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]

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

Are the Obama supporters likely to elevate their resentment of toward the Clintons above their resentment toward Bush?

One is a resentment of 2 months toward former friends, and the other is pathological hatred that they have cultivated for 8 years.

[DM1]

“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?
“

Um no. if anything this has been helping McCain significantly.

[roses of sharon]

Lib trolls going after talk radio, lol, they are so transparent. Using the old ego slam for those on the Right that take it to the Dims daily, year after year.

[new cruelty]

Aren't most of us now resigned to supporting McCain, and charged up about defeating the Democrates?

i'm more charged up about the DNC defeating themselves. my scope is limited to the workplace and my usual haunts, but from what i see, there are a number of democrats that are fired up about having a black president. if hillary and the super delegates take that away from them, they are not going to be happy about it. they don't see things as D and R, Left or Right. they may either sit out or vote for mccain just out of spite.

[prolifefirst]

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

Are you saying that what's important is when someone got their handle rather than the quality of their argument?

[1035rep]

Are you saying that what's important is when someone got their handle rather than the quality of their argument?

What quality?   

[safeasthebanks]

"I think you were on that thread, did you spot them?"

Absolutely. I'm sure the similar sign-up dates were "just a coincidence"!??!?!

[prolifefirst]

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.

Many times on this post people have made and argument and I've addressed them with argument.

I, for my part, think I have always engaged people with argument on this thread.

[1035rep]

BTW, I have never, ever seen a quality argument from a Code Pinker. They are nothing but scum sucking bottom feeders.

[Rick.Donaldson]

Are you saying that what's important is when someone got their handle rather than the quality of their argument?

I won't say that the date of your handle is important except for the message you're attempting to bring to the site.

But, I said you're trolling for a reason. The date of your joining here, plus reading through some of your previous stuff has certainly shed considerable light upon your message here. If I were you, I'd step back and reconsider who the folks are here you're attempting to "take on" in "debate"... which by the way, this isn't a DEBATE, it's an attempt at trolling. If you're unfamiliar with that term, then perhaps you ought to check out what it means.

[prolifefirst]

Lib trolls going after talk radio, lol, they are so transparent.

1) What should matter is the quality of the argument.

2) I in no way write like a Dem.

[hdstmf]

Only weak-need republican and Rinos can do that.

[prolifefirst]

BTW, I have never, ever seen a quality argument from a Code Pinker. They are nothing but scum sucking bottom feeders.

This is the same kind of reflexive name-calling that you hear all day on Air America.

[prolifefirst]

BTW, I have never, ever seen a quality argument from a Code Pinker. They are nothing but scum sucking bottom feeders.

Plus, this statement is vulgar just like you always hear on Air America.

[dforest]

Oh geesh. I thought we had moved past this. No radio host can bring about a defeat for McCain.

McCain, the GOP, Dem voters are in control of that.

[1035rep]

This is the same kind of reflexive name-calling that you hear all day on Air America.

Did I hit a nerve? You are now going to defend those communist loving Code Pinkers here on FR?

[Rick.Donaldson]

This is the same kind of reflexive name-calling that you hear all day on Air America.

LOL! I can honestly say I for one have never listened to Air America, nor any of the idiots that pretend to be commentators. I think 90% of the folks on the Right don't listen either. Why? Because they are full of themselves, and as someone else pointed out, they are 'scum sucking bottom feeders'.

So back to your so-called "debate".

[Xenalyte]

I didn’t say you did. My post was directed at someone who claimed to “know Rush and Hannity.”

[Xenalyte]

I am saying that what entertainers do is for the purpose of entertaining. “Michael Savage” is a perfect example, as are pro wrestlers.

If what Hannity and Limbaugh believe is what they say, then that’s gravy. But there’s no way for us to ascertain that.

Bottom line, entertainers entertain, and they say what brings in the advertising dollars.

[prolifefirst]

But, I said you're trolling for a reason. The date of your joining here, plus reading through some of your previous stuff has certainly shed considerable light upon your message here.

With everything I've ever said I've tried to be consistent with protecting the unborn and defeating the Democrat, can that be said about Rush and Hannity?

Do we always have to be silent when we think people on our side act wrongly?