http://www.duffelblog.com/2013/10/rush-limbaugh-calls-troops-welfare-queens-moochers/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rush-limbaugh-calls-troops-welfare-queens-moochers
"You see, Master Sergeant," began Limbaugh, rubbing his hands together, "you have exposed yourself. I thank you for the call — and I thank you for your service, I really do — but you've exposed yourself. Of course you like the idea of the government putting a band-aid on every little boo-boo you get, wiping your nose for you, giving you free prescription Advil when you could buy it at the drug store like the taxpayer, so on and so forth. You like that idea because you've lived with that your whole life. You said you joined the Army at 18. My guess is that before that, before you enlisted, you were on welfare. When you joined, you were essentially on welfare, because whether or not you ever go to war, you get free medicine, free food, free place to sleep, even free clothes to wear to work every day. The taxpayer even gives you years-long paid vacations to exotic foreign lands. I'm not saying you're not appreciative, but when you're used to people giving you free ice cream for forty years, if you suddenly have to pay for your own ice cream, you'll understandably be upset.
"You'll also probably think, well—" and here Limbaugh inclined the intonation of his voice to imitate that of a child, "Mr. Limbaugh, if only everyone could have fwee ice cream, Mr. Limbaugh, then the world would be all sunshine and unicorns and happiness. The only problem," continued Limbaugh, returning to his normal voice, "is that ice cream, folks, like health care, is not free. It is a product, created by a producer. And you have just as much a right to getting it for free as you have to getting ice cream for free. That is, you do not have a right to it for free. And if you believe otherwise, you are not a defender of the nation. You're a welfare queen — or more appropriately, a welfare grunt."
Mr. Limbaugh then launched into a tangent on what he called the "distressing trend" he's noticed in younger servicemembers to be supporters of the President.
"It used to be, back when I was of age to serve, back in the Vietnam era, that soldiers were stout, upright, conservative young men. They were Southern. They voted Republican. Their wives stayed home and had babies and knew their place. Cooked dinner, had a highball waiting when the husband got home, so forth. But nowadays we have a new generation of young military youth — low-information voters raised on liberal propaganda like Sesame Street and Mr. Rogers and PBS, what have you. Get their news from the drive-by media. They learned welfare, mooching, kumbaya and hand-holding from those sources. They learned mooching from an early age, folks. And even in uniform, still moochers. Can't change a leopard's....well, in this case, you can change a leopard's spots, folks. But he's still a leopard. Still a moocher. A little Obama jihadist, ready to march out and drone-attack American citizens in Yemen or Pakistan."
Read more: http://www.duffelblog.com/2013/10/rush-limbaugh-calls-troops-welfare-queens-moochers/#ixzz2iTvgqoN8
It seems to good too be true, so I'm suspicious.
That's a satire site, Raz. Like a military version of the Onion.
Sorry :sadface:
I highly doubt the authenticity of that, it reads too much like an urban legend. People like Limbaugh are evil, they're not stupid.
So Raz, what leftwing blog was it that unwittingly picked it up? Or are you going to Chinese news sites these days? :D
Quote from: derspiess on October 22, 2013, 02:52:29 PM
That's a satire site, Raz. Like a military version of the Onion.
Sorry :sadface:
Shhh, let him believe it.
Quote from: derspiess on October 22, 2013, 02:59:37 PM
So Raz, what leftwing blog was it that unwittingly picked it up? Or are you going to Chinese news sites these days? :D
Facebook.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 22, 2013, 02:47:18 PM
It seems to good too be true, so I'm suspicious.
In what way is it good?
I do. I don't see anything positive there.
Quote from: Maximus on October 22, 2013, 03:11:07 PM
I do. I don't see anything positive there.
And I reckon you never will.
I found it on facebook, someone from Languish commented on it, but it wouldn't let me see the comment. Just the story, I was a suspicious of it's veracity, and figured I'd get some clarification.
Quote from: Maximus on October 22, 2013, 03:11:07 PM
I do. I don't see anything positive there.
Limbaugh completely alienating moderates and many conservatives.
Quote from: Maximus on October 22, 2013, 03:11:07 PM
I do. I don't see anything positive there.
Are you new here?
Raz' entire organizing principle, his secular religion, is demonization of the right.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 22, 2013, 03:41:02 PM
Quote from: Maximus on October 22, 2013, 03:11:07 PM
I do. I don't see anything positive there.
Are you new here?
Raz' entire organizing principle, his secular religion, is demonization of the right.
Sure it is not Raz's as opposed to Raz'
Raz' is Raz's rapper name.
Raz is good people. Usually.
Was it last week or the week before when Yi suggested that the military is paid to much? I've always suspected that the radical budget hawks would turn their knives on military pay and benefits if they thought they could get away with it. It's such a big piece of the pie.
What's wrong with attacking the military?
Quote from: Razgovory on October 22, 2013, 03:52:31 PM
Was it last week or the week before when Yi suggested that the military is paid to much? I've always suspected that the radical budget hawks would turn their knives on military pay and benefits if they thought they could get away with it. It's such a big piece of the pie.
There is definitely some room to criticize military spending, including pay and benefits.
Quote from: Neil on October 22, 2013, 03:57:06 PM
What's wrong with attacking the military?
You're taking their jobs.
I was a Limbaugh fan back in my misguided youth, so I know his playbook pretty well...
I could believe him saying all of that, as he often uses extreme exaggeration to make a point...that's just part of his schtick.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 22, 2013, 03:41:02 PM
Quote from: Maximus on October 22, 2013, 03:11:07 PM
I do. I don't see anything positive there.
Are you new here?
Raz' entire organizing principle, his secular religion, is demonization of the right.
Think of it as a Raz D'etat.
Quote from: Barrister on October 22, 2013, 03:58:03 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 22, 2013, 03:52:31 PM
Was it last week or the week before when Yi suggested that the military is paid to much? I've always suspected that the radical budget hawks would turn their knives on military pay and benefits if they thought they could get away with it. It's such a big piece of the pie.
There is definitely some room to criticize military spending, including pay and benefits.
Perhaps, the fiscalnistas tend to shy away from that. They have been careful about forging an alliance with the rest of the conservative movement, they can get their foot in the door taking about "spending" in a vague way or going on about the foreign aid or welfare. They start a major push for cutting military benefits, they lose the alliance. Maybe when they've gotten rid of social security they can carve up Derspeiss's military benefits, but not yet. Not now.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 22, 2013, 05:06:43 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 22, 2013, 03:41:02 PM
Quote from: Maximus on October 22, 2013, 03:11:07 PM
I do. I don't see anything positive there.
Are you new here?
Raz' entire organizing principle, his secular religion, is demonization of the right.
Think of it as a Raz D'etat.
I think of it more as a raz-on d'etre.
The message I'm getting from you Raz is that were Republicans to cut military pay and benefits, that would make them bad people, but as it is, they're to afraid to do so, which makes them bad people. :lol:
They already bad people, they just with to hid it from their fellows.
Quote from: Barrister on October 22, 2013, 05:14:04 PMI think of it more as a raz-on d'etre.
:cheers:
Didn't think you had it in you :hug:
Quote from: Razgovory on October 22, 2013, 05:38:42 PM
They already bad people, they just with to hid it from their fellows.
Then what is the relationship of their badness to cutting military pay and benefits?
Quote from: Barrister on October 22, 2013, 05:14:04 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 22, 2013, 05:06:43 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 22, 2013, 03:41:02 PM
Quote from: Maximus on October 22, 2013, 03:11:07 PM
I do. I don't see anything positive there.
Are you new here?
Raz' entire organizing principle, his secular religion, is demonization of the right.
Think of it as a Raz D'etat.
I think of it more as a raz-on d'etre.
Yeah I screwed that one up. That's what I meant. I'm not good with French. :(
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 22, 2013, 05:40:57 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 22, 2013, 05:38:42 PM
They already bad people, they just with to hid it from their fellows.
Then what is the relationship of their badness to cutting military pay and benefits?
Fellow Conservatives would see it as bad. It's my opinion that the real, honest to God fiscal conservatives are rare, but ride the coat tails of the general conservative movement. They can make common cause talking about the cutting welfare and such hopefully pick up the adherents here and there. Once they cut the "Welfare" programs, they hope to move on to more popular ones, like social security and the like. Eventually they'll put their "fellow" conservatives on the chopping block as well cutting military pensions pay. It's sort of like the Popular Front strategy the Reds used to use.
Simple question Raz: would cutting military pay and benefits be a bad thing or a good thing?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 22, 2013, 05:52:10 PM
Simple question Raz: would cutting military pay and benefits be a bad thing or a good thing?
That's not a simple question :o
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 22, 2013, 05:52:10 PM
Simple question Raz: would cutting military pay and benefits be a bad thing or a good thing?
You are a clever one. I think cutting pay is fine at times, but not benefits or pensions.
from the same site
Admin Error Sends Bradley Manning to Death Row, Nidal Hasan to Gender Reassignment Surgery
Read more: http://www.duffelblog.com/2013/08/admin-error-hasan-manning/#ixzz2iUkWNwiX
Holy crap, Beeb made a pun. :o
The new Mac Pro made him overexcited.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 22, 2013, 05:58:24 PM
You are a clever one. I think cutting pay is fine at times, but not benefits or pensions.
When is it fine? OK in the morning, bad at night? Or good when Democrats are in favor, bad when Republicans are in favor?
Quote from: Barrister on October 22, 2013, 03:58:03 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 22, 2013, 03:52:31 PM
Was it last week or the week before when Yi suggested that the military is paid to much? I've always suspected that the radical budget hawks would turn their knives on military pay and benefits if they thought they could get away with it. It's such a big piece of the pie.
There is definitely some room to criticize military spending, including pay and benefits.
Hmm, no, I don't think so.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F2%2F20%2FProclaiming_claudius_emperor.png%2F774px-Proclaiming_claudius_emperor.png&hash=3d7a4b90447d142a9c0ef9233814943504389837)
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 22, 2013, 06:20:38 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 22, 2013, 05:58:24 PM
You are a clever one. I think cutting pay is fine at times, but not benefits or pensions.
When is it fine? OK in the morning, bad at night? Or good when Democrats are in favor, bad when Republicans are in favor?
When you don't need so many soldiers!
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 22, 2013, 06:16:55 PM
Holy crap, Beeb made a pun. :o
Beeb's relationship with puns is like Atticus Finch's relationship with rifles. He normally refuses to use them to keep it fair for others, but makes an exception when he comes across a rabid dog.
Quote from: Caliga on October 22, 2013, 06:22:05 PM
Quote from: Barrister on October 22, 2013, 03:58:03 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 22, 2013, 03:52:31 PM
Was it last week or the week before when Yi suggested that the military is paid to much? I've always suspected that the radical budget hawks would turn their knives on military pay and benefits if they thought they could get away with it. It's such a big piece of the pie.
There is definitely some room to criticize military spending, including pay and benefits.
Hmm, no, I don't think so.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F2%2F20%2FProclaiming_claudius_emperor.png%2F774px-Proclaiming_claudius_emperor.png&hash=3d7a4b90447d142a9c0ef9233814943504389837)
Caliga, your time spent dressed as a Centurion does not entitle you to either pay or benefits. :P
Yeah its the military's equivalent of the Onion, pretty sure I commented on it, Raz. :P
And I'm not sure about cutting pay and benefits. Maybe the pension, which is pretty good and they are actually talking about cutting. But what else can they reasonably cut, healthcare, dental? Soldier's sick or injured and can't do his job it can be pretty detrimental to the military and readiness. $100 a year clothing allowance? Maybe, but they require so much extra bullshit for you to purchase that really doesn't cover it when you take a look at how expensive uniforms and accessories are.
As for pay, you really don't make that much money in the military, especially the enlisted. As a brand new private i was making something like $14,000 a year. Now it's something like 18 before taxes. An E-7 with 15-20 years is makes $36,000, which I'm actually surprised is so low to be honest. Lot of knowledge and expertise at that level.
http://www.militaryfactory.com/military_pay_scale.asp
Quote from: Alcibiades on October 23, 2013, 11:07:13 AM
And I'm not sure about cutting pay and benefits. Maybe the pension, which is pretty good and they are actually talking about cutting. But what else can they reasonably cut, healthcare, dental? Soldier's sick or injured and can't do his job it can be pretty detrimental to the military and readiness. $100 a year clothing allowance? Maybe, but they require so much extra bullshit for you to purchase that really doesn't cover it when you take a look at how expensive uniforms and accessories are.
As for pay, you really don't make that much money in the military, especially the enlisted. As a brand new private i was making something like $14,000 a year. Now it's something like 18 before taxes. An E-7 with 15-20 years is makes $36,000, which I'm actually surprised is so low to be honest. Lot of knowledge and expertise at that level.
http://www.militaryfactory.com/military_pay_scale.asp
Isn't it more the free housing, etc., that makes up for the low pay?
Yeah, enlisted get housing in a dorm like setting or if they are married they get duplex like living quarters, depending the rank.
If those are filled you can get money to live off post, which is around 900-1100 depending where you live.
So yeah, that can bump it up a bit.
Quote from: Malthus on October 23, 2013, 10:47:01 AM
Caliga, your time spent dressed as a Centurion does not entitle you to either pay or benefits. :P
I used to dress up as an auxiliary ex-slave. :blush:
Quote from: Caliga on October 23, 2013, 03:03:50 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 23, 2013, 10:47:01 AM
Caliga, your time spent dressed as a Centurion does not entitle you to either pay or benefits. :P
I used to dress up as an auxiliary ex-slave. :blush:
Then you REALLY aren't entitled to either pay or benefits. :lol:
Am I, Welfare Queen?
I confess I might not be too good doing anything else.
Well, there is always McDonalds.
Quote from: Siege on October 24, 2013, 09:41:57 AM
Well, there is always McDonalds.
As noted in the other thread you would still have to be on welfare :P
Surely, there are other organizations beside the government willing to pay Siege decent money to kill people. :hmm:
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 24, 2013, 09:51:19 AM
Surely, there are other organizations beside the government willing to pay Siege decent money to kill people. :hmm:
McDonalds.
Quote from: lustindarkness on October 24, 2013, 09:56:11 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 24, 2013, 09:51:19 AM
Surely, there are other organizations beside the government willing to pay Siege decent money to kill people. :hmm:
McDonalds.
Decent money.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on October 24, 2013, 09:51:19 AM
Surely, there are other organizations beside the government willing to pay Siege decent money to kill people. :hmm:
They don't use outside contractors.