Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Okie doke. Just for the record, I didn't feel chided. I just stated I saw what seemed to be an attempt at chiding. Intentional or no.Fitz, I am sorry if you felt "chided". My intention is not to chide anyone. If you did like I have and left this place a few years and then came back, you'd probably be appalled, as I must admit I am. I am not saying that to insult or hurt anyone. I am just being honest. The level of conversation here is below the moral fiber that most decent people will tell you they aspire to. And that is not a left or right statement. It's a statement from someone who has made an honest effort at improving myself and the people around me. I work a lot with the public, I belong to a lot of web communities. It is difficult to say without some here taking it personal but this is as vile and uncivilized a group of folks as I ever came across, regardless of which political flag is being flown under the name.
I guess that is kind of "chiding". Be that as it may, there is a more effective way to communicate than what we have here.
The left has taught us that blogs are news sources. And the London Daily Mail is a 'right wing' source? Who knew? (Oh it's cause they turned on the glowbull wurming chicken littles... isn't it?)
Just living down to your standard. Then again, I've heard the robocalls from multiple sources. Shit, my family got one. So, yes, they're happening, and yes they're criminal.
Apparently the left in general doesn't get bias if they agree with it for one. That said, the source does not change the facts of the issue. A leftwing group IS committing the crimes it mentions.The left has taught us that blogs are news sources. And the London Daily Mail is a 'right wing' source? Who knew? (Oh it's cause they turned on the glowbull wurming chicken littles... isn't it?)
Just living down to your standard. Then again, I've heard the robocalls from multiple sources. Shit, my family got one. So, yes, they're happening, and yes they're criminal.
I said it was a "Right-Wing Blog", not a "Right-Wing Paper".
You do understand the difference, right?
And really: "I'm just doing it because you guys do it"?
Do you have any evidence at all of me using a blog as proof?
What is that, the right-wing version of "I'm rubber and you're glue"?
Didn't Rush just try that tactic in conjunction with his sad "apology". Didn't work too well there either, did it?
Apparently the left in general doesn't get bias if they agree with it for one. That said, the source does not change the facts of the issue. A leftwing group IS committing the crimes it mentions.
Also, Alinsky's rules are not going to change the fact that your own standard sucks when you are forced to face it yourself. I'm done with double standards, so I will use your standard on you.
Yes, we know the left doesn't accept apologies from any rightwing figure. The left just doesn't bother to apologize for its actions. Although P-BO has apologizing for the evil American Empire down pat.
As you can see...the rabid RWers and Neo-CON$ are desperately scratching and clawing for anything to get them out of this debacle.I had forgotten how this thing works about giving credits and taking credits from the little light meter up there.
Willow, I was only pointing out that this is probably not a criminal offense. The violation, according to the article, is the fact these recordings didn't properly identify themselves. At least not to the satisfaction of the person writing the article. This writer claims that because he doesn't know who "The 99% Womens Group" (or who ever these people are) is, that this violates the regulation that robocalls must identify who is sponsoring the call. It's just really thin to begin with and in addition, I don't see where any kind of charges have been made, much less has anyone been been convicted of anything and even if that were the case, it's not something covered by "criminal" code. We don't generally refer to speeders as criminals. Or any number of civil infractions or misdemeanors. Had the author of this topic said "illegal activity" then I wouldn't have raised a peep. But "criminal" is just misleading. No criminal offense here.
Yes. I know. Talk to the rest of your coffee clatch about calling blogs and obvious edits news then.Apparently the left in general doesn't get bias if they agree with it for one. That said, the source does not change the facts of the issue. A leftwing group IS committing the crimes it mentions.
Also, Alinsky's rules are not going to change the fact that your own standard sucks when you are forced to face it yourself. I'm done with double standards, so I will use your standard on you.
Yes, we know the left doesn't accept apologies from any rightwing figure. The left just doesn't bother to apologize for its actions. Although P-BO has apologizing for the evil American Empire down pat.
Dude, the "right-wing" part wasn't even the important point, it was the "Blog" part.
That video is definitely, 100%, edited. You can literally hear the break in the audio.
Who knows what was said in the cut-out portion? Could have been anything.
The fact that it was just some random guy's blog, lends no credence whatsoever to the writer's veracity.
Yes, the big companies are abandoning Rush in droves. So many droves I heard more than a few of them on his show today. Save for the lack of the carbonite pitches, I heard no difference really.As you can see...the rabid RWers and Neo-CON$ are desperately scratching and clawing for anything to get them out of this debacle.I had forgotten how this thing works about giving credits and taking credits from the little light meter up there.
Willow, I was only pointing out that this is probably not a criminal offense. The violation, according to the article, is the fact these recordings didn't properly identify themselves. At least not to the satisfaction of the person writing the article. This writer claims that because he doesn't know who "The 99% Womens Group" (or who ever these people are) is, that this violates the regulation that robocalls must identify who is sponsoring the call. It's just really thin to begin with and in addition, I don't see where any kind of charges have been made, much less has anyone been been convicted of anything and even if that were the case, it's not something covered by "criminal" code. We don't generally refer to speeders as criminals. Or any number of civil infractions or misdemeanors. Had the author of this topic said "illegal activity" then I wouldn't have raised a peep. But "criminal" is just misleading. No criminal offense here.
They are like a wildebeast caught in quicksand.
I mean...just look at 'em...clutching, clawing and grabbing at anything, hoping that it will save and/or resolve them...in vain.
As you can see...the rabid RWers and Neo-CON$ are desperately scratching and clawing for anything to get them out of this debacle.I had forgotten how this thing works about giving credits and taking credits from the little light meter up there.
Willow, I was only pointing out that this is probably not a criminal offense. The violation, according to the article, is the fact these recordings didn't properly identify themselves. At least not to the satisfaction of the person writing the article. This writer claims that because he doesn't know who "The 99% Womens Group" (or who ever these people are) is, that this violates the regulation that robocalls must identify who is sponsoring the call. It's just really thin to begin with and in addition, I don't see where any kind of charges have been made, much less has anyone been been convicted of anything and even if that were the case, it's not something covered by "criminal" code. We don't generally refer to speeders as criminals. Or any number of civil infractions or misdemeanors. Had the author of this topic said "illegal activity" then I wouldn't have raised a peep. But "criminal" is just misleading. No criminal offense here.
They are like a wildebeast caught in quicksand.
I mean...just look at 'em...clutching, clawing and grabbing at anything, hoping that it will save and/or resolve them...in vain.
Of course it's not criminal.I don't think this is "criminal". It may violate civil code of some sort but there is no criminal offense here.
I know what you mean...As you can see...the rabid RWers and Neo-CON$ are desperately scratching and clawing for anything to get them out of this debacle.I had forgotten how this thing works about giving credits and taking credits from the little light meter up there.
Willow, I was only pointing out that this is probably not a criminal offense. The violation, according to the article, is the fact these recordings didn't properly identify themselves. At least not to the satisfaction of the person writing the article. This writer claims that because he doesn't know who "The 99% Womens Group" (or who ever these people are) is, that this violates the regulation that robocalls must identify who is sponsoring the call. It's just really thin to begin with and in addition, I don't see where any kind of charges have been made, much less has anyone been been convicted of anything and even if that were the case, it's not something covered by "criminal" code. We don't generally refer to speeders as criminals. Or any number of civil infractions or misdemeanors. Had the author of this topic said "illegal activity" then I wouldn't have raised a peep. But "criminal" is just misleading. No criminal offense here.
They are like a wildebeast caught in quicksand.
I mean...just look at 'em...clutching, clawing and grabbing at anything, hoping that it will save and/or resolve them...in vain.
I don't know. I fail to see much good intention anywhere in any of it. It's all lowest common denominator stuff that I would think decent people would try to rise above, on both sides of the issue. Attempting to correct bad behavior with more bad behavior and then excusing all that bad behavior by pointing to yet more incidents of bad behavior... that's not good behavior. Know what that is? That's more bad behavior.
What does disappoint me somewhat is that just yesterday I had two or three fairly senior members here agreeing that reclaiming some shame for bad behavior would be a good idea. Also mentioned was the act of leading by example. And I found these to be excellent examples of good, Christian behavior that I can believe in. Unfortunately, those posters have yet to recommend those things to anyone but me. They seem remiss about mentioning those values in this conversation. I don't question their sincerity. I don't question them at all. I just notice their absence and think it could be appreciated in a conversation like this, as much as it was appreciated in the prior conversation when it was my behavior put out there.
I'd say read the rest of the thread before you joined. Much evidence and links pointing out where it is.Of course it's not criminal.I don't think this is "criminal". It may violate civil code of some sort but there is no criminal offense here.
The rabid RW is just clutching and gnawing at straws, desperate for salvation, but doomed for destruction...like a wilderbeast caught in quicksand.
Read the whole thread then. Many links early on.I'd say read the rest of the thread before you joined. Much evidence and links pointing out where it is.Of course it's not criminal.I don't think this is "criminal". It may violate civil code of some sort but there is no criminal offense here.
The rabid RW is just clutching and gnawing at straws, desperate for salvation, but doomed for destruction...like a wilderbeast caught in quicksand.
