Rush Limbaugh STILL is a big, fat idiot - Page 4

10-25-2006, 07:54 PM

MaggieL · 10-25-2006, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Yes, it sure is. If he went off his meds to make the point, then he is making a real sacrifice in hopes of helping people in the future.

Or to leverage his condition for maximum propiganda effect. Even during sworn testimony before Congress...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael J. Fox, in his book “Lucky Man”, 2002.

I had made a deliberate choice to appear before the subcommittee without medication. It seemed to me that this occasion demanded that my testimony about the effects of the disease and the urgency we as a community were feeling be seen as well as heard. For people who had never observed me in this kind of shape, the transformation must have been startling.

tw · 10-25-2006, 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaggieL

Or to leverage his condition for maximum propiganda effect. Even during sworn testimony before Congress...

Amazing how MaggieL will argue to completely miss the fact. Rush Limbaugh lied. Rush Limbaugh knows about lying. He created a lie about Michael Fox knowing full well that it was only invented. Rush Limbaugh used speculation as a fact - as only political extremist would do.

MaggieL would have us argue over MaggieL speculations so that we ignore a bottom line fact: Rush Limbaugh stated - as fact - what was only speculation - personal bias.

What kind of speculation was it? It was based in a political agenda. A feeling is spun into fact. Classic 'big dic' thinking. And MaggieL endorses it. That goes to credibility, MaggieL.

Bottom line fact: Rush Limbaugh stated as fact what was only classic 'big dic' speculation. He felt something big in his pants; therefore it must be a fact. MaggieL hopes you forget the reality. Rush lied. Rush lied intentionally for a political agenda.

Happy Monkey · 10-26-2006, 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaggieL

Or to leverage his condition for maximum propiganda effect. Even during sworn testimony before Congress...

What possible point could you be trying to make there? He went off the meds to make his point. He is wealthy enough to get the meds without problem. Not everybody is. There is no deceit there. The meds delay the inevitable. He will, even with the meds, eventually be that bad, and die. He sacrificed the benefit of the drugs, and probably some of his life, to make a serious point because his fame gives him a forum that is not available to most people in his situation.

mrnoodle · 10-26-2006, 01:25 AM

I was listening that day. And you're all full of shit. Now, back to the nipple thread.

His point was how liberals trot out sick people to parrot their talking points, hoping that the sick person will be held infallible because they have a disease. The idea is that if you are against making cloning a constitutional right, you must be against cures for disease. Conservatives want sick people to die.

Liberal media are the foulest batch of users and liars in the history of politics. All sides have done their share, but for pure evil, nothing beats em. Jesse Jackson doesn't want to empower blacks -- his paycheck comes from their misery. And around here, at least, blacks are sick of being told that they are second class humans who can't possibly succeed without the government to break their chains (to the tune of Amazing Grace of course).

Yeah. basically the idea is, they send out a sick person who says something. If you disagree with what is said, you are against life, health, and Michael J Fox. Fuck democrats and their sleaze.

Spexxvet · 10-26-2006, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrnoodle

I was listening that day. And you're all full of shit. Now, back to the nipple thread.

His point was how liberals trot out sick people to parrot their talking points, hoping that the sick person will be held infallible because they have a disease. The idea is that if you are against making cloning a constitutional right, you must be against cures for disease. Conservatives want sick people to die.

Liberal media are the foulest batch of users and liars in the history of politics. All sides have done their share, but for pure evil, nothing beats em. Jesse Jackson doesn't want to empower blacks -- his paycheck comes from their misery. And around here, at least, blacks are sick of being told that they are second class humans who can't possibly succeed without the government to break their chains (to the tune of Amazing Grace of course).

Yeah. basically the idea is, they send out a sick person who says something. If you disagree with what is said, you are against life, health, and Michael J Fox. Fuck democrats and their sleaze.

Are you actually saying anyone on the left is worse than the hate spewing Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, savage, and the rest of that nasty crew? You are waaaay out of touch with reality.

Happy Monkey · 10-26-2006, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrnoodle

His point was how liberals trot out sick people to parrot their talking points, hoping that the sick person will be held infallible because they have a disease.

And to make this point he claimed that Michael J. Fox wasn't really that sick.

Quote:

Liberal media are the foulest batch of users and liars in the history of politics. All sides have done their share, but for pure evil, nothing beats em.

The quotes that rkzenrage posted do, and those are just from Limbaugh.

Flint · 10-26-2006, 10:24 AM

The nastiness on both sides can be demonstrated. To believe that the "good guys" will save us from the "bad guys" while another group believes the same, but reversed, is a pointless ping-pong game. Wake up and reject them both. Vote independent. Vote third party. Vote "none of the above" when it comes to Democrats and Republicans: either of the two equals "more of the same" . . . there are no "good guys" in the two-party system.

glatt · 10-26-2006, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flint

Vote independent. Vote third party. Vote "none of the above" when it comes to Democrats and Republicans: either of the two equals "more of the same" . . . there are no "good guys" in the two-party system.

It's too late. A vote for a third party is a vote for the incumbents. The only way there will be any change right now is if you vote for the Democrats, and then only if they gain enough seats that they take congress. Then there will be gridlock, and it will put the brakes on the mess Bush & Co. has made of things recently.

A vote for a third party is a vote for more of the same. There are no viable third parties in this election. It's too late.

If you want a third party to get anywhere, you need to start looking toward an election in the future.

Flint · 10-26-2006, 10:52 AM

What you said applies to every election in the rigged system we have.
"You're throwing your vote away" is the voice of the two-party duopoly.

Voting in the "good guys" and then the "bad guys" get back in, and then you get the "good guys" back in, and then the "bad guys" muck it all up -
is that not throwing your vote away?! What do you ever get out of it? Nothing. More of the same. It's a false hope. It's a perpetual farce... . . .

I'm looking at the big picture, and it tells me: we have to start somewhere. If not now, then never.
There will never be a convenient time to reject a system which none of us, honestly, are happy with.

glatt · 10-26-2006, 11:01 AM

I think an independent or 3rd party really needs to get in on the local level. Once they have a local presence throughout the country, they will be able to take the step up to the big leagues. Vote independent locally all you like. I do.

Don't vote for an independent on the national level unless they have a shot to win. Otherwise you are throwing your vote away. Lieberman can pull it off, I'm not sure anyone else can.

Flint · 10-26-2006, 11:17 AM

Voting Democrat or Republican, successfully, can only result in something that pleases nobody, anyway, so... since your vote is "thrown away" no matter what you do, I propose that we actually vote our conscience, rather than submitting to the 2 horrible choices that are shoved in our face.

Shawnee123 · 10-26-2006, 11:18 AM

I have to say I agree with glatt. I wish it were possible to overthrow the two party stranglehold with my vote nationally, but it is not. So, if my choice is to vote for the lesser of the two evils on the national level or risk 4 MORE YEARS of pure hell, I'm going to have to go with the lesser evil.

Not saying it doesn't suck, but this country can't endure much more.

Flint · 10-26-2006, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

...my choice is to vote for the lesser of the two evils on the national level or risk 4 MORE YEARS of pure hell...

Don't you see, this is what everybody is saying! Nobody actually wants the choices they give us, but we vote for them out of fear. Fear is not a good basis for decision making. We are being played against each other, and the net result is that there is no real choice for the voters. I know it would be like taking a leap of faith to opt out of the fixed system, and you will not see any instant results (other than the peace of mind that you voted your conscience) but the alternative is pre-determined, and a pre-determined election result is nothing to be proud of.

Undertoad · 10-26-2006, 11:34 AM

If you don't know who the third party choice is, chances are you're not voting for something you would actually want to choose.

If the party itself is not very sturdy, it may be taken over or cult-ized by exactly the people you don't want to have in any level of power. (see Reform Party, Pat Robertson nominee)

10-26-2006, 01:25 AM	#50
mrnoodle bent Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: under the weather Posts: 2,656	I was listening that day. And you're all full of shit. Now, back to the nipple thread. His point was how liberals trot out sick people to parrot their talking points, hoping that the sick person will be held infallible because they have a disease. The idea is that if you are against making cloning a constitutional right, you must be against cures for disease. Conservatives want sick people to die. Liberal media are the foulest batch of users and liars in the history of politics. All sides have done their share, but for pure evil, nothing beats em. Jesse Jackson doesn't want to empower blacks -- his paycheck comes from their misery. And around here, at least, blacks are sick of being told that they are second class humans who can't possibly succeed without the government to break their chains (to the tune of Amazing Grace of course). Yeah. basically the idea is, they send out a sick person who says something. If you disagree with what is said, you are against life, health, and Michael J Fox. Fuck democrats and their sleaze. __________________ Sìn a nall na cuaranan sin. -- Cha mhór is fheairrde thu iad, tha iad coltach ri cat air a dhathadh

10-26-2006, 10:24 AM	#53
Flint Snowflake Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Dystopia Posts: 13,136	The nastiness on both sides can be demonstrated. To believe that the "good guys" will save us from the "bad guys" while another group believes the same, but reversed, is a pointless ping-pong game. Wake up and reject them both. Vote independent. Vote third party. Vote "none of the above" when it comes to Democrats and Republicans: either of the two equals "more of the same" . . . there are no "good guys" in the two-party system. __________________ **************** There's a level of facility that everyone needs to accomplish, and from there it's a matter of deciding for yourself how important ultra-facility is to your expression. ... I found, like Joseph Campbell said, if you just follow whatever gives you a little joy or excitement or awe, then you're on the right track. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Terry Bozzio**

10-26-2006, 10:52 AM	#55
Flint Snowflake Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Dystopia Posts: 13,136	@glatt: What you said applies to every election in the rigged system we have. "You're throwing your vote away" is the voice of the two-party duopoly. Voting in the "good guys" and then the "bad guys" get back in, and then you get the "good guys" back in, and then the "bad guys" muck it all up - is that not throwing your vote away?! What do you ever get out of it? Nothing. More of the same. It's a false hope. It's a perpetual farce... . . . I'm looking at the big picture, and it tells me: we have to start somewhere. If not now, then never. There will never be a convenient time to reject a system which none of us, honestly, are happy with. __________________ **************** There's a level of facility that everyone needs to accomplish, and from there it's a matter of deciding for yourself how important ultra-facility is to your expression. ... I found, like Joseph Campbell said, if you just follow whatever gives you a little joy or excitement or awe, then you're on the right track. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Terry Bozzio** Last edited by Flint; 10-26-2006 at 10:57 AM.

10-26-2006, 11:17 AM	#57
Flint Snowflake Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Dystopia Posts: 13,136	Voting Democrat or Republican, successfully, can only result in something that pleases nobody, anyway, so... since your vote is "thrown away" no matter what you do, I propose that we actually vote our conscience, rather than submitting to the 2 horrible choices that are shoved in our face. __________________ **************** There's a level of facility that everyone needs to accomplish, and from there it's a matter of deciding for yourself how important ultra-facility is to your expression. ... I found, like Joseph Campbell said, if you just follow whatever gives you a little joy or excitement or awe, then you're on the right track. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Terry Bozzio**

10-26-2006, 11:18 AM	#58
Shawnee123 Why, you're a regular Alfred E Einstein, ain't ya? Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 21,206	I have to say I agree with glatt. I wish it were possible to overthrow the two party stranglehold with my vote nationally, but it is not. So, if my choice is to vote for the lesser of the two evils on the national level or risk 4 MORE YEARS of pure hell, I'm going to have to go with the lesser evil. Not saying it doesn't suck, but this country can't endure much more. __________________ A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones who need the advice. --Bill Cosby

10-26-2006, 11:01 AM	#56
glatt ™ Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 27,717	I think an independent or 3rd party really needs to get in on the local level. Once they have a local presence throughout the country, they will be able to take the step up to the big leagues. Vote independent locally all you like. I do. Don't vote for an independent on the national level unless they have a shot to win. Otherwise you are throwing your vote away. Lieberman can pull it off, I'm not sure anyone else can.

10-26-2006, 11:34 AM	#60
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	If you don't know who the third party choice is, chances are you're not voting for something you would actually want to choose. If the party itself is not very sturdy, it may be taken over or cult-ized by exactly the people you don't want to have in any level of power. (see Reform Party, Pat Robertson nominee)

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

10-25-2006, 07:54 PM	#46
rkzenrage Guest Posts: n/a