Rush in limbo? Or Bimbo?

[PRout]

Rush is right.



Anyone that cant handle what Rush was saying needs to quit being so sensitive.



He was not saying anything bad about blacks.



He was commenting on how our media and/or society would like blacks to do well in the quarterback position. This one is not doing as well as is being rated by the media, because their hopes were high.



He didnt say blacks cant throw a ball. He didnt say blacks are inferior. In fact, he was standing up for black coaches in a prior commentary (but that doesnt seem to matter).



This is typical reverse discrimination, and alot of libs playing puke politics - again. Its what happens when you are losing on the issues. Things get personal. Ethics go out the window. Libs start wanting censorship (when they claim they want everyone's voice heard -hehe).



It amazes me that one of the biggest racists of our time (Al Sharpton) gets away with pointing the finger at Rush.



Go ahead and try to insult me for listening to Rush. I happen to appreciate someone that stands up for our rights, our country, our freedom.



Time to renew my NRA subscription (which is NOT a liberal group CF), and going to send a donation to Arnold.

 

[dpuckett]

Re: Pot calling the kettle black?

Originally posted by Champane Flight

The gun control laws in effect in Colorado were enacted and passed by Republicans, not Democrats. You are confusing people who are against guns that are outspoken and Democrats... .

Yes, and didnt we finally get "shall issue" status this year? Sounds like putting control back in the people's hands.

... Not to mention put the US in debt, spend money, lie to the American people, bomb and rebuild country's at our expense, and start the largest bureaucracy ever.

He never lied to the American people- he said it wouldnt be easy, it would take time, and we'd have to make sacrifices to win. I believe the honor of the biggest bureaucracy goes to the Dems-

Social Security (a failure) and Welfare (another failure). Yet both increase one's dependency on government, or takes control of their destiny out of their own hands.

The left is not the enemy, it is a balance between the two sides that makes us great. That is why our forefathers gave us this system of government, so no one person or group of persons could control. The guns are there for this reason too.

With regret, I must concede and agree with most of this, well, except about the left not being the enemy. On a national scale, the Democrat Party (left) is being run by Billary, and their main objective in life is power and control over the masses. If Billary have their way, we'll all depend on the government for our food, clothing, shelter, transportation, toilet paper, self defense, etc. And given govt's track record for efficiency, I'm sure we'll all be better off for it.



Let me spend my own money as I see fit; and leave me free to work as hard as I want and reap the rewards of it, and provide for myself and my family. Let me plan for my own retirement, provide my own healthcare, and if I fail to do that in the next 40-50 years, I dont expect the government or anyone else to bail my foolish a$$ out.



Daniel

 

[loncray]

Hee hee, I was waiting for somebody to blame the Clintons for Rush Limbaugh's current controversy! Rush was exercising his right of free speech, and many people exercised their rights to not like what he said. If he's doing drugs illegally (and there's no indictment to say this yet), then, as a prominent figure famous for exposing left-wing hypocrisy, he'll be exposed as one of the bigger hypocrites.

 

[illflem]

Surprised the Republican Party hasn't disavowed any connection to Rush.

Seems he would be an embarrassment to them.

 

[Champane Flight]

Believe it

He never lied to the American people- he said it wouldnt be easy, it would take time, and we'd have to make sacrifices to win. I believe the honor of the biggest bureaucracy goes to the Dems-

Social Security (a failure) and Welfare (another failure). Yet both increase one's dependency on government, or takes control of their destiny out of their own hands

Exaggerating the dangers to this nation from Iraq is a lie. This war was made by them, for them, period. The last time I checked SS checks were still going out and people were cashing them. Failure? You forget about the people who worked all their lives for a retirement, only to have it stole or lost by some white collar jerk. They end up on the streets? How about the people with limited intellect who have no job and few chances for a job? Or people with disability's? Do we as a nation just let em die down by the river? You are willing to give 87 billion to a country halfway around the world, yet starve and punish your own people?



Nobody is taking your freedom away, you have choices, make them and move on. The Patriot act is taking freedom, SS and welfare still works, you have a choice to use it or not, no one is forcing you on welfare. America 6. 0 "All Americans are created equal, as long as they can pay!".

 

[NETim]

Patriot Act

If I remember correctly, the Patriot Act passed 99-0 in the Senate. At last check, the Senate was not entirely comprised of Republicans.



Putting the entire blame on the Bush admin in this case is a bit disingenuous, isn't it?



Here it is again:



"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line. " President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.



"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program. " President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.



"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face. " Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.



