More accurately, as I noted privately the other day, Rush Limbaugh served up a combined “Sorry if you were offended” and “It was a joke.” David Axelrod should be familiar with these species of non-apology apologies, seeing as the Democrats are quite fond of both. Not that any of this is particularly my problem, since the last time I checked Limbaugh wasn’t running the Republican party, Axelr0d et al‘s tired rhetoric to the contrary.
That includes, pretty specifically, me not caring if anybody else has a problem with this not being particularly my problem. Take it up with Rush Limbaugh, assuming that you can even get his attention…
Consider the three-letter acronym that can be formed by that.
Background: our adventure in Libya is apparently the War That Dare Not Speak Its Name. At least, the White House seems absolutely, completely determined to avoid the ‘war’ word, to the point where administration officials actually used the laugh-out-loud weasel term ‘kinetic military action‘ to describe the situation. ‘Kinetic’ is definitely the buzzword in play, here: Defense Secretary Gates himself said that if our ad hoc cobbling together of largely unrelated objectives and media-friendly visuals plan works then “the level of kinetic activity should decline.”
You are about to see why Rush Limbaugh has a multimillion dollar talk radio empire that dominates its particular market, and I am an admittedly-amiable and reasonably creative guy blogging from home. Because this is prime stuff here (via Hot Air) coming from Rush:
RUSH: I swear, this is surreal. KMA, kinetic military activity has replaced WTF, (laughing) which is winning the future. I’m sure you thought it was something else. (laughing) Kick my — has replaced what the — Okay, so I guess we’re to assume it’s not a protest anymore. It’s a kinetic assembling action. It’s not a riot. It’s kinetic thuggery action. It’s not a vacation. It’s kinetic leisure action. It’s not golf. It’s kinetic ball striking action. It’s not dancing. It’s kinetic foot action. It’s not sex. It’s kinetic Lewinsky. (laughing) I’m not drunk. I’ve been engaging in kinetic adult beverage action. It’s not an election. It’s kinetic voting action. It’s not radio. It’s kinetic Limbaugh action. Whatever. Kinetic means motion. Military means armed forces. Action means motion. Kinetic action, moving motion. And these are the smartest people in the world.
What am I thinking? That’s an awful name. Let’s call it… “BubbaRush?” “RushboBill?” “The East Coast will go up in a blaze of light and heat if those two ever shake hands?” – Nah, that one won’t fit on the weekly Nielsen ratings.
“…The use of the word ‘regime’ in American political parlance is unacceptable, and someone should tell the walrus [Limbaugh] to stop using it.”
Matthews didn’t stop there. “I never heard the word ‘regime,’ before, have you?” he said to NBC’s Chuck Todd. “I don’t even think Joe McCarthy ever called this government a ‘regime.'”
[snip of numerous examples of the use of the phrase ‘Bush regime’ in news reporting]
Finally — you knew this was coming — on June 14, 2002, Chris Matthews himself introduced a panel discussion about a letter signed by many prominent leftists condemning the Bush administration’s conduct of the war on terror. “Let’s go to the Reverend Al Sharpton,” Matthews said. “Reverend Sharpton, what do you make of this letter and this panoply of the left condemning the Bush regime?”
Oops. Perhaps Joe McCarthy never called the U.S. government a regime, but Chris Matthews did. And a lot of other people did, too. So now we are supposed to believe him when he expresses disgust at Rush Limbaugh doing the same?
I’m going to guess that there may have been just the faintest touch of surreality going on, there: speaking as a former Democrat I have to admit that having Rush merely mention one of my RedState pieces caused me to blink, the first time that it happened…
Say you’re sorry, Rush – or the the Rev. Al Sharpton is suing.
The civil rights activist, angered by a Wall Street Journal op-ed piece written by Rush Limbaugh, threatened a defamation lawsuit Saturday against the conversative talk radio host.
“Unless Mr. Limbaugh apologizes and clarifies his statements, attorneys for Rev. Sharpton will move forward with a lawsuit,” said a statement from Sharpton.
(H/T: AoSHQ) What a horrid thought. I mean, I don’t see how that could possibly work out for Rush Limbaugh at all. I mean, it’s not like Limbaugh’s both rich and motivated right now, that Sharpton’s spent decades building Limbaugh’s ‘truth’ defense for him, that the ‘public figure’ defense covers what parts the ‘truth’ defense doesn’t, that there aren’t hordes of lawyers who’d love to play discovery on Sharpton, or that there are not more than a few liberals/Democrats out there that would enjoy watching Sharpton get eviscerated in the courts (especially if they can legitimately claim that they had nothing to do with it). No. Nothing of the sort would apply, here.
I’m actually going to go with 3). Chris Matthews will undoubtedly coward up and claim the usual ‘it-was-just-a-joke’ defense; and as for getting eyeballs, well, Matthews needs to get themsomehow. But Live and Let Die wasn’t even Roger Moore’s best Bond film; I’ll also be marginally nice and merely note that Matthews’ pick of it may say some very interesting things about how the pundit views African-Americans…
Which is a sign of professionalism, actually. As Hot Air’s own commenters note, most of us would have spent a considerably longer time running over the Cubslayer’s cardboard cutout. This makes more thematic sense: hit it once, back up and hit it again to make clear that this was deliberate, then go back to the race. And then wait for the gallant defenders of the helpless cutout start up… and never mind that 3/4ths of the complainers have watched Death Race 2000, cheering.
Although it occurs to me that they might not. After all, they have a clip now of Rush Limbaugh liking an electric car. Based on past experience, I believe that this earns him an indulgence from the Online Left on anything up to barratry (naval definition).
PS: I’ll take electric car advocates seriously when they start talking about how it’s a matter of vital national energy security to muzzle the anti-nuclear power fanatics.