Bach Limbaugh

[Lethevich]

I don't mean to imply that I think he is in any way imperfect by being dumb - it adds to his greatness.

[Superhorn]

   I sincerely hope that dear old Johann Sebastian is busy turning in his grave at the comparison between him and "The big fat idiot",in
Al Franken's immortal words.









                                                                             

[Bulldog]

Very nice - even Saul would like this one.

[Saul]

Very nice - even Saul would like this one.

I don't see anything special in her, I don't even think that she is beautiful.

[Daverz]

A question: What serious person takes Rush Limbaugh's opinions seriously?  Or Bill O'Reilly's or Keith Olberman's or Al Franken's.  Oh, wait, that last one . . .

Unfortunately, most of our ruling class and the Media. 

I've always had an odd response to Bill O'Reilly; he's such an obnoxious reactionary bully, but he has a pathetic quality that makes me feel a little sorry for him, and he also has certain "bad trainwreck" quality that makes it hard to avert the eyes; occasionally there are glimmers that he might have a little decency left.

Limbaugh is just a vile pigman, without a shred of decency. 

Trying to make out Olbermann or Franken as their cognates on the Left has always struck me as being tone deaf to both politics and character, and only Franken can really be said to be on the Left.  People seem to feel a need to make these equivalencies, though.

[False_Dmitry]

, but he has a pathetic quality that makes me feel a little sorry for him, and he also has certain "bad trainwreck" quality that makes it hard to avert the eyes;

I know what you mean, but I assure you there's not a shred of decency, civility or sanity left in Billo

Now Rachel Maddow, on the other hand...

[Todd]

Trying to make out Olbermann or Franken as their cognates on the Left has always struck me as being tone deaf to both politics and character, and only Franken can really be said to be on the Left.  People seem to feel a need to make these equivalencies, though.

Olberman and Franken are the closest "the left" has to mouthpieces on "the right" in that they get lots of air time, say rather silly things, and are obviously overtly partisan in their diatribes.  I would have thought the equivalency rather obvious, at least to people who are not blindly partisan.  The shrill Eleanor Clift is almost there, though she at least tries to maintain a more serious demeanor.

At least the media clowns on the right have not translated their buffoonery to elected politics.  Franken's behavior on at least two public occasions has been exceedingly poor for a Senator.  He apparently doesn't want to pass much legislation of his own.

And people ought not to be too hard on poor, poor Bill O'Reilly.  He's probably still smarting over having to work on Inside Edition for all those years.  He's a very serious journalist, after all.

[Daverz]

Olberman and Franken are the closest "the left" has to mouthpieces on "the right" in that they get lots of air time, say rather silly things, and are obviously overtly partisan in their diatribes. 

To have an equivalent of Rush Limbaugh, you have to have someone who demagogues against Blacks, gays, women, Latinos, Muslims, the poor, foreigners.  The guy has zero class.  Remember Chelsea Clinton as the White House dog?  The attack on Michael J. Fox?  Mocking Malia Obama?

O'Reilly does same of the same things and also bullies his guests, but doesn't give me the creeps as much.

Olberman is, ridiculously, considered on the "Left" because he's not a conservative.  There's actually a lot of ideological space between conservatism and the "Left".  Many Democrats are not even on the "Left" (e.g. the Blue Dog Democrats)  The political center has moved so far to the right, that milquetoast liberals are now considered "far Left". Richard Nixon would be considered a socialist in the current political climate.

I would have thought the equivalency rather obvious,

Franken has been a senator for long enough that he should probably be taken out of the race for obnoxious media personality.
Certainly, he's partisan; he's a Democratic senator.  But he's not a demagogue, and I've never seen an example of him lying or distorting facts like Limbaugh or O'Reilly constantly do.  Limbaugh spews misinformation nearly every time he opens his mouth.

The shrill Eleanor Clift is almost there, though she at least tries to maintain a more serious demeanor.

I had to dredge my memories of the 80s for Clift.  I don't watch the Sunday bobble-head shows, so I'd forgotten her.   I'm not impressed with a serious demeanor.  Does crazy old racist Pat Buchanan have a serious demeanor?

If I had to come up with an equivalent on the left who is actually on popular media (radio), Mike Malloy might fit the bill, but only because of his blood and thunder radio delivery.  But most people have probably never heard of him.

[Todd]

Remember Chelsea Clinton as the White House dog?  The attack on Michael J. Fox?  Mocking Malia Obama?

Actually, no I don't, because I don't listen to his show or pay attention to the press he gets.  I haven't bothered spending any time listening to him since the early 90s when I thought he was entertaining for brief time.  (I always considered him no more than an entertainer.)  O'Reilly has always struck me as a cynical hack; I'm not sure he believes in private everything he says in public.  He does like those paychecks, though.  Olberman is a second rate "liberal" hack, at least based on the little I've heard from him.  Franken, well, one would think that a senator should act a bit more dignified and shouldn't be considered along with the stalwarts I just listed, but his behavior on a few occasions while senator shows that he hasn't really grown up. 

There are people of all political stripes who blather hyperbolically.  You can say that's not the case, or that somehow Rush Limbaugh is what, more evil than others, but that doesn't detract from the reality that generally coarse and partisan political speech gets disproportionate attention, and it's not just the "right" that does it.  Of course, this is nothing new.  It can be entertaining, but also tiring.

[Daverz]

Actually, no I don't, because I don't listen to his show or pay attention to the press he gets. I haven't bothered spending any time listening to him since the early 90s

Then how can you say that these other people are equivalent?  People seem to want to believe that no matter how shitty things get, there's some kind of balance of shittiness in the world that makes it all OK.

Olberman is a second rate "liberal" hack, at least based on the little I've heard from him. 

I don't watch the cable channels, so I only see clips of his show and don't know what makes him a hack.

Rachel Maddow is probably as liberal a host as is possible on a cable news channel.  Ed Schultz is another one that I'd consider more centrist Democrat than liberal (I used to listen to his radio show in the car.) 

Franken, well, one would think that a senator should act a bit more dignified and shouldn't be considered along with the stalwarts I just listed, but his behavior on a few occasions while senator shows that he hasn't really grown up.

The senate is full of freaks, assholes, and crooks.   What, Franken supposedly rolled his eyes during someones speech?

There are people of all political stripes who blather hyperbolically. 

We're talking about a lot more than hyperbole in the case of Limbaugh. 

You can say that's not the case, or that somehow Rush Limbaugh is what, more evil than others

I can and will.  The man is a demagogue, stirring up hate, fear, bigotry, and xenophobia.  There is nobody on the Left with the megaphone he has; there is nobody on the Left in popular media who is anything like him.  Maybe we can find someone on a 5-Watt Pacifica station at 3 AM who is as bad a human being.

, but that doesn't detract from the reality that generally coarse and partisan political speech

That's a normal part of politics.  Limbaugh's rhetoric is far beyond coarse and partisan. 

And I want politicians who are partisan and will fight for my rights.  The days of bi-partisanship and comity died back in the 1980s with Tip O'Neil.  Politicians who try that now just get rolled.

[Dancing Divertimentian]

Pain killers are not the main stream criminal drugs.

What the hell does this mean? Whether pain killers are mainstream or not is utterly irrelevant.

Pain killers are just as destructive as any other drug that's abused. Just as addictive, just as mind-altering, just as expensive, just as debilitating, just as unhealthy, etc...

You're talking to someone who's witness pain killers IN ACTION (not me). Pain killers without doubt deserve their place among the hardcore drugs. Period.

The mainstream PRESS might not recognize this fact yet but that's irrelevant also. Pain killers have the capacity to wreak just as much havoc on lives as any other drug. Period. 

Do us a favor and get some education before you start spewing more rubbish on this board...

[Mirror Image]

What the hell does this mean? Whether pain killers are mainstream or not is utterly irrelevant.

Pain killers are just as destructive as any other drug that's abused. Just as addictive, just as mind-altering, just as expensive, just as debilitating, just as unhealthy, etc...

You're talking to someone who's witness pain killers IN ACTION (not me). Pain killers without doubt deserve their place among the hardcore drugs. Period.

The mainstream PRESS might not recognize this fact yet but that's irrelevant also. Pain killers have the capacity to wreak just as much havoc on lives as any other drug. Period.

Some excellent points, which is why I made that cartoon post. He's no better than the drug addicts he claims to dislike.

Pain killers are extremely dangerous. Look at the actor Matthew Perry (Friends, The Whole Nine Yards, etc.) he became addicted to pain killers very easily and they almost took his life. They can ruin your life just like any other drug can.

[Daverz]

Pain killers are not the main stream criminal drugs.

Very good, Saul.  We evil libs have taught you moral relativism well.  Next lesson: debauchery.

Or perhaps you are just confusing different drug incidents.  We're talking about the "hillbilly heroin" addiction, not the incident where Rush came back from the Dominican Republic with a bottle of Viagra without his name on it.   Why do you think Rusty had to go to the Dominican Republic -- traveling without a female companion to a country with a thriving sex tourism industry -- to, ahem, use Viagra.

[Bulldog]

I don't watch the cable channels, so I only see clips of his show and don't know what makes him a hack.

Rachel Maddow is probably as liberal a host as is possible on a cable news channel.  Ed Schultz is another one that I'd consider more centrist Democrat than liberal (I used to listen to his radio show in the car.) 

I wouldn't call Olbermann a hack, but a sanctimonious jerk; I enjoyed hearing that he's been dumped by Sunday Night Football.  He needs to give up the media life and take care of his poor old dad who has been on death's door for the past two years.

Maddow is much more likeable, but she sometimes uses poor logic.  I kind of like Ed who looks like a hard-nosed blue collar worker; he's also a lot less ideological in his views than Rachel or the Jerk.

[Daverz]

I wouldn't call Olbermann a hack, but a sanctimonious jerk.

Yeah, I think sanctimonious fits.  It's part of his schtick ("Worst Person in the Worrrrrld").  If he was doing that sort of schtick for an audience who just wanted to watch sports, I can understand why some people hate him.

Maddow is much more likeable, but she sometimes uses poor logic.

I'd feel smarter if I could hear that.  She was a Rhodes Scholar and has a PhD in Political Science from Oxford, but even very smart people can foul up their logic.

[Florestan]

Yeah, the "idiot" has likely already made more money than all the members of GMG.

Only because the world is full of even bigger idiots. 

[Saul]

What the hell does this mean? Whether pain killers are mainstream or not is utterly irrelevant.

Pain killers are just as destructive as any other drug that's abused. Just as addictive, just as mind-altering, just as expensive, just as debilitating, just as unhealthy, etc...

You're talking to someone who's witness pain killers IN ACTION (not me). Pain killers without doubt deserve their place among the hardcore drugs. Period.

The mainstream PRESS might not recognize this fact yet but that's irrelevant also. Pain killers have the capacity to wreak just as much havoc on lives as any other drug. Period. 

Do us a favor and get some education before you start spewing more rubbish on this board...

The guy had physical pain and he took pain killers to get rid of the pain, duh....

That's not the same as a major lowlife shooting heroin or crack up his veins to 'get high'...

You can't see this major difference, yet you have the nerve to tell me to 'get an education'...

Looks like you better take on your 'advice' yourself...

[Philoctetes]

The guy had physical pain and he took pain killers to get rid of the pain, duh....

That's not the same as a major lowlife shooting heroin or crack up his veins to 'get high'...

You can't see this major difference, yet you have the nerve to tell me to 'get an education'...

Looks like you better take on your 'advice' yourself...

gahahahahahaaa

[False_Dmitry]

The guy had physical pain and he took pain killers to get rid of the pain, duh....

BS

[Saul]

BS

The real BS is taking things out of context...