I know it's Rush Limbaugh, but he isn't the only one to go in this direction. If there's a Frank Luntz for extreme wingnut talking points, that person has invokec Stalin, Hitler, and the devil himself.

Rush claims here that all "great dictators" are beloved by their people, including Mao, Fidel, and of course, Stalin. Rush bemoans Stalin starving farmers by sending them "either to the Gulag or to the grave." Rush goes on to say that "[Stalin] literally found ways to get rid of all the farmers."

The reason for Stalin's success? According to Rush, he had a "compliant press," while killing off farmers in order to "punish the rich."

Aha! I see. The problem here is that the press is looking away while rich folks kill off the poor working folks. Am I right? Oh, I guess not, because the crux of Rush's argument is that Obama is just like Stalin, punishing rich people while maintaining the proper optics so the press will remain compliant.

Really? Between Rush Limbaugh, Judson Phillips, and Wayne LaPierre, I think beefing up mental health services for blowhard right wing media lobbyist types might be a top priority.

Take another Oxy, Rush, and calm down. Pre-K for all is nothing like Stalin's reign of terror, and normal people know that.

DOWNLOADS: (1111)

PLAYS: (18162)

Embed

From January of 2011 -- SNL Pans Bachmann For Her SOTU Tea Party Response:

Saturday Night Live gave Congresswoman Michele Bachmann and CNN a bit of grief for her "tea party" response to the president's State of the Union Address. They could have done better by just airing Bachmann's actual speech since their parody wasn't nearly as creepy or bizarre as the real thing.

In at least a temporary victory for liberal groups, the president won't endorse the catfood commission recommendation to raise the full retirement age for Social Security in tomorrow's State of the Union address -- but administration officials caution he won't rule them out for good:

President Obama has decided not to endorse his deficit commission's recommendation to raise the retirement age, and otherwise reduce Social Security benefits, in Tuesday's State of the Union address, cheering liberals and drawing a stark line between the White House and key Republicans in Congress.

Over the weekend, the White House informed Democratic lawmakers and advocates for seniors that Obama will emphasize the need to reduce record deficits in the speech, but that he will not call for reducing spending on Social Security - the single largest federal program - as part of that effort.

Liberals, who have been alarmed by Obama's recent to shift to the center and his effort to court the nation's business community, applauded the decision, arguing that Social Security cuts are neither necessary to reduce current deficits nor a wise move politically. Polls show that large majorities of Americans in both parties - even in households that identify themselves as part of the tea party movement - oppose cuts to Social Security.

"Most of us would like to see the Democrats remain the strong defenders of Social Security, which they have to be if they want to win the next election," said Roger Hickey, co-director of the liberal Campaign for America's Future.

Administration officials said Obama is unlikely to specifically endorse any of the deficit commission's recommendations in the speech, but cautioned that he is unlikely to rule them off the table, either. On Social Security, for example, he is likely to urge lawmakers to work together to make the program solvent, without going into details, according to congressional sources.

DOWNLOADS: (351)

PLAYS: (4128)

Embed

Sarah Palin almost talked dirty to us last night on Greta Van Susteren's Fox show:

PALIN: Speaking of last night, that was a tough speech to have to sit through and kind of stomach, because the president is so off base in his ideas on how it is he believes government is going to create jobs. Obviously, government growth won't create any jobs, it's the private sector that can create the jobs.

And his theme last night of the State of the Union was the WTF -- you know, winning the future. And I thought, OK, that acronym -- spot on! There were a lot of WTF moments throughout that speech.

In Palinville, this is what passes for cleverness -- along with such witticisms as "lamestream media" and "lock and load". Plus, it fits her whole naughty-librarian schtick -- we all know what that 'F' stands for, don't we? It's enough to make one collapse in a gale of giggles.

In a later segment, she expanded on the "WTF Moments" with one of her own:

VAN SUSTEREN: Governor, last night there was a lot of talk about the 'Sputnik moment' that the president talked about. Um, do you agree with him -- is this our moment?

PALIN: That was another one of those 'WTF moments' that when he so often repeated the 'Sputnik moment' that he would aspire Americans to celebrate. He need to remember that what happened back then with the former Communist USSR and their victory in that race to space -- yep, they won, but they also incurred so much debt at the time that it resulted in the inevitable collapse of the Soviet Union.

Pardon this brief interjection from Karen Famigheti at Media Matters, responding to identical dumbassery from the Dumbest Blogger in the Wingnutosphere:

It's mind numbing to have to point this out, but Obama's reference to Sputnik refers to the U.S. competing against the Soviet Union during the Cold War space race.

In calling this our "Sputnik moment," Obama was calling on America to "reach a level of research and development we haven't seen since the height of the Space Race" in order to create jobs and remain competitive. He was not expressing sympathy with the former Soviet Union.

Ah well. Sean Hannity indulged in precisely the same obtuse dumbassery last night. But really, Palin was just warming up her dulcet vocal cords for the real coup de grace:

PALIN: So I listen to that Sputnik moment talk over and over again and I think, 'No, you don't need one of those. You know what we need is a Spudnut moment. And here's where I'm going with this -- and you're a good one, because you're one of those reporters who actually gets out there in the communities, find these hard-working people and find solutions to the problems that Americans face.

Continue reading »