dogzilla

The liberals and Democrats complaints about Obama being labeled a socialist are rather ironic and amusing considering the years of liberal and Democratic rhetoric about Bush being a Nazi. The criticisms of Obama as a socialist are nothing by comparison.

Willravel

Not only did I never call Bush a Nazi, but people like me made sure to call out the very few people on the left who did. What we did do, however, and I'm not going to apologize for that, was draw apt comparisons between what was happening from 2000-2008 in the United States and Germany in the 1930s. Were the scales the same? Of course not, and I never claimed they were. Still, the parallels were there and you can't just dismiss them because they make you uncomfortable. The thing is, though, I can actually back up my assertions. I can back up every actual complaint and accusation I ever lobbed in the direction of Bush. I have evidence. There's no evidence whatsoever President Obama was born in Kenya or he's a Nazi or a communist. I'm not just calling these things illegitimate because I disagree with them, I'm calling them illegitimate because they are in fact illegitimate. They're not opinion, they're ridiculous lies and falsehoods.

Baraka_Guru

I don't recall anyone other than protesters and political bloggers and maybe MoveOn.org calling Bush a Nazi. I found this link: The Gallery of 'Bush = Hitler' Allusions

Other than that, which Democrats and liberal news media called Bush a Nazi? I tended to filter out such things while he was in office.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

dogzilla

So which faction do you think these people consider themselves part of? Liberals? Democrats? I'm quite willing to bet that the majority, if not all were neither conservatives or Republicans.

You're using the Canadian healthcare plan as an example of a socialist program http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/tilted-...ml#post2822219

Obama went on public record stating he favored both of these options

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32718713/

http://www.barackobama.com/factcheck...sistent_in.php

Now if he didn't believe a single payer system was the right approach, then why would he say it was on his campaign website?

The only reason we don't have the public option or the single payer option was that Obama got beaten so badly for advocating either option, not because Obama isn't a socialist.

Baraka_Guru

But how many of them were politicians or in the mainstream media?

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

dogzilla

What does that matter? I did notice several relatively well known names in the list. Besides which, I rather doubt that a list which says it was last updated in 2005 is anywhere near a complete list.

Baraka_Guru

It matters in that democratically elected officials and mainstream media consist of the lion's share of voices with regard to politics.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

dogzilla

So it's ok to be a hate monger and spread lies about politicians if you're only a minor media personality. Got it. It's not my fault that Air America flopped and the liberals have no voice.

Baraka_Guru

Think that if you want. I personally believe that idea to be reprehensible. I believe people communicating to the public even on a small scale should be as responsible as those communicating on a large scale. But maybe that's just me.

I don't know much about Air America, and no one's blaming you for the current state of the liberal voice in America. It's an interesting problem though. America is a rather conservative nation.

My point is that the form it has taken isn't the universal health care other nations have come to know. It's a insurance scheme. The reason why it happened is because people were freaking out about "socialized medicine" and "death panels" and so Obama had to change how he approached it, which is a shame. And this is where we get back to the OP: they demonized the health care proposal as socialist instead of seeing how it could actually work.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Wes Mantooth

I think whats at the root of all these illegitimate criticisms is that we live in a society that thrives on sounds bites and buzz words, the universal health care debate is perfect example of that. If the right simply went through the proposal and listed the things they didn't like about it nobody would have paid them any attention, its not sexy enough, instead they slap together a slogan like "death panels" and like a catchy jingle suddenly it was everywhere and it was all people were talking about.

But was "death panels" and "socialized medicine" an illegitimate criticism or was it just the easiest way to get the point of "universal health care bad" across to the American public? It seems like, for better or worse, the tactic worked pretty well and I'm pretty sure its the same reason we see the other crazy stuff thrown around about him as well.

__________________

aceventura3

I listened to Rush a few times in the past month, and I would say he mostly makes fun of the mainstream media as they over-react to stuff. He has a subtlety to his show that if people don't get it, they take him far too serious.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

Willravel

No he doesn't. He himself directly supports birthers and death panelers. There's no subtlety whatsoever.

dogzilla

You described the Canadian socialist health care plan as having both a public option and a single payer option. Obama went on record as wanting both of those in his health care plan, which places another tick mark in the socialist column for Obama. The fact that the American public wouldn't let him have those options doesn't erase the socialist tick mark.

Pearl Trade

I like Rush the same way I like Glenn Beck, I see and hear the entertainment, that's it. Sure, they have a good idea or two every once in a while, but for the most part I find them fun and passionate and exciting.

Rush is part of the mainstream media, Ace.

__________________

Our revenge will be the laughter of our children.
Give me convenience or give me death!

Baraka_Guru

Obama's position on universal health care doesn't give him an imaginary tick mark under some imaginary socialist/capitalist checklist. It won't make him a socialist any more than nationalization of S&Ls made Reagan a socialist.

Presidents use socialist tools. They use capitalist tools. The U.S. is a mixed economy. Obama is a Democrat---a liberal---not a socialist. Signing COBRA didn't make Reagan a socialist, did it?

If Obama were a socialist, his platform would include a central focus on nationalized child care, a stronger stance on supporting unions to help them thrive, a stronger thrust to grant access to post-secondary education to those who can't afford it (i.e. more than just grants and tax breaks), and a foreign policy that seeks to temper previous agreements of free trade with fair trade (probably a more aggressive stance with China with regard to their labour laws and practices), etc.

I could be missing it. Does Obama strive for these things as well?

Ask a socialist how they approve of Obama so far.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Willravel

This. This exactly.

aceventura3

Rush toys with liberals and the liberal media. As a conservative it is very easy for me to know when he is serious and when he is not. On a few occasions while listening to his show he even announces how he expects liberals to reacts to what he is going to say, either taking it out of context or misinterpreting it, and I have seen it happen. Rush is first an entertainer, he knows it, and he knows being edgy sells. Every time he is mentioned by the Obama team, liberals in the press, MSNBC, it is $$$$$$$ for Rush. Obama would be better served to ignore Rush. As for the others, for example, without Rush or Beck, what would the folks hosting MSNBC shows talk about now that Palin is fading a bit. They actually promote mis-information by talking about it all the time.

---------- Post added at 03:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:19 PM ----------

No more than Larry the Cable Guy is! Sure Rush has a radio talk show, but that is not my standard for mainstream media. I think of shows like Meet The Press, publications like the New York Times, News Week, etc, as the mainstream media. I think of Rush has having a fringe audience, perhaps that is why I don't understand why liberals seem to be obsessed with him. Like many, I now listen to his show when I am driving around just to see what all the fuss is about. Same with Beck. When I first saw his show, I thought he was a joke, and never watched again until, I was virtually forced to, just to see what he was actually saying.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

roachboy

how nice that you have an official limbaugh decoder ring, ace. did you have to send away for that or did it come with the koolaid?

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Baraka_Guru

Wait.... an 8-year, $400-million deal with Clear Channel and over 15 million weekly listeners and you don't consider that mainstream?

Wow....since when is an audience of 15 million a fringe audience? The New York Times doesn't even have 1 million in its daily circulation. Does that make the Times a fringe newspaper? Even if you consider NYTimes.com's 18 million or so unique visitors, I'd hardly call Limbaugh's show "fringe." It's currently the most listened-to radio show in America.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

aceventura3

I love you guys. So keep the rest in perspective.

I heard susan Boyle had 100 million hits on her YouTube audition video. Not mainstream.

Lady GaGa makes political statements, her audience is bigger than Rush's. Not mainstream.

If a person's show is an AM radio show, by definition (in my book) it ain't mainstream. Is Rush even on XM or Sirius?

I was doing some traveling by car in rural areas in the Southeast last month. Here is what you get on AM radio: Rush, college football talk, foreign language radio (mostly Spanish), religion, and I am not kidding, there was a Radio garage sale, good for about 300 miles - callers would call in and describe an item for sale, like a used post hole digger, and other callers would call in to inquire about it. I am not kidding! So if Rush has 15 million people who have to drive around and listen to his show each week because they speak English, don't care about college football, don't want to hear a religious sermon, or participate in a radio garage sale, and that makes him mainstream in your book. All I can say is - I love you man!

---------- Post added at 04:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:10 PM ----------

Thats some funny stuff! Between your post and Baraka's, i have tears in my eyes from laughter. Thanks. Time for lunch, I think I will tune in Rush on my way to McDonald's.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

roachboy

so now we're in mythological space again. standing in for conservatives in general, which is silly in a way now that there are multiple organizations that lay claim to the category and all the real amurican stuff for which is claims to itself to stand, ace has a Problem with admitting that limbaugh and the wingnuts on fox are mainstream because it undermines both the conservative-as-victim trope and the basis for the projection (the ultra-right merely reacts to what the evil Other is already doing, etc) that's at the core of conservative self-deception with respect to themselves and their own politics.

btw the argument would try out above is preposterous, ace.
saying that limbaugh is a mainstream infotainment source day in day out is met with factoids about susan boyle (ew) and lady gaga (yay!)...how are you today? the answer is meat by-products.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

aceventura3

The true mythological space is in the vagueness of the concept of "mainstream". I gave my point of view, yet you want to tell me I am wrong while not providing an objective and precise definition of the concept. And you may wonder why I find somethings here so humorous. Start with the fact that you take an issue like this far too serious. Is Rush mainstream? Who cares! Other than causing Obama's team and liberals to have fits, Rush has no influence on American life other than his entertainment value. Yet for some reason you need him to be something he is not. Take some time and try to understand why.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

roachboy

limbaugh has an 8-year, $400-million deal with Clear Channel and over 15 million weekly listeners...

mainstream.

compared to what? not lady gaga singles, chum. other infotainment outlets. here's some data:

Cable TV: Audience

mainstream, ace.

you like to make entirely arbitrary assertions and claim for them the status of a definition. i don't know where this quirk comes from. perhaps you should take a time out and think about it.

as for influence, i don't really know what you're talking about. limbaugh is part of a pretty elaborate conservative media apparatus. that apparatus performs opinion co-ordination functions. your views are almost inevitably informed by that opinion co-ordination mechanism. one of the quirks with conservative opinion co-ordination--which is paradoxically an indicator of its power--is that conservatives all like to see themselves as heroically free-thinking people. and they're all heroically free-thinking in exactly the same way at exactly the same moments.

that must be just a giant consistent coincidence.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Baraka_Guru

The fact that Rush gets more listeners each week than individual BBC Radio stations is of no consequence because, you know, Rush's broadcaster is using the wrong type of modulation. It's so totally fringe.

It's the number one radio show in America! But people only listen to it because it's better than football, garage sales, and Jesus. People don't have any other option but to listen to Rush "in the background" as they drive. It makes great background music.

Rush's show with its 15 million listeners certainly doesn't have the mainstream cachet as Meet the Press, with its Sunday morning bonanza of 3 million viewers. That pesky amplitude modulation is nothing like TV. Maybe that's why other media is always covering the goings-on at Meet the Press while they ignore poor ol' Rush as he toils on the fringe.

Yes, we never hear anything about Rush in the mainstream. Ever. They call that marginalization.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Cimarron29414

I think you are all trying to innertwine "mainstream" and "popular". Rush is definitely popular, but he is too abrasive a personality to be considered mainstream.

His influence is undeniable - he gets far more media play than his show because everything he says becomes the talking points on both sides later in the day.

Like him or not, he is incredibly powerful in shaping both sides of public opinion.

...and BG...Rush is definitely not better than Jesus.

__________________
Gives a man a halo, does mead.

"Here lies The_Jazz: Killed by an ambitious, sparkly, pink butterfly."

Baraka_Guru

Hm. That's odd. I was pretty sure that Rush is a prominent voice in the political discourse in the country. Or are you saying he gets the same treatment as Stephen Colbert and John Stewart? He's a commentator much like Glenn Beck, and to say he has no influence is a bit confusing to me. If he has no influence, then why do I keep hearing about him? I don't listen to AM radio, and I'm Canadian.

I think this is the point. We don't need to technically define him as mainstream, though I don't think there is a technical description of what that entails. Generally ask yourself this: Do Rush's opinions represent the opinions of a lot of other people?

That's not for you or me to decide.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

aceventura3

Yes.

Niether Beck nor Rush change a persons core beliefs, both men reinforce what people already believe. Great men/women of history or leaders, actually change the way people see themselves and the world. Example MLK, or in my view Reagan fit into this category. Even Obama had a measurable impact on the behaviors of young voters who would have ordinarily been apathetic but got enthused about about politics to the degree where it made a difference. Sure every once in awhile Rush will have a listener call in and talk about listening to his show changed their life, but those call are the exception from my point of view. Palin actually has more influence than Rush and we saw it during the McCain campaign and we saw it afterward as an opposite affect, influencing people who hate her to act in ways they would not have ordinarily.

Perfect question for a person like Roach, Will, the Obama team or the hosts of MSNBC shows. I don't get it either.

Rush is a reflection of his audience and he has the talent to be entertaining. It is not the other way around. I regularly listen to ESPN radio Colin Cowherd, he understands his show, his audience and he talks about it - as a sports talk show host he knows to reflect the topics people want to listen to, agree with him or not - same with Rush. As a professional in the business Cowherd would be the first to tell you, its about entertainment first. Radio talk is a business. One thing that makes Cowherd interesting is he doesn't pretend his audience lacks intellect. And if you listen to Rush he plays to two audiences, those who get him and to those he toys with. If all you hear about Rush's show is from "mainstream" media, you are getting the toyed with message.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

Wes Mantooth

I think people like Rush do have an impact but its hard to measure what that impact really is. Some do see him as a political commentator and take his word as religion others see him as an entertainer and take what he says with a grain of salt. I agree with Cimarron, the mainstream finds him too abrasive to take seriously but the fringe that loves him is large enough to keep him in the spotlight.

__________________

Baraka_Guru

So give me a bottom line, Ace: Would you say that Rush Limbaugh has a negligible impact on the national discourse about Obama?

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

aceventura3

The Final Fantasy video game franchise has sold over 97 million copies since introduction in 1987. That is about 4.3 million per year. The NY Yankees attendance averages about 3.5 million per year. I would say the NY Yankees is mainstream, Final Fantasy is not. We can play around with numbers, but "mainstream" to me has components other than numbers. If you believe Rush is "mainstream", that is o.k., it is your point of view.

---------- Post added at 07:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:46 PM ----------

Perhaps I am wrong. From the above point of view, Rush has influence and he in fact does change behavior.

---------- Post added at 07:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:48 PM ----------

I think Obama's team and his supporters over-react to Rush, giving him more influence and credibility than he deserves. If ignored, Rush would fade to zero or to a relatively small base of listeners who find him entertaining and reflective of their views..

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

Wes Mantooth

I'm not sure its always that easy though Ace, Rush has a large audience and has for a long time. Those that don't like him do ignore him but his core audience is big enough that it will always keep his views in the mainstream discourse about politics. I do agree that his opponents however give him far to much credit and if they didn't loose their shit every time he said something controversial it would certainly lessen the impact he does have.

__________________

Martian

It's a simple concept, guys. Rush Limbaugh is not mainstream because we're defining mainstream to exclude Rush Limbaugh. QED.

...

Aside: Whether or not some socially and/or politically liberal folks compared Bush Jr to Hitler is not relevant to this discussion.

__________________
I wake up in the morning more tired than before I slept
I get through cryin' and I'm sadder than before I wept
I get through thinkin' now, and the thoughts have left my head
I get through speakin' and I can't remember, not a word that I said

- Ben Harper, Show Me A Little Shame

Wes Mantooth

Yeah but the question is what is his role in the mainstream Martian. He obviously is a mainstream figure but does the majority regard him as a silly entertainer or a viable political commentator? I'm not really sure myself.

__________________

Baraka_Guru

I view the likes of Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert as modern-day editorial cartoonists.

I view the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck as modern-day pamphleteers.

Take that as you will.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

roachboy

seems to me that this kind of sad dust-up over whether limbaugh is or is not mainstream has already been dealt with.

as for ace's strange contention about "core beliefs"---the way you frame the notion, you're really talking about an essence or soul or some other such hopelessly befuddled and naive idea. i don't think there's any non-arbitrary way to distinguish "core" from "periphery" in terms of "beliefs" but i suspect that ace is committed to this new arbitrariness as a way to imagine himself morally superior to the rest of us, whom he would presumably see as all shifty-like particularly if us degenerates are contrasted with the manly resolve that is required to develop and maintain such a reality-independent political worldview as his.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

aceventura3

I don't know if Rush was the first to use the term czar when describing some of Obama's appointees, but it is something Rush would do. The reason he would do something like this and most of us know it, is to play to the socialism/communism/facsim barbs he throws at Obama and to get under the skin of overly sensitive liberals. Everyone who follow politics knows these folks are not czars, we know every President make these appointments, etc., but Obama's team got offended to the point where they did this on the Official WH website:

The Truth About "Czars" | The White House

The traction is gained from the over-reaction.

Or when Rush says "the Obama regime", and then the term is used by Howard Dean in an interview inadvertently, giving Rush hours of material and an immeasurable amount of credibility - it is the fault of Obama and his team. They should ignore Rush.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

filtherton

Whether something is mainstream or not isn't entirely relevant because the definition and power of elements of the mainstream aren't clearly defined. Even so, while numbers don't necessarily determine mainstream status they are undeniably an indicator of reach. Factually speaking, Limbaugh has a large enough audience and the rhetorical reach to influence local and national policy discussions. Anyone who doubts this has clearly not been paying attention to recent national discussions.

The fact that he has a financial incentive to say outrageous things just decreases the likelihood that Limbaugh will add anything of value to the discussion.

Baraka_Guru

You will likely find that even if Rush did, in fact, use the term pejoratively that he wasn't alone in using it that way. It was used in general by at least a few of those within what roachboy called the "pretty elaborate conservative media apparatus."

And you will also likely find that Rush isn't the only one to refer to Obama's office as a "regime."

I think there is a difference between being overly sensitive and making the decision to educate people who react negatively to such conservative bias, because maybe you're getting too much feedback or too many complaints about something that's actually rather misleading or false. Of course, the same conservative bias would likely call this "reeducation."

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

aceventura3

A core belief is a belief I would sacrifice my life for, a "peripheral" belief is one that has little or no relevance to my life. Hence a core belief is that my son live in a world where he is free from tyrannical rule. A "peripheral" belief is, I think Pluto should be considered a planet. Are you suggesting that you have no core beliefs or that all of your beliefs are the same?

Another core belief I have is that is o.k. for people to be different and have points views different than mine. It is never my intent to project that my point of view is superior to anyone, just different. If you perceive my style as projecting superiority, that is a "you" problem, not a "me" problem.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

Derwood

To say that the relationship between Rush and Obama can be "resolved" by Obama ignoring Rush is beyond naive. Rush shapes public opinion about the federal government, and every politician in Washington (on both sides) must constantly deal with that opinion. This isn't just about the President and a radio guy, it's about a complex series of daily actions and reactions and reactions to reactions, etc. on and on forever.

__________________
"You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel