One year without Rush Limbaugh – 5 lessons he left us on how to handle the left

Of this I am sure, whenever news hits, millions wonder, "What would Rush say?"

It doesn’t seem possible that we’ve weathered an entire year since that bleak day last Feb. 17 when at 12:06 p.m. Eastern the inevitable-yet-shocking announcement was broadcast to the world: Rush Limbaugh had passed away. The radio titan, having lived his threescore-and-10 to the absolute fullest, returned his borrowed talent to God. 

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/year-wit...na-allocco

---

Instead of a sign that says "Do Not Disturb" I need one that says "Already Disturbed Proceed With Caution."

Definitely miss Rush

---

He was extremely entertaining.

---

What will I do without my Sheppard to tell me how to think and act?

---

What will I do without my Sheppard to tell me how to think and act?

Hillary died?

---

What will I do without my Sheppard to tell me how to think and act?

Hillary died?

Lol, you think I'm a liberal? You are dumb, plus you're memory is failing you. Quit while you're behind before I completely destroy you.

---

What will I do without my Sheppard to tell me how to think and act?

Hillary died?

By the way, this rubber & glue bit perfectly encapsulates the stupidity of partisan politics. Moronic tribalism, as I call it.

---

I used to listen to Rush Limbaugh a long time ago, and I found him very entertaining. But after a while, I realized, it was the same thing over and over every day. Find the dumbest thing a liberal said or did, and talk about it for 3 straight hours. Talk about how liberals are evil. It was polarization for profit. There was very little intelligent discussion of any issue, and there was never any opposing point of view. He was basically a coward in that way. He never debated anyone, or invited anyone on the show who had a different opinion.

---

Hillary died?

Lol, you think I'm a liberal? You are dumb, plus you're memory is failing you. Quit while you're behind before I completely destroy you.

---

DIdn't agree with Rush on various topics but he definitely was a pioneer in his industry.

---

I could take Rush in small doses. He was funny and had some good stuff to say. Similarly, I enjoyed Colbert when he was only a half hour on comedy central. I don't enjoy him for a full hour on CBS, though many obviously do. If Rush confined himself to just a half hour per day, I would have liked him a lot more.

My gripe with Rush is similar to my gripe with Joe Manchin, weird as that is. Both of them stumbled into immense political power, Rush with his radio charisma and Manchin by being the 50th senator in a 50-50 Senate. A lot of people are jealous of their success. I'm not. I just wish they would use it for something lasting. Set a political goal and achieve it. Change the direction of your party. Rush just rolled over on not endorsing Bush 41 and never made any attempt to take sides in the primaries after that. Manchin has barely communicated with Biden about what he's against, and he won't get out there and tell us what he's for.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

I used to listen to Rush Limbaugh a long time ago, and I found him very entertaining.  But after a while, I realized, it was the same thing over and over every day.  Find the dumbest thing a liberal said or did, and talk about it for 3 straight hours.  Talk about how liberals are evil.  It was polarization for profit.  There was very little intelligent discussion of any issue, and there was never any opposing point of view.  He was basically a coward in that way.  He never debated anyone, or invited anyone on the show who had a different opinion.

This is how I felt about him. His show was an echo chamber for those who shared his opinions. I don't have a problem with differing opinions, I have a problem with willful polarization.

---

If you guys had listened to Rush as much as you claim, then you'd know the reason why he did not conduct a debate show. Rush stated many times that his show was balance to the continuous onslaught of biased media: "I AM equal time."

Yes, his show could be repetitive during slow news cycles, but when things picked up, he provided keen insight to the political process and motivations that you would hear nowhere else. Like any purveyor of opinion, sometimes listeners had to separate the wheat from the chaff. I don't claim he was always correct, however, he expressed viewpoints and revealed facts you would not hear or read in the biased media.

---

I used to listen to Rush Limbaugh a long time ago, and I found him very entertaining.  But after a while, I realized, it was the same thing over and over every day.  Find the dumbest thing a liberal said or did, and talk about it for 3 straight hours.  Talk about how liberals are evil.  It was polarization for profit.  There was very little intelligent discussion of any issue, and there was never any opposing point of view.  He was basically a coward in that way.  He never debated anyone, or invited anyone on the show who had a different opinion.

I found him somewhat amusing when I listened to him back in the 90s. Then he came to believe he actually was the caricature he'd created for his show. After that, it was all downhill.

---

I'm condescending. That means I talk down to you.

If you guys had listened to Rush as much as you claim, then you'd know the reason excuse why he did not conduct a debate show. Rush stated many times that his show was balance to the continuous onslaught of biased media: "I AM equal time."

Yes, his show could be repetitive during slow news cycles, but when things picked up, he provided keen insight to the political process and motivations that you would hear nowhere else. Like any purveyor of opinion, sometimes listeners had to separate the wheat from the chaff. I don't claim he was always correct, however, he expressed viewpoints and revealed facts you would not hear or read in the biased media.

I remember he used that excuse all the time.  But it was just a cop-out.  And I got tired of hearing the same old one sided monologues with no one to challenge anything he said.  It was always the same thing- demonize liberals.  I got bored with that.

---

Lol, you think I'm a liberal? You are dumb, plus you're memory is failing you. Quit while you're behind before I completely destroy you.

I apologize for this. Truly, I'm sorry.

---

Rush was nothing more than an entertainer who capitalized on telling people what they want to hear.

Liberals I know have pounded the table I'm at telling me Rush and rest of the so-called CEC is behind the current divide we have in this country. They state that these masters of AM radio form the thoughts of their audience, their audience that are nothing but clay in their hands. That Rush and Sean and their likes are true believers crafting their audience to their beliefs.

I argue with those liberals that their audience was baked in. It already existed, and these purveyors of AM do nothing more than exploit the unwitting. They placate where needed, and become excellent thermometers to adapt to the audience they prey on.

So, which is it, you so-called conservatives? Are you clay willing to be molded into any form, or are you just suckers for confirmation bias?

---

Rush was nothing more than an entertainer who capitalized on telling people what they want to hear.

Liberals I know have pounded the table I'm at telling me Rush and rest of the so-called CEC is behind the current divide we have in this country. They state that these masters of AM radio form the thoughts of their audience,  their audience that are nothing but clay in their hands. That Rush and Sean and their likes are true believers crafting their audience to their beliefs.

I argue with those liberals that their audience was baked in. It already existed, and these purveyors of AM do nothing more than exploit the unwitting. They placate where needed, and become excellent thermometers to adapt to the audience they prey on.

So, which is it, you so-called conservatives?  Are you clay willing to be molded into any form, or are you just suckers for confirmation bias?

I'll give you credit, I've rarely seen someone post such a well constructed either-or fallacy.

On another note, I dropped in on 104.5 the other day and heard the Rush replacement. It's pretty clear that Rush was extremely talented just based on how poor is the quality of his successor.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Rush was nothing more than an entertainer who capitalized on telling people what they want to hear.

Liberals I know have pounded the table I'm at telling me Rush and rest of the so-called CEC is behind the current divide we have in this country. They state that these masters of AM radio form the thoughts of their audience,  their audience that are nothing but clay in their hands. That Rush and Sean and their likes are true believers crafting their audience to their beliefs.

I argue with those liberals that their audience was baked in. It already existed, and these purveyors of AM do nothing more than exploit the unwitting. They placate where needed, and become excellent thermometers to adapt to the audience they prey on.

So, which is it, you so-called conservatives?  Are you clay willing to be molded into any form, or are you just suckers for confirmation bias?

I'll give you credit, I've rarely seen someone post such a well constructed either-or fallacy.

On another note, I dropped in on 104.5 the other day and heard the Rush replacement. It's pretty clear that Rush was extremely talented just based on how poor is the quality of his successor.

I completely agree with that. The lesser Rushes fail in comparison. Rush was a very accurate thermometer. He didn’t just talk, he listened. That’s the key to telling people what they want to hear.

---

So, let me some questions: If there are people who genuinely believe a certain ideology, only an outsider is capable of exploiting that ideology? It's not possible in your world for a person in that group to be talented and capable enough to share that ideology with its base and others? Furthermore, if it doesn't align with your way of thinking it's completely false? Is that where we're starting with this discussion?

---