The conservative insanity over the Cindy Sheehan protest just keeps getting more and more bizarre. The latest comes from Rush Limbaugh who, from the sound of things, is not just back on the hillbilly heroin, but also taking horse tranquilizers and a full case of children's Robitussin.
From Media Matters:
LIMBAUGH: I mean, Cindy Sheehan is just Bill Burkett. Her story is nothing more than forged documents. There's nothing about it that's real, including the mainstream media's glomming onto it. It's not real. It's nothing more than an attempt. It's the latest effort made by the coordinated left.Jesus, that's so surreal I don't even know where to begin. Nothing about the protest is real? What does that even mean? Does he think Casey Sheehan wasn't actually killed in Iraq, that he's hiding out in the attic like George Bluth? Forged documents? Does he think Cindy Sheehan forged the death certificate, or ... what? The posters at the rally?
Also, as the lovely and wise Malibu Stacy just pointed out to me, if Limbaugh thinks the left is "coordinated," then he's definitely back on the Oxycontin. The left these days is about as coordinated as Bambi on the frozen pond.
Of course, that doesn't stop Limbaugh from wanting to strike back against the powerful left that currently controls
LIMBAUGH: We just had Stephen Breyer saying, oh, yeah, totally appropriate, we must import what they're doing around the world in other democracies, it will help buttress their attempt to establish the rule of law, and we might learn something, too. Well, here's something I'd like to import. I'd like to import the ability that the Brits are doing to export and deport a bunch of hate-rhetoric filled mullahs and imams that are stoking anti-American sentiment. Wouldn't it be great if anybody who speaks out against this country, to kick them out of the country? Anybody that threatens this country, kick 'em out. We'd get rid of Michael Moore, we'd get rid of half the Democratic Party if we would just import that law. That would be fabulous. The Supreme Court ought to look into this. Absolutely brilliant idea out there.Only half the Democratic Party? Huh. Must have been on a reduced dose that day.
10 comments:
I know I go on and on about Paul Hackett, but last week on the Ed Shultz show, Paul called Rush a "fatass drug addict" (http://mydd.com/story/2005/8/8/233333/1849). This is the same guy who called the president a S.O.B. He is not the most, errr tactfull guy, but what a way with words.
While I agree that Limbaugh is a morAn, let me propose my view on this that may be somewhat aligned with his sentiment, at least with Tony Blair's anyway.
Western nations have, in general, welcomed people of all different cultures with open arms. Of course, there are biggots and xenophobes everywhere, but relative to many other countries and history, the West is relatively tolerant, open and allows people to practice their faith, beliefs, values, etc. with litle restriction.
Many Muslims do not respect this at all and come to Western countries and label "white" people as corrupt, consider all women here to be sluts and are completely insular and make NO effort to integrate and adapt to their new environment. On top of that, a growing percentage of first and second generation Muslims are becoming more radical (e.g. London bombers) and imams are continuously spewing hatred towards the evil West in mosques. I know this because my parents are Muslim and I can see what is happening in their social circles. Educated professionals in Canada and the US ironically love living in this society yet look down on anyone who is not Muslim and loathe "western culture". And the percentage of people like this is NOT small.
Living in the West is not a right, it is a privilege. If someone wants to move to my country and considers me corrupt, my wife a slut and sympathizes with people that are bombing civilians, why accept him or her?
Islam is not a religion of peace. That is PC crap. If you read and study the Koran, you will see that it is very specific in prescribing violence. The goal of Islam is world domination and this is directly from the Koran. While the Bible is also violent and backwards, there are distinct differences between it and the Koran that make Islam a much more dangerous religion.
Now it's time for sleep, that's where I'm a viking.
Ralphie, my parents are Catholic, so I'm only qualified to weigh in on the priest molestations.
But a couple things:
First, the British example is different than the American one. Muslims in Britain largely live in ghettoized slums, while those here have been largely integrated into economic and political life. (Check out suburban Dearborn, Michigan -- it's like Desperate Housewives without the whorish women.)
Second, Limbaugh wasn't saying throw out the Muslim leaders advocating violence. We already have laws to crck down on people who do that. He was saying that if you don't support the government enough, if you dare raise questions, if you disagree with Dear Leader, then you should be shown the door.
I'm assuming he doesn't count all the times he himself blasted Clinton or referred to federal agents as "jack-booted thugs."
I definitely agree that Limbaugh's statements were / are ridiculous.
I think there may be a sentiment that resonates however - I am not a big fan of over-extending tolerance to people who despise me.
I also agree that there is a difference in the economic status between Muslims here and in Britain. However, there is still a common thread that links the 2 which is a general condemnation of Western values as being corrupt and immoral. This increases the hypocrisy of those in the US that are well off and integrated into society because on one hand they socialize and work with Westerners, however behind their back they criticize and ridicule them and their values.
Oh by the way, the punishment for apostasy in Islam is death. So don't rat me out! Let's just call me Ralph W. No wait, how about R. Wiggum. yes, that will do.
I don't think we can get too tied up in what a religious tome teaches/does not teach. I think history pretty clearly shows that people find in a text whatever they want to. The Bible has been invoked in defense of blatantly anti-Christian things such as slavery, murder, racism, and the death penalty (if it's good enough for Jesus...)
I've heard that argument before and there is a distinct difference between the Bible and the Koran, a difference that should not be ignored and swept under the rug due to political correctness.
In Islam it is explicitly forbidden to make any change, adaptation or evolution of the book or religious values. It is considered the literal word of God and the perfect book. Christians and Jews have continuously re-examined their religion and adapted it for the times. In the Koran, anyone who suggests such a thing is an infidel.
Islam is based on a set of rules that are designed to guide every aspect of your life. It is a social construct and has explicit rules that can never be changed. It is much more prescriptive than the Bible, (e.g. I'm Mr. Allah, blah blah blah, do this do that, blah blah blah). The Bible is viewed as more of a historical document versus a set of rules on things that cover coduct, behavior, prescriptions on how inheritance should be handled, how to wash yourself, pretty much everything you can think of.
3) The Koran & Islamic law explicitly state the following:
- If your wife is disobedient, you should hit her as a last resort
- Jews should not be trusted
- Polytheists should convert or be killed
- The goal of Islam is to have the entire world eventually convert.
- An apostate should be killed
- Women are too dumb to testify in court, 2 women's testimony is equal to that of one man's.
I can go on.
Bottom line is, don't assume the traditional view that all religions are good and preach good and they have been hijacked by bad people. Islam is inherently a horrible religion that retards any evolution, freedom and the human spirit. And the evidence is clear. Look at human rights in Muslim countries. Look at the number of terrorist activities that have Muslims at the source, and not just isolated in one country. Pakistan, the Middle East, Indonesia, Russia, Egypt.
I am not trying to promote hatred of Muslims. Islam itself is the problem and Muslims need to make some major changes to the religion and critically examine it. I don't see this happening however, so I think it's prudent to weary of this cancer spreading across the globe.
Also, my cats' breath smells like cat food.
By the way, I don't mean to sound like a radical or the guy holding the "Morans" sign in Otto's earlier picture.
I'm just challenging the default thinking that "Islam has been hijacked" and want people to critically examine ALL of the reasons that there is a growing cultural war between Islam and the West.
The Bible is viewed as more of a historical document versus a set of rules on things that cover coduct, behavior, prescriptions on how inheritance should be handled, how to wash yourself, pretty much everything you can think of.
The first part sounds a lot like fundamentalist Christians -- homosexuality is bad because the Bible says so, women should submit to their husbands because the Bible says so, you should give 10% of your salary to the church because the Bible says so, etc. etc. And the second part sounds like rabbinical law. Here's what you can eat, and here's how it can and can't be cooked.
And both of those traditions have militant sects, too, whether it be the fundamentalist Christians killing abortion doctors and blowing up their clinics, or the Israeli rabbis currently praying for Sharon's death.
Look, I know you want Islam to be especially crazy just because you love your parents, Ralphie, but the rest of our religions can be just as crazy too. So there.
As far as I know, the Bible does not have the equivalent of the Hadith (collection of sayings / beliefs of the prophet) and the Sharia (Text that defines Islamic Law).
These 2 documents go light years ahead of the Bible's commands to not eat shellfish, etc. They are guidebooks for an Islamic State. Books that result in an oppressive, misogynist, backwards state.
However, forget analysis of the texts, Just take a look at "Christian" countries versus "Islamic" ones. Which would you rather live in? Or, which would your wife / mother / sister rather live in.
Another great example - India. Prior to 1947, India and Pakistan were one country. After seperation, the key difference between the 2 was that Pakistan was an Islamic state and India a Hindu one.
NOW: India - global economic power developing the top tech / business talent in the world through IIT. More and more corporations offshoring.
Pakistan - On the verge of a terrorist state, breeding ground for fundamentalism, highly oppressive of women.
Give me one example of a progressive Islamic state (with the exception of Turkey)?
Give me one example of a progressive Islamic state (with the exception of Turkey)?
Well, you took away my answer.
But it's not really a fair question, since there's no Christian state in which the religion is so closely wedded to politics like it is in some of the Islamic fundamentalist states.
Post a Comment