Hannity and Gingrich going round the bend
 

Sean and Newt were on the tube last night complaining about Biden saying he wanted to throw the execs who gave and got the $18 billion in bonuses after receiving taxpayer funds into the brig. They also dumped on BHO's remarks in the same vein, saying it was those executives right to make a profit and that they wouldn't stay in the business if they couldn't turn a profit.

Earth to Sean, earth to Newt: THEY DIDN'T TURN A PROFIT but behaved as though they did with the help of corporate welfare payments. This shows the depth of moral depravity of some the ivory tower suits: they think being wealthy for life is their birthright. And if the people providing those monies, ostensibly for the good of the nation, lose their house and struggle to feed the kids, oh well, they're the little people.

Sean and Rush are on the verge of self-destruction, or would be if there weren't so many rightie enablers equally delusional and stuck beyond stuck on their cherished ideology, of which they've apparently made secret blood pacts to support and defend for life, regardless of all new developments.

Somebody git a rope!

Sean is such a whiner. Now even more since Alan is not joining his company anymore.

To call himself the 'Great American Panel' and show up with bubbkle heads like Joe alias 'The Plumber', is a true delight.

I wonder if Sean ever watches any of his shows ...

Ps. not that Bill is much better, in fact, hardly anything he speaks does make any sense. I sincerely tried to understand his way of self expression. I came to the conclusion, he's just going for 'effects' and people happen to buy into it.

Blah, blah, blah...the extreme right is as full of ***** as the extreme left. That's why we need a moderate party who can take the good from both sides and make a system that works for everyone.

x2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Who are the representatives of the 'extreme left' on national tv. Just kind of interested ...

However, that's confirmative for the fact, that the media all together is rather useless, except to blur out your brains.

Personally, I think the bull bisquits backed up behind the media scenes are far worse than it seems ... from our side of the screen.

On a different note, what you are asking for requires a dramatic reset to a large portion of the American reality, lifestyle and philosophy.
For that matter, I don't think it's going to happen. Americans aren't up for that much cotton dry disillusionment.

This oughtta get your lacies all wadded-up.
Bot

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

Rush Limbaugh challenging notion of new politics
By DAVID BAUDER – 1 day ago

NEW YORK (AP) — For all the talk of new politics and a new start with a new administration, the media person who has emerged as the chief voice of opposition during the first week of Barack Obama's presidency — Rush Limbaugh — has been doing this for 20 years.

The talk-radio titan said, days before Obama was sworn in, that he hoped Obama failed because he didn't believe in the incoming president's policies. It's kept him in the headlines ever since, to the point where MSNBC on Thursday asked: "Is Rush running the GOP?" The day before, every Republican House member voted against Obama's economic stimulus plan, a bill Limbaugh has ridiculed as the "porkulus" plan.

"Obama was trying to marginalize me," Limbaugh said. "His hope was that the House and Senate Republicans would join him in denouncing me. Didn't work."

When Rep. Phil Gingrey, a Georgia Republican, tried to praise his House leadership this week by saying it's easy for talk-show hosts to stand back and throw bricks, the headline on the Politico Web site read: "House GOP member to Rush: Back off." Gingrey was so bothered by the phone calls of complaints that he visited four conservative talk-show hosts, including Limbaugh, the next day to apologize.

Limbaugh, he said, was a conservative giant and one of the "voices of the conservative movement's conscience."

Can it get any better for a personality whose business is built on buzz? "Rush Limbaugh is first and foremost a radio performer," said Michael Harrison, publisher of the trade journal Talkers magazine, which notes that Limbaugh has been the most listened-to talk-show host since at least the mid-1990s. "He's not a political leader. He doesn't make more money by turning elections. He only exists to gather large audiences and raise more advertising revenue and he does it terrifically."

(Limbaugh is heard on some 600 radio stations across the country, and more than 14 million people listen to him at least once a week.)

Yet count columnist Michael Wolff, writing in a newser.com column picked up by the Huffington Post, as one who believes Limbaugh is "being played."
He could prove valuable to the president, who has sought bipartisan support for many of his plans and romanced Republicans in his first week in office. Being able to point to an opponent like Limbaugh could help him with the millions of Americans for whom the message of ending partisan bickering rang true on Election Day.

Obama even cited Limbaugh in seeking support for his economic plans. "You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," he said. "There are big things that unify Republicans and Democrats. We shouldn't let partisan politics derail what are very important things that need to get done."

A liberal advocacy group, Americans United for Change, said Friday it was using Limbaugh's words in radio ads it was launching against three Republican senators: Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, George Voinovich of Ohio and John Ensign of Nevada. The ads, supporting Obama's economic plan, urges voters in those states to call their senator and "tell him he represents you, not Rush Limbaugh."

Wolff wrote that he believed the dinner Obama had with conservative columnists before his inauguration was a pointed snub to Limbaugh. "He's tried to make it out to be a political point ever since," he wrote, "but mostly he sounds like a guy who's hurt he didn't get invited to the hot party."

Asked about Wolff's comments, Limbaugh said, "Who?"

Another conservative talk-show host, William Bennett, said on CNN that Limbaugh's statement wasn't a good idea.

"The locution — `I want him to fail' — is not what you say the first week the man's been inaugurated," he said.

He noted that former President Bill Clinton used to talk about Limbaugh all the time. "It never helped Bill Clinton," Bennett said. "It certainly helped Rush."

Whiners
 

Valor dictates the un-indicted vanquished hang their heads in shame and
broadcast on the Public's Airwaves Never again.
(Of course moral ideals and common courtesy get in the way of raving Lunatics)

I'll never understand the holders of FCC licenses putting this kind of trash on the air.

The advertisers who allow these cretins to abuse the listening public are
banking negative karma in such large denominations as to endanger their
great,great,great grandchildren.

Limbaugh called out
 

So the problem I have with Rush Limbaugh is he is in it to create controversy, not to create answers. It would be wonderful if the greater "we"... everyone ... could work together to make life better for all of us. Some sacrifice and some benefit from all, and a better country to live in for all.

In the last couple of days one of the CNN financial hacks made some comments and Limbaugh said he was full of crap. Now that may be true, but he offered no solutions of his own from what I understand. Campbell Brown challenged Limbaugh to come out of his protected safety zone and offer to debate and compare ideas in the light of day, no filtered call list. Defend his ideas with a real debate. We'll see if he does. My money is he stays hidden behind his golden microphone and call screener.

Pelosi and the hard core Democrats are just as guilty.... we really need all the smarts we have to make the entire US better. Hope Obama straightens her out as well.

As we spiral down the toilet.
Who cares if one is a leftie, and one a rightie.
Their both turds.

Capitolism has never made much sense to me.
Why do people want to take from others, so they can have more than they need ?

Morals, are more valuable than stuff.

Why do we split ourselves into two waring camps ? ( left and right )
Were just fighting ourselves.

I am you, you are me, and we are all together... --John, Paul, Ringo, George

His goal is to earn a living, just like most of the rest of us. His formula works better than mine. Oh well.

Simply stated, it is because Capitalism WORKS.
It uses people's basic self interest to survive.
History Lesson time---
When the Pilgrims first landed, they were ruled by their famous Mayflower Compact. As you know, this was an agreement that all the crops and game they had went into a common storehouse. Each family would take only what they needed. ( From each according to his ability; to each according to his needs--sounds like Marx!)
The result is that they were starving. There was no incentive for the young men to work hard only to be deprived of the fruits of their extra labor, so they became lazy.

Eventually the Pilgrims made a new agreement recognizing that everyone owned whatever they produced. This arrangement produced extra food which they could use for barter with the indigenous population. You may know this celebration of abundance as "the first Thanksgiving".

The flip side, as it were, is that Capitalism is only suited for a moral people. No one argues that the Pilgrims were moral.
One could argue that we are no longer a moral people, but a corrupt society in which everyone ( almost everyone) seeks only his own benefit, and has no concept of community. In this environment, Capitalism requires rules and regulations to provide that restraint that is lacking in many individuals.
Regulated capitalism can fail in two distinct manners; It can fail from inadequate regulation, or it can fail from excessive regulation.

An example of the first would be the excessive executive compensation that is literally millions of times what the employees who actually produce the goods or services is paid. This is wrong for several reasons, but one is that it inflates the price charged for the goods and services.

An example of over-regulation would be the recent banking scandal where government forced banks to make bad loans under threat of legal action.

The fact that the banks then bundled the bad loans into "investment: vehicles, and found buyers for them complicates the issue. Further complications arose when these same banks paid their execs millions of $$ in bonuses, and then begged the taxpayers for $$.


Your,
Morals, are more valuable than stuff.
is very much right on target. Capitalism w/o morals is greed.
OTOH unbridled Communism is even worse, as all power is in the hands of a self-selected few who, if history is any guide, rule with an iron hand, ( behind a curtain of iron).

IMO, for a non-moral, or amoral society, properly regulated capitalism is the better economic system.

Yup. He also has an inflated sense of self importance. Just keep saying his name and you give him what he wants.

He's simply an "entertainer",no more,no less.

Just like this dyspeptic,drug-addled endomorph Rush.

Problem is there be many benighted blockheads who can't distinguish a handsaw from a handjob who look to these loons for ideas and opinions they are incapable of either forming or understanding.