Steele: Limbaugh 'entertainer', whose show is incendiary and ugly

That's right I'm Stupid... but it sure sounds like some of their ideas... but I wouldn't expect you to see that.

Perhaps you misread that. I never called you stupid, nor did I imply that you were stupid.
In regards to your post, I asked if you if you were aware how stupid it read. And then I asked you to clarify your statement.

That would mean I don't think you were stupid and such a thoughtless statement seemed uncharacteristic.

Now, please, go on to define Nazism for us.
And I'm fascinated by the conservative philosophy of "I'm better than you- just because." Please elaborate.
 
Foss - I did see the video clip of Hughley's show that was on Politico - you couldn't tell from that either, from the editing it sounds like Steele is just talking generalities...
Tsk, tsk, fox, you really need to look up the meaning of the word 'context.'

He was clearly referring to the 'fail' comment. Keep trying, though, it's amusing.
 
Additional point, that can't wait until Mespock may or may not respond back. I need to address a critical mistake you.

Conservatism DOES NOT imply or assume that everyone is stupid. To the contrary, conservatism is all about self-empowerment and the ability of the individual to make the right decisions.

It's the progressive movement that assumes that decisions are best made by officials in the government. That government should control the economy and raise our families. That the individual is incapable of doing these things alone.

Mespock has it completely backwards.
 
Some snippets from a current Politico article...

Gold Rush: Dems launch Operation Rushbo

"The Administration is enabling me,” Rush wrote in an email to POLITICO. “They are expanding my profile, expanding my audience and expanding my influence. An ever larger number of people are now being exposed to the antidote to Obamaism: conservatism, as articulated by me. An ever larger number of people are now exposed to substantive warnings, analysis and criticism of Obama's policies and intentions, a ‘story’ I own because the [mainstream media] is largely the Obama Press Office.”

The bigger, the better, agreed Democrat James Carville. “It’s great for us, great for him, great for the press,” he said of Limbaugh. “The only people he’s not good for are the actual Republicans in Congress.”

“His positives for voters under 40 was 11 percent,” Carville recalled with a degree of amazement, alluding to a question about whether voters had a positive or negative view of the talk show host.

And Gibbs served up a made-for-cable-TV quote to end his daily briefing Tuesday.

“I was a little surprised at the speed in which Mr. Steele, the head of the RNC, apologized to the head of the Republican Party,” Gibbs quipped with a grin, before striding out of the press room.

“I want to send Rush a bottle of vitamins,” said Begala. “We need him to stay healthy and loud and proud.”

With President George W. Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney out of the White House and Tom DeLay gone from Congress, the left had been suddenly absent an unpopular right-wing figure.

Few Americans know who the congressional Republican leaders are. Even Sarah Palin is now four time zones away from Washington.

It’s something of a back to the future tactic for Democrats: painting the GOP as the party of the angry white male. But unlike Newt Gingrich or other prominent Republicans, Limbaugh doesn’t have to mind his tongue.


You can't believe how excited all Democrats are regarding this turn of events. I would love to have more and more people listen to Rush, enabling him is a brilliant move.

There is no one better, in our mind, then Rush Limbaugh to be the face of the Republican party.
 
Rush just suggested that if Obama's cronies think he's the leader of the party, Obama himself is invited to come on his radio show and debate him. Then Obama can PWN him once and for all and he'll have no more political opponents.

Think he'll show?:rolleyes:
 
There is no one better, in our mind, then Rush Limbaugh to be the face of the Republican party.

He's an excellent voice, so long as he's not be filtered by the far left mainstream media.

If posted the main social points in his speech, so long as the people here didn't know the source, I'm confident that the vast majority of members here would agree with it.

"We want every American to be the best he or she chooses to be. We recognize that we are all individuals. We love and revere our founding documents, the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. We believe that the preamble of the Constitution contains an inarguable truth, that we are all endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, among them life, liberty, freedom -- and the pursuit of happiness,"
 
I think I should sign up....;)

Limbaugh To Convene A ‘Female Summit’ To Figure Out Why Women Hate Him


Women don’t really like Rush Limbaugh. On Feb. 23, Public Policy Polling released findings showing that only 37 percent of women hold a favorable opinion of the radio host, compared to 56 percent of men.

As Jill Zimon notes, Limbaugh brought up this poll yesterday on his radio show, noting that it was one of the largest gender gaps Public Policy Polling has seen on any issue it has polled in the past year. His solution? To convene a summit of women to find out why they dislike him:

"We’ll have a summit of all the women in this audience — or as many of them as we can get into breakout groups — and perhaps devote an hour in an upcoming program to calls only from women who genuinely want to talk to me. They can be liberal, conservative. They could be non-audience members, could be audience members. But I want some of these women to start telling me what it is I must do to close the gender gap — or, if not what it is I must do to close the gender gap, what it is I’ve done that has caused the gender gap; assuming the gender gap is true and that the poll is true. […]

I own the men, and what must I do now to own women? And who better to ask than women? Including some of those who may agree that that I’m unfavorable. So stand by for that. "


Face it, Rush. We’re just not that into you.

Got a clue? Well, we could start with that whole 'ownership' thing...:)

limbaughher.jpg
 
I think I should sign up....;)

Limbaugh To Convene A ‘Female Summit’ To Figure Out Why Women Hate Him


Women don’t really like Rush Limbaugh. On Feb. 23, Public Policy Polling released findings showing that only 37 percent of women hold a favorable opinion of the radio host, compared to 56 percent of men.

As Jill Zimon notes, Limbaugh brought up this poll yesterday on his radio show, noting that it was one of the largest gender gaps Public Policy Polling has seen on any issue it has polled in the past year. His solution? To convene a summit of women to find out why they dislike him:

"We’ll have a summit of all the women in this audience — or as many of them as we can get into breakout groups — and perhaps devote an hour in an upcoming program to calls only from women who genuinely want to talk to me. They can be liberal, conservative. They could be non-audience members, could be audience members. But I want some of these women to start telling me what it is I must do to close the gender gap — or, if not what it is I must do to close the gender gap, what it is I’ve done that has caused the gender gap; assuming the gender gap is true and that the poll is true. […]

I own the men, and what must I do now to own women? And who better to ask than women? Including some of those who may agree that that I’m unfavorable. So stand by for that. "


Face it, Rush. We’re just not that into you.

Got a clue? Well, we could start with that whole 'ownership' thing...:)

limbaughher.jpg
Untimely, fox...

He already had the summit on his radio show. Clearly you don't listen.
 
Untimely, fox...

He already had the summit on his radio show. Clearly you don't listen.

Really, ya think? I catch parts of his show maybe a couple of times a week...

It is all my tender constitution can handle... ;)
 
Really, ya think? I catch parts of his show maybe a couple of times a week...

It is all my tender constitution can handle... ;)
Not surprised. You appear to prefer the milquetoast, metrosexual Matt Lauer type.

By the way, I guess you should be proud of your boy Hopenchange:

Hope and Change: The Operation Rushbo Distraction

posted at 12:30 pm on March 4, 2009 by Ed Morrissey


If the first six weeks of the Barack Obama administration can be summed up in one sentence, it would be this: Obama fiddled with Rush Limbaugh while Wall Street burned. Politico reports that the demonization of Rush Limbaugh comes as a deliberate strategy by Obama and the Democrats, who hoodwinked people into believing that a Chicago Machine pol really wanted to change the partisan nature of politics. Starting in October, Obama relied on an old hand in attack politics to devise this strategy — and rolled it out even in the middle of an economic meltdown:

Top Democrats believe they have struck political gold by depicting Rush Limbaugh as the new face of the Republican Party, a full-scale effort first hatched by some of the most familiar names in politics and now being guided in part from inside the White House.

The strategy took shape after Democratic strategists Stanley Greenberg and James Carville included Limbaugh’s name in an October poll and learned their longtime tormentor was deeply unpopular with many Americans, especially younger voters. Then the conservative talk-radio host emerged as an unapologetic critic of Barack Obama shortly before his inauguration, when even many Republicans were showering him with praise.

Soon it clicked: Democrats realized they could roll out a new GOP bogeyman for the post-Bush era by turning to an old one in Limbaugh, a polarizing figure since he rose to prominence in the 1990s.

Read all of Jonathan Martin’s report, which makes clear that Carville and Paul Begala coordinated this effort with Obama chief of staff Rahm Emanuel on their morning conference calls. Clearly, Obama wants to use his media contacts to play rough with critics through coordinated personal-attack campaigns. Martin neglects to mention, though, that Obama himself started off this attack by telling Republicans that they can’t listen to Limbaugh any longer if they want to have access to Democratic-controlled agendas on the Hill.

So far, Obama’s attack machine — and there’s no other term for it — has mostly succeeded. While the markets have lost 18% of their value in the six weeks of his leadership, all Democrats can talk about is Rush. Newspapers and media have followed suit, and so have the blogs. Usually excellent sites like The Moderate Voice and Political Machine have turned themselves into almost nothing but anti-Limbaugh sites, where Jazz Shaw’s light satire of the trend gets completely subsumed in the overwhelming focus on someone who has no direct power on policy or enforcement. Instead of focusing attention on the real policy leaders in Washington — all Democrats — whose every move has received a resounding vote of no confidence from investors, they have allowed themselves to get distracted by a deliberate strategy of misdirection originating in the highest levels of the White House.
It’s reminiscent of Nixon’s enemies list, and it comes from the supposed messiah of Hope and Change.

Rush Limbaugh provides commentary, criticism, analysis, and entertainment, not political leadership, as Rush himself would attest. He has an audience of 20 million people, which makes attacks on him by people like Michael Steele and other Republicans rather stupid. Instead of dividing the Right, they would do better to act as Bobby Jindal did and find ways to unite the Right. But with Republicans out of power, this is mere sideshow. It’s a circus provided by Democrats to cover up their economic incompetence and massively ineffective spending programs. It’s also a harbinger of things to come as this administration fumbles one issue after another, as they will only need to expand the personal attacks against critics rather than respond to the criticism itself.

Operation Rushbo only succeeds if people swallow it.
 
Not surprised. You appear to prefer the milquetoast, metrosexual Matt Lauer type.

Nope, Jon Stewart, and oddly enough I find David Gergen really sexy, if I close my eyes and just listen to him. It is just like this orgasm waiting to happen....;)
 
Nope, Jon Stewart, and oddly enough I find David Gergen really sexy, if I close my eyes and just listen to him. It is just like this orgasm waiting to happen....;)
You really think there's a difference between Jon Stewart and Matt Lauer?

They're both metrosexuals.

And David Gergen...

Must be a father figure fixation.

:rolleyes:

gergen-718046.jpg
 
Stewart makes me laugh, Lauer is obnoxious... Never underestimate the appeal of laughter.

And Gergen is hard to explain, maybe a little of the old father figure thing going, but, really - it is his 'put me in bed now' voice...
 
Nope, Jon Stewart, and oddly enough I find David Gergen really sexy, if I close my eyes and just listen to him. It is just like this orgasm waiting to happen....;)

Jon Stewart, a comedian, is someone you look to for news and analysis?! The guy makes a living through distortion, exaguration, smears and mischaracterization. Don't you think that way of looking at things (and the intellectual dishonesty it leads to) tend to make his analysis....wrong?
 
Jon Stewart, a comedian, is someone you look to for news and analysis?! The guy makes a living through distortion, exaguration, smears and mischaracterization. Don't you think that way of looking at things (and the intellectual dishonesty it leads to) tend to make his analysis....wrong?

Ah, no, and I don't look to Matt Lauer for news and analysis either. They are in the same business, news as entertainment. Stewart is good at it, Lauer is bad at it...
 
Ah, no, and I don't look to Matt Lauer for news and analysis either. They are in the same business, news as entertainment. Stewart is good at it, Lauer is bad at it...

I used to get a few laughs from Stewart. But the Daily Show has long stopped simply being comedy to being smear peices on republicans and conservatism. mischaracterizing, mocking and ridiculing their ideas. It is offensive and not funny because the only "basis in reality" in the humor is in that liberals already assume the mischaracterization as true. In short, it is a show made by and made for ignorant liberals.

f**k Jon Stewart.
He a liberal version of what liberal's incorrectly think Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh are; a biased entertainer with no substance who uses lies, distortion and smears to cater to the hatred of the ideological base on his side of the isle. Bill Maher is the same as John Stewart, in that sense.
 
Good lord, someone has their panties riding high and deep... Stewart is a comedian and doesn't deny his show is anything but comedy first and foremost.

When he ripped Tucker Carlson a new #sshole on Crossfire, he even said so.
 
Good lord, someone has their panties riding high and deep... Stewart is a comedian and doesn't deny his show is anything but comedy first and foremost.

When he ripped Tucker Carlson a new #sshole on Crossfire, he even said so.

You're right, the Daily Show is an entertainment show.
But it does influence opinion, particularly amongst it's target audience. It has a very New York liberal editorial slant. That's neither good nor bad, but it should be noted.
 
Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it
 
He's an excellent voice, so long as he's not be filtered by the far left mainstream media.

If posted the main social points in his speech, so long as the people here didn't know the source, I'm confident that the vast majority of members here would agree with it.

"We want every American to be the best he or she chooses to be. We recognize that we are all individuals. We love and revere our founding documents, the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. We believe that the preamble of the Constitution contains an inarguable truth, that we are all endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, among them life, liberty, freedom -- and the pursuit of happiness,"

Well, I am not sure what constitution Rush is reading from... but it ain't ours...

And this sounds pretty good too...

I will fight to limit the power of the Federal Government that is taking more and more of our hard-earned money and more and more of our hard-won rights.

I will fight for personal responsibility. The welfare system that proliferates the underclass and all its social ills must end as we know it.

I will fight for a simple and fair national sales tax to abolish the income tax and the abusive IRS.

I will fight for the constitutional right of Americans to Keep and Bear Arms.

I will fight for reform in the Political process by ending all large political contributions and having free and open broadcast time and debates for all qualified candidates.

I will fight for real freedom of speech for the American people not just for the politically correct by ending the control of a few conglomerates over the American media.



however it is by David Duke.
 
Well, I am not sure what constitution Rush is reading from... but it ain't ours...
Yeah, Rush misspoke - he corrected himself later. He meant the DOI, not the preamble. But what difference does it really make? I'm sure the spirit of what Rush quoted is found in the Constitution anyway.
And this sounds pretty good too...

I will fight to limit the power of the Federal Government that is taking more and more of our hard-earned money and more and more of our hard-won rights.

I will fight for personal responsibility. The welfare system that proliferates the underclass and all its social ills must end as we know it.

I will fight for a simple and fair national sales tax to abolish the income tax and the abusive IRS.

I will fight for the constitutional right of Americans to Keep and Bear Arms.

I will fight for reform in the Political process by ending all large political contributions and having free and open broadcast time and debates for all qualified candidates.

I will fight for real freedom of speech for the American people not just for the politically correct by ending the control of a few conglomerates over the American media.



however it is by David Duke.
What is your point? Just because the Devil quotes Scripture doesn't mean the Scripture is false.
 
Foss I was showing Calabrio that you can take a group of words from anyone, Duke, Limbaugh, and they look great - you need to remember 'who' is speaking those words, and the body of work that is behind the speaker...

And, perhaps Rush could at least get the two most important documents in US history correct when he quotes them.

Jefferson is the man who has 'a way with words...' Adams has 'a way with law'...
 
Foss I was showing Calabrio that you can take a group of words from anyone, Duke, Limbaugh, and they look great - you need to remember 'who' is speaking those words, and the body of work that is behind the speaker...

And, perhaps Rush could at least get the two most important documents in US history correct when he quotes them.

Jefferson is the man who has 'a way with words...' Adams has 'a way with law'...
You sound like Keith Olbermann - full of sound and fury but signifying nothing. Do you have a real argument against Rush or are you going to continue picking nits like some internet spelling nazi? I'm pretty sure you've been caught more than once with your facts down in this forum. Is this really the hill on which you want to make your stand?

We've heard Obama say a lot of words which we all know he doesn't mean and won't follow up with action.
 
Foss, do you really want a list of quotes from Rush, on where he might veer from the ideals of our founding fathers? Or where he has been hypocritical?

I was addressing Cal's idea that if you just read 'some' of Rush's words, that they are more palatable. But, you need to remember the many things he has said and stood for.

And, didn't you have to memorize the Preamble and the first 2 paragraphs of the Declaration -and the last sentence- when you were in school?

I mean - these might be the most important words in American history - the start of the second paragraph of the Declaration...
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top