Rush Limbaugh: Bush's FDR Example

Washington Post ^ | 11/28/2001 | Rush Limbaugh

[Pokey78]

As I watch such liberal leading lights as Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy denounce President Bush and Attorney General John Ashcroft for detaining certain aliens to stem future terrorist atrocities against Americans, and hear them rail against the constitutionality of reinstituting military commissions to bring terrorist murderers to justice, I have to wonder: Would their views be different if their hero, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, were president today?

[Pokey78]

A PING for El Rushbo!

[Jean S]

Rush Limbaugh is published in the Washington Post?

I think I've seen it all.

[Sagitarius]

So if it was wrong when FDR did it, why are we doing it now?

Isn't that like a bank robber justifying bank robbing on the grounds that other people had robbed banks in the past?

[Bellanorma]

Since you mentioned the Washington Post..thought I would tell you this story. My brother-in-law got a solicitation in the mail from the Washington Post asking him to subscribe by sending in the post paid card included. He returned it with this written on it.

"Not now. Not ever. This trash isn't fit to line a bird-cage with"

[GeronL]

when did Limbaugh start writin for the Washboard??

[Trailer Trash]

Patrick Leahy rode hard and put away wet.

Good job Rush!

[beckett]

So far I have been unable to satisfy myself entirely that these tribunals are a good idea, but today I came a long way towards favoring them after watching a debate between Anthony Lewis and San Diego Union-Tribune columnist Joseph Perkins.

Perkins, taking the pro-military tribunal side, made the compelling point that two crucial pieces of evidence became known to al-Qaeda terrorists as a direct result of open testimony from prior trials:

1. testimony that ground level bombs could not bring down the WTC. It was even suggested by an explosives expert that something like a fully fueled jet would be the only thing that could do real damage to those buildings.
2. testimony that the CIA was able to listen in on Bin Laden's cell phone conversations, causing him to desist permanently from using cell phones.

Disclosures like these put at risk the national security of the United States, arming terrorists with invaluable information. Military tribunals eliminate that problem.

[MJY1288]

What I have been saying all along...If a military tribunal is good enough for one of our military who has committed a criminal act. It is certainly good enough for a NON-US CITIZEN TERRORIST. Liberals and Civil Libertarians who want to extend foriegn terrorist anything more than a military tribunal should ask what our soldiers are fighting for, OUR RIGHTS or NON-CITIZEN RIGHTS?...the answer is simple, and a military tribunal is far more courtesy than what the victims of 9/11 got

[history_matters]

Good post. Thanks for the insight.

Bump.

[duckln]

Rush is right on but has losted his punch.

I love what's left of Rush but he's in the grip of a power base, no longer on the cutting edge or shining the light of truth.

His hearing isn't going to take him down, his bending will. The most sane voice today is Pat Buchanan, evidenced again by his stream of weekly articles. Rush along with the neocons, shunning Pat, shows how far Rush has falled.

[Tunehead54]

Bookmarking - I'd say those are all the reasons you need!

[SmartBlonde]

Oh please! What dreck. Rush is not a part of the establishment, except in conservative circles (which is exactly where he should be!). Any minute you'll be telling us he's meeting in Davos with Henry Kissinger. No one is beating down Buchanan's door to get his opinion on anything - except, of course, when he can trash other conservatives, Bush in particular.

[america-rules]

Pat is very good as a writer and journalist and sometimes makes alot os sense but he sucked running for President. He came accross as a nut case and seemed to hate everyone !

[onyx]

I was not pinged! Awesome column by awesome Rush! A keeper!

[duckln]

Any minute you'll be telling us he's meeting in Davos with Henry Kissinger.

Well if you listen to Rush, he name drops Kissinger often, especially when he trys to debunk the conspiracy theory.

No one is beating down Buchanan's door to get his opinion on anything

They should, he's more right than Rush, over a longer period. When Rush had him on for over an hour at the beginning of the last presidential campaign, the gap in savy intellect was obvious.

- except, of course, when he can trash other conservatives, Bush in particular.

They are not conservatives, neocons is a better term. Pat doesn't 'trash', and has supported Bush much more often than not. Proof is comparing his remarks with the likes of 'conservative' Safire and Kristol.

[Capitalist Eric]

Isn't that like a bank robber justifying bank robbing on the grounds that other people had robbed banks in the past?

As Bubba Clinton would say, "close, but no cigar." In the correct context (and not trying to twist it around, as you obviously are attempting), at times of crisis, tough decisions have to be made.

BTW, nice screen name. Too bad it's spelled Sagittarius.

[nopardons]

Pat ? Pat Buchanan ?

Well then, it just might interest you to know, that Pat has said that the military tribunals are a good idea, as well. Now, what are you going to say ? Hmmmmmmm ? It's about the ONLY thing that Pat and I have agreed about, in a long time, and I used to love reading / listening to what he had to say. LOL

[nopardons]

You are in serious denial. Get help ASAP !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Pokey78]

Pat Buchanan. Now let me see.......

Oh yeah, I remember him. He left civilization long ago and now resides as Chief Nutcase in the Land of Misfit Xenophobes.