Rush Limbaugh's apology doesn't change anything

[The Minsky Moment]

Geez, everybody's just hearing what they want to hear out of this one.  Not free contraception, healthcare packages that include coverage of contraception.  Big, neon difference there.

The root cause of this particular teapot tempest is the basic evil underlying US health policy - the employer-based system for providing personal health care coverage.

[The Minsky Moment]

Like I said, I've never heard him speak. I only read news reports or comments about him. From these he seems to be failry influential.

Yes and Jon Stewart is influential as well, and has his own political take, but they are in the same business.

[derspiess]

You are overthinking this.  He is an entertainer with a radio show.  The political angle is just the schtick is uses to pull in an audience.

Pretty much, yeah.  I don't doubt he actually disagrees with much of what he says, but he's an entertainer first & foremost. 

[Admiral Yi]

So he takes his position on issues like this one on the basis that his enemies'' enemy is his friend rather than as a matter of principle?

He takes the very principled stand that anything Democrats do is bad.

edit: He's also not a big fan of Hollywood, academia, and the mainstream media.  You get the drift.

[Martinus]

I think that unlike both Stewart and Colbert, Limbaugh seems to be playing it both ways, trying to appear both as a comedian and a political commentator, whichever suits him at the time. Or it could be that he just lacks any sense of humour or finesse of these two.

[crazy canuck]

I think that unlike both Stewart and Colbert, Limbaugh seems to be playing it both ways, trying to appear both as a comedian and a political commentator, whichever suits him at the time. Or it could be that he just lacks any sense of humour or finesse of these two.

In what way are Stewart and Colbert not doing both?

[Martinus]

Incidentally, I know we had this discussion before, but it seems that conservative "comedians" (not comedians who happen to be conservative, but the ones that make their conservatism a part of their shtick) in general seems to be less funny than the liberal ones.

It could be because comedy is, at its core, irreverential, which makes it often incompatible with conservatism.

[Martinus]

I think that unlike both Stewart and Colbert, Limbaugh seems to be playing it both ways, trying to appear both as a comedian and a political commentator, whichever suits him at the time. Or it could be that he just lacks any sense of humour or finesse of these two.

In what way are Stewart and Colbert not doing both?

Neither of them claims to be "serious" even if they take on serious topics - it's pretty obvious they are comedy shows (with Colbert's show being a deliberate parody). Their shows feature comedic sketches and jokes, and Stewart always objects when e.g. a guest tries to call him a serious political commentator (it's different for Colbert, but that's because of his "conservative commentator" parodist persona).

Limbaugh's show has none of these elements - he is snarky, bitchy and over the top, but his show is not deliberately set up as a comedy show, but is a straightforward political radio talk show. I think if you wanted a direct comparison from the liberal side, then Rachel Madow and Bill Maher come much closer to what Limbaugh is doing.

If you want Languish comparisons, I'm like Limbaugh and Fireblade is like Colbert.

[Gups]

Incidentally, I know we had this discussion before, but it seems that conservative "comedians" (not comedians who happen to be conservative, but the ones that make their conservatism a part of their shtick) in general seems to be less funny than the liberal ones.

It could be because comedy is, at its core, irreverential, which makes it often incompatible with conservatism.

I think most political comedy isn't that funny but if you like it, you probably like comedians who agree with you more than those that don't.

The few really good political comedies that I can think of (Yes Minister, The Thick of It) have been pretty much non-partisan.

[Admiral Yi]

I think you have somewhat of a point Marty, but at the same time I think it's overstated.  If Rush were playing to an audience you'd probably get howls of laughter at certain points.

AND OF COURSE WE KNOW THAT WE CAN TRUST THE DEMOCRATS WITH OUR MONEY, RIGHT??!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA  WHOOO!

[crazy canuck]

Neither of them claims to be "serious" even if they take on serious topics - it's pretty obvious they are comedy shows (with Colbert's show being a deliberate parody). Their shows feature comedic sketches and jokes, and Stewart always objects when e.g. a guest tries to call him a serious political commentator (it's different for Colbert, but that's because of his "conservative commentator" parodist persona).

For your benefit I am going to ignore your analogy this one time.

Colbert brought his personae when he testified at a congressional hearing.  He also had an influence on the primaries when he urged his viewers to support a non candidate who was still on the ballet.

Both Stewart and Colbert deal with real news issues.  They are just much better entertainers then some others and so that might cause you to miss their politics.  But they are definitely there.

[Berkut]

Limbaugh is not a comedian - he is an entertainer, certainly.

Both Stewart and Colbert are clearly just comedians.

The counterpart to Limbaugh would be the d-bag on MSNBC from ESPN.

I don't think a left wing "serious" political commentator works in the similar way a right wing comedic political entertainer would work. Kind of funny, really.

[crazy canuck]

Both Stewart and Colbert are clearly just comedians.

Really, just like any stand up comedian or sit com? Thats just silly.

[Berkut]

Both Stewart and Colbert are clearly just comedians.

Really, just like any stand up comedian or sit com? Thats just silly.

No, not at all. I meant to distinguish them from entertainers like Limbaugh who are in fact entertaining via political commentary, but not at all comedians. Rush might say something his viewrs find funny now and again, but getting his viewers to laugh is not his primary goal.

Stewart and Colbert are comedians who use comedy to make political points, but they make it pretty clear that the validity of the point takes second place to the comedic value.

A poor choice of words on my part.

[crazy canuck]

Both Stewart and Colbert are clearly just comedians.

Really, just like any stand up comedian or sit com? Thats just silly.

No, not at all. I meant to distinguish them from entertainers like Limbaugh who are in fact entertaining via political commentary, but not at all comedians. Rush might say something his viewrs find funny now and again, but getting his viewers to laugh is not his primary goal.

A poor choice of words on my part.

Ok, I see what you are saying and I agree with that.