Agreed, too.  It's a comedy show.

Agreed, too.  It's a comedy show.

************

Then why isn't it funny?

You mean Howard Stern and Roger Stern AREN'T related?

Heh heh... ducks...

I'm not so sure.  I suspect Rush Limbaugh's fans would be less willing to pay for the privilege of listening to him than Howard Stern's fans are.  Sterns' fans are fanatics, so of course they're happy to pay for their daily dose of their enlightened master.  Rush's fans are Republicans, which means they're cheapskates (I kid, I kid) as well as more conservative and hence less likely to suddenly be willing to pay for something that's always been free before. 

"Rush Limbaugh would have brought more."

****

So, what's he waiting for?  That comment reminds me of the "bumper" they used to play when Howard came back from commercial.  Deep voiced announcer: "You're listening to the man who could cure cancer...uh, if he felt like it."

So, what's he waiting for?  That comment reminds me of the "bumper" they used to play when Howard came back from commercial.  Deep voiced announcer: "You're listening to the man who could cure cancer...uh, if he felt like it."

Uh...perhaps it's that $400 million dollar contract he just signed?

Plus, why would he go to an outlet with a such a reduced audience? Stern was getting dropped by a lot of terrestial radio stations bc they couldn't sell advertising bc of he controversial nature of the program. So the Sirius deal was a good thing for him. However, Stern brought along a much lower audience number with him than he was predicting. And his presence certainly didn't do anything to help Sirius turn a profit. This XM merger is a last ditch effort by both sides to make this satellite radio thing work. Frankly, even though I think Rush would bring more listeners than Stern (and I could be wrong about that), it would still be a fraction of his regular listeners.

(And I've been an XM subscriber for years, and I'm a huge FAN of satellite radio. But if you look at the numbers, they ain't pretty...)

I'm not so sure.  I suspect Rush Limbaugh's fans would be less willing to pay for the privilege of listening to him than Howard Stern's fans are.  Sterns' fans are fanatics, so of course they're happy to pay for their daily dose of their enlightened master.  Rush's fans are Republicans, which means they're cheapskates (I kid, I kid) as well as more conservative and hence less likely to suddenly be willing to pay for something that's always been free before. 

You're not counting the listeners who hate Limbaugh and tune in just to get fired up.