All bow to the leader - Rush Linbaugh....

Southern Man said:
Good luck with that Rush = Hitler tactic.
Click to expand...

It's not a tactic. It's the truth. Go study Goebbel's propaganda model. There's no doubt Rush has adopted it. The only difference is that he's not replaced religion with the state but equate his "conservative values" with religiosity which is essentially the same tactic. Where Rush differs from Goebbel's is that he uses (or tries to) humor with his propaganda and most effectively as it's made him a multimillionare. But there can be no argument about Rush and other right wing talking heads adopting this model. All's one has to do to see the truth of this is that anytime in a speech where Rush say's "Liberal" is to just cross the word liberal out and insert "Jew".

The truth becomes self evident. Rush is indeed a fascist.
 
Last edited:
Darla said:
Onceler, one of the many things I have learned about right wing nuts on message boards over the years, and this is the most important out of all of them: They are all about projection.

When you were saying that you didn't want us to fail in Iraq even though you were against going in, they didn't believe you. Because they could never have had those feelings. And they assume others feelings to be exactly as theirs are. So now they claim that "liberals prayed for Bush to fail for years" because that's what they believe. And they believe it because that's what they did during the Clinton years. And that's what they're doing again now. And that's what they always have done,a nd that's what they always will do, and they are congenitally incapable of grasping the possibility that not all hearts are as black as their own.

This is why I learned years ago to read what they write about me very closely; they are telling me about themselves. This has never failed me, and they have always gone on to prove it. Always.
Click to expand...

geesh, project much?:rolleyes:
 
Darla said:
Onceler, one of the many things I have learned about right wing nuts on message boards over the years, and this is the most important out of all of them: They are all about projection.

When you were saying that you didn't want us to fail in Iraq even though you were against going in, they didn't believe you. Because they could never have had those feelings. And they assume others feelings to be exactly as theirs are. So now they claim that "liberals prayed for Bush to fail for years" because that's what they believe. And they believe it because that's what they did during the Clinton years. And that's what they're doing again now. And that's what they always have done,a nd that's what they always will do, and they are congenitally incapable of grasping the possibility that not all hearts are as black as their own.

This is why I learned years ago to read what they write about me very closely; they are telling me about themselves. This has never failed me, and they have always gone on to prove it. Always.
Click to expand...

You said it; I couldn't agree more.

It's always interesting to hear righties explain to me exactly how I felt and what I was "really" hoping for during the Bush years.

And I don't believe this is one where both sides are equal. Republicans, in general, lack a certain compassion & quality of empathy; I think it's much easier for many of them to hope that wars fail, or that people lose their homes, for the sake of ideology.

It's certainly much easier for them to be vocal about wishing failure on a national level.
 
evince said:
I'm really kinda sick to my stomack right now.

There is NO fairness to be gleened out of the right leaning people.

I had to constantly clarify I did NOT want Bush to fail but merely knew the policy was going to produce failure.


I am learning a very sad lesson here, for some Americans there is no fairness. There is only party.

I'm very tired right now , I think I need to stop coming here.
Click to expand...

I totally know how you feel Desh. Tiana being here yesterday broke my habit of not coming here during the day. Some days I'd read some of it in the morning and maybe make a post or two, some days I wouldn't even read it.

I have to get back to that, you should see the shit i have been getting done, it's not even funny.
 
Damocles said:
The reality is, the cure can be worse than the disease. Recognizing that somebody's success at what appears beneficent but you think will be detrimental is possible is, again, not the same thing as you present.
Click to expand...

Again, and we are going in circles here, that is not what Rush said. Had Rush said that I would agree with you. He said he did not want President Obama to be successfull at correcting the American economy.

Had Rush said, "I hope President Obama is not successful at getting his plan passed, because it will in the long run hurt the American economy, I would understand that"!

While I feared Bush's war in Iraq would be the mess it turned into, I always hoped that war would have been successfull. I hoped he would not have gotten the Congressional authority to go into Iraq, but when he did, I always hoped I had been wrong about the ability of the war to lead to success.
 
meme said:
oooooooooooo, Rush is an EXTREAMIST...with 20 million extremist listeners..

I shudder:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Yes Rush is an extremist. Not all 20 million who listen agree with him, I know this because I listen to him at times and don't agree with him. But those that do are extremists in large part as well.
 
What happened to when the left said, "dissent is the highest from of Patriotism"?

