I suffered through three hours of his reptilian twaddle to make the list you will find here:
Eh, either way. Hypocrisy is still king here.
Ayn Rands? Agreed. And all the Republicans who wonder why they can't get redress for grievances in the court system but don't know what tort reform really means. Oh, wait, that's just ignorance.
Well, looks like Rand did take medicare under a pseudonym, admitted by her own lawyers.
A woman who testified in a public forum about needed medicine for a friend of hers who nearly died for lack of it was called a prostitute by Limbaugh. Birth control has many uses beyond suppression of pregnancy. These are facts one would not get if he were to only listen to Fox and Limbaugh. It is a sad fact, indeed, that those who get their news exclusively from Fox/Limbaugh are literally more poorly informed than those who ignore the news altogether.
Uh huh... There are many things good about many things. Birth control is the wonder cure for the world. Yay. Doesn't mean the government should be financing it.
Especially based on the word of a 30 year old activist "college student" who hops around from universities just to make a point. Rush Limbaugh is best thing that ever happened to her and her ideology, wouldn't ya say? Imagine if he hadn't said anything. She would have never gotten to go on the View.
As to your silly comment regarding uninformed viewers and listeners of Fox and Limbaugh - Were you just as outraged by Bill Mahr's comments regarding Sarah Palin? Or Ed Shultz calling Laura Ingram a Slut?
I suppose you just pick and choose that with which you will "suffer" for eh?
Heh. I know.
Well, good luck with that. How's it working for you so far?
Okay, I'll attempt a less pissy reply to just one of your many incorrect statements: FOX viewers ignorant: http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2011/knowless/
As to your equivalency argument, does ignoring the one negate criticism of the other? And, if it does not, why are you not as outraged at Limbaugh as you were (presumably as you're clearly a champion of women's rights) at Mahr?
I wasn't outraged by either really. I believe in free speech. I listen/watch both of em. (not Shultz really) Just noting the hypocrisy of your "suffering" as you endeavor to "fight" for the integrity of women everywhere.... ya know, except those with which you don't like.
My suffering is hypocrisy? Good lord. No wonder you guys can't figure out why we're outraged. You can't understand a simple argument.
I suffered through Limbaugh's miserable show. I raised the mighty sword of blogginghood against his statement that (by logical extension) all women who testify in public about privately held insurance paying for medicine are by definition prostitutes who should post their sexual liaisons on youtube. Defend him all you want. The lines are clearly drawn and you're standing with the ideologues, religious nuts and fanatics. We're far too disorganized and prone to circular firing squads on this side to merit all your "your side" arguments.
"You can't understand a simple argument."
Maybe that's because it's a red herring Chris...I know getting called on this kind of thing at the fix is new to you guys...but here we are.
You've mixed up your fallacies. The red herring is pretending that ignoring one shot is somehow cause to forgive a subsequent carpet bombing. Do you get paid for this? I'm serious. If I were to start repeating Heritage Foundation crapola I'd at least draw a few bucks from the Rio Grande Foundation. That guy knows how to milk the fatcats.
I think all of us are trying to make the point...both sides are guilty of inappropriate statements form time to time. In this case, the only thing being ignored is your hypocrisy. It's not isolated, if I thought this productive, I could cite many instances of this violation of public discourse on the left that went ignored. It doesn't matter, we all know that you only get mad when it's convenient. It's going to take more tan that to get him re elected Chris.