rush limbaugh ??
11-10-2007, 12:09 PM
#71
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 0
Re: rush limbaugh ??
Originally Posted by random-strike
sitting behind the golden EIB microphone.
i listen to lars larson while rush is on, but if lars it out then i listen to rush
i highly recommend the great one mark levin.
GET OFF THE PHONE YOU BIG DOPE.
Umm yes, god bless and thank me very much.
i love his nicknames for politicians... my favs:
hillary rotten clinton, her thighness
nancy strech pelosi (so many face lifts you could bounce a nickle off her face)
little dick durbin
arlon spectical
harry the body reid
also his nickname for that terrible show by the old espn sports center host
keith overbite countdown to no ratings
the great one mark levin is the best
i listen to lars larson while rush is on, but if lars it out then i listen to rush
i highly recommend the great one mark levin.
GET OFF THE PHONE YOU BIG DOPE.
Umm yes, god bless and thank me very much.
i love his nicknames for politicians... my favs:
hillary rotten clinton, her thighness
nancy strech pelosi (so many face lifts you could bounce a nickle off her face)
little dick durbin
arlon spectical
harry the body reid
also his nickname for that terrible show by the old espn sports center host
keith overbite countdown to no ratings
the great one mark levin is the best
11-10-2007, 01:01 PM
#73
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 0
Re: rush limbaugh ??
Originally Posted by rawr
That's the most unintelligent thing you've ever said, hands down. And you've said a lot of retarded ----.
That's absolutely brilliant, you'd never learn anything about that in college
No one would ever come up with that angle of argument, it's just so astounding that I bet no one's ever written about it before and I bet it's never been subject to , i don't know, lets say thousands of years of writing and thought.
You are not indoctrinated into the 'current way of thinking', you are encouraged to develop your own way of thinking and develop your cognitive skills as a person to be able to come to your own conclusions. To be a person who produces thought, who stimulates discussion, who helps develop the world through education and progress. You learn how to analyze the current ideologies, you learn about the old ideologies and their justifications for existence, you learn about the new ideologies and their justification for existence, you learn about so much ---- you cant just bag it up and say professors are full of ----. Academia is the grounds that the news media can not ------- touch and that is why they try to discredit it on television.
I'm sure a majority of professors do express some anti-American sentiment. For example, Stanley Kultz, the guy you're agreeing with in the video happens to be a professor. He has a Ph.D in sociological anthropology from Harvard and he also happens to be a huge advocate for Zionism and Neoconservativism. Which are both completely anti-American in nature. It looks like academia completely brainwashed him and now he's not able to come to his own conclusions after reading all of that literature..
I'd also like to see some examples of these 'brightest people'. Especially those people who have done work in the social sciences or humanities without having being educated, or participating in some sort of academic forum or some kind. Which in it's self is a type of formal education.
That's absolutely brilliant, you'd never learn anything about that in college
No one would ever come up with that angle of argument, it's just so astounding that I bet no one's ever written about it before and I bet it's never been subject to , i don't know, lets say thousands of years of writing and thought. You are not indoctrinated into the 'current way of thinking', you are encouraged to develop your own way of thinking and develop your cognitive skills as a person to be able to come to your own conclusions. To be a person who produces thought, who stimulates discussion, who helps develop the world through education and progress. You learn how to analyze the current ideologies, you learn about the old ideologies and their justifications for existence, you learn about the new ideologies and their justification for existence, you learn about so much ---- you cant just bag it up and say professors are full of ----. Academia is the grounds that the news media can not ------- touch and that is why they try to discredit it on television.
I'm sure a majority of professors do express some anti-American sentiment. For example, Stanley Kultz, the guy you're agreeing with in the video happens to be a professor. He has a Ph.D in sociological anthropology from Harvard and he also happens to be a huge advocate for Zionism and Neoconservativism. Which are both completely anti-American in nature. It looks like academia completely brainwashed him and now he's not able to come to his own conclusions after reading all of that literature..
I'd also like to see some examples of these 'brightest people'. Especially those people who have done work in the social sciences or humanities without having being educated, or participating in some sort of academic forum or some kind. Which in it's self is a type of formal education.
bill gates is one of the richest men in the world, no formal education.
george washington, no formal education
Abraham Lincoln, no formal education
Michael Dell, another one of the richest men, no formal education
steve jobs, etc... , no formal education
Benjamin Franklin, etc...
John Hancock
John Marshall - architect of the supreme court
the list goes on and on and on and on.
real world education is far superior to formal education
11-10-2007, 01:03 PM
#74
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 0
Re: rush limbaugh ??
Originally Posted by snm95ls
Do you honestly think before you spew out this type op garbage?
Rawr pretty much summed it up.
Talk radio is worthless trash. It honestly reminds me of the likes Ricki Lake or some other trashy worthless talk show.
Rawr pretty much summed it up.
Talk radio is worthless trash. It honestly reminds me of the likes Ricki Lake or some other trashy worthless talk show.
11-10-2007, 02:11 PM
#77
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 0
Re: rush limbaugh ??
Originally Posted by random-strike
"social science" or "humanities" are phoney. look at 100% of the people in this field. they all are figuring out ways to steal your freedoms.
It also happens to be something you cant ------- ignore. If you do, and discredit them, you're liable to get all your freedoms striped away by the people who currently hold all of the power, in order to further endow themselves with wealth.
Originally Posted by random-strike
bill gates is one of the richest men in the world, no formal education.
george washington, no formal education
Abraham Lincoln, no formal education
Michael Dell, another one of the richest men, no formal education
steve jobs, etc... , no formal education
Benjamin Franklin, etc...
John Hancock
John Marshall - architect of the supreme court
the list goes on and on and on and on.
real world education is far superior to formal education
But lets debunk your list anyway
Bill Gates went to Harvard for pre-law and had highly educated parents. He must have not thought Social Science was bullshit.
George Washington did not go to college, but the rest of his family did and he was surrounded by educated, intelligent people. This constitutes as a Social forum.
Abe Lincoln is a stretch, he did mostly educate himself, but he did so by reading a ton of lit and studying law on his own. Can you consider it a self education when you're reading someone else's work? Again, it's all social science and the humanities.
Michael Dell, his father was a doctor, he came from an upper class family, he went to college but then he quit to peruse his career in computing since it was more fruitful. He had the experience of his farther to rely on and I'm sure he had a pretty solid early discipline.
Steve Jobs also went to college, formally dropped out but then continued to go to lectures without paying, like a true -------. He also must have seen a value in formal education.
Benjamin Franklin falls along the same lines of Abe Lincoln, not a real formal education but he put himself in situations where he could learn a great deal from those with that education. Both by reading their works and speaking to them personally.
John Hancock went to Harvard and graduated
John Marshall studies classics and English lit, had private scholars teach him when he was young then was sent to a private classic English academy for a secondary education.
Originally Posted by random-strike
real world education is far superior to formal education
11-10-2007, 02:12 PM
#78
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 0
Re: rush limbaugh ??
Originally Posted by random-strike
ron paul the guy you guys blow your loads over all the time has no formal education in poly sci "social studies" or "humanities"
11-10-2007, 02:25 PM
#80
1.5 BAR
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 670
Re: rush limbaugh ??
The sad thing is rawr, you put a lot of thought, research, and effort into your posts to get your points across, and the only reply you'll get from random-strike is some ignorant "dem' libruls kin burn in hell....yi don' need no skewlin...ma lernz me at deh kitchin tabil."
I'm not insulting your grammar rs, it's for dramatic effect lol. But if you're going to try and counter his arguments, try to cut down on the non-sense you pull out of your ***. Maybe a whole 5 minutes of research.
I'm not insulting your grammar rs, it's for dramatic effect lol. But if you're going to try and counter his arguments, try to cut down on the non-sense you pull out of your ***. Maybe a whole 5 minutes of research.
