Limbaugh, Remove Foot insert the Other

[Lurker]

Hmm, three detractors of Rush who all have listened to the show. I guess Bill Thompson is just plain wrong.

Again, I don't hate Rush as much as I think he is a pilonidal cyst on the political arse of America.

Lurker

 

[Garrette]

I have found that people who hate Rush have never heard his radio show.

I used to listen a lot and like him.

I no longer like him but still occasionally listen.

I'll make the same wager Lurker made, i.e., that I have been listening to him longer than you.

I still think he is the most talented political pundit out there, and among the most intelligent, though possibly the least educated.

He's gotten worse. He used to announce that he was biased, and he would list all his sources. He does both much less frequently now and proclaims himself right by virtue of being himself a lot. This is separate from his humor, which I get and often find funny.

 

[daredelvis]

I have found that people who hate Rush have never heard his radio show.

Funny, I have found that people who like Rush have never had a clue. That is, they usually have fundamental misconceptions about facts. I have always wondered if they listen to Rush because they are clueless, or are clueless because they listen to Rush. He does seem to attract a certain element that wants (needs?) to be told what to think.

First heard his show in 91. Did not start hating him until after listing to his show (granted it only took about 45 min. to reach this position).


Daredelvis

 

[RandFan]

I used to listen a lot and like him.

I no longer like him but still occasionally listen.

I'll make the same wager Lurker made, i.e., that I have been listening to him longer than you.

I still think he is the most talented political pundit out there, and among the most intelligent, though possibly the least educated.

He's gotten worse. He used to announce that he was biased, and he would list all his sources. He does both much less frequently now and proclaims himself right by virtue of being himself a lot. This is separate from his humor, which I get and often find funny.

Rush used to be a bit more intelectually honest and less likely to take himself so seriously. He believes his own S*** now. He's always had poor logic skills. However, when Rush is on his mark he can be very good. Probably one of the best ever at doing what he does. It's unfortunate that he is not better at critical thinking when it comes to his biases.

 

[Garrette]

Rush used to be a bit more intelectually honest and less likely to take himself so seriously. He believes his own S*** now. He's always had poor logic skills. However, when Rush is on his mark he can be very good. Probably one of the best ever at doing what he does. It's unfortunate that he is not better at critical thinking when it comes to his biases.

Agree completely.

I think this also addresses both how he gets followers and how he keeps most of them.

He got them initially because he was fairly intellectually honest.

He gets them now because he has that reputation.

In addition, since he quotes/cites articles, studies, interviews, news spots, and more a lot, he adds to his apparent credibility.*

He keeps people because they've already been convinced he's trustworthy.


*I recently wrote some lengthy rebuttals to, and commentary on, Ann Coulter's books for some family members who adored her every word. One reason my sister gave for trusting Coulter was the number of end notes in her books. I had to go through a lot to demonstrate that end notes need checking, too.

 

[Lurker]

Randfan,

I agree, Rush is very good at what he does - entertaining. I even laugh when he is making fun of liberals.

His broadbrushing really gets to me though. It is the equivalent of me saying all Republicans are like David Duke. Ugh.

You are also right that over the years he has really taken himself far too seriously though, which interferes with this liberal's ability to listen to him without getting nauseas.

Lurker

 

[varwoche]

Again, I don't hate Rush as much as I think he is a pilonidal cyst on the political arse of America.

It is my singular mission in life to get just one person to acknowledge the irony that anti-evolutionary Rush Limbaugh may have been BORN WITH A TAIL.

(A good friend of mine had a pilonidal cyst that was the result of being born WITH AN ACTUAL FREAKING TAIL.)

You are my last hope Lurker.

 

[Charlie Monoxide]

I have found that people who hate Rush have never heard his radio show.

When I came down to the states from Canada, way back in 1996, I too listened to Rush. I love listening to talk radio during the day and sorely missed CBC radio. I didn't realize that NPR existed (yes, I just rolled in on a turnip truck).

I really gave him the benefit of the doubt and listened objectively to him for about 2 or 3 weeks off and on. This was during his "Clinton rant" era. I wasn't much into American politics and really had no political leanings. Most of what I heard Rush say didn't seem too far-fetched, but every so often he would say something outlandish that made think "say what?" This was before WWW and it was hard to check facts. The one thing I never understood at that time was Rush was constantly saying how the Democrats were a party of hate. He would then follow with some hateful news tidbit or opinion (usually opinion) directed at the Democrats. This all sounded very Orwellian. After 3 weeks of this I seriously thought that if this is main-stream America, I'm in looney-land. (I should mention I was in California)

I don't hate Rush, but I will use the tired cliche that the xtian right used about gays...

Charlie (don't hate the sinner, hate the sin) Monoxide

 

[wastepanel]

The funny thing is that I find Rush Limbaugh very entertaining as a radio host. My biggest issue is that his brand of comedy has now moved into the White House. I can't tell whether he is being truthful, or running such an elaborate lie that even the President and his cronies have bought into it.

 

[SlippyToad]

Oh yeah, Godwin. Damn, did that guy know or what?

ETA: Hitler launched a war that caused the death of millions and attempted genocide, and Limbaugh made fun of Chelsea Clinton. Wow.

Uh, it could be easily argued that Rush, while not actually putting his finger on the lever, certainly swung the bottle of champagne that christened the war in Iraq, which has resulted in the utterly needless slaughter of hundreds of thousands, in search for weapons of mass destruction that never were, to oust a dictator who was an impotent crazy, and usher in a democracy that is being rejected like a bodily disease by a people who are now so antipathic toward the United States, Democracy, and Capitalism that they will likely careen into the arms of another vile dictator quite shortly.

Godwin's Law is intellectual cowardice. It's not even a modern extension of any rhetorical fallacy, just a cheap reference often made by Internet newbies with the emotional maturity of a 14-year-old. Comparing Rush to Hitler is extremely valid. Diagram the opening of Rush's first book. Diagram the opening of Mein Kampf. I noticed some chilling similarities, some 12 or 13 years ago when I first performed that exercise.

Shoving utterly false and hateful propaganda down the national gullet was part and parcel of the Nazi plan to subvert their rather young Republic and turn it over to the corporate/nationalist fusion . . . our current Neo-Con government resembles a fascist nation in many very obvious ways. Shrill Authoritarianism. Corporate control of the government. Strident nationalism. Manufactured internal enemies. Fake crises used to frighten people into giving up checks and balances, and give extra powers to the government. Overreaching wars of foreign aggression. Negotiating with foreign powers in bad faith.

Rush has done far more than simply poke virturpatively at a few seemingly helpless people. He has demonized everyone and everything he doesn't agree with. I can find no correlation on the political left to him, or to the Glenn Becks, Sean Hannitys, Bill O'Reillys or Ann Coulters of the right. There is no comparison.

 

[SlippyToad]

I have found that people who hate Rush have never heard his radio show.

You have found a specious generalization. I've watched his TV show, listened to him on the radio, and read his putrid first book, at least until the near stream-of-consciousness (or unconsciousness) began to repeat itself like a frigging broken record.

In conclusion, you are wrong.

 

[Dancing David]

Rush used to be a bit more intelectually honest and less likely to take himself so seriously. He believes his own S*** now. He's always had poor logic skills. However, when Rush is on his mark he can be very good. Probably one of the best ever at doing what he does. It's unfortunate that he is not better at critical thinking when it comes to his biases.

Certainly the Air America people think he is good at what he does, as one of them said "It is really hard to talk for three hours and make any sort of sense, especialy every day".

 

[Ladewig]

Uh, it could be easily argued that Rush, while not actually putting his finger on the lever, certainly swung the bottle of champagne that christened the war in Iraq, which has resulted in the utterly needless slaughter of hundreds of thousands, in search for weapons of mass destruction that never were, to oust a dictator who was an impotent crazy, and usher in a democracy that is being rejected like a bodily disease by a people who are now so antipathic toward the United States, Democracy, and Capitalism that they will likely careen into the arms of another vile dictator quite shortly.

But "swinging the bottle that christened" something is nowhere near as serious or as culpable as doing that thing itself. Some people within America's borders cheered the events of 9/11, but cheering something on is not illegal and in terms of moral culpability is orders of magnitude less serious than actually performing the act.

Godwin's Law is intellectual cowardice. It's not even a modern extension of any rhetorical fallacy, just a cheap reference often made by Internet newbies with the emotional maturity of a 14-year-old.

There are countless examples on the internet of people making an invalid comparison between a specific person or group and Hitler. Someone considered this practice so common as to name it. I have yet to see an internet example that represents intellectual cowardice. RandFan's mentioning it is not intellectual cowardice.

Rush has done far more than simply poke virturpatively at a few seemingly helpless people. He has demonized everyone and everything he doesn't agree with. I can find no correlation on the political left to him, or to the Glenn Becks, Sean Hannitys, Bill O'Reillys or Ann Coulters of the right. There is no comparison.

And yet "demonizing everyone and everything he disagrees with" is his right under the first amendment. Rush is nothing like Hilter and making the comparison erodes the level of political discussion far more than anything Rush has ever said.

 

[RandFan]

Uh, it could be easily argued that Rush, while not actually putting his finger on the lever, certainly swung the bottle of champagne that christened the war in Iraq, which has resulted in the utterly needless slaughter of hundreds of thousands, in search for weapons of mass destruction that never were, to oust a dictator who was an impotent crazy, and usher in a democracy that is being rejected like a bodily disease by a people who are now so antipathic toward the United States, Democracy, and Capitalism that they will likely careen into the arms of another vile dictator quite shortly.

Rhetorical. Verbose.

Godwin's Law is intellectual cowardice. It's not even a modern extension of any rhetorical fallacy, just a cheap reference often made by Internet newbies with the emotional maturity of a 14-year-old. Comparing Rush to Hitler is extremely valid. Diagram the opening of Rush's first book. Diagram the opening of Mein Kampf. I noticed some chilling similarities, some 12 or 13 years ago when I first performed that exercise.

"Intellectual cowardice"? "Extremely valid"? Are you trying to win an argument via adjective? Oh, and don't forget that the similarities are "chilling".

Rhetorical and fallacious. Such comparisons to Hitler are intellectually dishonest and intellectually lazy. They are also offensive.

Shoving utterly false and hateful propaganda down the national gullet was part and parcel of the Nazi plan to subvert their rather young Republic and turn it over to the corporate/nationalist fusion . . . our current Neo-Con government resembles a fascist nation in many very obvious ways. Shrill Authoritarianism. Corporate control of the government. Strident nationalism. Manufactured internal enemies. Fake crises used to frighten people into giving up checks and balances, and give extra powers to the government. Overreaching wars of foreign aggression. Negotiating with foreign powers in bad faith.

The Nazi's weren't fascist. That you can find what you see as similarities does not justify your comparison. You could perhaps argue a slippery slope and I might be inclined to listen to your argument if you were not so clearly demonstrating your emotion and bias. You won't likely be taken seriously by sincere individuals on this forum regardless of which side of the fence they are on.

Rush has done far more than simply poke virturpatively at a few seemingly helpless people. He has demonized everyone and everything he doesn't agree with. I can find no correlation on the political left to him, or to the Glenn Becks, Sean Hannitys, Bill O'Reillys or Ann Coulters of the right. There is no comparison.

"Still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest." --Paul Simon. I would ad to that he sees what he wants to see also.

Of course you can find no correlation. Why am I not surprised?

 

[RandFan]

But "swinging the bottle that christened" something is nowhere near as serious or as culpable as doing that thing itself. Some people within America's borders cheered the events of 9/11, but cheering something on is not illegal and in terms of moral culpability is orders of magnitude less serious than actually performing the act.

There are countless examples on the internet of people making an invalid comparison between a specific person or group and Hitler. Someone considered this practice so common as to name it. I have yet to see an internet example that represents intellectual cowardice. RandFan's mentioning it is not intellectual cowardice.

And yet "demonizing everyone and everything he disagrees with" is his right under the first amendment. Rush is nothing like Hilter and making the comparison erodes the level of political discussion far more than anything Rush has ever said.

Thanks.

 

[wastepanel]

Did anybody else catch today's show where he pretty much accused the Clinton's of being involved in a (possible) murder of one of Clinton's pardonees?

 

[Ladewig]

The next time that a proslytizer asks me what it would take to believe in God, I think I'll respond with, "If Michael J. Fox were miraculously cured of his Parkinson's Disease on the very same day that Rush Limbaugh was diagnosed with Parkinson's, then I'd walk into a church and look for some answers."

 

[Snide]

The next time that a proslytizer asks me what it would take to believe in God, I think I'll respond with, "If Michael J. Fox were miraculously cured of his Parkinson's Disease on the very same day that Rush Limbaugh was diagnosed with Parkinson's, then I'd walk into a church and look for some answers."

 

[RandFan]

The next time that a proslytizer asks me what it would take to believe in God, I think I'll respond with, "If Michael J. Fox were miraculously cured of his Parkinson's Disease on the very same day that Rush Limbaugh was diagnosed with Parkinson's, then I'd walk into a church and look for some answers."

Snide bet me to it but what an excellent prologue to this entire debate.

 

[RandFan]

Oh, Ladewig. In case you didn't know it.

Kent Hovind was convicted.
Ted Haggard was caught using the services of a male prostitute.
Ann Coulter could be prosecuted for voter fraud.

So perhaps there is some reason for rejoicing if not worship.