Weighing in on the Steele/Limbaugh flap

Look, I know this is a couple days old, but I'd like to throw my two cents in on this little tit-for-tat dust up.

First, to Michael Steele, why in the Hell are you even bothering to sound off on Rush Limbaugh? The man is an entertainer and a commentator. Sounding off on him would be like ripping someone like Hugh Hewitt, Jim Geraghty, Michelle Malkin, Captain Ed Morrissey, Robert Stacy McCain, ourselves, or any other blogger/pundit/commentator. It's not worth it because we're not the ones running the party. That's Mr. Steele's job. He is the de-facto head of the party. His job is to raise funds, and organize the party's base to win elections. It's not to engage in BS rhetoric on failed comedian's cable news shows. (And yes, DL Hughley is pretty much a failure as a comedian, and he's even worse as a political commentator. In fact, he's about as talentless as Keith Olbermann.)

When asked to weigh in on Rush Limbaugh's CPAC speech, Mr. Steele should have known the half-wit was going to hit him with a gotcha question, and he fell into the trap, hook, line, and sinker. He criticized Mr. Limbaugh's rhetoric as "ugly," and he let DL Hughley's comment regarding the Republican National Convention (equating it to a Nazi rally) pass without defense.

Had I been in Mr. Steele's shoes, and been confronted by DL Hughley, I would've reminded the host that: A) Rush is a commentator, not a party leader, B) The like myself, Mr. Hughley, and every other citizen in America, he has First Amendment rights, C) That the RNC was not similar to any sort of Nazi rally, and D) That I'll discuss specific political subjects, but that one man's speech at a political action committee meeting isn't one of those subjects.

It's time our leaders and spokespeople quit playing the games by the media's rules. Look folks, even John McCain got it through his thick skull during the election that THE MEDIA IS NOT OUR FRIEND. They're not going to play nice with us. They're not going to treat us with kid gloves. And they're sure as Hell not going to cut us any slack. So why do we sit there and play their games? Because some of our leaders are more foolish than we originally thought.

As for Rush's speech? We watched it on YouTube, and I printed it out to read over it. Hugh is quite correct in stating that Rush and Oprah are the two most effective communicators in the world. They succinctly make their cases to the public, and they have an extremely large following. Rush's speech at CPAC did an effective job of explaining what conservatism is, and why it works. I perused CPAC's agenda -- those speaking at the forum -- and I noticed that Michael Steele wasn't there. Whether that was because he wasn't invited, or there was a scheduling conflict, the facts can't be denied.

He wasn't there, and as the leader of the GOP, maybe he should have been. Maybe the context of Rush's speech would have sunk in, and he wouldn't have made an @$$ of himself on CNN.

I'd also like to note that we agree with Rush. We don't want President Barry's policies to succeed. We are already on the slippery slope to socialism, so we don't need his hard lurch towards full-blown socialism to succeed. Do we want to see him fail? Folks, we're witnessing his epic fail in leading this nation. Never before have we elected such an inexperienced, unprepared person to the presidency. The last such president was Carter, and he had the experience of being a chief executive (he was Georgia's governor). Barry? He had no such credentials. He had a record in the Illinois state Senate, and was correctly known as "Mr. Present." Once getting into the US Senate, he set his sights on the White House, breaking his promise to his constituents in Illinois.

President Barry deserves all the criticism that can be heaped on him. I'm not kidding when I say he has failed miserably in his first month in office. By signing the S-Chip bill, he has opened the door for nationalized health care (and as PJ O'Rourke famously quipped "If you think health care is expensive now, wait until it's free"). His stimulus bill will do little, if anything,to stimulate our weakened economy. And his budget is a pork-laden giveaway (yet another promise broken as he did say he'd stand against such wasteful spending from Congress). And coming down the tracks is another trillion dollar spending bill.

So to Mr. Steele, it would be wise if you paid more attention to what's going on with this administration before you come out and criticize a commentator who is paying attention to things. You'd look a helluva lot less foolish when you decide to go into the enemy's camp for an interview.

Publius II

ADDENDUM: I tuned in late to Rush's show today (busy, busy, busy) but I think I tuned in at the right time. the last half hour of his show he was discussing those Republicans out there that are criticizing him over what he said in his speech at CPAC; namely that his definition of conservatism lacked the policy ideas.

His point in rebuttal, and one we agree with, is that you can't set a policy without the guiding principles. Without the principles -- the very ideology that defines us as conservatives -- you can't make the policies that emphasize those principles. Conservatives believe in limited government, less taxes, a strong national defense, and so on. But we also stand for the founding principles of America. Recall, if you will, this from the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

It would have been boring had Rush sat there and read this at CPAC. But he enunciated the ideals above succinctly and correctly. This is what we stand for. This is where conservatism's roots are, and where they have grown from. Remember, not all Republicans are conservatives, and not all conservatives are Republican. But the fact that conservative-minded people stand up for these principles is the guiding light to the revitalization that this nation needs.

Publius II