Ha ha! And you've been picking on Rush - Moore is much worse. If it acts and looks like a slob, it is a slob! I think you're on to something, we need to collaborate on making him the "voice" of the dems! Ha ha! He's already the voice for socialism!

Sorry, it ain't going to happen. What Obama and the dems have done will strengthen the Republican party in the long run. Just watch and see what happens in two years. The main reason Obama is scrambling to push through his agenda as quickly as possible is because in two years he's going to be a lame duck!

That's priceless -- spoken like a true tyrant. Thank you for illustrating my point. Having the majority and the associated ability to legislate their agenda isn't enough for liberals. It's not sufficient to achieve their agenda through the democratic process; they want to achieve it without any questions or criticism. The only dissent they'll tolerate is, at best, a token few tightly-constrained museum pieces they are willing to allow as a form of charity to maintain the illusion of democracy.

That's shameful.

As for Michael Moore, Bush never tried to shut him down -- nor were the powers of government ever brought to bear against him.

Gingritch calls Rush "irrational" says he doesn't want his president to fail.

I'll bet he lasts longer than Steele before he comes groveling on his knees all semblance of manhood shredded. Maybe 3 days.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LQxqrSAoik

It's amazing how the cohesive the lie is about what Rush actually said. The "I hope he fails" statement was in regard to Obama's socialist policies. Rush didn't say that he wants the economy to fail, he didn't say he wants the country to fail -- he said he wants what he considers to be bad policy to fail.

When you strip back all the alarmism, what you're left with is the fact that the Democrats are trying to convince people that it's un-American, if not treasonous, to oppose this president. If you buy the argument they're selling, then the only "correct" thing for people to do is abandon their principles and go along with whatever the man says.

Obama is trying to convince the American people that anyone who opposes him opposes America. There's another tyrannical attitude for you -- that one goes back to Louis XIV's "I am the State" quote.

That's not how this country works. At least that's not how it worked for the first 220 years.

Well one thing is for sure, I'll bet the Repubs wish Rush had said he wanted the policies to fail, but instead he said he wanted his president, Barack Husein Obama, to fail. That means he wants the policies that the majority of the American people have chosen (after congress and the senate vote on and pass them) to fail, and take the country down. Quite a leader you've got.

There's another classic dictator line: the American people elected me, so therefore they believe in all of my policies. If you oppose my policies, you oppose that which the majority of Americans want.

I know you're a big fan of polls, and the last numbers I saw from Gallup showed 43 percent of Americans felt their standard of living was getting worse, consumer mood was 76% negative (only 2% positive and dropping), and 77% were dissatisfied with the state of the nation.

Quite a leader you've got.

Had

You're right -- "had" would probably be a better term, because Obama's leadership seems to have stopped when he put his hand on Lincoln's bible.

In a round-up of comments by women on “Why Do Women Dislike Talk Radio,” Danielle Crittenden says it’s the men:

http://www.newmajority.com/ShowScroll.aspx?ID=094b9911-44ae-4812-902a-31...

I can only imagine the outrage if I penned an article talking about how angry feminists have ruined liberalism for me, and how the Gloria Steinems of the world are like old girlfriends trapped in a permanent state of PMS that find fault with everything on the planet.

But I could never do that, because only liberals are allowed to be sexist or racist.