Posted on 04/01/2013 9:01:32 PM PDT by Pinkbell
There are various ways to describe the civil war rising inside the Republican Party: insiders versus outsiders, pragmatists versus true-believers, establishment versus Tea Party. Here’s another: Bill O’Reilly conservatives versus Rush Limbaugh conservatives.
Last week, the two media titans clashed after O’Reilly accused opponents of gay marriage of lacking “compelling argument[s]” and merely “thump[ing] the Bible.” Limbaugh responded by saying that conservative Christians “were sort of marginalized” on O’Reilly’s show. On the surface, the scuffle merely reflected differing opinions about the arguments deployed last week at the Supreme Court. But in reality, it reflected a different view of conservatism itself.
O’Reilly is a conservative populist, which is to say, he only champions those conservative viewpoints that he believes enjoy mass appeal. His evolution on gay marriage—as helpfully chronicled by New York magazine’s Dan Amira—illustrates the point. While O’Reilly’s own views have shifted, what has remained constant is his tendency to justify those views by reference to the popular will. In 2006 O’Reilly said he opposed gay marriage because “it is clear that most Americans want heterosexual marriage to maintain its special place … Traditional marriage is widely seen as a social stabilizer.” In 2009 he again phrased his opposition in terms of public opinion: “You don’t do it [pass gay marriage] particularly if people in California … don’t want it, they think that the heterosexuality is a societal stabilizer.” But by linking his own notions of social stability to those of the public at large, O’Reilly gave himself room to shift. By May of last year he was declaring that “individual states should decide the question.” And last week he said he supported civil unions, while on gay marriage, “I don’t feel that strongly about it one way or another. I think the states should do it.”
(Excerpt) Read more at thedailybeast.com ...
Blowreilly also had the same “epiphany” with homosexual adoptions. He said he wasn’t for it, then rosie odonut came on his show and he practically gushed over her and declared homosexual adoption a wonderful institution.
vomit
Also one of his most infamous skits was the “Caller Abortions”:
Wow, to me it sounds like he is mocking the pro-life movement with that bit. Does that really sound pro-life to you? I don't think pro-lifers I know would like that skit. And it seems to be portraying pro-lifers as wack jobs. Maybe, if he has pro-life beliefs today, they came later. That really sounds anti-pro-life to me.
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/12/03/flashback_1992_america_has_lost_its_soul
Pay attention especially to this part....I remember this from his old TV Show:
“But you can’t teach the Ten Commandments because that stems from somebody’s religion. Why do kids take guns into schools? Because they have no respect for the sanctity of life. I’ve told you that time and time again. You can’t have a million-and-a-half abortions every year in this country for all the years that we’ve had, folks, without life itself being cheapened.”
I get what you are saying.
Rush saying that homosexual marriage is inevitable was a great victory for homosexual marriage??? How about republicans in office declaring that homosexual marriage is inevitable was a great victory for homosexual marriage.
It’s over. The progressives and homosexuals have won. Homosexual marriage is happening, whether you like it or not. Rush was just the reporting delivering the news.
Marriage “equality” relegates the vulva to the anus. It’s a misogynistic agenda.
I heard Rush say myself that it looked like in time we will lose....that we cannot stop it
Even if we win this time they will keep coming back till enough judges vote their way
More or less like that
I think Rush has become ...like myself...more aware that true conservatism is in a demographic hole
He like me again...does not for an instant think Mexicans are natural conservatives
“If they are then why do the Dems want them legal so bad?”
This article suggests that O’Reilly is a conservative. Right, and I’m the next King of England.
Your comment reflects profound stupidity.
LOL!
Limbaugh was specifically referencing the two Supreme Court cases, which he believes will go against Conservatives.
read the description. I can’t imagine any pro-lifers I know who would find that funny.
In my opinion, Limbaugh's only flaw is his failure to take a stand during the Republican primary elections, when it matters most.
I think he games the elections (see Operation Chaos), because his failure to use his influence during the primaries results in candidates not to his liking, so he compensates by ridiculing the elections.
I'd like to see Limbaugh actually endorse a primary candidate, appear side-by-side with a candidate at stump speeches. I'd like to see Limbaugh campaign for a general candidate, too.
But he won't do it. He prefers to sit above it all and observe, comment, parody, and wish for different outcomes.
-PJ
I don't need to read the description. I know all about it.
It wasn't meant to be funny. Here is what Limbaugh said about the caller abortions after outrage and calls for censorship:
"None of what I did was real. Yet, in this country an abortion happens 4,000 times a day--for real...There is real emotional distress. There is physical harm and there's death...Where is the outrage against those who do it for real just down the street from where they live?...If you didn't know in your heart of hearts that abortion was a savage, violent act, what I did wouldn't have bugged you so much. I took you inside an abortion mill, and some of you couldn't take it."
These "caller abortions" were meant to prick the consciences of leftists. And they did.
I'm getting sick of "conservatives" who think "libertarian" (with a small l) is only and all about legalizing drugs. I say to them: Get off your high horse and act like a Christian. Small l libertarianism is the most moral political philosophy a social conservative can advocate. If we had small l libertarian government right now, the governnment wouldn't be in the job of punishing free people for peacefully choosing to reject things they deem immoral. The small l libertarian says the government has zero place punishing landlords for refusing to rent to openly homosexual couples or unmarried couples. The small l libertarian says keep the Federal government out morality, such as charity (welfare) and lifestyle. If businesses or adoption agencies or rental complexes want to discriminate in favor of homosexuals, let them -- and see how far they really get in a free America.
Because in that free America, if an online matchmaking service like eharmony wants to match ONLY heterosexual people and tell homosexuals to go somewhere else, they can do that, too. Let morality find its level, and have faith in America and Americans. They were doing fine until the Federal govennment came along and got involved in morality -- Roe v. Wade, welfare (or charity, a key component of morality), the homosexual agenda in schools, workplaces, and groups like the Boy Scouts, even down to being able to have a Christian cross and the 10 Commandments in a city park, or saying a prayer before the football game.
We have the right to live as we see morally fit. Small l libertarian ideals and ethics are the only path to retaining that right to live morally, keeping government OUT OF IT. America's moral malaise is fueled by a government that, by way of tax dollars spent "morally," rewards sloth and promiscuity and sympathizes with envy and covetousness, and then punishes folks who try to do what they believe is moral, such as telling the homosexuals to get the hell out of grade schools, or refusing to rent to a guy and gal cohabitting unless they're married.
Republicans and Democrats are now flip sides of the same coin, and it can go to blazes. Most Americans are good, moral people. It just doesn't look that way because a slick, gripping, biased MSM culture and victories of candidates elected by fraudulent votes, creates the illusion of a nation of liberals where level-headed Americans aren't as numberous. But we are. There are more of us than there are of them in both parties, and we're all starting to realize that Democrat and Republcan "platforms" bad jokes.
Limbaugh like to see himself as a kingmaker, but I think he is unwilling to go out on a limb and endorse someone, then be wrong. He did nothing against any of the Bushes.
Limbaugh like to see himself as a kingmaker, but I think he is unwilling to go out on a limb and endorse someone, then be wrong. He did nothing against any of the Bushes.
What you understand about Limbaugh can be summed up in one word.
Squat.
O’Reilly is the official Fox News spokesman and in the end an old school RINO Rockefeller Republican with the Nixon and Bush talent for articulating conservative words and then moving back to the left.
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.