Forum Post: Don't Blame Rush Limbaugh!
Posted 12 years ago on March 4, 2012, 11:29 a.m. EST by HitGirl
(2263)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Don't Blame Rush Limbaugh for calling an educated, honest and well-meaning law student a slut and a prostitute. Unfortunately it has long been a right-wing tactic, practiced even by Republican elected officials, to personally attack, disparage, smear, degrade, and abuse the character of anybody who isn't on board with their loot-the-government agenda. The more educated, honest and well-meaning the person is, the more violent and outrageous the attacks. We've seen it happen with Barack Obama and Elizabeth Warren.
Why do they do it? Because they have to. Honest people are a threat to them and because there are billions of tax-payer dollars at stake and that is what they are all about.
So don't blame Rush Limbaugh, but do sign the petition to get his fat lying ass off the air...
http://campaigns.dailykos.com/p/dia/action/public/index.sjs?action_KEY=81
Andrew Brietbart, and Rush Limpballs, two pathetic lying men made from the same cloth.
His clown act of catch me if you can, and oh I was joking for god sakes, needs to grind to a halt once and for ALL. This country desires much much better. Let's try reason for a change and instead of this "jonny git yer gun and book of insult drenched hate bullshit".
I think this time will finally be different. He has bitten the hand that feeds him. He will join Glenn Beck in the annals of hate.
The Puzzler
Amen to that.
You know it.
Here's a link to the advertisers still active on Rushbos Monday show:
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/03/all-advertisers-who-are-sticking-limbaugh/49499/
I've been working this issue pretty well. Our efforts matter. Hit these adverts hard, this where we can take down this a$$hat.
Thanks Hit Girl!!!
Well, Obama said it best - "We are the change we've been waiting for."
Who let the trolls out?
We don't have to blame Rush Limbaugh, his advertisers already did so. Good riddance Rush, don't let the door hit ya on the way out.
I don't blame Rush,I blame the idiots that listen to him.
That's the whole problem with getting rid of Rush, the vacuum where normal human thought should be remains to be filled by another dirtbag hate-monger.
Some people have a need to hate some have a need to love our choice our world.
Hate, prejudice and bigotry are easy. The right wing herders always seem happy to incite the worst instincts in people. They play on human weakness and prejudice to further their own ends. Glad to see Americans choosing decency and truth when push comes to shove.
They will be with us till the end.Just realize what they are and move on.
UPDATE-UPDATE UPDATE-UPDATE UPDATE-UPDATE
Second radio station drops Limbaugh | Earlier today, a Hawaii radio station announced they would no longer air Rush Limbaugh’s radio show because he “crossed a line of decency.” Now, a second radio station — in Pittsfield, Massachusetts — has said it is no longer going to put up with Limbaugh’s antics. “The nature of Rush’s programming has always presented challenges for us and he’s always pushed the envelope. But this time he’s taken it too far,” said WBEC’s General Manager Peter Barry. Armed Forces Radio is also under pressure by VoteVets to pull Limbaugh out of its programming.
Wow, this is like a revolution! It reminds me of how they rose up against Rupert Murdoch in England. Eventually the Truth Prevails. And Puzzlin will bring us the updates...:)
You bet cha! This time the Rushbo is going down!
The guy was running on hate and fumes.
It won't be long now. I've heard this a$$hat for decades spouting his hate mongering. There is hope after and we do have a voice!!!
Ya gotta love it when good things just take off.
Yes there is some justice in the world. Who says Good things can't happen to Bad people.
I mean this is good - Right?
And He is Bad - Right?
Karma.
Now if only his hedge fund crashed and burned. That would be down right poetic.
News today Rushshshhs LIMpppBallslssl files for unemployment and welfair aid.
As Gandhi said: Eventually the Truth Prevails.
There is a certain truth about the ole Rushbo, it has a undeniable stench to it. I have known for decades now what this truth has always been. It's nice to see everyone else finally catching up.
You want to see more truth coming to light?
Check out my new post on the oil industry.
Do you object to "personally attack, disparage, smear, degrade, and abuse" folks like:
Sarah Palin and her children:
http://24ahead.com/s/sarah-palin-smear
http://voices.yahoo.com/trig-palins-third-birthday-occasion-8334455.html?cat=9
John McCain and his wife:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6slnZQcjR88
http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2008/04/left-smears-mccains-military-service-as.html
The daughters of GW Bush:
http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/2008/02/08/keith-olbermanns-understudy-suspended-from-msnbc/
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/pimp-gate-update-msnbcs-ethics-don%E2%80%99t-extend-bush-twins
Yes. I agree with ThunderclapNewman.
Yep. I do object to it. No one should be swift boated, ever.
I agree Thunder. A friend of mine was outraged by Limbaugh's comment and I laughed because the truth is, at least Limbaugh is being true to himself and not pretending to be anything that he is not. I dislike Limbaugh and find him to be extremely dangerous yet on the other hand, I respect his honesty. At least I know that he's consistently scum. As a woman, I believe that the majority of men in Washington ( and many across the country) have the same demented prehistoric view of women and pretend not to. Yes, there are some wonderful men out there who respect women as people and don't objectify them but again, that's not the majority. Sexism and racism are alive and kicking in the USA.
As you know, Gillian, the definition of Chauvanism is the belief in the superiority of one's own group and so, sexism and racism are Chauvanistic too.
Is this something that's ingrained in human DNA? Would you say that it's a coping/"steamlining" mechanism that simplifies something that is, in reality, nuanced and complex. It's "easier" for one to generalize about a group based on some obvious visual characteristic and therefore less time consuming for the person making the judgement.
Specific to this thread, Mr. Limbaugh made a gross generalization concerning a Ms Fluke in which Limbaugh categorized her based on one known factor - that she was favorable to the idea that payment for contraceptive pills should be included in healthcare insurance plans.
Rationally, Limbaugh made a pretty far-fetched leap concerning Fluke's morality and sexuality and did so in a public venue for all his listeners to hear. Had Limbaugh met the woman? Has he had conversation with her regarding her sexual activities or more simply her views of sex? It would seem that Mr. Limbaugh has made a judgement based strictly on "appearances."
FreeDiscussion5 claims 20,000,000 listeners as Rush Limbaugh's audience. Assuming they all heard what he said about Fluke's personal moral conduct, he could well be looking at being sued for libel. I'm sure there are no shortage of barristers "standing in a queue" for the chance to have at it. That would be a very nice payday for some lucky lawyer.
Rush Limbaugh's conduct, both professionally and personally, are reprehensible. If by "true to himself" you mean that he is consistant in his desire to prove to the world that he is a mean-spirited bully who really ought to do some serious soul searching, then I'll agree with you. He's is true to his nature.
