This has got to stop

[kalm]

Wow

A political pundit says goofy things of questionable veracity

so different from all the other political pundits and politicians

Limbaugh has his demagogue moments- sometimes frequently- but like I said before- his political analysis is generally pretty sound

tell me- would you be that passionate about debunking someone who held forth anybody at MSNBC, FOX, or ANY political leader on the House, Senate or White House as exemplars of honesty and integrity? Or is it just Rush Limbaugh?

Wait... Didn't you just say (one post back) what a reliable honest source Rush was..?
And now you're saying this ^ come on CID which one is it..?

I'll tell you what - I have never come running - like you just came running
to defend anybody (except Whole Foods)

When somebody says some guy on MSNBC is full of crap, frankly I would likely agree

But the percentage of Republicans who come to Limbaugh's "Aid" whenever he gets identified as a hoax is always alarming - and then when it's pointed out again that he is INDEED just a common LIAR who makes sh!t up on the spot and is anything but a reliable source - they step back ever so slightly and point to the pundits on MSNBC or wherever...

I expected better that "Right out of the playbook" from you CID, but whatever...

Are we really debating whether Limbaugh is a legit information source? What the fuck is this, 1994?

And CID...my favorite old school atheistic, social libertarian Buckley/Will/Buchanonesque conk... the grumpy conservative old uncle that can solidly stand his ground and make you look forward to the days where you too can slip comfortably into conservatism... who frequently makes me check my own thoughts…who makes you think Nixon probably was right about more things than he was wrong...defending Limbaugh?

And I get made fun of for linking to Greenwald and Taibbi articles???

[CID1990]

Wow

A political pundit says goofy things of questionable veracity

so different from all the other political pundits and politicians

Limbaugh has his demagogue moments- sometimes frequently- but like I said before- his political analysis is generally pretty sound

tell me- would you be that passionate about debunking someone who held forth anybody at MSNBC, FOX, or ANY political leader on the House, Senate or White House as exemplars of honesty and integrity? Or is it just Rush Limbaugh?

Wait... Didn't you just say (one post back) what a reliable honest source Rush was..?
And now you're saying this ^ come on CID which one is it..?

I'll tell you what - I have never come running - like you just came running
to defend anybody (except Whole Foods)

When somebody says some guy on MSNBC is full of crap, frankly I would likely agree

But the percentage of Republicans who come to Limbaugh's "Aid" whenever he gets identified as a hoax is always alarming - and then when it's pointed out again that he is INDEED just a common LIAR who makes sh!t up on the spot and is anything but a reliable source - they step back ever so slightly and point to the pundits on MSNBC or wherever...

I expected better that "Right out of the playbook" from you CID, but whatever...

You ARE passionate

I get it- you hate Rush Limbaugh

maybe Im not being clear here so Ill try again

I dont keep a talky sheet on Rush the way you do so I cannot point to each and every time he has put something out there that wasn't true. But all that being said, MY experience is that when it comes to POLITICAL ANALYSIS and SPORTS I find him to be pretty lucid and well researched.

if he makes something up about Hillary's underpants size or the amount of old growth forest or space aliens and that upsets you, then fine- but dont confuse my own amusement at how up in a bunch he gets you with "running to his defense".

I listen to a LOT of political commentary from a LOT of different sources, all of whom have varying bullshit levels. I just dont see Limbaugh as the devil and taken across the total spectrum of political commentators I find him to be one of the least sensational- even among conservative commentators. IN FACT- come to think of it, I dont even have to throw MSNBC out there. I could even ask you if you would have such a visceral response if the subject was Mark Levine or Michael Savage.

[Chizzang]

Wait... Didn't you just say (one post back) what a reliable honest source Rush was..?
And now you're saying this ^ come on CID which one is it..?

I'll tell you what - I have never come running - like you just came running
to defend anybody (except Whole Foods)

When somebody says some guy on MSNBC is full of crap, frankly I would likely agree

But the percentage of Republicans who come to Limbaugh's "Aid" whenever he gets identified as a hoax is always alarming - and then when it's pointed out again that he is INDEED just a common LIAR who makes sh!t up on the spot and is anything but a reliable source - they step back ever so slightly and point to the pundits on MSNBC or wherever...

I expected better that "Right out of the playbook" from you CID, but whatever...

You ARE passionate

I get it- you hate Rush Limbaugh

maybe Im not being clear here so Ill try again

I dont keep a talky sheet on Rush the way you do so I cannot point to each and every time he has put something out there that wasn't true. But all that being said, MY experience is that when it comes to POLITICAL ANALYSIS and SPORTS I find him to be pretty lucid and well researched.

if he makes something up about Hillary's underpants size or the amount of old growth forest or space aliens and that upsets you, then fine- but dont confuse my own amusement at how up in a bunch he gets you with "running to his defense".

I listen to a LOT of political commentary from a LOT of different sources, all of whom have varying bullshit levels. I just dont see Limbaugh as the devil and taken across the total spectrum of political commentators I find him to be one of the least sensational- even among conservative commentators. IN FACT- come to think of it, I dont even have to throw MSNBC out there. I could even ask you if you would have such a visceral response if the subject was Mark Levine or Michael Savage.

I don't see Limbaugh as the devil either
But the bullsh!t I'm smelling is coming mostly from your keyboard...

1) I don't listen to ANY political commentary - anywhere - ever
2) I am not passionate about Rush Limbaugh, I'm passionate about Conservatives defending him and then pretending like they're not... (it's called apologetics and you're doing it)
3) And then dismissing his list of lies as casual Hilary underwear sizes (BTW: That's XXL)
4) A list of lies that reads like a greatest hits of political misinformation from the past 20 years

Rush Limbaugh "fact Check" record is abysmal
And apparently what he's well researched in is appeasing right wing apologists

And I don't care about and won't defend some left wing equivalent either...
But you've got my attention now (and not in a good way) sadly

[houndawg]

You ARE passionate

I get it- you hate Rush Limbaugh

maybe Im not being clear here so Ill try again

I dont keep a talky sheet on Rush the way you do so I cannot point to each and every time he has put something out there that wasn't true. But all that being said, MY experience is that when it comes to POLITICAL ANALYSIS and SPORTS I find him to be pretty lucid and well researched.

if he makes something up about Hillary's underpants size or the amount of old growth forest or space aliens and that upsets you, then fine- but dont confuse my own amusement at how up in a bunch he gets you with "running to his defense".

I listen to a LOT of political commentary from a LOT of different sources, all of whom have varying bullshit levels. I just dont see Limbaugh as the devil and taken across the total spectrum of political commentators I find him to be one of the least sensational- even among conservative commentators. IN FACT- come to think of it, I dont even have to throw MSNBC out there. I could even ask you if you would have such a visceral response if the subject was Mark Levine or Michael Savage.

I don't see Limbaugh as the devil either
But the bullsh!t I'm smelling is coming mostly from your keyboard...

1) I don't listen to ANY political commentary - anywhere - ever
2) I am not passionate about Rush Limbaugh, I'm passionate about Conservatives defending him and then pretending like they're not... (it's called apologetics and you're doing it)
3) And then dismissing his list of lies as casual Hilary underwear sizes (BTW: That's XXL)
4) A list of lies that reads like a greatest hits of political misinformation from the past 20 years

Rush Limbaugh "fact Check" record is abysmal
And apparently what he's well researched in is appeasing right wing apologists

And I don't care about and won't defend some left wing equivalent either...
But you've got my attention now (and not in a good way) sadly

Her azz is so big that when she sits down she gets taller.

[kalm]

Here's the non-partisan Politifact page on Rush:

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/rush-limbaugh/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Turns out, Rush's analyzed statements are true or half true 14% of the time. Just the list on the front page shows several Rush claims that curiously enough have shown up on this board.

Rush is an infotainer who's listeners are mostly low-information voters.

[CID1990]

Here's the non-partisan Politifact page on Rush:

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/rush-limbaugh/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Turns out, Rush's analyzed statements are true or half true 14% of the time. Just the list on the front page shows several Rush claims that curiously enough have shown up on this board.

Rush is an infotainer who's listeners are mostly low-information voters.

You're really going to crap the bed with politifact? They are nonpartisan alright- they get it wrong on both sides- all the time. They invented the straw man fact check. You really should look it up sometime.

I took a look, and half the "nontruths" are OBVIOUS tongue in cheek comments- like NASA being a muslim outreach organization. (the tongue in cheek stuff is one of the many things I dont like about the guy)

The others are nontruths based on how people want to view statistics, like Wisconsin's unemployment rate

But yeah some real earth shattering game changing significant whoppers there - right up there with I know a dude who sez Mitt Romney cheats on his taxes and you can keep your health plan

You guys really DO have an obsession with the guy.

And Cleets Im not losing any sleep over having your attention. Now that I have it I think youll find that Ill "rush to the defense" of liberals too if the same hyperbolic garbage is being thrown around

[D1B]

Here's the non-partisan Politifact page on Rush:

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/rush-limbaugh/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Turns out, Rush's analyzed statements are true or half true 14% of the time. Just the list on the front page shows several Rush claims that curiously enough have shown up on this board.

Rush is an infotainer who's listeners are mostly low-information voters.

You're really going to crap the bed with politifact? They are nonpartisan alright- they get it wrong on both sides- all the time. They invented the straw man fact check. You really should look it up sometime.

I took a look, and half the "nontruths" are OBVIOUS tongue in cheek comments- like NASA being a muslim outreach organization. (the tongue in cheek stuff is one of the many things I dont like about the guy)

The others are nontruths based on how people want to view statistics, like Wisconsin's unemployment rate

But yeah some real earth shattering game changing significant whoppers there - right up there with I know a dude who sez Mitt Romney cheats on his taxes and you can keep your health plan

You guys really DO have an obsession with the guy.

And Cleets Im not losing any sleep over having your attention. Now that I have it I think youll find that Ill "rush to the defense" of liberals too if the same hyperbolic garbage is being thrown around

JSO1990 making excuses for Rush and the Catholic Church.

[kalm]

Here's the non-partisan Politifact page on Rush:

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/rush-limbaugh/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Turns out, Rush's analyzed statements are true or half true 14% of the time. Just the list on the front page shows several Rush claims that curiously enough have shown up on this board.

Rush is an infotainer who's listeners are mostly low-information voters.

You're really going to crap the bed with politifact? They are nonpartisan alright- they get it wrong on both sides- all the time. They invented the straw man fact check. You really should look it up sometime.

I took a look, and half the "nontruths" are OBVIOUS tongue in cheek comments- like NASA being a muslim outreach organization. (the tongue in cheek stuff is one of the many things I dont like about the guy)

The others are nontruths based on how people want to view statistics, like Wisconsin's unemployment rate

But yeah some real earth shattering game changing significant whoppers there - right up there with I know a dude who sez Mitt Romney cheats on his taxes and you can keep your health plan

You guys really DO have an obsession with the guy.

And Cleets Im not losing any sleep over having your attention. Now that I have it I think youll find that Ill "rush to the defense" of liberals too if the same hyperbolic garbage is being thrown around

I'm about as concerned over Rush as I an with MSNBC putting Al Sharpton on the air. Like I said, they're infotainers. Rush is one of the best because he uses half truths and biased sources far more strategically, and his audience is probably a little dumber or more gullible than the run of the mill Dems. I just didn't count on you being among that audience.

You defended Rush's accuracy. We can dig a little deeper if you'd like?

