Rush Limbaugh STILL is a big, fat idiot - Page 5

glatt · 10-26-2006, 12:01 PM

I think an independent or 3rd party really needs to get in on the local level. Once they have a local presence throughout the country, they will be able to take the step up to the big leagues. Vote independent locally all you like. I do.

Don't vote for an independent on the national level unless they have a shot to win. Otherwise you are throwing your vote away. Lieberman can pull it off, I'm not sure anyone else can.

Flint · 10-26-2006, 12:17 PM

Voting Democrat or Republican, successfully, can only result in something that pleases nobody, anyway, so... since your vote is "thrown away" no matter what you do, I propose that we actually vote our conscience, rather than submitting to the 2 horrible choices that are shoved in our face.

Shawnee123 · 10-26-2006, 12:18 PM

I have to say I agree with glatt. I wish it were possible to overthrow the two party stranglehold with my vote nationally, but it is not. So, if my choice is to vote for the lesser of the two evils on the national level or risk 4 MORE YEARS of pure hell, I'm going to have to go with the lesser evil.

Not saying it doesn't suck, but this country can't endure much more.

Flint · 10-26-2006, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

...my choice is to vote for the lesser of the two evils on the national level or risk 4 MORE YEARS of pure hell...

Don't you see, this is what everybody is saying! Nobody actually wants the choices they give us, but we vote for them out of fear. Fear is not a good basis for decision making. We are being played against each other, and the net result is that there is no real choice for the voters. I know it would be like taking a leap of faith to opt out of the fixed system, and you will not see any instant results (other than the peace of mind that you voted your conscience) but the alternative is pre-determined, and a pre-determined election result is nothing to be proud of.

Undertoad · 10-26-2006, 12:34 PM

If you don't know who the third party choice is, chances are you're not voting for something you would actually want to choose.

If the party itself is not very sturdy, it may be taken over or cult-ized by exactly the people you don't want to have in any level of power. (see Reform Party, Pat Robertson nominee)

Flint · 10-26-2006, 12:36 PM

I know exactly what I'm voting for: "none of the above" . . .

I'm not foolish enough to believe that a switcheroo between two fixed positions is going to magically make everything all better.

warch · 10-26-2006, 03:59 PM

But then you are foolish to be so idealistic. No one is claiming magic.

Vote D and vote for checks and balance.

Flint · 10-26-2006, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by warch

But then you are foolish to be so idealistic.

No, I'm being pragmatic.
An action is observed to produce a known result.
Options: repeat ad nauseum... . . . ???

Quote:

Originally Posted by warch

No one is claiming magic.
Vote D and vote for checks and balance.

Yes, a nice symbolic counter-balance on those contrived wedge issues.

Quote:

Originally Posted by warch

Vote D, vote for science.

Tempting, Waxman and all that.
But I don't think politics is going to restore common sense to a willfully ignorant populace.

Happy Monkey · 10-26-2006, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flint

But I don't think politics is going to restore common sense to a willfully ignorant populace.

We do need to remove the politicians who support the willfully ignorant lobby.

Flint · 10-26-2006, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

We do need to remove the politicians who support the willfully ignorant lobby.

I think our society suffers from a lack of critical thinking that won't be solved by a battle between R and D.

warch · 10-26-2006, 04:00 PM

Vote D, vote for science.

Happy Monkey · 10-26-2006, 05:30 PM

It won't be solved by electing the Natural Law (replace the Air Force with yogic flyers) Party either.

The pickings aren't good in the third parties.

Flint · 10-26-2006, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

The pickings aren't good in the third parties.

Of course they aren't.
There's no market for third parties because all the voters are stuck in boogey-man mode.

tw · 10-26-2006, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flint

There's no market for third parties because all the voters are stuck in boogey-man mode.

Boogey-man mode exists because some politicians are flagrantly lying - sound byte logic and being politically correct. And they have troops to promote flagrant and obvious lies - extremist talk radio. Worse are the so many who endorse this lying. They listen to Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson. Outright lying starting with lies about a silly spy plane conflict in China, destruction of the Oslo Accords, destruction of the anti-ballistic missile treaty, imposing religion in laws and upon all people, and axis of evil. Early examples of making America confrontational. It is necessary if one is a drug addict and needs $100million incomes.

