The Radio Equalizer: Brian Maloney

19 September 2007

Rush Limbaugh, Barbra Streisand, Donovan McNabb, ESPN


Even Years Later, Limbaugh's Words Anger Foes

Due to the inherently fleeting nature of words uttered into the airwaves, radio talk show hosts have long faced a major challenge: how can one's thoughts make a lasting impact?

As a result, it's common to see talkers writing columns, blogging and appearing on television shows, where transcripts are made and placed on the Internet. Another method is to engage in stunts, which sometimes generate local newspaper coverage.

For talk titan Rush Limbaugh, however, none of that is necessary. When El Rushbo speaks, his enemies are busy recording every word, hoping they will finally get the ammo that will bring him down.

There's a peculiar aspect to this, however: Limbaugh's foes have recently resorted to recycling comments from years ago, applying it to the present day. This week alone, there have been two major examples:

First, the talk titan's comments about Philadelphia Eagles Quarterback Donovan McNabb are still generating a significant amount of fuss, a full five years later. Rush addressed this yesterday:

"I wonder what about?" I said to myself, given that the Eagles are playing. In fact, let's start at number one. Let's go there. This is what was said during the Redskins and Iggles game last night. This is play-by-play man Mike Tirico talking about Donovan McNabb.

TIRICO: Go to the other controversies, Freddie Mitchell, kind of criticizing Donovan for being more of a management guy than a player's guy in the locker room. Then, of course, you have the Rush Limbaugh incident, when Rush Limbaugh was on Sunday NFL Countdown at ESPN and brought up the whole black quarterback issue with McNabb and everybody wanting a black quarterback to succeed.

RUSH: Right. They just can't let go of this. Do you know this is five years ago now? I think it was 2002. I mean, it's been a long, long time and they just can't let go of it, and I'm going to tell you something, folks. The one thing about this incident that I really have noted and I'm not happy about -- and it's a very sad thing: This incident has made Donovan McNabb a perfect victim, and that is just very sad. There was no need for him to become a victim. The media has aided and abetted this victim status, and that's what that little bite there from Tirico is all about. Whenever there's a game and he's not doing well, "Let's go back and talk about the Limbaugh incident. Let's talk about the Freddie Mitchell incident. Let's talk about Terrell Owens," and so forth and so on. He's just become this giant victim now. That's really sad for me to see. They had Charles Barkley in the booth last night, and Barkley had this exchange with Mike Tirico.

In the second incident, left- wing moonbat Barbra Streisand is now going after El Rushbo for an on- air book review he did two years ago! Here are her comments, published just this week on her website:


Rush Limbaugh is plugging a new book whose conservative agenda attacks liberals. But the facts the book alleges about Barbra Streisand, as reported in the WorldNetDaily website, just aren’t factual. The website, celebrating Limbaugh’s breathless praising of the book, says, “It points out how Barbra Streisand, while lamenting the way labor unions are treated in this country, gets all of her movies produced in Canada."

Ms. Streisand has, in fact, made all of the feature films she has produced (through her Barwood Productions) in the United States, with the exception of “Yentl” which required filming on locations in Eastern Europe closely approximating the setting of the story. All of her other features were set in and filmed in the United States, with full use of American labor union talents and observation of union regulations.

Here's WorldNetDaily with the background story:

It seems Barbra Streisand is catching up on some old reading.

On her website, she attacks Rush Limbaugh and WND for statements made and reported nearly two years ago. Streisand, whose political activism and social commentary in recent years many times have received more attention than her singing, is up in arms now about accusations made in an unnamed book, discussed by Limbaugh and reported in WND in 2005.

The response was apparently generated by a story about talk radio empire builder Rush Limbaugh, and his opinion of several books, from November 2005.

Limbaugh referenced the new – at that time – book "Do As I Say (Not As I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy" by Peter Schweizer, calling it "just fabulous!"

Limbaugh was responding to a caller's question about his reading habits. He trumpeted the book, noting:

It points out that Michael Moore, for example, owns stock in Halliburton. That Al Franken, in the course of his career over the last 12 years has hired 115 people, only one of them black. It points out how Barbra Streisand, while lamenting the way labor unions are treated in this country, gets all of her movies produced in Canada.

It talks about Ted Kennedy and his family, how they oppose doing away with the estate tax, but the Kennedy family has sheltered all their money in a myriad bunch of trusts to avoid estate taxes.

It is just replete with example after example of the utter hypocrisy of the Left.

Hey, when your words are still steaming them years later, you must be doing something right! But why are they resorting to this? Have they run out of reasons to slam him otherwise?

AT NEWSBUSTERS: media elitists somehow spin rate cut into negative news

FOR Boston- area talk radio updates, see our other site. New: it's courtroom showdown time in Massachusetts! Will Howie Carr prevail?

Your Amazon orders that begin with clicks here, regardless of what you ultimately purchase, help to further this site's efforts.

Or, if you would prefer, please contribute at the
Honor System box in the upper right corner. Thanks again!

Technorati tags:


  • Brian, that is an interesting analysis. The fact that his critics have to rely on material that is years old just reaffirms Limbaugh's domination of the airways.

    I think most people have to admire the verbal skill that Limbaugh has. There are not many people who can talk extemporaneously for 15 hours every week and do it well.

    By Blogger The Benson Report, at 19 September, 2007 12:48  

  • Many people do it well, limbaugh has not been good at it in 15 years, since the drugs ruined his brain.
    Nobody admires this degenerate, only fake Republicans like you.

    President Eisenhower was a great president and a Republican, if Republicans were more like him, everyone would support them. Fake Republicans support psuedo Republicans who are really radicals like Ronald Reagan and Bush, they are not Republicans, nothing you see today resembles Republicanism, is is Anti-american radical, government destroying, free market insanity, not Republicanism. Limbaugh can't explain the difference, he knows not his ass from his elbow... and you admire the man who is destroying your party, by turning young Republicans into idiots, who support Republicans who are not Republicans

    anyway.......... Limbaugh bottom line, a lightweight, who used to be a decent talk show host, before drugs destroyed his brain.

    Maybe some movement will form and want to bring back Republicans to the Eisenhower era, whgen Republicans made sense and were patriots, not profit driven pigs.
    Until then the GOP is dead in the minds of the intelectual heavyweights. Your party as of now is the party of idiots.
    Eisenhower would spit in Reagan and Bush's face, both proponents of the military-industrial comples which he warned of us, not the "libs", that term is a Republican term, in the era where Repukes were Republicans not pukes.

    By Blogger Minister of Propaganda, at 19 September, 2007 14:53  

  • Dust MOP

    What makes you think anyone would take your opinion seriously.

    You hate Rush because he destroys any lefty competition.

    Your party of vote with the poll numbers is over playing its hand and it will bite them in the ass this election.

    By Blogger pf1, at 20 September, 2007 00:53  

  • What makes you think anyone would take your opinion seriously.

    simple, It is more grounded than anyone on this board.

    My opinion is based on histroy, yours is based on the radio. I personally don't give a flying fuck about who gets better ratings. Im a PATRIOT, not a partisan hack, like you.

    you look at this like a football game, I look at everything from an historical perspective

    Just for balance, I have repeatedly said Limbaugh has not been entertaining since 1991, I mean it. I don't say it just because he is a right wing idiot, with opinions that are not grounded in facts. On the other hand, Savage, who is just as ungrounded in reality, is enntertaining.

    By Blogger Minister of Propaganda, at 20 September, 2007 09:58  

  • MoP,

    How you can equate the corporate welfare the government loves so much these days with anything resembling a free-market policy is beyond me. How much in subsidies is the government throwing at oil, virtually all cash crops, etc. these days? (And why are we married to corn-based ethanol rather than the superior sugar-based stuff? Hmmm...not because politicians have to kowtow to the citizens of Iowa every four years; it couldn't be that! But I digress.)

    And are you saying that Rush has never been entertaining in the last 15 years, or that he has not been consistently entertaining? There's a marked difference. My experience, in those limited times when I listen (I prefer music myself...) is that he is sometimes entertaining, someones ranting, and usually somewhere in between. (And he is occasionally tasteless.)

    But he does have good bumper music. Anyone who plays Patrice Rushen can't be all bad in my book. :)

    By Blogger Snowed In, at 21 September, 2007 11:09  

  • "My opinion is based on histroy"

    Wrong. Your opinion is based on lies and ignorance.

    By Blogger pf1, at 24 September, 2007 04:15  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Page Rank Checker

Powered by Blogger