[CID1990]

You're really going to crap the bed with politifact? They are nonpartisan alright- they get it wrong on both sides- all the time. They invented the straw man fact check. You really should look it up sometime.

I took a look, and half the "nontruths" are OBVIOUS tongue in cheek comments- like NASA being a muslim outreach organization. (the tongue in cheek stuff is one of the many things I dont like about the guy)

The others are nontruths based on how people want to view statistics, like Wisconsin's unemployment rate

But yeah some real earth shattering game changing significant whoppers there - right up there with I know a dude who sez Mitt Romney cheats on his taxes and you can keep your health plan

You guys really DO have an obsession with the guy.

And Cleets Im not losing any sleep over having your attention. Now that I have it I think youll find that Ill "rush to the defense" of liberals too if the same hyperbolic garbage is being thrown around

I'm about as concerned over Rush as I an with MSNBC putting Al Sharpton on the air. Like I said, they're infotainers. Rush is one of the best because he uses half truths and biased sources far more strategically, and his audience is probably a little dumber or more gullible than the run of the mill Dems. I just didn't count on you being among that audience.

You defended Rush's accuracy. We can dig a little deeper if you'd like?

Dig all you want, Klam. I said before that I am not a Rush listener. Probably the last time I ever heard his show was around 2008. You can cherry pick what I say all you like, but the fact remains that among political commentators I have found him to be way above the mean in terms of accuracy.

You can point to politifact all you want and continue to hope that nobody will look too closely at exactly WHAT they are fact checking. You have no choice but to try to pile on to my comments about Limbaugh, I get that. I would only suggest that you not rely too heavily on your "nonpartisan" fact checking sources without giving them a once-over on Google.

[YoUDeeMan]

I'll tell you what - I have never come running - like you just came running
to defend anybody (except Whole Foods)

...and Seattle...and higher wages...and...well, lots of other, "anybodys" (since Whole Foods also isn't an, "anybody").

[CID1990]

I'll tell you what - I have never come running - like you just came running
to defend anybody (except Whole Foods)

...and Seattle...and higher wages...and...well, lots of other, "anybodys" (since Whole Foods also isn't an, "anybody").

I was going to go there but Klam stepped in with the usual troll and I was ensnared

[GrizFanStuckInUtah]

Not to derail a good political/religious thread here or anything but...........


I think the most surprising thing about the SS administration going after old debt like this, is the fact that they have been authorized to do it. I mean, it is wrong on so many levels and yet here we are. They are doing it and it will probably be upheld by some stupid court somewhere because it was passed as a law. Minor children are not allowed to incur credit/debt so there is no way they can be held resposible, period. I really am not sure what is more disgusting, the fact we are doing it or the fact some politicians thought it was a good idea.

[Chizzang]

...and Seattle...and higher wages...and...well, lots of other, "anybodys" (since Whole Foods also isn't an, "anybody").

I was going to go there but Klam stepped in with the usual troll and I was ensnared

Typical...
Ideas are not people / I will defend an occasional idea

However:
Rush Limbaugh the holy grail of your belief system retains his position as "highly defended" "well researched" and ""honest" / the apologetics on display over him from you guys should have been embarrassing

Amazing and sad

I don't want to hear one more post from you clowns about how Rush isn't "the voice" of your party after you all just defended him as Well Researched and Honest - there is NO BACKING AWAY NOW boys - you've exposed yourselves

Here come the "obsessed over Rush" posts... As distraction and defense part VI
(with a dose of MSNBC side swipe)

Face it - you own it

[kalm]

...and Seattle...and higher wages...and...well, lots of other, "anybodys" (since Whole Foods also isn't an, "anybody").

I was going to go there but Klam stepped in with the usual troll and I was ensnared

I honestly hoped you were trolling with your Limbaugh praise.

[Chizzang]

I was going to go there but Klam stepped in with the usual troll and I was ensnared

I honestly hoped you were trolling with your Limbaugh praise.

Yeah except the whole gang of them came to Rush's defense...
"I'm no ditto head but he's very reliable and accurate" was the theme

[YoUDeeMan]

I was going to go there but Klam stepped in with the usual troll and I was ensnared

Typical...
Ideas are not people / I will defend an occasional idea

I'll tell you what - I have never come running - like you just came running
to defend anybody (except Whole Foods)

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, once again, you made the statement of not defending anybody...and then somehow included Whole Foods. Is Whole Foods an,"anybody?" anymore than Seattle?

Own your ideas...or "anybodys." Or don't...but be clear about those, "anybodys."

[Chizzang]

Typical...
Ideas are not people / I will defend an occasional idea

I'll tell you what - I have never come running - like you just came running
to defend anybody (except Whole Foods)

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, once again, you made the statement of not defending anybody...and then somehow included Whole Foods. Is Whole Foods an,"anybody?" anymore than Seattle?

Own your ideas...or "anybodys." Or don't...but be clear about those, "anybodys."

Whatever.. dude (weak ass sh!t right there) I was trying to be "funny"
Maybe you better check in with Rush and see what he thinks

[YoUDeeMan]

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, once again, you made the statement of not defending anybody...and then somehow included Whole Foods. Is Whole Foods an,"anybody?" anymore than Seattle?

Own your ideas...or "anybodys." Or don't...but be clear about those, "anybodys."

Whatever.. dude (weak ass sh!t right there) I was trying to be "funny"
Maybe you better check in with Rush and see what he thinks

Speaking of weak ass sh!t, stop trying to be funny...it isn't your best skill set.

As far as Rush goes...never watched him...couldn't identify his voice if my life depended on it.

The only way I can identify him is through the photos people post on here. Fat dude. However, I do find it funny that that guy in the 28 minute Chi-com clip looked like the Rush pictures. Does the Right pump them out like Pillsbury Dough Boys?

I simply don't bother with TV talk shows...or the news....gave it all up for Lent many moons ago. Cripes, I can't name a TV drama/comedy show on now either.

The rare times we watch TV, the science channel, nature shows, or some historical show are the things we watch. Exception: occasional college football (FBS).

Anyway, I'm not too concerned about political talk shows...they are probably about as entertaining as the discussions on here. The best thing about this place, versus TV, is you get to call people out on their BS.

[BlueHen86]

Whatever.. dude (weak ass sh!t right there) I was trying to be "funny"
Maybe you better check in with Rush and see what he thinks

Speaking of weak ass sh!t, stop trying to be funny...it isn't your best skill set.

As far as Rush goes...never watched him...couldn't identify his voice if my life depended on it.

The only way I can identify him is through the photos people post on here. Fat dude. However, I do find it funny that that guy in the 28 minute Chi-com clip looked like the Rush pictures. Does the Right pump them out like Pillsbury Dough Boys?

I simply don't bother with TV talk shows...or the news....gave it all up for Lent many moons ago. Cripes, I can't name a TV drama/comedy show on now either.

The rare times we watch TV, the science channel, nature shows, or some historical show are the things we watch. Exception: occasional college football (FBS).

Anyway, I'm not too concerned about political talk shows...they are probably about as entertaining as the discussions on here. The best thing about this place, versus TV, is you get to call people out on their BS.

Have you seen the episode of Nature about honey badgers? Worth a look. Guy operates an animal rescue with lions, rhinos, honey badgers etc. one badger gets bored and decides to dig his way into the lion pen. He f'd up two lions! He wasn't so lucky the second time he tried it. Didn't die, but was in hospital for a while.

[YoUDeeMan]

Have you seen the episode of Nature about honey badgers? Worth a look. Guy operates an animal rescue with lions, rhinos, honey badgers etc. one badger gets bored and decides to dig his way into the lion pen. He f'd up two lions! He wasn't so lucky the second time he tried it. Didn't die, but was in hospital for a while.

Was Brent Musburger doing the play-by-play?





Haven't seen that one, but I love those shows about the badgers and wolverines. They have some serious attitude.

[JohnStOnge]

Rush is an infotainer who's listeners are mostly low-information voters.

I think that, in relative terms at least, you are incorrect.

See http://www.pewresearch.org/2009/02/03/l ... ative-men/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; . The focus of the article is comparing the audiences of Limbaugh, Hannity, and O'Reily. But there is a table in it, headed "Knowledgeable News Audiences," that allows you to put Limbaugh's audience into overall context. Look at the far right column, headed "High Knowledge."

Limbaugh's audience is not at the very top. But it is definitely in the upper portion. While 18 percent of the general population was characterized as "High Knowledge," 36 percent of Limbaugh's audience was.

On one hand it's a little depressing to see that the audience of Chris Mathews' "Hardball" had a higher knowledge level than that. On the other hand the high knowledge level percentage of Limbaugh's audience was higher than that of PBS' "Newshour."

[JohnStOnge]

And BTW Wisconsin is a "Blue" State by any reasonable standard by which most people define "Blue" States.

[kalm]

Rush is an infotainer who's listeners are mostly low-information voters.

I think that, in relative terms at least, you are incorrect.

See http://www.pewresearch.org/2009/02/03/l ... ative-men/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; . The focus of the article is comparing the audiences of Limbaugh, Hannity, and O'Reily. But there is a table in it, headed "Knowledgeable News Audiences," that allows you to put Limbaugh's audience into overall context. Look at the far right column, headed "High Knowledge."

Limbaugh's audience is not at the very top. But it is definitely in the upper portion. While 18 percent of the general population was characterized as "High Knowledge," 36 percent of Limbaugh's audience was.

On one hand it's a little depressing to see that the audience of Chris Mathews' "Hardball" had a higher knowledge level than that. On the other hand the high knowledge level percentage of Limbaugh's audience was higher than that of PBS' "Newshour."

1). Really old poll based on 3 overly general questions.

2). Lol at the Fox rankings.

3). Not you best evidence.

[BlueHen86]

Rush is an infotainer who's listeners are mostly low-information voters.

I think that, in relative terms at least, you are incorrect.

See http://www.pewresearch.org/2009/02/03/l ... ative-men/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; . The focus of the article is comparing the audiences of Limbaugh, Hannity, and O'Reily. But there is a table in it, headed "Knowledgeable News Audiences," that allows you to put Limbaugh's audience into overall context. Look at the far right column, headed "High Knowledge."

Limbaugh's audience is not at the very top. But it is definitely in the upper portion. While 18 percent of the general population was characterized as "High Knowledge," 36 percent of Limbaugh's audience was.

On one hand it's a little depressing to see that the audience of Chris Mathews' "Hardball" had a higher knowledge level than that. On the other hand the high knowledge level percentage of Limbaugh's audience was higher than that of PBS' "Newshour."

Not so much "low information" as "wrong information". Some of his listeners might become "high knowledge" if they stopped listening to him.

[CID1990]

I was going to go there but Klam stepped in with the usual troll and I was ensnared

Typical...
Ideas are not people / I will defend an occasional idea

However:
Rush Limbaugh the holy grail of your belief system retains his position as "highly defended" "well researched" and ""honest" / the apologetics on display over him from you guys should have been embarrassing

Amazing and sad

I don't want to hear one more post from you clowns about how Rush isn't "the voice" of your party after you all just defended him as Well Researched and Honest - there is NO BACKING AWAY NOW boys - you've exposed yourselves

Here come the "obsessed over Rush" posts... As distraction and defense part VI
(with a dose of MSNBC side swipe)

Face it - you own it

Whoa- youre so touched off youre even pre-empting replies

"Your" party?



BTW I used to think that part of Limbaugh's allure was because he gets liberals in such a lather

Now I KNOW it to be true. He's like the Krugman of the right

only better researched and more honest