It's an attempted compliment:
RUSH: We welcome to the program this afternoon Senator Rand Paul from Kentucky. Senator, you got some sleep last night, I trust?
PAUL: Well, I did, but, you know, I was thinking of you when I was in the middle of this 13-hours. I got about five hours into it and I was like, "Well, Rush does four hours of this every day. Certainly I can do four more hours."
As anyone at all familiar with the Rush Limbaugh show would know, Rush does
3 hours. (If you subtract the commercials, it's less than 2 hours.) So right at the outset, Rush knows Paul doesn't pay much attention to the show.
RUSH: (chuckling) That's awfully nice of you to say, but I doubt that I was in your thoughts last night, although I appreciate the comment.
This seems like a corresponding self-deprecating pleasantry, but listening to the podcast, I translated "I doubt that I was in your thoughts" to:
I know you don't care about me.
Posts
57 comments:
Ron Paul or Rand Paul?
That's the second time I've seen that mistake today, the other being on a WSJ piece. Ron really needed a name for his son that was either varied more from Ron or WAS Ron.
Rand.
It's been a long time since I've been able to listen to any radio during the day, but doesn't Rush do an additional hour for premium EIB subscribers only? Wouldn't that technically make the show four hours long?
Yes, Rush pops up at the microphone at precisely noon every day, and runs out to his waiting limo at 3:00.
Radio hosts get breaks and Senators filibustering get to yield, temporarily, for a question which is the same thing.
When you're not on the right side of history the slightest glitch is fatal!
I'd be disappointed in any US senator who actually knew or cared a lot about daytime talk radio.
LOL.
AA purposely starts with a gaffe to post about a gaffe. (Actually does not fit definition of gaffe)
"Ron Paul or Rand Paul?"
Oops.
Corrected.
I doubt either Rand Paul or Rush Limbaugh think of the conversation in those terms. That's the kind of second guessing and parsing listeners and pundits do.
I'm familiar with the show, but haven't listened in ages and I couldn't tell you if it's 2,3, or 4 hours.
Nontroversy
Question how much Rand believes what Ron believes. On these military questions, it matters a lot!
I'm not saying the mistake is a controversy. I'm saying Rand Paul began with a gaffe that let Limbaugh know he was engaging in dishonest flattery and didn't follow the show. Paul tipped his hand.
Don't try to bullshit a bullshitter, is the rule more honored in the breach.
I've long been interested in what Althouse has to say about the conflicts generated by the artistic impulse to achieve access and overcome reticence.
This is such a simple and obvious subject that people have to find ridiculous things to talk about. Rand Paul is taking the side of the people against the government. This is a seminal event. His popularity will increase so much that others will follow, but not without resistance from the usual suspects.
Dishonest flattery?
LOL.
What percentage of flattery is not dishonest?
Womens are soooo intuitive. I would've never thought of that. Ever. Big ol' dumb guy I guess. But ya' know Professor, I don't think Rush did either.
Tageting American citizens on American soil without due process. No big deal. No slippery slope. Thank goodness Obama is opening the door and not that crazy dictator GWB.
btw- McCain should retire now.
Ann Althouse said...
Question how much Rand believes what Ron believes. On these military questions, it matters a lot!
I honestly don't know. He seems to have avoided talking much about it at any rate. But just because he hasn't talked much regarding his father isolationist viewpoints doesn't mean he doesn't share them.
Not following the show is not synonymous with listening everyday and knowing every detail about it. It does not seem impossible that Rand is familiar that Rush exists and broadcasts everyday, and used that information to hype himself up to continue. It wasn't about knowing every detail, it was about getting over a hump
Of course, he's a politician so it could be he's just flattering Rush.
But Rand not knowing every detail is not the same as not caring, not following the show, or not admiring what Rush does.
I'm saying Rand Paul began with a gaffe that let Limbaugh know he was engaging in dishonest flattery and didn't follow the show. Paul tipped his hand.
Good lord, that's some pretty weak tea.
Why is Rand any more likely to believe what his father believes than any other father and son?
Does Obama believe what his father believed? He wrote a book about him!
"But ya' know Professor, I don't think Rush did either."
Oh, I do. He noticed. I could hear it in his voice. He knew it was false flattery. I could hear the effort at flattery in Paul's voice. He came prepared with that line, ready to feed Rush's ego, and he did the opposite (without realizing it). That was an interesting encounter between the 2 men.
I'm just saying I noticed. Pointing it out.
Nice little civil war brewing in the Republican party. What an absolute shame!
With I thought Rush did a 4th hour on Internet cams. At least, he used to.
With all the content that you could have talked about, you chose something irrelevant. Really. This is how you and other low information voters ended up voting in the current joke-in-chief. Yes, low information, because you filter information and end up focusing on the silly stuff.
"With" = Wait.. Bleah.
I don't think this "gaffe" was an intentional insult.
I highly doubt that Rand listens to Rush much at all. I'm sure he's heard pieces of the show a handful of times over the years (whether through clips circulated in the media or just listening to it for a little while on a longish car trip). He may have people on staff follow it. Him being on the show was purely about exposure, raising his profile amongst voters and such.
Ya know, she's the blogger here, and so she gets to do WTF she wants.
I love the way Serious Readers think they should try to steer the debate. Blog posts are cheap and there's time for silliness and seriousness both. And in between.
Anyone remember how wild Rush was 20 years ago? Good times.
I get my news from the internet because I can't afford to spend 3 hours on someone else's timeline, waiting for them to spit out what they are trying to say.
So I also couldn't tell you how long the Rush show was and I wouldn't expect a Senator to lose 3 hours out of their day every day either. If Rush says something particularly noteworthy, I read about it from you or someone else.
That doesn't mean I don't care about the guy.
Well, I can't argue with you hearing in their voices.
I'm surprised that Althouse missed the clever gambit here.
When Paul runs for prez and is predictably denounced as a Rushbot, his defenders can simply point to this as evidence that he doesn't really pay much attention to Limbaugh.
AA is usually much more aware of the long game.
And what about the million Slow Joe gaffes? Remember he as as smart as a ashtray.
Or hundreds of Obama gaffes (at least Rand knows how mny states there are in the union.)
So I also couldn't tell you how long the Rush show was and I wouldn't expect a Senator to lose 3 hours out of their day every day either.
Why is everyone assuming that Paul has to listen to Rush's show to know that the average radio show (of nearly any format) is four hours long?
I too thought Rush did a 4th Hour for internet listeners, but then I rarely listen. He deserves his profit center timeouts, but I'm not required to listen.
@Professor - Men don't take flattery the same way. It's all bullshit anyways and we deflect it that way in case we misunderstand (which is all the time). That said, media types and male prima donna's probably behave differently. Just guessin'.
"With all the content that you could have talked about, you chose something irrelevant. Really. This is how you and other low information voters ended up voting in the current joke-in-chief. Yes, low information, because you filter information and end up focusing on the silly stuff."
This. But the 19th amendment guaranteed this would happen.
Bye bye America. You had a good run experimenting with liberty, but the hucksters, crooks, tyrants and dictators would like their planet back, thank you very much.
You only translated it that way because you're a woman, Althouse, and women say those kinds of catty things to each other and weigh them on their delicate mental scales. What exactly did she mean by that? Is she saying I'm fat...? Subtext, implicit meaning, attitude and tone, oh my. Typical girl stuff.
Men, on the other hand, as a rule say things women often find astonishingly hostile quite carelessly and unconsciously to each other all the time, more or less as a means of making conversation (you're sure to get a response), or just because they're not paying a lot of attention to what slips out of their mouth. And it doesn't mean a thing. I think both Limbaugh and Paul would be astonished and amused at your reading so much into a snippet of throwaway dialogue neither may actually remember. (Although, being men, they would strain after the fact to spin some meaning to every word -- men hate being discovered to have simply been sloppy or brainless. After every pratfall: "No really, I meant to do that! Here's why..."
"Rand Paul goes on Rush Limbaugh's show and begins with a gaffe."
Well, at least he didn't take a sip of water or something else really really important and career shattering .
Anyone who does listen to Rush knows that because of his deafness he has more than usual difficulty handling phone interviews. His implants don't work all that well all of the time and without lips to read he sometimes needs help. Often when he responds it is in a kind of non committal way while he waits for his staff to send him a transcript. Whether Paul knew how long the program was and misspoke or just didn't know, I don't think would upset Rush either way. I don't think Rush expects our senators to spend hours glued to his show when they have to attend to the people's business. I think you are looking for tempests in teapots that don't even exist.
Rand is so much better when he speaks from the heart, like he did two days ago when he made his bones on the Senate floor.
When he strays from that, his inexperience shows.
His opening line to Rush was obviously prepared in advance, but as an ice-breaker, it failed.
He was wrong about the show's duration - whether he knew that or not, and he didn't think of Rush during his filibuster either. Rush elegantly takes care of that one.
That's two glaring errors, and a third would be that he believed he could get away with it.
Carol said...
Anyone remember how wild Rush was 20 years ago? Good times.
Me.
He was 100 times better then.
"But ya' know Professor, I don't think Rush did either."
Oh, I do. He noticed. I could hear it in his voice. He knew it was false flattery. I could hear the effort at flattery in Paul's voice. He came prepared with that line, ready to feed Rush's ego, and he did the opposite (without realizing it). That was an interesting encounter between the 2 men.
Conceit.
Nice little civil war brewing in the Republican party. What an absolute shame!
What you may see as a civil war is more likely a much needed pre-cleansing of the GOP leadership. McCain and Graham are the old school vestiges that are in dire need of being put out to pasture by a brighter and energetic GOP.
I wouldn't be to glib, its guys like Paul and Cruz that scare the piss out of leftwing nutjobs like Reid and Obama because they actually resonate with the electorate.
"Oh, I do. He noticed. I could hear it in his voice. He knew it was false flattery"
Gynocentrism
Men couldn't care less. In-person flattery is just uncomfortable for us, fake or not. Women live for it.
Well count me firmly among the folks who like Rush Limbaugh, but who don't listen to him much (I have a day job) and I really, truly, don't know how long his show runs. You could have told me three or four hours and I'd never have known.
I think it is a clever line by Rand Paul, and I see absolutely no reason for Rush to have taken any offense whatsoever.
I'd be shocked if any member of Congress had the day-time time to listen to an entire show with Limbaugh. I know I don't; and I don't have to raise $1.5 million in campaign donations every year, vote on pending legislation, fulfill committee assignments and meet constituents.
Nice little civil war brewing in the Republican party. What an absolute shame!
I think it's great and necessary to figure shit out rather than assemble a strange mix of semi-related groups known only for their skin color, sexual orientation, and gender and hope that one doesn't become too powerful.
I like Rush too but I rarely listen to him.
Perhaps it was flattery, but also perhaps he did consider that people on talk radio go on for hours talking on the radio.
The biggest bullshit flattery I've ever heard is "I feel your pain." Every time I listened to that guy, I felt like I had to take a shower.
Meanwhile, if Rand Paul doesn't listen to Rush, who is to say what he thinks of Rush's views?
AA commented: He noticed. I could hear it in his voice. He knew it was false flattery. I could hear the effort at flattery in Paul's voice. He came prepared with that line, ready to feed Rush's ego, and he did the opposite (without realizing it). That was an interesting encounter between the 2 men.
I'm just saying I noticed. Pointing it out.
I was listening at the time too. Rush announced ahead of time he'd be talking to Rand Paul, and I knew that was rare. Rush seldom has guests on the radio with him.
But my take on it was that it was a bit of hyperbole by Paul, and Rush was concerned that some listeners might take that at face value as an error, rather than an over-the-top compliment. He was mildly embarrassed for Paul, not by Paul.
I don't listen to Rush much anymore, but I did hear this exchange. What I noticed was that Rush didn't correct him.
The reason I don't listen much anymore is because that by the time his show comes on, I have already read parts of The Washington Post, Drudge Report, Instapundit, Althouse, and Dave Barry. I also listen to an hour or so of Mike Gallagher. Very Seldom does Rush bring up anything I don't already know.
What percentage of flattery is not dishonest?
A LOT of flattery is HONEST. For example, if you walk up to a woman with a nice rack and say, "Nice tits!" you're probably being sincere. Rude, but sincere!
At least he didn't go to Green Bay and talk about all the great football played at Lambert Field.
And Rush is not really there for the Congress critters. He's there for the people who care which critters go to DC and what they do there.
Carol said:
Anyone remember how wild Rush was 20 years ago? Good times.
Tank said:
Me.
He was 100 times better then.
- - - - - - - - - -
OH BS! Both of you!
Neither one of you has any *tapes* from that era, only slowly-fading memories that are doing you NO FAVORS!
PS. I wore out a Dokorer Reel-Reel taping Rush during the day and listening in the evening, sometimes while making a cassette tape copy ... some from 1991 still exist.
For instance, the interview Rush did with his 100 yr-old grandfather ....
Question how much Rand believes what Ron believes. On these military questions, it matters a lot!
Exatctly!
It's the difference between maybe voting him or dismissing him as a loon fringer who would fit better as a far left candidate.
That's gaffe? Who cares.
Seriously, if that's enough to offend Rush at this point, I have a pea I'd like to put under his mattress.
Post a Comment