Loismustdie 0 Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Yeah, it's Rush. It's right on, though....http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/sit...5106.guest.html Link to post Share on other sites
CaneBrain 95 Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Well, that was five biased minutes of my life I will never get back. Link to post Share on other sites
Sportsmack 0 Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Well, that was five biased minutes of my life I will never get back.you seriously didn't know that going in? Link to post Share on other sites
nutzbuster 7 Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Yeah, it's Rush. It's right on, though....http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/sit...5106.guest.html can't disagree with most of that.Still .... Link to post Share on other sites
Loismustdie 0 Posted October 9, 2008 Author Share Posted October 9, 2008 Well, that was five biased minutes of my life I will never get back. He spent more time criticizing McCain then Obama. It's about as unbiased as Rush gets. Link to post Share on other sites
copernicus 0 Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 He spent more time criticizing McCain then Obama. It's about as unbiased as Rush gets.Thats not surprising. He's always been anti-McCain. The Obama ad that tried to potray Rush and McCain as being on the same page was retarded. Link to post Share on other sites
Loismustdie 0 Posted October 9, 2008 Author Share Posted October 9, 2008 Thats not surprising. He's always been anti-McCain. The Obama ad that tried to potray Rush and Limbaugh as being on the same page was retarded. My point exactly. If you read that and see bias in there, then I contend you need to go to the Derek Zoolander School for kids who can't read good. Link to post Share on other sites
Sportsmack 0 Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 you need to go to the Derek Zoolander School for kids who can't read good....and wanna learn to do other stuff good too Link to post Share on other sites
Ron_Mexico 4,219 Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 Thats not surprising. He's always been anti-McCain. The Obama ad that tried to potray Rush and Limbaugh as being on the same page was retarded.Rush and Limbaugh aren't on the same page? Believable, considering the pill fetish. Link to post Share on other sites
copernicus 0 Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 Rush and Limbaugh aren't on the same page? Believable, considering the pill fetish.Lol, ty. Link to post Share on other sites
Ron_Mexico 4,219 Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 Thats not surprising. He's always been anti-McCain. The Obama ad that tried to potray Rush and McCain as being on the same page was retarded."potray"Is that ebonics?I'm just breakin' your balls tonight.Carry on Cop, carry on. I have nothing productive to contribute tonight. Link to post Share on other sites
CaneBrain 95 Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 He spent more time criticizing McCain then Obama. It's about as unbiased as Rush gets.It was not bias against Obama as much as it was a blatant disregard for any poll that does not back his theory (i.e.---the majority of the polls).It also ignores the fact that polls that are looking at the total popular vote are worthless.....only state by state polls mean anything since that is how elections are decided. And in that regard, McCain is in real trouble unless someone (like Rush) think that all those polls are full of crap. (http://news.yahoo.com/election/2008/dashboard)I agree that Rush is no fan of either candidate and probably wishes Bush could have a third term. I blame all the Oxycontin. Link to post Share on other sites
brvheart 1,752 Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 I have an issue with people that trash Rush but never listen to him. If you can out debate him or explain why he is wrong on some issue, I'm all ears... but if you can't... stfu. (This is just a general comment, although it will look like it's directed at Canebrain... however it is not) Link to post Share on other sites
akoff 0 Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 Rush has a problem...he is usually right!! Link to post Share on other sites
CaneBrain 95 Posted October 9, 2008 Share Posted October 9, 2008 I have an issue with people that trash Rush but never listen to him. If you can out debate him or explain why he is wrong on some issue, I'm all ears... but if you can't... stfu. (This is just a general comment, although it will look like it's directed at Canebrain... however it is not) I just disagree with his premise and think he is in denial about Obama's current strangehold on the election. I read the article though. I know things can change in a month too. But McCain needs a lot of change at this point. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted October 11, 2008 Share Posted October 11, 2008 I just disagree with his premise and think he is in denial about Obama's current strangehold on the election. I read the article though. I know things can change in a month too. But McCain needs a lot of change at this point.Rush made the point a few months ago that there is a faction in the Republican party that wants to remove itself from the conservative side of the party, in effect cut them out. McCain would be on this team.So he of course doesn't want Obama, but having McCain lose would probably strengthen the conservative majority of the party and hopefully result in a strong conservative nominee in the next election to run against Hillary.But from a Rush Limbaugh radio show perspective, who is the best candidate for him? Obama by a mile, it will give him tons of material for his show.Just like a McCain/Palin win could save SNL from getting canceled. Link to post Share on other sites
CaneBrain 95 Posted October 11, 2008 Share Posted October 11, 2008 Rush made the point a few months ago that there is a faction in the Republican party that wants to remove itself from the conservative side of the party, in effect cut them out. McCain would be on this team.So he of course doesn't want Obama, but having McCain lose would probably strengthen the conservative majority of the party and hopefully result in a strong conservative nominee in the next election to run against Hillary.But from a Rush Limbaugh radio show perspective, who is the best candidate for him? Obama by a mile, it will give him tons of material for his show.Just like a McCain/Palin win could save SNL from getting canceled.It is fair to wonder if the Daily Show or Bill Maher will fall apart without George "me speak good" Bush in office.If McCain was truly serious about cutting the conservative (read: ultra-religious) faction out of the GOP, he would not have picked their poster-girl to run with him.And I would appreciate it if someone would tap Palin on the shoulder and say: "It's kind of hard to be credible when you ask America Who is Barack Obama when no one knew your name 6 weeks ago." She has not been through one hundreth of the scrutiny Obama has been subjected to (and she has done nothing but bitch and moan and blame the liberal media about the scrutiny she has received). Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted October 11, 2008 Share Posted October 11, 2008 It is fair to wonder if the Daily Show or Bill Maher will fall apart without George "me speak good" Bush in office.I would think Jon Stewart would be able to mock a democrat administration, but Maher? He might have another failed tv show in his resume. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted October 11, 2008 Share Posted October 11, 2008 She has not been through one hundreth of the scrutiny Obama has been subjected to (and she has done nothing but bitch and moan and blame the liberal media about the scrutiny she has received).I really wonder how you can see it that way. Granted Obama is on the most wanted list at the GOP, but the national press has done more PR for him and less attacks on him then on any politician I can think of...ever. Link to post Share on other sites
Zealous Donkey 0 Posted October 11, 2008 Share Posted October 11, 2008 I really wonder how you can see it that way. Granted Obama is on the most wanted list at the GOP, but the national press has done more PR for him and less attacks on him then on any politician I can think of...ever.AGREED. and Cane, be honest, can you think of any Republican politician that would still be in the running for president if he went to a church even for 1 month with the kind of hate speech coming out of Obama's church. Or had his campaign begin the the home of a terrorist. What has Obama been scrutinized on at all? The media reports consistently report the democratic spin and talking points as fact. They would not have reported on the Jeremiah Wright issue had not they been shamed into it by Fox News. Anderson Cooper admitted that he didn't think it was relevant to the Campaign. I ask you to go back to the 2000 and 2004 election reports and see how many times it was reported over and over again about GWB giving a speech at Bob Jones University. The media thought this was the biggest issue in the campaign, if you measure by how much ink and air time they spent on that one issue. Go read MSM media reports about his ties to Rezko, Ayers, ect. They all toe the talking point line minimizing Obama's connections even in the face of evidence to the contrary. He is always given the benefit of the doubt in the face of damning evidence. McCain, nor any other republican is given the benefit of the doubt about anything. If you can't see the overwhelming bias the media has for Obama, then you just aren't being honest with yourself. Link to post Share on other sites
irishguy 14 Posted October 11, 2008 Share Posted October 11, 2008 AGREED. and Cane, be honest, can you think of any Republican politician that would still be in the running for president if he went to a church even for 1 month with the kind of hate speech coming out of Obama's church. Or had his campaign begin the the home of a terrorist. What has Obama been scrutinized on at all? The media reports consistently report the democratic spin and talking points as fact. They would not have reported on the Jeremiah Wright issue had not they been shamed into it by Fox News. Anderson Cooper admitted that he didn't think it was relevant to the Campaign. I ask you to go back to the 2000 and 2004 election reports and see how many times it was reported over and over again about GWB giving a speech at Bob Jones University. The media thought this was the biggest issue in the campaign, if you measure by how much ink and air time they spent on that one issue. Go read MSM media reports about his ties to Rezko, Ayers, ect. They all toe the talking point line minimizing Obama's connections even in the face of evidence to the contrary. He is always given the benefit of the doubt in the face of damning evidence. McCain, nor any other republican is given the benefit of the doubt about anything. If you can't see the overwhelming bias the media has for Obama, then you just aren't being honest with yourself.I agree could you imagine the outrage from the republican party if there nominee had been endorsed by church leaders who publically blamed America's lack of moral fiber for 9/11? The outrage would be insane........I think the scrutiny for Palin seems worse because it's been compacted into such a short time frame while Obama has been on the trail and in the public eye for much longer. I don't know where you get you news but I have seen numberous stories in MSM about Ayers, Rezko etc and the Rev Wright stuff was all over the place (except Anderson Cooper) but some of the msm felt an obligation to play the entire sermons not just the soundbytes that you are so fond of.As for McCain or any other republican not being given the benifit of the doubt how many msm media stories have you seen about the end of McCain first marraige, his shady associates and fundraisers or the whackiness of the church leader who support him? The bias that is out there is not even a tenth as bad as the republicans make it out to be but will give them something to complain about come November. Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted October 11, 2008 Share Posted October 11, 2008 I agree could you imagine the outrage from the republican party if there nominee had been endorsed by church leaders who publically blamed America's lack of moral fiber for 9/11? The outrage would be insane........I think the scrutiny for Palin seems worse because it's been compacted into such a short time frame while Obama has been on the trail and in the public eye for much longer. I don't know where you get you news but I have seen numberous stories in MSM about Ayers, Rezko etc and the Rev Wright stuff was all over the place (except Anderson Cooper) but some of the msm felt an obligation to play the entire sermons not just the soundbytes that you are so fond of.As for McCain or any other republican not being given the benifit of the doubt how many msm media stories have you seen about the end of McCain first marraige, his shady associates and fundraisers or the whackiness of the church leader who support him? The bias that is out there is not even a tenth as bad as the republicans make it out to be but will give them something to complain about come November.I see your point, but McCain's ex-wife has a McCain for president bumper sticker, kind of hard to make it out to be a bad thing.Neither side will make too big an issue over campaign contributions because they both steal and lie about them, just like they both have some voter fraud scams.But attending a church for 20 years is a lot different than having a religious leader support you.I would bet some of the people that vote for Obama want to fire bomb governmetn buildings, and some people that vote for McCain will do it just because they hate blacks. Neither of those groups are going to gain a seat at the table just because they 'support' them.And many studies find that about 70-80% of reporters are registered democrats Link to post Share on other sites
irishguy 14 Posted October 11, 2008 Share Posted October 11, 2008 I see your point, but McCain's ex-wife has a McCain for president bumper sticker, kind of hard to make it out to be a bad thing.Neither side will make too big an issue over campaign contributions because they both steal and lie about them, just like they both have some voter fraud scams.But attending a church for 20 years is a lot different than having a religious leader support you.I would bet some of the people that vote for Obama want to fire bomb governmetn buildings, and some people that vote for McCain will do it just because they hate blacks. Neither of those groups are going to gain a seat at the table just because they 'support' them.And many studies find that about 70-80% of reporters are registered democratsI agree 110% with the bolded part and I really don't think that there is anyone in the world that would stand as a perfect example of character or judgement held in the scrutiny that anyone in the public light gets.Thats an interesting stat and I don't disagree that there are those in the media who let there beliefs shine through and in a perfectly balanced world it wouldn't happen on either side but I still don't think its nearly as bas as people try to make it out. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now