Video: Rush Limbaugh to Speak at Sojourners’ Mobilization to End Poverty

by Ryan Rodrick Beiler 04-01-2009

In an inspiring display of bipartisan bridge-building, talk radio personality Rush Limbaugh has accepted Jim Wallis’ invitation to deliver a keynote address at Sojourners’ Mobilization to End Poverty conference in April.

“I’ve always said the monologue of the extreme right is over, and a new dialogue has begun,” said Wallis. “Well, that dialogue is about to get a whole lot louder.”

Limbaugh, longtime champion of conservative media, announced his acceptance of the invitation on his daily radio show. Interrupted occasionally by call-ins of incredulous listeners, Limbaugh detailed months of off-the-record conversations with Wallis during which the two forged a deep friendship despite political, theological, philosophical, ideological, ecological, anthropological, eschatological, and soteriological differences. That dialogue came to a head one night when an anguished and sleepless Limbaugh called Wallis after 3:00 a.m., seeking spiritual solace.

“I responded like any good evangelical would,” said Wallis. “I told him he should read his Bible. And then I hung up and went back to sleep.”

Vexed but desperate, Limbaugh grabbed his trusty KJV, fanned it open at random, closed his eyes, and thrust his index finger upon whatever page it might find, landing upon this passage from James 5:

Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you. Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are motheaten. Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days. Behold, the hire of the labourers who have reaped down your fields, which is of you kept back by fraud, crieth: and the cries of them which have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord of sabaoth. Ye have lived in pleasure on the earth, and been wanton; ye have nourished your hearts, as in a day of slaughter.

“I admit, of all the verses for him to read, this passage sounds a bit harsh—especially in the King James,” said Wallis. “But with 2,000 verses on poverty in the Bible, Rush was bound to hit one of them.”

Limbaugh’s response to the Word was swift and dramatic: “Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount.”

As part of Limbaugh’s dramatic change of heart, he has reciprocated Wallis’ speaking invitation by naming him the new co-host for his daily radio show, giving it a more faith-based focus.

“The way Kathy Lee needed Regis, that’s the way y’all need Jesus,” said Limbaugh. “That’s what Jim will bring to the show on a daily basis—that good ole’ Red Letter Christian gospel!”

Limbaugh further detailed his plans to team up with Sojourners and others to fight domestic and global poverty, issuing this challenge to all Dittoheads in a recent broadcast: ”I want everyone within the sound of my voice to call upon their members of Congress to cut the number of Americans living in poverty in half in the next 10 years, and to support America’s commitment to the Millennium Devleopment Goals. … And always remember to recycle. … Oh, and one last thing: fur is murder.”

Watch a video sneak preview of Rush’s speech at the Mobilization to End Poverty:

With Mobilization attendees and legions of conservative talk radio fans both reeling from this dramatic turn of events, many are asking what other surprises are in store for the Sojourners conference.

090401-stephen-colbert-prayer Anonymous sources have confirmed that TV talk show host Stephen T. Colbert (pictured) will be delivering the prayer of invocation to kick off the event. Also, Bono has cancelled the free U2 concert for emerging leaders due to lack of interest. Instead, band members The Edge, Larry Mullins Jr. and Adam Clayton will accompany Jim Wallis in leading the young people in a sing-a-long of church camp fireside favorites. “Arky Arky” anyone?

Okay, as you may have already guessed—April Fools! But seriously folks, come to Washington, D.C., this April for the Mobilization to End Poverty!

+Click here to see the amazing line-up of actual speakers and to register online

+E-mail this April Fool’s blog post to your friends

+Share this April Fool’s blog post on Facebook

Categories: Humor

neuro_nurse

APRIL FOOLS!!!

canucklehead

did they get that off a World Wrestling Entertainment clip?

lpkb

Very nice. :)

JamesM

Very good!

brgulker

I think today's display of immaturity from this website has just convinced me to quit reading.

Here's my reasoning:

If you're simply going to make fun of people who don't agree with you, then what makes you any different from them (other than your particular convictions)?

In other words, you don't fight fire with fire. If you think Rush is going about things the wrong way, then what's the point of stooping to his level to combat the ideology?

xfree9

I kinda agree with you, here. I'm sick of the blathering on this site, too. But it is clever, so in good faith I accept the humor.

Palosaari

I guess you missed their previous post where they made fun of themselves.

brgulker

So, as long as you make a joke out of yourself you're allowed to make a joke out of everyone else?

O

Palosaari

Not at all- that's a bit too simplistic. I was just responding to your point that you were objecting to them making fun of people who don't agree with them.

Under the Madeoff post, I've made a further argument, that every culture has there times when the rules are suspended. In our culture, parody is allowable when it takes place in Late Night Comedy. It is allowable for everyone at Roasts, where you can make fun of the President of the US in front of him in a way that would be totally inappropriate at any other time. And our culture has decided you can do so on April 1st of every year, when everyone knows this is the time you poke fun- but it's always better if you are also poking fun of yourself, as 3/5ths of the April Fools' posts do here in general, and one (the one right before this) in specific.

Secondly, as I also said under another thread, there is a long tradition of the prophetic revealing truth, and even through humor and parody. I see this ocassionally in the words of Jesus as he talks to the pharisees, and especially in the OT prophets, like Jeremiah. Yet Jesus doesn't do this towards anyone- he does it only to those who claim righteousness and purity, and yet are hypocrites; those who demand others do justice and yet live off the backs of the poor. In other words, people like Rush Limbaugh. So yes, just like any prohetic parody in the Bible, I learned something from this article, too.

BLFL

Hypocrite? Is Rush a hypocrite if he gives his charitable money to a foundation that isn't the "Mobilization to End Poverty?" He gives, every year, an amount that is more than I'll make in 40 years to a leukemia foundation. We should somehow be encouraging him that he continue to be passionate in helping this worthy and charitable cause. This kind of satire doesn't do any good.

Palosaari

Well, no. I didn't say that, or even suggest that. Rather, Limbaugh or anyone else is a hypocrite who demands that others do justice and yet lives off the back of the poor. (I know, I'm repeating myself.) Limbaugh, or anyone else, who advocates that people follow justice, yet themselves work for injustice, is a hypocrite.

I'm glad that Limbaugh gives, to take your word for it. But what matters is not how much, but rather what percentage, and in what spirit it is given, as Jesus clearly indicates. If Limbaugh gives away 80% of his wealth, that would be great. Hey, if he gives away 10%, that would be impressive. Far more impressive than if he gives away 200,000 and makes 20 million a year.

BLFL

I am truly sorry if any feelings were hurt. That was not my intent. I am going to edit out the six words in the middle of my point that could be taken (unintentionally) as me judging you for doing some judging of your own.

We should still encourage Rush's giving without criticizing where he chooses to contribute or how much he chooses to contribute (not you specifically, but anybody in general). That's where the slippery slope begins, none of us want to come across as knowing how much, or where a person should give, better than that person themself. Let's just be happy there is cheerful giving going on. God loves a cheerful giver!

Palosaari

Thank you for your kind response.

SisterMarie

"If you're simply going to make fun of people who don't agree with you, then what makes you any different from them (other than your particular convictions)?"

Three of the five April Fool's Day blogs made fun of Democrats or liberals. If you think that the fun was all at the expense of those with whom this site disagrees, then you've been reading posts from somewhere else.

Don't let the door hit you in the butt.

brgulker

"Dont let the door hit you in the butt"

--------------

This is exactly the type of thing I'm objecting to. I admire your conviction and most likely share many of them.

However, what good does it do anyone to tell people you disagree with to get out of "your" website? How is this building God's Kingdom in any way, shape, or form?

neuro_nurse

You’ve been posting on God’s Politics for a total of three weeks. Seven out of fifteen of your comments have been in response to the April Fools threads.

SisterMarie may have an abrasive sense of humor, but she is also an important contributor to the conversations that occur on this blog.

IMO, you’ve overreacted and need to back down.

brgulker

For the record, I've been reading Sojourners for years but only started posting on the blog recently. In other words, I understand what Sojourners is about -- and frankly, I agree with lots and lots that comes out of Sojourners.

You are obviously entitled to disagree with me. But had you grown up as I did, I doubt you would think I'm overreacting. I haven't said anything to attack anyone personally. I've only disagreed with ideas and specifric comments and I think I've done so respectfully. If I have not, please show me how I haven't, because that's not my intent.

Does being a relatively new poster mean I can't disagree with people who've been here a long time? It's not as if this is a private chat group or something... it's a public blog with a comment box, right?

If you want to explain to me how you think I'm overreacting, I would be glad to engage you in conversation. But, if you're not willing to at least explain how my ideas and comments are misguided, at least don't be dismissive. In other words, if you don't like what I have to say, explain to me why, because then perhaps both of us can learn from each other. Simply telling me to "back down" won't produce anything productive.

neuro_nurse

I did not imply that you aren’t welcome to comment here or that your are not entitled to disagree with me or anyone else but, as far as your priorities are concerned, you’ve spent more time reacting to the April Fools posts than anything else – that, IMO, is overreacting.

That’s my opinion, you are free to disagree with it.

Chill out, and have a nice day!

brgulker

Why do I get the impression that if I disagree it will only be further evidence of an overreaction?

I kid, I kid.

See you all when a serious post is made.

PASTOR JEFF

I grew up as you did, and I think you overreacted.

nuclearferret

"SisterMarie may have an abrasive sense of humor, but she is also an important contributor to the conversations that occur on this blog."

...you're not (since "You’ve been posting on God’s Politics for a total of three weeks.")

Flip the paragraphs.