Limbaugh’s first day back on New Orleans radio:
By on Dec 6th, 2005 at 9:57 am
Limbaugh’s first day back on New Orleans radio:
Introduced caller “Ray from New Orleans,” where, he said, “They’re getting back to normal in the city.” “Things are not returning to normal,” said Ray. “I wish you would come down here to see for yourself. … None of the things that [Bush] promised are happening.” (Via C&L)
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Surprise!!!
Limpbaugh steps on his miniscule member again! Well he was off the mark with his ex-wife so many times that she had to divorce him, that this is no big deal for him…
Controversy sells, and if he doesn’t say off the wall things, then he will really have to up his habit to ensure his dream world continues to flourish!
Hip Hip Hooray for PRESCRIPTION DRUGS!!!
December 6th, 2005 at 10:09 amThe levees in New Orleans were built by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The money sent to New Orleans by the “nation’s taxpayers” was spent by a Federal agency.
December 6th, 2005 at 10:14 amit’s good to see they’ve restored “essential services” to NO! what more does the town need than a loudmouth who’s dismissive of their problems???
December 6th, 2005 at 10:25 am#2, I thought that was the case as well. Why is any credence given to claims that monies for the levee projects were misappropriated by local organizations? Other than blatant lying by kool-aid drinkers, that is?
December 6th, 2005 at 10:26 amNone of the things that [Bush] promised are happening
No change there.
December 6th, 2005 at 10:27 am#4, it is my understanding that several recent appropriations by Congress were far less than requested by the Corps and were deemed, by the Corps, to be too small to produce a worthwhile improvement to the levee system, so the money was diverted to other projects of appropriate scale. I heard that some money was appropriated to other projects, such as repair of a fountain within the Lakeshore Park that includes the levees.
December 6th, 2005 at 10:35 amThe most important question:
ARE THE PHARMACIES OPEN YET?
If yes, then New Orleans is back in action.
If no, can someone get me the number of my Latina housekeeper. She knows where to get the “little blue babies” that I buy with my copious amounts of “cabbage”.
It is good to be a fat console warrior who never gets outside the air-conditioned comfort of my studio and never debates anyone face-to-face.
-Rush
December 6th, 2005 at 10:39 amA Bushite friend of mine that lives in NO is fed up with the Federal Government. According to him, the running joke around town is that they’ll cut off gas and oil supplies to the rest of the country if they don’t get some help soon. Conditions are bad, businesses going under, people in despair. I haven’t heard how things are in MS, but this could cost the GOP some support.
December 6th, 2005 at 10:40 amCould that have been Ray, the mayor, Ray Nagrin? I can’t imagine him calling in, but anything’s possible..
December 6th, 2005 at 10:48 amCould all you progressives please ask yourselves why we have not been able to have an impact on his audience?
————–
Rush Limbaugh’s nationally syndicated radio show has an estimated audience of nearly 15 million weekly listeners. It is syndicated by Premiere Radio Networks, a subsidiary of radio conglomerate Clear Channel
http://www.oliverwillis.com/2005/09/23/know-your-cons
LOS ANGELES, July 20 /PRNewswire/ — Rush Limbaugh, the first national
radio host to interview Vice President Dick Cheney and former New York City
Mayor Rudolph Giuliani today about President George W. Bush’s nominee to the
Supreme Court, also was first today in the Arbitron Spring 2005 ratings survey
for Los Angeles and Chicago.
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/07-20-2005/0004071545&EDATE=
Mr. Rush Limbaugh continues to consistently beat liberal talkers, according to the Arbitron Spring 2005 ratings survey for Cleveland, Dallas, Minneapolis, and Houston. In Cleveland, Mr. Limbaugh’s Persons 12+ audience is twice the size of Mr. Jerry Springer’s audience and four times its size for Adults 25-54
http://sev.prnewswire.com/entertainment/20050728/LATH10528072005-1.html
December 6th, 2005 at 11:04 am#2,#4,#6
I thought that I heard an Army Corps of Engineers explain that when they ask Congress for money, they ask for a “dream appropriation” of enough to do everything that they would like done. They don’t get all of it, of course, but I think it is up to the Corps to decide which of their projects will get whatever money is appropriated to them. This is one reason why the upgrades to the levees were not yet done, and why there were reports of funding being “cut”. But I may be wrong.
We all know by now that when Washington talks about “cuts” in federal spending, it usually means a decrease in the original amount they intended to increase the spending. They still may spend more than the year before, but it provides good campaign material to be able to say they “cut” spending. (Both sides are guilty of manipulating this “Washington-speak”, which is why I suggested that TP provide a primer on how things work. I think I suggested that.)
Besides, they were only planning to strengthen the levees to handle a Cat 3 storm, so there probably would have been a problem even if the work had been completed as designed.
December 6th, 2005 at 11:31 amThe GOP’s poster boy for drug use/abuse stepped in it. Again.
A family friend reopened his restaurant in NO recently to happy crowd. But our friend says that NO will _never_ be the same again. He lost his home. He lost his restaurant safe (the police were seen taking it away, and they’re not giving it back). He lost nearly everything except the shell of the business he just reopened. He tells anyone who will listen that its worse than anyone thinks down there. He’s sooooo mad at Bush and people like the Oxycondin King for distorting reality! He has no idea what to do now.
December 6th, 2005 at 11:34 amCould all you progressives please ask yourselves why we have not been able to have an impact on his audience?
Comment by monitor — December 6, 2005 @ 11:04 am
I can think of a couple of reasons:
Three of Four Bush Supporters Still Believe in Iraqi WMD, al Qaeda Ties
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1022-01.htm
The survey found that 72 percent of Bush supporters believe either that Iraq had actual WMD (47 percent) or a major program for producing them (25 percent), despite the widespread media coverage in early October of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA’s) “Duelfer Report,†the final word on the subject by the one billion dollar, 15-month investigation by the Iraq Survey Group.
Then you have voter ignorance:
A poll by the nonprofit Pew Research Center, released in September, gently touched on this issue. The poll showed that 56 percent of Americans could not name a single Democratic candidate for president. Things weren’t better for the Republicans: Only 63 percent could recall the name “Bush.” -http://www.salon.com/books/it/1999/11/22/voter/print.html
Your boy Rush preys upon the uninformed like a junkie on a quaalude.
December 6th, 2005 at 11:37 am#10
I heard that an examination of Limbaugh’s audience was done and was found to be about half-liberal. (This was done before Air America Radio started, so those results may be obsolete by now.) One reason that it is difficult for liberals to impact his audience is because of his careful screening of calls. He rarely seems to be in the mood to talk to a liberal, so whoever calls in is just a dittohead repeating what all the other “fans” of his want to hear. This creates the illusion that there is more support for this kind of thinking than really exists in the country. After hanging up with a liberal who got through the screener to complain to him, I have heard him sometimes say that the caller must have lied to the screener to get through.
Rush Limbaugh would never have been the success he is had he been willing to take calls from both sides of the political spectrum. The illusion of unity with his listeners was necessary. Has anyone ever noticed that he rarely (if ever) has liberal guests on his show to discuss issues? Why do you think that is? I believe it’s because if a well-spoken liberal got in the studio with him to “debate” the issues, he would lose. But since there is nobody there to disagree with him, he makes people think he’s right all the time. But we know better.
December 6th, 2005 at 11:38 amHoward Dean – US can’t win war in Iraq. That one’s going to hurt.
December 6th, 2005 at 11:45 am#13 jparker is right. There were also majorities of Bush supporters who voted for him in 2004 and who believed that Saddam had operational ties to al Qaeda and that Saddam had something to do with 9-11, both of which we know were wrong.
I am not saying that the President ever said those things directly. But his speeches were carefully worded to give listeners the chance to make that connection in their own mind. When you say things like (paraphrased), “In the War on Terror, you can’t distinguish between Saddam and al Qaeda,” this gives people who are half-listening (and half-thinking) that there is a conneciton. That and making sure that whenever he talked about Saddam, he brought up 9-11. This, too, provided people with an imaginary connection between the two. But he never directly said those things.
Someone once gave a great example here at TP. You talk to your neighbor over the fence and say of another neighbor, “I hate that guy. I have no use for wife-beaters.” Whether you meant to or not, you just gave that guy the impression that you think the other neighbor is a wife-beater. But you are still free to say, truthfully, “I never said that.” It’s exactly how the public was manipulated into these misconceptions by the aministration. Good example, whoever posted that.
December 6th, 2005 at 11:50 amOh, and “monitor”-
You’re quoting PR Newswire, which isn’t a credible news source. Rush paid to have that published on the Wire. I can pay about $500 and claim that I am the King of Persia.
NEXT.
December 6th, 2005 at 11:50 amThey got dick Cheney on msnbc right now. I had to shut it off, I allmost Puked.
December 6th, 2005 at 11:57 am#10 – the answer is because people love trash… just look at how popular “reality” TV is today… Rush’s ratings don’t mean he’s good, just outrageous… do people look at car accidents because they like them? no, they’re just fascinated by the vile, the disgusting, the base…
December 6th, 2005 at 12:01 pmHoward Dean – US can’t win war in Iraq. That one’s going to hurt.
Comment by danny k — December 6, 2005 @ 11:45 am
There are many reasons why this is probably true:
US public support has dropped faster than during the Vietnam and Korean wars, polls show.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1121/p01s02-usfp.html
And, as the Murtha Resolution noted:”Whereas, according to recent polls, over 80% of the Iraqi people want US forces out of Iraq; Whereas polls also indicate that 45% of the Iraqi people feel that the attacks on US forces are justified.”
Not to mention the opinion of the rest of the Arab world:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7080-2004Jul22.html
(by the way, they are only a couple of billion Muslims in the world)
Take a legimate look of the internal makeup of the different factions within Iraq (beyond just Sunni, Kurd & Shia) and it would take someone of considerable ignorance not to see why this war is not “winnable” in the sense of Japan and Germany in WWII.
Of course, you wouldn’t acknowledge that, because you’ve strapped on the Official Rush Limbaugh Guano Feedbag.
December 6th, 2005 at 12:04 pmUS public support for this criminal war has dropped fast because of blogs like this and posters like us, so let’s give each of us a big pat on the back. We are in a mutual support group which enables us to stand up a little taller in our communities for truth and reality, and to get the word out to the troglodytes that we’re mad as hell and we’re not taking it any more.
December 6th, 2005 at 12:12 pmHey, dannyk, the reason you wont win it is because it was for the oil, and the lie came from bush crony rightwingers like you.
December 6th, 2005 at 12:12 pmNo, YOU WONT WIN THE WAR!
Because you dont know HOW!
I Know how you can win it.
Get the hell out of iraq AND Afganistan, Thats How!
And Then , Get your own backyard CLEANED UP!
December 6th, 2005 at 12:13 pmI’m amazed Rush let that caller on the air. He usually doesn’t allow any dissent.
It is a tribute to Rush’s pompousity that he is trying to convince someone that actually LIVES in NO that what he is seeing isn’t true “don’t believe your lying eyes, all is according to plan!”
Someone should send him some Oxy so he can finish killing himself.
December 6th, 2005 at 12:13 pmDon’t worry dannyk. GW Bush didn’t think we could win the war in the Balkans (remember his exit strategy defeatism?), but that didn’t stop Clinton from bringing a dictator to justice and establishing democracy.
December 6th, 2005 at 12:16 pmWhen is the IMPEACHMENT Proceedings Going to Start?
December 6th, 2005 at 12:24 pmAmerica can Wait NO Longer!
#18 Good catch! I use PR Newswire whenever I need to broadcast uncontested, un-fact-checked client bullshit to an unknowing universe of recipients. It’s rare, and I only do it with great shame and trepidation.
But you’re right — PRN is like the bulletin board in a campus student union. T’aint necessarily true…and could be a trap for the unwary.
December 6th, 2005 at 12:26 pm#26 – having impeachment hearings requires a power base. You don’t have one. Bush will not be impeached.
December 6th, 2005 at 12:26 pm#26 – having impeachment hearings requires a power base. You don’t have one. Bush will not be impeached.
Comment by danny k — December 6, 2005 @ 12:26 pm
Translation: “I will ignore the crushing defeat of my argument by retorting with a hollow taunt, based on temporary circumstance.”
LMAO!!!
December 6th, 2005 at 12:30 pmAll I want for Christmas is to see Impeachment Proceedings Started!
December 6th, 2005 at 12:33 pmWhy anyone would want to listen to the Limbaue crap is beyond me. I would sooner listen to a carnaval barker. How can any one buy into anyting a known druggie with a boil on his butt, spewing mean spirited drivval about the left and lies for the right. Just plane madness….
December 6th, 2005 at 12:33 pmAn open Ode to Danny K:
“Oh Danny boy, the (crack)pipes, the (crack)pipes are calling
December 6th, 2005 at 12:35 pmFrom glen (reynolds) to (gary) glen, and down the (Iraqi)mountain side
The summer’s gone, and all the soldiers are dying
‘Tis you (Rush), ’tis you (Bush) must go and I must bide.”
#28,29.Posted Twice.
Hey , Thanks for the Tip Dannyk, having impeachment hearings requires a power base.
December 6th, 2005 at 12:37 pmA Power Base IS being Established.
having impeachment hearings requires a power base.
having impeachment hearings requires a power base
having impeachment hearings requires a power base
having impeachment hearings requires a power base
A Power Base IS being Established.
having impeachment hearings requires a power base.
A Power Base IS being Established.
having impeachment hearings requires a power base
A Power Base IS being Established.
having impeachment hearings requires a power base
A Power Base IS being Established.
having impeachment hearings requires a power base
A Power Base IS being Established.
We Got It!
December 6th, 2005 at 12:38 pmThanks for the Tip Dannyk
December 6th, 2005 at 12:39 pm#28 don’t you find it disturbing that a power base (i.e. majority in congress) is the ONLY thing missing from an impeachment? Everything else is there, from high crimes to misdemeanors.
December 6th, 2005 at 12:41 pmRemember what Judd said yesterday: Feeding the trolls just adds to the problem. We know they are wrong, but addressing them directly just encourages them. (Believe me, I learned that the hard way this weekend.)
I would like to suggest that whenever a troll posts somewhat ignorant or factually incorrect, that they be responded to indirectly with something like “To anyone who believes…” and state the incorrect opinion and why it’s wrong. This will help build up this website as the research base that ThinkProgress would like to make it. Responding to them directly by name, even if they directly insult you, just encourages them to disrupt our dialog about how to achieve our goals.
Ignore personal insults because it’s not as though you can give them the punch in the nose they deserve. TP will take care of weeding them out. Thanks you for listening.
#36, #37 I agree. Once the Dems have control of both Houses, the impeachment proceedings and both men can begin and successfully end. There’s the charge of misusing the $700 million Congress authorized for the War in Afghanistan for which the President can be impeached, and I’m sure there’s something specific for which the VP can go, but it doesn’t come to mind.
December 6th, 2005 at 1:01 pmWay to Go Cynical…
But as far as a power base, it is funny how it is every man for himself when it comes to:
Duke – (everyone giving back the money, hoping they will not get called for an investigation)
Abramoff – so many Senators on the list, both parties will be stung by this one!
and
DELAY – seems the only one supporting him these days is Cheney!
Evidence overwhelming, JUSTICE spinning on excuses of partisan politics! No wonder they are trying to push for Alito…at least they know that they will have a better chance if they do face charges! wink wink
December 6th, 2005 at 1:19 pmPresident Bush hasn’t engaged in any wrongdoing, let alone any “high crimes or misdemeanors.”
December 6th, 2005 at 4:57 pmAll the intolerant ad hominems won’t change the fact Rush Limbaugh puts disagreeing callers to the front of the line.
Perhaps Wayne can now explain Air ScAmerica’s almost non-existent ratings for us. :()
December 6th, 2005 at 5:00 pmAll the intolerant ad hominems won’t change the fact Rush Limbaugh won’t air disagreeing callers unless they trick him.
Perhaps wwallace can now explain why Rush’s ratings are sinking like a stone while Air America’s is increasing consistently. :()
December 6th, 2005 at 5:09 pmPresident Bush has repeatedly engaged in any wrongdoing, most of which rises beyond the level of “high crimes or misdemeanors.†:()
But since wwallace still has his blue dress in the closet, bush hasn’t been impeached for them yet :()
December 6th, 2005 at 5:10 pmFor those who believe that President Bush hasn’t engaged in any wrongdoing, let alone any “high crimes or misdemeanors,†I would remind them that Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 of the US Constitution clearly states “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law, and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.” [That's the way they capilalized words.]
While forces were engaged in Afghanistan, and before Congress voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq should it be necessary, Gen Tommy Franks admitted to Sen Bob Graham that he was ordered, by the administration, for which President Bush is accountable, to send some of his troops into Iraq to begin planning the invasion. Congress did not authorize funds for this purpose, so any expenditures of money for that purpose were unauthorized.
Therefore, it can be argued, the President violated the Constitution and committed an impeachable offense. I do not doubt that others examples might exist, but no provable ones come to mind.
December 6th, 2005 at 5:57 pmI think we are seeing lower numbers of Right Wing responses here lately because they are all on thier month long vacation now.
December 6th, 2005 at 6:20 pm#44, in response to your post of 11:30 this a.m., Congress has fallen far short of the “dream appropriation.” Several news articles articulate the full extent of the shortfall. Corps project managers say that the appropriations are sufficient to cover staff salaries, but little more. For years, Congress has done little more than the equivalent of sending a check for less than the cost of the postage. From this year:
December 6th, 2005 at 6:29 pmhttp://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4200/is_20050606/ai_n14657367
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4200/is_20050627/ai_n14693654
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4200/is_20050207/ai_n10176537
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4200/is_20050214/ai_n10176332
Rush Limbaugh
December 6th, 2005 at 6:39 pmThanks, Pete. Nice work.
December 6th, 2005 at 6:42 pmWayne, #44, is really grasping at straws. Any time any member of the military is deployed without specific authorization for Congress, it’s an impeachable offense? Get a grip. ROFLMAO
December 6th, 2005 at 9:09 pm#44, you make a good point. There are so many reasons to impeach, it will make quite a list when the Dems begin to gain more power in the House and Senate next year. It will be a long 13 months!
December 6th, 2005 at 10:37 pmIt’s pretty shaky for the Repubs to put all their faith in his not being impeached — as soon as their power is not so predominant, their guy is toast.
BTW, Air America is growing and adding new stations weekly, despite FCC restrictions on the signals. Also, Franken and Schultz each have a one-hour show on Armed Forces Radio starting this week. They will help to balance the poison spewed daily by Lintball.
December 6th, 2005 at 10:39 pm