Dr. Laura & Howard
HowardFan
for distributing Dr. Laura. He not only urged them to drop
the planned TV show, but also urged all gay employees of
Paramount (which he and others in the media such as the
"Los Angeles Times" say is a sizable number) to "raise up"
and force Paramount to cancel Dr. Laura. He also said this
must be done to "stop Dr. Laura from spreading her hate".
How is this consistent with Howard's supposedly militant
advocacy of FreeSpeech? Is he not doing to Dr. Laura what
some people have done to him or tried to do? If Dr. Laura
can be canceled for what she says-actually what she has
said in the past- then why shouldn't CBS and "E!" cancel
Howard?
BTW, if you have not listened to Dr. Laura, she's an
orthodox Jew.
Christian Hancock
about their opponent's position in the process. So what else is new?
C. Hancock
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
treg
<ccmro...@att.net> wrote:
>In article <8aoa80$ahk$1...@clematis.singnet.com.sg>,
>"HowardFan" <howa...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
>> On Howard's 3/14/2000 show he exploded on Paramount
>> for distributing Dr. Laura. He not only urged them to drop
>> the planned TV show, but also urged all gay employees of
>> Paramount (which he and others in the media such as the
>> "Los Angeles Times" say is a sizable number) to "raise up"
>> and force Paramount to cancel Dr. Laura. He also said this
>> must be done to "stop Dr. Laura from spreading her hate".
>> How is this consistent with Howard's supposedly militant
>> advocacy of FreeSpeech?
>C. Hancock
Howard has pretty much had sole possession of the hate spewing market
lately, with the exception of Limbaugh but nobody takes him seriously
anymore. Howard is probably upset that Dr. L. might cut into his
monopoly.
Ray Arthur
Jeff Bond
I enjoy the film music of all three! Let's hope they keep composing!
Ben McSwain
> monopoly.
>
> Ray Arthur
Bingo! It's all about cash. Of course, he probably does actually feel
that way about Laura, and I must say I think she's a moron, and whatever
institution awarded her the title of Doctor must be totally humiliated.
However, HOward is the perfect example of liberal idiots. Screamin' free
speech - until, of course, it offends them or goes against their idea.
Got to Hell howard.
--
Ben McSwain
Excel IR
Thomas Clement
This November. But why no mention of McCain? Didn't Al Gore blatantly
rip of McCain's score to The Reformers?
Jeff Bond
Don't forget they're also all lazy and smelly. I also suspect that
they're diluting our pure Aryan blood.
Mike McCleary
Ben McSwain wrote:
> > Howard is probably upset that Dr. L. might cut into his
> > monopoly.
> >
> > Ray Arthur
>
> Bingo! It's all about cash. Of course, he probably does actually feel
> that way about Laura, and I must say I think she's a moron, and whatever
> institution awarded her the title of Doctor must be totally humiliated.
> However, HOward is the perfect example of liberal idiots. Screamin' free
> speech - until, of course, it offends them or goes against their idea.
Have you actually listened to Dr. Laura? or are you just borrowing the knee
jerk response from the left. She's actually quite good, and very common sense
based.
Mike
th...@my-deja.com
jeff...@earthlink.net wrote:
> > Bingo! It's all about cash. Of course, he probably does actually
feel
> > that way about Laura, and I must say I think she's a moron, and
whatever
> > institution awarded her the title of Doctor must be totally
humiliated.
> > However, HOward is the perfect example of liberal idiots. Screamin'
free
> > speech - until, of course, it offends them or goes against their
idea.
Of course, then there is the fact of the number of conservative
religious groups that whine about other religious groups getting
recognition-saying they shouldn't be allowed to worship-there was the
case of wiccan military folk wanting to have their ceremonies on
military land, and Christian groups were appalled and fought it. But
question Christian's right to have chaplains-and suddenly our country
is all about freedom of religion. Liberal, conservative...when it
comes to activists, they are all the same.
Scott
>
> Have you actually listened to Dr. Laura? or are you just borrowing the knee
> jerk response from the left. She's actually quite good, and very common sense
> based.
ROTFLMAO! She's a sick woman.
Jeff Bond
Before I get blamed for this, I did not write the quote attributed to me
above...
ragar
"Thomas Clement" <tho...@nowtranslations.comspamless> wrote in message
news:160320001045278048%tho...@nowtranslations.comspamless...
> I agree, especially, Limbaugh and his score for I Know How You'll Vote
> This November. But why no mention of McCain? Didn't Al Gore blatantly
> rip of McCain's score to The Reformers?
Rush isn't much of a movie guy...Although Paul Shanklin who does the musical
parodies and impressions on his
show is up there with The Capitol Steps as the best
in the political satire business.
And sometimes both use movie music....
Knew I'd get it back on topic.
Gary
(When I wasn't doing theatre or playing bassoon and drums in band, I got
this Poli Sci degree thingee. So I break up my score listening by getting a
Rush fix almost daily.)
Ben McSwain
Jeff Bond wrote:
>
>
> Don't forget they're also all lazy and smelly. I also suspect that
> they're diluting our pure Aryan blood.
You should be sure to let everyone know this is your statement, and is in no
way associated with mine.
--
Ben McSwain
Excel Managing Representative
Interested in a free Dell computer?
http://www.excelir.com/BamaBen
Look at the "Opportunity"
Email me with questions!
Ben McSwain
>
> Of course, then there is the fact of the number of conservative
> religious groups that whine about other religious groups getting
> recognition-saying they shouldn't be allowed to worship-there was the
> case of wiccan military folk wanting to have their ceremonies on
> military land, and Christian groups were appalled and fought it. But
> question Christian's right to have chaplains-and suddenly our country
> is all about freedom of religion. Liberal, conservative...when it
> comes to activists, they are all the same.
Are you in the military? If not, I strongly suggest you refrain from
casting judgement upon what is right and wrong as far as the military
community goes. If so, that is your opinion and you are entitled to it.
Also, don't assume because CNN told you so that all opposition was
Christian.
As far as activists go, I agree. Can't stand any of them.
Ben McSwain
> Before I get blamed for this, I did not write the quote attributed to me
> above...
So, why no disclaimer to my post regarding your disgusting reference to
"ruining Aryan blood"?
Chris Olin
>
>
> Howard has pretty much had sole possession of the hate spewing market
> lately, with the exception of Limbaugh but nobody takes him seriously
> anymore. Howard is probably upset that Dr. L. might cut into his
> monopoly.
>
> Ray Arthur
(I'm going to regret jumping into this sooner or latter)
What exactly has Rush or Dr Laura ever said that would constitute
"spewing hate"?
Chris
Christian Hancock
you can understand someone like her. Otherwise, I guess she would come
across as judgemental.
And as far as the typical responses of what she's done in her past,
again revealing the ignorance of her accusers, she never has validated
her past behavior. It is precisely to help other women (and men) avoid
making the stupid choices she used to that she's doing what she does.
But, of course, if you don't listen to her, and worse yet, you form your
main opinion of her from the mainstream media, then you wouldn't have a
clue.
C. H.
DrEldon
DrE...@aol.com
Jaquandor
>Scott <westsi...@yahoo.USPAMBACKcom> wrote:
>> Mike McCleary wrote:
>> >
>> > Have you actually listened to Dr. Laura? or are you just borrowing
>the knee
>> > jerk response from the left. She's actually quite good, and very
>common sense
>> > based.
>>
>> ROTFLMAO! She's a sick woman.
>>
>Well, you see, you actually have to care about right and wrong before
>you can understand someone like her. Otherwise, I guess she would come
>across as judgemental.
Or, perhaps you just have to be suspicious of all the self-appointed moral
guardians around. But then, people who don't agree with Dr. Laura or her
opinions obviously must be immoral whackos, since clearly Dr. Laura's idea of
morality is the only possible morality.
>And as far as the typical responses of what she's done in her past,
>again revealing the ignorance of her accusers, she never has validated
>her past behavior. It is precisely to help other women (and men) avoid
>making the stupid choices she used to that she's doing what she does.
>But, of course, if you don't listen to her, and worse yet, you form your
>main opinion of her from the mainstream media, then you wouldn't have a
>clue.
Hmmmm. On the occasions that I have listened to her, I have not heard one iota
of argument framed as "This is what I did, this is the mistake I made". All I
have ever heard is moral condemnation; the only referencing of her own mistakes
has taken place when they have been dug up by various muckrakers. Granted,
perhaps I haven't listened enough; but I really have no intention of finding
out. She and Bill Bennett can wax poetic about the days of good ol' morality
all they want, as long as they accept the fact that neither they nor any of
their ilk is even a blip on my radar. (Neither is Howard Stern, Don Imus, or
just about anyone else.)
Oh, and before I forget, stop the crossposting.
Thus say I, and sayeth I no more.
-J
David Murray (SG Fan)
Jeff Bond wrote in message <38D15B...@earthlink.net>...
>> jeff...@earthlink.net wrote:
>> > > Bingo! It's all about cash. Of course, he probably does actually
>Before I get blamed for this, I did not write the quote attributed to me
>above...
We know. We can count to four.
David Murray / dbmu...@deletethis.rfci.net
http://rfci.net/dbmurray
http://www.musicscribe.com
Making hay while the sun shines.
Scott
> Scott wrote:
> > ROTFLMAO! She's a sick woman.
> >
> Well, you see, you actually have to care about right and wrong before
> you can understand someone like her.
I understand her fine--she's a sicko.
Jaquandor
>> Before I get blamed for this, I did not write the quote attributed to me
>> above...
>
>"ruining Aryan blood"?
Because in said "disgusting reference" he was making a joke. Lighten up.
DrEldon
the "Aryan" reference was a JOKE. Get a life, and get outta here.
Dr "The Jew" Eldon
DrE...@aol.com
Roger Espel Llima
Ben McSwain <bmcs...@excelonline.com> wrote:
>Are you in the military? If not, I strongly suggest you refrain from
>casting judgement upon what is right and wrong as far as the military
>community goes.
Are you a drug traficker? If not, I strongly suggest you refrain from
casting judgment upon what is right and wrong as far as the drug
traficking community goes.
Err, wait, that doesn't sound right does it?
>Also, don't assume because CNN told you so that all opposition was
>Christian.
So tell us more.
np: Piero Milesi, _Modi_
--
Roger Espel Llima, es...@iagora.net
http://www.iagora.com/~espel/index.html
th...@my-deja.com
> > religious groups that whine about other religious groups getting
> > recognition-saying they shouldn't be allowed to worship-there was
the
> > case of wiccan military folk wanting to have their ceremonies on
> > military land, and Christian groups were appalled and fought it. But
> > question Christian's right to have chaplains-and suddenly our
country
> > is all about freedom of religion. Liberal, conservative...when it
> > comes to activists, they are all the same.
>
> casting judgement upon what is right and wrong as far as the military
> community goes.
No offense...but I can't believe you said that...it's a ridiculous
argument...made FURTHER ridiculous by the fact that I did NOT cast
judgement ON the military.
>If so, that is your opinion and you are entitled to it.
WHAT OPINION?! I didn't say anything either way. All I said is some
groups opposed another group-but if you reverse it-they want tolerance.
> Also, don't assume because CNN told you so that all opposition was
> Christian.
Don't assume I got the info from CNN...
You missed the point of the above. I was simply pointing out that
people were speaking as if the hypocrisy fell on the liberal side of
activism. I was pointing out that it does not. That's all.
CountV
Usenet, for all the world to see, the following:
> Well, you see, you actually have to care about right and wrong before
> you can understand someone like her. Otherwise, I guess she would come
> across as judgemental.
You know, that just might make my sig file in all its intensely
self-delusional glory.
--
CountV/John T
"Any PC built after 1985 has the storage capacity to house an evil
spirit." - Reverend Jim Peasboro
Design by Coercion - http://www.m-ideas.com/coercion/index.htm
New: John's World - http://www.m-ideas.com/jw/index.htm
Thomas Clement
<rag...@ameritech.net> wrote:
You are on track, sir. I thank you.
To try to tie movie music and talk show hosts even closer, Dennis
Prager (KABC in La La Land and probably elsewhere) has just gotten
"turned on" to film music. I'd also be surprised if Rush didn't like
film music as he's quite the eclectic (gave Chip Davis a big boost,
among others) and, heck, he is a fellow Mac user.
Ever notice that those people who are supposed to be espousing hate
aren't but the people who accuse them of it are? Quite the conundrum
Craig Franck
In article <8aoa80$ahk$1...@clematis.singnet.com.sg>,
"HowardFan" <howa...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> On Howard's 3/14/2000 show he exploded on Paramount
> for distributing Dr. Laura. He not only urged them to drop
> the planned TV show, but also urged all gay employees of
> Paramount (which he and others in the media such as the
> "Los Angeles Times" say is a sizable number) to "raise up"
> and force Paramount to cancel Dr. Laura. He also said this
> must be done to "stop Dr. Laura from spreading her hate".
> How is this consistent with Howard's supposedly militant
> some people have done to him or tried to do? If Dr. Laura
> can be canceled for what she says-actually what she has
> said in the past- then why shouldn't CBS and "E!" cancel
> Howard?
It's not just a free speech issue. Since it's the *Dr.* Laura
show, there is the possibility that she is incompetent, while
Stern can only be bad at what he does. Also, people who moralize
to the degree she does are typically held to higher a standard
because they take it upon themselves to be so preachy. Howard
is mostly goofing off while Dr. Laura is supposedly dispensing
sober considered opinion, so you're really comparing apples and
oranges.
As much as I despise her, I think if she drops the misleading
doctor and admits to being just a moral elitist she should be
allowed to stay, and there is nothing wrong calling on her to
justify her opinions.
--
Craig
clfr...@worldnet.att.net
Manchester, NH
Everyone hears only what he understands. -- Goethe
Craig Franck
> Well, you see, you actually have to care about right and wrong before
> you can understand someone like her.
Translation: You need to have the same prejudices in order to
think like she does.
> Otherwise, I guess she would come
> across as judgemental.
Or just annoying.
Jeff Bond
>
> In article <zlgA4.576$XF.1...@nntp0.detroit.mi.ameritech.net>, ragar
> <rag...@ameritech.net> wrote:
>
> You are on track, sir. I thank you.
>
> To try to tie movie music and talk show hosts even closer, Dennis
> Prager (KABC in La La Land and probably elsewhere) has just gotten
> "turned on" to film music. I'd also be surprised if Rush didn't like
> film music as he's quite the eclectic (gave Chip Davis a big boost,
> among others) and, heck, he is a fellow Mac user.
>
> Ever notice that those people who are supposed to be espousing hate
> aren't but the people who accuse them of it are? Quite the conundrum
I just always notice sweeping generalizations. For instance, we all know
that all liberals lie and distort, while all conservatives only tell
God's own truth. Given that, what's the sense in arguing any political
point? It can all be broken down quite simply. Liberals = dirty, Commie,
lying scum. Conservatives = sweetness, light and truth. End of story.
Ben McSwain
th...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <38D1A28F...@excelonline.com>,
> Ben McSwain <bmcs...@excelonline.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Of course, then there is the fact of the number of conservative
> > > religious groups that whine about other religious groups getting
> > > recognition-saying they shouldn't be allowed to worship-there was
> the
> > > case of wiccan military folk wanting to have their ceremonies on
> > > military land, and Christian groups were appalled and fought it. But
> > > question Christian's right to have chaplains-and suddenly our
> country
> > > is all about freedom of religion. Liberal, conservative...when it
> > > comes to activists, they are all the same.
> >
> > Are you in the military? If not, I strongly suggest you refrain from
> > casting judgement upon what is right and wrong as far as the military
> > community goes.
>
> No offense...but I can't believe you said that...it's a ridiculous
> argument...made FURTHER ridiculous by the fact that I did NOT cast
> judgement ON the military.
The way your post reads seems to blame *military* servicepeople of the
Christian faith. Newsgroups suck.
>
>
> >If so, that is your opinion and you are entitled to it.
>
> WHAT OPINION?! I didn't say anything either way. All I said is some
> groups opposed another group-but if you reverse it-they want tolerance.
>
> > Also, don't assume because CNN told you so that all opposition was
> > Christian.
>
> Don't assume I got the info from CNN...
It was meant as a general statement regarding our "free" media. (And don't
read any conspiracy threories into that.)
>
>
> You missed the point of the above. I was simply pointing out that
> people were speaking as if the hypocrisy fell on the liberal side of
> activism. I was pointing out that it does not. That's all.
In that case, I agree. Liberal activits just seem to get all the publicity,
not to mention they are activists about some pretty whacko things. (Don't
ask me to elaborate, I don't have the time or desire to open that can of
worms.)
Ben McSwain
> Go back to Canada, ya fuckin' hippie!
Although not very popular to our Canadian friends - I find this very funny.
>
>
> --
> "Yesdick post about the 1980 Yes album Drama: 'pansy boy' refers to bassist
> Chris Squire, 'Howe' is guitarist Steve Howe, 'Horn' is replacement vocalist
> Trevor Horn, 'fag' refers to regular singer Jon Anderson."- Axel Bruns
> provides a thumbnail guide to Yes members past and present
Thomas Clement
> > aren't but the people who accuse them of it are? Quite the conundrum
>
> I just always notice sweeping generalizations. For instance, we all know
> that all liberals lie and distort, while all conservatives only tell
> God's own truth. Given that, what's the sense in arguing any political
> point? It can all be broken down quite simply. Liberals = dirty, Commie,
> lying scum. Conservatives = sweetness, light and truth. End of story.
Used to be that liberals (generalization coming) proclaimed: "I may
disagree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death for your
freedom to say it." This has morphed into "I disagree with what you say
(even though I've never really listened to it) and I'll fight till
you're dead to keep you from saying it."
And a Happy Hate Day to all!
Jaquandor
Hmmmmm. I guess it must have been the liberals, then, who worked to get ABC
affiliates to not broadcast "NYPD Blue" when it began seven seasons ago. It
must be the liberals who are doing the same with the current show "God, the
Devil, and Bob". And no doubt it's the liberals who tried to organize massive
boycotts of Disney when that organization extended health benefits to the
partners of its homosexual employees. Obviously the liberals have been busy
introducing legislation to require public libraries to install Internet
filters. And when they weren't busy doing that, they were turning out at movie
theaters to protest films like "The Last Temptation of Christ". With all that
liberal activity, how could they have time to protest a group of Wiccans
practicing on military bases? I don't know, but somehow they found the time.
There is more than enough "freedom of speech" hypocricy to go around; your
attempts to lay it all at the feet of "the liberals" are, at best,
disingenuous.
JJ Hinrichs
I didn't have much of a problem with her liberalness (is that a word?), but
with the way she would not tolerate my views on things, yet proclaim that I
HAD to see her view on politics, etc.
Liberals want you to see all points of view, but don't you dare show them an
alternative that challenges them philosophically and intellectually.
It galled her to think that I could see both sides of an issue and not be like
her in every way.
THEN when she found out I am a Christian.....boy did the name calling begin!
And *I'm* supposed to be judgmental and intolerant? sheesh....
JJ
Thomas Clement wrote:
> > > Ever notice that those people who are supposed to be espousing hate
> > > aren't but the people who accuse them of it are? Quite the conundrum
> >
> > I just always notice sweeping generalizations. For instance, we all know
> > that all liberals lie and distort, while all conservatives only tell
> > God's own truth. Given that, what's the sense in arguing any political
> > point? It can all be broken down quite simply. Liberals = dirty, Commie,
> > lying scum. Conservatives = sweetness, light and truth. End of story.
>
> Used to be that liberals (generalization coming) proclaimed: "I may
> disagree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death for your
> freedom to say it." This has morphed into "I disagree with what you say
> (even though I've never really listened to it) and I'll fight till
> you're dead to keep you from saying it."
>
Thomas Clement
I was only talking "generalization" about liberals (even used the word)
but since you're using specifics, here goes:
I don't remember NYPD Blue having any problems, so can't comment
(although by not commenting, am I not really making a comment, and if
so, can't we all be brothers?).
Boycotting of Disney was done by some, but not all Christians who
didn't like the idea of a family-centered company from which they buy
products, legitimizing a behavior considered Biblically unacceptable
(Old/New Testament, it ain't hard to miss). This can only mean that
they HATE gays, right? Wrong. That's like saying that if someone
doesn't like brussel sprouts, he's against food. Accusing people of
hating, even when untrue, is an easy way to get those people (and folks
like Dr. Laura) H-A-T-E-D. Here's the equation: accuse someone or some
group of hate, then hate them, all without nagging logic or guilt. It's
fun!
Never saw Last Temptation of Christ, but certainly read everything I
could about the controversy. While Scorsese can make whatever he wants
people have a right to non-violently react anyway they want. Isn't that
what happened? Yup. But it left a bad, eternal taste in the mouths of
"some." Which "some"? Why, the "some" who hate Christians who don't
agree with them, naturally.
NOTE: after seeing Casino, I've come to the conclusion that Scorsese is
sick in the head -- just my opinion (loved King of Comedy, though!).
The Wiccan Religion (excuse me while I stop laughing) is another
pre-packaged, new-aged, foo-foo fad that gives a few something to
believe in with the added bonus of being a pariah that needs equal
rights! Oh, and don't tell me there is a long line of Wiccan heritage
going back 1,500 years or to the first McDonald's franchise, because
that pig don't fly.
God, the Devil, and Bob? Saw it. Liked it. Hope to see it again (oh
darned, they're going to take my Lock-Step Conservative Toady Card).
Course, don't go buy me, I liked the PJs.
And finally, remember this: If cats are out-lawed, only outlaws will
have cats.
> Thomas Clement spaketh:
>
> >> > Ever notice that those people who are supposed to be espousing hate
> >> > aren't but the people who accuse them of it are? Quite the conundrum
> >>
> >> I just always notice sweeping generalizations. For instance, we all know
> >> that all liberals lie and distort, while all conservatives only tell
> >> God's own truth. Given that, what's the sense in arguing any political
> >> point? It can all be broken down quite simply. Liberals = dirty, Commie,
> >> lying scum. Conservatives = sweetness, light and truth. End of story.
> >
> >Used to be that liberals (generalization coming) proclaimed: "I may
> >disagree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death for your
> >freedom to say it." This has morphed into "I disagree with what you say
> >(even though I've never really listened to it) and I'll fight till
> >you're dead to keep you from saying it."
>
Thomas Clement
are drawn to liberalism in its ugliest vestiges. Thankfully, many
mature out of this or get lives.
I trust your next relationship was more convivial.
In article <38D40B5C...@worldnet.att.net>, JJ Hinrichs
<hinr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> my ex-girlfriend was defiantly liberal, as I am defiantly conservative.
>
> I didn't have much of a problem with her liberalness (is that a word?), but
> with the way she would not tolerate my views on things, yet proclaim that I
> HAD to see her view on politics, etc.
> Liberals want you to see all points of view, but don't you dare show them an
> alternative that challenges them philosophically and intellectually.
> It galled her to think that I could see both sides of an issue and not be like
> her in every way.
>
> THEN when she found out I am a Christian.....boy did the name calling begin!
> And *I'm* supposed to be judgmental and intolerant? sheesh....
>
>
> JJ
>
>
> Thomas Clement wrote:
>
> > > > Ever notice that those people who are supposed to be espousing hate
> > > > aren't but the people who accuse them of it are? Quite the conundrum
> > >
> > > I just always notice sweeping generalizations. For instance, we all know
> > > that all liberals lie and distort, while all conservatives only tell
> > > God's own truth. Given that, what's the sense in arguing any political
> > > point? It can all be broken down quite simply. Liberals = dirty, Commie,
> > > lying scum. Conservatives = sweetness, light and truth. End of story.
> >
> > Used to be that liberals (generalization coming) proclaimed: "I may
> > disagree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death for your
> > freedom to say it." This has morphed into "I disagree with what you say
> > (even though I've never really listened to it) and I'll fight till
> > you're dead to keep you from saying it."
> >
Thomas Arena
last year. I guess he's laughing all the way to the bank. When has he
ever engaged in hate speech? Oh, that's right, anyone who disagrees
with liberals is automatically guilty of it.
treg wrote:
>
> On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 04:52:30 GMT, Christian Hancock
> <ccmro...@att.net> wrote:
>
> >In article <8aoa80$ahk$1...@clematis.singnet.com.sg>,
> >"HowardFan" <howa...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> >> On Howard's 3/14/2000 show he exploded on Paramount
> >> for distributing Dr. Laura. He not only urged them to drop
> >> the planned TV show, but also urged all gay employees of
> >> Paramount (which he and others in the media such as the
> >> "Los Angeles Times" say is a sizable number) to "raise up"
> >> and force Paramount to cancel Dr. Laura. He also said this
> >> must be done to "stop Dr. Laura from spreading her hate".
> >> How is this consistent with Howard's supposedly militant
> >> advocacy of FreeSpeech?
> >C. Hancock
Chris Olin
is not conservative doesn't have a brain"
Author unknown
Chris Olin
Thomas Arena wrote:
> No one takes Rush Limbaugh seriously anymore, yet he made 22 million
> last year. I guess he's laughing all the way to the bank. When has he
> ever engaged in hate speech? Oh, that's right, anyone who disagrees
> with liberals is automatically guilty of it.
>
I wish I could get paid 22 mill for not being taken seriously.
Chris Olin
Thomas Arena wrote:
> No one takes Rush Limbaugh seriously anymore, yet he made 22 million
> last year. I guess he's laughing all the way to the bank. When has he
> ever engaged in hate speech? Oh, that's right, anyone who disagrees
> with liberals is automatically guilty of it.
>
Also note, no one seems to have asnwered my query for an example of
"Spewing hate" From either Rush, or Dr L.
Chris
treg
wrote:
>Ray Arthur wrote:
>No one takes Rush Limbaugh seriously anymore, yet he made 22 million
>last year. I guess he's laughing all the way to the bank. When has he
>ever engaged in hate speech? Oh, that's right, anyone who disagrees
>with liberals is automatically guilty of it.
I apologize, I was wrong. There obviously is still at least one
"dittohead" who still takes Rush seriously!
Ray Arthur
Lord John Whorfin
>
> As much as I despise her, I think if she drops the misleading
> doctor and admits to being just a moral elitist she should be
> allowed to stay, and there is nothing wrong calling on her to
> justify her opinions.
>
their *first* name. Makes me think of the popular exchange on _The
Simpsons_: "Hi, ev'ry-bodee!" "HI, DR. NICK!"
The only people who _might_ be justified in using the Friendly
Authority Figure shtick are pediatricians. Oh, and quacks...
th...@my-deja.com
> The way your post reads seems to blame *military* servicepeople of the
> Christian faith. Newsgroups suck.
No...I don't even recall if anyone on the military side was objecting.
I believe it was certain Christians outside of the military.
> It was meant as a general statement regarding our "free" media. (And
don't
> read any conspiracy threories into that.)
Unfortunately, I haven't found Christian news to be much more reliable
in the overall. They complain a lot about the "liberal bias" of the
media(my problem is that "liberal" doesn't equal evil in my eyes-and
"conservative" don't equal Godly either. "Evil is still evil man-on
the left or on the right."), as if they present some unbiased news.
That's why I take ALL news with a little wariness...
> In that case, I agree. Liberal activits just seem to get all the
publicity,
> not to mention they are activists about some pretty whacko things.
(Don't
> ask me to elaborate, I don't have the time or desire to open that can
of
> worms.)
But worms are fun! And tastey, too! ;^)
Thomas Clement
In article <38D5A891...@ix.netcom.com>, Chris Olin
Lord John Whorfin
>
> "Anyone who is under 30, and not a liberal does have a heart; Anyway over 30 who
> is not conservative doesn't have a brain"
>
> Author unknown
>
Bruce A. Brown
> From: Lord John Whorfin <neme...@iquest.net>
> Organization: Planet Ten, by way of the 8th dimension
> Newsgroups:
> rec.music.christian,rec.music.country.western,rec.music.movies,rec.music.progr
> essive
> Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 12:17:11 -0600
> Subject: Re: Dr. Laura & Howard :Hollywood composers
"Have you lost your mind?!!"
--John Bigbootee
racvb
Lord John Whorfin wrote:
> Chris Olin wrote:
> >
> > "Anyone who is under 30, and not a liberal does have a heart; Anyway over 30 who
> > is not conservative doesn't have a brain"
> >
> > Author unknown
> >
> Author very well known: Winston Churchill
I believe the original quote was from either Lenin, Marx or Trotsky and referred to
Communist vs Capitalist,
then Churchill rephrased it.
Ray Arthur
Jeff Bond
You're all wrong. The quote was originated by Maltuvis of Rigel VII
during that planet's early colonization wars.
Scott
>
> Also note, no one seems to have asnwered my query for an example of
> "Spewing hate" From either Rush, or Dr L.
No one's taking you seriously.
Ethan D. Rogati
It wasn't Ford Prefect or Slartbartifast?
--
e
http://www.geocities.com/ethanic.geo/
Jeff Bond
>
> Chris Olin wrote:
> >
> > Also note, no one seems to have asnwered my query for an example of
> > "Spewing hate" From either Rush, or Dr L.
I believe Dr. L has stated that homosexual men prey on young boys in
disproportionate numbers, when the statistics actually point in quite
the opposite direction--the vast majority of child molesters are
heterosexual. If implying that a particular demographic group is more
likely to prey on your kids is a demonstration of her "fairness and
common sense," I think I'll get my relationship advice elsewhere.
Scott
>
> Good news!
>
> I just heard this on the radio. The homosexual boycott of Dr. Laura
> (whoever she is) is not working. Bravo!
>
> I don't know who Dr. Laura is but if Howard Stern and the perverts don't
> like her, she has to be good.
She is a sicko. Damaged goods. I don't know what you mean by the
boycott "working", but they got her to cancel her appearance here.
Let's see, EP, wasn't it you hypocritically whining about hate groups?
Chris Olin
Actial I figured someone would remeber that, I just didn't know it off the top
of my head....Thankyou...
> It's a paraphrase of Winston Churchill, I believe.
>
> In article <38D5A891...@ix.netcom.com>, Chris Olin
> <cho...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> > "Anyone who is under 30, and not a liberal does have a heart; Anyway over
> > 30 who
> > is not conservative doesn't have a brain"
> >
> > Author unknown
> >
> >
Chris Olin
Ebeneezer Pockawockadopolis wrote:
> Good news!
>
> I just heard this on the radio. The homosexual boycott of Dr. Laura
> (whoever she is) is not working. Bravo!
>
> I don't know who Dr. Laura is but if Howard Stern and the perverts don't
> like her, she has to be good.
>
She is a non-practing theripist with a talk radio show. She is an orthodox
Jew by faith, and advices callers on moral delemas from the presective of the
Jewish ethic. I catch bits and peices of her show from time to time.
An example of "clasic Dr Laura"; A caller describers herself as a 25 year old
college educcated professional, then posses her question;
Caller; I'm wondering if i should have sex with my boyfreind
Dr L; No........Do you have another question or should we move on to the
next caller
Caller; Why?
Dr L; Because it's not a convental relationship
Caller; But he wants to...
At this point Dr L goes into a long lecture about how she (the caller) is
being weak, and needs to grow up.
Althought I have to admitt alot of the questions, and proablems that i brought
to her and really too complex to be correctly delt with via a 10 minute
conversation on the radio, and I do find the basic format questionalable. But I
generally agree with her on the principles she she aspires.
Chris
Chris Olin
Scott wrote:
> Chris Olin wrote:
> >
> > Also note, no one seems to have asnwered my query for an example of
> > "Spewing hate" From either Rush, or Dr L.
>
> No one's taking you seriously.
Then where is my $22 million?
Thomas Arena
> > last year. I guess he's laughing all the way to the bank. When has he
> > ever engaged in hate speech? Oh, that's right, anyone who disagrees
> > with liberals is automatically guilty of it.
> >
>
So do I.
Thomas Arena
> >No one takes Rush Limbaugh seriously anymore, yet he made 22 million
> >last year. I guess he's laughing all the way to the bank. When has he
> >ever engaged in hate speech? Oh, that's right, anyone who disagrees
> >with liberals is automatically guilty of it.
>
> "dittohead" who still takes Rush seriously!
His ratings are as strong as ever, so I can't be the only one. He is
certainly not my only source of political info, just the most
entertaining. I must say that it is his show that helped bring me out of
the lowest point in my life 5 years ago. It was something I could
depend on while battling depression, no matter how low my mood. He
still does a great job supporting the conservative cause. Does he have
the same influence as a few years back? It may have diminished a
little, mostly from so much disinformation about him over the years.
Most of the criticism has come from people who barely, and in most cases
have never listened to his show. Listening out of context could cause
people to get the wrong idea. Still, I see such a hatred by some people
of conservatives of any kind, not just Rush. I don't hate any liberal,
I just disagree with them, same with moderates. I want them to come
join us, we will welcome you with open arms.
Thomas Arena
> > last year. I guess he's laughing all the way to the bank. When has he
> > ever engaged in hate speech? Oh, that's right, anyone who disagrees
> > with liberals is automatically guilty of it.
> >
>
> "Spewing hate" From either Rush, or Dr L.
>
Don't worry, they will find some out of context comment to try and push
their point.
Thomas Arena
Scott wrote:
>
> Chris Olin wrote:
> >
> > Also note, no one seems to have asnwered my query for an example of
> > "Spewing hate" From either Rush, or Dr L.
>
Thomas Arena
are child molestors. But maybe they are a slightly greater risk. It
does not matter, all child molestors should be executed, no matter which
sex they attacked.
Jeff Bond wrote:
>
> Scott wrote:
> >
> > Chris Olin wrote:
> > >
> > > Also note, no one seems to have asnwered my query for an example of
> > > "Spewing hate" From either Rush, or Dr L.
>
Ebeneezer Pockawockadopolis
That left it off the record, that's why you didn't hear it. But it was
there. Believe me, it was there.
Ethan D. Rogati wrote in message <38D69597...@rmi.net>...
>Jeff Bond wrote:
>>
>> racvb wrote:
>> >
>> > Lord John Whorfin wrote:
>> >
>> > > Chris Olin wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > "Anyone who is under 30, and not a liberal does have a heart;
Anyway over 30 who
>> > > > is not conservative doesn't have a brain"
>> > > >
>> > > > Author unknown
>> > > >
Ebeneezer Pockawockadopolis
I just heard this on the radio. The homosexual boycott of Dr. Laura
(whoever she is) is not working. Bravo!
I don't know who Dr. Laura is but if Howard Stern and the perverts don't
like her, she has to be good.
Thomas Arena wrote in message <38D6E12D...@home.com>...
>> > No one takes Rush Limbaugh seriously anymore, yet he made 22 million
>> > last year. I guess he's laughing all the way to the bank. When has he
>> > ever engaged in hate speech? Oh, that's right, anyone who disagrees
>> > with liberals is automatically guilty of it.
>> >
>>
James M. Barry
James M. Barry
"Film is a wonderful place for a composer to practice his art; there, he can be
ignored by a much larger audience."
Lord John Whorfin
> "Have you lost your mind?!!"
> --John Bigbootee
"BigbooTAY-TAY-TAY!"
Lord John Whorfin
>
> Lord John Whorfin wrote:
>
> > Chris Olin wrote:
> > >
> > > "Anyone who is under 30, and not a liberal does have a heart; Anyway over 30 who
> > > is not conservative doesn't have a brain"
> > >
> > > Author unknown
> > >
> > Author very well known: Winston Churchill
>
> I believe the original quote was from either Lenin, Marx or Trotsky and referred to
> Communist vs Capitalist,
> then Churchill rephrased it.
>
is 40 and not a conservative..."
Lord John Whorfin
>
> racvb wrote:
> >
> > Lord John Whorfin wrote:
> >
> > > Chris Olin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Anyone who is under 30, and not a liberal does have a heart; Anyway over 30 who
> > > > is not conservative doesn't have a brain"
> > > >
> > > > Author unknown
> > > >
> > > Author very well known: Winston Churchill
> >
> > I believe the original quote was from either Lenin, Marx or Trotsky and referred to
> > Communist vs Capitalist,
> > then Churchill rephrased it.
> >
>
> You're all wrong. The quote was originated by Maltuvis of Rigel VII
> during that planet's early colonization wars.
Well, if we're going to get into the dicey areas of dodekapylotomy and
thanatippomastixia, Maltuvis copped the line in an altered form (like he
was wont to do) from the Dar-Vl'ibbikh Thrawgh of the great (but now
extinct) Bifrondo clan. Of course the political tides in the days of the
clannish duchies were considerably more extreme, so there were no
accurate translations for terms like "liberal" and "conservative".
Indeed, it was the political affiliation of the Bifrondo that accounts
for their extinction, being supporters of an ideology so xenophobic as
to be solipsistic, in that clan members were usually executed at birth.
treg
wrote:
>> >Ray Arthur wrote:
>> >No one takes Rush Limbaugh seriously anymore, yet he made 22 million
>> >last year. I guess he's laughing all the way to the bank. When has he
>> >ever engaged in hate speech? Oh, that's right, anyone who disagrees
>> >with liberals is automatically guilty of it.
>>
>> I apologize, I was wrong. There obviously is still at least one
>> "dittohead" who still takes Rush seriously!
>
>His ratings are as strong as ever, so I can't be the only one. He is
>certainly not my only source of political info, just the most
>entertaining. I must say that it is his show that helped bring me out of
>the lowest point in my life 5 years ago. It was something I could
>depend on while battling depression, no matter how low my mood. He
>still does a great job supporting the conservative cause. Does he have
>the same influence as a few years back? It may have diminished a
>little, mostly from so much disinformation about him over the years.
>Most of the criticism has come from people who barely, and in most cases
>have never listened to his show. Listening out of context could cause
>people to get the wrong idea. Still, I see such a hatred by some people
>of conservatives of any kind, not just Rush. I don't hate any liberal,
>I just disagree with them, same with moderates. I want them to come
>join us, we will welcome you with open arms.
We're waayyy off topic for this NG but let's get a couple of things
straight. His ratings are about half what they were at his peak. He's
lost 1/3 of his former radio stations. And at the height of his
popularity and influence, 1992, he helped Bill Clinton win the
presidency. I used to listen to him regularly, now only occassionally.
He is an amazing and great radio ENTERTAINER. Anyone contemplating a
career in show business can learn much from him.
As a conservative power, he was and is an empty suit ... just a much
smaller empty suit than a few years ago.
If you want to look up to a conservative, look up to Bill Buckley,
Barry Farber, Alan Simpson, someone with some intelligence and depth.
Limbaugh is nothing but a modern day P. T. Barnum with a barely
working knowledge of supply side economics.
Ray Arthur
Ebeneezer Pockawockadopolis
you support them?
As for your town, are you glad the faggots won? If so, do you love faggots?
Please don't come beat my butt with your karate or taekwondo or whatever it
is.
Scott wrote in message <38D715...@yahoo.USPAMBACKcom>...
>Ebeneezer Pockawockadopolis wrote:
>>
>> Good news!
>>
>> I just heard this on the radio. The homosexual boycott of Dr. Laura
>> (whoever she is) is not working. Bravo!
>>
>> I don't know who Dr. Laura is but if Howard Stern and the perverts don't
>> like her, she has to be good.
>
Ebeneezer Pockawockadopolis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>treg wrote in message about Rush Limbaugh
>Anyone contemplating a
>career in show business can learn much from him.
>
>As a conservative power, he was and is an empty suit ... just a much
>smaller empty suit than a few years ago.
>
Scott
> Scott wrote:
>>Let's see, EP, wasn't it you hypocritically whining about hate groups?
> do you think the KKK should be able to march? If yes, does this mean
> you support them?
> As for your town, are you glad the faggots won? If so, do you love faggots?
I'm just pointing out your hypocrisy. You said you don't think the KKK
should be able to march, and yet you go right ahead in the very next
paragraph and say the same things they do--only you're doing it
worldwide, not down the street. You're a glowing, stellar example of a
hypocrite.
> Please don't come beat my butt with your karate or taekwondo or whatever it
> is.
I doubt if you'd be worth my time.
Christopher J Currie
> No one takes Rush Limbaugh seriously anymore, yet he made 22 million
> last year. I guess he's laughing all the way to the bank. When has he
> ever engaged in hate speech?
At one point, Rush suggested that the "experimental" beliefs of 1960s
America led to the country's moral decay. Among the experimental beliefs
that he cited was "Hinduism".
I'm surprised that no-one's ever called him on that one ...
The Christopher Currie
Nicholas Delonas
> At one point, Rush suggested that the "experimental" beliefs of 1960s
> America led to the country's moral decay. Among the experimental beliefs
> that he cited was "Hinduism".
>
> I'm surprised that no-one's ever called him on that one ...
Hinduism is also mocked a lot in this country. I can't count the number
of times I've heard OM being chanted in comedy skits.
--
Nick Delonas
My band: http://ironia.net
My cult: http://cultv.com
My day job: http://digitalsg.com
Christopher J Currie
> In article <8bbiov$jnh$5...@knot.queensu.ca>, 8c...@qlink.queensu.ca says...
>> At one point, Rush suggested that the "experimental" beliefs of 1960s
>> America led to the country's moral decay. Among the experimental beliefs
>> that he cited was "Hinduism".
>>
>> I'm surprised that no-one's ever called him on that one ...
> Hinduism is also mocked a lot in this country. I can't count the number
> of times I've heard OM being chanted in comedy skits.
Er ... I think that the word "om" had more to do with Buddhism, in its
original meaning.
That said, though, I'm aware of the casual mockery of Eastern religions
which is prevalent in American, um, humour. It just struck me as odd that
Rush could openly insult a major religion, and that no-one would care.
*
Well, actually, I suppose that wouldn't be so surprising *now*. But this
was in 1993/94, when he was actually popular ...
The Christopher Currie
Jeremy S.
Christian Hancock <ccmro...@att.net> wrote:
>In article <8beadl$76o$1...@knot.queensu.ca>,
>Christopher J Currie <8c...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote:
>
>> That said, though, I'm aware of the casual mockery of Eastern
>religions
>> which is prevalent in American, um, humour. It just struck me as odd
>that
>> Rush could openly insult a major religion, and that no-one would care.
>>
>> *
>>
>> Well, actually, I suppose that wouldn't be so surprising *now*. But
>> this was in 1993/94, when he was actually popular ...
>
Unless you have some Arbitron ratings to back that up, you might not want
to throw those claims around.
>(Sheesh, you liberals sure make a lot of sense. It's good to know Rush
>isn't the only one.)
Of course anyone who has anything disparaging to say about Rush Limbaugh
is a liberal. Why am I not surprised?
--Jeremy
le cri d'merlin
to be castrated on the air.
Who would score a movie of Dr Laura?
le cri d'merlin
Thomas Arena wrote:
>
> > Ebeneezer Pockawockadopolis wrote:
> > >
> > > Good news!
> > >
> > > I just heard this on the radio. The homosexual boycott of Dr. Laura
> > > (whoever she is) is not working. Bravo!
> > >
> > > I don't know who Dr. Laura is but if Howard Stern and the perverts don't
> > > like her, she has to be good.
> >
> > She is a sicko. Damaged goods. I don't know what you mean by the
> > boycott "working", but they got her to cancel her appearance here.
> > Let's see, EP, wasn't it you hypocritically whining about hate groups?
>
> Lets see, she sticks up for Judeo-Christian values, so that makes her a
> sicko? I'm so out of touch.
They may be Judeo-Christian values but they're not the ethic of Jesus,
who set everyone free and whose come-lately disciple "Saint Paul"
started closing the windows Jesus had recently opened.
Christian Hancock
> That said, though, I'm aware of the casual mockery of Eastern
religions
> which is prevalent in American, um, humour. It just struck me as odd
that
> Rush could openly insult a major religion, and that no-one would care.
>
> *
>
> Well, actually, I suppose that wouldn't be so surprising *now*. But
this
> was in 1993/94, when he was actually popular ...
Yeah, he's only the most listened to talk show host in America today!
(Sheesh, you liberals sure make a lot of sense. It's good to know Rush
isn't the only one.)
C. Hancock
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Thomas Arena
Thomas Arena
> >> >No one takes Rush Limbaugh seriously anymore, yet he made 22 million
> >> >last year. I guess he's laughing all the way to the bank. When has he
> >> >with liberals is automatically guilty of it.
> >>
> >> I apologize, I was wrong. There obviously is still at least one
> >> "dittohead" who still takes Rush seriously!
> >
> >His ratings are as strong as ever, so I can't be the only one. He is
> >certainly not my only source of political info, just the most
> >entertaining. I must say that it is his show that helped bring me out of
> >the lowest point in my life 5 years ago. It was something I could
> >depend on while battling depression, no matter how low my mood. He
> >still does a great job supporting the conservative cause. Does he have
> >the same influence as a few years back? It may have diminished a
> >little, mostly from so much disinformation about him over the years.
> >Most of the criticism has come from people who barely, and in most cases
> >have never listened to his show. Listening out of context could cause
> >people to get the wrong idea. Still, I see such a hatred by some people
> >of conservatives of any kind, not just Rush. I don't hate any liberal,
> >I just disagree with them, same with moderates. I want them to come
> >join us, we will welcome you with open arms.
>
> We're waayyy off topic for this NG but let's get a couple of things
> straight. His ratings are about half what they were at his peak. He's
> lost 1/3 of his former radio stations. And at the height of his
> popularity and influence, 1992, he helped Bill Clinton win the
> presidency. I used to listen to him regularly, now only occassionally.
> career in show business can learn much from him.
>
> As a conservative power, he was and is an empty suit ... just a much
> smaller empty suit than a few years ago.
>
> Barry Farber, Alan Simpson, someone with some intelligence and depth.
> Limbaugh is nothing but a modern day P. T. Barnum with a barely
> working knowledge of supply side economics.
> Ray Arthur
Lets see, Clinton won in 92 because of Rush Limbaugh? I guess Ross
Perot had nothing to do with it. Clinton only received 43% of the
vote. He then beat an over the hill Dole (who may have run the worst
campaign in history) and still did not get 50% of the vote. I don't
think Rush added or took away any votes at all. No, he just gave more
fuel to the fire of the conservative cause. Its funny that you failed
to mention the Republican takeover of Congress in 94, or the fact that
they have held it two elections since. Did Limbaugh cause that? He may
have influenced a little, but that is really hard to tell. As for his
ratings, I wonder who your source is. He is still on in NY, the number
1 market, and WABC's ratings are doing quite well. I get the feeling
you have never really listened to him, at least not for more than a few
minutes at a time. Take the time out, say an hour a day for three
weeks, it may do you a world of good. Then again, maybe not.
Goodnight.
---Tom---
Thomas Arena
Christopher J Currie wrote:
>
> In rec.music.progressive Nicholas Delonas <del...@cultv.com> wrote:
> > In article <8bbiov$jnh$5...@knot.queensu.ca>, 8c...@qlink.queensu.ca says...
>
> >> At one point, Rush suggested that the "experimental" beliefs of 1960s
> >> America led to the country's moral decay. Among the experimental beliefs
> >> that he cited was "Hinduism".
> >>
> >> I'm surprised that no-one's ever called him on that one ...
>
> > Hinduism is also mocked a lot in this country. I can't count the number
> > of times I've heard OM being chanted in comedy skits.
>
> Er ... I think that the word "om" had more to do with Buddhism, in its
> original meaning.
>
> which is prevalent in American, um, humour. It just struck me as odd that
> Rush could openly insult a major religion, and that no-one would care.
>
> *
>
> Well, actually, I suppose that wouldn't be so surprising *now*. But this
> was in 1993/94, when he was actually popular ...
I love this little ploy of yours, ignore and mock Mr. Limbaugh, and hope
he goes away. I keep hearing comments to the effect of him being
irrelivant and having no influence. Nobody listens to him anymore. No
one takes him seriously. Its so funny hearing his show when all those
seminar callers phone in. You know, the ones who claim to be a longtime
listener and conservative, then bash him for being out of touch, then
procede to list so many liberal ideas throughout their call. They are
very obvious. No one takes him seriously anymore, thats why his name
gets mentioned so many times here in political discussions, and not by
conservatives. Oh well, its getting late, and I'm bored of this.
laura in space
: Thomas Arena wrote:
: >
: > Lets see, she sticks up for Judeo-Christian values, so that makes her a
: > sicko? I'm so out of touch.
: They may be Judeo-Christian values but they're not the ethic of Jesus,
: who set everyone free and whose come-lately disciple "Saint Paul"
: started closing the windows Jesus had recently opened.
Amen, brother!
Jesus would have to do the turning-over-the-tables at the temple thing all
over again - *in his own church*.
"Reckon we'd just nail him up if he came down again."
- Kris Kristofferson, "Jesus Was a Capricorn"
laura
--
Dragons coming out of the sea, shimmering silver head of wisdom looking at me.
JSMITHHE
philosophers, not commentators. They do what they do for the sake of
maintaining and building an audience.
If you don't believe me, take a look at an Elia Kazan film called "A Face in
the Crowd.." That says it all. These characters aren't real.
And they know no one's name except their own...
BlkJk
treg
wrote:
>I love this little ploy of yours, ignore and mock Mr. Limbaugh, and hope
>he goes away. I keep hearing comments to the effect of him being
>irrelivant and having no influence. Nobody listens to him anymore. No
>one takes him seriously. Its so funny hearing his show when all those
>seminar callers phone in. You know, the ones who claim to be a longtime
>listener and conservative, then bash him for being out of touch, then
>procede to list so many liberal ideas throughout their call. They are
>very obvious.
Thomas.
One of the main reasons Rush is an excellent entertainer and his show
has been so successfull is that he fully recognizes his assets and
liabilities. He is a terrible debator. That has been proven over and
over again whenever an intelligent caller with an opposing viewpoint
slips through. Robert Kennedy, Jr., a few years ago, ate Rush alive.
The most interesting thing was that Rush's ego wouldn't let go and
Kennedy embarrassed him for THREE segments.
And let's not forget the night he filled in for Pat Sajak on his short
lived CBS late night show. He got in a fight with an old lady in the
audience and embarressed himself so badly that they had to clear the
studio for the remainder of the show. His one and only network TV
show. And how long did HIS TV show last? A couple of years at 3;00
AM in the few markets that carried it.
The callers to which YOU refer would never get on the air of any other
reputable talk show because they have the ability to make a clear
point. Easy pickins' for your El Rushbo.
> No one takes him seriously anymore, thats why his name
>gets mentioned so many times here in political discussions, and not by
>conservatives. Oh well, its getting late, and I'm bored of this.
Rush gets very sparse mention on any serious political talk shows. Add
to that that very few Republican leaders will either appear on his
program or enlist or accept his support.
The sad fact is that when Limbaugh says he's doing his show with half
his brain tied behind his back ... he's still only half correct.
Ray Arthur
treg
I partially agree. I've always maintained that Limbaugh is, in fact
and of course, a conservative. But if you hold his hand to the fire,
he probably only believes about 2/3 of what he spouts/spews. The rest
is just show biz puffery.
Dr. Laura is a little more disconcerting. Anybody can bullshit about
politics and make Clinton or Bush or whomever jokes. But she seems to
have a darker and meaner ... and more sincere agenda.
Having said that, she has just as much right to afford me the
opportunity to turn off her show as Howard Stern, Tom Scott or Rush.
Ray Arthur
treg
CORRECTION: because they DON'T have the ability ...
CountV
Usenet, for all the world to see, the following:
> In article <8beadl$76o$1...@knot.queensu.ca>,
> Christopher J Currie <8c...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote:
>
>> That said, though, I'm aware of the casual mockery of Eastern religions which
>> is prevalent in American, um, humour. It just struck me as odd that Rush
>> could openly insult a major religion, and that no-one would care.
>>
>> Well, actually, I suppose that wouldn't be so surprising *now*. But this was
>> in 1993/94, when he was actually popular ...
>
> Yeah, he's only the most listened to talk show host in America today!
Quality, not quantity.
--
CountV/John T
"Any PC built after 1985 has the storage capacity to house an evil
spirit." - Reverend Jim Peasboro
Design by Coercion - http://www.m-ideas.com/coercion/index.htm
New: John's World - http://www.m-ideas.com/jw/index.htm
Cramnella
>disproportionate numbers, when the statistics actually point in quite
>the opposite direction--the vast majority of child molesters are
>heterosexual.
Actually, she said that, although there are a greater number of
heterosexual pedophiles, the percentage of homosexuals who are also pedophiles
is higher than the percentage of heterosexuals who are pedophiles. I have no
idea as to what she was trying to imply by this statement.
Marc Allen
Cramnella
Rush Limbaugh chosen as most influential radio talk show host.
By Michael Colton
Issue Date: November 1999
Howard Stern may grab more headlines and young listeners, Dr. Laura
Schlessinger's ratings may be ballooning, and Don Imus may be chummy with the
media and political elite. But for tangible, everyday influence on both the
talk-radio industry and on 18.7 million weekly listeners, Rush Limbaugh is
still the guy to beat.
"He's a giant," says Michael Harrison, the editor and publisher of Talkers
magazine, which covers the talk-radio industry. "He sets the standards...and
embodies the conservative position that has had such a dynamic life on radio in
America this decade."
Every weekday, broadcasting either from New York City or Palm Beach, Florida,
Limbaugh launches a three-hour diatribe against "anti-smoking Nazis,"
"environmental wackos," and all sorts of other liberals. Heard on approximately
600 radio stations around the country, he attracts more listeners than any
other host, as he has for most of his 11 years on the air.
Limbaugh is widely credited with helping to resuscitate AM radio in the early
1990s. Such hosts as Oliver North, G. Gordon Liddy, Sean Hannity, and Michael
Reagan are viewed by industry observers as having benefited from the tone and
format Limbaugh perfected. What's more, his opinions sway listeners. "He's made
people far more politically aware than they were ten years ago," says Al
Peterson, the news/talk editor at Radio and Records, a trade journal. "He's a
strong voice for the populist movement in America."
To illustrate his effectiveness, Limbaugh cites a series of shows he aired two
years ago, during a period that saw a wave of layoffs of white-collar workers.
"I did shows that featured nothing but laid-off, middle-age callers who had
managed to prosper from their downsizing. Those three shows are routinely cited
as some of the most important that my listeners have heard. One of our new
advertisers on the program said he was so inspired, he quit his mailman job to
follow his dream of making board games."
Marc Allen
Cramnella
>And let's not forget the night he filled in for Pat Sajak on his short
>lived CBS late night show. He got in a fight with an old lady in the
>audience and embarressed himself so badly that they had to clear the
>studio for the remainder of the show.
I don't remember any old lady, but I do remember that a gay activist group
(I believe, "Act Up!") packed the studio audience with its members with the
explicit aim of disrupting the show and protesting Rush.
>He is a terrible debator. That has been proven over and
>over again whenever an intelligent caller with an opposing viewpoint
>slips through. Robert Kennedy, Jr., a few years ago, ate Rush alive.
>The most interesting thing was that Rush's ego wouldn't let go and
>Kennedy embarrassed him for THREE segments.
I don't remember any debating on Kennedy's part. As I recall, he just read
a bunch of statistics.
>Rush gets very sparse mention on any serious political talk shows. Add
>to that that very few Republican leaders will either appear on his
>program or enlist or accept his support.
>
Tim Russert has has had Rush as his guest on his hour long interview show for
the past two years. The Sunday shows have asked him to appear, but Rush has
declined (he says) because the shows always end up being about him rather than
about the issue at hand.
To keep this semi on topic: G. Gordon Liddy uses Goldsmith's "Generals
Suite" in his bumper music rotation.
Marc Allen
Lord John Whorfin
>
> That said, though, I'm aware of the casual mockery of Eastern religions
> which is prevalent in American, um, humour. It just struck me as odd that
>
Look at his audience, fercrissakes! Back in the day when he was on TV,
they showed the studio audience when they in/outro'd to
commercial--dress code enforced, first of all--but it sort of reminded
me of a room full of Irish setters for some reason.
Lord John Whorfin
>
> Near as I can figure, you only call Laura if you're a masochist and wish
> to be castrated on the air.
>
> Who would score a movie of Dr Laura?
>
by the likes of Pat Boone?
Lord John Whorfin
>
>think Rush added or took away any votes at all. No, he just gave more
> fuel to the fire of the conservative cause. Its funny that you failed
> to mention the Republican takeover of Congress in 94, or the fact that
> they have held it two elections since. Did Limbaugh cause that? He
The reason the GOP has held onto Congress since '94 is only because
attrition hasn't brought them back to parity. Yes, they've done a
stellar job with their majority. If anything is responsible for Slick's
2nd term, it's the '94 coup and the Contract On America.
racvb
Lord John Whorfin wrote:
Really , I was thinking more German Shepard/Rottweiller mix.
Ray Arthur
Scott
>
> Lets see, she sticks up for Judeo-Christian values, so that makes her a
> sicko? I'm so out of touch.
Nobody in this thread has said that. The particular "woman" is the
problem. Brush up on your comprehensive reading skills.
racvb
Lord John Whorfin wrote:
That interesting. I see it as the opposite. If anything lends credibility to
what's left of the '94 Republican Congress (minus the embarrassment of Newt,
Bob Barr, the impeachment debacle, etc.) it's Clinton transforming from an old
Democrat to a new Democrat to a new Republican.
Ray Arthur
James M. Barry
>heterosexual pedophiles, the percentage of homosexuals who are also
>pedophiles
>is higher than the percentage of heterosexuals who are pedophiles. I have no
>idea as to what she was trying to imply by this statement.
She was doing what we refer to in baseball as "playing the percentages" ...
James M. Barry
"Film is a wonderful place for a composer to practice his art; there, he can be
ignored by a much larger audience."
James M. Barry
I'd give it to the only man who possibly infuse it with enough irony to keep me
in stitches -- Marc Shaiman. >=)
racvb
to reeducate you to the facts!
Thomas Arena wrote:
Ross split the vote evenly between Clinton and Bush. Rush didn't help Bush.
> He then beat an over the hill Dole (who may have run the worst
> campaign in history) and still did not get 50% of the vote. I don't
> think Rush added or took away any votes at all.
I think you're correct
> No, he just gave more
> fuel to the fire of the conservative cause. Its funny that you failed
> to mention the Republican takeover of Congress in 94,
The Republican takeover in '94 was due mostly to a backlash to Clinton's health
plan.
The Contract with America was little known at the time of the election but became
very popular AFTER the election. It had nothing to do with the 94 R
congressional victory.
> or the fact that
> they have held it two elections since. Did Limbaugh cause that? He may
> have influenced a little, but that is really hard to tell.
No, Limbaugh had nothing to do with it. Limbaugh has preached to the same choir
for the past 12 years
The R congress has stayed in power for several reasons:
people don't vote change when things are good
Gingrich is gone
BTW they still have a slim majority but they have lost seats each election since
'94.
> As for his
> ratings, I wonder who your source is. He is still on in NY, the number
> 1 market, and WABC's ratings are doing quite well. I get the feeling
> you have never really listened to him, at least not for more than a few
> minutes at a time. Take the time out, say an hour a day for three
> weeks, it may do you a world of good. Then again, maybe not.
>
covered all that before.
> Goodnight.
> ---Tom---
Ray Arthur
Christopher J Currie
> Christopher J Currie wrote:
>>
>> That said, though, I'm aware of the casual mockery of Eastern religions
>> which is prevalent in American, um, humour. It just struck me as odd that
>> Rush {Limbaugh: ed.LJW} could openly insult a major religion, and that no-one would care.
> Look at his audience, fercrissakes! Back in the day when he was on TV,
> they showed the studio audience when they in/outro'd to
> commercial--dress code enforced, first of all--but it sort of reminded
> me of a room full of Irish setters for some reason.
Er ... yes, I know about his audience. But surely some other anti-Rush
people must have been watching at home ...
The Christopher Currie
(this may be the first time I've used the phrase "anti-Rush" on
r.m.p. without referring to the band ...)