I think Rush Limbaugh sees the writing on the wall

[JonLP24]

I really don't want to link to him (I got there from Media Matters) but really wanted to share this. After the first several articles that are pretty much nonsense which is all I ever read from him but then he stumbles onto the obvious and makes sense explaining it though I'm pretty sure this is more about his radio audience than anything else but is almost dead on how the rest of us sees the Republican party though he doesn't explain how they are wrong -- just says "liberalism" is in danger of being stopped
----

When you're between 25 and 54 you are in the midst of everything. You're right in the middle of it, because that's the age, for the most part, of people making things happen. But as you get older and you get out of that demographic and realize that that demographic is still where the power is -- exceptions, of course -- but you realize that people now moving into that 25-54 demographic have an entirely different worldview simply and only because of their age.

<snip>

When I was 20 I wanted to be 25; 25, wanted to be 30; 30, wanted to be 40. It always has proven out. Getting older has always been better for me. Everything about life got better as I got older. I became freer. I became more independent. I became more successful. Everything that I wanted and envisioned about getting older happened. Consequently, I never feared it, never feared getting older. So now people ask me, "Rush, you're over 60 now. Do you wish you were 70?"

<snip>

The 25-54 demographic is where a lot of things in our culture are happening. People are on their success tracks. People are becoming freer and becoming more independent, and they are becoming more successful, and they're making more decisions with more power behind them. They're becoming less dependent. They're arguably becoming (there are exceptions to this, of course) more self-reliant. They are attaining, in their careers, positions of greater influence and power and all of those kinds of related things.

<snip>

Do you wonder why conservatism to them is this obscure, way-out-there kind of odd thing? They've never been exposed to it, because the Republican Party has not been ideological since Reagan. They were either pups, infants, babies -- too young or not even born -- during Reagan, and that was the last conservative president, the last chance Republicans actually had to vote for a genuine conservative. They have grown up with completely other experiences, influences, attitudes.

I think it's crucial, rather than be critical of who they are and what they think, understand why that is, because it all makes sense. It's why I have continually harped, in this example, anyway. It's why I have just spent a lot of time trying to persuade people that ideology is crucial in persuading people, because these people that we're talking about -- young people, the Millennials -- don't know it, but they have grown up immersed in the left-wing ideology.

To them, it's just normal day ebb and flow life, and Republicans and conservatives over here are really from Mars. They haven't had presented to them an opposing ideology. They've got a bunch of old guys in suits and ties in Congress that want to stop what the Democrats are doing. But there's no ideological opposition to what they've grown up experiencing. I think it's missing a huge reason for why things are the way they are.

If the Republican Party is not going to be conservative, if it's not gonna present an ideological characterization of itself, if it's gonna hide that and try to deny that -- which it's doing -- then there's nothing that's ever gonna stop liberalism. The Republican Party is demonstrating that they have no desire to. I mean, the current Republican leadership. That is why I continually harp on this notion, this necessity that people be trained to spot the ideology of politicians or other political leaders.

If that doesn't happen, then the truth that you and I know about liberalism is gonna have a much tougher time being taught to people who have never even looked at life that way. Now, the left knows this. That's why they don't call themselves ideologues. Liberalism is not an ideological point of view the way they talk about. It's just natural. It's just what "is," and anything else may as well be from Mars. Anything else is odd, crude, extreme, discriminatory, or what have you.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/03/04/millennials_don_t_worship_the_clintons

The bold part is where I feel he nails it as I do & most younger people probably see the Republican party as "odd, crude, extreme, discriminatory". He just makes no sense when it comes to Liberalism or why it must be stopped but makes a point that they didn't grow up & live under the Reagan aura and the party is living off of Reagan still. I didn't and don't understand the Reagan worship but there it is.

[Skittles]

1. I think it is very easy to understand their Reagan worship

Reagan made greed and idiocy fashionable - he make repukes feel good about their sickening ignorance and materialism, and got a fair amount of Democrats to ho on that bandwagon too

[JonLP24]

2. I get that

it explains the party itself or mostly the members of Congress & pundits as to what they're holding onto but even the Republicans around here with the economy the way it is (booming for Wall Street but stagnating for the rest of us) they look back to the Reagan years as the good 'ol days. I don't ever, even in the most conservative city of 250,000+ find anyone speaking fondly on Bush -- there is a lot of racism toward Obama but even I hear positive opinions on this or that but no love for Bush.

[tularetom]

3. If someone as famous and successful as a big time radio host agrees with you

how can you possibly be a bigot?

That's been limpalls' mission for 25 years, to validate peoples stupidity, racism, and misogyny. He's done a damn good job of it too, of course he's been telling his audience exactly what they wanted to hear so it's really not so hard.

[Exilednight]

8. I was teenager during the Regan years. I was

10 when Reagan was elected and I remember doing a scrap book as part of my class project. At the time my dad was working for the Carter administration as a cultural attaché to Japan.

When Reagan took office our country came to a fork in the road. We went right instead of left and Reagan drove the bus to a dead end road.

The one thing my dad noted was how Reagan gutted many agencies of career federal employees in the CIA, State, DoD FBI and many other agencies. We had a tradition of hiring the smartest people from the most elite universities regardless of ideology. Reagan changed that and his administration began hiring based strictly on ideology, no matter how stupid they were.

[Warren Stupidity]

4. " the Republican Party has not been ideological since Reagan" - is absolute horseshit. nt.

[JonLP24]

5. I agree

which him saying he wants them to be ideological or more ideological compared to where they are is, I'd hate to imagine what that looks like or what that would look like.

[Gothmog]

6. Rush's contract with clear channel is up in 2016

This will be fun to watch to see if Limbaugh continues show

[JonLP24]

7. That was the Media Matters article that linked to this

which is how I got there so I know. I think the word "conceded" was linked to what he said about the 25-54 demographic and no longer sees the world the same way as the 25-54 demographic does. This is article seemed to be more about crying about losing sponsors & ratings than anything else really though his theories on how the younger generation sees him is dead on but doesn't say where they are wrong but just that "liberalism" must be stopped but no mention on why

[Tobin S.]

9. This country is probably more conservative than it's been since the 1920s, economically speaking.

Socially speaking, I think we continue to improve, but our economic system has been very regressive starting at around 1980.

I don't think social issues are very important to people like Rush. They just use them to keep the rubes voting for them. They are much more concerned about their money. So I don't really know what Rush is lamenting here. The wealthy in this country are wealthier than they've ever been and he is a part of that class. They have a Republican controlled Congress and a Democratic president who is willing to play ball with them on the TPP, an agreement that will probably only further entrench the wealth of the 1%.

Why the long face, Rush?

[JonLP24]

10. The use of the 25-54 age range

clearly reflects the 25-54 demo that networks & radio desire & with that declining his pockets are getting smaller. His career depends on people seeing the world the same way he does but even with the Roaring 20s economy, most Americans don't support it

With about one in three Americans, including a minority of independents and Democrats, in favor of extending the Bush-era tax cuts for all taxpayers, Democrats may not be putting themselves at great political risk by allowing the tax cuts to expire for wealthy Americans. In fact, the middle ground of extending tax cuts for low- and middle-income Americans but allowing them to expire for wealthy Americans -- the Democrats' most likely proposal -- is the specific option the public prefers most.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/142940/americans-allowing-tax-cuts-wealthy-expire.aspx