Thinking about the Limbaugh mess makes me wonder about the daily grind. Why is it that pundits like Limbaugh get their "gigs" and just seem to go on forever? The conservative ones in particular have no expiration date.
Why is it that conservatives seem to "need" Limbaugh? Hasn't he become more trouble than he's worth, even to them?
Why can't Limbaugh be like a country music singer who has his "run" and then fades? New talent comes along. The audience wants something fresh. All very understandable.
So why is it that conservative throngs out there, people who thump their chest about being "conservative" even though the pure application of those principles might leave them chagrined, seem to want something stale or rotten?
How can they not describe Limbaugh as totally creepy now? How can they not see he has some sexual issues coming to the surface that ought to be subdued?
How can they not describe Limbaugh as totally creepy now? How can they not see he has some sexual issues coming to the surface that ought to be subdued?
Sean Hannity of Fox News thought Joe McGinnis was "creepy" just because he rented the house next to Sarah Palin, while researching for a book that is now available at our Morris Public Library. I wondered for some time whether local tea partiers might protest if that book came here. They are as protective of Palin as they are of Limbaugh.
I suspect the McGinnis book is just "old news" now. So many highlights came out and were reported some time ago. Not that I wouldn't want to read it. It's on the new non-fiction rack.
Did Rick Santorum actually insult the nation's conservatives by saying Limbaugh was "just an entertainer?"
Santorum like so many of his stripes is scared of the pied piper. No one on the progressive side exudes this.
The "entertainer" tag might seem to belittle the rotund radio god. A mere entertainer can't dispense serious political thoughts, can he? Oh but he does. He tries to put "progressives" on their heels every day. He knows he has to be confrontational to a degree.
But he also knows this is a daily tightrope act. Because first and foremost he guards the interests of his advertisers. This is despite the fact he likened some of his now-departed advertisers to "a few french fries that might fall out at the drive-through."
The "entertainer" tag might seem to belittle the rotund radio god. A mere entertainer can't dispense serious political thoughts, can he? Oh but he does. He tries to put "progressives" on their heels every day. He knows he has to be confrontational to a degree.
But he also knows this is a daily tightrope act. Because first and foremost he guards the interests of his advertisers. This is despite the fact he likened some of his now-departed advertisers to "a few french fries that might fall out at the drive-through."
If I were one of those advertisers, I'd have a few choice words for the bombastic idiot/manipulator.
The "french fries" comment might in fact be a dagger (for him). He was biting the hand that feeds him, suggesting his whole persona was bigger than his advertisers, many of whom are apparently nothing more than discarded french fries.
The "french fries" comment might in fact be a dagger (for him). He was biting the hand that feeds him, suggesting his whole persona was bigger than his advertisers, many of whom are apparently nothing more than discarded french fries.
Limbaugh has been the de facto leader of the Republican party.
If Santorum brands Limbaugh as a mere "entertainer," not worthy of serious commentary or reaction from a presidential aspirant, what does that say about the nation's conservatives? That they are inspired by a non-thinker? A lot of us have known that all along.
If Santorum brands Limbaugh as a mere "entertainer," not worthy of serious commentary or reaction from a presidential aspirant, what does that say about the nation's conservatives? That they are inspired by a non-thinker? A lot of us have known that all along.
Here's a dirty little background secret about the Limbaugh controversy: A lot of advertisers would absolutely love to bypass him. The tech revolution and new media are increasingly making this possible anyway.
Advertisers simply want to reach their customers. They aren't interested in covering the overhead for a printing plant or delivery trucks as with newspapers. They would love not having to "sponsor" a boob like Limbaugh. They would like not having to sponsor anyone.
The entertainers have just been a lure for an audience.
Advertisers simply want to reach their customers. They aren't interested in covering the overhead for a printing plant or delivery trucks as with newspapers. They would love not having to "sponsor" a boob like Limbaugh. They would like not having to sponsor anyone.
The entertainers have just been a lure for an audience.
In the past this model was a given. People who run newspapers know that advertising is everything. They say their mission is to inform the public but it's a charade. I'm not exaggerating.
Most people who run newspapers view their news divisions as sort of a nuisance. They cost money. They can cause trouble. The public can place unreasonable expectations on them.
Most people who run newspapers view their news divisions as sort of a nuisance. They cost money. They can cause trouble. The public can place unreasonable expectations on them.
Newspaper publishers know they have to maintain a modicum of news coverage and public service for reasons of reputation. They gnash their teeth at the same time. They just want local businesses to keep cutting checks to them.
Newspapers used to operate with sort of a monopoly mentality. They have been truly shaken up the past few years. Nothing has improved because of that. The competition faced by newspapers doesn't even fight on their terms. They bypass newspapers, harnessing new tech with efficiency and reach that ought to make our head spin.
Newspapers have been pummeled but they hang on, smaller and less relevant than before. The newspaper in Morris has gone through a non-stop shrinking act in terms of frequency of publication and (let's not forget) page size. And we aren't supposed to notice.
We're flooded with advertising circulars many of which are dumpster-ready.
And on the radio airwaves, we're supposed to revere a mouth that reaches millions in spite of the drivel, paranoia and outright creepiness that emanates from it. Most advertisers are now saying the voice ought not define America or at least a significant chunk of it.
At a certain point, basic civility needs to be invoked. We have to be concerned about our image in the world. Rush Limbaugh is a big fat whatever. I don't care that he's fat, just that he's a cynical and manipulative opportunist.
Isn't there some younger talent out there waiting in the wings? Can't we see a "fresh face" like in country music?
There is talk that a new Mike Huckabee radio show might be a "safe haven" for advertisers. I guess he's not really young or fresh. But he seems a bit more level-headed, less sensational or confrontational.
He's an acknowledged conservative leader. So he can't be expected to speak intelligently all the time. At least he has clergy credentials. He has succumbed to some of the "birther" rhetoric and that's concerning. But the bar must be set very low for these people.
Huckabee won't stir the pot so much. He's not so much of a throwback. He has said Barack Obama grew up in Kenya. He elaborated, saying our president was influenced by the Mau-Mau Revolution. Such mishandling of facts would bring a failing grade in a high school classroom. And this man was a serious candidate for president.
But if conservatives need a pied piper of sorts, no matter how off-base, Huckabee might be more agreeable than Rush Limbaugh the cigar-chomping clown.
I can't imagine Huckabee making the kind of offensive-beyond-words comments that recently came from Limbaugh.
Limbaugh has been in his "daily grind" long enough. Maybe he has just become zombie-like having done it so long. Why doesn't he wake up in the morning sometime and start thinking about something else? Refresh yourself - it'll be good for you.
After a while you might come to see just how absurd you had become. Let the "new country singer" in. Huckabee isn't new but he's fresh at least in terms of the radio product.
We must remind ourselves that we can't expect too much from conservatives, a reflexive and emotional movement that articulates quite well what it doesn't like and what it is suspicious of. But it has no clear eye at all about what clearly should be enacted.
Conservatives crash and burn when they get real power. They begin ignoring real issues and dive into the social issues spectrum, where they can keep pulling those emotional and impulsive levers that have worked well for them. They are in effect a one-trick pony.
They're harmless if they just bide their time listening to an afternoon radio show that reinforces their fears. Let them clog online comment boards with their vitriol. Let them be a sideshow.
This is the line that Limbaugh crossed. His "entertainment," as Santorum would describe it, couldn't be dismissed as innocuous anymore. Calling Sandra Fluke a slut and prostitute and suggesting she have her sexual activity videotaped was the kind of tripe that should cause flamethrowers to be directed at him immediately.
Instead we see Republican presidential contenders with their tepid and cowardly reactions. This speaks volumes.
Lest there be any doubt Barack Obama will be re-elected, it's put aside now.
Ask for your french fries to be put in a sack, then they can be handed off at the drive-through with nothing lost. Turn off Rush Limbaugh on your car radio. Show some discretion. You're better than to require a pied piper.
- Brian Williams - morris mn minnesota - bwilly73@yahoo.com
No comments:
Post a Comment