Rush Limbaugh’s Long, Slow March to Irrelevance

[daveman]

Limbaugh's is a threat, he does not think the same as us Liberals

Limbaugh's is a threat, he does not think the same as us Liberals

Limbaugh's is a threat, he does not think the same as us Liberals

Limbaugh's is a threat, he does not think the same as us Liberals

 

[daveman]

Limbaugh's net worth is $23 million
What's yours OP?

-$311.80?

That's way off. I think he earned like 70 million in 2012 alone. I've read his networth is close to a billion dollars.

Interesting use of the word "earned".

More interesting, the same poster above, a few hours prior, said he was worth 29 million. What can you spend 6 million on in three hours? Viagra and Dominican hookers cost that much?

Most interesting is the value system: that "how much one is worth", i.e. how many millions beyond what you can ever spend, is some kind of measure of accomplishment.

It's at least a measure. "Being a liberal" isn't something you should put on your resume.

 

[Pogo]

Limbaugh's is a threat, he does not think the same as us Liberals

Limbaugh's is a threat, he does not think the same as us Liberals

Limbaugh's is a threat, he does not think the same as us Liberals

Limbaugh's is a threat, he does not think the same as us Liberals

Whew...

Interesting surrealism. Where do you get your inspiration?

Just FYI, there's no such thing as "thoughtcrime" under Liberalism. But I guess you know that, hence the irony.

Gatsby tried to fly this canard a few pages back. I challenged him to back it up and he ran away whimpering (posts 54-58).
I gotta get off this low-hanging fruit diet...

 

[daveman]

Fame may be fleeting but obscurity is forever.​

https://www.google.com/search?q=editec&oq=editec&aqs=chrome.0.69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

editec
About 242,000 results (0.29 seconds)​

https://www.google.com/search?q=edi...53,d.eWU&fp=aabfeb84bfcc56d1&biw=1920&bih=947

rush limbaugh
About 94,400,000 results (0.37 seconds)​

Yes, you have a point.

 

[Pogo]

Fame may be fleeting but obscurity is forever.​

https://www.google.com/search?q=editec&oq=editec&aqs=chrome.0.69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

editec
About 242,000 results (0.29 seconds)​

https://www.google.com/search?q=edi...53,d.eWU&fp=aabfeb84bfcc56d1&biw=1920&bih=947

rush limbaugh
About 94,400,000 results (0.37 seconds)​

Yes, you have a point.

Google search: "Hitler":
About 70,700,000 results (0.17 seconds)

What shall we conclude? That Hitler is more like Limblob than Editech?

Or that my internet service is faster than yours?

Hmm... my ISP sucks so that can't be it....

 

[daveman]

Limbaugh's is a threat, he does not think the same as us Liberals

Limbaugh's is a threat, he does not think the same as us Liberals

Limbaugh's is a threat, he does not think the same as us Liberals

Limbaugh's is a threat, he does not think the same as us Liberals

Whew...

Interesting surrealism. Where do you get your inspiration?

The left.

Just FYI, there's no such thing as "thoughtcrime" under Liberalism. But I guess you know that, hence the irony.

Who's talking about liberalism? I'm talking about progressives, who loath individual liberty and individual rights. Individualism, too, for that matter. All must be surrendered to the kollektive.

Anyone who supports bringing back the Fairness Doctrine wants to use government force to punish certain ways of thinking.

Anyone who supports Hate Crime laws wants to use government force to punish certain ways of thinking.

Anyone who defends the IRS slow-rolling tax-exempt applications wants to use government force to punish certain ways of thinking.

How many of those three issues do you support?

Gatsby tried to fly this canard a few pages back. I challenged him to back it up and he ran away whimpering (posts 54-58).
I gotta get off this low-hanging fruit diet...

Yeah, your e-peen is HUGE.

 

[daveman]

Fame may be fleeting but obscurity is forever.​

https://www.google.com/search?q=editec&oq=editec&aqs=chrome.0.69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

editec
About 242,000 results (0.29 seconds)​

https://www.google.com/search?q=edi...53,d.eWU&fp=aabfeb84bfcc56d1&biw=1920&bih=947

rush limbaugh
About 94,400,000 results (0.37 seconds)​

Yes, you have a point.

Google search: "Hitler":
About 70,700,000 results (0.17 seconds)

What shall we conclude? That Hitler is more like Limblob than Editech?

Or that my internet service is faster than yours?

Hmm... my ISP sucks so that can't be it....

I think it's safe to say that Limbaugh isn't obscure, no matter how hard some progs want him to be.

 

[Pogo]

Whew...

Interesting surrealism. Where do you get your inspiration?

The left.

Just FYI, there's no such thing as "thoughtcrime" under Liberalism. But I guess you know that, hence the irony.

Who's talking about liberalism?

Uummmmmm..... read your own post? The one with "us Liberals" in it? Ring a bell? Hello?

I'm talking about progressives, who loath individual liberty and individual rights. Individualism, too, for that matter. All must be surrendered to the kollektive.

Can't comment. I don't watch The Glenn Beck Fantasmagoria.

Anyone who supports bringing back the Fairness Doctrine wants to use government force to punish certain ways of thinking.

That doesn't follow. But again, I don't read the comic books featuring whatever double-dem-demon Hannity's featuring this week, so...

Anyone who supports Hate Crime laws wants to use government force to punish certain ways of thinking.

That does.

Anyone who defends the IRS slow-rolling tax-exempt applications wants to use government force to punish certain ways of thinking.

How many of those three issues do you support?

What issues?

I know about the first one; the next two have nothing to do with the topic.

Gatsby tried to fly this canard a few pages back. I challenged him to back it up and he ran away whimpering (posts 54-58).
I gotta get off this low-hanging fruit diet...

Yeah, your e-peen is HUGE.

Dunno wtf that means, I'm just saying, Gats made the same point; I challenged him to back it up and he had nothing.
What you got?

 

[bripat9643]

Limbaugh's net worth is $23 million
What's yours OP?

-$311.80?

I think Limbaugh's Gulfstream IV is worth more than $23 million.

 

[daveman]

Whew...

Interesting surrealism. Where do you get your inspiration?

The left.

Who's talking about liberalism?

Uummmmmm..... read your own post? The one with "us Liberals" in it? Ring a bell? Hello?

You try reading it. That was CrusaderFrank's post, not mine. I riffed on his Borg reference with an apropos image of the progressive attitude towards Limbaugh.

Get it now?

Can't comment. I don't watch The Glenn Beck Fantasmagoria.

Nor do I. But I do pay attention to progressives.

That doesn't follow. But again, I don't read the comic books featuring whatever double-dem-demon Hannity's featuring this week, so...

Of course it follows. Your inability to understand is not my problem.

That does.

I know.

Your inability to understand is not my problem.

What issues?

Ummmm...really?

The three issues I just mentioned, genius.

I know about the first one; the next two have nothing to do with the topic.

Of course they do. Your inability to understand is not my problem.

Gatsby tried to fly this canard a few pages back. I challenged him to back it up and he ran away whimpering (posts 54-58).
I gotta get off this low-hanging fruit diet...

Yeah, your e-peen is HUGE.

Dunno wtf that means, I'm just saying, Gats made the same point; I challenged him to back it up and he had nothing.
What you got?

I. Just. Told. You.

I gave three examples of progressives using government force to silence ideas with which they disagree.

Look, you may believe "I dunno what you're talking about, so I win, durrr hurrr!" is a valid response, but it's not.

 

[Pogo]

The left.

Who's talking about liberalism?

Uummmmmm..... read your own post? The one with "us Liberals" in it? Ring a bell? Hello?

You try reading it. That was CrusaderFrank's post, not mine. I riffed on his Borg reference with an apropos image of the progressive attitude towards Limbaugh.

Get it now?

Nor do I. But I do pay attention to progressives.

Of course it follows. Your inability to understand is not my problem.

I know.

Your inability to understand is not my problem.

Ummmm...really?

The three issues I just mentioned, genius.

Of course they do. Your inability to understand is not my problem.

Yeah, your e-peen is HUGE.

Dunno wtf that means, I'm just saying, Gats made the same point; I challenged him to back it up and he had nothing.
What you got?

I. Just. Told. You.

I gave three examples of progressives using government force to silence ideas with which they disagree.

Look, you may believe "I dunno what you're talking about, so I win, durrr hurrr!" is a valid response, but it's not.

.....aaaaand blammo, you committed the same fallacy Gatsby did; moving the goalposts.
In his case he went from Liberals to O'bama; you went from Liberals to "progressives". Whatever the **** that means.

Since this flew over your head, "bringing back the Fairness Doctrine" is not an issue because it's not happening. But if it did happen it would have nothing to do with "using government force to punish certain ways of thinking". Because the FD didn't do that and couldn't do that. If anything it did the opposite.

The other two, we already did hate crimes and the IRS is just not something I deal with, so I can't comment because I don't know wtf you're talking about. But if you want the question addressed, explaining it IS your problem. If not, then never mind.

 

[daveman]

.....aaaaand blammo, you committed the same fallacy Gatsby did; moving the goalposts.
In his case he went from Liberals to O'bama; you went from Liberals to "progressives". Whatever the **** that means.

Wrong. I haven't mentioned liberals. CrusaderFrank did; I did not.

Since this flew over your head, "bringing back the Fairness Doctrine" is not an issue because it's not happening. But if it did happen it would have nothing to do with "using government force to punish certain ways of thinking". Because the FD didn't do that and couldn't do that. If anything it did the opposite.

You're wrong on two counts.

1. Nothing you're capable of saying can go over my head.

2. The FD would silence voices because not all venues could profitably provide time for other views and would therefore have to shut down.

The other two, we already did hate crimes and the IRS is just not something I deal with, so I can't comment because I don't know wtf you're talking about. But if you want the question addressed, explaining it IS your problem. If not, then never mind.

Never mind indeed. You're not interested in discussion. You just want to be told you're right.

How's that working out for you?

 

[Pogo]

.....aaaaand blammo, you committed the same fallacy Gatsby did; moving the goalposts.
In his case he went from Liberals to O'bama; you went from Liberals to "progressives". Whatever the **** that means.

Wrong. I haven't mentioned liberals. CrusaderFrank did; I did not.

Since this flew over your head, "bringing back the Fairness Doctrine" is not an issue because it's not happening. But if it did happen it would have nothing to do with "using government force to punish certain ways of thinking". Because the FD didn't do that and couldn't do that. If anything it did the opposite.

You're wrong on two counts.

1. Nothing you're capable of saying can go over my head.

2. The FD would silence voices because not all venues could profitably provide time for other views and would therefore have to shut down.

The other two, we already did hate crimes and the IRS is just not something I deal with, so I can't comment because I don't know wtf you're talking about. But if you want the question addressed, explaining it IS your problem. If not, then never mind.

Never mind indeed. You're not interested in discussion. You just want to be told you're right.

How's that working out for you?

Nobody ever tells me I'm right. What you guys usually give me is crickets. Like Gatsby did.

On to the meat:
It is not the role of the government to provide "profits" for businesses. That's the business owner's concern. There's your fallacy right there.

 

[daveman]

.....aaaaand blammo, you committed the same fallacy Gatsby did; moving the goalposts.
In his case he went from Liberals to O'bama; you went from Liberals to "progressives". Whatever the **** that means.

Wrong. I haven't mentioned liberals. CrusaderFrank did; I did not.

You're wrong on two counts.

1. Nothing you're capable of saying can go over my head.

2. The FD would silence voices because not all venues could profitably provide time for other views and would therefore have to shut down.

The other two, we already did hate crimes and the IRS is just not something I deal with, so I can't comment because I don't know wtf you're talking about. But if you want the question addressed, explaining it IS your problem. If not, then never mind.

Never mind indeed. You're not interested in discussion. You just want to be told you're right.

How's that working out for you?

Nobody ever tells me I'm right. What you guys usually give me is crickets. Like Gatsby did.

Tissue?

On to the meat:
It is not the role of the government to provide "profits" for businesses. That's the business owner's concern. There's your fallacy right there.

It would be, if that's what I'd claimed.

You're reading things that simply aren't there.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Nobody ever tells me I'm right. What you guys usually give me is crickets. Like Gatsby did.

You have to be right before you can be told you're right. And I've always regarded you fairly direct. The instance you refer to was after a somewhat lengthy exchange and afterwards, I had finally left to perform work. But, I guess it's easier for you to create your own version of reality. That's no secret.

 

[Pogo]

Nobody ever tells me I'm right. What you guys usually give me is crickets. Like Gatsby did.

You have to be right before you can be told you're right. And I've always regarded you fairly direct. The instance you refer to was after a somewhat lengthy exchange and afterwards, I had finally left to perform work. But, I guess it's easier for you to create your own version of reality. That's no secret.

I invited you to post any evidence; you made several more posts over several hours, and had nothing. Now you've made another one, and you still have nothing.

How much makes zero?

 

[Pogo]

Wrong. I haven't mentioned liberals. CrusaderFrank did; I did not.

You're wrong on two counts.

1. Nothing you're capable of saying can go over my head.

2. The FD would silence voices because not all venues could profitably provide time for other views and would therefore have to shut down.

Never mind indeed. You're not interested in discussion. You just want to be told you're right.

How's that working out for you?

Nobody ever tells me I'm right. What you guys usually give me is crickets. Like Gatsby did.

Tissue?

Gesundheit.

On to the meat:
It is not the role of the government to provide "profits" for businesses. That's the business owner's concern. There's your fallacy right there.

It would be, if that's what I'd claimed.

You're reading things that simply aren't there.

I even put it in bold for ya. Do I need to make it blink in purple?

 

[Misty]

Pogo, Rush Limbaugh is a radio talk show host who believes in conservatism.

He is a LEGEND becuz of it And he has brilliant people capable of taking his spot if needed.

His voice is a belief not a lie not a brainwashing. It's out there and 20 million people Get It.

.....aaaaand blammo, you committed the same fallacy Gatsby did; moving the goalposts.
In his case he went from Liberals to O'bama; you went from Liberals to "progressives". Whatever the **** that means.

Wrong. I haven't mentioned liberals. CrusaderFrank did; I did not.

You're wrong on two counts.

1. Nothing you're capable of saying can go over my head.

2. The FD would silence voices because not all venues could profitably provide time for other views and would therefore have to shut down.

The other two, we already did hate crimes and the IRS is just not something I deal with, so I can't comment because I don't know wtf you're talking about. But if you want the question addressed, explaining it IS your problem. If not, then never mind.

Never mind indeed. You're not interested in discussion. You just want to be told you're right.

How's that working out for you?

Nobody ever tells me I'm right. What you guys usually give me is crickets. Like Gatsby did.

On to the meat:
It is not the role of the government to provide "profits" for businesses. That's the business owner's concern. There's your fallacy right there.

 

[Misty]

I don't have time nor energy to look for wtf you're talking about. But ask me and I will give you the answer you seek. :/

Nobody ever tells me I'm right. What you guys usually give me is crickets. Like Gatsby did.

You have to be right before you can be told you're right. And I've always regarded you fairly direct. The instance you refer to was after a somewhat lengthy exchange and afterwards, I had finally left to perform work. But, I guess it's easier for you to create your own version of reality. That's no secret.

I invited you to post any evidence; you made several more posts over several hours, and had nothing. Now you've made another one, and you still have nothing.

How much makes zero?

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Nobody ever tells me I'm right. What you guys usually give me is crickets. Like Gatsby did.

You have to be right before you can be told you're right. And I've always regarded you fairly direct. The instance you refer to was after a somewhat lengthy exchange and afterwards, I had finally left to perform work. But, I guess it's easier for you to create your own version of reality. That's no secret.

I invited you to post any evidence; you made several more posts over several hours, and had nothing. Now you've made another one, and you still have nothing.

How much makes zero?

I declined your 'invite' on a particular matter(s) and adequately clarified my reasons. Get over yourself, dude. I'm not interested in allowing you to be my personal time suck.

But, here's some truth. You're a progressive. Daveman even gave you a test for it and you did not respond directly to him, hypocrite. That is why you love yourself some Obama and hate yourself some Rush. Can you deny that? And if so, will you be giving reasons rather than making lame challenges for people to dig into your posts or present you with mounds of common knowledge?