http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weber

one of the "three dead white men" of sociology.
first (as far as i know) to really define what a bueracracy(i can never spell it right) is.
he spent a lot of time looking at different socio-economic conditions, and is most famous for his work investigating why capitalism arose in Europe. He wrote about how protestantism (specifically Calvinism) brought about capitalism. Did a lot of comparing and contrasting between Europe and China, looking at social, legal and political structures.

[Edited on April 11, 2006 at 9:17 PM. Reason : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protestant_Ethic_and_the_Spirit_of_Capitalism]

4/11/2006 9:16:33 PM

Quote :

"If illegal aliens (is that what we're calling them these days?)"

What the fuck else would you call someone who's here illegally?

4/11/2006 10:15:50 PM

^I dunno, dude...I suppose that's why I asked.

4/11/2006 11:14:04 PM

Listen to Pink Floyd, they use a lot of Weberian ideas in their music.

Weber is really the only sociologist I put much stock it.

SHUT THEM OFF, THEN AMERICANS WILL PICK THEIR OWN FOOD AND WORK IN THE SLAUGHTERHOUSE

as bill cosby would say, yeah, right.

[Edited on April 11, 2006 at 11:43 PM. Reason : .]

4/11/2006 11:42:27 PM

another term is undocumented aliens.
or some such thing. what is it, "a rose by any other name..." ?

4/12/2006 12:48:45 AM

the point is this country cant get by w/o cheap labor right now, unless there are some major changes (which wont happen)

4/12/2006 12:36:42 PM

Quote :

"if it were as easy for them as it was for our ancestors, i'm sure they'd do it in droves"

my ancestors came into this country LEGALLY

4/12/2006 3:49:32 PM

Quote :

"he said the only people who want the illegals here are democrats, so they can get them to vote for them."

as usual the critics of Rush mistate his position. He said democrats and some misguided republicans in the senate are pushing for amnesty for illegals simply to increase their voter base.

4/12/2006 5:20:33 PM

that's still a ridiculous oversimplification.

4/12/2006 5:24:45 PM

he is still an idiot.

4/12/2006 5:27:06 PM

Rush is not saying that is absolutely the only reason for anyone to support the legislation,( I haven't listened to every moment of Rush so I can't be sure, but on the basis of what I've heard...) he is merely saying that the motivation of those supporting the bill is to gain voters in the long run ( he says it's more of a ten year plan most likely ). He certainly doesn't say it's just democrats for it, he has discussed his disagreement with Bush on the issue, and I heard him talk to a republican fruit farmer at length about the pro/cons and legalities of keeping illegals. It'd take several pages and hours of my time to summarize the by now lengthy commentary by Rush on this issue.

The rediculous oversimplification here is the original post of this thread.

(Maybe I should reformulate these comments with a suitable amount of namecalling so that some of you^ can understand it...)

4/12/2006 5:46:13 PM

considering the average politician in washington cant look past the next 6 months i find a 10 year plan hard to believe.

but what justification would there be for taking a position that would take 10 years to come about instead of taking a position that would have an impact in 6 months?

4/12/2006 5:53:56 PM

Quote :

"Rush is not saying that is absolutely the only reason for anyone to support the legislation"

He's calling this immigration bill "The Illegal Voting Rights Act of 2006"

4/12/2006 5:57:29 PM

^^^the oversimplification was purposeful

the point of this thread was to say he is an idiot moreso for not realizing the importance of illegals to this country right now.

shutting off the border and not having a guest worker program could cripple some sectors of our economy. this is the main point here.

and you automatically lose for being a fan of punditry, mathman.

4/13/2006 9:12:03 PM

if you listen carefully you can hear the sound of me not caring.

4/14/2006 2:08:26 PM

...or thinking

4/15/2006 2:04:33 AM

^^ not listening is one of the reasons this country is so fucked up

thanks for HATING AMERICA!

4/16/2006 9:53:32 PM

Yes because I like Rush that means I'm not listening or thinking... obviously. If only I only got my news from the MSM like a good little liberal then maybe I would be worthy of your esteem... whatever.

4/17/2006 12:57:37 AM

you get your news from a pundit?

and liberals are the ones getting their news from the MSM? wouldnt that make the majority of americans liberals, seeing as how, you know, the msm is mainstream?

i mean, getting your news from a guy giving his opinions? thats dumb.

4/17/2006 1:17:00 AM

Quote :

"If only I only got my news from the MSM like a good little liberal then maybe I would be worthy of your esteem... whatever."

hmm
washington post
ny times
news and observer (for fun local lies)
msnbc

yeah. im a good little liberal with my one source for news.

4/17/2006 1:36:32 AM

Quote :

"Yes because I like Rush that means I'm not listening or thinking... obviously. If only I only got my news from the MSM like a good little liberal then maybe I would be worthy of your esteem... whatever."

Dude, Rush is not news, and only borderline-credible as a pundit. Rush is entertainment.

[Edited on April 17, 2006 at 2:01 AM. Reason : and I think liberalism sucks more than anyone here, probably.]

4/17/2006 2:01:11 AM

Rush has alot of news on it, yes it also entertainment. You can disagree with his opinions if you like but at least he is up-front about having opinions. Not like the self-proclaimed "objective" and "impartial" MSM.

And I never said Rush was my only source of news. I usually take what I hear on Rush and combine it with other news... most days I can't even listen to Rush anyways.

Good grief, Rush is at least as "credible" as the usual news. If Rush is so wrong all the time then tell me specific news events he has lied about. And don't just go cut and paste some antiRush site. Since everyone here is so wise as to know Rush is almost always wrong ( and a moron) it ought to be easy to provide me with concrete examples of misfactual reporting on the part of Rush.

4/17/2006 8:55:05 PM

[Edited on April 17, 2006 at 8:56 PM. Reason : stupid mozilla]

4/17/2006 8:55:44 PM

Quote :

"Rush is at least as "credible" as the usual news."

Laughable notion.

Did Rush train you to say that?

4/17/2006 8:59:56 PM

Quote :

" You can disagree with his opinions if you like"

See, that's the thing. I agree with a fair amount of what he says. He's still not much more than political entertainment.

Quote :

"Good grief, Rush is at least as "credible" as the usual news. If Rush is so wrong all the time then tell me specific news events he has lied about."

No, he is in no way, shape, or form as credible of a news source as the usual news, and it's not because he's wrong or a liar...it's because he's not giving you the news--he's giving you the half of the news that supports his opinion.


He's not altogether different from Michael Moore--he's just not as annoying, and he probably doesn't molest the truth QUITE as much.

4/17/2006 9:06:58 PM

well, last week he was talking about the south florida labor force being unaffected by a loss of illegal immigrants. if thats not a crock of shit, i dont know what is.

4/17/2006 9:48:38 PM

Quote :

"Good grief, Rush is at least as "credible" as the usual news. If Rush is so wrong all the time then tell me specific news events he has lied about. And don't just go cut and paste some antiRush site. Since everyone here is so wise as to know Rush is almost always wrong ( and a moron) it ought to be easy to provide me with concrete examples of misfactual reporting on the part of Rush."

His documented falsehoods are too numerous to cut and paste in the wolfweb, so the urls will have to do

http://mediamatters.org/items/200502180006

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1895

It's entertainment.

4/18/2006 12:24:39 AM

here comes the "THOSE SITES HAVE LIBERAL BIAS" comment

4/18/2006 12:27:38 AM

Here comes the "SO DOES REALITY, APPARENTLY" comment

4/18/2006 12:56:05 AM

Quote :

"If Rush is so wrong all the time then tell me specific news events he has lied about. And don't just go cut and paste some antiRush site."

4/18/2006 5:17:06 PM

Are you really that dense?

Rush has repeatedly explained himself as an entertainer, not a reporter.

4/18/2006 5:27:30 PM

Quote :

"If Rush is so wrong all the time then tell me specific news events he has lied about. And don't just go cut and paste some antiRush site."

is this so hard to read?

4/18/2006 5:28:36 PM

its easy to just call every site you dont like "anti-rush", isnt it?

are you trying to say you want a site you approve of to say something like this? b/c that obviously isnt happening.

i mean, this fuckin guy didnt believe it when China had stores, and they took money

4/18/2006 6:10:43 PM

This will do for starters.

1. Volcanoes do more harm to the ozone layer than humans.

2. Spray cans still have CFCs in them.

3. Banks take the risks in issuing student loans and they are entitled to the profits.

4. "Don't let the liberals deceive you into believing that a decade of sustained growth without inflation in America [in the '80s] resulted in a bigger gap between the haves and the have-nots. Figures compiled by the Congressional Budget Office dispel that myth."

5. Comparing the 1950s with the present: "And I might point out that poverty and economic disparities between the lower and upper classes were greater during the former period."

6. "Oh, how they relished blaming Reagan administration policies, including the mythical reductions in HUD's budget for public housing, for creating all of the homeless! Budget cuts? There were no budget cuts! The budget figures show that actual construction of public housing increased during the Reagan years."

7. There's no such thing as an implied contract.

8. "Ladies and gentlemen, we now know why there is this institutional opposition to low tax rates in the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. It's because [low tax rates] are biblical in nature and in root. When you can trace the lowering of tax rates on grain from 90 percent to 20 percent giving seven fat years during the days of Pharaoh in Egypt, why then you are tracing the roots of lower taxes and rising prosperity to religion.... You can trace individual prosperity, economic growth back to the Bible, the Old Testament. Isn't it amazing?"

9. It has not been proven that nicotine is addictive, the same with cigarettes causing emphysema [and other diseases].

10. "The worst of all of this is the lie that condoms really protect against AIDS. The condom failure rate can be as high as 20 percent. Would you get on a plane -- or put your children on a plane -- if one of five passengers would be killed on the flight? Well, the statistic holds for condoms, folks."

11. "Most Canadian physicians who are themselves in need of surgery, for example, scurry across the border to get it done right: the American way. They have found, through experience, that state medical care is too expensive, too slow and inefficient, and, most important, it doesn't provide adequate care for most people."

12. "Do you know we have more acreage of forest land in the United States today than we did at the time the constitution was written."

13. "The videotape of the Rodney King beating played absolutely no role in the conviction of two of the four officers. It was pure emotion that was responsible for the guilty verdict."

14. "Anytime the illegitimacy rate in black America is raised, Rev. Jackson and other black 'leaders' immediately change the subject."

15. "There are more American Indians alive today than there were when Columbus arrived or at any other time in history. Does this sound like a record of genocide?"

16. "Women were doing quite well in this country before feminism came along."

17. "Now I got something for you that's true--1972, Tufts University, Boston. This is 24 years ago--or 22 years ago. Three year study of 5000 co-eds, and they used a benchmark of a bra size of 34C. They found that the--now wait. It's true. The larger the bra-size, the smaller the IQ."

18. On Whitewater: "I don't think the New York Times has run a story on this yet. I mean, we haven't done a thorough search, but I--there has not been a big one, front-page story, about this one that we can recall. So this has yet to create or get up to its full speed--if it weren't for us and the Wall Street Journal and the American Spectator, this would be one of the biggest and most well kept secrets going on in American politics today."

19. "You know the Clintons send Chelsea to the Sidwell Friends private school.... A recent eighth grade class assignment required students to write a paper on 'Why I Feel Guilty Being White". '... My source for this story is CBS News. I am not making it up."

20. Quotes President James Madison: "We have staked the future...upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God."

21. "And it was only 4,000 votes that--had they gone another way in Chicago--Richard Nixon would have been elected in 1960."

22. In an attack on Spike Lee, director of Malcolm X, for being fast and loose with the facts, Limbaugh introduced a video clip of Malcolm X's "daughter named Betty Shabazz."

23. Explaining why the Democrats wanted to "sabotage" President Bush with the 1990 budget deal: "Now, here is my point. In 1990, George Bush was president and was enjoying a 90 percent plus approval rating on the strength of our victories in the Persian Gulf War and Cold War.

24. The Sierra Club wants to limit the number of kids you can have to two.

I mean, I suppose you can cop out behind the sources, but the reality is, Rush asserted each of these things. The sources just happened to make a note of them.

[Edited on April 18, 2006 at 6:13 PM. Reason : ...]

4/18/2006 6:12:19 PM

^ what that nigga said

4/18/2006 6:19:31 PM

wow, typed that yourself really quick. Guess Rush isn't the only one who encourages people to think like him.

Of course if I repeat anything remotely resembling something Rush might have said the all ya all are like OMG that's just what Rush said, what a shock. I'm only asking you to tell me some things that YOU have personally heard Rush to say that are wrong. Since you have such conviction that he is not a legitimate source of new I feel it's only fair to apply the same standard of independent thinking that you espouse for me. If I can't say anything Rushish then you can't say anything antiRushish unless you have met the standard of independent thinking that you seem to be requiring here.

I've seen it alot. More than once I've read things on TWW like " Sean Hannity said that" or "Rush said that" followed by the immediate dismissal of the idea merely because Rush or Sean said given topic. This makes you no better ( in fact worse ) than those you disdain. You say Rush and Hannity are the end of thinking but you stop thinking and start calling names at the mere hint of their presense.

Eyeballing the list, I'd say #17 is a joke. Certainly many of those statements are at a minimum taken out of context and others are plainly speaking true. But, I'm not going to spend alot of time on something you just cut and pasted.

4/18/2006 6:30:58 PM

Actually, #17 is something he said on his program, and he preceded it with "Now I got something for you that's true...".

I love your baseless, blanket dismissal. It's so Rush.

So, care to outline which ones you think "plainly speaking" are true? Or are aware of how quickly and easily I will destroy that notion into oblivion as soon as I see it?

---

When he asserted the items on the list:

1. The Way Things Ought to Be, pp. 155-157

2. Ibid.

3. Radio show, Summer '93

4. The Way Things Ought to Be, p. 70

5. See, I Told You So, p. 84

6. The Way Things Ought to Be, p. 242-243

7. Radio show, Spring '93

8. Radio show, 6/28/93

9. Radio show, 4/29/94

10. The Way Things Ought to Be, p. 135

11. See, I Told You So, p. 153

12. Radio show, 2/18/94

13. Radio show, Summer '93

14. The Way Things Ought to Be, p. 225

15. See, I Told You So, p. 68

16. Radio show, Summer '93

17. TV Show, 5/13/94

18. TV Show, 2/17/94

19. Radio show, 1/16/94

20. See, I Told You So, p. 73

21. TV show, 4/28/94

22. TV show, 11/17/92

23. See, I Told You So, pg. 304

24. The Way Things Ought To Be, Chapter 15

[Edited on April 18, 2006 at 7:07 PM. Reason : ...]

[Edited on April 18, 2006 at 7:08 PM. Reason : ...]

4/18/2006 6:48:28 PM

Gamecat = FAIR

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1895

Quote :

