Rush Limbaugh: ‘The Media Did Not Make Donald Trump and They Can’t Destroy Him’

[mystery-ak]

by Pam Key19 Feb 2017394



On this weekend’s broadcast of “Fox News Sunday,” conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh said argued since the media did not make President Donald Trump, they could not “destroy him.”

Limbaugh said, “They have a formula, they have a blueprint for destroying Republican political officials they don’t like. It’s not going to work on Trump. He doesn’t fit that mold. They’re trying to every day. It’s kind of comical to watch.”

more
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/02/19/rush-limbaugh-the-media-did-not-make-donald-trump-and-they-cant-destroy-him/

[ABX]

Some forms of media did make him, along with pop culture. He is a marketing fabrication made to specifically target a specific audience set.
For every Don Lemon who attacked him, there is a Sean Hannity who helped write the mythos about him- both are necessary in the creation of this beast. Most of Trump's marketing plan is the 'us versus them' storyline, he feeds off it and needs it.

Trump needs the CNNs, MSNBCs, NYTimes, and others as a 'foil' or an enemy to personalize and target as much as they need him for the same reason.

It is all part of the story that is being created.

Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.

In conflict tactics there are certain rules that the organizer should always
regard as universalities. One is that the opposition must be singled out as
the target and "frozen."  ......

....With this focus comes a polarization. As we have indicated before, all
issues must be polarized if action is to follow. The classic statement on
polarization comes from Christ: "He that is not with me is against me" (Luke 1 1:23). He allowed no
middle ground to the moneychangers in the Temple. One acts decisively
only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils
on the other. A leader may struggle toward a decision and weigh the
merits and demerits of a situation which is 52 per cent positive and 48 per
cent negative, but once the decision is reached he must assume that his
cause is 100 per cent positive and the opposition 100 per cent negative.
He can't toss forever in limbo, and avoid decision. He can't weigh
arguments or reflect endlessly — he must decide and act. .....

https://archive.org/stream/RulesForRadicals/RulesForRadicals_djvu.txt

[Meldrew]

For every Don Lemon who didn't make him, there is a Sean Hannity who did help create the monster.

A Sean Hannity AND a Rush Limbaugh. 

Rush has often made the same point - "the media didn't make me so the media can't break me" - about himself.  It seemed apparent to me early in the campaign that Rush was living vicariously through Trump to some extent.  This just confirms that.

It also helps explain why Rush would so easily abandon his stated principles to support a "republican of convenience" who just happens to be a golfing buddy.

Very disappointing.

[ABX]

A Sean Hannity AND a Rush Limbaugh. 

Rush has often made the same point - "the media didn't make me so the media can't break me" - about himself.  It seemed apparent to me early in the campaign that Rush was living vicariously through Trump to some extent.  This just confirms that.

It also helps explain why Rush would so easily abandon his stated principles to support a "republican of convenience" who just happens to be a golfing buddy.

Very disappointing.

For the longest time, I was hoping Rush was just trying to get people to think and dropping hints when he talked about cronyism and 'the donor class' and then immediately segwaying to a story about Trump. Later though, it started to become obvious he wasn't getting people to think, he was trying to cover for Trump and it was either willful or ignorance that he completely overlooked Trump being the exact same problem he was complaining about it he segment just ten minutes before.  Even today, he still spouts the falsehood that Trump is 'not from the establishment class and has nothing to do with politics' even though he is the very definition of a 'donor class crony' that he complained bout.

[goatprairie]

Limbaugh's comments about the media making past Pubbie president's is a lot of bull. There have absolutely ZERO!!!! Pubbie presidents in the last century made by the media. The lib media has oppposed every Pubbie prez candidate for as long as I can remember over fifty years worth. Heck, mild and inoffensive Mitt Romney was depicted by the media as the reactionary devil of the century.
Another bogus straw man from Rush.
To Rush, apparently everybody who opposes His Orangeness is the establishment. There can be no valid criticism of Trump...everything he does is wonderful. Phooey on that.
It seems many people can't maintain a critical view of both sides.....the media is criminal in their disregard for presenting all the news, and Trump is no Savior Of The People.  I just hope Trump doesn't turn out to be as bad as I think he will be.  Just being better than Hillary is not good enough.

[Meldrew]

I just hope Trump doesn't turn out to be as bad as I think he will be. 

And in the process take down what little semblence of a Conservative movement so many worked so long to build.  Sad.

[dfwgator]

And in the process take down what little semblence of a Conservative movement so many worked so long to build.  Sad.

Oh yes, because the Conservative "movement" was doing so well before. /s

[ABX]

Oh yes, because the Conservative "movement" was doing so well before. /s

Actually yes, in many ways there was somewhat of a conservative/libertarian resurgence with an increase in people who identified as such, maybe not in title or party affiliation but in personal beliefs on issues.  When it comes to local politics, Conservative candidates were winning left and right taking a majority of the State legislators and even increasing margins in the House. Even among the millennial generation, most identified to some degree or other as pro life (just one example).

We can see in the past couple of years though, a big flip in what should be the main Conservative principles of limited centralized government tempered under the constraints of the Constitution and maximum personal liberty to it shifting to be one that demands and expects, just as much as the left, a massive, centralized government that is there to fix your problems for you. They want the hammer of the government to fix their issues just as much as the left, the only difference is the specific issue.

Whether it be the left or the right now, both are heading in the direction of bigger, more massive government that controls more and more of our lives and heeds less and less to the Constitution.

I don't believe Trump is the cause of this, it is a split on the Right that has been building for a while, he is both a symptom of it and a magnification of it. Whether by outright plan or coincidence, he made the rift on the right explode with many, if not most, falling into the authoritarian wing and proclaiming the liberty wing the enemy.

[truth_seeker]

Oh yes, because the Conservative "movement" was doing so well before. /s

Which "conservative movement?" Led by who? The movement led by John McCain or the movement led by Mitt Romney? Ron Paul? Yes, even Ted Cruz?

Hint: None reached the summit to plant the flag.

There is not a "movement." There are individual candidates. All of those candidates run in states or districts, except President/VP.

More than a "movement," those candidates need money, media, reputation, smarts, good staff, good campaign skills, etc. And the ability to speak about issues that resonate with their voters.

Trump "constructed" his own movement. I attended a rally, in once conservative Orange County CA.

I saw with my own eyes, that what the media and his opponents were saying about Trump was not true.

I didn't need a media advisor to interpret events for me. I saw the only violence was by radical leftists. I saw supporters that were younger and more diverse, than was claimed by his detractors.

I don't need no stinking media advisors.

 

[geronl]

The media got Trump nominated, no question about that at all.

[ABX]

Which "conservative movement?" Led by who? The movement led by John McCain or the movement led by Mitt Romney? Ron Paul? Yes, even Ted Cruz?

Hint: None reached the summit to plant the flag.

There is not a "movement." There are individual candidates. All of those candidates run in states or districts, except President/VP.

More than a "movement," those candidates need money, media, reputation, smarts, good staff, good campaign skills, etc. And the ability to speak about issues that resonate with their voters.

Trump "constructed" his own movement. I attended a rally, in once conservative Orange County CA.

I saw with my own eyes, that what the media and his opponents were saying about Trump was not true.

I didn't need a media advisor to interpret events for me. I saw the only violence was by radical leftists. I saw supporters that were younger and more diverse, than was claimed by his detractors.

I don't need no stinking media advisors.

You are confusing Conservatism as a philosophy with the Republican party and specific candidates.

[truth_seeker]

You are confusing Conservatism as a philosophy with the Republican party and specific candidates.

Okay, then in order for you to prove me wrong, and yourself right:

Name the "conservatives" that are not also republicans? (answer, virtually none)

Name the Republicans that don't claim to be "conservatives." (answer, very very few)

You are confusing forum chatter with reality out in the real world.

I asked two or three times yesterday for the definition of conservative. Got no answer, except a claim of "core principles," with no specifics.

There are people active on this forum, who stated they were conservatives, and they would vote for Hillary.

People ask me how I vote, and I say I always vote Republican, since I want conservative outcomes. I know that 99 times out of 100, the Republican will yield more conservative outcomes.

Trump is proof of my method. I don't need to parse his every utterance. I merely need to look at results. Thus far I am being proved correct.

 

[corbe]

Actually yes, in many ways there was somewhat of a conservative/libertarian resurgence with an increase in people who identified as such, maybe not in title or party affiliation but in personal beliefs on issues.  When it comes to local politics, Conservative candidates were winning left and right taking a majority of the State legislators and even increasing margins in the House. Even among the millennial generation, most identified to some degree or other as pro life (just one example).

We can see in the past couple of years though, a big flip in what should be the main Conservative principles of limited centralized government tempered under the constraints of the Constitution and maximum personal liberty to it shifting to be one that demands and expects, just as much as the left, a massive, centralized government that is there to fix your problems for you. They want the hammer of the government to fix their issues just as much as the left, the only difference is the specific issue.

Whether it be the left or the right now, both are heading in the direction of bigger, more massive government that controls more and more of our lives and heeds less and less to the Constitution.

I don't believe Trump is the cause of this, it is a split on the Right that has been building for a while, he is both a symptom of it and a magnification of it. Whether by outright plan or coincidence, he made the rift on the right explode with many, if not most, falling into the authoritarian wing and proclaiming the liberty wing the enemy.

   Great points, all @AbaraXas

   Enough tumpsters traded in the small incremental gains for a dull orange sword in which to slice and dice immediately everything they proclaimed to be the enemy, they were never true Conservatives to begin with, so be it.
   Time to move on, 'you fight with the Army you have'...Rumsfeld

[Emjay]

Some forms of media did make him, along with pop culture. He is a marketing fabrication made to specifically target a specific audience set.
For every Don Lemon who attacked him, there is a Sean Hannity who helped write the mythos about him- both are necessary in the creation of this beast. Most of Trump's marketing plan is the 'us versus them' storyline, he feeds off it and needs it.

Trump needs the CNNs, MSNBCs, NYTimes, and others as a 'foil' or an enemy to personalize and target as much as they need him for the same reason.

It is all part of the story that is being created.

Not really.  The Media did help elect him by mistakenly thinking that covering all his statements and speeches, they would reveal his weaknesses.

Unfortunately for them, his followers saw them as strengths.  People that originally knew him only as a real estate mogul and TV personality, liked his political ideas.

So now, after realizing that ... oops.. they've created a monster...or at least a monster to them, they're trying to rectify the situation.

They are pounding on him constantly, often without identifying or proving sources.

The media does have power and should be kept in check, as in, don't print unsourced stories as news and save your opinions for columns and editorials.

[Emjay]

A Sean Hannity AND a Rush Limbaugh. 

Rush has often made the same point - "the media didn't make me so the media can't break me" - about himself.  It seemed apparent to me early in the campaign that Rush was living vicariously through Trump to some extent.  This just confirms that.

It also helps explain why Rush would so easily abandon his stated principles to support a "republican of convenience" who just happens to be a golfing buddy.

Very disappointing.

Your avatar looks as cranky as you sound.  TOS despised Rush all through the campaign because Rush did not fawn on Trump and, in fact, made it pretty obvious that he preferred Ted Cruz.

Trump is now the Republican president and Rush is supporting him 100% ...not because they were golfing buddies (not sure that's true anyway) but because he has spent the first month trying to keep his campaign promises and nominating an excellent Supreme Court nominee and very good cabinet members.

That's kinda my stance also.  I could go on pointing out various Trump faults that I hated or I could support him as long as he does nothing to hurt the country and seems to be helping it.

[Meldrew]

TOS despised Rush all through the campaign because Rush did not fawn on Trump and, in fact, made it pretty obvious that he preferred Ted Cruz.

I wouldn't know. I haven't been back on there since I was put in time-out.  Not suprising though that it would be that way over there.  Anything less that total adulation for the Donald seemed unacceptable to them.

And to clarify my previous post, I do mean "conservative movement" as a philosophy and not as representatived by any particular individual.

Glad you like the avater - Mr. Meldrew is a hoot!

[EC]

Your avatar looks as cranky as you sound.

Doing anything tonight? (It's not what it sounds like, honest!!)

If not, fire up youtube and search for "One Foot in the Grave." You can thank me (and Meldrew) tomorrow while you are still giggling.

[Chosen Daughter]

Some forms of media did make him, along with pop culture. He is a marketing fabrication made to specifically target a specific audience set.
For every Don Lemon who attacked him, there is a Sean Hannity who helped write the mythos about him- both are necessary in the creation of this beast. Most of Trump's marketing plan is the 'us versus them' storyline, he feeds off it and needs it.

Trump needs the CNNs, MSNBCs, NYTimes, and others as a 'foil' or an enemy to personalize and target as much as they need him for the same reason.

It is all part of the story that is being created.

Just what I was going to say.  The media did make him.  Fox news dropped every other candidate right away.  And they have done that for as long as I watched them, which is a very long time.  However I dropped them now like a hot rock.

[Cripplecreek]

Just what I was going to say.  The media did make him.  Fox news dropped every other candidate right away.  And they have done that for as long as I watched them, which is a very long time.  However I dropped them now like a hot rock.

The media did make Trump. If it weren't for the tabloids and crap TV like Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous there's no way a teenager like myself would have known anything about Donald Trump back in the 1980s. After all, there are far more billionaires we don't know than billionaires we do know because most avoid the limelight.

As far as FOX is concerned you're absolutely right. Trump couldn't have gotten better service from a hooker behind a dumpster in a back alley. I abandoned FOX the day Trump made the claim about Rafael Cruz being involved in the JFK assassination and those idiots sat there with concerned looks on their faces nodding their heads like morons. I've never looked back.

[geronl]

Your avatar looks as cranky as you sound.  TOS despised Rush all through the campaign because Rush did not fawn on Trump and, in fact, made it pretty obvious that he preferred Ted Cruz.

Rush was in the trunk for Trump for a lot of the campaign. He refused to criticize anything the orange fool said and did. He talked up Trump for 96% of his shows before mentioning how conservative Cruz is for a minute or so.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

The media did make Trump. If it weren't for the tabloids and crap TV like Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous there's no way a teenager like myself would have known anything about Donald Trump back in the 1980s. After all, there are far more billionaires we don't know than billionaires we do know because most avoid the limelight.

As far as FOX is concerned you're absolutely right. Trump couldn't have gotten better service from a hooker behind a dumpster in a back alley. I abandoned FOX the day Trump made the claim about Rafael Cruz being involved in the JFK assassination and those idiots sat there with concerned looks on their faces nodding their heads like morons. I've never looked back.

I grew up in the Tri state area and first I ever heard of Trump was all the "Current Affair" shows about him cheating on what's her face with Marla Maples.


The media did make Trump.

[kevindavis007]

Limbaugh's comments about the media making past Pubbie president's is a lot of bull. There have absolutely ZERO!!!! Pubbie presidents in the last century made by the media. The lib media has oppposed every Pubbie prez candidate for as long as I can remember over fifty years worth. Heck, mild and inoffenive Mitt Romney was depicted by the media as the reactionary devil of the century.
Another bogus straw man from Rush.
To Rush, apparently everybody who opposes His Orangeness is the establishment. There can be no valid criticism of Trump...everything he does is wonderful. Phooey on that.
It seems many people can't maintain a critical view of both sides.....the media is criminal in their disregard for presenting all the news, and Trump is no Savior Of The People.  I just hope Trump doesn't turn out to be as bad as I think he will be.  Just being better than Hillary is not good enough.

I remember the media going after Reagan when I was a kid.

[geronl]

if the press did not show his picture or video for a week and ignored him, Trump would be outraged. He needs attention and adulation

[Cripplecreek]

I grew up in the Tri state area and first I ever heard of Trump was all the "Current Affair" shows about him cheating on what's her face with Marla Maples.


The media did make Trump.

Back in the 80s when we didn't have cable TV out in the sticks. That Current Affairs type garbage was all that was on in the afternoon when I got home from school.

[Cripplecreek]

I remember the media going after Reagan when I was a kid.

And Reagan handled them with typical Reagan class.