Rush is right

Norwegian on March 9, 2009 at 11:35 AM

Yeah, you’re right. It’s not Rush that I worry about — it’s what Frum and his ilk are continually trying to do to conservatism and what this says about where the country is headed. Frum, Perle, Noonan, Will, they are all establishment players and the establishment hates the average American. They are embarrassed by us. I don’t deny that those I just listed make good sense on occasion. But that is not the point. The point is that they are trying to rid the Republican Party of specific ideas and people.

Meanwhile, David Frum’s new website is declining in hits and he is fast becoming the laughingstock of the conservative movement. Noone takes him seriously anymore.

Tell me, is it not a little odd that David Frum has found common cause with communists at The Nation and has taken their side when it comes to defining Who and What is conservative?

and your deduction is that if someone doesn’t subscribe to your faction, they are not a conservative.

Madison, again you like others don’t get it. It is David Frum (and others) who are saying that the tent is not big enough.

Google “David Frum paleoconservatives” and see what he did in the pages of National Review and elsewhere to try to rid the party of traditional conservatives.

It is he that is ruining the party by trying to make it smaller and more to his liking!

You might want to google “the stupid party” while you’re at it.

galenrox on March 9, 2009 at 2:45 AM

You don’t get it. Rush has only become a net cost to the party because the establishment hates him and has demonized him. The average American hasn’t the leisure to look into a lot of what Rush says to see whether or not it lines with the truth. If they did, they would see that at least 75% of what he says is true. In the meantime, the media and the the powers in Congress and the Executive spend their time demonizing him, causing some listeners to wonder if in fact Rush is trouble to the party.

He is not. It’s pathetic what’s being done. Rush will come out just fine, the country on the other hand will have become European.

Montana on March 9, 2009 at 3:10 AM

Agreed.

athensboy on March 9, 2009 at 7:12 AM

You have it completely backwards! It’s David Frum who has spent much of the past 9 years trying to purify the party. First it was the paleocons, now it’s Limbaugh. He’s a kiss ass that can’t stand the idea that he might not be relevant to the liberal establishment. His butt-buddy Richard Perle is doing the same thing: desperate to be loved and accepted, and thus denying everything he had to do with the Bush administration, the war in Iraq, and the war on terror.

What a loser.

In the 21st century a Noble Yeoman Farmer is simply not capable of leading the country.

Not by herself at least…..she would need to surround herself with intellectuals and elites….however….Palin is on record as despising elites.
Tough to fill cabinet spots with the domain equivalents of Joe the Plumber and expect good results in the Age of Complexity.
Imagine….Bob the Busdriver as Secretary of Transportation….you get the idea.

Oh wait- LIBS DON’T TRASH THEIR OWN!

It’s just the ‘castrati’ of my PARTY that EATS OUR OWN.

Please all you ‘faux GOP elites’ if it’s TOO HARD FOR YOU TO HAMMER THE DEMS THEN just STFU! Please.

It may be a necessary and useful argument to have regarding whether there’s as much political juice in tax cuts as there may have once been, but I do not see the usefulness of gratuitously cheap shotting a woman who, as far as I can tell, lost her bid to be Vice President and now is doing what even Frum and his kind admit she was competent at doing previously, governing the state of Alaska.

NOT a gratuituos cheap shot.
Ace is dead wrong here….Palin was the fracture point.
Her nomination cleaved the GOP along the IQ fault line.
She epiphanized the base into realizing their leadership has been stealthy elites just pretending to be Noble Yeoman Farmers all along, to scam their votes.
But like JTP famously said, “Palin is the Real-Deal”, actually one of them.
Unfortunately the GOP elite, the intelligentsia, were also epiphanized. They all saw on review, and upon Palin’s less than graceful performance in the public square, that she was not qualified for the job she was applying for…..to be President on Day One.
Palin was simply what the Founders would have called a demagogue.
Now only some of them (Brooks, Powell, Buckley, Parker, etc) have admitted that, and all of the admitters have been keelhauled under the hull of the SS Conservative Titanic.
So here is the paradox….the base has been taught to despise intellectuals, academics, and media elites through years of dog-whistle IQ baiting…but like Ruffini and Douthat and others have said the grassroots need elites and the elites need grassroots.
In the 21st century a Noble Yeoman Farmer is simply not capable of leading the country.
So to say Palin is not relevent (word up, Ace) to one of the profoundly unresolved problems of the GOP is just blowing more smoke up the base’s ass.

It is interesting that these worthless “pundits” feel the need to endlessly obsess about Rush Limbaugh vs. focusing on the endless mistakes Obama is making- I guess the payoff in attention is worth it to them.

anniekc on March 9, 2009 at 8:02 AM

The main ‘problem’ that I have with Frum now (and with the Palin attacks that Will, Brooks, Noonan, baby Buckley et al spewed during the run up to the election) is that Frum’s attention is on Rush and NOT on obama and what obama’s doing to this country.

Gohawgs on March 9, 2009 at 3:53 AM

That’s right. If you don’t think there’s a payoff in this for Frum somewhere now or down the road you’re hopelessly naive. The only reason a so-called conservative writer would be engaging in this invective is to assist the opposing party drive a wedge further into it as it fumbles to find true conservative leadership.

PS You can pick on Lumpy Rutherford if you want.

maverick muse on March 9, 2009 at 8:08 AM

In other words he refused to walk lock step with our new communist overlords.

Leave Jerry Mathers (or Tony Dow) Alone!!!

I wonder what people 150+ years from now will think of us.

Montana on March 9, 2009 at 3:32 AM

If they think of us at all it will be as evil sub-human savages, more or less the way we currently think of Nazi’s.

It is interesting that these worthless “pundits” feel the need to endlessly obsess about Rush Limbaugh vs. focusing on the endless mistakes Obama is making- I guess the payoff in attention is worth it to them.

anniekc on March 9, 2009 at 8:02 AM

Rush’s “everyman” influence insults their elitist egos — to them, that he should be more influential than they are is an affront to elitism everywhere.

Sarah Palin’s popularity had the sam effect.

It’s sad, really, to see how they small they are inside.

Homeland Security blames his “inability to adapt to the way business is done in Washington.”

Mr. Rod Beckstrom’s National Cybersecurity Center, created last March to coordinate all government cybersecurity efforts, answered to the secretary of homeland security, and was estimated to cost at least $6 billion in 2009 and $30 to $40 billion over the next several years. Mr. Beckstrom, a former Silicon Valley entrepreneur, said in his resignation letter that the NSA’s central role in cybersecurity is “a bad strategy” because it is important to have a civilian agency taking a key role in the issue. The NSA is part of the Department of Defense.

In reality, “NSA currently dominates most national cyber efforts,” Mr. Beckstrom wrote to Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano on Thursday. “While acknowledging the critical importance of NSA to our intelligence efforts, I believe this is a bad strategy on multiple grounds.”

He added that “the threats to our democratic processes are significant if all top level government network security and monitoring are handled by any one organization (either directly or indirectly).” That echoed the view of some privacy advocates who worry about a government agency having too much information on individuals.

Some Homeland Security officials said Mr. Beckstrom’s criticism stemmed from personality clashes and an inability to adapt to the way business is done in Washington.

SIOBHAN GORMAN, WSJ, Politics