Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: midnight Target on November 17, 2006, 09:39:04 PM
-
Incredible amount of moral bankruptcy displayed by Rush.
The way I feel is this: I feel liberated, and I'm going to tell you as plainly as I can why. I no longer am going to have to carry the water for people who I don't think deserve having their water carried. Now, you might say, "Well, why have you been doing it?" Because the stakes are high.
-
I was listening to that show and was wondering the exact same thing. Seems like he blew a circuit.
-
Must be on the wagon or something.
-
This is kinda old news but I'll bite.
Here's how I interpreted it.
He's tired of defending conservatives that are not at all conservatives for the sake of beating the democrats.
Just my take on it.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
This is kinda old news but I'll bite.
Here's how I interpreted it.
He's tired of defending conservatives that are not at all conservatives for the sake of beating the democrats.
Just my take on it.
What he explained just after that was that he was not going to do the work and explain or defend some of these guys actions if they are not able to do it for themselves.....either by being poor communicators or just plain ignorant and unable to explain themselves. He said he would no longer do their work for them (paraphrased) and carry their water.
He didn't say that he was lying for them before....just that he was making them look good by explaining their actions and defending them on his show when they don't even do that themselves.
But when he dropped that first line, I thought he'd lost his mind.
-
I agree with Rush. He's pretty much saying that the Republicans got what they deserved. The republicans didn't wage the political war in the ways that they had for the past 12 years and been successful. A result of this is that they lost.
It's kind of like the Parent / hot stove / wondering kid mentality. Rush is glad the republicans got burned because they didn't do it the way they should have.
-
The way I feel is this: I feel liberated, and I'm going to tell you as plainly as I can why. I no longer am going to have to carry the water for people who I don't think deserve having their water carried. Now, you might say, "Well, why have you been doing it?" Because the stakes are high.
What he means is a bad republican is a better day in hell than a good liberal! :aok
Oh, and welcome to 9 days ago, Midnight.:rolleyes:
-
Don't forget, Rush consistently states that he is an entertainer first. Not only that, he unapologetically repeats almost daily that he picks/chooses issues, callers, etc. with the express intent of making himself look good. Because you see, he's an entertainer not a politician.
So get over it :)
-
Originally posted by eagl
Don't forget, Rush consistently states that he is an entertainer first. Not only that, he unapologetically repeats almost daily that he picks/chooses issues, callers, etc. with the express intent of making himself look good. Because you see, he's an entertainer not a politician.
So get over it :)
Air America never figured that part out. ;)
-
Originally posted by eagl
Don't forget, Rush consistently states that he is an entertainer first. Not only that, he unapologetically repeats almost daily that he picks/chooses issues, callers, etc. with the express intent of making himself look good. Because you see, he's an entertainer not a politician.
So get over it :)
That's true, we had a guy at work call the show and the screener told him "Sorry, he says you're too smart, try another day"
The guy, an ardent listener since the 80s was left mumbling WTF for days LOL
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
What he means is a bad republican is a better day in hell than a good liberal! :aok
Oh, and welcome to 9 days ago, Midnight.:rolleyes:
Well I actually did a search to make sure this wasn't posted yet. I was sure someone would be outraged at the lies. Or maybe outraged at the unapologetic admission of lieing, but I guess not.
So since the "stakes were high" it was OK to lie to millions of people? And all this from the guy who continually posts about how old values were the best. Unbelievable.
"There have been a bunch of things going on in Congress, some of this legislation coming out of there that I have just cringed at, and it has been difficult coming in here, trying to make the case for it when the people who are supposedly in favor of it can't even make the case themselves - and to have to come in here and try to do their jobs."
Making the case for something that you "cringe at" is hardly akin to "explaining", it is more akin to dishonesty. Fountain of truth indeed.
AND... how many of you accept the "he's just an entertainer" excuse. Kinda like Barbara Streisand is "just an entertainer' or the Dixie Chicks are "just entertainers".
The moral high ground is still up for grabs.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
I agree with Rush. He's pretty much saying that the Republicans got what they deserved. The republicans didn't wage the political war in the ways that they had for the past 12 years and been successful. A result of this is that they lost.
It's kind of like the Parent / hot stove / wondering kid mentality. Rush is glad the republicans got burned because they didn't do it the way they should have.
Actually they followed the Karl Rove playbook exactly. While it worked for a number of years, this election cycle changed and Rove didn't acknowledge the change.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Well I actually did a search to make sure this wasn't posted yet. I was sure someone would be outraged at the lies. Or maybe outraged at the unapologetic admission of lieing, but I guess not.
So since the "stakes were high" it was OK to lie to millions of people? And all this from the guy who continually posts about how old values were the best. Unbelievable.
Making the case for something that you "cringe at" is hardly akin to "explaining", it is more akin to dishonesty. Fountain of truth indeed.
AND... how many of you accept the "he's just an entertainer" excuse. Kinda like Barbara Streisand is "just an entertainer' or the Dixie Chicks are "just entertainers".
The moral high ground is still up for grabs.
What exactly did he lie about? Not that I have the desire to defend the guy but you just got more than a few rational explanaitions for what he said and you dismiss their reality and substitute your own.
Let it go....the dems won.
-
Not sure why you consider supporting questionable policy opinion "lies", but whatever floats your boat...
-
Originally posted by eagl
Not sure why you consider supporting questionable policy opinion "lies", but whatever floats your boat...
Not sure how you can call publicly agreeing with something that you actually disagree with anything but lieing.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
Not sure how you can call publicly agreeing with something that you actually disagree with anything but lieing.
Ever been in the military? :rofl
-
He's an entertainer, not a policy maker. Name one news or entertainment source (or statistician for that matter) that doesn't selectively choose what they say or don't say in order to get their point across.
If Rush was in charge of anything or had a say in spending public funds on projects, then I would expect him to do "the right thing". Not that any congressman actually does that, but that's my personal expectation. As an entertainer, I expect him to be entertaining. The fact that he is very successful at getting people like you all riled up by predicting where Democrats will make fools of themselves, and then pointing out where he is right, is entertaining as hell. The fact that he thinks the republican party has lost it's sense of direction doesn't have much to do with his show.
All he's saying is that now the elections are over, he'll feel free to direct more of his attention back at the republican party instead of simply pointing out what fools the democrat politicians are. He'll quit ignoring the dumb things the repubs have done.
That also doesn't change his basic belief that an incorrect or "lost" republican is still better than the typical liberal democrat who is right on track... I'll take an incompetent republican over a competent democrat almost any day because although the republican might accidentally stray into the tax and spend mentality, the liberal democrat's entering argument is that I have no right to my own money and the government has the obligation to interfere with every aspect of my life.
That's what Rush is saying. I don't see the lie in there. He's definately been selective in his criticism and support, but lies? What could he possibly be lying about since he doesn't actually DO anything or have any say in how the government is run?
Edit: VOR is also right, and the military is a great example. I'm currently in charge of planning a major theater exercise that I have personal concerns about. Worse, my planning efforts will directly result in the expenditure of a few million taxpayer dollars and will direct the efforts of over 8,000 people over the next several months. Does that make me a liar? Hell no, I'm implementing decisions and policies made by people who are responsible for making those decisions. Truth and lies has nothing to do with my opinion about our force structure, manning, budget, or exercise/operations tempo. I shut up and do my best to make it happen, as directed. I know where my loyalty belongs.
-
So you have to be a policy maker to be a liar? LOL... wow.
-
Not true MT. You're deliberately twisting the discussion.
Rush always makes it clear that on his show, you're getting his opinion. He could say that it's his opinion that the moon is made of green cheese. That would make him wrong, but not a liar.
Read some of his past transcripts and you'll find him avoiding certain topics, such as the budget deficit. Is he somehow a liar because he avoids those topics?
Remember, he doesn't make this stuff up. He sees what goes on, picks topics to discuss, and then presents his opinion. Where is the lie in that?
-
Also, go back and read the edit: responding to VOR at the end of my previous post.
By your logic, I'm a liar, and so is every salesman on the planet who has ever attempted to show that their product is better than another product. If one small part of the other product is better than theirs, then damn the overall product quality, the salesman is automatically a liar.
-
I'm not twisting anything, you are ignoring the man's words completely.
He made cases for policy he disagreed with. He gave an opinion, but it wasn't his own... he said it was his own, but he is now admitting it wasn't. That is in fact a lie.
-
Actually, he said he was "carrying the water" for people who do not deserve his support. You seem to be reading a lot into what he really said.
-
By your argument, people can never ever change their mind about something because that means everything they previously said is retroactively a bunch of lies.
That's a load of bullcrap and you know it.
-
Originally posted by Stringer
Actually they followed the Karl Rove playbook exactly. While it worked for a number of years, this election cycle changed and Rove didn't acknowledge the change.
:noid maybe this is all part of Rove's plan for 08...:noid
-
You have to recall, by MT and his pals on the left, anyone earning over $30k a year is wealthy. And the tax cuts, well those only help the wealthy.
Once you compute in their "logic", its quite laughable when they try to call others liars.
By all means, MT, keep swinging. Maybe your liberal talkshows will come out from bankruptcy someday.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
I agree with Rush. Rush is glad the republicans got burned because they didn't do it the way they should have.
The default mentality of all fascists is to blame everyone else when their own ill-conceieved and poorly executed strategic plans go awry.
Hitler said nearly the exact same thing in '45, before he blew his head off. Don;t believe me? Googlt it.
We should be so lucky.
-
Redtail, remember that Rush has always been very nearly a "pure" republican in very broad terms of reduced government size and intrusion into the lives of citizens. It wasn't his plans that went awry, and it wasn't his staff that deviated from the course.
If you were talking about the President instead of Rush, then your argument might have some merit, except that the President isn't going around blaming everyone else for the election results or the results of his policies. Rush has never deviated from the core values behind his conservative political opinions, so holding him somehow accountable for people he has no authority over is ludicrous. Painting Rush as a fascist who is busy blaming his minions for atrocities is simply beyond any shred of reality.
He gave a bunch of people credit who probably didn't deserve it, and he's come out and admitted that the republicans in office no longer appear to represent the conservative republican beliefs that were instrumental in getting them into office in the first place. Sounds reasonable to me... They used to represent his beliefs but deviated, and now he's not going to give them as much support based on the hope that they'll further conservative ideals and goals.
Remember, Rush will STILL support republicans over democrats in most cases because he and many conservatives are convinced that an incompetent republican is still better than an honest and competent democrat. We can hope that an incompetent republican won't make anything worse, but a liberal democrat's stated purpose is to un-do everything that conservative republicans value. From that perspective, Rush will not and should not change his tune.
Now (just as an example), if we could find ONE democrat who'd be willing to admit that their support for Slick Willie was a mistake and that the man who told the world that he did not have sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinski, no longer deserves their support because he deviated from the ideals that formed the basis for their support, then we'd be getting somewhere. But I guess his behavior actually reinforced their belief that Slick Willie actually still represents EXACTLY what they think is right, and should get even more vehement support because of it.
-
I listened to that show, he was quite clear in his reasoning and the logic was sound.... Your digging for a skeleton that isnt there on that statement...
-
Did somebody compare someone to Hitler again? :lol
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
I'm not twisting anything, you are ignoring the man's words completely.
He made cases for policy he disagreed with. He gave an opinion, but it wasn't his own... he said it was his own, but he is now admitting it wasn't. That is in fact a lie.
Isnt' that a Debating? Do debate teams get to pick their topics? no DO they have to agree with their topics to debate them? no Hence carrying the water for somone he doesn't really agree with because as he stated "the stakes are high"
Does this make him a lier? no are you grasping at straws here? yes and I can't figure out why, the republicans lost.
-
Originally posted by eagl
Also, go back and read the edit: responding to VOR at the end of my previous post.
By your logic, I'm a liar, and so is every salesman on the planet who has ever attempted to show that their product is better than another product. If one small part of the other product is better than theirs, then damn the overall product quality, the salesman is automatically a liar.
Liar is right. Any salesman that misrepresents his product is a liar. Any salesman that needs to stretch the truth to sell a product is a liar. We have many salesmen. They are not given "lies" to spread they are given a list of the attributes of our product. If they say something that isn't true.. it is a lie and it hurts the company and costs them their job.
Amazing how much you are defending this.. simply amazing.
And LePaul, I've listened to Air America about 4 times in the past 2 years. But you just keep on thinkin...
-
Rush's thing is conservatism, not Republicanism--- it happens that Republicans are the best vehicle to accomplish that end (last 6 years aside)
-
There is something I just don't understand here. MT, if you don't like Rush, why do you listen to him??? I've heard some of his stuff and other "conservative talk shows" since my old boss was a fan and had the radio on all the time in the hanger. Since I retired over 2 years ago I haven't listened to a single show. I didn't care that much for Rush, or Savage or the others and simply let it drop. You on the other hand seemn to ahve an obsession for this guy. Why can't you simply listen to something else or just ignore it like I did when the boss changed the channel from music to the talk stuff???
-
Actually they followed the Karl Rove playbook exactly. While it worked for a number of years, this election cycle changed and Rove didn't acknowledge the change.
DISAGREE! DISAGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE!
The only thing that changed is that the republicans did not follow the play book. Just as much as republicans forced democrats to play their game, the democrats didn't do anything and as such, the republicans then played the democrats game.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
DISAGREE! DISAGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE!
The only thing that changed is that the republicans did not follow the play book. Just as much as republicans forced democrats to play their game, the democrats didn't do anything and as such, the republicans then played the democrats game.
I was watching Real Time with Bill Maher....again same principle, the guy is an entertainer.
He stated something so simple yet so profound and so true. The democrats did not WIN the elections......the Republicans just lost it. In other words the republicans screwed up so badly the green party could have beat them, the dems didn't do anything unique, they just happen to win.
There's a key factor here in Rush's statement...."there's alot at stake"
The people got tired of picking the republicans over the democrats because they are the lesser of two evils, yet to me and other conservatives (actually I'm still a south park conservative, google it) the Democrats fighting the war on terror is a scary thought....hence there's a lot at stake.
-
A democrat calling someone a liar, that's rich.
-
The people got tired of picking the republicans over the democrats because they are the lesser of two evils,
Disagree again. The people didn't get tired of picking the republicans. The republicans didn't remind the people why they got voted in on the first place.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Disagree again. The people didn't get tired of picking the republicans. The republicans didn't remind the people why they got voted in on the first place.
I would agree with that as well. I think my statement referrs to more of the swing voters.
-
As hard as he tried to Clinton could not end the Reagen era. George Bush finally ended the Reagen era of conservatism with his unique brand of semi intelligent bafoonery. Took him nearly six years but he did it.
I wonder who will lead us out of this Bush induced darkness?
:cry
-
Originally posted by Yeager
As hard as he tried to Clinton could not end the Reagen era. George Bush finally ended the Reagen era of conservatism with his unique brand of semi intelligent bafoonery. Took him nearly six years but he did it.
I wonder who will lead us out of this Bush induced darkness?
:cry
Rewt fer Newt!
-
Originally posted by VOR
Ever been in the military? :rofl
Exactly VOR, when the Monica thing came out with Clinton, the CO came out to talk to the company and explain that if we were found to be talking bad about the pres for it we would be infront of his desk for an article 15. We had 2 in the company who were standing in front of his desk later that week giving back some money and time to the gov.