Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Limbaugh and Hannity - the world's biggest idiots

  1. Nov 13, 2008 #1

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    http://mediamatters.org/items/200811120011

    One has to ask: Are they really that stupid? I think these two qualify for public assistance as they are clearly mentally disadvantaged.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 13, 2008 #2
    I think its a consequence of being a "shock jock" or shock jackass in these cases. You have to continually up your shock factor in order to keep people tuned in. What is really troublesome is the fact that enough people listen to them to keep them in business.

    I must admit, I do sometimes listen to conservative talk radio in the car, but is only to keep me mad enough to stay awake on long trips, and it is usually somewhat humorous in a sad sort of way. . .
     
  4. Nov 13, 2008 #3

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    It is still polluting your brain.

    To me this is like the series of movies called "The Faces of Death". These were quite the rage some years ago - movies of people and animals dying - but I refused to watch any of it because once it gets into my head, it can't be unwatched.
     
  5. Nov 13, 2008 #4
    Perhaps this recession is the concequence of a multitude of factors. Maybe the federal government shouldn't get in bed with business as well as vice versa. This throwing bombs from both sides is becomming really dull and doesn't resolve anything. This has been a long time comming and needs to allowed to run its course. Yes, it will be painfull but you can't patchwork a ship with this many holes in it.
     
  6. Nov 13, 2008 #5
    I am somewhat relived that the rest of the nation has begun to feel the recession that Michigan has been in for close to 2 years now. For Limbaugh to say that Obama had anything to do with it, is just so pointless. But what scares me, is the people who believe him.
     
  7. Nov 13, 2008 #6
    It's silly to say that Obama caused the current troubles. But it is not silly to say that fears of an Obama Presidency with a Democratic Congress are at play. Recently Treasury Sec. Paulson was given $700 billion to buy up devalued mortgage assets. He spent $350 billion, but not for that purpose. Instead he bought preferred stock. It is coming out now that Paulson wants to abandon current activity and instead focus on I'm not sure what, the automobile industry, student loans, credit card debt. I think he's still working out the content of the new plan. Republicans were right to vote against that package. Now the market remembers that the President elect was a cheerleader for that failed plan. While I caution against reading too much into short term gyrations in the market, I also note that in the 7 trading days since he won the election the S&P went from 1005.75 on Nov 4, to a low of 818.69 earlier today, a drop of 18.6% just shy of a bear market all on it's own.
     
  8. Nov 13, 2008 #7

    Office_Shredder

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    So your argument is the current administration put together a bad plan and is failing to implement it, and people are worried that the next administration supported the bad plan... but the bad plan that's causing people to worry about the next administration's plans isn't actually causing any of the problem? The current bailout fiasco is happening under a republican administration, so it's tough to say that makes people worry about a democratic administration, even if Obama supported the original plan since McCain did also.
     
  9. Nov 13, 2008 #8

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    In fact, Republican leaders strongly supported the plan. Boener was almost in tears as he begged the House to pass it. And yes, McCain flew back to Washington to push it through. It can be argued that those who voted against the bailout would drive this country into the ground over ideology; if they haven't already.

    The fact is that failure to pass it may well have meant disaster. We were told that we have a gun to our heads; now vote.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2008
  10. Nov 13, 2008 #9
    Yeah, but do those fears have to do with anything Obama has actually done or might do differently from any other president-elect, or do they have much more to do with Limbaugh and Hannity and others who not at all shyly participated in convincing great numbers of people that our president-elect is a Muslim terrorist and who obviously wouldn't hesitate to do the same sort of thing on the economic front?

    I.e. does rampant ambient fear have more to do with the guys who sell fear for a business or the guys who sell hope for a business?
     
  11. Nov 13, 2008 #10

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

  12. Nov 13, 2008 #11

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Not true, Obama was not happy to vote on it at all.

    http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/28/news/economy/reaction_mccain_obama/
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2008
  13. Nov 13, 2008 #12
    The market is afraid that Obama and a Democratic Congress will continue the current bailout fiasco. It is not worried that McCain will.

    The leaders but not the rank and file. 2/3 voted against.

    You are twisting my words. I didn't say he was happy about voting for it, I said he was a cheerleader for others to vote for it.
    In a story entitled "Obama Sells Bailout Plan to Skeptics"
    NY Times
    There was also a story about how he went to the Black Caucus, which had rejected it, and talked them into supporting it, but I can't find that story now.
     
  14. Nov 13, 2008 #13

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Fortunately, I don't pay attention to either of those two, or O'Reilly.

    BTW - the Dow rallied ~560 pts. today.


    The systemic weaknesses in the financial markets and the global economy have been slowly evolving. There was a lot of mismanagement, some inappropriate financial instruments, e.g. synthetic CDOs, and too much leverage (too much stuff bought on credit or speculative investing). There is no quick fix to the sudden loss of 'apparent' wealth - it will take time - a few years perhaps.
     
  15. Nov 13, 2008 #14
    Oh, I don't know if it pollutes my noggin, I don't lean a bit more to the right every time I hear that habitual drug abuser Limbaugh speak, probably more to the left. . . just gets me all fired up.

    Anyway, as for the recession, it was inevitable. Its a derivatives bubble bursting caused by too little regulation of these murky financial "products". Nonetheless, markets historically do better under democratic presidents :)
     
  16. Nov 13, 2008 #15

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Doesn't sound much like cheerleading. I think Obama, like others, were far more concerned about a catastrophic collapse of the US economy.
     
  17. Nov 13, 2008 #16
    If a team of cheerleaders went out on the field at the halftime of a football game and cheered, "Let's prevent this crisis from turning into a catastrophe!" I don't think they would be regarded as very good cheerleaders.
     
  18. Nov 13, 2008 #17
    That's because of your selective quoting. Here's the part you left out.
     
  19. Nov 13, 2008 #18

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    However, when you were posting this, the S&P was up over 850, and now it's up over 900. What must we make of this?
     
  20. Nov 13, 2008 #19
    This would probably be many of the same people who bravely made every attempt to disassociate themselves from Bush and the Republican party in reelection contests, some even going so far as to feature Obama in campaign ads. Go figure, people like that not having the spine to do anything but cover their butts when faced with dealing with the financial crisis.

    Not saying that all Democrats supported it out of a tough moral fiber - it's about as pathetic as the many Democrats who voted to endorse the War in Iraq instead of standing up for what's right at a risk to their political careers.

    Or perhaps it's because no matter how it's spun "we need to take these unfortunate measures to safeguard the American economy" can't be pejoratively passed off as cheerleading no matter how hard you try. If you simply wanted to say that he advocated for that solution to the problem no one would object I think.
     
  21. Nov 13, 2008 #20
    I wouldn't read too much into short term gyrations in the market. I have a granularity of one month myself.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Limbaugh and Hannity - the world's biggest idiots
  1. Satan is an idiot. (Replies: 9)

  2. Rush Limbaugh Arrested (Replies: 12)

  3. Idiot question (Replies: 11)

  4. Dealing with Idiots (Replies: 18)

Loading...