It can be argued that limbaugh has been indirectly responsible for the rise in liberalism. Before limbaugh the media at least tried to cover their biases. Since the media HATE limbaugh, anything he says is immediately REJECTED by the MSM. What would have been blockbuster RAT scandals in the MSM are now ignored because Limbaugh talks about them first and at length. If they report the same stories and share the same opinion as Limbaugh they give him credibility. Also since limbaugh is all over the RAT scandals, the media dont feel the need to report them since the info is out there. Unfortunately the MSM still has a great deal of credibility with American viewers. Unless the MSM airheads are upset about an issue, the avg viewer doesnt think its a big deal. Another issue is that before limbaugh MSM “reporters” didnt realize that there was big money in becoming celebrity commentators. They used to keep their opinions mostly to themselves, but afterwards were all over the air spouting off on everything and cashing in. The boundaries between opinion and journalism blurred even further, now there is no difference. In the end, I think Rush drove the media way further left than they used to be and despite what Rush says, the media is important in driving American opinion.
Onion dip topped with maraschino cherries; go ahead and barf.
John Derbyshire is one of the reasons National Review will never again achieve the prominence it had under Bill Buckley.
Derb is, quite simply, a snob. I have no use for snobs who think they are better than me with their nasal Mr. Howell-esqe “Yes, I remember BBC 4, Lovey” vapidity.
Rush Limbaugh IS the leader of the Conservative movement, Derb. Get on board, or get your snooty butt outta the way.
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.
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...
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.
Of course it can't, who ever said that? Derbyshire is so myopic and you really needed a barf alert.
Baloney. The MSM "news", as well as network TV entertainment shows are simply stiff with lowbrow liberalism. It's extreme pervasiveness may be why JD doesn't notice it.
FreeRepublic and the various blogs fill in the gaps.
This guy is a way off base loon ... Rush is not a dictaor nor is any of the others. The conversation they have with listeners is how issues get worked on and play out.
Talk radio is the best thing since sliced bread.
Typical inside the beltway vs outside the beltway fight.
Derb is only vaguely conservative. He’s conservative compared to, say, the current president. Or Olympia Snowe.
Conservatism had had successes in the eighties and fell into a slump in the GHW Bush years. Talk radio was also in a rut, so there was plenty of room for growth for both conservative politics and radio.
At some point in the new millenium that potential was exhausted. Conservatism's back in a slump, and talk radio's pretty well saturated the market and begun to produce diminishing or negative returns.
You can also look at it in McLuhan's terms. The Internet is a "cooler" medium, not as intense as talk radio. The web's dominance affects the style of public discourse, so we may see a turn to less intense media for a while.
Of course if the politics start getting heated up, talk radio will be there, if the Democrats don't change the rules.
He's more Reaganite than they are, and less given to cultural gloom-and-doom.
That's all well and good. But the celebratory or congratulatory vein in his speeches can be a little too much some times.
Some people like a bright and sunny pallette. Others are into more somber shades. Most of us fall somewhere in between.