and just to be clear, my post wasn't meant to insult you or other Rush fans. My overall point was that people who hear this Batman thing from Rush, then go nuts over it and post comments, threaten the director, etc are just plain ignorant. This goes for anybody on the left as well.
I think he's smoking something other than cigars these days.
Don't you get it maaaaan? and Batman is the Dark Knight......DARK......like black.....like Obama black.
Last edited by GGGGG-Men; 07-18-2012 at 09:50 PM.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/batman-v...#ixzz212PMabqzWhen director Christopher Nolan announced two years ago that the character Bane would be Batman's nemesis in The Dark Knight Rises, more than a few eyebrows were raised. While the villain, who first appeared in 1993, has played a prominent role in the caped crusader's comic book canon, he is not nearly as well known as longer-standing bad guys such as the Joker, the Penguin or the Riddler.
Now the real reason for the hulking antagonist's deployment in Nolan's superhero blockbuster has been revealed - at least, in the mind of the rightwing US commentator Rush Limbaugh: it's a thinly veiled attack on the Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney.
According to Limbaugh, who was speaking on his syndicated radio show, Bane is designed to get Americans thinking about Bain Capital, the investment fund Romney founded in 1984.
All of our comment prove one thing. Rush Limbaugh is smarter about what he does than we are. The point of this comment is not the Bane/bain thing. Nor is it the 'Liberal Hollywood Elite'. Nor is it the crazyness of Limbaugh and his fans. The point of this whole comment is to change the story.
Two days ago, the story was Mitt Romney. Did he control Bain? Did he ship jobs over seas? When will he release his tax returns? Did he pay any taxes one of the years he won't release? What's he got to hide? All those things are bad for Romney and don't make him look presidential.
But now the story is all about Rush. His fans don't care if people call him crazy. They seem to like him better when he is being attacked. He loses nothing. And gets to change the topic for a news cycle. So Romney gets a break, Rush takes a hit from guys he doesn't care about and his fans rush to his defense. Everyone wins. But mainly the spotlight goes off Romney, which was the whole point of the exercise.
Well played Rush.
rush (and every talking head, for that matter) is no different than sports pundits (like skip bayless and screamin' a. smifffff) who intentionally make outrageous claims and remarks (that i am almost certain they do not believe, or at least do not wholeheartedly believe) in order to garner attention, remain relevant in their field, and above all else, MAKE MONEY.
to take what rush says at face value is as patently absurd as taking what skip bayless routinely says at face value. what's worse is getting all riled up over it. we are literally allowing an entertainment persona (akin to any character on any fictional tv show) to push us to vitriol over **** he most likely does not actually believe. that's not only genius on his part, it's incredibly sad and pathetic on our part (in an unintentionally comedic, "look how gullible we are as a society" type of way).
Rush is also a master of playing the victim of a controversy and sometimes he's the one who started the controversy. The Sandra Fluke controversy was a great example. He totally ignited that firestorm but if you listened to his show it was just a witch hunt by the left, mainstream media, PC police, ect.