Rush Limbaugh - Most Accurate Man in Media

RandFan · 5th April 2007, 12:09 AM

By Consensus...The Most Accurate Man In Media

It's a member's only page. I found it googling. If anyone has access (yeah right) please to post a quote or two.

I haven't seen the page but I listened to Rush on the radio yesterday. Let me restate his... ah, argument.

Rush Limbaugh is the most listened to man in the media.
The consensus of those listeners is that Rush is the most accurate.
Therefore rush is the most accurate man in the media.
Those that doubt this conclusion are "Rush deniers".

Ok, clearly a fallacy so what's up?

Options:

He is just stupid and incapable of figuring out the fallacy.
His arrogance blinds him from seeing that his argument is embarrassingly fallacious.
He's taking a page from the AGW debate and he is mocking the argument that there is a consensus that AGW is real (never mind that the consensus is a consensus of EXPERTS).
He's taking a page from those who battle Holocaust deniers.

ETA: For the record I don't think he is too stupid to figure out that this is a fallacy. I'm also not sure about the ego option. I think it is 3 or 4, perhaps both with some degree of 3 of course.

a_unique_person · 5th April 2007, 01:39 AM

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...2155918AAbozKX

Quote:

I don't care what the show is, it's larger -- and by many, many multiples. As such, a "consensus" of American news consumers, by making me the most listened to media figure in the country, have therefore anointed me with also being the most accurate and the most right. There is a consensus of agreement among the American people that this is not only the most listened to program, but by virtue of that, it is also the most right. It is also the most accurate. It is also the most correct. Anybody else, people who disagree with this, are "Rush Deniers," and they are simply living in a dream world. They refuse to accept the truth. They refuse to see the truth for what it is, and I am going to become even less tolerant of the Rush Deniers than I have been up to now. A consensus of the American people, ladies and gentlemen, has made me not only the most listened to radio talk show host in America, but also the most accurate and the most correct.

Damn, he was almost there, then he had to ruin it all by making a stupid statement like that.

This Guy · 5th April 2007, 01:47 AM

OK, it's been years since I actually watched a complete issue of his show, but isn't that just his "style"? I always took those ramblings as intended exaggerations, blown up to the point that no one would take it serious, but see it as it was - blowing smoke.

Has he begun to believe his own hype now?

SezMe · 5th April 2007, 02:42 AM

RandFan, I think you have left out the most likely option:

4) Limbaugh is in the ratings business. Whatever boosts his ratings is good. Logic, clarity, fairness, balance, accuracy, data and honesty are all completely irrelvant to the pursuit of ratings.

So your finding him in your google search and our discussing him here all help him in his ratings game.

*sigh*

Just thinking · 5th April 2007, 04:18 AM

He jokes about himself all the time, knowing there are those out there that will get a rise out of it. To those that do, he simply laughs ... all the way to the bank.

Ex-drone · 5th April 2007, 04:50 AM

It's time for Rush to solidify his popularity. He should seriously consider moving his followers away from the corrupting influences of the unthinking in society who "refuse to accept the truth". There's a little property in Guyana, which he could call Rushtown, that he could get for a good price. I'll even help him pack.

BPSCG · 5th April 2007, 04:51 AM

Originally Posted by RandFan

He's taking a page from the AGW debate and he is mocking the argument that there is a consensus that AGW is real (never mind that the consensus is a consensus of EXPERTS).

Seems pretty clear to me that it's 3; he's making fun of people who claim that the issue of GW has been settled beyond any reasonable debate, and, as Just thinking points out, having some fun in the process.

BTW, he fell for that "tax on Wallonian barbecues" story yesterday. Turned out to be a hoax.

thinkingaboutit · 5th April 2007, 05:11 AM

Limbaugh has cultivated a following known as ditto-heads. 'Nuff said.

cgallaga · 5th April 2007, 05:21 AM

Been out of touch with Rush since before I moved here 13years ago, but I did read "the way things ought to be" long long ago. As I remember it, it was not an unreasonable book.

