Conservative Talk Radio & Iraq

[elektra]

You can make anything up that you wish. I've been anything but ambiguous.

I was literally listening to Levin as I typed the post, which is why I said "Levin is coming closer to endorsing military action".

So tell me: If I'm lying, then when Levin talks about Iraq, what does he say, precisely? Not a plan - we know he doesn't have one - just what does he say?

Surely you can answer THAT.

.

Bullshit, it is plane for all who read your posts that you did not listen.

Mac is not even close, Levin did not speak of military action on the 19th, I downloaded the show, the show was strictly about what the USA ' S foreign doctrine. Levin did not even criticize Obama, like mac stated.

Either way mac, you are proven wrong, all one need do, is download the show in question, I did.

Mac, go back and listen, quote and note the time.

Mac has not done this because mac is simply repeating the liberal/Democrat talking points.

Post 1, this is what I said about Levin: Levin is coming closer to endorsing military action, but he too is essentially just dancing around the edges without going too far, and has probably asked a dozen hazy rhetorical questions in the 30 minutes I've been listening.

Do you see me saying he was criticizing Obama? That was the WHOLE POINT. He/they CANNOT "criticize Obama" because they're WAITING FOR SOMETHING TO CRITICIZE. And THAT is why they're not getting specific.

Holy crap. Are you paying attention here?

And I see that you didn't answer my questions.

Maybe you should sit a few plays out, huh?

.

Your question has nothing to do with levin's or rush's show, mac wishes to try his luck at another false premise of the liberal/Democrat party.

I am simply staying on topic.

Mark levin's show did not discuss Obama's policy on iraq, levin did not discuss obama but maybe for one brief sentence, literally, and at that it was while responding to a caller.

Levin and rush offered pertinent in depth ANALYSIS OF CURRENT EVENTS.

The op is at best, a false premise in the context of the day mac states he listened.

What should the United States of America foreign doctrine be is what levin discussed on the 19th of june, the vague criticisms and vague call for military action was not a topic mark Levin spoke if.

Mark Levin is very articulate, levin has a great show all should listen to.

Mac, I listened to the show specifically to address this thread.

Mac, it is your thread, I challenge you to link and quote what you speak of, it is simply a waste time to discuss mac's op until mac can offer fact from a show which we can link to, listen to, and quote directly.

 

[Mac1958]

Bullshit, it is plane for all who read your posts that you did not listen.

Mac is not even close, Levin did not speak of military action on the 19th, I downloaded the show, the show was strictly about what the USA ' S foreign doctrine. Levin did not even criticize Obama, like mac stated.

Either way mac, you are proven wrong, all one need do, is download the show in question, I did.

Mac, go back and listen, quote and note the time.

Mac has not done this because mac is simply repeating the liberal/Democrat talking points.

Post 1, this is what I said about Levin: Levin is coming closer to endorsing military action, but he too is essentially just dancing around the edges without going too far, and has probably asked a dozen hazy rhetorical questions in the 30 minutes I've been listening.

Do you see me saying he was criticizing Obama? That was the WHOLE POINT. He/they CANNOT "criticize Obama" because they're WAITING FOR SOMETHING TO CRITICIZE. And THAT is why they're not getting specific.

Holy crap. Are you paying attention here?

And I see that you didn't answer my questions.

Maybe you should sit a few plays out, huh?

.

Your question has nothing to do with levin's or rush's show, mac wishes to try his luck at another false premise of the liberal/Democrat party.

I am simply staying on topic.

Mark levin's show did not discuss Obama's policy on iraq, levin did not discuss obama but maybe for one brief sentence, literally, and at that it was while responding to a caller.

Levin and rush offered pertinent in depth ANALYSIS OF CURRENT EVENTS.

The op is at best, a false premise in the context of the day mac states he listened.

What should the United States of America foreign doctrine be is what levin discussed on the 19th of june, the vague criticisms and vague call for military action was not a topic mark Levin spoke if.

Mark Levin is very articulate, levin has a great show all should listen to.

Mac, I listened to the show specifically to address this thread.

Mac, it is your thread, I challenge you to link and quote what you speak of, it is simply a waste time to discuss mac's op until mac can offer fact from a show which we can link to, listen to, and quote directly.

I agree.

This is a waste of time, since you're clearly a Levin True Believer ("levin has a great show all should listen to", yikes), I've struck a nerve, and I clearly can't get real answers out of you. Ironically, just like Levin's comments on Iraq.

So let's stop wasting our time.

.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Levin and Rush offer a shell game that is a MIRROR of actual events that truly reflect the shallow end of the gene pool on the far right.

 

[elektra]

[quote challenged=Mac1958;9293102].

Pretty interesting today, I had a chance to listen to a little Rush, a little Hannity, and a little Levin. Since Obama hasn't done anything specific yet about the Iraq crisis and has not yet shown his hand, they're all doing essentially the same thing:

All of them are tossing out vague criticisms of Obama, they're all (interestingly) asking many nebulous rhetorical questions, but none of them are saying "this is exactly what we should do". Levin is coming closer to endorsing military action, but he too is essentially just dancing around the edges without going too far, and has probably asked a dozen hazy rhetorical questions in the 30 minutes I've been listening.

My guess is that, since Obama hasn't done anything yet, they don't want to take a stand because they feel they need to be able to criticize Obama no matter what he does.

Is that a fair assumption? If not, why aren't they being clear? They usually are.

And have their fans noticed this? If so, does that bother you?

.[/quote]

Post 1, this is what I said about Levin: Levin is coming closer to endorsing military action, but he too is essentially just dancing around the edges without going too far, and has probably asked a dozen hazy rhetorical questions in the 30 minutes I've been listening.

Do you see me saying he was criticizing Obama? That was the WHOLE POINT. He/they CANNOT "criticize Obama" because they're WAITING FOR SOMETHING TO CRITICIZE. And THAT is why they're not getting specific.

Holy crap. Are you paying attention here?

And I see that you didn't answer my questions.

Maybe you should sit a few plays out, huh?

.

Your question has nothing to do with levin's or rush's show, mac wishes to try his luck at another false premise of the liberal/Democrat party.

I am simply staying on topic.

Mark levin's show did not discuss Obama's policy on iraq, levin did not discuss obama but maybe for one brief sentence, literally, and at that it was while responding to a caller.

Levin and rush offered pertinent in depth ANALYSIS OF CURRENT EVENTS.

The op is at best, a false premise in the context of the day mac states he listened.

What should the United States of America foreign doctrine be is what levin discussed on the 19th of june, the vague criticisms and vague call for military action was not a topic mark Levin spoke if.

Mark Levin is very articulate, levin has a great show all should listen to.

Mac, I listened to the show specifically to address this thread.

Mac, it is your thread, I challenge you to link and quote what you speak of, it is simply a waste time to discuss mac's op until mac can offer fact from a show which we can link to, listen to, and quote directly.

I agree.

This is a waste of time, since you're clearly a Levin True Believer ("levin has a great show all should listen to", yikes), I've struck a nerve, and I clearly can't get real answers out of you. Ironically, just like Levin's comments on Iraq.

So let's stop wasting our time.

.

Real answers? True believer?

Mac, you are a liberal partisan hack, why else would you make, "ME", the issue.

Mac, you started this thread stating Obama has not done anything specific in regards to the ISIS terrorist battling for control of Iraq. Obama sent 300 military advisors.

mac, you started this thread by being wrong and have thus far dodged and deflected.

mac can not admit this, mac deflects and attacks me when all I am doing is pointing out that nothing make posted in the OP is true.

mac, you have failed.

mac, I pointed out what may of been a simple error, but it seems the willful deflecting and personal attacks on me shows mac as a liberal partisan hack simply continuing a lie, which mac was not even smart enough to think up himself.

Obama sent 300 military advisors, that is a specific action.

mac, you started a OP with lies, I hack successfully pointed that out.

 

[Mac1958]

Mac, you are a liberal partisan hack...

This from a guy who says "Levin has a great show all should listen to."



.

 

[LoneLaugher]

The idiot Electra fails to understand what makes Mac tick.

 

[elektra]

[quote challenged=Mac1958;9293102].

Pretty interesting today, I had a chance to listen to a little Rush, a little Hannity, and a little Levin. Since Obama hasn't done anything specific yet about the Iraq crisis and has not yet shown his hand, they're all doing essentially the same thing:

All of them are tossing out vague criticisms of Obama, they're all (interestingly) asking many nebulous rhetorical questions, but none of them are saying "this is exactly what we should do". Levin is coming closer to endorsing military action, but he too is essentially just dancing around the edges without going too far, and has probably asked a dozen hazy rhetorical questions in the 30 minutes I've been listening.

My guess is that, since Obama hasn't done anything yet, they don't want to take a stand because they feel they need to be able to criticize Obama no matter what he does.

Is that a fair assumption? If not, why aren't they being clear? They usually are.

And have their fans noticed this? If so, does that bother you?

.

Post 1, this is what I said about Levin: Levin is coming closer to endorsing military action, but he too is essentially just dancing around the edges without going too far, and has probably asked a dozen hazy rhetorical questions in the 30 minutes I've been listening.

Do you see me saying he was criticizing Obama? That was the WHOLE POINT. He/they CANNOT "criticize Obama" because they're WAITING FOR SOMETHING TO CRITICIZE. And THAT is why they're not getting specific.

Holy crap. Are you paying attention here?

And I see that you didn't answer my questions.

Maybe you should sit a few plays out, huh?

.

Your question has nothing to do with levin's or rush's show, mac wishes to try his luck at another false premise of the liberal/Democrat party.

I am simply staying on topic.

Mark levin's show did not discuss Obama's policy on iraq, levin did not discuss obama but maybe for one brief sentence, literally, and at that it was while responding to a caller.

Levin and rush offered pertinent in depth ANALYSIS OF CURRENT EVENTS.

The op is at best, a false premise in the context of the day mac states he listened.

What should the United States of America foreign doctrine be is what levin discussed on the 19th of june, the vague criticisms and vague call for military action was not a topic mark Levin spoke if.

Mark Levin is very articulate, levin has a great show all should listen to.

Mac, I listened to the show specifically to address this thread.

Mac, it is your thread, I challenge you to link and quote what you speak of, it is simply a waste time to discuss mac's op until mac can offer fact from a show which we can link to, listen to, and quote directly.

I agree.

This is a waste of time, since you're clearly a Levin True Believer ("levin has a great show all should listen to", yikes), I've struck a nerve, and I clearly can't get real answers out of you. Ironically, just like Levin's comments on Iraq.

So let's stop wasting our time.

.

Real answers? True believer?

Mac, you are a liberal partisan hack, why else would you make, "ME", the issue.

Mac, you started this thread stating Obama has not done anything specific in regards to the ISIS terrorist battling for control of Iraq. Obama sent 300 military advisors.

mac, you started this thread by being wrong and have thus far dodged and deflected.

mac can not admit this, mac deflects and attacks me when all I am doing is pointing out that nothing make posted in the OP is true.

mac, you have failed.

mac, I pointed out what may of been a simple error, but it seems the willful deflecting and personal attacks on me shows mac as a liberal partisan hack simply continuing a lie, which mac was not even smart enough to think up himself.

Obama sent 300 military advisors, that is a specific action.

mac, you started a OP with lies, I hack successfully pointed that out.[/QUOTE]

Mac, you are a liberal partisan hack...

This from a guy who says "Levin has a great show all should listen to."



.

Mac, am I the topic or is it the op?

Mac again proves mac started this thread on a lie.

Mac, Obama announced that he is sending 300 military advisors to Iraq, mac you started this thread stating Obama did nothing specific, mac are you a liar or simply ignorant.

Mac, how can there be a discussion on the topic you started this thread about when that topic is not true?

I say mac never listened to rush or levin otherwise mac would address my post, that mac attacks me and ignores mac's opinion piece simply shows mac's only one hectic was to be a liberal partisan hack.

Mac, you are a liar or ignorant, deflecting and ignoring the facts in my post well at the same time "cherry picking", the same post for material to attack and flame me indicates mac is lying intentionally.

 

[jasonnfree]

You can make anything up that you wish. I've been anything but ambiguous.

I was literally listening to Levin as I typed the post, which is why I said "Levin is coming closer to endorsing military action".

So tell me: If I'm lying, then when Levin talks about Iraq, what does he say, precisely? Not a plan - we know he doesn't have one - just what does he say?

Surely you can answer THAT.

.

Bullshit, it is plane for all who read your posts that you did not listen.

Mac is not even close, Levin did not speak of military action on the 19th, I downloaded the show, the show was strictly about what the USA ' S foreign doctrine. Levin did not even criticize Obama, like mac stated.

Either way mac, you are proven wrong, all one need do, is download the show in question, I did.

Mac, go back and listen, quote and note the time.

Mac has not done this because mac is simply repeating the liberal/Democrat talking points.

Post 1, this is what I said about Levin: Levin is coming closer to endorsing military action, but he too is essentially just dancing around the edges without going too far, and has probably asked a dozen hazy rhetorical questions in the 30 minutes I've been listening.

Do you see me saying he was criticizing Obama? That was the WHOLE POINT. He/they CANNOT "criticize Obama" because they're WAITING FOR SOMETHING TO CRITICIZE. And THAT is why they're not getting specific.

Holy crap. Are you paying attention here?

And I see that you didn't answer my questions.

Maybe you should sit a few plays out, huh?

.

Worrying about when radio talk show hosts are going to endorse military action might be part of your problem. What do these three know about anything other than talking into the mike? The three of them together know less about the military than anybody that's served even one day in boot camp. I doubt if any of them have even traveled outside the country except when limbaugh goes to santo domingo to prey on little boys.

 

[HenryBHough]

............ I doubt if any of them have even traveled outside the country except when limbaugh goes to santo domingo to prey on little boys.

Please share with us your enjoyment of........

Nothing can best a description by an actual participant - for direct knowledge, of course, rather than just repetition of unsubstantiated rumors.

 

[Mac1958]

Worrying about when radio talk show hosts are going to endorse military action might be part of your problem. What do these three know about anything other than talking into the mike?

Just pointing out the transparency of their inconsistency.

If Obama makes a big move, they'll spring to life, right on cue.

.

 

[tinydancer]

Bullshit, it is plane for all who read your posts that you did not listen.

Mac is not even close, Levin did not speak of military action on the 19th, I downloaded the show, the show was strictly about what the USA ' S foreign doctrine. Levin did not even criticize Obama, like mac stated.

Either way mac, you are proven wrong, all one need do, is download the show in question, I did.

Mac, go back and listen, quote and note the time.

Mac has not done this because mac is simply repeating the liberal/Democrat talking points.

Post 1, this is what I said about Levin: Levin is coming closer to endorsing military action, but he too is essentially just dancing around the edges without going too far, and has probably asked a dozen hazy rhetorical questions in the 30 minutes I've been listening.

Do you see me saying he was criticizing Obama? That was the WHOLE POINT. He/they CANNOT "criticize Obama" because they're WAITING FOR SOMETHING TO CRITICIZE. And THAT is why they're not getting specific.

Holy crap. Are you paying attention here?

And I see that you didn't answer my questions.

Maybe you should sit a few plays out, huh?

.

Worrying about when radio talk show hosts are going to endorse military action might be part of your problem. What do these three know about anything other than talking into the mike? The three of them together know less about the military than anybody that's served even one day in boot camp. I doubt if any of them have even traveled outside the country except when limbaugh goes to santo domingo to prey on little boys.

Neg coming your way for being so vile that you can't have a political difference with someone without blatantly lying and saying Limbaugh is a pedophile.

Fuck you asshole.

 

[tinydancer]

Worrying about when radio talk show hosts are going to endorse military action might be part of your problem. What do these three know about anything other than talking into the mike?

Just pointing out the transparency of their inconsistency.

If Obama makes a big move, they'll spring to life, right on cue.

.

For crying out loud Mac what the hell is anyone to say about Obama and Iraq. The President is doing jack shit. And they've all duly noted that Obama let Baghdadi out in 2009 and because of Obama's obsession with removing Assad from power, Obama has allowed ISIS to grow in power and stature in Syria with his take over of cities. Obama was cool with that because he so desperately wants to depose Assad. Hell's bells the fucking moron in the White House is still asking for more funds to send to the "nice rebels".

And that idiot Obama I guess just thought that this new AQ offshoot wouldn't decide to turn its attention to Iraq. Now ISIS has risen to the point that Baghdadi has amassed a fortune with the invasion of Iraq in particular he raided the banks in Mosul.

ISIS is now the most powerful terrorist army in the world with recruited jihadists coming in from all over the globe.

But what more is there to say about it? Obama fucked up in the ME AGAIN, Like Egypt. Like Libya. Like Syria. Like Iraq. Obama is a foreign policy mega disaster.

Consequently the home front takes center stage for these talkers. The border fiasco, the humanitarian crisis because of the President, more shit coming out daily on the IRS and the VA; hell's bells Hannity, Rush, Mark and others only have 3 hours each a day to try to cover everything.

And by the way, Levin in particular is hard on the Republican primaries. He kicks more RINO ass than anyone.

So with all due respect Mac, your OP is bullshit that they are waiting to spring on him. Cripes on a day to day they have their hands full to deal with all the crap that comes out of 1600.

 

[MarcATL]

Why are you so emotionally invested in this argument?

[MENTION=25451]tinydancer[/MENTION]

 

[Mac1958]

Worrying about when radio talk show hosts are going to endorse military action might be part of your problem. What do these three know about anything other than talking into the mike?

Just pointing out the transparency of their inconsistency.

If Obama makes a big move, they'll spring to life, right on cue.

.

For crying out loud Mac what the hell is anyone to say about Obama and Iraq. The President is doing jack shit. And they've all duly noted that Obama let Baghdadi out in 2009 and because of Obama's obsession with removing Assad from power, Obama has allowed ISIS to grow in power and stature in Syria with his take over of cities. Obama was cool with that because he so desperately wants to depose Assad. Hell's bells the fucking moron in the White House is still asking for more funds to send to the "nice rebels".

And that idiot Obama I guess just thought that this new AQ offshoot wouldn't decide to turn its attention to Iraq. Now ISIS has risen to the point that Baghdadi has amassed a fortune with the invasion of Iraq in particular he raided the banks in Mosul.

ISIS is now the most powerful terrorist army in the world with recruited jihadists coming in from all over the globe.

But what more is there to say about it? Obama fucked up in the ME AGAIN, Like Egypt. Like Libya. Like Syria. Like Iraq. Obama is a foreign policy mega disaster.

Consequently the home front takes center stage for these talkers. The border fiasco, the humanitarian crisis because of the President, more shit coming out daily on the IRS and the VA; hell's bells Hannity, Rush, Mark and others only have 3 hours each a day to try to cover everything.

And by the way, Levin in particular is hard on the Republican primaries. He kicks more RINO ass than anyone.

So with all due respect Mac, your OP is bullshit that they are waiting to spring on him. Cripes on a day to day they have their hands full to deal with all the crap that comes out of 1600.

Well, most of my opinions tend to annoy one side or the other, often both, but at least you didn't call me names!



Okay, two things: First, I noticed while listening to Rush that day that he was doing exactly what I said: Asking a lot of rhetorical questions, but never really making a point. That struck me a bit, so I listened to Hannity and he was doing precisely the same thing. So I made sure I listened to Levin, and he was asking questions too. Now, he was more aggressive about it, and he came by far the closest to saying we should engage in military action. But the similarities between the three were pretty clear.

Second, I think we can all say where these three guys stand on foreign policy, war, taxation, abortion, minimum wage, taxes and gay rights. Right? Why? Because they tell us. Over and over. So I think it's reasonable to wonder why they are being less than clear on ISIS. It just struck me that they're just being coy until Obama makes a big move one way or the other so that they can oppose whatever that move is. Probably soon, if Obama really never makes a big move, they can oppose that.

Maybe I'm wrong. But given the regular behavior of partisan ideologues - do everything possible to avoid agreement and keep attacking - I don't think it's an unreasonable theory.

.

 

[tinydancer]

Just pointing out the transparency of their inconsistency.

If Obama makes a big move, they'll spring to life, right on cue.

.

For crying out loud Mac what the hell is anyone to say about Obama and Iraq. The President is doing jack shit. And they've all duly noted that Obama let Baghdadi out in 2009 and because of Obama's obsession with removing Assad from power, Obama has allowed ISIS to grow in power and stature in Syria with his take over of cities. Obama was cool with that because he so desperately wants to depose Assad. Hell's bells the fucking moron in the White House is still asking for more funds to send to the "nice rebels".

And that idiot Obama I guess just thought that this new AQ offshoot wouldn't decide to turn its attention to Iraq. Now ISIS has risen to the point that Baghdadi has amassed a fortune with the invasion of Iraq in particular he raided the banks in Mosul.

ISIS is now the most powerful terrorist army in the world with recruited jihadists coming in from all over the globe.

But what more is there to say about it? Obama fucked up in the ME AGAIN, Like Egypt. Like Libya. Like Syria. Like Iraq. Obama is a foreign policy mega disaster.

Consequently the home front takes center stage for these talkers. The border fiasco, the humanitarian crisis because of the President, more shit coming out daily on the IRS and the VA; hell's bells Hannity, Rush, Mark and others only have 3 hours each a day to try to cover everything.

And by the way, Levin in particular is hard on the Republican primaries. He kicks more RINO ass than anyone.

So with all due respect Mac, your OP is bullshit that they are waiting to spring on him. Cripes on a day to day they have their hands full to deal with all the crap that comes out of 1600.

Well, most of my opinions tend to annoy one side or the other, often both, but at least you didn't call me names!



Okay, two things: First, I noticed while listening to Rush that day that he was doing exactly what I said: Asking a lot of rhetorical questions, but never really making a point. That struck me a bit, so I listened to Hannity and he was doing precisely the same thing. So I made sure I listened to Levin, and he was asking questions too. Now, he was more aggressive about it, and he came by far the closest to saying we should engage in military action. But the similarities between the three were pretty clear.

Second, I think we can all say where these three guys stand on foreign policy, war, taxation, abortion, minimum wage, taxes and gay rights. Right? Why? Because they tell us. Over and over. So I think it's reasonable to wonder why they are being less than clear on ISIS. It just struck me that they're just being coy until Obama makes a big move one way or the other so that they can oppose whatever that move is. Probably soon, if Obama really never makes a big move, they can oppose that.

Maybe I'm wrong. But given the regular behavior of partisan ideologues - do everything possible to avoid agreement and keep attacking - I don't think it's an unreasonable theory.

.

I'd never call you names You're a straight shooter and a rarity these days. Rather an endangered species.

I think what you are witnessing across the board in talk and I can verify that this goes beyond the three amigos to shows like Coast to Coast or the excellent Red Eye Radio and others is that everything that is happening on the home front is absolutely swamping the talkers. Iraq is on the back burner.

And that is much to my dismay because I believe the situation with ISIS could and should have been avoided and I'm spitting bullets about it. I do wish one of them would grab on and drive this issue.

All hell is about to break loose big time. But that's for another thread.

But truly, I don't believe they are waiting to pounce on him for Iraq. They don't have the time to squeeze in more smackdowns than they are already rolling out. How sad is that? Only three hours and they still can't cover everything.