Monday, October 17, 2005

Say what you want about the man's radio show
But don't try to tell me that Rush Limbaugh is anything less than brilliant. You may disagree with his political philosophy, and I'll be the first to admit that his radio show does little besides appeal to the lowest common denominator—but the man is smart. He writes well, he knows what he stands for, and he can argue just about anything convincingly.

There's a reason he was the pioneer in conservative talk radio. He figured out the system and gamed it to the extreme. And it's no wonder he's stayed the most popular—his biggest competitor is Sean Hannity, whose show is crap. I listen to both from time to time, and while I think Rush's show is mostly useless, he at least understands what he's saying at all times—Hannity, by way of contrast, often makes it abundantly clear that he has no idea what he's talking about. Laura Ingram is my personal favorite, but she has a less attractive timeslot&8212;falls at the end of the East Coast commute, the middle of the Midwest commute, and the beginning of the West Coast commute—which will continue to limit her possible audience. But I digress.

The column linked above is Rush's explanation of why conservatives—social and fiscal alike—have concerns about the Miers nomination, and why it doesn't show a crack-up in the Republican Party. I think he's pretty much right, and he explains himself well. Take a look. It has its faults, sure—I don't agree with everything he says—but on the balance it's a pretty strong piece.

No comments: