# Limbaugh Dares Obama:  'Debate Me'



## ScreamingEagle

"I am offering President Obama to come on this program -- without staffers, without a TelePrompTer, without note cards -- to debate me on the issues. Let's talk about free markets versus government control. Let's talk about nationalizing health care and raising taxes on small business...

"Let's talk about the New Deal versus Reaganomics,'' Limbaugh said today. "Let's talk about closing Guantanamo Bay, and let's talk about sending $900 million to Hamas. Let's talk about illegal immigration and the lawlessness on the borders. Let's talk about massive deficits and the destroying of opportunities of future generations...

" The president yesterday suggested "we're getting to the point where profits and earnings ratios are approaching that point where you want to invest." Uh, Mr. President? There is no "profits and earnings" ratio. It's "price and earnings" ratio. He's the president of the United States. He doesn't know anything about the stock market. He's admitted it before. Let's talk about it anyway. 

"Just come on this program,'' Limbaugh says to Obama. "Let's have a little debate...

" You've debated the best! You've debated Hillary Clinton. You've debated John Edwards. You've debated Joe Biden. You've debated Dennis Kucinich. You've debated the best out there. You are one of the most gifted public speakers of our age. I would think, Mr. President, you would jump at this opportunity. 

Limbaugh dares Obama: 'Debate me': The Swamp


NEW YORK -- March 4, 2009: Premiere Radio Networks' Rush Limbaugh today invited President Obama to appear on his show -- all travel expenses paid -- for a "one-on-one debate of ideas and policies." Limbaugh cited a report by Jonathan Martin on the Politico.com website that begins, "Top Democrats believe they have struck political gold by depicting Rush Limbaugh as the new face of the Republican Party, a full-scale effort first hatched by some of the most familiar names in politics and now being guided in part from inside the White House." 

The report points to Democratic strategists Stanley Greenberg and James Carville and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel as leading the effort, which came in part out of polls saying younger voters in particular have a negative view of Limbaugh. 

According to a transcript on RushLimbaugh.com, Limbaugh said on Wednesday's show, "If these guys are so impressed with themselves, and if they are so sure of their correctness, why doesn't President Obama come on my show? We will do a one-on-one debate of ideas and policies. Now, his people in this Politico story, it's on the record. They're claiming they wanted me all along. They wanted me to be the focus of attention. So let's have the debate! I am offering President Obama to come on this program -- without staffers, without a teleprompter, without note cards -- to debate me on the issues. "

Radio Ink Magazine

Limbaugh Wants To Debate Obama | Political Hotsheet - CBS News


----------



## Midnight Marauder

The Obama cannot do that. Even though his interview with Bill O'Reilly went well, Bill was a friendly interviewer in that he isn't a partisan hack and stayed away from populist nonsense. Bill was firm, but The Obama came across very well in that arena.

Up against Rush, in that much more informal and partisan setting, there is no way The Obama can come out smelling good. He's far too intelligent to even try it.

Limbaugh knows that.

Hannity has had a standing invitation for The Obama to come on either his TV or radio shows, for months.


----------



## Shogun

Why would Obama care to go on Rush's show to debate him?   Hell, I CHALLENGE RUSH LIMBAUGH TO DEBATE ON US MESSAGEBOARD.  IF HE DOESN'T, then he is a giant pussy.


now... let's see how quickly Rush logs on.  I am about as important to Rush as Rush is to Obama.  You people want Rush on that kind of platform?  Put your vote where your big mouths are and get him out from his little radio cave.


----------



## Midnight Marauder

Shogun said:


> Why would Obama care to go on Rush's show to debate him?   Hell, I CHALLENGE RUSH LIMBAUGH TO DEBATE ON US MESSAGEBOARD.  IF HE DOESN'T, then he is a giant pussy.


Do you really think busy, rich people like Limbaugh post on message boards?


----------



## Shogun

Midnight Marauder said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would Obama care to go on Rush's show to debate him?   Hell, I CHALLENGE RUSH LIMBAUGH TO DEBATE ON US MESSAGEBOARD.  IF HE DOESN'T, then he is a giant pussy.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you really think busy, rich people like Limbaugh post on message boards?
Click to expand...


Do you think American Presidents debate silly radio jockeys?


----------



## Midnight Marauder

Shogun said:


> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would Obama care to go on Rush's show to debate him?   Hell, I CHALLENGE RUSH LIMBAUGH TO DEBATE ON US MESSAGEBOARD.  IF HE DOESN'T, then he is a giant pussy.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you really think busy, rich people like Limbaugh post on message boards?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you think American Presidents debate silly radio jockeys?
Click to expand...

Did you not read my previous post?


----------



## Shogun

Indeed, it looks like you took the suggestion seriously enough to contemplate his chances of "smelling good".  So, again, if Rush won't take my challenge seriously why would you imagine that Obama would take a challenge from a radio entertainer seriously?


----------



## WillowTree

obamalama knows better than that,, he pays his hacks at MSNBC to spread the poison..


----------



## Midnight Marauder

Shogun said:


> Indeed, it looks like you took the suggestion seriously enough to contemplate his chances of "smelling good".  So, again, if Rush won't take my challenge seriously why would you imagine that Obama would take a challenge from a radio entertainer seriously?


I didn't say he would, or should. But he would be alot closer to doing that with Limbaugh, than Limbaugh would ever do with you. Because Limbaugh, like him or not, IS somebody.

You're not.


----------



## Shogun

Midnight Marauder said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, it looks like you took the suggestion seriously enough to contemplate his chances of "smelling good".  So, again, if Rush won't take my challenge seriously why would you imagine that Obama would take a challenge from a radio entertainer seriously?
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't say he would, or should. But he would be alot closer to doing that with Limbaugh, than Limbaugh would ever do with you. Because Limbaugh, like him or not, IS somebody.
> 
> You're not.
Click to expand...



Limbaugh "is somebody"?  What, EXACTLY, are his credentials that should temp an American President?  Should Bush have gone at it with Randi Rhodes?  She's somebody on the radio, yes?  If you can't fathom the ridiculous, and let's face it LAUGHABLE, nature of some radio entertainer challenging the President then I guess it's pretty clear why you don't get my farcical challenge to Limbaugh.


----------



## Midnight Marauder

Shogun said:


> Limbaugh "is somebody"?  What, EXACTLY, are his credentials that should temp an American President?  Should Bush have gone at it with Randi Rhodes?  She's somebody on the radio, yes?  If you can't fathom the ridiculous, and let's face it LAUGHABLE, nature of some radio entertainer challenging the President then I guess it's pretty clear why you don't get my farcical challenge to Limbaugh.


You're comparing Randi Rhodes to Limbaugh?

You missed your last two med doses, clearly. But I suppose if The Obama did some far-left Liberal radio show for a creampuff interview, you'd be okay with that.

I said, The Obama is far too intelligent to get in that arena.


----------



## ScreamingEagle

Shogun said:


> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, it looks like you took the suggestion seriously enough to contemplate his chances of "smelling good".  So, again, if Rush won't take my challenge seriously why would you imagine that Obama would take a challenge from a radio entertainer seriously?
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't say he would, or should. But he would be alot closer to doing that with Limbaugh, than Limbaugh would ever do with you. Because Limbaugh, like him or not, IS somebody.
> 
> You're not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Limbaugh "is somebody"?  What, EXACTLY, are his credentials that should temp an American President?  Should Bush have gone at it with Randi Rhodes?  She's somebody on the radio, yes?  If you can't fathom the ridiculous, and let's face it LAUGHABLE, nature of some radio entertainer challenging the President then I guess it's pretty clear why you don't get my farcical challenge to Limbaugh.
Click to expand...


Yess....Evidently Rush "is somebody".....at least according to top liberals who say he is the defacto leader of the Republican party.

""Top Democrats believe they have struck political gold by depicting Rush Limbaugh as the new face of the Republican Party, "

"The report points to Democratic strategists Stanley Greenberg and James Carville and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel as leading the effort..."


----------



## Shogun

Midnight Marauder said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Limbaugh "is somebody"?  What, EXACTLY, are his credentials that should temp an American President?  Should Bush have gone at it with Randi Rhodes?  She's somebody on the radio, yes?  If you can't fathom the ridiculous, and let's face it LAUGHABLE, nature of some radio entertainer challenging the President then I guess it's pretty clear why you don't get my farcical challenge to Limbaugh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're comparing Randi Rhodes to Limbaugh?
> 
> You missed your last two med doses, clearly. But I suppose if The Obama did some far-left Liberal radio show for a creampuff interview, you'd be okay with that.
> 
> I said, The Obama is far too intelligent to get in that arena.
Click to expand...



Indeed, YOUR personal validation of Rush Limbaugh is about as universal as a liberal's opinion of Rhodes.  Don't let that get in the way of acting like a Rush fanboy though.  Obama doing an interview, "creampuff" in your opinion or not, isn't a DEBATE, now is it little guy?  Maybe you should go sit at the kiddy table and get your radio hero some digits.


ps, by all means... talk shit.  In case you haven't noticed I enjoy stomping mudholes in the asses of people like you.  I suggest you pick up your gauntlet and adjust your tone.


----------



## Shogun

ScreamingEagle said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't say he would, or should. But he would be alot closer to doing that with Limbaugh, than Limbaugh would ever do with you. Because Limbaugh, like him or not, IS somebody.
> 
> You're not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Limbaugh "is somebody"?  What, EXACTLY, are his credentials that should temp an American President?  Should Bush have gone at it with Randi Rhodes?  She's somebody on the radio, yes?  If you can't fathom the ridiculous, and let's face it LAUGHABLE, nature of some radio entertainer challenging the President then I guess it's pretty clear why you don't get my farcical challenge to Limbaugh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Evidently Rush "is somebody".....at least according to top liberals who say he is the defacto leader of the Republican party.
> 
> ""Top Democrats believe they have struck political gold by depicting Rush Limbaugh as the new face of the Republican Party, "
> 
> "The report points to Democratic strategists Stanley Greenberg and James Carville and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel as leading the effort..."
Click to expand...




Hey, just because the GOP has gonads the size of a field mouse nutsack when it comes to the republican platform doesn't mean that a radio disk jockey should expect anything but a round of laughter from such blustered bravado.  Like I said, if you feel this strongly about Rush's leadership then put your vote where your talking points are.


----------



## PoliticalChic

WillowTree said:


> obamalama knows better than that,, he pays his hacks at MSNBC to spread the poison..



What a clever fellow this Limbaugh is. According to the Politico article, the WH hatched the plan to demonize Limbaugh:
Rush Job: Inside Dems' Limbaugh plan - Jonathan Martin - POLITICO.com

For the Obama supporters who crooned about how smart, what a great speaker, how messianic their favorite son is, they are going to have to, publically at least, come up with maneuvers reminiscent of the game Twister to explain why he picked this fight, actually naming Limbaugh, but cannot pick up the gauntlet. 

Privately, they will have to add this (defeat) declination of the challenge to the series of bad decisions including corrupt politicians selected for his cabinet, a DOW plummet of 2800 points, reversing his promises on lobbyists, and on earmarks.


----------



## xsited1

Obama would be crushed like a bug.  No way he would ever do that.


----------



## Midnight Marauder

Shogun said:


> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Limbaugh "is somebody"?  What, EXACTLY, are his credentials that should temp an American President?  Should Bush have gone at it with Randi Rhodes?  She's somebody on the radio, yes?  If you can't fathom the ridiculous, and let's face it LAUGHABLE, nature of some radio entertainer challenging the President then I guess it's pretty clear why you don't get my farcical challenge to Limbaugh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're comparing Randi Rhodes to Limbaugh?
> 
> You missed your last two med doses, clearly. But I suppose if The Obama did some far-left Liberal radio show for a creampuff interview, you'd be okay with that.
> 
> I said, The Obama is far too intelligent to get in that arena.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, YOUR personal validation of Rush Limbaugh is about as universal as a liberal's opinion of Rhodes.  Don't let that get in the way of acting like a Rush fanboy though.  Obama doing an interview, "creampuff" in your opinion or not, isn't a DEBATE, now is it little guy?  Maybe you should go sit at the kiddy table and get your radio hero some digits.
> 
> 
> ps, by all means... talk shit.  In case you haven't noticed I enjoy stomping mudholes in the asses of people like you.  I suggest you pick up your gauntlet and adjust your tone.
Click to expand...

I don't validate Limbaugh. Your disdain for him is clouding your vision of the topic. Like it or not, he's the #1 radio commentator in the country. I didn't address whether The Obama should go on his show. I opined why he wouldn't.

If you think you're some kind of internet tuffguy, and that you can actually "stomp" folks, you are as delusional as you are stupid, and I have been wrong in my estimation. It's actually a week's worth of meds you missed.

Clown.


----------



## Chris

I dare Limbaugh to lose 50 pounds and get off OxyContin.


----------



## Shogun

xsited1 said:


> Obama would be crushed like a bug.  No way he would ever do that.



....which is why Rush has to hide behind his little cave based radio show to invoke a challenge, eh?




Tell me, if Rush is such the MAN, why doesn't he run for office?  Hell, if you feel so strongly then I guess YOU HAVE SOMEONE TO RUN IN '12, yes?


----------



## Midnight Marauder

Shogun said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama would be crushed like a bug.  No way he would ever do that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ....which is why Rush has to hide behind his little cave based radio show to invoke a challenge, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me, if Rush is such the MAN, why doesn't he run for office?  Hell, if you feel so strongly then I guess YOU HAVE SOMEONE TO RUN IN '12, yes?
Click to expand...

Limbaugh doesn't crave power, and likes his millions in salary. What fool would leave a job which pays millions, to try for a job that pays a low six figures?


----------



## DiveCon

actually, to be fair, it would need to be on neutral ground
no way anyone would accept Rush's show as such


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> I dare Limbaugh to lose 50 pounds and get off OxyContin.


hes already done one
and why do you care what his weight is


----------



## Midnight Marauder

DiveCon said:


> actually, to be fair, it would need to be on neutral ground
> no way anyone would accept Rush's show as such


Which is, exactly what I said. O'Reilly is one thing, not a partisan hack. Limbaugh is a totally one-sided other.


----------



## Shogun

Midnight Marauder said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're comparing Randi Rhodes to Limbaugh?
> 
> You missed your last two med doses, clearly. But I suppose if The Obama did some far-left Liberal radio show for a creampuff interview, you'd be okay with that.
> 
> I said, The Obama is far too intelligent to get in that arena.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, YOUR personal validation of Rush Limbaugh is about as universal as a liberal's opinion of Rhodes.  Don't let that get in the way of acting like a Rush fanboy though.  Obama doing an interview, "creampuff" in your opinion or not, isn't a DEBATE, now is it little guy?  Maybe you should go sit at the kiddy table and get your radio hero some digits.
> 
> 
> ps, by all means... talk shit.  In case you haven't noticed I enjoy stomping mudholes in the asses of people like you.  I suggest you pick up your gauntlet and adjust your tone.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't validate Limbaugh. Your disdain for him is clouding your vision of the topic. Like it or not, he's the #1 radio commentator in the country. I didn't address whether The Obama should go on his show. I opined why he wouldn't.
> 
> If you think you're some kind of internet tuffguy, and that you can actually "stomp" folks, you are as delusional as you are stupid, and I have been wrong in my estimation. It's actually a week's worth of meds you missed.
> 
> Clown.
Click to expand...



My opinion of Limbaugh has nothing to do with the total joke that is a radio DJ calling out an American President to a debate.  And yes, by even giving the slightest validity to the idea you DO validate Rush a some kind of political contender.  Like it or not, even #1 radio entertainers are still not anywhere close to being a debate contender with the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.  


Oh, you are wrong about a whole lot more than who is missing what medication, fuck knuckle.  Hell, I'd rather be CLOWNING your FOOL ass than trying to defend some court jester challenge.  Now, like I said, I suggest you change your panties because I thrive on turning out people like you in this forum.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Chris said:


> I dare Limbaugh to lose 50 pounds and get off OxyContin.



I can't tell you how it makes one swoon when a liberal speaks so elequently about an opponents weight, or pain threshold.  Ahhhhh.

Time for a review:
  Since Liberals see their view as a higher calling that that of Conservatives, they mistakenly believe that it is entirely appropriate for then to use, not logic, facts,  nor accepted debating techniques, but ad hominem attacks on the physical appearance, personal history, or imaginary mental defects. Notice how the Liberal replaces intellect with emotion. This is, no doubt, based on a medieval concept of recognizing witches and demons. In fact, Liberals attempt to deal with opponents in similar fashion: recall Clarence Thomas High Tech Lynching.


----------



## DiveCon

Midnight Marauder said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> actually, to be fair, it would need to be on neutral ground
> no way anyone would accept Rush's show as such
> 
> 
> 
> Which is, exactly what I said. O'Reilly is one thing, not a partisan hack. Limbaugh is a totally one-sided other.
Click to expand...

i propose the site be GWU
thats about as neutral as you will get


----------



## ScreamingEagle

Shogun said:


> ScreamingEagle said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Limbaugh "is somebody"?  What, EXACTLY, are his credentials that should temp an American President?  Should Bush have gone at it with Randi Rhodes?  She's somebody on the radio, yes?  If you can't fathom the ridiculous, and let's face it LAUGHABLE, nature of some radio entertainer challenging the President then I guess it's pretty clear why you don't get my farcical challenge to Limbaugh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently Rush "is somebody".....at least according to top liberals who say he is the defacto leader of the Republican party.
> 
> ""Top Democrats believe they have struck political gold by depicting Rush Limbaugh as the new face of the Republican Party, "
> 
> "The report points to Democratic strategists Stanley Greenberg and James Carville and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel as leading the effort..."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, just because the GOP has gonads the size of a field mouse nutsack when it comes to the republican platform doesn't mean that a radio disk jockey should expect anything but a round of laughter from such blustered bravado.  Like I said, if you feel this strongly about Rush's leadership then put your vote where your talking points are.
Click to expand...


He'd sure make a better prez than Obama...

The GOP needs to get back to its conservative roots....Rush is one of the very few who actually promotes conservatism and opposes Obama's headlong rush toward fascistic socialism....

We all know who would win the debate.....and it ain't D'Ohbama.


----------



## Shogun

Midnight Marauder said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama would be crushed like a bug.  No way he would ever do that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ....which is why Rush has to hide behind his little cave based radio show to invoke a challenge, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me, if Rush is such the MAN, why doesn't he run for office?  Hell, if you feel so strongly then I guess YOU HAVE SOMEONE TO RUN IN '12, yes?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Limbaugh doesn't crave power, and likes his millions in salary. What fool would leave a job which pays millions, to try for a job that pays a low six figures?
Click to expand...


suuuuuuuuure, dude... whatever you say..  


looks like were having CHICKEN for dinner and, uh, Midnight Marauder lol still has feathers on his cyst filled ass!


----------



## Chris

PoliticalChic said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> I dare Limbaugh to lose 50 pounds and get off OxyContin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't tell you how it makes one swoon when a liberal speaks so elequently about an opponents weight, or pain threshold.  Ahhhhh.
> 
> Time for a review:
> Since Liberals see their view as a higher calling that that of Conservatives, they mistakenly believe that it is entirely appropriate for then to use, not logic, facts,  nor accepted debating techniques, but ad hominem attacks on the physical appearance, personal history, or imaginary mental defects. Notice how the Liberal replaces intellect with emotion. This is, no doubt, based on a medieval concept of recognizing witches and demons. In fact, Liberals attempt to deal with opponents in similar fashion: recall Clarence Thomas High Tech Lynching.
Click to expand...


I need a Vicodin.....RUSHHH!!!!!


----------



## Shogun

DiveCon said:


> actually, to be fair, it would need to be on neutral ground
> no way anyone would accept Rush's show as such



of course not.  But hey, this is WND fodder for fanboys who who really gives a fuck about the laughable details of such a goofnut challenge?


----------



## Midnight Marauder

Shogun said:


> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, YOUR personal validation of Rush Limbaugh is about as universal as a liberal's opinion of Rhodes.  Don't let that get in the way of acting like a Rush fanboy though.  Obama doing an interview, "creampuff" in your opinion or not, isn't a DEBATE, now is it little guy?  Maybe you should go sit at the kiddy table and get your radio hero some digits.
> 
> 
> ps, by all means... talk shit.  In case you haven't noticed I enjoy stomping mudholes in the asses of people like you.  I suggest you pick up your gauntlet and adjust your tone.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't validate Limbaugh. Your disdain for him is clouding your vision of the topic. Like it or not, he's the #1 radio commentator in the country. I didn't address whether The Obama should go on his show. I opined why he wouldn't.
> 
> If you think you're some kind of internet tuffguy, and that you can actually "stomp" folks, you are as delusional as you are stupid, and I have been wrong in my estimation. It's actually a week's worth of meds you missed.
> 
> Clown.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> My opinion of Limbaugh has nothing to do with the total joke that is a radio DJ calling out an American President to a debate.  And yes, by even giving the slightest validity to the idea you DO validate Rush a some kind of political contender.  Like it or not, even #1 radio entertainers are still not anywhere close to being a debate contender with the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
> 
> 
> Oh, you are wrong about a whole lot more than who is missing what medication, fuck knuckle.  Hell, I'd rather be CLOWNING your FOOL ass than trying to defend some court jester challenge.  Now, like I said, I suggest you change your panties because I thrive on turning out people like you in this forum.
Click to expand...

I didn't give any validity to the idea. And you're the only one so far with soiled diapers. Why don't you go back and read what I actually said, perchance to stop making yourself look like a total idiot. And change those shit filled, rotten diapers. You're stinking up a classy place.


----------



## xsited1

Shogun said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama would be crushed like a bug.  No way he would ever do that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ....which is why Rush has to hide behind his little cave based radio show to invoke a challenge, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me, if Rush is such the MAN, why doesn't he run for office?  Hell, if you feel so strongly then I guess YOU HAVE SOMEONE TO RUN IN '12, yes?
Click to expand...


I have someone to run in 2012, but he wouldn't be a Republican.

Face facts:  Barack Obama is a mental midget compared to Rush Limbaugh.  I am not supporting Rush or do I even listen to his show.  In fact, liberals know far more about Rush Limbaugh than I'll ever know.  However, Obama is just not that smart.  He relies on his teleprompter to introduce people.  He doesn't know how basic things work like the stock market.  It would be a no-win situation for Obama.


----------



## ScreamingEagle

Chris said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> I dare Limbaugh to lose 50 pounds and get off OxyContin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't tell you how it makes one swoon when a liberal speaks so elequently about an opponents weight, or pain threshold.  Ahhhhh.
> 
> Time for a review:
> Since Liberals see their view as a higher calling that that of Conservatives, they mistakenly believe that it is entirely appropriate for then to use, not logic, facts,  nor accepted debating techniques, but ad hominem attacks on the physical appearance, personal history, or imaginary mental defects. Notice how the Liberal replaces intellect with emotion. This is, no doubt, based on a medieval concept of recognizing witches and demons. In fact, Liberals attempt to deal with opponents in similar fashion: recall Clarence Thomas High Tech Lynching.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I need a Vicodin.....RUSHHH!!!!!
Click to expand...


You lose your hearing and we'll see how YOU handle it.


----------



## DiveCon

Chris said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> I dare Limbaugh to lose 50 pounds and get off OxyContin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't tell you how it makes one swoon when a liberal speaks so elequently about an opponents weight, or pain threshold.  Ahhhhh.
> 
> Time for a review:
> Since Liberals see their view as a higher calling that that of Conservatives, they mistakenly believe that it is entirely appropriate for then to use, not logic, facts,  nor accepted debating techniques, but ad hominem attacks on the physical appearance, personal history, or imaginary mental defects. Notice how the Liberal replaces intellect with emotion. This is, no doubt, based on a medieval concept of recognizing witches and demons. In fact, Liberals attempt to deal with opponents in similar fashion: recall Clarence Thomas High Tech Lynching.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I need a Vicodin.....RUSHHH!!!!!
Click to expand...

more proof you are a moron


----------



## Midnight Marauder

xsited1 said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama would be crushed like a bug.  No way he would ever do that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ....which is why Rush has to hide behind his little cave based radio show to invoke a challenge, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me, if Rush is such the MAN, why doesn't he run for office?  Hell, if you feel so strongly then I guess YOU HAVE SOMEONE TO RUN IN '12, yes?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have someone to run in 2012, but he wouldn't be a Republican.
> 
> Face facts:  Barack Obama is a mental midget compared to Rush Limbaugh.  I am not supporting Rush or do I even listen to his show.  In fact, liberals know far more about Rush Limbaugh than I'll ever know.  However, Obama is just not that smart.  He relies on his teleprompter to introduce people.  He doesn't know how basic things work like the stock market.  It would be a no-win situation for Obama.
Click to expand...

Obama's intelligent. Don't ever underestimate that. He's intelligent enough to know what card table to not sit at.


----------



## Shogun

ScreamingEagle said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ScreamingEagle said:
> 
> 
> 
> Evidently Rush "is somebody".....at least according to top liberals who say he is the defacto leader of the Republican party.
> 
> ""Top Democrats believe they have struck political gold by depicting Rush Limbaugh as the new face of the Republican Party, "
> 
> "The report points to Democratic strategists Stanley Greenberg and James Carville and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel as leading the effort..."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, just because the GOP has gonads the size of a field mouse nutsack when it comes to the republican platform doesn't mean that a radio disk jockey should expect anything but a round of laughter from such blustered bravado.  Like I said, if you feel this strongly about Rush's leadership then put your vote where your talking points are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He'd sure make a better prez than Obama...
> 
> The GOP needs to get back to its conservative roots....Rush is one of the very few who actually promotes conservatism and opposes Obama's headlong rush toward fascistic socialism....
> 
> We all know who would win the debate.....and it ain't D'Ohbama.
Click to expand...


Opinions and assholes, buddy.  

and no, what we all know is why the big conservative bear needs to hide in his little bear cave while you rushbots make excuses for your failed elections.  Like I said, if you feel so strongly then put your vote where your talking points are... 

I have no doubt that a debate on a neutral setting would eviscerate what pathetic semblance of leadership you are grasping at.


----------



## ScreamingEagle

True, he knows how to stack the cards...


----------



## ScreamingEagle

Shogun said:


> ScreamingEagle said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hey, just because the GOP has gonads the size of a field mouse nutsack when it comes to the republican platform doesn't mean that a radio disk jockey should expect anything but a round of laughter from such blustered bravado.  Like I said, if you feel this strongly about Rush's leadership then put your vote where your talking points are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He'd sure make a better prez than Obama...
> 
> The GOP needs to get back to its conservative roots....Rush is one of the very few who actually promotes conservatism and opposes Obama's headlong rush toward fascistic socialism....
> 
> We all know who would win the debate.....and it ain't D'Ohbama.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Opinions and assholes, buddy.
> 
> and no, what we all know is why the big conservative bear needs to hide in his little bear cave while you rushbots make excuses for your failed elections.  Like I said, if you feel so strongly then put your vote where your talking points are...
> 
> I have no doubt that a debate on a neutral setting would eviscerate what pathetic semblance of leadership you are grasping at.
Click to expand...

LOL...like your loser debates?


----------



## xsited1

Midnight Marauder said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....which is why Rush has to hide behind his little cave based radio show to invoke a challenge, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me, if Rush is such the MAN, why doesn't he run for office?  Hell, if you feel so strongly then I guess YOU HAVE SOMEONE TO RUN IN '12, yes?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have someone to run in 2012, but he wouldn't be a Republican.
> 
> Face facts:  Barack Obama is a mental midget compared to Rush Limbaugh.  I am not supporting Rush or do I even listen to his show.  In fact, liberals know far more about Rush Limbaugh than I'll ever know.  However, Obama is just not that smart.  He relies on his teleprompter to introduce people.  He doesn't know how basic things work like the stock market.  It would be a no-win situation for Obama.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Obama's intelligent. Don't ever underestimate that. He's intelligent enough to know what card table to not sit at.
Click to expand...


Obama is intelligent enough to know which thugs to hire.  Alone, he's a mental midget.


----------



## Midnight Marauder

Shogun said:


> Opinions and assholes, buddy.
> 
> and no, what we all know is why the big conservative bear needs to hide in his little bear cave while you rushbots make excuses for your failed elections.  Like I said, if you feel so strongly then put your vote where your talking points are...
> 
> I have no doubt that a debate on a neutral setting would eviscerate what pathetic semblance of leadership you are grasping at.


Your biggest problem so far is, assuming facts not in evidence. I am not a Limbaugh fan, don't listen to his show, and don't even agree with most of his views which reach me.

Your type of assumption asshattery is among the worst kind, makes generally intelligent people look really stupid. Like you do right now.

Are you the idea police? Limbaugh challenges Obama to a debate, in Limbaugh's arena, and I point out it's nothing but posturing blatherskite because Limbaugh knows The Obama is far too intelligent to fall for such a scam, and that's somehow being a fan of Limbaugh and endorsing the idea?

Are you seeing how stupid you've made yourself look yet?


----------



## Midnight Marauder

xsited1 said:


> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have someone to run in 2012, but he wouldn't be a Republican.
> 
> Face facts:  Barack Obama is a mental midget compared to Rush Limbaugh.  I am not supporting Rush or do I even listen to his show.  In fact, liberals know far more about Rush Limbaugh than I'll ever know.  However, Obama is just not that smart.  He relies on his teleprompter to introduce people.  He doesn't know how basic things work like the stock market.  It would be a no-win situation for Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> Obama's intelligent. Don't ever underestimate that. He's intelligent enough to know what card table to not sit at.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Obama is intelligent enough to know which thugs to hire.  Alone, he's a mental midget.
Click to expand...

No way. He didn't get to where he is by being a "mental midget" that's your first mistake.


----------



## Toro

I'll debate Limbaugh.

Shouldn't be too hard.


----------



## DiveCon

Toro said:


> I'll debate Limbaugh.
> 
> Shouldn't be too hard.


he would rip you apart


----------



## Meister

Chris said:


> I dare Limbaugh to lose 50 pounds and get off OxyContin.



I dare you to grow a couple and become a capitalist


----------



## PoliticalChic

Midnight Marauder said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama's intelligent. Don't ever underestimate that. He's intelligent enough to know what card table to not sit at.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama is intelligent enough to know which thugs to hire.  Alone, he's a mental midget.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No way. He didn't get to where he is by being a "mental midget" that's your first mistake.
Click to expand...


This man is a fine speaker. What remains to be learned is how intellent he is. The spokesman from his undergrad days would only say that he achieved no honors.

He has refused to allow his grad transcript to be revealed. One can only wonder why.

He was selected to be head of law review, in large part due to afirmative action.

As President, he appears mostly ideological, willing  in fact to spend political capital to push a left-wing agenda. It may or may not be successful. 

Although would love to hear an Obama-Limbaugh debate, we all know that- even though the WH started this dust-up, he will not accept the challenge.

Anyone think he would win this debate? Why?


----------



## AllieBaba

Has Obama ever won a debate? I don't believe he has.

Yet Limbaugh got the leader of the Republican party to apologize to him, has been working steadily pretty much unchallenged for more than 20 years, routinely exposes louts and fools...

Obama will never in a million years debate him.

For one thing, liars don't like debate. It's too easy to get tripped up. And he'd get called on his brazen doublespeak.

He will never do it. Someone who is afraid to let the press in the room when he's meeting with the Brit PM and who won't visit the military unless he has a tv crew is NOT interested in a debate with Rush.


----------



## AllieBaba

And a person's intelligence is secondary to his character. This is something the left has forgotten. Don't get all weak-kneed at alleged "intelligence". I have an I.Q. of 126, which is supposedly what Obama's is. My ex's is 139 or something thereabouts, his brother's is higher. They are knock kneed retards. Not only are they pathetic behind the wheel of a car, they are emotionally stunted, shallow morons who couldn't even pick out a casket and flowers for their own mother when she died.


----------



## editec

That fat NAZI gasbag would look like such a fool in any kind of _real _debate.

He'd discover that actually debating honestly is nothing like pontificating a load of partisan nonsense when one controls the microphone.

Not that Obama will bother, of course.

Nor should he.

Now, run along fat man and beat up on the Republican leadership who are frightened of you.

Obama's got a country to run.


----------



## AllieBaba

Once again. Pointing out that Nazis are ruining the world does not constitute "hoping" they will make people suffer.

Likewise, pointing out that Nazis are ruining the world does not constitute "hoping" they will make people suffer.


----------



## DiveCon

editec said:


> That fat NAZI gasbag would look like such a fool in any kind of _real _debate.
> 
> He'd discover that actually debating honestly is nothing like pontificating a load of partisan nonsense when one controls the microphone.
> 
> Not that Obama will bother, of course.
> 
> Nor should he.
> 
> Now, run along fat man and beat up on the Republican leadership who are frightened of you.
> 
> Obama's got a country to run.


wow, you sound more like a Nazi than Rush ever has


----------



## Missourian

Chris said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chris said:
> 
> 
> 
> I dare Limbaugh to lose 50 pounds and get off OxyContin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't tell you how it makes one swoon when a liberal speaks so elequently about an opponents weight, or pain threshold.  Ahhhhh.
> 
> Time for a review:
> Since Liberals see their view as a higher calling that that of Conservatives, they mistakenly believe that it is entirely appropriate for then to use, not logic, facts,  nor accepted debating techniques, but ad hominem attacks on the physical appearance, personal history, or imaginary mental defects. Notice how the Liberal replaces intellect with emotion. This is, no doubt, based on a medieval concept of recognizing witches and demons. In fact, Liberals attempt to deal with opponents in similar fashion: recall Clarence Thomas High Tech Lynching.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I need a Vicodin.....RUSHHH!!!!!
Click to expand...


Screw the legal drugs, get President Obama to hook you up with his coke dealer.


----------



## PoliticalChic

editec said:


> That fat NAZI gasbag would look like such a fool in any kind of _real _debate.
> 
> He'd discover that actually debating honestly is nothing like pontificating a load of partisan nonsense when one controls the microphone.
> 
> Not that Obama will bother, of course.
> 
> Nor should he.
> 
> Now, run along fat man and beat up on the Republican leadership who are frightened of you.
> 
> Obama's got a country to run.


Tell me, having listened to many of President Obama's speeches, are you really saying he would win? Then why won't he debate?

Just wondering, do you listen to the radio show? Can you explain why he is a "nazi," or are those the four letters left from your last Scrabble contest? You can Google the word if you don't actully know what it means.

Why do you suppose President Obama has brought up Limbaugh's name several times, yet will not accept the challenge?

If he is certain to win the debate, wouldn't he -pun intended- Rush to accept? What is the downside? He would look good: he calls Limbaugh out, accepts the challenge, wins? 

And, an added benefit: he puts to rest that old saw that smart Democrats go into politics, smart Republicans make a million, and buy the smart Democrats.

Enlighten me.


----------



## alan1

Shogun said:


> Why would Obama care to go on Rush's show to debate him?   Hell, I CHALLENGE RUSH LIMBAUGH TO DEBATE ON US MESSAGEBOARD.  IF HE DOESN'T, then he is a giant pussy.
> 
> 
> now... let's see how quickly Rush logs on.  I am about as important to Rush as Rush is to Obama.  You people want Rush on that kind of platform?  Put your vote where your big mouths are and get him out from his little radio cave.



Well, the democrat party (of which Mr Obama belongs to) has called Mr Limbaugh the leader of the republican party.  It would only make sense for the two party leaders to exchange ideas.

Limbaugh challenges Obama to debate on his show - On Politics - USATODAY.com



> Rush Limbaugh, apparently taking to heart *the Obama administration's description of him as the leader of the Republican Party,* has invited President Obama to come on his radio show for a debate.
> 
> The edgy, bombastic conservative, describing himself as a "harmless, lovable little fuzzball"  and "the Last Man Standing," wrapped the invitation in a long series of jibes at Obama, his policies, his party, his aides, his speaking style and the entertaining he's done during his six weeks at the White House.
> 
> "You are one of the most gifted public speakers of our age. I would think, Mr. President, you would jump at this opportunity," Limbaugh said on his show, which has millions of listeners on more than 600 radio stations.
> 
> Read the whole segment here. There's even a cartoon invitation in fancy script.
> 
> It's the latest chapter in a tale that began Saturday with Limbaugh reiterating his hope that Obama fails in a nationally televised speech to a conservative group, and has continued all week with *Democrats designating him the leader of the GOP *and Republicans stumbling over whether to embrace Limbaugh, reject him, ignore him or figure out something else.
> 
> We've asked the White House for a response to today's development.


----------



## Missourian

Shogun said:


> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, it looks like you took the suggestion seriously enough to contemplate his chances of "smelling good".  So, again, if Rush won't take my challenge seriously why would you imagine that Obama would take a challenge from a radio entertainer seriously?
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't say he would, or should. But he would be alot closer to doing that with Limbaugh, than Limbaugh would ever do with you. Because Limbaugh, like him or not, IS somebody.
> 
> You're not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Limbaugh "is somebody"?  What, EXACTLY, are his credentials that should temp an American President?  Should Bush have gone at it with Randi Rhodes?  She's somebody on the radio, yes?  If you can't fathom the ridiculous, and let's face it LAUGHABLE, nature of some radio entertainer challenging the President then I guess it's pretty clear why you don't get my farcical challenge to Limbaugh.
Click to expand...


Sorry Shogun but President Obama singled Rush Limbaugh out by name in a national address and said Rush was the problem...so if Rush wants to make the president back that up face to face,  I'm all for that. 

When Rush Limbaugh calls you out, I'll defend your right to challenge him to a confrontation.

EDIT: Dangit PC, that's the second time today you have stolen my thoughts...I'm going to get my stud-finder and locate your mind reading device


----------



## AllieBaba

Lol, good points.


----------



## Midnight Marauder

PoliticalChic said:


> Why do you suppose President Obama has brought up Limbaugh's name several times, yet will not accept the challenge?
> 
> If he is certain to win the debate, wouldn't he -pun intended- Rush to accept? What is the downside? He would look good: he calls Limbaugh out, accepts the challenge, wins?
> 
> And, an added benefit: he puts to rest that old saw that smart Democrats go into politics, smart Republicans make a million, and buy the smart Democrats.
> 
> Enlighten me.


This is what I left unsaid from before, during the elitist moronic rant about why Obama should take this "challenge" seriously. Which to that point, no one had suggested.

If Limbaugh is so far below The Obama, why would The Obama find him worthy of so much mention? And if he is worthy of so much mention, why not worthy of a debate?

They could do it pay-per-view, with the revenue going to charity.


----------



## AllieBaba

Never happen. Obama is removing himself from the arena. He's about widening the gap between himself and accountability, not narrowing it.


----------



## Toro

AllieBaba said:


> Has Obama ever won a debate? I don't believe he has.



Polls showed that most people thought Obama won the debates against McCain.


----------



## Toro

DiveCon said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'll debate Limbaugh.
> 
> Shouldn't be too hard.
> 
> 
> 
> he would rip you apart
Click to expand...


Only if I had a pale of KFC!


----------



## Midnight Marauder

Toro said:


> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> Has Obama ever won a debate? I don't believe he has.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Polls showed that most people thought Obama won the debates against McCain.
Click to expand...

Some polls did, some didn't.


----------



## DiveCon

Toro said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'll debate Limbaugh.
> 
> Shouldn't be too hard.
> 
> 
> 
> he would rip you apart
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only if I had a pale of KFC!
Click to expand...

oh man
a fat joke


thats pretty low of you


----------



## DiveCon

Midnight Marauder said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> Has Obama ever won a debate? I don't believe he has.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Polls showed that most people thought Obama won the debates against McCain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Some polls did, some didn't.
Click to expand...

well, come on, it was McLame


----------



## Midnight Marauder

DiveCon said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> he would rip you apart
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only if I had a pale of KFC!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> oh man
> a fat joke
> 
> 
> thats pretty low of you
Click to expand...

I thought it was a bad spelling joke.


----------



## Midnight Marauder

DiveCon said:


> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Polls showed that most people thought Obama won the debates against McCain.
> 
> 
> 
> Some polls did, some didn't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> well, come on, it was McLame
Click to expand...

That The Obama didn't absolutely trounce McCain hands-down in the debates is still sort of a sticking point. Like if the Steelers managed only to win by 6 against a high school team. There'd be questions.


----------



## Neser Boha

I honestly can't believe that anyone seriously thinks that Limbaugh would win that one.  No way no how!  

And to whether Obama should debate him or not... seriously people, don't you think he's got a WAAAYYYY bigger fish to fry than to debate some over-zealous ideologue?  Sure, when the wars are over, the crisis is no longer, and public education's worth a shit, why shouldn't he... 

Don't wanna be a pessimist here... but I don't think that's gonna happen anytime soon...


----------



## Midnight Marauder

Neser Boha said:


> seriously people, don't you think he's got a WAAAYYYY bigger fish to fry than to debate some over-zealous ideologue?


Don't you think he has wayyyyyy bigger fish to fry than to even bring the dude's name up? We didn't see Bush using the bully pulpit to call out any of his media/pundit critics.


----------



## DiveCon

Midnight Marauder said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Only if I had a pale of KFC!
> 
> 
> 
> oh man
> a fat joke
> 
> 
> thats pretty low of you
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I thought it was a bad spelling joke.
Click to expand...

Meh, it was also a spelling error, but i dont point those out unless that person has also done so to me
attack the point not the spelling, as long as its close enough to actually figure out


----------



## DiveCon

Midnight Marauder said:


> Neser Boha said:
> 
> 
> 
> seriously people, don't you think he's got a WAAAYYYY bigger fish to fry than to debate some over-zealous ideologue?
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you think he has wayyyyyy bigger fish to fry than to even bring the dude's name up? We didn't see Bush using the bully pulpit to call out any of his media/pundit critics.
Click to expand...

you made my point for me


----------



## Midnight Marauder

DiveCon said:


> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> oh man
> a fat joke
> 
> 
> thats pretty low of you
> 
> 
> 
> I thought it was a bad spelling joke.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Meh, it was also a spelling error, but i dont point those out unless that person has also done so to me
> attack the point not the spelling, as long as its close enough to actually figure out
Click to expand...

I seldom do myself. it was a joke within a joke there, Dive.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Midnight Marauder said:


> The Obama cannot do that. Even though his interview with Bill O'Reilly went well, Bill was a friendly interviewer in that he isn't a partisan hack and stayed away from populist nonsense. Bill was firm, but The Obama came across very well in that arena.
> 
> Up against Rush, in that much more informal and partisan setting, there is no way The Obama can come out smelling good. He's far too intelligent to even try it.
> 
> Limbaugh knows that.
> 
> Hannity has had a standing invitation for The Obama to come on either his TV or radio shows, for months.



O'Reilly is a self aggrandizing buffoon...  He is partially responsible for the Marxist Muslim presently sitting in the Executive and driving the US Economy over the edge.

Limbaugh's never been rude to any guest on his program and he wouldn't be rude to the Lord of the Idiots.  But you're correct, there's no way that Hussein will come out smelling good where his natural leftist odor is fanned to the open air.  Socialism never looks good in the light... which is why Socialists go to such lengths to conceal their intentions.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Toro said:


> I'll debate Limbaugh.
> 
> Shouldn't be too hard.



ROFLMNAO... you're right, it wouldn't be hard... you'd be eviscerated and you'd just sit there helpless to do a damn thing about it; and there's no real potential for effort to be found in that equation.


----------



## Midnight Marauder

PubliusInfinitum said:


> O'Reilly is a self aggrandizing buffoon...  He is partially responsible for the Marxist Muslim presently sitting in the Executive and driving the US Economy over the edge.


O'Reilly is a journalist who has traveled the world covering wars, politics, disasters, you name it and through it all has managed to remain non partisan and not an ideologue. He's tough but fair. He's as tough on the right as he is on the left. We need more people like him in the media.


> Socialism never looks good in the light... which is why Socialists go to such lengths to conceal their intentions.


They only conceal it so long as they're insecure. Once they're secure in their power, they lose that fear of being honest. This bunch is already doing so.


----------



## Care4all

xsited1 said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama would be crushed like a bug.  No way he would ever do that.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ....which is why Rush has to hide behind his little cave based radio show to invoke a challenge, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me, if Rush is such the MAN, why doesn't he run for office?  Hell, if you feel so strongly then I guess YOU HAVE SOMEONE TO RUN IN '12, yes?
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have someone to run in 2012, but he wouldn't be a Republican.
> 
> Face facts:  Barack Obama is a mental midget compared to Rush Limbaugh.  I am not supporting Rush or do I even listen to his show.  In fact, liberals know far more about Rush Limbaugh than I'll ever know.  However, Obama is just not that smart.  He relies on his teleprompter to introduce people.  He doesn't know how basic things work like the stock market.  It would be a no-win situation for Obama.
Click to expand...


rush is a bozo, he is divisive....  divisivemess is a tool of Evil...divide and conquer is the tool of satan....

continue to stay away from him, you'll feel cleaner and will have less need to waste drinking water to shower imo....


no president would ever debate any broadcast host....no need, they're president....sheesh, when does common sense come in to play....?

it's a JOKE that any of you even thought this could even be in contention???

i'm SHOCKED actually that anyone would even think that this would be appropriate for a president, any president, while we are paying him to lead our country, or ever for any reason????    you all are pretty funny just talking about it....

quite immaturely too!  but amusing none the less...

care


----------



## AllieBaba

Care4all said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....which is why Rush has to hide behind his little cave based radio show to invoke a challenge, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me, if Rush is such the MAN, why doesn't he run for office?  Hell, if you feel so strongly then I guess YOU HAVE SOMEONE TO RUN IN '12, yes?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have someone to run in 2012, but he wouldn't be a Republican.
> 
> Face facts:  Barack Obama is a mental midget compared to Rush Limbaugh.  I am not supporting Rush or do I even listen to his show.  In fact, liberals know far more about Rush Limbaugh than I'll ever know.  However, Obama is just not that smart.  He relies on his teleprompter to introduce people.  He doesn't know how basic things work like the stock market.  It would be a no-win situation for Obama.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> rush is a bozo, he is divisive....  divisivemess is a tool of Evil...divide and conquer is the tool of satan....
> 
> continue to stay away from him, you'll feel cleaner and will have less need to waste drinking water to shower imo....
> 
> 
> no president would ever debate any broadcast host....no need, they're president....sheesh, when does common sense come in to play....?
> 
> it's a JOKE that any of you even thought this could even be in contention???
> 
> i'm SHOCKED actually that anyone would even think that this would be appropriate for a president, any president, while we are paying him to lead our country, or ever for any reason????    you all are pretty funny just talking about it....
> 
> quite immaturely too!  but amusing none the less?
> 
> care
Click to expand...



Fiddlesticks.

If he was divisive, he wouldn't have the HUGE listening audience he has. 

You know, Obama is the one who is immature. He's the president of the US and he has taken it upon himself to attempt to marginalize the host of the nation's #1 talk show.

What a fucking idiot.


----------



## Meister

Care4all said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....which is why Rush has to hide behind his little cave based radio show to invoke a challenge, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me, if Rush is such the MAN, why doesn't he run for office?  Hell, if you feel so strongly then I guess YOU HAVE SOMEONE TO RUN IN '12, yes?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have someone to run in 2012, but he wouldn't be a Republican.
> 
> Face facts:  Barack Obama is a mental midget compared to Rush Limbaugh.  I am not supporting Rush or do I even listen to his show.  In fact, liberals know far more about Rush Limbaugh than I'll ever know.  However, Obama is just not that smart.  He relies on his teleprompter to introduce people.  He doesn't know how basic things work like the stock market.  It would be a no-win situation for Obama.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> rush is a bozo, he is divisive....  divisivemess is a tool of Evil...divide and conquer is the tool of satan....
> 
> continue to stay away from him, you'll feel cleaner and will have less need to waste drinking water to shower imo....
> 
> 
> no president would ever debate any broadcast host....no need, they're president....sheesh, when does common sense come in to play....?
> 
> it's a JOKE that any of you even thought this could even be in contention???
> 
> i'm SHOCKED actually that anyone would even think that this would be appropriate for a president, any president, while we are paying him to lead our country, or ever for any reason????    you all are pretty funny just talking about it....
> 
> quite immaturely too!  but amusing none the less?
> 
> care
Click to expand...


Don't you think it's a joke that obama and his administration is even bringing Limbaugh into their conversation??


----------



## DiveCon

Care4all said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....which is why Rush has to hide behind his little cave based radio show to invoke a challenge, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me, if Rush is such the MAN, why doesn't he run for office? Hell, if you feel so strongly then I guess YOU HAVE SOMEONE TO RUN IN '12, yes?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have someone to run in 2012, but he wouldn't be a Republican.
> 
> Face facts: Barack Obama is a mental midget compared to Rush Limbaugh. I am not supporting Rush or do I even listen to his show. In fact, liberals know far more about Rush Limbaugh than I'll ever know. However, Obama is just not that smart. He relies on his teleprompter to introduce people. He doesn't know how basic things work like the stock market. It would be a no-win situation for Obama.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> rush is a bozo, he is divisive.... divisivemess is a tool of Evil...divide and conquer is the tool of satan....
> 
> continue to stay away from him, you'll feel cleaner and will have less need to waste drinking water to shower imo....
> 
> 
> no president would ever debate any broadcast host....no need, they're president....sheesh, when does common sense come in to play....?
> 
> it's a JOKE that any of you even thought this could even be in contention???
> 
> i'm SHOCKED actually that anyone would even think that this would be appropriate for a president, any president, while we are paying him to lead our country, or ever for any reason????  you all are pretty funny just talking about it....
> 
> quite immaturely too! but amusing none the less...
> 
> care
Click to expand...

then why are you being so divisive yourself?



if he is such a joke, why would Obama bring him up?


----------



## Midnight Marauder

Meister said:


> Don't you think it's a joke that obama and his adminstration is even bring Limbaugh into their conversation??


They cannot see that double standard through their partisan blinders and their hero worship.


----------



## DiveCon

Meister said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have someone to run in 2012, but he wouldn't be a Republican.
> 
> Face facts:  Barack Obama is a mental midget compared to Rush Limbaugh.  I am not supporting Rush or do I even listen to his show.  In fact, liberals know far more about Rush Limbaugh than I'll ever know.  However, Obama is just not that smart.  He relies on his teleprompter to introduce people.  He doesn't know how basic things work like the stock market.  It would be a no-win situation for Obama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rush is a bozo, he is divisive....  divisivemess is a tool of Evil...divide and conquer is the tool of satan....
> 
> continue to stay away from him, you'll feel cleaner and will have less need to waste drinking water to shower imo....
> 
> 
> no president would ever debate any broadcast host....no need, they're president....sheesh, when does common sense come in to play....?
> 
> it's a JOKE that any of you even thought this could even be in contention???
> 
> i'm SHOCKED actually that anyone would even think that this would be appropriate for a president, any president, while we are paying him to lead our country, or ever for any reason????    you all are pretty funny just talking about it....
> 
> quite immaturely too!  but amusing none the less?
> 
> care
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Don't you think it's a joke that obama and his adminstration is even bringing Limbaugh into their conversation??
Click to expand...

can someone remind me of the media people Bush called out by name?
or Reagan?


----------



## glockmail

I was listing today and someone called and challenged him to debate on TV with a negotiated venue, and he wouldn't agree to it. It's a stunt.


----------



## Toro

DiveCon said:


> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> oh man
> a fat joke
> 
> 
> thats pretty low of you
> 
> 
> 
> I thought it was a bad spelling joke.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Meh, it was also a spelling error, but i dont point those out unless that person has also done so to me
> attack the point not the spelling, as long as its close enough to actually figure out
Click to expand...


wot is rong wit mi speling?


----------



## Missourian

Toro said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'll debate Limbaugh.
> 
> Shouldn't be too hard.
> 
> 
> 
> he would rip you apart
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Only if I had a pale of KFC!
Click to expand...


So after he ripped ya apart he'd eat your lunch too?  You are a glutton for punishment.


----------



## Patriot2009

Midnight Marauder said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would Obama care to go on Rush's show to debate him?   Hell, I CHALLENGE RUSH LIMBAUGH TO DEBATE ON US MESSAGEBOARD.  IF HE DOESN'T, then he is a giant pussy.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you really think busy, rich people like Limbaugh post on message boards?
Click to expand...


Ole Rash Limburger is a genius showman in the mold of P.T. Barnum, who was credited with the observation that there&#8217;s a sucker born every minute.  In other words, he&#8217;s a charlatan who spoon feeds the right wing what they want to hear and sells Sleep Number Beds, Blue Emu, Oreck Vacuums and other stuff while they&#8217;re in rapture. 

If he thought that he could sell enough product by posting here he'd do it in a New York second, or have it done by a surrogate on the sly!


----------



## del

Toro said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought it was a bad spelling joke.
> 
> 
> 
> Meh, it was also a spelling error, but i dont point those out unless that person has also done so to me
> attack the point not the spelling, as long as its close enough to actually figure out
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> wot is rong wit mi speling?
Click to expand...


nuttin


----------



## Shadow

editec said:


> That fat NAZI gasbag would look like such a fool in any kind of _real _debate.
> 
> He'd discover that actually debating honestly is nothing like pontificating a load of partisan nonsense when one controls the microphone.
> 
> Not that Obama will bother, of course.
> 
> Nor should he.
> 
> Now, run along fat man and beat up on the Republican leadership who are frightened of you.
> 
> Obama's got a country to run.



Yeah...run the country into the ground.  If Oblah blah is so busy,why did he send his thugs to do his petty bidding then?  If Odumbo is so thin skinned that he can't handle Rush's commentary without blowing a gasket..it's going to be a long 4 years for the dipshit.


----------



## Shadow

Midnight Marauder said:


> Neser Boha said:
> 
> 
> 
> seriously people, don't you think he's got a WAAAYYYY bigger fish to fry than to debate some over-zealous ideologue?
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you think he has wayyyyyy bigger fish to fry than to even bring the dude's name up? We didn't see Bush using the bully pulpit to call out any of his media/pundit critics.
Click to expand...



Oblah blah has been doing this dating back to the elections.  He had to have his lackeys trash Joe the plumber (a private citizen) because his huge ego couldn't stand the heat of any opposition.  We will see a lot more whiny,cry baby bullshit from this immature dipshit the left elected in the next 4 years.


----------



## Shadow

Care4all said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....which is why Rush has to hide behind his little cave based radio show to invoke a challenge, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell me, if Rush is such the MAN, why doesn't he run for office?  Hell, if you feel so strongly then I guess YOU HAVE SOMEONE TO RUN IN '12, yes?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have someone to run in 2012, but he wouldn't be a Republican.
> 
> Face facts:  Barack Obama is a mental midget compared to Rush Limbaugh.  I am not supporting Rush or do I even listen to his show.  In fact, liberals know far more about Rush Limbaugh than I'll ever know.  However, Obama is just not that smart.  He relies on his teleprompter to introduce people.  He doesn't know how basic things work like the stock market.  It would be a no-win situation for Obama.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> rush is a bozo, he is divisive....  divisivemess is a tool of Evil...divide and conquer is the tool of satan....
> 
> continue to stay away from him, you'll feel cleaner and will have less need to waste drinking water to shower imo....
> 
> 
> no president would ever debate any broadcast host....no need, they're president....sheesh, when does common sense come in to play....?
> 
> it's a JOKE that any of you even thought this could even be in contention???
> 
> i'm SHOCKED actually that anyone would even think that this would be appropriate for a president, any president, while we are paying him to lead our country, or ever for any reason????    you all are pretty funny just talking about it....
> 
> quite immaturely too!  but amusing none the less...
> 
> care
Click to expand...


If divide and conquer is the tool of satan,then Oblah blah must be the devil...he started this big bru ha ha with Rush.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Midnight Marauder said:


> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> O'Reilly is a self aggrandizing buffoon...  He is partially responsible for the Marxist Muslim presently sitting in the Executive and driving the US Economy over the edge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> O'Reilly is a journalist who has traveled the world covering wars, politics, disasters, you name it and through it all has managed to remain non partisan and not an ideologue. He's tough but fair. He's as tough on the right as he is on the left. We need more people like him in the media.
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism never looks good in the light... which is why Socialists go to such lengths to conceal their intentions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They only conceal it so long as they're insecure. Once they're secure in their power, they lose that fear of being honest. This bunch is already doing so.
Click to expand...


Not an ideologue?  ROLMNAO... Why don't you explain to my what you think an ideologue is...  and were I you, I'd consult a dictionary;  As I said O'Reilly is a self aggrandizing buffoon... He is interested in what promotes Bill O'Reilly... and that he sets aside the adovocacy of immutable, bed-rock principle in order to appear 'non-partisan' is all I need to know, to know that O'Reilly is part of the problem.

O'Reilly could have shut down the Hussein campaign... had I interviewed him, Lord Hussein would be forever known as a 'Former Presidential Candidate Hussein;' and that would be a result of his failure to respond to simple questions which would have exposed his Marxist intentions... 

To you, that's 'partisan', to me that's being an American.  Socialism is the antithesis of American... Socialism is cultural decadence... Socialism is cultural death... it's wrong, it's foolish and it's never acceptable in any 'ism'...

Never forget friend: THERE ARE NO LEFTIST AMERICANS... PERIOD!

O'Reilly disagrees... which once again, conclusively proves that he is part of the problem.


----------



## Midnight Marauder

PubliusInfinitum said:


> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> O'Reilly is a self aggrandizing buffoon...  He is partially responsible for the Marxist Muslim presently sitting in the Executive and driving the US Economy over the edge.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> O'Reilly is a journalist who has traveled the world covering wars, politics, disasters, you name it and through it all has managed to remain non partisan and not an ideologue. He's tough but fair. He's as tough on the right as he is on the left. We need more people like him in the media.
> 
> 
> 
> Socialism never looks good in the light... which is why Socialists go to such lengths to conceal their intentions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They only conceal it so long as they're insecure. Once they're secure in their power, they lose that fear of being honest. This bunch is already doing so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not an ideologue?  ROLMNAO... Why don't you explain to my what you think an ideologue is...  and were I you, I'd consult a dictionary;  As I said O'Reilly is a self aggrandizing buffoon... He is interested in what promotes Bill O'Reilly... and that he sets aside the adovocacy of immutable, bed-rock principle in order to appear 'non-partisan' is all I need to know, to know that O'Reilly is part of the problem.
> 
> O'Reilly could have shut down the Hussein campaign... had I interviewed him, Lord Hussein would be forever known as a 'Former Presidential Candidate Hussein;' and that would be a result of his failure to respond to simple questions which would have exposed his Marxist intentions...
> 
> To you, that's 'partisan', to me that's being an American.  Socialism is the antithesis of American... Socialism is cultural decadence... Socialism is cultural death... it's wrong, it's foolish and it's never acceptable in any 'ism'...
> 
> Never forget friend: THERE ARE NO LEFTIST AMERICANS... PERIOD!
> 
> O'Reilly disagrees... which once again, conclusively proves that he is part of the problem.
Click to expand...

He does agree. To understand O'Reilly, you have to do a little research. But you have him totally misjudged, which most people do.

It's the job of an interviewer to shut down a Presidential campaign? I get this feeling you didn't see the O'Reilly/Obama interview.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

editec said:


> That fat NAZI gasbag would look like such a fool in any kind of _real _debate.



Now don't be so hard on Toro... she does the best she can, God bless'er.

And I think it's just bad form to denigrate her weight...  people come in all sizes and shapes and that someone is 'heavy' doesn't make them a bad person...  



> He'd discover that actually debating honestly is nothing like pontificating a load of partisan nonsense when one controls the microphone.



So you've pontificated loads of partisan nonsense while controlling a microphone?  I gotta say that it's nice that you finally experienced this little epiphany... as it's been obvious to the rest of us that you're painfully ill-equipped for debate.



> Not that Obama will bother, of course.



Well "bother" is a poor choice of a word, as The Lord of you Idiots has no potential upside by taking Limbaugh up on his challenge...  We've all seen the Coke-head Marxist grand puhbah when he's working without a teleprompter net...  HE's a mess...  

Limbaugh on the otherhand spends 15 hours a week free-thinking before 22 MILLION PEOPLE...  He instinctively knows what he believes... and he isn't afraid of who knows it.



> Nor should he.



ROFL... Easy, don't spot... Hussein isn't going to risk it... He knows what will happen and knowing THAT is all he needs to know.



> Now, run along fat man and beat up on the Republican leadership who are frightened of you.
> 
> Obama's got a country to run.



LOL... Is there anyone on this site that really believes that this idiot is anything other than a radical leftist?  

Anyone?
.
.
.
.
.
.

Anyone at all?


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Midnight Marauder said:


> It's the job of an interviewer to shut down a Presidential campaign? I get this feeling you didn't see the O'Reilly/Obama interview.



Well I read his books The No Spin Zone and Culture Warrior; and I am a semi-regular veiwer of The Factor... and I saw the interview...  so you're all over it.

The JOB of an interviewer is to expose the interviewEE to questions which provide insight into who they are... IT'S THE JOB OF AN AMERICAN WHO IS INTERVIEWING A MARXIST MUSLIM, WHO IS CLOAKING HIMSELF BEHIND THE FACADE OF A CENTRIST CHRISTIAN, IN ORDER TO PROMOTE HIMSELF AS A CANDIDATE FOR THE PRESIDENCY OF THE US TO EXPOSE THAT MARXIST FUCK FOR WHAT HE IS...  

Hells bells man... O'Reilly didn't have the sack to ask Hussein if, as a Christian, if HE  BELIEVES THAT Muslims are going to Hell...


----------



## Vel

Neser Boha said:


> I honestly can't believe that anyone seriously thinks that Limbaugh would win that one.  No way no how!
> 
> And to whether Obama should debate him or not... seriously people, don't you think he's got a WAAAYYYY bigger fish to fry than to debate some over-zealous ideologue?  Sure, when the wars are over, the crisis is no longer, and public education's worth a shit, why shouldn't he...
> 
> Don't wanna be a pessimist here... but I don't think that's gonna happen anytime soon...




You know, given the state of our nation you would think that the Obama Whitehouse would be consumed morning to night with finding ways to help Americans... AND... you would be wrong. The article clearly stated that the efforts to demonize a radio talk show host are originating from the Whitehouse. Bless their ignorant little hearts..the dems haven't figured out that the presidential campaign ended back in November.


----------



## oreo

Midnight Marauder said:


> The Obama cannot do that. Even though his interview with Bill O'Reilly went well, Bill was a friendly interviewer in that he isn't a partisan hack and stayed away from populist nonsense. Bill was firm, but The Obama came across very well in that arena.
> 
> Up against Rush, in that much more informal and partisan setting, there is no way The Obama can come out smelling good. He's far too intelligent to even try it.
> 
> Limbaugh knows that.
> 
> Hannity has had a standing invitation for The Obama to come on either his TV or radio shows, for months.



"He's far too intelligent to debate Rush Limbaugh">  Does that really make any sense to you?  It appears to me that he's probably a little intimidated by someone or anyone who would actually criticise his current policies, therefore putting him on the spot to defend his policies.  _Obama won't debate anyone regarding his policies, even going to the point of pre-selecting reporters at news conferences--so he knows exactly what they're going to be asking._  An example-of that was during the news conference regarding the stimulus bill.


----------



## oreo

Vel6377 said:


> Neser Boha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I honestly can't believe that anyone seriously thinks that Limbaugh would win that one.  No way no how!
> 
> And to whether Obama should debate him or not... seriously people, don't you think he's got a WAAAYYYY bigger fish to fry than to debate some over-zealous ideologue?  Sure, when the wars are over, the crisis is no longer, and public education's worth a shit, why shouldn't he...
> 
> Don't wanna be a pessimist here... but I don't think that's gonna happen anytime soon...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You know, given the state of our nation you would think that the Obama Whitehouse would be consumed morning to night with finding ways to help Americans... AND... you would be wrong. The article clearly stated that the efforts to demonize a radio talk show host are originating from the Whitehouse. Bless their ignorant little hearts..the dems haven't figured out that the presidential campaign ended back in November.
Click to expand...


It's only designed to smoke screen the masse's into looking at a conservative talk show host, to keep the masse's eyes off of what the White House is actually doing.  Rush can stir up a lot of hate, especially with left wing way out wacco's.  The hate from this group aka (moveon.org) was evident when Bush was in office.  The Obama Whitehouse is just trying to stir up the anger movement again coming from this group.  

I don't ever remember the Bush Whitehouse going after Al Franken or even mentioning his name.  President Bush never said to Democrats--"Don't listen to Al Franken or Keith Obermann."

LOL!  I think this backfires on them.  Anyone with half a brain knows that an a.m. talk show host is not running for political office, & would eventually realise that's something is really weird about the DNC actually spending money in an off-election year to bring up what Limbaugh has to say.   Millions of Americans are fairly upset over all this spending & bail-out after bail-out.  They may just get curious enough to listen to what the opposite side of being liberal & tune into Rush Limbaugh.   

I'll bet Rush Limbaughs audiance has increased over this.


----------



## DiveCon

oreo said:


> Vel6377 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Neser Boha said:
> 
> 
> 
> I honestly can't believe that anyone seriously thinks that Limbaugh would win that one.  No way no how!
> 
> And to whether Obama should debate him or not... seriously people, don't you think he's got a WAAAYYYY bigger fish to fry than to debate some over-zealous ideologue?  Sure, when the wars are over, the crisis is no longer, and public education's worth a shit, why shouldn't he...
> 
> Don't wanna be a pessimist here... but I don't think that's gonna happen anytime soon...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You know, given the state of our nation you would think that the Obama Whitehouse would be consumed morning to night with finding ways to help Americans... AND... you would be wrong. The article clearly stated that the efforts to demonize a radio talk show host are originating from the Whitehouse. Bless their ignorant little hearts..the dems haven't figured out that the presidential campaign ended back in November.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's only designed to smoke screen the masse's into looking at a conservative talk show host, to keep the masse's eyes off of what the White House is actually doing.  Rush can stir up a lot of hate, especially with left wing way out wacco's.  The hate from this group aka (moveon.org) was evident when Bush was in office.  The Obama Whitehouse is just trying to stir up the anger movement again coming from this group.
> 
> I don't ever remember the Bush Whitehouse going after Al Franken or even mentioning his name.  President Bush never said to Democrats--"Don't listen to Al Franken or Keith Obermann."
> 
> LOL!  I think this backfires on them.  Anyone with half a brain knows that an a.m. talk show host is not running for political office, & would eventually realise that's something is really weird about the DNC actually spending money in an off-election year to bring up what Limbaugh has to say.   Millions of Americans are fairly upset over all this spending & bail-out after bail-out.  They may just get curious enough to listen to what the opposite side of being liberal & tune into Rush Limbaugh.
> 
> I'll bet Rush Limbaughs audiance has increased over this.
Click to expand...

this is because Obama is a lightweight and is just a puppet
Moveon.org is running this show
and George Soros money is funding it


----------



## driveby

Shogun said:


> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would Obama care to go on Rush's show to debate him?   Hell, I CHALLENGE RUSH LIMBAUGH TO DEBATE ON US MESSAGEBOARD.  IF HE DOESN'T, then he is a giant pussy.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you really think busy, rich people like Limbaugh post on message boards?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you think American Presidents debate silly radio jockeys?
Click to expand...


No, Obama's people labeled him the "voice of the GOP".

So if Rush is the voice of the GOP and the Dems want both sides heard on the radio, here's a chance to kill two birds with one stone.......


----------



## Sinatra

driveby said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you really think busy, rich people like Limbaugh post on message boards?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think American Presidents debate silly radio jockeys?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, Obama's people labeled him the "voice of the GOP".
> 
> So if Rush is the voice of the GOP and the Dems want both sides heard on the radio, here's a chance to kill two birds with one stone.......
Click to expand...


Exactly - if Rush represents tens of millions of registered Republicans, then should not Mr. Obama take an hour to debate with him on the current economic mess and potential solutions?  

I have said it many times prior - take away his teleprompter, and Obama's IQ plummets.  He is no Kennedy - lacking both wit and the ability to grasp concepts quickly while communicating responses quickly.  Off-script and he struggles greatly - perhaps even more so than Bush...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6HVeaDDMdc]YouTube - Stupid Obama[/ame]


----------



## Zoomie1980

Shogun said:


> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed, it looks like you took the suggestion seriously enough to contemplate his chances of "smelling good".  So, again, if Rush won't take my challenge seriously why would you imagine that Obama would take a challenge from a radio entertainer seriously?
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't say he would, or should. But he would be alot closer to doing that with Limbaugh, than Limbaugh would ever do with you. Because Limbaugh, like him or not, IS somebody.
> 
> You're not.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Limbaugh "is somebody"?  What, EXACTLY, are his credentials that should temp an American President?  Should Bush have gone at it with Randi Rhodes?  She's somebody on the radio, yes?  If you can't fathom the ridiculous, and let's face it LAUGHABLE, nature of some radio entertainer challenging the President then I guess it's pretty clear why you don't get my farcical challenge to Limbaugh.
Click to expand...


Limbaugh is an American social Icon comparable to Elvis and the Beatles.  He is the GodFather of modern talk radio, has the largest radio audience of any radio personality in the world, and is one of the most wide recognizable media celebrities in the world.  He has over 30,000,000 regular listeners world-wide.  No one else is even close.  He is THE voice of American conservatism.  Many credit his influence as being the deciding factor in Bush beating both Gore and Keary and for the Republicans taking over Congress in 1994.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Shogun said:


> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would Obama care to go on Rush's show to debate him?   Hell, I CHALLENGE RUSH LIMBAUGH TO DEBATE ON US MESSAGEBOARD.  IF HE DOESN'T, then he is a giant pussy.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you really think busy, rich people like Limbaugh post on message boards?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you think American Presidents debate silly radio jockeys?
Click to expand...


Well it's good to know that the in-house advocates of adult-child sex are Obama Supporters, can't say that I'm shocked...

But President Hussein is the one that said that Limbaugh is the leader of the opposition... so if Limbaugh is a 'silly radio jock' then I'd love to hear how it is that the 'President of the US' who you hold in such high esteem, has spent a month crying about Rush Limbaugh...

But let's not get bogged down in yet another of you patented fatal tactical flaws...

President Hussein is a Marxist; and as such it is not possible for her to be an American... as *THERE ARE NO LEFTIST AMERICANS!*

She's The President of the United States;  which recently has been proven to be substantially less a deal than it was, even as early a mid-Jaunary of this year...  It turns out that even a lowly Muslim-Marxist can be elected to that office, even when the US is at war with Muslim Marxists.  So like everything else leftists touch, "The Office of the Presidency" is just not that big a deal anymore...  

I mean DAMN!  This jackass is making public STATEMENTS which DENIGRATE PRIVATE CITIZENS...  He can't even win a debate with a political celebrity...  THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES DOESN'T EVEN HAVE THE BALLS TO DEBATE A MAN WHO HE HAS DECLARED TO BE THE LEADER OF THE US POLITICAL OPPOSITION!

Now if HUSSEIN CAN'T WORK UP THE BALLS TO DEBATE RUSH LIMBAUGH... WHAT ARE THE ODDS THAT HE'S GONNA GET MUCH OUT OF VLADIMIR PUTIN?


----------



## Zoomie1980

Sinatra said:


> driveby said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think American Presidents debate silly radio jockeys?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, Obama's people labeled him the "voice of the GOP".
> 
> So if Rush is the voice of the GOP and the Dems want both sides heard on the radio, here's a chance to kill two birds with one stone.......
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Exactly - if Rush represents tens of millions of registered Republicans, then should not Mr. Obama take an hour to debate with him on the current economic mess and potential solutions?
> 
> I have said it many times prior - take away his teleprompter, and Obama's IQ plummets.  He is no Kennedy - lacking both wit and the ability to grasp concepts quickly while communicating responses quickly.  Off-script and he struggles greatly - perhaps even more so than Bush...
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6HVeaDDMdc]YouTube - Stupid Obama[/ame]
Click to expand...


I would rather see him debate Newt Gingrich, a much more cerebral and knowledgeable expert on conservative issues than Rush.  Without his crutches, both would annihilate Obama in any debate on the issues.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Well if we're wishin'... I'd love to see Hussein locked in a room with Mark Levin...  

Levin would chew him to pieces...


----------



## Sinatra

PubliusInfinitum said:


> Well if we're wishin'... I'd love to see Hussein locked in a room with Mark Levin...
> 
> Levin would chew him to pieces...




Levin cracks me up.

"Get off of my show you moron!"


----------



## bk1983

Midnight Marauder said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> Some polls did, some didn't.
> 
> 
> 
> well, come on, it was McLame
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That The Obama didn't absolutely trounce McCain hands-down in the debates is still sort of a sticking point. Like if the Steelers managed only to win by 6 against a high school team. There'd be questions.
Click to expand...


I think the questions should be, why did the Republicans nominate a "high school team" to represent their party in leading the country?


----------



## Care4all

Just utter nonsense...

Like they would have expected president Bush to interview with Rhandi Rhodes or olbermann....

cut me a fricking break!

What is wrong with you guys lately?

I realize the news has been boring and we feel like we have our hands completely tied when it comes to this economic mess which is very frustrating but PLEASE, expecting something like this to even be feasible, is believing in the tooth fairy...


----------



## DiveCon

Care4all said:


> Just utter nonsense...
> 
> Like they would have expected president Bush to interview with Rhandi Rhodes or olbermann....
> 
> cut me a fricking break!
> 
> What is wrong with you guys lately?
> 
> I realize the news has been boring and we feel like we have our hands completely tied when it comes to this economic mess which is very frustrating but PLEASE, expecting something like this to even be feasible, is believing in the tooth fairy...


ah, but there IS a difference here

did Pres Bush EVER call out Rhandi Rhoades os Olbermann?
NOPE


----------



## rayboyusmc

> Don't you think it's a joke that obama and his administration is even bringing Limbaugh into their conversation??



Not all.  Look what grate publicity it is giving for the RNC to the rest of US.  

Pogo, in an open debate that wasn't on Rush's set, he would come away looking like an idiot without the savant.

Rush is rude.  He told the woman who didn't want to be called babe, that "babe" that...

He a frigging entertainer who has tapped into the hate of the far right and is making millions off of it.  He needs to be happy with that.  If he ever tried to go legitimate all his warts and pinedial cysts would be exposed for what they are.

A bombastic PT Barnum of the right selling egress ticktets to his ditto heads and having them love it.


----------



## Care4all

DiveCon said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just utter nonsense...
> 
> Like they would have expected president Bush to interview with Rhandi Rhodes or olbermann....
> 
> cut me a fricking break!
> 
> What is wrong with you guys lately?
> 
> I realize the news has been boring and we feel like we have our hands completely tied when it comes to this economic mess which is very frustrating but PLEASE, expecting something like this to even be feasible, is believing in the tooth fairy...
> 
> 
> 
> ah, but there IS a difference here
> 
> did Pres Bush EVER call out Rhandi Rhoades os Olbermann?
> NOPE
Click to expand...


Got any proof that Obama called out Rush?

I saw that the head of the GOP called out Rush but when did president Obama say something about rush?  What did I miss?

Do you have a link for obama calling out Rush?

Care


----------



## sealybobo

Care4all said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just utter nonsense...
> 
> Like they would have expected president Bush to interview with Rhandi Rhodes or olbermann....
> 
> cut me a fricking break!
> 
> What is wrong with you guys lately?
> 
> I realize the news has been boring and we feel like we have our hands completely tied when it comes to this economic mess which is very frustrating but PLEASE, expecting something like this to even be feasible, is believing in the tooth fairy...
> 
> 
> 
> ah, but there IS a difference here
> 
> did Pres Bush EVER call out Rhandi Rhoades os Olbermann?
> NOPE
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Got any proof that Obama called out Rush?
> 
> I saw that the head of the GOP called out Rush but when did president Obama say something about rush?  What did I miss?
> 
> Do you have a link for obama calling out Rush?
> 
> Care
Click to expand...


The White House did comment on Rush yesterday.  They were THRILLED that Rush is the voice of the GOP.  

I can't remember if Obama himself said anything, but the new Dana Perino did.  I believe the guys title was White House Press Secretary?

And the idea that a sitting president would debate Rush and give him credibility?

First of all, Rush doesn't ever have anyone debating him or even giving the other side of the story.  If he did, it would be exposed that half the shit he is saying is bullshit.  And I'm being kind when I say half.  

So I hope another Democrat steps up and challanges Rush to a debate.  Randi Rhodes would be the best choice.  She's fuck him up!!!


----------



## driveby

sealybobo said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ah, but there IS a difference here
> 
> did Pres Bush EVER call out Rhandi Rhoades os Olbermann?
> NOPE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Got any proof that Obama called out Rush?
> 
> I saw that the head of the GOP called out Rush but when did president Obama say something about rush?  What did I miss?
> 
> Do you have a link for obama calling out Rush?
> 
> Care
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The White House did comment on Rush yesterday.  They were THRILLED that Rush is the voice of the GOP.
> 
> I can't remember if Obama himself said anything, but the new Dana Perino did.  I believe the guys title was White House Press Secretary?
> 
> And the idea that a sitting president would debate Rush and give him credibility?
> 
> First of all, Rush doesn't ever have anyone debating him or even giving the other side of the story.  If he did, it would be exposed that half the shit he is saying is bullshit.  And I'm being kind when I say half.
> 
> So I hope another Democrat steps up and challanges Rush to a debate.  Randi Rhodes would be the best choice.  She's fuck him up!!!
Click to expand...



No, in a debate she would not be able to scream at him and hang up on him........


----------



## rayboyusmc

On his best day with full bottles of oxycontin and viagra he couldn't come close to winning an argument with Randy.

She would hand him his little set of balls in a thimble.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Care4all said:


> Do you have a link for obama calling out Rush?
> 
> Care



PREZ ZINGS GOP FOE IN A &#36;TIMULATING TALK - New York Post

Washington Times - WH admits Limbaugh attacks unhelpful

Rush Job: Inside Dems' Limbaugh plan - Jonathan Martin - POLITICO.com

So, why isn't the WH jumping at this opportunity to put Limbaugh in his place? 
I think we all know.


----------



## sealybobo

driveby said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> Got any proof that Obama called out Rush?
> 
> I saw that the head of the GOP called out Rush but when did president Obama say something about rush?  What did I miss?
> 
> Do you have a link for obama calling out Rush?
> 
> Care
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The White House did comment on Rush yesterday.  They were THRILLED that Rush is the voice of the GOP.
> 
> I can't remember if Obama himself said anything, but the new Dana Perino did.  I believe the guys title was White House Press Secretary?
> 
> And the idea that a sitting president would debate Rush and give him credibility?
> 
> First of all, Rush doesn't ever have anyone debating him or even giving the other side of the story.  If he did, it would be exposed that half the shit he is saying is bullshit.  And I'm being kind when I say half.
> 
> So I hope another Democrat steps up and challanges Rush to a debate.  Randi Rhodes would be the best choice.  She's fuck him up!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, in a debate she would not be able to scream at him and hang up on him........
Click to expand...


She would fuck him up with facts.  

Who would I fear debating?  Karl Rove and Tom Delay.  They are slick debaters.  And they know what hot buttons to push.


----------



## Midnight Marauder

PubliusInfinitum said:


> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's the job of an interviewer to shut down a Presidential campaign? I get this feeling you didn't see the O'Reilly/Obama interview.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well I read his books The No Spin Zone and Culture Warrior; and I am a semi-regular veiwer of The Factor... and I saw the interview...  so you're all over it.
> 
> The JOB of an interviewer is to expose the interviewEE to questions which provide insight into who they are... IT'S THE JOB OF AN AMERICAN WHO IS INTERVIEWING A MARXIST MUSLIM, WHO IS CLOAKING HIMSELF BEHIND THE FACADE OF A CENTRIST CHRISTIAN, IN ORDER TO PROMOTE HIMSELF AS A CANDIDATE FOR THE PRESIDENCY OF THE US TO EXPOSE THAT MARXIST FUCK FOR WHAT HE IS...
> 
> Hells bells man... O'Reilly didn't have the sack to ask Hussein if, as a Christian, if HE  BELIEVES THAT Muslims are going to Hell...
Click to expand...

O'Reilly gave him a tough interview. Probably the only tough one The Obama had during the campaign. Have you noticed that NO ONE not even Coulter, Limbaugh, Hannity, bring up his alleged Muslim roots? Because they have investigated it and there is nothing to it perhaps?

O'Reilly stuck to issues which have some meat on their bones, not, as I said, populist nonsense.


----------



## sealybobo

rayboyusmc said:


> On his best day with full bottles of oxycontin and viagra he couldn't come close to winning an argument with Randy.
> 
> She would hand him his little set of balls in a thimble.



You know what Ray?  I think even Air America is controlled by right wingers.  They fired Randi for some reason.  Not when she called Hillary and Ferraro whores, but she got picked up by Nova M Radio and now she's gone?  

People who don't like her need to realize that she is the left version of rush, only she doesn't lie.  So if you don't like her yelling, don't watch.  But the fact is, a lot of people love her and she even beat Rush in markets they put her against him.  

And I don't care what official reason is given, its bullshit.  Reminds me of when Howard Stern was run off the air.  As soon as Howard started bashing Bush before the 2004 election, they ran him off FM radio.  

Randi refuses to let anyone tell her what she can or can't talk about on her show.  That's why she never took a tv deal.  They control you.  So Rachel Maddow is told what she can and can not discuss.  That's fucked up.


----------



## Caligirl

ScreamingEagle said:


> " You've debated the best! You've debated Hillary Clinton. You've debated John Edwards. You've debated Joe Biden. You've debated Dennis Kucinich. You've debated the best out there. You are one of the most gifted public speakers of our age. I would think, Mr. President, you would jump at this opportunity.
> 
> Limbaugh dares Obama: 'Debate me': The Swamp



Seems like Limbaugh is acknowledging that Obama already debated the most uimportant people i order to get his ideas across. Seems obvious why Obama wouldn't go on Limbaugh. What would be asked next? That he debate at the next CPAC? Or that he debate at a mega church with some pastor or other? that he and Michael steele duke it out, or maybe Coulter or some other conservative icon? Where would it end?

If Obama did agree to go on Limbaugh, I am pretty sure he'd turn the conversation to faith, repeatedly. He knows the audience, he's smart enough to know that you won't 'win' that debate by being aggressive towards rush. So it would be a game. Why do that? 

This is silly.


----------



## Midnight Marauder

oreo said:


> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Obama cannot do that. Even though his interview with Bill O'Reilly went well, Bill was a friendly interviewer in that he isn't a partisan hack and stayed away from populist nonsense. Bill was firm, but The Obama came across very well in that arena.
> 
> Up against Rush, in that much more informal and partisan setting, there is no way The Obama can come out smelling good. He's far too intelligent to even try it.
> 
> Limbaugh knows that.
> 
> Hannity has had a standing invitation for The Obama to come on either his TV or radio shows, for months.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "He's far too intelligent to debate Rush Limbaugh">  Does that really make any sense to you?  It appears to me that he's probably a little intimidated by someone or anyone who would actually criticise his current policies, therefore putting him on the spot to defend his policies.  _Obama won't debate anyone regarding his policies, even going to the point of pre-selecting reporters at news conferences--so he knows exactly what they're going to be asking._  An example-of that was during the news conference regarding the stimulus bill.
Click to expand...

Read what you posted, then re-read what i posted, and look at how they're the same. Were The Obama unintelligent, he would go into the Lion's den. He won't, because he's not stupid.


----------



## del

sealybobo said:


> rayboyusmc said:
> 
> 
> 
> On his best day with full bottles of oxycontin and viagra he couldn't come close to winning an argument with Randy.
> 
> She would hand him his little set of balls in a thimble.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *You know what Ray?  I think even Air America is controlled by right wingers.  They fired Randi for some reason. * Not when she called Hillary and Ferraro whores, but she got picked up by Nova M Radio and now she's gone?
> 
> People who don't like her need to realize that she is the left version of rush, only she doesn't lie.  So if you don't like her yelling, don't watch.  But the fact is, a lot of people love her and she even beat Rush in markets they put her against him.
> 
> And I don't care what official reason is given, its bullshit.  Reminds me of when Howard Stern was run off the air.  *As soon as Howard started bashing Bush before the 2004 election, they ran him off FM radio. *
> 
> Randi refuses to let anyone tell her what she can or can't talk about on her show.  That's why she never took a tv deal.  They control you.  So Rachel Maddow is told what she can and can not discuss.  That's fucked up.
Click to expand...


sealy fires up his "special" radio searching for randi.....hello, rangoon?


----------



## Midnight Marauder

Caligirl said:


> ScreamingEagle said:
> 
> 
> 
> " You've debated the best! You've debated Hillary Clinton. You've debated John Edwards. You've debated Joe Biden. You've debated Dennis Kucinich. You've debated the best out there. You are one of the most gifted public speakers of our age. I would think, Mr. President, you would jump at this opportunity.
> 
> Limbaugh dares Obama: 'Debate me': The Swamp
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Seems like Limbaugh is acknowledging that Obama already debated the most uimportant people i order to get his ideas across. Seems obvious why Obama wouldn't go on Limbaugh. What would be asked next? That he debate at the next CPAC? Or that he debate at a mega church with some pastor or other? that he and Michael steele duke it out, or maybe Coulter or some other conservative icon? Where would it end?
> 
> If Obama did agree to go on Limbaugh, I am pretty sure he'd turn the conversation to faith, repeatedly. He knows the audience, he's smart enough to know that you won't 'win' that debate by being aggressive towards rush. So it would be a game. Why do that?
> 
> This is silly.
Click to expand...

It's equally silly for The Obama to be bringing up Limbaugh then... Right?

What he COULD do is accept Limbaugh's challenge, but make it a pay-per-view event on TV with all monies going to charity. Can you imagine the buy rate for something like that?


----------



## Caligirl

That's a good idea.  I'd pay to see it -

Yes, Obama shouldn't be stooping to mention Limbaugh, but I thought it was Rahm that did that, not Obama, and Rahm is supposed to be a bit of a hot head.


----------



## Midnight Marauder

Caligirl said:


> That's a good idea.  I'd pay to see it -
> 
> Yes, Obama shouldn't be stooping to mention Limbaugh, but I thought it was Rahm that did that, not Obama, and Rahm is supposed to be a bit of a hot head.


Obama publicly told Republican members of Congress, "If you want to get anything done, stop listening to Rush Limbaugh" or words to that effect.


----------



## xsited1

Caligirl said:


> That's a good idea.  I'd pay to see it -
> 
> Yes, Obama shouldn't be stooping to mention Limbaugh, but I thought it was Rahm that did that, not Obama, and Rahm is supposed to be a bit of a hot head.



Obama is a poor leader if he can't control his Chief of Staff.


----------



## PoliticalChic

rayboyusmc said:


> On his best day with full bottles of oxycontin and viagra he couldn't come close to winning an argument with Randy.
> 
> She would hand him his little set of balls in a thimble.



Ah, Chocolate Soldier, you have given me an ephany!  It is not ideology that causes your  defense of the constantly failed left wing talk radio.  No, it your unrequited love of the unsucessful, washed-up, never-was, foul-mouthed Randy-one.  

In fact, I now believe that is goes further, a more personal envy. Let's test the theory: do you have trouble balancing a checkbook?  Have trouble parallel parking?  Hate it when folks leave the toilet seat up? Can't resist sales at Nordstroms?  I've got it: you are a woman in a man's body!  What frilly unmentionables are hidden beneath that tunic and John Brown belt?

And that reference to the two male accessories: is that a silent wish that they were gone?

I think that there are pills that you can take. Speak to your doctor to see if they are right for you.


----------



## glockmail

PoliticalChic said:


> Ah, Chocolate Soldier, you have given me an ephany!  It is not ideology that causes your  defense of the constantly failed left wing talk radio.  No, it your unrequited love of the unsucessful, washed-up, never-was, foul-mouthed Randy-one.
> 
> In fact, I now believe that is goes further, a more personal envy. Let's test the theory: do you have trouble balancing a checkbook?  Have trouble parallel parking?  Hate it when folks leave the toilet seat up? Can't resist sales at Nordstroms?  I've got it: you are a woman in a man's body!  What frilly unmentionables are hidden beneath that tunic and John Brown belt?
> 
> And that reference to the two male accessories: is that a silent wish that they were gone?
> 
> I think that there are pills that you can take. Speak to your doctor to see if they are righ for you.


----------



## sealybobo

xsited1 said:


> Caligirl said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's a good idea.  I'd pay to see it -
> 
> Yes, Obama shouldn't be stooping to mention Limbaugh, but I thought it was Rahm that did that, not Obama, and Rahm is supposed to be a bit of a hot head.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama is a poor leader if he can't control his Chief of Staff.
Click to expand...


Who outted Valerie Plames?  If it was Scooter & Chaney, then Bush is a poor leader if he can't control his people.

Rahm says things Obama wants to say but can't.


----------



## xsited1

sealybobo said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caligirl said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's a good idea.  I'd pay to see it -
> 
> Yes, Obama shouldn't be stooping to mention Limbaugh, but I thought it was Rahm that did that, not Obama, and Rahm is supposed to be a bit of a hot head.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama is a poor leader if he can't control his Chief of Staff.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who outted Valerie Plames?  If it was Scooter & Chaney, then Bush is a poor leader if he can't control his people.
> 
> Rahm says things Obama wants to say but can't.
Click to expand...




We all know Obama is behind this.  The President of the United States is attacking a private citizen because he doesn't like criticism.  Anyone else see a problem here?


----------



## sealybobo

PoliticalChic said:


> rayboyusmc said:
> 
> 
> 
> On his best day with full bottles of oxycontin and viagra he couldn't come close to winning an argument with Randy.
> 
> She would hand him his little set of balls in a thimble.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, Chocolate Soldier, you have given me an ephany!  It is not ideology that causes your  defense of the constantly failed left wing talk radio.  No, it your unrequited love of the unsucessful, washed-up, never-was, foul-mouthed Randy-one.
> 
> In fact, I now believe that is goes further, a more personal envy. Let's test the theory: do you have trouble balancing a checkbook?  Have trouble parallel parking?  Hate it when folks leave the toilet seat up? Can't resist sales at Nordstroms?  I've got it: you are a woman in a man's body!  What frilly unmentionables are hidden beneath that tunic and John Brown belt?
> 
> And that reference to the two male accessories: is that a silent wish that they were gone?
> 
> I think that there are pills that you can take. Speak to your doctor to see if they are right for you.
Click to expand...


For something that is a failure and garbage, you guys sure do fight awfully hard to avoid putting Randi against Rush in syndication.

Oh you'll put some average non threatening liberals on, like Ed Schultz or Bill Press, but you REFUSE to put the left's version of Rush on.

Because you are liars, punks, bitches and pussies.


----------



## sealybobo

xsited1 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama is a poor leader if he can't control his Chief of Staff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who outted Valerie Plames?  If it was Scooter & Chaney, then Bush is a poor leader if he can't control his people.
> 
> Rahm says things Obama wants to say but can't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We all know Obama is behind this.  The President of the United States is attacking a private citizen because he doesn't like criticism.  Anyone else see a problem here?
Click to expand...


Actually, in some ways, Rush is acting like Tokyo Rose.  He is hurting America's chances to recover from the financial crisis his own party caused.

He's just another anti American right wing obstructionist.  

His vision of America looks a lot like Mexico.  5 families have all the money and the rest are poor.  And those poor mexicans have only themselves to blame for their financial situation.


----------



## Shogun

ScreamingEagle said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ScreamingEagle said:
> 
> 
> 
> He'd sure make a better prez than Obama...
> 
> The GOP needs to get back to its conservative roots....Rush is one of the very few who actually promotes conservatism and opposes Obama's headlong rush toward fascistic socialism....
> 
> We all know who would win the debate.....and it ain't D'Ohbama.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Opinions and assholes, buddy.
> 
> and no, what we all know is why the big conservative bear needs to hide in his little bear cave while you rushbots make excuses for your failed elections.  Like I said, if you feel so strongly then put your vote where your talking points are...
> 
> I have no doubt that a debate on a neutral setting would eviscerate what pathetic semblance of leadership you are grasping at.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> LOL...like your loser debates?
Click to expand...


do you really want to focus on the word LOSER after the spanking you got last year, dude?


----------



## Care4all

PoliticalChic said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have a link for obama calling out Rush?
> 
> Care
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PREZ ZINGS GOP FOE IN A $TIMULATING TALK - New York Post
> 
> Washington Times - WH admits Limbaugh attacks unhelpful
> 
> Rush Job: Inside Dems' Limbaugh plan - Jonathan Martin - POLITICO.com
> 
> So, why isn't the WH jumping at this opportunity to put Limbaugh in his place?
> I think we all know.
Click to expand...

THANKS to everyone that headed me in the right direction for my own google on this and Gibbs and Emanuel....!

Obama made a mistake in my opinion for speaking out against what Limbaugh said this past weekend that implied his hatred for Obama was so great, that he wished total failure on to Obama....allowing America to fail....

Obama's team should NOT have gone out there on the attack after the conservative conference where Limbaugh spoke and was cheered....(Obama had to have approved this, I don't believe they were rogue)

And even if they were wishing America to fail....this is what freedom brings for goodness sakes!

It was more than stupid, stupid...after reading all that i could on it...imho!

Having said that, it is still silly to think that any president would have a debate with a radio host...silly, silly, silly.....to me...just on National Security alone, reasons....let alone, it just being ridiculous.

We have elections for choosing leaders for our country and for our different leaders of our Political Parties....Limbaugh is neither.

Unless you think he is the Leader of the Republican Party for some reason?  But i don't think he was ever elected such and I know he could never be elected by republicans in to that position because he is a very POOR roll model of any kind, when talking about his personal life....he just wouldn't pass muster and be elected for such a position or appointed for such a position, in my humble opinion.

He's an entertainer, nothing more....and this is just for attention...Rush knows enough, to KNOW this debate would never take place...for goodness sake, he's not stupid....he's playing this for entertainment value only....

Care


----------



## Shogun

Midnight Marauder said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Opinions and assholes, buddy.
> 
> and no, what we all know is why the big conservative bear needs to hide in his little bear cave while you rushbots make excuses for your failed elections.  Like I said, if you feel so strongly then put your vote where your talking points are...
> 
> I have no doubt that a debate on a neutral setting would eviscerate what pathetic semblance of leadership you are grasping at.
> 
> 
> 
> Your biggest problem so far is, assuming facts not in evidence. I am not a Limbaugh fan, don't listen to his show, and don't even agree with most of his views which reach me.
> 
> Your type of assumption asshattery is among the worst kind, makes generally intelligent people look really stupid. Like you do right now.
> 
> Are you the idea police? Limbaugh challenges Obama to a debate, in Limbaugh's arena, and I point out it's nothing but posturing blatherskite because Limbaugh knows The Obama is far too intelligent to fall for such a scam, and that's somehow being a fan of Limbaugh and endorsing the idea?
> 
> Are you seeing how stupid you've made yourself look yet?
Click to expand...


dance, puppy, dance.. Hell, I'll quote you trying to validate the challenge as if a declining Obama will suggest something more than the laughable tirade of a disk jockey and his fan boys.  


I know I know... no one is a fan of Bush anymore either, dude.  Quick!  peel off that W bumper sticker!


----------



## cunclusion

Rush debate the issues he didnt before he wont now. I have listen to his show and he has found is niche. Anti anything Obama.  Obama just needs to concentrate on the nation and not pay him any attention there are alot more things important right now than debating Rush.


----------



## Shogun

MountainMan said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would Obama care to go on Rush's show to debate him?   Hell, I CHALLENGE RUSH LIMBAUGH TO DEBATE ON US MESSAGEBOARD.  IF HE DOESN'T, then he is a giant pussy.
> 
> 
> now... let's see how quickly Rush logs on.  I am about as important to Rush as Rush is to Obama.  You people want Rush on that kind of platform?  Put your vote where your big mouths are and get him out from his little radio cave.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, the democrat party (of which Mr Obama belongs to) has called Mr Limbaugh the leader of the republican party.  It would only make sense for the two party leaders to exchange ideas.
> 
> Limbaugh challenges Obama to debate on his show - On Politics - USATODAY.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rush Limbaugh, apparently taking to heart *the Obama administration's description of him as the leader of the Republican Party,* has invited President Obama to come on his radio show for a debate.
> 
> The edgy, bombastic conservative, describing himself as a "harmless, lovable little fuzzball"  and "the Last Man Standing," wrapped the invitation in a long series of jibes at Obama, his policies, his party, his aides, his speaking style and the entertaining he's done during his six weeks at the White House.
> 
> "You are one of the most gifted public speakers of our age. I would think, Mr. President, you would jump at this opportunity," Limbaugh said on his show, which has millions of listeners on more than 600 radio stations.
> 
> Read the whole segment here. There's even a cartoon invitation in fancy script.
> 
> It's the latest chapter in a tale that began Saturday with Limbaugh reiterating his hope that Obama fails in a nationally televised speech to a conservative group, and has continued all week with *Democrats designating him the leader of the GOP *and Republicans stumbling over whether to embrace Limbaugh, reject him, ignore him or figure out something else.
> 
> We've asked the White House for a response to today's development.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


clearly, you comprehend and savor sarcasm.  But hey... if you feel so strongly I suggest you write in and replace Steele with Rush.  After all, it's a whole lot harder for STEELE to jettison out an escape hatch than it is for Rush's situational standards while we are talking about Radio Booths instead of Speech podiums, eh?

come on, dude.. make it official!  Put some validity into King Rush (see, sarcasm.. he's not really anyone's king) and drag him, kicking and screaming, from his little DJ cave!


----------



## Shogun

Missourian said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't say he would, or should. But he would be alot closer to doing that with Limbaugh, than Limbaugh would ever do with you. Because Limbaugh, like him or not, IS somebody.
> 
> You're not.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Limbaugh "is somebody"?  What, EXACTLY, are his credentials that should temp an American President?  Should Bush have gone at it with Randi Rhodes?  She's somebody on the radio, yes?  If you can't fathom the ridiculous, and let's face it LAUGHABLE, nature of some radio entertainer challenging the President then I guess it's pretty clear why you don't get my farcical challenge to Limbaugh.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sorry Shogun but President Obama singled Rush Limbaugh out by name in a national address and said Rush was the problem...so if Rush wants to make the president back that up face to face,  I'm all for that.
> 
> When Rush Limbaugh calls you out, I'll defend your right to challenge him to a confrontation.
> 
> EDIT: Dangit PC, that's the second time today you have stolen my thoughts...I'm going to get my stud-finder and locate your mind reading device
Click to expand...



Hey, if you feel so strongly then put your GOP vote where your talking points are.  Let's see you drag Rush out of his little bear cave and talk some shit outside of his security blanket microphone.  By all means, take it to the GOP leader electing convention.


----------



## Shogun

Midnight Marauder said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you suppose President Obama has brought up Limbaugh's name several times, yet will not accept the challenge?
> 
> If he is certain to win the debate, wouldn't he -pun intended- Rush to accept? What is the downside? He would look good: he calls Limbaugh out, accepts the challenge, wins?
> 
> And, an added benefit: he puts to rest that old saw that smart Democrats go into politics, smart Republicans make a million, and buy the smart Democrats.
> 
> Enlighten me.
> 
> 
> 
> This is what I left unsaid from before, during the elitist moronic rant about why Obama should take this "challenge" seriously. Which to that point, no one had suggested.
> 
> If Limbaugh is so far below The Obama, why would The Obama find him worthy of so much mention? And if he is worthy of so much mention, why not worthy of a debate?
> 
> They could do it pay-per-view, with the revenue going to charity.
Click to expand...




simple.  Sarcasm and lining up the GOP to continue to fail.  You've just missed how Obama has DEFINED the gop.  Clearly, your political science comprehension runs deep.  Congratrs.  you've just been swiftboated into validating Rush's role in your political leadership.


Please, though, do continue to act like you don't have a dog in Rush's little ass cyst race though.  It's hilarious to watch you stumble over your own posts.


----------



## xsited1

sealybobo said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who outted Valerie Plames?  If it was Scooter & Chaney, then Bush is a poor leader if he can't control his people.
> 
> Rahm says things Obama wants to say but can't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We all know Obama is behind this.  The President of the United States is attacking a private citizen because he doesn't like criticism.  Anyone else see a problem here?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, in some ways, Rush is acting like Tokyo Rose.  He is hurting America's chances to recover from the financial crisis his own party caused.
> 
> He's just another anti American right wing obstructionist.
> 
> His vision of America looks a lot like Mexico.  5 families have all the money and the rest are poor.  And those poor mexicans have only themselves to blame for their financial situation.
Click to expand...


So citizens like Rush Limbaugh should not criticize our government because he is hurting America's chances of a recovery?  Do you realize how crazy that is?


----------



## Shogun

Midnight Marauder said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> Has Obama ever won a debate? I don't believe he has.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Polls showed that most people thought Obama won the debates against McCain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Some polls did, some didn't.
Click to expand...


oh yea, I know..  Your buddies over at World Net Daily and the forums at Hannity dot com probably DID score them differently!


----------



## sealybobo

cunclusion said:


> Rush debate the issues he didnt before he wont now. I have listen to his show and he has found is niche. Anti anything Obama.  Obama just needs to concentrate on the nation and not pay him any attention there are alot more things important right now than debating Rush.



Just like you can't go on the air and insight a riot, Rush should not be allowed to go on air and blatently lie about the Democrats or the economic stimulus act.  

And he is hurting our efforts at recovery.  I think it is on purpose because they want 95% of America to fail.  If 95% fail, 5% succeed.  Just like the last 8 years, the rich got richer and the rest of us got poorer.  He's in the top 5% income earners, right?  

So of course he wants us to fail.

But should we allow him to go on air and spew his ignorance?

The FCC never told Howard Stern EXACTLY what he did wrong.  They could never define what they considered, "indecent".  They just said he was.

I consider Rush indecent.  

Or just fine the shit out of him each time he lies.

And bring back the fairness doctrine.  If he is allowed to lie to millions, we need someone to counter him.

Funny, you right wing assholes want to see a debate between Rush and Obama but you don't want to give us liberals equal time on the radio.  Why?  Scared the truth will come out?


----------



## sealybobo

xsited1 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We all know Obama is behind this.  The President of the United States is attacking a private citizen because he doesn't like criticism.  Anyone else see a problem here?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, in some ways, Rush is acting like Tokyo Rose.  He is hurting America's chances to recover from the financial crisis his own party caused.
> 
> He's just another anti American right wing obstructionist.
> 
> His vision of America looks a lot like Mexico.  5 families have all the money and the rest are poor.  And those poor mexicans have only themselves to blame for their financial situation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So citizens like Rush Limbaugh should not criticize our government because he is hurting America's chances of a recovery?  Do you realize how crazy that is?
Click to expand...


Yes, just as crazy as not being honest how the Iraq war was going because it might jeopordize the mission or hurt the moral of our troops..  

Just wanted to show you how dumb you all sounded the last 6 years.


----------



## editec

Does anyone remember how I suggested that this issue of Rush might end up?

Remember me suggesting that by mentioning Rush Obama would stir up the wingnuts in the Republican party thus making the Republican party respond?

And then Stell did respond, and the wingnuts were so incensed that Steel had to apologise?

So what has happed?

The donkey's tail (Rush) is now pinned on the ass of the Republican party.

I doubt this was thought out in advance, but the fall-out for the RNC is fairly obvious.

The RNC looks weak in comparison to a right wing hate monger who has half the brains God gave geese.

The RNC needs to win back control from Rush.

Not the Dems, because they know nobody who supports them cares what Rush thinks, but the RNC certainly doesn't want RUSH in cotnrol of the debate.

_Amazing_...the RNC is being driven even further to the radical right.

There is no equivalent spokeman for Rush in the Demoractic universe, but this is rather like having some leftwingnut able to make the DNC apologise to them for not being DEMOCRATIC enough.

_Holy crap!_ This is amusing for me to witness.


----------



## xsited1

sealybobo said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, in some ways, Rush is acting like Tokyo Rose.  He is hurting America's chances to recover from the financial crisis his own party caused.
> 
> He's just another anti American right wing obstructionist.
> 
> His vision of America looks a lot like Mexico.  5 families have all the money and the rest are poor.  And those poor mexicans have only themselves to blame for their financial situation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So citizens like Rush Limbaugh should not criticize our government because he is hurting America's chances of a recovery?  Do you realize how crazy that is?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, just as crazy as not being honest how the Iraq war was going because it might jeopordize the mission or hurt the moral of our troops..
> 
> Just wanted to show you how dumb you all sounded the last 6 years.
Click to expand...


You are such an idiot.  How many times do people have to tell you that just because you disagree with Obama that does NOT mean you supported Bush?  Seriously, did you drop out of school at age 12?  Were you dropped on your head as an infant?  Just how do you explain your incredible stupidity?


----------



## sealybobo

xsited1 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So citizens like Rush Limbaugh should not criticize our government because he is hurting America's chances of a recovery?  Do you realize how crazy that is?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, just as crazy as not being honest how the Iraq war was going because it might jeopordize the mission or hurt the moral of our troops..
> 
> Just wanted to show you how dumb you all sounded the last 6 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are such an idiot.  How many times do people have to tell you that just because you disagree with Obama that does NOT mean you supported Bush?  Seriously, did you drop out of school at age 12?  Were you dropped on your head as an infant?  Just how do you explain your incredible stupidity?
Click to expand...


I'm not stupid.  I don't believe you.  Big difference.


----------



## sealybobo

xsited1 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So citizens like Rush Limbaugh should not criticize our government because he is hurting America's chances of a recovery?  Do you realize how crazy that is?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, just as crazy as not being honest how the Iraq war was going because it might jeopordize the mission or hurt the moral of our troops..
> 
> Just wanted to show you how dumb you all sounded the last 6 years.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are such an idiot.  How many times do people have to tell you that just because you disagree with Obama that does NOT mean you supported Bush?  Seriously, did you drop out of school at age 12?  Were you dropped on your head as an infant?  Just how do you explain your incredible stupidity?
Click to expand...


Will you sign this then?

Sen. Patrick Leahy recently proposed a truth and reconciliation commission to investigate abuses during the Bush-Cheney Administration - so they never happen again. These abuses include the use of torture, extraordinary rendition, and executive override of laws. 

Please sign his online petition urging Congress to establish a truth and reconciliation commission to investigate the Bush-Cheney Administration's abuses. 

I didn't think you would, because you fucking supported/defended Bush.


----------



## sealybobo

editec said:


> Does anyone remember how I suggested that this issue of Rush might end up?
> 
> Remember me suggesting that by mentioning Rush Obama would stir up the wingnuts in the Republican party thus making the Republican party respond?
> 
> And then Stell did respond, and the wingnuts were so incensed that Steel had to apologise?
> 
> So what has happed?
> 
> The donkey's tail (Rush) is now pinned on the ass of the Republican party.
> 
> I doubt this was thought out in advance, but the fall-out for the RNC is fairly obvious.
> 
> The RNC looks weak in comparison to a right wing hate monger who has half the brains God gave geese.
> 
> The RNC needs to win back control from Rush.
> 
> Not the Dems, because they know nobody who supports them cares what Rush thinks, but the RNC certainly doesn't want RUSH in cotnrol of the debate.
> 
> _Amazing_...the RNC is being driven even further to the radical right.
> 
> There is no equivalent spokeman for Rush in the Demoractic universe, but this is rather like having some leftwingnut able to make the DNC apologise to them for not being DEMOCRATIC enough.
> 
> _Holy crap!_ This is amusing for me to witness.



I think Steele is the reality of the GOP and Rush is their fantasy.  

So in a debate, the GOP would be much better off sending a Steele.

But for the GOP base who doesn't give a fuck about reality, Rush is their man.  

Facts be damned.  

Do you remember Rush's speech?  I wanted to puke.  Especially everytime he turned his head and coughed.  When he coughed, so did I, really loud, mocking him.  And with that black silk shirt and he unbuttoned one too many buttons so his fat chest was sticking out.  
OMG!  

When he started talking about how Republicans love people but they understand that we are all individuals, I wanted to barf.  

And when he got the Preamble thing wrong, and started talking about life, liberty and the persuit of happyness, I had to change the channel, because just like all Republicans, Rush is full of shit.


----------



## xsited1

sealybobo said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, just as crazy as not being honest how the Iraq war was going because it might jeopordize the mission or hurt the moral of our troops..
> 
> Just wanted to show you how dumb you all sounded the last 6 years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are such an idiot.  How many times do people have to tell you that just because you disagree with Obama that does NOT mean you supported Bush?  Seriously, did you drop out of school at age 12?  Were you dropped on your head as an infant?  Just how do you explain your incredible stupidity?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Will you sign this then?
> 
> Sen. Patrick Leahy recently proposed a truth and reconciliation commission to investigate abuses during the Bush-Cheney Administration - so they never happen again. These abuses include the use of torture, extraordinary rendition, and executive override of laws.
> 
> Please sign his online petition urging Congress to establish a truth and reconciliation commission to investigate the Bush-Cheney Administration's abuses.
> 
> I didn't think you would, because you fucking supported/defended Bush.
Click to expand...


You just asked me to sign a petition and in the same breathe said that I wouldn't because I supported/defended Bush.   

You're just a troll, right?  You just post crap because you think it's fun.  I know your game.  heh.  For a minute there, I thought you were perhaps the most stupid person on the planet and now I see you're just posting crap to get a rise out of people.  Happy trolling!


----------



## del

xsited1 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are such an idiot.  How many times do people have to tell you that just because you disagree with Obama that does NOT mean you supported Bush?  Seriously, did you drop out of school at age 12?  Were you dropped on your head as an infant?  Just how do you explain your incredible stupidity?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will you sign this then?
> 
> Sen. Patrick Leahy recently proposed a truth and reconciliation commission to investigate abuses during the Bush-Cheney Administration - so they never happen again. These abuses include the use of torture, extraordinary rendition, and executive override of laws.
> 
> Please sign his online petition urging Congress to establish a truth and reconciliation commission to investigate the Bush-Cheney Administration's abuses.
> 
> I didn't think you would, because you fucking supported/defended Bush.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just asked me to sign a petition and in the same breathe said that I wouldn't because I supported/defended Bush.
> 
> You're just a troll, right?  You just post crap because you think it's fun.  I know your game.  heh.  For a minute there, I thought you were perhaps the *most stupid person on the planet* and now I see you're* just posting crap *to get a rise out of people.  Happy trolling!
Click to expand...


wherever did you get the idea that the two are mutually exclusive?


----------



## Shogun

Maybe Limbaugh should work on debating CNN talking heads and work his way up



* Commentary: A challenge to Rush Limbaugh*

 (CNN) -- Thursday night on this program, we spent some time talking about Rush Limbaugh and a piece he had in The Wall Street Journal, arguing there should be more emphasis right now on tax cuts to help the economy.

Our chief business correspondent, Ali Velshi, came on and took issue with some of what Limbaugh said.

Limbaugh responded with this Friday:

Rush Limbaugh: "Mr. Velshi, you are incompetent. You are a disservice to your business. Except you fit right in at CNN. Disinformation, character assaults. This economy is nowhere near as bad as it was in 1982."

Let's stop there.

Mr. Limbaugh, you may well have a legitimate case to make about tax cuts and what they can do for the economy.

But the histrionics and name-calling, they undermine anything constructive you might have to say.

Rush, I would love for you to come on this show and debate Ali on the issues.

Make a case for your ideas. Our country is in desperate straits right now and we need ideas.

 What we don't need is nasty rhetoric and useless noise.

This doesn't help anyone get a job, keep a job, or feed their family.
advertisement

If there were ever a time to put the meanness behind us and focus on real dialogue and real solutions, this is the time.

Commentary: A challenge to Rush Limbaugh - CNN.com


----------



## sealybobo

xsited1 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are such an idiot.  How many times do people have to tell you that just because you disagree with Obama that does NOT mean you supported Bush?  Seriously, did you drop out of school at age 12?  Were you dropped on your head as an infant?  Just how do you explain your incredible stupidity?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Will you sign this then?
> 
> Sen. Patrick Leahy recently proposed a truth and reconciliation commission to investigate abuses during the Bush-Cheney Administration - so they never happen again. These abuses include the use of torture, extraordinary rendition, and executive override of laws.
> 
> Please sign his online petition urging Congress to establish a truth and reconciliation commission to investigate the Bush-Cheney Administration's abuses.
> 
> I didn't think you would, because you fucking supported/defended Bush.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You just asked me to sign a petition and in the same breathe said that I wouldn't because I supported/defended Bush.
> 
> You're just a troll, right?  You just post crap because you think it's fun.  I know your game.  heh.  For a minute there, I thought you were perhaps the most stupid person on the planet and now I see you're just posting crap to get a rise out of people.  Happy trolling!
Click to expand...


Maybe to me you seem like a troll.  And certainly the shit you say sounds like bullshit to me.  

And I KNOW you won't sign it because I believe you are FOS.  Is it called trolling when I call you out?  Is that what trolling is?

And when I post to people like you, its not to get a rise out of you, its to call you out on your bullshit. 

Now if you want to call me out when you think I'm wrong, go for it.  I won't accuse you of trolling.  

So Ms. "disagrees with Obama but didn't support bush", did you sign the petition yet?  I didn't think so.

Many German's didn't support Hitler, but they didn't say or do anything to stop him either.  I'm not comparing Bush to Hitler, but I am comparing you to the German people back in the 30's and 40's.

I also compare you guys to Iranians.  You know how Iranians deny the holocaust?  Well you guys sound a lot like them when you deny that 1 million Iraqi's might have died since Bush's invasion.  

So what number would be acceptable to you?  500k?  Still a lot of dead people.

That reminds me of something I heard yesterday about Sudan.  NPR was interviewing Pat Roberts son, or one of those televangelists son, and he was saying we can not remove President Bashir because there is no one to take his place.  And he said, "there are a lot of evil dictators in the world, we can't remove them all, blablabla.  

Anyways, isn't it funny that right wingers understand this now but didn't understand it when they rushed in to remove Saddam.  Same situation.  

I'll make a new thread, but here is the story:  World Court Issues Warrant For Sudan's President : NPR

Just like we shouldn't remove this guy from power, because it is too risky and would be too costly, we should not have invaded Iraq.


----------



## del

sealybobo said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Will you sign this then?
> 
> Sen. Patrick Leahy recently proposed a truth and reconciliation commission to investigate abuses during the Bush-Cheney Administration - so they never happen again. These abuses include the use of torture, extraordinary rendition, and executive override of laws.
> 
> Please sign his online petition urging Congress to establish a truth and reconciliation commission to investigate the Bush-Cheney Administration's abuses.
> 
> I didn't think you would, because you fucking supported/defended Bush.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just asked me to sign a petition and in the same breathe said that I wouldn't because I supported/defended Bush.
> 
> You're just a troll, right?  You just post crap because you think it's fun.  I know your game.  heh.  For a minute there, I thought you were perhaps the most stupid person on the planet and now I see you're just posting crap to get a rise out of people.  Happy trolling!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Maybe to me you seem like a troll.  And certainly the shit you say sounds like bullshit to me.
> 
> And I KNOW you won't sign it because I believe you are FOS.  Is it called trolling when I call you out?  Is that what trolling is?
> 
> And when I post to people like you, its not to get a rise out of you, its to call you out on your bullshit.
> 
> Now if you want to call me out when you think I'm wrong, go for it.  I won't accuse you of trolling.
> 
> So Ms. "disagrees with Obama but didn't support bush", did you sign the petition yet?  I didn't think so.
> 
> Many German's didn't support Hitler, but they didn't say or do anything to stop him either.  I'm not comparing Bush to Hitler, but I am comparing you to the German people back in the 30's and 40's.
> 
> I also compare you guys to Iranians.  You know how Iranians deny the holocaust?  Well you guys sound a lot like them when you deny that 1 million Iraqi's might have died since Bush's invasion.
> 
> So what number would be acceptable to you?  500k?  Still a lot of dead people.
> 
> That reminds me of something I heard yesterday about Sudan.  NPR was interviewing Pat Roberts son, or one of those televangelists son, and he was saying we can not remove President Bashir because there is no one to take his place.  And he said, "there are a lot of evil dictators in the world, we can't remove them all, blablabla.
> 
> Anyways, isn't it funny that right wingers understand this now but didn't understand it when they rushed in to remove Saddam.  Same situation.
> 
> I'll make a new thread, but here is the story:  World Court Issues Warrant For Sudan's President : NPR
> 
> Just like we shouldn't remove this guy from power, because it is too risky and would be too costly, we should not have invaded Iraq.
Click to expand...


----------



## xsited1

sealybobo said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Will you sign this then?
> 
> Sen. Patrick Leahy recently proposed a truth and reconciliation commission to investigate abuses during the Bush-Cheney Administration - so they never happen again. These abuses include the use of torture, extraordinary rendition, and executive override of laws.
> 
> Please sign his online petition urging Congress to establish a truth and reconciliation commission to investigate the Bush-Cheney Administration's abuses.
> 
> I didn't think you would, because you fucking supported/defended Bush.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just asked me to sign a petition and in the same breathe said that I wouldn't because I supported/defended Bush.
> 
> You're just a troll, right?  You just post crap because you think it's fun.  I know your game.  heh.  For a minute there, I thought you were perhaps the most stupid person on the planet and now I see you're just posting crap to get a rise out of people.  Happy trolling!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Maybe to me you seem like a troll.  And certainly the shit you say sounds like bullshit to me.
> 
> And I KNOW you won't sign it because I believe you are FOS.  Is it called trolling when I call you out?  Is that what trolling is?
> 
> And when I post to people like you, its not to get a rise out of you, its to call you out on your bullshit.
> 
> Now if you want to call me out when you think I'm wrong, go for it.  I won't accuse you of trolling.
> 
> So Ms. "disagrees with Obama but didn't support bush", did you sign the petition yet?  I didn't think so.
> 
> Many German's didn't support Hitler, but they didn't say or do anything to stop him either.  I'm not comparing Bush to Hitler, but I am comparing you to the German people back in the 30's and 40's.
> 
> I also compare you guys to Iranians.  You know how Iranians deny the holocaust?  Well you guys sound a lot like them when you deny that 1 million Iraqi's might have died since Bush's invasion.
> 
> So what number would be acceptable to you?  500k?  Still a lot of dead people.
> 
> That reminds me of something I heard yesterday about Sudan.  NPR was interviewing Pat Roberts son, or one of those televangelists son, and he was saying we can not remove President Bashir because there is no one to take his place.  And he said, "there are a lot of evil dictators in the world, we can't remove them all, blablabla.
> 
> Anyways, isn't it funny that right wingers understand this now but didn't understand it when they rushed in to remove Saddam.  Same situation.
> 
> I'll make a new thread, but here is the story:  World Court Issues Warrant For Sudan's President : NPR
> 
> Just like we shouldn't remove this guy from power, because it is too risky and would be too costly, we should not have invaded Iraq.
Click to expand...


        

Did you major in Trolling?  This has got to be one of the funniest troll posts I've ever seen.

Keep up the good (troll) work!


----------



## AllieBaba

sealybobo said:


> cunclusion said:
> 
> 
> 
> Rush debate the issues he didnt before he wont now. I have listen to his show and he has found is niche. Anti anything Obama.  Obama just needs to concentrate on the nation and not pay him any attention there are alot more things important right now than debating Rush.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just like you can't go on the air and insight a riot, Rush should not be allowed to go on air and blatently lie about the Democrats or the economic stimulus act.
> 
> And he is hurting our efforts at recovery.  I think it is on purpose because they want 95% of America to fail.  If 95% fail, 5% succeed.  Just like the last 8 years, the rich got richer and the rest of us got poorer.  He's in the top 5% income earners, right?
> 
> So of course he wants us to fail.
> 
> But should we allow him to go on air and spew his ignorance?
> 
> The FCC never told Howard Stern EXACTLY what he did wrong.  They could never define what they considered, "indecent".  They just said he was.
> 
> I consider Rush indecent.
> 
> Or just fine the shit out of him each time he lies.
> 
> And bring back the fairness doctrine.  If he is allowed to lie to millions, we need someone to counter him.
> 
> Funny, you right wing assholes want to see a debate between Rush and Obama but you don't want to give us liberals equal time on the radio.  Why?  Scared the truth will come out?
Click to expand...


You are a complete fucking idiot.

#1. Freedom of speech. 
#2. Freedom of speech.
#3. Freedom of speech.
#4. Freedom of speech.

What you are saying is you want to get rid of freedom of speech, so you can put a halt to anyone who says things you don't like from speaking publicly.

It will never happen.

Oh, and btw. Post some proof of a lie Rush has told about the dems. Otherwise, shut the hell up. You quit being funny a long time ago, now you're just sickening.


----------



## Red Dawn

ScreamingEagle said:


> "I am offering President Obama to come on this program -- without staffers, without a TelePrompTer, without note cards -- to debate me on the issues. Let's talk about free markets versus government control. Let's talk about nationalizing health care and raising taxes on small business...
> 
> snip
> 
> Radio Ink Magazine
> 
> Limbaugh Wants To Debate Obama | Political Hotsheet - CBS News




So your position is that the President of the United States should debate a talk show host?


Not very astute of you.   Shouldn't you be posting on sports forums or soap opera forums, instead of political forums?


----------



## AllieBaba

That president is the one who told people not to listen to Rush, and threw himself into that world by idiotically taking a stand against a talk show host.


----------



## bthoma91

rush knows his politics; obama knows how to pretend to know his politics.


----------



## twogreen2c

BoBo I have watched repeatedly your misspelling of Dick Cheney's name as Chaney.  It wasn't until you did a cut and paste (re: sign petition) that the spelling appeared correctly.  Consider my pointing out this error of yours as a favor.  I already corrected you in another thread on the spelling of Harry Reid (not Reed).  When you consider the media coverage surrounding these people is so great, I would think you would pick-up on the spelling of their names.  I'm sensing an A.D.D. problem.  Hmmm, that could explain you distorted political views.


----------



## DiveCon

Care4all said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just utter nonsense...
> 
> Like they would have expected president Bush to interview with Rhandi Rhodes or olbermann....
> 
> cut me a fricking break!
> 
> What is wrong with you guys lately?
> 
> I realize the news has been boring and we feel like we have our hands completely tied when it comes to this economic mess which is very frustrating but PLEASE, expecting something like this to even be feasible, is believing in the tooth fairy...
> 
> 
> 
> ah, but there IS a difference here
> 
> did Pres Bush EVER call out Rhandi Rhoades os Olbermann?
> NOPE
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Got any proof that Obama called out Rush?
> 
> I saw that the head of the GOP called out Rush but when did president Obama say something about rush?  What did I miss?
> 
> Do you have a link for obama calling out Rush?
> 
> Care
Click to expand...

he did it on national tv care

are you REALLY this clueless


----------



## DiveCon

xsited1 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We all know Obama is behind this.  The President of the United States is attacking a private citizen because he doesn't like criticism.  Anyone else see a problem here?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually, in some ways, Rush is acting like Tokyo Rose.  He is hurting America's chances to recover from the financial crisis his own party caused.
> 
> He's just another anti American right wing obstructionist.
> 
> His vision of America looks a lot like Mexico.  5 families have all the money and the rest are poor.  And those poor mexicans have only themselves to blame for their financial situation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So citizens like Rush Limbaugh should not criticize our government because he is hurting America's chances of a recovery?  Do you realize how crazy that is?
Click to expand...

especially after the last 8 years with asshole morons like Bobo


----------



## DiveCon

rayboyusmc said:


> On his best day with full bottles of oxycontin and viagra he couldn't come close to winning an argument with Randy.
> 
> She would hand him his little set of balls in a thimble.


drink some more of that koolaid ray


----------



## DiveCon

sealybobo said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caligirl said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's a good idea.  I'd pay to see it -
> 
> Yes, Obama shouldn't be stooping to mention Limbaugh, but I thought it was Rahm that did that, not Obama, and Rahm is supposed to be a bit of a hot head.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama is a poor leader if he can't control his Chief of Staff.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Who outted Valerie Plames?  If it was Scooter & Chaney, then Bush is a poor leader if he can't control his people.
> 
> Rahm says things Obama wants to say but can't.
Click to expand...

Armitage and wilson himself
how is it a covert agent is listed in a book like who's who
LOL
you are a fucking CLOWN


----------



## Caligirl

xsited1 said:


> Caligirl said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's a good idea.  I'd pay to see it -
> 
> Yes, Obama shouldn't be stooping to mention Limbaugh, but I thought it was Rahm that did that, not Obama, and Rahm is supposed to be a bit of a hot head.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama is a poor leader if he can't control his Chief of Staff.
Click to expand...


???

Leadership doesn't require 'controlling' others and surely you aren't saying that presidents don't think strategically when trying to get a message out?


I can think of one recent president who surrounded himself with "yes men" in order to control the message.


----------



## DiveCon

sealybobo said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rayboyusmc said:
> 
> 
> 
> On his best day with full bottles of oxycontin and viagra he couldn't come close to winning an argument with Randy.
> 
> She would hand him his little set of balls in a thimble.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, Chocolate Soldier, you have given me an ephany!  It is not ideology that causes your  defense of the constantly failed left wing talk radio.  No, it your unrequited love of the unsucessful, washed-up, never-was, foul-mouthed Randy-one.
> 
> In fact, I now believe that is goes further, a more personal envy. Let's test the theory: do you have trouble balancing a checkbook?  Have trouble parallel parking?  Hate it when folks leave the toilet seat up? Can't resist sales at Nordstroms?  I've got it: you are a woman in a man's body!  What frilly unmentionables are hidden beneath that tunic and John Brown belt?
> 
> And that reference to the two male accessories: is that a silent wish that they were gone?
> 
> I think that there are pills that you can take. Speak to your doctor to see if they are right for you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For something that is a failure and garbage, you guys sure do fight awfully hard to avoid putting Randi against Rush in syndication.
> 
> Oh you'll put some average non threatening liberals on, like Ed Schultz or Bill Press, but you REFUSE to put the left's version of Rush on.
> 
> Because you are liars, punks, bitches and pussies.
Click to expand...

what the fuck are you jabbering about
you want her on from noon to 3, pony up the money to buy the airtime


----------



## DiveCon

Caligirl said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Caligirl said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's a good idea.  I'd pay to see it -
> 
> Yes, Obama shouldn't be stooping to mention Limbaugh, but I thought it was Rahm that did that, not Obama, and Rahm is supposed to be a bit of a hot head.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Obama is a poor leader if he can't control his Chief of Staff.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ???
> 
> Leadership doesn't require 'controlling' others and surely you aren't saying that presidents don't think strategically when trying to get a message out?
> 
> 
> I can think of one recent president who surrounded himself with "yes men" in order to control the message.
Click to expand...

except Obama himself said it
he cant even control his OWN mouth, let alone anyone elses in his administration


----------



## Caligirl

xsited1 said:


> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Obama is a poor leader if he can't control his Chief of Staff.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who outted Valerie Plames?  If it was Scooter & Chaney, then Bush is a poor leader if he can't control his people.
> 
> Rahm says things Obama wants to say but can't.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We all know Obama is behind this.  The President of the United States is attacking a private citizen because he doesn't like criticism.  Anyone else see a problem here?
Click to expand...


It seems ridiculous to take a few comments and characterize it as a problematice attack on a private citizen.

Surely freedom of speech is still available to the president? Surely opinions are allowed? 

This line of thinking is bizarre.


----------



## DiveCon

Caligirl said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who outted Valerie Plames?  If it was Scooter & Chaney, then Bush is a poor leader if he can't control his people.
> 
> Rahm says things Obama wants to say but can't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We all know Obama is behind this.  The President of the United States is attacking a private citizen because he doesn't like criticism.  Anyone else see a problem here?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It seems ridiculous to take a few comments and characterize it as a problematice attack on a private citizen.
> 
> Surely freedom of speech is still available to the president? Surely opinions are allowed?
> 
> This line of thinking is bizarre.
Click to expand...

sure he has it
so does Rush to respond


----------



## KittenKoder

Here's something odd, this whole point is moot, why? If Obama did spend time debating Rush then the right wingnuts would complain that he is wasting time anyway, placing someone in a no win situation is just bad form, even though I don't like Obamas policies ... it's just bad form.


----------



## Caligirl

> sure he has it
> so does Rush to respond


Yeah, and people here have the right to call Obama a pussy for not going on Rush's show. 

And people have the right to call the whole thing ass-stupid.


----------



## KittenKoder

Caligirl said:


> sure he has it
> so does Rush to respond
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, and people here have the right to call Obama a pussy for not going on Rush's show.
> 
> And people have the right to call the whole thing ass-stupid.
Click to expand...


Pertty much ... isn't America great?

Oh, and I forgot, no matter which side of the debate "wins" ... wingnuts on both sides will claim their "leader" did better.


----------



## DiveCon

KittenKoder said:


> Here's something odd, this whole point is moot, why? If Obama did spend time debating Rush then the right wingnuts would complain that he is wasting time anyway, placing someone in a no win situation is just bad form, even though I don't like Obamas policies ... it's just bad form.


then maybe Obama should have had the smarts not to engage a talk radio personality in the first place


win/win for conservatism


----------



## KittenKoder

DiveCon said:


> KittenKoder said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's something odd, this whole point is moot, why? If Obama did spend time debating Rush then the right wingnuts would complain that he is wasting time anyway, placing someone in a no win situation is just bad form, even though I don't like Obamas policies ... it's just bad form.
> 
> 
> 
> then maybe Obama should have had the smarts not to engage a talk radio personality in the first place
> 
> 
> win/win for conservatism
Click to expand...


True ... that was a stupid move on his part.


----------



## Shogun

DiveCon said:


> KittenKoder said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's something odd, this whole point is moot, why? If Obama did spend time debating Rush then the right wingnuts would complain that he is wasting time anyway, placing someone in a no win situation is just bad form, even though I don't like Obamas policies ... it's just bad form.
> 
> 
> 
> then maybe Obama should have had the smarts not to engage a talk radio personality in the first place
> 
> 
> win/win for conservatism
Click to expand...


if you think this is a win for conservatism then I guess it's no wonder why teh GOP keeps failing.


Truly, it's hilarious to watch you people put all of your eggs into the basket of.. a radio dj.


----------



## KMAN

No way Obama or any of his tax cheats go on his show...  Why would they...  They have the rest of the media in their back pocket...

Besides Rush would kill him in a debate...


----------



## Diuretic

DiveCon said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> he would rip you apart
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only if I had a pale of KFC!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> oh man
> a fat joke
> 
> 
> thats pretty low of you
Click to expand...


Not really a fat joke, more a joke about food avarice


----------



## Diuretic

Limbaugh knows Obama wouldn't take the challenge.  Among other things it would demean the office.  He's on safe ground, bluffing as usual.  It's sad that a radio shock jock is considered to be the intellectual force of the GOP.  You folks who think that Limbaugh could defeat Obama in a debate are either deluded or you are so partisan that you've lost touch with reality.  It won't happen so you can speculate without fear.  

Limbaugh is a lightweight (that is not a fat man joke).  He doesn't debate, he declaims.  I just wonder how the hell he can get through a programme without pissing himself laughing at his audience of dittoheads.  I bet at times the man stops, thinks and wonders if he is actually living in reality or it's some sort of illusion.  How can a former sports broadcaster (sorry Billo) make the sort of money he has and have such influence?  He holds a mirror up to popular prejudices.  If he wanted to he could achieve high political office in the US.  You know that don't you?  He won't though, because whatever else he is he knows he isn't a political demagogue.  He's enjoying himself immensely but he's no Hitler (a reverse play on Godwin's Law).  You should be glad ol' Rush doesn't take himself as seriously as some of his supporters.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Diuretic said:


> Limbaugh knows Obama wouldn't take the challenge.  Among other things it would demean the office.  He's on safe ground, bluffing as usual.  It's sad that a radio shock jock is considered to be the intellectual force of the GOP.  You folks who think that Limbaugh could defeat Obama in a debate are either deluded or you are so partisan that you've lost touch with reality.  It won't happen so you can speculate without fear.
> 
> You should be glad ol' Rush doesn't take himself as seriously as some of his supporters.




Wow, did I predict this? Check out part of my post #15:

"For the Obama supporters who crooned about how smart, what a great speaker, how messianic their favorite son is, they are going to have to, publically at least, come up with maneuvers reminiscent of the game Twister to explain why he picked this fight, actually naming Limbaugh, but cannot pick up the gauntlet. "

The only thing I left out was your name.

If he won't take the challenge, why did he start it?

Did it demean the office starting the dustup?

You must be delirious if you actually think the radio host would pass up an opportunity to have the POTUS on his show!!!! 

Yeah, Limbaugh would eat his lunch.

BTW, still playin' much Twister?


----------



## Diuretic

PoliticalChic said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Limbaugh knows Obama wouldn't take the challenge.  Among other things it would demean the office.  He's on safe ground, bluffing as usual.  It's sad that a radio shock jock is considered to be the intellectual force of the GOP.  You folks who think that Limbaugh could defeat Obama in a debate are either deluded or you are so partisan that you've lost touch with reality.  It won't happen so you can speculate without fear.
> 
> You should be glad ol' Rush doesn't take himself as seriously as some of his supporters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, did I predict this? Check out part of my post #15:
> 
> "For the Obama supporters who crooned about how smart, what a great speaker, how messianic their favorite son is, they are going to have to, publically at least, come up with maneuvers reminiscent of the game Twister to explain why he picked this fight, actually naming Limbaugh, but cannot pick up the gauntlet. "
> 
> The only thing I left out was your name.
> 
> If he won't take the challenge, why did he start it?
> 
> Did it demean the office starting the dustup?
> 
> You must be delirious if you actually think the radio host would pass up an opportunity to have the POTUS on his show!!!!
> 
> Yeah, Limbaugh would eat his lunch.
> 
> BTW, still playin' much Twister?
Click to expand...


In there somewhere is a point, I'll see if I can find it.

Nope, there isn't one.

But I'll repeat mine because you didn't understand it.

The president of the US does not go onto a shock jock radio show to debate the host.

How's that?  Clear enough?


----------



## sealybobo

PoliticalChic said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Limbaugh knows Obama wouldn't take the challenge.  Among other things it would demean the office.  He's on safe ground, bluffing as usual.  It's sad that a radio shock jock is considered to be the intellectual force of the GOP.  You folks who think that Limbaugh could defeat Obama in a debate are either deluded or you are so partisan that you've lost touch with reality.  It won't happen so you can speculate without fear.
> 
> You should be glad ol' Rush doesn't take himself as seriously as some of his supporters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, did I predict this? Check out part of my post #15:
> 
> "For the Obama supporters who crooned about how smart, what a great speaker, how messianic their favorite son is, they are going to have to, publically at least, come up with maneuvers reminiscent of the game Twister to explain why he picked this fight, actually naming Limbaugh, but cannot pick up the gauntlet. "
> 
> The only thing I left out was your name.
> 
> If he won't take the challenge, why did he start it?
> 
> Did it demean the office starting the dustup?
> 
> You must be delirious if you actually think the radio host would pass up an opportunity to have the POTUS on his show!!!!
> 
> Yeah, Limbaugh would eat his lunch.
> 
> BTW, still playin' much Twister?
Click to expand...


That's like me challanging Randy Couture or Fedor to a fight.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Diuretic said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Limbaugh knows Obama wouldn't take the challenge.  Among other things it would demean the office.  He's on safe ground, bluffing as usual.  It's sad that a radio shock jock is considered to be the intellectual force of the GOP.  You folks who think that Limbaugh could defeat Obama in a debate are either deluded or you are so partisan that you've lost touch with reality.  It won't happen so you can speculate without fear.
> 
> You should be glad ol' Rush doesn't take himself as seriously as some of his supporters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, did I predict this? Check out part of my post #15:
> 
> "For the Obama supporters who crooned about how smart, what a great speaker, how messianic their favorite son is, they are going to have to, publically at least, come up with maneuvers reminiscent of the game Twister to explain why he picked this fight, actually naming Limbaugh, but cannot pick up the gauntlet. "
> 
> The only thing I left out was your name.
> 
> If he won't take the challenge, why did he start it?
> 
> Did it demean the office starting the dustup?
> 
> You must be delirious if you actually think the radio host would pass up an opportunity to have the POTUS on his show!!!!
> 
> Yeah, Limbaugh would eat his lunch.
> 
> BTW, still playin' much Twister?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In there somewhere is a point, I'll see if I can find it.
> 
> Nope, there isn't one.
> 
> But I'll repeat mine because you didn't understand it.
> 
> The president of the US does not go onto a shock jock radio show to debate the host.
> 
> How's that?  Clear enough?
Click to expand...


In the words of the Immortal Brown Bomber, "You can run but you can't hide."


----------



## Diuretic

PoliticalChic said:


> In the words of the Immortal Brown Bomber, "You can run but you can't hide."



Yoo hoo!  I'm baaaaaaaaaaack!  Please leave a message, I'll get back to you as soon as possible


----------



## midcan5

Rush Limbaugh challenging anyone is funny. The big sissy with the bad ass! Here is a talk show hostess who makes millions and never even served this nation because while he is a perfect a-hole, something was amiss. He uses the nation's resources to spread stupidity while he is a bawk bawk chickenhawk. Blah blah blah blah or is it bawk bawk bawk.....

snopes.com: Rush Limbaugh's Pilonidal Cyst
New Hampshire Gazette I Barking Head Brigade
New Hampshire Gazette I Propaganda Platoon
http://web.archive.org/web/20070205060543/www.nhgazette.com/news/chickenhawks/politicans_platoon/


----------



## DiveCon

Diuretic said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Limbaugh knows Obama wouldn't take the challenge.  Among other things it would demean the office.  He's on safe ground, bluffing as usual.  It's sad that a radio shock jock is considered to be the intellectual force of the GOP.  You folks who think that Limbaugh could defeat Obama in a debate are either deluded or you are so partisan that you've lost touch with reality.  It won't happen so you can speculate without fear.
> 
> You should be glad ol' Rush doesn't take himself as seriously as some of his supporters.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, did I predict this? Check out part of my post #15:
> 
> "For the Obama supporters who crooned about how smart, what a great speaker, how messianic their favorite son is, they are going to have to, publically at least, come up with maneuvers reminiscent of the game Twister to explain why he picked this fight, actually naming Limbaugh, but cannot pick up the gauntlet. "
> 
> The only thing I left out was your name.
> 
> If he won't take the challenge, why did he start it?
> 
> Did it demean the office starting the dustup?
> 
> You must be delirious if you actually think the radio host would pass up an opportunity to have the POTUS on his show!!!!
> 
> Yeah, Limbaugh would eat his lunch.
> 
> BTW, still playin' much Twister?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> In there somewhere is a point, I'll see if I can find it.
> 
> Nope, there isn't one.
> 
> But I'll repeat mine because you didn't understand it.
> 
> The president of the US does not go onto a shock jock radio show to debate the host.
> 
> How's that?  Clear enough?
Click to expand...

the POTUS shouldnt be calling out them either
don't you agree?


----------



## DiveCon

midcan5 said:


> Rush Limbaugh challenging anyone is funny. The big sissy with the bad ass! Here is a talk show hostess who makes millions and never even served this nation because while he is a perfect a-hole, something was amiss. He uses the nation's resources to spread stupidity while he is a bawk bawk chickenhawk. Blah blah blah blah or is it bawk bawk bawk.....
> 
> snopes.com: Rush Limbaugh's Pilonidal Cyst
> New Hampshire Gazette I Barking Head Brigade
> New Hampshire Gazette I Propaganda Platoon
> http://web.archive.org/web/20070205060543/www.nhgazette.com/news/chickenhawks/politicans_platoon/


he had a legal medical reason
you are looking like a moron for even bringing that up


----------



## midcan5

DiveCon said:


> you are looking like a moron for even bringing that up



And you are a damn fool, as we were there and having a cyst during Nam was no excuse. Consider how much the fat ass sits today and one can only wonder. bawk bawk bawk


----------



## PoliticalChic

midcan5 said:


> Rush Limbaugh challenging anyone is funny. The big sissy with the bad ass! Here is a talk show hostess who makes millions and never even served this nation because while he is a perfect a-hole, something was amiss. He uses the nation's resources to spread stupidity while he is a bawk bawk chickenhawk. Blah blah blah blah or is it bawk bawk bawk.....
> 
> snopes.com: Rush Limbaugh's Pilonidal Cyst
> New Hampshire Gazette I Barking Head Brigade
> New Hampshire Gazette I Propaganda Platoon
> http://web.archive.org/web/20070205060543/www.nhgazette.com/news/chickenhawks/politicans_platoon/



The first thing one must learn about Libs, like yourself, is that once aspersions and pejoratives are thrown about, they slink away as though there had been a point made. There has not been. 

Now read carefully: The President called out Rush Limbaugh. He warned people not to listen to him. He and his hit squad painted him as head of the GOP.
Limbaugh responded: he demanded a debate.  The President has never had to face such a challenge, and, we would both bet, will decline. The 'Why' is evident. 

At no point in your post did you deal with this, and so I am forced to remind you of a major difference between Conservatives and Liberals:
  Since Liberals see their view as a higher calling that that of Conservatives, they mistakenly believe that it is entirely appropriate for then to use, not logic, facts,  nor accepted debating techniques, but ad hominem attacks on the physical appearance, personal history, or imaginary mental defects. Notice how the Liberal replaces intellect with emotion. This is, no doubt, based on a medieval concept of recognizing witches and demons. In fact, Liberals attempt to deal with opponents in similar fashion: recall Clarence Thomas High Tech Lynching.

Aren't you embarrassed?


----------



## AllieBaba

They're never embarassed by lack of veracity or character.

That's the #1 trait of a lib.


----------



## PoliticalChic

Diuretic said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> In the words of the Immortal Brown Bomber, "You can run but you can't hide."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yoo hoo!  I'm baaaaaaaaaaack!  Please leave a message, I'll get back to you as soon as possible
Click to expand...


Not simple enough?

You have covered yourself in the rhetorical equivalent of Twister: bending and contorting, just as I predicted those on your side of the aisle would.

You claim not to see the point? Now, you know this is an obfuscation. 

Did you also clap your hands over your ears and say "I can't hear you, so your not speaking"? 

Honesty is the least I should be able to expect, and, sadly, you have disqualified yourself.


----------



## DiveCon

midcan5 said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> you are looking like a moron for even bringing that up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you are a damn fool, as we were there and having a cyst during Nam was no excuse. Consider how much the fat ass sits today and one can only wonder. bawk bawk bawk
Click to expand...

no, you have exposed yourself as the fool
but then, i have suspected you of being a fool for some time

do you even know what a pilodial cyst is?


----------



## Diuretic

DiveCon said:


> the POTUS shouldnt be calling out them either
> don't you agree?



Now I don't want to shock you but........no 

While I appreciate that the office has a fair amount of gravitas about it - and rightly so - it seems to me to be the holder has to have a mix of statesmanship and politician but with a definite leaning towards statesmanship.  The statesmanship aspect of the office demands that it be kept above the day to day political fray that rightly belongs in Congress.  But the political aspect of the office demands that there be prudent reaction to political threats. The holder of the office should not have to endure political attack without having a go back.  That would render the office impotent, politically.  

Limbaugh entered the political arena when he made his presentation to CPAC.  He is now a political player.  That's his grave personal mistake and the GOP has made a grave tactical mistake in allowing LImbaugh to take over their party.  Limbaugh isn't able to use his status as a radio show host to slide out of the political engagement.  He is a valid political target, he pinned that label on himself.


----------



## Diuretic

PoliticalChic said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> In the words of the Immortal Brown Bomber, "You can run but you can't hide."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yoo hoo!  I'm baaaaaaaaaaack!  Please leave a message, I'll get back to you as soon as possible
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not simple enough?
> 
> You have covered yourself in the rhetorical equivalent of Twister: bending and contorting, just as I predicted those on your side of the aisle would.
> 
> You claim not to see the point? Now, you know this is an obfuscation.
> 
> Did you also clap your hands over your ears and say "I can't hear you, so your not speaking"?
> 
> Honesty is the least I should be able to expect, and, sadly, you have disqualified yourself.
Click to expand...


Not disqualified.  Just waiting for you to make a point worthwhile engaging.  

Try this.  I just posted how Limbaugh is now in the political game.  No longer is he on the sidelines cheerleading, he actually walked out on to the field.  Your views on that?


----------



## Diuretic

DiveCon said:


> midcan5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> you are looking like a moron for even bringing that up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And you are a damn fool, as we were there and having a cyst during Nam was no excuse. Consider how much the fat ass sits today and one can only wonder. bawk bawk bawk
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no, you have exposed yourself as the fool
> but then, i have suspected you of being a fool for some time
> 
> do you even know what a pilodial cyst is?
Click to expand...


 Was it up his arse?


----------



## Diuretic

Pilonidal cyst - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why would that keep someone from going into service after they recovered?

I hope I've got the right condition there, seems to be a typo or something.


----------



## AllieBaba

Diuretic said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yoo hoo!  I'm baaaaaaaaaaack!  Please leave a message, I'll get back to you as soon as possible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not simple enough?
> 
> You have covered yourself in the rhetorical equivalent of Twister: bending and contorting, just as I predicted those on your side of the aisle would.
> 
> You claim not to see the point? Now, you know this is an obfuscation.
> 
> Did you also clap your hands over your ears and say "I can't hear you, so your not speaking"?
> 
> Honesty is the least I should be able to expect, and, sadly, you have disqualified yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not disqualified.  Just waiting for you to make a point worthwhile engaging.
> 
> Try this.  I just posted how Limbaugh is now in the political game.  No longer is he on the sidelines cheerleading, he actually walked out on to the field.  Your views on that?
Click to expand...


He's always been on the field. What has happened that is different is that OBAMA entered the TALK SHOW field when he idiotically told people to stop listening to Rush, and when his party (as noted above) stupidly named Rush as the head of the GOP.

They thought that would hurt the GOP, but all it has done is put them in a really awkward position....because people DO agree with Rush.


----------



## DiveCon

Diuretic said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> the POTUS shouldnt be calling out them either
> don't you agree?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now I don't want to shock you but........no
> 
> While I appreciate that the office has a fair amount of gravitas about it - and rightly so - it seems to me to be the holder has to have a mix of statesmanship and politician but with a definite leaning towards statesmanship.  The statesmanship aspect of the office demands that it be kept above the day to day political fray that rightly belongs in Congress.  But the political aspect of the office demands that there be prudent reaction to political threats. The holder of the office should not have to endure political attack without having a go back.  That would render the office impotent, politically.
> 
> Limbaugh entered the political arena when he made his presentation to CPAC.  He is now a political player.  That's his grave personal mistake and the GOP has made a grave tactical mistake in allowing LImbaugh to take over their party.  Limbaugh isn't able to use his status as a radio show host to slide out of the political engagement.  He is a valid political target, he pinned that label on himself.
Click to expand...

uh, only Obama called him out PRIOR to that


so you are either ignorant of the facts, or just another simpleton that hates anyone that disagrees with your politics


----------



## DiveCon

Diuretic said:


> Pilonidal cyst - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Why would that keep someone from going into service after they recovered?
> 
> I hope I've got the right condition there, seems to be a typo or something.


because they have a history if becoming reinfected on the battlefield
thats why the military rejects people with them


----------



## DiveCon

AllieBaba said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not simple enough?
> 
> You have covered yourself in the rhetorical equivalent of Twister: bending and contorting, just as I predicted those on your side of the aisle would.
> 
> You claim not to see the point? Now, you know this is an obfuscation.
> 
> Did you also clap your hands over your ears and say "I can't hear you, so your not speaking"?
> 
> Honesty is the least I should be able to expect, and, sadly, you have disqualified yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not disqualified.  Just waiting for you to make a point worthwhile engaging.
> 
> Try this.  I just posted how Limbaugh is now in the political game.  No longer is he on the sidelines cheerleading, he actually walked out on to the field.  Your views on that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He's always been on the field. What has happened that is different is that OBAMA entered the TALK SHOW field when he idiotically told people to stop listening to Rush, and when his party (as noted above) stupidly named Rush as the head of the GOP.
> 
> They thought that would hurt the GOP, but all it has done is put them in a really awkward position....because people DO agree with Rush.
Click to expand...

no kidding, i think Di doesnt actually know whats going on
but since he doesnt live here, i can understand that


----------



## Diuretic

AllieBaba said:


> He's always been on the field. What has happened that is different is that OBAMA entered the TALK SHOW field when he idiotically told people to stop listening to Rush, and when his party (as noted above) stupidly named Rush as the head of the GOP.
> 
> They thought that would hurt the GOP, but all it has done is put them in a really awkward position....because people DO agree with Rush.



Always been in the field?  What on the special team?  Pig's bloody arse he has.  He has sat on the sidelines, commenting on the plays, John Madden without the football brain.

He has now made his gravest error though.  He has engaged Obama.  Obama is constrained, as I pointed out, by the nature of his office, he can't go after Limbaugh - and would be ill-advised - in the manner a politician goes after another (not that there's much of that in US politics, you're a genteel lot indeed).  But Obama's proxies will certainly feel free to go after him.  And they will.  The debate invitation was pure Limbaugh.  Bluff.  If he was serious he'd invite Obama to the Oxford Union, not on his radio show.

He isn't serious, he knew Obama would be forced to turn down the invitation.  Limbaugh is one of the Hollow Men.  Limbaugh will end, not with a bang, but a whimper.



> We are the hollow men
> We are the stuffed men
> Leaning together
> Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
> Our dried voices, when
> We whisper together
> Are quiet and meaningless
> As wind in dry grass
> Or rats&#8217; feet over broken glass
> In our dry cellar


----------



## midcan5

PoliticalChic said:


> Now read carefully: The President called out Rush Limbaugh. He warned people not to listen to him. He and his hit squad painted him as head of the GOP.
> Limbaugh responded: he demanded a debate.  The President has never had to face such a challenge, and, we would both bet, will decline. The 'Why' is evident.



The president may have made a mistake mentioning the idiot by name but Limbaugh is a insult to all that is good in this country, and calling the million dollar a year hostess who can only berate others, who are doing real things, what he is, is a great thing. I hope others do that and do it again and again. Limpwrist talks hate and lies and deserves to be called out but let others do it. The president has real work - sissy pants chickenhawk has only words and a following of lemmings. 

Rush, Newspeak and Fascism: An exegesis: I: Projecting Fascism


----------



## Diuretic

DiveCon said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> the POTUS shouldnt be calling out them either
> don't you agree?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now I don't want to shock you but........no
> 
> While I appreciate that the office has a fair amount of gravitas about it - and rightly so - it seems to me to be the holder has to have a mix of statesmanship and politician but with a definite leaning towards statesmanship.  The statesmanship aspect of the office demands that it be kept above the day to day political fray that rightly belongs in Congress.  But the political aspect of the office demands that there be prudent reaction to political threats. The holder of the office should not have to endure political attack without having a go back.  That would render the office impotent, politically.
> 
> Limbaugh entered the political arena when he made his presentation to CPAC.  He is now a political player.  That's his grave personal mistake and the GOP has made a grave tactical mistake in allowing LImbaugh to take over their party.  Limbaugh isn't able to use his status as a radio show host to slide out of the political engagement.  He is a valid political target, he pinned that label on himself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> uh, only Obama called him out PRIOR to that
> 
> 
> so you are either ignorant of the facts, or just another simpleton that hates anyone that disagrees with your politics
Click to expand...


Call me ignorant of the facts.  I don't follow Limbaugh's activities.  Obama may have cautioned about Limbaugh's growing influence well before the CPAC appearance but that only validates Obama's political nous.  He saw it coming 

I don't hate anyone that disagrees with my politics.  If I did I wouldn't post here or I'd be a seething wreck in minutes.


----------



## Diuretic

DiveCon said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pilonidal cyst - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Why would that keep someone from going into service after they recovered?
> 
> I hope I've got the right condition there, seems to be a typo or something.
> 
> 
> 
> because they have a history if becoming reinfected on the battlefield
> thats why the military rejects people with them
Click to expand...


Fair enough, that's all I need to know.


----------



## DiveCon

midcan5 said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now read carefully: The President called out Rush Limbaugh. He warned people not to listen to him. He and his hit squad painted him as head of the GOP.
> Limbaugh responded: he demanded a debate.  The President has never had to face such a challenge, and, we would both bet, will decline. The 'Why' is evident.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The president may have made a mistake mentioning the idiot by name but Limbaugh is a insult to all that is good in this country, and calling the million dollar a year hostess who can only berate others, who are doing real things, what he is, is a great thing. I hope others do that and do it again and again. Limpwrist talks hate and lies and deserves to be called out but let others do it. The president has real work - sissy pants chickenhawk has only words and a following of lemmings.
> 
> Rush, Newspeak and Fascism: An exegesis: I: Projecting Fascism
Click to expand...

spoken like a true obamabot


----------



## Diuretic

DiveCon said:


> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not disqualified.  Just waiting for you to make a point worthwhile engaging.
> 
> Try this.  I just posted how Limbaugh is now in the political game.  No longer is he on the sidelines cheerleading, he actually walked out on to the field.  Your views on that?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He's always been on the field. What has happened that is different is that OBAMA entered the TALK SHOW field when he idiotically told people to stop listening to Rush, and when his party (as noted above) stupidly named Rush as the head of the GOP.
> 
> They thought that would hurt the GOP, but all it has done is put them in a really awkward position....because people DO agree with Rush.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> no kidding, i think Di doesnt actually know whats going on
> but since he doesnt live here, i can understand that
Click to expand...


On the other hand there is a certain clarity of vision that comes with distance


----------



## Diuretic

The right has degenerated into personal points.  It's over


----------



## DiveCon

Diuretic said:


> The right has degenerated into personal points.  It's over


LOL
you gotta be kidding
the LEFT is always on personal attacks


----------



## Meister

Diuretic said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yoo hoo!  I'm baaaaaaaaaaack!  Please leave a message, I'll get back to you as soon as possible
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not simple enough?
> 
> You have covered yourself in the rhetorical equivalent of Twister: bending and contorting, just as I predicted those on your side of the aisle would.
> 
> You claim not to see the point? Now, you know this is an obfuscation.
> 
> Did you also clap your hands over your ears and say "I can't hear you, so your not speaking"?
> 
> Honesty is the least I should be able to expect, and, sadly, you have disqualified yourself.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not disqualified.  Just waiting for you to make a point worthwhile engaging.
> 
> Try this.  I just posted how Limbaugh is now in the political game.  No longer is he on the sidelines cheerleading, he actually walked out on to the field.  Your views on that?
Click to expand...



Di, if what you say is true, then Limbaugh is no longer just a "shock jock", but is part of the republican political game, and should be elevated to a discussion with our messiah.


----------



## Sinatra

Meister said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not simple enough?
> 
> You have covered yourself in the rhetorical equivalent of Twister: bending and contorting, just as I predicted those on your side of the aisle would.
> 
> You claim not to see the point? Now, you know this is an obfuscation.
> 
> Did you also clap your hands over your ears and say "I can't hear you, so your not speaking"?
> 
> Honesty is the least I should be able to expect, and, sadly, you have disqualified yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not disqualified.  Just waiting for you to make a point worthwhile engaging.
> 
> Try this.  I just posted how Limbaugh is now in the political game.  No longer is he on the sidelines cheerleading, he actually walked out on to the field.  Your views on that?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Di, if what you say is true, then Limbaugh is not longer just a "shock jock", but is part of the republican political game, and should be elevated to a discussion with our messiah.
Click to expand...


And on this topic - how many times has Obama discussed his policies in an unfiltered environment - taken questions from reporters not pre-approved to do so?

He has spent trillions in weeks and has not done this ONCE.

That my friends, is a frightening situation.  Not that Obama has done so, but that he has done so with so little requirement to explain it.


----------



## ScreamingEagle

glockmail said:


> I was listing today and someone called and challenged him to debate on TV with a negotiated venue, and he wouldn't agree to it. It's a stunt.


I was wondering if anybody was going to bring that up....why should Rush agree to a TV debate just because somebody called in to ask him?     

In the first place, radio is Rush's venue so why should he risk a (possibly rigged) TV show....if the President is going to attack a private citizen like a typical neomarxist then he needs to meet Rush's challenge on Rush's home ground or else go to ground like a typical neomarxist whose bluff has been called...which is what he's done.

In the second place, attempting to switch the venue is nothing more than a shell game, a sleight of hand....leftists can then say well, he won't go on TV so he must be all bluff....

In the third place, BO never _actually _asked Rush to debate him on TV  (he never will).....if he did, I think Rush might just take him up on it....as long as the rules were fair.

Lastly, here we have the conservative right opening up plenty of talk time for the neomarxist left oppostion....and the left is turning down a radio opportunity for "Fairness".....what's with that?


----------



## glockmail

ScreamingEagle said:


> I was wondering if anybody was going to bring that up....why should Rush agree to a TV debate just because somebody called in to ask him?
> 
> In the first place, radio is Rush's venue so why should he risk a (possibly rigged) TV show....if the President is going to attack a private citizen like a typical neomarxist then he needs to meet Rush's challenge on Rush's home ground or else go to ground like a typical neomarxist whose bluff has been called...which is what he's done.
> 
> In the second place, attempting to switch the venue is nothing more than a shell game, a sleight of hand....leftists can then say well, he won't go on TV so he must be all bluff....
> 
> In the third place, BO never asked Rush to debate him on TV.....if he did, I think Rush might just take him up on it....as long as the rules were fair.
> 
> Lastly, here we have the conservative right opening up plenty of talk time for the neomarxist left.....and the left is turning down a radio opportunity for "Fairness".....what's with that?


 All good arguments, and ones that Rush should have made.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

bk1983 said:


> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> well, come on, it was McLame
> 
> 
> 
> That The Obama didn't absolutely trounce McCain hands-down in the debates is still sort of a sticking point. Like if the Steelers managed only to win by 6 against a high school team. There'd be questions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think the questions should be, why did the Republicans nominate a "high school team" to represent their party in leading the country?
Click to expand...


Massive intellectual failure, brought on by a virulent infection of leftism...   More than sufficient to explain the lethal levels of stupidity which are required to run John McCain against Hillary Clinton or the great anti-while-HOPE...


----------



## Meister

PubliusInfinitum said:


> bk1983 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midnight Marauder said:
> 
> 
> 
> That The Obama didn't absolutely trounce McCain hands-down in the debates is still sort of a sticking point. Like if the Steelers managed only to win by 6 against a high school team. There'd be questions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the questions should be, why did the Republicans nominate a "high school team" to represent their party in leading the country?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Massive intellectual failure, brought on by a virulent infection of leftism...   More than sufficient to explain the lethal levels of stupidity which are required to run John McCain against Hillary Clinton or the great anti-while-HOPE...
Click to expand...



Geeze, and I thought the media had nominated McCain.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

midcan5 said:


> Rush Limbaugh challenging anyone is funny. The big sissy with the bad ass! Here is a talk show hostess who makes millions and never even served this nation because while he is a perfect a-hole, something was amiss. He uses the nation's resources to spread stupidity while he is a bawk bawk chickenhawk. Blah blah blah blah or is it bawk bawk bawk.....
> 
> snopes.com: Rush Limbaugh's Pilonidal Cyst
> New Hampshire Gazette I Barking Head Brigade
> New Hampshire Gazette I Propaganda Platoon
> New Hampshire Gazette I Politicans Platoon



SWEET FALLACY!  

Now if something relevant comes along... don't hesitate to bring that up as well.

(Now what that means is no one gives a red rats ass what boils are growing in Limbaughs ass...  and Limbaugh not serving in the US military is ABSOLUTELY IRRELEVANT...  I served in the US Military and YOU LOATHE ME EVERY BIT AS MUCH AS YOU LOATHE LIMBAUGH... so this fiegning respect for the US military; holding up those who didn't serve in the military to be somehow unworthy of consideration is absurd... GIVEN PRESIDENT HUSSEIN, WHO YOU VOTED TO PUT INTO THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENCY HAS NEVER EVEN APPLIED TO SERVE IN THE US MILITARY AND IT OTHERWISE PERFECTLY QUALIFIED TO DO SO...

Dumbass...


----------



## Detmurds

Shogun said:


> Why would Obama care to go on Rush's show to debate him?   Hell, I CHALLENGE RUSH LIMBAUGH TO DEBATE ON US MESSAGEBOARD.  IF HE DOESN'T, then he is a giant pussy.
> 
> 
> now... let's see how quickly Rush logs on.  I am about as important to Rush as Rush is to Obama.  You people want Rush on that kind of platform?  Put your vote where your big mouths are and get him out from his little radio cave.



I like your avatar, but please, that is a bit mentally Obamatarded if you ask me.


----------



## Toro

I sent an email to Rush offering him to debate me on USMB.

I haven't received a response yet.  

I think he's chicken.


----------



## Detmurds

Sorry, and don't hold your breath, he gets paid to do such things, how much do you have for him?


----------



## DiveCon

Toro said:


> I sent an email to Rush offering him to debate me on USMB.
> 
> I haven't received a response yet.
> 
> I think he's chicken.


you sure you sent it to the right address?


----------



## Diuretic

DiveCon said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right has degenerated into personal points.  It's over
> 
> 
> 
> LOL
> you gotta be kidding
> the LEFT is always on personal attacks
Click to expand...


I do a bit of it myself at times but usually only when someone throws shit at me.  Childish I know but my inner brat loves it 

Now, I'll point out your ad hom DC.  And this isn't a personal attack, just an observation.  You wanted to make the point that I can't understand this particular issue because I don't live in the US.  You might be right but to simply make the claim and then sit back, job well done, doesn't cut it.  it is a classic ad hom.  I'm not doing ethnographic research  I am perfectly able to, at a distance, examine the issues and make certain logical claims.


----------



## Diuretic

Meister said:


> Di, if what you say is true, then Limbaugh is no longer just a "shock jock", but is part of the republican political game, and should be elevated to a discussion with our messiah.



But he isn't in an elected office.  Being elected to an office does give one some moral authority.  The people's choice and all that.  Right now Limbaugh is still just a shock jock.  Do you think that if President McCain were in the White House he should answer an invite from Keith Olbermann to come on his show and debate him?  Truly I don't think so, I do really believe it would demean the office.

I think when Rushbo gets himself a seat in Congress he can hop right into it and....he can even launch his campaign for the presidency.....until then your president (whoever he or she is) is best advised not to get into the mudpit with anyone.


----------



## DiveCon

Diuretic said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> The right has degenerated into personal points.  It's over
> 
> 
> 
> LOL
> you gotta be kidding
> the LEFT is always on personal attacks
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I do a bit of it myself at times but usually only when someone throws shit at me.  Childish I know but my inner brat loves it
> 
> Now, I'll point out your ad hom DC.  And this isn't a personal attack, just an observation.  You wanted to make the point that I can't understand this particular issue because I don't live in the US.  You might be right but to simply make the claim and then sit back, job well done, doesn't cut it.  it is a classic ad hom.  I'm not doing ethnographic research  I am perfectly able to, at a distance, examine the issues and make certain logical claims.
Click to expand...

actually, i didnt say that you CANT, i said its understandable that you DONT


----------



## Diuretic

DiveCon said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL
> you gotta be kidding
> the LEFT is always on personal attacks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do a bit of it myself at times but usually only when someone throws shit at me.  Childish I know but my inner brat loves it
> 
> Now, I'll point out your ad hom DC.  And this isn't a personal attack, just an observation.  You wanted to make the point that I can't understand this particular issue because I don't live in the US.  You might be right but to simply make the claim and then sit back, job well done, doesn't cut it.  it is a classic ad hom.  I'm not doing ethnographic research  I am perfectly able to, at a distance, examine the issues and make certain logical claims.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> actually, i didnt say that you CANT, i said its understandable that you DONT
Click to expand...


I never claimed I read a post carefully


----------



## DiveCon

DiveCon said:


> no kidding, i think Di doesnt actually know whats going on
> but since he doesnt live here, i can understand that


 

and here is the post in question

maybe you were trying to read MORE into my post that what i actually said


----------



## DiveCon

Diuretic said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> I do a bit of it myself at times but usually only when someone throws shit at me.  Childish I know but my inner brat loves it
> 
> Now, I'll point out your ad hom DC.  And this isn't a personal attack, just an observation.  You wanted to make the point that I can't understand this particular issue because I don't live in the US.  You might be right but to simply make the claim and then sit back, job well done, doesn't cut it.  it is a classic ad hom.  I'm not doing ethnographic research  I am perfectly able to, at a distance, examine the issues and make certain logical claims.
> 
> 
> 
> actually, i didnt say that you CANT, i said its understandable that you DONT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never claimed I read a post carefully
Click to expand...

ah, there is that


----------



## Diuretic

But usually I do.  

The vagaries of text-based communication.....and that's my defence


----------



## DiveCon

Diuretic said:


> But usually I do.
> 
> The vagaries of text-based communication.....and that's my defence


meh, its ok
i thought it funny that you took offense to something i didnt say


----------



## Diuretic

DiveCon said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> But usually I do.
> 
> The vagaries of text-based communication.....and that's my defence
> 
> 
> 
> meh, its ok
> i thought it funny that you took offense to something i didnt say
Click to expand...


Shadow boxing on my part? 

Any minute now the Jungians will be along and I'll be accused of "projection".  Oh well, why not?


----------



## Toro

DiveCon said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sent an email to Rush offering him to debate me on USMB.
> 
> I haven't received a response yet.
> 
> I think he's chicken.
> 
> 
> 
> you sure you sent it to the right address?
Click to expand...


Oh yeah, but I'm not sure if I put on the right postage.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

sealybobo said:


> xsited1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> sealybobo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Who outted Valerie Plames?  If it was Scooter & Chaney, then Bush is a poor leader if he can't control his people.
> 
> Rahm says things Obama wants to say but can't.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We all know Obama is behind this.  The President of the United States is attacking a private citizen because he doesn't like criticism.  Anyone else see a problem here?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Actually, in some ways, Rush is acting like Tokyo Rose.  He is hurting America's chances to recover from the financial crisis his own party caused.
> 
> He's just another anti American right wing obstructionist.
> 
> His vision of America looks a lot like Mexico.  5 families have all the money and the rest are poor.  And those poor mexicans have only themselves to blame for their financial situation.
Click to expand...


The one's that hurt America's recovery were the one's that voted to elect a MARXIST...  

Socialist policy WILL ONLY UNDERMINE AN ECONOMY...  you can't discourage capital growth and expect capital growth UNLESS YOU'RE INSANE!


----------



## Shogun

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNK4byQkn7w]YouTube - A Bully Gets Bullied[/ame]


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Diuretic said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> 
> Di, if what you say is true, then Limbaugh is no longer just a "shock jock", but is part of the republican political game, and should be elevated to a discussion with our messiah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But he isn't in an elected office.  Being elected to an office does give one some moral authority.  The people's choice and all that.  Right now Limbaugh is still just a shock jock.  Do you think that if President McCain were in the White House he should answer an invite from Keith Olbermann to come on his show and debate him?  Truly I don't think so, I do really believe it would demean the office.
> 
> I think when Rushbo gets himself a seat in Congress he can hop right into it and....he can even launch his campaign for the presidency.....until then your president (whoever he or she is) is best advised not to get into the mudpit with anyone.
Click to expand...


First, Limbaugh is now, as he has been since his first day on nationally syndicated air, a very real and present voice which expresses CONSERVATIVE THOUGHT and as he is wont to note himself, from time to time, he does it brilliantly.

The only people that are SHOCKED by Conservative thought are those who, due to their stark intellectual limitations are incapable of embracing Conservative thought: Leftists and the Comrade Centrists.  

Rush is a private citizen, who VERY PUBLICALLY and very EFFECTIVELY evokes opposition to LEFT-THINK...  President  Hussein HAS DECLARED LIMBAUGH TO BE THE LEADER OF THAT SPECIES OF REASONING WHICH OPPOSSES PRESIDENT HUSSIEN AND THE SPECIES OF REASONING ADVANCED BY PRESIDENT HUSSEIN...  thus President Hussein is the one who has DECLARED HIMSELF AND HIS POLICIES to be "LEFTISTS."

Now as to whether or not a President McCain would have invited Olberman to debate is anyone's guess; I'd say it's unlikely, as to publicly debate Olberman would be tantamount tochild-abuse...  

Look, over the many years of internet debate the number one complaint I've had from those that agree with my writing has been that I seem to be cruel...  that when they read the exchanges between me and the left, I come off as being  'mean' and abusive...  that it doesn't seem to be enough to win the debate that I appear intent on publicly humiliating the opponent.  

But what they have always failed to understand is that such is ALWAYS going to be the case when people debate Leftists, because Leftism is the Feminine Ideology... they're the default victims...   to debate a leftists is to debate the 'Mind of a Child;' meaning that one can never really win in terms of public acceptance, because as soon as one carries the point... This very action is to deny the child the sense of accomplishment; it appears to be robbing them of that most coveted of all PC fallacies... "SELF ESTEEM."

Thus the President has FROM HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS CHIEF EXECUTIVE, DECLARED RUSH TO BE *THE DEFACTO LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION*; Rush Limbaugh OPPOSSES LEFT-THINK; THUS the President has, quite by DEFAULT, declared himself AND HIS POLICY AS BEING DECIDEDLY LEFTIST; meaning he has declared himself to be 'the perpetual victim;' the President has declared his policies to be off limits, because their his policies and he like's 'em! and anyone who doesn't like 'em can SHOVE 'EM!  They're important to HIM! And to reject the policy is to REJECT HIM! And to reject HIM is just mean... 

Rush would call this, 'being too smart by half...' 

The President, as is typical of Leftists, has ALL ALONG projected himself as a MODERATE; a Centrist, who believes that _both species of thought_, Right and LEFT (wrong)... are correct and worthy of consideration.  YET: the President has used his high office to attack a private citizen... to QUIET the VOICE of that SPECIES OF REASONING which HE HAS CONTINUOUSLY AND QUITE PUBLICLY PROJECTED AS BEING WORTHY OF CONSIDERATION...  

And it is THIS which conclusively establishes the President's position to be CHILDISHLY DECEITFUL... FOOLISH... in the context that HE BELIEVES THOSE WHO SUPPORT HIM ARE FOOLS... that they will accept him as a MODERATE... DESPITE HIS INDISPUTABLE< UNWAVERING HISTORY AS A MARXIST AGITATOR... and DESPITE HIS JUST AS INDISTPUTABLE MARXIST POLICY INITIATIVES.  This represents the psychological foundation of an irrational female; a female who sets herself at the center of the Universe and requires those about her to hold her in ADJULATION or face the consequences of her wrath... 

President Hussein is not an imbecile; he is a cunning subversive who falls prey to his own crippling psychological flaws...  he damn well knows that by declaring Limbaugh as the leader of his opposition that he has identified WHO HE AND HIS IDEOLOGY ARE... and he knows that he now faces the prospect of having NO CHOICE, but to debate Limbaugh.  The question NOW is only how that debate will realize itself in actuality...  A four year long, daily debate of the minutia revolving around his policy and his comments regarding that policy; which leaves the debate as unfocused as possible, providing the highest degree of doubt for his followers to embrace; maximizing doubt to which his political base can cling; or a brilliant concentration, expressed in one hour... which in so doing would conclusively PROVE that his followers are children, that his psychological foundation is that of a VICTIM, a perpetual child... and exposing his authority to that reaction which can only come where the world cannot avoid the realization that the US has elected and is being 'lead' by the Presidential equivalent of Doogy Howser.  A brilliant little guy, who has a tough job, but who can't be left alone because in the end, he will ALWAYS return to being a child...


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Toro said:


> I sent an email to Rush offering him to debate me on USMB.
> 
> I haven't received a response yet.
> 
> I think he's chicken.



As usual, the KEY ELEMENT of the relevant issue is DISMISSED in order ot project a lovely Red Herring...

Rush Limbaugh has not publicly declared you as the defacto-leader of his opposition...  

Which of course IS the CORNERSTONE of the ENTIRE RELEVANT ISSUE: President Hussein havinf publicly declared Rush Limbaugh as the defacto-leader of THE PRESIDENT'S OPPOSITION; wherein so doing, by virtue of Limbaugh oppossing LEFTISM, the PRESIDENT DECLARED HIMSELF A LEFTIST... and subjected himself TO AN INTELLECTUALLY SOUND and LOGICALLY VALID REQUEST THAT HE ACCEPT THE CHALLENGE TO DEBATE; WHERE THE PRESIDENT'S LEFT-THINK WILL FACE A DIRECT AND UNAMBIGUOUS CONTEST AGAINST IT'S NATURAL OPPOSITION: Right-think...

You demanding Rush debate you, is the equivilent of a T-baller writing the Yankees demanding a try-out; and when no acceptance immediately presents itself, the child concludes that the Yankees are protecting the positions of their current staff; thus exemplifying cowardous through their silence.


----------



## DiamondDave

Shogun said:


> YouTube - A Bully Gets Bullied



And babies are being killed all over the world every day because of bitches like her

It's not a bully being bullied.... it's an irrational bitch going off on a rant against an entertainer

Fuck Rush... I don't give a rat's ass what he says... but also Fuck Obama, for what he says is 100% against what this country should be doing and is set up to be... It's just that I DO care what Obama says because he is in a position of power to hurt the country I swore to defend


----------



## Care4all

PubliusInfinitum said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sent an email to Rush offering him to debate me on USMB.
> 
> I haven't received a response yet.
> 
> I think he's chicken.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As usual, the KEY ELEMENT of the relevant issue is DISMISSED in order ot project a lovely Red Herring...
> 
> Rush Limbaugh has not publicly declared you as the defacto-leader of his opposition...
> 
> Which of course IS the CORNERSTONE of the ENTIRE RELEVANT ISSUE: President Hussein havinf publicly declared Rush Limbaugh as the defacto-leader of THE PRESIDENT'S OPPOSITION; wherein so doing, by virtue of Limbaugh oppossing LEFTISM, the PRESIDENT DECLARED HIMSELF A LEFTIST... and subjected himself TO AN INTELLECTUALLY SOUND and LOGICALLY VALID REQUEST THAT HE ACCEPT THE CHALLENGE TO DEBATE; WHERE THE PRESIDENT'S LEFT-THINK WILL FACE A DIRECT AND UNAMBIGUOUS CONTEST AGAINST IT'S NATURAL OPPOSITION: Right-think...
> 
> You demanding Rush debate you, is the equivilent of a T-baller writing the Yankees demanding a try-out.
Click to expand...


the whole thing is riduculus PI....?

What man who has won the Presidency, debated a leader from the opposition party AFTER HE ALREADY WON the vote of the people?

NOT one president that I can remember....

so even if Obama did label Rush the head of your party, you all seem to agree he is, since  you want him to represent your party in this debate?

So is this the case, you agree with Obama, Rush is your leader and he represents you?

care


----------



## Ravi

Sounds like Rush is gearing up to run for president. Wouldn't that be sweet?


----------



## jillian

that would be too funny for words. 

but i doubt it... he'd have to take too big a paycut.


----------



## DiamondDave

Rush knows he is not a legit candidate.. and frankly don't think he cares... 

Not the kind of candidate I want


----------



## brownlou

There is no way that Obama has time from his busy schedule to debate a radio personality.


----------



## DiamondDave

brownlou said:


> There is no way that Obama has time from his busy schedule to debate a radio personality.



You are right

It takes lots of time to think up new ways to expand government beyond what it was ever set up to be.. find ways to spend trillions.. and figure out an even more complex scheme of wealth redistribution thru wasteful government bureaucracy to pull the wool over the eyes of even more ignorant fucks who believe in the entitlement mantra


----------



## DiveCon

brownlou said:


> There is no way that Obama has time from his busy schedule to debate a radio personality.


yet he has time to spend attacking him


----------



## DiamondDave

DiveCon said:


> brownlou said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no way that Obama has time from his busy schedule to debate a radio personality.
> 
> 
> 
> yet he has time to spend attacking him
Click to expand...


touché


----------



## Care4all

the lack of confidence in our presidential position world wide would collapse if obama stooped LOW ENOUGH to do something as silly as debating rush....   they'd peg our president as a petty child and fool...and our country adversely....rush knows this....he also knows, NO PRESIDENT, republican or democrat would ever lower themselves enough to debate him....

he's playing you guys well....boocoos more money in his hands with higher ratings...and obama's team's comments is only making rush richer!


----------



## Ravi

Care4all said:


> the lack of confidence in our presidential position world wide would collapse if obama stooped LOW ENOUGH to do something as silly as debating rush....   they'd peg our president as a petty child and fool...and our country adversely....rush knows this....he also knows, NO PRESIDENT, republican or democrat would ever lower themselves enough to debate him....
> 
> he's playing you guys well....boocoos more money in his hands with higher ratings...and obama's team's comments is only making rush richer!


Either that or Rush needs a big box of tissues.


----------



## AllieBaba

Once again. Rush has been approached many times to run for president. Jillie is right about the paycut...but he also doesn't want to be muzzled. He has said time and again...he isn't interested. He can be more effective right where he is at. He gets to talk to the people every single day, he gets to talk to politicians, he gets to write, he gets to educate, and there's no term limit.

He's doing his service to his country in the manner in which he thinks he's most helpful.

And he's right. He's not running for president. If you ever listened to his show, you'd know that. Also, his show, despite the ridiculous attacks on him (he's always gotten those) is putting right along like it always does. He's still addressing the issues. It's not focused on this ridiculous drama, though he certainly refers to it. But he remains constant in his broad coverage of politics and politicians. 

For all that you think he's such a loon and non-entity, you sure do act afraid of him.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Care4all said:


> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sent an email to Rush offering him to debate me on USMB.
> 
> I haven't received a response yet.
> 
> I think he's chicken.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As usual, the KEY ELEMENT of the relevant issue is DISMISSED in order ot project a lovely Red Herring...
> 
> Rush Limbaugh has not publicly declared you as the defacto-leader of his opposition...
> 
> Which of course IS the CORNERSTONE of the ENTIRE RELEVANT ISSUE: President Hussein havinf publicly declared Rush Limbaugh as the defacto-leader of THE PRESIDENT'S OPPOSITION; wherein so doing, by virtue of Limbaugh oppossing LEFTISM, the PRESIDENT DECLARED HIMSELF A LEFTIST... and subjected himself TO AN INTELLECTUALLY SOUND and LOGICALLY VALID REQUEST THAT HE ACCEPT THE CHALLENGE TO DEBATE; WHERE THE PRESIDENT'S LEFT-THINK WILL FACE A DIRECT AND UNAMBIGUOUS CONTEST AGAINST IT'S NATURAL OPPOSITION: Right-think...
> 
> You demanding Rush debate you, is the equivilent of a T-baller writing the Yankees demanding a try-out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> the whole thing is riduculus PI....?
> 
> What man who has won the Presidency, debated a leader from the opposition party AFTER HE ALREADY WON the vote of the people?
> 
> NOT one president that I can remember....
> 
> so even if Obama did label Rush the head of your party, you all seem to agree he is, since  you want him to represent your party in this debate?
> 
> So is this the case, you agree with Obama, Rush is your leader and he represents you?
> 
> care
Click to expand...


Care,
Rush extended the challenge for the reason I stated.  Hussein will refuse for the reason I stated. 

Now with regard to your position, what President in US history has singled out a private citizen as the leader of a political party.  

So your position, as was the case with Toro's and The pedophile's failed argument, hopes to avoid that Hussein is the one that sought to quiet the voice of a private citizen who simply espouses views which HE himself has said were worthy of consideration.


----------



## Truthmatters

Rush is a public figure and hardly can be considered a private citizen any more than any entertainer is.


----------



## AllieBaba

And yet...why do Rahm Emmanuel and Obama feel compelled to name him as the head of the republican party, then refuse to engage because he's a radio guy?

One minute they say he's one thing...then the minute they might have to come face to face with their own stupidity, he's suddenly not important enough to mess with.

Typical liberal idiocy.


----------



## Truthmatters

PubliusInfinitum said:


> why do you think hes a pedophile?


----------



## Truthmatters

AllieBaba said:


> And yet...why do Rahm Emmanuel and Obama feel compelled to name him as the head of the republican party, then refuse to engage because he's a radio guy?
> 
> One minute they say he's one thing...then the minute they might have to come face to face with their own stupidity, he's suddenly not important enough to mess with.
> 
> Typical liberal idiocy.




Go get the quotes.


----------



## AllieBaba

Let's see the evidence of Rush's buffoonery:

"A month after Bill Clinton's defeat of George H.W. Bush in 1992, Ronald Reagan sent Limbaugh a letter in which he thanked him "for all you're doing to promote Republican and conservative principles... [and] you have become the Number One voice for conservatism in our Country."[137]

Limbaugh was the 1992, 1995, 2000 and 2005 recipient of the Marconi Radio Award for Syndicated Radio Personality of the Year (given by the National Association of Broadcasters), joining the syndicated Bob & Tom Show as the only other four-time winners of a Marconi award. He was inducted into the Radio Hall of Fame in 1993.

In 2002, Talkers magazine ranked him as the greatest radio talk show host of all time.[138] Limbaugh is the highest-paid syndicated radio host.[139]

On March 29, 2007, Limbaugh was awarded the inaugural William F. Buckley, Jr. Award for Media Excellence, by the Media Research Center, a conservative media analysis group.[140]

On January 5, 2008, the conservative magazine Human Events announced Limbaugh as their 2007 Man of the Year.[141]

On December 1. 2008, TV Guide reported that Limbaugh has been selected as one of America&#8217;s top ten most fascinating people of 2008 for a Barbara Walters ABC special that aired on December 4, 2008.[142]

On February 28, 2009, following his self-described "first address to the Nation", lasting 90 minutes, carried live, on CNN and FOX NEWS, and recorded for CSPAN, he received CPAC's "Defender of the Constitution Award", a document originally signed by Benjamin Franklin, given to someone "who has stood up for the First Amendment...Rush Limbaugh is for America, exactly what Benjamin Franklin did for the Founding Fathers...the only way we will be successful is if we listen to Rush Limbaugh". [143]"
Rush Limbaugh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
He's done more in the last 10 years than Obama has done in his whole life.


----------



## Truthmatters

More?


I guess you think its more impoartant than being president huh?


----------



## Care4all

AllieBaba said:


> Once again. Rush has been approached many times to run for president. Jillie is right about the paycut...but he also doesn't want to be muzzled. He has said time and again...he isn't interested. He can be more effective right where he is at. He gets to talk to the people every single day, he gets to talk to politicians, he gets to write, he gets to educate, and there's no term limit.
> 
> He's doing his service to his country in the manner in which he thinks he's most helpful.
> 
> And he's right. He's not running for president. If you ever listened to his show, you'd know that. Also, his show, despite the ridiculous attacks on him (he's always gotten those) is putting right along like it always does. He's still addressing the issues. It's not focused on this ridiculous drama, though he certainly refers to it. But he remains constant in his broad coverage of politics and politicians.
> 
> For all that you think he's such a loon and non-entity, you sure do act afraid of him.



his criminal record would prevent him from ever being a leader of conservatives, his being a filanderer and married 3 times would not get him elected either imo....and his big mouth and things he's said, would also work greatly, against it.


----------



## KittenKoder

Alright ... Obama has once again proven my assessment of him accurate. He has accepted this challenge ... so again, he proves to be nothing more than a pop star.


----------



## DiveCon

he did?have a link for that?


----------



## Truthmatters

KittenKoder said:


> Alright ... Obama has once again proven my assessment of him accurate. He has accepted this challenge ... so again, he proves to be nothing more than a pop star.





Link?


----------



## AllieBaba

Care4all said:


> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> Once again. Rush has been approached many times to run for president. Jillie is right about the paycut...but he also doesn't want to be muzzled. He has said time and again...he isn't interested. He can be more effective right where he is at. He gets to talk to the people every single day, he gets to talk to politicians, he gets to write, he gets to educate, and there's no term limit.
> 
> He's doing his service to his country in the manner in which he thinks he's most helpful.
> 
> And he's right. He's not running for president. If you ever listened to his show, you'd know that. Also, his show, despite the ridiculous attacks on him (he's always gotten those) is putting right along like it always does. He's still addressing the issues. It's not focused on this ridiculous drama, though he certainly refers to it. But he remains constant in his broad coverage of politics and politicians.
> 
> For all that you think he's such a loon and non-entity, you sure do act afraid of him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> his criminal record would prevent him from ever being a leader of conservatives, his being a filanderer and married 3 times would not get him elected either imo....and his big mouth and things he's said, would also work greatly, against it.
Click to expand...


His criminal record? Hmmm....I don't think so. And being a philanderer has NEVER prevented men from attaining the highest office. 

But the fact remains, he's never been interested in the presidency.


----------



## AllieBaba

Truthmatters said:


> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> And yet...why do Rahm Emmanuel and Obama feel compelled to name him as the head of the republican party, then refuse to engage because he's a radio guy?
> 
> One minute they say he's one thing...then the minute they might have to come face to face with their own stupidity, he's suddenly not important enough to mess with.
> 
> Typical liberal idiocy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Go get the quotes.
Click to expand...


"White House aide Rahm Emanuel casts Rush Limbaugh as top GOP voice
By Associated Press
Sunday, March 1, 2009 
WASHINGTON  President Barack Obamas chief of staff says talk show personality Rush Limbaugh is a top figure in the Republican Party.

Chief of staff Rahm Emanuel says Limbaugh is the "intellectual force" of the GOP."
White House aide Rahm Emanuel casts Rush Limbaugh as top GOP voice - BostonHerald.com

"*Obama: Quit Listening to Rush Limbaugh if You Want to Get Things Done*

Obama warned Republicans to quit listening to Limbaugh if they want to get along with Democrats, during a White House discussion on his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package...

" In an exchange with Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) about the proposal, the president shot back: "I won," according to aides briefed on the meeting. 

"I will trump you on that." 

Not that Obama was gloating. He was just explaining that he aims to get his way on stimulus package and all other legislation, sources said, noting his unrivaled one-party control of both congressional chambers."
PREZ ZINGS GOP FOE IN A &#36;TIMULATING TALK - New York Post


----------



## Toro

PubliusInfinitum said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sent an email to Rush offering him to debate me on USMB.
> 
> I haven't received a response yet.
> 
> I think he's chicken.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As usual, the KEY ELEMENT of the relevant issue is DISMISSED in order ot project a lovely Red Herring...
> 
> Rush Limbaugh has not publicly declared you as the defacto-leader of his opposition...
> 
> Which of course IS the CORNERSTONE of the ENTIRE RELEVANT ISSUE: President Hussein havinf publicly declared Rush Limbaugh as the defacto-leader of THE PRESIDENT'S OPPOSITION; wherein so doing, by virtue of Limbaugh oppossing LEFTISM, the PRESIDENT DECLARED HIMSELF A LEFTIST... and subjected himself TO AN INTELLECTUALLY SOUND and LOGICALLY VALID REQUEST THAT HE ACCEPT THE CHALLENGE TO DEBATE; WHERE THE PRESIDENT'S LEFT-THINK WILL FACE A DIRECT AND UNAMBIGUOUS CONTEST AGAINST IT'S NATURAL OPPOSITION: Right-think...
> 
> You demanding Rush debate you, is the equivilent of a T-baller writing the Yankees demanding a try-out; and when no acceptance immediately presents itself, the child concludes that the Yankees are protecting the positions of their current staff; thus exemplifying cowardous through their silence.
Click to expand...


It's amazing how many different ways you display your cluelessness.



Waits for a five page rant about liberals...


----------



## Care4all

AllieBaba said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> Once again. Rush has been approached many times to run for president. Jillie is right about the paycut...but he also doesn't want to be muzzled. He has said time and again...he isn't interested. He can be more effective right where he is at. He gets to talk to the people every single day, he gets to talk to politicians, he gets to write, he gets to educate, and there's no term limit.
> 
> He's doing his service to his country in the manner in which he thinks he's most helpful.
> 
> And he's right. He's not running for president. If you ever listened to his show, you'd know that. Also, his show, despite the ridiculous attacks on him (he's always gotten those) is putting right along like it always does. He's still addressing the issues. It's not focused on this ridiculous drama, though he certainly refers to it. But he remains constant in his broad coverage of politics and politicians.
> 
> For all that you think he's such a loon and non-entity, you sure do act afraid of him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> his criminal record would prevent him from ever being a leader of conservatives, his being a filanderer and married 3 times would not get him elected either imo....and his big mouth and things he's said, would also work greatly, against it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> His criminal record? Hmmm....I don't think so. And being a philanderer has NEVER prevented men from attaining the highest office.
> 
> But the fact remains, he's never been interested in the presidency.
Click to expand...


I forgot he got off on his peddling doctors for oxycontin gig....

And being a philanderer has STOPPED many a politician from getting elected or reelected, expecially before running for office....and many afterwards as well...

He ain't no role model of ANY KIND Allie, nor should he be thought of as one, ever, imho....

Care


----------



## Diuretic

Gawd you righties are a thick lot.  You've been told time and time again why Obama should not debate Limbaugh.  Yet you go on and on and on about it and you don't even bring up a fresh angle, just the same old rot turned over like a bloody compost heap.  Yes, a steaming compost heap.  Get some new talking points


----------



## DiveCon

Diuretic said:


> Gawd you righties are a thick lot. You've been told time and time again why Obama should not debate Limbaugh. Yet you go on and on and on about it and you don't even bring up a fresh angle, just the same old rot turned over like a bloody compost heap. Yes, a steaming compost heap. Get some new talking points


then you are still missing the point
the point being Obama should just IGNORE him in the first place

did Bush respond to any of Olbermanns idiotic rants, EVER????


----------



## AllieBaba

Care4all said:


> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> his criminal record would prevent him from ever being a leader of conservatives, his being a filanderer and married 3 times would not get him elected either imo....and his big mouth and things he's said, would also work greatly, against it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> His criminal record? Hmmm....I don't think so. And being a philanderer has NEVER prevented men from attaining the highest office.
> 
> But the fact remains, he's never been interested in the presidency.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I forgot he got off on his peddling doctors for oxycontin gig....
> 
> And being a philanderer has STOPPED many a politician from getting elected or reelected, expecially before running for office....and many afterwards as well...
> 
> He ain't no role model of ANY KIND Allie, nor should he be thought of as one, ever, imho....
> 
> Care
Click to expand...


So what? I don't think Obama is a role model. His past is sketchy, his friends are criminals and tax evaders of the most vile sort.

Besides which, I never held him up as a role model. I simply repudiate the baseless attacks on him. So far, none of them have held an ounce of truth.


----------



## AllieBaba

Diuretic said:


> Gawd you righties are a thick lot.  You've been told time and time again why Obama should not debate Limbaugh.  Yet you go on and on and on about it and you don't even bring up a fresh angle, just the same old rot turned over like a bloody compost heap.  Yes, a steaming compost heap.  Get some new talking points



Au contraire. It is the left who are thick. I'm not demanding a debate. I'm simply pointing out why it's funny that Obama has gotten himself into this mess. 

And you should know about regurgitating the same old rot, you guys do it every time you stupidly blab about how fat Rush is, drivel about oxycontin, etc., instead of accepting your own stupid leaders are the ones who accorded him the limelight in the first place.


----------



## Diuretic

Would you like a spade or a shovel?


----------



## AllieBaba

Whatever you're using, thanks.


----------



## DiveCon

Diuretic said:


> Would you like a spade or a shovel?


which are you using right now to get yourself out of the hole you are digging?


----------



## AllieBaba

Jinx!


----------



## Care4all

I think Obama having his team address Rush lately...since Rush was the main guest at the Conservative's CPAC convention this past weekend... is a mistake and he shouldn't have his team spend another nano second on it....it is immature....and not uniting in any manner...

none the less it is silly for republicans or those on the right, to act like Rush made this challenge for any reason other than to increase his own ratings....he is not a dumb man and certainly knew before he threw the challenge out, that it would never be accepted....

If it were accepted, then it's time for all of us, to just give up on America or America's President, ever having respect, again....


----------



## DiveCon

Care4all said:


> I think Obama having his team address Rush lately...since Rush was the main guest at the Conservative's CPAC convention this past weekend... is a mistake and he shouldn't have his team spend another nano second on it....it is immature....and not uniting in any manner...
> 
> none the less it is silly for republicans or those on the right, to act like Rush made this challenge for any reason other than to increase his own ratings....he is not a dumb man and certainly knew before he threw the challenge out, that it would never be accepted....
> 
> If it were accepted, then it's time for all of us, to just give up on America or America's President, ever having respect, again....


what you are either missing, or forgetting, is that Obama was the one that first brought up Rush, and Rush is just responding
as almost anyone would


----------



## AllieBaba

Care4all said:


> I think Obama having his team address Rush lately...since Rush was the main guest at the Conservative's CPAC convention this past weekend... is a mistake and he shouldn't have his team spend another nano second on it....it is immature....and not uniting in any manner...
> 
> none the less it is silly for republicans or those on the right, to act like Rush made this challenge for any reason other than to increase his own ratings....he is not a dumb man and certainly knew before he threw the challenge out, that it would never be accepted....
> 
> If it were accepted, then it's time for all of us, to just give up on America or America's President, ever having respect, again....



Care, he has no need to increase his ratings. He did it to make a philosophical point. When you call Rush out, he answers. That's all.


----------



## Care4all

DiveCon said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Obama having his team address Rush lately...since Rush was the main guest at the Conservative's CPAC convention this past weekend... is a mistake and he shouldn't have his team spend another nano second on it....it is immature....and not uniting in any manner...
> 
> none the less it is silly for republicans or those on the right, to act like Rush made this challenge for any reason other than to increase his own ratings....he is not a dumb man and certainly knew before he threw the challenge out, that it would never be accepted....
> 
> If it were accepted, then it's time for all of us, to just give up on America or America's President, ever having respect, again....
> 
> 
> 
> what you are either missing, or forgetting, is that Obama was the one that first brought up Rush, and Rush is just responding
> as almost anyone would
Click to expand...


Really?

I thought the full court press from Obama's team players, emanuel and gibbs the press secretary, was AFTER Rush Limbaugh's attack on Obama and America, ( he tso ook it) at the CPAC convention this past weekend?Either way, obma should have never had his team engage this the way they have...i think it is so childish, i can't begin to tell ya...

i guess i have more catching up to do on this.....????  

care


----------



## DiveCon

Care4all said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Obama having his team address Rush lately...since Rush was the main guest at the Conservative's CPAC convention this past weekend... is a mistake and he shouldn't have his team spend another nano second on it....it is immature....and not uniting in any manner...
> 
> none the less it is silly for republicans or those on the right, to act like Rush made this challenge for any reason other than to increase his own ratings....he is not a dumb man and certainly knew before he threw the challenge out, that it would never be accepted....
> 
> If it were accepted, then it's time for all of us, to just give up on America or America's President, ever having respect, again....
> 
> 
> 
> what you are either missing, or forgetting, is that Obama was the one that first brought up Rush, and Rush is just responding
> as almost anyone would
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> I thought the full court press from Obama's team players, emanuel and gibbs the press secretary, was AFTER Rush Limbaugh's attack on Obama and America, ( he tso ook it) at the CPAC convention this past weekend?Either way, obma should have never had his team engage this the way they have...i think it is so childish, i can't begin to tell ya...
> 
> i guess i have more catching up to do on this.....????
> 
> care
Click to expand...

it was a plan his team thought up
LOL
and its backfired


----------



## Toro

DiveCon said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gawd you righties are a thick lot. You've been told time and time again why Obama should not debate Limbaugh. Yet you go on and on and on about it and you don't even bring up a fresh angle, just the same old rot turned over like a bloody compost heap. Yes, a steaming compost heap. Get some new talking points
> 
> 
> 
> then you are still missing the point
> the point being Obama should just IGNORE him in the first place
> 
> did Bush respond to any of Olbermanns idiotic rants, EVER????
Click to expand...


Yeah, I agree with this.  Obama shouldn't even acknowledge Rush Limbaugh as it is elevating him above his stature.  Its kind of like when Dan Quayle took on Murphy Brown.  He cannot win.  Rather, you let your surrogates do it for you. 

There's a reason for the Democrats to elevate Rush.  If they can paint him as the spokesperson of the Republicans, he is bound to say something stupid and offend people.  Plus, it fires up the Democrat fundraising base.  But Obama shouldn't go anywhere near him.

The Obama administration is displaying its inexperience in all this.  Similarly, highlighting Rick Santelli did nothing for them. FFS, he's the _President_ of the United States!


----------



## DiveCon

Toro said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gawd you righties are a thick lot. You've been told time and time again why Obama should not debate Limbaugh. Yet you go on and on and on about it and you don't even bring up a fresh angle, just the same old rot turned over like a bloody compost heap. Yes, a steaming compost heap. Get some new talking points
> 
> 
> 
> then you are still missing the point
> the point being Obama should just IGNORE him in the first place
> 
> did Bush respond to any of Olbermanns idiotic rants, EVER????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yeah, I agree with this.  Obama shouldn't even acknowledge Rush Limbaugh as it is elevating him above his stature.  Its kind of like when Dan Quayle took on Murphy Brown.  He cannot win.  Rather, you let your surrogates do it for you.
> 
> There's a reason for the Democrats to elevate Rush.  If they can paint him as the spokesperson of the Republicans, he is bound to say something stupid and offend people.  Plus, it fires up the Democrat fundraising base.  But Obama shouldn't go anywhere near him.
> 
> The Obama administration is displaying its inexperience in all this.  Similarly, highlighting Rick Santelli did nothing for them. FFS, he's the _President_ of the United States!
Click to expand...

at least the Clintons had that right
LOL


----------



## Diuretic

AllieBaba said:


> Whatever you're using, thanks.



A scalpel?


----------



## Diuretic

DiveCon said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> what you are either missing, or forgetting, is that Obama was the one that first brought up Rush, and Rush is just responding
> as almost anyone would
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> I thought the full court press from Obama's team players, emanuel and gibbs the press secretary, was AFTER Rush Limbaugh's attack on Obama and America, ( he tso ook it) at the CPAC convention this past weekend?Either way, obma should have never had his team engage this the way they have...i think it is so childish, i can't begin to tell ya...
> 
> i guess i have more catching up to do on this.....????
> 
> care
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> it was a plan his team thought up
> LOL
> and its backfired
Click to expand...


We'll see. One thing's for sure, he learned from John Kerry not to ignore the loonies because they can do you a lot of damage.  If Limbaugh had been ignored he would have continued to gore Obama.  This way Limabugh is forced to respond and not to follow his own game plan.  All Limbaugh can do now is to keep upping the ante.  During the progression to rank stupidity there will be a point at which the White House will step away from the fray declaring that Limbaugh has gone too far and while the office of president has to be defended from deeply partisan attacks it is also necessary to defend its dignity and it's time to allow Limbaugh to spray into his microphone without the White House becoming embroiled.


----------



## DiveCon

Diuretic said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> I thought the full court press from Obama's team players, emanuel and gibbs the press secretary, was AFTER Rush Limbaugh's attack on Obama and America, ( he tso ook it) at the CPAC convention this past weekend?Either way, obma should have never had his team engage this the way they have...i think it is so childish, i can't begin to tell ya...
> 
> i guess i have more catching up to do on this.....????
> 
> care
> 
> 
> 
> it was a plan his team thought up
> LOL
> and its backfired
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We'll see. One thing's for sure, he learned from John Kerry not to ignore the loonies because they can do you a lot of damage.  If Limbaugh had been ignored he would have continued to gore Obama.  This way Limabugh is forced to respond and not to follow his own game plan.  All Limbaugh can do now is to keep upping the ante.  During the progression to rank stupidity there will be a point at which the White House will step away from the fray declaring that Limbaugh has gone too far and while the office of president has to be defended from deeply partisan attacks it is also necessary to defend its dignity and it's time to allow Limbaugh to spray into his microphone without the White House becoming embroiled.
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO

Kerry was and IS a fucking MORON
he lied about his buddies and they were right
he still hasnt released to public view those records


----------



## KittenKoder

DiveCon said:


> he did?have a link for that?



It was on the morning news ... they were going to do some video conferencing thing.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Care4all said:


> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> Once again. Rush has been approached many times to run for president. Jillie is right about the paycut...but he also doesn't want to be muzzled. He has said time and again...he isn't interested. He can be more effective right where he is at. He gets to talk to the people every single day, he gets to talk to politicians, he gets to write, he gets to educate, and there's no term limit.
> 
> He's doing his service to his country in the manner in which he thinks he's most helpful.
> 
> And he's right. He's not running for president. If you ever listened to his show, you'd know that. Also, his show, despite the ridiculous attacks on him (he's always gotten those) is putting right along like it always does. He's still addressing the issues. It's not focused on this ridiculous drama, though he certainly refers to it. But he remains constant in his broad coverage of politics and politicians.
> 
> For all that you think he's such a loon and non-entity, you sure do act afraid of him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> his criminal record would prevent him from ever being a leader of conservatives, his being a filanderer and married 3 times would not get him elected either imo....and his big mouth and things he's said, would also work greatly, against it.
Click to expand...


Care, Limbaugh is hands DOWN the indisputable leader of American Conservatism... that's not even debatable.  And his 'criminal record' and his 3 marriages hasn't stopped him...  and he's not seeking public office... Why would he?  He's more influential than the President of the United States.


----------



## KittenKoder

PubliusInfinitum said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> Once again. Rush has been approached many times to run for president. Jillie is right about the paycut...but he also doesn't want to be muzzled. He has said time and again...he isn't interested. He can be more effective right where he is at. He gets to talk to the people every single day, he gets to talk to politicians, he gets to write, he gets to educate, and there's no term limit.
> 
> He's doing his service to his country in the manner in which he thinks he's most helpful.
> 
> And he's right. He's not running for president. If you ever listened to his show, you'd know that. Also, his show, despite the ridiculous attacks on him (he's always gotten those) is putting right along like it always does. He's still addressing the issues. It's not focused on this ridiculous drama, though he certainly refers to it. But he remains constant in his broad coverage of politics and politicians.
> 
> For all that you think he's such a loon and non-entity, you sure do act afraid of him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> his criminal record would prevent him from ever being a leader of conservatives, his being a filanderer and married 3 times would not get him elected either imo....and his big mouth and things he's said, would also work greatly, against it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Care, Limbaugh is hands DOWN the indisputable leader of American Conservatism... that's not even debatable.  And his 'criminal record' and his 3 marriages hasn't stopped him...  and he's not seeking public office... Why would he?  He's more influential than the President of the United States.
Click to expand...


If that's the case ... it would suck to be conservative because he is also one of the reasons you are losing support.


----------



## Old Rocks

Midnight Marauder said:


> Shogun said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why would Obama care to go on Rush's show to debate him?   Hell, I CHALLENGE RUSH LIMBAUGH TO DEBATE ON US MESSAGEBOARD.  IF HE DOESN'T, then he is a giant pussy.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you really think busy, rich people like Limbaugh post on message boards?
Click to expand...


Naw. Take too much time from enjoying his "hillbilly heroin".


----------



## Old Rocks

PubliusInfinitum said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> Once again. Rush has been approached many times to run for president. Jillie is right about the paycut...but he also doesn't want to be muzzled. He has said time and again...he isn't interested. He can be more effective right where he is at. He gets to talk to the people every single day, he gets to talk to politicians, he gets to write, he gets to educate, and there's no term limit.
> 
> He's doing his service to his country in the manner in which he thinks he's most helpful.
> 
> And he's right. He's not running for president. If you ever listened to his show, you'd know that. Also, his show, despite the ridiculous attacks on him (he's always gotten those) is putting right along like it always does. He's still addressing the issues. It's not focused on this ridiculous drama, though he certainly refers to it. But he remains constant in his broad coverage of politics and politicians.
> 
> For all that you think he's such a loon and non-entity, you sure do act afraid of him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> his criminal record would prevent him from ever being a leader of conservatives, his being a filanderer and married 3 times would not get him elected either imo....and his big mouth and things he's said, would also work greatly, against it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Care, Limbaugh is hands DOWN the indisputable leader of American Conservatism... that's not even debatable.  And his 'criminal record' and his 3 marriages hasn't stopped him...  and he's not seeking public office... Why would he?  He's more influential than the President of the United States.
Click to expand...


Yes, Limpbaugh is the leader to the Conservatives, a fact that conservatives find infuriating. No, he is in no way more influential than the President of the United States, no matter what you and he think.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Care4all said:


> I think Obama having his team address Rush lately...since Rush was the main guest at the Conservative's CPAC convention this past weekend... is a mistake and he shouldn't have his team spend another nano second on it....it is immature....and not uniting in any manner...
> 
> none the less it is silly for republicans or those on the right, to act like Rush made this challenge for any reason other than to increase his own ratings....he is not a dumb man and certainly knew before he threw the challenge out, that it would never be accepted....
> 
> If it were accepted, then it's time for all of us, to just give up on America or America's President, ever having respect, again....



The Presidency is greatly respected... However, this President is a Marxist and is doing his level best to RUIN THE US ECONOMY...  there is a very high likelihood that the US economy will COLLAPSE BECAUSE of the policies advanced and implemented by this President... there's no potential for respect to be found anywhere near this Marxist FUCK!

Rush made the CHALLENGE in RESPONSE to Hussein's FOCUS ON LIMBAUGH...  and Limbaugh has the highest ratings in Radio History... so your assertion that he challenged the the Lord of the Idiots t increase his ratings is absurd.  

The simple fact is Rush is a very effective advocate of American Conservatism and President Hussein is a piss poor example of a human being who managed to con 52 million idiots into voting for him, MOST OF WHOM ARE PRESENTLY SUFFERING MAJOR REGRET...  

Your boy is a one termer and it's now nearly a certainty that the Democrats will be sent into near extinction in the 2010 election...  brace yourself sis...  this one is gonna HURT!


----------



## KittenKoder

PubliusInfinitum said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Obama having his team address Rush lately...since Rush was the main guest at the Conservative's CPAC convention this past weekend... is a mistake and he shouldn't have his team spend another nano second on it....it is immature....and not uniting in any manner...
> 
> none the less it is silly for republicans or those on the right, to act like Rush made this challenge for any reason other than to increase his own ratings....he is not a dumb man and certainly knew before he threw the challenge out, that it would never be accepted....
> 
> If it were accepted, then it's time for all of us, to just give up on America or America's President, ever having respect, again....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Presidency is greatly respected... However, this President is a Marxist and is doing his level best to RUIN THE US ECONOMY...  there is a very high likelihood that the US economy will COLLAPSE BECAUSE of the policies advanced and implemented by this President... there's no potential for respect to be found anywhere near this Marxist FUCK!
> 
> Rush made the CHALLENGE in RESPONSE to Hussein's FOCUS ON LIMBAUGH...  and Limbaugh has the highest ratings in Radio History... so your assertion that he challenged the the Lord of the Idiots t increase his ratings is absurd.
> 
> The simple fact is Rush is a very effective advocate of American Conservatism and President Hussein is a piss poor example of a human being who managed to con 52 million idiots into voting for him, MOST OF WHOM ARE PRESENTLY SUFFERING MAJOR REGRET...
> 
> Your boy is a one termer and it's now nearly a certainty that the Democrats will be sent into near extinction in the 2010 election...  brace yourself sis...  this one is gonna HURT!
Click to expand...


Time to use a conservative line ...

Obama was voted n by the majority, suck it up or admit you hate America.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Toro said:


> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> I sent an email to Rush offering him to debate me on USMB.
> 
> I haven't received a response yet.
> 
> I think he's chicken.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As usual, the KEY ELEMENT of the relevant issue is DISMISSED in order ot project a lovely Red Herring...
> 
> Rush Limbaugh has not publicly declared you as the defacto-leader of his opposition...
> 
> Which of course IS the CORNERSTONE of the ENTIRE RELEVANT ISSUE: President Hussein havinf publicly declared Rush Limbaugh as the defacto-leader of THE PRESIDENT'S OPPOSITION; wherein so doing, by virtue of Limbaugh oppossing LEFTISM, the PRESIDENT DECLARED HIMSELF A LEFTIST... and subjected himself TO AN INTELLECTUALLY SOUND and LOGICALLY VALID REQUEST THAT HE ACCEPT THE CHALLENGE TO DEBATE; WHERE THE PRESIDENT'S LEFT-THINK WILL FACE A DIRECT AND UNAMBIGUOUS CONTEST AGAINST IT'S NATURAL OPPOSITION: Right-think...
> 
> You demanding Rush debate you, is the equivilent of a T-baller writing the Yankees demanding a try-out; and when no acceptance immediately presents itself, the child concludes that the Yankees are protecting the positions of their current staff; thus exemplifying cowardous through their silence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's amazing how many different ways you display your cluelessness.
> 
> 
> 
> Waits for a five page rant about liberals...
Click to expand...


LOL... Is it?  Ok, if you say so... But that pales in comparison to your ability to pretend that you engage the argument from which you're fleeing...

But hey... that's idiocy for ya.


----------



## KittenKoder

PubliusInfinitum said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> As usual, the KEY ELEMENT of the relevant issue is DISMISSED in order ot project a lovely Red Herring...
> 
> Rush Limbaugh has not publicly declared you as the defacto-leader of his opposition...
> 
> Which of course IS the CORNERSTONE of the ENTIRE RELEVANT ISSUE: President Hussein havinf publicly declared Rush Limbaugh as the defacto-leader of THE PRESIDENT'S OPPOSITION; wherein so doing, by virtue of Limbaugh oppossing LEFTISM, the PRESIDENT DECLARED HIMSELF A LEFTIST... and subjected himself TO AN INTELLECTUALLY SOUND and LOGICALLY VALID REQUEST THAT HE ACCEPT THE CHALLENGE TO DEBATE; WHERE THE PRESIDENT'S LEFT-THINK WILL FACE A DIRECT AND UNAMBIGUOUS CONTEST AGAINST IT'S NATURAL OPPOSITION: Right-think...
> 
> You demanding Rush debate you, is the equivilent of a T-baller writing the Yankees demanding a try-out; and when no acceptance immediately presents itself, the child concludes that the Yankees are protecting the positions of their current staff; thus exemplifying cowardous through their silence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's amazing how many different ways you display your cluelessness.
> 
> 
> 
> Waits for a five page rant about liberals...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL... Is it?  Ok, if you say so... But that pales in comparison to your ability to pretend that you engage the argument from which you're fleeing...
> 
> But hey... that's idiocy for ya.
Click to expand...


Hmm ... fleeing ... you do plenty of that yourself.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

KittenKoder said:


> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> his criminal record would prevent him from ever being a leader of conservatives, his being a filanderer and married 3 times would not get him elected either imo....and his big mouth and things he's said, would also work greatly, against it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care, Limbaugh is hands DOWN the indisputable leader of American Conservatism... that's not even debatable.  And his 'criminal record' and his 3 marriages hasn't stopped him...  and he's not seeking public office... Why would he?  He's more influential than the President of the United States.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If that's the case ... it would suck to be conservative because he is also one of the reasons you are losing support.
Click to expand...



Is he?  What support did Conservatism lose?  And as always BE SPECIFIC


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Old Rocks said:


> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> his criminal record would prevent him from ever being a leader of conservatives, his being a filanderer and married 3 times would not get him elected either imo....and his big mouth and things he's said, would also work greatly, against it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care, Limbaugh is hands DOWN the indisputable leader of American Conservatism... that's not even debatable.  And his 'criminal record' and his 3 marriages hasn't stopped him...  and he's not seeking public office... Why would he?  He's more influential than the President of the United States.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, Limpbaugh is the leader to the Conservatives, a fact that conservatives find infuriating. No, he is in no way more influential than the President of the United States, no matter what you and he think.
Click to expand...


ROFLMNAO... The often advanced and rarely admired "Nuh HUH" defense... 

A CLASSIC!

Ya did the best ya could Rocks... Not bad at all, for a feeble minded fuck.


----------



## KittenKoder

PubliusInfinitum said:


> KittenKoder said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> Care, Limbaugh is hands DOWN the indisputable leader of American Conservatism... that's not even debatable.  And his 'criminal record' and his 3 marriages hasn't stopped him...  and he's not seeking public office... Why would he?  He's more influential than the President of the United States.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If that's the case ... it would suck to be conservative because he is also one of the reasons you are losing support.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Is he?  What support did Conservatism lose?  And as always BE SPECIFIC
Click to expand...


Specific ... coming from someone who thinks their religious myths are science ... sure.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

kittenkoder said:


> publiusinfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> i think obama having his team address rush lately...since rush was the main guest at the conservative's cpac convention this past weekend... Is a mistake and he shouldn't have his team spend another nano second on it....it is immature....and not uniting in any manner...
> 
> None the less it is silly for republicans or those on the right, to act like rush made this challenge for any reason other than to increase his own ratings....he is not a dumb man and certainly knew before he threw the challenge out, that it would never be accepted....
> 
> If it were accepted, then it's time for all of us, to just give up on america or america's president, ever having respect, again....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the presidency is greatly respected... However, this president is a marxist and is doing his level best to ruin the us economy...  There is a very high likelihood that the us economy will collapse because of the policies advanced and implemented by this president... There's no potential for respect to be found anywhere near this marxist fuck!
> 
> Rush made the challenge in response to hussein's focus on limbaugh...  And limbaugh has the highest ratings in radio history... So your assertion that he challenged the the lord of the idiots t increase his ratings is absurd.
> 
> The simple fact is rush is a very effective advocate of american conservatism and president hussein is a piss poor example of a human being who managed to con 52 million idiots into voting for him, most of whom are presently suffering major regret...
> 
> Your boy is a one termer and it's now nearly a certainty that the democrats will be sent into near extinction in the 2010 election...  Brace yourself sis...  This one is gonna hurt!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> time to use a conservative line ...
> 
> Obama was voted n by the majority, suck it up or admit you hate america.
Click to expand...


There are no leftist Americans!


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

KittenKoder said:


> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's amazing how many different ways you display your cluelessness.
> 
> 
> 
> Waits for a five page rant about liberals...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL... Is it?  Ok, if you say so... But that pales in comparison to your ability to pretend that you engage the argument from which you're fleeing...
> 
> But hey... that's idiocy for ya.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Hmm ... fleeing ... you do plenty of that yourself.
Click to expand...


ROFLMNAO.. Do I?  I'm gonna need you to provide a SPECIFIC BASIS IN FACT in support of that soon to be discredited JOKE.

And when you fail to post such a basis in a reasonable period of time, your failure will be noted as a default concession... so don't sweat it... it'll take care of itself.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

KittenKoder said:


> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KittenKoder said:
> 
> 
> 
> If that's the case ... it would suck to be conservative because he is also one of the reasons you are losing support.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is he?  What support did Conservatism lose?  And as always BE SPECIFIC
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Specific ... coming from someone who thinks their religious myths are science ... sure.
Click to expand...


ROFLMNAO... DAMN SIS the delusion is OFF THE HOOK tonight...  SWEET AVOIDANCE OF THE DIRECT AND UNAMBIGUOS CHALLENGE: Which serves as your default concession that you're _full of shit_ and have no means to support a word ya say...

Now you're being directly and unambiguously challenged to post SPECIFIC EXAMPLES WHEREIN YOU CAN SUPPORT THIS SOON TO BE DISCREDITED FARCE... 

and as usual, when you fail to post such a supporting basis in a reaosnable period of time, your failure will be noted as a default concession...  so, don't sweat it, 'cause it'll just take care of itself.


----------



## necritan

Toro said:


> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> Has Obama ever won a debate? I don't believe he has.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Polls showed that most people thought Obama won the debates against McCain.
Click to expand...


Polls showed that more people voted based on feelings , and not logic.


----------



## Diuretic

DiveCon said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> it was a plan his team thought up
> LOL
> and its backfired
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We'll see. One thing's for sure, he learned from John Kerry not to ignore the loonies because they can do you a lot of damage.  If Limbaugh had been ignored he would have continued to gore Obama.  This way Limabugh is forced to respond and not to follow his own game plan.  All Limbaugh can do now is to keep upping the ante.  During the progression to rank stupidity there will be a point at which the White House will step away from the fray declaring that Limbaugh has gone too far and while the office of president has to be defended from deeply partisan attacks it is also necessary to defend its dignity and it's time to allow Limbaugh to spray into his microphone without the White House becoming embroiled.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ROFLMAO
> 
> Kerry was and IS a fucking MORON
> he lied about his buddies and they were right
> he still hasnt released to public view those records
Click to expand...


Couldn't give a shit 

My point wasn't about Kerry, it was about the Swiftboat propagandists


----------



## DiveCon

Diuretic said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> We'll see. One thing's for sure, he learned from John Kerry not to ignore the loonies because they can do you a lot of damage.  If Limbaugh had been ignored he would have continued to gore Obama.  This way Limabugh is forced to respond and not to follow his own game plan.  All Limbaugh can do now is to keep upping the ante.  During the progression to rank stupidity there will be a point at which the White House will step away from the fray declaring that Limbaugh has gone too far and while the office of president has to be defended from deeply partisan attacks it is also necessary to defend its dignity and it's time to allow Limbaugh to spray into his microphone without the White House becoming embroiled.
> 
> 
> 
> ROFLMAO
> 
> Kerry was and IS a fucking MORON
> he lied about his buddies and they were right
> he still hasnt released to public view those records
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Couldn't give a shit
> 
> My point wasn't about Kerry, it was about the Swiftboat propagandists
Click to expand...

ah, but you are fine with the Kerry propagandists


----------



## Diuretic

DiveCon said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ROFLMAO
> 
> Kerry was and IS a fucking MORON
> he lied about his buddies and they were right
> he still hasnt released to public view those records
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Couldn't give a shit
> 
> My point wasn't about Kerry, it was about the Swiftboat propagandists
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ah, but you are fine with the Kerry propagandists
Click to expand...


I said at the time he was making a terrible mistake.  But would he listen?

Noooooooooooooooooo.  Well serves him right for ignoring me


----------



## DiveCon

Diuretic said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Couldn't give a shit
> 
> My point wasn't about Kerry, it was about the Swiftboat propagandists
> 
> 
> 
> ah, but you are fine with the Kerry propagandists
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I said at the time he was making a terrible mistake.  But would he listen?
> 
> Noooooooooooooooooo.  Well serves him right for ignoring me
Click to expand...

dont you get it?
he COULDNT answer them because they were RIGHT


----------



## Diuretic

DiveCon said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ah, but you are fine with the Kerry propagandists
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I said at the time he was making a terrible mistake.  But would he listen?
> 
> Noooooooooooooooooo.  Well serves him right for ignoring me
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> dont you get it?
> he COULDNT answer them because they were RIGHT
Click to expand...


I'm sorry, did you say something relevant to the thread?


----------



## DiveCon

Diuretic said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> I said at the time he was making a terrible mistake.  But would he listen?
> 
> Noooooooooooooooooo.  Well serves him right for ignoring me
> 
> 
> 
> dont you get it?
> he COULDNT answer them because they were RIGHT
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, did you say something relevant to the thread?
Click to expand...

i was responding to the very thing YOU brought up


----------



## Toro

necritan said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> Has Obama ever won a debate? I don't believe he has.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Polls showed that most people thought Obama won the debates against McCain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Polls showed that more people voted based on feelings , and not logic.
Click to expand...


That matters why?


----------



## Diuretic

DiveCon said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> dont you get it?
> he COULDNT answer them because they were RIGHT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, did you say something relevant to the thread?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> i was responding to the very thing YOU brought up
Click to expand...


Ah but I was bringing up what happened to Kerry, his foolishness in not addressing a threat, I wasn't intending to rehash the claims and counterclaims, just saying that it was an object lesson for everyone in politics, never ignore a threat even if it seems as if won't be effective.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Diuretic said:


> DiveCon said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really?
> 
> I thought the full court press from Obama's team players, emanuel and gibbs the press secretary, was AFTER Rush Limbaugh's attack on Obama and America, ( he tso ook it) at the CPAC convention this past weekend?Either way, obma should have never had his team engage this the way they have...i think it is so childish, i can't begin to tell ya...
> 
> i guess i have more catching up to do on this.....????
> 
> care
> 
> 
> 
> it was a plan his team thought up
> LOL
> and its backfired
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We'll see. One thing's for sure, he learned from John Kerry not to ignore the loonies because they can do you a lot of damage.  If Limbaugh had been ignored he would have continued to gore Obama.  This way Limabugh is forced to respond and not to follow his own game plan.  All Limbaugh can do now is to keep upping the ante.  During the progression to rank stupidity there will be a point at which the White House will step away from the fray declaring that Limbaugh has gone too far and while the office of president has to be defended from deeply partisan attacks it is also necessary to defend its dignity and it's time to allow Limbaugh to spray into his microphone without the White House becoming embroiled.
Click to expand...



Diur... Gore, "gored' Gore...  Meaning that Gore's record was what 'gored Gore.'  Which is the same thing that Kerry realized...  KERRY'S RECORD CAME BACK TO HAUNT HIM. 

But it serves reason that you, a relativist, would cry about someone's record being used against them in a Presidential race.  The fact is that Hussien's record was kept OUT of the campaign; the "MAIN STREAM" media remained silent or 'tut tutted' the attempts to speak to Hussein's record... to this DAY there are still those who refuse to accept his 20 year attendance at a Revolutionary 'Cult Church' which espouses the virtues of Islam and languishes in the festering boil of slavery and thinly vieled advocacies of Marxism.  Hussein's RECORD of associating with Radical Leftists, Domestic terrorists and cult-worship of Marxist agitators has likewise been ignored; not to mention his refusal to simply provide evidence of his 'natural Birth' in the United States, which is now all but a 100% certainty that he was NOT born in the US...

But the good news here is all of the reasons that stand as the basis of KNOWING SOMEONE'S RECORD are coming into sharp focus as the Marxist policies being implemented by President Hussein have lead the equity markets into unspeakable lows...  and it'll just continue to get worse.  

Of course a revolution is a necessity from time to time and it seems Hussein is determined to get one started, which is fine, as at the end of the next US Revolution, there will be no Leftists residing in the Contenintal US, at least none above grass level.

But it's cool to see a Leftist lament open understanding of a person's record prior to their being sworn in as President of the US. *It demonstrates why you people are so damn dangerous.*


----------



## Old Rocks

necritan said:


> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AllieBaba said:
> 
> 
> 
> Has Obama ever won a debate? I don't believe he has.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Polls showed that most people thought Obama won the debates against McCain.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Polls showed that more people voted based on feelings , and not logic.
Click to expand...


Damned right. Feelings like grief for a loved one killed in a war based on lies. Feeling broke because the paycheck stopped, but the bills did not. Feeling betrayed by an administration that was more interested in spying on American Citizens, than getting the murderer of 3000 Americans on American soil. Damned straight, pretty strong feelings.


----------



## Old Rocks

Publius;


Of course a revolution is a necessity from time to time and it seems Hussein is determined to get one started, which is fine, as at the end of the next US Revolution, there will be no Leftists residing in the Contenintal US, at least none above grass level.

........................................................................................

Hmmmm...............   Still threatening other Americans. I get this picture in my mind of this pimple faced 5'4" 240 lb 35 year old adolescent typing this shit in his mothers basement. 

I disagree with Conservatives, and occasionally conservatives, also. I cannot imagine setting out to, or stating that I wish to kill other Americans. These people work at the same jobs that I do, they also served in the Armed Service of this nation, as I did. They are human beings that have a differant viewpoint than I do. 

This kind of statement is indictutive of a deeply disturbed individual, one that should be seeking help before he harms himself, or those around him.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Toro said:


> necritan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Polls showed that most people thought Obama won the debates against McCain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Polls showed that more people voted based on feelings , and not logic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That matters why?
Click to expand...


ROFLMNAO... Well there ya have it kids... a self declared "Centrist" declaring that they can find no distinction in conclusions drawn from wishful desires and intellectual sound logically valid reasoning.

Yet another example of why  the means of these people to cast a vote being counter productive to the health of of a free culture.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Old Rocks said:


> Publius;
> 
> 
> Of course a revolution is a necessity from time to time and it seems Hussein is determined to get one started, which is fine, as at the end of the next US Revolution, there will be no Leftists residing in the Contenintal US, at least none above grass level.
> 
> ........................................................................................
> 
> Hmmmm...............   Still threatening other Americans. I get this picture in my mind of this pimple faced 5'4" 240 lb 35 year old adolescent typing this shit in his mothers basement.
> 
> I disagree with Conservatives, and occasionally conservatives, also. I cannot imagine setting out to, or stating that I wish to kill other Americans. These people work at the same jobs that I do, they also served in the Armed Service of this nation, as I did. They are human beings that have a differant viewpoint than I do.
> 
> This kind of statement is indictutive of a deeply disturbed individual, one that should be seeking help before he harms himself, or those around him.



Well looky here... a member of the opposition infering a threat where no threat exists...

So the question becomes: "Why would someone imply that they've been threatened, when there is no evidence within the sourced reference of a threat having been advanced?"

We can be sure that this is a function of flawed reasoning; flawed reasoning which is born of ignorance.

What the sourced reference spoke to was bed-rock principle; bed-rock principle which stands as the foundation to the inalienable human rights which every human being enjoys.  And Bed-Rock principle of which this prattling buffon is ignorant.

You see friends, based upon nothing more than the above position it is clear that this individual has no understanding of, or perhaps dismisses the very notion of inalienable human rights; thus they would not recognize or would summarily reject, depending upon the depths of their depravity, the INTRINSIC RESPONSIBILITIES inherent in those very rights... Rights which require that NO INDIVIDUAL EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS TO THE DETRIMENT OF ANOTHER'S MEANS TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS... and where such is found to be the case; where an individual is exercising their rights to the detriment of another's rights, it is the RESPONSIBILITY of the individual to defend themselves from those who would usurp their God given rights...  and to defend the rights of others who are found to have their inalienable rights being unjustifiably usurped.

As such the advocate of Left-think runs to declare that any attempt to prevent him and his comrades from usurping the rights of a free people is unjustified; that any discussion wherein the sure and certain consequences of of their offensive actions is a threat... when it is not a threat, but a warning; a warning which they can choose to observe and change their thinking to avoid the very real consequnces that are PROMISED should they fail to do so or reject that warning and suffer the unavoidable consequences for those who fail to adhere to the RESPONSIBILITIES intrinsic to their own inalienable rights. 

Again... her response is yet ANOTHER CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF WHY THESE IDIOTS ARE SUCH A HAZARD TO A FREE CULTURE; and we can be sure that she will reject the fair warning and continue to advocate for government policy which infringes upon and otherwise usurps the means of the individual to exercise their inalienable rights  to pursue the fulfillment of their life.


----------



## Diuretic

Eh?


----------



## KittenKoder

Diuretic said:


> Eh?



LOL I gave up reading most of Pubicus' crap already ... he says a lot of words but with very little meaning or content. Just poke fun at him, makes his hot air more tolerable sometimes.


----------



## Diuretic

When I used to bother I got a bit confused.  I kept asking myself why Pub kept on posting the same two hundred line post....then I realised it was his signature line I was reading


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

KittenKoder said:


> Diuretic said:
> 
> 
> 
> Eh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL I gave up reading most of Pubicus' crap already ... he says a lot of words but with very little meaning or content. Just poke fun at him, makes his hot air more tolerable sometimes.
Click to expand...


ROFLMNAO ...

Ain't delusion grand....


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

Diuretic said:


> When I used to bother I got a bit confused.  I kept asking myself why Pub kept on posting the same two hundred line post....then I realised it was his signature line I was reading



Now it should be noted that If these two idiots COULD offer a substantive argument, which THEY FELT could advance their 'feelings'... THEY WOULD...

That they've opted to change the subject, tells one all one needs to know about how THEY 'feel' about their own means to do so...

The above failures to do so is little more than default concessions wherein they admit their ideological inadequacies... thus ending any potential doubt that they COULD...

Congrats Rush, you win AGAIN!


----------



## KittenKoder

Aaaw .. how sweet ... he called Diuretic and I "friends" ... LOL


----------



## Diuretic

Yeah?


----------



## necritan

Toro said:


> necritan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Polls showed that most people thought Obama won the debates against McCain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Polls showed that more people voted based on feelings , and not logic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That matters why?
Click to expand...


If you dont think it matters that people voted purely on a feelgood basis....and the result is a feel good president....then I guess you you'll never know why.


----------



## necritan

Old Rocks said:


> necritan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Toro said:
> 
> 
> 
> Polls showed that most people thought Obama won the debates against McCain.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Polls showed that more people voted based on feelings , and not logic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Damned right. Feelings like grief for a loved one killed in a war based on lies. Feeling broke because the paycheck stopped, but the bills did not. Feeling betrayed by an administration that was more interested in spying on American Citizens, than getting the murderer of 3000 Americans on American soil. Damned straight, pretty strong feelings.
Click to expand...



I agree....weird as it may be for "me" to agree with "you"....I agree with those feelings. I dont whole heartedly think it was only the bush administration to blame for our woe's...but rather the result of a centralized government full of Dems and Repubs that say "FUCK YOUR WELL BEING....AND FUCK YOUR RIGHTS".

I dont think you gained a better POTUSA......or a better protector of this country.


----------



## necritan

PubliusInfinitum said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Publius;
> 
> 
> Of course a revolution is a necessity from time to time and it seems Hussein is determined to get one started, which is fine, as at the end of the next US Revolution, there will be no Leftists residing in the Contenintal US, at least none above grass level.
> 
> ........................................................................................
> 
> Hmmmm...............   Still threatening other Americans. I get this picture in my mind of this pimple faced 5'4" 240 lb 35 year old adolescent typing this shit in his mothers basement.
> 
> I disagree with Conservatives, and occasionally conservatives, also. I cannot imagine setting out to, or stating that I wish to kill other Americans. These people work at the same jobs that I do, they also served in the Armed Service of this nation, as I did. They are human beings that have a differant viewpoint than I do.
> 
> This kind of statement is indictutive of a deeply disturbed individual, one that should be seeking help before he harms himself, or those around him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well looky here... a member of the opposition infering a threat where no threat exists...
> 
> So the question becomes: "Why would someone imply that they've been threatened, when there is no evidence within the sourced reference of a threat having been advanced?"
> 
> We can be sure that this is a function of flawed reasoning; flawed reasoning which is born of ignorance.
> 
> What the sourced reference spoke to was bed-rock principle; bed-rock principle which stands as the foundation to the inalienable human rights which every human being enjoys.  And Bed-Rock principle of which this prattling buffon is ignorant.
> 
> You see friends, based upon nothing more than the above position it is clear that this individual has no understanding of, or perhaps dismisses the very notion of inalienable human rights; thus they would not recognize or would summarily reject, depending upon the depths of their depravity, the INTRINSIC RESPONSIBILITIES inherent in those very rights... Rights which require that NO INDIVIDUAL EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS TO THE DETRIMENT OF ANOTHER'S MEANS TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS... and where such is found to be the case; where an individual is exercising their rights to the detriment of another's rights, it is the RESPONSIBILITY of the individual to defend themselves from those who would usurp their God given rights...  and to defend the rights of others who are found to have their inalienable rights being unjustifiably usurped.
> 
> As such the advocate of Left-think runs to declare that any attempt to prevent him and his comrades from usurping the rights of a free people is unjustified; that any discussion wherein the sure and certain consequences of of their offensive actions is a threat... when it is not a threat, but a warning; a warning which they can choose to observe and change their thinking to avoid the very real consequnces that are PROMISED should they fail to do so or reject that warning and suffer the unavoidable consequences for those who fail to adhere to the RESPONSIBILITIES intrinsic to their own inalienable rights.
> 
> Again... her response is yet ANOTHER CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF WHY THESE IDIOTS ARE SUCH A HAZARD TO A FREE CULTURE; and we can be sure that she will reject the fair warning and continue to advocate for government policy which infringes upon and otherwise usurps the means of the individual to exercise their inalienable rights  to pursue the fulfillment of their life.
Click to expand...


Translation:

"Rights violators must die"


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

necritan said:


> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Publius;
> 
> 
> Of course a revolution is a necessity from time to time and it seems Hussein is determined to get one started, which is fine, as at the end of the next US Revolution, there will be no Leftists residing in the Contenintal US, at least none above grass level.
> 
> ........................................................................................
> 
> Hmmmm...............   Still threatening other Americans. I get this picture in my mind of this pimple faced 5'4" 240 lb 35 year old adolescent typing this shit in his mothers basement.
> 
> I disagree with Conservatives, and occasionally conservatives, also. I cannot imagine setting out to, or stating that I wish to kill other Americans. These people work at the same jobs that I do, they also served in the Armed Service of this nation, as I did. They are human beings that have a differant viewpoint than I do.
> 
> This kind of statement is indictutive of a deeply disturbed individual, one that should be seeking help before he harms himself, or those around him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well looky here... a member of the opposition infering a threat where no threat exists...
> 
> So the question becomes: "Why would someone imply that they've been threatened, when there is no evidence within the sourced reference of a threat having been advanced?"
> 
> We can be sure that this is a function of flawed reasoning; flawed reasoning which is born of ignorance.
> 
> What the sourced reference spoke to was bed-rock principle; bed-rock principle which stands as the foundation to the inalienable human rights which every human being enjoys.  And Bed-Rock principle of which this prattling buffon is ignorant.
> 
> You see friends, based upon nothing more than the above position it is clear that this individual has no understanding of, or perhaps dismisses the very notion of inalienable human rights; thus they would not recognize or would summarily reject, depending upon the depths of their depravity, the INTRINSIC RESPONSIBILITIES inherent in those very rights... Rights which require that NO INDIVIDUAL EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS TO THE DETRIMENT OF ANOTHER'S MEANS TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS... and where such is found to be the case; where an individual is exercising their rights to the detriment of another's rights, it is the RESPONSIBILITY of the individual to defend themselves from those who would usurp their God given rights...  and to defend the rights of others who are found to have their inalienable rights being unjustifiably usurped.
> 
> As such the advocate of Left-think runs to declare that any attempt to prevent him and his comrades from usurping the rights of a free people is unjustified; that any discussion wherein the sure and certain consequences of of their offensive actions is a threat... when it is not a threat, but a warning; a warning which they can choose to observe and change their thinking to avoid the very real consequnces that are PROMISED should they fail to do so or reject that warning and suffer the unavoidable consequences for those who fail to adhere to the RESPONSIBILITIES intrinsic to their own inalienable rights.
> 
> Again... her response is yet ANOTHER CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF WHY THESE IDIOTS ARE SUCH A HAZARD TO A FREE CULTURE; and we can be sure that she will reject the fair warning and continue to advocate for government policy which infringes upon and otherwise usurps the means of the individual to exercise their inalienable rights  to pursue the fulfillment of their life.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Translation:
> 
> "Rights violators must die"
Click to expand...


It is the duty of the every free sovereign to defend their rights...  is it not? << That's a question; answer it.

If that is true, then is it also true, that part and parcel of a fair and just defense of those rights, is to state for the record what those rights are, in a public forum where those who are advocating for policy which represents a certain infringment and usurpation of those rights are present; where they are present and overtly advancing positions which rationalize a need to usurp the rights or projecting an outright disregard for those same rights; is it not critical to a just defense to argue what those rights are; their origins and the basis of their authroity; to define the principles on which those rights rest and to state the responsibilities which are intrisic in those rights; and is it not critical to the justice inherent in those responsibilities to inform those who seek to usurp those rights of the inevitable and unavoidable responsibilities which must come if they continue; if they do not alter their path; is such not a function of a fair and just cause; where one invests his time and effort to publicly advocate for his rights, giving every opportunity for his oppressor to see the error of his way and to literally beg them to CHANGE, so that violence can be avoided?  

And finally... is it a fair and valid interpretation to look upon such as is queried above as a threat against the safety and well being of those who are being ecouraged to the extent of the means of this soveriegn to desist from their incessant march towards their own destruction?

Now take your time... study the position and let your answer be worthy of your character.


----------



## PubliusInfinitum

necritan said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> necritan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Polls showed that more people voted based on feelings , and not logic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Damned right. Feelings like grief for a loved one killed in a war based on lies. Feeling broke because the paycheck stopped, but the bills did not. Feeling betrayed by an administration that was more interested in spying on American Citizens, than getting the murderer of 3000 Americans on American soil. Damned straight, pretty strong feelings.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I agree....weird as it may be for "me" to agree with "you"....I agree with those feelings. I dont whole heartedly think it was only the bush administration to blame for our woe's...but rather the result of a centralized government full of Dems and Repubs that say "FUCK YOUR WELL BEING....AND FUCK YOUR RIGHTS".
> 
> I dont think you gained a better POTUSA......or a better protector of this country.
Click to expand...


The 'wierdness' you felt is a result of your having, possibly unwittingly, accepted a false premise.

Rocks advanced the typical notion that the US War on Terror and the Campaign  in Iraq, within that war is 'based upon Lies;' and further that the Bush administration took it upon themselves to attack Americans and violate their rights...

None of which was realized in reality, but remains a constant in the ethereal delusion in which Rocks exist...  She want's to project that where others suffer the same delusion, that they're rightfully pissed off at GW Bush for those things which they falsely believe he did.

So while any reasonable person would agree that it is wrong for the government to step beyond its constitutional limitations, it is NOT reasonable to conclude that the actions of the Bush administration were such; you'll notice that these projections NEVER COME WITH ANY SUPPORTING EVIDENCE and that is because none exists... and it's particularly ironic, that the idiots who shout this insanity the LOUDEST, are the same ones who FREELY VOTED TO ELECT AM MARXIST WHO IS PRESENTLY STRIPPING EVERY AMERICAN OF THEIR MEANS TO ECONOMIC PRODUCTION... which is critical to a free people; and the frist step in establishing a tyranny.

SO I do not believe that it's weird that you agreed with the projected theme of Rocks, just disappointing that you were not able to disect such a simple and erroneous argument, place the inevitable sound principle in its proper context, stripping the deciet from the assertion and adhering to sound principle without lending credence to subversive absurdity.


----------



## necritan

PubliusInfinitum said:


> necritan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Damned right. Feelings like grief for a loved one killed in a war based on lies. Feeling broke because the paycheck stopped, but the bills did not. Feeling betrayed by an administration that was more interested in spying on American Citizens, than getting the murderer of 3000 Americans on American soil. Damned straight, pretty strong feelings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree....weird as it may be for "me" to agree with "you"....I agree with those feelings. I dont whole heartedly think it was only the bush administration to blame for our woe's...but rather the result of a centralized government full of Dems and Repubs that say "FUCK YOUR WELL BEING....AND FUCK YOUR RIGHTS".
> 
> I dont think you gained a better POTUSA......or a better protector of this country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The 'wierdness' you felt is a result of your having, possibly unwittingly, accepted a false premise.
> 
> Rocks advanced the typical notion that the US War on Terror and the Campaign  in Iraq, within that war is 'based upon Lies;' and further that the Bush administration took it upon themselves to attack Americans and violate their rights...
> 
> None of which was realized in reality, but remains a constant in the ethereal delusion in which Rocks exist...  She want's to project that where others suffer the same delusion, that they're rightfully pissed off at GW Bush for those things which they falsely believe he did.
> 
> So while any reasonable person would agree that it is wrong for the government to step beyond its constitutional limitations, it is NOT reasonable to conclude that the actions of the Bush administration were such; you'll notice that these projections NEVER COME WITH ANY SUPPORTING EVIDENCE and that is because none exists... and it's particularly ironic, that the idiots who shout this insanity the LOUDEST, are the same ones who FREELY VOTED TO ELECT AM MARXIST WHO IS PRESENTLY STRIPPING EVERY AMERICAN OF THEIR MEANS TO ECONOMIC PRODUCTION... which is critical to a free people; and the frist step in establishing a tyranny.
> 
> SO I do not believe that it's weird that you agreed with the projected theme of Rocks, just disappointing that you were not able to disect such a simple and erroneous argument, place the inevitable sound principle in its proper context, stripping the deciet from the assertion and adhering to sound principle without lending credence to subversive absurdity.
Click to expand...


I agreed in a sense......

I only agree that the Bush administration was taking our country in an un-constitutional direction.

However....I think the the "New Guy"....is 1000 X's worse.


----------



## necritan

PubliusInfinitum said:


> necritan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well looky here... a member of the opposition infering a threat where no threat exists...
> 
> So the question becomes: "Why would someone imply that they've been threatened, when there is no evidence within the sourced reference of a threat having been advanced?"
> 
> We can be sure that this is a function of flawed reasoning; flawed reasoning which is born of ignorance.
> 
> What the sourced reference spoke to was bed-rock principle; bed-rock principle which stands as the foundation to the inalienable human rights which every human being enjoys.  And Bed-Rock principle of which this prattling buffon is ignorant.
> 
> You see friends, based upon nothing more than the above position it is clear that this individual has no understanding of, or perhaps dismisses the very notion of inalienable human rights; thus they would not recognize or would summarily reject, depending upon the depths of their depravity, the INTRINSIC RESPONSIBILITIES inherent in those very rights... Rights which require that NO INDIVIDUAL EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS TO THE DETRIMENT OF ANOTHER'S MEANS TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS... and where such is found to be the case; where an individual is exercising their rights to the detriment of another's rights, it is the RESPONSIBILITY of the individual to defend themselves from those who would usurp their God given rights...  and to defend the rights of others who are found to have their inalienable rights being unjustifiably usurped.
> 
> As such the advocate of Left-think runs to declare that any attempt to prevent him and his comrades from usurping the rights of a free people is unjustified; that any discussion wherein the sure and certain consequences of of their offensive actions is a threat... when it is not a threat, but a warning; a warning which they can choose to observe and change their thinking to avoid the very real consequnces that are PROMISED should they fail to do so or reject that warning and suffer the unavoidable consequences for those who fail to adhere to the RESPONSIBILITIES intrinsic to their own inalienable rights.
> 
> Again... her response is yet ANOTHER CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF WHY THESE IDIOTS ARE SUCH A HAZARD TO A FREE CULTURE; and we can be sure that she will reject the fair warning and continue to advocate for government policy which infringes upon and otherwise usurps the means of the individual to exercise their inalienable rights  to pursue the fulfillment of their life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Translation:
> 
> "Rights violators must die"
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It is the duty of the every free sovereign to defend their rights...  is it not? << That's a question; answer it.
> 
> If that is true, then is it also true, that part and parcel of a fair and just defense of those rights, is to state for the record what those rights are, in a public forum where those who are advocating for policy which represents a certain infringment and usurpation of those rights are present; where they are present and overtly advancing positions which rationalize a need to usurp the rights or projecting an outright disregard for those same rights; is it not critical to a just defense to argue what those rights are; their origins and the basis of their authroity; to define the principles on which those rights rest and to state the responsibilities which are intrisic in those rights; and is it not critical to the justice inherent in those responsibilities to inform those who seek to usurp those rights of the inevitable and unavoidable responsibilities which must come if they continue; if they do not alter their path; is such not a function of a fair and just cause; where one invests his time and effort to publicly advocate for his rights, giving every opportunity for his oppressor to see the error of his way and to literally beg them to CHANGE, so that violence can be avoided?
> 
> And finally... is it a fair and valid interpretation to look upon such as is queried above as a threat against the safety and well being of those who are being ecouraged to the extent of the means of this soveriegn to desist from their incessant march towards their own destruction?
> 
> Now take your time... study the position and let your answer be worthy of your character.
Click to expand...


Its either your writing style...or my reading comprehension skills that is making this hard to read. Lol

I believe it is the duty of every American to uphold the Constitution....even if it means a  (Last Resort)....Civil War. 

To destroy the Constitution is to create tyranny....and that should be a severely punished crime. And when done continuously by our government , it has to come to an end. Some governments wont step aside for freedom, and have to be removed by other means.


----------



## Old Rocks

necritan said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> necritan said:
> 
> 
> 
> Polls showed that more people voted based on feelings , and not logic.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Damned right. Feelings like grief for a loved one killed in a war based on lies. Feeling broke because the paycheck stopped, but the bills did not. Feeling betrayed by an administration that was more interested in spying on American Citizens, than getting the murderer of 3000 Americans on American soil. Damned straight, pretty strong feelings.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I agree....weird as it may be for "me" to agree with "you"....I agree with those feelings. I dont whole heartedly think it was only the bush administration to blame for our woe's...but rather the result of a centralized government full of Dems and Repubs that say "FUCK YOUR WELL BEING....AND FUCK YOUR RIGHTS".
> 
> I dont think you gained a better POTUSA......or a better protector of this country.
Click to expand...


We gained a better POTUS than the last one. And, I think, a better one than McCain would have made. I admire McCain, but he was not the man for these times.


----------



## Old Rocks

PubliusInfinitum said:


> necritan said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Damned right. Feelings like grief for a loved one killed in a war based on lies. Feeling broke because the paycheck stopped, but the bills did not. Feeling betrayed by an administration that was more interested in spying on American Citizens, than getting the murderer of 3000 Americans on American soil. Damned straight, pretty strong feelings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree....weird as it may be for "me" to agree with "you"....I agree with those feelings. I dont whole heartedly think it was only the bush administration to blame for our woe's...but rather the result of a centralized government full of Dems and Repubs that say "FUCK YOUR WELL BEING....AND FUCK YOUR RIGHTS".
> 
> I dont think you gained a better POTUSA......or a better protector of this country.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The 'wierdness' you felt is a result of your having, possibly unwittingly, accepted a false premise.
> 
> Rocks advanced the typical notion that the US War on Terror and the Campaign  in Iraq, within that war is 'based upon Lies;' and further that the Bush administration took it upon themselves to attack Americans and violate their rights...
> 
> None of which was realized in reality, but remains a constant in the ethereal delusion in which Rocks exist...  She want's to project that where others suffer the same delusion, that they're rightfully pissed off at GW Bush for those things which they falsely believe he did.
> 
> So while any reasonable person would agree that it is wrong for the government to step beyond its constitutional limitations, it is NOT reasonable to conclude that the actions of the Bush administration were such; you'll notice that these projections NEVER COME WITH ANY SUPPORTING EVIDENCE and that is because none exists... and it's particularly ironic, that the idiots who shout this insanity the LOUDEST, are the same ones who FREELY VOTED TO ELECT AM MARXIST WHO IS PRESENTLY STRIPPING EVERY AMERICAN OF THEIR MEANS TO ECONOMIC PRODUCTION... which is critical to a free people; and the frist step in establishing a tyranny.
> 
> SO I do not believe that it's weird that you agreed with the projected theme of Rocks, just disappointing that you were not able to disect such a simple and erroneous argument, place the inevitable sound principle in its proper context, stripping the deciet from the assertion and adhering to sound principle without lending credence to subversive absurdity.
Click to expand...


Sure, Pube, sure. Anything that agrees with the Constitution of the United States of America is subversive in your book. When are you going to get out of the basement into the sunshine?


----------



## Old Rocks

PubliusInfinitum said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Publius;
> 
> 
> Of course a revolution is a necessity from time to time and it seems Hussein is determined to get one started, which is fine, as at the end of the next US Revolution, there will be no Leftists residing in the Contenintal US, at least none above grass level.
> 
> ........................................................................................
> 
> Hmmmm...............   Still threatening other Americans. I get this picture in my mind of this pimple faced 5'4" 240 lb 35 year old adolescent typing this shit in his mothers basement.
> 
> I disagree with Conservatives, and occasionally conservatives, also. I cannot imagine setting out to, or stating that I wish to kill other Americans. These people work at the same jobs that I do, they also served in the Armed Service of this nation, as I did. They are human beings that have a differant viewpoint than I do.
> 
> This kind of statement is indictutive of a deeply disturbed individual, one that should be seeking help before he harms himself, or those around him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well looky here... a member of the opposition infering a threat where no threat exists...
> 
> So the question becomes: "Why would someone imply that they've been threatened, when there is no evidence within the sourced reference of a threat having been advanced?"
> 
> We can be sure that this is a function of flawed reasoning; flawed reasoning which is born of ignorance.
> 
> What the sourced reference spoke to was bed-rock principle; bed-rock principle which stands as the foundation to the inalienable human rights which every human being enjoys.  And Bed-Rock principle of which this prattling buffon is ignorant.
> 
> You see friends, based upon nothing more than the above position it is clear that this individual has no understanding of, or perhaps dismisses the very notion of inalienable human rights; thus they would not recognize or would summarily reject, depending upon the depths of their depravity, the INTRINSIC RESPONSIBILITIES inherent in those very rights... Rights which require that NO INDIVIDUAL EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS TO THE DETRIMENT OF ANOTHER'S MEANS TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHTS... and where such is found to be the case; where an individual is exercising their rights to the detriment of another's rights, it is the RESPONSIBILITY of the individual to defend themselves from those who would usurp their God given rights...  and to defend the rights of others who are found to have their inalienable rights being unjustifiably usurped.
> 
> As such the advocate of Left-think runs to declare that any attempt to prevent him and his comrades from usurping the rights of a free people is unjustified; that any discussion wherein the sure and certain consequences of of their offensive actions is a threat... when it is not a threat, but a warning; a warning which they can choose to observe and change their thinking to avoid the very real consequnces that are PROMISED should they fail to do so or reject that warning and suffer the unavoidable consequences for those who fail to adhere to the RESPONSIBILITIES intrinsic to their own inalienable rights.
> 
> Again... her response is yet ANOTHER CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF WHY THESE IDIOTS ARE SUCH A HAZARD TO A FREE CULTURE; and we can be sure that she will reject the fair warning and continue to advocate for government policy which infringes upon and otherwise usurps the means of the individual to exercise their inalienable rights  to pursue the fulfillment of their life.
Click to expand...


Uh, better tell your psychiatrist.


----------



## DiveCon

Old Rocks said:


> PubliusInfinitum said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> necritan said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree....weird as it may be for "me" to agree with "you"....I agree with those feelings. I dont whole heartedly think it was only the bush administration to blame for our woe's...but rather the result of a centralized government full of Dems and Repubs that say "FUCK YOUR WELL BEING....AND FUCK YOUR RIGHTS".
> 
> I dont think you gained a better POTUSA......or a better protector of this country.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 'wierdness' you felt is a result of your having, possibly unwittingly, accepted a false premise.
> 
> Rocks advanced the typical notion that the US War on Terror and the Campaign  in Iraq, within that war is 'based upon Lies;' and further that the Bush administration took it upon themselves to attack Americans and violate their rights...
> 
> None of which was realized in reality, but remains a constant in the ethereal delusion in which Rocks exist...  She want's to project that where others suffer the same delusion, that they're rightfully pissed off at GW Bush for those things which they falsely believe he did.
> 
> So while any reasonable person would agree that it is wrong for the government to step beyond its constitutional limitations, it is NOT reasonable to conclude that the actions of the Bush administration were such; you'll notice that these projections NEVER COME WITH ANY SUPPORTING EVIDENCE and that is because none exists... and it's particularly ironic, that the idiots who shout this insanity the LOUDEST, are the same ones who FREELY VOTED TO ELECT AM MARXIST WHO IS PRESENTLY STRIPPING EVERY AMERICAN OF THEIR MEANS TO ECONOMIC PRODUCTION... which is critical to a free people; and the frist step in establishing a tyranny.
> 
> SO I do not believe that it's weird that you agreed with the projected theme of Rocks, just disappointing that you were not able to disect such a simple and erroneous argument, place the inevitable sound principle in its proper context, stripping the deciet from the assertion and adhering to sound principle without lending credence to subversive absurdity.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sure, Pube, sure. Anything that agrees with the Constitution of the United States of America is subversive in your book. When are you going to get out of the basement into the sunshine?
Click to expand...

how can you say better, when he's doing all the dumb things Bush did, and then some


LOL
you are such a partisan hack


----------



## necritan

Old Rocks said:


> We gained a better POTUS than the last one. And, I think, a better one than McCain would have made. I admire McCain, but he was not the man for these times.




I didnt vote for McCain either.....


----------

