Rush to judgment: A media hopelessly divided
by Andrew BreitbartThis week’s Washington Times column:
The mood at the Omni Shoreham Hotel late Saturday afternoon was off the electrical meter when Rush Limbaugh took center stage at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).
Hundreds of revelers packed the Regency Ballroom and hundreds more filled overflow rooms, hallways and stairways to watch on wide-screen TVs. It was a rare and much-anticipated public appearance of the man so powerful that President Obama singled him out for destruction in his administration’s first days.
Conservative pundits, party leaders and movement bigwigs took special care to position themselves close by so they could hang on every word of the only person who actually could accomplish what the three-day conference was all about – jump-starting the flagging conservative cause.
Fox News joined C-SPAN in carrying the nearly hour-and-a-half experience, while CNN broke ranks with the “mainstream media” and aired most of the speech as well.
It was an address that could have altered the election had it been delivered early last fall by any Republican presidential candidate.
About midway through Mr. Limbaugh’s clear-headed, timely and sometimes rambunctious call to ideological arms, my BlackBerry began buzzing with elated text messages from across the Omni and across the nation.
A friend in Los Angeles e-mailed a one-liner: “Best speech I have ever seen.”
My urbane father-in-law, the first person I knew who copped to listening to Mr. Limbaugh and who has been witness to most of the big events of the modern age, called it the “most thrilling thing [he's] seen on TV.”
Hugh Hewitt simply titled his post-speech blog post “The Speech, 2009″ and wrote: “Rush gave a speech … that will be talked about for years and even decades.”
You can read the column in full here.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
229 Comments
How I wish I had seen this. I had reached the point of not watching things just because of bias, and now Rush goes and does something I need to add to my memories, like the Moon landing, the Fall of the Berlin wall, Michael Jordan, and how Tiger twirls up like a watch spring as he unleashes a drive. Damn!
Anyone finds a link to this in its entirety, please post it!
Here's a link to Rush's speech. It's in ten parts and it's excellent.
Good points, AB, but compared to Lincoln's 2nd Inaugural, King's "I Have a Dream" speech, or Christ's Sermon on the Mount, it was only pretty good.
Rush's speech was the sort of thing BO only wishes he could give. BO has smooth delivery and cadence learned by watching many a Southern Baptist preacher, buor sheer, raw emotion and power, Rush one-upped him. Rush would make the perfect stalking-horse candidate in 2012. He would never do it and doesn't want to be President, but if he ran in the primaries, imagine the frothing convulsions of the left.
Rush's speech was the sort of thing BO only wishes he could give. BO has smooth delivery and cadence learned by watching many a Southern Baptist preacher, but for sheer, raw emotion and power, Rush one-upped him. Rush would make the perfect stalking-horse candidate in 2012. He would never do it and doesn't want to be President, but if he ran in the primaries, imagine the frothing convulsions of the left.
Caught the last hour or so, I was rivited. I'm in school while he's on the radio so I don't hear him very often, but we share core beliefs. I'm amused by a sitting President targeting a talk show host, and his minnions goose stepping in lock to demonize him and silence him. Who has the big ego in this scenario?
It was awesome. I was at the Gym and nearly fell off the elliptical. I cheered, I laughed, I cried. Got home in time to see the end of it. I felt like running outside yelling THIS IS SPARTA!
So which speech was it? "How to lose 300 lbs in 30 days" or "Breaking Oxycontin addiction through transcendental meditation" ?
I was at CPAC and in the audience for the speech – Rush blew the roof off – it was amazing. I am so happy I got to be there in person.
I'm sure the speech was great, and I'll get around to listening to it eventually, but the Conservative movement isn't going to hit it's stride until the most articulate voice stops being people like Limbaugh (who makes his living bomb-throwing against everyone who disagrees). He is often correct in his assessments, but like Coulter, it get's drowned out because of his other, often ignorant, comments. At the moment, Conservatives have my allegiance because the Democrats are so completely and irretrievably morally bankrupt. However, they need to find a voice that is not diminished because of his day job (being a ring announcer for the WWF of politics).
Andrew, I respect you A LOT more than I do him. Hopefully voices like yours can be inspired by whatever means necessary, so they can really get the Conservative movement in gear. I have a feeling that people in the Center will be more than ready for a change in a couple of years, if there's a viable option.
One of the finest speeches I've ever witnessed. I'm just grateful it was televised. We needed a shot in the arm after the last few weeks. And the joke at the beginning was priceless…..
Care to give examples of his ignorance or are you just going to make the claim and hope it sticks?
Few speakers possess the ability to make a case which can actually alter listeners' viewpoints. Most speakers simply make their already-confirmed supporters feel good. And that's what separates Rush.
He can be eloquent and folksy at the same time, and he can pound home the points that conservative politicians can't, won't or are incapable of expressing.
No, it was the "Honk if You're a Socialist" speech. Stan, your car horn is stuck.
It was no 'I'm a Cokehead' that Obama did a week ago.
It was a great speech. I hope the party listens…
Stans your face has a really interesting shade of purple going on. You might want to find a doctor. They have stuff that can treat it.
Nah, throw the bomb and run the mouth. Rush has been on target and articiculating core conservatism for 20 years now. When the party strays left, it loses. People thought they were getting Clinton style "Liberal Light", instead we're getting neo-socialism, Eastern European style. Watch for the Second Amendment to come under attack after the first gets sanitized of conservative ideas.
There's nothing to "hope," over his career he's made any number of statements that insult a large portion of the voting public that the party needs in order to retake Congress (and eventually, the Presidency). It doesn't matter if you agree with it, the fact is that there are a lot of people who find him to be less than a serious commentator.
I'd much rather listen to Newt, Mark Steyn, or Mike Murphy. They somehow manage to state a Conservative case without needing to insult everyone who differs on issues (whether it be one or many).
Is that the one he cribbed from GW Bush?
Rush makes his living by being controversial. If you want to hear core Conservative opinions being espoused (using fact rather than insults and gimmicky songs), there are better places on the radio to find them (I'd recommend Hugh Hewitt or Michael Medved).
Also, the nonsense about the party losing because it strays to the Left is constantly over-stated. The analysis is there for anyone who cares to look. McCain (despite a mediocre effort and an opponent with far superior charisma) outperformed Conservative candidates in their districts all over the country. Whether you think they weren't "Conservative enough," is an interesting debate to have, but it's merely conjecture. With only 30% of voters identifying themselves as Conservative (and many of those being the types that get attacked for not being "real Conservatives"), merely running to the Right doesn't guarantee anyone of anything.
It could be Obama's "I'm a Ego-maniacal Neo-Socialist" speech. He gave it earlier this week. "Dollars for Commies" was the working title, but, ya know, the ego thing trumped that.
When they start calling you mean, it's because they know you're right and can't take you to task on facts.
The statement "well, they're right, but they just need to say it nicer" betrays a prideful attitude that cares more about being flattered than with being educated.
It is really funny how Obama's water boys all go out and stomp their feet saying "Rush is mean, he's saying mean things about us, I'm telling." What freaking babies, the whole lot. Obama – Worst President Ever
He can't afford it under "Obama Care". So sorry. Move along, move along…
Thrilling to see some major Right Wing website acknowledge the speech.
Michael Steele is an idiot, btw. The Corner gang is silent as death. PJTV can't be bothered, apparently. They can all kiss my a**.
Rush apparently is the Last Man Standing.
Thrilling to see some major Right Wing website acknowledge the speech.
Michael Steele is an idiot, btw. The Corner gang is silent as death. PJTV can't be bothered, apparently. They can all kiss my a**.
Rush apparently really is the Last Man Standing.
type: "CPAC Limbaugh YouTube" in Google search
Envy! Envy! Envy!
"Thank you President Obama for taking out time from your busy day! We need you to give all the conservatives money so they can fly in to see Rush give amazing speeches! Have the overpaid Hollyweird libs level out our playing field. Bless you."
(Strong sense of Irony here?)
There's hard news, hard news commentary, and commentary. Rush is commentating. I like all the guys you mentioned but they don't have a guy doing that great parody of Barney Frank / ABBA doing the "Banking Queen". Newt cooked his own goose with me and others, he squandered the majority. He became just another spendthrift politician. Steyn is insightful, intelligent and CANADIAN! Has he immigrated to the U.S. yet? We need him, I bet Canada wants him GONE!
Historically, nothing is more controversial than the Truth. People who think Rush is controversial are not regular listeners, or are listening to elitist ivory-tower fears of appearing ridiculous. The Left and the Media have achieved their goal: making Republicans ashamed of themselves.
Stan I believe Michael Moore gave the How to lose 300 lbs in 30 days speech a while ago. How's that going for him?
That is not only untrue, but sounds a little silly. You think that Rush is the great purveyor of "The Truth?" Really? Not Jesus, a modern religious figure, or even a political commentator who doesn't seek financial gain from his stances, but Limbaugh?
People who disagree with Gore always cite the fact that he refuses to debate his ideas with anyone an indicator of how full of crap he is (which I agree with). So why is it different when Rush does it?
How can you say that Obama is the worst president ever – he hasn't even been in for 100 days yeat you silly cow!
Well, Canada did try to prosecute him (so it proves he's doing something right).
I think Rush is a great entertainer, but that's what he is. Everything he does is calculated to secure him the greatest financial benefit. There's nothing wrong with that, but it should at least cause people to take his opinions with a grain of salt. As I said, it doesn't make him wrong or uninformed, but it makes him a bad spokesman for a movement (at least if you want to attract people who aren't inclined to listen to someone with his history of comments and behavior).
The Republican party needs better leadership, and that means individuals who actually put themselves on the line and create change. They need to cultivate those individuals, but instead you have factions that will attack anyone who doesn't walk in lockstep with them. Instead of promoting someone who speaks to the factions, they need someone who will unite them, even if it doesn't mean they always agree.
Anyone can uphold the truth and become controversial. People are beheaded for it all the time. I did not equate Rush with Jesus, you did. My point is about truth, not about who speaks it. When Rush upholds "self-evident" truth, it really shouldn't be painted as controversial. What is sad is that lies are seemingly never controversial. That should be tip-off to deep skepticism.
Your silly trotting out of Jesus and financial gain notwithstanding, I could care less what any political commentator realizes from advertising profits in a free market.
Please explain how you think Rush refuses debate. A curious new tack…
Wow Daily Kos and HuffPo is teaching "passive aggressive" rebuttal. Nice try Des.
How can you call me a silly cow – you've never seen me! I was just pulling a typical liberal line, you guys did it ALL THE TIME!!!! Did it hurt your feelings? Oh, please don't run and tell on me. Poor Obama. All the libs have to defend him.
No. We know Obama was a coke head. On stupid libs call Bush that without any facts at all.
Obama wrote about his drug use.
And you're absolutely right, Steve, it is excellent! Thank You!
Nothing stops anyone from responding to Rush and getting their ideas out there or explaining why he's wrong. I don't often see anyone saying what he's wrong about or addressing anything he says.
No need to be a baby about it.
Who said I was giving my full confidence to anyone? You're absolutely silly. I merely stated that he was upholding truth, not trying to create it out of whole cloth like you do. You do go on and on… about things never said. Nice try and all that.
Is it too much to like someone because they speak the truth? Because I'm beginning to dislike you the more you post such silly nonsense, and suspect that my articulations are too copious for your diminutive intellectual stature. Any shorter and you'll be a troll.
Rush puts it out there every day and takes callers who debate with him regularly, and makes fantastic amounts of money by being smarter than his critics.
Bush's speech was amazing, all the more so considering his less than stellar public speaking chops. It proves that what makes a great speech is the level of passion for your argument.
He's an overachiever.
I think you've hit it on the head James! When you combine Rush's comedic timing, sense of style, willingness to target anyone that gets in the agendas way, his dedication to the founding principles of this country, and his total…in your face and I will not apologize for it USA pride… all mixed together in that furry little fuzzball heart of truth…need I go on (?)! For sure there are lots of "others" from all sides, but there remains only one Rush Limbaugh and nobody but nobody does it like Rush does it!
The Right are screwed if this is their voicebox. You guys are desperate. Conservatives don't believe in victims? YOU'RE ALL ACTING LIKE VICTIMS NOW!!! The MSM hates us! No one likes us! Liberals are eeeeevil.
Cry me a friggen river.
Of course Rush, "the last man standing," has the video links at his site. Go to rushlimbaugh.com and there are many links to various videos of his speech.
My favorite MSM response was delivered up by the ever dependable Bill Schneider of CNN who said he felt that Limbaugh had "crossed the line" a few times by questioning Obama's "motives". The sad thing is that I don't think Schneider is even aware of the grotesque hypocrisy present in his comments. Barack Obama and his Democrats have spent the last eight years (50 really) doing nothing but slandering the supposed "motives" of those who disagree with them about anything.
But CNN was really trying to forward the Democrat strategy which is an old gem from the Carville/Begala (by way of Emanuel – they talk daily) playbook of trying to build up evil Rush as a convenient foil. So they showed the whole speech and then spent a few segments pondering wether or not this meant that Rush is now the "Leader" of the Republicans. It's all so hackneyed and obvious. They should just get Matt Groening to produce some generic soundbites by C. Montgomery Burns and use them to create the dramatic contrast they feel they need to prop up Obama. Excellent.
Des, I agree with you. And I think that Coulter and Limbaugh also agree. They know what they do is incendiary and entertaining, they probably can't believe that they are the only ones taking the conservative stance firmly and publicly. From listening to Rush Limbaugh's show I get that he is amazed at the absence of conservative leadership. That he doesn't see that as his role at all. seems obvious.
Sort of the Michael Jordan of failure?
and he used no teleprompter!
A remarkable speech given by a remarkable man, expressing American ideals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Delivered in a strait forward easy to understand conservative point of view without equivocation or apology, “brilliant.”
It was a magnificent speech and a most positive answer to my hopes, dreams and prayers ever since socialist (at the least) leaders began taking over this country. Limbaugh along with the wonderful outburst byf Rick Santelli and the ensuing tea parties are the most heartening turns in many months.
I heard it went so poorly he ended up looking for a faith healer in Cuba… at least, that's what I think he was doing in Cuba.
Did you not hear the part, which just so happened to be the entire thesis of his talk, that what conservatism needs is a leaders who will "communicate basic conservative values"?
Also, just where does Krauthammer and Gingrich differ from Rush in any meaningful way?
I completely agree, Harley (which means that the apocalypse is nigh). My problem is not so much with Conservatism (although I'm not strictly one, most of my favorite commentators are), it's with the lifting up of the Pop culture variety like a talk show host (especially one who is most famous for his sense of humor, not winning arguments). It doesn't help that he attacks the 50% of the public who call themselves Moderates or Independents pretty much on a daily basis. I am frankly baffled that so many Conservatives think that's a winning strategy.
Des, I agree and I think people may be missing your point. I love Rush. I've been listening since the early 1990s. And Rush is a great speaker and a great voice to rally the troops, BUT he's not a politician and he can't be the leader of the Republican Party. If we don't start finding politicians who can claim the mantle of leadership, we will have a problem ever rebuilding the party.
Umm. That's good insight. . I'll side with The Personalities over The Thinkers any time. Everything is an existential crisis with the pointy heads. Ross Douthat comes to mind. What will happen is that the Populists will do the real work of reviving Conservatism and then the Intellectuals will swoop in at the last moment, take credit, and implement whatever the latest fad is amongst them.
Des, every time Rush has been in a debate format (and he has, whether you've seen one or not…obviously not) he is usually solo against 3-4 liberals ganged up against him where he gets to comment only 20% of the time…not a fair fight. He finally gave up going on TV networks (like CNN) that insisted on this format. It seems you haven't been around long enough to know of this history.
You're right, I need to stop crying. When Austin gets that frisbee golf course that the Obama stimulus is paying for with my grandkids' money, I'm going to forget all my troubles and thank the liberals in power for their wisdom and foresight.
The biggest problem with policy is that it requires that people be willing to listen and think logically about it. Now think about the average American voter and tell me how many of them are into thinking logically about policy and what it means … think about it some more … by now, you've lost the average American voter. They're bored and don't get it, and you aren't going to to get them back to make them digest it either. That's why you have to have the "cult of personality" types who can break conservative principles down into something that people can get in sound bites and make it attractive at the same time.
Harley, you're wrong on both counts. You haven't the slightest idea what Conservatives are about and don't you pretend that you know. The poll you cite doesn't exist.
I'll give you one example. Rush's repeated use of the term "Magic Negro." To the extent you want to view Rush as speaking for the Republican Party, is it a good idea for him to use a term that "the middle" is programmed to view as racist? Can you imagine Reagan using that term against a political opponent?
Honestly guys, Rush is an entertainer, he's our side's version of Sean Penn. He has some good ideas, but he cannot be the representative of the party because he has zero ability to reach anyone who doesn't already believe.
Bingo!
I was told that Obama's Munich… er… Denver speech was the greatest of all time. In fact, didn't Chris Matthews wet himself when he heard it? Have I been misled?
God bless Rush! That was an awesome speech I saw on C-SPAN Saturday night.
I know you just wanna help, but we tried the middle of the road moderate Republican approach with McCain, that’s a definite zero. Or the compassionate conservative with “W.” I want an unabashed conservative someone who will express in a crystal clear tone, this country is great because of it’s people not government. I watched a great movie today, “The Lives of Others, about the East German life behind the Iron Curtain, chilling how close we are. I heard that Obama’s health care proposals, for the Medical Records Data Base. One of the ideas to gather this information is to have all citizens come to the local Post Office for a Biometric ID, or eye scan. You mix this with, The War on Drugs, The War on Terror, The War on Poverty, the IRS, ad nauseum equals, The War on America. I want less government not more and win lose or draw Rush has got it right, Washington politicians have got it wrong.
No you have not. Chris Matthews has not change his underwear since that pant-wetting speech in Denver.
Brooks and Krauthammer are big thinkers? You can have them. We'll send you their registration papers in the morning.
At the very least it'd be nice to lose with our own team. Watching McCain was like playing the 'anybody but the Yankees' game since my own team never seems to make it to the series.
I like Krauthammer, although I'd much rather listen to Steyn or Jonah Goldberg. I get the same attitude about Murphy from Conservatives (because he's more of a Center-Right guy). Brooks completely lost me during the election. His opinions seemed to be incredibly shallow and wishy-washy. His defense of Obama seemed pretty uninformed. Peggy Noonan is another one. Can we give her away and keep Charles?
What I am having a hard time wrapping my mind around is why are people so concerned about defining which cubbyhole the speaker fits into; it is absolutely irrelevant to the discussion. The crux of the discussion is; do these statements fit with the current paradigm we find ourselves in, is the content applicable in defining the problem, and does the speaker offer effective solutions? Yes, yes, and yes.
Doesn't matter if its Rush, Mark, Rusty, Newt, or Ronnie Reagan from beyond the grave. The content is applicable.
Now, what are WE gonna do with it?
That's because he said what he meant. Rarely do politicians do that.
cjenk, for the first time, accidentally IS right about one thing. And Rush "got it" in his speech. We're conservatives, we shouldn't cry about sh**t. One, when we complain about media we're entertaining the false thought that it's ever going to be fair (if we don't make our own sources) and two, we should only assert our principles and "do it ourselves" like good conservatives if we feel wronged.
However, the speech probably did scare cjenk because it was effective and not complaining. And no we're not desperate, you're "One" is giving us enough ammo to destroy the liberal movement for the next 50 years.
There weren't any conservatives running against McCrazy.
Duncan Hunter couldn't get any light or oxygen and withered pathetically, Tom Tancredo bailed out in 30 seconds, and Fred Thompson was merely a McCrazy crony running as a stalking horse to undercut anyone else from getting enough traction to beat the eventual nominee, voted the most obnoxious man in Washington *by his own party*.
Republican grassroots will tolerate a right-wing conservative candidate who's willing to move to the middle to win the general election.
They will not tolerate a RINO who pretends to be conservative to win the nomination.
And After four years of Dubbya's Republican socialism-lite, they're not in any mood to rally to the frauds anymore.
I'm not the biggest fan of the former President on a number of issues, but one thing I believe many of us will miss in the future is his level of honesty and sincerity about his beliefs. Even though he left office with a low approval rating, I think a lot of those people are going to remember his certitude fondly, especially if Iraq continues to improve.
Two points from his speech we should repeat over and over. Okay, three. One) We love everyone and believe that they can succeed. Two) We don't want the country to fail, we're trying to save it from Obama's policies and
Three) Obama has proposed more spending in 39 days THAN THE US HAS DONE SINCE IT'S FOUNDING!!!!
Wow. Spread that around and see what people think.
I also like Krauthammer. Is there something I'm missing?
I'm guessing it's his lack of support for the Religious-Right portion of the party. He isn't a big Palin fan either. I don't know that he's not religious, but he rarely mentions it and I've seen him bemoan the fact that it's too ingrained in the Republican party.
i, too, have been skeptical of Michael Steele. Have seen nothing from him that says he has what it takes. Republican rappers? Thats a joke, right? Right? Republicans are about ideas and core beliefs. Think there are those who would make the same argument about Steele that Rush made about Donovan McNabb.
Actually, UNDERLING, you have done much better. You have decided not to allow the libs to speak for you in places outside this forum, where its easier to challenge words on a screen.. That's the key. When someone spouts off, you'll be nice and say, "That's not what I believe. I think ____."
Thanks for stepping up, the first of many, I hope.
"The liberal left is now spending money that will not be or come into existence until my kids have grandchildren."
My issues with Krauthammer aren't religious based. I have problems with many of the stances I've seen him take over the years. For example, he's an opponent of the death penalty, he's come out in favor of higher taxes on energy to force conservation, his foreign policy is borderline adventurist, and I've never seen him say anything nice about conservatives on tv — to the contrary, he's usually hyper critical of all things conservative and he's ultra accomodating to all things liberal.
Honestly, most of the people I know really despise him.
Peggy Noonan should go too.
Everyday on his radio program. He takes questions no politician would like to answer.
I am sure this will pi$$ you off ,Des, but actually, your views are the ones that cause the problems. Rush is an entertainer. He is self-employed. He has made a career for himself, and single-handledly brought back A.M> radio. Michael Medved and High Hewiit, along with all the others, owe their very livelihood to Rush. He makes money, a lot of money. GREAT! That is what this country is all about. I wouldn't mind if he made trillions. I am a big believer is the independent person who pulls themselves up by their bootstraps and makes a living that makes them very happy, (not to mention tens of thousands of others), and is successful. To say differently sounds like wealth-envy to me. The point you are missing is that Rush would be on the radio espousing his Conservative principals whether he was making the big money or not, as he did for many years in the beginning. So many in radio are just there to make money, fine, but then they pander to what others want them to say, or seem to be wishy-washy and flip-flop on their views. Continued
Rush was so awesome!! He had me jumping out of my seat. I loved it the when he told the Drive by media that he didn't need a teleprompter. That it all came from his heart. I get so tired of hearing how BO is such an eloquent speaker. It's like we judge on delevery rather than substance. For anyone who hasn't seen Rush's "National Address". Fox has been replaying it or you can go to Rush's web site and view it for your self.
Lola you are SOOOOO my sister! LMAO!
I'm so sorry I missed it live! I'm going to have to hit the video streams.
It was a good speech. Rush knows how to hit the right buttons.
And you know… you can't hit the right buttons without knowing what and where they are.
Some of the criticism seems to be that Rush is good at riling people up and therefore Rush is bad. (This is the same sort of logic as "Pokemon is evil" or "Harry Potter is evil" proof by popularity that I noticed when my kids were little.) Rush is Rush. He always will be. Making this about him is sort of silly. Also, it misses the point.
He knows what and where the buttons are. The buttons are what is important. It's about understanding people and how they work.
Which means understanding the ways that government destroys motivation and responsibility. It means understanding cause and effect. Rush mentioned that we're supposed to be impressed by the liberals *intentions*. Understanding how humans work means that few of us are going to be impressed by intentions. And we struggle with being branded "uncaring" because the real results of government programs and social trends is more important to conservatives than being seen to "care". What does it matter if my heart is in the right place? What does it matter that my intentions are good?
Why are we so convinced that someone who can do that button pushing is the wrong choice? No… not Rush. He is what he is. But when we look for leaders we disqualify them, or seem to, on their ability to excite people. Does that even make any sense? No one was excited about McCain… but no one really hated him either. Lots of people were fascinated by Palin, excited by Palin, and somehow that made her bad in some Republican eyes. Not enough gravitas or some such.
Rush said that Obama could destroy the Republican party forever if only he *inspired* people. But he doesn't. And we talk about leaders who can inspire the imagination, actually function as a *leader*, but what they seem to want is someone bland… someone that neither inspires nor raises hackles. Someone who can take the "middle."
I'm not at all impressed for calls to conservative purity, but too much worry over the "middle" is going to guarantee a loss as well.
[...] policy ideas,” – Rush Limbaugh . I didn’t make that up (and it was a dig at Newt): Rush to judgment: A media hopelessly divided – bighollywood.breitbart.com 03/02/2009 This week’s Washington Times column: The mood at the Omni [...]
I think one of the contrasts libs so love is that because PBHO is so eloquent, (and because W is not) that PBHO is so much smarter. That's why W beat them. Twice. Because he's dumb.
People HAVE been judging on delivery rather than substance, especially during this cycle. BHO was a center-left portrait, McCain was center-right, and McCain would be Bush lite. Thus was the paradigm set. And when the battle was halfheartedly joined by "Mister Civility" McCain, leader of the Gang of Fourteen, the electorate went with the more eloquent, no background, if I have to choose someone liberal, I want someone who is actually a liberal, not a patsy liberal. But everyone forgot the key points; Ayers, Wright, Resko, et. al., Now the snake is up in the tree passing out free apples to all.
Wow – lame ad hominem from a lib! What a shock.
Unfortunately, much of this will probably be turned around in MSM by tomorrow,
and look nothing like the original thought:
"Obama has proposed more spending in 39 days THAN THE US HAS DONE SINCE IT'S FOUNDING!!!!"
=Look at how much the current gov't has to spend to save us from the previous administration.
I hate to be negative about it, but Rush is such a target others will jump at the chance to pick him apart.
Well, ok, I posted 2 very long posts here, inrely to one of Des' first comments upthread. Unfortunately they seem to have disappeared. I will try again, but after reading more comments, which I should have done sooner, I have a slightly different comment. Des, I respect your opinions, but you, and some of the others here are wrong about the Conservative Party. I won't claim to be an expert, I'm not, but I have been working for the Republican Party, like my mom, for most of my life. Here's where I see it much differently. Rush is an entertainer, he pulled himself up by his bootstraps, and made a living, a good living, and has stayed true to his roots the whole time he was doing it. This is extremely commendable. People like Medved, Hewitt, et al, owe their very livelihoods to Rush, as he is the one who single-handedly revived A.M. radio. He is NOT a politician, or a big "intellectual," nor does he want/try to be. That is why he is so well liked he is being himself, daily. I have respect for a lot of the "think tankers," but it is the Frums and Brooks who cause the party the most harm.
False dichotomy on your part there harley. It isn't an either or thing with us conservatives but thanks for playing. Palin, Jindal and Rush are powerful personalities, but they are loved because they espouse consistent conservative ideology. Just like Reagan did. The "big thinkers" aren't the ones who win elections. OK – maybe Newt once upon a time. And Brooks can hardly be called a conservative anymore.
They want to remake the Republican party, but to do so, they are wanting to change our core values. Conservatives don't chane their core beliefs, their morals. This isn't ideology, this is how we live our lives, how we form our moral code. Their idea is to make us "Dem-lites." Well, I have seen a few of those come down the pike in my life, it doesn't work. The American people will pick the real thing over the faux, everytime, whether it is good for them, or not. The biggest insult these pseudo-intellects do, is to feed into the media generated conflicts and say things like the party is dead, it has cancer, it has lost it's way, etc. This is a ploy, no one should be sucked into it. The more the left, and the right who want to remake us, keep telling the Am. people that the party on the Right, is in the Wrong, them we will lose elections. We cannot let them dictate how we act, and what we say and do.
Wonderful speech by Rush. Glad to hear how conservatives seemed very energized at this year's CPAC. I know there have been a couple of bloggers grousing about how they felt marginalized etc. But I think the future is bright for the conservative movement. The reactions from the usual leftist trolls tell me we are doing the right things.
Ronald Reagan had a belief in his "11th commandment." It basically was that no repub speak ill of another repub in public. So what do we allow to hapen now? We eat our own. This is wrong, and will keep the Dems in power longer, and unified. They don't have the core beliefs we do, so it's easy to be an accepted member in the party. Basically hating "rethuglicans" is enough. LOL. Anyway, I didn't intend to preach, but it is hard for me to see so much vitriol and infighting that does absolutely no good, except to give the lefties talking points, and things they can use against us. The party isn't dead. Just like it wasn't after Goldwater, or Nixon, or during Carter's time. We are out of power. It had to happen at some time, and they ran a well-spoken black man who is seemingly fairly intelligent. Even though McCain was a horrible cadidate to represent a conserv. viewpoint, I doubt anyone had much of a chance. Obama has the dream story. And like in life, politics and the media love a great story.
The biggest challenge going forward for the Republican party is for our politicians to act and live their core beliefs. We need to concentrate on 2010, NOT 2012. This is a fight for another day, far away. It has only been 12 weeks, guys, we have a 4 year contract with this guy, that part is a done deal. If people really want to help the party, don't run it down. Don't believe everyhting you read/ hear. And most of all, work to get new candidates nominated in your area, or support the ones you have, if they deserve it. Go door to door, make phone calls for them, make signs, get money donated. It really does work. The Libs at places like Daily Kos did this, and even on a local level, and were successful. They announced who their guy was, asked for help for him, then listed the "enemy" and told them to go out and help get rid of him. Sometimes activism does work, especially if it is well-targeted. Thanks for reading my long rants, but this is my life, and I get passionate.
Magic Negro is a term coined by a black man in an op-ed piece. There's context to it.
And to des, you keep harping on how much money Limbaugh makes( what's up with that, btw? 'splain please ) and in the same breath say that he's on the fringe. Uh, he wouldn't be making the big $$ if he was on the fringe.
He and his fellow bomb throwers are exactly what the right needs right now.
No kiddin' Sounds all astro turfy and $hit.
You must be logged in to post a comment.