Is Rush Limbaugh Over-Paid?
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
Moore genuinely earns what he creates.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
My point isn't about Heston or even gun rights but about Micheal Moore's integrity as a maker of "documentaries". The Heston distortion was just one in a long string of untruths and misleading set pieces that he's put together over the years, right down to his own background (he's not really from Flint). His movies might be entertaining if you agree with what he has to say, but they should rightly be shelved in the fiction section at the videostore. Sure, Moore might be marginally more subtle than Limbaugh, but they're in different medias with different audiences and have different strengths; we don't know what a Michael Moore radio show or a Rush Limbaugh movie might look like.
Dox47, Limbaugh actually does do research for his show, and in all honesty the left provides so much material that he doesn't have to make anything up.
Limbaugh researching? Like when he said that there are more American Indians alive today than there were when Columbus arrived in the New World? Or when he said Obama didn't have a birth certificate?
Moore may have a slanted view of the world, but I'm more likely to believe anything he said over Limbaugh.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Moore genuinely earns what he creates.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
My point isn't about Heston or even gun rights but about Micheal Moore's integrity as a maker of "documentaries". The Heston distortion was just one in a long string of untruths and misleading set pieces that he's put together over the years, right down to his own background (he's not really from Flint). His movies might be entertaining if you agree with what he has to say, but they should rightly be shelved in the fiction section at the videostore. Sure, Moore might be marginally more subtle than Limbaugh, but they're in different medias with different audiences and have different strengths; we don't know what a Michael Moore radio show or a Rush Limbaugh movie might look like.
Dox47, Limbaugh actually does do research for his show, and in all honesty the left provides so much material that he doesn't have to make anything up.
Limbaugh researching? Like when he said that there are more American Indians alive today than there were when Columbus arrived in the New World? Or when he said Obama didn't have a birth certificate?
When did he say those things and again I want sources.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Moore isn't on the air 2-3 hours a day 5 days a week, anyone talking that much per day is going to say something stupid once in a while.
Moore genuinely earns what he creates.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
My point isn't about Heston or even gun rights but about Micheal Moore's integrity as a maker of "documentaries". The Heston distortion was just one in a long string of untruths and misleading set pieces that he's put together over the years, right down to his own background (he's not really from Flint). His movies might be entertaining if you agree with what he has to say, but they should rightly be shelved in the fiction section at the videostore. Sure, Moore might be marginally more subtle than Limbaugh, but they're in different medias with different audiences and have different strengths; we don't know what a Michael Moore radio show or a Rush Limbaugh movie might look like.
Dox47, Limbaugh actually does do research for his show, and in all honesty the left provides so much material that he doesn't have to make anything up.
Limbaugh researching? Like when he said that there are more American Indians alive today than there were when Columbus arrived in the New World? Or when he said Obama didn't have a birth certificate?
When did he say those things and again I want sources.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Moore isn't on the air 2-3 hours a day 5 days a week, anyone talking that much per day is going to say something stupid once in a while.
exactly theyare entertainers and should not be used for political information.
they both preach exclusively to the choir, boring.
infact no none with a talkshow or that works for a network left or right should be seen
as a valid political figure.
_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??
http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/
Moore genuinely earns what he creates.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
My point isn't about Heston or even gun rights but about Micheal Moore's integrity as a maker of "documentaries". The Heston distortion was just one in a long string of untruths and misleading set pieces that he's put together over the years, right down to his own background (he's not really from Flint). His movies might be entertaining if you agree with what he has to say, but they should rightly be shelved in the fiction section at the videostore. Sure, Moore might be marginally more subtle than Limbaugh, but they're in different medias with different audiences and have different strengths; we don't know what a Michael Moore radio show or a Rush Limbaugh movie might look like.
Dox47, Limbaugh actually does do research for his show, and in all honesty the left provides so much material that he doesn't have to make anything up.
Limbaugh researching? Like when he said that there are more American Indians alive today than there were when Columbus arrived in the New World? Or when he said Obama didn't have a birth certificate?
When did he say those things and again I want sources.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Moore isn't on the air 2-3 hours a day 5 days a week, anyone talking that much per day is going to say something stupid once in a while.
exactly theyare entertainers and should not be used for political information.
they both preach exclusively to the choir, boring.
infact no none with a talkshow or that works for a network left or right should be seen
as a valid political figure.
So in other words you want to trample on the 1st Amendment is that it, define unbiased. There is no unbiased source out there.
Moore genuinely earns what he creates.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
My point isn't about Heston or even gun rights but about Micheal Moore's integrity as a maker of "documentaries". The Heston distortion was just one in a long string of untruths and misleading set pieces that he's put together over the years, right down to his own background (he's not really from Flint). His movies might be entertaining if you agree with what he has to say, but they should rightly be shelved in the fiction section at the videostore. Sure, Moore might be marginally more subtle than Limbaugh, but they're in different medias with different audiences and have different strengths; we don't know what a Michael Moore radio show or a Rush Limbaugh movie might look like.
Dox47, Limbaugh actually does do research for his show, and in all honesty the left provides so much material that he doesn't have to make anything up.
Limbaugh researching? Like when he said that there are more American Indians alive today than there were when Columbus arrived in the New World? Or when he said Obama didn't have a birth certificate?
When did he say those things and again I want sources.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Moore isn't on the air 2-3 hours a day 5 days a week, anyone talking that much per day is going to say something stupid once in a while.
exactly they are entertainers and should not be used for political information.
they both preach exclusively to the choir, boring.
infact no one with a talkshow or that works for a network left or right should be seen
as a valid political figure.
So in other words you want to trample on the 1st Amendment is that it, define unbiased. There is no unbiased source out there.
what !? did you read what I said? I did not even use the word unbiased (actually I'm agnostic that such a thing exists)
this is a straw man that does not even have a connection to the argument.
the 1st amendment? wtf are you talking about?
they both fill the function of blowing complimentary smoke.
tv personalities should not be seen as political figures.
actors don't make good presidents.
_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??
http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
Moore genuinely earns what he creates.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
My point isn't about Heston or even gun rights but about Micheal Moore's integrity as a maker of "documentaries". The Heston distortion was just one in a long string of untruths and misleading set pieces that he's put together over the years, right down to his own background (he's not really from Flint). His movies might be entertaining if you agree with what he has to say, but they should rightly be shelved in the fiction section at the videostore. Sure, Moore might be marginally more subtle than Limbaugh, but they're in different medias with different audiences and have different strengths; we don't know what a Michael Moore radio show or a Rush Limbaugh movie might look like.
Dox47, Limbaugh actually does do research for his show, and in all honesty the left provides so much material that he doesn't have to make anything up.
Limbaugh researching? Like when he said that there are more American Indians alive today than there were when Columbus arrived in the New World? Or when he said Obama didn't have a birth certificate?
When did he say those things and again I want sources.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Moore isn't on the air 2-3 hours a day 5 days a week, anyone talking that much per day is going to say something stupid once in a while.
I'm going by memory about what Limbaugh said. But I'm afraid I'm not so pathologically enthralled by the man that I'm going to remember each and every date of his statements.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Moore genuinely earns what he creates.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
My point isn't about Heston or even gun rights but about Micheal Moore's integrity as a maker of "documentaries". The Heston distortion was just one in a long string of untruths and misleading set pieces that he's put together over the years, right down to his own background (he's not really from Flint). His movies might be entertaining if you agree with what he has to say, but they should rightly be shelved in the fiction section at the videostore. Sure, Moore might be marginally more subtle than Limbaugh, but they're in different medias with different audiences and have different strengths; we don't know what a Michael Moore radio show or a Rush Limbaugh movie might look like.
Dox47, Limbaugh actually does do research for his show, and in all honesty the left provides so much material that he doesn't have to make anything up.
Limbaugh researching? Like when he said that there are more American Indians alive today than there were when Columbus arrived in the New World? Or when he said Obama didn't have a birth certificate?
When did he say those things and again I want sources.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Moore isn't on the air 2-3 hours a day 5 days a week, anyone talking that much per day is going to say something stupid once in a while.
exactly they are entertainers and should not be used for political information.
they both preach exclusively to the choir, boring.
infact no one with a talkshow or that works for a network left or right should be seen
as a valid political figure.
So in other words you want to trample on the 1st Amendment is that it, define unbiased. There is no unbiased source out there.
what !? did you read what I said? I did not even use the word unbiased (actually I'm agnostic that such a thing exists)
I'm pointing out that every news outlet is going to be left or right leaning.
Actually it isn't a strawman, right now Rush Limbaugh has more credibility than several media outlets including the New York Times.
The fact you seem to want Mr. Limbaugh taken off the air because you can't stand his opinions.
No, they don't Limbaugh doesn't stoop to the level many on the left do.
I'm sure certain TV Personalities don't want to be political figures (example: Glenn Beck), however that doesn't mean they should sit there and ignore people that are actively trying to destroy this country either (example: George Soros).
Ronald Reagan was a great President, he won the Cold War and brought about the implosion of the Soviet Union. Thing is Obama is trying to use the same tactics the Soviets tried that caused their collapse.
Actors can actually make good Presidents.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
Obama is pouring all the nation's wealth into defense at the expense of the infrastructure? That's how the Soviet Union actually collapsed.
As far as Limbaugh being more reliable than any other news source - and the other liberals on WP think you don't have a sense of humor.
As for a multi-billionaire like George Soros being out to destroy America - well, the Koch brothers have gotten him beat in that regard.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Moore genuinely earns what he creates.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
My point isn't about Heston or even gun rights but about Micheal Moore's integrity as a maker of "documentaries". The Heston distortion was just one in a long string of untruths and misleading set pieces that he's put together over the years, right down to his own background (he's not really from Flint). His movies might be entertaining if you agree with what he has to say, but they should rightly be shelved in the fiction section at the videostore. Sure, Moore might be marginally more subtle than Limbaugh, but they're in different medias with different audiences and have different strengths; we don't know what a Michael Moore radio show or a Rush Limbaugh movie might look like.
Dox47, Limbaugh actually does do research for his show, and in all honesty the left provides so much material that he doesn't have to make anything up.
Limbaugh researching? Like when he said that there are more American Indians alive today than there were when Columbus arrived in the New World? Or when he said Obama didn't have a birth certificate?
When did he say those things and again I want sources.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Moore isn't on the air 2-3 hours a day 5 days a week, anyone talking that much per day is going to say something stupid once in a while.
exactly they are entertainers and should not be used for political information.
they both preach exclusively to the choir, boring.
infact no one with a talkshow or that works for a network left or right should be seen
as a valid political figure.
So in other words you want to trample on the 1st Amendment is that it, define unbiased. There is no unbiased source out there.
what !? did you read what I said? I did not even use the word unbiased (actually I'm agnostic that such a thing exists)
I'm pointing out that every news outlet is going to be left or right leaning.
Actually it isn't a strawman, right now Rush Limbaugh has more credibility than several media outlets including the New York Times.
The fact you seem to want Mr. Limbaugh taken off the air because you can't stand his opinions.
No, they don't Limbaugh doesn't stoop to the level many on the left do.
I'm sure certain TV Personalities don't want to be political figures (example: Glenn Beck), however that doesn't mean they should sit there and ignore people that are actively trying to destroy this country either (example: George Soros).
Ronald Reagan was a great President, he won the Cold War and brought about the implosion of the Soviet Union. Thing is Obama is trying to use the same tactics the Soviets tried that caused their collapse.
Actors can actually make good Presidents.
oye - your brain it don't work good.
I never said the rush should be taken off the air.
I said he should not be taken seriously politicaly.
please, learn to read or have someone read to you.
you mistate on purpose to get a raise off of aspies.
you are a NT troll get a life.
_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??
http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/
Moore genuinely earns what he creates.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
My point isn't about Heston or even gun rights but about Micheal Moore's integrity as a maker of "documentaries". The Heston distortion was just one in a long string of untruths and misleading set pieces that he's put together over the years, right down to his own background (he's not really from Flint). His movies might be entertaining if you agree with what he has to say, but they should rightly be shelved in the fiction section at the videostore. Sure, Moore might be marginally more subtle than Limbaugh, but they're in different medias with different audiences and have different strengths; we don't know what a Michael Moore radio show or a Rush Limbaugh movie might look like.
Dox47, Limbaugh actually does do research for his show, and in all honesty the left provides so much material that he doesn't have to make anything up.
Limbaugh researching? Like when he said that there are more American Indians alive today than there were when Columbus arrived in the New World? Or when he said Obama didn't have a birth certificate?
When did he say those things and again I want sources.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Moore isn't on the air 2-3 hours a day 5 days a week, anyone talking that much per day is going to say something stupid once in a while.
exactly they are entertainers and should not be used for political information.
they both preach exclusively to the choir, boring.
infact no one with a talkshow or that works for a network left or right should be seen
as a valid political figure.
