In a nut shell.
Posted on 03/29/2009 6:33:46 AM PDT by kellynla
If you are reading this newspaper, the likelihood is that you agree with the Obama administration's recent attacks on conservative radio talker Rush Limbaugh. That's the likelihood; here's the certainty: You've never listened to Rush Limbaugh.
Oh no, you haven't. Whenever I interrupt a liberal's anti-Limbaugh rant to point out that the ranter has never actually listened to the man, he always says the same thing: "I've heard him!"
On further questioning, it always turns out that by "heard him," he means he's heard the selected excerpts spoon-fed him by the distortion-mongers of the mainstream media. These excerpts are specifically designed to accomplish one thing: to make sure you never actually listen to Limbaugh's show, never actually give him a fair chance to speak his piece to you directly.
By lifting some typically Rushian piece of outrageous hilarity completely out of context, the distortion gang knows full well it can get you to widen your eyes and open your mouth in the universal sign of Liberal Outrage. Your scrawny chest swelling with a warm sense of completely unearned righteousness, you will turn to your second spouse and say, "I'm not a liberal, I'm a moderate, and I'm tolerant of a wide range of differing views -- but this goes too far!"
There is more untruthfulness in that statement than in a speech by President Obama.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Very interesting theory.
“Do what your intellectual keepers do not want you to do and keep an open mind.”
Hardly a more unadulterated piece of writing to liberals have I ever seen. Really good.
Indeed. Timothy McVey used the more typical weapon of the terrorist, the bomb. It was well within these boys' capabilities of making an IED that would have killed many more people.
More likely a bong or some tofurkey.
“My favorite response to Limbaugh critics is “What do you disagree with him about?””
Absolutely! And the responses will be:
“He’s fat”
“He’s arrogant”
“He’s a hater”
“He’s a racist”
“He’s just trying/will say anything to boost his ratings”
And after you repeat your original question, you’ll get “I don’t need to listen to him, I know what he’s all about! [repeat prior responses]
Then you have the choice of asking your orignal question yet again, or saying “So, you admit that you haven’t listened to him”.
That’s when they say “You’re a right wing nutjob for listening to him”. Or, “Only right wing fascist nutjobs listen to him”.
Is that about right?
See, because they’re too smart to have to know about what they are talking about, they don’t need real-world experience. And you’re too stupid to be able to see their higher-level reasoning which is so sophisticated, so erudite, that it can figure out how to put whatever they have no knowledge of into a little bitty box so they can throw ad hominems at it.
Man, these libs are just sooooo smart, I don’t know how or if we stand a chance against them.
They’re not that stupid. Plus, the ashtray’s likely stolen.
How to destroy Rush Limbaugh:
1. Get him to foment unrest, to organize conservatives against the government, and to personally sponsor and fund such groups.
That's it.
His job is to keep us informed, and he is doing great work to that end.
Ha ha ha ha ha!
If she is a feminist of a certain sort, “pro-choice” extends to more than abortion.
Were you talking to Al Franken? Franken must be the most unpleasant man in the world.
Its because they hate the truth
He may be, but I find those responses, those exact responses, very widespread and not exceptional at all among libs.
Individual liberal responses will always be widespread among liberals, because by definition liberals don't stand on their own. They really, actually, are sheeple group collectivist masses, by choice, and by constant effort. So they will all always be saying the same thing, even down to the same emotional affectations.
Maturity is the process of individuation. Liberals refuse individuation because they are refusing maturity itself. What conservatives call slavery, liberals fantasize as the peace, security and joy of childhood, which is by definition non-individuated (children don't stand on their own). So the liberal perspective is that conservatives aren't fighting for freedom - they're fighting to destroy the safety of childhood the liberals refuse to give up. This is why liberals always say conservatives are "against the children" - they actually mean themselves.
All Leftists have to do, therefore, is organize the cowardly liberals by promising them the security they want (without any need to back the promises with rational thinking - just endless, deliberately childish programming-meme attacks against the "adult" conservatives). And voilà - democracy becomes socialism, and socialism becomes communism, through the frightened, angry votes of the liberal masses.
In a nut shell.
Brutal
If they had only ordered from ALLEN BROTHERS and asked for the LIMBAUGH SPECIAL.
One day as my family was traveling, we stopped at the home of some friends. After we had gottenn in the car, my daughter who was aged in the single digits at the time commented on the hate Rush type book in the bathroom. She opined that our friends must never have listened to Rush because that book took Rush's statements out-of-context and placed constructions on it that Rush never intended. Of course, the daughter didn't phrase it like that, however, because she knew the truth she wasn't duped by that book's influence.
It is a good read. Thanks Kelly.
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.