Day: February 2, 2007

Dyn-o-mite: Not that there’s a snowball’s chance in hell that it could actually happen, but the fact that anyone would nominate Viagra-assisted blowhard Rush Limbaugh for any world-recognized prize beggars belief. Yesterday, however, hyper-conservative law firm Landmark Legal Foundation announced in a press release that it had nominated the radio wingnut windbag for the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.

Either the LLF is mounting a ballsy and if so, pretty cool public relations stunt or, more likely, the outfit is experiencing complete disassociation from the plane of reality that you and I share:

Limbaugh, whose daily radio show is heard by more than 20 million people on more than 600 radio stations in the United States and around the world, was nominated for the prestigious award for his “nearly two decades of tireless efforts to promote liberty, equality and opportunity for all humankind, regardless of race, creed, economic stratum or national origin. These are the only real cornerstones of just and lasting peace throughout the world,” said Landmark President Mark R. Levin.

“Rush Limbaugh is the foremost advocate for freedom and democracy in the world today,” explained Levin. “Everyday he gives voice to the values of democratic governance, individual opportunity and the just, equal application of the rule of law — and it is fitting that the Nobel Committee recognize the power of these ideals to build a truly peaceful world for future generations.”

Whew! I almost fractured my irony bone while reading that. Fortunately, the thoughtful Landmark folks provide a description of the prize in the press release:

The Nobel Peace Prize, which is given by a committee of the Norwegian Storting (the Norwegian Parliament), was created by inventor Alfred Nobel in his will in 1896 to be given to the individual or organization who “shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding of peace congresses.”

Shall we compare the sentiment in that description to a few choice Rush quotes culled from his Web site?

“Did you see ExxonMobil’s profit? Oh, this is great! Makes me feel proud to be an American! Makes me love capitalism! The largest annual profit in US history: 39 1/2 billion dollars. Yes!”

“When you focus on Tony Dungy’s and Lovie Smith’s race, you’re doing them an injustice. They are great men. They happen to be the best in their conferences this year. And both of these guys are ‘clean’ and ‘articulate’ — absolutely right.”

“Mike, I can’t believe that you’re going to hire a maid and only pay her $7.15. You know what I pay my maid, you cheap bastard? I pay my maid more than you will make in a lifetime!”

“The Democrats are worried that any action against Iran might get the country behind the president. Did I just say that? Yes, I said it! I am quoting them! They said it! Here we are in the war on terror, and these people have it out for us. I mean, there’s no other way to put it!”

“What do these four things have in common: embryonic stem cells, synthetic fuels, global warming, and Hillary Rodham Clinton? They are all a lifetime away from delivering their promise. They’re all liberal Democrat fantasies, pure and simple.”

“Don’t insult me — I haven’t made $7 million a year in 14 years! Do you realize how that humiliates me in front of my audience and this country?”

I imagine that his Nobel acceptance speech would be like his radio show — stream-of-consciousness potty talk punctuated by bombastic blather and preposterous pronouncements. That’s okay, though, Rush is as far away from the Nobel Peace Prize as Joe Biden is from becoming president.

In a fit of non-irony, Landmark Legal Foundation disclosed that Limbaugh serves as an unpaid member of its board of advisors.

Referring to his escalation of the war in Iraq in last month’s State of the Union speech, Pres. Bush said he was sending “reinforcements of more than 20,000 additional soldiers and Marines to Iraq.” The key phrase in the quote is “more than” — much more:

A study released today by the Congressional Budget Office shows that the real troop increase associated with President Bush’s escalation policy could be as high as 48,000, more than double the 21,500 soldiers that Bush has claimed.

As DefenseTech notes, extra forces are expected because the combat units being sent into Iraq “need to be backed up by support troops, ‘including personnel to staff headquarters, serve as military police, and provide communications, contracting, engineering, intelligence, medical, and other services.’” The CBO’s low estimate envisions at least 15,000 additional support personnel. The alternative scenario “would require about 28,000 support troops in addition to the 20,000 combat troops.”

Additionally, the cost of the escalation could be as much as five times higher than White House estimates:

According to the study, the costs for the “surge” would also be dramatically different than the President has said. The White House estimated a troop escalation would require about $5.6 billion in additional funding, the CBO now believes “that costs would range from $9 billion to $13 billion for a four-month deployment and from $20 billion to $27 billion for a 12-month deployment, depending upon the total number of troops deployed.”

Remember the bad old days when the media used to get exasperated with the Clinton administration because they had to parse their statements about Pres. Clinton’s sex life?

Except for Keith Olbermann on MSNBC’s “Countdown” last night, I haven’t heard a single cablenewser express concern that when Pres. Bush said “more than” 21,000, he meant “more than double” 21,000.

Bustards!