RE: The Voice of American Conservatism?

RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (Full Version)

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

Message

Moonhead -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 12:29:03 PM)
He's not thrilled with it, because it's one of his boys, rather than some lefty country singer who's being harmed by it.

Edwynn -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 12:41:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic It's interesting, Edwynn, that the bit you left out in your snip, was the part that undermined the whole premise of your reply. Thoughts can only be expressed within your narrow frame of vision, and politically correct terminology. Sorry, but merely stating that the premise was undermined does not make it so. You are welcome to repeat all of both statements of concern here and we'll leave it to the readership as to whether the premise was undermined or not. Would your explication on how the part that was left out undermined the premise demonstrate as much ability to understand basic logical concepts and even simple facts as your assertion that Ms. Fluke was wanting others to pay for her promiscuity? Or equating the situation of her congressional testimony to Joe the Plumber's media grab lying? Sure you want to go there?

Raiikun -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 12:47:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead if you're talking about electioneering for three republicans 1) Reagan...there is no 2 and 3. (He said he voted for Bush, no mention of electioneering for him.) Noting of course, you said "three republicans", not "a republican in three elections."

TheHeretic -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 12:47:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen That you dare equate access to contraception to promiscuity is disgusting. That's interesting, Ken, in light of your easy use of slurs for people who don't share your faith in AGW theory, or don't believe with sufficient conviction to embrace the methodolgy. I'm disgusted by the fact that the national discussion in these times is over who pays for the condom jar.

Moonhead -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 12:53:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead if you're talking about electioneering for three republicans 1) Reagan...there is no 2 and 3. (He said he voted for Bush, no mention of electioneering for him.) Noting of course, you said "three republicans", not "a republican in three elections." Reagan was a separate republican in each election. That's how your political system works.

Moonhead -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 12:54:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic I'm disgusted by the fact that the national discussion in these times is over who pays for the condom jar. You'd rather pay for a single mother than for rubbers, then?

dcnovice -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 1:01:55 PM)
quote: I'm disgusted by the fact that the national discussion in these times is over who pays for the condom jar. Good line, but isn't that trivializing the issue a bit? Isn't it more a matter of covering medical contraceptives the same way that other medications (including, I think, Viagra) are covered?

Edwynn -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 1:04:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic I'm disgusted by the fact that the national discussion in these times is over who pays for the condom jar. You'd rather pay for a single mother than for rubbers, then? Doesn't want to pay for either. Not sure about him, but there is a deafeningly loud minority in this country that want Pinochet's Chile right here, right now.

fucktoyprincess -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 1:08:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy The driving force behind conservative talk radio is anger and scape-goating. One has to love the disconnect between: (1) Being against contraception AND abortion. & (2) Not wanting to subsidize poor families. (3) No sex & unlimited guns. (a real bad combination) This society already exists - in Islamic theocracies. I vote that Limbaugh and his cronies all move there and leave AMERICA to us....

tweakabelle -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 1:15:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Edwynn quote: ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess What planet are we on? For some, a planet that existed forty years or longer ago. Witness: quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic This young woman got up and talked about her right to subsidized promiscuity. Note that even forty or more years ago promiscuity was a term used for easily going from one partner to the next, on some occasions perhaps even two or more simultaneously. The poster above apparently agrees with Rush that even long term monogamous pre-marital sexual relationships constitute 'promiscuity.' That designation applying of course only to the woman in the situation. That's what planet they're on. Did I issue any sort of value judgement on promiscuity, Edwynn? I'm a fan of promiscuity, as a matter of fact. I indulged in, and enjoyed the hell out of promiscuity for a goodly percentage of my life. And if we are going to become so heavily involved in healthcare (whole other subject) then we probably should be subsidizing it. What planet are you two on, to think that your values are the only ones that can possibly exist, and only within the tiny framework of acceptable ways to discuss them? TheHeretic's claim above is utterly specious and seriously deceptive.' Rush chose to falsely and viciously libel this woman as a slut and a whore for taking a contraceptive for hormonal (non-sexual) reasons. TheHeretic then chose to attempt to sanitise Rush's outrageous behaviour as an attack on "the right to subsidized promiscuity". Trying to pretend that the use of this term is value-free is preposterous. "Subsidized promiscuity", in this context, is a euphemism for "slut" and "whore". To claim that using "subsidised promiscuity " in this manner is value free is clearly, self-evidently ludicrous. It is transparently false and misleading. TheHeretic's goal is to excuse naked and uncompromising misogyny. No further proof of the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of TheHeretic's position and claims is needed.

TheHeretic -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 1:21:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Edwynn Sorry, but merely stating that the premise was undermined does not make it so. You are welcome to repeat all of both statements of concern here and we'll leave it to the readership as to whether the premise was undermined or not. Would your explication on how the part that was left out undermined the premise demonstrate as much ability to understand basic logical concepts and even simple facts as your assertion that Ms. Fluke was wanting others to pay for her promiscuity? Or equating the situation of her congressional testimony to Joe the Plumber's media grab lying? Sure you want to go there? Where? A horribly run on sentence contest? Maybe on a rainy Saturday afternoon sometime. Even though I'm on the same side of the issue, I have used improper words in describing her role in the media frenzy. That leads to, "what planet am I on?" Get over yourself.

Edwynn -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 1:44:49 PM)
Good then, we can get on with other issues. Remembering again that we are not talking about the subject of Fluke's testimony, use of the pill for one particular medical condition, but the other issue of normal adult behavior ... So then the subject is the cost of a ubiquitous form of birth control. This is required to prevent what would otherwise be irresponsible pregnancies that might result from normal human adult behavior. (See how easy that is?) Being that contraception and the prevention of it are both matters of health, and result from normal adult behavior as opposed to reckless disregard for the body, many people consider that any prescriptions dealing with this particular health matter should be covered under the same insurance that covers any other health matter.

DomKen -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 4:16:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen That you dare equate access to contraception to promiscuity is disgusting. That's interesting, Ken, in light of your easy use of slurs for people who don't share your faith in AGW theory, or don't believe with sufficient conviction to embrace the methodolgy. I'm disgusted by the fact that the national discussion in these times is over who pays for the condom jar. Nice try at changing the subject. Too bad nobody is dumb enough to fall for it. Now back to you trying to use a 4 syllable word to call women who are on the pill sluts.

DomKen -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 4:28:55 PM)
The weasel has "apologized" in that great tradition of weasel worded notpologies. http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/03/03/a_statement_from_rush Pathetic

Fightdirecto -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 5:04:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen The weasel has "apologized" in that great tradition of weasel worded notpologies. http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/03/03/a_statement_from_rush Pathetic If he hadn't lost several major sponsors and may be losing several more - he probably wouldn't have even made this "apology". ABC News quote: Four sponsors have severed ties with Rush Limbaugh’s radio show after the outspoken host called law student Sandra Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute.” National advertisers LegalZoom, Quicken Loans and Sleep Number along with West Coast ad buyer The Sleep Train announced this week they were pulling all advertisements. “We don’t condone negative comments directed toward any group. In response, we are currently pulling our ads from Rush with Rush Limbaugh,” Sleep Train wrote on Twitter... The California-based Sleep Train has enjoyed a relationship with Limbaugh since it opened its first store in 1985. The Hollywood Gossip quote: Moreover, nine companies - including Legal Zoom, Citrix Success, Heart and Body Extract, AutoZone and Quicken Loans - have pulled ads from Limbaugh's show. And for those of you that refuse to believe anything unless it comes from a Right-wing source, The Drudge Report confirms this: The Drudge Report

Fightdirecto -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 5:10:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Fightdirecto But if Limbaugh, or Beck or Coulter make a statement about a government policy (for example) that gets a generally negative public reaction, conservatives on Internet Forums and in Letters To The Editor or on their TV Channel (Fox News) claim that it's just Limbaugh's or Beck's or Coulter's opinion and not the position of all American conservatives? Confirmed: ABC News quote: Rick Santorum said Limbaugh was just being an entertainer.

Raiikun -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 5:16:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead if you're talking about electioneering for three republicans 1) Reagan...there is no 2 and 3. (He said he voted for Bush, no mention of electioneering for him.) Noting of course, you said "three republicans", not "a republican in three elections." Reagan was a separate republican in each election. That's how your political system works. Funny, I saw him as the same person who was elected twice.

Owner59 -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 5:41:22 PM)
The only person that "destroyed Joe the Plumber" was Joe the Plumber. All you had to do was ask him a question or let him speak and he looked like an imbecile. He had the anti-gov-code-words down pretty pat tho,pretending to a victim of it.When in fact...... he was a tax-owing leach on the system......and just to dumb to defend the code-phrases he used, when he was pressed to. I don`t see any reason why anyone should be able to say something whacked in puplic and not have to answer about it....in public. The public has a right and deserves to know. And the willingly ignorant are going to blame the "the media`s" finding that out he was a shmuck?!?!!...God....being that pathetic must really suck..... Joe`s only claim to fame and skill-set was/is being a victim of the liberal media monster.But in con-land.......... that`s all the credibility one needs to be a leader. I mean...... just look at all the hissie-fits the cons went through when Katie Couric asked Sarah Palin what magazines she read......a real "gotcha-question there.........lol Jeezz...imagine if fucks-news limited their questions/stories to what mags the president read.......kinda tame .....compared to the terrorist-pal-commie-Muslim-radial-foreigner-yada-yada the president received. And THEY are claiming to be the victims?!

Hillwilliam -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 7:01:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: Do ordinary right wingers in the US actually admire such despicable qualities? Are they so insecure that they require reassurance from such a dubious source? no and no Serious question, boi. Would you consider yourself a Right Winger or a Conservative? I don't see a whole lot of difference between the two. As an old school conservative who thinks the Religious Right is scum of the earth, I see a huge amount of difference.

Owner59 -> RE: The Voice of American Conservatism? (3/3/2012 7:09:45 PM)
It was inevitable that old-school conservatives and neo-conservatives would be viewed as the same.... as soon as neo-cons/bush-cheney took over the party.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875