Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
Limbaugh goes off the deep end...again
Thursday, July 19, 2012 8:34 AM
NIKI2
Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...
Quote:Put this one in Rush Limbaugh’s greatest hits collection. Now he’s seeing liberal conspiracies in the new “Batman” movie, “The Dark Knight Rises.” On his show this week, El Rushbo pointed out that the villain in the new flick, which opens Friday is called “Bane.” As in it sounds like “Bain”…as in “Bain Capital,” the sweet spot for the past many months of attacks from Obama supporters — and Romney’s fellow Republicans in the primary. Did we all forget that the pro-Gingrich super PAC paid to air a 27-minute documentary slamming Romney’s Bain tenure? But to Rush, it is only a liberal conspiracy. Said Rush:Quote:“The villain in “The Dark Knight Rises” is named Bane, B-a-n-e. What is the name of the venture capital firm that Romney ran and around which there’s now this make-believe controversy? Bain. The movie has been in the works for a long time. The release date’s been known, summer 2012 for a long time. Do you think that it is accidental that the name of the really vicious fire breathing four eyed whatever it is villain in this movie is named Bane?”Stick with Rush here, because he’s about to leap the Logic Gap:Quote:“A lot of people are gonna see the movie, and it’s a lot of brain-dead people, entertainment, the pop culture crowd, and they’re gonna hear Bane in the movie and they’re gonna associate Bain. The thought is that when they start paying attention to the campaign later in the year, and Obama and the Democrats keep talking about Bain, Romney and Bain, that these people will think back to the Batman movie, “Oh, yeah, I know who that is.”We don’t doubt for a second that once this latest “Batman” becomes a megahit, Democratic operatives will be making Bane/Bain references with such regularity that you’ll want to hurl. We’ll bet the price of a 3-D movie ticket on that. That said, there are (at least) two problems with Rush’s liberal conspiracy theory/way to kill three hours every morning: 1. The Bane character was created in 1992…about a year before Mitt Romney was even thinking of starting his unsuccessful Senate campaign in Massachusetts. He — Bane, not Romney — debuted in 1993. 2. The Bane character was created by a CONSERVATIVE, Chuck Dixon. “Graham and I are both staunch conservatives, so from our angle there is no liberal agenda,” Dixon said, name-checking his partner Graham Nolan. “It’s ridiculous. Obviously Bane was not created as an attack on Mitt Romney. We never heard of Romney twenty years ago,” Dixon told the nationally syndicated “Schnitt Show” Tuesday. Besides, Dixon said the comparison between Bane and Romney doesn’t work. “My understanding is that Bane is more of an Occupy Wall Street type. Romney is more like Bruce Wayne.” The big winner here: Dixon, who hears the cash register ring anytime Bane is used. “He’s been my own Bane Capital!” http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2012/07/rush-vs-batman-limbaugh-sees-liberal-conspiracy-in-new-movies-villain-named-bane/ think he didn't know how long ago the character of Bane was created, because now he's walking back his idiocy as fast as he can:Quote:On Wednesday, Limbaugh set out to clarify what he meant:Quote:“I never said that the villain was created by the comic book character creator to be part of the 2012 campaign,” Limbaugh said, referring to Bane, who debuted in 1993. “I never said that at all. And everybody’s out there running around, thinking I got this giant conspiracy.… I didn’t say there was a conspiracy. I said the Democrats were going to use it.” http://kfyo.com/chads-morning-brief-rush-limbaugh-the-dark-knight-rises-c/GO Rushbo! You keep us laughing, you do...
Quote:“The villain in “The Dark Knight Rises” is named Bane, B-a-n-e. What is the name of the venture capital firm that Romney ran and around which there’s now this make-believe controversy? Bain. The movie has been in the works for a long time. The release date’s been known, summer 2012 for a long time. Do you think that it is accidental that the name of the really vicious fire breathing four eyed whatever it is villain in this movie is named Bane?”
