Stewart to Limbaugh: 'Get the [Snip] out' of NYC

reply to post by drwizardphd


Perhaps you missed it in the beginning of last year. Rush signed an 8 year deal for $300M. It caused quite the stir. He makes more than Tom Brokaw, Brian Williams, Katie Couric, Chris Wallace. He makes more than all of them, by a long shot. Katie Couric just had a contract re-up and she makes $6M or so and thats in the ball park of what the others make.

There are only two folks in media that make more than Rush. Oprah and O'Reilly.

Now you may not like the gent, and his success might upset you, but face facts. He practically single handedly created conservative talk radio. He has had an enormous impact on the political scene in this country - for the good, I think. He has created a multiplier effect in a form of mass media that Jon Stewart and these other jokers can only dream about.

How about you get off your high horse and get a few facts. You also might want to try to not let your emotions influence your argument for a change

Jon Stewart is a flash in the pan, a hack. Just another dude who does what 100s of dudes have done before him. Is he smart, yes. Is he entertaining, yes. Is he influencial, no. He is a commedian with about 2M average following. Rush has an average listenership of close to 14M. In media, numbers count and he's got the numbers.

Originally posted by Fremd
it's only a no-name network to those who invest their self-worth and opinionated origins from the main stream media

in your case, im going to assume, fox news.

[edit on 2-4-2009 by Fremd]

Fox is "mainstream" ??? ROFL

Let me guess...you think Stewart is "fair and balanced"???

Originally posted by mybigunit
What does his pay have anything to do with this thread can I ask? Rush is an entertainer who entertains a group of people. Think of him as Andy Dick but just a little more gay.

Rush's pay has a lot to do with it, since he is taking his tax dollars elsewhere, which is the topic of the thread.

Yes, Rush is an entertainer. So is Stewart. One of them makes 50 million and one makes 1.5 million.

I'll bet you can figure it out.

Originally posted by whoshotJR
I hate rush but just to add some stuff to ponder

Howard sterns deal was 500 mil for 5 years ( granted he pays some of his staff but it also doesnt include all the other stuff he does)

So it looks like Howard is more important then either of them of your arguments and he also lives in NY

Comedy central is known for not paying very well so it wouldn't be a big surprise if Stewart makes around 10-15 mil a year also.


Viacom and Clearchannel are both evil corporations that should be burned to the ground.

Last but not least! Rush is a blowhard that should practice what he preaches but each of these 2 are entertainers and nothing more. So why do we care so much?

Stern did get a LOT of money to get "Sirius".

Now they are getting ready to file for bankruptcy.

Ooops.

Originally posted by drwizardphd

Judging by the rest of your post, you have probably listened to Rush for a grand total of 25 seconds.

At least you don't want him to shut him down, like a lot of democrats want to with the Unfairness Doctrine.

You're right, I don't listen to Rush. I have too much self-respect for that. Don't worry, I've heard his "highlights" whenever he makes a big enough ass of himself to garner national attention.

And could you possibly...POSSIBLY consider condensing your replies into one post? It's pretty childish to fire off five posts in a row. Really dedicated to Mr. Limbaugh, eh? I won't judge.

So you admit you let other people do your thinking for you. So when the media reports "Rush said this...", you simply assume that it must be true and that the media would never lead you astray.

Well, at least you are honest about it.

Oh, if I answered all the lies, distortions, and just plain idiocy on this thread in one post...I'm sure I'd be breaking numerous ATS rules. lol

Originally posted by Fremd
reply to post by jibeho

 

you really have stalker issues.

Stop following me, the white hood is scary.

1.) I never made any assumptions. If you call Comedy Central "no name" you simply have not owned a TV for the last 8 years.

2.) Yes, he's a successful entertainer. But the difference is, the daily show markets themselves as poop and fart jokes, Limbaugh tries to pass his garbage off as truth.

Snake Oil is snake oil

But the daily show advertises as such

Limbaugh is telling you his is actually Oxycontin....wait.....didnt he get busted for that already?

Don't cry little fella. I'm not stalking you. I am free to browse this site as I please. I just happened to catch one of your ever so interesting and assumptive posts. Call me a stalker when I start sending you U2U messages.

You respond to threads like a 15 year old who just saw his first R rated movie. Time to grow up and get with the program. You can start by moving out of your parents basement. The radon is probably getting to your brain. Hence the gas mask in your avatar.

Your canned comments regarding Limbaugh are about as old as the hills. Time to drum up a new attack on Limbaugh. Perhaps you would like to call into his show and go head to head. I'm sure you will do just fine.

Funny how you assume that anyone who didn't vote for Obama is a racist. That argument will lead you no where. That old liberal fail safe argument is often the last resort tactic before people like you curl up into a ball in the corner of your tiny bedroom.

You have referred to white hoodies and made Klan references to me in 3 of your posts so far. Keep it up little fella. I'll be watching for you.

[edit on 3-4-2009 by jibeho]

Originally posted by GLDNGUN

Originally posted by Fremd
it's only a no-name network to those who invest their self-worth and opinionated origins from the main stream media

in your case, im going to assume, fox news.

[edit on 2-4-2009 by Fremd]

Fox is "mainstream" ??? ROFL

Let me guess...you think Stewart is "fair and balanced"???

in what world do you live that you believe Fox News is not main stream media?
Because i want to move there.

Originally posted by RRconservative
Hey! Remember when John Stewart used to be funny?

Me neither.

i imagine that you, and people like you, find humor in the sucking noises that Rush Limbaugh used to use on his airwaves to "have a caller abortion" that featured a tube sucking liquid sporadically followed by a child screaming?

Yeah...that's humorous

no wonder NYC can't wait to see him go.


oh, and

Originally posted by Blaine91555
For the English challenged -

Satire -

–noun
1. the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc.
2. a literary composition, in verse or prose, in which human folly and vice are held up to scorn, derision, or ridicule.
3. a literary genre comprising such compositions.

Synonyms:
1. See irony 1 . 2, 3. burlesque, caricature, parody, travesty. Satire, lampoon refer to literary forms in which vices or follies are ridiculed. Satire, the general term, often emphasizes the weakness more than the weak person, and usually implies moral judgment and corrective purpose: Swift's satire of human pettiness and bestiality. Lampoon refers to a form of satire, often political or personal, characterized by the malice or virulence of its attack: lampoons of the leading political figures.

Source is dictionary.com

I have another one for you

Hilarious - Adjective
extremely funny

also see: the first line in Blaine's post. "for the English challenged" is not the proper way to say it.

If you're going to call in the grammar police, make sure you're not the one committing the felony.


[edit on 3-4-2009 by Fremd]

reply to post by baseball101


I saw this episode and starting cheering in my living room. The audience seemed just as inclined to help Rush pack his bags as Jon was. If anyone ever finds the ends of the earth, I'll shove his butt over my self.

Wow, grandstanding from Stewart. Big surprise. Nobody has done more to dumb down politics over the past ten years than Stewart. A few million morons watch his 22 minute daily broadcast and smugly think they know everything.

At least Rush takes 3 hours and covers a lot of ground. At least he deals in arguments rather than snarky comments and raised eyebrows. Rush is just a man who is being honest with his opinion. He engages the listener without any real flash at all, it's all about what he and you the listener think. That's the success of his radio show; believe it or not, his listener base is wider than people think because they are drawn to his simple formula. His audience does not agree with everything he says, far from it. Contrast that with Stewart, whose audience is there to suck up everything he says and isn't given time to think for themselves. Wooooo another yukity yuk yuk zinger, political politics stuff is fun weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

Demonizing Rush is just stupid. It's not fair, it's not right, and it's not a good use of your time. And it's definitely not distracting me from the so far shockingly bad Obama administration.

What's really going to shock the Democrats is how much their 'attack dog' politics is going to cost them at the polls with moderates. Pay no attention to us imploding the country, the real problem is this guy with a radio show. They are OBLITERATING the center/left coalition he ran on.

Stewart should be demonizing Clinton and Geithner and Pelosi. You know, actual political officials. Obama's only chance at being a decent President is to purge his cabinet of Clinton influence. And he can remake congress or lose it to Republicans, it's that simple. Obama is the president of a Clinton administration and a Clinton congress, it's disgusting and makes him look exactly as weak as a Medvedev.

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II


Obama said he would bring the soldiers home from Iraq. Afghanistan is not Iraq. don't mince words.

reply to post by 11andrew34


Funny. Stewart covers more accurate news in 30 minutes then Rush can do in a week.

Originally posted by 11andrew34
Stewart should be demonizing Clinton and Geithner and Pelosi. You know, actual political officials.

That's why I don't watch Stewart. His one-sided liberal based comedy gets old. Sure, he is pretty funny sometimes. And makes some good points. But it's just too one sided. Kind of like a liberal O'Reilly, only funny. If that suits some people, so be it. Both come with an extreme bias and fail to cover things that contradict their own conservative/liberal agenda. Personally, I would rather watch somebody who shows the ridiculousness of both sides.

Jon Stewart is a comedian that presents his material as comedy. He makes no claims to his program being a source of factual information, and has discouraged people from using his show as such. He is aware that what he says shouldn't be used as an actual news program, and is best viewed as a way of having a laugh at it all at the end of the day.

Rush Limbaugh is a neo-conservative pundit that presents his statements as the truth, and makes no distinction between opinion and fact. He encourages people to use his opinions as the building blocks of their political ideology, and considers himself the voice of the republican party.

The key differences between the two are A) Jon Stewart sells his snake oil as snake oil, while Limbaugh says it's a cure all and B) Jon Stewart used to be The Green Lantern. Those are important, because there are ( Or should be ) different standards of accountability for comedians and self proclaimed newsmen.

Originally posted by Fremd

i imagine that you, and people like you, find humor in the sucking noises that Rush Limbaugh used to use on his airwaves to "have a caller abortion" that featured a tube sucking liquid sporadically followed by a child screaming?

Yeah...that's humorous

no wonder NYC can't wait to see him go.

Doesn't it seem funny that people were actually offended by a caller being aborted (simply being hung up on), yet don't care about the thousands of real abortions that occur every year?

Drive-by listeners don't get Rush Limbaugh.

Anyway Rush is getting the heck out of the oppresive state of New York.

What do you think the state is going to do to make up this revenue? Cut something in their massive budget, or come up with another tax to make up for it?

Originally posted by TheDustman

Rush Limbaugh is a neo-conservative pundit

Really? I seriously doubt that Rush was ever a liberal.

If he was could you point out when, and why you think so.

reply to post by TheDustman

My friend, we are talking about media. Not to go into the content, of which, clearly Rush has better, more reasoned and funnier. The simple fact of the matter is this: In 20+ years from now when they tldalk about this time in American history, they will mention Rush Limbaugh. They won't mention Jon Stewart. Now you can hate him. You may disagree with 100% of what he says and how he says it. You are being either dishonest or foolish to suggest for a moment that Jon Stewart is anybody. I would guess that less than 5 out of a 100 people in this country even know who Stewart is.

reply to post by dolphinfan


Your to my post had nothing to do with what I discussed. I pointed out that, regardless of impact, finances or listening base, they are both entertainers. Limbaugh is more successful, but he also presents his info-tainment and opinions as inarguable facts.

reply to post by RRconservative


Then what would you prefer to call Limbaugh's ideology?

reply to post by baseball101


News for Stewart. He already is! He only goes there for meetings and when there is a hurricane. Yet EVERY year he is audited. Yeah, no political motivation behind that!