• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Vilification of Rush

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
24,380
Reaction score
7,805
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
American Thinker: The Vilification of Rush
I truly believe that this is brought on by what I call the Minority Thought Pattern. Let's not mince words: the Minority Thought Pattern is the total disdain and hatred of what God has accomplished through the white male throughout history. Coming from an African-American, I know this will shock you.

I am not minimizing the accomplishments of women, African-Americans, immigrants, the religious, or anyone else who is part of America. But the white male was here on Plymouth Rock for God to use, and the Pilgrims had a great belief in that God. The nation built out of their efforts, reflecting their values (most especially their religious values), has become the light of liberty for the world and an obstacle to those power-hungry individuals who hate it.

Another Good Rev., just speaking the truth.
 
"Limbaugh" is a German name, is it not? The early Anglo-Saxon settlers were hardly fans of Germans any more than they were of Irishmen or Italians, though we didn't yet see heavy migration patterns from those groups. It's therefore somewhat disingenuous to speak of the "white male" as though there's even the semblance of racial homogeneity there.

As to the article, I'd say that Rush can only truly love the halftime feast. :shrug:
 
"Limbaugh" is a German name, is it not? The early Anglo-Saxon settlers were hardly fans of Germans any more than they were of Irishmen or Italians, though we didn't yet see heavy migration patterns from those groups. It's therefore somewhat disingenuous to speak of the "white male" as though there's even the semblance of racial homogeneity there.

As to the article, I'd say that Rush can only truly love the halftime feast. :shrug:
I think accuracy is irrelevant in this case. People don't care about the subtle differences in Europeans, they're just white.

Nevertheless, the Hutch said it well.
 
... or maybe he's just crazy wrong almost all of the time, just like his detractors are saying.
 
One of the more amusing things that goes on at DP as regards Limbaugh is many of the same people who complain about him, his satires and takes on matters, are the same people who laud John Stewart. It has been my observation that there is great deal fans of both share in common, and I frequently enjoy transposing the arguments made about each, with the names of both. Meaning when you do so you see some truly hypocritical gobbledygook being spread about.

For example, the whole Rush is not news is quite interchangeable with John is not news, and you can read at DP lengthy arguments about the same on and on.

And the kazoo band played on............
 
For better or for worse, but America was created by white men; and unless political correctness is not eliminated, will be destroyed by "multiculturalism" (or whatever passes for it in America).
 
One of the more amusing things that goes on at DP as regards Limbaugh is many of the same people who complain about him, his satires and takes on matters, are the same people who laud John Stewart. It has been my observation that there is great deal fans of both share in common, and I frequently enjoy transposing the arguments made about each, with the names of both. Meaning when you do so you see some truly hypocritical gobbledygook being spread about.

For example, the whole Rush is not news is quite interchangeable with John is not news, and you can read at DP lengthy arguments about the same on and on.

And the kazoo band played on............
Anyone who listens to Rush regularly, and knows his style, understands what he is about. He is about a large audience, having fun, having strong beliefs and making money. He is quite forthright about this. His fans are therefore genuine.

He doesn't claim to be a journalist, but a commentator and entertainer. So those who have problems with him are either ignorant or are projecting.
 
Anyone who listens to Rush regularly, and knows his style, understands what he is about. He is about a large audience, having fun, having strong beliefs and making money. He is quite forthright about this. His fans are therefore genuine.

He doesn't claim to be a journalist, but a commentator and entertainer. So those who have problems with him are either ignorant or are projecting.
Whereas many here at DP would point to Stewart as an incisive political commentator and journalist. Go figure.
 
Whereas many here at DP would point to Stewart as an incisive political commentator and journalist. Go figure.

I would have to say Stewart is a little bit more even handed in his approach.
 
I would have to say Stewart is a little bit more even handed in his approach.

LOL... Jon who? The comedian hack-guy barely taller than a stool? LOL.

Rush has national weight. John is barely a paper weight.

Rush has weight because he wades through the Lib Media Machine on a daily basis and reveals their general ineptitude/blindness. He has fun, almost no interviews, no writers, no side kicks to chew up time like the barely paper weight Liebowitz.
 
Anyone who listens to Rush regularly, and knows his style, understands what he is about. He is about a large audience, having fun, having strong beliefs and making money. He is quite forthright about this. His fans are therefore genuine.

He doesn't claim to be a journalist, but a commentator and entertainer. So those who have problems with him are either ignorant or are projecting.
i'm not ignorant, nor am i projecting. i would really like to see the definitive demographics of rush's fan base as opposed to stewart's.

i have no doubt they are quite different.
 
LOL... Jon who? The comedian hack-guy barely taller than a stool? LOL.

Rush has national weight. John is barely a paper weight.

Rush has weight because he wades through the Lib Media Machine on a daily basis and reveals their general ineptitude/blindness. He has fun, almost no interviews, no writers, no side kicks to chew up time like the barely paper weight Liebowitz.

Admit it you have a crush on Rush:lol:
 
i'm not ignorant, nor am i projecting. i would really like to see the definitive demographics of rush's fan base as opposed to stewart's.

i have no doubt they are quite different.

Here you go:
Online Papers Modestly Boost Newspaper Readership: Section 4: Audience Segments - Pew Research Center for the People & the Press

zimmer-albums-conservitoons-picture1113-online-papers-modestly-boost-newspaper-readership-section-4-audience-segments-pew-research-center-people-and-press.png
 
Last edited:
I like both Rush and Stewart. John Stewart, I sadly have to say, is probably one of the best political commentators on TV. While he has his tendencies for absurdities, it's not nearly as terrible as pretty much everyone else and rather transparent. He has good political discourse on his show, and it's sad that a comedy show is probably the best on that front. Rush has a great show as well. He too is given to absurdities and takes things to sometimes rather low probability ends. But he still has some good ideas and is usually well read and educated on what he's talking about. Most other forums are trash. Hannity is horrible, I envision Hannity as a slightly more rational form of Truth Detector. Beck is putting on a song and dance, and both suck. Other networks aren't even on the map.

Pretty much with all "mainstream" media, there's always a slant and propaganda you have to wade through.
 
I like both Rush and Stewart. John Stewart, I sadly have to say, is probably one of the best political commentators on TV. While he has his tendencies for absurdities, it's not nearly as terrible as pretty much everyone else and rather transparent. He has good political discourse on his show, and it's sad that a comedy show is probably the best on that front. Rush has a great show as well. He too is given to absurdities and takes things to sometimes rather low probability ends. But he still has some good ideas and is usually well read and educated on what he's talking about. Most other forums are trash. Hannity is horrible, I envision Hannity as a slightly more rational form of Truth Detector. Beck is putting on a song and dance, and both suck. Other networks aren't even on the map.

Pretty much with all "mainstream" media, there's always a slant and propaganda you have to wade through.

Ive been listening to Dennis Prager alot lately. While I might disagree with him on numerous issues I like his approach.
 
nothing new just more liberal attacks...

They can't argue substance, because they just don't get substance...

If it doesn't fit into a 8 second sound bite there lost and confused!

so on it goes.. personal attacks without substance for the politically ignorant and the hopelessly liberal....
 
For better or for worse, but America was created by white men; and unless political correctness is not eliminated, will be destroyed by "multiculturalism" (or whatever passes for it in America).

The Anglo-Saxons didn't care for Eastern Slavs either, nor did the California Indians, as their resistance repelled them back up the coast quite quickly. ;)
 
Ive been listening to Dennis Prager alot lately. While I might disagree with him on numerous issues I like his approach.
dennis prager isn't an ass, i'll give you that.
 
I like both Rush and Stewart. John Stewart, I sadly have to say, is probably one of the best political commentators on TV. While he has his tendencies for absurdities, it's not nearly as terrible as pretty much everyone else and rather transparent. He has good political discourse on his show, and it's sad that a comedy show is probably the best on that front. Rush has a great show as well. He too is given to absurdities and takes things to sometimes rather low probability ends. But he still has some good ideas and is usually well read and educated on what he's talking about. Most other forums are trash. Hannity is horrible, I envision Hannity as a slightly more rational form of Truth Detector. Beck is putting on a song and dance, and both suck. Other networks aren't even on the map.

Pretty much with all "mainstream" media, there's always a slant and propaganda you have to wade through.
i read whatever i can for my news. the daily show, to me, is comedy, and rush is absurd.
 
i read whatever i can for my news. the daily show, to me, is comedy, and rush is absurd.
How many times have you listen to Rush's show in its entirety?
 
Constantly. Today he was yapping about how liberals constitute 20%, conservatives 40%, and moderates/independents 36% according to some poll he cited.
 
Constantly. Today he was yapping about how liberals constitute 20%, conservatives 40%, and moderates/independents 36% according to some poll he cited.
Oh that's very disturbing. :shock:
 
Back
Top Bottom