Rush on ‘Massa’
LIMBAUGH: Are you sure that Paterson appoints or is there a special election?
CALLER: I am reasonably sure that Paterson will be appointing the replacement, assuming that he, you know, doesn’t resign in the next 60 or 90 days.
LIMBAUGH: Let’s assume you’re right. So, David Paterson will become the massa…
CALLER: Yes.
LIMBAUGH: …who gets to appoint whoever gets to take Massa’s place. So, for the first time in his life, Paterson’s gonna be a massa. Interesting, interesting.
via Rush Limbaugh races to inject racial joke about Paterson into Massa mess.
I go for long stretches of time without listening to Rush/Hannity-esque hate radio, so I forget from time to time what utter douche bags these people are. The shock factor of not listening to these guys for months and then switching them on out of the blue is really awesome; it’s like visiting another planet.
Today I listened to Michael Medved and some moron from a “Religious Liberty” think-tank flipping out about the end of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Their thesis was that forcing God-fearing, 1000% straight men like themselves to share locker rooms and barracks with gay men will mean the end of civilization. Presumably this is because all that uncorrupted religious straight-dude flesh will be too much of a temptation for gay soldiers — who naturally will have enlisted for deadly dangerous combat in stinking Middle Eastern hell-holes just to get a glimpse of toothless Christian boys from Arkansas naked. These megachurch-bred anti-gay advocates with their visceral terror about the end of the closet, sure that liberated gay men by the hundreds will be lying in wait to rape them the instant the shower-nozzles turn on … I mean, the amount of projection going on is so obvious, it’s almost laughable.
Then I get home and I read that Rush Limbaugh is making a funny about New York Governor Paterson and the scandal surrounding Representative Eric Massa. Massa is naturally is the hot news on every right-wing talk radio station in the country today because he is a poster child for exactly this same conservative sex-paranoia — a Democratic politician who apparently felt liberated enough in our permissive cultural environment to grope and tickle straight male staffers. Limbaugh, discussing the scandal with a caller who mistakenly believed that Massa’s resignation would allow Paterson to appoint a replacement, then made the above pun.
It’s not so much that Rush made a racist joke. Nor does it even bother me that the whole premise of the discussion was incorrect (Paterson doesn’t get to appoint a replacement). We’re used to Rush being both racist and factually indifferent.
It’s more that Rush is such an intellectually lazy piece of shit who’s been on dumbly racist autopilot for so long that he literally can’t avoid making a dumb, unfunny black-baiting joke when the opportunity is shoved in front of his face. You could see this joke coming from thirty miles away, and Rush is so intellectually obese, he still couldn’t get out of the way in time. I mean, the minute the conversation switched to a discussion of the black governor Paterson and a guy named “Massa,” who among us didn’t think that Rush was going to go there?
If the guy had even an ounce of self-awareness left, he would have tried to surprise us by not making the joke. It actually might have been funny, if he had left it alone, just this once, just to fuck with us, as it were. But the guy has been self-plagiarizing for like eighteen consecutive years now — hasn’t added a single thing to his act since the first Clinton term at least — and this shit is just muscle memory with him by now. He’s just mailing it in over and over again, using as little mental energy as possible broadcast after broadcast, so that he can make it to the end of every day and stuff his face with pills or French fries or whatever his drug of choice is these days. Ugh…
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
Funny stuff Matt….but I have a bone to pick with ya bud (sorry for that one but couldn’t resist) Here’s the deal….comparing Rush to shit isn’t fair to shit. Also What the HELL…..Michael Medved??? What the hell are you doing listening to that fascist??? Oh my….we are so fkd when these slime have so much air power. Until journalists grow a pair and go after these clowns and the rest of these clowns in mainstream media….then the rest of us sheeple have no voice. Hell next thing you know we will have to get off our ass’s and go out in the square and faceoff a tank. Gd I love this game. Keep it up man. Blast these bunch of scumbags..
The sad thing is not that there are a few nutcakes like Rush out there, but that:
a) he and his ilk are given national platforms to hate-cast, and,
b) there is a shamefully sizable audience for this schlock.
I suppose we shouldn’t be too surprised. When you cripple and starve the educational system for a few decades, this is what you get.
[...] Oh, how I love him: Today I listened to Michael Medved and some moron from a “Religious Liberty” think-tank flipping out about the end of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Their thesis was that forcing God-fearing, 1000% straight men like themselves to share locker rooms and barracks with gay men will mean the end of civilization, presumably because all that uncorrupted religious straight-dude flesh will be too much of a temptation for gay soldiers — who naturally will have enlisted for deadly dangerous combat in stinking Middle Eastern hell-holes just to get a glimpse of toothless Christian boys from Arkansas naked. These megachurch-bred anti-gay advocates with their visceral terror about the end of the closet, sure that liberated gay men by the hundreds will be lying in wait to rape them the instant the shower-nozzles turn on … I mean, the amount of projection going on is so obvious, it’s almost laughable. [...]
What’s frightening about Rush isn’t the man himself; it’s the lack of reaction to him.
He keeps saying and doing things that would be the end of a career in any kind of mass media so recently. Instead, he’s hauling in tens of millions per year, as if his utterances were an endless series of Dan Brown books.
I guess I know how the Greatest Generation felt when they started hearing swear words and seeing soft porn-grade love scenes after decades of sanitized media where Lucy’s pregnancy was unmentionable, and all marriage beds were two singles.
Rush fans, of course, chortle at how Rush “stirs up the left-libs” by saying aloud what they’re thinking.
I suppose that’s the value in it: the percentage of the country that thinks well of Rush (somewhere in the 20’s percents?) are the percentage that actually think in obscenities. It’s good (if depressing) to know the number.
Why the hell would Rush bother changing his schtick? Rush Limbaugh goes to work every day to provide a service. He helps grievance-mongering white guys to feel like no matter how terrible things are, no matter how much of a mess the country may be in, that they are still better than those lousy (insert minority here). Expecting him to pass on a “Massa” pun is like expecting Carrot Top to leave the props home this time.
It’s not like he considers himself an artist who needs to hone his craft. He’s rich! And as we’re all aware, wealth equals your value to society. Limbaugh is a service provider, helping middle-class white guys pretend they have more in common with Mitt Romney than their black next door neighbor for over twenty years!
Its fascinating how all this crap gets thrown together into a giant heap of ignorant indifference. This corporatist strategy originates from earlier provocateurs J.P. Morgan and Walter Lippman: They would push media and leaders to
Get the ignorant herd distracted and divided over issues that have no earthly relevance to what is happening to their economic interests…
In a global, capitalistic domain, what is more important that who gets the resources and why? By distracting and dividing, they are successful at fomenting difference that can be used as a wedge to prevent change in other common areas.
Engineering dissent is so much easier to do that to repair: homophobia, racism and Jesus vs. Allah are topical and regional dividers from which to preach difference… This is Propaganda 101 mixed in with a little myth building American Exceptionalism
It also goes hand in hand with privatization, deregulation and the gutting of social services. And the public has trouble following that we sell the idea of free markets but when we own them we create oligopolies and monopolies….
* (Bernays and Goebbels would be proud of the obese one)
Attention Universe: Matt Taibbi has discovered a stunning shocking new truth: Rush Limbaugh is a titanic imbecile. Stay tuned, readers. Matt will soon prove incontrovertibly, that Glenn Beck is a whack screwball. This be amazing enlightenment that we have come to crave from Mr. Taibbi. If Matt works real hard, practices his fundamentals, says fuck less, and does road work in the off-season, he might get to play with the real deal opinion leaders like Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews, and the all-world thinker of thinkers, (drum roll please) Keith Olberman. We’re all pullin’ for your Matt to make the bigs, buddy. Sky’s the limit! ….. And the band played on……
Yeah, if you’re so fuckin’ smart, why are you just a commenter on someone else’s blog?
In response to another comment. See in context »How did you manage to reach from the beanbag to your keyboard to type this without your fries and soda getting in the way?
In response to another comment. See in context »Jabba the Host is Nailed and Pwnd properly. I hear Oxycotin grows on trees in Costa Rica. Godspeed for the corpulent fraud to leave the USA.
Matt — I blame Florida.
Yes, there are those who hate Limbaugh enough they never would even consider this.
But even those who vehemently disagreed with early Limbaugh had a difficult time nailing him, because there was more intellectual rigor there. Like it or not, modern liberals owe him a debt for making them hone their arguments.
Sometime around the time he abandoned New York for his safe little enclave in Florida, something happened. (Besides Oxycontin, people. Don’t be as predicable as he has become.)
He lost his edge, started believing his own promo hype, he was surrounded by sycophants and out from under the scrutiny of Gotham – what have you. There’s something about that time that correlates (if not has a causal relationship) to Limbaugh becoming the self-parody.
If liberals want to reclaim the mantle of intellectual rigor that has been vacant for more than a decade, at least they are smart enough to realize they shouldn’t sink to Limbaugh’s level.
Nope. They’re shooting even lower, at Palin instead.
And those of us who are independents just keep watching the Kabuki.
Limbaugh never had an “edge.” He cut his teeth bloviating on the Iran-Contra scandal, defending convicted conspiracist Ollie North against evil congress. He was as reprehensible then as he is now, and he never had a shred of “intellectual vigor.”
In response to another comment. See in context »Sure, he’s gotten even worse, but think of it this way: every hour he is on the air, that’s another child in a third world country spared an absolutely ghastly experience.
You may have disagreed with everything he said, but if you go back and look at Limbaugh’s early shows and books, you would find an internal logic that was hard to refute.
Of course, you will deny this all day long, but that is because you are approaching your worldview from a different set of core values.
Aren’t there people on the left that you agree with, in conclusion, who are absolute idiots with regards to their logic backing it up?
Same deal.
It’s “Intellectual Rigor,” not “vigor.” Rush had it once, and was far more dangerous in the bargain. Now he’s just an echo of his own past, and does his side more harm than good. As another comment notes, he commits several logic fallacies each hour. Didn’t used to happen.
(If you don’t agree, then you never really analyzed his rhetoric and style enough to base an informed opinion — and it’s quite possible you’re relying on what other people have told you about his show and his history. Reading the last five years of Media Matters doesn’t count for doing your homework here.)
In response to another comment. See in context »If I’m reading you correctly, you’re saying that there was an era, let’s call it The Golden Age of Limbaugh, in which Limbaugh bothered to structure his tirades and polemics in something that approximated a “premise/premise/conclusion” style such that, if you were suckered into buying his premises then the conclusion (sort of, kind of) followed. I don’t actually disagree that there was a time, inside those golden days, when Rush bothered to make up arguments to support his conclusions.
That said, as I recall, his premises were typically supported not by evidence, but by the same curious cocktail of innuendo, misrepresentation, and outright fabrication he still favors.
I was a teenage Conservative. Grew up on Bill Buckley, Edmund Burke and, when I wanted a good belly laugh, PJ O’Rourke. It was late in high school, when I first started bothering to fact check some of Limbaugh’s claims, that the modern Republican party’s parade of phony Conservatives first began to revolt my stomach. The evidence he used to back up his premises (and this was in the days you refer to, when he still bothered to adorn his polemics with the mask of “reason”) was so contaminated by disinformation that, even though I agreed with what he said he stood for politically (it became obvious later that he was a bellowing buffoon, an unreconstructed racist, a vile misogynist, and not a “Conservative” in the true sense of the word anyway) his conduct and methodology were so repugnant it pushed me away from the Republican party.
So I don’t know how “dangerous” he ever was as a sophist. He was and is effective at preaching to the choir. But even people who agree with some of his conclusions, unless they are intellectually lazy and/or dishonest, have surely always had to find both his demeanor and his disdain for genuine discourse beneath contempt.
In response to another comment. See in context »You’re understanding my point.
Strip away base premises and the supporting “facts.” There is still a logical linkage that can be analyzed in any long-form argument.
That linkage can be sound, or it can be unsound. In the unsound variety, you can have people blathering with little regard for what makes sense, yet they can erroneously come to the right answer. (These would be the morons on your side that you wish would shut up, because they provide easy fodder for the other side to belittle.)
What I am saying is that Limbaugh’s “logic linkage” used to be sound — even if he at times supported it with dubious facts. And that the Limbaugh of today engages in so many logic fallacies, you don’t even have to fact-check the premises or the “evidence,” because there’s no way to get from A-to-G.
In response to another comment. See in context »When I saw “scrutiny of Gotham,” why did I think of Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s?
In response to another comment. See in context »Uh, Mr. Intellectual Rigor, liberals aren’t the ones who are promoting Sarah Palin for president. What do you suggest that sane people do about that idea, other than respond with fully deserved derision?
In response to another comment. See in context »There is only one logical reason why a conservative would back Palin for president:
“She would drive the Left positively insane.”
Yes, that would indeed be true, but in and of itself is a crappy Raison d’être.
Just one logical reason, that reveals a mindset that is more hellbent on Winning than it is on furthering an agenda.
I am by no means a liberal, but like you I view a Palin candidacy as an expensive joke.
In response to another comment. See in context »Matt Matt Matt – don’cha know that Rush was using *satire* to make a point about Massa’s massa? It’s as if he’s saying Patterson’s the new “the man” and so many people don’t get it because there’s a left wing conspiracy to cripple the right by not giving them any legitimacy. And we don’t want the government ramming out health care down our throats and FOX is the only news channel that’s leading the American public with its fair and balancedness. I mean, the average American just wants a fair shake and Rush represents them.
wash rinse repeat
Do any Americans realize that your politics has been dragged so far right since Reagan that your ‘left wing’ political party is actually further right than most other (first world, OECD) countries’ right wing?
Or is that all-encompassing media echo chamber just too intense?
In response to another comment. See in context »What the hell are you smoking? You say that like it is a bad thing? This is America (fuck-yeah!) and we are different than the rest of the world because we are awesome UNLIKE the rest of the world. Other countries don’t have the freedoms we do like being able to google a man getting hit by a train in slow motion, strapping gats to wal-mart just for the hell of it, and all kinds of other awesome stuff. Get your facts straight buddy. Second place is first to lose, and were on the top of the food chain for a reason.
In response to another comment. See in context »Awesome comment. It’s we’re not were. What does ’strapping gats’ mean? Thanks.
In response to another comment. See in context »http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=strapping
The above link is for “Strapping” and gats can be defined as
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=gats
In response to another comment. See in context »Now that’s satire
In response to another comment. See in context »I was being as facetious as possible without giving it away. I do have a problem pretending to be Sarah Palin, or even a Palin wanna be.
I am keenly aware how far to the right our country is; I used to be a Republican (before they went insane). I did move to the left some, but at the time was still considered “moderate”; now I’m so far left the Dems piss me off.
In response to another comment. See in context »It’s too late now, you’re dead to me.
In response to another comment. See in context »rush’s race-baiting really is like watching a child poking at a bee’s nest with a stick. i often wonder if that’s why most of his listeners tune in, to able to retell the latest knee-slapper to their friends.
The story here isn’t a Nazi gasbag, but another Nazi. As shown on CounterPunch this past weekend, Rush’s pad in Manhattan is on the block for almost $14m. To quote from Cockburn’s article, someone opined “Looks feminine, dainty and uncomfortable. No reclining chair. No TV. No pool table. No mounted deer head. No bear rug. No gun rack. No militaria. No truck in the driveway. Are you sure a single man lives here?”
Rush Limbaugh is fascist America’s answer to Ernst Roehm. Cue up Bill Hicks’ “dark little poetry” about Rush, ’cause this guy’s so heavily closeted that even Roy Cohn’s ghost is asking for a second opinion. And that joke about “Jesse’s collection of little shoes,” fits as well.
What’s amazing about this whole thing is that these guys (Rush, Medved, etc) consistently get away with it. I rarely get offended, but when it comes to the overt racism of this guy it makes me wonder how/why he just gets a free pass from society as a whole.
I love all the tough-talking-real-man bullshit that the right wingers cling to and how as soon as the topic of gay guys in the locker room comes up they run screaming like nine year old girls. “I don’t want them to see me NAKED!” What the fuck is with that? Do Christian genitals look different from the rest of ours? Does the Christian Penis crumble into dust when looked upon by the eyes of a heathen? I certainly hope that’s the case. I’ll start hanging out in more country club locker rooms if so.
Ha ha. Great column on no class-fatso. Intellectually obese – gout of the frontal lobe.
Honestly, it’s hard to get too worked up over whatever blatant stupidity the likes of Rush and Hannity and their ilk spew out of their holes these days. On one level I’m aware of how disgusting they and their Republican masters are and how awful it would be if they were running the show again. Blah, blah, welfare queens, blah, blah, kill the poor, blah, blah.
But then I look at Obama and the Democrats taking a problem (just for one example of many) like health care and “fixing” it by creating an insurance industry utopia – where every man, woman and child is mandated to buy private insurance from this hated, profit-maximizing, parasitic industry without any real cost controls, with their antitrust exemption intact, and having attached a money funnel via subsidies straight from Treasury to insurance companies’ income statements, and how can I work up any outrage? These people (mostly) aren’t mindless morons like Rush – they’re smart enough to know better and they’re doing it anyway. This is what they do in a near-depression when people are desperate for help? It’s going to be a hell of a ride down the drain.
Isn’t Rahm Emanuel known for doing lots of research on political players when he gets into a situation? I’ve enjoyed speculating that Rahm knew Massa was a closet case and confronted him nudely as some sort of cruel power play.
God this is funnny. Its still early, but this might be the funniest thing I’ll read all day, maybe all week. Congrats.
In response to another comment. See in context »“Intellectually obese” what a perfect way to describe Rush – maybe healthcare reform will pass and he will move to Costa Rica as he promised.
The appropriate thing would be for the gay men to start their own militia. From what I have read about the constitution there is to be no standing military only militias. The gay men could then convince the teabaggers to join them instead of supporting the current standing military, but I don’t think the gay men would like the teabaggers………uh oh.
Matt….hope you enjoy your National Obamacare medical ID card……this was about communist planned obamacare
Please tell me I’m not quite picking up on your sarcasm….
In response to another comment. See in context »Don’t hold your breath; check out the man’s profile.
In response to another comment. See in context »Kind of unrelated, but I am reading “Game Change” and was reminded of Obama’s April 2008 quote: “You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”
That quote is so true, and it’s a shame that the truth behind it got obscured (like so many things) in the craziness of a presidential campaign. The real problems are ignored because people focus on bullshit issues like abortion, gun rights, etc. Massa is just the latest. It reminded me of The Great Derangement (which I loved), and I wish that public figures could just SAY things like this without fear. Maybe some day.
People in Western PA were legitimately insulted by this gross and inaccurate misrepresentation. It’s not only snotty. It just is not true.
In response to another comment. See in context »I’m not saying that generalities are 100% true, but there is a HUGE grain of truth in the statement. People focus on BS instead of on the real issues.
In response to another comment. See in context »Didn’t mean to piss anybody off. I just like the stuff about how the banks and corporations own us all better than having it pointed out how much of an ass an ass is. Anybody with half a grasp on reality should know how much of a nincompoop Rush Limbaugh is. Tell us something we don’t know.
Break out the WD-40…the American way. Talk talk, talk…jived with axle grease. When are people going the French Rev Way to get at a Marat in his tub? Or better yet, we need the Reds and Whites of 1917…yes we do! Or, do we? Maybe it is good that Americans are all talk and no action. Moebius had this cartoon about Le Bandard Fou…guy who walked around with a hard on all the time…he finally got to fuck a humongous Earth Mother. There is always a solution.
Rush commits ten logical fallacies an hour, but that’s par for the course for radio ranters. (And evening cable news yakkers, like Olbermann and Beck.) Rush has also gone from gags such as calling feminists “feminazis” — a marginally successful attempt at humor — to reading Mein Kampf on air and pointing out how Obama is like Hitler. (The comparison was the logical equivalent of saying: Hitler wore pants; Obama wears pants; therefore Obama is just like Hitler.)
Of course, hearing “feminazi” the first three times might have brought a chuckle: the next thirty thousand, not so much. So, yeah, I agree he’s mailing it in. But like an old, platooned DH, who signed a killer contract before going into decline, he makes more now than ever ($50 million a year).
I’m sure political talk radio will be around in some form for a long time, but it already seems dated to me. Like watching old episodes of M.A.S.H. or a mullet haircut. The guys on weekends trying to become the next Rush or Hannity or Beck are the worst; every sentence is comprised of the word “liberal” and a logical fallacy.
Oh, one last thing: I love the ads on Rush’s show offering advice on how to get out of paying all your credit card debt. Few of the ads, in fact, target at the demographic Rush would have you believe he attracts.
You nailed this.
He is much sloppier in his logic than he used to be, but he’s more about the punchline and delivering the payoff to his throng.
Old Rush would take all the time necessary to explain a rationale, based on a principle. You might disagree with his principles and priorities, but you couldn’t easily assail the logic.
Now he takes short cuts and gets burned. Often.
In response to another comment. See in context »Hey, you got a good site to see those Olbermann logical fallacies? The only one’s there are all beck and rush. we’d all like to see a good fact-checker cuz Kieth’s got a few good ones. To compare him to Rush is laughable. You just spouted out a little baby vomit, that’s all.
In response to another comment. See in context »Read Irving M. Copi’s “Introduction to Logic” and you won’t need a website. I have the fourth edition from 1972 (my textbook from Logic 101 in college), but I see there is now a twelfth edition (2005). This comment is not a putdown or insult: I’m completely serious when I say if you read the section on Informal Fallacies, you’ll be amazed at how prevalent they are in what passes for political debate.
In response to another comment. See in context »I found an old First Edition on eBay.
Oh — and just for laughs, I wrote this a while back: http://ike4.me/4arg
In response to another comment. See in context »Haha, yeah, that should cover every possible scenario.
In response to another comment. See in context »Gropophillia is a common disorder that is cured by a slap in the face. The disorder has been given notoriety by a former congressman named Eric Massa. He was fortunate that he controlled his disorder by limiting his groping to males. The groping of a female is a criminal offense that could lead to the imprisonment of the gropophile.
Matt – my Chinese friend says that the Rush/Hannity spew reminds him of the Communist Party’s approach to politics. He’s a newly minted American and finds the right wingnut volume here pretty scary.
Here is rural VA, they both permeate the AM airwaves and there are a number of folks here who have grown up politically sucking on Rush’s titty. As you noted in _The Great Derangement_ hate speech, like religion, just takes practice.
Beck, Hannity, and Limbaugh all have a kind of train-wrecky quality to them. Some times it’s hard to look away. The hypocrisy is also stunning. Consider this: Beck recently told people to leave their churches if there was any mention of “social justice.” Well, in the Mormon temple (trust me, I know, I’m a former lock step door knocking LDS missionary) Mormons promise to one day live the “law of consecration,” a kind of socialist regime dreamed up by Joseph Smith where members deed over all possessions to their bishop who then redistributes the goods to the congregation according to need.
So how can Beck foam at the mouth every week about socialists and communism, all while maintaining a devout right wing (and heavily populated by mormons) fan base? Isn’t this contradiction stunning?
Ugh . . .
I think Rush is frustrated, and tired with life…and contemptuous of his audience….he never had the raw vitriol of Bob Grant who was terminally pissed off at modernity,nor was such a empty suit just happy to have face time like Hannity or O’Reily…Rush was made for AM radio but believed he was greater and when he was constantly shown he just couldn’t carry a mainstream vehicle…he just walked, there is no effort to his show, it is plug/play and cash the checks a lot of icons who wanted more end up like him.
I would love to drug him to the hilt and hear what he thinks about the burned out top 40 disc jokey who thinks he is leading the second American Revolution…or Inside Edition teleprompter reader who thinks he is a Network….Ailes just could never put his fat monkey in the Chair with the camera rolling…no wonder Rush was slamming oxy…he could never “get over” stuck forever doing the circuit…he is still playing to sold out High School stadiums and YMCAs….but always to be the Babbyface to the hicks who would show up and the Heel to the fools who still believed that match wasn’t fixed
I think you nailed it.
In response to another comment. See in context »Massa is one of those self-loathing gays that refuse to admit anything about them is gay. Right before I read this article, I read an post from Driftglass about Massa that had a link to an old article from The Onion: “Why Do All These Homosexuals Keep Sucking My C*ck?”
http://www.theonion.com/content/opinion/why_do_all_these_homosexuals
This is like Whack-a-Mole. I can’t wait to see who pops up and attracts your attention next. Better than the carney, because the game never ends. Whack!
I rub elbows with guys who listen to OHanibeckbaugh and it’s a joy to call them out as soon as they start repeating their idiotic bullshit, especially in front of their friends.
Matt, you are the one that dragged me back into reality years ago, when I made enough money that I thought I could turn myself into a conservative and vote for candidates that lied to me more than my liberal candidates did. I figured that it was just going to be that way. Your writing changed my mind about that shit. Now, with the “…blowing of the sunshine up your ass…” out of the way, let me say this: I have successfully NOT listened to Rush for most of my adult life, but continue to have little arguments with the folks he taps on a day to day basis for the length of his whatever-it-is.
I continue to argue with them about why, a hard working person that has done nothing but work hard for the balance of their lives would listen to a man that has never had any other job but sit in a glass gas box making more than their entire fucking family tree, getting them angry about things that most would otherwise ignore if not for that noxious gas bag whining in their ears. Some get it, some don’t, for all of the obvious reasons – not having the time in their lives to really think about the fact that the guy tying them to their unvoiced fears, is the same guy that would encourage them to keep a bag full of money found on the side of the road, even after finding out it belonged to their grandmother to pay the mortgage on her house: she’s the loser who lost it, too fucking bad. He makes sycophants of all that unwittingly pay attention.
Nice job, to get paid so much for being a fucktard – seems to be all the rage these days.
Keep making us laugh/see with your colorful and powerful observations about all of our fucktards.
Whenever I hear the tired argument that the military as we know it would implode if straight men were “forced” to serve alongside gay men, I can’t help but wonder if the people making this argument realize that we ALREADY have straight men serving alongside gay men. Did these people not get the memo? They behave as if repealing DADT would miraculously cause gay people in the military to exist despite the fact that gay people in the military ALREADY exist.
Since straight men and gay men are already serving side-by-side, and the military considers the current system to be functional, I can’t help but wonder why there would be a radical change if we simply allow these people to admit that they’re gay. Do they think the gay men in the military can only “control” their “urges” if they pretend to be straight? Do these people honestly believe that a good soldier is suddenly going to transform into a mindless, out-of-control lech simply because he can admit that he’s gay without fear of losing his place in the military?
Don’t Ask Don’t tell isn’t really what most people think it is. In my opinion, its a misguided attempt at achieving the same ends as the Army’s policy against putting female soldiers in frontline combat units: They do not want any romantic interactions or drama interfering with a combat units performance. Thing is that don’t ask don’t tell doesn’t really achieve that.
Secondly, Its a bit hypocritical to criticize tasteless humor when this is in there:”toothless Christian boys from Arkansas”. The simple fact that Taibbi would characterize soldiers in that way tells me that he has never been near an Army base nor had any significant interactions with military personnel.
What’s even more fun is when you go BACK to listening to ‘normal’ radio after a couple of hours listening to Rush and expect the hate to keep coming out. It’s kinda like reading The Onion and you go back to normal world and you look for the irony in all the titles? It takes a few minutes for the brain to adjust. C’mon, we all dot. Admit it.
Not really. The difference is that while Rush’s conclusions are often spectacularly off-base (ranting about how banks should not be regulated because it would go against capitalism), the Onion’s satire is usually a fairly accurate portrayal of the idiosyncrasies in mass media reporting.
In response to another comment. See in context »Anyways, though, with regards to Rush I’ve found him an interesting piece of work. While he does have a decent research team and presents facts that are by and large accurate, his conclusions are so twisted by his partisan leanings that it is difficult to take any of his analysis seriously. Most obvious is how he will eagerly defend any big business that Democrats attack, not realizing that often those attacks are mere lip service intended to appeal to Americans who are losing their jobs while CEO’s continue to get golden parachutes.
Exactly: The first thing that popped into my mind when I saw the apartment picture—-How Dainty. But I don’t think Limbaugh is a closeted gay. Listen to him sometime when he is speaking to a female listener, especially a female who somehow suggests herself to be aware that sex exists….suddenlt Limbaugh begins to get intense, responsive, interested in the listener’s history……and….it is obvious in his voice…he is terribly engaged in trying to find something from the listener that will allow him to get an even minor erection. (the most glaring example of Limbaugh’s attraction to females came just before his memorable jowl-jiggling speech to the conservative conference last year when the newly permed lady who introduced him told the audience how she used to make out with her boyfriend in his car whiled they listened to “rush.”
Matt race-baiting is YOUR specialty.
What’s the difference between Rush Limbaugh and the Hindenberg?
One is a flaming Nazi gasbag, and the other is a dirigible.
I’m glad, Matt, you mentioned Rush’s intellectual laziness in addition to his knee-jerk, casual racism (which is a main reason he’s still broadcasting anywhere, talking to the dead-enders). Here’s a man who’s been in the national media for two decades + and still doesn’t understand basic information about the US Constitution. Yet millions take him seriously and I’m sure NEVER wonder why he wouldn’t know such a basic fact. The dipshit -
Matt, why does the military have seperate barracks and showers for male and female soldiers? Certainly no red-blooded American 18 year old male would enlist for deadly dangerous combat in stinking Middle Eastern hell-holes just to get a glimpse of toothless 18 year old white girls from Arkansas naked!
Why is this discussion limited to trading barbs between enlightened liberals and homophobic right-wing nutjobs who, preferably, have never served in the military?
You want to pretend that this all comes down to some objective and rational discussion of fairness and equality but when has anything sexual ever been objective or rational? Sure, these all just professionals doing their jobs serving God and country but isn’t it legitimate to ask how so many female soldiers end up pregnant or raped in a war zone…despite all this professionalism?!!
Is it to much to even consider that some 18 year old virgin from smalltown USA, who hasn’t come to grips with this whole sexuality thing, might not need to have someone continually rub up against them in the shower after a long day of ducking and side-stepping the bullets and IEDs of the evil-doers?
I’m just saying.
Your argument is bizarre. Since straight men rape straight women, gay men could rape straight men. The problem with the logic is it doesn’t identify the straight males as the dominant demographic, which they are in both cases. Straight men don’t fear reprisal from their subordinate women, while the same couldn’t be said about gay men and their straight, male victims.
It’s interesting how the entire military establishment hasn’t come crashing down when hundreds of women have been raped by fellow servicemembers, but the possibility of one dude “rubbing up against another” is enough to justify segregating the service and making America less safe.
In response to another comment. See in context »I’m not saying that the entire military establishment will come “crashing down” if gays are allowed to serve openly in the military. I am ASKING why heterosexual sexuality is looked at differently than homosexual sexuality.
If you think people are in an uproar over gays in the military imagine what would happen with unisex barracks and showers and subsequent reports of big black men rubbing up against virginal white girls while they’re NAKED!
My point is that the importance given to sexuality in our society has never been logical so why do you expect this instance to be any different?
Also, have you noticed in all this talk about rubbing up against people it is virtually always about male sexuality. I am pretty certain that just as much ‘rubbing’ goes on in the lesbian community.
Lastly, I’m not implying that homosexuals are more likely to engage in rape. I’m implying that they are just as likely. We need to get past stereotypes and acknowledge people are people…with all the psycho-sexual illogic that entails.
In response to another comment. See in context »I have to admit being surprised that Matt went after Rush not because of Rush but because Matt has been making his living saying this whole right left debate is a sideshow. The real argument is over the have and have nots.
However, when I re-read Matt’s piece, it wasn’t an attack on Rush’s poliitcs but his effort. Back in 1992, Rush was a political force to be reckoned with. His dialogue was crisp, clever, and original. Newt Gingrich took Rush’s ideas and made them part of his contract with America. There was no question that Gingrich and Clinton had different ideas on how to run the country. It was a great fight to watch, and the country benefitted from the debate. They were two worthy opponents.
Now, of course, all we have is Rush Limbaugh on the right bascally saying “You suck” to the Dems, and the Dems saying “Well, you suck worse.” Name calling has replaced debate, and the country has suffered. Rush has been phoning in it for years. There may occasional be a small nugget of insight like after the Republican victory in Mass., but for the most part, the show is always the same.
Everything good in the world is because of Republicans and Bush. Everything bad in the world is because of Democrats and Obama. The real truth about Rush Limbaugh is not that he is a bigot, racist, loud mouth ETC. No, the worst thing is that he has become boring.
Fatties like Moore and Taibbi are just pushing the race card this week .They are going after people that done agree with Obamas agenda. They are using libel(not Matt though, Matt’s blowing off steam, it’s not based on fact bullshit shield) True that his ranting are not based on facts. When Taibbi slants his rantings, he is trying to create racial tensions. I think that he is the racist for stirring up faux racial tensions. He also says in a piece below that blacks,latinos and minorities were to blame for the housing crisis, hell what about Pelosis district, all the $800,000. homes (2nd homes?) in forclosure, what about them? So ALL these people are black,Latino, or minorities too? Remember Nancys homeowners get a higher cap on their conforming loans. Lets talk about that Matt. When your suppose to be a professional journalist, (writer in Rolling Stones Mag.) you have a responsibility to be factual and accurate. To me Matt is irresponsible, this site proves it, his employers really need to wake-up! This taints all his body of work for me. I think I’ll leave a few e-mails to Wenner and their sponsors. Read down a few pieces and you may decide to do the same.
For the love of god, PLEASE learn how to write a coherent sentence/paragraph. It took me five minutes to read that.
To quote you: “He also says in a piece below that blacks,latinos and minorities were to blame for the housing crisis..”
Uh, Matt never said that. Try re-reading and maybe you’ll see what he said. It’s actually pretty hilarious when you argue that Matt is drudging up some racial tension when what he’s doing is the exact opposite. He’s attacked the Tea Party windbags that think all of our problems are the result of minorities buying homes.
“When your suppose to be a professional journalist, (writer in Rolling Stones Mag.) you have a responsibility to be factual and accurate.”
Uh, he WAS factual and accurate.
“Read down a few pieces and you may decide to do the same.”
You might want to take your own advice…you seem to think you’ve read something that you didn’t read. I don’t know why I’m even wasting my time right now….
In response to another comment. See in context »Mattyoubum, don’t project racism on ppl you DON’T agree with because of your ideology, this is called being racist. Stop exploiting minorities!!! What’s the new racial attack your opponent called these days? RAHMISM..LOL
In response to another comment. See in context »Lynne…I obviously can’t tell if you’re joking or not but if you aren’t, you might want to re-read his articles. Apparently you’ve completely missed the point…
In response to another comment. See in context »Hard to read racist spin pinpointed on 1 disconnected comment ,that is meant to mislead. A True journalist takes the WHOLE set of facts and bases it in truth. Maybe the blog should be called Racist/Slant, yes? BTY, I would agree my writting skills could be better, but I’m not a writer for Rolling Stone Mag. are you? Better for you to see for yourself, watch Santellis videos on youtube, (600+) see what he really said about the banks etc.. The truth will help you see, there is something bigger going on here, it will be a rude awakening.(Even for you Matt.) Remember, Rick can be debated anytime on live T.V., I don’t see it happening, and I don’t see Rick hiding behind a blog. Actions speak louder then words! Let’s see if (Taibbis) can put his actions where is mouth is! Matt has been on MSNBC, and his daddy works for NBC, Matt has no excuses, and top that with he REALLY,REALLY cares about you! LOL!
In response to another comment. See in context »The other side of this is that Massa was once a republican who switched his party affiliation to Democrat just to get elected.
When it all goes to shit, conservative “Americans” like Rush will be the first ones out. The last we’ll ever see of him is the ass end of a GulfStream headed for a private island, the cargo hold full of cash.
http://www.sawyerspeaks.wordpress.com
No shit Sherlock, with 20 million listeners, he can do what ever he wants to. You will be here with your trickle-up poverty, have fun. But you will have all the crap to reread from the big egos like Ames, Moore, Taibbi. When you all wake-up, I’ll be back to read your comments. I’ll be still LOL!
In response to another comment. See in context »FOR YEARS I HAVE USED THE NICKNAME GOEBELS WHEN TALKING ABOUT LIMBAUGH. I THINK A GUY ON CNN APTLY USED THE TERM “LITTLE BALL OF HATE” WHEN TALKING ABOUT HANNITY (IS THAT HOW YOU SPELL IT?). IT IS TERRIBLY FRIGHTENING WHEN I SEE PEOPLE CALLING OBAMA HITLER WHEN THESE GUYS ARE REALLY TRUELY LIKE NAZIS. GOD HELP THIS COUNTRY AND THE WHOLE WORLD IF THESE SCUM EVER GET THEIR FAVORITES BACK IN CONTROL OF THE COUNTRY.
RE: Rush on ‘Massa’.
Calling this clown a “douche bag” demeans a useful article useful for women eveywhere. “Enema bag”, although sometimes an equally useful article, might be more descriptive and accurate.
jfleni
I think part of what has been observed and commented on here can be attributed to the decline and erosion of the ideology that Rush represents. The Bush/Cheney debacle was the last great hurrah of Reaganism. The end has been reached.
After the crash, it is not so easy to champion their cause anymore, especially if you want to use rational logic. That has become a nearly impossible task. Discredited, and out of power, the more unhinged come to the fore. Witness Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck.
I had the pleasure of catching some of Beck’s radio show the other day. My first time, I was surprised by the level of emotional and mental instability. Beck sounded more desperate, confused, and whiny than I had expected. More like some mentally unhinged person you encounter on the street.
I guess this is the level of intellect the ideology is groping for these days. “Trickle Down! Step right up and get your Trickle Down Economics!”
“Dancing with Smurfs” was a pretty accurate parody of Glenn Beck.
However, “Trickle Down! Step right up and get your Trickle Down Economics!” is an invalid argument. The Democratic solution is also trickle down economics: give the big banks more bailouts, and the money will trickle down to the little guy.
In response to another comment. See in context »Thanks, Eugene, for that classic example of the Straw Man Argument. Please observe that my comment says nothing, nor implies anything, about Democrats, or their modern-day practice of politics.
But since you fallaciously bring the subject up, I completely agree with the notion that modern day Democrats are merely part of the fascist whole. As a matter of fact, I’ve been writing, quite a bit, about that very subject here: http://mk.users.sonic.net/
In response to another comment. See in context »Only Democrats could so foul up health care reform that I’ll actually cheer if nothing gets done.
Nancy Pelosi: “But we have to pass the bill so that you can, uh, find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.”
Of course, there really is no bill, because they won’t claim ownership of the Senate bill without some ethereal fixes they assure us they’ll put in — just like Obama assured us “no mandate” during the campaign, I suppose.
Matt, I read your short piece on the health care bill at Rolling Stone and have to disagree. If this bill dies, I don’t think health care reform dies. It can’t. The current model can’t continue for long. And I don’t think mandating people buy for-profit insurance is forcing anything on the insurers they don’t very much want. I feel passing this legislation is waving a white flag to Big Business and saying, “We surrender.”
I always assumed Michael Medved was gay when I watched him on Sneak Previews. I was surprised when he reappeared on my television as a cultural crusader for the political right.