Limbaugh is an entertainer, and a good one at that, nothing more, nothing less. Everything he says and does is designed to appeal to a cult-like following of ditto-heads. I began listening to him in 1990, and thought he made some thought provoking points, but as time went on he became more and more mean spirited and egocentric. I pretty much quit listening to him in the mid-ninties as I felt he had crossed the line between political commentator to radio personality. Just last year I tried to watch the golf channel show with him trying to improve his game under the tutelage of Hank Haney. I had watched the series with Barkley and Ray Ramono, and enjoyed it. After parts of two episodes with RL, I gave up. His egomania and bluster sucked all the joy and interest out of the show. He is, in my opinion, a smart, but seriously compromised, personality, with very little impact beyond his few million ditto-head like-minded listeners.

Originally Posted by Villages PL

I'll try to explain it the best I can.

Take any information and/or entertainment medium such as magazines, television, internet or radio. They each have their own special appeal for various reasons. If you are a music lover, you might subscribe to a magazine called "Making Music." The job of this magazine is to create an atmosphere that will bring music lovers together with the makers and sellers of instruments, plus other related products and services. In other words, buyers and sellers are brought together.

Radio is much the same in that it too seeks to bring buyers and sellers together by creating a favorable atmosphere for whatever is is that it hopes to sell. And Rush is mainly responsible for creating the atmosphere on his show, for a target audience that is relatively young. So he frequently talks about things that he thinks younger people will be interested in. And when you have that target audience in place, the sellers to that group will show up too.

To create an atmosphere for the sale of products, he talks about a lot of different things like sports, electronic gadgets, computers, food etc. etc.. Even though he may not do all food commercials himself, it's his job to create an atmosphere that will bring certain buyers and sellers together.

It is in this endeavor that he either acts as a natural "self appointed" spokesperson or, if there's a contract, a payed spokesperson. Obviously, if there's a contract it will stipulate that he cannot talk about it. But, regardless of which form it takes, the effect is the same. He will be speaking to create an atmosphere conducive to the sale of certain types of food items. That makes him an industry spokesperson. Some might even say that he is part of the industry. After all where does the industry begin and end? At any rate, you can at least say that he is an extension of the industry.

Now, what types of food products? It's highly unlikely to be any whole food. So what's left? Processed foods, fast foods and restaurant food. All three of these can, and often do, overlap. To save time, I usually refer to all of it as "fast food."

So now the question is: How do you create an atmosphere conducive to selling fast (processed) foods? You ridicule those who are trying to be healthy. That plays well to their younger target audience. But he can't do that by itself. How would that look to those in his audience who may be older and more sensible? So he does it under the guise of ridiculing liberals. That way it serves a duel purpose and has double the appeal to his audience.

You may say that you don't recall a lot of foods being advertised. But, remember, his show is played in about 600 markets all around the country and advertising will varry from market to market. And they are always trying to attract more advertising revenue. To the extent that they don't attract industry advertisers, shows in various markets may be canceled.

You cannot illustrate in the slightest way how any of your imaginings above is true or has anything substantial to do with Rush Limbaugh. It's total unadulterated trash.

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

Limbaugh is an entertainer, and a good one at that, nothing more, nothing less. Everything he says and does is designed to appeal to a cult-like following of ditto-heads. I began listening to him in 1990, and thought he made some thought provoking points, but as time went on he became more and more mean spirited and egocentric. I pretty much quit listening to him in the mid-ninties as I felt he had crossed the line between political commentator to radio personality. Just last year I tried to watch the golf channel show with him trying to improve his game under the tutelage of Hank Haney. I had watched the series with Barkley and Ray Ramono, and enjoyed it. After parts of two episodes with RL, I gave up. His egomania and bluster sucked all the joy and interest out of the show. He is, in my opinion, a smart, but seriously compromised, personality, with very little impact beyond his few million ditto-head like-minded listeners.

I don't think your post illustrates much intelligence and insight into the man named Rush Limbaugh, or explains why his enormous influence on the political scene for the past few decades is bogus. It appears to be a terminal case of sour grapes.

You didn't like his appearance on a golf show. It was the highest rated of all those Hank Haney shows. The channels audience apparently didn't agree with your disgust.

This hate-fest is truly tickling me.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

I don't think your post illustrates much intelligence and insight into the man named Rush Limbaugh, or explains why his enormous influence on the political scene for the past few decades is bogus. It appears to be a terminal case of sour grapes.

You didn't like his appearance on a golf show. It was the highest rated of all those Hank Haney shows. The channels audience apparently didn't agree with your disgust.

This hate-fest is truly tickling me.

Your manlove for Rush explains a lot about your attitudes and opinions. His ratings may have been high, for an obscure cable show, that would be explainable by his ditto-heads (i.e. can't think for themselves) following their hero to the golf channel. As for his enormous influence, would that be in '92 and '96 when he got Clinton elected? Or would it be in 2008 where he got Obama elected and a democratic majority in both houses of congress? Your hate-fest for anyone who dares disagree with your self-inflated opinions is truly tickling me.

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

Your manlove for Rush explains a lot about your attitudes and opinions. His ratings may have been high, for an obscure cable show, that would be explainable by his ditto-heads (i.e. can't think for themselves) following their hero to the golf channel. As for his enormous influence, would that be in '92 and '96 when he got Clinton elected? Or would it be in 2008 where he got Obama elected and a democratic majority in both houses of congress? Your hate-fest for anyone who dares disagree with your self-inflated opinions is truly tickling me.

You've got nothing in which to back up anything you say and your response is to throw out a homo-phobic response.

It's a little disgusting that you've sunk so low in your futile attempts to out debate me.

You demean yourself.

Originally Posted by RichieLion;442***

You've got nothing in which to back up anything you say and your response is to throw out a homo-phobic response.

It's a little disgusting that you've sunk so low in your futile attempts to out debate me.

You demean yourself.

Dittos rich!

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

Dittos rich!

I take this as your surrender. It is accepted.

Originally Posted by RichieLion;442***

You've got nothing in which to back up anything you say and your response is to throw out a homo-phobic response.

It's a little disgusting that you've sunk so low in your futile attempts to out debate me.

You demean yourself.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

I take this as your surrender. It is accepted.

Once again you delude yourself in an attempt to inflate your self-importance. What is said in this forum is far from legitimate debate, and tends more toward attempts to insult and belittle others attitudes, beliefs, and arguments, while attempting to claim some higher intelligence. It is hilarious that you look for some kind of victory in this silliness, but it does seem to reveal some character flaw. By the way, you seem to self profess to be so well read and educated on political matters, I could save you a lot of time. You are going to vote a straight republican ticket so go have some fun - it takes no study or thought to do that.

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

Once again you delude yourself in an attempt to inflate your self-importance. What is said in this forum is far from legitimate debate, and tends more toward attempts to insult and belittle others attitudes, beliefs, and arguments, while attempting to claim some higher intelligence. It is hilarious that you look for some kind of victory in this silliness, but it does seem to reveal some character flaw. By the way, you seem to self profess to be so well read and educated on political matters, I could save you a lot of time. You are going to vote a straight republican ticket so go have some fun - it takes no study or thought to do that.

I make no claims other than I read a lot. If you glean a high intelligence from my posts and are threatened, I have nothing to say to that. As far as your "prediction", it is one I've professed myself in this very forum, so it is no prognostication on your part. There's no Democrat worth his salt anymore; not for years.

All your personal attacks on me now are proof of your failure here and your frustration. It's bitter pill.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

I don't think your post illustrates much intelligence and insight into the man named Rush Limbaugh, or explains why his enormous influence on the political scene for the past few decades is bogus. It appears to be a terminal case of sour grapes.

You didn't like his appearance on a golf show. It was the highest rated of all those Hank Haney shows. The channels audience apparently didn't agree with your disgust.

This hate-fest is truly tickling me.

Just as a reminder above is where the personal attacks started.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

I make no claims other than I read a lot. If you glean a high intelligence from my posts and are threatened, I have nothing to say to that. As far as your "prediction", it is one I've professed myself in this very forum, so it is no prognostication on your part. There's no Democrat worth his salt anymore; not for years.

All your personal attacks on me now are proof of your failure here and your frustration. It's bitter pill.

I don't particularly glean a high intelligence from your posts, that is another of your delusions of grandeur. Did not prognosticate on your voting, I had read where you admitted to it. Again, it would seem your personal attacks are proof, in your mind, of your superiority, and others personal attacks are proof of their frustration. It's a bitter pill. Quite an ego you have there - by the way don't forget Valentines Day is in a few short weeks, be sure you buy that card to yourself before they are all picked over.

I questioned your analytical prowess. You threw out a gratuitous homo-phobic remark . OOHHH, that's exactly the same thing.

You don't even know what your saying anymore. Get a grip.

I love all the bold type. It makes your post so much more compelling.

Pathetic display.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

I questioned your analytical prowess. You threw out a gratuitous homo-phobic remark . OOHHH, that's exactly the same thing.

You don't even know what your saying anymore. Get a grip.

I love all the bold type. It makes your post so much more compelling.

Pathetic display.

I know precisely what I am saying, I am saying you are a self imagined intellectual without portfolio.

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

I know precisely what I am saying, I am saying you are a self imagined intellectual without portfolio.

It's all you. It's all in your mind. Why don't you make another gay remark. Maybe it'll make your argument stronger.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

It's all you. It's all in your mind. Why don't you make another gay remark. Maybe it'll make your argument stronger.

Richie, I hate to break it to you, but that "sage" designation means only that you have made a lot of posts. For what it's worth, the term "manlove" is not homophobic, and not even a real word, but simply something I made up to describe your apparant love for limbaugh. Call it hero worship, dittolove, if that makes you feel better.

Who's better to stand up to the sanctity of multiple marriages than Rush?