Why do Republicans lobby on behalf of people who live like royalty?

Why do Republicans lobby on behalf of people who live like royalty?
Why do leftists lobby on behalf of people who are lazy and don't pay taxes?

 

The handful that do aren't supported by any party, but keep on implying they are.

But is this much different? Maybe because this is actual reality. Wave to your friends at Berkeley who are NOT condemned by Democrat leadership.

 

Didn't have much social media back in Rush's heyday.
He got a lot of attention. Every day at lunchtime where I worked, they would haul a** out to their pickups
to eat their grub and listen to Rush.

 

Yep, seen that myself. They all probably watched football on Sunday too. I know some 40-50 year olds that haul a** to every new Star Wars movie!

I listen to the dude sometimes to get a different perspective on things. Just doesn’t come across as a cult leader or even a thought leader to me. Could be though. But from your list I can think of a lot of worse things he could brainwash people into.

 

Yep football number one.
What I found most interesting was change in their person.
I knew them before the Rush popularity. Most of them did not
have any idea what a Republican stood for because being a Republican
did not imply the "us against them" idea as it does today.
If you were a Republican cool. If not...so what. Packers/Bears game more important.
Now a days, everyone knows what a Republican stands for.
The same things Rush harped on every single day. Got to where you could meet a stranger on the street
and know for a fact he was Republican. Anything that came out of his mouth
was Rush Limbaugh exactly word for word.

 

Just wanted to add that I was talking to my brother-in-law one day, and noticed that
some of the things he was saying were Rush quotes to the letter. Joking around
I told him to stop listening to Rush. He said he never listens to Rush.
He heard those things from the guys at work.

 

Interesting. Guess people I know that listen regularly held their beliefs independently. Some before he was a thing. I agree he has likely made people more outspoken but I don’t think he’s influenced core beliefs any more than main stream media.

As far as parroting I see it often and not just from Rush fans. It’s annoying. Just out of curiosity how do you know so much of what Rush says that you recognize quotations? I don’t sense you’re a fan.

 

Oh. I guess that's what you do when you can't deny the facts.

 

Thanks for reply. I was one of the dudes that listened to him everyday. You see before Rush got so popular, we all listened to a guy
named Paul Harvey. Another radio talk show. At the end of his story he would always say "And that's the rest of the story." "Good Day?"
He talked various topics of interest, he did not repeat the same topic over and over. So by the time Rush came along,
we were already in the daily routine of listening to radio at noon. Then Rush come on in our area at the same time period.
Unless you were around in the 80's and 90's you could not have witnessed this happening.
Here is a bit of history for you..."When the Republican Party won control of Congress in the 1994 midterm elections, the freshman Republican class awarded Limbaugh an honorary membership in their caucus believing he had a role in their success."
Try to go back as far as you can remember, and see where you acquired your political beliefs.

 

Here is another piece of the puzzle..."The repeal of the Fairness Doctrine—which had required that stations provide free air time for responses to any controversial opinions that were broadcast—by the FCC on August 5, 1987 meant stations could broadcast editorial commentary without having to present opposing views. Daniel Henninger wrote, in a Wall Street Journal editorial, "Ronald Reagan tore down this wall (the Fairness Doctrine) in 1987 ... and Rush Limbaugh was the first man to proclaim himself liberated from the East Germany of liberal media domination."

 

My mistake

 

When you first mentioned guys going out to listen to the radio I almost brought up Paul Harvey. When I would go to work with my dad as a kid that’s what you did. You went and sat in the pickup and ate your sandwich and listed to Paul Harvey news. (Stand by for newwws...). I miss him. He was one of those guys that will never have an equal.

Yes, I think Rush probably influenced the turnout for the midterm takeover. But he didn’t convince a bunch of people to believe certain things. He just spoke up about what people already believed. Kind of a cheerleader.

My political beliefs started forming in early childhood. Based on honesty, integrity , personal responsibility, hard work, and charity.

Read a lot staring in about 3rd grade. I was in college taking macroeconomics trying to wrap my head around fed reserve policies etc and working after classes for a guy with an IQ of probably 60 who had a lawn care business. Figured he was making twice what my professors were. Little things like that made me pay attention to reality instead of just theories. Started to realize politics is mostly just “baffling with bs”.

Back to Harvey. Interesting you bring him up in the context of Rush. Harvey was 3X the Christian conservative Rush is. He made statements of his beliefs and lived them. But nobody ever hated him or says a bad word about him. Just a different style and a good man. Yet he probably influenced more people than Rush because everyone listened to what he had to say, not just republicans or conservatives.

Good discussion. Good memories of Paul. Thanks.

 

Yes good point.

 

The gender pay gap is fake. The gender earnings gap is real.

For instance, male Uber drivers make more than female Uber drivers because they drive faster and work more in surge hours. Nobody can pick male or female drivers in the app, there is no patriarchy to pay women less, just merit.

Of course, this is just the mean and individuals can be anything - but that's exactly why controlling for race and gender on the basis of an assumed 50-50 split is so totalitarian.

Conditions have improved immeasurably since the 1980s,

Tax cuts are not a subsidy, they are simply the state refraining from taking your property. That is, by and large, not from where the big corporate elites get their graft. Pfizer for instance only exists and is profitable because of state granted monopolies. That they might have to pay tax on their effectively stolen profits bothers them, but not to the extent it bothers the small business owner pulling 10m in turnover, who runs an honest business, gets none of this graft. To him that's a huge chunk of his life and soul.

Thieves don't care about paying tax. They'd prefer not to, but if you have to you've still got something from nothing.

 

I wasn't talking about the gender pay gap although apparently women are on track to earn the same as men in 200 years..... Whoohoo! ... it's not really funny.. ok maybe it's a little funny

Women will be paid the same as men … in about 200 years
https://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/2178634/women-will-be-paid-same-men-about-200-yearshttps://www.scmp.com/news/world/article/2178634/women-will-be-paid-same-men-about-200-years

 

Give me an example of Republican voters "lobbying for the rich". I totally disagree with this premise. Examples please.

 

Thanks for filling in the facts about your back ground and your upbringing. They are admirable.
Yes I agree with U. Rush didn't create your beliefs for U and then con U into excepting them.
He simply convinced U that your values "Based on honesty, integrity , personal responsibility, hard work, and charity."
are exclusive to you and Republicans. The moment you start to believe that you are better than the guy standing next to you,
your ego takes over.
Remember when Trump said this....
“I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and wouldn’t lose any voters, ok? It’s, like, incredible.” — Donald Trump, who is currently the frontrunner for the Republican nomination for president, insulting the intelligence of his own supporters.

He understood the fact that U would support him no matter how insane his actions were.
Because it really wasn't him you were cheering for....it was yourself.
Once your ego takes over, even the slightest suggestion that U may be wrong about something, becomes a threat to your existence. Wars have been fought over this.
And will continue to be.

 

This is what right-wing socialists do............

 

Fake news on the fake "wage gap" is never funny any more, just dishonest and divisive.

Paying women less than men for equal work has been illegal in the U.S. since the 1960s.

 

Really you are ascribing a negative human behavior specifically to a group, here Rush listeners. In essence you are exhibiting the same behavior you infer is unique to them. Perhaps that isn’t your intention but in the context of the Rush discussion it is an argument most see through these days and isn’t particularly compelling.

As far as Trump goes, do you really think people would support him if he shot someone? This backwards approach at ascribing intent and motive to voters based on something politicians say annoys me. Find a bunch, or even some Trump supporters who said they support Trump even if he’s a murderer and we have something to discuss. Otherwise we’re stuck with “whataboutisms” pitting Trump the shooter against Hillary the basket filler. Not really productive.

Again, if your intent is a general indictment of human behavior by adherents to all political stripes we are in agreement on the ego thing. But the idea it’s unique to the “RW” or caused by Rush simply doesn’t fly.

 

Sorry

 

But I am not "ascribing a negative human behavior specifically to a group".
It's just plain old human behavior. You added the word negative perhaps to take an opposing stand.
I never said..."people would support him if he shot someone". That was your interpretation.
I said that..."He understood the fact that U would support him no matter how insane his actions were.
Because it really wasn't him you were cheering for....it was yourself."

You said..."Again, if your intent is a general indictment of human behavior by adherents to all political stripes we are in agreement on the ego thing.

Yes. I honestly believe that to be root of it all.
Do you disagree?

 

I stated I wasn’t sure of your intent. It’s seems you are applying the behavior to humans not just the group we were discussing so we are in agreement on that. I added the “negative” to be clear. You cast the behavior in a negative light I just put it in writing.

That’s fair. You are the rare person I’ve come across that doesn’t take the Trump quote literally. I’m a little confused on the “U” shorthand. Is that a reference to me personally or Rush acolytes or something else? Until I’m clear on that I’m not sure how to address that further.

I agree that ego interferes with one’s ability to learn or listen to others.

I disagree that ego is responsible for political disagreement. I never know what terms to use as many are offended by words like “right/wrong, moral/immoral, and correct/incorrect”. But actual disagreement is predicted on these things, not on egos. Ego only impedes learning and understanding and exacerbates conflict over concrete issues.

 

Thank you Sir for kind reply.
I've used U because I lack a more accurate way of reference to someone other than myself.
Perhaps "another view" would be better?
Thank you for setting aside the "words like right/wrong, moral/immoral, and correct/incorrect”.
Am I correct in assuming that neither of us has the ultimate wisdom required to make those judgements?

You said..."Ego only impedes learning and understanding and exacerbates conflict over concrete issues."
I much agree. But adding the word "only" to that sentence seems to diminish it's truth to an unnecessary degree.
Comforting to know that people can still communicate as human to human.