Page 8 of 29 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 281

Thread: Democrats Launch Petition Against Rush Limbaugh

  1. #71
    Professor
    Shewter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Puget Sound
    Last Seen
    02-21-13 @ 09:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,995

    Re: Democrats Launch Petition Against Rush Limbaugh

    Rush is one of the most annoying Talk Radio hosts I've ever heard.

    The Democrats doing anything at all that happens to recognize his existance will do nothing more than raise his voice.

    sigh.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Don't apologize to me over that silly ****. I could care less if I can see the dust or not.
    Now apologize for apologizing!

  2. #72
    Too big to fail
    niftydrifty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    03-03-16 @ 03:20 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,725

    Re: Democrats Launch Petition Against Rush Limbaugh

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    In this particular instance, you. Yes, Rush speaks a LARGE amount of propoganda. You've never seen me state differently, nor will you ever find me stating differently. However, you using propoganda and mischaracterizations to attack someone that does the same does not make your action right or....more to the point...doesn't make your action something then it actually is.

    Actually no. You talked about Rush, I talked about your comments about Rush and used your historical political lean on this forum as a means of explaining my rational.

    Nice swipe, but no surprise, selective. Addressing the person making a statement, their motivations behind such statement, and then relating that to your argument is a valid form of debate. You've shown yourself to be someone who routinely posts from an extremely hyper partisan standpoint on the left, which gives insight into the likihood of what source you recieved your information from and the likely partisan nature of it. This opinion about your political lean is related to then to your comments, which are related to the topic, and to my argument against it.

    On the contrary, if I just said "There's Niftydrifty blabbering bafoonary" and nothing else, that has nothing to do with debating, that's just attacking.

    I never said that Rush does not speak in hyperbole, or mistruth. However, thanks for proving my point. You posted up those quotes, without any source, without any context, and made it out to be Limbaugh's actual beliefs. Then you talk about Hyperbole. Let us look at the definition of Hyperbole, shall we?

    "A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect"

    Wow...lookie here. Intentional exaggeration used to make a point? And what's exaggeration.

    "To represent as greater than is actually the case"

    Wait, so he's intentionally reprsenting something as greater than it actually is to make a point?

    Well by god! YES! That DOES sound exactly like he's saying these things literally, so that one could take a single line of hyperbole and present it as if its his actual thoughts and views. By God thank you, thank you for showing me you were correct.

    Yes. Rush uses Hyperbole. And yes, Rush does peddle propoganda and mistruths. That does not mean that using propoganda and mistruths, or presenting his hyperbole as his legitimite views is acceptable or honest to do
    how tedious this can be, Zyphlin. I challenge a claim made by a poster, and you come along, like you often do, blasting away about partisanship. it's not an argument. the tragic thing is that I shouldn't have to tell you that.

    discussing what niftydrifty tends to do in some other thread and bringing it up here, as if it is some matter of relevance isn't an argument, and is ad hom. evidence isn't proof. rationalizing motivations of a fellow poster isn't an argument. this is a debate website. brush up on these debate concepts.

    my quotes were Rush's beliefs. you've spent a great deal of time talking all around it, but not about it.

    I'm glad we agree about what Rush is and does. as for the rest, ... "I'm right, you're left," ... "niftydrifty resembles his rhetoric" ... completely pointless.
    http://www.debatepolitics.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=3227&dateline=1247527  127

  3. #73
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Democrats Launch Petition Against Rush Limbaugh

    Quote Originally Posted by BWG View Post
    I guess people sorta forgot this...

    Neither deserves any attention from elected officials.
    After digging a little deeper, one sees the irony of that one, too.

    That article mentions Boxer's resolution, so I decided to dig further.

    The text of Boxer's amendment:

    SA 2947. Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mr. Levin, and Mr. Durbin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed to amendment SA 2011 proposed by Mr. Nelson of Nebraska (for Mr. Levin) to the bill H.R. 1585, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2008 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; as follows:


    At the end of subtitle E of title X, add the following:

    SEC.X--SENSE OF SENATE.

    (a) FINDINGS.--The Senate makes the following findings:

    (1) The men and women of the United States Armed Forces and our veterans deserve to be supported, honored, and defended when their patriotism is attacked;

    (2) In 2002, a Senator from Georgia who is a Vietnam veteran, triple amputee, and the recipient of a Silver Star and Bronze Star, had his courage and patriotism attacked in an advertisement in which he was visually linked to Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein;

    (3) This attack was aptly described by a Senator and Vietnam veteran as ``reprehensible'';

    (4) In 2004, a Senator from Massachusetts who is a Vietnam veteran and the recipient of a Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat V, and three Purple Hearts, was personally attacked and accused of dishonoring his country;

    (5) This attack was aptly described by a Senator and Vietnam veteran as ``dishonest and dishonorable.''

    (6) On September 10, 2007, an advertisement in the New York Times was an unwarranted personal attack on General Petraeus; who is honorably leading our Armed Forces in Iraq and carrying out the mission assigned to him by the President of the United States; and

    (7) Such personal attacks on those with distinguished military service to our nation have become all too frequent.

    (b) SENSE OF SENATE.--It is the sense of the Senate--

    (1) to reaffirm its strong support for all of the men and women of the United States Armed Forces; and

    (2) to strongly condemn all attacks on the honor, integrity, and patriotism of any individual who is serving or has served honorably in the United States Armed Forces, by any person or organization.

    Now compare that to the text of Cornyn's amendment:

    SA 2934. Mr. CORNYN proposed an amendment to amendment SA 2011 proposed by Mr. NELSON of Nebraska (for Mr. LEVIN) to the bill H.R. 1585, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2008 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; as follows:


    At the end of subtitle E of title X, add the following:

    SEC. 1070. SENSE OF SENATE ON GENERAL DAVID PETRAEUS.

    (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings:

    (1) The Senate unanimously confirmed General David H. Petraeus as Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, by a vote of 81-0 on January 26, 2007.

    (2) General Petraeus graduated first in his class at the United States Army Command and General Staff College.

    (3) General Petraeus earned Masters of Public Administration and Doctoral degrees in international relations from Princeton University.

    (4) General Petraeus has served multiple combat tours in Iraq, including command of the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault) during combat operations throughout the first year of Operation Iraqi Freedom, which tours included both major combat operations and subsequent stability and support operations.

    (5) General Petraeus supervised the development and crafting of the United States Army and Marine Corps counterinsurgency manual based in large measure on his combat experience in Iraq, scholarly study, and other professional experiences.

    (6) General Petraeus has taken a solemn oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

    (7) During his 35-year career, General Petraeus has amassed a distinguished and unvarnished record of military service to the United States as recognized by his receipt of a Defense Distinguished Service Medal, two Distinguished Service Medals, two Defense Superior Service Medals, four Legions of Merit, the Bronze Star Medal for valor, the State Department Superior Honor Award, the NATO Meritorious Service Medal, and other awards and medals.

    (8) A recent attack through a full-page advertisement in the New York Times by the liberal activist group, Moveon.org, impugns the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all the members of the United States Armed Forces.

    (b) Sense of Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate--

    (1) to reaffirm its support for all the men and women of the United States Armed Forces, including General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq;

    (2) to strongly condemn any effort to attack the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all the members of the United States Armed Forces; and

    (3) to specifically repudiate the unwarranted personal attack on General Petraeus by the liberal activist group Moveon.org.


    Here's the issue I have on this. One specifically askes to repudiate any attacks on those who have served honorably, Including Petreaus by name; while the other seeks to repudiate the attacks on Petreaus and MoveOn specifically.

    What I don't understand is how one could vote Yea for Cornyn's but vote Nay for Boxer's or vice versa.


    The only senators who get my respect on this issue are those who voted the same way on both amendments.

    They are:

    Feingold (the only "nay" to both), Baucus, Bayh, Cardin, Carper, Casey, Conrad, Dorgan, Feinstien, Hagel, Johnson, Klobuchar, Kohl, Landrieu, Lieberman, Lincoln, McCaskill, Mikulski, Nelson, Nelson, Pryor, Salazar, Specter, Tester, and Web.


    Just an interesting aside regarding a related issue.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  4. #74
    Banned

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Seen
    07-11-11 @ 02:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,249

    Re: Democrats Launch Petition Against Rush Limbaugh

    Quote Originally Posted by niftydrifty View Post
    how tedious this can be, Zyphlin. I challenge a claim made by a poster, and you come along, like you often do, blasting away about partisanship. it's not an argument. the tragic thing is that I shouldn't have to tell you that.

    discussing what niftydrifty tends to do in some other thread and bringing it up here, as if it is some matter of relevance isn't an argument, and is ad hom. evidence isn't proof. rationalizing motivations of a fellow poster isn't an argument. this is a debate website. brush up on these debate concepts.

    my quotes were Rush's beliefs. you've spent a great deal of time talking all around it, but not about it.

    I'm glad we agree about what Rush is and does. as for the rest, ... "I'm right, you're left," ... "niftydrifty resembles his rhetoric" ... completely pointless.
    What a hack.

  5. #75
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,968

    Re: Democrats Launch Petition Against Rush Limbaugh

    Quote Originally Posted by aps View Post
    I disagree. How is attacking the President of the United States--the most powerful person in our country--any different than attacking a General? I thought it was stupid that Congress gave a joke of an organization like MoveOn any importance.
    Sadly its different for a slight societal reason.

    In general, while the President IS the commander in chief, its not his only job. He is the top political figure in the country, elected by the people, and so is general to open to critisism and attacks.

    Generals are not political figures, they're not elected, and their job at all times is to pretty much lead our men and women in war. They also are forbidden from making certain political statements and other things while in uniform leaving them rather vulnerable to political attacks.

    So there is a difference, at least societally, on how its viewed and been viewed for many years. Clinton wasn't free of attacks, and Bush most CERTAINLY wasn't free to attacks, its just the nature of being a politician...not a general.

    I'm not saying its right, I'm just saying it is on a different level than others.

    That said, I think people need to actually address Limbaugh's actual comments in context whether than how its being percieved.

    Saying you want Obama to fail, flat out, cut and dry, is pretty bad.

    Saying you want him to fail in the context that you do not want his specific policies he preaches to be successful because you deep down in your core principles believe that in the long term they will be disasterous for this country is different.

    For example, lets take a Republican in office instead.

    Lets say they've said they want to cut welfare benefits in half, completely do away with the department of education so its completely a state issue, get a ban on abortion passed, and repeal a huge number of environmental regulations.

    I think it'd be perfectly understandable for someone on the opposite side of him (or even maybe the same side) to say that they hope he "fails", in terms of hoping that things like a huge cut to welfare or a ban on abortion fails, because even if they DID help the country in the short term that persons deep down, personal principles say those things are going to be bad for this country in the long term even if they may be good in the short term.

    I too hope most of Obama's policies that he stated while running fail. I hope we don't see National Healthcare. I hope we don't see massive government intervention into businesses and more and more take overs of businesses. I hope we don't see amnesty given to everyone illegal in the U.S. right now or an immediete full withdrawl from Iraq mandated. I do hope all those initiatives fail to happen.

    I do not hope Obama's Presidency "fails" in regards to it helping America though.

    I hope that his goals and things will be tempered by those on the other side, and that those republicans still in some kind of power are able to forge compromises that reduce the negative affects I believe Obama's policies would do. I hope that on things like immigration, his policies fail from the voices of the nation rising up again as they did last time. I hope that through listening to the public, changes in his own beliefs through getting more information in the position he's in, and staunch opposition by the Republicans working for compromises that he DOES succeed as President and America DOEs prosper under him.

    But I, deep in my core, in my base principles, do not think such success and goodness in a long term way will be had if certain portions of his policies pass. And it is those things I hope he "fails" at.

    And that was what Rush was saying if people took him on context, instead of people seeing Limbaugh, knowing he can be a blow hard and is a typical slimy hyper partisan, and immedietely going "how can we misconstrue his words to get extra angry today". I'm not saying EVERYONE that believes he honestly said he wants Obama to Fail, as a blanket general statement, is looking to misconstrue his words and just do it for the sake of being angry at him...but I am saying the sources that started this campaign, which has then reached into blogs and news, which has then reached into peoples minds and given them the impression are.

  6. #76
    Tavern Bartender
    Pussy Grabbin' Beaver
    Middleground's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Canada's Capital
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    22,453
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Democrats Launch Petition Against Rush Limbaugh

    I appreciate you well thought out post, Zyphlin. Though I don't disagree with much of what you wrote here, but I do think that we cannot be totally sure of what is most factual regarding Rush listeners. After all, I don't believe there are hard stats out there that ask Rush listeners how much they believe or not, let alone why they listen.

    I would like to know, though, what is the percentage of people that get their news from talk radio. There must be something out there for that, I would think.
    No men are anywhere, and Im allowed to go in, because Im the owner of the pageant and therefore Im inspecting it, Trump said... Is everyone OK? You know, theyre standing there with no clothes. Is everybody OK? And you see these incredible looking women, and so I sort of get away with things like that.

  7. #77
    Passionate
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    03-07-11 @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    15,675

    Re: Democrats Launch Petition Against Rush Limbaugh

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Loin View Post
    Hey never mind Limbaugh did not attack Obama, ya know because why should that trifling little detail be considered. Jesus.
    Are you calling me Jesus?

    I still don't see a difference. A loser (including MoveOn) says something negative about someone. Who the f*** cares?

  8. #78
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,968

    Re: Democrats Launch Petition Against Rush Limbaugh

    Quote Originally Posted by niftydrifty View Post
    how tedious this can be, Zyphlin. I challenge a claim made by a poster, and you come along, like you often do, blasting away about partisanship. it's not an argument. the tragic thing is that I shouldn't have to tell you that.

    discussing what niftydrifty tends to do in some other thread and bringing it up here, as if it is some matter of relevance isn't an argument, and is ad hom. evidence isn't proof. rationalizing motivations of a fellow poster isn't an argument. this is a debate website. brush up on these debate concepts.
    No, an ad hom would be you saying a bunch of things, and me saying "No, you're wrong, you're stupid". That's not what I did. An Ad hom is debating the person specifically and not touching the actual argument. Referencing the persons views, political mindset, and history to explain the conclussiosn and arguments you're making is not an ad hom.

    I stated that I knew for a FACT that one of those things you posted was completely out of context and not a true representation of Limbaugh's feeling as professed on his radio show.

    Now, the FACT that one of the things you provide as being true thoughts and beliefs of Limbaugh was completely out of context and untrue along with the opinion of my own that you routinely demonstrate an extreme left wing slant and willingness to believe left wing propoganda, lead me to the statements and beliefs that the rest of those are likely ALSO out of context. The FACT that you provided ZERO sources to reference those statements in any form of context addded to my doubt of their validity. I combined all those to express my belief that they are poor, if not completely inaccurate, representations of Limbaughs stances.

    my quotes were Rush's beliefs. you've spent a great deal of time talking all around it, but not about it.
    No, its your opinion they're his beliefs. Give me sources for them. Give me show date and time so I can go see them in context. They're single snippets of lines from a 3 hour show done over 200 days a year for over a decade worth of time complete with no context and nothing to even validate them as being true words from his mouth.

    As you said, Rush users hyperbole...which is intentional exaggeration of a situation or a view to try and make a point. I know that one of the things you posted WAS hyperbole, yet you're trying to present it as a legitimate opinion and belief of his. Therefore it shows me that you're intentionally being either dishonest in this or intentionally being lazy in actually wanting to provide context and actual proof to the claims you've made about what he's said and the seriousness of those statements.

  9. #79
    Banned

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Seen
    07-11-11 @ 02:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,249

    Re: Democrats Launch Petition Against Rush Limbaugh

    Quote Originally Posted by aps View Post
    Are you calling me Jesus?

    I still don't see a difference. A loser (including MoveOn) says something negative about someone. Who the f*** cares?
    Well if you chose not to "see" the difference, no appeal to common sense nor pointing out your erroneous characterization of Limbaugh "attacking Obama" will help. You chose not to perceive some pretty basic facts, to what end or benefit is certainly the question.

  10. #80
    Passionate
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    03-07-11 @ 04:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    15,675

    Re: Democrats Launch Petition Against Rush Limbaugh

    Quote Originally Posted by Sir Loin View Post
    Well if you chose not to "see" the difference, no appeal to common sense nor pointing out your erroneous characterization of Limbaugh "attacking Obama" will help. You chose not to perceive some pretty basic facts, to what end or benefit is certainly the question.
    Okay. *shrugs shoulders*

Page 8 of 29 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •