Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: caver; Pelham; golux
Pelham, thanks for the stirring defense, and allow me to add a craven sort of explanation.

It was brought to my attention that what I thought to be a startlingly brilliant original aperçu, had been aired at sometime in the past by one Rush Limbaugh, to whom I have not listened for some years.

"Why?" one might reasonably ask. Well, I'll tell you some of the reasons:
Limbaugh is a brilliant broadcaster. I have experience in the business and he is among the greats. No, make that The Immortals.
However, as a member of the choir, there is only so much preaching that I can handle; so many blinding glimpses of the obvious.
I know just how bad the Democrat Party is. Knew that in the '50s.
I know that Obama is a Marxist ... even if not a very bright one.
I know the massive harm he has already wreaked upon the nation and fear what is to come.

But what I now expect from "Right Wing Radio" is not a further discussion of personalities and symptoms, but some hint of solution. I also blame "right wing radio" for disseminating a miasma of despair among certain blocs who, although they listen to right wing radio all gd day, have been discouraged from even voting! Perhaps the right wing hosts, IMNVHO, are now the "nattering nabobs of negativity," whom Spiro Agnew decried.

Specifics:
During that long period when Rush claimed that "illegal immigration was merely the sign of a strong economy," and California among other states in which I operated began their tragic descent into the Third World, I became suspicious. This was only one of the areas in which Rush seemed to be an establishment wannabe ... and as it turns out, that was during his addiction to prescription drugs and resultant deafness ... both since openly and sincerely rectified, much to his credit. But for me, the damage was done.

In 2007 and 8, Rush Limbaugh NEVER managed to cover the constitutional objections to Obama's first candidacy ... not that I sought his advocacy. He is not alone in this, of course, but I found it bizarre that not one talk show host, especially he, would not even mention it as an item of interest. Ditto the work of the Cold Case Posse.
I can accept Rush as a necessarily cautious, and fabulously successful businessman. But slap my butt and call me Snobby, former rock'n'roll disc jockeys ain't never gonna be my first choice for go-to political philosophers.

Now I am given to understand that Rush Limbaugh is brilliantly re-branded as a staunch anti-establishment conservative sympathizer.

Cool. But we don't need sympathy, boys. We need a Program, a Plan, and a Leader.

BTW, speaking of the Constitution, Mark Levin has somewhat atoned for his past sins (which are similar to those enumerated above) by actually recommending a positive step: A Constitutional Convention of the States. Program? Plan? Leader?

Let's all take a grain of salt here and realize that these entertainers have done some good. But, let's own up to the fact that as capitalists ourselves we can realize that they are in the business of selling radio time, not saving our Republic. That's our job. Entertainment may well be a distraction.

54 posted on 01/02/2014 8:36:27 AM PST by Kenny Bunk (This GOP is dead. What do we do now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]


To: Kenny Bunk

“During that long period when Rush claimed that “illegal immigration was merely the sign of a strong economy,” and California among other states in which I operated began their tragic descent into the Third World, I became suspicious. “

I was more furious than suspicious, living at Ground Zero of the Third World tidal wave. Limbaugh has always been quite open about success, financial success, being his first interest. It never surprised me to find him brown nosing the Chamber of Commerce and other treasonous elites, the GOP establishment especially.

Limbaugh has never once spoken of doing grunt work on a political campaign in the days before he became rich, and I’m sure that that’s because he never did. Politics wasn’t his passion. He was interested, but not enough to even bother to vote until well into his 30s.

So while he’s a great broadcaster he’s not a political thinker. He may accidentally help some of us on occasion by using his bully pulpit. I’d rather have him speaking out against Amnesty 20 years late than helping the other side, which he used to do and the foolish Hannity still does.

So if any significant change is going to come it won’t be from ‘our’ media celebrities, who will be too busy trying to make money- funny how the Right managed to get Reagan elected with the only media celebrity being Reagan himself.


57 posted on 01/02/2014 10:32:38 PM PST by Pelham (Obamacare, the vanguard of Obammunism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson