No Liberal Leaders for Republican Party (David Limbaugh)

NewsMax ^ | February 5, 2008 | David Limbaugh

[2ndDivisionVet]

I suppose I could be accused of over-dramatizing, but I truly worry about the direction this nation is headed when contemplating a presidential race where the choices are liberal and liberal-light.

If John McCain is the GOP nominee, that's what we'll be faced with, despite the Herculean efforts of some to spin it otherwise.

In that case, the presidential candidates of both parties would be willing to use the bully pulpit and governing power of the presidency to suppress political speech, punish producers, oil companies and drug companies, open wider our borders, cater to the whacko environmental movement and its junk-science-driven pseudo-consensus on global warming, nominate judges who don't "wear their conservatism on their sleeve," close Gitmo, confer constitutional civil liberties on enemy combatants, end life-saving interrogation techniques, demonize evangelical conservatives, and obstruct efforts of conservative Republican legislators.

It is also distressing that many conservative commentators are so deeply mired in rationalization in order to spin their support for John McCain.

Sure, if I'm a paid staffer for McCain or a high-school debater forced to take the affirmative side of the proposition that McCain is a conservative, I can make a colorable case — intellectual honesty be damned — that he's a conservative. But I am under no such constraints.

Getting 50 endorsements from well-placed Republican officials or even respected conservatives doesn't make McCain conservative. Being a conservative makes one a conservative. I bet, truth be told, McCain can't even stand the word.

How quickly we forget that McCain said that conservative evangelicals are "agents of intolerance" and that social issues just aren't his thing.

How readily we overlook that his environmental and immigration policies alone contradict his self-identification as a budget hawk.

How quickly we forget that he really was just one of two Republican senators who actively opposed the Bush tax cuts, which, despite liberal disinformation, led to sustained economic growth.

How blindly we're willing to overlook McCain's fib that he opposed the cuts because they weren't coupled with guaranteed spending cuts. That was most certainly not the thrust of his opposition to the cuts — and he knows it.

The facts are available for all to see. He opposed the cuts because he said, quite dishonestly, that they were skewed in favor of the wealthy. That, "my friend," is apparently what he means by "straight talk."

McCain has no abiding loyalty to conservative principles. His loyalty is to John McCain.

If he captures the nomination and then goes on to win the election after leading the charge for open borders and against the Bush tax cuts, can you imagine how liberally he'll govern? How long do you think it will take for him to abandon his opportunistically acquired, more restrictive immigration policy when he has already stated that he hasn't changed his position at all? It's time for Rod Serling to bring us back from the Twilight Zone.

With McCain's many liberal predispositions and his craving for approval from elitist liberal circles, how likely is it that he will be able to resist the temptation to govern so as to please The New York Times? Would the Old Gray Lady have endorsed McCain had she believed he had actually converted to the supply . . . er, dark side? Would this most liberal of liberal print-publication giants eulogized McCain if he hadn't established himself as a persistent annoyance to the Republican Party and conservatism?

Would the liberal commentariat in general be salivating over McCain if he'd seen the error of his quasi-liberal ways?

It would be one thing for a Democratic president to rail against capitalism, slander those as racists and bigots who want to protect the unique American culture and safeguard our national security through prudent protection of our borders and rule of law, routinely pay homage to the gods of global warming, and use the tax code as a weapon against achievement and realization of the "American dream." But for a Republican, also falsely labeled as a conservative, to do it would be tragic.

We've already gone far enough in that dangerous direction under Republican administrations. We can't afford to go any further.

No matter how freely both parties have neglected the essential principles of limited republican government established in our Constitution, and no matter how foolishly we assume our unique experiment in constitutional self-rule will thrive even if we continue to reject the constitutional principles underlying it, we can destroy ourselves just as quickly from within as our enemies can destroy us by force.

We can't ever expect the ultra-liberal modern Democratic Party to vigilantly safeguard the pillars of self-government that guaranty our liberties. We have no choice, then, but to work to bring home the GOP and its principal leaders, to conservatism.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

David Limbaugh is a writer, author, and attorney. His book "Bankrupt: The Intellectual and Moral Bankruptcy of Today's Democratic Party" (Regnery) was recently released in paperback. To find out more about David Limbaugh, please visit his Web site at www.davidlimbaugh.com.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Rush didn't get all the intelligence genes in that family: David hits one out of the park, again!

[lilylangtree]

Mailed my ballot for the primary yesterday. Voted for a candidate that’s not running. Couldn’t bring myself to vote for the top two in either party that the media’s pushing. It’s a real sad day for our country when one has to decide the lesser of two evils to vote for.

[zebrahead]

I prefer:

“NO LIBERAL HILLARY/OBAMA SUPPORTERS IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY”

As in, no supporters of Hillary or Obama allowed.

You are either with us or against us in keeping the Democrats out of the White House.

[donna]

Too late. That ship has already sailed.

[pabianice]

This is over-thinking. All presidential elections with no incumbent running is always a choice between Somewhat Different and Very Different. Same this year.

[Digital Sniper]

McCain has no abiding loyalty to conservative principles. His loyalty is to John McCain.

This sums up the McChurian Candidate quite well. Quite well indeed.

[rockinqsranch]

“We have no choice, then, but to work to bring home the GOP and its principal leaders, to conservatism.”

Many at FR have stated the same concept, and possibly these same words multiple times, myself included. There is no doubting these words.

[sweet_diane]

I too voted for a candidate that is no longer running. So did my daughter and my mother. No clothespin, no compromise.

[tfecw]

Couldn’t bring myself to vote for the top two in either party that the media’s pushing

Look around ;) it's not just the media pushing them. It's prominent GOP leaders and if you jump into a Huck/McCain/Mitt thread you'll see it's more than a handful of folks here as well

[trisham]

Excellent article.

[xzins]

I think he skirted the truth.

He attacked liberal McCain and didn’t attack Liberal Romney and Liberal Huckabee.

It was just another political ploy. To bad his title gave the impression he was going to be honest in his article.

[Yosemitest]

Consider today and what's going on. Then think about this...

Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth?
I tell you, Nay; but rather division:
For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided,
three against two, and two against three.
The father shall be divided against the son,
and the son against the father;
the mother against the daughter,
and the daughter against the mother;
the mother in law against her daughter in law,
and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

"Wake Up!" It's time to get involved. It's time to vote.

"When presented with alternatives, it's as if many don't even hear them.
In fact, they probably don't want to hear them because it would call for them to change."

Even bad things happen for a "reason." We must do our best. Read the excerpt from "Wake UP!"

"The scoffers skepticism is based upon their evil desires,
which lead them to prefer a view of the future in which there is no divine judgment.
The scoffers maintain
that everything in the world goes on without divine intervention.

Notice that the emphasis here is on a deliberate rejection,
or as some translations put it, a "willing ignorance."
Thus, it is a deliberate action on a person's part not to believe.
People refuse to believe these things
even when presented with evidence

-people simply do not want to be convinced.
Ignoring the flood as a divine intervention was not an oversight;
it was deliberate."

[petitfour]

Hubby and I will be voting for a candidate no longer running as well. We can’t stomach the rest.

[Sybeck1]

Can Mike Pence and others in the house pull a coalition together to fight either a McCain or Hillary?

[manapua]

I agree with him. And that's why I have serious reservations about supporting either McCain or Romney.

Yet another conservative commentator that I respected is being intellectually dishonest and ignoring the elephant - or rather the RINO - in the room: Slick Willard. Hannity, the Limbaughs, Coulter... their support for Slick Willard isn't principled at all; it's about revenge for McCain's past behavior. Fine. I can understand that on some level. But trying to camoflauge their revenge with sanctimony and claims of higher principles? C'mon.

[xzins]

Limbaugh did not mention the name “Romney” once in his article. He did not mention “Huckabee.” The only one — as if he’s the only liberal rino running — he mentioned was McCain.

I don’t want any of them.

[rockinqsranch]

I haven’t a clue as to what Mike Pence can do, or if he is willing to do it, but I do know that without sufficient Conservatives in the Congress there isn’t much anybody can do. Therefore we must concentrate all efforts to ensure we have those Conservatives in place.

In other words it’s our Government, it’s up to us to stand up and fight for our Nation.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

"If he captures the nomination and then goes on to win the election after leading the charge for open borders and against the Bush tax cuts, can you imagine how liberally he'll govern? How long do you think it will take for him to abandon his opportunistically acquired, more restrictive immigration policy when he has already stated that he hasn't changed his position at all? It's time for Rod Serling to bring us back from the Twilight Zone."

[manapua]

That’s my point - perhaps I made it poorly! If David Limbaugh is so concerned about liberal leaders in the GOP, then why does he not lament Romney or Huck? I find that ommission rather glaring and intellectually dishonest.

[xzins]

Agreed!

The true conservative’s best hope right now is a locked convention.

We see how far McCain can get today, and then we work like heck to keep him from getting any farther. Yet, he could deal with Huck or Romney for the #2 slot, and garner enough delegates to win.

That’s the truly discouraging side of having 3 liberals remaining in your election.

I also like the idea of a conservative republican coalition/caucus/party that demands a conservative VP.