Fails To Understand His Own History Lesson In Responding To Republican Cave On Budget
Yesterday, after the Republicans caved in – again – Limbaugh called the cave “One of the greatest political disasters I have ever seen.” Today, while he was trying to make it sound as though he still disagreed with the cave, he was actually defending the Republican Party – again. But then he gave a little history lesson that should give pause to those in his audience who are actually awake. Here’s that lesson and what it means.
We start with what Limbaugh had to say yesterday (listen to the audio inside the story):
“I was trying to think if ever in my life, I could remember any major political party being so irrelevant. I have never seen it,” Limbaugh said. “I have never seen a major political party simply occupy placeholders, as the Republican party has been doing. There has not been any serious opposition…against what’s happening in this country.”
He continued: “The Republicans have done everything they can to try to make everyone like them and what they’ve ended up doing is creating one of the greatest political disasters I’ve ever seen in my lifetime…I was pondering if I could ever remember…a time when a political party just made a decision not to exist, for all intents and purposes.”
This was yesterday, October 16th, 2013. And Rush’s ‘explanation’ was the same as it has always been: the Republicans are afraid of the media. But today, Rush was trying to convince his audience that, while the cave was a tactical defeat, it was a strategic victory. A long-time listener who is awake may have noticed that Limbaugh seemed divided on how he felt. While he seems personally inclined to agree with the rank-and-file Republican voter and call the cave what it was — a cave, a defeat, a sell-out – at the same time, it seems as though he has been told to put a positive spin on the story. If left me wondering how, in the course of one night, Limbaugh could go from calling this a political disaster to a strategic victory – unless he really does respond to pressure from Republican Party leaders (as I have suspected for some time now). Then he made a mistake. At least, it is a mistake where those who are awake are concerned.
Limbaugh has always told his listeners that Republicans just want to be liked, so they cave because they are afraid of the media. Well, I have no doubt this is what many of his closest Republican friends tell him. I wouldn’t be surprised if Limbaugh even believes it. However, if he does, it tells us a great deal about how well the man thinks things through. I say this because he gave us a little history lesson today. He reminded us that, when William Buckley was first trying to start what became the modern conservative movement, Buckley spoke of what he called “well fed” Republicans. These are the same people Rush calls “blue bloods” and “country club” Republicans. Thanks to another radio personality, those of us who are awake now know them to be PROGRESSIVES!
Anyway, according to Limbaugh, Buckley had to fight these Progressives exactly the same way Reagan had to, and the same way Cruz and Lee have been trying to fight them. So we know – thanks to Rush – that those of us who really want small, limited government have been fighting and trying to get rid of the Republican Party leadership for more than 50 years. Now, let me ask you: how much progress have we made in this effort? The answer is none! So why is Rush telling us this latest cave-in is actually a strategic victory? And why has he never called for a third Party?
Look, I am not accusing Limbaugh of anything. I am willing to grant he means and believes exactly what he says. But that means that he believes we can keep doing exactly what we’ve been trying to do for 50+ years while expecting a different result. I believe this is the operational definition of insanity. I also believe that Limbaugh’s explanations for why this pattern always repeats are insufficient. They do not explain everything we see Republicans do. So I ask you, does this explanation better explain what we actually see, and, if so, why should anyone who believes in limited government remain in the Republican Party?
You may disagree, but – to me – this is a better explanation for the things we actually observe in Washington D.C. And that is why this man has won me to his side on most issues: because what he tells me actually explains what I see. Furthermore, his predictions based on his assertions have been amazingly accurate. If this were a ‘scientific theory,’ it would be considered as reliable as the theory of general relativity, whereas Limbaugh’s explanations would rank right there with the climate change crowed (ice age; no, warming; no, wait, cooling again; no, cooling means warming; etc…). It’s up to you to decide, but I will stand with Beck – at least until I find a better explanation for actual observation.