There is an ongoing debate among conservatives and libertarians about how best to resuscitate the cause of limited government. In a recent post at the Cato Institute Blog, my colleague Brink Lindsey defended another Cato colleague, Jerry Taylor, who caught some flak for criticizing conservative talk radio at National Review online. Both Brink and Jerry argue that Limbaugh, et al, undermine the case for good policy because of sloppy arguments and unappealing styles.
This is a much-needed discussion, especially since the GOP’s decade-long embrace of statist economic policy has dramatically undermined the cause of liberty.
To add my two cents to the mix, I disagree with part of their analysis. The problem is not Rush Limbaugh or any other talk show host. Talk radio, after all, existed when Republicans were riding high and promoting small government in the 1990s.
The real problem is that today’s GOP politicians are unwilling to even pretend that they believe in limited government. In such an environment, it is hardly a surprise that anti-tax and anti-spending voters decide that talk show hosts are de facto national leaders.
This does not mean that Rush Limbaugh is always right or that Sean Hannity never engages in demagoguery. But I suspect if any of us had to be live on the air three hours every day and support our families by attracting an audience, our efforts to be entertaining might result in an occasional mistake – either factually or rhetorically. Heck, when I had to be on the air for just one hour each day in the mid-1990s for the fledgling conservative television network created by the late Paul Weyrich, I’m sure I had more than my share of errors.
This being said, I agree with Brink’s main points about conservatism being adrift. How come there were no tea parties when Bush was expanding the burden of government? Why didn’t conservative think tanks rebel when Bush increased the power of the federal government? Where were the supposedly conservative members of the House and Senate when Bush was pushing through pork-filled transportation bills, corrupt farm bills, a no-bureaucrat-left-behind education bill, and a massive entitlement expansion?
I sometimes wonder if the re-emergence of another Reagan would make a difference, but Brink and others offer compelling reasons to believe that the problems is much deeper.
I wonder how many would actually go along with the idea of agreeing to free birth control if the deal included free ammunition. Nothing is free except the air we breath and that is a gift from God. Someone has to pay for everything we eat, everything we wear, every bit of health care we get, every house we live in etc. NOTHING IS FREE, except for our air. The government would tax us on our air if they could find a way to do it.
“Slut” implies a woman that is free with her favors. Wanting to be paid implies a different pejorative.
How can you refer to Rush and Hannity as conservative? They are pro-war, for one thing, which is hardly conservative. Please call them what they are: neocons.
Oh, and the REAL Tea Party was started in December 2007, during Bush’s second term. The tea party we now have is the co-opted tea party, no longer what it once was.
[…] not making an indirect dig at Limbaugh, by the way, who does a rather impressive job of staying on the right side of the line while spending three hours every day trying to be funny, entertaining, and informative. I shudder […]
“slut” the audience viscerally understands. “A women of easy virtue” elicits infinite exploration…..
[…] way, that the cartoon portrays the student in an unflattering light. This is the mistake Rush made (not for the first time), and it enables the left to deflect attention from the real issue of whether the government should […]