No comment Rush. No comment at all.

Mr.Limbaugh says of Michelle Obama“I’m trying to say that our first lady does not project the image of women that you might see on the cover of the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue or of a woman Alex Rodriguez might date every six months or what have you,” Limbaugh said Monday.

In other news, here’s a sneak peek at the next cover of Playgirl.

I'm too sexy for my clothes

23 responses to “No comment Rush. No comment at all.

  1. I guess Rush hasn’t looked at himself a full length mirror lately!


  2. He doesn’t need mirrors as he would not have a reflection.


  3. Moe, that’s an unflattering picture of Rush. He’s lost a lot of weight and actually looks okay I suppose. Why is it liberals always attack a persons physical appearence? Is it because they have no argument on the subject matter? You seem to have a problem with him being married four times. I don’t see how that has anything to do with anything.
    Now, I’m not overweight or anything … and when I look at pictures of Mrs. Obama, I don’t see anything to write home about. Actually, I’ve seen better faces on an iodine bottle. (being facetious) But you know, that’s just me. And truthfully, Alex Rodriguez probably wouldn’t give Mrs. Obama a second look. It’s nothing. Don’t be offended by it.
    I still can’t figure out why liberals are so hateful towards people that are successful and might disagree with them. Help me out there.
    Oh, I still love you Moe. You’re my favorite liberal. πŸ™‚


  4. Steve – of course I intentionally chose an unflattering picture of him. He asked for it.

    You ask “Why is it liberals always attack a persons physical appearence?” Ummm, is my post not about Limbaugh’s attack on Michelle Obama’s appearance? What am I missing?

    You make me blush Steve! πŸ™‚


    • You’re missing what Rush was saying. Michele is on this thing about child hood obesity; and perhaps she should lead by example. That’s about the jist of his original point.
      I’m curious though. What is it about Rush you don’t like? I’ve listened to him since 1997 and really, I can’t think of too much I disagree with (mayby a couple things). One has to admit, most of the time, he’s right. (and I don’t care how much money he makes, or if he’ been married four times, he’s good at what he does) He has legitimate points in most cases.


      • Steve – Rush’s ‘point’ was bogus. Are you saying that someone who preaches against drunkeness is a hypocrite for enjoying a tropical cocktail before dinner while on vacation? Of couse not – that’s absurd. A drink does not equal drunkeness and a rib dinner does not equal a bad diet. And Michelle couldn’t not have chosen a less controversial ’cause’ – that is after all what First Ladies do – Lady Bird Johnson was stop littering (it worked), Nancy Reagan was “just say no” to drugs but sadly that didn’t work), Betty Ford was mental health and she made a difference, Laura Bush was reading and education and she also made a difference.

        Rush is just into mockery and don’t mistake it for satire. Satire is meant to make you laugh. Mockery is meant to demean another person.

        Yeah, I have no use for Rush. I’ve disliked him and his strawmen and ego since I first heard him. First, other than the occassional caller, he doesn’t have guests and refuses to be challenged. If a caller veers off script and dares to challenge, Rush takes the mike and talks his way right out of it. The caller doesn’t exactly get a follow up.

        If you find him to be benign, I”ll not change your mind. But I find him to be the very worst of public men – he has been morbidly obese most of his life, has been married four times, was born to privlege but dropped out of college and yet has spent a career attacking otheres for thier personal failures. Where he can’t find legitimate failures, he makes htem up. Remember the clinton body count? HIllary killed Vince Foster? It goes on and on. He’s a negative influence on millions of people and I utterly despise him. If he stumbles accross a legitimate point sometimes, well, when you talk three hours a day for twenty years – the odds will favord him occassionally.


  5. Liberal Presidents wives seem to be attacked a lot. Hillary was even more than Michelle I think.


    • Hillary was under constant attack – the right saw her as an ‘uppity’ woman, not knowing her ‘place’, like Michelle – being a lawyer and an executive and all. Eleanor Roosevelt was widely attacked for the same reason.


  6. good point bruce, the bottom line, America’s right for the most part are just a bunch of pigs lacking in scruples and common good manners.


  7. Well, I think the point Limbaugh was trying to make was that Michelle Obama has no business trying to tell parents what their kids should eat, seeing as how Ms. Obama and her ilk have made a habit of dining on ribs as of late.

    And while I do not care for nor agree with Limbaugh in general, I do agree with him in this instance.

    Parents should be free to give their kids what they want, with absolutely no input from anyone else.


  8. “Parents should be free to give their kids what they want, with absolutely no input from anyone else.”

    That’s a pretty broad reaching statement. So a parent putting vodka in their kid’s bottle is cool with you?


    • No Brian, you have me there.

      But…I will say that I think when it comes to traditional American cuisine, parents should be able to feed children what they want…and school cafeterias should reflect the parents – not the First lady’s – wishes on what to serve.


  9. ” One has to admit, most of the time, he’s right.”

    Um, no one doesn’t. At least no one who can actually form a proper sentence and add 2 + 2.


  10. I wish for better for our children Unrepublican.


  11. It’s like prohibition. Who would argue that alcohol is bad for you . In the early 1900s there were a lot of drunks who did not support their families . A lot of bible thumping church women got prohibition passed. A decade later the country figured out it was a bad idea.

    Michelle Obama is going down that well traveled road of do gooder women trying to basically outlaw something Americans want, this time good tasting food. If she wants to push temperance in eating fine . But do not do it by limiting our choices .


    • The gov’t has been overseeing food consumption in this country since the early 19th century – to pretend this is osmething new is silly.

      Thank elvis for those do-gooder women. Our history is full of do-gooders who did damn good and our lives are much better and richer for them.

      Are do-gooder men okay Alan?

      By the way, the temperance movement was led by male preachers.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s