Where Rush Limbaugh Went Astray At CPAC
But if Rush actually does believe that our policies are fine and that we just need the right candidate, there are two big problems with his position.
First off, it abandons the whole field of “new ideas” to people who are not conservatives. Liberals are always coming up with new ways to spend our money and grow government.
So if all the prominent “idea men” on “our side” are people who hate social conservatives and love big government, then the conservative movement will have to choose between being forever frozen — or moving farther away from its roots with the adoption of each new idea. That path will lead to a long, slow slide into oblivion.
Conservative principles may not change, but political agendas can and should change fairly regularly based on events, circumstances, and the desires of the public. Having the best principles and philosophy is all well and good, but we’re not going to win future elections in this country if we spend all our time talking about the philosophies of Hayek, Burke, and Friedman, while ignoring the day-to-day issues that voters care about.
That brings us to problem number two. We may be able to win future battles running on Reagan’s ideas, but we won’t win the long-term war for the future of our country by perpetually running on a nearly 30-year-old political agenda.
To name one issue, it has gotten to the point where I cringe when a Republican starts talking about income tax cuts like they’re a political powerhouse. That sounds almost like conservative sacrilege, doesn’t it? Yet, as most of the conservatives reading this column know, more than 40% of Americans pay no income tax. So how effective of an issue is that to those people compared to, say, health care, an issue that we have allowed the Democrats to own because we’re still pretending that it’s 1980, when that wasn’t a hot topic?
The reality is that conservatives have better ideas than liberals in every area. We want clean air, water, and soil, but oppose budget-busting environmental extremism to achieve these goals. We want quality education, but support shifting the power and the money from the federal government and the teachers’ unions to the states and the parents. We want to cut the cost of health care via tax credits and giving consumers more choice in health care. We want achieve real energy independence not through investing billions in pie-in-the-sky solar and windmill technology, but by investing in shale oil drilling that could actually allow America to become the world’s biggest oil exporter in 15 years.
Conservatives have better solutions than either the left or the moderates in our own party can come up with — ready to go, ready to improve the lives of Americans — but very few people on the right are promoting those ideas.
Sure, it’s possible we could win in 2012 on the same old stale agenda. But what if we don’t? What if we run a conservative like Sarah Palin, and Barack Obama just manages to squeak out a victory, not over a squishy RINO like John McCain, but over a real conservative?
That would create a crisis of confidence in our movement. And that is why we can’t afford to be complacent about our agenda, technology, or the grassroots.
As Rush said, we do need the “right candidate.” However, we also need to improve our political agenda to show the American people that not only are conservatives philosophically superior to liberal Democrats, but that they have relevant, intelligent policies that will make a positive difference in their lives.
Rush has a tight relationship with the Heritage Foundation. His affiliation suggests to me something other than a man that won’t discuss policy. I took his comment to mean holding with the philosophical foundation of conservatism, meaning your Hayek, Burke, and Friedman, Kirk, Buckley, and so on, rather than trying to out-wonk the New Dealers as Bill Kristol and others aim to do.
None of that suggests abandoning ideas. Friedman was still discussing ideas when he passed on in 2006, and in fact his son’s blog is titled “Ideas.” The New York Times just featured Gingrich churning out ideas for saving the taxpayers government overhead expenses.
And I’m kicking around an idea for how to restructure car insurance laws. Right now, you have to buy a policy for every car you drive. But why is that? You can only wreck one of your cars at a time, right? So I’m wondering if conservatives can’t run on a platform that includes cutting waste in car insurance requirements. Wouldn’t it be cheaper to insure yourself as a driver rather than your sedan and mini van?
What I saw was a good speech, and I’m not a Dittohead. I’m not among those that thought he embarrassed the movement in any way, and I didn’t see anything from him that needs my rebuke.
Point taken on income taxes, though.
Nice topic, Hawk! IMHO a difference should be drawn between political/philosophical conservatism and socio-economic conservatism to begin to understand or describe who we are as conservatives. Conservatism begins and ends with a strict interpretation of the Constitution. Philosophically, there is no middle ground to be shared between Libs and Cons on interpretation. This is black and white with a line drawn in the sand! This is where a battle to save our society should be waged.
BHO’s professed goal to “fundamentally change America” begins with him using the Constitution to wipe his butt with.
I disagree. At least to the extent that in the coming years Republicans will need to get down to basic philosophy to draw as sharp a distinction as possible between themselves and Obama. Shaded policy distinctions will get lost, either in the personality cult and media distortions or simple ignorance. Keep it simple.
Obama’s presidency is already shaping up to be a disaster. He seems determined to spend us into bankruptcy while using this crisis to achieve state control over many areas of the economy. We know from history this is a prescription for misery. He will be instituting the largest tax increase in our history while we are still in recession. This will all have to be reversed some day in as painless a way as possible if we are ever going to return to the prosperity of the past 25 years.
It’s doubtful we have ever had in our history a president as profoundly ignorant of economics as Obama has shown himself to be (the market has lost nearly 30% of its value in the short time since his election, so the investor class already knows this). The only way he is taken seriously is the ennui from a poorly educated populace.
“Conservatives have better solutions than either the Left or the moderates in our own party can come up with — ready to go, ready to improve the lives of Americans — but very few people on the Right are promoting those ideas.”
Agree, however I’ll add that it is easy to be a close-mined Liberal when economic instability is the last thing one has to worry about; now that economic instability is at the forefront of discussion people will naturally open their mines to Conservative ideals.
It is a matter of personal survival and when this is threatened the ears prick up and people start to pay close attention.
Granted Reagan was an inspirational speaker however if the economic situation had not grown so dire during Jimmy Carter’s tenure most Americans would not have tuned into Reagan’s message.
Rush’s comments were aimed at John McCain and his ilk, who clearly do not represent the conservative philosophy. Look at McCain’s position on (1) amnesty/immigration; (2) global warming; (3) campaign finance/free speech; (4) TARP I; etc. If McCain had taken a principled stance against unlimited government bailout spending, he might have picked up the 3% more voters he needed to win. Instead, he presented himself as a “Democrat-Lite” candidate. We need conservatives who can articulate the philosophy of smaller government, free markets, less regulation and strong national defense – all the things the Democrats are against – not someone who believes Obama is going in the right direction but is just trying to proceed too quickly.
If a single Conservative would stand and deliver the truth regarding the economic situation it would be a shining beacon of light in the current environment. The truth would do more for the conservative movement than anything else;
The citi of London is a financial powerhouse ( the citi of london is a financial corporation that exists seperately from London), has issued 600 Trillion in worthless derivatives that somehow Americans are being forced to make good on. The Federal Reserve has sent 2 trillion in Cash to Citi of London to make payments on these derivatives without Federal oversight or authorization during 2007 and 2008. ( the Fed Reserve is a private entity made up of shareholder banks in the citi of London).
Not a single Congressman or Senator has the guts to stand and question why this was allowed, or what authorization the Federal Reserve had to transfer 2 Trillion from USA banking system and send it to Citi of London. This is the amount we know of so far, we do not know the totals yet as there is no supervision of our banking system. It may be far higher.
So how about it, one single conservative legislator to stand and deliver the Truth. Then we can fix the sytem.
Bravo, and let me come at what I think is your point from another angle, for the sake of the detractors:
The Democrats are in power because they’ve won elections.
They’ve won elections because they have done a better job of articulating a set of (arguably wrongheaded) requirements that a modern society would ask of its government.
Online, I’m often the one screaming “Constitution” in a crowded outburst of collectivism.
But what has to be done is *not* to argue how collectivism is antithetical to the Constitution, but how that, in a Federalist context, Massachusetts should be able to go full-on nanny state if they want to, without too big a dig into the wallet of the other 56 states.
Then, let history be the judge.
IOW, you can harmonize Federalism and nuance, without being open to charges of obstructionism.
“They’ve won elections because they have done a better job of articulating a set of (arguably wrongheaded) requirements…”
Nonsense. They are winning elections because they dominate the MSM and the major intellectual and cultural institutions. The United States remains a center-right nation. But we must learn to better work around the obstacles placed before us. I am convinced that we would easily win 55% of all elections if only we can get our message out in front of the citizenry.
Barack Obama did not win the most recent election because the majority of Americans embrace his core beliefs. No, they did so because they were conned into thinking that he was some sort of center left politician competing against the feckless John McCain. When voters are asked to decide between a make believe conservative like the Arizona U.S. senator and a perceived moderate like Obama—they will likely opt for the latter.
You make some interesting points about where Rush went astray, John, but the moment you start tossing around Palin as a candidate for 2012, then I realize your speaking with your little head, and not the one between your shoulders, and your piece should be titled “Where Hawkins Went Astray”
During the Gen Election, Palin proved then, and continues to prove now, that she has NO intellectual ability to sell conservatism nor does she understand the larger world, and the many issues that our country faces.
An emotional connection to Palin from our base is no different than an emotional connection to Obama from his base.
Rush, off the top of his head, did a far better job of explaining conservatism ( “Let me tell you who we conservatives are” ) than anyone in the GOP has done since Reagan.
Palin may have political celebrity, but she has very little political credibility. And both are dwindling daily.
Even the CPAC straw poll chose Romney as its Candidate of Choice for 2012.
That also worries me and I m left to wonder what’s going on within the minds of conservatives these days.
With Palin and Romney still being foolishly discussed for 2012, it’s clear that the GOP is still lost in the wilderness.
You clearly misunderstood Rush’s point. Debating policy is how Republicans lose elections – debating philosophy is how they win.
During the debates, Obama would extol one leftist policy after another. John McCain should have taken a step back and blasted those policies on philosophical grounds – as Reagan or Rush would have. With every liberal give-away and tax increase, I heard in my head “there you go again.” I kept waiting for McCain to pull that philosophical trigger and he never did.
Instead of raising the debate to the philosophical level and forcing Obama to defend big government, McCain would trot out his semi-leftist policies instead. It was a perfect formula for losing.
Huntress, It’s official!! You are the biggest idiot to ever have posted on PJM. How can you cite Rush as having articulated who conservatives are, better than anyone since RR, and not recognize that Rush has often stated who a conservative IS – Sarah Palin.
“Having the best principles and philosophy is all well and good, but we’re not going to win future elections in this country if we spend all our time talking about the philosophies of Hayek, Burke, and Friedman, while ignoring the day-to-day issues that voters care about.”
Okay..so you’re really beginning to piss me off. Let’s walk through this shall we? Any conservative with an IQ above 100 can apply basic conservative principles and mores to past, current, and future issues and within SECONDS (and I do mean seconds) be able to spit out a viewpoint.
I do it all the time. And every one of my fellow conservatives are capable.
Sooooooooooo, what you really need to say is:
1. Those who can not apply, don’t want to apply, or are unwilling to apply the core conservative principles and mores to issues aren’t…..conservatives. And may be, God forbid, swimming in the shallow end of the gene pool.
2. Let’s CONTINUE to convince those millions of Americans who could care less about politics and our country- to start caring.
Limbaugh, Gingrich, and others articulate VERY WELL every issue under the sun. Quit mollycoddling stupidity. All those Americans who voted for Democrats in 2006 and 2008 want a free lunch.
It’s that simple.
As I continue to read the articles and comments I wonder if the real soul of the conservatives who vote, earn, and spend in this great country are so tired of big government by both parties that they are confused and disoriented by politicians who may say smaller government but are campaigning to become part of big government. I don’t pretend to have answers. I see the market talking to the world, expressing their disappointment in policies and actions through a lack of trading, and I wonder who if anyone in “Big Government” is listening.
Ths article confuses principals with ideas. The creative application of conservative prinicpals to current problems is what is needed. Tax cuts do work. Just because it’s been said before doesn’t mean that it can’t be proposed. It is amazing that the media and the Dems have been able to make the idea that rasing taxes is good and that cutting taxes is a bad isea. In a sane world proposing higher taxes should be poison for a party.
Framing the debate is critical. It includes asserting those principals in the discussion to frame the discussion. Too often, we allow the discussion to be framed as to whether we want to ‘save the environment or not’ instead of whether the idea, ie carbon tax, even makes sense or addresses the problem.
Regan was effetive because he had a strong grasp of the principals and framed the discussion without acknowledging the incorrect premise of the other side.
Most Americans are hungry for someone who cuts throught the trivial and innane crap we see on a daily basis and states things as we see them ourselves. This is why Rush, Hannity, Joe the Plumber, and Santini strike such a response. Millions are sitting in their living rooms talking the their TV’s waiting for someone who makes sense.
So what are “Conservative Principles”? Name them. If Palin has no intellectual ability (BIG mistake. Even Camille Paglia on the Left recognizes how smart she is.) to “sell conservatism”, it’s because you can’t sell nothing. Ayn Rand wrote a brief article in 1960 called “Conservatism: An Obituary.” You people need to decide what principles (but that would be ideology, wouldn’t it? and “Conservatives”, we are told, eschew ideology.) you stand for and articulate them. You might start with the unconservative idea that your life belongs to you and the good is to live it. That’s from the Declaration of Independence. And get a new name. America wasn’t founded by conservatives. George III was the conservative.
I think what Rush was trying to express is the thing which will get conservatism back on track and winning is passion not policy. Everyone wants to win the policy debate by ordering from a chinese food menu . Believing the right mixture of issue and positions will create a winning slate .
He is right in that our morale is so low and and lack of leadership so acute that the best thing for us is to cling to basic principle and not abandon the philosophical principles to liberalism.
“New ideas” does not have to mean big government solutions. I love Rush because he is a captivating speaker and he doesn’t back down when attacked. Conservatives need candidates that can do the same.
When you talk about tax cuts you have to say which ones and why. Obama’s tax “cuts” are either welfare checks to people who don’t pay taxes or some piddling amount to taxpaying individuals.
Cuts to investments taxes of all kinds, and a flatter tax structure, will grow the economy. That’s what the track record shows. Point out that the US has one of the highest corporate taxes in the world, and that some states’ are even higher, on top of that. People don’t know that, they think we are easier on big business than more “enlightened” countries.
Just saying “tax cuts” does not win the argument.
Democrats win elections because they cheat.
They gerrymander, stuff ballot boxes, pay for anyone (including illegals) to vote, legislate voters into their camp (prisoners, motor-voter, Federal programs and grants a la ACORN), and get-out-the-vote (even with baseball bats). They also own the mouth-breathing, gum-chewing, NTA-NEA dumbed-down hoi polloi by lowest common denominator propaganda by the MSM elites, but without the vote cheating that wouldn’t be enough.
The NRCCYGOP (Nelson Rockefeller Country Club Yalie GOP) are feeble milksops speaking in a closed echo chamber. They’re the Tsarist gentry thunderstruck at the Bolshis, the Roman elites dumbfounded at the onrush of Huns. Don’t expect squat from them.
I want Palin, the Christian Conservatives and Rush to push the party even further to the right so we can be treated to more hilarity for the next 4 years.
The GOP created a monster when they chose Palin this election. The evangelicals won’t give up power easily.
Our government is the best in the world. “Policy” structures are what our government is comprised of. The reason republicans lost is because they don’t know what “policy” is and Rush is living proof.
Furthermore, I did a word search on his verbatim speech at CPAC and found no mention of “drugs.” I quit listening to him when I learned that he was addicted to narcotics. Conservatives love drugs.
I think this article misinterprets Rush’s statement on process and policy to mean that Republicans ought to toss policy ideas out the window. That’s not what he seems to be getting at, at all. His point is that, when interviewing nationally elected Republicans on Capital Hill, when they’re asked about the Stimulus, for instance, instead of responding “It’s horrid. It’s wrong. It’s trading 30% of our future income for a 10% return on infrastructure and 90% increase in Democratic political support and social welfare incareases.” or the like, they start talking about how they can use the power of this committee or that committee to ameliorate the proposed spending of $140 million on mattress subsidies for low income folks to only $138 million…
Looked at from the other side, the Democrats, during Bush’s Administration, when asked about anything at all would start by declaiming that Bush was wrong, deceitful, making the world hate the US, etc etc.
Rush is right, the Republican approach wins no public support. Who is going to get excited about hearing Boehner wax rhapsodic about the %0.8 reduction in waste he was able to leverage on a spending bill? The Democrats may not have been factual, may have sounded like they were reading a protest flyer all the time, but at least they engaged the voting public.
Conservatism is losing because we are letting the Democrats define it and their definition is wrong. Rush Limbaugh sets the record straight every day which is why he is so popular.
Conservatism is based on common sense and history backs it up. The more people understand the real views of conservatives (not what they hear from the Democrats and CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC), they like it and vote for it.
Karl Rove wrote an excellent article in the Wall St. Journal talking about the fake straw men that Obama uses in his speeches. Obama is ascribing views to Republicans that are purposely wrong. Why? Because he is using this as a way to lie about the conservative viewpoint in order to push through his socialist agenda. (Here is a link to the article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123561484923478287.html)
Obama lies in his speeches and frames the debate to benefit his radical views, but, of course, Obama makes his views seem mainstream. Unless we call Obama out on his lies and set the record straight every single day, every single time he does it, we will continue to be wrongfully defined.
Rush Limbaugh is calling Obama out on his lies every day which why he is under attack from the Democrats. Sean Hannity is doing the same and we see how he is being targeted, too.
It’s time that more Republican politicians speak up and speak loudly. If they can’t or won’t, we need to replace them.
I agree that the idea that we just had the wrong candidate is enticing but will likely prove untrue. There needs to be a clearer sense that the party is in touch with what people really want. Like it or not, most people really do want healthcare reform, for example. So there needs to be some discussion. Rush L. suggests that is socialism. OK, then the polls are showing a majority want socialism.
At this point, in other words, Rush is going to start sounding just like the Democrats sounded last year when they essentially trashed all people who didn’t endorse elitism as being uneductated and racist. That pushed me away, without a doubt. The same can happen on the other side.
Intelligent policies and programs are, indeed, the way to go.
I was a young teenager when Reagan was elected but even in my naivtee about the world, I recognized a great leader and even better motivator. He made Americans proud to be Americans again. He lifted spirits and gave hope to a deflated economy and morale. Rush Limbaugh did just that on Saturday night. Love him or hate him, he is inspiring and filled with the American spirit that conservatives need to bring back to the tables once again. Palin has the same raw optimism and love for her country. I think Romney/Palin would make a great team in 2012.
Ladies and Gents,
It’s about Core Principles and Values. Adjustments can be made AROUND them but you can’t change them or give them up in any way.
By the way. CNN stretched out Rush’s picture to make him look Fat. CNN is still just a puppet I see.
Now we are hearing from those who are trying so hard to earn a membership in the National Accomodationists Association, those who would destroy the message by diluting it (for what reason? To fly under the radar of political correctness?) at the cost of killing it.
The mobilization of the conservative vote is not a matter of charm, it’s a question of making the fundamental arguments of conservatism, which are not some kind of private property of the right, but also most naturally resonate with voters of all stripes when a sincere and respectful appeal is made to their thinking and their national pride, not to some cultivated victim-like sense of powerlessness.
The only way to reverse the tsunami of collectivism is to stand up and oppose it, not try to mitigate it. Personal courage is simply doing what you know is right, not falling in the trap of “inclusion” regarding the opposing arguments.
The republicans who will reverse the tide will be the true patriots, not the idiots toying with some liberal-lite “well balanced” recipe.
ha, ha, ha,
I love this. Sarah Palin is your dream candidate. Joe the Plumber is your star journalist. Rush Limbaugh is the voice and leadership of your party. I think it’s safe to say that we’re looking at Democratic party dominance for a looooooooong time.
Gerald: By the way. CNN stretched out Rush’s picture to make him look Fat. CNN is still just a puppet I see.
Yeah, and I bet CNN messed with the lighting to make him look bald too, right? Durned librul meed-yah.
Rush is the worst example of, well, anything I can think of. He’s a junkie. A liar. A whore monger. racist. And a hypocrite. Now, let’s stay focused here. I’m not taking about anybody else but Rush. Not Obama. Not Ted Kennedy. Not Mr. Spock. Just Rush. Now, if conservatives are so frustrated or desperate or angry or just plain stupid that they’re willing to lineup behind this guy, then you deserve to be marginalized even further. And you will be. No, this is not “Oh, they’re so terrified of Rush that they’re saying they’re not terrified of Rush, that they really want him when in fact they really fear him.”
I’m just telling you, this guy is gonna lead you into a generation of exile. And he won’t care, because none of this is about YOU. It’s about HIM. You know that, right? And Palin is exactly the same, only not as smart. And Romney, well, let’s just say it’s gonna be tough i this day of hyper-religiosity for him to explain worshipping a 19th century pedophile from Missouri. Jindal? Super smart, way too geeky.
Come to think of it, stay with Rush. He’s your best shot.
I think Rush was dead on. Elections in America are not ordinarily won; they are lost. Without Jimmy Carter there would have been no Ronald Reagan, however great his ideas. Obama is president because Bush was a mediocre manager and a grossly ineffective communicator who had difficulty correcting his mistakes and was completely unable to seize credit for his successes. Even then, McCain was ahead when the market tanked. Like Katrina, the market drop was not really Bush’s fault, of course, but that makes no difference in the real world.
If the economy recovers during Obama’s tenure and we avoid catastrophe in foreign affairs, whether by the brilliance of his policies or by (in my opinion his only hope) blind luck, conservatives will remain on the sidelines however brilliant their policies may be.
But if the Obama administration fails, as it very likely will, their only hope to retain power will be to convince people the Republicans are even worse. They know this, and have only accelerated the demonization of conservatives since they acquired power.
You don’t fight demonization with wonky stuff. You fight it with noble rhetoric and good, solid American philosophy. This is what Rush is doing. And this is exactly the path that will make conservatives the acceptable alternative when the One falls on his face.
We do need sound policies, not to win, but to govern well after winning.
The only thing I disagreed with on hearing Rush’s speech was his defense of that bank and John Thune on spending. The latter he joked about stimulus but really how he spent his and Merrill’s money isn’t most of our business. Defending him is a waste of energy. And that Northern X, bank that had a big bash for clients and such, well the word leaked out that some knucklehead was bragging about using taxpayer money for throwing it. That’s hearsay but damning if true. No political capital needs be wasted on such arrogance either with this bank or similarly with AIG executives.
So John you really have to see the fuller picture. How does a conservative voice, based on principle stand up against a statist who is advocating a welfare state that will eat nearly 50% of the US GDP by 2010/2012.
Obama did not run on that platform. He ran on symbolism and largely empty platitudes. He and the Democrat Party will have to run on something much more substantial than their true intentions which they hide every time the election cycle comes up: their record.
So let’s see how a Mitt Romney or a Bobby Jindal or who have you fares mano a mano before we throw in the towel. That battle needs to be waged before Michael Steele and others think that an overhaul of principle(s) is required.
It’s not.
Mr. Hawkins,
Wow, I really agree with you.
If we had a candidate that understood what you elaborated, AND understsood what Limbaugh represents to us, which is a person who is true to himself and honest with what he believes, not afraid to speak it -well, then, we’d have 2012 wrapped up.
Thanks for the post.
BTW. For all you liberal celebrity worshipers on this board. You love your messiah because he’s so pretty appearance wise. If he opened his mouth and a snake slithered forth, you’d probably be OK with that. Conservatives really do like people, we look beyond the surface to what they believe. Rush is a very good looking dude, but you’d never understand that.
Says 10. Huntress:
“With Palin and Romney still being foolishly discussed for 2012, it’s clear that the GOP is still lost in the wilderness.”
Too true.
Oh, and it wouldn’t hurt if Rush knew the difference between the Declaration of independence and the Constitution. We liberals, we’re sticklers for that sort of thing.
When the Democrats fear you enough to actually go out of their way to mention you by name you’re doing something RIGHT.
When the actual [supposed] PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES mentions your name then you’ve just gained more cred and visibility than any commercial could ever do ya for.
Thanks for helpin’ us out, Mr. Moobies.
-
“Conservatives have better solutions than either the left or the moderates in our own party can come up with — ready to go, ready to improve the lives of Americans — but very few people on the right are promoting those ideas.”
↑I agree. People on the left seem to conveniently ‘forget’ that conservatives are great survivalists and inventors.
All you have to do is look at the Conservative party in the UK to see the direction that the Republican party has taken and which Limbaugh was quite rightly warning against. The Tories under David Cameron look like Blairites, so you end up having to chose between two types of left. Look at France, Sarkozy gets in and turns out to be a Socialist, who do you vote for then. The USA must not go down that road, there must be at least one country that has real political choice, you made the mistake with McCain, learn from it
The reality is that conservatives have nothing but hot air to sell in every area. The GOP has fought tooth and nail against clean air, clean water and clean soil. The GOP has fought tooth and nail to dismantle the public education system and defund public institutions. The GOP has fought any health care reform that would expand coverage or reduce costs. The GOP believes energy independence can be achieved without an investment in future technologies, that drilling for oil is the ultimate solution to energy independence in spite of the very real environmental damage it causes.
Rush is right that Obama is a very talented orator, and that the GOP cannot compete with Democrats on policy – that much has been clear for a while. Rush is also right that the GOP “do not look out across the country and see the average American, the person that makes this country work.” The GOP has been ignoring the plight of the working American for decades, while providing largesse to corporations and the ultra-wealthy.
The GOP ignores the impact of their policies on the people. There is no concern for the general welfare in removing taxes for the rich, regulations that protect human health and the environment, and government that provides a safe, secure, and prosperous foundation for their success. The GOP wants to tell people who they can marry, what medical procedures they can receive, and give their government away to the rich.
Rush just keeps on selling his hot air, and the GOP keeps on buying it. Without a fundamental change in the backwards politics of the GOP, the conservative movement will be treading water for some time to come.
Peace.
DS
#37
I know the difference between aggravated assault and murder. Knowing how they are different doesn’t mean I respect either. Does that pretty much sum up your comment?
41. Sara,
One of your own just ‘supposedly’ grew a set and became ‘two’ and his posts are still just empty garbage. Ignore. He ain’t worth your well articulated verbiage, sweetheart.
Take heart though… I smell fear and it’s coming from the sore ‘winners’ who come here on the daily to try and foist their teensy little obsolete complaints upon us…
America is not a center right nation. That is a talking point by conservatives to cheer themselves up. America is now center left. The last two elections proved that. The face of America is changing and the demographics are trending even bluer. The median voter is moving left on the spectrum, continuing to position republican politicians to the right will ensure further losses. Obama didn’t win because Republicans strayed from conservative ideals, he won because this country is a majority progressive so deal with it. And please stop running to buy more ammo it makes you all look like paranoid hillbillies.
It never ceases to amaze me that when liberals cannot discuss the issues, make a coherent point, or begin engaging in discussing the topic at hand; they true to form resort to personal attacks and name calling. Does anyone find it amusing that Obama has admitted to using drugs for recreational purposes and Rush’s drug use was due to an actual physical condition in his body? Or could they just call it a wash and say both men made wrong choices and actually discuss the current situation Americans are in without Bush bashing, screaming about the war on TERROR or the eeeeevvvvvillll Rush?
Currently the market is trading below 7000 and is below 200 points. Conservatives are about good ideas from all sides that promote the success of ALL Americans. We are for freedoms and when your door closes to your domicile your rights to privacy are what we strongly endorse. I agree with some of the points made in the comment section and the article itself, but monkey, I do think Rush was limited as to time and should have fleshed out or more clearly defined what he meant on the policy deal. During his show he does this, but as he said during his first “National Address to the Nation” he should have given the public a more defined explanation.
What I really do not think some like Rush do not get is the state of our Union on morality issues and policy. This is not the same nation as was during the Great Depression and WWII eras. The Church is weak and the population does not easily distinguish between right vs. wrong. Educationally, morally and financially Americans are on a far different playing field that the one we were placed on when the nation faced prior crisis situations. The world is a far different place in many ways and more violent with the rise of radical Islam and the sheer numbers of anti-American populations residing in each and every country. And these folks are armed to the teeth in most banana republics, and not with just guns! Anyone recall the shipment of tanks to Kenya that were stopped due to the Somalian pirates and in turn our military? This is not our grandparents world.
As Rush alluded to, we are up against an ingrained mindset on every level. It is one thing to create good policy, but another thing to get the masses to comprehend it. There is such a stigma against anything Conservative because we were so lax in fighting back. I am not for redefining Conservatism, but this is going to be quite a task to re-educated the masses to Conservatism tried always succeeds and is all about freedom not restriction.
43. Whatnow?,
Have you noticed how sh*tty the blue states are doing, my adroit little scalawag?
Here’s a refresher course:
http://pajamasmedia.com/edgelings/2009/02/26/the-coming-blue-state-collapse/
-And, remember. There is NO SUCH THING as “Liberal LOGIC”… NONE. NADA. Zilch. Nyet!
Tell me, whatnow?… Have you studied the failure of communism and socialism or are you just here as a Liberal ‘fluffer’? You know what a ‘fluffer’ is right?
Rush is right about philosophy, however I doubt he would be able to properly identify the correct philosophy. Conservatism does not provide that philosophy so long as it’s married to religion and tradition since religion by it’s nature is an abdication of logic and reason.
Rush never mentioned the word socialism and his speech just played to the base. It was platitudes.
And now we find that the new RNC Chairman Steele is jumping on the “bash Rush” bandwagon. So it didn’t even work on that level.
I think in the next four years conservatives (of whatever ilk) need to find better “heroes” than Rush, Coulter & Paul. They may be music to many ears, but they sound off-key to the vast majority of Americans and many on the right as well.
#35. I agree. Character is more important to conservatives than charisma. If Lincoln were running today, he would lose because of his looks. Sad but true.
The GOP today has no soul, no vision, no ethics (think former Speaker Dennis Hastert); its right wing is dominated by overly excited young YAF ers with no kids, no judgment and little practical experience to moderate their foaming insistence that Ayn Rand will solve everything. They exclude everyone else: they are so blind they think that kicking everyone else out of the party will make it stonger.
Conservative and GOP commentators on blogs like this are often qreat quirky people but they have no balls. They talk, drink coffee, eat lobster and cracked crab (or whatever middle class conservatives eat), buy Ann Coulter books and leave it at that.
What the GOP should have done in the past 10 locust years is reinstate the values it was suppsoed to hold in the new generations: it failed: it should have kept tax rates low and surcharged for the war; invited zillions of poor smart kids (meaning not the Greg Marmalards of Animal House) to the White House as clerks, pages, and hit up conservative foundations to enlist them in internships;
They should have involved business in a “what can be done for America,” as opposed to for Wall Street and lobbyists; special US History speeches and lectures could have been delivered to schools for free by funded speakers; …..the federalist Papers explained in TV specials timed to reach high school and college kids; the evil effect of high taxes on liberty and initiative explained in public townhall meetings, . . . .
…..early parole for some non violent drug offenders…links to the black community fostered via thier smart kids and parents in middle school, virtually coopting the “we are always victims” groups in the black community…limiting the explosive growth of union benefit plans in state government…actually phoning the head of the SEC and asking “are you sure these super rich guys are on the up and up…it’s didn’t work out that way in the 80′s you know?”…….but nooooo., all this lost and for what?
So Dennis Hastert could do a preferential real estate deal in his home state… so some GOP officials could fulminate against gay marriage…name on other domestic policy advance under the GOP in the last 10 years?
David S is a perfect example of a smart but misdirected guy (sorry david S) that we should have grabbed early: and he’s not entirely wrong: the GOP has been last in too many matters that were and are needed for the common good. A result of too much opposing and not enough forward thinking that is perfectly consistent with good government: would Alexander Hamilton oppose clean air and water laws? Ben Franklin? No, only latter day shills for corporate America do that. Left to the left, those restrictions are now enforced by anti-business officials that were born and raised by democrats. The GOP stands for lowering the capital gains tax and the estate tax: meanwhile manufacturers and renters are left to bleed.
David, the GOP could match the Dmeocratic party easily if it weren’t populated by old barnacles and modern day barnacles that think being a conservative means opposing gay marriage and meeting with lobbyists. Any reasonable conservative has more ideas in an afternoon than a latter day GOP official has in 10 years.
The GOP needs experienced people with private sector experience not just lifetime GOP pols. It needs smart people that can do more than just oppose. A politician with a human feel that would have landed during Katrina, shaken some hands outside the white House, dropped in on a high school class or a college history class….but the GOP ceded the country to everyone else. Hiding inside its catered parties, it was as doomed as the US military hiding in the cities in Vietnam: the GOP controlled the white house and congress so it thought it didn’t matter what went on in the countryside.
What a shame.
PS to #37: come one: don’t be like one of those high school teachers that mark down a good essay for one typo.
Steve P.,
Your fooling yourself if you think there is no Media Bias against Republicans. I did’nt see it until Rush pointed it out to me years ago. I had been fooled all those years by the Liberal Media. Check out howobamagotelected.com to see for yourself. Or, just continue to swim in ignorance.
Gerald
Liberal Turned Republican(For Life)
Good article. But I think Rush is right about sticking to philosophical differences and not getting sucked into wonking-over the Obama program. That’s where Republicans were for many years before the Gipper came along — playing dentist to the Democrat candyman. The Republican Party cannot allow itself to be defined as proposing less of what Democrats propose. That concedes the fundamental principles (big govt vs liberty) at the outset and makes Republicans the cheap, tee-totalling uncle at the keg party…once again. We saw how that turned out last time. Again, Reagan showed us that new policy ideas flourish under the flag of first principles.
Bogus Blackwell,
You don’t baffle me with your B.S.
You, my dear madame are NO conservative. NOT by a longshot.
Cracked crab and lobster? LMAO!
The last time I had the LUXURY of either crustacean was my birthday back in 2001. Ask your ‘limo libs’ how many times the eat gourmet food? Ask your new Pimp in Office when he last ate a gourmet meal…
You’re a joke.
Thanks for playing just the same.
This Nation is in the worst shape it has ever been in. Conservatives got us into this mess and now there are blaming Democrats for trying to bring us out of it. Sounds like a double edge sword to me.”I’ll take my ball and go in the house”. No one knows what is going to work or not work, but giving something a try is better than doing NOTHING. Only GOD knows the pure motives of all involved. Let’s stop critisizing and do more positive talking and listening. IF Rush or Shaun were the leaders of our country we would be in deep,deep______. I work and live in this country and all the employers I’ve worked have pocked the money off the tax breaks given them and didn’t hire nore people. I don’t know if that would happen again or not, but I as an American is willing to give it a chance.
Why is it that generally the worst written posts here at PJM are typically composed by the KosKiddies who have dropped in to run up the flag for the Left? Poor grammar and spelling… choppy thoughts – or what passes for thought…
History
“Owners of capital will stimulate the working class to buy more and more of expensive goods, houses and technology, pushing them to take more and more expensive credits, until their debt becomes unbearable. The unpaid debt will lead to bankruptcy of banks, which will have to be nationalized, and State will have to take the road which will eventually lead to communism”
Karl Marx from “Das Kapital”
1867
Policies should be consistent with principles. Like the supremacy of private property and what I earn is mine, not someone else’s. That the government has no right to tax. What if got rid of the income tax. That would reduce the revenue to the government that funds so many social welfare programs we disagree with.
Or maybe we concede the evil necessity of income tax and but reduce it to 10 % flat. Keep the home deduction, business expenses and cost of health insurance and education.
You want to stimulate corporate America then get rid of the corporate income tax. It is only passed on as a cost of production the buyers pay. That would enable corporation to provide goods and services for cheaper and keep or hire more employees creating more jobs.
Eliminate the inheritance tax so wealth can be passed on so can business and farms that no longer have to be sold to pay the tax.
Just a couple of items. Newt’s Solutions America has lots of ideas. Ideas we have but they need to be consistent with the principle of small government. That most issues need to be handle by the private market and new ideas tries out in the states first.
“You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out
of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person
must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody
anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When
half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the
other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the
idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what
they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You
cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.”
Dr. Adrian Rogers, 1931-2005
Delia whines: “Ask your new Pimp in Office when he last ate a gourmet meal…”
Okay, now how about you go ask your new party spokesman when was the last time he took one of his viagra-fueled trips down to Latin America so he could enjoy the company of underage prostitutes.
The writer is propounding a false policy, because he has fallen into the trap of the Left’s making. He’s bought into their narrative.
New Ideas. No such thing. You think these ideas are new. You’re kidding, right? Did not Franklin and de Toqueville warn against these very “ideas” 200+ years ago? Conservative positions are not “stale ideas”. They are not ideas, by definition, because they are tried-and-true philosophies. Hence, the concept of conservative. We conserve the old, proven ways. We hew to tradition.
Better solutions. Big mistake. Huge. Never engage the enemy on his chosen field of battle. You’re likely conceding the victory at the start. When we start engaging the opposition on issues that they have defined, we are sure to lose, because they have defined the issues in such a way as to make their “solution” axiomatic.
Take healthcare, for example. McCain’s solution was recognized as being superior to Obama’s, but it was too technical for people to get in a soundbite, and it was the wrong answer, anyway. He engaged on the enemy’s chosen field, fought very well, and lost anyway, because he couldn’t win. To win, he had to redefine the issue. The problem isn’t lack of insurance. The problem is the spiraling-out-of-control cost of health care. Identifying the problem is half the solution.
Now, why is the cost out of control? Because in 1849, the government gave authority over regulation of health care to the AMA, a union of doctors who believe that only surgery and pharmaceuticals can cure disease. They then drove all other competitors out of business and formed a monopoly. The Chinese herbalist, the village wise woman, the chiropractor, and many others, were out of business in five years. It was governmental interference in health care 160 years ago that caused today’s problems.
Redefined, government is the problem, not the solution. This is in line with conservatism. Now, the debate changes to philosophy, instead of false “solutions”. This changes the battlefield to one of our choosing. It’s one where the Libs cannot win. It’s the only way to defeat the “free goodies” mentality.
The writer is saying we have to adapt to the desires of the public, but that is basically conceding to the opposition the choice of battleground, because what the public desires, is whatever the opposition has declared it to be. They’ve defined the issue. We must redefine it. That’s what Reagan did, and it is why he was so successful.
I have learned after my 69 years on this Earth painfully .
That to be a very good Liberal , racial Socialist or Closet Marxist You must Control the mass’s for Utopian totally equality although never achieved on this planet . In fact the compete Opposite was achieved with Millions starved to death , murdered , enslaved and living many generations in total Poverty .
Poverty knows Socialism best because it is aquatinted with far , far more than Capitalism has ever been even remotely .
Reason , Reality , Common sense , Facts , Individualism ,Personal Responsibility and Success though creativity ,taking chances , hard work are in fact scorn-able , deceiving , uncontrollable , unfair and unneeded in a Collective Society .
Socialism is all about Regulations and total Control …. hence a Lost of Freedom .
Capitalism is based on Achievement , paying the price for success .
Welfare ,is rewarded as is bad behavior and Entitlements is based on others hard work and being Responsible …… That is not Equal , Fair , Right or Just .
#43 — America is not a center right nation. That is a talking point by conservatives to cheer themselves up.
Bingo.
Here at PJM it’s taken as a given that the religious right are a big and important “base” to reckon with, which has always seemed at great odds to every iota of national level sociodemographic data. So then when you look into this numeric revelation a bit closer, you’ll find the source is — the religious right.
Before the GOP can fix itself, it needs to understand that the religious right is NOT a vast majority, but rather a minority of vocal blowhards. It also needs to come to grips with the fact that the US is not center-right.
We graduate a lot of college kids every year. A million perhaps? They vote. How many of these are social conservatives? Virtually ZERO.
I rest my case.
“playing dentist to the Democrat candyman” Great description of what Republican wonks are doing.
The Democrats have been working overtime lately on a mission to publicly demonize Rush Limbaugh because THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IS SCARED THE LIBITARIAN PARTY AND ALL AMERICANS SHOULD AND PROBABLY WILL VOTE RUSH LIMBAUGH FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!
A few thoughts:
Besides the problems of a dumbed down electorate, fed a steady stream of mainstream pablum & doublespeak, having lost sight of the real Principles at stake- is that of OPEN PRIMARY which I suspect had something to do with the nomination of McCain- as many Dems were likely to cross lines & choose the likely candidate to beat.
Imho there were fatal flaws with all of the R candidates this time around: Romney made mandatory health insurance as Gov, besides illegal immigration & “gay marriage” views that were off the wall. Some of Ron Paul’s monetary ideas are right on, while other positions seem loony. Huckabee was not objective to see that a minister would have no chance as a national candidate. While Palin has a good concept of the basics & attitude, was not adroit enough in national/ international issues ( by contrast, Biden/Obama can bluff with convincing lies assisted by the lapdog media)
An informed populace is the only enduring answer, which is the shared responsibility of us all, to make an effort to reach out & CONSTRUCTIVELY engage with people who do not understand our ideas. At a time when such things as:
the “Farceness doctrine” threatens to turn the lights out on freedom to choose information sources;
prohibitive gun insurance schemes are openly floated as a backdoor method of prohibition;
when the truth behind “Transparency of govt” manifests as 48 hours to read over 1000 pages of constituency payoffs; & a ‘Shamulus” bill which has the real purpose of making more people dependent on govt… these are the kinds of things that can open the door to greater understanding.
As it is, enough people are hoodwinked enough to look the other way when Constitutional norms for POTUS are overlooked, etc…
I hope someone will create a cartoon before I get around to it, perhaps at thepeoplescube: Fashioned after the cellphone ad, from the investors around the world: “CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?”
Democrats have controlled Congress for 2 years, but conservatives got us into this mess? Hairy Greed, Nancy Petrol, Dodd, Barney Frank just sat and watched this disaster happen?
Give me a break!
Obama tried what?- Its not working.
Even you agreed he needs to stop being so negative and be more positive,
I didn’t write that, you did.
And I agree,
He doesn’t know what to do next.
You voted for Hopenchange in Washington DC and you got it. -DISASTER-
Stocks are down another 250 and headed to what had been predicted,
6500.
The man truly is an empty suit.
# 63-
RUSH LIMBAUGH IS OUR ‘GREAT WHITE HOPE!’
** heh **
Rush has always said that Dems cannot win in the arena of ideas. I don’t believe he ever meant that conservative/Rep leaders shouldn’t spell out their ideas and solutions, but they need to be rooted in the conservative principles he spelled out with great clarity. As to the big idea men in the GOP who love big government and want to be Dem Lite, they need to go. That’s what he meant by leadership. GWB has a good heart, but he has never been truly a conservative. That was an impediment to conservatism for 8 years, and it was only towards the end of the admin that some of the conservative GOP actually began to speak against him. While the GOP cannot just be the party of “no”, they must expose Obama’s true agenda. European style government rooted in fascism.
Are the Republicans going to be an opposition party or a version or a mealy version of the Democratic party?
Boot the RINOS and stand for something.
Frederick:
“No one knows what is going to work or not work, but giving something a try is better than doing NOTHING.”
Really??? You really believe that? I think most of your fellow KosKids would argue that that is the exact logic that got us into the Iraq War.
Putting aside the logical fallacy, your argument also contains a fundamentally false premise: The mechanisms for economic growth are not a mystery. If the government provides a stable currency, removes barriers to entry and trade, removes punitive taxes on profits, and protects property rights, then an economy will grow. Capitalism is not an ideology; capitalism is what happens when individuals are left to do what they want to do. Economies stagnate when the government tries to impose its will in the form of wage and price controls, trade restrictions or the creation of artificial markets.
Delia: Oh but I am a conservative: I’m not entirely sure what you are, although I’ve read your posts on several issues, and admire your often gritty comments.
But you’ve confused the idea of a conservative with a mossback; the man yelling at kids to keep off his grass; people who oppose gay marriage and think that their civic duty ends when they vote against new taxes.
Some “Conservatives” support the use of US treasury funds to build roads and clean water systems in Iraq,remove landmines, protect other countries shipping lanes from pirates–but oppose spending our own money here to clean up our own air and water –that we all own–that some bloody company and its unionized work force fouled while making a profit that went to shareholders and overpaid workers. That’s not conservative–its a lot of things, but not conservative. It may even be a bit stupid.
Other self-styled conservatives think Wall Street is the United States. Its not: Main Street is and always has been the backbone of the US.
Other so-called conservatives seem to believe they can go off and make money and write books and all will be well: never mind the vesigal problems of racism, pollution, poor medical care and greedy unions–all problems caused by government tampering or private use of commonly owned things like our water.
I kind of think that protecting our water from people who want to dump chemicals in it is pretty conservative: preserving the staus quo one might say.
These “I oppose therefore I am a conservative” types opposed gay marriage night and day while state employee unions wound a noose around the neck of almost every solvent state, locking in pension benefits and health plans that’ll sadlle us all for generations. Shrewd bunch those “conservatives.” Not exactly the shrewdness of the Yankee traders, is it?
The “I oppose” “conservatives” sat and wrote books for 10 years while Dennis Hastert made the House into a lobbyists lounge for big business. That’s not conservatism. Its shortsighted, uninformed wimpiness that helped the GOP favor greedy lobbyists. The American voter isn’t stupid and can tell what it is. The conservatives got “taken” by the GOP and recognizing that is no sin: its a necessity.
Calling Obama a pimp is childish: if you want to compete on ideas and not name calling (a game the Dems always win), you’ll lose. Oops. You are losing–you lost! Winston Churchill, by the way, pushed and supported free milk for poor kids almsot 100 years ago, along with free schools and more. He was hardly a leftist.
You can “stand astride history yelling stop,” as Bill Buckley used to say, or you can act to remedy problems caused by the government in the past, and protect the people who don’t want polluted water and air for some company’s benefit; who don’t want non-violent drug users locked up in expensive max security prisons for the benefit of the prisono guards lobby; etc. (I am pro death penalty–don’t call me a softie).
And if you want to make it better, get out and spread the message. Try to figure out what a conservative is for, not just against.
I am center-right. Here’s my own problem. Not yours, mine.
I so don’t agree with Republicans on abortion rights, immigration reform, education spending, gay rights, and health care.
I so don’t agree with Democrats on union tactics, taxation on capital gains/businesses, the lack of clear implementation on education spending, and health care.
So I’m your real type of independent. I have no dog in this fight. If the Republicans wish to try to return to a far-right agenda, I’m OK with that.
But I won’t vote for them.
If they form a moderate…….truly moderate…….voice. I will.
But I don’t care emotionally.
I’m sorry, Mr. Hawkins, you just don’t get it. We cannot accept the liberal terms of the debate. You’re buying into the liberal media talking point that “the Republicans have no plan”. You’re buying into the liberal media talking point that conservatism in America was invented by Ronald Reagan 30 years ago, not 230+ years ago by the founding fathers. If our elected Republicans would start talking about principles – life, liberty, pursuit of happiness – and arguing as Rush did about enabling human potential, then our ideas and our candidates would prevail.
Just for Fun:
CNSNews.com) –
Where the hell was Al Gore?
I HAVE BEEN LISTENING TO RUSH FOR YEARS AND I AM PROUD TO BE ON THE SAME LINE WITH EVERYTHING HE SAYS. ANY GOOD MOTHER WOULD BE PROUD TO HAVE A SON WHO LOVES AMERICA SUCH AS RUSH. HE HAS BEEN TAUGHT WELL TO LOVE AMERICA AND ABOVE ALL TO LOVE OUR GOD WHO HAS GIVEN HIM HIS TALENTS. I DO PRAY FOR HIM TO BE ABLE TO REPRESENT THE AMERICA THAT I HAVE ALWAYS KNOWN. I WAS A DEPRESSION NEWBORN AND I CAN REMEMBER THE YEARS AND I CAN REMEMBER THE CRIES OF MY FATHER WHICH I CAN NEVER FORGET. RUSH SEEMS TO REFRESH MY MEMORY OF THOSE DAYS. I LOVE YOU RUSH.
Are all the writers this stupid? This is the third article I have read since the speech which doesn’t seem to understand that neither Bush nor McCain are Reagan conservatives. EVERY DAY on Rush’s show he espouses Reagan conservatism. There is no doubt that Reagan conservatism was successful and will be successful IF it is espoused to the American people. You guys live in the political sphere as a means of making a living. I run three businesses, and yet I have the time to figure this out and you don’t?
How is that?
I think this author missed the point…
Rush was saying not to just take the Dems policies or processes and try to tweak them, as if that is all they could come up with, or all that they thought they could do as a response. I think he made it clear that the republicans/conservatives need to push back with their own more responsible (and rational) policy and process suggestions.
I am not sure this author heard the whole speech.
“We don’t want to tell anybody how to live.”
Riiiiiiight.
Incredible self-delusional lying bullshytt.
Prop 8?
The socon agenda?
This mendacious crap is going to keep you a rump forevah.
I am hearing the same thing from Limbaugh that almost all Republican lawmakers pay lip service to. I agree with the author. The Republican Party has lost itself, and turned many never-before Democrat voters into Democrat voters who have no urge to change until the Republican Party has reformed itself. The Party needs many new faces and new ideas to rid itself of its’ tarnished reputation. As long as Republicans promote social conservatives and not economic conservatives for national office Democrats will continue to win.
What the pin head author of this article fails to mention is that the GOP has to believe in conservative principles. No salesman can succeed if he doesn’t believe in his product. So long as we have social moderates in the GOP the GOP will lose.
Where did the idea come from that the Democrats are about “new ideas?” There isn’t one policy being enacted now that hasn’t been on their drawing board for decades. What has Obama done that we couldn’t have heard from any leftist Democrat in 1970?
As for Republicans?
The greatest political victories the Republicans have won recently–1980, 1984, and 1994–were founded on conservative principles presented clearly by conservatives who actually held and believed them. The lousy electoral record of Republicans who are, as they say, “neither hot nor cold,” stands as a stark contrast.
The ideas you mention to improve education, give us choice and competition in health care, exploit our own energy resources, and yes, cut taxes on those who create new wealth, are the consequences of these principles, not the principles themselves.
Why are the Liberal Leftist Democratics such Blind Idiots? The Congress has been a Democrat majority for the past 2 years. And they refused to do anything decent. This country is suffering from a Morality issue which is what brings in your democratic stupid ideas of spreading the wealth…Instead of pushing personal responsibility, strength of character and integrity. They push Abortion because that is the easy fix to unwed mothers who continue to have babies out of wedlock. Instead of pushing moral responsibility. They wonder why our nation is going to the toilet when they push for Gay/Homosexual agendas and elect these people into our governments, school systems, and at the same time remove the ten commandments from court house steps and reject the constitution. Anyone can see that they are completely led by immorality at it’s base core. Let me say that again. IMMORALITY is at it’s BASE CORE…don’t agree? Then why do we have so many problems with Democratic leaders who don’t pay their taxes? Or get caught with an intern? We allow the 2% of the population (Gays, Homosexuals) to control the media and have the loudest voice. Why is it that these people have the loudest voice for their agendas and they claim “tolerance for others” and put up their dukes saying it’s because we are not “politically correct”… Until we get that under control and wake up and let moral responsibility return to our lives we are going to go under as a nation no different then Rome, or the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah…Or do I need to explain those as well? Political Correctness and the Tolerance of EVERYTHING is what is causing this country to collapse under it’s immorality…it’s refusing to call a spade a spade…and it’s tolerance for things that we know are wrong. It won’t matter which party is in Office Democrat or Republican. If American’s don’t wake up Spiritually and Morally and realize that we are having problems that result from a weak core. A WEAK CORE! And so far most of those weak ideas come from the democratic party who elects liberal supreme court justices…and allow laws that are passed which only help the rapid decline of our nation’s moralistic compass. Maybe there is a reason Republican’s are conservative…Maybe it’s because Republican’s also have a better moral compass. And don’t need to appease everyone all of the time. Unlike Democrats who think they need to allow and tolerate everything and others, to the point of endangering our nation. Now we have a President who has continually told Lies and we let him Get away with it! He said he would not hire lobbieist’s but he hired over 47 of them! He said that he would not raise taxes and he did! He said there would be “No Pork” and there is! Lies, Lies, Lies, Lies… NO MORAL COMPASS!!!
scared……I listened for 20 minutes. That was plenty.
Any speech over that is ridiculous.
Now, if you’re a Rush fan and in love with his diatribe, you loved it.
I don’t dislike him or like him. I just thought 20 minutes was enough.
Rush is right and consistently has been right, which is that the Republican leadership is scared to death. They get ignored because they want to be perceived as prim and proper. It would not have killed the Senate and House Republicans to show up en masse on Saturday. Take off their $1000 suits and enjoy themselves .
58. Steve P.,
“Okay, now how about you go ask your new party spokesman when was the last time he took one of his viagra-fueled trips down to Latin America so he could enjoy the company of underage prostitutes.”
~
Huh? When’s the last time you’ve been on the receiving end of a Slick Willy “Lewinsky”?
Please, go back to the Huffpo sandbox. You’ve removed ALL doubt already.
79. oldpapajoe:
“So long as we have social moderates in the GOP the GOP will lose.”
~
AMEN. If Repubs have to ‘act’ like Dems to get elected I want no part of it. I’m not going to sell my soul and cheapen my core beliefs in order to end up in the same place we already are because ‘some’ repubs want to play hopscotch with the left. Playing games written with ‘chalk’ is a dangerous game. Circular logic is…ILLOGICAL.
“Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has no heart; and any
man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains.” – Winston Churchill cribbing from French Prime Minister Aristide Briand who cribbed from Francois Guizot who had those wanting republican forms of government as the ones to be looked down upon from a Monarchist view.
After watching Rush I can say that the foundation is that good political philosophy forms the foundation for an understanding of the role of government, and from that policy should follow. If you do believe that society is the source of government and the holder of all that is good, and that government is the punisher to curb the abuses of society and be the holder of our negative liberties, then it follows that you do not invest good things to do with government: that is not its role nor place in a society of free men. To do otherwise is to take liberty from society and hand it to a punisher.
The strange idea that government is omni-competent, is one that mystifies me no end. It is made up of all too fallible humans and needs strict control upon it so that it is limited in the abuses that it can perform due to the action of a few individuals. Policy from that means having less government, less intrusive government, less costly government and less for government to regulate. Doing that will get you lower taxes – starting with taxes gets you more money to fund an already intrusive government. Republicans refused to cut the beast down and starve it, and, instead, handed it extra morsels during economic recovery and more power.
You do not need a religious view to hold that and, indeed, a number of atheists at the time of the founding held just such concepts. What is more interesting is that the churches, then, did not want any government ‘help’ or intereference, then, as it was an intrusion of the secular into the divine. Morality helps to form philosophy and that should help make good policy, and for that to work you need less central government and vital and strong local government as it is better representative of the population at the smaller scale. From that you would have States that would provide equal protection to fundamental rights, but have leeway to try different things for their own populations.
That is good sense as problems at the local scale are more amenable to the people as they are more accountable. When you increase proportion sizes for representation accountability drops as those who can be paid off with corruption, convinced to stay home for various reasons or just turned off by such unaccountable government will, at first, feel it is better not to act. Better to put up with minor abuses while they are sufferable… right up to the point they are unsufferable and action is necessary.
It was expected that, in 1980, the Republicans would take a chainsaw to the federal government… not haul out extra nourishment and encourage the thing to grow. Now it rots from the inside, overburdened and reaching is rotting tendrils out to all of us: the punisher given too much good to do cannot do anything, save feed, and we are its source of nourishment. Good policy was dead simple. Republicans did not have the guts to do what was needed and, instead, looked to their personal places in government and sought to help this thing that was a necessary evil turn into a true evil. That would have taken policy backed by philosophy explaining why liberty is good and freedom is good and limited government is the greatest good of all to get them.
And yet that has found no articulate members on the Right to speak of it.
Time grows short as the suffering of insufferable government growing large continues. And Jefferson let us know that such government grown that powerful needs to be changed or abolished. That, too, is conservative… and as Revolutionary, today, as it was in 1776. To avoid that is a true good and requires less government. How is it that we always have a choice of lesser evils, and never one for someone who will actually do the right thing and just say no to more spending?
I totally agree. The Republicans are in Ronald Reagan LA LA LAND! They need to come into the 21st Century.
Look I love tax cuts too. I also know that lower taxes creates more revenue for the IRS. But we can’t be the PARROT PARTY of “Tax Cuts, Tax Cuts, Tax Cuts HAWK!”
The people have lost confidence in capitalism we need to get them to fall in love with personal responsibility again and to help them find affordable health care, realistic enviornmental policies, and domestic oil drilling.
Conservative ideals hold that government should be the least possible influence over citizen’s lives. Regan reintroduced these principles some 30 years ago, but the ideals are older than that. He was however, very good at explaining conservative optimism and he only had to point to Jimmy Carter as an exammple of what fails. Obama’s successor in 2012 will have this luxury as well. Detailing the successes particularly of economic conseratism can be a tedious discussion to liberal voters seeking immediate gratification.
The one challenge conservatives face then, is to make this old argument seem new to the mulltitudes of newly minted and uninformed voters churned out by members of the teachers unions.
What Americans want is for their government to leave them alone. Laisez nous faire was what the french wanted before the revolution too. But that’s not what politicians want . It’s not anything you can build a political party around either. Obama is so bad that the pubs will do well next time around but they have not and will not deliver small government , just slightly less than the dems .
Small government is coming . Not because politicians will reign the government in but rather because when the dollar collapses we wont be able to afford anything else.
federal reserve delendum est
I heard what Rush said, and I took it in a different way. What I heard was that rather than fall into the trap of responding to THEIR policy initiatives, of merely being reactive against TARP II and what not, that we need to start actively promoting other solutions.
So I disagree that “it abandons the whole field of “new ideas” to people who are not conservatives.” No. It means changing the rules of the game, and NOT playing by the rules of the game they set when they advance their “new ideas” — because when you do that, you let THEM define the problemc and the solutions!
Rush: “What do you mean? Who is setting the process or policy? They are. You want to tweak it? No. This is philosophy, folks.”
The Dems are presently setting process and policy. We as conservatives are to counter on the basis of our conservative philosophy. That’s what Rush is saying.
We are to counter on the basis of our conservative philosophy, not tweak bad policy until it’s a compromise. Can you see the difference? On the former hand we are taking the approach of starting at our roots and doing what is needed to uphold the values we believe in, and the the latter we start with crap and end with crap. Lipstick on a pig comes to mind.
OldPapaJoe and Delia:
Who is the social moderate? (A) The one who says “I don’t think the government ought to run your life…except for my preferences on gay marriage, smoking pot and religion, giving tax breaks to corporations, as opposed to the working man who can’t deduct his lunch or rent” or (B), the one that says, I really don’t want government in your life: let the gays marry, people smoke pot (over age 18 of course), and enough with trying to alter conduct with taxes”.
My taxes are going up because “Taliban-lite” guys like you are scaring off people like AnninCa.
I heard what Rush said, and I took it in a different way. What I heard was that rather than fall into the trap of responding to THEIR policy initiatives, of merely being reactive against TARP II and what not, that we need to start actively promoting other solutions.
So I disagree that “it abandons the whole field of “new ideas” to people who are not conservatives.” No. It means changing the rules of the game, and NOT playing by the rules of the game they set when they advance their “new ideas” — because when you do that, you let THEM define the problems and the solutions!
Rush is right as long as you limit your sources of information to him and his supporters. The more knowledge you get on any subject, from as many sources as possible, the less he makes sense. Rush does not talk about conservative ideas, he talks about hatred and vile for those Americans that do not support him. He says more hateful things about American’s than any terrorist group ever has. He doe not love Americans, he loves Americans that support his show. He tells you this all the time.
You all seem to be living in a time bubble that missed the last 8 years. Conservatives often say they right things, but we just saw what happens when they are in charge. You can repackage and spin it into anything you want, but the bottom line is Conservative control of our government was a total and complete disaster. To use the Conservative label as a dodge, “ that was the republicans, now we are called the conservatives” is a thin transparent dodge of responsibility. Same old ideas under any name will just get the same results, the disaster you have already brought us all. Just keep attacking those that are trying to clean up the conservative mess, and you will get the same results.
When Rush says “ we can take back this country” ask yourself when would Rush Limbaugh not say that? Is that based on any reality at all or just what Rush always says, regardless of the situation? Remember “Baghdad Bob” live on CNN saying they where not being attacked while the bombs exploded in the background behind him? How is that any different than Rush? Lie to yourself if it helps.
And for all your whinning and crying about experience being so important, to turn to Rush for advice is comical. As you stated He has so littel influence on the party but so much influance on conservatives is a pretty transparent dodge of responsibility for your parties horrific performance. Rush has always been a poster child for all the GOP ideas that have samged this country so severaly.
Party before country, Unitil they GOP can fix that problem, they will remain the biggest obsticle to our countries success. “when I look out a
Rush’s speech was a pleasure to listen to simply because he said many of the things right out loud that should have been said six-eight months ago. The fact that our Republican leaders stand around looking confused makes me so mad I fervently which we had the right to recall the lot of them and send them packing.
This is the worst nightmare I can even imagine. Each morning I wake up and realize it’s really true…all I can see ahead is a gray socialist future filled with green police, censorship and rationing of food, water and energy perhaps even on some new global level—and the worst part is the leadership of the Republican party can’t seem to even work up any kind of coherent response to the unbelievable level of corruption, arrogance and tyranny that is on display in Washington daily. They are too afraid they’ll mess up their hair.
And that is the heart of the problem in my view. The reason our representatives are having such a hard time with the principals and application of conservatism right now (with the exception of a very few) is that they are simply career politicians. They will say anything and do anything to get elected and to stay in power.
This is our fault. We were supposed to be stewards of our country and most of us were asleep. It’s that famous lame joke about the lying politicans that’s come to take our freedom away while we were snickering in our beer.
And, please, stop the Reaganfest. I for one am sick of it. Damnit, he and Nancy started the War on Drugs, for crying out loud, don’t you remember that? The Drug Czar, oh yeah. That’s real conservatism for you. His Tax Reform Act of 1986 imposed the largest corporate tax increase in history. In spite of all the hype the truth is that Reagan raised taxes four times just between 1982-84.
And this is why people like Sarah Palin. For whatever reason they trust her. She seems like the lady down the street and she not a millionaire’s kid or a movie star.
They like that she’s not perfect, she talks funny and it’s a sheer gut reaction to the smarmy lawyers that have never set foot in a Wal-Mart or swung by Hardees with a carload of kids after the game—but they’re filling our lives up with regulations and laws and things that just make life harder and harder.
Our reps have got to be held accountable. Face it, if they had backbones they wouldn’t be in the business they’re in. It’s let’s make a deal every day of the week with these people and it’s time we all forgot about ideology and just embraced the basics.
Either you believe in the Constitution and stop trying to scam your way around it or you’re out.
Balance your budgets, be it State or Federal. Cut until it bleeds, just like we do.
Stop using the FDA, the FCC and other federal regulatory agencies to make hugely invasive laws that are stripping American citizens of their rights.
Fix the crazy primary system that allows Democrats to elect our candidates.
Kind of all over the place but I’ve been wanting to say this for a while.
Why does Rush Limbaugh hate America?
Public schools are mass producing Obama zombies like there’s no tomorrow. They would do less damage to the foundations of the US were they to mass produce counterfeit US currency. Obama zombies cannot help but vote for corrupt populists such as Obama, it’s in their programming.
Charlie Crist and John McCain are but milder variations on the same theme, politically speaking. Dumb down the population and you destroy its human capital, and all chances for success.
Better policies include ‘health care reform’, but it’s not the medicine that needs changing. There must be an end to the outrageous lawsuits which drive up the cost of being a doctor and with it the cost of their time. Put reasonable limits on lawsuits, both from the point of frivolity and also the amount of damages awarded.
1. clean air, water, and soil
2. investing in shale oil drilling
These things do not go together.
Thanks for this article, though, as a liberal it helps me understand the conservative viewpoint. And I agree with your main point — I’d much rather see conservatives putting out constructive and well-considered ideas than see belligerents like Limbaugh try to ad-hominem the other side to death.
Go America.
If you bother to do the research, heaven forbid, you find that most Americans are really quite conservative.
This disturbs the trolls quite a bit, but it’s true nonetheless.
Trying to convince a liberal of the truth is a fruitless effort, it accomplishes nothing and just upsets the liberal.
So the government will give away crap sandwiches until we are all out of money, believe that crap sandwiches are the best we can do and learn to speak French.
If the country does not totally go down the crapper in the next 4 years…. I have “The Plan”. It’s called… FAIR TAX. Listen up conservatives…. who’s got the guts?
THE gop got John Mcshame because of the open primaries allowing the scumbag left to vote for a socialist lite instead of sound conservatives like Romney or Thompson. This post by Hawkins shows where the problem really lies. Unlike the pinko scum, we divide ourselves over single issues where the lefties put ideology above everything. Remember one last thing about Reagan: His 11th commandment about not criticizing fellow CONSERVATIVES(not republicans). Rush Limbaugh is NOT the problem. Failure to follow thru on the ideas he articulates ARE.
Have a conversation about Rush and the trolls do a mass attack. But such a pitiful performance. What happens when they find out their whole political world is based on lies and their Dear Leader is a fraud? Improve their writing maybe?
pOSTER #43 THE COMMIE IDIOT- maybe you can tell all of us productive folks whos going to pay for comrade Obama and his butt buddy Soros commie schemes when all the businesses are forced out of business? Like all of the Obamacommies pals , Id bet lunch that his buttbuddy Soros doesnt pay taxes like Giutnerd and Dasshole didnt. Hey Soros you disgusting pigscum, whatcha gonna when there noone left to rip off ? Its easy to see why even the chinese commies hate you.
David C.: “If you bother to do the research, heaven forbid, you find that most Americans are really quite conservative.
This disturbs the trolls quite a bit, but it’s true nonetheless.”
Saying it does not make it true. This is what you have been told to think by people like Rush. They have told you that you are smart and everyone else is stupid. He has also told you time and time again, that he says what he does for ratings. Rush has no experience, education or success outside of convincing the ignorant how smart they are. The right spends 90% of its time talking about the left. If you ask Rush what a Conservative is, he will be talking about liberals by the second sentence of his answer. This is true with most of his crowd today. They only exist as opposition, never with any solutions. The demonizing caricatures and the focus on the packaging over substance will never do anything to solve the problems we face today. Palin was a perfect example of this, they loved her for the package and the image, there was no concern that she was clearly not capable of performing the job at all, she got voters and she got attention, and that is the single most important thing to today’s GOP. Even now they need to reinvent the packaging, not the failed policy. The “We don’t have to perform better, we just have to look better performing” mentality is what lost the election. All you get is a loud vocal minority group of self-righteous puppets that repeat what they are told and believe that they are the smarter intellectual group. This is the reason Rush hides from any and all debate; his shtick does not stand up to reason or reality. That is not his intention, again he tells you this but you don’t hear it.
I would agree that most Americans agree with a majority of the principals that conservatives claim to, but very few conservatives seem to. Conservatives, raise taxes, increase spending, grow government and then spend the majority of the time talking about how liberal do those things. But that is not what your superior intellect was told to think, so you don’t.
95. k lewis:
Well Said. As a liberal Democrat I would agree with you. This is true on both sides of the isle. With the majority of people on both sides seeing things this way, you have to ask what is the value of people like Rush that make a living out of keeping both sides focused on fighting each other. Can anyone argue that this is not Rush’s single biggest contribution?
The difference between the parties are a lot smaller than those making a living off the war between the parties market.
I believe that Rush was mostly right, although I do see where you’re coming from. The problem with the GOP is that we have “come to the middle” to reach those “moderates”. So, when McCain had to debate Obama, their agendas had very few differences, leaving America to just pick the one who spoke that agenda better. I firmly believe the juxtaposition of Conservative and Liberal ideas is enough to spark true Change. It’s when they can’t be differentiated that Conservatives have a problem.
But what are your ideas that you reference that could help people immediately that conservatives are not spelling out? Or, are you another conservative who’s not spelling them out? Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes.
“Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has no heart; and any
man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains.” – Winston Churchill cribbing from French Prime Minister Aristide Briand who cribbed from Francois Guizot who had those wanting republican forms of government as the ones to be looked down upon from a Monarchist view.
Alas, the liberal he was referring was not socialist as the Democrats are but the 19th century liberal. “Liberals” in the early 19th century were truly liberal and not the socialists by any other name they are now.
There’s nothing like a mind washed liberal,thinking with emotion and misinformation.They can’t be reasoned with.
I have said this a number of times. A poll showed that the majority of mericans did not know that the Democrats had been running Congress for the last two years.
Just maybe the economy might have been the straw for the Republican party if the voters knew that the Dems were in charge of the Congres.
What sort of a campaign doesn’t captitalize on this. A losing campaign, and we lost.
I think it’s an open question: Is the United States really a Center-Right nation, or has it been shifting for at least a couple of decades now steadily to the Left?
The next four years will surely clarify that. Personally, I feel out of synch with the way the country seems to be moving. I’ve been moving from the Left to the Right since 1987.
Lets see we are now a center left country many on the left hope to believe. Yet Obama won with a word salad of rhetoric embracing among others, Lincoln, Reagan, and tax cuts while dissing his own grandmother as well as his pastor and spiritual mentor who he had to deep six because he was a flaming racist biggot and anti-american extremist.
Obama outspent his opponent 8 to 1 and received billions of dollars in free pr from fellow leftists in the media- yet he beat an aging and inept ‘maverick’ who was simply a democrat-light beltway insider who often dissed his own supporters on the right in order to pander to other Washington insiders in the worthless media and Democrat establishment.
None-the-less Obama won by a mere six percent or so. If only three percent of voters changed their preference- the shrill Old Dodderer would have won the election.
Right on Rush. Right on.
Rush is a tremendous patriot and political leader who will be immensely more popular than Obama 6 yearss hence.
When they say 40% of Americans pay no income tax how is it calculated? Does it include retirees? Children? Certainly they shouldn’t be included in any calculations because it is obvious most don’t earn a living let alone pay taxes. Is it 40% of all people earning a salary or in a self run business? Can someone qualify this 40% value?
Rush Limbaugh is not interested in America, the Republicans or the Democrats. His god is money. And as long as republicans bow to him they will never be able to bounce back. He is a blabber mouth and windbag that says anything he can to try to improve his ratings which mean more money. Coulter is the same. Why do republicans listen to them. Get with it, pick republicans who are intelligent, who aren’t making waves just so they can raise money…..listen to republicans who really really love this country.
If B.O. is the bad guy the conservatives think he is, there will be no more free elections in this country. The GOP is in their present predicament because of abandoning Reaganism and not listening to Rush. The very idea that Reaganism ideals are stale! Thoughts like that is why the GOP is now out of power. How can you say Reagan’s ideas are stale when they were never really implemented to begin with. Oh yeah, the tax cuts and military build up were implemented, but the spending cuts weren’t. And the first George Bush quickly abandoned Reagan’s ideas for no good reason. Look where it has taken the GOP. Rush is right. Listen to him you rinos if you don’t want your party to be permanently out of power. Ignore him if you want to continue to lose elections. I guarantee you, there aren’t enough liberals and moderates in this country to make up for the loss of your base if you insist on your move to the left. Wake up GOP before it’s too late.
“Obama outspent his opponent 8 to 1 and received billions of dollars in free pr from fellow leftists in the media- yet he beat an aging and inept ‘maverick’ who was simply a democrat-light beltway insider who often dissed his own supporters on the right in order to pander to other Washington insiders in the worthless media and Democrat establishment.”
Don’t forget the coup de grace was by McCain’s own hand – his “valiant” rushing off to D.C. to save the country by eagerly supporting the TARP bill.
It’s not mentioned a lot, especially as blaming the Palin VP choice seems to be the popular meme (and perhaps it was with some of the swing voters).
But in the weeks between the VP announcement and the bank bailout, McCain’s campaign gained lots of momentum and began to rapidly overtake Obama in the polls – but his foolish handling of the matter took the wind out of the sails. He may have looked good to his peers in Congress, but popular opposition to the bill was fierce and widespread and I suspect kept a lot of people home on November 4th.
If this guy is what the Republicans are banking on to bring them back, then the Dems are in great shape for 2010 and 2012. He’s a big fat joke.
Hawkins did a good job of framing Limbaugh’s argument against Obama. He did a BETTER job explaining why the “yellow dog Conservative” (my words) model can’t win in America, 2009…He laid it out in an honest, convincing fashion….THEN, he closed with this line: “What if we run a Conservative, like Sarah Palin and Obama manages to squeak out a victory”…This line was used to give gravitas to an “ideas candidate”..The implication is that Palin could never be an “ideas” candidate (ouch!). Here’s the point that Hawkins missed and Limbaugh senses: The GOP can win in 2012 ONLY if Obama screws up by being incompetent!…The Bush administration has elevated COMPETENCE ahead of “ideology”, “principals” and “core values”..Bush displayed those concepts but he was perceived as lacking in COMPETENCE. Obama projects competence. If this projection is misguided, the GOP can run a charismatic, ideas-candidate in 2012. The Limbaugh argument is to frame Obama as a dangerous ideologue who threatens “freedom”….That’s not as important as the public view of Obama as being a Competent Chief Executive. Why does a nation elect a first term Senator who was in the Illinois Senate 5 years ago? Because he ran a flawless campaign, executed over 2 years, in the shadow of the Bush Whitehouse…If Obama’s “competence projection” is re-enforced with execution; the “ideology” will be trumped. The GOP will need to ‘Think 2016′….George W. Bush’ perceived performance will prevent the nation from following another “yellow dog Conservative” blueprint, for electing a President. That’s why Palin is attractive to the core base but the smart money knows that she can’t win. She’s Bush in a skirt. Hawkins says that she’s not an “ideas” candidate. America looks at her and decides that she doesn’t project Competence.
You had me until the oil shale part. You want clean air, clean water, etc. etc. but until conservatives get over this climate change denial thing and a few other things we drag our heels on that are science-based (stem cells, evolution, homosexuality (not a “choice”), etc.), we’re never going to be taken seriously by the rest of the country (or even the 50%+1 we need). As both a scientist and a conservative, it’s appalling to see how absolutely 16th Century so-called “mainstream” conservatives have become. Until we get some more William Safires and Bill Buckleys and Milton Friedmans and fewer Rushes, Hannitys and Coulters, we’re going down the tubes, and deservedly so.
“That brings us to problem number two. We may be able to win future battles running on Reagan’s ideas, but we won’t win the long-term war for the future of our country by perpetually running on a nearly 30-year-old political agenda.”
Are you absolutely nuts? This country was founded on the idea Reagan held dear.
#58 Steve P,
Did you see him there? Or did you just read that on the Daily Kos?And since when does Rush Limbaugh’s personnal life become some of your business? He isn’t living off of your tax dollars. Why do you write this drivel Steve? Try to refute something he says, if you can.
JackT: How fat are you?
Good god, first Phil Gingrey and now Michael Steele, falling all over themselves to groom the dingleberries of the Rotund One – El Rushbo. Aren’t you people embarrassed by all this? I mean, there isn’t a stand-up man anywhere to be seen in the Republick party. How could any self-respecting man prostrate himself at the feet of this gas bag? Forget 2010, the Republickers will be lucky to get jobs in the Vienna Boys Choir – not manly enough. Trust me, fellas, it’s time to butch up before you end up sandwiched between David Dreier and Lindsay Graham (with Mitch McConnell looking on) . . .. not that there’s anything wrong with that.
What Limbaugh is right about is that Republicans have no backbone, and no credibility, after the last 8 years of suckling at the debt teat. They need to come out hard against bailouts, socialized healthcare, and subsidized science, but all they do it waffle on the specifics. Listening to Jindal pick apart a few million in pork while telling us that the bailout is necessary is sickening. This party needs a pair of balls.
Bill, #101 above had it right. FAIR TAX! Until this message is heard, nothing will change. Yet, how many people listen and really want to do something to change the tax structure of this country??? Oh, btw, it’s not that Conservatives do not have inventive ideas, it’s simply, the MSM’s reluctance to let the American public HEAR what is being said! But, hey, what do I know; I’m just an ole’ worn out ole’ truck driver…
Your ranting of “We wants” is why you tried and didn’t get it while you had the perfect chance during the Bush administration. Your wants are all-contrary to progressive thinking and are sure-fire failures. How can you have clean air and water if you don’t have environmental restrictions on business-China is proof of that. How can you have energy reform is you don’t try to find alternatives? And public school up until the 70′s was a very good institution and can be revitalized.
Rush Limbaugh is a complete buffoon! Don’t worry he is successful at what he does, and that is…. with driving confidence brainwashes people into a hate frenzy that is undeniable, infallible and righteous to the point of being absolutely ridiculous. And you should worry if you walk away thinking the same as he.
I find nothing wrong with Limbaughs speech;
What I find interesting is that the White House has to bicker with every citizen that chastises its policies like school children. That should alarm everyone!But it won’t. The bickering continues here, with the Obama supporters.
I think you underestimate the wimple peolple, and you talk about their needs. (You also in Rushs speak mix up principles with policies, when you write “if Rush actually does believe that our policies are fine…”).
I think you, John Hawkins, are non-consistent in your analysis and thus lose both conservative — or any — principles and conservative — or any — policies.
Can you deny that you in your reasoning makes people needy recievers of the generous government instead of people free from government? Explain how you can deny that.
The Republican Party will lose, even in the future, if they are not viewed as a party that offers PROACTIVE plans.
Just kicking into old ideas works when a society isn’t in crisis.
That is not us.
Not even remotely.
So, either they find proactivity, or they are out of power for a long time.
I believe that the time for Democracy is over. It was fun while it lasted but we can no longer survive with a majority of voters who have finally figured out that they can “vote” themselves freebies. Democrats have a devoted following in the ignorant and under educated masses who can’t see any further than “today.” They could care less about what tomorrow may bring because “it isn’t here yet.”
Since the nation is divided by liberals and conservatives, I would like to see a dozen states set aside for conservatives only! Can you imagine? I think it would be like heaven! Oh! Maybe that IS heaven, huh? Anything is possible!
AnninCA. Our society is in crisis because of too much politics. What do you mean is to offer “PROACTIVE plans”? The word you write in capital letters has to be translated to something that is offered, and since you say it has to be offered to win election I guess you mean offered to voters. People. So to offer a proactive plan has to mean to offer a plan where politicians are active to offer something to citizens. Am I right? It also, since it is about to win elections, has to be about politicians offering people benefits. Am I right?
The only way one can defend such politics is by saying that the people needs these benefits. But politics is then not about ideas or convictions. Only, as you admit, about holding power. We’ll be found ourselves in a not very moral game where we without any other responsibility than to win election skip our principles — and wreck the economy too. I should not say “we” because I’m not from US, but I’m a conservative. I think that good political communication towards public can affect the minds of a vast majority of people, but the US liberal media may be a though obstacle. Nevertheless: to lose the politics is to abandon principles, and then we have no ground for our existence, we — then so called — conservatives.
I think it’s better to be out of power for a time, even if it’s a long time, but also think that things can change fast when people realize reality. To wait may be better than to lose a specific election. As a conservative I e.g. don’t say that government shall have no social costs. I believe in freedom and a small state but don’t even refer to Hayek too much since he was ideological liberal minded in values. (Btw, the republicans has to have a small state as central theme; to compromise with liberals these days of extreme large state libs isn’t it to remove ones right to exist?!) I don’t think the core of conservatism is about limitless freedom, or economy, but about values and (old fashion) morality (not “morality” which says nothing is wrong). (Limbaugh may have had “bias” there which I would have liked to complement with more specific conservative values, but that is a challenge in the dialectic times of ours, where relativism and nothing-is-wrong-morality is regarded as the height of humanity.)
To communicate a position clearly and far away from the liberal point of view but not necessary always 180 degrees on opposite side may be a way to give a necessary impression of the dialectics of today (which I think is a root of problems now — I see that this site is USA partisan and thus an inappropriate “melting pot site”…) but still always make a point of a distinctly different view where the liberal views can’t be accepted. This I think, or hope(…), is rhetoric but I think *that* is quite crucial in politics anytime. But if those who are right compromise with truth they lose cred for any future victory and may as well disappear. To not be demodrats/liberals but also to not necessarily be 180 degrees on opposite side but define the position in respect to the democrats and at the same time both defend ones position (which give democrats some kind of benefit of doubts) and criticize their extreme and thus not acceptable position may be a political way forward where politics is also to achieve through understandings of the way people think and to handle that current situation in the political communication.
But this site is a partisan site, so I’m afraid you (and too many other republicans) have sold your soul to the devil long ago…
I hope my English wasn’t too bad. Not my native language (and too seldom used in my profession).
BTW. I dont’ know if this is a pro-partisan site, and I’m sorry if that accusation was wrong, or if I was rude somewhere else. I don’t use to visit this- or non-swedish political sites. …
Maybe — I say maybe, not anything more — Limbaugh has a tendency toward idealism, e.g. for personal freedom, in a way which isn’t typically conservative, but rather slightly closer to libertarians? But the freedom of the US, which also Reagan was focused on, is of course always and still crucial (and I’ll say its source is Christianity). I guess the focus on freedom made the communist system collapse easier and is important today to avoid new regulations where politicians gain power on maybe even global basis. But the word freedom is also, gradually more and more, a word for no limits in how anyone lives his life. That sounds good for most people today, but do we really think that any value or way to live can be accepted before it more explicitly leads to death of victims or other losses (relevant in utilitarianism). And who can judge anyway? New moral is the opposite of “old” moral, and to be able to defend on (old) moral basis that people are not hurt may be done through communications of the difference between new (=no) and old moral, and a conservative view can be to defend that regulations are avoided where instead morality is regained.
E.g. too much social benefits erode the dependence between members of families. Maybe moral is corruped when there’s a tendency to achieve what a generously giving state wants one to do rather than to act according to what real persons around oneself are in need for?
Maybe we are challenged both by a general trend of “modern” relativistic thinking, which we havn’t been anaware as we should as well as a slippery slope of larger government which benefits from eroded “old” values — thus modern way of thinking boosts big government and vice versa. (Vice versa = conservatism enables and benefits from small government.)
I liked Limbaughs speech — partly because of his skills as a great political artist.
MoveOn claims about 3.2 million members. Daily Kos claims between 14 million and 24 million visits per month. That’s about 5 million per week.
Rush claims 20 million listeners a week.
How is MoveOn or Daily Kos more influential on the Democratic Party than Rush is on the GOP? The numbers don’t add up.
Magnus Anderson makes an excellent point.
Think of it this way; If we ‘update’ our ideas/ideals/principles away from conservatism, what are we really doing, but willingly changing them so as to be more like liberals?
You want fresh approaches? Well, let’s try ‘compassionate conservatism’. Oops. Been done, already, huh? What did that do except grow government?
Similarly, the movement away from our conservative values is what caused John McCain to be nominated, and what caused him to lose in the general. In a choice between socialism and socialism lite,apparently the choice is for the real thing, or nothing.
We keep getting ‘moderates’ who encourage us to move left, and guess what? Every time we do, we move farther away from where we want to be. Perhaps the change that needs to take place is moving back that 30 years that John speaks of, and thereby to a 200-some-odd year old agenda that I’ve heard of, once upon a time.
The argument should not be focused on the idea that we need to change in order to be relevant… what needs to improve is our commitment to relating how our positions are already relevant, and should never have been given up.
I see this as an ongoing process. Chesterton, I think it was, painted a word picture about a white post. If you want to keep it white, you’ve gotta keep painit or at least cleaning the thing. It’s a maintainence thing. We need to keep poinding on the principles of the thing, keep reselling them, keep the idea high in the public eye that our principles, our agenda of freedom, was, is, and always will be valid.
Bob, you are correct.
Nothing else matters…….
Mr. Hawkins,
what Rush MEANT by the point you have misunderstood is simple–
we cannot win by adopting LIBERAL policies and tweaking THEM to seem less liberal. He is telling us we can’t adopt Porkulus and then trim spending by 40% and say OUR porkulus is more conservative than theirs..
our PRINCIPLES should prevent us from even PRESENTING a porkulus, slimmed down or NOT. It’s TOO MUCH SPENDING at 1/10th its size.
our PRINCIPLES tell us that the way to spur the economy is by cutting taxes and FREEING ENTREPRENEURS and business to go get the profits without fearing they will be seized by a greedy hungry spend-monster government.
Can’t believe you wrote a whole column on this misunderstanding on your part.
Dave in Texas
argh, you talk about tax cuts not being ‘effective issue’.. COME ON, john, tax cuts are part of our principles! We should always work toward reducing tax burdens on the producers of our economic engine.. not just at campaign time, and not just to win votes! I have a hard time believing more than a tiny few of that 40% will EVER vote for us, because they’re voting for checks not leadership.. so why even BRING THEM UP?
The Republicans are hurting,in my opinion, because they spent the last couple of decades in an all out effort to cater to the multi-national corporations at the expense of the American worker. They pushed NAFTA, WTO, outsourcing, illegal aliens, anything to drive down wages. This country is in the state it is because we don’t have a manufacturing base to build on.
I voted for Bush twice because I could not stomach the alternatives, and forced myself to vote for McCain because of Sarah. Give Obama hell if you must but it does look like he is trying.
@ Bald John….
Yes, VERY trying.
The so called New idea’s are B/S and nothing more than returning to The Moderate Rockfellow Country Club Limo North Eastern Wing of OUT OF TOUCH Fat Kats !
Reagan was about MIDDEL AMERICA , 100 % Conservatives getting their votes as were his getting sissy republicans votes ,cross over grass root Reagan Democrats , Middle of the Road , Jews and even Blacks .
The New Moderate republicans have lost three election in a row .
Bush was a Moderate sissy as was McCain .
McCain is closer to Ted Kennedy thinking than he was to Reagan ways to win !