Posted: July 3, 2008 5:06:40 pm
... is apparently still a big, fat idiot.
In an interview with the New York Times, he pouts about not being accepted socially by famous journalists.
Said Limbaugh: “I assumed there was a fraternity of broadcasting guys in New York. I thought my success would launch me into a circle of accomplished people. Look, I admired these people. Peter Jennings, Tom Brokaw, Dan Rather — people watched these guys. I thought they would welcome me as one of them. I was wrong.
I realized that my professional achievements were discounted because of my conservatism and my constant criticism of those who I thought would welcome me.”
Seriously? Does Rush really consider himself a peer of journalists like Tom Brokaw?
There's no doubt Rush is successful. As a commentator, not a journalist. He's clearly an advocate for a cause, while broadcast anchors like Brokaw and Jennings are objective presenters of the news.
Thoughts?
Last edited July 3, 2008 5:08:02 pm
In an interview with the New York Times, he pouts about not being accepted socially by famous journalists.
Said Limbaugh: “I assumed there was a fraternity of broadcasting guys in New York. I thought my success would launch me into a circle of accomplished people. Look, I admired these people. Peter Jennings, Tom Brokaw, Dan Rather — people watched these guys. I thought they would welcome me as one of them. I was wrong.
I realized that my professional achievements were discounted because of my conservatism and my constant criticism of those who I thought would welcome me.”
Seriously? Does Rush really consider himself a peer of journalists like Tom Brokaw?
There's no doubt Rush is successful. As a commentator, not a journalist. He's clearly an advocate for a cause, while broadcast anchors like Brokaw and Jennings are objective presenters of the news.
Thoughts?
Last edited July 3, 2008 5:08:02 pm





