• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Rush Limbaugh on the air gaslighting using homophobia

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

HurleyBird

Golden Member
Apr 22, 2003
1,986
412
136
Why don't you explain how you think Rush is gas-lighting in this case when the next moment you turn around and say "Sure, those [bigoted] demographics are technically a minority of the population, but thanks for gerrymandering and the EC, that minority gets to set policy for everyone."

If it wasn't for that last sentence I may have given you the benefit of the doubt and thought "Well, he could add some qualifiers, some of which may be genuine," but you really destroyed yourself here. You're simultaneously holding two contradictory positions in a very obvious way.
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
27,667
6,953
136
Why don't you explain how you think Rush is gas-lighting in this case when the next moment you turn around and say "Sure, those [bigoted] demographics are technically a minority of the population, but thanks for gerrymandering and the EC, that minority gets to set policy for everyone."

If it wasn't for that last sentence I may have given you the benefit of the doubt and thought "Well, he could add some qualifiers, some of which may be genuine," but you really destroyed yourself here. You're simultaneously holding two contradictory positions in a very obvious way.
Wowzers. My post was pretty clear. None of what you've posted seems to address it one bit.
 

HurleyBird

Golden Member
Apr 22, 2003
1,986
412
136
There would need to be a rational argument to address, as opposed to an ocean of snark with no substance. I could respond with my own snark, but that's not me. That said, you saying that Rush is gas lighting you and then turning around and agreeing with him a few sentences later was too good to pass up on.
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
27,667
6,953
136
There would need to be a rational argument to address, as opposed to an ocean of snark with no substance. I could respond with my own snark, but that's not me. That said, you saying that Rush is gas lighting you and then turning around and agreeing with him a few sentences later was too good to pass up on.
I think you need to read my post again., And the link I included. I can do snark if you like, there was none in that post. It seems this is about your feels.

Based on this post, you dont understand how gaslighting works.
 

HurleyBird

Golden Member
Apr 22, 2003
1,986
412
136
I know what the term gas-lighting means. Your first two paragraphs were contradictory double-think. You last paragraph was perhaps worse somehow - a combination of snark, tu quoque, two-wrongs-make-a-right, and straw-manning/nut picking. You didn't make a single logically sound argument.
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
27,667
6,953
136
Based on your own post it doesnt appear you do.

My post was just fine. Your feels tho.
 

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
99,999
13,987
136
I'm not a Rush Limbaugh fan, but after reading the article I have no idea what you guys are making a fuss over. The quotes in the story aren't a condemnation of Buttigieg's sexuality, they're a claim that if Buttigieg shows PDAs with his husband in the general that it will hurt his electability. Which certainly may be the case given the predilections of some minority demographics that usually lean Democrat.

But even if there were something there, that hardly excuses you guys from celebrating a cancer diagnosis.
How many people do I have to have endured watching die from cancer before I'm allowed to celebrate it in unmistakably vile people that have already well-outlived their deserved life?

Oh wait, I don't care what you think.

I do, however, wish that Rush's cancer was worse, and that it killed him 50 years ago.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
30,694
1,820
126
It doesn’t take anything away from the argument, but he’s not a combat veteran.
When asked if he considered himself a combat veteran, he replied, “Some say you are a combat veteran if you have a Combat Action Ribbon (I do not). Others say deploying to a combat zone makes you one. I simply consider myself a veteran, and I’ll leave it to others to decide what else to call it.”,-- which he is!!
 

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
6,368
1,954
136
I think we're going to find out that American voters are more homophobic than polls predict - just like the country being more racist than polls predicted. People in phone polls seem to prefer to say what sounds good, not what they really think. I’d like to be proven wrong.
 
Feb 16, 2005
13,691
4,581
136
I'm not a Rush Limbaugh fan, but after reading the article I have no idea what you guys are making a fuss over. The quotes in the story aren't a condemnation of Buttigieg's sexuality, they're a claim that if Buttigieg shows PDAs with his husband in the general that it will hurt his electability. Which certainly may be the case given the predilections of some minority demographics that usually lean Democrat.

But even if there were something there, that hardly excuses you guys from celebrating a cancer diagnosis.
well, it's rush limbaugh so
 
  • Haha
Reactions: ch33zw1z

ASK THE COMMUNITY