Rush Limbaugh has passed

RE: NBA discussion and comparing old to new. This is kind of cool to check out:

NBA League Averages - Per Game | Basketball-Reference.com

Teams were taking 30 FTA's per game in the 80's. We're only at 22 these days. Average player size right now is 6' 6" 218 lbs and in the 80's it averaged 6' 7" 207 lbs.

You can see when eFG% starts dropping in the late 90's and how boring the league was (pace was way down) and then they change to allow zone D and banned hand-checking and eFG% comes up. Then teams started constructing their rosters and adjusting game plans to strategize around the new rules and scoring efficiency quickly became respectable again, and soon thereafter pace increased.

It's a matter of taste. IMO the game sucks now on so many levels I seldom watch.
 
Yeah - I mean he essentially said "don't listen to the mainstream media's echo chamber; listen to my echo chamber."

I totally agree with the notion that the media had a completely self-interested reason for hating him. This whole "he poisoned our political discourse" is virtue signaling and pearl clutching. Not only did he say opinions they disagreed with but, similar to internet media/social media, he largely created himself a competing outlet (talk radio) that reduced establishment media's control and influence. I actually respect Rush for that. However, that doesn't mean that his show wasn't an echo chamber itself though.
Anything can be called an echo chamber if that is all you listen to. No doubt there.
 
Now that I think about it, the popularity of Limbaugh should have been an indication that the Republican Party could end up with somebody like Trump as its leader.

Rush was an anti-PC bomb-thrower with lots of bugaboos in his personal life from the perspective of conservatives (married 4 times, prescription drug problems). He understood that politics was downstream from culture, and was an entertainer first and foremost.

The scary thought is what Lib was so popular the DNC gave us Biden. Seriously, think about that.
 
But Rush never viewed silence as an option.

Rush did what few have done. Stand up to the left and expose them. If for no other reason than to provide balance. Many times that required he be who ya'll want to despise because he wouldn't stick his head in the sand.
 
As much as I dislike some politicians I do realize they are still human beings.... sort of....and as rude and crude as I can be at times.... I wouldn’t stoop to celebrating a death of one of them.... or a liberal clown media personality. These people do have families and loved ones that are innocent of their dumbfu**ery. People should keep that in mind
A mature, thoughtful, and kind approach. I was absolutely sure yesterday evening I would not hold back on the next RIP [rando politician] thread. Now, I am not so sure. Darn you, CP.
 
I'm not surprised that this is your takeaway.

I also don't care much for what the NFL has become.

Your #1 gripe about today was fouls and now we find out the era you liked had almost 40% more FT's. Of course I'm going to mock you.
 
Rush did what few have done. Stand up to the left and expose them. If for no other reason than to provide balance. Many times that required he be who ya'll want to despise because he wouldn't stick his head in the sand.

Problem is that he was a hateful prick. Celebrated people getting aids and dying. Said gay marriage leads to beastiality. It wasn't the fact that he stood up to the left, it was the fact that he sometimes did so in a completely despicable manner.
 
Anything can be called an echo chamber if that is all you listen to. No doubt there.
Not necessarily. Something like Joe Rogan's podcast, for example, I wouldn't describe as an echo chamber. Rogan brings on people from all over the political spectrum, in addition to non-politicians, and more or less lets them make their argument without interrupting. "Rising" with Krystal and Saagar I don't think is an echo chamber. "Left, Right & Center" is another example. However, even if you listen to a show that does make some kind of concerted effort to present multiple viewpoints, it still can be biased (e.g., maybe there is a 3rd or 4th opinion that isn't being presented, or perhaps they are creating a false sense of balance). That's why you shoudn't listen to just one thing, or even a couple of things, to get information.

In contrast, Rush's show was him speaking into a microphone for 3 hours with no dissenting viewpoints. He very rarely had guests or callers on his show, and the guests/callers he did have were people who agreed with him.
 
Yeah - I mean he essentially said "don't listen to the mainstream media's echo chamber; listen to my echo chamber."

I totally agree with the notion that the media had a completely self-interested reason for hating him. This whole "he poisoned our political discourse" is virtue signaling and pearl clutching. Not only did he say opinions they disagreed with but, similar to internet media/social media, he largely created himself a competing outlet (talk radio) that reduced establishment media's control and influence. I actually respect Rush for that. However, that doesn't mean that his show wasn't an echo chamber itself though.
Your thought, if any, on his policy of advancing liberal callers to the front of the queue on his show?
 
Problem is that he was a hateful prick. Celebrated people getting aids and dying. Said gay marriage leads to beastiality. It wasn't the fact that he stood up to the left, it was the fact that he sometimes did so in a completely despicable manner.
He trolled before we knew what a troll was.

When I listened regularly, his trolling was the soundbite the media ran with. But the issue behind the bombast could be as much as 2 or 3 segments on his program.
 
Your thought, if any, on his policy of advancing liberal callers to the front of the queue on his show?
I wasn't even aware he had such a policy. Almost every time I listened to his show, it was just him talking. If he had a caller, 99% of the time it was a "Dittohead" who agreed with him. The 1% where it wasn't would be a "liberal" who called in and usually attacked him personally, as opposed to attacking something he had said.
 
I wasn't even aware he had such a policy. Almost every time I listened to his show, it was just him talking. If he had a caller, 99% of the time it was a "Dittohead" who agreed with him. The 1% where it wasn't would be a "liberal" who called in and usually attacked him personally, as opposed to attacking something he had said.
It was his policy. Anyone who listened consistently can vouch.

At times, I felt he was softer with respectful liberals than when ditto heads called in.

I found his treatment of them to be very cordial and respectful to the degree the caller was polite.
 
No, my gripe is about ticky tack (hand check type) fouls.

Hand checking literally never gets called.

Stop embarrassing yourself. You think an era (that you don't watch) with 30% fewer FT's has more ticky-tack fouls? No fkn way.
 
It was his policy. Anyone who listened consistently can vouch.

At times, I felt he was softer with respectful liberals than when ditto heads called in.

I found his treatment of them to be very cordial and respectful to the degree the caller was polite.
Regardless of whatever "policy" he had, I don't think anybody would confuse his show for a debate show.
 
He trolled before we knew what a troll was.

When I listened regularly, his trolling was the soundbite the media ran with. But the issue behind the bombast could be as much as 2 or 3 segments on his program.

He's a big reason for the current climate, IMO. Republicans used to be the party of the high road and he was kind of the inception of the antagonistic right-wing. Maybe he was justified because of the way the left behaves but it's hard to argue the results are good. Reagan was probably the high-point for the Republican party. Rush shows up and besides the contract with America, the R party has pretty much been a **** show ever since.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
Regardless of whatever "policy" he had, I don't think anybody would confuse his show for a debate show.
Of course not. It was no more debate than any agenda-driven entertainment.

You posted as if you had listened a lot. You also tend to be level headed. That's why I was curious on your take.

I liked it, myself. In an era where the "other side" was/is shutting down those with differing opinions, he welcomed them to his show as a caller. Others had a cynical view of the practice calling it a stunt but I never got that impression.
 
People that berate others for not being libtards only because they hold traditional values are the opposition. Ya'll just don't agree to disagree. Ya'll make war out of it.
Making war out of disagreement is indeed the problem and it is 100% the intended result of Rush-esque talk radio.
 
  • Like
Reactions: evillawyer

VN Store



Back
Top