Right Wing Media: congratulations Rush Limbaugh on three full years of sobriety!

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Right Wing Media: congratulations Rush Limbaugh on three full years of sobriety!

«‹›3441 »

pentyne: Nov 7, 2012

emptyspace posted:

Not entirely true. They're also apparently against higher taxes on rich people, according to this commercial from last year:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeHOdJl2Ahs

I'm sure it's just a coincidence that Grover Norquist sits on their Board of Directors.

The NRA is a pretty obviously partisan organization at this point. They're really no different than the American Family Association or any number of other nakedly partisan non-profits.

The NRA doesn't actually care about gun rights, or proper regulation/safe use of firearms, and I don't really think they care that much about funneling money to gun manufacturers anymore. They want to get Republicans elected. Because being Republican means being pro-gun, regardless of the actual policies championed by the parties or individual politicians. poo poo, some restrictions on carrying weapons have actually been relaxed by Obama - by exectutive order, no less - and they still call him a gun-grabber.

gently caress the NRA.

At a certain point, its an economic windfall for many members. I remember reading about how gun store owners would make sure to post the "Obama's coming to take our guns/ammo" stories in their store because customers would drive for hundreds of miles to stock up on ammo they thought was going to be outlawed.

# ? May 27, 2014 05:00

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 18, 2024 00:55

Ivan Shitskin: Nov 29, 2002

Somehow I doubt anything will be done about mental health care. It seems even worse now because of all the partisanship and paranoia and hatred people have for each other now, and the right wing's love for demonizing the more vulnerable members of society. The constant publicity that mass shootings get only make people more paranoid about each other. This has affected me personally because I have a long history of depressive disorders. I was hospitalized for it at one point and they treated people there like criminals.

It's like how people mock people with autism or asperger syndrome all over the internet now. Autism or "sperg" or whatever is used as a slur against people you don't like. It's especially rich when liberals who argue for gay rights and equality use a mental condition as a slur. People disgust me.

# ? May 27, 2014 05:25

mr. mephistopheles: Dec 2, 2009

The right wing gun nuts who say we need mental health solutions to gun crime are literally referring to the forced institutionalization of people they deem mentally unfit. It takes a lot of twisting to get them to admit it, too, but if you prod enough eventually they'll just say something vague like "these people shouldn't be out on the streets."

# ? May 27, 2014 06:17

Hazo: Dec 30, 2004; SCIENCE

pentyne posted:

At a certain point, its an economic windfall for many members. I remember reading about how gun store owners would make sure to post the "Obama's coming to take our guns/ammo" stories in their store because customers would drive for hundreds of miles to stock up on ammo they thought was going to be outlawed.

I was just tonight remembering how Indianapolis-area gun stores were in the paper posting record sales in early fall 2008 because of Obama paranoia. I tried to find the article but the Indianapolis Star website has somehow become even shittier.

Kenzie posted:

Somehow I doubt anything will be done about mental health care. It seems even worse now because of all the partisanship and paranoia and hatred people have for each other now, and the right wing's love for demonizing the more vulnerable members of society. The constant publicity that mass shootings get only make people more paranoid about each other.

I agree entirely and I posted something to this effect a page or two ago.

Kenzie posted:

It's like how people mock people with autism or asperger syndrome all over the internet now. Autism or "sperg" or whatever is used as a slur against people you don't like. It's especially rich when liberals who argue for gay rights and equality use a mental condition as a slur. People disgust me.

This bothers me too until I just sort of remind myself to stop reading nu-GBS

mr. mephistopheles posted:

The right wing gun nuts who say we need mental health solutions to gun crime are literally referring to the forced institutionalization of people they deem mentally unfit. It takes a lot of twisting to get them to admit it, too, but if you prod enough eventually they'll just say something vague like "these people shouldn't be out on the streets."

I'm hesitant to bring this up because of cross thread bullshit but back when we were messing with the Tea Party Facebook, even insane Tea Partiers overwhelmingly agreed with simple gun control measures.

Hazo fucked around with this message at 06:26 on May 27, 2014

# ? May 27, 2014 06:18

Raskolnikov38: Mar 3, 2007; We were somewhere around Manila when the drugs began to take hold

God drat those are some leading questions.

# ? May 27, 2014 06:38

Swan Oat: Oct 9, 2012; I was selected for my skill.

ErIog posted:

All the hate Cenk gets is mostly from him being a smug prick who feels like kinda maybe the Armenian genocide didn't happen. Few people would contend he isn't funny sometimes. The problem is that he's grating even over the course of a 2-3 minute clip even though he might actually say a funny thing or make a good point.

I think Cenk has come around on the Armenian Genocide though he definitely denied it when he was a shithead college Republican.

# ? May 27, 2014 06:50

mr. mephistopheles: Dec 2, 2009

Raskolnikov38 posted:

God drat those are some leading questions.

The fact that one choice literally says criminals should be allowed to own guns with no restrictions and a third of people still picked it makes me dubious of the "even the Tea Party supports basic reform!" claim.

# ? May 27, 2014 06:53

Beamed: Nov 26, 2010; Then you have a responsibility that no man has ever faced. You have your fear which could become reality, and you have Godzilla, which is reality.

Kenzie posted:

Somehow I doubt anything will be done about mental health care. It seems even worse now because of all the partisanship and paranoia and hatred people have for each other now, and the right wing's love for demonizing the more vulnerable members of society. The constant publicity that mass shootings get only make people more paranoid about each other. This has affected me personally because I have a long history of depressive disorders. I was hospitalized for it at one point and they treated people there like criminals.

It's like how people mock people with autism or asperger syndrome all over the internet now. Autism or "sperg" or whatever is used as a slur against people you don't like. It's especially rich when liberals who argue for gay rights and equality use a mental condition as a slur. People disgust me.

On the other hand, I've been shouted down and called a "neurotypical ableist" because I said maybe mental illness is the cause of a lot of shootings.

# ? May 27, 2014 08:08

jonjonaug: Mar 26, 2010; by Lowtax

Post 9-11 User posted:

The NYDN is purestrain tabloid poo poo.

Edit: It's such crap it gets handed out for free at the terminals by immigrants working at less-than-minimum-wage (thanks for treating new arrivals like garbage, NYDN). I don't know how it's still in print when even the National Enquirer tanked despite having a captive audience of bored idiots waiting in line at supermarkets.

At least it isn't as poo poo as the New York Post?

# ? May 27, 2014 08:18

PostNouveau: Sep 3, 2011; VY till I die; Grimey Drawer

Sir Tonk posted:

well then

That sure is a cover of the Daily News on the cover of the Daily News.

# ? May 27, 2014 10:06

Hazo: Dec 30, 2004; SCIENCE

Raskolnikov38 posted:

God drat those are some leading questions.

And yet almost one third of Tea Partiers thinks criminals deserve the same rights to guns as everyone else.

Hazo fucked around with this message at 11:01 on May 27, 2014

# ? May 27, 2014 10:48

My Q-Face: Jul 8, 2002; A dumb racist who need to kill themselves

mr. mephistopheles posted:

The right wing gun nuts who say we need mental health solutions to gun crime are literally referring to the forced institutionalization of people they deem mentally unfit. It takes a lot of twisting to get them to admit it, too, but if you prod enough eventually they'll just say something vague like "these people shouldn't be out on the streets."

Yet, somehow these same people don't want to actually have to pay for it and supported Reagan's shuttering of institutions. And yes, some people do need to be institutionalized, though I wouldn't want these clowns to be the ones to make that determination.

# ? May 27, 2014 10:58

Pirate Radar: Apr 18, 2008; You're not my Ruthie!
You're not my Debbie!
You're not my Sherry!

Hazo posted:

And yet almost one third of Tea Partiers thinks criminals deserve the same rights to guns as everyone else.

And two-thirds of them picked the inane "I've got nothing to hide!" option. Sometimes the only winning move is not to play.

# ? May 27, 2014 14:08

computer parts: Nov 18, 2010; PLEASE CLAP

Hazo posted:

And yet almost one third of Tea Partiers thinks criminals deserve the same rights to guns as everyone else.

This is starting to sound like an unironic approval of "tough on crime" rhetoric.

# ? May 27, 2014 14:49

Fried Chicken: Jan 9, 2011; Don't fry me, I'm no chicken!

mr. mephistopheles posted:

The right wing gun nuts who say we need mental health solutions to gun crime are literally referring to the forced institutionalization of people they deem mentally unfit. It takes a lot of twisting to get them to admit it, too, but if you prod enough eventually they'll just say something vague like "these people shouldn't be out on the streets."

Mental health issues are one of the major causes of homelessness. Shockingly, it is hard for an untreated schizophrenic to hold a regular job. Reagan's gutting the public health budget resulted in the shuttering of mental health clinics across the nation so now instead of getting help these people end up living on the streets, in jail, or in the ground.

They shouldn't be out on the streets, they should be getting the treatment they need, the treatment we used to provide.

# ? May 27, 2014 16:13

ReindeerF: Apr 20, 2002; Rubber Dinghy Rapids Bro

The ACLU, I believe, but definitely liberal organizations were equally at fault on that very narrow, particular point. Granted, they had a good reason post-Willowbrook and all the RD Laing stuff to do what they did, but they basically made it impossible to hold people against their will for mental health reasons without a process so arduous that it's essentially untenable from what I gather. I suppose this may vary on the state level, but the latitude can only be so much. They wanted to protect civil rights in the wake of the discovery that mentally ill (and lots of not-mentally-ill) people were being stacked in state institutions like cord wood, which makes a lot of sense, but it turns out that the ability to commit someone at least for the short term without calling the police, having them perform an interview and then going through a legal review is actually pretty important, because the mental health professionals are who you want making that call and when people are cray cray and about to snap you need to err on the side of caution and not based on what Sheriff Billy Bob thinks.

Reagan's reforms basically just gutted funding, making sure that even those who were under treatment or would submit to treatment would find it difficult, which of course came from absolutely zero noble intention.

# ? May 27, 2014 17:24

Hazo: Dec 30, 2004; SCIENCE

computer parts posted:

This is starting to sound like an unironic approval of "tough on crime" rhetoric.

From me? Maybe I worded that poorly then. I just thought the screenshot was a funny insight into their thinking.

# ? May 27, 2014 18:31

Pirate Radar: Apr 18, 2008; You're not my Ruthie!
You're not my Debbie!
You're not my Sherry!

You know, I can even totally see an argument against background checks, or against revoking the gun rights of criminals in the first place, on the basis that--it might be easy for me to say that it doesn't affect me because I'm not a criminal, but in a way that's an expression of my privilege; if you're not a straight white man then the American justice system doesn't really need a reason to declare you a lawbreaker, and so me saying "well, I've got nothing to hide" rests on the support of my privileged social position.

But somehow I don't think that's quite what the respondents to this survey were thinking.

# ? May 27, 2014 19:32

Intel&Sebastian: Oct 20, 2002; colonel...
i'm trying to sneak around
but i'm dummy thicc
and the clap of my ass cheeks
keeps alerting the guards!

Hazo posted:

And yet almost one third of Tea Partiers thinks criminals deserve the same rights to guns as everyone else.

That's the real takeaway there. It's a completely broken poll meant to skew the sample towards gun control and you still end up with nearly a third still looking for some line in the sand where they'd approve the removal of a gun from someones hands. We need to invent a new word for a super-fetish.

# ? May 27, 2014 19:41

Eggplant Squire: Aug 14, 2003

Religious zealot?

# ? May 27, 2014 19:43

ChristsDickWorship: Dec 7, 2004; Annihilate your demons

Seems to me that even if we already had background checks it would be a brutal battle to get guns taken away based on mental health. For one thing the first group that would have a bunch of guns taken away would probably be veterans, right? They pop into my head as very likely to have some kind of documented psych profile and also own guns. The next group of people would probably be white middle class families with teenagers in therapy, for the same reasons. Neither of those two things would be popular, even given all the mass shootings on military bases and by white kids in schools.

Republicans won't even need the NRA to raise voices against laws like that. I'm not 100% sure my liberal rear end agrees with those kinds of regulations, I don't care what regulations are put on firearms but in general I agree with the ACLU that it should be pretty damned difficult to alter someone's rights based on their perceived mental state.

# ? May 27, 2014 19:45

Eggplant Squire: Aug 14, 2003

That also might have the unintended side effect of people with possible mental disorders not getting them treated out of fear of having weapons confiscated.

# ? May 27, 2014 19:46

moths: Aug 25, 2004; I would also still appreciate some danger.

You could probably do a gun buddy system, where you sign off on another gun owner's sanity and if he fucks up you both lose your guns.

# ? May 27, 2014 19:52

Intel&Sebastian: Oct 20, 2002; colonel...
i'm trying to sneak around
but i'm dummy thicc
and the clap of my ass cheeks
keeps alerting the guards!

moths posted:

You could probably do a gun buddy system, where you sign off on another gun owner's sanity and if he fucks up you both lose your guns.

The year is 2024 - FOX: 10 tips for avoiding the massive gov't gun grab cascade set off by Ted Nugent.

# ? May 27, 2014 20:01

mr. mephistopheles: Dec 2, 2009

Fried Chicken posted:

Mental health issues are one of the major causes of homelessness. Shockingly, it is hard for an untreated schizophrenic to hold a regular job. Reagan's gutting the public health budget resulted in the shuttering of mental health clinics across the nation so now instead of getting help these people end up living on the streets, in jail, or in the ground.

They shouldn't be out on the streets, they should be getting the treatment they need, the treatment we used to provide.

No need to preach to me, sir.

And they're just saying the mentally ill should be in jail in a roundabout pussy way that sounds less monstrous. They are absolutely not advocating for greater spending and expansion of facilities that cater to mental health. They basically want having a mental illness to be a jailable offense in itself.

The party who thinks a semi-regulated private insurance marketplace is godless socialism does not want government funded mental health facilities. You saying "they shouldn't be out on the streets" has completely different implications than when they say it.

Also cool story, a former coworker who was a mindless Reagan worshiping conservative had his mind blown when I told him what Reagan did to mental health facilities in the US. He had absolutely no idea. Of course it only made him question his worldview for half a second before the programming retook, but it was there.

# ? May 27, 2014 20:32

moths: Aug 25, 2004; I would also still appreciate some danger.

Wasn't there a gun-grabbing nanny state panic in the right a few years ago when a crazy person lost his guns for posting crazy poo poo on Facebook?

# ? May 27, 2014 21:10

kik2dagroin: Mar 23, 2007; Use the anger. Use it.

Limbaugh spent about an hour musing over the meanings of The Hunger Games. Let's just get a little dose of context because this whole thing started as a fairly benign comment as he ranted about the recent shooting in Santa Barbara

quote:

RUSH: The kid in Santa Barbara, Isla Vista. Everything that has happened since is utterly predictable. Everybody on the left is taking another real human tragedy and converting it into a political issue, the purpose of which is to advance their political agenda, in this case: get rid of the Second Amendment and confiscate everybody's guns. And they're all out in unison.

They're trying to make the case that this is another instance where -- never mind that the first three deaths were by machete. Maybe not the first three, but never mind that guns were not used for all of the deaths. We still gotta get guns out of the hands of people. If you do that, this would never have happened.

Now, I know as much about this as you do, maybe less, actually, than you do 'cause I've not been absorbed with it because I think I understand it. What could go wrong here. You've got an estranged mother and dad. The dad produces oddball movies like The Hunger Games and as a side hobby takes photos of nude women's bare rear ends in exotic locales around the country. (interruption) Yeah, you didn't know that? You didn't know that? Well, they're in art galleries. This guy takes black and white, for the most part artsy, photos of nude women from the rear focusing on their butts. One's in front of the Taj Mahal in the pool. They're all over the place. That's his art, the guy's father.

Unrelated to Hunger Games but he also had this to say about abstinence

quote:

RUSH: The thing about abstinence, let's say in preventing AIDS or pregnancy, is abstinence works every time it's tried. Every drat time it works. It prevents unwanted pregnancy, it prevents sexually transmitted diseases, it prevents HIV.

But you don't dare say so, and you know why you don't dare say so? Because it's silly, it's stupid, it's old-fashioned, and it's unrealistic. What do you mean, abstinence? Kids are gonna have sex, and we can't stop it. We better find a way to make it as safe as we can so you take that cucumber to school and get a balloon and show 'em how to use a condom.

Most boys are gonna say, "A cucumber? What's that supposed to be?" because it doesn't look like a cucumber to them. They wish it did, but it doesn't. (laughing) Well, you know, I'm the mayor of Realville. Now, the... (interruption) Well, that's the point. He was abstinent. Jeremy's point here is real simple. If he had been raised with the idea that not being promiscuous was good for him, then he wouldn't be jealous of all these people say how much they're getting every day and night.

But you can't say that.

That's just so old-fashioned and unrealistic. "I mean, abstinence? No, kids are gonna do it. You can't stop 'em!" It's just like Nancy Reagan's, "Just Say NO to Drugs." I mean, that was laughed out of town, and so was abstinence laughed at. His only point was if he'd had a couple parents who said, "You know, Son, you're gonna be better off in the long run. It's gonna have more meaning to you later on," maybe he wouldn't have gone off the deep end. Who knows?

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/05/27/the_left_takes_another_human_tragedy_and_converts_it_into_a_political_issue
Haha, yes if you just raised the shooter to be abstinent none of this would have happened. Back to The Hunger Games though!

quote:

RUSH: ... Let's take a look at Star Wars. Do you think that young people, when they watched Star Wars, the first three of 'em back in the -- had to be the seventies and I guess some into the eighties, you had Darth Vader, the evil emperor. You had their Death Star, and they were out to wipe out everybody who stood in their way from little Yoda to Luke Skywalker, to Princess Leia, and all of those, you know, oddball little freedom fighter guys.

Now, do you think that young people saw the Democrat Party in Darth Vader and the evil emperor and the Death Star, and that they saw Reagan conservatism in Luke Skywalker, Yoda, and Obi-Wan Kenobi? I don't. If they did, then the Democrats wouldn't be having such an easy time. My only point is I finally found out who wrote these Hunger Game books and movies, Suzanne Collins, and she admits to being a far-left liberal, concerned with the environment, concerned with too much war and economic deprivation. (laughing) I told somebody: "Well, she made a mistake, then, because her movies are real Republican."

No, they're not. That's my point. They can't possibly be.

Anyway, Snerdley said to me during the break, "It's amazing that you can turn 60, 63, and keep an open mind and not turn into an old fuddy-duddy, but does that mean you're not gonna be honest and say that the music and the movies today is absolute garbage?" And I said, "Well, go back and look at your era, look at Psycho and Alfie. There were all kids of things, for its day, which were just as depraved and shocking as this stuff is today. It's just relative to what your baseline is. The difference to me today, it really does boil down to optimism and pessimism, to me.

You know, back when I was young eating up whatever, the media that I liked back then was, be it entertainment, books, movies, TV shows, it was all for the most part, at the end of the day, end of the movie, optimism triumphed. There was no such thing as a dystopian. That didn't happen until the left got totally concerned with nuclear weapons in the seventies and the eighties and the Phil Donahue show and so forth. Then you had the Mad Max movies which were post-apocalyptic world where there was no gasoline except what you could steal. Everything dystopia, the opposite of utopia. Dystopia is just absolute disaster.

That's the difference to me. And if you check, if you'd be open-minded, if you check attitudes today, take a look at Millennials. What are they telling you? They've lost faith. American dream's over. No chance for them. Those days are long gone, as far as they're concerned. All they face is $200,000 minimum student loan debt, no job. And they're not blaming Obama. They're just down on America. The old promise of America doesn't exist for them. And I think a never-ending barrage of pessimism and dystopianism has to have played a role in that attitudinal thinking.

Look, anybody well adjusted can go watch anything and come out of it fine and dandy. If you're well adjusted you can go watch the biggest horror, slasher movie in the world and come out of there not wanting to go do that kind of thing to people. If you're not well adjusted, if it fits your worldview, it's just gonna confirm the pessimism, the uselessness and so forth. That's the difference to me today.

In fact, folks, this is one of the reasons why the whole notion of writing children's books on American history appealed to me, because it was an opportunity to restore -- I mean, the story of this country is a fascinating story in human history. It doesn't need any embellishment. It doesn't need any exaggeration. What happened in founding this country is an absolute miracle when it comes to human history on this planet. It is just an amazing story. But you and I all know that what's happened -- and not just in the education system -- is the whole idea of what America stands for has been under assault for a long time when the multiculturalists came in and got control of things. And it's worked.

All you need to do is look at polling data of attitudes and measure how much optimism versus pessimism there is out there, and you'll know exactly what I'm talking about. These Hunger Games books are for kids, 14 to 16. They're not for adults, but adults go watch the movies and read the books, and I do think that there is a real craving, sad though this may be, I think there's a real craving among many conservatives to see their values reflected in popular culture, because we've lost it, admittedly. Everybody admits we've lost it.

Even Frank Rich had a piece over the weekend in the Atlantic, or wherever he writes, that there's no such thing as conservative comedy. Conservatives aren't funny. Well, we've been doing comedy and humor here for 25 years. The left is who doesn't find it funny, because you can't make fun of them. See, here's the left view of comedy: Comedy can only legitimately be done if the powerless are making fun of the powerful. Therefore, the left is filled with powerless people who need a big government looking out for them.

In my case, the homeless update. That's not humor. That's cruelty, in their worldview. All these things that we did that you thought were the funniest stuff you ever heard, nobody ever came along, nobody made fun of liberals. They don't find that funny because they look at themselves as downtrodden, the disadvantaged, they need a big government protecting 'em. They're all Julias or pajama-clad metrosexuals running around, and everybody's out to get 'em except Obama, who's there to protect 'em and other Democrats.

So if you are a conservative and you're sitting around waiting for your values to be reflected in popular culture, as long as it's owned by the left, it isn't gonna happen. But if you're desperate to see it you might go watch a movie and think, "A-ha! It's a secret conservative message! Look at that!" And you're being fooled. Well, when the producer, the writer, the director, and everybody in it is a staunch ultraliberal, then you... (interruption) Yes, it is! It drat well is the intent. (interruption) No. It's for people to figure out that it's Obama, it's fine, but it's not just Obama. It's liberalism, totalitarianism, authoritarianism.

George III represents tyranny. And so if you put modern words uttered by liberals in the mouth of George III the message is to convey what tyranny is to young readers. Well, I don't know President Snow from President Frost 'cause I haven't seen these movies, and now you're making me so mad about this, I don't care that I want to. But I'm almost obligated to now. What does Hunger Games have to do with it? Why did they call it Hunger Games? It's obviously not about games and it's not about hunger. (interruption) Oh, they don't have enough food, do they? Oh, so they kill people in order to have enough food to eat? (interruption) They don't kill people?

"They do kill people, but that's not the point, Rush, that's not the point. They kill people, kids kill kids, but that isn't the point!" Apparently no food stamps in Hunger Game dystopia. You gotta kill to eat? That's the way it was in the caveman days, Fred Flintstone in the boys. They didn't have food stamps. They didn't have Social Security disability. Hell, they had to conquer dinosaurs and ride the things to be able to move stones around. But no, seriously. The reason that the history books seem so -- I mean, just a natural to me. I am an optimist. I always have been. And there's no earthly reason if you look at my life why I shouldn't be.

If I were a pessimist, boy, what a mistake that would be, given the blessed life that I've had. So I'm an optimist. I believe in optimism and happy endings and stuff. They're possible. But I don't think there's a whole lot of that now because the modern definition of reality is dystopia. The modern definition of reality is how everything sucks. I'm telling you, it wasn't that way when I was growing up, and I am not being a fuddy-duddy. I'm just trying to chronicle some of the differences and how much impact they have on people. I still maintain if you're self-adjusted, well adjusted, all this crap in the world is not gonna affect you.

But look at this kid. The kid had his $40,000 Beamer. He was not bad looking. A lot of this stuff I didn't understand. They said he had Asperger's disease or whatever it is. I've known some people with that. You can't function. That's worse than -- it's similar to autism, but, I mean, you gotta be kid gloves around people who have that disease. It doesn't take much to have them just go off, and so you have to kid glove everybody. It's terrible. I don't know, this kid supposedly had that.

Folks, it's also true that there's just plain bad people out there. No matter what you do, there's evil out there and no amount of gun control or caring or concern, no number of hashtags is gonna stop it. But, see, that reality is overlooked and events like this are all rolled in to the dystopian nature the left presents everybody, this overall pessimistic view. And they benefit from it, is the point. Things are so bad, you need your big government run by us to protect you from all of this horror that's out there, that this country has become.

It's insidious to me. I think this country's story is amazing, and I think it's optimistic. I think it's uplifting. The story of this country and our Founding Fathers is some of the greatest inspiration people can expose themselves to.

This prompted several callers to respond with varying takes on The Hunger Games

quote:

CALLER: ... So I got a little upset about what you said because I think 99.999% of the time you are right. But The Hunger Games is not just about kids killing kids. When you read the whole series, it's about a revolution. It's about people mad at a government who's been oppressing them and who take over and attack the government. I actually --

RUSH: That can't be. That can't be.

CALLER: No, it is.

RUSH: Hollywood wouldn't produce anything like that. That can't be. You gotta be wrong. Do kids kill each other in these movies?

CALLER: Yes, they do. But that's the point of the books. That's not the point of the series. The point of the series is that they finally get tired of being oppressed and they attack the government.

RUSH: Yeah?

CALLER: When you read the third book, it all comes to light. But you have to read all three, otherwise people get the impression that it's just kids killing kids, and that's just not what it's really about.

RUSH: All right. Well, that's cool. If that's how you see it, I'm not gonna sit here and argue with you about it.

CALLER: (badly garbled) Well, did you read the third book? Because you have to read the third book to get that. If you don't read the third book, it is just kids killing kids.

RUSH: No. In fact, I'll be honest. I haven't seen one minute of the movie or read a book. I had somebody tell me about it, so I'm not surprised. You know, when people tell you things, what you get is their impression of it.

CALLER: Right.

RUSH: I'm just passing on what I had heard. I haven't seen one minute of either of the movies, and I have not read any of the books.

CALLER: Well, (garbled) movie is about so much.

RUSH: Here's the point. Wait a second, though. All this came up in context of this kid running amok and what his dad does. And what does this kid do? He is out killing people. Did kids kill people in this movie, or in the books? Do kids kill kids?

CALLER: They do, but the reason they do it is they're forced to do it to keep their district alive.

RUSH: All right.

CALLER: If they don't go and do what they need... (garbled) If they win, then their district gets (unintelligible) for the next year. And if they don't, they're (garbled).

RUSH: All right.

CALLER: (garbled cell)

RUSH: Okay, okay. Look. I cannot understand a word you're saying 'cause the cell phone connection. But what I gathered that you said before it all started jamming up was that they kill, yes, but because they were forced to in order to save their "districts," which is fine and dandy. But Debbie, thanks for the call. I appreciate it. Another Debbie. She's in McLean, Virginia. Hello.

CALLER: Hi, Rush. How are you?

RUSH: Good. Thank you.

CALLER: Third-time caller dittos for you from a Rush Babe. I'd like to agree with my predecessor Debbie that it's not glorifying the killing. It's criticizing it, and the whole point --

RUSH: Wait, are we talking about the movies or the books here?

CALLER: Both. In the books, it is there because it is kind of to show you how bad this government is forcing their people, their citizens to compromise their personal beliefs and devalue life the way they do for entertainment for the bourgeoisie capital people. And the command-and-control government doesn't give the people in the district, to put it in your terms, the ruling class versus the country class --

RUSH: Okay, let me try this. Let me ask you a question.

CALLER: Okay.

RUSH: There's no wrong answer.

CALLER: Sure.

RUSH: I just want to know what you think. As you watch these movies or read the books, and you imagine young people who vote Democrat and think Obama's great and love big government -- as they watch these movies -- are they going to be inclined to be more in favor of Democrats and big government or are they going to think, "Wow, this is not good. I don't want to support government if it does this kind of thing"?

CALLER: Well, unfortunately because of our education system, I don't think that they're getting the metaphor. They're seeing that, "Oh, President Snow, he's a bad guy. He's the villain, and he's forcing these kids to go into this arena and kill each other while he and his friends in power, the ruling class, get to reap all the resources from each of the districts, be it coal mining, technology, farming, livestock, textiles, lumber.
RUSH: Right, so you are --

CALLER: You know, they are basically taking the hard work of the citizens for themselves.

RUSH: Okay.

CALLER: They never have to work a day in their life. All they have to worry about is what color their hair is gonna be or how much they can eat at the party --

RUSH: Okay, so --

CALLER: -- and they watch it for entertainment. It's kind of like Running Man, where the government controls the media, and to the citizens of the capital, the ruling class --

RUSH: Well, I haven't --

CALLER: -- it's entertainment, and --

RUSH: I can't talk to her. (thumps desk)

CALLER: -- for the country class, it's a threat and a warning for troublemakers.

RUSH: I haven't seen -- what is it -- The Running Man either. But let me ask you: Would you describe the books and the movies as anti-government?

CALLER: Well, like I said, I think with anything you read, you get out of it what you put into it. Just like people who read your books are looking for you to be the bad guy. With my personal/conservative core beliefs, that's what I see. I see anti-government. You know, the hero tries to overthrow this government, so that way the killing can stop and they can stop The Hunger Games.

RUSH: Okay, who is the hero?

CALLER: Well, the main heroes are Katniss Everdeen and Peeta Mellark, who are, as you mentioned before -- spoiler alert -- two survivors in the first book. And they go on, and they have to kind of become a part of this system that they don't agree with, and then they basically try from the inside out to have their own personal statement, own personal protests. Katniss sort of becomes the beacon of the revolution, the symbol of hope that things can change.

RUSH: Okay, let's back up. You said that people that read my books want to look for me to be the bad guy?

CALLER: Well, I mean, even with your recent books, people say they're appalled, "Oh, Rush Limbaugh wrote a children's book and he's going to --" I read some, you know, very biased reviews, which are obvious that people haven't read the books. They claim that you and Sean Hannity go back to change history, and that's not what you do, obviously. I read the books, my nephews have read the books, and you're trying to teach them the truth about what has been misinterpreted.

RUSH: We're not trying; we are.

CALLER: Yes, you're succeeding very well.

RUSH: And, you know, frankly the reviews have been somewhat surprisingly good to me. We got a Stack and collection, they've been amazingly good. (interruption) What, you got an Amazon e-mail that mentioned? (interruption) Yeah. That's true. That's true. Amazon's pitching them. Go figure. But I even read a review by some guy who just despises me who said, "The books are actually quite good, I have to admit." It had to be hard to write. I've not seen too many of these bad reviews. But I got your point. People have preconceived notions and they plug what they see into what they want to believe.

I haven't seen any of these movies and I haven't read any of the books, and I'll tell you why. The title is The Hunger Games, and then when I first heard what these movies are about, I didn't get the connection between the title, and then when I saw everybody in it winning awards, "Well, to hell with that." (interruption) What? (interruption) Yeah. See, I'm being told, "No, it's really, really good, the kids killing kids, it's just a minor part, it doesn't --" (interruption) Right, they don't. If everything I've heard so far about it, we ought to have legions of teenagers marching to the polls voting every Democrat out of office if the movies and books are that good. And we don't, do we? (interruption) What's that? (interruption) Oh. Well, you know, it's fascinating.

You take a look at what people see, it always is amazing to me. That's why I try to keep an open mind about everybody's perception of things. I mean, here kids are killing kids, it's not a big deal! Okay. Yeah. "They have to because they're being told to, and then they eventually rebel against it and they get rid of the oppressive government," while they vote for one to live under themselves over and over again.

Well, I look at polling data, Millennials are openly telling pollsters how much they hate big government. They don't like it. They think it's ineffective and they're voting for it at the same time, which I also understand, because I understand why they're doing it, and it all comes down to Republican branding, when you get down to basics. Anyway, Debbie, I appreciate the call. Really do.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Okay, so I just got an e-mail from somebody I know who is 60. "Don't believe what these two callers have told you. These movies are sick. They are about socialism and government control of food, and they are dystopian." Now, I think I understand this. Follow me on this. We've had two women call today who praised these books to the hilt. They're really, really good. I don't know how old those women were. I couldn't tell. It's really tough to guess based on voices. So I'm not going to.

But you take somebody who was nine or 10 years old in the fifties and take them through the sixties, teenage years, you put this movie in front of them back then, and it's a horror story. Kids killing kids just was not portrayed. War movies were. But even the war movies back then, nowhere near the realism that you get today in terms of the gore. But the idea of a movie that is entertaining that has good in it, that shows a government making kids kill each other, unheard of.

So you take somebody who grew up, their formative years were the fifties and sixties, you put this movie in front of 'em and I guarantee you they're gonna get sick. But you put the movie in front of kids today, "Ah, it's just no big deal." I mean, compared to the what else they've seen and what else they've heard, what else they've been exposed to, it's no big deal. Maybe they can even see themselves in it. And I find all this fascinating. It's why I have vowed that I was never gonna become a fuddy-duddy.

When I was 60, I was not gonna look at what was going on with young people when I'm 60 and immediately put it down as trash or whatever. But I can honestly tell you that something like this would never even have gotten made back in the fifties or sixties. Would you agree with that? Something like this couldn't even get made. And why? Because it's rotten. It's an absolutely horrible, worthless premise. And yet today, it's award-winning.

Now, is that so hard to understand in an era where abortion occurs for the convenience of the living? I think not. There are reasons why what used to be considered coarse and taboo or intolerable, today is considered art. I remember the outrage when Piss Christ happened, Andres Serrano, the crucifix. Piece of art, submerged in a jar of urine. And we were told we had to learn to appreciate it.

Here's the difference, folks. Or one of the differences. You put The Hunger Games or something like it, Mad Max, one of these dystopian movies. What is troubling to me is the dystopian nature of these things, that there's no good in the world anymore, that everything is rot and everybody's corrupt and everything's sick. (interruption) No, I'm not talking about just this movie. I'm talking about if I had somebody from the current Drive-By Media here explaining why The Hunger Games or movies like them are winning awards, it's because, "This is the world people live in today, Rush, this is what life is about to them. They're scared. This is what they see as possibly their future."

To which I would say, "Why? How has that happened?" It wasn't all that long ago that the future was an optimistic thing, not a pessimistic thing. It wasn't that long ago that young people couldn't wait to get out of the house; couldn't wait to strike out on their own; couldn't wait to make their own way in the world. And the reason for that was bubbling effusive optimism, eagerness. But today there's not so much of that. There's a lot of pessimism, fear, and even dystopianism, in the media, that defenders of it, "Well, this is what the world is to them today." Then I would say, "How did that happen? That's a shame."

I mean, I know pessimism's easy. I know anybody can do it. I know optimism takes work. Optimism has always been an applied discipline. But it used to be natural. It used to be a defining characteristic of leaders and people who were otherwise inspirational. Today, it seems like people who can see the evil ahead and who can see the horrors, they seem to carry a lot of weight, the pessimists. I mean, I would much rather have everything in life be optimistic, you know, tempered with reality. Not everything is.

I'm not talking about rose-colored glasses or anything here, but so many movies are dystopian. End of the world destruction, you know, LA is nothing more than a giant land-filled dump of people flying around in space machines and all kinds of human debris are involved and selling 'em this and that and the whole idea is to escape it. And LA's not gonna be that. Well -- no, it's not. It's not gonna be that.

quote:

RUSH: You know what I thought I'd do? I thought I'd go to some popular liberal website and just put in the search term "Hunger Games" and see what I got, and that's what I did. I went to the Huffing and Puffington Post, and I entered "Hunger Games" as a search term, and I found a headline to a story on the Hunger Games movies at the Huffing and Puffington Post. Do you want to know what it says?

"The Hunger Games and the death of winner-take-all capitalism." So at the Huffing and Puffington Post they clearly watched the Hunger Games and they were cheering it. (paraphrased) "This is the greatest thing for socialism we've ever seen! Why, this thing destroys free market capitalism!" Now again, I haven't seen these flicks, haven't read these books. So I'm at a little bit of a disadvantage.

I could fake it like many hosts would lie to you and claim they've seen the movies. I haven't. I don't care that I haven't seen 'em yet, and can still discuss it. I just think it's fascinating. I got all these people telling me today, "Rush, this is a secret message. The conservatives... Boy, Hollywood is really ripping into big government." Well, here's a big government website saying it's the best movie for their view that they've ever seen.

And how about this: "The death of winner-take-all capitalism"? Capitalism is not winner-take-all. Liberalism is! Liberalism is where everybody's poor except the Fidel Castros of the world. It's just the exact opposite.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/05/27/callers_defend_the_hunger_games
What are your thoughts on Wall-E, Mr. Limbaugh :unsmigghh:

# ? May 27, 2014 23:04

BigRed0427: Mar 23, 2007; There's no one I'd rather be than me.

What's with the interrupts in the transcripts? Is he constantly being corrected by his producer or someone in the other booth?

Edit: Hollywood making a movie about people overthrowing a Government! NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN!

BigRed0427 fucked around with this message at 23:25 on May 27, 2014

# ? May 27, 2014 23:18

Intel&Sebastian: Oct 20, 2002; colonel...
i'm trying to sneak around
but i'm dummy thicc
and the clap of my ass cheeks
keeps alerting the guards!

Only Limbaugh could straight tell you he's leading a discussion about something he knows absolutely nothing about, doesn't care that he doesn't know, and frame it as some principled stance against people who would know what they're talking about. He accidentally summed up his entire schtick there.

Edit: He's literally googling the goddamn title on HuffPo to find something to talk about and he's telling you that he's doing this :laffo:

Intel&Sebastian fucked around with this message at 23:26 on May 27, 2014

# ? May 27, 2014 23:22

kik2dagroin: Mar 23, 2007; Use the anger. Use it.

BigRed0427 posted:

What's with the interrupts in the transcripts? Is he constantly being corrected by his producer or someone in the other booth?

Yep! It's basically him and Snerdley having a conversation that only he can hear, although it's pretty rare that they correct Limbaugh on anything.

# ? May 27, 2014 23:29

OAquinas: Jan 27, 2008; Biden has sat immobile on the Iron Throne of America. He is the Master of Malarkey by the will of the gods, and master of a million votes by the might of his inexhaustible calamari.

I also like how he taps into "the American dream doesn't exist for Millennials" due to crushing debt and a lack of support and somehow tries to turn it around onto Obama. Like they would have been just fine if it wasn't for him being elected.

# ? May 27, 2014 23:33

PeterWeller: Apr 21, 2003; I told you that story so I could tell you this one.

That poor woman is right. Our education system has failed. Otherwise, she wouldn't be so drat parochial and would see that the relationship between the Capitol and the Districts is not a metaphor for DC and the states, but a metaphor for America and the developing world. Sadly, our education system has left her so miopic and uncurious, she can't even consider a world beyond her borders.

# ? May 27, 2014 23:45

Buried alive: Jun 8, 2009

"I've managed to keep an old mind and not become an old fuddy duddy. Now listen while I rant about kids-these-days and their movies and completely ignore people who tell me that the movie is something other than what I think it is!" :argh:

# ? May 27, 2014 23:52

FuzzySkinner: May 23, 2012

Hollywood has made movies like "The Hunger Games" since the beginning of time. They've generally been critical of a oligarchies and the blending of private/public life.

Logan's run
THX-1138
Network
A Clockwork Orange
Rollerball
"Escape from New York"/"Escape from LA"
The Terminator Series
Blade Runner
Star Wars

Damnit..now I want to go watch some of these movies again.

Don't the Koch Bros. want to make the plot of "RollerBall" a reality? ("Jonathan!", "Jonathan!", "Jonathen!)

e: gently caress forgot about Starship Troopers which is critical of the Military Industrial complex.

# ? May 28, 2014 00:03

ShortStack: Jan 16, 2006; tinystax

Don't forget Death Race 2000 and They Live.

# ? May 28, 2014 00:28

Darkman Fanpage: Jul 4, 2012

Weren't there a bunch of Tea Party people that did Hunger Games cosplay at a convention?

Rush trying to make connections between the Hunger Games series and Elliot Rodger is pretty hilarious. You can criticize Bruce Rodger for his failings as a father, which seems to be manifold, but this all somehow happened because he happened to work on a movie? Shut up, Rush. And child on child violence is absolutely nothing new in literature/film. The Outsiders and Lord of the Flies immediately come to mind as books that kids in middle school and high school are regularly assigned to read. Why? Because they're good books. And while The Hunger Games might not be exactly up to the same caliber as the two mentioned above there's nothing controversial in the series that hasn't been touched upon before in another young adults book.

Darkman Fanpage fucked around with this message at 00:47 on May 28, 2014

# ? May 28, 2014 00:39

woke wedding drone: Jun 1, 2003; by exmarx; Fun Shoe

Fuckin' perversion of our youth with themes of revolution and alienation :mad:

# ? May 28, 2014 00:42

Intel&Sebastian: Oct 20, 2002; colonel...
i'm trying to sneak around
but i'm dummy thicc
and the clap of my ass cheeks
keeps alerting the guards!

I think there's just too many factors that naturally lead to popular movies portraying baddie governments mostly as a mirror of conservative governments, Enough that I think it's silly to really praise/hate them for doing it on purpose when there's no stated intent.

I think the real headline here is that Rush Limbaugh, the smug conservative elemental, identifies so much with those fictional oppressive baddie governments that he doesn't even need to see the movie/read the book to start carrying water for them. I guess he's right about never becoming a fuddy duddy, back in my day college conservatives would at least watch Star Wars before making writing their half-ironic defense of the Empire and the effects of uncertainty on galactic markets. Nowadays I guess all they have to hear is "poor people dying" "rich people yukking it up" and it's off to the races.

"So caller, when you watched the movie did you get the sense that it was actually the poor people's own fault that they have kids killing kids? Please feel free to elaborate, I need to read more of this wiki page."

Intel&Sebastian fucked around with this message at 00:56 on May 28, 2014

# ? May 28, 2014 00:52

FuzzySkinner: May 23, 2012

ShortStack posted:

Don't forget Death Race 2000 and They Live.

"They live" loving owns.

"The Running Man", forgot about that one.

"Total Recall".

I never understood the whole "LIEBERAL HOLLYWOOD" argument.

One moment Conservatives are bitching about how Liberals are all pussies that want to take away their guns, among a million other things.

The next? THEY'RE PROMOTING THEIR VALUES IN HOLLYWOOD! VIOLENCE! SEX! DRUGS! ALL GLORIFIED!.

# ? May 28, 2014 01:11

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 18, 2024 00:55

PeterWeller: Apr 21, 2003; I told you that story so I could tell you this one.

SedanChair posted:

Fuckin' perversion of our youth with themes of revolution and alienation

I like that he implies that they never made a movie about the dire ramifications of nuclear weapons back in the 40s, 50s, or 60s, you know, the golden age of B movies about the dire ramifications of nuclear weapons.

# ? May 28, 2014 01:27

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Right Wing Media: congratulations Rush Limbaugh on three full years of sobriety!

«‹›3441 »