When Sore Losers and Mad Cows go on a Rampage

Have you been keeping up with all the crazy flying around the Conservative Loonisphere? KeeeeyRIIIST! Who let all the bugs outta the Right-Wing Roach Motel?

Above and beyond the GOP cattle rustlers herding busloads of cattle AND sheep into town halls, mooing and bullying the speakers with monosyllabic catcalls and childish name calling —

Above and beyond the threats of violence; the democrat hung in effigy, the swastika painted on another democrat’s door; the anonymous revolver left behind at a town hall — do ya get the message yet, you commie fags?

Above and beyond the whips of fear being cracked across the bleeding back of America by Sarah “Death Panel” Palin and Rush “ObamaNazi” Limbo —

Above and beyond all the snippets you’ve seen on TV —

— there’s a hell of a lot of stupidity deliberately being generated by the mouthbreathers of the Republican monkeymachine, and a whole lotta shakin’ goin’ on:

• This laundry list of lies about the Health Care Act. It’s been making it’s way from one conservative web site to another — and not a single one of them credible. It was submitted under false pretenses to the comments of this blog last week. It started out as an anonymous list — Hey, why the hell own up to something full of bullshit and lies, right? — but it’s now been sourced, as close as can be, to Virginia’s very own Liberty University. You know, the one founded by that upright, moral citizen, Jerry Falwell. Lies? Sent out by Christians? NO! SAY IT AIN’T SO, JERRY! Don’t you and the true brethren believe in the ninth commandment?

Sure don’t look like it. Jerry might be long gone, but his hatred and poison still live on.

They had to have been separated at birth. Or one is the reincarnation of the other. NO — Phyllis Schlafly is still alive, just like the coelocanth, the living fossil of Madagascar. So what could explain . . .

CLONES! That’s it! Sarah and Phyll are clones!

But what crazed scientist would dare go against the laws of God and Man to recreate Woman in her most rabid form?
Oh, the humanity!

• Have you ever been attacked by a rabid liberal? This guy says he has — and at a town hall, loaded with the right-wing’s bullying thugs. Hmm. I wonder how the fight started?

The funny thing is, even though he’s against the Health Care Act, this clown is uninsured. He would be completely covered if we had universal health care right now. As it is, he’s asking for donations to cover his medical costs.

Hey, maybe he could get some of those samaritans and angels at the insurance companies to pitch in.


The girl has balls!

Gov. Mark Sanford’s wife left the dumb son of a bitch for cheating on her. I’m damn proud of her! Hilary should have done it!

So, while Marky Mark is crying in his state-paid-for-beer (probably PBR draft) because his squeeze moved out and because he CAN cry for me, Argentina, it looks like he’s also been stealing some of the South Carolina beernuts and no one’s noticed . . . until now.

Did Evita like yer $1,265 haircut? ¡Oooooh! ¡Muy macho!

• To quote his profile,

Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of Michigan Citizens for Science and co-founder of The Panda’s Thumb.

Ed is also incredibly intelligent and he does not allow pseudoscience, belief, disbelief or stupidity to get in the way of the honest, plain and simple facts. I urge all of you, if you have any regard for science and understanding the natural world which surrounds us, to visit his daily blog, Dispatches from the Culture Wars.

Ed today referenced this “fair and balanced” article about the Health Care Act and a hero of mine whom I will probably never meet, Stephen Hawking. He’s smarter than us all. His mind is a supernova.

The important thing is that the idiot who wrote this fair and balanced article has absolutely no idea what he’s talking about. Pundits talk about the democratization of the Internet and that every voice can be heard; this voice is one that belongs under the category of village idiot.

His point: under the health care plan in Great Britain, upon which — DUH! — the socialist Obama’s plan is based, the great Stephen Hawking would be left to die! OMG! FML!

Funny thing, though: Hawking does live in Great Britain, is a distinguished professor and author, and he has been reaping the benefits of comprehensive British health care for 45 years.

ONE REALLY HOT DAMN FUNNY THING: all the references to Stephen Hawking have been removed from the article since this morning! YES! Go look for yourself! Then go to one of the cached pages on Google, and you’ll be able to read the part the bastards cut out:

The U.K.’s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) basically figures out who deserves treatment by using a cost-utility analysis based on the “quality adjusted life year.”

One year in perfect health gets you one point. Deductions are taken for blindness, for being in a wheelchair and so on.

The more points you have, the more your life is considered worth saving, and the likelier you are to get care.

People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn’t have a chance in the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless.

The British are praised for spending half as much per capita on medical care. How they do it is another matter. The NICE people say that Britain cannot afford to spend $20,000 to extend a life by six months. So if care will cost $1 more, you get to curl up in a corner and die.

In March, NICE ruled against the use of two drugs, Lapatinib and Sutent, that prolong the life of those with certain forms of breast and stomach cancer.

The British have succeeded in putting a price tag on human life, as we are about to.

I don’t know if you know this about me, but I hate bullies and I hate liars. Just thought you ought to know that.

• Rush Limbo has for years made old people chortle until the snot ran outta their noses when he mentioned those damn Feminazis. Hyuck, hyuck! Hey you feminazi kids, get outta my yard! Ha ha ha! Chuckle!

Lately, our president has been labeled by The Large One as a nazi. No, I don’t mean the more appropriate president named Bush, who had art covered up and American citizens spied upon. May I see your papers? I mean the current prez, the one who wants people to be well and healthy — not the one who wanted to wage war and kill the foreigners.

Here’s a piece by a non-partisan source that examines media for bias. And for lies.

Hmm. I’ve heard that RUSH IS RIGHT.

I don’t think so.


More later, when the bullshit starts overflowing again and I can’t take it any more . . .

Limbaugh says Obama made Sanford Cheat

You can’t make up wingnut stuff as crazy as this. Limbaugh, who is being paid a shitload of money to spew his right-wingnut rhetoric — whether he believes it or not — said on his radio show that Obama’s mad plan to ruin the nation sent Sanford over the edge and into the arms of his Argentine mistress. Doesn’t matter that the Gov started the affair before Obama became President — it’s still Obama’s fault.

Also Obama’s fault: ecoli, hantavirus, sunspots, forest fires, crabgrass, splinters, and alien anal probing. And he made da widdle gubaner cwy!!!

Read the story — and listen to Limbaugh’s crack pipe fantasy — here.

Limbaugh’s Dirty Little Secret of Radio "Success"

One should respect public opinion insofar as is necessary to avoid starvation and keep out of prison, but anything that goes beyond this is voluntary submission to an unnecessary tyranny.
• Bertrand Russell

President Obama has not yet been in office 100 days, and so far — according to every conservative mouthpiece on television and radio — his every act is a crime against America.

The right wing has fired attacks on everything from Michelle wearing the same outfit more than once, to mocking the new puppy for the Obama girls. The television mouthpiece for the strident right wing, Fox News, has helped take part in organizing “tea parties” today across the country, in order to foment not just distrust of the government — frankly, I was MUCH more distrustful of the government under the Republican regimes of Nixon, Reagan, and the Bush babies — but to create ratings for their network. And a recent report that concluded that far-right extremists can be dangerous is being deliberately misconstrued by Conservatives that the Obama government will soon become Big Brother . . . I guess that’s a “Little Brother” to W’s Big Brother that was monitoring phone calls, torturing suspects . . .

Here, read “DC Tea Party Protesters Agree: ‘Chairman Maobama’ Is Leading The Country On A Path To Socialism” and “Scarborough: Obama Is ‘More Focused On Targeting Veterans’ Than Fighting Al Qaeda” if you don’t believe me. And take note of all the happy, smiling people. They’re not protesting anything — they’re ecstatic they’re finally getting their own 15 minutes of fame on tv.

Right wing radio still remains a chief culprit in the Conservative War for Control of America. Here’s a short yet insightful piece on one primary reason much of America listens to Rush Limbaugh: because there’s nothing else on . . .

Empty minds, filled with nothing more than empty-headed blather . . .

And the Right Wing Propaganda Machine keeps rolling.

The Black Hole of Limbo

This man is not an entertainer. Nope. Never.

I don’t know anything about Bob Cesca except that he’s a blogger and, at least in this essay about the time-and-space-warping-singularity that is Rush Limbo (from which no conservative brain can escape its gravitational pull), he’s pretty damn funny.

In other words, he gets it right (pardon the pun).

Read it here.

The 2012 Republitard Presidential Candidate

My prediction: Rush Limbo.

It doesn’t matter that he’s just a mouthpiece who tells scared conservatives exactly what they want to hear. It doesn’t matter that he can’t think for himself; he’s just a parrot for conservative ideology. It doesn’t matter that he promulgates an endless war between the two parties; that’s what conservatives want, a war between us and them . . . and they win. (But not with this election, and that’s why they’re so angry: sour grapes.) And it won’t matter that Limbo can’t even get the wording of the Constitution correct.

But my, he sure do have a nice voice, don’t he?

And now, with Limbo’s recent speechifying before the neocons who want Obama to fail and us regular Americans to shut the hell up about our exorbitant taxes (while they pay little or nothing), the Rich, Fat Liar is actually positioning himself if not for the role of President, then as a politician of some kind (and do you really think Limbo’s show biz ego — and that’s what he does for a living: it’s show biz — would let him accept any position less than President?). Here. Decide for yourself. RNC Chair Michael Steele was interviewed by D. L. Hughley on CNN a few days ago. Rush and his constituents were up in arms about something Steele said:

HUGHLEY: Rush Limbaugh, who is the de facto leader of the Republican Party —

STEELE: No, he’s not.

HUGHLEY: Well, I’ll tell you what, I’ve never —

STEELE: I’m the de facto leader of the Republican Party.

HUGHLEY: Then you know what? Then I can appreciate that, but no — no one will — will actually pry down some of the things he says, like when he comes out and says that he wants the president to fail, I understand he wants liberalism to fail.

STEELE: How is that any different than what was said about George Bush during his presidency? Let’s put it into context here. Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer. Rush Limbaugh, the whole thing is entertainment. Yes, it’s incendiary, yes, it’s ugly —

That’s all that was said; but Limbo and his Republitard minions want to believe that Limbo is more than an entertainer. If that’s true, what is he? A politician? Not yet. A leader? Of what? No, he’s just a mouthpiece who repeats the same self-serving lies to like-minded people who have a desperate need to feel reassured that their world, their way of life, isn’t coming to an end, and that they are in charge and far, far above the common folk . . . meaning you and me.

Read Limbo’s long-winded response here, and decide for yourself if he’s positioning himself for a run at Obama in 2012 or not. And while you’re at his site, make sure you buy one of his humorous “Club Gitmo” commemorative torture t-shirts.
Hey, it’s just a joke, people!

There’s something wrong with you, Limbo. Just like with Ann Coulter.

Oh, by the way, ThinkProgress.org is now reporting that Michael Steele, important politician, has apologized to Limbo:

Steele has quickly backed down. Politico reports that Steele “reached out” to Limbaugh today to say that he didn’t mean what he said.

“My intent was not to go after Rush – I have enormous respect for Rush Limbaugh,” Steele said in a telephone interview. “I was maybe a little bit inarticulate. … There was no attempt on my part to diminish his voice or his leadership.” […]

“I went back at that tape and I realized words that I said weren’t what I was thinking,” Steele said. “It was one of those things where I thinking I was saying one thing, and it came out differently. What I was trying to say was a lot of people … want to make Rush the scapegoat, the bogeyman, and he’s not.”

Steele made clear that he will welcome Limbaugh into the party,” calling him a “very valuable conservative voice for our party.” “He does what he does best, which is provoke,” Steel said. “My job is to try to bring us all together.”

Steele isn’t alone. Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC) and Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA) have previously dared to criticize Limbaugh but then quickly backed down. To quote Rush, a lot of Republicans are being told to “bend over and grab the ankles” for him.

Limbo. Entertainer, addict and poster boy for fat asses, liars and weasels. And my apologies to weasels.

Limbaugh, Hatred, and Philosophy via Starbucks

“Anger is contagious.”
Sandra Cisneros
Starbucks cup # 276

Just some simple words on the side of a coffee cup.

Yet true.

* * *

If you look on my Facebook page, you will see the absolute truth in my profile, under POLITICAL VIEWS.

Goddamned independent.

Some of my conservative friends have been aghast when they discovered I am liberal. Some of my Democratic friends have been aghast when I told them I’ve voted Republican.

See, I’ll vote for the man — or woman — who I think is best for the job: someone who will not play party politics — or who I believe will play politics less than the other. Someone who is strong enough to make their own decisions, based on facts and circumstance — not based on what their constituency wants.

Because the truth is — and let’s face it, I’m talking mostly about the Presidency, here — I don’t want another Reagan or Nixon; nor a Carter, although his heart was in the right place, because he just wasn’t strong enough; nor a Clinton, who rarely bucked the dictates of the Dems-in-charge. I wanted Gary Hart. I wanted John Anderson.

I wanted a Prez who could be his own man.

But — we got party politics as usual.

Rush Limbaugh is the radio mouthpiece of American Conservatives, and the primary venue for their politics is Fox News on cable. Limbo (and all the jabbering heads on Fox News) tells his constituency — for, really, that’s what it is — exactly what they want to hear. He gives them support. It’s political therapy for the Haves, and screw the Have Nots. He — and Fox News, in their mean-spirited acts of biased outrage at, well, everything they don’t like — don’t give a damn about America. They only care about themselves . . . and, by extension, other conservatives . . . because there is strength in numbers; and numbers = power; and power, in 21st century America, equals money.

They want to be in charge. Bottom line. And they’ll do and say anything to wield that power.

Especially hurting the people that disagree with them.

This anger, this hatred, is contagious. And on a very human level, it is just evil.

I just can’t sit back any longer and be silent. I want to be as apolitical as possible, but I can’t take the dirty tricks any more. I can’t take the lies, the power plays, the ruining of reputations. Honestly, both the Dems and the GOP play these games; both the Liberals and the Conservatives. But for the last sixteen years, I have deduced one thing: the conservative Republicans are the worst. They hide behind the American Flag and the Bible, yet their actions contradict the very meaning of both. Freedom. Love. Tolerance.

Take, for example, the newborn hatred of our new President. He’s the one who Limbo, sarcastically, calls the Great Unifier, simply because Obama wants to bring the parties together to form a . . . wow! a nation of true Americans. United. Like the States.

But this will take power away from one party, will it not? If one wins, one will lose. Correct?

The old playground philosophy. Black, white; right, wrong; tit for tat. Old-fashioned thinking. Us versus Them. The politics of hate.

Last week, Republican Phil Gingrey courageously took Rush to task for criticizing the President. Courageous, I thought.

Only one day later, Gingrey called the conservative mouthpiece and publicly sucked up to his far-right base on the air:

Following statements made to Politico yesterday telling Rush Limbaugh to “back off,” Republican congressman Phil Gingrey now has his tail between his legs. In a groveling call to Limbaugh’s conservative radio program this afternoon, Gingrey offered a humble apology and described Limbaugh as a “conservative giant” who plays an integral role in maintaining the ever-decreasing Republican base.

Go here for the whole story and some video.

My point: Politicos are bowing to a mere radio host; playing sides instead of doing their job for all of America. And this guy they’re bowing to makes public the conservative party position every day, that minorities can get away with anything, Hillary Clinton is a “B-I-itch” who has a “testicle lockbox,” and Obama is a “little black man-child.” The thing that kills me — and, to a degree, makes me want to laugh out loud — is that “Rush Limbaugh” is a character. Rush, the man, after a mediocre career in radio, then marketing, later reinvented himself in radio as a voice of conservatism in northern California. I point you to this blog by Beau Weaver, a national voice-over talent with a history in radio and the early days of Rush’s career, who chronicles and dissects the creation of “Rush Limbaugh.” Weaver’s conclusions are the same as mine: “Rush’s success has almost completely destroyed our ability to have a constructive national dialog about policy.”

It’s a collective voice of anger and hatred that will not listen to reason.

A friend of mine recently received some racist, anti-Obama email. It moved him to post a note to all his friends on Facebook:

How have we evolved and progressed as a people? The people of the United States have now elected their first black president. Yes, I know not everyone cast their vote for him, but a majority did, and most of the time in the U.S.A., the majority is on the side that wins. Not always, of course. There are exceptions, such as the elections of John Quincy Adams over Andrew Jackson in 1824, Rutherford B. Hayes over Samuel J. Tilden in 1876, Grover Cleveland over Benjamin Harrison in 1888, and of course, George W. Bush over Al Gore in 2000. But those are the exceptions, not the rule.

Many see this as a turning point in American history. That America has finally put aside its racial differences and made monumental change in the defeat of racism. I want to believe this is true. I desperately pray for a change of heart in my country. Racism serves no purpose in our lives. It is driven by fear and hate and the most despicable emotions in human nature. I love the United States and all it stands for. I am not proud of every aspect of our history, but I am very proud of my country on the whole. However, this post is really not about the president.

I must confess that when I look around, I still see so much work to be done. There are so many people in this nation that still judge a man by the color of his skin, not the quality of his character. And I will confess that there are times that I catch myself spouting something that could be offensive to others based on their ethnic background. I have honestly tried to change myself and the way I was raised to look past a person’s background and only judge them on what they present to me as a person on an individual basis. I don’t always succeed.

With that in mind, I ask these questions. How many times do we spout off a racially offensive joke or statement? How many times do we forward this type of joke or statement on to our friends when they arrive in our email box?

Do you send those “I love Christ” type of emails along with them? Do you think Christ would approve of your views?

Do you ignore them? Do you roll your eyes and delete them? Do you ask the person who sent it to you to not send you those types of insensitive things?

Do you laugh?

When you see this type of statement from your friends, does it change the way you view them? Do they remain your friends? What is our responsibility in combating the ongoing struggle to overcome our past and look towards a new future?

Should we ignore these statements, or should we make a stand? If we say something to the person who makes the statement, will it damage a friendship? Is it worth the possibility of losing that friend in order to move forward as a people? Will it even make a difference?

And this brings up another basic tenet of the American values. Freedom of speech. Guaranteed in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Let’s state it here for all to read:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Congress shall make NO LAW…abridging the freedom of speech. Okay, but what about individuals? What is our responsibility? Just as I am looking in the mirror, I ask you to do the same.

For myself, all I can do is what I feel is right. And I will let this serve as my only notice to anyone who cares to have read this far into this post. I will not stand for any racist comment posted on my pages. They will be deleted. Repeated offenses will be “un-friended”. Say whatever you want on your own pages, but I will not tolerate it on mine. Do not send me any email with this type of humor. I do not care to read it.

I am not a saint, far from it. I will make mistakes. Sorry, just the way it is. But I will do my small part to advance our society and make this world even a slightly better place to live.

Those are good words, and they deserve to be read by many. They touch a deep, dark part of us all — they strike at a corner of our individual souls that is shameful.

I guess my main point is this: I really don’t care what Republicans do — or try to get others to do — in their own homes. The same goes for Democrats. Let them hate. They can keep it in their own, foul hearts, their own cesspool homes.




But when their childish actions, their one-sided politics, their mean-spirited beliefs — their hatred — affect the country as a whole, then, sorry, I have to speak up.

I have to speak against.

Against parties. Against politics. Against hate. Against the games that hurt you and me, where the money men in the shadows choose nasty, juvenile, irrelevant sides, like kids on a playground, playing kickball, and leaving out the kids they think are inferior. Against Rush and Hannity and O’Reilly. Against the schoolyard bullies.

Because we now have a Prez who will be his own man, who is not afraid to try to bring the parties and the politics together for the benefit of — GASP! — not just one party, but for as many Americans as possible, dems and cons, reps and libs . . . and all the people in between, which, frankly, is most of us.

A playground that’s fair to all.

I hope. And that is the hope of the true Americans who elected him: for a better country and a better world, not just a better life for a select few: the conservative elite.

