A highbrow professorial intellectual would probably not make it in talk radio, even though they may be very well-rounded in the subjects of politics, culture, history, and conservative principles.
I'd be willing to bet that if you had the chance to spend some quality time with Rush, away from the mics and the media, you'd likely find him to be possessed of a much deeper well of knowledge than you give him credit for.
He runs a fast-paced radio talk show, which is a terrible forum to deeply expound on his thoughts. Sure, he'll take a few minutes here and there to elaborate on some issue, or train of thought, but there's nothing like the long-form, written word to really expand on a subject.
He's got commercial breaks and callers - not to mention that he's got to take time to comment on the most pertinent breaking news of the day. The clock hangs over him every minute, like some harsh taskmaster. Yet despite those limitations, he manages to articulate conservative thoughts and considerations well enough to have the largest audience in the business.
I'll say one thing about Rush, and that is, he can articulate things better on the fly than anyone I've ever heard. He understands (and believes in) conservative principles to such depth that he doesn't need to write speeches, or prepare statements to fully engage an audience while he develops a fairly complex weave of ideas.
Rush has written at least one book that I'm aware of, which I've also read. I found it so engaging, that I read it twice. Maybe you'd like it. Or maybe you'd think that it doesn't measure up to your literary icons.
That's ok. I think there's room enough for Rush and all the rest. There are a lot of good voices for conservatism out there, and they're not all eminent scholars.
Rush has one book, his first, that is a compilation of radio transcripts of his shows. His second book was ghosted by John Fund. It takes a lot of time and effort to write a book. Medved, Prager, and Buchanan write their books. And Liddy. Rush and Hannity use ghosts. It’s a common practice among celebrities.
“I’ll say one thing about Rush, and that is, he can articulate things better on the fly than anyone I’ve ever heard. He understands (and believes in) conservative principles to such depth that he doesn’t need to write speeches, or prepare statements to fully engage an audience while he develops a fairly complex weave of ideas.”
Rush is a very engaging speaker. It’s a key to his success. I don’t agree with you concerning the depth of his thinking. His instincts are conservative but he often uses flawed arguments, and his knowledge of his subject matter is often superficial. This isn’t always apparent in an extended monologue format such as what he uses for his radio show. He operates much as a professor does, where statements go unchallenged. But you would see the flaws much more clearly if he was in a debate format.
“I’d be willing to bet that if you had the chance to spend some quality time with Rush, away from the mics and the media, you’d likely find him to be possessed of a much deeper well of knowledge than you give him credit for.”
I certainly give him credit for having a deep well of knowledge concerning his passions, which include the NFL and golf. Not so much for some of the topics of his radio program where he tends to wing it.