Quotes of the day

posted at 10:35 pm on March 2, 2009 by Allahpundit

“The fact is that the GOP has been doing precisely what it claims it wants to do now – helping moderate and liberal Republicans it sees as more electable, at the expense of conservatives. Cornyn’s plan is nothing new. It has been tried and it has failed.

It is non-conservative Republicans who have gotten the party to where it is today. It is the massive spending and government enlargement that have forced a significant part of the base to abandon the GOP. It is the pork projects and the related corruption of ‘moderates’ that have dragged down the Republican brand. The people who have decidedly not been the downfall of the Republican Party are its conservatives.”

***
“What Limbaugh fails to understand is that any successful political movement is built of both true believers and evangelizers. True believers, like Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, fire up the troops. They tell their followers exactly what they want to hear, and they instinctively resist any compromise of their hallowed principles. As a general rule, true believers live and work and worship among other true believers, and they like it that way…

It should hardly come as a surprise that true believers aren’t always fond of evangelizers. After all, evangelizers tell true believers things they don’t want to hear. Just as devout Saudi Muslims are quick to question the Islamic credentials of Bengali and Malay and American Muslims who mingle freely with nonbelievers, Limbaugh is enraged by the likes of David Brooks and David Frum and Jim Manzi and Ramesh Ponnuru, conservatives who consort with the liberal enemy. Though all of these writers and thinkers disagree amongst themselves about a great deal, they share a basic belief that the party needs to do more than just promise tax cuts we can’t afford. And they recognize that a healthy political movement is always open to new ideas, and to questioning old convictions.”

***
“Rush knows what he is doing. The worse conservatives do, the more important Rush becomes as leader of the ardent remnant. The better conservatives succeed, the more we become a broad national governing coalition, the more Rush will be sidelined.

But do the rest of us understand what we are doing to ourselves by accepting this leadership? Rush is to the Republicanism of the 2000s what Jesse Jackson was to the Democratic party in the 1980s. He plays an important role in our coalition, and of course he and his supporters have to be treated with respect. But he cannot be allowed to be the public face of the enterprise – and we have to find ways of assuring the public that he is just one Republican voice among many, and very far from the most important.”

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: 1 2 3

Have to make a stand somewhere…

tigerinexile on March 2, 2009 at 10:39 PM

Allah has a fevah…and the only prescription is less Rush Limbaugh!

AUINSC on March 2, 2009 at 10:40 PM

It is non-conservative Republicans who have gotten the party to where it is today. It is the massive spending and government enlargement that have forced a significant part of the base to abandon the GOP. It is the pork projects and the related corruption of ‘moderates’ that have dragged down the Republican brand. The people who have decidedly not been the downfall of the Republican Party are its conservatives.”

ABSOLUTELY RIGHT!!!!

ddrintn on March 2, 2009 at 10:40 PM

MSM giving Rush this much time, they must be very worried.

Hog Wild on March 2, 2009 at 10:42 PM

the party needs to do more than just promise tax cuts we can’t afford.

I ned anothr dink.

Skandia Recluse on March 2, 2009 at 10:42 PM

You know,,,, I really just think Rush is the greatest! Where would we be without him right now?
I wish there was something we could do for him! Build him a statue or send him a big card or something. Some days I just get tired of all this and wish we could all just go out and get some pizza and just forget about Obama and the Marxist plans of evil, destruction and annihilation for a few hours.

JellyToast on March 2, 2009 at 10:42 PM

Though all of these writers and thinkers disagree amongst themselves about a great deal, they share a basic belief that the party needs to do more than just promise tax cuts we can’t afford

The entire premise of this argument is shot down with this quote. How about spend less and then we can afford tax cuts.

genso on March 2, 2009 at 10:43 PM

It is the massive spending and government enlargement that have forced a significant part of the base to abandon the GOP.

I can’t argue with that.

Spirit of 1776 on March 2, 2009 at 10:43 PM

Ah,the Frum quote as always.

Punchenko on March 2, 2009 at 10:43 PM

Seriously. 3 days in a row he runs the Quote of the Day with some garbage from the RINOs.

How long are we going to continue to let Allah run with his Rush/Palin/Anything conservative hatred? The guy belongs at HuffPo or DailyKos, not a website owned by the revered Michelle Malkin.

And no, he doesn’t do it to help generate comments. Check webratings on Alexa.com; weekly hits to Hotair.com has decreased the past 8 weeks.

Norwegian on March 2, 2009 at 10:44 PM

From the same piece:

Besides, is getting individuals with an “R” next to their name into Congress really a worthy goal in and by itself? What about what those Rs actually do when it comes to voting on key legislation? The massive, deceitfully labeled and economically destructive “stimulus” was made possible a few weeks ago only with the help of three Senate RINOs who had the full ability to stop it in its tracks. One of them is Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter, who beat unfailing conservative Pat Toomey by a tiny 1.6 percent in a 2004 primary, thanks to help from the Republican establishment, including President George W. Bush. Things would look a lot different today in Congress had the GOP not prevented Toomey from capturing Specter’s seat.

YES! Are ya listening?

ddrintn on March 2, 2009 at 10:44 PM

When the house is on fire, I’ll listen to whomever has the blueprint for the exits.

Joan of Argghh on March 2, 2009 at 10:44 PM

All politicians, including President Obama, are temporary stewards of this nation. It is not their task to remake the founding of this country. It is not their task to tear it apart and rebuild it in their image.

I love that quote.

Spirit of 1776 on March 2, 2009 at 10:46 PM

Rash Fatblob’s economy is doin’ just fine….

I don’t suppose any of you could be objective enough to realize he’s selling an act (successfully)?

If he really believes all of his own bloviation, why doesn’t he run for office and try to do something?

As it stands, he’s just a more intelligent Maureen Dowdy or David Frump.

MrScribbler on March 2, 2009 at 10:46 PM

What is the friggin’ point of Democrat Lite?

ddrintn on March 2, 2009 at 10:46 PM

I don’t like Limbaugh, but the “reformers” are even worse. Their only idea of reforming is to “move to the center” on “gay rights” “climate change” and what have you. Meanwhile, we’re presumably still stuck with pro-war, pro-state, anti-free market platform. It’s sheer insanity.

The Dean on March 2, 2009 at 10:47 PM

Moderates are “rung on the ladder” Republicans. For them getting elected to Congress is just another step up the career ladder. If there were no personal rewards for their public “service” they wouldn’t run at all as there is nothing in it for them. We need Conservative candidates who run for office to serve the nation, not themselves. Moderates don’t believe anything so it’s easy for them to shift their positions with the shifting political winds. That is why I personally demand candidates with deeply held principles that they can clearly articulate. Anyone who can’t explain what they believe and why is seeking office for self-aggrandizement. Kick ‘em to the curb.

DerKrieger on March 2, 2009 at 10:47 PM

Check webratings on Alexa.com; weekly hits to Hotair.com has decreased the past 8 weeks.

Norwegian on March 2, 2009 at 10:44 PM

Hell, I’ve been depressed for the last 8 weeks given the reaction of the market to Dear Leader.

genso on March 2, 2009 at 10:47 PM

Whatevs. Rush is the man.

I would expound on my statement, but this is the HotAir message board.

VolMagic on March 2, 2009 at 10:48 PM

Rash Fatblob’s economy is doin’ just fine….

I don’t suppose any of you could be objective enough to realize he’s selling an act (successfully)?

If he really believes all of his own bloviation, why doesn’t he run for office and try to do something?

As it stands, he’s just a more intelligent Maureen Dowdy or David Frump.

MrScribbler on March 2, 2009 at 10:46 PM

Who really cares? What’s more important and more worthwhile, principles, or detesting Rush Limbaugh?

ddrintn on March 2, 2009 at 10:48 PM

The republicans are lost, wandering in the desert, clueless.

Rush is right, to hell with beltway, blue blood, country club republicans!

Zorro on March 2, 2009 at 10:49 PM

I would like to have a Frum free day…

Bunsin on March 2, 2009 at 10:49 PM

Must be nice having a job where you are paid to troll your own blog..

Smiles on March 2, 2009 at 10:50 PM

Frum is an idiot.

Conservative?

Yeah, and pigs fly.

Saltysam on March 2, 2009 at 10:51 PM

As I understand many liberals and “moderates,” conservatives can be successful, as long as there aren’t umm, conservative.

Star20 on March 2, 2009 at 10:51 PM

It is non-conservative Republicans who have gotten the party to where it is today. It is the massive spending and government enlargement that have forced a significant part of the base to abandon the GOP. It is the pork projects and the related corruption of ‘moderates’ that have dragged down the Republican brand. The people who have decidedly not been the downfall of the Republican Party are its conservatives.”

+775,000,000,000

SlimyBill on March 2, 2009 at 10:52 PM

David Frum has never been as completely irrelevant to the GOP and to Conservatives as he is right now.

So, why the Hell is Allahpundit including part of what he wrote today and a link to that turd sandwich of an article it comes from in this quote of the day??

This comparison by the FRUM-ster in the article is the WORST comparison I have in a long time by someone who claims to be a serious political writer. This is just horrificly bad!

“Rush is to the Republicanism of the 2000s what Jesse Jackson was to the Democratic party in the 1980s.”

Uhhhhh, not even close Frum!!

TheMightyQuinn on March 2, 2009 at 10:53 PM

It has been tried and it has failed.

…….. you can say that again!

It has been tried and it has failed.

It has been tried and it has failed.

It has been tried and it has failed.

Seven Percent Solution on March 2, 2009 at 10:53 PM

Who really cares? What’s more important and more worthwhile, principles, or detesting Rush Limbaugh?

ddrintn on March 2, 2009 at 10:48 PM

Looking at the skew here of posts now, I would guess it’s 1) detesting Rush Limbaugh 2) principles

But what do I know?

Because once the Conservatives get rid of Rush, the moderates will flock to the GOP, just like they did when the great exemplar of moderate politics, John McCain, ran for office…the guy with his hand across the aisle, as he said…that worked PERFECTLY!

AUINSC on March 2, 2009 at 10:53 PM

National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) Chairman John Cornyn has been promoting this philosophy in the last few weeks, declaring: “I’m going to be looking to broaden the appeal of the Republican Party, not to narrow it just to conservatives.”

What’s most remarkable is that this position assumes that congressional Republicans have actually been trying conservatism.

HA!! BEEEEAUTIFUL!

katy on March 2, 2009 at 10:53 PM

As intense as the pressure is to embrace RINOs, he and the rest of the GOP establishment must resist it. Otherwise, all they will be left with is a permanent Republican minority – and one that isn’t even true to its principles.

I couldn’t have said it any better myself! WOW!

SouthernGent on March 2, 2009 at 10:54 PM

the party needs to do more than just promise tax cuts we can’t afford

Ugh. Every time I open a thread I feel like heading back to my reloading bench.

Bishop on March 2, 2009 at 10:55 PM

Rush is the best. I can’t say enough how he is rooting out the scum of our party and making establishment as well as Washingtonian republicans shake in their boots. Conservatives are angry and we are galvanized. Rush represents us well and is the leader of our movement.

jencab on March 2, 2009 at 10:55 PM

As I understand many liberals and “moderates,” conservatives can be successful, as long as there aren’t umm, conservative.

Star20 on March 2, 2009 at 10:51 PM

Oh, you’re ridiculous! They’re allowed to be conservative, they just shouldn’t be, you know, conservative. They shouldn’t take conservative positions on anything controversial or important. Abortion? Don’t be such a prude — go with the Dem position. Same sex marriage? Don’t be such a homophobe — go with the Dem position.

And don’t be loud, and don’t be abrasive. Be darlings of appeasement in general, like Howard Dean was.

Kensington on March 2, 2009 at 10:55 PM

Frum, you’re a punk.

No, not because you don’t like Rush.

I could care less about that.

It’s because you think you think you’re smart, but you’re a dolt…too stupid to know that you’re stupid.

That’s why.

Saltysam on March 2, 2009 at 10:55 PM

So who has the “most important” voice in the Repub party, if not conservatives, David Frum? All that dude does is sh–, sh–, sh–, on anyone in our party who fires up the base and takes the arrows (ie, Rush n’ Palin). He’s like the ugly girl in high school who is jealous of all the cheerleaders but refuses to pluck his unibrow.

Pasalubong on March 2, 2009 at 10:55 PM

Sure would be nice if the blogger/reporters actually looked at poll numbers, the number of “tea party” advocates recently attending thousands of town halls nationwide, and the falling approval ratings of the new President in town – before they write this sort of review. The kool aid still is in vogue evidently.

Jessie on March 2, 2009 at 10:56 PM

Republicans have to stand for something, or they’re just a social club that wants political power.

I think they should stand for limited, less intrusive government; steadfast defense of our nation and our freedoms; opportunity for all; and a focus on fair rules rather than “fair” outcomes (a focus which both minimizes “gaming the system” and also perpetual victimization).

People can differ about when life begins. People can differ about consumption taxes v. income taxes. People can differ about a lot of things.

But when diversity means that there is nothing special about the GOP, then the GOP will cease to have any attraction to anyone, whatsoever.

cthulhu on March 2, 2009 at 10:56 PM

I think I have From Derangement Syndrome, because I heard him on the radio last week with Medved, and just the sound of his voice made me want to kick the radio. He’s an arrogant shmuck, too.

Kensington on March 2, 2009 at 10:56 PM

Cornyn is one of my Senators and since he got re-elected in November, he’s been seriously heading into RINO country…
He was MIA for the Senate vote on the last Porkulus bill, meeting with big money donors in New York City.
I asked him & and Kay Bailey Hutchison to vote “No” on TARP; they didn’t.
Pete Sessions, my Congressman, did, though.
I used to think Cornyn was a good guy–no longer.
Nothing I’ve seen in politics for the last 33 years has led me to believe that Rush is wrong about Republicans (or somebody!) needing to embrace true Conservatism to preserve and promote the enduring values of this republic which are Freedom and Capitalism.
Cornyn’s gotten my last dollar and ounce of support.
Frum is talking smack–he has no clue about anything.
He’s Canadian and has zero listeners, while Rush has to account to at least 20 million.

Jenfidel on March 2, 2009 at 10:57 PM

Tax cuts generate revenue (up to a point). We can’t afford to tax ourselves out of all this revenue.
.
Anyone for the Fair Tax?!?
.

CLaFarge on March 2, 2009 at 10:57 PM

Rush knows what he is doing. The worse conservatives do, the more important Rush becomes as leader of the ardent remnant. The better conservatives succeed, the more we become a broad national governing coalition, the more Rush will be sidelined.

Oh for the love! Really, Frum? Is that what you have really concluded? Or are you just trying to find an interesting angle?

Weight of Glory on March 2, 2009 at 10:57 PM

Rush is to the Republicanism of the 2000s what Jesse Jackson was to the Democratic party in the 1980s.

A race-pimp extortionist who calls NYC “Hymietown”?

Bishop on March 2, 2009 at 10:58 PM

True believers are evangelizers. Reagan won a lot of Dem votes by explaining conservatism.

jgapinoy on March 2, 2009 at 10:59 PM

Shorter comment: pick 95 theses and nail ‘em to the door. Then if you’re in, you’re in — and if you’re out, you’re out.

cthulhu on March 2, 2009 at 10:59 PM

Frum’s great ambition in life is to be the token conservative, the eccentric one at the Wine Tasting parties.

Iblis on March 2, 2009 at 10:59 PM

One of them is Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter, who beat unfailing conservative Pat Toomey by a tiny 1.6 percent in a 2004 primary, thanks to help from the Republican establishment, including President George W. Bush. Things would look a lot different today in Congress had the GOP not prevented Toomey from capturing Specter’s seat.

This is one of the things, that really disappointed me about Bush. I still don’t understand what he was thinking.

Spirit of 1776 on March 2, 2009 at 10:59 PM

Oh for the love! Really, Frum? Is that what you have really concluded? Or are you just trying to find an interesting angle?

Weight of Glory on March 2, 2009 at 10:57 PM

You’d almost think, reading Frum, that he was unaware that Limbaugh’s been on the air nationally for over twenty years, through five presidents of both parties and seven administrations.

The man’s ignorance of Rush combined with his presumption of understanding is breathtaking.

Kensington on March 2, 2009 at 11:00 PM

What’s more important and more worthwhile, principles, or detesting Rush Limbaugh?

Sorry, Allah and other kiddies, this isn’t about who’s got the correct number of ego strokes. Rush has his “features”, but he’s dead right about this.

This is not a debate about process, this is the last best chance to save your freedom and any possibility of wealth. Obama and the Democrats are busily destroying America. They want nothing less than to remove what was and replace it with what they think ought to be.

Get a clue, “opposition bloggers” will get a chance to “work and be free” the same way other regimes have done.

The “moderates” are egos without any principle. They lack any sort of real moral compass and they replace it with the words of facile advisers and the “main stream media”. During the last 8 years they have betrayed their party into the disaster that now exists. (It wasn’t their acts alone, there were really clever operations which “outed” corrupt Republicans just in time to insure that the more “upright” voters stayed home.

If we don’t unite behind our principles we’re done!

All of this silliness about process and policy and cleverness is just intellectual masturbation.

Obama is deliberately destroying the wealth of this nation! That will destroy the U.S. as a world power, and will insure that you are so busy scrabbling for something to eat that you won’t be organizing and voting. We’ve got one chance to reverse this. NOW. In a few more years it will be too late.

CrazyGene on March 2, 2009 at 11:00 PM

And just what have Brooks, Baby Buckley, Frum, Noonan, Parker, et al done for the Republican party lately, besides doing the democrats a favor and ATTACKING the Republican Vice Presidential nominee during the run up to Election Day? They have shown themselves to be more interested in having din din with BHO and staying on Beltway party invite lists than in ARTICULATING conservative Republican principles in response to BHO’s socialist, power grabbing moves during his 1st month in office.

There is nothing wrong with putting forth alternative, constructive options to the massive Federal Government spending and bailouts. There is nothing wrong with pointing out the hypocrisy of various democrat “leaders” and using their own words to make your case. There is nothing wrong with saying that you want America to remain a free, vibrant, capitalistic society. Getting along to get along is NOT a principle, it’s a sure way to end up with nothing of value.

Gohawgs on March 2, 2009 at 11:00 PM

Norwegian on March 2, 2009 at 10:44 PM

How about you go to HuffPo or DailyKos instead.

doriangrey on March 2, 2009 at 11:01 PM

Really odd group of comments. What’s the bio of the first two? One guy was born in Lebanon and the other guy’s name is Reihan Salam and he’s an associate editor for the Atlantic.

The evangelizer/true believer comment is all backwards.

An evangelist (this is the correct term) has the role of making new converts. This would be Rush.

True believer is a term that just begs to be contrasted with the term false believer. We all know who they are.

INC on March 2, 2009 at 11:03 PM

Frum can blow it out his ass.

outOfElement on March 2, 2009 at 11:04 PM

If he really believes all of his own bloviation, why doesn’t he run for office and try to do something?

Do you believe your own bloviations? Why aren’t you running for office? Why isn’t everyone here running for office? Because you or I or anyone can believe in principles and have values without needing to express ourselves as a politician.

Besides, I couldn’t imagine having to deal with the likes of Pelosi or Reid on a regular basis; I’d be in prison for assault about two weeks after taking office.

Bishop on March 2, 2009 at 11:04 PM


Rush is to the Republicanism of the 2000s what Jesse Jackson was to the Democratic party in the 1980s. He plays an important role in our coalition, and of course he and his supporters have to be treated with respect.

What a cartload of CRAP this is. Rush analogized to Jesse Jackson?? Now I’ve heard everything. This is an attempt to bring down someone who is the bona fide heart and soul of the party (Rush) with a sideshow phony (Jackson). Nice try, Mr. Frum, but I see right through you. You attempt to equate Rush with some fringe element, but your attempt fails miserably. People who care about the GOP are too smart to buy into such nonsense. That attempted analogy is beyond pathetic.

But he cannot be allowed to be the public face of the enterprise – and we have to find ways of assuring the public that he is just one Republican voice among many, and very far from the most important.”

Why shouldn’t Rush Limbaugh be the public face of the enterprise? He is one of the VERY few who are demonstrating TRUE conservative leadership in spite of the slings and arrows hurled his way. The words “very far from the most important” are laughable. Rush Limbaugh has been THE singularly most important Republican voice for well over 15 years now. He has single-handedly revolutionized talk radio, for the better, demonstrating first-hand why the death of the Fairness Doctrine was beneficial to survival of the First Amendment.

Mr. Frum, whatever rock you crawled out from to present your diluted (and deluded) view of conservatism, please now go back to it and stay there until you have something halfway intelligent to share with us (which I imagine will be quite some time).

OneVision on March 2, 2009 at 11:05 PM

Spirit of 1776 — who’s responsible for the awesomely awesome quote you posted upthread? Thanks so much.

haikusrock on March 2, 2009 at 11:05 PM

Rush is to the Republicanism of the 2000s what Jesse Jackson was to the Democratic party in the 1980s.

And David Frum is to the Republican party as Roger Clinton was to the Clinton family.

katy on March 2, 2009 at 11:05 PM

To Frum…. from Inigo…

Conservative…. you keepa usin dat word…

I think you all know the rest…

Romeo13 on March 2, 2009 at 11:06 PM

Is Frum a Moby?

Ampersand on March 2, 2009 at 11:06 PM

The man’s ignorance of Rush combined with his presumption of understanding is breathtaking.

It’s the nature of the beast. Anyone trying to build a following (which is what Frum is doing with marketing a new site) needs to gather people who don’t have a intellectual home, like Dittoheads do, for example. And then the next attempt is to expand that base by attacking or frictioning off others. The truth is irrelevant to marketing.

Rush will always be a target because he is the biggest, most powerful voice on the right. And he will be until another Reagan comes into the big house.

Spirit of 1776 on March 2, 2009 at 11:06 PM

Spirit of 1776 — who’s responsible for the awesomely awesome quote you posted upthread? Thanks so much.

haikusrock on March 2, 2009 at 11:05 PM

I’m pretty sure Rush said that in his speech on Sat.

Pasalubong on March 2, 2009 at 11:06 PM

In my opinion it comes down to this. If Conservatives abandon principle in order to win elections, they have become Democrats. Period.

In much the same way that Pope Benedict has said that adherence to principles may simply result in a smaller Catholic church, and that’s all right, I have no interest in pandering to the moral swamp that is the current culture merely to have “my guy” in office.

What’s the point of calling yourself a conservative if you have no principles worth defending? Unlike Brooks, Buckley (the latter), Frum (who’s not even an American, for Chrissake, and yeah, that matters) et al, my Conservatism has nothing to do with family history (since I have none), or maintaining my legacy (ditto), and everything to do with having to look myself in the mirror when I shave.

Has the entire world forgotten the meaning of the word “shame?”

warbaby on March 2, 2009 at 11:07 PM

good lord, the blogger has a man crush on the frumster!

james23 on March 2, 2009 at 11:07 PM

“Rush is to the Republicanism of the 2000s what Jesse Jackson was to the Democratic party in the 1980s”

Actually, Rush is to the Republicanism of the 2000s what Barry Goldwater was to the Republicanism of the 1960s; i.e. perhaps 15 years ahead of his time.

notropis on March 2, 2009 at 11:08 PM

haikusrock on March 2, 2009 at 11:05 PM

Rush from his CPAC speech :)

Spirit of 1776 on March 2, 2009 at 11:08 PM

Allah when you post things like Frum’s drivel people are going to understandably angry. And they can’t take it out on Frum so who do you think they’re going to target but you. Even I am sorely tempted to launch into a poorly reasoned diatribe about how you’re not a real conservative and blah, blah, blah.

Then again I understand what you’re doing, as enraging as it is for people like Frum and that other idiot (didn’t follow the link so I don’t know his name) to claim they are conservatives while spouting nonsense, we still need to be aware of their constant attempts to corrupt the principles that made this country great.

As someone said in another thread Rush is Conservatism. Which doesn’t mean that Conservatism is Rush but rather all his views and opinions and even his tone is all rooted in his Conservative beliefs. That is why when you go after Rush people get angry, not because Rush is sacred and can’t be criticized but rather because he is so aligned with Conservatism that its hard for people to separate the two.

Kronos on March 2, 2009 at 11:09 PM

Check webratings on Alexa.com; weekly hits to Hotair.com has decreased the past 8 weeks.

Norwegian on March 2, 2009 at 10:44 PM

Dunno, but HuffPo, DU and DKos no doubt generate plenty of hits. Freakshows are inherently fascinating.

ddrintn on March 2, 2009 at 11:09 PM

Thanks so much.

haikusrock on March 2, 2009 at 11:05 PM

The man of the hour, the one the media adore, the one the liberals can’t stop talking about…Rush Limbaugh.

Entelechy on March 2, 2009 at 11:09 PM

I think most conservative blogs & on this blog have already taken the position from QOTD Part 1. Is there a reason this still needs to be discussed, because I surely can’t see it…

youngTXcon on March 2, 2009 at 11:10 PM

Ok, there is some stuff there at forbes I had not seen so good job. But then there is this part from the same author. “…the party needs to do more than just promise tax cuts we can’t afford.….?”

Grooan! It has been proven over and over again…when you raise taxes…..less..
Ah forget it. We all know it already.

kahall on March 2, 2009 at 11:10 PM

Rush could say everything wrong for weeks and I’d still give him the benefit of the doubt! The man has earned it.
He is a great man who is putting a lot on the line.

JellyToast on March 2, 2009 at 11:10 PM

We perhaps need to work to elect RINOs in Blue states, but in Red states, we should never settle for less than true Conservatives, who can then lead the party in a Conservative direction. And we need to elect enough true conservatives so that we are not held hostage to RINO votes.

mydh12 on March 2, 2009 at 11:10 PM

All we need to do is just be 1960s democrats?

I don’t think so and the proof is in the results.

jukin on March 2, 2009 at 11:11 PM

Thanks for the responses! I thought it was Rush, but I wanted to make sure. That’s a damn good quote, and sums it all up rather nicely, too.

haikusrock on March 2, 2009 at 11:12 PM

It’s the nature of the beast. Anyone trying to build a following (which is what Frum is doing with marketing a new site) needs to gather people who don’t have a intellectual home, like Dittoheads do, for example.

So what you’re saying is that From knows what he’s doing. The more he can crap on Rush, the more important Frum thinks he’ll become as leader of the other clueless moderates who didn’t learn anything from McCain’s failure. The better Rush succeeds, the more conventionally conservative the GOP becomes, the more Frum will be sidelined.

Kensington on March 2, 2009 at 11:13 PM

That Forbes analogy about true believers vs. evangelists doesn’t even get Christianity right, much less conservatism.

The reasons Rush is so influential and threatening at the same time are:

1) He is the clearest, most articulate expository preacher of conservatism,

2) The most forceful practitioner and historian of conservative apologetics,

3) And the most dedicated, effective evangelist to spread the conservative message.

The loss of Rush Limbaugh would be devastating to conservatism. I pray for his good health and longevity.

Terrie on March 2, 2009 at 11:13 PM

i am so sick of hearing rush is the voice of conservatism. I am a die-hard conservatve, and i honestly have never even heard Rush speak once in my life. From what i know about him, he is simply an entertainer who supports views that we like, but thats it.

Chiasmos on March 2, 2009 at 11:14 PM

Chiasmos on March 2, 2009 at 11:14 PM

Seminar poster.

Pasalubong on March 2, 2009 at 11:15 PM

It is non-conservative Republicans who have gotten the party to where it is today.

Yep.

The failure of establishment Republicans — whether they’re a member of Congress, Washington or New York editorial writers; even some talk show hosts who live and work and socialize in that community — to uphold conservative principles during the last decade or more, has resulted in the mess that they are now complaining about.

They are complaining about us failing to join them as they have changed the party, as they have watered it down. This confusion, this mess — contrary to the take of the Drive-By Media — that conservatism, slash, Republican Partyism finds itself in today, is a reaction to the establishment Republicans who have ignored conservative principles and watered down their party for the last decade or more and their failures. This mess has resulted from them and their failures and their false promises. These very same people now who were the big-tent guys, which resulted in — and, by the way, I’m all for big tent, but you bring people in as us; not as them. Don’t misunderstand. There’s nothing exclusionary about me. You want to expand the party? I’m all for it. It’s what we’ve been trying to do here, in fact, with conservatism! Now, these very same people now who sought to expand the party by essentially marginalizing conservatives and bringing in their buddies (the moderates, the independents, even some liberals) are now demanding that the people they took for granted — us, and the evangelicals and so forth — continue to follow them, continue to be swayed by their demeaning and condescending lectures.

[ ... ]

This is about the riff: How it came about, who’s going to get blame for it — and that’s where I eventually am headed here. Because I’m going to tell you something, folks: what’s happening in our party today is not only do the establishment Republicans want amnesty for illegal immigrants, they want amnesty for Democrats. They want punishment… Well, they don’t want punishment, but they want to try to humiliate, manipulate, whatever, us; to join them as they destroy the concept of the three-legged stool of conservatism.

Leadership is a little bit more than being the anti-Hillary. That’s the minimum that we expect. And all of our candidates fit that bill. A leader, folks, is someone who — by his own convictions, personality, and vision — can unite a party, a movement, a country behind him. Do you see instead what is happening? The leader of the party is not being told or it’s not being said of him, that he will unify.

It’s up to those of us who have problems with what’s happening in the party to put our problems aside, our differences aside, and join up. This is the exact opposite of leadership. Leadership, on its own, unites a party or a movement or a country. It’s not up to me or anybody else to unify the Republican Party, much to the Drive-By Media’s exasperation. These are not my jobs. This is not our purpose. I’d be happy to tackle it, but that’s not what happens here. I’m not the candidate. It’s the candidates’ jobs to unify a party, a movement, a country behind him.

[ ... ]

When you demean and smear the people whose support you need down the road, it’s human nature that they’re going to remember the personal insults and the abuse that you heaped on them not that long ago. You call them nativists and racists and so forth, insult the people personally, call them corrupt if you oppose abridging the First Amendment — campaign finance reform. You call ‘em deniers, if you don’t buy into the hoax of manmade global warming. Ronald Reagan never spoke this way. He wouldn’t have spoken this way, and he didn’t speak this way; he was a leader. So the establishment Republicans have their work cut out for them. They can continue to attack the grassroots (that’s you); they can pretend this primary shows that you have no influence, or they and their candidate can start to act like mature and seasoned, intelligent adults who will try to find a way to repair the damage they have done to the party and the conservative movement. How in the world can conservatives who have stayed loyal to conservative principles and concepts, be blamed for what’s happened to the Republican Party? The people that have made the mess of the Republican Party are those who have attempted to expand it by including liberals and independents and Democrats so as to marginalize conservatives. And all of a sudden it’s our fault. No, sir!

Michael in MI on March 2, 2009 at 11:17 PM

So what you’re saying is that From knows what he’s doing. The more he can crap on Rush, the more important Frum thinks he’ll become as leader of the other clueless moderates who didn’t learn anything from McCain’s failure. The better Rush succeeds, the more conventionally conservative the GOP becomes, the more Frum will be sidelined.

Yes.

Spirit of 1776 on March 2, 2009 at 11:17 PM

i am so sick of hearing rush is the voice of conservatism. I am a die-hard conservatve, and i honestly have never even heard Rush speak once in my life. From what i know about him, he is simply an entertainer who supports views that we like, but thats it.

Chiasmos on March 2, 2009 at 11:14 PM

I count about five lies in your post.

TexasJew on March 2, 2009 at 11:18 PM

Pasalubong on March 2, 2009 at 11:15 PM

Yes. They need some talking points with a little bit more credibility for their mobys.

INC on March 2, 2009 at 11:19 PM

I am a die-hard conservatve, and i honestly have never even heard Rush speak once in my life. From what i know about him, he is simply an entertainer who supports views that we like, but thats it.

Chiasmos on March 2, 2009 at 11:14 PM

Well, you hit on exactly why people love him.

He says the views that “we like”, and he does it unabashedly. It’s not like he makes it up. It’s like Tickledragon (I think) says, Rush says what I’m thinking.

Spirit of 1776 on March 2, 2009 at 11:19 PM

Seminar poster.

Pasalubong on March 2, 2009 at 11:15 PM

Good one!

Terrie on March 2, 2009 at 11:19 PM

Spirit of 1776 on March 2, 2009 at 10:59 PM
Because he wanted an R in that seat? Other than that, “I got nothin’”.

youngTXcon on March 2, 2009 at 11:20 PM

i am so sick of hearing rush is the voice of conservatism. I am a die-hard conservatve, and i honestly have never even heard Rush speak once in my life. From what i know about him, he is simply an entertainer who supports views that we like, but thats it.
Chiasmos on March 2, 2009 at 11:14 PM

You also voted for Donald Reagan, right?

Bishop on March 2, 2009 at 11:20 PM

All politicians, including President Obama, are temporary stewards of this nation. It is not their task to remake the founding of this country. It is not their task to tear it apart and rebuild it in their image

Quote of the Year

Entelechy on March 2, 2009 at 11:21 PM

“Frum’s great ambition in life is to be the token conservative, the eccentric one at the Wine Tasting parties.

Iblis on March 2, 2009 at 10:59 PM”

Sadly, he sees himself as the next David Brooks; why someone should aspire to be a David Brooks I can’t imagine….

notropis on March 2, 2009 at 11:21 PM

i am so sick of hearing rush is the voice of conservatism. I am a die-hard conservatve, and i honestly have never even heard Rush speak once in my life. From what i know about him, he is simply an entertainer who supports views that we like, but thats it.

Chiasmos on March 2, 2009 at 11:14 PM

You really should view the CPAC vids before marginalizing the man.

Bunsin on March 2, 2009 at 11:21 PM

Let’s look at the last few elections.

2008 – McCain is the great maverick. He sets himself as Mr Moderate and has the background to back it up. He loses.

2004 – Bush has been portrayed for 4 years as a right wing extremist. He isn’t. But his firm stand on the Iraq war easily sets him apart from the Democrats muddled stand on teh biggest issue of the day. He wins.

2000 – Bush runs as a moderate conservative. His campaign is about restoring honor to the presidency. He wins, but oh so narrowly.

1996 – Dole starts as a moderate, as his background shows him to be. He switches to trying to run as a conservative later on and fails to persuade anyone. He loses.

1992 – Bush 41 is the great tax raiser. The public ignores his explanation and votes for an obscure southern governor who promises to cut their taxes.

1988 – Bush 41 campaigns as a mix of Reagan’s third term and some nods to mushy moderatism. He wins. Big.

1984 – Reagan runs as an unapologetic right winger. He wins. Big.

1980 – Reagan runs as an unapologetic right winger. He wins.

1976 – Ford runs as a mushy moderate. He loses.

So, if we look back to 76 at least, every time the Republicans have run a candidate the public sees as legitimately conservative – Reagan 80 + 84, Bush 88, Bush 04 – they have won. Every time they have run a candidate not credibly conservative – Ford 76, Bush 92, Dole 96, McCain 08 – they have lost.

This is a pretty strong pattern and you can certainly get into the details for each candidate’s performance, but I would not lose the big picture in the details…

18-1 on March 2, 2009 at 11:21 PM

It’s extremely obvious that not everyone actually listened to Rush’s speech…………

…………… Frum is an ant in the afterbirth.

Seven Percent Solution on March 2, 2009 at 11:22 PM

Chiasmos on March 2, 2009 at 11:14 PM

So, you admit that what you know about Rush is pure hearsay, and not from having heard him yourself.

Your meaningless statement is therefore hereby disregarded under the Hearsay Rule.

Thanks for playing.

OneVision on March 2, 2009 at 11:22 PM

Frum is the Milli Vanilli of the conservative movement.

TexasJew on March 2, 2009 at 11:23 PM

Its important to note that Rush Limbaugh is an Icon of the Conservative movement but not its leader and nor does he pretend to be. However at a time when we are seeing the Democrats using their control of the reigns of Government and the panic of a major financial crisis to push America further down the path to Socialism its is Iconic Conservative figures like Rush who are the ones sounding the alarm and warning people of the threat that the Democratic agenda poses.

Rush will continue to be an important and influential voice for the conservative movement and the GOP until such time as a real conservative political leader steps up to the plate and takes the fight to the Democrats and their lackeys in the press. Strong principled leadership is what people want to see and at the moment that’s not what they are getting from the GOP political elite. Which is exactly why people listen too, trust and support a strong principled Conservative voice like Rush Limbaugh over Republican politicians like Michale Steele.

Dreadnought223 on March 2, 2009 at 11:23 PM

Pay more attention to this article in the Headlines: http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-03-02/stop-lecturing-us-mr-president

Rush Limbaugh is not the problem. Obama is.

I would be happier if the “Republican” pundits would pay more attention to what is threatening to America. Hint: It’s not Rush Limbaugh.

onlineanalyst on March 2, 2009 at 11:24 PM

Frum and others like him can’t understand how guy like Rush Limbaugh, who did not go to college and get a degree, can have a bigger following than they have.

Most of the people do not pay attention to politics. If they think something sounds different or that someone is not like a typical, lazy, pandering politician, they will vote for them. Since we haven’t tried conservatism since the 80′s, I believe a true conservative can win if he can get the message out.

Limbaugh gets the message out because the media loves controversy. Eventually enough people will notice.

Vince on March 2, 2009 at 11:24 PM

Rash Fatblob’s economy is doin’ just fine….

I don’t suppose any of you could be objective enough to realize he’s selling an act (successfully)?

If he really believes all of his own bloviation, why doesn’t he run for office and try to do something?

As it stands, he’s just a more intelligent Maureen Dowdy or David Frump.

MrScribbler on March 2, 2009 at 10:46 PM

Nice. You must be a big hit at DK and HuffPo. Take a bow.

(You forgot to mention “drug addict” though. Do try to stay on top of your talking points)

The fact is, ALL debates are over. We all know where we stand on just about every issue there is. The left has their ideology, and the right has theirs. No gray area, just “I’m right and they’re wrong.”

I’ve heard all of your arguments just as you have heard mine. We both remain steadfast in our convictions.

So where do we go from here?

Talon on March 2, 2009 at 11:24 PM

Chiasmos

Isn’t that an over watered chiapet?

katy on March 2, 2009 at 11:24 PM

Frum is the Milli Vanilli of the conservative movement.

TexasJew on March 2, 2009 at 11:23 PM

Girl Texas Jew, You Know It’s True.

OneVision on March 2, 2009 at 11:25 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3