• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Everyone is in a bubble, but some bubbles model reality far better than others!

Despite his magical powers, I don’t think Trump is thinking this through, to be honest.

“But what about the lurkers?”

One of our two political parties is a cult whose leader admires Vladimir Putin.

When do the post office & the dmv weigh in on the wuhan virus?

A lot of Dems talk about what the media tells them to talk about. Not helpful.

Relentless negativity is not a sign that you are more realistic.

Please don’t feed the bears.

There are some who say that there are too many strawmen arguments on this blog.

This country desperately needs a functioning Fourth Estate.

Nancy smash is sick of your bullshit.

In after Baud. Damn.

A thin legal pretext to veneer over their personal religious and political desires.

“And when the Committee says to “report your income,” that could mean anything!

People are weird.

Too often we confuse noise with substance. too often we confuse setbacks with defeat.

Their boy Ron is an empty plastic cup that will never know pudding.

Donald Trump, welcome to your everything, everywhere, all at once.

It’s a doggy dog world.

Another missed opportunity for Jamie Dimon to just shut the fuck up.

Well, whatever it is, it’s better than being a Republican.

Can we lighten up on the doomsday scenarios?

Speaker Mike Johnson is a vile traitor to the House and the Constitution.

with the Kraken taking a plea, the Cheese stands alone.

Mobile Menu

  • Four Directions Montana
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2024 Elections
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Politics / Media / Talk Radio Wet Dream

Talk Radio Wet Dream

by John Cole|  June 1, 20052:34 pm| 32 Comments

This post is in: Media

FacebookTweetEmail

This is interesting:

Could there be any odder couple than Rush Limbaugh and Al Sharpton?
Not if I have anything to do with it.

Last week – after Matrix Media announced a deal for Sharpton to host a “Limbaugh of the Left”-type talk radio show – the conservative radio star said he’ll think about mentoring the minister in the finer points of the medium.

Yesterday, Sharpton contacted me to say he’s eager to accept the sort-of offer to (as Limbaugh put it on his own show Friday) “let [Sharpton] guest-host the program for, like, 30 minutes at a time while I am sitting here critiquing him.”

Sharpton told me: “I was a little surprised, but I’m willing to take him up on his speculative offer. I think it would be interesting. It would be something that both of us can learn from. He can learn some of the thoughts of the left, and I can learn some of the techniques of the right. Let’s see if he’s serious.”

Yesterday Limbaugh’s producer, Kit Carson, assured me that he’s in earnest.

“At this point, Rush is still undecided,” Carson said. “He’s very flattered that Rev. Sharpton is interested in doing this. Rush is still considering giving him some pointers, some tutoring.

“Rush also believes that Rev. Sharpton has the best shot of anyone to be the Limbaugh of the Left. He is also very impressed that he has the humility to admit he has something to learn. … So we’ll see.”

For my part, I will do anything I can to make it happen.

Whatever you think about either one, it would be interesting.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Watergate Fall-out
Next Post: The Dollar Looks Good Against The Euro »

Reader Interactions

32Comments

  1. 1.

    James Emerson

    June 1, 2005 at 3:05 pm

    Interesting indeed…

    I’ve always thought of Rush as being more of an opportunist than a committed idealogue. Is his consideration of tutoring a major pariah and total whipping boy of the rightwing nutters an indication that he sees a coming political tsunami? I mean really, here’s a guy who spent years running down and stomping all over the moral degeneracy of feralized drug addicts only to find himself stumbling around radioland in a pair of drug addled shoes bottle of OC tightly gripped by a very red hand. Rush not only survived his brush with addiction, but he also survived the near nonexistent outrage and moral turpitude of his loyal fans, becoming even more popular and more outrageous than before.

    I would think that Rush being interested mainly in the survival of Rush is preparing to ride the coming wave that is swelling up from the hinterlands, and Rush is just be astute enough to see it building before anyone else does. Afterall…Rush has always been about Rush. There is nothing much more to him than that.

  2. 2.

    M. Scott Eiland

    June 1, 2005 at 5:04 pm

    Are you kidding? Having Sharpton on the air regularly is like a license for Rush to print money–he’ll have a “Sharpton Moment” feature on his show before that coiffed thug’s seat has a chance to get warm.

  3. 3.

    Shawn

    June 1, 2005 at 5:09 pm

    My first reaction to reading this was literally LOL. Sharpton thinks he can guest-host and convert all the Limbots and make Limbaugh look like an ass. Limbaugh thinks he can make Sharpton look like an ass and increase his audience.

    It seems like a pretty smart move. I would imagine a lot more people would listen in to the show rooting for their side, hoping for a smackdown.

  4. 4.

    Kimmitt

    June 1, 2005 at 6:26 pm

    Rush is an entertainer first and a politico second; this would be good radio.

  5. 5.

    Rick

    June 1, 2005 at 6:26 pm

    But shouldn’t we be concerned that another cleric gets to impose his values on the masses?

    Gotta contain those religious nutters, after all.

    Cordially…

  6. 6.

    ape

    June 1, 2005 at 7:03 pm

    No way to all of the above: Rush is a total GOP partisan. (“A wholly owned subsidiary of the Republican Party”). The notion that he is ‘primarily an entertainer’ is just something that’s wheeled out when he comes out with anything really unjustifiable.

    My prediction is that, of course, this will not happen. Secondly, that, whatever reason there is for this, Rush will claim it was because Sharpton chickened out in some way, if this is at all possible.

    The concept of Limbaugh ‘giving lessons to the left’ is a regular part of his decades-old bombastic schtick (“with half my brain tied behind my back” ect..). In truth, the format of his show relies on the Maha never being questioned.

  7. 7.

    Kimmitt

    June 1, 2005 at 7:36 pm

    Rush is primarily an entertainer; this does not excuse his relentless lying.

  8. 8.

    ppgaz

    June 1, 2005 at 7:52 pm

    Two loud, egocentric know-it-all manipulators going mano-a-mano.

    This is a great country. Really, I’m serious.

    It’s Crossfire on steroids.

    Weapons of Mass Distraction.

    I can’t wait for the great blurbs to start showing up on the blogs.

  9. 9.

    carpeicthus

    June 1, 2005 at 8:33 pm

    I’m still waiting for Ann Coulter and Castro.

  10. 10.

    willyb

    June 2, 2005 at 1:55 am

    “Rush is primarily an entertainer; this does not excuse his relentless lying.”

    This sounds like fun . . . How about listing a couple of his relentless lies?

  11. 11.

    ppgaz

    June 2, 2005 at 9:26 am

    Google the terms Rush Limbaugh lies.

    The search results should keep you busy for a while.

    This is one of the better examples:

    http://mediamatters.org/items/200502180006

    Enjoy.

  12. 12.

    Rick

    June 2, 2005 at 10:34 am

    Media Matters? Isn’t that run by an acknowledged liar? I believe so.

    Cordially…

  13. 13.

    Kimmitt

    June 2, 2005 at 11:35 am

    Hey, wow, stopped clock.

  14. 14.

    Rick

    June 2, 2005 at 12:05 pm

    And hello to you, my blind squirrel.

    :)

    Cordially…

  15. 15.

    AWJ

    June 2, 2005 at 12:55 pm

    How about listing a couple of his relentless lies?

    The Rush Limbaugh Show, June 17, 2004:
    LIMBAUGH: The [9-11 Commission] report said that Mohamed Atta did meet with an Iraqi Intelligence Agency, or agent, in Prague on April 9th of 2001. We’ve known this for a long time.

    9-11 Commission Staff Statement 16:
    We have examined the allegation that Atta met with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague on April 9. Based on the evidence available — including investigation by Czech and U.S. authorities plus detainee reporting — we do not believe that such a meeting occurred.

    The Rush Limbaugh Show, June 18, 2004:
    CALLER: I’m just talking about the false claim of uranium from Niger, that one that was very specific and stated —
    LIMBAUGH: That was a British government claim, and Bush disowned it in a State of the Union speech.

    2003 State of the Union address:
    The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design for a nuclear weapon and was working on five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb. The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.

    (All emphasis added)

    There’s a couple right there. I can dig up more if you like.

  16. 16.

    willyb

    June 2, 2005 at 1:23 pm

    AWJ:

    Wow, impressive. He passed on intelligence information, that may or may not have been incorrect. Note that the comment “we do not believe that such a meeting occurred” is different from “the meeting did not occur.” In any event, passing along mainstream information can hardly be viewed as a relentless lie.

  17. 17.

    ppgaz

    June 2, 2005 at 1:37 pm

    Limbaugh is a buffoon, and entertainer, a huckster, and a mouthpiece for a particular power structure.

    This is not exactly news, or even interesting, any more.

    As for lies? Anyone who thinks that most talk radio is not 90% bullshit …. good for you. It’s a great country, you can think whatever you like. But the fact remains, it is 90% bullshit.

    All politics is theater. did I mention … all? Okay. Limbaugh is the perennial warmup act. He’s the clown that gets the audience loosened up.

    Aside from that, he is an awful, awful person, he is pompous, he is a drug addict, he is arrogant, he is mean, he’s a gay-baiter, he is a misogynist, he’s a bully, and he is a millionaire many, many times over thanks to brilliant marketing and a gullible but very appreciative audience.

    So, having said all that, let me say, who gives a flying fig?

    Do you really want to live in a country where discourse, reason, and information are the purview of people like Limbaugh, or Sharpton?

    Yes, obviously, many of you do.

    I don’t. So my suggestion is, when you get tired of being manipulated, turn off your goddam radios and use your energy for something constructive.

  18. 18.

    AWJ

    June 2, 2005 at 1:39 pm

    Comprehension test:

    A: I do not believe that the water in this bottle is salt water.
    B: A believes that the water in his bottle is salt water.

    In this example, did B “pass on” A’s statement? Or did B lie about A’s statement? For a bonus point, is the answer related in any way to whether A’s bottle actually contains salt or fresh water?

  19. 19.

    ppgaz

    June 2, 2005 at 2:33 pm

    I used to do a seminar in which I employed an exercise called “Two Men in a Tub of Water.”

    A says the water is warm.

    B says it is cold.

    We can take the temperature of the water, and get data.

    But how to deal with Mr. A, and Mr. B? Suppose our agenda is warmer water? Do we browbeat Mr. A? Do we impeach Mr. A? Do we give Mr. B authority?

    Etc.

    Question: Is 70 degree (f) water warm, or cool?

    If you are running a business, what lessons can we take away from the Two Men in the Tub?

  20. 20.

    willyb

    June 2, 2005 at 6:40 pm

    AWJ:

    Cute little test., but how is it analogous to the two statements regarding the alleged meeting between Atta and the Iraqi agent? I noticed you inserted

  21. 21.

    willyb

    June 2, 2005 at 6:56 pm

    “If you are running a business, what lessons can we take away from the Two Men in the Tub?”

    That they are likely to be in favor of gay marriage? That they are in touch with their feelings, but aren’t sure what those feelings are? I give up, what lesson are we supposed to take away?.

  22. 22.

    willyb

    June 2, 2005 at 7:38 pm

    “As for lies? Anyone who thinks that most talk radio is not 90% bullshit …. good for you. It’s a great country, you can think whatever you like. But the fact remains, it is 90% bullshit.”

    Where did you get the “fact” (i.e., something that has actual existence) that talk radio is 90% bullshit? I’m thinking it has something to do with the koolaid you’re sippin’.

  23. 23.

    ppgaz

    June 2, 2005 at 7:48 pm

    It’s a free country, believe what you want. If you think that talk radio is where it’s at … what are you doing here? Isn’t some loudmouth jerk on right now telling you what to think?

    As for what lesson you should take from the men in the tub, since you’ve exposed yourself as the kind of moron who would turn it into a gay joke, take whatever lesson you please.

    If you want mine, you have to pay for the seminar.

  24. 24.

    willyb

    June 2, 2005 at 8:19 pm

    “It’s a free country, believe what you want.”

    Hey, thanks for the permission to do what I already can do without your permission! Just because I don’t embrace some wild-eyed rhetoric by you, I’m letting “some loudmouth jerk on right now telling you what to think?” Frankly, you seem to be the one coming across as the “loudmouth jerk.”

    You whole rant is nothing but an ad hominem attack.

    If your seminars are anything like your vacuous comments, you couldn’t pay me to go.

  25. 25.

    willyb

    June 2, 2005 at 8:48 pm

    “As for what lesson you should take from the men in the tub, since you’ve exposed yourself as the kind of moron who would turn it into a gay joke”

    Is there something wrong with gay jokes? What is so offensive about suggesting that two men in a tub might be gay? Do you have a problem with gay folks?

    YOU are calling me a MORON??? Don’t tell me, let me guess. Your seminars are on showing respect for people that have mental handicaps? Or maybe respecting diverse viewpoints?

    Get a clue ppgaz!

  26. 26.

    AWJ

    June 2, 2005 at 11:05 pm

    willyb:
    No, Limbaugh wasn’t referring to “the” 9-11 Commission Report (as in the final public report, which wasn’t published until July) He was referring to the Commission’s Staff Statement 16, which was presented on June 16, the day before the broadcast in question. And what he claimed the statement said about Atta in Prague was the exact, 180-degree opposite of what it actually did say.

    This statement was on public record; anyone capable of reading a newspaper could have found out what it had to say, and someone with access to the Internet could have even gotten a word-for-word transcript, e.g., here. So Limbaugh, having full knowledge that the Commission staff had just reported that they did not believe Atta met with any Iraqi agent in Prague, went and told his thousands of listeners that the Commission reported that they did believe Atta met with an Iraqi agent in Prague. Where I come from we call that lying.

  27. 27.

    willyb

    June 3, 2005 at 12:07 am

    AWJ:

    HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT LIMBAUGH WAS REFERRING TO? Where can I find the transcript of Limbaugh’s entire discussion of this subject? For all I know, he could have been talking about the underlying Czech intelligence report. In any event, the Staff Report is PRELIMINARY, and therefore subject to revision… “We remain ready to revise our understanding of this subject as our work continues.” In the final report the Commission states that “These findings cannot absolutely rule out the possibility that Atta was in Prague on April 9, 2001.”

    It appears to me that calling someone a liar on the basis of a preliminary report that contradicts the initial eyewitness testimony of a Czech agent, is a bit over the top. Especially if it turns out that Limbaugh was referring to that intelligence. But I may be persuaded otherwise after reading the transcript.

  28. 28.

    willyb

    June 3, 2005 at 1:25 am

    AWJ:

    Your second example of a relentless lie suffers from the same problem as the first. What is the context? Maybe you could explain what the lie was?

    Based on what you’ve quoted, it seems to me that Limbaugh is attributing the source (ownership) of the intelligence on the African uranium to the British. This tracks with your quote from the SOTU address. Does Limbaugh clarify what he means by “disowned” in the next few sentences of his discussion?

  29. 29.

    AWJ

    June 3, 2005 at 10:10 am

    HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT LIMBAUGH WAS REFERRING TO? Where can I find the transcript of Limbaugh’s entire discussion of this subject?

    Right here. The relevant part is at the very beginning of the transcript, on pages 1 and 2:

    [“]The other relevant information’s included on page 8 of Staff Statement number 16. In the Statement, which exhaustively discusses the 9/11 plot, we address the movements of hijackers in the years leading up to the attacks. This paragraph addresses reports that Mohammed Atta met with an Iraqi Intelligence Agency in Prague on April 9th, 2001.

    [“]While some have criticized the questioning during public hearings, I’ve seen few quibbles with our Staff Statements. I urge you to look over all of the Statements.” And I got the link to the

  30. 30.

    Rick

    June 3, 2005 at 3:11 pm

    Likely because of this.

    Cordially…

  31. 31.

    willyb

    June 3, 2005 at 9:59 pm

    Rick

    What is the “this” of which you speak? The link you posted doesn’t work.

  32. 32.

    AWJ

    June 4, 2005 at 1:04 pm

    willyb:
    It’s an (attempted) link to a website about Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder. Ha, ha.

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • 3letterjon on Righteous Rant Open Thread (Apr 15, 2024 @ 5:49pm)
  • Martin on Righteous Rant Open Thread (Apr 15, 2024 @ 5:46pm)
  • lowtechcyclist on Take the Fucking Win (Apr 15, 2024 @ 5:46pm)
  • Ken on Henry Would Like His Lunch Right Now, Please (Open Thread) (Apr 15, 2024 @ 5:44pm)
  • Baud on Righteous Rant Open Thread (Apr 15, 2024 @ 5:42pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning
Proposed BJ meetups list from frosty

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8
Virginia House Races
Four Directions – Montana
Worker Power AZ
Four Directions – Arizona
Four Directions – Nevada

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
Positive Climate News
War in Ukraine
Cole’s “Stories from the Road”
Classified Documents Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Political Action 2024

Postcard Writing Information

Balloon Juice for Four Directions AZ

Donate

Balloon Juice for Four Directions NV

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2024 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!