I listened to Rush for the first time Wednesday.

[candycorn]

Limbaugh took on Liberal Media Titans like ABC,NBC,CBS,CNN,PBS,and many others when it wasn't fashionable. For a long time he did that all by himself. Without Rush Limbaugh, there would be no counterweight to the massive Liberal Media Bias. So while i do disagree with him on some issues, i have to respect him for his bravery & perseverance. All Conservatives owe the many nothing but gratitude.

Since he's so over the top, it's a 2 sided coin.

He's also created this enormous "I'm a republican, I'm a victim of the media" mentality. So now anytime a republican does or says something stupid (Palin provided many examples of this) they can just blame it on the media.

It's what happens. A friend of mine in houston e-mailed me this story about a conservative wingnut who was filmed going into a gay bar. When he left, he intentionally plowed into the bouncer's truck. The cops covered it up. First, of course, he said he wasn't there. When they produced the tape of it, he copped to being there but said he didn't know it was a gay bar. Now he blames the media for the witch hunt. Typical politician and typical republican.

 

[candycorn]

The k00ks are still on this story?? LMAO....even Stephanopolous said earlier this week that the story is just about over.


But not for the k00ks..........

They must keep it going because it's better than talking about obama's failures.

You started the thread....today.

Busted.

 

[PredFan]

The k00ks are still on this story?? LMAO....even Stephanopolous said earlier this week that the story is just about over.


But not for the k00ks..........

They must keep it going because it's better than talking about obama's failures.

You started the thread....today.

Busted.

Yeah, I'm sure Stephanopolous was talking about me when he said that.

 

[healthmyths]

Fair enough, maybe he didn't invent the i'm a republican i'm a victim of the media mindest. Maybe he did, at minimum, he markets that idea round the clock. Once you listen to him more, you'll learn that. I listened to him for years, he usually doesn't go a half hour without doing it.

But, I hear that on Hannity, I hear that on Boortz, I hear it on FOX and I read it on this board. It isn't something Rush made up. The Main Stream Media is biased to the left (and to be fair, FOX is biased to the right).

I hear that a lot, i dunno if it's true or not. After 9/11, when our gov't was made up mostly of reps, the media annointed everyone in gov't patriotic heros and how we need to get behind them.

There was little to no questioning or blame assessed to gov't for letting 9/11 happen, it was all "Rah Rah go get those terrorists!"

Plus i dunno who's more left, the rep or dem party.

DUH!!! You wrote"i dunno if it's true or not. "

OK! You tell me what if any the following FACTS might open your eyes to the extreme biased MSM!!!

FACT 1) Editor of NewsWeek Evan Thomas..

There is a liberal bias. It's demonstrable. You look at some statistics. About 85 percent of the reporters who cover the White House vote Democratic, they have for a long time. There is a, particularly at the networks, at the lower levels, among the editors and the so-called infrastructure, there is a liberal bias.- Newsweek Washington Bureau Chief Evan Thomas (Hardly a right wing publication!)

FACT 2) Proof of the above statement..
MSNBC.com identified 144 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign,
according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 17 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties."
Journalists give campaign cash - politics - msnbc.com

FACT 3) Bashing Bush praising Obama..

Well, our job is to bash the president, that's what we do." -- Evan Thomas responding to a question on whether the media's unfair to Bush on the TV talk show Inside Washington, February 2, 2007.

BUT when it comes to Obama???

"I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God." –
Evan Thomas on Hardball, June 5, 2009.

Finally have YOU ever had any journalism experience?
I have. minored in college and took courses like "Backgrounding the News" where we read multiple papers... THIS WAS IN the 60s mind you!

AND then journalists were taught objectivity first!
BUT in my journalism classes were future "lower level editiors/producers that Thomas described.. AND they were part of the SDS/Weathermen... GET the man mentality!
THEY are now the ones that write the headlines and 30 sec. sound bites that FORMS the opinions for the majority of people that don't go any further!

SO as a result.. read your headlines and notice the tenor. The tendencies. The overall positive nature when discussing Obama.




News Bias Explored

 

[Dr.Drock]

I think Rush doesn't drink alcohol.

Why are you posting things like this while pretending to have a problem with straw man arguments?

How is saying that "i don't think Rush drinks" a strawman argument in any way? How am I misrepresenting anyone's side of the issue?

Sounded like you were implying that I said Rush drinks. I brought up the fact that I'll be drinking this weekend and the drinks i'll be taking in are worse than MJ.

 

[Dr.Drock]

But, I hear that on Hannity, I hear that on Boortz, I hear it on FOX and I read it on this board. It isn't something Rush made up. The Main Stream Media is biased to the left (and to be fair, FOX is biased to the right).

I hear that a lot, i dunno if it's true or not. After 9/11, when our gov't was made up mostly of reps, the media annointed everyone in gov't patriotic heros and how we need to get behind them.

There was little to no questioning or blame assessed to gov't for letting 9/11 happen, it was all "Rah Rah go get those terrorists!"

Plus i dunno who's more left, the rep or dem party.

DUH!!! You wrote"i dunno if it's true or not. "

OK! You tell me what if any the following FACTS might open your eyes to the extreme biased MSM!!!

FACT 1) Editor of NewsWeek Evan Thomas..

There is a liberal bias. It's demonstrable. You look at some statistics. About 85 percent of the reporters who cover the White House vote Democratic, they have for a long time. There is a, particularly at the networks, at the lower levels, among the editors and the so-called infrastructure, there is a liberal bias.- Newsweek Washington Bureau Chief Evan Thomas (Hardly a right wing publication!)

FACT 2) Proof of the above statement..
MSNBC.com identified 144 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign,
according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes. Only 17 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties."
Journalists give campaign cash - politics - msnbc.com

FACT 3) Bashing Bush praising Obama..

Well, our job is to bash the president, that's what we do." -- Evan Thomas responding to a question on whether the media's unfair to Bush on the TV talk show Inside Washington, February 2, 2007.

BUT when it comes to Obama???

"I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God." –
Evan Thomas on Hardball, June 5, 2009.

Finally have YOU ever had any journalism experience?
I have. minored in college and took courses like "Backgrounding the News" where we read multiple papers... THIS WAS IN the 60s mind you!

AND then journalists were taught objectivity first!
BUT in my journalism classes were future "lower level editiors/producers that Thomas described.. AND they were part of the SDS/Weathermen... GET the man mentality!
THEY are now the ones that write the headlines and 30 sec. sound bites that FORMS the opinions for the majority of people that don't go any further!

SO as a result.. read your headlines and notice the tenor. The tendencies. The overall positive nature when discussing Obama.




News Bias Explored

1.) Maybe there's a liberal bias, but both parties are liberal parties, so i dunno who that hurts or helps.

2.) Yep that covers a 4 year time frame. Like I said after 9/11 the media was in love with the republicans running things, so i'd say from 2001-2004 they were giving very good media attention to the reps. Giuliani was their republican version of the Messiah before anyone knew who Obama was.

3.) He's right, it is his job to bash the president if he deserves it. He's right again, people do view him as a god, they still do now. Look at all the Obamabots who think he's incapable of making a mistake.

Yes Obama gets good press, so did Bush for a bare minimum of the first 3-4 years of his presidency. The media was forced to turn on Bush after a good 6-7 years and the public's hate for Bush couldn't be downplayed anymore.

 

[Vast LWC]

1.) Maybe there's a liberal bias, but both parties are liberal parties, so i dunno who that hurts or helps.

Hmmm... Pardon me, but I believe you're confusing the words "Liberal" and "Progressive" here.

A Liberal is someone who believes that Government should have a hand in economics and business, but should stay out of issues of personal morality.

A Conservative is someone who believes that Government should have a hand in issues of personal morality, but should stay out of economics and business.

A Libertarian is someone who believes Government should not have a hand in either.

And a Statist, (who in the past have been known at points as "progressives") believe that government should have a hand in everything.

So, I believe what you may have meant to say is that both parties are "statist" or "progressive" parties, not "liberal" parties.

2.) Yep that covers a 4 year time frame. Like I said after 9/11 the media was in love with the republicans running things, so i'd say from 2001-2004 they were giving very good media attention to the reps. Giuliani was their republican version of the Messiah before anyone knew who Obama was.

3.) He's right, it is his job to bash the president if he deserves it. He's right again, people do view him as a god, they still do now. Look at all the Obamabots who think he's incapable of making a mistake.

Yes Obama gets good press, so did Bush for a bare minimum of the first 3-4 years of his presidency. The media was forced to turn on Bush after a good 6-7 years and the public's hate for Bush couldn't be downplayed anymore.

"Obamabots" comment aside, you would be right in saying that it is Rush Limbaugh's "job to bash the president, if he deserves it".

Of course, in Rush Limbaugh's case, he will "bash" the president even if he doesn't deserve it. In fact, if the president produced enough gold from his rectum to pay off the national debt, Rush Limbaugh would complain about the smell.

But, as a commentator, he certainly has the right to do that. Of course, when he does that, he gives up any claim to journalistic integrity or to credibility, but that is his choice.

And that is why, like Keith Olbermann, or Bill Maher, or most of the talking heads on FoxNews or MSNBC, Rush Limbaugh has no credibility.

But, that is not surprising, since, as ditto-heads will tell you anytime Rush says something stupid, he's an "entertainer".

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

Limbaugh took on Liberal Media Titans like ABC,NBC,CBS,CNN,PBS,and many others when it wasn't fashionable. For a long time he did that all by himself. Without Rush Limbaugh, there would be no counterweight to the massive Liberal Media Bias. So while i do disagree with him on some issues, i have to respect him for his bravery & perseverance. All Conservatives owe the man nothing but gratitude.

i don't quite understand you're love for the neo-conservative wing of the republican party. that is something that ron paul despises.

I love it when non-libertarians try to describe what Ron Paul likes and doesn't like. RP despises Neo-Conservatism but that doesn't automatically mean he hates Limbaugh. Being a Libertarian myself, I have witnessed the extreme bias of them MSM against all things conservative and in particular, Ron Paul. RP is not a fan of the media and is a fan of free speech. I would be interested to hear RP's take on this issue.

being a libertarian myself, i guess we'll have to agree to disagree on what Paul thinks. he recently did say the following regarding Rush and the "slut" comment and the apology...

"He's doing it because some people were taking their advertisements off of his program. It was his bottom line he was concerned about," Paul said.

"I don't think he's very apologetic," Paul said. "It's in his best interest, that's why he did it."

and on neo-conservatives, listen to his own words in this video. just listen to the audio and ignore the video...
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ki9GAE1ZKRI&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PL4503C3946F558715]Ron Paul The Enemy of America. AIPAC PNAC Trilateral CFR NWO 2012 - YouTube[/ame]

 

[PredFan]

i don't quite understand you're love for the neo-conservative wing of the republican party. that is something that ron paul despises.

I love it when non-libertarians try to describe what Ron Paul likes and doesn't like. RP despises Neo-Conservatism but that doesn't automatically mean he hates Limbaugh. Being a Libertarian myself, I have witnessed the extreme bias of them MSM against all things conservative and in particular, Ron Paul. RP is not a fan of the media and is a fan of free speech. I would be interested to hear RP's take on this issue.

being a libertarian myself, i guess we'll have to agree to disagree on what Paul thinks. he recently did say the following regarding Rush and the "slut" comment and the apology...

"He's doing it because some people were taking their advertisements off of his program. It was his bottom line he was concerned about," Paul said.

"I don't think he's very apologetic," Paul said. "It's in his best interest, that's why he did it."

and on neo-conservatives, listen to his own words in this video. just listen to the audio and ignore the video...
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ki9GAE1ZKRI&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PL4503C3946F558715]Ron Paul The Enemy of America. AIPAC PNAC Trilateral CFR NWO 2012 - YouTube[/ame]

I know he doesn't like NeoCons, neither do I. That doesn't mean he hates Limbaugh and it doesn't mean that those of us who are Libertarian can't support Limbaugh and his free speech. It also doesn't mean that we aren't disgusted with the hypocrisy of the left. I agree that Rush apologised because he felt he had to. I am sure that he believes what he originally said. How does that make him a NeoCon?

Your argument makes little sense. It is not a contradiction that Paulitician is disgusted with what is happening to Rush.

 

[Too Tall]

I was talking about the physical toll it takes on the human body, abusing prescription drugs is much worse on the body than MJ use is.

Fine; and no doubt you are correct about that. But the greater harm is social and from the use of MJ, on multiple levels emanating out from the individual, his or her family, associates, the crime it induces into communities not able to cope with it, and on and on. You can't buy a bag of dope without incurring risk to innocents associated with you. Potheads are very good at getting by undetected in automobile accidents which they have caused because of their habits. They can't even be open in their interpersonal relationships to any healthy degree.

Agree to disagree, and i've never smoked MJ or abused prescriptions but all the flaws you named I think are even worse in those who abuse prescriptions because the prescriptions are addictive, MJ isn't and the addiction causes ppl do things they wouldn't do unless they were addicted.

The beer I'm going to drink this weekend is far worse than MJ.

The beer you are going to drink this weekend may well be worse than MJ if you are going to drink considerably more than one. My Mother's doctor prescribed one bottle of beer a day for her because she was so thin. She finally died at age 93, so I guess it was that damned beer, huh?

MJ may or may not be physically addictive, but there is a strong argument that it is psychologically addictive. Since I have not smoked MJ, I cannot attest to that, but there is evidence to that affect.

No argument at all on prescription drugs being damned dangerous is abused, and many of them are definitely addictive.

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

I love it when non-libertarians try to describe what Ron Paul likes and doesn't like. RP despises Neo-Conservatism but that doesn't automatically mean he hates Limbaugh. Being a Libertarian myself, I have witnessed the extreme bias of them MSM against all things conservative and in particular, Ron Paul. RP is not a fan of the media and is a fan of free speech. I would be interested to hear RP's take on this issue.

being a libertarian myself, i guess we'll have to agree to disagree on what Paul thinks. he recently did say the following regarding Rush and the "slut" comment and the apology...

"He's doing it because some people were taking their advertisements off of his program. It was his bottom line he was concerned about," Paul said.

"I don't think he's very apologetic," Paul said. "It's in his best interest, that's why he did it."

and on neo-conservatives, listen to his own words in this video. just listen to the audio and ignore the video...
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ki9GAE1ZKRI&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PL4503C3946F558715]Ron Paul The Enemy of America. AIPAC PNAC Trilateral CFR NWO 2012 - YouTube[/ame]

I know he doesn't like NeoCons, neither do I. That doesn't mean he hates Limbaugh and it doesn't mean that those of us who are Libertarian can't support Limbaugh and his free speech. It also doesn't mean that we aren't disgusted with the hypocrisy of the left. I agree that Rush apologised because he felt he had to. I am sure that he believes what he originally said. How does that make him a NeoCon?

Your argument makes little sense. It is not a contradiction that Paulitician is disgusted with what is happening to Rush.

i have no problem at all with Rush having every right to say whatever he wants. i feel the same way about maddow. i also think that both sides are hypocrites.

where you and i are gonna have a big problem is that you think rush is not a neocon. are you saying that he doesn't support the US using it's military (at least when republicans are in charge) to control the world (when we feel like it needs to be controlled) or that he doesn't support other neocon views?

 

[Rozman]

Here's my take:

1. There were fewer commercials than I'm used to, that's a good thing.
2. There were still commercials, still sponsors, I don't know if they are new or not.
3. Rush has moved on.
4. He's entertaining (though not as much as Boortz).

I was expecting more..Is that all you got from the whole program?

I've listened for the last 3 years now give or take.
I have never thought Rush had a lot of commercials.

 

[snakedoc]

I don't listen to talk radio but to each their own.

 

[KissMy]

CARBONITE stocks falls to it's all time low after leaving the rushlibaugh show.

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

CARBONITE stocks falls to it's 1 year low after leaving the rushlibaugh show.

okay, i'm a stock trader and looked at their chart. it got to over 20 in August of 2011, went down as low as 11 in October of 2011, finished at 9.53 on Feb 1, 2012, was at 9.12 of Feb 22, 2012, and finished yesterday at 8.71.

what trend do you see?

 

[paperview]

CARBONITE stocks falls to it's 1 year low after leaving the rushlibaugh show.

okay, i'm a stock trader and looked at their chart. it got to over 20 in August of 2011, went down as low as 11 in October of 2011, finished at 9.53 on Feb 1, 2012, was at 9.12 of Feb 22, 2012, and finished yesterday at 8.71.

what trend do you see?

The line of Limbaughs trousers falling down around his knees.

 

[PredFan]

being a libertarian myself, i guess we'll have to agree to disagree on what Paul thinks. he recently did say the following regarding Rush and the "slut" comment and the apology...

"He's doing it because some people were taking their advertisements off of his program. It was his bottom line he was concerned about," Paul said.

"I don't think he's very apologetic," Paul said. "It's in his best interest, that's why he did it."

and on neo-conservatives, listen to his own words in this video. just listen to the audio and ignore the video...
Ron Paul The Enemy of America. AIPAC PNAC Trilateral CFR NWO 2012 - YouTube

I know he doesn't like NeoCons, neither do I. That doesn't mean he hates Limbaugh and it doesn't mean that those of us who are Libertarian can't support Limbaugh and his free speech. It also doesn't mean that we aren't disgusted with the hypocrisy of the left. I agree that Rush apologised because he felt he had to. I am sure that he believes what he originally said. How does that make him a NeoCon?

Your argument makes little sense. It is not a contradiction that Paulitician is disgusted with what is happening to Rush.

i have no problem at all with Rush having every right to say whatever he wants. i feel the same way about maddow. i also think that both sides are hypocrites.

where you and i are gonna have a big problem is that you think rush is not a neocon. are you saying that he doesn't support the US using it's military (at least when republicans are in charge) to control the world (when we feel like it needs to be controlled) or that he doesn't support other neocon views?

I haven't listened to Rush but for two days. I started listening to him just last Wednesday. However, during that 4 hours I never heard him say anything about bombing anyone, or controlling the world with our military. I cannot argue with you about Rush's veiws but even IF he is a NeoCon, I like to think that Dr.Paul is smart enough to not simply put a label on him and dismiss him and every single one of his views. I'm a libertarian and I didn't hear a single thing from Rush in those two days that was disagreable.

For you to jump all over Paulitician for supporting Rush on this Fluke issue is nonsense, and to try to tell him and I what RP would think of it is rediculous.

 

[PredFan]

CARBONITE stocks falls to it's 1 year low after leaving the rushlibaugh show.

Good.

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

I know he doesn't like NeoCons, neither do I. That doesn't mean he hates Limbaugh and it doesn't mean that those of us who are Libertarian can't support Limbaugh and his free speech. It also doesn't mean that we aren't disgusted with the hypocrisy of the left. I agree that Rush apologised because he felt he had to. I am sure that he believes what he originally said. How does that make him a NeoCon?

Your argument makes little sense. It is not a contradiction that Paulitician is disgusted with what is happening to Rush.

i have no problem at all with Rush having every right to say whatever he wants. i feel the same way about maddow. i also think that both sides are hypocrites.

where you and i are gonna have a big problem is that you think rush is not a neocon. are you saying that he doesn't support the US using it's military (at least when republicans are in charge) to control the world (when we feel like it needs to be controlled) or that he doesn't support other neocon views?

I haven't listened to Rush but for two days. I started listening to him just last Wednesday. However, during that 4 hours I never heard him say anything about bombing anyone, or controlling the world with our military. I cannot argue with you about Rush's veiws but even IF he is a NeoCon, I like to think that Dr.Paul is smart enough to not simply put a label on him and dismiss him and every single one of his views. I'm a libertarian and I didn't hear a single thing from Rush in those two days that was disagreable.

For you to jump all over Paulitician for supporting Rush on this Fluke issue is nonsense, and to try to tell him and I what RP would think of it is rediculous.

did you listen to the audio i provided regarding what Dr. Paul says about neo-conservatives?

 

[PredFan]

i have no problem at all with Rush having every right to say whatever he wants. i feel the same way about maddow. i also think that both sides are hypocrites.

where you and i are gonna have a big problem is that you think rush is not a neocon. are you saying that he doesn't support the US using it's military (at least when republicans are in charge) to control the world (when we feel like it needs to be controlled) or that he doesn't support other neocon views?

I haven't listened to Rush but for two days. I started listening to him just last Wednesday. However, during that 4 hours I never heard him say anything about bombing anyone, or controlling the world with our military. I cannot argue with you about Rush's veiws but even IF he is a NeoCon, I like to think that Dr.Paul is smart enough to not simply put a label on him and dismiss him and every single one of his views. I'm a libertarian and I didn't hear a single thing from Rush in those two days that was disagreable.

For you to jump all over Paulitician for supporting Rush on this Fluke issue is nonsense, and to try to tell him and I what RP would think of it is rediculous.

did you listen to the audio i provided regarding what Dr. Paul says about neo-conservatives?

I don't have to, I know very well what he thinks of NeoCons. Did you even read my post? i addressed that already.