He calls himself “the intellectual engine of the conservative movement.” On the air, Rush Limbaugh unblushingly announces that because his hero William F. Buckley, Jr. has passed away, he is now “the leader of the conservative movement.”
His claim may be justified. But, because the movement has been seized by socialist neoconservatives and Republican-über-alles conservatives, many Americans have abandoned the conservative label in favor of “constitutionalist.” If the definition of conservative can wander all over the landscape, as it certainly has, it makes far more sense to attach oneself to a hard and fast standard, even one that many conservatives have relegated to the dustbin of history.
Rush Limbaugh was the subject of a very flattering cover article in the July 6 New York Times Magazine. It may not need to be stated, but we’ll state it just in case: The New York Times Magazine does not publish puff pieces about its enemies. In this one, we read that Rush indeed has an audience of 20 million listeners each week, each of whom gets a heavy dose of his softball conservatism along with a steady diet of claims that Republicans are the answer and Democrats are devils.
Having just inked a huge new contract, Limbaugh is riding high. Premier Radio Networks will pay him $38 million per year for the next eight years, and he makes more millions from sponsors. Already rolling in money, El Rushbo (as he likes to call himself) drives a $450,000 auto, owns a palatial home and several more within his Palm Beach estate, flies around in his $54 million airplane, and occasionally leaves a $5,000 tip at his favorite restaurant. Lucky guy, that.
What enabled him to acquire such riches? He told the Times reporter, “Not my political ideas. Conservatism didn’t buy this house. First and foremost, I’m a businessman. My first goal is to attract the largest possible audience so I can charge confiscatory ad rates. I happen to have great entertainment skills, but that enables me to sell air time.” He made the same admission, just as clearly reported by John McCollister in the May/June 1993 issue of the Saturday Evening Post, who quoted Limbaugh from a speech he gave in Daytona Beach: “It’s a business — strictly a business.”
O.K., he’s a businessman first and an entertainer second. His political ideas are way down on his list of goals. And he knows very well that those political ideas can’t include putting the Constitution first and blaming the nation’s ills on deliberate treachery. The word conspiracy is never heard on his program, except to discount it fiercely. Nor is there any discussion of the Council on Foreign Relations, the dominant force that steers top leaders of the America’s media, military, corporations, educators and, of course, political leaders of both parties. Because he won’t mention, or allow callers to mention, the most substantive issues, he is in reality a champion purveyor of political correctness.
Upon occasion, Limbaugh has allowed himself to be used by people who aren’t even conservative. In 1995, when Bill Clinton sought help in bailing out Mexico’s corrupt government, who should happen to call the show to defend that enormous raid on taxpaying Americans but Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan. It was as if Greenspan were a regular listener and, just like any other caller, had to give his two cents about the need for the bailout.
When George H. W. Bush needed help in his 1992 reelection campaign, he just by chance showed up in the studio to be interviewed by the nation’s premier flag waver for Republicans. Rush had even been a guest at the White House and “Poppy” Bush carried the great one’s luggage to the Lincoln Bedroom. The fraudulent suggestion that the two were great buddies was given a blow, however, when the president referred to his new pal as “Russ” over the air.
In 1994, when Congress was asked to approve the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), Limbaugh pointed to House leader Newt Gingrich and Senate leader Bob Dole as supporters, and that was that. GATT (which became the World Trade Organization) had strong and incisive opponents in Pat Buchanan and Phyllis Schlafly, who tried unsuccessfully to get on the air to register their concerns. Also, Schlafly had offered $85,000 for ad time, and the Buchanan forces offered $100,000 to oppose GATT. Both were rebuffed. So Limbaugh isn’t all businessman after all.
It wasn’t always this way with Limbaugh. Before he became a household word, he searched hard for a way to make a name for himself. While hosting a show on a single Kansas City station in 1975, he developed admiration for a John Birch Society program he’d seen. “I saw the film Overview and it got into my head for six months and they had me believing this stuff.” But the view promoted by the Birch Society, applauded by increasing numbers of concerned Americans, wasn’t politically correct. So Limbaugh began attacking the Society and its carefully presented claim about conspiracy. His stock then rose dramatically with the people who have provided him air time and the opportunity to become a millionaire.
Not a leader, the man continues to be a misleader. “I’m not retiring until every American agrees with me,” he told Zev Chafets of the New York Times Magazine. He will, therefore, have work until he drops because this American — and many more — do not agree with “The King of Talk Radio .”
Last Updated ( Thursday, 24 July 2008 07:59 )
Comments (31)
Rush does sometimes speak of conspiracies
31
Sunday, 14 September 2008 20:38
Allan Knippling
Ive heard Rush often belittle anyone who brings up the idea of a political conspiracy.
But ive also heard Rush often accuse liberal democrats (Clintonites) of secret backroom meetings -called to order for the purpose of attermpting to strategize against republicans .
I believe thats a pretty good definition of a conspiracy.
All this political discussion is necessary i know , but prayer will win this battle . attempting to rationalize and make sense of American politics today is losing it . More prayer is needed and asking our Lord for his intervention is the answer . in my opininon.
This is in reality a spiritual battle we are fighting not a political one . And our country is spiritually sick . God can heal our country we must as a country turn to God and return to his Grace
Rush and conspiracy
30
Wednesday, 06 August 2008 21:41
Gary Larson
Rush Limbaugh isn't hiding anything. As hard as it is for some of you people to believe, Rush is simply interpreting events as he truthfully views them. Two people can look at the same basic information and come to a different conclusion.
Take the NAU as an example. Rush, along with many , many others really does not believe there is a plan to create an EU style political/economic merger. These skeptics think the failure to secure the border is merely due to ineptness, political squabbling, and short-sighted self interest among businessmen and politicians. I THINK THEY ARE WRONG- BUT I DON'T THINK THE VAST MAJORITY ARE ATTEMPTING TO DECEIVE ME. I do believe this mis-interpretation of events is encouraged by a very, very few "Insiders," such as David Rockefeller.
Unfortunately, those sincere but misguided individuals, who fail to see a larger agenda at work, (such as Rush) hold positions of great influence. Our job is to educate others, to assemble the pieces of the puzzle into a cohert picture so that they can see what we see, and take effective action to oppose it.
It irritates me as much as you people that Rush doesn't discuss so called "conspiracy" subjects. As smart and talented as Rush is, he is in many ways a shallow thinker.
Yes, Rush misleads those who look to him for guidance, but,he does not do so deliberately.
Rush gets call from the president
29
Monday, 04 August 2008 17:12
Lee
Gonzales
Had Rush been exposing a conspiracy,( as it is the duty of any red-blooded American to do once he learns of its existence), he (Rush) would not have gotten a call from one former president and vice-president, one former governor and the current president to congratulate him on the show's 20th season. The three Bush's called live on the air to congratulate him. They didn't say thanks for exposing the CFR or the NAU or talk about SKUll and Bones. These people are conspirators and conspirators don't call their enemies to pat them on the back.
El Rushbo aka Rush Limbaugh
28
Thursday, 31 July 2008 19:46
James
Salata
I'm gklad that the JBS has finally come out with an article about him. I can remember back in 1995, listening to his program on the radio and day after day he would deny that there was a conspiracy and anyone who believed in the conspiracy was a "kook". I was well aware of the conspiracy back then, thanks to the JBS who I was introduced to in 1984, and had him figured out back then. Funny thing is you don't hear ElRushbo talk about any conspiracy today on his show or call anyone "kooks". He has to be in the hip pocket of the Insiders.
