From: art@world.std.com (Al Thompson)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: (no subject given)
Date: 25 Jan 93 21:29:20 GMT
	<ART.93Jan23025038@world.std.com> <nate.1106@psygate.psych.indiana.edu>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA

In article <nate.1106@psygate.psych.indiana.edu> nate@psygate.psych.indiana.edu (Nathan Engle) writes:

   art@world.std.com (Al Thompson) writes:
   >harry@hershele.alf.dec.com (Harry Katz) writes:
   >   vengeanc@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu wrote:

   >          Here's the situation.  Rush is an ENTERTAINER first and
   >          foremost.  He is not a journalist, reporter, or Geraldo Rivera.

   >   If Rush is not a journalist or a reporter then he must be a "Geraldo
   >   Rivera," that is, an entertainer posing as a reporter.

   >The difference is that Rush says straight out that he's an entertainer.
   >He makes is very clear that he is not a reporter.

       That's not what he was saying last week to that conservative lady 
   caller who was complaining about his near-total focus on Clinton. In his 
   belated pseudo-response to her criticisms he said that he had to focus on 
   Clinton in the interests of "good reporting". Why is Rush concerned about 
   engaging in "good reporting" if he's not a reporter?

Quite simple, to "report" something does not mean you are a reporter.
But that aside, he repeatedly says wheat I reported above, and below.

   >   Unfortunately, many of his supporters on this net do not know this fact
   >   and it colors their perception of the man and his ideas.

   >I don't see how they could miss it unless they are deaf.

       Actually I think that the reason some of them miss the point is that 
   Rush himself seems to contribute to the state of confusion with stuff like 
   the "good reporting" comment last week.

Crap.  He says over and over again that he is an entertainer, that he is
in business to make money and the purpose of the calls is to make him
look good.  Listen to him sometime I'm sure you'll hear it if you bother
to listen.

   >  He says over
   >and over again that he controls the whole show, including screening
   >calls.

       The main thing that I can remember Rush saying over and over was his 
   tirade last week while discussing liberals in which he repeated the phrase 
   "Their ideas do not work" at least 5 times in rapid succession, almost as 
   though he was reciting a mantra or as though he was trying to reconvince 
   himself through repetition.

So?  He makes it clear he thinks liberals are the only thing wrong with
this country.  "Symbolism over substance."

       Is entertainment the reason that Rush repeats his anti-liberal 
   propaganda so much, or could it be that he's trying to make a point 
   above and beyond the simple goal of making people laugh? Do you think 
   that he really believes that liberal-bashing is funny no matter how 
   often its repeated, or is he just willing to sacrifice a little humor 
   for the purpose of bashing liberals?

Of course he's trying to make a point.  He says that all the time too.
Besides, why is it that just because he is an entertainer he is precluded
from having an opinion?  The fact is that he makes no bones about it.  He
is open and straightforward about it.  He makes no effort to hide is
positions.

   >  He even goes so far as to say the purpose of taking calls is to
   >make him look good.  He's quite open about this, and anybody who doubts
   >it just plain isn't listening.

       Maybe they are simply listening more closely than you. None of my 
   problems with Rush have arisen from anything besides his exact words. I 
   think that perhaps you should join me in my scrutiny of those exact words 
   before you assume that I haven't been listening. Inconsistancies are there 
   if you bother to look for them.

Sure there are some inconsistencies.  They just don't happen to comprise
much of what he says.  I hear him repeatedly saying he's there to make
money, be an entertainer, has an anti-liberal agenda and the purpose of
the calls is to make him look good.  I have never heard him claim to be
unbiased, or even fair.
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.activism