The people who question authority; the people who challenge the status quo; the individuals who refuse to follow any party line; those who will not allow themselves to be cooed and wooed by the soothing babble of so-called leaders, who in reality, are party puppets; these are the people — the individuals, the free thinkers — whom I will side with.

Because the answer to uninformed opinion is not to try and stifle it or to take it away, but to add more voices, more informed opinion. To make a noise. To stir up a shitstorm.

To fight.

It’s the only way to beat down a bully.

So I ask you to read. Everything. To ask questions. To challenge. To go outside your comfort zone. If you’re a lib, go read the Drudge Report. If you’re a con, go read the Huffington Post.

I will do both. And I’m also going to read ThinkProgress.org. They keep track of the crap America has to put up with.

And I ask you to fight. To be vocal.

Because the bullshit has to stop. The bullying has to stop.

The hate, the sheer political stupidity, has to stop.

An ignorant America, under one party, one policy, will never, ever work again. We need a better America. And Americans really don’t need more opinions — we need informed opinions.

Spread the words, no matter how simple or how eloquent.

Fight the hate.

“Be the example. Spread hope.”
Cat Cora
Starbucks cup # 272

Rush Limbaugh: Radical Clown

On January 23, President Obama — I can’t believe how much I like saying that — made some disparaging comments about radio host Rush Limbaugh. You can read a New York Post piece all about it.

Bimbo the Clown, a puppet.

I’m an independent. I will listen to both sides — how I wish there were truly three sides or more! — and I will vote for the candidate whom I think will do the best job. I’ve voted Democrat and Republican, for and against. I will not be dictated to by any party. In the words of the ultimate politician, Groucho Marx, “I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.”

I’ve listened to Rush Limbaugh before, at first because I was told he could be funny. I had heard about him in the year or so before Bill Clinton was elected President, and Limbo did everything he could to derail his chances. In the subsequent eight years, Limbo became more and more spiteful and hateful. He would say anything to hurt Clinton, whether it was true or not, and I eventually clicked him off permanently.

Limbo, the clown and Conservative puppet

Limbo’s response to President Obama is chronicled in the National Review Online, the online version of the ultra-conservative National Review magazine. You can click on the link, but I’ll reproduce the piece here, in its entirety:

Limbaugh Responds to Obama [Byron York]

According to an account in the New York Post, President Barack Obama yesterday told Republican leaders, “You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done.” With George W. Bush now off the stage, it may be that Obama and some of his fellow Democrats view Limbaugh, and not John Boehner, Mitch McConnell, or any other elected official, as the true leader of the Republican opposition. This morning I asked Rush for his thoughts on all this, and here is his response:

There are two things going on here. One prong of the Great Unifier’s plan is to isolate elected Republicans from their voters and supporters by making the argument about me and not about his plan. He is hoping that these Republicans will also publicly denounce me and thus marginalize me. And who knows? Are ideological and philosophical ties enough to keep the GOP loyal to their voters? Meanwhile, the effort to foist all blame for this mess on the private sector continues unabated when most of the blame for this current debacle can be laid at the feet of the Congress and a couple of former presidents. And there is a strategic reason for this.

Secondly, here is a combo quote from the meeting:

“If we don’t get this done we (the Democrats) could lose seats and I could lose re-election. But we can’t let people like Rush Limbaugh stall this. That’s how things don’t get done in this town.”

To make the argument about me instead of his plan makes sense from his perspective. Obama’s plan would buy votes for the Democrat Party, in the same way FDR’s New Deal established majority power for 50 years of Democrat rule, and it would also simultaneously seriously damage any hope of future tax cuts. It would allow a majority of American voters to guarantee no taxes for themselves going forward. It would burden the private sector and put the public sector in permanent and firm control of the economy. Put simply, I believe his stimulus is aimed at re-establishing “eternal” power for the Democrat Party rather than stimulating the economy because anyone with a brain knows this is NOT how you stimulate the economy. If I can be made to serve as a distraction, then there is that much less time debating the merits of this TRILLION dollar debacle.

Obama was angry that Merrill Lynch used $1.2 million of TARP money to remodel an executive suite. Excuse me, but didn’t Merrill have to hire a decorator and contractor? Didn’t they have to buy the new furnishings? What’s the difference in that and Merrill loaning that money to a decorator, contractor and goods supplier to remodel Warren Buffet’s office? Either way, stimulus in the private sector occurs. Are we really at the point where the bad PR of Merrill getting a redecorated office in the process is reason to smear them? How much money will the Obamas spend redecorating the White House residence? Whose money will be spent? I have no problem with the Obamas redoing the place. It is tradition. 600 private jets flown by rich Democrats flew into the Inauguration. That’s fine but the auto execs using theirs is a crime? In both instances, the people on those jets arrived in Washington wanting something from Washington, not just good will.

If I can be made to serve as a distraction, then there is that much less time debating the merits of the trillion dollar debacle.

One more thing, Byron. Your publication and website have documented Obama’s ties to the teachings of Saul Alinksy while he was community organizing in Chicago. Here is Rule 13 of Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals:

“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.”

The last item is the most interesting to me. I had heard of Alinsky before, but never his Rules For Radicals, which I immediately Googled. Here they are, reprinted in concise form — Alinsky wrote a book about them, but this will give you the idea:

Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals

By Craig Miyamoto, APR, Fellow PRSA

(This is an expanded version of the 2000 Third Quarter issue of Public Relations Strategies, a quarterly publication of Miyamoto Strategic Counsel)

To paraphrase some sage advice, “keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer.” If your business or organization ever becomes a target of radical activists, it will be extremely helpful to know what strategies of attack will used against you. Short of having spies infiltrate their organization – a practice that is sure to be found out and exposed to your discredit – it would help to study their methods.

Known as the “father of modern American radicalism,” Saul D. Alinsky (1909-1972) developed strategies and tactics that take the enormous, unfocused emotional energy of grassroots groups and transform it into effective anti-government and anti-corporate activism. Activist organizations teach his ideas widely taught today as a set of model behaviors, and they use these principles to create an emotional commitment to victory – no matter what.

Grassroots pressure on large organizations is reality, and there is every indication that it will grow. Because the conflicts manifest in high-profile public debate and often-panicked decision-making, studying Alinsky’s rules will help organizations develop counteractive strategies that can level the playing field.

Governments and corporations have inherent weaknesses. And, time and again, they repeat mistakes that other large organizations have made, even repeating their OWN mistakes. Alinsky’s out-of-print book – “Rules for Radicals” – illustrates why opposition groups take on large organizations with utter glee, and why these governments and corporations fail to win.

Large organizations have learned to stonewall and not empower activists. In other words, they try to ignore radical activists and are never as committed to victory as their opposition is committed to defeating them. Result? They are unprepared for the hailstorm of brutal tactics that severely damage their reputation and send them running with their tails between their legs.

Some of these rules are ruthless, but they work. Here are the rules to be aware of:

RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)

RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don’t address the “real” issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)

RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)

RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that any other human being. We all avoid “un-fun” activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)

RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)

RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)

RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists’ minds. The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)

RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management’s wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)

RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. (Old saw: If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have to have a compromise solution.)

RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

I am absolutely astounded at Limbo’s acknowledgment of Alinsky’s Rules — not because he knows about them — he ought to, since this stuff is his stock in trade — but that, item by item, the tactics, as outlined by Alinsky, were used against Bill and Hilary Clinton for eight years by Limbaugh, Fox News, the National Review, and every other conservative mouthpiece.

He just gave away the right wing’s modus operandi.

In other words, because the Democrats held control then, the conservatives had to become the new radicals. Hilary was absolutely right about her “vast right wing conspiracy” — ultraconservatives were rich, organized and angry — and they weren’t about to lose to a couple of hicks from Arkansas.

Expect more of this behavior in the years to come — which I predict will be eight years. If the actions of the right wing have shown us anything since the election of Bill Clinton, it’s that they will do anything to regain power . . . and that they are sore losers.

And Limbo once again gets things wrong.

As far as I can discover, Alinsky only wrote twelve rules for radicals.

Thirteen, I think, is Limbo’s unlucky number.