ChatterBank18 mins ago
Wasted Career?
A horrible cynical man who made a career out of nastily peddling misinformation and scapegoats. How depressing to think that someone had the potential to do something good for the world and chose not to.
https:/
https:/
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Untitled. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I really doubt that Rush Limbaugh believed all of the bile he spouted... most of these American "shock jocks" are cynical amoral people with zero real beliefs or convictions... it is just a shame because broadcasters can have such a good impact but he chose to whip up hate, lies, and conspiracy theories instead.
//Disgusting thread. But pretty typical.//
I'm guessing (please correct me if I'm wrong) that you're suggesting we should be more respectful of someone who has just passed away?
Okay, my condolences to his friends and family, but should we really pretend that he was something he wasn't because of that? Sounds hypocritical to me.
I'm guessing (please correct me if I'm wrong) that you're suggesting we should be more respectful of someone who has just passed away?
Okay, my condolences to his friends and family, but should we really pretend that he was something he wasn't because of that? Sounds hypocritical to me.
Spicerack - // The poor man has just died of cancer.
I'd put this on the same level as 'the offensive tweet about Sir Tom Moore'.
But then I'm not prejudiced where bad taste is concerned. //
I don't agree that this thread and the tweet about Sir Tom are in any way comparable.
Sir Tom spent his last days raising money for charity, having lived a quiet and uneventful life, and done a lot of good for people, and hardly deserves a nasty comment from an anonymous fool.
Rush Limbaugh on the other hand, made millions of dollars out of whipping up nasty right-wing bigots through the media, and would probably laugh out loud at the idea that he has achieved some sort of sainthood that cherishes his memory simply because he has died.
As Mozz pointed out, Mr Limbaugh does not suddenly morph into Mother Theresa by dying, he peddled a lot of untrue and dangerous nonsense in pursut of ratings, and that has not vanished into the ether to be replaced by some sort of angel-on-earth figure by his passing.
I don't think anyone has said anything on here that Mr Limbaugh would have taken issue with - he was what he was, and from what I have heard and read, the last thing he needed when alive, or needs how he is dead, is some stranger from several miles away cutting up about a discussion about him.
I'd put this on the same level as 'the offensive tweet about Sir Tom Moore'.
But then I'm not prejudiced where bad taste is concerned. //
I don't agree that this thread and the tweet about Sir Tom are in any way comparable.
Sir Tom spent his last days raising money for charity, having lived a quiet and uneventful life, and done a lot of good for people, and hardly deserves a nasty comment from an anonymous fool.
Rush Limbaugh on the other hand, made millions of dollars out of whipping up nasty right-wing bigots through the media, and would probably laugh out loud at the idea that he has achieved some sort of sainthood that cherishes his memory simply because he has died.
As Mozz pointed out, Mr Limbaugh does not suddenly morph into Mother Theresa by dying, he peddled a lot of untrue and dangerous nonsense in pursut of ratings, and that has not vanished into the ether to be replaced by some sort of angel-on-earth figure by his passing.
I don't think anyone has said anything on here that Mr Limbaugh would have taken issue with - he was what he was, and from what I have heard and read, the last thing he needed when alive, or needs how he is dead, is some stranger from several miles away cutting up about a discussion about him.
Spicerack - // Like I said, I'm not biased. //
No you didn't, you said you were not prejudiced, which is not the same thing.
But which ever of those you actually meant to say, I don't understand what you meant by saying it.
You object to the thread, and liken it to the nasty tweet about Sir Tom - I have explained why I believe it is not the same - but I don't see what not being 'biased / prejudiced' has to do with anything - care to elaborate?
No you didn't, you said you were not prejudiced, which is not the same thing.
But which ever of those you actually meant to say, I don't understand what you meant by saying it.
You object to the thread, and liken it to the nasty tweet about Sir Tom - I have explained why I believe it is not the same - but I don't see what not being 'biased / prejudiced' has to do with anything - care to elaborate?
Andy, I believe Spicy means that we had already made up our minds about Mr Limbaugh, which he's completely correct about. I don't see it as prejudice or bias, just informed opinion, but there you go.
And it is completely different to the nastiness posted about Sir Tom. We (well, I at least) was commenting on Limbaugh's career, not out of spite, but out of observation. The comments about Tom Moore were made to cause offense only and had no basis in reality.
And it is completely different to the nastiness posted about Sir Tom. We (well, I at least) was commenting on Limbaugh's career, not out of spite, but out of observation. The comments about Tom Moore were made to cause offense only and had no basis in reality.
