Rush Limbaugh Taken to Hawaii Hospital

[TC]

DING DONG maybe

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126222894160411421.html

[bellcurve]

Rush Limbaugh is such a queen. I'm surprised he was in Hawaii; Key West or Fire Island seem more fitting.

Death would be too easy. I want him to finally admit the obvious about himself and see if he retains his conservative base.

[marceline]

Isn't Obama vacationing in Hawaii? How hard would it be to send one Secret Service agent to the hospital with a hypodermic? Assuming there isn't already someone working there ready to do it.

[George008]

I've always thought the whole basis for the views that oppose Limbaugh was compassion for mankind. Seems strange to wish death on a person or say "ding dong". It comes across as a bit much. What is Rush guilty of besides expressing his right to free speech?

[alphanguy74]

Rush is guilty of inciting greed and class warfare. And yes, the views that oppose Limbaugh involve compassion for mankind, with the exception of those who have no compassion. Almost no human has compassion for ALL people. I mean, few people have compassion for Hitler. I simply feel pity for him. No woman can stand to be with him for any length of time, he has no children... he's unhealthy, unattractive, and addicted to drugs. He'll be swimming in a lake of fire after his death without any help from us. His money and his listeners are all he has in the world. If he can worship the great golden calf of capitalism and not feel guilty, then I suppose that is his problem. But I can look MYSELF in the mirror every morning. I doubt he can say the same, unless he's in a great deal of denial. I mean, in his hour of suffering and sickness... who is at his bedside? A paid employee. It's very sad, really. This blog sums him up pretty well, I think, and how most liberals feel:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-shireman/get-well-mr-limbaugh-but_b_408431.html

[George008]

Having compassion and wishing death are at two totally different ends of the spectrum. I'm just scratching my head at how this leap is made. You might not agree with the man but comparing him to a man that murdered millions and saying he is going to hell is totally going against why you disagree with him in the first place. It makes no sense. Our country is lost. Disagreeing politically and being able to express our thoughts is what made America great. Now an opionated person on the opposite side deserves death and hell.

I never realized being a Capitalist constituted going to hell. I guess our founding forefathers are all in hell. They developed the system.

[alphanguy74]

There's a difference between being in a free market system, and being one who worships money and material posessions. Rush Limbaugh has advocated on MANY occasions the practice of businesses and entrepeneurs charging "What the market will bear", as opposed to "Fair market value". Our founding forefathers DID believe in a free market, but it had to be tempered with a moral responsbility to fairness and honest dealing. Rush's attitude is to GET WHAT YOU CAN, however you can. So you tell ME, since when did bleeding people for everything you can get out of them suddenly become the decent, honest, and upstanding thing to do? When did our country devolve into this "every man for himself" attitude? You asked why some people wished him dead, and I told you why. I didn't wish him dead, I wish him unemployed, powerless, and with not enough money to afford health care. that would serve him right, because he is heavily resposible for denying neccesary care to others. Some people DID wish him dead, but others also tap danced on the grave of Ted Kennedy a few months ago. The day after his death, Rush did not have a kind word to say about Ted. He literally came on with rant after rant about how Ted destroyed this country. No, Rush... YOU and your ilk are the ones destroying this country. The difference between a conservative and a liberal is that conservatives value money and material posessions more than they value people (Unless it's their own family or friends, and sometimes, not even then). There are mean spirited people on both sides that wish death on the opposition, those numbers are about equal.

[George008]

My definition of a free market is having the freedom to make/earn whatever one desires. Why should another person have the right to tell another they've made or earned too much? That's not freedom.

Everyone has the same opportunities to be successful in this country. Bill Clinton came out of a very low income family. Barrack Obama came from a single mother household. The American dream is to work hard and succeed.

At what point do you cross the threshold and become "greedy"? What is the boundary that creates the idea that one worships Capitalism? Who has the right to determine that? No one! When did it become a bad thing to want to be successful? Scary stuff.

What scares me the most is that there will become a specific dollar amount that will be considered "greedy". Once that happens there will be the potential to lower and lower this greed line until our standards and motivation completely diminish into nothing.

[alphanguy74]

Spoken like a greedy person. That's the whole problem... your definition is warped and morally bankrupt. The fact remains that the vast majority of people who ARE rich, get that way on the backs of hardworking people who work for them. Not EVERYONE can be successful and rich, no matter what happens in our society, SOMEONE has to be at the bottom, scrubbing the toilets and flipping the burgers. I'm not saying everyone should be equal... far from it. But those who ARE rich and are that way because of the work of all those under them, have a responsiblity to assure that those that ENABLE their wealth are treated with dignity, respect, and are provided the basic necessities of life, which are food, shelter, and health care... nothing more. Look at the financial problems of the american farmer, for instance. The vast majority can't afford health care. But if all you conservatives want to hoard all your money and can't manage to give up an extra 4 or 5 percent of your income (When that 4 to 5 percent would not cause you to give up ANY necessity of life) so the poor amercian farmer can have health care... well.... maybe the FARMERS should get greedy, and grow only food for themselves, and then when you walk into a grocery store, the shelves would be bare. How would feel then? You better get down on your KNEES and thank God that all the poor farmers in this country grow the food you shove down your gullet every day, even though they can never afford the same things some middle management pencil pusher in an office can.

[George008]

Ask yourself this question. Does a person that chooses to be a farmer do so because they want to fail? No. Their plan is to be successful and fulfil the American dream. Many farmers have become wealthy and have incorporated. IE: Tyson, Purdue, Del Monte...etc. I guess that makes them greedy because their plan to succeed worked.

Why is it that no credit is given to successful people? Why is it that they've ridden the backs of others? If there was no rich employers many of these "burger-flippers" would have no income what so ever, or the ability to join a wellfare program funded by the evil success.

The fact of the matter is that Capitalism is the best method of operating an economy. This is proven in history. There is a reason the the US is the greatest country our world has ever known. Communism/Socialism has failed time and again.

There is no motivation for the motivated under a system that punishes ambition. As sad as that may be to the unmotivated.

At least you have the opportunity to obtain wealth in America. Why punish the masses and make everyone as strong as their weakest link?

In America you have the choice of being a burger flipper or a successful franchise owner. No one makes that decision but the individual. That is the greatness of freedom and America. We lose all that when decisions are made for us.

[alphanguy74]

What a bunch of hooey. What works best is a hybrid of Capitalism and socialism. Which is what most of the Scandinavian countries employ. When private enterprise is allowed to operate unfettered by the government, you get what you see in China.. sweat shops, child labor, peasants living in shacks. This SAME argument that is being waged against Obama's health care plan was waged back in 1935 when Roosevelt created the Rural Electric Administration as part of the Tennessee Valley Authority. Conservative members of congress rallied against it, saying it would unfairly compete with private business, the government had no business getting into private industry... and without the REA, and all that government interference... us farmers WOULD NOT HAVE EVEN HAD ELECTRICITY! To answer your question what do farmers dream of? You must not know any, because they do NOT dream about getting rich. They dream about making ends meet, working the land, and enjoying the simple things in life... and the independence of not having to kiss a boss' ass every day of the week. That's the appeal of it. At my great Grandfather's farm, you had to go to the bathroom in an OUTHOUSE. So wealth was not a priority. And being a farmer used to be a profession that could support a family. The key word is USED TO. Check the violent crime rates in those scandinavian countries.. a FRACTION of what it is here in the USA. Why? Because their society has a safety net to protect the less fortunate. People aren't so destitute and desperate that they turn to crime to survive.

[Max]

This is absolutely sickening how some are hoping for Limbaugh to die.

Last year, no conservative came to this board to gloat over Ted Kennedy's death (by proclaiming that's what Kennedy deserved for what happened at Chappaquiddick).

And, for the record, I abhor how Limbaugh is trying to purge the moderates from the Republican party.