March 17, 2016
John Ziegler’s analysis is fine up to a point, but…
Eventually it turns into those articles etc where someone complains that “after September 11,” people started being mean to Muslims.
Well… yeah. But “September 11” is laid on the table as if it were just some arbitrary point in time.
Likewise, Ziegler condemns right wing pundits for harping on Trump because “he’s good for ratings.”
But… why is Trump “good for ratings” — i.e., someone others want to read about and listen too?
Yes, for some there is a “trainwreck” factor, but is that really such a large cohort of listeners and viewers?
Wouldn’t it be more accurate to say — and if Ziegler did and I missed it, sorry — that Levin, Rush et al are playing footsies with Trump because they sense a sea-change in the meaning of conservative/Republican and naturally don’t want to lose their lofty positions in a “conservative” media landscape?
Is that opportunistic? Sure. But I also sense that long held “conservative” theories are (rightly or wrongly) being rejected more or less wholesale and maybe, just maybe, Levin/Rush etc are genuinely starting to wonder if they were wrong, at least about a few things.