Page 4 of 7
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 9:58 pm
by Simon Viavant
GabonX wrote:Rush didn't have a candidate in the last election. He rallied people to vote against Obama but McCain was not his man. Had there have been a true conservative candidate that person would have received more votes. Palin was really the only reason he got as many votes as he did.
Do you occasionally take your head out of your ass to breathe, or do you just go on a tube?
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:04 pm
by Juan_Bottom
I think he's talking specifically about the truer conservatives that were backing Romney and Huckabee. Not about the voters that counted, lol.
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:18 pm
by mpjh
Hmmmm, Romney, Huckabee --- didn't they lose also?
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:22 pm
by Frigidus
mpjh wrote:Hmmmm, Romney, Huckabee --- didn't they lose also?
They lost to the guy who lost.
Also, how would a guy farther from center have garnered more votes? Hardcore conservatives backed McCain just like Hillary supporters voted Obama. They both were throwing a tantrum, and said mean things they didn't intend. Nothing more.
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:38 pm
by mpjh
Ah, sour grapes. He won because he got the most votes -- over 7 million more than the loser.
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 4:46 pm
by MeDeFe
Napoleon Ier wrote:MeDeFe wrote:Napoleon Ier wrote:MeDeFe wrote:Napoleon Ier wrote:Exactly MeDeFe... a period of sustained deflation liquidating malinvestments is a necessary for full recovery.
Except there will hardly be a recovery this time, oh, the economy will pick up slightly again, but barely anyone will start hiring. The employees simply won't be needed, in fact, they already aren't, but firing everyone not strictly necessary and optimizing the existing lines of production would have caused too much of a fuss. With companies going bust left and right and losing a few hundred million US$ every month however... well, why employ people if you can install a robotic production line that manages twice the output and you only have to pay for it once, maintenance costs are negligible when compared to wages. Mid-term we'll have to get used to unemployment rates in the 20s, eventually they will go as high as 80%. Fewer and fewer people will be necessary to provide the goods and services that can possibly be consumed by everyone.
Work is fast becoming a thing of the past.
Take those 80% and treat them as a separate economy: can't they just start up their own chains of capital structure?
No, those 20% are already producing as much as the 100%
can possibly consume. Adding even more production capacity would accomplish exactly nothing, except for a lot of unnecessary effort and wasted time and resources, because 80% of all production would go to waste and people in service occupations would mostly just be kicking their heels and killing time.
So essentially, all wants are satisfied, and Capitalism has led society to Nirvana.
Err... powerful critique you got there, MeDeFe. Gee... I'm definitely joining the barricades now.
Think it through, only 20% can actually find any work at all, there's nothing to do for the rest so they can earn money. It doesn't matter which current system you take, be it a social market economy, unfettered capitalism, or anything in between, no system can handle that. How are the 80% going to buy anything without an income? How's a welfare state going to provide for that many? What do you think they will do if the state doesn't provide? It's a keg of powder that will explode, and unless you're a fan of unfettered rioting and looting as a sustainable economic model it's not a situation that needs to be resolved.
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 5:02 pm
by mpjh
Nappy knows all that; he just doesn't care -- he thinks this situation cannot possibly reach him.
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 7:27 pm
by Napoleon Ier
MeDeFe wrote:
blah blah unfettered capitalism blah blah blah whinge whinge greed businessmen entrepreneurs etc
...
Think it through, only 20% can actually find any work at all, there's nothing to do for the rest so they can earn money. It doesn't matter which current system you take, be it a social market economy, unfettered capitalism, or anything in between, no system can handle that. How are the 80% going to buy anything without an income? How's a welfare state going to provide for that many? What do you think they will do if the state doesn't provide? It's a keg of powder that will explode, and unless you're a fan of unfettered rioting and looting as a sustainable economic model it's not a situation that needs to be resolved.
Yawn.
As I said, you can then treat them as a separate economy, and they develop their own ratios of inequality and capital chains.
You objected of course, that everyone's wants are satisfied, so there's no room for extra production.
Although that's in fact an impossible scenario (as Tonkaed has pointed out), I'm humoring your deluded pseudo-intellectual fantasy for the time being.
OK. It's now left as an exercise to the reader to find the contradiction in MeDeFe's claims... or to join in playing bait the retards with him and mpjh, I don't know, whichever you'll fund more fun.
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 11:47 pm
by GabonX
Simon Viavant wrote:GabonX wrote:Rush didn't have a candidate in the last election. He rallied people to vote against Obama but McCain was not his man. Had there have been a true conservative candidate that person would have received more votes. Palin was really the only reason he got as many votes as he did.
Do you occasionally take your head out of your ass to breathe, or do you just go on a tube?
Do you ever have anything constructive to add or is your input limited to empty threats and chilsdish insults?
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 12:04 am
by mpjh
I guess you could call that a non-denial denial, or an affirmative to the original question.
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 12:18 am
by GabonX
Call it whatever you want but your shit still stinks!
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 12:43 am
by mpjh
Whose, doesn't? Oh, I forgot, real Christians' shit doesn't stink.
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 12:56 am
by bedub1
mpjh wrote:Whose, doesn't? Oh, I forgot, real Christians' shit doesn't stink.
And real non-Christians don't shit. Your statement is meaningless. Come up with something better.
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:02 am
by mpjh
Just trying to be agreeable. You holier-than-thou types sure take your shit seriously.
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:10 am
by bedub1
mpjh wrote:Just trying to be agreeable. You holier-than-thou types sure take your shit seriously.
at least I don't have it as my avatar....
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:14 am
by muy_thaiguy
mpjh wrote:Just trying to be agreeable. You holier-than-thou types sure take your shit seriously.
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:17 am
by mpjh
bedub1 wrote:mpjh wrote:Just trying to be agreeable. You holier-than-thou types sure take your shit seriously.
at least I don't have it as my avatar....
Ho hum -- you should visit the site in San Antonio, NM. It is 30 miles from the Trinity site, and was there when the first atomic bomb exploded. Interesting contract between the emergence into the atomic age, and a lack of plumbing. Sort of a metaphor for our capacity to manage nuclear weapons.
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:25 am
by bedub1
mpjh wrote:bedub1 wrote:mpjh wrote:Just trying to be agreeable. You holier-than-thou types sure take your shit seriously.
at least I don't have it as my avatar....
Ho hum -- you should visit the site in San Antonio, NM. It is 30 miles from the Trinity site, and was there when the first atomic bomb exploded. Interesting contract between the emergence into the atomic age, and a lack of plumbing. Sort of a metaphor for our capacity to manage nuclear weapons.
manage nuclear weapons? they go boom and destroy shit. like your outhouse. like the end of ww2. like the end of your argument. if you support nuclear weapons in this age, you might as well blow up the earth...or go join Iran...or all the other countries that are currently pursuing nuclear weapons. instead of the countries that realized it's pointless and started disarming them.
BTW..i lived in vegas...you know...the city in the state where all the nuclear waste is heading?
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:32 am
by mpjh
Blah, blah. Inherent contradictions. Inane references. Senseless.
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:33 am
by bedub1
mpjh wrote:Blah, blah. Inherent contradictions. Inane references. Senseless.
qft
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:34 am
by mpjh
Now, just boring.
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:35 am
by bedub1
mpjh wrote:Now, just boring.
stop talking about yourself. nobody wants to listen to you brag.
I already nominated Hitler as the lead of the Democratic party. there is nothing you can do about it. Limbaugh was chosen as the head of the republican party...there is nothing the republicans can do about it. since we agree the opposition gets to nominate the head of the opposing party....you loose. go worship him. can I make fun of you for being a jew killer now? I'm *sure* the democrats will start associating all republicans as drug addicted jackass's.....
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:42 am
by mpjh
super boredom. Why don't you go back to reading your Harry Potter.
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:44 am
by bedub1
mpjh wrote:super boredom. Why don't you go back to reading your Harry Potter.
lol. no response egh? can't even try? already admitting defeat? why don't you climb into your avatar and look for the keys to your car.
EDIT: honestly though. the democrat party is so desperate, they poll people and poll people until they find the guy everybody hates the most, and works to try to make him out as the leader of the opposition party, so everybody will think they are great and the opposition is crazy. thats how desperate they are. and thats how stupid they think American's are. and you know what? they are right. it will probably work.
Re: The Limbaugh Problem
Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 3:57 am
by got tonkaed
What hasnt been said (and possibly because many fail to see it) is that if the democrats are successful in making Limbaugh a flash point to reassert some popular control, it is primarily the failure of the republican party. It is not really all that different in terms of influence than the relative failure of more left christianity in the past 20 years to shape public discourse in a fashion that took focus off the Christian right. Of course time and scope are different, but the reason for failure is similar. The inability to present a clear and coherent alternative that appeals to the mainstream.
In my opinion its been an issue for the GOP for roughly the last year, if not for a bit longer.