Ya know, I used to listen to Rush every now and then. I had to stop, though- otherwise my head would have exploded from the sheer self-righteous hatred that man exudes, and the people who would call in and agree with every damn point he made, just because they came out of his mouth.
I thought the point of him appearing in that commecial was to BE influential. That’s the life he has to go through, even if it isn’t like that all the time- why shouldn’t he show the worst of what he has to endure?
So does that mean his Viagra prescription is in his own name now?
Wow, attacking someone’s IQ because they misspelled something. I didn’t realize this work was being published and required an editor, but we all better run spellcheck before posting from now on.
I’m calling BS on your accusation that most of Rush’s factual statements being false. Please provide me with specific examples of where he’s said a “fact” that is in fact false.
:rolleyes: Well, might as well start at the beginning… FAIR report
Yeah, I guess I must not be clear on the concept either. Isn’t the entire point of making a political ad to attempt being influential?
lissener, the rules of quoting don’t allow for editorializing within attributed quote tags. Your use of brackets was admittedly fairly unambiguous, but still technically against the rules as written. Please make a note of it. (This is not a warning.)
Which is why he was mimicing Fox’s movements.
:rolleyes:
You’re a real prick, you know that?
Oh hey, I just remembered something-Rush doesn’t have any kids, so he’s definitely a selfish asshole.
Who gives a fuck what Rush Limbaugh says? He was funny once, but now??
Oh, he’s funny all right-not that it’s intentional.
That was a total non-apology. “So I will bigly, hugely admit that I was wrong, and I will apologize to Michael J. Fox, if I am wrong in characterizing his behavior on this commercial as an act.”
Putting the conditional on there means that he’s not saying he was wrong.
At first I thought this was one of those satyrical “why do you hate America” posts.
You’ve got it all wrong! Not having kids is a noble sacrifice on his part, because it would really suck to have him as a father. He’s doing the nonexistent kids a favor.
Actually, it would have been harder to find proof of when Limbaugh isn’t full of garbage. The thing that makes me the most uncomfortable about him is I knew a guy that was a fan of his. Hell, this guy even roomed with me for a time. It became obvious that this guy (I’ll call him “Ditto”) didn’t have one original opinion in his freaking head…EVERYTHING he thought was in truth what he had heard on Limbaugh or Howard Stern. Now, Ditto is a relatively harmless guy in the great scheme of things. (I still know the guy, known him for 26 years now) But to think there are legions of Ditto Drones out there is…ugh. (To paraphrase the Cat on Red Dwarf: “Last time I thought about that it took me a week to dry out the mattress!”).
I mean, *is it really that hard * for Rush fans to admit that he was at the very least being a dick *this particular time at least? *
(I’m guessing yeah, because then they might have to think other times he was being a collossal dick)
Satirical.
The last thing I feel like thinking about is bob55 or Rush doing anything satyrical.
OMG. You are inside my mother in law’s head… :eek:
Did you see the video yet? Just check out Rush doing his impression of Michael J. Fox’s Parkinson’s symptoms:
http://movies.crooksandliars.com/KO-LimbaughMJFox.wmv
Nice.
And it’s not a comfortable place. But it is the head of a human being, reacting, albeit inappropriately, to some real or imagined pain. Hate and contempt are not remedies for our dissatisfaction, but they can be powerful analeptics, and like all such drugs, are powerfully addictive. Those who prescribe and dispense it for their own enrichment are much more to blame than the poor fools who cling to it because the alternatives have become intolerable, if not impossible. A message of hope, personal responsibility, charity and kindness might also have appealed to your mother-in-law in the midst of her trials. But it was absent, or not loud enough, or she was too weak to accept and act on it without help she didn’t have or was too proud to ask for. Without even being sought, a man appeared with the comforting and invigorating message that there was someone else to blame, and she was more than happy to shed the thoughts that she might have brought some of her problems on herself and that there was something shameful about her various unspoken prejudices.
This incident is significant because we shall see whether distaste for the pusher, who cruelly mocked a sick but still much-loved celebrity, is enough to inspire quitting the drug.
Yeesh. Thanks for the link. So, Rush apologists, is it ok to say he’s a dick now?
Tilt on, Don Quixote, tilt on. Those windmills will sooner turn into giants.
Assuming you and Rush are yammering about the Missouri thing, it’s not a bill, it’s a ballot initiative to amend the state’s constitution. And I’ve heard this argument that it’s really about creating a constitutional right to clone human beings and has nothing to do with embryonic stem cell research, and I simply don’t get it. Will someone with advanced reading comprehension please review this link to the text of the initiative and explain to me the basis of the assertion that this amendment legalizes human cloning and has nothing to do with stem cell research?
This section, in particular, is a hurdle I’m having some trouble getting over in attempting to accept that assertion:
Clearly just another thinly veiled attempt by TRUTH™ to make Rush look bad!
CMC fnord!
:eek:
Thanks for that. I thought it looked wrong for a moment.