I’ll say it for the millionth time:
It’s unfair and unfortunate, but unless you listen to Rush Limbaugh for some length of time, you are prone to misinterpret him.
Not just “Rush has been using the same catchphrases for so long that they have a meaning that fans understand but first-time listeners don’t appreciate.”
But also that Limbaugh delivers extended, extemporaneous monologues that do not always lend themselves to soundbites.
Often, “taken out of context” is a dopey alibi, but when it comes to Rush Limbaugh, it can be very valid.
It may be unclear to some listeners that he is often using obviously invisible and inaudible “quotation marks” around certain phrases or even whole paragraphs.
OK, fine. But he posts transcripts right after each hour concludes.
So there is really no excuse.
Yesterday, Limbaugh was commenting on media coverage of Williams’ suicide, not necessarily the suicide itself:
So our last caller from Des Plaines, Illinois, wanted to know, “What is the politics in the coverage of the suicide of Robin Williams?” Well, I believe there is some. But I don’t think that the politics is driving it. I think there was, on the part of media and Hollywood, genuine affection for the guy that is driving it, but there is politics. If you notice the coverage is focused on how much he had, but it wasn’t enough.
“He had everything, everything that you would think would make you happy. But it didn’t.“ Now, what is the left’s worldview in general? What is it? If you had to attach not a philosophy but an attitude to a leftist worldview, it’s one of pessimism and darkness, sadness. They’re never happy, are they? They’re always angry about something. No matter what they get, they’re always angry.
They are animated in large part by the false promises of America, because the promises of America are not for everyone, as we see each and every day. I mean, right here there’s a story on the Fox News website. Do you know, it says right here, that the real reasons that Robin Williams killed himself are he was embarrassed at having to take television roles after a sterling movie career.
He had to take movie roles that were beneath him, sequels and so forth, and he finally had to do television just to get a paycheck because he was in so much financial distress. He’d had some divorces that ripped up his net worth, and he had a big ranch in Napa that he couldn’t afford any longer and had to put up for sale, and a house in Tiburon that he couldn’t afford anymore. This is all what’s in the Fox News story.
He had it all, but he had nothing. He made everybody else laugh but was miserable inside. I mean, it fits a certain picture, or a certain image that the left has. Talk about low expectations and general unhappiness and so forth.