User Tag List

First 123 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 25

  1. #11
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,675

    Default

    I think this is disappointing.

    Should be able to express political views without being threatened with legal action to keep you quiet, also if you're offended you should deal with it rather than seeking legal recourse, unless its some sort of explicit incitment to violence or planning of violence. By which I mean more than simply saying "I hate all ______ and wish they were dead", which I believe could be plenty of things, rude, wrong, cruel, ungentlemanly, uncivilised, wicked but not a criminal offence.

    Its big in the US, and getting big over here too, that pundits try to be real big mouths and grab attention (although here in the UK both conservatives and labour and liberals, basically the whole of the political spectrum embraces a pretty militantly homosexual agenda, which makes me think about the background of politicians and their financial backers).

    After the riots and at the time of the big first round of public pay and pensions freezes and cuts enacted to pay for the bankers bonuses, mistakes and fraud a lot of real, real ugly conservatives came out of the wood work and picked some really vicious verbal battles, employing really simplistic logic, often fallaciously simple, with the less intellectual and easily flustered trade union shop stewards on the radio shows. It wasnt real politics at all. It was something like the "debates" you would see in a school yard about whose dad was the toughest or what "we" should think of the unpopular kids who dress different or have different tastes in music.

    Part of what I didnt like about it was that it made politics into a kind of sport, and for the majority a spectator sport, no real thought required. There never was greater proof that people arent wired to pursue truth they are wired to pursue "win" and most easily identify with the aggressor or powerful whether it really reflects their immediate interests or not.

  2. #12
    Freaking Ratchet Rail Tracer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,041

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    I think this is disappointing.

    Should be able to express political views without being threatened with legal action to keep you quiet, also if you're offended you should deal with it rather than seeking legal recourse, unless its some sort of explicit incitment to violence or planning of violence. By which I mean more than simply saying "I hate all ______ and wish they were dead", which I believe could be plenty of things, rude, wrong, cruel, ungentlemanly, uncivilised, wicked but not a criminal offence.
    There is a difference between attacking a person and attacking an idea/ideology.

    That lady is a person.

    Christianity is an ideology.

    This is personally attacking a person, and that is wrong whether it was a political(view) or not.

    However, the more popular you are, the less immunity you have from this general rule because you've made yourself known. It is when you use your new-found power to attack someone is when you get in trouble. Limbaugh had power, he attacked someone with little influence outside of a private college.

  3. #13
    Senior Member ZPowers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    1,492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by swordpath View Post
    My point is that Rush made an offensive comment for which he apologized and now people (and not even the victim) are talking about trying to prosecute him. He's a conservative political talk show host, his whole persona is for the purpose of ruffling feathers. He stepped the line, yeah, but a lawsuit? Seriously? These are cases the court system DOES NOT need to be bogged down with. This is just stupid. Everything about this whole situation (even before mention of prosecution) is ridiculous. I've been laughing a lot at politics lately. It's a freakin' circus.
    Should he be prosecuted or sued? Of course not. Should he be stripped of his financiers and his show? Yeah, if that's what the people want.

    The first amendment happens to cut two ways. People can say what they want, but other people can say "hey, I don't want to hear what you have to say anymore, because it is crazy, sexist, and moronic." And those people can walk away from you.

    If Rush lost his show tomorrow, he'd have the same free speech I do. Now, what I say doesn't go out on a national radio program, but I still have that right to say what I want. So does that stupid, hateful asshole. And frankly, I hope he doesn't have the pull to say them nationally anymore. Its only cutting out the unhealthy parts of the diet that create our national debate.
    Does he want a pillow for his head?

  4. #14
    Senior Member swordpath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    MBTI
    ISTx
    Posts
    10,552

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZPowers View Post
    Should he be prosecuted or sued? Of course not. Should he be stripped of his financiers and his show? Yeah, if that's what the people want.

    The first amendment happens to cut two ways. People can say what they want, but other people can say "hey, I don't want to hear what you have to say anymore, because it is crazy, sexist, and moronic." And those people can walk away from you.

    If Rush lost his show tomorrow, he'd have the same free speech I do. Now, what I say doesn't go out on a national radio program, but I still have that right to say what I want. So does that stupid, hateful asshole. And frankly, I hope he doesn't have the pull to say them nationally anymore. Its only cutting out the unhealthy parts of the diet that create our national debate.
    Of course people have the right to pull their support. If that's what they want to do then more power to them. Amurrica! However, I can't imagine how rich Rush is... I think he'll be ok. I think he'll kick for another day.

  5. #15
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    The first thing that popped into my head when I opened that link was that woman wears way too much makeup. The second thing was that this lady is giving Rush Limbaugh exactly what he wants. She's trying to turn a reasonable public reaction into a witch hunt, which just gives people like Rush Limbaugh more ammunition for his talk show. This is crossing the line.
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  6. #16
    Senior Member ZPowers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    1,492

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by swordpath View Post
    Of course people have the right to pull their support. If that's what they want to do then more power to them. Amurrica! However, I can't imagine how rich Rush is... I think he'll be ok. I think he'll kick for another day.
    Of course. If Rush wants another job, probably one that has a more limited scope, he will get it. On the other side, Bill Maher did something similar when he moved from ABC (I think?)'s "Politically Incorrect" to HBO's "Real Time."

    I agree that Rush shouldn't (and, honestly, won't) be sued, but I'll also argue he is in a position that does not need any defending.
    Does he want a pillow for his head?

  7. #17
    Senior Member Munchies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    MBTI
    XNXP
    Enneagram
    OMG sx
    Socionics
    iuno
    Posts
    474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    I think this is disappointing.

    Should be able to express political views without being threatened with legal action to keep you quiet, also if you're offended you should deal with it rather than seeking legal recourse, unless its some sort of explicit incitment to violence or planning of violence. By which I mean more than simply saying "I hate all ______ and wish they were dead", which I believe could be plenty of things, rude, wrong, cruel, ungentlemanly, uncivilised, wicked but not a criminal offence.

    Its big in the US, and getting big over here too, that pundits try to be real big mouths and grab attention (although here in the UK both conservatives and labour and liberals, basically the whole of the political spectrum embraces a pretty militantly homosexual agenda, which makes me think about the background of politicians and their financial backers).

    After the riots and at the time of the big first round of public pay and pensions freezes and cuts enacted to pay for the bankers bonuses, mistakes and fraud a lot of real, real ugly conservatives came out of the wood work and picked some really vicious verbal battles, employing really simplistic logic, often fallaciously simple, with the less intellectual and easily flustered trade union shop stewards on the radio shows. It wasnt real politics at all. It was something like the "debates" you would see in a school yard about whose dad was the toughest or what "we" should think of the unpopular kids who dress different or have different tastes in music.

    Part of what I didnt like about it was that it made politics into a kind of sport, and for the majority a spectator sport, no real thought required. There never was greater proof that people arent wired to pursue truth they are wired to pursue "win" and most easily identify with the aggressor or powerful whether it really reflects their immediate interests or not.
    the sport you talk about is game theory. The polarization of arguements into black and white. The mindless sheep pick a side. Every movement will be hijacked and turned into mainstream polarization, for example the wall street protests was hijacked into being a 99% vs 1%. The idiots adapted this which was started by the media. Totally made the movement a failiure. This is the basics of politics and is all explained if you check out my World Government thread in politics section
    1+1=3 OMFG

  8. #18
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,675

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rail Tracer View Post
    There is a difference between attacking a person and attacking an idea/ideology.

    That lady is a person.

    Christianity is an ideology.

    This is personally attacking a person, and that is wrong whether it was a political(view) or not.

    However, the more popular you are, the less immunity you have from this general rule because you've made yourself known. It is when you use your new-found power to attack someone is when you get in trouble. Limbaugh had power, he attacked someone with little influence outside of a private college.
    Christianity is not an ideology.

  9. #19
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,675

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Munchies View Post
    the sport you talk about is game theory. The polarization of arguements into black and white. The mindless sheep pick a side. Every movement will be hijacked and turned into mainstream polarization, for example the wall street protests was hijacked into being a 99% vs 1%. The idiots adapted this which was started by the media. Totally made the movement a failiure. This is the basics of politics and is all explained if you check out my World Government thread in politics section
    Seriously man, you shouldnt be high all the time.

  10. #20
    Senior Member Munchies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    MBTI
    XNXP
    Enneagram
    OMG sx
    Socionics
    iuno
    Posts
    474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Seriously man, you shouldnt be high all the time.
    LOL woops you changed your picture def didnt realize it was the Lark woudnt have tried to trade thoughts with your dumbass
    1+1=3 OMFG

Similar Threads

  1. Why people are spiritual in the first place?
    By Virtual ghost in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 07-23-2009, 07:10 PM
  2. All people are the same?
    By UnitOfPopulation in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-11-2009, 08:41 PM
  3. [MBTItm] New graduate. All my "mentors" are idiots, and looking to get on a power trip. Help!
    By mysavior in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 08-26-2008, 09:30 PM
  4. Most people are 'vertically ill'
    By xNFJiminy in forum Health and Fitness
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-11-2007, 08:18 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO