There is no better warrior for the conservative movement than Rush (although I wish he's address social issues more).
Posted on 11/30/2001 12:24:12 PM PST by Jean S
As far as I’m concerned, the giants of modern day conservatism are William Buckley, Milton Friedman, Ronald Reagan, and Rush Limbaugh. While much has been said and written about the contributions of the first three men, not enough attention has been paid to Rush’s accomplishments.
Yet today Rush’s influence on the conservative movement and the public debate is unparalleled. He has a unique ability to move from issue to issue, from the complex to the every day, with uncommon ease.
On any given day, Rush provides his 20 million listeners with insight into a wide variety of subjects.
During the first hour of a three-hour program, he might discuss the principles of America’s founding with specific references to the Declaration of Independence and the Revolutionary War, the Articles of Confederation, the Federalist Papers and the U.S. Constitution, to the Civil War, the New Deal, World War II and the Civil Rights movement.
In the second hour he might talk about the federal budget and government spending, entitlement programs, capitalism, the Federal Reserve and supply-side economics.
In the third hour, he might address cultural issues, the environment, the feminist movement, politics, an injustice in some part of the world, or share a personal experience.
At all times, Rush is well prepared, thought-provoking and entertaining. And the common theme that underlies all he discusses, and to which he is committed, is an abiding belief in individual liberty, limited government, and the rule of law—the three cornerstones of our republic.
Impeachment: Rush was a guiding light during Bill Clinton’s impeachment. Despite the fact that this was only the second presidential impeachment in American history, Rush was able to walk his listeners through some of the most arcane issues of constitutional precedent and congressional procedure.
When some contended that Clinton’s offenses were not "high crimes and misdemeanors," Rush proved them wrong. When certain members of Congress and even some conservative pundits were urging the Senate to forgo an impeachment trial for a resolution of censure, Rush was the most outspoken opponent of this extra-constitutional ploy. To this day, Rush admonishes the Senate for failing to conduct a serious trial and thereby failing to uphold its constitutional responsibility.
Sen. John McCain: When John McCain’s presidential candidacy was gaining legs, with the mainstream media’s support, after a primary victory over George W. Bush in New Hampshire, Rush was both thoughtful and tenacious in his opposition to McCain’s brand of Republicanism. McCain, he pointed out, backed numerous liberal policies, from so-called campaign-finance reform to opposing serious tax cuts. Rush also challenged McCain’s frontal assault on the religious right and the National Rifle Association, and his campaign’s smear tactics in South Carolina and Michigan.
Gov. George W. Bush: While Rush made no apologies for his preference for George Bush, he was, as always, intellectually honest in his analysis of Bush’s positions.
During an early campaign speech in New York, for example, Bush made a derogatory reference to Robert Bork. Rush was the first to criticize Bush for seeking political capital at the expense of a renowned conservative. Bush never repeated the mistake.
Presidential Recount: The Bush-Gore presidential race proved to be one of the most controversial, complicated and constitutionally challenging elections in U.S. history. In the five weeks following election day—while trial lawyers, state and federal courts, and the media grappled with the election process—Rush was a voice of clarity helping his listeners work their way through a maze of historical, legal and political questions.
Rush described the intricacies of the Electoral College, the role of the Florida legislature as the final authority in determining the awarding of the state’s electoral votes under Article II of the U.S. Constitution, and the limitations of judicial review (especially by the rogue Florida Supreme Court). And Rush was not altogether comfortable with the U.S. Supreme Court’s reliance on the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause in its final ruling—a view he shared with his audience.
Sen. Thomas Daschle: Rush was the first to label Sen. Tom Daschle (D-.S.D.) "the illegitimate Senate majority leader" when Daschle seized the leader’s position from Trent Lott by persuading Vermont’s Jim Jeffords, who had just been reelected as a Republican, to leave the GOP in exchange for a committee chairmanship and support for continuing milk price supports. Rush has also been one of the most effective counterweights to Daschle’s dishonest rhetoric and liberal agenda by denouncing his efforts to thwart Bush’s tax-cut plan, judicial nominations, energy bill and—prior to September 11—increased defense spending.
Rep. Bill Thomas: Rush was a vocal critic last spring of the timidity of the GOP House tax-cut plan, authored by Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas (R.-Calif.). Thomas, having been cowed by the class warfare propaganda of the Democrats, rejected conservative efforts to cut retroactively all income tax rates—including those in the higher brackets.
Such was the outcry over Thomas’s plan after Rush questioned it that the chairman called Rush on the air in a futile attempt to defend his position. Rush politely yet persuasively dismantled the congressman’s arguments. No one has been more consistent and vocal in advocating tax cuts than Rush.
Terrorism: The Bush Administration has been attacked for its antiterrorism policies by certain conservatives and liberals. First, after only a few weeks of battle, the armchair generals complained that the President had not introduced thousands of ground troops into Afghanistan, a move they claimed was necessary to win the war. Rush insisted otherwise, arguing that the U.S. military had destroyed most of the Taliban and al Qaeda’s infrastructure in short order, that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his commanders were highly experienced warriors who knew what they were doing and, besides, that the U.S. could not support such a large deployment so early in the campaign because it lacked forward bases in the region for launching such an operation.
Shortly thereafter, the U.S. began ratcheting up its bombing runs and increasing coordination with the Northern Alliance. The Taliban and al Qaeda forces have been on the run ever since. The armchair generals’ defeatism was misguided, just as Rush had said. Others are now questioning Bush’s order reestablishing military commissions to try non-citizen combatants (terrorists) and the administration’s detention of several hundred aliens who either have ties to al Qaeda or have violated federal law. Again, Rush has been at the forefront of this debate. Both on his radio program and in a widely applauded Washington Post op-ed piece, Rush described the historical and legal justifications for the President’s actions.
Moreover, Rush dared to tread where others would not. Both on the radio and in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, he exposed the failure of the Clinton Administration to take effective steps in response to repeated acts of terrorism committed by this same al Qaeda network, dating back to 1993 and the original bombing of the World Trade Center. Rush confuted Clinton and his minions who had been appearing on television and in print rewriting the record of their miserable failures.
With a combination of seriousness and humor, Rush has been devastating in his commentaries on a host of other subjects: the radical environmental movement ("environmental wackos"), the extremist feminist movement ("feminazis"), campaign-finance reformers ("anti-free speech crowd"), gun-control advocates ("gun confiscation advocates"), the trial lawyers, the anti-tobacco lobby, the teachers’ unions, political correctness, abortion, cloning and stem cell research, and on and on.
Rush’s success is not due solely to his knowledge and intellect. He has also succeeded because his audience identifies with, and relates to him. As Rush likes to say, he confirms what his listeners and so many Americans believe in a time when tradition and common sense are often turned on their heads. He is a voice of reason and sanity to many.
And unlike many in his profession, Rush does not use his golden "Excellence In Broadcasting" microphone to ridicule or abuse his callers in order to make himself look clever. He is positive, polite, respectful and a gentleman. He not only tolerates dissent, but liberals are given preference when they call his show.
As someone who is privileged to count him as a good friend, I can attest that Rush is selfless, considerate and compassionate. He’s a genuine article. I marvel at his strength and fortitude in dealing with his sudden hearing loss. What would have devastated most people has energized him. I have no doubt that, as Rush likes to say with tongue in cheek, his talent is on loan from God. But I know for a fact that his character comes from the heart.
Nor am I. Quite some time ago, I was introduced to the idea of being conservative to mean not straying too far from the traditional thinking of the founding fathers and the document they used to institute this government among men where a peoples' freedom was of paramount importance.
I think now "conservative" has been relegated to the meaningless word category by far too many politically expedient redefinitions.
Those two issues are NOT conservative issues they are Pat Buchanan populist pro-union issues.
Where do you get that nonsense? There haven't been any Populists around for over 100 years.
Traditional conservatives were always concerned with establishing trade treaties that benefited America and were debated and properly ratified by the Senate.
Huey P. Long would be surprised to hear that as would PJB. Free trade is a conservative goal, those most opposed to it are the Labor Unions. Don't presume to give me lessons on populism or its adherents.
Someone should. Maybe that someone could also clear up that misconception you have about NAFTA and GATT implementing anything that could be considered "free trade".
Never belonged to any union. What union do you belong to?
Could be. GWB calls himself conservative.
Now that's a persuasive argument.
But it does not triumph an eyewitness account. Sorry, you lose again.
You are not being very estute in the 'fine points' of 'talk show' hedging.
Check post #92. Poet is very estute to the finer points of deception by Rush's advisors.
A Populist was a member of the People's party, a political organization formed in 1891 but only lasted a few years. They advocated such things as expansion of the currency, state control of railroads, placing restrictions on the ownership of land, etc.
Don't know of any political entity that formally adopted their philosophy or their name. Perhaps in your history book there is one listed and I hope you will let us know if you find one.
Of course, one could pervert the meaning of the word "Populist" to fashion some politically expedient propaganda to fit any occasion but then this word would become as worthless as "conservative".
There is no better warrior for the conservative movement than Rush (although I wish he's address social issues more).
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.