Alaska Darin Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 I listen to rush maybe 8 times a month, and on numerous occasions has he denounced the Bush spending. However, it didn't get big play on "internet sound bites" because we weren't running $1.3 trillion deficits... more like $280 billion. You clearly lose on this, so go back to your hole. I'm pretty sure they hit half a trillion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Warms my heart when people of all different stripes can come together and call a poster out on his utter nonsensical bull sh--. On a somewhat seperate note, is there ANYTHING some retards (incudling that idiot in the WH press room) WONT blame on Limbaugh? The same people who whine about his "power" are THE ONES THAT !@#$ING GAVE IT TO HIM!!!!!! Come on, you know that in this country, it is easier to blame a scapegoat. Now Rush is a complete money grubbing scumbag, but he isn't responsible for much of anything other than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 I'm pretty sure they hit half a trillion. I don't think so...but only because a lot of the war spending was "supplemental", hence off-the-books (so to speak) and not counting officially against the budget as a deficit. I believe in the Bush administration's worst year the national debt increased by about $700B, even though the "budget deficit" was only $300B-$400B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 I'm pretty sure they hit half a trillion. thats the average deficit for 2002-2007. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeyemike Posted June 10, 2009 Share Posted June 10, 2009 Yeah, like this 88 year old racist fool is Limbaugh's target demographic. He's a dumbass...a murderous dumbass, but still, a dumbass. When will people on the left AND the right figure out that when bad things like this happen neither side of the political spectrum is to blame? Back in 1998 when Matthew Sheppard was killed in Wyoming, people on the left were blaming Rush and James Dobson, among others, for creating the atmosphere that led to a gay college student's murder. Yeah, like the two Laramie townies who killed Sheppard (both of whom had EXTENSIVE criminal histories) were part of Dobson's core audience. It's a foolish argument. Pointing fingers and saying ________ is to blame only clouds the sad event that occurred. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheeseburger_in_paradise Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Between this and the conner is sexy thread, this place is turning into Woodstock. I am naked at this very moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 If you don't think that all this anti-gov't fear mongering talk doesn't rile up these mentally unstable people, Case in point: look how riled up PastaJoe is. /end_thread winner = DCT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 If the guy doing the shooting was named "Mohammed" instead of Von Brunn do you think the Right would be going apesheet right now? PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 If the guy doing the shooting was named "Mohammed" instead of Von Brunn do you think the Right would be going apesheet right now? PTR Great post. It was extremely enlightening, and it was in no way completely idiotic. You should post more often. Fingon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 If the guy doing the shooting was named "Mohammed" instead of Von Brunn do you think the Right would be going apesheet right now? PTR Hard to say. I mean, an anti-military Muslim convert named Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad gunned down two American soldiers at a training center in Arkansas this month, killing one of them. I think the the MSM may have given it a brief mention. Don't remember the right going apeschiit about that. You did know about this right? No? Bad timing for the soldiers, I guess. I mean, Tiller was getting most of the attention. Who had time for an American soldier murdered by a domestic terrorist when the media has a pro-life wacko to drag through the ink? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Hard to say. I mean, an anti-military Muslim convert named Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad gunned down two American soldiers at a training center in Arkansas this month, killing one of them. I think the the MSM may have given it a brief mention. Don't remember the right going apeschiit about that. You did know about this right? No? Bad timing for the soldiers, I guess. I mean, Tiller was getting most of the attention. Who had time for an American soldier murdered by a domestic terrorist when the media has a pro-life wacko to drag through the ink? What are you talking about? That story was covered extensively by all major media outlets, both on the air and online. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Back in the prehistoric days of journalism, where news was still delivered by paper, a term was coined that signified the importance of a story "Above the fold". That is when newspapers are stacked in newstands, people glimpse at the major headlines on the upper frame of page one. I believe that Moc's point is that Tiller's story was above the fold at all media outlets, while the Army shooting was just news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Back in the prehistoric days of journalism, where news was still delivered by paper, a term was coined that signified the importance of a story "Above the fold". That is when newspapers are stacked in newstands, people glimpse at the major headlines on the upper frame of page one. I believe that Moc's point is that Tiller's story was above the fold at all media outlets, while the Army shooting was just news. I understand, but he was acting like these guys were killed and nobody noticed. Anyway, the media is just a reflection of what the public wants to see. The public was more fascinated by the Tiller killing. A media outlet would lose business to competitors if they didn't make that the top story. If you don't like what you see on a media outlet whose primary concern is profit, blame the society that demanded the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 I don't think so...but only because a lot of the war spending was "supplemental", hence off-the-books (so to speak) and not counting officially against the budget as a deficit. I believe in the Bush administration's worst year the national debt increased by about $700B, even though the "budget deficit" was only $300B-$400B. Increase in public debt is the right way to look at it because of spending gimmicks (which, btw, also reveals that the budget was not balanced by the end of the Clinton administration, though it came closer than at any other time.). Here are the annotated increases in public debt: 1997 $189 billion 1998 $113 billion 1999 $130 billion 2000 $18 billion 2001 $133 billion <- Dot-Com burst and potential recession 2002 $421 billion <vvv- Spending on homeland/GWOT/Afghanistan and to shore up markets post-9/11 2003 $555 billion <vvv- Bush Tax Cuts 2004 $596 billion <vvv- Iraq spending 2005 $553 billion 2006 $574 billion 2007 $501 billion 2008 $1,017 billion <--- includes one-time creation of $700 billion TARP fund 2009 $1,358 billion <--- as of June 2. Note: total Iraq spending is about $600 billion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 An 88-year-old Maryland man with a long history of ties to white supremacist groups is the suspect in Wednesday's fatal shooting at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, two law enforcement officials told CNN. James W. von Brunn served six years in prison for trying to make what he called a "legal, non-violent citizens arrest" of Federal Reserve Board members in 1981 -- a prison term he blamed on "a Negro jury, Jew/Negro attorneys" and "a Jew judge," he said on his Web site, Holy Western Empire. "He is in our files going back way into the 1980s," said Heidi Beirich, a researcher for the Southern Poverty Law Center, based in Montgomery, Alabama. "He has an extremely long history with neo-Nazis and white supremacists. He's written extremely incendiary publications, raging about Jews, blacks and the like." http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/06/10/dc.mus...pect/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 James W. von Brunn served six years in prison for trying to make what he called a "legal, non-violent citizens arrest" of Federal Reserve Board members in 1981 -- a prison term he blamed on "a Negro jury, Jew/Negro attorneys" and "a Jew judge," he said on his Web site, Holy Western Empire. Rather than blaming Bush and Rush for incitement, shouldn't we be pointing the finger at Ron Paul and friends? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Rather than blaming Bush and Rush for incitement, shouldn't we be pointing the finger at Ron Paul and friends? Bush and Rush??? I did not blame anyone. All I did here was post what CNN had written. Ron Paul or Rue Paul? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 I understand, but he was acting like these guys were killed and nobody noticed. Anyway, the media is just a reflection of what the public wants to see. The public was more fascinated by the Tiller killing. A media outlet would lose business to competitors if they didn't make that the top story. If you don't like what you see on a media outlet whose primary concern is profit, blame the society that demanded the story. Before it gets to that stage, an editorial decision needs to be made which story goes above the fold and what journalistic resources you will provide to cover that story. Which one got more resources at the outset? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Before it gets to that stage, an editorial decision needs to be made which story goes above the fold and what journalistic resources you will provide to cover that story. Which one got more resources at the outset? Yes. but in defense of the disparity at the outset: a good editor will try to anticipate what story will better capture the publics interest and allocate resources accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 I just want to point out that without Hilter, there would be no decent Holocaust museum in which to shoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts