The Conservative Cave

Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on March 07, 2012, 08:38:26 AM

Title: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on March 07, 2012, 08:38:26 AM
So what do we call them now?

Censors?

Freedom-haters?

Fascists?

Quote
el_bryanto (2,268 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

In your opinion who is the most offensive Conservative Commentator that should be allowed on the air

It seems fairly clear that many on this board (possibly most) feel that Limbaugh has gone to far and does not deserve to be on the public airwaves anymore (if he ever did). So assuming we could remove him from those airwaves, would we move on to Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, et al? Or is Limbaugh just heinous enough that he cannot be on the airwaves anymore - but those other commentators, while terrible, are not so bad as to mandate being kicked off the air?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002395403

"should be allowed?"

I don't need your permission ****-****. I'm a free rabbit.

You aren't the gate-keeper. You're a petty wannabe tyrant.

Ever since Obama outlawed Catholicism these shit stains have been emboldened as never before. They smell blood in the water and they are in a feeding frenzy.

Don't forget: the dems in Colorado have passed a senate bill demanding religiously based health care providers to declare their religious affiliation and explain which health care procedures they will not provide. See the thread in GD.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on March 07, 2012, 09:00:58 AM
Quote
90-percent (4,186 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

2. Glen Beck

Isn't he over halfway to oblivion already?

I'd have to google him just to find out where he's currently working.

Quote
el_bryanto (2,269 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

3. His radio show is still going on

Caught a bit of it last week. So you are saying he should be allowed to stay on the air?

So not agreeing to his fascism is now an implied accusation of disloyalty.

Quote
HopeHoops (28,813 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

4. I don't care what their political bias is. Saying shit like that is disgusting.

You just made The List, buddy!
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: USA4ME on March 07, 2012, 09:05:07 AM
Can't help but laugh at the self-importance and preceived power they've convinced themselves they possess.

.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: BEG on March 07, 2012, 09:31:54 AM
DUers are so blind. You have always been fascist. No amount of denial will change the facts. 

By the way, Glenn Beck has his own radio show for three hours a day. LINK (http://www.glennbeck.com/content/radio/)

A streaming channel called GBTV. LINK (http://web.gbtv.com/schedule/index.jsp)

And a website called The Blaze. LINK (http://www.theblaze.com/)

Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on March 07, 2012, 09:42:47 AM
Quote
wiggs (4,184 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

8. Left or right, you shouldn't be allowed on public airwaves for the

purpose of deception of the American people and undermining of democracy. A voter who is misinformed isn't good for democracy.

You can't air a commercial that lies about its product or other products...you shouldn't be able to lie about politics under the guise of public discourse in order to sell a party.

And opinion/analysis is different than demonstrable lies.

Quote
el_bryanto (2,270 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

11. OK - than Sean Hannity/Glenn Beck - should they be allowed to remain on the air? n/t

Quote
izquierdista (11,283 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

10. William F. Buckley

Now that he's dead, a live mike on his grave wouldn't be too bad.

Quote
Guy Whitey Corngood (12,589 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

16. I like the way you think.

How cute.

The-only-good-conservative-is-a-dead-conservative.

Quote
LeftinOH (3,844 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

13. Lying and spreading misinformation should not be allowed-

Maybe lying is also free speech- I just have a problem with it.

Ever notice how these sorts of conversations never arise here?

My guess is because we're so in love with the ideal of personal liberty we can't even see it being taken away from filthy assholes like Mike Malloy.

But then again, we have principles and we live according to those principles. Unlike lefties who just want power and don't care who they hurt to get it.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: NHSparky on March 07, 2012, 09:47:08 AM
DU--because we're so open-minded we don't need to tolerate other viewpoints.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: jukin on March 07, 2012, 09:56:57 AM
Scratch a Liberal, find a fascist.

For lurking DUchebags, if lying becomes a crime presidebt 0bama will be one of the first sent up the river.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on March 07, 2012, 10:06:10 AM
Imperious little gits, ain't they?
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: USA4ME on March 07, 2012, 10:11:56 AM
Quote from:
wiggs

Left or right, you shouldn't be allowed on public airwaves for the purpose of deception of the American people and undermining of democracy. A voter who is misinformed isn't good for democracy.

And opinion/analysis is different than demonstrable lies.

One persons opinion/analysis is another persons lie.  Who gets to decide which is which?  Certainly not the political left as they have proven time and again they aren't qualified.

.

Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: Karin on March 07, 2012, 10:21:02 AM
Should we allow the DUmpmonkies to pound away at their grubby keyboards today?  Should we let MSNBC go ahead with their daily broadcast?  Should we permit Malloy to broadcast today?  I say no.  Make it so. 


Did that work, DUmmies?  What exactly makes you think you have any power over anyone else's free speech?  What makes you think nobody will try and take it away from YOU?  Do you wish for a law that says "Mr. _____ hereby has the right and power to silence anyone he wishes."  Is that what you really want? 

 
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: Airwolf on March 07, 2012, 10:47:06 AM
What I want to know is who is next after conservatices? Are they going to silence Blacks then or Jews or maybe Asians. Maybe they will go after Buddist or Hindus. Eventually they will get to someone that you like and then who will stand up to them.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: BlueStateSaint on March 07, 2012, 10:55:32 AM
What I want to know is who is next after conservatices? Are they going to silence Blacks then or Jews or maybe Asians. Maybe they will go after Buddist or Hindus. Eventually they will get to someone that you like and then who will stand up to them.

AW, just who has the guns again?  They won't silence us, because they'll have to shed (lots of) their blood to do it.  They don't want to go that far.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: NHSparky on March 07, 2012, 11:09:55 AM
AW, just who has the guns again?  They won't silence us, because they'll have to shed (lots of) their blood to do it.  They don't want to go that far.

No way they'd shed blood, man--that'd just totally harsh their mellow.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: Splashdown on March 07, 2012, 11:16:52 AM
This might earn me a bitchslap or two.

I'm a big fan of Nat Hentoff. He's an amazing writer and columnist, and I have loved reading his stuff even though I disagree with a bunch of what he says. He says it well, he's not a moonbat, and I think it's good to hear differing opinions. He's also an expert on the First Amendment.

You know what he says the response should be to "hate speech"? More free speech. I love this quote from him:

"Those who created this country chose freedom. With all of its dangers. And do you know the riskiest part of that choice they made? They actually believed that we could be trusted to make up our own minds in the whirl of differing ideas. That we could be trusted to remain free, even when there were very, very seductive voices – taking advantage of our freedom of speech – who were trying to turn this country into the kind of place where the government could tell you what you can and cannot do."
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: thundley4 on March 07, 2012, 11:32:28 AM
I wish DU had a network of stations like Rush Limbaugh.  For an hour every day, someone could read threads from DU, and let people know what the left is really like. 

We don't want to silence the left, we encourage them to let their real thoughts be known.  Omaha Steve Dawes of Bellevue should be proud of his socialist views and not lie to the voters in his district.  Why does he like watching girls basketball anyway?
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: jukin on March 07, 2012, 11:35:43 AM
What I want to know is who is next after conservatices? Are they going to silence Blacks then or Jews or maybe Asians. Maybe they will go after Buddist or Hindus. Eventually they will get to someone that you like and then who will stand up to them.

It will be somebody because a communist/socialist/fascist totalitarian state NEEDS enemies for the low IQers to hate for the conditions that the totalitarian state forces on them.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: BEG on March 07, 2012, 11:46:59 AM
I dare DUers to click on these links:


LINK (http://michellemalkin.com/)

LINK (http://reason.com/blog/2012/03/06/its-like-totally-different-when-a-libera)

LINK (http://michellemalkin.com/2011/01/10/the-progressive-climate-of-hate-an-illustrated-primer-2000-2010/)
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: Karin on March 07, 2012, 12:24:05 PM
No bitchslap from me, Splash.  Great quote.  

Thanks for the links, BEG, maddening as they are.  


