Conservative Talk Radio & Iraq

[JoeB131]

[MENTION=47651]Nutz[/MENTION], I'm just honest and curious and I'm not a narcissist.

Looks like that combination of qualities makes me a little weird here!



.

Dude, you are definitely a narcissist.

Well, maybe that depends on the context.

Compared to all the partisan ideologues here -- those who think that their way is the only way, that anyone who disagrees with them is stupid, that life is black & white, that no ideas from the other side can be considered, that anyone who says something they don't like should be silenced -- can you think of anyone like that? -- yeah, I'm downright humble.

Outside of that context, well...

.

Guy, I considered the "other side" for years. Voted for the GOP for years.

And what I got was a 20% reduction in salary, fired for running up too many medical bills with an underwater mortgage and a busted 401K.

Not much of what the other side has any interest to me at this point. Been there. Done that.

Now, there was a very breif time when I tried to be fiscally/economically liberal and socially conservative. I supported Huckabee for a while. Then I watched the GOP collectively shit their pants because he dared state Jesus' central message was not "Tax Cuts for Rich People".

I had to conclude that as much as they carp about the abortion and the family issues, the GOP just uses that to keep stupid people distracted.

 

[JoeB131]

Oh, Mac will not consider a thing I just said, and will simply declare "that proves his point about ideologues" or some such shit.

 

[Mac1958]

Dude, you are definitely a narcissist.

Well, maybe that depends on the context.

Compared to all the partisan ideologues here -- those who think that their way is the only way, that anyone who disagrees with them is stupid, that life is black & white, that no ideas from the other side can be considered, that anyone who says something they don't like should be silenced -- can you think of anyone like that? -- yeah, I'm downright humble.

Outside of that context, well...

.

Guy, I considered the "other side" for years. Voted for the GOP for years.

And what I got was a 20% reduction in salary, fired for running up too many medical bills with an underwater mortgage and a busted 401K.

Not much of what the other side has any interest to me at this point. Been there. Done that.

Now, there was a very breif time when I tried to be fiscally/economically liberal and socially conservative. I supported Huckabee for a while. Then I watched the GOP collectively shit their pants because he dared state Jesus' central message was not "Tax Cuts for Rich People".

I had to conclude that as much as they carp about the abortion and the family issues, the GOP just uses that to keep stupid people distracted.

Oh, Mac will not consider a thing I just said, and will simply declare "that proves his point about ideologues" or some such shit.

Yep!

Ya beat me to it!

.

 

[JoeB131]

Yup. You prove my point. There's not a point were you even want to bother to understand why I got to the point where i am at.

Why, I must just be a mean-spirited idealogue.

 

[tinydancer]

.

Pretty interesting today, I had a chance to listen to a little Rush, a little Hannity, and a little Levin. Since Obama hasn't done anything specific yet and has not yet shown his hand, they're all doing essentially the same thing:

All of them are tossing out vague criticisms of Obama, they're all (interestingly) asking many nebulous rhetorical questions, but none of them are saying "this is exactly what we should do". Levin is coming closer to endorsing military action, but he too is essentially just dancing around the edges without going too far, and has probably asked a dozen hazy rhetorical questions in the 30 minutes I've been listening.

My guess is that, since Obama hasn't done anything yet, they don't want to take a stand because they feel they need to be able to criticize Obama no matter what he does.

Is that a fair assumption? If not, why aren't they being clear? They usually are.

And have their fans noticed this? If so, does that bother you?

.

Their fans are blind. That's why they love radio

Really? I don't have television because I choose not to be a slave to reality shows and bullshit 30 second "news" blurbs.

I listen to radio because it is the last bastion of true reporting. Even the CBC.

 

[HenryBHough]

In order to figure out what to do that would be most effective it is first necessary to find out what Our Kenyan President proposes to do. Then choose the exact opposite because his track record says every decision he has ever made turned out to hurt America and/or Americans. Or even kill them.

 

[elektra]

.

Pretty interesting today, I had a chance to listen to a little Rush, a little Hannity, and a little Levin. Since Obama hasn't done anything specific yet about the Iraq crisis and has not yet shown his hand, they're all doing essentially the same thing

.

Pretty interesting, that you think you know what your speaking of based on what you admit, is a little listening for one day.

You got lots of thanks, for what, you make a statement on almost zero information. Why would you do that, seems simple to me, you have a preconceived idea based on political headlines you seek out based on you ideology.

Do you really believe you know what your talking of just listening to a little.

I say bullshit, your a liar, that you listened to no Rush, or Levin, maybe you listened to Hannity, but most likely you are simply repeating the political mantra of the left.

I could believe that you are ignorant enough to base your opinion on just a "little". After all, that is what you stated, that you base your opinion only on a very little amount of information.

??? What is it you're attempting to say? Your babbling is harder to decipher than a Sarah Palin rant.

You think that is a clever comeback, you obviously can not tell Sarah from Tina, moron.

Go pick something from Rush or Levin you think you can debate, otherwise we can just trade flames, idiot!

 

[elektra]

.

Pretty interesting today, I had a chance to listen to a little Rush, a little Hannity, and a little Levin. Since Obama hasn't done anything specific yet about the Iraq crisis and has not yet shown his hand, they're all doing essentially the same thing

.

Pretty interesting, that you think you know what your speaking of based on what you admit, is a little listening for one day.

You got lots of thanks, for what, you make a statement on almost zero information. Why would you do that, seems simple to me, you have a preconceived idea based on political headlines you seek out based on you ideology.

Do you really believe you know what your talking of just listening to a little.

I say bullshit, your a liar, that you listened to no Rush, or Levin, maybe you listened to Hannity, but most likely you are simply repeating the political mantra of the left.

I could believe that you are ignorant enough to base your opinion on just a "little". After all, that is what you stated, that you base your opinion only on a very little amount of information.

Believe what you will.

I'd guess I listen to Rush about 9 hours a week on average, Levin maybe 5. Hannity, maybe 3. As an independent, I agree with them about 40% of the time. Not often all on the same day. On that day, I made sure to listen to all three because I was curious about how they were handling this topic.

Yet you assume I'm a left wing partisan ideologue.

Speaking of "preconceived ideas".



The fact remains, they were all dancing a bit, and continue to. And I suspect it's because they're waiting for Obama to do something so that they can take an opposite stance.

I guess we'll see, huh?

.

Believe what I will? You stated that you listened just a little, I guess I was suppose to think a little was actually a lot and that you listened all the time?

Now you state you did not listen to them a little, but all day?

You state that I assume you're a "left-wing ideologue"? Talk about a pre-conceived idea, I just stated in so many words you're full of shit and now I will simply state I believe your a liar.

I never stated you were, "left-wing", for you to state that as what I thought of you only proves my assertion that you do not listen to conservative talk radio.

You I assigned thoughts to me that never crossed my mind, if you do that so easily to me, I can see that is how your mind operates period.

The fact remains, they were all dancing a bit, and continue to. And I suspect it's because they're waiting for Obama to do something so that they can take an opposite stance.

Thats not a fact, its your opinion, based on "I had a chance to listen to a little Rush, a little Hannity, and a little Levin", you're words, "a little".

The only fact proven here is the fact that you based your opinion on "a little".

 

[Mac1958]

Pretty interesting, that you think you know what your speaking of based on what you admit, is a little listening for one day.

You got lots of thanks, for what, you make a statement on almost zero information. Why would you do that, seems simple to me, you have a preconceived idea based on political headlines you seek out based on you ideology.

Do you really believe you know what your talking of just listening to a little.

I say bullshit, your a liar, that you listened to no Rush, or Levin, maybe you listened to Hannity, but most likely you are simply repeating the political mantra of the left.

I could believe that you are ignorant enough to base your opinion on just a "little". After all, that is what you stated, that you base your opinion only on a very little amount of information.

Believe what you will.

I'd guess I listen to Rush about 9 hours a week on average, Levin maybe 5. Hannity, maybe 3. As an independent, I agree with them about 40% of the time. Not often all on the same day. On that day, I made sure to listen to all three because I was curious about how they were handling this topic.

Yet you assume I'm a left wing partisan ideologue.

Speaking of "preconceived ideas".



The fact remains, they were all dancing a bit, and continue to. And I suspect it's because they're waiting for Obama to do something so that they can take an opposite stance.

I guess we'll see, huh?

.

Believe what I will? You stated that you listened just a little, I guess I was suppose to think a little was actually a lot and that you listened all the time?

Now you state you did not listen to them a little, but all day?

You state that I assume you're a "left-wing ideologue"? Talk about a pre-conceived idea, I just stated in so many words you're full of shit and now I will simply state I believe your a liar.

I never stated you were, "left-wing", for you to state that as what I thought of you only proves my assertion that you do not listen to conservative talk radio.

You I assigned thoughts to me that never crossed my mind, if you do that so easily to me, I can see that is how your mind operates period.

The fact remains, they were all dancing a bit, and continue to. And I suspect it's because they're waiting for Obama to do something so that they can take an opposite stance.

Thats not a fact, its your opinion, based on "I had a chance to listen to a little Rush, a little Hannity, and a little Levin", you're words, "a little".

The only fact proven here is the fact that you based your opinion on "a little".

You're putting a lot of (tedious) effort into avoiding the point of my thread.

You didn't like my thread, so you tried to infer that I didn't listen to them enough, as if that matters.

Tell me, precisely what is Rush's plan for Iraq? What is Hannity's?

.

 

[elektra]

Believe what you will.

I'd guess I listen to Rush about 9 hours a week on average, Levin maybe 5. Hannity, maybe 3. As an independent, I agree with them about 40% of the time. Not often all on the same day. On that day, I made sure to listen to all three because I was curious about how they were handling this topic.

Yet you assume I'm a left wing partisan ideologue.

Speaking of "preconceived ideas".



The fact remains, they were all dancing a bit, and continue to. And I suspect it's because they're waiting for Obama to do something so that they can take an opposite stance.

I guess we'll see, huh?

.

Believe what I will? You stated that you listened just a little, I guess I was suppose to think a little was actually a lot and that you listened all the time?

Now you state you did not listen to them a little, but all day?

You state that I assume you're a "left-wing ideologue"? Talk about a pre-conceived idea, I just stated in so many words you're full of shit and now I will simply state I believe your a liar.

I never stated you were, "left-wing", for you to state that as what I thought of you only proves my assertion that you do not listen to conservative talk radio.

You I assigned thoughts to me that never crossed my mind, if you do that so easily to me, I can see that is how your mind operates period.

The fact remains, they were all dancing a bit, and continue to. And I suspect it's because they're waiting for Obama to do something so that they can take an opposite stance.

Thats not a fact, its your opinion, based on "I had a chance to listen to a little Rush, a little Hannity, and a little Levin", you're words, "a little".

The only fact proven here is the fact that you based your opinion on "a little".

You're putting a lot of (tedious) effort into avoiding the point of my thread.

You didn't like my thread, so you tried to infer that I didn't listen to them enough, as if that matters.

Tell me, precisely what is Rush's plan for Iraq? What is Hannity's?

.

You stated you did not listen, sorry if I believe what you wrote.

Rush's plan, precisely? Like written in his own words?

Well, lets begin with "exit strategy", or as what that really is, an official U.S.A date of surrender. Rush was against telling the terrorists that we are leaving on such and such date. The biggest Wartime Strategy Blunder in our history.

So you wish to discuss something, lets discuss Rush being against telling the terrorists that we will surrender Iraq to the terrorists.

Rush pointed out that we still have troops in Germany and Japan, it was foolishness to think we could pull out of Iraq, a great point by Rush.

Anyhow, you are the one who stated you listened, "very little", you have proven that you started a thread on the ideas in your head, not what is said on Rush's show.

Rush stated you can not pull the troops out of Iraq without Iraq being taken over by terrorists, current events prove Rush to be right, the Liberal/Democrats to be wrong.

Precise plan, what is the Democrats Precise Plan? The people who scream the loudest about there being no plan, are the ones who have no plan or ideas.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

.

Pretty interesting today, I had a chance to listen to a little Rush, a little Hannity, and a little Levin. Since Obama hasn't done anything specific yet and has not yet shown his hand, they're all doing essentially the same thing:

All of them are tossing out vague criticisms of Obama, they're all (interestingly) asking many nebulous rhetorical questions, but none of them are saying "this is exactly what we should do". Levin is coming closer to endorsing military action, but he too is essentially just dancing around the edges without going too far, and has probably asked a dozen hazy rhetorical questions in the 30 minutes I've been listening.

My guess is that, since Obama hasn't done anything yet, they don't want to take a stand because they feel they need to be able to criticize Obama no matter what he does.

Is that a fair assumption? If not, why aren't they being clear? They usually are.

And have their fans noticed this? If so, does that bother you?

.

Well even conservative talk show hosts have to wade thru the bullshit coming out of the White House and the media that this is just a Sunni uprising because they've been disenfranchised.

Obama's moving too little to late. ISIS is working with Saddams Baathists and it's a bloodbath with these Sunni terrorists.

I'm going to be able to pick up Levin on WLS in a minute.

Source?

The Baathists are all Shi'a. ISIS hates them more than they hate the US.

 

[Mac1958]

Believe what I will? You stated that you listened just a little, I guess I was suppose to think a little was actually a lot and that you listened all the time?

Now you state you did not listen to them a little, but all day?

You state that I assume you're a "left-wing ideologue"? Talk about a pre-conceived idea, I just stated in so many words you're full of shit and now I will simply state I believe your a liar.

I never stated you were, "left-wing", for you to state that as what I thought of you only proves my assertion that you do not listen to conservative talk radio.

You I assigned thoughts to me that never crossed my mind, if you do that so easily to me, I can see that is how your mind operates period.



Thats not a fact, its your opinion, based on "I had a chance to listen to a little Rush, a little Hannity, and a little Levin", you're words, "a little".

The only fact proven here is the fact that you based your opinion on "a little".

You're putting a lot of (tedious) effort into avoiding the point of my thread.

You didn't like my thread, so you tried to infer that I didn't listen to them enough, as if that matters.

Tell me, precisely what is Rush's plan for Iraq? What is Hannity's?

.

You stated you did not listen, sorry if I believe what you wrote.

Rush's plan, precisely? Like written in his own words?

Well, lets begin with "exit strategy", or as what that really is, an official U.S.A date of surrender. Rush was against telling the terrorists that we are leaving on such and such date. The biggest Wartime Strategy Blunder in our history.

So you wish to discuss something, lets discuss Rush being against telling the terrorists that we will surrender Iraq to the terrorists.

Rush pointed out that we still have troops in Germany and Japan, it was foolishness to think we could pull out of Iraq, a great point by Rush.

Anyhow, you are the one who stated you listened, "very little", you have proven that you started a thread on the ideas in your head, not what is said on Rush's show.

Rush stated you can not pull the troops out of Iraq without Iraq being taken over by terrorists, current events prove Rush to be right, the Liberal/Democrats to be wrong.

Precise plan, what is the Democrats Precise Plan? The people who scream the loudest about there being no plan, are the ones who have no plan or ideas.

When did I say I don't listen? Show me. Which post was it, I'll check it out. Full disclosure: I already know you won't be able to, but I won't expect an apology.

So you're saying Rush's plan is to not pull troops out? What, those that are remaining? What are they supposed to do, in Rush's plan? He didn't discuss it today. And not looking backward, looking forward.

And what about Hannity? What's his bold and clear plan? Which one of the bad guys does he want to support?

You still haven't told me what their plans are. And that's because they have not said what they would do. And that's because they're waiting for Obama so they can go in the opposite direction. Why can't you just admit that?

.

 

[Nutz]

You're putting a lot of (tedious) effort into avoiding the point of my thread.

You didn't like my thread, so you tried to infer that I didn't listen to them enough, as if that matters.

Tell me, precisely what is Rush's plan for Iraq? What is Hannity's?

.

You stated you did not listen, sorry if I believe what you wrote.

Rush's plan, precisely? Like written in his own words?

Well, lets begin with "exit strategy", or as what that really is, an official U.S.A date of surrender. Rush was against telling the terrorists that we are leaving on such and such date. The biggest Wartime Strategy Blunder in our history.

So you wish to discuss something, lets discuss Rush being against telling the terrorists that we will surrender Iraq to the terrorists.

Rush pointed out that we still have troops in Germany and Japan, it was foolishness to think we could pull out of Iraq, a great point by Rush.

Anyhow, you are the one who stated you listened, "very little", you have proven that you started a thread on the ideas in your head, not what is said on Rush's show.

Rush stated you can not pull the troops out of Iraq without Iraq being taken over by terrorists, current events prove Rush to be right, the Liberal/Democrats to be wrong.

Precise plan, what is the Democrats Precise Plan? The people who scream the loudest about there being no plan, are the ones who have no plan or ideas.

When did I say I don't listen? Show me. Which post was it, I'll check it out. Full disclosure: I already know you won't be able to, but I won't expect an apology.

So you're saying Rush's plan is to not pull troops out? What, those that are remaining? What are they supposed to do, in Rush's plan? He didn't discuss it today. And not looking backward, looking forward.

And what about Hannity? What's his bold and clear plan? Which one of the bad guys does he want to support?

You still haven't told me what their plans are. And that's because they have not said what they would do. And that's because they're waiting for Obama so they can go in the opposite direction. Why can't you just admit that?

.

It is mind numbingly funny, how some people simply cannot put aside their partisanship and look at an issue objectively, whether it proves positive or negative for their position. Is that human nature or a testament to one's character and integrity? The lies and the willful ignorance tell me it is character. I could be wrong.

I can even understand spinning a point to fit your needs, but this outright denial we see among the Teapers is mind boggling. Good job at remaining unbiased, Mac! I am afraid you waste that talent on this forum. LIBERALS TOO!

 

[Mac1958]

It is mind numbingly funny, how some people simply cannot put aside their partisanship and look at an issue objectively, whether it proves positive or negative for their position. Is that human nature or a testament to one's character and integrity? The lies and the willful ignorance tell me it is character. I could be wrong.

I can even understand spinning a point to fit your needs, but this outright denial we see among the Teapers is mind boggling. Good job at remaining unbiased, Mac! I am afraid you waste that talent on this forum. LIBERALS TOO!

Oh, don't get me started. I've started a couple of threads on the psychology of partisanship, it's an amateur psychological / sociological / anthropological study of mine.

As far as this topic goes, I think that down deep their fans know what they're doing by avoiding offering clear plans. Can you imagine if Obama did precisely what Rush and/or Hannity said they wanted to do? Now THAT would be funny. As division pimps, they are committed to disagreeing with him on everything, and this would **** their schtick up.

.

 

[emilynghiem]

Hi [MENTION=34298]Mac1958[/MENTION]
Most of the work on refining and implementing solutions is done behind the
scenes, on the ground, in the trenches.

It takes so much work to pull the right ideas and people together, they aren't from the same pool or party.

We should be working out solutions in networks, like here, organize and resolve issues to formulate proposed solutions, and get those to the media and leaders in parties or govt.

I see reforms working from the ground up, not the top down.
Anyone on left or right can rag about problems in the media.

To resolve conflicts one-on-one, and form solutions that represent the best ideas of all parties put together, takes a lot more groundwork than a few soundbytes on air can cover.

The solutions are going to come from the people, working together in teams.

.

Pretty interesting today, I had a chance to listen to a little Rush, a little Hannity, and a little Levin. Since Obama hasn't done anything specific yet about the Iraq crisis and has not yet shown his hand, they're all doing essentially the same thing:

All of them are tossing out vague criticisms of Obama, they're all (interestingly) asking many nebulous rhetorical questions, but none of them are saying "this is exactly what we should do". Levin is coming closer to endorsing military action, but he too is essentially just dancing around the edges without going too far, and has probably asked a dozen hazy rhetorical questions in the 30 minutes I've been listening.

My guess is that, since Obama hasn't done anything yet, they don't want to take a stand because they feel they need to be able to criticize Obama no matter what he does.

Is that a fair assumption? If not, why aren't they being clear? They usually are.

And have their fans noticed this? If so, does that bother you?

.

 

[elektra]

.

Pretty interesting today, I had a chance to listen to a little Rush, a little Hannity, and a little Levin. Since Obama hasn't done anything specific yet about the Iraq crisis and has not yet shown his hand, they're all doing essentially the same thing:

All of them are tossing out vague criticisms of Obama, they're all (interestingly) asking many nebulous rhetorical questions, but none of them are saying "this is exactly what we should do". Levin is coming closer to endorsing military action, but he too is essentially just dancing around the edges without going too far, and has probably asked a dozen hazy rhetorical questions in the 30 minutes I've been listening.

My guess is that, since Obama hasn't done anything yet, they don't want to take a stand because they feel they need to be able to criticize Obama no matter what he does.

Is that a fair assumption? If not, why aren't they being clear? They usually are.

And have their fans noticed this? If so, does that bother you?

.

Your own words, you state you listened, "very little", and based on how you are a 100% it is clear you do not listen.

Further, your statement as I quote below shows your a simply hack who never listened more than a "little".

All of them are tossing out vague criticisms of Obama

Vague? Are you serious, go back to school, seriously, your post is sloppy, Rush and Levin are hardly vague in their criticism of Obama.

Its funny how the hacks, "project", which means what you do you state your opponents are doing.

So please, your criticism is very vague, you listened a little, which day, which hour, and what is the vague criticism you heard, and just so you know, Levin's show is a 100% available online, so you need not be vague in your response, you can actually cut and paste right from there websites.

So go ahead, tell me the hour you listened to Rush, I will go to his page myself and read the transcript, I will link to it and post it, that way we can see if its MAC1958 who is full of shit, or me.

Go ahead MAC, which day and hour did you listen, a "little".

Or how about paraphrasing, can you do that MAC?

Go ahead, you made the thread now prove you are not a liar, I am a bit bold and more than prepared to respond, I just need MAC not to be so VAGUE!

 

[Nutz]

It is mind numbingly funny, how some people simply cannot put aside their partisanship and look at an issue objectively, whether it proves positive or negative for their position. Is that human nature or a testament to one's character and integrity? The lies and the willful ignorance tell me it is character. I could be wrong.

I can even understand spinning a point to fit your needs, but this outright denial we see among the Teapers is mind boggling. Good job at remaining unbiased, Mac! I am afraid you waste that talent on this forum. LIBERALS TOO!

Oh, don't get me started. I've started a couple of threads on the psychology of partisanship, it's an amateur psychological / sociological / anthropological study of mine.

As far as this topic goes, I think that down deep their fans know what they're doing by avoiding offering clear plans. Can you imagine if Obama did precisely what Rush and/or Hannity said they wanted to do? Now THAT would be funny. As division pimps, they are committed to disagreeing with him on everything, and this would **** their schtick up.

.

That would be funny...but they would spin it and say he didn't do it right or quick enough or exactly as they said.

 

[elektra]

It is mind numbingly funny, how some people simply cannot put aside their partisanship and look at an issue objectively, whether it proves positive or negative for their position. Is that human nature or a testament to one's character and integrity? The lies and the willful ignorance tell me it is character. I could be wrong.

I can even understand spinning a point to fit your needs, but this outright denial we see among the Teapers is mind boggling. Good job at remaining unbiased, Mac! I am afraid you waste that talent on this forum. LIBERALS TOO!

Oh, don't get me started. I've started a couple of threads on the psychology of partisanship, it's an amateur psychological / sociological / anthropological study of mine.

As far as this topic goes, I think that down deep their fans know what they're doing by avoiding offering clear plans. Can you imagine if Obama did precisely what Rush and/or Hannity said they wanted to do? Now THAT would be funny. As division pimps, they are committed to disagreeing with him on everything, and this would **** their schtick up.

.

MAC, I thought you stated Rush and Hannity were "vague",

Let me quote you MAC.

but none of them are saying "this is exactly what we should do"

Now you state, "imagine if Obama did precisely what Rush and/or Hannity said they wanted to do?"

So how can Obama do precisely what Rush stated when you state that Rush offered nothing?

MAC, you have to see how it seems that you are full of shit.

 

[Mac1958]

It is mind numbingly funny, how some people simply cannot put aside their partisanship and look at an issue objectively, whether it proves positive or negative for their position. Is that human nature or a testament to one's character and integrity? The lies and the willful ignorance tell me it is character. I could be wrong.

I can even understand spinning a point to fit your needs, but this outright denial we see among the Teapers is mind boggling. Good job at remaining unbiased, Mac! I am afraid you waste that talent on this forum. LIBERALS TOO!

Oh, don't get me started. I've started a couple of threads on the psychology of partisanship, it's an amateur psychological / sociological / anthropological study of mine.

As far as this topic goes, I think that down deep their fans know what they're doing by avoiding offering clear plans. Can you imagine if Obama did precisely what Rush and/or Hannity said they wanted to do? Now THAT would be funny. As division pimps, they are committed to disagreeing with him on everything, and this would **** their schtick up.

.

MAC, I thought you stated Rush and Hannity were "vague",

Let me quote you MAC.

but none of them are saying "this is exactly what we should do"

Now you state, "imagine if Obama did precisely what Rush and/or Hannity said they wanted to do?"

So how can Obama do precisely what Rush stated when you state that Rush offered nothing?

MAC, you have to see how it seems that you are full of shit.

Wow, two angry posts and no answer to my questions.

Rush and Sean have no problem listing the standard conservative talking points on all OTHER issues.

No answer yet -- or did I miss it?

.

 

[elektra]

Oh, don't get me started. I've started a couple of threads on the psychology of partisanship, it's an amateur psychological / sociological / anthropological study of mine.

As far as this topic goes, I think that down deep their fans know what they're doing by avoiding offering clear plans. Can you imagine if Obama did precisely what Rush and/or Hannity said they wanted to do? Now THAT would be funny. As division pimps, they are committed to disagreeing with him on everything, and this would **** their schtick up.

.

MAC, I thought you stated Rush and Hannity were "vague",

Let me quote you MAC.

but none of them are saying "this is exactly what we should do"

Now you state, "imagine if Obama did precisely what Rush and/or Hannity said they wanted to do?"

So how can Obama do precisely what Rush stated when you state that Rush offered nothing?

MAC, you have to see how it seems that you are full of shit.

Wow, two angry posts and no answer to my questions.

Rush and Sean have no problem listing the standard conservative talking points on all OTHER issues.

No answer yet -- or did I miss it?

.

You have yet to answer any of my questions which are relevant to your OP, beings how you started this thread you are responsible to answer our questions, so what's up, just thought you would provide another example of your hypocrisy.