Rush Limbaugh Says Brownback "Not a Thoroughbred Conservative"
Transcript from today's Rush Limbaugh Show:
Somebody called, "How come you don't talk about Brownback? You could really help Brownback if you talk about Brownback!" Look, Brownback is out there on the wrong side of the anti-war resolution. He's doing some things here that have me scratching my head. He's not a thoroughbred conservative, like I think he once was.My Comments:
(emphasis added)
Well, I guess that means I'm not a "thoroughbred conservative" anymore either, at least not according to Rush. But then, I try to have my Catholicism inform my conservatism rather than having the Republican establishment define it. And I believe that Sen. Brownback does as well.
When "compassionate conservatism" first entered the political lexicon, many conservatives like Rush derided the term, noting that it was redundant because, so they said, conservatism is compassionate. Maybe. Or maybe what Rush really objects to is compassion itself - at least compassion as Sen. Brownback believes his Faith defines it.
And for the life of me, I'm still trying to figure out just what is so conservative about serial marriage and breaking narcotics laws.
Labels: Brownback
posted by Pro Ecclesia 10:05 PM
8 comments
8 Comments:
Rush, Gingrich, McCain, Rudy, the face of Conservatism to America is the face of adultry/divorce, it makes me sick. Brownback has some common sense proposals on immigration, opposes the death pennalty, has some idealism regarding Dafur, and raises some questions about the Iraq war and these "Conservatives" turn on him. Brownback, to me, seems to be a true Conservative in the tradition of Edmund Burke and the establishment Republicans seem to fear him as much as the left does, that only speaks well to the kind of man he is. If it comes down to Hillary and Rudy, I would be happy to see Brownback run 3rd party (it might spark a chain of events leading a strong anti-war dem to run 4th Party, and THAT would make for one heck of an interesting election.
But then, I try to have my Catholicism inform my conservatism rather than having the Republican establishment define it. And I believe that Sen. Brownback does as well.
Jay, it's like I said before, it's illegal immigration! And I'm afraid you ARE on the side of the Republican establishment if you support a guest worker amnesty program like Brownback does.
And although the American bishops seem to also be with you on this, authentic Church teaching is quite clearly in favor of what "thoroughbred conservatives" believe is the solution to the illegal immigration. The catechism is quite clear about the duties of citizens: obey the laws of the host country. They have not done that. To grant them legal status violates the laws of justice. Read St. Thonas More on that and St. Thomas Aquinis. And if you're looking for some real Catholic pro-life leaders on that, read what Alan Keyes has to say or Phyllis Schlaffly. You might even try asking Bishop Bruskewitz.
Oh, and leave out the ad hominen attacks on Rush. He doesn't claim to be perfect. But he does have a good handle on conservative thought.
Frankly, I never understood how media personalities became the arbiters. There are a lot of people falsely calling themselves conservatives, but Brownback is not one of them.
You DO realize, Michelle, that in the transcript I linked Rush seems to be prepared to make the argument that Rudy Giuliani is acceptable to conservatives as long as he says the "right" things about judges.
So, Rudy Giuliani is acceptable to "conservatives" like Rush, but Brownback isn't? Please.
Rush is, at heart, a libertarian. He's never cared about the social conservative agenda, except insofar as it (a) helps Republicans and/or (b) helps keeps his taxes lower. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for limited government and lower taxes, but government is only effective in that it serves the ends of promoting and protecting the basic unit of society - the family. Libertarianism ignores this, as it sees the basic unit as the individual. Rush only feeds this mentality.
As for my so-called "ad hominem", when someone sets himself up as the arbiter of who is and is not a "thoroughbred conservative", he opens up his own life for review as to whether or not what he practices is TRULY conservative. I see nothing conservative about some of Rush's lifestyle choices. Rather, they reflect someone who is, as I have said, more of a libertarian.
Jay,
The whole premise of this monologue was based on the fact that Chris Matthews was covering the fact that "Rush is not reved up" by anyone who's running yet. (That includes Giuliani.) Also, Matthew's guest was saying that it used to be that conservatives always backed a "loser" in the primary, and now they seem to only be looking for someone "who can win". (I would agree with him when it comes to the establishment). And he linked this directly to the prospect of Giuliani.
Rush responded by asking "Reagan was a loser?" And then proceeded to say that we don't have a Reagan running, and that there will never be another Reagan. And yes, he defended Giuliani on the basis of his positions on other issues, but expressed the weaknesses that he has on social issues. And you're right that this is not the most important issue to Rush, but he knows how important it is to many of us. But he is NOT a libertarian. Nor is Giuliani (he's not conservative enough on fiscal issues to be libertarian). Rush, however, knows what a "thoroughbred conseravative" is. It's someone who can lead the conservative movement. He was not comparing Giuliani to Brownback or saying that Giuliani was better than Brownback. I'm sure if he was to compare the two of them, he would say that both of them have their weeknesses on serious issues. Giuliani on life and marriage, Brownback on illegal immigration. But they both have significant strengths.
He did say that he thinks it's too early yet and even recognized that it might be one of the "second tier" candidates who rises up and leads the movement, but he wasn't going to help them get noticed, that would be their job. I personally, would like to see him back Tancredo, but I understand his reasoning, to let them do it for themselves, and then he'll back one of them. As he said, between now and November '08 anything can happen, and I think he wants to avoid backing one over the other at this point.
One who can lead the conservative movement cannot deeply be at odds with conservatism in any crucial area.
One who can lead the conservative movement cannot deeply be at odds with conservatism in any crucial area.
Michelle, this is why I say we deserve Hillary if we cannot come up with anything better than Giuliani or McCain! Don't think I approve, I'm just saying. . .
Catholic wife and mother,
We're in agreement here. There are much better candidates than Giuliani and McCain. Brownback is a better candidate on life. Tancredo, Hunter and Paul are better all around, including on life. The point I've been making is that we're going to end up with Giuliani or Romney (I think McCain is toast), and then ultimately Hillary, UNLESS pro-lifers unite with other conservatives to elect a "thoroughbred conservative".
If Brownback were to rethink the other issues, I might be able to support him, but I'm afraid he's lost crediblility with those who are as concerned as I am about our borders, soverenty and rule of law. He might have the support of many pro-life bloggers and marchers, but that is about it, and it's not even 100% of them.
I encourage everyone to read what's going on with our borders, and what Bush's "guest worker" program would entail from the critics who happen to be solidly pro-life and solidly Catholic. Phyllis Schlaffly, Alan Keyes, Laura Ingraham and Michelle Malkin come to mind. Also the many great writers at World Net Daily and Renew America websites. Get informed before you put your eggs in one basket. But eventually, the pro-life movement and other movement conservatives need to gather our eggs together and put them in one for one of the conservative "second tier" candidates. Otherwise, the conservative vote will be divided, and it will go to Romney or Giuliani. I'm doing everything in my power to stop that from happening. And we all should.
Post a Comment
<< Home