BTW, did anyone hear Rush at noon?  The left is crowing about 28 sponsors blah blah blah.  Sponsors are both national and local.  These were mainly local, who said something like "please don't run my drycleaners store ad during Rush for just the time being."  600 stations, with about 30 sponsers per, is a denominator of 18,000.  

28!!!!   :lmao:   Lurkers, he's having absolutely NO financial/business problems.  

(Carbonite is still on).
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: BEG on March 07, 2012, 12:28:20 PM
No bitchslap from me, Splash.  Great quote.  

Thanks for the links, BEG, maddening as they are.  


BTW, did anyone hear Rush at noon?  The left is crowing about 28 sponsors blah blah blah.  Sponsors are both national and local.  These were mainly local, who said something like "please don't run my drycleaners store ad during Rush for just the time being."  600 stations, with about 30 sponsers per, is a denominator of 18,000.  

28!!!!   :lmao:   Lurkers, he's having absolutely NO financial/business problems.  

(Carbonite is still on).

Yes I heard it.

DUmmies this is why Lucy always pulls the football out from under you guys. You believe your own hype to the point that you are disappointed time after time. You don't live in the real world.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: Splashdown on March 07, 2012, 12:59:13 PM
Yes I heard it.

DUmmies this is why Lucy always pulls the football out from under you guys. You believe your own hype to the point that you are disappointed time after time. You don't live in the real world.

I have had a number of facebook "friends" say they were "un-friending" -- God I hate that word -- people who came out in favor of Rush, or against Fluke, or who didn't disavow Kirk Cameron or whatever. What they're left with is this echo chamber where they think every believes exactly what they do. And they call conservatives closed-minded...  :whatever:
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: GOBUCKS on March 07, 2012, 01:22:14 PM
DUmmy el_bryanto is a moderatly talented mole.

The DUmpmonkeys fell for his bait en masse, and he even got some civilized people stirred up.

I'm afraid the MIRT liquidation team may be clever enough to see through his camouflage.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: DLR Pyro on March 07, 2012, 01:24:26 PM
I wish DU had a network of stations like Rush Limbaugh.  For an hour every day, someone could read threads from DU, and let people know what the left is really like. 


Wans't that pretty much what air America was?
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: AllosaursRus on March 07, 2012, 03:25:35 PM
Scratch a Liberal, find a fascist.

For lurking DUchebags, if lying becomes a crime presidebt 0bama will be one of the first sent up the river.

If we made the penalty 1 year/lie, he'd be doin' life, and these shit stains won't ever admit it!
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: Ogre on March 07, 2012, 04:23:34 PM
I see the DUmb****s have finally dropped all pretenses of democracy.  They would make their idol Josef proud.

Hey DUmpmonkeys, what's next, deciding who is worthy of life and death?  Oh wait, you are already part way there with abortion, thank God you worthless ****s have no say over the rest of us. :censored: :banghead:
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: Airwolf on March 07, 2012, 08:54:58 PM
And in other news gun sales are up. I wonder why DUmmies? Looks like this country may still yet get a second Civil war and it will probably be even less civil then the last one.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: Big Dog on March 07, 2012, 09:56:39 PM
Quote
wiggs (4,184 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

8. Left or right, you shouldn't be allowed on public airwaves for the

purpose of deception of the American people and undermining of democracy. A voter who is misinformed isn't good for democracy.

You can't air a commercial that lies about its product or other products...you shouldn't be able to lie about politics under the guise of public discourse in order to sell a party.

And opinion/analysis is different than demonstrable lies.

Wigger wants the Thought Police to enforce his brand of "truth".

Wigger, please.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: Airwolf on March 07, 2012, 10:13:20 PM
Well then wiggs most of the left should just give up now and let decent people have a turn.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: Evil_Conservative on March 07, 2012, 11:16:59 PM
I wish DU had a network of stations like Rush Limbaugh.  For an hour every day, someone could read threads from DU, and let people know what the left is really like. 

We don't want to silence the left, we encourage them to let their real thoughts be known.  Omaha Steve Dawes of Bellevue should be proud of his socialist views and not lie to the voters in his district.  Why does he like watching girls basketball anyway?

There is/was a radio station for sale in Mesquite.  It broadcasts in Las Vegas.  It has a little static, but it might work.  If it's still for sale, we should start a fund.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: obumazombie on March 07, 2012, 11:22:30 PM
One benefit of my job which will more than likely be ending soon, is, as I traverse the country, I can tune in to talk radio stations that I have preprogrammed in my ADF receiver as I fly, then, when I am not talking or listening on the radio, I can have Rush in the background from a list of stations spread all across the country. If I am airborne early, I listen to Beck, If it's a little later, Hannity, or Boortz.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: dandi on March 07, 2012, 11:49:34 PM
I have no problem at all with people letting their conscience be their guides when deciding what products to buy or services to use. For example, I certainly wouldn't patronize a place like Portland's Red And Black Cafe due to the way it refuses service to police. To me, though, it's a completely different thing to organize groups to punish people for the express purpose of silencing someone merely because you disagree with them. It smacks of the fascistic, and while it doesn't rise to the level of a First Amendment issue, private citizens not being the government, it is still wildly out of step with the spirit of free speech that is a cornerstone of our nation.

There already exists legal remedies both civil and criminal to deal with speech that is actually harmful. Libel and slander suits, false advertising, inciting to riot, etc., are there for the purpose of protecting individuals and maintaining order. These little vigilante groups running around trying to impose their idea of "allowed" speech through financial extortion are distasteful in the extreme to me. They are definitely not people who understand what America is supposed to represent. They would counter that those same American freedoms are what allows them to do this, and I would agree with them. I don't question the legality at all, just the motivations behind it, which I think are obvious.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: BlueStateSaint on March 08, 2012, 04:47:44 AM
And in other news gun sales are up. I wonder why DUmmies? Looks like this country may still yet get a second Civil war and it will probably be even less civil then the last one.

I tell my wife that, every day, that it will occur in two years, and it will make Rwanda circa 1994 look like an afternoon tea party.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: AprilRazz on March 08, 2012, 06:30:06 AM
Quote
wiggs (4,184 posts) Profile Journal Send DU Mail Ignore

8. Left or right, you shouldn't be allowed on public airwaves for the

purpose of deception of the American people and undermining of democracy. A voter who is misinformed isn't good for democracy.

You can't air a commercial that lies about its product or other products...you shouldn't be able to lie about politics under the guise of public discourse in order to sell a party.

And opinion/analysis is different than demonstrable lies.
Why do you want to alienate most of the dim voter base?
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on March 08, 2012, 09:01:31 AM
And in other news gun sales are up. I wonder why DUmmies? Looks like this country may still yet get a second Civil war and it will probably be even less civil then the last one.

I'm not betting that it will ever happen, but if it does, it'll make the Yugoslavian Civil War look like a white-glove garden party.  The division isn't highly regional like our 19th-Century Civil War, and neither side is politically organized for it on those lines as was the case then, so it would simply be a bloodbath with hundreds of warlords.  
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on March 08, 2012, 09:16:57 AM
I'm not betting that it will ever happen, but if it does, it'll make the Yugoslavian Civil War look like a white-glove garden party.  The division isn't highly regional like our 19th-Century Civil War, and neither side is politically organized for it on those lines as was the case then, so it would simply be a bloodbath with hundreds of warlords.

If there is ever a general breakdown of civil order I imagine the dependent class will be consumed like the veal calves they are. Then it will be outlaw gangs against those carving out enclaves in the city.

Those of us who live 20 miles away from the nearest paved roads will watch the fires as we pass around our roasted shanks and moonshine.
Title: Re: Apparently we need DU's permission to speak in public
Post by: DumbAss Tanker on March 08, 2012, 09:33:59 AM
Those of us who live 20 miles away from the nearest paved roads will watch the fires as we pass around our roasted shanks and moonshine.

That's more or less my OPLAN.

 :cheersmate: