Obama's 2016

[runco]

For people voting for the person, and not the party, does not understand politics (on a national level). The figure head is just that, the figure head, spokesperson, etc, sometimes we call them a president. The real "power" is with the house and senate, and the majority ruling party. That is whay I vote republican in presidential election. Do you really think that president of the US can do anything without a bill being passed both houses? Yea, there are executive orders to fear, but congress and the federal court system can addross those. The president can influence other members of congress to sway votes, its just political ploy and leverage that is all. No real power.

[45guy]

Ultimately our elected members of congress will vote along party lines on major bills. Voting for the person not the party sounds good but will usually mean the party with the most members will have enough votes to pass the big bills. I have struggled with this with the RINOS. The Tea Party putting the heat on the RINOS with primary challengers have really helped a lot. I think it is best to change the party that is closest to your values for the better rather than to abandon them for a third party that may leave the party further from your values in power. What would our country look like if Ross Perot had not taken a bunch of votes from George Bush Sr. We would not have had Bill Clinton for 8 years, I was no fan of Sr. but his values where much closer to mine than Clintons. Ross Perot left no lasting movement that has grown stronger over the years. He was not the beginning of anything, all he did was assist Bill Clinton to the win.

[S&WForty]

Ultimately our elected members of congress will vote along party lines on major bills. Voting for the person not the party sounds good but will usually mean the party with the most members will have enough votes to pass the big bills. I have struggled with this with the RINOS. The Tea Party putting the heat on the RINOS with primary challengers have really helped a lot. I think it is best to change the party that is closest to your values for the better rather than to abandon them for a third party that may leave the party further from your values in power. What would our country look like if Ross Perot had not taken a bunch of votes from George Bush Sr. We would not have had Bill Clinton for 8 years, I was no fan of Sr. but his values where much closer to mine than Clintons. Ross Perot left no lasting movement that has grown stronger over the years. He was not the beginning of anything, all he did was assist Bill Clinton to the win.

Those are my thoughts exactly.

[runco]

Ultimately our elected members of congress will vote along party lines on major bills. Voting for the person not the party sounds good but will usually mean the party with the most members will have enough votes to pass the big bills. I have struggled with this with the RINOS. The Tea Party putting the heat on the RINOS with primary challengers have really helped a lot. I think it is best to change the party that is closest to your values for the better rather than to abandon them for a third party that may leave the party further from your values in power. What would our country look like if Ross Perot had not taken a bunch of votes from George Bush Sr. We would not have had Bill Clinton for 8 years, I was no fan of Sr. but his values where much closer to mine than Clintons. Ross Perot left no lasting movement that has grown stronger over the years. He was not the beginning of anything, all he did was assist Bill Clinton to the win.

Well Said!!!

[RobertNashville]

...And the only election I would vote for Feinstein in, would be in the election to kiss my butt. Same goes for Pelosi, and Rush Limbaugh.

Whether you like Rush or not, you should be damn happy he came along.

Until his show there was no such thing as conservative talk radio and without conservative talk radio this country would have gone to hell in a hand basket 15 or 20 years ago because all we would have would be the BS coming out of CNN and their ilk. Even with all those those who have followed Rush's lead, conservative thought is still being overpowered by all the other outlets which are all liberal biased.

Rush has had problems and has overcome them...a radio talk show host who lost his hearing and still does his job after very painful surgery which helps him function (but not really hear)...a man who became addicted to pain killers (like that's never happened to anyone we know) and overcame it...hell; we've got accused murderers and wife beaters playing pro sports and everybody loves them but I guess we just can't forgive Rush can we...I guess it sucks for him that he doesn't play in the NFL or NBA.

[mikegideon]

Whether you like Rush or not, you should be damn happy he came along.

Until his show there was no such thing as conservative talk radio and without conservative talk radio this country would have gone to hell in a hand basket 15 or 20 years ago because all we would have would be the BS coming out of CNN and their ilk. Even with all those those who have followed Rush's lead, conservative thought is still being overpowered by all the other outlets which are all liberal biased.

Rush has had problems and has overcome them...a radio talk show host who lost his hearing and still does his job after very painful surgery which helps him function (but not really hear)...a man who became addicted to pain killers (like that's never happened to anyone we know) and overcame it...hell; we've got accused murderers and wife beaters playing pro sports and everybody loves them but I guess we just can't forgive Rush can we...I guess it sucks for him that he doesn't play in the NFL or NBA.

Rush, and the ones that came after him are there because they get HUGE ratings. That's why there are several. I agree that he's been a big force in conservative politics, but he's also been a huge money maker for the industry. Same deal with Beck.

[Guest ThePunisher]

Thank God for conservative talk radio, and Fox News.

[Guest HillyKarma]

Rush, and the ones that came after him are there because they get HUGE ratings. That's why there are several. I agree that he's been a big force in conservative politics, but he's also been a huge money maker for the industry. Same deal with Beck.

Glenn Beck?

No. Stop it please.

I have to maintain some of my rationalism on this forum.

In the end, that's what it's all about. These people come along,

spew some ideaology that they've never practiced a day in their lives,

and get payed about half of what the average American makes in their lifetime

every year.

[S&WForty]

In the end, that's what it's all about. These people come along,

spew some ideaology that they've never practiced a day in their lives,

and get payed about half of what the average American makes in their lifetime

every year.

Where's the proof of that? I guess Reagan did it all for the money, too? Same for Clint Eastwood's convention speech? Did Mitt wire him a billion dollars for that? Rupert Murdoch probably started FOX News for the money, too. Yeah, it's that simple, huh?

If that's what it was all about, I would rather see people get rich spewing my beliefs than a bunch of thug athletes getting rich for what they can do with a ball.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

It's easy to trash, sometimes people only remember bad things that happen to even good people. I imagine

that movie has gotten it's share of trashing, also. I know when I mention "Atlas Shrugged" some people cringe,

also, but show me where it isn't happening in this country before one trashes it.

Why I lean to the right, instead of the left is easy to me, and I don't need either to tell me, but it's nice to see

and hear those folks on conservative talk radio. We've been surrounded by the left for so many years. Don't

confuse every Republican as being in the right. There are those who are extremely liberal, one or two in our

own state prove their left leanings occasionally, but sometimes vote right. The modern day liberal stands for

death in the end, because of their doctrine. That doesn't mean all Republicans are that way, just a few who

make loud noises.

If any of you listen to conservative radio for it's entertainment value while driving down the road, it can enlighten,

but I doubt any of us say "Amen" to all of it. That is just a cheap shot. Go listen to what you want. When Rush is

on, and I can, I usually try to listen. Beck, not so much. A little whiny for me.

Stay with network news and be happy, but if you don't know anything other than his pill problem in the past, you

don't know much of what you're talking about. Rush has some real funny stuff on his show, plus, the callers are

usually superb. Ever heard of a guy named Paul Shanklin? He got his start on Rush by doing parodies. That guy

is hilarious and is selling CD's packed with funny parodies because of him. Rush is upbeat. I like upbeat. Beats a

negative message every time.

Edited October 22, 2012 by 6.8 AR

[RobertNashville]

Rush, and the ones that came after him are there because they get HUGE ratings. That's why there are several. I agree that he's been a big force in conservative politics, but he's also been a huge money maker for the industry. Same deal with Beck.

He did get huge ratings but I suggest he got them because he gave a voice to what most people believed. Before him there were none...zero (unless maybe you count VoA or Paul Harvey). All the radio experts said that a conservative talk show, especially in the daytime could never make it and that he would be stupid to try.

As is almost always the case, when somebody wants to do something that no one else is doing, there are plenty of experts (or family or friends) around to tell you why it will fail (then of course they are always happy to take credit for the success if it comes).

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Yep. Roger Ailes made a fortune because of Rush, also. Now he runs Fox News and Fox Business. Success

must be a bad thing.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

wow! Looking at Dinesh D'souza's links on Google, you would think he's a pariah. He has a lot of people hating him.

I guess it's the side of the political spectrum he took. He did make a good movie, and is more caring to Obama's family

than Obama is. I love the hypocrisy in some folks.

[RobertNashville]

Glenn Beck?

No. Stop it please.

I have to maintain some of my rationalism on this forum.

In the end, that's what it's all about. These people come along, spew some ideaology that they've never practiced a day in their lives, and get payed about half of what the average American makes in their lifetime every year.

Rationalism? You are disparaging people but what do you actually know about Rush or Beck or Levin or any of the others given that all have risen to their success while your age hadn't yet reached double digits and for the most part, people who started their careers a couple of decades before you were born? What do you know about the political and radio/entertainment landscape of 20 or 30 years ago?

I'm sorry if it seems like I'm beating up on you but I have a 14 year old nephew who seems to think he knows everything (just as I probably did too) and if there is one overriding truth in life that I've learned after 58 years it's that what I know is a grain of sand on an ocean beech compared to what there is to know.

Moving on, what do have against people making money? Do you think Rush and Beck and the rest have been financially successful by providing a product that people didn't want? If we don't have wealthy people in our society where are the half-MILLION $ donations going to come from like the one Rush gave to the House Ear Institute in Los Angeles a couple of years ago or the half-MILLION he gave recently to the Leukemia Society this year?

Rush is not perfect; neither is Beck or any of the rest of them...I know that, not because I know them personally but because they are human beings...they make mistakes...sometimes big ones...but I've watched (and listened to them) for a long time and I am sure, based on that observation and their actions, that they believe and live what they preach. Celebrities always seem to be held to a higher standard than we hold for ourselves...it's unfair and it's bound to be a source of disappointment for us because people almost always fail us.but we do it anyway...we ought to know better. We also ought to know that when we hold up celebrities up and are then disappointed, the disappointment is actually our fault; not theirs.

Edited October 22, 2012 by RobertNashville

[atlas3025]

I saw 2016 at Downtown West Theater in Knoxville a couple of months ago. The house was PACKED, and it was a raucus crowd. My wife had a physical sympton during the film because she became so upset and anxiety stricken.

A Great and scary film.

[mikegideon]

He did get huge ratings but I suggest he got them because he gave a voice to what most people believed. Before him there were none...zero (unless maybe you count VoA or Paul Harvey). All the radio experts said that a conservative talk show, especially in the daytime could never make it and that he would be stupid to try.

As is almost always the case, when somebody wants to do something that no one else is doing, there are plenty of experts (or family or friends) around to tell you why it will fail (then of course they are always happy to take credit for the success if it comes).

Rush was able to do what he does because of the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine. He started the conservative talk at KFBK in Sacramento. Big talk station. If you get big ratings on a station like that, especially if you drive the ratings for the whole station, it's not that hard to get a syndication deal.

The show would have never worked if they were required to provide equal time to Liberal spew. If the Fairness Doctrine hadn't been repealed, it's most likely that Rush would have never made it to the national scene.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Yeh, liberals have been trying to get a version of the Fairness Doctrine back because of his success, for years.

[mikegideon]

Yeh, liberals have been trying to get a version of the Fairness Doctrine back because of his success, for years.

That's because Libtalk radio doesn't work. I guess it makes their little heads explode.

[Guest ThePunisher]

Yeh, liberals have been trying to get a version of the Fairness Doctrine back because of his success, for years.

That could very well happen if Obama is re-elected.

[mikegideon]

That could very well happen if Obama is re-elected.

Doubt it seriously. Ain't worth the political capital.

BTW... Dittoheads are plumb scary when you stir 'em up. Don't ask me how I know

Edited October 22, 2012 by mikegideon

[S&WForty]

Doubt it seriously. Ain't worth the political capital.

BTW... Dittoheads are plumb scary when you stir 'em up. Don't ask me how I know

I thought we were "harmless little fuzz balls!"

[Guest 6.8 AR]

We know each other well enough.

[RobertNashville]

I thought we were "harmless little fuzz balls!"

I'm a "lovable little fuzz ball" but I've never claimed to be harmless (although I am mostly harmless).

[mikegideon]

I thought we were "harmless little fuzz balls!"

Kill the transmitter when Rush is in mid bellow. They get mean.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

That might start a war!