Quote:“A lot of people are gonna see the movie, and it’s a lot of brain-dead people, entertainment, the pop culture crowd, and they’re gonna hear Bane in the movie and they’re gonna associate Bain. The thought is that when they start paying attention to the campaign later in the year, and Obama and the Democrats keep talking about Bain, Romney and Bain, that these people will think back to the Batman movie, “Oh, yeah, I know who that is.”
Quote:On Wednesday, Limbaugh set out to clarify what he meant:Quote:“I never said that the villain was created by the comic book character creator to be part of the 2012 campaign,” Limbaugh said, referring to Bane, who debuted in 1993. “I never said that at all. And everybody’s out there running around, thinking I got this giant conspiracy.… I didn’t say there was a conspiracy. I said the Democrats were going to use it.” http://kfyo.com/chads-morning-brief-rush-limbaugh-the-dark-knight-rises-c/
Quote:“I never said that the villain was created by the comic book character creator to be part of the 2012 campaign,” Limbaugh said, referring to Bane, who debuted in 1993. “I never said that at all. And everybody’s out there running around, thinking I got this giant conspiracy.… I didn’t say there was a conspiracy. I said the Democrats were going to use it.”
Thursday, July 19, 2012 9:37 AM
ANTHONYT
Freedom is Important because People are Important
Thursday, July 19, 2012 9:53 AM
WHOZIT
Thursday, July 19, 2012 9:55 AM
BIGDAMNNOBODY
Thursday, July 19, 2012 10:31 AM
STORYMARK
Thursday, July 19, 2012 10:35 AM
AURAPTOR
America loves a winner!
Thursday, July 19, 2012 10:59 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Storymark: Of course you'd think that. I was waiting for one of you wingnut morons to try to make that comparison. You have the same mindset as Rush, and can't distinguish between a joke made at the coincidence, and a batshit crazy conspiracy theory.
Thursday, July 19, 2012 12:53 PM
JONGSSTRAW
Thursday, July 19, 2012 12:58 PM
Quote:Originally posted by BIGDAMNNOBODY: Quote:Originally posted by Storymark: Of course you'd think that. I was waiting for one of you wingnut morons to try to make that comparison. You have the same mindset as Rush, and can't distinguish between a joke made at the coincidence, and a batshit crazy conspiracy theory. You are correct sir. I should not have compared Limbaughs coincidental joke with your batshit crazy conspiracy theory.
Thursday, July 19, 2012 1:01 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Jongsstraw: When it's all said and done Rush Limbaugh does nothing to help Republicans and Conservatives. He's just another super-rich and aloof bloviator like so many of his counterparts in the MSM. Although it is amusing how Libs fear and loathe him, he himself has influenced exactly jack squat in elections.
Thursday, July 19, 2012 1:15 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Storymark: He's got legions of hillbillies and rednecks who actually beleiev him. Shit, guys like Rappy defend anything he says, no matter what. You're not dumb enough to think that's no influence.
Thursday, July 19, 2012 1:28 PM
Thursday, July 19, 2012 2:03 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Storymark: What theory did I float, now? Oh, right, I'm expecting a wingnut to back up their words. Nevermind, I forget ya'll are incapable in that regard.
Thursday, July 19, 2012 3:41 PM
Quote:When it's all said and done Rush Limbaugh does nothing to help Republicans and Conservatives. He's just another super-rich and aloof bloviator like so many of his counterparts in the MSM. Although it is amusing how Libs fear and loathe him, he himself has influenced exactly jack squat in elections.
Quote:Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh has been inundated with criticism after calling Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown University student who testified before a House committee about contraception, a “slut” and a “prostitute.” But while Democrats have fiercely condemned the comments, Republicans’ ire has been significantly more muted. ABC’s George Will told me Sunday on “This Week” that GOP leaders have steered clear of harshly denouncing Limbaugh’s comments because “Republican leaders are afraid of Rush Limbaugh.” “[House Speaker John] Boehner comes out and says Rush’s language was inappropriate. Using the salad fork for your entrée, that’s inappropriate. Not this stuff,” Will said. “And it was depressing because what it indicates is that the Republican leaders are afraid of Rush Limbaugh. They want to bomb Iran, but they’re afraid of Rush Limbaugh.” http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/george-will-republican-leaders-are-afraid-of-rush-limbaugh/] Quote:Why will Paul say the obvious while Romney, Santorum and Gingrich are barely willing to clear their throats? Because Paul, who is in this campaign to spread the gospels of libertarianism and Austrian economics, knows he can’t win the Republican nomination. The others, who think they do have a chance to win, are afraid of making Limbaugh into an enemy — or, in Romney’s case, into more of an enemy than he already is. So let’s get this straight: These guys want us to believe they’re ready to face down Vladimir Putin, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong Eun, the Taliban and what’s left of al-Qaeda. Yet they’re so scared of a talk-radio buffoon that they ignore or excuse an eruption of venom that some of Limbaugh’s advertisers find inexcusable. I would have thought that crass political calculation might lead the would-be GOP nominees to the correct position on Limbaugh’s rhetorical depravity. Women constitute a majority of voters. If they merely lean toward the Democrats this fall, as they usually do, Republicans still have a mathematical chance to win the presidency by racking up a big majority among men. But if the GOP is perceived to endorse Limbaugh’s hateful rhetoric about “feminazis” and his stance of male grievance, female voters could turn what looked like a winnable election for Republicans into a debacle. But Romney, Santorum and Gingrich are so frightened of being labeled insufficiently conservative — in this context, meaning “not nice enough to Rush” — that when given the opportunity to show some backbone, they go all wobbly. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/rush-limbaugh-too-fearsome-for-gop-candidates-to-cross/2012/03/05/gIQAb5JZtR_story.htmlIt's happened over and over; the minute a well-known Republican says ANYTHING even slightly negative about Rushbo, within a day or two they walk it back. Go ahead and Google "Rush Limbaugh not head of Republican Party" or "Republicans don't fear Rush Limbaugh"...see if anything comes up. So who's afraid of the big bad Rush?
Quote:Why will Paul say the obvious while Romney, Santorum and Gingrich are barely willing to clear their throats? Because Paul, who is in this campaign to spread the gospels of libertarianism and Austrian economics, knows he can’t win the Republican nomination. The others, who think they do have a chance to win, are afraid of making Limbaugh into an enemy — or, in Romney’s case, into more of an enemy than he already is. So let’s get this straight: These guys want us to believe they’re ready to face down Vladimir Putin, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Kim Jong Eun, the Taliban and what’s left of al-Qaeda. Yet they’re so scared of a talk-radio buffoon that they ignore or excuse an eruption of venom that some of Limbaugh’s advertisers find inexcusable. I would have thought that crass political calculation might lead the would-be GOP nominees to the correct position on Limbaugh’s rhetorical depravity. Women constitute a majority of voters. If they merely lean toward the Democrats this fall, as they usually do, Republicans still have a mathematical chance to win the presidency by racking up a big majority among men. But if the GOP is perceived to endorse Limbaugh’s hateful rhetoric about “feminazis” and his stance of male grievance, female voters could turn what looked like a winnable election for Republicans into a debacle. But Romney, Santorum and Gingrich are so frightened of being labeled insufficiently conservative — in this context, meaning “not nice enough to Rush” — that when given the opportunity to show some backbone, they go all wobbly. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/rush-limbaugh-too-fearsome-for-gop-candidates-to-cross/2012/03/05/gIQAb5JZtR_story.html
Thursday, July 19, 2012 3:46 PM
Monday, July 23, 2012 1:36 PM
RIONAEIRE
Beir bua agus beannacht
Monday, July 23, 2012 2:56 PM
1KIKI
Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.
Monday, July 23, 2012 3:50 PM
CHRISISALL
Monday, July 23, 2012 4:19 PM
HERO
Monday, July 23, 2012 4:43 PM
Monday, July 23, 2012 5:09 PM
PIRATENEWS
John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!
Monday, July 23, 2012 8:01 PM
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 1:27 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: Let's see ... Rush is stupid, a fat, butt-fucking addict, misogynistic, racist - what's NOT for ZIT and little Rappy to like!
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 1:41 AM
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 1:56 AM
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 1:58 AM
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 2:06 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: Let's see ... Rush is stupid, a fat, butt-fucking addict, misogynistic, racist - what's NOT for ZIT and little Rappy to like! The fact that Rush is none of those things is why I happen to listen. --- Little Rappy really DID post this!
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 2:53 AM
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 3:44 AM
Quote: Rush is an important part of the mindless uneducated and fear soaked American culture!
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 8:54 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 1kiki: You need to work on your grammar. Commas are there for a reason. So, out of curiosity, along with claiming Rush isn't fat, do you also claim he's not an addict?
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 9:09 AM
Quote:Almost all who study and work in this field say there is no cure for drug addiction. think one way to approach this is to review a definition of alcohol/or drug addiction. Although there are many signs and symptoms, there is one that is common to all alcoholics and drug addicts—and that is loss of control. At some point a person will lose the ability to control their use. Whether they are daily users or binge users, the common thread is—once they start using they cannot control how much or when to stop. So if we can agree on that point we can go on to a discussion about cure. To me a cure means a reversal, or absence of the problem or disease. In the case of addiction to substances I, in the past thirty-three years, have never seen an addict regain control of their use—to become a social-occasional user. So I believe that if I were to tell someone they are cured, they may think they no longer have a problem. That opens the door to another attempt at social use—which NEVER turns out well. The way I explain it to people is to think of it like cancer. There is no cure for cancer but cancer often goes into remission after treatment. It does not mean they have been cured or that a cure has taken place. It’s still there but it’s in remission. Personally, I have not used anything since 1977—but I’m not cured. My disease is in remission. If I were to choose to try to drink occasionally or socially I would bring my disease out of remission and very soon it would again cause lots of problems.
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 9:35 AM
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 9:51 AM
Quote: During the late 1980s and continuing through the 1990s, Miller was generally perceived as a cynic on the left, ever eager to bash conservative Republicans. This perception did not change much even when Miller told USA Today in 1995: "I might be profane and opinionated, but underneath all that are some pretty conservative feelings. On most issues, between Clinton and Newt Gingrich, I'd choose Newt in a second, even though he is a bit too exclusionary."[42] Miller also declared himself a "conservative libertarian" in a 1996 Playboy interview.[42] He became one of the Hollywood celebrities backing George W. Bush and the war in Iraq.Miller endorsed Herman Cain in the 2012 presidential election, but later dropped his support, saying of Cain, “he can’t win!”
Quote: He has stated that he is a libertarian,[25][26] however, some feel his views are more in line with "republitarian" philosophy that embraces incrementalism domestically,[19] and a generally interventionist foreign policy based on self-interest, national defense and the expansion of freedom.[27] Neal disagrees with the Libertarian Party platform on several key issues including his firm support of the war in Iraq,[27] incremental tax reform,[19] and his opposition to the unrestricted immigration policy advocated by the Libertarian Party. He has repeatedly stated his belief that global climate change is not man-made. His stances on many of these issues make him popular among conservative Republicans, who, due to their larger numbers in comparison to Libertarians, make up the majority of his listeners and callers.[ Boortz tends to advocate Conservative platforms. Boortz's post-9/11 politics include support for the US-led War on Terror, a more aggressive foreign policy,[27] and the USA Patriot Act. Boortz is also strongly in favor of a crackdown on illegal immigration. These views occasionally put him in conflict with the Libertarian Party.
Quote: Dennis Prager (born August 2, 1948) is an American syndicated radio talk show host, syndicated columnist, author, and public speaker. He is noted for his conservative political and social views emanating from conservative Judeo-Christian values. He holds that there is an "American Trinity" of essential principles, which he lists as E Pluribus Unum, In God We Trust, and Liberty.
Quote: While focusing on the theme of Hollywood vs. America, radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh interviewed Medved and then asked Medved to guest-host his talk show. Medved went on to serve as a regular guest-host for Limbaugh on close to 30 occasions. In November 2007, Medved became a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, hub of the intelligent design movement
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 9:53 AM
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 10:14 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: So who's being told what to think??? And/or choosing to mostly listen to those who will reaffirm what they already believe?
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 10:20 AM
Quote: As to who you listen to...whoo, ee! After looking them up, it's pretty clear you only listen to those who are very conservative and who echo what you already believe!
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 10:44 AM
Quote:The United States saw dramatic growth in the popularity of talk radio during the 1990s due to the repeal of the Federal Communications Commission's post-war Fairness Doctrine of 1949, in 1987. The mandate of the Fairness Doctrine was to require that audiences were exposed to a diversity of viewpoints. It had required the holders of broadcast licenses to "present controversial issues of public importance" and to do so in a manner that was, in the Commission's view, "honest, equitable and balanced". Its repeal provided an opportunity for a kind of partisan political programming with commercial appeal that had not previously existed. Pew researchers found in 2004 that 17% of the public regularly listens to talk radio. This audience is mostly male, middle-aged and conservative. Among those who regularly listen to talk radio, 41% are Republican and 28% are Democrats. Furthermore, 45% describe themselves as conservatives, compared with 18% who say they are liberals.[2] The most successful pioneer in the 1990s' talk radio movement in the US was the politically conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh. Limbaugh's success demonstrated that there was a nationwide market for passionately delivered conservative commentary on contemporary news, events, and social trends, and changed the face of how the talk radio business was conducted. Limbaugh's unprecedented success is illustrated by Fresno, California's then number-one radio station, KMJ "news-talk radio," a typical example of how the talk radio format was changed nation wide. Before Limbaugh, their day time talk show hosts were local and not particularly partisan, each quite a bit different from the other, and had diverse conversations on a wide variety of topics from both local and national politics, to food, to interviews with interesting people, book authors, and so forth. There was a local morning host plus a local afternoon host. The evenings (with less advertising revenue) typically included nationally syndicated hosts such as family finance pundit Bruce Williams. KMJ, seeking to cut corners, brought in Limbaugh at 09:00 from New York and within three months had become wildly popular among Fresno's conservatives. The station presented news from 6 to 9, Limbaugh from 9 to noon, then news, then the local Ray Appleton, a moderate Democrat from 1 to 4. Stations across the nation soon discovered that less diverse programming sold even better, and Appleton became a Republican and KMJ along with most talk radio across the nation became all-conservative. As of 2011, KMJ has filled the afternoon slot with various other nationally syndicated conservative political shows, and Appleton does his conservative show during the lunch hour. Other radio talk show hosts (who describe themselves as either conservative or libertarian) have also had success as nationally syndicated hosts, including Hugh Hewitt, Sean Hannity, Jon Arthur, Glenn Beck, Michael Medved, Laura Ingraham, Neal Boortz, Michael Savage, Bill O'Reilly, and Mark Levin. The Salem Radio Network syndicates a group of religiously oriented Republican activists, including evangelical Christian Hugh Hewitt and Jewish conservatives Dennis Prager and Michael Medved; these are mostly distributed in a 24-hour network format among Salem's own stations, and they generally earn ratings much less than their syndicated counterparts. In the summer of 2007, conservative talk show hosts mobilized public opposition to the McCain-Kennedy immigration reform bill, which eventually failed.[3] Conservative hosts Limbaugh, Ingraham, Bennett, Prager, Hannity, Beck, Levin and Hewitt coalesced around endorsing former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney for president at the end of January 2008 (after Fred Thompson, the described favorite of some of the hosts, dropped out), in an effort to oppose the nomination of Sen. John McCain;[4] however, Romney suspended his campaign in February of the same year, and endorsed McCain. During the primaries, Limbaugh in particular had endorsed a plan to do whatever it took to prolong the Democrats' nomination by encouraging political conservatives to cross over to the Democrats and voting for the trailing candidate, a plan he calls "Operation Chaos". Conservative talk show hosts also lent their unified support for Congressional candidate Doug Hoffman, a conservative third-party candidate who was running in New York's 23rd congressional district special election, 2009 against a liberal Republican (Dierdre Scozzafava) and a mainstream Democrat (Bill Owens). The unified support from the conservative base helped propel Hoffman to frontrunner status and effectively killed Scozzafava's campaign, forcing her to drop out of the race several days before the election. This effort backfired on the conservative hosts, as the Democratic candidate Owens won in part thanks to Scozzafava's endorsement of Owens. Local hosts, such as Los Angeles's John and Ken, have also proven effective in influencing the political landscape.
Quote:Ed Schultz, Stephanie Miller, Thom Hartmann, and Bill Press; The Young Turks; Fox News host Alan Colmes, First Amendment Radio Network Libertarian host Jon Arthur, self-distributed Norman Goldman and Mike Malloy, and Premiere's Randi Rhodes. In some markets, local liberal hosts have existed for years, such as the British talk host Michael Jackson (who was on the air at KABC in Los Angeles beginning in 1968 and is currently at KGIL); Bernie Ward in San Francisco; Jack Ellery in New Jersey and Tampa; Dave Ross in Seattle, and Marc Germain in Los Angeles. A few earlier syndicated programs were hosted by prominent Democrats who were not experienced broadcasters, such as Jim Hightower, Jerry Brown, Mario Cuomo and Alan Dershowitz; these met with limited success.
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 11:13 AM
Quote:Seems I know more Liberal talk show personalities than you know on the Right, either t.v. OR radio. Huh.
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 12:06 PM
Quote: I can only imagine (with great effort) how much reality you've missed out on, how many facts you are unaware of, how misinformed you are, if all you take in is from one side
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 12:16 PM
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 1:05 PM
KWICKO
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: Quote:Originally posted by Storymark: He's got legions of hillbillies and rednecks who actually beleiev him. Shit, guys like Rappy defend anything he says, no matter what. You're not dumb enough to think that's no influence. First of all, I'm neither hillbilly or redneck. I've known some who are, and they're quite proud of who they are, faults and all. Well, I ain't them.
Quote: Second, I don't defend Rush at every turn.
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 1:10 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Hero: Liberal bloggers started talking up the Bane-Bain business a couple weeks ago and it built from there as the movie premier got closer. Limbaugh was probably reacting to last weeks Drudge links to newspaper articles citing liberal saying stuff like "movies reflect our times". I note for the record that Batman had always been a conservative character. Billionaire philanthropist and businessman orced to act on his own to make up for big government's failures.
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 1:20 PM
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: So Niki, is being an addict, 'butt-fucking' or otherwise, a personal failing, in your view ? Is it a sign of a mental defect ? Or a focal point of derogatory scorn or ridicule ? You'll probably say " no", that ANYONE can be an addict, or some such. But in Rush's case, he's a bad person for becoming addicted, or what ever, huh?
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 1:25 PM
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: And I do listen to other things besides conservative talk radio ( as I clearly stated above ). But I've also stomached Randi Rhodes, for brief moments that I can stand to listen to that idiot. When AirAmerica was on, ( meaning when it was stealing from children's fund raisers and not paying its employees for healthcare ) I tried to listen to Al Franken and a few others. I felt my IQ dropping with each passing moment. Thankfully, that garbage was taken off the air, and order was restored back to nature.
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 1:29 PM
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: "take note, when I hear something, which conflicts from what I've heard before." How will you ever hear something which conflicts with what you've heard before, if you're only listening ton conservative sources?? Dichotomy there...you never mentioned ONE neutral or liberal source, so... "UNLESS it is consistent with what you already know to be true"--that caveat kinda nullifies the whole thing. If you already BELIEVE stuff, of course it would be consistent with what you already believe...and how can you tell what's true if you hear the same thing from all your various "sources"? Sorry, that's a good sentiment, but I don't think too many follow it. And I can't keep doing this, I gotta get outta here. Enjoy.
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 2:34 PM
Quote:Originally posted by AURaptor: he does like to B.S. his audience " AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall
Tuesday, July 24, 2012 9:38 PM
Wednesday, July 25, 2012 2:14 AM
Wednesday, July 25, 2012 2:47 AM
6IXSTRINGJACK
Wednesday, July 25, 2012 8:02 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Niki2: In that other thread he actually SAID he'd worry less if leaks were happening and it were a Repub in the White House...
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL