Rush = Keith.
The difference you ask....ones a Republican nut and the other is a Liberal nut.
Last edited:
-
Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
-
Check Out IronMag Labs® KSM-66 Max - Recovery and Anabolic Growth Complex
Not looking good for California Prop 8
- Thread starter Splash Log
- Start date
Rush = Keith.
The difference you ask....ones a Republican nut and the other is a Liberal nut.
This!
You would be surprise at how much influence and money they have. One thing they know how to do is earn money.
Sheesh...There would be no Catholic priests in California.
Ditto!
The pot calling the kettle black.
Keith's watchers: 928,000 (lowest on cable news)
Rush's listeners: 20,000,000
Keith isn't even in the same league as Rush Limbaugh.
Proof please.... and not from FOX.
the voice of moderation!When I looked up his ratings, this is the first one i found...
Olbermannâ??????s ratings shrinking faster than glacier in global warming
The site i probably biased, but it links to the hard numbers from Nielsen.
Even if Olbermann had O'Reilly's number at 3 mil a night, it's still 1/6 of Limbaughs.
When I looked up his ratings, this is the first one i found...
Olbermann’s ratings shrinking faster than glacier in global warming
The site i probably biased, but it links to the hard numbers from Nielsen.
Even if Olbermann had O'Reilly's number at 3 mil a night, it's still 1/6 of Limbaughs.
Hey, I try not to be biased. Yall may call me whatever but I don't belong to one party.
If I am wrong then I am wrong, I can admit I am wrong.
Perfect example was with the gun issue, I was against but in listening to both Willbrink and Albob I learned a lot and it made me see things differently.
Is it we have to get interested in?
Not really, in NYC the gun laws are very, very strict.
Dduh! That's a no brainer.
I think this proves that more Conservatives can't think for themselves.......
Ouch.....
I think it proves Conservatives actually care about what's going on & pay attention. Liberals don't know shit, nor do they care to. Pop culture tells them democrats are cool, and they defend them. I don't talk politics to friends, but to hear them talk in mind-boggling.. I love em, but they're clueless
Conservative TV & Radio destroys it's liberal competition... it's not even close. Liberal radio went bankrupt, and MSNBC does pitiful.
All but one of my friends consider themselves democrats/liberals and don't know shit. The one conservative friend I have is very knowledgeable on politics. '
I find that no one who affiliates with a particular party is knowledgeable on what is going on, I don't refer to it as politics because IMO that slants it right away. I won't watch the typical liberal news, I watch Colbert and Stewart because they are funny, read the news, watch Fox and Friends (As much for Gretchen as to learn), Shep every now and again, then research and form my own opinion. The very fact that someone affiliates with a party let's me know they are only willing to listen to their stuff.
I will never watch or listen to Rush. He is immature, about as slanted as anyone could be, and a hypocrite. People who listen to him either do so to hear what they want to hear or to be outraged. I would say Stewart is slanted slanted left, but he is funny and handles himself like a man, not a douchebag.
Almost forgot, I like Huckabee too, but he is not on at a convenient time for me.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2001
- Messages
- 11,622
- Reaction score
- 333
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 63
- Location
- An alternate reality.
Whatever you say.
History of Marriage
"The notion of marriage as a sacrament and not just a contract can be traced to St. Paul who compared the relationship of a husband and wife to that of Christ and his church (Eph. v, 23-32)."
That's called a "tyranny by the majority" and why the Const. exists, as an overriding set of principles we follow that does not require current public opinions/social norms of a particular time to apply to a group of people.
The majority of people were in favor of slavery at one time, but it was clearly not Const. They solved that problem (for a time) by deciding blacks were not actually human beings.
No state should be able to right bigotry into their state Const. and the US Const . will usually be used to override/correct it. Thus, we may see a US Supreme Court case from the CA issue if they decide it's a Const. issue.
I think it is, some will argue it's not. If I were gay, I would push for the civil unions personally, but I do understand their position that it's "Separate but equal" similar to what was used to hold up discrimination against blacks:
"Blacks were entitled to receive the same public services such as schools, bathrooms, and water fountains, but the 'separate but equal' doctrine mandated different facilities for the two groups. The legitimacy of such laws was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1896"
Separate but equal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Some see the idea of civil unions as a way to work with those so opposed to calling it marriage and some see it as a classic "Separate but equal" which does not = equal at all.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 14,833
- Reaction score
- 1,676
- Points
- 113
- Age
- 43
- Location
- In my imagination.
"Separate but equal" sounds exactly like "They have the right to marry members of the opposite sex just like everybody else." Its a way of pretending to offer equal treatment without actually giving them equal treatment.
It is the same bigoted mentality that causes people to try and deny other people the same rights and privileges they hold dead to themselves. This behavior comes from good people, too. It is a human trait I guess. Not the better side of humanity, that's for sure.
