[Dane]

A quandary for the Bushbots who are Rushbots

Not really, Rush is an entertainer. His first half hour is filled with pro-Pubbie stuff(his bread and butter), his second half hour(where listenership is less) is a bone thrown to the "true beleivers", fall on their sword, don't care if Hillary gets to sign a $800 billion prescription bill with no reforms, the revolution is coming any second, yada, yada, yada, crowd.

[Sam Cree]

I personally like both GW and Rush, in spite of my libertarian leanings. I can find fault with both, but figure they are on my side mostly.

I see neither man as false.

I remain wary, however.

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

his second half hour(where listenership is less) is a bone thrown to the "true beleivers", fall on their sword, don't care if Hillary gets to sign a $800 billion prescription bill with no reforms, the revolution is coming any second, yada, yada, yada, crowd.

What a rant. What is the point of this post anyhow? That criticizing Bush for this entitlement will bring Hillary to office?

That he shouldn't do this? That he's not doing that enough? That magic occurs in the second half hour that keeps this secret "sword fallingness" from the Bushbots in order to keep all his demographics seperate and perfectly Triangulated to entertain?

Your dislike of Rush is so obvious, too bad that has prevented you from making a point.