I have a feeling that you would, Madame MeToo.
[QUOTE=Rush]
We don’t burn our cars. We don’t burn down our houses. We don’t kill our children. We don’t do half the things the American left does.
[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but you seem to enjoy blowing up government buildings and killing other peoples’ children.
Dear idiot OP and other idiot leftists in this thread, this may be news to you, but dreaming something doesn’t make it happen. Remember that when you enter second grade.
[QUOTE=Blank Slate]
Limbaughs popularity used to annoy the hell out of me, but then I realized, hey, mental defectives need entertainment too.
[/QUOTE]
Like the OP. And others who take this way too seriously.
[QUOTE=F. U. Shakespeare]
Yeah, but you seem to enjoy blowing up government buildings and killing other peoples’ children.
[/QUOTE]
Jesus fucking Christ, did Rush really say what you quoted there? How can anyone tolerate that utter horseshit?
A few thoughts:
-
While Rush and his defenders are saying he’s only “dreaming” of riots, not encouraging them, he does seem to have explicitly called for people to cast ballots in an attempt to sabotage the Democratic nominating process and lead to a brokered convention. If that should lead to violence, he bears some direct responsiblity.
-
The quotes from the Wikipedia link
don’t leave much wiggle room. If “dreaming” gets him off the hook, how do you excuse “objective”.
- Even at the most impossibly charitable reading of his comments, he is saying that he wishes pain, and possible death, on people simply because he disagrees with them politically. That is despicable.
I don’t know how anyone can defend him in this matter.
[QUOTE=Robot Arm]
A few thoughts:
-
While Rush and his defenders are saying he’s only “dreaming” of riots, not encouraging them, he does seem to have explicitly called for people to cast ballots in an attempt to sabotage the Democratic nominating process and lead to a brokered convention. If that should lead to violence, he bears some direct responsiblity.
-
The quotes from the Wikipedia linkdon’t leave much wiggle room. If “dreaming” gets him off the hook, how do you excuse “objective”.
-
Even at the most impossibly charitable reading of his comments, he is saying that he wishes pain, and possible death, on people simply because he disagrees with them politically. That is despicable.
I don’t know how anyone can defend him in this matter.
[/QUOTE]
First - Rush is a blowhard entertainer who makes money by bringing in the listeners. It would not surprise me to find out that he believes at best 30% of what he says.
Second - I don’t listen to him (having a job and all that). I can’t stand AM talk radio - too many commecials.
Now - what I “hear” Rush saying in the transcript posted is that he is hoping that the Democrats are so jacked up by the time of the convention that they get another black eye ala '68. I honestly do not think that he wants death - he wants the worst of the extreme fringes of the Democrats to come out and play. He then hopes that the Democrats can once again be painted with the broard brush of that activity. Remember, those riots helped the Republicans for YEARS.
I think Rush doesn’t understand the change in the Left since then. Back then they rioted.
Today they would go out there, do a drum circle and have some large puppets.
Can we stop with the fucking brushes the size of Kansas? People can be anywhere on the political spectrum and not be represented by the most extreme, criminal or insane members of their group.
The Left is no more defined by the actions of ELF than the Right is defined by the actions of McVeigh.
[QUOTE=Ogre]
Jesus, Shodan. You misinterpreted the quote in the OP, made a fool of yourself, and you refuse to acknowledge it?
I don’t have a problem with you. This board needs a few conservative voices. Keeps things honest and interesting.
But you are wrong. Be a man. Just fucking admit it, apologize, and MOVE ON.
Regards,
Ogre
[/QUOTE]
No, sorry - BrainGlutton has already admitted putting words in Limbaugh’s mouth, and the quote in the OP seems a bit too cut up to be definitive. And when asked for a cite, he simply threw Limbaugh’s website up and wanted me to do his research for him.
I think the quote’s been doctored, in the sense of leaving out a bunch of stuff.
I think Algher is a lot closer to correct than BG. Sharpton is the one threatening “street action”, and Rush is hoping Sharpton is as good as his word. Because more “street action” at the Democratic convention will make the Democrats look stupid and lead to the defeat of Democratic candidates. But not because Limbaugh is calling for riots, but because Sharpton is, along with all the other fringe elements of the Loony Left.
And another tactic of the Loony Left is willfully to misinterpret. It happens. If Wright had said the same thing, the Usual Suspects would be falling all over each other excusing it.
SOP.
Regards,
Shodan
[QUOTE=vibrotronica]
The Right is now openly calling for political violence against liberals.
[/QUOTE]
Talk about lack of reading comprehension. Will vibrotronica be back to retract this comment?
[QUOTE=Shodan]
And another tactic of the Loony Left is willfully to misinterpret. It happens. If Wright had said the same thing, the Usual Suspects would be falling all over each other excusing it.
[/QUOTE]
:dubious:
You really are a complete fucking idiot, aren’t you?
Regards,
Frank
[QUOTE=Euphonious Polemic]
Are you being deliberately obtuse? You can’t be this thick for real. This must be some kind of performance art.
[/QUOTE]
Naw, it’s just that certain protected groups are allowed to troll all they want. As long as they don’t actually confess, they’re fine.
It’s an SMDB tradition.
-Joe
[QUOTE=Merijeek]
Naw, it’s just that certain protected groups are allowed to troll all they want.
[/QUOTE]
I suppose if conservatives are a kind of endangered species on this board, that makes sense. It is still illegal to kill a retarded bald eagle, after all.
ETA: Who knew the bald eagle is no longer on the ESA? For accuracy sake, replace my snark with grizzly bear.
This is quite interesting. Sharpton predicts (i.e., incites) violence in the streets. Limbaugh says good on ya, act like asses…it’ll pay off big time for us pubbies.
Everyone here then blasts Limbaugh and says nary a peep about Sharpton.
What’s up with that?
To be honest, I have lower expectations of Sharpton than I do of Limbaugh. There had been times when Limbaugh actually appeared to be reasonable. FTM, I know more people who have listened to Limbaugh.
[QUOTE=Starving Artist]
Sharpton predicts (i.e., incites) violence in the streets. Limbaugh says good on ya, act like asses…it’ll pay off big time for us pubbies.
[/QUOTE]
Please demonstrate that Limbaugh’s cite of Sharpton was accurate. After that, if applicable, you can demonstrate that “trouble” = “violence in the streets”. Have fun storming the castle!
[QUOTE=Starving Artist]
Sharpton predicts (i.e., incites)…
[/QUOTE]
(Bolding mine.)
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
I think it’s used in the same manner as:
Starving Artist posts (i.e. trolls)…
[QUOTE=Robot Arm]
(Bolding mine.)
You keep using that word.
[/QUOTE]
Actually, I’ve only used it once. 
But having said that, is there some question as to the veracity of Sharpton’s comment? I admit I haven’t scrutinized every word of this thread, but the impression I’ve gotten so far is that Sharpton said it (or at least implied it) and Limbaugh essentially cheered it on. Given Sharpton’s history as a fiery race-baiting rabble-rouser, such a comment hardly seems out of character for him.
Sounds pretty blatant to me. If there really is a riot in Denver (which I doubt), I’ll be one person asking for Rush to get hauled in on inciting violence.
There’s a difference between being in the left and representing the left. For example, it’s hard to argue that I’m anything but a left-winger, but I doubt anyone would say that I represent the left.
As for Shodan, I think we can write him off as being off in loony-land with Rush and ignore his absurd arguments in this and other threads altogether.