What is wrong with Rush Limbaugh, besides his surname? -- 02/08/00
Baker, Bush, & Co. are flip-flopping around
the McCain phenomenon -- 02/10/00
The Rules of War by Rush Limbaugh! --
02/28/00
Last month, Mr. Limbaugh got busy bashing Senator McCain and defending Governor
Bush, though he acknowledged that the only difference between the two republican
candidates was that the public perceived the former as having a character and
the latter as not having it. Then, what interest does Mr. Limbaugh have in
bashing McCain and the moderate republicans and promoting Bush and the extreme
conservatives?
I do not think that such a shrewd political commentator as Mr. Limbaugh would
not know the difference between the moderate republican and the extreme
conservative. Therefore, I assume that Mr. Limbaugh purposely makes topsy-turvy
of his own logic when he states that ‘today a "conservative" is a synonym for a
"reformist"’.
As I see it, all major dictionary compilers agreed that a conservative is one
who conserves and preserves what is already achieved, and a moderate is one who
is willing to preserve the best of the achieved and to sacrifice what is worse
today for the better future. The art of compromising with what "you are not
willing to die for" is not Mr. Limbaugh’s simplistic strategizing oneself into
the Procrustean bed of the statistical majority. The people, moderate
individuals, are organizing themselves into this same majority when each
compiling moderate individual is following through his own ideology of prudence
and moderation, which is usually called ‘common sense’. When the moderate
individuals are uniting in the voting process, then the statistical bar of
majority is rising, but not vice versa -- because the statistics cannot exist
without real individuals.
Mr. Limbaugh wants us to return to an ancient scholasticism – which came first,
the chicken or the egg, the individual or the society, the real or the abstract.
However, for the past ten years, Mr. Limbaugh has been saying that he is trying
to teach us how to use our common sense in discerning that the interests of
majority and the whole society grow from individual interests. Then why is he
trying to pull our leg right now and what is his interest in Bush & Co. that he
is willing to bend the truth and to smear his own reputation and become a "quack
of democracy"?
The root of Mr. Limbaugh’s snobbism probably lies in his schooling past when he
was educated as a Jew. Judaism is a religious ideology and, as any ideology, it
requires its disciples to be ready to bend the truth on behalf of the inner
circle. A recent example of such a bending happened three weeks ago when the
Jews of New York depleted the state fund of school vouchers.
Last year, the New York State Assembly passed an ordinance in accord with which
the state must allocate some percentage of educational funds for school vouchers
so that parents can transfer their children from public to private schooling.
However, because the majority of the Assembly is comprised of Jews, the law was
vague on the matter of how to promulgate the law, i.e., how to publicize it.
Because the voucher law specified that the money would be distributed on a
"first come, first serve" basis, the Jews spread the knowledge of the starting
day of the voucher program among themselves. Thereafter, three weeks ago, when
the black parents came to receive a better opportunity for their children, they
were told that ‘all the money was already taken’ (by the Jews). Moreover, when
the blacks started to complain that the people unite into a civilized society,
into a state of equality before the law, they were told, that ‘we (the Jews)
will slip on the issue and will devise a "fairer" system of distribution’ (for
the next time, but for now, you can lick your paws). And you know how to entrust
a sheep to a wolf.
Well, and that means that the Jews organized themselves into a Jewish state
inside the State of New York, as they organized themselves into the Communist
Party inside the Russian State. That is why the New York republican voting
system is organized in such a manner that the Russian Jews can be proud of. That
is why Senator McCain and four other republican candidates have a hard time to
place their names on the New York ballot. That is why my book will never
published by Simon & Schuster. And that is why Mr. Limbaugh is promoting Bush &
Co., hoping on his father’s record in preserving status quo.
I understand that Mr. Limbaugh fears that the campaign finance reforms of Mr.
McCain can clarify our voting system and make it transparent, thus, diminishing
the Jewish power, which breeds on our ignorance. But then again, stop talking
about your own "intellectual" honesty, Mr. Limbaugh, because it is you and your
beloved political extremists who really do not have the founding principles. And
you will not have them unless you understand the difference between political
extremism and excellence in the arts, and until then you will again gain the
weight (physical) and will again lose the weight (spiritual).
The entire history of the American Constitution is the history of compromise and
moderation between political extremes. First, between the Anglicans and the
Protestants, then, between the rich and the poor, later, between the whites and
the blacks, and now, between the Jews and the "Gentiles." Moreover, even the
very name of Mr. Limbaugh, from Christian lingo, means a region between heaven
and hell. And I am wondering how the hell he came up with the doctrine that only
the extremists have principles, and the moderates only adjust themselves to the
external interests of majority. Hello, Mr. Limbaugh, how was that majority
organized in the first place?
We know that the extremes tend to converge into each other. Probably that is why
Mr. Limbaugh had started his political career as a revolutionary and is
finishing it as a retrograde.
02/08/00
For the past six weeks, Bush’s people got busy bashing Senator McCain and
refusing to discuss issues with fellow-republicans in a civilized manner, as if
McCain’s supporters were the outsiders of the Republican Party, and even worse,
as if they were extra-terrestrials. Now Bush’s staffers realized that they
themselves boosted McCain’s image, implying that he is the outsider of the
Washington elite. Consequently, now Bush wants to expose McCain as some kind of
upper-class mole. Moreover, the Bush’s staffers (Baker, Reed, & Co.) realized
that they made the bigger flip-flop in their tactics when they decided to rely
more on money than on honest politics. Baker, Reed, & Co. decided that the
moderate republicans could be easily manipulated as if they were ultra
democrats.
Consequently, Mr. Limbaugh jumped on the moderate republicans, accusing them of
not having common sense and not knowing what honesty is, as if they were
Clintonites. However, the flip-flop became apparent when Mr. Limbaugh tried to
redefine the moderate republicans as if they were ultra democrats who may not
have strong principles. And it did not fly with the moderate republicans, who
became republicans in the first place because they strongly believe in the
principle of lesser, but more effective government. This flip-flop became
transparent even to an elementary school student when Mr. Limbaugh stated that
‘today a "conservative" is a synonym for a "reformist"’.
It does not matter to us, the middle-class republican moderates, how an upper
class individual would try to redefine us. However, we discern a conservative
republican as an upper class person who conserves and preserves what he/she has
already achieved, and a moderate republican is one of us who is willing to
preserve the best of the achieved and to sacrifice what is worse today for the
better future, for we also want to be among the upper class. Therefore, it is
we, the moderates, who are reformists, not the ultra-conservatives who want to
preserve the status quo.
Talking about form, our art of compromising with what "we are not willing to die
for" is not Mr. Limbaugh’s "strategizing" oneself into the Procrustean bed of
the statistical majority. The statistical majority appears when each of us
decided to follow through his own ideology of prudence and moderation, which we
usually call ‘common sense’. When we unite in the voting process, then, the
statistical majority appears, but not vice versa -- because the statistics
cannot exist without real people. Therefore, we cannot "strategize" ourselves
into the majority. Trying to redefine us, Mr. Limbaugh willingly bent the truth
on behalf of the ultra-conservative upper class elite, thus, turning from a
"doctor of democracy" into a "quack of democracy" and from a "detector of truth"
into a "killer of truth".
Talking about essence, we, moderate republicans, are willing to preserve the
best of the achieved and to sacrifice what is worse today for the better future
of our children and ourselves. As such reformists, we will proceed from our
principle of lesser, but more effective government, for we understand that we
cannot eliminate all taxation because that would mean the elimination of the
government itself. We cannot live entirely without a government, for we are not
rich enough (as Bush & Co.) to be entirely without a social safety net.
Therefore, the Baker-Bush tax-cut plan to cut the federal budget by extremely
lessening taxes will benefit exclusively the upper class. Why? Because it will
lead to disproportionate increase of independence of the upper class from us,
the middle class, and will allow them gradually denigrate us to the lower class
and definitely will ruin our social safety net. However, acting in accord with
the McCain tax-cut plan, we will save our social safety net and will give a
moderate boost for upper class activity. These two fiscal plans are the best
evidence of the crime against our children and us, moderates, – the crime of
extremism.
We have already compromised too much with ultra-conservatives by allowing them
to criminalize some lighter forms of drugs and prostitution, which led to an
enormous increase of their power over the lower class, the majority of which was
passed trough the meat-grinder of the prison system in order to learn to be
submissive to their dictate. Each of the past sixty some bloody years, we let
them have $300 billion via Mafia, plus $25 billion via ATF, and nearly $90
billion that we spend in the health system healing the byproducts of the
underground drug system. That kind of money (not counting those thousands of
broken lives) could extinguish six times the national debt that we have right
now. Do you think they appreciate that? Not a zilch. They want more money and
more power at our expense, and they will not calm down until they denigrate us
to the same low level as they did the Negroes and Latinos, if we let ‘em. Will
we???
The latest flip-flop of Baker, Bush, & Co. happened two days ago, when Bush won
the Maryland primary (51%) and McCain finished second (with 25%). However, the
liberal press reported it as the victory of McCain because the latter was not
even present there, while preparing for South Carolina. The latest polling data
shows that the majority of independents and defected democrats of the middle
class, who were allowed to vote in the Maryland primaries as republicans, prefer
McCain over Bush. Now Baker, Bush & Co. cry foul that it is a "left-wing
conspiracy" to tamper with the republican electorate now and switch their votes
back later, during the general elections. Why would they do so? Baker, Bush, &
Co. claim it is "because they are defectors, and we, ultra-conservatives, cannot
trust them. Because such people like practical jokes, and they would like to
screw our system. Because it appears as if nobody trembles in the camps of Gore
and Bradley in the face of the entire desolation of their camps. And because
McCain would be a much easier adversary for either Gore or Bradley."
Why would McCain be much easier competition for Gore or Bradley? "Because he has
nearly the same socialistic program as they have." After all of this suspicion
and fear mongering, Baker, Bush & Co. have finally found some dirt on McCain.
However, at close look, their latest finding only highlighted their own filthy
minds, implying that the middle class is so dumb and stupid that people cannot
discern their own long-run interests and cannot switch party (a formal
representative of their long-run interests), even if that party no longer
represents their interests. The latest ultra-conservative labeling also implied
that such labels as "socialism" or "communism" could easily intimidate the newly
converted republicans. Therefore, they will be constantly sitting on a fence,
scratching their foreheads, and plotting a prank for the "poor"
ultra-conservatives.
The mouthpiece of the Baker, Bush, & Co., Mr. Limbaugh, had already branded
McCain’s moderate tax-cut plan with moderate social programs as a "communistic
one." However, this labeling is about form, and as such, it is a matter of
taste, not of reason. Therefore, I prefer the term a "capitalistic one… with a
humane face." Who can blame me for that?
02/10/00
For more than two months, Mr. Limbaugh has been advising Bush to take his gloves
off and start a war with McCain, because the public loves fighting and fighters.
Now, when Mr. Limbaugh’s instigation succeeded and the war is going on full
speed, Mr. Limbaugh’s protégé got a blow below what Mr. Limbaugh thinks is the
correct line of behavior of the fighters during the wartime. Now Mr. Limbaugh
bethinks himself and wants to cook the rules of engagement into the combat.
Whining to that end, he proposes to outlaw playing the "religion-card" as too
divisive for the Republican Party that it cannot handle such an assault of one
faction against another faction. To enforce this moratorium, he proposes to call
such tactics of war as "Clintonesque" and such wars as the "holy-wars".
Mr. Limbaugh thinks that the inner-party fight for the leadership in the party
should be a duel-like fight of equals. However, he hypocritically silences that
the "equality" of the fighters is unequal in money from the outset. That is why
the disadvantaged side necessitated using savvier tactics in the battlefield in
order to survive.
And where do you, righteous Rush Limbaugh, stand on that equalizing suggestion
of the campaign finance reform? You hypocritically turned it down, because it
would equate your protégé with other adversaries, but you want him to have
advantage before the fighting started.
McCain's team says that it will divide the party until one silver line will
crystallize and one leader will emerge, then it will unite the country… and they
do so.
Baker-Bush commando says that it is uniting the party right now and it will
unite the country after this inner-party struggle… and they do to a contrary.
So, who is a hypocrite here? And I am wondering, why on the earth you think that
McCain started this war? If you say that he started only the "holy-war," then,
is it not your Clintonesque, Mr. Limbaugh?
02/28/00
[email protected]
Victor J. Serge created this page and revised it on 04/13/03