Who listens to Rush Limbaugh?
Obviously a lot of people do and a lot of people like the guy, (otherwise he wouldn't have a quarter of a billion dollar contract right now).
I admit, I listen to the show every chance I get. I like Rush. It's entertaining and I agree with him roughly 90% of the time. Most of the time, I'd say he's right on the money but does anybody else get annoyed about how much he defends Bush? I guess he's getting paid to make people believe Bush can do no wrong. Sometimes I wish he wouldn't talk about him at all. When he talks about the amnesty deal and only blames the democrats, it drives me nuts. Very poor argument IMO. Shouldn't even be debated on the program.
On top of that, he's on the radio every day telling us how great Iraq is going and that it's the drive by media that has us brain-washed into believing it's going badly. Who should we believe?? I know the media puts a negative spin on things but the fact of the matter is, I thought we would have been bringing troops home two years ago. Rush is with the generals and believes we need to give the military "just a few MORE years." Rush thinks we were wrong in "securing defeat and leaving Vietnam, too."
Sorry guys, I just don't buy it. If the Iraqis can't secure their own country after 5 years, I don't believe they'll be doing it after 30 years or 60 years. I'm willing to see the plug pulled at any point now. These guys are not. I feel the US is like the parents afraid to spank the child. If they don't learn the hard way, they'll never amount to anything and simply be spoiled. An Iraqi on our side can shoot and kill an Al-Queada member just as easily as we can. You can't tell me Al-Queada outnumbers the Iraqi population.
Anyway, then Rush bragged about a poll concerning how people view the war is going, the other day. People who believed the war was going well went from 23% up to 25% and that was supposedly a big deal. And the fact that Congress' approval rating is lower than Bush is all that matters.
I wish someone would call him on it but I guess you have to agree 100% or trick the screeners to get on the show. Sometimes I think he's the one that's brainwashed.
I admit, I listen to the show every chance I get. I like Rush. It's entertaining and I agree with him roughly 90% of the time. Most of the time, I'd say he's right on the money but does anybody else get annoyed about how much he defends Bush? I guess he's getting paid to make people believe Bush can do no wrong. Sometimes I wish he wouldn't talk about him at all. When he talks about the amnesty deal and only blames the democrats, it drives me nuts. Very poor argument IMO. Shouldn't even be debated on the program.
On top of that, he's on the radio every day telling us how great Iraq is going and that it's the drive by media that has us brain-washed into believing it's going badly. Who should we believe?? I know the media puts a negative spin on things but the fact of the matter is, I thought we would have been bringing troops home two years ago. Rush is with the generals and believes we need to give the military "just a few MORE years." Rush thinks we were wrong in "securing defeat and leaving Vietnam, too."
Sorry guys, I just don't buy it. If the Iraqis can't secure their own country after 5 years, I don't believe they'll be doing it after 30 years or 60 years. I'm willing to see the plug pulled at any point now. These guys are not. I feel the US is like the parents afraid to spank the child. If they don't learn the hard way, they'll never amount to anything and simply be spoiled. An Iraqi on our side can shoot and kill an Al-Queada member just as easily as we can. You can't tell me Al-Queada outnumbers the Iraqi population.
Anyway, then Rush bragged about a poll concerning how people view the war is going, the other day. People who believed the war was going well went from 23% up to 25% and that was supposedly a big deal. And the fact that Congress' approval rating is lower than Bush is all that matters.
I wish someone would call him on it but I guess you have to agree 100% or trick the screeners to get on the show. Sometimes I think he's the one that's brainwashed.
0
-
I haven't listened to him since 1996.
I loved those capital steps songs and that other guy who used to make the parody songs about Bill Clinton and Al Gore.
Funny Stuff0 -
i would rather listen to rap music, both will rot your brain, his emotions are an issue, and his ability to twist anything he talks about is simply amazing 0 -
Yep - I listen to Rush most every day - usually on the car radio - going to and coming from
places on my daily routine.
I like the guy - makes a lot more sense than his opponents/critics.
[:D]0 -
used to while in tractor but got tired of 20 minutes of info & 40 minutes of patting himself on the back.....arms had to have been to tired to wipe up the sheet at the end of the hour....... 0 -
I listen to him, for a period of time almost everyday.
I find him better than he used to be, in the know it all department.
I also listen to Boortz, so go figure?!
It's what happens when you spend a lot of time on the road for years I guess.[;)]0 -
I listen to Rush in the am. And Roger Hedgecock in the afternoon. Dr Laura is on during my nap time. I also listen to Glen Beck sometimes in the early evening.
And by the way I don't have a TV in San Diego, so my enterainment is via the laptop I bring with me.0 -
I usually listen to a local guy till 10 then Rush, then Sean Hannity, then Bill O'Rielly. We agree and we agree to disagree. I just wish I was rich enough to be a Republican. 0 -
I used to listen to him when he was a "Local guy" and I worked in Sacramento. The guy was hilarious back then, but when he went national I lost interest. 0 -
I listen to Rush almost every day. Even those who don't agree with him (I usually do) will admit that he is articulate, funny, intelligent, extremely well-read, thoroughly researched, and at all times entertaining. Those who spout off that he is "hateful" or "arrogant" eventually admit that they don't actually listen to Rush. And, for the record, he is not a lock-step Bush supporter. He clearly states where he and George part company. 0 -
Ill give you that but I do belive these talk show hosts(and that is all they are) could do just as good of a job for the other side. Its all professional wrestling, they bash each others heads in when the camers are on but when they cut off they all "go out to dinner toghther". 0 -
As a follow-up on the rest of Vess' comment, of course Rush is pro-Iraq. He's a Reagan conservative! So am I, and I like listening to him (and Hannity, and Glenn Beck, and Laura Ingaham, etc.).
I support the troops and their mission in Iraq. Never heard of there ever having been a two-year war anywhere, so I'm not really in sync with Vess on his expectations. I expect the current war, which I refer to as World War IV, to take another 25 years -- and that's if we Americans get our heads out of our backsides NOW, not tomorrow. It just as well might end with the Lord's coming, and that's okay with me.
FYI, I also believe we broke and ran in Vietnam. I was there, and that's been bothering me for 35 years. We only encouraged the Iranian revolutionaries several years later, and the Somalis several years after that. And then Bierut a few years after that. And then brought on 20 years of al Qaida attacks. Since Vietnam we have shown the world that we have no resolve, and the bad guys have taken full advantage of it. The USA has been their pinata. In fact, Bush surprised the snot out of them by attacking Afghanistan and Iraq. Their stated gameplan since then has been to wage a media war that would make us lose our resolve again.
One picture sticks in my mind. A smiling young woman, holding up a purple finger. In two elections, under the threat of violence, the Iraqis turned out to vote in a bigger percentage than Americans do. There's your proof of how this will turn out.0 -
used too but no more, farkin windbag rehashing yesterdays news if he was half as smart as he though he was .....Lmfao not to mention preaching family values, drug use ect ect he can go take a flying leap! 0 -
quote:Originally posted by dbain99
I just wish I was rich enough to be a Republican.
Try it the other way... Maybe if you became a Republican you would find yourself making different decision which would help you acquire additional wealth. [:)]0 -
I make decisions based on my Conservative beliefs which are VERY different than this administrations and that is why I cant afford to be a Bush Republican. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by dbain99
I make decisions based on my Conservative beliefs which are VERY different than this administrations and that is why I cant afford to be a Bush Republican.
+1000
I have always said Bush may be a Republican,......but he sure as heck ain't a "Conservative"!
Tired of the lesser of two evils scheme.[xx(]0 -
What about the first Iraq war?? A couple months and the Iraqis went home with their tail between their legs. The actual Iraq war pt. II was also settled in a matter of months in that the known entity they came to fight (the Iraqi regime) was over-whelmed quickly once again, as expected.
After that, the occupation began and ever since, the troops don't really know who they're fighting or where, while becoming defenseless targets of hundreds if not thousands of IEDs. I'm not interested in sending more targets there or leaving these people there to be targets any longer. In the mean time, you have a make shift Iraqi government that felt they deserved a 3 week vacation from it all.
We can never be paid back for the price that has been paid for that country. The price has been far too high (which is a huge understatement) for what it is or will ever be.
Iraq is becoming (if it hasn't already) the unemployed 34 year old living at home that mom and dad just can't build up the nerve to ask to leave. I don't feel we can do any more for these people or that it's in our best interest at all to remain there. We're losing almost a hundred people a month and at the cost of a half trillion dollars. I don't understand what the finished product is supposed to be and I doubt Limbaugh could give me anywhere near an answer I could be satisfied with. People making minimum wage can give me all the vague answers I need.
I'm sure the argument will now head to, " then we'll be fighting them here on our soil." To which my answer is wide open borders.....THAT ARE ENCOURAGED!! They're all welcomed in right now if they want. Iraq and Afghanistan be damned! We do nothing at home to protect ourselves. Hell, concealed carry is non-existant in my state. I can't even protect myself from the average thug, let alone Al-Queda. We're sitting ducks for them whenever they want us. I'm not safer because of these wars. They can train in the Mexico desert if they want. They can train in somebody's house if they want!
The best thing we could do is pull the plug and implement major changes at home, like everybody else does. We're either serious about security or we're not. If we're not, everything has been a waste of time. How Limbaugh can't understand this, I will never know.0 -
The other reality you have to look at is, this war/occupation, had already become political years ago. EVEN IF the real answer was to stay there for another 10 years and every problem would be solved, without knowing....Are we actually going to stay there for another 10 or 20 years to let that happen? IMO, NO WAY! It's already been highly political. It's going to cost people elections until somebody does something drastic. Somebody's going to pull the plug on it soon. It's going to happen. So since that's going to happen, wouldn't it make more sense to leave now, than pro-longing it any further? Who decides when America has paid enough to this cause to go home? 0 -
Let me point out two facts:
WWII USA defeated Japan and occupied them for seven years before they got on their feet as a democracy. Best thing that ever happened to them.
WWII USA defeated Germany and occupied them for seven years before they got on their feet. Best thing that ever happened to them.
Seal Iraq borders. Kill all resisters. Let Iraq get on their feet as a democracy.0 -
I listen to Rush and like him. I agree with probably 98% of what he says. Smarter and more open minded than most talk radio host.
Well stated,Alpine. Most folks compare the terrorist to Nazis. Thay are closer to the Japs. Beat them into submission, which means killing as many as possible.0 -
all the time, sean, bill too. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Alpine
Let me point out two facts:
WWII USA defeated Japan and occupied them for seven years before they got on their feet as a democracy. Best thing that ever happened to them.
WWII USA defeated Germany and occupied them for seven years before they got on their feet. Best thing that ever happened to them.
Seal Iraq borders. Kill all resisters. Let Iraq get on their feet as a democracy.
I've heard the comparisons a hundred times. Different time, different places. To think the same will work with Iraq is crazy. I've read reports that Germany was well under control and very well recovered within 2 years after the wars end. You also had a 'majority' of 'normal people' who were 'glad we were there' and were 'united as a country towards the cause of getting back on their feet'. In both cases. In Iraq you don't and you never will. Plain and simple. They can't even unite themselves in their own country!
In WW II, you also had surrounding countries who, if they weren't helping them get back on their feet, they at least weren't fanning the flames, being part of the problem. Iraq is surrounded by countries with irrational leaders living in the stone age who hate America. Therefore, they'd love nothing more than to ensure Iraq fails. How do you beat this without taking over the entire region?
This is a whole different ball game in which I don't believe any amount of occupation will ever solve. It is hard for me to watch it go on. Nevermind that we're going bankrupt over it.0 -
quote:Originally posted by vess1
I've heard the comparisons a hundred times. Different time, different places. To think the same will work with Iraq is crazy. I've read reports that Germany was well under control and very well recovered within 2 years after the wars end. You also had a 'majority' of 'normal people' who were 'glad we were there' and were 'united as a country towards the cause of getting back on their feet'. In both cases. In Iraq you don't and you never will. Plain and simple. They can't even unite themselves in their own country!
In WW II, you also had surrounding countries who, if they weren't helping them get back on their feet, they at least weren't fanning the flames, being part of the problem. Iraq is surrounded by countries with irrational leaders living in the stone age who hate America. Therefore, they'd love nothing more than to ensure Iraq fails. How do you beat this without taking over the entire region?
This is a whole different ball game in which I don't believe any amount of occupation will ever solve. It is hard for me to watch it go on. Nevermind that we're going bankrupt over it.
I stopped listening to Rush Limbaugh several years ago when he mastered the art of talking for hours without saying anything. I guess anybody who is on the radio for fifteen hours a week has to do that, but I get tired of listening to it.
I have to say though, you have a pretty distorted view of history and a lack of understanding of how an occupation is supposed to work, and has been demonstrated to work.
You are correct that Iraq is a different place and time, but the difference that makes is none at all. A World War Two style victory followed by a World War Two style occupation will work the same today as it did sixty years ago and it will work anywhere in the world. However, that will never be proven because it will never be tried. For reasons I don't understand, the United States stopped fighting wars to win after World War Two.
A loss in Iraq will be a disaster beyond comprehension. It will be prewar Afghanistan time ten. Al Quieta will be a legitimate government among other things. I am convinced now that that is what is going to happen, not because the war is unwinnable, but because of our own political reasons and a lack of desire among the American people to win. If you think abandoning Iraq will end the war, think some more. This is a war that unless we surrender, will last for at least thirty years and could last for a century or more. Iraq is just the current battleground.0 -
I used to think he was the bees-knees just for saying anything conservative on the radio; now I can't stand him. Blow-hard Bush-bot is a kind description.
Michael Savage is my man now. Street smart, educated, well-traveled, sharp as a tack and peerless at cutting up lefty callers.
Speaking of the occupation, he had a caller who had been tasked with cleaning up the "werewolves" in post-war Germany, the Nazi remnants who were causing trouble like what's called "insurgents" nowadays. Savage kept asking him questions like:
Savage: Did you make sure they had ethnically-correct meals?
Caller: No.
Savage: Did you make sure they had the religious leaders of their choice?
Caller: No.
And so on until:
Savage: So, how did you treat them?
Caller: Well, when we found them, we put them against a wall and we shot them.
Of course, we had a different president back then.0 -
A statement for the ages. . .
quote:You are correct that Iraq is a different place and time, but the difference that makes is none at all. A World War Two style victory followed by a World War Two style occupation will work the same today as it did sixty years ago and it will work anywhere in the world. However, that will never be proven because it will never be tried. For reasons I don't understand, the United States stopped fighting wars to win after World War Two.0 -
I used to be a big fan of Rush's, but stopped listening to him several years ago. As was said above, his self-congratulating got old and tiresome. Plus, he's lost a lot of the charm he used to have -- I used to like the funny songs he'd put together.
I've been listening to Dennis Prager, who competes with Rush's time slot. Prager doesn't tote the party line, talks about things other than politics (although he does talk a lot about politics) and makes me think.0 -
I put Rush Limbaugh in the same category of shameless huckster as P.T. Barnum and Aimee Semple McPherson. 0 -
I listened to Rush for years.The longer you listen to him,the more you figure him out.Now I cant stand him.Rush rattles useless crap on the radio but never really does anything.A perfect example of the old saying "When its all said and done there is a lot more said than done". 0 -
I didn't know he was still on. You could miss him for two years & it would still sound like yesterday. He got very old very quickly. Is he still backing Bush & the tax cuts for the very rich? 0 -
I like Rush but don't like "politics" I listen to him once in a while nothing against Rush but I'd rather listen to music. It's much more relaxing then to hear about all the back stabbing going on when our government should be helping this country instead of trying to hurt each other. Dems vs Rep BS. 0 -
I listen to Him some times,But if the Democrats get their way Talk Radio will be a thing of the past. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
30 comments