Actually, I was TRYING to hide from Rush; impossible because...sm
Posted By: Cyndiee on 2009-03-02
In Reply to: he's hiding from Rush! sm - nm#2
like a very bad itchy rash, or the smell of cow manure, he is EVERYWHERE, even to ignorant dems/independents who (OH MY GOD) get all the nes channels, C-SPAN, that the special Republicans can. You know, it is ironic that Rush could be a lying, hypocritical pill-popper addict AND still be the messiah of the Republican Right. Were he a Dem or Independent, there is NO WAY that stuff would have EVER been forgotten/forgiven, no way. Just because we are not listening to the rantings of a hypocritical, press-hunting, pompous, loud, obnoxious BS'er like Rush does not mean we "don't get the real news"....on the contrary, I think it shows we do, and we can read between the lines and interpret with intelligence. JMHO, putting on my flame-retardant suit.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
People with nothing to hide, hide nothing!
One of my favorite quotes!
Is this mission impossible...
Every time I decide to give this site another chance I find posts like this....is this mission impossible and are there spies among us?? ha ha
As you can see from posts below, it is impossible
nm
Nope, not mission impossible, not spy, not anything like that...
just the drive-by LINO poster using different monikers to attack me personally to make it appear that there are more on the board who want to make personal attacks than just the one...safety in numbers, I suppose, even though they are pseudonumbers. The poster comes and goes, attacks and runs, attacks and runs...it is what it is. If liberals are into that, fine. One poster just comes on and does post after post after juvenile Bush-bashing post. Is that really what you guys are about? Flies in the face of the way liberals describe themselves. I said I wanted to understand, and understand I do...thank all of you...so much.
Why It's IMPOSSIBLE to Have an Intelligent Dialogue with Conservative *Followers*
I would strongly advise watching the video. I saw Mr. Dean on this show, and everything started to make a lot of sense as to why it's impossible to have any kind of intelligent debate on these boards. In the couple times I have tried, I never received any substantive responses to the issues. I only received (and continue to receive) personal attacks.
Video: 50 year study says conservatives 'followers'
07/11/2006 @ 11:48 am
In an interview with MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, former Nixon counsel John Dean explained a largely unknown 50 year academic study. The data shows that conservatives are much more likely to follow authoritarian leaders.
Dean discovered the ongoing study while researching his new book, Conservative Without Conscience.
Dean believes that the study helps to explain why the Republican party has been driven further right.
A rush transcript follows the video.
Video can be found at: http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Video_50_year_study_says_conservatives_0711.html
DEAN: Goldwater Republicanism is really R.I.P. It's been put to rest by most of the people who are now active in moving the movement further to the right than it's ever been. I think that Senator [Goldwater], before he departed, was very distressed with Conservatism. In fact, it was our conversations back in 1994 that started this book. That's really where I began. We wanted to find answers to the question, Why were Republicans acting as they were? -- Why Conservatives had taken over the party and were being followed as easily as they were in taking the party where [Goldwater] didn't want it to go.
OLBERMANN: What did you find? -- In less than the 200 pages that the book goes into.
DEAN: I ran into a massive study that has really been going on 50 years now by academics. They've never really shared this with the general public. It's a remarkable analysis of the authoritarian personality. Both those who are inclined to follow leaders and those who jump in front and want to be the leaders. It was not the opinion of social scientists. It was information they drew by questioning large numbers of people -- hundreds of thousands of people -- in anonymous testing where [the subjects] conceded their innermost feelings and reactions to things. And it came out that most of these people were pre-qualified to be conservatives and this, did indeed, fit with the authoritarian personality.
OLBERMANN: Did the studies indicate that this really has anything to do with the political point of view? Would it be easier to impose authoritarianism over the right than it would the left? Is it theoretically possible that it could have gone in either direction and it's just a question of people who like to follow other people?
DEAN: They have found, really, maybe a small, 1%, of the left who will follow authoritarianism. Probably the far left. As far as widespread testing, it's just overwhelmingly conservative orientation.
OLBERMANN: There is an extraordinary amount of academic work that you quote in the book. A lot of it is very unsettling. It deals with psychological principles that are frightening and may have faced other nations at other times. In German and Italy in the 30's, come into mind in particular. But, how does it apply now? To what degree should it scare us and to what degree is it something that might be forestalled?
