Community > Posts By > boo2u

 
no photo
Sun 10/18/09 08:44 AM




Not all of the opposition calles conservatives racist. But I sure agree that we should hold our own political affiliates responsible for their actions and words. ON BOTH SIDES.

How do you hold someone responsible for words he was accused of saying but never said?


Are you still referring to quotes? I already commented on the quotes, I don't care about them, I only care about what I actually hear him say. And Rush will never be held responsible for his words, though it appears he sure can be slowed down in his plans. Rush isn't just being questioned for those quotes. He's been around for quite some time now. Like another poster said here just the fact that he is so divisive is enough to many folks including me.

no photo
Sun 10/18/09 08:37 AM







I read the same garbage day after day that you post...try listening to his show before you cast judgement...Rush is anything but racist...and like he says...how do you know when you've won an arguement with a Liberal ?...they call you a racist...


I have listened to his show, he seems like a bigot. Everyone has their own perception based on their own experiences,, and that is mine. Doesnt mean he isnt fantastic entertainment or any number of other things though.



the only reason you think he sounds like a bigot...is because he dares to disagree with the Annointed One...Obama has been a disaster and Rush points it out...day after day...thats not being a bigot...thats being honest...
on just about every issue

Not wise to ASSUME,,truly. I heard Rush long before I even heard of OBama and felt he acted like a bigot...


like Rush says...you have to listen to his show six weeks...before you fully grasp it...I can tell that you have NOT...listened to Rush for six weeks...if you did...you would totally and 100% agree with him...on just about every issue...


Of course you can tell I havent. What type of person subjects themselves to six weeks of something non beneficial that they dont care for? I have heard him blame too many things on race the few random times I have seen him. That says plenty. Vick gets recognition because he is black, powell endorses obama because he is black, black on white crime is happening now (because apparently it wasnt happening before,,,lol) because of OBama and OBama is black with a chip on his shoulder,,,etc,,,,etc,,,etc,,,

For a white male , the man just assumes far too much about what black individuals do, why they do it, and what other people think about it. His is not the opinions I care to listen to because they seem to me unresearched and unfounded and serving no point but to divide and insult... but thats just my opinion.


Obama DOES have a chip on his shoulder...Powell DID endorse Obama because he's black...why else would a conservative support a Liberal...and...opinions need not be researched...they come straight from the heart...


I always respected Powell, he's a level headed, thoughtful man, unlike many in his party. He did not vote for Obama because he is black, but you'd have to have been paying attention to what he did say to know that.

no photo
Sun 10/18/09 08:35 AM






I read the same garbage day after day that you post...try listening to his show before you cast judgement...Rush is anything but racist...and like he says...how do you know when you've won an arguement with a Liberal ?...they call you a racist...


I have listened to his show, he seems like a bigot. Everyone has their own perception based on their own experiences,, and that is mine. Doesnt mean he isnt fantastic entertainment or any number of other things though.



the only reason you think he sounds like a bigot...is because he dares to disagree with the Annointed One...Obama has been a disaster and Rush points it out...day after day...thats not being a bigot...thats being honest...
on just about every issue

Not wise to ASSUME,,truly. I heard Rush long before I even heard of OBama and felt he acted like a bigot...


like Rush says...you have to listen to his show six weeks...before you fully grasp it...I can tell that you have NOT...listened to Rush for six weeks...if you did...you would totally and 100% agree with him...on just about every issue...


Of course you can tell I havent. What type of person subjects themselves to six weeks of something non beneficial that they dont care for? I have heard him blame too many things on race the few random times I have seen him. That says plenty. Vick gets recognition because he is black, powell endorses obama because he is black, black on white crime is happening now (because apparently it wasnt happening before,,,lol) because of OBama and OBama is black with a chip on his shoulder,,,etc,,,,etc,,,etc,,,

For a white male , the man just assumes far too much about what black individuals do, why they do it, and what other people think about it. His is not the opinions I care to listen to because they seem to me unresearched and unfounded and serving no point but to divide and insult... but thats just my opinion.


Divide and insult. That's Rush...drinker

no photo
Sun 10/18/09 08:33 AM





I read the same garbage day after day that you post...try listening to his show before you cast judgement...Rush is anything but racist...and like he says...how do you know when you've won an arguement with a Liberal ?...they call you a racist...


I have listened to his show, he seems like a bigot. Everyone has their own perception based on their own experiences,, and that is mine. Doesnt mean he isnt fantastic entertainment or any number of other things though.


the only reason you think he sounds like a bigot...is because he dares to disagree with the Annointed One...Obama has been a disaster and Rush points it out...day after day...thats not being a bigot...thats being honest...
on just about every issue

Not wise to ASSUME,,truly. I heard Rush long before I even heard of OBama and felt he acted like a bigot...


like Rush says...you have to listen to his show six weeks...before you fully grasp it...I can tell that you have NOT...listened to Rush for six weeks...if you did...you would totally and 100% agree with him...on just about every issue...


Interesting what a massive ego Rush has, it'doesn't take more than six DAYs to have a very good idea where he comes from. So if 'Rush says' it takes six weeks you automatically think that is true? Interesting...


no photo
Sun 10/18/09 08:26 AM


Oh poor poor Rush Limbaugh so abused and misused....lolrofl

Rush made his bed. You live by the sword, you die by the sword.


I cannot believe there are still Americans who cannot see his racial bias and sick philosophy on the world.

It totally amazed me that people still have not evolved past a Rush Limbaugh.




Rush has racial bias? Naw, he just has his own opinions like everyone does and the opposing party always calls the conservatives a racist. Nice job folks.

Now you wanna talk about someone with racial bias? Let's talk about Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, the two guys that help keep racism alive and well.

I just wish some would hold their own political affiliates responsible for their actions or words.grumble


Not all of the opposition calles conservatives racist. But I sure agree that we should hold our own political affiliates responsible for their actions and words. ON BOTH SIDES.

no photo
Sun 10/18/09 08:23 AM



I read the same garbage day after day that you post...try listening to his show before you cast judgement...Rush is anything but racist...and like he says...how do you know when you've won an arguement with a Liberal ?...they call you a racist...


I have listened to his show, he seems like a bigot. Everyone has their own perception based on their own experiences,, and that is mine. Doesnt mean he isnt fantastic entertainment or any number of other things though.


the only reason you think he sounds like a bigot...is because he dares to disagree with the Annointed One...Obama has been a disaster and Rush points it out...day after day...thats not being a bigot...thats being honest...


Rush is repetative in his opposition to Obama and that of course makes him right... rofl

no photo
Sat 10/17/09 09:36 PM





I pledge alliegance to the flag of Barack Hussein Obama,
and to the new world order for which he stands,
one world under Obama with no rights and socialism for all.


i thought last year's new world order was the new new world order. we have another new new new world order because the white house got redecorated?


There is always a "new" world order. The question is, will you like it or not? Will it be beneficial or not? Should we have a "new" world order or not?


Wasn't it the first Bush that talked about a new world order, I could have sworn it was because I remember getting a chill when he used those words. I don't know what it was about the words but it really had an affect on me at the time.

Every one of them talks about a 'new' world order. It means usually an indication of change in foreign and domestic policy. They only hope they gonna set up a "new" world order. It has nothing to do with Orwellian nightmare scenarios as many would think, it has more to do with foreign relations.


Ok I'll hold you to that then and sleep well.. Grin :wink:

no photo
Sat 10/17/09 09:27 PM



I pledge alliegance to the flag of Barack Hussein Obama,
and to the new world order for which he stands,
one world under Obama with no rights and socialism for all.


i thought last year's new world order was the new new world order. we have another new new new world order because the white house got redecorated?


There is always a "new" world order. The question is, will you like it or not? Will it be beneficial or not? Should we have a "new" world order or not?


Wasn't it the first Bush that talked about a new world order, I could have sworn it was because I remember getting a chill when he used those words. I don't know what it was about the words but it really had an affect on me at the time.

no photo
Sat 10/17/09 09:17 PM





I think some posts here are comparing apples to oranges. NONE of the other examples given were examples of RACISM, let alone racism towards football players. This is a question of owning a FOOTBALL Team. The players have every right and are completely logical in not wishing to work under an owner who feels that way about THEM.I dont think they need a saint, but at least someone who will see a footballers strengths, weakenesses, rewards and critiques and attribute them to something that isnt about RACE, but about their skill.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704322004574477021697942920.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_RIGHTTopCarousel

The sports media elicited comments from a handful of players, none of whom I can recall ever meeting. Among other things, at least one said he would never play for a team I was involved in given my racial views. My racial views? You mean, my belief in a colorblind society where every individual is treated as a precious human being without regard to his race? Where football players should earn as much as they can and keep as much as they can, regardless of race? Those controversial racial views?



Sure clean it up when you realize there might be a lot, A LOT of people who think you are a scum bag...slaphead


Oh hell, Rush doesn't need to be a racist to be a scum bag.


Racism is just one of the many facets of his baggyness...lol


To me the guy is just an angry old man that can't handle the real world, I really am not convinced he is a racist. I wouldn't put it past him giving the impression for his racists viewers maybe.

I dislike many of his views, and I hate when he pretends to give someone the benefit of the doubt all the while cutting the same person down while he does it. He's just dispicable to me. His last interview really says a lot about the guy if you watched it. But anyway this conversation is so useless at this point.

Those that like him will stick up for him no matter what. And I suppose I would too if I liked him the way they do.


no photo
Sat 10/17/09 08:42 PM



I think some posts here are comparing apples to oranges. NONE of the other examples given were examples of RACISM, let alone racism towards football players. This is a question of owning a FOOTBALL Team. The players have every right and are completely logical in not wishing to work under an owner who feels that way about THEM.I dont think they need a saint, but at least someone who will see a footballers strengths, weakenesses, rewards and critiques and attribute them to something that isnt about RACE, but about their skill.


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704322004574477021697942920.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_RIGHTTopCarousel

The sports media elicited comments from a handful of players, none of whom I can recall ever meeting. Among other things, at least one said he would never play for a team I was involved in given my racial views. My racial views? You mean, my belief in a colorblind society where every individual is treated as a precious human being without regard to his race? Where football players should earn as much as they can and keep as much as they can, regardless of race? Those controversial racial views?



Sure clean it up when you realize there might be a lot, A LOT of people who think you are a scum bag...slaphead


Oh hell, Rush doesn't need to be a racist to be a scum bag.

no photo
Sat 10/17/09 08:20 PM
What is Rush playing the victim now? Oh ya, Rush is the perfect example of high moral standards.

no photo
Sat 10/17/09 01:21 PM

happy The president had to run up the deficit to save the economy from an even greater Bush depressionhappy


What? You don't know by now that the Bush administration never did anything wrong. Noper, they were angels. It's all about Obama, Geesh, you'd think you'd know that by now. :laughing:

no photo
Sat 10/17/09 10:41 AM

geez ignorance refuses to die.... I bet he's old... (showing some of my ignorance)


Now, now. Not all all of us old folks are still living in the dark ages. But believe me with new generations still being taught archaic thinking, ignorance will be with us for a while.

no photo
Fri 10/16/09 07:15 PM



Shall you make it a violation of law to see a doctor and pay him with money from one's own pocket?

Will you make it illegal for a doctor or a church to have a free healthcare clinic and treat the poor and homeless? I've gotten such treatment, at **gasp** a church in my neighborhood where doctors from the University medical school run a free clinic for the indigent and they even pay for their scripts at the Wal-Mart. I didn't have to pay a dime. I avoided a sure case of bronchitis because of it. One that if I had come down with it would have landed me in your precious emergency room, the cost of which would have either gone to the taxpayer or followed me around for the next several years (I'd prefer that latter by the way)

Should that become illegal under this magnanimous system?

someone mentioned the hypocratic oath.. If I remember right, the first statement is: Do no harm..

The designs the Democrats have on the healthcare system will violate that principal, primary statement.


Just curious, but if you got help at a church, where do you think that money came from. Indirectly but you still got it from the taxpayers that go to church.


The people that belong to a church are called a "congregation" and the Doctors and med students that are there all volunteer their time.

No Tax dollars involved. All resources provided by the church and it's parishoners.. good friendly people.. they even have a free hot meal service that coincides with the clinic, all paid for by the congregation of the church..

As an aside,

Do you just see American citizens for the tax dollars they give to the government? like the humans in The Matrix.. just resources for the benefit of running the state?

Are you not a free man or woman? Are you not entitled to allocate your resources as you see fit? Or would you rather just surrender your resources to the state so that it may allocate them as it sees fit?


No assumptions please. All I meant was that they too are tax payers as well as volunteers. And what other choice is there for the poor if some churches don't do this. Very few have access to such clinics though, so it doesn't mean much of a dent, despite that fact that it's a great thing. I have no clue what the Matrix thing it.

no photo
Fri 10/16/09 06:03 PM

a shame i have to come here to debate real topics with real people on real issues and so many posts are nothing but copy/paste articles. the author is never here to answer my challenges and i have a pretty souped up search engine too if i want a search engine drag race to see who can out copy/paste who. must so many form and express their opinions with such media help?


Don't forget 'UPTIGHT OLD MEN'. winking Must be very difficult living in a modern world for some.

no photo
Fri 10/16/09 01:16 PM

ok...this is JMO...IF it is an elected government official paid by the people...then they should only uphold the law. if it is legal then they have an obligation. if the person is a minister or got their license on the internet and does private services (not that kind ya pervs lol) then it's up to them to decide.

clear as mud???? laugh


Pretty clear to me. That is exactly the way I 'assumed' it was. I didn't notice anyone saying someone should do something against their beliefs but too lazy today to go back and look.

no photo
Fri 10/16/09 01:13 PM


This opens a whole new door.

Ok if it's against his belief and is forced to marry this couple, what will happen if a gay couple comes along, will he be then forced to marry although it's against his beliefs or religion? Will they start forcing doctors to kill unborn babies? where will it stop. No, he should not be forced. Because it's his belief he's being chastised for it.

Go somewhere else to get married. I think it will open up pandora's box.




I like how you think :thumbsup:

I never stated whether I agreed or disagreed with his decision of not wanting to perform service because the couple was interracial and still wont comment on that. But have found it amusing that people think that just because one can perform a service that they must on demand.

:thumbsup:



Hmmm, I never came to that conclusion unless I missed something again. I just thought if it was government they had to follow the local law. A private marriage ceremony, they could descriminate for what ever reason they wanted to, and not have to explain it.

no photo
Fri 10/16/09 12:53 PM
Hilldog?

no photo
Fri 10/16/09 12:50 PM

Shall you make it a violation of law to see a doctor and pay him with money from one's own pocket?

Will you make it illegal for a doctor or a church to have a free healthcare clinic and treat the poor and homeless? I've gotten such treatment, at **gasp** a church in my neighborhood where doctors from the University medical school run a free clinic for the indigent and they even pay for their scripts at the Wal-Mart. I didn't have to pay a dime. I avoided a sure case of bronchitis because of it. One that if I had come down with it would have landed me in your precious emergency room, the cost of which would have either gone to the taxpayer or followed me around for the next several years (I'd prefer that latter by the way)

Should that become illegal under this magnanimous system?

someone mentioned the hypocratic oath.. If I remember right, the first statement is: Do no harm..

The designs the Democrats have on the healthcare system will violate that principal, primary statement.


Just curious, but if you got help at a church, where do you think that money came from. Indirectly but you still got it from the taxpayers that go to church.

no photo
Fri 10/16/09 12:32 PM




Why is it that one can select who they want to perform a service but those who offer the service can't be selective?

hmmmm????

I think he can not do that when he is paid to provide a service to all people . He might be sacked soon . I hope....!.


so you're ok with you chosing a person/company to do a service, but all who offer the same service must service you?




When it is a public position like Judge or Justice of the Peace, you're damn right. I just moved away from LA and I can tell you that if government officials there were allowed to choose whether or not they would provide services to people, then a lot of people would receive no services at all. That was how it was in the past and without our Federal Civil Rights laws, that is how it still would be today. Too many people in LA are stuck in the 19th Century.



Actually I was wondering what the heck happened to LA in the last 30 years, they used to be fairly open minded.

1 2 3 5 7 8 9 24 25