Monday, November 24, 2008

Will Rush Limbaugh remain conservatism's leader 2009 onwards? (part 2 of 2)

>> Continued from Part 1 of 2

Below are three arguments made in recent weeks as to why some feel Rush Limbaugh is no longer the preferred figurehead for the GOP and conservative values.

David Frum, who served as President Bush' speechwriter, makes an argument that what might have worked for Rush Limbaugh and conservatism in the past may not work (and proven so) for the future.

The Wonder Years: David Frum & Brink Lindsey
...on our side now we have a big problem, we have a party that is not serious about government, we have a party that is trying to squeeze more and more out of an ever declining sector of those non-poor, non-college white voters, and who's leaders refuse to see the need for change. Rush Limbaugh - who I think represents a lot of people obviously - he's on "the air everyday, he's saying "we did it in 1994, we gotta do it again!". I call it 'Say-it-louder' conservatism. If the public is not accepting your message, it's clearly because you haven't said it loudly enough so you have to say it again but louder more forcefully then they'll agree with you.

Mort Kondracke of FoxNews suggests that the GOP should marginalise Right Wing talkers headed by Rush if it is to remain viable.
First Steps to GOP Recovery
How can the Republican Party rebound? The first step would be to quit letting Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham set its agenda...

fire Rush Limbaugh and his ilk as the intellectual bosses of the GOP. They shouldn't be muzzled, as some liberals want to do by reviving the "fairness doctrine" in broadcasting, just ignored more frequently.

In recent years, Republicans have let right-wing talk show hosts whip the GOP base into frenzies -- over immigration, brain-damage victim Terry Schiavo and same-sex marriage -- that have branded the party as troglodyte.

Karen Harper of The Examiner offers a different take, That voices like Rush, the ideological and loud but also more entertaining will drown out the centrist republicans who maybe more palatable to the wider electorate
Is Rush Limbaugh hurting the GOP?
Given the choice between interviewing Sarah Palin or Newt Gingrich and some of the more centrist Republicans we can hardly remember the names of, the news and infotainment networks are going to give more time to the Palins and Gingriches of the party. They sell more advertising. They are entertaining.

... moderates must contend with Rush Limbaugh and others like him. Limbaugh, the Jerry Springer of radio, continues to encourage his listeners to support the right wing conservative wing of the Republican party as he trashes anyone who disagrees with him and that includes moderate centrist Republicans.

Ed Morrissey of HotAir offers a rebuttal and an appeal:
Rush Limbaugh did not lose the election
The GOP will go nowhere if it engages in scapegoating talk radio for the next couple of years...

Note to Kondracke and Harper: Rush doesn’t work for the Republican Party. The Republican Party doesn’t follow Rush’s policy agenda, and hasn’t since George Bush came to office. The notion that the main problem with the GOP is Rush Limbaugh is profoundly foolish, so much so that only Beltway insiders could possibly reach that conclusion.

1 comment:

John Lofton, Recovering Republican said...

Forget "conservatism," please. It has been Godless and thus irrelevant. As Stonewall Jackson's Chief of Staff R.L. Dabney said of such a humanistic belief more than 100 years ago:

"[Secular conservatism] is a party which never conserves anything. Its history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation. What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is today .one of the accepted principles of conservatism; it is now conservative only in affecting to resist the next innovation, which will tomorrow be forced upon its timidity and will be succeeded by some third revolution; to be denounced and then adopted in its turn. American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward towards perdition. It remains behind it, but never retards it, and always advances near its leader. This pretended salt bath utterly lost its savor: wherewith shall it be salted? Its impotency is not hard, indeed, to explain. It .is worthless because it is the conservatism of expediency only, and not of sturdy principle. It intends to risk nothing serious for the sake of the truth."

Our country is collapsing because we have turned our back on God (Psalm 9:17) and refused to kiss His Son (Psalm 2).

John Lofton, Editor,

Recovering Republican