The Rush Limbaugh Show 14-Feb-11 CF mp3 48K

The Rush Limbaugh Show 14-Feb-11 CF mp3 48K Podcast

udp://tracker.openbittorrent.com:80
udp://open.demonii.com:1337
udp://tracker.coppersurfer.tk:6969
udp://exodus.desync.com:6969

thunderbum (2011-02-15)

Thank you!

vadersan (2011-02-15)

Thanks a lot jw!

ktomktom (2011-02-15)

The morons are still active I see, spreading this muck farther than it should go, but hey, that's democracy, giving the crazies as much oxygen as the rest of us.
Kinda sad though, knowing that there are people out there who actually believe this rubbish (the dumbest 15 million people in the USA for example).
Aren't you Lim-bore lovers embarrassed that your idol is an obscenely overweight drug abuser who makes his living as a demagogue? Silly me, that description actually fits his listeners, sitting around in their trailer parks hoping one day that fate will allow them to get a platform to publicly broadcast their ignorance to an audience of EVEN stupider people out there who believe what they say.
Hey, Billy-Bob...pass the banjo. I got a tune-a-comin'...

0x5b785d (2011-02-16)

Thanks!

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-16)

Wow, that was typical... try harder, ktomktom.
"Lim-bore"? Cringeworthy. When will you liberals ditch the wordplay and insults, and start focusing on actual issues? You came here to call Limbaugh fat, boring, and a drug addict? Seriously?
Weight is irrelevant... and it has nothing to do with ideology; just look at Michael Moore. Boring? Rush is a very animated, humorous speaker. Listen for yourself. Compare his speech to Obama's monotone drone while you're at it. As for drug addiction: Rush became addicted to prescription drugs after a botched back surgery. Obama was just a coke user, plain and simple. As admitted in his books.
Rush abused legal drugs that lined the pockets of doctors. Obama simply supported murderous druglords. But either way, all of these things are utterly irrelevant, and only argued by people who have nothing else to go on. There's no better way to illustrate your lack of knowledge than to immediately go for the pop-culture angle. Even worse is staying there... it's one thing to use it as an opener, but to close with it too? Weak... so incredibly weak. But, as I said, ultimately predictable.
Now, with the irrelevant tripe out of the way, do you wish to debate the issues? First explain how the "dumbest 15 million people in the USA" are the ones FIGHTING taxation, not begging for it. Explain why it's the inner-city liberals who are fat, illiterate dependents.
If we're so stupid, how come we're rich? If liberals are so superior, how come the states and cities in the most debt are the ones that have been run by liberals for 30 to 80 years?
Seriously, man... either argue the issues, with examples and facts, or don't bother typing. As it is, you just come across as a sad, uninformed loser.
"Lim-bore"
*Facepalm*
Immigration, foreign policy, debt, taxes, any number of federal social programs... numbers, names, dates. ISSUES. Check 'em out sometime.

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-16)

"sitting around in their trailer parks"
Ummm... you do realize that low / no income housing is predominantly liberal, right? Welfare bums in trailer parks are dependent on the state, moron.
Man... it doesn't take much simple propaganda and imagery in pop-culture (MSM, Comedy Central, etc) to manipulate your comprehension of reality, does it?
Think for yourself, man... carbon-copy liberals are terrifying. They all say the exact same handful of things over and over again. Same insults, same fallacies, same stereotypes... but never any tangible arguments.
Scary.

ktomktom (2011-02-16)

Ma! Pa! Quick! Come look! We got some people at the door who are selling horse-sh*t! They sprinkle it with real clever words, but... must be good, huh? Lets buy ourselves some!
Debt: 8 years of Bush saddled the USA with the highest deficits it ever had, after he took over the country from Clinton, who was running surpluses. Explain that, melon-heads, and we can go to the next point. Unfortunately you can't though, can you, because it's true. Admit it, and we can talk further about facts.
Now back to the fun stuff... Fox news, Rush Lim-bore... all low-brow rubbish for the cretins. The tea party is made up of dumb white people who think Sarah Palin is their intellectual superior... go figure! Good that you identify with them, as it is then obvious to the rest of us how truly, amazingly stupid you really are.

ktomktom (2011-02-16)

Tax policy! hhahahaahahahahaahha...
George Bush... tax cuts for all! Hey, what about funding them? What about cutting spending?? Naww, let's find a false pretext to invade another country (WMD's anyone?)and then spend, spend, spend on a war the USA didn't have to fight! Equals deficit, right? Right?? Deficit not big enough? Let's give oil companies money for nothing! Yeehaa! Dem good ole boys will sure be happy, pappy! What about maize growers... give them money too!

ktomktom (2011-02-16)

Ronald Reagan... your idol! He was a tax-cutter who raised taxes in seven of the eight years of his presidency. He was a budget-cutter who nearly tripled the federal budget deficit.
Facts! You got any?

ktomktom (2011-02-16)

And you really hated the "overweight" thing, didn't you? Let me guess, you are 350 pounds... 400? C'mon, don't be shy. It's fatties like you who keep the economy moving, guzzling soda and eating burgers, driving your car 500 yards down the road with the air-con blasting so your wobbliness doesn't get all sweaty.

ktomktom (2011-02-16)

Paul Volcker, who served as chairman of the Federal Reserve during most of the Reagan years, commented about the economist Arthur Laffer’s famous curve, which, incredibly, became a cornerstone of national economic policy. “The Laffer Curve,” said Mr. Volcker, “was presented as an intellectual support for the idea that reducing taxes would produce more revenues, and that was, I think, considered by most people a pretty extreme interpretation of what would happen.” Toward the end of his comment, the former Fed chairman chuckled as if still amused by the idea that this was ever taken seriously.
Hit me with your experts fat-boy! Ohh, Glenn Beck doesn't count... sorry!

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-17)

Oooh... we have a copypasta, ladies and gentlemen!
LOL.

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-17)

"Paul Volcker, who served as chairman of the Federal Reserve during most of the Reagan years..."
Using the Federal Reserve as a cornerstone... now I've seen it all.
What an idiot. He's running to the people who just lied about monetizing the debt for examples... and throwing economics out of the equation at the same time.
Amazing.

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-17)

"George Bush... tax cuts for all! Hey, what about funding them? What about cutting spending??"
1) You do not "fund" tax cuts, moron. Tax cuts is simply letting people keep more of the money they earned. You fund taxes, not tax cuts.
Only dependents need to be funded.
2) Cutting the spending? Obama took the deficit from 9 trillion to 14 trillion.

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-17)

"And you really hated the "overweight" thing, didn't you? Let me guess, you are 350 pounds... 400? C'mon, don't be shy. It's fatties like you who keep the economy moving, guzzling soda and eating burgers, driving your car 500 yards down the road with the air-con blasting so your wobbliness doesn't get all sweaty."
You live in a land of assumptions, bro... it's why you don't know anything. I weigh 165. Don't drink soda, coffee, or smoke. I have a CBR, not a car.
You just keep proving my point... you're a victim of propaganda.

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-17)

"And you really hated the "overweight" thing, didn't you?"
I hate to waste time coming back to it, but I just wanted to point something out: My argument against your fat comment was one of several others... and was the shortest one. Yet you still managed to convince yourself I was offended, and 400 lbs.
Now that is funny. You make up your reality as you go along, don't you?

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-17)

Exactly what I was waiting for... exactly.
You don't even know which branch of government controls spending, do you? Because it's not exactly the executive branch... it's congress. Congress controls spending. Ever heard of the CBO? And under Bush, the vast majority of spending was with a Democrat majority. And most of it wasn't on war, believe it or not.
Regardless: the national debt was 9 trillion when Obama got into office. It is currently over 14 trillion. He makes Bush look like a saint in the spending department. So, if you had any idea what you were talking about, you wouldn't have mentioned debt because Obama-and-freinds are KINGS in that department.
About that debt: What was the main problem? What were the bailouts for? Unions and housing... now, who could that be? UAW, AFL-CIO, SEIU, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac... all broke, all corrupt, all bailed out with taxpayer money... and *drumroll* all MAJOR Democrat / establishment Republican donors! Goldman-Sachs execs have saturated both parties and all administrations since Clinton. It's mass incest.
So let me get this straight: Are you telling me Bush caused the housing bubble and subsequent collapse? The toxic assets? Because 1) it was set up by Clinton, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac & friends, and 2) I thought Bush "didn't care about the poor". Because that's what caused this: giving loans to people who couldn't afford them.
You're contradicting yourself with the spending argument. Because I can show you where the spending was... and it was almost entirely Democrat social programs and bipartisan corporate interests who literally sit in the administrations.

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-17)

LOL about the "Clinton surpluses" too. As I said, you're so predictable. News flash: THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A SURPLUS. Every single president has run UP the deficit. Even Reagan. But Reagan can be (partially) excused because of the Cold War, which was economic... hence the "cold" instead of "hot". His spending collapsed the Soviet Union and quite possibly averted major war. It was literally a war tactic, and it worked. As for the "inexcusable" spending: at least he was opposed to it. But you can't control congress with an iron fist. But even since then, even with an expanding economy, wealth, and assets, the spending has only increased, and increased beyond sustainability. Debt has only gone up, and become increasingly foreign. Manufacturing is gone. Taxed away overseas. Social programs and Federal bureaucracies have only gotten bigger and badder. So, are you telling me under Clinton the debt was nonexistent? How can you have a "surplus" when you're in debt? Answer that.

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-17)

You have to understand that you are being manipulated. There are at least 3 sets of books. Clinton (and every other president, yet Clinton did it to such an extreme as to claim "surplus" as opposed to "deficit reduction") simply takes money from one pocket and puts it in the other, publishes the numbers for one book, and then moves the money around again. This can be PROVEN by looking at the TOTAL debt which has only INCREASED. It could be proven in excruciating detail if it wasn't for the fact that the remaining books are closed. Secret. They promise you "things are good" yet won't even show the numbers to prove it... Bernanke literally just says "no." What does that tell you? But either way there's no need to look any closer; as I said, look at the total.
No surplus.

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-17)

It's the same thing they do with the unemployment numbers: Obama claimed 9% initially, yet it was 18% in reality. Why? Because they don't count people who have GIVEN UP LOOKING FOR WORK as "unemployed". They define "unemployed" as "out of work, yet still looking for it", so when someone gives up, they can reduce the number. As a result, idiots like you think people are finding jobs. The exact same tactics were used to attain the Clinton "surplus". There never was one. Not as a total, or even as a budget. The debt only increased... this is FACT that can be verified any number of ways. Face it: you have been fooled, because you are a fool. The "surplus" was a scam, along with all those toxic assets that got bundled together and came crashing down at the end of Bush's presidency, and the beginning of Obama's. It's called a pyramid scheme, and every presidency has done it to one degree or another. But Clinton took it to the extreme. And what true economic boom there was was because of the PRIVATE sector, not public. All Clinton did was create more debt... debt you're seeing right now. Fool.

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-17)

Bush was no conservative. This is where I disagree with Rush. (I actually disagree with him on issues, as opposed to you who simply don't know the issues). George W Bush acted like a lib when it came to everything but big business... and I don't mean he was a conservative with business either. His support for big business was from the fascist angle. Just like Clinton and Obama. AIG, Goldman-Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, Lehman Bros, BP, GE, Federal Reserve, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac... they are "the government". Everyone since Reagan has been their puppets. Notice how the only 2 presidents to actively and vocally oppose corporate globalism were shot in public? JFK and Reagan? Both warned of this regularly. They raised a lot of red flags. Listen to their speeches. Go for it. You'll be amazed at just how relevant they are to the present moment... oh, wait. You won't, because you're clueless.
If you oppose Bush, you should oppose Clinton and Obama, because Bush manufactured the framework Obama is currently assembling, and Clinton set the stage for the "need" for Bush to begin... yet you don't. That tells me you're utterly clueless about reality. All you have are these cookie-cutter opinions and illusions you've been fed by the MSM. No doubt you go to Comedy Central for your "news".

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-17)

I'll just let George H. W. Bush, the famous neo-con and early supporter- perhaps even founding father- of Obama's current adopted master plan say it best:
"We have before us, the opportunity to forge for ourselves and future generations, a New World Order. A world where the rule of law, not the law of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations. When we are successful, and we will be, we have a real chance at this New World Order. An order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfil the promise and vision of the UN's founders."
Sounds like something George Soros would say. Funny how "enemies" like Bush and Obama see eye to eye on the largest issue of them all, huh? Almost as if it's been a big game of good cop, bad cop the entire time. Dividing the population with MSM propaganda and posturing when in fact all are working toward the common goal of the UN's founders. Why don't you find out what that goal is? Find out what George Soros, Barack Obama, George Bush, Bill Clinton, Maurice Strong, Cass Sunstein, Mark Lloyd, John Holdren, Al Gore, Joe Biden, Henry Kissinger, Ben Bernanke, Gordon Brown, Herman Von Rumpoy, and all the friends in the Fed and its corporate arms agree on and are actively working toward.
You're an idiot, man... and not even a useful one. Just an ineffective one. A flaccid, obnoxious, and profoundly uninformed idiot. You're so proud of yourself, too... it would be cute if it wasn't so scary.

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-17)

Face it: Conservatism is not the problem, especially fiscal conservatism. Quite the opposite there; it's the spending. You even admit it yourself. You are championing fiscal conservatism, here.
The free market is not the problem. Capitalism is not the problem. All three have been abused and suppressed, and what remains is riddled with corruption. It is the ABUSE of the system, not the system itself. Institutionalized corruption has brought the entire planet to its knees. George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and now, putting all others to shame, Barack Obama, the king of debt, corruption, secrecy, and lies are to blame. Along with complacency and ignorance, of course... of which you are a prime example.

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-17)

You think Obamacare is supposed to be compassionate, am I right? Yet it was initially written by the very insurers you apparently hate. It was exposed to the point that Obama had to scrap the initial plan (that YOU idiots were voting for) and apologize, playing the blame game, saying he didn't know. Conservatives saved you from yourselves, if only for a short time. But did CNN and MSNBC tell you? No. One was even owned by GE, another one of Obama's major contributors and benefactors of current legislation, so no surprise there.
So, the revisions were made, it was passed without being read (as championed by Conyers, Waters, and Pelosi) and now that the hidden controls have surfaced, almost all of Obama's major health care supporters (unions, key corporations etc) have gotten EXEMPTIONS. Yes, the major proponents have dumped the burden (and it WILL be a burden) on YOU and backed out. It was the plan all along, moron. You were used, and it's been exposed, and you sill don't know it. But don't worry; they were used too. They are inherently unsustainable, only this time there will be no more bailouts.
They served their purpose and can die. Just like Hitler did it; used ignorant labor unions to get elected with false promises of national socialism only to implement good old fashioned fascism.

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-17)

You use the Federal Reserve chairman as an example, and Clinton too... one's the head of the most secretive, untrustworthy semi-private group controlling the government unconstitutionally, and the other lied under oath about getting blown by an intern.
LOL... liberal standards. Clinton lied to YOU too, you know.
""It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is"
Classic. Lied under oath about shoving a cigar tube up an intern and blowing his load on her dress, yet you trust his numbers on the economy.
You're a first class idiot, man.

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-17)

It's not the first time Obama used you, either. His entire campaign was a lie; he said he'd close GITMO, yet it remains open. He said he'd end torture, yet he retained it as an option under executive order. He said he's end the wars. It was "only a signature away", remember? He had an entire campaign on that, with idiotic college students sending in photos of themselves holding "it's only a signature away" signs. Yet here you are with the highest death toll to date (both civilian and military) in Afghanistan, and a THIRD conflict in Pakistan. He told you morons he'd end the wars, yet he started a third. He was accepting his Nobel Peace prize while simultaneously sending Predator drones over the Pakistan border and blowing people to pieces. Literally. There were missiles fired as he was on his way. He said he's stop the spending, yet he has added 5 TRILLION dollars to the deficit. He expanded Federal payroll and the average salaries to the point that even low level Fed workers are rich compared to the average private sector career. And their payroll is funded by YOUR TAXES. That is just not sustainable. Obamacare is already in the red (so much for the "surplus") and it hasn't even started yet. It brought in an army of IRS workers for a reason, you know. He cows people like you with "the facts on Obamacare" from the very same CBO that said Medicare part A would cost $9 billion annually by 1990 when actual 1990 spending was $67 billion. They also said medicare as a whole would cost $12 billion when actual spending was $110 billion.
Those are the origins of the "facts" on Obamacare. The "expert opinion". The exact same "experts" in the exact same offices that gave us the "facts" on Medicare and Medicaid. The exact same tactics and lies. Again, from the CBO... the CONGRESSIONAL Budget Office. Congress. The people who produced this "Clinton Surplus" you are so proud of, and the current spun "cuts" Obama is bringing in.
Idiot.

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-17)

The lies continue: he bashed Bush's Patriot Act, yet has extended and expanded it, removing the sunset clauses. He is also working toward applying it to the tapping and tracking of cell phones (Patriot Act only applies to landlines) and domestic calls, as well as reading of emails. All without warrant. He said he'd build "the most transparent administration in history" yet the secrecy has skyrocketed. He didn't even allow media into a meeting on freedom of the press. Now that's irony. He's building a state media and cracking down on internet anonymity and freedom. He's attacking free speech and content online, on the radio, and television via Mark Lloyd and the FTC / FCC and Cass Sunstein.
You don't even know your enemies, let alone your supposed allies... and it has to be that way because it regularly crosses the aisle. It's not convenient for you to know the whole story, you see. It isn't as clean cut as you like to believe, slave. You think it's "Democrat vs Republican" when in fact it's "the Fed vs us".
Establishment Republicans are identical to establishment Democrats. Do you think there was much of a difference between McCain and Obama? If so, you're continuing the pattern of being uninformed. It's all a game, and it is obvious (provably so via simple quotes, legislation, and associations) to anyone with a brain. The Tea Party gets a lot of it, because not only did they just vote out Democrats in November, they assaulted the Republican hacks too. They are cleaning up the whole system, and, if you haven't noticed, are under attack from BOTH parties. The establishment knows no borders. It resides in both parties, and is trying to infiltrate the third.

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-17)

I oppose everyone for excessive spending, yet you only oppose Republicans for excessive spending... interesting.
Do you want liberalism or low debt? Pick one.

ktomktom (2011-02-17)

Amazing. Hilarious. Again, amazing... Imagine if you had a job... you could be so productive.

ktomktom (2011-02-17)

Hey Jwhitt... at least write under your own name. Barry really sounds like sh*t. Sockpuppeteer!

ktomktom (2011-02-17)

And you are fat, I am sure of it. 350 minimum, possibly a 500 hundred pound gorilla. You write so much because you have nothing left to do, being stranded in a bedroom where your only way out is a crane through the window. Fatty.

hayesy316 (2011-02-19)

Don't waste your time arguing with a child, Barry.

BarrySoetoro (2011-02-26)

"Hey Jwhitt... at least write under your own name. Barry really sounds like sh*t. Sockpuppeteer!"
What an idiot... not only does he think we're the same person, he doesn't even know who Barry Soetoro is.
LOL.