Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!
Rep. Kingston Introduces Resolution ‘Commending’ Rush Limbaugh
thinkprogress.org — Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) -- who voted to criticize MoveOn.org -- has decided to commend Limbaugh. Today at 3:16 PM, Kingston introduced a resolution “[c]ommending Rush Hudson Limbaugh III for his ongoing public support of American troops serving both here and abroad.”
aterkel- 623 diggs
- digg it
- bobothedorkboy, on 10/10/2007, -22/+49Jeezus. Just "Jeezus"... That's all I got.
- whiskeymb, on 10/10/2007, -7/+50No kidding! That's all I could say. Seriously, do our congressmen have nothing better to do with their time then try to pass bills that either condemn or commend individual organizations and people in this country? Where the ***** is the fixing of our healthcare system, or fixing SS, or fixing this giant ***** called the Iraq war. *****! If I was in Georgia I'd be calling for this guy's resignation for wasting our god-damned time!
- natedouglas, on 10/10/2007, -1/+17Didn't they recently pass a bill commending Smuckers for their outstanding jams and jellies? This is what we pay these people for.
- byronm, on 10/10/2007, -2/+13I personally liked it when they condemned skull *****.. i mean, jeez.. i'm sick of walking around town and seeing a bunch of skull *****
- natedouglas, on 10/10/2007, -1/+17Didn't they recently pass a bill commending Smuckers for their outstanding jams and jellies? This is what we pay these people for.
- smoothmedia, on 10/10/2007, -5/+17Just wait 'till the resolution passes because Democrats vote in favour of it.
- FredFredrickson, on 10/10/2007, -10/+22Funny how all the Republican / Conservative assholes who would balk at a 1 cent rise in taxes to help support the poor will applaud this complete waste of taxpayer money and government time / effort.
- kenn5, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1One cent rise in taxes to support the poor? How about $100? Wait, maybe 10% of my income? Hold on, lets make it 50%. I love it when government forcibly takes my money to help the poor. That way, I do not have to choose to give my money to charities. The government can help the poor much better than charities.
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Factually, they can. Programs like Medicare are much more efficient than private charities, with a much higher ratio of $ actually ending up providing services vs. being squandered on fundraising and massive executive salaries. Check it out for yourself.
- kenn5, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1One cent rise in taxes to support the poor? How about $100? Wait, maybe 10% of my income? Hold on, lets make it 50%. I love it when government forcibly takes my money to help the poor. That way, I do not have to choose to give my money to charities. The government can help the poor much better than charities.
- cliffzdude, on 10/10/2007, -12/+3Limbaugh (ass hat) was speaking about so called "phony soldiers", the "phony" comes in as they've been telling lies about their past, including one guy who washed out of basic but was telling of his horrific times as a soldier, including killing innocents in mosques. There is argument as to if Limbaugh actually meant this in his show, but apparently if one is a Limbaugh listener he's made this point enough times that his "phony soldier" label is one the has a specific reference. Not to all soldiers, as they are "phony". But to specific full of bs soldiers, who are liars and proven to be "phony". Whew, now that is out of the way.
Limbaugh was condemned today by Harry Reid for his calling soldiers "phony". Jack Kingston replies by trying to commend Limbaugh.
***** ME! Doesn't anybody on Digg read the muther ***** articles? And if it comes from "Think Progress", be certain you may be spoon fed a steaming pile of dogg *****.
*****! *****! *****!
I hate Limbaugh, but more than Limbaugh I hate ***** politicians who are playint the US public like cheap fiddles. Damn people! They're gaming you! Don't you get it? The MORE polarized the US public becomes, the MORE POWERFUL each side becomes. Damn it. Quit drinking the kool-aid, be you far left, far right, or anywhere in the middle, get a ***** life and READ.
Digg posts 2 sentences about a story on Think Progress. Story on Think Progress is a cherry picked lines from multiple news stories. Yeah, that's critical thinking, reading two sentences and taking it as the truth and running with it....
So, you think that is being a responsible citizen? Basing your point of view from 15 words on a Digg headline?- Gerz1219, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Your rant is completely irrelevant. Whatever your opinion of Rush Limbaugh's remarks, it's not the role of Congress to be issuing "gold stars" and "check minuses" to commentators on purely partisan lines. They're supposed to be debating and passing legislation, not acting as a focus group for political discourse.
- ClosedCaption, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Ever notice how everything is ok as long as a Republican does it
Nation Building previously condemed now embraced
Bigger Government (Homeland Security, Wiretapping)
Spending out of control (half a trillion in Iraq)
Now attacking the troops
All they need to defend the things they never defended is to say that a Democrat hates it, then they are all for it like a rebellious teenager who doesnt want to listen to his father. Lets just hope that a Democrat says that leaving the country is a bad idea, then they'll be a mass exodus of right wing idiots
- whiskeymb, on 10/10/2007, -7/+50No kidding! That's all I could say. Seriously, do our congressmen have nothing better to do with their time then try to pass bills that either condemn or commend individual organizations and people in this country? Where the ***** is the fixing of our healthcare system, or fixing SS, or fixing this giant ***** called the Iraq war. *****! If I was in Georgia I'd be calling for this guy's resignation for wasting our god-damned time!
- thejoshuablog, on 10/10/2007, -21/+18This putz is too funny for words.
- DavidYeah, on 10/10/2007, -30/+27In Limbaugh's "up is down" universe, saying that soldiers that are publically for withdrawal are "phony" is exactly the same as saying they're not phony.
So anyway... there's this special category of soldiers that are real, devoted members of the military... until the second they come out against the war, at which point they are no longer authentic, they're simply political operatives. Isn't that how the logic goes? That even works within the context of the edited Limpaugh version of what happened.- EntropyMan, on 10/10/2007, -17/+31No. In Rush's world, he didn't say what he clearly said. He claims he was talking about just one phony soldier, who he tells us was _actually_ a phony soldier, never served, etc... Never mind that he agreed in context that any soldier that doesn't support the war is phony. Never mind that the MoveOn ad never actually called Petraeus a traitor, as Republicans claimed (Betray Us != Treason, unless a specific crime against the US was committed. Conservatives were actually the first to use the word treason).
Never mind revisionist history. What's really important is that this exactly what the Democrats should have done. Instead of cowering and condemning MoveOn, they should have defeated the previous motion on the grounds that Republicans are retarded and issued a confirmation that MoveOn represents mainstream American views that the war is ***** and those who promote it are *****. In fact, there were any number of instances of Republicans dissing anti-war soldiers, even generals, before the MoveOn ad. And all the Dems had to do was change the language to either condemn anyone who attacked a soldier in uniform, or no one on the grounds that soldiers can pretty much defend themselves.
It's as if the Dems are afraid that people might still secretly prefer the Republicans in '08. And the truth is, most people are sick of both -- third party is the only way out.- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Third party is the most certain way to perpetuate Republican's lock hold on power. The "no difference between the parties" is a meme that only serves the status quo by discrediting the opposition.
Rather, if the Democrats had a real controlling majority in Congress - nevermind a veto-resistant majority, I'll settle for an actual margin in the Senate that compensates for the DINOs and the whores like Lieberman - then we'd see real change.
Political ignorance, wishful thinking and rejecting the good while insisting on the perfect will kill this republic dead.
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Third party is the most certain way to perpetuate Republican's lock hold on power. The "no difference between the parties" is a meme that only serves the status quo by discrediting the opposition.
- p0s3r, on 10/10/2007, -15/+16He didn't say what you think he clearly said. He was obviously talking about the host of phony soldiers the Left likes to trot out.
- SpudgeBoy, on 10/10/2007, -11/+10Wrong. He clearly said it and anybody that has listened to the audio know that he said it, except Bush apologists.
- p0s3r, on 10/10/2007, -6/+9I've listened to the audio and read the transcripts. Either the people pushing this smear are being deliberately dishonest (most likely) or they are just retarded.
- onisamsha, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2So, if it's not okay for moveon to IMPLY something (Petraeus is a traitor), then it should also NOT be okay for Rush to imply something either. Right?
Right???
While all of this is stupid rhetorical BS (both the moveon ad, and Rush's on-air snafu) i like the double standard that conservatives are using. When a group of 300 million says something that can be construed to insult a general, it's despicable and anti-american, but when a talk-show host says something that can be construed to insult anti-war soldiers, he just misspoke and the lefties are the ones who are in the wrong for bad listening.
Now, now, i know what you're gonna say...."But when he said 'phony soldiers' he was refering to a guy he was talking about earlier in the program who wasn't even in the military." That's all well and good, but in the context of the caller who he was talking to, he was agreeing with him, saying PLURALLY (not singular), "The phony soldiers." The caller mentioned multiple soldiers that the ambiguous "left" likes to trot forward to say that the war is wrong, never mentioning the man who faked his military credentials. Therefore, no, when Rush agreed with the caller and refered to soldiers who are against the war as phony, he was labeling any soldier who believes the war is wrong as phony. This interpretation, as any other, is derived from my unique semantic interpretation and the way in which the conversation transpired, but my point is, it could be construed that way. There's no deliberate dishonesty taking place when people call out Rush for being a douche, just as there's no deliberate dishonesty when congress calls out moveon. This is the way conversation works; sometimes a speakers statement is taken out of context by the audience for all manner of reasons other than the actual words that were used.
I think Rush would serve himself far better if he came out on air and just said, "look, i'm sorry if what i said was construed to be an attack on soldiers who don't agree with the war. i was refering to a man who wasn't actually in the military." (although personally i think that would utter BS. He actually just likes playing the victim cause it helps in ratings)- onisamsha, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1that was menat as a reply to p0s3r not to spudgeboy
- SpudgeBoy, on 10/10/2007, -11/+10Wrong. He clearly said it and anybody that has listened to the audio know that he said it, except Bush apologists.
- ReinMasamuri, on 10/10/2007, -7/+6Because the US DoJ loves to lie since it's a huge right wing conspiracy:
“As a Vietnam Veteran, and the father of a decorated Army officer currently serving, I feel very keenly the damage done by Jesse Macbeth and these other fakes,” said Jeff Sullivan, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Washington. “Macbeth’s lies fueled hostility to our servicemen in Iraq and here at home. Those who falsely claim medals for heroism, cheapen the recognition of our true war heroes.”- SpudgeBoy, on 10/10/2007, -5/+9That's great, but that isn't what Lush was talking about and anybody who who listened to the audio knows it.
Strawman- Gothvanhelsing, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Oddly in the audio by chance he happens to only give one example by name and that name was not a real soldier. It was a guy who washed out of boot camp and made up stories. but who cares that he only named one person who was in fact a phony soldier
- SpudgeBoy, on 10/10/2007, -5/+9That's great, but that isn't what Lush was talking about and anybody who who listened to the audio knows it.
- EntropyMan, on 10/10/2007, -17/+31No. In Rush's world, he didn't say what he clearly said. He claims he was talking about just one phony soldier, who he tells us was _actually_ a phony soldier, never served, etc... Never mind that he agreed in context that any soldier that doesn't support the war is phony. Never mind that the MoveOn ad never actually called Petraeus a traitor, as Republicans claimed (Betray Us != Treason, unless a specific crime against the US was committed. Conservatives were actually the first to use the word treason).
- DavidYeah, on 10/10/2007, -26/+17And now there's news that ABC was talking about the "phony soldier" two days before Limbaugh started using the term.. nevermind that it is ABC that is talking about THE phony soldier, and the reason for it is that he faked being a war hero.
Limbaugh's talking about a group of soldiers, namely, people who are against the war that happen to be soldiers, current or past, be they John Kerry, John Murtha, or anyone who has come back from the war to speak up publically.. They're the phony soldiers, the "heroes" of the "left" One of them, according to him, is the guy who falsified claims about his time in Iraq. John Kerry was even called a phony by this chickenhawk in the past.- SheilaNoya, on 10/10/2007, -11/+21ABC did a story about people who were falsely claiming they were soldiers, when in reality, they were never in the military. Rush accused soldiers who oppose the war of being "phony soldiers". HUGE DIFFERENCE. Now Rush has re-edited his transcript and lied to cover up what he said. He's a pathetic mouthpiece for Bush and the neoCon agenda who is using his show to push propaganda that is dangerous to America. He deserves the same kind of hatred that he spews at others on a daily basis.
- DavidYeah, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3Hmm.. I don't exactly know how I got dugg down and you got dugg up for saying basicalyl the same thing, but oh well.
- ploop, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10Clarity, my friend. Clarity.
- SpudgeBoy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Because you didn't say the same thing.
- DavidYeah, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3Hmm.. I don't exactly know how I got dugg down and you got dugg up for saying basicalyl the same thing, but oh well.
- GADave, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5You are terribly misinformed.
- rationalthinker, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4GO RUSH!... You da man.... ***** the media, liberal democrats, and the liberal morons on digg. We need more congressman like this. ***** all you liberal bastards... ***** you all!!!!
- repete, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Can anyone please confirm for me, if there are actually Americans (Beyond their teens) who actually think this way, or if it is just some snotty nose brat trying to get a rise out of people?
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Just look at his screen name - War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength, and "rationalthinker" is anything but.
- repete, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2Can anyone please confirm for me, if there are actually Americans (Beyond their teens) who actually think this way, or if it is just some snotty nose brat trying to get a rise out of people?
- SheilaNoya, on 10/10/2007, -11/+21ABC did a story about people who were falsely claiming they were soldiers, when in reality, they were never in the military. Rush accused soldiers who oppose the war of being "phony soldiers". HUGE DIFFERENCE. Now Rush has re-edited his transcript and lied to cover up what he said. He's a pathetic mouthpiece for Bush and the neoCon agenda who is using his show to push propaganda that is dangerous to America. He deserves the same kind of hatred that he spews at others on a daily basis.
- polymath22, on 10/10/2007, -23/+11i listen to hannity and limbaugh radio shows.
today limbaugh devoted my listening time to congressional action being taken to condemn him. he had lots of sound bites from the politicians. he was *particularly* testy today, you could almost hear his blood pressure rise. he was especially defensive as well, stuttering and stammering and at a loss for words.
one of the clips he played said that "rushs show has been losing listeners for a long time" and rush didn't challenge that.- bmalachuk, on 10/10/2007, -28/+9actually rush did challenge the loss of listeners BS. No one eve comes close to the number of listeners Rush has on a daily or weekly basis, course all the lefty moonbats will cite even a few hundred less listeners from month to month as evidence that he is losing his audience. If that were true then hmmm Air Amerika would have flourished, eh?
- SheilaNoya, on 10/10/2007, -7/+24The 71% of Americans who are against this war are all "lefty moonbats"??? Are you REALLY that ignorant?
- dondara, on 10/10/2007, -3/+12"lefty moonbats"? WTF does that even mean? Is that supposed to be an insult? Sounds like childish gibberish for when you can't defend your position because you are just repeating lies that some neocon ***** spewed since the truth doesn't suit their war profiteering agenda.
- pickypg, on 10/10/2007, -14/+3"Lefty moonbats" refers to the people that talk out like crazy against conservatives (real conservatives...) and in this case, Limbaugh in particular. This does not mean random liberals, or even conservatives that may disagree with the war (heck, I am for the war, but if we aren't willing to unleash our full military power and stop warning everyone before we are about to show up, and stop just holding one hand behind our back because it's the politically correct thing to do, then we /should/ leave.).
Also, are you implying that that the 71% number, even if it is true, meant that 71% of the population would not listen to Limbaugh for that reason? Are you REALLY that stupid? - christor, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4"I am for the war, but if we aren't willing to unleash our full military power and stop warning everyone before we are about to show up, and stop just holding one hand behind our back because it's the politically correct thing to do, then we /should/ leave."
I see. So you're for atrocity. Well, at least we know where we disagree. (And by the way, can you explain how a scorched earth fight would achieve our objective of ending sectarian strife?)
- quaxon, on 10/15/2007, -5/+4im pretty sure howard stern whether on terrestrial or satellite has MANY more listeners than rush.
- dmh11686, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5No, Rush has more listerners. Almost twice as many. This is from 2005.
http://radioequalizer.blogspot.com/2005/05/annual- ...- quaxon, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1are you ***** me? "Here's the list, with names, followed by ESTIMATED weekly audience size, rounded to the nearest quarter-million." This is just a stupid survey somebody did, in the official ratings books, you know the one that every advertise and anyone in the radio business look at, howard stern has dominated for over a decade comming in first in every category.
- SpudgeBoy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3A two year old poll. It is over the last two years that the right wing talk radio has been going down the tubes and is still spiraling down. People get sick of hearing the same ***** day in and day out.
- Monk22, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2oh i thought you were talking about air amerika
- dmh11686, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5No, Rush has more listerners. Almost twice as many. This is from 2005.
- onisamsha, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Where's Amerika? Or was that a lame attempt at wit?
- SheilaNoya, on 10/10/2007, -7/+24The 71% of Americans who are against this war are all "lefty moonbats"??? Are you REALLY that ignorant?
- bmalachuk, on 10/10/2007, -28/+9actually rush did challenge the loss of listeners BS. No one eve comes close to the number of listeners Rush has on a daily or weekly basis, course all the lefty moonbats will cite even a few hundred less listeners from month to month as evidence that he is losing his audience. If that were true then hmmm Air Amerika would have flourished, eh?
- shawnfassett, on 10/10/2007, -22/+18maybe its time to go back and see how rush got his sweatheart deal in florida. jeb promoted the attorney that was going after rush and replaced him with somebody that was a tool for the gop. i'm sure those dems that sat back and watched will complain when elections are routed, but they let fools like this go by and then they act surprised when bad people ruin good government -
Gov. Bush taps Limbaugh investigator for county judge
Susan Spencer-Wendel
Palm Beach Post Staff Writer
December 20, 2005
James Martz, the prosecutor leading the Rush Limbaugh investigation, is headed out of the state attorney's office and on to the judicial bench.
Gov. Jeb Bush nominated Martz on Monday to a seat on the Palm Beach County Court. He's expected early next year to fill a vacant seat created by the Florida Legislature.
Martz, 48, of Parkland, did not return a call for comment.
For more than two years, Martz has led the investigation of conservative talk show king Limbaugh, arguing successfully through protracted appeals a prosecutor's right to seize medical records and subpoena doctors during the course of a criminal investigation.
Limbaugh, of Palm Beach, has not been charged with any crime. Limbaugh, an acknowledged painkiller addict, has been under investigation for alleged doctor-shopping, seeking duplicate prescriptions from doctors.
Limbaugh has called the investigation a political fishing expedition and adamantly denies he ever doctor-shopped.
A spokesman for the state attorney's office would not comment on who would take over the investigation or how Martz's departure would affect the case. - Barbrady, on 10/10/2007, -39/+14Rush has done more to support the troops than the "we support the troops, not the war" lefties.
- wynja, on 10/10/2007, -8/+15Dude, I want some of what your smoking.
- izzybr, on 10/10/2007, -3/+14Seriously? You couldn't even mention ONE WAY he has done this?
- pintomp3, on 10/10/2007, -6/+17rush loves the troops so much he wants them to stay there and die.
- quaxon, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1what about us that support the war but not the troops?
- phoofy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Examples, please.
- onisamsha, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1This has to be snark. I mean come on, your names Barbrady. I am right now imagining Barbrady on the season opener of South Park tomorrow repeating what you just said.
It is beyond hilarity. Ah sweet irony. - ClosedCaption, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1What about offering memberships to the troops for $30.00, Club Gitmo shirts and those cool coffee mugs? /sarcasm
- crillbilly, on 10/15/2007, -23/+23I threw up a little in my mouth...
- bonerjams2k3, on 10/10/2007, -10/+3dugg up for dodgeball reference
- SpudgeBoy, on 10/10/2007, -5/+10Dugg down for not recognizing that people have been throwing up a little in their mouths and telling people for a lot longer than Dodgeball has been out.
- bonerjams2k3, on 10/10/2007, -10/+3dugg up for dodgeball reference
- chicofaraby, on 10/15/2007, -24/+45Excellent. The more the right wing supports that fat bastard, the further they move away from most Americans.
- SheilaNoya, on 10/10/2007, -10/+10I agree with you 100%. The Republican party is doing everything it can to identify themselves as the party of FEAR, PROPAGANDA, and LIES. It will be nice to see them disintigrate in 2008. Maybe this will force them to finally toss out the NeoCons, the religious nuts, and the fear-mongers and go back to being the old Republican party they used to be.
- Commodore84, on 10/10/2007, -18/+11This just shows the left's complete ignorance on "most Americans." "Most Americans" like Rush Limbaugh and agree with him, as demonstrated by his incredible numbers. What happened to Air America again? Oh yeah, they couldn't even get enough listeners to break even in the most liberal of markets (SF for example).
P.S. SheilaNoya, it's "disintegrate." That "check spelling" button is really useful. Try it sometime.- bonerjams2k3, on 10/10/2007, -5/+7too bad they don't also happen to have a "btw, i'm a santorum-gargling *****" button for you. it'd be really useful.
- SpudgeBoy, on 10/10/2007, -6/+10Are you high? There are 300 million people in this country. Rush has about 2 million listeners a day. Where do you get your math? Same place Karl Rove got his I guess. Home schooling and church.
- seomike, on 10/10/2007, -10/+7And the Democrats are the party of DEFEAT, TUCK AND RUN and BURKA WEARING FEMALE bootlickers that pander to extreme left masters funded by billionaire communists.
- chicofaraby, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Digging you up for the hilarious satire of goofy right-wing catch-phrases.
- wishninja, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1soon america will be a one party system?
- wynja, on 10/10/2007, -16/+46Okay, this is just as retarded as the Congress voting to condemn Moveon.org's ad. I'm not paying these peoples' salary to vote to condemn ANYONE's right to free speech.
This is exactly why the Fairness Doctrine and the Equal-time Rule must be restored to public broadcasting. If you've never heard of either of these, then I suggest you wikipedia them. If you don't trust wikipedia, then pick up an old encyclopedia. Each media outlet should be forced to present both sides of every argument fairly. Without this doctrine and rule, there can be no democracy.- StarlessKnight, on 10/10/2007, -2/+12They'll consider restoring those about the same time they restore Haebus Corpus for everyone, not just the non-Enemy Combatant American Citizenry, and put an end to Rendition.
- pickypg, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Actually, not only are we paying them to do nothing, increase the deficit by spending more than we have (every time), while at the same time complaining about everyone "else" doing it, and we pay them and they /don't/ pay social security taxes on their salaries (but we the peasants must for the good of the country??).
- KirbyMeister, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7Digg doesn't even follow this rule.
- schrankage, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Digg isn't a government.
- seomike, on 10/10/2007, -8/+3Fairness doctrine is anti Capitalism and is very unconstitutional. How can you sit back and say that a government should dictate what is aired and the contents of the program. Or are you of such little mind to comprehend that. No one is forced into listening to AM radio. The fact that Air America was such a failure and the only way for liberal talk radio to even have a remote chance of success is to piggy back on the success of conservative radio.
Talk shows are on the air because they make money in the private sector. People listen and advertisers pay good money to appeal to their demographics. If the message isn't popular, like Air America, it fails. Colbert, Stewart and all of MSNBC and CNN do a very good job at countering talk radio.- SpudgeBoy, on 10/10/2007, -4/+9I like how right wing whackos talk like Air America isn't around anymore. I listen to it everyday and their ratings are going up. You need to catch up and turn off Fox and Rush. You might learn something at that point.
- pintomp3, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8the fairness doctrine only applies to public airwaves, nice try though.
- Gothvanhelsing, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1This is how bad ideas become law.
- SheilaNoya, on 10/10/2007, -20/+21If Rush Limbaugh supports the troops, then why doesn't he ever mention that the majority of our troops are against the war, or that the vast majority of political donations from the troops are going to Anti-War candidates?
- StarlessKnight, on 10/10/2007, -9/+4Because then he couldn't say he supports the troops?
- p0s3r, on 10/10/2007, -9/+14Because that's not true?
- Acewrap, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3No, that's not the answer.
- pickypg, on 10/10/2007, -7/+12Because they aren't? My brother is in the Marines and his whole unit just volunteered for their second tour in Iraq.
- amoirae, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3Your imaginary brother and his friends don't count.
- Atomic1fire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1unless they are not imaginary
phony solders dont count ether
(and Yes when I say that I mean the opposition that just suddenly appears regardless of stories of solders playing baseball with iraqi children)
- Atomic1fire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1unless they are not imaginary
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Presenting anecdotal evidence, even if it were real, to refute statistical trends is a logical fallacy.
- amoirae, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3Your imaginary brother and his friends don't count.
- usercc, on 10/10/2007, -7/+8Maybe because that is not true.
- pintomp3, on 10/10/2007, -6/+8http://www.militarycity.com/polls/2006_main.php
"more troops disapprove of the president’s handling of the war than approve of it"
what now?- calmeacham, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4there is a clear difference between disapproving of the "handling of the war" and disapproving of the war itself. so i would say that is "what now"
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1That depends on what your definition of the word "is", is.
- calmeacham, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4there is a clear difference between disapproving of the "handling of the war" and disapproving of the war itself. so i would say that is "what now"
- killakan, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5How about because the majority of troops are NOT against the war, regardless of what MoveOn, CrooksAndLiars, and RawStory say.
Maybe you should go out and get some real information instead of just lapping up the propaganda they spew out.- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1P, K.
- Atomic1fire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1or Mediamattersthatseemimportanttous
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1P, K.
- Gothvanhelsing, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2And oddly all Armed forces radio and television is chosen by the troops and some how Rush seems to always be renewed on their network. did you know the first year rush was on AFRAT he had the country's #1 rated radio show but he was not a choice but he was written in by service men and women in the armed forces and got more votes then any of the other choices.
- izzybr, on 10/10/2007, -4/+38I'm glad to see that this type of stuff is going on in congress instead of any REAL debate about the war.
- davestar, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9Exactly what we should be pissed at in this situation. While it's infuriating that Kingston is so detached from reality, the real sin is that our tax dollars are paying for Representatives who choose to to sit around and draft resolutions that only serve to pander to their base rather than accomplish anything meaningful.
- pickypg, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3While I agree with you, I'd rather they did this stuff then blowing all of our money on pork projects.
- davestar, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9Exactly what we should be pissed at in this situation. While it's infuriating that Kingston is so detached from reality, the real sin is that our tax dollars are paying for Representatives who choose to to sit around and draft resolutions that only serve to pander to their base rather than accomplish anything meaningful.
