• 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!

About all this Obama teleprompter business

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
The second link seems as partisan and biased as you.
Click to expand...

Actually, his second link, biased as it is, uses Limbaugh's own words, which speak for themselves. I believe Winston has proven his point, and answered your question.
 
winston53660 said:
Meh shrug what does that have to do with what you asked of me? It more than adequately illustrates Limaugh's position.
Click to expand...




One quote you have is about legalization, The second mouth foaming you posted (ironic eh) talks about medical use of marijuana.


They are not related. You will have to do better, and perhaps you should quote something that is relevant. I find this constant discourse on weed sophomoric at best.
 
danarhea said:
Actually, his second link, biased as it is, uses Limbaugh's own words, which speak for themselves. I believe Winston has proven his point, and answered your question.
Click to expand...




they are two different points. And weed is so "non-issue" that it proves no such thing...


Do I expect them to be 100% in agreement? no. But I am trying to figure out the depth of Winston's claim. Thus far....

Weed.


I am underwhelmed.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
they are two different points. And weed is so "non-issue" that it proves no such thing...


Do I expect them to be 100% in agreement? no. But I am trying to figure out the depth of Winston's claim. Thus far....

Weed.


I am underwhelmed.
Click to expand...



You asked for me to compare and contrast the two. I did not only on an issue but also in style. One is an intellectual the other is a blow hard wind bag.
 
If I was a DailyKos-requenting, Obama-loving partisan, I believe the last thing I would want to do is to compare Obama with Raygun. I'd be looking for images of Brett Favre reading from one, or sumpin.
 
winston53660 said:
You asked for me to compare and contrast the two. I did not only on an issue but also in style. One is an intellectual the other is a blow hard wind bag.
Click to expand...




1 is commentary on legalization of weed.

2 is a commentary on medical use of weed.


FAIL
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
1 is commentary on legalization of weed.

2 is a commentary on medical use of weed.


FAIL
Click to expand...

Well since your messiah is against medical pot what do you think his position on legal would be? Sheeesh.

One is a blow hard wind bag windbag frothing at the mouth the other presents an argument the supports it with clear lucid reasoning and not resorting to name calling.
 
winston53660 said:
Well since your messiah is against medical pot what do you think his position on legal would be? Sheeesh.
Click to expand...


I am against medical pot. I am for legalization.


Figure that one out. MESSIAH FAIL


One is a blow hard wind bag windbag frothing at the mouth the other presents an argument the supports it with clear lucid reasoning and not resorting to name calling.
Click to expand...


:lol: so what, one is an entertainer, the other is room tempurature. Thanks for your concession.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
I am against medical pot. I am for legalization.
Click to expand...

Who cares? That has nothing to do with comparing and contrasting Limbaugh with Buckley.

so what, one is an entertainer, the other is room tempurature. Thanks for your concession.
Click to expand...

Obviously you have never seen Buckley debate.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Really?

Please contrast the opinions the two hold. Thanks
Click to expand...

I'm kind of sad you all fell for this strawman of Reverends. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I was reading you and Dana saying seemed more that you prefered the discourse and way in which Buckley focused on the issues over Rush Limbaugh, not necessarily that they have dissimilar views.

I have very similar views to Rush Limbaugh, but my presentation of those views, what I think should be focused on the most, etc. I got the distinct impression from dana and Winston that that was what they were talking about, more people taking reasoned stances on actual legitimate issues rather than just trying to abrasive as possible focusing on the least common denominator issues possible.

Also, seriously, enough with the god damn fail. You're acting like a 13 year old kid that plays on X-Box and posts on 4chan with your non-stop incessesant adolescent attitude with the constant barrage of "fail". I'm half expecting to come here one day to see you starting to say your debate is l33t and that you're pwning us all.
 
Last edited:
Zyphlin said:
I'm kind of sad you all fell for this strawman of Reverends. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I was reading you and Dana saying seemed more that you prefered the discourse and way in which Buckley focused on the issues over Rush Limbaugh, not necessarily that they have dissimilar views.
Click to expand...

Bingo.....
 
Then don't fall for it next time Winston ;) You got dragged into a discussion you weren't intending to have about a stance you didn't actually hold because you let him frame the scope of your initial statement. Rev does this, constantly, and it only works when people go along with it instead of either ignoring him or acknowledging his attempt at strawmaning from the start. I've been guilty of the same thing.
 
Zyphlin said:
Then don't fall for it next time Winston ;) You got dragged into a discussion you weren't intending to have about a stance you didn't actually hold because you let him frame the scope of your initial statement. Rev does this, constantly, and it only works when people go along with it instead of either ignoring him or acknowledging his attempt at strawmaning from the start. I've been guilty of the same thing.
Click to expand...

Could we say that the rev and limbaugh are peas in a pod;)
 
Zyphlin said:
I'm kind of sad you all fell for this strawman of Reverends. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I was reading you and Dana saying seemed more that you prefered the discourse and way in which Buckley focused on the issues over Rush Limbaugh, not necessarily that they have dissimilar views.

I have very similar views to Rush Limbaugh, but my presentation of those views, what I think should be focused on the most, etc. I got the distinct impression from dana and Winston that that was what they were talking about, more people taking reasoned stances on actual legitimate issues rather than just trying to abrasive as possible focusing on the least common denominator issues possible.
Click to expand...


Really?

Please review and try again.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=1057975977


He said we needed more buckleys and less limbaughs, I assumed he meant policy. I asked him to contrast policies.

The BEST he could come up with was weed and it was a FAILURE


Also, seriously, enough with the god damn fail. You're acting like a 13 year old kid that plays on X-Box and posts on 4chan with your non-stop incessesant adolescent attitude with the constant barrage of "fail". I'm half expecting to come here one day to see you starting to say your debate is l33t and that you're pwning us all.
Click to expand...


***yawn***

It's not something serious, and I am not the only one who uses it. I await to see you have a tantrum over other posters when they do it.....


:2wave::lol:
 
I'll eagerly await you to find me a single poster that uses "Fail" as often as you outside of the scope of when they're replying to specifically you and are doing so in a sarcastic manner of portraying your posts.
 
Zyphlin said:
Then don't fall for it next time Winston ;) You got dragged into a discussion you weren't intending to have about a stance you didn't actually hold because you let him frame the scope of your initial statement. Rev does this, constantly, and it only works when people go along with it instead of either ignoring him or acknowledging his attempt at strawmaning from the start. I've been guilty of the same thing.
Click to expand...





He could have easily clarified his statement when I asked him to compare the positions the two hold instead of answering it...


See I think he infered they held different opinions, only after he fails at providing evidence of such, and you coming in here as the supposed voice of sanity, is it now, his technuique of an entertainer.

I asked a question, how is that a "strawman"


Please zyph, learn yourself what an actual strawman is before you start bitching about them....


And is it really appropriate to hijack a thread to bitch and cry about me?


:2wave:
 
Last edited:
Zyphlin said:
I'll eagerly await you to find me a single poster that uses "Fail" as often as you outside of the scope of when they're replying to specifically you and are doing so in a sarcastic manner of portraying your posts.
Click to expand...



Goal posts, moved.


:lol:
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Goal posts, moved.


:lol:
Click to expand...

Zyph didn't move the goal posts at all. You did, by changing the tenor of the debate from the "Buckley represents reason and Limbaugh doesn't" to "Let's make a comparison between the two on an issue". Buckley was one of the greatest right wing thinkers of our times. He focused on ISSUES. Limbaugh? He is a jackass. He focuses on silly-assed stuff like presidents using teleprompters, which has absolutely nothing to do with the ISSUES Americans are facing today.

Note that I capitalized the word ISSUES.
 
Last edited:
danarhea said:
Zyph didn't move the goal posts at all. You did, by changing the tenor of the debate from the "Buckley represents reason and Limbaugh doesn't" to "Let's make a comparison between the two on an issue". Buckley was one of the greatest right wing thinkers of our times. He focused on ISSUES. Limbaugh? He is a jackass. He focuses on silly-assed stuff like presidents using teleprompters, which has absolutely nothing to do with the issues Americans are facing today.
Click to expand...




I asked a freaking question!!!! :lamo


Jeeesush..... All winston had to say, was "that is not what I am saying, what I am saying is that Rush is a blowhard and Buckley was reasoned" or some such and I would have actually agreed.


Instead he answered the question leading me to believe I had understood that he meant they differed on policy. And for that, I got zyphlin violating the spirit of the "don't be a jerk" thing, hijacking your thread to attack me.


I still think that's what he meant initially. Or is Winston admitting he is easily duped and led astray by a question? I think he is smarter than that. Apparently Zyph does not. :cool:





Do you listen to rush by the way? I find your hyperbole on what he actually says and what you are claiming he says typical of those who do not listen to him and instead get thier opinions from his detractors. ;)
 
Last edited:
Zyphlin said:
Then don't fall for it next time Winston ;) You got dragged into a discussion you weren't intending to have about a stance you didn't actually hold because you let him frame the scope of your initial statement. Rev does this, constantly, and it only works when people go along with it instead of either ignoring him or acknowledging his attempt at strawmaning from the start. I've been guilty of the same thing.
Click to expand...




Could you provide some links and examples? I would hate to have to accuse you of prevarication. :lol:
 
winston53660 said:
I miss the days when the Republicans had people like William F Buckley Jr instead of Rush Limbaugh.
Click to expand...

Sadly I think part of it is a sign of the times.

You have the 24/7 news cycle along with media being in the form of radio, TV, print, and electronic.

Buckley was an eccentric personality it seems and had his own side of crassness and bluntness to him. However, at the time where he was truly coming into prominence it does not seem that one needs to be as controversial or shocking, nor need to worry as much about balancing true "entertainment" to political discourse. Rush is competing not only with magazines and news papers but with cable TV shows, dozens of other radio hosts, hundreds of blogs, and even hundreds of thousands of internet posters for peoples attention concerning conservative views.

Buckley generally could put out his views and thoughts and have enough of a following in his market without needing to distinctly go for the lowest common denominator. Rush currently can't really do that to retain the same success he's had due to the saturation of the market. Not to mention Rush is tasked with having to prepare far more material, going 3 hours (more like an hour and a half) 5 days a week every week. The just pure amount daily that Rush must fill up is part of the cause of his veering into the inane and pointless.

I think Rush IS a very astute conservative mind and could still have intelligent, entertaining, meaningful discourse about legitimate issues with the best of them. Indeed, often times he does. Its just that often times its mixed with over the top hyperbole, attempts to appeal to the lowest common denominator, and what I believe is a slight handcuff in regards to his stances to come out on things due to the past 8 years and the movements within the conservative movement from what they were in the 90's.

I don't think so much that its truly a lack of people on the caliber of Buckley, but that the current media format that we have within this country for politics unfortunantely rewards those that care more about shock, entertainment and baseline emotions rather than true discussion of meaningful issues and attempts for appeals to intelligented reasoned thought instead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom