• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

rush limbaugh and god

adler

Student
A
Joined
Jul 12, 2006
Messages
29
I was listening to Limbaugh today just to get mad at his mouth and idiot behavior,
He stated today that global warming was not created by man, this in itself would be an argument I would and am considering.
My jury is out on the question that man is all the fault of global warming and how much it means to our future.
That aside, Limbaugh states that God would not allow man to destroy the planet, I am a confirmed atheist and do not believe all the bible claptrap, but Limbaugh says he does and that "god would not allow man to have the power to destroy the earth and it is arrogant to think they could, well fat boy does not read his bible, rev. 11,18 says in the KJV;
And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.
Along with all his other big business crap, his "if you don't believe in god you will believe in anything," I say if you believe in the bible you will believe in anything. Limbaugh is arrogant and Ignorant and leads a bunch of mind numb idiots. IMO.
 
adler said:
I was listening to Limbaugh today just to get mad at his mouth and idiot behavior,
He stated today that global warming was not created by man, this in itself would be an argument I would and am considering.
My jury is out on the question that man is all the fault of global warming and how much it means to our future.
That aside, Limbaugh states that God would not allow man to destroy the planet, I am a confirmed atheist and do not believe all the bible claptrap, but Limbaugh says he does and that "god would not allow man to have the power to destroy the earth and it is arrogant to think they could, well fat boy does not read his bible,

rev. 11,18 says in the KJV; and the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

Along with all his other big business crap, his "if you don't believe in god you will believe in anything," I say if you believe in the bible you will believe in anything. Limbaugh is arrogant and Ignorant and leads a bunch of mind numb idiots. IMO.
Click to expand...
Rush, who proclaims to be blessed with talent on load from God, (and not knowledge on consignment from God) appears not to realize that the rental agreement expired a while back, and that he is on his own. He has been for some years. When his CPA lets him know the status of the lease, he may change his tune, or fire the CPA.

Knowledge may be power, but ignorance is bliss.

DR
 
adler said:
That aside, Limbaugh states that God would not allow man to destroy the planet earth.
Click to expand...
He really said that? Does that strike anyone else as scary? It is scary because this is also the kind of magical thinking that inspires George Bush. With the fate of the world in his hands, he depends on God to prevent his hand from doing anything really terrible to the world. Essentially, with God in his corner, he can do no wrong. Nothing is more dangerous than a person in power who believes he can do no wrong. I'm sure he also believes that God would never let global warming destroy the world, so why should be overly concerned.
 
adler said:
Limbaugh states that God would not allow man to destroy the planet.
Click to expand...

The ultimate of a concept is its opposite. Greens who worship Mother Nature share this view that regardless of man's stupidity to do its best to destroy this planet, Earth is greater than man and will somehow rebound.

There is of course no guarentee that man will still be around to witness this.
 
[nitpick mode]Man is unable to and probably for the forseeable future will be unable to destroy the Earth.

Make it uninhabitable for human beings, yeah, we have a shot at that, but that only involves messing up about 1/4 mile of the surface and about 3-5 miles of the atmosphere and we may be able to accomplish that feat.

But the Earth will be here long after we are footnotes to the pages of the universe...[/nitpick mode]
 
Hutch said:
[nitpick mode]Man is unable to and probably for the forseeable future will be unable to destroy the Earth.

Make it uninhabitable for human beings, yeah, we have a shot at that, but that only involves messing up about 1/4 mile of the surface and about 3-5 miles of the atmosphere and we may be able to accomplish that feat.

But the Earth will be here long after we are footnotes to the pages of the universe...[/nitpick mode]
Click to expand...


Ya, but that is all that matters to us. saturn may be around long after we are gone, but what does that have to do with the price of eggs in china?
 
steverino said:
The ultimate of a concept is its opposite. Greens who worship Mother Nature share this view that regardless of man's stupidity to do its best to destroy this planet, Earth is greater than man and will somehow rebound.

There is of course no guarentee that man will still be around to witness this.
Click to expand...

If you are talking about Gaia, I think the original notion was that the current state of earth was remarkably self correcting, almost like the human body and homeostasis. The earth will carry on regardless of what we do, although it may revert to being a pile of rocks for a while, till the sun gets unfriendly.
 
So much for free will -- except where it really counts. I wonder why Rush thinks that God gave him the choice about sinning in all kinds of ways, but not about destroying the planet? At least professional religious charlatans, like Pat Robertson, can cite chapter and verse when making stuff up. Rush should stick to areligious political propaganda.

ETA: add in a crucial word, italicized above.
 
Last edited:
hgc said:
So much for free will -- where it really counts. I wonder why Rush thinks that God gave him the choice about sinning in all kinds of ways, but not about destroying the planet? At least professional religious charlatans, like Pat Robertson, can cite chapter and verse when making stuff up. Rush should stick to areligious political propaganda.
Click to expand...
Rush made a rather perceptive remark on the radio this morning, about money being the prime something or other of politics. I can't find a transcript, and since I only listen to his stuff once a week, doubt I'll hear it again. It was one of those morning editorials during the local news, in which he discussed Democrats, money, Republicans, money, and McCain Feingold, and how Republicans needed to get their funding sorted out. It was one of his few incisive comments in a while, a snowflake of truth midst a blizzard of BS.

I thought I'd remember it, as I went "aha" when I heard the line, but now my brain can't find it in RAM.

DR
 
I heard Limbaugh say once that not only did he not think things like aerosols hurt the atmosphere, he was standing outside spraying his aerosol can just for the heck of it.

That's weird. Regardless of whether you accept anthropromorphic GW or not, standing outside spraying aerosol serves no purpose at all, other than to show you to be a dork.
 
pgwenthold said:
I heard Limbaugh say once that not only did he not think things like aerosols hurt the atmosphere, he was standing outside spraying his aerosol can just for the heck of it.

That's weird. Regardless of whether you accept anthropromorphic GW or not, standing outside spraying aerosol serves no purpose at all, other than to show you to be a dork.
Click to expand...

This is his schtick, like playing the sound effect of the buzz saw like he is off in the Redwood Forest chopping down trees. It is sarcasm in the face of political correctness. I guess most here feel he is polically incorrect on many levels.:p

If you cherry pick, he can make good points. But what worries me is that a lot of old foggies from Cincinnati just follow him blindly without hearing opposing views on NPR or other media. By the same token, some Americans listen only to Jon Stewart to get all their news and make their judgements through his prism.
 
The saddest part about Rush is that, imo, he truly is one of the sharpest commentators out there and is unquestionably, again imo, the most talented presenter.

When he decides to be analytical, he is very very good at it.

The fact he has chosen to be so partisan about it is regrettable. The fact he has chosen to put on blinders regarding to what topics he applies his reason and analytical skills is tragic.
 
Garrette said:
The saddest part about Rush is that, imo, he truly is one of the sharpest commentators out there and is unquestionably, again imo, the most talented presenter.

When he decides to be analytical, he is very very good at it.

The fact he has chosen to be so partisan about it is regrettable. The fact he has chosen to put on blinders regarding to what topics he applies his reason and analytical skills is tragic.
Click to expand...


You really think Limbaugh has good analytical skills? Sharp commentator I will grant, but I think his analysis is subpar. He makes so many mistakes in his logic on a regular basis that I see no reason whatsoever to say he has good analytical skills. That is, except as it relates to spin. He is good with spin.

Lurker
 
Lurker said:
You really think Limbaugh has good analytical skills? Sharp commentator I will grant, but I think his analysis is subpar. He makes so many mistakes in his logic on a regular basis that I see no reason whatsoever to say he has good analytical skills. That is, except as it relates to spin. He is good with spin.

Lurker
Click to expand...
Yes, I think so.

His analysis falls short only when his bias requires it so that he may reach a desired outcome. You can tell when he is (perhaps unknowingly) agonizing over what he realizes (again perhaps unknowingly) is faulty logic.
 
I think rush is a spin DR for the right, I heard him state that when the man who broke free form the corrections officer on his way to court and killed a deputy and a few others then held up in the woman's apartment, and she preached to him that god had a plan for him, Rush states that You cant tell me that God was not in that apartment with those two people,any one who is seeing this can not say with a strait face that god was not in that apartment" I can look that idiot in the face and say GOD WAS NOT IN THAT APARTMENT OR ANY OTHER APT.
I do not see how any one can say that this type of mentality is a anything other than polarized spin doctor for the god machine.
Rush is no better a communicator than Jim Jones,or Benny Hinn, Idiots who think with emotion and do not want to think for themselves like rush, God will not let things get to bad, I don't have to worry about life, I think the Jews said that when Hitler got elected " it cant get any worse, it has to get better" Those ovens are for bagels.
 
adler said:
... I think the Jews said that when Hitler got elected " it cant get any worse, it has to get better" Those ovens are for bagels.
Click to expand...

Geeze. I'm out of here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law
 
Umm, was going to mention this before, but Godwin's Law does not necessarily mean a logical fallacy.
 
OK, let me use an analogy.
Early in No Man's Land, Danis Tanovic's bitterly funny film about the war in Bosnia, one Bosnian soldier asks another -- as they sit, immobilized in the fog, on what turns out to be a battlefield -- whether he knows the difference between a pessimist and an optimist.

The soldier shrugs.

The answer: "a pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."

Happy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom