back to article Mass mind control artist condemns El Reg to obscurity

Mass mind control artist Rush Limbaugh has convinced millions of brainwashed Americans that The Register is an "obscure UK tech site." In the US, Limbaugh is famous for using the country's highest-rated radio program to control millions of small American minds over more than two decades. He's also famous for being "a big fat …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

@henchan

Well, good bye then. I think we'll never disagree. People who believe that everything is but points along a continuum and I are likely to never come to an agreement about anything philosophical in life. I do believe in the concept of “tipping points.” Things are good until you reach a barrier…after which they go dramatically sideways.

As to your point about my approach to cultural warfare not being dissimilar from that of RL’s fans…you are correct save one key point. I would be perfectly content to let them have their culture and society intact. They would not be content to allow me the same freedoms. Yes, we are both afraid of eachother: it’s the nature of war, whether that be cultural or physical.

Still, the difference is that overall intellectuals don’t believe in “converting” others quite so much. Oh, we debate. We banter endlessly and argue every little item about every little thing. We are however generally content to have all parties shake hand afterwards and go back to wherever they came from. There is a huge difference between the sorts of debates that I (and those I enjoy spending my time with) prefer and the emotion-drive “conversion of the heathens.”

Your argument seems to be that I should simply let them try to convert me – and everyone else I know – without ever saying “nien.” To open the gates of Troy and welcome the Greeks in. I think not. Our species has had ten thousand years to perfect the emotive conversion of someone else to one’s own beliefs. For only a few piddly decades have more than the elite of society been working on mental tools to ward such off.

With luck, our descendants will still be around in a few thousand years: I would dearly like to know what their take on the same debate would be after having had that time to adapt.

In the meantime, I’ll follow your lead and sign off from this thread. Despite the many arguments present, I wish a happy holiday season to everyone!

9
1
Stop

I hoped I would not have to see the cocked-up phrase "culture war".

Could someone please explain what this phrase means?

I hear it bandied about, and all I've been able to deduce is that "culture war" roughly means "loud discussions between people who want civil rights for all people and people who still wish to withhold rights from some excluded- group- du- jour".

Someone implied that this "war" began in the 1960s, when youth dared to express their disagreement with Vietnam, and their desire for social equality (black power, Chicano power, &c).

If any of this is true, why on earth should there be any argument (let alone "war") over extending equal civil rights to all?

3
0
Silver badge

@ skeptical i

All wars are "culture wars", by definition ... That said, allow me to answer:

"why on earth should there be any argument (let alone "war") over extending equal civil rights to all?"

I have no idea. But the followers of TheBigFatIdiot seem to think there are good reasons. My mind boggles at the thought ... Why, exactly, should TBFI's followers be allowed to tell me & my Wife, or the Gay guys at the end of my wife's rose garden, how to think and live?

Note that I'm not trying to tell TBFI's followers how to think and live. If they enjoy their ignorance, who am I to tell them otherwise? Hopefully they enjoy their bliss ... and don't mind when I point & giggle :-)

4
0
Anonymous Coward

@henchan re: 'two sides'

You either want more people to be deluded or you want fewer people to be deluded - just about *nobody* is neutral on that issue! Rush Limbaugh wants more people to be deluded. That makes it a matter of taking sides - democracy is based on the concept of informed citizens making collective decisions about the future of their country, not an ignorant herd who are kept "fucking terrified" of whatever happens to serve whichever party's backers.

Furthermore, opposing intolerance is not *being* intolerant. Trying to "find common ground" with intolerance is yielding to a demand that you diminish your own right to a point of view. That is a spurious concept of balance. Here's an analogy: demanding *all* of your garden doesn't give me a right to expect half of it!

4
0
Thumb Up

@thecakeis(not)alie

Best comment ever.

I love how every time el reg takes a shot at an American we end up with debates about concepts too complicated for my head to hold all at the one time with participants ranging from the most intellectual to the most emotional, and from both sides of the pond.

I genuinely enjoyed your comment. Thank you.

More on topic, I agree with the sentiment that those who shout the loudest get noticed the most.

Reason is, by definition, reasonable - shouting is not.

However the flipside to this is that those who are reasonable know what shouting for the sake of it sounds like.

If you don't, just watch anything where a politician is asked an uncomfortable question, and listen - I mean really *listen* to the response.

That's what it sounds like.

Incidentally, I know a couple of teenagers for whom this is the way to win any argument about anything regardless of what the opposition says or does. It also doesn't matter whether or not they win in the end, just that they shout louder or get the last word.

I say let Rush say things if he wants.

As el Reg has noted, alot of it is just air.

2
0
Silver badge
Joke

What a big debate

from what was really a rather tongue-in-cheek remark.

I don't take myself nearly so seriously!

3
0

Thank you, sir, from a fellow Albertan

I too spent my formative years in Alberta, with anti-Semitic teachers (Alberta is famous for them) and red-in-tooth-and-claw oil men, and I emerged non-red-neck, non-conservative, bookish, left-of-centre, and with a taste for opera and modern dance, the scientific method, rational argument, and tolerance.

Needless to say, I don't live in Alberta any more.

Beautiful countryside, though.

2
0
Stop

It was the pax. The G-23 Paxilon Hydrochlorate

Careful with that drug supply in the water. If Hollywood has taught me anything, then it's that a small proportion of the population go mad and kill everyone.

1
0

bitter?

Whilst understandable, This article is a rant that should probably have stayed in the staff room.

Hardly likely to win you any credibility points with the big fat idiots and small minded american's is it now?

2
29
Boffin

It's all about the whatsherface effect

They're trying to goad old Rushyboy into talking about them again, maybe they got a spike in views?

2
1
Happy

@bexly

Wouldn't actually having credibility with "big fat idiots" and "small minded american's [sic]" actually be detrimental? I suspect pleasing the first quarter of the IQ bell curve is not a typical part of the “Science and Technology Webizine” agenda. (Indeed, I would argue it never should be.) El Reg does have a reputation to maintain and standards to uphold!

21
2
Silver badge

@bexley

"Hardly likely to win you any credibility points with the big fat idiots and small minded american's is it now?"

You are, either intentionally or by accident, making it sound as if Elreg was calling all Americans fat and small minded, which is not the case.

In my opinion, very few Americans* would feel insulted. After all, nobody considers himself small minded. :)

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but your comment seems to imply that Elreg should be triying to please this group of 'fat and small minded Americans'. How does one go about that? Should ElReg start using shorter sentences and lots of pretty pictures? A section of fast food recipes? A horoscope? .

I prefer ElReg the way it is, thank you. Small minded people have already enough mass media trying to please them. Most mainstream media nowadays has been designed for morons. o_0

*Note: Of course, I mean the Americans able to read and understand the article. Functionally illiterate Americans are likely to read this article as an attack against their country.

15
3
Black Helicopters

Big fat RICH idiot

Rush Limbaugh isn't an idiot. He's a genius. He's figured how to get rich doing basically nothing. All he does is say whatever spiteful lies he can make up on the spot and people send him piles of money. I wish I were smart enough to find a gig like that.

I don't claim he's a particularly nice person, or that what he's doing is in the best interest of anybody but himself, but I've never understood why people call him an idiot. Sure, he'd be an idiot if he believed everything he says, but there's a reason the only people who believe it are a bunch of stupid trailer trash rednecks. You don't see them getting rich by spouting hate-filled drivel, do you?

11
2

No, not all americans

Just the ones that they are calling small minded, which is almost certainly correct.

I'm not disputing the accuracy of the claims, just commenting that if you upset about being refered to as an obscure tech site then perhaps writing a childish rant full of insults and name calling is not the most gracefull way of answering.

Sure, this right wing radio chap is an easy target, but still.

Better to rise above it.

2
11
(Written by Reg staff) Gold badge

Re: No, not all americans

Upset?

We're delighted!

11
1
Paris Hilton

It does...??? Hang on it does!

"El Reg does have a reputation to maintain and standards to uphold!"

My initial response was: It does...? Good grief, hardly anyone's ever written than before...

My more considered response is "indeed it does". What this requires is some serious investigative journalism, with the results presented in an easily accessible medium. So one of the following:

a) Playmobile reconstruction of Mr L's minions extracting dossiers from El Reg, or

b) Reconstruction of the Moderatrix demonstrating to Mr L that stealing El Reg's glory does not go unpunished. (playmobile optional ;))

Ms Hilton since even she's always been certain about the difference of coming first or second.

4
0
Silver badge
Boffin

And on top of that

El Reg's Standarts Converter: http://www.theregister.co.uk/Design/page/reg-standards-converter.html

They don't just uphold their standards, they allow you to express them in more conventional quantities, awkward as that may be.

2
0
Silver badge
FAIL

Indeed

"Hardly likely to win you any credibility points with the big fat idiots and small minded american's is it now?"

I doubt El Reg is yearning to collect those points.

I doubt it very much.

3
0

EIB

I think we can come up with the true meaning of EIB, maybe...

Emetic Irritating Bloob

4
3

Over five million geniuses read this site?

Damn.

Well that's me feeling intimidated then. Here, I always thought the resident geniuses were Lester and Lewis…

0
0
Silver badge

Don't be so modest, Cake.

See title

2
0

This post has been deleted by its author

Thumb Up

Wow, guys! Awesome foto!

I really like the way the photographer captured that view of Rush's face just a split second before Moe Howard poked his eyes out.

0
2
Silver badge
Happy

Well I think he's doing us a favour

Do we really want a bunch of mindless non-genius types cluttering up our pristine website with their ill-mannered unsophisticated drivel?

>

>

>

Sophisticated drivel is so much better!

8
2
FAIL

To be honest...

If they listen to that gasbag and are so easily brainwashed by him, then they probably wouldn't be able to read or understand most of El Reg's articles anyway... so no big loss of readership there.

8
4
Coat

Limbaughing up for a bad joke

This Rush Limbaugh guy is clearly very silly. I mean, who names themselves after a nerdy prog rock band?

8
2
Anonymous Coward

sad

While I love El Reg, I am a listener of Rush. While most think that he is the arbinger of the mindless I would like to think that he is the one that make most "yanks" (as you call us) think out side the box that the mainstream media tries to put us in.

If all you watch is CNN, then I'd say that you are the one that's the zombie.

Hey, at least he gave you all credit. Rush can be quite the egotist and he could have taken all the credit.

From the other side of the pond...

A mindless zombie

8
26
Anonymous Coward

The what hey?

" most think that he is the arbinger of the mindless..."

I can't figure out if you added an a and swapped the r and b, meaning that Rush creates idiots... Or if you meant a cockney accent, and that he presages idiots... Or if you meant that he chooses among the idiots those he deems worthy.

Anyway - bringer, harbinger, or arbiter, I think we can come to a solid conclusion that Mr. Limbaugh himself is a bar-bingeing backbiting hack, bringing crack-addled crap off the back-burner.

Done and done, then.

13
3
Thumb Up

Jon Stewart himself watches those guys.

It is perfectly good to watch Rush, O'Reilly and that tubby blond guy provided you also watch some non-Fox News.

Stewart* himself watches those guys.

Check out BBC News, or CBC Newsworld, or even just The Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

(* And Jon Stewart also quotes The Reg as an authoritative news source, which is probably what turned Rush on to watch this place.)

7
1

Aw, c'mon

Or if his keyboard is a bit iffy, jeez!

0
0
Grenade

Yes but

Jon Stewart may listen to Rush Limbaugh, but it's not to get prepackaged opinions. It's to get prepackaged ammunition.

8
3
Stop

Yanks?

'We' call 'you' Yanks about as often as 'you' call 'us' Limeys... i.e. not very often, and then mostly said by idiots.

0
0

thanks

unique geniuses? awwww..... thanks el reg!

2
1

But you ARE an obscure UK tech site...

...to most of the world. I love The Register and read major portions every day. I've learned quite a lot and been quite amused.

I also listen to Rush, though not every day. I learn some things (filtered through other sources) and am often amused.

Methinks thou Protesteth Too Much!

3
9
Silver badge
Thumb Down

But shureley-

EIB is an obscure radio station- to the rest of the world.

4
1

The Reg Must Be Butt Hurt

I like Rush. I am a conservative person that can think for himself. But I think you guys have acted a bit childish. Got your pantihose in a knot over Rush, eh? Your response was very personally disparaging and small minded. I think it was unbecoming of you. I like the Reg too.

4
22

I think the Reg is doing what the Reg does best

Taking the piss.

If you're a big enough idiot not to notice that, that's not their problem.

14
1
J 3
IT Angle

Er...

"I am a conservative person that can think for himself."

Hahahahaha... Er.. Ahem. Hahahahaha! And likes that low life druggie bully. Nice.

I love El Reg, you find humo(u)r here even in the comments page.

3
0
Anonymous Coward

conservative person that can think for himself

Is that an oxymoron or just a conventional moron?

0
0
Silver badge

Who the f is Rush Limbaugh?

<wiki> Oh, right. A political shock jock with a messy life. Nobody important then...

9
2
FAIL

That's THE un-American gear-head rag read by no one, IUDM

Am I missing something? How can he claim 'firsties'? Secondsies, surely?

I thought this sort of thing only went on at B3TA...

0
2
Happy

LOL @ thumbs down!

Looks like his mother has dropped by

2
0
Unhappy

That makes two of us.

I contend that the majority of Rush's critics, especially the loudest and most obnoxious are those who have never taken the time to listen to the show, instead parroting on what they read on a liberal blog or saw on MSNBC one night.

Limbaugh does come across as extremely egotistical. It's part of his schtick, it's intended to be done tongue-in-cheek most of the time, although I'd say that there is a fair dose of sincere egotism there too. So what? If you don't like his style don't listen.

As to the mindless zombies, that's a handy excuse for the weak minded. If that many people in the USA were that stupid we'd have fallen off the map a lot sooner than we're about to. Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with Rush on all counts. In fact I think there are times when he deliberately takes an extreme view on some issue for the sensational effect of it, but he's far from alone in that. I know of several other radio and TV personalities that do the same thing for their own gain. If it were a crime, there wouldn't be much to watch or listen to.

Would I like a sensible, calm yet conservative talk show to watch or listen to? Sure. The problem is that like good news in the tabloids, it just doesn't sell, so don't hold your breath for it. Meanwhile I do listen, laugh at some of the antics, nod at some parts and shake my head at others. In the meantime, like the vast majority of this country (East of the Sierras and West of the Appalachians), I am a conservative. I am not a religious fanatic and believe that religion and government are best kept far apart. I believe strongly in individual responsibility and liberty, the two must go hand in hand. I believe Keynes was an absolute idiot, and every central banker on the planet is a clueless boob. I am not a Republican, and I am absolutely not a Democrat. I believe in individual choice, and the power of the States before the federal government. I believe that the Constitution should actually be adhered to.

What I hold true did not come from Limbaugh or any other on-air personality, I am not a mindless zombie, but I do find some common ground with the conservative talk show hosts, as do most of the people in this country, which is /why/ Limbaugh is #1 on the radio in ratings. Do you really believe that many people can be controlled by the words of one person? If that were true Obama's ratings wouldn't be in the gutter.

Believe in what you believe is right, don't follow /anyone/, get your information from the sources you trust, AND the sources that your trusted sources say not to listen to! Then decide for yourself.

Meanwhile, I'm proud to be a regular reader of this obscure little online tech publication. It makes me feel like I'm just a little cooler than I am.

That and I love a good pint of bitter, so I live vicariously through the staff of El Reg (since you can't find a decent beer within a thousand miles of my town) :P.

There you go - flame away.

18
14
fnj

Bingo

Bravo. Just bravo.

3
3

This post has been deleted by its author

Alert

Just one question...

...does The Economist count as a liberal blog?

0
0
Silver badge
Thumb Up

Yes.

Always need to keep in mind that the "radio personality product" in non exactly the same as the person behind it.

1
0

Could someone please explain to me...

OK - I'm obviously on the wrong side of the pond to understand this; why do Americans "believe in Liberty" yet oppose Liberals? Is there some kind of twisting of the word liberal in Americanese that I am unaware of?

I guess I'd consider myself a liberal socialist (or possibly a social liberal at beer o' clock) - insofar as I believe in individual freedom within the constraints of society at large ... or in it's older, more basic concept - so long as you're not hurting anyone, do whatever you like.

("an it harm none, do what ye will.")

0
0
Anonymous Coward

An attempt at an explanation...

...from an American that is disappointed with most American politics.

Liberty is meant as you say, personal freedom. However, it is the debate over what the "constraints of society at large" are that gets otherwise sane people all frothy.

Examples. On the "conservative" end, there are few to no constraints on business, land use, gun ownership, etc. But that same demographic endorses constraints on civil union, scientific progress, financing the government, and who can become a member of society. These constraints are usually argued on the basis of Christian morality, and when Christian morality doesn't agree, they are argued instead on the basis of nationalism. Note that when I refer to Christian morality in this context, I mean mostly the evangelical interpretation thereof, which unfortunately leaves out a lot of the "love thy neighbor" lessons. To summarize, this mindset specifies that the individual must prosper, and that society will benefit if this is allowed to occur. However, the individual must prosper according to a set of moral rules that have been tweaked a lot in the last hundred years or so.

On the "liberal" end, the constraints on the individual are largely removed, and placed on society instead. For example, gay civil union is legal and drugs like THC are legal (but heavily taxed). However, due to heavier regulation on society as a whole, personal liberties are stifled by laws such as the DMCA. Small businesses suffer under one-size-fits-all legislation designed to reign in the larger corporate behemoths. These constraints are mostly argued on the basis of advancing society, or on the basis of protecting society from itself. To summarize, this mindset specifies that society can best advance when managed from the top, and that layers of organization and regulation will insure compliance. However, by limiting the resourcefulness of the individual, the desired progress is stifled.

Both sides are hypocritical. And thus I find both sides completely disappointing. Those of us caught between the extremes try to pick and choose the best of both sides, but American politics is extremely polarized, so there is rarely a viable centrist option.

2
0
Thumb Up

my +1

Not badly put, most are just voting for the lesser evil (or so they think) anyway. only a handful are so nieve as to actually think ANY politition is actually going to be GOOD. It's a real shame you have to take a canidate, the good with the bad, when you really just want some of his/her policies, others you (almost assuradly) want left at the door.

0
0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017