Posted on 03/04/2009 6:39:43 AM PST by seatrout
“Before limbaugh the media at least tried to cover their biases”
Now that is a funny statement!
Let me detail my thoughts.
it's (the GOP is) going to have to be (primarily) blue collar folks (who are) unpolluted by universities and "erudition."
I did NOT mean:
it's (the GOP is) going to have to be (exclusively) blue collar folks, (and the GOP will need to be) unpolluted by universities and "erudition."
However, having extracted an advanced degree myself from a University in spite of the "intellectual pollution" surrounding those places, I can assure you that I -do- admire intelligent blue collar folks who did not choose that path. They are many, and they tend in my mind to be the most representative of the classical individualist American of the past, better gorunded in basic principles, and altogether more pleasant people to be around.
I see Universities like Hospitals. Central points of contact which perform some of the highest, most advanced functions of modern civilization...but also....a place which draws the best minds but also certain sick people, and perfectly healthy people can contract deadly infections in the normal course of business!!!!
Careful, I’ll rout your seat, and fillet your trout.
They preferred an anti-American racist to what they saw as white trash....in Palin, Joe the Plumber, and their blue collar audiences.
NPR’s right and leftwing “intellectual” bigots cannot be trusted.
I would trust the instincts, guts, moxie, and judgment of their “underlings” anyday.
Yes. Bryt was on to it and I tried to clarify in #44.
However, I'd say it's going to be increasingly blue collar and less and less white WFB and Golbergian! The college educated right is dwindling.
What you're really saying is that "commercial success" is the only success that matters. Well, that's one point of view, I suppose -- but it's clearly not the only one, nor is it even important when one is talking about political influence. Derbyshire's point is that, as an intellectual component of propagating a political point of view, NPR's offerings are much more effective than those of conservative talk radio.
The FACT is that the two NPR shows have audience numbers comparable to Limbaugh's -- which for radio is "success" in the most meaningful sense. I would also suggest to you that the NPR shows are simply better than Limbaugh's or Hannity's. They have better content, a much broader range of topics, discussion, and points of view, and much greater depth.
If you've ever sat through the excruciating pain of listening to Hannity attempt to debate an intelligent liberal, you'll understand the qualitative difference between conservative talk radio and the NPR offerings. I'll give sean credit for trying, though. Limbaugh never even has guests -- who, after all, would just get in the way of his own opinions.
Given that we're talking about political influence here, your focus on commercial success
If that's true, we're screwed.
Great article making a very cogent point. I know a number of people that live very conservative lives, go to church regularly, pay their bills, normally vote Republican, are solid members of the community and can’t stand the ranting of the Limbaughs and Hannitys of the world. I listened to many of the speeches at CPAC and I can tell you Limbaugh’s was one of the most light weight of the group. Limbaugh and many of his imitators sell a very limited, simplistic, low rent version of conservatism. One where you don’t have to think just believe and agree. Pick up your pitchfork and torch and storm the castle. I understand that He has his place in the entertainment end of the conservative spectrum much like a Bill Maher on the liberal side. However, it would be wonderful to actually have some enlightened conservative discussion on TV or radio once and awhile. A conversation amongst thoughtful people who would lay out the conservative message and how it can best address the problems facing the country in an in-depth intellectual way.
Personally I have a hard time taking a multi-millionare talking head who lives in a gated community and flies around in a private jet seriously when he rants about issues like unemployment, foreclosures and everyday pocketbook issues. Actually after listening to Limbaugh since 1990 I can tell you that in the last few years the quality of his show has devolved immensely as has the intelligence of his callers as a whole. Whether he understand it or not I have come to believe that he has become a great tool of the Left.
Flame away.
Well, nothing can live by radio-talk alone. Look at how well liberalism has done in talk radio. How many times has Air America tanked into the ground? It was so unstable liberal radio talk show host Al Franken decided to seek a more stable government job.
You have to first believe in conservative principles, and then, live them.
Second you have to stop listening to liberals and the media and liberal politicians when they say you must compromise your beliefs. They never do. They always get something that inches forward on of their goals.
Conservatives have to learn that to liberals, ‘compromise’ is: conservatives having to leave their principles and core beliefs and give up things to the liberals. The libs will give up token small things that were decoys in the first place, or things they will wind up going for the NEXT time.
The libs understand incrementalism and getting to the final goal in small steps. They are masters at it and the media gives them a backstop because it’sall about ongoing ‘progress’ and the stupid GOP/RINOs that go along with it are the ‘enlightened’ ones.
Limbaugh 14M listeners outlandishly successful, NPR 13M listeners an abject failure. Yeh that’s the ticket.
The comparison of audience size is misleading. Rush reaches 14 mil DAILY. Whereas NPR’s shows are WEEKLY.
Hannity never claims to be an intellectual.
Besides, the conservative message has to be in plain english. If you are going to win national elections, the average american MUST understand your positions and what you represent.
Buckley was a great conservative thinker and writer, but the average joe needed a dictionary to understand what he was saying. “Highbrow” conservative discourse and hyper-intellectual conservative theory goes right over the head of the people who spend most of their time working their asses off to pay the bills and take care of their kids.
Conservatives need to influence the working american. Not just the intellectual.
“Wow, now Rush is responsible for the 40 year MSM campaign against Republicans?”
In my experience the media has always leaned somewhat left, however it has moved dramatically left in the last 20 years. Perhaps it is only a coincidence, perhaps not.
Got ya.
This is one disastrous abortion of an opinion piece. NPR and BBC vs. Rush and Hannity? Guess it’s time to break out the crayons and coloring book to draw this fool a picture of why he’s so clueless...
You might be surprised by how many of Rush’s listener would agree with that statement. That is one of the problems with talk radio. It lowers the discussion to a simplistic, sloganeering level where intellectual discussion is looked on as elitist. The problem with that is that conservatism will never compete well with liberalism in the world of sound bites. Conservatism is about ideas and thinking unlike liberalism which lives on emotions. Rush sells emotion to the hard core conservative masses looking for a leader, but in doing so turns off the moderately conservative majority who could be swayed by the intelligent debate that is sorely lacking.
“Today’s GOP is pretty much rudderless — they’ve been mooching for the past 20+ years off the intellectual foundations laid in the ‘60s and ‘70s by the likes of Mr. Buckley and Mr. Reagan. “
Reagan showed the Repubs how to win and to defeat the left. Rather than learn from him, Bush 1 rejected those policies and the repubs have never looked back. They choose not to learn from the most successful repub presidency since Lincoln. Its gross stupidy or incompetence.
Not true. They're both daily shows -- played during morning and evening commutes. As a result they actually have far better audience access than Limbaugh does.
Hannity never claims to be an intellectual.
Agreed -- which is why we don't want him trying to build intellectual foundations for conservatism.
Besides, the conservative message has to be in plain english. If you are going to win national elections, the average american MUST understand your positions and what you represent.
Yeah -- it has to be more than noise and bluster and GOP cheerleading, too. Unfortunately, that's what conservative talk radio tends to do; it certainly doesn't provide the intellectual depth necessary to foster real understanding. Conservative talk radio depends primarily on an essentially emotional appeal.
Buckley was a great conservative thinker and writer, but the average joe needed a dictionary to understand what he was saying. “Highbrow” conservative discourse....
As Mr. Derbyshire conceded. His point is that NPR is quite ably serving the "Middlebrow" liberal audience; whereas conservative talk radio is essentially "lowbrow." We have no comparable "Middlebrow" offerings -- which is where the conservative message really needs to be spread, if we want to have broad intellectual support.
I think it's actually more serious than that. If it were simply a matter of rejecting policies, the GOP wouldn't be where it is today. Bush 1 rejected (and I think never really understood) the intellectual underpinnings on which those policies were based.
That's the only explanation for his puzzlingly issue-less non-candidacy in 1992; not to mention that quick and suicidal reversal, on his only unambiguous promise ("no new taxes!") -- with no compensating concessions on the part of the Democrats.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.