1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Limbaugh offers to debate Obama one-on-one

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by Little-Acorn, Mar 4, 2009.

  1. Little-Acorn

    Little-Acorn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    I would love to see this take place. Very seldom does a liberal sit down with a conservative in a public forum, for the express purpose of debating the merits of conservatism vs. modern liberalism and socialism.

    If Limbaugh is as stupid as his detractors keep calling him, or as wrong, then the detractors should be as eager for this debate as I am. Obama is truly a gifted speaker, no doubt, and is intelligent and articulate. He should be able to mop the floor with Limbaugh, prove him wrong in a dozen ways, if that's really how much better modern liberalism is than conservatism.

    Of course, if Limbaugh is right in what he says, and Obama wrong, then it might not be Obama doing the mopping.

    Of course, this will happen... when pigs fly. Liberals such as Obama (and his advisors) know what will happen when someone almost as articulate as Obama, promotes and defends conservatism, in a debate with ANY liberal. Conservatives have always had the advantage of being right, in their contention that limited government and personal freedom and responsibility yield greater prosperity than government expansion and dependence.

    President Obama, of course, has no particular reason to want to debate Limbaugh or any other prominent conservative. He has the votes, and can simply hide in the White House and go along with the Dem majorities in Congress to put his agenda in place. I predict he will do exactly that, and will act like he's never even heard of Limbaugh's offer.

    Still, it's a great thought.

    -------------------------------------------------

    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=90720

    Rush challenges Obama to 1-on-1 debate
    Says president will own U.S. if he can wipe out Republican head

    by Joe Kovacs
    Posted: March 04, 2009
    1:51 pm Eastern

    WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. – With Democrats targeting talk-show host Rush Limbaugh as the de facto head of the Republican Party, the radio giant is now inviting President Barack Obama on his show for a face-to-face debate about policies important to America's future.

    "I am offering President Obama to come on this program without staffers, without a teleprompter, without note cards to debate me on the issues," Limbaugh said on his program today.

    "Let's talk about free markets versus government control. Let's talk about nationalizing health care and raising taxes on small business. ... Let's talk about illegal immigration and lawlessness on the borders. Let's talk about massive deficits and the destroying the opportunities of future generations."

    The offer comes in the wake of a published report by the Politico stating White House insiders have been targeting the No. 1 rated host now that President Bush is out of office.

    Limbaugh said the debate could take place without spending a single dime of taxpayer money, offering to fly Obama to South Florida at the host's own expense, lodge him at the five-star Breakers Hotel in Palm Beach, and even feed him $100-a-pound beef.

    "If you take me out," Limbaugh said addressing Obama directly, "if you can wipe me out in a debate and prove to the rest of America that what I say is senseless and wrong, do you realize you will own the United States of America? You will have no opposition."

    "You've debated the best out there. You are one of the most gifted public speakers of our age. I would think, Mr. President, you would jump at this opportunity," he added.

    Regarding his being placed on a so-called "enemies list," Limbaugh offered this analysis:

    "It's amazing. In 1972, Richard Nixon had an enemies list, and the media was outraged by this. They were outraged. At the same time, those who weren't on it were a little jealous. But they were outraged that a president would engage in this kind of behavior toward the media. Now they go after a private citizen. Rahm Emanuel is leading the team going after a private citizen, and the Drive-By Media applaud, get on board and help further the mission. We live in different times."

    As WND previously reported, Limbaugh has verbally slammed the economic stimulus plan of Obama and the Democrat-led Congress, calling it an assault on capitalism intentionally designed to harm the private sector and lead to bigger government.

    "This is a full-fledged attack on capitalism, and the leftists Democrats have been seeking this for the longest time," Limbaugh said. "That's why they can't stop themselves. It is Christmas morning every day for these people. There's nobody that can stop them."
     
  2. chestnut

    chestnut New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    Messages:
    1,222
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Obama would have his A$$ handed to him so it would never happen.
     
  3. top gun

    top gun New Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    4,940
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Ohio, USA
    Druggie Limbaugh is basically Joe The Plumber with a mirophone... he's really just an opinion only, know nothing, rabble rousing side show!:D

    Now I will say this. He has every right to rant & rave for Far Right ratings. That's his chosen profession being the major fear monger of the Right and the enemy of anything & everything the Democratic Party does.

    I mean I do understand it. I get enjoyment from the other side with Keith Olbermann. And while Olberman is totally on the Democratic side he doesn't go to the extremes of a Limbag.

    Olbermann makes fun of the Republicants. He may even scold them from time to time... and I do enjoy that. But he doesn't try to whip his listeners up to violence or to purposely try to screw up our election process. And I wouldn't like that if Olbermann did it either.

    But all that said it would not be appropriate or realistic for Olbermann to have debated Bush anymore than it would be Limbag debating our new president, President Obama.

    These are serious times and we need serious people like President Obama to try and solve them.

    And I can guarantee you Rush only does two things. He tries to make you afraid of things and then tries to tell you who to blame for it... and it's all for the ratings.

    He's not a problem solver... he's just an instigator.

    He's like that fat loud mouthed neighbor that yells at his kids all the time in public and you're almost sure beats his wife. You can't really do anything about him living next door... but you sure wish he'd move because his bullying behavior makes everyone not in "his special little click" very, VERY uncomfortable.


     
  4. chestnut

    chestnut New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    Messages:
    1,222
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Even after saying that- you Obama Lover.... Obama will have his A$$ handed to him.

    That's why he hasn't agreed to appear on any conservative talk radio. He would not be able to hold his own.

    Without his handlers, Obama says stupid crap.
     
  5. Little-Acorn

    Little-Acorn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    With or without his handlers, Obama would not be able to prevail in an effort to show that his exptreme-left agenda is sound and will result in prosperity... because it wouldn't. And deep down, I thing President Obama knows it.

    That's the main reason Obama will never debate Limbaugh or any other conservative. He can't afford to lose that debate.

    Although the country certainly COULD afford his losing such a debate. Might straighten him out and get him to take a course with a better track record: conservatism and Constitutional adherence.
     
  6. BigRob

    BigRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Messages:
    7,366
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA
    While I agree Obama will not take this debate for numerous reason, and I agree that we need to follow a more conservative path, I have to ask, what constitutional adherence are you referring to?


    As a side note: The constitution took effect today (March 4th) back in 1789 when the first Congress met in New York.
     
  7. Little-Acorn

    Little-Acorn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2009
    Messages:
    2,444
    Likes Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    It was ratified on June 21, 1788. Didn't it take effect then?

    March 4, 1789 was the time that the old Continental Congress scheduled, for the first meeting of the new Congress under the new Constitution. But Congress missed the date. Travel wasn't easy back then, particularly in late winter/early spring, and congresscritters straggled in over most of the month. The Senate didn't achieve a quorum until early April 1789. And George Washington wasn't officially elected President under the new Constitution, until months after that.

    But the offices existed, even if they weren't filled, when the states ratified the Constitution. And that was on June 21, 1788.
     
  8. Popeye

    Popeye Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Washington state
    Yeah, sure... fat boy Rush would need a little pick me up before debating

    [​IMG]
     
  9. Pandora

    Pandora Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    11,790
    Likes Received:
    257
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The people's republic of Eugene
    OMG Top

    Your president is a coke head and and a crack head and your calling some other guy a druggie


    you crack me up



    Obama will never debate him, Rush was clear... no teleprompters
    obama can't speak without one
     
  10. Pandora

    Pandora Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    11,790
    Likes Received:
    257
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The people's republic of Eugene
    Can you find me a picture of a crack pipe for obama
    or maybe he would rather shoot some coke
     
  11. Dr.Who

    Dr.Who Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Messages:
    6,776
    Likes Received:
    251
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Horse Country
    The liberals own the entire MSM, the white house, the house, the senate, and the courts. The conservatives own Fox news and talk radio.

    Yet somehow that small voice of the conservatives manages to convince about half of all the voters to vote republican and the libs only manage to squeek out about half of the vote. In a free marketplace of ideas liberalism looses every time.

    Which of course explains why the libs are trying to bring back the so called fairness doctrine and advocating that people don't listen to Rush. It's the only way they can win a debate.
     
  12. Popeye

    Popeye Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2007
    Messages:
    3,023
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Washington state
    Hey, I'm glad to see you've got it all figured out....did your leader Rush tell you what to say?

    Lookee here... a Democrat, Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL), apologizing to Rush...not groveling like you Republicans do though..


    “I’m sorry Limbaugh called for harsh sentences for drug addicts while he was a drug addict. I’m also sorry that he’s bent on seeing America fail. And I’m sorry that Limbaugh is one sorry excuse for a human being.”


    http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2009/03/breaking-news-alan-grayson-apologizes.html
     
  13. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah....typically, you "conservatives" enjoy watching someone smaller, weaker & more-impoverished (than you) suffering (as in your efforts to deny reasonable health-care, for everyone), but I can't figure-out why none of you are concerned about Porky's (obvious) psychosis. It appears he's given-up the "downs" (Oxy-style) for "stimulants"; not exactly the cure for an over-burdened heart. :rolleyes:

    If he was serious, about a debate, he should avail himself to random drug-testing, in the mean-time. We don't need The President hanging-around with some outta-control speed-freak....especially one that's dancin' on the edge of a heart-attack cliff.

    I think most-people are well-aware of what's driving this distraction.

    [​IMG]

    *

    George W. Bush’s Disposable Constitution
     
  14. BigRob

    BigRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Messages:
    7,366
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA
    No, after New Hampshire got on board, they set a timetable for when the new government would begin operating under the Constitution. That began on March 4th, when the first Congress met.

    All true, travel was quite difficult, but technically, under the terms established to transition to the Constitution, it would have begun on March 4th, when the Articles of Confederation expired and the Constitution took over. However, Washington was sworn in on April 30th I believe, not really months after.

    Only New Hampshire ratified it on this day. They were the 9th (the number needed) and that set in motion the transition. The transition would have officially ended on March 4th though, when Congress was supposed to be meeting.
     
  15. BigRob

    BigRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Messages:
    7,366
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA
    Again, if you can support the troops but not the war (which we heard so often), why can't you support the office of President, and not the policies put forth from it?
     
Loading...

Share This Page