Limbaugh; No third party?

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Rush, to his credit, has done as much as anyone to stand up for liberty and freedom in our nation and to fight the forces of collectivism, socialism and, frankly, communism.

Also, he freely admits to his anger and frustration with the GOP. However, as was his position with Buchanan in '88 and Perot in '92, he is, at core, a party man no matter how much he protests he is a conservative first and foremost.

His point is that a third party is doom for the right and that, at the end of the day, the battle is to take back the GOP, not leave it.

I would argue that Limbaugh is stating, by definition, conservatism can not stand on it's own and has NO appeal to moderates and independents.

I would argue that there are so many people in this nation just flat out disgusted with both parties that there is MORE than enough support for a conservative party. A party that is pro individual liberty AND responsibility, for smaller, better government, for less taxes, less foreign interventionism (no neocons need apply) pro energy independence, pro simple tax, pro strong national defense, anti corporate bailouts, pro small business, anti socialist and against the DH rule.

So, what say you, people?

[Bann (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

Rush, to his credit, has done as much as anyone to stand up for liberty and freedom in our nation and to fight the forces of collectivism, socialism and, frankly, communism.

Also, he freely admits to his anger and frustration with the GOP. However, as was his position with Buchanan in '88 and Perot in '92, he is, at core, a party man no matter how much he protests he is a conservative first and foremost.

His point is that a third party is doom for the right and that, at the end of the day, the battle is to take back the GOP, not leave it.

I would argue that Limbaugh is stating, by definition, conservatism can not stand on it's own and has NO appeal to moderates and independents.

I would argue that there are so many people in this nation just flat out disgusted with both parties that there is MORE than enough support for a conservative party. A party that is pro individual liberty AND responsibility, for smaller, better government, for less taxes, less foreign interventionism (no neocons need apply) pro energy independence, pro simple tax, pro strong national defense, anti corporate bailouts, pro small business, anti socialist and against the DH rule.

So, what say you, people?

I was glad to catch this part of his show today, as I get off work @2pm and can't always catch the first part when I'm at work. I think he said he was repeating it in case people missed it at the beginning.

At any rate - I agree with your last paragraph. I do. But I also agree with Rush that NOW is not the time for it. Like he said - we're in a triage situation and the first thing we need to do is get rid of Obama.

I think if we split the vote, we're doomed. And Rush is right, a third party wouldn't have any representation in Congress right now. So it could be impossible to get any recognition.

I did this backwards - I need to go vote in the pole now. : biggrin:

[aps45819 (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

A party that is pro individual liberty AND responsibility, for smaller, better government, for less taxes, less foreign interventionism (no neocons need apply) pro energy independence, pro simple tax, pro strong national defense, anti corporate bailouts, pro small business, anti socialist and against the DH rule.

So, what say you, people?

Why can't Steel (or whoever is in charge of the Republican party) Come up with a party platform and hold the party members responsible to adhering to it?

[willie]

Originally Posted by aps45819

Why can't Steel (or whoever is in charge of the Republican party) Come up with a party platform and hold the party members responsible to adhering to it?

Limbaugh neutered Michael Steele.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by aps45819

Why can't Steel (or whoever is in charge of the Republican party) Come up with a party platform and hold the party members responsible to adhering to it?

Simple; The McCain vote was big enough to lend credence to the RINO school of thought, more to the left, not more to the right.

Yet now, ALL the energy and relevance in the GOP is from the right and from people who are not interested in any more moving to the left.

So, Steele has two masters; the party power structure, a left leaning approach, and the energy of the party, a right wing approach.

For instance, most people have, finally, come to the realization that TARP was a horrible, terrible and unnecessary mistake, however well intentioned, and they're angry about that and about Obama taking that ball and running wild with it. Obama whips it out and makes the point every single time he is asked about GM and the banks and AIG and more TARP; "Hey, I didn't start this..."

So, how does Steele appeal to the people, that all this bail out garbage is just that when the party power sure as hell won't let him?

[aps45819 (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

Simple; The McCain vote was big enough to lend credence to the RINO school of thought, more to the left, not more to the right.

The concept that a vote for McCain was anything other than folks holding their nose and once again voting for what appeared to be the lesser (slightly) of two evils is laughable.
McCain voting for TARP showed he was at best slightly less a socialist then Obama

[vraiblonde]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

So, what say you, people?

I say that conservatism can not stand on it's own and has NO appeal to moderates and independents.

Nobody wants to eat their broccoli and clean their room. Nobody wants to drive 55. Nobody wants to tell some kid that they can't have a new toy.

Personal responsibility and independence is not something people are interested in. And you know this - you have raised up the same 4 kids that I raised up. They didn't any of them do a damn thing that we didn't make them do. And you lived in the same overindulging neighborhood that I did, and saw what those parents were teaching their own kids.

So you know these things and I have no idea where you get your antiquated notions. But you also think people are smarter than they are, so....

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by aps45819

The concept that a vote for McCain was anything other than folks holding their nose and once again voting for what appeared to be the lesser (slightly) of two evils is laughable.
McCain voting for TARP showed he was at best slightly less a socialist then Obama

It doesn't matter why people voted for McCain! The fact is, they did and that gives him and his ideas and everyone who strongly supported him a huge amount of power for the future! Their view is more moderation, no Palin, he wins. Why is this hard to understand?

Had McCain got wiped out, then we're not having this argument, we're not wondering what is wrong with the GOP or where we go from here, we're not listening to Obama use Bush as an excuse time after time after time and Joe Wilson isn't a lone voice; he's one of 180 in the House.

You asked the question. I gave you the answer; Steele has to deal with the left wing of the GOP, the RINO's and he's gotta face those who are livid with the Bush betrayals, the whole RINO thing and the way these people treat the right wing of this party.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

I say that conservatism can not stand on it's own and has NO appeal to moderates and independents.

Nobody wants to eat their broccoli and clean their room. Nobody wants to drive 55. Nobody wants to tell some kid that they can't have a new toy.

Personal responsibility and independence is not something people are interested in. And you know this - you have raised up the same 4 kids that I raised up. They didn't any of them do a damn thing that we didn't make them do. And you lived in the same overindulging neighborhood that I did, and saw what those parents were teaching their own kids.

So you know these things and I have no idea where you get your antiquated notions. But you also think people are smarter than they are, so....

So, had Bush cut spending, reigned in entitlements instead of expanding them, made us energy independent, not did TARP, not bailed out the UAW and Wall Street and not got bogged down in two wars the GOP would still had lost in '06 and last fall?

I know, I know; antiquated notions, those.

[aps45819 (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

It doesn't matter why people voted for McCain! The fact is, they did and that gives him and his ideas and everyone who strongly supported him a huge amount of power for the future! Their view is more moderation, no Palin, he wins. Why is this hard to understand?

Yes it does matter.

This weekend on the mall wasn't a gathering of McCain supporters

If Palin had been there the crowd might have installed her in the white house