disneydude
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2006
- Messages
- 25,528
- Reaction score
- 8,470
- Location
- Los Angeles
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Another Mickey Mouse response.
:roll:
Egad!I can't believe we agree! :shock:
:2wave:
The -real- story here is the Dems being outraged over someone having the audacity to question The Obama.The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has launched an online petition for readers to express their outrage at conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh for saying last week that he wanted President Barack Obama to fail.
It would be better than your sad kabuki, after all there is only up from down. Most of the liberal posters on this topic have managed to post thoughtful comments. Thoughtful is not an adjective that can be associated with your post, either today or any other for that matter.:roll:Gonna do another song and dance for us Goobie?
It would be better than your sad kabuki, after all there is only up from down. Most of the liberal posters on this topic have managed to post thoughtful comments. Thoughtful is not an adjective that can be associated with your post, either today or any other for that matter.:roll:
Moderator's Warning: |
Of course you do, so in the interest of fairness let us examine how thoughtful you are being.I think what I posted is quite thoughtful.
Since Rush broadcast his show over the air and has the largest audience in political talk programming, you sure did not put much thought into that comment.Many have said that the Democrats are afraid of Rush....that may be true. I am a Democrat and I think Rush should shout his propoganda to the sky.
Wrong in almost every measurable sense. But then a sensible and thoughtful approach to reality would prevent anyone but a proud partisan from making such a fatuous claim.Most people see him for what he is...only the extreme right give him any credibility.
You’re just a couple decades too late for the linking you so thoughtfully speak of. Yes your participation in this thread has been as thoughtful as a puddle is deep.The more the Republican party is linked to Rush in the eyes of the Moderates/Independents, the better it is for the Democrats.
You may disagree...but it doesn't make it not "thoughtful".....:doh
I guess people sorta forgot this...Captain America said:You didn't see any sissy-boy whiners bitching about Keith Olbermann in Bush's posse did ya?
Neither deserves any attention from elected officials.The Senate approved a resolution on Thursday denouncing the liberal antiwar group MoveOn.org over an advertisement that questioned the credibility of Gen. David H. Petraeus, the American commander in Iraq.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/21/us/politics/21moveon.html
LOL, on the part of Rush, or of me?YAY for propoganda.
Yawn, I talk about Rush. And Zyphlin talks about niftydrifty.Since at least one of those I know for an absolute undisputable fact that its taken out of context, and knowing your love to go completley hyper partisan to the left at times, I'm going to assume the vast majority of these are taken out of context.
Indeed.
Moderator's Warning: This thread is about a topic, not about niftydrifty, keep your responses to the topic and the posts and not just posts dedicated to nothing but targetting a poster
I'll do it on any given day. Within any hour. Rush speaks in generalizations and hyperbole. and all the meanwhile he peppers them with mistruths.Thank you niftydrifty, you've proven that if you take a single sentence out of a 3 hour show that's on 200+ times a year for over a decade now you can find a number that can appear questionable. You've definitely swayed me.
Actually that is not quite true, but why bother with context? It is utterly normal to argue Limbaugh ignores context while ignoring context to complain about Limbaugh. And the band played on……………..HEre's my take:
Rush doesn't give a **** about what's best for the country, he cares only about what's best for Rush. I'd lay odds that he secretly in his heart of hearts was ROOTING for Obama to win the election.
And now he not so secretly wants Obama to fail.
Not to deny you your speculation, but demographics long ago destroyed the claim that Limbaugh’s audience is disenfranchised, stupid, uneducated and insert claim here.This isn't because he wants what's best for the country, it's because the worse Obama does, the better his ratings will be. The more unhappy the people of the country are with "liberals" the more his ratings will increase.
The more pain and suffering they endure, the better for him.
And for the last 8 years gooftards like Oberman were hoping for the same ****. It was a boon to them for Bush's policies to fail. They don't really care that the country is in dissarray, they only need to pretend to care in order to sell advertising and increase ratings.
Like it or not, these people exist solely because they say the things that the disenfranchised want to hear.
The more disenfrachised the people in their target demographic are, the better they do.
Actually I think it is that kind of narrow minded knee jerkery that lead to this very story. Way to diagnose and illustrate how people arrive at making public comments and gestures that defy common sense.:dohLet him keep spewing his bullcrap. "Exposing" him will not get his ditto-head audience to finally see that they've been brainwashed. In fact, I think it would have an opposite effect.
I guess people sorta forgot this...
Neither deserves any attention from elected officials.
Like him, hate him, Limbaugh is an extremely influential and important character in the landscape of American Politics and many of the liberals in power are extremely afraid of that fact to the point of feeling the need to make stupid stunts or idiotic comments like those in the past week.
LOL, on the part of Rush, or of me?
Yawn, I talk about Rush. And Zyphlin talks about niftydrifty.
Indeed.
I'll do it on any given day. Within any hour. Rush speaks in generalizations and hyperbole. and all the meanwhile he peppers them with mistruths.
Yes because Rush listeners are just empty fools till they turn on Rush and get their marching orders :roll:I don't know about that. He might be influencial over the "lazy" (i.e. those who can't be bothered to think for themselves), but I doubt he has influence over the majority of Americans, let alone those in government.
He show is quite popular, but I can bet a lot tune in purely for entertainment value.
So basically you said nothing here, aside from the broadly ignorant “they” are all lazy and brainwashed. At least you are not afraid to keep it dumb, real dumb, while trying to stereotype millions. And remember now, you don’t like Limbaugh why? Chuckle.I don't know about that. He might be influencial over the "lazy" (i.e. those who can't be bothered to think for themselves), but I doubt he has influence over the majority of Americans, let alone those in government.
He show is quite popular, but I can bet a lot tune in purely for entertainment value.
I don't know about that. He might be influencial over the "lazy" (i.e. those who can't be bothered to think for themselves), but I doubt he has influence over the majority of Americans, let alone those in government.
He show is quite popular, but I can bet a lot tune in purely for entertainment value.
Attacking a General who is on active duty and in command of combat troops DESERVES denouncement by congress.
Getting excited by a radio talk show host... silly.
Hey never mind Limbaugh did not attack Obama, ya know because why should that trifling little detail be considered. Jesus.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.
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
I guess people sorta forgot this...
Neither deserves any attention from elected officials.
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.
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.
What a hack.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.
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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?