RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh.

RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

kittinSol -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 8:33:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead What do they get out of it? Populism is the sharpest tool in the box of rabble-rousing right-wingers. Exalt your public with the ideas of God, country, and exacerbate their natural xenophobia, and you're in business, because at the same time as they hallucinate over the cheap imagery, they won't realise that you're truly screwing them economically. That's how a certain segment of the public keeps on adoring those that would shaft them up the arse without lube... including Beck, Limbaugh & Co. (has anyone noticed my desperate attempts at sticking to the subject of the thread, by the way, you bunch of good for nuffin commies?).

HatesParisHilton -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 8:38:27 AM)
that's "nuffink", cockney girl! what, ya'll go ta Bush Learnin' Skool 'r SUM' thin'?

kittinSol -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 8:42:36 AM)
We forget another evil creepy crawly. The "chick" with the Adam's apple. Ann "Jews have to be perfected" Coulter. What's up with that?!!!

HatesParisHilton -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 8:52:19 AM)
/laughing hard enough to scare the outdoor catkitty oh what, the Neo Cons can't hate gays on one hand and beatify and glamourize a HellTrannie on the other? are you being a big ol' consistancy meanie again?

DomKen -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 8:55:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDamnedPanda I'm not planning any bank robberies in the foreseeable future, but I do enjoy shooting an AR-15. It's a fun gun on the range. Functionally, it's no different than my dad's 40-year old deer rifle - a .308 semi-automatic is a .308 semi-automatic. Assault-style weapons are used in only a tiny percentage of violent crime, and there's no sensible reason to ban them. If you mean semi automatic weapons with assault rifle stylings, there is a single reason. Too often the weapon is made almost identically to the automatic capable military version and it is a fairly simple matter to convert it to selective fire. That's a popular myth, Ken, but it's just not true. It's almost impossible for anyone but a highly skilled gunsmith to convert a semi-auto assault-style weapon without the manufacturer's parts, which are illegal under the same statute that makes it illegal to possess fully-automatic weapons in the first place. It's not like you can just walk into WalMart and buy a kit - the only people allowed to own or purchase this equipment are people who are already allowed to own or purchase machine guns anyway. It may not be true of all weapons but I've seen it done with both a Norinco AK and an Uzi, I don't know for sure what make. I know exactly how to do it to my cousins Colt AR-15. I'm not a highly skilled gunsmith and neither are the people who converted the AK or Uzi. As a matter of fact the AK was converted using a kit sold at a gun show and took longer to disassemble than it did to make the change, IIRC this is one reason the Norinco AK was banned from import.

kittinSol -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 9:01:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HatesParisHilton are you being a big ol' consistancy meanie again? I love to torture the politically afflicted [8D] . Did you just call me big? You didn't just call me big, did you? Nah, didn't think so either [sm=cool.gif] .

SpinnerofTales -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 9:05:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol We forget another evil creepy crawly. The "chick" with the Adam's apple. Ann "Jews have to be perfected" Coulter. What's up with that?!!! The only reason that Ann Coulter has any audience at all is that more conservative men would like to have sex her than they would Rush Limbaugh. Ok...that's unfair. More conservatives would ADMIT to wanting to have sex with her than would admit to wanting to have sex with Rush Limbaugh.

kittinSol -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 9:16:10 AM)
Brilliant transition to the subject of the conservative chick, Spinner. For I have pondered for a long while now about the mystery that makes so many conservative women share the same physical characteristics, especially around the eyes. Bachman. ; Thatcher ; Coulter ; Palin ; et j'en passe, et des meilleures. So, why do they all have crazy beady piggy eyes?

SpinnerofTales -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 9:42:03 AM)
quote: So, why do they all have crazy beady piggy eyes? Now you know if I give any one of a hundred good answers to that question, the cons are going to get all riled up and say all sorts of mean things in return. Insulting Ann Coulter is to a con is like insulting Betty Paige for a bondage entheusiast.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 9:55:45 AM)
Perfect examples of the 'intellectual' nature of the liberal, whoops sorry 'progressive', viewpoint. quote: ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol We forget another evil creepy crawly. The "chick" with the Adam's apple. Ann "Jews have to be perfected" Coulter. What's up with that?!!! Bachman. ; Thatcher ; Coulter ; Palin ; et j'en passe, et des meilleures. So, why do they all have crazy beady piggy eyes? The only reason that Ann Coulter has any audience at all is that more conservative men would like to have sex her than they would Rush Limbaugh. Ok...that's unfair. More conservatives would ADMIT to wanting to have sex with her than would admit to wanting to have sex with Rush Limbaugh. Forget the issues raised or point to contrary facts - insulting the looks of the critic is a valid argument. Take the OP comment: quote: It seems that Glen Beck and Rush are the 2 most popular right wing talk show hosts in the media today and that both preach family values. It seems, however that they are both reforming drug (and in Beck's case) also alcohol addicts. The President represented he smoked and tried cocaine. His strength not to be an addict as a result speaks well of his fortitude, and compares to the weakness of Beck & Limbaugh. However, they are NOT President. They are commenting and giving opinion of the President, his results, and what he's accomplished. That the radio commentators rationalize their drug use and addition with their position on family values matters? Obviously it doesn't for their sponsors and listeners. What is also doesn't change are the factual representations that they talk about. Their slant of those issues tends most likely uses that same ability to rationalize. Don't take that ability too lightly; after all, enough people rationalized that a prior drug user should be President of the US in the last three elections. Another thing that didn't 'CHANGE!' with the color of the party banner hanging from the White House window. Stipulating the Beck, Limbaugh, and Obama used drugs - what's the point? On the other hand considering that it must be a key component based upon the comments; I'll also stipulate that "Obama is cute!"

SpinnerofTales -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 10:11:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth enough people rationalized that a prior drug user should be President of the US in the last three elections While Obama's drug use didn't bother me, I almost ended up not voting for Clinton because of his "I tried pot but didn't inhale" comment. I was very concerned about turning over the reigns of power for this country to a man who wasn't bright enough to figure out how a joint worked. On a more serious level, I have said before and will say again: It is not their drug use. It is their drug use in the face of their advocacy that drug users be jailed for longer periods of time as a deterrent to crime. I don't mind a person getting high. But a stoned hypocrite is still a hypocrite.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 10:29:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth enough people rationalized that a prior drug user should be President of the US in the last three elections While Obama's drug use didn't bother me, I almost ended up not voting for Clinton because of his "I tried pot but didn't inhale" comment. I was very concerned about turning over the reigns of power for this country to a man who wasn't bright enough to figure out how a joint worked. On a more serious level, I have said before and will say again: It is not their drug use. It is their drug use in the face of their advocacy that drug users be jailed for longer periods of time as a deterrent to crime. I don't mind a person getting high. But a stoned hypocrite is still a hypocrite. I'm happy, and can appreciate, that you can qualify hypocrisy based upon its source and how it fits into your value system. I know I do the same; however, with a conscience ongoing effort not to do so. The distinction is that as a source of facts; I trust all equally - not at all. Somehow though a negative opinion of Obama from these sources isn't addressed on the facts, even to discount them, but instead is an attack on the source's appearance. Personally, I take that tactic as telling that no substantive counter argument can be made. Obama, Beck, and Limbaugh all used drugs, all can be represented with examples as being hypocritical; only one is President. Anyone know, or even consider, the drug usage, and/or criminal history of the talking heads supporting Obama and this Administration? It's a waste to spend any time denigrating the source of information, better spent vetting the fact instead of the source. Mocking them, exposes weakness.

SpinnerofTales -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 10:45:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth I'm happy, and can appreciate, that you can qualify hypocrisy based upon its source and how it fits into your value system. I know I do the same; however, with a conscience ongoing effort not to do so. I fail to see how the question of hypocracy rests upon it's source in this case. Neither Obama Clinton or Bush campaigned for harsher treatment of drug users as part of their platform. They did not speak as crusaders against drugs while using drugs at the time they did so. To me, it is the shouting out against something one is currently involved in that is the source of my charge of hypocracy (my apologies if I misunderstood your point on this). Again I cite the case of Roy Cohen. There is nothing wrong, in my view, with being gay. There is something wrong and hypocritical about being gay and trying to hide it by using one's political power to persecute gay people to prove one's straightness. It isn't just about each thing a person does seperatly that matters sometimes. It is how many things they do add up that counts.

kittinSol -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 11:03:08 AM)
Well that killed the joy, didn't it [:(] ?

thornhappy -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 11:13:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls 6) Legalizing gay marriage sounds harmless enough, until you look a little deeper. Democrats claim to be Christians, but the bible clearly disapproves of homosexuality and clearly defines marriage as a sacred ceremony between a man and a woman. Actually, the Bible allows for multiple wives and concubines. Care to legislate for that? thornhappy oh yeah...as for multiple husbands...that could get right interesting!

SpinnerofTales -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 11:19:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol Well that killed the joy, didn't it [:(] ? Sorry kitten....would some catnip make up for it?

Mercnbeth -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 11:20:09 AM)
quote: Neither Obama Clinton or Bush campaigned for harsher treatment of drug users as part of their platform. They did not speak as crusaders against drugs while using drugs at the time they did so. To me, it is the shouting out against something one is currently involved in that is the source of my charge of hypocracy (my apologies if I misunderstood your point on this). There decision to run for office came AFTER their drug use. Hypocrisy is forgiven, especially when it serves an agenda, but stupid hypocrisy in the face of a documented past would have been much more difficult a hurdle to overcome. Living with an active advocate on the use of medical marijuana I can represent the hypocrisy of the ongoing DEA action against CA dispensaries by the Obama Administration. Unlike President Bush, Obama campaigned on eliminating DEA involvement in States with medical marijuana statutes. I don't know, or care Beck's and Limbaugh's position on the matter, hypocritical or not, because unlike Obama - they aren't President and can not affect DEA enforcement. My overall point is more basic. Pointing to the personality traits, past behavior, and appearance of any source of information is not a response to the sum and substance of their opinion or the facts they used in forming that opinion. Those needing to point to form over substance weaken the argument for any side they represent. Clear?

Kirata -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 11:26:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales I fail to see how the question of hypocracy rests upon it's source in this case. Your dislike for Rush provides a basis for questioning your motives, particularly when considered in the light of your inability to read other people's minds and psychically discern their thoughts. hypocrisy – noun 1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess. 2. a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude. Rush would not be the first person whose self-loathing over some hated weakness manifested itself in a marked attitude against the practice and those who engage in it. That being the case, neither his attitude nor the beliefs with which he judged himself would have been mere pretense. Of course, I don't read minds either. But he was never so happy and proud of himself as after he had finally been forced to seek help and, with it, managed to beat the addiction. Also, it bears note that his addiction involved a medication prescribed for pain. And as anyone who suffers from chronic pain will know, in time it can take more and more of the medication to get relief. This was no extracurricular recreational pursuit such as those he rails against, and a charge of hypocrisy would fail on that count too. K.

kittinSol -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 11:31:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol Well that killed the joy, didn't it [:(] ? Sorry kitten....would some catnip make up for it? S'okay, Spinner, snot your fault. It's Merc - he has zero sense of humour when it come to Coulter sigh.

rulemylife -> RE: Glen Beck and rush Limbaugh. (9/30/2009 11:44:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Stipulating the Beck, Limbaugh, and Obama used drugs - what's the point? There is only a point with Limbaugh, as has been pointed out on this thread and others. He repeatedly said all drug abusers should be sent to jail for lengthy terms. And the whole time he was saying it he was abusing drugs himself. I've also noticed he didn't volunteer for jail time.

Page: << < prev 8 9 [10] 11 12 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875