Since Rush Limbaugh went on the air in 1988 in Sacramento, California, he has been controversial. The left-wing media in America have been seeking to take him down from the start. He has been called everything from “an entertainer” to “the titular head of the Republican party”.
In jest Limbaugh describes himself as “the most dangerous man in America to the left and that’s because I’m right!”
Indeed he always has been just “the enemy” to the Democrats.
Rush often has said that he illustrates the absurd by being absurd. And so he has been absurd repeatedly, for decades now. His stream-of-consciousness commentaries are funny, incisive, informative, edgy, and pointed. He really is a remarkable talker with a singular gift of gab compared to a president of the United States who needs a teleprompter to give a speech. In 2010 Rush gave a 90 minute uninterrupted off-the–cuff address to the CPAC conference that was wildly received.
Now Limbaugh’s recent statement calling a Georgetown University birth-control advocate a “slut” and a “prostitute” has raised a storm. Limbaugh even added that if taxpayers or insurers are going to subsidize birth control, as the advocate is demanding, that they should get some free porno films in return.
Indeed this comment was the theater of the absurd. But when liberals come up against their own absurdity, they are clueless. After all what is more absurd than demanding that taxpayers or insurers subsidize birth control for female law-school students at Georgetown who are reported to be in line for $160,000-a-year jobs after leaving that prestigious school.
Yet then it is Limbaugh who is savaged while no thought is given to the absurdity of the topic that started the debate.
And indeed Rush was out of line with the “slut” comment. And he apologized and so we conservatives accept that. But this has not stopped the thin-skinned left from flying into a rage, the same Democrat/media complex that offered not a syllable of criticism when Bill Clinton was accused of raping Juanita Broaddrick or when Ted Kennedy allowed Mary Jo Kopechne to drown.
But considering the catatonic reaction to the “slut” comment, imagine if the shoe were on the other foot. Imagine how angry we conservatives would be if a liberal commentator called Christians “stupid” or called a major female Republican leader a “dumb twat” and a “cunt” on national television. We conservatives certainly would be angry and would have that liberal punished and thrown off the air, wouldn’t we?
Oh, wait! That is exactly what Bill Maher said in an interview on Fox and on his HBO program about Sarah Palin. Yet there have been no repercussions… Why?
Because Maher is a liberal, that’s why.
By the way, anti-Christian Maher believes that the Bible was “written by God…”
Thus now these same leftists are on a jihad hoping to take down Rush over his “slut” statement, like the final straw that will put him away. Many advertisers have left Limbaugh’s radio show even with the apology. Because they believe that Rush has gotten too hot to handle this time.
Shouldn’t Maher’s advertisers be made to feel the same way?
The left’s big problem with Rush is that he is successful. After all THEY were supposed to have total control of the media. And after conservatives have taken over talk radio while liberals tried it and failed – as with the collapse of left-wing Air America – libs are perplexed and angry.
So what is it about radio that makes it just right for conservatives?
There are theories:
*That radio is a “thinking medium” where you don’t get the whole package – images and words – shoved down your throat, but only the words (the ideas).
*That conservatives are smarter people who don’t need the pictures.
*That conservative ideas are infinitely more persuasive than liberal ones if you would simply listen to them without interference.
*That conservatives are multi-taskers who can listen to the radio as they do other things, unlike TV which takes all of your attention away.
There is a famous example about the power of radio from 1960 in which Richard Nixon was debating John F. Kennedy in the presidential race (which Kennedy ultimately won). Those who heard the debate on the radio said Nixon was the clear winner. Yet those who saw it on television picked Kennedy because he was handsomer than Nixon and because Nixon was literally sweating during the debate.
Thus Limbaugh has proven, again, that the radio medium fits thinking people well. He truly is America’s most long-lived and influential political voice of the last few decades. He makes even Bill Clinton seem dated, while many of the other Big Democrats of the past 20 years have faded into oblivion. Yet Limbaugh is more powerful than ever.
And that is why liberals hate him. Because he just keeps going and going and going, like the Energizer Bunny. He doesn’t go up and down or fade away. He is steady and sure.
What enrages the left so much is Limbaugh’s natural talent. He simply has a unique gift of gab. No liberal has shown the ability to talk for several hours a day straight and be funny and informative and sharp and not screw up or go off the emotional deep end. Rush’s aptitude truly is astonishing. Even his critics grant that.
But the radio format has its traps in that one wrong word can turn into a fiasco. It is amazing how few gaffes Limbaugh has committed in his stream-of-consciousness technique over 23 years. But the “slut” comment has taken root.
Meanwhile other radio hosts have suffered for their views. Michael Savage (estimated total listenership is 10 million+) – who calls himself an independent unlike Limbaugh who is unabashedly conservative – has even been banned from entering Britain over comments he made about Muslims. Savage even has been banned from other conservative media in America for his hot temper including his fearless tagging of Obama as a “communist”. But he has a highly devoted audience that understands his passion which sometimes goes over the top.
Meanwhile the same British government recently freed from prison a radical Islamic preacher. Reported USAtoday.com on February 13, 2012:
‘Tonight, Britain released a radical Jordanian cleric who was held for six years as a national security threat and who reportedly influenced the lead hijacker of the Sept. 11 attacks, according to news reports.
Abu Qatada, 51, was released late tonight from Worcester jail on restrictive bail conditions that include 22 hours of house arrest and wearing an electronic monitoring bracelet, the BBC says. Last week, a judge ordered him freed after the European Court of Human Rights blocked his deportation to Jordan, where he was convicted in absentia of involvement in terror conspiracies. British and Jordanian officials had agreed he would not be tortured if he was returned, but the human rights courts rejected that assurance.’
Huh?! A known terrorist versus a radio talk show host??!!
Wow. That’s the left for you.
So indeed Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage are more dangerous to the liberal left than real terrorists are. After all the feminist lawyer Gloria Allred wants Limbaugh arrested for his “slut” comment while the same people on the left want every Constitutional protection for every terrorist, including civil trials.
Now even the Nation of Islam is intimidating radio talker Glenn Beck.
Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan said in 2011 that Barack Obama is “a murderer” and “an assassin” for ordering US air forces to help the rebels who killed Moammar Ghaddafi, the Libyan leader. Ghaddafi was a friend of Farrakhan’s.
Beck simply said: ““I’m telling you this (the “assassin” and “murderer” comments) is a clear and present danger to the president of the United States. Will someone in the Secret Service or DOJ investigate what is happening at the Nation of Islam?”
Beck was simply noting the inflammatory nature of Farrakhan’s words and their danger to a president whom Beck does not even like. Yet he got trashed by the Nation of Islam’s official newspaper The Final Call which called Beck a “minion of the synagogue of satan” and vowed that it will “not allow such vicious assaults” on Farrakhan.
Thus these conservative radio talkers are being intimidated and threatened from all sides. Which means that they are, in essence, correct.