Here we go again Limbaugh to Powell Become a democrat already.

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by macfan881, May 7, 2009.

  1. macfan881 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2006
    #1
  2. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #2
    Powell is right. People like Limbaugh are exactly what's wrong with the Republican party at the moment. He's what's been wrong with them for a very long time.
     
  3. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #3
    Ah yes... the purity police are out again. That's right Boss Limbaugh, your party just hasn't been hard-right enough. That's your problem. Believe that, and run with it -- I'm begging you.

    It's also quite amusing in light of the interview I saw this morning where Specter's replacement on the Judiciary committee was on the teevee crying crocodile tears of concern saying that it was such a bad sign that Democrats have temporarily stripped Specter of his seniority because it's a sign of a party enforcing rigid ideological purity upon it's members. Seriously. And he said it without a hint of irony.
     
  4. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #4
    My favorite Rushism of the Week™

    Eric Cantor going out on a listening tour.
    Limbaugh saying we don't need a listening tour,, we need to educate tour.
    Cantor going on TV saying he wasn't on a listening tour.

    Pathetic.
     
  5. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #5
    Boss Lardbaugh says Powell's endorsement of Obama is about race....if it was about race, why the hell did he not endorse until 2 weeks before the election? Both Powell and Obama have always been black, if Powell's going to endorse because Obama is black, he would've done it at the beginning of the election cycle. One of them didn't suddenly turn black the day before Powell endorsed.
     
  6. Teh Don Ditty macrumors G4

    Teh Don Ditty

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Location:
    Maryland
    #6
    Colin Powell is openly white, he just happens to be black

    </George Carlin>
     
  7. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #7
    This is frickin' hilarious. Rush simultaneously claims that Powell is a liberal who might as well join the Democratic party; and also that the only thing Powell based his vote upon was Obama's race.

    If Powell is indeed such a liberal, wouldn't that mean he supported Obama on far more than just a racial basis?

    Rush can't even keep his smears straight.
     
  8. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #8
    Is it too early to put a bet on four more years?
     
  9. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #9
    As I've said before, please let Limbaugh keep talking. We won't have to worry about Republicans for a very long time.
     
  10. Tomorrow macrumors 604

    Tomorrow

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2008
    Location:
    Always a day away
    #10
    I'm not sold on Powell being all that liberal; I got the sense last fall (around the time of the election) that his endorsement did have something to do with race, although it would be colossally stupid of him to admit that. The smartest way for Powell to have played it was to sell his endorsement on Obama's politics. We may never know the truth.

    I've told many people that although I was disappointed with the outcome of the Presidential election, the two things that disappointed me most were (1) knowing that there are many people out there who voted for Obama largely (if not completely) because of his race, and (2) knowing that there are many people out there who voted for McCain largely (if not completely) because of Obama's race.
     
  11. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #11
    Huh? It couldn't be because of policy difference? I'd say race had very little to do with the outcome of the election. Those two groups you mentioned most likely cancelled each other out.
     
  12. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #12
    Of course Powell's no more a liberal than Obama is a socialist. Limbaugh apparently thinks anyone who doesn't hew to his version of conservatism is a liberal.

    I got the sense that Powell was thoroughly disgusted with the path the GOP was taking, and that he thought President Obama would be better for America than President McCain would.

    Of course, we may never know the truth about much of anything any politician says -- or any person.

    Or the people who voted for Bush because they wanted to have a beer with him, or because he had an (R) after his name, or because he believed in the same god as they did.

    Or the people who voted the opposite. I'm not a big fan of the single-issue, no-thought-involved voter.
     
  13. Rt&Dzine macrumors 6502a

    Rt&Dzine

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2008
    #13
    Powell may not be that liberal, but he became disenchanted with much of the Republican agenda (Bush/Cheney) well before Obama ran for president. Powell tried to talk Bush out of the Iraq war among other things.

    Edit: weird, mactastic's post didn't show up before I posted or I'm blind.
     
  14. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #14
    The people who would've voted for Obama due to race are going to be African Americans, and they overwhelmingly vote Democratic in every presidential election
     
  15. Tomorrow macrumors 604

    Tomorrow

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2008
    Location:
    Always a day away
    #15
    I'm sure policy difference was a factor for many voters, and hopefully with all voters. Race alone might not have made the difference; especially since, as you mentioned, the two groups likely cancelled each other out, at least partially.

    My disappointment has more to do with people allowing race to be a factor. I can appreciate that it's more pleasant to think about policy being the deciding factor, but you can't convince me that nobody out there let race be a factor. You've probably been subjected to some persecution somewhere along the way in your life - you don't think there are some "good ol' boys" who voted for McCain because they couldn't stomach the thought of a black man in the White House? Or surely, somewhere in this country, are some blacks who finally saw a chance to buck a 220-year trend of white presidents?

    I think my logic to Lee's argument applies to yours as well; Bush almost certainly got votes because of all the reasons you mentioned. But it's just my opinion that all of those are more forgivable reasons for choosing a candidate than choosing based on race.
     
  16. kavika411 macrumors 6502a

    kavika411

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Location:
    Alabama
    #16
    I just did a "search forums" to see how many threads contain the following terms, and got the following results:

    Obama 141
    Bush 179
    Kevin Rose 201
    Pelosi 271
    Jobs 339
    Limbaugh 382

    Not sure what it means.
     
  17. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #17
    I don't think any of the reasons Mac mentioned are any more forgivable. They're all based on ignorance of the real issues.

    I'm sure there were people who voted because of race, but as I mentioned, I bet they cancelled each other out.
     
  18. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #18
    Why would it be more forgivable to vote for someone because they're fervent believers in the same religious sect as you than because they're the same race as you? I don't see any difference between the two, so I'm curious to know what makes a race-based vote worse in your mind.
     
  19. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #19
    This is beautiful. The Republican party is a sinking ship; moderates like Specter are jumping overboard; and Captain Bli-- er, Limbaugh, is actively encouraging desertion!

    To carry the sailing analogy further, Captain Limbaugh reminds me of Curly (of Three Stooges fame), who, when faced with a sinking ship, decided to drill holes in the bottom of the boat to let the water out.

    Yes, it's that kind of comedic self-destruction.

    And since I've been suffering that blowhard's pronunciamentos for several decades now and have been waiting patiently for him to get his comeuppance, I will now sit on the shore and sip a margarita while I watch him and his crew go down for the third time.

    Yo ho ho!
     
  20. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #20
    That's not a fair comparison. Curly is very funny and entertaining and probably wasn't half the asshat Lardbaugh is
     
  21. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #21
    It's just amazing to see how unbelievably ridiculous Limbaugh has become. At least during Clinton, he had some legitimate things to say and he even made some sense. Now he's just this side of insane. I listen to him now and he isn't even the same person. He's not funny anymore. He's just full of piss, vinegar and a whole lot of bitterness.
     
  22. Macaddicttt macrumors 6502a

    Macaddicttt

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2004
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #22
    As a direct descendant of Captain Bligh, I take offense at that comparison. :mad: :p

    Although Bligh was subject to a mutiny, so it's more like Limbaugh is the mutineers and Bligh is the moderate Republicans. Let's just hope that they manage to do what Bligh did in the end: haul them back to London and hang them.... :p

    (I kid, I kid. I don't want anyone to be hanged.)
     
  23. Tomorrow macrumors 604

    Tomorrow

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2008
    Location:
    Always a day away
    #23
    Because a vote for a skin color makes no sense to me - as far as I'm concerned you might as well ask each candidate to pick a number 1 to 10, or flip a coin, because to me it surely isn't taking ideology into account. A vote for an ideology does make sense to me, whether it's religion, economics, or whatever.
     
  24. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #24
    Religion says nothing about ideology. Nor does the ability to enjoy a malted beverage, how "hot" the candidate is, their state of residence, or any of a host of other factors. To me, that's the same as basing your vote on race.

    Unless you base your vote on a range of issues, and the candidates actions (not words) addressing those issues, you might as well just pull the lever for/against someone based on their race.
     
  25. Gelfin macrumors 68020

    Gelfin

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #25
    See, I don't think he's insane at all. On the contrary, I think the man is quite canny. A bipartisan-friendly GOP takes money almost directly out of his pocket. On the other hand, a bloodless coup that substitutes his audience for the former membership of a formerly legitimate political party puts money directly into it.

    Limbaugh is the toxoplasma gondii in the rat's brain of the Republican Party. He knows he's marginalizing the GOP and he knows he'll be richer than Croesus as long as he can keep it up.
     

Share This Page