Usually, Rush is pretty good at sniffin-out rats like this. But he has been very quiet regarding the whole production, spending most of his time lately on immigration. Not a peep about this latest hostage movie.<br />Speaking of movies, he had the crew of "24" on his show...WTH was that all about? He'll interview movie guys in his studio, but nobody else! He never has to my knowlege, EVER held a live interview in his studio before!! Where was Cheney? If "Rush contrived the entire operation to regain lost credibility", as you stated, he blew it here.<br />I won't speculate on the reasons, but was not aware his "credibility" was being "lost" in the first place...Amazing what we can learn on the internet
<br /><br /><br />I guess, given the importance of the immigration issue, RL's time has been wisely spent.<br />Do not forget; I listen to RL every day. I get the podcasts, so i don't miss a word,CJY.<br />But RL dropped the ball on the Jill show for some reason.<br /><br />I learned what "the Stockholm Syndrome" was today.The reason is simple. It's his ego. He does not want someone to debate him on his garbage. He just wants to spew. If he enters a rational debate that he does not have control of, he would be made to look like a fool.
Wycapedia (or whatever it's called) describes it as "the behavior of kidnap victims who, over time, become sympathetic to their captors. The name derives from a 1973 hostage incident in Stockholm, Sweden. At the end of six days of captivity in a bank, several kidnap victims actually resisted rescue attempts, and afterwards refused to testify against their captors." <br />It's amazing what we can learn on this internet thingy!<br /><br />EXAMPLE:They werent bad people. They let me eat, they let me sleep, they gave me my life <br /><br /> A hostage from Flight 847<br /><br />Since her "release", Ms Caroll has publically denounced all of her statements while under captivity. What does this mean?<br />To me, it means Jill recanted what she had to say under the gun, and has expressed strongly, the guilt of her kidnappers. This is actually a good thing, CJY. She might not refer to the enemy as her friends, as defined by the "stockholm syndrome". Because she is a journalist, my prediction is that she will, at some point, "heap praise upon thier cause". In simpler terms, CJY, I am probably going to be wrong.We shall see.<br /><br /><br />Terrorist strategy is not my field of expertese, nor is furtune-telling.<br />But the one thing i hope you take away from this exchnage is that i have a right to believe what i will, same as PW and you have. Stay civil.
That's not what i meant, Pointer. I meant in-studio. He holds countless phone interviews, and i really liked the last one he held with Cheney.<br />I just found it odd that his exception turned-out to be such a trivial subject (to me at least).<br />I'dd like to see one of these photos;<br />
My learning what Stockholm syndrome was had nothing to do with you or anyone else here, outside of it's import to the TOPIC. I happened to learn of the term via Wicapedia (or whatever it's called). And i am certain, i stated that. <br />How you got from there to here is beyond me, and totally off-topic...Not that i really care, just confused by the irrelivance of all this.<br />Very cliche' for sure! It(the spewing debate stuff)is so very worn-out and predictable, that i laughed loud enough to make the dog wake up and bark (ns).<br /><br />as far as "Explaining to you why he has not chosen to debate his garbage with knowledgeable opponents.", I cannot (meaning i am both incapable and do not desire to).<br /><br />As far as i am concerned, he continuously debates with the callers. It truely is something i enjoy listening to and learning from. And there is virtually nothing that anyone can do to stop him or me. Unless he slips-up and slits his own throat, you are S.O.L., and stuck with whoever Georgie Soros can afford to place on-air --and for how long.<br /><br /> So far, Maha Rushi and his show are protected under the constitution. I am aware of the concerted efforts to HAVE him removed from the airwaves, so far, to no avail. Then, there is the ongoing effort to rewrite laws in order to get him thrown into the dungeon for "doctor shopping" -- again, to no avail. It's very amusing to follow the case online (i have access to his online case updates).
<br /><br />So no need for anyone including me, to produce for him.He does a quite effective job. You hate him. This is good. It is by design. You hate Bush also. You are against the war on islamic terror, (or at least, against a coalition victory).So you are not supposed to like what RL has to say, but diametrically oppose him. Keep doing so. It is why he is number one. That is to say, you are correct -- there are many of your ilk out there that must never gain control of this nation's defense.<br />.Let me clear up your confusion 12, you said this at the end of your post: DID YOU NOT? And, I might add, I was confused because it came out of nowhere. This was my reason for following up to your statement found below.<br /><br />
Now as far as irrelevance goes, if it is not relevant, don't attempt to discuss it if you feel it is irrelevant. YOU WERE THE FIRST TO MENTION IT!!! What relevanc<br /><br />
He has control of all debates with callers.<br /><br />I am not stuck with him. I have never heard any of his shows except when he was on television and I passed by during channel surfing.<br /><br />Lots of irrelevant stuff in there 12.
This would make an interesting thread by it's own merit.The last was your comment in regards to my questioning of stockholm syndrome.<br /><br />The way you attempt to argue your points 12, is a very good reason I do not listen to him. When you have been confronted on your points, you begin talking in circles in an attempt to confuse or it is out of confusion. I'm not sure which. One thing RL will not teach you is how to logically back your points. Reason, because he never does.
