California Needs Conservatism (by Rush Limbaugh)

The Wall Street Journal ^ | August 20, 2003 | Rush Limbaugh

[Prince Charles]

Simon and McClintock are unelectabvle in California, the only role they can play si that of spoilers.

The Establishment also said that Sam Brownback was unelectable in Kansas, and that Pete Fitzgerald was unelectable in Illinois...

[Mr. Silverback]

Sadly, I think it's a different time...wth a different citizenry....largely illegals voting...and anti-Americanism in AMERICA! I think Calif. is almost unsavable.

In the 70's things were pretty much that bad across the whole country, and people were talking about America in decline, and the US and Soviet systems growing toward each other to produce a workable socialism, with fewer freedoms but more economic equity. Note that I still haven't mentioned any of the problems Rush cites going into the '80 election.

During Carter's term (1977), our UN ambassador, Andrew Young, made speeches in churches praising the Soviet system. In just one speech in Manhattan he called the Cold War a tragedy (because the U.S. had wasted so much money fighting a non-threat), the Soviets a "so-called clear-and-present danger," proposed that a vast right-wing conspiracy was using a "massive education campaign" to keep Americans scared of the cute and fuzzy Soviets and even found a way to blame Soviet suppression of basic rights on the shorter Russian growing season. We went from that to "Tear down this wall" in less than ten years, and the actual fall of the wall in 12. When Carter was in office, my Dad struggled to work two jobs--firefighter and auto mechanic--and any pick-up jobs he could do in his own garage, all to pay a crushing two digit mortgage on a two bedroom house. I'm pretty sure he voted for Reagan (I don't remember any kind words for Carter being expressed by anyone in 1980, even though I lived in the liberal bastion of the Portland, Maine suburbs) and he started his own shop in the early 80s. Heck, try this one on for size: We went from being too scared to deal with Iran properly to getting the hostages back in one day.

California's not too far gone, but Arnold is not going to help things any. Arnold is a nice guy, but he's a total RINO. And let's not forget that Howard Dean has been describing himself as a "fiscal conservative."

We might not be able to beat Arnold, but if we don't try, we definitely won't beat him.

[unspun]

Right on!

"...ENOUGH of the republicrats, NO MORE RINOs, VOTE OUT the socialist moles sent to destroy the Republican party from within!!! Conservative principles, beliefs and policy presented by a passionate, genuine LEADER can not, and will not, lose!!!"

Well said!!

[tophat9000]

I saw every one of these arguments put forward about Simon and look how well that turned out.

True... but that the point

The national party undercut and blew off Simon as unelectable .....he ran on a shoestring compared to Gray having one of the largest war chest ever... the experts said Simon would lose by 20 points... then Simon dam near did win

It a Chicken or the Egg argument

The “experts” in the national party are always saying conservatives are unelectable ... will lose by 20 points... then push a RINO down our throat .... dry up the money and undercut us....making the conservatives as unelectable as possible.... then the conservatives comes within a few points of winning.... if they gotten to support up front there should have ... they win

Hell we heard this on the props.... the national party ran like hell from 187 there ran from the recall

The true untold story in California... is there a civil war going on in the state party for the last ten years or so.... national party people decided some time back conservatives are unelectable in California and have been actively undercutting them eversince ....

The grass roots now does everything OUTSIDE the party because there view it as the “other” enemy along side the dems....

To be honest I’m surprised the grass roots hasn’t stormed the party headquarter with ax handle and baseball bat yet ... the anger is that deep ..............

We been betrayed an screwed for years out here with this same “unelectable so we won’t help.. so in fact will hurt you to save you” crap

The kicker is the recall.... all in state grassroots.... per the outside experts.... never goint to happen... bad idea...

So guess what.. grassroots right... outside experts wrong....

So what do we have now same outside experts saying...well conservatives and there idea are unelectable.... yea right

If you don't believe me about the in party war, the anger, and the national party undercutting of conservatives out here..... ask other California’s on the board about it

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

calgov2002:

Gray Must Pay
Cruz Must Lose

calgov2002: for new calgov2002 articles. 

Other Bump Lists at: Free Republic Bump List Register

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

Does anybody know who Rush is talking about?

I haven't read the whole thread yet so others may have weighed in, I know Hannity was on the bandwagon before, as was Micheal Medved, they are both timidly staying back now. Hugh Hewitt is the biggest sycophant though, Arnold could shoot somebody and he would make an excuse for it.

There have been many conservatives on FR that fit exactly what the Truth Detector is referring to.

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

Simon and McClintock are unelectabvle in California, the only role they can play si that of spoilers. Rush knows this but for some reason he's leading the GOP down the primrose path.

The only one who "knows" that is you, Quidnunc. My state is conservative-but not Republican. They vote for ideas, which usually come from the GOP, but not here. I talk to people about the issues here every day, they are SICK AND TIRED OF AHRNOLD and are opening shopping for other candidates. After I tell them about McClintock they fall in love.

Keep watching those polls, and the debates.

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

This is the 21st Century, not the Reagan 70's. Rush doesn't get it.

The unbelieveable IRONY! How can people today be so ignorant of history?

How many times was it said, Its not the 1950s, its the 80s. Reagan doesn't get it.

No kathy, you don't get conservatism.

[goldilucky]

California might appear to be a "liberal" state but actually there are more conservatives in it.

[quidnunc]

PeoplesRep_of_LA wrote: The only one who "knows" that is you, Quidnunc. My state is conservative-but not Republican. They vote for ideas, which usually come from the GOP, but not here. I talk to people about the issues here every day, they are SICK AND TIRED OF AHRNOLD and are opening shopping for other candidates. After I tell them about McClintock they fall in love.

Hugh Hewett sees things differently.

To read all about it go here:

http://www.FreeRepublic.com/focus/f-news/967238/posts

[SierraWasp]

"Sounds more like tough sh.... well, nevermind."

Well... actually it's pronounced "tough chit!" (unless you're in a public employee's union)

[SierraWasp]

"There have been many conservatives on FR that fit exactly what the Truth Detector is referring to."

So disappointly true!!!

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

Hugh Hewett sees things differently. To read all about it go here:

LOL! Yes, been there, done that. I see things very differently from Hugh, please see my post #16 in this concerning that. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/966919/posts

[DodgeRam]

Great post Mo1. Arnold never called himself a Reagan Conservative, so the question to me is why keep bringing it up? It sound very similar to the democrats always saying we are questioning their patriotism when no one has. Arnold is not a true conservative like some of us, but neither is Gulliani and he in my opinion was one of the best leaders in a crisis that I have ever seen. Also if we start throwing our non-conservative's overboard let's not stop here. Next out should be spector, collins, snow, mcain, chaffee, and the northeastern reps. in the house. Opps just lost the senate and house, but at least we could say that everyone left is a true conservative right RUSH. Ronald Reagan was the greatest leader since Churchill and his later counterpart Thatcher, and there will never be another one. So maybe we should comparing current leaders to level that most could never attain.

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

Many voted against Carter rather than voted for Reagan. You win elections like you win a chess game, by controlling the middle

Ahh geez, this again. No, you win the middle by showing them you have a (conservative) vision. Why didn't he lose bad in '84? Hell, everyone said he was an ultra-conservative monster. How in the wide world could any conservative gotten a landslide like that before talk radio? Mondale had no skeletons, no controversies, he's still not a HATED guy by the right wing, I mean-this revisionism is wrong, and dangerous.

The opposition is obviously very bad in California, but that might get you only a new 'Rat in office

Does that sentence make ANY sense to you? Me neither.

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

You have to read between the lines. Rush is not talking to voters and he's not talking to McClintock here. Rush is talking to a powerful person with a real chance to win the governorship of the great state of CA, Rush's adopted state and where he got his hearing back. Rush is telling Arnold to speak passionate, affirmative language to us voters, to whip us to our feet in belief that we, the people of the state of California, can make this place great again.

I know what you were saying. A week ago that may have been true, but he-as I have, realize that Ahrnold has no "core" he has hinted strongly at that many times. He won't say "McClintock" because Rush doesn't like to endorse candidates, particuarly since Simon's idiot-self is still cluttering things up (Do you know anybody voting for this guy? Me Neither. FYI, Simon gave $10,000 to Prop 26, which gave Sacramento a backdoor to go around Prop 13-he's no anti tax crusader) Rush, like me, would like it if Shriver-Bloomberg was a real conservative. He would like it if Mayor Bloomberg were a conservative, but he is smarter than that.

So are we. You will only be getting the milquetoast you are suspecting, and Rush knows it. Rush just timed that to make it more glaring.

God Bless Rush, God Bless Reagan, and God Bless California.

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

I got a Reagan pic too, enjoy,

[SierraWasp]

"God Bless Rush, God Bless Reagan, and God Bless California."

Amen, brother Ben!!!

[FeliciaCat]

"Californians are generally conservative and they should endeavor to elect a conservative governor and get back on the right track."

This cannot be said enough! Thank you!!! The rest of the country tends to view California as Los Angeles and San Francisco...HELLO! Much of California is farm land, ranches and rural communities, I know as I am from that part of California. The fruits, nuts and flakes dont speak for us.

[Wild Irish Rogue]

" Three scenarios seem most likely to me: (1) He lost enough of his audience during his deaf period and he has decided that he needs a change of direction in order to regain market share, (2) he feels slighted by the Bush administration and doesn't think he is being afforded the deference which is due him or, and to my mind most likely, (3) he really has his heart set on this football commentator gig and he thinks that anything which smacks of boosterism for the Republican Party will hurt his chances.

Whatever the case, Rush is getting increasingly repetitous, egocentric and annoying — in short he's becoming a crashing bore."

Re # 3-I have found this analogy helpful to the doubters.The target audience for ESPN/ABC will be half liberal/half conservative-that appears to be the way the country is breaking. Carville gets hired by ESPN to do football commentary. Would I watch it-absolutely not,I avoid anything with Carville. Carville suddenly starts undercutting and trashing the Clintons and Democrats and this gets picked up by the media and his quotes are mentioned in op ed pieces,by commentators and talk show hosts. The word goes forth. I hear that Carville may be coming around to my way of thinking and I might possibly consider tuning in.The flip for Limbaugh is not a complete 180-he cleverly disguises his Republican bashing as doing it for " Ronald Reagan ",which doesn't totally alienate some of his base audience.Imus does the same thing-he blows one way, one day and shifts the next,trying to keep both sides tuned in. The newer generation of Limbaugh listeners cannot appreciate how dramatic a departure his behavior is now,from the Limbaugh of the 80' and 90's. What he has been doing since George Bush was inaugurated(disagreeing in an adult manner on policy is one thing,but, the low down,personal attacks are repulsive- calling GW a socialist,no better than Clinton,calling him George W Clinton on NBC News, ad nauseum,ad infinitum),he would have labeled heresy then.I have actually had the honor of meeting Ronald Reagan on a few occasions and if anyone is no Ronald Reagan,it's Rush Limbaugh.