Sean Hannity is a big, fat, troop-hating coward

[General Zod]

Much as I dislike them, Having Beck, Hannity, O'Riley, and Rush around are doing wonders...Mostly because they continue to try and push whats left of the Republicans into ever more extreme and tribalistic groups. Really, the more these people try and run things, the more the GOP looks crazy and out of touch.

Their ratings are huge. What make you think the average American thinks they're kooks?

Limbaugh's fanbase composes about 13.9 million listeners per week on average. The Republican party has about 200 million registered voters. Limbaugh's popular, but the idea that the average American agrees with him is rather stretching it.

[Sute]

Limbaugh's fanbase composes about 13.9 million listeners per week on average. The Republican party has about 200 million registered voters. Limbaugh's popular, but the idea that the average American agrees with him is rather stretching it.

200 million? That's over half the population of the US. Did you mean the number of registered US voters? Because the way that was phrased, it looks like the number of registered Republican voters.

[General Zod]

Limbaugh's fanbase composes about 13.9 million listeners per week on average. The Republican party has about 200 million registered voters. Limbaugh's popular, but the idea that the average American agrees with him is rather stretching it.

200 million? That's over half the population of the US. Did you mean the number of registered US voters? Because the way that was phrased, it looks like the number of registered Republican voters.

Hmm, I should have put 97 million. I'm not sure why 200 million sprang to mind when I typed that, but even with the number almost cut in half the gulf is still pretty large.

[Yogi]

What makes you think their audience is not mainly the 20 percenters?

Crossroads Inc is the one that made the assertion that Rush & comopany is "push[ing] whats left of the Republicans into ever more extreme and tribalistic groups" and making the GOP look "crazy and out of touch", an assertion I don't feel is self evident enough to make without evidence. And so, in the grand tradition of SD.Net debating, I have asked someone to provide evidence to backup his assertion.

[Crossroads Inc.]

What makes you think their audience is not mainly the 20 percenters?

Crossroads Inc is the one that made the assertion that Rush & comopany is "push[ing] whats left of the Republicans into ever more extreme and tribalistic groups" and making the GOP look "crazy and out of touch", an assertion I don't feel is self evident enough to make without evidence. And so, in the grand tradition of SD.Net debating, I have asked someone to provide evidence to backup his assertion.

Well I can't do that, and I'll come right out and say it before being asked and admit to it. I don't have any polls or numbers SHOWING that they are being pushed by Rush and CO into a more extreme camp... That said, I would say it certainly SEEMS like they are.

[Samuel]

Well, it would require us to prove several things:
-they are getting crazier
-people are following them
-the majority of the population is getting repulsed by what they see
-this is affecting the Republican party

All of these seem true... but in our little bubble of logical thought what we think and what the US thinks do not always coincide. Unless a survey has been done, the best is to check one and three.

[Duckie]

3 is true: Republicans since inauguration have had a slump of reported membership in polls, according to Nate Silver. However, meanwhile, political ideology doesn't seem to be shifting. I think what's happening is moderate conservatives are getting to be ashamed to admit they're in the same party as extremist republicans.

[The Yosemite Bear]

Let's not forget those recent killings.

[The Spartan]

*Snip Limbaugh stats*

When does his program air? I know it's during the day but I don't know the exact hours. I ask because many, perhaps most, of those who would listen are probably at work during that period of time. I know of at least two people in my office who participated in his little interference operation in the Democratic primaries who couldn't listen. Or, at least, couldn't listen during the day.

Edit: I doubt it would make up a huge difference in numbers, but I'm curious.

[General Zod]

When does his program air? I know it's during the day but I don't know the exact hours. I ask because many, perhaps most, of those who would listen are probably at work during that period of time. I know of at least two people in my office who participated in his little interference operation in the Democratic primaries who couldn't listen. Or, at least, couldn't listen during the day.

Edit: I doubt it would make up a huge difference in numbers, but I'm curious.

I haven't the foggiest, but I hear he has a website you might be able to find this out at?

[The Spartan]

I haven't the foggiest, but I hear he has a website you might be able to find this out at?

I would presume so, but, honestly? I don't care enough to subject myself to his website as I generally go out of my way to avoid anything and everything he says. Or doing anything that will subject me to seeing his face...

I was just hoping someone might know and be able to tell me.

[Count Chocula]

Rush aired 12-3PM Eastern, when I was listening regularly in San Diego. Ten or more years ago. I doubt it's changed since then, but I'm an XM customer so I'm not positive.

[Glocksman]

My best friend goes out to his car at break and lunch at work.
He listens to 15 minutes of Laura Ingraham at break and a half hour of Limbaugh at lunch.


It doesn't take much of teh crazy to stay indoctrinated.

As far as waterboarding goes, I made an offhand comment to a coworker about Hannity being a coward for ignoring Olbermann's challenge.

He was OK until I insisted that waterboarding was torture.
As soon as I said that, he got really loud and said that it was not.
After I pointed out that the US considered it to be torture (and tried several Japanese for doing it to US troops) until Bush said it was OK, he said that what made it torture was the intent of the person doing the waterboarding.
He then proceeded to cite 9/11 as justification.

At that point, I told him that 24 isn't a documentary, and then he got so mad he just left.

[Glocksman]

On a serious note, my best friend isn't stupid by any means.
To me, his problem is that he only seeks out news and commentary (Rush, FOX, O'Reilly, etc) that affirms his current world view and dismisses those that go against it.

I used to be even more rabid right wing than either of the people described above, but there was a point where I could no longer close my eyes to the truth.
That was the beginning of my metamorphosis from a conservative Republican to a Obama supporting Democrat.
As I've said in the past George W Bush did the impossible and turned me into a Democrat, and I've been a Republican before I was old enough to vote.

Heck, I worked 500 hours of volunteer time at the local Repub HQ during the 1984 elections.
Though I will admit that the volunteer coordinator was a devastating 30 year old blonde with nice legs who drove me home 3 times a week because I didn't have a car.
What made it great was that her car was a stick shift Chevy Citation.
Watching those long tanned legs work that clutch pedal was fascinating.

[Gil Hamilton]

The only reason right wing folks don't consider waterboarding to be torture, despite everything, is because we were doing it. Since torture is bad and we aren't, therefore it can't be torture. QED or so they'd claim. Their position isn't rational, its inherently defensive.

[Qwerty 42]

The only reason right wing folks don't consider waterboarding to be torture, despite everything, is because we were doing it. Since torture is bad and we aren't, therefore it can't be torture. QED or so they'd claim. Their position isn't rational, its inherently defensive.

A lot of less-learned people might believe that waterboarding isn't torture because it doesn't, compared to a lot of things, cause a great deal of physical harm. Therefore, to them, it isn't torture because mental pain can't possibly be as bad as physical, right?

[The Yosemite Bear]

The only reason right wing folks don't consider waterboarding to be torture, despite everything, is because we were doing it. Since torture is bad and we aren't, therefore it can't be torture. QED or so they'd claim. Their position isn't rational, its inherently defensive.

A lot of less-learned people might believe that waterboarding isn't torture because it doesn't, compared to a lot of things, cause a great deal of physical harm. Therefore, to them, it isn't torture because mental pain can't possibly be as bad as physical, right?

so beating someone with a soft object isn't torture after all it doesn't always leave bruises....

[SCRawl]

The only reason right wing folks don't consider waterboarding to be torture, despite everything, is because we were doing it. Since torture is bad and we aren't, therefore it can't be torture. QED or so they'd claim. Their position isn't rational, its inherently defensive.

A lot of less-learned people might believe that waterboarding isn't torture because it doesn't, compared to a lot of things, cause a great deal of physical harm. Therefore, to them, it isn't torture because mental pain can't possibly be as bad as physical, right?

I'll invoke Hitchens again. I was watching a video from one of his colleagues who said something to the effect that because Hitch had volunteered to undergo the procedure, it couldn't be torture. "You wouldn't volunteer to have your fingernails pulled out, just to try it out, would you?"

Yeah, I thought that that was pretty stupid too. I mean, just because it doesn't leave permanent damage doesn't mean that it's extremely unpleasant to have happen to you.

[PainRack]

He was OK until I insisted that waterboarding was torture.
As soon as I said that, he got really loud and said that it was not.
After I pointed out that the US considered it to be torture (and tried several Japanese for doing it to US troops) until Bush said it was OK, he said that what made it torture was the intent of the person doing the waterboarding.
He then proceeded to cite 9/11 as justification.

At that point, I told him that 24 isn't a documentary, and then he got so mad he just left.

Point out that the Japs were using waterboarding to prevent terrorist attacks on their troops too.

For example, the aftermath of Operation Zipper in Singapore by Australians meant the systematic torture of POWs and other civilians, because there MUST had been a civilian resistance network with the POWs that helped those pesky australians commandoes.

[Patrick Degan]

And that's a very pretty point. The late maladministration actually put forth the sophistry that waterboarding was not torture because there was no legal definition of it as such, despite the fact that U.S. military and international case-law exists which establishes the practise as a war crime.

[Glocksman]

He was OK until I insisted that waterboarding was torture.
As soon as I said that, he got really loud and said that it was not.
After I pointed out that the US considered it to be torture (and tried several Japanese for doing it to US troops) until Bush said it was OK, he said that what made it torture was the intent of the person doing the waterboarding.
He then proceeded to cite 9/11 as justification.

At that point, I told him that 24 isn't a documentary, and then he got so mad he just left.

Point out that the Japs were using waterboarding to prevent terrorist attacks on their troops too.

For example, the aftermath of Operation Zipper in Singapore by Australians meant the systematic torture of POWs and other civilians, because there MUST had been a civilian resistance network with the POWs that helped those pesky australians commandoes.

I mentioned that, and that's when he trotted out the 'intent' defense.
Also, another friend contends that when we waterboard people it's not torture because we don't 'stomp on their stomachs' or otherwise physically abuse the person undergoing waterboarding the way the Japanese did.

Even before my 'conversion', I didn't like such tactics because I believe they are unworthy of Americans.
IOW, we as a people should be better than that, otherwise we 'have met the enemy and they are us' to quote Pogo.

[Samuel]

I mentioned that, and that's when he trotted out the 'intent' defense.

It isn't wrong when we do it?

Also, another friend contends that when we waterboard people it's not torture because we don't 'stomp on their stomachs' or otherwise physically abuse the person undergoing waterboarding the way the Japanese did.

That was a seperate type of torture. They forced the prisoner to drink water and rice than stomped on them. Waterboarding was done one it own.

[Pulp Hero]

The only reason right wing folks don't consider waterboarding to be torture, despite everything, is because we were doing it. Since torture is bad and we aren't, therefore it can't be torture. QED or so they'd claim. Their position isn't rational, its inherently defensive.

A lot of less-learned people might believe that waterboarding isn't torture because it doesn't, compared to a lot of things, cause a great deal of physical harm. Therefore, to them, it isn't torture because mental pain can't possibly be as bad as physical, right?

I'll invoke Hitchens again. I was watching a video from one of his colleagues who said something to the effect that because Hitch had volunteered to undergo the procedure, it couldn't be torture. "You wouldn't volunteer to have your fingernails pulled out, just to try it out, would you?"

Yeah, I thought that that was pretty stupid too. I mean, just because it doesn't leave permanent damage doesn't mean that it's extremely unpleasant to have happen to you.

That just doesn't compute.

People go to S&M sex clubs to have all sorts of crazy shit done to them, but I suspect that forcibly doing that to the average person would constitue torture.