Topic of this thread is Rush Limbaugh - that he is a liar. To stop confrontation, we only need to talk honestly - used facts and not Limbaugh hype. A fact that can only be disputed by using confrontation: Rush Limbaugh is a liar. He even got rich by promoting lies to 'Brown Shirts'. From the Washington Post of 25 Oct 2006:

Quote:

Rush Limbaugh On the Offensive Against Ad With Michael J. Fox
After his apology, Limbaugh shifted his ground and renewed his attack on Fox.

"Now people are telling me they have seen Michael J. Fox in interviews and he does appear the same way in the interviews as he does in this commercial," Limbaugh said, according to a transcript on his Web site. "All right then, I stand corrected. . . . So I will bigly, hugely admit that I was wrong, and I will apologize to Michael J. Fox, if I am wrong in characterizing his behavior on this commercial as an act."

Was Limbaugh being honest? You have his promise. Did he tell the truth? If Rush does not do as he said, then he has again created confrontation ... which is how wacko extremists came to power and want from their politicians. Lies and intentionally creating confrontation is how Hitler came to power.

You have his statement. Did he only lie again?

Happy Monkey · 10-26-2006, 05:40 PM

I'm just saying that you can't rail against "the lesser of two evils" style thinking if you end up picking someone worse.

10-26-2006, 12:17 PM	#2
Flint Snowflake Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Dystopia Posts: 13,136	Voting Democrat or Republican, successfully, can only result in something that pleases nobody, anyway, so... since your vote is "thrown away" no matter what you do, I propose that we actually vote our conscience, rather than submitting to the 2 horrible choices that are shoved in our face. __________________ **************** There's a level of facility that everyone needs to accomplish, and from there it's a matter of deciding for yourself how important ultra-facility is to your expression. ... I found, like Joseph Campbell said, if you just follow whatever gives you a little joy or excitement or awe, then you're on the right track. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Terry Bozzio**

10-26-2006, 12:18 PM	#3
Shawnee123 Why, you're a regular Alfred E Einstein, ain't ya? Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 21,206	I have to say I agree with glatt. I wish it were possible to overthrow the two party stranglehold with my vote nationally, but it is not. So, if my choice is to vote for the lesser of the two evils on the national level or risk 4 MORE YEARS of pure hell, I'm going to have to go with the lesser evil. Not saying it doesn't suck, but this country can't endure much more. __________________ A word to the wise ain't necessary - it's the stupid ones who need the advice. --Bill Cosby

10-26-2006, 12:36 PM	#6
Flint Snowflake Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Dystopia Posts: 13,136	I know exactly what I'm voting for: "none of the above" . . . I'm not foolish enough to believe that a switcheroo between two fixed positions is going to magically make everything all better. __________________ **************** There's a level of facility that everyone needs to accomplish, and from there it's a matter of deciding for yourself how important ultra-facility is to your expression. ... I found, like Joseph Campbell said, if you just follow whatever gives you a little joy or excitement or awe, then you're on the right track. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Terry Bozzio**

10-26-2006, 05:30 PM	#12
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	It won't be solved by electing the Natural Law (replace the Air Force with yogic flyers) Party either. The pickings aren't good in the third parties. __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

10-26-2006, 05:40 PM	#15
Happy Monkey I think this line's mostly filler. Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DC Posts: 13,575	I'm just saying that you can't rail against "the lesser of two evils" style thinking if you end up picking someone worse. __________________ _________________ \|...............\| We live in the nick of times. \| Len 17, Wid 3 \| \|_______________\| [pics]

10-26-2006, 12:01 PM	#1
glatt ™ Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 27,717	I think an independent or 3rd party really needs to get in on the local level. Once they have a local presence throughout the country, they will be able to take the step up to the big leagues. Vote independent locally all you like. I do. Don't vote for an independent on the national level unless they have a shot to win. Otherwise you are throwing your vote away. Lieberman can pull it off, I'm not sure anyone else can.

10-26-2006, 12:34 PM	#5
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	If you don't know who the third party choice is, chances are you're not voting for something you would actually want to choose. If the party itself is not very sturdy, it may be taken over or cult-ized by exactly the people you don't want to have in any level of power. (see Reform Party, Pat Robertson nominee)

10-26-2006, 03:59 PM	#7
warch lurkin old school Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Minnesota Posts: 2,796	But then you are foolish to be so idealistic. No one is claiming magic. Vote D and vote for checks and balance.

10-26-2006, 04:00 PM	#11
warch lurkin old school Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Minnesota Posts: 2,796	Vote D, vote for science.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)