[T]he language lately on air has grown particularly fierce and apocalyptic: President Obama called a dictator and sympathizer with terrorists. His policies called socialist, Marxist, Bolshevik, dangerous. Americans called to rise up in revolt. All this while the economy tanks and gun sales surge.

That last line is the operative and, frankly, scary one: while the economy tanks and gun sales surge. Let’s not forget that conservative right-wing blowhards animated, if not inspired, two recent terrorist incidents: 1. A gunman that opened fire at a church for its liberal views, 2. A second man in Pennsylvania ambushed police officers because, he thought, they and Obama were coming to take his guns away.

I wish Tom Ashbrook, the host of On Point, had been unabashedly critical of the vile rhetoric being spewed by conservatives on Fox News and talk radio; but, like a good “journalist,” Tom maintained his objectivity and largely agreed that liberals were guilty of similar offenses during the Bush years. To which I simply respond: bullshit! When was the last time any liberal went on TV or radio to call for armed revolution against the US government? Tom Ashbrook’s default fallback of journalistic objectivity is simply weak, and irresponsible in this instance.

LIMBAUGH: “Save the — keep the troops safe” or whatever. I — it’s not possible, intellectually, to follow these people.

CALLER: No, it’s not, and what’s really funny is, they never talk to real soldiers. They like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and talk to the media.

LIMBAUGH: The phony soldiers.

Here you have Rush, who got out of serving in Vietnam ’cause he had a boil on his ass, calling American war veterans “phony soldiers” because they oppose a war that Bush-republicans support and, of course, there’s no one in the traditional media calling Bush-republicans out on their hypocrisy.

Remember, this week Bush-republicans forced a vote in Congress condemning the MoveOn ad that, rightly, pointed out how General Petraeus acted as a political operative for the Bush administration when the General appeared before Congress.

Well, I think John Amato has it right:

I’m calling on the Senate to pass an amendment or uphold their latest one and condemn Rush Limbaugh’s cowardly acts on our troops! Soldiers from the 82nd Airborne in Iraq wrote a NY Times op-ed — criticizing the war in Iraq, and had the bravery to suggest that it was time to develop an exit strategy. Two of them just died. Are they phonies, Rush? Where’s the “sense of the Senate” on this outrage?

UPDATE: This is more like it… from Congressman John Hall:

Dems ARE condemning Rush Limbaugh for his repeated attacks against our service members. Enough is enough.

I know that there is a back and forth about whether another condemnation is worth the time. I happen to believe it is in this case. Therefore, I’m introducing a resolution that shows emphatically that Congress will not condone ad hominem political attacks on U.S. troops. On Monday, I’m introducing legislation to express the Sense of Congress that this body rejects and condemns Limbaugh’s heinous remarks, and will continue to engage in a debate on ending our involvement in Iraq that eschews character-based attacks on our Armed Forces. Hopefully, this will end the back and forth so we can focus our efforts on ending the war.

Unfortunately, the Republican party has mounted a blatant and concerted effort to court born-again Evangelical Christians, and have thereby equated being “Christian” with being aligned with the Republican party (and, rightly or wrongly, with the conservative right-wing). By way of example, about a month ago the Republican National Committee (RNC) urged Evangelical pastors to actively recruit members of their congregation for the Republican party and, too, the RNC requested that pastors forward to the party contact information on their congregation. By making such a self-serving request, the RNC actually placed the churches that responded in jeopardy; because those churches could’ve have lost their (557) tax-exempt status with the IRS — whereby non-profit, including religious organizations, receive certain tax benefits as long as they don’t directly advocate for a political party.

Again, if there’s anyone that should rightfully be the recipient of one’s ire for exploiting and mischaracterizing people of the Christian faith, its the Republican party and its cohorts. In the first presidential debate, for example, Mr. Bush resorted to his religious crutch once again. In his closing statement Mr. Bush clearly invoked biblical imagery when he uttered:

Bush: We’ve climbed the mighty mountain. I see the valley below, and it’s a valley of peace.

Once again, if there’s anyone to blame for the contemporary notion that devout “Christians” are somehow aligned with a particular party, it’s the Republican party and those that do not stand up for their faith’s core values: tolerance, love of neighbor, charity and forgiveness.