The Era of Limbaugh

First Lady Melania Trump delivers the Medal of Freedom to radio personality Rush Limbaugh after being acknowledged by US President Donald Trump as he delivers the State of the Union address at the US Capitol in Washington, DC, on February 4, 2020. (Photo by MANDEL NGAN / AFP) (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images)

I think I was born conservative, in a way that perhaps only a boomer born to parents who had worked their way through the Great Depression and World War II can understand. They were indeed conservative, not to mention frugal, and yet they were New Dealers. And so it was for many.

It was a matter of leadership as much as anything. FDR at least was willing to try things that might help, Hoover seemed to sit there feeling sorry for both the American people and himself. And not everything in the New Deal was all that bad for America, some were, and for the most part, none of it affected the depression, but some things did deliver real progress, especially in rural areas. It brought US agriculture into the 20th century, and thusly contributed greatly to winning World War II. Anyway, that’s how it was.

In college, I discovered William F. Buckley, and I never looked back. I loved his erudition, his vocabulary, his knowledge of the classics, and above all, his conservatism. Like all young people, I became a non-critical acolyte, and in some ways, I still am. But eventually, he got supplanted by Ronald Reagan, who to me always combined Buckley with the down to earth libertarianism of Barry Goldwater. It was an epic brew, sliding the Overton window for a while, defeating the Soviet Union and so many other things.

Then came the resurgence of what we at the time called the Rockefeller Republicans, and we now call the GOPe and much worse things, which were and are deserved. If I never see another Bush or acolyte on stage, it will be much too soon. They perhaps meant well, but their timidity and fear of the media almost destroyed the country. As Reagan slipped away from us mentally, the reason it did not is mostly down to one man: Rush Limbaugh.

Due to things that Reagan had championed, he was able to become a national voice, and you will not understand today’s American conservative without understanding Rush. Matthew Continetti at The Washington Free Beacon wrote well recently about why Rush Limbaugh matters so very much.

Florida governor Ron DeSantis spoke to Rush Limbaugh last fall at a gala dinner for the National Review Institute. The radio host was there to receive the William F. Buckley Jr. award. “He actually gave me one of the greatest compliments I’ve ever had,” Limbaugh told his audience the next day. “He listed five great conservatives and put me in the list.” DeSantis’s pantheon: William F. Buckley Jr., Ronald Reagan, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Limbaugh.

Good list. No media figure since Buckley has had a more lasting influence on American conservatism than Limbaugh, whose cumulative weekly audience is more than 20 million people. Since national syndication in 1988, Limbaugh has been the voice of conservatism, his three-hour program blending news, politics, and entertainment in a powerful and polarizing cocktail. His shocking announcement this week that he has advanced lung cancer, and his appearance at the State of the Union, where President Trump awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom, are occasions to reflect on his impact.

It is, in fact, the defining list. Buckley brought forward the tenets of American Conservatism from before the war, Reagan is pretty self-explanatory, Scalia and Thomas highlighted how the left had used the courts against us, and Limbaugh showed the way ahead.

Limbaugh made the most of these opportunities. And he contributed stylistic innovations of his own. He treated politics not only as a competition of ideas but also as a contest between liberal elites and the American public. He added the irreverent and sometimes scandalous humor and cultural commentary of the great DJs. He introduced catchphrases still in circulation: “dittohead,” “Drive-By media,” “feminazi,” “talent on loan from God.”

The template he created has been so successful that the list of his imitators on both the left and right is endless. Even Al Franken wanted in on the act. Dostoyevsky is attributed with the saying that the great Russian writers “all came out of Gogol’s ‘Overcoat.'” Political talk show hosts came out of Limbaugh’s microphone.

Limbaugh’s success prefigured more than the rise of conservative radio. His two bestsellers, The Way Things Ought to Be (1992) and See, I Told You So (1993), were the leading edge of the conservative publishing boom. And his television program, The Rush Limbaugh Show, produced in collaboration with Roger Ailes, was a forerunner of the opinion programming on Fox News Channel. “I had to learn how to take being hated as a measure of success,” he told a Boy Scouts awards dinner in 2009. “Nobody’s raised for that. And the person that taught me to deal with this and to remain psychologically healthy was Roger Ailes.”

Yep, here are the roots of the Fox News that we depended upon to bring us through the various reigns of error, it all goes back to Ailes, but more to Rush himself.

Bold, brash, divisive, funny, and amped up, President Trump’s style is similar to a shock jockey’s. His presidency is another reminder of Limbaugh’s staying power. The American right has been molded in his anti-elitist, grassroots, demotic, irreverent, patriotic, hard-charging image. Rush Limbaugh is not just a broadcaster. He defines an era.

Indeed so, and with luck, it will define the Second American Century, as still more people are lifted from tyranny and destitution with the help of the freest people on earth, not because it benefits us (even if it sometimes does) but because it is the right thing to do.

What The Hell Is An Angry Conservative Supposed To Do?

Erase-The-CountrySomething is going to end up a smoldering ruin. Maybe it will be the whole country. Maybe it’ll just be the elite-run GOP.

Yeah, we’re going to talk a bit about politics today. I don’t speak of it very much, for reasons which I’ve shared with you. More and more, though, I’m coming to like Kurt Schlichter’s read on the situation. here’s a sample:

Something is going to end up a smoldering ruin. Maybe it will be the whole country. Maybe it’ll just be the elite-run GOP. Hopefully it will be whatever painfully white, elderly, socialist creep the Democrats nominate. But regardless, I’m one of those many people who is so angry he just wants to see something burn.

Boehner down, plenty to go. Now is this reasonable? Is this a smart, savvy strategy? I’m not sure we even care anymore.

See, we’ve been shafted too long– these hacks can’t even keep the government from spending money on baby dismemberment – and someone or something has got to pay. I’d prefer it be the Democrats, but I’m happy to wreck unholy vengeance on the GOP elite that has lied to us, cheated us, and run away faster than Brave Sir Robin.

Which raises the question – what is the air speed velocity of an unladen swallow? Well, I don’t care if it’s African or European; I just want to roast it on a spit.

Source: What The Hell Is An Angry Conservative Supposed To Do? – Kurt Schlichter – Page full

Heh! Keep reading. And specifically about Marco Rubio:

I want to support Marco Rubio, but today I can’t. He may not have burned all his bridges to us conservatives, but he charred the hell out of them with his flirtation with the Gang of Eight and his disingenuous embrace of amnesty. Right now, a huge and decisive bloc of conservatives will not vote for him. So, can he ever win us back?

Maybe. That depends on him. Entirely on him.

Rubio has plenty going for him. For one thing, he can talk – Rubio can put a sentence together without sounding like he’s in a cage match with the English language. He’s handled the baiting by that oaf Trump with aplomb and good humor – you can tell he’s been effective because The Donald has gone off to bully other targets.

Rubio comes off as personally likeable, though a bit goody-goody, like he’ll cry if he gets an A- on his history quiz. Sure he’s young, but everyone looks young compared to the Democrats’ commie cryptkeeper contingent.

Substantively, especially on foreign policy, Rubio is really sharp. He sounds like a president. You know the Democrats fear him because their media minions tried to kneecap him early on – “Psst, did you hear? Rubio bought a boat!”

Oh, and his wife is hot.

Source: How Marco Rubio Might Win Back Us Conservatives

Although that is not really supposed to be a factor. 🙂

I also like the end of the first linked article:

Which leaves Carly. She seems ticked off. I like that. She kicks tail. I like that too. She can put together a coherent sentence. Finally. I don’t despise her. That’s something new for a GOP candidate. And, best of all, I think the elite distrusts her and Hillary fears her – in fact, she could mop the floor with the Orange Pantsuit Lady.

Yeah, maybe Carly.


But if not her, and if there’s no one else, then I’m still ready to burn it all down.

Yeah, me too!

But in something else I rarely do, I’m going to link to Rush. The main reason I don’t is that I try not to be overtly political most of the time, partly because it’s not good for my health, if that really matters. But here’s an opening from his show lately:

RUSH: I have three stories here. The headlines are enough. “Workers Remove Ten Commandment Monument from Oklahoma City Capitol Grounds at 10:30 p.m. to keep protesters from demonstrating.” Next headline: “Pork Products Face Workplace Ban for Being Offensive.”

The next headline: “School Cancels America Day.” Fourth headline. Do you know what the fastest growing language in the United States is? Nope. It’s Arabic. Fastest growing, not the most spoken. “Fastest Growing Language in the United States Is Arabic.” Here’s another headline: “World’s First Lesbian Bishop Calls for Church to Remove Crosses and to Install Muslim Prayer Space Instead.” There is a creep, creep, creep, creep, creep that is happening throughout Western nations, Western cultures, and Western civilization countries.

It is a creep, creep, creep, creep, creep through various means. Illegal immigration, normal immigration, intimidation, political correctness, what have you. But Western civilizations are pretty much in the process of erasing themselves, in my view, anyway. The people who wish to erase Western civilization in many cases are not even firing a shot. Some are, such as ISIS and Al-Qaeda and all that, but the legal immigrants are not firing a shot. La Raza’s not firing a shot. A number of the domestic upheavals in this country are happening not because of any kind of force.

Source: We’re Erasing Western Civilization.

He’s close here, I think, but not quite correct. We’re not so much erasing Western Civilization as we are running away from it at full speed, apologizing all the way. And that is the underlying reason why so many Americans like me are ready to burn it all down. It has no real meaning any more. I’d guess, there are a whole lot of Britons, Germans, Swedes, and other Europeans that feel the same way, but have already lost the freedom to say so, and are looking to America to lead the way back. I hope so, anyway.

Egypt: Democracy and Christianity

The distribution of the predominant Islamic ma...

The distribution of the predominant Islamic madhhab (school of law) followed in majority-Muslim countries and regions (English) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)


In speaking of Christianity the other day, I commented that what those who wanted to go back to the early church had to face was that they were wanting (amongst other things) to go back to a society with slavery and that treated women somewhat worse than traditional Sharia does. That’s not what they really want of course, but they make the common mistake of looking at a historical society through 21st century glasses. The church and the society have always reflected each other.


That’s why the Bible (like the Constitution) are interpreted somewhat differently from age to age. A case in point is Mary. We all believe (well, those of us that are Christians and Moslems do) that Mary conceived Jesus while a virgin and while unmarried. In my lifetime the virgin part has often been glossed over, and in truth most people today say “So what, she was pregnant at her wedding”. But now translate that story to a conservative Muslim household, that believes in the Sharia. Now Mary either becomes a very dishonorable daughter, or a heroine, doesn’t she? And that was equivalent to the society she lived in.


But how did we get here? We, and our churches, grew. Our doctrinal beliefs, for most of us, are the same as the Apostles, maybe, sort of, kind of. We try, but we have built generation by generation upon our ancestors shoulders, so that for us women are equal (although the wise amongst us recognise that they are not the same), our honor tells us to protect the weak, and the other common tenets of western civilization. The acceleration came with the Enlightenment and I think the Reformation is key as well. Why? because once there was something approaching a free market in Christianity one had a better chance of promulgating your views in science, or whatever. It also matters that the Reformation brought in a generation of warfare, warfare has often stimulated technological progress and there’s no reason to suppose it didn’t here. In truth we know it did, the war started with crossbows and ended with nearly recognizable muskets.


The relevance for today


Interesting, I hear you thinking, so what? Let’s take a glance around the Middle east, shall we. We see a lot of unrest, and the interesting thing about it is that the troublemakers are almost always young and urban. In other words they’ve been exposed to the west, the other side is trying to hold back the tide, and is predominantly older and rural. It begins to look a lot like the younger generation wants to join the west and the old folks are saying no. Nor am I the only one thinking this way.


Egypt confronts modernity – Q&A with Herbert Meyer

In light of the turmoil in Egypt, The Center for Vision & Values contacted its longtime friend Herb Meyer. Mr. Meyer was special assistant to the director of the Central Intelligence Agency in the Reagan administration. He also served as vice chairman of the CIA’s National Intelligence Council. Mr. Meyer is the author of two eBooks, “How to Analyze Information” and “The Cure for Poverty.”

V&V – Herb, do you have any thoughts about what’s going on in Egypt?

Meyer – It’s good to hear from you! I could write a 2,000-word essay on the turmoil in Egypt. Come to think of it, I did write a 2,000-word essay on the turmoil in Egypt more than two years ago. To the best of my knowledge, absolutely no one read that piece.

V&V – You are a tremendous analyst, Herb, and we’re not surprised that you saw this coming. After all, you were way out front in forecasting the demise of the Soviet Union for President Reagan and CIA Director Bill Casey. Are our intelligence services in regular contact with you? Have you had opportunities to mentor young analysts?

Meyer – No one in our intelligence service has the slightest interest in checking in with me from time to time. I’d love to help teach an entire new generation of analysts how to do it. When I was there we ALWAYS stayed in touch with those who came before us – we always figured we could learn from them, even if we disagreed with them from time to time – but apparently the current crowd doesn’t do that. There’s always tomorrow….

V&V – Recently, and before the lid came off Egypt, you had a fascinating conversation with Rush Limbaugh. Please share some of the insights that you shared with him. They seem remarkably relevant right now.

Meyer – As I said in that conversation with Rush, the world is becoming modern. This is really what “the war” is all about. Islam is finally starting to do what Christianity and Judaism did centuries ago: figure out how to reconcile faith with the modern world. In effect, the Islamic world has started to write the code for Version 2.0. This is a momentous development in world history. Remember that it took us a long time to get it right, so to speak, and we shouldn’t expect the Muslim world to accomplish this overnight.

For 30 years, Hosni Mubarak kept Egypt from becoming modern. He and his military took control of the economy, and they wrecked it. This is a country of 90 million people, half of whom are illiterate, 70 percent of whom live on the land – and which imports half its food. This was okay with U.S. policymakers, because in return for keeping Egypt from moving forward Mubarak kept the peace with Israel. At some point the lid on this pressure cooker had to blow off, and that’s what happened last year. It was idiotic for all of our (self-proclaimed) professional conservatives to say we should have urged Mubarak to put the lid back on. That cannot be done; at least, not without gunning down 20,000 or 30,000 protestors and then explaining that the U.S. said it would be okay….

V&V – An apology to you, Herb. We followed your analysis about the Muslim world going through convulsions on the way to becoming more modern, that is to say, more liberal and free in the classical sense. Frankly, we thought you were wrong. You called the February 2011 Egyptian revolution, just a “half-revolution.” You predicted that the Egyptians would seek more freedom than what they would get under the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood.


– See more at:


And Steven Hayward over at The Power Line Blog offers this


Here’s a historical counter-factual thought experiment for you: suppose the German military, in the spring of 1933, decided that the ascension of Hitler and his Nazis was bad news for Germany, moved to remove Hitler by a coup, outlawed the Nazi party, and in ruling henceforth by military decree thereby ended more than a decade of democratic weakness that was the Weimar Republic.  What judgment would you cast?  (Turns out Tom Trinko over at has wondered the same thing.)


Well, OK but a good contra-factual needs a smaller turn for a larger effect.


What if England and France had overruled Wilson, and insisted on merely the personal abdication of Wilhelm II and the coronation of Crown Prince Wilhelm as King of Prussia and Emperor of Germany. The problem, of course, was the traditional American distaste for royalty, but in less than 20 years we managed to swallow that enough to like the King of England. Or even more to the point, if somehow they had managed to take Wilson up on just stopping and calling it status quo ante bellum.


