Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
You're trying to stretch the argument here but it doesn't work. Maher has a very limited reach, really limited and compared to Rush only a fraction of influence.
Obama didn't take 1 million from Maher.
A Super PAC supporting Obama did and Obama is prohibited by law from directing what they do with the money.
You're comparing apples and oranges. I don't need to "make" your comments wrong...they already were.
-spence
|
"Maher has a very limited reach, really limited and compared to Rush only a fraction of influence."
Spence, I'm going to focus on this one absurdity.
You're saying that Rush's use of the word slut, is worse than Maher's use of the word c*nt, because Rush has a wider audience?
Spence, do you listen to what comes out of your mouth? What you're saying is, freedom of speech is inversely proportional to the size of the audience? What's the logic behind that? Exactly how big does one's audience have to be, before he is obligated to be a gentleman? 1 million? 2 million?
"Obama is prohibited by law from directing what they do with the money. "
I'm no expert on campaign finance laws, but it's curious that's NOT what the white house is saying. I heard Jay Carney say that they weren't asking the superPac to give the money back, not that they were prohibited by law from telling the PAC to give the money back.
Threaded Mode