Regarding Haiti: Cuba Humanitarian, Rush Not So Much

Yes my friends we have reached that bottom of the toilet moment when conservative’s favorite radio pundit makes Cuba look like the shining light on the hill.

The United States and Cuba have reached an agreement to allow planes to fly through Cuba’s airspace to speed relief to earthquake torn Haiti.

In the meantime, egged on by one of his paranoid pin-head listeners, Rush impedes help to Haiti by suggesting that if you use our government web site to make your relief contribution, the money will not get to Haiti but your name will get on a mailing list.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

After Glenn Beck called Obama a racist, pressure was brought to bear on advertisers to bail. It worked. The time has come for this same pressure to come down on Limbaugh like the cement roofs that crushed thousands of Haitians three days ago.

Update: To petition Rush’s corporate sponsors to pull out, sign the petition found at!

Rutherford Political Blogger Alliance

25 thoughts on “Regarding Haiti: Cuba Humanitarian, Rush Not So Much

  1. Actually the “pressure” to get Beck’s advertisers to bail was largely a failure. Those few who did pull their adds of Beck’s show pulled them off of all such shows with controversial opinions, including most of MSNBC and CNN.

  2. While the baby was at the in-laws, one of my brothers and I smoked a fat joint (I rarely partake and deserved to be lambasted) and made a vow to come up with a business plan.

    I swear to you, the next day, we both soberly agreed that the idea we came up with is solid. My brother just recently passed his third CFA test.

    Time for the great American tradition of saying fuck it! Go for Broke! upper class or bust!

    Rutherford, tell you’re liberal fruits to get out of our way, we are both man enough to fall flat on our face.

    If you don’t see much it’s because I will be juggling the fam, work and our new business.

    God Speed!

  3. Beck was damaged? 😆 Let me tell you the most solid investment plan I have ever dabbled in. When the left turns on a company, wait 2 days and buy the stock. I’ve made more off of lefty animosity than I ever did honestly. Caterpillar, check. R.J Reynolds, check, Exxon Mobile, check. To be successful in business, it should be a prerequisite to make the left hate your guts first.

    Beck is more popular than ever with all his venues sold out for his shows, two or three books on the NYT bestseller list concurrently, one of the most successful cable news shows on TV. Put him the 8:00 EST slot, and Beck would walk away in a win.

    If he doesn’t die of a M.I. first, Limbaugh must be setting up the Left for another big fall from grace. This is great stuff!

    Rutherford, I feel your pain.

  4. Rabbit,

    Good luck in your new endeavor – balls and charm to boot. An unbeatable combination for success!

    I guess “expanding” your mind really does work? I might need to buy some weed… 😆

  5. Speaking of insufferable, I see the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (for Martha Coakley), I’m warning any early celebration.

    If Brown isn’t at least 10 points ahead come Tuesday, count on a Republican loss. If you think Minnesota was dirty, wait until the Kennedy’s, ACORN, and the corruption at levels comes to play. They’ll pulll a Franken for sure.

    The one thing you can never underestimate about liberals – they die hard. They’ll lie, cheat, steal, and would behead their own mother to stay in power. I actually think Coakley will win simply based on history. Many times I traveled to the Commonwealth for business and never met a person that liked Teddy Kennedy. But he always won going away.

  6. Again, in his own words…


    RUSH: I’m gonna respond to this absolute BS that I said don’t donate. But, you know, I do not make this program about me. I try very hard not to make this program about me. So if I have time to deal with that, I will. I’m confident everybody in this audience knows what I said and what I didn’t say. Even the Washington Post says without the context, “What Limbaugh said is horrible.” All I said was, if you paid your income taxes, that’s how you donate to government for aid, and sure enough, here comes Obama announcing $100 million from the government for aid to Haiti, fine and dandy. But, you paid for it, it’s your taxes. All I said was if you’re going to donate do it outside the government, pure and simple. I was attacked, folks, because I am the leading voice of mainstream conservative views, not for any other reason. And this outrage is totally feigned, just as Tony Blankley said, all this outrage at me is totally faked up. They know exactly what I said, and they know for a fact that I would never tell people not to donate to any charitable cause like this, so it is what it is.


    RUSH: David Brooks today in the New York Times is basically saying what I said yesterday and was attacked for, that giving aid money to countries does not help them grow. Here it is right here in the New York Times, and nobody’s mad at them. Do I need to read it? Yeah, let me. “On Oct. 17, 1989, a major earthquake with a magnitude of 7.0 struck the Bay Area in Northern California. Sixty-three people were killed. This week, a major earthquake, also measuring a magnitude of 7.0, struck near Port-au-Prince, Haiti. The Red Cross estimates that between 45,000 and 50,000 people have died. This is not a natural disaster story. This is a poverty story. It’s a story about poorly constructed buildings, bad infrastructure and terrible public services. On Thursday, President Obama told the people of Haiti: ‘You will not be forsaken; you will not be forgotten.’

    If he is going to remain faithful to that vow then he is going to have to use this tragedy as an occasion to rethink our approach to global poverty. He’s going to have to acknowledge a few difficult truths. The first of those truths is that we don’t know how to use aid to reduce poverty. Over the past few decades, the world has spent trillions of dollars to generate growth in the developing world. The countries that have not received much aid, like China, have seen tremendous growth and tremendous poverty reductions. The countries that have received aid, like Haiti, have not.” Oh, my gosh, this is deja vu, except I’m the one that said it. Using our own war on poverty, how much money have we given to the poor in this country, and we still have the same percentages of poor people — and we’re never supposed to examine the results, right? Only the good intentions of the givers!

    And, of course, the givers are us. Our back pockets are looted by our own government, and the money is redistributed — and as Mr. Brooks is saying here, there is no upside to this. “In the recent anthology ‘What Works in Development?,’ a group of economists try to sort out what we’ve learned. The picture is grim. There are no policy levers that consistently correlate to increased growth. There is nearly zero correlation between how a developing economy does one decade and how it does the next. There is no consistently proven way to reduce corruption. Even improving governing institutions doesn’t seem to produce the expected results. … . More than 10,000 organizations perform missions of this sort in Haiti. …

    “The second hard truth is that micro-aid is vital but insufficient. Given the failures of macrodevelopment, aid organizations often focus on microprojects. So we have “more than 10,000 organizations perform[ing] missions of this sort in Haiti.” It’s exactly what I said: We’ve got charities on the ground 24/7, 365 in Haiti. By some estimates, Haiti has more nongovernmental organizations per capita than any other place on earth. They are doing the Lord’s work, especially these days, but even a blizzard of these efforts does not seem to add up to comprehensive change. Third, it is time to put the thorny issue of culture at the center of efforts to tackle global poverty. Why is Haiti so poor? Well, it has a history of oppression, slavery and colonialism.” Yeeeees, all the things we pointed out this week: Dictatorships! “But so does Barbados, and Barbados is doing pretty well.

    “Haiti has endured ruthless dictators, corruption and foreign invasions. But so has the Dominican Republic, and the D.R. is in much better shape. Haiti and the Dominican Republic share the same island and the same basic environment, yet the border between the two societies offers one of the starkest contrasts on earth — with trees and progress on one side, and deforestation and poverty and early death on the other. “As Lawrence E. Harrison explained in his book ‘The Central Liberal Truth,’ Haiti, like most of the world’s poorest nations, suffers from a complex web of progress-resistant cultural influences. There is the influence of the voodoo religion, which spreads the message that life is capricious and planning futile. There are high levels of social mistrust. Responsibility is often not internalized.”

    “Child-rearing practices often involve neglect in the early years and harsh retribution when kids hit 9 or 10. … In this country, we first tried to tackle poverty by throwing money at it, just as we did abroad. Then we tried microcommunity efforts, just as we did abroad. But the programs that really work involve intrusive paternalism. These programs, like the Harlem Children’s Zone and the No Excuses schools, are led by people who figure they don’t understand all the factors that have contributed to poverty, but they don’t care. They are going to replace parts of the local culture with a highly demanding, highly intensive culture of achievement — involving everything from new child-rearing practices to stricter schools to better job performance,” and none and none of these programs are sponsored by government and certainly not by liberal government.

    So the things that end poverty are cultural, and they start bottom-up, and they’re done by citizens and real people who can’t take it anymore. Throwing money at it accomplishes nothing! It’s been demonstrated all across the world, but most near to us it’s been demonstrated in Haiti. I mention all this as a rebuttal to all of the feigned outrage at me, the lying note that I urged people not to give to charity for Haiti. Nobody in their right mind would ever believe that about me or anybody else, for that matter. However, I did say find some way to do it other than giving it to Obama, ’cause I know he’s going to eliminate the charitable deduction. He wants to wipe out individual charitable giving. He wants the government to be the go-to person for all charities. That’s the only reason you wipe out the deduction for charitable contributions.”

    Further fodder…

    Impact of Obama’s Charity Tax Ten Times Worse Than Current Recession

  7. R, what’s with this new found bone against Rush? I mean, it is little surprise that you’ll don’t agree with him, but attacking him has never worked for you guys.

    Obama went after him and guess what happened, his rating and listening audience increased. I just find it humorous…

    P.S., your tactic doesn’t seem to have worked well on Palin either…

  8. Colossal Miscalculation On Health Care

    Obama and Hill Democrats should have focused much more on the economy.
    by Charlie Cook

    Saturday, Jan. 16, 2010

    Honorable and intelligent people can disagree over the substance and details of what President Obama and congressional Democrats are trying to do on health care reform and climate change. But nearly a year after Obama’s inauguration, judging by where the Democrats stand today, it’s clear that they have made a colossal miscalculation.

    The latest unemployment and housing numbers underscore the folly of their decision to pay so much attention to health care and climate change instead of focusing on the economy “like a laser beam,” as President Clinton pledged to do during his 1992 campaign. Although no one can fairly accuse Obama and his party’s leaders of ignoring the economy, they certainly haven’t focused on it like a laser beam.

  9. I went back and read what Rush said. I feel his timing was inappropriate. Even waiting just 48 hours would have made more sense. People are dying by the tens of thousands while fellow Americans are wondering if family members are alive and Rush elects that this is the right time to debate the merits of Third World financial aid. That’s fucked up. You can call me PC or anything else for that matter. I think it showed a lack of understanding of the immediate event at hand and no empathy.

    That being said, he simply stated the truth: much of the money will end up in the wrong hands. I’m not sure anyone can really debate that. Perhaps, as Rush pointed out, other charities would be more efficient.

    In some ways, Rutherford was just as guilty as Rush when it comes to timing. Eager to score one for his “team,” Rutherford also politicized the quake as people were dying.

    How telling.

    Rutherford links a petition to boycott Rush sponsors.

    Nothing on charity for Haiti.

    Ignoring Rush came natural to me. As did ingoing Jeremy Glover’s take on the quake. I was trying to wrap my mind around what was happening and praying for those people.

    Now Hugo Chavez, on the other hand, should NOT be ignored.

    That piece of shit claims that President Obama is using the quake as an excuse to occupy Haiti.

    I never forgave Chavez for punking Obama out last summer.

    Hugo’s response is proof that Obama should have threw the stupid book on the ground.

    At the time I defended Obama. What was he to do, I thought.

    No more. Fuck Chavez. No more letting him get away with propaganda hi-jinks. For that asshole to physically get in the Presidents comfort zone and use him as a prop was bull shit.

    No more pretending to be friendly.

    I hope Chavez ends up the same way Mussolini did: hanging from his feet in his Sunday’s best with his entrails drooping over his slacks.

  10. Oh yeah……I can’t BELIEVE a Republican might win Mass. HOLY CRAP.

    I’m glad with two wars, unemployment at 10% plus, and a massive rescue mission in the middle of total anarchy, Obama will be “stumpin’ in Mass.


    Whistle while you work. Whistle while you work. Whistle while you work.

  11. Speaking about Coakley ineptness again and the spin from the Rutherford deadwood that this is no referendum on Bomba? Really?

    According to media sources, including FOX News in attendance, Big O couldn’t even fill a 3,000 seat hall in Massachusetts while campaigning today. The entire speech was a huge lie and about hiim. Can you imagine the mouth with the teleprompter can’t even fill a 3,000 seat hall in one of the most dependable, liberal states? No wonder Rutherford is becoming more silent in response and more unhinged in his posts. Rutherford recognizes the impending disaster President Hoodwink has become to “R”‘s failed lefty ideology. A failure of epic proportions in less than a year! Hope & Change baby…

    Rutherford, looks like you attached your wagon to a lame mule, and the mule can’t do anything but sit on its ass braying and whining. Write a letter to Bomba and tell him he needs to brush up on blaming George Bush some more.

  12. Nothing on charity for Haiti.

    Rabbit, normally you don’t piss me off but this time you did. Go back and read the previous article and you’ll find the following:

    If you want to help the Red Cross relief fund for Haiti, text the word “haiti” (without the quotes) to 90999 from your cell phone. You’ll be charged $10.00.

    Do your homework before you call me out. (And yes, I made my donation.)

    P.S. Rush is an asshole.

  13. I saw your sentence on text messaging. Lame.

    I stick by what I said.

    Every vet of the info revolution knows the difference between dropping little text and posting a link.

    Dude, face it. Right when America was truly learning the horrors of the quake even, what collective action did you chose to take?

    Join the masses and…rabbit drum roll……..boycott Rush fucking Limbaugh???

    That’s the link you put up?

    That’s what really pissed you off the most?

    A comment by a radio guy?

    I can see not feeling the need to put up a link of any sort.

    Fair enough.

    But, deciding on delving into some good old grass roots action and then going with a “Boycot Rush” movement a good 12 hours into it?

    And you’re different from Rush how?

  14. I saw your sentence on text messaging. Lame.

    I stick by what I said.

    Every vet of the info revolution knows the difference between dropping little text and posting a link.

    Have you lost your mind? What the hell are you talking about? Please tell me “vet of the info revolution” what is the difference between posting instructions to text msg vs posting a link? More than 8 million dollars was raised via the text messages to the Red Cross relief fund. Do you understand that it wasn’t simply messaging someone? It was messaging a server that automatically charged your phone bill $10.00 …. i.e. it was a friggin donation. What more did you want? If I had dropped a link to the government web page, you would’ve pulled a Limbaugh on me about how the gov’t can’t be trusted with our money.

    You smoked way too much weed the other night dude. You’re on a different f*cking planet.

    Bottom line, the text messaging method was the most convenient approach and it raised a sh*tload of money.

    P.S. Rush is still an asshole.

  15. I’m glad with two wars, unemployment at 10% plus …

    Please BiW. Obama goes to take a crap and he’s “wasting time” while he could be doing more important things. None of your crises are going to get any worse because Obama was in Massachusetts stumping for Coakley. I just wish he had a more worthwhile candidate to promote.

  16. LOL I’m the same way about Big Mac’s. About once a year I have one thinking I’m gonna love it and then by the time it’s finished I’m like “highly over-rated”.

  17. Please BiW.

    Please R. I just repeated what DR said.

    The fact is that it is terribly revealing of O’s motives. Health care is clearly everythig for him, ’cause to support the Bucket 0′ Gaffes named Coakley is to take another hit to credibility that he could ill-afford.

  18. The one thing you can never underestimate about liberals – they die hard. They’ll lie, cheat, steal, and would behead their own mother to stay in power.

    I just noticed this gem.

    What good did all those decapitated mothers do in 1980, ’84 and ’88? That’s a lot of dead mothers for three consecutive losses. 😉

  19. By the way, I’ve noticed quite a bit of liberal = taliban/al qaeda talk from you lately Tex (e.g. beheading mothers). Sounds like you’ve been smoking some of DR’s weed lately. 😉 Or perhaps you’ve been possessed by the spirit of …… Elric? 😀

  20. Things changed when the serial rapist made it to President. Besides, you got your asses handed to you so badly in 80-88 (as I hope you do today), even the “living” dead people couldn’t overcome the vote.

    Reagan won what? 48 or 49 states in 1984? And libs have the nerve to say Obama’s victory overwhelming? It was last year that I knew the only thing libs lie worse than supposed mandates is basic math. Of course, that is what all those liberal arts majors from prestigious universities get you. 😉

  21. Yes, I miss Elric for no other reason that he provided wonderful links and was so effective at pissing you off, he even apparently surpassed me in lib bashing.

    I have great admiration for any Conservative that sends libs bonkers.

What's on your mind?

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