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.
Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Rush is not PC. Rush is telling the truth. These socalled atrocities didn't even draw blood. They ARE about as severe as hazing rituals. Of course The President cannot say this, he must be politically correct on this to avoid the wrath of the world. Rush is telling you the truth, Bush is being PC.
Rush is one of the most brilliant and consistently correct political analysts around. You just can't handle the truth.
Just in general, name a few point of his you think are idiotic.
Originally posted by brneyedgrl80
They did not draw blood? You need to go outside of your box and actually read and look at things that may go against your line of thinking (like I do). Maybe it is you who can't handle the truth.
Try www.thememoryhole.org or any other news website that talks about the pictures and you will see that in some cases, blood was in fact drawn.
That's the first of some of the things I find ignorant, not idiotic.
Happy looking and reading!
Originally posted by nycflasher
And here we have the definition of the word "fact" by RWA.
Somebody loan me a shovel....
Reactionary? I can't believe I actually got called reactionary by Ms. Avenger.
Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
Maybe someone pulled a scab. The point is our "atrocities" are ready for primetime and can be shown in a PG context. The atrocities against westerners cannot even be shown.
Our actions do not nearly rise to the level of the actions against us. That's the broader point you seem to be missing. You libs want us to get a guilt complex, when, by comparison, it's just not close to real atrocities, and does not warrant the national guilt you libs wish it did. SOrry, Shirley.
Originally posted by Pale Rider
Love him or loath him, he nailed this one right on the head.............
By Rush Limbaugh:
If you lost a family member in the September 11 attack, you're going to get an average of 1,185,000. The range is a minimum guarantee of $250,000, all the way up to $4.7 million.
Originally posted by Merlin1047
Government had no business compensating the families of the victims of the 9/11 attacks any more than government should compensate the families of the victims of drunk drivers.
This attitude may sound callous, but the fact is that my wife and I donated several hundred dollars to the Salvation Army fund for the 9/11 families. Now many of them are in a greedy feeding frenzy trying to prove that they deserve more than others. The whole thing is shameful and disgusting. Almost makes me wish I had kept my money in the checking account.
Jk
Originally posted by Avatar4321
Well if you ever want to give your money for a noble cause. Support my law school education fund id really appreciate it
Originally posted by Merlin1047
LOL - Law school? Why not take up something more respectable, like prostitution?:teeth:
lol
Originally posted by Merlin1047
Government had no business compensating the families of the victims of the 9/11 attacks any more than government should compensate the families of the victims of drunk drivers.
This attitude may sound callous, but the fact is that my wife and I donated several hundred dollars to the Salvation Army fund for the 9/11 families. Now many of them are in a greedy feeding frenzy trying to prove that they deserve more than others. The whole thing is shameful and disgusting. Almost makes me wish I had kept my money in the checking account.
Originally posted by Avatar4321
Well if you ever want to give your money for a noble cause. Support my law school education fund id really appreciate it
Originally posted by brneyedgrl80
I don't think you even went to the website that I provided you. So maybe what I said hit home. Are you afraid to go check out things that may go against your beliefs and look at pictures that speak volumes? On this website, they also show the pictures of what happens to our soldiers and civilians. If you are even interested, they have the Nick Berg video as well. This is a sight that believes in freedom of information and will show things that the news and newspapers will not show. Plus, they provide links to other websites to view other pictures as well. You should really give it a look. Look at what someone is presenting you before going off and making assumptions.
As for the second part of your post, that has nothing to do with what we were talking about. Please stay focused and stick to one subject. If you want to talk about the so-called guilt complex that us libs supposedly give, please start a new thread for that.
By the way, my name is Starla. You may call me brneyedgrl80 though, lol
Edit:
Funny how things change:
RUSH LIES TO TIME (REPOSTED FROM 6-1-4)
Some of you might have seen the Time Magazine interview with Rush Limbaugh.
TIME: YOU'RE GETTING CRITICIZED FOR COMPARING THE PRISON ABUSE IN IRAQ WITH A COLLEGE PRANK. WERE YOU MISINTERPRETED?
LIMBAUGH: I was totally misinterpreted and taken out of context. In a three-hour show, I would wager that two hours and 58 minutes were spent discussing the aspects of those photos that repulsed everybody, including me.
Limbaugh is suggesting that he spent 98 percent of his on-air time talking about the horrific aspects of the photos.
So, we went to the record, and checked out the May 4 transcript over at Media Matters. This is the now-infamous show when Limbaugh said: "This is no different than what happens at the Skull and Bones initiation..."
There were about 19,000 words in the transcript. We sliced up the transcript by topic, and calculated the percentages.
He didn't spend 98 percent of this show talking about the aspects of the photos that repulsed everybody.
He spent 2 percent of the show talking about the repulsive aspects.
He spent 37 percent of his time downplaying the photos, the abuse, or the efforts to investigate prison abuses.
Here's the full Rush Limbaugh, May 4, 2004 breakdown by topic:
Downplaying the photos and/or abuse: 37 percent
Attacking John Kerry: 28 percent
Talking about gas prices, and why people still love their SUVS: 18 percent
Attacking the liberal media: 5 percent
Talking about redecorating his bathroom: 4 percent
Democrats are sabotaging the war effort: 2.5 percent
The pictures are bad / the abuse is bad: 2 percent
Liberals are concerned about seafood running out: 1.5 percent
A new super-skinny diet prolongs life: 1 percent
The French and UN hate us: 1 percent
In short, Limbaugh lied about how he spent his time during that show. He spent twice as much time talking about redecorating his bathroom as his did suggesting that we should be concerned about the abuse of prisoners.
A follow-up question: Why did Richard Zoglin of Time Magazine take his word for it?
J.R. Norton
I'm sure this can easily be referenced in the Time Magazine so one can see it with their own eyes.
http://www.airamericaradio.com/bin/blogExcerpts.cfm?blogId=1&prg=3
Originally posted by brneyedgrl80
I never said it was worse. I think what happens to both sides are horrible. I was just giving an example as you asked.
I'll have to disagree about his "concern". But thanks for taking the time to look.
Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
The point remains. our atrocities are not even comparable to theirs. Yet libs act like we're worse. It's just that simple.
He was concerned about the abuse, but he was also willing to put in context, which is what liberals refuse to do.
Originally posted by brneyedgrl80
I never said it was worse. I think what happens to both sides are horrible. I was just giving an example as you asked.
Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
He was concerned. You don't listen to the show.
Yeah what happens to both sides is horrible. But what they do is much much more horrible. They TARGET civilians for god sake. And when we have some unfortunate collateral damage, you libs act like we're the big bad guys on earth. Your perspective and logic on many issues are quite flawed.
Originally posted by brneyedgrl80
I admit that I don't listen to the show on a daily basis, but I do listen. Just as I watch certain conservative shows once in awhile. Which is more than I can say for certain people here who have already shown by their posts that they do not look at anything that goes against their line of thinking. And from what it looks, if you actually listened to his show or read the transcripts (all of which should be provided in the above links, if they aren't I will be happy to supply) you would see that he first down played the situation and then later on stated he was concerned. Which one is it?
I will address this other part of the post even though it has nothing to do with this entire post. I never once said it was worse over in Iraq. I have always said that both were horrible. If you have read my posts in this thread or in any other thread discussing this topic you would have noticed that. But I know that would be asking too much considering you can't even take the time to look at some pictures with a link that was provided for you.
I do have one question for you though, that I will admit, is out of context so you don't have to answer it and I will understand. But what is it that makes you feel so compelled to prove others are speaking lies when in fact they provide valid proof, yet you have done nothing to prove your side? All you do is question others but provide no back up. This whole time that we have gone back and forth you have provided no information, just opinion, to back up what you say about Rush. All you do is question and insult. So now I am asking you a question. And here is a second. Could you please provide a concrete link or quote or both to counter everything I have posted to make your side clear? Or I may have to dismiss your perspectives and logic as flawed.
If you cannot, I will understand and consider this conversation between us done.
Originally posted by brneyedgrl80
Thank you for your supportive information instead of just opinions. I officially end our conversation on this post. See you on the next one!
: 
