I want to see the first Hillary supporter with the ethics to step up and denounce what Carville did by calling Richardson Judas

Not everyone at once now

Just denounce, you don't even need to reject ; )

Ed,

There will be some who will say yes the Clinton's wanted Richardson's endorsement but Hillary will prevail without it and there will be others who will deny the Clintons desire for Richardson's endorsement (forgetting the Super Bowl picture) and say it doesn't matter. I will wait with you for those who say Carville was so freaking out of line that both he and the Clinton should be ashamed.

It's true the Clinton's gave Bill Richardson his break on the national stage but he did the job! So while they opened the door (like Affirmative Action does), HE DID THE JOB! Do the Clinton now want to take credit for Bill Richardson doing his job?

How the world changes Pearl and how it stays the same

I am disgusted with the campaign Hillary has run and I refuse to hold my nose and pull the lever for her

Wright hype by damned, I think Obama is still going to pull this off and change will have a chance, McCain wants no part of that wave

"still sporting the beard that he grew on vacation when he was down there somewhere in the Caribbean."

Oh Rush....... having flashbacks are we?

Step right up

No pushing, no shoving

More hot air from the biggest bloviator on talk radio. Anyone have a blimp that they need aired up.

Agreed, Limpaugh is fat piece of human filth

And Richardson is no Judas, Hillary should ask Carville to leave the campaign

Limbaugh still has not come clean about his arrest in t he company of a male prostitute in the '70s, when he was working for a Pittsburgh radio station under the name "Jeff Christie".

C'mon, Rush - I know that either you or someone in your organization monitors MMFA.  The truth shall set you free, and the dittoheads have a right to know about your double life.

Carville is a poopy head!

Can we move along Eden?

To what?

To McCain running an ad, maybe flashing a picture of Richardson with Obama and adding audio of Carville, a Democratic strategist calling him Judas

How far is too far for you?

And will you apply that same length to the Neocon nutsacks that are killing our kids, destroying the middle class and erasing our rights ?

Whats your pound of flesh? How much pain and self disgust do I have to experience? How many possibly decieved people do I have to declare evil and beyond the pale? Must I be reduced to a personality that only sees the black and white. How am I then different from a neo con? Is it because unlike them, I know the truth, so the resultant pain and suffering is all for a good cause?

No Sale!

So Why are you here ?

To coment on the media. I'm still a fed gov worker for 6 more days, I don't politic for candidates. Doing so is not what I come here to see.

Ego I suppose there is no conversation to be had with you. Ta ta.

Well, don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya

i said i did not like carville's comments.  but i don't see what some ad of richardson with obama, and carville calling him judas, is going to mean to  voters this fall, other than having them scratch their heads.  what mccain might show is pictures of obama and tony rezko, now on trial.  obama said rezko did not do him any favors.  actually the house that obama bought had been on one piece of property, and the sellers split it up, leaving the house with a very small side yard.  so obama brought rezko in on the deal, and rezko bought the lot.  obama did pay for the strip of land, but rezko paid for a 14,000 dollar fence to split the two properties.  and all this was going on while rezko was under investigation, a fact obama admits.  that might appear in an ad, and it's better to discuss it now.  [and matt lauer went on his usual hillary attack fest on the today show this morning.]  

Regardless of anything what Carville said is out of bounds

And do you really want to bring up shady land deals or anything shady for that matter when you are endorsing the Clintons ?

And do you really want to bring up shady land deals or anything shady for that matter when you are endorsing the Clintons ?

Yes. Seventy million dollars worth of investigations, and all they could find were a few BJ's.

They lost money on the "land deal," in case you forgot about or couldn't understand the Pillsbury Report.

Everything else was lies, exactly of the type you are implying here. 

Ten years later, you haven't learned a thing, and probably never will. 

WOW EASY

You just post without reading, in no way do I infer that there are any skeletons in the Clinton closet, as far as I know they are clean as any other dirty politician.  What I'm saying is that if Hill wants to drag the discourse down to that level against Obama in her scorched Earth strategy then she is opening Pandora's box as far as the MSM goes.  Its just a subject she'd do better to avoid.

That said the thread is about how Clinton did Richardson dirty through her unapologetic subjugate Carville and she's not apologizing either although Wolfson sort of is.

So was it a warning to other superdelegates? All or nothing ?  And if not then why throw Richardson under the bus like that ?

See, it might be EASY TO REFUTE WINGNUTS, BUT ITS HARD TO SEE THE TRUTH...I've been a Democrat my whole life and I am a US citizen and I will godddamned if this party is going down the same road as the Republicans while we all sit silent and let it happen.

But thanks for stopping by

"do you really want to bring up shady land deals".  are those your words?

Look up

so square those words with the assertion that you are not trying to infer anything about the clintons. 

What part of

You just post without reading, in no way do I infer that there are any skeletons in the Clinton closet, as far as I know they are clean as any other dirty politician.  What I'm saying is that if Hill wants to drag the discourse down to that level against Obama in her scorched Earth strategy then she is opening Pandora's box as far as the MSM goes.  Its just a subject she'd do better to avoid.

Is unclear ?

Obama was running a clean campaign and all was quiet until Hill started to lose, then the negatives started flying...so far she is has been willing to have an ally called Judas and all I'm saying is if she goes the Rezko route the MSM will reair every bit of the Clinton era and it won't matter if its not true...it'll be what people are talking about

 

what part of my question was unclear?  i said square the words about a shady land deal with your assertion that you were not trying to infer anything about the clintons.  i did not need to reread your post.  i asked what shady land deal are you talking about, if not the clintons.   is that clear?

Whitewater, obviously.

Again, note well, I don't belive that dog hunts, that does not mean I think the MSM won't wall to wall it anyway if Rezko is the next slip down the muddy campaign for the Queen.

 

obviously.  i thought so, and so did easy to refute wingnuts.  and that is what he responded to.  and you jumped all over him and said you were not trying to infer anything about the clintons.  which was clearly not the case.  you were. 

And I qoute EasyWayOut "Ten years later, you haven't learned a thing, and probably never will. 

Now ME, I took that tired cat to the woodshed for questioning my competency, and the fact that he hadn't read my post because it is tortured logic to think I was suggesting the Clinton's were dirty...I said they were clean as far as I know, sheesh

Now please, tell me you're knocking on MY door with something better than this...I've made many unrefuted points

the only "tortured logic" is you trying to claim you were not trying to infer the clintons were involved in a shady land deal.  you said it, he responded.  

He responded blindly

I said they were clean, its an exact qoute

Hell, I even said as far as I know

Anything to say about the point ?  Dirty Campaigns ?  Hill saying who her pastor would not be ?  How see mispoke on snipers ?  How Carville called fellow Dem Richardson Judas ?

uh no, you did not say they were "clean" in the post he responded to.   that was in the post in which you responded to him.  since he only has the one post, clearly you are misrepresenting the conversation. 

Regardless of anything what Carville said is out of bounds

And do you really want to bring up shady land deals or anything shady for that matter when you are endorsing the Clintons ?

 

• - edenscape246494 / Tuesday March 25, 2008 8:06:37 AM EDT
• - Reply to this comment / Flag this comment

• And do you really want to bring up shady land deals or anything shady for that matter when you are endorsing the Clintons ?

  Yes. Seventy million dollars worth of investigations, and all they could find were a few BJ's.

  They lost money on the "land deal," in case you forgot about or couldn't understand the Pillsbury Report.

  Everything else was lies, exactly of the type you are implying here. 

  Ten years later, you haven't learned a thing, and probably never will. 

So I got a little threaded, the point still stands, I was accused of something as opposed to being asked for clarification..besides why answer YES, that makes no sense unless you approve of the Hillary scorched Earth campaign style in which case my further posts answer to that

Again, are you enjoying the dirty politics?

I will also concede I was operating under the possibly unfair assumption the article and the thread had been read up to that point before aspersions were cast

I'll add IMHO that folk should read the dammned threads before spouting off

i agree, you should do that.

But people don't...then they take one snippet, which is a response to something else and then they spout off without reading your previous posts that provide the context

Not that it prevents you from defending them anyway, but if you're gonna wear that cape and those tights I guess you might as well do something ME

"i got a little threaded".  in other words, you screwed up.  there was nothing out of context, one post followed the other.

Not exactly,

initially I was replying under the impression that it was you after reading the look up to my response to Easy...since you had more material to work with than Easy since he hadn't seen my reply I expanded the conversation, thus threaded after ad naseum replies about semantical parts of my argument as opposed to the many points on dirty politics you have yet to refute.

 

so you were "under the impression" you were replying to me when you weren't?  again, sounds like you need to take your own advice and read and know who and what you're replying to. 

what is this, dodgeball ?

at least you admit it.

Wait!

No, I got it...I misspoke ?

Can't hold that against me ; )

certainly not.  but you were the one insisting you didn't, and everyone else was misunderstanding you.

Well

I got it right in the book, I misspoke once in 12 years and I do say millions of words...

which doesn't explain your repeated insistence that you were being taken out of context.

You're right.  Eden's been on this board trashing Hillary for at least a month (if not more).  He's got nothing better to do.  I agree that Hillary's campaign hasn't been the cleanest, but damn, this is politics and as such, it's sometimes dirty.  Obama is a good candidate.  Hillary is a good candidate.  IMO, either would be a fantastic president, especially considering the alternative.  There shouldn't be figthing between members of the Democratic Party - especially to the point that Eden's taken it - to the level of black and white (and no, I don't mean racial).  It seems as though Eden's saying that if you vote for Hillary, you're not looking for change, you're not a real Democrat and that you're looking for a continuation of the current policies. 

Eden, you're sometimes worse than the right-wing media.  Your rants aside, people have the right to vote for whomever they want.  If you choose not to vote for Hillary (if she's the nominee), then you're the one who doesn't want change (as imho, a vote not cast for the Democratic nominee is the same as a vote cast for McCain.).  God knows I've held my nose and voted for a candidate that I didn't really support (Kerry), but I knew him to be infinitely better than the alternative.  Your refusal to pull the lever for Hillary (if she were to get the nomination) because you don't like her campaign is your business.  My point is this:  Hillary is better than McCain.  We disagree who is better between Hillary and Barack.  That matter will be settled in late summer.  You've already decided who to vote for in the general election before the nominee is decided.  You're a hypocrite.

COMMON

That about sums you up.  I've got a sense you're not as Liberal as you say, that or you're just a lazy one.  By election time we will have eight year olds in our midst that grew up post War on Terror.  Kids reared on a healthy diet of jingoism and Fox style news that never knew habeus corpus because it never existed in their time.

Yes, I think if we follow the GOP into the slime we may be able to scare the public into voting Hillary.  We can attack Obama because he is only where he is because he is black.  We can send people on TV and talk about Hussein and Cocaine and then fire them the next day.  We can talk about how Al Qaeda is watching this election.  We can run 3am ads.  We can have surrogates reminding the public that Barack only wins where the black folk are.  We can acknowledge the opposition candidates credentials over or rivals.  Hey, its all politics right?  Who cares?

Then we can harangue Obama over his pastor, and assail a friend that happened to endorse him as Judas

After the Obama wave has crashed we can attack McCain's age, his divorce, his possible affair, his mental health and his non white kid.  We can win, but then who the F are we???

You call me Troll because I hold my fellow Liberals to the same standard I hold these filthy neocons?  Meanwhile you have the support of Carlil and his fellow trolls that want us to attack each other as the primary drags on and on and on.

Yep, you're pretty Common, but you made no sense and if this is where you want us to go then you're no Liberal either

I can think of lots of nicknames for Carville.  "Poopy Head" didn't make my original list, but thanks for the addition!

I happen to like Carville.  Poopy-head didn't make my short list either.

Here is an important update on the need for us to consider only what the candidates have to say themselves and the verasity of those statements:

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/speech/view/?id=6553

as opposed to this type of garbage:

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/03/hillarys_balkan_adventures_par.html

 

Ah...this is called SATIRE...Kind of what Al Franken gets away with.  Of course, this is much funnier since there is a kernel of truth to it.

Not to mention the numerous examples of death wishes that leftists offer for Bush, Cheney and other Republicans.  That's OK of course since the folks spewing that hate are fellow COMRADES fighting the capitalist pigs

 

This is great Satire and I agree is not unfounded.  If you don't understand the context of Rush's comments you need to understand all the deaths related to the Clintons.  Here is a site to refresh some of your memories. http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/ARCHIVE/CLINTON_CHRONICLES.html

Go see snopes.com. Anything they haven't refuted?

Still pushing this stupidity which has been debunked over and over? IT not only wasnt good satire it was lying by implication and showing th Rush doesnt have a shred of decency and neither do you.

I don't think you have a right to comment on morality when you insult people for having an opinion and are just trying to exercise there right to free speech.  In addtion, trying to help you lost souls that are misguided.   I wish you the best.

What, no reverse vampires or pod people?

No its called being a lying jerk and a piece of human garbage. A Clinton friend of the family committed suicide and the Oxymoron will not stop pretending and pushing the lie that the Clintons killed him. No one with a shred of decency would do this OR call it satire.

Let's be fair, now. He's seeking the truth. There's no proof he ever found any.

No he isnt. Calling it satire is LUDICROUS. The ONLY way it would have been satire is if he were making FUN of those dumb enough to believe those Foster rumors. Show of hands everyone that believes THAT.

He wasn't just talking about Foster.  He was talking about all the people that were killed.  Look up all the associates that were killed mysteriously.  Of course there is no proof, but just suspecious events.  Suspecion is what makes this a great nation, so don't just blindly believe what is told to you. 

Quite correct:  IMPOSSIBLE to find any truth on this site.  The handle I've chosen is, in itself, SATIRE.  But I would not expect that to register on the dim bulb between your ears

No your name would be ironic. Since you are too stupid to recognize the truth if it ran you over with a lawnmower.

SOLON:  I was not saying you had the dim bulb

True but  you are saying there is no truth on this site. THAT is a lie. There is a LOT of truth on this site. A lot of hyperbole, a lot of many things but TRUTH is one of those things.

Now Now

You two know the rules

One Bridge   One Troll

 

3

Somebody dial 9 1 and we'll wait and see what happens next, its a Troll invasion

Could we at least request a few with some more current propaganda? Nothing more boring than outdated trolls.

And my own PSA: once again, an explanation of humor for conservatives- it doesn't start with a "kernel" of truth, but a big ol' solid foundation of truth. While there may be some things that are true coming out of the Oxymoron's mouth (ex: Bill Richardson is alive) he has failed at working any of these things into the joke, and instead has relied on long-debunked rumors that only the simplest of dittoheads believe.

But he knows his audience..

What does dialing 9 1 do?

Answer: Not a damn thing. It makes as much sense as the troll posts Eden has been making for a while now. 

Another drive by ?  Looks like I have a groupie

Take is easy wingnut, you were wrong the first time

You aren't right now either

Trolls?  Is name-calling the best you folks can do??

Oxymoron??  Is that a play on words?

You must have something better than that. 

Just enforcing the rules

One Bridge  One Troll

Stress tests, don'cha know

And what truth do you seek today?

THIS IS NOT A FORUM.  IT IS A PLACE TO MAKE COMMENTS ON THE ARTICLES.  GO ENFORCE SOME RULES WHERE THEY APPLY AND STOP TRYING TO PONTIFICATE ALL OVER THE PLACE. 

I DON'T HAVE THE TIME TO WASTE ON COMMENTING ANY MORE SO DON'T BOTHER TO RESPOND BECAUSE I WILL NOT RETURN TO THIS STORY. 

:)

Try to imagine how little we CARE.

Actually, I very generously gave a helpful introduction to Humor 101, and an explanation as to why Rush doesn't fit the bill. If all you saw was name-calling, why would I waste my time trying to pound anything more complicated into your skull?

YOU are a real piece of work. You WHINE about name calling yet defend Limbaugh dishonestly keeping the whole Vince Foster was killed by the Clintons LIE going. So its ok to lie shamelessly and without decency if you are a conservative but its just so mean for liberals to call you a troll? Get real.

SOLON:  Trust me, I am not at all offended by any name I might be called here.

That is a good thing.

SOLON:  You state: "YOU are a real piece of work. You WHINE about name calling yet defend Limbaugh dishonestly keeping the whole Vince Foster was killed by the Clintons LIE going. So its ok to lie shamelessly and without decency if you are a conservative but its just so mean for liberals to call you a troll? Get real."

I'm really not whining about being called a name I'm just wondering why you folks resort to it. 

So even though you talk about dim bulbs and feeble minds and in another thread talk about America hating liberals you want to know why WE call names? MAYBE because we are tired of ceding the exclusive franchise on namecalling to conservatives.

Just some general observations abaout Rush Limbaugh...

I've heard Limbaugh expound many times on how miserable liberals are...that liberals are basically unhappy people. Then it occurred to me how miserable Rush Limbaugh's existence must be. How would like to have a job that required you to rant non-stop for several hours a day with the most negative, vitriolic condemnation of another set of people? People who are your own neighbors and fellow countrymen. Limbaugh's entire show every single day is a paranoid stream of consciousness soliloquy that blames liberals for every ill that has ever befallen mankind. How corrosive must Limbaugh's daily condemnation exercise be to his own psyche? How rancid is this man's soul? If he has a soul...

Irony...

Be honest.  How many times have you listend to Rush?  How many hands do I need to count that...one? two? 

If you find it an endless rant then you obviously haven't listened often.  

Incorrect, Truthseeker... For many years I have listened to Limbaugh quite regularly, usually when I'm in my car. Sometimes I have to turn him off because his rants are so offensively dishonest....and his rants are non-stop. Perhaps part of the problem is that the minds of the megadittoheads who agree with the drug addicted fat boy have become so numbed that they don't even recognize a rant when they hear one. And, of course, it goes without saying that a megadittohead would not recognize the truth if it bit them on the behind. I am very familiar with Limbaugh...

IRONY...when you state this in your original post:

<i>How would like to have a job that required you to rant non-stop for several hours a day with the most negative, vitriolic condemnation of another set of people?</i>

It does smack of ignorance because while rants do comprise his show at times, the show as a whole is not close to how you describe.  It may be that you agree more with those he criticizes and therefore hear it differently than I do. 

My point, which you apparently missed, is that Limbaugh's show, every single day, is a continuous condemnation of liberals and Democrats. His show is characterized by it's non-stop negativity. What kind of effect must this have on the conveyor of such constant negative thoughts...day after day, year after year? What kind of person is capable of such non-stop negativity? 

Quibble if you want over what constitutes a rant...but it doesn't take a shrink to recognize someone whose mental health is probably not in tip-top shape. IMO Limbaugh is probably a miserable person...that comes across to me listening to him as often as I do.

TS, I can't think of anything he does other than anti-non-right-winger ranting---as Irony described.  He next to never has a guest on---as he has explained on the air "why should I promote anyone other than myself".  Sean Hannity at least interviews people.  Michael Savage will regularly bash Republicans (after he's made his bones on the liberals/gays /Dems/etc.).  Whether you agree with him or not Limbaugh’s show is still very ranty.   The best part is when he seems to be giving us at the beginning of the show his most pressing thoughts.  He does take calls to give mini rants during and afterwards.  And there is an occasional newsclip or news story he’ll read which he’ll then springboard off of into another rant.  He’s classic hate radio.

Still haven't found any truth, have you?

Well, keep seeking, although I think truth is eluding you on purpose so it doesn't get dirty when you play with it. 

EASY TO REFUTE:  No truth on this site.  That's the joke which so easily escapes you feeble, closed mind

Just because you are too stupid and brainwashed to KNOW the truth if it stole your wallet and slapped your face doesnt mean it isnt right in front of you MORON.

"Long-debunked rumors"  where can I find the debunking? 

Or is this just standard MM "debunking"  which would go something like this:

"As Bill Clinton has stated numerous times he had nothing to do with this criminal activity..."

OK  Lets start with basics

Do you believe that all the counries ills could be blamed on one political party?

 

Of course not..do you?

Nope but Limbaugh does

And so for starters we agree he is intellectual dishonest

You are wrong.  He has plenty to say against Republicans. They have disappointed him and conservatives MANY times.  He was highly critical of Bush Sr. when he raised taxes in 1990 (or was it '91).  He took the party to task this entire primary election season. 

Again...a lot of posters here have a lot to say about Limbaugh, but there is little evidence anyone actually listens regularly.

I dont eat Dog poop regularly either. How far out on a limb am I going saying it stinks and it shouldnt be eaten. Just because you have been assmilitated by the Limborg doesnt change the FACT he is a liar and a propagandist. That he spews nonsense regularly and if you take him seriously you need professional help.

I agree wholeheartedly that Limbaugh is intellectually dishonest. He knows how to craft an argument but within his rapid fire delivery every few seconds he throws in a supposed fact that is either demonstrably false or, at the very least, subject to debate. But Limbaugh, in his authoratative delivery conveys his opinions and interpretations (all negative towards liberals and Democrats) as not just facts but as gospel truths. I've always said that I wished I had the opportunity to tape just one of Limbaugh's shows and to play it back for right wingers...with my finger on the pause button. You could probably stop the tape every 30 seconds and point out another specious claim represented as fact. His arguments fail when you break down the so-called facts upon which they are based. But, hey, the megadittoheads don't care..they just want to hear him bash liberals and Democrats. That's how Rush has trained them... 

Ditto that.

I'll debunk the rumors.

Clinton's worst political enemies were given unlimited time, money, and power to pour over every nick and cranny of his entire life to dig up anything the least bit morally shady.  Everything they found is public, and it stops well short of murders.

Now lets turn a Bush hater loose with godlike powers and see what turns up.

That just proves that Clinton is such a criminal mastermind that he managed to destroy every last shred of evidence...

Both special prosecuters looked into the Vince Foster suicide and said it was a suicide. The coroner said it was a suicide exactly what do you want? There is no evidence whatsoever. and never HAS been that it was anything but a suicide. The only thing saying otherwise are the rumors started by cretins without a shred of decency like Limbaugh and regurgitated by his loyal Limborg.

Bravo to IRONY 101 He has described the far right's star gasbag perfectly.How people can listen and respect this hatefull and arrogant piece of garbage  is beyond belief.

Do you listen to show?  Be honest

I found the Club Gitmo nonsense offensive to the troops

Offensive to the troops?  How so? 

To me that is another example of a satircal take on the left-wing's position.  I don't see that as offensive to the troops at all.

I don't see that as offensive to the troops at all.

And, therefore, it's people like you who have made Rush Limbaugh a very rich man.

Please I want to know how you see Club Gitmo as offensive to the troops. I could be missing something, seriously.  Is it just the making light of the entire situation?

I find Limbaugh's Club Gitmo satire offensive to America as a whole. Gitmo raises serious questions as to whether the current administration is willing to uphold American ideals that our troops are presently dying to purportedly defend and spread. Limbaugh's satire celebrates the (at least arguable) diminution of America's ideals. Some satire may be eye-opening. Limbaugh's is not. It is simply a juvenile exercise in antagonizing thinking Americans. Limbaugh's satire adds nothing to any serious debate. 4,000 young people (average age, 21) have died in Iraq. I think it's inappropriate to gratuitously make light of any aspect of the war.

It's offensive to our troops because the United States is a signatory to The Geneva Conventions. Anyone who wears the uniform of this nation is required to abide by the rules.

Many today say that times are different, they are not. We still hold ourselves to a higher standard than our enemies.

Any citizen that justifies or minimizes waterboarding, simulated electric shock, sleep deprivation, forced masturbation or any of the other atrocities inflicted on detainees in our prisons must also agree that our troops when captured will probably be subjected to at least, the same cruelties.

It's always someone like Limbaugh or Cheney, men who refused to serve our country who now have the biggest balls and are at the forefront of the pro-torture movement. They are cowardly men, who now tell us how our troops should behave themselves in war.

Truthseeker, I listen to Rush quite a bit, usually if I'm on the road. It's entertaining mostly to follow along as he builds his pile of BS, and imagine that there are other people listening who don't see through it. I don't think his base audience is necessarily stupid, as a whole, just scared and lazy.

What are we supposed the "SEE THROUGH."  What do you think is behind the "BS?"   What exactly are you and the rest of the Liberals afraid of?

Why do you state as a fact that we're "afraid" of anything? Why do you constantly project your own shortcomings onto others?

EASYTOREFUTE:  OK let me ask you:  Are you afraid of anything?

Never underestimate the power of STUPID people in large groups. Not fear so much as awareness.

I haven't been part of this conversation, but I thought I'd weigh in.  I've listened to hundreds of hours of Limbaugh.  I love talk radio and don't like to restrict myself to those with whom I agree.  Frankly, for a couple decades the choice was pretty much conservative talk or none.

The last five to ten years I've listened to a lot less Limbaugh.  This is mostly because it became so repetitive.  The same rants, the same wisecracks, the same insinuations over and over again.  He became boring and tiresome.  About the same time, my talk radio obtions expanded locally; therefore, I listened to less Limbaugh.

Regardless, I think I'm well qualified to offer an opinion on Limbaugh's product.  It's substandard and deceitful.

I found his tirade and sketch about the NBA to ignorant and racist as well as his takes on Donovan McNabb.  The NBA one was well over the line with the stereotypical "black" voice and making the NBA player sound like more than an idiot.  His sketches with the "black" voices of Jesse Jackson and Sharpton is well over the line too.

He propagates the same right-wing lies over and over and over (Vince Foster, claiming Gore said he invented the internet), he avoided the draft, but smear vets who oppose the war.  He claims to be a social conservative, but has no respect for the institution of marriage.  The list goes on and on.

I don't listen because when I heard those first two skits and his "Barack the Magic Negro" song sung the way it was, I had enough.

Do you listen to win or place?

Stomp your foot once for yes, twice for no. 

But how long can Rush survive without an OxyContin hit????

ToTRUHTSEEKER68, unfortunatly I do listen to EL FLUSHBO. Nothing new with him, the same old anti liberal anti progressive garbage he has been spewing out for years. As I have said in an earlier post  he is just a propaganda artist in the mold of DR. JOSEF GOEBBLES.

Of course it would be "satire" - if Rush weren't continually also suggesting as a fact the Clintons murdered White House counsel Vince Foster.

 

Odd how satire in some places can nowinclude murder or suicide.  Have public standards changed that much?

STEEVE,

Seems we've had Bush haters on the loose for eight long years and not much has stuck outside of POLICY disagreements which are fine. 

In fact we had a major network news operation try and take him down with verifiably FORGED memos, letters and documents.  Now there was something demonstrably FALSE. 

There is plenty of Bush, GOP and Conservative opposition out there so bring it on.

The real reason Limbaugh and the rest of talk radio is hated by the left is that he and others take on the Left and THEIR LIES and try to point out the folly of many of their flawed policy ideas.

The real reason Limbaugh and the rest of talk radio is hated by the left is that he and others take on the Left with LIES and try to promote the folly of many of conservatives' flawed policy ideas.

There, I fixed that for you.

Do you have an example of a flawed conservative policy?

A regurgitation of Hivemind greatest hit LIES. Lots of them INCLUDING calling questioned documents verifyable forged. AN OUTRIGHT LIE. A memo the CONTENTS OF WHICH WERE VERIFIED. So we got a double whammy lie. Calling documents that cannot be verified but were never PROVEN forgeries verified forgeries lie number one. Then implying they were wrong even though the woman who WROTE Killians memos verified that they were correct and whoever wrote them might have worked off of HER MEMOS. Then a bunch of baseless assertions, repititions of what the Limborg have been instructed to beleive regardless of the fact its mostly abject stupidity.

Where are the ORIGINAL memos.  Do they or did they exist? 

We dont know either of those things. They have NOT been proven to be forgeries THAT is a lie.

The documents posted by CBS News were forged.  That was PROVEN.  NONE of your assertions have been. 

NO THEY WERENT. Feel free to repeat that hivemind idiocy a few dozen more times in the VAIN hope it will magically become true like some demented parrot. It doesnt ADD any credibility for you to repeat a lie. They cannot be verified but were NEVER proven forgeries. THAT IS A LIE. By the way the CLAIM they were PROVEN forgeries is YOURS. It is up to YOU to prove it is true not up to ME to prove a negative. So give it a try and dont waste my time with some rightwing opinion piece. CBS brought on the woman that DID type Killians memos and she VERIFIED THE CONTENTS. Ya got nothin but the ravings you were TOLD to believe as a loyal member of the Limborg.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200511140013

This links to the study DONE by Republican Richard Thornborough for CBS and says directly

 "has not been able to conclude with absolute certainty whether the ... documents are authentic or forgeries."

I have told you guys. Just because you were TOLD to believe it on Screechmonkey radio doesnt make it true.

I am hoping and praying that Hillary tries to steal the election from Barack Hussein Obama using superdelegates.  Perhaps she has photocopies of their FBI files (Filegate) and is using the informatioin to blackmail some of the superdelegates.

If Obama wins the pledged delegates and the popular votes but does not win the nomination, there will be riots.  There is no way Hillary can possibly win in November without the black vote.  I don't see blacks and college students turning out for Hillary in any meaningful way in November if they view the election as stolen.

This can potentially cause a schism in the Democrat party that could last 20 years.  It if gets very ugly perhaps the GOP can regain the House and Senate.

My dream of destroying the Dems is actually in the process of coming to fuition.  Now if only McCain names Mitt as he VP, we can work on impeaching McCain!!!!

Your post gives new meaning to the word "delusional".

Just the sort of delusions I would expect from someone so ignorant they dont even know the NAME of the largest political party in the United States./

Would that be the DEMOCRAT PARTY????

Another really stupid moron heard from. I always wonder why people as ignorant as you are PROUD to parade their abject stupidity?

SOLON:  What is your preoccupation with calling me and others stupid simply for disagreeing with you?  I really don't understand it.    

If the slipper fits...Personally I suspect it's got something to do with the difference between disagreeing on matters of opinion and disagreeing on matters of fact.

And as for the examples of truth you claim to be seeking and somehow missing, try looking at the transcripts provided by MM - it's all there in black and white mate.

Please spare me the psuedo outrage. You had no reason to repeat the Democrat party BS other than to antagonize us. It is contemptuous to call the party by anything but the name GIVEN it and you know it. Why do YOU toss mud at us then snivel that it comes back at YOU? You arent an innocent victim here but I will explain AGAIN my rationale. I am not trying to hurt anyone feelings but I want to make the point how easy it is to do ad hominem attacks. How easy and therefore worthless to just SAY rude things. So I use virtually exclusively appellations like stupid and moron. By now you must have observed that most of the people on THIS site are pretty intelligent. On average those coming HERE to post are pretty bright. I have no insecurity about my intelligence and I know people telling me how stupid I am dont bother me because its ridiculous. I figure calling Callista Flockheart FAT wouldnt hurt her feelings. So I use that one over and over. I dont tailor insults to make an individual person feel bad about themselves. I do the tossaway generic insult because it is what the person I am responding to is doing. Perhaps if they dont like it done to THEM it might occur to them to stop doing it to US.

Right on  BILLJ-MN. I couldent have said it better myself.EL FLUSHBO spews out nothing but RIGHT WING HOT AIR AND HATE.

Right on  BILLJ-MN. I couldent have said it better myself.EL FLUSHBO spews out nothing but RIGHT WING HOT AIR AND HATE.

Q - What's the difference between Rush Limbaugh and the Hindenberg?

A - One is a flaming Nazi gasbag, and the other was a dirigible that exploded in Lakehurst NJ in 1937.

:-)