Any Rush listeners in the house?

[12Footer]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

Originally posted by jtexas:<br /> I think I got my answer. If you don't mind a couple questions, just to clarify:<br /><br />Do you really believe that to disagree with the administration regarding what the country's military goals should be is "siding with the enemy?"

Yes, i do. Durring peacetime, i would call this action "freedom of speech", and might even give the armchair command a long hard ride myself.....<br />Durring wartime, my opinion is that this very same activity is -- that it is traitorous.<br /><br />As the Admin and generals will conduct military affairs from their own authority, civilian and media second-guessing and whining serve only to encourage the enemy.<br />To me, it is as basic as that....Go/no-go.<br /><br /> <br />

Originally posted by jtexas:<br /><br />Do you really believe that it is "unamerican" to oppose the official government position?

Not at all. NEVER! I think it is ANY American's right to always voice their opinion.<br />One caveat---See your first question, and note the context.<br /><br />GWB's domestic welfare spending is hideous. But he is, and for the next 6.5years, will be, our military's Commander in Chief. It's "Hooyah!" until the war is over.And i personally think the military is more efficiant today than it has been since Reagan was CiC.<br /><br /><br />

Originally posted by jtexas:<br /><br />Do you really believe that there are "masses" who think "the snail darter is more important than man?"

I think there are very few, JTexas, who actually hold that opinion. However, I think there is an entire party that will embrace that opinion, if it meant stopping developement, or obstructing policy of the other party. I don't believe it's a sane or healthy practice, but it happens. Hate motivates people to do some whacked-out things, like stop oil drilling in a frigid desert, because the KOOKS have convinced their contituancy, they could protect the migrating maibu, while hurting the economy, or the current president vicariously.<br />And i truely think the exreme-left believe they win if they can outline a failing economy. Their hatred for one man is just that extreme in my view.<br /> <br />

Originally posted by jtexas:<br /> Does everyone who works to save a species from extinction value an animal's life over a human life?

In most cases , yes. But of course, not all. To make any assumption on such an issue, you must first look at the individual scientific findings, and those findings better be proovably-independent, and not without prejudice. But this is seldom the case, as you know.<br />However, if you do not, concider this:<br />All scientists must receive a paycheck. In every such case before the axe, one must always "follow the money"....Or, "Who bought the scientists?"<br /><br /><br />BTW, just to be clear--the "snail-darter" reference i made was for reference only, but it is a genuine event where man took a back seat to a species' THEORETICAL, and prejucial extinction.

 

[jtexas]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

thanks, sorry I made ya work so hard. <br /><br />Aside from actual kooks (I mean sociopathic personalities who have no influence with anyone anywhere) I don't believe for a second that there is any kind of left-wing conspiracy trying to ruin the economy in order to hurt the president. If you have a source of info on that, other than Rush Limbaugh's opinion, I'll be happy to take a look, I'm willing to be convinced. Meanwhile that story has even less credibility than the one about Bush & Cheney doing favors for their pals at Haliburton. But that's just my opinion.<br /><br />thanks,

 

[12Footer]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

Convince you? I have a hard time convincing my wife the toilet paper doesn't need to be on that silly roller in the wall.<br />No, Jtexas, i wont attempt to convince you. I would much rather you look around and smell the coffee on your own. Let me see if i can lead you to a few facts over the next few days, right here in this particular thread. I'll just edit it.<br /><br />In the meantime, look at the results of "species preservatation" wherever you encounter the practice...Then, find the motivation of those activists that pushed this one issue.<br />I do not care if you choose snail darters, malibu, or "East Indian" Manatees in Florida. Any species, any where in the United States, that has been singled-out by these whacko few. Then, note WHO embraces their "cause".<br />Seek a motive.<br /><br />"Look what four people who had their favorite camping spot slated for developement by the actual landowner can do with a guppy, a science degree, and a good lawyer!" -- Rush Limbaugh<br /><br />Follow the "crusade" from day-one, if possible, and on thru the findings of the court.<br />It's not that i mind spending the time to do this for you, but i simply don't have the time, (which is why i stated "Let me see if i can lead you to a few facts over the next few days, right here in this particular thread. I'll just edit it".<br /><br />But in the meantime, hate is a powerfull motivator. Look what a few nut jobs like Cindy Sheehan can do given the weapons of media propaganda and a mob who hate one man more than they hate OBL.<br /><br />But we aren't talking about the same issue....Just the same people. "Political correctness" is the 20year-old name for the overall outcome of their efforts.<br />So no biggie.. The tide is turning. A new "PC" is in the making, becuase popular opinion has shifted greatly in the last decade.<br />It will surely have it's problems. But after seeing the political correct machinne of the left churn and chew on the problems of poverty for the last 40years with no results (we still have as much or more poverty), people are sick of being lied to....So i guess they'll get lied to by the other swing of the pendulum. But the new "masses" must try.<br />I just hope it don't take another 40years to find out we were all lied to again.<br />

Originally posted by jtexas:<br />Aside from actual kooks (I mean sociopathic personalities who have no influence with anyone anywhere) I don't believe for a second that there is any kind of left-wing conspiracy trying to ruin the economy in order to hurt the president. If you have a source of info on that, other than Rush Limbaugh's opinion, I'll be happy to take a look, I'm willing to be convinced. Meanwhile that story has even less credibility than the one about Bush & Cheney doing favors for their pals at Haliburton. But that's just my opinion.

Ok, from that statement, I take it that you wanted me to source my case for my opinion that the left gets it's marching orders from it's kook fringe base. It was less time-consuming than i thought it would be...Again, not that i mind the time required to vet my opinion basis, or debating any issue...It's just kind of scarce <br /><br /><br />Click for one example of a democrat politician using kook science to prop-up their Bush Bashfest. Don't worry -- no sound to scare the coffee over the cubical wall. (My appologies again for that).<br /><br /><br />Now explain how THIS nut-job doesn't dictate left-wing politics.<br />And although, you didn't want Rush's opinion, but mine, i have to claim real "dittos" to this morning update;<br /><br />"The New York Times reports that FEMA has signed $1.5 billion in contracts to clean up Hurricane Katrina debris but — outrage of outrages — 80 percent were awarded with little or no competitive bidding. Unbelievably, the companies given the contracts include Kellogg, Brown & Root — a Halliburton subsidiary — and the Shaw Group. Both companies have been represented by Joe Allbaugh, President Bush’s ex-campaign manager and former head of... (whispers) FEMA. <br /><br />The Times quotes Richard Skinner, an inspector general for Homeland Security: “When you do something like this, you do increase the vulnerability for fraud, waste, abuse and mismanagement,” he says, adding that his agency is “very apprehensive” about the contracts. Now, three weeks ago, libs were throwing a five-alarm tantrum because federal tentacles couldn’t reach out and touch every victim of Hurricane Katrina vanden Heuvel fast enough. It was a catastrophic failure, the worst in history; it was rich Republican vs. poor Democrats; it was racist; it was evil capitalistic excess and most of all, it was Bush’s fault. Now, when the feds act quickly to get the cleanup underway, it’s rich Republican lobbying, it’s evil capitalistic cronyism, and it’s Bush’s fault. <br /><br />It never occurs to these stuck-on-stupid liberals that the reason companies like Kellogg and Shaw are called on to get the job done is because they CAN get the job done. Unlike the liberals in charge of building levies, where billions get diverted into a sinkhole of corruption. But don’t look for that exposé in The Times; they’re too busy feeding talking points disguised as news to the liberal kook base!" -- Rush Limbaugh.<br />NYT--Cronies at the till-- (what Rush was refering to).<br />Rush sights the Haliburton "SCANDAL" as reported here.

 

[jtexas]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

Originally posted by 12Footer:<br /> Convince you? I have a hard time convincing my wife the toilet paper doesn't need to be on that silly roller in the wall.<br />

LOL, or that she oughtta put the seat up when she gets done?<br /><br />

<br />In the meantime, look at the results of "species preservatation" wherever you encounter the practice...Then, find the motivation of those activists that pushed this one issue.<br />I do not care if you choose snail darters, malibu, or "East Indian" Manatees in Florida. Any species, any where in the United States, that has been singled-out by these whacko few. Then, note WHO embraces their "cause".<br />Seek a motive.<br /><br />"Look what four people who had their favorite camping spot slated for developement by the actual landowner can do with a guppy, a science degree, and a good lawyer!" -- Rush Limbaugh<br />

You don't have to convince me of the existence of an Enviro-nazi movement, but is this group using guppies and lawyers to stifle development in favor of parkland part of it? <br /><br />I mean, when we say "value animal life over human life" are we including real estate development? If so, it's a fair opinion, but it helps me to know what we're talking about. <br /><br />In fact I think the "masses" who oppose ANWR drilling and favor owls over loggers (except for the terrorists who spike the trees) are citizens who love America as much as me & you & Mr. Limbaugh, but just need better information.<br /><br />I also think you have small groups from a broad cross-section of policitical views, who care deeply about one issue or another, for example, guppy people who couldn't care less about the manatees.<br /><br />

<br />Follow the "crusade" from day-one, if possible, and on thru the findings of the court.<br />It's not that i mind spending the time to do this for you, but i simply don't have the time, (which is why i stated "Let me see if i can lead you to a few facts over the next few days, right here in this particular thread. I'll just edit it".<br />

Don't feel like you need to spend a lot of time typing on my account, but I'll check out whatever sources you want to point me towards as time allows.<br /><br />thanks,

 

[alden135]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

I like Rush.<br /><br />I hope this post isn't to long.

 

[SCO]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

Both Oddjob and 12'r considered themselves to be liberal. That is a surprise, and confess that I too was once in that camp.

 

[PW2]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

I've got to weigh in just a little here.<br /><br />As far as "Our country, right or wrong" , it is an extrordinary dangerous position to take to suggest that it is somehow Un-American to criticize leaders.<br /><br />Our leaders are just people, and subject to failings just like any other people. Our founding fathers knew this, and tried to set up a government where no one person could get too much power, and there were limits and checks to that power.<br /><br />The ultimate check to any politician's power is public opinion, which is of course why a free press is a fundamental right guaranteed in the constitution. Do you think part of the constitution should be rescinded in times of crisis? I hope not, but if you do, you are wrong, and go expressly against the founding fathers and their vision. Remember, the European model from which they came was the divine right of kings, where all power was centralized into one figure, right or wrong.<br /><br /><br />As far as environmental issues, The Federal Endangered Species Act has a long history before it was finally passed. For years, no thought was given to anything other than how people would benefit to any given project.<br /><br />There are tons of examples of this, but the Grand Coulee Dam is a classic. It permanently cut off, in one project, amid lots of fanfare, more than one half of the salmon and steelhead spawning areas in the west, and no one even gave it a second thought at the time.<br /><br />And you can say that well the lowly snail darter is so insignificant as to not matter. That may well be true, but the problem becomes Ok, but who gets to choose what is or isn't significant, and what criteria is used. Laws don't work very well when they are vague and unclear what they really mean, ar who has to follow them. If you get an occasional snail darter case ( and we have very few cases like it), then so it goes.<br /><br />But take a case where I have intimate knowledge of, and that is spotted owls in the Northwest.<br /><br />For years and years the US forest service, as well as the BLM in Oregon and the DNR in Washington State, would get together with big timber companies and they together would decide how much wood the companies needed, and how much was needed to be put up for sale. It made lots of sense at the time, as there was lots to go around, the revenues from the sales paid the budgets of the USFS, built new schools and all manner of things that politicians could get money for without raising someone's taxes, and it provided lots of jobs.<br /><br />It was win-win all the way around.<br /><br />But then things gradually changed. More and more mills were built, technology made them more efficient, using more and more wood, and perhaps the single biggest event to happen was the 1962 Columbus Day storm which blew down billions and billions of feet of timber--more than the mills could use in 3 years.<br /><br />Government, who owned most of the blow down, did not want it to go to waste, so they enlisted the Weyerhaeuser Co (among others) to help them fine a home for all this extra timber.<br /><br />So they developed overseas markets for it. It was a good move. Everyone benefitted. And the big companies found that it was relatively easy to make a ton of money loading ships, as opposed to running mills, and did more of that and less mill operating--but still mills were expanding, new mills were built, technology was better and better,<br /><br />And finally the pressure on the forests were way more than they could possibly sustain, but still all these mills, and all these jobs, required the government agencies to provide the timber needed... And everyone knew this could not be sustained<br /><br />And while there was no law at the time requiring government to manage forests sustainably, there was a law protecting endangered species, and voila, in enters the spotted owl. If it had not been for spotted owls, it would have been flying squirrels or some other critter, but something had to happen. And it was easy to blame it on owls, rather than to explain the science behind it, but everyone involved knew what the problem was, even if they didn't want to admit it or accept it. If they say they didn't know, they are pure and simple either very dumb, or lying.<br /><br />And it makes great talk radio fodder for blaming environmentalists. That's not to say that there are no wacko-environmentalists out there--There clearly are, and I deal with some of them all the time, but not all environmentalists are wackos. Just as not all talk radio hosts are fascist pigs. <br /><br />some are, but not all<br /><br />And to finish my little story here, there are now roughly two thirds fewer mills out west, cutting roughly half the amount of timber they used to, the forests are more or less sustainable now, and you rarely if ever hear anything about spotted owls.

 

[jtexas]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

Enron. Tyco. Martha Stewart Living.<br /><br />Examples of respectable law-abiding citizens who got caught up in the greed when you put too many zeros between the dollar sign and decimal point.<br /><br />Point being, don't underestimate the "good 'ol boy network." The Cheneys & Haliburtons need to be watched for their own protection as much as ours. The press is the watchdog. You quoted from an editorial, clearly marked as an editorial, don't mean the editor hates America. True there are reasons not to go with lowest bidder in all cases or even not to bid out some contracts, but facts are facts. We the people need to know. To label the editor as "unamerican" is downright, well, unamerican, IMO.<br /><br />The story about the Alaskan congresswoman, sounds like politics as usual to me. Sorry I didn't see any science in the article & I'm not familiar with the science of it. Personally I think ANWR petroleum can be recovered with only acceptable environmental damage but there are those who disagree and I'm not qualified to diagnose 'em all as kooks. Or if your just referring to the last paragraph, that guys a certifiable nut-job who isn't influencing anybody, but how stupid was she for autographing that sign? See if you can get her to do that with a check for a million bucks "autograph this for me please?"<br /><br />The drudgereport link is busted.<br /><br />Hey, PW2, what are you trying to say, that things are usually more complicated than just "conservative vs. liberal, agree with me else be unamerican?"<br /><br />thanks,

 

[oddjob]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

Hey PW thanks for the heads up om the owl. Very interesting...

 

[demsvmejm]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

Originally posted by 12Footer:<br />

Originally posted by David L. Moore:<br /> We all have our own opinions, but rush thinks his are better than yours, unless yours are the same. He also thinks HE is better than you are, and all you have to do is listen with an open mind to hear that.<br />

<br />How is it that you know this?

If you actually read the opposing viewpoints instead of ASSuming you know what they wrote you would know that I have listened to rush. I was subjected to his blatant tyrrany and narrow-mindedness for slightly over a year, every weekday. So for at least 520 hours I had to listen to this pompous blow-hard. Unlike so many of his rectum dwelling followers (brown-nosers with depth perception problems), I speak from experience, with knowledge of the topic I wrote about. I expressed my opinion. My opinion was based on experience, and therefore was qualified. But regardless it was my opinion, rush is an arrogant, egotistical, self-righteous, self-interested, pompous a$$.<br />Respectfully submitted for your consideration.

 

[8580edwardo]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

I cut and pasted this post<br /><br />WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?<br /><br />I NEED A LIBERAL TO TRANSLATE FOR ME<br /><br /><br />I'm paraphrasing; I tried to find a transcript of the actual question and answer, but didn't have any luck. Still, that was the gist of it, and in my mind that position has been strengthened by occasional Rush statments that violate logic yet deliver messages that his core constituancy want to hear (symbolic logic, a discipline within mathematics that studies formal systems in relation to the way they encode intuitive concepts of proof and computation as part of the foundations of mathematics. It is a purely objective discipline comprised of those parts of logic that can be modelled mathematically<br /><br /><br />Michael Savage would translate 'or say'<br /><br />LIBERALISM IS A MENTAL DISORDER<br /><br />Rush takes the news of the day<br />Good or bad <br />and just tells us what he thinks<br /><br />He throws the facts against the wall<br />And most of the time they stick<br /><br />Thank You

 

[PW2]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.<br /><br />First off, I don't how it is possible to throw "facts against the wall", let alone determine whether or not they "stick"

 

[12Footer]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

Originally posted by PW2:<br /> I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.<br /><br />First off, I don't how it is possible to throw "facts against the wall", let alone determine whether or not they "stick"

Allow me to try to explain it to you, PW2.<br />The phrase, "throwing facts against the wall to see what sticks", would be a twist on an old expression (frankly suprised you have never heard it):<br /><br />"throwing MUD against the wall to see if it sticks".<br />Rush and others depict this practice of "news manufacturing" using that expression (throwing mud) quite often, because it is tried so often....Only with Rush, it must be factual, or his show is toast.<br />An example of this practice would be Calypso-Louie fairykahn's statements claiming GWBush and his military blew up the levees in N/O to kill blacks.....<br />Another would be the very act of indicting Tom Delay. The mud is the indictent itself, and the sticking would be the "perp-walk photo op" after the fact.<br />Another was the attempts to accuse Bush of going AWOL.<br /><br />Rush someimes twists this practice used by others,in an effort to illustrate absurdity by injecting the facts on any given issue.<br />Examples of "throwing facts against the wall to see what sticks":<br />Rush illustrates; "Why Aren't Conservatives Allowed to Talk Race?"(An interesting read by the way).<br />Another would be -Rush's "Rathergate" recap-.<br /><br /><br />By the way, Rush is documented to be almost always right; 98.5 percent of the time: The actual figure changes from time to time as there are natural fluctuations in my accuracy. Rating is determined each month by an official Opinion Audit conducted by The Sullivan Group in Sacramento, California. <br />His continued success and fame depends greatly upon that "accuracy rating", which is one of the reasons Al Franken never made a dent in Rush's market share. But understand, accuracy is but one needed ingrediant to success, as is his moral presentation of it...Rush has the added ability to illustrate absudity on the left every time it surfaces, which is often. To most of us, it wouls just go right over our heads durring the Sunday talk shows, as Louie weaves his tale of racism.<br /><br />Incidentally, If rush was a journalist, he would not have a career, as he would promptly be fired at the first illustration of absudity. And then,as his reputation became known, he would never be hired as a "journalist". It is why he is an "entertainer". And a clean one at that. Let Howard Stern have his seedy satellite syndication. Bill Maur can keep his "daily show" and "politically incorrect" TV filth.<br />And let Dan Rather's legend define the TV "news" format.

 

[txswinner]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

Rush actually made a liberal remark Fri. Said Oil companies may be gouging. Wow.

 

[PW2]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

12 footer,<br /><br />This is not worth commenting on. If you believe it, good for you.<br /><br />Like the old joke, why do women knit? It gives them something to think about while they are talking.

 

[demsvmejm]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

Rush's accuracy rating is based on opinion! You said it 12footer. Whose opinion is right? Does that make someone else's opposing opinion wrong? To you your opinion is right, to me mine is. Does that make yours wrong? It doesn't make mine wrong. <br /><br />Opinions are just that, opinions. So rush is not "right". He is simply agreeable to his sheople. By saying that he is enterntainment releases him from any obligation to utter the facts as opposed to strictly what is supportive of his party's objective.<br /><br />The reason why the opposing viewpoint celebrities don't "make it" is because the more liberal (read NOT hard right-wingers) can think for themselves. They don't need some pompous self-righteous blowhard telling them what the party wants them to think.<br /><br />We are intelligent. We think, therefore WE DON'T NEED rush!

 

[12Footer]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

Well good for you. I wouldn't think of changing your opinion. I have my opinion, you have yours.<br /><br />And if you're anything like me, you form your opinions from the world around you. I think we all do. We read,watch news on the tube, listen to it on the radio, conversation over cards with our friends, and from these and the life we live, we form opinions. I am not a bad person for liking Rush Limbaugh, listening to his program, or believing he is right 98.5% of the time. And you're not a bad person for thinking he is "some pompous self-righteous blowhard". <br /><br />But you suggest I "need some blowhard telling me what the party wants me to think". I deny that totally.<br /><br />I submit to you, that the party is out there with, or without Limbaugh making a sound! And i stated already that Rush has made a sucessful career out of listeners like me. There just happens to be so many of us, that we won the majority of this country, and made Rush a success by the default of shear numbers.<br /><br />It is also my opinion that Rush frightens the extreme left, because of his popularity. It rivals the popularity of both clintons put together, doesn't it? I see this fear apparent in their posts here, and in their discussions on talk shows, at the very mention of his name...It's as if Rush were the antichrist to the kook fringe of the left wing. But that would assume they believed in the whole Christ/antichrist thing to begin with. <br />I'm just relating the simularities in their reaction to these two totally different topics ,as the emotional picture they present on the subject of Rush Limbaugh...It resembles a televangelist on the tube talking about the antichrist to a tee.<br /><br />And the entire movie industry, media, all the Mike Moores, Al Frankens, and Guy jameses put together, cannot compete with his market share --<br /> much less, begin to approach his accuracy rating.<br /><br />No, there are more important things to fear in this world than Rush. If you feel you must wage war with his popularity, keep trying to find your liberal equivalent to Rush.<br /><br />The best way to defeat capitalists is to win competitively. So far, those who have tried to quiet Rush have failed miserably, even after being propped-up monetarily by Soros and mob, and hyped by the left wing media machine like the next Star Wars film. Even the WPB district attorney has failed to supress him or his popularity.

 

[oddjob]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

Liberalism is a disease......and its the facts that make you sick.....

 

[jtexas]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

Originally posted by 12Footer:<br /><br />By the way, Rush is documented to be almost always right; 98.5 percent of the time: The actual figure changes from time to time as there are natural fluctuations in my accuracy. Rating is determined each month by an official Opinion Audit conducted by The Sullivan Group in Sacramento, California. <br />

LOL, 12footer, accuracy as determined by an opinion audit. <br /><br />is the earth round or flat? I dunno, let's vote on it!<br /><br />good one!

 

[oddjob]

Re: Any Rush listeners in the house?

I think what he/it means is that opinions from the minions are audited/validated as being right or wrong after the fact. Just a guess.<br /><br />I would be interested in reviewing some others as well as Rush.