GOP in Total Implosion

I laugh myself to sleep every night.

The Rove/Limbaugh/Dobson/Gingrich/Bush/Cheney/Addison crowd are all on the downhill side of history and they are too stupid to realize it. They will never, ever be in power again.

Their policies have failed. The demographics of this country are changing. Their time is over and it ain't coming back.

The old GOP white guys are shoving Bobby Jindal and Michael Steele out front to be cosmetic siding and cannon fodder, but they throw them both under the bus at the first hint of dissent.

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Over the weekend, Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele called Rush Limbaugh's rhetoric "incendiary" and "ugly" and insisted that he, not Limbaugh, is in charge of the GOP.

But that was two days ago. Monday, after a blistering response from the conservative talk-radio kingpin, Steele told the online journal Politico that he "was maybe a little bit inarticulate."

"There was no attempt on my part to diminish his voice or his leadership," Steele said. He added, "There are those out there who want to look at what he's saying as incendiary and divisive and ugly. That's what I was trying to say. It didn't come out that way."

Steele's original remarks came from an interview on CNN's "D.L. Hughley Breaks the News," which aired Saturday. They came as Democrats, including White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, have tried to paint Limbaugh -- who has said he wants to see the Obama administration "fail" -- as the effective head of the opposition party.

Steele rejected the idea, saying, "I'm the de facto leader of the Republican Party."

"Rush Limbaugh is an entertainer. Rush Limbaugh's whole thing is entertainment," Steele told CNN. "Yes, it is incendiary. Yes, it is ugly." iReport.com: Limbaugh and Steele show divisions in GOP

Limbaugh fired back on his radio show Monday, saying the Republican chairman appears to be supporting President Barack Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. He said Steele appears "obsessed with seeing to it President Obama succeeds."

"I frankly am stunned that the chairman of the Republican National Committee endorses such an agenda," Limbaugh said. "I have to conclude that he does, because he attacks me for wanting it to fail."

But Monday night Steele told Politico he didn't intend to go after Limbaugh.

"My intent was not to go after Rush -- I have enormous respect for Rush Limbaugh," Steele told Politico in a telephone interview. "I was maybe a little bit inarticulate ... There was no attempt on my part to diminish his voice or his leadership."

Steele told Politico he tried to call Limbaugh after the show on Monday and said he hoped he would be able to talk to the radio host soon.

"I went back at that tape and I realized words that I said weren't what I was thinking," Steele told Politico.

"I'm not going to engage these guys and sit back and provide them the popcorn for a fight between me and Rush Limbaugh."

And in a written statement issued to CNN, Steele said, "To the extent that my remarks helped the Democrats in Washington to take the focus, even for one minute, off of their irresponsible expansion of government, I truly apologize."

"I respect Rush Limbaugh, he is a national conservative leader, and in no way do I want to diminish his voice," Steele said. "I'm sure that he and I will agree most of the time, but will probably disagree some as well, which is fine."

Steele's Democratic counterpart, Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine, said he was "briefly encouraged" by Steele's "courageous" remarks.

"However, Chairman Steele's reversal this evening and his apology to Limbaugh proves the unfortunate point that Limbaugh is the leading force behind the Republican Party, its politics and its obstruction of President Obama's agenda in Washington," Kaine said in a written statement."

It's a different world and they have no idea how to adapt. And that means extinction.

Obama vs. Dobson

I only have about 15 minutes so I have to make this quick.

"The criticism, to be aired Tuesday on Dobson's Focus on the Family radio program, comes shortly after an Obama aide suggested a meeting at the organization's headquarters here, said Tom Minnery, senior vice president for government and public policy at Focus on the Family.

The conservative Christian group provided The Associated Press with an advance copy of the pre-taped radio segment, which runs 18 minutes and highlights excerpts of a speech Obama gave in June 2006 to the liberal Christian group Call to Renewal. Obama mentions Dobson in the speech.

"Even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools?" Obama said. "Would we go with James Dobson's or Al Sharpton's?" referring to the civil rights leader.

Dobson took aim at examples Obama cited in asking which Biblical passages should guide public policy — chapters like Leviticus, which Obama said suggests slavery is OK and eating shellfish is an abomination, or Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, "a passage that is so radical that it's doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application."

"Folks haven't been reading their Bibles," Obama said.

Dobson and Minnery accused Obama of wrongly equating Old Testament texts and dietary codes that no longer apply to Jesus' teachings in the New Testament.

"I think he's deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview, his own confused theology," Dobson said."

Really? So Jesus' teachings cancel out everything in the Old Testament?

Then why is it even a part of the Christian bible?

I don't recall anywhere in the New Testament where Jesus said "Hey, I'm here now. New Sheriff in town. You can crack open those lobster tails, and pass the melted butter!"

Plus, Dobson is kind of shooting himself in the dick if he's saying that the book of Leviticus is null and void. I'm pretty sure that Leviticus is where all of the biblical condemnations of homosexuality come from.

The Right loves to repeat that "the bible defines marriage as a holy covenant before God between one man and one woman".

Seriously?

I challenge all of the biblically literate to find me one single passage from Jesus where he addresses this issue. Find me a quote from Jesus where he condemns homosexuality. Find me a quote from Jesus where he says that the only form of marriage acceptable to God is "one man, one woman".

Come, on. Chapter and verse. Educate us.