Posted on 03/16/2009 7:33:14 PM PDT by Kaslin
As if it is not enough that they have been decimated by the Democrats in the past couple of elections, the Republican survivors are now turning their guns on each other.
At the heart of these internal battles have been attacks on Rush Limbaugh by Republicans who imagine themselves to be so much more sophisticated because they are so much more in step with the political fashions of the time.
New Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele's cheap shot at Rush's program as "ugly" set off the latest round of infighting. That is the kind of thing usually said by liberals who have never listened to the program.
Regular listeners to the Rush Limbaugh program or subscribers to the Limbaugh newsletter know that both contain far more factual information and in-depth analysis than in the programs or writings of pundits with more of a ponderous tone or intellectual airs.
Why Michael Steele found it necessary to say such a thing — except as a sop to the liberal intelligentsia — is one of the many mysteries of the Republican Party. Steele has since apologized to Rush, but you cannot unring the bell.
More important, the mind-set it betrays is at the heart of many of the problems of the Republican Party, going back for years, long before Steele appeared on the scene.
An element of the Republican Party has felt a need to distance itself from people who stand up for conservative principles, whether those with principles have been Ronald Reagan, Rush Limbaugh or others.
(Excerpt) Read more at ibdeditorials.com ...
Why do you say that? It's actually based on an educated supposition. Most people who are hard-core evolutionists (i.e. they don't even believe in "medial" positions like ID or theistic evolution) tend to be very secular in their worldview. Most secularists tend to vote Democratic, since most secularists are either liberal in general or else are "scared of the Religious Right." Ergo, it follows that most people who are evolutionists vote Democrat.
It’s amazing how these DC retreads cannot help but pick up right where they left off when they reappear on FR.
[[Creationism has NOTHING to do with the GOP losing voters.]]
Lol- Dems are quite lustful over the idea that the numbers of ‘religious’ people have ‘dwindled’ (Some commentators dishonestly state “Dramatically dwindled’- You can almost see the giddiness i ntheir columns but hte fact is that we’re being inundated by imigrants that claim no religion so of course the % is goign to ‘drop’. You know the left is in trouble when they start attacking with nothign but spitwads. This coutnry weanted hteir mommy, and Barack promissed to be our mommy- paying off all our debts for us, givign us free this and free that- it’s quite humorous watching people like hihoherman try to blame the loss of GOP on religion- folks like that obviously haven’t gota clue. WE’re goign to see an increase in attacks on Religion by hateful dems trying to portray Christians as hateful lol- You should have seen the nasty ‘commentary’ in hte paper hte other day by a liberal commentator- and he had the gaul to claim it’s the Repubs that are ‘nasty’ The lbieral hypocrisy just goes on and on and on- but the good news is that now that barack is pres- people are goign to see dems true colors as their nastiness comes more andm ore to the forefront. The dems are so desperate for fodder to attack GOP with htat they have to make up crap about GOP’ers and people liek Rush- We see this desperation in comments like hihoherman- let htem whine- the 79% of peopel hwo value morals in the this coutnry are STILL the majority
I am reminded of the story Mark Lowry tells about evolutionism vs creation. Evolution and the Big Bang theorists tell us that some six billion years ago, there was NOTHING. Then out of NOTHING, this big bang happens and suddenly there’s Chaos. Then, magically there comes ORDER from Chaos.
So he offered to take his watch apart, put the components into a paper sack and shake it for the next six billion years. Then he’d take bets (he’s a Baptist, after all) about whether or not he could reach into that bag and pull out a watch that was somehow all back together and keeping good time or a handful of parts.
I think that explains the situation quite clearly.
An element of the Republican Party has felt a need to distance itself from people who stand up for conservative principles, whether those with principles have been Ronald Reagan, Rush Limbaugh or others.
There's something you don't see every day - an ungrammatical sentence by Thomas Sowell.
Expanding on my position on abortion: I'm personally opposed to abortion, but abortion is low on my priority list, well below shrinking government, lowering taxes, and preserving the Bill of Rights.
An analogy of my position is Abe Lincoln's position on slavery. Abe Lincoln was personally opposed to slavery, but saving the Union was higher on his list. In his letter to Horace Greeley, Lincoln said:
I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be "the Union as it was." If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.
Thanks.
I have one or two others, but I need to condense my links some.
(Egads, how much junk have I bookmarked?!)
I admit, I stole the statement off of Scott Adams.
But it fits so well considering how many posting bots exist.
Thanks for the ping metmom. The title of this thread has it exactly right; GOP Shouldn't Seek Approval From The Left.
When you get back to the Democratic Underground, be sure to tell them that at least you were not assailed with gutter snipe profanity as we usually are when we venture over there.
You are, of course welcome to troll here, but you really should listen and think a while before jumping in....
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.