So in other words you want to trample on the 1st Amendment is that it, define unbiased. There is no unbiased source out there.
what !? did you read what I said? I did not even use the word unbiased (actually I'm agnostic that such a thing exists)
I'm pointing out that every news outlet is going to be left or right leaning.
Actually it isn't a strawman, right now Rush Limbaugh has more credibility than several media outlets including the New York Times.
The fact you seem to want Mr. Limbaugh taken off the air because you can't stand his opinions.
No, they don't Limbaugh doesn't stoop to the level many on the left do.
I'm sure certain TV Personalities don't want to be political figures (example: Glenn Beck), however that doesn't mean they should sit there and ignore people that are actively trying to destroy this country either (example: George Soros).
Ronald Reagan was a great President, he won the Cold War and brought about the implosion of the Soviet Union. Thing is Obama is trying to use the same tactics the Soviets tried that caused their collapse.
Actors can actually make good Presidents.
oye - your brain it don't work good.
I never said the rush should be taken off the air.
You implied he should be taken off the air.
If the information he is stating is accurate, then yeah he should be taken seriously.
Typical liberal elitist, always assuming people are somehow inferior because they don't agree with you. I was reading college level text books for fun by 8th grade.
It would be "rise" not "raise." Further you're really out of line, guess you can't handle the fact someone disagrees with you.
1. I am actually on the spectrum.
2. I am not a troll, I don't say things to anger people for amusement.
I find your arrogance and intolerance to be just plain sad, as much as you may wish for me to run around screaming that I somehow hate you, I don't. I pity you, that's right I feel sorry about the fact you can't face the concept that people whom are Conservative are not intellectually inferior to you and are also not evil. Seriously, I think many liberals are arrogant idiots with over-inflated opinions of themselves, but I don't think all of them are.
Rush Limbaugh, obviously gets under liberals' skin to the point that they react to him in hatred, try to smear him, etc. Well got news for liberals, their over-reacting (though I think he's actually hit too close to the truth for the radical left's comfort), actually adds to Rush Limbaugh's credibility.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I don't think that conservatives are intellectually inferior
I think you are.
(you don't like to hear other peoples arguments)
there are a long list of conservatives I think are quite bright
George Will
William F. Buckley sr.
David Brooks
Ernie Hancock
Shelby Steele
Jaun Williams
Barry Goldwater
.
.
.
on some strange occasions even Pat Buchanan.
notice that Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh are not on the list.
because they like you are not conservative thinkers they are rodeo clowns.
I used to work for the republican party (Bob Bennett's 1st campaign)
maybe you are on the spectrum
you don't seem to have a working theory of mind for who you are talking to.
you continually misread and mistate other peoples oppions.
(on purpose or because of a learning disorder ? I don't know)
but then again all of your arguments contain a emotional component.
fear, villification, conspiracy.
don't know not a headshrinker.
all I know is you undermine my oppionions of smart conservatives.
_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??
http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/
I don't think that conservatives are intellectually inferior
I think you are.
(you don't like to hear other peoples arguments)
there are a long list of conservatives I think are quite bright
George Will
William F. Buckley sr.
David Brooks
Ernie Hancock
Shelby Steele
Jaun Williams
Barry Goldwater
.
.
.
on some strange occasions even Pat Buchanan.
notice that Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh are not on the list.
because they like you are not conservative thinkers they are rodeo clowns.
I used to work for the republican party (Bob Bennett's 1st campaign)
maybe you are on the spectrum
you don't seem to have a working theory of mind for who you are talking to.
you continually misread and mistate other peoples oppions.
(on purpose or because of a learning disorder ? I don't know)
but then again all of your arguments contain a emotional component.
fear, villification, conspiracy.
don't know not a headshrinker.
all I know is you undermine my oppionions of smart conservatives.
While wikipedia claims George Will is a conservative, he's more center-left.
William Buckley Jr, died in 2008
David Brooks -- Are you referring to the man that works at the NY Times, if so he's a liberal trying to pretend he's a conservative which is probably why you like him.
Ernest Hancock is a libertarian that tried to run against John McCain in 2004 with no success. Guessing he is also for legalizing drugs (can't find much on him) so that's probably why you like him.
Shelby Steele -- Finally someone that is actually center-right.
Juan Williams is not a Conservative he's a liberal.
Barry Goldwater died in 1998
Of the people you claimed are conservatives 3 are liberals, 1 is center right, 1 is a libertarian, and 2 are deceased.
You just proved my point, you seem to think people are intellectually inferior to you because you don't agree with them.
I don't think that conservatives are intellectually inferior
I think you are.
(you don't like to hear other peoples arguments)
there are a long list of conservatives I think are quite bright
George Will
William F. Buckley sr.
David Brooks
Ernie Hancock
Shelby Steele
Jaun Williams
Barry Goldwater
.
.
.
on some strange occasions even Pat Buchanan.
notice that Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh are not on the list.
because they like you are not conservative thinkers they are rodeo clowns.
I used to work for the republican party (Bob Bennett's 1st campaign)
maybe you are on the spectrum
you don't seem to have a working theory of mind for who you are talking to.
you continually misread and mistate other peoples oppions.
(on purpose or because of a learning disorder ? I don't know)
but then again all of your arguments contain a emotional component.
fear, villification, conspiracy.
don't know not a headshrinker.
all I know is you undermine my oppionions of smart conservatives.
While wikipedia claims George Will is a conservative, he's more center-left.
William Buckley Jr, died in 2008
David Brooks -- Are you referring to the man that works at the NY Times, if so he's a liberal trying to pretend he's a conservative which is probably why you like him.
Ernest Hancock is a libertarian that tried to run against John McCain in 2004 with no success. Guessing he is also for legalizing drugs (can't find much on him) so that's probably why you like him.
Shelby Steele -- Finally someone that is actually center-right.
Juan Williams is not a Conservative he's a liberal.
Barry Goldwater died in 1998
Of the people you claimed are conservatives 3 are liberals, 1 is center right, 1 is a libertarian, and 2 are deceased.
You just proved my point, you seem to think people are intellectually inferior to you because you don't agree with them.
the way you used the word proved and the fact you think George Will is center left and Juan is a liberal implies you are a moron. Juan describes himself as center-right
_________________
?We must not look at goblin men,
We must not buy their fruits:
Who knows upon what soil they fed
Their hungry thirsty roots??
http://jakobvirgil.blogspot.com/
I don't think that conservatives are intellectually inferior
I think you are.
(you don't like to hear other peoples arguments)
there are a long list of conservatives I think are quite bright
George Will
William F. Buckley sr.
David Brooks
Ernie Hancock
Shelby Steele
Jaun Williams
Barry Goldwater
.
.
.
on some strange occasions even Pat Buchanan.
notice that Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh are not on the list.
because they like you are not conservative thinkers they are rodeo clowns.
I used to work for the republican party (Bob Bennett's 1st campaign)
maybe you are on the spectrum
you don't seem to have a working theory of mind for who you are talking to.
you continually misread and mistate other peoples oppions.
(on purpose or because of a learning disorder ? I don't know)
but then again all of your arguments contain a emotional component.
fear, villification, conspiracy.
don't know not a headshrinker.
all I know is you undermine my oppionions of smart conservatives.
While wikipedia claims George Will is a conservative, he's more center-left.
William Buckley Jr, died in 2008
David Brooks -- Are you referring to the man that works at the NY Times, if so he's a liberal trying to pretend he's a conservative which is probably why you like him.
Ernest Hancock is a libertarian that tried to run against John McCain in 2004 with no success. Guessing he is also for legalizing drugs (can't find much on him) so that's probably why you like him.
Shelby Steele -- Finally someone that is actually center-right.
Juan Williams is not a Conservative he's a liberal.
Barry Goldwater died in 1998
Of the people you claimed are conservatives 3 are liberals, 1 is center right, 1 is a libertarian, and 2 are deceased.
You just proved my point, you seem to think people are intellectually inferior to you because you don't agree with them.
the way you used the word proved and the fact you think George Will is center left and Juan is a liberal implies you are a moron. Juan describes himself as center-right
Juan Williams is only right wing when you compare him to the leftist fanatics at NPR and the New York Times. George Will works for Newsweek which is notoriously left wing, if he was really a conservative he would have been fired by now.
Juan Williams is only right wing when you compare him to the leftist fanatics at NPR and the New York Times. George Will works for Newsweek which is notoriously left wing, if he was really a conservative he would have been fired by now.
Maybe George Will is their "token conservative".
ruveyn
