Why I listen to Conservative Talk Radio

[Foxfyre]

I'm not sure anyone could say anything on here to offend me. I'm just curious to learn why i'm an idiot simply for listening to Rush occasionally. I'm sure the explanation is going to be very enlightening; i can't wait!

First, welcome to USMB SomeGuy. Be sure your bullshit detector has fresh batteries and your bullet proof vest is in place and wade right on in. Hopefully, you'll find a few here worth sparring with and/or having a discussion on some interesting stuff.

But may I be so bold as to explain why you are idiot in the eyes of Ed et al when you admit that you listen to Rush on occasion?

First, you are honest enough to admit it, a trait some have a great deal of trouble with.

Second, you are likely intelligent enough to understand the nuance, metaphors, using absurdity to illustrate absurdity, and other qualities of those programs that go right over the head of most radical wingnuts or certain young skulls full of mush.

Third, you appreciate that you actually can get some interesting or even useful information from those shows on occasion. Listening in hopes of learning something is too often a concept totally foreign to those who judge without ever listening.

I tend to be wary of those who look to Rush or any other talk show host as some kind of guru with all the answers. Anybody who lets others do all their thinking for them are most likely going to be wrong much of the time. But I look with more suspicion on those who are so damned sure of what is said on those programs when they have never seriously listened to them. They tend to be wrong almost all of the time.

As to #3, maybe you might be inclined to enlighen us as to an interesting and/or informative idea, policy or judgment from one of Limbaugh's shows.
I should add, you might actually learn something by watching/listening to Ratchel Maddow -the difference between she and Limbaugh is striking if one listens without bias.

Hee hee, was the RAT-chel Maddow a Freudian slip?

Certainly Rachel does have a pertinent point or two to make and now and then actually gets past the snarky how awful they are themes enough to make one. Unfortunately, like most of her ilk, she focuses so much attention on criticism of the 'other side' that she never gets around to expressing a coherant reason for why the 'other side' is wrong, off base, hateful, or whatever the negative adjective of the day might be. And that's why liberal talk radio or TV becomes so boring so quickly. Those on the left have a very difficult time articulating a rationale for their ideology, values, or point of view and/or why that of the other side is wrong or, as they so often seem to express, despicable.

 

[edthecynic]

Don't be offended, ed has a addiction to take Rush's words out of context. He does this a lot, and people have learned to ignore him for the most part.

I'm not sure anyone could say anything on here to offend me. I'm just curious to learn why i'm an idiot simply for listening to Rush occasionally. I'm sure the explanation is going to be very enlightening; i can't wait!

But may I be so bold as to explain why you are idiot in the eyes of Ed et al when you admit that you listen to Rush on occasion?

First, you are honest enough to admit it, a trait some have a great deal of trouble with.

Second, you are likely intelligent enough to understand the nuance, metaphors, using absurdity to illustrate absurdity, and other qualities of those programs that go right over the head of most radical wingnuts or certain young skulls full of mush.

Third, you appreciate that you actually can get some interesting or even useful information from those shows on occasion. Listening in hopes of learning something is too often a concept totally foreign to those who judge without ever listening.

Well there you go again. Obviously I would never call someone an idiot for merely listening to your MessiahRushie since it is obvious I listen to him too!!!! The idiots are those who parrot all his lies and rationalizations without ever checking them, like YOU.

You have repeatedly accused me of not listening to LimpBoy and getting my quotes from some unnamed "Lib" site, but when challenged you can never post a link to the MYTHICAL site. I have even googled the quote and posted the search for you, since you are too stupid and lazy to do anything for yourself, and the only sites that come up are my posts here and at the AOL board, and LimpBoy's site and other GOP hate sites like freerepublic, yet you continue to say I don't listen to him.

I have even shown how he likes to mock his followers by linking you to articles that expose his lies knowing his cult followers will be to lazy to check the link and even if I post that his own link proves him a liar, you will block out that truth and run away without comment.

Here is his satellite radio lie exposed with his own link which I posted in this very thread, and a google search of the quote.

Now explain how I could know about this lie if I don't listen since it was posted nowhere else but LimpBoy's hate site and my post in this thread????

Please don't cut and run without an answer, like a typical CON$ervative pusillanimous poltroon.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1864077-post155.html

"it doesn't matter what the total number is, because one in ten satellite subscribers are in un-owned cars still sitting on the car lot" - Google Search

 

[Foxfyre]

Sorry Ed, I do not believe that you have ever sat down and listened to Rush Limbaugh or any other conservative programming with an interest in understanding the content. I do not believe you do not cherry pick quotations out of context and portray them as something they are not. When you actually can show me that you are dealing with a Rush quotation in its full context, then we might have a basis for discussion. Otherwise I intentionally choose not to engage in an exercise in what I believe would be utter futility and mind numbingly boring. Thanks so much for understanding.

 

[edthecynic]

I'm not sure anyone could say anything on here to offend me. I'm just curious to learn why i'm an idiot simply for listening to Rush occasionally. I'm sure the explanation is going to be very enlightening; i can't wait!

But may I be so bold as to explain why you are idiot in the eyes of Ed et al when you admit that you listen to Rush on occasion?

First, you are honest enough to admit it, a trait some have a great deal of trouble with.

Second, you are likely intelligent enough to understand the nuance, metaphors, using absurdity to illustrate absurdity, and other qualities of those programs that go right over the head of most radical wingnuts or certain young skulls full of mush.

Third, you appreciate that you actually can get some interesting or even useful information from those shows on occasion. Listening in hopes of learning something is too often a concept totally foreign to those who judge without ever listening.

Well there you go again. Obviously I would never call someone an idiot for merely listening to your MessiahRushie since it is obvious I listen to him too!!!! The idiots are those who parrot all his lies and rationalizations without ever checking them, like YOU.

You have repeatedly accused me of not listening to LimpBoy and getting my quotes from some unnamed "Lib" site, but when challenged you can never post a link to the MYTHICAL site. I have even googled the quote and posted the search for you, since you are too stupid and lazy to do anything for yourself, and the only sites that come up are my posts here and at the AOL board, and LimpBoy's site and other GOP hate sites like freerepublic, yet you continue to say I don't listen to him.

I have even shown how he likes to mock his followers by linking you to articles that expose his lies knowing his cult followers will be to lazy to check the link and even if I post that his own link proves him a liar, you will block out that truth and run away without comment.

Here is his satellite radio lie exposed with his own link which I posted in this very thread, and a google search of the quote.

Now explain how I could know about this lie if I don't listen since it was posted nowhere else but LimpBoy's hate site and my post in this thread????

Please don't cut and run without an answer, like a typical CON$ervative pusillanimous poltroon.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1864077-post155.html

"it doesn't matter what the total number is, because one in ten satellite subscribers are in un-owned cars still sitting on the car lot" - Google Search

Sorry Ed, I do not believe that you have ever sat down and listened to Rush Limbaugh or any other conservative programming with an interest in understanding the content. I do not believe you do not cherry pick quotations out of context and portray them as something they are not. When you actually can show me that you are dealing with a Rush quotation in its full context, then we might have a basis for discussion. Otherwise I intentionally choose not to engage in an exercise in what I believe would be utter futility and mind numbingly boring. Thanks so much for understanding.

Well at least you didn't cut and run, I'll give you that much, but you also didn't click on the link which would have spared you making such a complete fool of yourself and at the same time exposing your closed-mindedness!

You pretend to be someone who checks things out, but obviously you are just blowing smoke. You just gave your programmed knee-jerk "OUT OF CONTEXT" BS.

I quoted the satellite radio lie in its entirety, every word, syllable and punctuation mark from beginning to end and gave you the link to his hate site to confirm it. In a later post, in reply to YOU, I even showed you how he changed the title of the link to the article that exposed his lie, that he used for "proof" of his claim knowing that all CON$ would do is look at his new title and take that as proof and never actually click on the link and, God forbid, read the article themselves.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1865294-post171.html

 

[Wry Catcher]

First, welcome to USMB SomeGuy. Be sure your bullshit detector has fresh batteries and your bullet proof vest is in place and wade right on in. Hopefully, you'll find a few here worth sparring with and/or having a discussion on some interesting stuff.

But may I be so bold as to explain why you are idiot in the eyes of Ed et al when you admit that you listen to Rush on occasion?

First, you are honest enough to admit it, a trait some have a great deal of trouble with.

Second, you are likely intelligent enough to understand the nuance, metaphors, using absurdity to illustrate absurdity, and other qualities of those programs that go right over the head of most radical wingnuts or certain young skulls full of mush.

Third, you appreciate that you actually can get some interesting or even useful information from those shows on occasion. Listening in hopes of learning something is too often a concept totally foreign to those who judge without ever listening.

I tend to be wary of those who look to Rush or any other talk show host as some kind of guru with all the answers. Anybody who lets others do all their thinking for them are most likely going to be wrong much of the time. But I look with more suspicion on those who are so damned sure of what is said on those programs when they have never seriously listened to them. They tend to be wrong almost all of the time.

As to #3, maybe you might be inclined to enlighen us as to an interesting and/or informative idea, policy or judgment from one of Limbaugh's shows.
I should add, you might actually learn something by watching/listening to Ratchel Maddow -the difference between she and Limbaugh is striking if one listens without bias.

Hee hee, was the RAT-chel Maddow a Freudian slip?

Certainly Rachel does have a pertinent point or two to make and now and then actually gets past the snarky how awful they are themes enough to make one. Unfortunately, like most of her ilk, she focuses so much attention on criticism of the 'other side' that she never gets around to expressing a coherant reason for why the 'other side' is wrong, off base, hateful, or whatever the negative adjective of the day might be. And that's why liberal talk radio or TV becomes so boring so quickly. Those on the left have a very difficult time articulating a rationale for their ideology, values, or point of view and/or why that of the other side is wrong or, as they so often seem to express, despicable.

Well, after correcting my spelling and telling us all about Rachell's theme, you failed to respond to my simple question. Tell me, what informative idea, policy or judgment has Limbaugh ever put forth?

 

[Foxfyre]

As to #3, maybe you might be inclined to enlighen us as to an interesting and/or informative idea, policy or judgment from one of Limbaugh's shows.
I should add, you might actually learn something by watching/listening to Ratchel Maddow -the difference between she and Limbaugh is striking if one listens without bias.

Hee hee, was the RAT-chel Maddow a Freudian slip?

Certainly Rachel does have a pertinent point or two to make and now and then actually gets past the snarky how awful they are themes enough to make one. Unfortunately, like most of her ilk, she focuses so much attention on criticism of the 'other side' that she never gets around to expressing a coherant reason for why the 'other side' is wrong, off base, hateful, or whatever the negative adjective of the day might be. And that's why liberal talk radio or TV becomes so boring so quickly. Those on the left have a very difficult time articulating a rationale for their ideology, values, or point of view and/or why that of the other side is wrong or, as they so often seem to express, despicable.

Well, after correcting my spelling and telling us all about Rachell's theme, you failed to respond to my simple question. Tell me, what informative idea, policy or judgment has Limbaugh ever put forth?

Why don't you just visit his website? There's quite a bit of stuff in the free area of that.

But though I tune in to the show rather infrequently these days, when I do I generally get an update on the current events of the day, reference to some good quotes or articles that Rush uses in his monologue or to lead into a discussion, some general statistics or data with sources mentioned so that if I have time to jot them down, I can check those out.

His own philosophy is pretty basic modern American conservatism: Small, efficient, effective government that is no more intrusive than is absolutely necessary, a belief that America is basically a good place and Americans are basically good people, that bad choices generally result in bad results; good choices will almost always result in better results; entreprenourship and small business is the primary source of new jobs in this country and they should not be discouraged or hindered. . . .

In the 15 hours of broadcast plus an occasional book, an occasional article, and an occasional speech or other public appearance, there is a plethora of information provided. But this pretty well is the general gist of it.

 

[edthecynic]

But may I be so bold as to explain why you are idiot in the eyes of Ed et al when you admit that you listen to Rush on occasion?

First, you are honest enough to admit it, a trait some have a great deal of trouble with.

Second, you are likely intelligent enough to understand the nuance, metaphors, using absurdity to illustrate absurdity, and other qualities of those programs that go right over the head of most radical wingnuts or certain young skulls full of mush.

Third, you appreciate that you actually can get some interesting or even useful information from those shows on occasion. Listening in hopes of learning something is too often a concept totally foreign to those who judge without ever listening.

Well there you go again. Obviously I would never call someone an idiot for merely listening to your MessiahRushie since it is obvious I listen to him too!!!! The idiots are those who parrot all his lies and rationalizations without ever checking them, like YOU.

You have repeatedly accused me of not listening to LimpBoy and getting my quotes from some unnamed "Lib" site, but when challenged you can never post a link to the MYTHICAL site. I have even googled the quote and posted the search for you, since you are too stupid and lazy to do anything for yourself, and the only sites that come up are my posts here and at the AOL board, and LimpBoy's site and other GOP hate sites like freerepublic, yet you continue to say I don't listen to him.

I have even shown how he likes to mock his followers by linking you to articles that expose his lies knowing his cult followers will be to lazy to check the link and even if I post that his own link proves him a liar, you will block out that truth and run away without comment.

Here is his satellite radio lie exposed with his own link which I posted in this very thread, and a google search of the quote.

Now explain how I could know about this lie if I don't listen since it was posted nowhere else but LimpBoy's hate site and my post in this thread????

Please don't cut and run without an answer, like a typical CON$ervative pusillanimous poltroon.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1864077-post155.html

"it doesn't matter what the total number is, because one in ten satellite subscribers are in un-owned cars still sitting on the car lot" - Google Search

Sorry Ed, I do not believe that you have ever sat down and listened to Rush Limbaugh or any other conservative programming with an interest in understanding the content. I do not believe you do not cherry pick quotations out of context and portray them as something they are not. When you actually can show me that you are dealing with a Rush quotation in its full context, then we might have a basis for discussion. Otherwise I intentionally choose not to engage in an exercise in what I believe would be utter futility and mind numbingly boring. Thanks so much for understanding.

Well at least you didn't cut and run, I'll give you that much, but you also didn't click on the link which would have spared you making such a complete fool of yourself and at the same time exposing your closed-mindedness!

You pretend to be someone who checks things out, but obviously you are just blowing smoke. You just gave your programmed knee-jerk "OUT OF CONTEXT" BS.

I quoted the satellite radio lie in its entirety, every word, syllable and punctuation mark from beginning to end and gave you the link to his hate site to confirm it. In a later post, in reply to YOU, I even showed you how he changed the title of the link to the article that exposed his lie, that he used for "proof" of his claim knowing that all CON$ would do is look at his new title and take that as proof and never actually click on the link and, God forbid, read the article themselves.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1865294-post171.html

Well, it looks like I complimented you for not cutting and running like a typical CON$ervative coward too soon!

You have posted in this thread after this post was made and avoided explaining how I could have taken the satellite radio lie "out of context" by quoting his lie in its entirety!!!

But maybe that was a wise choice after all, this way you can't make an even bigger fool of yourself.

 

[Foxfyre]

You have posted in this thread after this post was made and avoided explaining how I could have taken the satellite radio lie "out of context" by quoting his lie in its entirety!!!

You again demonstrate that you don't have a clue what 'in context' means and you have consistently avoided my patient attempts to educate you about that. So again, I will choose not to engage you in a circular argument that is suffocatingly boring to other members. I acknowledge that you think I'm the idiot. I acknowledge that you are incapable of engaging in reasonable debate. Do have a nice day.

 

[edthecynic]

You have posted in this thread after this post was made and avoided explaining how I could have taken the satellite radio lie "out of context" by quoting his lie in its entirety!!!

You again demonstrate that you don't have a clue what 'in context' means and you have consistently avoided my patient attempts to educate you about that. So again, I will choose not to engage you in a circular argument that is suffocatingly boring to other members. I acknowledge that you think I'm the idiot. I acknowledge that you are incapable of engaging in reasonable debate. Do have a nice day.

You again demonstrate your CON$ervative dishonesty.
What possible "context" could possibly justify lying about satellite radio????????
If you are going to be condescending, like a typical CON$ervative, then "educate" me how "context" can change a lie into the truth, rather than rationalizing your cutting and running like a coward.

 

[Meister]

You have posted in this thread after this post was made and avoided explaining how I could have taken the satellite radio lie "out of context" by quoting his lie in its entirety!!!

You again demonstrate that you don't have a clue what 'in context' means and you have consistently avoided my patient attempts to educate you about that. So again, I will choose not to engage you in a circular argument that is suffocatingly boring to other members. I acknowledge that you think I'm the idiot. I acknowledge that you are incapable of engaging in reasonable debate. Do have a nice day.

You again demonstrate your CON$ervative dishonesty.
What possible "context" could possibly justify lying about satellite radio????????
If you are going to be condescending, like a typical CON$ervative, then "educate" me how "context" can change a lie into the truth, rather than rationalizing your cutting and running like a coward.

Apparently, you didn't understand just what he was saying to you.

 

[DiveCon]

You again demonstrate that you don't have a clue what 'in context' means and you have consistently avoided my patient attempts to educate you about that. So again, I will choose not to engage you in a circular argument that is suffocatingly boring to other members. I acknowledge that you think I'm the idiot. I acknowledge that you are incapable of engaging in reasonable debate. Do have a nice day.

You again demonstrate your CON$ervative dishonesty.
What possible "context" could possibly justify lying about satellite radio????????
If you are going to be condescending, like a typical CON$ervative, then "educate" me how "context" can change a lie into the truth, rather than rationalizing your cutting and running like a coward.

Apparently, you didn't understand just what he was saying to you.

it's beyond his capability

 

[edthecynic]

You again demonstrate your CON$ervative dishonesty.
What possible "context" could possibly justify lying about satellite radio????????
If you are going to be condescending, like a typical CON$ervative, then "educate" me how "context" can change a lie into the truth, rather than rationalizing your cutting and running like a coward.

Apparently, you didn't understand just what he was saying to you.

it's beyond his capability

Well, you finally crawled out of your spider hole to post something instead of sniping in silence with your neg reps.

Well why don't you two condescending cowards explain how "context" can turn the satellite radio lie into the truth, especially since I quoted every word in your MessiahRushie's satellite radio lie rant.

Like I said, his own link exposes his lie and he gave you the link to MOCK your intelligence knowing that even armed with the truth you will never catch him lying.

 

[Meister]

Apparently, you didn't understand just what he was saying to you.

it's beyond his capability

Well, you finally crawled out of your spider hole to post something instead of sniping in silence with your neg reps.

Well why don't you two condescending cowards explain how "context" can turn the satellite radio lie into the truth, especially since I quoted every word in your MessiahRushie's satellite radio lie rant.

Like I said, his own link exposes his lie and he gave you the link to MOCK your intelligence knowing that even armed with the truth you will never catch him lying.

Why don't you assume the position of respect.

 

[DiveCon]

Apparently, you didn't understand just what he was saying to you.

it's beyond his capability

Well, you finally crawled out of your spider hole to post something instead of sniping in silence with your neg reps.

Well why don't you two condescending cowards explain how "context" can turn the satellite radio lie into the truth, especially since I quoted every word in your MessiahRushie's satellite radio lie rant.

Like I said, his own link exposes his lie and he gave you the link to MOCK your intelligence knowing that even armed with the truth you will never catch him lying.

fucktards like you hide in spider holes

 

[amrchaos]

i thought people listened to conservative talk radio beacuse they were incapable of independent thought and felt it easier to have their opinions given to them

I listen to right wing radio to sharpen my arguement skills.

Like "How do you handle an overbearen personality?"
"How to tackle 'Hypothetical situtations' in a skillful manner?"


Basically, it helps in this situation:
"How to recognize right wing propaganda?"


I need some left wing talk radio to help do the same for the lefties. Unfortunately, I live in South Florida!!

 

[Some Guy]

First of all, it is a Straw Man to suggest that Libs say people are idiots for merely listening to LimpBoy. It's pretty clear the Libs are saying idiots PARROT LimpBoy in agreement. Ditto that?

I'm not sure if i can tell or not, but inferring that Rush listeners just parrot him is basically calling his listeners idiots who can't think for themselves. Correct me if i'm wrong on that.

And for the record, i'm sure you'll never hear Rush suggest that legalization of marijuana is a good idea, whereas i would.

And the point of my post was, it is just as valid, OR INVALID, to say people are idiots for agreeing with MassiahRushie as it is for him to say people are stupid if they don't agree with him and need to be educated by him. He exposes his OWN arrogant condescension that he condemns in others. So the point is, it is hypocritical for his cult followers to whine like crybabies when the Golden Rule bites them in their hypocritical condescending asses.

Get it?

The difference between Rush's arrogance and elected officials' arrogance is that Rush isn't in position to enact legislation that affects your life. He's simply an entertainer with something to say on politics. It's no different than the talkers on the left. Stephanie Miller is on the progressive station here in Chicago in morning and she's every bit as arrogant and condescending as Rush is; maybe even moreso as she's more direct with her insults.

Unfortunately, like most of her ilk, she focuses so much attention on criticism of the 'other side' that she never gets around to expressing a coherant reason for why the 'other side' is wrong, off base, hateful, or whatever the negative adjective of the day might be.

They're pretty much all like that. So why does Rush get singled out? Probably because he's the most listened to radio personality in the nation. Obviously he's doing something right.

 

[edthecynic]

it's beyond his capability

Well, you finally crawled out of your spider hole to post something instead of sniping in silence with your neg reps.

Well why don't you two condescending cowards explain how "context" can turn the satellite radio lie into the truth, especially since I quoted every word in your MessiahRushie's satellite radio lie rant.

Like I said, his own link exposes his lie and he gave you the link to MOCK your intelligence knowing that even armed with the truth you will never catch him lying.

Why don't you assume the position of respect.

fucktards like you hide in spider holes

Just as I thought, neither of you can do any better than Ff at rationalizing how quoting your MessiahRushie's entire satellite radio lie takes it out of context.
Thank you both.

 

[edthecynic]

First of all, it is a Straw Man to suggest that Libs say people are idiots for merely listening to LimpBoy. It's pretty clear the Libs are saying idiots PARROT LimpBoy in agreement. Ditto that?

I'm not sure if i can tell or not, but inferring that Rush listeners just parrot him is basically calling his listeners idiots who can't think for themselves. Correct me if i'm wrong on that.

And for the record, i'm sure you'll never hear Rush suggest that legalization of marijuana is a good idea, whereas i would.

And the point of my post was, it is just as valid, OR INVALID, to say people are idiots for agreeing with MassiahRushie as it is for him to say people are stupid if they don't agree with him and need to be educated by him. He exposes his OWN arrogant condescension that he condemns in others. So the point is, it is hypocritical for his cult followers to whine like crybabies when the Golden Rule bites them in their hypocritical condescending asses.

Get it?

The difference between Rush's arrogance and elected officials' arrogance is that Rush isn't in position to enact legislation that affects your life. He's simply an entertainer with something to say on politics. It's no different than the talkers on the left. Stephanie Miller is on the progressive station here in Chicago in morning and she's every bit as arrogant and condescending as Rush is; maybe even moreso as she's more direct with her insults.

It's calling listeners WHO parrot him idiots.
Get it now?

And regarding LimpBoy's hypocritical arrogance, that's a distinction without a difference he programmed his mindless followers to say. Only today he was taking singlehanded credit for killing health care, after saying how he doesn't like to BRAG, of course. So he seems to think he has power to effect legislation and the lives of Americans even if you parrot that he doesn't.

January 21, 2008
RUSH: * I am a conservative and an all-powerful media figure; a powerful, influential member of the media.

 

[Foxfyre]

Unfortunately, like most of her ilk, she focuses so much attention on criticism of the 'other side' that she never gets around to expressing a coherant reason for why the 'other side' is wrong, off base, hateful, or whatever the negative adjective of the day might be.

They're pretty much all like that. So why does Rush get singled out? Probably because he's the most listened to radio personality in the nation. Obviously he's doing something right.

No, they don't all do that. Rush doesn't do that. If he is going to say that somebody is wrong, dishonest, off base or whatever, he will give a specific, well-articulated reason, analysis, and rationale for his opinion about that and, more often than not, will cite a source that his listeners can follow up to verify what he has said. He is sometimes partisan and judgmental in his more all inclusive criticisms of liberals and liberalism in general, but while he doesn't bother to explain a rationale each time he does that, he does explain it within his full context over a period of time.

This is why Rush is interesting and somebody like Rachel Maddow isn't. Whether or not you agree with him, Rush does deal in actual ideas and concepts to back up his criticisms and/or gives specific explanation for why criticism is warranted. She seldom does.

And that in a nutshell is why conservative programming is far more successful than any liberal programming. The liberals even bore their constituency to tears and have a really tough time building any kind of ratings.

 

[edthecynic]

Unfortunately, like most of her ilk, she focuses so much attention on criticism of the 'other side' that she never gets around to expressing a coherant reason for why the 'other side' is wrong, off base, hateful, or whatever the negative adjective of the day might be.

They're pretty much all like that. So why does Rush get singled out? Probably because he's the most listened to radio personality in the nation. Obviously he's doing something right.

No, they don't all do that. Rush doesn't do that. If he is going to say that somebody is wrong, dishonest, off base or whatever, he will give a specific, well-articulated reason, analysis, and rationale for his opinion about that and, more often than not, will cite a source that his listeners can follow up to verify what he has said. He is sometimes partisan and judgmental in his more all inclusive criticisms of liberals and liberalism in general, but while he doesn't bother to explain a rationale each time he does that, he does explain it within his full context over a period of time.

You obviously never listen to LimpBoy, or you are a pathological liar just like your MessiahRushie.

He spews his "well articulated" pure CON$ervative hate day in and day out, year in and year out.

February 2, 2007
RUSH: We may not, cockroaches will. That means some liberals will.

January 21, 2010
RUSH: You gotta understand, folks. See, I know liberals -- I know these cockroaches --

Thursday Quotes: A Lovable Little Fuzzball
October 9, 2008
"I call Obama a squirrel. What's a squirrel? Nothing but a rat with better PR."

http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/dehumanization/
Dehumanization

Dehumanization is a psychological process whereby opponents view each other as less than human and thus not deserving of moral consideration.

The Psychology of Dehumanization

Dehumanization is actually an extension of a less intense process of developing an "enemy image" of the opponent. During the course of protracted conflict, feelings of anger, fear, and distrust shape the way that the parties perceive each other. Adversarial attitudes and perceptions develop and parties begin to attribute negative traits to their opponent. They may come to view the opponent as an evil enemy, deficient in moral virtue, or as a dangerous, warlike monster.

An enemy image is a negative stereotype through which the opposing group is viewed as evil, in contrast to one's own side, which is seen as good. Such images can stem from a desire for group identity and a need to contrast the distinctive attributes and virtues of one's own group with the vices of the "outside" group.[4] In some cases, evil-ruler enemy images form. While ordinary group members are regarded as neutral, or perhaps even innocent, their leaders are viewed as hideous monsters.[5]

Enemy images are usually black and white. The negative actions of one's opponent are thought to reflect their fundamental evil nature, traits, or motives.[6] One's own faults, as well as the values and motivations behind the actions of one's opponent, are usually discounted, denied, or ignored. It becomes difficult to empathize or see where one's opponent is coming from. Meaningful communication is unlikely, and it becomes difficult to perceive any common ground.

Once formed, enemy images tend to resist change, and serve to perpetuate and intensify the conflict. Because the adversary has come to be viewed as a "diabolical enemy," the conflict is framed as a war between good and evil.[7] Once the parties have framed the conflict in this way, their positions become more rigid. In some cases, zero-sum thinking develops as parties come to believe that they must either secure their own victory, or face defeat. New goals to punish or destroy the opponent arise, and in some cases more militant leadership comes into power.

Enemy images are accentuated, according to psychologists, by the process of "projection," in which people "project" their own faults onto their opponents. This means that people or groups who tend to be aggressive or selfish are likely to attribute those traits to their opponents, but not to themselves. This improves one's own self-image and increases group cohesion, but it also escalates the conflict and makes it easier to dehumanize the other side.

Deindividuation facilitates dehumanization as well. This is the psychological process whereby a person is seen as a member of a category or group rather than as an individual. Because people who are deindividuated seem less than fully human, they are viewed as less protected by social norms against aggression than those who are individuated.[8] It then becomes easier to rationalize contentious moves or severe actions taken against one's opponents.