June 18, 200719 yr Now you're throwing me off by playing nice... :lol: :lol: :lol: I will agree that it would be difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that talk radio represents a majority on either side, but I do stick to my original assertion that Conservative talk radio represents the views of more Americans than Liberal talk radio does. :thumb: Without a doubt.
June 18, 200719 yr Now you're throwing me off by playing nice... :lol: :lol: :lol: I will agree that it would be difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that talk radio represents a majority on either side, but I do stick to my original assertion that Conservative talk radio represents the views of more Americans than Liberal talk radio does. :thumb: Not playing nice nor taking shots.
June 18, 200719 yr I will agree that it would be difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that talk radio represents a majority on either side, but I do stick to my original assertion that Conservative talk radio represents the views of more Americans than Liberal talk radio does. :thumb: No problem with that argument. It just doesn't mean they represent the majority of the actual population. Does it represent the majority of people that actually vote? Better question. My guess, though , is that based on the recent election that the answer is still "no." In order for it to be true, Rush and friends voters would have had to jump ship and vote for the Democrats or they stayed at home.
June 18, 200719 yr No problem with that argument. It just doesn't mean they represent the majority of the actual population. Does it represent the majority of people that actually vote? Better question. My guess, though , is that based on the recent election that the answer is still "no." In order for it to be true, Rush and friends voters would have had to jump ship and vote for the Democrats or they stayed at home. And that is what I think happened. Upset with GW and they voted Democrat. Interesting that GW is NOW FINALLY saying he is going to be the fiscal conservative candidate we all thought he would be with his talk on vetoing the pork in the budget bill. I believe the veto is as much if not more a political move as a "what he believes" move as the Republicans want to establish themselves going into the 2008 election as the fiscal conservative candidate rather than the free spending Democrats of this budget. The Dems don't take control in 2006 and I don't think Bush is vetoing anything. He learned his lesson from his defeat and now trying to show the voters the Reps are this while the Dems are that.
June 19, 200719 yr You obviously don't listen to Limbaugh because if you did you wouldn't be so wrong on what legislation Limbaugh has supported. He was vehemently against the Medicare drug entitlement, opposed the steel tariffs, and railled against Federal spending, (like the Education Bill which Limbaugh sarcastically claims was written by Ted Kennedy). The only legislation that Limbaugh actually supported as you claimed was tax cuts but unlike as you claimed support for tax cuts is a traditionally conservative position. It would be difficult to mischaracterize Limbaugh's positions on these issues more that you just did. I listen to Limbaugh sparingly, not nearly as much as I did before changing jobs. My point is that given the sum total of these most decidedly non-conservative actions by the Bush administrations, if he had a shred of intellectual honesty Limbaugh would be ripping Bush for being the false conservative that he is. And while he might have voiced cordial disagreement with the President on a few shows here or there over the issues I mentioned, if he were an honest, traditional conservative (read: small government, free trade, fiscal restraint), he would be livid over the state of the Republican Party and would let you know it each and every show. Instead, Limbaugh is strictly a partisan mouthpiece who does nothing constructive to help guide the GOP back from its dalliances.
June 19, 200719 yr I listen to Limbaugh occasionally. I think his voice represents conservatives (not to be confused with Republicans) fairly well. I rarely listen to Hannity anymore because he's such a party hack. Savage, although quite insane, brings up some interesting views. He hates all the politicians. I think my favorite would have to be Glen Beck.
June 19, 200719 yr Author :thumb: Agree your Limbaugh description... :thumb: Agree with your Hannity description... Kind of agree with your Savage description, accept to add that he seems to rip on Republicans alot harder than Democrats. I'm not exactly sure why... I think Glenn Beck is alot better on television than he is on radio. He seems like he was always trying to be Rush on the radio, but he seems a much better fit on television...
June 19, 200719 yr I listen to Limbaugh sparingly, not nearly as much as I did before changing jobs. My point is that given the sum total of these most decidedly non-conservative actions by the Bush administrations, if he had a shred of intellectual honesty Limbaugh would be ripping Bush for being the false conservative that he is. And while he might have voiced cordial disagreement with the President on a few shows here or there over the issues I mentioned, if he were an honest, traditional conservative (read: small government, free trade, fiscal restraint), he would be livid over the state of the Republican Party and would let you know it each and every show. Instead, Limbaugh is strictly a partisan mouthpiece who does nothing constructive to help guide the GOP back from its dalliances. I will agree that if a Republican and a Democrat did the same thing and Rush disagreed with it, his criticism of the Democrat would be more harsh than his criticism of the Republican. However, a Democrat is more likely to do something that Rush disagrees with so a Democrat will more often be the target of Rush than a Republican. I would also add that Rush does not shy away from voicing his disagreements with Bush or any other Republican. He's just a little more civil when he does it. (And he has done it numerous times on many issues with Bush including immigration reform, judicial nominations, the Education Bill, and the prescription drug bill.)
June 20, 200719 yr And that is what I think happened. Upset with GW and they voted Democrat. Interesting that GW is NOW FINALLY saying he is going to be the fiscal conservative candidate we all thought he would be with his talk on vetoing the pork in the budget bill. I believe the veto is as much if not more a political move as a "what he believes" move as the Republicans want to establish themselves going into the 2008 election as the fiscal conservative candidate rather than the free spending Democrats of this budget. The Dems don't take control in 2006 and I don't think Bush is vetoing anything. He learned his lesson from his defeat and now trying to show the voters the Reps are this while the Dems are that. Accurate observations indeed.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.