United States Professor David Azerrad Verbally Owns American Conservatism

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
No, it's unreasonable for me to have to trawl through literal decades worth of recordings. This is the sort of "educate yourself" type nonsense I'd expect from a close-minded social justice warrior on Twitter.

I told @LordsFire over and over that being popular isn't going to make Limbaugh better. If Limbaugh is popular and is spreading bad ideas, then he's not going to be a boon for the conservative movement, now is he? And I have no damn way of knowing of this without looking through decades of work. At least give me some white paper or a book or something. Don't just say "listen to his stuff!"


I never said he was bad for being a popularizer. Rather, I said (or rather, implied) that was a popularizer of bad ideas. I said he wasn't improving the conservative movement because we don't need more popularizers. What we need is new ideas. And he doesn't have any.

You're making an assertion. That assertion is 'His ideas are bad.'

Substantiate this assertion.
 

Free-Stater 101

Freedom Means Freedom!!!
Nuke Mod
Moderator
Staff Member
No, it's unreasonable for me to have to trawl through literal decades worth of recordings. This is the sort of "educate yourself" type nonsense I'd expect from a close-minded social justice warrior on Twitter.
Then don't make statement's you can't back up. Have you ever heard the rules of cross examining before? Never demand of someone to answer a question you yourself don't know the answer to.

You are acting like you have won the argument when all you have proven is that your argument is equally as fallible if not more so.
I never said he was bad for being a popularizer. Rather, I said (or rather, implied) that was a popularizer of bad ideas. I said he wasn't improving the conservative movement because we don't need more popularizers. What we need is new ideas. And he doesn't have any.
Well neither do you or anybody else, for that matter, well at least ideas that are remotely feasible or worth looking at seriously.
 

The Name of Love

Far Right Nutjob
You're making an assertion. That assertion is 'His ideas are bad.'

Substantiate this assertion.

I read his Wikipedia article and a few of his transcripts. That didn't entice me, but Wikipedia is biased against conservatives like him. So I asked you, one of his fans, for some of his good ideas. You basically told me to go watch all 20+ years of his show. Is that not a sign that the emperor has no clothes?

Then don't make statement's you can't back up. Have you ever heard the rules of cross examining before? Never demand of someone to answer a question you yourself don't know the answer to.

You are acting like you have won the argument when all you have proven is that your argument is equally as fallible if not more so.

Shouldn't LordsFire know the answer to "what interesting ideas or questions does Rush Limbaugh talk about on his show that makes him a worthy figure on the right?" If so, why is it unreasonable to ask for his position? All he would have to do is give me a few examples of things he talks about on his show often, and I'd be forced to eat my words and admit I was wrong about Rush Limbaugh.

Well neither do you or anybody else, for that matter, well at least ideas that are remotely feasible or worth looking at seriously.
Well, of course I don't have ideas that are feasible. That's why I look for people who do and learn from them. But what can I learn from Rush Limbaugh?
 
D

Deleted member 88

Guest
I’d say there’s an issue of lag here as well.

“zombie Reaganism” is despite not being suited to the present era still treated hagiographically by the GOP in a lot of ways. As is Reagan himself.

A general anti communist sentiment, paean to American values of both traditional morality and unbridled capitalism, etc...

This sort of Republican ideological notion doesn’t die easily, as it’s been around a long time and has served as a unifying glue.

Even now, a lot of conservatives will get noticeably agitated or angry when the problems in modern capitalism are brought up-both on forums like Freerepublic, and Sean hannity criticizing Tucker Carlson, as conservatives have been accustomed to a knee jerk defense of the market and business as inherently good in themselves.

This is probably one of the most difficult aspects to deal with, as it’s tied up with the good years of the post war boom and the age of the conservative population-“criticize business and Wall Street-your a communist!”

Rush has the issue of his audience being stuck in this bubble of eighties conservatism. A bubble due to age and habit they will not leave.
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
I read his Wikipedia article and a few of his transcripts. That didn't entice me, but Wikipedia is biased against conservatives like him. So I asked you, one of his fans, for some of his good ideas. You basically told me to go watch all 20+ years of his show. Is that not a sign that the emperor has no clothes?
Or it's a sign that I don't want to take the time to try to explain his philosphy to you, when I don't believe you're arguing in good faith. Your attempting to impute meaning to my words that is not there very solidly supports this decision.
Shouldn't LordsFire know the answer to "what interesting ideas or questions does Rush Limbaugh talk about on his show that makes him a worthy figure on the right?" If so, why is it unreasonable to ask for his position? All he would have to do is give me a few examples of things he talks about on his show often, and I'd be forced to eat my words and admit I was wrong about Rush Limbaugh.
Interesting ideas or questions Trump was one of the first to popularize to the American public:
1. The media are not in fact reporters, but political activists and members of the Democrat party.
2. The media will openly and actively lie.
3. 'Republicans In Name Only' are not to be trusted. They're more interested in being part of the social elite than actually voting for principles in the legislature. IIRC, he's the one who coined 'RINO.'

A lot easier to give a few quick points than an essay on his entire philosophy.

Well, of course I don't have ideas that are feasible. That's why I look for people who do and learn from them. But what can I learn from Rush Limbaugh?

You could learn to understand how other people other think, and become an effective communicator. Maybe learn some humility.
 

The Name of Love

Far Right Nutjob
Or it's a sign that I don't want to take the time to try to explain his philosphy to you, when I don't believe you're arguing in good faith. Your attempting to impute meaning to my words that is not there very solidly supports this decision.

Interesting ideas or questions Trump was one of the first to popularize to the American public:
1. The media are not in fact reporters, but political activists and members of the Democrat party.
2. The media will openly and actively lie.
3. 'Republicans In Name Only' are not to be trusted. They're more interested in being part of the social elite than actually voting for principles in the legislature. IIRC, he's the one who coined 'RINO.'

A lot easier to give a few quick points than an essay on his entire philosophy.

You could learn to understand how other people other think, and become an effective communicator. Maybe learn some humility.
First, projection much? This entire attitude of "educate yourself" is the sort of arrogance I get enough of on the Left. I don't need it from a right-winger. And your comment on how I should "learn to understand how other people think" is a bit hypocritical coming from the guy who couldn't understand what I was saying earlier. Perhaps we should both take your advice.

Second, these are not interesting observations. These are observations that anyone who doesn't outsource their thinking to liberal journalists has picked up on. I suppose the part where the RINOs are "more interested in being part of the social elite than actually voting for principles in the legislature" is beginning to hit on something, but it comes across as sort of common populist rhetoric. No analysis of why the social elite are liberal, no analysis of where conservatives fit into the power dynamic, etc.
 

The Name of Love

Far Right Nutjob
But thats literally your responsibility, though, if you brought it up.
I think entire argument went something like this:

Me: I don't see any evidence that Rush Limbaugh has any interesting ideas. Therefore, he's not an asset to conservatism.
LF: Yes he is! He brings in 20 million people.
Me: A popularizer is only as good as his ideas. If his ideas are bad, then he's a bad influence on the movement. What are his ideas?
LF: Educate yourself, bigot. I don't want to explain anything to you.
Me: I suppose if his supporters can't say anything of substance, then he doesn't have anything to say.
LF: :mad:

I suppose the problem is that he's not addressing my argument, claiming that it's a mere assertion and then dismissing it.
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
Me: A popularizer is only as good as his ideas. If his ideas are bad, then he's a bad influence on the movement. What are his ideas?
Bull. You made explicit assertions:
Instead, he's a popularizer for Zombie Reaganism and mindless platitudes. Popularizers are only as good as the ideas they promote, and he promotes bad, useless ideas!
Then you tried to shift the burden of proof to me. Whether you're lying now because you forget so quickly what you claimed just last page, or because you're deliberately being deceitful, I don't much care at this point, you're clearly not arguing in good faith.

First, projection much? This entire attitude of "educate yourself" is the sort of arrogance I get enough of on the Left. I don't need it from a right-winger. And your comment on how I should "learn to understand how other people think" is a bit hypocritical coming from the guy who couldn't understand what I was saying earlier. Perhaps we should both take your advice.

Second, these are not interesting observations. These are observations that anyone who doesn't outsource their thinking to liberal journalists has picked up on.

You say these are not interesting observations. You say 'anyoe who doesn't outsource their thinking to liberal journalists has picked up on.'

This is exactly the kind of low-energy lack of thinking I expected, and why I didn't want to waste my time.

You say this now. You say this after Limbaugh, then more talk radio, then Fox News, then Breitbart, have broken the media monopoly. You ignore the fact that I said he was the one who popularized understanding of these things to the American Public.

You show your ignorance of what the media environment was like before Limbaugh made his entrance. You are standing on the shoulders of work that people like him accomplished, after what he has accomplished has become wide-spread knowledge, and sneering at him for that very accomplishment, because you, living now, take that accomplishment for granted.

I suppose the part where the RINOs are "more interested in being part of the social elite than actually voting for principles in the legislature" is beginning to hit on something, but it comes across as sort of common populist rhetoric. No analysis of why the social elite are liberal, no analysis of where conservatives fit into the power dynamic, etc.

And here, just as I expected from you, you are dismissive because I didn't lay out the detailed position and argument, when I explicitly say that I'm giving quick points rather than a philosphy essay.

I am finished with this. You are not engaging in good faith here, and I'm not wasting my time on this any longer.
 
D

Deleted member 88

Guest
Can we at least acknowledge the issue of lag, nostalgia and age here?

Like how many conservatives don’t recognize and never will the problems of modern capitalistic excess?

Due to being raised in the Cold War and having a knee jerk reaction to any criticism of capitalism as “communism”.

Limbaugh isn’t appealing to younger conservatives, he’s appealing to Boomers.

(I really hate to use that language-it’s disrespectful and crass but I digress).

Boomer conservatives are stuck in the eighties/nineties era where the Drudge Report was hard hitting journalism, and cutting taxes combined with american paeans was the essence of the right wing existence.

That’s not a fault of theirs. Once your in your forties and fifties your mental patterns become set.

Limbaugh taps into that.
 

Cherico

Well-known member
Can we at least acknowledge the issue of lag, nostalgia and age here?

Like how many conservatives don’t recognize and never will the problems of modern capitalistic excess?

Due to being raised in the Cold War and having a knee jerk reaction to any criticism of capitalism as “communism”.

Limbaugh isn’t appealing to younger conservatives, he’s appealing to Boomers.

(I really hate to use that language-it’s disrespectful and crass but I digress).

Boomer conservatives are stuck in the eighties/nineties era where the Drudge Report was hard hitting journalism, and cutting taxes combined with american paeans was the essence of the right wing existence.

That’s not a fault of theirs. Once your in your forties and fifties your mental patterns become set.

Limbaugh taps into that.


Limbaugh has done some good and nessary work but the problem with the republican party for the longest time was that they pretended the 1950s never ended, and the problem with the democrats is that they pretend the 1960s never ended.

That entire world is over and we are not able or willing to have an honest conversation about what to do about it.
 
Mod Directive - Argue in Good Faith

LordSunhawk

Das BOOT (literally)
Owner
Administrator
Staff Member
Founder
The Boot is watching this thread. Certain posters, and they know who they are, are dancing on the line of the rules by substituting repetition of initial assertion for argument, then demanding that others defend positions that they have not in fact taken, then claiming victory when they refuse to play this game. Consider this a mod directive to argue in good faith, and not to simply play out scenes from Monty Python's Argument Clinic.
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
Can we at least acknowledge the issue of lag, nostalgia and age here?

Like how many conservatives don’t recognize and never will the problems of modern capitalistic excess?

Due to being raised in the Cold War and having a knee jerk reaction to any criticism of capitalism as “communism”.

Limbaugh isn’t appealing to younger conservatives, he’s appealing to Boomers.

(I really hate to use that language-it’s disrespectful and crass but I digress).

Boomer conservatives are stuck in the eighties/nineties era where the Drudge Report was hard hitting journalism, and cutting taxes combined with american paeans was the essence of the right wing existence.

That’s not a fault of theirs. Once your in your forties and fifties your mental patterns become set.

Limbaugh taps into that.

1: Limbaugh does not argue for capitalism without ethics. It has long been a straw-man of socialists that all people who believe in free markets are An-Caps, Randians, or similar. Like most Conservatives at large, Limbaugh argues for Capitalism as an economic system, and Christian ethics for how to conduct yourself within it.
2: Limbaugh appeals across age ranges. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, he's published a children's book series, one which has been very successful. Beyond that, I started listening when I was 12 or 13, and he frequently gets callers in from their teens and twenties.
3: People tend to have their mental patterns set by their forties and fifties. This is not universal.
 
D

Deleted member 88

Guest
1: Limbaugh does not argue for capitalism without ethics. It has long been a straw-man of socialists that all people who believe in free markets are An-Caps, Randians, or similar. Like most Conservatives at large, Limbaugh argues for Capitalism as an economic system, and Christian ethics for how to conduct yourself within it.
I wasn’t referring to Limbaugh specifically. Also has he criticized say vulture funds outright ravaging small towns in the Midwest? Or the pharmaceutical industry? Carlson has, Limbaugh hasn’t that I know of. In the conservative media sphere-news busters, Limbaugh, etc... criticism of capitalism is relatively rare. From what I’ve seen.
2: Limbaugh appeals across age ranges. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, he's published a children's book series, one which has been very successful. Beyond that, I started listening when I was 12 or 13, and he frequently gets callers in from their teens and twenties.
That’s very nice but who actually listens to his show? Like in broad statistical terms? I’m going to guess their generally over thirty five.

3: People tend to have their mental patterns set by their forties and fifties. This is not universal.
Counter examples exist. But they aren’t relevant. As they are the exceptions which prove the rule. So that’s a bit of pointless pedantry on your part.
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
That’s very nice but who actually listens to his show? Like in broad statistical terms? I’m going to guess their generally over thirty five.
You guess. There are two ways that people track who listens to what radio. Who calls in, and who responds to surveys. I know from listening to the show that one of those two indicates that his audience runs across all ages, though I'll admit I don't have access to the ratings results from surveys.

You have a guess. That's not an argument.
Counter examples exist. But they aren’t relevant. As they are the exceptions which prove the rule. So that’s a bit of pointless pedantry on your part.

It's not pedantry. Don't make absolute statements about what are trends, not laws.
 

Shipmaster Sane

You have been weighed
You guess.

You have a guess. That's not an argument.


It's not pedantry. Don't make absolute statements about what are trends, not laws.
This isn't a very good attitude to take for someone insisting they don't have to explain the views of a figure they are, in fact, defending.
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
This isn't a very good attitude to take for someone insisting they don't have to explain the views of a figure they are, in fact, defending.

If you would like to have some discussion about the ideology Rush Limbaugh espouses, I'd be happy to engage on the subject. I expect you'd actually be interested in productive discourse.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top