- pintomp3, on 10/10/2007, -14/+15we've come to expect this kind of partisan treachery from the republicans, but the democrats have proved themselves to be of the same cloth. they all need to be voted out. let's start cleaning house in '08
- johnlabmonkey, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2You're missing the point. The Dems have to start hitting back, and this is one way to do that.
- way2muchsense, on 10/10/2007, -10/+8What an idiot.
- Laytonx, on 10/10/2007, -5/+27The Government shouldn't be in the business of condemning the so called 'feed speech' of its citizens.
As much as I hate Rush, the Congress should stay out of it. Its a slippery slope.
Same goes for the condemnation of the move on add.- seomike, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4We have lesser men and women in higher callings. You should expect no less from them.
- leftyslament, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9They're not condemning him, they're commending him. Either way this partisan ***** has to stop. Right now Duncan Hunter is trying to push a bill to "restore patriotism to Columbia University campus" and remove federal funding from the school for allowing Iranian president Ahmadenijad to speak there. Doesn't congress have some slightly more important issues to attend to?
- enginbeering, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3No, hurting education and free speech is priority #1.
- Atomic1fire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1what education
this is the same guy that hangs homosexuals
and denies the halocaust
Ive seen the images of the 4 men being hanged on trucks
siding with this guy will no doubt hurt the right and left
- Atomic1fire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1what education
- enginbeering, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3No, hurting education and free speech is priority #1.
- usercc, on 10/10/2007, -11/+6Why do liberals hate those they disagree with?
- byronm, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4hahaha.. after reading the rest of your quotes the only person spreading hate is you. I mean, look at yourself. DO you see how you come off as? grow up.
- natedouglas, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Probably because you support naïve, hypocritical, and short-sighted policies; infractions of other's civil liberties based on good ol'-fashioned ignorance; going into random countries and killing ***** of innocent people for oil; building political platforms on the backs of the religious; and general asshattery. That being said, I don't hate you. I do think you're frustratingly gullible.
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Why do conservatives whine so much?
- pickypg, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5What I don't understand is that we are willing to create legislation to both commend and condemn a CITIZEN of the United States that whether you agree with him or not, is not out talking about the destruction of America (well, he's not for it anyway--he does talk about it).
Then you look over at Venezuela, where actors regularly visit Hugo Chavez, publically encouraging our enemy, which correlates directly with Iran, who obviously is no friend of ours. So, we go a step further and allow Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to come speak at a public forum at Columbia University and just spread lies. At least the Columbia University talked about him negatively; that was actually surprising.
Yet, I don't see any condemnations for supporting our enemy, or commendations for showing them for what they actually are (even if they should have cut off his mic).- leftyslament, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I think you're missing the point. Congress has no business making commendations or condemnations in the first place. Congress is supposed to be a representative, legislative body. They are supposed to make laws in accordance to the will of the people they represent. Instead they are wasting our time and money by playing party politics instead of actually dealing with real issues.
- zanzzz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Chavez is our enemy? Did I miss the declaration of war on Fox News? We get substantial shipments of oil from Venezuela despite our political disagreements.
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Funny how us liberals seem to want America to remain faithful to its entire Bill of Rights, while you conservatives only seem to care about the 2nd Amendment and forget the rest, especially the 1st.
Almost sounds like you wish Bush were more like Chavez and the US more like Iran.
- vonnegut, on 10/10/2007, -9/+15Reid, Harkin , Kingston are wasting our time and our money on grandstanding for the cameras, propagating a media-matters lie. PATHETIC. This is why Congress approval rate is around 12%.
We are NOT so stupid that we can be distracted by these liberal democrats pointing to lightening rods like Limbaugh instead of actually doing anything productive or positive regarding the war.
Congressional democrats picking a fight about troop moral? What a joke!- p0s3r, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8The only group this smear has gained traction with is the retards.
- johnlabmonkey, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2The low approval is because the Dems don't fight back. I hope this is a start.
- EIderofzion, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Hmm at first poser I doubted your comment, but now thanks to johnlab I can see there is absolutely no doubt at all you are right.
- johnlabmonkey, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2The low approval is because the Dems don't fight back. I hope this is a start.
- SpudgeBoy, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4Congresses approval rating is 23% Congressional Reps approval rating is 23% and Congressional Dems approval rating is 33%. Get your facts straight.
- p0s3r, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Here's some facts to straighten you out.
Congressional Approval Rating: 24%
Republicans: 37%
Democrats: 23%
http://www.galluppoll.com/content/default.aspx?ci= ...- art42, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1The link is dead. Try again.
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Remarkable, the lengths to which p0s3r and other radical conservatives will go to lie, deceive, and bear false witness.
Here is the full link, to the latest Gallup national poll comparing favorability ratings between he Democratic and Republican parties:
http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=28780
The title of the findings summary, dated September 25, 2007, is:
Democratic Party Maintains Solid Image Advantage Over GOP
Public Prefers Democratic Party to Republican for handling terrorism, military security
The actual ratings in the Gallup Poll:
Favorability:
Democratic Party: 53%
Republican Party: 38%
Check out all the graphs in the article - quite interesting - and quite opposite to the lies p0s3r regularly spreads on Digg.
One has to wonder at the moral bankruptcy of an ideology so irrational and extreme that is compels its followers to regularly and aggressively lie.
- p0s3r, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Here's some facts to straighten you out.
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Don't look now, but Kingston is a Republican. "Commending" does not mean "condemning" vonnegut - but then again, expecting literacy in the dittohead brigade is a bit much.
- p0s3r, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8The only group this smear has gained traction with is the retards.
- ChazHollywood, on 10/15/2007, -21/+13Good, Rush deserves the praise. You know, if you people would just listen to his show directly you'd find that he's not anything like the media makes him out to be. You might even start to agree with him. Oh, and the thumbs down button is over there ===>
- StarlessKnight, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Why yes, the thumbs down button *is* over there. I'd like it if you didn't employ MSM strategy, however, in telling me how to vote.
- ChazHollywood, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Apparently you aren't able to comprehend what I'm trying to say so I'll spell it out for you. The point I'm trying to make with the thumbs down button is that even though my comment is non inflamatory, the simple fact that it's being made on digg, in favor of Rush Limbaugh, automatically equals a buried comment. I could write out any thoughtful and insightful comment and post it here and as long as it doesn't meet the digg community agenda it will have a 100% chance of getting buried.
- Thuktun, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Surprise, a community site voting for what they like ("digg") and what they don't like ("bury").
- sekhui, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4but we have listened to rush, and we don't agree with him. we disagree with your inaccurate guess as to our reactions to him, so we digg you down.
- ChazHollywood, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2I don't believe that ANY of you have ever listened to his 3 hour program in its entirety. Pics or it didn't happen.
- chicofaraby, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Stop whining. The right wing gets buried on Digg because of it's tremendous unpopularity.
- ChazHollywood, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3...on digg
- SpudgeBoy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Well at least it is starting to sink in that you are part of the minority and guess what, not just on Digg. You are a minority in this country and absolutely in this world you are. So, enjoy.
- ChazHollywood, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Apparently you aren't able to comprehend what I'm trying to say so I'll spell it out for you. The point I'm trying to make with the thumbs down button is that even though my comment is non inflamatory, the simple fact that it's being made on digg, in favor of Rush Limbaugh, automatically equals a buried comment. I could write out any thoughtful and insightful comment and post it here and as long as it doesn't meet the digg community agenda it will have a 100% chance of getting buried.
- natedouglas, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Your arrow aims low. Just like you apparently do :-/
- byronm, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4Rush is like listening to my 3 year old daughter talk. Cute at times, but mostly gibberish and sometimes its just mind numbingly irritating.
I can listen to many other talk shows, radio shows, news people and accept whatever it is they through at me without regard. The only reason Rush exists is to feed an agenda without regard for any other views or opinions.. sort of like a 3 year old that simply doesn't know any better but the sad thing is Rush is much older than my 3 year old but less mature- natedouglas, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4It's not that Rush isn't mature -- he does possess an animal cunning akin to that often found in the marmot family -- but that he resists any attempt to raise the level of discourse. The man thinks ethics are people who swam across rivers to get into this country.
- sekhui, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3i haven't heard anything cunning out of him in a long time. just the same fat pompous bastard regurgitating the same old party line ***** every day.
- natedouglas, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4It's not that Rush isn't mature -- he does possess an animal cunning akin to that often found in the marmot family -- but that he resists any attempt to raise the level of discourse. The man thinks ethics are people who swam across rivers to get into this country.
- cesig, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Don't worry. I found the down arrow.
- StarlessKnight, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Why yes, the thumbs down button *is* over there. I'd like it if you didn't employ MSM strategy, however, in telling me how to vote.
- jger82, on 10/10/2007, -5/+13IT FEELS LIKE I'M IN THE ***** TWILIGHT ZONE.
- elcaminos, on 10/10/2007, -8/+17Don't confuse conservatives with neocons. I'm a conservative, and I think rush is an asshat.
- conrail, on 10/10/2007, -4/+7Sorry, rush represents mainstream republican values and the mainstream republican party, no matter what label (conservative, neocon) you try to wrap them in.
- Monk22, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2rush represents rush's values. id appreciate it if youd from refrain deciding what everyone thinks about the subject, especially since your clearly not a conservative and probably have never actually bothered to talk to one. im a conservative that smokes weed figure that ***** out.
- enginbeering, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Um, you're not a 'conservative'. Smoking weed is practically the definition of socially liberal (aside from being gay or having repeat abortions). I don't know your views on Economic policy, but I'm willing to bet they're not very well thought out.
Just because daddy calls himself a conservative doesn't mean that's what you are.- Monk22, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1so your doing exactly what i asked not to be done. nice. my father is dead and wasnt a conservative.
- enginbeering, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Um, you're not a 'conservative'. Smoking weed is practically the definition of socially liberal (aside from being gay or having repeat abortions). I don't know your views on Economic policy, but I'm willing to bet they're not very well thought out.
- Monk22, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2rush represents rush's values. id appreciate it if youd from refrain deciding what everyone thinks about the subject, especially since your clearly not a conservative and probably have never actually bothered to talk to one. im a conservative that smokes weed figure that ***** out.
- fsjonsey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1ZOMG NEOCON. Only asshats use the term neocon.
- conrail, on 10/10/2007, -4/+7Sorry, rush represents mainstream republican values and the mainstream republican party, no matter what label (conservative, neocon) you try to wrap them in.
- MarkDykeman, on 10/10/2007, -8/+6Is it 1994 again? I thought Rush was in suspended animation, waiting for the next Republican majority?
Well, not really...- natedouglas, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Until recently, yes, but having recently bathed in the blood of innumerable persian kittens, he is feeling much better. Thank you for your concern.
- onisamsha, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Still riding the wave of the 90's republicans, surfing on Newt's coat-tails.
Sandbar dead ahead! That's no sandbar.....THAT'S A MIDEASTERN RELIGIOUS HELLHOLE!
- maxpower17@digg, on 10/10/2007, -5/+13Why the hell are they wasting so much time over this dumb SH!T like move-on and rush. They should be focused on the REAL issues like Bush & the war on hate of our policies ( or Terrorism)
- zensequential, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3*gasps* ...and have our Congress do some REAL work!? have you no shame!! you know that's not what we pay them for....
If any politician actually start to do some good, heck, do ANYTHING, our whole political system would crumble as it stands.... it's all about "check and balance," accepting campaign donation in big fat "checks" and make sure they have positive "balance" in their bank accounts- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I'm betting you don't even know who your Congressman or Congresswoman are, let alone ever read a bill they sponsored or voted on, nor have any idea on what actually goes on in a Congressional office in DC - or in your state or even municipality (or village). You go through life thinking everything around you just happens by magic, from the highways to the clean water to the medicine that actually contains what the label on the bottle says to the childhood vaccinations that are the reason you are hear today ignorantly dissing "THEM".
And, no doubt, you can't even be bothered to drag yourself down to the polling booth to vote on November of any given year. Let alone actually run for office and see if you could survive one month with the schedule of the average public representative.
It's ignorant cynical ***** like you that are responsible for the minority of asshats like Rep Kingston surviving in office while dedicated, hard=working people get shat on every day for actually doing the job we elected them to do.- zensequential, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1the reason I'm here today because I score excellently during middle school year, which earned me a spot to come to America for study abroad; after 10 years living in this country, i again proven myself to the US congress and immigration office that I am fit to be an US citizen by taking the examiniation/interview/sworn-in; and believe me, US congressmen didn't help my one bit by passing laws and regulations that restrict the immigrant status simply because they don't want more "minority" in this country. what have YOU done to earn your citizenship and your right to vote? your parents born you here? yeah... you earn it alright
I have no desire to be a public servant, not because i don't bothered myself with "real" politics, but simply because of the fact that is just not my career path.
"And, no doubt, you can't even be bothered to drag yourself down to the polling booth to vote on November of any given year." and you will know this because we're old time friends, isn't that correct? I know my candidates' platforms, and i vote whenever my schedule allows; i don't have the luxury of taking time off to vote simply because I need every waking moment of my life either in class or at work. I got my 2 bachelors and 1 master's degree, and working on another post-bachelor degree, all in the while working for IBM. What the f**k have you done with your life then!?
just because i didn't started out my comment with "republican sux!' or "liberals can kiss my balls" any meaningless comments as such, you automatically think that I'm just jumping on the flaming bandwagon to gain some diggs points; if you truly with to know, I don't even agree with Kingston's point of view, and my opinion on Limbaugh is nothing short of "self-proclaiming righteous conservatives who think his opinion is the voice of all conservatives, and anyone that disagree with him automatically labelled 'fakes' and 'bogus' and 'unpatriotic'"
by the way, off the top of my head, Jesse Helms and John Edwards were the two congressmen from North Carolina that I can think off, how's that for being a cynical *****!?
- zensequential, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1the reason I'm here today because I score excellently during middle school year, which earned me a spot to come to America for study abroad; after 10 years living in this country, i again proven myself to the US congress and immigration office that I am fit to be an US citizen by taking the examiniation/interview/sworn-in; and believe me, US congressmen didn't help my one bit by passing laws and regulations that restrict the immigrant status simply because they don't want more "minority" in this country. what have YOU done to earn your citizenship and your right to vote? your parents born you here? yeah... you earn it alright
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I'm betting you don't even know who your Congressman or Congresswoman are, let alone ever read a bill they sponsored or voted on, nor have any idea on what actually goes on in a Congressional office in DC - or in your state or even municipality (or village). You go through life thinking everything around you just happens by magic, from the highways to the clean water to the medicine that actually contains what the label on the bottle says to the childhood vaccinations that are the reason you are hear today ignorantly dissing "THEM".
- zensequential, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3*gasps* ...and have our Congress do some REAL work!? have you no shame!! you know that's not what we pay them for....
- DavidYeah, on 10/10/2007, -11/+9Many of the Democratic candidates for congress and senate last year were former soldiers... They literally are political operatives now.. I wonder if Rush would say that they are phony and were simply going to Iraq with the foresight that they would run for congress one day... that's what folks like Limbaugh said about Kerry and his presidential run...
- seomike, on 10/10/2007, -7/+4Inform yourself and listen to what he was talking about... you'll be amazed how stupid your comments really sound afterwards
- DavidYeah, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5I did, a couple of times.
- seomike, on 10/10/2007, -7/+4Inform yourself and listen to what he was talking about... you'll be amazed how stupid your comments really sound afterwards
- brianbennett, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16...at least they aren't making laws. Nothing good ever comes from that.
- usercc, on 10/10/2007, -18/+13I listened to the whole show. Rush clearly was talking about people claiming to be soldiers who witnessed and committed war crimes who actually never were soldiers and had never been in a war zone. He specifically named one man, Jesse Macbeth, a lying liberal from Tacoma, Washington. He was not talking about any real soldiers. He was talking about people pretending that they were soldiers. He was talking about phony soldiers like Jesse Macbeth.
Rush is a better man and a better American than any liberal could ever be.- ChazHollywood, on 10/10/2007, -10/+6Preach on broddah.
- StarlessKnight, on 10/10/2007, -6/+8Define liberal. Define liberal, or stop slapping generalized, meaningless labels on people you disagree with just so you can stick your nose up at them, give a good sniff, and pretend you're better than them.
- natedouglas, on 10/10/2007, -5/+8Really? I actually served my country. Where was Rush at the time? Where were you, for that matter?
Basing an entire argument on Jesse Macbeth, who was discharged for a mental disorder, and using him to discredit every other soldier out there and every liberal is a bit low, even for neocons. And WTF does Tacoma have to do with it?- GADave, on 10/10/2007, -5/+7Well, it's obvious that usercc's comments went right over your head. .Again, a bit slower, and yes, I served my country in Gulf 1...He wasn't using him to "discredit every other soldier out there and every liberal". He was specifically referring to those that speak of "atrocities" they witnessed but had never served or had never served in a war zone...let alone the war zone where they had supposedly witnessed these atrocities.
Sheesh
- GADave, on 10/10/2007, -5/+7Well, it's obvious that usercc's comments went right over your head. .Again, a bit slower, and yes, I served my country in Gulf 1...He wasn't using him to "discredit every other soldier out there and every liberal". He was specifically referring to those that speak of "atrocities" they witnessed but had never served or had never served in a war zone...let alone the war zone where they had supposedly witnessed these atrocities.
- cesig, on 10/10/2007, -4/+7That you automatically assume that a "liberal" is a bad person indicates just how brainwashed you are. Think for yourself. Do you really think that every Republican is the same? Moreso, do you actually believe that you, or anyone else, is better than everyone in an entire class of people?
If so, not only are you brainwashed, you're an idiot. - vofuse, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Lay off the oxytocin, dude.
- onisamsha, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3He was referencing a single soldier, but used the plural form, saying "Phony Soldiers."
Either you're stupid, or Rush is stupid.....Or maybe both?- Gothvanhelsing, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1MacBeth was not the first or last Phony soldier
- terrordome, on 10/10/2007, -3/+21The American political system is a circus.
- StarlessKnight, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5And the Presidential election a population contest a la American Idol.
- sekhui, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4it's "popularity". but your point is well taken.
- StarlessKnight, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5And the Presidential election a population contest a la American Idol.
- MercedRocks, on 10/10/2007, -17/+12All least somebody in Congress knows what Rush was talking about...........liberal crap
- byronm, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5I'm glad you like Facism.. last time i checked freedom of speech was pretty important but i guess to morons like you its only important when it makes you feel good.
Fascist pig. I hope you enjoy your miserable existence that will soon be limited to what someone thinks you should do. After all, you have no idea what the meaning of "liberal is".
- byronm, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5I'm glad you like Facism.. last time i checked freedom of speech was pretty important but i guess to morons like you its only important when it makes you feel good.
- Enfilade, on 10/10/2007, -3/+14It isn't congress's place to be condemning or commending any media operation. Do something besides get fat on our tax dollars you worthless con-men!
- seomike, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2Fire them all, how much time have democrats and republicans waisted debating, grand standing and trying to 1 up each other over matters of private citizens and what they say and do. absolutely ridiculous!
There are far more pressing matters of national security & national wellness to bog down congress with votes over he-said she-said bull crap. We've let our lessers into higher callings. Time for it to stop. - brese1200, on 10/10/2007, -7/+17Rush is a scumbag.
Congress, Senate et al.- GET TO WORK AND STOP WASTING TIME WITH ***** LIKE THIS!!!! - DangerCollie, on 10/10/2007, -11/+5Hypocrisy: The other rich white meat.
- lead2thehead, on 10/10/2007, -15/+20Rush's comments are being grossly misrepresented here. He wasn't implying that troops who are anti-war are "phony soldiers". He was talking about civilians who pretend to be soldiers in order to push their anti-war agenda. More specifically, Jesse Macbeth, who claimed to be an Army Rangeer who witnessed all kinds of attrocities in Iraq. It turned out that he was not an army ranger, had never been to Iraq, and in fact washed out of boot camp. Here are is the conversation in its entirety:
CALLER: No, it's not, and what's really funny is, they never talk to real soldiers. They like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and talk to the media.
RUSH: The phony soldiers.
CALLER: Phony soldiers. If you talk to any real soldier and they're proud to serve, they want to be over in Iraq, they understand their sacrifice and they're willing to sacrifice for the country.
RUSH: They joined to be in Iraq.
CALLER: A lot of people.
RUSH: You know where you're going these days, the last four years, if you sign up. The odds are you're going there or Afghanistan, or somewhere.
CALLER: Exactly, sir. My other comment, my original comment, was a retort to Jill about the fact we didn't find any weapons of mass destruction. Actually, we have found weapons of mass destruction in chemical agents that terrorists have been using against us for a while now. I've done two tours in Iraq, I just got back in June, and there are many instances of insurgents not knowing what they're using in their IEDs. They're using mustard artillery rounds, VX artillery rounds in their IEDs. Because they didn't know what they were using, they didn't do it right, and so it didn't really hurt anybody. But those munitions are over there. It's a huge desert. If they bury it somewhere, we're never going to find it.
RUSH: Well, that's a moot point for me right now.
CALLER: Right.
RUSH: The weapons of mass destruction. We gotta get beyond that. We're there. We all know they were there, and Mahmoud even admitted it in one of his speeches here talking about Saddam using the poison mustard gas or whatever it is on his own people. But that's moot. What's more important is all this is taking place now in the midst of the surge working, and all of these anti-war Democrats are getting even more hell-bent on pulling out of there, which means that success on the part of you and your colleagues over there is a great threat to them. It's frustrating and maddening, and why they must be kept in the minority. I want to thank you, Mike, for calling. I appreciate it very much.
Here is a Morning Update that we did recently, talking about fake soldiers. This is a story of who the left props up as heroes. They have their celebrities and one of them was Army Ranger Jesse Macbeth. Now, he was a "corporal." I say in quotes. Twenty-three years old. What made Jesse Macbeth a hero to the anti-war crowd wasn't his Purple Heart; it wasn't his being affiliated with post-traumatic stress disorder from tours in Afghanistan and Iraq. No. What made Jesse Macbeth, Army Ranger, a hero to the left was his courage, in their view, off the battlefield, without regard to consequences. He told the world the abuses he had witnessed in Iraq, American soldiers killing unarmed civilians, hundreds of men, women, even children. In one gruesome account, translated into Arabic and spread widely across the Internet, Army Ranger Jesse Macbeth describes the horrors this way: "We would burn their bodies. We would hang their bodies from the rafters in the mosque."
Now, recently, Jesse Macbeth, poster boy for the anti-war left, had his day in court. And you know what? He was sentenced to five months in jail and three years probation for falsifying a Department of Veterans Affairs claim and his Army discharge record. He was in the Army. Jesse Macbeth was in the Army, folks, briefly. Forty-four days before he washed out of boot camp. Jesse Macbeth isn't an Army Ranger, never was. He isn't a corporal, never was. He never won the Purple Heart, and he was never in combat to witness the horrors he claimed to have seen. You probably haven't even heard about this. And, if you have, you haven't heard much about it. This doesn't fit the narrative and the template in the Drive-By Media and the Democrat Party as to who is a genuine war hero. Don't look for any retractions, by the way. Not from the anti-war left, the anti-military Drive-By Media, or the Arabic websites that spread Jesse Macbeth's lies about our troops, because the truth for the left is fiction that serves their purpose. They have to lie about such atrocities because they can't find any that fit the template of the way they see the US military. In other words, for the American anti-war left, the greatest inconvenience they face is the truth.- StarlessKnight, on 10/10/2007, -6/+4But Rush is really not biased. He overlooks the fact we've had countless "War Heroes" (at least three instances I recall, starting some time around Lynch's "valiant" rescue) in favor of pointing out the evil liberals have decided just to follow the playbook laid out before they gained the "majority." *Golf clap* Bravo. We could point at the failures of the system, but pointing at the "Other" is so much more important.
- lead2thehead, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I dare you to make less sense.
- seomike, on 10/10/2007, -10/+9How dare you post the truth. Look at all the thumbs down already... Political diggers are like holocaust deniers lol. can't stand the truth sometimes.
- nullcodes, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3CALLER: Phony soldiers. If you talk to any real soldier and they're proud to serve, they want to be over in Iraq, they understand their sacrifice and they're willing to sacrifice for the country.
RUSH: They joined to be in Iraq.
-- Now wait a second, are they sure that no soldier joined so that they can take the place of others? As in, they can not support the war, but still be over there so that someone else won't have to make the sacrifice and also to protect their buddies? And no, I don't claim to know. Also, I support the america's goals and the war.. but I think people should be allowed to oppose aspects of how a war is fought without being derided. Nobody called people who opposed nation building in Somalia and Haiti in the 90's unpatritic for not supporting the soldier's missions.
- nullcodes, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3CALLER: Phony soldiers. If you talk to any real soldier and they're proud to serve, they want to be over in Iraq, they understand their sacrifice and they're willing to sacrifice for the country.
- cesig, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7That's not the issue. The fact that a congressman is bothering with this trivial issue, regardless of its political bent or intention, is a travesty.
- lead2thehead, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Yes, and I'm just pointing out that (in addition to being a huge waste of time) what they're saying is dishonest. And at this point, the Democrats who are bashing him KNOW what really happened... but they're misrepresenting it on purpose to gain political points. And that, in my opinion, is much much worse than simply wasting time.
- natedouglas, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Jesse Macbeth was a phony soldier, a liar, a cheat, and a fraud. He was discharged for a mental disorder.
But call this man a phony soldier: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/09/27/iraq/mai ... - nullcodes, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3CALLER: Phony soldiers. If you talk to any real soldier and they're proud to serve, they want to be over in Iraq, they understand their sacrifice and they're willing to sacrifice for the country.
RUSH: They joined to be in Iraq.
-- Now wait a second, are they sure that no soldier joined so that they can take the place of others? As in, they can not support the war, but still be over there so that someone else won't have to make the sacrifice and also to protect their buddies? And no, I don't claim to know. Also, I support the america's goals and the war.. but I think people should be allowed to oppose aspects of how a war is fought without being derided. Nobody called people who opposed nation building in Somalia and Haiti in the 90's unpatriotic for not supporting the soldier's missions.- TaranWalker, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Bear in mind, though, that Clinton never felt compelled to lie about why we were in Somalia, Bosnia, Haiti, et al...in each of those cases, there was a clear humanitarian cause, and in none of them were we, out of the blue, overthrowing a legitimate ruling government...
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1What you posted is not the real transcript - it is the doctored transcript Rush put up on his site. Since the original audio has been released, this discrepancy has been widely discussed all over the Net. So, there are two possibilities here:
1) You are unaware that you posted an altered transcript - in which case you are an ignorant dittohead who unthinkingly and uncritically regurgitates whatever you are fed, no matter how absurd - and are probably among that percentage of Americans that still believe that Iraq was behind 9/11; or
2) You know perfectly well that the transcript you posted was false, in which case you are a deliberate liar who seeks to spread misinformation in order to fanatically, unthinkingly and uncritically promote a cause so radical that it justifies any lie as a mean to an end, whatever that is.
So, which is it - ignoramous dittohead, or liar?- fsjonsey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3So the MediaMatters transcript you spew is supposedly more accurate?
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1As my comment noted, "the original audio has been released" and the discrepancy "widely discussed all over the Net". Please refer me to where I referred to a media matters transcript. I referenced the actual, original, source material - the recording of the radio show (the full version, not the one with a section omitted that Rush released along with the doctored transcript), which you obviously can't be bothered to listen to for yourself.
- goforbroke, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2There is absolutly no context to the tangent in the 95 seconds of transcript. Please show me how media matters can conclude so and use it to prop up this phoney phoney story.
Everybody with a brain knows that Rush didn't slander anti-war soldiers, and that the whole phoney phoney story was an attempt by the left and especially Senate Democrats to change the subject from the MoveOn.org ad which has branded them as anti-military
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/blog- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1As my comment noted, "the original audio has been released" and the discrepancy "widely discussed all over the Net". Please refer me to where I referred to a media matters transcript. I referenced the actual, original, source material - the recording of the radio show (the full version, not the one with a section omitted that Rush released along with the doctored transcript), which you obviously can't be bothered to listen to for yourself.
Also note that Democrats are criticizing Rush Limbaugh for what Rush Limbaugh said, while you and others on the Right are trying to tar the entire Democratic Party with what Moveon.org chose to to.
That right there is the difference between honest, rational, specific criticism and ranting, dishonest, vague, overgeneralizing, zealous lunacy. Which do you suppose is more consistent with the values, traditions and Constitution of the United States of America?- goforbroke, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Please keep it up...the nation is watching. The truth is the truth.
- appleann1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I listened to the broadcast live, better than a transcript. Rush doctored nothing.
".......you and others on the Right are trying to tar the entire Democratic Party with what Moveon.org chose to to."
That's because the Democrat party is owned by moveon, they have to dance to their tune.
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1As my comment noted, "the original audio has been released" and the discrepancy "widely discussed all over the Net". Please refer me to where I referred to a media matters transcript. I referenced the actual, original, source material - the recording of the radio show (the full version, not the one with a section omitted that Rush released along with the doctored transcript), which you obviously can't be bothered to listen to for yourself.
- fsjonsey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3So the MediaMatters transcript you spew is supposedly more accurate?
- StarlessKnight, on 10/10/2007, -6/+4But Rush is really not biased. He overlooks the fact we've had countless "War Heroes" (at least three instances I recall, starting some time around Lynch's "valiant" rescue) in favor of pointing out the evil liberals have decided just to follow the playbook laid out before they gained the "majority." *Golf clap* Bravo. We could point at the failures of the system, but pointing at the "Other" is so much more important.
- Brain1, on 10/10/2007, -8/+12Well its about time Rush got the recognition he deserves!!!...Im gonna celebrate this wonderful occasion with 3 Oxycontin, and some Glenfiddich !!!
- Zarxrax, on 10/10/2007, -8/+15Rush's idea of supporting the troops is allowing his listeners to purchase subscriptions to his "rush 24/7" internet site for the troops. People should be outraged that he tries to profit off of the troops like this. I'm sure the troops would appreciate donations of actual value more than a donation of a subscription to propaganda.
- seomike, on 10/10/2007, -7/+324/7 is archived podcasts and live webcams of his show you moron. It's for devoted fans that actually work for a living and may miss a show or two during business hours.
- Zarxrax, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Yes, I know thats what it is. And he encourages his listeners to buy subscriptions of it to give to troops. There is practically no cost involved in something like that, it's just pure profit in the name of trying to make people think they are somehow helping troops.
- seomike, on 10/10/2007, -7/+324/7 is archived podcasts and live webcams of his show you moron. It's for devoted fans that actually work for a living and may miss a show or two during business hours.
- socialpyramid, on 10/10/2007, -12/+14Rush is a pill-popping fornicator who can't get it up.
Why any conservatives continue to listen to him at all is completely beyond me. Drug addict? Check. Premarital sex? Check. Taking drugs illegally across U.S. borders? Check. All he needs to do is hit on some underage boys to become a real GOP darling.- seomike, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4OMG he's human. He defines liberals as those who want to control you because you are too dumb to do it yourself and conservatives as those that think and take care of themselves without government involvement. Sex, drugs and all the rest have nothing to do with it.
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11) When you condemn the very things you are secretly practicing, it has everything do with it - that is at the core of conservative, self-hating hypocrisy. Of course he is human, as are liberals - the difference is that we don't imply that people are "sinners" or "evil" because they are human.
2) In fact, social conservatives like Rush Limbaugh are every bit as interested in government involvement as liberals; the difference is that liberals want to use government as the most efficient and effective way to fulfill our shared responsibility to provide the checks and balances on corporatism that Adam Smith, father of capitalism, advocated be instituted - which include reasonable restrictions on corporate freedoms which protect society as a whole while not preventing capitalist enterprise from thriving - as it has, historically, under Democratic administrations; liberals also see government as a means to protect minorities and the powerful from the predation and discrimination of majorities and powerful minorities; while conservatives want to use government to impose religious beliefs on society and constrict individual's freedom to pursue private matters such as love, marriage, reproduction and children's education.
Rush's "definitions" are propaganda - lies. He favors heavy government involvement - just not in the marketplace, but rather in our bedrooms and in women's wombs.- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1"means to protect minorities and the powerful from the predation and discrimination of majorities and powerful minorities"
should read:
"means to protect minorities and the powerless many from the predation and discrimination of majorities and the powerful few"
Damn digg.
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1"means to protect minorities and the powerful from the predation and discrimination of majorities and powerful minorities"
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11) When you condemn the very things you are secretly practicing, it has everything do with it - that is at the core of conservative, self-hating hypocrisy. Of course he is human, as are liberals - the difference is that we don't imply that people are "sinners" or "evil" because they are human.
- fsjonsey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4What the leftards never like to mention is that he was prescribed a drug with a 40% addiction rate after a botched back surgery. Oxy is one of the most addictive drugs prescribed today. Many other average people become hooked after taking it for chronic pain.
- seomike, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4OMG he's human. He defines liberals as those who want to control you because you are too dumb to do it yourself and conservatives as those that think and take care of themselves without government involvement. Sex, drugs and all the rest have nothing to do with it.
- christor, on 10/10/2007, -5/+11Kingston is one of the first Reps featured on Colbert's Better Know a District. In that interview, he famously agreed that he (a white man who had loved in Africa) was an African American. He's also the guy who complained that the Dem's shift to a five-day workweek in Congress "damages families." It seems that he's on a mission to become a self-parody.
- christor, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3^loved^lived ... talk about self-parody - oh well, long day.
- bonhoeffer, on 10/10/2007, -14/+10So Rush put the "Fake Soldiers" label on guys who aren't real soldiers, who come out of the blue to the media spouting anti-soldier, anti-war claims.
This offends anti-war liberals, how? Rush should be commended and his critics laughed off the floor.- cesig, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6You're just one more person missing the point.
- plasticquart, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2I'm a Libertarian (go ahead, look up things I've dugg... I'll wait...) and I've tried to follow this Rush incident as best as I could and for the life of me I don't understand where the issue is.
From the radio broadcast I listened to, it is CLEARLY evident that he was referring to people like this Jesse Macbeth kid -- someone who is/was a "phony" soldier.
This kid didn't see any combat, yet he was thrown to the media as an ex-soldier who didn't like what was going on in Iraq. Certainly there are 10's of thousands of such soldiers who have actually been to Iraq and aren't on board w/ our current military strategy. (And any conservatives who assert that there aren't 10's of thousands of current military members who are against this war are deluded.)
Why was there any need to use this kid? Why go through the motions when it isn't needed.
And further, why is the left all over this Rush incident?? Please, seriously, someone explain this to me.
- plasticquart, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2I'm a Libertarian (go ahead, look up things I've dugg... I'll wait...) and I've tried to follow this Rush incident as best as I could and for the life of me I don't understand where the issue is.
- natedouglas, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Clearly critical thought was never your strong suit. He was insulting soldiers who talk to the media and do not support the war or actions within it. Jesse Macbeth wasn't mentioned until later in the show.
- pintomp3, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3rush and his apologists have already come up with an alternate reality and time line.
- bonhoeffer, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Immediately before Rush said "Phony Soldiers" a caller said "they never talk to real soldiers. They like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and talk to the media."
Critical thinking says Rush was labeling those non-real soldiers who come up out of the blue.
You set up a straw man with the invention "He was insulting soldiers who talk to the media and do not support the war or actions within it" which simpletons like Harry Reid attack heroically.
- cesig, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6You're just one more person missing the point.
- schneidafunk, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1Am I the only one wondering where they got this information? I did a search in google and only thinkprogress shows up? While this story is *PROBABLY* true, I would appreciate a citation.
- missingnoh4x, on 10/10/2007, -6/+8I move that we pass a Digg resolution condemning Kingston.
- SEANWOOKIE, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I second that.
- Atomic1fire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I move against that notion
- Atomic1fire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I move against that notion
- SEANWOOKIE, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I second that.
- darrin2k, on 10/10/2007, -12/+6Wow it is crazy to me that you people do not research a story like this... When I heard that Rush called soldiers in Iraq phony soldiers instead of being in a uproar without looking at the facts, as a strong supporter of the troops and a patriot as well as a son of a man who served in the military 34 years, I researched this story and found out he was speaking of Jesse MacBeth, an anti-war activist who pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs for pretending to be an injured Iraq war veteran.
Macbeth was quoted in an April 26, 2006 SocialistAlternative.org article as saying "We would leave the bodies in the streets and blame it on the Shi'ites or the Sunnis. [In Fallujah] we were ordered to go into mosques and slaughter people while they were praying." Macbeth is also quoted as saying he was "stabbed many times," has shrapnel in his knee, has been shot in the back, and that he has received the Purple Heart. He also says his unit was the 3d Ranger Battalion.The unit did not participate in the U.S. occupation of Fallujah. Macbeth also says he was "picked" for Ranger School. Ranger School students are strictly volunteers.The article was replaced May 26, 2006 with a statement rejecting "use of false statements in the mistaken belief that they can in some way strengthen opposition to the war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Macbeth
You people should not attacking Rush for calling a man who flunked out of boot camp and never served in the military a "phony soldier" (Which he is! As well as any other person who claims to be a combat soldier and never was!) Why aren't you looking at these moveon.org people who have been betraying the American people and who called a active 4-star general who is serving in the trenches of war while there sitting on their ass "General Be-trayUs"! People wake up and do your research, do not take anything at face value, find out what people actually say before you attack them. Rush has been defending the troops for years and anyone who listens to him knows that. If Rush or any other person actually did call the soldiers in Iraq "phony soldiers" I would be condemning them! By the way Mr. Limbaugh received the marine corp and law enforcement foundation award for patriotism. I cant believe a man honored by troops and marines for his comments supporting them and a man who started the adopt a soldier foundation would say such a thing.
God bless the troops and God bless America!- dehnomac, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1The diggers who are promoting this story do not care what the true story is, in fact they do know, but do not care. They jump on the band wagon to try to destroy a private citizen who disagrees with the left's views. For a group who defended Sheehan and Fonda and spit on Vietnam soldiers and call our soldiers in Iraq now terrorist and baby killers, they sure have a warped view of the 1stt Amendment.
- darrin2k, on 10/10/2007, -17/+8Wow it is crazy to me that you people do not research a story like this... When I heard that Rush called soldiers in Iraq phony soldiers instead of being in a uproar without looking at the facts, as a strong supporter of the troops and a patriot as well as a son of a man who served in the military 34 years, I researched this story and found out he was speaking of Jesse MacBeth, an anti-war activist who pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs for pretending to be an injured Iraq war veteran.
Macbeth was quoted in an April 26, 2006 SocialistAlternative.org article as saying "We would leave the bodies in the streets and blame it on the Shi'ites or the Sunnis. [In Fallujah] we were ordered to go into mosques and slaughter people while they were praying." Macbeth is also quoted as saying he was "stabbed many times," has shrapnel in his knee, has been shot in the back, and that he has received the Purple Heart. He also says his unit was the 3d Ranger Battalion.The unit did not participate in the U.S. occupation of Fallujah. Macbeth also says he was "picked" for Ranger School. Ranger School students are strictly volunteers.The article was replaced May 26, 2006 with a statement rejecting "use of false statements in the mistaken belief that they can in some way strengthen opposition to the war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Macbeth
You people should not attacking Rush for calling a man who flunked out of boot camp and never served in the military a "phony soldier" (Which he is! As well as any other person who claims to be a combat soldier and never was!) Why aren't you looking at these moveon.org people who have been betraying the American people and who called a active 4-star general who is serving in the trenches of war while there sitting on their ass "General Be-trayUs"! People wake up and do your research, do not take anything at face value, find out what people actually say before you attack them. Rush has been defending the troops for years and anyone who listens to him knows that. If Rush or any other person actually did call the soldiers in Iraq "phony soldiers" I would be condemning them! By the way Mr. Limbaugh received the marine corp and law enforcement foundation award for patriotism. I cant believe a man honored by troops and marines for his comments supporting them and a man who started the adopt a soldier foundation would say such a thing.
God bless the troops and God bless America!- FredFredrickson, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7Wow are there some stupid people out there. Being anti-war doesn't make you anti-American, *****.
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Sadly for you, this isn't LGF or freeper land. You can't shut out reality - which has a well-known liberal bias.
I hope you stick around, though, and get a little exposure to a forum where everyone doesn't march in lock-step with you, and some people actually think for themselves. And do their own independent research - such as listening to the original, actual recording.
Reading right-wing propaganda and Rush's doctored transcript doesn't constitute fact-checking.
- nplace1, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14The resolution condemning the MoveOn.org ad was a waste of time (even though the ad was both in bad taste and a misdirection of antiwar energies), and this is even more ridiculous. Limbaugh's a jerk, but even if he was awesome, Congress should be spending time, you know, governing and *****.
- surilamin, on 10/10/2007, -15/+7Long live Limbaugh! The smear campaign against him has failed!
- surilamin, on 10/10/2007, -14/+7Long live Limbaugh! The smear campaign against him has failed!
- ZenMojo, on 10/10/2007, -10/+13Do people really believe that Rush Limbaugh *****? He edited the audio!
http://mediamatters.org/items/200710020002?f=h_top
Grow some balls and click on the ACTUAL AUDIO instead of listening to the edited crap he plays on his own show. Or are you afraid of the reality that he said something absolutely indefensible?- ZenMojo, on 10/10/2007, -6/+6http://mediamatters.org/items/200709270010?f=h_top
Actually, here's the ACTUAL AUDIO, the audio above is from his false apology.- DavidYeah, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2Clearly mediamatters has some sort of voice synthesis machine!
- p0s3r, on 10/10/2007, -5/+7It wasn't a false apology. He was sincerely apologizing to the troops on behalf of mediamatters and the rest of you retards.
- wizbor, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6Bonehead, MM was started by Hillary and is funded partly by her. She stated this FACT in public at a KOS meeting. Do you actually think MM would tell us anything else?
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1John Gibson's FoxNews propaganda does not qualify as "FACT" - even if you type it in ALL CAPS.
Interesting that you don't think to check these "FACTS" for yourself, on the intarnets (that you believe Al Gore said he invented, no doubt), and make up your own mind.- Atomic1fire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Interesting that you criticize him over facts yet claim shrillery's propaganda as facts
- Atomic1fire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Interesting that you criticize him over facts yet claim shrillery's propaganda as facts
- rationalist, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1John Gibson's FoxNews propaganda does not qualify as "FACT" - even if you type it in ALL CAPS.
- fsjonsey, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Yes, like I'm going to believe ANYTHING from a liberal smear group that tries its hardest to get ALL opposing voices off the air. Socalists= Stalinists when it comes to free speech.
- ZenMojo, on 10/10/2007, -6/+6http://mediamatters.org/items/200709270010?f=h_top
- growler1, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5I think it's a great idea. If it comes to a vote, any representative who votes for this will be marked as someone who deserves to be fired and replaced, and undeserving of their seat. Votes of 'nay' and 'no vote' I'd consider letting slide, but the people should take the list of nays for this smarmy little piece of partisan excrement and use it as voting guide.
[and yes, ye squawking neocons, I feel the same way about the moveon.org legislation. the partisan douchebaggery needs to stop.] - synarchy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Demagogy (Demagoguery) (from Greek δῆμος, "people", and ἄγειν, "to lead") refers to a political strategy for obtaining and gaining political power by appealing to the popular prejudices, fears and expectations of the public — typically via impassioned rhetoric and propaganda, and often using nationalist or populist themes.
------------------Get a life. - davewashere, on 10/10/2007, -5/+8I'll start listening to Rush again when he starts supporting the rights of living human beings over the rights of soon-to-be-garbage stem cells.
- Atomic1fire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Stemcells that could still come from adults or from cord blood which does not include discarding of human life for research
- pintomp3, on 10/10/2007, -9/+12looks like the dittoheads have descended on digg to support that fat, drug addicted, hypercritical emperor.
- LastVisibleDog, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4you might want to keep up - I guess your blind hate is getting the best of you. Rush is not fat and has not been fat for a long time - you might want to do some research before you parrot.
- amigabill, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3Guess we know ol' Rush will have a comfy place in the Inner Party.
- brandon00, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1War in the Middle East? Domestic economy? Social Security? Health care?
Congress? ...Anyone? -
Show 51 - 75 of 75 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by