Video: Rush vs Powell
posted at 11:00 am on December 16, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view
Rush Limbaugh counts himself flattered and amazed that so much attention comes his way from supposedly Republican reformers like Colin Powell, but also just a little confused. Rush wonders which person supports big-tent Republicanism best — the conservative talk-show host who supported the moderate presidential candidate, or the moderate who wants conservatives like Rush drummed out of the party? (via Matt Lewis)
For someone who supposedly wants to promote tolerance, Powell seems pretty intolerant of dissent. And let’s make one point very, very clear: when the Republicans actually nominated a moderate for their candidate, fellow “moderates” like Powell left the party anyway. If Powell want to support Republican big-tent efforts, they need to stop going running away when a big-tenter runs for office.
If the GOP wants to win governing majorities again, they will have to find ways to make their message relevant to the majority. That will never happen with purity purges, which are ideologically satisfying but a quick path to a generation out of power. Rush knew that, which is why he supported John McCain in the general election, and why he supports Republicans at election time. Powell apparently hasn’t learned that much about politics as yet, which is why he doesn’t support Republicans at election time but feels himself enough of an authority to speak on party unity.
Who should Republicans keep — Powell or Rush? We should find ways to keep both and settle on core principles that unite the disparate conservative cliques, just as Ronald Reagan did. If we have to choose, however, the choice is easy. I’d rather keep the Republican.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
It is amazing the depth of the hatred for Gov. Palin when she is bought into every thread. Scared much?
Cindy Munford on December 16, 2008 at 2:55 PM
“He felt Palin was a weak choice and showed a lack of judgement required of a commander in chief.”
What of Obama’s “judgement”?
Attending Rev. “Goddamn America” Wright’s cult church with his children?
Hanging around with a guy who thought bombing the Pentagon was a great idea?
Getting a “loan” from shady foreigner Tony Rezko?
Yes, Obama is an excellent judge of character. He’s surrounded himself with all the same sort of slime.
But I’m sure Obama’s clean, it’s just all of the other politicians in Illinois are slimy. They allowed him to grow untouched like a hothouse flower, right?
NoDonkey on December 16, 2008 at 2:56 PM
And what did Obama do? According to his own books, drugs.
If he really meant that, he would have never been able to support a man with as poor judgment (no e) about people as Obama. I can’t count the number of times he’s thrown someone under the bus.
Esthier on December 16, 2008 at 2:58 PM
Bobby, What’s a matter, lonely?
Look, specifically,the determining factor, had more with the shade of pale or the making of history.
Bridgette on December 16, 2008 at 3:05 PM
Wow, they must have put out some yummy troll food to bring this crowd out!
pseudonominus on December 16, 2008 at 3:10 PM
Happy holidays folks. It’s been fun.
robertnyc212 on December 16, 2008 at 3:10 PM
robertnyc212,
What liberal rock have you been under? Powell is respected for his service to our country, but he has now veered off into crazy land. He has completely destroyed any future he had as a respected voice in American politics. He should have taken a long listen to MacArthur’s farewell speech and simply faded away. But the more he opens his pie hole, the more he reveals himself to be part of the gaggle of former military officers that are embarrassing caricatures of themselves. Ala General Clark.
csdeven on December 16, 2008 at 3:15 PM
Sure, go play in traffic.
hawkdriver on December 16, 2008 at 3:16 PM
what happened to my comment, ed?
eh on December 16, 2008 at 3:18 PM
It isn’t that he’s veered off into crazyland. He’s just a Democrat.
Illinidiva on December 16, 2008 at 3:19 PM
I’ll have much more sympathy for Rush when he can begin to label George W. Bush, Dick Chenney and Karl Rove as “Washintonian”. Rush Limbaugh must realize, as all of us do out here in flyover country, that the GOP Hierarchy, not only do they not respect us but they have deep contempt for us. THAT INCLUDES YOU RUSH!!! They’ve no respect for you! They do just the opposite of what you advise them to do. They’re all a collection of Transnational Progressives. Why, Rush, do you continue to have their ilk on your show?
But, Rush, this is a good start. Powell should be blocked from any GOP functions indefinitely. Lets hope we have an new RNC Chair that will get tough w/the likes of Colin Powell, etc. DD
Darvin Dowdy on December 16, 2008 at 3:35 PM
What the Republicans need to do is to develop positive policies that stand in stark contrast to the absolutely worthless Democrat Party.
That means, running capable candidates who have accomplished something in their lives in business, in the military, etc.
No more lawyers who have spent their lives insulated in Washington. No more family members of family members, at least not until they’ve accomplished something on their own.
Do not permit even the hint of corruption. The Democrats can be dirty to the core (e.g. Charles Rangel and pretty much the rest of the Democrat Congress) and the media will give them a free pass, but one little speck on a Republican and they will pounce.
Don’t allow them to.
These two simple things will completely differentiate the Republicans from the vile scum that makes up the Democrat Congress.
NoDonkey on December 16, 2008 at 3:42 PM
http://www.thepoliticalcesspool.org
eh on December 16, 2008 at 4:00 PM
that wasn’t it. i’m trying to figure out where my comment went.
eh on December 16, 2008 at 4:01 PM
Rush has labelled W as a nice man but not a conservative. At least not a Movement Conservative. He knows that President Bush has never wanted to push any agenda but his own. There is a lot to admire but Rush knows who President Bush is. That doesn’t mean he dislikes him and he doesn’t dislike Mr. Obama. This is ideology not personalities.
Cindy Munford on December 16, 2008 at 4:02 PM
Personally, I think Obama is a nice man too. I wouldn’t mind him as a neighbor.
Just don’t want him in any way, in charge of anything at all that influences my life. He’s woefully inexperienced, completely unqualified and likely corrupt.
Doesn’t mean he can’t be a nice guy.
NoDonkey on December 16, 2008 at 4:06 PM
Powell = loser
How can you claim to be a Republican and publicly endorse Obama? Powell has always been a democrat.
gdonovan on December 16, 2008 at 4:06 PM
Ditto. Pun intended.
Cindy Munford on December 16, 2008 at 4:10 PM
I haven’t read the thread and this has probably been said, but after Powell endorsed Obama, IMO, Powell took himself out. I see no need to try get him back in.
INC on December 16, 2008 at 4:10 PM
Are you posting on mulitple threads? Easy to post on the wrong one.
Cindy Munford on December 16, 2008 at 4:11 PM
The Big tent is what got us into the mess we’re in now. It started in 2000. We’d had six years of the Republicans standing for smaller Government and more individual responsibility.
We picked GW Bush. I grant you, he’s been a fine President regarding the War on Terror, for the most part. I’ve thought him a lousy Smaller Government Republican since he helped re-define Bankruptcy, and then went jelly spine on McCain-Feingold.
So long as there was only one issue, the War on Terror, as it was in 2002 and 2004. The Republican Party had an issue that could and would work for them. One that set them dramatically apart from the Democrats. Yet, when we open the door to see the whole package, the Republican’s were screwed.
We had the majority, so why didn’t we have the sense or guts to start trimming wasteful Government? Just like Bill Clinton’s staffers, we saw it as OUR Government now. We owned it, and we became everything we claimed to detest. The Deficit which was a huge issue to us in 2000, became another thing to ignore in 2002, and in 2004. Social Security, which all of us know is going to be insolvent in fifteen year, well, we’re not going to do the tough things, it’s just too tough.
We became the party of the Big Tent, we wouldn’t take a unified stance on any issue, and eventually the War on Terror became one of a number of issues that people cared about. We had one issue, the Democrats had every single other issue out there on their side. Our elected representatives would talk smaller Government at home, and once in Washington, vote for bigger more intrusive Government. We became the party of the big tent, and bigger Government. We became the party of the Democrats in the 1970’s, instead of the Republicans of the 1980’s, and 1990’s.
I’ll admit when I lost a great deal of Respect for President Bush, but I will also say I supported him on issues when he was right. When he said he was going to sign McCain Feingold, despite his own personal belief that it violated the First Amendment, he was going to sign it, and let the Supreme Court decide.
“Congress shall pass no law.” No gray area there gang. If you believe that what you’re doing is wrong, Constitutionally, and you do it anyway, you just showed the world, and your supporters that you’re a coward, and unwilling to do what you believe is right.
Ronald Reagan educated the people, he told them “This is what I believe, and this is why I believe it.” The Republican Revolution in 94 was the same thing. We told the people what we believed, and why we believed it. Now we tell them what we think they want us to say we believe, and do whatever it takes to keep the big tent up.
Sad. For the party, and the nation.
Snake307 on December 16, 2008 at 4:11 PM
Good comment.
INC on December 16, 2008 at 4:15 PM
Even if I’m willing to accept the allegedly unassailable nature of Powell’s patriotism and courage, I can’t fathom how anyone could conclude that the judgment of a junior senator would be superior to a veteran and war hero on security matters.
To disqualify John McCain over a VP pick is moronic, particularly when that VP pick had every bit as much relevant experience as Barack Obama. Transparently false logic and a stupid argument.
TheUnrepentantGeek on December 16, 2008 at 4:20 PM
“Transparently false logic and a stupid argument.”
It’s their lameass, idiotic argument and they are sticking to it.
I’ve asked dozens of Obama supporters how exactly his wealth of experience is so vastly superior to Sarah Palin’s and I’ve not once received an answer.
And I never will. Because they can’t come up with one that isn’t completely ridiculous. Kind of like Barack Obama.
NoDonkey on December 16, 2008 at 4:28 PM
Why, Rush, do you continue to have their ilk on your show?
But, Rush, this is a good start. Powell should be blocked from any GOP functions indefinitely. Lets hope we have an new RNC Chair that will get tough w/the likes of Colin Powell, etc. DD
Darvin Dowdy on December 16, 2008 at 3:35 PM
In addition to the comment that purity parties are satisfying but [useless] there was Regan’s 11th Commandment. Learn grasshopper. Grow to the point you can be nice but take counsel elsewhere.
The point is that Powell has internal conflicts and he should keep them to himself.
We none of us live up to our expectations all the time but we don’t quit trying. Maybe Powell can grow a bit here, too.
Flying Israeli flag
Caststeel on December 16, 2008 at 4:31 PM
Palin lacks a broad frame of reference. Palin does not have an interest in national or international affairs. In brief, she is uninformed. You can not say the same about Obama. At least intelligently.
robertnyc212 on December 16, 2008 at 4:36 PM
Snake307 on December 16, 2008 at 4:11 PM
Is this the same snake as on this flag?
Flying Culpeper Flag
Caststeel on December 16, 2008 at 4:38 PM
“Palin lacks a broad frame of reference.”
What exactly does that mean? Are you in the media? This is exactly the meaningless, intellectual poseur type of drivel they trot out to appear “in the know”. You’re doing a great imitation of it if you aren’t, my compliments.
She was the Governor of the State of Alaska. That requires being in charge of a budget, the National Guard, the schools, commerce, etc. She rooted out corruption in her own party.
While Obama was a party to corruption.
What National Guard was Obama in charge of? What budget did he manage, besides the catering for his Senate Staff Christmas Party? Which he likely delegated?
“Palin does not have an interest in national or international affairs.”
And you know this . . . How? Oh wait, you have ESP like our media betters. I forgot.
“In brief, she is uninformed.”
Yes. Very brief. Because you when you have no idea what it is you’re writing about, being brief is a good idea.
“You can not say the same about Obama.”
I would not say the same about Obama, you’re correct, because nothing you’ve written makes any sense whatsoever.
NoDonkey on December 16, 2008 at 4:41 PM
And you are an expert? Why would that be?
Cindy Munford on December 16, 2008 at 4:42 PM
robertnyc212 on December 16, 2008 at 4:36 PM
Please return to the children’s table. At least until you have developed some ability to reason. Besides, there are snakes here and you should be afraid.
Flying Still Culpeper Flag
Caststeel on December 16, 2008 at 4:42 PM
robertnyc212 on December 16, 2008 at 4:36 PM
And other vipers.
Flying Gadsden Flag
Caststeel on December 16, 2008 at 4:44 PM
Now we get to the nitty-gritty part. What is the meaning of ‘informed’?
Kind of like what the meaning of is, is.
belad on December 16, 2008 at 4:49 PM
Amen. Many of the current republicans in congress ran their campaigns as conservatives, but governed like democrats. They said big government is fine as long as we are in charge. We had the opportunity to trim the federal government down to constitutional levels, but once we had the reigns of power all across the board, that whole small government thing was thrown out the window. And I include GWB in this also. He ran sounding like Reagan and then governed like his father.
Corsair on December 16, 2008 at 4:58 PM
here’s my abbreviated version of the comment which seems to have dissappeared into the ether:
in the comments which everyone is supposedly reacting to, powell critisized the gop’s recession into the pale of obscurity by narrowly focussing on the specific cultural interests of less-educated, straight white protestants in small towns while interestedly alienating itself from all other cultural spaces.
in doing so, he specificly said that social conservatism is good and should be preserved in the party.
the conservatives arguing back at powell are accusing him of wanting to eliminate social conservatism from the party.
are they missing the point negligently or willfully?
is “social conservatism” being used here by conservatives as a euphamism for white nationalism?
eh on December 16, 2008 at 5:06 PM
I like Powell – he really protected me well.
Sincerely,
Richard Armitage
thirteen28 on December 16, 2008 at 5:18 PM
eh, NO. And frankly, I’m totally fed up with everything being about race and nation. Yes, we’re Americans, and damn proud of it, and if that makes us “nationalists” then I guess we are.
Powell is not a conservative. He screwed Bush over both while working for him and once he left. Now he, just like all the other luke warm mushies, is trying to tell conservatives how to be more like liberals, claiming that will lead them to victory.
NTWR on December 16, 2008 at 5:21 PM
actually, no. that’s not what he tried to tell conservatives in his comments.
eh on December 16, 2008 at 5:24 PM
eh on December 16, 2008 at 5:06 PM
No. You are missing the point. Conservatives are down on Powell because of his ideology, not the color of his skin.
We identify with Rush because he is from a small town in flyover country and has not changed his Conservative values over the years to please anybody. Powell is viewed as trying to suck up to the Washington Elite and seems to want to pull the Republican party in a Center Left direction
to where it will eventually become Democrat-Lite.
We’re talkin’ Conservatism. You’re talkin’ Raaacism.
kingsjester on December 16, 2008 at 5:25 PM
NTWR on December 16, 2008 at 5:21 PM
+1
Powell is just one more figment of conservative foist upon us by the codepends media. It’s okay. Smile and make nice but get counsel elsewhere. No biggie. And be conservative.
Flying 76 Flag
Caststeel on December 16, 2008 at 5:28 PM
i’ll try this again. the comments powell made which conservatives are supposedly responding to were about the gop devoting itself to the cultural concerns of rural whites while specificly excluding all other cultural spaces. in doing so, he specificly said that social conservatism is good and should be preserved in the party.
you and others are reacting by accusing him of prescribing that the party become more liberal.
that’s my point. do you think the issue is conservatism versus liberalism because you haven’t actually read what powell said (which would be understandable since ed chose not to cite that context)?
or are you proceeding from a definition of conservatism in which white identity is a primary referent?
eh on December 16, 2008 at 5:37 PM
Cindy Munford on December 16, 2008 at 5:40 PM
Powell is no more a Republican than the man he voted for. G’me a break. Lose him.
hawkeye on December 16, 2008 at 5:43 PM
What Powell is trying to say is conservatives should be less conservative. You know, like him.
To me it seems like the beginning of an orchestrated campaign to do to conservatives the same thing they’ve done to everyone else who doesn’t fit the required parameters for becoming future solylent green … they’ll soon label Rush and anyone else who thinks like Rush or believes what Rush believes as “extremists”.
darwin on December 16, 2008 at 5:44 PM
Urban versus Rural does not imply racism. Have you been out of your neighborhood? Although I imagine that people in rural areas are more interested in property rights then urban areas but I wouldn’t limit the possibility there either. There really isn’t anything about conservatism that doesn’t equally benefit all.
Cindy Munford on December 16, 2008 at 5:44 PM
solylent green = soylent green
darwin on December 16, 2008 at 5:45 PM
Cindy Munford on December 16, 2008 at 5:46 PM
eh on December 16, 2008 at 5:37 PM
NO. I am not. If you are a Conservative, it doesn’t matter to me if you are PURPLE. I am friends with several Black Conservatives who share my vaules. When I first started listening to talk radio, one of my favorite hosts was Ken Hamblen, The Black Avenger, a Conservative from Denver. The Washington Beltway, in their arrogance, has been trying to redefine Conservatism. That is what cost the Republican Party the Presidency. It is the arrogant belittling of “flyover country” and the Americans that live there that is truly irritating to many Americans. It is not a skin color issue.
kingsjester on December 16, 2008 at 5:48 PM
Keep Rush and Palin, you get to be known as the Party of “We don’t care about leadership. We just want someone who offends the opposition the most”.
Keep Powell, and you might just get leadership. Let the talkers go independent if they all care about existing.
sethstorm on December 16, 2008 at 5:50 PM
i don’t think so. there are a few direct references to a “big tent” policy in this thread, in which the “big tent” is then described as something which erodes conservatism.
now, the first part of that is somewhat responsive to what powell said. the second part i’m having some trouble with.
how does having more people professing patriotism, a strong national defence, limited government and social responsibility erode conservatism?
eh on December 16, 2008 at 5:56 PM
It’s absolutely amazing what the media can do. The democrats paint Rush and Palin as devisive and polarizing and people believe it. If the democrats are screaming about Rush and Palin it’s not because the’re offending, it’s because they’re exposing the democrats for who and what they are. The typical liberal tactic is to personalize and demonize … something the media assists with very well.
Powell is no leader, he’s trying to change the definition of the GOP and redefine conservatism.
darwin on December 16, 2008 at 5:57 PM
No D, you make some very good points. I think your point about not tolerating any corruption should be a basic in the REP party, regardless of how the DEMs handle similar transgressions. Whether my repesentative is liberal, moderate or conservative, I want them to be honest and ethical at all times. Tactically, it’s also a way to draw in voters who are craving honest, ethical government.
Red State State of Mind on December 16, 2008 at 5:57 PM
I have an alternate suggestion . . . you take Powell and we’ll keep Rush and Plain.
And please tell us exactly what leadership Powell offers. To this point he’s been nothing but a liberal naysayer.
rplat on December 16, 2008 at 6:01 PM
right, but powell was critisizing the arrogant belittling of “fake virginia”.
eh on December 16, 2008 at 6:03 PM
“Keep Rush and Palin, you get to be known as the Party of “We don’t care about leadership. We just want someone who offends the opposition the most”.”
Unlike the Democrats, who have towering beacons of leadership such as Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid leading the House and Senate.
If you can name anything at all these two corrupt incompetents bring to the table, please do. Because I’ve followed their careers and read their bios, and they have nothing to offer that I can see.
And instead of tearing down Palin all of the time, how about the libs mentioning all of the accomplishments and experience Obama brings to the table? Because I never hear that mentioned.
Not from Powell, not from anyone. Powell et al just “hope” Obama isn’t the elusive lightweight he’s been for 47 years, that’s all they have to offer us.
So why should we take advice from Powell anyway, when he endorsed by far the least experienced and least accomplished Presidential Candidate in American History?
NoDonkey on December 16, 2008 at 6:03 PM
Personally I think Colin Powell is ticked off at Rush Limbaugh for supporting Sarah Palin on an almost daily basis on his talk show, and Powell is ticked off at Sarah Palin because she was responsible for energizing the Republican base and rolling back the expected/predicted 2008 landslide election of Barack Obama.
Keep the ‘Cuda’ ditch the RINO(s).
.
philly_PA on December 16, 2008 at 6:04 PM
ideally, no.
eh on December 16, 2008 at 6:06 PM
i must’ve missed that detail. so, palin is the president elect?
eh on December 16, 2008 at 6:08 PM
…a-ha!
…a-ha!, I say…and again I say “a-ha!”….
The point of uniting the herd of conservative-esque cats currently masquerading as Republicans, relying on them to “settle on core principles” has little to do today with “conservative cliques” as in the past….
…disunity today comes from the so-called “moderates”, who’re nothing more than “progressives” in clean underwear…comfortable with big government and giveaways, many the recipients of same and some (like Powell) even creatures of the paternalism of Uncle Sugar…they don’t want to be seen in the same room, let alone the same party, will the unwashed masses who see “core principles” as involving guns, personal sovereignty and (*GODFREY DANIELS!*) anything impairing access to the federal teats from which they’ve long drawn deep and hard….
…it’s indeed no contest…Powell is not even on the right of the Democratic Party…let him go there…he’s shown that bent, and has been showing it long before his Obama endorsement….
…Rush, on the other hand, is irreplacable….
Puritan1648 on December 16, 2008 at 6:09 PM
Notice how the media uses RINO’s like Powell as representative of “good” Republicans … implying that Republicans and conservatives that don’t accept what Powell is saying are somehow “fringe”.
If the media had done it’s job instead of trying to undermine McCain/Palin, if Palin would have gotten the exposure she deserved, and her accomplishments told instead of the falsehoods the media breathlessly repeated … I think we might have a different President.
Obama owes the media big time for covering his ass, Biden’s ass and sliming Palin and McCain at pretty much every chance they got. Not to mention keeping vital info about Palin from getting out.
darwin on December 16, 2008 at 6:13 PM
There is nothing wrong with more people believing any of those things. Unfortunately when people get to Washington most seem to throw all that away. It’s a power grab. You have to have a little power lust to even run for president but Sen. McCain compromised and “reached across the aisle” way more than Mr. Obama ever did. My point is that Sen. McCain was the perfect candidate for Gen. Powell, everything that he believes a Republican should be. But General Powell went for history. And I don’t blame him. He just needs to be honest about it but instead he insults all of the other members of party that are just as legitmate as those who have the same view as he. And unfortunately your posts read as someone who has defined Republicans or better yet conservatives in your own heart and mind then pick and choose posts that in your mind justifiy you opinion. I am glad that works for you, you are missing a lot of wonderful people who have very insightful things to says. And trust me, the same people that you denigrate here are the ones that will stand by you the quickest.
Cindy Munford on December 16, 2008 at 6:19 PM
Cindy Munford on December 16, 2008 at 6:19 PM
Extremely well said and gratefully appreciated.
kingsjester on December 16, 2008 at 6:20 PM
Powell is a
brasshatprofitsbeard on December 16, 2008 at 6:26 PM
Do you mean, like Obama’s involvement in the election in Kenya?
Johan Klaus on December 16, 2008 at 6:31 PM
i’m sorry you see it that way. what i’ve been trying to do is to is call attention to trends and currents within the right which i think are mallign and self-discrediting. in doing so, i don’t mean to define all people who identify with conservatism, but rather to provoke conservatives to disagregate themselves from those currents.
two years ago it would have been unthinkable to me that i would be crying “racist” or “anti-intellectual” all over conservative blogs. it’s just that i see those currents now and i can’t shut up about it.
it’s made all the more difficult that conservatives have been abused by the left with false and tendentious accusations for so long that a callous of reflexive denial has developed in those spots.
i don’t know if we can reconcile on that point. i still maintain that “rinos” haven’t been half as mean to “real” conservatives as the reverse.
i once challenged the “mccain called me a racist because i want the laws enforced” crowd to cite where mccain called immigration reform opponents racist. i had no takers.
in the meantime, too much of the border enforcement rhetoric is directly informed by white nationalist outlets like vdare.
eh on December 16, 2008 at 6:38 PM
Allow me to repreat what I had stated when Powell said the GOP needs to stop embracing ’small town’ values:
Screw you, Powell, you traitor!
madmonkphotog on December 16, 2008 at 6:41 PM
Exactly how would you address the problem if apparently Vdare is too “white” and “nationalistic”?
darwin on December 16, 2008 at 6:49 PM
Smokescreen. Convenient excuse. Powell was an Obama supporter the moment BO got the nomination.
Anyway, if common sense is the measure, I’d take Palin over Hillary, Joe Biden, Rahm Emanuel or any of the other more kooky people Obama has named thus far.
ddrintn on December 16, 2008 at 6:49 PM
Cindy Munford on December 16, 2008 at 6:52 PM
I think RINOs should be removed and replaced with DINOs. Reaching across the aisle only expands government. When a “Republican” only criticizes Republicans he is a Democrat. People aren’t interested in bi-partisanship. They are interested in principles and core values. Democrats have offered nothing but criticism for 8 years. They’ve not offered a single positive alternative to any policy enacted since,at least, 2000. The reason the Republicans lost this year was because they abandoned conservatism by selecting McCain as the frontrunner. Did I say selected? I mean, Democrats, voting in the primary, put McCain over the top. I would agree that Palin was uninformed if a single news agency asked Obama even one question that would reveal his amazing grasp of every aspect of the American political process. The truth is, specific knowledge is attained through an understanding of where, exactly, the information can be found. I don’t expect anyone to be able to reel off an answer to any question a reporter can come up with. Not having some specific piece of information is niether an indication of intellegence nor the measure of a lack of leadership ability. I’d vote for Palin in a heartbeat, not because of what people in the press think she should represent but rather as a true representative of real people in the United States.
jakabok_botch on December 16, 2008 at 6:52 PM
By the way, how have those moderate Republicans in New England fared over the past couple of cycles? Yep, that’s a winning philosophy.
ddrintn on December 16, 2008 at 6:52 PM
pardon me, i didn’t read your post closely enough.
is powell being comepletely forthcoming about his endorsement of obama? yes and no.
i think he did choose history and i don’t blame him either. but that’s a macro issue. i think there was a personal issue in the way that powell was cited early on as a lead vp prospect. in my opinion, he should have been.
instead, he was passed over for an unknown quantity who was chosen to reflect and continue the trend that powell critisizes in his comments.
the thing is, it’s not like he’s saying something scores of well-established conservatives are also seeing:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=98174969
and that still isn’t the thing i was trying to get at vis a vis conservatism and white identity.
eh on December 16, 2008 at 6:52 PM
Why are Bush and the RNC silent about Powell? Do they agree with Powell? This was the SOS for a Republican President just a few years ago and you can’t just ignore his comments and hide behind a radio commenter.
If you want some guy on the radio to do your job for you, RNC, then put him in charge of the RNC. It doesn’t cut it to let a radio performer do the party’s job in some unofficial capacity. It’s just pathetic.
Buddahpundit on December 16, 2008 at 6:53 PM
eh, I think you probably hit way too close to home with your original comment in this thread. Not surprised you didn’t get much reaction around here…pretty subtle point for this crowd.
