Thread: How Limbaugh Manipulates Listeners

O'Reilly is a Harvard grad.

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

O'Reilly is a Harvard grad.

And makes a lot more money than Maddow & Olbermann combined...

^ As are his ratings at least double theirs.

TV is TV.

It's for the sheeple. Regardless of viewpoints or what sides of the aisle.

TV is bad.

Originally Posted by Milkman

TV is TV.

It's for the sheeple. Regardless of viewpoints or what sides of the aisle.

TV is bad.

TV as in telly or Thai Visa? And, erm, Rush ain't on TV.

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

O'Reilly is a Harvard grad

That he is, he has an MPA. He's also the least incredible of the Right wing commentators I listed.

Originally Posted by sabang

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

O'Reilly is a Harvard grad

That he is, he has an MPA. He's also the least incredible of the Right wing commentators I listed.

You left several of those most noteworthy off of your list. Wonder why?

^ I listed those that, in my perception are the most prominent- which unfortunately means the most vociferous, given the lowbrow direction that the GOP has followed.

You are more than welcome to add equally prominent Conservative commentators that have some intellectual credibility- in fact I welcome it. I could only think of George Will.

Originally Posted by sabang

^ I listed those that, in my perception are the most prominent- which unfortunately means the most vociferous, given the lowbrow direction that the GOP has followed.

You are more than welcome to add equally prominent Conservative commentators that have some intellectual credibility- in fact I welcome it. I could only think of George Will.

Will (Pulitzer Prize winner, University of Oxford - B.A. M.A, Princeton M.A. and Ph.D. degrees in politics and has taught at Harvard) is at the top of my list (big surprise for anyone who has read my posts) Newt Gingrich (M.A. and Ph.D in Modern European History - Tulane University), Mitt Romney (graduated with a joint Juris Doctor/MBA from Harvard Law School and Harvard Business School), Mark Levin (B.A. Phi Beta Kappa, magnum cum laude, and J.D. Temple University), Judge Andrew Napalitono (Princeton and Notre Dame Law School).

Not to worry, the left has Jane Fonda and Ariena Huffington!

Ya, where did Arianna get her money again?

She married a bisexual Getty. Huff Post does OK too.

It must have seemed so perfect. An obscure blogger unearths some pages of President Obama's college thesis. The report supposedly comes from big-time journalist Joe Klein of Time magazine. And the thesis has some real gems: like Obama's disdain for the Constitution.

The whole thing was nothing more than a satirical post on a humor blog. But Rush Limbaugh, who quoted from the supposed thesis on his radio show, sure wasn't laughing. Here's how it went down.

An unknown blogger picked up on a made-up post meant as a joke, which claimed that Joe Klein had gotten his hands on 10 pages of student Obama's college thesis. Rush Limbaugh jumped on it, which immediately sparked Web searches on "obama thesis."

Supposedly titled "Aristocracy Revisited," the excerpt revealed the president had "doubts" about the "so-called founders." Juicy. Except not true. Limbaugh discovered halfway through his show that he'd been had, but defended himself by saying basically the thesis felt true.

The Buzz Log - Rush Was Punked: “Obama Thesis� Hoax - Yahoo! Buzz


What a Bimbo.
Can't he afford researchers?

Originally Posted by sabang

basically the thesis felt true.

Good enough for me. Rush fools in where wise men fear to tread.

^^ here it is,...........starts 1:00 into the vid

^"We stand by the fabricated quote because we know Obama thinks it anyway" WTF!? That man has no shame. Worse, he clearly has no respect for any of his audience knowing they'll swallow such nonsense.

That pretty much nicely sums up must of the right-wing posters on here too: they want to believe, are so desperate to believe, that they'll swallow anything thrown their way and only too happily repeat it verbatim as the 'truth'.

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

^"We stand by the fabricated quote because we know Obama thinks it anyway" WTF!? That man has no shame. Worse, he clearly has no respect for any of his audience knowing they'll swallow such nonsense.

That pretty much nicely sums up must of the right-wing posters on here too: they want to believe, are so desperate to believe, that they'll swallow anything thrown their way and only too happily repeat it verbatim as the 'truth'.

CLearly borrowed a page from the Dan Blather play book. Not good to copy the offences of the left. Doesn't really suit the right.

This was Rather's response once the documents were proven to be a hoax: "If I knew then what I know now, I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question."

Compare and contrast;

Limbaugh: "We stand by the fabricated quote because we know Obama thinks it anyway".

If you're looking to make any sort of valid comparison then you're going to have to do better than that.

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

This was Rather's response once the documents were proven to be a hoax: "If I knew then what I know now, I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question."

Compare and contrast;

Limbaugh: "We stand by the fabricated quote because we know Obama thinks it anyway".

If you're looking to make any sort of valid comparison then you're going to have to do better than that.

Blather's response was after he was facing termination. I do not condone EITHER side putting out false information - such as the falacious quotes attributed to Rush by the left. It's clear bush-league tactics.
Now, in this case Rush was definitely wrong, but are you able to acept that wrongs have also been perpetrated by the left, or is it your view that the left can do no wrong?

priceless,

they should make up their mind, is a socialist or an elitist ? fuck for all we know, he could be a royalist !!!

Now, in this case Rush was definitely wrong, but are you able to acept that wrongs have also been perpetrated by the left, or is it your view that the left can do no wrong?

You see this is what I'm talking about, the strawmen and shifting of the posts. What I can or can't, or do or don't, accept is entirely irrelevant; as is your comparison in a thread about Limbaugh where the current topic is addressing this particular stuff-up on his part.

Who cares what Rather or anyone else has done, it's beside the point and has already been discussed to death so why do you feel the need to rehash it now? Would you argue that a murderer is excused because others have committed murder too.

So what's the point of it if not only to distract and divert?

I just think it's funny as fuck Rush got punked. He's a truly vile, repugnant individual.

Originally Posted by venturalaw

Now, in this case Rush was definitely wrong, but are you able to acept that wrongs have also been perpetrated by the left, or is it your view that the left can do no wrong?

Lefites? Never. They ignore or pooh-pooh the truth. I imagine Rush's producer is not in good graces at the mo.

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

Originally Posted by venturalaw

Now, in this case Rush was definitely wrong, but are you able to acept that wrongs have also been perpetrated by the left, or is it your view that the left can do no wrong?

Lefites? Never. They ignore or pooh-pooh the truth. I imagine Rush's producer is not in good graces at the mo.

What relevance to this does that 'truth' have then Jet?

The discussion is about Limbaugh, not what Dan Rather did ages ago and what I or others think of it. It's just an irrelevant distraction and diversion barely even analogous, which also - ironically enough given what you've said - is "ignoring and pooh-poohing" the truth on this occasion.