OT:Rush Limbaugh

[Rockindeano]

You shouldn't post Deano when you're uninformed. "Barack The Magic Negro" is simply a parody of an LA Times piece TITLED "Obama, The Magic Negro."

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la- ... ion-center

Rush is simply making fun, as well he should have. The messiah complex throuhout the campaign was a bit much for some of us.

Deano is right.
The LA Times piece (which, mind you, was written by a black man) simply gave Rush the plausible deniability to engage in his usual race baiting.
Back when he went under the DJ name "Jeff Christie" he even told a black caller to "take the bone out of your nose."

Took you long enough to bail me out, err, validate my points.

Listen, it is no secret Limbaugh is a closet racist. I say that matter of factly. He is a coward, for being a closet racist. I would respect him a lot more if he just came out and said, "We are a party of Nigger haters." It has to kill this blob of shit to have Steele running the party. Fortunately for Dems, Steele is about as smart as stevew2 is literate, so opposing parties and political factions have absolutely nothing to worry about.

Calling Mayor Nagin "Mayor Nigger" oops, o well, you got it out there Rush boy.

Then his slam on "black quarterbacks not being smart enough to well, be a NFL QB." He is really what America is not to supposed tobe about, and I would say 90% of the GOP is a direct mirror image of this piece of shit.

[RedWingFan]

To me that shows Dumbaugh's true colors.

True colors? The guy is shit brown. Go listen to his song he played ad nauseum for weeks..."Barack the magic Negro." Classy guy I tell ya. Almost as classy as the Fox News cartoonist laughing out loud at his recently drawn toon of a Monkey being shot(yes, Obama was supposed to be that dead monkey).

I just don't see how people can proudly proclaim to be a conservative in the name of Rush Limbaugh and Fox News. Garbage, both of them.

Check that again. Rush said in his view Pelosi is the one who would be the monkey. Nice of YOU to equate Obama with the monkey though.
It wasn't Rush who said Obama wasn't black enough, or that he didn't have slave blood. All those accusations came from libs. Rush just loves pointing out parodying all the racism of the left. Then you guys squeal like stuck pigs and blame Rush for bringing attention to it like he's the racist.

Then his slam on "black quarterbacks not being smart enough to well, be a NFL QB." He is really what America is not to supposed tobe about, and I would say 90% of the GOP is a direct mirror image of this piece of shit.

Wow, when are you claiming he said this?

[Voyager]

No one takes Dumbaugh seriously anyway so it doesn't matter. Like the RNC Chairman stated so correctly, Rush is an entertainer... similar to Jimmy Kimmel but from the Religious Right. No one pays any serious attention to him that I know of. The only reason he is on the news is due to his bullshit drama. Three months from now he will probably on another Oxycontin binge and end up in a fucking rehab.

[conversationpc]

No one takes Dumbaugh seriously anyway so it doesn't matter. Like the RNC Chairman stated so correctly, Rush is an entertainer... similar to Jimmy Kimmel but from the Religious Right. No one pays any serious attention to him that I know of. The only reason he is on the news is due to his bullshit drama. Three months from now he will probably on another Oxycontin binge and end up in a fucking rehab.

Rush is not from the religious right.

As I've said numerous times on here, I'm not a Limbaugh fan at all. I've tried three or four times to listen to his program and have not been able to finish listening to the whole thing if even half of it. Regardless, lots of people pay serious attention to him. To say that no one pays attention to him is just factually inaccurate.

[conversationpc]

Then his slam on "black quarterbacks not being smart enough to well, be a NFL QB."

If I recall correctly, that's not at all what he said. His point was that the press was overly enamored with McNabb for the simple fact that he is a black QB which, at the time the comment was made, was much more unusual than it is now.

Here's what he said...

"I think what we've had here is a little social concern in the NFL. The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well,'' Limbaugh said. "There is a little hope invested in McNabb, and he got a lot of credit for the performance of this team that he didn't deserve. The defense carried this team."

Nothing racist at all about that.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Rush is not from the religious right.

No, but he does talk about morality and losing the battle for America's culture.
Which is about as rich coming from the thrice-married, drug abusing, alleged sex tourist, Limbaugh, as it is coming from Bill "butt plug" O'Reilly.

[conversationpc]

Rush is not from the religious right.

No, but he does talk about morality and losing the battle for America's culture.
Which is about as rich coming from the thrice-married, drug abusing, alleged sex tourist, Limbaugh, as it is coming from Bill "butt plug" O'Reilly.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Flashback: Carville Wanted Bush to Fail

The press never reported that Democratic strategist James Carville said he wanted President Bush to fail before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. But a feeding frenzy ensued when radio host Rush Limbaugh recently said he wanted President Obama to fail.

By Bill Sammon

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

On the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, just minutes before learning of the terrorist attacks on America, Democratic strategist James Carville was hoping for President Bush to fail, telling a group of Washington reporters: "I certainly hope he doesn't succeed."

Carville was joined by Democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg, who seemed encouraged by a survey he had just completed that revealed public misgivings about the newly minted president.

"We rush into these focus groups with these doubts that people have about him, and I'm wanting them to turn against him," Greenberg admitted.

The pollster added with a chuckle of disbelief: "They don't want him to fail. I mean, they think it matters if the president of the United States fails."

Minutes later, as news of the terrorist attacks reached the hotel conference room where the Democrats were having breakfast with the reporters, Carville announced: "Disregard everything we just said! This changes everything!"

The press followed Carville's orders, never reporting his or Greenberg's desire for Bush to fail. The omission was understandable at first, as reporters were consumed with chronicling the new war on terror. But months and even years later, the mainstream media chose to never resurrect those controversial sentiments, voiced by the Democratic Party's top strategists, that Bush should fail.

That omission stands in stark contrast to the feeding frenzy that ensued when radio host Rush Limbaugh recently said he wanted President Obama to fail. The press devoted wall-to-wall coverage to the remark, suggesting that Limbaugh and, by extension, conservative Republicans, were unpatriotic.

"The most influential Republican in the United States today, Mr. Rush Limbaugh, said he did not want President Obama to succeed," Carville railed on CNN recently. "He is the daddy of this Republican Congress."

Limbaugh, a staunch conservative, emphasized that he is rooting for the failure of Obama's liberal policies.

"The difference between Carville and his ilk and me is that I care about what happens to my country," Limbaugh told Fox on Wednesday. "I am not saying what I say for political advantage. I oppose actions, such as Obama's socialist agenda, that hurt my country.

"I deal in principles, not polls," Limbaugh added. "Carville and people like him live and breathe political exploitation. This is all a game to them. It's not a game to me. I am concerned about the well-being and survival of our nation. When has Carville ever advocated anything that would benefit the country at the expense of his party?"

Carville told Politico that focusing on Limbaugh is a deliberate strategy aimed at undermining Republicans.

"The television cameras just can't stay away from him," he said. "Our strategy depends on him keeping talking, and I think we're going to succeed."

Greenberg added: "He's driving the Republican reluctance to deal with Obama, which Americans want."

In 2006, 51 percent of Democrats wanted Bush to fail, according to a FOX News/Opinion Dynamics poll.

Umm, the very first sentence puts the difference into sharp focus: "Carville said he wanted President Bush to fail before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks."
At that time, Bush had yet to handle any global crisis on the scale of what Obama is wrestling with.
The first recession hadn't started yet, and the towers still stood tall.
Many have said Obama is dealing with the economic equivalent of 9-11.
If that's the case, why can't the opposition party pay him the same sober respect the Dems initially did for Bush?
As Carville stated in your own article: "Disregard everything we just said! This changes everything!"
Difference is, the Repubs are conducting themselves as if nothing's changed - as if Obama's actions personally wrought this global meltdown.

[conversationpc]

If that's the case, why can't the opposition party pay him the same sober respect the Dems initially did for Bush?

That never happened, except briefly following 9/11. The Dems thought he had gained the Presidency through "foul craft", to quote Saruman from LOTR, and hated him for it.

[Jana]

Rush is not from the religious right.

No, but he does talk about morality and losing the battle for America's culture.
Which is about as rich coming from the thrice-married, drug abusing, alleged sex tourist, Limbaugh, as it is coming from Bill "butt plug" O'Reilly.

Priceless,

[The_Noble_Cause]

That never happened, except briefly following 9/11. The Dems thought he had gained the Presidency through "foul craft", to quote Saruman from LOTR, and hated him for it.

I'm talking about after 9-11.
FactFinder's article shows that when faced with a grave threat at our doorstep, Carville abandoned all rhetorical bombs and was ready to take up arms with the President.
No such luck with Limbaugh and the zero hour crisis this President unwittingly finds himself in.
That's the difference between a patriot and a scumbag.

[conversationpc]

No such luck with Limbaugh and the zero hour crisis this President unwittingly finds himself in.
That's the difference between a patriot and a scumbag.

There's a huge difference and be careful what "scumbag" you point to since three of those fingers could indicate yourself.

If someone thinks the policies of the sitting President are harmful to the country long-term, don't you think they SHOULD speak out against them?

[The_Noble_Cause]

There's a huge difference and be careful what "scumbag" you point to since three of those fingers could indicate yourself.

Really?
After 9-11, I seem to recall both Dems and Repubs alike rallying behind the President and his policy to invade Afghanistan.
Good to know Americans can unite around ho-hum things like launching hellfire missiles into mud huts, but the idea of rebuilding roads and bridges is simply unacceptable to our laissez-faire spirit.
Just what the fuck is wrong with this picture.

If someone thinks the policies of the sitting President are harmful to the country long-term, don't you think they SHOULD speak out against them?

Limbaugh and his ilk portray everything Obama does as harmful, just on the virtue of it having been done by a Democrat.
When you’re talking about people whose job is to feign indignant outrage 15 hours a day, five days a week, genuine thoughts, beliefs, and passions do not matter.

[conversationpc]

There's a huge difference and be careful what "scumbag" you point to since three of those fingers could indicate yourself.

Really?
After 9-11, I seem to recall both Dems and Repubs alike rallying behind the President and his policy to invade Afghanistan.
Good to know Americans can unite around ho-hum things like launching hellfire missiles into mud huts, but the idea of rebuilding roads and bridges is simply unacceptable to our laissez-faire spirit.
Just what the fuck is wrong with this picture.

Ah, selective memory, I see. You know darn well that you're not telling the whole truth here. NONE of us here on the forum have a problem with spending money on fixing infrastructure and you'd be hard-pressed to find any nationally-known conservative who is against it as well. The problem isn't with spending on that stuff but on all the other pet & pork projects that have been crammed into these last couple of bills in the libs' orgasmic frenzy of spending.

When you’re talking about people whose job is to feign indignant outrage 15 hours a day, five days a week, genuine thoughts, beliefs, and passions do not matter.

I'm hearing Twilight Zone music in the back of my head, 'cause this sounds exactly like what I was thinking of you.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Ah, selective memory, I see. You know darn well that you're not telling the whole truth here. NONE of us here on the forum have a problem with spending money on fixing infrastructure and you'd be hard-pressed to find any nationally-known conservative who is against it as well.

Ok.
Let's start with Reagan...
Sure he's long dead, but that hasn't stopped you guys from invoking his hallowed name every twelve seconds.
Part of his 'starve the beast' ideology choked federal funding on infrastructure.
The American Society of Civil Engineers has said our infrastructure has never rebounded since (for the 2009 current year, they rank U.S. infrastructure a cumulative grade of D).

For a more recent example, let's look to Repub Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota where the bridge fell down.
Despite knowing the sorry shape of his state's infrastructure, he vetoed gas taxes twice.
What do gas taxes fund again?
Oh right, infrastructure.

Say, wasn't the standard bearer of your party, Jon McCain, calling for a freeze on gas taxes during his 2008 presidential campaign?
A freeze which, by all accounts, would've deprived the gov't of some nine billion in infrastructure spending?

The problem isn't with spending on that stuff but on all the other pet & pork projects that have been crammed into these last couple of bills in the libs' orgasmic frenzy of spending.

Earmarks make up at most 1-2 percent of the entire bill.
It's a big deal, but again, not really a big deal.

When you’re talking about people whose job is to feign indignant outrage 15 hours a day, five days a week, genuine thoughts, beliefs, and passions do not matter.

I'm hearing Twilight Zone music in the back of my head, 'cause this sounds exactly like what I was thinking of you.

If you wish to believe the schooner wagon snake oil bullshit they're peddling go right ahead.
I hear your personal oracle of truthiness, Glenn Beck, is now equating Obama's stem cell executive order with eugenics, harvesting organs, and a certain toothbrush 'stached German dictator again.
And I bet you think that's just great, don't you?

[conversationpc]

Ok.
Let's start with Reagan...
Sure he's long dead, but that hasn't stopped you guys from invoking his hallowed name every twelve seconds.
Part of his 'starve the beast' ideology choked federal funding on infrastructure.
The American Society of Civil Engineers has said our infrastructure has never rebounded since (for the 2009 current year, they rank U.S. infrastructure a cumulative grade of D).

For a more recent example, let's look to Repub Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota where the bridge fell down.
Despite knowing the sorry shape of his state's infrastructure, he vetoed gas taxes twice.
What do gas taxes fund again?
Oh right, infrastructure.

Say, wasn't the standard bearer of your party, Jon McCain, calling for a freeze on gas taxes during his 2008 presidential campaign?
A freeze which, by all accounts, would've deprived the gov't of some nine billion in infrastructure spending?

None of those things mentioned indicates any of those people were against funding infrastructure but nice diversion nonetheless. This is akin to spineless libs like yourself who say conservatives want old people to suffer and children to die if your favorite liberal projects aren't funded as you see fit. There are alternatives ways to do things rather than to just blindly throw money at everything (something the last Republican Congress was all too good at...).

I hear your personal oracle of truthiness, Glenn Beck, is now equating Obama's stem cell executive order with eugenics, harvesting organs, and a certain toothbrush 'stached German dictator again.
And I bet you think that's just great, don't you?

If the sole purpose of the embryo is simply for experimentation only, then I would agree with that statement. Producing a human life, which is what an embryo is scientifically, simply to perform these experiments on is nothing more than eugenics. Perhaps the caterwauling voices in your head can understand that bit of "truthiness"?

[The_Noble_Cause]

None of those things mentioned indicates any of those people were against funding infrastructure but nice diversion nonetheless. This is akin to spineless libs like yourself who say conservatives want old people to suffer and children to die if your favorite liberal projects aren't funded as you see fit.

Ok, well then you've obviously yet to reconcile the ramifications of your own ideology.
There is a direct cause-and-effect between the GOP mantra of "drown the gov't in a bathtub" and our infrastructure being in the shitter.

There are alternatives ways to do things rather than to just blindly throw money at everything (something the last Republican Congress was all too good at...).

Like what?
Tax cuts?
Tax cuts never built jack.
How much of the infrastructure that still stands today is a result of FDR's socialist programs like the WPA?

If the sole purpose of the embryo is simply for experimentation only, then I would agree with that statement. Producing a human life, which is what an embryo is scientifically, simply to perform these experiments on is nothing more than eugenics. Perhaps the caterwauling voices in your head can understand that bit of "truthiness"?

The trial and error of creating and flushing embryos has been ongoing at fertility clinics for years.
Anyone who equates the savage butchery of Dr. Mengele to extending the lives of millions of handicapped people is beneath contempt.

[conversationpc]

The trial and error of creating and flushing embryos has been ongoing at fertility clinics for years.
Anyone who equates the savage butchery of Dr. Mengele to extending the lives of millions of handicapped people is beneath contempt.

You seem to be the resident expert on all things contemptible so I'll defer to you on that one. Regardless, when was the last time stem cell research extended anyone's life? I'm not saying the potential isn't there but, the last I researched this issue, scientists were saying that non-fetal stem cells held much more promise than the crap shoot that was fetal stem cell research. Since then, I've learned that fetal-like stem cells can be manufactured from other types of cells, so is fetal stem cell research really even necessary anymore or is it just a political buzzword that people like yourself use to demonize the opposition?

[conversationpc]

None of those things mentioned indicates any of those people were against funding infrastructure but nice diversion nonetheless. This is akin to spineless libs like yourself who say conservatives want old people to suffer and children to die if your favorite liberal projects aren't funded as you see fit.

Ok, well then you've obviously yet to reconcile the ramifications of your own ideology.
There is a direct cause-and-effect between the GOP mantra of "drown the gov't in a bathtub" and our infrastructure being in the shitter.

The problem isn't that the government doesn't have money to fund infrastructure but, again, that they've been wasting money on tons of other things that shouldn't have had priority. It's blatantly OBVIOUS. Republicans and Democrats alike get into office with good intentions and, one after another, fall prey to the same disease...Overspending.

[The_Noble_Cause]

You seem to be the resident expert on all things contemptible so I'll defer to you on that one. Regardless, when was the last time stem cell research extended anyone's life? I'm not saying the potential isn't there but, the last I researched this issue, scientists were saying that non-fetal stem cells held much more promise than the crap shoot that was fetal stem cell research.

Excellent point.
Why explore every possible avenue to beat diseases ranging from cancer to alzheimers when we can limit it to just one.

Since then, I've learned that fetal-like stem cells can be manufactured from other types of cells, so is fetal stem cell research really even necessary anymore...

Ahh, "fetal-like", therein lies the giveaway.
You know perfectly well that the scientific consensus is that embryonic are more flexible and live longer.

...or is it just a political buzzword that people like yourself use to demonize the opposition?

I'm not the one equating science to genocide.

[The_Noble_Cause]

The problem isn't that the government doesn't have money to fund infrastructure but, again...

Nobody said there wasn't money.
It's that spending in the interest of the greater good goes against the "bathtub drowning" catechism of the radical right (which has swallowed the Repub party whole).
In its current fringe state, Eisenhower's interstate higway system would never have gotten passed by this GOP.
It's the same reason why something perfectly sensible (and long overdue) like a high speed rail line becomes a cheap laugh line for Bobby Jindal.

[conversationpc]

Ahh, "fetal-like", therein lies the giveaway.
You know perfectly well that the scientific consensus is that embryonic are more flexible and live longer.

Like I said, the last I researched this issue, the consensus was that non-fetal stem cells held much more promise. Anyway, this is from the International Society for Stem Cell Research...

While it has been theorized that some adult stem cells may have a broader potential to form different cell types than was previously suspected (for example, cells from the bone marrow may contribute to regeneration of damaged livers, hearts and other organs), this is highly controversial in the scientific community. Currently, it is not clear whether stem cells from adult tissues or umbilical cord blood are truly pluripotent. The comparison of human embryonic stem cells to adult stem cells is currently a very active area of research.

[The_Noble_Cause]

While it has been theorized that some adult stem cells may have a broader potential to form different cell types than was previously suspected (for example, cells from the bone marrow may contribute to regeneration of damaged livers, hearts and other organs), this is highly controversial in the scientific community. Currently, it is not clear whether stem cells from adult tissues or umbilical cord blood are truly pluripotent. The comparison of human embryonic stem cells to adult stem cells is currently a very active area of research.

Ok...do both.