- Joined
- Apr 8, 2008
- Messages
- 19,883
- Reaction score
- 5,120
- Location
- 0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Other
On the one side, the president of the United States: soft-spoken and conciliatory, never angry, always invoking the recession and its victims. This president invokes the language of "responsibility," and in his own life seems to epitomize that ideal: He is physically honed and disciplined, his worst vice an occasional cigarette. He is at the same time an apparently devoted husband and father. Unsurprisingly, women voters trust and admire him.
And for the leader of the Republicans? A man who is aggressive and bombastic, cutting and sarcastic, who dismisses the concerned citizens in network news focus groups as "losers." With his private plane and his cigars, his history of drug dependency and his personal bulk, not to mention his tangled marital history, Rush is a walking stereotype of self-indulgence—exactly the image that Barack Obama most wants to affix to our philosophy and our party. And we're cooperating! Those images of crowds of CPACers cheering Rush's every rancorous word—we'll be seeing them rebroadcast for a long time.
Rush knows what he is doing. The worse conservatives do, the more important Rush becomes as leader of the ardent remnant. The better conservatives succeed, the more we become a broad national governing coalition, the more Rush will be sidelined.
This sums it up nicely:
On the one side, the president of the United States: soft-spoken and conciliatory, never angry, always invoking the recession and its victims. This president invokes the language of "responsibility," and in his own life seems to epitomize that ideal: He is physically honed and disciplined, his worst vice an occasional cigarette. He is at the same time an apparently devoted husband and father. Unsurprisingly, women voters trust and admire him.
And for the leader of the Republicans? A man who is aggressive and bombastic, cutting and sarcastic, who dismisses the concerned citizens in network news focus groups as "losers." With his private plane and his cigars, his history of drug dependency and his personal bulk, not to mention his tangled marital history, Rush is a walking stereotype of self-indulgence—exactly the image that Barack Obama most wants to affix to our philosophy and our party. And we're cooperating! Those images of crowds of CPACers cheering Rush's every rancorous word—we'll be seeing them rebroadcast for a long time.
Rush knows what he is doing. The worse conservatives do, the more important Rush becomes as leader of the ardent remnant. The better conservatives succeed, the more we become a broad national governing coalition, the more Rush will be sidelined.
Because of the lack of anger or harsh words? Sorry, but not everyone views Obama through partisan spectacles. I disagree with his political views, but he's certainly an intelligent orator with some wit and charm.Sounds like he wants to blow Obama.
Still sounds like he wants to blow a democrat.
He was explaining why it benefits Obama for Rush to take the helm as "leader" of the GOP:Rush is an Entertainer, why is he being grouped with the President?
Read it however you please.Read "become more liberal, like Obama"
Because of the lack of anger or harsh words? Sorry, but not everyone views Obama through partisan spectacles. I disagree with his political views, but he's certainly an intelligent orator with some wit and charm.
He was explaining why it benefits Obama for Rush to take the helm as "leader" of the GOP:
Here's what I wrote: President Obama and Rush Limbaugh do not agree on much, but they share at least one thing: Both wish to see Rush anointed as the leader of the Republican party.
Read it however you please.
In comparison to Rush, which is what he was doing in the article, Obama is quite the little angel when it comes to rhetoric."Obama is so soft spoken and concerned. never a harsh word" blah blah blah, even you don't believe this tripe I hope.
In comparison to Rush, which is what he was doing in the article, Obama is quite the little angel when it comes to rhetoric.
Frum is an idiot...
I agree with rush.
Save for Rush has stated repeatedly that he doesn't want to be the leader of the GOP and isn't the leader of the GOP. And guess what, I believe 98% of republicans AGREE THAT HE'S not.
Maybe that 98% ought to grow a pair then and not beg Boss Rush for forgiveness every time they say anything that might offend him.
For all intents and purposes, Rush is the leader of the conservative movement in America today. Thats your problem.
Frum's problem is that he is something of an intellectual, and we all know how much today's conservatives despise objectivity and intellect.
The biggest rift I see for conservatism, is the one on social issues. Due to the evangelical tie in with the republican party, it creates an at odds approach with the more libertarian minded folks who normally would be inclined to go with the smaller government party(read smaller, not necessarily small government at this point in the game). Somehow this gap needs to be bridged if the conservatives want to ever regain power with the voting populace. And I honestly don't know if it can be bridged. There seems to be no common ground between the two entities regarding social issues. The best they could possibly do, is prehaps to leave social issues as something pertaining to states, and leave those issues on the back burner in debate.
I'm interested to see if the GOP panders to Libertarians this next election. They can use all the help they can get.
I would love to see it, but I doubt it will happen. The majority of Americans have no clue what Libertarianism means or what it's constituency believes in. It would be nice to have a Libertarian participate in the Presidential Debates, thus educating the populace on our positions. Again, I doubt it will happen but I would be pleased to be proven wrong.If they will pander to the religious right, they will pander to anybody.:lol: Maybe this is the time for libertarians to start positioning themselves?
Maybe that 98% ought to grow a pair then and not beg Boss Rush for forgiveness every time they say anything that might offend him.
For all intents and purposes, Rush is the leader of the conservative movement in America today. Thats your problem.
Frum's problem is that he is something of an intellectual, and we all know how much today's conservatives despise objectivity and intellect.
One only needs to point out: SD is not a conservative himself, so how would he know?Well, considering you've been absolutely wrong about anything dealing with Conservatism well...just about every single time I've ever interacted with you...excuse me as I don't really care what YOU tell me is the reality of things for the "conservative movement in America". :roll:
The fact is, he's not the leader. That's an actual fact. He's not an elected leader, he's not the head of the GOP, over 90% of polled republicans don't consider him it. No matter how much you, like you routinely do, incorrectly tell conservatives what they believe doesn't make it true it just makes you ignorant on the subject.
Well, considering you've been absolutely wrong about anything dealing with Conservatism well...just about every single time I've ever interacted with you...excuse me as I don't really care what YOU tell me is the reality of things for the "conservative movement in America". :roll:
The fact is, he's not the leader. That's an actual fact. He's not an elected leader, he's not the head of the GOP, over 90% of polled republicans don't consider him it. No matter how much you, like you routinely do, incorrectly tell conservatives what they believe doesn't make it true it just makes you ignorant on the subject.
You can tell yourself that it if it makes you feel better. However, if a leader of a movement is described as the individual with the strongest contingency in the movement, then Boss Rush is your leader.
Frum is as right about the future of the GOP as nuch as Rove was right about the future of the Democrats.
I think that sums it up in a nutshell quite nicely, eh?
I wouldn't get too excited.I wouldn't get too excited.
You folks ran on Foley and Blue Dogs to win the last midterms.
You ran a Vaudeville act, The Messiah, for president this time. Now it's turned into a bad sitcom.
These sideshows hid the fact you're still the tax and spend leftists you always were.
At some point dealing from the bottom of the deck won't work anymore.
Then what's left for The Left?
.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?