Rush Limbaugh confesses ignorance to y2kgreenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
A friend of mine was listening to Rush Limbaugh when a caller asked Rush's opinion of the severity of y2k. Rush had to admit almost total ignorance. After a few minutes a person claiming to be a banker tried to put the issue on the back burner by claiming that the banks have everything under control.
It occurred to me that there is a golden opportunity to help inform a large segment of radio listeners by having Ed or Jennifer voluntee to do a y2k spot with Rush, or, better yet, debate on the air any informed establishment type who would like to take the other side of the argument.
-- Roger Altman (RogAltman@AOL.com), April 21, 1998
I sent Rush an email about Y2K this past week, urging him learn more about the problem and use his position as the most listened to radio talk show host in America to increase the awareness of average Americans. I pray that he will seriously study this issue and discuss it with some knowledgeable callers soon. If anyone else would like to email him about Y2K, his email address is:
-- Bryan Huie (firstname.lastname@example.org), April 21, 1998.
I'm an avowed Libertarian (whome Rush considers to "have it almost right"). I also listen to Rush when I can.
My feeling is that he's not going to get on board with this unless they're sufficient audience support for it. He professes not to "lick his finger and stick it in the air", but it's simply not true. He has to get a feeling for where his audience is or he's out of business.
If you want an example, take his stands on the Ruby Ridge or Waco killings. I don't want to get into it in any depth, but he took the populist position (those people were whackos in the first place) rather than the true one (they may have been socially offensive, but they were murdered by their governments for being peacably socially offenseive).
Note that my take isn't alone on this -- Randy Weaver was dismissed of all charges and last I knew was taking his attackers to trial.
Now, Rush wasn't about to talk about it on his show in anything other than the populist way -- and he's certainly smart enough to know the truth of the matter. But he didn't -- and won't -- talk about it because it would associate him with what's perceived as a lunatic fringe.
Similarly, as long as Y2K remains a topic for the perceived lunatic fringe, Rush isn't going to get on board.
The day something major fails, we'll start to hear about it. Not before.
-- "John Smith" (email@example.com), April 22, 1998.
Rush Limbaugh doesn't have a clue about anything unless his merry group of researchers does the work for him. I seriously doubt if this loud mouth would get ahold of the Y2K issue. It's much to deep for him.
-- Gail (firstname.lastname@example.org), April 22, 1998.
The word MUST be spread. I emailed Rush as suggested - please do the same.
-- Tom Kelly (email@example.com), April 24, 1998.
Sometimes the best and most accurate answer one can give is "I DO NOT KNOW." Rush wisely did so. A lot of Y2K problems are being fixed without fanfare. Maybe a lot will be overlooked. Not enough good people will get credit for their effort to correct problems like Y2K. Rush should stay in the mainstream of U. S. or even world concerns. I would like to see more widespread concern for problems like Y2K. But, hey, Y2K is a drop in the bucket compared to other quality and safety problems in software. Let's all read Ed's "Death March" and Philip Crosby's "Quality is Free" to go after some of the real problems that cause these sometimes terrible effects. ISO 9000 and SEI can also help the software industry get on the right track.
-- Trent Duff (firstname.lastname@example.org), April 26, 1998.