I would say that journalists have a duty to bottom feed. The 24/7 news cycle makes such slumming inevitable and, actually, "fun." Since wise viewers know that they have to take everything they hear with a grain of salt at this time, they instinctively enjoy comic relief, the levity of, say, an Ann Coulter and a Rush Limbaugh. These people are entertainers and sensible people enjoy seeing just how far such court jesters go in prostituting themselves for the oligarchs or, as is the case of Limbaugh if not quite yet Coulter, self-dealing in tax breaks in order to push the Bush Economic Doctrine of trickle-down, the federal taxation equivalent of a pyramid scheme, a shameful giveaway to the smallest number for the greatest damage to middle class workers and the poor.
Besides, Ann and Rush are such fine specimens of the homo sapien type.
"They do it for the money." Sounds like whores to me (with apologies to honest "working women" everywhere!).
As to Coulter, all I can say is that you can take the white trash girl out of the trailer park, but you can't take the trailer park out of the white trash girl.
P.S. James, I know it's Halloween. But did you really have to put that photo on here? Ohhhh, the humanity!!!
The answer, in my opinion, is that lots of the idiots in this country watch when they're on. That means that those people bring up ratings which results in networks generating more ad money. Sadly, intelligent conversation just doesn't sell as well as does idiotic ramblings.
Hey Steph! I've never heard of that show. :) I almost never watch TV. It's amazing how many singing showes there are that are almost exactly alike. Most people are so easily entertained.
Wow! That sounds absolutely disgusting!
This article explains the mystery of Limbaugh's notoriety. It's not really about people who support what he's saying, they don't pay his bills. It's people who are outraged by him that keep him in business. He doesn't support reasonable policy at all, he goes out of his way to be absurd so that when reasonable people talk, they talk about how ridiculous he is. It doesn't require any thought to construct arguments against what Rush says. It takes a pair of ears and the decency to act like a human being with thoughts and feelings. Being upset at what he says is a natural act of human behavior. He counts on that to make a living, and when we get frustrated at him and his hate speech we are lending support to him and his ilk indirectly. I think the best approach to Rush is to pity the man for having to act like such a buffoon in order to make a living. He can never have a meaningful discussion, or make a positive contribution to society. He will die with a legacy of being hated, and despised, because of what he chose to do for a living.
I keep hearing that Rush is the De Facto leader of the Republican party. But, I think that is a title that the left gave him in order to make other Republican and right wing ideals guilty by association. It's also easier to make Rush your opponent and counter his crazy rants, than to attack a more legitimate conservative perspective. When we kick dirt at Rush we fail to challenge ourselves with real, meaningful discussion of the issues. Rush doesn't exist as far as the legitimacy of his ideas are concerned. He is a terrible villain in a story that we insist on reading as if it were non-fiction. If he really said something that was in any way meaningful he would have to stop being a bigot for one second to say it, and no one wants to listen to Rush if he's not filled with hate.
I'm not so sure Michael. I saw a poll that indicated a majority in a southern state believed Obama was a Muslim. I see people running for Senate that have said outrageous things about abortion and rape. I think someone like Limbaugh has cachet with a portion of the electorate and they do agree with him and Coulter.
Maher, Colbert and Daily are entertainers as well - but when they are absurd - hopefully we get the joke.