Harry reid, the "leader" of the Democrats in the Senate wasted hundreds of thousands of tax payer dollars to ask for a Senate Resolution condemning Rush Limbaugh (a private citizen) for something he didn't even say.
OK, Now I KNOW I am going to catch hell for this but I was actaully listening to the Limbaugh show last week and know exactly what he said. I don't usually listen to him but I just happened to be driving to Bakersfield that day and the ONLY radio station I can pick-up in the central valley is a Fresno station that just happened to be broadcasting the Rush Limbaugh show...bring it on.
Anyway, He was talking about how disgraceful it is for people who have never served in uniform to go around claiming that they served in Iraq, got wounded, etc. to impress people or somehow justify their hate for the military. He gave an example of these people with some guy who was convicted recently of this exact thing; Jesse something or other. The story broke on the AP wire and Limbaugh picked it up. He called the guy a "Phony Soldier" Which he was. he was never a soldier, he was never in Iraq, he was never wounded in combat.
Harry Reid, in a desparate attempt to deflect the slings and arrows being hurrled at him for condoning the General "Betray Us" ad grabbed onto these two words and deliberately misrepresented the context in which they were used to try to claim that Limbaugh was talking about Soldiers who disagree with the war.
Reid and his cronies occupied 100 Senators doing the people's work on OUR tax dollars to personally attack a private American Citizen on the floor of Senate. I never heard him ask for a resolution comdeming other private citizens who have actually done something wrong like Martha Stewart or Ted Bundy or Patrick Kennedy. But all of a sudden, he feels this need to not only attack a private citizen but to do so with a deliberate misrepresentation of the man's words. I can think of few abuses of power that outweigh this and I am infuriated.
Senator Reid...RESIGN NOW!
IP: Logged
05:30 PM
PFF
System Bot
htexans1 Member
Posts: 9116 From: Clear Lake City/Houston TX Registered: Sep 2001
People always take Rush out of context when it benefits them. While I haven't listened to Rush in years on a regular basis, I know how Rush speaks, and it affords the opposition to take him out of context easily. Mabye Rush should change his method of delivery to easier to understand speech. (OPINION only)
As for travelling in the desert....Thats one reason I use Sirius satellite radio. (To prevent one station reception in "dead" areas.)
------------------ 1988 Fiero Formula T-tops CJB 143 of 1252 "factory T-top cars"
People always take Rush out of context when it benefits them. While I haven't listened to Rush in years on a regular basis, I know how Rush speaks, and it affords the opposition to take him out of context easily. Mabye Rush should change his method of delivery to easier to understand speech. (OPINION only)
As for travelling in the desert....Thats one reason I use Sirius satellite radio. (To prevent one station reception in "dead" areas.)
He plays that game a bit too, but i agree, due to his market share they love to pick on him like this.
Somedays i think he actually enjoys, it but this time i think it pissed him off, as he respects the troops greatly. Anyone that listens to his show for 15 mins would know that.
IP: Logged
06:08 PM
Toddster Member
Posts: 20871 From: Roswell, Georgia Registered: May 2001
Somedays i think he actually enjoys, it but this time i think it pissed him off, as he respects the troops greatly. Anyone that listens to his show for 15 mins would know that.
I think that is why this is so bizzare and disturbing. For 20 years Limbaugh has stood-up for the troops. In fact, he has been to Iraq a half dozen times since the outbreak fo war, organized donation drives, demanded better HumVees and body armour, yada yada yada. The Armed Services Radio carries the Limbaugh show at the REQUEST OF THE TROOPS!!
HENCE, what the hell could Reid have been thinking?!?!? Here is a guy who CLEARLY supports the troops. How could Reid think this ridiculous attack on Limbaugh would do anything but backfire on him? THIS is the level of intelligence running the Democratic Party?
IP: Logged
06:13 PM
htexans1 Member
Posts: 9116 From: Clear Lake City/Houston TX Registered: Sep 2001
Actually that is a GREAT question. Well done Bill.
Just who is Rush Limbaugh to rate a Senate Resolution? The Iranian President, a murderer, terrorist, kidnapper, and tyrannical thug received an open invitation to speak at Columbia University. Something Limbaugh will never receive.
Where was the Senate resolution condeming this monster?
Nancy Pelosi bulldozed a wildlife preserve displacing two protected and endangered species to build the Cordevalle Golf Course and Country Club. She was ordered to restore the habitat 5 years ago...still hasn't happened. But you will all be glad to know that the most beautiful 7th fairway you've ever seen before straddles this once protected wildlife preserve.
Where was the Senate resolution comdeming this eco tragedy?
Senator John Murtha accused our soldiers in Iraq of, "'cold-blooded murder and war crimes''. Those very soldiers are now suing John Murtha in Civil Court for defamation. And they will WIN!
Where is the Senate resolution condeming this totally IN-CONTEXT statement?
When Senator Dick Durbin compared US soldiers guarding prisoners at Gitmo to Nazis, Stalin's Gulags, and Pol Pot's regime...
WHERE WAS THE SENATE RESOLUTION CONDEMING THIS HORRIFIC LIE!?
Yes indeed. Rush Who.
IP: Logged
07:00 PM
Wichita Member
Posts: 20709 From: Wichita, Kansas Registered: Jun 2002
Originally posted by Toddster: Actually that is a GREAT question. Well done Bill.
Just who is Rush Limbaugh to rate a Senate Resolution? The Iranian President, a murderer, terrorist, kidnapper, and tyrannical thug received an open invitation to speak at Columbia University. Something Limbaugh will never receive.
Where was the Senate resolution condeming this monster?
Well to add balance to that.... This is supposed be be an appy occasion, Lets not fight and argue about eww killed eww.
It can be argued that George Bush is responsible for the deaths of thousands of soldiers who he has ordered to remain indefinatly in Iwreak and Afghaninsane. So your statement about the Irainian prez is equal in scale and scope.
quote
Nancy Pelosi bulldozed a wildlife preserve displacing two protected and endangered species to build the Cordevalle Golf Course and Country Club. She was ordered to restore the habitat 5 years ago...still hasn't happened. But you will all be glad to know that the most beautiful 7th fairway you've ever seen before straddles this once protected wildlife preserve.
Where was the Senate resolution comdeming this eco tragedy?
Senator John Murtha accused our soldiers in Iraq of, "'cold-blooded murder and war crimes''. Those very soldiers are now suing John Murtha in Civil Court for defamation. And they will WIN!
Where is the Senate resolution condeming this totally IN-CONTEXT statement?
When Senator Dick Durbin compared US soldiers guarding prisoners at Gitmo to Nazis, Stalin's Gulags, and Pol Pot's regime...
WHERE WAS THE SENATE RESOLUTION CONDEMING THIS HORRIFIC LIE!?
One senator attached a 35 million dollar airport spending porkbelly to an important bill... which passed... The proposal stated that the airport was getting more and more "heavy operations" which demanded improvements for the public safety.
Turns out the heaviest traffic was the senators own "publicly owned and funded" private jet...
So to answer the question... the senate appears to be a self serving organization. I could be wrong but I have NO DOUBT you know how that goes.
A who that has millions of loyal listeners that vote. A who that has a huge marketability ( ie, selling commercials ) that has made him obscenely wealthy, with some powerful friends. ( remember money = power )
A who that due to both of these points scares the hell out of the democratic side of the fence.
I thought it was illegal for the Congress to pass laws aimed at individual citizens?
Congress can pass anything they want along to the president hoping to be signed into law. Anything. Assuming its signed, It is then up to the supreme court to decide if congress overstepped their constitutional boundaries. That is if the court feels like ruling on it in the first place, they get to decide what they want and dont want to deal with. That also assumes you can even get an attorney to press the issue. Congress is full of attorneys and they stick together like stink on poo. So are almost all the judges in the system.
So in the end, its all stacked against us common citizens at this point. Rather scary if you ask me.
And yes, i understand its our responsibility to not reelect them if they do stupid stuff, but by then the damage often has already been done.
Originally posted by User00013170: A who that has millions of loyal listeners that vote. A who that has a huge marketability ( ie, selling commercials ) that has made him obscenely wealthy, with some powerful friends. ( remember money = power )
Must by why I dont care.
quote
A who that due to both of these points scares the hell out of the democratic side of the fence.
Oh so he descriminates and expresses bias toward others based on party affiliataion too? Sounds almost like a nazi propogandist and a hoser to me.
Oh so he descriminates and expresses bias toward others based on party affiliataion too? Sounds almost like a nazi propogandist and a hoser to me.
Bob and Doug would be proud.
In politics that is just how it works, it doesnt make you a nazi for supporting your party and not the others. You feel your side is right, so why wouldn't you support them?
In more general terms however: Anyone that claims to have NO biases at all is a lier. We all have biases to an extent, its human/animal nature. What we do with those biases is what makes us 'civilized',
Originally posted by User00013170: In politics that is just how it works, it doesnt make you a nazi for supporting your party and not the others. You feel your side is right, so why wouldn't you support them?
Well the german populace went along with the program so the fact the this Rush character insnt dead supports your theory.. in part. If senators acted against him then I would tend to believe the shoe were on the other foot.. but then again... They are warring factions. I'm non bias.. I dislike them both equally... and I dont get paid to do it.
quote
In more general terms however: Anyone that claims to have NO biases at all is a lier. We all have biases to an extent, its human/animal nature. What we do with those biases is what makes us 'civilized',
Civilized? Seems we are nothing more than nakid apes living in a concrete jungle proclaiming we are civil but honestly it appears we end up displaying little of it most of the time by expressing thos biases. Hardly civil if you ask me.
quote
What is a 'bob and doug' ?
Before your time eh? Actually they were to crocked to be proud of anything but scoring a case of beer.
IP: Logged
09:49 PM
Oct 7th, 2007
fierobear Member
Posts: 27110 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
Originally posted by fierobear: Rush Limbaugh is infotainment. His job is to talk and talk, and keep people interested enough to listen through the commercials. Anything else you guys need to know?
Ohhh yeah.... That guy. Isnt he that Oxycodone junky who works for ClearChannel... Yeah yeah... Now I remember... I used to cut his segments for the AM radio station where I worked... Yeah.. hummm... Must have money. I know a girl who served 6 month in jail for having them in her possesion without the perscription bottle... even though she had the perscription for them... some law that florida passed a few years back.
Yeah, it's all coming back now.
[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 10-07-2007).]
IP: Logged
03:32 AM
PFF
System Bot
blackrams Member
Posts: 33232 From: Covington, TN, USA Registered: Feb 2003
Senator Reid is simply trying to deflect attention off of the General Betrayal Ad run by MoveOn.Org. The Democrats have taken quite a bit of heat on that ad and Mr. Limbaugh is being misquoted but used to changed the news focus. It's all BS. I have listened to Mr. Limbaugh's commentary. He did not insult current soldiers or past veterans, he was talking about one individual that had a blog and was pretending to be a highly skilled and decorated soldier. Politicians, especially Senator Reid are full of their own self-fullfilling crap.
------------------ Ron
Never, never do anything or wear things that you don't want to have to explain to Paramedics, it can get very embarrassing. They talk!
IP: Logged
08:58 AM
niemann99 Member
Posts: 258 From: Seattle, WA USA Registered: Dec 2006
Hey, I am a conservative and I don't particualrly like Mr. Limbaugh, but Mr. Reid is just falling in line with the rest of his socialist buddies. You can bet that if a democrat wins the presidency, we'll see socialism like we've never before seen, and the economy, already teetering from the real estate craziness, will take a nose dive, along with a lot of your freedoms. *** Notice that I call them both Mr. - just as I would say Mr. Reid, Mr. Bush or President Bush not Bush, or Reid. Calling someone by just his last name and leaving off titles is an insidious propaganda tool. It's easier to hate "Bush" than it is President Bush or Mr. Bush.***
OT of this thread, but everyone knows that both sides use propaganda. Mr. Limbaugh spouts lots of propaganda. The difference is that conservatives use propaganda to cast themselves and what they believe in a better light. Democrats use propaganda to hide their real agenda. If anyone here has not read the Communist Manifesto, or who do not know what the Socialist International is all about, ( the core organization of the international Socialist Workers Party ) I would urge everyone to get real smart real fast. What they advocate is what is happening in the US today. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Quote from a very famous socialist:
To....Socialists, revolution does not mean a movement of the masses with which they hope to associate themselves; it means a set of reforms which 'we', the clever ones, are going to impose upon 'them', the Lower Orders.
George Orwell
IP: Logged
05:01 PM
Raydar Member
Posts: 41477 From: Carrollton GA. Out in the... country. Registered: Oct 1999
Hey, I am a conservative and I don't particualrly like Mr. Limbaugh, but Mr. Reid is just falling in line with the rest of his socialist buddies. You can bet that if a democrat wins the presidency, we'll see socialism like we've never before seen, and the economy, already teetering from the real estate craziness, will take a nose dive, along with a lot of your freedoms. *** Notice that I call them both Mr. - just as I would say Mr. Reid, Mr. Bush or President Bush not Bush, or Reid. Calling someone by just his last name and leaving off titles is an insidious propaganda tool. It's easier to hate "Bush" than it is President Bush or Mr. Bush.***
OT of this thread, but everyone knows that both sides use propaganda. Mr. Limbaugh spouts lots of propaganda. The difference is that conservatives use propaganda to cast themselves and what they believe in a better light. Democrats use propaganda to hide their real agenda. If anyone here has not read the Communist Manifesto, or who do not know what the Socialist International is all about, ( the core organization of the international Socialist Workers Party ) I would urge everyone to get real smart real fast. What they advocate is what is happening in the US today. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Quote from a very famous socialist:
To....Socialists, revolution does not mean a movement of the masses with which they hope to associate themselves; it means a set of reforms which 'we', the clever ones, are going to impose upon 'them', the Lower Orders.
George Orwell
X2 (except that I'm a Libertarian, mostly.)
quote
Originally posted by 84Bill: ...that Oxycodone junky who works for ClearChannel...
I thought you left.
[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 10-07-2007).]
Todd's got a point. People can say Rush is full of it all they want, but to actually try to get a Senate Resolution condemning what Rush "allegedly" said is very wrong. Forget whether or not the quote is accurate for a moment. That any member of our government would move to get a Senate Resolution condemning what any citizen has said is a pretty strong violation of the First Amendment. The fact that the quote is taken out of context and spun to mean something he didn't say makes it even more disturbing.
This is worse than "free speech zones" at political rallies. This is your government officially trying to condemn a citizen's speech because they disagree with it.
IP: Logged
08:18 PM
niemann99 Member
Posts: 258 From: Seattle, WA USA Registered: Dec 2006
Todd's got a point. People can say Rush is full of it all they want, but to actually try to get a Senate Resolution condemning what Rush "allegedly" said is very wrong. Forget whether or not the quote is accurate for a moment. That any member of our government would move to get a Senate Resolution condemning what any citizen has said is a pretty strong violation of the First Amendment. The fact that the quote is taken out of context and spun to mean something he didn't say makes it even more disturbing.
This is worse than "free speech zones" at political rallies. This is your government officially trying to condemn a citizen's speech because they disagree with it.
Exactly. Couldn't have said it better myself. The left only supports free speech for the left. Check the "fairness doctrine".
IP: Logged
08:34 PM
blackrams Member
Posts: 33232 From: Covington, TN, USA Registered: Feb 2003
The fact that our Senators took the time to vote on the resolution is demeaning enough but they've been talking about it all week at every oportunity. You'd think our Senators would have more important things to do than misquote and worry about what Mr. Limbaugh says. As I said before, they are trying to get the heat off of themselves from the MoveOn.Org ad. It's more about politics and getting the "Party" in power. I'd be ashamed to be associated with some of these politicians.
------------------ Ron
Never, never do anything or wear things that you don't want to have to explain to Paramedics, it can get very embarrassing. They talk!
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 10-07-2007).]
Todd's got a point. People can say Rush is full of it all they want, but to actually try to get a Senate Resolution condemning what Rush "allegedly" said is very wrong. Forget whether or not the quote is accurate for a moment. That any member of our government would move to get a Senate Resolution condemning what any citizen has said is a pretty strong violation of the First Amendment. The fact that the quote is taken out of context and spun to mean something he didn't say makes it even more disturbing.
This is worse than "free speech zones" at political rallies. This is your government officially trying to condemn a citizen's speech because they disagree with it.
Right... and where was your concern when the legislators passed a bill designed spacifically to keep the reverend Phelps and his family of nare do goods away from funerals?
Phelps is a blowhard... Limbaugh is a blowhard... and our society of blowhards only blows when and where it sees fit.
I'm not at all surprised at this Senate resolution since yall have already allowed it to happen in the past.. Sorry but It's too late now folks..
You dont have my support on this issue but I will agree with you..
There ARE some very serious problem afoot.
Elections are coming.. Now I've mentioned this before and I'll say it again.. the voting system is being hacked. Care to make an issue of the leaky roof now or complain later when the rain is falling on your head and it's too late to do a damn thing?
"The enemy of the people is their own ignorance and one day they will wake up to find themselves prisoner of their own designs.." - 84Bill
[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 10-07-2007).]
IP: Logged
08:56 PM
Blacktree Member
Posts: 20770 From: Central Florida Registered: Dec 2001
That any member of our government would move to get a Senate Resolution condemning what any citizen has said is a pretty strong violation of the First Amendment...
...This is your government officially trying to condemn a citizen's speech because they disagree with it.
That's basically what I was trying to say. But you said it better.
The big question is: will Mr. Reid be punished for blatantly disregarding the Constitution which he swore an oath to protect? Mr. Reid (and all the other Senators) swore by this oath upon entering office:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."
Furthermore, the First Amendment to the Constitution clearly forbids the Congress from abridging the freedom of speech, or the press, for that matter.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
I'm not a fan of Rush Limbaugh. Actually, I can't stand him. But I will NOT support the alienation of his fundamental rights. IMO, any Senator who acts in the same manner as Mr. Reid should be thrown out of office.
[This message has been edited by Blacktree (edited 10-08-2007).]
IP: Logged
09:08 PM
Formula88 Member
Posts: 53788 From: Raleigh NC Registered: Jan 2001
Right... and where was your concern when the legislators passed a bill designed spacifically to keep the reverend Phelps and his family of nare do goods away from funerals?
Phelps is a blowhard... Limbaugh is a blowhard... and our society of blowhards only blows when and where it sees fit.
I'm not at all surprised at this Senate resolution since yall have already allowed it to happen in the past.. Sorry but It's too late now folks..
You dont have my support on this issue but I will agree with you..
There ARE some very serious problem afoot.
Elections are coming.. Now I've mentioned this before and I'll say it again.. the voting system is being hacked. Care to make an issue of the leaky roof now or complain later when the rain is falling on your head and it's too late to do a damn thing?
"The enemy of the people is their own ignorance and one day they will wake up to find themselves prisoner of their own designs.." - 84Bill
I suppose I was the same place you are. On the internet complaining and not getting anything done.
What else has our resident welfare freedom fighter been up to?
Originally posted by Formula88: I suppose I was the same place you are. On the internet complaining and not getting anything done.
Seems like a very popular thing to do to pass the time.
quote
What else has our resident welfare freedom fighter been up to?
Oh.. no doubt on the internet complaining and not getting anything done.
The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on Earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but only to have the law of nature for his rule. - Samuel Adams
[This message has been edited by 84Bill (edited 10-07-2007).]
IP: Logged
09:39 PM
Oct 8th, 2007
Toddster Member
Posts: 20871 From: Roswell, Georgia Registered: May 2001
Right... and where was your concern when the legislators passed a bill designed spacifically to keep the reverend Phelps and his family of nare do goods away from funerals?
For the same reason that I have explained to you over and over and over again. TRY to pay attention Bill, your freedom of speech ENDS the moment it interferes with the rights of another. You can just tune Rush out. Every radio has an 'off' button. When you are burying your dead son and have to listen to crazy people bemoaning the war while you are trying to listen to the preacher, your rights are being interfered with. Phelps does not have an 'off' button. EVERYONE has a right to speak. NO ONE has a right to be heard.
Getting this concept yet Bill or are you still oblivious?
For the same reason that I have explained to you over and over and over again. TRY to pay attention Bill, your freedom of speech ENDS the moment it interferes with the rights of another. You can just tune Rush out. Every radio has an 'off' button. When you are burying your dead son and have to listen to crazy people bemoaning the war while you are trying to listen to the preacher, your rights are being interfered with. Phelps does not have an 'off' button. EVERYONE has a right to speak. NO ONE has a right to be heard.
Getting this concept yet Bill or are you still oblivious?
No one has a right to be heard, but that doesnt mean you can prevent them from being heard... ( like if you can shout louder )
Originally posted by Toddster: your freedom of speech ENDS the moment it interferes with the rights of another.
Speaking in pub lick is speaking in pub lick. I dont differentiate between a jackass on a radio or a jackass posted up on the block. One thing I like about a jackass posted up on a block is I can throw rotten eggs in their general direction. I can tell them to kiss my ass. I can flip them the bird, I can get up in their face. I prefer the up close and personal and I like having that option.
So Todd you are either FOR or AGAIN the freedom of speech. Theres no hair splitting, no you can speak here but not over there or there.. No.. no no no NO! For or against.. got it?
quote
Getting this concept yet Bill or are you still oblivious?
You are for dicing up the freedom of speech.... and no... I'm not for that AT ALL never will be and you might as well give up on trying to convince me that the freedom of speech is something to be delegated, regulate or or infringed upon.
So Todd you are either FOR or AGAIN the freedom of speech. Theres no hair splitting, no you can speak here but not over there or there.. No.. no no no NO! For or against.. got it? ...
You are for dicing up the freedom of speech.... and no... I'm not for that AT ALL never will be and you might as well give up on trying to convince me that the freedom of speech is something to be delegated, regulate or or infringed upon.
Any questions?
With respect, I have to disagree with you Bill. Freedom of speech has never been carte blanche to say anything at anytime anywhere. You can't yell "Fire!" in a theater because the panic may cause personal injury. That's but one example. I agree that there are too many restrictions on free speech today, but it's not now, nor has it ever been an all or nothing issue.
(OPINION only)
Civilized?
