Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from cowtherabbit-. Show cowtherabbit-'s posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    • In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams:
      [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams : Someone makes an incorrect point that the United States led the world in abolishing slavery.  I point out that this was untrue, that in fact most of the world, including Latin America, had abolished slavery, in some cases decades before.  So you respond by pointing out ... that slavery had been abolished in many parts of the world before it was abolished in the U.S.  Thanks for the support.  If you are attempting to suggest that slavery continued in large parts of Latin America until 1886, try again.  Most of the Spanish-speaking countries of Latin America had established their independence much earlier in the century and soon thereafter abolished slavery.  How many Spanish New World colonies were there in 1886 besides Cuba?     
      Posted by newenglanderinexile[/QUOTE]
    • Independent Brazil ended slavery in 1888.
    • Spanish colony of Cuba 1886. I clearly stated that European controlled slavery ENDED at this time.
    • Spanish colony of Puerto Rico 1873,
    • Although the British outlawed slavery in 1834,they allowed the practice of "debt bondage" to take it's place in parts of it's empire to maintain cheap labor.The conditions of debt bondage were nearly identical to slavery and could continue for generations paying on the same debt.It is still in use in some places today in the Commonwealth, notably India. 
    • Dutch colonies of the Carribean 1861. All of it's colonies in 1863
    • Portugal outlawed slavery in some of it's colonies in 1858 but did not free many of their slaves until a 20 year "apprenticeship" was completed. In it's African colonies slavery continued until 1869.
    • Suadi Arabia 1962 Oman 1970 (Not European but suprising enough to list)
    • Russia emancipated it's serfs in 1861,not quite slavery but close enough.
    • I believe the poster you are defending stated that "Europe had long done away with slavery before the U.S". I pointed out that he was wrong. The war that ended slavery in the U.S. began the same year as the Dutch abolished slavery in it's Carribean colonies.
    • This isn't about whose side I'm on, it's about people getting their facts straight. The Southern U.S. fell right in the middle of the historic timeline of abolition,sadly by force of arms.The Northern U.S. however,was setting precedents for many European and Latin American nations to follow since 1777,when Vermont first banned slavery in it's Constitution.Vermont was the first colony in the New World to independently abolish slavery.The last  Northern state to abolish slavery was New Jersey in 1804.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from NickC1188. Show NickC1188's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams:
    [QUOTE]Hey Nick and all you other liberals. Rush probably has more black friends than you ever thought of having. And, another thing. You guys hate the truth. You live in a make believe world.
    Posted by revereman[/QUOTE]

    And once again, someone assumes that because I don't like Rush, that I'm liberal.  And unless you know the guy personally, I doubt you could verify that he does in fact have black friends other than the one who uncleafie has mentioned.

    It's damaging to the good of the people to try to force every conservative to comply with one absolute, inflexible standard.  All I have to say is that I'd be Republican if it wasn't for people like Limbaugh demanding that I comply to his every whim.

    I think it's difficult for a guy to make 20+ racially incisive comments and yet somehow have context be an excuse for all of them.  I already destroyed his statement on McNabb as not possibly having any other motivation other than race.  As PAOB noted that Kiwanuka said,  I think it's too much to be coincidence...
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ritchie-az. Show Ritchie-az's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    NickC,

    Honestly, I think the premise of the thread is what caused so much debate. Your premise was "since Rush Limbaugh is a racist..." I pointed out that Rush Limbaugh cannot be racist against backs if his best friend is black. (If you disagree with that statement, get out a dictionary and review the definition of racism). 

    10 random snipits were posted that sound like Rush Limbaugh made racist statements. I pointed out that one of those was taken out of context and was actually commentary about the L.A. Times using race against Obama. If one of the 10 is wrong, it surely gives doubt to the other nine. I hope you can find the entire monologues for those quotes, because my guess is their meanings are much different than what is being proported. (I tried to find them, but without luck).

    Back on page four or five of this thread I requested the moderators move it to a different forum, because it really doesn't belong on the Patriots Front Burner. But apparently that request was ignored.

    Aside from some rediculous accusations and unnecessary name-calling, this thread has actually been fairly civil. I'm glad of that.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from jedinate. Show jedinate's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    Limbaugh is one of the biggest anti-American, self absorbed, D-Bags of all time. I don't want his Karma touching my favorite sport.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ritchie-az. Show Ritchie-az's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    "Limbaugh is one of the biggest anti-American, self absorbed, D-Bags of all time. I don't want his Karma touching my favorite sport."

    It's posts like the one quoted above that made me say "some rediculous accusations and unnecessary name-calling."

    Shesh! If you're not going to add something of substance, why add anything at all?
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from softserve. Show softserve's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    Rush has friends.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from newenglanderinexile. Show newenglanderinexile's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams:
    [QUOTE]Newenglanderinexile, You still have it completely wrong. Many Latin-American countries had abolished slave TRADE prior to 1863, but had not actually freed the slaves within their borders. The U.S. did this, by abolishing slave trade in 1808. The U.S. was only the fourth country in the world to partially abolish slavery (slavery was abolished in the "northern" states at it's inception), with Russia, England, and Portugal being the first three. After so many gave their lives to free the slaves here in the U.S., many countries worldwide freed their slaves.
    Posted by Ritchie_az[/QUOTE]

    Go to Google Books, look up a title called "Historical Dictionary of Slavery and Abolition," an authoritative reference work, and look at the chronology of abolition at the beginning of the book.  You will see that many Latin American countries abolished slavery, not just the slave trade, well before the United States did. 


     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from cowtherabbit-. Show cowtherabbit-'s posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams:
    [QUOTE]Rush Limbaugh and all the other Republicans can burn in hell!  Fu*ck you, you self-absorbed white rich a**holes!
    Posted by themightypatriotz[/QUOTE]

    I guess posting racist comments against whites is OK though.Where are all the liberal anti-racists who have posted on this board now? How come they aren't condemning this anti-white racist post? MORE liberal hipocrisy.You'll attack a guy for alleged racial comments against blacks but will blind yourselves to blatant racial attacks against whites?Your silence is defening.Spineless liberals! Enough with the double standard!
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from cowtherabbit-. Show cowtherabbit-'s posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams : I don't hate whites, I hate stuck up rich people who try to control the government to make themselves even richer.  And it's criminal for a bunch of rich white republicans to sit around and plot how to sscrew poor minorities while acting all self-righteous about it. There aren't any golf courses in hell, Republican POS's. 
    Posted by themightypatriotz[/QUOTE]

       It's obvious you're a racist.If I made disparaging remarks against poor blacks,there would be 20 posts ripping me apart.I don't buy into this double standard BS.The only reason democrats care about the poor is for their vote.
       Has Obama done anything since becoming president other than giving record amounts of money to financial institutions and corporations as so called "bailouts"? It looks like he just bought some job security so when this whole presidential thing runs it's course he'll get a nice executive board post at a Fortune 500 company. 700,000,000,000 hard earned tax dollars stolen from the American people and given out to corporate America by Obama.That amount of money is incomprehensible. Yeah those hundreds of billions of dollars really helped me out a lot. LMAO. Do you actually follow what the government,both democrats and republicans are doing? I'll tell you one thing,they all play golf,usually with eachother.
       Obama's net worth is over 7 million dollars (somehow he made 3 million since becoming president.His net worth in Jan. 2008 was only 4.3 million),but that's OK,it's only the white republican millionares who are the bad guys.More liberal hypocrisy.
       BTW,the top 3 wealthiest Senators are democrats,John Kerry $164 million(his wife however,is worth over $1 billion via Heinz food products),Herb Kohl $111 million(owns NBA Milwaukee Bucks) and John Jay Rockefeller(Universal icon of wealth,family wealth built on Standard Oil's monopoly of petroleum) $82 million.
       How about the democratic hero of the green movement Mr. Al Gore? Well, his net worth went from $2 million to $120 million since his crusade to save the world's climate began in 2001.I'm sure he found that truth convenient.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from unclealfie. Show unclealfie's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams:
    [QUOTE]Limbaugh is one of the biggest anti-American, self absorbed, D-Bags of all time. I don't want his Karma touching my favorite sport.
    Posted by jedinate[/QUOTE]
    Oh you know him personally, do you? cause I'm sure you wouldn't be so stupid as to make such a slanderous judgment of a man based on some BS you read on the internet. 
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from unclealfie. Show unclealfie's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams : I don't hate whites, I hate stuck up rich people who try to control the government to make themselves even richer.  And it's criminal for a bunch of rich white republicans to sit around and plot how to sscrew poor minorities while acting all self-righteous about it. There aren't any golf courses in hell, Republican POS's. 
    Posted by themightypatriotz[/QUOTE]
    LOL!! Your ignorance knows no bounds. Maybe its not too late for daddy (probably a republican) to get a refund on the college tuition he paid to produce such hateful little commie.   
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from softserve. Show softserve's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    I'm guessing by your avatar unclealfie that you served in the U. S. military, am I right?
    Please follow General MacArthurs advice about OLD soldiers and just fade away.

    Oh BTW it must have taken you hours to write your above posts, much improved.
    I'll move you up to the middle of the 62% uneducated listeners of Rush......LOL!

    Oh, an another thing, I'm guessing you didn't serve in military intelligence...LOL!
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from jedinate. Show jedinate's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams:
    [QUOTE] Shesh! If you're not going to add something of substance, why add anything at all?
    Posted by Ritchie_az[/QUOTE]

    It's an opinion poll and that's my opinion. I don't have to justify it to you, by going on some diatribe about what is wrong with political pundits in America and this racist in particular. If you want that, go to a Politics forum.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ritchie-az. Show Ritchie-az's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    For the sixth time, he's NOT a racist.

    Racist definition (since you're too lazy to look it up yourself): "hatred or intolerance of another race or other races."

    His BEST FRIEND, Bo Snerdley, is black. How can he hate him and how can he not tolerate him AND be his best friend? Answer: it's impossible, and for this reason, therefore: he cannot be a racist.

    Is this really a hard concept to understand? Or is your hatred for his politics blinding you to logic? 
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from paob. Show paob's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams : I guess posting racist comments against whites is OK though.Where are all the liberal anti-racists who have posted on this board now? How come they aren't condemning this anti-white racist post? MORE liberal hipocrisy.You'll attack a guy for alleged racial comments against blacks but will blind yourselves to blatant racial attacks against whites?Your silence is defening.Spineless liberals! Enough with the double standard!
    Posted by cowtherabbit-[/QUOTE]

    Rush Limbaugh and all the other Republicans can burn in hell!  Fu*ck you, you self-absorbed white rich a**holes! 

    The above comments were made by Mightypatriotz. 
    Cow exactly how were you able to determine that he or she is a person of color? 

    Where is your disgust toward conservatives who also haven't spoken out about his opinion?!

    Stockholm Syndrome anyone?!

    Some Republicans - conservatives are quick to point out that liberals are spineless and blah, blah, blah. Conservatives don't hold a moratorium on bravery. I don't know why the hell a number of you seem to think that you're a bigger man or that you've got more guts than someone just because their politics are liberal.

    If push comes to shove and I have to defend myself or my family physically the last thing on my mind would be if the person I was fighting was a liberal or a conservative. It's irrelevant, so, please put the macho nonsense to rest. 
    As for Rush Limbaugh's 'alleged' racist comments, someone posted a link a few pages ago that listed where they could be found. 
    I told Nick when he first began this thread they're going to be responses that he's not going to want to see or read. I guess you can say themightypatriotz provided you with yours.


     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from cowtherabbit-. Show cowtherabbit-'s posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams : Rush Limbaugh and all the other Republicans can burn in hell!  Fu*ck you, you self-absorbed white rich a**holes!  The above comments were made by Mightypatriotz.  Cow exactly how were you able to determine that he or she is a person of color?  Where is your disgust toward conservatives who also haven't spoken out about his opinion?! Stockholm Syndrome anyone?! Some Republicans - conservatives are quick to point out that liberals are spineless and blah, blah, blah. Conservatives don't hold a moratorium on bravery. I don't know why the hell a number of you seem to think that you're a bigger man or that you've got more guts than someone just because their politics are liberal. If push comes to shove and I have to defend myself or my family physically the last thing on my mind would be if the person I was fighting was a liberal or a conservative. It's irrelevant, so, please put the macho nonsense to rest.  As for Rush Limbaugh's 'alleged' racist comments, someone posted a link a few pages ago that listed where they could be found.  I told Nick when he first began this thread they're going to be responses that he's not going to want to see or read. I guess you can say themightypatriotz provided you with yours.
    Posted by paob[/QUOTE
       He posted a racist remark and you are trying to defend him and coming after me? LMFAO.I neither defended or condemned Rush because I don't listen to him.I simply do not know all that much about him. The several lists that were posted of remarks allegedly made by Rush were never associated with a link from a reputable source to confirm their authenticity after I've asked several times for the link. Look through the posts and you'll see this is true. I also never  assumed the poster was any color.I simply stated that if I were to make a racist comment against blacks there would be a huge uproar from liberals on this board,but when a racist remark was made against whites,noone cares. Where did you see me assume the poster was black? Nice try liberal,but you're not going to twist my words around.
       As for the conservatives defending Rush,I have yet to see any of them personally post a racial remark.
       I will reinstate my opinion that anyone who has blasted Rush for his remarks should also blast the racist post I responded too.Those who don't are spineless hypocrits,including yourself. That's not machoism,it's the truth. If you truly don't like racism,you should have condemned the post that I did.Obviously many posters here could care less about racism unless it could be used to crusade against the political opposition.As for Rush's remarks,if true,are disparaging of blacks and racist in my opinion but that is no excuse for people to post racist remarks on this board against whites and both should be condemned with the same enthusiasm.
       I'll make this really simple,many people posted against Rush for anti-black remarks but ignored anti-white remarks.That is hypocrisy at it's worst. How can you even begin to defend that?
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from paob. Show paob's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams : [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams : Rush Limbaugh and all the other Republicans can burn in hell!  Fu*ck you, you self-absorbed white rich a**holes!  The above comments were made by Mightypatriotz.  Cow exactly how were you able to determine that he or she is a person of color?  Where is your disgust toward conservatives who also haven't spoken out about his opinion?! Stockholm Syndrome anyone?! Some Republicans - conservatives are quick to point out that liberals are spineless and blah, blah, blah. Conservatives don't hold a moratorium on bravery. I don't know why the hell a number of you seem to think that you're a bigger man or that you've got more guts than someone just because their politics are liberal. If push comes to shove and I have to defend myself or my family physically the last thing on my mind would be if the person I was fighting was a liberal or a conservative. It's irrelevant, so, please put the macho nonsense to rest.  As for Rush Limbaugh's 'alleged' racist comments, someone posted a link a few pages ago that listed where they could be found.  I told Nick when he first began this thread they're going to be responses that he's not going to want to see or read. I guess you can say themightypatriotz provided you with yours. Posted by paob[/QUOTE    He posted a racist remark and you are trying to defend him and coming after me? LMFAO.I neither defended or condemned Rush because I don't listen to him.I simply do not know all that much about him. The several lists that were posted of remarks allegedly made by Rush were never associated with a link from a reputable source to confirm their authenticity after I've asked several times for the link. Look through the posts and you'll see this is true. I also never  assumed the poster was any color.I simply stated that if I were to make a racist comment against blacks there would be a huge uproar from liberals on this board,but when a racist remark was made against whites,noone cares. Where did you see me assume the poster was black? Nice try liberal,but you're not going to twist my words around.    As for the conservatives defending Rush,I have yet to see any of them personally post a racial remark.    I will reinstate my opinion that anyone who has blasted Rush for his remarks should also blast the racist post I responded too.Those who don't are spineless hypocrits,including yourself. That's not machoism,it's the truth. If you truly don't like racism,you should have condemned the post that I did.Obviously many posters here could care less about racism unless it could be used to crusade against the political opposition.As for Rush's remarks,if true,are disparaging of blacks and racist in my opinion but that is no excuse for people to post racist remarks on this board against whites and both should be condemned with the same enthusiasm.    I'll make this really simple,many people posted against Rush for anti-black remarks but ignored anti-white remarks.That is hypocrisy at it's worst. How can you even begin to defend that?
    Posted by cowtherabbit-[/QUOTE]

    Cow, I'm not in high school and to be frank I'm not gonna go back on forth with you on the juvenile name calling. I don't have time for that sh*t. Where in my post did you see me defend or support what themightypatriotz about said Republicans or conservatives or whites for that matter?


    I can't imagine anyone who has any respect for themselves or their culture making a statement about their race along the lines that  themightypatriotz did, hence the statement the he or she was possibly a person of color. 

    Again, Stockholm Syndrome anyone?! 

    To put it in layman's terms, that would be like me getting on this board and making statements about people of color and democrats that were less than flattering. Anyone reading those statements would assume that I wasn't Black, or Latino or Asian, etc., etc.,
    I've been on this board for some time and only recently did I begin to post more often, why?! Because a number of people who come on here have said some things over the years that were either flat out ignorant or intolerant. And I assumed those people were white. I didn't see anyone coming to my aid when I chose to call some of those people out.

    As for whether Rush Limbaugh made those statements, I believe he did, because I've seen and heard him in action. You can believe whatever the hell you want. We can agree to disagree, but don't assume he didn't make those statements because you didn't hear with it with your own ears.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from cowtherabbit-. Show cowtherabbit-'s posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams : Cow, I'm not in high school and to be frank I'm not gonna go back on forth with you on the juvenile name calling. I don't have time for that sh*t. Where in my post did you see me defend or support what themightypatriotz about said Republicans or conservatives or whites for that matter? I can't imagine anyone who has any respect for themselves or their culture making a statement about their race along the lines that  themightypatriotz did, hence the statement the he or she was possibly a person of color.  Again, Stockholm Syndrome anyone?!  To put it in layman's terms, that would be like me getting on this board and making statements about people of color and democrats that were less than flattering. Anyone reading those statements would assume that I wasn't Black, or Latino or Asian, etc., etc., I've been on this board for some time and only recently did I begin to post more often, why?! Because a number of people who come on here have said some things over the years that were either flat out ignorant or intolerant. And I assumed those people were white. I didn't see anyone coming to my aid when I chose to call some of those people out. As for whether Rush Limbaugh made those statements, I believe he did, because I've seen and heard him in action. You can believe whatever the hell you want. We can agree to disagree, but don't assume he didn't make those statements because you didn't hear with it with your own ears.
    Posted by paob[/QUOTE]

       Enough with the holier than thou BS.Your initial post said nothing about the person I found fault with,but you seemed quite happy  to chop down my remarks.That's defense enough.You fail to address the most glaring point I have made, that of the blatant hypocrisy exhibited by those on this board who jump at the chance to attack anti-black racial comments but selectively ignore anti-white comments.
       You're dancing with words to avoid my point.Your continued reference to "Stockholm Syndrome" makes absolutely no sense and quite honestly sounds like you are trying to practice psycology from a crack den.How am I showing loyalty to a person who has taken me hostage? LOL.Do you know what "Stockholm Syndrome" means?  I guess you walk small but carry a big word.  
       What does other people's post throughout the years have to do with my original and subsequent post? I have no idea how or when I was suppose to come to your aid.You are only proving my point. Your slide of hand tactics are quite transparent.
      You now accuse me of assuming Rush did not make those comments. Should I have just assumed he did? I won't assume he did or didn't make those comments. I wanted proof. I'm not a big fan of witch hunts and I refuse to condemn someone solely on hearsay. Asking someone to do so is ignorant. I have already explained that I am much less familiar with Rush L. than most people on this board.  I did however call Rush's remarks about McNabb ignorant in a far earlier post on this thread.That was the only comment from him that I knew to be true.
      You accused me of assuming the original poster was black,("Cow, how exactly were you able to determine that he or she is a person of color?"), which I did not. You then pretend you didn't accuse me of that, after which you defend yourself for doing the same thing.There's that little "H" word again.
       Finally,you have yet to condemn the original post that I attacked thus proving my point that you and many other people on this board are hypocrital liberals who are using racism,whether true or not,to promote a larger political agenda.If the subject was truly racism,then they and yourself would have immediately responded to the original post that I attacked, with the same enthusiasm that was exhibited in responding to Rush's remarks.
      Let me now put it in layman's terms.How can someone vehemently condemn anti-black remarks but selectively ignore anti-white remarks without being a hypocrit? I'm curious to see what tune you're going to dance to this time.
       BTW,I'm neither republican or democrat.I equally dislike all politicians.They're all crooks.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriotz. Show themightypatriotz's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    "BTW,I'm neither republican or democrat.I equally dislike all politicians.They're all crooks"

    Finally, something we can agree on.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from paob. Show paob's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams :    Enough with the holier than thou BS.Your initial post said nothing about the person I found fault with,but you seemed quite happy  to chop down my remarks.That's defense enough.You fail to address the most glaring point I have made, that of the blatant hypocrisy exhibited by those on this board who jump at the chance to attack anti-black racial comments but selectively ignore anti-white comments.    You're dancing with words to avoid my point.Your continued reference to "Stockholm Syndrome" makes absolutely no sense and quite honestly sounds like you are trying to practice psycology from a crack den.How am I showing loyalty to a person who has taken me hostage? LOL.Do you know what "Stockholm Syndrome" means?  I guess you walk small but carry a big word.      What does other people's post throughout the years have to do with my original and subsequent post? I have no idea how or when I was suppose to come to your aid.You are only proving my point. Your slide of hand tactics are quite transparent.   You now accuse me of assuming Rush did not make those comments. Should I have just assumed he did? I won't assume he did or didn't make those comments. I wanted proof. I'm not a big fan of witch hunts and I refuse to condemn someone solely on hearsay. Asking someone to do so is ignorant. I have already explained that I am much less familiar with Rush L. than most people on this board.  I did however call Rush's remarks about McNabb ignorant in a far earlier post on this thread.That was the only comment from him that I knew to be true.   You accused me of assuming the original poster was black,("Cow, how exactly were you able to determine that he or she is a person of color?"), which I did not. You then pretend you didn't accuse me of that, after which you defend yourself for doing the same thing.There's that little "H" word again.    Finally,you have yet to condemn the original post that I attacked thus proving my point that you and many other people on this board are hypocrital liberals who are using racism,whether true or not,to promote a larger political agenda.If the subject was truly racism,then they and yourself would have immediately responded to the original post that I attacked, with the same enthusiasm that was exhibited in responding to Rush's remarks.   Let me now put it in layman's terms.How can someone vehemently condemn anti-black remarks but selectively ignore anti-white remarks without being a hypocrit? I'm curious to see what tune you're going to dance to this time.    BTW,I'm neither republican or democrat.I equally dislike all politicians.They're all crooks.
    Posted by cowtherabbit-[/QUOTE]

    What the fuc*k is it with some of the people on this board like you and your fondness for using crack expressions and how big your nuts are and all that other bullsh*t?! If you can't answer my posts without using homo-erotic or drug references, please don't bother to respond. Look Dog, it's Sunday, so I'm gonna try to be nice here...

    Can you cut and paste text? If you think you're up for the challenge, go back and show me where I made any statements supporting what TMP said. Again, you chose to ignore what I said about a number of you who get on this board and in the anonymity of your home post ignorant and intolerant comments. Gimme a break with that everybody hates whitey nonsense.
    One person (TMP) made that statement. One!

    I stand by everything I said, especially about that reformed drug addict/bigot Limbaugh! As I mentioned earlier, we can agree to disagree and keep it civil. That's the route I prefer to take. But if you want to take it there and continue to come at me with this macho - I'm am man posturing - I'm not going to back down. I ain't scared!

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from softserve. Show softserve's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    CAT FIGHT! CAT FIGHT! FIGHT NICE LADIES......LOL!  MEOW! LOL!
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from cowtherabbit-. Show cowtherabbit-'s posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams : What the fuc*k is it with some of the people on this board like you and your fondness for using crack expressions and how big your nuts are and all that other bullsh*t?! If you can't answer my posts without using homo-erotic or drug references, please don't bother to respond. Look Dog, it's Sunday, so I'm gonna try to be nice here... Can you cut and paste text? If you think you're up for the challenge, go back and show me where I made any statements supporting what TMP said. Again, you chose to ignore what I said about a number of you who get on this board and in the anonymity of your home post ignorant and intolerant comments. Gimme a break with that everybody hates whitey nonsense. One person (TMP) made that statement. One! I stand by everything I said, especially about that reformed drug addict/bigot Limbaugh! As I mentioned earlier, we can agree to disagree and keep it civil. That's the route I prefer to take. But if you want to take it there and continue to come at me with this macho - I'm am man posturing - I'm not going to back down. I ain't scared!
    Posted by paob[/QUOTE]
    Your a great dancer. I've explained everything already.If you have trouble reading English and your only defense is to rant and rave via virtual world then my points are well proved. You might not like what I posted,but it's all true.Something you are having trouble dealing with this morning. BTW,why would you be scared of a computer? LMAO.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fenwayfaith. Show Fenwayfaith's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    Limbaugh's a total dirtbag & racist...Some people are so foolish and gullible...Throughout the years he has said numerous racist things, but because he has such a large listening audience, it would take alot to get him canned.  I think what he said about McNabb is proof enough and other things he's said have gotten no publicity but their equally as bad...Ahhh calling a sitting president of the United States of America a "racist" is proof enough that this guy is not on very stable ground. 
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Somnambulus. Show Somnambulus's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams:
    But other then he made a comment about McNabb which I think was taken out of context which is what happens to people as polarizing as he is I do not recall any racist remarks and I listen to him all the time. I just would ask for proof, I know unreasonable isn't it!?  
    --

    http://newsone.com/obama/top-10-racist-limbaugh-quotes/

    Limbaugh has said some incredibly racist things on his show. 
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Somnambulus. Show Somnambulus's posts

    Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams

    In Response to Re: Rush Limbaugh as (part) owner of the St. Louis Rams:
    [QUOTE]Newenglanderinexile, You still have it completely wrong. Many Latin-American countries had abolished slave TRADE prior to 1863, but had not actually freed the slaves within their borders. The U.S. did this, by abolishing slave trade in 1808. The U.S. was only the fourth country in the world to partially abolish slavery (slavery was abolished in the "northern" states at it's inception), with Russia, England, and Portugal being the first three. After so many gave their lives to free the slaves here in the U.S., many countries worldwide freed their slaves.
    Posted by Ritchie_az[/QUOTE]
    ---

    The above post does not make a great deal of sense, though the tangled sentence organization may be causing me to misread it.

    Abolishing the trans-Atlantic slave trade and abolishing slavery are two very different things.  The US slave trade itself was not abolished in 1808; slaves were still transported between states, and slaves were still illegally smuggled into the US despite restrictions on trans-Atlantic transportation of slaves.  Instead of stealing men, women, and children from western Africa for use as chattel, men, women--husbands, wives, fathers, sisters, brothers--and children were sold as part of the domestic slave economy.  Planters would breed human beings for sale as chattel.  To give the US credit for abolishing slavery by banning non-domestic importation is a serious misreading of the historical record. 
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share