O
OrdinaryMelkite
Guest
Yet some people DID equate the whiteface on OBama as being some sort of “racial slur.”
NOT ME------just pointing out what some other foolks I’ve heard from said.
Just putting that out there.
- Status
NOT ME------just pointing out what some other foolks I’ve heard from said.
Just putting that out there.
A
andyklein
Guest
I used to think he was just full of hot air. Now, after started to study philosophy, I realize anything that comes from his mouth is a living fallacy.
C
Cat
Guest
Can you list some of the things that come out of Limbaugh’s mouth that are a “living fallacy?”
Thank you.
K
KSU
Guest
Cat, you don’t have to fear the political tactics of the Conservative Americans who comprise the so-called Tea Party-- Ronald Reagon’s old Silent Majority. Your beliefs and prayers ARE the Tea Party. If the Limbaughs and Starrsmothers were listened to by just half of the Catholics in America, that would make one heck of a powerful voting block to put Conservatives in control. And Conservative policies are Catholic teachings-- subsidiarity, inviolability of life, freedom of religion, dignity and freedom of individuals rather than State rule, charity, etc.I can certainly agree with quite a few of your points, but when it comes to the Tea Party, I think they “play the game” stupidly, plow into the battle with no plan or strategy, talk way too much, tolerate dunces, and sabotage their chances. They need to be “wise as serpents and gentle as doves.” They need to recruit more African Americans and Hispanics and put them front and center, and refuse any interviews or television spots that do not include these African Americans and Hispanics. They need to hire people to guard their every waking and sleeping moment and who will monitor every single solitary word that Tea Party politicians say so that they don’t say dumb things that the media can twist into racism and sexism. And more than anything, they need to hire image-makers who will re-create them so that they’ll come across as “in touch” and “compassionate” and “up-to-date.”
Republicans need to stop trying to come across as ordinary regular middle-class folks. They need to embrace their wealthiness. Romney made an error to try to pretend to be “one of us.” He should have come right out from the beginning and said, “I am so wealthy that I make J.R. Ewing look like a pauper, and I’m not going to try to hide it or pretend to be someone I’m not. I’ve never tasted a hot dog in my life, my wife never cooks our family meals, and when our cars break, we don’t fix them–we just buy a new one.”
In the U.S., one of the things we value is individualism and being “real.”
Yes, I realize that most of the Democratic politicians are even wealthier than the Republicans, and the Republicans could use that against them! They could say things like, “While I was playing polo with Nancy Pelosi at our Club last week…” or “Yesterday Harry and I were enjoying a bottle of Dom Perignon with our caviar while we watched a private showing of Phantom of the Opera–the live musical–in Harry’s home theater in his guest house on his estate…”
Whatever they say should be true, not lies. But I’m sure much of the “rich talk” would not be a lie.
Seriously, the Republican Party needs to wise up and develop and use some more effective strategy, instead of just stumbling along from crisis to crisis.
Please forgive me, but it appears that your opinion of the Tea Party was formed by listening to the likes of O’Reilly, *****, McCain, neo-cons, McConnell, Krauthammer and Rove–all good, decent people, but still very haughty people who place their precious, do-nothing, say-nothing Establishment over the unwashed Conservative masses, i.e., the Tea Party. That includes many Blacks and Hispanics.
Senator Ted Cruz alone had more strategy in his highly ridiculed “no plan Tea Party” actions than all of those people combined. And guess what? His plan won; just yesterday a gaggle of Democrat Senators went to the White House to beg Obama to do what Cruz wanted all along; delay Obamacare by one year and “fix” it. O’Reilly et al. now sit there with egg on their faces! But will they say they were wrong? Sure, when hell freezes over.
Wake up, my friend. We need people like you on our side or we may as well just let the Establishment continue to sit on its hand$ and let all of the Tea Party’s Ken Cuccinellis go down to defeat by the baby killers.
You say the Tea Party plays the game stupidly, plows into battle with no plan or strategy, and sabotages their own chances.
Please! Tell me the Republican Establishment did not sabotage the Tea Party victory in Virginia. Cuccinelli is a practicing Roman Catholic. His victory was ripe fruit for the picking despite the Dem’s dirty trick of bankrolling a third party candidate who caused his and our defeat.
Cuccinelli could not defeat the Dems when his own party sabotaged him. What a disgrace the Establishment has come to be.
C
CaptFun
Guest
I didn’t hear today’s program, but sometimes I listen to Rush. As I read all these takes, I wonder if many of the posters have heard the program lately … or really know what it is … except to take a side pro or con because Limbaugh is not uncontroversial – but weighs in on controversy.
Here’s a transcript of today’s program. It is interesting. A college business professor from Vermont gives his take on how “Obamacare” is about to affect those in his profession (professors at universities) per their existing healthcare.
nbcwashington.com/news/local/Georgetown-University-Chapel-Vandalized-Overnight-202933461.html < An earlier example of vandalism – at GU’s chapel this year.
*Note: The Limbaugh site punctuates the transcript with photos and quotes which are predictably non-neutral politically (brace yourself for this if you find the program’s conversation unpleasant), as one might expect. No “fair and balanced” attempted, just plainly labelled advocacy submitted for your approval or otherwise.
*
Here’s a transcript of today’s program. It is interesting. A college business professor from Vermont gives his take on how “Obamacare” is about to affect those in his profession (professors at universities) per their existing healthcare.
Rush allows him to air his story before issuing his “take” that even suffering a personal reversal per the new health care law will not dissuade some of the President’s most ardent supporters from remaining loyal to him.
- my emphasis.
- my emphasis again. Is this not a backhanded compliment from Rush to liberals for standing more for what they believe in? Or is it also a critique of the lukewarm resistance by the GU administation? Interesting juxtaposition.
nbcwashington.com/news/local/Georgetown-University-Chapel-Vandalized-Overnight-202933461.html < An earlier example of vandalism – at GU’s chapel this year.
*Note: The Limbaugh site punctuates the transcript with photos and quotes which are predictably non-neutral politically (brace yourself for this if you find the program’s conversation unpleasant), as one might expect. No “fair and balanced” attempted, just plainly labelled advocacy submitted for your approval or otherwise.
*
K
KSU
Guest
Thanks CaptFun. Two comments. First, for years I’ve suspected that Limbaugh is a big fan of the Roman Catholic Church, but that the seeming free reign allowed by the Church in America to the openly heretical members of the American Catholic Church confuses him; i.e., why would the most crucially important organization in history allow itself to be divided against itself in contradiction to all that it believes about itself? He must wonder: Does the Roman Catholic Church really possess the full truth and have Divine guidance to boot? If so, why does it appear that it allows immortal souls entrusted to it by God to be led astray, with only occasionally meek (at best) resistance?
Second, in one of the links you provided nbcwashington.com/news/local/Georgetown-University-Chapel-Vandalized-Overnight-202933461.html
there is this, to me, very telling statement by Georgetown President, John J. DeGioia, who BTW is an apparent admirer of the late Robert Drinan, S. J.; Secretary Sebelius; Sandra Fluke and President Obama : “As a Catholic AND [caps are my emphasis] Jesuit university, we are committed to fostering a community that is welcoming to people of all…”
Is he indirectly admitting that “Catholic” and Georgetown “Jesuit” are not necessarily synonymous? If so, I would second the motion and add that Georgetown and Catholic are not necessarily synonymous either. I lived in the vicinity for thirty years.
Second, in one of the links you provided nbcwashington.com/news/local/Georgetown-University-Chapel-Vandalized-Overnight-202933461.html
there is this, to me, very telling statement by Georgetown President, John J. DeGioia, who BTW is an apparent admirer of the late Robert Drinan, S. J.; Secretary Sebelius; Sandra Fluke and President Obama : “As a Catholic AND [caps are my emphasis] Jesuit university, we are committed to fostering a community that is welcoming to people of all…”
Is he indirectly admitting that “Catholic” and Georgetown “Jesuit” are not necessarily synonymous? If so, I would second the motion and add that Georgetown and Catholic are not necessarily synonymous either. I lived in the vicinity for thirty years.
C
CaptFun
Guest
Occasionally he has sounded very pro-Catholic (he had high praise for the late Cardinal O’Connor of New York whom he’d met on several occasions apparently; and he complained when the Church has been singled out for punishments on occasion, particularly by Government).
As for Georgetown, the first time I knew there was a problem was when gay students at the University again pressed for University recognition of its club on campus as it had done since 1977. Per Catholic doctrine the administration again decided not to certify the club … but the Clinton Administration threatened to cut off all Pell Grants to Georgetown and other government help unless GU allowed the club an acknowledged place. The GU administration at the time caved in – and apparently more challenges to Catholic Orthodoxy have continued from that time to this.
In the 1980’s GU was sued … at first unsuccessfully due to its obvious First Amendment Rights. But a battery of lawyers from around the U.S. appealed the decision on the basis of a Washington D.C. Human Rights statute … and won. Costing GU a lot of time, grief and money along the way. Goodness this little club had clout! From whence did it come?
leagle.com/decision/1987537536A2d1_1537 < details of the 1987 appeal.
Prominent at GU now (note the editorial comments of Reverend Kevin O’Brien S.J. Executive Director of Campus Ministry, Georgetown University > lgbtq.georgetown.edu/about-us/
In light of stuff like this … Does anybody take Catholicism at Georgetown Seriously?
The “free reign” that Catholic “dissidents” or scofflaws seem to have confuses me too.
And when persons openly hostile to well known Catholic teachings are feted and paid and honored at Catholic College Campuses – it makes one wonder if anyone is watching the store but those trying to compromise it.
nytimes.com/2013/08/04/education/edlife/how-georgetown-became-a-gay-friendly-campus.html?pagewanted=3&_r=0
cardinalnewmansociety.org/CatholicEducationDaily/CatholicEducationDailyArticles/tabid/230/pfcatid/67/lnmoduleid/1725/V-Monologues.aspx < “Georgetown Law Students for Reproductive Justice” sponsor auditions for a production of “The Vagina Monologues” performed later in the year.
Even Rush doesn’t know the half of this. Souls are being harmed and deceived and yet
it is considered enlightened to support them in their mistake and in promoting the errors
RIGHT in the middle of a Catholic University (or several of them if the link above is correct).
As for Georgetown, the first time I knew there was a problem was when gay students at the University again pressed for University recognition of its club on campus as it had done since 1977. Per Catholic doctrine the administration again decided not to certify the club … but the Clinton Administration threatened to cut off all Pell Grants to Georgetown and other government help unless GU allowed the club an acknowledged place. The GU administration at the time caved in – and apparently more challenges to Catholic Orthodoxy have continued from that time to this.
In the 1980’s GU was sued … at first unsuccessfully due to its obvious First Amendment Rights. But a battery of lawyers from around the U.S. appealed the decision on the basis of a Washington D.C. Human Rights statute … and won. Costing GU a lot of time, grief and money along the way. Goodness this little club had clout! From whence did it come?
leagle.com/decision/1987537536A2d1_1537 < details of the 1987 appeal.
Prominent at GU now (note the editorial comments of Reverend Kevin O’Brien S.J. Executive Director of Campus Ministry, Georgetown University > lgbtq.georgetown.edu/about-us/
emphases above mine.
In light of stuff like this … Does anybody take Catholicism at Georgetown Seriously?
The “free reign” that Catholic “dissidents” or scofflaws seem to have confuses me too.
And when persons openly hostile to well known Catholic teachings are feted and paid and honored at Catholic College Campuses – it makes one wonder if anyone is watching the store but those trying to compromise it.
nytimes.com/2013/08/04/education/edlife/how-georgetown-became-a-gay-friendly-campus.html?pagewanted=3&_r=0
cardinalnewmansociety.org/CatholicEducationDaily/CatholicEducationDailyArticles/tabid/230/pfcatid/67/lnmoduleid/1725/V-Monologues.aspx < “Georgetown Law Students for Reproductive Justice” sponsor auditions for a production of “The Vagina Monologues” performed later in the year.
Even Rush doesn’t know the half of this. Souls are being harmed and deceived and yet
it is considered enlightened to support them in their mistake and in promoting the errors
RIGHT in the middle of a Catholic University (or several of them if the link above is correct).
C
Captain_America
Guest
good point; understand totally.
J
jimmy
Guest
holy shnikes. You really must be angry; I don’t know what would make me switch over to NPR.
G
GEddie
Guest
NPR is cool!
I don’t know why they are on Sirius and Rush is not, though.
NPR’s Car Talk is funny, something Rush used to be, and hopefully he can get back. I’d rather laugh than listen to ongoing anger.
ICXC NIKA
J
jimmy
Guest
NPR bores me to death with their monotone voices. They all have the same soft voice. They sound like they have taken one too many hits from the peace pipe, and now their brains are fried.
I don’t listen to rush though either. I listen to Glenn Beck sometimes, because they are pretty funny on there. I also listen to Coast to Coast AM on my way into work. Now that is entertainment. It’s like the XFiles for the radio.
K
KSU
Guest
From Rush’s show today: rushlimbaugh.com/
QUOTE
It’s Sad How Wrong Pope Francis Is (Unless It’s a Deliberate Mistranslation Error By Leftists)
November 27, 2013
RUSH: I am receiving e-mails from people who are telling me that the pope, his economic writing has been mistranslated. Now, my first reaction was, “Come on, this document is too big and massive for it to be mistranslated.” But then I caught myself, and this is exactly what the left does. If they had a chance to take somebody as influential and revered and beloved as the pope and put their words in his mouth, they would do it in a minute.
Listen Now (Members Only) Read Transcript
END QUOTE
William Blatty, of course, is ashamed of Georetown: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=10841306
QUOTE
It’s Sad How Wrong Pope Francis Is (Unless It’s a Deliberate Mistranslation Error By Leftists)
November 27, 2013
RUSH: I am receiving e-mails from people who are telling me that the pope, his economic writing has been mistranslated. Now, my first reaction was, “Come on, this document is too big and massive for it to be mistranslated.” But then I caught myself, and this is exactly what the left does. If they had a chance to take somebody as influential and revered and beloved as the pope and put their words in his mouth, they would do it in a minute.
Listen Now (Members Only) Read Transcript
END QUOTE
William Blatty, of course, is ashamed of Georetown: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=10841306
C
CaptFun
Guest
Insomnia.
L
Luigi_Daniele
Guest
Rush is a true patriot. Is he perfect? No. Who is? He’s unapologetically pro-life. Who on the left is?
I’ll give you some choices: Rush or Sharpton? Rush or Bashir? Rush or Baldwin? Rush or Obama? Rush or Biden?
Rush donates a huge amount to cancer research. The others donate, too. They just do it with someone else’s money.
I’ll give you some choices: Rush or Sharpton? Rush or Bashir? Rush or Baldwin? Rush or Obama? Rush or Biden?
Rush donates a huge amount to cancer research. The others donate, too. They just do it with someone else’s money.
C
CaptFun
Guest
I found this fascinating. Rush is a non-Catholic Catholic admirer by his own admission - and up to now one of Francis’.
It is not often Rush doesn’t grasp a concept … in fact he is quite adept at stating clearly the opposing argument in a controversy. Here he defends capitalism as Pope Francis seems to decry an aspect of it. Me? I agree with both of them. Because I see the Pope’s 50,000 word document (that deals with economies in just ONE section of the 287 included) as being more of a personal counsel to Catholics than a general advisory to the world on how to economically manage society.
Pope Francis did warn us about certain excesses of Capitalism … the greatest of which would seem to me by my reading of it … deferring to a government or a philosophy to handle our duties to “love our neighbor” rather than doing anything ourselves.
Limbaugh’s spirited defense of capitlalism in general was quite an intellectual experience as well. It is also interesting to note his personal crisis in hearing this take on what Francis said (filtered as it is by the mainstream media into a story about Francis’ economic takes - when it was just one aspect of the larger (more spiritual than political) proclamation on “The Joy of Evangelization!” per title.
By the time the transcript hit the Limbaugh site, the “misinterpreted” disclaimer was prudently added. IMO.
vatican.va/holy_father/francesco/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium_en.html
Note that the section so trumpeted by the media as being the defining message of Francis is subtitled “No to an Economy of Exclusion” and not “NO to Trickle-Down Economics” or Spillover Economics for that matter.
The adjective “trickle-down” seems an odd addition to a more general caution against making money the answer … and certain side effects that can plague capitalism that should be avoided. It is a politically charged term. Found in the English Translation of the document. Without that one adjective (seized and elaborated upon by the MSM including now, Limbaugh himself) the Pope’s cautions seem rather tame and sensible – and not even so focusedly anti-capitalist. To me he seems to warn people not to let your politics do your charity or duty for you. And to watch out for the pitfalls (in even the best of human systems IMO).
http://assets.nydailynews.com/polop...tives/landscape_635/alg-rush-limbaugh-jpg.jpg
S
seekerz
Guest
Please define:
- “true patriot” (as opposed, I guess, to false patriot?)
- “perfect”
- “unapologetically pro-life”
- “huge amount”
- “someone else’s money”
S
seekerz
Guest
It’s not really as complicated as people are making it out to be…Jesus says it is our DUTY to care for the poor. The Pope is saying the same thing. Expending time and energy on opposing certain ways of caring for the poor is something I have seen NEITHER indulge in so I come to the conclusion that it is unnecessary.
It’s really, really simple: we all came here with nothing, we all leave with nothing, all “ownership is temporal”, sharing is not optional - in ANY religion that I know of, least of all Christianity.
K
KSU
Guest
The pope did not and would not and can not reject the Compendium: vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html
Accordingly, I will not believe that Pope Francis knowingly attacked the American Conservative political meaning of “trickle-down” economics unless he himself confirms it. And don’t hold your breath for him to do so because it is the cornerstone of American Capitalism–the most unique, life-affirming, Church supporting, charitable, compassionate, just and productive system of government ever known to mankind.
The angels in heaven would be dancing with joy if by some miracle Satan was vanquished and the entire world adopted the American Conservative political system of “trickle-down” economics.
Pope Francis knows that, and Rush got it right.
I also did not believe that the pope attempted to change Catholic teaching on homosexual behavior or contraception, even though we were told that he did.
So, people of good will should calm down and have a very HAPPY THANKSGIVING.
Accordingly, I will not believe that Pope Francis knowingly attacked the American Conservative political meaning of “trickle-down” economics unless he himself confirms it. And don’t hold your breath for him to do so because it is the cornerstone of American Capitalism–the most unique, life-affirming, Church supporting, charitable, compassionate, just and productive system of government ever known to mankind.
The angels in heaven would be dancing with joy if by some miracle Satan was vanquished and the entire world adopted the American Conservative political system of “trickle-down” economics.
Pope Francis knows that, and Rush got it right.
I also did not believe that the pope attempted to change Catholic teaching on homosexual behavior or contraception, even though we were told that he did.
So, people of good will should calm down and have a very HAPPY THANKSGIVING.
G
GEddie
Guest
Economics is not the Church’s mission; human beings are.
As such, the Church has at least two conflicting imperatives to maintain: the right of human beings to life, which implies at least a basic wherewithal to live life; and the rights of persons to hold property and to just compensation.
The socialistic version of Euroeconomics emphasizes the first at the expense of the second; laissez-faire capitalism protects the second at the expense of the first.
Therefore, an effort to do both will not resemble either all the way, and will not satisfy an adherent to either side.
ICXC NIKA
As such, the Church has at least two conflicting imperatives to maintain: the right of human beings to life, which implies at least a basic wherewithal to live life; and the rights of persons to hold property and to just compensation.
The socialistic version of Euroeconomics emphasizes the first at the expense of the second; laissez-faire capitalism protects the second at the expense of the first.
Therefore, an effort to do both will not resemble either all the way, and will not satisfy an adherent to either side.
ICXC NIKA
C
Cat
Guest
If you have the time, I suggest listening to both NPR and Rush-types shows.
My husband does this. He works from home, and so has the radio on all day.
He gets the podcasts of This American Life and Planet Money from NPR and listens to these during his business trips and commutes.
Because my husband listens to these programs, he knows BOTH sides of the issues, and this makes him a formidable debater when discussions come up about issues in the United States.
I have observed many discussions with “liberals” and “conservatives” where my husband has literally ended the discussion by raising a few points that neither side was aware of. Sometimes all he has to do is cite one fact, and it brings the debate to an end.
I’ve watched liberals sputter and bluster, but be unable to counter his points, and eventually admit that he is right.
And I’ve watched conservatives sit back and frown as they realize that there is much more to the issue than they thought.
I’ve often wished that my husband could run for a public office, because I think we need more men and women like him who can listen to both sides, sort through all the information, and come up with the Truth.
We need to be careful not to make generalizations. There is much on NPR that is excellent. One of these programs is Planet Money. If you haven’t listened to it, start listening. This show presents the fairest, best-researched information on money issues that you will see anywhere. It is not “liberal” at all–quite the opposite. Some of the information on Planet Money is more conservative than the conservatives! But it is presented in a way that liberals can understand and assimilate. That’s something that we all need to learn how to do. I wish that Rush Limbaugh would take a cue from the reporters at Planet Money, and do less emoting and more presentation of facts and research.
And This American Life has changed a lot in recent years. We used to call it “This Homosexual Life,” as so many of the shows dealt with homosexual issues. Well, now that they have succeeded in bringing the U.S. over to their side, the show now has a lot more content that is of interest to regular folks. I just listened to a fantastic two-part show about gangs in inner-city Chicago–absolutely riveting, and so necessary for Illinoisians to understand!
If you haven’t heard This American Life in recent years, give it a try.
I also think that a lot of Americans miss the best of the conservative talk show hosts–Mike Huckabee. This man always sounds calm and rational, and he doesn’t use foul language and he isn’t hyper. I really like him. Unfortunately, he’s on in the evening, when most of us don’t listen to the radio. But give him a try.
My husband does this. He works from home, and so has the radio on all day.
He gets the podcasts of This American Life and Planet Money from NPR and listens to these during his business trips and commutes.
Because my husband listens to these programs, he knows BOTH sides of the issues, and this makes him a formidable debater when discussions come up about issues in the United States.
I have observed many discussions with “liberals” and “conservatives” where my husband has literally ended the discussion by raising a few points that neither side was aware of. Sometimes all he has to do is cite one fact, and it brings the debate to an end.
I’ve watched liberals sputter and bluster, but be unable to counter his points, and eventually admit that he is right.
And I’ve watched conservatives sit back and frown as they realize that there is much more to the issue than they thought.
I’ve often wished that my husband could run for a public office, because I think we need more men and women like him who can listen to both sides, sort through all the information, and come up with the Truth.
We need to be careful not to make generalizations. There is much on NPR that is excellent. One of these programs is Planet Money. If you haven’t listened to it, start listening. This show presents the fairest, best-researched information on money issues that you will see anywhere. It is not “liberal” at all–quite the opposite. Some of the information on Planet Money is more conservative than the conservatives! But it is presented in a way that liberals can understand and assimilate. That’s something that we all need to learn how to do. I wish that Rush Limbaugh would take a cue from the reporters at Planet Money, and do less emoting and more presentation of facts and research.
And This American Life has changed a lot in recent years. We used to call it “This Homosexual Life,” as so many of the shows dealt with homosexual issues. Well, now that they have succeeded in bringing the U.S. over to their side, the show now has a lot more content that is of interest to regular folks. I just listened to a fantastic two-part show about gangs in inner-city Chicago–absolutely riveting, and so necessary for Illinoisians to understand!
If you haven’t heard This American Life in recent years, give it a try.
I also think that a lot of Americans miss the best of the conservative talk show hosts–Mike Huckabee. This man always sounds calm and rational, and he doesn’t use foul language and he isn’t hyper. I really like him. Unfortunately, he’s on in the evening, when most of us don’t listen to the radio. But give him a try.
- Status