It seems that Rush has had more influence on society than 1000 Harry Reids will ever have.
2007-10-08 07:21:58 · 22 answers · asked by Major Deek 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Is that what drives leftists to froth and foam? Ineffectualness? Impotent lack of power or influence?
2007-10-08 07:25:25 · update #1
Rush will be remembered as the person who presided over the demise of modern liberalism in America. Reid will be a mere mention in the World Almanac, listing the years that he was the majority leader in the Senate. Otherwise, history will ignore him as it does other minor governemt figures.
2007-10-08 07:27:48 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
The sad thing is that you are more or less correct. Rush Limbaugh has assured himself a very prominent place in history, at least much more prominent than the current (or any other) senate majority leader. His position as a pop culture icon is assured. However, among serious scholars who do roiginal research and analysis, even the most obscure of senate majority leaders will be much more prominent than a loud, fat talk-show host. This is a dichotomy that has existed throughout our society for a long time. Entertainment figures are very well known and even influential among the general population; however, they are routinely ignored by future generations of serious academicians.
Rush is different, though. He has been a true political force, and I suspect that many future generations of graduate students will be designing thesis projects that seek to explain his proper place in American politics.
2007-10-08 14:36:36 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Rush Limbaugh will be in the history books--but not in a favorable light. And not nearly as prominantly as I suspect he thinks.
He'll be noted mainly as a mouthpiece for the neoconservative movement--and like comparable figures, from movements like the old South white supremecists or pre-WW2 "Popular Front" will appear only in histories dealing with such unAmerican movements. Mostly only because some of his comments will be quoted as examples of the demagogery and smear tactics commonly employed by such failed groups.
Reid isn't going to e remembered as a major player, etither--based on his actions so far. Depending on whether or not he remains as Majority Leader of the Senate after 2009-and his performance at that time, that could change. That's not negative--he's done a fair job. But he hasn't made a real mark as yet.
2007-10-08 14:31:47 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
From a purely professional psychological point of view, if you are holding on to your conservatism by listening to things like Rush and Faux News, then you are insecure in your political views and only seeking those things that agree with what you think you should be rather than reaching out to find out what is out there that you don't know about.
Rush will be to history as a mouth full of warm spit will be to the ocean. If he is remembered any, it will be only because of his effect on the 1994 elections, the myriad of lies and the wealth of misinformation that he has spread, and his addiction to pain killers while he was calling other drug addicts all sorts of nasty things.
2007-10-08 15:10:04 · answer #4 · answered by Polyhistor 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. History will remember Rush as a drug-induced bomb dropper who couldn't take, what he dished out to others.
And Harry Reid will probably not even show up in the history books. He has been completely ineffectual and should be removed from his position.
2007-10-08 14:28:06 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Harry will be a low-rent minor historical figure.
Rush got his place craved out in history for making talk radio relavent.
2007-10-08 14:32:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think that Harry Reid will go down as a great statesman or anything, but Rush will go down somewhere below Alan Thicke in the list of obscure turn of the century comedians.
2007-10-08 14:27:11 · answer #7 · answered by celticexpress 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
He won;t even be in the history books. Edward R.Murrow he is not. Just some blow hard on the radio. Hell, soon enough, the radio will be relegated to history books.
In fairness, Reid will not be remembered either. But at least he has a real job.
2007-10-08 14:26:57 · answer #8 · answered by BROOOOOKLYN 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Rush as a shaper of opinion ...your opinion yes. but I doubt he will get any mention,or you.
A sophistical rhetorician, inebriated with the exuberance of his own verbosity, and gifted with an egotistical imagination that can at all times command an interminable and inconsistent series of argument to malign an opponent and glorify himself. Benjamin Disraeli
2007-10-08 14:33:11 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Of course it seems that way to you.
Rush is an entertainer. Harry is a U.S. Senator.
2007-10-08 14:34:53 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