Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Rush Limbaugh

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

When Rush started some years back I used to listen to him on the car radio while on long trips. But he really got on my nerves with his religion. I admire his consistency and his boldness, I like that he likes himself, but I have not listened to him in years.

Sometimes he had Walter Williams as a substitute host, it was wonderful to listen to him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I have listened to Limbaugh several times to make a better assessment of the man rather than simply saying I will not listen to him.

In the end, I cannot respect him because of his strong fundamentalist religious approach. While he may be an advocate of the free market, too many of his other opinions are tainted by the irrationality of his religious belief to make him someone I could admire. If anything, i would consider him harmful because Rush and others like him help create the association that Capitalism and free market advocacy are inextricably linked to religious right mentalities. I am not sure he is doing as much good as some here think- after all, with his double stance he is more of a posterboy for unclear thought than anything else.

-----------------

Klytemnestra

-"Darling, won't you hand me that ax over there, be a dear?"

-----------------

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure he is doing as much good as some here think- after all, with his double stance he is more of a posterboy for unclear thought than anything else.

I'll lay out his philosophical and sense of life positives and negatives, then I will draw my conclusion about him.

Positives:

1> He believes in free markets. Although he doesn't seem to fully understand how they work, because he gets certain fundamentals wrong, on the whole he does believe in them.

2> He has promoted self-interest very explicitly on several occasions. He has even linked to an Objectivist article on the virtue of selfishness approvingly.

3> He is unabashed about pursuing profits, and uses the phrase "We are going to take another obscene profits break", and does so with great pride.

4> He believes in self-reliance and pursuing happiness.

5> He believes in defending America and freedom.

6> He believes in being in contact with reality, which is why he likes the phrase "It is what it is". He has said this explicitly before.

Negatives:

1> Religion. This is his massive negative and this, of course, contradicts much of the first. He believes religion is vital for the moral component.

2> Sloppy in logic. He is too often sloppy about clarifying points or hammering out contradictions. Not always, sometimes he is crystal clear, but in the overall picture I detect a distinct lack of integration in large swaths of his thinking.

Conclusion:

I'd say that the metaphysics of religion is massively under cutting his views on freedom and how to live your life. He has the American sense of life, but it is being undermined by religion. Yet he even holds to some of Ayn Rand’s philosophical elements, which is buoying him. Perhaps the sloppiness in logic which I often detect is a result of him failing to put together a cohesive big picture of the world. He may just *want* religion, since he grew up with it, and his father and grandfather were so influential on him. Whatever the case, there is a big conflict there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been listening to Rush since I was a kid. My parents always listened to him, and I have to say that if it weren't for him I wouldn't be an objectivist today. His ideas are far from perfect, but I have a great deal of respect for the man.

Also, he is a big advocate of Ayn Rand, despite the criticisms from many objectivists. It makes me wonder how in-touch with Ayn Rand's movement of ideas he is.

Well, in the end, I think Rush is certainly free to make his own decisions on what he believes regardless of his complete or lack of complete following of any movement...isn't that being part of a collective in that one would be ostricized by a group?

Entertainment? Yes. Kernels of truth? Certainly. Philosopher? Don't think so. Political leader? Not at all. Why should he want to be? He makes very good money, and, at a moment of his own, choosing, he could decide to leave what he's done and achieved for himself. And that could only have been done in this country.

He has no need to spew anything to get into office. He hammers a lot of people on both "aisles" of the political spectrum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...

I think Rush Limbaugh is intelligent, but he deliberately translates difficult ideas into language the average listener can understand and follow. Often, he uses humor and presents topics in the form of questions, to make his program entertaining and prompt the listener to think. This is not easy to do well, and it is not easy to attract and keep a large audience with serious ideas, and he does it day after day. He doesn't just state his views, he presents the opposing view in contrast first. He often asks the listener to figure things out for himself, before stating his own solution. When it comes to economics and foreign policy his arguments are from fundamental principles of self-interest, self-defense, and respect for the rights of and character of the achiever and producer.

Limbaugh and Glenn Beck mention Ayn Rand and Atlas Shrugged all the time, especially now that the book is so relevant to what is happening. Limbaugh mentioned a caller was "atlas shrugging" just in passing today without even needing to define it further.

Limbaugh's boastful, self-confident persona is one of his better features. On Phil Donohue's program Ayn Rand agreed that false humility is not a virtue, in regard to baseball players or anyone else.

Of course Limbaugh's pro-religion comments are wrong, and his anti-immigration arguments are not valid, but I see those aspects of his presentation to be ones that he just trots out to please the Christian Right. He doesn't seem to be a particularly religious man in his everyday life. When he sticks to one of those topics for awhile, I cannot listen to him. But when he speaks on foreign policy, and especially economics, he is usually on target and bases his arguments on self-interest and logic. Even his anti-environmentalism and anti-global warming arguments have come to rely much more on scientific evidence in recent years, and man's right to exist and produce, rather than on a "belief in God" argument.

Yes, I cannot defend his ideal of Conservatism. But in this Obama/Pelosi era, I find his reporting on daily political maneuvers and the likely deeper meanings of Democrats' words, their long-term intentions, to be indispensable. His defense of producers is inspiring. When he goes back to religionist comments, I turn him off.

Probably the dumbest thing he ever said was that Matthew J. Fox exaggerated his Parkinson's medication effects in a political campaign ad supporting a Democrat. Logically, if Fox isn't actually that affected now, he will be eventually, so what's the point? Obviously, Limbaugh's opposition to stem cell research is one of his worst applications of religion to politics.

What I don't agree with is when people say they "will never" listen to Limbaugh. That's a second-hander statement. Each of us ought to use his own judgment and if you never listen, you cannot make a judgment. Someone as influential and popular as Limbaugh deserves a few listens or at least read his web site a few times, before judging him. I believe the Left tries to make out that he's crazy or a bigot and doesn't warrant any attention, so that people won't hear his strong arguments against them, much as Ayn Rand was labeled crazy to stop people from reading her work.

See www.rushlimbaugh.com to see actual transcripts. See my two recent blogs that refer to Rush Limbaugh as well:

http://zigory.thinkertothinker.com/2009/01/31/rush-limbaugh/

and

http://zigory.thinkertothinker.com/2009/02...-you-angry-yet/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple of other thoughts:

It is especially important to support Limbaugh and the other right-wing Talk Radio programs now, when the Obama administration is trying to bring back some form of Fairness Doctrine or enforced rules of diversity in programming which would have the effect of cancelling many or all of these alternatives to the liberal media and thereby limiting freedom of speech.

See Limbaugh's own comments:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/sit...5111.guest.html

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/sit...5112.guest.html

Secondly, in regard to listening before making a judgment:

In a 1978 Q and A, Ayn Rand said that despite disliking the naturalistic, boring content of most situation comedies on TV, which meant that she did not watch them, she always saw at least one episode of each new show to judge for herself whether she would want to see future episodes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you, Greg.

Honestly, I think that we talk a lot about the right and the left, but the real threat is from the radicals that have used the liberals on the left for some ideas in addition to grilling those on the right in not being able to keep up with their own "rules". Regardless, the radicals hold many of the cards in our government. They have generated "warfare" between the left and right while they work on "common good" principles that serve to generate more centralized power for themselves.

There are many individual freedoms that are shared by both those on the left and the right, but the radicals have corrupted this. They are the enemy of individual freedom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What principles are those exactly?

Let's see: individualism, hard work, liberty, freedom, pursuit of happiness, smaller government.

Only flaw i saw some was some religiousness and creationism seeping into the speech. But hey Obama and most politicians play the religious type. I do not agree with everything Rush or Republicans have to say but as far as I can tell, Rush and other Republicans understand individualism and hard work and are a hell of a lot closer to principles and my beliefs than the looters in charge in office now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like to listen to Rush... maybe once a year, not because I think he is objective but because he is so good at his job. I see so many people, day in and day out, who just suck at what they do that it is nice to listen to a pro do his thing. As for his politics, he is stumping for the conservatives, which is one of the two groups fighting over who gets to tell me what to do. I'll pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's see: individualism, hard work, liberty, freedom, pursuit of happiness, smaller government.

There is a large difference between principles and buzzwords.

Only flaw i saw some was some religiousness and creationism seeping into the speech.

Those contradict those principles. And contradictions can't exist, no?

But hey Obama and most politicians play the religious type. I do not agree with everything Rush or Republicans have to say but as far as I can tell, Rush and other Republicans understand individualism and hard work and are a hell of a lot closer to principles and my beliefs than the looters in charge in office now.

Do they really? Because if they actually understood those principles, they would actually adhere to those principles and things would be better than they are today. Those aren't principles for them, they are buzzwords. Floating abstractions.

What does Rush Limbaugh know about hard work and individualism? He gets paid millions to be a mouth piece for a collective, that he sings and dances with every step of the way.

Grounded principles have become hollow mantras as far as the Republicans are concerned.

Edited by Mammon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The post earlier read that at least he spoke about some principles in his speech that night. you asked what those principals are and i read through the speech and replied.

I do not know Limbaugh personally and I do not often listen to his show but I know many Republicans who share the principles he spoke about but are dissatisfied with the mistakes of government. You should not be so quick to shut down every Republican you see or hear in an attempt to even the score with the people who criticize your Obama you enjoy defending poorly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...You should not be so quick to shut down every Republican you see or hear in an attempt to even the score with the people who criticize your Obama you enjoy defending poorly.

Such is the burden of an acolyte. He has no other choice. :blush:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those contradict those principles. And contradictions can't exist, no?

Do they really? Because if they actually understood those principles, they would actually adhere to those principles and things would be better than they are today. Those aren't principles for them, they are buzzwords. Floating abstractions.

What does Rush Limbaugh know about hard work and individualism? He gets paid millions to be a mouth piece for a collective, that he sings and dances with every step of the way.

Grounded principles have become hollow mantras as far as the Republicans are concerned.

Well, an individual has the right to being an individual and making choices. If that is to ascribe to a particular religion, is that not their right as a free man? Even from an Objectivist point of view? I don't recognize where a religion is to be imposed upon the country by "the religious right".

Republican principles. Agreed. As a party, they have lost their way a whole bunch. But there certainly is some common ground shared by those that are citizens that are Republicans. Those elected to represent, at times, political elite. Might even be radicals in "Republican clothing".

As for Mr Limbaugh's hard work and individualism? He gets paid millions, yes, as he can do the job. If it was easy to do, others could to his job, just better and more efficiently. That opportunity would be available to you as well, if one had the ability, desire, work ethic, etc. I believe he's been doing it for over twenty years. Has to be easy, right?

As for being a mouth piece? He smashes Republicans too when they aren't principled for individual freedom. But that does require one to listen. The main stream media does not report when Rush slams Republicans, do they? If that is one's source for information about "the mouth piece", then it is potentially the lack of information is problematic in a rational assessment about Rush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The post earlier read that at least he spoke about some principles in his speech that night. you asked what those principals are and i read through the speech and replied.

I do not know Limbaugh personally and I do not often listen to his show but I know many Republicans who share the principles he spoke about but are dissatisfied with the mistakes of government. You should not be so quick to shut down every Republican you see or hear in an attempt to even the score with the people who criticize your Obama you enjoy defending poorly.

Republicans largely will always side with the religious and socially conservative principles of the party, not the supposed principles of economic freedom that they claim to possess. The Republicans didn't abandon their bad ideas over the past 14 years. They abandoned whatever good was in the party and became more socially conservative than ever.

Both parties will always side with their bad principles over their good ones. The Republican party is the stronghold of the religious right and the Democrats are a bevy of socialists. Eventually the two parties will probably meet up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My dad is way way way into Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh. I used to like them, and on occasion I like the things they say. However, most of the time, when not espousing religious faith as the only source of morality for mankind, Limbaugh and Coulter can be found sniping at fishy things the political left does. Is this good? Yeah, but every time I find myself thinking, 'Who's watching the watchmen?' The republican party is sorely bereft of real principles. They yell and scream about free markets and individual rights for now, but when Limbaugh is dead, and the party begins to evolve, future generations of republicans will realize that the foundation for all their ideals is basically the same as the left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Well, an individual has the right to being an individual and making choices. If that is to ascribe to a particular religion, is that not their right as a free man? Even from an Objectivist point of view? I don't recognize where a religion is to be imposed upon the country by "the religious right".

Well, then you've obviously never met a Republican who said they'd throw you in jail if it was up to them like I have.

As for Mr Limbaugh's hard work and individualism? He gets paid millions, yes, as he can do the job. If it was easy to do, others could to his job, just better and more efficiently. That opportunity would be available to you as well, if one had the ability, desire, work ethic, etc. I believe he's been doing it for over twenty years. Has to be easy, right?

Well, I could be snide and say that it's because Rush is a particular brand of idiot that is difficult to repeat because those who believe like he does would rather just listen to him, because that requires less thought and effort than trying to capture part of his market share.

As for being a mouth piece? He smashes Republicans too when they aren't principled for individual freedom. But that does require one to listen. The main stream media does not report when Rush slams Republicans, do they? If that is one's source for information about "the mouth piece", then it is potentially the lack of information is problematic in a rational assessment about Rush.

He bashes Republicans for not being Republican enough. That's being a mouth piece for a collective, seeing as how the collective comes before any else. And yes, I've listened to Rush and he is an embarrassment for the country and the thorn on the side of reason.

Edit: And he reminds of John Eden, I'm expecting him to roll up in the White House with Enclave troopers to take out Obama.

Edited by Mammon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rush also seems to be on the intellectual level of a high school bully. Remember when he made fun of Micheal J. Fox and said he was faking his disease?

Yeah, that's really the type of association we want with Rand's ideas and ideals. And that must be a sign of him "getting it" right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rush also seems to be on the intellectual level of a high school bully. Remember when he made fun of Micheal J. Fox and said he was faking his disease?

Michael J. Fox said he deliberately does not take his medicine sometimes in order to make a more dramatic case for his disease. This is what Rush was referring to. The msm, being dishonest and/or lazy, somehow missed that.

Yeah, that's really the type of association we want with Rand's ideas and ideals. And that must be a sign of him "getting it" right?

Rush's fundamental flaw is his religiosity. But, as a human being, he's a very good person, and a very courageous person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I could be snide and say that it's because Rush is a particular brand of idiot that is difficult to repeat because those who believe like he does would rather just listen to him, because that requires less thought and effort than trying to capture part of his market share.
If you made that kind of snide comment then you too would reveal yourself to be a particular brand of idiot. Whether you like his views or not, he is the most accomplished radio broadcaster in the last 20 years. Limbaugh almost single-handedly turned AM talk radio from a moribund format to a ratings and commercial powerhouse. That by itself was quite an achievement in my book.

He bashes Republicans for not being Republican enough. That's being a mouth piece for a collective, seeing as how the collective comes before any else. And yes, I've listened to Rush and he is an embarrassment for the country and the thorn on the side of reason.
Limbaugh is very clear in saying that he is a "Conservative" first and a member of the Republican Party only because he sees that party as the closest one to his Conservative political beliefs. He then goes on the radio every day for 3 hours and advocates for those political beliefs. I'm not sure how what he does would qualify him as "a mouthpiece for a collective". Can you explain that further?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...