Segway PT Sighting Amsterdam!

[KSagal]

Originally Posted by Bob.Kerns

This is what we get (and deserve) for electing rich people to make our decisions for us.

So, Limbaugh being rich, and being a big advocate of low taxes on the rich, it is natural to wonder about his tax situations.

Comparisons between people aren't really the point here. Looking at public people's public positions, and whether they are self-serving, or (as in Kerry's situation) contradicted by their own actions is more the point. But it's adding to a long list, based on comparison WITH THEMSELVES, rather than each other.

Lets be honest here. The point was to bash someone with a particular political bent. I messed up that point by bringing others in with an opposite bent, but with a history of doing exactly what was inferred.

Your point of examining the behavior of our rich 'leaders' is exactly what I said when I first mentioned the hyprocracy on both sides.

A further example of some of our rich legislators not doing what they preach can easily be seen in the fact that Massachusetts has two tax rates for residents, both higher than mandated by public referendum. Many preach that taxes should be higher, and while we all pay the 5.3 %, the voluntary rate of 5.8% is not, I repeat, NOT chosen by any of the elected officials (for federal office) of this state, even though they are all in the proverbial 1%.

[Civicsman]

So, you're saying that you think Limbaugh CAN buy more Oxycontin with his $50 million per year than some other guys?

You forget that Limbaugh does not have a "political bent". at least not a public one.. He's an entertainer! Said so himself. Consequently, his "political bent" is simply part of his act. He has found an audience that works for him and he has learned how to push the buttons of that audience. He has tuned his act until it plays to perfection and puts a great deal of money in his pockets, just like a comedian working the crowd for laughs.

Sure, there are others who deserve scorn, but nobody else comes to mind who has made such as complete donkey of themselves in the national conversation in the last week or so (though I admit the competition has been strong).

[KSagal]

Originally Posted by Civicsman

So, you're saying that you think Limbaugh CAN buy more Oxycontin with his $50 million per year than some other guys?

You forget that Limbaugh does not have a "political bent". at least not a public one.. He's an entertainer! Said so himself. Consequently, his "political bent" is simply part of his act. He has found an audience that works for him and he has learned how to push the buttons of that audience. He has tuned his act until it plays to perfection and puts a great deal of money in his pockets, just like a comedian working the crowd for laughs.

Sure, there are others who deserve scorn, but nobody else comes to mind who has made such as complete donkey of themselves in the national conversation in the last week or so (though I admit the competition has been strong).

I don't listen to Limbaugh, so I cannot comment on what he has said in the last week or so (or longer) but since this is a national conversation and more, I would say that at least one body comes to mind for me. None the less, I did not forget anything.

I guess it is all subjective when deciding who is making a complete donkey of themselves...

[Civicsman]

I don't listen to Limbaugh, so I cannot comment on what he has said in the last week or so (or longer)...

I don't listen to Limbaugh's radio show either, but... one would have to not be paying any attention whatsoever to pretty much any print, radio, TV, or internet news outlet not to know about Rushbo's latest debacle.

If we agree with Limbaugh that he is, and should be viewed as, nothing more than an "entertainer", with an act that is slightly less crazy than Glen Beck, then we are keeping things in the proper perspective. Unfortunately, a bunch of people apparently think he is a serious radio commentator.

[florin]

FYI, I have moved the thread to Other Topics, seems to be a better fit for it.

Please continue discussing Apple/Journalism/etc. as you did before.

[Bob.Kerns]

Originally Posted by florin

FYI, I have moved the thread to Other Topics, seems to be a better fit for it.

Please continue discussing Apple/Journalism/etc. as you did before.

Well, now that you've moved the thread, I think we have to discuss Android and Linux instead.

(Thanks)

[KSagal]

Originally Posted by Civicsman

I don't listen to Limbaugh's radio show either, but... one would have to not be paying any attention whatsoever to pretty much any print, radio, TV, or internet news outlet not to know about Rushbo's latest debacle.

If we agree with Limbaugh that he is, and should be viewed as, nothing more than an "entertainer", with an act that is slightly less crazy than Glen Beck, then we are keeping things in the proper perspective. Unfortunately, a bunch of people apparently think he is a serious radio commentator.

I am not sure who this was directed to, but I surely would not categorize him as you did. So, I do not agree, but I am sure others might.

[Civicsman]

If we agree with Limbaugh that he is, and should be viewed as, nothing more than an "entertainer", with an act that is slightly less crazy than Glen Beck, then we are keeping things in the proper perspective.

I am not sure who this was directed to, but I surely would not categorize him as you did.

Well, there is simply no question that he is an entertainer, not a serious journalist. He said so himself, several times, in the last couple of weeks. Of course, if one doesn't listen to Limbaugh, or if one doesn't read or listen to any other news service in North America, one might not have heard him say this.

Assuming that you are aware that Limbaugh describes himself as an "entertainer", I can only conclude that you are not in agreement with the "slightly less crazy than Glen Beck" part of my statement. You think his act is not less crazy than Beck's?

[KSagal]

Originally Posted by KSagal

I don't listen to Limbaugh, so I cannot comment on what he has said in the last week or so (or longer) but since this is a national conversation and more, I would say that at least one body comes to mind for me. None the less, I did not forget anything.

I guess it is all subjective when deciding who is making a complete donkey of themselves...

Some fool gave me a negative point, or tried to, but did not have the intestinal fortitude to identify themselves, or their mother's house where they reside, for the above post, saying that it is disingenuous and reduces my credibility. Perhaps in their eyes.

I have posted many times that I do not listen to Limbaugh, nor Hannity for that matter, as I find them too political. I am not a republican by nature, I am a conservative traditionalist politically, and in many ways a social libertarian. Of course, I define those terms as I see fit, so they may not match someone else's definition.

I find that Limbaugh and Hannity are very much political, despite what has been posted by civicsman. I do not care if a person says they are not political, and are an entertainer, that is silly.

It would like me saying, "do not be offended, but you are fat and smelly". How could you possibly not be offended? Just because I told you not to be and then insulted you anyway?

If Limbaugh says he is not political and you believe him, it says more about you than him anyway.

So, sniveling cowards are welcome to say what they want in anonymity, it does not make them something else.

Of course, if the preceding sentence does not apply to you, do not apply it to yourself.

[KSagal]

Originally Posted by Civicsman

Well, there is simply no question that he is an entertainer, not a serious journalist. He said so himself, several times, in the last couple of weeks. Of course, if one doesn't listen to Limbaugh, or if one doesn't read or listen to any other news service in North America, one might not have heard him say this.

Assuming that you are aware that Limbaugh describes himself as an "entertainer", I can only conclude that you are not in agreement with the "slightly less crazy than Glen Beck" part of my statement. You think his act is not less crazy than Beck's?

What part of "I don't listen to Limbaugh" did you not understand? If I said that I do not listen to him, why on earth would you assume that I am aware of how he describes himself? That makes no sense at all.

Your conclusions are faulty, because your assumptions in this post are wrong.