Sunday, March 29, 2009
Take the Limbaugh Challenge.
Way back when, I was a Leftie. I kept hearing about this Limbaugh fellow. Being in Winnipeg, Canada at the time, it was hard to listen to him but he did have a T.V. Show. I was later able to find his radio replayed late at night from an American radio station. I took the challenge and I have never looked back.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I have subscribed to the National Post and read the National Review Online for years and while they are amusing, I still don't find myself the least bit convinced by their editorialists.
Somehow I don't think it would be any different with Rush.
I will have to draw you out.
What do you find amusing? The writers at NRO do have a good time bringing the silliness of Liberals and Leftists.
Rush is great at it. Once you understand and appreciate where he is coming from, you can never be a Leftist again. What I thought was true of the Right, is in fact more true of the Left. It is the Left that hates and discriminates. The Left's solutions to life do more damage than good.
I ask why? you are convinced.
Well, let me put it to you this way. Remember being in university and reading the campus rag, how it would be filled with page after page of copy from third-year political studies students who were certain that there wasn't a problem which didn't come about as a result of class conflict, and how only Marxism (or Maoism, depending on your bent) could save the day? And how Mulroney, Reagan and Thatcher were a bunch of lackeys for capitalist dogs? Remember rolling your eyes, tossing the paper in the garbage, and moving on?
That's more or less the same vibe I get from the Post and NRO. Ideology taken to ludicrous extremes, and ad hominem attacks that discredit the message itself. If they learned to tone it and to focus on the issues, they might be more successful in convincing people who don't think the state is their mortal enemy out to get them.
The Post is well written, so it is a good read. But do I take it seriously? Not really. I can give Rush a try, but I doubt it'll be different - from what I've seen and heard of Rush over the years (which is admittedly little), I wouldn't really even expect to be entertained.
I see you haven't waded to deeply into the right wing thought. It is a big tent and the debates within it are something to behold. I will try to deal with some of your points best I can.
The most ridiculous ad hominem attacks I have seen in recent years were the ones I saw directed against Bush and Sarah Palin. I don't remember see any of them in NRO. How did you miss on the Bush and Palin hatred?
The state is a bad thing. The less of it the better. I don't see why NRO or Reason or any right-wing has to change their tone on this issue. But if you believe in the efficacy of the state, I at least have an idea of where you stand.
I guess what you are is one of these squishy middle of the roaders who is trying to have it both ways. You probably would have voted for Obama because you liked his vibe. So what if his speeches were vapid. And his actions have proven to belie his words.
People who proudly boast they are middle of the road or moderate are in the position of being defined by the extremes. They don't believe in anything in particular.
Too bad your history is wrong when you talk about reading third year political science student articles. The fact was their professors and many of the intelligensta before them were thoroughly Marxist. It took the likes of Reagan and Thatcher to discredit them permanently. Reagan was thought of an ideologue taken to the extremes even by many in his party and yet he was able to make the likes of you look with disdain on Marxists.
So as far as I am concerned, your analogy between left-wing political science students and the writers of the NRO you posit is ridiculous.
You don't take well-written articles seriously? Snob!!! If you don't mind me go ad hominem.
Do I think the state is a mortal enemy out to get me? Not particularly. If that is what you think the right believes, you have not been reading very carefully. The state makes the problems it tries to solve worst. It does this often by unintended consequences. It does this because many believe that it is somehow immune to the laws of physics and economics.
When I first listened to Rush, I had gone in with these conceptions that he was racist and homophobic and every other imaginable evil thing that right wingers were supposed to be. None of this was true. I found him entertaining. I was especially impressed by his generous and correct assessment of his political opponents: they were well-meaning people with bad ideas. And he was entertaining. You have to be a haughty squishy angry centrist to think otherwise. And does anyone on the Left say similarly genuine things about Rush?
Sorry, my friend but the ideology taken to ludicrous extremes, and ad hominem attacks aren't coming from the likes of Rush Limbaugh and NRO.
Post a Comment