Monday, March 9, 2009

A Word to the Wise

The infighting among conservatives over whether Rush Limbaugh’s “tone” is helpful or not is an absurd distraction from the need to focus criticism on the great power grab currently in progress by Obama and the Democrats. While it is true that Obama and his advisors have purposely attempted to draw attention to Rush, it is maddening to see conservatives, unwittingly or not, falling into this White House trap. The Democrats effectively have set the house on fire, and various conservatives, instead of setting up a bucket brigade, want to stand around on the lawn in the light of the flames arguing about whether it was an accident or arson, and whether Rush should get to wear the fire chief’s hat. I include in this number “conservatives” such as David Brooks, Christopher Buckley and David Frum, who, truth to tell, did not so much fall into the trap as help lay it. Whatever their actual beliefs and intent, these opinion-mongers are so admirably filling the role of agents provocateurs for the Democrats, sowing discord on the Right over a completely bogus controversy, that it is immaterial to me that they might not literally have been entrusted with the Democratic Party's secret password and handshake.

I’m with Protein Wisdom and Stephen Green on the subject of taking the fight to the Democrats, particularly when it comes to the importance of not ceding to them the right to frame the arguments. As I noted in a previous post, if you feel compelled to begin every criticism with a politically-correct preamble consisting of bromides designed to make your arguments palatable to people who couldn’t care less about the logic of your views, you have already lost the fight – and it is becoming increasingly evident that this is a fight, not merely a debate. Hundreds of billions of dollars of shareholder wealth have been wiped out, more wealth will be diverted to implementing the fantasies of the green cult and to socializing healthcare, and there is now a dangerous leadership vacuum on the world stage which Obama and his Bush-bashing penitence tour cannot hope to fill. There are many potentially effective responses to this lurch toward statism; I submit that photoshoping a Christian Dior necktie onto the Korda picture of Che Guevara and calling it conservatism is not one of them; nor is humbly tugging our forelocks and burying our criticisms under a load of diplomatic applesauce.

Mark me down as an Outlaw - in the Goldstein sense.


JeffS said...

I chatted with a friend about the Rush "controversy" over the weekend. My friend is "center-left" and sensible, but was amazed and outraged that Rush would even dare challenge Obama to a debate on his radio show. But his question was clear: He wanted me to explain what Rush was doing, as though I agreed with him.

I didn't mention the diversionary tactics being employed by the White House*, but I did point out that (a) I'm not an ardent follower of Rush, and he's not my leader; (b) Obama brought this upon himself by challenging Rush, or at least egging him on; and (c) Rush is in this for the ratings. There's nothing wrong with that, as ratings drive how his show is paid for; Rush isn't the RNC leader, but he's no fool. But my message was clear (I hope): Rush is not the issue. Obama is the issue.

(Implied but not stated during our conversation: Obama IS a fool for going after Rush on Rush's home turf. Sun Tzu offered stern advice against that strategy, so clearly Obama and his staff are not well read).

My point being: the Democrats are already taking the fight to us. So mark me down as Outlaw as well.

But I do find it interesting that Obama's diversionary tactics aren't really working at the grass roots level, if one data point can be used for that conclusion. But they will keep on trying with other diversions, that's for sure.

*: I did want to say it, but my friend and I have a tacit agreement not to get into major political arguments. That would have crossed the line in this case, as it involves a clear difference of opinion on Obama's objectives. On that, my buddy and I agree to disagree.

Anonymous said...

...a Christian Dior necktie onto the Korda picture of Che Guevara

On the other hand Paco, it might make a great T-shirt for the OUTLAWS.

I'm sure Paco Enterprises can rustle up a few thousand.

Kevin B

PS I'm with Jeff G on this one. Apologising in advance for having the temerity to disagree with the Obama/Pelosi/Reid junta is not going to win many arguments.

Paco said...

Kevin: For an icon (or mascot), I'm thinking more along the lines of Chuck Norris or Ike with a mohawk - or, even better, that pretty woman economist I've been seeing on some of the blogs. Anybody know her name? I think she was at CPAC.

Anonymous said...

OT, but re your Churchill post the other day, Theo has one up with a list of pithy quotes including this:

"Some see private enterprise as a predatory target to be shot, others as a cow to be milked, but few are those who see it as a sturdy horse pulling the wagon."


TW: holpling: you won't be completely distracted by the totty

Minicapt said...


Paco said...

Michelle Muccio. Thanks, Captain!

richard mcenroe said...

It tells me more that worries me about Steele and Gingrich than it does anout Rush. How does Steele justify asking me for money week after week to oppose the Democrats, while he's busy attacking private citizens who dare talk back to the Democrats?

And Newt is just continuing his campaign for the job of MAC, the Media Acceptable Conservative, the face of 'conservatism' THEY choose to present us...