"Limbaugh vs. Reality Bogus Economics LIMBAUGH: On California contractor C.C. Myers completing repairs 74 days early on the earthquake-damaged Santa Monica Freeway: "There was one key element that made this happen. One key thing: The governor of California declared the [freeway] a disaster area and by so doing eliminated the need for competitive bids.... Government got the hell out of the way." (TV show, 4/13/94) "They gave this guy [Myers] the job without having to go through the rigmarole...of giving 25 percent of the job to a minority-owned business and 25 percent to a woman." (TV show, 4/15/94) REALITY: There was competitive bidding: Myers beat four other contractors for the job. Affirmative action rules applied: At least 40 percent of the subcontracts went to minority or women-owned firms. Far from getting out of the way, dozens of state employees were on the job 24 hours a day. Furthermore, the federal government picked up the tab for the whole job (L.A. Times, 5/1/94). LIMBAUGH: "Banks take the risks in issuing student loans and they are entitled to the profits." (Radio show, quoted in FRQ, Summer/93) REALITY: Banks take no risks in issuing student loans, which are federally insured. LIMBAUGH: "Don't let the liberals deceive you into believing that a decade of sustained growth without inflation in America [in the '80s] resulted in a bigger gap between the haves and the have-nots. Figures compiled by the Congressional Budget Office dispel that myth." (Ought to Be, p. 70) REALITY: CBO figures do nothing of the sort. Its numbers for after-tax incomes show that in 1980, the richest fifth of our country had eight times the income of the poorest fifth. By 1989, the ratio was more than 20 to one. LIMBAUGH: Comparing the 1950s with the present: "And I might point out that poverty and economic disparities between the lower and upper classes were greater during the former period." (Told You So, p. 84) REALITY: Income inequality, as measured by the U.S. Census Bureau, fell from the 1940s to the late 1960s, and then began rising. Inequality surpassed the 1950 level in 1982 and rose steadily to all-time highs in 1992. (Census Bureau's "Money Income of Households, Families and Persons in the United States") LIMBAUGH: "Oh, how they relished blaming Reagan administration policies, including the mythical reductions in HUD's budget for public housing, for creating all of the homeless! Budget cuts? There were no budget cuts! The budget figures show that actual construction of public housing increased during the Reagan years." (Ought to Be, p. 242-243) REALITY: In 1980, 20,900 low-income public housing units were under construction; in 1988, 9,700, a decline of 54 percent ;Statistical Abstracts of the U.S).In terms of 1993 dollars, the HUD budget for the construction of new public housing was slashed from $6.3 billion in 1980 to $683 million in 1988. "We're getting out of the housing business. Period," a Reagan HUD official declared in 1985. LIMBAUGH: "The poorest people in America are better off than the mainstream families of Europe." (Radio show, quoted in FRQ, Spring/93) REALITY: Huh? The average cash income of the poorest 20 percent of Americans is $5,226; the average cash income of four major European nations--Germany, France, United Kingdom and Italy--is $19,708. LIMBAUGH: "There's no such thing as an implied contract." (Radio show, quoted in FRQ, Spring/93) REALITY: Every first year law student knows there is. LIMBAUGH: "Ladies and gentlemen, we now know why there is this institutional opposition to low tax rates in the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. It's because [low tax rates] are biblical in nature and in root. When you can trace the lowering of tax rates on grain from 90 percent to 20 percent giving seven fat years during the days of Pharaoh in Egypt, why then you are tracing the roots of lower taxes and rising prosperity to religion.... You can trace individual prosperity, economic growth back to the Bible, the Old Testament. Isn't it amazing?" (Radio show, 6/28/93) REALITY: Amazingly wrong. Genesis 41 is about the wisdom of instituting taxes, not cutting them. After Pharaoh had a dream that prophesied seven fat years to be followed by seven lean years, Joseph advised him to "appoint officers over the land, and take up the fifth part of the land of Egypt in the seven plenteous years...and lay up corn under the hands of Pharaoh." In other words, a 20 percent tax on the grain harvest would put aside food for use during the famine. Pharaoh took Joseph's advice, and Egypt avoided hunger during the famine. Weird Science LIMBAUGH: "It has not been proven that nicotine is addictive, the same with cigarettes causing emphysema [and other diseases]." (Radio show, 4/29/94) REALITY: Nicotine's addictiveness has been reported in medical literature since the turn of the century. Surgeon General C. Everett Koop's 1988 report on nicotine addiction left no doubts on the subject; "Today the scientific base linking smoking to a number of chronic diseases is overwhelming, with a total of 50,000 studies from dozens of countries," states Encyclopedia Britannica's 1987 "Medical and Health Annual." LIMBAUGH: "We closed down a whole town--Times Beach, Mo.--over the threat of dioxin. We now know there was no reason to do that. Dioxin at those levels isn't harmful." (Ought to Be, p. 163) REALITY: "The hypothesis that low exposures [to dioxin] are entirely safe for humans is distinctly less tenable now than before," editorialized the New England Journal of Medicine after publishing a study (1/24/91) on cancer mortality and dioxin. In 1993, after Limbaugh's book was written, a study of residents in Seveso, Italy had increased cancer rates after being exposed to dioxin, The EPA's director of environmental toxicology said this study removed one of the last remaining doubts about dioxin's deadly effects (AP, 8/29/93). LIMBAUGH: "The worst of all of this is the lie that condoms really protect against AIDS. The condom failure rate can be as high as 20 percent. Would you get on a plane -- or put your children on a plane -- if one of five passengers would be killed on the flight? Well, the statistic holds for condoms, folks." (Ought to Be, p. 135) REALITY: A one in five AIDS risk for condom users? Not true, according to Dr. Joseph Kelaghan, who evaluates contraceptives for the National Institutes of Health. "There is substantive evidence that condoms prevent transmission if used consistently and properly," he said. He pointed to a nearly two-year study of couples in which one partner was HIV-positive. Among the 123 couples who used condoms regularly, there wasn't a single new infection (AP, 8/29/93). LIMBAUGH: "Most Canadian physicians who are themselves in need of surgery, for example, scurry across the border to get it done right: the American way. They have found, through experience, that state medical care is too expensive, too slow and inefficient, and, most important, it doesn't provide adequate care for most people." (Told You So, p. 153) "

observe my original thinking. Wow that was easy, I give up. I'm going to stop listening to Rush and just cut and paste all my future opinions to, everybodies doing it!

4/19/2006 9:43:36 PM

Is there any possibility you'd, y'know, refute anything they said? It's not like I claimed to come up with the list myself, genius.

Also, try reading sometime:

Quote :

"Gamecat: I mean, I suppose you can cop out behind the sources, but the reality is, Rush asserted each of these things. The sources just happened to make a note of them."

[Edited on April 19, 2006 at 9:47 PM. Reason : ...]

4/19/2006 9:46:14 PM

doesnt rush need some more pills or something

fucking douchebag

4/19/2006 9:50:43 PM

Quote :

"16. "Women were doing quite well in this country before feminism came along.""

That's what my mom thinks, and she was a feminist, said she'd never had kids, got a professional education,... had me and my brother and hated every bit of working. Without the specter of feminism demanding to remove gender differences my mom would never have been encouraged to think that being a houswife was boring or not worthwhile. But, "just a houswife" is almost the underlying chorus of modern feminism.

Personally, I've got nothing against equal wages and such, but only when they can do an equal job. Men and women are different and as such they should be treated differently. Feminism (as Rush refers to it ) differs with that opinion at it's core. At least before feminism came along the profession of motherhood was given more esteem.

and I again repeat

Quote :

"I'm not going to spend alot of time on something you just cut and pasted."

not in this thread anyway.

4/19/2006 10:02:43 PM

You just embarrassed yourself by admitting that you take Limbaugh seriously, and now you don't want to further embarrass yourself by trying to justify it.

I understand.

4/19/2006 10:14:32 PM

^^ Is your mom aware that before feminism, women couldn't vote?

4/19/2006 10:33:44 PM

Quote :

" Men and women are different and as such they should be treated differently."

are they different? in aggregate, most scientists will agree that their bell curves are separated minutely, but individually, it is impossible to claim a single thing based on gender. The curves are just too wide for that.

4/19/2006 10:43:03 PM

^^^^wow, thats great

too bad everyone isnt your mom

4/19/2006 10:52:59 PM

and I repeat:

Quote :

"Gamecat: So, care to outline which ones you think "plainly speaking" are true?"

and:

Quote :

"Gamecat: I mean, I suppose you can cop out behind the sources, but the reality is, Rush asserted each of these things. The sources just happened to make a note of them."

and I'll add:

Not only did he assert those things, but just about every last one of them are rather unequivocally BULLSHIT. Specifically, everything I pulled from Fair, which if you'd even looked at, you'd realize I didn't just cut and paste. I picked the items that were most clearly incorrect.

4/20/2006 12:59:14 AM

Quote :

"mathman:I'm not going to spend alot of time on something you just cut and pasted."

Dude, do you understand the concept of educated argument? You make a claim, and then you back it up with facts or evidence. Please allow me to demonstrate.

Claim
Sayer: During the daytime hours, unless obstructed by clouds, an eclipse, smog or smug, the sky is blue.

Shit to back my claim up
Stuff I'll cut and paste:
"During daylight the sky has the appearance of an opaque blue surface, but this is the result of the air scattering sunlight." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky

"The blue color of the sky is due to Rayleigh scattering." - http://www.sciencemadesimple.com/sky_blue.html

"A clear cloudless day-time sky is blue because molecules in the air scatter blue light from the sun more than they scatter red light." - http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/General/BlueSky/blue_sky.html

Shit, I'll even throw some photographic evidence in as well...
Here's a pretty one:


Here is another:


---

Ok, I just cut and pasted all of that. But I can clearly see how none of it can be acurate, because it's all obviously cut and pasted from biased websites. In order for you to take me seriously, I guess I'm gonna have to do the investigative research on my own.

Please hold.... I'll walk to the window.







Holy shit! You'll never believe what I found!!!!! The sky! It's BLUE!!

You know, maybe I coulda saved the time and effort of going to the window, because so many before me have aleady provided ample evidence to back up my claim.

Now, maybe my little lesson sunk in. If you would like to continue to sit there, thumb firmly implanted in your ass, and refuse to argue evidence presented against you which has been pulled off the web, then the community here will simply and stop wasting their time with you. Until then, I fucking dare you to prove you've got the mental testicular fortitude to go toe-to-toe with Gamecat and prove that the evidence he is presenting is invalid, and that the claims he is making are wrong.

Or just show us all you're just more SB fodder. *shrug* We could use another appetizer around here anyway.

4/20/2006 1:41:31 PM

On thursday Maha Rushie ( ) claimed that SUV sales were doing better than ever.

b/c GM did well in march due mostly to international truck sales, and Prius sales were down in march. Those two facts = environmentalists losing, Americans buying "mammoth" SUVs more than ever.

4/22/2006 1:04:10 AM