Haiti : Limbaugh, shut the F*** up!

not true! (But then I would not expect you to go to his site to find the truth).  What he did say was giving through the government would result in only about 30 cents on the dollar getting to the relief effort, while giving to PRIVATE charities would see a much higher percentage.

The beauty of Rush Limbaugh - for those who care to do even a modicum of research - is that his actual transcripts are available each day on his web site. You do not have to listen to him to know what he said.  You can read it at your leisure (for a week's worth.  Beyond that, you have to subscribe.) As this is recent, it is still available.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_011410/content/01125112.guest.html

Some like the 70% skim the govt takes. It's good for the social agenda.

Obama has no issues with a quick personal response when he can offer aid, or blame police doing their job. He's only shy when it involves the military or national security, these issues don't appeal to his core constituents. Nothin to see here folks, move along.

Also, the former is out of his control, while the latter is his responsibility.

It would be a shame when the fate of the victims and the whole country of Haiti indeed would only be used for political gain of some sort - who brings the most aid, the fastest aid - in competition btw.  south american countries like Venezuela, Cuba and others that I don't know about and the US.

The reports I heard in the news here lauded the decision of the US to send aid so quickly - even if it had been done to make Obama look good and show leadership qualities. Days matter for the thousands injured and trapped. Apparently most of the infrastructure has been destroyed, no roads, no haitian police nor government coordination at all, no communication, no water, no electricity and no food, no medicine, no doctors, no hospitals.. it is really unimaginable that of all the worst possibilities everything seems to have come true. Political hickhack should wait until at least the worst is over or not take place at all.

Forecast: 100% chance of rain on parade day.

It still warrants criticism of Obama based on the speed of his answer?

Or the insult he made about appointing George W. Bush and Clinton as envoys? (A bipartisan appointment, if I ever saw one).

The man is despicable. Worse, I've seen this very website criticise the NFL players who did not wanted him to buy a team, after many blatant racism and sexist remarks he said live.

And that insult is what?

I do not care for politics and have never run for office.  nor do I belong to a party.  That being said, what is the difference between what Limbaugh is Lampooning the media (what he is doing with his barbs) and the Liberals politicizing it with comparisons to Katrina? http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_011410/content/01125110.guest.html

The difference is what side of the aisle you are on.  I know what side you are (and respect you for it), but then we will never see eye to eye.  Why are you not condemning Danny Glover for his outrageous and stupid statements?  While he is not, usually, a social commentator, he does love to jump into the fray with his idiocy (Praising hugo Chavez, blaming global warming for earth quakes, etc.).

If you read the transcript of the entire episode, you will see that Limbaugh's criticism is really less about Obama, than about the media reaction to it.  Obama is too easy of a target, since conservatives already do not like his policies, and liberals cant get enough of him.  So limbaugh then parodies the supposedly mainstream media - which he did.  You got the boiled down version that the liberals wanted to scandalize you with - and as you see, they succeeded.  That is why I said go to the source.  It is one of the few places where you can read exactly what is said, in the context said and for free (for a week).

"We've already donated to Haiti. It's called the U.S. income tax."

In other words, if you pay taxes, you already did your part.

He is an asshole who only care about ratings, nothing more. He embodies the robotic anti-Obama protestation rethoric that I only see too often on this website, where you don't care about the fact 90% of the time, you just want to bash the president.

"If I was named envoy to Haiti, I'd quit government. Envoy to Haiti? You can't even pick up a prostitute down there without genuine fear of AIDS"

That was classy, wasn't it?

Do you know the difference between Danny Glover and Rush Limbaugh?

13 millions weekly viewers.

Lets face it, all catastophies are also political events. If we didn't know that before, we certainly learned it during Katrina. It seemed at the time that more people cared about destroying President Bush than anything else. Now the left wing media seem more intent to spend more hours at work attempting to destroy Limbaugh than help the people of Haiti or cover the event. It seems that the people have gotten virtually nothing in the way of aid and are all still on their own. I guess thats Rush's fault.

And how is that related to Bush and Clinton? (Other than being very close to true)

is that during the opening of Lethal Weapon?

The first part is true again - and no where does he say NOT TO DONATE (just not to donate through the white house).  And he may be an asshole, but you fail to understand what he is.  He is not some PC spouting politician, or ass kissing nimrod.  He is an entertainer.  He never claims differently.  But he is not robotic.  That implies he is a follower, and all too often, because of his cynicism and his ideology (and the fact the MSM refuses to do its job) he is a leader in disseminating information.

I will not say all his critiques are warranted as I do not agree with him always.  But most of them are.  If Obama had come into office and sat on his fanny, he would not have been below my expectations.  However, he blew it by not only lying, but lying badly and often.  I expected at least honesty (and transparency???) from him.  And I could not even get that much.

I know you love him, most of the rest of the world that only gets their information from the American MSM about America does because they love him.  But there is a reason he has sunk to below 50% approval here.  Most of the americans are not that naive.

What did you hear when Bush sent aid during the Tsunami? It was a logistically tougher location (for the US). Of course that wasn't Europe's US president in office at the time.

I don't remember anything specific to tell you the truth - it's been five years or so. I do remember that the US navy was on site with ships full of aid but that the indonesian government did not allow them to land at first.

The analysts here mentioned Obama's decision and explained that the opposition (reps) criticized a lack of leadership in Obama and that he had changed is political vocabulary as well in response to that. He now said "war on terror" for example even though he had tried to avoid using such belligerent language (according to the news here). It could be that they are way off, domestic US politics aren't usually the focus in german newspapers.

The US military is the only organization that has the capability to really get something moving in Haiti. They have the equipment and specialists and knowhow on site or close by. Any american president would have offered help, and the US has often helped in natural disasters around the world in the past. GW Bush would probably have made a similar decision to help Haiti.

An interesting side note.  In today's headlines, I saw 3 items.

1. Chavez saying the US was using this as an excuse to take over the country Militarily.

2.  Haitians, deploring the lack of civil authority, had started to take matters into their own hands with vigilanti justice,

3. 3500 US troops sat at an airfield for days because they were not given permission by the Haitians to assist with civil law enforcement (they were just given permission yesterday).

Take a good long look at what is happening in Massachusetts, the liberal heartland if you will, seems the shine has worn off this loser's "grand socialist experiment" (yes, it is about Obama). If you like his policies so much you can have him up there in 3 years, you know spread the hope and change a little, just keep an eye on your wallet.

I read an article in the paper here about the bickering of who is in charge of the aid efforts in Haiti. Apparently, there is some jealousy to go around about that title. Here, especially France sort or detests the US "taking over" their former colony, and there are other voices in the same category from Brazil.

Well you can't just charge in and take things in your own hand. I suppose that the order was given to wait until clearn permission was given by the Haitian government, or what was left of it. Can you imagine the headlines had the US done just that - just start doing what was necessary without regard to politics and diplomacy? A few days are a lot of time when the desperation is huge, but it isn't when you plan for a longer span of time.

I can tell you that all the articles in the paper that I have were positive about the US military presence in Hait. 

Perhaps France is trying to atone for their treatment of their former colony.  The history is definitely a black eye for them.  But regardless, President James Monroe basically told europe 200 years ago that this was our (America's) hemisphere and for the them (Europeans) to stay out.  Regardless of whether you agree with that or not, that mindset has stayed with America since then.  Brazil may have a legitimate beef as the Monroe Doctrive did not address any countries in our hemisphere (although past practices kind of did).

in any event, I think it would be a blight on America if we could send an aircraft carrier (with all its support) to help People half a world away 5 years ago, and yet not step up quickly to help a nation right next door.  I think that is the way that Americans (Joe and Jane Plumber) are taking it.

They are more than welcome to kick in more aid. The other few remaining "possession's" they have in the Caribbean and South America are none too pleased with French rule. I wouldn't feel bad at all if someone else did more, in fact it would be nice for a change.

The carrier USS Carl Vinson had just started its deployment on the 12th of January and was immediatly diverted to Haiti the next day. I guess it was really lucky that it was relatively close by and able to be on site in a matter of days - usually carriers don't stick around to the US coast line for long.

I think the US will gladly share the long term effort to rebuild Haiti with europeans this time around. The humanitarian tragedy in the US's front yard compelled the administration to help. It would have been incredibly bad for the image if the US would not have done everything possible. I read that some criticized Obama for his commitment to Haiti but I bet Bush would have had done the same in the same situation and then it would have had been the democrats barking.

Exactly

France hosts the former haitian dictator Baby Doc Duvalier. He leads a happy live in Paris, together with his colleagues Omar Bongo from Gabun and Joseph-Désiré Mobutu from Zaire. Tht about sums france's attitude towards dictators up nicely, and im not surprised that nobody else likes french rule.

Dont forget where khomeni lived before subjugating Iran.  France is a great place to live - if no one else wants you as a neighbor.

Gotta love how Rush can get peoples blood presure going so easily. He is just a man, a man with a radio show just lie many others. That people find him more interesting says a lot about him. If you fear the words of a man like Rush than your problem is not Rush, your problem is the people who listen to him. They are either smart and understand and agree with him or are stupid and simply follow what ever he says. based on your and many others opinion on Rush, that would lead me to believe you think the average person is stupid. Otherwise you would not fear a man like Rush as this article shows.

Who gives a rats ass what Rush thinks about Haiti, Obama or anything else? It's what you believe that matters. And if you think people are too stupid that they follow Rush blindly than that's fine. But you're obsessing over nothing more than a simple man. He is not the 8th wonder of the world, he is not a God and he is certainly not the most important person in the world. Why do you people fear him so much? You should be afraid of those who listen to him if what he says is so bad to you.

Gotta love how some people would go as far as believing that Rush might impede donations going to Haiti. You people give him too much credit, which is why he is as interesting as he is. It's people like you who make Rush what you think he is.

Rush is the man, he has the ability to scare Democrats and Liberals in ways no one else can. The mere mentioning of his name strikes more fear than Darth Vader. Ironically he as dangerous as C3PO.

Talk Radio is a cynical form of entertainment which only seems to live off glib derision and humiliation of others. Making fun of Haiti in any way or form at this moment when so much tragedy has befallen thousands of people just shows what sort of impious etertainment talk radio can be. Who makes a living off the misery of others who just have lost everything and are still digging out their dead by turning everything into some form of satirical comedy? I don't really care to know more about a man like that, even if he is just an unimportant guy behind a microphone. I would expect some tact, decorum and compassion instead from a public figure like that - and that is independant from  political oppinion and ideology.