Rush Limbaugh considers himself a spokesperson for America’s religious right

I don't view people as 'spokespersons' beyond the fact that everyone's thoughts are usually representative of others 'out there,' just because there isn't that much diversity of thought in the world.

Rather than thinking about people as 'spokespersons,' try to think of them as discussion-starters. Someone has to get the ball rolling for civil democracy to occur, so any publicly-available text can serve that purpose. It could be something Limbaugh says or something you read in a discussion forum like this one, or in the news.

Whether you believe or not isnt the point. I agree that, hearing his








I like his self proclaimed intelligence . He says he keeps half his brain "tied behind his back to make it fair". Yet, only those who buy his brand of schmaltz even call him. So, in effect, he is calling his loyal listeners morons.

It sounds like provocation to lure callers into debating him.

but all he lures are sycophants. "Dittoheads" they were called.

When Rush first came to Houston, one idiot radio man ran his show twice a day. I used to listen, thinking I had to refute all his blather. One day it dawned on me that the only refutation he understands is to lose his audience. I never tuned him in again.

he used to be a disc Jockey with a conservative attitude in Sacramento. He was a douche bag even then. Like most of his radio types they have absolutely NO senses of humor.

Probably that's their way of undermining his debate provocations. I.e. he wants debate so they give him the opposite. It sounds like a pretty passive-aggressive relationship between the show and its callers, to be honest.

Youvve never listened I think. Limbaugh seems to only talk with his "base". Others dont call , so its all one way radio.

I listened last week when Trump backed off n his wall **** when Limbaugh and Coulter told him which way to march.

So why do you listen?

Thomas Kaine
‏

@thomaskaine5

funny...many seniors are finding that they no longer can receive Fox News on their TVs...somehow it got blocked....coincidentally this seems to happen after their children visit...has this happened to anyone you know?

Lucky you. My kids tune my TV to fox news. My wife has a thing for Lush Limbaugh. I go to the coffee shop looking for some liberal attitude and can find only Trump lovers. I express my opinion of him and am expecting a visit from the f b i. O wait, that would be the k g b or what ever putin enforcers are called now.

Is there a reason that youdont want me to listen?
If you only listen to one side of an argument your world is, of course, quite simplified.

It just sounds like a low quality show that irritates you because you disagree with what they're propagating. So why don't you put less effort into listening and fighting against it and instead put more effort into promoting the ideas and solutions you think are good?

I spend significant time with the National Center for Science Education and its work to have kids be taught biological sciences that are free from non-scientific bias and evidence-free assertion. I feel that I need to understand where the Creationist/ID POVs arise so I can be better prepared to discuss what science education is about.
Its sorta the same with Rush. His folks BELIEVE him, every word. I think I should try to understand what he and others of his ilk, have to say.

I listen, but I sure don't understand their screwy thinking, like bible before constitution.

I was comparing Rush's thinking to creationist thinking as an analogy, not a simile. Sorry if I was a bit vague in that.

I think the only way you can understand a lot of conservative rhetoric/propaganda is to first understand their critical POV on liberalism and leftist ideology, and then analyze what they are saying from the perspective of it as a provocation against liberalism.

E.g. many Christians never reach the point of fully understanding evolution because they view it as liberal propaganda against Christianity/religion. For many liberals, that is actually all it really means to them. They don't really care about how life progresses from primordial forms to more complexity, but they don't like Christian values and morals and they use evolutionary science as a way of deeming religion stupid and thereby rationalizing the rejection of their morality and values.

My problem with some creationists is that they insist on interpreting Moses' description of the Earth being created in six days in terms of 24 hour Earth days. If we discover the universe is older than we think, then it is not that hard to interpret the "six days" as being days for God, not Earth.

Anyway, the point is that there can be no truth that doesn't resonate with God and if something turns out to be falsely true, then it was always in conflict with God to begin with. We can't ever be 100% sure about what is truly true and what we are deceived into believing is true, but we try our best and accept the possibility that what we believe could turn out to be false due to some revelation that we haven't received yet.

So I accept evolution as the means by which life is created. The logic of selection is perfectly resonant with the logic that sin leads to death, because that means that organisms that survive to reproduce are able to do so by averting sin to some degree. Obviously sin isn't selected out of existence in this way, but we do keep evolving in the direction of having more awareness of consequences and foresight . . . that is provided we don't start degenerating as per Mike Judge's theory in the movie Idiocracy.

Entertainer.

Rush Limbaugh considers himself an entertainer.