- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 10,320
- Reaction score
- 2,116
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
No but Biden did.
Really? I missed that, but considering how he runs his mouth, it wouldn't surprise me.
No but Biden did.
That's a very fair position to take.I think that his giving a voice to the conseratives not represented by the GOP is a good thing. I don't like Rush for other reasons more than I don't like his policies.
One thing Rush loudly proclaims is that "liberals" hate being the butt of a joke, so he does this to a) point out the folly of some of their positions, and b) make them angry.I think does a serious disservice to the country with some of his rhetoric. HE is naturally a divider of people, not a uniter.
His venom towards the other side is overkill, IMO. I'm not saying that he is wrong to want Obama to fail (and by now, everyone knows exactly waht he meant by that).
I have no problems with either stance, my problem wasn't the conscientious objectors, that happens in every war, I had a problem with those that hid behind the "support the troops but....." banner for alternative reasons, like those who wanted to simply beat up on GWB for anything they could dig up, or people who hated the military but didn't have the stones to admit it, or for other such reasons.I can agree with the concept of supporting the cvountry but not the mission that the leadsers of teh country want ot engage in.
In fact, it is very similar to the concept of "supporting the troops, but not the mission".
Rush has a particular schtick that he uses, and the purpose of this particular logical exercise was to point out the fallacy of the "support the troops but...." banner as he saw it. But I can't fault people for seeing it from your point of view either because it was a subtle move that you'd have to be a regular listener who has become familiar with his methods to fully be in on it.Where Rush becomes a hypocrite is that he has made statements like: "I told them what I think is the sort of phony-baloney, plastic-banana, good-time rock 'n' roller of some members of the American left saying they support the troops but they don't support their mission"
The fact is that with the left in charge, their mission is indeed the coutnry's mission.
There probably is some truth in both views, I'm certain Rush wants the implementation of liberalism to fail, but as the above adresses, there is probably more schtick to it than most see.So Rush is now engaging in the same thing, in a way, by trying to say that he wants Obama's Policies to fail, not Obama himself.
I can concede this point.Rush apparently does not see how his current position parralels that of the left with regard to supporting the troops.
It's possible, but that would depend on what Obama does and the consequences...good or bad from said actions. If Obama creates a fallout from his policies, then Rush does have a possible independent audience increase in the making.I'm not saying he has lost ratings, or that they have not increased, I'm saying that he will receive a boost in ratings when he has more material.
Off the top of my head the ratings showed the same numbers, slight increase, but they held to average. I could be mistaken, but our local ratings were consistent.Didn't his ratings increase more when he had Obama to go after in 2008? (Although in general an election year might increase ratings in it's own right)
I don't know, McCain did some pretty screwy things himself, so it's quite possible that either of the two candidates could have provided enough idiocy for ratings boosts.I'm saying that he'll have even bigger ratings boosts with Obama in office than he would with McCAin in office because it is likely that more people will become unhappy with liberal policies while Obama is in office. And that's Rush's bread and butter.
Hard to say really.It's addimittedly purely speculation on my part that his ratings will get a bigger boost with Obama than they would have with McCain. I can tell you one thing, though, there is little doubt that Rush's ratings will never decrease with a Dem in office.
It had something to do with a college thesis, don't have the link on hand, but it was well hidden until the end of the fairness doctrine.Really? I missed that, but considering how he runs his mouth, it wouldn't surprise me.
It had something to do with a college thesis, don't have the link on hand, but it was well hidden until the end of the fairness doctrine.
Oh my, now THIS is truly funny. Thank you Disney dude, you never fail to entertain with your blatant obfuscations and hypocrisy. :rofl
Here's the link:It had something to do with a college thesis, don't have the link on hand, but it was well hidden until the end of the fairness doctrine.
Oh this is rich; the Democrats are exercising their free speech by trying to deny Rush his free speech.
Yes folks, you just can't make up this liberal mumbo jumbo. If you won't join them, be censured. :rofl
The ONLY ones in the world and on this forum who can't stand free speech are the Liberals who constantly rail about how evil Fox News and Rush Limbaugh are; two supposedly minor players in the world of media empires.
But to compound the laughable state Liberals are in, they want to suggest that it was patriotic to impugn and hate George Bush, but wrong to say anything against Obama's plan to destroy the American economy and dream and they are out in fanatical droves to slam the small single voice in American that still has some reason; Rush Limbaugh.
The only thing more fantastical here is the silly assed notion being expressed by the drive-by media and Liberal Democrats that allowing the Government to spend us into a two trillion debt hole is the ONLY way to get us out of a recession.
It would be hilarious if it weren't such an impending disaster for generations of Americans and the future of our economy,
Carry on; watching you people rant and whine about Rush is about as amusing as watching you suggest that impugning the Commander and Chief while our troops are at risk is somehow patriotic. Yet now it is unpatriotic to suggest that Obama's plan is idiotic. Got hypocrisy?
:rofl
Well I knew you had no intelligent answer. News Flash: Nobody gets their news from Limbaugh. He does not even do news. Though the news does interrupt his program about once every twenty three minutes or so.Credibility about anything. When you get your information from a drug addicted gas bag...how accurate do you think that information is going to be?
Rush has a particular schtick that he uses, and the purpose of this particular logical exercise was to point out the fallacy of the "support the troops but...." banner as he saw it. But I can't fault people for seeing it from your point of view either because it was a subtle move that you'd have to be a regular listener who has become familiar with his methods to fully be in on it.
Looks like a white flag to me. Something about an offer to take it to a True Debate does cause that to happen..................:mrgreen:Picture removed
Well I knew you had no intelligent answer. News Flash: Nobody gets their news from Limbaugh. He does not even do news. Though the news does interrupt his program about once every twenty three minutes or so.
Now run back to the kiddy table, the grown ups are trying to talk.:roll:
Actually many do get their news (or at least sound bites and false information) from Rush and some do take him seriously.
Are you seriously saying NO CONSERVATIVE WHATSOEVER takes Rush Seriously?
Because of the high volume of phone calls and correspondence received by my office since the Politico article ran, I wanted to take a moment to speak directly to grassroots conservatives.
[...]Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Newt Gingrich, and other conservative giants are the voices of the conservative movement’s conscience. Everyday, millions and millions of Americans—myself included—turn on their radios and televisions to listen to what they have to say, and we are inspired by their words and by their determination.
Claiming that people get their news from a non news source is at this point silly. The man does a show about his opinions and takes on political issues and stories for three hours a day, which is interrupted by news updates. It is called political commentary not news. So what if people agree/disagree with his opinions and so what if many (including many thoughtful left leaning posters and political commentators) realize the man is no fool? He is taken very seriously to the tune of millions of dollars annually. He single handedly revitalized the radio industry and owns a few Marconi awards too. But you say he should not be taken seriously because why? You don’t like him or his politics so that emboldens you to make broadly generalized claims that fly in the face of common sense? Mr. Obama and the DNC take him quite seriously.:dohActually many do get their news (or at least sound bites and false information) from Rush and some do take him seriously.
Plenty of people take him seriously on both sides of the political spectrum, that might not fit your preconceptions or motivations in an internet debate forum, but it is the truth. Depending on what he is talking about and saying, I take him seriously. Other times not so much. It really is amazing how one can use their ears and mind to make these determinations.Are you seriously saying NO CONSERVATIVE WHATSOEVER takes Rush Seriously?
Picture edited
But no, I’ve known many many Limbaugh listeners and so far none of them have fit the sad and lazy stereotypes that Limbaugh detractors try to attribute to his audience. :roll:[/FONT]
I'm watching Chris Matthews right now. He's apparently doing his entire show on Rush -does he rule the GOP. And apparently Republicans politicians are supposed to apologize for Rush. :roll:
WTF happened to Matthew? If you go back 5 years ago he was someone you could take seriously. Now he's nuts. Not quite Keith Olbermann. But he's getting close.
And plenty do. Your point?Then it is obvious you don't know too many Limbaugh listeners then because you've even admitted BY YOURSELF plenty of people take him seriously.
No as was indicated in my last reply, perhaps go back and read it more carefully and see if you catch on to the English.Or is it you are claiming only those on the left take him serisouly.
If that made any sense I guess I’d be all butt hurt. If it made any sense.Because then you would be full of **** because those on the left aren't contributing to his funds.
I have no idea what you are going on about, do you? I personally do not “contribute” money to any talk show host. So what?So then most of you on the right take him seriously enough to contribute money to. That says a lot.
Who on the right who gives rush money are you talking to and more importatnty what the hell does these unseen monetary supporters of Limbaugh have to do with what we were talking about? Before you ran off the rails?I take a look at my paycheck each month, and none of it is contributed to Rush or any other left wing pundit. How does that fair for you on the right who support him with money.
I’d say at this point it is pretty obvious why you are not being taken seriously. By the way Limbaugh’s multi million dollar contract is paid from proceeds from advertising revenues and such. You really should educate yourself a bit more about such basic public knowledge least you look foolish.I'd say those on the right are the most fooled. While those on the left may hate him, the idiots on the right actually send the fool money :rofl
BTW Shewter, I have not seen you since you quietly slithered away from another thread. You know the one where you vehemently argued with me again and again about comments I never made? Yeah the thread where you and RighOfCenter both kept yammering about another posters comments as being mine, despite the fact that I kept telling you they were not mine? Yeah that one, the one where once it became obvious neither of you knew what the hell you were blabbering about, you both just did the Batgirl and vanished without even acknowledging your mistakes and all the idiotic things said mistakes led you to claim?
Of course it did not worry me as I knew that kind of brave owning up to your errors naturally signaled that you would soon start trolling me and throwing your most sincere “thanks” the way of anyone I argue with. Chuckle. I can hear you as you “thank” away, go get him Tucker, that guy Sir Loin made me make an ass of myself and I ran away like a little girl. Ewwwwwww!!!!!!!!!!:baby2
Moderator's Warning: |
This personal attack post was unnecessary. Please cease this behavior. |
It would be OK if your side did not take these things 100% out of context.Sounds like the ones that are going into a tizzy are conservatives over the The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee expressing it's rights of free speech against Rush.
The Rushbots don't like free speech when it goes against their mesiah Rush.
The party has dived because the R's have abandoned their roots. It's why there was no excitement over McCain; a RINO. Palin saved McCain, but wasn't enough to drive him over the finish line. Palin is the one who generated excitement, and the way the media went after her and her family illustrated they believed her to be a clear and present danger to Obama and the socialists in general.Personally, I think the GOP ought to study the issue while it's in the light.
I mean, personally, I traditionally like the GOP. Over the better part of the last decade, I have gotten sideways with it. I like being conservative, in a Goldwater "live-and let-live" kinda way. Since the O'Reilly's and Limbaugh's started representing and making policy for the GOP, (and brought in all these rude, disrespectful, nasty people with them,:roll The party has nosedived and you can't hardly buy a seat in politics anymore if there is an "R" beside your name.
And that is exactly why your position is fair, your truly looking at the whole picture.I can easily see that being the case. As I'm not a regular listener, I cannot say for sure either way. I can only explain that it comes across a certain way to me, but I'll take your word for it that I'm missing something, because I admittedly am not a regular listener.