Professor Rush "We gotta redefine smart"

Lorax · October-30-09, 08:32 AM

I would add that the kooks in the Rethuglican party are being touted as the mainstream of their party.

Contrary to what Eunice Sniveling says, Lush Bimbo is nothing more than Glenda Speck's baby daddy- a discredited lump of batcrap who's audience is as relevant as the rotted elastic on a pair of Goodwill underwear.

**Detroitej72** · October-30-09, 08:54 AM

Entertainers like Rush and Beck are popular because they play up to the paranoid, traditionally racist, and uneducated crowd. This is the backbone of their popularity and it is becoming increasingly isolated despite the propaganda conservatives scream on the airwaves.

**rb336** · October-30-09, 09:29 AM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

Rb...you are the greatest...who is misusing polls now, ay Rb? Not very long after you derided me for doing exactly what you are doing now...classic.

no, actually, i didn't. your "poll" was a perfect example of mashing words to determine the outcome rather than asking a straight-out question. here, I'm saying that yes, people describe themselves as "conservative" BUT when you look issue by issue, the American public repeatedly chooses the more liberal answers. there is a HUGE difference

Lorax · October-30-09, 09:30 AM

there is a HUGE difference

One lost on the Viceroy of the Batcave.

ccbatson · October-30-09, 08:32 PM

"My" Gallup poll?

**rb336** · November-02-09, 09:11 AM

for those of you who are nuance challenged --
"your" poll means the poll you suggested looking at

Lorax · November-02-09, 09:31 AM

So true.

He cites polls he's never looked at because some fascist talking head said Gallup was reliable.

Armchair pontificating born of sloth-like research.

**Detroitej72** · November-02-09, 10:47 AM

Wing Nuts manipulate polls to reflect their evil agenda on a constant basis.

ccbatson · November-02-09, 09:16 PM

Gallup is no good by the liberals now? Can you count how many times Democrats referred to Gallup as recently as...oh, I don't know, a few weeks [[maybe days) ago?

Come on Dyes libs, next time try to put up a decent fight would you?

**Detroitej72** · November-02-09, 09:37 PM

Bats, in the immortal words of your hero: "there you go again".

If you really believe everything is black and white, then I have some swampland in Antarctica to sell you...

ccbatson · November-02-09, 09:38 PM

Who is it you believe to be "my hero"?

**Detroitej72** · November-02-09, 09:40 PM

Ronald Wilson Reagan, the 40th president of the U.S.

Or, is it Rand?

Lorax · November-02-09, 09:48 PM

Randy Raygun- a blending of the two.

Enough to make any sane person go postal.

**vetalalumni** · November-04-09, 01:12 PM

Did Mr. Hoffman represent efforts to redefine smart?

ccbatson · November-04-09, 08:48 PM

And when did these supposed heros say the phrase "there you go again" and in what context?

Hint, are you starting to realize that you are not making sense?

Lorax · November-04-09, 08:50 PM

More posts disappearing around here- gee, I wonder who's behind that?

ccbatson · November-04-09, 08:53 PM

Some advise Lorax...follow the rules of the owners of the forum, I have no idea what you are talking about, but I suspect you are supplying the rope with which you may get hung.

Lorax · November-04-09, 09:00 PM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

Some advise Lorax...follow the rules of the owners of the forum, I have no idea what you are talking about, but I suspect you are supplying the rope with which you may get hung.

Did I say it was necessarily my post?

ccbatson · November-04-09, 09:02 PM

Does it matter?

Lorax · November-04-09, 09:07 PM

Nice to see you admit to "advising" the moderators.

I was having an exchange, a friendly one with another poster that involved a link from the Rocky Horror Picture Show. Nothing ad hominem directed at another poster, just an aw shucks between two posters.

ccbatson · November-04-09, 09:09 PM

Now you did say it was your post [[oops), and you also confirm that I had nothing to do with it...yet you still imply that I did...let's summarize a bit...name calling, personal attacks, welching on wagers, violating forum rules repeatedly...not looking good for credibility for this person, now is it?

Lorax · November-04-09, 09:23 PM

Originally Posted by ccbatson

Now you did say it was your post [[oops), and you also confirm that I had nothing to do with it...yet you still imply that I did...let's summarize a bit...name calling, personal attacks, welching on wagers, violating forum rules repeatedly...not looking good for credibility for this person, now is it?

I admit to contributing to it, not that it was of my origination. And I never said you didn't contribute to it, did I?

Where did that come from?

Let's see:

Ad hominem personal attacks
Insisting on being a "doctor" when evidence is to the contrary
Higest number of posts with the least content

Guess someone else has a credibility problem.

ccbatson · November-05-09, 09:50 PM

Slow down Lorax, you misunderstand what is going on and have things backwards ad upside down [[again). Go over it again and let us know what you think once you understand.