http://www.indystar.com/articles/1/154287-7781-062.html

Well, let's see. We have a drug-addicted, three-times divorced spokesperson for family values and the Republican right. Anything wrong with this picture? Nah! Its perfect.

Hey man, hate the sin, love the sinner.

Actually, as they would say in Deadwood, "that cocksucker needs to shut his fucking mouth up".

I hate the conservative right more and more each day....

"Well, let's see. We have a drug-addicted, three-times divorced spokesperson for family values and the Republican right. Anything wrong with this picture?"

Amen to that!!.

If having to deal with overzealous drug prosecuters, the kind that are praised and favored by the conservative right, and the fact that the favorite whipping boy of the right, the ACLU, stepped up and came to the aid of Limbaugh by filing several briefs in support of doctor/patient priveledge, as well as a right to privacy ( a core issue in pro-choice arguments), that probably kept his ass out of jail, does not, at the least, teach "the mouth that roared", a lesson in liberal ethos, the man is more an idiot than a full-blown hypocrit.

Perhaps his soon-to-be-ex-wife saw that.

It should be a matter of time before we see sightings of him in some posh palm beach strip-clubs.

OG

There seems to be a lot of anger out there.

Well, I am angry about those Florida persecutors (oops, I mean prosecutors) who are trying to make a lesson out of Rush. I don't agree with Rush on his politics, but people should not be persecuted for their beliefs.

This clown (and many others like him) made their fortunes selling advertising beacuse they are good at stirring up people who can't do their own fact checking or come to their own conclusions.

He is a bufoon and a comedian who knows that the AM Talk Radio listening audience will buy almost anything because "If he said it on the radio it must be true."

It's a sad day in this country when people allow clowns like this to do their thinking for them. A true disgrace. How this guy became an "opinion leader" in the first place is beyond me. Are Americans that easily led?

When are people in this country going to take back their government and stop letting jokers like this pollute the airwaves?

Country John

Where are all the lefties who stood behind Clinton with "his personal life shouldn't have to impact his professional life?"

The silence is deafening.

But politics is devoid of morality, especially when it comes to critiquing the morals of your opponent. But please - just ONE leftie who defended Clinton - now is your chance to stand up and defend Rush. Anybody??

I don't ever remember Clinton taking a strong stand on morality. I think it is more about hypocracy that stirs up the hatred towards Rush.

-from the far out center,
tryer

Limbaugh's personal life shouldn't have to impact his professional life.

He divorce 100 wives, but it wouldn't mean his politics were wrong.

Dongringo writes "now is your chance to stand up and defend Rush. Anybody??"

And now is your chance to get some "sage advise" from your hero since you're both in the same situation.

touche

Note: When I saw hypocrisy and Rush, my first thought was the drugs, so I originally wrote it from that angle. Upon realizing this was about divorce, I added some corresponding bits to my initial analysis, but didn't bother to do additional research into the article excerpts at the end. I assume his marriage beliefs aren't as hypocritical as his drug commentaries since this is his third marriage. However, I don't believe the drubbing by the rest of the conservative media would be any less severe.

......

As Tryer points out, it's the hypocrisy, but not only from Rush, but from the convervative media.

If you substituted "Rush Limbaugh" with any "liberal" personality or celebrity, there would be howls and ridicule emanating from the right on a scale far eclipsing what we've seen Rush have to deal with. Coulter would be calling the liberal a "pathetic girly-boy wife-cheater who who may as well open a meth lab run by his harem"*. Hannity would attack the liberal's supporters as "apologists for a weak willed liberal who views marriage like the weekly trash and deserves to face our nation's laws like any other American citizen would."* The Republican National Committee would be issuing alerts to conservative think-tanks, politicians, and media outlets to research all past associations between "the divorce-obsessed liberal drug addict" and Kerry and to mention them together in the same sentence whenever possible. The Media Research Center would cry "LIBERAL BIAS" for any articles that didn't condemn "the liberal drug-abusing divorcer" as a drug-addicted criminal pig. Fox News, the WSJ editorial page, Townhall writers, Heritage writers, and a multitude of other convservative journalists and media personalities would all chime in as to how "the fallen liberal druggie divorce master" is the end result of the bigger picture of liberal immorality and philosophical failings.

And Rush...he'd be right up there leading the charge, firing potshots and ridiculing the fallen liberal druggie divorce obsessee and his morally bankrupt supporters for failing to realize that he has no respect for the sanctity of marriage and that each time he broke the law, it was his personal choice.

But instead, it's a right-wing darling and not a liberal, and the left for the most part gives him a free pass. The left has nothing close to the attack and propaganda machine developed by the right.

* My approximation of what they might say, not what they have actually said, which is often even more outrageous. Quotes can easily be found for them.

The fall of a moralist is always a great American spectacle. The Elmer Gantry story—the righteous preacher who turns out to be a letch and a boozer—has a special resonance in a nation that postures as morally superior but enjoys sin. Nothing entertains (or instructs in the essentials of human nature) like hypocrisy on a grand scale. When Bill Bennett, best-selling author of “The Book of Virtues,” was outed as a compulsive gambler, and evangelist Jim Bakker was caught embezzling from his Praise the Lord empire, the lamentations of the true believers were drowned out by the snickers of the knowing.
...When Rush Limbaugh declared to his radio audience that he was “your epitome of morality of virtue, a man you could totally trust with your wife, your daughter, and even your son in a Motel 6 overnight,” he was acting.
I Am Addicted to Prescription Pain Medication
By Evan Thomas
Newsweek
October 27, 2003

Anyone expecting that Limbaugh or his apologists would lay down their arms and take up Limbaugh's call for the incarceration of white drug abusers like himself, or better yet, call for a dramatic overhaul of American drug policy, is in for a rude awakening. Not only do his supporters refuse to confront the counterproductive consequences of this war and its obvious race and class-based double standards, they've turned hypocrisy into their own rallying cry. With appalling chutzpa, the conservative choir has excused Limbaugh's hypocrisy while simultaneously accusing "liberals and the media" of either themselves doing drugs or defending those who do. Indeed, according to the warped logic of one of his most vocal supporters, Limbaugh's hypocrisy is acceptable in large part because of the media's hypocrisy.
...Drudge's defense of Limbaugh is taken directly out of the Right's playbook: "When caught red-handed living a lie, deflect attention from your personal responsibility and shoot one directly across the bow of those perpetual evil-doers, 'the liberals and the media.'" This is classic misdirection, the key to the success of generations of politicians and charlatans for whom smoke and mirrors have always been a stock in trade. And it works. At best, the misdirection is entirely exculpatory; at minimum, the public is stymied and confused. When the public discussion over the "war on drugs" degenerates into a debate over who's the bigger hypocrite, Limbaugh and his apologists have effectively won.
Rush Limbaugh and the Hypocrisy Smokescreen
by Kimberle Williams Crenshaw
Common Dreams News Center
Saturday, October 18, 2003

Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up.
...What this says to me is that too many whites are getting away with drug use, too many whites are getting away with drug sales, too many whites are getting away with trafficking in this stuff. The answer to this disparity is not to start letting people out of jail because we're not putting others in jail who are breaking the law. The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them and send them up the river, too.
...It's kind of like sentencing. A lot of people say that we have a heavy sentence for this crime and a light sentence for another crime, and what we ought to do is reduce the heavy sentence so it's more in line with the other. Wrong. In most cases we ought to increase the light sentence and make it compatible with the heavy sentence, and be serious about punishment because we are becoming too tolerant as a society, folks, especially of crime, in too many parts of the country.
-- Rush Limbaugh. October 5, 1995 show transcript.
http://www.takebackthemedia.com/gophotwrush.html

THe arguments that Limbaugh is a clown and not a thinker are specious. He is extremely bright, and few people could debate him because of his command of the issues. I think what people are saying is they dont like that he doesnt agree with them.

I am not a political guy. But it speaks to Limbaughs success that he stirs up so much name calling. With the exception of D'art the critics of Rush on this forum have mostly resorted to name calling. And I KNOW one of these critics to be a smart guy.

ANyway, I think Rush has every right to be human. His addiction is sad for him and I wish him success in recovery as I would anyone else who was in that situation.

Regarding the overzealous prosecutor in Palm Beach County--I would think it odd if Rush DIDNT fight illegal seizure of medical records for a selective enforcement of the law. This is fight or flight--he has to do this. And I respect him for it. He had an illness, and its too bad all people can do is howl about what a hypocrite he is instead of substantively countering the issues with which they disagree.

"Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream."

"The difference between Los Angeles and yogurt is that yogurt comes with less fruit."

"They vote with their vaginas."

"Take that bone out of your nose and call me back."

"Bigot - A person who wins an argument with a liberal."

All quotes above are attributed to Rush Limbaugh. Seems like Rush does a pretty good job of name calling himself.

He has every right to be human. But what makes his situation, both with his drug addiction and his marriages so ironic to me is that he gets on the radio program everyday and runs his mouth like he is some know-it-all, self righteous guy. He preaches like he is a saint, yet makes the same mistakes we all do. He is a “do as I say and not as I do guy.” And he is being called on it now.

Here is a particular quote from Rush I find appropriate in this situation.

"If you commit a crime, you're guilty." –Rush Limbaugh

Did he commit a crime? If so, by his own standards he is guilty. The quote from GCL above I find incredibly ironic as well.

"His addiction is sad for him and I wish him success in recovery as I would anyone else who was in that situation." - GCL

I would say that is a liberal point of view. Help people. Let them recover so they can be productive members of society. The conservatives say lock up all the criminals and drug users and throw away the key. Forget rehab! Waste of time. Waste of money they say.

Some other quotes from Rush that makes him look pretty bad regarding drugs and drug users:

Rush Limbaugh Show, 9-23-93
LIMBAUGH: (Voiceover) He says that, I know every expert in the world will disagree with me, but I don't buy into the disease part of drug abuse. The first time you reach for a substance you are making a choice. Every time you go back, you're making a personal choice. I feel very strongly about that.'

What he's saying is that if there's a line of cocaine here, I have to make the choice to go down and sniff it. And I don't know how--how to do it, but if I was going to do it, I'd do it. If there were a gun here, it wouldn't fire itself. I've got to reach for it and--and pull the trigger. And his point is that we are rationalizing all this irresponsibility and all the choices people are making and we're blaming not them, but society for it. All these Hollywood celebrities say the reason they're weird and bizarre is because they were abused by their parents. So we're going to pay for that kind of rehab, too, and we shouldn't. It's not our responsibility.

Rush Limbaugh Show, 1-15-96
In fact, I'm reminded--I had this story about three weeks ago--maybe it was before Christmas, maybe it was as far back as November--but there were a couple of drug convictions out in--I think it was a Colorado court. And these guys had--had done some really bad stuff, and there were mandated federal sentences for the crimes they had committed. And the judge apologized to the criminals while sentencing them because he thought it was too severe. He apologized and the com--the community was outraged. So we've gone from a judge sentencing a mother who makes her child beg six months in jail, to judges apologizing for getting dope dealers and crack dealers and drug salesmen off the streets with too severe a sentence.

Rush Limbaugh Show, 10-13-95
Now get this: Bob Johnson, drunk, driving around Minneapolis, threatening to shoot himself with a BB gun--Wonder where Al Cowlings was this night?--was drunk and calling people on the phone. Lis--listen to this. Bob Johnson was once listed in legislative directories as a school social worker, quote, "recognized for work in fields of youth and family problems and alcohol drug prevention."'
Another Democrat--another--folks, these people are taking it really hard, you know, these Democrats, threatening to kill themselves with a BB gun, getting drunk. Here--a guy who had been cited, who had been recognized for his great work in alcohol and drug abuse is drunk on the highways. This is just--it's tragic, but it's just--it's outrageously funny. And he is just the latest in a series of Democratic legislators in Minnesota accused of crimes including shoplifting, spouse abuse and insurance fraud. Conflict resolution, Democrats and all their good social works, and still, look at what ha--it just--it's--it's hypocrisy. ...


Rush Limbaugh Show, December 16, 1994
So we're not going to get on--we don't fault these animals for a lack of discipline, but we get on human beings who are fat for lack of discipline and you know it and I know it. But here's the thing that struck me about this. We have alcoholics and drug addicts in our society, don't we? And what do we say about them? Well, they can't help it. Why, it's genetic. Why, they have a disease. Why, put one thimbleful of scotch in front of them and they can die.'

We totally exempt them from any control over their lives, do we not? Some athlete will spend two years snorting lines of coke. He can't help it.' You know, it's--it's just--it's not--it's--it's genetic. These people--they're predisposed to having this addictive syndrome. They--they can't help--yeah, like that line of cocaine just happened to march into the hotel, go up to the athlete's room and put itself right there in front of him on his blotter.

"Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be
convicted and they ought to be sent up."
-- Rush Limbaugh. October 5, 1995 show transcript.

"What this says to me is that too many whites are getting away with drug use, too many whites are getting away with drug sales, too many whites are getting away with trafficking in this stuff. The answer to this disparity is not to start letting people out of jail because we're not putting others in jail who are breaking the law. The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them and send them up the river, too."
-- Rush Limbaugh. October 5, 1995 show transcript.

"It's kind of like sentencing. A lot of people say that we have a heavy sentence for this crime and a light sentence for another crime, and what we ought to do is reduce the heavy sentence so it's more in line with the other. Wrong. In most cases we ought to increase the light sentence and make it compatible with the heavy sentence, and be serious about punishment because we are becoming too tolerant as a society, folks, especially of crime, in too many parts of the country."
-- Rush Limbaugh. October 5, 1995 show transcript.


As for DG comments, that comparison is not valid. It would only be so if there was a witch-hunt or organized effort by a particular group demanding Rush lose his job because he has been married three times. No one really gives a shit though because everyone has been married three times.

As it stands, it only makes him out to be a hypocrite to preach about "family values" after being married three times and lends him little credibility. He just looks foolish and people are calling him out about it.

So my question is how is this impacting his professional life the same way Clinton's was impacted by the Lewinsky scandal? Clinton's administration was totally handcuffed for MONTHS, if not years because of the scandal and it was to the detriment of this country as well.

Can the same thing be said of Limbaugh? I don't think so. How has his career been impacted by this other than a small newspaper article about it and some people on message boards getting a big laugh about it?

Just for good measure, here are some Limbaugh quotes on divorce, marriage, family, etc:

March 15, 1993:

LIMBAUGH: (Voiceover) During the same 30-year period, a 560 percent increase in violent crime, a 419 percent increase in illegitimate births, a quadrupling in divorce rates, a tripling of the percentage of children living in single-parent homes, more than a 200 percent increase in teen-age suicide rate and a drop of almost 80 points in SAT scores.

You know what we have? We have a behavioral problem. We have a love problem. We have a spiritual problem. We're spending more money than this country ever thought it would have on all these problems, government trying to take care of all these problems. This can be shown--may, in fact, be leading to the--to the deterioration of some of our cultural strengths. There's no question about when people like Marian Wright Edelman say more money, more money, what we ought to say is, You've got enough money. You have plenty enough money. Why don't you let us get involved with teaching values, teaching right and wrong again instead of just throwing money at the problems so you can be in power?' That's...

April 26, 1994:

LIMBAUGH: See, we're all laughing. It was funny. It was supposed to be funny, and the press thinks this stuff is just uncalled for and mean-spirited. And the reason we're showing you all this is--is just to once again illustrate how many in the press corps just cannot take at all what they dish out.

You know, I mean, I have always wanted to do a profile on somebody in the press. Pick your favorite reporter. Who had a--look, Connie Chung--let's do a profile. How many divorces has Connie had? Did she ever do drugs when she was in high school? How many illegitimate children has she ever had? This kind of stuff--the stuff they ask about everybody they cover--the stuff they get--let's find out who these people are. Let's call up and say, You know, we're going to call everybody you've ever worked with. And we're going to get all kinds of information about you. We can't'--they panic. That's what they do every day.

Now we have--we have some other samples of the president--by the way, I don't know if--Connie Chung--she's a nice woman--I just--first name I thought of--I don't know any of that. I'm not suggesting anything by it, so please, it's just--you know, I could have said Sam Donaldson, and how many illegitimate children has he had? I could have said, you know--any--I could have brought up anybody. I don't--I don't mean to associate any of that with any particular person. I really, really don't.

This is called, Don't call our lawyers.' I just--you know, I just grabbed a name out of the top--you know, about myself, you know--I could have said it. So the president then decided that he was going to have some fun with Time magazine, which--Time magazine was pretty tough on him over the course of the campaign, and the first year and a half of his presidency, and here's how he chose to have some fun with Time and himself. Watch this.

September 24, 1993:

So, the basic disagreement, and the--one of the primary reasons for divorce or unhappiness in a relationship, is that a woman who's deriving--she--she wants the husband to think of her first, think of the kids first, think of the house first. Foremost; first, second, third; he's thinking of his career. That's where he gets his self-esteem and if he doesn't think of the career and doing well and climbing the ladder, she's not going to be happy with that either.

...
August 25, 1994:
[criticizing Arkansas]
LIMBAUGH: (Voiceover) And finally, the highest, number one state in divorce rate in 1991.

So we think it was a valid question, President Clinton, and it doesn't matter where you started. It hasn't gotten much better.
...

July 16, 1996:

[from the childless Limbaugh]
Marriage is simply the way humanity has discovered that it is the best way to build a building block of an orderly society and sustain it. That's all it is. It is also the means by which you produce legitimate offspring. And I--and I've--whatever else Barney and his mate do, they cannot do that. And that's the soul purpose--now look, we're devaluing marriage--a lot of divorce. Got to fix that. There is way, way too much illegitimacy in this country, and it's leading to the crime rate. This business of the gay marriage is nothing more than a money grab, in my opinion, so people can get on the welfare rolls or the benefit rolls, in state offices and other--and other places.

I--I really do not even think marriage is a right. Marriage is a responsibility. It's not a gift that somebody says, Hey, now it's time for you to get married. It's our bestowal to you.' It's--it's a--it's a commitment that you make and it is a responsibility that you accept. And it's--to--to be--to be tossed around in this manner is to devalue it, which is to devalue the fundamental building block of our society. And I think that's what's wrong with this whole process of same-sex marriage. It just simply denies the definition of what the institution is.

...
August 8, 1996:

[Limbaugh began his correspondence with his soon to be ex wife on Compuserve. She was married at the time.]:
Well, you wonder--you know, when you see the story and you say, Well, this is crazy. Couch potatoes.' But it--they may have a point. Because look at--look at this headline. This is from the New York Post last Friday: My wife's a cyberslut! New Jersey man seeks divorce for computer adultery.' These two people are so lazy, they're having an affair on a computer. So maybe the surgeon general's office has a point here. I mean, i--if people are sitting around--and they are so lazy, ladies and gentlemen, they can't even get off their duffs to go look at each other. They're just typing words. I mean, the most exercise they're getting is finger exercise on a keyboard. So I don't know. Maybe--maybe you should put those warnings on computer screens as well.

I only saw small parts of Rush's show before deciding it was complete trash. One was a segment ridiculing Hillary's haircut. Another part had him calling Chelsea Clinton a dog. It's interesting because that Chelsea = dog episode was described in Al Franken's latest book. The joke went something like this...a picture is shown of the Clinton's cat, Socks, while Rush describes the picture. He then says the Clintons also have a dog...flash picture of Chelsea. He must have gotten called on it though because they later claim that the Chelsea photo was a technical error. However, they offer no explanation of the photo that was supposed to be shown, and it's a taped show. There IS NO explanation because Chelsea was the joke, the dialogue didn't make sense otherwise. The rest of the right seems to accept the explanation, too.

Now could you imagine if anyone from the left said the Bushes were out walking their dogs and showed a picture of the Bush twins? Half the media would be in overdrive accusing the entire left of the politics of personal destruction and cruel indecency regarding respect for the White House. Those failing to condemn would be accused of LIBERAL BIAS. And Rush would be right there in all his hypocrisy preaching about the repugnant indecency of the left.

Granted, Rush is very bright, but that's not why people can't debate him. He doesn't allow it on his show and interrupts, insults, and hangs up on callers that disagree with him. His mastery is of monologue where his analysis and facts cannot be challenged.

YOU might find the addiction sad and wish anyone in that situation a successful recovery, but you obviously aren't familiar with Rush rants if you believe Rush would feel the same way. To Rush, drug users are criminals, and criminals need to be punished, and light crimes need to be punished more severely because our society has become too tolerant of crime...wait...unless the criminal is Rush. You see..."Rush is right...and that's the way things ought to be"

The only reason Rush is fighting this is because he is the one in the hotseat. If it was a liberal, he'd be ridiculing and ranting from the other side about how the guilty deserve to be punished and that any reference to disease or uncontrollable addiction is just a pathetic excuse to avoid personal responsibility. You see...his hypocrisy is totally relevant because he has been one of the leading voices in condemning what he himself is guilty of.
_____

"it speaks to Limbaughs success that he stirs up so much name calling"
I do not understand the logic of this. By this measure, former President Bill Clinton would be one of the most successful men in the entire history of the world. Not that I would disagree that Clinton was successful, but not by using "being called names" as an indicator.

Xenon, I never said I was a liberal or a conservative. My favorite radio entertainer is Howard Stern. My second favorite, Phil Hendrie. I think Rush is funny, but I dont have time to listen to his show. Your suggestion that my view is liberal because I wish Rush, or anyone else, good luck with their recoveray from addiction is incorrect. Liberals dont have a right to say compassion is theirs and noone elses. Compassion has nothing to do with liberal or conservative--I believe it exists on both sides of the aisle.

ALso, Rush is not name calling when he says feminism was created so that ugly women could have access to mainstream society. He is in my opinion correct. So because you disagree with him that makes it name calling? Compare that to a post on this thread saying Rush is a "clown". Which is name calling? You guys seem to be a little slippery with the truth.

Look, it is irrelevant whether you think Rush is guilty or not. He has every right to fight for his rights. MEanwhile, why not substantively argue against his positions with which you disagree? It would seem to be more on point then trying to make him look like a hypocrite. To put all this energy on Rush's character basically say's, "I cant win an argument on an issue, so I am going to make him look bad so maybe people wont accept his opinions on the real issues".

Dart--sorry I missed your post.

I listened to Rush for many years before moving to Brasil. I disagreed with much of the political stuff, but grew to like him personally and thought he was a good entertainer--and quite clever. The joke about Chelsea for example, I think thats pretty funny. Call me crazy.

Meanwhile, he isnt an elected official, making policy. Somehow I just never get full of rage when listening to opinionators on TV or radio. I like Al Franken, Rush, Dennis Miller. I think we need to all lighten up a little.

Well Xen didn't say you were a liberal or convervative either, so that's irrelevant. He wrote "I would say that is a liberal point of view." It's there in black and white.

So you revert to the generic issue of "compassion" when Xen is referring to the general stance of the right vs left on the issue of drugs. On that, I do not see how anyone that follows politics could disagree. (Well, we are political while you said you are not very) In general, the left sees drug abuse as more of a health issue which requires treatment. In general, the right sees drug abuse as a criminal issue which requires incarceration. My personal opinion falls in between and depends in large part on circumstance. I agree with Xen in that your statement as read seems more aligned to the left.

Name calling...how about calling the President's daughter a dog on television in front of a national audience? I could come up with more examples...give me some time though as it's 5am here.

Slippery with the truth...that's some loose usage of that term. So since you disagree with Xen's assessment, that makes him a liar? He didn't call you a liberal, he categorized one of your views as liberal. Does that make you a liar? (And yes, it is possible for people to have both liberal and conservative views on different subjects)

By the way, Rush lied about his drug addiction until he could no longer refute it. Only when he was forced to did he come clean, or at least partially clean.

If you want to argue for or against Rush's opinions, then why don't you start a topic articulating Rush's postition on another issue and we can all debate it.

As for THIS topic, it was started regarding marriage. Xen has provided a great quote above from Rush on July 16, 1996. As you see, it seems unusual that this beacon of integrity has just ended his third marriage.

How about Rush and the issue of drugs? Again we both have quotes to identify Rush's stance on this issue. Rush believes that our society has become too tolerant and that we let drug users off the hook when we should be sending them to prison. That's RUSH'S view. By his own definition, he deserves to go to prison.

So, do you agree with Rush and his stance on these two issues? Do you think he's a moral failure for his divorces and deserves jailtime for his criminal acts? Rush doesn't agree with his stance on these issues when applied to himself. That's what makes him a hypocrite and his hypocrisy relevant discussion.

GCL slipped the most important point in on his last post - Limbaugh IS AN ENTERTAINER. I remember when the G. Gordon Liddy show came on local radio here in DC (before it went national). People were laughing about it - how the hell does an ex-con, a bagman who was caught in the biggest political scandal in US history, get a radio show? Well, from a practical standpoint (i.e. an intellectual standpoint if you're an educated Democrat) it doesn't but from an entertainment standpoint, it makes perfect sense.

That being said, Limbaugh is a complete cocksucker

I also found some humor in the Chelsea = dog joke.

But if you do not understand what incites people to the left about the likes of Limbaugh, Coulter, and Hannity...it is that they can get away with making jokes like that because there is no liberal equivalent to the conservative attack machine that blasts the left for less offensive behavior. It's this and other kinds of hypocrisy that gets blood boiling.

Coulter is one of the easiest examples to use. If you don't know about some of her quotes, you should look them up. She's got one of the most vile mouths of recognized political commentators, yet blames the entire left for lowering the level of discouse. She's an abolutely insane megabitch. (Here's a link to a thread about her on this site)

Limbaugh invokes the same feelings for the same reasons, but his means of attack are more subtle and nuanced. While Coulter relies on vicious attacks, Rush user humor.

While not elected officials, they do have wide audiences and are willing to distort, mislead, and at times outright lie to get their point across while using "LIBERAL BIAS" claims to dismiss challenges of their "wisdom".

Rush may have started off as an entertainer, but in my opinion he has evolved into a powerful political commentator. I certainly doubt many of his dittoheads view him solely as an entertainer.

The "entertainer" designation does give him more leeway though to distort the truth and manipulate at least part of his audience into a political force. I would not simply dismiss him as an entertainer.

At least I think we can all agree that we all hate Ashcroft.

I sure hate political discussions...

I love Rush, although I guess I am sort of a liberal since it seems most of the substantive issues brought up here you guys tell me I am not conservative on. Somehow Rush doesnt make me mad at all though. One of the reasons I dont like political discussions is the hatred, almost an intolerace of other viewpoints. Rush is gifted with the ability to make his points in a funny, cutting sort o way. More power to him. ANd Al Franken, and ...well everyone EXCEPT Ashcroft.

I LOATH Ashcroft. He actually has an office of people reviewing porn all day looking for people to prosecute. I would argue that is criminal in and of itself. Having said that, I would love to see a video of Ashcroft annointing himself in oils as pure entertainment.

I never saw the issue of being for prosecution versus treatment as a liberal or conservative position. ALthough someone may be able to reference a position paper by either party, it would be news to me.

And I never called Xenono a liar. TO mischaracterize my statment is again--slippery wiht the truth. Taking a persons statement and saying it is name calling when it isnt...well that is simply bending the facts to fit your argument. At best, Rush's statement about Feminists is grey...not black and white. I dont see it as name calling, I see it as fact.

God I miss Turk. THe Censorship of Turk is a liberal or a conservative issue?

Love you guys.

Cha shing cha shing

Spin Spin Spin. How many people think this clown is on a mission from God?

This is amazing. How much of your (well, maybe not YOU, but YOU know who YOU are) opinion is influenced by this clown? Any moron can read the papers, form an opinion, seek agreement, get it, feed egos etc.

It's like this guy was given a license to be a fucking media bully and everyone was happy as long as he was saying what everyone wants to hear. Well, that's how you sell advertising minutes and that's how you get rich.

That's how you get your "product" in front of the consumer and instill in him a genuine desire to have it. We use Brand-X because this clown endorses it.

He's smart? I don't think so. He's a good salesman, he's no different than you or I. Look, lets take a few years to get up to speed on what we need to know to create a real political stir in people to are willing to believe guys like that. You can do it. The difference between you and he is that HE did it, you didn't.

If America went to the polls clowns like him wouldn't have an audience because Americans would be running the show.

Jerks like him are expert at creating new pockets of politcal interest so he can have new places to direct your attention. Hopefully you'll form opinions and give them life so he can keep his fucking job for another year or so.

Seemingly endless threads and posts centered around topics and notions sourced back to this clown are indicative that so many Americans are so easily led around by the nose.

If this guy can't be evaluated on the basis of how he conducts himself in his personal life how then can he be evaluated in his professional behavior?

Look, there's a book you need to read: Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind.

Read this book.

Wake up America, WAKE UP!!!

I actually applied for the job at Justice to review porn all day, but they said I was overqualified for the position.

And, as I have stated before, ANN COULTER IS A TRANSVESTITE. Big adams apple, no hips or tits, the voice - she looks just like this transvestite streetwalker that walked into a Tim Horton's in Montreal one night when I was having my midnight donut break after a long day of mongering and taking in the Jazz Festival. I thought the trannie was Ann at first, but then I saw the trannie being nice to kid behind the counter and realized that it couldn't be Ann.

You know bashing Rush Limbaugh and the conservative right on this board is somewhat preaching to the choir.

It is safe to say that a majority of the TJ Hombre membership are not bible-thumping, Christian, Church-goers. That is not to say we are pagans, heathens or devil-worshipers either. We are probably centrist or more liberal in out views else we would not be partaking of this hobby and contributing to this board. It is refreshing to hear fellow hombres like don gringo and Gcl attempt to defend Rush Limbaugh for his politics and actions. It is a futile attempt, as RL's hypocrisy has caught up with him in a very public way. Defending his personal life by separating it from his professional life is also missing the point. Rush Limbaugh has been "hoisted on his own pitard". The very subjects he pontificates to his radio audience, the very attitudes and actions he slam in his profession as a talk show host, he is personally guilty of, in his private life. That is construed as hypocrisy, pure and simple. In a perfect world you might make a case to seperate the public from the personal, Limbaugh however, crossed that line long ago in personal and political attacks against those who disagree with his, and as use this term loosly. opinions.

Much like of court of law, when a witness if found to have lied, his credebility has been tainted, so that his usefulness as a witness is ended. In the court of public opinion, Rush Limbaugh opinions and credability have diminished. Arbitron ratings have shown that his rating have fallen. In New York City, he has been consistently beaten by the liberal Air America.

The Rush Limbaugh show, being syndicated nationaly will always air comments from "ditto heads" that castigate central of liberal politics. But they are increasingly culled from the rural and southern areas, manifest with a simplistic world view. I don't need to hear some hayseed in Bumfuck, Nebraska wailing about "Sadam whosane" and his secret pact with that guy "al keyda"

Limbaugh started his show to give those a voice against what was construed as a world that catered to everyone but those who were really important, the angry white male. The voice is shrill, impotent and off the mark, much like it's founder.


OG

(Message edited by orgngrndr on June 16, 2004)

Rush Limbaugh is a big, fat, idiot

OKAY, ENOUGH ALREADY!! GCL, I know you have been on a mission to convince the members of this board that it has become a bastion of boredom ever since Turk5555 suffered his tragic death. In furtherance of this mission, you are now posting commentary about Rush Limbaugh, commentary that I assume is extremely boring, although frankly I have been unable to confirm owing to my failure to get past the first line or two without my mind drifting. Yes, if Turk were still alive, I might now, taking into account the assumed extreme boredom of your present posts, support his return to this board, but this is no longer possible. What are we to do?

I have a solution to save this board that should appeal to those who miss Turk (like yourself); those who are interested in the present thread about Limbaugh (see above); and, those like myself, who would like some useful information about the mongering scene. It is a two-step process, and you GCL have the power.

(1) I know how frustrating it must be for you to have missed the opportunity to have a Bukkake with Turk's namorada and Gilda. If I recall, you intended to film it. You can now make amends by having a Bukkake with your other true love, Rush Limbaugh. To be clear, you would be the Bukkakor, and he the Bukkakee (my Japanese language skills are rusty, so if I mis-spelled the words, please forgive me). There would, of course, have to be many other Bukkakors; just don't invite me as I am unavailable. Of course you will film the Bukkake, as you intended with Turk's namorada and Gilda. Maybe even a live camcast would be possible.

(2) With the money you make from selling the film of the Limbaugh Bukkake, you will be able to afford to check out every R$1 per minute establishment in Rio. If there is a live camcast as well, maybe you can check out some of the casas of Sao Paulo for our benefit. Once you have done these things, post a detailed report, thereby satisfying those of us who come to this site to obtain information about mongering rather than about Turk or Rush.

I hope this helps you get back on track.

(Message edited by LAguy on June 16, 2004)

The days of Rush having a meaningful political influence are largely gone. But who can forget that sad period from '92-94 when Clinton had a majority in the house and senate and CNN & crew ruled the media wolrd. Rush was a far more significant force then. He and Newt Gingrich were the underdogs. Now he represents the majority. Actually, the time is ripe for a liberal antagonist.

Speaking of ripe, American politics have been marred by too many extremests of late:

Clinton staffed his administration with queers intent on liberal reforms. Hell his wife is a lesbian! (yikes)

Bush has a bunch of ultrachristians who are hellbent on persecuting Cuba and threatening innocent pornographers.

What America needs is a hobbyist at the helm. I'd volunteer, but I'm not born in the USA. I'd nominate GCL, but god only KNOWS what skeletons would emerge from THAT closet. (Think masks and and a strap-on)

God - I'm getting nauseated. As much as I hate to admit it, I'm starting to miss Turk too. And Admin never answered my post asking if Turk was confirmed as a real nutjob or the alter-ego of one of you deranged buttpirates.

DeeG

I suppose I could run for office. I think there would be a LOT more attention paid to our policies concerning South America and SEA. This would, of course, require a more "hands on" approach...

E

I'm not interested enough to read this thread thoroughly but I think the fact that it exists and the depth to which some are thinking is indicative of the influence RL had.

I recently called the Iraqi war the Rush war. It seemed to fit, particularly because I don't think Gore would have done it and I think RL had a lot to do with Bush winning.

I'm taking the Ariel Sharon approach to Yasser Arafat and hereby declaring RL irrelevant. His days are over. Can he still bash Clinton and hold his audience after the next election?

Ldvee: Thank you for your kind words. I am thankful that at least someone appreciates the depth of my thoughts about the Rush Limbaugh Bukkake as stated in my post above.

Hell Goldwater was too much of a liberal for me.

Don Gringo, I can't imagine you knowing ANYONE who doesn't have skeletons in their closet....