Rush Limbaugh at CPAC
If you have been reading my blog for very long, you will know that I am no fan of Rush Limbaugh. I find him very hard to listen to because of his arrogance, but I have to admit, if you want to watch a speech that defines conservatism and it’s core beliefs, this is the speech to watch. I found it very informative and what’s more, very entertaining, much more than I ever expected with my dislike of the man and his style. Thanks to Kevin Tracy for bringing this speech to my attention.
Before you watch the speech, there is one thing that I want to point out. At one point in the speech, Limbaugh makes the point that one reason the Republican Party lost the election to Barack Obama was the fact that we did not field a true conservative candidate. While I certainly agree with him on that, I want to remind us all of one reason we did not have such a candidate. The true conservative candidates such in the 2008 Republican primary race were all shot down by the Republican Party establishment and conservative commentators, such as Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh himself. Mike Huckabee fought an uphill battle that was due in no small part to Hannity and Limbaugh deriding him and his candidacy. I am sure he wouldn’t want to admit to this, but he does bear some responsibility for John McCain being the Republican presidential candidate in 2008.
Now you can watch the speech. Regardless of my views, it is a good speech.
Rush is arrogant, and uses some language I don’t appreciate. Hence why I prefer to listen to local talk or Glenn Beck (who also uses some language… sigh). But, Rush can bring the house down, that’s for sure.
MuskogeePolitico’s last blog post..Democrat Forum Wants Williams as OKGOP Chair
Yes, he can bring the house down but it was more than that. I thought he made some very relevant remarks about what conservatism really is and how it is actually better than the government providing everything for the citizens. I still do not care for him but this was certainly a good speech.
I wholeheartedly agree; I’ve actually just about finished listening to the whole thing… part 9 of 10! And it appears that he’s not using a script (then again, he’s spent 20+ years speaking without a script…).
He is very comfortable doing what he does. I just hope he can get behind the right candidate in 2012. Regardless of what I think of him, he has influence on a lot of voters.
I could only listen to the first 15 minutes — but the man is good! I disagree with so much of what he says and his arrogance, as you pointed out Larry, is sickening; but the man is incredibly eloquent, entertaining, funny, and passionate, and the crowd just adores him. I predict he’ll make it really big one day
I could argue so many of his points but I’ve already stated my view that a conservative candidate would never have won this last election and won’t win future presidential elections unless the Dem candidate is equally far left or is an incumbent in whom the country has completely lost confidence. The middle will hold unless the choices preclude it.
But I do wish to take issue with Rush on one point: he accused Obama of punishing achievement and speaking negatively about the country. I agree that Obama has been candid, perhaps too candid, about making sure the country knows exactly how difficult things are; but don’t you think it’s about time somebody did just that rather than stupidly saying that “the fundamentals of our economy are strong”? I would add, and this is more to my point, that Rush made that comment about Obama just 5 minutes after saying that our country has “been destroyed by 50 years of welfare.” Now whether you agree with that statement or not it’s not exactly the “rah rah America” kind of statement he’s saying we need from the bully pulpit. And if it’s okay for Rush to be candid then why not Obama too?
Rush’s arrogance is just part of his act. He talks down to liberals because he feels like they talk down to the conservatives. I think he does this because it really ticks them off and he likes pushing their buttons.
The 50 years of welfare remark is pretty close to the truth.
50 years of welfare? Maybe, if you squint. But certainly our country has suffered through a GOP party that, since 1980, has been redefining “Conservatism” to include originating massive deficit spending, tacit approval of illegals in our country by originating the very first amnesty bill and rewriting the Constitution to suit the particular goals of an administration. And the spin doctor Rush has done little but cheer this irresponsible interpretation of Conservatism on.
Thanks, Larry, for pointing out that Rush and Company- 50 million strong in Conservative Listeners- had as much to do with the GOP candidate in 2008 as the party itself. Because talk radio hosts do nothing but stoke emotion, it’s not surprising that they won’t take responsibility for the candidacies that they led their following to and away from.
But the real truth is even smarmier. Rush. Beck, Hannity, Ingraham et al prefer the Democratic administration we got, as it is a HUGE career boost (a $400 million dollar contract for Rush once in 2008). They are equal opportunity busters, sure, but if you listened to any of them after the election you would have heard naked comments to support this i.e. Ingraham saying she is “thrilled” by the prospect of the next four years as a broadcaster. SO much easier to stoke the base when they have a true enemy. So maybe-just maybe- their entertainment bias got in the way of any support they might have given to a true Conservative.
Just didn’t fit their agenda.