To: Roger Ebert
From: Liquidator65

Before we take Rush Limbaugh out and horsewhip him for exercising his First Amendment rights, maybe you should read again what he actually said. Rush did not say that Obama was a thief who would use the money donated to the Red Cross for his own political purposes. Indeed that would have been besmirching the President, although no worse than George W. Bush was besmirched on a daily basis with no complaint from you, Mr. Ebert. Rush merely stated that going through the White House might put your name on a mailing list for donations to other causes deemed worthy by the Obama administration. That strikes me as a highly likely prospect, given the history and political culture of the Chicago school of politics from which our sainted President is a prestigious graduate.

There might be some reason to doubt that money donated to the Red Cross or any other relief organization will actually end up in Haiti and be spent on the desperate needs of Haitian victims of the quake. How much of that dollar donated will actually buy food, clean water, medicine, medical supplies and housing or end up in the pocket of some corrupt thug in what is the second most corrupt nation on the planet. Who knows the answer and I am not making an argument against donating money to Haitian relief. It is an overwhelming tragedy, but as Rush said in his own loveable way, it is a crisis made to order for the Obama administration. Here is a whole nation of people who can instantly be transformed into U.S. government dependents for years to come, if not for life. This the dream, Mr. Ebert, of every progressive and lifetime cultural liberal like yourself to make an entire population worship at the altar of Government, dependent on private and public bureaucracies for all the necessities of life. And don't think that it can not happen here. The fact that Haitians are all shades of black is a bonus that will validate the President's credentials with his most loyal constituency. Does that mean Obama does not really care about the Haitians. No, I am not so cynical as to believe that, but he will use the situation to his advantage, if only to make comparisons to the Bush response to Katrina. Given the hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars that went to refugees of New Orleans after Katrina, the Bush failure was one more of public relations than lack of compassion, and the Obama people are masters of public relations and how to shape perceptions of reality. The Bush people were rank amateurs by comparison.

So, what is the crime of Rush Hudson Limbaugh? He has dared to dissent from the accepted moral wisdom that we should all reach deep into our pockets to give to those who claim to be in the forefront of those helping Haiti. For the individual donating to private or semi-private charitable institutions this is still a choice, but for the American taxpayer, it is an involuntary contribution that will eventually be measured in hundreds of billion added to the national debt. There goes the manned space program and our return to the Moon. That little ball in the sky will soon be Chinese real estate. And angry Haitians are already demonstrating in front of our embassy in Port au Prince, demanding more aid than we are giving. How long before they are dragging the naked bodies of U.S. Marines and Army Rangers through their dusty street as they did in Somalia 17 years ago. You see, Mr. Ebert, if truth be told, dependent people are seldom grateful for what they receive from rich countries and in a short time they even come to resent their benefactors. Just ask the French and Germans. The unpleasant truth is that even our own dependent classes receiving monthly benefits from Washington or their states are more often than not angry at their fellow citizens for not being generous enough with the hefty slice of their lives extorted from them in taxes to pay for entitlements. Needless to say, the productive taxpayer is almost never thanked for his generosity and the generous people of the United States should expect little in the way of gratitude from Haiti, which will continue to be a failed state and showpiece for corruption and human misery long after we have gone.

The best places to donate are always the church groups, which get the best bang for their charitable buck and to Israeli relief groups, which have an impeccable reputation for sending mobile hospitals to global disaster areas and no political ax to grind. I have more confidence in the Reverend Pat Robertson than I do in President Obama and I could care less if Pat thinks that Haiti sold its soul to the Devil 200 years ago. The evidence suggests that maybe they did, but I am no theologian.

So, Mr. Ebert, whether or not you like it, an American citizen has every right to insult the President or even call him a thief, a murderer and a degenerate if they so choose. Our political speech is not yet subject to regulation, political correctness or the approval of yourself and the Chicago Sun Times. And Rush Hudson Limbaugh is a priceless voice in the wilderness of whom I am thankful every single day.

Yes, he knows exactly what he is doing as you do, Mr. Ebert. That's why we love him.