Return to the Hot Topics Forum | Post a Follow-Up

 o
Rush's Post Christian Philosophy

Posted by florey (My Page) on
Mon, Mar 31, 14 at 16:25

"Do you know what the difference between Republicans and Democrats iS? Democrats caRe. Republicans are smaRt!"
He continued by quoting his Dad who did not like politicians using 'caring' talk because it meant the government spending money on other people. Okey doaky. There was more in this line, you've heard it. Rushy thinks he's smarter than other people. What's new.
Well this time It registered when he was intimating [that's the way he talks] that it was wrong to care. Maybe it was the talk onfootball players. It put my back up.
Fox has not seemed to believe in caring. Trashiest programs,
commentators against caring.
Hey what ever happened to the basic tenets of Christianity? 1. Loving God, 2. Loving thy neighbor, The Sermon on the Mount. Trying to follow Jesus' example.
Stuff you don't hear anymore, especially not on 'christian' radio.
but really now rush and friends have been snide about caring and compassion for years. So, is that an anti Christian stand or a post Christian stand for Rush and Fox? Either way
I don't like it .

That was last fall, on quickstop a few weeks ago to see if he'd mellowed, nah, He was quoting Woody Allen ~ having more money just means being turned down by a better class of women~
Huh. Both attractive guys right? sensitive, caring, not self centered? what could possibly be going wrong for them?
Well, don't worry your pretty little heads about it too much, guys, go visit Scrooge MacDuck and talk about the feel of gold coins.
Seemed an odd direction for rush but some study had come out about a lonely middle age male population segment. Maybe he was hoping they could relate.

I was listening to see what he was going to say about the Pope. He kept intimating he would say something. Other subjects included a diatribe against blueberries 'This guy said they're supposed to be healthy... they've got anti oxidants or something.... He said blue berries are healthy, and 3 months later the guy was DEAD!'
yadda , Republicans are smart , many rich people are smart. Football players know what they are getting into with brain injuries. whoa... what?
Pope. yadda yadda.
I had started rolling my eyes and laughing, with those bad, caring, democrats, after the serving of blueberries [was it a car crash that killed that daring blueberry eater? A 4th of July pie?]. But stopped with the irresponsible brain injured, ew. shame.
The Pope had said something about greed. That may have upset Rush. What could poor Rush confess to? a lack of humility? or compassion.


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: Rush's Post Christian Philosophy

  • Posted by rosie Southeast 7A/B (My Page) on
    Mon, Mar 31, 14 at 16:40

LOL. Rush is such a buffoon. I always enjoy hearing what he's saying now, thanks. Of course he's anti- blueberries. :)

He is also one of those who took a big, organized swing a couple years ago at redefining the world "empathy" as a silly contemptible liberal dysfunction. It failed then, and they had to quickly back off. This new inning suggests, though, that empathy and caring on the right (this isn't about influencing the left, after all) are still threatening vested interests and reactionary ideologies.

Post Christian? If I believed in such things, I'd strongly suspect he was swinging for the Prince of Darkness.


 o
RE: Rush's Post Christian Philosophy

Ironicallly, another conservative (who I'm too lazy to look up right now), complaiing that when people are "over educated" they tend to become liberal. How does that fit with the "smart" thing.

And I agree Rush is a buffoon.


 o
RE: Rush's Post Christian Philosophy

What might have really gotten to me was the smugness. I'm smarter than you -watch me influence opinion against injured football players. He then worked hard at that for quite a while. No compassion, no - hey, lets watch and see where the facts come out. No.
Brain injured players were characterized as greedy. They would never have signed, if they had proven their case. They had no ironclad proof, he said, and hat's why they settled
Yes, Bill O. was on the anti-empathy band wagon,a couple of years ago too.


 o
RE: Rush's Post Christian Philosophy

I don't believe that Rush believes half of what he spouts. He's in it for the money, and, as long as there are enough mouth-breathers that listen to him, he'll keep spouting putrid stuff.


 o
RE: Rush's Post Christian Philosophy

"I don't believe that Rush believes half of what he spouts. He's in it for the money, and, as long as there are enough mouth-breathers that listen to him, he'll keep spouting putrid stuff."

Exactly... and a buffoon if there ever was one.


 o
RE: Rush's Post Christian Philosophy

It is not news that Rush is conservative. What brought up this whole Post Christian Anti-Christian thing, was the brain injuries. It just coalesced for me.
- Gee, He thinks he's bigger than Jesus, much more than the offhand comment by the Beatles. Compassion is bad hey? Uh uh, Rush is in his power and his glory, and we are just going to stand in line for this. This is a Post Christian attitude. It's Shameless. And, It's a pattern.
So, is it Post Christian or Anti Christian... I don't know, maybe someone could tell me. It's not just him at fox either, gee.

This was my thought pattern as it came to me last fall, after listening to him for quite a while, repeatedly.


 o
RE: Rush's Post Christian Philosophy

"I don't believe that Rush believes half of what he spouts. He's in it for the money, and, as long as there are enough mouth-breathers that listen to him, he'll keep spouting putrid stuff."

That is precisely what I've observed for many years. It has always interested me that different conservative personalities are so varied in their sincerity and rationale. Some, like Rush, fully realize how wrong most of the Regressive agenda is, but are too greedy to let that stop them from repeating it to exploit their followers. Others, like Hannity, fully believe that up is down and black is white (it's like his brain is wired backwards). Then there are the Levin's...cowering under the table in sheer terror of any human advancement.

This post was edited by brandon7 on Tue, Apr 1, 14 at 20:01


 o
RE: Rush's Post Christian Philosophy

More on the anti Christian theme.
The concepts of Prudence, and of Stewardship he sees as negatives.
I'm sorry, then, what is being conserved?

Modern conservativism is being defined be these guys.

Bill, where are you?


 o
RE: Rush's Post Christian Philosophy

  • Posted by rosie Southeast 7A/B (My Page) on
    Wed, Apr 9, 14 at 9:53

"Modern conservativism is being defined be these guys." Yes, for SOME conservatives, and with it a new conservative twist on religion, the virtuous being identified by their (successful) pursuit of money.

We see it constantly in this group's glorification of wealth and the wealthy and a truly amazing insistence on the right, and very much even duty, to accumulate wealth.

Not that this was their idea. They were seduced as voters away from the tenets of faith they were brought up with in the same manner as the seduction and purchase of politicians. To benefit their manipulators.

Wealth itself of course, is emphasized as a measure and proof of worth under this spin on religion. Of course, of course.

Not that that's new. The Puritans knew only a special few among them would be chosen by God to live with him. However idealistically this notion might have started, they degraded to identifying who were God's Chosen by their affluent and influential paths through life, and, of course, who to look down on, and abuse if desired, as unworthy rejects.

Sound familiar? After all, Father Rush and other ministers of this new gospel preach it daily to the servants of their new Chosen.


 o
RE: Rush's Post Christian Philosophy

I am puzzled about what is being conserved in Rush's world.

Humility? nah, Personal frugality? nah, Showing respect for womanhood? nah, Doing good to those in need? Being kind?
Walking a mile in the other man's shoes? Respecting the natural world as a gift of God, not to take too much, or defile it? absolutely not.

Rosie mentions conspicuous consumption, then uses some very strong language:
" We see it constantly in this group's glorification of wealth and the wealthy and a truly amazing insistence on the right, and very much even duty, to accumulate wealth.
Not that this was their idea. They were seduced as voters away from the tenets of faith they were brought up with in the same manner as the seduction and purchase of politicians. To benefit their manipulators."
Wealth itself of course, is emphasized as a measure and proof of worth under this spin on religion. Of course, of course"


Is she wrong?
Are we hearing a lot of prating about traditional values, from people who don't practice what they preach? How so?

The puritans, have been an important element in the American story, and they were thankful. They also believed in prudence and stewardship. But their theology, which was often, very narrow and vehement, is no longer of much interest in New England now. It has slowly changed into one of the regular protestant mainline churches. - Uplift, coffee, and good works That makes me thankful.

BUT maybe Rush ought to try it. Might be too hard, as you are expected to review your actions and aspirations in silence, in front of the Almighty.


 o
RE: Rush's Post Christian Philosophy

  • Posted by rosie Southeast 7A/B (My Page) on
    Sun, Apr 13, 14 at 17:58

Good post, good questions, Florey.

As for Rush, he couldn't possibly believe what he tells those he so tellingly thinks of as his "Dittoheads." He's far too smart, and obviously very cynical. And he's clearly not worried at all about his soul. His last contract, in spite of ridiculously bush-league paying advertisers, was $45 million for 4 years of feeding that giant sucking sound.


 o
RE: Rush's Post Christian Philosophy

Well, it's time they were asked.


 o
RE: Rush's Post Christian Philosophy

So... it's better to be "smart" than to care? I don't grasp the concept.

I'd rather care than call myself overly intelligent. Somehow, I'm guessing those I care about would agree.


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum.

    If you are a member, please log in.

    If you aren't yet a member, join now!


Return to the Hot Topics Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here