- This topic has 49 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 9 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Prior to the invent of the internet, [ by Al Gore lol] the main forum for exchange of ideas and opinions was talk radio, recently two giants of talk radio died, Larry King and Rush Limbaugh, regardless of what you thought of their politics [they were polar opposites] both were very well informed and entertaining.
As someone who grew up on talk radio its a sad moment with the passing of these very talented men.@CommonSaychel
I don’t agree that Rush was talented, he was an offensive bigot. Larry King overnight was entertaining.
I still listen to talk radio….NPR.
No right wing for me.How do we know that they weren’t secretly murdered by the democrats cause they weren’t supporting them and their agenda and then the democrats just covering it up like the way they are blaming the entire January 6 capitol riots on Trump filled with lies just to put a bad name on Trump whatever it will cost them even with COS saying she was almost killed there when she confirmed and confessed later what a list she is that she wasn’t even there?
Such a corrupt world today…..
When Israel invited Gorbachev in 1992, Rush quipped – This is as Jews inviting Pharaoh after Exodus
I don’t agree that Rush was talented
That’s unusual bias induced blindness. Most of his detractors acknowledge his immense talent. Most people are not talented enough to gain such a huge audience.
Talk radio was never about exchanging ideas. It was about letting someone talk about their opinion for hours on end with occasional callers who were screened to either reinforce the host’s opinion, or let on to be sneered and laughed at before cutting them off.
I may agree with a lot of what Rush had to say, and even went through the usual (thankfully brief) Yeshiva Bachur phase of enjoying to listen to him, but let’s not pretend he was anything more than he was. A cheerleader who could yell his opinions really loud.
Rush, above all else, was a heavy weight (no pun intended) intellectual. That’s what his far-left detractors hated most, causing them to deny the truth. The left could never produce a counter-weight to Rush. Their only tool left was ad hominems utilizing fabrications and falsehoods, which are trademarks of the left.
Ctlawyer, an “offensive bigot”? How’s that? Too easy to toss around disgusting insults these days…
The guy was a legend whether you agreed with his political views or not …Reagan, Buckley and Limbaugh were the three giants of American conservatism.
A recitation of Rush’s “greatest hits’ would likely not even be allowed by the Mods. he was entertaining in the same way as someone else we know who seemed incapable of civil discourse and resorted to name-calling and insults with frequent racists and misogynistic tropes. Many of us did not find those either entertaining or reflecting a great intellect.
Alright gh, try and see if the mods approve. I have seen a supposed quote belonging to rush, which spoke of how “in the times of slavery, at least there weren’t dangerous thugs roaming the street… ” something obviously racist along those lines-but was completely made up, Rush never said it. Think it was the liberal Snopes that rated it false. But the left, being the left, took it and ran..
A truly great American:
In response to CTL, GH, et al
Rush Limbaugh was bombastic, provocative, and partisan to the extreme.
Michael Che is bombastic, provocative, and partisan to the extreme.The difference is that Rush was unquestionably one of the most talented political entertainers of his time, and Michael Che is… Michael Che.
I don’t agree with either of their viewpoints, and I think there is a lot of merit to the argument that Rush was one of the catalysts of the hyper-partisanship which currently holds our country hostage. This does not detract from Rush’s talent level (which was enormous), and the fact that someone might agree with Che does not mean that he has any talent (he’s pathetic).
@Catchyourself
Sorry, I’ve never heard of Michael Che.
A quick Google search shows him to be a stand up comedian, not a talk radio host@ CTL
No need to apologize. Michael Che is a senior writer and one of the leading performers on SNL. He is currently in the headlines (including the YWM home page) because of an outrageously anti-Semitic “joke” that he used this week in Weekend Updates.
I have no problem laughing at jokes whose premise is a political ideology with which I disagree. I just have never found Che’s stuff to be any good. I find it contrived, unoriginal, and without class. Nevertheless, there must be some people who think he’s funny, or he wouldn’t have his job.
I brought him up in this conversation as an illustration that someone can be an “offensive bigot” and still be talented. It’s easier to see this when the offensive bigot is on your side.
Limbaugh was an “entertainer” in the Jackie Mason tradition who got his laughs through the use of racist and misogynistic stereotypes and hyperbole. There were and continue to be many outstanding conservative thought leaders who engage in civil discourse and express deeply held views on the virtues of patriotism, small government and personal responsibility without denigrating others. Limbaugh thrived on creating an “us” (aka real americans) versus “them” (liberal elites”) and a sense of belonging to the “dittoheads” who found a voice in his daily rants. The Dems have their own version of polarizing voices, although none with the “entertainment” skills of a Limbaugh.
Che was likely an affirmative action hire.
@Catchyourself
Thanks. I am not a watcher of Saturday Night Live or much television besides news, weather, business channelsTo ujm: How do you know why Che was hired?
I used to think Che was funny, but that joke got him kicked off my “funny” list. Let’s wait to see whether he apologizes properly.
@Common You have no Saychel
NP RADIO…one cannot watch Radio, so don’t say I do the impossible.
Ctlawyer, still curious why you view Rush as an “offensive bigot.”
The comparison between Rush and che is an apt one.
bot are entertainers first and foremost (though rush was far more entertaining than che) People who go to either of them for news or rational intellectual takes on any subject are looking in the wrong place.That people take anything either of them says/said seriously is puzzling .
Its like being offended by Howard Stern. Um, yes that is the point, if you don’t like it shut it off.
Limbaugh was more akin to Howard Stern than to Bill BuckleyBill Buckley disagreed with you. He held highly of Mr. Limbaugh as an intellectual.
ujm
I’d like to see a source for that.
(I’m not arguing)
allow me to clarify. At no point did I mean to imply that Rush Limbaugh wasn’t an intellectual . I meant his show. His show was not intended to stimulate thought , or to be “high brow” it was intended to entertain the masses who already agreed with him.
If you were looking for an honest intellectual take on politics/news if you looked to Limbaugh’s show, or SNL you were looking in the wrong place
@ubiquitin Let me clarify. Rush Limbaugh was not an intellectual. One only has to listen to his various attempts to debunk climate change over the years to understand that. “Melting ice doesn’t make the water in the glass rise!” is not an intellectual response.
Yserbius
ITs hard to seperate the man from the character
He had to fill 3 hours day in and day out. That is no easy to do. He can’t just say wel its a slow news day so lets call it after 10 minutes.
Natrually a lot of gibberish came forth in that time.Sadly some iof his listeners believed it because their gadol said it . Many knew it was shtick don’t take him (too?) seriously of course everything/most of what he said was imbecilic
@Torahvalues
I composed a lengthy reply full of direct quotes of his bigotry about 7 hours ago and submitted it.
Somehow it has never appeared in this thread.I can’t imagine you are wondering why.
Talk radio has a propaganda aspect influencing masses, that I am not fond of, and an educational aspect that is good. You hear not just pronouncements, but arguments and discussions.
I listen more to NPR than to AM radio to get familiar with their reasoning. Does not mean that I agree with them, but I am sure that when I take a position I know what the counter-arguments are. Some here have a curious view that they refuse to listen to the other side – and then pronounce their judgment based on quotes they picked up somewhere. You can not be sure that you are not being biased. You see that a number of reasonable people found something in Talk Radio, so you should investigate and make a reasonable judgment.
PS It appears some liberal-minded Israelis have more integrity than Americans. A story that one Israeli academic told me: “I chose” not to be observant … Then, my older son, growing up, started mocking Datiim. I told him – if you want to talk like that, you need to at least know what you are talking about. So, he went a took a class. Became shomer Shabbat. Does not eat in my house anymore. Then, my 2nd son – same story repeated… (One of them is involved in right-wing Israeli politics). <end of story>. I give this guy a lot of credit – especially that he said the same thing to the 2nd son after what happened with the first.
Ok ctlawyer , you’ve convinced me!🙄
@commonsaychel Oish, Air America, I remember that disaster. Michael Moore was their big draw and even he quit after he was basically ignored. I don’t know what it is about AM radio that attracts Conservative viewpoints, but in a way I’m glad it does.
@ubiquitin He spent an awful lot of those three hours daily pushing pure fiction that he knew most of his listeners believed. Up until his death, he was still claiming that the people who attacked the Capitol were Antifa hired by Democrats, despite many being identified as prominent Trump supporters.G. Gordon Liddy had a much better show than Rush.
I actually think Rush was responsible for the massive loss of credibility that the mainstream media had with American public.
I recall seeing a clip of an interview with a Black women who supported Trump, I think it was on CBS. She was asked why and replied. After Trump’s July 4’th speech at Mt Rushmore I watched all the commentary calling it “dark’ and “divisive” and then I went to watch it and saw it was nothing of the sort. So I started investigating the man and administration behind the caricature the media was painting and I became a supporter”
I may have got somethings wrong but that the gist of what she said.
I feel Rush served the same purpose.
Anyone who actually listened to Rush on even an occasional basis saw and heard that he was no bigot. He actually had an African American who produced his show, and had African Americans filling in for him all the time. He was extremely pro Israel and extremely respectful of religion.
He was also very generous dedicating his show to raising money for various causes and donating plenty himself. In fact he was considered from the most generous celebrities out there.
His personal failings are well documented but that does not change facts.
The media regularly would take a line or two out of a 15 minute monologue and purposely take it out of context to create a caricature of him that was objectively false showing they were in essence dishonest.
Yserbius
while what you say is 100% true. And I think the world is a better place now that he is gone. that in no way diminishes the fact that he was no dummy. He knew what he was doing
Ubi, better for leftist liberals, who love that there is one less conservative voice to oppose their own opinions…
What anyone who spent any regular amount of time listening to Rush knows is that the left and the mainstream media and the comments above speaking ill regarding Mr. Limbaugh are from people who rarely (if ever) listened to him. All they know is third-hand claims about what he allegedly said. 99.8% of it is complete rubbish. (Note for the uninitiated: that percentage is a joke; but the point is not.)
Mr. Limbaugh, as his listeners well know, had a very good sense of humor. And he often used sarcasm to make his excellent points. And the nitwits who rarely listen to him, and don’t understand his humor, often and repeatedly took his sarcasm as being comments he said and meant literally. (They often did the same with President Trump.)
I can challenge anyone to produce a source (and not from his detractors) for any of the false claims made regarding what he said. (The man produced three hours of audio five days a week for over thirty years!; if he said it, surely there’s ample original source material to find and produce for us.) The vast majority of it will have absolutely no source; and the little that does will turn out to be from comments made not literally but rather Rush expressing a point humorously.
ujm
“expressing a point humorusly” is not a license to be a bigot.
Take the SNL example, the whole show is “expressing points humorously” people are still all bent out of shape over a “joke” they deemed offensive.There are plenty of Offensive things rush has said availabel online.
I’m not so interested in having you explain why each was “just a joke”to avoid you saying I couldnt come up wit hany I’ll provide 2 examples.
One which Rush later admitted was offensive and “apologized” (though he did it 3 times). The other is less offensive but highlights the double standard among his supporters
1)in 1993 when Clinton was in the Whitehouse he held up a picture and introduced the world to “socks the white house cat” He then said “and here is the white house dog” with a picture of then 12 year old Chelsea Clinton.
I know Know , it was “sarcastic” and was trying to make a point.
He did variations of this “joke” 3 times
2) He often used the term “feminazi” (I once heard him clai to have coined it) I’m old enough to remember how ben out of shape people got when AOC called the camps on the southern border “concentration camps” How dare she minimize the holocaust. Yet rush described those who want equal rights for women as “nazis” (almost) daily and all is fine. Because hey He is being “humorous”
spare me
GH, I find it hard to believe you were a regular listener of Limbaugh
Did you ever listen to him explain the development of the term Feminazi? Who it is referring to and what it means?
ubiquitin: Your comment is further amplification and demonstration of exactly what I pointed out in my previous comment about people haven’t regularly listened to him trying to explain what he said based on third hand reports from the extremely biased and antagonistic mainstream media. How often have you listened to a good portion of his show? He isn’t and never was a bigot. Any reports otherwise are from the left, whether from the MSM or other organs of the left, falsely reporting or entirely misinterpreting him.
You write that he referred to Chelsea Clinton as the White House dog. Okay, that seems like an offensive comment. And you write that he apologized for it. Having an original show for 15 hours every week for over 30 years there’s bound to be some offensive commentary. Have you never made offensive comments? Have you never apologized? You ought to be lauding him for apologizing, not criticizing him for an error he apologized for. And, for the record, such mistakes by him were relatively quite rare. Additionally, referring to the president’s daughter as the White House dog is hardly the biggest aveira out there.
Now as far as your own demonstration of absolutely incorrectly describing Rush’s comments. You brought up the term feminazi. As Midwesterner nicely pointed out, do you even know how or in what sense he used that? Clearly not. Because you openly claimed he meant something he never did (and reapeatedly pointed out as such when the MSM claimed he meant exactly what you claimed, even though he never used it as such.) No, Rush never described those who want equal rights for women as “nazis” or any such thing. Those who he applied the term feminazis, and the ONLY group he ever applied it to, were those advocating for laws permitting abortion-on-demand for all and anyone who wanted it at anytime during pregnancy, and who furthermore encouraged as many abortions as possible. Supporting and encouraging killing millions and millions of innocent unborn children is at least arguably, for some fair-minded folks, considered to be nazi-like. He didn’t even apply that term to general supporters of abortion. Yet that fallacy you expressed that he used the term feminazi in lieu of the term feminist is another one (of many) of the falsehoods commonly attributed to Mr. Limbaugh.
As a side note, Rush was a strong supporter of Israel long before it was popular. He went to Israel in the early 1990s and received a personal tour of the country by Ariel Sharon, in addition to having a meeting with P.M. Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders. He was also a big supporter of Orthodox Jewish positions in the United States.
That Steve Allen quote up thread was worthy. “Radio is the theater of the mind; television is the theater of the Mindless” – Steve Allen.
midwesterner
“Did you ever listen to him explain the development of the term Feminazi? Who it is referring to and what it means?”
Yes, more than once (he is quite repetitive, though I don’t blame him give his task)
ujm
” about people haven’t regularly listened to him ”
wrong.“You write that he referred to Chelsea Clinton as the White House dog. ”
more than once
“Okay, that seems like an offensive comment.”
you are welcome.
” And you write that he apologized for it.”
I wrote “apologized” ( he blamed it on a producer error, what a sloppy producer he must have had to make the same mistake 3 times)
Having an original show for 15 hours every week for over 30 years there’s bound to be some offensive commentary. Have you never made offensive comments?”
lol, I told you I knew you’d have excuses
I asked you so nicely to spare me.
No I have never insulted a kid on national radio. 3 times.
“Additionally, referring to the president’s daughter as the White House dog is hardly the biggest aveira out there.”
lol! I’m surprised it isn’t a mitzva
see we speak different languages .
Again,I know yo have canned excuses for your guy” do you even know how or in what sense he used that? ”
yes“Clearly not. Because you openly claimed he meant something he never did (and reapeatedly pointed out as such when the MSM claimed he meant exactly what you claimed, even though he never used it as such.) ”
I said no such thing
“Those who he applied the term feminazis, and the ONLY group he ever applied it to, were those advocating for laws permitting abortion-on-demand”
This is factually incorrect.
But again, I know you have excuses for everything he says. you ove him and can’t see fault, I get that. Really I do.
“. He didn’t even apply that term to general supporters of abortion.”
You arent telling the truth. Ive heard him refer to people demanding equal wage “feminazis” as well as Sandra fluke who thought health insurance should include Birth control. I know I know the Nazis supported equal wages too.
Look, I’m not getting sucked into this silliness with you.
anything he ever said, you will claim, well he speaks so long what do you expect, or its not that offensive (or both lol). You can also lie about who he called what (which his strange If you’ve listened to him regularly I’m not even sure where this bizarre limitation of his term came from, did you even listen to him? )
Again I get that you can do that. No need to prove me right
“No I have never insulted a kid on national radio. 3 times.”
I wouldn’t rest on your laurels on this one.
ubiq: “I said no such thing.”
You certainly have said exactly that. To quote your own factually incorrect words: “Yet rush described those who want equal rights for women as “nazis” (almost) daily.” That hasn’t happened even once. And I’ll point out again — if he had said that “almost daily”, as you claimed, for 30+ years you should be able to point to a source very easily — in fact many sources over the 30+ years — of a direct verbatim quote or recording. Yet despite multiple requests you cannot produce even a single direct source.
And the fact that to prove he had made offensive comments in 30+ years of a daily show you had to resort to an apologized for incident from literally over a quarter of a century ago, with the Clinton family, further demonstrates how rare (not to mention how tame) it was.
ujm
I replied, but IT may not have gotten past YWN censors (not that I blame them the comments should be censored thats how offensive they are)
“Yet despite multiple requests you cannot produce even a single direct source.”
I already supplied a source. He called Sandra Fluke a “feminazi” it was not over abortion, as you wrongly claimed.
He called her and said about her far far worse. He said things all would consider ” offensive ” by any meaningful definition of the term (most republicans criticized him at the time and yes of course he “apologized” )If you don’ t think they are offensive comments, then we have different definitions of the word, and simply speak different languages.
As I said earlier, I have no interest in supplying lists of offensive things for you to say, it was a joke, it was along time ago, he/she/they deserved it. Yes Iv’e heard all that before. I’m not interested in hearing it again
You wanted an example I supplied it. That is all
Look if you say : “what do you want he spoke for 3 hours daily he was passionate he was funny (and he was), sure he occasionally said offensive things, The good outweighed the bad.”
I disagree, but that is a judgment call and people can disagree.
To say he never said anything offensive, and if he did it was always ok becasue “Sarcasm” is preposterous.
There are plenty of lists of offensive things I mentioned a few, there are others if you care for truth.If you have a specific question on the topic I am of course happy to answer. Otherwise all the best
Where did I ever say he never said anything offensive? You must have confused me with someone else. Frankly, I doubt there’s one in a million people alive who never said something offensive in 30 years.
As far as Sandra Fluke, everything Rush said about her was on target and well deserved. She was publicly advocating for free contraceptives to unmarried college students, whining that 40% of them can’t afford it. Here’s a little tip Sandra: offer the practice of abstinence for unmarried folks rather than publicly promoting immorality via governmental support of premarital relations.
And, again, if someone apologized for something you should be proud rather than faulting them and using their apology itself as proof of wrongness. I don’t recall you being angry at Barack Obama for what he offensively said about, and later apologized to, the Cambridge Police Department and Sergeant Crowley. Or about Obama’s apology for having lied when he claimed everyone will be able to keep their current health insurance plan after Obamacare would be passed, which turned out to be false.
talk radio is not the truth, i don’t think these people are honest. they’re agenda blinds them.
there is too much group think on the right and the left.
every one just copying each other in an echo chamber.
even the politicians keep posturing to fit what they think is accepted and keep changing their minds.
rush Limbaugh mostly bored me, and he was very haughty, and some of his ideas were outlandish bordering on conspiracy theories. not too mention what it seemed like borderline racism.
but give him credit for being a man of god, nice to everyone, he had too fill 3 hours every day.
and i did enjoy his show from time to time.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.