Wednesday, July 07, 2004
..what I think..what I like..what I know...what I want...what I see....
Since I'm quoting PJ O'Rourke I may as well just go for it and do Toby Keith as well. Just so you know, I can't stand Toby Keith. But these lyrics are perfect for this topic.
Having the discussion on political discourse yesterday was a very good exercise for me. It forced me to back up my beliefs. I'm a strong believer in challenging and being challenged. It's the only real way to know what I truely believe.
It seems PJ O'Rourke is having this same dilemma. PJ and I are essentially on opposite sides of the political spectrum. If we were to have a debate on politics we'd most certainly find little if any common ground.
But PJ appears to be having a problem with conservative debate, or lack thereof:
Anyway, I couldn't get NPR on the car radio, so I was listening to Rush Limbaugh shout about Wesley Clark, who had just entered the Democratic presidential-primary race. Was Clark a stalking horse for Hillary Clinton?! Was Clark a DNC-sponsored Howard Dean spoiler?! "He's somebody's sock puppet!" Limbaugh bellowed. I agreed; but a thought began to form. Limbaugh wasn't shouting at Clark, who I doubt tunes in to AM talk radio the way I tune in to NPR. And "Shari Lewis and Lamb Chop!" was not a call calculated to lure Democratic voters to the Bush camp. Rush Limbaugh was shouting at me.
Me. I am a little to the right of ... Why is the Attila comparison used? Fifth-century Hunnish depredations on the Roman Empire were the work of an overpowerful executive pursuing a policy of economic redistribution in an atmosphere of permissive social mores. I am a little to the right of Rush Limbaugh. I'm so conservative that I approve of San Francisco City Hall marriages, adoption by same-sex couples, and New Hampshire's recently ordained Episcopal bishop. Gays want to get married, have children, and go to church. Next they'll be advocating school vouchers, boycotting HBO, and voting Republican.
I suppose I should be arguing with my fellow right-wingers about that, and drugs, and many other things. But I won't be. Arguing, in the sense of attempting to convince others, has gone out of fashion with conservatives. The formats of their radio and television programs allow for little measured debate, and to the extent that evidence is marshaled to support conservative ideas, the tone is less trial of Socrates than Johnnie Cochran summation to the O.J. jury. Except the jury—with a clever marketing strategy—has been rigged. I wonder, when was the last time a conservative talk show changed a mind?
A valid question.
Given the meanness and sometimes downright evil of rightwing radio talk shows (and television)...how could it possibly change anyone's mind? It's all about preaching to the choir. Even a dyed-in-the-wool rightwinger like O'Rourke can see it.
While the energizing of the base is key..so is good discourse. Without it we end up with people like George W Bush as President of the United States.
|
Having the discussion on political discourse yesterday was a very good exercise for me. It forced me to back up my beliefs. I'm a strong believer in challenging and being challenged. It's the only real way to know what I truely believe.
It seems PJ O'Rourke is having this same dilemma. PJ and I are essentially on opposite sides of the political spectrum. If we were to have a debate on politics we'd most certainly find little if any common ground.
But PJ appears to be having a problem with conservative debate, or lack thereof:
Anyway, I couldn't get NPR on the car radio, so I was listening to Rush Limbaugh shout about Wesley Clark, who had just entered the Democratic presidential-primary race. Was Clark a stalking horse for Hillary Clinton?! Was Clark a DNC-sponsored Howard Dean spoiler?! "He's somebody's sock puppet!" Limbaugh bellowed. I agreed; but a thought began to form. Limbaugh wasn't shouting at Clark, who I doubt tunes in to AM talk radio the way I tune in to NPR. And "Shari Lewis and Lamb Chop!" was not a call calculated to lure Democratic voters to the Bush camp. Rush Limbaugh was shouting at me.
Me. I am a little to the right of ... Why is the Attila comparison used? Fifth-century Hunnish depredations on the Roman Empire were the work of an overpowerful executive pursuing a policy of economic redistribution in an atmosphere of permissive social mores. I am a little to the right of Rush Limbaugh. I'm so conservative that I approve of San Francisco City Hall marriages, adoption by same-sex couples, and New Hampshire's recently ordained Episcopal bishop. Gays want to get married, have children, and go to church. Next they'll be advocating school vouchers, boycotting HBO, and voting Republican.
I suppose I should be arguing with my fellow right-wingers about that, and drugs, and many other things. But I won't be. Arguing, in the sense of attempting to convince others, has gone out of fashion with conservatives. The formats of their radio and television programs allow for little measured debate, and to the extent that evidence is marshaled to support conservative ideas, the tone is less trial of Socrates than Johnnie Cochran summation to the O.J. jury. Except the jury—with a clever marketing strategy—has been rigged. I wonder, when was the last time a conservative talk show changed a mind?
A valid question.
Given the meanness and sometimes downright evil of rightwing radio talk shows (and television)...how could it possibly change anyone's mind? It's all about preaching to the choir. Even a dyed-in-the-wool rightwinger like O'Rourke can see it.
While the energizing of the base is key..so is good discourse. Without it we end up with people like George W Bush as President of the United States.
Return to Main
