Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Brent Bozell :: Townhall.com Columnist
Personal Smears Against Rush
by Brent Bozell
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 

It's a consistent line from the left: Conservative talk radio is a cauldron of hate. In the Clinton years, a CBS News promo set out to warn the public about the dangers of Gordon Liddy: "The words are shocking ... What he says may not be illegal, but is it dangerous? Has free speech gone too far? Hate radio under fire, and firing back."

It is an unmistakable, unquestionable, resoundingly unequivocal exercise in liberal hypocrisy. The airwaves are now filled with the meanest, most insulting, most dishonest ad hominems in history. They are coming from left-wing talk show hosts.

And from CBS & Co.? Dead silence.

Take Ed Schultz, the closest thing the liberals have to a talk-radio star. He comes unglued when he talks of Rush. On July 15, he uncorked this rant: "Apparently, the drug-ridden loser Rush Limbaugh, he thinks because he's got a lot of money and a lot of stations that he's a success in life, the guy that can't hear because he did so many drugs and had no self-discipline and character has now taken his first shot at me on 'The Ed Show' on MSNBC. I love it!"

Schultz then challenged Limbaugh to a debate: "C'mon, you fat pig. Let's get it on. I'm getting ratings without you. Hell, I'm doing you a favor. C'mon, Rush! Let's get it on! Get out of your compound down there. Get away from your drugs. Go see the doctor, and get some hearing. Maybe you could pick up a 19th girlfriend. Maybe you could try marriage again. By the way, Rush, you got any kids? Oh, you're out of the mainstream!"

This is some strange taunting, since Schultz is well, heavy set, and in his second marriage. He does have six children -- and about six listeners.

Then there's Ron Reagan, the liberal talk show host and the youngest child of the last century's greatest president. He may have been a ballet dancer in his youth, but on May 15, he taunted Limbaugh as less than a full man after he heard Rush making fun of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's Botox shots: "Limbaugh hasn't had a natural erection since the Nixon Administration; think he's compensating for something? Now, I wouldn't pick on him for any of this stuff, not his blubbiness, not his man-boobs, not his inability to have a natural erection -- none of that stuff -- to me, off limits until! Until! -- Mr. Limbaugh, you turn that sort of gun on somebody else. Once you start doing that, you're fair game, fat boy. Absolutely, you jiggly pile of mess." Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Founder and President of the Media Research Center, Brent Bozell runs the largest media watchdog organization in America.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Brent Bozell's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Rush, what a man!!!
Once again, the libs show how clueless they are. But one good thing did cme from this. Rush is on a diet!!!

Semper Libertas - again
SL: If I own, for example a store that sells liquor, or smokes, or porn, or all three, perhaps it is reasonable to have zoning laws or whatever to keep it away from schools. On the other hand, isn't it better to just have a law forbidding minors from entering such a place than to infringe on someone's property rights?

Jo: Perhaps if this is what the people of the community want - would the store have advertisement or windows where the kids could peek at porn? How does the school stop people from drinking and smoking sitting on the school benches after leaving your store? After all in your world this would be their right. This is why I say *reasonable* laws should apply.

SL: I'll grant more leeway to local governments, simply because a person can move to another town.

Jo: On this we agree, and another reason why we should leave welfare and other issues to the perspective states. Don't like the benefits? Then move.

SL: That doesn't mean that people will choose correctly, but there's obviously always going to be gray area, and people can "vote with their feet". Not so when the federal government does it, particularly since the federal government is bound by very strict limits on what it can do (the Constitution).

Jo: You mean they are *supposed* to be limited, they break the law daily and smile doing it because they know the American people are sleeping.

We essentially agree on freedom, however we must have some reasonable guidelines to live at liberty, precisely for those who will not "choose" wisely for the rest of us.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
The very best in financial advice from Dave Ramsey, Larry Kudlow, Motely Fool and many more plus Dilbert!