The Rush Limbaugh Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Backdrifter said:
Question my morals? Aren't you the one calling him a piece of trash that flies wouldn't even go towards? That's some real moralistic talkin', right there!

I said that I do not think he is right but I can see what he is talking about. I think you are letting your hatred for someone you don't really know or follow influence the way you talk about him and me. I don't really appreciate being treated that way. You can smear Limbaugh all you want, but at least have the MORAL decency to treat people on this board with a little dignity.
Click to expand...

I feel the term "smearing" is used when the accusations about said person isn't true. In all honesty, how can you say Rush has a point? He doesn't have a point when you look at Janet Reno, Ali, and obviously Fox who are suffering from the same affliction.

Granted I'm sure those who have the disease experience different symptoms. But anyone who has seen Fox's interviews know he was not faking and for Rush to mock him, accuse him of faking, and even called him shameless really deserves to NOT have any attention given to him. Because what he said and did was shameless and was very, very cruel to those who suffer from the very same disease.
 
Timstuff said:
If the body language Rush used while describing Fox's symptoms are considered "mocking" him, then I have yet to meet someone who does not mock people with motor disabilities when they describe them. If you were to ask me, or anyone else I've ever met how I'd describe Fox's symptoms, the exact same body language would have been used. I have found myself frustrated with Rush plenty of times, but I definitely called bulls*** when people started throwing out accusations over his body language. If you want to say Rush crossed the line by accusing Fox of not taking his medication when he made that speech, then that's perfectly reasonable. But when I saw headlines like "Rush Limbaugh mocks Parkinson's victims!", I could not help but roll my eyes.
Click to expand...

The fact that he said Fox was faking is mocking in of itself.
 
LastSunrise1981 said:
I found out I received an infraction for this post and I honestly do not see ANYTHING wrong with this post. Can anyone explain to me what's so offensive about this post? Because I definitely feel like I'm being singled out here and I find it pretty offensive honestly.
Click to expand...


Your complaint has been forwarded to an admin, please speak with them in PM's and keep this discussion on topic.

Thanks...:yay:
 
Rush Limbaugh. Quite the polarizing figure, eh? It seems most are incapable of objectively viewing the the topic.

Should he be ignored? Certainly not! The man has proven himself extraordinarily capable of articulating the conservative agenda and casting events in a conservative point of view.

Is he overly partisan? You betcha! I'm only a casual listener, an in the truck from point a to point b type, but I've NEVER heard him say anything positive about a (D). But to counterpoint, you probably don't see much praise being heaped on any (R)s over on the HuffPo.

Should conserative politicians kow-tow to the man? HELL NO! These men and women should form their political ideology and have the spine to standby it regardless of what he or any other commentator may have to say. That isn't to say they should be inflexible idealogues, one should always be open to new views, but I don't want my senators or representative to be anyone's lapdog.


Does he cheapen his arguments by his failure to live up to his espoused ideals in his personal affairs? I think he does, yes. Whether or not this is an appropriate reaction is a debate for another time, but we as a society seem to have been conditioned to evaluate an idea based to a large degree on the personal character and behavior of whomever advanced it. (Of course there is also a growing movement to evaluate ideas in relation to party affiliation - the two behaviors are, or at least can be, somewhat contradictory which is interesting in and of itself.)

Of particular debate here is his MJF commentary. As I recall the situation, I think this can be ascribed to a poor implementation. My memory is he had a salient point but it was lost admist an delivery that should have been more sensitively handled. Again, casting ideas against personal conduct.

This insensitivity and his intolerance of all things not (R) have distanced him from our youth who, having grown up where you don't keep score in games and schools were they all dress the same, reject his gruff, acerbic rejection of the belief system ingrained upon them in these inceasingly liberal institutions. This I believe is to their detriment as I think they should be exposed to this alternate viewpoint.

So I say keep him - as long as you understand he is NOT a legislator, public official, or demagogue. He's quite useful as a mouthpiece of conservatism.
 
Last edited:
Marx said:
LIMBAUGH: KENNEDY WILL BE DEAD BY THE TIME HEALTHCARE PASSES
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/06/limbaugh-kennedy-will-be_n_172595.html



Stay classy, Rush.
icon13.gif
Click to expand...

Classy as usual, El Rushbo. :hehe:
 
I have no beef with any comments that are derogatory toward Ted "Killer" Kennedy. I DO have beef with a murderer being allowed to serve in the Senate. Unlike political commentators I DO hold my elected officials to a higher standard of personal conduct.
 
Wow, you sound like someone else I know around Memphis......hmmmm.
 
Did anyone catch Colbert breaking character to slam Limbaugh?
 
No, I missed that, hopefully it will be online somewhere.....
 
GINGRICH TAKES ON RUSH
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/08/gingrich-takes-on-rush-ho_n_172852.html

Newt Gingrich became the highest profile Republican yet to push back against Rush Limbaugh, saying on "Meet the Press" that it's "irrational" to hope for the President of the United States to fail.

"You've got to want the president to succeed," said the former House Speaker. "You're irrational if you don't want the president to succeed. Because if he doesn't succeed the country doesn't succeed... I don't think anyone should want the president of the United States to fail. I want some of his policies to be stopped. But I don't want the president of the United States to fail. I want him to learn new policies."
Click to expand...

...and now we wait for the possibility of a Gingrich apology.
 
Flashback: 2006 Poll Showed Most Democrats Wanted Bush to Fail

An August 2006 poll conducted by FOX News/Opinion Dynamics showed 51 percent of Democrats did not want Bush to succeed.


Rush Limbaugh took a lot of heat for saying he wants President Obama to fail -- but a lot of Democrats felt the same way about former President George W. Bush during his second term.

An August 2006 poll conducted by FOX News/Opinion Dynamics showed 51 percent of Democrats did not want Bush to succeed. Thirty-four percent of independents also did not want Bush to succeed.

By comparison, 90 percent of Republicans said at the time that they wanted Bush to succeed, and 40 percent of Democrats said the same.
Conservative radio talk show host Limbaugh says he doesn't want the economy to fail -- just Obama's policies. But his comments last month at the Conservative Political Action Conference drew sharp criticism from the White House.

After CPAC, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel told CBS' "Face the Nation" that Limbaugh's stance was the "wrong philosophy for America."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/fir...hback-poll-showed-democrats-wanted-bush-fail/
 
That point is kind of irrelevant. Most people aren't radio talk show hosts and the voice for a political party or persuasion. Rush, however, is, and it is irresponsible of him to go on National airwaves and use that kind of mean spirited, ignorant rhetoric.
 
So, any can have any opinion they want, as long as they don't have a Talk Show?
 
SuBe said:
So, any can have any opinion they want, as long as they don't have a Talk Show?
Click to expand...
When your in a public forum and you reach a wide audience you have to be more responsible about what you say and do, yes. You say that like that's some new, radical idea:huh:
 
When your format is nothing BUT opinion, I don't see a reason to self-censor your opinion.
 
SuBe said:
When your format is nothing BUT opinion, I don't see a reason to self-censor your opinion.
Click to expand...
What if it's your opinion that people should go start a riot? Is that a responsible use of the airwaves?
 
Well, as a Libertarian, I would say that there is no such thing as "Responsible use of the Airwaves". People are left to their own devices to do with what they want. To blame another for your own actions is faulty. If someone pays a videogame and shoots up a school, is it the Videogame developers fault? Or is the the person that pulled the trigger?

Just because this person is popular enough that people tune in to listen to him, doesn't give others the right to blame him for their opinion. It is THEIR opinion that can change. That is the great thing about this country, you have the ability to listen to opinion, or you don't have to.
 
SuBe said:
Flashback: 2006 Poll Showed Most Democrats Wanted Bush to Fail

An August 2006 poll conducted by FOX News/Opinion Dynamics showed 51 percent of Democrats did not want Bush to succeed.


Rush Limbaugh took a lot of heat for saying he wants President Obama to fail -- but a lot of Democrats felt the same way about former President George W. Bush during his second term.

An August 2006 poll conducted by FOX News/Opinion Dynamics showed 51 percent of Democrats did not want Bush to succeed. Thirty-four percent of independents also did not want Bush to succeed.

By comparison, 90 percent of Republicans said at the time that they wanted Bush to succeed, and 40 percent of Democrats said the same.
Conservative radio talk show host Limbaugh says he doesn't want the economy to fail -- just Obama's policies. But his comments last month at the Conservative Political Action Conference drew sharp criticism from the White House.

After CPAC, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel told CBS' "Face the Nation" that Limbaugh's stance was the "wrong philosophy for America."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/fir...hback-poll-showed-democrats-wanted-bush-fail/
Click to expand...

You do have a point. Every administration at some point makes the mistake of thinking that they are the state, and anyone who wishes ill on them wishes ill on the country.

So we shouldn't hate Limbaugh for this. We should hate him for many, many, many other reasons, but not this.
 
SuBe said:
An August 2006 poll conducted by FOX News/Opinion Dynamics showed 51 percent of Democrats did not want Bush to succeed.
Click to expand...

Here is where it lost ALL credibility.
 
C.F. Kane said:
You do have a point. Every administration at some point makes the mistake of thinking that they are the state, and anyone who wishes ill on them wishes ill on the country.

So we shouldn't hate Limbaugh for this. We should hate him for many, many, many other reasons, but not this.
Click to expand...
I don't see how HATE = Disapproval or Disagreement. But sure, whatever. I don't HATE Obama, I disagree with him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

gap5ewl
Florida teens gang rape woman, force son to join.
4 5 6
Replies
149
Views
14K
Orko Is King
Orko Is King

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Staff online

Members online

Total: 8,499 (members: 30, guests: 8,469)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,368
Messages
22,092,955
Members
45,887
Latest member
Barryg

Share this page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"