Rush Limbaugh - Ha! What An Ass

[phee]

I can only go on what you say. You said you are against his methods, his methods are Free Speech. It's his only method. So, now you qualify that and say you support his Free Speech, just not what he is saying... So you do agree with his methods...

I don't think your normal methods of obfuscation, avoidance and misdirection are going to work here phee... You might have to actually take a position, stick to it and defend it.

I am sorry you feel that I communicate that way (obfuscate, avoid, and misdirect) I can honestly say that you are the only one that has ever accused me of that.

*Back on topic now

The methods that Rush suggests using to improve the country I disagee with, that is my position.... I don't think I was being that unclear at any point... And I am not sure how it came to a conversation about me disagreeing with the American Dream because I don't support Rush Limbaugh....

[Destroit]

If one rides a high horse they should be perfect. Those that live in glass houses - shouldn't be throwing stones.

And I realize - those that are fans of conservatives don't like to hear the ugly truth about persons who fly the same flag.

If Rush's drug use is no big deal then I think there is something fundementally wrong with people who are ok with drug abusers that conceal their habit and have a soapbox in which they are trying to change the minds and opinions of the larger portion of our population.

Has any of that gotten through? Do I need to go into more detail?

Lemme know.

They're painkillers, okay, they're technically drugs but so is nicotene and many of us abuse those. I'm saying the guy isn't doing lines off his desk.

And furthermore...did he not get help? Is he still addicted to painkillers? If not, then personally it seems like something to be dropped. If somebody is doing something wrong, you dog on them until they correct it, when/if they do you still give 'em a little shit after yet emphasising the whole "good job on cleaning yourself up" and then move on with life. It seems those who have to bring it up every five minutes or so all this time later is just trying to go out of their way to dig up dirt on the guy, it's sad.

I mean if people are really picking on Limbaugh for something as trivial as painkillers, why don't we pick on someone a little more prominent for something a little more serious: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/BothSidesAl...tory?id=2773754 ?

[The evil fish]

If one rides a high horse they should be perfect. Those that live in glass houses - shouldn't be throwing stones.

And I realize - those that are fans of conservatives don't like to hear the ugly truth about persons who fly the same flag.

If Rush's drug use is no big deal then I think there is something fundementally wrong with people who are ok with drug abusers that conceal their habit and have a soapbox in which they are trying to change the minds and opinions of the larger portion of our population.

Has any of that gotten through? Do I need to go into more detail?

Lemme know.

Yeah - go into more detail. I'm trying to figure out how his drug abuse affects so much? It's funny that an artist can abuse drugs, have a soap box to stand on and be called a genius yet a talk show host can do the same thing and be called something else. Geee, lets see here... John Lennon just to name one of thousands? I guess Rush has to die to get that switch flipped huh? The guy... drugs or no drugs.... understands government and politics better than most in office. He had that talent before the drug use and still does. He isn't delusional at all.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

If one rides a high horse they should be perfect. Those that live in glass houses - shouldn't be throwing stones.

And I realize - those that are fans of conservatives don't like to hear the ugly truth about persons who fly the same flag.

If Rush's drug use is no big deal then I think there is something fundementally wrong with people who are ok with drug abusers that conceal their habit and have a soapbox in which they are trying to change the minds and opinions of the larger portion of our population.

Has any of that gotten through? Do I need to go into more detail?

Lemme know.

You should really look up Rush's position on Drug addiction. It's not what you think it is.

[The evil fish]

Oh and btw - Rush had no issues blasting Clinton for the "scandel" with Monica.

Ok - a bj compared with a hidden drug addiction.

Well - I think that says a lot about a persons character.

Um Rush wasn't the President of the United States. Clinton acted like a little horny teenager while in office and disrespected the office. Sure, others did the same but had the intelligence to be able to hide it better at least. There is a big deal of difference in being a talk show host and the President.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

I am sorry you feel that I communicate that way (obfuscate, avoid, and misdirect) I can honestly say that you are the only one that has ever accused me of that.

I'm not sure why. You make a habit of derailing threads and get accolades for it. You almost neer answer a direct question unless the answer will directly support your position. As for misdirection... Did we just have a whole thread with you making it about me rather than answer a direct question and stay on topic?

[phee]

I agree... the hyprocasy of his past is a small thing in the grand scheme of things... I agree... people all have a past and deserve the truth to be heard.... Even if Rush disagrees with this concept while being guilty of it himself...

Again I disagree with what he says, his methods that he suggests for fixing the country I believe are not helpful and a bit antagonistic.... but that is IMO.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Um Rush wasn't the President of the United States. Clinton acted like a little horny teenager while in office and disrespected the office. Sure, others did the same but had the intelligence to be able to hide it better at least. There is a big deal of difference in being a talk show host and the President.

Rush isn;t even trying to become President... or the head of the Republican party.

[Mean Salley]

It's funny that an artist can abuse drugs, have a soap box to stand on and be called a genius yet a talk show host can do the same thing and be called something else.

That is a really good point.

People will listen to someone because they're rebellious, or a bad-ass or counter culture, despite the fact they could be talking out of their ass. Even people who claim to reject mainstream ideas, do the same damn thing. Instead of rallying behind a pop star/actor actress, they'll do the same with a more obscure/ less acceptable person simply because they're rebellious, bad-ass or counter culture.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

I agree... the hyprocasy of his past is a small thing in the grand scheme of things... I agree... people all have a past and deserve the truth to be heard.... Even if Rush disagrees with this concept while being guilty of it himself...

Again I disagree with what he says, his methods that he suggests for fixing the country I believe are not helpful and a bit antagonistic.... but that is IMO.

What hypocracy? Perhaps you should research his stance on drug addiction.

[phee]

I'm not sure why. You make a habit of derailing threads and get accolades for it. You almost neer answer a direct question unless the answer will directly support your position. As for misdirection... Did we just have a whole thread with you making it about me rather than answer a direct question and stay on topic?

*Off topic for a moment*

Well... I suppose I figured that when talking to someone I figured it was important to understand where the other person is coming from. If that is derailing the subject in your opinion so be it. In said thread you told me (essentually) that you had already made up your mind about the president (due to his record) and that no amount of evidence would ever sway your opinion of him... I figured that is important to know when having a discussion with another... in said case with you, I guess it could be considered avoidence, because I find someone who is that entrenched in their position (in this case your hatred for Obama) has stopped utilizing their ability to learn and adjust because they have already decided no matter what, and no amount of facts would ever change their point of view... so what is the point in talking to someone who has stated that mindset?

*back on topic now*

Rush is not the head of the republican party in any official sense correct.... but he is considered by many to be the unofficial but most true voice of said party.

"Leader of Republican Party"

On March 1, 2009 CBS's "Face the Nation" asked chief-of-Staff, Rahm Emanuel: Who represented the Republican Party? He answered, it was Limbaugh. [54][55][56]

On March 2, 2009, Limbaugh responded to Rahm Emanuel. [57]

In remarks aired by CNN on March 1, 2009, Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele said that Limbaugh, is "an entertainer".[58]

Steele later telephoned Limbaugh and apologized. Limbaugh stated he would not want to run the RNC in its "sad sack state". [59]

On March 4, 2009, Limbaugh challenged President Barack Obama to a debate on his radio program, offering to pay all of Obama's expenses: travel, food, lodging, and security.[60]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

*Off topic for a moment*

Well... I suppose I figured that when talking to someone I figured it was important to understand where the other person is coming from. If that is derailing the subject in your opinion so be it. In said thread you told me (essentually) that you had already made up your mind about the president (due to his record) and that no amount of evidence would ever sway your opinion of him... I figured that is important to know when having a discussion with another... in said case with you, I guess it could be considered avoidence, because I find someone who is that entrenched in their position (in this case your hatred for Obama) has stopped utilizing their ability to learn and adjust because they have already decided no matter what, and no amount of facts would ever change their point of view... so what is the point in talking to someone who has stated that mindset?

So, it's ok when you do it... but when I do...

[phee]

What hypocracy? Perhaps you should research his stance on drug addiction.

he is a convicted felon.... that was my point....

[phee]

So, it's ok when you do it... but when I do...

*I guess this thread can be about me then... lol*

I'll bite, when you say "do it" are referring to avoidence? or being entrenched in a singular point of view?.... I can think of several times when you yourself have changed some of my opinions when it came to Bush, and I even stated as much on the board that you were in fact correct .(And example would be his success in fighting AIDS in Africa)

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

he is a convicted felon.... that was my point....

might want to check your facts...

[phee]

might want to check your facts...

will do

[phee]

You are correct he was not convicted:

After his surrender, he filed a "not guilty" plea to the charge. Prosecutors agreed to drop the charge if Limbaugh paid $30,000 to defray the cost of the investigation and completed an 18-month therapy regimen with his physician.[127]

But here is the hypocracy I mentioned earlier... but I suppose he was not convicted... so I guess by his standards if you have the money to get out of the drug crimes it's okay and not hypocracy.

Previously, Limbaugh has condemned illegal drug use on his radio broadcast and has stated that those convicted of drug crimes should be sent to jail.[129][130]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh

[TitsMcGee]

You are correct he was not convicted:

But here is the hypocracy I mentioned earlier... but I suppose he was not convicted... so I guess by his standards if you have the money to get out of the drug crimes it's okay and not hypocracy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh

If you want to be technical about it, he wasn't using illegal drugs. And he paid his fines and did the court ordered rehab...so why does everyone have their panties in a bunch over it still.

[phee]

If you want to be technical about it, he wasn't using illegal drugs. And he paid his fines and did the court ordered rehab...so why does everyone have their panties in a bunch over it still.

exactly...

My original point was about judging people on there past...

he had not issue pointing the finger at others for their past... so he opened himself up to the same scruteny...

I personally think that people should here out his opinion regardless (even if he doesn't think others should be heard based on his own words).

[TitsMcGee]

exactly...

My original point was about judging people on there past...

he had not issue pointing the finger at others for their past... so he opened himself up to the same scruteny...

I personally think that people should here out his opinion regardless (even if he doesn't think others should be heard based on his own words).

Well what he was saying is that people convicted of drug crimes should do jail time, which they should depending on the amount and what kind of drug it is. The reason he didn't get jail time is because he was offered a plea deal, which is at the discretion of the prosecutor. So as I said he served his time so to speak.

And if I'm not mistaken, hasn't Obama admited to using cocaine? So why isn't anyone getting their panties in a bunch about that?

[Destroit]

Well what he was saying is that people convicted of drug crimes should do jail time, which they should depending on the amount and what kind of drug it is. The reason he didn't get jail time is because he was offered a plea deal, which is at the discretion of the prosecutor. So as I said he served his time so to speak.

And if I'm not mistaken, hasn't Obama admited to using cocaine? So why isn't anyone getting their panties in a bunch about that?

Yeap, I mentioned that earlier in the thread and everyone conviently glossed over it .

[TitsMcGee]

Yeap, I mentioned that earlier in the thread and everyone conviently glossed over it .

Sadly, that doesn't suprise me at all.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

You are correct he was not convicted:

But here is the hypocracy I mentioned earlier... but I suppose he was not convicted... so I guess by his standards if you have the money to get out of the drug crimes it's okay and not hypocracy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush_Limbaugh

Again, might want to check your facts. Like, use something other than wiki. The comments that he sopposedly said about putting drug users in jail for life... Rush has never said... it was attributed to him in a boondocks cartoon strip... and like "I can see Russia from my house" instead of the the actuall thing said, what a parady said is attributed to someone.

[Simon Bar Sinister]

http://www.newsweek.com/id/188279

[Slogo]

Everyone's missing the point

All of the drugs Limbaugh, Clinton, Obama, Garcia, Hendrix, Staley, Cobain, etc... used

SHOULDN'T BE ILLEGAL

To quote D. Stanhope "I have the right to do whatever the hell I want to my own body. If it kills me slowly, happy for me, fuck you <cocks shotgun> stop me!"

If I fuck up my life it's nobody's fault but my own. If I hurt someone or steal from them for money, yeah...put me away. But if I'm not bothering anyone else, piss off.

BTW. All I do is drink occasionally