How long will Rush stay interested?

vchimpanzee · Jan 22, 2015

I had the opportunity to be in the car at noon yesterday. Ordinarily, I wouldn't go to any trouble to listen to Rush, even though I do enjoy listening occasionally.

I was disappointed when he said he didn't even bother with Obama's State of the Union address. During the short time I was in the car, he ranted about how Obama's policies were against everything he stood for and how a Republican Congress would never pass any of his proposals. Okay, that's sort of what I was looking for. He did have enough material to know what apparently was said.

But Rush also said when he stopped being interested, he would quit doing the show. He had reached the point where he was no longer interested in the State of the Union address. But he assured us he did not think he would ever lose interest in doing this show.

Just to give you an idea of where I stand, I taped the address and fast-forwarded through the commentary before and after as well as the applause. I thought it all sounded good, and didn't sound like the extreme liberal position Obama is accused of taking on everything. But I understood that a lot of the new jobs were not good-paying and a lot of the people who have health insurance got it because a lot of others can't afford it now or are struggling to pay for it, all to pay the tremendous cost of covering everyone. And where are we going to get the money to pay for all those new programs? They sound good, but maybe it's too much, and too much government in our lives.

Ravens · Jan 22, 2015

vchimpanzee said:
I had the opportunity to be in the car at noon yesterday. Ordinarily, I wouldn't go to any trouble to listen to Rush, even though I do enjoy listening occasionally.

I was disappointed when he said he didn't even bother with Obama's State of the Union address. During the short time I was in the car, he ranted about how Obama's policies were against everything he stood for and how a Republican Congress would never pass any of his proposals. Okay, that's sort of what I was looking for. He did have enough material to know what apparently was said.

But Rush also said when he stopped being interested, he would quit doing the show. He had reached the point where he was no longer interested in the State of the Union address. But he assured us he did not think he would ever lose interest in doing this show.

Just to give you an idea of where I stand, I taped the address and fast-forwarded through the commentary before and after as well as the applause. I thought it all sounded good, and didn't sound like the extreme liberal position Obama is accused of taking on everything. But I understood that a lot of the new jobs were not good-paying and a lot of the people who have health insurance got it because a lot of others can't afford it now or are struggling to pay for it, all to pay the tremendous cost of covering everyone. And where are we going to get the money to pay for all those new programs? They sound good, but maybe it's too much, and too much government in our lives.

Perhaps you should have not fast forwarded past the commentary, because you didn't get the point of the speech at all. It was pretty much all cheap shots at the opposition and big government spending programs.

As for Rush, he's stuck in the place where radio guys who have been doing this for 30-40 years generally get. He's got nothing else to do. I don't think he enjoys the work anymore, but would go nuts if he retired. My dad worked at his job until he was 75 and was forced to quit by his doctor. Same deal with Rush.

TheBigA · Jan 22, 2015

Ravens said:
Same deal with Rush.

He's at a point where he can do it in his sleep, and it's possible some days he does. Then again, even Frank Sinatra continued to sing at a point where he needed a teleprompter to feed him the lyrics. He's not alone.

Ravens · Jan 22, 2015

TheBigA said:
He's at a point where he can do it in his sleep, and it's possible some days he does. Then again, even Frank Sinatra continued to sing at a point where he needed a teleprompter to feed him the lyrics. He's not alone.

The one common trait with most uber-successful people is that they're workaholics.

wadio · Jan 22, 2015

It should be up to management to take away the car keys but since Rush pretty much controls his own empire I guess that's not so easy.

flybynight · Jan 22, 2015

Ravens said:
The one common trait with most uber-successful people is that they're workaholics.

I think of Rush more as an assholic.

Goat Rodeo Cowboy · Jan 22, 2015

Ravens said:
Perhaps you should have not fast forwarded past the commentary, because you didn't get the point of the speech at all. It was pretty much all cheap shots at the opposition and big government spending programs.

Did you watch the speech.... or did you skip it and just take the word of your favorite commentators when it was over? I watched the speech. My memory of the event does not seem to match your description of the event.

But... that is not a new phenomenon. People who like Rush listen, and people who DON'T like Rush listen, and they come away with different explanations and memories of what Rush said.

That is one of the problems we have to deal with when we want to engage in "self governance". When the populace has hearing difficulties, we have governance difficulties.

TheBigA · Jan 22, 2015

wadio said:
It should be up to management to take away the car keys but since Rush pretty much controls his own empire I guess that's not so easy.

I think the one who's more in need of this is Imus.

flybynight · Jan 22, 2015

wadio said:
It should be up to management to take away the car keys but since Rush pretty much controls his own empire I guess that's not so easy.

Rush may control his own empire, but he is NOT in charge of keeping himself on any radio stations.

If any of his affiliates (or the company that owns many of them) wants to "take away the car keys" they can simply stop carrying his show.

Ravens · Jan 23, 2015

Goat Rodeo Cowboy said:
Did you watch the speech.... or did you skip it and just take the word of your favorite commentators when it was over? I watched the speech. My memory of the event does not seem to match your description of the event.

But... that is not a new phenomenon. People who like Rush listen, and people who DON'T like Rush listen, and they come away with different explanations and memories of what Rush said.

That is one of the problems we have to deal with when we want to engage in "self governance". When the populace has hearing difficulties, we have governance difficulties.

It's my job to watch. So yes, I did. Several times. It was a typical SOTU with a laundry list of spending programs, just like every SOTU for the past 50 years. More "tax the rich" and "free stuff". More attacks on the half of the room that doesn't stand up to applaud him and less (none, actually) attacks on the radical savages that are killing thousands around the world.

There may be "hearing difficulties" here, but they weren't on my end.

wadio said:
It should be up to management to take away the car keys but since Rush pretty much controls his own empire I guess that's not so easy.

Considering he makes money for them, why would they?

flybynight said:
I think of Rush more as an assholic.

Classy.

wadio · Jan 23, 2015

flybynight said:
Rush may control his own empire, but he is NOT in charge of keeping himself on any radio stations.

If any of his affiliates (or the company that owns many of them) wants to "take away the car keys" they can simply stop carrying his show.

The difference is he continues his gradual fade vs. being pulled off the road all at once.

JeffM · Jan 23, 2015

Ravens said:
Perhaps you should have not fast forwarded past the commentary, because you didn't get the point of the speech at all. It was pretty much all cheap shots at the opposition...

You mean he's stealing Rushbo's act?

Goat Rodeo Cowboy · Jan 23, 2015

Ravens said:
It's my job to watch. So yes, I did. Several times. It was a typical SOTU with a laundry list of spending programs, just like every SOTU for the past 50 years. More "tax the rich" and "free stuff". More attacks on the half of the room that doesn't stand up to applaud him and less (none, actually) attacks on the radical savages that are killing thousands around the world.

There may be "hearing difficulties" here, but they weren't on my end.

These forums are not designed to deal with political opinion so we will need to wind this line of logic down in a reasonable way.

Maybe "comprehension difficulties" would be a better analysis of the issue you and I are pushing back and forth.

Spending programs, and equitable distribution of the cost of being a government and being a nation is a rational and legitimate topic for discussion when our President is asked to assess the "State of the UNION".

The president along with the congress have the opportunity and obligation to protect us from threats posed by other nations and other peoples, but his constitutional task the other night was to discuss the "State of the UNION". I would argue that it is not the purpose of a state of the UNION address to "discuss radical savages that are killing thousands around the world". Keeping our military strong, keeping our security apparatus operating properly is part of the "business of the UNION" but to expect him to stand up there like a right-wing preacher and criticize the lifestyle and goals of peoples in other parts of the world is NOT part of the State of the Union. If we need a bigger military to protect us, and we need taxes and budget for that military, that is the business of our UNION. Being a hellfire-and-brimstone critic of citizens of other countries that have a behavior pattern we don't like is good content for another speech at another time.

Ravens · Jan 24, 2015

Goat Rodeo Cowboy said:
I would argue that it is not the purpose of a state of the UNION address to "discuss radical savages that are killing thousands around the world". Keeping our military strong, keeping our security apparatus operating properly is part of the "business of the UNION" but to expect him to stand up there like a right-wing preacher and criticize the lifestyle and goals of peoples in other parts of the world is NOT part of the State of the Union. If we need a bigger military to protect us, and we need taxes and budget for that military, that is the business of our UNION. Being a hellfire-and-brimstone critic of citizens of other countries that have a behavior pattern we don't like is good content for another speech at another time.[/SIZE][/FONT]

Simply mentioning that there is a threat, IDENTIFYING IT and saying what we're going to do about it isn't "hellfire and brimstone".

And if you think this is about "other countries that have a behavior pattern we don't like", you're sorely mistaken. This is about a minority group of people AROUND THE WORLD that want to KILL US. Killing innocent people isn't a "behavior pattern". It's savagery. Refusing to admit that is suicidal.

JeffM said:
You mean he's stealing Rushbo's act?

No, yours.

Goat Rodeo Cowboy · Jan 24, 2015

Ravens said:
It was a typical SOTU with a laundry list of spending programs, just like every SOTU for the past 50 years. More "tax the rich" and "free stuff".

There is a lot of "granularity" in SOTU speeches that you seem to lump into a simplistic dismissal: "Free stuff... tax the rich".

Apparently you have nightmares about the radical savages from around the world ending up in your living room killing you.

Let me tell you of a nightmare that invades millions of American bedrooms nightly. It's called "Healthcare" and is is much bigger and broader than the limited scope of Obamacare. If you are wealthy, when the day comes for nursing home care for your spouse or your parents, you just sit down and write the check for $6,000 to $12,000 per month. Private Enterprise is building luxurious digs for this crowd. If you are dirt poor, you present yourself to Medicaid and they will warehouse you in some digs that would be anyone's nightmare. But if you are middle-class, getting old, and need this kind of care, you are.... well I don't know any better term for your situation than S.O.L.

If this president or any other president, past or future, addresses this issue, I get the idea your mental receptors snap shut like a clam and you complain: "Free stuff.... tax the rich... you politicians are all alike."

This is an equal opportunity political nightmare. There is this constant noise machine out there about the failures of Obamacare and an administration that can't even get the computer enrollment system working.

But the noise machine ignores the fact that Medicare Part D coverage for prescription drugs became effective in 2006 and it has a computer enrollment system that after 9 years still doesn't work. I don't think Obama or any other Democrat was president in 2006.

I have someone in my "my care and custody" that I enroll each year in Part D. The computer told me back in November that in 2015 this person's share of the prescription costs would be $18,000. (This is in addition to what Part D pays!!!!) In 2014, this person paid $4,000 and Part D paid $5,000. But that computer that is supposed to help select the most advantageous plan for the coming year is quite sure the same drugs will cost the patient $18,000 this coming year and who knows how much the computer thinks Medicare will pay.

Tell me how many middle income Americans are struggling to control and pay their medical costs for 2015. Tell me how many American people were actually killed on American soil in 2014 by "radical savages from around the world". Maybe there is a valid reason why year after year, president after president, the SOTU address contains a lot of talk about things that seem to bore and upset you.

If you are lucky, there will come a day when you reach retirement age. Maybe then you will find the president of that era will "follow suite" and he/she will talk about things that younger folks think is nothing more than "Free Stuff.... Tax the Rich" but will resonate in your ear with a much more practical message.

This is probably an issue that is lost in that half of Rush's brain that is "tied behind his back".

Having it tied back there has never made his "shtick" fair, just not useful and practical for a large segment of the population.

boombox4 · Jan 25, 2015

I missed the President's SOTU speech. Read it in the newspaper. The first half I thought was unrealistic, for reasons I won't go into, and the last half of the President's speech I thought was excellent.

I haven't listened to Rush in probably 15 years of more. Don't care to, either.

Ravens · Jan 25, 2015

Goat Rodeo Cowboy said:
Tell me how many American people were actually killed on American soil in 2014 by "radical savages from around the world".

7.

3/6/2014 USA Port Bolivar, TX 2 0 A Muslim man shoots his lesbian daughter and her lover to death and leaves a copy of the Quran open to a page condemning homosexuality.

4/27/2014 USA Skyway, WA 1 0 A 30-year-old man is murdered by a Muslim fanatic.

6/1/2014 USA Seattle, WA 2 0 Two homosexuals are murdered by an Islamic extremist.

6/25/2014 USA West Orange, NJ 1 0 A 19-year-old college student is shot to death 'in revenge' for Muslim deaths overseas.

9/25/2014 USA Moore, OK 1 1 A Sharia advocate beheads a woman after calling for Islamic terror and posting an Islamist beheading photo.

Also, it's common procedure for the president to address national security issues. Even THIS president has in his prior 5 SOTU addresses.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfac...st-obama-first-president-2001-not-say-al-qai/

I don't expect the word "savages" to be used. I DO expect the threat to at least be mentioned.

This is a worldwide problem. The president not mentioning it in his SOTU address is shameful. Now now go ahead and post another wall of text, since you can't not have the last word when it comes to defending these people.

Goat Rodeo Cowboy · Jan 25, 2015

Ravens said:
7.

This is a worldwide problem. The president not mentioning it in his SOTU address is shameful. Now now go ahead and post another wall of text, since you can't not have the last word when it comes to defending these people.

Where I live, every time you turn around when a decent, peaceful group of Muslims go to city hall and ask zoning approval to establish a place of worship, the conservative Christians and conservative political groups show up and try to crowd them out, shut them out, run them out of town.

Those who are not so decent and peaceful probably take notice of this, and take that as a signal from us that we desire to engage their entire religion in a less than "warm and fuzzy" way. If the radicals could watch us treat their more decent brothers with more dignity, it might do more than anything the President can get done.

It doesn't help anything that six years into his presidency, we still have the birthers running around yelling that Obama isn't an American, he is actually a Muslim, and that makes him bad and evil. If that is the message we transmit as a nation, why would Muslims anywhere have pleasant thoughts about us?

If you going to prove your point with a list of "bad actors" of the Islamic persuasion, let's quote the facts on all the other deaths and mayhem in this country. How many schools have been shot up by Baptists.... how many robberies-gone-bad resulted in killings by Catholic individuals or Lutheran individuals. How many highway deaths by drunk drivers were Methodist or Presbyterian? How many bank robbers are Jewish? What is the religious and ethnic back-ground of the typical drug smuggler bringing the stuff in from Mexico?

Yes, our government has a role to play in containing the terrorists, but our people, our military, our missionaries, our corporations have not always "kept their skirts clean" when it comes to building the picture of American values around the world.

Am I down of America? No, just disappointed that some of my fellow citizens don't have the ability to see "the whole big picture".

And in keeping with our focus in these forums on broadcasting, Talk Radio seems to be the cheer-leader section for giving people around the world reason to wonder if we know who we want to be when we grow up.

Feel free to write words on the wall if you like.

boombox4 · Jan 26, 2015

Mr. Cowboy, the difference between the 'bad actors' of various religions you mentioned, and the 'bad actors' in Syria & Iraq right now, is that the 'bad actors' in Syria & Iraq fill beds of pickup trucks with severed heads, and intend to kill hundreds of millions of people, if necessary, if that's what it takes to carry out their cause. Their cause isn't as much a reaction to how their religious compatriots are treated here -- it is based on religious ideology. They control a huge swath of territory, and are gaining in numbers daily. Whether the President should have belabored very long on this threat to world peace in the SOTU, I don't know -- the SOTU is just political theatre, after all, and he HAS addressed it in other speeches and statements. And if I recall, he did mention it in the SOTU. He has taken action -- I certainly hope that over the long term it's effective.

Your other points are well taken.

Goat Rodeo Cowboy · Jan 26, 2015

boombox4 said:
Mr. Cowboy, the difference between the 'bad actors' of various religions you mentioned, and the 'bad actors' in Syria & Iraq right now, is that the 'bad actors' in Syria & Iraq fill beds of pickup trucks with severed heads, and intend to kill hundreds of millions of people, if necessary, if that's what it takes to carry out their cause. Their cause isn't as much a reaction to how their religious compatriots are treated here -- it is based on religious ideology.

I understand... this is a bit of a "fool's errand" to try and hold up the madness of other parts of the world and offer a suggestion that maybe we in our country are in some ways showing signs of following in their foot-steps.

"It is based on religious ideology"? What religion has an ideology that calls for pickup trucks loaded down with severed heads?

So, I ask myself: Why are you even messing with this topic? Does it have any importance? Yes, in our own political system in this country I see us beginning to create POLITICAL ideologies that claim to be based on our own RELIGIOUS ideologies. So far we don't have any Congressmen driving pick-up trucks to work displaying human remains, but in the name or religious ideology in this country we have people now and then gun down a abortion doctor.

What will that develop into over the next 4, 8, 12 or 48 years? They had quite a political gathering this weekend in Iowa. Well, they say it was a political event.... but many of the players seem to be having trouble sorting out political theology from religious theology.

Which brings us back to Talk Radio.

Talk Radio in America. A bunch of folks who can't seem to figure out if a Political Science Degree or a Theological Degree is the most desired credential.