Rush Limbaugh Out of Control, asks NY Times Reporter Andy Revkin to "just go kill yourself."

Tue, 2009-10-20 12:47Kevin Grandia
Kevin Grandia's picture

Rush Limbaugh Out of Control, asks NY Times Reporter Andy Revkin to "just go kill yourself."

I’ve never been a fan of Rush Limbaugh, he’s always been someone who creates controversy by stoking hate and division.

For the most part I’ve ignored him over the years beacuse he’s just too far out there.

But today I will make an exception. On his radio show today Limbaugh spews the most vitriolic rant against environmentalists. He compares them to terrorists, wackos and “jihad guys” and  then says that NY Times environment reporter Andy Revkin should kill himself.

Seriously.

It’s so easy for someone like Limbaugh to say such things because he knows it plays to his audience and in turn he makes a mountain of cash. He’s playing people for his own financial gain, but the unfortunate consequence is that this type of shock radio does nothing to advance the interests of the American people. It only breeds hatred.

Pathetic.

Here’s the audio and below that is the full transcript provided by the amazing team at Media Matters for America:

LIMBAUGH: I think these militant environmentalists, these wackos, have so much in common with the jihad guys. Let me explain this. What do the jihad guys do? The jihad guys go to families under their control and they convince these families to strap explosives on who? Not them. On their kids. Grab your 3-year-old, grab your 4-year-old, grab your 6-year-old, and we’re gonna strap explosives on there, and then we’re going to send you on a bus, or we’re going to send you to a shopping center, and we’re gonna tell you when to pull the trigger, and you’re gonna blow up, and you’re gonna blow up everybody around you, and you’re gonna head up to wherever you’re going, 73 virgins are gonna be there. The little 3- or 4-year-old doesn’t have the presence of mind, so what about you? If it’s so great up there, why don’t you go? Why don’t you strap explosives on you – and their parents don’t have the guts to tell the jihad guys, “You do it! Why do you want my kid to go blow himself up?” The jihad guys will just shoot ‘em, ‘cause the jihad guys have to maintain control.

The environmentalist wackos are the same way. This guy from The New York Times, if he really thinks that humanity is destroying the planet, humanity is destroying the climate, that human beings in their natural existence are going to cause the extinction of life on Earth – Andrew Revkin. Mr. Revkin, why don’t you just go kill yourself and help the planet by dying?

From Revkin’s New York Times blog post (emphasis added):

More children equal more carbon dioxide emissions. And recent research has resulted in  renewed coverage of the notion that one of the cheapest ways to curb emissions in coming decades would be to provide access to birth control for tens of millions of women around the world who say they desire it. A study by researchers at the London School of Economics and commissioned by the Optimum Population Trust came to the following conclusion:

Contraception is ‘Greenest’ Technology

U.N. data suggest that meeting unmet need for family planning would reduce unintended births by 72 per cent, reducing projected world population in 2050 by half a billion to 8.64 billion. Between 2010 and 2050 12 billion fewer “people-years” would be lived - 326 billion against 338 billion under current projections. The 34 gigatons of CO2 saved in this way would cost $220 billion - roughly $7 a ton [metric tons]. However, the same CO2 saving would cost over $1trillion if low-carbon technologies were used. (Here’s a link to a pdf of the report.)

I recently raised the question of whether this means we’ll soon see a market in baby-avoidance carbon credits similar to efforts to sell  CO2 credits for avoiding deforestation. This is purely a thought experiment, not a proposal. But the issue is one that is rarely discussed in climate treaty talks or in debates over United States climate legislation. If anything, the population-climate question is more pressing in the United States than in developing countries, given the high per-capita carbon dioxide emissions here and the  rate of population growth. If giving women a way to limit family size is such a cheap win for emissions, why isn’t it in the mix?

 

Comments

Not qualified to defend Rush much because all I’ve ever heard from him are a few short clips - but so far my impression of him is that he’s some kind of Don Cherry type with an extra 20 iq points and without the hockey.

that can’t be all bad

Rick, we’re starting with an IQ comparable to his shoe size!!!!!

Awww, Femack, don’t be so hard on Don Cherry! He’s got a good heart, unlike the curmudgeonly Rush Limbaugh who seems to be supported only by conspiracy theorists, the rabid right-wing, or other crazies. Cherry at least has some support from the centre. I wouldn’t call Cherry a genius, but at least he can string a sentence together without labeling people, spinning out of control, or being hyper-partisan.

Rush makes 400 million dollars because he knows more about politics than the entire congress combined. He is the all knowing all seeing, Maha Rushie! You Canadians, you realize there is only one road in Canada and Saddam Hussein is your true prime minister? I wish we could trade you obama for harper. This Harper you guys have, he seems like a great leader.

yeah, one road, and it always has 6 feet of snow on it, but I always thought our true prime minister was Don Cherry.

Anyway Rush needs to take his great vision and knowledge and make something of himself and quit yacking on the radio and run for President or something …. or at least donate a couple bucks to the Canadian Road Development Fund.

Rick cmon, man. The Maha Rushie is one of the only people who is warning about Obama’s policies. Obama is a nice guy, a good guy but he has not been a good president so far. If we do socialized medicine like you Canadiens, there will be no turning back

You are fools not to want universal health care. Why listen to a drug-addled racist like Limbaugh? http://newsone.com/obama/top-10-racist-limbaugh-quotes/

Vj, this is why I live in U.S. and you live in Canada. You do not mind paying higher taxes and do not mind having poor dental care. We have the best doctors in the world, period. This is because they can make more money here than anywhere else. A better doctor should make more money than an average one. Vj, you realize New York advertises to Canadians to go there for health care? Vj I honestly wish all of the lefty whackos in this country would move up your way.

The only problem with our dental care is that it is privatized and so expensive. But no Canadian goes bankrupt in order to pay their medical bills because we all have a right to health care. You get to pay for health insurance and when you get an expensive disease your insurance company will find a reason to drop you with a thud.

No. I don’t know where you get the idea that dental care is any different here than it is in the US. In fact, I have a mouthful of world-class dental work. The one thing wrong with dental care in this country is that it ISN’T included in our universal health program. Most people rely on their employment benefits packages. I am willing to bet that the lowest income folks in the US aren’t getting any better dental care than those without dental insurance here.

Ready access to healthcare when I need it? Yes. I have no complaints. I am 55 and have been through a variety of health issues over the years. I have never waited in line or felt myself ill-used by the system.

Am I willing to pay a bit more on my taxes to make sure that no one has to lose everything they own because of catastrophic injury or bad luck in the health/disease lottery? Frankly, yes. “There, but for the grace of God, go I” would be my answer, if I believed in a god, which I don’t.

But I firmly believe that we have a responsibility to each other as human beings, and that extends to enshrining compassion in our political systems. Universal health care and a global approach to AGW are not so different. Some issues transcend individual rights and liberties. One of these is making health care available to everyone who needs it. Another is finding solutions to a problem that affects the entire planet and everyone/everything that lives on it.

“A better doctor should make more money than an average one”. Well, fine. My father was an exceptional doctor who accepted payment in all kinds of unorthodox forms before OHIP (that’s Ontario’s health care insurance)came along, and sometimes wrote his fees off as a loss if people couldn’t pay. But he never withheld his care. I am not going to get into a discussion with you about what doctors should earn.

Maybe he’s confusing us with the British. When GW Bush was running for a second term the Guardian was encouraging people to contact Americans and urge them to vote against Bush. Of course the rightwingers learned about this and sent all sorts of nasty emails to the Guardian, which the Guardian posted on its website. I remember several of them referred to British people having bad teeth; my favourite was the angry tirade which ended: ‘and brush your teeth, you filthy animals!’

[x]
A U.S. District Court judge ruled on June 27 that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Forest Service both wrongly approved expansion of the West Elk coal mine in Somerset, Colo., because they failed to take into account the economic impacts greenhouse gas emissions from the mining would have.
 
The federal agencies said it was impossible to quantify such impacts, but the court pointed out a tool is...
read more