The Tired War on Rush Limbaugh

Jonah Goldberg:

Here we go again. Rush Limbaugh is public enemy No. 1.

Liberal bloggers and media chin-strokers are aghast at Limbaugh’s statement that he hopes Barack Obama fails.

Well, given what Obama wants to do, I hope he fails too. Of course I want the financial crisis to end — who doesn’t? But Obama’s agenda is much more audacious. Pretty much every major news outlet in the country has said as a matter of objective analysis that Obama wants to repeal the legacy of Ronald Reagan and remake the country as a European welfare state. And yet people are shocked that conservatives, Limbaugh included, want Obama to fail in this effort?

But even Goldberg implicitly concedes the argument, letting the canard stand that Limbaugh is “shrill” and extreme. Implicitly assuming that Limbaugh “turns off” moderates. I don’t buy the argument. As a regular Limbaugh listener, I find that his arguments are as well stated as that intellectual hero, Bill Buckley, albeit with much more humor.

Limbaugh has relatively high negatives because, despite the fact that he is the number one listened to talk radio host in the country, fewer than half the country listens to him. 20 million listeners still leaves something like 280 million people who don’t listen … and get their opinions of Rush from the media that despises him.

By making Rush the object of their vitriol, Team Obama may be making a strategic mistake by assuming that his disapproval ratings are graven in stone. They are not. The more people listen to him to find out what the ruckus is all about, the more people will find out that they agree with Rush and call in to say “Ditto.”

Goldberg then suggests that the Right resurrect “Firing Line” minus Bill Buckley, who died a year ago. This is a particularly poor idea, for two reasons. Bill Buckley, like Rush Limbaugh, was a unique personality. “Firing Line” as a not a program with a host, it was a host with a program. Secondly, Bill Buckley may have been very popular among conservative intellectuals and may have founded a magazine that appealed to conservative thinkers, but Bill Buckley never won an election. He once ran for Mayor of NY City and replied to the question of what he would do if he won. His answer: “Demand a recount.”

UPDATE: I have a great deal of admiration for Jonah Goldberg. He has the ability to think outside the box and is one of our most gifted essayists.

So I was thrilled to receive his reply from his iPhone; it read (in its entirety):

I didn't call him shrill. You are looking to take offense.

What could I say? I had to reply:

I did not say you called him shrill. I stated that you let the description stand.

I making the point that people who call for the reincarnation of Bill Buckley are implying that Limbaugh is a rube who needs to be supplanted as the intellectual leader of Conservatives by the dulcet tones of the new Buckley. Well apparently it does not run in the family. Chris Buckley is very nicely parodied by Burge who exhibits an order or magnitude greater comedic powers than Bill Buckley's son who swooned for Obama during the election, thinking he (Obama) was lying..

Another possibility is Mark Steyn. I am a big fan of Mark Steyn but the fact is that he is a much better essayist than a radio host, a spot he has been allowed to fill by Limbaugh.

You are also a good essayist. I have seen you on video and frankly, you need work as an on-air personality in a live format.

But take Burge (Iowahawk) to heart. There is more than a touch of social snobbery about the NT crowd who are desperately seeking an alternative to Limbaugh because he and his assumed listeners are "not just our kind." The people who count in the rebellion against Team Obama are not Chris Buckley and David Brooks. They could not win an election in East Cupcake, NJ. Neither could Bill Buckley. Republicans need Limbaugh, he doesn't need the NR crowd.

I'm not trying to attack (please don't take it wrong) you and I'm not looking to take offense. I like much of your essay. But in it you assume the Liberal position, that Limbaugh turns off middle of the road people. I reject that position, if you read my essay. And if "we" go into the ideological fight with the assumption that our most articulate spokesman is incapable of attracting the average American, you have a seriously skewed idea of what portion of the political spectrum the average American occupies.

If you want another spokesman for the Right, you don't need another Buckley. the intellectual foundation for Conservatism has been laid. We need 2, 3, 4 more Limbaughs.

Regards,

It remains to be seen of there is more tete-a-tete.