Ann Coulter is a bigger nut job than any of em
Which Right-Wing Windbag Is Most In Need of Psychiatric Hospitalization?
- Thread starter Facial_King
- Start date
Facetious
Moderated
Instead of the obligatory and ubiquitous political identity critique, try to listen to those whom you think that you are likely to disagree with and you might be surprised at what you hear, For instance, NY Atty Gen. Cuomo (the junior) said some encouraging things in support of the taxpayers, recently. He spoke of his desire to better prosecute the filthy disgusting ponzi scheme thieves i.e. the Bernard Madeoff types for instance. Whether he means it or not, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. I must say, it was refreshing to finally hear a politician finally acknowledge the taxpayer.
And then Carville said something the other day that I had a lot of respect for. :hatsoff: . . Boortz, will both piss me off and make me chuckle . . .
This is my mission, to better listen to both sides, before calling the shots or making blanket statements about an entire party or a particular personality. If we Americans don't begin to refocus on our commonalities as opposed to our differences, there's going to be hell to pay for everybody.
And then Carville said something the other day that I had a lot of respect for. :hatsoff: . . Boortz, will both piss me off and make me chuckle . . .
This is my mission, to better listen to both sides, before calling the shots or making blanket statements about an entire party or a particular personality. If we Americans don't begin to refocus on our commonalities as opposed to our differences, there's going to be hell to pay for everybody.
Wainkerr99
Closed Account
Rumsfeld? The unknown knowns that unknown to those in the know is known by knowns that the unknowns know. If you know what i mean?
Rush in a heartbeat. Glenn Beck is simply boring. While I do not agree with Bill O'Reilly, he can be entertaining in a sick way. His main crime is egotism. Rush Limbaugh is actually dangerous because he appeals to the stupidest urges of jingoistic America. He is a bigot and is attempting to dumb our culture down.
I agree with a few other posters that Hannity should have been included in this list. He is running neck to neck with that fatass Limbaugh.
I agree with a few other posters that Hannity should have been included in this list. He is running neck to neck with that fatass Limbaugh.
bandanoantri
Banned
Man, there are so many of them, but here's one from my country: Gerhard Maria Wagner, auxiliary bishop of Linz, thinks that Harry Potter is Satan's work and that homosexuality can be cured if treated right. That's just the two most prominent thoughts which came out of this shithead. But he's got a whole lot more in store.
Will E Worm
Conspiracy...
Rush Limbaugh, is a drug addict.
Rush said all drug users should turn themselves in.
Why hasn't he?
Bill O'Reilly, had a sex scandal right around the time his children's book was coming out.
Also, instead of actually debating someone he tells the crew to turn off the person's mic.
It's on youtube.
Glenn Beck, Mainly just a pawn.
They are all pawns. They all lie.
But, so does Bill Maher, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and so on.
They are all pawns and liars.
Rush said all drug users should turn themselves in.
Why hasn't he?
Bill O'Reilly, had a sex scandal right around the time his children's book was coming out.
Also, instead of actually debating someone he tells the crew to turn off the person's mic.
It's on youtube.
Glenn Beck, Mainly just a pawn.
They are all pawns. They all lie.
But, so does Bill Maher, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and so on.
They are all pawns and liars.
good posts! I really liked your points
I referenced Chris Matthews out of disagreement. I say I don't like him simply because during the dem/rep conventions of this year (and during the Kerry/Bush campaigns) I thought he was way too easy of a read. Coverage was notably shorter (air time wise) of the rep. convo. The actual convention time was the same, but the pre-convention was notably longer. I know it sounds lame, but I timed it...hehe. I was excited about Obama as well, but he seemed to just be jumping out of his seat during the convention. During the rep. convention he seemed so "matter of fact," that I thought he was knitting under his desk. A journalist, and a voter, should be just as willing and thirsty for all side's arguements to give them equal consideration and enthusiasm/scrutiny. For the lay person....not a problem as our opinions don't have nearly the potential to influence others, but as a major TV news figure, impartiality is a must to gain credibility in my eyes. I will hand it to you though, he isn't without some excellent points.
I do notice that about Dobbs too, but I will say I mostly agree with him and his delivery. Just because I hate Dubya, doesn't mean that Obama is all the beans. I like to think whomever is in power should constantly be in check, albiet in a polite manner, (not this constant bitching that has been prevalent in the media for more then a decade) as respect is earned through actions and outcomes not just given blindly.
Having oneself alligned as Democratic/republican/moderate/et.al is not for me. I'm not saying it is a bad thing, "I just don't dig that's all." I like to vote based on what I believe the country is in need of at the given time, be it change, reform, or whatever else. I mention Dobbs, cause the fact that he is always against those "in charge" makes him most like the regular american and more accurate voice of the people in my opinion. However, I will not stick my tongue completely down his throat as I do believe he says somethings that I just don't agree with at all. He still gets my vote among the media gang for now though.
Thanks for making me think. Good points from all.
Who said Dobbs was EVER a Democrat or Republican?
Especially since Lou Dobbs immediately started criticizing the Democrat Congress once they took over in 2007. It hardly started with Obama.
People say the same about me, only opposite, in how I allegedly "defend" some decisions by politicians. When Clinton was in, I "explained" many of his decisions. When W. was in, I "explained" many of his decisions. Now that Obama is in, I'm "explaining" many of his decisions. Or when I'm on left-leaning boards, I explain "W." and when I'm on right-leaning boards, I explain "Clinton" and now "Obama."
People like Dobbs, myself, others do not "sit the fence" and have some anti-"whoever is in" or anti-"whoever is not in" agenda. We have our own views and the politicians do not do what we like on both sides.
People like to slam the Bush's policies on college affirmative action, but the same people ignore that those policies actually increase the number of minorities getting into schools. W. did it in Texas, Jeb in Florida. Even the Urban League sided with W. and Jeb when the NACCP was against it. Why?
Here's the deal. Affirmative Action actually benefits already affluent African Americans, ones who have power and special interests. As I always say, the rich black man doesn't speak for the poor black man any more than the rich white man does for the poor white man. Things like the "10% Rule," which is actually preferred by organizations like the Urban League," benefit the top 10% of students in schools, including the predominately African American ones, let alone makes it about catching kids doing their best in poorly performing schools.
The Republican party has always been about equality. It was the staple with Lincoln and carried forth. The Republicans in Congress were how LBJ, a Democrat, got things changing in the '60s. But after that, we switched over to this non-sense of "oh, we have to make up for things." And the sad thing is, we're not! Affirmative Action is a perfect example. We're fucking ourselves, and our attitudes. The Republicans who said "we need equality" before the '60s are the same ones now saying "hey, what happened to equality?"
Dude, just because Fox doesn't believe in affirmative action, just like most Republicans do not, doesn't mean they are racists. Your dropping the "R" bomb is just as bad as when they did it to the Duke University team as well. It's a "hate crime" -- because race is used as an excuse for hate, only in reverse. It's pathetic that we've gone from "holding hands" to "my hands go first," only in reverse to "make up for it."
If you mean "racist" in another way, please do tell! I'd really like to know. People call W. a racist when it's not even remotely true! Clinton was far, far more of a racist (and an insulting sexist to the extreme, and I don't mean Monica) than W. any day.
No, that's your analysis of him, and it's not remotely accurate.
Especially since Lou Dobbs immediately started criticizing the Democrat Congress once they took over in 2007. It hardly started with Obama.
People say the same about me, only opposite, in how I allegedly "defend" some decisions by politicians. When Clinton was in, I "explained" many of his decisions. When W. was in, I "explained" many of his decisions. Now that Obama is in, I'm "explaining" many of his decisions. Or when I'm on left-leaning boards, I explain "W." and when I'm on right-leaning boards, I explain "Clinton" and now "Obama."
People like Dobbs, myself, others do not "sit the fence" and have some anti-"whoever is in" or anti-"whoever is not in" agenda. We have our own views and the politicians do not do what we like on both sides.
Dude, I do not see racism on Fox, in the Republican platform or decisions and other things. Just because they are against affirmative action does not mean they are racists. And it's quite the opposite many times!
People like to slam the Bush's policies on college affirmative action, but the same people ignore that those policies actually increase the number of minorities getting into schools. W. did it in Texas, Jeb in Florida. Even the Urban League sided with W. and Jeb when the NACCP was against it. Why?
Here's the deal. Affirmative Action actually benefits already affluent African Americans, ones who have power and special interests. As I always say, the rich black man doesn't speak for the poor black man any more than the rich white man does for the poor white man. Things like the "10% Rule," which is actually preferred by organizations like the Urban League," benefit the top 10% of students in schools, including the predominately African American ones, let alone makes it about catching kids doing their best in poorly performing schools.
The Republican party has always been about equality. It was the staple with Lincoln and carried forth. The Republicans in Congress were how LBJ, a Democrat, got things changing in the '60s. But after that, we switched over to this non-sense of "oh, we have to make up for things." And the sad thing is, we're not! Affirmative Action is a perfect example. We're fucking ourselves, and our attitudes. The Republicans who said "we need equality" before the '60s are the same ones now saying "hey, what happened to equality?"
Dude, just because Fox doesn't believe in affirmative action, just like most Republicans do not, doesn't mean they are racists. Your dropping the "R" bomb is just as bad as when they did it to the Duke University team as well. It's a "hate crime" -- because race is used as an excuse for hate, only in reverse. It's pathetic that we've gone from "holding hands" to "my hands go first," only in reverse to "make up for it."
If you mean "racist" in another way, please do tell! I'd really like to know. People call W. a racist when it's not even remotely true! Clinton was far, far more of a racist (and an insulting sexist to the extreme, and I don't mean Monica) than W. any day.
Given the theme of this thread (which, as anyone might guess was originally intended as sort of a light-hearted thing) and that Prof V has now mentioned "hate crime" it seems like a great time to point you all to this:
http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/knoxville-church-shooters-manifesto
It's about the guy who killed 2 people at that church in Knoxville, TN last year (apparently a church this guy knew was full of liberals - maybe so). He wrote a manifesto (the link above also has a link to a PDF of the actual document) of sorts, and said charming shit like this:
""Know this if nothing else: This was a hate crime. I hate the damn left-wing liberals. There is a vast left-wing conspiracy in this country & these liberals are working together to attack every decent & honorable institution in the nation, trying to turn this country into a communist state. Shame on them....
"This was a symbolic killing. Who I wanted to kill was every Democrat in the Senate & House, the 100 people in Bernard Goldberg's book. I'd like to kill everyone in the mainstream media."
Visit any of the right-wing sites (be they independent or connected with a right-wing tv or radio pundit) and you can regularly see the hot blonde chick (sort of a Coulter lookalike) wearing the t-shirt with the big conservative "idea"/fantasy of "Imagine no liberals". I guess it's the right-wing's notion of humor, but yet, I think there's a strong eliminationist tendency among many of them. Indeed, they spend a lot of time fantasizing about the complete absence of their political enemies, and then also how they can start to bring it about...
http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/knoxville-church-shooters-manifesto
It's about the guy who killed 2 people at that church in Knoxville, TN last year (apparently a church this guy knew was full of liberals - maybe so). He wrote a manifesto (the link above also has a link to a PDF of the actual document) of sorts, and said charming shit like this:
""Know this if nothing else: This was a hate crime. I hate the damn left-wing liberals. There is a vast left-wing conspiracy in this country & these liberals are working together to attack every decent & honorable institution in the nation, trying to turn this country into a communist state. Shame on them....
"This was a symbolic killing. Who I wanted to kill was every Democrat in the Senate & House, the 100 people in Bernard Goldberg's book. I'd like to kill everyone in the mainstream media."
Visit any of the right-wing sites (be they independent or connected with a right-wing tv or radio pundit) and you can regularly see the hot blonde chick (sort of a Coulter lookalike) wearing the t-shirt with the big conservative "idea"/fantasy of "Imagine no liberals". I guess it's the right-wing's notion of humor, but yet, I think there's a strong eliminationist tendency among many of them. Indeed, they spend a lot of time fantasizing about the complete absence of their political enemies, and then also how they can start to bring it about...
Continuing about that nutcase in Knoxville, I highly recommend everyone take a few minutes to read the PDF of the guy's actual goodbye letter. It's fascinating. It is also starkly obvious that he was directly "inspired" by the likes of O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Beck, etc. It's also abundantly clear that he's a racist and a homophobe, as well. He decries a "white woman having a niger (sic) baby" and "a man sticking his dick up another man's ass". The letter (only 4 pages, no difficult vocabulary - haha) is really worth a read. Remember, this guy killed 2 people, and would've killed plenty more if given the time and the chance. It WAS terrorism.
This short article is worth a read, too:
http://firedoglake.com/2008/07/28/knoxville-update-all-liberals-should-be-killed/
a highlight from it (which is a quote from the Knoxville News):
"Inside the house, officers found "Liberalism is a Mental Health Disorder" by radio talk show host Michael Savage, "Let Freedom Ring" by talk show host Sean Hannity, and "The O'Reilly Factor," by television talk show host Bill O'Reilly."
The fact that he had those books wouldn't necessarily mean much by itself, but considering the letter he wrote and the fact that he carried out the fantasy of killing the dangerous liberals that he described therein makes it pretty clear that this was right-wing terrorism. Imagine if he were an airline pilot...and flew a route that included DC (watch out White House!) or San Francisco.
This short article is worth a read, too:
http://firedoglake.com/2008/07/28/knoxville-update-all-liberals-should-be-killed/
a highlight from it (which is a quote from the Knoxville News):
"Inside the house, officers found "Liberalism is a Mental Health Disorder" by radio talk show host Michael Savage, "Let Freedom Ring" by talk show host Sean Hannity, and "The O'Reilly Factor," by television talk show host Bill O'Reilly."
The fact that he had those books wouldn't necessarily mean much by itself, but considering the letter he wrote and the fact that he carried out the fantasy of killing the dangerous liberals that he described therein makes it pretty clear that this was right-wing terrorism. Imagine if he were an airline pilot...and flew a route that included DC (watch out White House!) or San Francisco.
Philbert
Banned
Boy...you are getting worse by the day.
This is another example of your lack of intellectual honesty...instead of taking evidence and figuring out what happened, you decide what happened and find evidence to prove it, excluding facts that don't support your wacko theories.
You have joined the ranks of the chicken littles of the 70s who pointed out how the Beatles were destroying the young people and our society, and how evil they were.
And they pointed out how Charles Manson and his family listened to them, used the title of one of their songs on the wall of one of their victims, and were influenced by them to commit their murders.
News flash...a nut job is a nut job, he wouldn't have passed the psych testing to be a pilot or even a bus driver. He could've just as easily used Winnie the Pooh to justify his twisted thoughts...that isn't "Right Wing Terrorism". Like there is a branch of the Right engaged in assasination of Liberals.
None of those authors has ever espoused violence to anyone, and would be outspoken against any group that was engaged in such.
Eliminationist tendencies...please.
QUOTE=Facial_King;2945838]Continuing about that nutcase in Knoxville, I highly recommend everyone take a few minutes to read the PDF of the guy's actual goodbye letter. It's fascinating. It is also starkly obvious that he was directly "inspired" by the likes of O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Beck, etc. It's also abundantly clear that he's a racist and a homophobe, as well.....It WAS terrorism. [/QUOTE]
It wasn't "terrorism"; the DC Sniper was terrorism, for money.
This was a case of murder, plain and simple.
By a nutcase, your words.
This is another example of your lack of intellectual honesty...instead of taking evidence and figuring out what happened, you decide what happened and find evidence to prove it, excluding facts that don't support your wacko theories.
You have joined the ranks of the chicken littles of the 70s who pointed out how the Beatles were destroying the young people and our society, and how evil they were.
And they pointed out how Charles Manson and his family listened to them, used the title of one of their songs on the wall of one of their victims, and were influenced by them to commit their murders.
News flash...a nut job is a nut job, he wouldn't have passed the psych testing to be a pilot or even a bus driver. He could've just as easily used Winnie the Pooh to justify his twisted thoughts...that isn't "Right Wing Terrorism". Like there is a branch of the Right engaged in assasination of Liberals.
None of those authors has ever espoused violence to anyone, and would be outspoken against any group that was engaged in such.
Eliminationist tendencies...please.
QUOTE=Facial_King;2945838]Continuing about that nutcase in Knoxville, I highly recommend everyone take a few minutes to read the PDF of the guy's actual goodbye letter. It's fascinating. It is also starkly obvious that he was directly "inspired" by the likes of O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Beck, etc. It's also abundantly clear that he's a racist and a homophobe, as well.....It WAS terrorism. [/QUOTE]
It wasn't "terrorism"; the DC Sniper was terrorism, for money.
This was a case of murder, plain and simple.
By a nutcase, your words.
Well Facial, as much as I didn't like that article. I have to point somethings out about this individual. This person is using the church shooting to make a case with her own vitrolic attack on "public" conservatives.
This has adjectives in it that clearly decry her own hate toward Conservatives.
This person is showing ALOT of paranoia here. Most Conservatives would denounce Adkisson as a nut in the vein of John Hinckley, Jr. Granted Hinckley tried to assassinate Reagan, but this loon fantasized about killing, well, ALOT of politicians.
Watch out... your paranoia is showing!!
Becoming quite the little Fear-Monger aren't they??
If that really is a valid arguement, then rock music if from the Devil and Rock musicians are Satanists. By this persons definition of cause and effect, video games are responsible for violence caused by teenagers.
THEN... this individual becomes the very same as the individual she/he is decrying by implying some sort of violence against Conservatives.
Also, this was an act of murder by a man who was insane. To claim it was terrorism is to soften the words impact. If this man did commit an act of terrorism, half of the U.S. Government would now be gone.
To many are allowing their emotions to enflame them and not using their intelligence to solve. The person that wrote the article is clearly a sheep and is not capable of much more than hate themselves. This person should not list their profession as "writer" but instead as "cheerleader for liberals".
The article in the link above is an op/ed piece and should not be taken seriously as there are nothing more than inflamed and angry opinions in it.
This has adjectives in it that clearly decry her own hate toward Conservatives.
This person is showing ALOT of paranoia here. Most Conservatives would denounce Adkisson as a nut in the vein of John Hinckley, Jr. Granted Hinckley tried to assassinate Reagan, but this loon fantasized about killing, well, ALOT of politicians.
Watch out... your paranoia is showing!!
Becoming quite the little Fear-Monger aren't they??
If that really is a valid arguement, then rock music if from the Devil and Rock musicians are Satanists. By this persons definition of cause and effect, video games are responsible for violence caused by teenagers.
THEN... this individual becomes the very same as the individual she/he is decrying by implying some sort of violence against Conservatives.
Also, this was an act of murder by a man who was insane. To claim it was terrorism is to soften the words impact. If this man did commit an act of terrorism, half of the U.S. Government would now be gone.
To many are allowing their emotions to enflame them and not using their intelligence to solve. The person that wrote the article is clearly a sheep and is not capable of much more than hate themselves. This person should not list their profession as "writer" but instead as "cheerleader for liberals".
The article in the link above is an op/ed piece and should not be taken seriously as there are nothing more than inflamed and angry opinions in it.
rush limbaugh is a retard...like all steeler fans
Wow. He implied violence, eh?
Dockets are calendars of the cases awaiting action in courts of law. To put their asses in the dockets would mean to try them in a court of law for the crime of terrorism. So you consider court trials to be violent acts?
Thanks for the good laugh, stampede. I'll leave it to others to think of the right words to describe you based on your particular blend knowledge and cockiness.
:1orglaugh:rofl:
I'll respond to some more of it later if I get the time...
:wave2:
Thanks for the good laugh, stampede. I'll leave it to others to think of the right words to describe you based on your particular blend knowledge and cockiness.
:1orglaugh:rofl:
I'll respond to some more of it later if I get the time...
:wave2:
...and I wait. Clocks tick'in. :nanner:
how about if all of fox news just implodes?
While OReilly is angry, Rush is just plain hateful. I hope he stops soon.
While OReilly is angry, Rush is just plain hateful. I hope he stops soon.
Prof-
...sigh....this is a nice example of why it is tiring to debate you. You seem to share traits of schizophrenia
Why are you conflating words and introducing sub-arguments or tangential arguments and making assumptions about what I say (or what other posters say)?
Fox is racist. Just watch it for a couple of hours. If you can't see a "whiff' of racism, than you are simply not aware or not able to perceive it.
Affirmative Action is a completely separate issue, one I did not mention or allude to and I don't want to talk about it. It bears no significance in this thread, basically.
I have accurately characterized Lou Dobbs's show. He, too, borders on racism because of his intense scrutiny toward illegal immigration from a single view point. He does not offer up alternative viewpoints for close examination on that issue. His "reporters" just serve up the same anti-Mexican stance but edited to "seem fresh." He also likes to spread the conspiracy theory of the "North American Alliance"--where Mexico, the U.S., and Canada will all become legally bound to each other some day soon. There are no true facts that support this only circumstantial "evidence."
...sigh....this is a nice example of why it is tiring to debate you. You seem to share traits of schizophrenia
Why are you conflating words and introducing sub-arguments or tangential arguments and making assumptions about what I say (or what other posters say)?
Fox is racist. Just watch it for a couple of hours. If you can't see a "whiff' of racism, than you are simply not aware or not able to perceive it.
Affirmative Action is a completely separate issue, one I did not mention or allude to and I don't want to talk about it. It bears no significance in this thread, basically.
I have accurately characterized Lou Dobbs's show. He, too, borders on racism because of his intense scrutiny toward illegal immigration from a single view point. He does not offer up alternative viewpoints for close examination on that issue. His "reporters" just serve up the same anti-Mexican stance but edited to "seem fresh." He also likes to spread the conspiracy theory of the "North American Alliance"--where Mexico, the U.S., and Canada will all become legally bound to each other some day soon. There are no true facts that support this only circumstantial "evidence."
Facetious
Moderated
False ! Lou has had Jesse Jackson as a guest on his radio show and there was nothing but a polite dialog. :dunno:
If Lou was a "bordering racist" I doubt that CNN of all networks would entertain his program.
Lou doesn't speak in terms of race when referencing illegal immigration, he's just worried about our nations' ability to sustain them as well as the undermining of our immigration laws.
Let me ask - Are there any conversions yet ? i.e. new made democrats, republicans or, God forbid, free thinking independent issue oriented voters to be, as a result of this thread ?
didn't think so
Similar threads
- Locked
