Posted on 04/14/2008 8:18:41 AM PDT by 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?
You're....not really....a....warrior princess?!?!?? Say it ain't so....
ok
Are we never suppose to be self-critical? Can't we just engage in debate instead of calling names?
Maybe if we were more willing to look at ourselves we would steer a truer course.
Maybe we would have McCain, maybe we wouldn't have lost the Senate and House.
This post is either classic chutzpah or unparalleled ignorance...
Your misunderstanding me:
1) I'm saying Rove is right
2) I'm saying that Rush did probably have an effect when he told people to vote for Hillary
Obama is death to the Democrats and now finally that fact is getting through their dense skulls, and the superdelegates will eventually break to Hillary.
I didn't claim to know them and or their motivations, I was just asking questions, the answers to which I fear.
Are you saying that they aren't sincere, or that you expect them to put their careers ahead of their country?
If any one of the three liberals running wins, Rush will have plenty of good material for his entertainment show.
That will secure sponsors, and income for Rush.
Rush is such a "damn fool" and an "idiot," that he will continue to bank millions.
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.
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?
There’s your original questions. You framed these questions from a very specific point of view, which appears not only to me, but to others to be “from the Left”. You also are framing both of these questions from incorrect assumptions. That is tantamount, in my opinion to lying.
In question 1, you A) ASSUME that the “Ego” of these two commentators is “at fault” and then you B)’blame’ Rush for bringing Hillary Clinton “back to life”.
In question 2, you still have based everything on the false premise of “ego” from commentators, then you further make it an apparent “wrong” for Hannity to “break a story” (which by the way he DID NOT do) and then you claim, or imply that perhaps he should have “held off” on giving that information.
These are wrong assumptions to begin with. ALL INFORMATION regarding someone running for President is absolutely essential for ALL of us to properly decide for whom we will vote.
Your assertion that “keeping information hidden” is wrong on so many levels I can’t even begin to list them all. The facts are facts and should never be hidden.
This is a “Leftist” way to do things. Only give out ENOUGH information to sway someone your way, thus this is NOT something either of those two guys would do, nor SHOULD they do it. Neither would I, and neither should you.
Give all the information related to a subject, don’t cherry pick it.
The Reverend Wright, was WRONG and should be exposed for exactly what he was. At the same time, every nook and cranny of Clinton’s life, as well as Obama, AND McCain should be an OPEN book for everyone to read.
Period.
And imagine how that will upset the applecart.
The fact that many consider these two to be political gurus has created a problem all in itself. Too bad some can't think for themselves anymore and need daily IV feedings of Hannity and Rush to get by.
Rush has taken credit for it, and I for one, respecting Rush's influence, think he might well be right.
I don't pretend to understand politics; nor do I want to.
I voted for Obama in the primaries because I could, and I viewed him as the worst candidate among a field of bad viable candidates. I do not mean justified or competent, simply viable. Extremus inter pares, so to speak.
I voted for Clinton in '92 on the theory that he would screw up the country so badly that more competent leaders would emerge to set things right.
That didn't work out so well. It never occured to me that the First Rapist's long range plan was simply to use the presidency as a stepping stone to becoming a zillionaire and buying a quadruple-wide...
Of course, the Republicans had a major role in the last 16 years, too, mainly incompetence. I kept hoping that there would be at least one with brass ones who would eventually emerge and address the real problems in our country.
Nothing that the Republicans have done since '92 has given me any cause for optimism any time soon. The political eunuchs are not one whit more in tune with their support base than they were 16 years ago. So what is there to lose?
I plan to vote for Obama again, for the same reasons I voted for Clinton in '92. If it can be any worse, that might be a good thing. The beauty of the final implosion, when it comes, is that none of the usual suspects are likely to survive; politically, or in any other sense. The sense of anger and frustration among most Americans is palpable.
Why is Hannity morally obligated to save the Democrats by deceminating information immediately?
You’re pretty funny.
You just admonished someone else to “engage in debate” and yet you throw back these little one-liners. I, for one, am unimpressed, and I think you’re attempting to paint yourself as something you’re not, and to ‘troll’.
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.
What is your opinion... line by line.
Please.
Especially the second one. Hannity has been mentioning the outlandish and hateful "Pastor" Wright for over a year now. Only until recently when the rest of the media (like PMSNBC) caught up.
I don't think you'll have the chance because Hillary will be the nominee.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.