Keith Olbermann should kill himself

The BBQ Pit
161

Yeah, it’s funny how retractions around here seem to have developed floating parameters as to when they should applied. First tomndebb refuses to retract and apologize for his clearly, provable (and in my opinion, embarrassingly) wrongful accusations about me because he felt I’d been mean to him in the past, and now you refuse because you’re not in the mood.

And here all this time I foolishly thought that the standard for retractions was that a comment could be proven wrong.

Somehow I’m beginning to find it increasingly difficult to see why I should retract and apologize in those instances when I’m wrong.

Funny how that works, huh?

All of which again has nothing to do with anything where my comments to Sampiro were concerned. I gave a factual answer to his question, and Limbaugh played no part in either Sampiro’s question nor my answer.

And the ‘equivalency’ I was drawing in the quote you posted had nothing to do with my comment to Sampiro either, nor did it have to do with whether or not you find Limbaugh credible.

It had to do with elucidator’s belief that Limbaugh was being ridiculous in concluding without proof that Obama was trying to exploit the recession for political gain, and my response which you posted above was that he had just as much right to do so as elucidator and other posters around here have to take it as fact that Bush lied about Iraqi WMD in order to justify the war in Iraq…the point being that people arrive at opinions and beliefs all the time based upon what their life experience, judgement and political persuasion tell them is true. elucidator thinks ‘Bush lied’; Limbaugh thinks Obama is using the recession for political gain. Both are value judgements based on observation, life experience and political persuasion, and are therefore equally valid.

That’s where the equivalence lies, and it has nothing to do with Hussein’s allegedly smuggling WMD out of the country.

162

Hentor is… walking down Grant Street.

Hentor is thinking about the shape of the distribution of IQ scores among the batshit insane.

Hentor is trying to think of an amusing way to trip Ogre’s “don’t ya’ll mess with the South” hair-trigger, and coming up with nothing.

Hentor is waiting for the trolley, and pondering Red’s Giant Crabs as a possible name for a restaurant.

163

It’s a proven fact that the Bush Administration lied about Iraq being a threat, about knowing for a fact that they had WMD (and where they were hidden) and about Saddam Hussein being in cahoots with al Qaeda.

Exactly how much Bush himself truly understood was a lie is somewhat of an open question – he certainly was not telling the truth when he said he KNEW Iraq had WMD because you can’t know something that isn’t true. he might have honestly been talked into believing it by Cheney, et al, but be;ieving isn’t knowing. I do think that for people like W, though, that distinction is vaporous at best. He “knew” Iraq had nukes aimed at Mall of America just like he “knows” that Jesus was the only son of God, that Noah built an Ark and that the legacy of George W. Bush will one day be redeemed by history.

Cheney knew it was a lie, though. Cheney is not capable of good faith or well-intended self-delusion. Cheney is Cynicism with a three piece suit covering its rotting flesh, and a man sized safe in its office.

164

Olbermann is a Frasier.
Limbaugh is a Two and Half Men.

165

:smiley:

Hope I can meet the demand. TMI as to how.

166

I love Socialism.

There I said it.

I think it’s good and a much better alternative than many of the systems already established here.

Screw the GOP.

167

I hate Socialism.

There I said it.

It takes from producers and gives to slugabeds.

It is terrible and short of serfdom or communism - is the worst and most unfair type of government.

Screw Socialists (and the government-owned horse they rode in on)!

168

Starving Artist How is Capitalism, a system whereby the wealthy have the advantage of becoming more wealthy, fair?

169

‘Slugabed’?

170

Folks who sleep in til all hours; not to be confused with rapacious greedy assholes who will steal your morning paper if you’re not up by 6:30.

171

Of course. Don’t you know that only lazy people are the ones unable to hold down jobs?

172

From each according to his ability to each according to his ability is how I view it.

There is nothing preventing people from achieving wealth (or even just a very comfortable income and lifestyle) under capitalism. People who have a lot of money have by and large worked very hard and risked a great deal in order to get it…either that or their parents or grandparents did.

Anyone who studies hard, works hard, and is willing to take risks based on what they see as opportunities has the ability - and likelihood -to become wealthy. There are multi-millionaires today who had nothing twenty years ago, and children in grade school today who will become multi-millionaires themselves some day.

In short, there is nothing keeping people from attaining wealth in this country other than the limitations they put upon themselves.

The wealthy do not steal the money they make, they are paid it voluntarily by people who want whatever service or product they offer or provide. And their wealth makes it easier to do the R&D necessary to come up with new products that people want, and it makes it easier for them them to mass-produce their goods and therefore harder to compete with, but we at the cash register are the ones who benefit from that.

So in other words, there is nothing whatsoever about wealthy people having money that is keeping me from earning mine.

A person’s value in the market place is determined by what people are willing to pay for the work he does. If a person loafs through school and then chooses to work in a retail store or an automobile assembly line, he will live a less financially beneficial life than someone who studied and worked hard, invested his money, took educated risks and had them pay off for him. And there’s nothing wrong with that. That’s the way it should be.

Still, take a look around most cities in this country. You will see an area of around ten percent where wealthy people live. And you will see an area of sixty or seventy percent where people are living very nice, comfortable lives - lives that would be considered the height of luxury even in most western Europen countries - and you will see an area of around fifteen or twenty percent where people live lives of genuine financial hardship, though the number that is actually destitute is miniscule.

This means that our capitalistic system provides a higher standard of living for a greater percentage of its population than any other system currently in existence, and IMO that’s the paramount consideration, especially when you consider that even for those in the less advantaged strata of society, the same rewards for hard work exist as they do for everyone else.

And that’s where the fairness lies. Everybody has the opportunity to attain weath or a nice lifestyle. It’s mostly those who can’t be arsed to pursue it, or those for whom it’s intellectual masturbation to decry the plight of the ‘working man’, who evangelize for forced income redistribution.

173

Rapacious greedy assholes built this country. Unfortunately, being rapacious greedy assholes, they do not really deserve the rewards.

174

OK, then what am I supposed to retract? I don’t hold to the idea that all value judgements have equal value. I simply don’t. Some people will make a “value judgement” that is pure garbage. So, then it has no value, and is not worthy of any consideration or respect. I think I’ve made it crystal clear what I think of Limbaugh’s “value judgements”. If he wrote them down, I wouldn’t even wipe my ass on them.

175

Remember when you said to me:

“The WMD is a lie.
Something doesn’t become true just because you keep repeating it.”

You were accusing me of promoting the lie (if that’s what it is; after all we don’t know for a fact that WMD smuggling did not happen, just that it’s unlikely) that Hussein smuggled WMD out of Iraq, despite the fact that I clearly said that subsequent events would likely have uncovered it if so.

You simply saw my name in relation to reference of Iraqi WMD smuggling and jumped to an erroneous conclusion.

I was not attempting to make the lie become true by repeating it, and that’s what you should retract and apologize for.

176

So much drivel, so little time…

First off, the comparison between Limbaugh’s bounding leaps of logic/faith compared to my assertion of “lies” told to justify the war. Lets center on the notion of facts. It is a fact that Bush said a bunch of stuff that wasn’t so it order to justify his war. If there is any question at all, it is whether or not he knew that these things were not so. Be that as it may, the position he occupied demands a higher degree of responsibility than the rest of us must bear. He is supposed to know, if he doesn’t know he’s supposed to find out, and if he doesn’t find out, he fails in his duty. He wasn’t drafted, he ran to be President, he put himself forth. Viewed in that light, the distinction between lies and innocent falsehoods fades to insignificance.

But those are facts: he said A, and A was not true.

Limbaugh has no facts at all to base his accusations upon, save that Obama is a Democrat. Period. He has no statements to point to, he has no actions, he has only his penetrating Oxycontin-bolstered insight. In the one instance, facts, in the other instance, an utter lack of facts.

Let us know if yoiu need any more help with this.

177

And that, in a nutshell, is why capitalism is no more fair than any other system, and arguably much less.

178

Unless, of course, the job is not there to be had. I believe this phenomenon is referred to as the “unemployment rate”, that is, the number of people who seek to work but cannot.

This is not a self-imposed limitation. Hence, your assertion above is drivel.

179

And speaking of this, I’m reminded of the saying that government can’t do anything for you except in proportion as it can do something to you.

Simply put, I don’t want government control over my life.

180

In that case, it was your erroneous conclusion. Did I say YOU were lying? Did I direct it squarely at you? It was a statement about “the right” or parts of it that are STILL sticking to that story. It was the generic “you”. I could have said “those people that may be or may appear to be but might not be but could be construed to be”, but fuck it. If I wanted to call you a liar, I would do it in a far far more direct and obvious way. I would direct it to you by name and there would be NO ambiguity. I would just say “SA you are a damn liar” and that would be it. But I didn’t say that, did I?