I lol'ed...

[AZhitman]

Not a Rush fan since the early 90's, but good God, these people vote? It's all I can do to keep from hunting this woman down and drowning her in a 5-gallon bucket of overcooked grits with cheese.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jWjQICy ... r_embedded[/youtube]

I LOL'ed at 5:50... I sure couldn't handle her accent or her apparent psychosis, but Rush has GOT to be loaded up on Oxy to put up with her pathetic idiocy. I'd be a bad radio host.

[heliochrome85]

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/t ... heads.html
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201101190024

you keep laughing. there are hookers in calcutta who have more morals and decency than this guy.

[AppleBonker]

Rush has GOT to be loaded up on Oxy to put up with her pathetic idiocy.

Does and idiot need drugs to put up with other idiots? Actually, that's not fair. I honestly believe Rush is a very intelligent person. He is FANTASTIC at manipulating stories/events/people and he certainly uses that to his advantage. In fact, I think he probably enjoys getting calls from nutty left-wingers just so he can use them to make himself look more intelligent. I'm so glad I couldn't understand any of his crap when my Grandpa used to listen to it all the time. As a small child I probably listened to Rush an average of 4 hours per day when I was visiting them.

I'd be a bad radio host.

And yet Rush still does ok. I think you should give it a shot. I'd listen in for sure.

[dusred]

Once you accept Rush as an entertainer he's not bad to listen to. If you take anything he says seriously or at face value you'll get yourself in an embarrassing situation when you start chatting with your Liberal friends.

He's just like Jon Stewart. Entertaining but utterly useless for serious political thought. Jon Stewart at least calls his show comedy while Rush is 100% srs about what he says.

[AppleBonker]

But doesn't the Daily Show claim to be a comedy news program whereas Rush is advertised as being far more politics-based? I certainly wouldn't use the Daily Show to develop political opinions, mostly because it's just news. Granted, they tend to cover a lot of politics, but that's just because there is a lot of comedy in how politicians act. Also, there is a limited amount of material that can be generated from weather, sports and the death-news (around decently populated areas it seems the news consists of weather, sports, a long list of people who died for various reasons, and some politics). Personally, I enjoy getting news from Stewart because I don't have to sit through all the murders/traffic accidents/rapes/robberies/etc. I would never listen to Rush for news however.

[dusred]

Personally, I enjoy getting news from Stewart because I'm a liberal.

FTFY.

If you were a hard core wingnut you'd enjoy Rush for the same reasons.

[AppleBonker]

You may choose to believe that, but it is entirely false. I probably pick on crazy right-wingers more than the crazy left-wingers, but the fact is I don't really have a dog in the fight. I think both are wrong most of the time, and I just want to be left alone. I said I like the news from Stewart because it's funny and I enjoy laughing. If he were picking on democrats more I would find it equally appealing (inform me of a conservative-leaning comedy news show and I'll watch it just as frequently). Politicians get boring to me quickly, so there's a limit to how much I can watch. CNN/Fox News are pretty much at the same place in my book: boring after about 12 seconds.

The point at hand was that Rush is advertised as talk (IE opinions) and the Daily Show is advertised as news (albeit completely comedic).

[dusred]

Are you denying that you are left leaning in your political views? Those are the kind of people Stewart appeal to. If you're a hard core Lib *cough*Telcoman*cough* there's always Kieth Olbermann (wait didn't he get kicked off?).

[AppleBonker]

Yeah, I would argue that I don't consider myself left-leaning. It may come across that way occasionally. And that may be an easy way to describe it sometimes. But the thing is, I make up my mind based on the issue. I have no ties to any one person/group. You want to know the way I truly lean? Leave me alone and I'll leave you alone. That's what would make me happy. I don't care what you do with your life, and I ask the same in return (assuming what you're doing doesn't impede on what I'm doing - IE murder/rape/etc). Don't restrict my guns, don't restrict my abortions, don't restrict my drug/alcohol use, don't take all of my money and use it on pointless stuff and so on. While I'd like that to always be the case, I do understand it cannot always work that way. But that is what I will fight for more often than not: personal liberties.

[IBCoupe]

I don't consider myself left-leaning, either, but I come across that way because I'll argue against anybody. It just so happens that conservative thought is in front of me here more often than liberal thought is. If Telcoman posted as much as AZhitman did, I'd probably have an opportunity to go back and forth with him the way that I do with Greg. On the other hand, I don't typically like Telcoman's posts, because there isn't a lot to respond to.

I'm trying to think back of a time when Tariq and I went at it, but I can't think of any, so maybe I'm completely full of crap in that first paragraph.

[IBCoupe]

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/t ... heads.html
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201101190024

you keep laughing. there are hookers in calcutta who have more morals and decency than this guy.

The second one bothered me a bit more than the first one. For the first couple of seconds as he was going on in his faux-Chinese, I was like, "Yeah, okay, he's just recapping in a pretty dumb way, but it's not particularly offensive." When he went on for a full 16 seconds (may not sound like much, but you go ahead and time yourself making fake Chinese noises for sixteen seconds - it takes a good bit of effort), it started to piss me off.

And before anybody says anything about "political correctness," I'd like to point out that not mocking the largest population on the planet's for the sole reason that you don't understand it (that was his point) isn't being a stickler for political correctness. That's called "not being a complete and utter ***hole."

[stebo0728]

Deleting emotional rants after the fact isnt just playing devils advocate your vested in some of this stuff too

[IBCoupe]

Deleting emotional rants after the fact isnt just playing devils advocate your vested in some of this stuff too

I am vested in some of it - you go ahead and continue that debate framing "science" against "religion," and you'll see me get vested. The two have nothing to do with each other, and the debate itself is the problem.

The emotional rants, however, in whatever thread it was that it happened (I can't remember) were triggered by the personal jabs, and not really the subject matter.

[stebo0728]

But you make a grave assumption. You assume that science embodies the religion of secular humanism. Now I have no problem when we talk about proven stuff, but where we start to have a problem is when sh*tty science, with frail theory built upon frail theory, then pushing these notions as absolute fact and forcing everyone to treat it as such, thats where we have problems. Im not saying inject religion back into science, Im just saying clean science back up, and do it right.

[stebo0728]

Oh and if I've made any personal jabs, consider them retracted, they are never my intention. Im vested in alot of this too, so sometimes I slip up on emotion too

[IBCoupe]

But you make a grave assumption. You assume that science embodies the religion of secular humanism. Now I have no problem when we talk about proven stuff, but where we start to have a problem is when sh*tty science, with frail theory built upon frail theory, then pushing these notions as absolute fact and forcing everyone to treat it as such, thats where we have problems. Im not saying inject religion back into science, Im just saying clean science back up, and do it right.

I don't assume anything about science. I assume that religion is based on faith, which involves something that is entirely unscientific. If it's untestable, you shouldn't be making the claim in the first place. But that's science, and that's not religion.

I'm not suggesting that one's better than the other, I'm just saying that they're different, you know?

[stebo0728]

I feel ya ... and I dont believe I injected religion into this topic, I could be wrong. Though I sit in the judeo christian pew, I dont devalue evolution based on religion alone, in fact I dont use religion much at all against it, I devalue it based on neglectful practice of science, issues that Darwin himself could not see, but hinted towards, and hinted that if they were found would botch his whole theory.

[dusred]

I don't consider myself left-leaning, either,

Who did you vote for in the last presidential election?

[dusred]

Yeah, I would argue that I don't consider myself left-leaning. It may come across that way occasionally. And that may be an easy way to describe it sometimes. But the thing is, I make up my mind based on the issue. I have no ties to any one person/group. You want to know the way I truly lean? Leave me alone and I'll leave you alone. That's what would make me happy. I don't care what you do with your life, and I ask the same in return (assuming what you're doing doesn't impede on what I'm doing - IE murder/rape/etc). Don't restrict my guns, don't restrict my abortions, don't restrict my drug/alcohol use, don't take all of my money and use it on pointless stuff and so on. While I'd like that to always be the case, I do understand it cannot always work that way. But that is what I will fight for more often than not: personal liberties.

Personally, I enjoy getting news from Stewart because I'm a closet liberal.

FTFY again.

You certainly come across as a Liberal. But hey, so does IBCoupe and Helio so what do I konw ?

[IBCoupe]

Who do you think I voted for?

[srellim234]

Who do you think I voted for?

"None of the above"

[stebo0728]

Who do you think I voted for?

Ralph Nader?

[IBCoupe]

Stebo's got it, but he might not get why.

[dusred]

Who do you think I voted for?

Just guessing Obama but since he's a radical and you aren't left leaning IDK what your other choices were.

[AZhitman]

you keep laughing. there are hookers in calcutta who have more morals and decency than this guy.

So?

He's not running for office or making policy decisions.

Argumentum ad hominem all up in your post.

[IBCoupe]

Who do you think I voted for?

Just guessing Obama but since he's a radical and you aren't left leaning IDK what your other choices were.

He's not a radical, and I didn't vote for President Obama.

[AZhitman]

Let's get this one back on-topic.

AB is far from a true lefty... IB is pretty middle-road (when he's arguing from his true positions) and so is Tariq....

[n00b240]

Once you accept Rush as an entertainer he's not bad to listen to.

Truth. I enjoy The Savage Nation for the same reasons