After reading this, I have to say that I am not surprised by this.
I'm working on trying to iron out some thoughts about the differences between the organizational hierarchy in the two parties. I think conservatives are very much at a disadvantage by the fact that many of the people who are de facto leaders in the party are unelected (think Rush Limbaugh, Newt Gingrich, Sean Hannity and others). There are fundamental differences between the parties in their grassroots compositions: Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity's roles within the American conservative universe are far different role than that of anyone on the left (I'm thinking Arianna Huffington, Olbermann, Maddow, Jon Stewart, DailyKos folks etc. - Am I forgetting anyone who might make a better comparison?). Further, I think most elected conservatives are much more beholden to the likes of Limbaugh, Hannity et al because of their domination in the world of grassroots conservatism. This is highly unsustainable, as the polarization of the American polity grows, people like Limbaugh & Co. are driving significant numbers of voters away with their rhetorical slime and unsophisticated worldviews. This is nothing new of course, it's been said before. But in order to win again, the dominance of the right's pundits and entertainers needs to be choked off or else I think we are doomed.
And for the nonsense that these fools like to spread about how shutting down the likes of Limbaugh would be sacrificing true conservatism: give me a break. Not one of those drunken morons has read a page of Edmund Burke and so they should stop mouthing off about true this or true that.
For the record neither Sean Hannity nor Rush Limbaugh have a BA. Why are they on the airwaves doing political analysis of highly complex issues? Shouldn't we demand more from people who have such influence?
Adjust contrast of a pdf free
8 years ago
No comments:
Post a Comment