What does Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, & Rush Limbaugh have in common?

[Madeline]

You express yourself like some stupid trollop and your comment is idiotic. You know nothing about me. Yet I am disturbing??? Look in the mirror again, it's your face that is pitiful, not mine.

I guess Sitarro didn't find my Palin post response worthy.

Did you say something worth listening to? I can't take college rah rah people seriously Tulaney clown......... aren't they permanently under water over there? I bet you wear someone else's jersey on game day too.

You Hate All Clevelanders and also All New Orleanseans? Do the two cities have anything in common I am not aware of?

Seriously, sitarro...get help now.

 

[Madeline]

On Ignoring: It's just simple mathematics. I have just so much time to read posts, OK? Therefore, to economize my time and use it wisely, I just get rid of those who consistently have nothing interesting to say, and add nothing to any debate. We all know who these people are, and there are a surprisingly large number of them. They drive good posters away from the site. Bad posters just drive away good posters.

Those who are interesting, regardless of their politics, I would never put on ignore and we all know who they are.

But those who are not funny, but think they are, who are not intelligent but think they are, who are so short of vocabulary that they use nonstop profanities and obscenities, and nothing else, and those who on top of all those characteristics, are extremely, and aggressively Liberal, rude, and annoying, these I just don't want to waste my time reading. There are just certain people who are abusive in general without any socially redeeming qualities at all.

So far it seems to be working very well for me. It it doesn't for any reason, I can change my tactics.

O Thank God! I was having a panic attack till I read this. There IS a method to Founder's Ignore Theory of USMB Domination!

LOL.

 

[bodecea]

I don't have time to read this entire thread, but can I be on Founder's Ignore List too. Seems to be the new "In" place to be.

 

[geauxtohell]

I don't have time to read this entire thread, but can I be on Founder's Ignore List too. Seems to be the new "In" place to be.

If you work moderately hard, you can be on flounder's ignore list too.

Like all things in life, the key is hard work. Unless you are Si Modo and then it's just:

 

[geauxtohell]

On Ignoring: It's just simple mathematics. I have just so much time to read posts, OK? Therefore, to economize my time and use it wisely, I just get rid of those who consistently have nothing interesting to say, and add nothing to any debate. We all know who these people are, and there are a surprisingly large number of them. They drive good posters away from the site. Bad posters just drive away good posters.

Those who are interesting, regardless of their politics, I would never put on ignore and we all know who they are.

But those who are not funny, but think they are, who are not intelligent but think they are, who are so short of vocabulary that they use nonstop profanities and obscenities, and nothing else, and those who on top of all those characteristics, are extremely, and aggressively Liberal, rude, and annoying, these I just don't want to waste my time reading. There are just certain people who are abusive in general without any socially redeeming qualities at all.

So far it seems to be working very well for me. It it doesn't for any reason, I can change my tactics.

You are so full of shit. You've got nothing but time to diddle away on a message board you shrill harpy.

Stop acting like your decision to ignore most of the board was made out of any sort of considerations for economy and embrace your weak mind.

Loser.

 

[Rinata]

Maybe if you weren't so partisan people might not think poorly of you.

Let's see, from the first day I was cussed out and called names because I am a liberal. Yet you are telling me that this is my fault?? So what should I have done, do you think?? Be a little wuss that let them insult me and just take it so that they will like me and not think poorly of me?? I'm sorry, but giving advice is just not your thing.

School Days, School Days!

No, I agree with you. Don't go along to get along. That is really sick. If you believe in the Liberal Kool Aid, then flaunt it, as that will either confirm you in your position, or teach you the error of your ways. Either way you win by standing firm for what you believe.

I was thinking of setting up a school to train recovering Liberals in how to be Conservatives. I'm actually serious about this idea. I think it is badly needed for those, of course, who need it, or I should say want it. Would you like to be my first pupil?

No, thank you. But why would you have to give a class??? How hard is it to learn to lie, cheat, think you're better than other people, have no critical thinking skills, and believe everything you hear on Fox??? Oh, and have no empathy for other people, and be so friggin cheap that you squeak??? Piece o' cake.

 

[Rinata]

What does Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, & Rush Limbaugh have in common?

Autozona wants to have each of their love children....

Not funny, annoying, your wine glass, and superciliousness, gets you on Ignore with me "Dr" House

You're so weird!!!

 

[Rinata]

Edthecynic Wrote:

Don't be sore just because I chopped you off at the knees before you could argue that people CAN be knowledgeable without having experience. Since the CON$ you defend say someone can't be knowledgeable without experience, then that "logic" applies to the CON$ also.
Get it?

Of course I get your silly little point. It doesn't stop it from being wrong, and my original question from being valid. Why would I be sore? You're the one whose arguing poorly, lol.

I wanted to make sure that I was reading the OP correctly - that he feels it is dangerous that Hannity, Limbaugh and Beck are dangerous not because they say inaccurate or inflammatory things, but rather because they do not possess the necessary requirements, in his opinion, to be heard. From what I have read - that seems to be the assertion, no one has argued effectively that this isn't what was meant. Therefore, yes...my point is that such an assertion is asinine.

What I think is funny...and why your point is invalid...is because you assume that I give two sh*ts whether Limbaugh agrees with the asinine original post or doesn't. Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck could all be in complete agreement that no one without military experience should be allowed to speak on military issues...it wouldn't make it right.

Now, to respond to your issue of Limbaugh's opinion of Obama's lack of military service... Considering the fact that the Left was patently disinterested in the question of military service as a prerequisite for serving as President when Clinton served...but FASCINATED by the subject when Kerry was running...then SUDDENLY disinterested again when Obama was President is certainly an interesting bit of political theater...and, in my opinion...is probably what Limbaugh is highlighting by bringing up Obama's lack of service...I would guess that what Limbaugh is doing is SATIRIZING people like you...who refuse to see the absolute hypocrisy of the media not caring, then caring, then not caring about military service as it suits their needs. He seems to do that quite a bit...enjoying watching the liberals hop around in indignation as they pretend to think (or are so dumb they actually believe) that he is serious about what he was saying. But having never heard Limbaugh speak about Obama's lack of military service...I'm just theorizing.

Bingo........ Limbaugh is a brilliant satirist, one of his best qualities. He also has an incredible sense of humor and doesn't take himself as seriously as the left do, he's actually quite humble. Like Obama, he has a very impressive research staff that he can depend on to help him with the details of what he chooses to discuss. After over 20 years of political interest and discussion as his profession, it would be asinine to assume he is just an entertainer............ hell, the only reason Obama made it as far as he has is the fact that he was entertaining at giving speeches while revealing nothing about himself or his plans for this country. Obama had a team of 2,500 researchers during his 2 year, 730,000,000 dollar campaign......... obviously having a law degree from Harvard wasn't that big of a help to him. He had never had a real job, never served in the military, barely showed up at the government "jobs" he did have.......... he isn't qualified to be a talk show host, much less the Commander In Chief and President of The United States, that fact is painfully obvious every day.

You received a thank you from the other weirdo, founder. Why don't you two just get back to the hospital and stay there until you're well.

 

[MaggieMae]

What do Hannity, Beck, and Limbaugh have in common?...
... they're not douchbag socialist thieves.


Rush is right. Liberals always tell us what they're afraid of.... and as usual... what scares them most is FREE SPEECH.

That's another myth. What's scary about them is that there are so many millions who cling to every word they utter as if it's gospel truth. I couldn't give a shit what THEY say--only that when they say something totally inaccurate, or perpetuate an already debunked "story," you and your ilk believe it anyway.

 

[MaggieMae]

All are college dropouts who have no work experience except radio and TV, have never held public office, served in military, nor worked in government. Yet their followers treat their words as gospel.

Also they all have 7 digit incomes. No wonder they are so concerned with higher taxes on the rich.

Sean Hannity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Glenn Beck - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Rush Limbaugh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They're hatemongers.

They're media whores working for the elite.

Liberals always were masters of projection.

When they call you a "hate monger" what they really mean (even if the don't know it themselves) is that they HATE the fact you have a right to think differently from them.

They dream for a world like Orwell's 1984 where thinking differently from them would be a "thought crime."

Bull. You're just confirming the fact that you believe every talking point or snippet you hear from the right wing noise machine. Where has any Democrat (er, liberal, pardon ME) ever proclaimed that free speech should be squelched? Give an example, please.

 

[MaggieMae]

What a fucking PATHETIC, WHINY, LOAD IN YOUR DIAPER, CRY BABY LITTLE PUSSY, LIBERAL thread.

This guy is a good example of a Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck follower.

His well thought out, intellectual retort is an example of the type of thinking they produce.

I changed my avatar because of "Pale."

 

[MaggieMae]

All are college dropouts who have no work experience except radio and TV, have never held public office, served in military, nor worked in government. Yet their followers treat their words as gospel.

Also they all have 7 digit incomes. No wonder they are so concerned with higher taxes on the rich.

Sean Hannity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Glenn Beck - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Rush Limbaugh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What's the point? JEALOUS?????

Dickweed.

I don't think they are really JEALOUS as much as hey are pissed off that these 3 uneducated, unmotivated, de-militarized, non-working silver-tongued devils have figured out how to want for nothing and at the same time gain such a mezmerizing grip on so much of our population. These guys are out of control and there's nothing, short of shredding the first amendment rights, they can do about it.

They see LIMBECKITY as the antichrist and just as we don't understand how some people can believe EVERYTHING Obama says or support EVERYTHING Obama does, they too struggle with the fact that so many Americans are tuned into LIMBECKITY everyday for their daily dose of truth.

LIMBECKITY! I love it. I shall call the "new" conservatives brand of politics "limbeckityism." Thanks. I've been looking for a label for months now.

 

[MaggieMae]

Edthecynic Wrote:

Don't be sore just because I chopped you off at the knees before you could argue that people CAN be knowledgeable without having experience. Since the CON$ you defend say someone can't be knowledgeable without experience, then that "logic" applies to the CON$ also.
Get it?

Of course I get your silly little point. It doesn't stop it from being wrong, and my original question from being valid. Why would I be sore? You're the one whose arguing poorly, lol.

I wanted to make sure that I was reading the OP correctly - that he feels it is dangerous that Hannity, Limbaugh and Beck are dangerous not because they say inaccurate or inflammatory things, but rather because they do not possess the necessary requirements, in his opinion, to be heard. From what I have read - that seems to be the assertion, no one has argued effectively that this isn't what was meant. Therefore, yes...my point is that such an assertion is asinine.

What I think is funny...and why your point is invalid...is because you assume that I give two sh*ts whether Limbaugh agrees with the asinine original post or doesn't. Limbaugh, Hannity, and Beck could all be in complete agreement that no one without military experience should be allowed to speak on military issues...it wouldn't make it right.

Now, to respond to your issue of Limbaugh's opinion of Obama's lack of military service... Considering the fact that the Left was patently disinterested in the question of military service as a prerequisite for serving as President when Clinton served...but FASCINATED by the subject when Kerry was running...then SUDDENLY disinterested again when Obama was President is certainly an interesting bit of political theater...and, in my opinion...is probably what Limbaugh is highlighting by bringing up Obama's lack of service...I would guess that what Limbaugh is doing is SATIRIZING people like you...who refuse to see the absolute hypocrisy of the media not caring, then caring, then not caring about military service as it suits their needs. He seems to do that quite a bit...enjoying watching the liberals hop around in indignation as they pretend to think (or are so dumb they actually believe) that he is serious about what he was saying. But having never heard Limbaugh speak about Obama's lack of military service...I'm just theorizing.

My recollection of the issue of military service by at presidential candidate only goes back to George W. Bush when there was all the hoopla over his missing week while serving with the TANG. The Bush supporters made a lot of noise over the fact that "at least he served...unlike Clinton" and the opposition making the point that Kerry actually DID serve in Nam. I don't recall any big deal over Clinton's deferment. In any event, military service shouldn't be a prerequisite at all, in my opinion.

 

[MaggieMae]

This the scary part. Some people actually take these radio entertainers seriously and soak in their misinformation. Then they regurgitate this information back out as if it were truth.

Your time would be better spent reading a book than listening to this radio tripe. If you listen in your car, turn the channel to easy listening music.

No, there's nothing scary about the truth. If you can prove any one of them is lying, call them, prove it. Otherwise you're just another empty liberal voice on the internet spreading some line of pure bull shit.

Conservatives want to hear the facts. That's why more people listen to Hannity, Beck and Limbaugh than all your liberal, piece of shit, lame stream media outlets put together. So enjoy your dough headed minority, and keep listening to the likes of those morons like stewart, who are purely, nothing but comedians.

You have been brainwashed. Talking heads have great power over the weak-minded. You do not want to hear facts, it appears you just want to have your own uninformed opinions validated over and over again. Does that make you FEEL intelligent?

The problem with Beck, Limbaugh and Hannity is that people actually listen to them. What we need in this country is intelligent discourse. These three inhibit such. Our country is becoming increasing politically divided and this endangers democracy and makes our government more difficult to run efficiently.

I love the way you overgeneralized. "Conservatives want to hear facts." Does that mean the ALL conservatives want to hear facts and that all non-conservatives do not wish to hear facts? And what is your definition of FACTS? I am guessing your definition of a FACT is whatever comes out of the mouth of a right wing talk show host.

You have made the assumption that I am a liberal. I guess it is your weak attempt to build a strawman arguement. Then again, perhaps I meet your definition of a liberal. After all I do not think President Obama is a socialist. Now you have made a challenge to prove that these talk show hosts are lying. They have referred to President Obama as a marxist and a socialist. Look up the definition of either and it will show that our president is neither. There you have it, the talk show hosts are either very ignorant or lying.

Anyone who takes a different opinion is called a "liberal" these days. Although Jesus was a liberal, the word has taken on a demonic characterization. They are the "us" and we are the "them" (evil liberals). That still annoys me, because I am far from being a "liberal," as are many left-leaning people who post here. People forget that the health care bill was almost brought down by REAL "liberals" who thought it didn't go far enough. But do they try to separate out the 3 factions that make up DEMOCRATS? No. We are all liberals, just as any Republican who dares attempt compromise with a Democrat is quickly labeled a "RHINO."

 

[MaggieMae]

All are college dropouts who have no work experience except radio and TV, have never held public office, served in military, nor worked in government. Yet their followers treat their words as gospel.

Also they all have 7 digit incomes. No wonder they are so concerned with higher taxes on the rich.

Sean Hannity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Glenn Beck - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Rush Limbaugh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In addition, all three of them are immensely annoying.

You're on Ignore now for being inane and unfunny.

Do you really think anyone cares who you put on ignore? I only have 3 on ignore, and I'm sure they couldn't give two shits. They are there because they will either stalk me or use insults without making their case and not worth my time. But you use the ignore feature like a little child stomping from the room because you can't have your way.

 

[Madeline]

Can I BE MaggieMae when I grow up? A Vulcan mind-meld mebbe?

Always reach for the stars. Every man's reach should exceed his grasp.

 

[MaggieMae]

...for years, all i could get on radio was ruse windbag, insane hannitwitty, glen wreck, etc. festering republican peckerheads galore..whose whole shticks could be adequately replaced by a parrot trained to squawk, 'republican good/better, democrat bad/worse'.. (they'd save illion$!!)

...i got all exicited when i heard about a new station in town..'a new choice, a new voice'..so i tuned in..maddow, shultz, press, etc..whose whole shticks could be adequately replaced by a parrot trained to squawk, 'democrat good/better, republican bad/worse'

...republicrats, i hope someone pees in your water jug..

..the rest of you, have a good day!..

You get the prize for unfunny, uneducated, time wasting. The prize is you are on my Ignore list. Good Day! And get off the sauce please before you hurt someone.

Oh gawd, I'm only up to reading from yesterday afternoon, and Founder has already collected a dozen more names for his famous "ignore list."

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, add my name tooooooooooooooooooooo!!!

 

[bodecea]

All are college dropouts who have no work experience except radio and TV, have never held public office, served in military, nor worked in government. Yet their followers treat their words as gospel.

Also they all have 7 digit incomes. No wonder they are so concerned with higher taxes on the rich.

Sean Hannity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Glenn Beck - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Rush Limbaugh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They are all brave realists.

Brave? How successful was that Hannity waterboarding for charity thingee?

 

[MaggieMae]

Let's settle this right now asshole, what should Sarah Palin have done? She actually did the noble thing, something that most ego driven politicians wouldn't think of, relinquish the power they all crave for the betterment of the State and people she was in charge of. The bullshit lawsuits have stopped and the state has a Governor that doesn't have to waste time addressing them, what would you have done differently?

You poor thing!!!

Don't give me that faux sentiment, you are the one that everyone needs to feel sorry for. You swallow every drop of garbage that the democrat party ejaculates down your throat, the idea of that is really disturbing.

Interesting that FOUNDER "thanked" sitarro for his post, although it included a disgusting sexual invocation, which FOUNDER puts "liberals" on ignore for.

All together now: Can we say HYPOCRISY?!

 

[bodecea]

All are college dropouts who have no work experience except radio and TV, have never held public office, served in military, nor worked in government. Yet their followers treat their words as gospel.

Also they all have 7 digit incomes. No wonder they are so concerned with higher taxes on the rich.

Sean Hannity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Glenn Beck - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Rush Limbaugh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They have earned their way to the top, as informed men of honor and passion, who join several other men of honor and passion, who held no college degree. Andrew Jackson,William Harrison, Zachary Taylor, Millard Fillmore, Abraham Lincoln, Andrew Johnson and Grover Cleveland. All it takes is common sense, compassion and a desire to work harder and work smarter than the rest, for the benefit of humankind.

Being good at what you do, does not make what you do a good thing.

This is very, very, very true.