Rush off the rails (OT)

OT, but I think it needs to be said. I usually agree (to a point) with Rush Limbaugh, but I think he went way off the rails in saying that Obama "gave the order" to kill the pirates on Friday and the Navy was "guilty of insubordination" in not shooting at that instant.

IIRC, RL has never served in the armed forces or anywhere else in the government, so it may be simple ignorance, but his charges of insubordination are ridiculous. The President didn't give any such "order" - he gave an authorization for the commander on the scene to take such action if and when it appeared necessary and feasible. That is pretty much SOP in such situations; it frees the local commander (and the Navy snipers) of any claim that they acted irresponsibly or without civilian control.

Jim

Why would anyone expect that Rush Limbaugh would have the slightest concept of Rules of Engagement and the Military receiving authorization to use deadly force through I assume the National Command Authority?

I haven't had an opportunity to listen to ALL of what Rush said Monday, but he was pretty deep into sarcasm when he was 'praising' The One for decisive military leadership.

Giving Obama credit for that rescue is like turning on a light switch and thinking you discovered electrcity.

dale

Rush had his tongue firmly in his cheek.

Local Newspaper, which is always Socialist on the editorial page, ran a cartoon of a helicopter swooping down on the Maersk Alabama and a smaller boat. Obama is dangling by a rope in his left hand and has a M-16 in his right.

Someone in the helicopter is saying " All I said was'When are You going to take the lead in the Somali Pirate problem' ".

Jim

.. you don't listen very often. Just for example, the other day he claimed to have met secretly with The Messiah before the election. Of course he didn't, but he was setting the audience up for a slap at Joe Biden's remark about scolding then President Bush. Rush can be obtuse at times but if you really listen and think about what he is trying to accomplish, you will see that he is actually a genius when it comes to tweaking the left.
:rofl:

I am aware that Rush uses sarcasm, but I heard the program and he seemed serious to me.

Sarcasm, by the way, is a very poor way to make a point, since it is so easily used against the speaker. A person who is reading a transcript or a report, without the context of the speaker's voice or facial expressions, can easily misinterpret or be misled as to the intent.

Jim

. A person who is reading a transcript or a report, without the context of the speaker's voice or facial expressions, can easily misinterpret or be misled as to the intent.

Jim[/QUOTE]

What Jim has stated above also happens here when a person posts a reply and it is taken as a challange or personal attack. Keep it simple folks and maybe we can continue to have a great place to make new friends and learn. I believe that is the purpose of a forum, a modern gathering place much like those around the old pot belly stove of long ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoosierDaddy

Rush had his tongue firmly in his cheek.

---

+1. Sarcasm and satire are forms of humor. Some of you guys need to get out more.

Don

I heard most of it and it was sarcasm. I've listened to him long enough to know when he's being sarcastic. There's a subtle change in the tone of his voice. Lighten up! Carl

Rush, like Ann Coulter, is so intelligent that often they will make a statement of sarcasm to make a point and it will go right over the head of less intelligent people. That is what happened to Ann on her John Edwards statement last year.

Rush is so far above liberals that he can tell a story, they will take it the wrong way because they are too dumb to get it, then they will spin it to try to make him look bad.

He can be real funny if you can get the idea behind him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim K

I am aware that Rush uses sarcasm, but I heard the program and he seemed serious to me.

Sarcasm, by the way, is a very poor way to make a point, since it is so easily used against the speaker. A person who is reading a transcript or a report, without the context of the speaker's voice or facial expressions, can easily misinterpret or be misled as to the intent.

Jim

---

Which is why Rush frequently issues the disclaimer that the first time listener needs to tune in for about six weeks in order to fully understand where he's coming from. He's admitted that his delivery style causes problems for the novice but he has his personal standards and isn't about to dumb things down to the "Dick & Jane" level.

Limbaugh illistrates absurdity by being absurd. I agree, listening to him for a while helps.

Same for Mark Levin. Seeing him interviewed on TV helps to understand where he is coming from. I heard it said that he is Limbaughs lawyer.

Respectfully, I wish the "thought leaders" in our country today were men and women who have shown true leadership and service in our country - people like McCain (probably get a blast here), Petrais and other people who I have served with. I think it is a decline in American character and ideals when people like Limbaugh, Olberman, O'Reilly, Coulter, Maddox, and Matthews are setting the national dialogue - they are not even good entertainment. I think it is waste of a minute of my life to listen to any of these talking heads chatter endlessly for their supper about whatever their producers are saying into the their ear and yes I recognize satire. These people polarize our country for a living.....IMHO

I can certainly agree with the first 12 words of rlex' comment.

Rush calls it 'illustrating the absurd with absurdity'.

Well, Limbaugh and O'Riley at least have a sense of humor. Olberman is so full of hatred and his own pomposity that he cannot see anything but his own rage at the world.

Jim