# For Conservatives Only...........



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

*Agree or Disagree*​
Agree964.29%Disagree535.71%


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

I don't pay much attention to Rush, but I do agree with what he says here.

Rush Limbaugh: Why Republicans Lost

Republicans lost control of the House, and perhaps the Senate, because they abandoned their conservative principles and in the end stood for nothing, Rush Limbaugh said today.

In his Wednesday broadcast, America's top talker said that until Republicans begin asking themselves what's wrong with themselves they are never going to fix their problems.

When things go wrong, Rush said, "you must look inward and ask first, 'What did we do wrong? What could we have done better? What mistakes did we make?"

Commenting that although Republicans lost, "Conservatism did not lose, Republicanism lost last night. Republicanism, being a political party first, rather than an ideological movement, is what lost last night."

The Democrats, he said "beat something last night with nothing. They advanced no agenda other than their usual anti-war position. They had no contract - they really never did get specific. Their message was one of 'vote for us; the other guys have been in power too long.'"

Rush further admonished, "There was no dominating conservative message that came from the [Republican] top and filtered down throughout in this campaign."

He added that if there was conservatism in the campaign, it was on the Democratic side: "There were conservative Democrats running for office in the House of Representatives and in a couple of Senate races won by Democrats yesterday." He cited James Webb as an example.

He also said it was conservatism that won fairly big when it was tried yesterday, but it was Democrats who ran as conservatives and not their GOP rivals. He added that the Democratic leadership had gone out and recruited conservative candidates because they knew liberals could not win running against Republicans in red states.

Rush quoted Thomas Sowell as explaining that the latest example of election fraud is actually what the Democrats did - they nominated a bunch of moderate and conservative candidates for the express purpose of electing a far-left Democratic leadership.

"The Democrats could not have won the House, being liberals," Rush said. "Liberalism didn't win anything yesterday; Republicanism lost. Conservatism was nowhere to be found except on the Democratic side."

The root of the problem, Rush said, is that "our side hungers for ideological leadership and we're not getting it from the top. Conservatism was nowhere to be found in this campaign from the top. The Democrats beat something with nothing. They didn't have to take a stand on anything other than their usual anti-war positions. They had no clear agenda and they didn't dare offer one. Liberalism will still lose every time it's offered."

Republicans, Rush said, allowed themselves to be defined. "Without elected conservative leadership from the top Republicans in the House and Senate republicans are free to freelance and say the hell with party unity."

That leads, Rush said, to the emergence of RINOs - Republicans in name only.

Republicans in Congress, Rush explained, were held captive by the party's leadership in the White House. They were put into a position of having to endorse policies with which as conservatives they disagreed.

"The Democratic Party," Rush went on to say, "is the party of entitlements; but the Republicans come up with this Medicare prescription drug plan that the polls said that the public didn't want and was not interested in. That is not conservatism. Conservatives do not grow the government and offer entitlements as a means of buying votes. But that's what the Republicans in Congress had to support in order to stay in line with the Party from the top.

"It is silly to blame the media; it is silly to blame the Democrats; it is silly to go out and try to find all these excuses," Rush said. "We have proved that we can beat them &#8230; we have proved that we can withstand whatever we get from the drive-by media. Conservatism does that - conservatism properly applied, proudly, eagerly, with vigor and honesty will triumph over that nine times out of 10 in this current political and social environment. It just wasn't utilized in this campaign."

Rush also blamed the failure to embrace conservatism on Republican's fear of being criticized from those in the so-called establishment. Republicans, he charged, go out of their way to avoid being criticized, fearing they will be characterized as extremists and kooks.

As a result conservatism gets watered down, and the GOP loses the support of the nation's conservative majority Rush stated.

Anything can beat nothing, Rush concluded, "and it happened yesterday."


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

You can hate Rush all you want (I don't mean you Zogman) but I've yet to see anyone successfully argue his points.

Except for his reluctance to deviate from strict party lines at times, I agree with almost everything he says, but can't stand to listen to him for very long!

Does that make any sense?


----------



## always_outdoors (Dec 17, 2002)

> but I've yet to see anyone successfully argue his points.


Because he screens his calls. I have heard people get on, but they get bumped when he knows he is going to loose. He cuts them off, spins the subject. Big Eddy does the same dang thing.



> When things go wrong, Rush said, "you must look inward and ask first, 'What did we do wrong? What could we have done better? What mistakes did we make?"


 Wow do you really think??? Boy he sure is a smart guy. I wonder if charged a consulting fee for that one.

I took this from another site, but IHMO it makes sense as to what happened on Tuesday.



> It said the vote was not a vote for a Democratic Congress instead was a " Shut up and listen to us" message.
> I would agree many of us feel the arrogance that has prevailed in Washington needed to change and if the Demos don't listen they will find themselves outside looking in also. Most of the Dems that won are gun carrying, get the debt under control, centralists. The far left was not a winner except in the far northeast.
> If you watched the exit poles on the votes where republicans were defeated most incumbents were given positive Over 50% approval ratings by those that voted. If you receive a positive rating and get dumped I would say that is a message against arrogance. That is except in the case of those with ethics violations.
> Central leaning Republicans and central leaning Dems will for awhile anyway, rule elections. If we return to far left against far right, a new party of centralist ideas will emerge. The majority of the public by far is somewhere between that far right, far left arrogance we have come to expect from our two main parties.


I am not sure who said it, but as I stated above, I found it on another site and to me...and IMHO...it makes sense.


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

Rush is so conservative that he can't see outside his tunnel vision to see that tunnel vision conservatism is why the Republican party lost. When you get that conservative it is not a philosophy that a majority of American's can support and that is what free elections are all about. A majority of people are not going to vote for a tunnel vision conservative party. The republican party claimed everything that was good in America as only being Republican and that my friends turned off the American voters. Self righteous people are dangerous people and Rush Limbaugh does not have an ounce of humilty in his body or soul. He was the voice of the Republican party and he can't see through his own ignorance.


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

Your completely wrong DJ. Remember 1994 the country overwhelingly elected CONSERVATIVES not the Republicians we ended up with.

Once in office they got addicted to the pork as the Dems were the previous 40 years


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

zogman said:


> I don't pay much attention to Rush,


 :beer: :beer:


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

live2hunt, screening calls is nothing new, and certainly not exclusive to either party.

But I seem to vaguely remember an open challenge by Rush to debate anybody, anywhere, in any format, and he offered up a very large sum of money to make his offer more attractive.

No takers.

Purely coincidental? You be the judge.

I'd love to see him on Bill Mahr's Politically Incorrect, and I'd bet Rush would LOVE to do it....but I won't hold my breath!


----------



## crna (Nov 7, 2002)

let's be honest, the democrats had no agenda, no real "plan". the democrats
just had to sit back and stay off the police blotter.


----------



## Gohon (Feb 14, 2005)

Zogman, I don't know why some are surprised that the Democrats took the House in this election. The writing has been on the wall for sometime now. I think it was a surprise that the Senate was lost or will be lost. As for Rush Limbaugh, whether someone likes him, dislikes him or what ever, he is correct in his statement. The Democrats didn't win the House, the Republicans simply lost because they had morphed into what the Democrats are famous for. Big spending and not paying attention to the people. I've been in Colorado this past two weeks setting up a base camp for my Son-in-laws Elk hunt but we had a television for the election night. What got my attention was the long lines at the voting polls in Colorado. I watched the citizens of Colorado turn out in droves and put Democrats in office. But the amazing thing was, just like eight or nine other states that had gay right issues and tax increase issues on the ballots, the people of Colorado rejected all of them as did the other states. So if people think the Democrats have taken control because people are embracing their ideas then they are in for a rude awakening.

All one has to do is go back to the 1994 take over of the House by the Gingrich Republicans and they would see that the newly elected Republicans were not far right conservatives. They were straight down the middle Republicans. Unfortunately for the Republicans, the people of greed and power hunger eventually took control after Gingrich left. Just take a look at all the new Democrats that have been elected and you will see the same thing. They are all centralist in their ideas. Gingrich was smart and able to control the new Republicans and work with them. It remains to be seen if Polosi can do the same with the new Democrats. To do so will mean she herself will have to make a lot of changes in her own thinking, and she is going to have to block the radical left members that will surely try to get their agendas through.

One last thing&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.. if people think Bush is going to roll over and play dead they have a very big surprise coming. The replacing of Rumsfeld was most likely in the planning for some time now to be announced after the election no matter which way it went. Rumsfeld had become a lighting rod for the one cell thinkers that haven't a clue what this war is really about.


----------



## Turner (Oct 7, 2005)

For the one's who know who Big Eddy is, help me out here. Didn't he sell out to the almighty dollar? Wasn't he a republican until he found out there was money in taking his show on the road as dem? Can't remember him back when, he was local, couldn't stand listening to him then either.


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

Turner,
Your right, he also was a big NDSU Bison fan until the radio station he worked for got the broadcast rights for UND Sioux. Ah the power of the dollar.
Also after getting a few free hunts from G/O's he became their windbag too.
He's a real joke..........................


----------



## always_outdoors (Dec 17, 2002)

> Also after getting a few free hunts from G/O's he became their windbag too.
> He's a real joke..........................


When and where did he get the free hunts from zogman? I would really like to see that information.

If you recall, Big Eddy cursed at the g/o's and even went so far as to ridicule the Cannonball Co. After that, he bought a house in Mott of which the locals went nuts and landowners said they wouldn't let him on because he didn't support Cannonball's guide service.

I heard him speak at the Young Senator's Conference about 2 years ago. Before he spoke I thought he was just a windbag. After he spoke, he was still a windbag. I listen once in a while to him and Rush just to get a laugh. Both are just entertainers and that is it.

Sure Rush will debate anybody, but only under his conditions which means his show where he manages the controls.


----------



## DJRooster (Nov 4, 2002)

Big Eddy, ah yes, he is a bs'er from the east coast who is really good at self promoting and he is not afraid to change his direction in life. He even thought he was a hunter and fisherman at one time. He really doesn't try to hide anything but will pretty much tell you what is on his his mind so I can respect him for that!


----------



## Turner (Oct 7, 2005)

Way back, when Eddy got his over size mouth and butt out in the field he had a hunting accident and shot his dog. Not sure how the story goes, does any one remember that?


----------

