![]() |
United 93 Movie - Printable Version +- RepairmanJack.com Forums (https://repairmanjack.com/forum) +-- Forum: Other Topics (https://repairmanjack.com/forum/forum-9.html) +--- Forum: Off Topic (https://repairmanjack.com/forum/forum-4.html) +--- Thread: United 93 Movie (/thread-1672.html) |
United 93 Movie - jimbow8 - 05-25-2006 Here are some excerpts from Rush about the ACLU. Again, maybe not as harsh, but I didn't exactly do an exhaustive search to find these: [INDENT][URL="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3947362"]Rush Limbaugh Of Limbaugh’s many targets, it is hard to pick a favorite. But if you enter “Rush Limbaugh” and “American Civil Liberties Union” or ACLU into an Internet search engine, you’ll get 8600 results. Sample items taken from Mr. Limbaugh’s own website: September 12th, 2003: “If this guy had burned that flag,” Limbaugh said, “the ACLU and countless other groups would be down there supporting this guy’s right to desecrate old glory. But because he’s flying the American flag respectfully, none of the so-called civil libertarians makes a peep.” September 23rd, 2003: “The ACLU has decided they’re not going to appeal the Ninth Circuit’s decision to reinstate the California re-call election... They must not really care all that much about you stupid minorities and poor people.” December 23rd, 2003: “Where have all these so-called civil libertarians gone, the ACLU and the rest of them, claiming our government is overreaching?” Maybe I’m over-reaching, but I don’t think Mr. Limbaugh likes the ACLU. And something else he has shown an antipathy to—the right to privacy. Again, from his own website: August 22nd, 2003: “I warned you about this ever-broadening interpretation of the so-called right to privacy. It’s not a ‘right’ specifically enumerated in the Constitution or Bill of Rights.” A quote that makes an odd preface to this next one: December 23rd, 2003: “Now they need my medical records, my private medical records to find out if I’ve committed a crime called doctor shopping? They now have to invade my privacy to learn whether I have broken the law? Yesterday, the ACLU filed a friend-of-the court brief supporting Mr. Limbaugh’s argument that the seizure of his private medical records was illegal, and Limbaugh gratefully accepted the ACLU’s help.[/URL][/INDENT] United 93 Movie - Tempest - 05-25-2006 Seriously now, you guys make me laugh. I like hearing how hypocritical Rush is, how hypocritical Republicans are, but never a mention of the same about Democrats. Are you kidding me? EVERY politician is a hypocrit. The fact that you haven't mentioned that....well, it says a lot. United 93 Movie - jimbow8 - 05-25-2006 Tempest Wrote:Seriously now, you guys make me laugh. I like hearing how hypocritical Rush is, how hypocritical Republicans are, but never a mention of the same about Democrats. Are you kidding me? EVERY politician is a hypocrite. The fact that you haven't mentioned that....well, it says a lot.Democrats are also hypocrites. William Jefferson should at the VERY least try explaining his side of the story (though it certainly seems he is guilty) and possibly even resign his seat (as Pelosi has asked him to do - on committees, anyway). Democrats (and Republicans) are hypocrites for defending him for all the wrong reasons (save your own ass) while citing defending his privacy (the same privacy they don't defend of average citizens). Happy? I didn't think so. Does it say a lot when the right-wing people on this site don't mention Republican hypocrisy (hmm, who comes to mind?) or is it just me? United 93 Movie - Tempest - 05-25-2006 Thanks for editing my post bud...in the future I'll try not to make such an egregious error ![]() All I'm saying is that it goes both ways, and so there's really no reason for anyone to get upset. United 93 Movie - jimbow8 - 05-25-2006 Tempest Wrote:Thanks for editing my post bud...in the future I'll try not to make such an egregious errorNo prob. Just trying to help, like ..... someone else. ![]() Quote:All I'm saying is that it goes both ways, and so there's really no reason for anyone to get upset.But there are plenty of reasons to get upset ... with our government and politicians .... United 93 Movie - NewYorkjoe - 05-25-2006 law dawg Wrote:Really it depends, I guess. I worked the projects for a long time when I was a local. And they generally vote liberal. And a lot of the people there would jack you up as soon as look at you. No doubt this is why Hillary is pushing for felons to be reenfranchised, right? ![]() United 93 Movie - NewYorkjoe - 05-25-2006 Scott Hajek Wrote:What a waste of perfectly good carbon you've proven yourself to be! United 93 Movie - NewYorkjoe - 05-25-2006 Salon.com, and to think I was criticized for referencing NewsMax.com once. I have never before read such a load of self-serving propaganda. If even half of this stuff were true and Clinton done so much to counter Usama bin Laden, then why would Sandy Berger be smuggling classified material OUT of the National Archives in his underwear? Why there would be nothing to hide! Don't quote the 9/11 Commission to me, they were not formed to discover anything, just to cover up the lapses of the previous administration. If I ever "swallow anything evil" (The Who), rereading that link to Salon.com will work much better than a "finger down my throat!" Also, I said "armored support" not armor, that signifies Bradley Fighting Vehicles and M-1 Abrams tanks, not body armor. That was what was needed in Somalia and refused by the Clinton administration. jimbow8 Wrote:How does one wrap something in a sandwich? United 93 Movie - NewYorkjoe - 05-25-2006 jimbow8 Wrote:I guess you aren't interested in civil discussion, despite your claims. I guess you didn't notice the anti-Catholic slur that provoked my retort? United 93 Movie - jimbow8 - 05-25-2006 NewYorkjoe Wrote:I guess you didn't notice the anti-Catholic slur that provoked my retort?I noticed. I'm Catholic and I wasn't offended...... Maybe you're just wound too tight. I notice you didn't make mention of ANY of the other links. I even included a NewsMax link for your pleasure. I could provide things on Sandy Berger episode also, but why bother, as you'd just dismiss them (not refute them, just dismiss them). But then you never actually offer evidence, only "personal observation." |