RE: Rush is right (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events



Message

mapachito13 -> RE: Rush is right (6/13/2008 2:59:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: colliefan

quote:

That one family made their money illegally does not negate that another may have made theirs unethically.


show me how the Bush family violated ANY laws


I think the word used was unethical. Abortion is unethical but it isn't illegal.



tafkam -> RE: Rush is right (6/13/2008 7:58:54 AM)

quote:

Dispute your tax bill with the IRS without having a lawyer present and see what strong arm tactics they will bring to bear on you with their threats and intimidation. Oh, they also can seize your property without due process.


That's been a well known fact for years. It's hardly a by product of the Bush administration.

Nice try, but it needs work....



SonInMe1 -> RE: Rush is right (6/13/2008 8:13:17 AM)

Being in the oil business is unethical? I would wager any successful busines in your opinion is unethical.

ALL internet usage is monitored and that started way before Bush. Your example holds no weight...and of course what were the consequences of the FBI monitoring your internet usage? I would wager, once again, it was nothing.

FDR did much worse than what Bush has done.

How do you propose to counteract terrorism...ask them politely not to terrorize? If Bush's solutions are so evil, then...suggest some of your own. I have not heard any solutions, credible or not, from those who dislike Bush to counteract terrorism.

They just wanna whine. Its pure politics. Very few people have had their rights trampled upon....in fact I have not heard of any, though I am sure our government has made mistakes with their surveilences.

We still pay less for gas than most of the world.

Its just more whining from spoiled americans.



iluvatar -> RE: Rush is right (6/13/2008 8:14:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tafkam

quote:

I haven't had most of those things happen to me


Thank you. Next.....


Oh come on. You're smarter than this. By this logic, only aborted infants should be able to complain about abortion. Were you aborted? No? Then what's your problem?

-Dan.



tafkam -> RE: Rush is right (6/13/2008 8:21:27 AM)

Because for all the whining, no one seems to be able to come up with an instance where their rights have been trampled on. It just doesn't happen.

If there was abuse of this program, I would be the first to call out the administration on it. But there hasn't. Sorry....



freakofnature -> RE: Rush is right (6/13/2008 8:44:17 AM)

quote:

freakofnature

quote:

I think Rush Limbaugh has been right the past few days


Dangerous territory there galadriel2. Ssshhhhhh... I hope your up for a long drawn out argument...


-out.


Alright galadriel2: See whatcha started... LOL I warned ya'



jkdjr25 -> RE: Rush is right (6/13/2008 11:20:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: colliefan

quote:

That one family made their money illegally does not negate that another may have made theirs unethically.


show me how the Bush family violated ANY laws


Strawman.

Unethical and illegal are two entirely seperate issues.



ljmac -> RE: Rush is right (6/13/2008 11:24:27 AM)

Just to set the record straight, GWB worked in oil business, but made his money in baseball.



PaleHawkWoman -> RE: Rush is right (6/14/2008 4:37:59 PM)

Yeah, well, I'm Native American. Under Federal Law, I am a ward of the Federal Government and they have the right at any time to seize my assets and income, including real property, bank accounts, stocks/bonds, IRA'sor 401k's, livestock, etc, and hold it in trust for me or sell it without my permission and administer the funds from said sale as they deem fit, without giving me any benefit from it. It's been this way since the 1880's for us. Heck, we weren't even citizens until 1924 and even then Congress had to argue whether or not we were even human beings before deciding whether or not we could be citizens. We still did not and do not have the same rights under the US Constitution as other groups.

Try walking in those shoes and see how they fit.

As far as Rush Limbaugh and other such pundits, I try not to give them the time of day. I'd rather not waste my time on ignorance and skewed views, left or right. If they were interested in civil discourse and seeking out the actual facts, I would consider listening to them. Of course, it makes finding the real news so much more difficult to find, and even then I take it with a large grain of salt.



tafkam -> RE: Rush is right (6/14/2008 5:21:09 PM)

PaleHawkWoman, the question was asked about the current policies of the Bush adminsitration and how they have supposedly trampled on all these rights.

The problem you speak of, if it is indeed fact, was established LONG before Bush ever became President, so it is not applicable here.

But then the left would blame Bush for the dinosaurs becoming extinct if they thought it would help their cause.....



Sophie11 -> RE: Rush is right (6/14/2008 5:23:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaleHawkWoman

Yeah, well, I'm Native American. Under Federal Law, I am a ward of the Federal Government and they have the right at any time to seize my assets and income, including real property, bank accounts, stocks/bonds, IRA'sor 401k's, livestock, etc, and hold it in trust for me or sell it without my permission and administer the funds from said sale as they deem fit, without giving me any benefit from it. It's been this way since the 1880's for us. Heck, we weren't even citizens until 1924 and even then Congress had to argue whether or not we were even human beings before deciding whether or not we could be citizens. We still did not and do not have the same rights under the US Constitution as other groups.


I am wondering PaleHawk, has any of this ever actually happened to you?



tafkam -> RE: Rush is right (6/14/2008 5:26:13 PM)

Right. It's always, "well, this could happen" or "that might happen".....but never an actual testimony of an actual incident.

So far we've had a police stop and a pop-up ad, but that seems to be the best they can come up with....



PaleHawkWoman -> RE: Rush is right (6/14/2008 10:09:07 PM)

No, it has not happened to me but it could. It has happened to others, though, even recently. Indian ranchers have had their livestock seized, tribes have had their resources sold off for a pittance by the Fed's, and in the state of Georgia there was a law in the books up until the 1970's which prohibited any Indian from owning land within the state and allowed for said land to be seized and sold by the state or local government at auctionon the courthouse steps. Not only that, Indians had to purchase a permit to travel through the state, which happened to my mother back in the 60's when I was a kid and we were traveling down to see Stone Mountain and some other historical sites.

Right now the state of Minnesota is trying to seize Red Lake and 1 mile of shoreline from the Red Lake Chippewas, citing eminent domain for economic reasons. Red Lake is a federally recognized tribe and considered a sovereign nation under authority of the federal government but separate from and not subject to the state. Since the tribal members pretty much all live within that 1 mile distance from the shore and the tribe makes its living from the lake, the people would be disposessed and lose their income.

My understanding is that George W Bush ran 2 companies into the ground and was bailed out by the Saudis. If that is true, it doesn't speak well of Bush as a businessman.

My statements on Rush are based on many year's observations. I am not fond of anyone-right or left- who engages in bombastic rhetoric, skewing of facts, and demonizing segments of the population. I grew up in an age and in a culture where civil debate and discourse was the preferred means of taking up issues, and to my mind anything less than that is uncouth, immature, ignorant, and destructive. It doesn't encourage people to engage one another and seek common ground from which to resolve problems, but is divisive and hurtful, pushing people to form battle lines and attack each other.

As Abraham Lincoln observed, a house divided against itself cannot stand. If Americans pull further and further apart from each other, entrenching themselves in demonizing anyone who thinks or looks differently than themselves, we will fall. Either we act like adults and learn to respect and hear each other out or we devolve into the Lord of the Flies. Human nature being what it is, most people prefer whatever takes the least amount of mental or physical effort, which is why people like Rush Limbaugh and Al Franken are on the air.



jkdjr25 -> RE: Rush is right (6/15/2008 1:35:35 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tafkam

PaleHawkWoman, the question was asked about the current policies of the Bush adminsitration and how they have supposedly trampled on all these rights.

The problem you speak of, if it is indeed fact, was established LONG before Bush ever became President, so it is not applicable here.

But then the left would blame Bush for the dinosaurs becoming extinct if they thought it would help their cause.....


The policies are still enforced. Her situation does apply.

It's interesting to note that no one's situation, potential or otherwise, seems to apply in your opinion. It's an easy way to declare yourself the victor in such discussions, but a strawman argument at best.



rlj -> RE: Rush is right (6/15/2008 7:22:48 AM)

quote:

I think Rush Limbaugh has been right the past few days.


OK, about what?

quote:

In other words, it is an attack on the free market system in favor of bigger government and with less freedom for the citizens and more control for government. Less money in our pockets is less freedom.


Ok.

So let me pose a question: The first federal budget submitted by Dubya was 2 trillion dollars for 2002. The federal budget submitted by Dubya for 2008 was 2.9 trillion dollars. Is government getting bigger or smaller? The deficit has ballooned by 4 trillion dollars over the last 7.5 years. That is even MORE money that the government has to deal with.

Want big government? Applaud an administration that 1)Consistently sets records for biggest budgets ever passed and 2)Sets records for biggest deficits. The more money the government spends the bigger it is.

And Rush says liberals want big government and conservatives don't? Is he still popping the pills like a junk?



tafkam -> RE: Rush is right (6/15/2008 8:07:51 AM)

quote:

It's interesting to note that no one's situation, potential or otherwise, seems to apply in your opinion. It's an easy way to declare yourself the victor in such discussions, but a strawman argument at best.


I notice "straw man" seems to be one of your favorite terms, as it conveniently gets you out of having to acknowledged nay point of view other than your own. But if that's the best retort you have....



mapachito13 -> RE: Rush is right (6/15/2008 8:22:36 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tafkam

quote:

It's interesting to note that no one's situation, potential or otherwise, seems to apply in your opinion. It's an easy way to declare yourself the victor in such discussions, but a strawman argument at best.


I notice "straw man" seems to be one of your favorite terms, as it conveniently gets you out of having to acknowledged nay point of view other than your own. But if that's the best retort you have....


Well here's another 2 words for you ad hominem.

The courts were created to address grievances when the government is overstepping their boundaries and rectify them as was done in this ruling. That's why the founding fathers created the system we have of checks and balances. They didn't want a monarchy, even a democratically elected one!



SonInMe1 -> RE: Rush is right (6/15/2008 8:58:30 AM)

quote:

And Rush says liberals want big government and conservatives don't?


Bush is a republican. He is not a conservative.



jkdjr25 -> RE: Rush is right (6/15/2008 11:06:07 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tafkam

quote:

It's interesting to note that no one's situation, potential or otherwise, seems to apply in your opinion. It's an easy way to declare yourself the victor in such discussions, but a strawman argument at best.


I notice "straw man" seems to be one of your favorite terms, as it conveniently gets you out of having to acknowledged nay point of view other than your own. But if that's the best retort you have....


You asked who's rights had been violated under the Bush administration. Several people answered your question only to have you totally dismiss their arguments by saying that they didn't count. By definition what you're using at that point is a strawman argument.

My own account of people on this very message board making acusations that people are siding with terrorists if they don't support President Bush is evidence that there are people trying to undermine free speech. It's an old tactic but it has been used by people in an attempt to silence any reasonable dissent. Yet again, you say that this doesn't count.

You have no intention of accepting or even remotely considering that you might be wrong. Hence every argument you make assumes you, and only you, are correct. This is also a strawman tactic. I just have no problem pointing that fact out.



Sophie11 -> RE: Rush is right (6/15/2008 11:15:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jkdjr25

My own account of people on this very message board making acusations that people are siding with terrorists if they don't support President Bush is evidence that there are people trying to undermine free speech. It's an old tactic but it has been used by people in an attempt to silence any reasonable dissent. Yet again, you say that this doesn't count.


I would like to point out that while you complain of others accusing you of siding with terrorists, you accuse all who oppose you of trying to stifle freedom of speech. Just so you understand, the attacks seem to be flying both ways, not only in the direction of one side of the issue.



jkdjr25 -> RE: Rush is right (6/15/2008 11:23:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sophie11

quote:

ORIGINAL: jkdjr25

My own account of people on this very message board making acusations that people are siding with terrorists if they don't support President Bush is evidence that there are people trying to undermine free speech. It's an old tactic but it has been used by people in an attempt to silence any reasonable dissent. Yet again, you say that this doesn't count.


I would like to point out that while you complain of others accusing you of siding with terrorists, you accuse all who oppose you of trying to stifle freedom of speech. Just so you understand, the attacks seem to be flying both ways, not only in the direction of one side of the issue.


I don't seek to silence anyone. I'm just pointing out that telling someone that they support terrorism if they don't support the President is a means of trying to silence a person. All I'm doing is talking about a person's actions. According to the Constitution they have the right to speak their minds, but they don't have the right to try and silence dissent. They have to be accountable for the words that come out of their mouths, same as anyone else.



Sophie11 -> RE: Rush is right (6/15/2008 11:41:27 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jkdjr25

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sophie11

quote:

ORIGINAL: jkdjr25

My own account of people on this very message board making acusations that people are siding with terrorists if they don't support President Bush is evidence that there are people trying to undermine free speech. It's an old tactic but it has been used by people in an attempt to silence any reasonable dissent. Yet again, you say that this doesn't count.


I would like to point out that while you complain of others accusing you of siding with terrorists, you accuse all who oppose you of trying to stifle freedom of speech. Just so you understand, the attacks seem to be flying both ways, not only in the direction of one side of the issue.


I don't seek to silence anyone. I'm just pointing out that telling someone that they support terrorism if they don't support the President is a means of trying to silence a person. All I'm doing is talking about a person's actions. According to the Constitution they have the right to speak their minds, but they don't have the right to try and silence dissent. They have to be accountable for the words that come out of their mouths, same as anyone else.


You know, just to be sure I went back through and reread this entire thread to see if there was a point that amyone in this thread had ever accused you of siding with the terrorists. Well, what I found is no there is not. The first mention of "siding with the terrorists" came from you, in an accusation to another. No one previously had said anything that even resembles accusing you of siding with the terrorists. But I did notice you said something about "expecting" that sort of behavior so maybe you were just inclined to read things into what people were saying, I can't be sure though.



rlj -> RE: Rush is right (6/15/2008 1:28:34 PM)

quote:

Bush is a republican. He is not a conservative.


Sadly over the last 7 plus years the Republican Party is now a rival to the Dems in terms of big government. Rush's point is somewhat moot there is no big government vs. little government debate when comparing the two parties. It's more a question of "what flavor of big and overwhelming government do I want?" Bush Sr., Dole, Bush Jr., Bush Jr. and now McCain. The party is probably farther to the left now then it was in 1976. My biggest three memories of Dole though are his filibustering Clinton into submission to help pave the way for the '94 takeover, all of the farm money and the Super Bowl Pepsi commercial. :D (The latter not being relevant but it was funny) He may have been more to the right than I give him credit for though he struck me as being more to the left of Bush Sr.



Concerto -> RE: Rush is right (6/15/2008 2:20:07 PM)

I don't listen to Rush...after years and years of criticizing democrats..enough is enough..that is played out. (I'm a registered Repub now, but, will be changing to independent)

I don't need Rush or Glenn Beck to tell me how to think. Their thoughts and comments are not brilliant or even unique. And yet, they get paid millions of dollars.

So, let me do the math. They are millionaires, they offer no new brilliant ideas (there is nothing new under the sun), so, why should I listen? Last time I checked, listening to either one of them did not elevate the quality of my life.

I would rather read the Bible or listen to a sermon. Those things are beneficial.

C



tafkam -> RE: Rush is right (6/15/2008 2:38:34 PM)

quote:

Several people answered your question only to have you totally dismiss their arguments by saying that they didn't count.


Name one.. NOBODY actually came out and said the Bush adminsitration's policies directly affected them. Sorry.

quote:

My own account of people on this very message board making acusations that people are siding with terrorists if they don't support President Bush is evidence that there are people trying to undermine free speech.


Hey, I gave you what you wanted. I asked if you wanted us to win the WOT. You didn't respond. Your silence speaks volumes....

quote:

You have no intention of accepting or even remotely considering that you might be wrong.


When someone proves me wrong, I'll admit it. So far, no takers. Only differing opinions.



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI