No.

It might have made sense one time in the past. Perhaps it was too complicated to get ratings all year round. But there’s no reason to continue that now.

Going off topic here, but speaking of ratings, can anyone explain to me just why there is a “ratings sweeps week”? All the networks put on their high-interest shows to try to draw the largest audience during one week. To what point?

If I’m an advertiser looking to spend my money on TV I would think I don’t care how large an audience you drew on some particular week. I want to know how many eyeballs you deliver week after week during the regular season. The logic escapes me.

I don’t think anyone does, at least not in a meaningful way. Radio ratings are a joke. They are virtually no better than random guessing.

Not unless you patronize his sponsors or are somehow counted be Nielsen (or whoever tracks ratings for the radio).

True. It won’t harm him as much as it should but that’s only because his base are a bunch of unreflecting, “fiercely independent” ditto heads. I hope he chokes on his own bile and then spits it into Hannity’s face.

Though I’m ashamed to admit I contribute my drop in the bucket to the show’s revenue, I listen now and then for the whole trainwreck value.

Maybe in your conservative addled mind, but not in reality.

‘We can argue about what Rush really meant…’ is evidence that what you believe is far from reality.

Obama is president. Dems are in charge of Congress. A huge roll-back of Bush II’s deregulation and reckless, incompetent military strategies are about to go “poof.”

Dems, being the reality based folks that they are, believe in actual victories. Republicans, slipping into obscurity as the regional party for southern white males, can only take pleasure in symbolic ones, since they’re incapable of real ones any longer.

O-dub makes a good point as well. For all the millions Rush rakes in as a demagogue, he’s a net bonus for the future of the Democratic party. The guy is red-faced pig, and he’s maxed out his popularity demographic. There’s no longer any “cross-over” potential for his racist, ignorant schtick.

Say g’night, Republicans.

We call it snark around these parts, pod’ner.

Aren’t you aware of all internet traditions?

You got your hobbies, I got mine.

Fair enough!

(And notice, fafaroo didn’t feel it necessary to respond by yelling “Liar!” or “Fucking ‘tard!”. I’m jus sayin’.)

So now you’re defending the thrice divorced racist asshole and paragon of modern Republican-hood? Oh Dennis, I thought we were making progress. Oh well, keep calling them “allegations” if you must.

What are the “tenets of the Laffer Curve”?

It was, sorry, my mistake. I tried to put ’strikes’ around the ‘taken out of context’ phrase but it didn’t appear like I wanted it to. Good joke though. Really funny. Before reading that had never ever heard anyone on a liberal blog joke about Limbaugh’s drug and pedophile allegations.

No, actually, I think the context is right there. What I was implying is that Rush is a drug-crazed pedophile.

You got your hobbies, I got mine.

…er, over at Open Left. Check it out.

Only if the Dems keep pointing it out and using him as an example. I’m telling ya, the Dems should be taking every opportunity (and they get provided with lots) to paint the right and the Repubs in particular as hateful, ignorant liars who are out to screw you until the public common sense about them is “Oh, you can’t believe anything they say.”

You criticize him for bringing it up when he does, and now you criticize him for not bringing it up when he hasn’t?

Ladies and Gentlemen, the face of the new Republican party…
Rush Limbaugh. [Cue the Barack the Magic Negro song].