Politico and NY Times Pimp for Media Matters, Smear Rush Limbaugh Over "Kill Yourself" Comment

Leftist Democratic Party front group Media Matters put a hit out on Rush Limbaugh this afternoon. Politico and Paul Krugman at the New York Times pimped the Media Matters character assassination of Rush to the political world. They take his comments out of the context of illustrating liberal hypocrisy to paint him as a violent person.

This is a perfect example of how the Democratic party and the media work hand in glove to attack conservatives and try delegitimize them in the public arena.

Rush Limbaugh thinks mankind's carbon footprint would be cut down if the New York Times' environmental reporter would just go ahead and kill himself.

Limbaugh "environmentalist wacko" Andrew Revkin--also known as the global climate reporter for the New York Times -- with some choice, violent words.

"This guy from The New York Times, if he really thinks that humanity is destroying the planet, humanity is destroying the climate, that human beings in their natural existence are going to cause the extinction of life on Earth -- Andrew Revkin. Mr. Revkin, why don't you just go kill yourself and help the planet by dying?"

Revkin's Times colleague Paul Krugman, the columnist, blogged ruefully: "Always good to remember what we’re dealing with."

Limbaugh launched into the tirade by comparing "militant" environmentalists -- which Revkin ain't -- to suicide bombers:

"I think these militant environmentalists, these wackos, have so much in common with the jihad guys. Let me explain this. What do the jihad guys do? The jihad guys go to families under their control and they convince these families to strap explosives on who? Not them. On their kids. Grab your 3-year-old, grab your 4-year-old, grab your 6-year-old, and we're gonna strap explosives on there, and then we're going to send you on a bus, or we're going to send you to a shopping center, and we're gonna tell you when to pull the trigger, and you're gonna blow up, and you're gonna blow up everybody around you, and you're gonna head up to wherever you're going, 73 virgins are gonna be there."

Times reporter and blogger Andy Revkin, on the environment beat, has pointed out that a growing population is one source of rising greenhouse gas emissions. Rush Limbaugh’s response:

"Mr. Revkin, why don’t you just go kill yourself and help the planet by dying?"

Piece Krugman linked to by Revkin from September 15, 2009 entitled, Are Condoms the Ultimate Green Technology?, with intro:

More children equal more carbon dioxide emissions. And recent research has resulted in renewed coverage of the notion that one of the cheapest ways to curb emissions in coming decades would be to provide access to birth control for tens of millions of women around the world who say they desire it.

"So the purpose of this panel discussion was to eventually come up with a plan to limit the number of children American couples can have by offering them carbon credits for children not had. Revkin said, in allocating carbon credits for not having kids as part of any cap-and-trade scheme, he said, "if you can measurably somehow divert fertility rate, say toward an accelerating decline in a place with a high fertility rate, shouldn't there be a carbon value to that?" He went on to say that "probably the single-most concrete and substantive thing an American, young American, could do to lower our carbon footprint is not turning off the lights or driving a Prius, it's having fewer kids, having fewer children." More children equal more carbon dioxide emissions. Now, I've been thinking about this during the commercial break because I take these people seriously. They are lunatics but they are dangerous. I take these people seriously.

"If we're going to do this, and this is going to happen, just like you thought I was off my rocker back in 1997 when I told you they were going to come after your SUV, I've warned you every aspect of this leftist agenda is coming. "Rush, that will never happen." I never thought there would be a pay czar, but it's happened. I never thought that we'd have governments telling us what we can and can't eat. I never thought any of this stuff would happen, but it's happening. This is going to happen. It's still a fringe movement, but it's going to happen. But two things about this: What defines a couple? Is it marriage? I mean a lot of people have kids today that are not married. Do you realize the scheme that is waiting here? Do you realize all women, regardless of age from about 13 on could argue that they should be paid every nine months for not having a baby because they're saving the planet. Well, whatever puberty is, 13 on, once puberty hits and you can have a baby every nine months, and you don't do it, can you get a carbon credit, can you get an allowance, can you get whatever they're going to pay you for not doing this?

"We don't even have to talk about getting married. We don't even have to talk about being a couple. I mean men have no say now, really, in whether a child is born or not, legally I mean. So would a man have any way of benefiting from the carbon credit? A man cannot give birth, women can give birth without a man around, many of them prefer to do so, they work in the Obama administration, too, but that's another thing. The second aspect -- seriously, you gotta think this way because this is where these people are coming from. And as I said, what about homosexuals? They never have babies. No wonder the New York Times is all for this. Think of the financial windfall the homosexuals, who never have babies, they can say we are single-handedly doing more than anybody to save the planet. We should be paid whatever mass sum. The militant gay community, "Tax the breeders. We are saving the planet." Where does this stop?

"But here's another observation. I think these militant environmentalists, these wackos, have so much in common with the jihad guys. Let me explain this. What do the jihad guys do? The jihad guys go to families under their control and they convince these families to strap explosives on who? Not them. On their kids. Grab their three-year-old, grab your four-year-old, grab your six-year-old, and we're going to strap explosives on, and then we're going to send you on a bus or we're going to send you into a shopping center and we're going to tell you when to pull the trigger and you're going to blow up and you're going to blow up everybody around you and you're going to head up to wherever you're going, the 73 virgins are going to be there, the little three or four-year-old doesn't have the presence of mind to say, "Well what about you? If it's so great up there why don't you go? Why don't you strap explosives on?" And their parents don't have the guts to tell the jihad guys, "You do it. Why do you want my kid to go blow himself up?" The jihad guys will just shoot 'em because the jihad guys have to maintain control.

"The environmentalist wackos are the same way. This guy from the New York Times, if he really thinks that humanity is destroying the planet, humanity is destroying the climate, that human beings in their natural existence are going to cause the extinction of life on earth, Andrew Revkin, Mr. Revkin, why don't you just go kill yourself and help the planet by dying? Why do you want every one of us except you and your buddies on the left? See, liberals always come up with these laws, these plans, these solutions, and they're always for everybody else. You go and limit the number of kids you have. You go drive a Yugo. You go get rid of your big house. You go turn your thermostat up or down, you go do this, you go do that. But I, Barack Obama, I'm going to throw big parties every night in the White House, I'm going to bring in Earth, Wind and Fire, I'm going to bring in Charlie Pride. This is happening. They're having gigs at the White House. Drudge has a story, Earth, Wind and Fire, a bunch of people coming in they're having big parties, Obama's playing basketball. I saw a picture today Obama's basketballs are logoed with his logo on them. I kid you not. Yes, they are. Yes, they are. I got a picture of that circle with the three red lines, the rip-off of the Pepsi logo, his basketballs are logoed."

I’d like to think that Rush Limbaugh was floating a thought experiment, and not seriously proposing something, when he told millions of listeners the following: “Mr. Revkin, why don’t you just go kill yourself, and help the planet by dying.”

He had picked up on some commentary and reports that have been bouncing around the instanet ever since I spoke via Skype video at a symposium on media coverage of the population part of the climate and energy challenge, put on by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

As I put it in the Wilson event: “Should you get credit — if we’re going to become carbon-centric — for having a one-child family when you could have had two or three. And obviously it’s just a thought experiment, but it raises some interesting questions about all this.”

The result, once the reverberating blogosphere ramped up the sound bites and eliminated the context, was Mr. Limbaugh’s challenge — or was it, in fact, a thought experiment?

"This guy from The New York Times, if he really thinks that humanity is destroying the planet, humanity is destroying the climate, that human beings in their natural existence are going to cause the extinction of life on Earth — Andrew Revkin. Mr. Revkin, why don’t you just go kill yourself and help the planet by dying?"

This might be funny, in a sad way, if it weren’t for the fact that my mailbox is already heaped with hate mail. And of course there’s the reality that explosive population growth in certain places, particularly sub-Saharan Africa, could be blunted without a single draconian measure, many experts say, simply by providing access to family planning for millions of women who already want it, but can’t get it — whether or not someone gets a carbon credit in the process.

If you’re serious about Global Warming there is only one way to get a zero footprint.

Pray for America and Our Troops

Screw 'em all where they breathe. They're not to be paid any attention unless you're lining them up in the crosshairs of a sharply contentious political debate...

...ya, yeah, that's it; a sharply contentious political debate. MOO hoo hoo ha HAHAHAHahahahahahahahaha...

;-/

Libs, gov workers and schoo employees hyperventilate over these types of comments. Context means nothing. It is an offshoot of their zero tolerance rules.

If God were to Rapture every believer off the face of the earth, these people would rejoice, until they started facing the fact that they are stuck with each other and there is no one else to blame.

Wow ... this happened today? Hadn’t listened to more than the first 1/2 hr of his program so far ...

Rush is right.

Illuminating absurdity by being absurd

I think it’s a fine suggestion. Not sure what all the hubub is about. The moron can always say no.

How violent is leftist rhetoric? Bill Maher?

Of course those don’t get reported

I think I’d rather spend my time attacking the Marxist in the White House. The only question is, which one?

All Liberals, Calling all Liberals:

Please help the planet. Please kill yourselves.

Didn’t Chris Matthews want to see someone put a gun in Rush’s mouth or something? Just last week. I don’t recall the outrage from Politico et al.

It was this quote at the end of the story that got my attention.
And of course there’s the reality that explosive population growth in certain places, particularly sub-Saharan Africa, could be blunted without a single draconian measure, many experts say, simply by providing access to family planning for millions of women who already want it...

It sounds like his real goal is to bring "family planning", better known as abortion, to millions of undesirables in places like sub_Saharan Africa. So it's not just in America they want to discourage carbon generators from ever having a chance to pollute their earth with dirty carbon footprints.

13 posted on 10/20/2009 7:52:57 PM PDT by eggman (Obama's Spread the Wealth will work just as well as Spread the Liabilities (sub-prime mortgages))

See, suggesting that someone who thinks breathing is bad for the planet might kill themselves is just evil.

But suggesting that black women in another country kill their babies, that’s just good public policy.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.