Selective Liberal Principles

Top Stories

Rush apologizes

Rush Limbaugh has apologized for calling Ms. Fluke a slut and a prostitute for advocating that the Catholic college she attends be forced to provide her with free birth control pills. Here is his statement: 

For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week.  In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation. I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.

I think it is absolutely absurd that during these very serious political times, we are discussing personal sexual recreational activities before members of Congress. I personally do not agree that American citizens should pay for these social activities. What happened to personal responsibility and accountability? Where do we draw the line? If this is accepted as the norm, what will follow? Will we be debating if taxpayers should pay for new sneakers for all students that are interested in running to keep fit? In my monologue, I posited that it is not our business whatsoever to know what is going on in anyone's bedroom nor do I think it is a topic that should reach a Presidential level.

My choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir. I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.

He explained himself and apologized for his "insulting word choices."  I doubt this will satisfy his critics. 

In 2010 when Bill Maher called Sarah Palin a "cunt" and a "stupid twat," he too apologized. Here is his apology:

Well, you know, I've been through this so many times. There's a lot of people in America who have, of course, nothing to do except look for something to get mad at. And I've been a frequent target and I'm happy to provide that service. So, you know, I always say, as I've said many times in these kind of situations, if I hurt somebody's feelings, I'm always sorry about that, I'm not trying to hurt somebody's feelings. But if you want me to say I'm sorry what I said was wrong, no, sorry, I can't go there.

Top Stories

Political entertainer uses vulgarism to describe women

No, not Rush Limbaugh; I am speaking of the left wing political entertainer Bill Maher who called Sarah Palin a "cunt" and a "stupid twat," and referred to Palin and Bachmann supporters as the "Milf vote." (For those who may not know, Milf means "mothers I would like to F**k.")

Rush Limbaugh created a firestorm of relentless trumped up phony indignation by crudely calling a women a "slut" and a prostitute because she testified she wanted the government to force her employer to provide her with birth control pills paid for by someone other than herself. Rush's critics have succeeded in getting two sponsors to drop sponsorship of his show.

You may have heard a lot about what he said. Here is what he said:

Can you imagine if you’re her parents how proud of Sandra Fluke you would be? Your daughter…testifies she’s having so much sex she can’t afford her own birth control pills and she agrees that Obama should provide them, or the pope.

Fluke testified that without insurance coverage, contraception can cost a woman as much as $3,000 during law school. Three thousand dollars for birth control in three years? That’s a thousand dollars a year of sex — and, she wants us to pay for it.

They’re admitting before congressional committee that they’re having so much sex they can’t afford the birth control pills! What does it say about the college co-ed Sandra Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex, what does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She’s having so much sex she can’t afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We’re the pimps. 

I think Limbaugh was over the top and offensive. However, that is what he does. He is often offensive. He is a pundit who uses humor, exaggeration, and rant to make a point. He is an entertainer.

I have a close member of my family who is as about as far left as one can get without being an armed revolutionary. We have simply come to an understanding to avoid controversial topics. I am sure she will be fighting to contain herself from blasting Limbaugh when next she sees me. The funny thing is, she and her husband watch Bill Maher faithfully. They are big Bill Maher fans.

When Bill Maher used his vulgarity to describe Sarah Palin, The National Organization for Women issued a critical statement and the conservative media was critical, but the mainstream liberal establishment was very quiet. There was no outrage among liberals and there was not an effort to get him kicked off the air. You may not have even heard about it. He got a pass.  Democratic leaders and Democratic political candidates were not asked to denounce him. No one asked candidate Barack Obama what he thought of Maher's comment. When Piers Morgan interviewed Bill Maher and Maher made his "milf vote" comment, Piers laughed and found if oh so amusing.

Can anyone say "phony indignation," "hypocrisy," "opportunistic sensitivity" or "double standard?"

Top Stories

Does Rush Define What Conservatives Stand For?

Reason Online – In attacking Rush Limbaugh, American Enterprise Institute Fellow David Frum risked incurring the ire of the conservative movement. But in doing so, did Frum open up the door to questions about the soul of the conservative movement, and what it now stands for after two electoral failures? [read article here]

Top Stories

Is Rush Limbaugh Good for the Conservative Movement?

I was conflicted as I watched Rush Limbaugh address the CPAC convention. There were times when he got my adrenalin pumping and I wanted to stand and cheer. There was much in his speech with which I agreed. Then, his attack on John McCain and, without naming them by name, George Will, David Brooks and Charles Krauthammer brought me back to reality.

I suspect that if William F. Buckley, Jr. were alive today that Rush would denounce him and read him out of the conservative movement also. Buckley was the person most responsible for defining post World War II conservatism until Rush Limbaugh redefined it. Buckley and those around him like Russell Kirk. James Burnham, Frank Meyer, Willmoore Kendall, L. Brent Bozell, and Whittaker Chambers were educated men and political theorist. They not only opposed something; they also stood for something. They made reasoned arguments. They challenged people to think.

Today we have Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage and Ann Coulter as leaders of the movement and their stock in trade is to insult, belittle, and rant. They don’t appeal to people’s reason but to their emotions. You don’t have to exercise your intellect to enjoy Rush Limbaugh. Much of the Limbaugh appeal is an appeal to class envy. He excels at pitting the beer and pretzel crowd against the wine and brie crowd. That is not ideology but class warfare. It should be beneath us. Limbaugh and Hannity even brag about the fact they do not have a college education as if too much education will corrupt you.

If we accept Limbaugh as the leader of the conservative movement, I fear we will become the movement of the peasants with pitchforks. We will become the movement of the stupid. We will have an angry and motivated but shirking base. I do not want to overstate my case against Limbaugh. I was once a fan. He made people unashamed to be conservative. He poked fun at liberal pretensions and I enjoyed it. He can be cleaver and entertaining. However, enough is enough already. He is the conservative’s equivalent of the liberal’s Michael Moore or Al Franken. He is preaching to the choir. He is rousing the rabble. The conservative movement does not need more Limbaugh; we need another William F. Buckley.

Top Stories

Is Rush a Buffoon?

There is a good post today over at Tampa Pirate. Tampa Pirate writes that he used to be a fan of Rush but got over it. Me too.

Tampa writes, “today he defends Merrill Lynch as they beg for money on one hand while redecorating an executive office for over $2 million. I am a believer in Capitalism, but not the expense of the American taxpayer.” I could not have said it better. Read the full essay: Rush is a Buffoon.

Top Stories

Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity denounce George Will and David Brooks

Last night I was watching Sean Hannity interview Rush Limbaugh and it all became clear. The conservative movement is badly splintered. On one side you have the likes of Charles Krauthammer, George Will and David Brooks and on the other side you have the likes of Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage. I will identify them as the “thinking-conservatives” and the “peasants-with-pitchforks-conservatives.” The pitchfork conservatives label this division as between “so called conservatives” and “genuine conservatives.”

I really hate that we have this division. A movement that is in the minority does not need to be split in two. I would not have wanted to verbalize this division. I would prefer to ignore it. But Limbaugh laid down the gauntlet. He apparently wants to read out of the movement anyone who is not a ditto head. Below are excepts from the Hannity-Limbaugh interview (link):

HANNITY: What about all these — these so-called conservatives that met with Obama? Were you invited to that dinner?

LIMBAUGH: No, I wasn't. I wasn't.

(LAUGHTER)

HANNITY: I wasn't invited either.

LIMBAUGH: No. The blueprint is there. Let me — here's what's going on in the Republican Party. And it's really not new. These people that we're talking about, the northeastern blue blood Rockefeller Country Club types, they didn't even like Reagan. They — Reagan was an embarrassment. They believe that he was the dunce, an amiable dunce.

But what it's about, Sean, is abortion. These northeastern moderate liberal Republican types all have wives. I know this is going to sound pedantic and simplistic. But I have experienced it and this is how I know it. These guys that we are talking — they are big-money people. They are contributors, donors, fundraisers, they are just embarrassed to be in the same party with people in the (sigh) of who are pro (laugh) and they go to NASCAR races and that's — that's at the heart of this.

They go to the convention, the Republican convention with these people they think are hicks and hay seeds. 24 million of them without whom they couldn't win. So it really is about that. They won't say so publicly. But it — and it's not just that. But that's a large part of it, the Obama — it's a great — if you have time for me to analyze.

HANNITY: We have plenty of time.

LIMBAUGH: Does anybody, anybody with even half a brain really believe that Barack Obama went to dinner with a bunch of conservatives to have his mind changed?

HANNITY: Good point.

LIMBAUGH: If he did, there are some genuine conservatives he could have talked to. He could have invited us. He could have gone to Human Events. He could have gone to some people at the Heritage Foundation. He doesn't want his mind changed. He is co-opting these people. He's bringing them in. He wants the establishment media inside the beltway, punditry and so- called journalism, to be afraid to criticize him. I mean if he's broken bread with them and he's made them feel good about themselves, and given them an inside view of exactly who he is, it's going to be very difficult for these people to criticize him. I don't think for a minute that he cared to have his mind changed.

Pardon me, but I am greatly offended. Brooks and Will are “so called conservatives?” They are the bright lights of the movement! As far as I can determine, both George Will and David Brooks were Reagan enthusiast. Both are pro-life. The difference is that Brooks and Will analyze issues and make rational arguments; Hannity and Limbaugh rant and play to peoples prejudices. Brooks and Will appeal to the intellect; Hannity and Limbaugh appeal to the gut.

Now, I will admit that I do see a certain class or regional division within the Republican Party as well as within American society in general. I have often felt that there is a certain segment of society that looked down their nose at those of us from the South or Middle America. I myself am not a NASCAR fan, but I know what Rush means. I am a son of the South. I am a Tennessean and proud of it. I love country music. Thank God I’m a country boy! Just because I talk slow does not mean I’m dumb.

This southern inferiority complex or regional chauvinism or class resentment however is not the basis of the division within the movement. It is not about NASCAR or accents or style. I am a southern boy with an accent who likes country music so I am not a “northeastern moderate liberal Republican.” I certainly am not a “blue blood Rockefeller Country Club” Republican. If there is a Will-Brooks vs. Hannity-Limbaugh division within the conservative movement it is not a regional or class division but a division between those who think and those who simply emote.

It this is the division that Hannity and Limbaugh want to force upon the conservative movement then I would much rather identify myself with the George Will- David Brooks branch of the conservative movement than the Hannity-Limbaugh branch of the movement. I refuse to accept their labels however. We should not let the peasants-with-pitchforks hijack the movement of Buckley, Brooks and Will and claim the mantel of Reagan. We conservatives who read and think should not accept the label of “so-called conservatives.”

Top Stories

Guess who’s coming to dinner? Some "so-called conservatives."

These are the columnists who recently had dinner with Barack Omaba at the home of George Will. These are the people that Hannity and Limbaugh referred to as “so called conservatives.”


David Brooks: Brooks served as an editorial writer and film reviewer for the Washington Times, a reporter and later op-ed editor for The Wall Street Journal, a senior editor at The Weekly Standard from its inception, a contributing editor at Newsweek and The Atlantic Monthly, and a commentator on NPR. He is now a columnist for The New York Times and commentator on The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer.


George Will: George Will is a Pulitzer Prize-winning newspaper columnist and author and Washington Post columnist. Will served as an editor for the conservative magazine National Review from 1972 to 1978. He joined the Washington Post Writers Group in 1979, writing a syndicated twice-weekly column, which became widely circulated among newspapers across the country. In 1976, he became a contributing editor for Newsweek, writing a biweekly backpage column. He is a regualar panelist on This Week. He also was a teacher at Harvard University.


Charles Krauthammer: He is a Pulitzer Prize -winning syndicated columnist and, a contributing editor to the Weekly Standard and The New Republic. Krauthammer appears regularly as a commentator on Fox News and as a weekly panelist on Inside Washington.


Peggy Noonan: She is an author of seven books on politics, religion and culture, a weekly columnist for The Wall Street Journal, and was a primary speech writer and Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan.


Larry Kudlow: He is a supply-side economist, television personality, and newspaper columnist. He is the host of CNBC's Kudlow & Company. As a syndicated columnist, his articles appear in numerous U.S. newspapers and web sites.


Bill Kristol: Kristol is the founder and editor of the political magazine The Weekly Standard, a regular commentator on the Fox News Channel, and a conservative op-ed columnist for the New York Times.


These educated and accomplished people are all solid conservatives. They are scholars, thinkers, theorist and are wise men and women. They are the best and the brightest the conservative movement has to offer. Although many of Rush’s listeners may not be familiar with them, every conservative who can read knows these luminaries of the conservative movement. I would trust their judgement over that of Hannity and Limbaugh any day of the week. Do you suppose Hannity and Limbaugh are simply jealous because deep down they know that are nothing but loud-mouthed entertainers and don’t deserve to be in the same room with these people? Hannity and Limbaugh are not worthy of shining the shoes of the likes of these people.

Top Stories

President Obama attacks Rush Limbaugh

Yesterday President Obama warned Republicans on Capitol Hill that they needed to quit listening to Rush Limbaugh if they wanted to get along with Democrats and the new administration.

"You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," he told top GOP leaders, whom he had invited to the White House to discuss his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package. (link to New York Post story)

I am sure this made Rush Limbaugh’s day. Rush will have a field day with this attack. It enhances his prestige and will energize his audience. Rush couldn't have paid for better advertising. I would think President Obama would be better off to simply ignore Limbaugh and relegate him to the fringe. Was this a harmless off-the-cuff remark or is there a strategy behind making Limbaugh the image of his opposition? I just got through saying I was a Will-Brooks conservative, not a Hannity-Limbaugh conservative, and now Obama is driving me back into the Limbaugh camp.

Years ago I used to make a point to listen to Rush if I was free to do so at the time he was on. I was a Rush fan. Over time, I grew tired of Rush and stopped listening. At times I found myself annoyed by him. Some his more outrageous episodes such as the attack on Michael J. Fox and his hypocritical drug use and his often-faulty logic and his mean-spirited humor caused me to loose any respect for him I may have had. I lost all desire to listen. Now, I am anxious to see how Rush responds to this attack so I will try to tune-in.

In addition to finding this attack on Rush interesting, I seem to recall something about Obama going to be the post-partisan President. Dismissing those who have legitimate questions about the proposed trillion-dollar stimulus package as followers of Rush Limbaugh does not sound like a guy who is trying to build bridges and change the way things are done in Washington. I think I am beginning to understand what Obama meant when he spoke about ending partisanship in Washington. I think he meant that if you didn’t agree with some of his policies you were to keep your mouth shut and roll over and play dead. Obama has only been President for two days and the warm and fuzzy is starting to fade.

Top Stories

Why They Hate John McCain

It appears that John McCain has the Republican nomination all but locked up and will almost certainly be the Republican nominee, yet it seems that John McCain is disliked more by some members of his own party than he is by Democrats.

Those on the outrageous and righteous right loath John McCain. Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Glen Beck, Sean Hanity, Michael Savage, Rev. James Dobson, Laura Ingraham, and a host of Internet bloggers and chatters seem to try to out do each other in proclaiming their contempt for John McCain. Many would prefer a Hillary Clinton or Obama victory to a McCain win.

Rush Limbaugh said, “If I believe the country will suffer with either Hillary, Obama or McCain, I would just as soon the Democrats take the hit rather than a Republican causing the debacle. And, I would prefer not to have conservative Republicans in the Congress paralyzed by having to support, out of party loyalty, a Republican president who is not conservative."

Ann Coulter has said she will campaign and vote for Hillary Clinton if John McCain is the nominee.

Reverent James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, said, “I would not vote for John McCain under any circumstances.” He sited a statement McCain made that appeared tolerant of gay marriage and the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance reform legislation as the reason for his dislike of McCain. "Values Voters are not going to carry the water for the Republican Party if it ignores their deeply held convictions and beliefs," he said.

The basis for this extreme dislike for John McCain is varied but boils down to a claim that McCain is a liberal. With a rating from the liberal Americans for Democratic Action of only 15%, and a lifetime rating from the conservative American Conservative Union of 83%, it is hard to support the contention that McCain is a liberal. In any objective look at voting patterns, McCain stacks up with the icons of the conservative movement.

The Dobson argument is that McCain is weak on the values issue. Others are angry because he did not support the initial Bush tax cuts although McCain has said he would oppose their repeal. Others site McCain’s efforts as a leader of the “Gang of fourteen” that negotiated a conciliatory compromise on a parliamentary procedure in the Senate. The result of that effort benefited Republicans in getting conservative judicial nominees approved by the Senate, yet some seem angry that McCain found a congenial compromise rather than ramming the will of the Republican majority down the throat of the Democratic minority. Others are mad because McCain does not think the US should engage in torture of prisoners of war.

Despite these issues however, the two overwhelming issues that make the right livid is that John McCain disagrees them on immigration reform and global warming. On global warming, John McCain accepts the prevailing science about global warming and he supports a policy of cap and trade that would do something about it.

On immigration, McCain does not think we can round up and deport 16 million people. He supports a humane immigration reform policy similar to that proposed by President Bush that many have wrongly characterized as “amnesty.” In fact, the legislation proposed by McCain would actually increase the penalty for those who illegally entered the United States and it would establish a way for illegal immigrants to come out of hiding, register as guest workers, pay a penalty, and earn the right to apply for citizenship if they desired to do so. For these two rational pragmatic policy positions he is reviled.

Top Stories

Bob Dole to Rush Limbaugh: Lay off McCain.

Below is the text of an open letter former Republican presidential candidate, Senate Republican Majority Leader and long-time Kansas Senator Bob Dole sent to radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh. I appreciate Bob Dole for speaking out. It is time someone with good Republican credentials publicly stood up to that blowhard windbag Rush Limbaugh. Rush does not speak for all Republicans and no one gave him the authority to define who is and who is not a conservative.

I am disgusted by the attempt of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and the Internet bloggers and chatters who are demonizing John McCain. They want to narrowly redefine what is “conservatism” and want everyone to march in lockstep to a narrow agenda. I doubt Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, or William F. Buckley could pass their purity test.

Like Bob Dole, I do not always agree will the policy positions of John McCain, but John McCain is an honorable man and has served his country, party, and the conservative movement well. He has a lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union of 82.3%; hardly a liberal. We need to be trying to mend the splintered Republican coalition and not reading people out of the party. Thank you Bob Dole for coming to the defense of John McCain and standing up to Rush Limbaugh.

Rush,

I have not seen you in a long time but I do hear you frequently and I know that you have serious reservations about Senator McCain. Not that many care but I have not been involved in the Republican Primary contest because Elizabeth, a good conservative, is running for reelection in North Carolina where Romney, McCain and Huckabee each enjoy considerable support.

I was the Republican Leader from January 1985 until I left the Senate voluntarily in June 1996. I worked closely with Senator McCain when he came to the Senate in 1987 until I departed. I cannot recall a single instance when he did not support the Party on critical votes.
(At my age, I cannot be entirely certain but here are a few key conservative examples:)
1. Consistent pro-life record
2. Strong advocate for strict constructionist judges (We were misled on the Souter nomination)
3. Supported voluntary school prayer
4. Supported Constitutional Amendment for a Balanced Budget (needed two-thirds and lost by one vote - 66-34)
5. Strong advocate for reducing spending and opposing pork barrel “ear marks” which has, I might add, angered some of his colleagues
6. Consistent on defending Second Amendment rights
7. Opposed “Hillary Care” which would have been devastating
8. Probably the Senate’s strongest advocate for strong national defense

Of course he has cast many votes since I left. I totally disagreed with the McCain-Feingold legislation. On immigration, Senator McCain was not in the Senate when Congress passed President Reagan’s immigration legislation which passed overwhelmingly. It granted amnesty to 2.7 million illegals. It was not much different than the 2007 McCain, Kennedy, Bush effort.

I disagree with his votes against the Bush tax cuts but I believe his pledge to make them permanent and I do not agree that Governor Romney ever suggested a timetable for troop withdrawals in Iraq.

McCain is a friend and I proudly wore his P.O.W. bracelet bearing his name while he was still a guest at the “Hanoi Hilton.” I believe our major candidates are mainstream conservatives and that our nominee will address our concerns by keeping taxes low, reducing corporate taxes, protecting and assisting the vulnerable, strengthening our traditional values, and above all, keeping America strong militarily, whatever the cost.

Whoever wins the Republican nomination will need your enthusiastic support. Two terms for the Clintons are enough.

Gob Bless America,
BOB DOLE

P.S. Rush, I just came across a document from the Senate Library which shows Presidential Support scores. Let me give you ratings for “Mr. Conservative” Senator Helms through 2002 (Helms retired in January 2003) and Senator McCain through 2004.

[To see the year by year data, click here: " Bob Dole" . The evidence is clear that John McCain's record stacks up well against that of Senator Helms, the senator often regarded as the most conservative man in the Senate. Rod]

Top Stories