"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983. " Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998.



"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U. S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs. " Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.



"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process. " Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.



"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies. " Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.



"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies. " Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.



"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them. " Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.



"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country. " Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.



"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power. " Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.



"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction. " Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.



"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons... " Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.



"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security. " Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.



"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction. " Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002.



"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. " Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.



"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. " Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002.



"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. " Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002.



"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ... " Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.



Again, who's lying? Who's exaggerating? Surely you're not going to give these people a pass are you? Where's your righteous indignation CF?



Tim

 

[dpuckett]

Re: Believe it

Originally posted by Champane Flight

Exaggerating the dangers to this nation from Iraq is a lie.

Fact is, Sadaam supported terrorists, and was himself a terrorist. Thus he needed to be eliminated. Considering we spend $760B+ a year to "educate" mediocre students, dont bring that line of BS up.



SS checks were still going out and people were cashing them. Failure?

Compared to the long term performance of any other investment, YES.



You forget about the people who worked all their lives for a retirement, only to have it stole or lost by some white collar jerk. They end up on the streets? How about the people with limited intellect who have no job and few chances for a job? Or people with disabilities?

I hadnt tought of the disabled- yes, we need to what's right by them, and I had no intentions of forsaking them. I'd still rather work my whole life and have my own retirement plan and savings; beats being coerced into contributing into a losing proposition with every paycheck. If I "contribute" 14% (self employed, once I get out of this cr@p hole) of my income to a mutual fund, stock market, etc, I will have a MUCH MUCH bigger monthly check by the time I retire than if I rely on SS.



You are willing to give 87 billion to a country halfway around the world, yet starve and punish your own people?

If it means preserving our freedom, and preventing further 9/11-type attacks, yes. AS for starving and punishing our own, I'll admit, some people just fall on hard times, and that is what SS and welfare were designed for, but (esp in this area) there are too many lazy people out there who take advantage of the system, and milk more money than they are worth from the rest of us. The system needs an overhaul, and I am by no means nearly familiar enough with the ins and outs of it to provide more than this first step- if I want, let me set up my own retirement plan, and keep more money in my control.



no one is forcing you on welfare.

No, but the inefficient government is forcing every working person in this country to pay for it, with nothing in return

 

[dpuckett]

AMEN, NETim

And let us not forget who turned down Bin Laden's head THREE TIMES!! after Saudia Arabia offered it to us. Had Billy Jeff done his job, instead of making a buck off our defense secrets and shady real estate dealings, 9/11 may have never happened.



Daniel

 

[KBennett]

AMEN NETim

I think Governor Arnie said it best:

I don't like Democrats because they remind me of the Communist Party in the country I came from.



Jesus Christ said it even better:

Let him who is perfect, cast the first stone.

(John 8:1-11 if you are interested in the whole story)



Personally I don't agree with everything our President and the Republicans do but most things line up with me. I am surprised any diesel owner would agree with the tree-huggin Dems or maybe you are a libertarian?



Anyway, it is easy to kick a man while he's down. Why doesn't someone come up with a solution for this country's problems?

 

[Rebel_Horseman]

Some solutions have been suggested already. Check out the "What Would You Do If You Were President?" thread.



Reb [><]

 

[Champane Flight]

Lets not forget?

Lets not forget we don't have Bin laden yet, even after the taking of Iraq. Lets not forget that NONE of the 9/11 hijackers came from Iraq. Lets not forget that the Intel on Iraq given to our governing body's was flawed from the beginning, so decisions on Iraq invasion was flawed. I really don't give a hoot how many Dems said it was right to go into Iraq. I have no respect for them either.



Saddam is not the only terror backer in the area, why him? Lets see, can you spell OIL and easy hit for political gain, satisfying the old right wings thirst for blood? Oh and our Buddy's in Israel wanted us to, you know the ones in violation of over 14 UN resolutions! Lets not forget, we don't have Saddam either.



Do you really think we are safer since our boondoggle into Iraq? Your living in a dream world. We just gave the terrorists a target closer to home. Do you think our borders are safer? Do you think that the little emergency drills we did in our major cities made us safer? Do you realize that our seaports can be infiltrated, our CG is overwhelmed, screening of imports is limited? Our new homeland security is a joke, a very large joke, a very large expensive joke!



Invest in what you like, no one is forcing you to take the SS check when you turn 65, if your investment makes you a millionaire do it. I am also paying for your war in Iraq, with no satisfactory explanation or anything in return!

 

[Mike Ellis]

Back to the Original Thread.....

Ran across this while searching for some quotes. Gee, wonder how many people in the media have lost their job for all the moaning about white men being unable to play basketball, or make good NFL running backs, or top track athletes? Did anybody lose their jobs for making movies like "White Men Can't Jump", "The Great White Hype", or even "The Great White Hope"?

 

[NETim]

Re: Lets not forget?

Originally posted by Champane Flight

I really don't give a hoot how many Dems said it was right to go into Iraq. I have no respect for them either.

Goldarn it CF, you just can't have it both ways ol' buddy. If you remember one of your previous posts

This war was made by them, for them, period.

, it's readily apparent that you're putting the blame on the Bush admin and accusing them of the lying.



Go ahead and accuse Bush and Co of lying all you want, that's your right, but please for accuracy's sake, in the future please include the phrase "and many Democrats as well". OK?



Your objectivity is compromised by your dislike of Bush and Co.



Tim

 

[illflem]

Most Dems and quite a few Reps have said they wouldn't have voted for the war if the true facts had been presented rather than a load of faulty intelligence.

 

[Boomer II]

Yeah right, LMAO.

 

[John]

Re: Re: Rush bashing

Originally posted by dpuckett

One thing no one here has mentioned that is a big factor in Rush's comments- he supports his comments with facts, something completely foreign to the liberal left (media and Dem party). When Billy Jeff was premature on Monica's dress, the media made him out to be a victim of some "right wing conspiracy" to make him out to be a bad guy for getting some action on the job. But no one in the media has mentioned in recent times all the people associated with the Clintons who have died, disappeared, been indicted on federal charges, etc. Or all his shady real estate dealings in Arkansas. But that would make the media poster child out to be less than the second coming of Christ. The Clintons are evil people, and if you get in the way of their aspirations for power and control, you die. They have no integrity, no honesty, no decency. In other words, they are shining examples of the new Demoncrap- lie, cheat, sling mud on your opponents all you can, cause you sure arent going to win by conventional means- i. e. debating issues, your own track record. Just look at all the flip flopping Billy Jeff did when he was in office. Depended on whom he was adressing what his position on a given topic was. And they have put their support behind Wesley Clark, who until last month was a REPUBLICAN. The man flip flops worse than Bill. They want a loser now so Billary can run in 08, and if she gets the White House, they will destroy this nation worse than they did first time around.



Just think where we'd be if Billary were in office on 9/11. They wouldnt have had the balls to stand up to the Useless Nations, and go into Iraq or Afghanistan (or anywhere, for that matter) on our own. Yes, we are in a war on the biggest cowards the world has ever seen (Billary being a close 2nd). Yes, it will take a long time. Yes, people will die, it WILL cost money. But if we stay the course, we will come out stronger for it, and America will remain great. If we cave in to the politically correct opinions of the left and Europe, we will end up just like them- not free. No hunting, no freedom of speech, the press, no self defense, no economic opportunity, no turbo diesel pickups. But power & control is the #1 concern of the Liberal Left- the more independent and self sufficient you are, the more they hate and despise you.



Daniel

EXTREMELY well put Daniel!

 

[loncray]

Wait a moment, I've got it - it was a war injury from kicking Bill Clinton's ass that got Rush addicted (allegedly) on painkillers, yeah, that's the ticket!

I'm still waiting to see that list of indictments - they got Web Hubbell and his wife, and who else? Who died beyond Vince Foster? There were far more indictments in the Reagan White House than the Clinton White House. I wonder how many there will end up being from Bush II's White House? Starting with whoever leaked the name of a CIA undercover operative to Robert Novak.

I'm also still waiting to see how the Clinton Administration 'destroyed our nation' in any way shape or form? The longest-lasting economic boom we ever had, relative peace in the world, if what the Clintons did was destruction then Bush II is the apocalypse!

 

[Rman]

Loncray, i thought clinton axed off all his people so they couldn't be indicted to spill the beans? Amazing how all those "suicides" and single car accidents happened!

 

[loncray]

What suicides or car accidents? Name names, man! Vince Foster was depressed and committed suicide - if the right thinks he was murdered then where's the proof? Where's the GOP-hired private detective with proof?

 

[Rman]

holy cow are you serious. It'll take some time, but i know there is a LARGE list of people that were suspiciously dead at the end of his administration. The list is HUGE, and there hasn't been any talk of of since he left office (i just can't imagine why the media wouldn't be on this ... . oops hillary isn't pres yet)



I'll be back with some details, when i have the time. It may be a while i actually have to "work" today