First, there is no doubt that Limbaugh is in a completely different category than Colmes (or, for that matter, Hannity). Limbaugh sets the standard for the genre. I don’t think Colmes treated him badly…in fact, in my view, it was fair of him to give Rush a chance to respond to the criticisms that had been made (the 1:30 minute edit, the “attack” on a 12 year old etc). I was happy to hear the Rushman knock those out of the park.

Secondly,Colmes has to take difficult positions from time to time…it’s his role on the show (just as Hannity occasionally ends up having to defend the indefensible). I think that the segment would have been completely unsatisfying had Colmes not raised some of the criticisms. It would have looked too much like a set-up interview (like a Clinton on Hardball, for example) and also a bit weak (after all, I have confidence that Rush can handle this stuff). And Colmes structured the questions so that Rush had a fair chance to answer.

There are a lot of left-wing nutjobs that would love to be able to take a run at the guests on H&C. I think that, when you look at who COULD be there, Alan Colmes does a pretty good job. From time to time he gets upset, and often drives me up the wall with whacko and repetitive arguments, but he is generally civil. I think he was quite courteous to Limbaugh, and rightfully so.

And Limbaugh, in turn was courteous to him, as always.

Just my two pesos worth…

Colmes Skeletor had about as much chance as a high-school JV player thrown into an NFL game – lucky to get off the field alive!

Sadly, this won’t be the last battle, but for now, the Soros left is getting its nose bloodied. Pwn3d by Rush, who has demonstrated that it’s not necessary to quietly accept the crap constantly dished out by the left. Republican congress-critters and the White House need to take note, and grow some malkins.

The “drive-by media” (another great Rush phrase) have done a great job thus far of sitting on this story and keeping it out of the news; Fox is the only one covering the story (outside of talk radio and the blogosphere). Actually, THAT should be a major story all by itself.

David Brock’s boys dropped a turd in a box and Dingy Harry gift-wrapped it for them in Senate letterhead.

AllahP, you sure know how to turn a phrase.

concedes “good intentions”

This is something that has always annoyed me. My father always said that the road to Hell is paved with good intentions, and the older I get, the more people prove him right.

The way I see it, you’re allowed credit for good intentions the first time you screw up, but after you’ve been shown that the actual effect of your policy isn’t what you intended, if you continue to support that policy, you lose that allowance.

Of course, to a leftist, his policies are never responsible for any ill effects. It’s always some racist/sexist/homophobe/robber baron/etc. at fault. By that they mean that their policies would work great to govern a mythical species that shares their good intentions, in a universe where wishing something were true made it so. But here in reality (on which they ironically claim they are “based”) actual humans don’t behave the way their policies demand, which dooms them to produce those unintended consequences.

Silence is golden hilarious.

Rush was his usual insightful self. Colmes was way over matched.

Imagine David Gregory cowering in the corner behind Helen Thomas. As Flounder would say, “This is GREAT!”

A fella can dream, can’t he?

They’d be better off cutting their losses now, but you just know they’ll not be able to resist the temptation to step in it again and again!!

he makes his points very efficiently in a few sentences, and then hits that same point repeatedly after some of us has got it, but obviously others need to hear it again.

nottakingsides on October 19, 2007 at 1:11 AM

I know I’m one who needs to hear those points repeated, because many times the truths about liberalism that Rush is explaining are not necessarily obvious, and need to be reiterated from time to time. Especially considering the lefty bias we are bombarded with daily.

Holy Shiite! And Holy Sunni while I’m at it!

RightWinged on October 19, 2007 at 12:32 AM

Hey! Let’s not get carried away. ;)

Sorry to take just one small segment of your post, but this one really digs at me. We’re talking about the Senate Minority Leader telling our troops that, basically, their mission is hopeless, and they’re fighting a lost cause. Honestly, there’s no other way to interpret his words than this. It’s exactly what he meant, and he had no concern for how it would be interpreted by men and women who are overseas fighting for our country. Is this man really qualified to be a “leader” in any sense? I think not. He deserves to be shunned!

thedecider on October 19, 2007 at 12:43 AM

Exactly… that’s why I say he should be thrown out of office. And he’s not the only one. But then, there’s Pete Stark just today saying that Bush sends “kids” to Iraq to get blown up for his “amusement” today. That SOB ought to be locked up. He’s not some scarf wearing Truther at a rally in San Francisco, he’s a f-ing congressman, and I’m sick of allowing these evil people to say these things, while playing victims of partisanship. It’s crap like this that makes me want to backhand John Stewart for his idiotic pestering of Snow the other night, insisting that Bush is responsible for partisanship. Tony should have just sat and listed the BS from the Dems, but I guess he’s “above” that.

Since Bill is an American enemy, I guess we already know the answer.

….Colmes was on the floor trying to find his teeth, because I didn’t hear anything.

smellthecoffee on October 18, 2007 at 10:22 PM

Hilarious man! Good job!

…he is hitting his stride right now as to both his ability to brilliantly analyze the current political landscape, and his ability to succinctly communicate what is going on to his listeners in understandable language.

infidel4life on October 18, 2007 at 11:04 PM

Exactly! I’m not as witty and eloquent as you guys, but I enjoyed those comments and many others here. I respect and enjoy Rush and his show but it is too dang long. His problem is that he is so effectively good that he makes his points very efficiently in a few sentences, and then hits that same point repeatedly after some of us has got it, but obviously others need to hear it again.

I like Levin for many of the reasons I like Rush. But Levin also has some serious educational skills on constitutional law and such. Also Levin destroys liberal callers like no one else and there is nothing better (or funnier) than those few gems during his show.