Did Rush and Hannity' egos take an historic victory away from us?

Vanity | 4/14/08 | Vanity

[prolifefirst]

1) Did Rush give Hillary new life because he wanted to show that he still had influence, and will that fact allow the Dem's to avoid a crushing democratic defeat?

2) Did Hannity put the scoop and ratings ahead of the country's welfare by not holding the Rev. Wright stuff till the Dem race was settled?

[prolifefirst]

You just admonished someone else to “engage in debate” and yet you throw back these little one-liners.

Being concise and name calling aren't the same.

[prolifefirst]

You’ve basically started a vanity post in a “News/Activism” area attacking both Hannity and Limbaugh and provided very little reasoning for doing so, and yet you’re attempting to entice others to post their opinions.

As I said earlier, I posted this because I fear that a historic opportunity is passing us by and that some people on our side have inadvertantly, and selfishly, help happen.

If this might be true, I think it's self-evident why I would want it discussed.

[prolifefirst]

What is your opinion... line by line.

I fear that Rush and Hannity have made a tragic mistake for selfish reasons and wanted others" opinions?

[Rick.Donaldson]

Why is Hannity morally obligated to save the Democrats by deceminating information immediately?

Let me see... hmmmm that's a bit of a leading question. Is Hannity moral obligated to pass the TRUTH along? Yes. Are you? YES. Am I? Yes. Is he 'morally obligated to save the Democrats' from themselves? Nope, and he isn't doing any such thing with the Wright controversy either. Instead, he is passing on factual information regarding a racist black man who is associated with a Presidential candidate. Is he morally obligated to make sure that the public is aware of the actions of these two men? Damned straight he is.

[prolifefirst]

Is Hannity moral obligated to pass the TRUTH along? Yes. Are you? YES. Am I? Yes.

Are you saying that we have to immediately regurgitate everything we know without regard to tactics or ramifications?

[Rick.Donaldson]

I fear that Rush and Hannity have made a tragic mistake for selfish reasons and wanted others" opinions?

Then rather than attack them in your original message, why didn't you ASK for opinions? Instead you jaded the responses by placing yourself at odds with the two mentioned commentators. You've received my opinion now. Have a nice day.

[Publius6961]

Please take the trouble to engage the debate.
(1) Rush himself claims that he is responsible for Hillary winning the popular vote in Texas and doing so well in Ohio.
(2) If Obama would be a much worse candidate in the general, which is likely, why can't we discuss Rush's action.

What debate?
Elections are won at the ballot box, not through ego-boosting delusional debates, hand-wringing or polls.

Current candidates and their supporters are spending over half a billion$ on a job that pays $400,000 plus bennies and --- a whole lot of power and future millions$ for a select few. The game is stacked.

So some endlessly engage in these verbal circle-jerks and ignore the fundamental issues which matter, which remain essentially undebated, and are ultimately the reason most intelligent and engaged people choose one candidate over another.

If the "Madison Ave best detergent" approach to politics is the primary motivating force for the majority of voters, nothing that is presently being "debated" matters, and the national downward spiral will accelerate. Just google the current most popular 10 television shows and weep; or celebrate how "good" things are. As far as being useful, that would be as useful as this doofus "debate".

[prolifefirst]

I, for one, am unimpressed, and I think you’re attempting to paint yourself as something you’re not, and to ‘troll’.

1) The moderator and maybe Jim, himself, have allowed this thread to go on for over two hours.

2) What I am is not important, the value of the debate is?

[SuziQ]

The longer the Democrat primary goes on, the more we learn about Barack Obama, and that is a GOOD thing. Too many jumped on his bandwagon right at first, because they wanted to feel good about themselves for supporting a black man for President. They didn't know anything about his politics, and they didn't care, because it wasn't about him. As time as gone on, and he's had to make himself look different from Her Heinous, we find out more about him, both from folks doing more research, and from his own speeches.

MORE information is almost always a good thing.

[Publius6961]

I don't think you'll have the chance because Hillary will be the nominee.

For a self-styled political pundit you are quite dense. You missed my entire point:

I don't care what you think; or anyone else, for that matter. It has no influence whatsoever in my decision."

But don't take it personally; it's not personal.

[prolifefirst]

Then rather than attack them in your original message, why didn't you ASK for opinions?

I didn't add anthing negative about Rush or Hannity beyond my concise, one-sentence questions.

Are we never suppose to say anything that might reflect badly on Rush or Hannity?

[upsdriver]

Did the Republican party sell us out by nominating McCain? thereby giving me no one to vote for so I don’t care who the hell wins in November?

I believe Rush and Hannity will end up voting for McCain. I WON’T!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[prolifefirst]

The longer the Democrat primary goes on, the more we learn about Barack Obama, and that is a GOOD thing.

BUT what if the superdelegates find out that he would lead them to a crushing defeat in the general and break to Hillary?

[prolifefirst]

For a self-styled political pundit you are quite dense. You missed my entire point.

You said you are going to vote for Obama in the general, and I said I don't think you'll have the chance since Hillary will probably now get the nomination.

[1035rep]

"Did Hannity put the scoop and ratings ahead of the country's welfare by not holding the Rev. Wright stuff till the Dem race was settled?"

Your question starts with a false premise and the answer is NO.

[new cruelty]

BUT what if the superdelegates ... break to Hillary?

and if that happens, what if the media that favors obama revolts? and what if the people that voted for obama revolt?

there is still a lot of time on the clock.

[prolifefirst]

I believe Rush and Hannity will end up voting for McCain. I WON’T!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I sometimes feel that way, but isn't better to maybe get 50% of what we want instead of definitely only get 5%.

We're so close on the Supreme Court. At least we have a chance to make it conservative, or at least we have a good chance of keeping the status quo for 4 years.

Also, if McCain wins, especially if he wins big, we can make good progress with the Legislature races.

[prolifefirst]

and if that happens, what if the media that favors obama revolts? and what if the people that voted for obama revolt?

We're counting on the Obama people not to act in their own self-interest and to break from life-long voting patterns.

I ask that we look at ourselves. Aren't most of us now resigned to supporting McCain, and charged up about defeating the Democrates? I expect the same from the Democrats.

[1035rep]

I noticed that also. Two Jan 2008 code pinkers posting earlier. I think you were on that thread, did you spot them?

[Rick.Donaldson]

“And maybe Jim himself”?

hahaha.

It’s a vanity post. They generally don’t touch them as far as I have ever seen. I don’t usually delete vanity posts on our sites either. Why? Because they are “vanity”, and it gives folks a chance to vent sometimes. I figure that’s what you’re doing.

And what you are is exactly the important thing here. Why? Because your reasoning for writing the post in the first place is EVERYTHING, remember, it’s a VANITY post.

But, so far, there has been no debate.