But my point is this, the Hohenzollerns were held in deep respect in Germany, not really all that different than the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha’s (neé Windsors) were and are in England. If we had forced something like the conditions of the rule of their cousins on Germany, can anyone really imagine any Emperor of Germany giving Hitler that much rope. I wonder how much the lack of leadership experience in Weimar led to Hitler. A lot, I think.


And that leads to what I take as Steven’s point, political power must be in tension, it has no compressive strength. Our founders gave us a tripartite federal establishment with most real power reserved to the states. (Yes, we have screwed that part up, we need to fix it.) Even with the limited power of the federal government, it is split three ways.


England was similar with the Monarch and each house of the parliament, although they have gotten it even more out of balance than we have.


But pure democracy is always that old (not very funny) joke, of the lamb sitting down with two wolves for lunch. The lamb always needs protection, all minorities, right down to the individual do. It’s also something progressives don’t understand. They do in one direction, when they are in the minority, they understand very well, it’s other people’s rights they seem to have trouble with.


The Muslim Brotherhood, seems to have a similar problem (although while quite cowardly, it is more violent, so far, anyway). And so perhaps, the army is acting in lieu of whatever cultural safeguards should be in Egypt’s government going forward to protect minorities such as the Copts. Armies are usually an imperfect instrument for this type of mission but far better than nothing.


But Egypt is going to have to solve Egypt’s problems


we can’t do it for them.



A Remembrance

Do you remember where you were a year ago today? I was sitting in my office, doing a blog post, listening as usual to FNC. As per usual the news was bad, although not memorable, except for this: Breitbart was dead. Shook up the whole conservative movement, didn’t it? Why?

Mostly because he was our very own happy warrior, from getting the information out that others wouldn’t to retweeting the slurs made against him, he was the guy we all wanted to be, and that we are all still trying to emulate. And for those of you who have come here in the last year, that was the morning that picture and caption went into my sidebar, because if we are to win, we had all better be Breitbart.

And so this post is a remembrance and a commitment that I hope you’ll make with me. to tell the unvarnished truth as we see it; without fear or in hopes of favor, because

Breitbart is Here, in my chair and yours

Here is what Rush Limbaugh had too say about it a year ago, it seems so much longer, doesn’t it?

He was so much bigger than life while he was amongst us, I almost thought I caught an echo of all the trumpets sounding as he crossed to the other side.

And now, it’s up to us, he taught us how, to

Go and do Likewise

nebraskattitude: Conservatives FAIL Online – Please Read & Share!

My neighbor over at Nebraskattitude published this yesterday. I could not agree more, This is my  800th post, and I often wonder why I bother. I, like Shelly. work damned hard on these, to make them correct and fairly well written. While my audience is different from Nebraskattitude’s we have things in common. First we’re conservative, second we often feel like we’re working in a vacuum and mostly we’ve got something to say, that need to be heard.

The election is less than 50 days away, boys and girls, and if we don’t get to work, we could very well lose it. Normally, that wouldn’t matter all that much but, these are not normal times. I’ve got 322 followers according to WordPress, which considering I write fairly serious, unfun posts is not too bad. maybe but, you know what, judging by my comments and likes, while you may be following me, I could just as well tell it to the wall. One thing I agree with Shelly on, is Romney not the best candidate we could have had but, he’s the one we got, and he’s a hell of a lot better than Obama. If you can’t see that, you’re nothing but a fool.

We are watching direct attacks on American soil now; what is it going to be like after 4 more years on Obama? Read more of this post

The Economy is Also About “Values”

This is something we need to think about. Many of us refer to us as social conservatives or economic conservative. Sorry, but that doesn’t cut it. If you’re conservative, you’re conservative, actually as usual what I really mean is classically liberal, of course. The thing is, if you believe in property rights, you recognize that you need to pay taxes for the government “to provide for the common defense” very few have trouble with that, whatever our differences on how the military should be used. But how are you going to justify using tax money to buy Sandra Fluke’s contraceptives. See the intersection here. You may believe in contraceptives, that’s fine, do what you think is right: I may not, which is also fine. What is objectively wrong is for you, by way of the government, to take, by force my property (tax money) for your contraceptives.

this article is by Star Parker, writing for Townhall.

Somehow we’ve come to accept, regarding government policy, that there are separate “economic” issues and “social” issues. The former being issues having to do with our pocketbook and the latter being issues touching religious values and behavior.

But this is a mistake. The economy is also a social “values” issue.

It’s about the extent to which we respect private property and it’s protected from politicians.

Respect for private property is disdained in socialist countries. Respecting the sanctity of private property reflects our values as much as does our respect for the sanctity of life and marriage.

The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution guarantees protection from being “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of the law.”

The Ten Commandments demand respect for marriage (honor your parents) and for life and property (don’t kill, don’t steal).

Consider the Obamacare mandate, which went into effect August 1, requiring employers to provide “free” contraceptives, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs to employees as part of their health care plan.

The uproar about this has been about its violation of religious liberty – forcing employers to provide these services regardless of their religious convictions.

But this wouldn’t be possible without politicians seizing private resources of citizens to pay for this mandate.

Sandra Fluke, the Georgetown University activist who gained notoriety when she was verbally assaulted by Rush Limbaugh after she testified in favor of the contraceptive mandate, still promotes the cause.

In a recent Huffington Post column, she touts Obamacare as a victory for women’s “health care rights” and the fact that contraceptives are now available “at no cost.”

At no cost? Will contraceptives drop from heaven like manna?

In this case, women’s “health care rights” is a claimed right for women to have taxpayers foot the bill for their birth control – to get others to pay for their contraceptives and abortion-inducing pills.

The “right” to transfer to others the costs of personal decisions regarding sex trumps taxpayers right to keep government out of their private property.

When blacks fought for civil rights in the 1960’s, the rights they fought for were equal treatment under the law. Protection of their life, liberty, and property.

It had nothing to do with claiming any so-called right to violate the private property of some and force them to pay for another’s lifestyle choices.

The costs of Obamacare, including paying for Sandra Fluke’s contraceptives, come out of our hide in the higher prices we’ll pay for products, as companies pass on their higher health care costs to consumers. And as wages stagnate, as employers take bigger chunks of paychecks to cover health insurance costs.

The CEO of Papa John’s Pizza recently said that Obamacare will add 11 to 14 cents in cost to each pizza delivered.

University of Chicago economist Luigi Zingales notes in his new book “A Capitalism for the People”, “If workers feel poorer, it is because rising health insurance premiums have been swallowing up most of their real wage increases of recent years.” Premiums for family coverage, per Zingales, rose 50 percent from 2003 to 2010.

According to economist Art Laffer, government stimulus spending over the last five years totaled $4 trillion. That’s almost $13,000 for every American man, woman, and child. Our money, spent by politicians, according to Laffer, on “banks and companies that fail, solar energy companies that can’t make it on their own, unemployment benefits, and the like.”

And think about this some more; the government gave its buddies $13,ooo of your (you, not your family’s) money. If I had to guess, I’d say it cost them $10,000 to more to administer that money given how inefficient government is. Think $23,ooo more in your paycheck would have made your life better? Yeah, me too. That’s the problem with government planned economies, they don’t use your money the way you would, nor do they use it efficiently. Ok, granted, you only paid about 40% of that money, in taxes, some came from borrowing, which is money that could not be loaned to companies that produce things , and jobs, the rest they simply printed, which raised the price of everything else you buy.

How can we possibly have a functioning economy when politicians can randomly steal from citizens? When, basically, we have legalized theft.

Our economic crisis is also a crisis in values.

At the root of our floundering economy is a loss of respect for the sanctity of private property that goes hand in hand with the loss of respect for the sanctity of life and marriage.

The Economy is Also About “Values” – Star Parker – [page].

Values are about your rights and your property, they are not separable from economic concerns.

%d bloggers like this: