• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rush Limbaugh selection in children’s book competition causes a stir

Kobie said:
Hey, as long as non-Limbaughs keep getting elected, I'm fine with "sour grapes."

Thankfully, his toxic idea of what this country should be, despite his best efforts and his legions of blind idiot followers, has yet to take hold.
Click to expand...

Plenty of Republicans are getting elected. Even in the last presidential election, nothing changed. But the numbers aren't looking so good anymore for the Dems, who have alienated the white population to death. The Left has shown nothing but extreme hate for the white population in this country. Then there's Obama's approval rating which I don't think is going to improve very much. I wouldn't count the Republicans out.

A high white vote has Obama worried about Democrats in the 2014 midterms.

Democratic Senate Seats Up For Re-Election in 2014

How Likely Are Democrats to Lose the Senate? | RealClearPolitics
 
Top Cat said:
The problem is you hero Rush is big fat hypocrite. And he hasn't recanted. He uses his bully pulpit to prey upon weak minded rednecks and they lap it up like the morning milk.

Umm no. I judged Oxy boy. Don't want to know your sister.
Click to expand...

Your using terms such as "addict boy" and "Oxy boy" really say it all. As I've said, I'm not a fan of Limbaugh...but neither am I a fan of nasty people who crank out dismissive terms like this when the man did seek rehab and did beat his addiction basically a decade ago. Sorry you're so stuck in the past and so nasty and vengeful. Whether you like him or not, Limbaugh is much more than "addict boy," and your use of these terms says much, much more about you and your character and reasoning powers than it does about him.

I'm guessing that you yourself have never had to live with chronic, white-noise pain and so have no understanding of just how easy it is to become hooked on painkillers. It's not because they make you high; it's because they control the pain so that you can function.
 
SMTA said:
It is now.

Time to get out now and avoid Haymarket's avoidance of personal accountability as he adds hundreds of pages of garbage to the thread, effectively destroying it.
Click to expand...

Making a petty personal attack on me does not change the fact that Limbaugh appeals to people in denial of the last 100 plus years of history using a medium that hit its peak well over a half century ago espousing ideas that were out of fashion when the first two digits of the date changed from the nineteenth century.

And Haymarket is a great believer in personal responsibility. I only wish Limbaugh were.
 
Hard Truth said:
The Limbaugh quotes are from websites that provide links to the source for each quote.
Click to expand...

Since you appear to have some kind of irrational confidence in a source that admits up front that they got their "information" from emails submitted to them, we can leave that be.

But let's recap, shall we?
  • You said Limbaugh makes provocative comments that inspire groups who are prone to violence to commit such violence. The implication being that such groups are violent and from the radical Right.
  • I list actual groups who are not only prone to violence but do & did actually commit such violence. Those groups are unmistakably from the radical Left.
  • You then respond with a link to a site that lists comments allegedly made by Limbaugh that I gather you meant to suggest had encouraged violence of some sort or other to be committed by somebody or other. Yet you listed neither.

That's whatcha call disjointed nonsensical thinking born of partisan fervor and you should have that looked at.
 
apdst said:
1) I have read it.

2) I'm not touting it.

Now what? You gona keep trashing a book you've never read?
Click to expand...

You have read it, but you can't tell us what it's actually about? Maybe you should read it again.
 
American said:
Plenty of Republicans are getting elected. Even in the last presidential election, nothing changed. But the numbers aren't looking so good anymore for the Dems, who have alienated the white population to death. The Left has shown nothing but extreme hate for the white population in this country. Then there's Obama's approval rating which I don't think is going to improve very much. I wouldn't count the Republicans out.

A high white vote has Obama worried about Democrats in the 2014 midterms.

Democratic Senate Seats Up For Re-Election in 2014

How Likely Are Democrats to Lose the Senate? | RealClearPolitics
Click to expand...

Wait, I thought only lefties made it about race....I guess not, unless you are one now.
 
nota bene said:
I'm not a Limbaugh fan, but I also don't like false claims. Not willing to research all the quotes, but I did check with Snopes about some of them. snopes.com: Rush Limbaugh 'Racist Quotes' List
Click to expand...

Geezuz ... hope Hard Truth didn't read that ... could get ugly ... unfortunately I just posted a reply to him that may appear right before this one.
Ya know ... if H.T. does get violent about it, given the subject matter he'll probably blame Limbaugh for inspiring his violence.
 
nota bene said:
I'm guessing that you yourself have never had to live with chronic, white-noise pain and so have no understanding of just how easy it is to become hooked on painkillers. It's not because they make you high; it's because they control the pain so that you can function.
Click to expand...

Apparently oxy boy didn't get your memo. Typical right wing hypocrisy. And yet the minions run to his defense.

Rush Limbaugh Mocks an Obese Drug Addict



Now, this is the guy who admitted he got drunk and, what, he smoked crack?

Yeah, he smoked it in a "drunken stupor," and he refuses to resign, and they're trying to strip his powers as mayor away. His brother's backing him up, but he won't quit. He's a big, obese guy. He looks like Goldfinger with about, oh, 50 or 60 extra pounds, maybe a hundred extra pounds or whatever.
Click to expand...

All of that coming from the same guy who said this...

"There’s nothing good about drug use. We know it. It destroys individuals. It destroys families. Drug use destroys societies. Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up," Mr. Limbaugh declared on his radio show on October 5th, 1995.***

He concluded the point by noting: "What this says to me is that too many whites are getting away with drug use. Too many whites are getting away with drug sales. Too many whites are getting away with trafficking in this stuff. The answer to this disparity is not to start letting people out of jail because we’re not putting others in jail who are breaking the law. The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them and send them up the river, too."***
Click to expand...

Of course none of that should apply to him.

This isn't about your sister. This is about Rush Limpdick. The right wing flag bearer of hypocrisy.
 
Last edited:
rocket88 said:
Wait, I thought only lefties made it about race....I guess not, unless you are one now.
Click to expand...

That's the point of the article, that lefties have made it about race. :doh
 
American said:
That's the point of the article, that lefties have made it about race. :doh
Click to expand...

I thought the point of the article was that Rush Limbaugh wrote a childrens book? Here's what YOU said:

the Dems, who have alienated the white population to death
Click to expand...
.

If someone on the left said "the Republicans, who have alienated the black population to death" you'd jump all over them for playing the race card. I guess it's OK if it goes your way (as with everything else, IOKIYAR)
 
bubbabgone said:
Geezuz ... hope Hard Truth didn't read that ... could get ugly ... unfortunately I just posted a reply to him that may appear right before this one.
Ya know ... if H.T. does get violent about it, given the subject matter he'll probably blame Limbaugh for inspiring his violence.
Click to expand...

:) Rush gets blamed for hundreds, maybe thousands, of things he says during the course of 15 hours of mostly extemporaneous radio broadcast every week plus some additional interviews or the occasional essay he writes for publication. And if anybody can point to anybody with that kind of exposure who has never misspoke, made an error in fact, or said something that offended somebody, I would buy them a good steak dinner. I would be the first to say that Rush sometimes does cross the line into bad taste and I often don't agree on his conclusion about this or that or something else and I have caught him in a rare error of fact--his scholarship is pretty much as good as anybody's though. He does seem to have a heart as big as his girth, and he does a great deal of philanthropy and good works with his assets and name recognition.

And 99% of what he is blamed for is taken out of context and presented as something different from what he actually said or intended. Whole websites are devoted to defaming him and accusing him of all kinds of reprehensible intent and language along with phrases assigned as talking points for numbnuts to use to smear him all over the internet.

I haven't read his children's books but I would not hestitate to order them as gifts for any child. I believe the reviews that they are factual, non partisan, well done, written in an entertaining manner that makes them page turners for the reader, and are worthy of literary acclaim.
 
AlbqOwl said:
:) Rush gets blamed for hundreds, maybe thousands, of things he says during the course of 15 hours of mostly extemporaneous radio broadcast every week plus some additional interviews or the occasional essay he writes for publication. And if anybody can point to anybody with that kind of exposure who has never misspoke, made an error in fact, or said something that offended somebody, I would buy them a good steak dinner. I would be the first to say that Rush sometimes does cross the line into bad taste and I often don't agree on his conclusion about this or that or something else and I have caught him in a rare error of fact--his scholarship is pretty much as good as anybody's though. He does seem to have a heart as big as his girth, and he does a great deal of philanthropy and good works with his assets and name recognition.

And 99% of what he is blamed for is taken out of context and presented as something different from what he actually said or intended. Whole websites are devoted to defaming him and accusing him of all kinds of reprehensible intent and language along with phrases assigned as talking points for numbnuts to use to smear him all over the internet.

I haven't read his children's books but I would not hestitate to order them as gifts for any child. I believe the reviews that they are factual, non partisan, well done, written in an entertaining manner that makes them page turners for the reader, and are worthy of literary acclaim.
Click to expand...

Frankly, his popularity depends on those out of context criticisms he gets on a daily basis. I would think he'd have expected these children's books to be heavily criticized which would subsequently increase sales and visibility. He depends on daily criticism for his lively hood; books, radio, personal appearances, the whole magilla.
 
X Factor said:
I wonder how many people who will, no doubt, trash this book have actually read it. I haven't, so maybe it is complete garbage. On the other hand, I'm not offended either by the thought of a book that's actually positive about our nations beginnings.
Click to expand...


I don't give a damn. There is no way I will give this hatemonger a dime. Nor will I even present anything written by him to my children. The man is a disgusting human being. At the end of the day honest or not, you are making this bastard richer.

Lets flip the script....

Suppose Al Sharpton did the same thing and wrote a children's book that is completely honest. Would you give his book the time of day?
 
Ockham said:
Frankly, his popularity depends on those out of context criticisms he gets on a daily basis. I would think he'd have expected these children's books to be heavily criticized which would subsequently increase sales and visibility. He depends on daily criticism for his lively hood; books, radio, personal appearances, the whole magilla.
Click to expand...

True, but only partially true ... to put it another way, he has identified the totally dependable & unendingly predictable partisan nature of the Left to do what everyone has come to rely on them to do because if nothing else, they are consistent ... and not in a good way.
 
rcart76 said:
I don't give a damn. There is no way I will give this hatemonger a dime. Nor will I even present anything written by him to my children. The man is a disgusting human being. At the end of the day honest or not, you are making this bastard richer.

Lets flip the script....

Suppose Al Sharpton did the same thing and wrote a children's book that is completely honest. Would you give his book the time of day?
Click to expand...


eeeewwww ... now if Limbaugh had a Tawana Brawley prominent in his own resume it could serve as a starting point but ... nope ... what else ya got?
You know ... something of substance would be nice.
Something that might indicate you've actually listened to Limbaugh's show.
Got anything like that?
 
rcart76 said:
I don't give a damn. There is no way I will give this hatemonger a dime. Nor will I even present anything written by him to my children. The man is a disgusting human being. At the end of the day honest or not, you are making this bastard richer.

Lets flip the script....

Suppose Al Sharpton did the same thing and wrote a children's book that is completely honest. Would you give his book the time of day?
Click to expand...

Or even worse - Nancy Pelosi? The right really hates her. :lol: I seem to remember a few people being butthurt over Hillary Clinton's new children's book, too.
 
AlbqOwl said:
:) Rush gets blamed for hundreds, maybe thousands, of things he says during the course of 15 hours of mostly extemporaneous radio broadcast every week plus some additional interviews or the occasional essay he writes for publication. And if anybody can point to anybody with that kind of exposure who has never misspoke, made an error in fact, or said something that offended somebody, I would buy them a good steak dinner. I would be the first to say that Rush sometimes does cross the line into bad taste and I often don't agree on his conclusion about this or that or something else and I have caught him in a rare error of fact--his scholarship is pretty much as good as anybody's though. He does seem to have a heart as big as his girth, and he does a great deal of philanthropy and good works with his assets and name recognition.

And 99% of what he is blamed for is taken out of context and presented as something different from what he actually said or intended. Whole websites are devoted to defaming him and accusing him of all kinds of reprehensible intent and language along with phrases assigned as talking points for numbnuts to use to smear him all over the internet.

I haven't read his children's books but I would not hestitate to order them as gifts for any child. I believe the reviews that they are factual, non partisan, well done, written in an entertaining manner that makes them page turners for the reader, and are worthy of literary acclaim.
Click to expand...

I watched William F. Buckley for a very long time and he seemed to present rational conservatism without the blowhard over-the-top hyperbole in-your-face factor that Limbaugh uses. Same with George Will or John Leo - both of whom I always enjoyed reading or seeing on TV.
 
bubbabgone said:
eeeewwww ... now if Limbaugh had a Tawana Brawley prominent in his own resume it could serve as a starting point but ... nope ... what else ya got?
You know ... something of substance would be nice.
Something that might indicate you've actually listened to Limbaugh's show.
Got anything like that?
Click to expand...

So you are actually going to sit here and say that Rush doesn't cause division ????????
 
Superfly said:
Or even worse - Nancy Pelosi? The right really hates her. :lol: I seem to remember a few people being butthurt over Hillary Clinton's new children's book, too.
Click to expand...


Pelosi? Sorry ... ridicule ain't the same as hate.
I'm sure you recognize that Pelosi deserves to be ridiculed.
 
Ockham said:
Frankly, his popularity depends on those out of context criticisms he gets on a daily basis. I would think he'd have expected these children's books to be heavily criticized which would subsequently increase sales and visibility. He depends on daily criticism for his lively hood; books, radio, personal appearances, the whole magilla.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I just don't see it that way. He of necessity has no doubt developed a thick skin against the bombardment of the hatemongers who attack ANYBODY who express content that Rush expresses, but I am pretty sure he hates being falsely accused and defamed as much as the next person. His success has been based on content and ability to present it in an easy to understand and entertaining format for more than a quarter century now. It certainly has not been based on criticism he gets from anybody.

Likewise, of course his books will receive much more attention because of his name recognition as is true of all famous people who write books--publishers look for that name recognition because they know the book will go right to the top tier of the best seller list which means more profits for them. But people won't buy Rush's books because they hate him or disapprove of him or dislike him. People buy Rush's books because they know they'll be entertaining and a good read.
 
rcart76 said:
So you are actually going to sit here and say that Rush doesn't cause division ????????
Click to expand...
Division among who?
Haven't you noticed that his critics here never listen to him.
So any division has to be between his actual listeners and those who read what others have said (who also don't listen to him).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom