A Friend Stopped By | 02/26/2009 10:30 am

Margo Howard Calls Rush Limbaugh a Fat Fool

By Margo Howard

Well, that didn’t take long. Obama’s been in office little more than a month and I am once more in banshee mode, alternately known as high dudgeon, about the Republicans (exempting a very few, like Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins). Republican leaders are calling it “irresponsible” to increase some taxes, along with the federal debt. Well, there is no choice! Why can’t these party hacks connect the dots and own up to the fact that these measures are necessary because George Bush, with Cheney pulling the strings, got us into this mess … mostly to help their big business buddies? Obama inherited this financial chaos. I assure you he did not choose to begin his term by rescuing financial institutions and printing money.

The putative golden boy of the Republicans, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, in a lame response to Obama’s address, beat the drum for tax cuts. Helloooooo. We had tax cuts, remember? And … the Republicans’ own George W. Bush, during eight years, ran up quite an eye-popping deficit himself.

I find it Kafkaesque that many Republicans embrace the wish voiced by that fat fool Rush Limbaugh that Obama fail. It is hard to imagine an American even saying that. Do these people not live here, too? Who in their right mind would wish failure on a leader just because their guy lost? This is partisanship on steroids, with a big dose of obstructionism thrown in.

But I have a wish, too, Rush: that when the Republican legislators battling Obama come up for reelection, they are booted out, in big numbers, with their constituents letting them know that singing the same old song is no longer acceptable. Not to mention that they were way off-key in the first place.

360 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

got you yelling now…better take a chill pill there…oh my….Just sayin’!

By Libra Lady on 02/27/2009 7:20 am

e-mail alert

Steve has been making personal and disparaging comments about Michelle Obama’s appearance. This is what I object to, and it is very telling that you don’t feel he is at fault in that regard. Could it be because you agree with him?

I comment on Palin when there is a thread to comment on her and her family about. Just as you do, so if I have a crush on her, and you have posted FAR MORE comments about Palin and her family than I have, it is YOU not me that has a crush on Palin.

Hey LL, what time is the pep rally? Do you have a crush on that Steve guy? Oh sorry, whenever I deal with you I feel like I am back in junior high school again…..:-)

By Belinda Joy on 02/28/2009 11:18 am

e-mail alert

Oh where have all the Republicans and conservatives gone?. Most of the people who post on this board are more authoritarian or libertarian. Republicans and conservatives believed in "limited" government as opposed to the libertarians . Republicans and Democrats used to share the common good of the country but differed in program interests. Democrats were more concerned with social issues, fair labor practices, educaton etc and Republicans favored business and the wealthy hence tax cuts and other benefits for the rich. Republicans were know as the party of the wealthy and those who aspired to be. In the 1960’s after the civil rights legislation passed by Lydon Johnson the "southern democrats or dixiecrats" jumped ship and joined the republican party. So now these people along with the evangelical movement have created this republican base that no one can figure out what to do with. Some Republicans find this movement repulsive. There does not seem to be a place for them anymore.

By starry Nite on 02/26/2009 10:56 pm

e-mail alert

Unfortunately ladies, this is a group think with everyone patting themselves on their backs. Rush is not my favorite, but Margo calling him a "fat fool" was hardly becoming to a writer on this site.

The problems we have—not all Bush’s, but Bush’s, Clintonss, and on and on. All of our politicians have spent and spent, and Obama is continuing the trend. But I’m telling you taxing people more is not going to work—you are hurting the producers which in the end hurts the "workers." If Obama really wanted to walk the walk, he would have cut more spending. But he doesn’t want to anymore than the rest did—he wants his programs, his agendas, his way (and your ways in most cases). We’re getting what you guys were getting 8 years ago and I don’t like it. But unfortunately he’s the same as they all are, and he’s not doing anything to convince me differently.

By Susan Easterday on 02/26/2009 11:45 pm

e-mail alert

Just look at him and listen to him. There is no doubt that he is a "fat fool". The truth is looking you in the face! Paint it pretty, but the man is ugly, inside and out!

By Kris Merrill on 02/27/2009 9:29 am

e-mail alert

Of course, he is certainly "fat." But my point was I expect more from the women that write on this site. Calling him a "fat fool" is just name-calling. There are people on the other side, such as Al Franken, who are equally as ugly in spirit. But most people writing in opposition to him—don’t call him "ugly." Though, I’m assuming there are many that think he is. This isn’t about looks, weight, skin color, etc., right?

By Susan Easterday on 02/27/2009 11:17 am

e-mail alert

Susan, I’m reminded of a saying I learned as a little girl. Ugly is as Ugly does. I don’t care what he looks like, but the ugly, nasty lies he tells hurt us all - whether we agree with him or not. Especially if we agree with him - a sickness of the soul!

By Kris Merrill on 02/27/2009 12:03 pm

e-mail alert

Yes, I’ve heard that one. But not everything he says are lies. There are two sides to every story, and one can move numbers around or just have a difference of opinion—just like those on here. Fore instance—for every person and statistic that says universal healthcare is a good thing, you will have an equally smart person and compelling statistic to say the opposite.

And I remember something I also learned as a child. Two wrongs don’t make a right. So just because Rush speaks ugly, doesn’t make it right for Margo to do the same. :-)

By Susan Easterday on 02/27/2009 12:11 pm

e-mail alert

Actually Susan, you should have started your list with Reagan because THAT is where today’s troubles really began. Clinton didn’t do enough to stop it and even did a couple things to add to it… then Bush came along and the rest is history.

By DeBúrca obj on 02/28/2009 12:50 pm

e-mail alert

I agree with you on this, though I’d blame Reagan and the Congress of the time. I’ve become pretty disillusioned with our government of any party. The adminstrations and Congress has become so beholden to their contributors, parties, and cause of choice that they have lost all fiscal responsibility. They all expect fiscal responsibility of us, and yet they have none. It’s terribly disappointing.

By Susan Easterday on 02/28/2009 2:40 pm

e-mail alert

Margo! I loved, loved, that last line! As per usual you sign off with a bang!

I grimace whenever I see or hear the likes of Limb0ffh, ORally, bUsH, PaleIn, and now, (again) whats ‘er name? ummm, oh yes, COLDter.

It is even difficult for me to type out their names!!! Agh!

By Ro H on 02/27/2009 12:41 am

e-mail alert

Your article is simplistic to say the most, idiotic to say the least. George Bush is not responsible for the current economic mess (if there really is one), but the Democrats trying to regain their power at any cost are at fault. For 7 and a half years we’ve had a record GNP, high Dow Jones averages, and low unemployment. Translation: a booming economy. (Yes, the tax cuts that George Bush enacted during his first years in office DID work. More taxes do not.) Now the election comes along, and it is revealed that your lib buds Christopher Dodd and Barney Frank along with ACORN bud Barack Obama order Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to start issuing worthless mortgages. They guarantee banks will be bailed out regardless, and when the new buyers start defaulting on their loans, the banks start crying. Result: the banks need to be bailed out now, the stock market falls, and Democrats once again spend taxpayer money like water. Don’t blame George Bush for this mess. It was all part of a campaign to get our current Socialist president elected at all cost to us, and for Democrats to regain their complete dominance at any cost to the country. Barack Obama did not "inherit" this mess. He was partially responsible for it. Rush Limbaugh is completely right, and insulting him won’t change that.

By Gerald Ripberger on 02/27/2009 5:31 am

e-mail alert

Gerald…you nailed it, baby!

By deber B on 02/27/2009 7:57 am

e-mail alert

Bush had the republican congress spent trillions of dollars during the 8 years he occupied the Whitehouse, he wouldn’t sign one bill unless they all agreed with him, if they didn’t agree, he would veto the bill. He put the country in debt with his UNnecessary war which was and is the biggest lie told to the American people. Thousands died, because he refuse to make a plan to get out of Iraq. Bush is a war criminal, the republican congress stood by and let Wall Street run amuck, and steal, the retirements of millions of people.

Get a grip lady,wake up,the republican party has ruined this country, in just eight years. I DON’T WANT

THEM BACK, NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS.

By Alessan O on 03/05/2009 2:22 am