DEAN: To me, it was something of an epiphany to run into this information. First, I'd never read about it before. I sort of worked my way into it until I found it. It's not generally known out there, what's going on. I think, from the best we can tell, these people -- the followers -- a few of them will change their ways when the realize that they are doing -- not even aware of what they are doing. The leaders, those inclined to dominate, they're not going to change for a second. They're going to be what they are. So, by and large, the reason I write about this is, I think we need to understand it. We need to realize that when you take a certain step of vote a certain way, heading in a certain direction, where this can end up. So, it's sort of a cautionary note. It's a warning as to where this can go. Other countries have gone there.
OLBERMANN: And the idea of leaders and followers going down this path or perhaps taking a country down this path requires -- this whole edifice requires and enemy. Communism, al Qaeda, Democrats, me... whoever for the two-minutes hate. I overuse the Orwellian analogies to nauseating proportions. But it really was, in reading what you wrote about, especially what the academics talked about. There was that two-minutes hate. There has to be an opponent, an enemy, to coalesce around or the whole thing falls apart. Is that the gist of it?
DEAN: It is one of the things, believe it or not, that still holds conservatism together. There is many factions in conservatism and their dislike or hatred of those they betray as liberal, who will basically be anybody who disagrees with them, is one of the cohesive factors. There are a few others but that's certainly one of the basics. There's no question that, particularly the followers, they're very aggressive in their effort to pursue and help their authority figure out or authority beliefs out. They will do what ever needs to be done in many regards. They will blindly follow. They stay loyal too long and this is the frightening part of it.
OLBERMANN: Let me read something from the book. Let me read this one quote then I have a question about it. Many people believe that neoconservatives and many Republicans appreciate that they are more likely to maintain influence and control of the presidency if the nation remains under ever-increasing threats of terrorism, so they have no hesitation in pursuing policies that can provoke the potential terrorists throughout the world. That's ominous, not just in the sense that authoritarians involved in conservatism and now Republicanism would politicize counter-terror here which we've already argued that point on many occasions. Are you actually saying that they would set up -- encourage terrorism from other countries to set them up as a boogey man to have, again, that group to hate here -- more importantly, afraid of?
DEAN: What I'm saying is that there has been fear mongering, the likes of which we have not seen in a long time in this country. It happened early in the cold war. We got accustomed to it. We learned to live with it. We learned to understand what it was about and get it in proportion. We haven't done that yet with terrorism. And this administration is really capitalizing on it and using it for its' political advantage. No question, the academic testing show -- the empirical evidence shows -- when people are frightened, they tend to go to these authority figures. They tend to become more conservative. So, it's paid off for them politically to do this.
OLBERMANN: This all seems to require, not merely, venality or immorality but a kind of amorality where morals don't enter into it at all. We're right. So anything we do to preserve our process, our power -- even if it by itself is wrong -- it's right in the greater sense. It's that wonderful rationalization that everybody uses in small doses throughout their lives. But, is this idea, this sort of psychological sort of review of the whole thing, does it apply to Dick Cheney? Does it apply to George Bush? Does it apply to Bill Frist? Who are the names on these authoritarian figures?
DEAN: You just named three that I discuss at some length in the book. I focused in the book, not on the Bush Administration and Cheney and The President because they had really been there done that, but what I wanted to understand is what they have done is made it legitimate to have authoritarianism. It was already operating on Capitol Hill after the '94 control by the Republicans in Congress. It recreated the mood. It restructured Congress itself in a very authoritarian style, in the House in particular. The Senate hasn't gone there yet but it's going there because more House members are moving over. This atmosphere is what Bush and Cheney walked into. They are authoritarian personalities. Cheney much more so than Bush. They have made it legitimate and they have taken way past where anybody's ever taken it in the United States.
OLBERMANN: Our society's best defense against that is what? Do we have to hope, as you suggested, the people that follow, wise up and break away from this sort of lockstep salute to, of course, they're right, of course there are WMDs, of course there are terrorists, of course there is al Qaeda, of course everything is the way the president says it. Or do we rely on the hope that these are fanatics and fanatics always screw up because they would rather believe in their own cause than double-check their own math.
DEAN: The lead researcher in this field told me, he said, I look at the numbers of the United States and I see about 23% of the population who are pure right-wing authoritarian followers. They're not going to change. They're going to march over the cliff. The best thing to deal with them -- and they're growing, and they have a tremendous influence on Republican politics -- The best defense is understanding them, to realize what they are doing, how they're doing it and how they operate. Then it can be kept in perspective and they can be seen for what they are.
You mean, it's impossible to change intelligent people's minds!
You can call us what you want; however, intelligent people are not fazed by the comments of those who live in fear and enjoy wallowing in their own misery.
If you can't make abortion illegal, just make it impossible (sm)
That's right, Bush is still alive and well. Check this out.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#28024676
Yeah, I know it's MSNBC, but how many other people are doing a lame duck watch?
Why is it sad? What do you have to hide? nm
I don't have anything to hide, do you?
I could care less if the government opens my mail (which they have been doing for years and long before 9/11 BTW), my emails or listens to my phone conversations. I have nothing to hide. You also are not allowed to send contraband in the mail. It's a federal offense and always has been. If one were speaking to terrorists and live in this country one should be brought up on charges of aiding and abetting the enemy and for being a traitor to this country.
I have nothing to hide. If this is
actually going on, they would quickly realize that I'm no threat. The worst they could get me for is gossiping.
No need to run and hide from
What I heard Obama reiterate his consistent policy to Joe the unlicensed. In the absence of a link, not too sure I heard that "below Joe" phrase from Obama, but I am assuming you are referring to income levels. Apparently, you did not hear me say that progressive tax structure has been in place for as long as I can remember and that giving tax cuts and tax credits, allowing tax cuts to expire, adjusting tax rate, adding and subtracting deductions, opening and closing loopholes revising categories of tax burden to be benefit or detriement of any given class (i.e, shrubs's tax cuts to the rich that redistributed tax burden "downward" onto the middle class) is nothing new under the sun and is actually very, very American.
You obviously do not understand (or at least, have a selective understanding of) socialism. Palin's "collective ownership of resources" skips that bump in the road all together and smack of communism...straight up, as does government ownership of banks and lending institutions along with government buy-outs of privately owned properties such as homes, as proposed by McCain. If Obama is a socialist, so is McCain, so is Palin and so is the shrub....unless of course, you would have us believe that as long as the bucks are directed upward to a ruling elite class (as was the case in the Soviet Union) and left to trickle down across the land does not qualify as redistribution of wealth.
Get over yourself. Palin and McCain have busted their own slur campaign just by opening their mouths. It does not matter to me whether or not you understand basic economics...what matters to me is how this folly is playing out on the campaign trail with the undecided and independent voters.
I think if they had tried to hide it...(sm)
it would have been 10 times worse. -- that would also be true if we were talking about dems in that position. Having said that, since Palin advocates abstinence and safe sex (as do the dems), the position her daughter is in only proves that this approach does not always work. I don't fault Palin or her daughter for the pregnancy, but I do fault the republican party for putting her up there as an example. It just sends a mixed message. I just think it was a bad choice.
NY'ers would never run and hide
I am a born and bred New Yorker and you bet we would stand and fight. New Yorkers are quite a tough bunch. You must never have met a New Yorker cause you would not question whether they would stand and fight. And if you are a Brooklynite, LOL, you are even tougher.
The only one who would worry about it is the one who has something to hide. sm
I could care less. I won't answer in this thread anymore.
Run and hide from this can of worms
You think you can dismiss W administration boondoggle on this by pointing a finger at 2 people? Cooked books do not even qualify as the tip of the iceberg on this issue. I will not be going to chat rooms and biased resources to analyze this one. It is HUGE and frightening in terms of just how close the country is to total economic collapse. Whether you realize it or not, this crisis has global consequences in overseas markets. We will not be the only ones mopping up and ultimately a global solution will need to come into play.
In any case, this subject deserves more than just a casual flippant dismissal, is quite complicated and requires objective and in-depth analysis before concluding who is responsible and, more importantly, what can be done in terms of policy and legislation to prevent it from happening in the future. Most definitively, of paramount importance will be the "R" word that sends chills down the spine of W's flock…regulation of the mortgage/banking lending practices. W is positively allergic to that idea, and McCain's policy on that is exactly what now? At least Obama had already addressed this issue in his platform and is currently making an effort to "study" the situation further before issuing any further statement on it. I appreciate that in a leader, especially when it comes to a crisis of such magnitude.
Your Enron analogy is delusional. Enjoy while you can and just wait for the real underlying issues to reach the light of day. Like I said before, this feminist flap is a featherweight distraction from critical problems our nation is facing, but then again, I would expect nothing less from the JM/SP camp.
He can't hide the fact
that he cheated on his first wife many times before he met Cindy McCain and left his wife for her. I also have a good friend who as a former fighter pilot actually knew John McCain. He saw the philandering first-hand and has a very low opinion of him. And he is a conservative republican.
Probably because you hide behind your anonymous
daily moniker. You won't tell anyone what you do, who you are, or what your husband does.
The previous poster did, and I applaud her and her husband for all their hard work and dedication, and community involvement.
Sounds like someone I'd like to call a friend.
I have nothing to hide either - but don't want them listening to me - nm
x
How do you know Obama has nothing to hide? sm
I get no real pleasure with my gut feelings on this man. He was a complete unknown except for his past associations which he completely denied and threw to the curb when needed. It is a fact that he has put under lock and key, important documents that reveal his character. What you have seen play out in the media, is what they want you to see.
Everyone has a past. Hopefully, Obama can rise above it and prove himself to be an honorable leader. But some of his choices show his lack of character, and only time will tell who the real man is, who will become our next president shortly.
I myself think she was trying to hide it as long as she could -
the night she was first brought out, her daughter held the other baby in front of her all the time with an old blanket draped across her front. At the time, I kept wondering, why she would do that, and now I believe she was trying to hide her stomach from view that night.
O will fold and hide
behind Michelle's ample skirt. He has neither the experience or the guts to do what is needed. We will be run into the ground under and trampled over under O.
Yep, she could not hide her bias.
nm
Hide and watch. Isn't that what our very own
do, hide and watch right before they pull the trigger like they did with Dr. Tiller in a church no less? When it is Obama that is their next victim that they have been **hiding and watching**, I can't wait to see the explanations for that from the hiders and watchers on this very own board.
Limberger lies and tries to hide it, LOL
Biggest bunch of bunk? Limberger stated terrible things about Sheehan, ranting and raving. Then when he is called on it, he has it disappear from his website and states he never said any of it. Yet, the proof is in the pudding. Limberger is a liar, as are quite a few of the prominent radical right wing neocons, including the warmonger chickenhawk in the WH. The proof is there, the words were spoken by the druggie. So there is no reason to get all huffy and puffy, you have nothing to defend. Thank goodness for the written word and videos. Limberger..phew, he stinks.
Party all you want. Then go hide your money from
nm
Oooooo...let's all hide under the bed till he's gone! (nm)
You right-wingers are some wacky folks! I can't help but laugh at some of your posts.
Yes, any money you have left, hide it!. Otherwise,
nm
be grateful you have money to hide
so stingy and hateful
No instead they hide behind woman and children
In their own country. Not in boats.
I wish the people reporting this on the news would not be so iggy.
This is a lie. They live in Gaza. They don't hide there.
They were democratically elected into power, defeating the Fatah party, which retains its majority in the West Bank, but Hamas has won elections there, too.
The majority of the people in Gaza live in the squalor of refugee camps under the iron fist of their hostile occupiers who imposed an apartheid police state and enforce blockades of basic supplies such as food, medicine and MONEY. This strangles their economy and starves their people. Israel was supposed to lift the blockade as part of the cease fire conditions. They have had since June to do this and by the time the cease fire expired on December 19th, they had not done so and had no intention of doing so. THAT is why the cease fire did not hold. Surprise, surprise. More lies and broken promises from Israel, only these particular lies are creating deadly and fatal conditions for the entire population in Gaza. Can you say genocide? It's a war of attrition at the hands of Israel and sanctioned by the United States.
They do not hide behind women and children. The population in Gaza supports the resistance to the blockade, since they and their children are the ones who are being slowly starved to death. That's why they elected Hamas. An occupied population which has been invaded repeatedly, blockaded, has the highest unemployment rate in the world (Gaza at 45%), has no medical supplies and is on the verge of starvation tend to arm themselves and band together against their common enemy. It's human nature to do so. This is not about anything more than simple survival for them.
And that's NO JOKE! Hide and watch! Exactly what
--
If it's high you flash it, if it's low you hide it.....sm
like everything else, isn't it?
You hide BEHIND race...that is your obsession with O
And, yes, admit it, you didn't have a clue about MLK, as many that repeat his words don't know, or they would rethink the Obama thing....
You do NOT know what he stood for, you just repeat stuff he has said and that is all. Do you know how he felt about dems? No, you don't.... how he detested them? no, you don't, do your homework and stop trying to twist things around...
For you and especially the loud mouth ranting earlier, race is THE issue...so why is it you don't mind spewing it out but you just can't take the truth thrown back at ya?! I suspect you should get over it as you put it...
He's real. He is who is he is and he doesn't hide behind fakery. sm
I respect him for that. Harry Truman was not polished either. Neither as Lyndon Johnson. It's just not a big deal right now.
Doesn't hide behind fakery? You are kidding, right?sm
I am surprised lightning has not struck the man for all his lying, never mind all the blood on his hands.
Yeah, trying to hide Obama's answer, which is the
nm
people who hide behind God for bad manners and stupidity irk me
NM
I won't hide! It's kinda hard to give
posts any merit when the writer won't come forward. I don't like getting slammed, but what the heck--guess I deserve it sometimes.
Easy way for racists to hide their truths as well
Sure seems an easy way out to say that "oh! everytime I say something about Obama people say its racism, but it's not!" What a copy out and easy way to try to hide your racism.
You actually dont hide your sins welll either.....
You continuously judge people. How about just pray for them instead. Say that your opinion differs, and you have not felt first hand what they or their families have gone through, but you will pray for them to be okay and be right themselves with God. You don't know their relationship with God, their struggles or anything else, just as we don't know yours. I will pray for you though.
I think Jesse Jackson's probem is that Obama is not trying to hide the problems - see message
He is not trying to hide the problems in the black community - like his speech about father's needing to stand up and become involved in their children's lives - not just "bear the fruit" and leave it to rot... Most black people want their problems kept quiet and they will take care of it themselves. Also if there is a problem in the black community, they want to take care of it themselves and not broadcast it for the world to become aware (like they do not already know). As long as there is not a prominent black figure calling attention to their problems, they don't have to recognize them.
It is the same with Bill Cosby. The black community does not like it that he calls attention through the media to the problems. If he were just working behind the scenes quietly, it would be okay.
Understand, I am not prejudiced against black people - very involved with black people and therefore know some of how they think - agree with some of it and disagree with some of it.
Rush
What an evil, hateful, intolerant, ignorant person, but that explains the following he has with some on these boards. Birds of a feather stay together. Maybe it makes them feel more powerful somehow. If they weren't so hateful, I might even feel sorry for some of these poor misguided souls.
There seems to be an increasing movement of hate and intolerance in this country, wrapped around the Bible and the flag, neither of which is undeserving of such sacrilage by people who claim to love God and country.
It's becoming scarier every day to be an American who (1) might not belong to the "right" religion (no pun intended), (2) who thinks that Bush is taking us backwards in time, and (3) who supports our troops by wanting them to come home to their families safe, alive and intact, and to only be used when absolutely necessary, not at the whim of a president who has lies and who can't be trusted.
Rush is all over this, too. nm
..
Rush is Right Again
Who said anything about Jesus? Maybe I'm a Jew!
If you go to Rush's w/s, you'll see his "official Obama criticizer," aka "Bo Snerdley."
And speaking of the Jews, it was a Dem. strategist who made the comment in FL that the Jews wouldn't vote for a black man. That may well be on Rush's w/s as well. Even Rush hadn't heard that one.
Y'all just make this way TOO easy too much fun for me!
Rush is Right
If you actually studied this stuff you'd know what you're talking about. Even Greta played the soundbyte of what he said. It was printed on his web page, and is probably still there.
I don't have time to get into having studied this literally all my life.
Regardless, if you think that having a Socialist in the White House is the answer and that border security means nothing, then vote away for one. Ironically, the person who wrote the book "Real Change" before Obama picked it up as his buzz word was Newt Gingrich. You may have no idea who he even is.
Try looking at JusticeOnTheBorder.com or EyesOnTheBorder.com if you want to compare what Obama & Clinton said about opening our flood gates even more as they pandered to all the illegals.
You probably also had no idea that he has over 20 million listeners daily. Literally nobody can touch him. When you're on top, they always try to topple you.
Rush is NO racist. Even so, there's no law against it, whether it be black against white, white against black, etc.
I can't even believe when read things like this.
Have a nice day.
Rush
I LOVE RUSH!! Rush's show is so informative and entertaining at the same time. At least we still have someone who tells the truth about our government.
Re: Rush
Rush is common sense, huh? Do you consider being a blatant racist common sense? He lets it be known that he hates minorities and women, and as far as he is concerned all women are brainless individuals who should not have rights. Do you truly consider what he spews as gospel? He is one of the most toxic media personalities I have ever had the misfortune to listen to as many others feel he is, and he offers nothing of value to the true COMMON SENSE American public. The citizens of this country, whether white, black, red, yellow need to be brought together to make a change, whether you like Obama or not, whether your party affiliation is Republican or Democrat. I look at our current state and it saddens me that these individuals whom we have entrusted have continually messed over us and we STILL believe what they say and do - look at what we have endured for the past eight years and will for years to come. It's criminal.
Rush Limbaugh sm
I stopped listening to him when he started calling us feminazis. I can't believe that big load of (expletive) is still allowed on the air. Not only is he ignorant, he's a hypocrite and a druggy and if he's trying to impress someone, it's not me.
You are losing it for us, Rush.
"Whether you agree with the fact that it's going on or not, we all have come to the decision that it's best that we win it. You haven't even joined us on that. You hope we lose it. You want to lose it because you want to embarrass the leaders of the country. What must your lives be like?"
First of all, there is no war to be won. Our enemy cannot be destroyed by brute force. Our enemy hides among the population, lives among the people. They have no strongholds we can attack, no supply lines we can cut, and no army we can outmatch and outgun on a traditional battlefield. We are fighting on their terms, but we have refused to acknowledge that. I ask you, what do you think Rush means when he talks about "winning the war in Iraq?" What does he envision as victory? The end of all violence against American targets? Complete and total peace? When Iraqis welcome our soldiers into their homes, and hug and kiss them in the streets? The insurgency is a disease. We have tried to destroy the infections that we have encountered, but we have not found a cure. We cannot prevent it, we cannot vaccinate against it. So long as American forces remain in Iraq, there can be no peace. You cannot convince the average Iraqi that we are there for his benefit, when his brothers have been killed by our soldiers, his home bombed by our planes, his life governed and monitored by our Army. So long as our soldiers patrol their streets, the Iraqis cannot be free, and the insurgency will continue. The hard truth is, the Bush administration does not know what to do in Iraq. They do not know how to achieve victory, because they do not know what victory should mean.
Leave Iraq. Bring our soldiers home. Apologize to the Iraqi people. Has anyone in the Bush camp ever thought of that? We are not fighting the Iraqi people as a whole. We are fighting various elements within the population. We owe the Iraqi people an apology, for invading their lives and killing their innocents (and because it was accidental does not excuse us from our responsibility). It is wrong to hate the Iraqi people. The vast majority of them are victims, caught in the crossfire. But the longer we remain in Iraq, the more noncombatants will join the insurgency, and become our enemies. The insurgents don't need to recruit new members; we are providing the people with reasons to join the fight against us, merely by doing what we are currently doing in their country. It is the propaganda that people like Rush spread that creates more and more hate, and makes it harder and harder to really and truly win the war in Iraq.
blowhard rush
But it is okay for the blowhard, Rush, to rag on people, lie about people, diss people? Make a joke about people and their struggles? The minute someone proves what Rush is all about and you freak out. Tell me, if the article by Olbermann about Rush is not true, why has Rush's transcript where he is putting down on Sheehan been removed from his website? Why has he denied stating derogatory remarks about Sheehan? He knows he did because we have it in the net and on video. You know, it bugs me that blowhards spout their hate and intolerance, bugs me for sure but it bugs me even more when you can't own up to your remarks. If he stated it, he needs to come clean and we all know he stated it, as the proof is in the net.
Rush's new bottom.
I do not listen to Rush but I saw this on television and read it in the paper. Michael J. Fox has done a commercial for the democrat running in Missouri who is pro stem cell research. He is obviously having a really bad day or his Parkinson's has progressed since I last saw him. Anyway, Rush said that Fox was **acting,** flailing all over the place, that he knew Fox had Parkinson's but that he has never seen any symptoms of it before this political ad. He said Fox might have stopped taking his medication so that he would flail around more, but if not, then he was acting. Unfrigging believable. I have seen Fox unable to sit still or stop moving many many times even while taking medication over the years. I think he was diagnosed in 1994 so 12 years later he has probably deteriorated quite a bit. This just struck me as so mean-spirited. Knocking the homeless, the mentally ill, etc. is one thing, disgusting in my opinion, but to accuse a sick man of faking it is snake belly low. People in glass pill bottles should not throw stones.
|
