I'm not going to address Rush's comments on wanting Obama to fail. He only said it to get attention. As far as I'm concerned, it's best not to feed the troll. Instead, I want to discuss something that I've finally puzzled out from the tangled web of Rush's in-jokes and associations. Here's a recent statement which he posted on his "Daily Quotes" page:

"My question to the journalists who are acting as total butt boys for this administration is: You all have your own degree of wealth... Is the idea of the remaking of America into a so-called socialist paradise so important to you that you will sit around and happily -- without any concern -- watch your wealth dissipate?"

"Total butt boys" is just the touch of class that we have come to expect from Mr. Limbaugh over the years. But that's not what I want to address, either. Note how Rush again touches on the point that reporters have a lot of money. But he's canny about it, isn't he? Instead of saying "you're rich bastards," he says "you all have your own degree of wealth." Well, don't we all? A small degree is a degree. But by raising the issue with the loaded term "wealth," he's hitting what I will call Conversational Button #1: Rich Journalists. I picture any given Rush diatribe as being a symphony, played on a big panel of buttons. The "rich journalists" button outrages Rush's constituency, most of whom are distrustful of rich people. Rush's implication is that the journalists' bank accounts have grown fat off their efforts to mislead the American public. (I must stop at this juncture to pick up the pieces of my head, which just exploded all over my desk. By the way, the average journalist's salary is $38-50k per year. Rush Limbaugh makes $28 million dollars a year. Just throwing that out there.) I haven't yet sussed out where all of their money is coming from, according to the Word of Rush Limbaugh. I suspect at this juncture that the audience is meant to assume that the journalists' coffers are filled by a shadowy cabal of liberal foes of American democracy. Or possibly by the International Jewish Banking Conspiracy. Something evil, at any rate. I think it's important for Rush to point out to his audience that when journalists say things, they are earning money to say those things. And that the same goes for Rush Limbaugh, as well. Rush seems to imply that journalists earn more money for saying some things rather than others. And… the same goes for Rush Limbaugh as well. If we (Rush's audience, eager to sup from his plate of Truth, which drips from his lips like so much royal jelly) are meant to question the motivations of journalists, then what are we to make of Rush's own motivations? Are we to assume that his motives are pure? That he alone dons the Robe of Journalistic Purity? That he would never EVER say something just to get attention, increase his ratings, and boost traffic to his website (and thence to the click-through ads)? Interesting, indeed.