Rush at CPAC (in ten parts)

Comments

[Reggie Greene / The Logistician]

I watched Limbaugh, Gingrich, and Ron Paul all address the Conservatives tonight on CSpan. I heard three distinctly different messages. They each appealed to a different segment of the conservative movement. Last week, I heard a number of talk radio hosts suggest that Limbaugh is the intellectual soul of the Republican Party.

None of these fellows remind me of William F. Buckley. One thing always stood out about Buckley. Buckley could express a conservative principle without finding it necessary to personally attack those who had opposing opinions. He let the power of his principle carry his argument. We need to stop demonizing the opposition and appeal to the better judgment of the populace.

[Brenda Bowers]

I have real problems with naming Limbaugh the "intellectual soul" of anything. However I am sure that anyone hearing him understood exactly what he was saying. This was hardly ever the case with Wm. F. Buckley. Limbaugh speaks to the man on the street; he communicates. He gets down on what ever level he must to communicate his beliefs to those listening to him. So I really think we need the Limbaughs much more than we need the Buckleys if we are going to reach the American people.

As for defining the principles of the Conservative party Limbaugh did this well I thought. Conservatism as he stated is quite simply having faith in the individuals ability to see to himself if given the opportunity. Giving him a hand out rather than a hand up defeats the strongest talent. The handout becomes so easy to take allowing the individual to lose his ambition and remain immature and irresponsible.

Is it demonization to point out the wrong attitudes and actions of others? I don't know how you can teach what is right if you do not point out what is wrong. If one only speaks of what is right it leaves the average audience wondering what is wrong. Perhaps I lack faith in the intelligence of most people (and I do), but I have found that people simply don't get the point until and unless you spell it out to them three different ways at the very least. And even then you might reach only one half of the group.

A basic tenet of teaching is to compare and contrast. The Republican Party has got to reconnect with the public. And Reggie the public does not watch C-SPAN or Face the Nation. The public may or may not watch the 6 o'clock news before going on to some "reality" show. So in the short time you have the public's attention, if you have it at all, you have to make a point that will stick---a sound bite or jingle. Example: Republicans believe in Power to the People! or President Obama and the Democrats are going to raise your taxes! Which is going to get the message of the Conservative movement across best to the average person? Well, I believe Joe Street is going to ask, "What power are they talking about?"

The sad fact is that conservatism will never appeal to people because it requires too much of them. It doesn't give them a scape goat for where their lives are and their petty little disappointments. The very prosperity of the United States that was gained from a free market society has made us soft and lazy. BB

[Everest]

"We need to stop demonizing the opposition and appeal to the better judgment of the populace"....who is the "we" you're talking about here...? Because if you're talking about conservatives, perhaps you missed the most recent election, when the MSM and other liberal/Democrats perfected this demonization as an art form. If you're talking about Limbaugh, I'd like to see some examples of that...

As Brenda suggests, why is it that Democrats can call conservatives anything under the sun, supported by the media, and the first time we disagree with them and point out what they actually said, conservatives are stooping to "negative politics"...? Politics is a tough business and it ought to be - the decisions these representatives make are exceedingly important, and to think their beliefs/actions shouldn't be questioned is ridiculous...

Limbaugh is not an intellectual, and never professes to be...he's a conservative first, and I'm not sure why anyone would compare he and Buckley. He and Buckley were friends and similar in thought, but totally different people...unfair to suggest Rush is trying to take Buckley's place...

Thanks for posting the entire speech Joe - people can criticize Limbaugh all they want, but if conservatives had followed his philosophy more closely the past 8 years, we wouldn't be "in the weeds" politically....

[Stormy]

And, today, Lorraine Ahern announces that she has been promoted to ....(are you read for this?)...investigative journalist. Is this a joke?

[Joe Guarino]

Reggie, Everest, and Brenda, I don't think anyone should make the claim that Limbaugh is perfect, because he is not.

And I know for a fact that Buckley was an admirer of Limbaugh-- because, like all of us, they each had their own gifts. Buckley, with all his gifts, could not have done with talk radio what Limbaugh has.

It is partially a reflection of the fact that conservative Republicans do not have a single natural leader/spokesman in their ranks among the political class, so Limbaugh has assumed that position by default. And also, as the YouTubes demonstrate, by virtue of his immense gifts.

[Bubba]

"....so Limbaugh has assumed that position by default. And also, as the YouTubes demonstrate, by virtue of his immense gifts."

Hence the furious program to shut down Limbaugh and other influential talk radio conservatives by re-implementation of the (Un)Fairness Doctrine.

We're not that far removed from having Thoughtcrime becoming a reality under the Obamanation because Libthink can't compete with Talk Radio.

In addition, hide and watch what happens when government takes control of the net neutrality issue. The original intent of net neutrality will be unrecognizable after the bureaucrats get done "improving" it.

The evidence points to those eventual realities. We must not allow that to happen.

[Stormy]

I fail to see how Congress can take control of the internet. How could they do that when it is the WWW. Does that mean that Rush would have to go offshore, where all of the rich money is going soon because of O's soak the rich tax policy? Of course, when they do that, it will become a soak the middle class tax policy. The very rich have ways of avoiding, or at least minimizing, taxes.

[Joe Guarino]

Bubba, I think at this point, the real risk is not the reintroduction of the Fairness Doctrine, but rather the implementation of other policies with regard to radio broadcasting that will have the effect of squeezing out conservative talk radio.

But we need to be clear. Obama and the socialists are winning right now in spite of talk radio. It is not the omnipotent force we would like it to be. The balance of power remains with the supermajority they have in the US Senate. Our main hope for the next couple of months is that Obama has overreached with respect to chasing away support from those within his own party.

Until now, the other side has had the advantage with respect to the influence of using the internet on the national scale. If the Democrats limit that, they may be hurting themselves in some ways. But if they are preparing for a prolonged period in which they will prevail politically, maybe squelching speech while they run with their program unimpeded is the ticket...

[keith]

ann coulter ar cpac was in her element here is the link

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/02/28/ann-coulter-cpac

[keith]

at not ar