ETA I have no idea WTF this has to do with the OP

Ripley Twenty-Nine · 5th April 2007, 05:42 AM

Originally Posted by SezMe

RandFan, I think you have left out the most likely option:

4) Limbaugh is in the ratings business. Whatever boosts his ratings is good. Logic, clarity, fairness, balance, accuracy, data and honesty are all completely irrelvant to the pursuit of ratings.

So your finding him in your google search and our discussing him here all help him in his ratings game.

*sigh*

Exactly.

I lump Rush Limbaugh in the exact same category as Howard Stern.

I also think Rush Limbaugh's opinions on politics should carry as much weigh as Stern's.

a_unique_person · 5th April 2007, 06:07 AM

Originally Posted by Just thinking

He jokes about himself all the time, knowing there are those out there that will get a rise out of it. To those that do, he simply laughs ... all the way to the bank.

And those who think he's laughing with them, he's laughing at them.

hgc · 5th April 2007, 06:21 AM

By the same logic, Sanjaya Malakar will soon be shown to be America's best new singing talent.

Mephisto · 5th April 2007, 06:30 AM

Originally Posted by RandFan

By Consensus...The Most Accurate Man In Media

It's a member's only page. I found it googling. If anyone has access (yeah right) please to post a quote or two.

I haven't seen the page but I listened to Rush on the radio yesterday. Let me restate his... ah, argument.

Rush Limbaugh is the most listened to man in the media.
The consensus of those listeners is that Rush is the most accurate.
Therefore rush is the most accurate man in the media.
Those that doubt this conclusion are "Rush deniers".

Ok, clearly a fallacy so what's up?

Options:

He is just stupid and incapable of figuring out the fallacy.
His arrogance blinds him from seeing that his argument is embarrassingly fallacious.
He's taking a page from the AGW debate and he is mocking the argument that there is a consensus that AGW is real (never mind that the consensus is a consensus of EXPERTS).
He's taking a page from those who battle Holocaust deniers.

ETA: For the record I don't think he is too stupid to figure out that this is a fallacy. I'm also not sure about the ego option. I think it is 3 or 4, perhaps both with some degree of 3 of course.

Not much different than Howard Stern crowning himself King of All Media is it?

hgc · 5th April 2007, 06:42 AM

Originally Posted by Mephisto

Not much different than Howard Stern crowning himself King of All Media is it?

Howard Stern is funny. Rush is not. That's the difference to me. It's just like Rosie O'Donnell and her crapola. If only it was actually funny, it would be a lot more acceptable.

Freddy · 5th April 2007, 07:15 AM

Originally Posted by hgc

Howard Stern is funny. Rush is not. That's the difference to me. It's just like Rosie O'Donnell and her crapola. If only it was actually funny, it would be a lot more acceptable.

To each his own, I suppose. I find Rush amusing, but I don't take him seriously. Of course, I rarely listen to him, and I can see how his shtick would get old pretty quickly. The difference between him and Rosie is that he doesn't come across as perpetually angry and bitter. I do agree that he is no Howard Stern.

Just thinking · 5th April 2007, 09:33 AM

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

And those who think he's laughing with them, he's laughing at them.

I see you're an easy target.

ponderingturtle · 5th April 2007, 09:40 AM

Originally Posted by hgc

Howard Stern is funny. Rush is not. That's the difference to me. It's just like Rosie O'Donnell and her crapola. If only it was actually funny, it would be a lot more acceptable.

How many political claims does Stern make? He generaly spend more time talking to stripers and porn stars than talking about politics or making any sort of definite claim.

hgc · 5th April 2007, 10:17 AM

Originally Posted by ponderingturtle

How many political claims does Stern make? He generaly spend more time talking to stripers and porn stars than talking about politics or making any sort of definite claim.

He talks about politics a lot. Sure the strippers get more time, but with a >4 hours a day, that leaves plenty of time for politics. His views are often absurd, but then he's no different in that regard than the Fox News All Stars or even George Will. But he's usually cogent and funny.

(Haven't listened to him since he left regular radio, so I don't know what he does now.)

firecoins · 5th April 2007, 10:19 AM

Originally Posted by RandFan

.
He's taking a page from the AGW debate and he is mocking the argument that there is a consensus that AGW is real (never mind that the consensus is a consensus of EXPERTS)..

I heard his show. This seems to be correct.

firecoins · 5th April 2007, 10:21 AM

Originally Posted by Ripley Twenty-Nine

Exactly.

I lump Rush Limbaugh in the exact same category as Howard Stern.

I also think Rush Limbaugh's opinions on politics should carry as much weigh as Stern's.

I voted for Howard Stern when he ran for governor of NY.

hgc · 5th April 2007, 11:05 AM

Originally Posted by firecoins

I voted for Howard Stern when he ran for governor of NY.

One of us has a faulty memory. As I recall, he was picked at the Libertarians' nominating convention. But then he wasn't willing to do financial disclosure, and bailed out. So did you vote for him as a write-in?

(By the way, is the Libertarian Party a bigger joke for their NY party picking Stern or for the national party choosing Badnarik? I only say this because Stern is no libertarian, big or small letter L.)

Earthborn · 5th April 2007, 11:54 AM

Originally Posted by RandFan

If anyone has access (yeah right) please to post a quote or two.

I have access. That surprises you, right? I'm not the only on this who has access to it though. Everybody does. Switch off Javascript, or to not ruin your normal web experience, use a non-Javascript capable browser such as OffByOne. You'll immediately notice that the Rush Limbaugh website is surprisingly short on restrictions. And no, it is not hacking, it is refusing to be hacked.

You'd think that a $50 paysite would have better protection against unpaid snooping. There certainly are cheaper paysites on the web that do (though I won't link to any).

Jesus · 5th April 2007, 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by Mephisto

Not much different than Howard Stern crowning himself King of All Media is it?

To be accurate, that term was coined by then-sidekick Jackie Martling as a joking response to Michael Jackson's title of "King of Pop."

Stern does talk politics on Sirius, but as someone already mentioned, not many take his opinions seriously. One wonders why Limbaugh is taken seriously.

Dorian Gray · 5th April 2007, 08:34 PM

Stern has had a hit FM radio show, a hit movie, several bestselling books, several albums released by his alums, several successful pay-per-views, a successful (for E!) TV show, and now a successful satellite radio show. Short of having a magazine called H with him on the cover every month, he couldn't really NOT be the king of all media, now could he?

RandFan · 5th April 2007, 08:37 PM

Originally Posted by Dorian Gray

Stern has had a hit FM radio show, a hit movie, several bestselling books, several albums released by his alums, several successful pay-per-views, a successful (for E!) TV show, and now a successful satellite radio show. Short of having a magazine called H with him on the cover every month, he couldn't really NOT be the king of all media, now could he?

Nah. He's a jack of all trades and master of none.

To be king you've got to domniate at least two of the mix.

peptoabysmal · 5th April 2007, 08:50 PM

I listen often enough that I can tell you it is definitely number 3 from the OP. Rush often repeats the claim that there is no such thing as a consensus in science. It is straight out of Michael Crichton's Aliens Cause Global Warming.

Quote:

...
Ehrlich answered by saying "I think they are extremely robust. Scientists may have made statements like that, although I cannot imagine what their basis would have been, even with the state of science at that time, but scientists are always making absurd statements, individually, in various places. What we are doing here, however, is presenting a consensus of a very large group of scientists…"

I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.

Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.
...

JoeTheJuggler · 5th April 2007, 08:55 PM

Rush claims he is the most accurate. . hmmm, seems like a non-paradoxical version of the Liar's Paradox.

How about, "This cretin is a liar"?

5th April 2007, 12:09 AM	#1
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,263	Rush Limbaugh - Most Accurate Man in Media By Consensus...The Most Accurate Man In Media It's a member's only page. I found it googling. If anyone has access (yeah right) please to post a quote or two. I haven't seen the page but I listened to Rush on the radio yesterday. Let me restate his... ah, argument. Rush Limbaugh is the most listened to man in the media. The consensus of those listeners is that Rush is the most accurate. Therefore rush is the most accurate man in the media. Those that doubt this conclusion are "Rush deniers". Ok, clearly a fallacy so what's up? Options: He is just stupid and incapable of figuring out the fallacy. His arrogance blinds him from seeing that his argument is embarrassingly fallacious. He's taking a page from the AGW debate and he is mocking the argument that there is a consensus that AGW is real (never mind that the consensus is a consensus of EXPERTS). He's taking a page from those who battle Holocaust deniers. ETA: For the record I don't think he is too stupid to figure out that this is a fallacy. I'm also not sure about the ego option. I think it is 3 or 4, perhaps both with some degree of 3 of course.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith Last edited by RandFan; 5th April 2007 at 12:12 AM.

5th April 2007, 01:39 AM	#2
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Mt Disappointment Posts: 33,327	http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...2155918AAbozKX Quote: I don't care what the show is, it's larger -- and by many, many multiples. As such, a "consensus" of American news consumers, by making me the most listened to media figure in the country, have therefore anointed me with also being the most accurate and the most right. There is a consensus of agreement among the American people that this is not only the most listened to program, but by virtue of that, it is also the most right. It is also the most accurate. It is also the most correct. Anybody else, people who disagree with this, are "Rush Deniers," and they are simply living in a dream world. They refuse to accept the truth. They refuse to see the truth for what it is, and I am going to become even less tolerant of the Rush Deniers than I have been up to now. A consensus of the American people, ladies and gentlemen, has made me not only the most listened to radio talk show host in America, but also the most accurate and the most correct. Damn, he was almost there, then he had to ruin it all by making a stupid statement like that.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

5th April 2007, 01:47 AM	#3
This Guy Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: On the corner of WALK and DON'T WALK Posts: 2,000	OK, it's been years since I actually watched a complete issue of his show, but isn't that just his "style"? I always took those ramblings as intended exaggerations, blown up to the point that no one would take it serious, but see it as it was - blowing smoke. Has he begun to believe his own hype now?
	__________________ I'm lost. I've gone to find me. If I should return before I get back, please ask me to wait!

5th April 2007, 04:18 AM	#5
Just thinking Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: New Jersey Posts: 5,169	He jokes about himself all the time, knowing there are those out there that will get a rise out of it. To those that do, he simply laughs ... all the way to the bank.
	__________________ Our greatest challenge is not just to ask the important questions, but to recognize the meaningless ones.

5th April 2007, 04:51 AM	#7
BPSCG Cannibal Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Looting Fafner's Cave Posts: 17,556	Originally Posted by RandFan He's taking a page from the AGW debate and he is mocking the argument that there is a consensus that AGW is real (never mind that the consensus is a consensus of EXPERTS). Seems pretty clear to me that it's 3; he's making fun of people who claim that the issue of GW has been settled beyond any reasonable debate, and, as Just thinking points out, having some fun in the process. BTW, he fell for that "tax on Wallonian barbecues" story yesterday. Turned out to be a hoax.
	__________________ Philanthropist (n.) - Someone who spends his own money to advance his version of Utopia. Socialist (n.) - Someone who spends your money to advance his version of Utopia. Last edited by BPSCG; 5th April 2007 at 04:53 AM. Reason: cimmaron

5th April 2007, 02:42 AM	#4
SezMe post-pre-born Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 16,369	RandFan, I think you have left out the most likely option: 4) Limbaugh is in the ratings business. Whatever boosts his ratings is good. Logic, clarity, fairness, balance, accuracy, data and honesty are all completely irrelvant to the pursuit of ratings. So your finding him in your google search and our discussing him here all help him in his ratings game. sigh

5th April 2007, 04:50 AM	#6
Ex-drone Student Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 41	It's time for Rush to solidify his popularity. He should seriously consider moving his followers away from the corrupting influences of the unthinking in society who "refuse to accept the truth". There's a little property in Guyana, which he could call Rushtown, that he could get for a good price. I'll even help him pack.

5th April 2007, 05:11 AM	#8
thinkingaboutit Critical Thinker Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Toronto Posts: 315	Limbaugh has cultivated a following known as ditto-heads. 'Nuff said.
	__________________ "Peace cannot be kept by force. It can only be achieved by understanding." Albert Einstein

5th April 2007, 05:21 AM	#9
cgallaga Stranger in a Strange Land Join Date: May 2006 Location: Beautiful Ma Wan Island Posts: 1,550	Been out of touch with Rush since before I moved here 13years ago, but I did read "the way things ought to be" long long ago. As I remember it, it was not an unreasonable book. ETA I have no idea WTF this has to do with the OP
	__________________ Humanity has advanced, when it has advanced, not because it has been sober, responsible, and cautious, but because it has been playful, rebellious, and immature. -- Tom Robbins Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd. --Voltaire Last edited by cgallaga; 5th April 2007 at 05:38 AM.

5th April 2007, 05:42 AM	#10
Ripley Twenty-Nine Muse Join Date: May 2005 Location: London, Ontario Posts: 867	Originally Posted by SezMe RandFan, I think you have left out the most likely option: 4) Limbaugh is in the ratings business. Whatever boosts his ratings is good. Logic, clarity, fairness, balance, accuracy, data and honesty are all completely irrelvant to the pursuit of ratings. So your finding him in your google search and our discussing him here all help him in his ratings game. sigh Exactly. I lump Rush Limbaugh in the exact same category as Howard Stern. I also think Rush Limbaugh's opinions on politics should carry as much weigh as Stern's.
	__________________ Ripley 29 "Professor, without knowing precisely what the danger is, would you say it's time for our viewers to crack each other's heads open and feast on the goo inside?" "Yes I would, Kent."

5th April 2007, 06:07 AM	#11
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Mt Disappointment Posts: 33,327	Originally Posted by Just thinking He jokes about himself all the time, knowing there are those out there that will get a rise out of it. To those that do, he simply laughs ... all the way to the bank. And those who think he's laughing with them, he's laughing at them.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

5th April 2007, 06:21 AM	#12
hgc Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 13,014	By the same logic, Sanjaya Malakar will soon be shown to be America's best new singing talent.
	__________________ Bowel-shaking earthquakes of doubt and remorse assail him and wail him with monster truck force. - Cake, The Distance Was there a second singer on the grassy Knowles? - Stephen Colbert

5th April 2007, 06:30 AM	#13
Mephisto Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: in a state of disbelief Posts: 6,065	Originally Posted by RandFan By Consensus...The Most Accurate Man In Media It's a member's only page. I found it googling. If anyone has access (yeah right) please to post a quote or two. I haven't seen the page but I listened to Rush on the radio yesterday. Let me restate his... ah, argument. Rush Limbaugh is the most listened to man in the media. The consensus of those listeners is that Rush is the most accurate. Therefore rush is the most accurate man in the media. Those that doubt this conclusion are "Rush deniers". Ok, clearly a fallacy so what's up? Options: He is just stupid and incapable of figuring out the fallacy. His arrogance blinds him from seeing that his argument is embarrassingly fallacious. He's taking a page from the AGW debate and he is mocking the argument that there is a consensus that AGW is real (never mind that the consensus is a consensus of EXPERTS). He's taking a page from those who battle Holocaust deniers. ETA: For the record I don't think he is too stupid to figure out that this is a fallacy. I'm also not sure about the ego option. I think it is 3 or 4, perhaps both with some degree of 3 of course. Not much different than Howard Stern crowning himself King of All Media is it?
	__________________ "What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy?" Mahatma Gandhi

5th April 2007, 06:42 AM	#14
hgc Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 13,014	Originally Posted by Mephisto Not much different than Howard Stern crowning himself King of All Media is it? Howard Stern is funny. Rush is not. That's the difference to me. It's just like Rosie O'Donnell and her crapola. If only it was actually funny, it would be a lot more acceptable.
	__________________ Bowel-shaking earthquakes of doubt and remorse assail him and wail him with monster truck force. - Cake, The Distance Was there a second singer on the grassy Knowles? - Stephen Colbert

5th April 2007, 07:15 AM	#15
Freddy Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: South Bend, IN Posts: 1,024	Originally Posted by hgc Howard Stern is funny. Rush is not. That's the difference to me. It's just like Rosie O'Donnell and her crapola. If only it was actually funny, it would be a lot more acceptable. To each his own, I suppose. I find Rush amusing, but I don't take him seriously. Of course, I rarely listen to him, and I can see how his shtick would get old pretty quickly. The difference between him and Rosie is that he doesn't come across as perpetually angry and bitter. I do agree that he is no Howard Stern.
	__________________ William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law! Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that! More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat?

5th April 2007, 09:33 AM	#16
Just thinking Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: New Jersey Posts: 5,169	Originally Posted by a_unique_person And those who think he's laughing with them, he's laughing at them. I see you're an easy target.
	__________________ Our greatest challenge is not just to ask the important questions, but to recognize the meaningless ones.

5th April 2007, 09:40 AM	#17
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Tarrytown, NY Posts: 26,425	Originally Posted by hgc Howard Stern is funny. Rush is not. That's the difference to me. It's just like Rosie O'Donnell and her crapola. If only it was actually funny, it would be a lot more acceptable. How many political claims does Stern make? He generaly spend more time talking to stripers and porn stars than talking about politics or making any sort of definite claim.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

5th April 2007, 10:17 AM	#18
hgc Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 13,014	Originally Posted by ponderingturtle How many political claims does Stern make? He generaly spend more time talking to stripers and porn stars than talking about politics or making any sort of definite claim. He talks about politics a lot. Sure the strippers get more time, but with a >4 hours a day, that leaves plenty of time for politics. His views are often absurd, but then he's no different in that regard than the Fox News All Stars or even George Will. But he's usually cogent and funny. (Haven't listened to him since he left regular radio, so I don't know what he does now.)
	__________________ Bowel-shaking earthquakes of doubt and remorse assail him and wail him with monster truck force. - Cake, The Distance Was there a second singer on the grassy Knowles? - Stephen Colbert

5th April 2007, 10:19 AM	#19
firecoins Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Nyack, NY Posts: 3,191	Originally Posted by RandFan . He's taking a page from the AGW debate and he is mocking the argument that there is a consensus that AGW is real (never mind that the consensus is a consensus of EXPERTS).. I heard his show. This seems to be correct.
	__________________ NY Paramedic, skeptic, 9/11/01 Reality-ist. I am both right wing nut and left wing lunatic. Deal with it.

5th April 2007, 10:21 AM	#20
firecoins Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Nyack, NY Posts: 3,191	Originally Posted by Ripley Twenty-Nine Exactly. I lump Rush Limbaugh in the exact same category as Howard Stern. I also think Rush Limbaugh's opinions on politics should carry as much weigh as Stern's. I voted for Howard Stern when he ran for governor of NY.
	__________________ NY Paramedic, skeptic, 9/11/01 Reality-ist. I am both right wing nut and left wing lunatic. Deal with it.

5th April 2007, 11:05 AM	#21
hgc Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 13,014	Originally Posted by firecoins I voted for Howard Stern when he ran for governor of NY. One of us has a faulty memory. As I recall, he was picked at the Libertarians' nominating convention. But then he wasn't willing to do financial disclosure, and bailed out. So did you vote for him as a write-in? (By the way, is the Libertarian Party a bigger joke for their NY party picking Stern or for the national party choosing Badnarik? I only say this because Stern is no libertarian, big or small letter L.)
	__________________ Bowel-shaking earthquakes of doubt and remorse assail him and wail him with monster truck force. - Cake, The Distance Was there a second singer on the grassy Knowles? - Stephen Colbert

5th April 2007, 11:54 AM	#22
Earthborn Terrestrial Intelligence Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Terra Firma Posts: 5,648	Originally Posted by RandFan If anyone has access (yeah right) please to post a quote or two. I have access. That surprises you, right? I'm not the only on this who has access to it though. Everybody does. Switch off Javascript, or to not ruin your normal web experience, use a non-Javascript capable browser such as OffByOne. You'll immediately notice that the Rush Limbaugh website is surprisingly short on restrictions. And no, it is not hacking, it is refusing to be hacked. You'd think that a $50 paysite would have better protection against unpaid snooping. There certainly are cheaper paysites on the web that do (though I won't link to any).
	__________________ Perhaps nothing is entirely true; and not even that! Multatuli

5th April 2007, 05:27 PM	#23
Jesus Demon in Disguise Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Albany, NY Posts: 472	Originally Posted by Mephisto Not much different than Howard Stern crowning himself King of All Media is it? To be accurate, that term was coined by then-sidekick Jackie Martling as a joking response to Michael Jackson's title of "King of Pop." Stern does talk politics on Sirius, but as someone already mentioned, not many take his opinions seriously. One wonders why Limbaugh is taken seriously.
	__________________ Look here, brother, who you jivin' with that Cosmik Debris? - Frank Zappa

5th April 2007, 08:34 PM	#24
Dorian Gray Hypocrisy Detector Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Dayton, Ohio Posts: 20,195	Stern has had a hit FM radio show, a hit movie, several bestselling books, several albums released by his alums, several successful pay-per-views, a successful (for E!) TV show, and now a successful satellite radio show. Short of having a magazine called H with him on the cover every month, he couldn't really NOT be the king of all media, now could he?
	__________________ "A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men." - Willy Wonka "Rational arguments don't work on religious people. If they did, there wouldn't be any religious people." - House Additionally to Carlin being funnier than Izzard, I think Dorian is funnier than the Marquis. - Ron Tomkins

5th April 2007, 08:37 PM	#25
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,263	Originally Posted by Dorian Gray Stern has had a hit FM radio show, a hit movie, several bestselling books, several albums released by his alums, several successful pay-per-views, a successful (for E!) TV show, and now a successful satellite radio show. Short of having a magazine called H with him on the cover every month, he couldn't really NOT be the king of all media, now could he? Nah. He's a jack of all trades and master of none. To be king you've got to domniate at least two of the mix.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

5th April 2007, 08:50 PM	#26
peptoabysmal Illuminator Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 3,467	I listen often enough that I can tell you it is definitely number 3 from the OP. Rush often repeats the claim that there is no such thing as a consensus in science. It is straight out of Michael Crichton's Aliens Cause Global Warming. Quote: ... Ehrlich answered by saying "I think they are extremely robust. Scientists may have made statements like that, although I cannot imagine what their basis would have been, even with the state of science at that time, but scientists are always making absurd statements, individually, in various places. What we are doing here, however, is presenting a consensus of a very large group of scientists…" I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had. Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. ...
	__________________ OBAMA: It's not that I want to punish your success; I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you that they've got a chance to success, too. I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody.

5th April 2007, 08:55 PM	#27
JoeTheJuggler Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: St. Louis Posts: 26,774	Rush claims he is the most accurate. . hmmm, seems like a non-paradoxical version of the Liar's Paradox. How about, "This cretin is a liar"?
	__________________ "That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons