Bill Maher Calls Out Rush Limbaugh Boycotters

[homersapien 11,348]

No. The amount of bad ideas that some PC loons calling themselves liberals will embrace even when getting their asses handed to them is staggering. Air America was one long Ed Schultz rerun for all intents and purposes. It sucked morning, noon, and night time too. If it wasn't for Soros throwing good money after bad the nation wouldn't have had that crapfest on half as long as it was.

But what does Air America have to do with censorship of Rush Limbaugh?

[AUDub 11,131]

But what does Air America have to do with censorship of Rush Limbaugh?

This thread got funny in a hurry. Maybe DKW has come around on his views on free speech and just hasn't admitted it yet.

[Texan4Auburn 1,626]

Sorry, FREE Speech is for everyone, not just the braindead PC morons.

See, i dont object to you making a fool out of yourself.

That is how this Free Speech-y thing works.

The braindead PC morons are exercising their right to free speech by boycotting.

Actually, that isnt speech. That is the equivalent of shouting down the speaker. When you have FREE SPEECH, everyone gets to speak. The Morons get their turn, and then Maher and i get our turns. The ones that want to block someone else's free speech are those that KNOW that in an Idea Market, when all sides get to be heard, they lose. Therefore they HAVE to resort to shouting down the other sides and not allow them to speak. If the Islamic Extremists just wanted to have a political chat, then that would be fine and indeed proactive. When they want to silence others, that is what it means to deprive others of their Free Speech.

The quote often attributed to Voltaire is correct: "I may disagree with what you say, but i will defend to the death YOUR RIGHT TO SAY IT." When you are shouting down, or hampering in any way, the rights of another, then you are by definition limiting another's Free Speech.

It is beyond sad that this has to even be discussed on this forum. What you are advocating is that only those with the mob on their side should be allowed to speak at all. Is that your definition of Fee Speech? Really? Mob Rule=Free Speech?

It is a mockery of intellect for yall to call yourself "Liberals."

So those who boycotted the Dixie Chicks were morons?

What I was wondering also.

[TexasTiger 12,796]

No. The amount of bad ideas that some PC loons calling themselves liberals will embrace even when getting their asses handed to them is staggering. Air America was one long Ed Schultz rerun for all intents and purposes. It sucked morning, noon, and night time too. If it wasn't for Soros throwing good money after bad the nation wouldn't have had that crapfest on half as long as it was.

The fact that angry talk radio appeals more to right wingers says more about right wingers than those on the left, doesn't it? Or are you saying Rush has great ideas and ditto aheads are geniuses?

[DKW 86 7,410]

Look, Maher was rightfully slamming the lamewad PC loons that want to boycott this or boycott that even though they have had their collective butts handed to them in the arena if ideas. Maher is trying to tell the PC Loons out there to shut up and move on. If you can stifle someone else's speech it wont be long until YOUR speech is stifled. It is free speech for all, or no one.

The boycotts failed miserably. They make the people behind them look even dumber than they are. Want to beat Rush? Get out there with some real ideas and beat his butt. He is a drug addled pompous ass for crying out loud. The boycotts are really just the ignorant saying that they cannot compete with Rush even with Soros writing the checks. The problem with Air America was that, FOR WHATEVER REASON, radio just doesnt work for the PC Crowd.

IN CASE YOU DONT UNDERSTAND, I AM MAKING A HHHUUUGGGEEE DIFFERENCE IN BEING A TRUE LIBERAL, OR TRUE CONSERVATIVE, VERSUS PC LOONS AND PARTISAN HACKJOBS.

A true, thinking liberal or a true, thinking conservative can plainly see that there are two sides to any discussion. That there must be some common ground or mutual commonality to political discourse. The PC-Loon& Partisan Hackjobs, (PLPH) are just screaming banshees of crap from the Left. On the other side we have the Racist Loons & Wing Nuts (RLWN). They too are just as rabid that Obama is a Kenyan and that the Tri-Lateral Commission is about to declare Christianity Illegal and Impose Sharia Law on everyone. "You know those earthquakes all over murka are in the end times of the Bible..."

What we all really need to do is slow down and stop ramming agendas and freaking worthless talking points down each others throats.

This is not gonna happen tho. FNC, MSNBC, TPM, etc etc etc are all making a fine living feeding the "Confirm My Paranoias Crowd" mass hysteria.

The Koch Brothers were out given by several families on the Left. Why dont we hear about them 24-7? Steyer would buy the XL Pipeline and shut it down not because he gives a damn about the environment, but because he stands to make $BNs off the deal if he can stop it. Steyer may not be Big Oil, but he is Big Energy/Big Investment. We have some very well meaning people, even 1-2 on this board, that really think that the environment is worth fighting for. Most of us however are so caught up in the "Good Guys vs Bad Guys" storyline we have been sold by the media in this country.

"But we can boycott...AND Lose." and losing the boycott just inflames the partisan hacks even more. Once inflamed, nothing meaningful gets discussed

I have a guy on Liberal America that cannot refer to me except that i am from Alabama and therefore i must support the "RepigliKKKlan Tea Party."

Some of us, me included, have gotten to the same state.

Maher is saying, and i support, that it is time to stop the shouting and recognize that your tactics arent working and go do something else.

AND also recognize that trying to force the shut down Free Speech for anyone is the wrong thing to do.

[alexava 6,972]

So have we now changed the subject from boycotts as "shoutdowns" of free speech to....what?

The effectiveness of boycotts?

The propensity of liberals to listen to partisan propaganda on the radio?

Yea. i dont really give a damn about Rush. Maher is a comedian with political slants. I find him entertaining, enjoy him actually. Like an earlier poster pointed out he completely misused the "freedom of speech" argument. Many people do this. He showed he don't understand it and some others here apparently dont either.

[AUDub 11,131]

I like DKW when he goes off on these little screeds. Makes him seem like a petulant baby.

And seriously:

IN CASE YOU DONT UNDERSTAND, I AM MAKING A HHHUUUGGGEEE DIFFERENCE IN BEING A TRUE LIBERAL, OR TRUE CONSERVATIVE, VERSUS PC LOONS AND PARTISAN HACKJOBS.

I love that he keeps making this goofy "true liberal" point, as if either he or Maher have the standing to make such a judgement.

[DKW 86 7,410]

I like DKW when he goes off on these little screeds. Makes him seem like a petulant baby.

And seriously:

IN CASE YOU DONT UNDERSTAND, I AM MAKING A HHHUUUGGGEEE DIFFERENCE IN BEING A TRUE LIBERAL, OR TRUE CONSERVATIVE, VERSUS PC LOONS AND PARTISAN HACKJOBS.

I love that he keeps making this goofy "true liberal" point, as if either he or Maher have the standing to make such a judgement.

Yea, being an extremist on either side is so much better than acting like an adult.

BB, ichy, and homer are the PCers here. Yall only have one mode of thinking, only one line of thought.

PC thru and thru.

You are always correct, even when you arent (XL Pipeline built yet?)

[homersapien 11,348]

But what does Air America have to do with censorship of Rush Limbaugh?

This thread got funny in a hurry. Maybe DKW has come around on his views on free speech and just hasn't admitted it yet.

Well, just to make sure I wasn't overlooking something, I went back and started re-reading the thread from the beginning. Clearly the subject has been changed. Undoubtedly, it's an effort to run away from a losing position.

[homersapien 11,348]

Look, Maher was rightfully slamming the lamewad PC loons that want to boycott this or boycott that even though they have had their collective butts handed to them in the arena if ideas. Maher is trying to tell the PC Loons out there to shut up and move on. If you can stifle someone else's speech it wont be long until YOUR speech is stifled. It is free speech for all, or no one.

The boycotts failed miserably. They make the people behind them look even dumber than they are. Want to beat Rush? Get out there with some real ideas and beat his butt. He is a drug addled pompous ass for crying out loud. The boycotts are really just the ignorant saying that they cannot compete with Rush even with Soros writing the checks. The problem with Air America was that, FOR WHATEVER REASON, radio just doesnt work for the PC Crowd.

IN CASE YOU DONT UNDERSTAND, I AM MAKING A HHHUUUGGGEEE DIFFERENCE IN BEING A TRUE LIBERAL, OR TRUE CONSERVATIVE, VERSUS PC LOONS AND PARTISAN HACKJOBS.

A true, thinking liberal or a true, thinking conservative can plainly see that there are two sides to any discussion. That there must be some common ground or mutual commonality to political discourse. The PC-Loon& Partisan Hackjobs, (PLPH) are just screaming banshees of crap from the Left. On the other side we have the Racist Loons & Wing Nuts (RLWN). They too are just as rabid that Obama is a Kenyan and that the Tri-Lateral Commission is about to declare Christianity Illegal and Impose Sharia Law on everyone. "You know those earthquakes all over murka are in the end times of the Bible..."

What we all really need to do is slow down and stop ramming agendas and freaking worthless talking points down each others throats.

This is not gonna happen tho. FNC, MSNBC, TPM, etc etc etc are all making a fine living feeding the "Confirm My Paranoias Crowd" mass hysteria.

The Koch Brothers were out given by several families on the Left. Why dont we hear about them 24-7? Steyer would buy the XL Pipeline and shut it down not because he gives a damn about the environment, but because he stands to make $BNs off the deal if he can stop it. Steyer may not be Big Oil, but he is Big Energy/Big Investment. We have some very well meaning people, even 1-2 on this board, that really think that the environment is worth fighting for. Most of us however are so caught up in the "Good Guys vs Bad Guys" storyline we have been sold by the media in this country.

"But we can boycott...AND Lose." and losing the boycott just inflames the partisan hacks even more. Once inflamed, nothing meaningful gets discussed

I have a guy on Liberal America that cannot refer to me except that i am from Alabama and therefore i must support the "RepigliKKKlan Tea Party."

Some of us, me included, have gotten to the same state.

Maher is saying, and i support, that it is time to stop the shouting and recognize that your tactics arent working and go do something else.

AND also recognize that trying to force the shut down Free Speech for anyone is the wrong thing to do.

You just cannot stick to the subject can you? The first paragraph was OK even if the views you attribute to Maher are totally wrongheaded.

But you blew it with everything else. You seriously don't get the point (of the erroneous Maher characterizations) or you are deliberately trying to obfuscate the subject by changing it.

Now, do you want to get back to the subject of what constitutes repression of speech and what doesn't? Do you want to discuss why your last sentence is BS - if you are applying it to the Maher case. Or do you just want to keep obfuscating the subject with your ramblings.

(Incidentally, I think "liberal talk radio" would be fun to discuss but let's start another thread since it's clearly a different and unrelated subject.)

[homersapien 11,348]

So have we now changed the subject from boycotts as "shoutdowns" of free speech to....what?

The effectiveness of boycotts?

The propensity of liberals to listen to partisan propaganda on the radio?

Yea. i dont really give a damn about Rush. Maher is a comedian with political slants. I find him entertaining, enjoy him actually. Like an earlier poster pointed out he completely misused the "freedom of speech" argument. Many people do this. He showed he don't understand it and some others here apparently dont either.

Please, explain this to DKW. I seem to be just pissing him off with my attempts.

[AUDub 11,131]

So have we now changed the subject from boycotts as "shoutdowns" of free speech to....what?

The effectiveness of boycotts?

The propensity of liberals to listen to partisan propaganda on the radio?

Yea. i dont really give a damn about Rush. Maher is a comedian with political slants. I find him entertaining, enjoy him actually. Like an earlier poster pointed out he completely misused the "freedom of speech" argument. Many people do this. He showed he don't understand it and some others here apparently dont either.

Please, explain this to DKW. I seem to be just pissing him off with my attempts.

Yeah, I noticed you're not on his list of PCers ( ), alexava. He won't listen to us. Help!

[homersapien 11,348]

I like DKW when he goes off on these little screeds. Makes him seem like a petulant baby.

And seriously:

IN CASE YOU DONT UNDERSTAND, I AM MAKING A HHHUUUGGGEEE DIFFERENCE IN BEING A TRUE LIBERAL, OR TRUE CONSERVATIVE, VERSUS PC LOONS AND PARTISAN HACKJOBS.

I love that he keeps making this goofy "true liberal" point, as if either he or Maher have the standing to make such a judgement.

Yea, being an extremist on either side is so much better than acting like an adult.

BB, ichy, and homer are the PCers here. Yall only have one mode of thinking, only one line of thought.

PC thru and thru.

You are always correct, even when you arent (XL Pipeline built yet?)

Man, what an affirmation of Ben's point! :laugh:

Dude, cut your losses. Just stop.

[AURaptor 1,121]

First, that wasn't a random insult, Dingus. (Really, try not to be so blatantly hypocritical. And don't think I didn't notice you trimmed that off the chain.)

Again, I asked who exactly was "shutting down" Limbaugh from a free speech standpoint on the Mahar issue? Why don't you respond to that first?

But if you want to bring up other perceived instances of Limbaugh being shut down, I'll be glad to take them one at a time. Which one would you like for me to address first?

Referring to me as " typical weasel " was pretty damn random.

I have no idea what you even mean by ' tripped that off the chain' , but regardless, your comment...

I didn't account for the typical weasel to start arguing an entirely different case when they are clearly wrong about this one. Silly me. :-\

..

I didn't start to argue an entirely different case. YOU'RE the one who is tap dancing around the issues, too scared to admit you're wrong.

[homersapien 11,348]

First, that wasn't a random insult, Dingus. (Really, try not to be so blatantly hypocritical. And don't think I didn't notice you trimmed that off the chain.)

Again, I asked who exactly was "shutting down" Limbaugh from a free speech standpoint on the Mahar issue? Why don't you respond to that first?

But if you want to bring up other perceived instances of Limbaugh being shut down, I'll be glad to take them one at a time. Which one would you like for me to address first?

Referring to me as " typical weasel " was pretty damn random.

I have no idea what you even mean by ' tripped that off the chain' , but regardless, your comment...

I didn't account for the typical weasel to start arguing an entirely different case when they are clearly wrong about this one. Silly me. :-\

..

I didn't start to argue an entirely different case. YOU'RE the one who is tap dancing around the issues, too scared to admit you're wrong.

Blah blah blah.

Wrong about what exactly? Here's your chance to define the issue we are supposed to be talking about.

[AURaptor 1,121]

It's not a mystery, Homer. If YOU are confused, then just come out and say so. No need to call other folks names.

[homersapien 11,348]

It's not a mystery, Homer. If YOU are confused, then just come out and say so. No need to call other folks names.

Well, I admit that I am confused.

This thread started with a proposition that boycotting was equivalent to stifling or "shouting down" free speech. Not sure exactly where or why it veered off into a different direction, but it's clear that you are one of the ones who steered it away, specifically in post #32. That's also the post where you introduced the insults.

Perhaps I overestimated you in assuming you did so deliberately. But if it was deliberate, it's clearly evasive and obfuscation. And deliberate evasiveness and obfuscation is an obvious weaseling tactic.

So you are either clueless or a weasel. Take your pick.

(And let's not forget hypocritical since you protested being insulted after calling me dingus.)

[AURaptor 1,121]

Different tactics to accomplish the same goal. What's blatantly evasive to me is your insistence that one has absolutely nothing to do w/ the other.

And I was the one who pointed out that the 1st Amendment wasn't about everyone having the right to say what ever the hell they want, but had to do w/the GOVERNMENT not limiting political speech.

Guess ya missed that nugget as well.

[WarTim 3,456]

Free speech is for Rush-Maher-jesse-Sharpton...........EVERYONE. That's my 2 cents.....Keep the change.....

[homersapien 11,348]

Different tactics to accomplish the same goal. What's blatantly evasive to me is your insistence that one has absolutely nothing to do w/ the other.

And I was the one who pointed out that the 1st Amendment wasn't about everyone having the right to say what ever the hell they want, but had to do w/the GOVERNMENT not limiting political speech.

Guess ya missed that nugget as well.

That makes no sense. None of those incidents have anything to do with suppression of free speech by boycott.

[AURaptor 1,121]

That makes no sense. None of those incidents have anything to do with suppression of free speech by boycott.

Yeah, so what ? It's THE SUPPRESSION OF FREE SPEECH which is the goal here.

They want to shut people up, by any means necessary, short of violence. So far, thankfully.

Seriously, how is this hard for you to comprehend ?

[AUDub 11,131]

name='AURaptor' timestamp='1421696714' post='2200831']

...And I was the one who pointed out that the 1st Amendment wasn't about everyone having the right to say what ever the hell they want, but had to do w/the GOVERNMENT not limiting political speech....

[/b]

You weren't the only one. Got you by about 15 posts.

...No. Free speech is is the concept that any person can communicate with any other person, or persons, without fear of unwarranted governmental restriction or censorship. No one is saying he can't continue spewing hate. It's perfectly legal, after all....

[AURaptor 1,121]

Ben, problem is, Rush doesn't spew hate, nor does your definition accurately describe the purpose of the 1st Amendment.

But duly noted, you brought it up before I did.

Guess this shows my lack of interest in your posts.

[AUDub 11,131]

Ben, problem is, Rush doesn't spew hate,

He does. He's a professional troll.

...nor does your definition accurately describe the purpose of the 1st Amendment.

How so?

Even if it doesn't, I was merely explaining the concept.

By your logic, neither did yours.

[homersapien 11,348]

That makes no sense. None of those incidents have anything to do with suppression of free speech by boycott.

Yeah, so what ? It's THE SUPPRESSION OF FREE SPEECH which is the goal here.

They want to shut people up, by any means necessary, short of violence. So far, thankfully.

Seriously, how is this hard for you to comprehend ?

OK, if you want to be picky, none of them have anything to do with suppression of free speech, PERIOD.

And if you want to make outrageous assertions like the above, you need to include an example or reference to back your claim.

(And please define "They" while you are at it.)