I’m not sure how helpful it is for conservative commentators to join the chorus of mainstream media voices piling on Rush Limbaugh. The most recent columns by Rod Dreher of the Dallas Morning News and David Frum of the American Enterprise Institute give one cause to wonder if conservative commentators have a psychological need to be affirmed by Leftists who control the mainstream media.
Take David Frum’s recent essay in Newsweek, Why Rush is Wrong, for example. Frum is not merely attacking Rush Limbaugh’s style. Frum is calling for a fundamental capitulation of conservatism to liberalism in response to polls rather than principles. Consider carefully what Frum is calling conservatives to give up in order to secure electoral popularity:
Look at America’s public-policy problems, look at voting trends, and it’s inescapably obvious that the Republican Party needs to evolve. We need to put free-market health-care reform, not tax cuts, at the core of our economic message…
We need to modulate our social conservatism (not jettison—modulate). The GOP will remain a predominantly conservative party and a predominantly pro-life party. But especially on gay-rights issues, the under-30 generation has arrived at a new consensus. Our party seems to be running to govern a country that no longer exists. The rule that both our presidential and vice presidential candidates must always be pro-life has become counterproductive…
In other words, it’s time for conservatives to abandon their principles on fiscal and physical restraint because Frum perceives we can’t win without the votes of the under 30 demographic. Never mind that the under 30 crowd happens to be wrong on both social and economic issues. In Frum’s refashioning of Conservatism, polling and not principle would decide policy.
What Frum fails to realize is that the election of Barack Obama was in many ways an aberration. He never articulated his agenda during the campaign. He spoke only in esoteric terms about “hope” and “change.” The under 30 crowd could not possibly have known what they were voting for because their candidate never told them. They voted for an image which is turning out to be a mirage. The under 30 crowd needs to be persuaded, not capitulated to.
President Obama, through his cabinet nominees and his economic policies, is fundamentally altering the social and economic structure of our country. We need all conservative hands on deck using their pens to point this out while offering constructive, workable, conservative alternatives to those of the left-wing of the Democrat party which now has total control of the government.
But instead of articulate responses to the nostrums of liberalism coming to life in the expansion of the federal government during the first six weeks of Obama’s presidency, some of our best conservative voices have been duped by the bait hatched by Paul Begala and James Carville in the bowels of the White House: make Rush Limbaugh the face of the Republican Party.
Rush Limbaugh has never claimed to be the leader of the Republican Party. Rush does, however, have unparalleled influence in the conservative movement, and influence is essential to leadership.
But because he does not hold elective office, Rush Limbaugh has influence, but he does not have power, or at least a political position from which to exercise his influence. If he ran for nationwide office he may not have the electoral popularity to win. But this does not mean that the principles he advocates would lose if put to a vote.
Barack Obama, on the other hand, has unparalleled power. He is the president of the United States. With the stroke of a pen he can reverse policies which a majority of the citizens of this country favor (the Mexico City Policy, for example). And given the fact that both houses of congress are controlled by his party, the power Obama wields is somewhat unchecked.
Conservatives with pens have abandoned their posts in pursuit of one of their own while the fox in the White House wreaks havoc with his pen on the social and economic foundations of our country. We are diverting our energies from exposing the agenda of the man who has the power to destroy our way of life in order to attack a private citizen whose power is limited to his influence within his own constituency – OURS!
While I agree that Rush Limbaugh may indeed be the wrong spokesperson (from a political perspective) for conservative principles, the call for a wholesale abandonment of those principles is not the right play. David Frum, Rod Dreher, and all conservatives who take pen in hand had best keep our eye on the man with the power, being mindful of the very real damage he can do and indeed is doing. We cannot allow the man who possesses the power to distract us from his agenda with the man behind the microphone who is merely a voice crying in the wilderness.
Chris, you laid out well the divide and conquer method that works so well for the political and corperate establishments.
David Frum is an erstaz conservative. Why bother striving to peel off votes from the democrats if in the process we become just like them? I don’t know where David Frum is frum, but he is definitely not frum (a yiddish word for “kosher”)
My problem with Rush is the same problem I have with people like Al Franken or the editors of Rolling Stone–they view their ideology as gospel and, no matter how right the other side may be, they always shoot it down. Seriously, a Democrat could invent the cure for cancer and Rush would say it’s socialist to just give it to everyone who has cancer. And a Republican could find a way to make sure every unwanted child found a loving adoptive family and Franken would say that it took away the parents’ right to terminate the child.
I wish people would remember one thing–politics are man-made and inherently flawed. They are not doctrine and they are not God revealed. And each side has things that are right and things that are wrong. I voted for Obama not because I agree with every issue of the Democratic Party but because, on an issue-to-issue basis, the Democratic party had better answers to most issues I was concerned about. But on some issues–abortion, gay marriage, gun control (to an extent)–I’m more conservative. And the truth is that the truth about politics is not red or blue but purple. Conservatives need to acknowledge the things that are admirable from the Left and I think some Liberals would do much better to acknowledge that some of the people with strongest morals and convictions can be found on the right. And maybe we need each other–maybe Conservatives need Liberals to remind them that their economical programs should always be tempered with compassion, humility and the fact that we should only earn in order to (willingly) give back. And maybe Liberals need to be reminded that their Compassion needs to never be an excuse for immorality.
But speakers like Rush and Franken wouldn’t make any money or get an audience by spouting words about peace and unity, humility and compromise. People listen to them for the same reason they listen to Howard Stern–they want to hear what incindiary thing they’re going to say next. They make their living off of provocation. Take Limbaugh’s “I hope Obama fails” comment…do I understand what he meant even if I don’t agree with it? Sure. But I don’t believe for a moment that his use of that phrase was not a calculated efford to drum up publicity for himself and keep his name in the headlines–remain relevant by causing controversy, like the gossipy old woman who always complains so that her voice is heard.
And he has that right. And he’s done very well for himself financially by doing his thing. But never mistake volume for power or quantity of words for intelligence (seeing the length of this post, maybe you should think the same about me!) Why can’t there be a Purple Party?
I am waiting for someone a politician other than Ron Paul to actually stand up to Rush and speak the truth. Rush spent 8 years defending an administration that some 70% of the American public despises. An administration that caused many old conservatives, like myself, to reflect on what it all means. David Frum is smart to realize that without some major shifts in philosophy the democrat party will be the majority party for many years to come. That is a bad scenario, one party rules never work. Michael Steele was right, Rush is incendiary and divisive. He is a talk radio host not a politician, that is was sells. If the right wing continues to look to that person as the standard bearer of the conservative movement then look for more people, who call themselves independent to continue moving leftward. Obama won because the right wing messed up so badly by defending situations that never should have been defended over the last 8 years. I think the only thing that caused the past election from being an even more lopsided was race. I think there were many traditional dems that crossed the line and voted McCain or stayed home on Election Day. This country is heading left, there is no question. Young Christians are heading to the left. This is a trend that in 4 and 8 years will be even more evident as the issue of race and morals become less of a factor as much as caring for others and having a healthy economy.
BTW, Did any of you catch Huckabee’s speech at CPAC? Out of all the guys that took the stand that weekend he is one that I could get behind. He seems to have the right perspective on balancing big government and the needs of the less fortunate. You had him right Paul, when you supported him. If the entire right got behind a person like that they may have a chance. If they pick only who Rush crowns forget it.
PSS I thought what Paul Begala and James Carville did was brilliant from a political perspective. Almost as good as Rove without being dirty and in some cases illegal.