PDA

View Full Version : Rush Limbaugh Uses a Mac


NavyIntel007
Jun 28, 2003, 09:40 AM
Yeah yeah, don't flame me because I listen to Rush. At the end of his show yesterday, someone called to talk to him about Apple and he was PRAISING the superior quality and ease of use in comparison to PC's. He also said that that you can't explain how much better it is to have a Mac to a PC owner. I have to assume he has a Mac because only Mac owners talk like that and he wouldn't give out free advertising on his program if he didn't have to.

See, he's not so bad after all... :D :cool:

evil
Jun 28, 2003, 10:05 AM
thats cool that he was all ab0ut the mac.

scem0
Jun 29, 2003, 11:42 PM
http://www.macminute.com/2003/06/28/limbaugh
"The G5 is going to go to 64-bits, and it's going to change everything -- which is why I'm so frustrated that this technology isn't more mainstream," writes talk radio personality Rush Limbaugh. "I recently bought the latest dual-processor G4. I've already hooked up audio, video, iChat -- which is their version of AOL instant messenger -- and it's incredible. It's real-time video conferencing on your computer... The G5 is an even more advanced machine, yet Apple's market share remains static! They have so much superior equipment that they should have at least double the share of the market they hold now. Apple is apparently a company that is so constrained by the political views of its corporate leadership and board, which now includes Al Gore, that it's accepting lower sales. What a shame."

Seems like he has his computer facts straight ;).

scem0

Frohickey
Jun 30, 2003, 12:31 AM
He's been a loooooooong-time Mac user.

PowerPC 601, I believe. Maybe even prior to that!

tazo
Jun 30, 2003, 06:58 PM
thats cool that the man who started conservative talk radio uses macs :)

Vector
Jun 30, 2003, 07:49 PM
This is already being discussed http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?threadid=30889

Marble
Jun 30, 2003, 08:46 PM
How disturbing. I guess both a good and an evil man can appreciate a magnificent plate of the best cuisine. Why not a Macintosh?

MacFan25
Jun 30, 2003, 09:17 PM
I wouldnt have ever thought that he would have used a mac. ;)

Durandal7
Jun 30, 2003, 09:27 PM
Originally posted by Marble
How disturbing. I guess both a good and an evil man can appreciate a magnificent plate of the best cuisine. Why not a Macintosh?

Good and evil are relative. In the higher order of the universe there is no "good" or "evil." Humans are insignificant mammals on an insignificant planet with sometimes bizarre concepts of right and wrong and evil and good. The most primal root of the concepts of good and evil can be traced back to our unevolved pasts. We are communal creatures and our ethics reflect that. In a small community of apes, one that strenghthens the community by say providing food may be viewed as good by the other apes. An ape that kills another ape may be viewed as evil, that is unless the death of the ape in question benefits the other apes in which case it is good. All concepts of good and evil come from social groups. As time went on the idea arose that one must try to help the community at all cost, this was good. This idea originated in religion and it's goal was to opress oppisition to those in power. Thus it was "good" to be a drone to society, yet "bad" to be a heretic who went against the leader who was of course good. In fact nearly all descisions that humans make are decided by their effects on others in the subject's social group. People who realize this are at an advantage, ones who deny it cripple themselves. Good and evil seem to have become buzzwords in the last few decades, getting back to their arbitraty roots I suppose. Someone who deems a politician "evil" is most likely part of a social group that is so viciously exclusive that he must bandy about words to be accepted. And if not then the subject in question desperatly seeks to be accepted by this group. In the end there are no original thoughts, only derivitaves based on what we believe others want us to believe.

Frohickey
Jun 30, 2003, 10:15 PM
moral relativism?

tazo
Jun 30, 2003, 11:21 PM
Originally posted by Marble
How disturbing. I guess both a good and an evil man can appreciate a magnificent plate of the best cuisine. Why not a Macintosh?

How is he evil? Instead of touting mediocre vocabulary in your pursuit of miscommunication, why not face the facts and just say, "I dislike him for his political views".

Jerry Spoon
Jul 1, 2003, 12:36 AM
Originally posted by Durandal7
Good and evil are relative. In the higher order of the universe there is no "good" or "evil." Humans are insignificant mammals on an insignificant planet with sometimes bizarre concepts of right and wrong and evil and good. The most primal root of the concepts of good and evil can be traced back to our unevolved pasts. We are communal creatures and our ethics reflect that. In a small community of apes, one that strenghthens the community by say providing food may be viewed as good by the other apes. An ape that kills another ape may be viewed as evil, that is unless the death of the ape in question benefits the other apes in which case it is good. All concepts of good and evil come from social groups. As time went on the idea arose that one must try to help the community at all cost, this was good. This idea originated in religion and it's goal was to opress oppisition to those in power. Thus it was "good" to be a drone to society, yet "bad" to be a heretic who went against the leader who was of course good. In fact nearly all descisions that humans make are decided by their effects on others in the subject's social group. People who realize this are at an advantage, ones who deny it cripple themselves. Good and evil seem to have become buzzwords in the last few decades, getting back to their arbitraty roots I suppose. Someone who deems a politician "evil" is most likely part of a social group that is so viciously exclusive that he must bandy about words to be accepted. And if not then the subject in question desperatly seeks to be accepted by this group. In the end there are no original thoughts, only derivitaves based on what we believe others want us to believe.
ok...thanks

Flowbee
Jul 1, 2003, 12:49 AM
I dislike him for his political views.

Marble
Jul 1, 2003, 01:39 AM
Originally posted by Durandal7
Good and evil are relative ...(snip)... People who realize this are at an advantage ...(snip)... buzzwords in the last few decades, getting back to their arbitraty roots I suppose. Someone who deems a politician "evil" ...(snip)... there are no original thoughts, only derivitaves based on what we believe others want us to believe.

"Viciously exclusive" generalizations have been used for centuries as the perfect medium for humorous hyperbole. You know - jokes? It's that kind of abstraction in politics that I consider relatively high level humor. You know - farce, satire? If I wanted to post low-level humor about Rush Limbaugh I would paste a slapstick picture with dying oil-slicked animals in a decrepit ecosystem and perhaps some poverty-stricken workers being lorded over by a corporate boss. Now that would be funny!

As far as the Macintosh is concerned it's just a taste, so it's cool that he's got that taste.

As far as my posting is concerned, I thought it was funny, myself. I don't regret saying it, if that's what you wanted. The only thing I regret is that you've really blunted my scissors, as you can see above.

Durandal7
Jul 1, 2003, 02:13 AM
Now if you had not posted that then what would I ramble about? It is not the fact that it was meant as a joke but the fact that it gave me an excuse to ramble on at needless length that caused me to respond. Your political satire does not bother me as I also dislike him for many of his extremist views. As for rambling while some may not like it, it is a perfectly legitimate form of communication. The art of rambling has been perfected to an artform by some such as in the United States Senate with the phenomenon known as "filibustering." Rambling has gone by other names over the years such as "prattle." It is at it's base a train of thought that spills out of the mind, a vomiting of ideas. As for the content of the post, it was to analyse the concepts of "good" and "evil." Satire is a lovely form of humor. It is one that I respect. Humor is another human behavior that is extremely difficult to characterize, in fact I am going to have to collect my thoughts on humor then report back.

Though as a tie-in to your post above, I believe it was Samuel Clemmens who said "The root of all laughter is suffering" which seems appropriate for your satire.

Billicus
Jul 5, 2003, 10:48 AM
He's always said Apple should advertise on his program, but the leadership of Apple is too liberal to even consider it, or so he says. But there is no denying that the Apple leadership is liberal - they have Al Gore on their Board of Directors for goodness sakes. I think that Apple should advertise, it would be good for them.

Foxer
Jul 8, 2003, 04:07 PM
I remember him touting the superiority of Macs in the bad old days of mid- to late-90's.

If Apple were jsut a little bit less closed minded... They incorporate Al Gore into their keynote, but ignore someone with a huge following who is happy to promote their products even without compensation.

I always found it interesting that, like me, he is a die-hard Mac user who also refuses to buy into Microsoft is pure evil line of thinking. He spent alot of airtime criticizing the anti-trust suit against MS.

(And to those that blindly say that Rush is "evil," c'mon. You're just proving that you value sloganeering over independent thought. Everyone I've ever forced Rush upon (and indeed, you do have to force people to listen at first) now thank me, even those that remained liberals, for the experience. You may disagree, but if you haven't listened, I assure you that you don't have the slightest idea what the show is like.)

Mav451
Jul 13, 2003, 02:11 PM
I have to agree, he is very knowledgeable and if you listen to his radio show, you will learn alot.

As someone else said, i don't like him b/c of his political views. I disagree heavily on his stand on "common" Republican views: i.e. Oil situation.

When i did a research paper on ANWR, i used ALOT of what he said from NPR and other transcripts--this was all the information i EVER needed for the Republican (extreme conservative) side of the argument.

So while i do disagree with his views, you learn alot about your own views--b/c he DOES make you think about it.
Besides, the more he pisses me off, the more i think. This is good, b/c most republicans i meet (who tell me "democrats suck") don't actually back up there arguments. Rush does, however.

Strangely enough, i remember first hearing his show in my dad's car several years ago. Some reason, my mom also listens to him as well and both of my parents have been Democrats all there lives. His radio show, hate it or love it, is popular.

tazo
Jul 14, 2003, 02:50 PM
I think thats the great thing about talk radio. Often times even if you do not agree with a raido show host, they will cause you to think about your own views. In turn making them good hosts.

I listen to the Michael Savage radio show every once in a while if I catch it, and I do not agree with everything he says. Sometime he wil just attack something that personally i agree with, and you have to then take talk radio for what it is: opinions.

Les Kern
Jul 14, 2003, 03:12 PM
See, he's not so bad after all..

All of my beliefs have been shaken to the core -. I may hove to sell all my gear-