Rush’s position can most likely be explained by the fact that he has been slammed by Media Matters and others regarding the Bain Capital buyout of Clear Channel.
From 2009: http://mediamatters.org/columns/200905050007
I’m not defending Rush; I’m very irritated at him, actually, especially after today’s comments. But if you’ll read that article, it makes perfect sense. Newt and Perry are bringing up crony capitalism vs. ethical capitalism, which is virtually the same discussion a few years ago regarding Bain Capital/Clear Channel/Rush Limbaugh.
From the article:
“Would cutting back Limbaugh’s salary completely solve Clear Channel’s financial woes? No. But there is something bizarre about Clear Channel going out of its way to so dramatically overpay the host while the rest of the company suffers through the throes of a depression. It would be like the bankrupt Tribune Co. paying its Chicago Tribune editor millions annually while the newsroom got decimated by wave after wave of layoffs.”
interesting
i bet the left never disparages their stars when studios lay off the common man
that Media Matters article was pretty much all emo wasn’t it?
thanks for enlightening me