Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean
I guess that what I question is this:
Yes, the "grass-roots" conservative movement seems to be the Rush Limbaugh crowd rather than the intelligent and intellectual figures in the Republican Party. I mean hell, they even tried to make the word "intellectual" a dirty word during the campaign, which was extremely telling. But do they just seem to be the grass-roots portion of the party because they're the most marginalized at the moment, and as a result the most vocal? My fear is that taking this broad, aggressive approach of labeling Limbaugh as the leader of the Republican party might damage some potential relationships that could be formed with the intelligent and intellectual members of the party.
|
My perspective is that it isn't the "grass roots" (mob, more like it)/ rush side of things that are marginalized, its the conservative intellectuals that are marginalized. And that's why there is no check on Rush. But then I can't possibly see any difference between rush and hannity and coulter, outside of their different levels of success. Which, again, is why I'm arguing that rush is main stream and thus deserves to be head of the republicans out of power as well as volume.
That's why as much as I cna't stand people like david frum, his is a conservative intellectual and it is telling that he's constantly being attacked by right wing radio, also left the national review, the bastion of seasoned, british classical conservative intellectualism that really is no different now from hannity and colmes in agenda. But he's innefectual because he's sullied by the bad decisions that faltered conservative intellectual work. Sad but true. Its only people with clean hands like gov. of utah. john huntsman. who will be able to believably rebuild an effective conservative mind trust.
and john. I thought you were taking off for a bit. or was that just to trick the mods so you can continue spamming?