Good Old Rush

I was listening to a clip of good old Rush, I.E. Pigboy on bartcop's website. Bart was generally tearing him apart as well anyone should when listening to Rush, but I heard something in Rush's endless rambling that Bart didn't bring up and it struck me as being really galling, I know a liberal being offended by Pigboy's radio show, shocking isn't it?

He went off on one of those fantastic false comparisons where you compare the number of people murdered in American City X (In this case he used Philly) then compare it to Iraq, and wow! Iraq's no worse then American City X! The Press are a bunch of whiny defeatists who want to see us lose this war! The liberals long to live in an Islamic Dictatorship run by Osama Bin Laden! Clearly that's how the world works.

After making his false claims about Philly = Iraq, he then pouts over the fact that 3100 Americans have been killed in Iraq over 4 years, and that this is really a small small number of dead over such a giant period of time, really, Philly is just as bad, yet the Media does NOTHING but whine about all the dead kids in Iraq, not one word about all the violence riddling the streets of Philly.

Now of course I could waste a great many words refuting that stupidly illogical line of reasoning, but I won't, what I want to ask to Rush is, how many American troops in Iraq need to be killed for it to be worth writing about, and how fast does it have to happen? Do we need 200 in a week for you to accept it as being newsworthy? Is 10,000 dead enough no matter how long it takes, or do we have to reach that milestone within 2 years from now? When will the amount of America troops killed in Iraq reach the threshold you need to accept that this is in some small way, relevant to the world at large and thus, the press shall be allowed to spill some ink in covering it? How high must we pile the dead before you will grant your blessing for them to be spoken about?