Limbaugh is an entertainer. He tells his fans what they want to hear and plays to their authoritarian and fundamentalist tendencies. He’s barely a tier one thinker and mostly plays to lowest common denominator notions. Gen. Powell is an independent and probably leans right of center on most issues (but more center than right). BTW, I think many of you have a basic misunderstanding of the meaning of “conservative foreign policy”.
dakine on December 16, 2008 at 6:53 PM
i’m 34. pisces.
eh on December 16, 2008 at 6:55 PM
I’m not a thorough Rush fan myself, though I like the guy and thinks he’s right on a lot of the time. But I do get a little tired of the “he’s an entertainer, a third-rate thinker” line of crap coming (mainly) from liberals. What do the liberals have to offer as an anti-Rush? Al Franken? Bill Maher? Olby? Matthews? Those are first-tier “thinkers”? Puh-LEEEEEEZ.
Funny though how the “center” always seems more at home with left-wing candidates, huh.
ddrintn on December 16, 2008 at 6:58 PM
My word, you’re just full of yourself today. Please, as I’m sure your intellect far surpasses any neuron activity that Rush exhibits … why don’t you just call his show one day and let him have it? You know, just expose him to all his listeners. I know it’s such a simple task for you, and no doubt world governments are crying for your brilliance in solving all the worlds problems but maybe, just maybe you can call and put Rush in his place.
darwin on December 16, 2008 at 7:00 PM
“If you want some guy on the radio to do your job for you, RNC, then put him in charge of the RNC.”
If only . . .
1) There is someone at the RNC who actually does something? Other than draw a salary? Gee, I didn’t notice. The Democrats through the DNC have been lying about Republicans and our President for eight years and we haven’t heard nary a peep out of them.
Rush actually articulates what we all feel, but Republican politicians don’t dare say. Wouldn’t want to hurt the feelings of Democrats when they’re slandering the Commander in Chief during a time of war.
Rush is the defacto leader of the RNC because the RNC has been pathetically mealy mouthed and almost completely ineffective. Occasionally they rear their head for a few moments and then disappear.
One of the main Republican problems is a total lack of communication and it starts with not responding to Democrat lies and slander, both of which Barack Obama’s campaign and victory were based upon.
The RNC doesn’t “let” Rush do anything. Rush is able to command the attention of the audience because the RNC is a well-funded, deaf mute of an organization.
NoDonkey on December 16, 2008 at 7:02 PM
You might get that impression reading this except…
http://projectusa.org/2008/03/01/mccain-called-me-a-racist-in-front-of-hundreds/
My gut tels me McCain looks down on people who oppose these waves of illegal immigration, based on his comments. he sounds so much like a Democrat on this issue, it was difficult to vote for him.
Red State State of Mind on December 16, 2008 at 7:03 PM
what’s frustrating is when i get this kind of response from the perfectly aware:
“what bank robbery, copper? a bank got robbed? i don’t even know what a bank is!”
eh on December 16, 2008 at 7:05 PM
Many, many people felt that way. That should be a lesson to us to never, ever let the media choose our candidates again … which is precisely what happened. They got who they wanted, not who we wanted. When he picked Palin it threw them into a tailspin for their little plans had the potential to go up in smoke.
darwin on December 16, 2008 at 7:08 PM
I think many people value “book learning” over common sense, strong values, a good work ethic , etc… and many gravitate towards the uber-educated political elite for that reason. That’s why you hear “Ivy league education” bandied about so often to somehow inflate someone’s worth. It’s totally plausible that Powell,who navigated the politics of the U S Army to become Head of the Joint Chiefs, is of that same persuasion.
Red State State of Mind on December 16, 2008 at 7:10 PM
Nope…Palin has run a successful state,She ran a city,
and she help run a business….she has the skills and
basic experience to work on a national and international
scale….
…Obama has no executive experience, he has never run a business,and he has no foreign policy experience at all.
Obama…..nobody knows what he even really believes.
Not even his Lib allies in the media.
Palin has conservative core beliefs, and lives by them.
dec5 on December 16, 2008 at 7:11 PM
Ah … so you’d just ignore and look the other way it then.
darwin on December 16, 2008 at 7:11 PM
I really can’t think of a better source for the pulse of conservative thought than NPR. /sarc
I swear it’s like we’re besieged by an army of Axelrods … wait a minute …
TheUnrepentantGeek on December 16, 2008 at 7:12 PM
As Rush said, Yeah, I’ll take advise from a Republican who voted Democrat.. . NOT
reshas1 on December 16, 2008 at 7:15 PM
Rush believes in conservatism, never changed…..
Powell believes in……..ummmm Obama and dumped his friend
McCain.
Rush wins.
dec5 on December 16, 2008 at 7:15 PM
Rush: Supported the Republican Nominee for President
Powel: Supported the Democrat Nominee for President.
Mr. Powel, go f*ck yourself. You’re a Democrat, not a Republican. Feel free to give them your advice, we neither want it, nor need it.
Greg Q on December 16, 2008 at 7:15 PM
Keep Powell! To keep embracing Limbaugh will keep the GOP a party of nothing but nativists, creationists, homophobes, racists and religious zealots and will ensure it never reaches a majority again….
Noneya on December 16, 2008 at 7:16 PM
Just like I ignored the keyboard when I was typing.
So you’d just ignore it and look the other way then.
darwin on December 16, 2008 at 7:16 PM
I am inclined to think that open primaries were the main cause of this, but I have not researched it to see what actually happened. Do you agree, or see a different dynamic in what played out with McCain getting the nomination.
I live in MD, and I’m sorry to admit that I don’t know if other state’s primaries are closed or open.
Many here on HA make the basic statement that you did, that we had McCain “forced” on us. What do you think needs to happen so that we can be assured of a more conservative candidate the next time?
Also, I’m curious if you want a strong conservative litmus test for Congressional and Statewide races? That’s where I depart from many here, as I am in the camp that would rather see moderate Republicans (call them RINOs if you wish)who support the majority of the “feet of the stool” if they can win in liberal districts. Others want a strong conservative on every ticket in every district. Your thoughts?
Red State State of Mind on December 16, 2008 at 7:17 PM
Woo Hoo Nodonkey… You are right on the money;… Thank you for articulating so well.
reshas1 on December 16, 2008 at 7:17 PM
so, you send me to a white nationalist website to prove that border-enforcement proponents aren’t racist.
http://projectusa.org/2008/08/19/the-white-minority/
okay.
eh on December 16, 2008 at 7:18 PM
Yawn … you’re too late, we’ve already been called all those names. Can’t you people ever come up with something new?
Go away …
darwin on December 16, 2008 at 7:19 PM
Actually, John McCain’s answer is far closer to Abraham Lincoln’s position than that shown by the questioner in his wording.
In fact, overpopulation (by the dim-witted non-English speaking peoples entering our country) was one of the prime talking points for Margaret Sanger as she created the organization called Planned Parenthood.
It’s amusing how some find themselves in bed with Sanger without even realizing it.
unclesmrgol on December 16, 2008 at 7:21 PM
Are you directing that to me?
You never answered my question to begin with. I didn’t realize that wanting our borders enforced and secure meant one was raaaaaaaaaacist.
darwin on December 16, 2008 at 7:22 PM
The RNC or The Heritage Foundation (or any other conservative mouthpiece) needs to run brief radio spots catering primarily to an urban market. The emphasis should be on keeping more of the wealth that you have earned; or why low taxes mean more job opportunities and small businesses; why school choice means better education; how parents, not the state, are the best teachers; how liberty/freedom means determining the direction of your own life; that government handouts are not a hand up; that getting an education and/or learning a trade cannot be taken away by anyone, etc.
A creative person should be able to convey the message in a way that hooks the imagination and curiosity of a passive listener and interrupt the drivel that takes up much of their time.
Ad placards with similar messages can be placed on public transportation, too.
onlineanalyst on December 16, 2008 at 7:22 PM
I’m inclined to see it the opposite way. I like Limbaugh, even if I don;t agree with everything he says. I realize part of his radio program is meant to entertain, and I believe I can sift through what he says to find ideas and values I can identify with, or questions I want to think about and learn more about.
Using your conclusion above, does that make me a….
nativist
creationist
homophobe
racist
or religious zealot ?
Red State State of Mind on December 16, 2008 at 7:22 PM
Let’s be clear here: I have no problem with someone drinking a hearty cup of STFU and saying nothing about the race while it was going on, and then saying “as a Republican, here’s what I think the Republican Party should do.”
Power didn’t do that. He endorsed the other team. Once you’ve done that, you’ve got nothing of value to offer this team.
Greg Q on December 16, 2008 at 7:23 PM
if white nationalist ideology is nothing to be ashamed of then why not say so? why be dishonest twice over?
i don’t know which is worse: the possibility that you didn’t even click on the link to see what it was or the probabilty that david frum is a rino now too by virtue of being on npr.
eh on December 16, 2008 at 7:26 PM
Agreed. What about messengers like MojoSauce ? (Did I remember this guy’s name correctly?)
Based on what I observe in large parts of the populations in Urban areas, many of these citizens would really identify well with the principles of Conservatism.
Property rights
Gun rights
Better education with more parental input/influence
Tax policy that encourages entrepenuership & economic development
Socialyl conservative values of faith & family that are cornerstones of a strong community
Red State State of Mind on December 16, 2008 at 7:27 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »