Rush Limbaugh Defends Video Game Free Speech

[Kryten1029a]

any ally is a good ally.

I wouldn't really say that. What if we had a leader of a terrorist organization saying video games are good?

Is this a new spin on Godwin's Law? Bin Laden instead of Hitler?

 

[Irony's Acolyte]

Well it looks like the conservative American belief that free speech is very important didn't get overidden by the conservative American belief that "Someone must protect the children" or to a greater extent "Some things are immoral and must be banned because the Bible (or whatever holy book they follow, Christians are just the most numerous here in the US)says so."

I don't agree with alot of Rush's views but if he's on the same side as me then I won't get upset. The enemy of my enemy isn't always my friend, but sometimes he makes a convenient ally. I'm not on your side Rush, but I'll fight alongside you for this issue.

 

[Delusibeta]

I don't really know enough about Rush Limbaugh to have an actual opinion on him. I don't pay him enough attention. But nor do I pay any attention to a lot of people with extremist views. Much rather just watch the Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

It's a good rule of thumb to avoid any "news source" with a political agenda. No matter what the politics, they tend to be utter idiots when they decide that the other side is "The Great Satan" and can never be right on anything. This is a major reason that I hate our current political climate in the U.S. And I'm not JUST hating on the Republicans for this.

However, despite however you feel about Limbaugh, you have to admit that in this case he is right. If it bothers you so much, comfort yourself with the fact that even a broken clock is right twice a day.

This post struck me as rather amusing. Stewart's at least fairly honest about, but he most certainly has a political agenda.

The thing is, he's a comedian. You shouldn't get your news from a comedian because all his business is trying to make you laugh (like you shouldn't get your reviews from Yathzee for the same reason, but there's quite a few who ignores that he's a critic and just accepts his opinion as Teh Truth. I imagine that a similar principal applies to The Daily Show as well, but that's beside the point).

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

Wait............ What??????

I am very confused, but any defense is good I suppose.

 

[Cocamaster]

An objective perspective is most useful, and in an objective perspective, America is a right-wing country, in the most common sense of the phrase.

You can stand by the statement all you like, but I would suggest you (get this) try proving it first (and, for that matter, define it. What do you mean by centrist? How close to centrist does someone have to before they're essentially centrist in your view?). Political Scientists say American politicians tend to centralize. That is obviously not the same as "becoming centrist," but it would suggest Washington is more centrist than most of America (it is; that's the nature of popular vote).

Wait a second? Why are you demanding from me proof? Where's yours?

You just came here defining the US political spectrum and expected me to accept it at face value, then called me on my own anecdotal evidence.

You can claim "political studies and scientist" all day long, but without a shred of evidence to back your claims of "objectivity" I'm going to have to call you on that. I mean, who are these "political scientits" and do they all have a consensus?

Democrats favor social and modern liberalism, which is a left wing tendency. If you define "left" by classical liberalism, you're 100 years too late.

Republicans follow American Consevatism, which is nowhere near as right-leaning as traditional conservatism.

What's the "center"? Beats me, all I know it's not in the left or the right.

 

[Ch@Z]

Infinite monkey theorem. After years and years and years of saying the wrong things your eventually going to say something right for once.

 

[Frotality]

wow. me and rush limbaugh agree on an influential aspect of the american economy.

just how desperate must the state of the world be for this to happen?!

 

[PortalParadox]

0_0 I am so confused.






... as to why this surprises so many people.

 

[lizards]

so the fuck what? just because someone may be an extremist about something doesnt mean that hes from a different planet, you can agree about something nearly always

im sure a lot of people had at least one thing in common with hitler

 

[Zakarath]

Meh. While I don't mind that hes on our side of the video game ruling, I don't like how he's trying to paint the anti-video game law as some liberal Obama-administration agenda. It seems to me that he is just being intentionally divisive and trying to label the bill as such in order to garner more support for conservatism among the gamer demographic, while I see this bill as being much less of a party vs. party piece of legislation(This is part of the problem with a two-party system). I think, in reality, while some of the more vocal anti-video game spokespeople are democrats (Hillary Clinton, Tipper Gore), there is also many more who are more toward the middle (Schwarzenegger & Lieberman, who has not been a democrat for a few years now), and toward the right(Fox News). And the law (if it was a senate bill rather than a supreme court ruling) would doubtless have supporters from both the censorship-happy elements of the left and the "Protect The Children" right. So it seems to me that Lieberman is trying to make a bill seem polarized when its actually much more muddled.

 

[Saltyk]

I don't really know enough about Rush Limbaugh to have an actual opinion on him. I don't pay him enough attention. But nor do I pay any attention to a lot of people with extremist views. Much rather just watch the Daily Show with Jon Stewart.

It's a good rule of thumb to avoid any "news source" with a political agenda. No matter what the politics, they tend to be utter idiots when they decide that the other side is "The Great Satan" and can never be right on anything. This is a major reason that I hate our current political climate in the U.S. And I'm not JUST hating on the Republicans for this.

However, despite however you feel about Limbaugh, you have to admit that in this case he is right. If it bothers you so much, comfort yourself with the fact that even a broken clock is right twice a day.

This post struck me as rather amusing. Stewart's at least fairly honest about, but he most certainly has a political agenda.

On topic, I'm really not surprised by this. I'm not hugely familiar with Limbaugh, but I do know he's a hardcore conservative, and that means minimal government. He's just not being hypocritical about it like most of the neocons that have been running the Republic party for the last couple decades.

Yes, Stewart does have a political agenda, but he's much more honest about his beliefs than many others. He also does take issue with many people that he supports. Too few people criticize their own party. Of course, he does it to some extent for laughs, but I also think he is bothered by some of the hypocrisy of too many politicians, both Republican and Democrat.

And I do agree that Limbaugh supporting the game industry in this matter is not such a surprise as many people imply it is. This "surprise" is largely due to a bias against the man. They disagree with him so much, that when he actually says something they agree with, it's a surprise.

 

[SimuLord]

"If the First Amendment can protect a scumbag like me, it can protect anyone." - Larry Flynt

Also note that Chairman Yee, the guy who created this law in the first place, is one of California's highest-ranking Democrats (and Rush Limbaugh got his start in radio in Sacramento). Limbaugh's probably got a long-standing grudge against the Chairman.

 

[linkzeldi]

The enemy of our enemy is a friend.

 

[Cronq]

I hate Rush Limbaugh cuz I do whatever Comedy Central tells me to.

 

[Alon Shechter]

Well, this is interesting, if not ridiculously confusing.
Nevertheless,
*highfives Rush*

 

[Huxleykrcc]

An objective perspective is most useful, and in an objective perspective, America is a right-wing country, in the most common sense of the phrase.

You can stand by the statement all you like, but I would suggest you (get this) try proving it first (and, for that matter, define it. What do you mean by centrist? How close to centrist does someone have to before they're essentially centrist in your view?). Political Scientists say American politicians tend to centralize. That is obviously not the same as "becoming centrist," but it would suggest Washington is more centrist than most of America (it is; that's the nature of popular vote).

Wait a second? Why are you demanding from me proof? Where's yours?

You just came here defining the US political spectrum and expected me to accept it at face value, then called me on my own anecdotal evidence.

You can claim "political studies and scientist" all day long, but without a shred of evidence to back your claims of "objectivity" I'm going to have to call you on that. I mean, who are these "political scientits" and do they all have a consensus?

Democrats favor social and modern liberalism, which is a left wing tendency. If you define "left" by classical liberalism, you're 100 years too late.

Republicans follow American Consevatism, which is nowhere near as right-leaning as traditional conservatism.

What's the "center"? Beats me, all I know it's not in the left or the right.

American Government: Roots and Reform by O'Connor and Sabato. It was the book that many high schools started using for their AP classes last year.

Anyway, you're missing my point. I think to suggest that there are no centrists Washington is probabilistically silly, not to mention unsupported (I enjoyed your less-than-deft deflection of your own burden of proof, not to mention the attempt to establish some kind of Ethos by insinuating that you know bunches and bunches and political viewpoints. Which, maybe you do, but that's beside the point). The fact is, it is MORE CENTRIST (not centrist, just MORE CENTRIST) than most of America, on both relevant spectra. Even conjecture suggests this: Any average must be between two extremes in a data set, and politicians purport to have an average view, because that will garner the most votes, and votes are the direct cause of election. If we visualize a line, define a middle (which I is clearly the tricky part here), and make two notches, we can see the midpoint of those notches is closer to the middle than at least one notch. If we accept what I can gather about your opinions on where views rest in America, than that notch will probably be quite close to the middle. According to my source, such theory is supported by evidence.

In other words, Washington will tend to the average, which must be closer to center than any extreme. Specific regions will not tend to the average as strongly.

Of course, there are a discrete, not continuous (and finite), number of politicians in Washington. As I said, it would be helpful for you to explain what you mean by centrist and how strict you are about parameters (as without such there's no way for you or me to check for counterexamples). Regardless, I suppose it's possible that there is no politician that is exactly in the center according to your standards. But then I'm not sure of the relevancy of the claim: politicians are somewhat centrist, as I have already shown. Does it matter if there's no one DEAD in the center? After all, lawmaking is about competing views, not just one view.

Incidentally, I never claimed to be objective; if you'll read the end of my last post, you'll notice that I insinuated the opposite. Rather, I argue that it is possible, by codifying views independent of their experimental frequency in the actual population, to make an objective political spectrum. It's an oversimplified one, obviously, but all such spectrums are.

 

[Glerken]

snip

That's exactly Fox's problem. It was a rated M game. That was just a lack of research.
Haha, But I feel we're pretty far off topic from the original post now.

 

[Ossim_Sauce]

Wow. this post just made my day, good to see another person of influence support us. I don't care what party/movement he is apart of.

...

1+ to faith in humanity.

 

[Lord Mountbatten Reborn]

Bobby Kotick (although he has a livelihood to think about) and Rush Limbaugh. Who is going to be on our side next?