Talk Radio Jocks Are Gatekeepers
27
Wednesday, 30 July 2008 12:16
R Cozine
The proof is in the pudding, so to speak. I can't prove it's true and you can't prove it's false. I doubt we're going to sleuth out the memos.-)
A little discernment goes a long way. How long has Rush been on the air? I would guess 20+ years. Waiting for Rush and the other talk radio guys to talk seriously (without mocking those who are aware of a master conspiracy as tin foil hat wearing dupes) about the Conspiracy reminds me of the joke about the guy looking for his car keys under the street lamp even though he lost them down the block in the dark because the light is better under the lamp. It's not going to happen.
Rush Limbaugh and the other talk radio guys don't avoid the real topics because they're ignorant and just need a little more education. They know exactly what they're doing, and they would have no credibility if they weren't correct on many points. No, they don't talk about the real topics because they are gatekeepers; they are accomplices to this grand crime and they know who butters their bread.
Sinister Control
26
Tuesday, 29 July 2008 21:11
Gary Larson
With all due respect, I strongly disagree. If I am wrong I would love to be proven so. Really!
Of Course There Is Sinister Control
25
Monday, 28 July 2008 23:21
R Cozine
I'm not talking about FCC regulations. Of course there is sinister control. None of these talk radio clowns would have a job if they seriously advocated for the abolishment of the privately controlled Federal Reserve System and a return to sound banking, which would be the greatest thing that could possibly happen to this country.
I'm not defeatist, but the reality is that certain subjects are taboo even for bigshot blowhards like Limbaugh, so, in that sense, even he is micromanaged.
controlled media
24
Monday, 28 July 2008 22:30
Gary Larsonh
I think it's a mistake to attribute the behavior of people like Rush to some sort of sinister control. There are certainly FCC rules as to what a person can say on air, but, I highly doubt they extend to not discussing subjects like the NAU, Federal Reserve, 911 conspiracy, etc. If there are such rules I've never heard of them or seen any document to that effect. And, I doubt there are any such hard -and-fast rules by the owners of the radio stations either.
I believe Rush is merely adopting the ideas and attitudes of his hero, William F. Buckley - who with his vehement dislike of Birchers and other true conservatives, set the direction of the movement for the last half century.
Most of the media is is owned and controlled by a powerful few, and it frequently serves as a conduit for Insider propaganda. However, that doesn't mean that every bit of content is micro-managed from the top. There is still a wide margin of free expression- as witness a Lou Dobbs, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck and others.
Yes, there are tremendous forces arrayed against us, but we shouldn't be so negative that we end up defeating ourselves.
Beck, like Limbaugh, is controlled
23
Sunday, 27 July 2008 21:44
R Cozine
You mean the Glenn Beck who said that Ron Paul supporters perhaps represent a domestic enemy who demand scrutiny, and associated said supporters with violent terrorists because the Ron Paul campaign held a "money bomb" fundraiser on Nov. 5 2007 to coincide with the date that Guy Fawkes attempted to blow up the British Parliament in the Gunpowder Plot of 1605? That Glenn Beck?
No thanks. Beck will talk about the NAU and some other worthwhile topics, but it's the things he won't touch that are telling. He's a deceiver, just like Limbaugh.
Michael Savage gets closer to the truth than either Limbaugh or Beck, and he's still on the wrong side of things.
Lou Dobbs has been talking, nearly every day, about the NAU and border security for the past 3 years and people still don't believe it (the NAU) even exists.
I don't know what the answer is as far as getting the message out, but I know it won't be through the talk radio clowns. The media is controlled, and the controllers simply will not let the whole message get out over the airwaves under their control.
Talk Radio
22
Sunday, 27 July 2008 21:07
Gary Larson
I hate to sound like a "broken record," but, I really think talk radio is the way to go in order to influence masses of people. Its a sad but true state of affairs that most people don't spend much if any time reading to inform themselves.
I think Glenn Beck would be an excellent choice to work with. Glenn Beck has a very popular nationwide radio program and has discussed, albeit with some hesitation, subjects such as the NAU and the work of professor Carroll Quigley.
Rush
21
Sunday, 27 July 2008 19:20
Sammy
Rush, is such a loser and all the people who listen to him are so dumbed down its not funny, if they were not they be following Dennis Kusinich and Ron Paul. Rush is just a New World Order puppet!
SPP and its precursor, the FTAA
20
Sunday, 27 July 2008 15:56
R Cozine
OK John, I see you're earnestly trying to learn and engage people here and not yanking our chain. Sorry for misreading your intentions.
You probably can see now that Limbaugh's not the guy to enlist as an aide in this fight against the New World Order. It won't happen and makes about as much sense as inviting John Wayne Gacy over to babysit your kids. And yes, there is room at the table for you and others who are not (yet) members of the JBS.
Lee has given you good advice. I would like to mention one more thing that no one has said. The SPP is just the most recent incarnation of the drive for regional merger as a stepping stone to world merger. Its precursor was called the Free Trade Area of the Americas, or FTAA, and would have been a regional merger of all the countries of North, Central and South America, with Cuba being the lone exception. The FTAA was supposed to have been implemented by 2005, but was aborted because of widespread opposition in the US and abroad. Like NAFTA, CAFTA and other phony free trade agreements, the FTAA would have required a vote of Congress, which just wasn't gonna happen. The SPP, entered into in March of 2005 by George Bush, Vicente Fox and Paul Martin, is a stealth approach to merger, and was undertaken without the consent of Congress. Working groups within the State Department and Commerce Department are working behind the scenes to implement the provisions of this "agreement", which basically entails the political and economic merger of the US, Mexico and Canada, ostensibly for the purposes of making us safer and more secure.
The JBS produced a video about the FTAA called "In The Name of Prosperity: The Free Trade Area of the Americas", which is excellent and shows who the players are behind the drive for international merger and the subversion of national sovereignty (and, naturally, the concomitant subversion of the US Constitution). My favorite part is David Rockefeller quizzing Dick Cheney about the FTAA at a rare public meeting of the CFR. You can watch this exchange from the video on YouTube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbnpN07J_zg
Here is a fact sheet for the SPP from the White House website. If this isn’t a recipe for merger and subversion of national sovereignty I don’t know what it is.
"I am Prepared To Be Educated" ---On Security and Prosperity Partnership
19
Sunday, 27 July 2008 13:26
Lee
Gonzales
Mr Hanchey,
You have already connected the dots as to why the border(s) haven't been secured and why stopping the daily flow of illegals pouring mainly across our southern border is not part of this administration's agenda. That said please visit "ShopJBS.Org" under the category "ACTION" listed on the top of the page.
1: Order the video "The Real Face Of The European Union: It comes in three versions,
a) a self mailer with a very attractive color graphics package that can be mailed out. After you've viewed it mail it out to your friends across town or across the country.
b) a very nice looking cased version that can be used as part of your collection or as a gift to a graduate.
c) A DVD with the same disk graphics as the others except it comes in a simple plastic sleeve to cut down on costs.
2: Get a few copies of the "Merger In The Making" special issue of The New American magazine. This is a special issue dedicated entirely to the North American Union.
3. After you are informed share this with you friends and remember that educating your friends is sort of like fishing. Sometimes to get a bite and sometimes you don't. When the fish aren't biting you change the bait and keep on having fun!
What the JBS has accomplished or is working on, regarding the NAU/SPP, is in the JBS Bulletin. Please join us and you can read what we have been doing in this area with our 1 Million plus 100,000 copies of the special "Merger..." issue that have been delivered to specific opinion moulders. Our efforts in getting 42% of the States to introduce anti-NAU resolutions aimed at Congress to stop the North American Union is a direct result of the JBS project to get the special NAU Merger In the Making issue into the hands of over a million local political and civic leaders and other influential citizens. There are more details on our monthly bulletins about our campaign on stopping the NAU.
Insofar as the radio angle I can only ask you to visualize what could conceivably happen if this site-JBS.org - had a base of support that could support such a venture.In the meantime, there are ways to get the word out on local talk radio.Here in my home town that opportunity avails itself during the "open topics" hour. There are three staions with that forums,. One is totally secular and two are Christian stations. The local Catholic station is part of an affiliated network called EWTN that goes world wide!
The host is very accomodating.
As to the subjest of finding talk show host talent, I think that the talent is out there. Rush was a struggling sports announcer who was a conservative, albeit an uniformed one, when he started out. So I am certain there are many others as talented or more so than he is out there. But if talk radio is part of your daily habit, why not try the "liberal" staions and get in some words on the NAU there? Tom Harmon, spelling)(?) and Ed Schultz are probably the two most likely to listen to you for any length of time on the NAU. Tom more that Ed but the opportunity is there.
Fraudulentl Rush
18
Sunday, 27 July 2008 10:27
Las Vegas Bircher
I frequently meet conservative people who excitedly tell me what Limbaugh said and want me to agree with them that he is a true American patriot.
For instance, he sarcastically once called Obama a "Messiah." This sort of ridicule takes their minds off the real issues that they need to face, such as NAFTA and the SPP.
At the risk of ostracizing myself, I refer them to this web page. Then they are disappointed that I have smashed their icon. Well, let the chips fall where they may.
Congratulations for John McManus telling us the truth and disabusing us from Pied Piper Rush Limbaugh.
talk radio program
17
Saturday, 26 July 2008 21:48
Gary Larson
In reference to my previous posting about JBS starting its own radio program- perhaps they/ we could find an existing politically oriented radio show and encourage the host to discuss the subject of "conspiracy." My impression of most of them is that they are skeptics on the subject, but only because they are grossly misinformed. Admittedly, there is no shortage of really wacky ideas floating around out there, so it's not really surprising.
I believe an organization such as the Birch Society could do a credible job of educating these people to the truth, while working with them to develop an entertaining and informative program.
Hello Lee
16
Saturday, 26 July 2008 18:55
John B. Hanchey
Thank you for responding in such a courteous and informative manner.
Lee, I am prepared to be educated on this SPP and North American Union abomination. Frankly, I was unaware that such an effort was gaining so much momentum. I need to learn much more about it. I truly believe that most Americans would resist it's implementation, but if the history of the EU is of any relevance it may be such a subtle transition that most of us would not recognize the threat until it is too late.
I must concede that the immigration debacle makes much more sense when viewed from this NAU perspective. Perhaps our "leaders" believe that the chaos in the American southwest will eventually make this Union a forgone conclusion without them having to seriously sully their political credentials to do it. Scary stuff. Gives a whole new meaning to "Reconquista."
If this NAU is as serious an issue as you purport it to be, the "war on terror" would seem to be a convienent distraction. I want to know much more about this. And I would like to somehow force Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, Ingram, Elders, and the others to address it. I think I know where Ingram would stand, but I'm not so sure about the rest.
First, I want to learn as much about this as I can. Please suggest books and articles (in addition to Mr. McManus' book) that you found to be reliably researched and trustworthy. Second, how is JBS currently addressing this issue? Are we just talking about it or are there concrete actions that I can participate in if I so choose. Last how do we get 20 million conservatives to recognize the threat?
I am very enthusiastic about our own radio show, but we would have to invest some serious capital to make it happen. Take "Air America" for instance. It had the financial backing of Satan's little helper himself, George Sorros, and it tanked for lack of a coherent and valid message. But most importantly, it lacked talent. And real talent is extremely expensive. I would be willing to help back such an effort if we could find a worthy messenger.
Finally Lee, thanks again for your reply and your information. I will try to learn as much about this NAU nonsense as I can. At this point I still believe we have an army waiting in the wings if we will only court her. I look forward to your ideas and suggestions.
Mr. Hanchey
15
Saturday, 26 July 2008 10:07
Lee
Gonzales
Have you heard of a book written by John F. McManus titled:
William F. Buckley- Pied Piper For The Establishment"? McManus once admired Buckley and was critical of Robert Welch, the founder of the JBS. Buckley represented the epitome of the so-called "New Right," with its support for big government, et al. The book is an amazing journey through the words and actions and thinking of these new right leaders who have embraced this whole concept of one worldism. Mr. Limbaugh, according to Mr.McManus, views himself as the heir apparent of the New Right. The criticizism isn't directed at Mr. Limbaugh's penchant for making money, but for his role as the misdirector, if you will, for sending his listeners and followers down the wrong trail to battle the liberals on minor battles. The major battle where America truly needs fresh troops is in the theater of operations called the North American Union.It is in this major front that Mr. Limbaugh is in my opinion playing the role that he is being paid those millions for. If you stop to think about it the Establishment is having to spend huge amounts of their money just one this one man just to keep the natives quiet!
To the gentlman who wondered about a JBS radio show. Yes that would be wonderful and there is an audience. In Phoenix our people have a one hour show on a popular am station. More shows like this need to go on the air. But until we get the air support we have to slug it out down here in the trenches with the Establishment with our books, pamphlets and DVDs.
Some Good Comments
14
Saturday, 26 July 2008 09:37
Tony Anderson
A number of comments posted here are right on the mark, establishing the clarity that Mr. McManus was not attacking Rush for his wealth or capitalist abilitites, but rather his Establishment connections and spreading disinformation to his listeners.
I have been a Rush listener since '91, a former subsciber of his Limbaugh Letter and Website Membership. I've also read both his books, which I must admit were great reads.
What has always bothered me about Rush is his staunch neo-conservative and Bush I & II Administration support, even when the issues are anti-Constitutional. He has an uncanny ability of persuasion to mislead his listeners with keywords such as "conservatism" and "patriotism," and should a caller's view disagree with his, you're a liberal whose intellectual compass is misguided. Limbaugh generally clings to the Constitution only when his wallet/assets could be adversely affected.
He has on a number of occasions invited VP Dick Cheney (former CFR Director) on the show and has literally worshipped William F. Buckley Jr., totally avoiding all the highly skeptical skeletons from these men's closet, but rather defending them instead.
Mr. McManus has hit the nail on the head here, as he usually does!
talk radio
13
Friday, 25 July 2008 23:13
gary larson
Question: Why doesn't JBS create their own syndicated radio program? I think there is a huge market for their ideas, and if done correctly it could be a success.
By the Way
12
Friday, 25 July 2008 18:44
John B. Hanchey
If we don't enlist somebody as "aides against the New World Order," we are going to be swallowed by it.
C'mon R. Cozine
11
Friday, 25 July 2008 18:39
John B. Hanchey
I'm not trying to yank anybody's chain, but I am glad that you are all engaging here.
How can you honestly assert that greed is not the primary motivational force for the capitalist system? If you are a Christian, and I have no doubt that you are, you already know that man is weak, corrupt, and incapable of redemption without our Lord Jesus Christ. Capitalism addresses the reality of man's sinfulness and turns it to good through entrepreneurship, creativity, and desire for gain. And yes sometimes you have to ally with lesser mortals to accomplish anything. The problem is that there simply aren't enough of you "intellectual giants" to get anything done. Your power is in the influence of your ideas and you will never influence anyone if you continue to alienate the less educated. Can't you see that? Work within the system to topple it is all I am saying.
I don't suppose JBS members are the only people welcome at your table are they? Don't you make good faith efforts every day to educate your friends that don't share all of your views? Why shouldn't the same hold true for society at large ... a society we are desparately trying to change.
Sometimes I think many of us would prefer to moan and complain in private rather than addressing the reality of the contemporary and working with what we have inherited to change it.
I am not trying to be confrontational or antagonistic to anyone here. I respect the hell out of all of your views. This country needs your commitment and your patriotism. Don't deny it your talents by being so damn hardheaded.
This country is ripe for change, but it is not of the sort Mr. Obama thinks it is. It is ready to return to the first principles of it's founding. We should court everyone willing to help bring that about. I want both parties relegated to the ash-heap Many Republicans are learning now that the party has abandoned their values ... Limbaugh will figure that out too.
If I overeacted with Larry, it's simply because I don't like him implying that I am a liar.
Cliches don't wash
10
Friday, 25 July 2008 16:11
R Cozine
John's yanking our chain here. I find it difficult to believe that he actually believes the cliches he uses to make his points. The enemy of my enemy is my friend--Greed is good. What a bunch of trite garbage. Also, using members of the internationalist Establishment (the Vanderbilts, Morgans and Goulds) as examples of Americans to be exalted may fly with dumbed down Limbaugh listeners, but it won't work with the better informed folks who frequent the JBS websites.
Limbaugh and the others mentioned are the front men for the domestic enemies we have been warned about. They should be exposed for what they are, not enlisted as "aides" in the fight against the New World Order, which is a laughable notion anyway. They're deceivers and liars, and are thus not useful in helping to expose the machinations of the power elite so hell bent on the destruction of this country.
Oh really Larry?
9
Friday, 25 July 2008 15:10
John B. Hanchey
I suppose on your logic the founders should have eschewed the alliance with the despotic regime of Louis XVI in favor of a more ideologically compatible partner right? Who would you have suggested? If it were left to minds as dull as yours we'd still be flying the Union Jack. You shouldn't be so quick to label a man a liar.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend
8
Friday, 25 July 2008 14:18
Larry Brown
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend" is a bare faced lie.
To My Colleagues Lee and Michael
7
Friday, 25 July 2008 13:27
John B. Hanchey
I was glad to see that my comments about Rush illicited such a passionate and informed response from both of you. It is clear to me that you are both patriots and as concerned as I am with the dangerous path our country is currently taking. However, I still don't see how attacking Rush helps our cause.
First, I took more offence at Mr. McManus' indictment of Limbaugh's earnings than I did to his assault on his political stances. I admit that Mr. Limbaugh falls short of the ideal in several catagories. But we should be extremely careful when criticizing greed. Greed gentlemen built this country, and we should embrace it. Greed and self interest are the twin engines of Capitalism. Once we can admit that and stop trying to pretend we are all saints we will be much better off. Perhaps I'm not the one that needs to bone up on my history.
Would you suggest for instance that John Hancock was motivated purely by idealistic ferver? Madison and Adams freely admit, and even argue adamantly, that our entire system of government is based on the free working of self interested parties, their very competition ensuring that no one group gains a monopoly of power. That is the genius of it. You may cry sacriledge, but the "Revolution" was in fact no revolution at all. It was a reactionary event led and controlled by wealthy property owners who rightly percieved a threat to their perogatives by the British Parliament. And God bless them for it. Their corporate indignation led to the creation of the greatest country the world has ever known.
No gentlemen, we should celebrate Rush's piles of cash just as we should be unrepentant of the massive fortunes of the Vanderbilts, Goulds, and Morgans of history. Fortunes that made our country the ultimate power on this earth. We should all dipense with the pathetic guilt liberals perpetually try to saddle us with.
Second, Rush may indeed be softer than we would prefer on issues regarding national soveriegnty. I recoiled in horror at his endorsement of the Dubai Ports Deal. He was wishy-washy on the McCain-Kennedy Immigration Bill. And he is much too generous with his praise for NAFTA, GATT, and other so-called "Free Trade Agreements." Bailing out Mexico or Fannie May or Chrystler or The Savings and Loan is a crime against the American citizen and an assault on the "due process" clause of the 14th Amendment. Limbaugh has failed in his duty to cry foul in each instance. He is imperfect and flawed. I grant you all of this.
But why my friends should we drive a wedge between us and his 20 million listeners? Why should we not endeavor instead to pull them to the right with the force of our arguments? If we intend to acheive our goals of righting America's path and impeding it's slow march toward socialism and mediocrity we will need the influence of the new media to do it. Ingram and Hannity, Limbaugh and Coulter, are only a few steps removed from originalism. Coulter and Ingram move further right every day, and both of them make Hannity and Rush look like liberals.
It is not my intention to sacrifice the purity of our goals to political expediency. Please don't misunderstand me. I simply believe that alienating ourselves from Limbaugh's foot soldiers acheives nothing and forsakes much. I welcome any comments or discussion you gentlemen may have. I think this debate is proper and necessary. I appreciate both of your comments thus far and certainly look forward to our continued correspondence.
Not kidding you
6
Friday, 25 July 2008 12:19
Mike
We all know that the truth is out there and it's not the counterfeit truth being offered by various medias including Rush Limbaugh scattered around on the ground, in order to find the real truth you need to invest a little time and research something most Americans don't have the time or inclination for. Things like reading the Constitution and the debates that led to its adoption, reading the Federalist papers and undertaking a serious endeavor to learn American history minus the history revisionist version.
All these things I did and I might add accepting Jesus Christ into my life and adopting a biblical worldview, I don't care if Rush wants to make a buck I have nothing against the capitalist free-market system and believe its superior to the alternative but I listen to these callers to Rush's show and hear the holy type reverence they regard him with and these people really believe he is a champion of their cause when it's all just business to him.
I remember his kook test in the 90s how insulting and condescending to those of us who have done our homework, I lay the fact that John McCain is the Republican nominee to a large degree at Limbaugh's feet because of his fraudulent attacks and lies about Mike Huckabee and underhanded support for Mitt Romney who is nothing more than John Kerry repackaged with more charisma, Romney came to Iowa with barrels of money to buy the caucus but in the extended time he was here we learned the truth about him and that is that he's a fraud and Mike Huckabee who had barely any money won here because of his convictions and he was an evangelical Christian pro-life, profamily is a firm supporter of our right to bear arms and also supported abolishing the income tax and adopting the fair tax. Rush was merely one participant in the so-called conservative talkshow circuit that through Huckabee into the neocon club for growth meat grinder so now we have John McCain thanks to Rush Limbaugh, Shawn Hannidy, Ann Coulter and a host of others.
This American will no longer worship at the altar of Limbaugh or his ilk because my eyes have been opened to what he really is, if he claims to tell the truth then maybe he should start his show by explaining and confessing that it's just business and only a position not a conviction. Nothing against talkshow host we have two excellent talk radio hosts here in Des Moines Iowa and they and their guests have led me down the path of knowledge and discovering JBS and the ultimate truth about who's really running things.
I don't begrudge Limbaugh the money he has earned I know he gives to charities and has done some good works but it's not by works we are saved but by faith that goes for nations as well as individuals.
Once you learn the truth it's impossible to unlearn it, judge for yourself the quote below as to if it is true or not and ask yourself how is it going for us since we started kicking God out of America?
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." -- John Adams October 11, 1798
Rush is the worst kind of deceiver
5
Friday, 25 July 2008 12:09
R Cozine
Rush is the worst kind of deceiver. He's very good at what he does and is often correct, so his deception is more difficult to spot, especially for those who haven't been studying the New World Order for a long time.
But, make no mistake, Rush is working for the Establishment. He helps to keep well meaning "conservatives" in the dark and trapped in the false Democrat/Republican dialectic, in addition to cheerleading for unconstitutional wars and fanning the flames of fear of Islamic terrorists, never mind that all of the major Islamic terrorist organizations can be linked to the CIA, the Mossad or some other international intelligence agency.
As others have mentioned, Rush has supported free trade agreements and GATT, he won't mention the SPP and he really, really, really won't talk about the Federal Reserve. Hardly the mark of a Constitutionalist.
He deserves our scorn, not our admiration, and if anyone we know still believes he is telling the truth we should do our best to inform them otherwise.
By the way, nothing bores me faster than listening to how much money Rush makes or what kind of fancy car(s) he owns. Yawn.
Constitutionalist?
4
Friday, 25 July 2008 06:27
Michael Sawyer
To John B. Hanchey: How can you say Rush is a Constitutionalist? He supports, without apology, the unconstitutional wars we are currently involved in. A real Constitutionalist will stand on the principles contained in that document no matter the consequences. Rush is bought and paid for by the New World Order. Our Founding Fathers didn't fight the War for Independence and give us a Constitution so they could get rich. On the contrary, they pledged everything they had and lost much, in order to give us that precious document.
If Rush is so damaging to the Left, then why, with 20 million listeners, is Obama ahead in the polls right now? If he is a Constitutionalist why no mention of Ron Paul, the man in our government who has stood on that document for his entire political career.
I quit listening to Rush four years ago, when I began to get educated about the history of our country, and realized he is just a windbag for the powers that be. The whole bunch of them, Hannity, Ingraham, O'Reilly, et al are just Murdoch's lackeys. Turn them off and go read a book!! Visit the JBS store. Start with the Declaration of Independence.
Mr. McManus is right on target with Limbaugh
3
Friday, 25 July 2008 00:21
Lee
Gonzales
Mr. McManus wasn't criticizing "El Rushbo" for the money he makes. He quotes Mr. Limbaugh as describing himself as a "businessman" and as an "entertainer." You can read anything else into that except principled constitutionalist.
The talk show host isn't telling you anything that you don't already know. Don't kid yourself. Anyone can get on the air and say in "10 Minutes" how terrible the liberals are, or how bad Obama would be for the country.You would know those things without having this this man tell you that. At least I hope so!
The things he never mentions on the air tells us more about him that what he says. He doesn't mention the Council on Foreign Relations nor will he allow anyone to get on there and talk about this powerful and influential organization. He doesn't discuss the people behind the North American Community. Political conspiracy involving people from the CFR is a political incorrect zone on his program. How can anyone who purports to inform his audience going to accomplish that if he never mentions the people and the plans of the CFR? How will you be able to make the correct choice for president if you don't realize that a candidate is a member of an organization that favors the disapperance of the United States of America? Has Mr. Limbaugh ever mentioned on his show that John McCain favors creating a union called the Free Trade Area of The Americas? No and he won't because CFR people are welcomed guests on his show whereas conservatives like Pat Buchanan can't get on his show even when they offer to buy ad time on his show! But in case you are unaware of what the FTAA is, just think that Bill Clinton favored it. Then think that it is the Western hemisphere's version of the European Union. It is also something that was crafted by CFR people.
Unless listeners to a popular radio show are truly informed then it is nothing but entertainment.If you want to be entertained by a "businessman" that's fine with me. But don't expect people who are truly informed accept this label of "constitutionalist" that you placed on "El Rushbo."
Since the CFR is the epitome of political power in America, McManus's analysis of Mr. Rush Limbaugh is right on target.
This isn't Mr. McManus's first time at explaining the role that Mr. Limbaugh plays in keeping the natives quiet. The fact that the talk radio host supported the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and allowed Newt Gingrich to plug it on his show indicates to any student of the Constitution that Mr. Limbaugh is far from the "constitutionalist" that you say he is. GATT,(which had a name change to World Trade Organization), attacks the Constitution and strikes at the very core of America's sovereignty. Let me ask you Mr. Hanchey, if bailing out Mexico was right or wrong? If it was wrong for Bill Clinton to send Mexico millions of dollars of foreign aid why didn't Rush Limbaugh line up on against this issue? Mr. Limbaugh could have presented a "constituionalist's" point of view while the former federal Reserve chairman was on his show making a pitch for an unconstitutional bailout for Mexico.Instead he didn't challege Alan Greespan and left his listeners uninformed about two key issues. 1. the unconstitutionality of foreign aid progams 2. The CFR connections of Alan Greenspan.Instead this man who you obviously admire is keeping his listeners in the dark about the principles of constitutionalism and about the foes of America who belong to groups like the CFR who are working to abolish our independence as a sovereign nation.
Are You Kidding Me?
2
Thursday, 24 July 2008 20:08
John B. Hanchey
I can't beleive we are attacking Rush Limbaugh of all people!
Rush Limbaugh is an unrepentant, unapologetic, hard-core CAPITALIST! What the hell is wrong with that? Of course he is making a pile of cash, and we should celebrate it. Isn't that what the "American Dream" is all about? God forbid the day when talent and merit don't count for anything in America.
He is a true-blue, dyed in the wool, constitutionalist, and that is the truth. He thinks McCain is a spineless appeaser and I won't mention what he thinks of the "gentleman from Illinois." Lay off rush. He bashes the left on a daily basis, and damages them more in 10 minutes than you or I could do in a lifetime. Don't forget that the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Limbaugh tanking?
1
Thursday, 24 July 2008 17:21
Ed Lapinskas
No surprise that Limbaugh is / has become a 'spin master'.
"Anything for a Buck-Chuck" is what he should rename his show. Just another high dollar blow hard.
His claim may be justified. But, because the movement has been seized by socialist neoconservatives and Republican-über-alles conservatives, many Americans have abandoned the conservative label in favor of “constitutionalist.” If the definition of conservative can wander all over the landscape, as it certainly has, it makes far more sense to attach oneself to a hard and fast standard, even one that many conservatives have relegated to the dustbin of history.
But ive also heard Rush often accuse liberal democrats (Clintonites) of secret backroom meetings -called to order for the purpose of attermpting to strategize against republicans .
I believe thats a pretty good definition of a conspiracy.
All this political discussion is necessary i know , but prayer will win this battle . attempting to rationalize and make sense of American politics today is losing it . More prayer is needed and asking our Lord for his intervention is the answer . in my opininon.
This is in reality a spiritual battle we are fighting not a political one . And our country is spiritually sick . God can heal our country we must as a country turn to God and return to his Grace
Take the NAU as an example. Rush, along with many , many others really does not believe there is a plan to create an EU style political/economic merger. These skeptics think the failure to secure the border is merely due to ineptness, political squabbling, and short-sighted self interest among businessmen and politicians. I THINK THEY ARE WRONG- BUT I DON'T THINK THE VAST MAJORITY ARE ATTEMPTING TO DECEIVE ME. I do believe this mis-interpretation of events is encouraged by a very, very few "Insiders," such as David Rockefeller.
Unfortunately, those sincere but misguided individuals, who fail to see a larger agenda at work, (such as Rush) hold positions of great influence. Our job is to educate others, to assemble the pieces of the puzzle into a cohert picture so that they can see what we see, and take effective action to oppose it.
It irritates me as much as you people that Rush doesn't discuss so called "conspiracy" subjects. As smart and talented as Rush is, he is in many ways a shallow thinker.
Yes, Rush misleads those who look to him for guidance, but,he does not do so deliberately.
A little discernment goes a long way. How long has Rush been on the air? I would guess 20+ years. Waiting for Rush and the other talk radio guys to talk seriously (without mocking those who are aware of a master conspiracy as tin foil hat wearing dupes) about the Conspiracy reminds me of the joke about the guy looking for his car keys under the street lamp even though he lost them down the block in the dark because the light is better under the lamp. It's not going to happen.
Rush Limbaugh and the other talk radio guys don't avoid the real topics because they're ignorant and just need a little more education. They know exactly what they're doing, and they would have no credibility if they weren't correct on many points. No, they don't talk about the real topics because they are gatekeepers; they are accomplices to this grand crime and they know who butters their bread.
I'm not defeatist, but the reality is that certain subjects are taboo even for bigshot blowhards like Limbaugh, so, in that sense, even he is micromanaged.
I believe Rush is merely adopting the ideas and attitudes of his hero, William F. Buckley - who with his vehement dislike of Birchers and other true conservatives, set the direction of the movement for the last half century.
Most of the media is is owned and controlled by a powerful few, and it frequently serves as a conduit for Insider propaganda. However, that doesn't mean that every bit of content is micro-managed from the top. There is still a wide margin of free expression- as witness a Lou Dobbs, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck and others.
Yes, there are tremendous forces arrayed against us, but we shouldn't be so negative that we end up defeating ourselves.
No thanks. Beck will talk about the NAU and some other worthwhile topics, but it's the things he won't touch that are telling. He's a deceiver, just like Limbaugh.
Michael Savage gets closer to the truth than either Limbaugh or Beck, and he's still on the wrong side of things.
Lou Dobbs has been talking, nearly every day, about the NAU and border security for the past 3 years and people still don't believe it (the NAU) even exists.
I don't know what the answer is as far as getting the message out, but I know it won't be through the talk radio clowns. The media is controlled, and the controllers simply will not let the whole message get out over the airwaves under their control.
I think Glenn Beck would be an excellent choice to work with. Glenn Beck has a very popular nationwide radio program and has discussed, albeit with some hesitation, subjects such as the NAU and the work of professor Carroll Quigley.
You probably can see now that Limbaugh's not the guy to enlist as an aide in this fight against the New World Order. It won't happen and makes about as much sense as inviting John Wayne Gacy over to babysit your kids. And yes, there is room at the table for you and others who are not (yet) members of the JBS.
Lee has given you good advice. I would like to mention one more thing that no one has said. The SPP is just the most recent incarnation of the drive for regional merger as a stepping stone to world merger. Its precursor was called the Free Trade Area of the Americas, or FTAA, and would have been a regional merger of all the countries of North, Central and South America, with Cuba being the lone exception. The FTAA was supposed to have been implemented by 2005, but was aborted because of widespread opposition in the US and abroad. Like NAFTA, CAFTA and other phony free trade agreements, the FTAA would have required a vote of Congress, which just wasn't gonna happen. The SPP, entered into in March of 2005 by George Bush, Vicente Fox and Paul Martin, is a stealth approach to merger, and was undertaken without the consent of Congress. Working groups within the State Department and Commerce Department are working behind the scenes to implement the provisions of this "agreement", which basically entails the political and economic merger of the US, Mexico and Canada, ostensibly for the purposes of making us safer and more secure.
The JBS produced a video about the FTAA called "In The Name of Prosperity: The Free Trade Area of the Americas", which is excellent and shows who the players are behind the drive for international merger and the subversion of national sovereignty (and, naturally, the concomitant subversion of the US Constitution). My favorite part is David Rockefeller quizzing Dick Cheney about the FTAA at a rare public meeting of the CFR. You can watch this exchange from the video on YouTube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbnpN07J_zg
Here is a fact sheet for the SPP from the White House website. If this isn’t a recipe for merger and subversion of national sovereignty I don’t know what it is.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/03/20050323-4.html
You have already connected the dots as to why the border(s) haven't been secured and why stopping the daily flow of illegals pouring mainly across our southern border is not part of this administration's agenda. That said please visit "ShopJBS.Org" under the category "ACTION" listed on the top of the page.
1: Order the video "The Real Face Of The European Union: It comes in three versions,
a) a self mailer with a very attractive color graphics package that can be mailed out. After you've viewed it mail it out to your friends across town or across the country.
b) a very nice looking cased version that can be used as part of your collection or as a gift to a graduate.
c) A DVD with the same disk graphics as the others except it comes in a simple plastic sleeve to cut down on costs.
2: Get a few copies of the "Merger In The Making" special issue of The New American magazine. This is a special issue dedicated entirely to the North American Union.
3. After you are informed share this with you friends and remember that educating your friends is sort of like fishing. Sometimes to get a bite and sometimes you don't. When the fish aren't biting you change the bait and keep on having fun!
What the JBS has accomplished or is working on, regarding the NAU/SPP, is in the JBS Bulletin. Please join us and you can read what we have been doing in this area with our 1 Million plus 100,000 copies of the special "Merger..." issue that have been delivered to specific opinion moulders. Our efforts in getting 42% of the States to introduce anti-NAU resolutions aimed at Congress to stop the North American Union is a direct result of the JBS project to get the special NAU Merger In the Making issue into the hands of over a million local political and civic leaders and other influential citizens. There are more details on our monthly bulletins about our campaign on stopping the NAU.
Insofar as the radio angle I can only ask you to visualize what could conceivably happen if this site-JBS.org - had a base of support that could support such a venture.In the meantime, there are ways to get the word out on local talk radio.Here in my home town that opportunity avails itself during the "open topics" hour. There are three staions with that forums,. One is totally secular and two are Christian stations. The local Catholic station is part of an affiliated network called EWTN that goes world wide!
The host is very accomodating.
As to the subjest of finding talk show host talent, I think that the talent is out there. Rush was a struggling sports announcer who was a conservative, albeit an uniformed one, when he started out. So I am certain there are many others as talented or more so than he is out there. But if talk radio is part of your daily habit, why not try the "liberal" staions and get in some words on the NAU there? Tom Harmon, spelling)(?) and Ed Schultz are probably the two most likely to listen to you for any length of time on the NAU. Tom more that Ed but the opportunity is there.
For instance, he sarcastically once called Obama a "Messiah." This sort of ridicule takes their minds off the real issues that they need to face, such as NAFTA and the SPP.
At the risk of ostracizing myself, I refer them to this web page. Then they are disappointed that I have smashed their icon. Well, let the chips fall where they may.
Congratulations for John McManus telling us the truth and disabusing us from Pied Piper Rush Limbaugh.
I believe an organization such as the Birch Society could do a credible job of educating these people to the truth, while working with them to develop an entertaining and informative program.
Lee, I am prepared to be educated on this SPP and North American Union abomination. Frankly, I was unaware that such an effort was gaining so much momentum. I need to learn much more about it. I truly believe that most Americans would resist it's implementation, but if the history of the EU is of any relevance it may be such a subtle transition that most of us would not recognize the threat until it is too late.
I must concede that the immigration debacle makes much more sense when viewed from this NAU perspective. Perhaps our "leaders" believe that the chaos in the American southwest will eventually make this Union a forgone conclusion without them having to seriously sully their political credentials to do it. Scary stuff. Gives a whole new meaning to "Reconquista."
If this NAU is as serious an issue as you purport it to be, the "war on terror" would seem to be a convienent distraction. I want to know much more about this. And I would like to somehow force Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, Ingram, Elders, and the others to address it. I think I know where Ingram would stand, but I'm not so sure about the rest.
First, I want to learn as much about this as I can. Please suggest books and articles (in addition to Mr. McManus' book) that you found to be reliably researched and trustworthy. Second, how is JBS currently addressing this issue? Are we just talking about it or are there concrete actions that I can participate in if I so choose. Last how do we get 20 million conservatives to recognize the threat?
I am very enthusiastic about our own radio show, but we would have to invest some serious capital to make it happen. Take "Air America" for instance. It had the financial backing of Satan's little helper himself, George Sorros, and it tanked for lack of a coherent and valid message. But most importantly, it lacked talent. And real talent is extremely expensive. I would be willing to help back such an effort if we could find a worthy messenger.
Finally Lee, thanks again for your reply and your information. I will try to learn as much about this NAU nonsense as I can. At this point I still believe we have an army waiting in the wings if we will only court her. I look forward to your ideas and suggestions.
William F. Buckley- Pied Piper For The Establishment"? McManus once admired Buckley and was critical of Robert Welch, the founder of the JBS. Buckley represented the epitome of the so-called "New Right," with its support for big government, et al. The book is an amazing journey through the words and actions and thinking of these new right leaders who have embraced this whole concept of one worldism. Mr. Limbaugh, according to Mr.McManus, views himself as the heir apparent of the New Right. The criticizism isn't directed at Mr. Limbaugh's penchant for making money, but for his role as the misdirector, if you will, for sending his listeners and followers down the wrong trail to battle the liberals on minor battles. The major battle where America truly needs fresh troops is in the theater of operations called the North American Union.It is in this major front that Mr. Limbaugh is in my opinion playing the role that he is being paid those millions for. If you stop to think about it the Establishment is having to spend huge amounts of their money just one this one man just to keep the natives quiet!
To the gentlman who wondered about a JBS radio show. Yes that would be wonderful and there is an audience. In Phoenix our people have a one hour show on a popular am station. More shows like this need to go on the air. But until we get the air support we have to slug it out down here in the trenches with the Establishment with our books, pamphlets and DVDs.
I have been a Rush listener since '91, a former subsciber of his Limbaugh Letter and Website Membership. I've also read both his books, which I must admit were great reads.
What has always bothered me about Rush is his staunch neo-conservative and Bush I & II Administration support, even when the issues are anti-Constitutional. He has an uncanny ability of persuasion to mislead his listeners with keywords such as "conservatism" and "patriotism," and should a caller's view disagree with his, you're a liberal whose intellectual compass is misguided. Limbaugh generally clings to the Constitution only when his wallet/assets could be adversely affected.
He has on a number of occasions invited VP Dick Cheney (former CFR Director) on the show and has literally worshipped William F. Buckley Jr., totally avoiding all the highly skeptical skeletons from these men's closet, but rather defending them instead.
Mr. McManus has hit the nail on the head here, as he usually does!
How can you honestly assert that greed is not the primary motivational force for the capitalist system? If you are a Christian, and I have no doubt that you are, you already know that man is weak, corrupt, and incapable of redemption without our Lord Jesus Christ. Capitalism addresses the reality of man's sinfulness and turns it to good through entrepreneurship, creativity, and desire for gain. And yes sometimes you have to ally with lesser mortals to accomplish anything. The problem is that there simply aren't enough of you "intellectual giants" to get anything done. Your power is in the influence of your ideas and you will never influence anyone if you continue to alienate the less educated. Can't you see that? Work within the system to topple it is all I am saying.
I don't suppose JBS members are the only people welcome at your table are they? Don't you make good faith efforts every day to educate your friends that don't share all of your views? Why shouldn't the same hold true for society at large ... a society we are desparately trying to change.
Sometimes I think many of us would prefer to moan and complain in private rather than addressing the reality of the contemporary and working with what we have inherited to change it.
I am not trying to be confrontational or antagonistic to anyone here. I respect the hell out of all of your views. This country needs your commitment and your patriotism. Don't deny it your talents by being so damn hardheaded.
This country is ripe for change, but it is not of the sort Mr. Obama thinks it is. It is ready to return to the first principles of it's founding. We should court everyone willing to help bring that about. I want both parties relegated to the ash-heap Many Republicans are learning now that the party has abandoned their values ... Limbaugh will figure that out too.
If I overeacted with Larry, it's simply because I don't like him implying that I am a liar.
Limbaugh and the others mentioned are the front men for the domestic enemies we have been warned about. They should be exposed for what they are, not enlisted as "aides" in the fight against the New World Order, which is a laughable notion anyway. They're deceivers and liars, and are thus not useful in helping to expose the machinations of the power elite so hell bent on the destruction of this country.
First, I took more offence at Mr. McManus' indictment of Limbaugh's earnings than I did to his assault on his political stances. I admit that Mr. Limbaugh falls short of the ideal in several catagories. But we should be extremely careful when criticizing greed. Greed gentlemen built this country, and we should embrace it. Greed and self interest are the twin engines of Capitalism. Once we can admit that and stop trying to pretend we are all saints we will be much better off. Perhaps I'm not the one that needs to bone up on my history.
Would you suggest for instance that John Hancock was motivated purely by idealistic ferver? Madison and Adams freely admit, and even argue adamantly, that our entire system of government is based on the free working of self interested parties, their very competition ensuring that no one group gains a monopoly of power. That is the genius of it. You may cry sacriledge, but the "Revolution" was in fact no revolution at all. It was a reactionary event led and controlled by wealthy property owners who rightly percieved a threat to their perogatives by the British Parliament. And God bless them for it. Their corporate indignation led to the creation of the greatest country the world has ever known.
No gentlemen, we should celebrate Rush's piles of cash just as we should be unrepentant of the massive fortunes of the Vanderbilts, Goulds, and Morgans of history. Fortunes that made our country the ultimate power on this earth. We should all dipense with the pathetic guilt liberals perpetually try to saddle us with.
Second, Rush may indeed be softer than we would prefer on issues regarding national soveriegnty. I recoiled in horror at his endorsement of the Dubai Ports Deal. He was wishy-washy on the McCain-Kennedy Immigration Bill. And he is much too generous with his praise for NAFTA, GATT, and other so-called "Free Trade Agreements." Bailing out Mexico or Fannie May or Chrystler or The Savings and Loan is a crime against the American citizen and an assault on the "due process" clause of the 14th Amendment. Limbaugh has failed in his duty to cry foul in each instance. He is imperfect and flawed. I grant you all of this.
But why my friends should we drive a wedge between us and his 20 million listeners? Why should we not endeavor instead to pull them to the right with the force of our arguments? If we intend to acheive our goals of righting America's path and impeding it's slow march toward socialism and mediocrity we will need the influence of the new media to do it. Ingram and Hannity, Limbaugh and Coulter, are only a few steps removed from originalism. Coulter and Ingram move further right every day, and both of them make Hannity and Rush look like liberals.
It is not my intention to sacrifice the purity of our goals to political expediency. Please don't misunderstand me. I simply believe that alienating ourselves from Limbaugh's foot soldiers acheives nothing and forsakes much. I welcome any comments or discussion you gentlemen may have. I think this debate is proper and necessary. I appreciate both of your comments thus far and certainly look forward to our continued correspondence.
All these things I did and I might add accepting Jesus Christ into my life and adopting a biblical worldview, I don't care if Rush wants to make a buck I have nothing against the capitalist free-market system and believe its superior to the alternative but I listen to these callers to Rush's show and hear the holy type reverence they regard him with and these people really believe he is a champion of their cause when it's all just business to him.
I remember his kook test in the 90s how insulting and condescending to those of us who have done our homework, I lay the fact that John McCain is the Republican nominee to a large degree at Limbaugh's feet because of his fraudulent attacks and lies about Mike Huckabee and underhanded support for Mitt Romney who is nothing more than John Kerry repackaged with more charisma, Romney came to Iowa with barrels of money to buy the caucus but in the extended time he was here we learned the truth about him and that is that he's a fraud and Mike Huckabee who had barely any money won here because of his convictions and he was an evangelical Christian pro-life, profamily is a firm supporter of our right to bear arms and also supported abolishing the income tax and adopting the fair tax. Rush was merely one participant in the so-called conservative talkshow circuit that through Huckabee into the neocon club for growth meat grinder so now we have John McCain thanks to Rush Limbaugh, Shawn Hannidy, Ann Coulter and a host of others.
This American will no longer worship at the altar of Limbaugh or his ilk because my eyes have been opened to what he really is, if he claims to tell the truth then maybe he should start his show by explaining and confessing that it's just business and only a position not a conviction. Nothing against talkshow host we have two excellent talk radio hosts here in Des Moines Iowa and they and their guests have led me down the path of knowledge and discovering JBS and the ultimate truth about who's really running things.
I don't begrudge Limbaugh the money he has earned I know he gives to charities and has done some good works but it's not by works we are saved but by faith that goes for nations as well as individuals.
Once you learn the truth it's impossible to unlearn it, judge for yourself the quote below as to if it is true or not and ask yourself how is it going for us since we started kicking God out of America?
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." -- John Adams October 11, 1798
But, make no mistake, Rush is working for the Establishment. He helps to keep well meaning "conservatives" in the dark and trapped in the false Democrat/Republican dialectic, in addition to cheerleading for unconstitutional wars and fanning the flames of fear of Islamic terrorists, never mind that all of the major Islamic terrorist organizations can be linked to the CIA, the Mossad or some other international intelligence agency.
As others have mentioned, Rush has supported free trade agreements and GATT, he won't mention the SPP and he really, really, really won't talk about the Federal Reserve. Hardly the mark of a Constitutionalist.
He deserves our scorn, not our admiration, and if anyone we know still believes he is telling the truth we should do our best to inform them otherwise.
By the way, nothing bores me faster than listening to how much money Rush makes or what kind of fancy car(s) he owns. Yawn.
If Rush is so damaging to the Left, then why, with 20 million listeners, is Obama ahead in the polls right now? If he is a Constitutionalist why no mention of Ron Paul, the man in our government who has stood on that document for his entire political career.
I quit listening to Rush four years ago, when I began to get educated about the history of our country, and realized he is just a windbag for the powers that be. The whole bunch of them, Hannity, Ingraham, O'Reilly, et al are just Murdoch's lackeys. Turn them off and go read a book!! Visit the JBS store. Start with the Declaration of Independence.
The talk show host isn't telling you anything that you don't already know. Don't kid yourself. Anyone can get on the air and say in "10 Minutes" how terrible the liberals are, or how bad Obama would be for the country.You would know those things without having this this man tell you that. At least I hope so!
The things he never mentions on the air tells us more about him that what he says. He doesn't mention the Council on Foreign Relations nor will he allow anyone to get on there and talk about this powerful and influential organization. He doesn't discuss the people behind the North American Community. Political conspiracy involving people from the CFR is a political incorrect zone on his program. How can anyone who purports to inform his audience going to accomplish that if he never mentions the people and the plans of the CFR? How will you be able to make the correct choice for president if you don't realize that a candidate is a member of an organization that favors the disapperance of the United States of America? Has Mr. Limbaugh ever mentioned on his show that John McCain favors creating a union called the Free Trade Area of The Americas? No and he won't because CFR people are welcomed guests on his show whereas conservatives like Pat Buchanan can't get on his show even when they offer to buy ad time on his show! But in case you are unaware of what the FTAA is, just think that Bill Clinton favored it. Then think that it is the Western hemisphere's version of the European Union. It is also something that was crafted by CFR people.
Unless listeners to a popular radio show are truly informed then it is nothing but entertainment.If you want to be entertained by a "businessman" that's fine with me. But don't expect people who are truly informed accept this label of "constitutionalist" that you placed on "El Rushbo."
Since the CFR is the epitome of political power in America, McManus's analysis of Mr. Rush Limbaugh is right on target.
This isn't Mr. McManus's first time at explaining the role that Mr. Limbaugh plays in keeping the natives quiet. The fact that the talk radio host supported the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and allowed Newt Gingrich to plug it on his show indicates to any student of the Constitution that Mr. Limbaugh is far from the "constitutionalist" that you say he is. GATT,(which had a name change to World Trade Organization), attacks the Constitution and strikes at the very core of America's sovereignty. Let me ask you Mr. Hanchey, if bailing out Mexico was right or wrong? If it was wrong for Bill Clinton to send Mexico millions of dollars of foreign aid why didn't Rush Limbaugh line up on against this issue? Mr. Limbaugh could have presented a "constituionalist's" point of view while the former federal Reserve chairman was on his show making a pitch for an unconstitutional bailout for Mexico.Instead he didn't challege Alan Greespan and left his listeners uninformed about two key issues. 1. the unconstitutionality of foreign aid progams 2. The CFR connections of Alan Greenspan.Instead this man who you obviously admire is keeping his listeners in the dark about the principles of constitutionalism and about the foes of America who belong to groups like the CFR who are working to abolish our independence as a sovereign nation.
Rush Limbaugh is an unrepentant, unapologetic, hard-core CAPITALIST! What the hell is wrong with that? Of course he is making a pile of cash, and we should celebrate it. Isn't that what the "American Dream" is all about? God forbid the day when talent and merit don't count for anything in America.
He is a true-blue, dyed in the wool, constitutionalist, and that is the truth. He thinks McCain is a spineless appeaser and I won't mention what he thinks of the "gentleman from Illinois." Lay off rush. He bashes the left on a daily basis, and damages them more in 10 minutes than you or I could do in a lifetime. Don't forget that the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
"Anything for a Buck-Chuck" is what he should rename his show. Just another high dollar blow hard.