I would have preferred anything to Dem leadership - but now that we've lost, OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!
Aw, no reason to be upset... it wasn't such a big deal... it was only a flesh wound...
Posted on 11/08/2006 11:54:25 AM PST by Ol' Sparky
'Liberated' Limbaugh flays GOP for lame campaign
Radio host: Conservative values not trumpeted by 'I'm-afraid-of-my-shadow Republican Party'
Posted: November 8, 2006
2:10 p.m. Eastern
By Joe Kovacs
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
Radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh says Republicans are to blame for their own demise at the polls by failing to run a campaign trumpeting conservative values.
"You and I hunger for ideological leadership and we're not getting it from the top. Conservatism, conservative ideology was nowhere to be found in this campaign from the top," Limbaugh said today in his post-election analysis. "The Democrats beat something with nothing. They didn't have to take a stand on anything other than their usual anti-war position. They had no clear agenda and believe me, they didn't dare offer one. Liberalism will still lose every time it's offered."
Democrats took control of the House of Representatives for the first time since 1994, with the fate of the Senate still uncertain.
Limbaugh said Republicans allowed themselves to be defined by Democrats and the media, and says they instead should have gone on the offensive.
"It's silly to blame the media. It is silly to blame the Democrats. It is silly to go out and try to find all these excuses," he said. "We have proven we can beat them. We've proven we can beat Democrats. We've proven we can withstand whatever we get from the drive-by media. Conservatism does that. Conservatism properly applied – proudly, eagerly with vigor and honesty – will triumph that nine times out of 10 in this current political environment and social environment in this country. It just wasn't utilized in this campaign."
Limbaugh, a longtime proponent of conservative ideology, believes the primary reason Republicans didn't campaign on their beliefs is "fear of criticism from those in the so-called establishment; and nobody wants to be criticized and nobody wants to go through their life in fear."
He listed a number of benchmarks which should have been the basis for successful campaigns including no terrorist attacks on the U.S. since Sept. 11, 2001, gasoline prices averaging $2.08 per gallon, increased take-home pay, a strong economy and an unemployment rate at a historically low level.
"We all know that there's very positive things happening out there, but it was not trumpeted by the people who should have been shouting it from the rooftops because they were proud of it," Limbaugh said. "They should have been shouting it from the rooftops, 'Look what we've done! Look how America can improve. Look how your future is brighter!' ... instead of allowing the template to be set by its critics. ... You have a defensive, Gee-I'm-afraid-of-my-shadow Republican Party."
In answering questions about how he feels about the election results, Limbaugh said, "I feel liberated. ... I no longer am gonna have to carry the water for people who I think don't deserve having their water carried. ... If those in our party who are going to carry the day in the future both in Congress and the administration are going to choose a different path than what most of us believe, then that's liberating. ...
"There have been a bunch of things going on in Congress. Some of this legislation coming out of there that I have just cringed at. And it has been difficult coming in here trying to make the case for it when the people who supposedly in favor of it can't even make the case themselves."
During the last mid-term congressional election in 2002, Limbaugh proclaimed the Democratic Party to be in total chaos, and advised it to drop failed strategies if members wish to see political gains in the future.
"They're a party in total disarray, total collapse, total chaos," he said at the time.
During the 2004 campaign, Limbaugh said the Democratic Party was completely without a leader in its hunt to regain the White House, and members were desperately trying to invent one.
"They are so absent leadership right now it's a joke," said Limbaugh, "and everybody knows this in the media, and the Democrats are out trying to manufacture one – they're trying to create one. And they've got this list of nine candidates for the Democratic nomination, and nobody can name one of them."
Yep... it's called Controlling the Agenda.
Reagans are not developed at the grass roots or anywhere else. They are extremely rare people. The secret to RR's effectiveness was his understanding and training in economics. Political actors are dynamic personalities and Economics is a terribly dull subject. The man with what it takes to survive as a politician will almost never have any real acquaintance with the subject. Economics is much more than just studying and understanding how money flows, it is learning what motivates people. Politicians, being oriented toward government and not being economically literate themselves, take their advice from the "economists", Keynesians or Monetarists who tell them how the government can control the economy for this or that goal. A "conservative" politician listens to Keynesians or Monetarists who seem to offer him the tools to adjust the economy for conservative ends. The problem is that the whole concept of government control leading to prosperity is wrong. The conservative politician spends his term playing catchup by fiddling with interest rates of fiscal policy and at best, does not do too much harm. Reagan ended the economic death spiral of the Nixon-Carter economy by getting the government out of the business, not by trying to engineer results.
NAG should be NAH
She did. You don't recall the difference between Linseed in the impeachment and Linseed in the Senate trial, but I do. He changed overnight at one point. Hatch, too. Hmmm.
I don't think I could say what I said any clearer, but I will try. I'm sure you've heard the saying -- The road to hell is paved with good intentions. My father thinks that about Christian conservatives. While their intentions are good, politics is not the place to discuss those things. He thinks Chistian conservatives are damaging Christianity and losing their moral authority by whoring it out for partisan political purposes. There are millions of voters, Right, Left, and Center that think just like my Southern Baptist, deacon, Sunday School teacher father. Is that clear enough for you?
Perhaps he and they are wrong. The question you should ponder is, what if he and they are right?
Clinton was a vile president, but a master propagandist. He had a message of the day, every single day, and a theme for the week. It was easier for him, since he had a willing accomplice in the press, but the bully pulpit is still there for those who can use it.
Bush 41 and 43 both act as though they want to see how much attack they can take from the press without responding and still survive. Bush 41 didn't. Bush 43 squeaked through, but only because of the war, and then, only because of what he did in the war in the 6 months after 9/11. The goodwill was bound to run out with some of the electorate, I was just hoping that there was enough left to get through this election.
Good point. Here in Arizona, our attempt to amend the state constitution to ban gay marriage failed, most probably because it over-reached and proposed outlawing any legally-recognized gay relationship. Many conservatives support civil unions, as long as it's not "marriage", because many believe a committed, monogamous relationship is better than none, especially for those involved in a lifestyle fairly devoid of "traditional" values.
The Democrats will eventually get the job done. They will dismantle Defense and think they are ending the war by not participating. We will then take some horrific attacks on American cities that will show that the World Trade Center was just a little raid. The Democrats will sic the FBI on the perps and we will get hit again. After a few such attacks the Democrat president will panic and, in that panic and in exasperation that the enemy does not recognize the essential goodness of the Democrats who are dismantling the Evil American Empire, will launch the missiles. The destruction will be far greater than if we had proceeded to do the necessary job in Bush's term, in the ME and in Europe and in America and the Constitution will likely be a casualty but the job will get done.
Rush. Right again.
I'm saying that a significant portion of conservative voters chose to not vote for Santorum because they felt betrayed by his support of Specter. They said in 2004 that they would not support Santorum in 2006.
As for looking around, we live around a significant number of people with Spanish accents. If I were to take them to my home state, MS, or any of the other states where we have lived (except NM), I can guarantee that a good portion of the people they would meet would label them as "illegals" when they are anything but. They are family-loving, hard-working, Christian Americans. They go to church. They play baseball. They pay taxes. Etc. They would easily support conservative candidates if those candidates presented them something to vote FOR. The area where we are is represented by a democrat who seems to be fairly safe. I did not even know who his opponent was until yesterday morning when I looked it up. The Republican party must not have sent him any help. The district a few miles away from us had an extremely conservative candidate running. I don't think he got any support from the national GOP. With campaign finance reform, candidates depend on help from the national parties unless they have significant personal wealth from the outset. Otherwise, they must meet the whim and fancy of whomever is controlling the purse-strings for party money.
Six months ago, we lived in a fairly diverse neighborhood. By and large, all the neighbors are/were conservative. I don't know for certain, but I would wager that on our side of the street, there would have been 9 conservative votes for Webb.
I think Ronald Reagan would win in a landslide if he were alive and well today. (and running for office)
The Democrats will eventually get the job done. They will dismantle Defense and think they are ending the war by not participating. We will then take some horrific attacks on American cities that will show that the World Trade Center was just a little raid. The Democrats will sic the FBI on the perps and we will get hit again. After a few such attacks the Democrat president will panic and, in that panic and in exasperation that the enemy does not recognize the essential goodness of the Democrats who are dismantling the Evil American Empire, will launch the missiles. The destruction will be far greater than if we had proceeded to do the necessary job in Bush's term, in the ME and in Europe and in America and the Constitution will likely be a casualty but the job will get done.
I agree - to a point.
However, the GOP must begin to combat the fact that public school teachers, college professors, along with MTV, etc. are increasingly attempting (with some success) to turn our young people against the GOP and its traditional values.
Add that to the fact that the third-world (illegal or legal, who knows) immigrant vote went overwhelmingly against the Republicans (and no I don't have a link. I simply have antedoctal evidence which I saw at the polls yesterday) and you have a 10-percent Democrat advantage just to start each blue or purple state election.
Republicans since WWII have been just as zealous to cover up Democratic corruption as are Democrats. And Republicans have been just as zealous to reveal and punish Republican corruption as are Democrats. The effect on Joe Blow is to promote the appearance that Republicans are inherently corrupt and Democrats are pure.
I didn't realize Conservatives were such fair weather friends. One of their closest friends does one thing they don't like and OUT THE DOOR? Not only is that ridiculous, it borders on psychotic and that is why, my friend, Conservatives will never be back in power in our lifetime.
I concur. 85-percent, anyway.
Cunningham, Rey?, Foley, Abramoff clients, and others.
Yes, the Dems had their William Jefferson's, but that's normal. And no excuse for the GOP to join the corupt-fest.
To me limited government does not only refer to the size of government but also its reach. Like my father, I think the social conservatives are reaching too far, damaging both the body politic and the body religious, but not intentionally. Perhaps I and my father are wrong, but what if we are right? Serious questions for sure. I'm series. ;-)
I agree wholeheartedly, Rush.
But every lib-leaning media outlet (most are) went waaaaaaay out of their way NOT to let one smidgen of good news come out.
Contrast that to the five-year party ABC-CBS,PMS.DNC etc threw for the Democrat-lib-Clintonoids in the 1990s.
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.