Limbaugh takes a stand: gets hard over Obama

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Sinsear
Newsflash: Politicians stretch the truth and use soundbites and edited quotes in commercials.

And who really cares what Rush Limbaugh says?

It is not about what Rush said.

It is about Obama taking what Rush said and twisting it to mean something completely different then trying to tie it all to McCain.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: newnameman

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: newnameman

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: newnameman

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: newnameman

The ad claims Obama wants to teach sex education to kindergarteners. According to Barack Obama, "'Barack Obama supports teaching sex education to kindergarteners." What exactly do you find unfair?

The ad lies. It's already been debunked.

"'Barack Obama supports teaching sex education to kindergarteners,'" said Obama

You don't accept Obama's own words?

What do you feel was the point of the ad?

That Barack Obama supports teaching sex education to kindergarteners.

Lets take a different approach.

Yes you are absolutely right. Obama wants to teach sex education to kindergartners.

whats wrong with that in your opinion?

So you admit the ad is accurate?

you didnt answer my question.

Obama wants to teach sex education to kindergartners.

whats wrong with that? in your opinion?

 

[newnameman]

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: newnameman

So you admit the ad is accurate?

and... what was the intent of the ad?

I'll ask again, what exactly in the ad do you find inaccurate?

 

[lupi]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: UberNeuman
So, I'll ask you - do you think the McCain ad was fair?

a yes or no answer will do......

I have not heard the ad, but I am of the belief that there was no reason to run it.

Apparently the ad is 'technically' correct. But it still twists the meaning of the Obama law and changes the context of it.

I would say the ad is no worse than Obama taking McCain's 100 years in Iraq line and twisting it was well.

But it's alwas better for the goose, so our partisan friends will continue acting as such.


For anyone that want's to continue down this dead end road you should just find video of george will talking about the bill and the ad.

 

[lupi]

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: newnameman

So you admit the ad is accurate?

and... what was the intent of the ad?

The same intent as every other political ad that's being bought at this time, it's not rocket science here.

 

[UberNeuman]

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: newnameman

So you admit the ad is accurate?

and... what was the intent of the ad?

The same intent as every other political ad that's being bought at this time, it's not rocket science here.

If it's not "rocket science" then tell me what the ad was attempting to convey....

 

[lupi]

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: newnameman

So you admit the ad is accurate?

and... what was the intent of the ad?

The same intent as every other political ad that's being bought at this time, it's not rocket science here.

If it's not "rocket science" then tell me what the ad was attempting to convey....

it was conveying that people should vote for mccain.

 

[UberNeuman]

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: newnameman

So you admit the ad is accurate?

and... what was the intent of the ad?

The same intent as every other political ad that's being bought at this time, it's not rocket science here.

If it's not "rocket science" then tell me what the ad was attempting to convey....

it was conveying that people should vote for mccain.

Why? Because you can't answer a question posed to you?

 

[newnameman]

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: newnameman

So you admit the ad is accurate?

and... what was the intent of the ad?

The same intent as every other political ad that's being bought at this time, it's not rocket science here.

If it's not "rocket science" then tell me what the ad was attempting to convey....

it was conveying that people should vote for mccain.

Why?

Because Barack Obama supports teaching sex education to kindergarteners.

 

[OrByte]

Ha you guys dont WANT to answer the question because you KNOW you (and the Ad and McCain) are full of sh!t.

good job. Nice hackery.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: Sinsear
Newsflash: Politicians stretch the truth and use soundbites and edited quotes in commercials.

And who really cares what Rush Limbaugh says?

It is not about what Rush said.

It is about Obama taking what Rush said and twisting it to mean something completely different then trying to tie it all to McCain.

Actually, I would argue that the only fault in the ad is the attempt to tie it to McCain. I can't fault Obama for giving Limbaugh a taste of his own medicine, especially with Rush so butthurt about it. Well played there.

 

[UberNeuman]

Originally posted by: newnameman

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: newnameman

So you admit the ad is accurate?

and... what was the intent of the ad?

The same intent as every other political ad that's being bought at this time, it's not rocket science here.

If it's not "rocket science" then tell me what the ad was attempting to convey....

it was conveying that people should vote for mccain.

Why?

Because Barack Obama supports teaching sex education to kindergarteners.

Yep, I guess wanting to teach children about sexual predators is somehow wrong...

 

[Sinsear]

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: newnameman

So you admit the ad is accurate?

and... what was the intent of the ad?

The same intent as every other political ad that's being bought at this time, it's not rocket science here.

If it's not "rocket science" then tell me what the ad was attempting to convey....

it was conveying that people should vote for mccain.

Why? Because you can't answer a question posed to you?

Because Obama want's kindergartners in orgies? Hardly. The ad is not quite truthful. It's distorting context, just like every other political ad out there.

 

[fallout man]

So, who's on first?

 

[Sinsear]

Originally posted by: fallout man
So, who's on first?

I don't know.

 

[lupi]

Originally posted by: Sinsear


Because Obama want's kindergartners in orgies? Hardly. The ad is not quite truthful. It's distorting context, just like every other political ad out there.

Something that it seems just a few select simpleminded individuals can't grasp.

 

[First]

In response he said, "If we are going to start rewarding no skills and stupid people--I'm serious, let the unskilled jobs, let the kinds of jobs that take absolutely no knowledge whatsoever to do--let stupid and unskilled Mexicans do that work."

Explaining his comments, Limbaugh writes: "I was referring to jobs in MEXICO. I was not discussing immigrants, illegal or otherwise."

ROFL. Only Rush Limbaugh can say something this stupid and truly, honestly believe it with all his core. Do Mexican immigrants who cross the border (legally or not) suddenly become smarter and less "stupid" the exact moment their feet touch American soil? That's damn funny.

But then again, Limbaugh proves that even poorly educated people can rise to the top. Him and Hannity are good role models in that very narrow and limited scope of human achievement.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: fallout man
So, who's on first?

I will tell you who's not on first.

people that defend blatant lies like Obama wants to teach sex education to 5 and 6 year olds.

In their hearts and heads, they must relish the idea of inappropriate sex education to children barely old enough to be potty trained.

Its disgusting.

 

[newnameman]

Originally posted by: OrByte
Ha you guys dont WANT to answer the question because you KNOW you (and the Ad and McCain) are full of sh!t.

good job. Nice hackery.

Yet you still haven't said which of the ad's claims are untrue. Interesting...

 

[UberNeuman]

Originally posted by: newnameman

Originally posted by: OrByte
Ha you guys dont WANT to answer the question because you KNOW you (and the Ad and McCain) are full of sh!t.

good job. Nice hackery.

Yet you still haven't said which of the ad's claims are untrue. Interesting...

and again - what was the intent of the ad?

 

[lupi]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: fallout man
So, who's on first?

I will tell you who's not on first.

people that defend blatant lies like Obama wants to teach sex education to 5 and 6 year olds.

In their hearts and heads, they must relish the idea of inappropriate sex education to children barely old enough to be potty trained.

Its disgusting.

It's not disgusting, it just shows his poor performance as a legislator. The bill as modified was attrocious in its language and shocking of all shocking, it's one of the few he didn't vote present on.

 

[newnameman]

Originally posted by: UberNeuman

Originally posted by: newnameman

Originally posted by: OrByte
Ha you guys dont WANT to answer the question because you KNOW you (and the Ad and McCain) are full of sh!t.

good job. Nice hackery.

Yet you still haven't said which of the ad's claims are untrue. Interesting...

and again - what was the intent of the ad?

To inform viewers that Barack Obama supports teaching sex education to kindergarteners.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: Sinsear


Because Obama want's kindergartners in orgies? Hardly. The ad is not quite truthful. It's distorting context, just like every other political ad out there.

Something that it seems just a few select simpleminded individuals can't grasp.

You mean like how you're faulting one side in this thread here while apologizing for the other? Or like how you're completely oblivious of that... as usual?

The biggest irony is that you came into this thread complaining about that very behavior, and then jumped right in the deep end of it.

 

[lupi]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: Sinsear


Because Obama want's kindergartners in orgies? Hardly. The ad is not quite truthful. It's distorting context, just like every other political ad out there.

Something that it seems just a few select simpleminded individuals can't grasp.

You mean like how you're faulting one side in this thread here while apologizing for the other? Or like how you're completely oblivious of that... as usual?

The biggest irony is that you came into this thread complaining about that very behavior, and then jumped right in the deep end of it.

good to see you're blatant inability to read all replies or slant those you read for your personal pleasure continued.

 

[daveymark]

Originally posted by: Vic
I can't fault Obama for giving Limbaugh a taste of his own medicine

Obama gave limbaugh oxycontin? I thought obama was just an abuser, not a dealer?