Do you listen to Rush Limbaugh? (1 Viewer)

[SWJJ]

I find complete hilarity in the idea that the EE is somehow dominated by "the left".

Moderates? Probably. However, this "conservatives get ganged up on" stuff is nonsense. Ideologues get hit by all sides because the EE, more than most other places, is free minded turf. A leftist ideologue is just as likely to get an intellectual beatdown here as a right wing one. However, since this is a board comprised almost entirely of southern white males there just aren't many of those.

It's not about conservative or liberal it's about being able to express your self in a succinct way. LSSPAM is one of the strongest defenders of the war on this board. He doesn't whine about getting ganged up on when Reb and adder are going at him because he's able to express himself and his own thoughts effectively. dapperdan is about as rightwing as you'll find and is also one of the more respected posters here because of the wealth of knowledge he brings to almost any subject. Same can be said for guys like Inkspot and Sparkle.

It's not a conservative thing, it's a thinking thing.

I disagree. I know that all views may take an "intellectual beatdown" but it is the overall tone that rightwingers are simply "sheep" and that they are not freethinkers.

Implications are rampant that they "get thier marching orders" or "are brainwashed" just in these two threads.

And then when this is pointed out we get accussed of whining.

I dont really care, I am not scared and will not dunk a legit discussion, I have views that many on the board disagree with, and I feel I have [almost] always been very reasonable when discussing them, and though from time to time I may point out what I feel to be a condesending tone towards the low brow redneck religous right wingers, I generally have my discussions with out "whining."


even some people I believe are "moderates" on this board make such implications about rightwingers, especially limbaugh listeners, saying his listeners are sheep, and are brainwashed...

I just think that is an unjust, invalid, and unsupport generalization of MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of people....

and frankly the tone is one of superiorority over the lowly sheep that listen to rush.

 

[Tony The Fish]

No.

 

[SWJJ]

Good post. I almost wanted to bring dapperdan in as an example, because you don't see him coming in on a lot of the weakest threads, where there seems to be the greatest amount of complaining about liberal bias, or liberal whatever. The reason you don't see him IMHO is because they are weak threads to begin with.

He's a great poster who has a conservative point of view, but at the same time he's usually pretty open to having his mind changed about things if the arguments are strong enough. He doesn't change his mind much, but still, that's probably why threads that he invests in are pretty strong.

I'm not trying to get a date with him or anything, but I just think he's a good example of someone who mostly argues from a conservative point of view, but you don't see him giving a flip about Rush Limbaugh, do you? I think the smartest conservatives know that's just a silly sideshow topic.

So a conservative who will defend Rush limbaugh is not a smart conservative?
Are they sheep as well?

 

[Shawn]

I disagree. I know that all views may take an "intellectual beatdown" but it is the overall tone that rightwingers are simply "sheep" and that they are not freethinkers.

Implications are rampant that they "get thier marching orders" or "are brainwashed" just in these two threads.

And then when this is pointed out we get accussed of whining.

I dont really care, I am not scared to dunk a legit discussion, I have views that many on the board disagree with, and I feel I have [almost] always been very reasonable when discussing them, and though from time to time I may point out what I feel to be a condesending tone towards the low brow redneck religous right wingers, I generally have my discussions with out "whining."


even some people I believe are "moderates" on this board make such implications about rightwingers, especially limbaugh listeners, saying his listeners are sheep, and are brainwashed...

I just think that is an unjust, invalid, and unsupport generalization of MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of people....

and frankly the tone is one of superiorority over the lowly sheep that listen to rush.

Completely and utterly false.

Can we go back and look at the threads about Michael Moore, or all the liberale websites, or Cyndi Sheehan, etc?

And to be perfectly frank, there have been threads on topics like the Middle East, or Global Warming and others, where conservatives have come in with some pretty stock, cliche'd talking points, only to be completely beaten down because there were actually people on the board who are experts on the subject, in one way or another.

A non-controversial case in point would be a number of threads where Uncle Traveling Jim came in to set the record straight about the Middle East. And he's not an Air America liberal, either. He just knows his stuff.

Sometimes, a person gets a beatdown because the facts presented are just completely wrong. That has nothing at all to do with political leanings and everything to do with the fact that facts are facts.

 

[inetnawlins]

I find complete hilarity in the idea that the EE is somehow dominated by "the left".

Moderates? Probably. However, this "conservatives get ganged up on" stuff is nonsense. Ideologues get hit by all sides because the EE, more than most other places, is free minded turf. A leftist ideologue is just as likely to get an intellectual beatdown here as a right wing one. However, since this is a board comprised almost entirely of southern white males there just aren't many of those.

It's not about conservative or liberal it's about being able to express your self in a succinct way. LSSPAM is one of the strongest defenders of the war on this board. He doesn't whine about getting ganged up on when Reb and adder are going at him because he's able to express himself and his own thoughts effectively. dapperdan is about as rightwing as you'll find and is also one of the more respected posters here because of the wealth of knowledge he brings to almost any subject. Same can be said for guys like Inkspot and Sparkle.

It's not a conservative thing, it's a thinking thing.

lus-un2:

It is interesting that some conservatives who claim to represent the pull yourself up from the bootstraps mentality are often the quickest to claim victim status.

When someone disagrees with you, it isn't liberal bias, it is difference of opinion being freely expressed. That is what America was founded on. However, listening to hours of Rush or Fox News with no dissent can make you react oddly to the idea that others think differently than you.

State an opinion and defend it against one or many. This is freedom. Welcome to the internet and a forum not controlled by Clear Channel and conservative management.

 

[HouDat]

I listened religiously during my college days. He was edgy, irreverent, and there was distinction between Rush and the Republican party.

But somewhere around the time he got a TV show, he began a gradual phase shift into full-fledged shillery for the Republican party. At the time, I also listened to G. Gordon Liddy (whose show I loved for the unique "been there, done that, here's what you're missing" perspective; not to mention his thorough disregard for BS political correctness convention).

At any rate, Rush jumped the proverbial shark years ago. I think the last time I listened was either the '04 election or his drug issue, whichever of those was most recent. Before that, it was the week or so after 9/11.

Nowadays the only talk radio I listen to is Sirius NFL Network.

 

[Shawn]

So a conservative who will defend Rush limbaugh is not a smart conservative?
Are they sheep as well?

You putting words in my mouth, and frankly, you're whining.

I never used the word sheep.

If I defend a statement made by Rosie O'Donnell or Jeremiah Wright, does that make me a sheep?

I will say this: Rush is a light weight. He's a radio personality, and he makes good points about things, just like Dr. Phil sometimes makes good points about things. But no, I can't rationally mention him in the same breath as George Will, much less more brilliant conservative heavy hitters.

 

[SWJJ]

No one even addresses my points...

People have REPEATEDILY called rush limbaugh supporters Sheep, and say that they take thier marching orders directly from him.

I am simply saying this is not a FAIR STATEMENT!

I am not whining about the vast liberal media, or some conspiracy by the media to twist things left.;


I am saying these are completely unfair implications about conservatives that support limbaugh.

Shawn was even so bold as to imply defneding Rush makes you a stupid conservative,


none of these statements are valid and no attempt at validating these statements have been made,

instead they all say I am whining...

Whatever.....


yet these are the "great debaters" of the EE?

pulease...

 

[purvis_guy]

The responses to SWJJ's posts are making his points completely...

 

[SWJJ]

You putting words in my mouth, and frankly, you're whining.

I never used the word sheep.

If I defend a statement made by Rosie O'Donnell or Jeremiah Wright, does that make me a sheep?

I will say this: Rush is a light weight. He's a radio personality, and he makes good points about things, just like Dr. Phil sometimes makes good points about things. But no, I can't rationally mention him in the same breath as George Will, much less more brilliant conservative heavy hitters.

BUT SHAWN,

If you wouod read more than the one post you quoted, This thread was inspired by another thread linked in the first post.

In that thread Rush supporters were called sheep. Thats what I HAVE BEEN OBJECTING to.

instead like usual you come in a make a generalization on a half arsed understanding of what the discussion is on and cant wait for the first chance to throw a one liner or a zinger about any number of conservative posters that you have disdain for, and add absoultely nothing of value to a discussion.

 

[Shawn]

No one even addresses my points...

People have REPEATEDILY called rush limbaugh supporters Sheep, and say that they take thier marching orders directly from him.

I am simply saying this is not a FAIR STATEMENT!

I am not whining about the vast liberal media, or some conspiracy by the media to twist things left.;


I am saying these are completely unfair implications about conservatives that support limbaugh.

Shawn was even so bold as to imply defneding Rush makes you a stupid conservative,


none of these statements are valid and no attempt at validating these statements have been made,

instead they all say I am whining...

Whatever.....


yet these are the "great debaters" of the EE?

pulease...

This is a thread killer. You have brass one's accusing people of not addressing your points. It's a return of the old "Sportswriter" JJ, I suppose.

I never said defending Rush made anyone a sheep, which you keep repeating over and over (it's your catchphrase by the way, that YOU use on most of your posts). What I said, was that the best conservative posters on this site seem no more concerned about Rush or Coulter, than the best liberal posters seem concerned about Al Franken.

If I'm going to play junior psychiatrist here, it seems to me like you're up in arms because you're a fan of Rush.

Fine. But don't keep putting words in people's mouths.

 

[Saint Mike]

I listen to Rush just about every day. I do not take marching orders from Rush, nor are my views shaped by Rush. Rather, my previously existing political leanings are similar to those espoused by Rush. His show is entertaining and I enjoy it.

 

[Shawn]

BUT SHAWN,

If you wouod read more than the one post you quoted, This thread was inspired by another thread linked in the first post.

In that thread Rush supporters were called sheep. Thats what I HAVE BEEN OBJECTING to.

instead like usual you come in a make a generalization on a half arsed understanding of what the discussion is on and cant wait for the first chance to throw a one liner or a zinger about any number of conservative posters that you have disdain for, and add absoultely nothing of value to a discussion.

It's two different threads, for one.

I've read the thread, I understand the topic. I'm defending, and enjoy the posts of many conservative members of the board.

You are the one on a soapbox about being mistreated. Show me where I've taken the thread off topic? Topics drift, and somehow this become a siren song of "woe-is-me, conservative points of view aren't tolerated on the board."

I'm not the only one to point out that it's not true. So don't single me out.

 

[TPS]

Point 1: SWJJ, would you deny that about 2 years ago, you busted out the victim card on behalf of Chrsitians? /j

>>I disagree. I know that all views may take an "intellectual beatdown" but it is the overall tone that rightwingers are simply "sheep" and that they are not freethinkers. Implications are rampant that they "get thier marching orders" or "are brainwashed" just in these two threads. And then when this is pointed out we get accussed of whining.

A couple of additional points:

1) Consider the source (e.g. those posters whom I will not name for fear of a +10). Many of them are individuals who have adopted partisan ideology and are therefore idealogues and/or partisans. When you look at more moderate posters (right leaning, middle or left leaning) you are dealing with individuals who have generally not adopted ideology and are instead looking at issues. If one is an idealogue or a partisan, one has already adopted someone else's set of standards and beliefs as their own. How you don't view this to be "sheepishness" is suspect if not downright absurd. True, leftists/liberals/Democrats who follow partisanship or ideology are the same as the rightists/conservatives/Republicans. But you won't see as many of them quite so closed minded. I'll point some examples here - Rubberneck (a card-carrying Democrat) and gavinj (probably near or at the Top [tm] of EE posters). Rubberneck is going to use Democratic talking points pretty frequently, but if you get him to address specific issues, he's not throwing the Al Frankin equivallent of O'Reilly, Rush, Sean Hannity or Michael Savage back at you. As SBTB already noted, often you've already heard Host X make that very point earlier in the day, and then Poster Rightwinger X throws it back without so much of a credit and therefore is, apparently, adopting that viewpoint as his or her own.

Bottom line on this is that liberals/leftists/Democrats tend to show a greater separation between themselves and their party/ideology. On the other hand, many on the right - and particularly here on EE - demonstrate over and over again that they are little more than rubber stamps for the talking points they get from their party, talk radio hosts and ideology. I would invite you to take a step back from yourself and look at it objectively. Only the most dishonest or agenda driven poster will not be able to find exactly what it is that I'm talking about.

The Truth [tm].

TPS

 

[SWJJ]

Point 1: SWJJ, would you deny that about 2 years ago, you busted out the victim card on behalf of Chrsitians? /j

>>I disagree. I know that all views may take an "intellectual beatdown" but it is the overall tone that rightwingers are simply "sheep" and that they are not freethinkers. Implications are rampant that they "get thier marching orders" or "are brainwashed" just in these two threads. And then when this is pointed out we get accussed of whining.

A couple of additional points:

1) Consider the source (e.g. those posters whom I will not name for fear of a +10). Many of them are individuals who have adopted partisan ideology and are therefore idealogues and/or partisans. When you look at more moderate posters (right leaning, middle or left leaning) you are dealing with individuals who have generally not adopted ideology and are instead looking at issues. If one is an idealogue or a partisan, one has already adopted someone else's set of standards and beliefs as their own. How you don't view this to be "sheepishness" is suspect if not downright absurd. True, leftists/liberals/Democrats who follow partisanship or ideology are the same as the rightists/conservatives/Republicans. But you won't see as many of them quite so closed minded. I'll point some examples here - Rubberneck (a card-carrying Democrat) and gavinj (probably near or at the Top [tm] of EE posters). Rubberneck is going to use Democratic talking points pretty frequently, but if you get him to address specific issues, he's not throwing the Al Frankin equivallent of O'Reilly, Rush, Sean Hannity or Michael Savage back at you. As SBTB already noted, often you've already heard Host X make that very point earlier in the day, and then Poster Rightwinger X throws it back without so much of a credit and therefore, apparently, adopting that viewpoint as his or her own.

Bottom line on this is that liberals/leftists/Democrats tend to show a greater separation between themselves and their party/ideology. Many of these people are Pro Death Penalty and may even be completely Pro 2nd Amendment. On the other hand, many on the right - and particularly here on EE - demonstrate over and over again that they are little more than rubber stamps for the talking points they get from their party, talk radio hosts and ideology. I would invite you to take a step back from yourself and look at it objectively. Only the most dishonest or agenda driven poster will not be able to find exactly what it is that I'm talking about.

The Truth [tm].

TPS

I dont deny that TPS, Guilty as charged.

But again, the implication that rush listeners are brainwashed is a generalization, aqnd an UNFAIR ATTACK on anyone who defends rush.

I dont agree with Rush Lock step, or maybe not even a large majority.

I think Rush is a bigoty for touting "conservative principles" and living his playboy lifestyle and popping pain pills.

I think Rush is an egotistical blowhard.

BUT I listen to Rush, and am a fan, I enjoy his show, his parodies, and his insight.

That does not make me brainwashed and is an unfair generalization, in this instance.