Rush Limbaugh has advanced cancer [Thread Closed] (1 Viewer)

Status
Not open for further replies.
You keep telling yourself that.

What we are seeing today, is the legacy of Limbaugh, Gringrich, Buchanan, O'Reilly, etc.
There is no equivalency here.

Well, instead of focusing on the problem, shouldn't we be thinking about a way forward where we're not each other's enemy? I think it's a genuine question by Semper. And a reasonable one. The answer is of course going to be complicated because people are complicated. None of those names you've listed are people I've listened to lately. And they don't have the last word. So we move on from them and find a way to get along with one another while being disagreeable from time to time.
 
Well, instead of focusing on the problem, shouldn't we be thinking about a way forward where we're not each other's enemy?
How do you solve a problem without focusing on it?

I think it's a genuine question by Semper. And a reasonable one.
It may be genuine, but it rings of denial, if not naivety.

None of those names you've listed are people I've listened to lately.
And they don't have the last word.[/quote]
Millions listen to them. We have a President in the White House who ran on a platform he lifted straight from their talking points.

So we move on from them and find a way to get along with one another while being disagreeable from time to time.
Who is "we"?
And may be that people don't listen to them as they did before, but it is not only about them. It is the ideology they sowed and cultivated for decades.
 
Well, instead of focusing on the problem, shouldn't we be thinking about a way forward where we're not each other's enemy? I think it's a genuine question by Semper. And a reasonable one. The answer is of course going to be complicated because people are complicated. None of those names you've listed are people I've listened to lately. And they don't have the last word. So we move on from them and find a way to get along with one another while being disagreeable from time to time.
For me it’s worrying less about begavior/manners and focusing more on goals
Let’s say the goal is something like ‘equal opportunity for all’
Make that the aim and all other elements are secondary or tertiary to that
(I’m not accusing you of doing this) but if we’re arguing from unequal positions, then rules (even if unwritten/social) about how to interact, are tools of the status quo to help maintain that imbalance
 
How do you solve a problem without focusing on it?


It may be genuine, but it rings of denial, if not naivety.


Millions listen to them. We have a President in the White House who ran on a platform he lifted straight from their talking points.


Who is "we"?
And may be that people don't listen to them as they did before, but it is not only about them. It is the ideology they sowed and cultivated for decades.

So...what you're saying is to throw our hands up in the air and say screw it? Because that's what is sounds like to me.

We solve the problem by examining why we are where we are then doing something to change how we got there. Repeating tired old arguments doesn't accomplish anything and we need to let go of old assumptions. If we do this in good faith, I think there's a conversation to be had.

You're the one putting words in my mouth about denial. I'm not denying anything. I just want a way forward where we actually treat each other with respect and give weight to each other's points of view, even if they don't agree.

As for the rest, those people are not my influencers. I agree they influence millions of people, and I'm disappointed that more people like Romney don't stand up and apart from the current leadership. But that has to start somewhere.

"We" could be you and I and anyone else here. It could be people frustrated with the current state of our culture and politics. It could be a lot of things and a lot of people. I'm just wondering if there's a real desire to have a meeting of the minds or if this whole exercise is futile.
 
So...what you're saying is to throw our hands up in the air and say screw it? Because that's what is sounds like to me.
I said no such thing.

We solve the problem by examining why we are where we are then doing something to change how we got there. Repeating tired old arguments doesn't accomplish anything and we need to let go of old assumptions. If we do this in good faith, I think there's a conversation to be had.
So now you want to focus on the problem. Good.

You're the one putting words in my mouth about denial.
I didn't put words in your mouth. I was speaking about Semper's comments.
That's 0-2.

I just want a way forward where we actually treat each other with respect and give weight to each other's points of view, even if they don't agree.
Treating each other with respect requires that each other do so. You can't have one side not respecting the other... you never get anywhere taking the high road when the other side refuses to take it with you.

As for the rest, those people are not my influencers.
This is not about you.

I'm just wondering if there's a real desire to have a meeting of the minds
There seems to be none.
 
I said no such thing.


So now you want to focus on the problem. Good.


I didn't put words in your mouth. I was speaking about Semper's comments.
That's 0-2.


Treating each other with respect requires that each other do so. You can't have one side not respecting the other... you never get anywhere taking the high road when the other side refuses to take it with you.


This is not about you.


There seems to be none.

On the first part. Explain what the point of our discussion is then.

On the 0-2 part. I thought the comments was directed at me. I didn't realize your were talking to him in the same post.

Are you saying I don't respect you? That would be an incorrect assumption. I'd have a beer and have a conversation about whatever you like. I respect you enough to listen to what you have to say. I wouldn't be having this conversation if I didn't.

It's not about me, but I'm certainly not the only one who doesn't kowtow to the Republican party's submission to the current administration. My comments reflect those who are frustrated with the state of our discourse and politics.

To the last comment. Why not? We are here? Unless I'm misunderstanding your point.
 
On the first part. Explain what the point of our discussion is then.

On the 0-2 part. I thought the comments was directed at me. I didn't realize your were talking to him in the same post.

Are you saying I don't respect you? That would be an incorrect assumption. I'd have a beer and have a conversation about whatever you like. I respect you enough to listen to what you have to say. I wouldn't be having this conversation if I didn't.

It's not about me, but I'm certainly not the only one who doesn't kowtow to the Republican party's submission to the current administration. My comments reflect those who are frustrated with the state of our discourse and politics.

To the last comment. Why not? We are here? Unless I'm misunderstanding your point.

I am going to stop right here. Your reading comprehension is way off today.
 
Well, instead of focusing on the problem, shouldn't we be thinking about a way forward where we're not each other's enemy? I think it's a genuine question by Semper. And a reasonable one. The answer is of course going to be complicated because people are complicated. None of those names you've listed are people I've listened to lately. And they don't have the last word. So we move on from them and find a way to get along with one another while being disagreeable from time to time.
IMO, I don't think it's complicated at all. I think a simple agreement on truth and acceptance of facts would go a long way toward starting the process of reconciling. Right now, there is a whole segment of the population that believes outright lies as fact. There can be no conversation between someone who believes that grass is made from dog hair and those that don't. There are actually people who refute the truth and facts simply because the occupant of the white house has told them to.
I am going to stop right here. Your reading comprehension is way off today.
IMO, stopping like this is kinda part of the problem. Maybe try to re-explain the point you are trying to make. I don't necessarily agree with everything from DaveXA's POV but he's never come across as someone not willing to have a real discussion.
 
Last edited:
The exact one thing that does set him apart.


Case by case basis.


A large number of people agree with his vitriol.

If you want to feel sorry for Limbaugh, if you want to fell compassionate for Limbaugh, if you feel any respect for Limbaugh, go ahead, feel it. But that doesn't make you a better person, just a "holier than thou" person.

For my part, I don't feel sorry or compassionate for douchebags who spent a lifetime spewing vitriol and hate towards people, and profiting from it. But you do you, and I'll do me.
Dude. His family is either complicit and enjoying the fruits of his evil or they've stopped caring for him and are sitting back watching karma prove itself in a big way.

This is pretty much how I feel....its hard for me to have much empathy for a guy who made his fortune dividing people....
 
So...what you're saying is to throw our hands up in the air and say screw it? Because that's what is sounds like to me.

We solve the problem by examining why we are where we are then doing something to change how we got there. Repeating tired old arguments doesn't accomplish anything and we need to let go of old assumptions. If we do this in good faith, I think there's a conversation to be had.

You're the one putting words in my mouth about denial. I'm not denying anything. I just want a way forward where we actually treat each other with respect and give weight to each other's points of view, even if they don't agree.

As for the rest, those people are not my influencers. I agree they influence millions of people, and I'm disappointed that more people like Romney don't stand up and apart from the current leadership. But that has to start somewhere.

"We" could be you and I and anyone else here. It could be people frustrated with the current state of our culture and politics. It could be a lot of things and a lot of people. I'm just wondering if there's a real desire to have a meeting of the minds or if this whole exercise is futile.

there is no going forward because both sides have made politics their religion. Once you have decided that your position is the moral high ground and there is no middle ground or other way of looking at things, there is no hope.

those on both sides use the same logical fallacy....because I am *insert party/belief here*, then I am 100% right. There are more and more incidents of violence against those of differing political beliefs. both sides are moving more to the extreme and away from the middle and history has shown what happens when people claim moral superiority and won't tolerate those who are different
 
there is no going forward because both sides have made politics their religion. Once you have decided that your position is the moral high ground and there is no middle ground or other way of looking at things, there is no hope.

those on both sides use the same logical fallacy....because I am *insert party/belief here*, then I am 100% right. There are more and more incidents of violence against those of differing political beliefs. both sides are moving more to the extreme and away from the middle and history has shown what happens when people claim moral superiority and won't tolerate those who are different
Actually, this is learned behavior. These people are heavily influenced by their spheres of influence. Hence Rush's power over them.

The way forward is for reasonable people to do as you have and point it out, but it also needs to happen at a higher level than just folks on a message board. We need level headed influence to over come radicalization. Easier said than done, I know.
 
there is no going forward because both sides have made politics their religion. Once you have decided that your position is the moral high ground and there is no middle ground or other way of looking at things, there is no hope.

those on both sides use the same logical fallacy....because I am *insert party/belief here*, then I am 100% right. There are more and more incidents of violence against those of differing political beliefs. both sides are moving more to the extreme and away from the middle and history has shown what happens when people claim moral superiority and won't tolerate those who are different
Truth to tell, I think that buying into a ‘both sides’ narrative is just as problematic
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom