In her usual zeal to �get a conservative�, New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd wrote a passionate defense of now infamous Georgetown law Student Sandra Fluke in describing her as quote: �a poised, wholesome-looking 30-year-old Georgetown law student.�
However also included in her article was the following: (earning enough [Limbaugh] to bribe Elton John to play at his fourth wedding).
Where does this come from and was it necessary for Dowd to include in her comments?
Does she really believe that Rush Limbaugh committed a felonious act and somehow forced Elton John to perform at his wedding against John�s will? Does Dowd have any evidence of this serious accusation that appears in the pages of the New York Times, the so called paper of record?
Where�s the outcry against Dowd for making false accusations against a lovable little fuzz ball (as Rush often describes himself) of committing a crime? Or did passion get the best of Maureen Dowd who obviously can�t get over Elton John performing at Limbaugh�s wedding?
But, I seriously doubt Ms. Dowd will face any consequences because the rules are somehow different for Liberals. They get to call conservatives all kinds of names 24/7 and are never held to account. They even can wish death on conservatives with impunity and never a ruckus is raised. But, oh how they laugh and pat themselves on their backs for their cleverness.
No, no, no, Rush has to pay the price for his passion and these are the new rules of equality of expression as dictated by the Elites and what they say matters and the Constitution be damned. Either both sides are allowed to make mistakes like Rush calling Flukes a slut in the heat of his passion, and Dowd accusing Rush of commuting a felony bribe to get Elton John to perform at his wedding in the heat of her passion.
Where�s the fairness?
The Last Tradition is fast becoming one of the most popular political blogs on the net. Don�t miss out on the fun and tell a friend.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar