Archive for Current Events
It has been a long time since this advice was offered by Rush Limbaugh.
To many it may seem like a dim distant memory. But a walk down memory lane may serve us well.
The advice came during the time following the 911 disaster and around the early days of the Iraq War.
Then President George W. Bush enjoyed sky high approval ratings. The country, for the most part, was solidly united behind our leader. We had survived a horrible terrorist attack and now it was payback time for the terrorists.
Our military had swooped into Afghanistan and routed the Taliban in short order.
Next, the president focused on Iraq. In those days, the Iraq War was going well.
Everything that President Bush touched seemed to turn to gold. “Shock and Awe” appeared to be working. Mr. Bush’s legislative agenda was rolling through Congress unimpeded. No democrat dared criticize the popular president.
It was during those days that Rush Limbaugh offered the president this piece of unsolicited advice: “Mr. President, since you can do no wrong you might as well do what’s right.”
By those words Rush meant that since everything the president attempted to do was meeting with success the President might as well carry out his party’s political agenda full bore.
And, Mr. Bush and Karl Rove heeded Limbaugh’s advice. The rest, as they say, is history.
Fast forward seven years.
Now, President Barack Obama enjoys sky high personal and political approval ratings.
He has met, so far at least, with considerable success in imposing his will on the legislative branch of government. Though the Republicans complain they can mount no counter-offensive capable of any reasonable likelihood of success.
In just a few short months Obama has fulfilled many of his campaign promises.
It is time for Barack Obama to heed the advice Rush Limbaugh offered to President Bush: “Mr. President, since you can do no wrong you might as well do what’s right.”
It is time for Barack Obama to earnestly forge ahead with his party’s political agenda while he has the wind at his back. And, while the Republicans are in disarray.
After all, despite what he says now, it’s what Rush Limbaugh expects you to do, Mr. President.
Please, Mr. President. Listen to Rush Limbaugh’s advice to George Bush. Let’s get on with it.
Some may be incensed that Muhammad Ali has been mentioned in the same sentence as Rush Limbaugh. Or vice-versa. There is a perfectly logical basis for this title. And, you will agree once you have read the whole post.
1. They Were the Best of Their Time
Muhammad Ali was arguably the greatest heavyweight boxer of all time; certainly of his era. Not only did he face and decisively defeat the reigning world champion, Sonny Liston; he faced, and defeated, all challengers before being stripped of his title when he refused to join the military during the Vietnam War.
Likewise, Rush Limbaugh, without a doubt, is the most listened-to radio talk show host of all time. There is no dispute about that. For over 20 years he has sat atop the world of American talk radio, “firmly ensconced in the prestigious EIB chair,” as he likes to boast. He has taken on all challengers and remains the most listened-to radio talk show host in America.
2. Their Careers Were Aided by Hate As Much as By Love
Hatred fueled much of Muhammad Ali’s popularity.
At the height of his popularity Ali fought before millions on television with thousands more watching at ringside. His was one of the most recognized faces on the planet.
And, still is.
But, not everyone watching was cheering for him.
Many in the crowd hated Ali. Passionately.
Some who watched Ali box hoped to see history live, or as near to it as they could afford. They wanted to see the “loudmouth” boxer brought down a notch–to see the “Louisville Lip” finally get what he deserved.
They wanted to see Muhammad Ali lose.
And, they wanted to be there when it happened.
Muhammad Ali was aware that not everyone in the crowds wanted to see him win. He turned their hate to his advantage.
What he wanted most was for them to pay to see him fight. And they did.
You see, not only was Ali a consumate fighter. He was also a brilliant self-promoter par excellence, with few equals in the world.
One person who is also a brilliant self-promoter and equal to Muhammad Ali is political commentator Rush Limbaugh.
While being no match for Ali physically, Limbaugh does compare favorably to Ali in the using-hatred-to-make-a-profit area.
Hatred fuels much of Rush Limbaugh’s popularity also.
- Rush Limbaugh is at the height of his popularity right now. Indeed, like Ali, his talent is rare.
- His audience is large.
- Not everyone who listens to his show shares his beliefs. And, he knows it.
- His main concern, again like Ali, is to get people inside the tent.
Many people listen to Rush Limbaugh because they disagree with what he says. Yet, they listen to hear firsthand the things he says. No doubt, many yell at their radios in response to some statement Rush just made that they know is inaccurate.
Rush is aware of this anger against him. In Salon’s April 1, 2009 article titled “Rusty and Me,” penned by Limbaugh’s cousin, Julie Limbaugh, Rush counts on hatred to spark his financial success. According to Julie Limbaugh:
Rush once told me, “The only way to make millions is for half the nation to hate you.” He told me this at his mom’s funeral when I was 13, and I think the reason he was talking business was because he was trying not to look so sad. It’s funny how the subject of half the nation hating him could effectively lighten his mood. I wanted to say, “But I don’t want half the nation to hate you.”
3. All Things Must Come to An End
Nobody remains champ forever. Muhammad Ali’s reign as the heavyweight champion of the world eventually came to an end. Like all those before him: John L. Sullivan, Jack Johnson, James J. Jeffries, Jess Willard, Gene Tunney, Max Schmeling, and Rocky Marciano–to name a few–and those who followed him, no one remains champion forever. Eventually, either the combined effect of landed blows, the gradual decline in physical prowess, some upstart challenger or Father Time will humble the greatest of champions.
Some championships end in voluntary resignation of the crown. But, few know when to give it up.
Muhammad Ali’s time has already come.
One day Rush Limbaugh will no longer be the top radio talk show host. His reign will, too, come to an end. Who his eventual succesor will be is not clear at this time. Some say Sean Hannity is the likely replacement for Rush.
Regardless, Rush will not be around forever. Perhaps he is grooming someone to take his place. Perhaps not.
- Both were the greatest of their time.
- Both their careers were aided by hatred as much as by love.
- Both will eventually be followed by someone greater.
Both of these great men will one day pass from center stage due to age, wear-and-tear, or decline in ability and/or popularity. Simply put: they will no longer be at the pinnacle of their profession.
One already has moved on. How much longer does Rush have?
Rush Limbaugh has been called many things in his career. But “daddy” was never one of them.
Jason Miller, in his K-State Collegian (Kansas) post, proposes that Rush Limbaugh is the “daddy” of the Republican Party right now.
In March, as the still leaderless Republicans frantically tried to demonstrate to the American people that their party was not completely broken, Limbaugh spoke at the 37th Conservative Political Action Conference, solidifying his position as daddy of the minority party.
Who knew Rush had it in him?
This raises the question: Since Rush Limbaugh is now the “daddy” of the Republican Party can he be hit with child neglect charges for failing to provide for the needs of his child? Such as
- Failure to provide discipline
- Failure to provide responsible leadership
- Failure to provide structure
- Failure to provide a nurturing environment with reasonable boundaries
As a result of Rush’s failure to meet his “child’s” needs, the child has failed to thrive and prosper.
I think Jason Miller may be onto something.
What do you think?
A blogger who goes by the name “Robbiebear” and who is an avid hunter and fisherman suspects sinister motives behind Rush Limbaugh’s decision to cut Public Service Announcements (PSAs) for the Humane Society for the United States (HSUS).
What sinister motive does this San Diego woodsman “Robbiebear” attribute to Rush’s diabolical liason with HSUS?
Cue the Twilight Zone music, please.
it for yourself.
The fact that most hunters and anglers are politically conservative tells me that something is going haywire here with Rush. Has the OxyContin finally rendered him “conservator bait” by frying one too many brain cells? Has he misunderstood what HSUS is truly about? Or is Rush just being Rush, in that he’s either been paid a truckload of greenbacks to parrot HSUS’ party line, or that he just does what he wants…and his listeners can go suck a salmon!
Give us your opinion: What do you think Rush is really up to?
To hear Rush’s Public Service Announcement #2 click here.
Give us your opinion:
If Rush had to choose between saving an animal or saving a liberal which would he choose and why?
___a. the animal
___b. the liberal
___d. both, but he would save the animal first.
Recently, in a speech given in acceptance of a talk radio industry award, Rush Limbaugh openly admitted that his number one priority as a broadcaster is not to influence policy or sway peoples’ opinions. Rather, his foremost priority every day is to attract as large an audience as possible, hold that audience as long as possible, and then deliver that audience to advertisers in exchange for large sums of money.
