That's what the Rockefeller Republicans have been fighting against for the past 40 years!
Posted on 03/04/2009 6:39:43 AM PST by seatrout
” 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”
Think we could get some gov’t funding for such an endeavour?
Ooohhhh, I think you need to be very careful about such statements. You're confusing the liberal "operatives" with their political targets.
Considering the repeated thrashings liberals have administered to conservatives over the past several decades, it is obviously dangerous to dismiss them as you seem to be doing.
Liberal politics is very much about ideas and thinking. In the realm of goals, strategy, and tactics, "liberal politics" as a movement evidently has much better ideas and far clearer thinking than we conservatives do. The proof is in how they always seem to control the agenda: we're always in response mode.
You're looking at the targets -- and there, too, "liberal politics" generally has the upper hand. Liberal tactics certainly do appeal -- generally quite cynically -- to the emotions of the voting public; but the emotional appeal generally works because there's some real problem in play. We conservatives tend to spout theory at such times -- which is not only unhelpful to those who are actually hurting, but also extremely unhelpful to our own political viability.
He may espouse conservative principles but he abandoned Christianity and is a “Mysterian” which is described as a position with a ‘strong agnostic’ religious viewpoint.
No way I am betting the farm on him being right. Man’s smarts only get him just so far. I can see someone like him looking down on Rush and other religious conservatives because we’re stupid enough to believe in God. A little bit of jealousy the low-brow God-fearing conservatives seem to get more attention.
And I would also say that if there is a void in conservative talk radio and that people who want a more NPR-type conservative talk show format, I’d would say “go for it.” If it’s national and it’s not on the same hours Rush is on, I’d check it out.
But to me it seems more of a subtle sour-grapes I am not the conservative successor to Buckley, why won’t conservatives want me more than Rush, kind of thing. It sounds a little liberal-whiny to me.
Now I will point out in my own personal opinion, I do not place Rush in the same categories as Hannity and ORiley or even McLaughlin. Never heard Rush sound like Hannity geting into insult tossing with a liberal (I remember one with Alec Baldwin for ex.). That I don’t need to hear. Same with McLaughlin Group where everyone just goes nuts at each other. But Rush doesn’t do that kind fo stuff and that’s why I can listen to him the last 19 years (started in 1990).
Bushes problem was he waffled when the Rats attacked and never communicated with the American people connecting like he did after 9/11 Reagan laid down a blueprint of how to deal with these worthless RATs all W had to do was follow it.
How true!
Why not? Seriously ... why not?
Of course, Reagan, Buckley, et al. were able to do so mostly without gov't funding.
And you know ... given the difficulties faced by many MSM outlets these days, there's no fundamental reason why conservatives couldn't make a play for a commercial MSM niche.
The problem is that it would require patience and a willingess to look long-term (lack of which is our biggest flaw). And we'd have to present solid, truth-based news coverage; and morally sound but non-preachy entertainment -- which again is counter to the kind of propaganda we conservatives seem currently to be after.
Derbyshire ought to listen to Rush before critiquing. It was the lowbrow Rush & Hannity and other intellectual lightweights who opposed GWB’s obscene spending, and warned that Obama would be even worse.
It was Derbyshire’s intellectual heavyweights who supported both the spending and Obama.
? Are you missing my point?
I am college educated (only one in my family) from blue collar folks, so I do appreciate *those people*.. ;) In fact, I don’t think either of my husband’s parents had college degrees either. I consider both sets of parents to be very smart people, and all good conservatives. I think both sorts of folks can be conservatives, altho I DO admit I worry about what is coming out of the universities these days because of the serious brain washing that goes on. Honestly, it never occurred to me that the Republican party didn’t welcome both sorts of people.
And thank you for clarifying. :)
On an even playing field, NPR would fail. Period.
And by the way, I can't stand Rush or Hannity or any of those goofballs. I find them annoying. The only conservative radio host I can listen to is Praeger.
That's what the Rockefeller Republicans have been fighting against for the past 40 years!
No, I'm not skirting the issue at all. You, however, seem to be wishing away a current fact: that NPR is funded, is going to remain funded for at least the next four years, and that it fields two very successful and effective drive-time programs.
As a point of comparison in terms of quality, consider the topics covered on Morning Edition. Can you imagine conservative talk radio, in its current form, being able to match the breadth and depth? Me 'neither: the format simply doesn't support it.
I believe, by the way, that most local public radio stations "subscribe" to the various NPR offerings -- the money for it coming from periodic fund drives. Very often NPR is programmed on college-based radio stations, so the funding profile is considerably muddier than it seems.
And by the way, I can't stand Rush or Hannity or any of those goofballs. I find them annoying.
Agreed!
I invite you to make the application for federal funding for conservative radio. Explain to the powers that be you are seeking to raise the level of discourse by providing thoughtful, intellectual programming ala Buckley.See how far you get. Best of luck.
Gotta couple billion handy, we’ll start a network featuring conservative newsreaders and carve out a niche. Of course we’ll have to get the licenses necessary to broadcast on public airwaves. Good luck with that,too.
Oh, and if you need an example of propaganda, check out NBC,CBS,MSNBC,ABC,CNN,PBS, The NY Times, Washington Post, LA Times, Seattle-Post Intelligencer, Daily News, Newsday,and Miami Herald. Then come and tell me about all the conservative propaganda.
Maybe because I can fit into both camps (heck I am fluent in Redneck—they are my people!) it’s harder for me to see.
Do you think the fact that generation of revenue on commercial figures into the format of talk radio. Deep discussion constantly interrupted by necessary commercial breaks might make things a little difficult.No?
Yes. Which merely strengthens Derbyshire's point....
Bush is responding to Ron Pauls charge now.
Rush did pull away from GWB after 2006 election loss.
All you're doing is falling for the same trap that conservatives always seem to fall into: going for the Big Win, and nothing less will do.
There's no need to reinvent the wheel -- why not start a little lower, perhaps? One might more profitably take a page from the Democrat playbook and infiltrate their system.
A clever tactician (i.e., not me) might well parlay the current DNC vapors with respect to Mr. Limbaugh into an opportunity to offer "responsible" conservative viewpoints on Morning Edition or All Things Considered. A really clever fellow would be able to convince NPR that it would make them a better show with broader appeal.
Mr. Derbyshire very correctly notes that we conservatives lack intellectual respectability -- primarily because rantings of Messrs. Limbaugh, Hannity, et al. are emotional rather than intellectual.
You can fulminate against the liberal media all you want -- but it gets us nowhere to do so, unless there is some way to actually compete with them.
One effect of talk radio that I worry about is that I think that they impede the development of political voices on our side. They have so dominated the discourse that what could be great spokesmen defer to them. Eric Cantor at his best is seamless in his arguments and delivery. He seems to have difficulty getting a toehold as a leader because his message is dominated by talk radio. Ditto for Sarah Palin and a half dozen really compelling potential leaders. Talkers might discuss the messages of these folks but that is a far cry from having them deliver it themselves.
Of course it can't, who ever said that? Derbyshire is so myopic and you really needed a barf alert.
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.