Limbaugh v. O’Reilly

[Foxfyre]

True, though I won't say Fox has become liberal though it does do a good job of presenting all points of the view.

To Foxfyre: Every time I surf into FOX I hear a liberal espousing the liberal point of view that I wouldn’t listen to on the other networks. It seems to me that FOX management implemented its own version of the Fairness Doctrine.

It wouldn't command ratings that beat all the other cable news channels combined if it did not provide something other than the liberal point of view.

To Foxfyre: I know it’s about ratings and advertising dollars. If you put a stopwatch to many of FOX’s shows you’ll find that they are 30 minutes product commercial and 30 minutes program. You’ll be lucky if you get a minute of two of actual news in a one hour show; and the crap is repeated over and over again throughout the day. Put all of that aside and you’re left with one thing: FOX does more to put the liberal message into conservatives ears than all of the liberal networks combined. My major beef is FOX’s phoney fair and balanced B.S. To me, fair and balanced is individuals deciding to watch a conservative network or a liberal network.



To Foxfyre: I’m not sure “The Five” is a success. No show with Bob Beckel as a regular can be a success with conservatives who constitute at least half of FOX’s audience. Put it this way. If Beckel was on a liberal network show no conservative would tune in.

Incidentally, I’ve surfed into O’Reilly a few times and there sits Beckel. That tells me The Five needs a bit of pumping up.



To Foxfyre: Glenn Beck was dumped when FOX decision makers realized a motivational speaker had a show on their “news network.” Beck’s departure was no more than that.



To bripat9643: It doesn’t get better than that!



To jasonnfree: Then you should be thrilled if Rush comes back.

They even bought his power ties to wear on the program. Here he's making millions off these rubes and he still has to hustle them for their chump change. O Reilly's no better with the coffee cups and doormats.

To jasonnfree: Nobody is forced to buy anything. On the other hand, you and your kind do not object to the scum who get rich on tax dollars, nor do you object to the parasite class everybody is forced to support. Of course, you could be one of them. If that’s the case you have to be envious of everybody who does well without living on tax dollars. Bottom line: Envy is the foundation for every government’s authority.

if Mr. Limbaugh really wants to show how mighty he be, he'll buy a half hour and go head to head with Mr. Stewart's Daily Show.

To MeadHallPirate: I know who Stewart is, but I don’t know enough about him to lay odds. I’m sure El Rushbo will fare well against any liberal.

Beck's ratings had been slipping, and the non stop barrage of harrassment from the Left spooked some advertisers. He was STILL beating the competition on other cable news programs, but not as impressively as he did during the healthcare debates. He was losing his producer at Fox and there were some other tensions. . Part of the problem was that his show was so complex and involved so much stuff, you couldn't just listen to it casually or intermittently and get the gist of the day's 'lecture'. And once he was providing historical reference of less interest to the average viewer, many were not taking the time necessary to follow it. I don't know whether his leaving the show was entirely mutual, but there is plenty of suggestion that it was at least partially so. Beck remains as an inivted correspondent from time to time at Fox, however, being on with O'Reilly in just this past week.

O'Reilly apparently thinks Beck is less controversial than some since he still engages him in dialogue and I don't recall him inviting Limbaugh onto his show, quoting him, or otherwise engaging him.

I frequently disagree with Beck's take on this or that--also Limbaugh--but they both do impeccable research and you can learn something from both. But then I don't have to agree with everything somebody says to appreciate that they have something to offer. Sort of like I took your post.

 

[Foxfyre]

Also kudos to Fox for allowing a comprehensive liberal point of view to be heard during their programming--and they don't invite the most stupid and idiotic and ridiculous of liberals as spokespersons but invite knowledgeable and even likable folks to provide commentary. You don't get much more liberal than Bob Beckel, for instance, but he is completely lovable. Unless we all know ALL the arguments on a particular issue, how can we claim to be informed? Fox is the ONLY news outlet on television that reliably and objectively offers the whole conservative point of view, however, and is the only news group that gives us news that you won't hear on the liberal organizations who find some news uncomfortable for their point of view.

Which of course is why so many on the Left hate Limbaugh. And Beck. And O'Reilly. And Fox News. Etc. Etc. Etc.

 

[Flanders]

And once he was providing historical reference of less interest to the average viewer, many were not taking the time necessary to follow it.

To Foxfyre: I disagree. Exposing Woodrow Wilson for what he was is the best thing Beck ever did. I truly believe that the virulent attacks from the Left, and some on the Right, began there. I personally had no use for him after he sandbagged Deborah Medina on his radio show. Medina was not a 9-11 truther or a kook. Beck bringing it up made her look like both.

Beck aside, FOX is hustling conservatives. Most conservatives can write the spin FOX liberals offer on any issue before liberals say it. Opinion journalism is what “news’ networks do. Anybody who wants different opinions can find them without blending them on one show. In any event, no intelligent person needs interpretations offered by opinion journalists. As I’ve said many times, I watch TV to analyze the government’s lies, not to get opinions. I have enough of my own.

I don't know whether his leaving the show was entirely mutual, but there is plenty of suggestion that it was at least partially so.

To Foxfyre: Irrespective of what the public is told, I stand by my motivational speaker interpretation:

Forbes Magazine reported last week that Beck left Fox News, the top-rated cable news network, “to save his soul.”

“If you stay in it too long, you become Norma Desmond,” Beck said Friday during an appearance at New York University. “I remember feeling, ‘If you do not leave now, you won’t leave with your soul intact.’”

Norma Desmond is a fictional character in the 1950 film “Sunset Boulevard.” She was an aging silent film star who watched her career fade away with the advent of “talkies,” films with sound, and slowly lost her mind.

But a Fox News spokesperson emailed Mike Allen of the Politico, who gave an entirely different perspective on Beck’s departure.

“Glenn Beck wasn’t trying to save his soul, he was trying to save his a–,” the Fox News spokesperson wrote. “Advertisers fled his show and even Glenn knows what that means in our industry. Yet, we still tried to give him a soft landing. Guess no good deed goes unpunished.”

Fox News: Glenn Beck left 'to save his [bleep]'
War of words breaks out over departure of media giant
Published: 1 day ago
JOE KOVACS

Fox News: Glenn Beck left ?to save his [bleep]?

Incidentally, Beck citing Norma Desmond was a bit of a stretch. Beck is lost without dialogue:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOL70Qn_o4Q&feature=player_embedded]No Dialogue! - YouTube[/ame]​

 

[Flanders]

You don't get much more liberal than Bob Beckel, for instance, but he is completely lovable.

To Foxfyre: Oh Really:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwmARDDNoDY&feature=player_embedded]Bob Beckel Loses It: Screams "You Don't Know What the F*ck You're Talking About" on Hannity - YouTube[/ame]​

 

[jasonnfree]

True, though I won't say Fox has become liberal though it does do a good job of presenting all points of the view.

To Foxfyre: Every time I surf into FOX I hear a liberal espousing the liberal point of view that I wouldn’t listen to on the other networks. It seems to me that FOX management implemented its own version of the Fairness Doctrine.



To Foxfyre: I know it’s about ratings and advertising dollars. If you put a stopwatch to many of FOX’s shows you’ll find that they are 30 minutes product commercial and 30 minutes program. You’ll be lucky if you get a minute of two of actual news in a one hour show; and the crap is repeated over and over again throughout the day. Put all of that aside and you’re left with one thing: FOX does more to put the liberal message into conservatives ears than all of the liberal networks combined. My major beef is FOX’s phoney fair and balanced B.S. To me, fair and balanced is individuals deciding to watch a conservative network or a liberal network.



To Foxfyre: I’m not sure “The Five” is a success. No show with Bob Beckel as a regular can be a success with conservatives who constitute at least half of FOX’s audience. Put it this way. If Beckel was on a liberal network show no conservative would tune in.

Incidentally, I’ve surfed into O’Reilly a few times and there sits Beckel. That tells me The Five needs a bit of pumping up.



To Foxfyre: Glenn Beck was dumped when FOX decision makers realized a motivational speaker had a show on their “news network.” Beck’s departure was no more than that.



To bripat9643: It doesn’t get better than that!



To jasonnfree: Then you should be thrilled if Rush comes back.



To jasonnfree: Nobody is forced to buy anything. On the other hand, you and your kind do not object to the scum who get rich on tax dollars, nor do you object to the parasite class everybody is forced to support. Of course, you could be one of them. If that’s the case you have to be envious of everybody who does well without living on tax dollars. Bottom line: Envy is the foundation for every government’s authority.

if Mr. Limbaugh really wants to show how mighty he be, he'll buy a half hour and go head to head with Mr. Stewart's Daily Show.

To MeadHallPirate: I know who Stewart is, but I don’t know enough about him to lay odds. I’m sure El Rushbo will fare well against any liberal.

Beck's ratings had been slipping, and the non stop barrage of harrassment from the Left spooked some advertisers. He was STILL beating the competition on other cable news programs, but not as impressively as he did during the healthcare debates. He was losing his producer at Fox and there were some other tensions. . Part of the problem was that his show was so complex and involved so much stuff, you couldn't just listen to it casually or intermittently and get the gist of the day's 'lecture'. And once he was providing historical reference of less interest to the average viewer, many were not taking the time necessary to follow it. I don't know whether his leaving the show was entirely mutual, but there is plenty of suggestion that it was at least partially so. Beck remains as an inivted correspondent from time to time at Fox, however, being on with O'Reilly in just this past week.

O'Reilly apparently thinks Beck is less controversial than some since he still engages him in dialogue and I don't recall him inviting Limbaugh onto his show, quoting him, or otherwise engaging him.

I frequently disagree with Beck's take on this or that--also Limbaugh--but they both do impeccable research and you can learn something from both. But then I don't have to agree with everything somebody says to appreciate that they have something to offer. Sort of like I took your post.

I'll watch it. He's entertaining once in awhile. He's good for a few laughs and I'll get a few laughs at the geeks in his audience. Here's a pretty good clip of Limbaugh AKA Jeff Christie taking over a Pat Sajak show. Granted audience is mostly morons who are equivalent to his adoring following but on another side of the political spectrum, but it shows that Limbaugh needs an ivory tower full of conservative loons to applaud the garbage he expounds. He doesn't do well among the general public. This is why he goes on only safe programs (stay in you're ivory tower rush) and has no guests. He does though, but really safe ones like dick cheney or bill bennett.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNK4byQkn7w]A Bully Gets Bullied - YouTube[/ame]

 

[jasonnfree]

Also kudos to Fox for allowing a comprehensive liberal point of view to be heard during their programming--and they don't invite the most stupid and idiotic and ridiculous of liberals as spokespersons but invite knowledgeable and even likable folks to provide commentary. You don't get much more liberal than Bob Beckel, for instance, but he is completely lovable. Unless we all know ALL the arguments on a particular issue, how can we claim to be informed? Fox is the ONLY news outlet on television that reliably and objectively offers the whole conservative point of view, however, and is the only news group that gives us news that you won't hear on the liberal organizations who find some news uncomfortable for their point of view.

Which of course is why so many on the Left hate Limbaugh. And Beck. And O'Reilly. And Fox News. Etc. Etc. Etc.

Whenever I watched Fox back in the day I'd see the host continuously interrupting guests that he didn't agree with such as hannity. Same with o'reilly. Continuously interrupting and then saying "I'll let you have the last word when there was only a minute left, after which he'd interrupt them again for about 59 seconds.

 

[jasonnfree]

I first heard about some conservative guy shaking things up on the radio in California. It wasn’t until Rush Limbaugh got his TV show that he bowled me over. That was in the nineties before I got my first computer in 2000. Rush’s TV show was broadcasted in the early AM; so I programmed my VCR (remember them) to tape the show every night. My wife and I would watch the shows on the weekend.

Over the years I listened to Rush’s radio show as often as I could; always when I was in the car while he was on the air. I even got through to his show one time, but the call-screener told me to call back on Open-Line Friday.

Now, let’s fast forward to today.

Nobody was happier than I to read this:

PALM BEACH, Fla. – Rush Limbaugh, the most-listened-to personality on radio, is now considering purchasing time on national television to address America with his conservative political views.

“Folks, I’ve toyed with the idea of going to the networks and saying, ‘I want to buy 30 minutes.’ I actually have,” Limbaugh said on his syndicated radio program Tuesday.

Rush Limbaugh may buy national TV time
Media giant considers reaching people who don't hear his radio show
Published: 13 hours ago
JOE KOVACS

Rush Limbaugh may buy national TV time

I don’t know how it works, or how much it would cost, but I’d like to see Rush get his own Cable Network. Oprah has Oprah Winfrey’s Network —— OWN. Glenn Beck has The Blaze TV, but that one is subscription TV. (I didn’t care for motivational speaker Beck when he was free.)

Finally, conservatives would love to see Rush stick it to Bill O’Reilly in the ratings.

ahoy Flanders and well met,

if Mr. Limbaugh really wants to show how mighty he be, he'll buy a half hour and go head to head with Mr. Stewart's Daily Show.

i'd be curious to see how he'd fare, aye i would.

- MeadHallPirate

Good idea. I'd really like to see debates among both sides. Right vs. left with one rule. No interrupting when the other side is talking. Maybe give each side to expound say.....90 seconds to two minute increments of talking, then let the rebuttal begin for the other side with heavy penalties for breaking silence rule when the other side is talking, maybe like stun guns or pepper spray.

 

[Foxfyre]

To Foxfyre: Every time I surf into FOX I hear a liberal espousing the liberal point of view that I wouldn’t listen to on the other networks. It seems to me that FOX management implemented its own version of the Fairness Doctrine.



To Foxfyre: I know it’s about ratings and advertising dollars. If you put a stopwatch to many of FOX’s shows you’ll find that they are 30 minutes product commercial and 30 minutes program. You’ll be lucky if you get a minute of two of actual news in a one hour show; and the crap is repeated over and over again throughout the day. Put all of that aside and you’re left with one thing: FOX does more to put the liberal message into conservatives ears than all of the liberal networks combined. My major beef is FOX’s phoney fair and balanced B.S. To me, fair and balanced is individuals deciding to watch a conservative network or a liberal network.



To Foxfyre: I’m not sure “The Five” is a success. No show with Bob Beckel as a regular can be a success with conservatives who constitute at least half of FOX’s audience. Put it this way. If Beckel was on a liberal network show no conservative would tune in.

Incidentally, I’ve surfed into O’Reilly a few times and there sits Beckel. That tells me The Five needs a bit of pumping up.



To Foxfyre: Glenn Beck was dumped when FOX decision makers realized a motivational speaker had a show on their “news network.” Beck’s departure was no more than that.



To bripat9643: It doesn’t get better than that!



To jasonnfree: Then you should be thrilled if Rush comes back.



To jasonnfree: Nobody is forced to buy anything. On the other hand, you and your kind do not object to the scum who get rich on tax dollars, nor do you object to the parasite class everybody is forced to support. Of course, you could be one of them. If that’s the case you have to be envious of everybody who does well without living on tax dollars. Bottom line: Envy is the foundation for every government’s authority.



To MeadHallPirate: I know who Stewart is, but I don’t know enough about him to lay odds. I’m sure El Rushbo will fare well against any liberal.

Beck's ratings had been slipping, and the non stop barrage of harrassment from the Left spooked some advertisers. He was STILL beating the competition on other cable news programs, but not as impressively as he did during the healthcare debates. He was losing his producer at Fox and there were some other tensions. . Part of the problem was that his show was so complex and involved so much stuff, you couldn't just listen to it casually or intermittently and get the gist of the day's 'lecture'. And once he was providing historical reference of less interest to the average viewer, many were not taking the time necessary to follow it. I don't know whether his leaving the show was entirely mutual, but there is plenty of suggestion that it was at least partially so. Beck remains as an inivted correspondent from time to time at Fox, however, being on with O'Reilly in just this past week.

O'Reilly apparently thinks Beck is less controversial than some since he still engages him in dialogue and I don't recall him inviting Limbaugh onto his show, quoting him, or otherwise engaging him.

I frequently disagree with Beck's take on this or that--also Limbaugh--but they both do impeccable research and you can learn something from both. But then I don't have to agree with everything somebody says to appreciate that they have something to offer. Sort of like I took your post.

I'll watch it. He's entertaining once in awhile. He's good for a few laughs and I'll get a few laughs at the geeks in his audience. Here's a pretty good clip of Limbaugh AKA Jeff Christie taking over a Pat Sajak show. Granted audience is mostly morons who are equivalent to his adoring following but on another side of the political spectrum, but it shows that Limbaugh needs an ivory tower full of conservative loons to applaud the garbage he expounds. He doesn't do well among the general public. This is why he goes on only safe programs (stay in you're ivory tower rush) and has no guests. He does though, but really safe ones like dick cheney or bill bennett.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNK4byQkn7w]A Bully Gets Bullied - YouTube[/ame]

Baloney. Rush has done minimal interviews for years and he started out with a 'no guest' format, though he does include a special guest interview every now and then. The media RUSHES (pun intend) to create HUGE headlines if Rush's program declines in listeners for more than a day--they do the same with Fox News. But let Rush or Fox News or any other conservative media source beat the competition by huge margins, which they usually do, you don't see any big headlines, and frequently it isn't reported at all.

Rush has been syndicated since 1988, rose to the top within a very short time, and has commanded the #1 slot in almost every single market since that time. Certainly his ratings have slipped as more and more competition jumps on the band wagon he created by just doing what Rush has always done. And of course haters gonna hate and they will cheer when he finally hangs it up and they will declare him a failure. A failure after 25 years of commanding the No. 1 slot in talk/news radio and pushing almost every single station who features him to #1 in their market.

It must feel good to feel justified in the kind of arrogance that would accuse the 20 million or more of those who listen to Rush of 'not being among the general public'. I agree that many of them probably aren't since Rush's listeners are rated more intelligent, better educated, and more prosperous than the average radio listener. But I bet every media outlet out there would love to have them.

Regular listeners of the Rush Limbaugh radio talk show, according to a new national survey conducted by The Washington Post, the Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard University, also turn out at the ballot box with more consistency than most other voters.

During the last two years, Rush Limbaugh, the 44-year-old conservative talk radio host, has been one of the loudest voices cheerleading the transformation of America's political landscape. But if Limbaugh has been the mouth of the Republican revolution, the 20 million people who regularly tune in to his shows have been its loyal foot soldiers.

More self-identified Limbaugh regulars have college diplomas than the population as a whole, and the survey shows that while 9 percent of all American households take in $75,000 a year or more, 19 percent of the dittoheads make that much.
Profile Of Rush Limbaugh Listeners