I guess that only applies to when a Republican is President..:cof1:
 
Mottleydude said:
It's not a tactic. It's the truth. Go study Goebbel's propaganda model. There's no doubt Rush has adopted it. The only difference is that he's not replaced religion with the state but equate his "conservative values" with religiosity which is essentially the same tactic. Where Rush differs from Goebbel's is that he uses (or tries to) humor with his propaganda and most effectively as it's made him a multimillionare. But there can be no argument about Rush and other right wing talking heads adopting this model. All's one has to do to see the truth of this is that anytime in a speech where Rush say's "Liberal" is to just cross the word liberal out and insert "Jew".

The truth becomes self evident. Rush is indeed a fascist.
Click to expand...


To be fair, Jewish is a religen while Liberal is an ideology.
 
Socrtease said:
Yes Rush is an extremist. Not all 20 million who listen agree with him, I know this because I listen to him at times and don't agree with him. But those that do are extremists in large part as well.
Click to expand...


Righto, now Conservatism is extremism..and as I say, liberalism is a mental disorder..lol
 
Jarod said:
Again, and we are going in circles here, that is not what Rush said. Had Rush said that I would agree with you. He said he did not want President Obama to be successfull at correcting the American economy.
Click to expand...

We're going in circles because you are projecting onto what Rush said what you want him to mean rather than what he said. It's one of the few portions of the show I've listened to as it is on when I'm at work.

Had Rush said, "I hope President Obama is not successful at getting his plan passed, because it will in the long run hurt the American economy, I would understand that"!
Click to expand...

You wouldn't, but would have less to complain about. He said, "If the policies are socialist I hope they fail."

While I feared Bush's war in Iraq would be the mess it turned into, I always hoped that war would have been successfull. I hoped he would not have gotten the Congressional authority to go into Iraq, but when he did, I always hoped I had been wrong about the ability of the war to lead to success.
Click to expand...
Yes, but that doesn't change that many simply stated it would fail, that it had failed, that it could not be won, etc. Those people were simply talking about a policy yet others projected onto them what they wanted them to mean, the same way you are doing to Rush.
 
Damocles said:
I don't listen. I couldn't if I wanted to, his show is on at work and we get no radio inside our building.
Click to expand...

I only listen when I am in my car during the day. I dont listen at my desk, but I happen to be in my car when he is on often.
 
Damocles said:
We're going in circles because you are projecting onto what Rush said what you want him to mean rather than what he said. It's one of the few portions of the show I've listened to as it is on when I'm at work.



You wouldn't, but would have less to complain about. He said, "If the policies are socialist I hope they fail."


Yes, but that doesn't change that many simply stated it would fail, that it had failed, that it could not be won, etc. Those people were simply talking about a policy yet others projected onto them what they wanted them to mean, the same way you are doing to Rush.
Click to expand...


I guess our disagreement is what Rush ment by "fail". You say he ment that he hoped they would not innitially be successfull then become detramental to society. I say he ment that he hoped they would "fail".

I am argueing that Rush ment what he achually said, you belive he ment something differently than what he said.
 
Mottleydude said:
Socer, I resent the hell out of that comment. You have no basis to be insulting Mortimer like that. You owe and apology not only to him but to Charlie and Edgar as well!
Click to expand...
Upon further reflection, I acknowledge that Mottley is right. I actually new Mortimer Snerd, Mortimer Snerd was a friend of mine. George W Bush is no Mortimer Snerd. Further, I wish to convey my heartfelt sorrow at causing Mr. Chas McCarthy and Candice Bergen, the daughter of the late great Edgar Bergen, any emotional distress by comparing their sibling, Mortimer Snerd to George W Bush. I should have known by the visible trauma suffered by the former President's actual brothers from being related to Shrub, that a comparison of that sort to a family not related could only been seen as hurtful and demeaning. I hope that this apology serves, in some small way, as attonement for my careless words. Again, I am sorry.
 
Jarod said:
I guess our disagreement is what Rush ment by "fail". You say he ment that he hoped they would not innitially be successfull then become detramental to society. I say he ment that he hoped they would "fail".

I am argueing that Rush ment what he achually said, you belive he ment something differently than what he said.
Click to expand...
No, I'm saying I think he hopes they'll fail because he believes they'll be detrimental whether they are successful at first.

The word "hope" signifies an understanding of the possibility of it going the other way, of it "succeeding" and thus creating a worse quagmire for our future in his opinion. One can look at France and understand that some programs he would call socialist can "succeed". It is his opinion that in the long run they will be detrimental regardless of their "success".

I believe he meant what he said. That he was concise.
 
Oh my, the twisting and turning of what Rush "actually" said continues..

He said the same thing that the left said about Bush..they hoped his POLICIES fail..

But keep on twisting it...it's fun to watch..:cof1:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top