YASNY Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 18, 2007 -> 01:04 AM) You're right. They don't need anyone making up bulls***. And for every made up story that you find from the left, you can find made up stories, ginned statistics, or complete and total spin on the right too. Let's be honest. Rush Limbaugh meant more than that one person when he said phony soldiers. He meant any critic of the Iraq war who served. Your service doesn't matter to Rush if he can score a cheap point off you on the air. Because he's in the business of making entertainment, not getting people elected. And right now, that includes making fun of war protesters. You're a mind reader now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 20, 2007 Author Share Posted October 20, 2007 QUOTE(YASNY @ Oct 20, 2007 -> 10:55 AM) You're a mind reader now. As is everyone who claims he meant only one guy, or only one group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 20, 2007 -> 10:09 AM) As is everyone who claims he meant only one guy, or only one group. I don't KNOW exactly what he meant. But I'm not going to make a statement as fact the meant this or that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 20, 2007 Author Share Posted October 20, 2007 QUOTE(YASNY @ Oct 20, 2007 -> 11:12 AM) I don't KNOW exactly what he meant. But I'm not going to make a statement as fact the meant this or that. You don't have to, plenty of Rush's fans and supporters have already done so. BTW, RUSH is still not in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 QUOTE(Texsox @ Oct 20, 2007 -> 10:19 AM) You don't have to, plenty of Rush's fans and supporters have already done so. BTW, RUSH is still not in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. I'm not speaking for Rush's fans. I'm speaking for myself. Yet, like the comment I replied to, many of Rush's critics have also done so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 QUOTE(YASNY @ Oct 20, 2007 -> 11:55 AM) You're a mind reader now. Nope, I'm putting two and two together. He regularly attacks veterans' service whose opinions he doesn't agree with. He did it with Paul Hackett, he did it with John Kerry, and he did it with the guy in the Vote Vets ad. The best part of the phony soliders thing was that, he trotted out his own phony soldier a while back. He had a caller on the show, a phony officer claiming to represent units of the military that doesn't exist to get his own point of view across and even after the Pentagon contacts his show to tell him that this person and unit do not exist, he refused to rule out the possibility that he was talking to a soldier in Iraq. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 20, 2007 Author Share Posted October 20, 2007 To be fair, Rush says stuff on his show, a lot of stuff. Could he have a slip of the tongue? Could he misspeak? Of course. It is up to the audience to decide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 This whole letter fiasco sort of represents a good view of the difference between liberals and conservatives. The conservative (Rush)thinks of a free-market way of raising private funds to aid a worthwhile causes and backs his commitment with his own money. The liberal (Reid)asks other people to donate funds, doesn't donate any of his own money, and tries to take credit for the generosity of others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Oct 20, 2007 -> 04:21 PM) This whole letter fiasco sort of represents a good view of the difference between liberals and conservatives. The conservative (Rush)thinks of a free-market way of raising private funds to aid a worthwhile causes and backs his commitment with his own money. The liberal (Reid)asks other people to donate funds, doesn't donate any of his own money, and tries to take credit for the generosity of others. You should become a house painter. You'd be done in seconds with a brush that broad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 How funny that that is exactly what I am doing today, painting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted October 21, 2007 Share Posted October 21, 2007 QUOTE(YASNY @ Oct 20, 2007 -> 10:53 AM) I think 'rightist' is a legit tem. In fact, I saw it somewhere in the forum a few minutes ago. Don't ask me where, because I am too damn lazy to look for it. I guess I just dislike that they are both used like insults, and that it further amplifies this run for the extremes that out political system has been in for a while. This while so much of the public seems to want someone more centrist, reasonable. Leftist and Rightist sounds like people who can only turn one direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 21, 2007 Author Share Posted October 21, 2007 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 21, 2007 -> 09:42 AM) I guess I just dislike that they are both used like insults, and that it further amplifies this run for the extremes that out political system has been in for a while. This while so much of the public seems to want someone more centrist, reasonable. Leftist and Rightist sounds like people who can only turn one direction. I used it in response to a Nuke post, not because I find the term useful, but to highlight the silliness of leftist and rightist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted October 21, 2007 Share Posted October 21, 2007 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 21, 2007 -> 08:42 AM) I guess I just dislike that they are both used like insults, and that it further amplifies this run for the extremes that out political system has been in for a while. This while so much of the public seems to want someone more centrist, reasonable. Leftist and Rightist sounds like people who can only turn one direction. I don't use it as an insult and have never considered it as so. Leftist, to me, describes a person's political outlook, like conservationalist describes a person's view on the environment. It has never crossed my mind that the term could be considered an insult and I don't really understand why it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted October 21, 2007 Share Posted October 21, 2007 QUOTE(YASNY @ Oct 21, 2007 -> 12:28 PM) I don't use it as an insult and have never considered it as so. Leftist, to me, describes a person's political outlook, like conservationalist describes a person's view on the environment. It has never crossed my mind that the term could be considered an insult and I don't really understand why it is. Maybe 'leftists' have something to feel guilty about, which is why they consider it an insult? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted October 21, 2007 Share Posted October 21, 2007 QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Oct 21, 2007 -> 12:02 PM) Maybe 'leftists' have something to feel guilty about, which is why they consider it an insult? I think I figured it out. Catagorize anybody as anything and it's politically incorrect. We all know how leftists feel about politcal incorrectness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted October 21, 2007 Share Posted October 21, 2007 QUOTE(YASNY @ Oct 21, 2007 -> 12:28 PM) I don't use it as an insult and have never considered it as so. Leftist, to me, describes a person's political outlook, like conservationalist describes a person's view on the environment. It has never crossed my mind that the term could be considered an insult and I don't really understand why it is. You probably don't use it that way. Others here do. I just think its a poor term. But maybe that's because I have never fit well in either category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted October 21, 2007 Share Posted October 21, 2007 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 21, 2007 -> 12:43 PM) You probably don't use it that way. Others here do. I just think its a poor term. But maybe that's because I have never fit well in either category. Just curious. What do you think aboutt the term 'neocon'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted October 21, 2007 Share Posted October 21, 2007 QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Oct 21, 2007 -> 01:02 PM) Maybe 'leftists' have something to feel guilty about, which is why they consider it an insult? Maybe 'neocons' have something to feel guilty about, which is why they consider it an insult? Cheap labels cheapen the polemics. "The candidate can choose from two platforms, but remember -- no substitutions. For example, do you support universal health care? Then you must also want a ban on assault weapons. Pro limited government? Congratulations, you are also anti-abortion. Luckily, all human opinion falls neatly into one of two clearly defined camps. Thus the two party system elegantly reflects the bichromatic rainbow of American political thought." - Jon Stewart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 21, 2007 Author Share Posted October 21, 2007 QUOTE(Alpha Dog @ Oct 21, 2007 -> 01:02 PM) Maybe 'leftists' have something to feel guilty about, which is why they consider it an insult? Kind of like calling someone a dog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 molehill ---> mountain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 QUOTE(YASNY @ Oct 21, 2007 -> 01:46 PM) Just curious. What do you think aboutt the term 'neocon'? Eh, I am not even 100% sure what that refers to. Seems like its used to talk about the current power base within the GOP - the religiously-motivated social conservatives. But since it just means "new conservatives", it seems like it would change over time. Its really not worth all this fuss, I just don't like some of the terms used. I think we've beaten this horse pretty thoroughly at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts