Thanks to my free market-based, anti-bailout stance, some of TTAC’s Best and Brightest view me as an autoblogospherical arch-conservative. Which often leads to comparisons to or, at least, invocations of Rush Limbaugh. This despite the fact that I’ve pointed out that the liberal’s largest (in all senses of the word) bogeyman has been sucking on GM’s adver-teat for years, artfully slipping references to “wonderful GM products” and “this great American company” into his rants. Until, that is, Ralph Nader filed a complaint with the FCC. At which point Rush continued to accept GM payola for his personal imprimatur, only with a disclaimer. During this “transition,” I’ve highlighted Limbaugh’s (and Hannity’s) resulting philosophical discomfort (i.e., hypocrisy) on the Motown meltdown. Blame it on unions, congress, anyone but the people signing their paychecks. OK, so, the Detroit News reports that el-Rushbo is now calling for a GM boycott. Ish.
“Nobody wants to support an Obama company,” Rush Limbaugh told his audience Friday, citing a poll showing that 17 percent of Americans backed a boycott of GM . . .
The popular, controversial Limbaugh didn’t outright call for a boycott, but said he understood why people would want to avoid GM vehicles. “They don’t want to patronize Obama. They don’t want to do anything to make Obama’s policies work.”
A GM spokesman declined to comment Monday.
Oh, I would have LOVED to be on the other end of the phone when GM called Rush. “I’ve got three words for you Rush: driving while impaired.”
Meanwhile, the Limbaughian “wanting Obama to fail” meme refuses to die. A commentator recently e-mailed to accuse me of wanting Detroit to die so that President Obama would fail ’cause I’m a secret Republican. So anyone who’s anti-bailout is anti-Obama and, therefore, the enemy. Go figure.
Over 20 million listeners can’t be wrong, can they? Uh, yes.
Once GM became a ward of the state, things changed. They are no longer part of the capitalist system, and if you believe in the capitalist economic system, then GM no longer deserves your support.
I’m a guy who only buys domestic vehicles, but in this fact pattern related to GM, Rush is 100% right.
I don’t want GM or Chrysler to fail simply because if they do, we just pissed away billions of our tax dollars with no prayer of ever seeing it again. I mean, I don’t really have a lot of faith that we’re going to get a full (or any?) pay back anyway, but the failure of these companies guarantees that it will never happen.
RF, I wouldn’t say that it’s so much the content of much of your ostensible political commentary as it is the tone. The high-pitch and sometimes even strident way in which ideas are presented (and dismissed!) is what I’ve had trouble with from the start (as you know). I suspect this feverish approach might help sell coconuts, but it also leads in unforseen directions, not all of which are desireable. Can’t we turn the heat down a notch or two and raise the general level of civil discourse and respect? After all,do you really want to be mistakenly seen as the Limbaugh of Car World?
alright…..for the capitalism purists, if you’re going to boycott GM due to taxpayer subsidies and the bastardization of capitialism, some other things you’re going to have to also boycott:
1. corn….seriously, all the TENS of billions of taxpayer dollars spent to subsidize agro-biz makes the GM money look like chump change
2. every Gulf State (FL, MS, TX, etc), with all of the TENS of billions of taxpayer dollars spent to rebuild after hurricanes. (what haven’t you Southerners heard of hurricane insurance? *sarcasm*)
3. oil/gasoline…..the government subsidizes the energy sector with below market leases on federal lands even with $3 gasoline.
4. almost every major league sports team….hundreds of millions in local/state subsidies for almost every new stadium built recently.
5. every foreign transplant doing business in the US…..what about the tens/hundreds of millions of dollars of tax abatements/subsidies/etc. given by states and localities to Toyota, Honda, VW, Nissan, etc. to build/move factories, suppliers, HQs? And for you socialism-haters out there, every German/Canadian/Japanese-made car is built with labor costs subsidized by *gasp* socialized health care in their home country.
and the list goes on and on……
Republicans and Democrats equally subsidize their constituents where possible and convenient…..so just be consistent with your indignation.
and if I was Rush, I’d silently be cheering for 8 years of Obama….that would guarantee the $$$$$, lol.
Perhaps I’m breaking my self imposed policy.of not commenting on U.S. politics/policy,but here goes.
The Bush years were wonderfull,cause for eight years we were spared from the crap that erupts from that selfserving,drugaddled fat piece of shit
Rush Limbaugh.
Yes I’m a Liberal,but even if I was a far right Conservitive I’d be ashamed to have this guy as a spokesman representing my interests.
How much do you want to bet GM quietly dropped him as a sponsor, and this is just revenge?
I’m not a fan of GM but damn. You don’t have to buy their cars, but at least don’t kick them while the’re down. (directed at Rush)
Republicans and Democrats equally subsidize their constituents where possible and convenient…..so just be consistent with your indignation.
Yes they are two heads on the same coin, however there is more to it than GM’s failure.
Foreign car companies have been able to thrive in our market. They have shown it is possible to build cars in the US and sell them in the same market as GM.
Let’s face it. Even on the slight chance GM can rebound, those profits will never be returned to the taxpayers.
I don’t want GM or Chrysler to fail simply because if they do, we just pissed away billions of our tax dollars with no prayer of ever seeing it again.
Our tax dollars are pissed away on a continuous basis; it’s just no one really pays attention to vast scope of waste. If it weren’t GM and Chrysler, Obama would have found some other toilet to flush the money down.
GM and Chrysler are NOT corporations…They are welfare parasites that do not have to serve customers in a free-market…They are already dead and only kept alive by politcal violence/terrorism (aka, Taxpayer Theft).
Let’s face it. Even on the slight chance GM can rebound, those profits will never be returned to the taxpayers.
Just try to imagine what would happen to this country if GM turned off the lights…and all of their staff were out of a job. Our economy is in a very fragile state as it is…can you imagine what effect the hundreds of thousands of people being unemployed would have on the system?
MANY MORE of your tax dollars would go to keep these people liquid in the form of government programs, welfare, etc.
We have ALREADY witnessed the benefits of giving GM our tax dollars. It has ALREADY paid off…
And I will continue to support GM. They already make fantastic products, and the future looks very bright for them.
“GM and Chrysler are NOT corporations…They are welfare parasites that do not have to serve customers in a free-market…They are already dead and only kept alive by politcal violence/terrorism (aka, Taxpayer Theft).”
Great point. So, logically, neither are the 5 largest banks in America. Or any oil company. Or any utility. Or farm… etc, as slateslate said before.
GM (and Chrysler) have already failed, hence the ‘need’ for bailouts.
Most things are easier the second time around, so the future is easily predictable in this case. And so will be the associated waste and corruption.
It’s always easy to spot the smug, holier than thou, we’re more enlightened than you, liberals. They’re the ones that call anyone that disagrees with them; vulgar and hateful names.
They are already dead and only kept alive by politcal violence/terrorism (aka, Taxpayer Theft).
So what isn’t taxpayer theft? I’m waiting for a definition that doesn’t include “things I don’t like”.
It’s always easy to spot the smug, holier than thou, we’re more enlightened than you, liberalsdemagogues. They’re the ones that call anyone that disagrees with them; vulgar and hateful names.
Fixed that for you. Remember kids, they’re only smug, holier than thou and more enlightened if you don’t agree with them. If they’re on your side, they’re respected pundits.
Rather like the difference between terrorists and freedom fighters.
Insanity is the GM boycott of sensible cutomers via overpriced and frequently unreliable products.
So anyone who’s anti-bailout is anti-Obama and, therefore, the enemy.
And if you don’t confirm Sonia Sotomayor you’re obviously racist.
Thanks to my free market based anti-bailout stance, some of TTAC’s Best and Brightest view me as an autoblogospherical arch-conservative.
No, just whatever flavor libertarianism you subscribe to, that point’s been loud and clear since the gitgo. There are more than we can count.
So, Rush’s hatred for Obama trumps his love for (GM’s) money. Interesting.
Or is it that GM has stopped slipping him some coin because they don’t have any left.
I wonder how much money GM owed to Limbaugh for the advertising when they filed Bankruptcy?
It’s the Democrats fault
No, it’s the Republican’s fault
Wait, Rush Limbaugh caused this
LOL
Up until Obama’s rein of terror, the previous kings and their court jesters (congress) have increase spending every single year, literally by the same amount, ALL OF THEM. Sometimes revenues went up, sometime revenues went down. Personally, I think they are all a bunch of crooks and at the root of our spending problems.
Slateslate:
And for you socialism-haters out there, every German/Canadian/Japanese-made car is built with labor costs subsidized by *gasp* socialized health care in their home country.
That “socialized healthcare” lie just won’t die, I guess.
I’m German, my wife is Japanese, and we never heard of socialized healthcare. Each month I transfer a princely sum to the Allianz Versicherung, a very private and extremely unsocialistic insurance company. Every month, her father, bless his generous heart, transfers unknown amounts of Yen to Japan’s National Health Insurance (kokumin kenkou hoken.) If you could tell us where we could get free socialized health insurance in our mutual countries (dammit, we are citizens, we have a right!) then we would highly appreciate it.
Danke. Domo arigatou gozaimasu.
It wasn’t long ago that Limbaugh was a GM shill. A TTAC post on the subject is here.
So what isn’t taxpayer theft? I’m waiting for a definition that doesn’t include “things I don’t like”.
Things that the taxpayer is forced to pay for regardless of representation and still don’t benefit our nation’s future. This includes Iraq and a vast number of bailouts.
Personally, I would rather see this money going to Ford as an incentive to thrive. Unfortunately, this circus won’t end until they are under government control as well.
Fixed that for you. Remember kids, they’re only smug, holier than thou and more enlightened if you don’t agree with them. If they’re on your side, they’re respected pundits.
Sort of like how six months ago it was your patriotic duty to criticize your elected government, but doing so now labels you as an enemy of the state.
Bertel Schmitt–
Whatever you want to call it, I’m gonna guess the amount you pay is a lot less, with more coverage, than under the clusterf*ck that is the American health care system.
No industrialized nation spends more of their GDP than the United States on healthcare, yet we can’t even get everyone insured.
I’m a big fan of Rush Limbaugh. Very, very often he’s ahead of the pack and sees things well before the rest of the media. Usually his leading edge thoughts eventually catch on with the general public.
However, I must say he’s been off the mark re GM. He’s not talked about the errs of their ways. He’s let GM management off the hook.
Guess what? Rush isn’t perfect. But he’s bang on most of the time.
I hope most people by now understand that Rush Limbaugh wants President Obama to fail, because Rush feels that President Obama’s policies are wrong for America. Rush points out that most of President Obama’s policies take America down the road of socialism.
Rush doesn’t think most Americans want:
– Socialized health care.
– Government ownership of banks and insurance companies..
– Government ownership os car companies.
Rush Limbaush does not want America to fail.
Rachel Maddow kicks Rush’s oxycontin-contaminated ass.
Oh and to actually make this a car-related comment, I’ll bet she’s a better driver too.
Blame it on unions, congress, anyone but the people signing their paychecks.
I assume you don’t listen to Limbaugh or Hannity very much. If you did, you would have heard them blame everyone EXCEPT the workers themselves. I have heard both men blame management on many occasions.
They do put a heavy emphasis (rightly so, I think) on the unions, but management is criticized as well.
Just from a business standpoint, it’s a difficult spot.
If you have a political radio show with sponsors and one of the sponsors becomes a part of politics – what do you do? Rush wants to comment on the GM situation and it probably won’t make GM happy.
I’m eagerly awaiting Rachel Maddow’s comments on GE and all the various things they do. Take the PCB contamination that GE did in the Hudson River for example. GE owns Rachel’s network MSNBC. Of course the head guy at GE (Jeff Immelt) is one of Obama’s “advisors”. I guess we know how that’s going to come out.
Robert, I guess this makes you a terrorist. You disagree with GM. GM is run by Obama (through the proxy of the PTFOA). Obama is the US Gov. By disagreeing with the US Gov, you are now a terrorist (forget that silly first amendment thing – hell throw out the whole paper it is written on!). You were even interviewed by (gasp!) Al Jezeera! Please report to your nearest Homeland Defense outpost for immediate conviction.
Slateslate :
Nice list. I’m against all of the subsidies you listed. I’d like to reduce the number of subsidized industries, not increase the list.
I doubt Rush is hoping for a total of eight years of President Obama. The record shows that Rush Limbaugh is wildly popular and profitable whichever party is in power.
The media and the politicians don’t make or break Rush. Rush’s talent keeps him dominating talk radio.
slateslate
Please…you’re just adding to the madness.
You’re sounding like another of the ranting mouths in the media.
IF you are TRULY a conservative, you DON’T want subsidies for corn, oil, GM….or ANY at all.
The problem you have, as do most blindly follow the leader…see what I want to see…voices is you find the hypocritical words and actions of people and then declare their entire philosophy as hypocritical.
That’s not only wrong, its continuing the twisting and cutting/pasting methods used in pundit land.
And although Rush is just another hypocrite, that doesn’t mean conservatism is wrong.
Stop the subsidies.
Give us a flat tax.
Stop all the deduction madness.
“Thanks to my free market-based, anti-bailout stance, some of TTAC’s Best and Brightest view me as an autoblogospherical arch-conservative. Which often leads to comparisons to or, at least, invocations of Rush Limbaugh. This despite the fact that I’ve pointed out that the liberal’s largest (in all senses of the word) bogeyman has been sucking on GM’s adver-teat for years”
Hmm, can’t you like GM’s products, be paid to promote them, – BUT – be against a taxpayer bailout based on principal? Just like your principals?
“Rachel Maddow kicks Rush’s oxycontin-contaminated ass.”
You can’t be serious. She’s about the only one who needs that self-smug smerk slapped off her face more than Rush does. I will admit that she’s better looking, although I don’t think she’s of the same sexual orientation as I am :-)
P71 crownvic –
you imagine what effect the hundreds of thousands of people being unemployed would have on the system?
Are you kidding me? We’ve lost 1.5 million jobs since the “stimulus” package was passed (not even since it was created).
Last I checked, about $50+ billion has been given to GM in one form or another. My crazy math skills tells me that, assuming $150,000 per person, that’s the equivalent of employing 333,333 people for 1 year. (And $150,000 per person is a pretty generous figure).
And the end is far from in sight.
So yes, I’d rather see GM completely shut down (which, by the way, is an absurd statement) immediately and have that money spread into the general economy in the form of vast tax breaks to either corporations or individuals…depending upon whether you want to spur job growth or individual consumption….than what has been done with GM.
I understand that hundreds of thousands of jobs would be lost. But understand that the country had a net loss of 500,000 jobs, on average, for the past 3 months, each month.
Sustaining a company which has dug itself into a ditch via product creation, union contracts, and poor management is not a way to “stave off the worst case scenario”.
Just my .02
Boycotting GM is like imposing economic sanctions on North Korea – we don’t do business with them, anyway.
Most consumers already boycott GM, so it’s a moot point.
Bailout mania never stops reminding me of the run-up to the war in Iraq. Only now the liberals are the “our way or the apocalypse” crowd, while conservatives are all petulant and hoping for Obama/the country to fail. Deja vu all over again.
Both episodes showed how ugly politics can be when our leaders overreact to scary circumstances, not by inspiring sacrifice and solidarity but by whipping folks into a frenzy. It is my belief that the US was/is strong enough to contain Saddam Hussein and that the US economy was/is strong enough to handle real bankruptcies in the auto sector. Not sure where that puts me in the convenient old political spectrum.
I would describe myself as the prototypical arch-conservative, but, even I see through Limbaugh as nothing but a Potemkin village and just an entertainer. I am sad to see so many people that are educated, listen to him as he has been exposed as quite the hypocrite.
No doubt the man is very intelligent and quite entertaining and very insightful but as a grass roots conservative and not a shill for any party, I actually believe drugs are bad, one wife is enough, marriage is sacrament that demands loyalty, politicians of any stripe need to be called on their missteps and I am a true homer when it comes to American products. I don’t need payola to stand by my convictions.
I have been wondering for a while when his listeners will wake up from watching his train wreck of a life and see him for the fraud he is.
Shabster, nicely expressed and written. I feel much the same way.
shabster :
I’m a big fan of Rush Limbaugh. Very, very often he’s ahead of the pack and sees things well before the rest of the media. Usually his leading edge thoughts eventually catch on with the general public.
However, I must say he’s been off the mark re GM. He’s not talked about the errs of their ways. He’s let GM management off the hook.
Guess what? Rush isn’t perfect. But he’s bang on most of the time.
I hope most people by now understand that Rush Limbaugh wants President Obama to fail, because Rush feels that President Obama’s policies are wrong for America. Rush points out that most of President Obama’s policies take America down the road of socialism.
Rush doesn’t think most Americans want:
– Socialized health care.
– Government ownership of banks and insurance companies..
– Government ownership os car companies.
Rush Limbaush does not want America to fail.
So Robert, please explain the pic. The caption doesn’t help. Is that a picture of Rush? I know he’s lost weight, so some may not recognize. Or is it somebody else just having their pic taken in his driveway?
EN: Not sure where that puts me in the convenient old political spectrum.
YOU’RE A COMMUDANGLE!
It’s funny that all this degenerates to is a labelfest, regardless of what’s actually said. The straw men march mightily these days (meaning for quite some time now, not the last 6 months).
Boy, I think that most folks are misreading this. I don’t think Rush is advocating a GM boycott at all. If he were, he wouldn’t be using tepid mealy mouth statements like these. Rush understands people that want to boycott GM? Does he feel their pain, too? He’s beginning to sound like Oprah!
If Rush were advocating the boycott of GM.gov, he would lead the charge with unequivocal language. I have heard other Rush-wannabes doing so.
This just proves to me that Rush is still under some obligation with GM. He’s a hypocrite, so what’s new. This is just one more example of the corrupting effect that advertising dollars has on free editorial thought.
@gslippy :
Boycotting GM is like imposing economic sanctions on North Korea – we don’t do business with them, anyway.
Most consumers already boycott GM, so it’s a moot point.
Post of the day. I even laughed out loud!
Is anybody else disturbed by the idea that there are people out there willing to scuttle the economy because their people were voted out of office?
I suppose it’s a case of being able to “plausibly deny,” but it seems from the story that he said that “he could understand why some people would want to boycott them.” And I’m sure that most on TTAC “could understand” that as well, even if they don’t agree with that.
1. corn….seriously, all the TENS of billions of taxpayer dollars spent to subsidize agro-biz makes the GM money look like chump change
Sure, and I hate that. But we elected the Senator who was a steadfast friend of corn and ethanol subsidies to the Presidency, not the other guy, who has consistently opposed the agricultural bill and the ethanol subsidies.
Etc., etc. I hate the stadium subsidies too, etc.
So I agree with all your points, slateslate. Except for the foreign health insurance claim; to the first approximation that’s just stupid, since people and companies pay taxes in foreign countries for their national health insurance. Yes, you can get into an argument of efficiency and cost, but then that’s more on the order of saying that the Japanese companies have an advantage because their unions aren’t as stupid as the UAW and their plants are more efficient.
But even aside from all that, I don’t understand Robert’s claim about “Rush Limbaugh is Insane.” Insane for attacking a (perhaps former) advertiser? Insane for saying something that Robert agrees with, whether opposing the bailout or understanding why people wouldn’t buy GM? Or is it just that Robert doesn’t want to be lumped together with Rush?
Too bad, Robert, you’re going to be lumped together. Rush’s comment about wanting Obama to fail politically meant exactly the same thing about your anti-bailout position. He doesn’t want Obama to succeed politically in getting his plans passed, just as you didn’t want Bush or Obama to succeed in getting this dubious bailout passed.
I agree that it’s a bit dangerous politically to portray anyone who’s opposed to the bailout as a Republican or arch-conservative, but it seems like the Democrats would rather do that than pull out the “Bush did it too” argument.
Sigh…
I’m a conservative (small C). I generally vote Republican. Rush Limbaugh is NOT a Republican Spokesman.
So,who cares what Rush Limbaugh says?. I don’t.
Why do you care?
By the way, 20M people CAN be wrong… That’s only about 6% of the U.S. population. So 94% of the population don’t care what he says.
Can we STFU about politics and go back to talking about cars now?
Thank you.
“Most consumers already boycott GM, so it’s a moot point.”
So right: How else did GM get where it is? The outfit is dying because already for twenty years not enough people would do business with it.
Sorry, I haven’t ever listened to Limbaugh, or Rachel Maddow either afaik. I must be spending too much time reading TTAC!
Only now the liberals are the “our way or the apocalypse” crowd, while conservatives are all petulant and hoping for Obama/the country to fail.
No, conservatives want the policies which we believe to be detrimental to the country to fail. We do not want the country to fail.
Jeff Waingrow :
“After all,do you really want to be mistakenly seen as the Limbaugh of Car World?”
Uh, yeah, I imagine being known as the Limbaugh of your proffession would be a great thing.
Let’s see. If you are the Limbaugh of your profession, that’d mean:
– Being respected by your peers.
– Being number one.
– Being very wealthy.
– Having a major impact on many, many subjects.
Yup, being the Limbaugh of Car World is probably Mr. Farago’s dream.
Please don’t mistake dreaming about being the Limbaugh of Car World, with dreaming about actually being Rush Limbaugh. I doubt Mr. Farago wants to be Rush Limbaugh…..
Bringing this discussion back to cars, what happens to GM’s revenue if there is a 15% relative market shift from the Chevrolet Silverado to the Ford F-150? Both are good, profitable products that sell in huge volumes. Seems to me that if even a minority of Rush’s listeners decide not to buy GM products and the GM products they had purchased in the past tended to be high profit light trucks, GM may not have a path to become a viable business.
Saw a TV ad for a local Ford dealer yesterday that emphasized that Ford had not taken bailout money. Ford CEO Mulally made a cameo appearance at the end of the ad. I expect to see more ads like this.
Just try to imagine what would happen to this country if GM turned off the lights…and all of their staff were out of a job. Our economy is in a very fragile state as it is…can you imagine what effect the hundreds of thousands of people being unemployed would have on the system?
MANY MORE of your tax dollars would go to keep these people liquid in the form of government programs, welfare, etc.
Let’s see… if GM turned off the lights, the billions that are being granted (not loaned) to them would instead go to the people directly impacted by layoffs. They would be offered retraining programs and perhaps understand the reality of their situation. Instead, their employer is a tick on the ass of the taxpayer, sucking as much blood before the host gets around to lighting a match and burning the tick off.
So we, the taxpayer, are getting double billed – once for the incessant bailouts of failed car companies and again for the increased unemployment we’ll be on the hook for paying.
So anyone who’s anti-bailout is anti-Obama and, therefore, the enemy.
And if you don’t confirm Sonia Sotomayor you’re obviously racist.
Or if you do!!
Did I accidentally end up on foxnews.com?
What people don’t seem to understand or choose ot ignore is that our wonderful government spends our tax dollars like drunken sailors no matter what the cause. Spending it on GM and Chrysler loans at least has the side effect of keeping people employed, some dealers kept open, tax revenue open to local cities and towns and keeps unemployemnt from exploding worse than it already is. But of course few think of this. Things will never change when it comes to the Dems and Republicans. One will always blame the other or want the other side to fail. And Rush is still a fat moron.
Bertel Schmitt:
The German system involves required insurance, and premiums limited to a certain percentage of income for lower and middle income workers and a government fund to pay for the unemployed(??)- a system which by US definitions would be a form of socialized health care. However in the US far right all or nothing world view, socialized means it must be free to all and completely run and micromanaged by the government, leading to many misconceptions.
Robert:
While I think of you as a conservative, and do occasionally find some posts on TTAC overly ideological – by no means do I think of you as a “arch conservative”! That would imply a thoughtless blovating, forced idiocy, and almost evil intent that I have never found in your writing.
Rush is a hypocrite who lies and distorts for a living, a sort of yellow journalist and making many millions off easily led and delusional fools. “Mr. Limbaugh, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent radio show were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone is now dumber for having listened to it. May God have mercy on your soul.”
As a side note, my father was actually friends with Rush Limbaugh’s dad, and I grew up part time in Cape Girardeau MO. It was the most racist place I have ever lived, and so uptight that the when I was a freshman in high school, the kids in the lunchroom would only sit with other kids that went to the same church! A nightmare of anal retentive social conformity.
Author: ponchoman49
You write, “And Rush is still a fat moron.”
Definition of the word moron:
1. A stupid person; a dolt.
2. Psychology A person of mild mental retardation having a mental age of from 7 to 12 years and generally having communication and social skills enabling some degree of academic or vocational education. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive.
Hmmm. Rush Limbaugh has many faults, but being a moron isn’t one of them.
He is fat, but so what?
If someone violates your essential principles, from a moral perspective you should stop supporting them. For example, if a close friend bragged to you about murdering someone in cold blood, your friendship would be shaken to the core, if not destroyed.
This appears to be exactly the position Rush is taking, with respect to the bailout. GM took bailout money, and therefore it is bad. Frankly, this shows a shocking lack of hypocrisy on Rush’s part. He is sticking to his well-known, established principles.
I don’t always agree with Rush but he is no dummy and frankly, during the Obama administration he has been been a voice of reason in the bailout maelstrom.
Incidentally, Rush celebrated his contract extension last year by buying a beautiful $53 million Gulfstream G550 jet, an updated version of the one auto CEOs fly. Or used to.
Unlike them, he paid cash. Personally. No taxpayer bailout needed. His $25 million Palm Beach mansion carries no mortgage. Did you know that means $417,000 in annual property taxes? They are paid, bang on time.
I had no idea his job paid so well before I read that. Yikes. Makes auto execs look like pikers.
D
If you are the Limbaugh of your profession, that’d mean:
– Being respected by your peers.
If he gets the hat tip from overweight prescription drug junkies, then sign me up. I’m going to pay a visit to the medicine cabinet in his honor.
(It’s a shame that media blowhards of these sorts get so much attention. Quality heroes are hard to find, apparently.)
Don’t worry, Robert, we love you anyway!
I campaigned for Obama, and reject the bailout. What does that make me?
Nothing is ever simple.
I’m not necessarily anti-Obama, but I am anti-bailout because I am anti-stupid.
I’m not particularly a Rush fan, and I’ve probably only listened to his program three or four times in my life, but a read of the transcript shows that he did not call for a GM boycott.
Personally, I’m staying a long way away from GM until it’s demonstrated that the Waxmans and Franks aren’t running the company.
If the ecoclowns wanted to perform a service to this country, they could start by mulching Henry Waxman.
Here’s the transcript, he says he has nothing against GM, but understands why many people are considering a boycott. He does not claim to directly speak for them. He says they are uncomfortable with Obama et al acting as GM owners.
He is not taking this position directly, but is sympathetic to those who do.
As far as I can tell, the position he is reporting is identical to the position held by Robert and most TTAC readers. So I don’t see any reason for TTAC to oppose him, other than the mere fact it is Limbaugh saying it.
D
Jeff Waingrow + 1
David Dennis makes an important point. By acknowledging that some consumers might, for political reasons, object to a company that he’s sold advertising to, Limbaugh is demonstrating a certain amount of integrity.
The fact that this has been spun as “Limbaugh calls for GM boycott”, when in fact Limbaugh was simply describing a phenomenon the B&B have discussed for months, shows, though, how Rush has become an all purpose bogeyman for those on the left.
As for PcH101’s obligatory recitation of Mr. Limbaugh’s acknowledged problem with prescription painkillers, few people are saints and we all have our own foibles. Limbaugh has owned up to that problem and appears to be clean and sober. If Limbaugh had more melanin in his skin or a Spanish surname, referring to his past drug use would be considered culturally insensitive at best and certainly illiberal.
While Limbaugh may have his failings in his personal life (he’s been divorced two or three times) in his professional life he’s unquestionably succeeded in an incredibly competitive business. Remember, broadcast radio’s business model is based on offering content to for free in the hope of attracting enough listeners that advertisers will follow. The content is the draw, and Limbaugh does great, great radio. The guy is an expert at using that medium.
Though I share some political views with Rush, I’ve never really liked his shtick, only some of it works for me – the whole bravado thing (talent on loan from God, El Rushbo etc.) turns me off, but it works great at establishing a radio persona and brand. Behind the shtick, though, is some well thought out political ideology, and that is why Rush is a boogeyman for the left. To paraphrase Bob Seger, not only does Rush have the “tower and the power” of a broadcast pulpit, but he uses that pulpit to effectively spread the conservative message. You only get flak when you’re over the target.
Limbaugh’s succeeded at getting his show syndicated and he’s succeeded at building an audience of about 20 million listeners. My guess is that few of the B&B have been as successful in their chosen fields as Limbaugh has been in radio.
Non one’s made the connection that GM was told by some Obamatron to stop spending money on Rush’s show? Isn’t that the simplest and most likely answer?
Tied to all this Gov’t chatter, do read this article about how each one of us could get fined $5,000 if we don’t answer the US Census
http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentary/47070977.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUsZ
What Ronnie Schreiber wrote above – awesomely put. Wish I could have said it so well.
I’m not going there.
few people are saints and we all have our own foibles.
Well, that’s fine that you believe that. But according to Mr. Limbaugh, big losers like himself belong in jail:
Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods, which become consumed by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up.
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1159
It’s time that the GOP changed its slogan to something more accurate, such as “Accountability: It’s for other people!” (TM) It has a nice ring to it, and goes well with the meds.
I’m so fiscally conservative that I make Rush Limbaugh and George Bush look like communists. I also think that they are both idiots.
Look, across the board, car companies are selling half the cars they did in previous years. To any company, that’s going to be a major shock. The first question we need to ask is: why the are fewer cars being sold than yesterday. The true answer is: there were unrealistic numbers of cars being sold the last few years. Without the credit bubble, the companies wouldn’t have sold nearly that many cars (I can’t count the number of folks I saw driving Hummers, BMWs, and Harleys these last few years that had no business owning one). Likewise, they wouldn’t have geared up and made projections based on those sales. And when the credit bubble popped, the rugged was pulled out from under them. GM was too weak to survive that sort of stress.
So, who caused the credit bubble? It’s partly the fault of the Federal Reserve (which genius thought it would be a good idea to drop rates to 1%?) and partly the fault of sheister/opaque derivatives (money for nothing and chicks for free — see Enron). Free market capitalism requires transparency. Lying, cheating, and stealing isn’t a free market, but a rigged market.
So, with GM, we’re facing potential financial thermonuclear meltdown of the mid west. I’m not fan of intervening but was the government (through the credit bubble and the fake ownership society) that was responsible for this in the first place.
Oh, and Chrysler is partly Cerebus’ (see Dan Quayle) mess.
And don’t get me started on the “blame the CRA” rewrite of history. I know quite a few Wall Street quants who had a good laugh at that one.
@PCH101:
It’s time that the GOP changed its slogan to something more accurate, such as “Accountability: It’s for other people!” (TM) It has a nice ring to it, and goes well with the meds.
While this might be accurate, so is this:
It’s time that the Democrats changed its slogan to something more accurate, such as “Accountability: It’s for other people!” (TM) It has a nice ring to it, and goes well with cheating on your taxes or keeping bribe money in your freezer.
See, no matter which side you support, you’re still blinded by your own ideology. So why are you supporting either? You’re just choosing to believe one person’s bullshit over someone else’s.
Excellent post, Ronnie! I have liked Rush increasingly since the Obama administration took over. I think he’s said some excellent things that few have the guts to say.
PCH, isn’t Rush’s statement referring primarily to illegal street drugs such as marijuana and cocaine, and the culture they inspire?
I’m not convinced that illegal use of prescription drugs, which was Rush’s problem, is anywhere near as damaging.
And Rush is not a legal representative of the GOP. In fact, Rush has frequently disagreed with the GOP establishment on matters of principle. So I don’t think it’s fair to associate Rush’s peccadilloes with official GOP policy.
D
isn’t Rush’s statement referring primarily to illegal street drugs such as marijuana and cocaine, and the culture they inspire?
Maybe you’re not such a Rush fan, after all. As Limbaugh was fond of saying, “We’re becoming too tolerant, folks.” You should be grabbing his mantle of leadership by following his lead and jailing the addicts.
As for culture, I’ll take ten potheads over an oxycontin freak. The latter tend to lie and steal, while the former just eat too much junk food.
You’re just choosing to believe one person’s bulls*t over someone else’s.
Not really. I’m just pointing out the obvious hypocrisy. You have people here calling for us to tolerate Mr. Limbaugh’s vices, when Limbaugh himself has declared a war on tolerance. Why grant him an exemption when he is the very picture of what he claims to oppose?
Get real, folks. If you’re going to be inconsistent, expect to get a bit of mockery lobbed your way. Find some better heroes, and you’ll get less flack.
PCH, I read the entire “Limbaugh on Drugs” text that you linked to, and not even once does he refer to prescription drug abuse, as opposed to street drug abuse.
I personally dislike drugs but don’t feel that drug laws have been effective. This is an issue Limbaugh and I disagree on, and I’m cool with that – the important thing is that he does an outstanding job representing many of my other views, on issues I consider much more important than this one.
D
I am for the legalization of drugs since I believe the war on drugs has done as much harm to our society as the drugs themselves. That said, I find the argument laughable that prescription drug abuse is better than “street drug” abuse.
Is this because nice middle class folks get hooked on prescription drugs while poor folks go for crack? As I recall, heroin is a pain killer, and marijuana is medicinal, so I guess there is not to much of a difference in types of drugs when we really think about it. Shopping for doctors, which Rush did, to get more prescriptions is not a lot different than buying drugs from a dealer, it seems to me.
I do not think Rush should be held in ridicule for his addiction–I was given morphine after an accident, and I really wanted to become addicted–but I do find his hypocrisy on the subject galling.
I read the entire “Limbaugh on Drugs” text that you linked to, and not even once does he refer to prescription drug abuse
Nice attempt at parsing, but let’s quote him again:
if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up.
Oxycontin abuse is illegal. He violated the law. He obviously feels quite strongly about this sort of thing…except when it comes to himself.
Surely, there must be better conservatives to admire. Take George Will, for example — he may be a bit precious and I may never agree with him, but he is at least intelligent, a bit more measured in his thought, and capable of providing a decent battle in a debate.
In contrast, Limbaugh appeals to our lowest base instincts, the gold medal award winner in the Stuttering Right Wing Special Olympics. He should be an embarrassment to your cause, and to you. Defending him just makes it appear that your priorities are misplaced.
I’m just pointing out the obvious hypocrisy.
Yes, the hypocrisy of the side you disagree with while ignoring the hypocrisy for the side you believe in.
Talk about inconsistent.
@blankfocus :
June 9th, 2009 at 11:59 am
Did I accidentally end up on foxnews.com?
Best zinger of the day, so far. You made me laugh out loud at my desk. Customers are starting to stare…
@jkross22 :
June 9th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
@PCH101:
It’s time that the GOP changed its slogan to something more accurate, such as “Accountability: It’s for other people!” (TM) It has a nice ring to it, and goes well with the meds.
While this might be accurate, so is this:
It’s time that the Democrats changed its slogan to something more accurate, such as “Accountability: It’s for other people!” (TM) It has a nice ring to it, and goes well with cheating on your taxes or keeping bribe money in your freezer.
See, no matter which side you support, you’re still blinded by your own ideology. So why are you supporting either? You’re just choosing to believe one person’s bullshit over someone else’s.
Amen to you, JKRoss, amen.
Quality heroes are hard to find, apparently.
Quality heroes make dull copy.
I see an enormous difference.
Shopping for doctors to buy drugs, as far as I can tell, harms nobody but the person taking the drugs.
Buying drugs on the street supports a whole infrastructure of really nasty people who have made inner city life a live horror movie.
D
Q: What do you get when you cross oxycontin with Rush Limbaugh?
A: An oxymoron.
Twotone
I see an enormous difference.
See, we’re not talking about what you see. We’re talking about what Mr. Limbaugh sees, and how he holds himself to a far lower standard than he upholds for others.
The issue is hypocrisy. He wants to bust those who violate drug laws, except for himself. He condemns them and demands jail time for them…except for himself.
I am evaluating him by his own standards, not mine or yours. If you wish to give him a pass, then you’re just being an enabler for his own dysfunctional, hypocritical lifestyle.
AKM@
“I campaigned for Obama, and reject the bailout. What does that make me?”
Smarter now than you were then.
Shopping for doctors to buy drugs, as far as I can tell, harms nobody but the person taking the drugs.
Buying drugs on the street supports a whole infrastructure of really nasty people who have made inner city life a live horror movie.
Ah, so if the pusher is in a lab coat, it’s fine. If the pusher is a “from the street” (wink wink), then it’s troublesome.
Didn’t Limbaugh use his maid to get him his drug fix?
TTAC’s call for a GM boycott was a joke.
Rush Limbaugh’s call for a GM boycott is also a joke.
The fact is your moral justification of supporting this boycott is weak when you consider the subsidies that our government invested in building the internet you voice your opinions on, eating the food you’ve just bought from the supermarket, backing the mortgage you’ve obtained to purchase your house, and I can go on with a few more subsidized items that we all enjoy without a second thought.
If you’re going to boycott GM/Chrysler on this basis, please don’t stop there; you’ll only look like a hypocrite, and a foolish one at that. I expect you to go all the way, or at the very least be honest and tell us you won’t ever buy a GM product because you’re still upset over that Malibu that prematurely lost it’s intake manifold gaskets or something.
The fact is your moral justification of supporting this boycott is weak when you consider the subsidies that our government invested in building the internet you voice your opinions on, eating the food you’ve just bought from the supermarket, backing the mortgage you’ve obtained to purchase your house, and I can go on with a few more subsidized items that we all enjoy without a second thought.
I’m just waiting for them to switch off their computers, since a good chunk of the electricity is brought to them thanks to massive government capital subsidies. If they’re out West, they better turn off their faucets as well.
Anything Rush says, like Karl Rove, has been proven to not work, be bad social policy, or against the interests of his average fan…who still believes him.
AG@
“Is anybody else disturbed by the idea that there are people out there willing to scuttle the economy because their people were voted out of office?”
The economy is already scuttled. Now the people whose “people were voted out of office” are just trying to keep it from becoming scuttled and socialist at the same time.
While Limbaugh may have his failings in his personal life (he’s been divorced two or three times) in his professional life he’s unquestionably succeeded in an incredibly competitive business. Remember, broadcast radio’s business model is based on offering content to for free in the hope of attracting enough listeners that advertisers will follow. The content is the draw, and Limbaugh does great, great radio. The guy is an expert at using that medium.
His ilk prey on stupid people. I know this is hard to grasp, but just because something is profitable doesn’t mean it’s correct or beneficial. For example, there’s a reason we outlaw activities that lead to drug abuse.
Similarly, taking advantage of the mentally challenged by deceiving them on public policies is not only morally abhorrent but also destructive towards our society.
—
Bailout mania never stops reminding me of the run-up to the war in Iraq. Only now the liberals are the “our way or the apocalypse” crowd, while conservatives are all petulant and hoping for Obama/the country to fail. Deja vu all over again.
Just because something seems superficially similar does not mean it’s the same thing.
Look at it this way: smart people knew about the lies, the aims, the massive corruption, and the inevitable failure that is Iraq. The more or less same group of smart people if anything are claiming the current bailout levels are inadequate to trigger optimal economic recovery.
If your goal is to be correct, it pays to side with people who research these things extensively and actually know what they’re talking about.
As for culture, I’ll take ten potheads over an oxycontin freak. The latter tend to lie and steal, while the former just eat too much junk food.
As for culture, the main reason why drug users lie and steal is so they can buy drugs and get high. Multimillionaires with drug problems, like Limbaugh was, rarely have to resort to stealing. As for lying, well, like I said, that’s a foible we all have.
Since you’re now a supporter of the the war on drugs, could you tell us how you feel about substance abuse in the Kennedy family? Like Patrick Kennedy’s arrest by the Capitol Police for drug impaired driving, or his cousin Robert’s history of heroin use (while he was working as a prosecutor in New York)?
You’re only a drug warrior when it’s a conservative with a drug problem.
Rush Limbaugh is a public figure but a private citizen, not an elected official nor a political appointee. Limbaugh acknowledged his error, fixed it and went on with his life. There’s a very good chance that Minnesota will soon be represented in the US Senate by Al Franken, a man who admits using illegal drugs (and not just pharmaceuticals) and not only doesn’t regret it, he jokes about it.
I did my share of recreational drugs [while writing for SNL]. I was lucky in that I never became addicted to anything. There’d be cocaine around the show and if it was (mid-week) at 3 in the morning and I wanted to finish something I was writing I’d do some. But for some reason, toss of the dice, I was not addicted, at least not to drugs.
Source: Los Angeles Times, December 28, 1994
“Toss of the dice”, to me, indicates that he did more than just dabble or experiment, but fortunately did not get addicted.
Regarding Saturday Night Live:
Drugs were everywhere… Al Franken and Tom Davis, writers in the early days and coproducers of the program now, used LSD on the premises while writing a Nixon sketch, according to the book.
Source: The Washington Post, February 25, 1986
Franken:”It was impossible to do the show without drugs. Comedians and comedy writers and people in show business in general aren’t the most disciplined people, so the idea of putting the writing off until you had to, and then staying up all night, was an attractive one. And then having this drug that kept you awake in an enjoyable way was kind of tempting too. But I only did cocaine to stay awake to make sure nobody else did too much cocaine. That was the only reason I ever did it. Heh-heh.” Source: Live From New York: An Uncensored History of Saturday Night Live, as Told By Its Stars, Writers and Guests, Tom Shales and Jimmy the Writer, Inc, 2002, 104
Regarding his breakup with comedy partner Tom Davis:
Franken: That was one of the issues. He [Davis] thought I was an alcoholic and a drug addict. He called me a garden-variety alcoholic and drug addict. He did his share of my drugs. He did plenty of experiments. I don’t want to embarrass him now, because I don’t think he needs that for his current career or whatever, but it was common knowledge”. Source: Live From New York: An Uncensored History of Saturday Night Live, as Told By Its Stars, Writers and Guests, Tom Shales and Jimmy the Writer, Inc, 2002, 350-351
Some people sure don’t understand what hypocrisy is.
@Ronnie Schreiber:
You’re missing the point. This isn’t about supporting the drug war, it’s about being a hypocrite, as Pch101 said. As he noted, he’s not judging Limbaugh by his own standard, but by Limbaugh’s standard.
It doesn’t matter that Al Franken did drugs. It would matter if Al Franken did drugs, then went off saying that we should lock up drug offenders. Franken doesn’t say that. Rush Limbaugh does. That is what makes him a hypocrite.
A hyprocrite is one who advocates one thing, but does another. You see? Limbaugh would no longer be a hypocrite if he said, “You know, my own experience with addiction has made me realize that it’s an illness, not a crime. There should be compassion for those who suffer from addiction, be it to oxycontin or crack cocaine. There should be help: public and private resources to help people rebuild their lives. Prison is not the answer to addiction, even if the person lies or uses others to achieve a ‘score.\'” Do you think Limbaugh said that? No. He said he made a mistake, blah, blah, blah, and wanted his audience’s forgiveness. People who demand forgiveness for their own crimes, but punishment for the similar crimes of others, are hypocrites.
@ carsinamerica
Hey, you need to back off Ronnie. He’s just a dispassionate “independent” calling things as they are with pure objectivity. The fact that he’s vituperative solely towards people on the left, is a passionate apologist for the racist drug addict and hate-mongering propagandist Limbaugh, and hashes over every worn-out cliche fed to the right-wing echo chamber by the likes of Limbaugh in no way shape or form makes him a wingnut. So don’t say that or even think that.
Drug addicted Rush Limpnuts took a sex vacation to Dominican Republic. He was arrested for violating his agreement with law enforcement because he used someone else’s prescription Viagra. DR is famous as a sex tourist destination (like Haiti) for those who want sex with children, of either sex. There should have been a full investigation into his activities while in DR.
This is from Wikipedia:
“In June 2006, Limbaugh was detained by drug enforcement agents at Palm Beach International Airport. Customs officials confiscated Viagra from Limbaugh’s luggage as he was returning from the Dominican Republic. The prescription was not in Limbaugh’s name.
“After he was released with no charges filed, Limbaugh joked about the incident on his radio show, claiming that he got the Viagra at the Clinton Library and was told they were blue M&M’s. He also stated that “I had a great time in the Dominican Republic. Wish I could tell you about it.”[109]
He rapid loss of hearing requiring transplant surgery was probably due to his drug abuse.
Wow, once again the Rush haters rip a comment entirely out of context and then resort to personal attacks when they can’t argue with the substance of his remarks.
Read the transcript. Actually listen to the show. Rush was commenting on a Rasmussen report that 24% of people will not buy a GM product as long as it is government owned. He simply said he could understand why they would do that. He said NOTHING about supporting or starting a boycott himself.
Now is it my right to decided whether or not I buy a car from a particular company for any reason I chose? Yes. And not buying from GM because of the total waste of money Obama has blown on them is as good a reason as any.
“Read the transcript. Actually listen to the show.”
If Rush wasn’t taken out of context, there’d be nothing to talk about. He’s a boogeyman to most liberals. It’s irrational – it’s not supposed to make sense or be based in reality.
A hypocrite is one who advocates one thing, but does another. You see?
Apparently, not everybody does, as we’ve just seen.
Thanks for a great summary of what makes hypocrisy particularly odious. I don’t think that the fans are going to want to hear it, but I suppose that comes with the territory.
If Rush wasn’t taken out of context, there’d be nothing to talk about. He’s a boogeyman to most liberals.
Are there people who still deny his influence on the ring wing movement?