Posted on 04/18/2016 5:43:28 PM PDT by ObamahatesPACoal
Probably no one has earned more leeway from conservative voters and pundits than Rush Limbaugh. Rush has been a tireless force for the conservative movement for decades, and he probably is responsible for a whole lot of conservative Republicans who are currently in office. But thankfulness for past service only goes so far, and Rush’s program yesterday officially crossed the line.
When I think about Rush’s last year or so on air, I’m reminded of Marshall Phillipe Petain, one of the most intriguing figures of the twentieth century. Without Petain, the French might not have prevailed over the Germans at Verdun, and thus might have lost World War I. But for as much thanks as France owed Petain for his service in World War I, the full historical reckoning for Petain must acknowledge that Petain was a Nazi collaborator, the leader of Vichy France, and a totalitarian dictator. Petain’s history is complicated, and to tell the whole tale honestly requires acknowledging both the good and the bad.
So it is with Rush. For all he has done, and for all we should be thankful for, it is hard to deny that Donald Trump has brought conservatism to a critical moment. From this moment forward, it will either resemble the vision Rush has preached for thirty years, or it will not. It will either move forward as a recognizable force, or it will be destroyed with Trump in a historic landslide election.
Rush's real dilemma is that he has been GOPe his entire career and more than half of the Republican voters are rebelling against the GOPe for several reasons.
The two main reasons, practically open borders immigration and a string of one-sided trade deals, are issues that Rush has either supported wholehearted, or kept quite about. He is at odds with much of the GOP base and a large chunk of his listening audience on those issues.
And he sounds pretty ridiculous dancing around those issues and the two viable candidates on a daily basis.
I'd noticed the same thing, and can't recall what Rush said, if anything, during W's two big amnesty pushes during 2006 and 2007. And I've heard little or nothing from Rush about TPA and TPP.
But Rush did come out in support of NAFTA and did everything he could to discredit Perot, whose opposition to NAFTA was one of his primary issues. Rush seems either to support the GOPe on immigration and trade, or has very little to say. I've concluded that Rush is and always has been GOPe on immigration and trade issues, and most all issues.
He made his name deconstructing liberalism and talking in general terms about conservatism. Have listed to him very little for several weeks now.
That is so well stated. I agree with every word. I think it was common avarice. I no longer listen to rush.
I understand your argument but here is mine. Rush purports to represent “conservatism” but when he defines it it is very different from the way I define it. Rush doesn’t want the Wall. Rush loves free trade at the expense of manufacturing and industry just moving out. He would do nothing. Rush had not a whimper of admonition as the Gope funded obamacare 4 damned times. Rush was non committal on the “leadership” of Boehner and McConnell. He supported the Iraq war. He is not the Conservative he says he is . He is hiding from this election!!
Things are uneven in some of what you say.
For example many liberals agree with you regarding
free trade. What does that make them....or you?
Whether you or I like it or not Rush
will not stay home on election day
because he will pick GOPe over liberal
Democrat every time. He will see a
difference even tho others may not.
And when it comes to picking judicial
candidates I am on his side.
Limbaugh gives conservatism a wider
berth than many. It gives him a bigger
audience for one thing. Those who
don’t like it can vote with their ears.
I agree with your conclusion. I will vote with my ears.
The jury is in Rush was in the tank for the establishment all these years. I am sadder but wiser.
Yeah, all the *true conservatives* are at the Heritage Foundation. snark
Ask Mr. True Conservative what he thinks of nationalism and populism as well as that old bugaboo protectionism?
My magic *conservative* decoder ring says: nationalism is bad because it puts national interest before globalist interests, populism is bad because it actually considers what is good for the great majority of the people and protectionism is bad because it interferes with the trade deals of the internationalist elite.
Could Rush have even gotten on national radio unless he sealed a deal with the establishment? What we have seen recently with Fox News is what we have been experiencing with Rush. Much of national radio is probably like that as well. Remember how all controlled societies and oligarchies operate—control of media and controlled opposition.
Excellent observation.The exception to the rule would be Michael Savage. Right?
How many faux conservatives are making a good living in the many *conservative* think tanks with all of the contributions that chumps like us have been giving them for year? The conservatism racket.
I hope Trump starts a organization of his own so that we can make donations to people who will not betray our interests. A proAmerican PAC would be a good thing.
Not sure.
I think it is probably a lot nastier than we imagine.
I listen every day and I have no idea what you are talking about. I hear no sneering at Trump at all...even subtly. He was not a Rubio man a few months ago. He just wasn't a Rubio hater. There's a difference.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.