<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Conservative Intellectuals</title>
	<atom:link href="http://the-classic-liberal.com/conservative-intellectuals/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://the-classic-liberal.com/conservative-intellectuals/</link>
	<description>Libertarian &#38; Old Right Conservative News, Politics, Economics, Opinion, Analysis.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 12:12:43 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tyro</title>
		<link>http://the-classic-liberal.com/conservative-intellectuals/comment-page-1/#comment-66376</link>
		<dc:creator>Tyro</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2011 21:21:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://the-classic-liberal.com/?p=5799#comment-66376</guid>
		<description>Hey Carl, can you recommend me a good conservative blog grounded in good, clear thinking? I&#039;d really love to follow a conservative blogger who actually does philosophy or economics for a living.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Carl, can you recommend me a good conservative blog grounded in good, clear thinking? I'd really love to follow a conservative blogger who actually does philosophy or economics for a living.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: On Conservative Intellectualism and Conservative Philosophy &#124; The American MAXIM</title>
		<link>http://the-classic-liberal.com/conservative-intellectuals/comment-page-1/#comment-23271</link>
		<dc:creator>On Conservative Intellectualism and Conservative Philosophy &#124; The American MAXIM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 14:06:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://the-classic-liberal.com/?p=5799#comment-23271</guid>
		<description>[...] The Classic Liberal [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The Classic Liberal [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: theCL</title>
		<link>http://the-classic-liberal.com/conservative-intellectuals/comment-page-1/#comment-1589</link>
		<dc:creator>theCL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 May 2009 01:47:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://the-classic-liberal.com/?p=5799#comment-1589</guid>
		<description>I agree, Hannity is horrible!  He&#039;s an intellectual light-weight with no opinion of his own.  I&#039;m convinced he calls someone at the RNC to get approval, before he&#039;ll even open his mouth to give an opinion.

He&#039;s successful for sure, but for anyone who would compare his success to Limbaugh&#039;s (as if that validates anything) ... they might as well argue that Britney Spears is as artistically talented as Robert Plant too.  Limbaugh&#039;s an original.  Hannity is just a product.

Like I said before, I like Limbaugh.  Where I disagree with him though, is he can be (but not always) too apologetic for Republican politicos, and too light-weight in his economic analysis.  But then again ...

First and foremost, he&#039;s a broadcaster, and a very good one at that, with the largest audience in talk radio history.  So in other words, with Limbaugh, I don&#039;t think he lacks intellect ... he just understands and operates his business better than anyone else.

The whole point of my post was simply this: The conservative movement has a rich intellectual heritage, the majority of which is very different than what is considered &quot;conservative&quot; today.  So if anyone genuinely cares about conservatism anymore, I suggest they start learning about all of it, instead of just the general claptrap they listen to and read today.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree, Hannity is horrible!  He's an intellectual light-weight with no opinion of his own.  I'm convinced he calls someone at the RNC to get approval, before he'll even open his mouth to give an opinion.</p>
<p>He's successful for sure, but for anyone who would compare his success to Limbaugh's (as if that validates anything) ... they might as well argue that Britney Spears is as artistically talented as Robert Plant too.  Limbaugh's an original.  Hannity is just a product.</p>
<p>Like I said before, I like Limbaugh.  Where I disagree with him though, is he can be (but not always) too apologetic for Republican politicos, and too light-weight in his economic analysis.  But then again ...</p>
<p>First and foremost, he's a broadcaster, and a very good one at that, with the largest audience in talk radio history.  So in other words, with Limbaugh, I don't think he lacks intellect ... he just understands and operates his business better than anyone else.</p>
<p>The whole point of my post was simply this: The conservative movement has a rich intellectual heritage, the majority of which is very different than what is considered "conservative" today.  So if anyone genuinely cares about conservatism anymore, I suggest they start learning about all of it, instead of just the general claptrap they listen to and read today.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carl M.</title>
		<link>http://the-classic-liberal.com/conservative-intellectuals/comment-page-1/#comment-1580</link>
		<dc:creator>Carl M.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2009 21:40:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://the-classic-liberal.com/?p=5799#comment-1580</guid>
		<description>Buckley was an intellectual. National Review still has an intellectual bent. So does the Wall St. Journal. Fox, Washington Times, O&#039;Reilly, Hannity...pathetic.

I agree that Keynesian economics are incredibly destructive. My blog is 90% about getting this message out. Alas, prior to Obama, W. Bush was our most Keynesian president since WWII.

Years ago, Limbaugh was a funny buffoon, who did a great job of making fun of liberal buffoonery. His songs and sketches were great. Then, he got pretentious and started doing analysis -- which wouldn&#039;t have been so bad save that his tedious arguments as to why it&#039;s OK for Bush to do something when it was wrong for Clinton to do the same thing got really old.

But at least he&#039;s better than Hannity.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Buckley was an intellectual. National Review still has an intellectual bent. So does the Wall St. Journal. Fox, Washington Times, O'Reilly, Hannity...pathetic.</p>
<p>I agree that Keynesian economics are incredibly destructive. My blog is 90% about getting this message out. Alas, prior to Obama, W. Bush was our most Keynesian president since WWII.</p>
<p>Years ago, Limbaugh was a funny buffoon, who did a great job of making fun of liberal buffoonery. His songs and sketches were great. Then, he got pretentious and started doing analysis -- which wouldn't have been so bad save that his tedious arguments as to why it's OK for Bush to do something when it was wrong for Clinton to do the same thing got really old.</p>
<p>But at least he's better than Hannity.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: theCL</title>
		<link>http://the-classic-liberal.com/conservative-intellectuals/comment-page-1/#comment-1579</link>
		<dc:creator>theCL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2009 16:54:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://the-classic-liberal.com/?p=5799#comment-1579</guid>
		<description>Mises and Hayek were both influential prior to National Review.  Mises published &quot;The Theory of Money and Credit&quot; way back in 1912.  Hayek&#039;s &quot;The Road to Serfdom&quot; significantly influenced Winston Churchill.  And as far as any given politicos speech pattern, it has nothing to do with intellectualism.  Apples and oranges.  I mean, when is the last time a college professor was elected president?

The &quot;primary voice&quot; is Limbaugh?  How do you figure?  Do you listen to him?  It&#039;s rare that I do, but I enjoy him when I get the chance.  Rush is a professional broadcaster, and regardless of what anyone may think of his opinions, Limbaugh is the Muhammad Ali of the broadcast industry.  He&#039;s that good at it!

But that&#039;s the thing ... he&#039;s a broadcaster, not an intellectual.  For example, Thomas Sowell is an intellectual.  As you can see, Limbaugh and Sowell are in different professional fields.

I may not agree with everything Rush says either (only a zombie can find another person with which they can be in total agreeance), but I&#039;m here to tell you this - contrary to the Cool Kid Theory, Rush Limbaugh is a very valuable asset to the conservative movement.

Global warming is a myth, and no one should stand in favor of stomping on the freedoms of anyone in the name of such nonsense.

The &quot;right&quot; isn&#039;t happy about the past expenditures of Republican politicos anymore than they are about the expenditures of Democrat politicos.  Keynesian economics is not simply incorrect, it&#039;s diabolically destructive!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mises and Hayek were both influential prior to National Review.  Mises published "The Theory of Money and Credit" way back in 1912.  Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom" significantly influenced Winston Churchill.  And as far as any given politicos speech pattern, it has nothing to do with intellectualism.  Apples and oranges.  I mean, when is the last time a college professor was elected president?</p>
<p>The "primary voice" is Limbaugh?  How do you figure?  Do you listen to him?  It's rare that I do, but I enjoy him when I get the chance.  Rush is a professional broadcaster, and regardless of what anyone may think of his opinions, Limbaugh is the Muhammad Ali of the broadcast industry.  He's that good at it!</p>
<p>But that's the thing ... he's a broadcaster, not an intellectual.  For example, Thomas Sowell is an intellectual.  As you can see, Limbaugh and Sowell are in different professional fields.</p>
<p>I may not agree with everything Rush says either (only a zombie can find another person with which they can be in total agreeance), but I'm here to tell you this - contrary to the Cool Kid Theory, Rush Limbaugh is a very valuable asset to the conservative movement.</p>
<p>Global warming is a myth, and no one should stand in favor of stomping on the freedoms of anyone in the name of such nonsense.</p>
<p>The "right" isn't happy about the past expenditures of Republican politicos anymore than they are about the expenditures of Democrat politicos.  Keynesian economics is not simply incorrect, it's diabolically destructive!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk
Page Caching using disk (enhanced) (User agent is rejected)
Database Caching 7/18 queries in 0.039 seconds using disk

Served from: the-classic-liberal.com @ 2012-05-23 12:29:47 -->