Limbaugh is just an every day common codependent drama oriented drug abuser so it's no surprise to me that he behaves like he does. What else would the man with his life? Does he have a wife ( I mean hot babe) at home? Despite his lack of character, he stays true to part and at least I know where the man stands and who he is- unlike the rest of the boys who tout to be all for women's rights, a healthier America, pro-veterans rights, American patriots, etc.. The boys in Washington are chauvanists on many levels and are some of the biggest patrons to prostitutes among other so called ' immoral' women and require that they use birth control as well. America is full of closet chauvanists and racists. Suing Limbaugh will probably never happen since he apparently has cozy alliances with the conservative party but it was good to know that many of his sponsors didn't waste time abandoning him. Even so, will they be back in a few weeks ? My guess is that yes, they will once they know it's safe to return. The man says the most offensive things every day and for ' some' reason is allowed and even worse, too many of his listeners find that behavior to be completely American and in good taste. SCARY. The way he talks about our President is disgusting and I believe that years ago, the FCC would have taken him down. With every slap on the wrist to these radio show hosts, America becomes more and more tolerant of distasteful television and radio and even more in love with the controversy that abounds. Remember when Imus got sued for making that comment about matty hair or something? After that, the bar for respectful rhetoric seemed to be lowered instead of raised to a higher standard. I can't explain it other than to say that maybe since it was related to blacks and not whites, the majority of Americans were able to overlook the offensive nature of his comment. I used to listen to Limbaugh every day when I worked inside a hermetically sealed laboratory where I could only get AM talk radio. I don't approve of the man at all but I like knowing what his brew du jour is.
I watch Fox News occasionally to see and hear what's on their agenda. Bill O'Reilly (sp?) is sadly comical in his own way. The 5 or whatever they're called? Now, that's a crew there ladies and gentlemen. I've never listed to Rush Limbaugh. If I were in your situation I'd get myself an iPod to take into the lab, assuming that's kosher to do.
Kosher! How did you know I'm Jewish? hahahah I just made several matzo balls for my kosher chicken soup :D
I had an ipod but it's difficult for me to work when I'm wired up. It's fine if I'm just sitting at the scope for hours on end but I rarely do that anymore. A few of us will turn on The Jon Stewart Daily show for our dose of ' no spin' news. hahahah Rush isn't any worse than O'Reilly in my opinion. I think O'reilly is just as arrogant and hateful. I had the most bizarre and laughable experience last year with a man I met who was a psychologist and apparently LOVES O'reilly. When I said, ' O'Reilly? Are you kidding?"..he blew up at me with rage! He began screaming that O'reilly was the most moral upstanding American in the country. WOWEEEE...I was just speechless and left the room very quickly.
Apparently your psychologist likes O'reilly so much because they are just like minded. They're alike in temperment as well. I've seen and heard O'Reilly enough to know he can be a real ass when given half a chance to do so. And the way he refers to himself in the royal "we" and his own show as thefactor (as if it were one word and not two). He seems to have quite an ego. Oy vey!
I found out later from one of my peers that the psycho psychologist ( btw, not ' my' psychologist...just a guy I met at a conference) was a Mormon who apparently had abused his wife. The wife left him. Good for her! I can't imagine being with a man like that. Oh and he was starting his own religious cult too.
I've noticed something strange happening to me Newman and I'm not sure exactly why. As you know, I grew up in a very liberal family of activists who were all about equal rights, etc... and until recently, I've been a completely unbiased, open-minded woman and to the degree that I would not even refer to myself as a feminist since I think that label promotes divisiveness. But, lately, I've begun to fully realize just how anti-female our civilization truly is- everything from the way men view and treat women to the way media portrays us. It's not that I never noticed this before but it's really sinking in just how deeply ingrained this mindset is. Even the men I know who are liberal minded and very respectful of women, do things that are so utterly sexist...like leaving dirty dishes for their woman to clean up, leaving clothes next to the hamper for their woman to pick up, expecting their wives to be the sole nurturers in their family who must be responsible for their kids. Granted, they are not arrogant men but their lazy ways indicate an element of sexism. Am I judging them too harshly? On the show, ' Everyone Loves Raymond', Ray is portrayed as a pathetic, helpless man who will even lie to his wife and she will tolerate it and then automatically assume the role of making up for Ray's inadequate character. The husband in King of Queens is the same way and his wife also tolerates his lies, games, arrogant comments. It's not funny to me and if I were a man, I would feel insulted that my gender is always portrayed as stupid, helpless, emotionally depleted, spineless, ruthless, etc.. But, if men and women find this laughable and entertaining, then no wonder sexism is alive and well today.
Hi Glli - hey, i was going to write that "he put the psycho in psychologist" LOL! Religious cult?? Oh, yeah. Ancient aliens inhabiting the bodies of humans. No! Wait! That one's already taken. ;-)
You wrote of TV sitcoms and their portraying of men in an apparently sexist way as the "husband and wife dynamic" in the show. The creators of the show probably saw that dynamic as something that could drive a lot of the shows comedy.
He's a slob, he lies to avoid his wife's wrath, he's smart enough to hold a middle-class-working-stiff job and she's the tolerant yet sacastic motherly type who is so in love with this guy that she tolerates his screw-ups and his wacky family, though not always passively so. It's a formula that's worked in television since "The Honeymooners."
All of this leads me to my point that I don't watch a lot of that stuff on TV, and that's why. Most of it's just a repackaging of what came before. It's formulaic, trite and mindless. In other words, it's easy to watch and while away the evening, if that's one's goal. Sometimes that isn't a bad thing to do for many.
I think that there is a degree of sexism and even misogynism that may always exist. Those things didn't develop overnight and they wont be changed overnight. It could be the outgrowth of a dynamic that's been since the cave dwellers and mutated into what we had prior to WWII.
As you know, Gillian, when women went to work in heavy industry, in offices and the like doing what had been traditionally "men's work" and realizing what that meant to them and could mean for their daughters, the course for womens' futures was charted: women could be anything they were capable of and had the drive and desire to be. The true liberation of women. The societal pressures on women of "settling down and raising a family" were lifted. Women could be single as long as they chose to be. Women didn't have to have and raise children in order to achive validation as a woman.
Concerning the attitudes of some men you interact with, I would say to you that you are a strong and independent woman and that "being that" is a journey and not some end game. Life can be a tough thing and as career competition increases because of things such as men and women competing for the same jobs; being in the same job market, the competitivness becomes more and more obvious and can manifest itself in some unpleasant ways. Then there's the "that's just the way they were raised" thing, too, right?
You'll be fine. You have the constitution to make through all of this. Perhaps taking a break may help. A little vacation. Just no Italian cruise ships, ok? ;-D
I may be fine ( with or without the constitution) but I'm not so sure that the men in my life will be. Just the other day someone commented how the fashion industry was really pushing HIGH heels for women now and one of the men listening said, ' GOOD!!!". I became super defensive ( which is really out of character for me in that type of situation) and cornered him with " why do you say that? what do you mean exactly? So are you suggesting that more women should dress for men despite the fact that it causes harm to their bodies?" Your so f'n typical of most men- expecting women to do anything for YOUR sake without a care in the world that it could kill them!". I don't know where all that came from! I just blew. Maybe 50 years of gender oppression finally caught up with me? I know my reaction wasn't hormonal because I don't have any. In some ways, I think that we are more sexist than ever before. The high school girls are treated like call girls- expected to service the boys upon the receipt of a text message...and, the girls feel the need to perform for them. It seems we are living in Sodom and Gomorrah anymore.
I wouldn't mind taking a vacation- Let's see, Bush and Obama recommend Disney Land but that's not my speed and the last time I was there, Mickey Mouse got murdered and was found under a shrub. That incident spoiled my entire holiday. I just bought a new car and maybe I'll head to the hills with my dogs. Maple festivals should be gearing up. Do you think there might be a " female-only" maple festival? ( I'm sure there is...after all, this IS America) . I'd hate to think that I might start a gender war in southwest va. Stay tuned :D
Regarding women's fashion, fairly often I discuss the fact that for all that was accomplished with the Women's Liberation Movement, many youger girls still use sex appeal as a means to an end. They themselves are victimizing all women, and that seems very odd to me. Look at the Kardashian's. Out-spoken and certainly sexually liberated, yet they wear provocative clothing and even have a line sold through Sears, I believe. They seem to believe that most, if not all of their power is to be derived from sex. We men see this and are left to believe that this is the choice made by any woman who dresses as the Kadashians do. What else could we conclude? Hence, sexism redux;-)
I totally agree and I don't blame you one bit for being attracted to the hotties like Kim...after all, you're a typical shallow-minded man..hahahah And Sears? That's just so wholesome and all American.
This is a very interesting and complex topic relating to nature vs. nurture and it seems to me that mother nature always seems to win even though the human expression of our prehistoric gene is a bit over the top today ( Homo sapien kardashian style). Speaking of those bozos...when I discovered that Bruce Jenner was part of that clan, I lost total respect for him, her or whatever he is.
I believe in equal rights for all humans but I also realize that men and women cannot ever be equal in the cave and I've never known a radical feminist who had a happy marriage even though many pretend that it's working. Most problems arise when men and women are forced to play roles that they are not inherently desiring to play. Men and women are born to dance at different beats and there's a reason for that...makes mating much easier and longer lasting. I'm not suggesting that we play Tarzan and Jane every day but I think it would be wise for women and men to recognize and gladly appreciate each other's genetically forced differences, desires and needs. My gosh, if other species stifled chivalry and complicated the mating game with our modern civil rules they would all become extinct. I worked with two women last year, both scientists and one was in her early 60's, the other was in her early 30's. Both were radical self declared feminists. We attended a wedding of one our students and the bride had a very traditional wedding with the traditional vows. The two women blew up and were so disgusted and almost walked out. I got angry at them for making this woman's wedding all about them and reminded them that feminism wasn't about man-bashing or male oppression but instead, the right for a woman to choose. Soon after, the younger scientist was transferring to another uni and she came back and told me that she met some of the other faculty and their spouses and was so disgusted because the wives were stay at home mothers who were into pottery and home-schooling and she was not about to socialize with such women. I'll bet the feeling was mutual. :D I was shocked when Hillary was running for president and had the support of all the feminists simply because she was a woman. I told both of the women in my lab that I would not vote for her because I believed she had a serious character flaw since she had stayed with a man who consistently betrayed her with other women and hence, if she would tolerate that kind of infidelity from her husband despite the fact that she COULD very easily be successful and financially independent on her own, then what the heck would she tolerate from the other boys in Washington? The eldest scientist got really upset and said that it was unfair of me to judge her since I didn't know her circumstances. Perhaps..but why would a woman who claims to be a leader in women's rights, want to model that kind of tolerance for other women? What message does Hillary send to women? That no matter who you are, how hard you work, how successful you become and financially independent, the bottom line is that you are nothing without your man. No wonder girls today believe that sex is power- after all, women like Hillary teach us that we are nothing else despite our talents and brains. I found out a few months after that incident that the woman's husband sent her an email one morning asking for a divorce and had apparently been cheating on her for many years. Hmmmm Interesting eh that she would tolerate that being that she too was very successful, financially secure? I was sorry that she had to endure that but it sure opened my eyes to the feminist facade and how all that double talk can damage a marriage. Obviously, her husband didn't have much respect for her and I can see why. I can only imagine what her husband dealt with all those years. Apparently he was able to reverse his castration and has since remarried ( rather quickly actually). My great grandmother had 9 daughters, a very abusive alcoholic husband and uterine cancer. It was in the 30's during the depression and she was dying. She filed for a divorce- having no money, no way to work, no income and 4 young daughters at home to raise. She's my hero, my role model and the only woman in my family that I respect and that truly represents what every woman and man should do...live and die with dignity. Final note on the Homo sapien kardashian clan: I really don't know anything about them but they seem to be a lot like the wives of ? county. When I have caught a brief glimpse of these women and their husbands on TV, I can't help but wonder if people view me as abnormal in some way since I don't seem to have the same desires for wealth and fashion like they do. I'm a really quite a dull person compared to most women today. Did you know that most feminists wear diamonds because it's their financial security should their man ever leave them- since they of course would not leave their man. :D
Bruce Jenner. I saw him on their TV show a little while back as I was channel surfing. He's why people question the medical ethics of plastic surgeons. Wowee wow wow! I can handle those Kardashian women wanting to dress as they do. What bothers me is what them having a TV series says about us as a society. I mean Kim is a woman who became famous for making a vid of her and some guy having sex and putting it on the internet, if I remember correctly. I know I sound like an old fuddy-duddy when i say this, but what in the world is that about?
Your co-workers going to the wedding - on that score I'd say you're 100% correct. The bride had a choice regarding her vows. She chose the traditional vows.
Perhaps the bride didn't, now that I've thought about it more. I think lots of young women have the wedding their mothers want them to have. Then when their own daughters get married it's the same thing repeated. Mom asserts herself and the wedding ends up being for the mother of th bride and not the bride herself.
As to Hillary and Bill Clinton, no one can know what goes on inside any marriage except the two people in it. I seems like they had things worked out regarding extra-marital affairs a long time before the Monica Lowinsky (sp?) scandal. There were a few rumors about she and one of her staffers if I recall correctly.
You have a sex vid?? Wait! What?? Mr. Limbaugh called. He wants to see it. LOL!
30 companies have pulled their sponsorship (thus far) from his show.
I have a great story about Paris Hilton from back when she had a reality show with Nicole Richey (?) They were on a farm in Florida I think. Not the time and place for telling it just now though. Let's just say I saw more of Ms Hilton than she saw of me. And we were in a public place at the same time, tho not in each others company. Her sister Nikki made a good decision to remain out of the limelight.
I made a sex video too and did I get famous? Heck no and that's because I'm not part of the 1percent. This type of socioeconomic injustice is everywhere isn't it? It's just so unfair :( What it's all about grandpa is that sex sells and money buys big balls, bigger boobs and anything else that sells. If my pa had tons of money and fame then most anything I did would sell even my cellulite. Look at how popular Paris Hilton is? it's a struggle for news journalists to decide what's more important..Paris, Lindsay or Somalia. Oh wait, but we know what the people want to know about right and it's not starving babies in a third world country...unless the country is Nashville. Brains always finish last in the world today. Be shallow, get rich. It's the way of the world.
Hey woman, gitchur ass in the kitchen and bile me down some greens!
Right away dear. Slippers first?
This stuff gets taken too far. Men are attracted to Women. Women are attracted to Men. People are attracted to people.
We all try to look good and sexy for the ones we want to notice us.
It is nature = natural.
Or there would be no kids.
just sayin.
Humans have been mating very effectively since day one without all the superficial fluff and stuff. You're right, we take it too far..way too far even to the point that we harm ourselves to feel attractive. Industry does an excellent job at defining the standard/trend and manages to convince the masses that they ' need' this and that in order to be ' worthy' of love, sex, wealth, etc... But, like you say, we're free to choose and so, on that note, I better run get those 300 dollar Nikes to wear with my new flannel thong.
I take your point. And no one is forcing anyone to buy and wear high heeled shoes.
Many hetero men are attracted by the shapliness of a woman's leg, "the well-turned ankle" and the line created by a woman in heels. I think more generally, we are supposed to find a woman's physique alluring. Same holds true for women looking at men and wanting to attract a mate, though women tend to see other factors not directly of a physical nature a something sexy. I personally think it's very flattering to me when a woman notices me in that way.
You're right Newman that no one forces us but in reality, it doesn't take a lot of effort to make someone feel ' less' pretty, attractive, worthy when we're constantly being compared to Jessica Simpson :D I have noticed though that the more intelligent someone is , the less trendy they seem to be which may indicate that they have more self confidence and rely less on those external accessories and seek more substance. OR maybe they have a really boring sex life? The biggest turn off for me in males or females is pretentiousness on any level.
Freedom of choice is a wonderful thing. It is good to have choices available to make.
Hey Meatmuffin!!! I will be sending you a hookup text much later tonight after I get through with my business meeting at the nudie bar. Try to answer the door this time not wearing so many clothes. I suspect around 2 or 3 am. BTW.... could you be a dear and drop a few bands of 10's in my car before 5:30?
xoxoxox
PS.... I'm sure I'll be drunk already so you can bust out the Chivas or some other low grade stuff.
Sounds like you're going to be tired after that VIP meeting. I think I'll wear my new polartec fleece feet jammies since a cold front is approaching.
Fine baby, you know I like your Beau Duke Buck Knife necklace for peeling such outfits out of my way. In case I can't see, do it for me.
Gillian - please see this thread. Perhaps you might have some helpful info or background concerning this subject. :-)
http://occupywallst.org/forum/is-new-magnetic-motor-generating-400-over-unity-a-/
Oh yes, I think Ronco made something like this years ago that helped women clean their houses MUCH faster. :D Actually, I know very little about motors anymore. But, I wouldn't discount the invention just yet. I've seen some pretty powerful magnetic motors. However, there have been alternative energy solutions for years and of course, they are completely ignored and squashed because unless big energy can profit from it, they won't let anyone else have it. Did you hear about that elderly couple ( a few years ago) that was making their own bio-diesel for their garden tractor ( using KFC fat) and the Feds busted them, fined them an outrageous amount and jailed them for having a 50 gallon tank? So how has your week been? I have had a very frustrating week trying to make some house repairs. If only I had a personal handy man. I've hired two in the past to help me and they were both super duds.
Geez Gillian, I've been reading so many threads I've lost my place for replying to you! (heavy sigh) I asked you to look at the thread about the motor, I read some information about magnetic levitation technology via a link, I read some more about indirect defense spending. I've been looking for info on US intelligence spending, I read the "Rant" thread. I reread your banter with SmeggetySmudge or whatever that poster's screen name is. Very cleaver of you there. I like your sacastic wit. Man oh man! Miss a little, miss a lot.
Several years ago I was with a forum and things there became very ugly indeed. Apparently there were at least several posters with bi-polar disorder (a little later into this war of words, one after another, they each confessed this in the forum, each in their own way!) and then the forum became very polarized. Threats were made, everyone greatly disliked the worst offenders, people communicated only by PM and rarely even ventured into the forum and it finall all broke down and so what had been a very interesting and vibrant forum crumbled. Anonymity makes some feel very brave and causes them to write things they'd never say in person. I miss civility.
My week is going pretty well, thank you for asking. Grinding it out, ya know?
House repairs... Do you make these repairs yourself? Isn't that always such a good time? And they always make it look so easy on those Home Depot commercials, right? LIARS!!!
I DO remember that story about elderly couple. What a world! Fortunately, bio-diesel is catching on more and more. I read two news articles today that weren't very encouraging re: the electric car market. A company in Indiana that makes a small car that has shut it's doors and another story about how the Chevy Volt isn't selling as well as expected.
The Volt article took the Obama administration to task for failing to realize market conditions for electric vehicles in a realistic way. The selling prices are too high for the target market vs. internal combustion powered cars. So I thought "what if a consumer carbon tax were placed on the internal combustion cars that was payed by the purchasers - could that work like taxes put on cigarettes to de-incentivize those car buyers and steer them (pardon the pun) toward electric cars?" Hmmm...
Yes, I try to do as many house repairs as I can but it's frustrating because I don't have all the tools and I need and I've worn out most of my kitchen knives trying to saw with them. I had to break out the chain saw yesterday.
I've been on forums like the one you mentioned. I was on a forum last year that banned me for mentioning my affinity for nature. Apparently, that was too religious for them. WEIRD.
Your last comment about how the ecologically sound technologies are too expensive, etc.. is exactly how I think. Solar, electric, etc... way too expensive and most Americans cannot afford to make the initial investment. As far as taxing the technologies that create more eco burden, well, you and I are too logical and ethical and will never get elected for any gov't position with that kind of attitude! Our government and big business do not operate with a goal of creating a healthier world. Even the big companies today that employ some ' green' product or service are mostly only doing so in order to stay competitive and of course, profit. The attitude is that " Live life now, grab the gusto/profit now, I won't be around to see the collateral damage..so, live it up!". I've always felt discriminated against because I pay higher taxes than someone with children and yet, I leave less than half the environmental footprint that even one child does. I don't get any breaks on insurance either even though I have no frequently sick children that drive up the cost of healthcare for everyone. I don't waste gasoline shuffling my kids around, etc.. Don't misunderstand me, I love kids but.... The incentives in this world are given to the gluttons who keep the economy moving. Even the unhealthy, lethal , unsafe foods and drugs are subsidized by the government and yet, the safe, effective and healthy foods and drugs are way expensive or not covered by insurance. I have actually heard folks say that they are going to buy a big gas guzzler before the tree huggers make it impossible. Arnold Swartz...said that until being ' green' becomes sexy, no one will do it. Sadly, I believe he's right.
I remember GWB giving a speech about how he was excited about the idea of growing more sweetgrass for biodiesel. I just groaned because what most folks don't hear is the truth.....The real story is that Monsanto wanted control over all that land in America because the more crops they have growing with their patented seed, the harder it is for organic farmers to produce organic crops and hene, Monsanto eliminates that competition. I also knew that this sweet grass idea would not fly UNTIL the oil companies and their cohorts could negotiate an equal and very large piece of the pie for themselves. It didn't pan out apparently.
I just bought a diesel VW and at first I was a bit insecure because I know nothing about diesel engines. But, VW has a good warranty so I think I'm safe. When I considered the option of electric/hybrid, I was not nearly as confident because the technology is still new to the market and I would also need to spend money to have a charging receptacle installed outside my garage and such. Given our track record in putting products out to market before they are thoroughly tested, I'd rather just stick with what I know works for now. I suppose that's why I'm not a trendy gal.
I must say though, I've had my VW now for over a week and I've hardly burned any fuel. It's amazing. When I drove my Honda Passport, I had to fill up all the time.
You and I seem to be quite like-minded on many things you write of. And Arnold is , sadly, too correct. When it's sexy, it'll be cool to do and then people will buy. That already happened out in Califormis with the Prius. You V-Dub diesel gets wonderful gas milage. Hi-tech engine from what I understand. Well, gotta scoot for now. We'll catch up more very soon. It's getting quite late. Take care and best of luck with the repairs to your home. Hi to the pups! :-)
Seems like both sides do it and they are equally despicable.
We're all being played for chumps (an old timey term) :-)
I object to it totally, and yet you must admit that guys like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh make a career out of it. There is simply no comparison in terms of the numbers of these incidents between what left-wing media actually exists, and the relentless charactor assassination done by Guys like L&B.
I agree that nobody should do it, and that to respond to it is just giving it life, for the most part . But please, there is such a thing as fact. Shall we compare and see the number of such incidents on the right and on the left? Can you seriously compare Paul Krugman to Rush Linbaugh in terms of reason and civility?
I think that L&B have been smacked by their advertisers and networks for their offences, while guys like Maher and Ed Schultz largely get a pass. It should be unacceptable regardless of the source.
Paul Krugman is another matter. That man, as rich as he is, seems like the most un-happy person on the planet. Ever since he wrote The Age of Diminished Expectations he has been on a crusade to make his predictions come true (few of which have BTW).
don't even bother reading it
Are you sure, Master? Are they all lies?
how would I know?
I don't even bother reading it
one must choose what to read
I don't read anything that might prove me wrong, either. This way I always know I am right.
lol
No! They started the evil stuff first! All The law student did was try to make other people pay for her sexual joyride!
For real! I support my local hootchies and it's not only a patriotic thing to do, it's the democratic way!
I know the root of the problem that those gd republicans have with this is that they don't want anyone aborted or blocked from being created as they are so very evil and powerful, they know 8 out of 10 kids born to Democrats can easily be converted to Republicanism by doing nothing more than mussing their hair and then giving them a free comb.
Hi HitGirl, Good post. Signed. Best Regards
I think real scientists are the least corruptible people on earth.
Unfortunately, it looks like real scientists are virtually nonexistent on the earth :(
Why so cynical?
It seems as though every top-level scientist has been corrupted by powerful moneyed interest one way or another. Science is the tug-of-war rope of modern society, every one wants to use it to make money and get themselves power. No one seems to practice scientific pursuits for the joy of learning and discovering like they did during the days when science was illegal. Also no one wants to release their research notes or source material, which strips away all pretense of being scientific. It's not science unless it is open for all to see.
I'm really ambivalent about this. Of course I think Limbaugh is an offensive jerk, but I also believe in free speech and believe he has a right to be an offensive jerk. It is really unfortunate that the most progressive news and opinion outlets we have are things like PBS and MSNBC which are essentially mouth pieces for the Democratic Party and the Obama administration. Outside of the Pacifica Nework and Democracy Now there is virtually nothing in the electronic media and little in the print media where in anything resembling an American left much less OWS is in any way represented.
That said, I don't see how getting Limbaugh off the air can or will change that situation. If anything, it seems to me, it will make the public discourse still more narrow, albeit by shutting down one of its most reactionary voices. I don't feel that my position about this is carved in granite and suspect that my mind could be changed, but right off the top of my head I don't see how the American cultural and political discourse is improved by shutting anyone down, no matter how foolish or reactionary they are.
But it's ok for the Obimination to accept a million dollars from Bill Maher who called Sarah Palin A Cunt. No outrage about that is there?
Could it be that American's just didn't get as upset about that? I wonder why...then again, maybe I don't.
Good frickin' riddance.
I might have laughed at that if it happened at a comedy club where you expect trashy humour, but on a national radio program in that serious tone of voice? What a complete asshole.
Looks like Rush is paying a bunch of trolls to attack and low-rate intelligent comments. Maybe the moderator should get involved here. I agree alexai.
lol, ya last time I complained about him I got a -4. Didn't realize how many of his listeners were on this forum. :p
I think Rush has gone a long way to shape the regressive ideology of the New Right (or should I say Reich). Doesn't surprise me at all that he has an army of trolls.
Inhibit his free speech?
Not I. I hope he keeps talking. That would be perfect. The more he talks the worse it gets. You have to be a real dirt bag to defend this guy.
[Deleted]
LOL. No. I wasn't calling you a dirt bag. Have I called you a dirt bag before? Can you think of any sane reason why I would call you a dirt bag now?
Could it be, possibly, that I am speaking of the right?
Ah, copy and paste. Yes, I should write a lengthy repetitive essay. I can see how that is productive. Perhaps I should start another thread on something like the benefits of capitalism and tell everyone that doesn't agree with me a pinko commie bastard? Maybe I could write one with a focus on religion and how I feel about the first amendment?
Come on.
[Deleted]
but do sign the petition to get his fat lying ass off the air...
Doesn't sound to me like you are defending him. I have already posted on the other threads of similar nature about attacking his advertisers. I flat out to refuse to repeat it here and now.
[Removed]
I watched the hearing and wouldn't have absolutely labeled her a slut. I was leaning more towards unabashed trollop with no self-respect, dignity or pride.
You do realize you're going to Hell, don't you?
And you don't think you are too?
It will be one hell of a party!
Time will tell...
The SAGA continues as Rushbo slowly spirals downward.
Rush Limbaugh’s latest misogynistic tirade against Georgetown University Law Student Sandra Fluke may be the last straw for many of the shock jock’s corporate sponsors. Thousands of angry customers have been inundating dozens of Limbaugh’s corporate sponsors, demanding that they cut ties with the program.
Keep up the Pressure!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Obama called on to return misogynist PAC money. Where is the OWS outrage?
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/will-obama-super-pac-return-misogynist-bill-mahers-million-dollar-donation_633200.html
I am backing Rush Limbaugh on this one and if Bill Maher can get away with what he called Sara Palin then Rush should get a free pass also
Your law student is 30 year old and went to Georgetown with a purpose or fighting the contraception rule. This is about freedom of religion not contraception anyway. I'm conservative and i don't want contraception to be banned and no one else does either. She can go to planned parenthood like everyone else. She's paying 50k a year (?) or so for Georgetown, an elite school for the 1%, she can pay for her own gd contraception.
Freedom to practice your religion is fine, but when it conflicts with medical science, religion takes a back seat. Certainly you don't believe that we should honor the practices of every religion practiced in America? Or do you just want favoritism shown to your religion?
I am reminded of the Maasai of east Africa, who believe that all cattle on earth belongs to them and so if they take possession of cattle it isn't stealing. Now, there probably are some Maasai who have immigrated to the USA. In our system they are free to believe what they want to believe, but they are definitely not free to "practice" or act upon this belief.
(edit):
http://www.godchecker.com/pantheon/african-mythology.php?deity=ENGAI
Supreme Sky God — and supplier of all the world's cattle
In the beginning, ENGAI lived on Earth in joyful communion with all the cattle in the world. Then one day a terrible catastrophe occurred which sent him — and the cattle — zooming off into the sky. (We're not sure what kind of catastrophe, but there was a suspiciously active volcano nearby.)
ENGAI and the cattle tried to live in the clouds, but there wasn't a lot of grass up there to keep the cattle fed. So ENGAI called down to a human named NAITERU-KOP and told him to expect a special delivery.
NAITERU-KOP, who lived near the aforementioned volcano, must have been rather surprised to see a large herd of cattle sliding down to Earth on a vine. Cattle don't usually do that sort of thing. "Look after them for me," said ENGAI. "They don't like it up here so I'm giving them all to you."
NAITERU-KOP was amazed. Look at all those goats and sheep! He was rich! One of his neighbors was even more amazed — and spitefully cut the rope through sheer jealousy. Thus endeth the Great Cattle Bonanza. But with divinely-granted ownership of the entire cattle population of the world, NAITERU-KOP wasn't complaining.
He immediately founded the Maasai, a tribe devoted to cattle. Looking after cattle was their raison d'etre; not just a means of survival but a holy occupation expected of them by their God. The Maasai are still going strong today — and still believe that all the cattle in the world belongs to them. This gives them the perfect right to rustle cattle from neighboring tribes. Not cattle thieves but cattle rescuers.
As for ENGAI, he's still up there in the clouds, and can veer between two different manifestations. When he's in a good mood (Engai Narok), the clouds are black and full of nourishing rain. When he's annoyed (Engai Na-nyokie), the clouds are dry, red, and full of life-zapping lightning. When there aren't any clouds, he's probably taking a vacation at the holy volcano Oldonyo Le Ngai (Mountain of God).
When some of the Maasai migrated from Tanzania to Kenya, they found another holy mountain and another manifestation of ENGAI worshipped by the Kikiyu. See our entry on NGAI for details.
BOW DOWN TO XENU! L.Ron Hubbard commands it!
Just think what would happen if the government had to bow down before Aqua Budha...I shudder to think about it.
My religion says it's a sin to pay taxes and all laws not in my scripture are false laws and I don't have to obey them. Wow, this freedom of religion stuff is GEEERATE!
If only Hey? The church of the almighty 99%.
It's not really about "honoring" specific religions or not honoring them. It's not about religious freedom, either.
this requires an in-depth discussion of what rights really are. Rights are not granted to people by governments. Governments are there to restrict people's activities. As a famous person once said, "Governments are for bad people. If everyone was good, there would be no need for governments." People have the right to do anything that does not unfairly infringe on the rights of another person.
Suppose a person's religion required them to smack a stranger every day or they would not go to heaven. Do we make an exception to assault laws for this person's religion? Of course not.
Suppose the person's religion requires them to be smacked by a stranger every day or they will not go to heaven. Can they force people to hit them, to honor their religion? Of course not again; this is equally unfair to the stranger who may be pacifistic, not feel like it, or prohibited from doing it by their own religion.
People's rights stop where other's rights begin.
Rights require nonintervention from people and governments, not action. If a right requires someone else to go out of their way to do something for you, it is not a right. If it requires them to not intervene in your activities, it is likely a right.
We have a right to protest, but not to do it in someone else's living room without asking them first. Their right to not have us protesting in their living room trumps our right to free speech.
We have a right to keep and bear arms, but not to force our neighbors to buy us a gun.
We have a right to obtain contraception, but not to force our co workers to buy us any.
That's faulty logic. A lot of services are communal. Police and fire, for example.
Yes they are, but these things are not "rights". The supreme court has ruled that no specific individual has a right to police protection, only the public at large. These are things which the people, deciding democratically, has set up the government to provide because these are decidedly worthwhile things that the private sector will not fulfill. Rights are universal, so if a single person decides to live in the middle of the desert and they have a right to fire protection, the public is obligated to provide them a nearby fire station and/or hydrants. Not so.
This discussion of rights concerns how people and the government are prevented from unfairly interfering with each other. Yes, the quote I noted above is incorrect where it relates to these services, so called "public goods", but it is correct where individual rights are concerned.
what does this have to do this the contraception mandate?
Does your insurance cover your Viagra or do you pay fir it yourself?
you must be thinking of your short comings, not everything has your problems. Another pathetic occupier, IQ Check!
He said, avoiding a legitimate question and attacking in order to distract.
I guess it is OK to have insurance pay for drugs for men to have sex, but not for women to have sex. Are women's beliefs that it is immoral to to have children that they aren't able to care for, as legitimate as the judgement of a few male Bishops that they shouldn't use birth control even if the church doesn't pay for it?
Catholic leadership has issues with contraception because of the church's beliefs not with sex but with procreation and life. i don't think viagra has anything to do with preventing procreation. And these religious institution have never provided coverage for contraception; this isn't anything new. The liberals are trying to make this a woman's issue instead of a religious freedom issue. No conservatives , only liberals, are talking about baning contraceptions. if you work for a religious affiliated institution you would know about the contraception (unless you are a plant ,or just stupid, like 'the lawyer')
Catholic leadership is an oxymoron. When 99% of the members of a group have one position and less than 1% have the opposite position, The latter can hardly be considered, by any common definition of the term, "leaders."
So, since the catholic and non Catholic employees of these secular businesses want this coverage, and since it doesn't cost the "owners" of the business, the insurance company, who saves what it costs and therefore have no objection. the taxpayers, who also pay zero, who has any standing to get involved? You don't. The few old white guys in robes who can't lead "their" congregation don't. The GOP doesn't.
You are lying about banning contraception. There are several states in which the GOP is trying to do exactly that. One of the ways is "personhood at conception." Time to give it a rest. You lost.
yeah right, you are so full of (cuss word). So no one pays anything for this proposed free contraception? someone is paying for it in higher premiums. good thing that you aren't an accountant. This is about religious freedom not contraception, Democrats just can't get their minds off of contraception, take a breather, nobody cares and no one is going to take them away from you.
I copied the quote from a healthcare consultant, "Thomas Carroll, an analyst who covers health insurance companies for Stifel Nicolaus, said that, "in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't seem like a material cost to be added to the managed care company or the employer."
The savings of birth benefits (40% of pregnancies are unwanted) by having contraception, offsets the cost. They don't know accurately yet because they can't forecast the mix of the type of contraception that the insureds' will opt for (pill, IUD etc.). But 60% of the providers thought it would be a net savings. 40% thought it might be a small cost.
Good thing you aren't in insurance management.
Re contraception, then why does the GOP keep trying? It will be on the ballot for the third time this year in Colorado. Lost badly the first two times, worse even than in Alabama. You just can't give it up, can you? And you can't stop lying about trying.
Religious freedom for the 99% of the Catholics or a few old fat white guys in robes that nobody listens to? As far as I know, they are still believing that the earth is flat. Their parishoner's, not so much. They want somebody else to enforce their beliefs on citizens of the US who don't agree with them. I don't think the bishops own the rank and file Catholics anymore. Freedom. You should love it. You lost.
look, you don't like the church, fine. But they have the right to fight this and to me religious freedom rings a little stronger and more important, then 'i got to have my contraception man, and if we don't have any babies it'll save money' retard reasoning.
You don't like the employees, Catholic and nonCatholic, fine? Not fine. Freedom for the members or some phoney leaders who are trying to prevent the members and a large number of non members from a benefit they need? 40% of pregnancies are unwanted. That has consequences that responsible people, Catholic and non Catholic alike, and who are employed by secular businesses owned by the Catholic Church are trying to cope with.
What about the religious belief of the employees? Raising babies that they can't afford has many consequences that can't be successfully resolved by the wave of a hand, even in the sign of the cross.
These are citizens of the US who just need their jobs and the medical coverage that comes with it. Why don't their values matter? Why don't they get to practice their firmly held convictions? If the principle were so crucial, why would most of the Church owned secular institutions already provide the coverage? You won't talk about them. will you?
If even the members don't accept this position, who are you to impose it on them? And you would impose it on non Catholics, as well? They are not entitled to practice their beliefs? That is a tiny corner you prefer to live in.
[Removed]
"I'm conservative and i don't want contraception to be banned and no one else does either.'
Not true. Not all that many years ago you couldn't even buy a condom in Connecticut. That was due to the power of the RC Church.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_condoms
"In the 1960s and 1970s quality regulations tightened,[1]:267,285 and legal barriers to condom use were removed. In 1965, the U.S. Supreme Court case Griswold v. Connecticut struck down one of the remaining Comstock laws, the bans of contraception in Connecticut and Massachusetts. France repealed its anti-birth control laws in 1967. Similar laws in Italy were declared unconstitutional in 1971. Captain Beate Uhse in Germany founded a birth control business, and fought a series of legal battles continue her sales.[1]:276-9 In Ireland, legal condom sales (only to people over 18, and only in clinics and pharmacies) were allowed for the first time in 1978. (All restrictions on Irish condom sales were lifted in 1993.)[1]:329-30"
Here's what potential next US president has to say about states arresting people for using condoms:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsquCopESig
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsquCopESig
http://www.newser.com/story/139777/rick-santorum-birth-control-is-not-ok.html
Rick Santorum: Birth Control Is 'Not OK' VIDEO SURFACES OF SANTORUM DECRYING MORAL HAZARDS OF PROTECTED SEX
By Kevin Spak, Newser Staff Posted Feb 15, 2012 11:51 AM CST STORY COMMENTS (161)
(NEWSER) – Rick Santorum thinks contraceptive use is wrong and a danger to the country, he declares in a video clip that's racing across the blogosphere today. In an October interview with the evangelical blog Caffeinated Thoughts, Santorum volunteers that, as president, he'd confront the "dangers of contraception" and religious groups who think it's OK. "It's not OK, because it's a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be," he says. "They're supposed to be within marriage, for purposes that are, yes, conjugal... but also procreative. "
[Removed]
Why are people like you so threatened by anything he says? If you dislike him so much I'd think you'd ignore him but I've never seen a liberal who didn't love to hate someone.Guess what,if you don't like what he says don't listen. But there's that love to hate thing again. Why do you think anyone is responsible for a persons sex life other than that person? Every forced mandate to the insurance companies just gets passed on to we consumers in the form of higher premiums and or deductibles.
I'm not threatened by Rush. Ashamed that so many listen to him maybe, embarrassed for America maybe, but not threatened. If there was an underside of American ideology and you turned over that rock, Rush would be underneath.
[Removed]
See,you HATE anyone who thinks differently than you. If you are so secure in your beliefs you really shouldn't care what someone else believes. The left however feels the need to attack anyone or anything that doesn't fit their beliefs.Pretty INSECURE wouldn't you say? I agree with Rush. The left wing plant should be responsible for her own birth control not you or I,and if she is getting laid almost 3 times a day EVERY DAY and it's not with the same guy SHE IS A SLUT. So keep on with your name calling and negative analogies because trust me,those of us who lean right don't really care ROFLMFAO. Aren't you rather arrogant to believe that YOU know what is right and best for everyone.Pompous arse is more like it.
Thanks for that reply, it says a lot about you. Stuff I'm too kind to say.
Ah yes no arguments ey? As I asked.who are you to tell me what I should believe?
I'm sure Al Qaeda makes the same argument.
Oh poor baby. HitGirl you are just a dumb fucking CUNT. that's right CUNT. What,you say you are offended? Where was your outrage when Bill Maher called Sarah Palin a CUNT? or when Ed Schulz on MSNBC News call Laura Ingraham a right wing slut? You stupid fucking cow you just want everyone to believe the same way as you because YOU JUST KNOW YOU ARE RIGHT AND ANYONE WHO DISAGREES IS WRONG.You're just an arrogant cunt who has no respect for anyone else's idea's or beliefs. Yup,dumb cunt.
Ah yes no arguments ey? Well, wipe the spittle off your keyboard before you electrocute yourself. Your language shocks me even less than your lack of intelligence. I'm not surprised at all though since you're just taking after your whack-job guru Rush Limbaugh.
So what you are saying is it's okay for Bill Maher to call a woman a cunt but not for Rush to call one a slut and prostitute. Take a stance one way or the other or you're just a left wing zombie who repeats the mantras well.See though,you won't answer the questin will you? Is it okay for Bill Maher to call Sarah Palin a cunt? Cut and dried,simple,yes or no,question. Answer but I bet you won't.
Trolls hate it when you don't answer.
No it makes me laugh because you can't stand to admit your own double standard,it's hilarious.You know you're WRONG but you don't want to admit it. You want civility for everybody except those you hate which are those who disagree with you.Quite sad.
completely correct
Who passed Medicare Part D? Does it cover Viagra so people can have sex paid for by other people?
Do people with ED rape other people? Do they cause unwanted pregnancies? Does ED, untreated, reduce abortions?
I call Cognitive Distortion Program
All Republicans do is cling to their Bibles and their guns while impregnating their trailer park trash wives.....which part of this phrase was not uttered by a liberal?
i'm personally asexual but i think we all should get the same allotment from the government for sexual protection, mine will be spent on security cameras and a tazer. Everyone should be given the same amount.
[Removed]
Just read about Rush Limbaugh's apology today. Looks like you're confused, skylar.
Today on the NBC Nightly News, Brian Williams reported that Mr. Limbaugh issued 3 on-air apologies today in addition to the written one. There was some video of it included with the report as well.
The man has millions and millions but still can't live without his audience. Or maybe he just can't live without the feeling that he has conned America everyday.
He's a soul-less scoundrel! He called Fluke a prostitute. I think he was looking in a mirror when he said that. As the old joke goes...
A man spied a beautiful woman in an elevator and asked "Would you sleep with me for a million dollars?"
She coyly replied "I believe I would."
The immediately asked "Well then, would you sleep with me for twenty bucks?"
Glaring, the woman shot back "What kind of a woman do you think I am?!"
The man replied "I think I know what kind of woman you are. We're just trying to establish the price!"
Rush makes 54 million a year, I think I heard?
[Removed]
[Removed]
Really???? Do you know James Carville? Do you remember what HE said about women? He STATED that women that live in trailer parks are sluts wanting not just sex,,,, BUT,,,, $100 bills for sex. I bet you dont remember that. I bet you dont remember the long line of WOMEN that stated Clinton forced them to have sexual activity with him. And I bet NONNE of YOU made any comments to protect THOSE women. You OWS women and liberals women are the real idiots in this world for protecting YOU liberals when there are comments about $100 women in trailer parks. Really,,,,, YOU should be ashamed for protecting liberal men that hate women.
He's good though! He's a Democrat! Don't hate on a brother!
'HE'??? You mean THEM.... Nearly every liberal man takes advantage of women. Just look at the Kennedy's as just ONEEEEEE example. Liberal women love to be taken advantage of by MEN. They are sluts if you really get down to it. Sandra should have taken what Rush said as a badge of honor....
Well, I do remember Rush getting caught at the airport with a bottle of viagra while returning from a country known for it's child prostitutes...
DAILY KOS
Dan,
Spurred on by more than 120,000 members of the Daily Kos community like you, this week over 50 companies and organizations pulled their advertisements from Rush Limbaugh's radio program.
Yesterday, the results of your action could be heard in the form of beautiful, long silences during the commercial breaks in the online streaming of Limbaugh's show on WABC, the flagship station for his broadcasts. Here are the amazing stats:
A total of 86 ads aired during WABC's online streaming broadcast of The Rush Limbaugh Show yesterday; 77 of those ads were public service announcements donated free of charge by the Ad Council; Of the nine paid spots that ran, seven were from companies that have said they have taken steps to ensure their ads no longer air during the program; WABC's online feed included about 5:33 of dead air when ads would normally have run.
Click here to listen to the silence during the commercial breaks on Rush Limbaugh's program, and be sure to share it with friends over Facebook, Twitter, or something else. This is your accomplishment, so please be sure to savor it.
Thank you, Joan McCarter, Daily Kos
http://kos.salsalabs.com/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=AtH8/bSzDD8pTPlT%2BKUt646hzvzNYhAQ
Sweeeeet!
I know - Right?
Advertiser drops Limbaugh and stock plunges:
http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/06/investors-flee-carbonite-after-limbaugh-announcement/
And now Carbonite rebounded. For the investors that pulled out, good riddance. Nothing of value was lost just like Rush getting canned.
Done deal there were already 93,978 when I signed. 3/04/2012
Looks to be some pretty popular sentiment being shared.
People do it to it.
Thanks DKA. If you ever need a favor just PM me.
Your welcome I believe in taking part in positive direct action. For the health and prosperity of all.