More Selective reporting from Limbaugh
George Grapman
Omits these details:
Consumer confidence at its lowest in three years (when it goes up
Limbaugh boasts about while ignoring the general downward trend, when it
drops he ignores it).
Retail sales dropped for the third straight week.
Inflation exceeds the Feds "comfort level" for inflation.
clams casino
Leads me to believe Rod Speed is really Rush.
Everyone knows today's stock market climb is all due to GW's 2002 tax cut..
George Grapman
before posting. My punishment will consist of removing Rod Speed from my
kill file for 24 hours each time I fail to do that.
George Grapman
> MSM is pushing versus the real facts outlets like the NY Times and the
> major networks suppress?
> __________________________________________
> Never argue with an idiot.
> They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Which "real facts " would that be? The same AP story that had the
increase in consumer spending also had the figures that I cited.
jl
completely. It's all just one sided.
SMS 斯蒂文• 夏
> Limbaugh is a total blithering idiot. He never analyzes an issue
> completely. It's all just one sided.
Hey, he got very rich by conning enough right-wing wackos into actually
believing anything he says. Remember, he's an entertainer, not a news
person.
jl
> On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 11:57:28 -0500, jl <j...@nowhereszville.biz> wrote:
>
>> Limbaugh is a total blithering idiot. He never analyzes an issue
>> completely. It's all just one sided.
> the NY Times is a slanted leftist propaganda tool, I don't read it.
I don't listen to his show. But I have heard enough of it to realize
that most of the stuff that comes out of his mouth is bullshit. About
the only person on regular radio worth listening to is Phil Hendrie.
But I mostly listen to podcasts downloaded from iTunes.
Most of the talk show hosts are full of shit and are too far to the
right or to the left and none of them consider the whole picture. They
instead see things through their particular lens.
<RJ>
wrote:
Think of Rush as;
"Your daily dose of Whine and Cheese"
r
<rj>
George Grapman
>> completely. It's all just one sided.
> the NY Times is a slanted leftist propaganda tool, I don't read it.
If you don't read it how do you know it is slanted?
clams_casino
>On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 11:57:28 -0500, jl <j...@nowhereszville.biz> wrote:
>
>
>
>>Limbaugh is a total blithering idiot. He never analyzes an issue
>>completely. It's all just one sided.
>>
>>
>since you know that already why do you listen to his show?
>
For the entertainment - He's such a comedian.
Oddly, I've been told people take him for real. Not that's sad.
Brawny
> Limbaugh is a total blithering idiot. He never analyzes an issue
> completely. It's all just one sided.
...and your agenda is fair and balanced? I don't think so.....
George Grapman
> On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 18:12:01 -0800, George Grapman
> <sfge...@paccbell.net> wrote:
>
>> jdoe wrote:
>>> On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 11:57:28 -0500, jl <j...@nowhereszville.biz> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Limbaugh is a total blithering idiot. He never analyzes an issue
>>>> completely. It's all just one sided.
>>> since you know that already why do you listen to his show? I know that
>>> the NY Times is a slanted leftist propaganda tool, I don't read it.
>>
>> If you don't read it how do you know it is slanted?
>
> terminated my subscription I keep up with their daily foibles by going
> to www.timeswatch.org
One of the things I look for on a news site is a corrections section.
Neither timeswatch or rushlimbaugh.com have one but the NY Times does.
George Grapman
Brawny
> Brawny wrote:
> > On Dec 22, 11:57 am, jl <j...@nowhereszville.biz> wrote:
> >> Limbaugh is a total blithering idiot. He never analyzes an issue
>
Who did?
George Grapman
Limbaugh, numerous times.
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_100407/content/01125112.guest.html
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Let me get to the audio sound bites because I need to thank some
people, ladies and gentlemen. There are other items in the news, some
stuff I've held over from yesterday that are not related to this -- to
this -- oh! Sullivan Group, opinion audit. That's what it was. In the
last week alone, my opinion auditing firm has shown that I'm up a tenth
of a point again, documented to be almost always right 98.8% of the
time, in the midst of dealing with this smear. It's amazing, I knew
this was going to be the case, and I wanted to pass that on to you.
In fact, the Sullivan Group is Tom Sullivan, a Sacramento talk show
host and a friend of Limbaugh's.
Brawny
Successful people really anger you..... Why?
There is so MUCH to learn from a successful person. They did
something right to maintain/retain their position in life.
Merry Christmas and may you find some sort of peace in your life.
Being envious isn't the answer.
clams_casino
"almost always right 98.8%" - by Rush's typical stretch of the truth,
being wrong is equivalent to "almost" right. The other 1.2% is when he
is right.
He's such a comedian. Love his sense of humor.
George Grapman
> On Dec 23, 2:35 pm, George Grapman <sfgeo...@paccbell.net> wrote:
>> Brawny wrote:
>>
>> Limbaugh, numerous times.
>
> Successful people really anger you..... Why?
Not successful people, just frauds. By the way thanks for that
detailed explanation of the Limbaugh 99 percent lie.
Brawny
> Brawny wrote:
> > On Dec 23, 2:35 pm, George Grapman <sfgeo...@paccbell.net> wrote:
> >> Brawny wrote:
>
>Not successful people, just frauds. By the way thanks for that
>detailed explanation of the Limbaugh 99 percent lie.
Oh...now..............stop!! I have never given any "detailed
explanatnion" of Mr. Limbaugh's success.
George...when you have a three hour radio show on 600 plus stations,
maybe someone might listen to your thoughts. Right now...being
small, petty and tacky, will always keep you in your present state.
A fraud has a very short lifetime. Over 18 years of success is
hardly a "short lifetime". I doubt that you will be able to
contribute anything useful to this small forum in ten years, let alone
20. Besides, who really cares what you think? You are becoming an
OLD TIRED actress.
Best to you and yours.
George Grapman
> On Dec 23, 6:11 pm, George Grapman <sfgeo...@paccbell.net> wrote:
>> Brawny wrote:
>>> On Dec 23, 2:35 pm, George Grapman <sfgeo...@paccbell.net> wrote:
>>>> Brawny wrote:
>> Not successful people, just frauds. By the way thanks for that
>> detailed explanation of the Limbaugh 99 percent lie.
>
> Oh...now..............stop!! I have never given any "detailed
> explanatnion" of Mr. Limbaugh's success.
>
> George...when you have a three hour radio show on 600 plus stations,
> maybe someone might listen to your thoughts. Right now...being
> small, petty and tacky, will always keep you in your present state.
He fact that he has so many listeners is as much proof of his accuracy
as the fact that McDonald's selling more meals than an y other chain
reflects of their quality.
>
> A fraud has a very short lifetime. Over 18 years of success is
> hardly a "short lifetime". I doubt that you will be able to
> contribute anything useful to this small forum in ten years, let alone
> 20. Besides, who really cares what you think? You are becoming an
> OLD TIRED actress.
See above comments on McDonald's.
By the way, you cared enough to reply.
George Grapman
> On Dec 23, 6:11 pm, George Grapman <sfgeo...@paccbell.net> wrote:
>> Brawny wrote:
>>> On Dec 23, 2:35 pm, George Grapman <sfgeo...@paccbell.net> wrote:
>>>> Brawny wrote:
>> Not successful people, just frauds. By the way thanks for that
>> detailed explanation of the Limbaugh 99 percent lie.
>
> Oh...now..............stop!! I have never given any "detailed
> explanatnion" of Mr. Limbaugh's success.
>
> George...when you have a three hour radio show on 600 plus stations,
> maybe someone might listen to your thoughts. Right now...being
> small, petty and tacky, will always keep you in your present state.
>
> A fraud has a very short lifetime.
How long has National Enquirer been around?
How many years was Jean Dixon a success?
clams_casino
>On Dec 23, 6:11 pm, George Grapman <sfgeo...@paccbell.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Brawny wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Dec 23, 2:35 pm, George Grapman <sfgeo...@paccbell.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Brawny wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>Not successful people, just frauds. By the way thanks for that
>>detailed explanation of the Limbaugh 99 percent lie.
>>
>>
>
>Oh...now..............stop!! I have never given any "detailed
>explanatnion" of Mr. Limbaugh's success.
>
>George...when you have a three hour radio show on 600 plus stations,
>maybe someone might listen to your thoughts.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
So Rush is the MSM?
Melinda Meahan - take out TRASH to reply
He is an entertainer (a conservative Letterman-type), not a news reporter
Melinda, ultra-conservative who does *not* like Rush Limbaugh because he
lampoons those with ideologies contrary to his
--
Every job is a self-portrait of the person who does it. Autograph your
work with excellence.
The Real Bev
> Anybody who sees Rush Limbaugh as a news reporter needs a reality check.
> He is an entertainer (a conservative Letterman-type), not a news reporter
Funny is good. We need more funny. LOTS more funny.
> Melinda, ultra-conservative who does *not* like Rush Limbaugh because he
> lampoons those with ideologies contrary to his
Come on, who among us does not?
What bothered me about him is that the people he hires to check facts
make mistakes, allowing him to make public mistakes. He was also
espousing some homeopathic medicine, and I'm pretty sure he didn't know
what that meant either -- gotta be careful about whom you allow to
sponsor you.
--
Cheers, Bev
xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoo
"There are only two reasons to sit in the back row of an airplane:
Either you have diarrhoea, or you're anxious to meet people who do."
-- Rich Jeni
Jon v Leipzig
>> completely. It's all just one sided.
> since you know that already why do you listen to his show? I know that
> the NY Times is a slanted leftist propaganda tool, I don't read it.
"[I] never saw a foreign intervention that the [New York] Times did not
support, never saw a fare increase or a rent increase or a utility rate
increase that it did not endorse, never saw it take the side of labor in
a strike or lockout, or advocate a raise for underpaid workers. And
don't let me get started on universal health care and Social Security.
So why do people think the Times is liberal?"
~veteran New York Times reporter John Hess
Jon v Leipzig
> Melinda Meahan - take out TRASH to reply wrote:
>
>> Anybody who sees Rush Limbaugh as a news reporter needs a reality
>> check. He is an entertainer (a conservative Letterman-type), not a
>> news reporter
>
> Funny is good. We need more funny. LOTS more funny.
>
>> Melinda, ultra-conservative who does *not* like Rush Limbaugh because
>> he lampoons those with ideologies contrary to his
>
> Come on, who among us does not?
>
and sent off to re-edu camps.
Even if he were a news reporter, there's no requirement to report the
whole news.
George Grapman
Iraq?
The Real Bev
> The Real Bev wrote:
>> Melinda Meahan - take out TRASH to reply wrote:
>>
>>> Anybody who sees Rush Limbaugh as a news reporter needs a reality
>>> check. He is an entertainer (a conservative Letterman-type), not a
>>> news reporter
>>
>> Funny is good. We need more funny. LOTS more funny.
>>
>>> Melinda, ultra-conservative who does *not* like Rush Limbaugh because
>>> he lampoons those with ideologies contrary to his
>>
>> Come on, who among us does not?
>>
> Me. I think ideologically misguided peeps should be tazed, waterboarded,
> and sent off to re-edu camps.
So do I, but there aren't enough concentration camps to hold them all;
let's just kill them all and let god sort 'em out. If you need help
identifying them, just give me a call...
I meant "Who among us does not make fun of people who think things that
we find ridiculous?" You have a right to believe stuff that's patently
silly and I have a right to laugh at you. It may be rude, but so what?
Do you really care if you hurt Limbaugh's feelings?
> Even if he were a news reporter, there's no requirement to report the
> whole news.
Not even REAL news reporters do that. They frequently don't even report
small bits of it or don't get what they do report right. OTOH, their
makeup is perfect.
>> What bothered me about him is that the people he hires to check facts
>> make mistakes, allowing him to make public mistakes. He was also
>> espousing some homeopathic medicine, and I'm pretty sure he didn't know
>> what that meant either -- gotta be careful about whom you allow to
>> sponsor you.
Ditto. Oh, wait...
--
Cheers,
Bev
_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_|-_
When you stop bitching, you start dying.
Nicik Name
"jdoe" <jd...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:b4kqm39nqv1i63qp8...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 11:57:28 -0500, jl <j...@nowhereszville.biz> wrote:
>
>>Limbaugh is a total blithering idiot. He never analyzes an issue
>>completely. It's all just one sided.
> since you know that already why do you listen to his show? I know that
> the NY Times is a slanted leftist propaganda tool, I don't read it.
NEWS BY THIS VERY DANGEROUS MAN IS NOT.
Nicik Name
> itself to being an unraised news operation, guys like limbaugh are not
> news dissemination services, they are commentators who inject their
> opinions into the daily news stories, back to your puppy chow, foolish
> one
Problem is Ditto Heads think they are getting real news from Limbaugh.
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-libmedia.htm
Steve
>>> since you know that already why do you listen to his show? I know that
>>> the NY Times is a slanted leftist propaganda tool, I don't read it.
>>
>> "[I] never saw a foreign intervention that the [New York] Times did not
>> support, never saw a fare increase or a rent increase or a utility rate
>> increase that it did not endorse, never saw it take the side of labor in
>> a strike or lockout, or advocate a raise for underpaid workers. And
>> don't let me get started on universal health care and Social Security.
>> So why do people think the Times is liberal?"
>> ~veteran New York Times reporter John Hess
> Are you aware that both the Times and Judith Miller supported invading
>Iraq?
And your point is?
--
He trusted neither of them as far as he could spit,
and he was a poor spitter,
lacking both distance and control.
...P.G. Wodehouse
George Grapman
> "jdoe" <jd...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:qnn0n3t4331c4dovu...@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 20:36:47 -0500, "Nicik Name"
>> <orb...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "jdoe" <jd...@aol.com> wrote in message
>>> news:b4kqm39nqv1i63qp8...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 11:57:28 -0500, jl <j...@nowhereszville.biz> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Limbaugh is a total blithering idiot. He never analyzes an issue
>>>>> completely. It's all just one sided.
>>>> since you know that already why do you listen to his show? I know that
>>>> the NY Times is a slanted leftist propaganda tool, I don't read it.
>>> Chloroformed by Limbaugh for the past 18 years Fido?
>>> NEWS BY THIS VERY DANGEROUS MAN IS NOT.
>>>
>> what fools like you don't seem to grasp is that the NY Times purports
>> itself to being an unraised news operation, guys like limbaugh are not
>> news dissemination services, they are commentators who inject their
>> opinions into the daily news stories, back to your puppy chow, foolish
>> one
> Problem is Ditto Heads think they are getting real news from Limbaugh.
> http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-libmedia.htm
>
>
what appears to be a lie,i.e' says media ignored a story when ,in fact,
it was on page one, I post a Limbaugh lie of the day on
alt.fan.rush-imbaugh. The dittohead replies are:
Prove he said it.
After the transcript is posted they say it was taken out of context.
Where do you find the time to listen?
He is just an entertainer.
Wonder hoe many of his fans have considered that fact that when the
listened and nodded their heads in agreement he was stoned on oxy.
George Grapman
> George Grapman <sfge...@paccbell.net> wrote:
>>>> since you know that already why do you listen to his show? I know that
>>>> the NY Times is a slanted leftist propaganda tool, I don't read it.
>>> "[I] never saw a foreign intervention that the [New York] Times did not
>>> support, never saw a fare increase or a rent increase or a utility rate
>>> increase that it did not endorse, never saw it take the side of labor in
>>> a strike or lockout, or advocate a raise for underpaid workers. And
>>> don't let me get started on universal health care and Social Security.
>>> So why do people think the Times is liberal?"
>>> ~veteran New York Times reporter John Hess
>
>> Are you aware that both the Times and Judith Miller supported invading
>> Iraq?
>
> And your point is?
>
>
the invasion.
Limbaugh, who regularly attacks the Times, admitted that he never
reads it and rarely looks at their website.
Snowbound
Steve <h...@wsx.inv> wrote:
> George Grapman <sfge...@paccbell.net> wrote:
<snip>
> > Are you aware that both the Times and Judith Miller supported invading
> >Iraq?
>
> And your point is?
The point is, if the "media" doesn't fearlessly do everything it
possibly can to reveal to us the hypocrisy of our leaders and our power
brokers; to magnify their weaknesses, to uncover and undermine their
deceits, and in short, to shine highly critical light upon every one of
them from every possible perspective, then the media are not the fourth
estate. They are simply the mouthpiece of the government. Period.
Without exception, every time the media praises anything, it is not
doing its job, which is to keep the public informed. It is merely
advertising.
That is the point. It is the point of freedom of the press. Freedom of
the press does not exist so that Fox News or the NYT can lie to succor
their respective partisan mobs.
If George W. Bush has done anything right (albeit certainly not by
intent), it has been to starkly reveal what cowards and brown-nosed
parasites control the "MSM" in the United States today. The U.S. media
has fed public fears for so long, it has begun to believe its own
stupid, poorly-written horror stories. What the media *really* fear is
loss of access, loss of revenue, and loss of market share. In that
order. So, we get "happy news", "scary news", and "entertaining news"
regardless of what is really happening. Americans do not get news of any
particular long-term or historical significance anymore because they
don't want it. All they get is entertainment and its ever-present
attendant: deluded ignorance sufficient to think they are getting real
news.
During the OJ trial, I wrote to a reporter at a major newspaper that all
the round-the-clock coverage made the media look like a bunch of
vampires. Unbelievably, he responded that the right of the people to
bathe daily in Nicole Simpson's and Ron Goldman's blood was inviolable.
I now think the word "parasite" is more appropriate since "vampire"
implies a once intelligent, thinking, feeling human being.
All of us would get consistently better and more accurate news about our
own nation by monitoring Al Jazeerah reports than from any of the
so-called "news" outlets available in the U.S.
Brawny
>
> > Even if he were a news reporter, there's no requirement to report the
> > whole news.
>
> Not even REAL news reporters do that. They frequently don't even report
> small bits of it or don't get what they do report right. OTOH, their
> makeup is perfect.
"OH. Miss Couric....your scarf doesn't match your eyes tonight.
Let's try the other one...and can you show some more of those
gams.... "
(what a journalistic bimbo!)....and she isn't even entertaining.
Nicik Name
> things, your prejudices are as bad as anyone else's
read the blue fool above"?
> __________________________________________
> Never argue with an idiot.
> They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
Stormin Mormon
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
"jl" <j...@nowhereszville.biz> wrote in message
news:1198341...@sp12lax.superfeed.net...