Frum’s critique of Limbaugh is that he unnecessarily alienates those we need to persuade — the moderates and almost-conservatives — by engaging in gratuitous provocations which are more cathartic than forensic. And yet when it comes to the people Frum first needs to persuade — the mainstream of the conservative movement — he engages in precisely the same style of ‘debate’ through invective…
Ace is talking about the Levin vs Frum “interview” and that audio exposed something that is, obviously, not apparent in print: Frum’s voice. Whether through no fault of his own or by design (his late mother was one of Canada’s most famous broadcasters) Frum talks in this studied-sounding calm voice, a far less pronounced version of that voice Mulroney and sometimes Thatcher put on in public and which grated more than it soothed. It came across as patrician and patronizing.
It was quite a contrast to Levin’s infamous junkyard dog vocalizations. But it comes across as overly put on, and temporarily hides the fact that he’s (very calmly, of course) telling Levin he sounds like “a crazy guy screaming at cars going by.”
The bottom line seems to be: rudeness — it’s ok if Frum does it, but nobody else, cuz he does it in a, like, classier way.
Hmmm.
This fight is really about Party vs. Principle. That’s a good debate to have, and we’ll all have it til the end of days. But calling people names for being “name callers”? That’s all ya got?
