• 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!

Are we an arrogant country?

Are we an Arrogant country?

  • Total voters
    64
dclxvinoise said:
Well, I thought the whole thing he said about Michael J. Fox was pretty outrageous. I'm sure that was just a ratings goldmine for him, though.
Click to expand...

You have no problems with Fox deliberately twitching to garner pity to support his cause, though? It's just plain rude of Limbaugh to point it out for what it is, right?
 
Truth Detector said:
But Rush never attacked him and his illness; once more what we are talking about here is highly emotional hysterics and nothing related to the facts or the truth.
Click to expand...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpFC9uziVhE"]YouTube - Ass Rush Limbaugh mocks Michael J. Fox[/ame]

That's not making fun of his disease?
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
You have no problems with Fox deliberately twitching to garner pity to support his cause, though? It's just plain rude of Limbaugh to point it out for what it is, right?
Click to expand...

If he was deliberately doing so but Rush Limbaugh nor you have any proof that he was. The twitching is a result of the medication.
 
dclxvinoise said:
I know it's hard for you to do this, but just try this for me: Take a calming breath or two and read back to what I actually posted before you start foaming at the mouth and continue with your business as usual tactics. I know it's hard for you to be civil to someone who disagrees with your points but just try it this once.
Click to expand...

How ironic; the only one who appears to be foaming at the mouth about this issue is you. Civility is something that is apparently foreign to Liberals when they get called on their emotional hysterics.

dclxvinoise said:
Um...are you serious? :shock:
Did you not see the video where he mimicked Michael J. Fox shaking?
Click to expand...

I am sorry, but I didn't know Rush was a TV show, I only listen to him. Perhaps you can supply the video showing Rush "mocking" Michaels affliction; if that is the case, then I would be in agreement that he indeed "mocked" Michael.
 
Truth Detector said:
How ironic; the only one who appears to be foaming at the mouth about this issue is you. Civility is something that is apparently foreign to Liberals when they get called on their emotional hysterics.
Click to expand...

Are you going to address my points or continue trying to derail the discussion? I'm more than happy to discuss it with you in a civil manner.

I am sorry, but I didn't know Rush was a TV show, I only listen to him. Perhaps you can supply the video showing Rush "mocking" Michaels affliction; if that is the case, then I would be in agreement that he indeed "mocked" Michael.
Click to expand...

I did. See above.
 
dclxvinoise said:
YouTube - Ass Rush Limbaugh mocks Michael J. Fox

That's not making fun of his disease?
Click to expand...

You're kidding me right? You think that he is "mocking" Michael in that discussion?

Once again, what we have here are emotional hysterics coming from a liberally biased point of view that wishes to exaggerate the reality in order to defend the indefensible.

Anyone watching this video with a modicum of honesty cannot claim this is "mocking" a disease.

Good lord, you are quite amazing in your desperation to demagogue those you hate.

Dismissed. :rofl
 
Truth Detector said:
You're kidding me right? You think that he is "mocking" Michael in that discussion?

Once again, what we have here are emotional hysterics coming from a liberally biased point of view that wishes to exaggerate the reality in order to defend the indefensible.

Anyone watching this video with a modicum of honesty cannot claim this is "mocking" a disease.

Good lord, you are quite amazing in your desperation to demagogue those you hate.

Dismissed. :rofl
Click to expand...

Don't worry, I didn't for one second think that you would man up and admit that you were wrong. :lol:

And no, I don't hate Rush Limbaugh one iota. I think he's brilliant. As I asked earlier I would really appreciate it if you could actually go back and read my posts regarding Rush Limbaugh.
 
dclxvinoise said:
Are you going to address my points or continue trying to derail the discussion? I'm more than happy to discuss it with you in a civil manner.
Click to expand...

I did address it; apparently in your highly emotional state of denial, you failed to read it so here it is again:

How was he being mocked? Did Rush say; "look at that retard, he's faking it?"

No, he merely suggested that in order to have a greater effect, he allowed himself to be recorded with his "tic" in order to *appeal to emotions* rather than the facts of the cause he supported.

He also suggested that he had done plenty of other appearances completely normal and without evidence of having the "tic." How is this mocking him?

I am always amused at the *emotional hysterics* of Liberals who when called on their tactics become hurt and insulted.

The debate about embryonic cell research was based on a lie: That President Bush was denying funding for it, and that it was somehow this miraculous cure for conditions that Michael suffered from.

The truth was that Bush merely refused Federal Tax Payer funding for the research on moral grounds which, if it was such a miracle cure, can easily find PRIVATE funding. The other TRUTH is that to date, there has been ZERO evidence that embryonic stem cells are any better at cures than adult stem cells.

So aside from all the *emotional hyperbole* you bring, how was this in the least way mocking Michael?
 
Truth Detector said:
I did address it; apparently in your highly emotional state of denial, you failed to read it so here it is again:

How was he being mocked? Did Rush say; "look at that retard, he's faking it?"

No, he merely suggested that in order to have a greater effect, he allowed himself to be recorded with his "tic" in order to *appeal to emotions* rather than the facts of the cause he supported.

He also suggested that he had done plenty of other appearances completely normal and without evidence of having the "tic." How is this mocking him?

I am always amused at the *emotional hysterics* of Liberals who when called on their tactics become hurt and insulted.

The debate about embryonic cell research was based on a lie: That President Bush was denying funding for it, and that it was somehow this miraculous cure for conditions that Michael suffered from.

The truth was that Bush merely refused Federal Tax Payer funding for the research on moral grounds which, if it was such a miracle cure, can easily find PRIVATE funding. The other TRUTH is that to date, there has been ZERO evidence that embryonic stem cells are any better at cures than adult stem cells.

So aside from all the *emotional hyperbole* you bring, how was this in the least way mocking Michael?
Click to expand...

My highly emotional state? :lol:
You mean laughter?
 
dclxvinoise said:
Don't worry, I didn't for one second think that you would man up and admit that you were wrong. :lol:
Click to expand...

Yeah that's it; I cannot man up to the REALITY that he is not insulting Michael in that video. I guess I don't practice the level of willful denial it would take to believe that this is somehow mocking someone. :roll:

dclxvinoise said:
And no, I don't hate Rush Limbaugh one iota. I think he's brilliant. As I asked earlier I would really appreciate it if you could actually go back and read my posts regarding Rush Limbaugh.
Click to expand...

I did read them; I see a profound Liberal hatred for the man so much so that you are willing to fabricate/interpret events that never occurred.

Now either you are a very good liar, or you have done a pretty convincing job on your own psyche to suggest that you actually like Rush and think he is brilliant.

But suffice it to say, beyond the typically emotional hysterics behind Liberal logic, there is nothing here other than your exaggerations, hyperbole and innuendo about Rush and his positions and your biased perceptions about REALITY.

Carry on; I will leave you with the last word as once again we enter into the circle of futility where you ignore everything others post and stick to your silly illogical talking points. :2wave:
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
You have no problems with Fox deliberately twitching to garner pity to support his cause, though? It's just plain rude of Limbaugh to point it out for what it is, right?
Click to expand...

This pretty much sums up the Liberal hyperbole and talking points; but don't be fooled by the desperate emotional hyperbole from dclxvinoise, he actually likes Rush and thinks he is "brilliant." ;) :rofl
 
EgoffTib said:
Of course, name calling rather than refutation of the claim. Shocker. :lol:
Click to expand...

What claim? You mean this one:

EgoffTib said:
You seem to be the one getting riled up, not dcxlvnoise.
Click to expand...

What is there to refute when someone posts something that is obviously intended to provoke and bait and not debate?

Calling this a claim is about as dumb as suggesting it had substance.

Carry on; once again you add nothing to the thread topic or debate.
:rofl :2wave:
 
Truth Detector said:
What claim? You mean this one:



What is there to refute when someone posts something that is obviously intended to provoke and bait and not debate?

Calling this a claim is about as dumb as suggesting it had substance.

Carry on; once again you add nothing to the thread topic or debate.
:rofl :2wave:
Click to expand...

Uh...what did I post that was intended to provoke and bait?
 
Truth Detector said:
What claim? You mean this one:



What is there to refute when someone posts something that is obviously intended to provoke and bait and not debate?

Calling this a claim is about as dumb as suggesting it had substance.

Carry on; once again you add nothing to the thread topic or debate.
:rofl :2wave:
Click to expand...
You were claiming that Liberals were emotional, yet you're the only one in this thread throwing little tantrums.
 
EgoffTib said:
You were claiming that Liberals were emotional,
Click to expand...

Are you now claiming Liberals are not emotional? How so and when did they become un-emotional? This should be a fascinating lecture from the forums baiting troll expert. :rofl

EgoffTib said:
You were claiming that Liberals were emotional, yet you're the only one in this thread throwing little tantrums.
Click to expand...

Really? And so you project your little tantrum onto me in order to prove what? That you have a profound expertise at avoiding substance and are a professional DP baiter and troller?

I assure you, nothing contained my above arguments can be construed as throwing a tantrum unless of course you are a troll attempting to bait. Got substance?

Carry on; I look forward to more of your expert attempts to bait the thread with your troll like posts. :rofl
 
Moderator's Warning:
Alright. While the next person that does a one line post that has no point other than to attack the other person and not their actual argument (and calling their points "trolling" is NOT attacking their argument) is getting a thread ban.

Now get back onto topic or some kind of debate. Whether someone is Truth Detectors clone, whether YOU feel someone is trolling or baiting or not (you feel that way? report it), or other such things are NOT the topic.
 
Truth Detector said:
Are you now claiming Liberals are not emotional? How so and when did they become un-emotional? This should be a fascinating lecture from the forums baiting troll expert. :rofl



Really? And so you project your little tantrum onto me in order to prove what? That you have a profound expertise at avoiding substance and are a professional DP baiter and troller?

I assure you, nothing contained my above arguments can be construed as throwing a tantrum unless of course you are a troll attempting to bait. Got substance?

Carry on; I look forward to more of your expert attempts to bait the thread with your troll like posts. :rofl
Click to expand...

This is too easy...
 
Truth Detector said:
You're kidding me right? You can't see that the above was adressed to someone else? :rofl
Click to expand...

He mentioned me in the post and I thought that's what you were referring to. I was mistaken obviously.
 
Let me preface this by pointing out I'm hardly a big TD fan in regards to many of the ways he presents his stances, that said.

dclxvinoise said:
Um...are you serious? :shock:
Did you not see the video where he mimicked Michael J. Fox shaking?
Click to expand...

How is mimicing something mocking it? The video is even there because Limbaugh provides a webcam feed for subscribers to his site to be able to see his broadcast. If he said someone was waving as they left on a boat, and he mimiced waving, would he be "mocking" them? Because your original argument was that he was mocking Fox.

As far as the video you posted, I'm at work so can't view it. However I'd be interested to know if it was the one that was spread around on the broadcast networks that was purposefully sped up to increase the speed and then looped to make it appear to go on longer then it did.

Which is absurd, but that also doesn't begin to address the fact that he mimicked Michael J. Fox's shaking.
Click to expand...

Which again, mimicking does not equal mocking.

Now, I don't agree TD with you trying to play on emotional hysterics. HOWEVER, I actaully DO agree with Rush. I've watched Fox on Boston Legal numerous times and on the previews for Rescue Me. He is no where NEAR as fidgety and shaky as he was in the video.

So my question to you, would be WHY would he purposefully take lengths not to be that way when on television shows, but was doing it while in his commercial? Its obvious that he COULD'VE been FAR more composed in his commercial than he was, but he wasn't. Why was that?

My guess would be, trying to view it from his side, he wanted to the most raw look into parkinsons that he could provide in the commercial, and thus didn't want to take steps to make himself seem "better" than he really was. And you know what, I don't blame him for that. But to say that the reason you'd want to do that is for any reason OTHER than to hope that it still strike an emotional cord with people is simply dishonest in my opinion. The REASON you'd want to show it at its worst for him is specifically so people feel more emotionally disgusted at not helping such a horrible illness than if he just seemed like a perfectly fine person up there talking on the screen.

Which is exactly the point Rush was trying to make; albiet in his normal verbose, over the top, rather idiotic way.
 
dclxvinoise said:
He mentioned me in the post and I thought that's what you were referring to. I was mistaken obviously.
Click to expand...

Obviously; because when it comes to substance, you have him easily beat. At least you are trying to make a point, he doesn't even exert that much effort, and one could never confuse you two other than you both like to thank each other a lot. ;)
 
Zyphlin said:
As far as the video you posted, I'm at work so can't view it. However I'd be interested to know if it was the one that was spread around on the broadcast networks that was purposefully sped up to increase the speed and then looped to make it appear to go on longer then it did.
Click to expand...

It is one and the same; the video posted was from Youtube.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom