Rush Limbaugh and Liberalism’s Fatal Flaw

The American Thinker ^ | May 15, 2006 | Vasko Kohlmayer

[Vision]

The author could have summed it up briefly by saying liberals have to hide their message.

[SeeRushToldU_So]

Ditto's

[C210N]

As we move to election 2006 and 2008, all the more reason for libs to beef up those forums where they excel.

This morning, on the AM radio news, I heard a report conjecturing that Bush's low poll numbers would be the catalyst to bring down consumer confidence, and thus enter recession. Talk about the cart before the horse!

[OldFriend]

It's why it's so easy to listen to Rush even when not agreeing with his premise.

He engages in actual conversation. He listens to the caller's points. He has a sense of humor. He doesn't slur or slime the caller.

At the end of Rush's show I don't feel the need for decontamination, or a decompression chamber.

[basil]

Yes---but I enjoyed each turn of the screw. He really nailed them!

[Blueflag]

Liberalism survives when propaganda is the communications model. Read the oft-quoted words of Joeseph Goebbels --

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.

"The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”


“Whoever can conquer the street will one day conquer the state, for every form of power politics and any dictatorship-run state has its roots in the street.”


“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.” Bush lied. People Died. Domestic Spying. Bush Lied. People Died. Domestic Spying. Repeat after me … Lather rinse repeat.

[bcsco]

"The author could have summed it up briefly by saying liberals have to hide their message."

Do liberals really have a message? Oh, sure, they want to raise taxes, are for gun control, abortion, gay marriage, against war, intolerance, and on - and on, but is that really a message or issues that simply stem from living emotionally with minimal benefit from reason?

I would suppose if there is a message, it is that capitalism is criminal and socialism ideal. But they really can't say that, can they? So, they emote.

[theBuckwheat]

In a move that confirms the author's thesis, Rush Limbaugh did what no liberal talk show host would ever do, he turned his show over to an economist and college professor, who had never hosted a nationwide talk show in his life. Indeed, he was a broadcaster's nightmare, totally unproven, halting and unsure of his own ability to operate in the format.

To do such as thing could destroy the show's ratings in a single day. Yet, what Dr. Walter Williams has to say is so compellingly interesting to people who love liberty that Limbaugh took the chance.

That single decision says more about Limbaugh and the talk radio format he invented than any other explanation.

It is also telling that when a person like Williams gets the opportunity to speak, even though at first he was a total novice at doing so behind a microphone (even the famous Golden EIB Microphone), the important thing was not how slick he was, but the ideas behind his words. Liberty, Freedom, Respect for the rights of others, Respect for their property, understanding the Cost of government, wanting government to be as small as possible. Ideas that the Left calls HATE SPEECH.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

In the type of political talk show invented by Rush Limbaugh, the host openly takes an ideological stance (conservative or liberal) and then applies it to the issues of the day during his hours on the air. What this in effect amounts to is in-depth analysis of current affairs from a specific candid political point of view.

The author could have summed it up briefly by saying liberals have to hide their message.

. . . or that liberalism only seems to make sense when challenges to it are carefully circumscribed. As in a "Great Debate" in which the conservative is pitted against an open liberal and one or more "moderators" whose sole purpose is to prevent the conservative from raising and following up tough questions.

[starfish923]

The liberal radio talk show fails because the masses can read the SAME Dem liberal message every day in the newsrags, newsmagrags and Internet newsrages. The can see it and hear it on the boobtube.
Radio is just too redundant.
Rush is different because there is only FOX on the boobtube and no conversative magazine/newspaper to read/hear. Neo-con ragmags aren't even worth mentioning.

[joesbucks]

Sean is showing his "talking points skill" and is growing thin on his listeners. And can you tell me what major markets that Michael Reagan and Ollie North are now carried in? I don't think Ollie even has a show any more and while I personally like Reagan when he was on in my market, his clearance was due to him being syndicated by Premiere at the time and carried by a Clear Channel station. Clear Channel owns Premiere. They tend to clear their own shows. Since he is no longer syndicated by Premiere, his affliates have dropped in number and strength of affiliate. HE is no longer in my market.

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

awww poor little lib radio just can find a niche. watch out for the fairness doctrine on the horizon if the DIMS get back their power. GO RUSH!

[Vision]

In my view, the current media is hysterical. They have no idea how transparent their bias is.

Turning on/listening to any "news" is like watching a brainless, corrupt, depressed, bipolar drama queen who suffers from panic attacks. We should hold a Continental Congress and force them to move to France.

[robertpaulsen]

Liberals deal in short soundbites, the shorter the better (eg., Halliburton), and repeated constantly. Also, in short phrases (tax cuts for the rich, Bush lied, culture of corruption, etc.).

This makes television news, newspapers and magazines the media of choice for getting the message out. Any medium that goes into any detail (eg., radio and books) are dominated by conservatives.

[13Sisters76]

Here is what the liberals fail to realize- we LISTEN because the host agrees with US, not the other way around. And when Rush, et al, cease to agree with us, WE will stop listening.

THIS is why they fail. They will never get wise to this, because they will always think that THEY are smarter, know better, and are more "in tune" with what is best for all.

They are a bunch of smarmy, self-involved, morally superior elitists.

[Vision]

lol

[13Sisters76]

...and they are NOT-NOT- "liberals". They are LEFTISTS. Once we get the title right (and stop defining them the way they do)we can make that, that much more clear. Call them what they ARE.

[Enterprise]

Rushbo bump!

[robertpaulsen]

There's also G. Gordon Liddy (is he still on?), Laura Ingraham, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, and Dennis Prager. And I've got to be leaving out another half-dozen.

The point is that liberals aren't even close.