The Legacy of Compassionate Conservatism [Rush Limbaugh on the Campaign Reform SCOTUS fiasco]

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_121003/content/truth_detector.guest.html ^ | December 10, 2003 | by Rush Limbaugh

[Lazamataz]

The mainstream media is protected from the campaign finance law. Yes, Congress has limited the right to free speech of "We the People," but left the media's power intact. In fact, it's actually enhanced the media's power by letting them dominate the airwaves 30 to 60 days before an election.

But let me ask you a simple question: "If the Supreme Court can limit free speech today - under, I cannot believe, a GOP president, House and Senate - why can't it limit freedom of the press tomorrow? Once you amend the Constitution this way, anything goes!

Those who don't respect liberty - and by that I mean the left, these phony political reformers, most editorial pages and five Supreme Court justices - can't have it both ways. If the Constitution can be amended on the fly like this rather than through the 3/4ths majority in both houses of Congress and the states, then no aspect of the Constitution is safe from this kind of manipulation. All it's going to take is somebody in Congress to write a law saying, "We're going to put some regulations and restrictions on the broadcast and print media," and bingo...

Will that ever happen? No. The Congress is afraid of the media, but they are not afraid of you. Thus they felt free to pass a law taking away your most basic freedom: political speech. Why? What did you do wrong? Why, you corrupted the process! Yes, the way this ruling came down and the way the law was written, your rotten, dirty money is corrupting out courageous and brave elected officials. Why, as soon as they take a dime, they turn from angels into corrupt monsters! You're ruining their morals! So if you try to buy an ad, well, now there's a law to stop you rotten jerks!

I took some calls on this story, which you can hear below. These came from the same sort of people who were so sure Bush would veto the bill, or that the Supreme Court would overturn it, "So why fight it?" Frank in Auburn, Maine asked, "How long do you think it's going to be before we have a midnight session to overturn this in the Congress?" I gently told Frank that the very Congress that passed this abomination, and that is now insulated as incumbents from the annoying voices of you idiot voters, is not going to now right what it did. Hello?

They're overjoyed about this! So is the media - which debunks another caller's claim that the press would miss the ad revenue they'll lose from political ads. They'll still get the cash from all these other groups who've weaseled out of this law. This is worthy of more than a "whine," folks. After all, members of the House and Senate can easily get face time on TV. That's why I called this the "Incumbent Protection Act." This is a day of darkness, folks. We may as well be Hobbits, with dark cloaked figures looking for our rings.

Michael Barone, a brilliant guy, wrote the other day that this president is redefining conservatism from limited government to a government of choice and accountability. I disagreed with Mr. Barone for the first time in my life about something. Not only are we not advancing limited government, we are now limiting choice and accountability by restricting freedom of speech. We're not expanding anything that's conservative, here. We're not expanding liberty or expanding freedom - which is choice. That is the antithesis of what happened in the Supreme Court.

When all is said and done, when it comes to domestic issues, it looks to me like the legacy of the Republican control of Congress and the presidency for the first time in 50 years is going to be the largest entitlement in modern times, the greatest increase in domestic spending in modern times and one of the greatest set-backs for liberty in modern times. That's the legacy of Republican control of government. This may be "compassionate" conservatism, but it's not "conservatism" at all.

[NittanyLion]

Thanks for the ping.

Yes, it appears the GOP gambled and lost. Bigtime. Congress and the President understood the right action to take, and they decided to forgo that in favor of the expedient. Perhaps now they'll realize that gambling on some things is okay, but the Constitution is not one of them.

[PhilipFreneau]

>> through the 3/4ths majority in both houses of Congress and the states

A minor point. It requires a 2/3rd's super-majority vote of congress and a majority vote of 3/4th's of the state legislatures.

[Area51]

How ironic that one of the Biggest freaking crooks of the Congress, John McCain is the author to legislation that restricts my 1st Amendment rights!

Anyone ever remember the Keating five Scandal. Yeap, ole Strawberrys was hip deep in it.

Someone ought to ask the RAT the next time he tackles a newscamera for some face time, how this Law would have prevented him from the illegal activities he participated in.

And to Jorge Delano Bush, it is HIS FAULT this thing played out the way it did. He is the man that has the power, authority and RESPONSIBILITY to stop this kind of crap from becoming law.

Had he done his job, and vetoed the bill, the USSC packed full of Euroweenies never would have had a say on the matter.

This is a tarr baby that is justifiably wrapped around Jorge Bush's neck.

Up Next, Amnesty and SSI benefits for those pesky border jumpers!

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/1210mexbenefits10.html

Social Security checks could go south of border
Sergio Bustos
Gannett News Service
Dec. 10, 2003 12:01 AM

Thank god we have a Conservative in the White house! /sarcasm

BOHICA

[diotima]

Off topic, but interesting none the less is this opening gem: The Supreme Court's campaign finance ruling gives the Republicans, who raise far more in small donations, a big advantage in next year's elections for the White House and Congress.

I thought the GOP was a tool of the robber barons and corporate America. Funny how this pops up in THIS article, but not in any other GOP hit pieces.

[Lazamataz]

Here is an outstanding editorial that Rush Limbaugh wrote.

[Lazamataz]

So you consider Rush's editorial to be a "GOP hit piece"?

Maybe it is -- but it is nothing the GOP has not earned by tirelessly toiling to undermine conservative principles of freedom.

[William McKinley]

He gets no argument from me on CFR. It is a complete debacle, with the only possible saving grace (and it is only a mere possibility, by no means a certainty) that the new rules will get us enough Senate seats to where we can get a good conservative on the SCOTUS where they can undo some of the recent damage (here, and Lawrence) that court has done.

[Lazamataz]

Ping for an exceptional editorial by Rushbo.

[Lazamataz]

Ping for an amazing editorial by Messr. Limbaugh. This is a must-read.

[Lazamataz]

This must-read is penned by Rush Limbaugh.

[Lazamataz]

Rush Limbaugh knocks one out of the park. MUST READ!

[Lazamataz]

A truly brilliant piece by Messr. Limbaugh lies above.

[Lazamataz]

You rock. I really like you. :o)

[Lazamataz]

Rush Limbaugh nails it. MUST READ.

[leprechaun9]

Sandra O"Connor sodomized the Constitution!

[Lazamataz]

MUST READ by Limbaugh.

To Walkingfeather: have you ever heard of a constitutional amendment....? They are tough to pass but I think this one would. Let's go that route before you start breaking out the torches and pitch forks.

I sure wish they had gone the route of the Constitutional Amendment when they decided to abrogate the First Amendment yesterday.

But instead, they decided to overturn it by judicial fiat.

[4CJ]

When all is said and done, when it comes to domestic issues, it looks to me like the legacy of the Republican control of Congress and the presidency for the first time in 50 years is going to be the largest entitlement in modern times, the greatest increase in domestic spending in modern times and one of the greatest set-backs for liberty in modern times. That's the legacy of Republican control of government. This may be "compassionate" conservatism, but it's not "conservatism" at all.

Worth repeating. Thank you Mr. President for signing this POS.

[Lazamataz]

Agreed. Why this neo-facist leftist piece of crap can't retire is beyond me.

[M. Thatcher]

You rock. I really like you. :o)

I like you, too.
Does this mean we rock together?