Limbaugh-Beck and the GOP Patriots Against America
BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE
Limbaugh-Beck and the GOP Patriots Against America
If anyone had any doubt about whether or not the GOP has become anti-American, all doubt should now be laid to rest. Rush Limbaugh, the titular head of the Republican Party, slipped into an altered state of bliss after hearing the news that the United States lost its bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics. The man was completely beside himself with glee. God only knows what would have happened if we'd also been attacked - his body fluids would've had to be cleaned off the studio floor. I watched the video of Limbaugh's antics over and over again in total disbelief. It's literally unbelievable what's happened to the Republican Party.
This man is not a true Republican, and comes nowhere close to representing conservative values. No true conservative would celebrate an American loss of anything, no matter what the competition, who we were competing against, or what the circumstances were surrounding the competition. You can say what you want about the Republican Party and conservatism, and I've said a lot of mean things, but a true conservative ALWAYS comes to the defense of America.
For those progressives who are too young to understand my breaking ranks to come to the defense of conservatism, it's important to understand that as a baby boomer I know and understand the conservative mind-set, because as baby boomers we all started out raised as conservatives - society was geared that way.
For baby boomers, the first thing we did when we arrived at school was to recite the pledge of allegiance; the second thing was to recite the Lord's Prayer. Then after the Lord's Prayer it was social studies, where we learned that America never loses, has never done anything wrong, and anyone who said differently was evil. That's conservatism, and I believed every syllable until I became old enough to start thinking for myself.
During the fifties all children were raised with the very same values. So just like any other child in America, I pulled for the cowboys against the Indians, and rode with John Wayne as we single-handedly slaughtering the bad guys - which was anyone who didn't happen to look, think, or act like us. And as I looked up at the screen, even as a Black child, I was completely convinced that I was a part of "us." It was only later in life that I began to recognize that I represented "them."
It was only due to the shock of that recognition that many of us became progressives. We made it our mission in life to turn the conservative myth of America into a reality. So the difference between true conservatives (as oppose to racists) and progressives wasn't a disagreement over the American ideal, but whether that ideal was a reality.
So I throughly understand the conservative mind-set - been there, done that. Conservatives can be insensitive, and in my opinion, delusional about what America represents, but the Republican Party has always been fiercely patriotic. So I can say without hesitation that Limbaugh, Beck, and these current batch of demagogues who currently run the GOP are definitely NOT true conservatives, or conservatives of any definition.
There was a time when a Dick Cheney wouldn't have even been able to work as a gofer in the Republican Party. A true conservative would've never put up with a man who took five deferments to avoid defending this nation then publically admitting that he didn't serve this country because "I had other priorities." Yet, in today's Republican Party he was able to make that statement without a bit of shame, even as he lectured America on patriotism. A true conservative would never tolerate such a man - one who, now that he doesn't have to put his own life on the line, wants to teach us how to protect America. Such a man would never be allowed to carry the Republican banner.
Can anyone imagine Cheney telling General Eisenhower that I didn't defend my country because "I had other priorities"? Ike would have told him in no uncertain terms that there ARE no priorities more important than serving your country. And there's absolutely no doubt in my mind that if Ike had been president, Cheney would have been unceremoniously shot for outing a CIA agent. Because Ike was both a true conservative, and a true American. He had an unwavering set of convictions that didn't vary as the wind blows, and more importantly, he had the courage of those convictions. Unlike Beck, or Rush Limbaugh who avoided serving this country by claiming a boil on his ass, Ike was the kind of man that one could have serious disagreements with, but still feel compelled to call sir.
And this is not just hyperbole. Think about it. Is there anyone who was alive during the fifties and sixties who believe that conservatives would have allowed the Republican Party to be taken over by draft dodgers, and worse yet, allow draft dodgers to send our troops to a senseless death? I don't think so.
Even as a progressive, as a former marine I think I'm safe in going on record for Ike and every American in Arlington Cemetery as saying that it is unforgivable that America let our young troops and their families down by letting this bunch of demagogues send these young people to an untimely grave. And for what? The horrible, and inescapable fact are, they died for no other reason than to enrich a bunch of cronies who made it a point not only avoid their own military service, but also made very sure that their children avoided it as well.
Conservatives? No, I don't think so. These are a bunch of conspirators against America who used the nation's pain over 911 to victimize this nation and accommodate their own greed. Like the vultures they are, they decided to not let a good crisis go to waste.
And they knew exactly what they were doing. As the bodies of our brave young troops were carried off the battlefield, they were honored in secret, because the dishonorable men who sent them to their deaths didn't want America to see the true price of their vulturous greed. For if these young people did indeed die for this country, and not simple greed, where were the bodies of the sons and daughters of those who sent them? Aren't they also patriots, and don't they also love this country? Of course they do, but their job is to luxuriate in the lobbies to country clubs giving lip service and drinking toasts to the brave sacrifice of the dead little people.
So does this batch of GOP scoundrels truly love America? Let's take a look at that through a simple analogy. For the sake of this discussion, let's think of America as a football team. Suppose a member of our team didn't like the coach and was angered because he had to ride the bench during the Super Bowl. What would you think of him if he started openly pulling for the other team, then once our team lost, he ran out on the field and started dancing and celebrating? Could he ever convince you that in spite of his actions, he loved our team? I don't think so.
Well, that's exactly what's taking place in America with Limbaugh, Beck, and all of their new-and-revised Republican colleagues. So as progressives, we should stop referring to these insurrectionist turncoats as conservatives, because by doing so we do a gross disservice to a long and honorable tradition, and a LOYAL opposition - even though we may seriously disagree with the tenets of that tradition.
If these neo-fascists were truly representative of conservative thought, Barack Obama would not be in office today. Let there be no doubt about it. This man was not elected by progressives alone.
Eric L. Wattree
Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.
















These same asshats got upset over the fact that Obama neglected to put his flag lapel pin on, now and then, last year.
I was a conservative Republican once. I thought it was because I was against "mindless spending".
I'm now a liberal Democrat...because I know I'm against "mindlessness".
October 7, 2009 7:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
LisB,
I just finished this article this morning, and most of the responses that I've gotten so far is from people who have either left or thinking about leaving the Republican Party. I knew this was going to happen months ago, because as I mentioned in the post, I have a very good feel for the conservative mind-set.
The fact is, I'm beginning to suspect that I understand conservatives better than the GOP leadership, because they don't seem to even have a clue to the fact that catering to the very worst element within the Republican Party, is a direct slap in the face to those who are the very best minds that the party has to offer.
As one poster reminded me, they seem to have forgotten the words of Barry Goldwater, who was as conservative as they come:
"Every good American ought to kick Jerry Falwell in the ass."
October 7, 2009 8:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
My father was a Goldwater conservative. I think he would've stopped watching Fox News over the past year....if not before then.
October 7, 2009 9:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Watree, you forgot one of the most important patriotic conservative activities of the '50's, the Duck and Cover Civil Defense Movie for student drills.
Kids would learn how to survive the nuclear blast. By hiding under tables or behind walls when they saw the bright flash of the nuclear explosion. The message actually said in the video is that nuclear war is just another natural disaster like fires or hurricanes. All we can do is accept it and get ready for it. Its inevitable. Unavoidable in fact. But we can win the war by acting like the tortoise in the movie.
Thank heavens nuclear war isn't a 'natural disaster' and thank heaven we never experienced it.
October 7, 2009 10:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
NCD,
It's funny you should mention that. I was thinking about it as I was writing. We used to call them Drop Drills - Drop!
I also thought about how they had us thinking that if you even touched a joint, dope would seep into your skin, crawl up your arm and turn you into a commie beatnik.
They had me thinking even if I smelled someone else smoking it I should run, because they're probably molest and murder and murder me. And if I smelled it long enough dark glasses would sprout from my fact, and by the time I get homemI'd be playing bongos and singing "Dayo".
But seriously, I started liking jazz when I was about 12 years old, and my mother liked to died. She called me a fanatic, and started telling me stories about how when my father (who was in prison at the time)started listening to jazz, when his mother got home from work he had painted his entire bedroom set red, using nothing but fingernail polish.
I remember thinking, it wasn't the jazz that caused that - he must've got hold of a pretty good batch of that "crazy weed." When I got a little older I revised that, and decided it must have been speed.
October 8, 2009 12:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why do you consider talk show hosts to be head of the party? Are Keith Olberman and Rachel Madow leading the charge on the other side of the aisle?
October 8, 2009 6:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
I take the position that Rush is the head of the Republican Party because he's clearly setting the GOP agenda, and no GOP official has the courage to stand up to him.
October 8, 2009 10:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's a very interesting perspective. Rush can say whatever he wants on TV, and I'm not sure why anyone needs to "stand up" to him. Do you see Democratic leadership "standing up" when Oprah or Olberman or Moore say stupid things? I don't think so.
You don't see leadership standing up to any of these media figures because it's a waste of time to do so. They're just bobble heads, not politicians.
October 8, 2009 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, months ago Rush declared himself the head of the GOP, and THAT is why Rush should be advised what his place actually is. A few politicians did object, but since they called Rush to publicly apologize within 72 hours of their declarations, they actually affirmed that Rush is the head of the GOP. I'm still waiting for someone, maybe Michael Steele, to assert without apology that he is the head of the GOP and not Rush. Or maybe Bohner, or Alexander, could call him out, or anyone, really, without apology. Until that is done, the proposition that Rush is the head of the GOP stands. No Lefty pundit has ever made that assertion, never mind had their ring publicly kissed for doing so.
October 8, 2009 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
You left out Senate Minority Leader (how that term must gall him, in more ways than one!) Miss McConnell.
October 8, 2009 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
When did he declare himself head of the GOP? I must have missed that.
October 8, 2009 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, I'm sure you did. Right after McCain lost he suggested literally that he was left to be the head of the GOP.
October 9, 2009 5:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Could you please provide a link? Thanks
October 9, 2009 5:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Give me a f&cking break. It was big news especially after Rahm Emanuel went on Meet The Press and stated Rush Limbaugh was the head of the GOP. The GOP got all offended, but no one dared make any assertions otherwise. Weeks later Rush did sideways mention he should not have said so, or some softly placed remark to that effect. I'm not going to do the research for you. Go find it yourself.
October 9, 2009 5:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
So now you're throwing f-bombs around just because I asked for a link? Nice. I'm sure you've never asked somehow to back up what they said with references. I did look myself but couldn't find anything.
October 9, 2009 9:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I remember the 60's as a period of unashamed racism. Anyone, everyone, who was not a white (American) male was less equal. And no one in white society, even polite society, was afraid to use the slurs we are all now afraid to speak.
The Republicans are in the game purely for their shortsighted self interest. Like Halliburton they are going to cash in their chips and head overseas as soon as they have raped any value out of the corpse of this country.
Like the Nazis they prey on the ignorance of the masses and the financial power of the plutocrats to screw everybody.
Why is no one talking about Rushs' opiate problem? Why did he not get the slammer like any of us would have?
Why is GWB not shaking in his bed in fear of a war crimes trial?
Why does the press still refer to "torture"?
Where is the justice?
Make Obama listen. Make sure he feels the fire of our anger. Write.
October 8, 2009 12:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
You hit upon the key, Adel:
"Make Obama listen. Make sure he feels the fire of our anger"
I'm hoping that he does hear us, but is just walking lightly until he gets this healthcare bill passed. But we'll see real soon.
October 8, 2009 4:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Limbaugh is not the titular head of the republican party, though the democratic party seems eager to declare him as such. I wrote about David Brooks take on this subject, which you can probably guess is 180-degrees out from your thesis.
Anyone who was going to leave the republican party did so years ago, so I would see them going the way of the Whigs anytime soon given the historical record to date. Independent is still the faster growing voter demographic, so I also wouldn't look for a huge influx of new democrats because of the current idiocy coming from the GOP.
I think this analysis misses a huge swath of the population that identify as conservative in some form or fashion, yet think the people you mention as their "leaders" are idiots.
October 8, 2009 8:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Again,
that is exactly my point. The current GOP leadership (official, and unofficial) are not true conservatives.
October 8, 2009 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
I guess I don't understand the call to action then.
We agree that they don't represent the majority of conservative thought, yet you call Limbaugh the titular head of the republican party and many liberals apply that ignorant ass's opinions to all their political rivals despite tons of evidence to the contrary.
I think it will be impossible for the GOP to be more representative of the conservative grassroots while continued partisan warfare remains the rallying cry for far wings of each party.
October 8, 2009 10:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
The point is simple and clear:
STOP calling those who AREN'T legitiamte conservatives "conservatives".
And STOP capitulating to their LYING that they are such.
A bit of history:
"For those progressives who are too young to understand my breaking ranks to come to the defense of conservatism, it's important to understand that as a baby boomer I know and understand the conservative mind-set, because as baby boomers we all started out raised as conservatives - society was geared that way."
I come from a military family. My first hero was Abraham Lincoln: "Everybody equal before the law".
My second was Cassius Clay/Muhammad Ali.
"For baby boomers, the first thing we did when we arrived at school was to recite the pledge of allegiance; the second thing was to recite the Lord's Prayer. Then after the Lord's Prayer it was social studies, where we learned that America never loses, has never done anything wrong, and anyone who said differently was evil."
Where I came from they weren't merely evil; they were COMMUNISTS!
Which I came to be called simply because critical of US involvement in Vietnam.
Funny: those who called me that weren't in any rush to enlist and demand they be sent to Vietnam to fight to defend the US of Freedom from Commies.
"That's conservatism, and I believed every syllable until I became old enough to start thinking for myself."
Yep. Today, conservatism is, to me, as originally defined: "To conserve". I've been getting all choked up watching Ken Burns' latest, "The National Parks".
Jason Everett Miller could learn a great deal about "conservatism" both as and against "corporatism" from watching that series. And how it was "the regular people" who saved the lands and wonders which comprise the Parks from the corporatist "conservatives".
October 8, 2009 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Regular people like Teddy Roosevelt saved our national treasure for future generations? I am not entirely sure what the take-away from this comment is supposed to be.
October 8, 2009 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Regular people -- often and most prominently with the HELP of Teddy Roosevelt.
And FDR as well.
Watch the Ken Burns series on the national parks.
October 21, 2009 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think this analysis misses a huge swath of the population that identify as conservative in some form or fashion, yet think the people you mention as their "leaders" are idiots.
Since when did having an idiot for a leader concern anyone on the right.
Ladys and Gentlemen I give you George W. Bush.
C
October 8, 2009 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not at all, Cmaukonen.
That's exactly the point of the piece - the people who are currently running the GOP are NOT true conservatives.
October 8, 2009 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Flies in the face of the notion that those in charge represent the majority, though. I suspect our 20% average turnout for primaries is largely to blame for such cognitive dissonance.
October 8, 2009 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Rush Limbaugh is not a true Conservative.
No truer words have ever been spoken. Like Limbaugh, George W. Bush and the Neo-Conservatives are also not true Conservatives, hence the "Neo" prefix.
In the case of Limbaugh and Glen Beck, it would be wise council to take a step back and synthesize their objective before pulling your hair out in disgust and dismay. Limbaugh and Beck are entertainers. Never forget that. In order become as popular and as celebrated as they are, you have to pick and a side and be controversial. There is no room in political television or AM talk radio for moderates or centrists; that's why nobody watches Anderson Cooper on CNN. That is also why Air America struggles to survive.
So the real problem, then, is the fact that so many people buy into the skewed sense of reality that these guys advance with fiery and well crafted rhetoric. But doesn't Jon Stewart do the same thing on the #1 rated Daily Show? Al Franken, meanwhile, was elected to the United States Senate due in large part to his liberal radio show on Air America.
My point here is that until Limbaugh or Beck actually runs for office, what are we worried about? Political radio and TV is very much akin to watching sports. There is much bravado and machismo as fans clamor for their favorite team, but in the end, it's nothing other than entertainment. Limbaugh's opinions may sway those of others, but at least his thoughts aren't turning into pieces of legislation being debated on the floors of Congress.
October 8, 2009 11:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
I could dismiss them if their disciples were not carrying guns to political forums and their inane ideas not echoed by Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin, a US Representative and a Governor/Vice Presidential Candidate.
The GOP is terminally ill. The Conservatives have left the Party and the Party beckons to their radicals because it IS all they have left. That the Dems are not growing as a result is evidence that the fog created by the pundits has yet to lift and those Conservatives remain unable to see that the caricatures creatd by the bobbleheads are fabrications and not very accurate when considering the whole Democratic Party. Conservatives fail to understand that we remain a party seldom walkig in lock step, which is what the GOp has coem to demand therefore alientaing so many Conservatives.
October 8, 2009 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
The GOP is indeed in complete disarray at the moment. The scary part is that history is on their side to rebound and the Democrats to crumble. Whenever one party has enjoyed an undivided government, they've generally never been able to sustain much beyond the minimum 2 year window.
If you are a Democrat, the double whammy of watered down health care reform (see Robert Reich's post) and deteriorating situations in Afghanistan and Pakistan make the party vulnerable in both domestic and foreign policy. Perhaps just as troubling is the obvious division on both of these issues between the White House and Congressional Democrats.
The Republicans, for all their problems, really don't even need to join the fight because the Democrats are cracking from within. As is the case whenever a party is completely out of power, they'll pick their fights carefully (i.e. no public option in health care), but the only saving grace for the Democrats might just be the fact that the GOP has yet to find a new face to challenge Obama in 3 years. It's a party without a voice and a face.
October 9, 2009 1:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Gettysburg, you said:
"Limbaugh's opinions may sway those of others, but at least his thoughts aren't turning into pieces of legislation being debated on the floors of Congress."
No, it's turning into the blocking of much needed legislation, and a movement that's coming very close to insurrection.
October 9, 2009 3:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't agree with that. I have no doubts that many Congressional Republicans know Rush Limbaugh and like Rush Limbaugh, but that certainly doesn't mean they are in a position to undertake his initiatives.
There are many arguments that can be justly waged against the GOP in terms of a perceived strategy of obstructionism towards the current Democrat-led government. But let's be honest. The GOP would never support any kind of public option in a debate on health care reform. The disarray of their party, and the power vacuum left behind by the Bush administration, has little to do with that particular piece of opposition. Also, the GOP's insistence that Obama adhere to General McChrystal's call for 40,000 more troops for the war in Afghanistan is also something the party would wholly endorse regardless of their position of strength or weakness in Washington.
I only reference these two areas because they are the prevalent topics of discussion in the Beltway these days. My greater point is that these positions have nothing to do with Rush Limbaugh or Glen Beck. In fact, the great thing about Rush and Beck (and Sean Hannity) is that if you were to go up to one of them and ask them point blank: "if you could construct your ideal nation, what would it look like and what would it entail?"
They wouldn't be able to tell you because they don't know. Their strategy to gain viewers is to simply attack and spin whatever that particular day's talking points are. They have no grand, ideal agenda. That's why they are entertainers, not even true pundits.
October 9, 2009 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink