Rush Limbaugh both deplores and welcomes a government shutdown. Confused? Not as much as Michael Savage is
As the budget debate gets more heated, fiscal conservative radio hosts are prepared to do anything to block the president's proposals, even if it means shutting down the federal government.
Rush Limbaugh
Rush Limbaugh believes that not only is a government shut down inevitable if an agreement cannot be reached on the budget, but that the President may actually be pushing for this outcome (listen to clip, read transcript).
"Don't think for a moment Obama's not setting up a government shutdown here and try to recreate 1995: shift the blame to the Republicans. I mean, they're doing their own budget. Obama's budget's a blueprint; all presidents' budgets are. Congress actually does the budget. And they'll send it up there, and if Obama vetoes the thing, then he wants a shutdown. He wants a shutdown because he thinks he can reverse his own fortunes, just like Der Schlick Meister, Bill Clinton, did in 1995."
Limbaugh is referring, of course, to the government shutdown orchestrated by Newt Gingrich in 1995, which didn't work out so well for Republicans, particularly Gingrich who has not held office since. Limbaugh is pretty sure, however, that the outcome will not be so favourable for Democrats this time round.
People in the email ask, "Well, are you for a shutdown, Rush? You were for it last time." Damn right I am! Shut it down! Let's prove again we can live without it for a few weeks!
But as ready as Limbaugh is to exploit a government shutdown as a means to show Americans that we don't really need a government anyway (who cares if the fire truck shows up on time?), he is anxious that Republicans avoid any political fallout by making sure, this time round, that they are not seen to be the responsible party.
We make it clear that he [Obama] is shutting down the government for his own political reasons. We make it clear that he and his media are treating this as a giant political game all for him to win. 1995 was what it was. This is a different time and different place today. For one thing, Obama is not Clinton. Clinton, there was no better liar than Clinton, and there still isn't. Obama is a stumbler! You take the teleprompter away, and he's got zilch.
And Limbaugh believes it will be easier for Republicans to shift the blame this time because of the rise in rightwing media outlets.
In 1995, basically it was still me. There was no Fox. There was no giant blog network. The new media was in its birth stages, if you will. It's a whole different day, today. It's a whole different time. We've gotta tell people exactly what's going on. Barack Obama is holding the government hostage for his own political ambitions. He's playing a game with it! His whole budget is a game. There's nothing serious in it.
Limbaugh may find, however, that there aren't too many Americans who think playing with their economic wellbeing is a game.
Laura Ingraham
Laura Ingraham stopped short of pushing for a government shutdown, but she was far from supportive of the president, whom she believes is spending the country into oblivion (listen to clip).
"What was he saying about monopoly money not so long ago? Here's my message to you [President Obama]. Do not pass go, do not collect 200. Go directly to jail!"
Ingraham, like many fiscal conservatives, managed to get through the Bush years without bursting a blood vessel, despite the fact that the Republican-led Congress and the Republican president turned a budget surplus into a $1tn deficit by instigating tax cuts at the same time as launching the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. Now, however, she has become hyper-aware of the dangers of living beyond our means.
So, what happens? Well, America ceases to have any influence in the world ? and here's the story that isn't getting written about. The dollar becomes gradually more and more worthless as time goes on. Now, why do I say that? Because people start believing that the investment in the United States doesn't make any sense. When the deficit gets so big, when the national debt reaches these levels, it means that no longer is the United States the "good old USA" as a good old investment.
Ingraham refers to a Washington Post editorial that criticises the president for not taking bold enough steps to "raise revenue and curb entitlement spending". She reads through most of the article on the air and agrees wholeheartedly with the parts that project dire estimates for future deficits and that deride some of the president's proposals as "gimmickry", but she has a swift change of heart when she gets to the final paragraph in which the Washington Post editors mention the "T word".
The Washington Post, of course, loses us at the end because it says that we should have across-the-board tax increases ? so it starts off at Paul Ryan and it ends up at Chris Dodd.
Love of country is all very well, apparently ? just not when it comes to paying taxes.
Michael Savage
Michael Savage had no time for budget and deficit discussions, so concerned was he about the rise of Islam, the fall of Israel, and how it all affects him (listen to clip).
He plays an excerpt from a recent speech given by former President Jimmy Carter ? whom Savage introduces as the "well-known Jew-hater" and "one of the most dangerous men to have walked the earth" ? in which Carter says that there is little reason to fear that the Muslim Brotherhood will be taking over Egypt.
Savage interprets the speech as a direct endorsement of radical Islam and goes into a long diatribe about why he thinks the radical Islamists enjoy the support of liberals and self-loathing Jews in America. He gets very worked up and does some shouting, and then part of broadcast appears to have been edited out (perhaps in deference to the new era of civility). He sounds calmer after the break.
I am not agitated. I'm cold and I'm clear, I'm seeing as clearly as I've ever seen. I'm seeing that Jimmy Carter is once again destroying a nation of moderate Muslims and ushering in radical Islam. You have to ask yourself: he did it once in Iran, he's doing it now in Egypt and the media is complicit.
Savage goes on to single out several prominent Jewish figures, including David Axelrod, Rahm Emmanuel and George Soros, whom he seems to believe are intent on destroying the state of Israel (by emboldening Islamist radicals). He realises that he will probably come under criticism from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) for what he is saying, but he doesn't care.
I sent letters to Abe Foxman of the ADL (about his ban from England). I sent letters to every Jewish organisation saying, "how did my name wind upon a list with Muslims who bashed in the heads of Jewish children. How can you permit this to happen?" And they did not even answer my letters.
It may seem a little confusing that the source of Savage's frustration at what he believes is a widespread movement to promote Islamism at the expense of Judaism is his anger at Jewish organisations for refusing to help him in his fight against the British ban, but he does attempt to clarify his position.
Now, you say, "why turn this whole thing into you?" I'll tell you why: because I'm the canary in the coal mine. I am the first member of the American media to have been targeted specifically in order to make the radical Muslims in England feel good, and not one member of the American media of any great, large, known quality has come out and said what has happened to Savage must be stopped. I am the canary in the coal mine, and I'm so fed up with it you can't believe it. And when I see this rabid Jew-hatred now spreading around the world, coming out of the mouths of Jimmy Carter and the Muslim Brotherhood, I am telling you we are very close to the end in this country ? unless there is a revolution in thinking and a revolution of people in the streets.
At least, it's keeping his mind off the budget.
Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/feb/18/republicans-us-television
Protest Milan Baros Alastair Cook Spending review 2010 Financial crisis Paul Myners
No comments:
Post a Comment