His admission comes at around the 3:40 minute mark.
From last year’s New York Times July 6th article titled Late-Period Limbaugh by Zez Chafets:
Limbaugh can afford to live the way he wants. When we met he was on the verge of signing a new eight-year contract with his syndicator, Premiere Radio Networks. He estimated that it would bring in about $38 million a year. To sweeten the deal, he said he was also getting a nine-figure signing bonus. (A representative from Premiere would not confirm the deal.) “Do you know what bought me all this?” he asked, waving his hand in the general direction of his prosperity. “Not my political ideas. Conservatism didn’t buy this house. First and foremost I’m a businessman. My first goal is to attract the largest possible audience so I can charge confiscatory ad rates. I happen to have great entertainment skills, but that enables me to sell airtime.”
How does Rush’s admission affect how you view his show? Does it change how you view him?
How do you feel about the statements that Rush Limbaugh makes on his radio talk show?
Do you think he makes outrageous statements simply to attract and hold an audience? Why or why not?
In the Old Testament book of Esther, the word “God” appears nowhere in the entire text.
Yet, behind the scenes one can discern the unseen hand of God influencing events.
In a similar fashion, Rush Limbaugh’s name appears nowhere in Kathleen Parker’s June 3, 2009 Washington Post column entitled “Carnival of the Fire-Breathers.”
One can’t help but think of Rush Limbaugh when reading the following paragraph of Parker’s column:
The GOP can’t control who joins the party, and Republicans don’t have a corner on random crazies. But what the Democrats have that the Republicans lack is a moderating voice to neutralize the party’s more strident characters. While Democrats have Obama, Republicans are stuck with the squeakiest wheel du jour.
Which character has been the squeakiest wheel of late from the Republican far right?
Which character has refused to moderate their tone while attempting to influence the nomination of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor?
Notwithstanding the fact that Parker’s piece was obstensibly about abortion, Rush Limbaugh’s presence still lurks in the background.
It appears that those who can not learn from history are indeed doomed to repeat it. In this instance, that would be Rush Limbaugh and the modern day Republican Party.
In an effort to remain “pure,” a local republican chapter in Wisconsin fired its spokesperson for being too “moderate.” Keith Olbermann explains it much better:
This is what New York Times op-ed columnist David Brooks wrote in his May 4, 2009 op-ed titled The Long Voyage Home:
If the Republicans are going to rebound, they will have to re-establish themselves as the party of civic order. First, they will have to stylistically decontaminate their brand. That means they will have to find a leader who is calm, prudent, reassuring and reasonable.
Brook’s statement leads to this set of questions:
- How did the Republican brand get contaminated?
- Who contaminated the Republican brand?
- Why do the Republicans need to find a leader if Rush Limbaugh is their leader?
- Why does the Republican party need to find a leader who is
- and reasonable
if Rush Limbaugh is all of these things already?
Are you listening, Rush?
Do you plan to kick David Brooks out of the Republican Party because of this op-ed piece, Rush?
Perhaps David Brooks foresaw the tumultuous talk Rush is tossing against Supreme Court nominee as chronicled at BarbinMD’s Daily Kos post ‘Racist Attacks Ramp Up Against Sotomayor’
Republican conservative Lloyd Marcus wants the media and all Americans–democrat, republican, conservative, and liberal–to stop beating up on Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Sean Hannity.
You can read Mr. Marcus’ entire article here.
EDITORIAL NOTE: Gordy did not write the title of Lloyd Marcus’ article. Presumably Lloyd Marcus did.
Like global warming, swine flu and everything else wrong in the world, racist, sexist and homophobe, Rush Limbaugh is largely responsible for who I am today. . . Folks, Rush especially, but you can include Hannity and Beck, are getting pretty beat up by the media, dems and even republicans. It is extremely critical that we stand by these guys. We need these brave patriot generals, if we are to win this battle against secular progressives and America hating leftists who seek to remake America in their own vile image.
Below is a video from http://www.errvideo.com that Lloyd Marcus references at his website: www.LloydMarcus.com