Rush Limbaugh doesn't Just Believe His Audience is Stupid, He DEPENDS on it.

Just Listened to Rush. Amazing.

It's just amazing to me that his listeners can be so plug stupid! But he relies on it!

How else could he get away with this;

"I, me, my, three of the most used words in President Obama's media appearance last night, not a single intelligence adviser, not a single national security adviser, military adviser, came up with the idea...not one of them... according to Obama, had the ability to understand the need to get DNA. This was Obama's message last night," Limbaugh said.
http://www.conservativerefocus.com/blog5.php/2011/05/02/media-has-problems-recognizing-satire-rush-limbaugh-s-thank-god-for-obama-sarcasm-initially-misread

Today Rush just went on and on about how Obama took all the credit, as though he designed, directed, and executed the operation himself. He just said it, and his audience no doubt believed it.

The actual text of the announcement;

http://missoulian.com/news/national/article_33b6a220-7475-11e0-81fd-001cc4c03286.html

Excerpt;
(The snipped bit had one 'I' and one 'we')


That's how he does it. He characterizes a speech by making false claims in order to perpetuate the bullshit perception that Obama is 'narcissistic'. He knows he will get away with it and his audience will simply believe him because he knows they are too damn lazy and stupid to check the facts for themselves.

Throughout the announcement, Obama routinely praises the work of others while only referring to himself in terms of his responsibilities as CiC. Of course he authorized the raid... who the hell else could? What is he supposed to say?

But Limbaugh just floats his shit right out there and spreads it far and wide across the American landscape. Then laughs his fat ass off all the way to the bank.

Because he knows his audience is comprised entirely of lazy ignorant morons.

And he couldn't do what he does without them.

Anyone else is welcome to do the same. (To their own friends and family, that is. I'll take care of mine)

Here is the ensuing discussion:

Wingnut: You need to stop reading this poison. Listen to Rush.

Me: Did I tell you I'm collecting data on the psychological defense mechanism of denial?
Thanks for you contribution.

So truth is poison?

Nice response. No effect, of course.

Everyone but the Rushbots have known this for years. There have been books written about the things he says being commonly known to be untrue at the time he said it. (I think the first one was called "Reign of Errors")

I'm with ya, but this is something we've known a long, long time.
GAC

Ever since I read "Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot", the starkness of his bullshit has been very clear to me.

The point I'd like to hammer into the 'Rushbots' is that He counts on their intellectual laziness. I didn't post this to inform DU, I posted it to piss off the trolls.

Thanks though. ^_^

It's just a remarkable imaginary world these people live in. Too bad how they act in their world fucks with the real one.

You could be the cause severe retinal damage putting 'Limbaugh' and 'Depends' in the same line. x( x(

Sorry if I didn't make that clear. I'd really like the trolling wingnuts to face a few moments of cognitive discomfort.

Feel free to K+R if you would too.

And realize the lies and bullshit he's been spewing all these years are in fact lies and bullshit.

They'll just latch on to the next lying sack of blow-hard that lies convincingly enough.

Spurts off and grows newer, bigger, scarier tentacles. :rofl:

Why would you inflict such horrid imagery on any sentient creature?!?!??!

You're a very bad person. :evilgrin:

To be able to withstand that torture; I literally can't listen for more than about five seconds.

would you say the same for Rachel Maddow's audience, since she also regularly floats misinformation?

If you really want to inform his audience (or the public) it is probably not a good idea to attack them as you do so.

Just a thought.

:rofl:

And if it was corrected later, it doesn't count, because Rush doesn't do that.

One ad hominem after another strung together with a few meaningless arguments and no supporting evidence other than right-wing blogger rants.

What are you still doing here?

Really, I want to know. Making claims that people have lied when they quite obviously have not is something of a breach in any reality-based community.

So really... what are you still doing here?

both why I am tolerated and why I bother. Sometimes the place seems both hopelessly tribal and hopelessly juvenile.

But I do try to stay within the rules, and I am definitely a Democrat, although I may not belong with the "progressive" caucus which seems to be fixated on social issues whereas I am far more concerned with economic issues. Like progressive taxes, for example http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/140

But enough about me. Your assertion that Rachel has "quite obviously not" lied lacks any sort of substance. Somerby (Al Gore's college roommate who has written millions of words on his blog, detailing the media's "War on Gore") goes into a fair amount of detail explaining what Rachel "got wrong" (n.b. this is not the same as "lying"). So what is your explanation for where Somerby is wrong. Other than your Scotsman argument that "No true Liberal would ever question the great and awesome Rachel" I am not seeing any substance.

But back to your last question, usually the backstroke, if you get my classic jokes.





Which you can find in Vonnegut.












"Waiter, what's this fly doing in my soup?"

"I believe that's the backstroke sir."

And it's the tune played by the wingnuts every day on these interwebz.

Why you would play that same tune here is a amazing to me.

If Rachel gets a fact wrong, she's not lying. But that's how the wingnuts convince themselves she is. They, like you, cannot seem to differentiate between deliberate deception and lapse of diligence.

Anyone who calls themselves a 'Democrat', yet buys into the rightwing brainwashing techniques really needs to take a long hard look at where they really stand and what's really going on in the world.

If you can't see the interstellar difference between Rush and Rachel, then I don't know why you stay a Democrat.


"Where's the spoon?"

I wish you were working for the other side. You could go argue with Republicans that they should become Democrats because they are not ideologically pure enough.

I sorta think the Democratic Party stands for more than just hatred of Rush Limbaugh and his fans and worship of Rachel.

Uh, I was the one who noted the difference between error and lying. My original post said that she gives out misinformation, making her viewers misinformed and more tribal.

One thing I can observe going on in the world is this tribalism. Where each side pretends that their own side is totally virtuous (and intelligent) and the other side is totally depraved (and stupid). I called bullshit on that when the other side did it to me (for protesting Bush and the war) and I call bullshit on it when my side does it to the other side (for protesting Obama and healthcare reform). Either we are all Americans here or you two gangs can just start your apocalyptic rockfight so we can move beyond the rhetoric of hate.

You gave one example of Rush getting something wrong and said that proves that his audience is a bunch of idiots.

Well, then why doesn't one example of Rachel getting something wrong (and Somerby has given scores of examples over the last year or so) prove the same thing about Rachel's audience?

Personally, I think your thesis is wrong and that your approach is counter-productive. It's one thing to point out when Rush Limbaugh gets something wrong, either because of stupidity or dishonesty. It is another thing to attack his audience for Rush's errors. Those are the voters that we want to wake up. We want them to quit listening to Rush and start reading Mother Jones magazine. You don't accomplish that by throwing insults at them.

I'll not waste my time on you tonight. You've already indulged in false parity, that much puts you below my consideration.

I'll read the whole of what you've written over the weekend and decide whether it's worthy of a response, or if I should just ignore you altogether.

Good night.

For every piece of information that Rachel does not get right, I'll find you at least a dozen deliberate lies (like the above) that Rush has disseminated.

As for 'attacking' his audience... if they could read and do research, then they wouldn't be his audience.

Either way, I'm very, very glad that this thread has drawn you out.

Just so you know... that was the point.

You like mushrooms?

I just watched that last Saturday!

Thanks for the new keyboard.

*_*

so it's not too hard to see how they believe the crap that Limbaugh spews.

That's the real difference. They are effectively brainwashed. They don't believe Rush because they're too lazy or dumb to get facts on their own, they believe Rush BECAUSE HE IS THE LEADER AND NO ONE EVER DARES QUESTION HIM. It would take deliberate de-programming efforts such as used to get people out of the Unification Church to break people away from the Limbaugh cult.