in today’s economy on a single parent income.

My suggestion is…Live simply just so others can simply live, and to abide by the book of instructions entitled THE HOLY BIBLE. Amen and God Bless the Children…

!!!!

Is there a difference between listening and hearing? Kind of a strange dichotomy of Mr. Steven-Arroyo here. After carefully and methodically dissecting the character flaws of Bush-Limbo. Then ends up saying it is No Sin to "Listen" to the guy.

There are differences between listening and hearing, not only grammatical and etymological, but also of meaning in action. I can hear my neighbors radio next door but I,m not paying attention to it; I'm not listening. So if someone asks me what was being played in my neighbors radio, I would not know. I heard some music but I did not care about it. I was busy with more important things.

So then here is the problem with Mr. Steven conclusion and religious dogma. If the man in question is such, that his speeches are Defamatory, Slanderous, Inflamatory, Incendiary, Deceitful, Sedicious and Flat out Lies. Then Listening to him is a SIN and an ocasion to sin. Now Mr. Arroyo's regular Column in this site carries the title Catholic America. Which makes me think that Mr. Arroyo's conclusion that is "Not a Sin" to listen to Limbo is based in his Roman-Catholic belief system. As someone who grew up under that system, I can say that his conclusion is in fact based on the system. In this particular case, totally and absolutely a vacuous belief system.

Now to really be informed about sin in my case I would go to the Best Source of Info about Sin the Scriptures aka the Bible, or La Biblía. In the Scriptures we can find a whole lot better information about the matter in question.

Soo let see, this is what Scriptures say about "listening", or hearing to such as Limbo; ...Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.
4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. (2nd Tim. 4:3b,4)

The Apostle Paul wrote to Timothy about the kind of people that would be around in the last days. BTW from my point of view now as a former Catholic, even listening to the Pope could as similar a Sin as listening to Limbo or Olbermann.

..?? :-o :-P

if you are traveling to Long island New York and Decided to use a car service from Jfk, Lga and Isp airport to Easthampton, Sag harbor, Amagansett and More . the best reliable and affordable service in these airports is Asm Limousine and town car Service. you can call 1 631 703 1662 or http://www.asmlimousine.com

I am a little confused with Mr. Steven-Arroyo's character assessment of Mr Limbaugh. He called Rush a Liar,Rascist, Drug User, and engages in character assassinations of his opponants. Calling listening to Limbaugh "not" a sin...but being a ditto heard (one who agrees with Rush) is a sin.

This being Mr steven-Arroyo's opinion as a catholic. Then it only stands to reason that he must conclude...being an Obama supporter is also a sin. Why? Because President Obama is a liar, has been an admitted drug user (cocaine, and dope, Obama spent 20 years in a racist church. Not to mention his last racist comments when his friend the Proffessor was arrested before knowing the facts. President Obama engages in character assassinations everyday...remember Joe the Plumber...the list is long.

Anthony Steven-Arroyo is employing character assassination in the article, he is classifying people by race, and is engaging in hate speech. Does this not make you a sinner? By your own standards...yes.

The problem is Rush uses fact, fiction and ridicule to stoke unreasonable fear in the susceptible. Some people lose sight of what is real and what isn't listening to his snake oil. They are so paranoid, confused and afraid that they start lashing out at shadows. Some liberals use similar tactics and it's equally frustrating to listen to. Faith and unreasonable fear are opposing forces.

A little green philosopher from the Dagobah system once told me: "beware the Dark side: anger, fear aggression, the dark side of the Force are they. Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight. If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will."*

As I think Paganplace said somewhere in this LONG discussion, the thing with Limbaugh, Mark Levin, Coulter, and the others is that they're exciting. They fire people up, and people like being fired up. The left has no answer to the gut-level appeal of these commentators - sometimes NPR is fascinating, other times it's just dreadfully boring.

The sad truth is that the conservative media (and Lou Dobbs, shame on him) aim for the lowest intellectual common denominator because, well, that's where they get the most attention. In fact, they're not aiming for the intellect - for critical thinking - at all. They're aiming for the emotions, particularly anger and fear.

Gut feelings are not necessarily bad (see the psychologist Gird Gigerenzer's excellent book on the subject), but for goodness sakes, they're no excuse for declaring Barack Obama an illegal alien or a Nazi against all the evidence.

That the leadership of the American Right aims straight past reason, straight for emotion, with deliberate lies like Sarah Palin's "death panel" line, shows its attitude toward its membership - cynicism, contempt and condescension, with an aim to manipulate.

It's easy to do because we live in a culture that has declared thinking to be bad. We don't want a brilliant President (and I'm not saying Obama is brilliant), we want someone we'd want a beer with.

We prefer excitement to information, clowns to journalists, attractive news anchors over competent ones (watch ANY 24-hour network, you'll see what I mean). It's quick, easy and fun.

On a side note, I suggest we stop calling him "Rush" and only call him Limbaugh, as the word "Rush" should only refer to Canada's greatest rock band.

*Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back

fr gimpi:

>I know Limbaugh, Beck and O'Riley expressed satisfaction with the recent murder of Dr. Tiller at his church by a radical anti-abortion activist. I know Glen Beck pantomimed murdering the speaker of the house...

That's why the aforementioned nutballs belong permanently off the air and IN JAIL, esp beck. Let's have limpburger's cellmate be Bubba, w/950 tattoos. I'm sure he'd make flush feel right at home.

"Hmmm and the solution?? (something right up Paganplace's Maypole)"

Maybe you ought to learn which way the thing *points* before you try getting clever about it, CCNL. :)

Hmmm and the solution?? (something right up Paganplace's Maypole)

http://www.pinheadvoodoodolls.com/Dolls.aspx?ID=Conservative

Has anyone heard of Joseph Paul Goebbels?

I agree with the poster who asks for a cite for Limbaugh's supposed quote, "Will someone rid us of this president?" It would be ironic if the only specific allegation turned out to be false. Since a Google search of the quoted phrase turns up only this article, I am quite skeptical.

Or did I miss the nuclear war and Soviet invasion that was once a fashionable excuse to get pietistic and gaybash?

"Rush is a truth-teller, a prophet."

zjr78xva

Well, he's too loopy to be a *journalist,* I'll give you that.

Unwitting heyoka, maybe.

'Prophet?'

Like most of the Religious Right 'Culture War' generals, I'd guess you'd *have* to be a 'Prophet' to make such unfailingly-wrong predictions for so long and still be listened to. :)

Ebryon:

"Rush Limbaugh's biggest sin is that he draws an audience. For years the only conservative voice consistently heard on the airwaves was William Buckley. He was reasoned, pedantic and BORING. As long as eyes and ears glazed over, he was fine with the left."

William F. Buckley was at least a respectable intellect, even if he spent most of it spinning arguments off ill-examined premises.

But he was a *real* conservative, even if his demagoguery, however confined to the old manner of 'talktalktalk believe me,' was mostly just a flag for neocons to wave, claiming they had an intellectual 'heavy-hitter' (kind of a messed-up way to see it, anyway) behind them.

Convoluted, pedantic, often *wrong,* but, no, not boring.

Under no illusions he'd have any interest in talking to *me,* at least I figured he might be someone worth talking *to.*

'Conservatism' nowadays is all about what Morton Downey Jr and Falwell and Robertson and the like started.

*Anger-inducing,* but ultimately boring.

*Boring* is people looking for parts of speeches they can edit 'gaffes' out of, to repeat the same tired bumper sticker slogans about.

William F. Buckley wasn't boring.

Rush is a truth-teller, a prophet.

No, it is not a sin to listen to Limbaugh. People are free to listen to whomever they choose. Rush does get an audience that is not intelligent. He is windbag who gives his intellectually challenged audience what they want to hear. As long as he does that, he will be on the air.

I do not listen to Rush. Why would I spend my valuable time listenting to some who blows nothing but hot air?

Rush Limbaugh's biggest sin is that he draws an audience. For years the only conservative voice consistently heard on the airwaves was William Buckley. He was reasoned, pedantic and BORING. As long as eyes and ears glazed over, he was fine with the left.

You can't be nuanced and calm and draw a big crowd. You have to be bombastic. Rush is that and, although I listen rarely now, he was not mean spirited back in the day. I'm certain that after thirty years doing his job he has stepped on toes and crossed lines at times. The Donovan McNabb example is a good one. He dared to criticize a black man that others lauded and pointed out that immunity from criticism was based on racial sensitivity. That offends some but the facts were that McNabb's football stats were not very good.

Rush is an entertainer. His job is to draw eardrums to advertisers and he does that. To characterize his act as sinful is raising the stakes in political argument to a level it doesn't deserve.

Spidermean makes this typically cogent observation:

'Rush is just too normal for these freaks. And by the way, most of these freaks believe that their ancestor was an ape.'

In the spirit of Spidermean's ongoing education -

Most humans and other modern primates evolved from a common ancestor - see below. However, it seems that a few human appearing creatures evolved directly from common arachnid ancestors, and this of course explains their venomous streak.

Here I'm thinking mainly of various right-wing Fox news and talk radio type celebrities and their anti-Obama supporters. Some of these idiots blame all the world's ills on the Catholic Church - I'm no fan, but this obsession really reeks of arachnoid paranoia.

One possible treatment - alot more reading and much less TV. Listen to classical music while driving to work.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090519104643.htm

Rush who????

In reply to Theodorebrown: First, I always read a column before looking at the comments (and often don't bother looking at the comments). In reading this column I thought that S-A's characterization of Rush was mistaken and that this appeared to be the result of a failure actually to listen to Rush himself (as opposed to repeat what he'd heard from others about Rush). On looking at the comments I found that those I read almost uniformly agreed with S-A, often calling Rush fat, stupid, etc. I did not find the relatively few who commented from a 'right' position doing likewise. If you like I'll give a couple dozen examples of ad hominem comments from the left. Can you gather half as many from the right?

Second, I said what I said about your previous post because you characterized Hannity and Coulter as idiots and, without giving examples, claimed that they together with Rush "insult our capacity for reason and understanding." Saying such things does not foster reasoned dialogue.

Third, though I do believe there is such a thing as truth, I'm glad to hear you don't believe you have a monopoly on it. For my part, I often tell people that I often disagree with myself in retrospect and consequently can't fairly expect anyone always to agree with me, however much I may think I'm right at the time.

Fourth, in reading material from widely diverse points of view, I find that unthinking adherence to a point of view is, if anything, more common on the left than on the right. But I deplore it wherever found. So, for that matter, does Rush; and as far as I can tell, he's quite sincere in saying so.

Finally, my objection to this column is primarily Mr. A-S's willingness to condemn listening to Rush as a sin when it is apparent that he's never listened to Rush himself and consequently, without realizing he’s doing so, seriously misrepresents him. My objection to many of the comments is that their authors evidently have never listened to Rush either, and are nevertheless equally willing to demonize him.

I doubt there is anyone posting here who is knowledgeable enough to criticize the Catholic religion or ANY religion. By the time a person is a fully mature adult, he has his OWN religion anyway, no matter WHICH religion he believes or practices (if he isn't too lazy.)

But, saying it is a SIN to listen to Rush Limbaugh or that Rush Limbaugh is a sinner is hypocritical, obviously! We are ALL sinners! or maybe THE ONE who isn't, should be the first one to throw the stone!

I don't like Rush Limbaugh either because his intent is only to be a rabble rouser, but he does make various issues available for thinking and discussion. Taking his word above my own thinking, studying, and judgment?? NEVER!! The reason I'm a Democrat is because I WANT to be able to THINK and decide for myself! However, idiots who presume that ALL Democrats are LIBERAL for sure NEVER learned HOW to think! These are the poor victims who are easy prey for the propagandists, like Rush Limbaugh. "CONSERVATIVE" means non-thinking; non-changing! I THINK, and I CHANGE, and I form MY OWN opinions. I don't fall for popular propaganda!

Dlachman--
A few things:
I tried to discern the main point of the column first, before taking a look at the comments. Frankly, I saw ad hominem attacks by commenters from both right and left positions.
You also assume that I and "those who agree" with me believe we have a monopoly on knowledge. Dlachman--I can only speak for myself--I don't believe I, personally, have a monopoly on truth. Can you trust me on this one?

Your implicit claim would be as ridiculous as my saying that YOU and those who agree with you think they have an answer for everything. Now, doesn't that sound stupid? Of course it does. But I would never make this kind of flawed assumption about your status as a contributor.

What I gained from this article is just this: that being a dittohead--on the right, and on the left--gets no one anywhere, and kills the fullness of faith.

Re: Theodorebrown: it's easy to assert that you and those who agree with you have a monopoly on rational thought and critical thinking, but, as I pointed out a bit earlier, if one were to judge only from the comments posted in respect to S-A's column, it certainly isn't the left which exercises critical thought. Your own comment is almost exclusively ad hominem; are you so blinded you can't see this? Try interacting with what your opponents actually are saying, for a change.

Rayosun evidently knows nothing of history; the Nazis actually were socialists and not all that different in either their methods or goals from the various other brands of socialists. Prior to the war, their kin here in the USA found much to admire in Nazi Germany, much as they did in the Communist Soviet Union. It probably comforts him to think that those fighting socialists today are most like the German Nazis, but in reality those he mentions are least like the Nazis, not most. But I'm sure Rayosun is blissful in his ignorance.

Rayosun,

Impressive stats but how sure are you these guys were truly faithful to their wives? I know many people who have long marriages but are not really that faithful.

14 of the top 15 most dangerous cities are liberal democrats. What does that mean?

It means you guys are dangerous. Obama may seem like a nice guy but deep inside, this man is dangerous fueling anger to many Americans simply by just being himself - a stupid person.

A lot of the comments misunderstand the central point of this argument--that the Good Lord has given us a faculty for rational thought and critical thinking, and that we ought to use, exercise, and apply it in on our ordinary lives. The problem with extremists--on the Left, but especially and profoundly on the Right--is that rational thought and dialogue are discouraged and dismissed in favor of screaming, exaggerating, yelling, dumbing down,fear mongering, and flat out lying. Through these tactics, which appeal to the intellectual level of 12 year olds--and often covering up their own sad and often deviant moral shortcomings--Limbaugh and the rest insult our capacity for reason and understanding. Dittoheads can't think for themselves--they can only copy and mimicry their media heroes. Now, they replicate idiots like Coulter and Hannity at town hall meetings. This kind of behavior, in some ways, is a sin of laziness, a sin of omission. If the Republican Party loses again in 2012, and at the midterms, the responsibility must be placed, to a large degree, with the extremists and other dittoheads who have taken over the party.

grace777 showcases the ignorance of conservatives when she writes:
"So lets review...Socialized medical care...sounds like socialism. Government take over of private industries...sounds like socialism. National Socialist Party (Nazi)...sounds like socialism."

The Nazis were FASCISTS - about as far from "socialists" as one can be -. The only reason they CALLED THEMSELVES "socialists" was because socialism was so popular at the time that they used the name to deceive the public. As soon as they had the power to do so, they fought the true "socialists" (along with communists and liberals) tooth and nail.
The people most like the Nazis in America today are the ones fighting socialists as ferociously as the Nazis did, i.e. people like Limbaugh, Malkin, Coulter, Beck, etc., etc.,
Rev. Ray Dubuque

What kind of people follow the moral leadership of Republicans like Limbaugh, Gingrich, and Bob Barr, who have all been divorced and remarried 3 times or more, and tell you what rotten and immoral people liberal Democrats are, people like :
+ Calif. Gov. Pat Brown married 72 years when wife died in 2002.
+ Sen. Robert Byrd of W. Va. married almost 69 years when wife died in 2006.
+ Sen. & presidential candidate George McGovern married 66 years in 2009.
+ Folk Music legend and activist Pete Seeger married 66 years in 2009.
+ Sen. & presidential candidate John Glenn married 66 years in 2009.
+ Journalist Walter Cronkite married 64 years when wife died in 2005.
+ Pres. Jimmy Carter married 63 years in 2009.
+ Sen. Howard Metzenbaum married 63 years, when he died in 2008.,
+ Former Attorney General & activist Ramsey Clark married 62 years in 2009.
+ Sargent Shriver married 56 years when wife Eunice Kennedy died in 2009.
+ Former NY governor Mario Cuomo married 55 years in 2009.
+ Journalist Bill Moyers married 55 years in 2009.
+ Supreme Court Justice Ruth Joan Bader Ginsburg married 55 years in 2009.
+ Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan, Jr. married 54 years when wife died in 1982.
+ Pres. Harry Truman married 53 years when he died in 1972.
+ Sen. & V.P. Walter Mondale married 53 years when wife died in 2008.
+ Journalist Dan Rather married 52 years in 2009.
+ Actor & Activist Alan Alda married 52 years in 2009.
+ Billionaire Warren Buffett married 52 years when 1st wife died in 2004.
+ Entertainer & Activist Harry Belafonte married 52 years in 2009.
+ V.P. Henry Wallace married 51 years when he died in 1965.
+ Sen. Wayne Morse married 50 years when he died in 1974.
+ Sen. Harry Reid married 50 years in 2009.
+ Speaker Nancy Pelosi married 49 years in 2009.
+ Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall married 48 years to 2nd wife when he died in 1993.
+ Actor & Activist Martin Sheen married 48 years in 2009.
+ Sen. Pat Moynihan married 46 years when he died in 2001.
+ Sen. Patrick Leahy married 46 years in 2009.
+ Comedian Bob Newhart married 46 years in 2009.
+ House Leader Charlie Rangel married 45 years in 2009.
+ Former NY governor Al Smith married 44 years when he and his wife died in 1944.
+ Speaker Dick Gephardt married married 43 years in 2009.
+ Sen. Hubert Humphrey married 42 years when he died in 1978.
+ Journalist Daniel Schorr married 42 years in 2009.
+ Comedian Billy Chrystal married 42 years in 2009.
+ Sen. John D. Rockerfeller married 42 years in 2009.
+ Sen. Tom Harkin married 41 years in 2009.
+ Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt married 40 years when he died in 1945.
+ Sen. Paul Simon married 40 years when his 1st wife died in 2000.
+ Pres. Lyndon Johnson married 39 years when he died in 1973.
+ Sen. Paul Wellstone married 39 years when he & his wife died tragically in 2002.

Some of you need to review your history. Comparing Limbaugh to a Nazi is indicative of an addict telling a glutton he has a problem. So lets review...Socailized medical care...sounds like socialism. Government take over of private industries...sounds like socialism. National Socialist Party (Nazi)...sounds like socialism. Rush speaks out against these in opion sounds like the right to free speech and dissent (which appears only to be ok if as a democrat who disagrees with the political positions of a conservative) ...but Obama and the fairness doctrine wants to censor that speech...sounds like socialism. Hmmm...who's the Nazi?

Posted by: grace777

I do say I do say this man or lady has some brains and is using them well!

Obama the heck with Israel !

Report on your faimly and friends if you hear they do not like what he is Doing!
what happened to freedom of speech with out fear of government! Sercure in ones self and Home!

Kill unborn babies for a pay check as a matter of covenace! it is more or less population Control.

Nationalize every thing!

He took office, Even though he was fighting to keep the votes of troops over seas from counting! he had Students like Bloomington Indiana IU voting two times and no one said anything about it!

He is the so called leader of defense but he would jail some one for defending his own That sounds like a Police state! did he not take an oath to uphold the constitution! One word "Treason"

I am looking forward to my county government's meetings with my No Obama Saying's home made shirts

Term Limits, freedom of speech,Voluntary Taxes when no war is declaired on us soil upheld by the vote of the free will of the people and Gun rights keeps government smaller and More Honest

Semper Fi
God Country Family Defense
Live free or Dig your self a deep Hole
Faith with out a JUST action is a worthless faith

Obama as a child of God we as the same as for your leadership One word Sir (WHY)

Good Job Washington Post for Putting Rushs stuff on here...

Amen !!!!!!!!!!!

Amazing, No Grace ()!

Me Alma Matr' is MARIST COLLEGE; the Same School? that Bill O'Reilly Borneth From!???

Chagasman (and, alas, many others to similar effect) says that "Judging by the number of posters who defend Rush Limbaugh and spew hatred and slander...". Perhaps Cman is only semi-literate and not capable of reading the other comments in respect to S-A's column, but the only ones spewing hatred and slander are the lefties like himself. Substantive critiques seem to be beyond their grasp; who then are those who are, in Cman's words, too stupid, too ignorant, too selfish, etc.?

Limbaugh has become the defacto head of the Republican Party, like it or not. What Limbaugh cannot stand is Obama being successful. Therefore, he tars and feathers him with the word "socialist." As if America, the least "socialistic" country on Earth, is even barely going in that direction. Is medical care for 50 million Americans who do not have it, socialism? Is the millions the stimulus has given to cities and states, keeping hospitals, schools and police departments from shutting down also socialism? We could go on and on, but Obama's actions are already saving and improving the American economy, and Rush is ticked. Make no mistake, Rush represents the status quo of the old White Southern Gentry. For him, it's a double insult that Obama is also a black man, and proving to be successful with his programs. He will now stop at nothing to take him down.

What an utterly stupid column. It's not a sin to listen to Rush, it's a sin to believe what he believes? That's laughable.

Rush seems to be anti-abortion. How many Catholics, especially liberal Catholics, can say the same? Are Kerry and Kennedy sinners? Of course they are, and for supporting abortion rights, they are worse sinners than Rush in the eyes of the Catholic church. Rush now knows he's not the marrying kind and has repented for his drug addiction. Have Kerry and Kennedy renounced their support for slaughtering fetuses in the womb?

I find some of the things Rush says crude and not particularly intelligent. But on occasion he speaks powerfully and effectively in his monologues.

Limbaugh says the liberals are the nazis and vice versa,,hitler was defending himself against the right wing brits,,poles ,jews,and americans. while being attacked by the liberal russians also,,not to worry rush still would have ducked ww2 even to fight the liberals,,a few oxys and rush will be ok

Some of you need to review your history. Comparing Limbaugh to a Nazi is indicative of an addict telling a glutton he has a problem. So lets review...Socailized medical care...sounds like socialism. Government take over of private industries...sounds like socialism. National Socialist Party (Nazi)...sounds like socialism. Rush speaks out against these in opion sounds like the right to free speech and dissent (which appears only to be ok if as a democrat who disagrees with the political positions of a conservative) ...but Obama and the fairness doctrine wants to censor that speech...sounds like socialism. Hmmm...who's the Nazi?

The notion of a sin, especially when listening to someone's opinions, is silly.

What is WRONG, however, is believing that what he's saying has any truth to it. Anyone who can think for oneself should be able to check his "facts" and consider them for what they are: Nonsense.

Entertaining? Maybe. Truthful or informative? Never.

Limbaugh is a natural outgrowth of Christianity. He is simply doing what all "good" christians do--tell us who and what is evil and who and what is good. "Their version of good and evil. The gop solidified their base using this tactic. They got those fundies and their preachers to back them by demonizing policies and politicians of the left. Not arguing, but demonizing. The fear that demonizing generates gets people out to vote!

He is demonizing my fellow americans and our leaders and making them fear each other. As a true patriot I am sickened by it. It's like some outsider has poisoned my family with lies about each other and now they are all having this huge fight--and some of them are toting guns!!

I know he is paid well for whipping up this frenzy, I know the gop and the lobbyists appreciate it, but at some point, when the dust settles, he will have frightened somebody enough to make them shoot somebody.

Hopefully, they have health insurance.

Chagasman, you don't know what you are talking about. Wait till Obama finishes his term then talk again.

The nice thing about the Internet is that you're not stuck with 'pills', by any stretch of the imagination. For that matter, YOU could become a web radio personality, then YOU can bloviate on the mic for 3 hours and people can complain about you. Of course, since Limbaugh does it for money, and you'd just be doing it for fun, you probably won't have the years behind you that he does when you finally sign off. Limbaugh's been around for decades, and as long as the sponsors keep indulging him, he'll keep on keepin' on.
George Carlin made a relevant statement on this. There's two KNOBS on the radio. One shuts it off, and the other....CHANGES THE STATION! Tune in to some quality entertainment, and let Rush froth himself into a frenzy. Meanwhile, you're catching a concert on XM or something. Ahhhh...freedom of choice...

Rush has nothing to do with Obama's self inflicted troubles. People has to realize that stupidity is self-destructive.

Obama (the Joker) is just simply stupid. Nobody can stop the guy from failing unless there's a cure for his idiocy.

The global warming freaks now blame livestock as causing 18% of greenhouse gas. Sure.. then don't eat meat and solve the warming. Obama has this kind of freak mindset.

Rush is just too normal for these freaks. And by the way, most of these freaks believe that their ancestor was an ape.

Now, why am I not surprised?

Judging by the number of posters who defend Rush Limbaugh and spew hatred and slander against Obama and the author, America is in serious trouble, and will not survive as a democracy much longer. The American population is too stupid, too ignorant, too selfish, too nationalistic, too fat, and just too hopeless to continue on much longer. The USA is in rapid decline, and will only maintain its power by stupidly threatening the rest of the world with its military power and nuclear weapons, while it rots from the inside out, thanks to people like Rush Limbaugh and his supporters.

MISSGRUNDY seems rather to overstate her familiarity with St. Peter and also appears to think that speaking of Rush as "that fat blob of stupid humanity" is a conclusive argument.

But how she thinks a visit to a local public library will aid anyone in understanding what Rush is saying is beyond comprehension. 'Research', to be worthwhile, must attend to primary sources. That is, it must look into what has actually been (or is being) said; unless MISSG intends that the researcher read Rush's books, a visit to a library will at best provide secondary discussion. But probably MISSG has no real idea of what constitutes responsible research. Real, honest 'research' in respect to Rush in the first instance involves turning on the radio and actually listening to Rush himself. Anything less is irresponsible and renders worthless (and perhaps sinful) any comment made about him.

persiflage wrote "While the stupid remain stupid, and madder than ever.....time to wake up folks. "
Yes, America is waking up to the stupidity of the Joker (Obama). The anger is everywhere.

"There is more anger in America today than at any time I can remember," Specter said

If ever the White House becomes a Burnt House, maybe it's because the Joker lives there. Lots of stupidity is spreading straight from that House.

The guy thinks that dissent is foolishness. He should look at the mirror what's causing that dissent.

Stupidity is self-destructive. Rush has nothing to do with Obama self-inflicted troubles.

"I thank God that in Catholic America there are a growing number of us who tune out hate speech."

Isn't that bit of self-flattery almost verbatim from mouth of the Pharisee in the Gospels who thanks God that he's "not like this sinner"?

Rush Limbaugh is a frightening reminders of years ago when name calling worked to put people out of their jobs, as in the Mc Carthy era, he also sounds an awful lot like the days of the Nazis. Note I did not say he was a Nazi. I cannot bear to listen to him, his rants and lies make me angry and want to fight back. If it is a sin to be angry and want to fight back, then I guess it is a sin to listen to him.

If stupid is sinful, then I suppose listening to Rush with all-believing rapt attention is similar to voluntarily getting a pre-frontal lobotomy. Let Rush do the thinking........

But I suppose with a 50 million dollar perpetually renewable contract he may be eligible for a co-pay on that national health insurance plan that gets his blood boiling. What could be more fun or more rewarding than stirring the masses up??

He can be the nasty SOB that he is, and get paid royally for that supremely vicious attitude - fueled by the miracle of modern chemistry.

Fact is, he's become the spokesman for an angry whitebread political fundamentalism whose emergence is no surprise. The rationally disadvantaged need an a frontman.

Rush Limbaugh is singlehandedly ushering in a new rendition of the communist scare of the 1950's - otherwise known as the McCarthy era. The glamour fascists like Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, Coulter, et al really know how to make a buck by appealing to the lowest common denominator - going home later to their palatial estates in gated communities.

While the stupid remain stupid, and madder than ever.....time to wake up folks.

If stupid is sinful, then I suppose listening to Rush with all-believing rapt attention is similar to voluntarily getting a pre-frontal lobotomy. Let Rush do the thinking........

But I suppose with a 50 million dollar perpetually renewable contract he may be eligible for a co-pay on that national health insurance plan that gets his blood boiling. What could be more fun or more rewarding than stirring the masses up??

He can be the nasty SOB that he is, and get paid royally for that supremely vicious attitude - fueled by the miracle of modern chemistry.

Fact is, he's become the spokesman for an angry whitebread political fundamentalism whose emergence is no surprise. The rationally disadvantaged need an a frontman.

Rush Limbaugh is singlehandedly ushering in a new rendition of the communist scare of the 1950's - otherwise known as the McCarthy era. The glamour fascists like Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, Coulter, et al really know how to make a buck by appealing to the lowest common denominator - going home later to their palatial estates in gated communities.

While the stupid remain stupid, and madder than ever.....time to wake up folks.

Instead we should believe who, Obama? Obama promised during the campaign to eliminate income taxes for seniors making less than $50,000 dollars a year and went so far as to promise seniors would no longer have to file a tax return.

That's a lie and everybody knows it. The left in incapable of defending Obama so instead they resort to attacks on his critics.

Obama says he does not want single payer health care. Rush plays an audio clip of Obama in 2007 saying he expects to accomplish single payer health care in 10 to 15 years. The question isn't whether to believe Rush, it is which Obama we should believe because he flip flops all over the place.

One commenter cynically and (unfortunately) accurately desribed Rush's plot as "all about the money".

But the commenter seems to miss the point: speaking such vile deceptions for the sake of money IS sinful, and extremely so. Rush's cynical appeal for the sake of money makes it all the more so.

It is also safe to conclude that not only the dittoheads, but even anyone who listens to Rush for any purpose other than refutation is complicit in Rush's sin.

Dreaming does not necessarily mean reality. If Obama dreams of universal health care, the reality is somebody has to pay for it in increased taxes or increased insurance. For many, that don't seem like a dream.

When Obama took over GM, they ordered to close almost all of GM's dealership. A man who thinks this way cannot be trusted with anything, let alone , health care.

Brace yourself for a very bumpy ride.

Rush seems to be prophetic. The Joker seems to be going on the path of failing.

Below is related to health care and immigration:

THE CATHOLIC CYCLE (Arroyo's religion)

In one third world country where population explosion has become a major problem, Catholic chapels or centers offer free operation to untie the fallopian tubes of mothers after indoctrinating them that it's a SIN.

This devilish Church invent their own doctrines so parents would produce more children despite their abject poverty. With more extra children, they are forced to raise them with no proper education and decent meals and most of all, no future.

They then teach these poor people that their government is the cause of their poverty due to corruption but lo and behold those same government personnel are usually "devout catholics".

Some revolt (with the church's help of course) which cause more poverty and this has become a "CATHOLIC CYCLE" which I presume is routinely duplicated around the world.

To escape poverty, many go abroad adding more economic pressure to their countries of destination.

Catholic countries not only over populate, they produce extortionist rebels too. Had you wondered why there are no marxist rebels in Islamic countries but there are so many in catholic countries? It's because many of their priests support that ideology. They breed fast and then kill each other fast too. WHAT A CYCLE.

There are many things this church does which is outside our scope of detection. The devil could be using a much bigger cycle that is harder to detect. Consciously or unconsciously, all catholics is part of that grand cycle.

Obviously, Arroyo and the other spewers of hate on these comments have never listened to Limbaugh. He has never, ever made comments that Arroyo claims he made. I'm a former journalist, and I often check facts on stories and comments made on the airwaves. Almost every time, Limbaugh is correct, which I can't say about most so-called media types these days.

Of course Limbaugh supports a CONSERVATIVE viewpoint, not REPUBLICAN, which is oppressive taxes and government destroy freedom, especially the rights of the individual, which if Arroyo has ever bothered to read the Declaration of Independence, come directly from our "Creator."

Arroyo, if you are truly Catholic, you know that spiritual formation is gained through an INFORMED conscious. I challenge you to listen to Limbaugh for three weeks and inform yourself before you make totally baseless statements about a person's character.

Quinn and Meacham continue their politicization of faith, bringing in these ringers to tell us how unChristian it is to be Republicans, and all of you people who post here get caught up in the 'Rush Limbaugh is a right-wing fanatic' rant. Wasn't it really charitable of this really devout writer to bring up Rush's addiction and marriages and then say, well we don't need to bring those up? He calls Rush Limbaugh a liar, racist ,sexist and homophobe. Name-calling CAN be an art form, but this dunderhead is not an artist.

The more shrill and outlandish the defense and justifications for Boss Limbaugh there's two things crystal clear: he truly is the de facto leader of conservatives and conservatives are becoming the largest terrorist threat to the safety and security of the United States.

Rush is right.

Come on, the guy is smart! It's his shtick, he doesn't believe himself what he is spewing, just like Ann Coulter, it's all about the money...

Limbaugh is nothing but a propagandist for Conservative Republicans. He has more in common with fascist viewpoints and opinions of the Nazis than with any viewpoint that speaks for our democracy. The fact that he is popular at all only speaks loudly about the sad state of our democracy and society.
He stands out as the biggest hypocrite in the "do as I say not as I do club". If he was ever held to the truth he would have nothing to say. I'm sure than when his popularity starts to fall he will suddenly find God and then become a television evangelist so he can continue his conning of the American people.

Why would anyone who values intelligent discussion, reason and fairness want to listen to Rush Limbaugh? The few times I've gotten stuck listening to him all I hear is a nasty, ranting, raving demagogue.

No, listening to Limbaugh is certainly not a sin; but listening to his and his listeners circle jerk is a waste of time and indignation.

Ditto!

(p.s. The fact that this comment has not appeared till now, reveals how many persons who have commented before me, have done so without ever listening to Rush. Nonetheless, great job Anthony, you got this issue EXACTLY right.)

First, Rush did not make a racist comment regarding Donnovan McNabb, his comment was directed at those who covered McNabb. His commentary is neither racist nor sexist, which leads me to believe the author really NEVER listens to Rush, but has judged him. "Judge not lest ye be judged." Author is committing a sin here.

Anyone who listens to that fat blob of stupid humanity has to be as stupid as that oxycotin addict. Limbaugh gets paid $3 million a month to talk garbage. It's a nice paycheck but I doubt that St. Peter will immediately let him into heaven upon his death. I'm sure he'll be spending time in purgatory if not eternity in Hades.

Instead of listening to Limbaugh, may I suggest you actually research the subject? If you don't know where to begin, I suggest a visit to your local public library and ask a reference librarian for help. That would be better than listening to some fat bloviator who won't help pay for your hospitalization if health care reform is defeated.

"In Portsmouth, N.H., Obama will speak directly about his proposal to ban insurance companies from denying individuals coverage because of pre-existing conditions."

Does the Joker (Obama) know that to realize this, insurance companies have to raise or even double the price of insurance?

Stupidity seems to be the twin of this Joker.

"There is more anger in America today than at any time I can remember," Specter said.

Stupidity is self-destructive. The Joker seems bent on going to that direction.

Rush appears to be a genius when he said "I hope (the Joker) Obama will fail".

He sounds prophetic coz the idiots always fail.

Please, another fat man with breasts who has never uttered one word of wisdom.
I just hope Rush continues as the spokesman for the Republican Party.
What more could we ask for?, an ex drug addict with no "stop button". Yes I know Palin is waiting in the wings to take over the Rush mantle, Bring her on.

RUSH IS A LOSER!

Mr. Stevens-Arroyo, please resign from writing as a defender of the Catholic Faith...
You did what our Lord Jesus Christ would not do...
involve our faith in politics...
leave unto ceasar's what is Caesar's and unto GOD's what is GOD's...
Rush is part of the Secular world and not part of my religion...

Posted by: DwightCollins

Dwight, that was then. This is now. Today Jesus would be involved in politics. Remember, the prophet wrote, "The government will rest upon his shoulders." There is nothing inherently wrong with politics or political discourse, so long as you are on the "right" side.

Mr. Stevens-Arroyo, please resign from writing as a defender of the Catholic Faith...
You did what our Lord Jesus Christ would not do...
involve our faith in politics...
leave unto ceasar's what is Caesar's and unto GOD's what is GOD's...
Rush is part of the Secular world and not part of my religion...

Racist Comments by Limbaugh:

I mean, let’s face it, we didn’t have slavery in this country for over 100 years because it was a bad thing. Quite the opposite... it had its merits. For one thing, the streets were safer after dark.

You know who deserves a posthumous Medal of Honor? James Earl Ray [assassin of Martin Luther King]. We miss you, James. Godspeed.

Have you ever noticed how all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?

Right. So you go into Darfur and you go into South Africa, you get rid of the white government there. You put sanctions on them. You stand behind Nelson Mandela — who was bankrolled by communists...

... the NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons.

The NAACP should have riot rehearsal. They should get a liquor store and practice robberies.

They’re 12 percent of the population. Who the hell cares?

Take that bone out of your nose and call me back (to an African American caller).

He is a racist windbag. Too many of you who listen to his politics make excuses for his racist views and comments. This is why minorities cannot fully embrace your party. You won't just own up to the pockets of racists that inhabit it. How can you claim any semblance of intelligence or credibility this way?

Mr. Stevens-Arroyo, please resign from writing as a defender of the Catholic Faith...
You did what our Lord Jesus Christ would not do...
involve our faith in politics...
leave unto ceasar's what is Caesar's and unto GOD's what is GOD's...
Rush is part of the Secular world and not part of my religion...

Is it immoral to listen to Rush, but moral to read the Post??, This is a laugh, I can't believe some of the nonsense that is printed in the Post this last year or so.

Limbaugh's words and attitude clearly contradict every standard of moral behavior, and yet so many "religious" people practically worship him. How can these folks be so oblivious to the hatefulness of his words? Would he be nearly so entertaining and inspiring if they had to spend three hours a day, in person, with someone like him? Of course not. They'd be so fast to condemn him that his head would spin off. And yet they listen and endlessly quote. How?

Anthony Stevens-Arroyo would do well to listen to Rush before accusing him of racism, sexism, etc. He repeats the leftist spin on Rush's comments on Donovan McNabb without seeming to have any idea that Rush was criticizing the press, not McNabb. S-A accuses Rush of often including "crude sexual and racial references" but gives NO examples of such.

What seems to motivate S-A (and many of those agreeing with him in these comments) is a hatred of Rush's politics. That he is willing to write an uninformed column inciting others to hate Rush is, I think, a demonstration of his own sinfulness. Perhaps he might consider listening to Rush for 4 or 5 weeks; it would at least give him some notion of what Rush is actually saying. At minimum he might learn to distinguish between "lies" and "provocative commentary". Perhaps he might even learn some tolerance and respect for someone with whom he disagrees, rather indulge himself with unsubstantiated condemnations for "the repetition of out-right lies." Mr. S-A should be ashamed of himself.

if anyone here believes that rush limbaugh gives a twit about reality, the facts, and your faith you a but a fool. check the BIBLE for the seven deadly sins. limbaugh qualifies under several categories.

if anyone here believes that rush limbaugh gives a twit about reality, the facts, and your faith you a but a fool. check the BIBLE for the seven deadly sins. limbaugh qualifies under several categories.

Today I heard Obama give a speech in which
BEARBANK:
he stated that he had never advocated a "single-payer" system. Limbaugh played speeches from Obama from 2003 and 2007 where he clearly stated the opposite. In one of the speeches he used the term "single-payer" and said that's what he wanted. Love him or hate him, credit Limbaugh for getting his facts right. Wonder if the mainstream media ("state run media" per Limbaugh) will report the inconsistencies in Obama's statements?

==

Sorry, but you'll have to either cite the whole speech or provide the quotes.

There is no reason to believe you, since all you are doing is repeating unverified info.

You may want to read this and restate your position:
http://www.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/01/05/fact_check_obama_consistent_in.php

Yes, I am.
Now, either prove that your Almighty exists, or prove that I am not the Almighty.

Posted by: HumanSimpleton | August 11, 2009 5:47 PM

Good challenge. I can't prove He (the God of Israel) exists, I am sure, not to your satisfaction. We have a pretty good indication He exists.

The Jew. What nation has been uprooted and exiled for some two thousand years and is still in existence today?

POSTED BY: SKLEIN19
presto668 wrote: "She had been dead for years; it's just that her body didn't know enough to stop breathing.""

How do you know she had been dead for years? Are you the Almighty?
===

Yes, I am.

Now, either prove that your Almighty exists, or prove that I am not the Almighty.

Today I heard Obama give a speech in which he stated that he had never advocated a "single-payer" system. Limbaugh played speeches from Obama from 2003 and 2007 where he clearly stated the opposite. In one of the speeches he used the term "single-payer" and said that's what he wanted. Love him or hate him, credit Limbaugh for getting his facts right. Wonder if the mainstream media ("state run media" per Limbaugh) will report the inconsistencies in Obama's statements?

@sklein19 "Limbaugh and other conservatives carried water for George W. Bush (and the Republicans) even when he / they clearly violated core conservative principles."

You mean the way Rush and Hannity backed Bush's "comprehensive" immigration reform? LOL

All talk show hosts have a pov--liberal ones too--and use facts selectively, including only those supporting their pov. Here are two examples of this from opposite ends of the political spectrum:

Taxes - Conservative talk hosts constantly remind us that a small percentage of the wealthy pay a disproportionately large percentage of income taxes, but overlook the much larger percentage of the nation's wealth controlled by this cohort--and completely ignore the payroll tax surpluses which are inappropriately applied toward general expenditures.

ObamaCare - Liberal talk hosts don't want to discuss the inevitability that illegal aliens will be covered, or that Medicare reductions adversely impacting seniors are included in the funding scheme.

In Limbaugh's defense, it must be daunting to produce a daily three hour show that's compelling and entertaining, while being scrutinized with a fine-tooth comb by opponents. So occasionally, Rush may slip with some overly-simplistic comment or metaphor. Given the pressure, it's amazing it doesn't happen more frequently.

Rush Limbaugh is a drug addict and a criminal. His comments and opinion on behalf of the far right serves to show just how foolish the Repub's have flown out of the mainstream.
Rusty started as a top 40 DJ at his father's radio station and has evolved into a spokesman for the Repub's talking points.
What I cannot understand is why anyone would listen to him or take him seriously. He is not nearly as funny as Howard Stern who makes many times more millions than Limbaugh will ever make!

He is a clown and every-time I have heard about him I laugh!
Perhaps he and Ms. Palin should run together for class clown?
You people - People-turn your dial and you will take all of his power away-literally!

You wanna talk about "big government" taking away your Constitutional freedoms? Try being a pregnant woman seeking an abortion. Or an unmarried woman seeking birth control. You conservatives scream about "the government getting between a patient and their doctor," but you are perfectly willing to get between a woman and her gynecologist.

Limbaugh is to the Republicans what Rasputin was to the Romanovs.... a mad monk... using religion to advance his agenda.

The Democrats would love to get rid of Limbaugh, however he has the survival skills of Rasputin. They fed Rasputin cakes and red wine laced with a large amount of cyanide and he survived, despite the fact there was enough poison to kill ten men.

Determined to finish the job, Yusupov worried that Rasputin would live until morning, so that the conspirators wouldn't have time to conceal his body. He ran upstairs to consult with the others, then came back down and shot Rasputin through the back with a revolver. Rasputin fell. When Yusupov went to check on the body, Rasputin opened his eyes, grabbed Felix by the throat and while strangling him said in an ominous whisper "You bad, bad boy", and then threw him across the room and took off. As he made his bid for freedom, the rest of the conspirators arrived and fired at him. After being hit three times in the back, he fell. As they neared his body, they found he was trying to get up so they clubbed him into submission. Then after wrapping his body in a sheet, threw him into the icy Neva River.

Three days later the body of Rasputin — poisoned, shot four times, and badly beaten — was recovered. Limbaugh is quite a survivor, too.

These comments are awash in fascist-think, i.e. "Rush is mean, so that means his viewpoint is thoroughly discredited." Try a new tack, libs.

"When I was a teenager in Philadelphia's Jesuit high school, St. Joe's Prep back in the 1950s, I was given rules for how to react to dirty jokes or to lies about our "neighbors."

I have no idea what you are talking about here. I also attended St. Joe's Prep (albeit in the 1960s)and don't remember any such rules for jokes. Perhaps my memory is failing me.

Unbelievable the commenters arguing that Rush Limbaugh is articulate and educated which used together to describe Rush is idiotic in itself. I am not Catholic but I totally agree with him. I am not even religious but the man was right. I never thought I would say that at least of this country are really stupid.

sklein19 wrote: "I don't like my automatic, annual insurance increases but I'd rather the government regulate corruption inherent in the industry than step in and replace the private sector market place."

Well then I think you'll have an issue with the republican party on that regulation. They believe industries can regulate themselves better because the government is "the problem". Remember the SEC and Wall Street?

sklein19 wrote: "I don't believe in socialism or Marxism. How about you? This is what Obama appears to be peddling. This is his background."

Do you use federal highways? National parks? Airlines that use the FAA? Does water in your neighborhood drain into sewers? Who do you think maintains the sewers? You are surrounded by socialism, you just take it for granted.

sklein19 wrote: "He believes in socialism. He supports socialist dictators."

Who? Like the Saudi King? I believe there is a picture of Bush holding hands with that dictator during a stroll in the garden.

sklein19 wrote: "On the other hand, you've got the trial lawyers who largely finance and back the Democrats. These lawyers are causing doctor's malpractice insurance costs to sky-rocket as a result of litigation - much of it excessive - but the Democrats will not touch them because they are such a large part of their support. So where is the integrity?"

Well, would you tell someone who has been maimed by a negligent doctor that they could not sue for damages? And if you think these must be limited would you back limiting damages for people suing other companies as well? When a car is defective should the damages be limited? Just who is tort reform benefiting? Sounds to me like it benefits those being sued. Why would you want to reform laws intended to pay restitution to those harmed and punish the negligent? Oh, if you're a republican, I forgot... government bad...

Arroyo is the pot calling the kettle black. His entire article is gossiping about someone else. Maybe the Catholic church forgot to tell him this is a sin.

Arroyo is pro-Obama, and his attempts to blame Rush for his commentary as "sinful" so we "shouldn't listen" is a cellophane attempt to discredit Rush and support Obama's wish to keep his opponents quiet. I'm not even a big fan of Rush, but Arroyo's article is laughable as well as shamefully out of line.

He should stick to really sinful subjects, like: How Obama and the Democrats are trying to turn this nation from a Democratic Republic to a socialist one; How Obama is pro killing of fetus' in late pregnancy (Did the Catholics learn that God said, "I knew you before you were born"...maybe not); How about how Democrats keep Americans suppresed through Government welfare programs (instead of giving them the fishing rod...); or, why not write about all of the corrupt organizations and people Obama is affiliated with?

Nahhh...being intelletually honest and outting Obama on these issues would just be sinful!

Rush and Jesus have at least one thing in common. Christ was crucified for speaking the Truth. Rush is 'crucified' for speaking the Truth. The Pharisees and Saducees didn't want to hear it then..and those same modern day actors don't want to hear it now.

There is no one - aside from maybe Sarah Palin - more assailed and pilloried in the press than Rush Limbaugh for being successful at excercising his free speech rights and speaking up for American Conservative values. - Who has stood up for the unborn and done more for cause of the unborn - Anthony Stevens-Arroyo or Rush Limbaugh?

sklein19 wrote: "OK I will read it but why should I trust Ezra Klein. I just did a quick search on him. He's only 25 years old and a defender of the ultra-leftist, anti-Israel lobby, J-Street. Good grief.

Oh my. Look, his article is an interview of republican Rep. Isakson. Unless you believe Klein lied about the interview you can see what a republican involved in the writing of this legislation thinks about the broohaha.

Next, read the section of the bill. Its legalistic as all bills are, but read it carefully. You will not see anything mandatory except Medicare have to pay for a consultation if one has not already been done within 5 years.

Next, listen to the republican politicians instead of the nutcases who have nothing too lose and feed off stupidity, like Palin and Gingrich. What are the republicans who will be up for election saying? Are they talking about euthanasia? Are they talking about mandatory end-of-life documents? Just because they are not out there speaking the truth as Isakson does in the interview does not mean they quietly agree. They're happy to see the nutjobs put the dems on the defense, but that does not mean they believe the nutjobs, they just like the result.

Then consider who wins if nothing gets passed. The CEO of Uniter Health Care makes over $100M in salary, which is about $7 for every claim. That is 1000 times the salary of the government bureaucrat who gets Medicare right, gets social security checks right, gets Medicaid checks right, gets CDC flu recommendations right, gets NIH research funding right, gets VA benefits right, and support the greatest military on earth. So the next time someone tells you government can't do anything right tell them to stop using federal highways, stop drinking their clean water, stop using seat belts in cars as well as the GPS system, etc. Government does a lot right. The republicans want you to think it cannot, but they are only particlly right. The government cannot do right when those in power do not believe in government, which is the mantra of the republican party. I would also fear a health care bill but only if it came from the republicans. But even then I'd have the decency to read the bill before repeating extraordinary claims of those who themselves have little credibility.

This article is ri-cockulous. I just started listening to Rush in 2009. I had always, "heard" so many negative comments about him in the press. I have found him to be well spoken, articulate, backed with real facts, truly concerned about the issues facing our nation, and I have NEVER heard him foment any kind of hatred.

ged0386 wrote: "You do not trust him because he is black. Stop hiding racism behind other issues."

My goodness. I voted for Alan Keyes in our 2000 Florida primary. I voted for Alan Keyes over George W. Bush. Why do you make this an issue of race?

ged0386: "And right now the private insurers monitor and try to minimize your coverage when you are gravely ill and require special coverage. They dont want to cover you or they would rather pass the cost to you and your doctor. That is killing granny now. I guess its ok for the capitalist to assess how end of life decisions are made based on their own profit line but if the government tries then they are killing granny. Please stop lying to yourselves and others. Or come clean because the very things you have a problem with government doing regarding healthcare you seem not to mind the private sector doing."

I'm not a laissez-faire, free-market absolutist. Unlike Rush Limbaugh and others, I believe government has a role in the regulation of business and industry; especially big business like insurance companies when they have a tendency toward corruption. In this sense, I tend to be a Teddy Roosevelt conservative. Remember Roosevelt?

I don't like my automatic, annual insurance increases but I'd rather the government regulate corruption inherent in the industry than step in and replace the private sector market place. I don't believe in socialism or Marxism. How about you? This is what Obama appears to be peddling. This is his background. He believes in socialism. He supports socialist dictators.

On the other hand, you've got the trial lawyers who largely finance and back the Democrats. These lawyers are causing doctor's malpractice insurance costs to sky-rocket as a result of litigation - much of it excessive - but the Democrats will not touch them because they are such a large part of their support. So where is the integrity?

@sklein19 "Limbaugh and other conservatives carried water for George W. Bush (and the Republicans) even when he / they clearly violated core conservative principles."

You mean the way Rush and Hannity supported Bush's "comprehensive" immigration reform? LOL

Arroyo's a leftist!

AWK!

He's a liberal!

AWK!

He's a socialist!

AWK!

Polly only know these three names to call people!

AWK!

Polly go hear Rush now!

AWK!

Rush good!

AWK!

Arroyo and leftists bad!

AWK!

I wrote:
"Read a little, like the article above which takes your claim of "mandatory" consultations and shows them to be a lie,"
But meant to say:
"Read a little, like Ezra Klein's article in todays Post (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/08/is_the_government_going_to_eut.html) which takes your claim of "mandatory" consultations and shows it to be a lie,"

Posted by: Fate1

OK I will read it but why should I trust Ezra Klein. I just did a quick search on him. He's only 25 years old and a defender of the ultra-leftist, anti-Israel lobby, J-Street. Good grief.

Rush is frequently dead wrong about the facts. The problem is that neither he or his listeners seem to care. When discredited, they just move on to the next lie. They never learn, and Rush doesn't bother to try.

sklein19

You do not trust him because he is black. Stop hiding racism behind other issues. And right now the private insurers monitor and try to minimize your coverage when you are gravely ill and require special coverage. They dont want to cover you or they would rather pass the cost to you and your doctor. That is killing granny now. I guess its ok for the capitalist to assess how end of life decisions are made based on their own profit line but if the government tries then they are killing granny. Please stop lying to yourselves and others. Or come clean because the very things you have a problem with government doing regarding healthcare you seem not to mind the private sector doing.

I thank the author for taking a reasonable approach. Sadly, the voice of reason in this country is being overtaken by the voice of ignorance and hate. I know we're in trouble when our congressmen agree with crazies like the birthers. I know we're in trouble when people take satisfaction in the murder of a man performing legal operations. I know we're in trouble when the Palin's of the world (supposedly a future leader) utter lies such as her "the President is setting up a death panel". I know reasonable people are in trouble when the mobs -- ignorant people all -- are having an effect on a national policy issue like health care. We will reap what Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity, Coulter, Palin and other haters have sown. I hope I'm artound to hear the wailing from the ignorant demanding that something be done to stop the violence they themselves unleashed by worshipping at the feet of haters.

Get rid of socialised medicine! Get government out of health issues! Get rid of Medicare! Get rid of Medicaide! Get rid of VA hospitals!

Government can't and never can run a good medical system. It is restricted by budget rules. Unlike health insurance copmapnies, who make a profit by charging you more than what you need, and limit services to what it is willing to pay. thus, the profit motive is superior to the government motive!

Mr. Stevens-Arroyo has deftly placed Rush Limbaugh in proper perspective as a purveyor of "ridicule" and "exaggeration," thus "making it impossible to separate his [Rush's] justifiable commentary from his objectiionable verbal bullying by racism, sexism, homophobia, fear mongering and downright lies."

Limbaugh deals in emotional, not rational, argument. Therefore, for me, it is a waste of time to listen. For others this may not be so. To each his own.

sklein19 wrote: "I've not read the bill. I believe it is Section 1233 of HR 3200. Activists on both sides interpret this section differently."

No. There is only one interpretation and that is explained in Ezra Klein's column today. Ezra actually went to a republican (Isakson) to get his interpretation on this section of the bill. He thinks people who accept the interpretation you accept to be "nuts".

sklein19 wrote: "It is my opinion, the left generally supports euthanasia. I would not put anything past Obama in terms of end or beginning of life issues. I simply do not trust the man. I do not believe he is honest. Neither was Bush for that matter but I believe Obama is worse than Bush if that is possible."

Well then you should watch him like a hawk, but don't say there is something in a bill you have not read just because you heard the lie repeated. Its available online if you want to read it. I have and am appauled that I'm seeing the lie repeated and even more appauled that people like Palin and other politicians are supporting the lie. All I can hope is that the credibility of these people who repeat lies on such an important subject will ruin their reputations. We don't need people like Palin who lies about "death panels" and nationalized health care to continue advise Americans on anything important.

FACT - Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity encourage hatred and stoke anger

FACT - Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity all earn mega millions (Glenn Beck just signed a $50 million radio contract, Rush and Hannity in the same ball park) and their salaries increase as Americans get angrier and more hateful. They are among the top earners in the industry and therefore they have it really good when you are really angry.

FACT - They use the name of God and claim moral superiority and yet encourage us to hate. They are obnoxious and rude.

Compare all these to what Christ taught us. Christ's commandment is to love. Christ teach us to be meek and humble.

These hate mongers are everything that Christ, our Lord warn us against and yet they have the audacity to claim to be Christians.

You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not acquit anyone who misuses his name. - Exodus 20

You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.” This is the greatest and first commandment. And a second is like it: “You shall love your neighbour as yourself.” On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.’
—Matthew 22:34-40

It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God - Matthew 19:23,24

I wrote:
"Read a little, like the article above which takes your claim of "mandatory" consultations and shows them to be a lie,"

But meant to say:
"Read a little, like Ezra Klein's article in todays Post (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/08/is_the_government_going_to_eut.html) which takes your claim of "mandatory" consultations and shows it to be a lie,"

Is it a sin to read articles by Leftist ideologues? No, but to give them any credence is. What new ideas does the Left have to offer? Well, dramatically reducing care to the elderly to finance care for the unemployed is one great idea. How about the grand plan to kill conservative radio with an ironically named bill - The Fairness Doctrine? Or maybe this great idea from the Left - create a scheme to radically enrich the coffers of the elitists who run Washington with an unchallengeable new tax on energy? That THAT is creative thinking?

Yes, let the Leftists speak. The more we hear of their IDEAS, the better off we will be.

sklein19 wrote: "Where have you been? Obama has consistently championed a "single payer" (government run / national) health care system."

You did not answer my question. Where in any of the bills being considered is there any mention of nationalizing health care?

sklein19 blathered: "When government seeks to control our lives and take away our legitimate freedoms, citizen anger is legitimate in my opinion. Where are the lies? The left believes in euthanasia. Have you heard of Terri Schiavo? These were leftist judges, politicians and activists who murdered; who advocated the murder of this young woman."

Err, wasn't it the right wingers who tried to interviene in Terri Shaivo's personal family matter, going so far as to create a bill exclusively to interfere with a family's right to end-of-life decisions they legally had a right to make? That is a good example of out of control government getting into people's lives and trying to take away their rights, yet you seem to support it. I've watched both my parents die, slowly and an in-law die even slower. I myself have been in and out of health care facilities and had more than a few battles with insurance companies denying valid claims, but never a problem with Medicare. So don't expect me to think the current system is perfect and reforms are not needed. And I haven't seen a single valid claim about euthanasia or nationalization. If you got one I'd love to see it. Bring it on!

sklein19 lied: "President Obama wants to make elderly consultations with doctors mandatory with respect to end-of-life matters. I'm not persuaded that this president who is pro-abortion radical has much concern for the sanctity of innocent human life. Are you?"

Read a little, like the article above which takes your claim of "mandatory" consultations and shows them to be a lie, yet you just repeated it. The phrase "we have nothing to fear but fear itself" rings very true today as we read your's and other's comments here which are a result of nothing but blind fear reinforced by liars like Palin.

Thank you Mr. Stevens-Arroyo, my perpetual soul will be forever grateful that you have deemed it not a sin if I listen to a talk show radio host. I hazard to think what my relationship with the creator would be without Mr. Stevens-Arroyo's guidance and counsel.

This is typical, liberal claptrap using emotion and muddied thinking to oppose a person with a viewpoint with which they disagree. Let's start from the beginning. You accuse Mr. Limbaugh of racism, sexism, homophobia, and prevarication but don't illustrate a single example of any of those serious charges. You are quite frankly wrong about Donovan McNabb. Go back and review what Mr. Limbaugh actually said (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=1627887). He essentially said Mr. McNabb was overrated and that the local Philadelphia media wanted him to do well because he is black. If you see that as a racist putdown of Mr. McNabb it's only because you WANT to see it that way.

If you are advocating that a sports analyst (the role Mr. Limbaugh was filling that day) can't assess a NFL quarterback anything less than "super star" then you'll at least have 32 guys who think you're brilliant. If you think a sports analyst can't call into question the motivations of their brethren in the media (yes... even pulling for a guy because of his race... sounds like a lot of people I know who voted in the last election) then you have a lot more free time on your hands than I do.

Here's the deal. You don't like Mr. Limbaugh... got it... don't listen to him. If you want to lecture him or us then do your homework and prove your assertions. For me as a Catholic, acts of racism, sexism, homophobia, and fear mongering are serious transgressions and I hold people who act that way in contempt. However the person I hold in almost the same measure of contempt are those who use false and weak charges of racial demagoguery to attack those because they don't have the facts and the smarts on their side.

Sin? you're joking. Listening to Rush might be considered bad judgment, demonstration of a lack of intellectual curiosity, poor taste, evidence of a yet-to-be identified dysfunctional syndrome, approaching senility, failure to complete high school, false idol worship...etc. But a sin? God is too busy for this nonsense...as most of us should be.

I don't think that listening to Rush is a sin, but I do judge people by how they regard him. I come from a family of conservatives. I'm the lone outspoken liberal, and I'm not into slinging hateful comments about people based on their political beliefs. My family loves me and respects my views, and I love them and respect their views. But I have noticed certain things. My father, who is in general a very mean-spirited person and totally amoral (yes, I love him even so because he has been great dad - he just treats other people badly)LOVES Rush Limbaugh. Can't get enough of him. My aunt and uncle, however are devout conservatives and devoutly religious. They are gentle-natured people who are nevertheless strong in their beliefs. And they actively despise Rush Limbaugh. Cannot stand him. One of my childhood role models, a kind of antithesis to my father, also loathes him, though you would never find a more gung-ho Republican. The rest of the family can't be bothered by his blathering. What it comes down to is that after a lifetime among conservatives, the people I respect the most are the ones who don't have time for Rush Limbaugh's antics or divisiveness. They view his attitude as immature, divisive and destructive. The only person close to me who does revere Limbaugh is a man who has alienated almost all his family and friends from his life, who cheated on his wife, who bullies people on a regular basis just to entertain himself. This is what speaks volumes to me. I think the most rabid Limbaugh fans have a few screws loose.

I wrote: "People are angry at an out of control leftist government."

presto668 wrote: "That's OK, from 2000-2008 a lot of us were angry about an out of control rightist government. Now it's your turn. Fair's fair. :)"

Fair enough.

I wrote: "Have you heard of Terri Schiavo? These were leftist judges, politicians and activists who murdered; who advocated the murder of this young woman."

presto668 wrote: "She had been dead for years; it's just that her body didn't know enough to stop breathing.""

How do you know she had been dead for years? Are you the Almighty?

presto668: "I also note that the politicians who meddled the most in the Schiavo case were also those who are always saying the government shouldn't meddle."

I think the saying is "we want government to get out of our lives" or something to this effect.

I do not say this. Nor do I use any similar expression. This is not a conservative statement. It is more of a "libertarian" sort of expression. Of course we need government. Sometimes we need government to meddle. Sometimes we need government in our bedrooms. If a man is molesting a child in his bedroom, who can say "we don't want government to meddle?"

I wrote: "President Obama wants to make elderly consultations with doctors mandatory with respect to end-of-life matters."

presto668: "No he doesn't. Have you actually read the House bill or are you just repeating incorrect claims you've read elsewhere?"

I've not read the bill. I believe it is Section 1233 of HR 3200. Activists on both sides interpret this section differently. It is my opinion, the left generally supports euthanasia. I would not put anything past Obama in terms of end or beginning of life issues. I simply do not trust the man. I do not believe he is honest. Neither was Bush for that matter but I believe Obama is worse than Bush if that is possible.

Some would believe that if:

1) You are Secular then it is not a SIN.
2) You are a Proclaimed, Sanctified, Baptized, Circumcised, Bible Toting, Praying, Preaching/Teaching Holy Roller et al, then you are without SIN.

3) On the other hand, in the Christian Bible, Jesus said, "Let him without SIN cast the first stone".

What this means to me, is that we ALL "Fall Short of the Glory of God", we are ALL SINFUL, regardless, of our political or religious beliefs. And we always be SINFUL, until the end of times.

Some of us fall waaaayyyy short of the Glory of God, and some of us think that we are right up there with God, or close to him; and then there are those, who could care less.

So no it is not a SIN to listen to Rush, it is only a SIN, if you are a proclaimed Christen, and act on most of what he says.

It's like acting on what the Devil says you should do, and Christians are supposed to know what it takes to get the Devil out of their hearts and minds.

O Father, listen to Mr. Limbaugh, what he says, ¿does it jibe with your common sense, does it jibe with what you know from other sources, can you check it out?

Rush supports «free trade», I know people who were put out of business by «Made in China» competition from low-wage labor, what Rush says does not jibe with what I know, Rush is wrong on «free trade».

Socialism, today Rush said in his monologue, the Left is trying to make «socialist» the new «N-word», so anyone who calls the Democrats' proposals «socialist», he must be a racist. I checked it out. On Internet today, I found Tim Wise's article in CounterPunch, a Left oriented Web site, Mr. Wise's title is, «Socialism as the New Black Bogeyman, Red-Baiting and Racism». Mr. Wise writes, «socialism is little more than racist code for the longstanding white fear that black folks will steal from them, and covet everything they have.» Here is someone on the Left, he is saying just what Rush says the Left is saying, Rush is right about this.

«Dittohead», I am not a dittohead, I listen, I think, I check, sometimes Rush is right, sometimes Rush is mistaken, Rush is not the mindless, bigoted hater that many make him out to be. You listen, you hear his arguments on an issue, ¿can you refute them from your experience, can you refute them from logic, if you can not, maybe he is right on that issue, please, give Rush the benefit of the doubt.

IF YOU OR ANYBODY BELIEVE ANY THING RUSH HAS TO SAY YOU PROBABLY ARE A NO GOOD CHRISTIAN HYPOCRITE I GOT A GAS STOVE FOR RUSH

Your implication that all love and justice is on the side of liberal Democrats while conservatives like Rush represent sin and racism is, to put it mildly, offensive and hateful.

Why is it that you people who claim to represent tolerance are so quick to condemn everyone who doesn't agree with you? Is that what Jesus means, to you?

Please stop speaking in the name of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church does instruct conservatives that sharing their views constitutes a sin.

Limbaugh is an obese, pill-popping, racist and liar. 'Nuff said.

Perhaps some of Rush's facts are a bit off. But those who dismiss Rush as extreme do so at their own peril. The truth is that at the core of his appeal are multiple kernels of truth, without which there isn't the slightest chance he'd be as massively popular as he is. Dismissing those who listen to him with whatever pejorative term comes to mind at the moment doesn't remove those supporters. In fact, in many cases it merely reinforces the logic of his arguments among people from a wide swath of the polity.

So rather than demonize Rush, why not take the far more intelligent approach of examining the core, underlying bases that his words represent, then address those? That - not personal attacks - would be the way to answer him. With every personal attack, his standing simply rises anyway.

The article here equating belief or support for Rush as "sin" while denying that's what the author is doing, is simply facetious and silly. Not really worth wasting print on, particularly in the context of religion. I'm amazed the Post printed it.

The real question is what core realities or fact-based truths does Rush draw from that continue to propel his strength year after year? Simplistic statements about homophobia and prejudice are, of themselves, are inaccurate and really little more than simply stereotyping the man to elicit applause from those who already oppose him. They reveal a level of ignorance and lack of any real inspiration in the critic, and (what ought to be an embarrasing) refusal to dig deeper. Making the same tired old "Omigod, he's a right winger" statements about him have little further value other than to pat the backs of those who have held the same anti-Rush prejudice all along. It certainly does nothing but embolden his supporters. And it does nothing to convert anyone who supports him into opposing him. So why bother?

Let's also remember that being anti gay marriage, for example, does not make one instantly "homophobic". It makes one opposed to gay marriage. That's all it does. Opposing the idea of amnesty for people who have streamed across our borders illegally does not make one racist. It makes one an opponent of illegal immigration. Demanding responsibility from people of all colors and races, as well as rights, and not just rights alone, doesn't make one "mean spirited", but a proponent of fair and equal treatment of all.

Rush doesn't get all his facts right, and goes over the top sometimes with half-truths to make a point he believes in. I'll grant that much. But to just mock him in front of your fellow Rush-mockers and then call it "The Final Word on Rush Limbaugh" shows a very limited IQ.

sklein19 wrote:
"Canada has one. England has one. These are socialist countries. Both are disasters."

Uh, no they aren't. They have problems, sure, but I'm pretty sure the vast majority of people who live there wouldn't want to get rid of it.

You also ignore other countries that have single-payer and it works fine.

"People are angry at an out of control leftist government."

That's OK, from 2000-2008 a lot of us were angry about an out of control rightist government. Now it's your turn. Fair's fair. :)

"Have you heard of Terri Schiavo? These were leftist judges, politicians and activists who murdered; who advocated the murder of this young woman."

She had been dead for years; it's just that her body didn't know enough to stop breathing. I also note that the politicians who meddled the most in the Schiavo case were also those who are always saying the government shouldn't meddle.

"President Obama wants to make elderly consultations with doctors mandatory with respect to end-of-life matters."

No he doesn't. Have you actually read the House bill or are you just repeating incorrect claims you've read elsewhere?

listening to the constant drone of a ceiling fan is not a sin either - it just gives no information and a headache to normal people. The stupid masses need something to take thier mind off reality.How anyone can stan to listen to rush is beyond me, but I have a life.

This is the only place I have seen put sin and Rush Limbaugh in the same place.

It may not be a sin to listen to him. What is sinful is some of the things that Rush says and does. However it will be God that he has to answer to as we all do.

What is shameful is that there are Americans who actually believes the name calling,deception, and lies that comes out of his mouth. What is shameful is that people who call themselves so called conservative Christians take what this man say as gospel.

The bible says beware of false prophets. I think Rush qualifies for one. He doesn't say or do anything that Jesus would do.

However God loves everyone even Rush Limbaugh! It's too bad that Americans cannot be that way toward one another as God intended. The world would be a lot better than it is now.

Listening to Limbaugh is not a sin. It's just a mortal act of vapid stupidity.

Another liberal Catholic gets his White House marching orders.

Anyway, Padre, good observations here:

"When I was a teenager in Philadelphia's Jesuit high school, St. Joe's Prep back in the 1950s, I was given rules for how to react to dirty jokes or to lies about our "neighbors." (I confess that I laughed at "dirty jokes," meaning humor with sexual references.) But some so-called jokes were vicious and crossed the line from humor to prejudice. They could be told only when no Black, Latino, woman or Jew was present. Sexual references - often to depravity on the part of those who were "different" -- were inescapable. These were not so much jokes as put-downs meant to cement white, rising middle-class Catholics in a faux sense of superiority over people who were "different.""

I've always found it interesting how Christians define 'the obscene,' and 'the dirty.' What provokes awkward laughter and aggression and censorship and what doesn't. Hideous violence may be merely 'gritty,' whereas an LBGT love story may be considered not fit for young eyes... while the very same people don't mind walking up to lesbian couples and our kids and shouting graphic descriptions of what they think men having anal sex is about...

No wonder you giggle. I can still get cheap laughs just walking into a room, and declaiming, as if it's a matter of great pith and moment:

Underwear.

Well, I wouldn't call listening to him a sin. I'd call it a waste of time.

Well, add another sin to my list. I am a "dittohead" and a Catholic.

I tend to agree with Rush 99% of the time. However, its not lies I agree with, but the truth, and I reject the author's statement that Rush tells lies. My belief that Rush is honest stems from my life experiences and observations, combined with an informed awareness of current issues. Rush makes a lot of sense, and those he criticizes, make little sense.

Concerning the author's statement, "...contribute to a climate of hate by repeating his provocative commentary.", I can't really jump aboard that train. His commentary may be provocative - it sells products for his advertisers, which he's proud to do as a contributing member of a free market society; but it also drives home the points he's trying to make to his listeners.

What I think Rush is contributing to is a climate of righteous indignation, an indignation born out of the nonsense this administration is trying to foist upon the citizens of this country. That indignation is energizing some to take a stand against the current administration's policies. That's a good thing. God bless Rush, and God bless the righteously indignant.

Palin, Cheney, Rush, Hannity, back to Palin, Cheney, Rush, Hannity, back to Palin, Cheney, Rush, Hannity....and so forth.
The donkeys have to find someone to blame for the fire at the Reichstag, I mean the defeat of the health care bill. Did I mention the donkeys have Congress, the Executive, and Acorn?

I am not a practicing Catholic, but I agree with the premise of this article: act ethically. Whatever your religious flavor, living ethically is broadly accepted. The Golden Rule offers easily understood ethical guidance:

"hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful." Buddhism

"What is hateful to you, do not to your fellow man. That is the entire Law; all the rest is commentary." Judaism

"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Christianity

"No one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself." Islam

"Blessed is he who preferreth his brother before himself." Baha'i Faith

"Are you serious? Where in any of the bills under consideration on capital hill is there any mention of nationalizing the health care industry? Can you give even one example?"

Posted by: Fate1

Where have you been? Obama has consistently championed a "single payer" (government run / national) health care system.

Obama: "Everybody in. Nobody out... but we may not get there immediately...." etc.

Canada has one. England has one. These are socialist countries. Both are disasters. England is a basket case. Obama wants America to have a single-payer health plan. I can't be certain Obama does not want the US to be a basket case. He appears to have many issues with white folks. Did he not say about his white grandmother, she is "a typical white person." (?)

http://www.breitbart.tv/obama-in-03-id-like-to-see-a-single-payer-health-care-plan/

What do you think this is about?

sklein19 wrote: "Germany, Limbaugh maintained yesterday, had its own system of national health care under the Third Reich. The Third Reich - like the Obama administration and many Congressional Democrats appear to want - took control of private industry."

Fate1: "what is very much like the national socialists in Germany was the mobs disrupting honest meetings, disrupting government talking to its citizens in town halls, and propaganda in the form of lies to confuse and obfuscate, like "death panels" and "euthanasia"."

People are angry at an out of control leftist government. When government is out of control there is legitimate anger. When government seeks to control our lives and take away our legitimate freedoms, citizen anger is legitimate in my opinion. Where are the lies? The left believes in euthanasia. Have you heard of Terri Schiavo? These were leftist judges, politicians and activists who murdered; who advocated the murder of this young woman.

President Obama wants to make elderly consultations with doctors mandatory with respect to end-of-life matters. I'm not persuaded that this president who is pro-abortion radical has much concern for the sanctity of innocent human life. Are you?

You know, I don't believe in this 'sin' thing, especially about ever listening to anyone...

But I will observe that in the case of Mr. Limbaugh, it doesn't exactly seem to do anything good to anyone's perceptual or mental acuity.

He appeals to an ignorant sort of pride and aggression, and calls it commonsense and virtue. He's the very epitome of a demagogue in all the worst senses.

And a hypocrite of the worst order, as are his dittoheads.

Listened to him for ten years of anti-drug crusades and all the rest, calling anyone disqualified from humanity if they ever did any drug but beer and ciggies...

Never went back to reexamine all those things he said and they internalized... *While the man was whacked out on drugs.*

You could hear it. If you know what people 'on drugs' sound like.

I guess people found the contents of his ten year frothing, slurring, paranoid bender (and aftereffects thereof) appealing.

You cannot continue listening to Rush without believing in him. Sin? Who of us is to say nor do I believe it is humans who determine what is or isn't sin.

Remember something else we were taught growing up...."birds of a feather flock together." Why would any of us run to listen faithfully to Rush except we are dying to hear what he has to say today cause we are of the same mindset as he is.

Maybe the question should be--does Rush poison minds to sin against his brother?

Mr. Arroyo must be one of those 'good Catholics' that voted for the Party of Death in the last election. So agreeing with Rush bad, but voting for guy who thinks its okay to let babies die in trash cans good. There is a special place in hell reserved for dissemblers like Mr. Arroyo. I pray for your soul Mr. Arroyo.

I often wonder why RL is so antagonistic to gay marriage. He has been married & divorced three times. How does he reconcile his belief in the sanctity of the institution and evangelizing his followers to rally against gay marriage (in a vehement rhetoric) with this fact.

If America is a free society which should limits the role of government in the lives of its citizens as Rush states -- then gays should have the right to commit to a legally binding relationship or wreck their relationships and the same frequency as Limbaugh has.

The man is an entertainer with a cult following. He is not dangerous -- the people who cannot separate the entertainer from the message and take his word as gospel are.

To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Stevens-Arroyo isn't a deacon, a priest or a bishop. In the writing of his column (which I assume is addressed to Catholics), he doesn't refer to Scripture, tradition, or any authority whatsoever. His appeal is to common sense and civility, which is correct in the broad scheme of things, but he falls terribly short when it comes to specifics. He seems to fault Rush Limbaugh principally because Limbaugh ridicules people. Fair enough. But so does Bill Mahr, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, and many other figures in the media. Wouldn't this mean that it's all right to listen to them, but a sin to agree with any of them? It doesn't follow through logically, Mr. Arroyo, not in the least.

who cares if it's a sin! get over your self-imposed punishment of someone, even yourselves - it's not a religious thing.

Oh My ears ! I'm going to cut them off now!!!

How silly.

Think of it in the eyes of the church: is it a sin ( lions and tigers and bears - oh my!!) to be ignorant?

No, it is not. That's clearly established by the churches regularly baptising p[agan babies; they aren't sinners per se - just ignorant of God and all that high-mucky-muck promise he holds for the great unwashed.

They wash them, and thier past paganism or whatever - maybe just an oil slick in the hair that needs tending to and not so much thier morality - but in reality the pagans of the world were all just plain ignorant, and the church allows that this is not a sin.

Fast forward to radio personalities, like the one mentioned in this article.

Nobody's going to hell because of Rush Limbaugh, or listening to his voice.

You will, however be branded as simply ignorant.

A simpleton - a mentally incomplete person.

That's about all you will achieve listening to people like Rush, who's biggest thrill in life is to hear himself talk.

ans15, while we can agree on some things you wrote (detailed below), you've yet to convince me the lowest common denominator in this case is people (on the right) who relish hating.

This piece is about Rush Limbaugh. I'm not going to defend the GOP. Nor will I defend everyone on the right. There are plenty of things I do not like about the political right. I did not vote to re-elect Bush in 2004. There were several Republican Congressmen I did not vote for because of my disenchantment with Bush and my party.

That having been said, your assertion that "they believe that they're smarter than their brothers and bray at the top of their lungs that they are righteous," can be said of both sides of the isle. I find many on the left looking down their noses at ordinary people. Otherwise, why does the left want the government to make decisions for me, such as health care if they do not think they (the government) is smarter than the average citizen?

You wrote: "In his view everything the Democrats do is bad and that is all his audience really needs to know."

I believe this has an element of truth, which has caused me to lose a fair amount of respect for Limbaugh over the years. More than notion that everything the Democrats do is bad is the notion that everything Bush and the Republicans did was good. This I believe lost the GOP elections in 2006 and 2008; uncritical support for Bush and the Republicans. Limbaugh and others carried water for Bush and the Republicans when clearly they were doing wrong. When they did wrong, Limbaugh was either silent or supportive.

ans15 wrote: "The problem that the GOP faces in catering to the haters is that they are handcuffed to them. They pay a price for those votes with the moderates and people who think independently. The party suffers."

I'm not sure what you consider hatred. You need to be more specific. I see much more hatred on the left today. As a Jew especially. The political left is the repository of anti-Semitism and Jew hatred. Have you ever read Daily Kos or the Huffington Post? Have you seen Jew-hating rallies organized by the left in league with jihadists? Do you know about the rank Jew-hatred on our left-leaning college campuses? What do you read? Who do you read? Have you ever visited this web site?

http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=35890

I suggest you open your mind to differing views and opinions.

Who the hell is Anthony Stevens-Arroyo?

Limbaugh and his ilk have done more damage to this country over the past twenty years than any other individuals (including W). He has fostered a culture of hatred, contempt and ridicule towards those with differing political views that is simply astonishing. Rush consistently makes statements that are verifiably false without compunction and his listeners eat it up as gospel with no further proof necessary. Like the current GOP, Rush has no positive ideas or agenda for fixing the problems in this country, only a smug disdain for any fact, idea or person that disagrees with his opinion. Most of his listeners fit a certain kind of closed-minded demographic and listen because he makes them feel superior to others and better about themselves and their mediocrity. They do not have to own their own failures in life because it is always someone else's fault -- someone else to blame (the media, minorities, the liberal elite, etc.). He truly embodies the worst in all of us - the stereotypical ugly american. The question is who will rid us of Rush? (and that goes double for Coulter)

Listening to talking heads is always a symptom of spiritual emptiness, regardless of the political point of view. These folks tend to be empty, narcissistic, and
corrosive. The times when I have listened to them have been the times when I have felt dead inside.

I'm going to create a column where I designate myself the spokesman for Catholics and all things Catholic. The fact that I have no legitimate authority is irrelevant. Then, while claiming I speak for Catholics, I'll write tendentious political attack pieces based on my extreme liberal ideology and all the tired buzzwords I hear about conservatives in my liberal echo chamber (all racists, homophobes, etc.). I'll make my columns intellectually vapid yet incendiary enough to draw attention to myself.

Eventually I'll be identified as a liberal hack and have to move on and create a new column. I'll create a column for right-handed white guys where I designate myself the spokesman...

sklein19 said: "[...]but if there is a comparison to be made between what is happening on the right vs. the left and National Socialism, it is on the side of this administration (and the left) attempting to take control of (or nationalize) whole industries like the health care industry."

Are you serious? Where in any of the bills under consideration on capital hill is there any mention of nationalizing the health care industry? Can you give even one example?

sklein19 wrote: "Germany, Limbaugh maintained yesterday, had its own system of national health care under the Third Reich. The Third Reich - like the Obama administration and many Congressional Democrats appear to want - took control of private industry."

So are you saying that today Germany, which has a national health care system, is a national socialist state? Is France, Britain, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, etc, etc, etc? But what is very much like the national socialists in Germany was the mobs disrupting honest meetings, disrupting government talking to its citizens in town halls, and propaganda in the form of lies to confuse and obfuscate, like "death panels" and "euthanasia".

gsross

Sure!

as soon as you stop making false statements about Dick Cheny.

;o)

mark
always seek the truth

But only the Rush True Believers are the ones tuning in day and night to listen to him - he only tells them what they want to hear - he doesn't inform them, educate them or reason with them - none of them including he are capable of that.

STUPID COMPARISON: Whether it is the liberal fringe beating up on former vice president Dick Cheney ...

In an effort to be "fair", writers usually end up be ridiculous. Dick Cheney hasn't begun to get the beating he truly deserves: prison without parole because he did facilitate the death of hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

Please, please stop making false comparisons.

Listening to Baraka Hussein Obama isn't a sin, but voting for him will cause your soul to burn in hell for eternity.

sklein19 In answer to your question: The
lowest common denominator in this case is people who relish hating. Who believe that they are smarter than their brothers and bray at the top of their lungs that they are righteous.
I suppose that you cannot blame the GOP. It is, after all, a situation set up where every person gets one vote. The GOP has to do nothing to obtain the votes Rush provides. In his view everything the Democrats do is bad and that is all his audience really needs to know. The problem that the GOP faces in catering to the haters is that they are handcuffed to them. They pay a price for those votes with the moderates and people who think independently. The party suffers.

This is the same whacked out Catholicism that made me leave the church. Have sympathy for pedophiles and aiding and abetting the violation of our borders with Mexico. Instead of punishing those who abuse children and convincing the citizens of Mexico to work for Change in their own country, they decided to let child rapists to transfer among parishes and give one bottle of water to pregnant women to cross a into the US. Shame on the this idea of Catholicism. Maybe when the Pope lives the life of poverty he preaches, maybe when priest decide not to be so ugly and greedy, then you will get your parish back.

Can't believe I am defending Rush Limbaugh, but he empowers the average citizen much more than the Catholic Church empowers its churchgoers.

let's face it: the USA would be a lot nicer without Jews, Mexicans, and Blacks. If anything, Rush is too restrained in his so-called racism.

Posted by: tiberiusjacksonII
__________________________---

you forgot pasty, white, obese neocon Huckabees and redneck racists like you as well. It was a lot nicer before they rose to bully the rest of us, too.

Shame on Americans for letting these cretins take over.

Good grief, this column is fatuous. There is more pure hat on 15 minutes of any MSNBC show and more suppressed rage in Chris Matthews (who I'm sure is one of Stevens Arroyo's favorite "Catholics")than three hours of Limbaugh. Something about a serious examination of liberal ideas just drives the Left nuts, doesn't it? Why not lump that in to all the free speech suppression techniques currently being employed by the Obama Administration and tell us if THAT is sinful, Mr. Stevens- Arroyo? This column has nothing to do with Catholicism by the way; never has, never will.

((Stevens-Arroyo only writes about Rush because he knows it will increase his readership. Stevens-Arroyo has nothing of his own to add to the discussion. I am sure that Rush couldn't pick him out of a room of 2 people. Stevens-Arroyo is irrelevant.)))

Well if you cant win the argument then shoot the messenger. ((?he can not add to the discussion?))
I think he started it.
You are just dumb sir.

delusional1 - Here is a fact, I'll see you, Limbaugh and all Ditto heads burning in Hell.

Posted by: Tell-the-Truth-Please

If you'll see us there, are you a closet dittohead?

Tell-the-Truth-Please

You can't handle the truth! I can tell because of your anger and hate. Typical liberal.

Stevens-Arroyo only writes about Rush because he knows it will increase his readership. Stevens-Arroyo has nothing of his own to add to the discussion. I am sure that Rush couldn't pick him out of a room of 2 people. Stevens-Arroyo is irrelevant.

They opened up the psycho wards, gave them all keyboards and pay them minimum wage to post anti left rantings everywhere. I just came back from the USATODAY and it is amazing how every rightwinged comment is gettiing like 575 Recommendations. Normally you see about 10 for a very good (left or right) posting. With no doubt the right wingers have declared war on every American who has posted an opinion that does not come from Fox news. A concerted, contrived attempt to smear the majority of AMERICANS.

Whenever I am in doubt about an issue, I ask myself: "WWRD?" (what would Rush do?). It gives me great strength to be able to go to Rush for the proper stand on the issues.

Limbaugh is mostly an entertainer in my book. I can take only so much of him bfore I switch the station. It's intereting to me that, once moved away from the bluster-causing microphone, he actually is very thoughtful about hismopinions (like them or not).

I find him no more or less offensive that Kirth Oberman or Rachel Maddow, each of whom pump out non-stop anti-right ridicule, supported by a non-stop guest list of lefties. I just wish they wouldn'r be on a "news" channel -- because their's isn't news.

Probably the Limbaugh tragedy for the GOP is that he, in his outrageousness, makes an easy target for those who want to undermine the right. The GOP needs more credible spokespeople to counter the "rush."

delusional1 - Here is a fact, I'll see you, Limbaugh and all Ditto heads burning in Hell.

Nothing like trotting-out the big-bad bogeyman Limbaugh to get WaPo readers agitated. Dick Cheney is like sooo 2007!

Anthony,
Rush's audience is 100 times larger than yours. A little jealous maybe?

Like most liberals, you tell us what we should do (not believe Rush) while you cannot even follow your own advice (your very personal attack on the person of Limbaugh)

You are irrelevant.

Dittohead

ans15 wrote: "I think it's a sad thing that conservatism in this country has sunk to such a level. The continued efforts of the GOP to draw their base from the lowest common denominator is a targic mistake and robs legitimate efforts at fiscally conservative policies that were once the parties hallmark. They seem to now be proud to be the party of idiots and fearmongers.""""

What do you mean, "the lowest common demoninator?"

I used to hear Limbaugh back in the 1995 (for about one month)and what I have noticed that he had the tendency place blame of the problems of society on Liberals which the GOP has used successfully to get their candidates elected without the need to fully explain their policies and what would happen if enacted. In many ways Rush is more of political commentator because he reads off right-wing news as truth without anyone having to debunk them unless it fits into what he regard as the truth. Factcheck.org have debunked many of the untruths perpetuated by him
In recent events have shown me that he works in concert with the GOP in order to spread lies and fear and forcing the others such as Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly and Sean Hannity and others have to say outrageous things to get noticed. Another thing, when someone calls him or others out for such falsehood, they act like children throwing temper tantrum. What's even funnier is that I have a older brother who's extremely smart and holds a position as AVP in an insurance company listens to Limbaugh and treats his word as gospel and I have had the pleasure of ripping his argument apart rather quickly which he could not counteract except to smile.

I haven't been able to read all of the many comments but fro the several that I have read I will say that they are alot of ugly people with ugly views out there..I mean alot.
Conservative thinking to me means narrow minded..I do mean Narrow Minded. I mean these dittoheads don't believe in global warming, evolution, science, human rights, a womens right to make her own choice and freedom of religion.
What they do believe in is owning any and every weapon manufactured,killing doctors that perform legal procedures,invading foreign countries, banishing everyone that doesn't look like they do, believing that God talks to them directly, corporate greed and Rush Limbaugh.
Now tell me what is wrong with this picture.

Mealy mouth author can not differentiate between ridicule and truth giving Catholics a bad name. Most of what people like him say is untrue because they do not listen to Rush daily.Why not complain about the lies and untruths Chris Matthews and Keith Doberman espouse on the disappearing MSNBC which has almost no listeners left. CNN has left for Moscow wave lengths so glad they are no longer available here.
Rush is very entertaining which is his secret while the mealy mouths frown and worship their Kenyan messiah.

I think it's a sad thing that conservatism in this country has sunk to such a level. The continued efforts of the GOP to draw their base from the lowest common denominator is a targic mistake and robs legitimate efforts at fiscally conservative policies that were once the parties hallmark. They seem to now be proud to be the party of idiots and fearmongers.

I'm not sure it is a sin to listen to him ,Rush is just a sin in general, and what he espouses and the hatred he foments is a sin

Here we go again a liberal attacking a conservative. Liberals are quick to judge a conservative. But this nut job hasn't once attacked any of his buddies on the left who smeared Sarah Palin. This guy is a joke. Talking about racism it is the democratic party and the left wing liberals who are quick to use the race card on everyhting. If you say or do anything you are called a racist by the democratic party. This party doesn't know how to debate anything anymore they just smear you and call you a racist. It is great watching the democratic party self destruct

Let's all be civil like Obama is to the opposition – Get in their Face and Argue with them.

"I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors. I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face."

-Barack Obama, September 18, 2008

For Alex511 - It drives you and your liberal buddies that Rush is very successful and has done more for this country in the last 21 years than all the destructive liberal ideas in the last 100 years.
_____________________________________________

While he ws on are off drugs?....Bless him anyhow......

For Alex511 - It drives you and your liberal buddies that Rush is very successful and has done more for this country in the last 21 years than all the destructive liberal ideas in the last 100 years.

Responding to: "At least Rush encourages his listeners to examine the issues he raises and make up there own mind."

Yes, I suppose that's why they call themselves dittoheads...oh...wait...

"Rush's best value as far as I am concerned is that he brings areas of concern to the forefront so we know what is going on."

Maybe going on in someone's fantasies, but certainly not the real world that the rest of us occupy.

"If it wasn't for the conservative talk shows Obama and all his henchmen would have us walking around in a golden haze."

Yeah, things are going so great in our country and the world...this golden haze is just...too cool!

let's face it: the USA would be a lot nicer without Jews, Mexicans, and Blacks. If anything, Rush is too restrained in his so-called racism.

Liberals cannot defend their ideals in a conversation when they are held to the standard that is the US Constitution. So, naturally a Liberal talk radio show ends with a boring call-in group of syncophants. This is exactly what happened with the ONE Liberal talk radio show featuring Joe Palka (Yes, Sue Palka the weatherwoman on Fox 5's husband) back during the Clinton Administration. The show was a died with a resounding whimper...
****************************************

Liberals CAN defend - your problem is that you CANNOT listen.

Cannot is incorrect - what I should say is WILL NOT! I actually do listen to the likes of Rush and Fox from time to time and each time that I do I am more and more convinced that they are NOT telling the truth or that they spin, twist and mutalate the truth to fit their agenda. I want the news, I don't want a political spin of the news.

But when people like you only recognize Rush as being the "truth" and fail to do any fact checking it is clear that what you are hearing from Rush is what you already believe and you don't want anyone to mess up your thinking with facts and truth.

((spidermean2 wrote: "You can't debate with someone like fate1 who thinks her ancestor is an ape. I hope she can show us her family tree tracing her roots to king kong."))

Your ancestor was a scorpion..but the rest of us share a common ancestor with other simians. Just to tinkle a little bit...all land life descended from the round worm...except Rush who stayed the same.

Why don't you ask if it's a sin to listen to Air America, Keith Obermann, Rachel Maddow, Jack Cafferty etc. They espouse their hatred for everthing conservative. And on the cross, Jesus died and paid for every sin you will or ever will commit. And every time you go to a man in a booth and confess and ask forgiveness for some sin, you spit in the face of our Lord and what He did. You make up a religious system and put it about the Lord. 1 Cor 15 1-4 tells you everything you need to do to be righteous and have every sin taken care of. Believe it!

"""Would you say, Wright, Jackson and Sharpton enunciate core liberal (or "progressive") principles? If they do, what are they?"""

No, they do not. Generally they are promoting their own unique causes, which sometimes overlap the basic beliefs of everyone who is not a Right wing Republican.

Item 1.

Rush Limbaugh makes so much money, he is insulated from the societal, economic and social effects of his idiotic screeds.

He literally can say anything he wants and not worry about the consequences. I hope you understand that this means he doesn't "really" "care" about "you."

That's the American Dream for any radio blow-hard.

Item 2.

Someone wrote:

"Obama wants to give us socialized medicine. Just say no and save our Medicare!"

This is satire and irony of the highest order. I hope you were kidding.

Unfortunately for our nation, the Dems in Congress are just as bad as Limbaugh. Liberal sheep follow the fools, just like the conservative sheep. No difference.

spidermean2 wrote: "You can't debate with someone like fate1 who thinks her ancestor is an ape. I hope she can show us her family tree tracing her roots to king kong."

Hey spidey, why don't you tell everyone on this board what you think about the Roman Catholic Church.

Limbaugh's a cheap, two bit shock jock no different than Howard Stern other than he appeals to ignorance at the other extreme.

The formula is Hitler's: stir up the people in fear, anger and hated against common enemies and political wedge issues. Then gain notoriety from those who hate you for it.

I would no much listen to two minutes of Limbaugh than I would watch 15 seconds of RNC Fox News. Neither are good for your health because of the stress they generate nor are they good for an increasingly divided nation.

Oh God. The dittoheads are in a lather, again. Fearlessly protecting their big, fat, hillybilly heroin addict, demi-god.

These people are crazy...wacka-doo. Boy they are dangerous in a serious way because stupid people will follow them to either their own deaths or the deaths of innocent people. They have the audacity to make comparisons between Nazis and Obama. Do we not realize that that is the same manipulative play on words, propaganda to its extreme that the Nazis used to bring about their objectives. Do we not realize that. Brighten up folks because just as Bush's presidency destroyed our economy and kept an unjust war going, their words and rhetoric have power to continue to destroy from within. If American's see this as a little deal then we have some serious, serious moral issues that desperately need to be addressed and resolved. Learn to recognize evil when you see and hear it. This kind of runaway slander, bigotry and trying to stimulate people to anger and violence can not and should not be ignored by anyone. I thank God they lost the presidency when they did. Who knows the greater objectives of such a group of thinkers.

Are those who listen to talk radio aware that the sole function of a talk radio host is to provoke an emotional response in the listener? This is how they attract and keep listeners. The easiest emotions to provoke are anger and hate. That is why they make such outlandish and provocative stmts. They're also clever enough to mix just enough facts in with false arguments to provide cover for their remarks. BTW: an example of a false argument would be, We need to waterboard captured terrorists or millions could die. This is a false dicotomous choice. These aren't the only two choices possible. But talk radio hosts present such choices as if they are reral arguments. The only way to identify such false arguments is to be aware of them. Once we are aware the emotional response they seek false away and the wizard behind the curtain becomes known. They are simple manipulators and salesmen. You don't have to buy the product.

"I was a critic of Bush, but unlike Mr. Obama, I saw no effort by the Bush administration to bully and intimidate his opposition. Obama and his team are skilled at this sort of thing."

Please provide instances wherein the Obama administration "bullied and intimidated his opposition" because I think that I missed that one.

I would go further and say that it appears that most of the Limbaugh supporters consider themselves to be religious - of the religious right in this country. Well, that is NOT what I thought religion was about - you speak hatefully about our President, you speak hatefully against your fellow citizens and you also speak hatefully against the Catholic religion. None of which is my idea of "religion" or the message it is intended to relay.

I personally don't suscribe to any religion but I would never be so critical (read hyprocritical) of any other person or religion.

Whats wrong with this picture?

Sadly, a whole lot!

I've seen Limbaugh on the radio - he lies he is terribly disrespectful of our president and his intent IS to inflame. That is NOT very American I don't care what side you are on in the political "war".

I was with you about not a sin to listen, it is to act on the hate and intolerance espoused. But to say Catholics don't listen to "hate speech", I have to say "huh?" What do you call homophobic vitriol coming from the pulpit? What do you call the condemnation of people who believe women should have a choice with thier bodies (calling them murderers)? What do you call the current Pope's support of that anti-semitic group of priests (can't remember their name) and lifting the ex-communication? All sounds like hate speech. What do you call the Church's unqualified support of the Bush administration in its pursuit of hate against Muslims? I guess the Church was happy to have the State pick up the Crusades where it left off.

I do not listen to or have the least respect for Mr. Limbaugh and his opinions. But I believe that it is important that facts be presented accurately.

1. Mr. Limbaugh was not fired from ESPN. He resigned. He probably resigned under pressure to keep from being fired, but there is a difference between being fired and resigning in the face of controversy. ESPN did not have to accept the resignations, they could have chosen to fire him instead.

2. While his comments about Mr. McNabb were certainly controversial and I disagree with them, they were not on their face racist. He simply said that McNabb was over rated by the media because he is black, and that the defense carried the team. Mr. McNabb's then past and subsequent performance disprove this opinion. But it is an opinion and Mr. Limbaugh was talking more about racial perceptions of the American media than Mr. McNabb's race. One can say the same thing about Eli Manning being over rated (and now over paid) because he is a Manning and that the defense carried the team. I think one great drive in the Super Bowl disprove that opinion.

Mr. Limbaugh has certainly made many horrible comments and personal accusations about people's sexual orientaton that do not have a place in polite company. But American media today is hardly polite company.

So I would say on the whole, it is a sin to listen to the corrupt and boring American media, including Mr. Limbaugh. My conscience is clear.

Liberals experience so much anger when they listen to Limbaugh because he frustrates them, most often because they are unable to counter his arguments with rational arguments of their own. Liberals have believed falsehoods for so long that hearing anyone denounce them is beyond the pale. Liberals are very emotional beings, like children, so we must be patient with them.

No, it's not a sin, but it's not a sign of literacy or high intellect either.

"I'm sorry but Jackson, Wright and Sharpton don't play the same role for Democrats as Limbaugh does for the GOP. Have you ever seen Democratic legislators and other leaders kowtowing to those three as Republicans do to Rush? GOP chair Michael Steele and other Republican members of Congress begged for Limbaugh's forgiveness after being mildly critical of him. Sorry, but you haven't see that on the Demo side."

Posted by: socityej

OK. I'll take a 'stab' at this one. You tell me where I am wrong. As I wrote earlier, I am not a fan of Limbaugh's because I found Limbaugh to be a George W. Bush lap-dog, even as Bush betrayed fundamental conservative principles. That having been said, Limbaugh does enunciate core conservative principles. Can this be said about Wright, Jackson, Sharpton, all clearly bigots, anti-Semites. Wright, Obama's mentor, like Louis Farrakhan friend, is an African American separatist / racist, anti-Semite, etc.

Would you say, Wright, Jackson and Sharpton enunciate core liberal (or "progressive") principles? If they do, what are they?

""Anyone who thinks Rush Limbaugh is a "Leader" of the Republican party also has to concede that Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Jeremiah Wright are leaders of the democrats."""

Really? I hear the drumbeat of ditto heads every day at work, can not remember the last time anyone quoted the aforementioned liberals. They have a small loyal following, no doubt, but most Democrats are listening to the President. I can not remember the last time the leader of the DNC (unlike the RNC) was publicly rebuked for stating that a radio personality was not the leader of their party.

Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and all of the rest of the on-air rabble-rousers are nothing but social pyromaniacs, getting their followers all fired up for the sheer pleasure of watching things burn.

In my humble opinion, Anthony M. Stevens-Arroyo and the Washington Post are no more qualified to evaluate sin than they are to evaluate Rush.

The sad part is that there may be some that believe him.

At least Rush encourages his listeners to examine the issues he raises and make up there own mind. Rush's best value as far as I am concerned is that he brings areas of concern to the forefront so we know what is going on. If it wasn't for the conservative talk shows Obama and all his henchmen would have us walking around in a golden haze.

I'm sorry but Jackson, Wright and Sharpton don't play the same role for Democrats as Limbaugh does for the GOP. Have you ever seen Democratic legislators and other leaders kowtowing to those three as Republicans do to Rush? GOP chair Michael Steele and other Republican members of Congress begged for Limbaugh's forgiveness after being mildly critical of him. Sorry, but you haven't see that on the Demo side.

fr yokisuka1985:

>... Rush is an American icon, self-made man who recovered from being fired and drug addiction. He continues to out think the left and stimulates the political debate in this country.

Your little bff flush limpburger is a racist, homophobic BIGOT who is STILL an addict. I'd find someone with morals to listen to, and hope that someday someone will have the guts to fire flush.

Rush Limbaugh's rants and raves shows to me the low bar we set for ourselves in radio broadcasting. It use to be called shock talk radio back in the 70's when I had friends who would listen to nothing but Rush Limbaugh. The Bible tells us that out of the heart the mouth speaks (Mark 7). When he speaks of getting rid of the President or advocating violence, he has crossed the line. When his sexist and hurtful comments about others reveal his homophobic nature continue, it crosses the line of decency and good taste and civil discourse. I doubt frankly that he can have a civil discourse about any subject. Why do the GOP tolerate him as a standard bearer of their party? Are they so desperate for leadership they will follow anyone with a caustic mouth? While it is not "sin" to listen to him and his ravings, why listen to him at all. There are other more sensible reporters out there who don't disguise their "hate speech" as entertainment. I feel sorry for the many who swallow "hook, line and sinker" the phrases of this media parasite. As an Evangelical who believe in a God who is there and not silent, I am directed to pray for those in authority over me, not rile people up against them. I am commanded by the same God as revealed in Jesus Christ to Love Him with all my heart, soul, and mind and my neighbor as myself. I don't think Rush Limbaugh as learned those lessons yet.

Anyone who thinks Rush Limbaugh is a "Leader" of the Republican party also has to concede that Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Jeremiah Wright are leaders of the democrats.

Rush Limbaugh is a conservative with a radio show -- period. Jackson, Sharpton and Wright are liberals with their own agendas -- period. Even though they are racists, the liberal press accords them more credability.

JOY- Thank you for demonstrating the exact sinfulness that the author was relating. You did a better job that him at demonstarting the inability of the followers of Rush to have a civil discourse. You berate the author about reporting facts.
Well this article was not about any facts.
It is about how you behave and you proved the authors points well.
You would dismiss him as a journalist because he disagrees with your viewpoints, not that he does a poor job as a journalist.
Your signature "freedom" is an absolute
mockery of your own enslavemnet to the hate that thrills you.

If that pathetic pile of Crisco was any fatter they'd be flying him over football games.

Rush is just like the people who support him. They're cowards, afraid of change, afraid of the unknown...afraid of everything.
Pity...

And if they want to talk about Nazi, trying to keep the people from having free choice between private and gov't health care is classic Corporate Nazism.

What a bunch of sorry traitors.

It's no more a sin to listen to Rush than it is to listen to a Richard Pryor album. They're both comedic drug addicted racists. Anyone that believes that blowhard is a freeking moron.

The left has a long history if distortion of the truth and failed ideas. The left has destroyed the black family in America through their welfare programs. The education system is owned by the left, but it's another failed system. And now we have to belive them as to whom we can listen too?. Rush is an American icon, self-made man who recovered from being fired and drug addiction. He continues to out think the left and stimulates the political debate in this country.

Rush is right!

In order to have civil discourse in this nation, it would have to begin with alleged journalists like you-reporting facts.

The biggest sin is that you are no journalist, I bet you have never listened to Rush consistently for 3 hours a day for even one day-let alone a week. Your reporting is one sided, opinionated and absolutely wrong--the only facts you include are convenient facts to support your side---it is just another propaganda piece.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing and you-are dangerous. Mr. Anthony Stevens-Arroyo.

Bias, state run media and hacks like you are a disgrace to all this nation was founded on.

Sadly for you - WE THE PEOPLE are sick and tired of puppets of the B.O. administration being so drunk on Kool Aid that you yourself are illegitmate in your profession.

If you are legitimate, time to take on Pelosi for her calling the
American people FASCISTS along with Hoyer while trying to shove more crap sandwiches down the PEOPLE's throats.

Then maybe take on Rangel for his tax evasion, Frank for his fraud at Freddie/Fannie and on and on.

Be a journalist, not a hack. As for change-in 1957 Cuba voted for Change--BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR.

In Freedom,

Joy

sklein19,

You can't debate with someone like fate1 who thinks her ancestor is an ape. I hope she can show us her family tree tracing her roots to king kong.

I can't believe it. This guy is a convicted major, heavy duty felon.
I have a copy of the Enquirer with his maid on the cover stating he sends her out for Percosomethings. Thousands of them.

I have a front page of USA today with his guilty plea or whatever tht was.

And this bum was influencing how many of you while so freaking under the influence...and continues to do same.

50 or 60 years from now when historians look back on this a-hole and his minions they are going to scratch their heads and wonder how damn stupid the American people were.

Besides, he's stinking lousy entertainment.

"I regularly listen to Rush so that when I tell people that he is a racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-Semitic, bigoted liar, that I know I'm still correct. So far, so good."

Posted by: CardFan | August 11, 2009 11:20 AM

I am a Jew. I'm pretty sensitive to Jew-hatred the likes of which we saw in President Obama's Cairo speech, where he compared the largely self-imposed plight of the Muslim-Arabs living in Israel to the Holocaust; where he employed the Arab-world narrative that the Jews were imposed on the region because of European guilt over Nazi atrocities against the Jews. Like Secretary Rice, Obama compared the "Palestinian" situation to that of African Americans in the racist south, thereby insinuating the Jews are equivalent to white racists.

Can you give me an example of an anti-Semitic statement Limbaugh made?

To: agapn9

Move to France!

Fate1 wrote: "Your "point" was that the only swastikas you saw had a line through them."

I do not have television. I was lucky to have seen or read about that one. The point is Speaker Pelosi made it appear that Nazis showed up at these rallies protesting nationalized health care in Nazi gear. She was wrong.

Fate1: "You were wrong as the picture shows."

I was not wrong. The picture did not illustrated a Nazi. He was accusing Obama of being such just as the left accused Bush. As they say, maybe turn about is fair play.

Fate1: "The policies were what were being compared to the nazis. The torture, the lying and propaganda, the moral crusade, the dehumanizing of a supposed enemy. All were part of the nazi system and all were part of the Bush administration. But I heard no one compare Bush directly to Hitler. Cheney maybe, but not Bush. Most think he was a fool pushed into policies he did not understand. That's no Hitler."

Well I did. Bush administration used interrogation methods on members of al Qaeda to extract information. They said it saved lives. I am not one to scrutinize these practices, particularly post 9/11. Israel has the same difficulty with these mass-murdering terrorists who murder innocent women and children. These are not Nazis. They are saving lives from mass-murderers. Does your heart bleed compassion for these mass murderers like bin Laden and his allies?

a. Wendell Potter, former VP for Cigna, was on PBS three weeks ago and revealed that in 1996 the Health Insurance's portion of dollars spent on health care was 5%, today its 20%.

b. Sunday, Aug 2, 2009 I heard on Stephanopolous' show that health care costs 2.5 trillion dollars a year. (Actually, its 2.4 trillion.) We could
save $375 billion a year just by driving down the Healthcare Insurance Industry's take back to 1996 levels.

c. We spend the most of any nation and yet WHO (the World Health Organization) ranks us 37 out of 191 nations with health care
systems.

d. The straw dog the GOP attacks is Canada, the prime example of 'socialized medicine' - never mind the fact that Canadian doctors make almost as much as ours.

e. Canada is rated # 33 (by WHO) out of 191.

f. Watch that neither France nor Italy will come up in the conversation - France is rated # 1 and Italy # 2.

g. When you talk about the health care system you have to make a distinction between the group and the individual. For those with health care coverage the US has the best system in the world according to Time Magazine. However, if that is true it's not due to the Insurance companies but the investments in R & D made by the US government from 1945 to 1965 when no other nation was making any.

h. But as far as group totals France's are almost three times as good as ours. And we are all both individuals and parts of groups. God help you if you lose your coverage under the current system and get sick. You either go bankrupt or die.

i. A study by the Toronto newspaper showed that if the US adopted the Canadian system we could cover everyone and save 1 trillion dollars. But if we adopted France or Italy's system we would still save money and have a much better system - maybe
the best due to our superior technology.

j. France's and Italy's systems are mixed -single payer and healthcare insurance - sounds strange but it works.

I regularly listen to Rush so that when I tell people that he is a racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-Semitic, bigoted liar, that I know I'm still correct. So far, so good.

Is this the same Anthony Stevens-Arroyo who wrote the following virtuous statement: "I never met an atheist I could like. Surely, somewhere on this planet, there is a friendly atheist, but I haven’t bumped into one yet."

I don't know what kind of Catholicism Mr. Stevens-Arroyo practices, perhaps his faith is equal to that of Sally Quinn.

But I do know that Rush has never commented on atheist and their beliefs.

And I'm pretty sure, on radio or print, his previous comment could be considered to "feed the monster of personal destruction."

I hope others tune out Mr. Stevens-Arroyo hate speech.

Posted by: gss49 wrote: Please quit repeating the two lies found in Sklein19 post.

1. Tiller was a baby killer. Late term abortions are not elective procedures. They are not used as "birth control". They are only prescribed in dire circumstances, often when the fetus is no longer viable and continued pregnancy is life threatening....."

Nonsense. Show us your proof. Don't simply call them lies. Present your evidence from reliable, objective sites. You know, anyone like you can write anything you want without proof. Let's see where you are getting this silliness.

gss49: "They are ghastly procedures, and few institutions will perform them. That is why patients were sent very long distances to receive them."

Most / all institutions perform them. Tiller an one or others advertised these savage abortion. Others do not advertise them but they perform them. Yes they are indeed ghastly procedures and to my knowledge, this president supports these ghastly procedures.

gss49 wrote: 2. Obama never voted to deprive babies who had survived abortions medical care to save their life."

Yes he did. You are the one who is not telling the truth. Not me.

gss49: "Occasionally, a fetus will be alive after the abortion, but it is not viable--it has not developed enough to survive."

Occasionally? Watch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPF1FhCMPuQ

http://www.jillstanek.com/archives/obama-links-to/

he bill would have declared all fetuses human beings (effectively eliminating abortions--the real goal) and would have required spending millions on fetuses that cannot survive no matter how much money is spent. When the declaration of the fetus as human being was removed, he voted for the bill to assist viable births."

Obama voted against the born alive legislation twice as State Senator and twice as a US Senator. Most Democrats, including Clinton and Boxer supported this humanitarian legislation.

Obama wants to give us socialized medicine. Just say no and save our Medicare!

Many Christian Americans have read the Bible and know how Satan works and gathers followers. Well now we have a true example. Republicans once were good Christian followers at most but 2000 Satan stepped in. It's been down hill from there. We thought God had forgiven us and came back which He did. But Satan put Rush Limbaugh a drug addicted and pervert as the Leader of the Republican Party. Most Republicans wouldn't have invited Rush to dinner 8 years ago he's so dirty but now he's their Leader. Hate, Sin and Evil is what Rush Limbaugh is and what's really scary is seeing some once good Law Makers bow to Rush. We read how Jesus was killed and good people followed Satan only to ask for forgiveness when they realized Jesus was the son of God. Even the Church Leaders were sucked in to the Bush Administration with money as the food. We see many today who are paid to cause chaos at the Health Care Meeting only one day these people will need that Plan themselves.

I WILL LISTEN TO RUSH ANYTIME, AT LEAST HIS FACT'S CAN BE CHECKED. AS FOR ALL OF YOU SO-CALLED CATHOLICS WHO GO TO CHURCH A FEW TIMES A YEAR AND KILL THE UNBORN AT WILL, YOU ARE THE FOLKS WITH A PROBLEM. AS FOR TILLER BEING SHOT DOWN I SAY GODS SPEED TO HELL BASTARD. SOME OF YOU CATHOLICS JUST MAKE ME SICK. THANK YOU.

it is not a sin to object to the socialist take over of our country.
the sin is your support of a government that has a whitehosue enemist list - denies the people of the right to participate, sends thugs out to the homes of people who oppose the government, THAT IS THE SIN.
and you obviously are a support of the goebbles propoganda machine.

"In Portsmouth, N.H., Obama will speak directly about his proposal to ban insurance companies from denying individuals coverage because of pre-existing conditions."

The idiot don't seem to understand that to ensure this, insurance companies would have to double the price of insurance. In other words, people would have to pay double of what they currently pay now.

The Joker strikes again.

sklein19 wrote: "Well thanks Fatel. You've made my point. The swastika in this image is in the place of the "O" for Obama. The image on this man's poster is a swastika (in place of "O") then "BAMA."

Your "point" was that the only swastikas you saw had a line through them. You were wrong as the picture shows.

sklein19 wrote: "Bush was routinely accused of being a Nazi; an Adolf Hitler by the left. This was a common theme."

The policies were what were being compared to the nazis. The torture, the lying and propaganda, the moral crusade, the dehumanizing of a supposed enemy. All were part of the nazi system and all were part of the Bush administration. But I heard no one compare Bush directly to Hitler. Cheney maybe, but not Bush. Most think he was a fool pushed into policies he did not understand. That's no Hitler.

sklein19 wrote: "I was a critic of Bush, but unlike Mr. Obama, I saw no effort by the Bush administration to bully and intimidate his opposition. Obama and his team are skilled at this sort of thing."

No evidence to bully or intimidate? Are you serious? Do you remember the poor civil servant who found out Medicare part D was going to cost $500B and not the $400B the Bush administration had said it would? Do you remember his job being threatened if he talked? Do you remember how the French were treated when they correctly surmised the iraq situation and were continued to be treated badly even after they were found to be correct? Do you remember the "my way of the highway" methods used to lockout democratic members of Congress?

You're memory is selective it seems. There is a lot that can be said about the various health plans that are both good and bad. None are the president's plan, Congress is working on them. But I'm only hearing a few of those valid complaints because there is so much noise from the teabaggers. They have shouted down valid dialog. That is the sad part of all of this, that even valid criticisms cannot get through the noise that is being orchestrated, and causing people to decide whether they should trust the rantings of people distorting the plans or those who they cannot hear. In the end the teabaggers will lose because they have ignored valid complaints and the lies they spread ruined any credibility they hoped to have.

No, not a sin, just a waste of time if you want understanding, light not heat. As the old lady from Maine said in explaining why she had never voted, "It just encourages them." Listening to Rush encourages him.

Please quit repeating the two lies found in Sklein19 post.
1. Tiller was a baby killer. Late term abortions are not elective procedures. They are not used as "birth control". They are only prescribed in dire circumstances, often when the fetus is no longer viable and continued pregnancy is life threatening. They are ghastly procedures, and few institutions will perform them. That is why patients were sent very long distances to receive them.
2. Obama never voted to deprive babies who had survived abortions medical care to save their life. Occasionally, a fetus will be alive after the abortion, but it is not viable--it has not developed enough to survive. The bill would have declared all fetuses human beings (effectively eliminating abortions--the real goal) and would have required spending millions on fetuses that cannot survive no matter how much money is spent. When the declaration of the fetus as human being was removed, he voted for the bill to assist viable births.

Define Racism.... Sounds like anything that offends democrats.

"So, it is not a sin to listen to Rush: it is only sinful to be a "dittohead" and believe in lies or contribute to the climate of hate by repeating his provocative commentary." That is like saying it is not a sin to go to a strip club every day so long as you don't engage in lustful thoughts or acts. I cannot believe that there is any regular listener of Rush who has not believed and repeated his provocative commentary. I don't condone Rush or any other person who deliberately distorts the facts and degrades people for his own personal benefit. One cannot listen to Rush on a regular basis unless they agree with what he is saying and enjoy the way he says it. Rush is making millions and knows that to continue to make millions he has to appeal to his "diddoheads". All churchgoers would be far more religious if they accepted what is being preached from the pulpit with the same vigor, enthusiasm and unquestioned faith as they accept what Rush puts forth.

I find it hysterical that a Catholic is condemning Rush Limbaugh for being racist, sexist and homophobic. Is there a more racist, sexist or homophobic organization in the world than the Catholic church?

I'm not sure I get it. "Just" listening as opposed to believing is obvious enough but I think you meant more and your conclusion is a little too subtle a distinction for me to swallow.

Limbaugh is an entertainer/clown first and foremost. He always has been. He's a top-forty guy who found a new schtick when top forty died. I don't think he believes a word of his screed--I don't think he cares at all: he says what gets listeners and pulls in the mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging demographic.

Are you saying excusing his behavior as "just" being a clown is like excusing the guy who tells dirty jokes? It's not good but it's not a "sin" either? And just overhearing a dirty joke means you're not required to say anything about it just tune it out.

I think that's a self-serving, arbitrary and cowardly distinction. Sounds to me like someone who doesn't have the courage to call a bully a bully. You may be able to tune it out, but a Jew or a woman or a black certainly will not. When does something cross the line and become sin? Are only those things you or I call sins worth actively fighting against? Who are you to say something is bad but not so bad it requires action?

What you call sin is a hair split too fine for me to see and sounds like an excuse. Saying it's not a sin, implies, however wrongly you may see it, that it is not unacceptable. By saying that listening to Limbaugh's -isms is not a sin you give tacit approval to, and ignore the active approval of those that tune him in.

If we replicate Rush a million times, it would be like a little America. Replicate Obama a million times then it would be like the leftist part of Bolivia.

I hope Obama starts a little business of his own so the world can see how idiotic this person is. It won't last a month Im sure. The guy don't seem to understand the word competition in business.

What a Joker.

The real sin as actually subscribing to this rag and funding the purveyors of personal destruction, pomposity, and the new NeoCommie creed. I bet Anthony takes Communion while at the same time advocating abortions of the pre-born. Yeah, and them he writes about someone else's short comings. Ah, it must feel good to be a Liberal and not have to worry about consistancy or integrity.....just publish the "Do as I say, not as I do" articles and get that check. Life is sweet!

I find it interesting how there are so many people with comments on Rush who have obviously never listened to his program.
It's sad that the only commentary they can provide is regurgitation from this half-wit psuedo clergyman or what others have said about Rush.
Posted by: xcannons | August 11, 2009 10:22 AM
===========================

SPEAK FOR YOURSELF..
All of us have listened to Limbaugh..

We need Radio Free America to counter his Propaganda Rhetoric..

Fei Hu

There is a reason why a fundamentalist is attracted to the hate based rantings of this former DJ. Religion is often used to validate and justify people's hatred of others. Now is hate a sin?

"Here's a picture for you with a swastica at a town hall meeting:

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/swastika%20guy%20and%20hammer%20and%20sickle%20guy.jpg

Posted by: Fate1 | August 11, 2009 10:12 AM

Well thanks Fatel. You've made my point. The swastika in this image is in the place of the "O" for Obama. The image on this man's poster is a swastika (in place of "O") then "BAMA."

Bush was routinely accused of being a Nazi; an Adolf Hitler by the left. This was a common theme.

I was a critic of Bush, but unlike Mr. Obama, I saw no effort by the Bush administration to bully and intimidate his opposition. Obama and his team are skilled at this sort of thing.

Sadly, he has changed. This is not the same Rush of 20 years ago, even 10 years ago.

the election was over and rush and his cohorts lost. The american people have spoken. They are irrelevant.

NAZI = a member of the National Socialist German Workers' party. So one guy held up a sign with the swastika and the word Omama next to it. Well, one good Socialist begets another, me thinks? But I see no mention of Dick Turban comparing our troops to Nazi's..nor John Kerry's stupid comments along the same lines. Seems i've stumbled into a fully operational liberal opium den here. Puff on Neocommies! The curtain closeth on your finest hour.

Ah yes, ditto-heads who have nothing productive to do during mid-day so they can listen to Rush (I stopped listening to him when my laughter at his absurdities made me a road hazard). At best he is an entertainer, at worst he is a hypocrite. He has no bona-fides that would cause me to take his opinions seriously. He is a creature of pop-culture who must keep running faster and faster just to keep his audience. My suggestion is to find something more productive to do during mid-day than listen to the ill-informed opinions of Rush Limbaugh.

The "plague on both their houses" notion doesn't hold up. I am not on the liberal fringe but I can see that abandoning the Geneva Conventions and insisting that "the gloves come off" makes a number of Bush administration officials including Mr. Rumsfeld culpable in condoning torture. Responsibility moves up the chain of command by clearly established precident and Mr. Rumsfeld is likely therefore to be guilty of complicity in torture. The sad part is that the rule of law has been so wrecked by the previous administration that politically or legally viable way to bring him to justice.

It's tough to daily fill air time...

Anyone knows on any good drama on television there is always the good guy and also the bad guy...

RUSH HAS TO MAKE "SOMEONE" or "SOMETHING" THE BAD GUY...And since he's a conservative and probably a racist, Preasident Obama and his team are good targets...

BUT, THE PROBLEM IS THIS --- There are many uneducated sick people in this country who believe everything Rush and his FOX NETWORK buddies say....

They may call themselves entertainers...But their audience hangs on every word they say...as the truth...

IT IS SAD TO SEE HOW FAR SOME INDIVIDUALS HAVE FALLEN FOR RATINGS!!!!

INDIVIDUALS WHO INCITE VIOLENCE USING THE MEDIA MAY NOT BE GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW, BUT A "HIGHER COURT," WE ALL FACE AFTER WE PASS MAY HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION!!!!

"I know Limbaugh, Beck and O'Riley expressed satisfaction with the recent murder of Dr. Tiller at his church by a radical anti-abortion activist. I know Glen Beck pantomimed murdering the speaker of the house. I know Gordon Liddy called for the assassination of Bill Clinton during the 90s. (A disturbed fellow who had spoken to Liddy on his show actually took pot-shots at the White House after this incident) Were you unaware of any of these?

Posted by: gimpi | August 11, 2009 9:54 AM

Do you have any reliable (news story or video) links to present as evidence. I do not watch Glenn Beck, nor do I listen to Libby. He's not syndicated here in my area. From what I have heard, Libby pushes the envelope on some violence-related issues but this is just hearsay on my part. I am a moderate-conservative so I doubt he would appeal to me.

I question your assertion that Limbaugh expressed satisfaction on the air over the killing of the abortionist. O'Reilly took the most heat because he is a pro-life Catholic who was critical of Tiller and his vile practice of late term abortion; he performed thousands of them. Even pro-abortion rights activists and Democratic Congressional leaders recoil at the brutality of these insensitive killings. I listened to O'Reilly tell his audience he took no pleasure in Tiller's death but he was in no way sorry for his condemnations of Tiller's abhorrent practice; his gruesome practice of child-killing. Pro-abortion rights activists alleged O'Reilly was guilty of incitement but he told it like it was. Tiller was a child-killer.

President Obama supports allowing aborted children (that survive the abortionist's knife) to die a slow death from lack of medical care. As Senator, he routinely voted against 'born-alive' legislation which was designed to protect children who survive botched abortions. By any standard of measure, Obama's position is extremist. Is it incitement to say so?

When I first read about Rush saying that he hopes Obama fails, I was not impressed.

But now, seeing the series of stupidity Obama has been doing, I think the guy could be much more intelligent than the Joker (Obama).

Why is it that people like fate1 who truly believes that their ancestor was an ape supports the Joker.

The same idiotic birds flock together.

Mr. Limbaugh is the most "dangerous" man in America. He embodies all that was "Joseph Goebbels" yet Limbaugh's very utterances will condemn him first. Apparently he is unaware that those with the most to lose will lose the most in the racial and economic conflagration he is instigating. Through his hateful myopia he is not aware that not only is he stirring his audience to hate, but also the other audience of haters of his audience.
The Rush Limbaughs',Hannitys', Becks' et al, should ponder seriously "Karma's" origins: Newton's 3d Law has its own life.
In the religious context know that "you reap what you sow".

I find it interesting how there are so many people with comments on Rush who have obviously never listened to his program.

It's sad that the only commentary they can provide is regurgitation from this half-wit psuedo clergyman or what others have said about Rush.

Anthony Stevens-Arroyo is a nobody who wants to be somebody....Dude-go work at McDonalds...get a life...

Of course it's not a sin to listen to Rush. It is a waste of time however. Putting money in Rush's pocket by doing business with his sponsors, now that may be a sin.

Anyone who listens to Rush had best be a critical thinker, and able to mitigate their own emotional reactions, because Rush will push the fear and hate buttons every chance he gets.

Rush is a profoundly underdeveloped human being. He's narcissistic, dishonest, greedy, hateful, clearly a great glutton, and deeply selfish. Why would any clear thinking intelligent person waste time listening to such a person, except possibly for research?

No, not a sin, just a waste of time if you want understanding, light not heat. As the old lady from Maine said in explaining why she had never voted, "It just encourages them." Listening to Rush encourages him.

sklein19wrote: "The only signs I saw with swastikas were those with a line through the image, i.e., we do not want national socialism here."

Here's a picture for you with a swastica at a town hall meeting:
http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/swastika%20guy%20and%20hammer%20and%20sickle%20guy.jpg

Mr.Limbaugh is a provocative entertainer, using current event issues and persons in the news as his base. He makes a handsome salary doing this. If you dislike what he says just turn off the radio. Comments and opinions about him are ridiculous.

Interesting Opinion piece... Is it a sin for the President to PROMISE that the Health Care Bill will still allow us to keep our private employer-based health insurance, when he knows damned well that, while technically a true promise, that the bill creates the conditions that will force everyone out of those private plans?

Or is it a sin that he makes such a PROMISE without actually knowing what's in the bill? One way or the other, the President is "Sinning", and anyone that follows a sinner... Sorry Mr. Stevens-Arroyo, try again...

By the way, is it a sin to hold Mother Mary higher than Jesus Christ?

Are Left-Wingers, like the author, not content with having nearly every voice on mainstream television under their domination, that they feel they must squash every attempt at dissent? Let's tally up politically affiliated TV channels:

NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News Channel - These are pretty much all the mainstream media channels. Guess how many of them lean Left and how many of them lean Right? ONLY Fox leans Right... Of course, none of them should be leaning in any direction, but the Leftists started it... (I know it's childish but so what!)

But I have a theory why Leftists cannot establish themselves on Radio. On TV, the commincation is one-way. Liberals can espouse their opinions and force it down our throats without any public feedback. However, on the radio, for a show to succeed, one must take callers and at least make an attempt to have their opinions heard. Failure to do that will make people change the dial. Conservative talk radio like Limbaugh, Hannity, Levine, etc. give people an outlet for exchange of ideas. They take numerous callers and will listen to dissent as well as support.

Liberals cannot defend their ideals in a conversation when they are held to the standard that is the US Constitution. So, naturally a Liberal talk radio show ends with a boring call-in group of syncophants. This is exactly what happened with the ONE Liberal talk radio show featuring Joe Palka (Yes, Sue Palka the weatherwoman on Fox 5's husband) back during the Clinton Administration. The show was a died with a resounding whimper...

Some here have commented on the "free speech" issue - that there seems to be some kind of perception that "free speech" is being muffled by the Obama administration - an accusation that reeks of schizophrenic/paranoia.....

Posted by: rikkirat | August 11, 2009 9:47 AM

I don't think it is paranoia at all. President Obama spent much of his adult life in community activism which by nature has been threatening and intimidating. Remember Reverend Jeremiah Wright was Mr. Obama's spiritual mentor of twenty-something years.

http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/2008/03/19/wright-says-that-dirty-word-israel/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfDeRY7IgcQ

Senator Obama and his campaign team threatened and intimidated political opponents (particulalry in the media) into silence. Rahm Emanuel is a Chicago thug, and as a Jew I might say, a poor example of Judaism and a poor reflection on his people. What was Obama doing sending out his SEIU union thugs to rough up peaceful protestors? What was that about?

Is buying a porn movie sinful if you do not watch it? Is it sinful to knowingly buy stolen merchandise or drugs but then not use them? Would it be sinful to buy CDs sold by Rush that have his "isms" on it? If so then it is also a sin to turn the dial to listen to him since that makes money for him just as purchasing any immoral product. The fact that you did not give him any of your money is not the point, he got money because you listened, so when you listen you support his sinfulness.

Also, keep in mind that Rush is not a reporter. He does not dig up things that are unknown and report on them. He takes what others dig up and repeats them with his own spin and "isms" attached. Any information coming from Rush can be found elsewhere. There is no "need" to put up with the sunfulness of Rush in order to hear something that cannot be gotten elsewhere. Just shut him off and he and his "isms" will vanish, making the world less sinful.

Limbaugh's a drug addict and a convicted drug criminal, so it's hard to understand those who see him as an authority on anything legitimate.

Was it a sin to listen to the NAZI propaganda in Germany?
Was the pope sinning when he turned his back to the holocaust?
What is a sin any way?
Is telling a lie in order to make millions of dollars a sin?

I don't think listening to Rush is a sin, it's just stupid.

Airwaves do belong to all of us, but our proxy, the federal government, sold them to corporate America long ago. Reinstituting the Fairness Doctrine would require a substantial investment to buy them back. Don't see it happeneing.

So we get a pure mercantilist competition in which folks like Mr. Limbaugh and Sean Hannity win out. They combine entertainment and demagoguery so well, few others can hope to compete.

Did he really pull a Hank the 2 and say "Who will rid us of this president (Obama)?" ("Who will rid us of this troublesome priest?") - I'd like some kind of citation on that. It's pretty disturbing

"'Extreme right' or 'extreme left" it would seem, can a matter of personal perspective. What is violent and apocalyptic about Limbaugh's rhetoric? Can you be more specific? What is a more coercive regime than that the current one is proving to be?"
Posted by sklein19

I know Limbaugh, Beck and O'Riley expressed satisfaction with the recent murder of Dr. Tiller at his church by a radical anti-abortion activist. I know Glen Beck pantomimed murdering the speaker of the house. I know Gordon Liddy called for the assisination of Bill Clinton during the 90s. (A disturbed fellow who had spoken to Liddy on his show actually took pot-shots at the White House after this incident) Were you unaware of any of these?

As to Obama's administration being a "coercive regime" what are you talking about? People keep tossing out bad fantasy-science-fiction plots about "FEMA camps for Christians, Death boards, outlawing the Bible, but remember, people, it's a fantasy. It's not real. During the 90s similar things were made up about the Clinton administration. They were a fantasy. They were made up for political gain. And, in the end, they got people so worked up, several of them attacked others. One of those attacks was the 2nd worse mass-murder in our history.

If you have real examples of abuses of power, please cite them. I sure haven't seen any.

"Recently, he compared Obama to Hitler. Father Coughlin was reined in by the Detroit Bishop, but I fear that the only way Limbaugh will be stopped is by his own excesses. And this may take a while."
Greg Bachelis
Posted by: gbachelis

I think this is a little out of proportion. I don't listen to Limbaugh religiously or for the three whole hours he is on the air. He dealt with this allegation yesterday. What he said yesterday was in response to Nancy Pelosi's statement last week, (her allegation) that protesters were coming to town hall meetings sporting swastikas, an allegation for which there appears to be no basis. The only signs I saw with swastikas were those with a line through the image, i.e., we do not want national socialism here.

Limbaugh said yesterday, he was in no way comparing Obama with Hitler but if there is a comparison to be made between what is happening on the right vs. the left and National Socialism, it is on the side of this administration (and the left) attempting to take control of (or nationalize) whole industries like the health care industry. Germany, Limbaugh maintained yesterday, had its own system of national health care under the Third Reich. The Third Reich - like the Obama administration and many Congressional Democrats appear to want - took control of private industry.

I can't wait to see where this all ends up and what those who say one hand free speech is still allowed in America, but bemoans this article. Makes no sense some of the arguments. America and the strength of our nation is suffering an identity crisis. Will we fall to the depths of the worst of us or rise to the heights of Jefferson, Franklin, King, and others? We pick and choose to satisfy our personal desires but that may not always be best for the Nation as a whole. So we debate, discuss, and work out solutions. Not holler and scream without reason or back and forth. One thing for sure Rush is Rich enough to never have to worry about the consequences of the advice he gives the lest fortunate of us. Telling people who don't have health care to not accept Govt. health care makes no sense. He's worth 100's of millions and has donated not one dime to the least of you. YOU'VE BEEN HAD!!

One does not have to agree with anyone to listen to them. How else is one to know thine enemy? Simple enough, but at the risk of being orthogonal to the discussion at hand, this simple rule of diplomacy seemed to elude George W. Bush.

Some here have commented on the "free speech" issue - that there seems to be some kind of perception that "free speech" is being muffled by the Obama administration - an accusation that reeks of schizophrenic/paranoia - why then is Limbaugh and his buddies in the GOP so gosh darn afraid of the reinstitution of the "Fairness Doctrine" on radio/TV airwaves (which by the way is SUPPOSED to belong to the people)? The right wing has always had the knack to only see things in black and white.

I am sick of the notion that what people like Rush say is just an entertainment, however misguided it may be, and hence his lies and distortions and incendiary remarks may be downplayed like that of an unruly child. It is more than that...what he does is diabolic and is no different from acts of terrorism. The GOP has in fact become the party of thugs and goons who would do anything, including resorting to violence, to achieve political ends. What is dangerous about this is that they have the support of our corrupt corporations and have the corporate owned media at their disposal, including the Washington Post.

The sin is to believe you and your false commentary. Please say ten Hail Mary and two Our Fathers but make sure there is an Act of Contrition somewhere in your plea.
If you don't know it:
O my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended you, and I detest
all my sins, because of Your just
punishments, but most of all because
they offend You, my God, who are
all-good and deserving of all my love.
I firmly resolve, with the help of
Your grace, to sin no more and to
avoid the near occasion of sin.

It may not be a sin to listen to Rush, but a daily diet of such trash causes one to wonder about the sanity of anyone who subjects himself to daily barrages from this ignomaniac.

When a fellow Christian tells me that he listens to Rush, I must admit that I form an opinion about this person that is less than flattering. I admit that I listen to Keith Olbermann, Rachael Maddow, Chris
Matthews, and Anderson Cooper. But when I want unbiased viewing, I always turn to C-SPAN. By and large, I like listening to Keith and Rachael because they make honest efforts to support their opinions and reporting with relevant video and transcripts. When they err, they apologize and make the corrections on air. Keith's "Comments" are usually on target.

The fact that Republicans and the rightwing zealots like Rush cannot handle the "birthers" shows the shallowness of their cause and their message. Tbey seem to make up "facts" out of thin air. They show a disdain for scientific evidence, actual facts that prove them wrong, and "educated" people. You might say that people like Rush and Glenn Beck play to the uneducated, woefully ignorant, and lazy intellectuals in our society. Thomas Jefferson had some words regarding an educated populace and the freedoms that we enjoy.

In our society, to hate government is really to hate ourselves. After all, government is of, by, and for the people. So when Rush goes off on one of his tirades, he is proving once again that he has very low self-esteem, which is only fitting a person who shows such disdain for the thoughts of others.

Let me give a situation where a counter argument supported by facts from the right was never offered. During the presidential campaign of 2008, there were several videos showing the nastiness of Republicans at rallies as they refered to Obama. Yet, the Republicans said that the same was true at Democratic rallies without so much as an audio or little snip of video showing such. I do know that Obama always stopped any such attempts at booing and so forth with ways to refocus his crowds on the issues that he cared most about. Remember Obama telling the people to save that evergy by going to vote. After many weeks of hateful speech at Republican rallies, McCain finally admitted that Obama would not do such and such. I can tell you in one second or less if someone has crossed a line and needs to be corrected. I do not need weeks to make this decision. Elected politicans hold a special place in our society. The least that they can do is be a postive model for the rest of us. Leadership has its inherent responsibilities.

If Rush is a leader for a group of zealots, he still has a responsibility to use established facts when formulating his opinions. What I see from Rush is a person who is all wrapped up in himself and making a ton of money.

Well then I am an unrepentant sinner.
Doesn’t the Catholic church consider Obama a sinner for supporting the most aggressive abortion policies of any president? Isn’t that a big deal for the Catholic church?

It is terribly unfortunate that this commentator chose to pose a moral question regarding this person. It is not immoral or "a sin" to listen to IT. IT is stupid.

Hey dunmbo. Limbaugh wasn't fired from ESPN for putting down McNabb. He was fired because the wimps at ESPN are politically correct cowards.
Limbaugh criticized the media for making McNabb out to be something he isn't...a top notch quarterback.
If you are going to criticize people, you ought to get your own facts straight.

Just more blathering by the Post against anyone who would dare speak ill of, or oppose, the annointed one.

Give me a break. Free speech is still allowed under our constitution until Obama and PelosiReid dictate it otherwise.

I have listened to rush. When i am driving through pennsylvannia i have 2 choices on my car radio, talk radio on AM and country music all over the FM range. But i hate country so i'll listen. Although he speaks quite quickly i have finally figured out what he does. He will take 1 indisputable fact and weave it for an hour into something totally opinion. And he continues to weave it until he can find a connection to get his ditto heads fired up. Take the fact that health care reform is up for debate and somehow he can turn that single fact into Obama wants to decide if you will live or die when you get too old or sick to be of a benifit to society. Then he states loudlt I dont know about you listeners but i dont want Obama telling me I am not going to get health care or not.....he is masterful at it. To bad he didnt turn his skills into something that could benefit mankind.

Rush is a fraud not a "truth teller". He claims to represent family values yet has been married three times; no kids; no church; arrested at least twice for illegal use of prescription drugs and he was a blatant draft dodger. For those ditto heads who will say no, no, in his own bio he states his own doctor (not a military doctor) gave him a note that he had a pilonital cyst. When I was on active duty at the Pentagon (and unlike these heros of the right I cheated to get in not to keep out) I was having discomfort sitting down. The Army doctor at Ft Belvoir said "you have a pilonital cyst. I'll fix that now". Did local surgery on me and I was back at work the next day. So much for getting out of the draft.
And for his "Hitler" comparisons: Hitler was a right wing extremist. Rush is a right wing extremist. Rush wants to ban abortions. Hitler banned abortions (makes him pro-life I suppose). Hitler campaigned on a return to traditional German family values; so did Rush; Hitler lied about his invasion of Poland and Bush lied about his invasion of Iraq supported by Rush.

Certainly there is a need for reform in our medical industry and more in our government. If this bill is so important why don't we do away with Earned Income Credit, Head Start, and WIC to help pay for it?. After all, it's so important that the members of Congress that support it won't every bother to read it.

Your comments are right on the mark. Limbaugh is not simply an entertainer. And his so-called logic is atrocious. The MSM continues to embrace him, and he has more listeners than ever. Recently, he compared Obama to Hitler. Father Coughlin was reined in by the Detroit Bishop, but I fear that the only way Limbaugh will be stopped is by his own excesses. And this may take a while.
Greg Bachelis
oldpoliticaljunkie.com

Gosh. This is truly revelatory. I never imagined those who listened to this fat, drug-addicted moron could actually type.

Rush Limbaugh seems like a bitter, angry and miserable person. He laughs at things that aren't funny, his rhetoric is not clever, he enjoys making fun of people. His multiple marriages and drug addiction likely indicate some sort of emotional unstability. Why would anyone take him seriously?

Having vanquished the Republicans onto the political sidelines, I suppose the left must turn to entertainers for a bogeyman.

profmoriarty,

The swastikas in the healthcare debate I saw was at a Texas "town hall." The video was also posted on u-tube. Senator Pelousi was correct on that. I have also seen "devil horns" drawn on pictures of congresspeople, a congressman hanged in effigy, and congresspeople escorted of meetings by police for their own saftey. There has been at least one death threat directed at a congressman. I support strong debate, but this is NOT debate. This is attack, coupled with outright lying. Then, to make matters worse, those pointing out the savagery and calling for civility are attacked.

Come on, people. We're better than this. We're just talking about getting our out-of-control health care system under control. This plan is aimed at getting the millions of uninsured and underinsured covered, and trying - over time - to get costs down. Are there problems in it, sure. It's not perfect. Nothing is, least of all our current system. But it's not "evil." There is no call for "death panels." There is no governmental payment for abortions. There is no plan to euthanize seniors or the seriously ill. We can discuss the serious issue of health care reform without making up imaginary threats. There's no excuse for what's going on. If you have questions, ask them, If you think you have a better idea, offer it. But, to quote Sibyl Faulty of the oid "Faulty Towers" TV show, "There is no excuse for rudeness." And to quote a former Alaska govenor, "Quit making stuff up."

The Democratic Regime gets incredibly upset over Rush, and for good reason. Nothing upsets the left and the Democratic Political Machine than widely distributed truthful discourse.

I don't always agree with Limbaugh, but any time I've listened to Rush, he has never said anything demeaning, out of line, or politically incorrect. The man just talks about issues in an unapologetic and honest manner.

Truth has always been the left wing's public enemy number 1.

I find most people that don't like Rush never listen to his show and are just made at his success in life. Rush has done a very good job exposing the Democrates and especially the Liberal Democrates for what they truely are in our political arena. Rush is a true American icon.

The liberal media fears and loathes Limbaugh and must smear him because they know his IDEAS are more based in fact, history and more popular with the American people than the the libs in their ivory towers attempting to always tell us how "big government" is "good" for us.

The utter arrogance coupled with the intellectual insecurity is a sight to behold.

Believing in Rush is a whole lot more than simply entrusting your soul to the devil's lieutenants. Rush feeds the phantasmagorical spirituality of minds that linger in the madness spectrum of cognizance. Rush gives them the fuel to boil, in passion, a smoldering racial, religious, egoistic and homophobic ghoulash (sic, or not to sic) of animus.

Which explains their fixation on guns. Guns give their owners a certain security; needless to say, a cosmic, maxed out virulent anti-sperm ejaculating penis.

It also helps them manage their homophobia. The gun gives them the tool to trump the penis of their envy, not to mention nightmare.

nychap44,

If you see a real connection between socialism and the National Socialist Gernman Workers Party you might want to take high school history again.

That said, there would seem to be a tactical similarity between the Nazi's selection of the word "socialist" in thier appeal-to-all party name and the argument that those supporting health care reform are socialist and NAZI's...

"do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men." Matt 6:2

Say no more....

The more vituperative and hysterical the moonbat attacks on Rush get, the more sensible and insightful Rush sounds.

Actually, this column and the responses make me think I have been missing something by not listening to Rush. I listened years ago but got bored. He must have gotten more vile in the intervening years.

It sounds like both he and Nancy Pelosi have an affinity for papering their foes with swastikas. Who has more power for evil, the Speaker or the entertainer?

Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer, and doesn't take himself quite as seriously as other folks do. He takes news feeds, and makes fun of liberals. That is about it. But he is very scrupulous about the news he presents. Either word for word, or if a rumor very clearly labels it as such.

He has the #1 rated talk show in America. He resonates with a LOT of people. As an attorney once said, if you want to know your jury, watch some daytime TV.

So I would suggest that no one take anyone else's word for what Rush Limbaugh is ... just go to his site or listen to the radio. Form your own opinion.

What surprises me most about this column is the suggestion that our fundamental right to free speech should be abridged. I don't like you and you should be shut down. As folks repeatedly point out, liberals are THE most intolerant group in our country.

i'm weary of these false equivalences, in this case, the comparing of criticism of cheney and his avowal of torture vs. lies about obama and the proposed health care reforms. pls use your noodle to discern the difference in 'essence'.

EdByronAdams writes:
"First of all that would require me to listen to his show, not something I wish to do. However, his arguments stand or fall upon their own. You rail against ad hominems and then, to use your own scoring system, you rate the messenger."
-----------------------------------------

I rate the messenger's delivery of the message.

An Ad Hominem is a logical error in which one uses the personal faults of the messenger to impugn the message. Here I am addressing the message itself - not so much its content, as its construction.

Remember, the thrust of the article is about just that - should a Christian ignore the medium in which a message sits? I think the answer is a resounding no. Any human message couched in terms of hatred goes against the very basis of Christian thought.

Stop with the Catholic concept stuff. How many so-called God fearing Catholics voted for Obama despite his open support for unlimited abortion? How many Catholics are cheering for Obama's health care reform despite providing, or not prohibited, using tax payer money for abortions? As smeone who was raised Catholic, I find the hypocrisy in Catholic mind boggling. They pick and choose what parts to believe and what parts not to. They rail agianst material goods, but always built gaudy churches and rectories. Either live it or shut up about it!

There is only one thing that drive Limbaugh and that is income derived from his readership and listener ratings. To rid ourselves of this plague, stop listening! His masters are capitalists and sooner or later will react. Limbaugh is like the "swine flu", avoid places of infection and wash your hands regularly. As a man, he is a waste of human skin. The bible ( I am not a bible person) might say, "Cast him out".

Good morning - I don't comment much on blogs, but I particularly despise Rush Limbaugh for the horrible person he is. It is my opinion, and just mine, that Rush Limbaugh is evil embodied in a human body. Psychiatrists and psychologists would probably differ with me but I truly believe that his diatribes are designed to anger anyone who listens while he demonizes the President and/or anyone else with whom he disagrees. We've all seen movies or read books where the devil's follower tries to lead God loving people down unrighteous paths to worship the Devil and do his bidding. That is what Rush Limbaugh does. He doesn't think or care about the outcomes of his heinous bellows - and if he does, then he's done the devil's work. I do believe in good and evil and I think Limbaugh is not only evil, I think his mission is to acquire as many followers as possible with his outrageous lies and misrepresentations. Plus, he's absolutely scared to death that a black man, our President Obama, will and already has accomplished good for all the people and because of that, Limbaugh will no longer be "at the top of the food chain because he's a white man." If we believe in God and believe that our deeds are rewarded, then those of us who work diligently to bring a good life to all people and people like Limbaugh will not only eventually lose in this life, he will pay for his deeds in the hereafter. Remember the millions of dollars he makes now will not accompany him in death.

When you listen to shows like Limbaugh's and there is no opposing view, one must think hard on why this person is trying sway my views. Are there people behind him, paying him to say things that are untrue? Is he being used by corporations or the government(operation mockingbird)? Do the people listening turn off the radio and stop and think about what has been said? Do they complain or just take it that because a person with the microphone says it its true? I hear some people saying some of the same things radio host say word for word. Some people call in asking for the words because they are unable to think of them on their own. American education and critical thinking hijacked by radio host with an agenda.

Limbaugh is a fat, racist pig who does not respect the Presidency, minorities, nor any American that believes in rights and the good will of all. Why isn't his show banned? All he spews out is hate and rhetoric. I pray that those who listen to him don't follow him and will get a clue and brain cells to dispell of his myths and useless conspiracy theories.

For all of those who defend the Ramblings of Rush, have any of you called and asked him how he would fix the health care system? It has to be obvious to everyone that the current health insurance system is not sustainable.

I work for one of the "Small Businesses" the politicians are fond of raising up. However, it can barely afford the $ 1,500.00 per month that it costs to provide my wife and I moderately good insurance coverage.

I would also like for someone to explain why socialism is considered EVIL. Like scientific principles, an ideology can not be evil. Only what a person does with, and yes preaches about, that ideology can be made evil. Perhaps a government controlled health care system is what we must have to assure everyone (even if you have insurance currently) access to health care. Like evolution has taught us, systems change and evolve to survive. And if we want the medical system to continue, it too must adapt and be adapted.

Mean while, back to the original subject, no matter if your leanings are left or right, the one sided talking heads are doing our Country and their listeners no favors. The equal and objective reporting and open minded debate of the issues that face us are our responsibility as citizens. If you consider yourself American, then it is your duty, to listen to, and to consider all opinions and to weigh, for yourself, what is right and what is not-so-right.

Clearly the challenges facing our nation, and the world as a whole, are solvable. What's the best course(s) of action is debatable and won't be arrived at over night, much less the first try.

As far as the religious aspect of the discussion, I was born and raised Christian. Despite my own decision to not believe all the teachings of the church, I acknowledge not only its status as a constitutional right of freedom, but also its benefit for those of faith. However, even under our constitution, the church and state are not to mix. That's for a reason. Yet, I challenge any politician out there to claim to be agnostic while running for public office.

President Obama, may not be perfect. His ideas may, or may not, be the right course for our country. However, I do believe that his intentions are good. Can Rush claim the same for his own?

I believe that listening to Limbaugh is a sin, also listening to Rachel Maddow, Keith Olbermann, Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity. Why? Because they present a rigid, black and white interpretation of experience, and because they project their inner brokenness onto others through the process of demonization.

Increasingly, I am drawn to the likes of Joe Scarborough, who is open to other points of view and who seems to be somewhat integrated psychologically and spiritually.

Rush is just another opinion at the end of the bar. He is the black hole, the person never chosen for the gym class volleyball team, the bitter sociopath who derides others without any constructive criticism, that's his "Rush". No wonder he has substance abuse problems. He has no academic skills thus insults any body who does. Ask his wives about his personality. If he wasn't the talk show host with millions of dollars he would be the latest man going postal. He is a sad person, and his followers are even sadder choosing him as their spiritual leader.

It is great to hear this freedom of speech slogan but is it really based on a level playing field? Why does the FCC harass Howard Stern but allow Rush Limbaugh to go free. Many of us believe that both say rather vulgar and outlandish things, so why is one savaged and the other not. Colud it just be that Howard offends across ethnic and religious lines but Rush reserves his vitriol for the minorities, and so it is ok.

"Is it a sin to listen to Rush? "

I suppose if you start with a premise that is utterly ridiculous, you can argue anything you want....

Rush is an ultra-rich entertainer that is leading the Republican Party.

and...

"We can also ignore issues about Rush's marriages or drug addition.... we should encourage forgiveness and understanding. "

Not until he does the same.

"I thank God that in Catholic America there are a growing number of us who tune out hate speech."

The numbers of Christian Americans that are tuning in are also rising...

Is it a sin to promote the notion that the pending HealthCare legislation includes the "Death panels.." knowing full well that blocking the legislation will lead to even more poor people being sick, uninsured, and dying, so that a few Americans can get even richer?

I believe it is and a lot of Christians are in on the lies and the sins.

I see the writer is perpetuating the McNabb myth. Rush Limbaugh was speaking about politically correct sportswriters. I watched the exchange on TV. Tom Jackson even acknowledged Rush may have had a point. It was only later, after Jackson was pressured by other forces (I guess like the imaginary hand behind tea parties and town hall meetings), this became an issue. “Let’s get Rush”, a mentality born of failure on the left, will twist truth and create myths. That, my friends, is a sin. As a reader of The Wanderer and New Oxford Review I believe I clearly understand my faith. It’s no surprise The Washington Post has a Unitarian wannabee spreading even more myths about the Roman faith.

Bill Colley
WGMD Radio
Rehoboth Bach, DE

Listening to RL is analogous to one hitting one's head with rubber hammer. It feels so good when you stop. But then, why would one want to hit his or her head with a hammer?

Rush is not a racists or a sexists. His comments on McNabb were racial but not racists. You obviously don't listen to him and to state something as fact when it isn't is pretty much lying. Rush is definitely not politically correct but he has more of a moral center than most of our public figures. To even ask the question if it is a sin to listen to him is ridicioulous. I think Jesus said judge not unless you also be judged. I cannot believe this is passed off as a religious column and I am a pastor. Thank God for Rush

I am perfectly capable of seperating the facts you will get very few other places with the bombastic opinion Rush supplies. You'd do better railing against the one sided opinion masquerading as news from the big 3, NPR and the Washington ComPost. Of all the people who would support Obamacare, a Catholic should be the last person. I can't blame you for not knowing this but this administration is stocked with card carrying people who are on record with approving of killing a fetus up to and including birth and NOT giving mediacl attention to a fetus that has survived the attempt on it's life and is now a baby, outside the womb and breathing. This is not myth or urban legend it is the actual voting record of this President as a state representative.
Stop worrying about an egomaniacal man who tells you things you need to hear because they are wrapped in fervor and actually listen to the calm, erudite words of a man selling you a pig in a poke.

Some of the comments here (and the article as well) are loaded with hate, misconceptions, lies, defamation and "isms" well beyond anything Limbaugh would say. Is it a sin to read them?

I love me some idiot Rush-heads trying to reconcile Christ's teachings with those of Rush Limbaugh.

Oh yeah, and no harking back to the Old Testament, unless you are a practicing Jew. Christ made it clear there was no more of that old-school fire and brimstone crap, and he spelled out clearly codes of Christian conduct. Compare them with the blatherings of Rush and his lemming-like followers and tell me where there is any overlap (besides your belt-lines). Really. Do it. Write it down and compare. Be honest with yourself. Then choose who you REALLY believe.

I am perfectly capable of seperating the facts you will get very few other places with the bombastic opinion Rush supplies. You'd do better railing against the one sided opinion masquerading as news from the big 3, NPR and the Washington ComPost. Of all the people who would support Obamacare, a Catholic should be the last person. I can't blame you for not knowing this but this administration is stocked with card carrying people who are on record with approving of killing a fetus up to and including birth and NOT giving mediacl attention to a fetus that has survived the attempt on it's life and is now a baby, outside the womb and breathing. This is not myth or urban legend it is the actual voting record of this President as a state representative.
Stop worrying about an egomaniacal man who tells you things you need to hear because they are wrapped in fervor and actually listen to the calm, erudite words of a man selling you a pig in a poke.

I agree, listening to RL is not a sin. In this country we have been bestowed with the right to say what we want, you know, the First Amendment. Where the concern should be levied, is how we, each of us, chooses to react to what he says.

Very simply, if RL told you to jump off the bridge because he believes that is the best way for you to help him make his points--are you going to do it? Whatever has happened to good old common sense and thinking for yourself once in a while?

Limbaugh is basically a "shock jock". Like Howard Stern he makes a good living saying outlandish things. There is no sin in being entertained by him. However, to grant him political power is folly.

Rush is an American icon. A self-made man that pursued the American Dream and achieved it.

GMHELLER:
Clearly he has listened to Rush. The fact that you make this claim with no examples lends to fact that you are probably a Dittohead! Do you Dittoheads EVER realize what you are calling yourselves and the box you are trapping your thoughts in? What is the matter with people trying to get along. Does it threaten your since of ignorance?

No matter what you want to believe, Rush Limpnuts is nothing but a cowardly bully. He needs to be dealt with accordingly, and those who hang in his "gang" can be described as his easily manipulated minions. When bullies are encountered, you have some choices. Either try to walk away and ignore him, or confront the bully and knock him down. The adolescent behavior exhibited by Rush and his minions is simply a matter of poor education and ignorance. Let's teach them how to respect other people's values and beliefs.

Rush is a cancer. The Fairness Doctrine is chemo.

iamweaver wrote:

For all those defending Mr. Limbaugh - here's a challenge for you:

Whether you agree with his VIEWS or not, take a pencil. Begin marking off the number of times that he uses an emotionally-laden, derogatory adjective in one column. Mark off every time that he makes a derogatory remark about someone (not their ideas) in another column.

_________________________________

First of all that would require me to listen to his show, not something I wish to do. However, his arguments stand or fall upon their own. You rail against ad hominems and then, to use your own scoring system, you rate the messenger.

The "sin" isn't in the listening. It becomes sinful if one commits an act of sin. Does Rush, Hannity or Beck, who btw, I've stopped tuning in, have what it takes to fuel a civil war, or does one with any sense deem them as purely entertainment; I view it as the latter. Their programs are so full of frightening scenarios and dooms-day predictions, that I no longer can tolerate their rantings. The infamous three (although there are more) are of the same mold. Funny, though, how their freedom of speech is upheld and unrestricted, while others with a much smaller audience dare to utter a "no-no", are immediately pounced upon by the media until they're forced to capitulate and apologize to the world.

Anthony and Lib's,
You seam to be quite emotional on this topic. Rush must be telling the truth about you.

Well, as Rush has trained us so well to do, we will simply and collectively dismiss Arroyo as a "liberal" and a "socialist"

That will dismiss him for good in our little pea brains. So be it. Amern

EdByronAdams writes:
"Is it a sin to repeat any political point made by Sen. Ted Kennedy because he got away with deadly negligence?

The argument that any political argument can be termed a sin because of the agent arguing the point is novel, and stupid."

----------------------------------------

This is why the author pointed out specifically that we should be avoiding Ad Hominems. He is talking about the message, not the messenger.

For all those defending Mr. Limbaugh - here's a challenge for you:

Whether you agree with his VIEWS or not, take a pencil. Begin marking off the number of times that he uses an emotionally-laden, derogatory adjective in one column. Mark off every time that he makes a derogatory remark about someone (not their ideas) in another column.

Now, after listening to one show, total the columns - then come back to me and tell me that this show, whether right or wrong, is done in a fashion that supports Christian values.

The Right Wing Authoritarian, of which Rush is a prime example, lives in an uninformed, delusional space, cocksure in his evaluations of every situation. You cannot argue with Rush, because Rush doesn't have the power to see both sides of an argument, just for the sake of argument. He is superior to all men and, of course, women. If you don't agree with him then he will bully you until you do. He claims you are being unfair to him when you take a tape recorded statement that he has made and demonstrate clearly to him that what he said is factually wrong. Right Wing Authoritarians love to submit to Authority. That's why Rush is very successful among other Right Wing Authoritarians: he's their champion. They need only switch off their minds and repeat whatever Rush is saying. Our hired mechanic, B. H. Obama, is trying to fix what's broke in America's health-care delivery system. Rush claims there's nothing wrong with the current system and that Obama plans to do awful things should Obama get control of health-care. Evidence? Doesn't need any.

Limbaugh,Beck,Hannity,and all the other hate mongers manipulate the dolts that listen to them.These idiots will point to something the talking heads say is true and think that justifies all the lies they espouse.The birthers,deathers,Palinites etc.are devoid of reality. Their idealogy trumps truth.They are evil and impossible to argue with since they are incapable of rational thought. As H.L. Mencken said,"No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people!"

"Whether it is the liberal fringe beating up on former vice president Dick Cheney as torturer-in-chief, or the right wing nuts saying that Obama wants "to kill Granny..."

Sir, you claim equivalence where no equivalence exists.

In case you haven't been paying attention, Dick Cheney did advocate and defend torture. That's by his own public admission. This is a FACT.

NEVER has Obama wanted to kill Granny. That's not fact, that's nonsense. That's a LIE.

How dare you strike such a comparison?

You may deem listening to these inflammatory media personalities as moral; what passes for morality among Christians often resembles nothing Jesus taught, so that's not a surprise.

But if one permits their intelligence to be insulted day in and day out by the lies, the innuendo, and the bigotry, well, that might not be moral, but it is a sure sign of mental illness.

When you speak of sins, do you forgive those members of your religion who molest small children while conviently turning your back on your bishops who condone this behavior. Rush shouldn't be a major part of your "sins" scheme. You need to focus on the villians in your midst. Stick to religious themes.

It is a sin to allow you to write your left wing drivel and put it into print and somehow connect it to the Catholic religion. I am I Catholic and I like to listen to Rush. He has a way of pointing things out about what people say and do that actually clarifies. Listen some time.
As far as the name calling goes, I do not think the Catholic Church is in any position to criticize anyone considering the proven immoral behavior of many of their leaders.

Also, for those of you who get upset when there is mention of the parallels between what Obama is doing now and what was done in Germany prior to World War II by the National Socialist German Workers' Party just remember that socialism is the connection.

I'm no Rush aplogizer, but obviously this guy has never listened to Rush (he might have heard him, but never listened). The Donovan McNabb comment proved that.

Is it a sin to repeat any political point made by Sen. Ted Kennedy because he got away with deadly negligence?

The argument that any political argument can be termed a sin because of the agent arguing the point is novel, and stupid.

Unfortunately, many in Rush's audience are closet racists who are uncomfortable with the changing demographics of this country, still cannot accept the fact that an Africa-Amerian is President of the United States, and therefore seek refuge in the share poison that he delivers them daily.

Yes it is a sin to be wasteful and listen to an overweight, uneducated drug addict assuming a leadership role in our developed society.We have many Nobel laureates to listen to not to mention thousands of other professors and scientists.

The fact that there are so many responses filled with vile and hatred only proves the author of this column correct.

It is false to think that those who listen to Limbaugh's insane and vindictive ramblings are not affected by the evil he represents. If it's not a sin to subject yourself to that kind of expression, would it also not be a sin to sit in witness of genocide, so long as you were only doing it for entertainment or educational purposes? I must admit that I sometimes tune into FOX for a few minutes at a time just to hear what foolishness and outright lies the radical right is espousing on a particular subject, but I feel that falls under the "know your enemy" category. And it is they who have defined themselves as my enemy, not visa versa. When you subject yourself to evil you create an opening into your psyche that can and will be exploited by those who engage in this particular form of brainwashing. So you can say it's not a sin if you like, but I seem to remember reading somewhere that it is a sin to bear false witness against your neighbor. To relegate such acts to harmless entertainment only lends it an aire of legitimacy which it doesn't deserve and falsely diminishes the crime, or sin, that it represents.

"The moral issue about Limbaugh regards his "-isms": racism and sexism, as well as homophobia and prevarication."

You cite no examples. Bad journalism.

What about Obama's nice little quote, "White Folk's Greed Runs a World In Need"?

What about Obama's association with the racist Rev. Wright for twenty years?

Are you sinful for supporting Obama since he displays racist tendencies?

"...he was fired from ESPN for his racist put-down of Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb." How disingenuous. If you're gonna try and blast someone, provide full context so people can see for themselves.

Wow, if you're gonna distort this for your own purposes, I can only imagine what else in the this "article" is distorted for your purposes. His ESPN comment was actually directed at the MEDIA (just like you), rather than actually at McNabb. His comment was that the media became socially invested in McNabb's success, and therefore was going to make sure he was covered well, no matter what happened. Just like Obama.

His comment was, "I think what we've had here is a little social concern in the NFL. The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well. There is a little hope invested in McNabb, and he got a lot of credit for the performance of this team that he didn't deserve. The defense carried this team."

"We can also ignore issues about Rush's marriages or drug addition."

Here's a nice little hand grenade to throw into the crowd and then run away. What do either of these issues have to due with listening him or whether it's "sinful" to do so? Nice personal attack!

....And what about Obama's "little" cocaine problem? So aren't you sinful for supporting him as a candidate then?

it appears Mr. Sevens-Arroyo is a liberal...
while some liberal doctrine is in line with the church, abortion and gay rights(those rights which created the Priest pedophille problem) are not consistent with the thinking of the church...
like I wrote earlier...
he should stick with going after obama on abortion and sodomy than freedom of speech...

You buy into the foolish leftwing memes about Rush Limbaugh. You do no original research. 10% of the adult population of this country listens to him. He is one of the most influential political figures in this country. He deserves your serious thought.

Here's a challenge. Listen to Limbaugh for a month. Then write again. I bet your opinion will change.

It's no sin to listen to Rush Limbaugh but, believing him is? Sounds like you're describing journalists. Never let the facts get in the way of a good story. Your's is no exception. I could point out several lies in your story, like the McNabb reference, but why bother. You people never change. It's enough to be aware and read accordingly.

"Limbaugh is far from perfect. But he does heroically speak the truth..."

You've got a pretty twisted definition of "truth".

"He is exaggerating the effects of the disease. He's moving all around and shaking and it's purely an act... This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox."

"There is no conclusive proof that nicotine's addictive... And the same thing with cigarettes causing emphysema, lung cancer, heart disease."

"if you really dig deep, you might find some Clinton PAC money, laundered three or four different ways, found its way to the Swift Vets."

Are you one of the fair-minded people who respect those who use their bully pulpit for race baiting?

"Columbus saved the Indians from themselves."

To a black caller: "Take that bone out of your nose and call me back."

"Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream."

Your defense of this garbage speaks volumes.

The level of ignorance and stupidity being displayed here by many is stunning. The "state" is the greatest evil in the history of humanity, and we are facing perhaps the most dangerous government of all. It makes no difference the color of the uniform, red or blue, the politicians wear. They're all enemies of freedom, but people simply don't get it. The game is divide and conquer, and the present administration is hell-bent on doing just that. I couldn't stand Limbaugh when he was an apologist for the warmongers, and I'm no "dittohead" now. However, Limbaugh is an excellent analyst and is doing a good job of pointing out the evils of the present administration. We must throw out all politicians and reduce the state to near zero if we want to be free. Sadly, we are moving toward enslavement.

The only people that love Rush and Sean Hannity are the american haters. Sean hides behind Fox News and Rush can say anything about woman, politics, etc. is because he is Rush and nobody calls him out. People are afraid of him. He is like the _____________, just don't say anything bad about him or else you will pay.

I agree: and now 'go after' Glenn Beck- another racist prevaricator. What is it with these angry, young white guys who I'm sure are his fan base?

Since there is no such thing as "sin. A better question would be, Does Rush Limbaugh have a reprobate mind? The answer is, YES!

BIRVIN9999 wrote:

"Nancy Pelosi called town hall attendees "Nazis" last week. Is she better?"

------------------------------

She did not call them "Nazis". She said that they carry swastikas to the town meetings which is true. They carry swastikas with healthcare reform written all over them. I think this your comment is indicative of what you guys are all about: lies and shifting blame.

Would you like us better if we believed Keef Olbermann or Chrissy Matthews? You people in the lamestream media need to come up with some new talking points.
Posted by: tcdif

About the only enjoyable part of interacting with The Base is how easy it is to tell when you've scored your point. The above is the textbook example of their standard reaction - attempt to justify their bad behavior by creating a false equivalence with some ideological opponent, toss in some insults in a weak attempt to engage the emotions so the topic is dragged off track and thus they don't have to actually answer with specifics but can continue to spout the party-line rhetoric, and finally project their own failings onto others. Classic! Well done tcdif and thanks for providing this opportunity.

Would you care to address the original article now or should we just take as answered that you got nothin'?

Pakistan has a very well developed Propaganda Machine, so have Republicans in USA.
The media has become a Brain Washing Machine full of lies, deceptions etc.
Is that what Journalism stands for - DON'T TRUST US.
RIP - credibility.

Mr. Limbaugh is far from perfect. But he does heroically speak the truth -- uncomfortable and inconvenient truths -- to the power of dominant institutions, including the media and academia, that are entirely consumed by extreme ultra-leftist (and, it must be said, anti-Christian) ideology. For putting the first few cracks in the media's hard left hegemony, he has earned the respect of all fair-minded people, whether they agree with him or not.

In any event, it is unjust and absurd to single him out for criticism over, say, the bigots and lunatics who inhabit the New York Times's op-ed pages, or MSNBC.

Rush is incapable of a ignoble thought of his own!
But none the less he has sold a lot of sugar water, mattress's, vacuum cleaners, and radio's and that is why he gets big money....

Rush Limbaugh is a purveyor of hate porn. Listening to him is like watching porn. If watching is OK, just doing is a sin, then I guess listening to him is not a sin, but I wouldn't want my mom to know about it.

Thank you for a Traditional Christian Editorial ...

this column is normally a sad mouthpiece of 'new-age Christians' that have re-written what "American Values" are ...

Thanks for expressing real Christian values.

I can not believe that some of the people commenting here actually are defending Rush Limbaugh and think that some of what he says is fact. Rush Limbaugh is indefensible. His shows are filled with inaccurracies. He is a racist, a homophobe, and much of his so-called commentary is anti-women. He panders and appeals to the worst in all who listen to him. Those are the facts. And I pity anyone who actually admits to listening to this piece of scum. They should be ashamed, but then, often those who are mentally challenged (and all Rush Limbaugh listeners are mentally challenged) really do not feel shame, do they?

I have listened to Rush's show. I understand the gut level appeal that he has to his audience. I think the closest way to describe this is when your team is losing by two scores but the game isn't over yet. He is the cheerleader in cheif for a segment of america that is being forced to change with the times and will only do so kicking and screaming rationally or irrationally.

That's humanity, not a sin. Opposing the ignorant by getting on the other side and turning up the volume just emboldens them.

Keith Olberman and Rush may be entertaining but unfortunately contribute to polarization as does this article.

what I find shamefull is that you choose to follow the party line and attack Rush instead of writing about obama and his extreme support of abortion which is the sin your column should address...
you choose to attack freedom of speech instead of freedom to live...
how sad...

The only person greater than Rush Limbaugh in today's America is Dick Cheney. Anyone who cannot understand this is beyond hope.

Vacuous Americans like Limbaugh is one the reasons why American is so heavily indebted to China to finance its consumption. Whilst China is busy constructing modern infrastructure and securing contracts all over the world, this daft mass of a man is busy spewing hate under the guise of entertainment. America needs to rediscover science once again in order to consign his type onto the scrap heap of irrelevance.

Nancy Pelosi called town hall attendees "Nazis" last week. Is she better?

"It's impossible to charge him with hate speech or venom unless you've never listened to him."

Very telling how warped the minds are here. I have listened to him and he is full of hate-speech. But wait a minute, true Nazi's didn't think Goebbels was hateful either.

I swear to God these right-wingnuts are speaking blackwhite straight from the INGSOC play book. I wonder if they have telescreens in their house.

Wow! Lots of mistakes here. Catholics are not free to join any political party; that's why Pius XI pointed out that "No one can be, at the same time, a sincere Catholic and a true socialist." It's why Leo XIII wrote Rerum Novarum. Socialism is inherently sinful, and it cannot be made right. Also, check Rush's accuracy rating: better than 98 percent. Like it or not, what he says is accurate. It's impossible to charge him with hate speech or venom unless you've never listened to him.

"... the liberal fringe beating up on former vice president Dick Cheney as torturer-in-chief, or the right wing nuts saying that Obama wants "to kill Granny," we Catholics have a responsibility to respect the humanity of all persons made in the image and likeness of God."

I was okay with the article until I got to the above. I am sorry, Dick Cheney is the scum of the earth, he is far worse the Rush (who is a festering sore on the earth). Rush is not personally responsible for murder as Cheney is. Dick Cheney and George Bush deserve to rot in hell for the misery they have inflicted on this country and Iraq. They are bad, bad men; and, if there is a fair God in heaven they will suffer for all eternity.

Rush and his ilk have given their audiences permission to hate so long as they share one core belief.

Too many broad generalities. It would be best for this writer's argument to cite more specific examples of what he regards as Limbaugh's sexism, racism, etc. I think he can, but in this column he gives one concrete example. As a result it's just one more general criticsm of Limbaugh, and one conservatives can simply brush aside. Weak.

And if getting hooked on drugs is a sin, then listening to Limbugh is a sin.

Posted by: zebra4 | August 10, 2009 6:06 PM

----
Are you a sinner for voting and listening to President Obama? He admits to using cocain. If you answer no, then you should not judge others for the same actions you take yourself.
Hypocrit.

Limbaugh is evil. So is religion.
Posted by: GeorgHerbet | August 11, 2009 5:16 AM
Report Offensive Comment
---
Your right Limbaugh is evil, but not religion. Strange don't you think num nuts that the beleivers(no matter what religion) out number the non beleivers. Could it be fright on your part that you know your in the wrong? Could it be fright on your part that if the world would end tomorrow, and the beleivers would asend to heaven, you wouldn't. You would be alone on a dieing planet?

Me, I'm not a bible thumper. I don't care if you beleive or not. I also don't care if you live or die. I hope it's death, and a painful one at that. But, who am I to judge idiots.

Would you like us better if we believed Keef Olbermann or Chrissy Matthews? You people in the lamestream media need to come up with some new talking points.

Rush speaks the truth, most of the time; it's only sad that the same can't be said about our President.

Yeah, Catholics love everyone, alright. Especially little boys- they get VERY SPECIAL LOVE from your Priesthood, don't they?

Yonkers, New York
11 August 2009

Obviously relying on the moral teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, Mr. Stevens-Arroyo declares that it is not a "sin" to listen to Rush Limbaugh.

Some 20 million Americans who reportedly listen to Rush probably agree with Mr. Steven-Arroyo's declaration.

Neither, I daresay, is it improper or illegal from an ethical or statutory perspective to listen to the rantings of Rush Limbaugh--or, for that matter, to the rantings of Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter and others of their ilk.

America is a free country, isn't it? People like Rush are free to say what they feel like saying, no matter how abusive or venomous, because they have the protection of the First Amendment.

Mariano Patalinjug

Say what you will about Rush, but he is a brilliant analyst, does his homework, and brings many things that would not otherwise be known to his 20 million daily listeners. Pelosi ,Reid et al would never dare to go on his show as they would be ripped to shreds by their own words and know it.

Is Anthony Stevens-Arroyo joking?
It can't help but be noticed that based on Stevens-Arroyo's 'review' of Rush Limbaugh, it doesn't sound as though Stevens-Arroyo has ever actually listened to Limbaugh for even a single three-hour show, let alone on any extended basis.
If he did, Stevens-Arroyo could not possibly in good Catholic (or any other religion's) conscience put forward ANY of the downright nasty -- and groundless -- criticisms he apparently feels obligated to lob Limbaugh's way.
Even the specific examples Stevens-Arroyo uses allegedly to illustrate his points are excerpted totally out of context, a fact which anyone who actually listens to Limbaugh on any regular basis would certainly know.
Likewise, had Stevens-Arroyo bothered to review any of the easily accessible transcripts of Limbaugh's shows, he also would know it.
But this Stevens-Arroyo has clearly NOT done.
The irony here is that Stevens-Arroyo, by not bothering actually to listen to the subject of his thousand-word rant, and by not deigning to read actual transcripts, merely proves that he is just one more hit-and-run Liberal-media hack, the type which Limbaugh has been excoriating successfully, at great profit, and to the delight of thinking audiences for more than two decades.
Bottom line: This is yet another hit piece based not on facts, but on the Liberal-Main-Stream-Media-held assumptions of a lazy reviewer who simply has not bothered to do his homework.
One additional -- and especially significant -- point:
The timing of this religion-cast piece in The Washington Post (entitled 'On Faith': 'Catholic America - A closer look at church, culture and change') is suspect, especially given the current fierce national debate over the proposed (in Limbaugh-speak) government-run 'ObamaCare', government-run 'Carbon Tax and Trade', and the already passed government-run 'Porkulus' legislation.
Regardless of The Post's attempt to bring God into the mix, Rush Limbaugh's large radio audience is plainly listening to the man at the 'golden EIB microphone', and that is what is having a large reverberating effect in the halls -- and at the switchboard -- of Congress.

Limbaugh is evil. So is religion.

Sometimes I think that conservatives are right. And that religion is about hate, violence and entitlement.

These programs are about ratings first, last, and always and are unburdened by any sense of shame or hypocrisy. Sensationalism sells.

On the same night ultra-conservative FOX News commentators are unloading their usual fare, the network is broadcasting a Britney Spears lifetime achievement award, honoring a man whose primary achievement is wearing a dress, and promoting the saga of Octomom.

Rush and others are shredding the social fabric of the country apart for no greater principle than attracting advertising revenue.

This man has clearly never listened to Rush Limbaugh's actual show, just repeated the stale and erroneous opinions of others.

Rush seems to be obsessed with references to being anally penetrated. This is no doubt a consequence of spending so much time with his head up his ass -- when he occasionally comes up for air, he likes to have something else fill the void.

It also explains why he sees the world through sh*t-colored glasses.

What about abortion and sodomy? Are they sins? Would it be a sin to listen to Obama? Obama is pro-abortion and pro-homosexual rights, so what is your opinion on that? What a waste of time to read this piece. I'm sorry I did.

Catholics are the biggest hypocrites on the planet.

Antony Arroyo wrote "it is only sinful to be a "dittohead" and believe in lies "

Catholocism is full of lies and yet this idiot doesn't have a clue.

Whether it is Rush or any number of 'opinion staters', they never get back to the basics of explaining their basic assumptions and the evidence they are using. They seldom even define the words they are using! 'Abortion is killing babies' or 'national health care is socialism' are examples of using words in a sense that is clearly beyond the academic definitions of 'baby' and 'socialism'.It seems that the book on values (Book 4) of the popular free ebook series "And Gulliver Returns" (http://andgulliverreturns.info) should be required reading.

What a crock. Mr. Stevens-Arroyo column should be titled "Holier than Thou."

Rush and the idiot who wrote this piece are both nut jobs.

I really wish the Post would find someone who can actually articulate authentic Catholic doctrine. Mr. Stevens-Arroyo demonstrates again and again that he knows just enough about Catholicism to be dangerous but not informative. If he understood Catholic moral teaching at all (and presumably he has more to go on than just his Jesuit prep school education here), he wouldn't be so quick to pronounce another person's actions as "sinful". The most any outside observer can do is judge whether an action is morally licit or illicit. Whether or not a person has actually sinned is a matter for that person's own conscience and the man upstairs to decide (and I don't mean Mr. Stevens-Arroyo). I suspect the distinction between objective moral evil and subjective culpability is one that Mr. Stevens-Arroyo doesn't understand, but it is a crucial one. So I ask again, as many other have in this space, could we get a real Catholic apologist who knows something about the Church? Or stop referring to this column as "Catholic America"? It's embarrassing...

OK, you confuse me. I see exactly one mention of Mr. Limbaugh's addiction in a throw-away one liner on this forum that added nothing to the actual discussion. To what are you referring?

Posted by: iamweaver

All I am saying is that I do not believe the fact that Limbaugh became addicted to prescription drugs (for a time) due to chronic back pain is relevant to this discussion. Why did Anthony M. Stevens-Arroyo make it appear he is a drug addict? What's the point?

iamweaver, you wrote: "Perhaps the author should have been more generic, and said that focusing on his personal life is irrelevant, or some such."

Yes. That would have been much better.

"But in any case, it's a point that you want to make early, while you are defining your target area, so to speak."

I'm not sure what my target area is. I pointed out earlier, Limbaugh's credibility went down in my estimation due to what I consider 'blind' partisanship during the two terms of the Bush administration. Limbaugh wasn't the only one. There was Sean Hannity and others. Most of these accusations in this opinion piece, I believe, are questionable. Is Limbaugh a racist, a sexist, a 'homophobe', etc.? These questions have been much debated, often unconvincingly in my view. I cannot say that he is any of these things. I am a Jew. I've been listening to the man on and off over the years. Is Limbaugh sensitive to Israel's security concerns? Not really. He was silent when Bush exerted immoral pressure. Only now that Obama is president has he found his voice. Is he an anti-Semite or a bigot? I don't think so.

SKlein19 writes:
"Since his cheap shot, much has been made - on this forum - of Limbaugh's (I believe former) addiction to prescription drugs due to chronic back pain. This is Christian love?"
----------------------------------

OK, you confuse me. I see exactly one mention of Mr. Limbaugh's addiction in a throw-away one liner on this forum that added nothing to the actual discussion. To what are you referring?

For you Catholic Ditto heads: go to confession quickly. If not the following applies to you also.

For you non-Catholic Ditto heads: you and your beloved Limbaugh will be soon be serving a real Authoritarian - in Hell.

St. Michael the Arch Angel, thrust in to Hell Satan and all the evil ones (Limbaugh & Ditto heads) who prowl the face of the earth for the ruin of man's soul. Amen.

SKlein19, I assumed the author brings them up precisely to counter hypocrisy. In some ways, it's a "lose-lose" situation.

Perhaps the author should have been more generic, and said that focusing on his personal life is irrelevant, or some such. But in any case, it's a point that you want to make early, while you are defining your target area, so to speak.

"Rush, Fox and the extreme right do not respect the results of the 2008 elections; their increasingly violent and apocalyptic rhetoric, and relentless strings of outrageous lies are all the hallmarks of coercive regimes...."

Posted by: tboyer33

"Extreme right" or "extreme left" it would seem, can a matter of personal perspective. What is violent and apocalyptic about Limbaugh's rhetoric? Can you be more specific? What is a more coercive regime than that the current one is proving to be?

"Mr. Stevens-Arroyo wrote: "We can also ignore issues about Rush's marriages or drug addition."

I said I think this is a cheap shot."

You wrote: "I disagree. I think that the author is completely correct to make a *point* of reminding his audience to avoid any Ad Hominems. All of us have personal failings."

Come on. It is similar to a "back-handed compliment." He makes these points early on in his piece, only to (piously?) say we can ignore them. If we should ignore them, why did he bring them to the fore in the first place? One can argue, divorce is inherently sinful, yet I can think of men who have never divorced that I would not give the time of day to. I am guessing Mr. Stevens-Arroyo is a Christian. Since his cheap shot, much has been made - on this forum - of Limbaugh's (I believe former) addiction to prescription drugs due to chronic back pain. This is Christian love?

Limbaugh is more than just coarse and misleading. He is a very clever propagandist for a virulent extremism that is the greatest threat today to American freedom and democracy. Rush, Fox and the extreme right do not respect the results of the 2008 elections; their increasingly violent and apocalyptic rhetoric, and relentless strings of outrageous lies are all the hallmarks of coercive regimes. Let's hope they don't regain power any time soon.

"Mr. Sevens-Arroyo wrote: "We can also ignore issues about Rush's marriages or drug addition."

I think this is a cheap shot."
---------------------------------

I disagree. I think that the author is completely correct to make a *point* of reminding his audience to avoid any Ad Hominems. All of us have personal failings.

Wow! That's a new one... as long as watching porn is not a sin and just acting out on it is... then I guess listening to a bile laden, untruthful, rabble-rouser isn't...

If only Mr. Limbaugh would use very colorful language maybe folks will see him for what he is...

Columnists know that any article featuring Rush Limbaugh, and accompanied by a photo of his bloated, stupid face is good for a couple of hundred comments regardless what it says.

Actually, the undeniable fact that he has a large following says more about America than it does about Mr. Limbaugh, a loud, uninformed blowhard who, not incidentally, is also a confessed drug addict. There's nothing wrong with permitting him a forum; any progressive democratic country would likely do so. However, in most of those other countries he would be treated as an amusing fool, an over-the-top clown, which he is. Only in America would he attract a coterie of dazed, angry moonies who hang on his every squeal.

Keep it up, Rush - you're making your country an object of mockery.

"Listening to Madame Pelousi state that people coming to the town hall meetings are "carrying swastikas" (you can find the tape on youtube) without offering any proof of such is yet another example..."
-------------------------------

Quite true. Diatribes like this on either side (as mentioned by Anthony Stevens-Arroyo) aren't at all helpful. But there is, in my mind at least, a difference between listening to someone who occasionally says stupid or hurtful things, and someone who continually does so. It's not too hard to clearly cut out a particular hurtful remark by someone - but when most of what someone says is hurtful, destructive and vindictive, it's nearly impossible for us to maintain any semblance of objectivity or hold onto christian love for those being so lambasted.

There is a certain insidious evil in listening to someone who holds the same beliefs as you - but does so in a way completely at odds with the morality of the Gospel. Surely it cannot be good.

It's true it's not a sin to listen to Rush Limbaugh. Nevertheless, you will get your punishment anyway because he's so stupid, so ill-informed, so bigoted and so boring. If you believe him, shame on you as the writer suggests. If you're happy hearing him, feel free to listen all you want. The guys in white coats with big nets and straight jackets will stop by and pick you up soon.

Mr. Sevens-Arroyo wrote: "We can also ignore issues about Rush's marriages or drug addition."

I think this is a cheap shot. I'm not a big fan of Rush Limbaugh's primarily because I find him to be a partisan Republican. I am an independent conservative. Limbaugh and other conservatives carried water for George W. Bush (and the Republicans) even when he / they clearly violated core conservative principles. I believe this lead to the election of Mr. Obama. Is it a sin for a Catholic or a Jew to support President Obama given his strong pro-abortion / anti-Israel stances? I would hope so.

I sometimes try to listen, but he is such a fraud it just makes me angry in very short order. He is so transparent, his "facts" so easily disproved, his distortions so obvious, it makes my head spin to know that there are actually people so uneducated and so gullible that they take his bloviating stupidity as truth. It is oddly amusing to check to see what he is lying about, and then find the same rhetoric word for word spouted out by people posting on sites like this as if they make any sense to any sane or educated person.

If it is a sin to take Limbaugh seriously then it certainly is a sin to support Democrats who claim to be Catholic, such as Kennedy, Kerry, Pelosi and others, yet still support abortion. Listening to Madame Pelousi state that people coming to the town hall meetings are "carrying swastikas" (you can find the tape on youtube) without offering any proof of such is yet another example of, to paraphrase "as long as Pelosi and her ilk continue to spew their poison we will not progress as a society".

PDX:

First, If you wish to participate in discussions, please don't use caplocks. It is miserable to read.

Second, I would like to hear what your connection is between Matt 16:19 and BAPTISM? Verse is part of Peter's confession, to which Jesus responds: you have been given this knowledge by God. You will be given the keys of the kingdom...whatever you bind is bound; whatever you loose is loosed. The context is the revelation of Christ as the Messiah. It is part of the call to discipleship, not baptism: Either that of John of Jesus, nor the Great commission, or otherwise.

Second, confession dates a lot longer back than a the fourteenth century. Monastic prayers of confession date from the middle ages.

Third, listening to Rush may not be a sin, but as a Christian I believe that he is at the least, a waste of time, and time is a gift of God, and secondly, encourages attitudes that ARE sins: Hatred of others, ridiculing other children of God, lying--which IS a sin, etc. etc.

All in all, I'd be happy if Rush just went away. Maybe he ought to pay attention to health reform...he's got a few pounds to lose getting ready for the new health care revolution. (now, if we just made health care a percentage of everyone's income, like, say 20%...since It will soon be costing everyone at least that much, Rush could subsidize a bunch of the uninsured...but too many of them might be all those people he objects to...Never mind. That won't work.)

Pr Chris

"But what is a sin is the fact that people take him seriously. People that are not using the brain they were born with"

--- I'm assuming, of course, that you're including Mr. Uber-Neanderthal Michael Moore in your comment. The same malcontent who produced a 90-minute political ad, called it a "documentary", and convinced a horde of dimwits to spend $120 million to see it.

And if getting hooked on drugs is a sin, then listening to Limbugh is a sin.

If bigotry is a sin, then listening to Limbaugh is a sin.

You're right. It isn't a sin to listen to Rush Limbaugh. But what is a sin is the fact that people take him seriously. People that are not using the brain they were born with. People who are afraid of change, or what is different, or to think outside the box.

As long as Limbaugh and his ilk continue to spew their poison, we will not progress as a society.

What is a sin?

Using capslock in your posts.

What an absurd notion. It is a sin to listen to what some person has to say. Weird.

If not a sin, certainly an 'occasion of sin"!

JUST WHAT IS SIN? WHAT RIGHT DOES ANY HUMAN HAVE TO MAKE A RULE OTHER THAN GOD'S SON THAT IF VIOLATED IS A SIN? WHEN CHRIST SAID "WHAT SINS YOU FORGIVE ARE FORGIVEN AND WHAT SINS YOU RETAIN ARE RETAINED", HE WAS SPEAKING OF BAPTISM. THE HISTORY OF CONFESSTION IS VERY INTERESTING AND THE TYPE IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH TODAY WAS STARTED IN IRELAND BACK IN THE EARLY 1300s MONK TO MONK AND WAS SHUT DOWN BY ROME FOR ABOUT 50 YEARS BEFORE RESTARTED WHICH MOST DO NOT GO TO TODAY. IT IS TIME THAT THE PART OF THE MASS AT THE OFFETORY WHEN THE PREIEST SAYS, "SO SINS MAY BE FORGIVEN" MUST BE CHANGED TO " SO SINS WILL BE FORGIVEN" AS WELL AS HAVE A SHORT GENERAL CONFESSTION SERVICE AT EACH MASS BEFORE THE OFFETORY. SO MANY HAVE BEEN BROUGHT UP WITH A GUILT COMPLEX BY MAN MADE RULES THROUGH THE AGES AND DIFFERENT CULTURES FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONTROL OF THE MEMBERSHIP. MOST PEOPLE OF THE WORLD ARE GOOD PEOPLE AND BELEIVE IN GOD. ONE DOES NOT SIN BY HEARING ON THE RADIO RUSH BUT MUST HAVE A OPEN MIND TO SORT OUT WHAT HE IS TRYING TO DO.