Originally posted by melon:
Bubba, you crack me up. I haven't responded all day, because I did a massive overhaul of my computer today, which included a hard drive format and an operating system update. It takes a while to get everything reinstalled and reconfigured. In fact, the only reason I'm online now is because I needed updated audio/game port drivers.
As for your insistence I address the Rush Limbaugh extremist paragraph, why not try taking a little trip north of the Mason-Dixon line outside of the Bible Belt and bask yourself in my home, which has been very nicely labelled the "Rust Belt." Limbaugh's "Rushisms" might strike a chord in your home environment, but they amount to nothing here. Most of the Rush fans up here used to live in the South.
I have no concrete statistics to prove this to you, but I don't have to: I've lived it. If that's not good enough, then it's not my problem.
Melon
Oh, THAT'S your evidence? Pathetic.
You're basically saying that the general feeling from the town you live in is reason enough to think that "the general consensus is that Rush Limbaugh is a right-wing extremist not even worthy of listening to."
Why couldn't I just say the same thing? Why couldn't I say that people in Michigan are more liberal than the rest of the country and you would see that if you ever stepped out of the Rust Belt?
Would YOU except that as evidence? I thought not.
In reply, then, something a bit more tangible:
1. Rush is still, far and away, the most popular radio talk show host in the nation - not just the Deep South, where our opinions count for little apparently, but the ENTIRE nation.
2. There are over two dozen stations in Michigan that broadcast Rush Limbaugh. Either a lot of Southerners have moved up to Michigan (and New York and California), or maybe - just maybe - there are even native-born fans in Michigan.
3. The nation itself has moved to the right, as evidenced by:
* The Congressional elections of 1994, in which Republicans became the majority party of both houses.
* The ensuing change in Bill Clinton, from an obvious liberal (the health care plan, stimulus packages, etc.) to a seeming moderate, even going so far as to agree to GOP budgets.
* The 2000 election, in which Gore did not embrace traditional liberal platforms and Bush embraced conservatism. The end result was that Bush gained more votes than Clinton did in '92 or '96.
* The success of
Bias a recent book that confirms the belief of Rush and other conservatives that the mainstream media is liberal.
* The success of the FOX News Channel, a station that originally advertised on the Rush Limbaugh program. While not a conservative network, it's far less liberal than its counterparts at CNN - and FNC has been rewarded for moving away from liberalism, in that its ratings are higher than CNN DESPITE the fact that CNN is carried by more providers. And look at O'Reilly; certainly, he doesn't agree with Rush on everything, but I'd say he's far closer to Limbaugh than he is any liberal, and his ratings are stellar.
Those are the types of things you have to overcome to pursuasively show that Rush is being rejected by mainstream America, and all you present is your "life experience"?
You're right in that your own life experience should be enough to convince YOU, but that's simply not enough to pursuade me to agree.
As arrogant as some people in this forum think I am, at least I provide something more substantial when I make such a broad claim. When you asked for my argument earlier in this thread, I provided it, and the argument was a bit more than some fuzzy explanation about life experiences.
"I have no concrete statistics to prove this to you, but I don't have to: I've lived it. If that's not good enough, then it's not my problem."
In other words, you won't provide anything more to back up your claim. It seems to me, then, that you have lowered the bar when it comes to evidence that you are asked to provide.
I nailed you on this one, Melon, and I don't think you're able to admit.
