Limbaugh gets sick of Beck getting all the attention, so...

[Bill Thompson]

I think no Conservative would take this comment of Limbaugh seriously. The idea that God is angry about healthcare in the United States so he makes Icelandic Volcanoes erupt is amusing. If you think not, you might consider the problem is that you have no sense of humor.

The only people who take Limbaugh's comment seriously are liberals who think there some nameless gullible rednecks somewhere like characters from "Hee Haw" who would actually believe God, in his mysterious ways, would set off volcanoes an ocean away for something that people did in the United States.

Liberals should consider that it is they who are the true clueless dolts. Rush once said "thank God for my critics and enemies". He is using you to bring him more recognition and people who see the writing on the wall are laughing at you behind your backs.

He said "maybe..." when joking about the eruptions in a very specific tounge-in-cheek way. He is banking on the fact that no liberal will do some digging and actually listen to the actual broadcast and get their necks bent out of shape over nothing. He is right. He knows you better than you know yourself. Your ideology blinds you.

 

[johnny karate]

I think no Conservative would take this comment of Limbaugh seriously.

The only people who take Limbaugh's comment seriously are liberals who think there some nameless gullible rednecks somewhere like characters from "Hee Haw" who would actually believe God, in his mysterious ways, would set off volcanoes an ocean away for something that people did in the United States.

Okay...

Welcome to the Creation Museum in Hebron, KY where they espouse such notions as Adam and Eve being actual historical personages, and that at a point in our history, humankind lived side by side with dinosaurs.

They recently celebrated the arrival of their one millionth visitor.

Your ideology blinds you.

You were saying?

 

[quarky]

I can't wait for 3d computer screens.

Then, my puke could show up all over this discussion, with blue chunks and all.

 

[easycruise]

Hard on theft for political reasons = Whatever.
Soft on communism = Bad
Hard on Axis Powers = Bad

That about sum it up?

I fail to see the relationship between locking up 100,000 American citizens in concentration camps and being "hard on axis powers".

And let's not forget how seemingly forgiving you are when a Democrat is dropping nuclear bombs on innocent civilians versus going quite apoplectic when a Republican is fighting terrorists in Iraq while simultaneously getting rid of a megalomaniacal dictator.

And speaking of political espionage, here's a more recent example of the democrats doing it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A57236-2002Oct7&notFound=true

 

[easycruise]

You certainly bend history to suit your ideology. Facts be damned!

And exactly what facts do I have wrong?

 

[easycruise]

He was joking around.

No I wasn't. I was pointing out how most liberals ignore the much worse actions of FDR and Truman while decrying much more minor incidents of Watergate and Iran/Contra.

 

[Upchurch]

I fail to see the relationship between locking up 100,000 American citizens in concentration camps and being "hard on axis powers".

And let's not forget how seemingly forgiving you are when a Democrat is dropping nuclear bombs on innocent civilians versus going quite apoplectic when a Republican is fighting terrorists in Iraq while simultaneously getting rid of a megalomaniacal dictator.

Did your ideological blinders not allow you to see that I was referring to the nuclear bombs when I said "hard on axis powers"?

How much of the kool-aid did you drink?

 

[easycruise]

Did your ideological blinders not allow you to see that I was referring to the nuclear bombs when I said "hard on axis powers"?

How much of the kool-aid did you drink?

Oh, I should have known that you would have conveniently glossed over the concentration camp part. Sweep that history under the rug, I guess. Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for you to provide evidence for your Limbaugh claim since you seem to have drank the Ivins/Franken kool-aid.

BTW, by inference, does this now mean that you approve that Bush-Iraq strategy and he was "hard on terrorist powers and dictators"? Just wondering, since he didn't drop any nukes on them like your guys did with Japan. Getting into the mind of a liberal is a scary thing. Of course, when we do get in there, we won't find any thinking on advanced concepts such as unintended consequences and dynamic scoring and the like.

 

[Dorian Gray]

Easycruise, haven't you conveniently glossed over the fact that Iraq and Afghanistan weren't attacking America, and we hadn't declared war on either, but Japan was and we had? And haven't you conveniently glossed over the fact that Bush's strategy was hard on exactly ONE dictator, while he virtually ignored all the others?

Dropping nukes on Iraq - what's Arabic for 'strawman'?

 

[Upchurch]

Oh, I should have known that you would have conveniently glossed over the concentration camp part. Sweep that history under the rug, I guess.

Strawman. Nice job.

Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for you to provide evidence for your Limbaugh claim since you seem to have drank the Ivins/Franken kool-aid.

Oh, and a non-sequitur. Well done.

I'm still looking when I can. In the meantime, I'm still waiting for you to provide evidence of your Limbaugh claim.

BTW, by inference, does this now mean that you approve that Bush-Iraq strategy and he was "hard on terrorist powers and dictators"?

How did you infer that and from what? I was summarizing your position, not my own.

Getting into the mind of a liberal is a scary thing. Of course, when we do get in there, we won't find any thinking on advanced concepts such as unintended consequences and dynamic scoring and the like.

Oh, that's right. You aren't interested in an actual discussion. You're here to preach.

 

[KingMerv00]

I think no Conservative would take this comment of Limbaugh seriously.

Bill, there have been conservatives who have taken Steven Colbert seriously.

 

[easycruise]

Strawman. Nice job.

Call it what you want, but you still ignored the topic and refused to denouce the shocking things your guys have done.

Oh, and a non-sequitur. Well done.

You obviously have trouble understanding what a non-sequitur is. Let me help you..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur

Let's review..You accused me of "drinking the kool-aid". I reminded you that it was ]you that has first drank the "kool-aid" since you have made a claim based on seemingly unproven allegations and mysterious dates in 1993 history that are propagated by known propagandists.

It was not comedic, it was not without meaning to what follows and it was not absurd, all qualities of a non-sequitur. Instead, it is clear that you should familiarize yourself with the words "projection" or "double standard"

I'm still looking when I can.

Nice. Make claim, then find supporting evidence later.

In the meantime, I'm still waiting for you to provide evidence of your Limbaugh claim.

And which claim would that be? My challenging your claim? Your evidence, if it ever comes, should settle the whole matter.

How did you infer that and from what? I was summarizing your position, not my own.

Just an aside, and a point of observation of mine that chronic Bush bashers never seem to denounce such Democrat actions such as nukes on civilians or US citizens in concentration camps by a US President. And it happened again on this thread, no one has yet denounced those actions, proving my point once again.

 

[easycruise]

Easycruise, haven't you conveniently glossed over the fact that Iraq and Afghanistan weren't attacking America, and we hadn't declared war on either, but Japan was and we had? And haven't you conveniently glossed over the fact that Bush's strategy was hard on exactly ONE dictator, while he virtually ignored all the others?

Dropping nukes on Iraq - what's Arabic for 'strawman'?

No. Perhaps you need to delineate between the President, Congress, the UN and it's sanctions, nuke program reporting, and where the terrorists were being harbored.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Bill, there have been conservatives who have taken Steven Colbert seriously.

There was a Republican who took Murphy Brown seriously ... his name was Dan Quayle. Did GOP mean "Goofy Old Party" or "Grand Old Party" that week/month?

 

[Upchurch]

And which claim would that be? My challenging your claim? Your evidence, if it ever comes, should settle the whole matter.

Your counter-claim that it was a technical error and not intentional.

But you don't really care, do you? If you actually see the video, would it really convince you otherwise? What would seeing the video tell you that the transcript has not?

 

[barrymore]

This thread is hilarious.

 

[Roadtoad]

There was a Republican who took Murphy Brown seriously ... his name was Dan Quayle. Did GOP mean "Goofy Old Party" or "Grand Old Party" that week/month?

I'd like to see it mean, "Get Out, Pinhead!"

 

[Dorian Gray]

No. Perhaps you need to delineate between the President, Congress, the UN and it's sanctions, nuke program reporting, and where the terrorists were being harbored.

Perhaps you need to go back and see how Congress, both Republicans and Democrats, voted to declare war against Japan. While at the same time, Congress, neither Republicans nor Democrats, voted to declare war against Iraq.

So what's all this 'your people' business?

 

[thaiboxerken]

Glenn Beck knows the value of Constitutional rights, unlike that a-hole from Arizona.

 

[barrymore]

Glenn Beck knows the value of Constitutional rights, unlike that a-hole from Arizona.

Sheriff Joe?