I wish Sowell was more plainspoken. His writing is so dense, each sentence packed with meaning. Difficult for the average bear to follow.

Sowell is an interesting figure and thinker. It’s unfortunate that he was used for a time as a prop by figures like Rush Limbaugh.

That figures like Rush Limbaugh and their level of influence exist, as well as on the opposite of the media political spectrum, as self-fulfilling visions of the world, is one of the tragedies referenced in the article as revealed in Sowell's extensive research and (>50 books) publication.

Number of books and number of readers are not well correlated, news at 11.

What makes a figure like Rush Limbaugh a tragedy?

That is not at all what I wrote. Apologies that my run-on sentence was difficult for you to parse.

Still can’t parse upon reinspection but am interested in understanding what you were getting at? Could not connect Limbaugh’s influence to any “tragedies” in the article even after rereading.

CTRL-F, "visions"

Rush Limbaugh exist, as well as on the opposite of the media political spectrum

Rush is a commie? On all the spectrums?

These sound like extremely confused questions. My apologies.

Opposite to media spectrum? What is opposite to media?

Too late to edit the comment. If I had written "...opposite end of..." it might have been clearer.

I did not mean the opposite of a political spectrum, but since you raise the question, I am very optimistic that it exists.

Well you could have been even more clearer than that, by not using double speek.

Interesting that neither one of us seems to know what the other is talking about.

How was he used as a prop? That’s amazingly condescending so I’m sure you have accurate links backing you up.