March 15, 2010

New Column: Without Firing a Shot?

During the height of the Cold War, some feared the communists would take over the United States without firing a shot. Could it be that nearly a half-century later, we're on the verge of that becoming a reality?

President Barack Obama and Democratic congressmen won their respective elections -- no shots were fired -- and they are feverishly attempting to dismantle this nation's institutions, brick by brick.

The American people are getting a bird's-eye view of what the left, which completely dominates the Democratic Party, thinks of the Constitution, freedom and the right of the people to self-governance.

The people now attempting to govern us with an iron fist are Marxist-leaning in terms of not only the policies they support but also the ruthless tactics they employ to enact those policies into law.

As long as it served Obama's Machiavellian purposes to maintain a semblance of unity for his ambitious agenda, he donned his bipartisan cap. But as soon as he encountered intractable opposition from Republicans, God bless them, he began to show his true political colors.

Continue reading "New Column: Without Firing a Shot?"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:27 PM

March 11, 2010

Heads Liberals Win, Tails We Lose

The left habitually distorts and exaggerates to demonize and discredit its opponents but squeals like a stuck pig when conservatives use colorful language to call the left out. Unfortunately, some on the right encourage the left's squealing.

As for the liberals, it's hard to take them seriously when they register their indignation at, say, Sarah Palin for her "death panels" comment, other conservatives for describing Obama as a socialist or liberals as "liberals," or, most recently, Liz Cheney for calling seven Justice Department appointees the "al-Qaida Seven."

Liberals are the ones who knowingly lied in saying that "Bush lied; people died," that supply-side tax cuts are "just for the rich" and that Bush left people on the rooftops in New Orleans after Katrina because they were black. These weren't just harmless rhetorical barbs; they had and continue to have serious, substantively damaging consequences.

Nor are the above descriptions by Palin, Cheney and other conservatives a matter of tit for tat or a case of the left's wrong mitigating the right's. The conservatives' statements above are different because they have a strong ring of truth, and they are not just gratuitous; they serve the purpose of calling attention to what is truly going on.

I'm not advocating that we be uncivil or mean-spirited, but that we have the guts to tell the truth, using difficult-to-hear language when necessary. I dare say our failure to speak frankly and boldly has a lot to do with the horrible predicament we're in in this country. Speaking a little more truth to political correctness would be helpful. But the left's tactic of whining and crying foul at anything it chooses to be offended by, echoed by genteel enablers on the right, intimidates many from expressing truth for fear of public condemnation.

Continue reading "Heads Liberals Win, Tails We Lose"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:21 PM

March 08, 2010

Obama vs. Insurers and the People, Part 2

President Barack Obama obviously has no qualms about slandering people or industries that interfere with his agenda. In the same creepy manner he defamed the Cambridge Police Department without benefit of the facts, he is scapegoating the insurance companies based on his distorted version of facts.

In the past week, he has ratcheted up his war on insurance companies, who, he apparently figures, must be destroyed if he is to accomplish his Utopian dream of socialized health care. He made them the focus of his wrath again, in his umpteenth health care speech, Monday in Philadelphia. Even the White House blog, in a post titled "Moving Forward to Put the American People Ahead of Insurance Companies," frames this debate as between insurance companies and the people.

Who is Obama to be smearing health insurance companies for allegedly bankrupting people to increase their profits when his policy agenda is already bankrupting America to increase government power? As the late Milton Friedman asked the clueless leftist Phil Donahue, "Is it really true that political self-interest is nobler somehow than economic self-interest?"

It's not the insurance industry versus the American people; it is Obama's socialist leviathan versus the American people, with the insurance companies as necessary collateral damage.

Is it fair to accuse the insurance companies of arbitrariness when they refuse to cover what their contracts don't require them to cover? And isn't Obama implying that if the government were to take full control over health care, there would be no denial of coverage? We don't have to wait for his plan to take effect to know that's false. Everyone, including Obama, is aware of Medicare's denying or reducing reimbursements so drastically that an increasing number of doctors are refusing Medicare patients. Does he call that arbitrary?

Continue reading "Obama vs. Insurers and the People, Part 2"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:45 PM

March 04, 2010

Obama versus Insurers and the People

President Barack Obama's obsessive, opportunistic demonization of insurance companies in his quest to pass his not-yet-written health care proposal is growing tiresome. Aren't you getting sick of a president attacking American citizens and businesses as if they -- not Obama's beloved government -- were the enemy?

His repeated implication that insurance companies are the primary reason for rising health care costs is politically expedient, but it's still untrue. Government is the main culprit.

Throughout his yearlong push for Obamacare, he has called insurance companies every name in the book. He has blamed them for soaring costs, bludgeoned them for taking profits, condemned their executives' salaries and savaged them for denying coverage for pre-existing conditions.

He even says insurers are the final arbiters of who gets care and who doesn't: "And insurance companies freely ration health care based on who's sick and who's healthy, who can pay and who can't."

Obama has framed the entire debate as if it were an insurance problem. In his theatrical speech Wednesday -- while flanked from all sides by white-coated props -- he said, "We began our push to reform health insurance last March," as if the thrust of his health care efforts has been to rein in insurers and little else.

Continue reading "Obama versus Insurers and the People"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 02:55 PM

March 01, 2010

Health Care Summit Charade -- A Clinic in Obama Partisanship

For a guy who touts himself as bipartisan and demands bipartisanship from Republicans, President Barack Obama had a funny way of showing his bipartisanship during last week's health care summit.

Obama has repeatedly promised an open, honest and bipartisan process on health care reform, but from the beginning, he has quarterbacked a highly partisan, closed-door and dishonest campaign.

In his opening remarks at the "summit," he said he wanted to make sure the participants didn't just trade "talking points" or engage in "political theater." He said, "If we've got an open mind, if we're listening to each other, if we're not engaging in sort of the tit for tat trying to score political points during the next several hours ... we might be able to make some progress."

He then proceeded to a) open the curtains for his own political theater, with one anecdotal Democratic sob story after another about the horrors of American health care; b) deliver his own talking points throughout the day, including his obligatory "tit for tat" following almost every Republican speaker; and c) demonstrate his own partisanship through (i) patronizing dismissals of the Republicans' substantive contributions as "talking points"; (ii) volleying partisan barbs at Republicans; (iii) mischaracterizing his positions and those of the Republicans; and (iv) accusing Republicans of not showing a good-faith willingness to make any movement in his direction when he made no effort to compromise with them.

To invoke my own anecdotal experience here, I have worked with people like Obama before, those who sanctimoniously demand collegiality and compromise while exhibiting no willingness to compromise themselves and then -- wholly blind to their own dogmatism -- castigate you for not "meeting them halfway" (meaning: wholly embracing their proposals).

Continue reading "Health Care Summit Charade -- A Clinic in Obama Partisanship"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:27 PM

February 25, 2010

Liberal Paranoia About Christian Conservatives

The left's paranoia about the intersection of Christianity and the public square continues unabated. It's amazing how much they fear something that represents such a little threat to them.

In his column in the British newspaper The Guardian, Northeastern University associate journalism professor Dan Kennedy rails against Republicans' "intolerance" of secularism and accuses them of representing a threat to the First Amendment.

In their penchant for projection, leftists accuse conservatives and Republicans of intolerance, when in fact, their own intolerance dominates the issues of freedom of speech and religion. Liberals accuse conservatives of being theocrats, when they are the ones trying to chill religious freedom and expression.

One would expect that Kennedy, having made these charges, would provide some proof in his column that Republicans have abridged or advocated abridging someone's First Amendment rights -- such as using the authority of government to infringe on citizens' freedom of speech, press, religion, assembly or petition or somehow violating the establishment clause.

I searched in vain for the payoff. He provided no examples, no scintilla of proof that Republicans are even skirting up against an activity that could fairly be considered threatening to Americans' First Amendment guarantees.

Continue reading "Liberal Paranoia About Christian Conservatives"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:33 PM

February 22, 2010

Obama Doesn't Even Fake Bipartisanship Well

How long will it take for every last American to realize President Barack Obama is not about bipartisanship, reconciliation (other than as a process to cram his health care bill through Congress) and uniting Americans? As his latest gyrations on health care demonstrate, he will not be deterred in his quest to saddle Americans with socialized medicine, even if it greatly increases the likelihood he won't be re-elected.

Here we have Obama, frenetically busy with at least three of his hands, pushing different buttons and sending mixed signals. I guess being a self-perceived messiah means you don't have to worry about being flagrantly inconsistent, even on the same day or in the context of one speech.

He's invited Republicans to a bipartisan summit on health care, intending to create the illusion that he's interested in conservative ideas on the subject.

But at the same time -- he can't even pretend long enough to let this ruse play out -- he is threatening Republicans that if they filibuster current congressional health care proposals, he will urge Congress to pass Obamacare by bastardizing the reconciliation process.

But wait, just like a Ginsu knife infomercial, there's more. Obama has also unveiled the outlines of his own new health care proposal, but it is hardly a model of bipartisanship.

Continue reading "Obama Doesn't Even Fake Bipartisanship Well"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:54 PM

February 18, 2010

When the Facts Don't Help Pound the Table

When you're president of the United States and your primary claim to fame is your economic prowess but your economic record fails by all objective measures, what do you do? You call on your skills as a virtuoso propagandist.

With the perceived catastrophic economic crisis of 2008-09, President Barack Obama captured the presidency at the perfect time in America's modern history for him to unleash his grandiose socialist policies -- policies so ambitious that the American people would never have tolerated them under any other circumstances.

With the nation in near panic over the impending doom of the economy, Obama presented his now-infamous "stimulus plan" to artificially create government demand by spending more than $800 billion of borrowed money to "jump-start the economy."

Being a die-hard Keynesian, Obama probably believed his program would create jobs. But given his attitude about the wealthy being undeserving of their good fortune, he probably wasn't risking too much in the event it didn't work. The funds would redistribute wealth to those less fortunate and whom society, in Obama's view, has cheated. It would also force allocations of money to "green" enterprises that would never be pursued if left to the sanity of private-sector consumer demand, further expand the public sector in general and provide ample slush money to reward unions and other supporters to shore up his re-election efforts.

According to Keynesian theory, as I understand it, it doesn't matter much where the government spends other people's money -- just as long as it spends it. Once the money is injected into the economy (never mind that an equal amount is taken out of the economy from the private sector), a multiplier effect unfolds to stimulate economic growth and jobs.

Continue reading "When the Facts Don't Help Pound the Table"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:02 PM

February 11, 2010

Bipartisanship Equals Single-Payer-ship

It's not a good idea for Republicans to accept President Barack Obama's invitation to a "bipartisan" health care summit, because it would not advance acceptable health care reform. The only thing it likely would advance would be Obama's propaganda message -- and, thus, his socialist agenda.

Everyone knows Obama wouldn't be considering such a move if the American people had not so resoundingly rejected Obamacare.

From the very beginning, he has approached this issue more as a dictator than one interested in hearing genuine input from the other side. Nor has he shown good faith, having broken his cynical promise to televise the debates on C-SPAN and having misrepresented his plan in a number of particulars.

When called on the C-SPAN pledge, he glibly replied that most of the process has been televised in regular sessions of Congress and committee hearings, knowing full well that's not what anyone understood him to mean when he made his promise.

He has been as highhanded and dishonest in dealing with this issue as he has been with any other, which is quite a mouthful. He has ridiculed Republicans for their alleged obstruction and for not offering ideas of their own, when it was Republicans who first called for bipartisan talks last May and who did offer alternative plans, which Obama summarily rejected.

Continue reading "Bipartisanship Equals Single-Payer-ship"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:31 PM

February 08, 2010

Lashing Out Beats Accountability

Conservatives understand that liberals often demonize their opponents rather than debate the merits of the issues because the tactic works. But you have to wonder whether another reason they lash out is that they are angry that reality doesn't cooperate with their ideologically driven solutions and it's easier to blame others than to face up to the unpleasant truth of their failed ideas.

It's not just the tirades of liberal talk show host Ed Schultz, who said he would cheat to keep Scott Brown from winning his Senate election, or Chris Matthews, who said Republicans indoctrinate their members in the same way Cambodian communists re-educated their subjects, or the nasty outbursts of presidential adviser Rahm Emanuel.

I was also reminded of this, on a subtler level, when reading a Washington Post piece on David Plouffe, Barack Obama's presidential campaign manager, who recently returned to the Obama camp to quarterback the Democrats' election efforts in 2010 and beyond.

Plouffe said: "Politics is a comparative exercise. This isn't just a referendum on Democrats. ... It's a choice. ... Republicans right now are just sitting back and slinging arrows. We need to ... shine some light over their side of the fence."

Plouffe said he would remind voters that Democrats have spent two years trying to fix problems, whereas Republicans want to wheel a "Trojan horse" into Washington and spill out bankers and health insurance executives. Sure, why not vilify bankers and insurers when it helps your guy avoid accountability for his policies?

Continue reading "Lashing Out Beats Accountability"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:03 PM

February 04, 2010

This 'Messiah' Isn't Delivering Peace

President Barack Obama's delusional perspective on fiscal issues is only surpassed by his surreal approach to the war on terror, which he doesn't even consistently recognize as a war. The ideological extremism of his policies is only surpassed by his flailing incompetence in administering them.

During his presidential campaign, Obama repeatedly denounced President George W. Bush's "unilateralist" and "imperialistic" foreign policy.

Obama carefully cultivated an image as a domestic and global healer who could leverage his personal background to rise above internal and foreign bickering and address the root causes of this conflict en route to a peaceful resolution. Frighteningly enough, he obviously believed his own hype.

What about those root causes? Well, Obama's entire approach to the war (he seems to prefer "law enforcement issue") is driven by his belief that Muslim extremists didn't become terrorists because of their ideology but because we have mistreated them. He thinks we have goaded potential terrorists into becoming terrorists and given existing terrorists further cause to hate us. "Guantanamo became a symbol that helped al-Qaida recruit terrorists to its cause," he said. "Indeed, the existence of Guantanamo likely created more terrorists around the world than it ever detained."

Well, he was going to turn all that around with euphemisms ("man-caused disaster," "overseas contingency operations"), a flurry of lofty rhetoric (his world apology tour), a few symbolic steps (closing Gitmo) and certain policy reversals (Mirandizing terrorists and trying enemy combatants in civilian courts).

Continue reading "This 'Messiah' Isn't Delivering Peace"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:11 PM

February 01, 2010

An Unusually Bad Prevaricator, Unusually Bad

Former Sen. Bob Kerrey famously said that Bill Clinton was "an unusually good liar. Unusually good." Well, then, President Barack Obama is an unusually bad liar. Unusually bad.

Obama said in his State of the Union speech (and similar statements several times since): "By the time I took office, we had a one-year deficit of over $1 trillion and projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade. Most of this was the result of not paying for two wars, two tax cuts, and an expensive prescription drug program. On top of that, the effects of the recession put a $3 trillion hole in our budget. All this was before I walked in the door."

Though it's true that the deficit for President George W. Bush's final year in office was close to $1.3 trillion, it must be noted that Obama and his fellow Democratic-controlled Congress members approved the TARP bailouts and are largely responsible for the other budget expenditures leading to that record deficit.

Plus, The Heritage Foundation's blog, "The Foundry," says that Obama's claims concerning the causes for that deficit are "clearly misleading." Despite those factors, "the budget deficit still stood at just $162 billion when the recession began in late 2007. The larger subsequent deficits have been driven by the recession (which Obama did acknowledge), the financial bailouts, the President's stimulus bill, and large discretionary spending hikes enacted by a Democratic Congress."

Also, there is major disagreement over Obama's assertion that Bush's projected deficits over the next 10 years were $8 trillion. But even if you let Obama slide on that claim, the more relevant comparison, as pointed out by Rep. Jeb Hensarling, is the annual average deficit for the 12 years that Republicans most recently controlled Congress -- $104 billion -- versus that of the past three years under the Democratic-controlled Congress -- $1.1 trillion.

Continue reading "An Unusually Bad Prevaricator, Unusually Bad"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:27 PM

January 28, 2010

There Was the President's Speech, and There Is Reality

Watching President Barack Obama's State of the Union speech makes me wonder whether the reason he tells so many fibs is that he believes them himself. Either that or he is an even better actor than he is a teleprompter reader.

Obama not only wasn't contrite about his broken promises and disastrous record; he was on the attack, daring anyone to oppose his agenda -- even in the face of the Massachusetts rebuke. But let's see how some of his statements match up with reality.

On health care, he taunted congressmen to "let me know" if any of them have "a better approach that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen Medicare for seniors and stop insurance company abuses," as if his own plan would do those things.

Even the Congressional Budget Office has said most of the Democratic plans would increase the budget. Besides, you can't reduce overall costs when government forces an increase in demand, even if it caps insurance premiums and shifts costs elsewhere and/or imposes rationing. The CBO has also reported that with Obamacare, millions would remain uninsured. So under his plan, costs would rise, quality and choice would decrease, care would be rationed, millions would remain uninsured and, worst of all, the government would acquire an unprecedented level of control over all aspects of our lives.

Do conservatives have better ideas? Of course. Restore market forces through tort reform, strengthening health savings accounts, abolishing government coverage mandates, allowing consumers to purchase policies across state lines and eliminating the tax laws incentivizing employer-provided health care, which unnecessarily increase demand by making prices invisible to consumers.

Continue reading "There Was the President's Speech, and There Is Reality"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:45 PM

January 25, 2010

'It's Not About Me' -- Wink, Wink

The more painful exposure we have to Barack Obama -- and we're talking hyper-exposure at this point -- the more we realize how narcissistic he is. Indeed, we are treated to this overexposure precisely because of his narcissistic impulses. He can't keep himself out of the spotlight.

So it was that on the heels of his crushing personal defeat in the Massachusetts senatorial election last week, Obama's principal reaction was, "This isn't about me."

When someone says that one time or a few times, you might believe him. But when he says it repeatedly (see below), you have to conclude he is protesting too much and means just the opposite.

Given what we've learned about Obama's self-absorption, it's not a stretch to infer that when he says "it's not about me," he wants to project an air of humility while receiving personal credit for that which he denies seeking credit. What he really means is, "The causes I am working on are greater than self, but -- wink, wink -- I darn well expect you to applaud me anyway, not just for my transcendent accomplishments but also for my being humble and selfless about it."

The context of his "not about me" statement following the Massachusetts election bears this out. After the obligatory disclaimer, he added: "This isn't about politics. This is about a health care system that is breaking America's families, breaking America's businesses and breaking America's economy."

Continue reading "'It's Not About Me' -- Wink, Wink"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:08 PM

January 21, 2010

Obama's 180 Degrees Out of Phase With the People

Reading excerpts of President Barack Obama's interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos underscores how tone-deaf and self-absorbed Obama is -- and that his tone-deafness is a function of his self-absorption and rigid ideology.

Obama said: "One thing that I regret this year is that we were so busy just getting stuff done and dealing with the immediate crises that were in front of us that I think we lost some of that sense of speaking directly to the American people about what their core values are and why we have to make sure those institutions are matching up with those values. And that I do think is a mistake of mine. I think the assumption was, if I just focus on policy, if I just focus on this provision or that law or are we making a good, rational decision here ... people will get it."

Let's unpack that mouthful. It's all about him; in almost every line, he is bragging or excusing himself. No wonder he can't see any farther than his navel.

Note in the opening sentence his umpteenth gratuitous reference to "crises" he inherited; he doesn't use the word "inherited" there, but his meaning is clear.

In the next sentence, he pretends to criticize himself (for not speaking directly to the American people) as a backdrop for patting himself on the back for "just getting stuff done and dealing with the immediate crises." Even if he hadn't immediately turned the phony self-deprecation into a boast, we'd know he wasn't sincere because the substance of his statement is flat-out false.

Continue reading "Obama's 180 Degrees Out of Phase With the People"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:40 PM

January 18, 2010

A Cadillac Exemption From a Cadillac Tax From an Edsel Administration

This past Sunday marked the first time President Barack Obama graced a Washington, D.C., church with his presence since Oct. 11, but apparently it was not to sit in a pew and worship. Instead, he was doing the sermonizing and politicking -- gloriously intermingling church and state as only liberals are allowed to do in this country.

Don't get me wrong; I'm no scold when it comes to the church-state separation mania, which I think has been grossly expanded by liberals not to preserve the constitutional protection of religious liberty, but to selectively suppress it. But here I am digressing before I've even gotten started on the main focus of today's rant.

Instead of quibbling over the propriety of Obama's turning the church service into a political rally for health care, let's focus on the outrageous substance of his message.

He told the congregants at Vermont Avenue Baptist Church that Obamacare would help more than 30 million Americans -- "men and women and children, mothers and fathers" -- to get health insurance. "This will be a victory not for Democrats," he said. (He's got that one right.) "This'll be a victory for the United States of America." (Yes, once he and his party get thrown out on their ears for this monstrosity.)

But it's another one of his statements that really sticks in the craw: "This'll be a victory for dignity and decency, for our common humanity."

Continue reading "A Cadillac Exemption From a Cadillac Tax From an Edsel Administration"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:00 PM

January 14, 2010

Obama's Alternative Foreign Policy Universe

There are definitely two Americas, but not the two that fallen former presidential candidate John Edwards had in mind. There's the real America, and there's the imaginary America President Barack Obama has boasted of creating.

Ben Rhodes, deputy national security adviser for strategic communications, tells us on the White House's alternative universe blog that "President Obama inherited unprecedented challenges at home and abroad," including "diminished American standing in the world. ... A year later, America is stronger because of the President's leadership."

How has Obama been able to perform this miraculous feat in such a short time?

Well, Obama's "steady diplomacy" has made America stronger and renewed its moral authority. In his superior wisdom, he realized that our real enemy isn't all Islamic extremists dedicated to world conquest, the annihilation of all infidels, and jihad, but the sole branch of that larger group, al-Qaida. So he's smartly and efficiently recalibrated our war effort against this solitary group of jihadists -- though I could have sworn his people have told us it's not exactly a war.

Through his myopic lenses, Obama apparently can't understand that terrorists would be virtually impotent against us without nation-state sponsors. Without that perspective, how can he possibly lead this nation in this "overseas contingency operation"?

Continue reading "Obama's Alternative Foreign Policy Universe"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:45 PM | TrackBack (0)

January 11, 2010

Obama Must Know His Spending Yields Bankruptcy, Not Growth

Could we all agree that we are doomed as a nation if President Barack Obama continues his deficit spending at unprecedented levels? Can you think of any reason, then, to justify this spending? Oh, our president says it's to jump-start the economy? Sorry, that dog won't hunt. So what's his real motive?

Obama has been saying from the beginning that his stimulus plan was for the purpose of spurring economic growth -- though when we did have economic growth during the George W. Bush administration, the likes of which Democrats can only fantasize about during Obama's term, they trashed it as a "jobless recovery."

On Jan. 16, 2009 -- about a year ago -- Obama said: "The first job of my administration is to put people back to work and get our economy moving again. That's why I've moved quickly to work with my economic team and leaders of both parties on an 'American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan' that will immediately jump-start job creation and long-term growth." Obama made similar statements repeatedly.

Notice he said "immediately." Here we are a year later at 10 percent unemployment after Obama promised it wouldn't exceed 8 percent. Is anyone holding him accountable for this outrage? Is he humbled? No, he wants a second stimulus, on top of his nationally bankrupting health care and cap-and-trade plans. He has the audacity to demand $75 billion more to stimulate construction jobs. A bill approving the plan has already passed the House, and the Senate is expected to take it up later this month. Unbelievable!

Obama's top economic advisers also said at the time that his stimulus package would create mostly private-sector jobs. We know how that turned out: just the opposite.

Continue reading "Obama Must Know His Spending Yields Bankruptcy, Not Growth"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:47 PM | TrackBack (0)

January 07, 2010

His 'Highness' or His 'Highhandedness'?

The more we read about Obama's health care scheme and his handling of it the more obvious his arrogance and contempt for the people become.

This is stunning behavior, really, for any administration (and his party), but especially one that holds itself out as a servant of the people and a model of transparency.

Just consider headlines from the past few days: "Obama Reneges on Health Care Transparency: As a Candidate, President Obama Promised to Put Health Care Reform Negotiations on C-SPAN," "White House REFUSES To Discuss Broken C-Span Promise," "Dems Will Bypass Conference Committee To Get Health Care Passed," "Sources: Obama, Dems to sidestep GOP on health care," "Hatch: Healthcare bill 'rich' for challenges on constitutionality," "AP sources: Obama OKs taxing high-end health plans," "Obama Pushes for Quick Health Care Deal," "Conference Committee Bypassed," "House Will Vote on Pro-Abortion Senate Bill" and -- get this one -- "Pelosi: 'There Has Never Been a More Open Process.'"

Seriously, who do these people think they are? No wonder they always assumed the worst of former President George W. Bush and then accused him of sinister motives he never had and actions he never committed. As I've noted before, they were projecting. They knew how they would behave if in power. Now, once again, they're proving it.

Think about it. Obama promised at least eight times -- memorialized in video recordings -- that he would air health care debates and negotiations on C-SPAN for all to see. If you watch the videos, you'll notice that he was even wearing that smug, self-righteous look as he made his deceitful pledge, as if to say: "When I take over, we are finally going to return power to the people. We'll be open and transparent. We won't behave as Washington politicians are used to behaving. We're better than that. We're morally superior."

Continue reading "His 'Highness' or His 'Highhandedness'?"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:06 PM

January 04, 2010

War on Terror? What War?

Can you imagine an administration so arrogant that it will not reconsider its decision to return Yemeni terrorists now being held at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility back to Yemen, much less its decision to close Gitmo in the first place?

President Barack Obama is obviously a man who won't permit any facts to penetrate his airtight ideological force field, from deficit spending to health care to global warming to his non-prosecution of the war on terror -- I mean "overseas contingency operations."

Last week, Sens. Lindsey Graham, John McCain and Joe Lieberman sent a letter to President Obama telling him his decision to transfer six Yemeni nationals back home is "highly unwise and ill-considered," especially in light of the attempted terrorist bombing of Northwest Airlines Flight 253 on Christmas Day. The senators pointed out that the terrorist, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, revealed to interrogators that he had traveled to Yemen for training and to gather explosives for the mission.

Even Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, weighed in, saying "detainees should not be released to Yemen at this time. It is too unstable." But the White House is undeterred, and even the closing of the U.S. Embassy in terrorist-rich Yemen is not causing the smug Obama to reconsider.

White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan told "Fox News Sunday" host Chris Wallace the administration absolutely intends to continue sending Yemeni prisoners back to Yemen. "We've had close dialogue with the Yemeni government about the expectations that we have as far as what they're supposed to do when these detainees go back," said Brennan.

Continue reading "War on Terror? What War?"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 02:23 PM

December 28, 2009

It's Not the Economy, Stupid! It's National Survival!

The Washington Post's Dan Balz thinks that "with new priorities, Obama and Democrats can recover in 2010." Sorry, Dan; it's about more than priorities. It's a matter of their worldview.

Balz dutifully cites "the size of the problems President Obama inherited" and "the battles he chose to take on during his first year" as mitigating factors that may lead to the public's understanding and allow Obama an opportunity to hit "the reset button."

Balz says Obama's advisers believe he can "pivot" in the first few months of 2010 and restore his standing with the American people. Balz offers four "elements" that "might allow that to happen": refocus on the economy; move Congress offstage; get serious about the deficit and spending; and avoid overloading the circuits.

Let's briefly examine Balz's analysis -- an analysis that is doubtlessly typical for Beltway media elites.

First, Obama's free-falling approval ratings are not a result of problems he inherited. How long are he and his liberal media shills going to milk this "blame Bush" mantra like a bunch of reprobate school kids? Balz is onto something, however, in citing "the battles he chose to take on during his first year." But he's wrong that it is a mitigating factor.

Continue reading "It's Not the Economy, Stupid! It's National Survival!"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:42 PM

December 21, 2009

Obamacare Hazardous to America's Health

At least common thieves don't destroy an entire health care system and socialize the American economy when they commit their felonies. Too bad we can't say the same for our illustrious Democratic senators who sold out the nation.

In exchange for criminally unconstitutional favors for their respective states, they voted to pass the Senate health care bill just 38 hours after it had been made available to the public for review.

Everyone knows about Sen. Mary Landrieu's negotiating $300 million for her state in non-guaranteed Medicaid payouts. She was even cocky about her institutionalized larceny.

Sen. Bernie Sanders finagled $10 billion worth of earmarked greenbacks for the funding of community health centers in his home state, Vermont, to support a bill he vehemently opposed just three days earlier.

Sanders and Sen. Patrick Leahy secured additional Medicaid funding for Vermont, while senators from Pennsylvania, New York and Florida achieved Medicare Advantage protections for their constituents even as benefits from this program are being cut nationwide.

Continue reading "Obamacare Hazardous to America's Health"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:24 PM

December 17, 2009

Radical is as Radical Does

I'm wondering whether there's anyone out there with the guts to pretend that it's insignificant that President Barack Obama keeps appointing radical after radical to his czar positions. Can anyone honestly say Obama's appointments don't tell us a great deal about Obama himself -- as if we needed any further proof he is a left-wing extremist?

I don't need to make a list of his radical appointees and detail proof of their extremism. Anyone paying attention knows it's irrefutably true that this has become a deliberate pattern. Statistically, Obama couldn't accidentally appoint this many radicals in two political lifetimes. Is he rubbing these people in our faces or just surrounding himself with like-minded soul mates -- or both?

My educated guess is "both" because his general attitude toward governance has been utterly dictatorial. He knows what's best for America -- the type of America he envisions, anyway -- and he will proceed to implement it, full well knowing that he's violating the will of the majority every step of the way.

It's truly sad to me that our federal government has expanded to the point that no one flinches at the thought that we need some federal bureaucrat in charge of making our local schools indoctrination facilities for homosexuality, er, safe.

As you know, Obama appointed known homosexual activist Kevin Jennings for the position.

Why would Obama, a self-professed Christian, choose Jennings, who admitted in his 2006 memoirs that he harbored a deep-seated hatred for God and religious believers at the time he embraced a homosexual lifestyle?

Continue reading "Radical is as Radical Does"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:44 PM

December 14, 2009

If B's Were F's, Obama Still Wouldn't Deserve a B-Plus

It's bad enough for America that President Barack Obama is a committed far-left ideologue, but when you couple that with his narcissism, you've got a recipe for a major disaster.

He told Oprah Winfrey he deserves "a good solid B-plus" for his first year in office. The only things standing in his way for that coveted A are -- for the most part -- other people, such as evil Republicans who oppose socialized medicine.

It's obvious that Obama is as self-absorbed as he is delusional. While most Americans are worried about the financial destruction of our country and our resulting inability to bequeath our heirs a land of liberty, Obama is fretting over the stresses the job is placing on him.

"The biggest burden on me right now is that economic growth has happened, but job growth has not happened." Note the "burden on me." Similarly, he said his painfully belabored decision to send 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan hit him "in the gut."

Obama insists economic growth has returned and job recovery is just a matter of time, but many are not so sure of either. But all are sure that his unwavering debt path is unsustainable and suicidal.

Continue reading "If B's Were F's, Obama Still Wouldn't Deserve a B-Plus"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:25 PM

December 10, 2009

Obama Reducing the Debt? Dream On

Two recent news stories illustrate, more clearly than ever, the Obama Democrats' contempt for the free market and individual economic liberty. If given the chance, they will expand government and spend as much of our money as they can get away with.

First we learn that Obama and his party simply will not agree to keep their grubby government hands off the estimated $200 billion the banks are going to repay under TARP. Just when we finally receive this glimmer of good news to ameliorate our reasonable panic over the ever-increasing national debt, Obama announces that he intends to intercept a good portion of the debt repayments and spend it on job creation and assistance to certain debtors.

I assume we're supposed to be too dense to remember that his stimulus spending to date hasn't created jobs and that most of it hasn't even been used for that purpose. So when this administration says its first priority is reducing debt, understand we are being played -- by consummate cynics.

Likewise, the Democrats' various health care plans contemplate $500 billion in Medicare savings between 2010 and 2019. But instead of using the savings to shore up this entitlement's solvency, they are charging forward with a new entitlement: major subsidies to the uninsured to buy health insurance.

They just can't help themselves, what with their firm control of the executive and legislative branches of the federal government. They barely have to pretend to like capitalism anymore.

Continue reading "Obama Reducing the Debt? Dream On"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:59 PM

December 07, 2009

Defenseless Enviro-thugs Go On Offense

At a time when leftist enviro-tyrants ought to be hanging their heads in shame, they are, instead, taking the offensive. They are not only dismissing the staggering ClimateGate scandal as insignificant but also redoubling and accelerating their push to enslave the world with their progress-swallowing treaties, laws and regulations.

It's the same old leftist playbook: Approach every desired major policy change as a crisis, and demand immediate action. If the public begins to wise up to the distortions and exaggerations, elevate the threat warning from dire to urgent.

We saw it in our domestic politics in the United States when President Barack Obama's leftist Democrats manufactured a simulated crisis over health insurance, deliberately overstating by multiples the number of uninsured as a predicate to Obama's demand that a comprehensive bill had to be passed before Congress' August recess.

Shortly thereafter, it came to light that Democrats had also grossly manipulated the projected costs of their proposals and flagrantly lied about such issues as rationing and government-funded abortions. All the while, these "progressives" concealed from the public the underlying facts and data and their ultimate aims, obliterating Obama's pledge for greater transparency in government.

Like-minded global and American leftists know the jig is almost up on the fabricated global warming "consensus," as the public is catching on to their deception (reflected by fresh polling data) and the ClimateGate scandal has lifted the veil on the leftist scientific community's global conspiratorial corruption. They tell us to pay no attention to the ClimateGate behind the curtain and to join with them in launching the reverse thrusters on modernity and progress in deference to the global warming hoax. Meanwhile, the Obama-leftist Environmental Protection Agency has hedged its bets (in the event Copenhagen is a bust) by declaring the air that we exhale an environmental hazard.

Continue reading "Defenseless Enviro-thugs Go On Offense"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:52 PM

December 03, 2009

Gibbs: Don't Confuse Copenhagen-bound Obama With Global Warming Facts

Despite the unfolding international "climate change" scandal involving the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit, President Barack Obama's ideological presuppositions on global warming remain unshaken, and he will still happily attend the Copenhagen global warming conference.

This unprecedented fraud by a "team" of politicized scientists whose research has generated some $20 million in research grants for the CRU hasn't deterred Obama from his energy- and economy-destroying agenda any more than double-digit unemployment figures have dissuaded him from his failed Keynesian policies. Nor is Obama bothered by the incestuous relationship among the CRU, the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the Copenhagen summit.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs sniffed that corruption at the highest levels of climate change intelligentsia -- corruption, mind you, that bears directly on the underlying science -- doesn't alter the president's firm opinion that "climate change is happening."

"I don't think that's anything that is, quite frankly, among most people, in dispute anymore," said Gibbs. "I think there's no real scientific basis for the dispute of this."

Oh? Is this administration so myopic as to be dangerously ignorant? So arrogant that it deems dissenting opinions unworthy of acknowledgment? Or just old-fashioned liars?

Continue reading "Gibbs: Don't Confuse Copenhagen-bound Obama With Global Warming Facts"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:14 PM

November 30, 2009

They Call It Fiscal Responsibility; We Call It Socialism

As President Barack Obama and his party conspire to destroy -- not reform -- the greatest health care system in the world in their quest to remake America into a full-blown Eurosocialist state, it is instructive to remember the premise upon which Obama launched this disaster.

In July, Obama said that if we do not control our health care costs, "we will not be able to control our deficit." He continued: "I've also pledged that health insurance reform will not add to our deficit over the next decade, and I mean it. ... In addition ... the bill I sign must also slow the growth of health care costs in the long run." Just to be sure there was no misunderstanding, Obama said, "The entire cost of that has to be paid for, and it has got to be deficit-neutral."

Those who didn't know this was hogwash in the first place have no excuse not to see it now. There's nothing deficit-neutral about the plans currently under consideration. There's nothing fiscally prudent about them. Indeed, they would greatly exacerbate our existing fiscal crisis -- not to mention usher in the largest socialistic transformation we've yet seen in this nation.

With the information that has now come to light about the costs of "reform," there is no other rational explanation for Obama's obsession to enact Obamacare than his desire to increase government control over every aspect of our lives.

As others have noted, Obama and company have employed multiple gimmicks to conceal and misrepresent the true costs of Obamacare. Like other groups wanting to destroy America from the outside, liberals are patient. By backloading their spending, they hope to deceive Americans into thinking their plan is budget-neutral.

Continue reading "They Call It Fiscal Responsibility; We Call It Socialism"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:46 PM

November 23, 2009

A National Nightmare, Indeed

In a Democratic fundraising speech in Iowa over the weekend, Vice President Joe Biden told party loyalists that opponents of the Obama administration's agenda "should be worried about us, for we are their worst nightmare." Duh.

Finally we can agree on something, Joe. Even the liberal New York Times reports that at the current level of federal spending, the annual interest on the national debt will exceed $700 billion by 2019 -- compared with $202 billion this year. Some forecasters predict it will be much higher. This additional half-trillion dollars a year in interest is more than our current combined expenditures on education, energy, homeland security and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Oh, and the Times isn't even factoring in the cap-and-trade nightmare you and Barack have in store for us, Joe -- you know, that urgent legislation to catapult the nation back into Third World status based on hysteria generated by fraudulent science and corrupt zealots and politicians.

Nor is the Times including in its calculations the additional debt that would result from Obamacare.

Joe, when The New York Times is sounding the warnings over the exploding national debt, you and Barack insist not only on not reversing your disastrous course but also on making it worse. How can reasonable people assume anything other than that you are trying to run this nation into the ground financially?

Don't dare keep telling us your hyper-ambitious spending is a necessary evil required to deliver us from a financial crisis you inherited. Whatever crisis we face is debt-related, purely and simply. Everything else is manageable. Yet you all are deliberately increasing our indebtedness as far as the eye can see, without the slightest pretense of scaling back in this millennium. In fact, you are laboring to establish further entitlements and institutional changes that would generate exponential burdens on our debt and would be enormously difficult for any responsible and financially sane successor to undo, much less reverse.

Continue reading "A National Nightmare, Indeed"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 08:34 PM

November 19, 2009

Sally Quinn on Sarah Palin -- Versus Reality

It seems the mainstream media's favorite pastime is to ridicule Sarah Palin. Of all the screeds I've read, I don't think any are snarkier than The Washington Post's Sally Quinn's "On Faith" blog post "Sarah Palin's 'rogue' Christianity."

Do we need further proof of the secular orientation of our dominant media culture than the fact that Quinn, an avowed atheist, pens the Post's "On Faith" blog? That would be like featuring a column by Fidel Castro on free enterprise and individual liberties.

On her mini-bio, Quinn writes: "I announced to my parents when I was 13 that I was an atheist. And I was a committed atheist all of my life. My view was that more evil had been done in the name of religion than anything else in the world. I saw no redeeming value in it at all. Then I met Jon Meacham and we began talking. No, Jon didn't convert me, but he did convince me that religion was not a subject to be dismissed or disdained."

If that's true, why did Quinn devote her entire blog post to dismissing and disdaining Sarah Palin's profession of faith in her book, "Going Rogue"? I must admit, though, it's difficult to tell whether Quinn is motivated more by her disdain for Sarah Palin, whom she has a history of berating, or mainstream Christianity.

Quinn says: "Sarah Palin writes that one summer at Bible Camp she 'put my life in my creator's hands and trust Him as I sought my life's path.' For Palin, this grand divine plan was 'a natural progression.' She writes. And later, 'I don't believe in coincidences.'"

Continue reading "Sally Quinn on Sarah Palin -- Versus Reality"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:26 PM

November 16, 2009

Civil Trial for Jihadists and Obama's Third World Vision for America

I can think of a number of motives President Barack Obama might have for his egregious decision to bring Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other high-profile al-Qaida terrorists to New York for trial in our civil courts. Regardless of which motives apply, one thing is clear: Our enemy is at war against us while we are in a suicidal, 9/10 state of denial.

I've heard at least three possible reasons for his decision, which fall into the categories of political, ideological and strategic, respectively. These motives are by no means mutually exclusive and are overlapping.

My friend Andy McCarthy, at National Review Online, emphasizes: "The decision ... is one of the most irresponsible ever made by a presidential administration. That it is motivated by politics could not be more obvious." Andy surmises that these proceedings will put the Bush administration on trial, giving the anti-war left, Obama's base, "its promised feast." The left's "shock troops, such as the Center for Constitutional Rights," will add each new disclosure to "the purported war-crimes case they are urging foreign courts to bring against President Bush, his subordinates, and U.S. intelligence agents." Andy's analysis is difficult to refute.

Another bright friend of mine doesn't dispute Obama's political motivations but calculates that in the end, though appeasing the hard left, his strategy will end up costing him dearly because of the national security nightmare (and public backlash) it will generate -- a scenario Andy McCarthy himself thoroughly lays out with foreboding. Given the inevitable and foreseeable blowback awaiting Obama, my other friend reasons that Obama has decided to do it because he is a true believer. That is, it's not just a matter of feeding his base. He is his base. He is a hard-left anti-war ideologue. Again, I would be hard-pressed to poke holes in this assessment.

Then we also have to consider as a motivating factor Obama's stunningly naive belief that by being solicitous toward Islam and overly kind to terrorists, we can convince them that we are good people after all and not an enemy they should attack. That Obama harbors this belief is scarcely deniable. His various statements on American foreign and domestic policy reveal his conviction that America's past behavior and attitude, up until the precise nanosecond he was inaugurated, have contributed to our unpopularity in the world and served as a terrorist-recruiting impetus throughout the world.

Continue reading "Civil Trial for Jihadists and Obama's Third World Vision for America"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:59 PM

November 12, 2009

More White House Economic Baloney

Of the many thoughts I had watching President Barack Obama's umpteenth speech on the economy Thursday morning, the most troubling was his refusal to accept responsibility for his disastrous policies.

With unemployment having soared to 10.2 percent, wouldn't it have been reasonable to expect that any Obama speech on the economy would at least acknowledge that his "stimulus" plan didn't come close to achieving the results he promised, starting with his claim that unemployment would peak at 8 percent?

Even a fallible leader would be humbled by this failed performance, but enjoying messianic stature, the expectations bar is rightfully much higher for Obama. Yet instead of showing contrition, he took to the microphone in a surreal, boastful mode, as if calculating that assuming an offensive posture would fool people into ignoring reality.

He bragged about the "bold steps" he had taken "to break the back of this recession." He said he'd prevented "responsible homeowners from losing their homes ... cut taxes for middle-class families ... and created and saved more than a million jobs." But, "We all know that there are limits to what government can and should do, even during such difficult times."

Let's examine his claims. Bold actions to end the recession and "created and saved more than a million jobs"? Well, he has engineered massive spending and debt explosions, but many weren't even calculated to stimulate the economy, especially in the short run.

Continue reading "More White House Economic Baloney"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:00 PM

November 09, 2009

Suicidal Political Correctness

Even as more and more realize oppressive political correctness is damaging our nation and killing our people, we still hold ourselves hostage to it. We can't criticize Obama on his policy agenda without absurd accusations of racism, and now our authorities' first instinct after the mass murder at Fort Hood is to victimize the identified shooter -- Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan -- rather than to protect our soldiers.

The military is the last place we should expect political correctness to flourish. We recognize, after all, that our armed forces exist primarily to safeguard our national security, not as a laboratory for social experimentation. Or do we?

Forget "don't ask, don't tell" policy for now. I'm referring to the reaction of the Army's top brass to the Fort Hood slaughter in the news conference and television interviews following the shooting.

The first question to Army chief of staff Gen. George Casey (and Army Secretary John McHugh) was whether he believed "this was a wake-up call to the nation that the Army is simply too small to carry out the tasks that it's been given." "You've been having suicide rates that are off the charts," the reporter went on. "Your soldiers are under great stress from multiple deployments."

Our military manpower is a legitimate concern, but I think it would be more appropriate for this type of question to come up in the context of whether we have the troops necessary to perform our missions in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. Instead, it surfaced in relation to whether an overly stretched Army might have contributed to causing this mass murder.

Continue reading "Suicidal Political Correctness"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:32 PM

November 05, 2009

White House Postelection Arrogance

The White House arrogance on display in denying that Tuesday's election results were a repudiation of President Barack Obama's radical agenda is of a piece with its arrogance in attempting to advance this agenda against the people's will.

One of the great ironies of this administration is its promise of returning power to the people but governing with an iron fist and its back turned to the expressed wishes of the voters. The White House claims a mandate for its extreme blueprint to restructure America, but the voters had no idea Obama would go this far, even if many of us listening closely to his statements and studying his relationships and voting record did.

It's possible, given the relatively monolithic embryo in which Obama was politically incubated, that Obama believed the majority of Americans held the same contempt for America's political and economic system as he did. It should be clear to him now, though, that he's not on the same page with them -- perhaps not even in the same book. But if you're paying attention, you know that this cold, hard slap of reality hitting Obama in the face isn't slightly deterring him from pressing forward. If anything, it has strengthened his resolve to implement his agenda with increased urgency, before the public turns even more against him.

Obama's attitude in over-reading his mandate and dismissing the significance of Tuesday's elections is, I believe, consistent with the liberal mindset that liberals know better than the people what is in their best interests. Sen. Jim Webb, whose fellow Virginia Democrat was soundly defeated Tuesday, said the election results indicate that "people up here on our side need to get their message straighter."

Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., went even further, saying it is "nonsense" to suggest that the New Jersey and Virginia results represent a referendum on President Obama and that Democrats should try harder to make sure they "deliver on the promises of the last election."

Continue reading "White House Postelection Arrogance"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:59 PM

November 02, 2009

Democratic Deficit Duplicity

I nearly fell out of my chair as I read this New York Times headline: "Democrats Push for Plan to Cut Deficit." From the headline alone, I couldn't tell whether this was before, during or after they supported President Barack Obama's intentional, exponential escalation of the deficit to $1.4 trillion.

That's simply immeasurable chutzpah. But just in case you're ready to be taken in yet again by these fair-weather deficit watchdogs, the first sentence of the Times article reveals their true -- and true to form -- motive.

"Faced with anxiety in financial markets about the huge federal deficit and the potential for it to become an electoral liability for Democrats, the White House and Congressional leaders are weighing options for narrowing the gap, including a bipartisan commission that could force tax increases and spending cuts."

Those elections have a stubborn habit of forcing even drunken sailor politicians to pretend to care about other people's money they otherwise have an unlimited appetite for squandering.

But wait; I thought concern about runaway federal spending was the concern only of those "tea party" protestors the administration has dubbed "potential domestic terrorists" who were carrying "political paraphernalia" -- copies of the U.S. Constitution -- and engaging in "right-wing extremist chatter" focused "on the economy."

Continue reading "Democratic Deficit Duplicity"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:39 PM

October 29, 2009

The Public Option Is Not an Option

Can you imagine the brazenness of President Barack Obama and his cohorts in going so far as to ridicule opponents of Obamacare for rightly pointing out that its ultimate goal is single-payer socialized medicine?

These people are propaganda virtuosos of the highest order. You might expect grand artists of deception just to silently dismiss such claims from critics or, at most, to summarily deny them. But they go further and mock the critics, trying to reduce them to acutely paranoid, tinfoil-hat-wearing, black-helicopter-hallucinating Cuckoo's Nest inpatients.

What better way to distract attention from what is right in front of our faces? It's brilliant reverse jujitsu: using the outrageousness of your own plan to discredit as preposterous the allegations of your opponents about your truly outrageous plan. Shameless!

Obama and his minions are indeed conspiring to foist socialized medicine on this nation through whatever means necessary -- including outright deception over the nature and purpose of the so-called public option. But before presenting proof of that, let me pose a few questions bearing on the likelihood Obama would be involved in such a deception in pursuit of this goal.

Didn't Obama repeatedly threaten to "spread the wealth"? Isn't he deliberately indebting us through government expenditures of borrowed funds not remotely designed to appreciably increase employment? This "stimulus" monstrosity is a massive redistributive scheme not only in its direct transfer payments but also in the confiscatory tax increases it will necessitate to retire the debt it is generating.

Continue reading "The Public Option Is Not an Option"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:18 PM

October 26, 2009

Obama's War on Fox Is Liberalism's War on Dissent

Can you imagine the outrage that would have ensued had former President George W. Bush declared off-limits those media outlets he thought (correctly) treated him unfairly?

Heck, the left declared him a dictator simply because he led a war on Iraq that Congress approved. He never tried to shut down his critics. He rarely even objected to their abuse.

But liberal politicians have been spoiled with mainstream media favoritism for so long that they believe anything other than sycophancy is mistreatment. Their selective outrage is as hollow as it is risible.

In fact, Fox News seems much more conservative than it is because no other television network over the past half-century has been anything but decidedly liberal. When the media norm is liberal, liberals equate liberalism with objectivity and deviations from it as bias, just as liberals preach tolerance toward all ideas -- except conservative ones. Their self-delusion is surreal.

Thus, Fox News Channel -- which has a number of liberal hosts, scores of liberal contributors, and nonstop liberal guests -- is painted as conservative because it is the only network that has more than one token conservative host.

Continue reading "Obama's War on Fox Is Liberalism's War on Dissent"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:01 PM

October 22, 2009

Obama's Uncompromising Inner Man

It's amazing that Barack Obama still has some fooled into believing he's a model of post-partisanship. Sure, he's as friendly and congenial as they come, as long as you agree with him -- 100 percent.

When on-script, he is mostly measured, reasonable-sounding and -- being a good reader -- occasionally eloquent. But when he ventures off-script, he often sounds less sophisticated, petty and even mean-spirited. In those moments, there's no hiding the inner man.

We see his inner man on renegade YouTube clips of his speeches to completely friendly audiences where he wasn't expecting to be heard outside the venue, as with his ridiculing of small-town Americans as bitter clingers. His unmasked face often reveals a marked contemptuousness for those who don't share his worldview.

He not only doesn't practice bipartisanship but also refuses even to debate the issues, treating dissenters as ill-motivated, disingenuous obstructionists.

I was reminded of this as I played a video posted on RealClearPolitics in which Obama -- candid, un-coached and bereft of his usual trappings of urbanity -- launched into opponents of Obamacare.

Continue reading "Obama's Uncompromising Inner Man"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:46 PM

October 19, 2009

Barack's Enemies List

Sorry to disillusion those of you who are still in denial about President Barack Obama's true socialistic and dictatorial nature, but this guy's militancy against his perceived enemies puts Richard Nixon's White House to shame. His war on Fox News is just his latest salvo.

Obama's perceived enemies are all those who have the temerity not to roll over for his extreme agenda. They all must be demonized, marginalized and silenced by a president who has turned the Oval Office into a glorified street organizing headquarters to attack his opponents. Indeed, this self-described uniter is the most divisive president in memory, and his uncontrollable ego can't countenance legitimate dissent.

Consider:

--He has smeared medical doctors with reckless charges that they administer unnecessary courses of treatment for profit, e.g., tonsillectomies and limb amputations.

--He publicly berated Chrysler's senior creditors as a "small group of speculators" who "endanger Chrysler's future by refusing to sacrifice like everyone else," merely because they wouldn't acquiesce to his demands and insisted on asserting their contractual rights.

--He has demonized "big oil" and other energy producers, free market capitalists, corporate executives, pharmaceutical companies, Republicans who oppose his health care plan as dishonest and partisan, the wealthy, municipal policemen who dared arrest his Ivy League professor friend for disturbing the peace, pro-lifers, global warming skeptics, the CIA, the military, the best health care system in the world, and George W. Bush every time he needs cover for the inevitably negative consequences of his policies.

Continue reading "Barack's Enemies List"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:42 PM

October 15, 2009

This Isn't About Rush

There will be no voluntary mea culpas from Rush's race slanderers despite the irrefutable fact that they spread poisonous and damaging lies with actual malice. To the left, Rush is the most prominent face of conservatism and the most influential opponent of President Barack Obama's destructive agenda and so must be stopped -- irrespective of the despicable means employed.

The left systematically destroyed President George W. Bush with the most egregious lies, repeated to the point that people who knew better even began to believe them. The formerly respected CBS News anchor Dan Rather was so convinced by his liberal bias that Bush was evil that he refused to apologize for slandering him with a story later proved to be manufactured -- and that's giving Rather the benefit of the doubt that he was unaware the story was fabricated from the get-go. To Rather, it didn't matter because he was convinced Bush possessed the character of someone who would have engaged in the acts of which he was falsely accused.

And what was it about Bush that led Rather to the conclusion that he possessed such low character? In Rather's eyes -- though many conservatives would strongly dispute this -- he was a conservative and conservatives are evil.

The parallel with Rush's leftist slanderers is striking. It's one of the first things that occurred to me as I heard their sniveling responses, one by one refusing to utter a syllable of apology and instead using the occasion of being caught red-handed in malicious lies as a further opportunity to reiterate their libel.

"How dare you suggest that we have done anything wrong in attributing statements to Rush he never uttered? Even if he didn't say those words, you know he was thinking them or something much worse."

Continue reading "This Isn't About Rush"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:39 PM

October 12, 2009

Wealth Redistribution on Steroids

Is there no problem Obama and his mesmerized Democrats think cannot be solved with money -- other people's money? Just when you think you've heard it all, more news stories about this bunch surface to shock you.

The Sunday Times reports that the administration is considering a novel approach to the war in Afghanistan: outbidding the Taliban to persuade Afghan villagers to lay down arms.

So much for a "war of necessity," which was just an opportunistic sound bite for Obama to demonize Bush while cynically pretending to be hawkish enough in the war on terror to appeal to Middle America. No, for Obama, Afghanistan must just be another "street" to organize, another constituency to schmooze in his permanent -- now global -- campaign.

Even when the Bush administration employed strategies to win over Sunnis, it was coupled with a redoubling of our military effort and a marked alteration in our strategy to "hold" territory once we had taken it. This idea that you can reduce this war to an auction, divorced from the required steps needed to strengthen the security there, is insane.

That's not merely my independent assessment. One general close to Gen. Stanley McChrystal told the Times he was taken aback by the administration's attitude. "It surprised a lot of us -- we thought the policy decision was made to come down on the counter-insurgency course of action." The general said the notion that "we can just cut deals with the Taliban without having to do anything" is a "crazy" idea.

Continue reading "Wealth Redistribution on Steroids"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:08 PM

October 08, 2009

Cloistered Media Libs Don't Get It

CNN "senior political analyst" Gloria Borger doesn't get it. Like so many cloistered mainstream media liberals, she just can't imagine why anyone would oppose Barack Obama's agenda. To her, it's all politics.

Where was Borger when Democrats, purely for partisan purposes, pummeled President George W. Bush for eight years? But let's stay focused on the present, because Republican opposition isn't about paybacks or getting even.

Borger argues that "Republicans don't really want to work with Obama" because they stand to regain congressional control simply by opposing his agenda without offering any ideas of their own. Their opposition couldn't possibly be grounded in principle because, to narrow-minded liberals such as Borger, the only legitimate ideas are liberal ones.

"In my next life," she writes, "I'd like to be an opposition party leader. What fun to go to work every day knowing you will always be right, largely because your ideas will remain untested. ... If we were in charge, you sing, the people would have tax cuts! More money in their pockets! And no deficits! But more jobs!"

Sorry, Gloria, but our ideas have been tested -- since the beginning of this republic -- and the record is pretty solid, though you might not view America's history with similar pride, given the left's revisionist mindset about America's mythical "imperialism" and capitalistic "exploitation."

Continue reading "Cloistered Media Libs Don't Get It"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:42 PM

October 05, 2009

Obama Administration Defiantly Defends Another Radical Appointee

I continue to be amazed at the naivete of people who keep giving President Barack Obama the benefit of the doubt concerning his radical appointments, saying his administration isn't doing its job in vetting the appointees. When will they wake up to the reality that Obama is deliberately picking people, such as Kevin Jennings, who share his radical values?

When prescient commentators were warning of Obama's radical friends and colleagues, such as Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers, during the campaign, his apologists diverted proper scrutiny, saying it's absurd to judge Obama by association. Even flawed cliches can work wonders when you have the entire mainstream media flacking for you.

Then when the radicalism of "green czar" Van Jones came to light, the left's reflexive reaction was that Jones was being victimized by an extremist element on the right and that the Internet itself had now been exposed as "an open sewer of untreated, unfiltered information." It was only when Jones' own extremism became too obvious to deny that the left shifted its line of defense to: Obama's team let him down by failing to vet Jones.

As I wrote at the time, "It's not Obama who didn't vet Jones, but the MSM who have never vetted Obama. Had they vetted Obama, they would have realized that he is Van Jones."

It seems that if you wait long enough, the Obama administration will get around to vindicating its legitimate critics, such as those of us who warned that Obama was insincere when he pretended that the public option was not an indispensable component of his health care scheme. (We hear that he's recently conducted a series of secret meetings with members of Congress, trying to cobble together a majority on a bill that includes the public option.)

Continue reading "Obama Administration Defiantly Defends Another Radical Appointee"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:55 PM

October 01, 2009

Big 'D' Democrats thwart small 'd' democracy

The signature of Obama's (uppercase "D") Democrats is their systematic betrayal of (small "d") democratic principles. Just look at today's news for a flavor of their pattern of flagrantly ignoring the popular will to cram down our throats policies we clearly reject.

As much as Obama pretends to be a man of the people, he is a man for himself -- a man who will get his way, the will of the people be damned. The same is true of many of his congressional lieutenants, including Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, who recently said that Congress will pass Obamacare despite the public's objections, because it is so important. Important to whom? To Democrats -- that's who.

Obama's Democrats add insult to injury in their steamrolling style of governance by using appealing language to mask their true intentions and pretending to govern in a manner that's precisely the opposite of their actual practice. They use free market language to sell their socialistic schemes and promise transparency while concealing their legislative misdeeds.

Need proof? Glad to oblige.

--Sen. Jim Bunning's proposal to require the Senate Finance Committee to post the final language of the nearly trillion-dollar health care bill, along with the Congressional Budget Office analysis of the bill, on the committee's Web site for at least 72 hours prior to a vote on the bill was voted down 12-11, with only one Democrat voting for it. Now, why would that bill be objectionable to Democrats when their president promised long ago to follow just such a policy? Simple: The less advance notice we have the less chance we have to block their scheme.

Continue reading "Big 'D' Democrats thwart small 'd' democracy"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:49 PM

September 28, 2009

Obama's Globalism: We Are the World

Polite conservatives grow nervous when their less inhibited brethren suggest that President Barack Obama does not feel warm and fuzzy when contemplating pre-Obama-inauguration America. But considering the mounting evidence, the burden of proof has certainly shifted to the polite group to demonstrate otherwise.

Obama should not get off the hook in just one short news cycle for the shots he took at this nation in his shameful first speech to the United Nations General Assembly.

In his opening salvo, he said, "For those who question the character and cause of my nation, I ask you to look at the concrete actions we have taken in just nine months." Then he proceeded to tick off those "concrete actions," such as prohibiting torture -- as if to suggest that prior to his ascension, it had been official U.S. policy.

Note that he didn't say, "For those who question America's character, I cite to you our record of international philanthropy, benevolence, peacemaking and peacekeeping, liberating nations from brutal dictators, promoting democracy throughout the world, and leading the world in technological innovation and the very advancement of civilization."

Instead, he made it clear that he shares the view of the world's leftist critics that America has acted "unilaterally without regard for the interests of others," "arrogant" and "sometimes dismissive."

Continue reading "Obama's Globalism: We Are the World"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 02:51 PM

September 24, 2009

Obama's Competing Waterloos

Sen. Jim DeMint predicted that Obamacare would be President Barack Obama's Waterloo. While that's certainly a strong possibility, Obama has other Waterloos in the wings competing for the prize, such as his monstrous deficits and his disastrous foreign policy.

The Heritage Foundation reports that Obama's budget would produce $13 trillion in deficits over the next decade, even more than the outrageous $9 trillion previously projected. This is nation-shattering stuff, folks, and Obama and his minions remain unflappable, intent on staying the bankrupting course, sporting Alfred E. Neuman, "What, me worry?" expressions. The fact that we know they can't be that oblivious is what makes us wonder whether something more sinister lurks in their motives.

But Obama's foreign policy is shaping up to be every bit as dangerous. Because he has lived in a relatively cloistered political world -- surrounded and shielded by mostly fellow leftist radicals -- he apparently doesn't realize just how repugnant his appeasement policies and mantralike derision of this nation are to most Americans.

When I first heard that he was Mirandizing al-Qaida on the battlefield, I thought it was political satire. But it wasn't, any more than his scrapping of long-range missile defense or his apparent plan to unilaterally disarm us of our nuclear weapons.

Then there's Afghanistan, which Obama and his fellow Bush-hating Democratic machine exploited merely to bludgeon Bush on his Iraq policy. It was transparently obvious that this appeasement bunch wasn't serious when they said they wanted to ramp up our efforts in Afghanistan and evacuate Iraq because the former was supposedly part of the war on terror and the latter was not. The political strategy was simple: Let's vent our anti-war spleen on Iraq under cover of beating the war drums on Afghanistan.

Continue reading "Obama's Competing Waterloos"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:38 PM

September 21, 2009

Obama At Odds With Majority, but Undeterred

While I couldn't bring myself to watch President Barack Obama's 1,000th-1,004th health care propaganda spiels on the Sunday shows, I did read some transcripts and watch a few video highlights. What is it about this guy's personality that compels him to keep beating his head against the wall?

Why does he keep doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result?

The more Obama stumps for socialized medicine the less popular it becomes. Yet Obama keeps going back to the well, apparently believing that if he just explains it one more time -- or maybe 10 more times -- to the ignorant masses, his wards will finally come around to his way of thinking.

On the one hand, it seems that Obama truly believes that the majority of people are as sick as he is of America and reject many of its founding principles. After all, during his formative years and beyond, he was always surrounded by those -- family and mentors -- who had bones to pick with America and its "exploitive" capitalistic economy. To say that most of his role models were outright Marxists is hardly inflammatory hyperbole.

When it was time for him to make his own associational choices, he opted to continue the pattern in which he'd been raised, from the church he chose to the angry, activist, anti-establishment street agitation he embraced in Chicago.

So he very well might believe that his attitude favoring fundamental change for America is the norm and that the only ones who want to preserve the nation's "outmoded" founding principles are selfish, moneyed elites and those they control. Indeed, on the campaign trail, he was explicit about his intention to pursue fundamental change. Those paying close attention and not blinded by the Utopian slogans of hope and change were fearful Obama was quite serious about his plan to push America's reset button.

Continue reading "Obama At Odds With Majority, but Undeterred"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:38 PM

September 17, 2009

Dowd and Carter Guilty of That Which They Decry

I'm sure New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd and former President Jimmy Carter derive a great deal of self-satisfaction slandering other people with false charges of racism, but the damage they're doing to race relations is worse than any bona fide racist could dream of doing.

I ask you: Who is more likely racist, the person who sees race every time she turns around or the person who aspires toward colorblindness? Could those always pointing the accusatory finger be projecting their own discomfort with race?

Listen to how Maureen begins her snarky Sept. 12 column, in which she posited that Rep. Joe Wilson's "you lie" outburst was driven by racism. She writes: "Surrounded by middle-aged white guys -- a sepia snapshot of the days when such pols ran Washington like their own men's club -- Joe Wilson yelled 'You lie!' at a president who didn't. But, fair or not, what I heard was an unspoken word in the air: You lie, boy!"

I don't know whether "middle-aged white guys" and "their own men's club" flow more from some bitter feminist strain Dowd seems to possess or her liberal obsession with the superficial aspects of people's differences in pigment, but it is nonetheless bizarre.

Why is it that Dowd sees race in the politicians sitting beside Joe Wilson? And why is she compelled to make "white guys" a pejorative? In her world, to be white and male is to be guilty. Well, I reject the charge, thank you, and would appreciate a little due process before condemnation by such self-proclaimed open-minded liberals as Dowd.

Continue reading "Dowd and Carter Guilty of That Which They Decry"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:01 PM

September 14, 2009

Memo to Dems: Spare Us the Phony Wilson Outrage

Memo to the Democratic leadership threatening to censure Rep. Joe Wilson if he doesn't publicly apologize on the House floor for calling President Barack Obama a liar on that floor: You don't have the moral authority to be demanding apologies.

Not only has their own decorum in that very chamber been abysmal at times, such as when they booed President George W. Bush during his 2005 State of the Union address; they do much worse damage every week to this nation and its institutions than Joe Wilson conceivably could have done with his temporary breach of decorum.

While Democratic leaders are wagging their fingers at the Republican Party's alleged descent into incivility over Joe Wilson's unplanned, indignant outburst, they have a very short memory about their own partywide monopoly on incivility, as they savaged President Bush throughout his presidency. I researched and wrote a 400-plus-page book documenting the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of these hypocritical scolds in 2006, in case you need a refresher course.

Unlike Rep. Wilson, these offending Democrats have never apologized for their outrages. Did Rep. John Murtha apologize for prejudging and slandering our battlefield Marines who were later vindicated? Did Sen. Harry Reid ever apologize for calling President Bush a liar? Al Gore? John Kerry? Has suspected tax evader Rep. Charles Rangel apologized for his conduct while devising new ways to confiscate even higher taxes from honest, hardworking Americans who actually pay their taxes?

Did Sen. Dick Durbin retract the substance of his remarks in comparing Gitmo to the gulag? Did House leader Nancy Pelosi repent for defaming the CIA?

Continue reading "Memo to Dems: Spare Us the Phony Wilson Outrage"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:55 PM

September 10, 2009

For O, It's 'My Way or the Highway'

Can someone explain to me how President Barack Obama's grandiose scheme destined to reduce the quality of the best health care system in the history of the world, force millions of people who choose not to purchase health insurance to purchase it, greatly increase medical costs, our deficits and national debt, ultimately reduce patient choice, and place health care decisions in the hands of heartless bureaucrats is somehow a demonstration of compassion?

Why, in the course of his countless speeches on health care, has Obama rarely, if ever, praised American health care, which is the envy of the entire world? Perhaps for the same reason he doesn't praise America about much of anything, I suppose. If he's not trashing us, he's not talking about us.

So instead of lauding our record in leading the world in treating heart disease and cancer and extolling our medical research industry for producing more than half of the $175 billion of health care technology products purchased globally, he complains: "We are the only advanced democracy on earth ... that allows such hardships for millions of its people. There are now more than 30 million American citizens who cannot get coverage. ... We spend 1 1/2 times more per person on health care than any other country, but we aren't any healthier for it."

As to his claimed number of uninsured, at least we're making progress. He's temporarily removed the illegal aliens to lower the number from 47 million to 30 million. But he's still lying to say 30 million "cannot get coverage."

Again, 18 million of these make more than $50,000 a year and can afford health care but choose not to purchase it. And millions more have access to government programs and don't access them, which, incidentally, doesn't bode well for Obama's mandated universal coverage plan. These are Census Bureau figures of which Obama is well aware yet chooses to misrepresent, which is why it's hard to take him seriously when he complains about his opponents' alleged distortions.

Continue reading "For O, It's 'My Way or the Highway'"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:25 PM

September 08, 2009

The Mainstream Media's Temper Tantrum

With the resignation of green czar Van Jones despite their efforts to protect him, the mainstream media have finally been reduced to sputtering incoherence, as they've observed the un-deification of their anointed messiah and experienced firsthand their own diminishing relevance.

The MSM are engaging in a colossal temper tantrum over their lost news monopoly -- a monopoly they forfeited through their bias, arrogance and self-imposed insulation. (Consider Rathergate and their shameless effort to "Swift boat" the Swift boaters, to name a few.)

This is an especially hard pill for them to swallow considering that during the past year, they've been stewing in the intoxicating delusion that they were again supreme, as they appeared to be getting away with their conspiratorial enthroning of King Barack Obama. And they're not handling rejection well.

On "Meet the Press'" round-table discussion, retired "NBC Nightly News" anchor Tom Brokaw and New York Times columnist Tom Friedman were protesting the grass roots' and alternative media's unmasking of Van Jones as a radical leftist.

Brokaw said: "A lot of people will repeat back to me and take it as face value something that they read on the Internet. And my line to them is you have to vet information. ... It is across-the-board ... and it's something that we all have to address, and it requires society and political and cultural leaders to stand up and say, 'This is crazy.' We just can't function that way."

Continue reading "The Mainstream Media's Temper Tantrum"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:49 PM

September 03, 2009

No Compromise, No Retreat, No Surrender

The key to stopping Obama's far-left agenda is to understand where his heart is. If politicians let their guard down and compromise, the Obama steamroller will regain its momentum and forge ahead to gobble up our individual liberties.

Obama's heart is and always has been on the farthest reaches of the left wing of politics. His driving ambition is to force fundamental change on America. That should go without saying, but it must be repeated -- and repeated -- lest people's forgiving spirits and short memories generate just enough complacency to allow Obama to get back on track.

It is remarkable that Obama has lost public favor so quickly. But the other side of that coin is that he is receiving a wake-up call early enough in his first term to allow him to recover well in time for the crucial 2010 elections.

Some erroneously believe that Obama will continue to bash his stubborn leftist head into the wall against the wishes of the public. I don't believe the modern myth that Obama is an erudite political philosopher, but I do think he's savvy enough to understand that he must significantly repackage his message in order to win back popular support for his policy goals.

The major obstacle to selling Obamacare has been the public's realization that the "public option" is a euphemism for socialized medicine. So it's time for Obama to take his Machiavellian talents to the next level.

Continue reading "No Compromise, No Retreat, No Surrender"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:16 PM

August 31, 2009

Obama's Shameless 'Torture' Prosecution Reversal

President Barack Obama is either extraordinarily politically tone-deaf or arrogant beyond bounds, as indicated by his relentless pursuit of policies strongly rejected by the American people. His decision or acquiescence in the Department of Justice's decision to reinvestigate CIA terrorist interrogators is the latest outrage.

Obama's approval ratings have cratered even further since my most recent column, and he's either Mr. Magoo, driving along in blissful oblivion, or Fearless Leader, who will do what he wants, American people be damned.

Based on Obama's oft-articulated mindset -- "I won, so the other side should just quit talking" -- I think it's safe to say he's closer to dictator than to Magoo. Besides, Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to begin a new investigation of the CIA interrogators has Obama's national security-emasculating fingerprints all over it.

Obama has been railing against alleged "torture" of terrorist detainees since early in the presidential campaign. He has endlessly apologized for American "imperialism," even going so far as to castigate our policy toward Iran of more than three decades ago, but giving that mullah-run state a pass for its egregiously hostile policies and behavior toward us.

On top of this, Obama is closing Gitmo with no plan to relocate the dangerous prisoners; he has directed that many of these terrorists be tried in civilian courts; he's abandoned the term "war on terror" in favor of "overseas contingency operations"; his administration has ordered that captured terrorists be Mirandized on the battlefield; and he's now going to further weaken the CIA by reassigning terrorist interrogation duties to an interagency entity operated out of the White House.

Continue reading "Obama's Shameless 'Torture' Prosecution Reversal"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:14 PM

August 27, 2009

Reclaiming Popular Sovereignty

It's true that Barack Obama's approval ratings began at the North Pole and are already hovering around the equator. But given what he's said and done, it is quite remarkable, frankly, that they aren't firmly planted at the South Pole.

The deceptions and contradictions are astounding. His premises for policy change are consistently duplicitous. He's embarked on a course to deliberately bankrupt the nation; he is at war with mainstream American values; he is undermining our national security during wartime (prosecuting our protectors -- and otherwise); and he's pursuing unprecedented government control of the private sector.

Just look at his handling of Obamacare. His stated goals aren't arguably fraudulent, but verifiably so. He says he's motivated to cut costs, but the Congressional Budget Office, even using static economic analysis, says Obamacare would increase costs by $1 trillion. This is without factoring in the inevitable inflation that would occur from further dissociating health care demand from market prices.

Obama also continues to use the counterfeit figure of 47 million uninsured when he knows that only a fraction of those are American citizens who both can't afford insurance and are not eligible for government assistance.

Some experts have estimated this number to be less than 10 million, and yet Obama wants to wholly revamp the system to make sure they are covered. Note I said "covered," not "given access to health care." But the CBO has projected that millions would remain uninsured after Obamacare, and history shows that access to care would shrink drastically under the socialized system Obama envisions.

Continue reading "Reclaiming Popular Sovereignty"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:08 PM

August 24, 2009

Don't Give Obamacare a Life Raft

So here I am feeling a lot better about the possibility of rolling back Obama statism, when I come across an AP report that Sen. John McCain is throwing President Barack Obama a health care life raft. It's official; the Beltway GOP simply can't stand "prosperity."

Why can't the senator read the tea leaves for once and realize America doesn't want socialism? Why can't he read history and understand that liberals never stop with socialism lite? Once in the door, the statist pushes it all the way open.

Don't you see, Sen. McCain? To them, compromise is about incrementalism. They are looking for useful idiots on the other side of the aisle to unlock that door and nudge it open.

Just look at the history of Social Security, for one. In his explosive best-seller "Liberty and Tyranny," Mark Levin details how FDR rejected the idea of direct welfare payments to the aged and unemployed because he believed it would result in Social Security's being rolled back by taxpayers forced to fund it. In order to sink in his government hooks fully, he had to make sure that "even the lowest wage earner covered by the program (would) pay the same fixed payroll tax as the millionaire." When criticized about the regressive nature of the payroll tax, FDR unapologetically said, "With those taxes in there, no damn politician can ever scrap my Social Security program."

Yet FDR, like Obama, was adept at speaking out of both sides of his mouth. In a message to Congress on Social Security on Jan. 17, 1935, FDR said that "except for the money necessary to initiate it, (the system) should be self-sustaining in the sense that funds for the payment of insurance benefits should not come from the proceeds of general taxation. ... It is proposed that the Federal Government assume one-half of the cost of the old-age pension plan, which ought ultimately to be supplanted by self-supporting annuity plans (emphasis added)."

Continue reading "Don't Give Obamacare a Life Raft"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:36 PM

August 20, 2009

Obama's Brick Wall: The American People

President Barack Obama has run into a brick wall: the American people, who cherish their liberty and revere their nation and do not want it remade in Obama's socialist image.

Obama's free-falling poll numbers are not the result of a misinformation campaign from a small sliver of unruly conservative opponents, as the administration wants you to believe. They are a reflection of the public's reaction to Obama's policies and his own comprehensive misinformation campaign to dupe the people into believing America is unsalvageable without fundamental change.

When Obama promised to bring fundamental change to America, most Americans, fortunately for him, did not take him literally. He offered them "hope" at a time when the economy was going south; political partisanship had reached new levels of acrimony, and people were weary of a protracted, albeit successful, war in Iraq. But most voters had no idea just how much change Obama had in mind.

But Obama was dead serious. If it wasn't obvious to trusting people then, it is abundantly so now. He doesn't share the majority's vision of America as the most wonderful experiment in constitutional governance in history. He sees it as a land of plenty, all right -- plenteous inequities, with maldistribution of resources, oppression and imperialism.

Surely people can now see that it is no accident that he sat at the feet of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright for 20 years, that his mother was a leftist activist and cultural Marxist, that his main early mentor was radical Frank Marshall Davis, that he was a member of the far-left New Party in Chicago, that his main vocation in life has been street organizing and agitation and that he didn't think the revolutionarily, transformative Warren court was liberal enough.

Continue reading "Obama's Brick Wall: The American People"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 01:09 PM

August 17, 2009

Public Option Not Optional for Obama

As I write this, I don't know whether President Barack Obama and his Democrats will end up pretending to abandon the public option aspect of Obamacare, but I do know that if they do, it will only be a matter of time before they resurrect it because that's where their heart is.

That's why, among other reasons, neither Blue Dog Democrats who oppose socialized medicine nor Republicans should consider compromising with left-wing Democrats to pass a bill. If they do, Obama will eventually -- and probably sooner than you think -- achieve his goal of nationalized health care.

Don't think I'm advocating Republican obstructionism. I would like nothing more than for conservative congressmen to quarterback real market reforms to the health care system. But if you understand liberals at all, you know that they'll never agree to market-based solutions for ideological reasons and because an expanding dependency class is their most essential power source.

Just watch conservatives propose an expansion of health savings accounts or an eradication of coverage mandates, including those prohibiting crossing state lines to buy health insurance, or tort reform or changing the tax code to eliminate the incentive for employer-provided health insurance and see what happens.

Obama will be all over state-run TV telling Americans that uncompassionate conservatives are going "Katrina" on the poor again. Democrats are the true obstructionists because they'll stop, at any cost, the only reforms that could reduce health care costs without rationing, creating waiting lines, or decreasing choice and quality of care.

Continue reading "Public Option Not Optional for Obama"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:55 PM

August 13, 2009

Obama's Forfeited Credibility Sabotaging Obamacare

President Barack Obama apparently came to believe the myth of his messiahship and has accordingly abused and squandered his good will and political capital and possibly self-sabotaged his socialized medicine scheme.

Of all the newsworthy aspects of this desperate "reform" effort, none is more so than the robust democratic processes it has reinvigorated in this nation. While Democrats insist the nationwide grass-roots movement against his Draconian measure is contrived and illusory, it is just the opposite.

Nothing could be so real as the American people, emboldened by their passion for liberty, standing up against a callous, dishonest government trolling for its freedoms in exchange for false promises.

All the proof we need that Obama and Democrats recognize the authenticity of this grass-roots protest is their hysterical reaction to it. They wouldn't be hyperventilating about it if they believed it to be fake, but would use their supermajorities to ram through this bill.

Indeed, that congressmen have not been able or courageous enough (against the threat of being removed from office in 2010) to pass this bill is the story of the year. Integral to that story is the unraveling of the Obama mystique, occasioned by Obama's ongoing arrogance and duplicity, most recently on the Obamacare issue.

Continue reading "Obama's Forfeited Credibility Sabotaging Obamacare"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 02:04 PM

August 10, 2009

"Conservatives, Shut Up and Step Aside"

The hubris, arrogance and deceit of President Barack Obama and the Democratic leadership are breathtaking. In their maniacal frenzy to assume control over every aspect of our lives through socialized medicine, they are behaving like the thuggish autocrats they have proved themselves to be.

The jig is up on their designs, evidenced by the very contents of the health bill they're promoting. As increasing public awareness has translated into increasing grass-roots opposition to the bill, the Democrats have ratcheted up their bullying tactics and deceit.

Our self-styled bipartisan president is telling his critics to shut up, while his partners in crime, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her colleagues, are calling them un-American and Nazis.

Understand this: The people who are showing up in droves with righteous anger befitting a body politic steeped in a unique liberty tradition are exercising the very type of bottom-up citizen protest and government watchdogging our Founding Fathers envisioned. They are not the artificially driven "AstroTurf" phonies the Democrats are depicting them to be. No, such activities are the province of Alinsky/Obama-type "street organizers" and union thugs enlisted by the administration to discredit these legitimate protests.

It wasn't enough for Pelosi to call us Nazis. She also co-wrote, with House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, an op-ed in USA Today calling us un-American and projecting her own nefarious tactics onto her opposition.

Continue reading ""Conservatives, Shut Up and Step Aside""

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:59 PM

August 06, 2009

Obama an Unwitting Catalyst for Free Market Health Care Reform?

Liberals say Republicans have no health care solutions. So their answer is to give us more of what caused most of the problems we have today: government intervention and control.

Perhaps it is true that Republicans haven't been aggressive enough in pursuing free market solutions because they are so intimidated by Democratic demagoguery at every step and so conditioned to believing that liberal lite (such as a new prescription drug entitlement) is the only product that will fly in the Beltway.

But President Barack Obama's radical socialist prescriptions might be the best catalyst for the resurrection of conservative ideas since Ronald Reagan.

Before we have a prayer at achieving sweeping market reforms, however, we must do a better job of making the case that government meddling in the health care industry to date -- e.g., mandates, laws and regulations -- has been the major source of our problems with both overall medical costs and insurance coverage.

Liberals believe evil profiteers cause price hikes, but their own do-gooder laws and regulations are the culprits. Yes, medical costs are higher because we demand (and receive) the best cutting-edge drugs, technology and treatment. But the only way to reduce these costs is to settle for lesser quality, as has every nation that has socialized health care, or to outlaw drug company profits, which would virtually end the willingness of risk-taking investors to finance groundbreaking medical research.

Continue reading "Obama an Unwitting Catalyst for Free Market Health Care Reform?"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 02:32 PM

August 03, 2009

Obama Can't Afford To Tell Truth on Health Care

President Barack Obama is spreading disinformation about health care almost as quickly as he's driving up the national debt, such as that 47 million Americans can't get health care and that a government takeover would be a panacea.

Democrats have constantly demagogued the 47 million uninsured figure to gin up public fear about the scarcity of health care access, especially for the poor. They follow up with the promise that under their plan, we would achieve universal access. But both are untrue.

In "The Top Ten Myths of American Health Care," Sally Pipes points out that while there are some Americans who simply can't afford health insurance, many millions who can afford insurance choose not to buy it and "very likely would not want to be 'rescued' by mandatory socialized medicine."

In the first place, the 47 million number is grossly inflated. The Congressional Budget Office survey generating it included those who were uninsured for any part of a year, despite the fact that almost half of these remain uninsured for an average of only four months.

Some 38 percent of this 47 million -- almost 18 million -- make more than $50,000 a year, and 10 million of them make more than $75,000. Of all the uninsured groups, this is the only one that is growing, because in a still-free country, they've made their own decision not to buy expensive insurance while (most of them) are young and healthy. The Census Bureau also reports that more than 10 million of the uninsured are not American citizens.

Continue reading "Obama Can't Afford To Tell Truth on Health Care"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:39 PM

July 30, 2009

Preparing for War: Boning Up on the Left's Health Care Myths

I am gratified that an awakened public has sent Congress an unequivocal message not to socialize our health care system, but note that this war is just beginning. Gen. Barack Obama is not the slightest bit deterred by the public's negative reaction, because he knows more than they do about what's best for them.

As we go forward, it's imperative we recognize that the current hiccup in Obama's momentum is a result of so-called Blue Dog Democrats' refusing to go along with his plan -- and this, largely because their constituents are raining down "tea party" speed bumps on their heads warning them against endorsing this disaster.

But if we're not careful, Obama will negotiate a path around this opposition, and it's important we anticipate it and prepare accordingly. The key lies in understanding the main reason for the Blue Dogs' resistance.

The Blue Dogs see themselves as being all about fiscal responsibility, even though most of them enthusiastically signed on to his budget-busting trillion-dollar porkulus scheme and his cap-and-tax debacle. Those little details aside, they have based their opposition to the bill thus far on their fear that the program wouldn't be able to pay for itself.

If that's true, then all Obama has to do to capture their support (he may already have) is to convince them it will be deficit-neutral -- or better. He can do that either by manipulating the numbers or by making adjustments to create the illusion it would pay for itself.

Let's set aside for now the canard that socialized medicine could be structured to pay for itself even with the diminution in quality and quantity it guarantees. What's relevant here is that Obama might be able to convince the Blue Dogs that it could. Then the bill would regain momentum, setting in motion the inevitable destruction of the world's greatest health care system.

Continue reading "Preparing for War: Boning Up on the Left's Health Care Myths"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:36 PM

July 27, 2009

A Teachable Moment Indeed

The Henry Louis Gates Jr./Cambridge police flap is most significant for what it tells us about President Barack Obama, his approach to the presidency, and his general attitude, including on matters of race.

In his July 22 news conference on health care, one member of the media asked Obama, "What does (the Gates arrest) incident say to you, and what does it say about race relations in America?"

Without hesitation, Obama launched into what appeared to be a pre-considered response. Had he been caught off guard by the question, we might assume he would hesitate -- at least briefly -- and then decline to inject himself into the matter.

We should expect Obama, of all people, given his reputation for coolness and sagacity, to act presidentially, not only in measuring his thoughts before speaking but also in declining to comment on local matters beyond his duties and about which he doesn't have all the facts.

But Obama's attitude toward the presidency is not particularly aligned with what our constitutional Framers had in mind. He obviously believes it is his prerogative to micromanage any and every aspect of American life, from the catastrophic to the mundane.

He's displayed this attitude in town hall meetings, where he has given advice to attendees concerning their specific problems, as if it were his place to make personal house calls on matters ranging from people's health care problems to their mortgages. All of this is consistent with Obama's perception of government's cradle-to-grave caretaker role and his effort to cultivate a dependency mindset in Americans.

Continue reading "A Teachable Moment Indeed"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 08:08 PM

July 23, 2009

Health Care Hellfire

President Barack Obama has completely discredited himself with his reckless, arrogant and high-pressure handling of his socialized medicine scheme. The only thing keeping his diving approval ratings above single digits other than blind partisanship and the dependency class he is voraciously expanding is the public's partial unawareness of the unmitigated horrors of this plan.

I have begun to go through H.R. 3200, the House bill Obama is telling us we must adopt (or some facsimile thereof) lest the world come to an end. It's a good thing for Obama that everyone doesn't have the time or inclination to do what I'm doing and that he still has an appreciable cult following that doesn't demand scrutiny in exchange for its unconditional support.

But his good will is fading fast and will fade faster the more people learn about this outrage, which explains his uncompromising demand that the bill be passed immediately -- even before he realizes what it contains.

Can you imagine the arrogance of a man who insists we have to pass a bill while simultaneously admitting he is unaware of a provision that would prohibit the reacquisition of private insurance by those who lose their coverage? Can you imagine him -- after getting caught with his pants down on this issue -- saying he will not sign a bill with such a provision yet simultaneously browbeating Congress to push through the bill that contains that very provision so he can sign it? Way beyond amazing!

I urge you to read as much of this bill as you can stomach. If you do, you'll never again doubt the Democrats' insatiable appetite for government control or their infinite trust in bureaucratic wisdom and efficiency. Marginally prudent people wouldn't place this much discretion over such an enormously complex operation in even Solomon's hands.

Continue reading "Health Care Hellfire"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:31 PM

July 20, 2009

More Health Care Lies

It's no wonder the White House is delaying release of the latest dismal budget figures. It's not just that they are grossly more dismal than the projections. It's that they will undercut already-waning public support for Obama's socialized medicine scheme.

The White House was supposed to release the budget numbers this month but has delayed their release until mid-August, which even has The Associated Press raising questions about its motives.

But you don't have to be in journalism to realize that Obama is playing hide the ball with the facts in his desperate rush to ramrod this disaster through Congress before the public wakes up. The latest Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that not only are Obama's disapproval ratings soaring but support for his health care debacle is now less than 49 percent -- a new low. And you can bet it will get much lower the more the public learns about his plan -- a plan whose promotion has been riddled with lies.

Why else would Obama, who was very tardy for his most recent news conference, arrogantly refuse to answer any questions following his terse, combative and defiant remarks about his plan? Is this the new transparency we can believe in?

Here are some inconvenient truths Obama must conceal from the American public:

--Despite White House-generated hysteria about the urgency of reform, the only urgency is in preventing this fiasco because it would destroy America's economy and liberty. Doing nothing -- even given the many problems that exist under the present system -- is far preferable to adopting this monster.

Continue reading "More Health Care Lies"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:28 PM

July 16, 2009

Calling All Blue Dogs

The most important thing to understand about the Democrats' domestic agenda is that they care more about establishing government control over our lives than they do about the stated policy goals of their proposals.

It's true of their fraudulently named stimulus packages, their cap-and-tax scheme and especially their universal health care plans.

With all of these programs and more, their driving aim is not only to acquire power for the sake of acquiring it but also to use government to impose their values on us and, effectively, destroy our personal liberties. The subject of liberty -- the very impetus for the founding of this nation -- is rarely mentioned in the public debate.

That is why we'll never convince them with evidence, from the growing scientific skepticism about global warming to the proven failed track record of Keynesian economics to the universal failure rate of socialized medicine throughout the world.

But it is also why they'll never persuade the public to go along with their mischief if the facts get out, which explains their unilateral declaration of a consensus on global warming and their refusal to debate the issue, their historical revisionism on the failures of New Deal stimuli, and their perpetual urgency in rushing their entire agenda through simultaneously -- before the public can even digest their proposals, much less organize to oppose them.

Continue reading "Calling All Blue Dogs"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:52 PM

July 13, 2009

Hell is for 'Heroes'

It appears that liberal activist group People For the American Way's smear campaign against Connecticut firefighter Frank Ricci is bearing fruit. Dahlia Lithwick has already responded with an obedient hit piece in Slate magazine, which perfectly fits the bill.

Why are liberals targeting Ricci? Because he had the audacity to challenge Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor's 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals summary ruling against him and other firefighters denied promotions because of affirmative action policies. Worse, he prevailed when the Supreme Court reversed the Sotomayor court.

Worse yet, Ricci has agreed to testify at Judge Sotomayor's Senate confirmation hearing, so liberal hardballers supporting Sotomayor's confirmation must personally discredit him -- just as they did Joe the Plumber.

You know the drill; liberals always go to the mat for the common man and for African-Americans and women -- unless, of course, those common men, African-Americans or women (e.g., Joe, Clarence Thomas, Sarah Palin) oppose their agenda.

People For the American Way triggered this opposition research campaign against Ricci in an e-mail, which cited "Frank Ricci's troubled and litigious work history." Dahlia Lithwick then helped to fill in the blanks in her article "Fire Proof." (I wish some of these lib crack investigative reporters would use their formidable talents to fill in the blanks on President Barack Obama's largely undocumented life. But here I merely fantasize -- and digress.)

Continue reading "Hell is for 'Heroes'"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:09 PM

July 09, 2009

Cap and Tax: Government vs. America

There is still time to stop the legislative monstrosity known as the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill before the Senate approves it. But for that to happen, Americans must learn how bad it is.

Let's briefly review the basics: The bill is ostensibly designed to curb man-caused carbon emissions (presumably without outlawing breathing) to retard global warming.

Even if we accept, for purposes of argument, the assumptions of radical, hysterical leftist environmentalists that man-caused global warming will destroy the planet if evil, rich capitalists don't radically curtail their own contributions to the catastrophe, Waxman-Markey would not prevent this Armageddon.

Climate scientist Chip Knappenberger, of New Hope Environmental Services, calculates that the bill would only reduce Earth's temperature by 0.1 to 0.2 degree Celsius by 2100. The Heritage Foundation's Ben Lieberman says he's found no "decent refutation of the assertion that the temperature impact would be inconsequential."

Unfortunately, the bill's negative impact on the economy would not be inconsequential. Lieberman says the bill would cause estimated job losses averaging about 1.15 million from 2012-2030, and the cumulative projected loss in gross domestic product would be almost $10 trillion by 2035. The national debt from this bill alone, disregarding the multiple bailouts, stimulus packages and health care "reform," would increase by 2035 for a family of four by 26 percent, or $115,000.

Continue reading "Cap and Tax: Government vs. America"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 02:58 PM

July 06, 2009

King Barack

Oh, how quickly times have changed. Just a few short years ago, Democrats were up in arms over King George III's (President George W. Bush's) "unconstitutional" executive power grabs. Where are these people now?

I'll tell you where they are: right in the thick of it, enabling President Barack Obama to consolidate and exercise unprecedented power.

Remember when Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy complained that the constitutional "checks and balances that have served to constrain abuses of power for more than two centuries in this country" were at risk because Republicans controlled the executive and legislative branches? How about Sen. Russ Feingold, who was looking at impeachment as a remedy to keep the president in check and prevent him from acquiring power "like King George III"?

Today these same senators are not just passively mute about Obama's power grabs; they are co-conspirators.

You might think the repeated conservative complaint about Obama's egregious lack of transparency is, by now, a tired talking point. But we're not just referring to minor procedural matters that are substantively inconsequential.

Continue reading "King Barack"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:51 PM

July 02, 2009

None Dare Call It Marxism

All right already. I won't call Obama a Marxist in this column. Instead, I'll point to some signs that indicate that Barack and Karl might well be soul mates. At least, they have similar attitudes about capital, labor and profits, er, surplus value.

Liberals, even those of the Marxist variety, take umbrage when you point out their ideological kinship with Marxism.

I suppose this dates back to the days when being a communist was tantamount to being an enemy of the United States, in that there was a global communist movement intent on -- and coming darn close to -- world domination. Though global communism has been defeated, there remains a strong contingent among us, whose nerve center is the Democratic Party leadership under President Obama, committed to obliterating America's free market.

Without getting into the intricacies of Marxist theory, suffice it to say that at the core of this political and economic philosophy is a belief in the historical class struggle. The capitalist (bourgeois) exploits the industrial worker (proletarian) by underpaying him and adding on unnecessary charges to the prices of goods and services, driving up costs to the consumer, and pocketing the profits.

In "Basic Economics," Thomas Sowell puts it this way: "Profits may be the most misconceived subject in economics. Socialists have long regarded profits as simply 'overcharge,' as Fabian socialist George Bernard Shaw called it, or a 'surplus value' as Karl Marx called it." The theory is that under socialism or Marxism, these surplus charges would be eliminated and goods and services would become more affordable.

Continue reading "None Dare Call It Marxism"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 12:48 PM

June 29, 2009

The Censorious Left's Global Warming Denier Deniers

There is so much misinformation on the subject of global warming and so little consensus -- as to what environmental changes are occurring, whether human behavior is contributing to them, whether they are causing significant environmental damage, and whether the proposed cap and trade legislation would do anything to alleviate any of this -- it is no wonder our freedom-hating majority in the House insisted on cramming it through before they could even read, much less digest, what it contained.

It would be bad enough if they passed innocuous legislation to address an alleged problem (man-caused global warming) without first verifying there is a problem and then analyzing and assessing the extent of it, but it's outrageous that they would pass a measure that could have crippling effects on our economy and American taxpayers.

Who do these people think they are -- that they can claim a mandate to do anything they want to, that they can grab as much power as they want, that they can transform our government overnight into an enemy of the people, with no fear of accountability? Oh, I know; the government has already behaved like the people's enemy all too often, but never on the scale we're witnessing today -- from a party that had the audacity to accuse President George W. Bush of abusing his authority.

Just where is the journalistic skepticism in today's dominant media culture or the professed open-mindedness of Democrats?

What is their response when people have the temerity to challenge their assertions on catastrophic global warming? It is ridicule and abuse. Not only are the doubters flat-earth Neanderthals; they are darn near treasonous, according to the dogmatic left.

Continue reading "The Censorious Left's Global Warming Denier Deniers"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:26 PM

June 25, 2009

Throw the Bums Out

Here they go again -- our faithful representatives in Washington, that is. They're about to pass, without reading its 1,200-plus pages, an incredibly expensive and destructive cap and trade bill, which has little prayer of accomplishing what it sets out to accomplish but satisfies their urgent need to pay homage to their liberal ideology and secular humanist worldview.

Do you remember when Barack Obama was forced to give an answer to justify his advocacy of a capital gains tax increase in view of such taxes' history of actually decreasing revenues? The revenue reductions are worth it because it's a matter of "fairness," he said. Spread the misery. Likewise, with cap and trade, Obama and his congressional cohorts will wreak untold destruction on the economy and get little benefit in return.

I'm not exaggerating here. Doesn't it make sense that before enacting legislation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions for the purpose of reducing man-made global warming, Congress would investigate whether significant man-made global warming is occurring (as opposed to watching Al Gore's propaganda film and simply declaring, by fiat, that scientists have reached a consensus on the issue when they clearly have not)?

And if, after a thorough and balanced inquiry, they determine that it is occurring, shouldn't they next examine whether their proposed legislative remedy is likely to significantly ameliorate the problem?

But they not only have not conducted a bona fide examination of the man-made warming issue but also have not attempted to examine, in any remotely scientific way, how much their proposed bill would reduce global warming (assuming it exists to the extent they contend) or whether any such reductions would make any difference at all to humanity's short- or long-term health or happiness or anything else.

Continue reading "Throw the Bums Out"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 01:46 PM

June 22, 2009

Reasons for Cautious Optimism

American freedom lovers studying the reign of Obama have been in a constant state of anxiety over the administration's assault on capitalism and America's very solvency, its thuggish political style, its PR war against America's history, its radical social policies and its Carteresque foreign policy. But for the first time, there are signs that America is starting to wake up.

The latest daily Rasmussen Reports Presidential Tracking Poll has Obama slipping into negative net approval territory, with more Americans strongly disapproving of his performance (34 percent) than strongly approving (33 percent). Just 54 percent of voters say they at least somewhat approve. Even the Gallup Poll reports a decline in his approval rating to a new low, albeit still at 58 percent. The decline results from a drop in support among independents, as well as Republicans -- but not Democrats.

Can you imagine what these numbers would be if the mainstream media weren't invested in Obama's success or, better yet, if moderate Democrats weren't still blinded by their lingering excitement over regaining the presidency and their vulnerability to Obama's cultish aura?

But it's not just the polling data that are encouraging. Obama's blame-it-on-Bush mantra is starting to wear thin. Another Rasmussen survey found that 39 percent of voters now think our economic problems are caused more by Obama's policies -- a 12-point jump from just a month ago.

Also, support for Obama's most dangerous agenda item, nationalized health care, is waning. A recent ABC News//Kaiser Family Foundation/USA Today survey indicates that 89 percent of Americans are satisfied with their health care. Worse (for Obama), congressional Democrats have warned that his plan is in jeopardy because its projected costs range between $1 trillion and $1.6 trillion, according to Congressional Budget Office scoring, and it would not even reduce by half the number of uninsured (the fraudulent impetus behind the administration's manufactured crisis). Just wait until further damaging truths come to light about the horrors awaiting America's health care system if it is nationalized, including government rationing and dramatically lower-quality care.

Continue reading "Reasons for Cautious Optimism"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:00 PM

June 18, 2009

Obama Protects Cronies at Taxpayers' Expense

The more we learn about the White House's summary firing of AmeriCorps' inspector general, Gerald Walpin, the more it smells of lawlessness, cronyism and a flagrant disregard for transparency and government accountability.

Remember President Barack Obama's commitment to oversee the expenditure of taxpayer funds to avoid waste and inefficiency -- to the point that he deputized Vice President "Mean" Joe Biden as the executive enforcer?

That was then. This is now. As has proved customary with this administration, the walk has not matched the talk. Biden's casual admissions that the administration "guessed wrong" and that money has been wasted don't begin to describe the fiscal recklessness and corruption that define this White House.

Walpin -- in investigating the misuse of AmeriCorps funds by St. HOPE charity, which is under the direction of Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, a strong Obama supporter -- discovered that St. HOPE had failed to use the federal monies for the purposes specified in the grant and improperly had used AmeriCorps personnel to drive Johnson to personal appointments, run other errands for him and wash his car. On Walpin's recommendation, an official at the Corporation for National and Community Service, the organization that runs AmeriCorps, ordered Johnson's suspension.

Walpin also referred the matter to the local U.S. attorney's office for a criminal inquiry. Though no criminal charges were filed, St. HOPE agreed in a settlement to repay half its $850,000 of AmeriCorps grants.

Continue reading "Obama Protects Cronies at Taxpayers' Expense"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:59 PM

June 15, 2009

America's Fatal Attraction

Excuse my mastery of the obvious, but I have to believe the greatest obstacle to America's return to policy sanity is the electorate's cultish adoration of Barack Obama.

If it weren't for this disturbing phenomenon -- not to discount a healthy dose of blind partisanship -- it is inconceivable that the majority of people would tolerate Obama's dismantling of America's free market system, his returning America to a pre-9/11 mindset against terrorists, his increasing usurpations of power, and his corrupt ties and practices, from the public funding of ACORN to the summary dismissal of the case against the Black Panthers to his firing of inspector general Gerald Walpin apparently for uncovering corruption by Obama's friends.

I don't quite understand how people, especially religious people, can place their trust for salvation in a fellow mortal, but history shows they do, and present-day America shows they are. From MSNBC's Chris Matthews' admitting Obama sends a thrill up his leg to audience members' fainting at his speeches to young girls' kissing his statue like brainless bookends, the trend continues unabated.

Even some not entranced by his supposed charisma are indirectly affected by it, evidenced by their unbounded willingness to give him the benefit of every doubt. They are impervious to his narcissism, indifferent to his megalomaniacal pursuit of power, ceaselessly forgiving of his childish scapegoating of the previous administration, and oblivious to his extremism.

The mainstream media are his biggest institutional enablers, drooling over his every utterance, irrespective of his many contradictions, his assaults on the Constitution and our liberties, and his spate of broken promises.

Continue reading "America's Fatal Attraction"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:00 PM

June 11, 2009

From the Battlefield to the Courtroom

During the presidential campaign, when some warned against Barack Obama's soft approach to the war on terror, I doubt they had any idea he would greatly exceed their worst expectations. But he has.

A common refrain of the Bush administration and its defenders in the prosecution of the war was that prior to the 9/11 attacks, the American government had been treating Islamo-terrorism as a law enforcement problem. The 9/11 attacks forced us, kicking and screaming, into the realization that the Islamo-jihadists were indeed in a war with us and that we would have to wage war against them, as well.

This new approach seemed to have been accepted as a necessity by both parties, and the nation united -- temporarily, at least -- around our new policy to adopt a proactive and comprehensive military approach to fight terrorism. For a time, we achieved a degree of bipartisanship on such ideas as breaking down the forced walls of separation imposed by the Clinton administration that discouraged our intelligence agencies from sharing information on terrorist activities.

Before long, though, Democrats reverted to their perennial practice of politicizing every exploitable issue and began systematically attacking and undermining our newfound war-oriented approach. They began their specious assaults, in the name of protecting the privacy of U.S. citizens, against the various programs we were using to monitor terrorists and prevent future attacks.

Their war against the war included criticizing the National Security Agency's terrorist surveillance program, which they slandered as "domestic spying," the NSA's tracking "data mining" of terrorist calls to and from the United States, and the administration's Terrorist Finance Tracking Program. In all these cases, their claims were eventually shown to be overblown at best -- and trumped-up at worst.

Continue reading "From the Battlefield to the Courtroom"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:07 PM

June 08, 2009

Tickling the World's Itching Ears

The apostle Paul said: "For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from truth and turn aside to myths" (2 Timothy 4:3-4).

Indeed, this generation is loath to tolerate not only biblical doctrine but also other truths. President Barack Obama tickles the world's ears with promises of hope, change, peace, harmony, diversity, pluralism and "tolerance," but in too many cases, he has allowed truth to become a casualty -- and more than a harmless casualty. Nowhere was that more clearly demonstrated than in his speech in Cairo to the Muslim world.

Many judge Obama's speeches, not to mention his policies and actions, on his high-sounding rhetoric and professed good will. They ignore his obvious errors and contradictions, duping themselves into believing that supposedly good intentions alone will trump facts and reality and insulate us from the negative consequences that will flow from his distortions.

In his Cairo speech, Obama, as usual, served up a plentiful smorgasbord of platitudes sufficient to appeal to the appetites of almost everyone (except, notably, our steadfast ally Israel). His idolaters in the mainstream media obediently praised him for his "honesty" in trashing America and for his equal-opportunity softball scolding of the Muslim world.

Newsweek's Evan Thomas even likened him to God -- not a god, but God. Many conservative commentators similarly bent over backward to heap guarded praise on him, apparently unable to muster the courage to warn of the dangers inherent in Obama's skewed vision without throwing in the required adulation.

Continue reading "Tickling the World's Itching Ears"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:47 PM

June 04, 2009

New Column: Conservatives Aren't the Extremists

Mainstream conservatives are routinely mischaracterized as extreme by liberals and squishy Republicans, when it is America's liberals who are, by any fair measure, more extreme.

Conservatives are not the ones who sermonize about tolerance yet demonstrate intolerance toward conservative and Christian thought; support exterminating babies in the womb; apologize the world over for America; or gut the military and missile defense because of some dangerously egotistical notion that they have the magic to turn evil into goodness with their charisma and eloquence or, even worse, because they refuse to recognize evil in the world, except as emanating from the United States.

Conservatives aren't the ones who have so little faith in their fellow human beings that they diminish their dignity by expanding the welfare state and increasing man's learned dependency on government; judge people by the color of their skin instead of the content of their character; pit economic groups against one another, stoking the flames of envy and greed; punish success, reward failure and promote mediocrity; side with the world's tyrants and dictators; slavishly attach themselves to leftist propaganda about impending environmental catastrophes; promote a secular humanist worldview that considers government a quasi-deity that can perfect the human condition; or morally equate the practice of enhanced interrogation techniques to save innocent lives with that of beheading innocent people.

Continue reading "New Column: Conservatives Aren't the Extremists"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:44 PM

June 01, 2009

Obama Knew What He Was Getting With Sotomayor

It amazes me that for all the attention Judge Sonia Sotomayor has attracted for a racially charged statement in a 2001 speech, few are tying her attitude to President Barack Obama's. Just as he knew precisely what his 20-year pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, was about and approved, he knew, prior to nominating her, what Sonia Sotomayor is about and approved. In both cases, he just didn't want us to know.

In her 2001 speech at Berkeley, Sotomayor said, "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

Obama's apologists claim Sotomayor's statement was taken out of context. But the context of her prepared remarks makes the statement more -- not less -- incriminating.

The sentences preceding the statement were: "Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences, a possibility I abhor less or discount less than my colleague Judge (Miriam) Cedarbaum, our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging. Justice (Sandra Day) O'Connor has often been cited as saying that a wise old man and wise old woman will reach the same conclusion in deciding cases. I am ... not so sure that I agree with the statement."

First, it's important to note that she's not talking about trial judges, for example, who might be more or less lenient in their sentencing within the prescribed sentencing guidelines, but about appellate judges applying the law.

Continue reading "Obama Knew What He Was Getting With Sotomayor"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:11 PM

May 28, 2009

Democrat Lite A Big GOP Does Not Make

I see "pragmatists" everywhere I look in the Republican Party -- those who say we must always be more concerned with not offending so-called moderates than with advancing our principles. The irony is that no one is less pragmatic, in the end, than these self-styled pragmatists because their prescriptions are a recipe for failure.

Most recently, of course, the Republican branch of the political correctness sect insists that we must not oppose Judge Sonia Sotomayor's nomination for the Supreme Court because her confirmation is inevitable and by opposing it, we'll gratuitously alienate Hispanics and women -- as if they haven't already been conditioned by the liberal press to believe conservatives are ogres regardless.

What's missing from this analysis is that one of the main reasons Republicans have lost favor of late, reflected in their trouncing in the 2006 congressional elections and in shrinking GOP party identification percentages, is their alienation of the conservative base. The best-kept secret is that with 60 percent of Americans still considering themselves conservatives, Republicans only need to be true to their conservative principles to win again.

While I've always considered it hyperbolic to suggest there is no difference between the parties, I find it increasingly difficult to defend this position. Beltway Republicans, with notable exceptions, spend half their time groveling to the forces of political correctness, conceding the ideological turf wars to liberal Democrats and agreeing to operate within the four corners of the liberal- and relativist-dominant media culture without a fight.

Take, for example, the Republicans' approaches to Obama's newly announced Draconian CAFE standards and his cap and trade proposal. In response to both, they virtually concede the cultish dogma that man-made global warming is destroying the Earth, rendering them powerless to battle to save capitalism. Likewise, how many of them fight for nuclear energy instead of knuckling under to the left's destructive fear-mongering on this no-brainer alternative energy source?

Continue reading "Democrat Lite A Big GOP Does Not Make"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:01 PM

May 26, 2009

Sotomayor, Reverse Empathy and the Rule of Law

True to form, President Barack Obama -- in his remarks introducing his Supreme Court nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor -- said he was doing one thing while doing the exact opposite. He articulated his criteria for the optimal nominee yet chose someone who falls squarely outside those criteria -- as best we can tell.

But what's all the fuss? A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little conservative minds. Obama's mesmerized audiences are not supposed to pay attention to the meaning and context of his words, only to their aesthetic appeal and to the tonal qualities and modulation in his voice.

Obama said a Supreme Court nominee's two most important qualities are her rigorous intellect and mastery of the law and her recognition of the limits of the judicial role -- that a judge's job is to interpret law, not to make it.

Then came the "but," the exception that imperceptibly swallowed the rule. He quoted former Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes as saying, "The life of the law has not been logic; it has been experience." In other words: "Forget what I just said about how judges should interpret, not make, the law. I want my judges to have empathy. And don't tell anyone, but when I say 'empathy,' that's code for bending the law to achieve the results I want based on the selective empathy I have for certain victimized groups."

Before you fall for the upcoming protests that Sotomayor truly is a practitioner of judicial restraint, you might want to examine her record, including the case of Ricci v. DeStefano.

Continue reading "Sotomayor, Reverse Empathy and the Rule of Law"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:19 PM

May 21, 2009

Still Politicizing Our Security

Democrats are outraged that former Vice President Dick Cheney is publicly defending the Bush administration's policies regarding the war on terror. How dare he defend the Bush record in the face of the partisan slander that began during Bush's first term and continues to this day unabated? Why, he's demeaning the office he serves.

It must have slipped their minds that radical environmentalism's high priest, former Democratic Vice President Al Gore, has gallivanted the world over, maliciously excoriating the Bush administration. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe there was ever the slightest complaint from the Democratic decorum police.

Does this ring a bell? "He betrayed this country! He played on our fears. He took America on an ill-conceived foreign adventure dangerous to our troops, an adventure preordained and planned before 9/11 ever took place."

How convenient, also, for Democrats to overlook that Cheney didn't start any of this. He isn't going about the country leveling unprovoked attacks against the administration. He is responding to Democratic attacks and thuggish threats to criminalize Bush administration policies.

But it's not Gore's attacks to which Cheney is responding. He's reacting to the far more current but equally vicious (though subtler) attacks against the Bush administration by President Barack Obama himself.

Continue reading "Still Politicizing Our Security"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:57 PM

May 18, 2009

Abortion Doublespeak Part of Pattern

With due respect to the millions who adore President Barack Obama, I just don't understand what causes people to hear only his lofty rhetoric and appeals for unity while turning a deaf ear to his polarizing language and actions, for example, on the subject of abortion.

In his book "The Audacity of Hope," he seemed determined to address every issue from the perspective of achieving some kind of common ground. We'll give a little bit of this to liberals and a little bit of that to conservatives and all live happily ever after.

I'm sorry, but I believe Obama calculatingly employs this approach mainly as a smoke screen to hide his real agenda, which resides anywhere but on common ground. He specializes in paying superficial respect to his opponents' arguments while proceeding to bury them. The examples are endless.

He calls forced union membership "free choice." He masquerades as a fiscal disciplinarian while authoring nationally bankrupting budgets in perpetuity.

He endorses capitalism as a superior economic system while undermining it with other words and actions. He condemns it as "unfair" and decries achievers as "selfish" and "greedy." He's set on restructuring our economy away from the free market and toward government control, from taking over private businesses to setting executive salaries to subsidizing mortgages to nationalizing health care. But he knows better than to condemn capitalism outright, because if he did, the American people finally would wise up to his endgame.

Continue reading "Abortion Doublespeak Part of Pattern"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:48 PM

May 14, 2009

Next on the Statists' Menu: Health Care

Since Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign, proponents of socialized medicine have bombarded us with nonstop demagoguery about the 40 million-plus uninsured to create a crisis mentality sufficient to catalyze sweeping "reforms." Their efforts didn't stand much of a chance until the advent of the pseudocrisis-exploiting administration of President Barack Obama, which never met a "crisis" it couldn't leverage.

The number of uninsured people is grossly misleading. Just because you are uninsured doesn't mean you have no access to medical care. And just because you are insured under universal systems doesn't mean you will receive care.

If you don't think the administration is parlaying the crisis angle, then you must have missed the feigned urgency in Obama's declarations that "reform" must be completed this year.

Obama wasn't kidding when he promised fundamental change. With him, many big things must happen, and they must happen yesterday, for he knows he has a finite window of time available to effectuate his mischief before people finally awaken to the horrors of the Obama hurricane.

What about this 47 million uninsured figure we've heard so much about -- thanks to the Clintons, Michael Moore and armies of George Soros disciples?

Continue reading "Next on the Statists' Menu: Health Care"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:56 PM

May 11, 2009

Fearing Our Government

Of the dozens of reasons to be concerned about the ever-growing and unchecked power of the federal government under President Barack Obama, the upcoming assault against conservative talk radio may surpass them all.

It's not enough that liberals dominate the executive and legislative branches, liberals are poised to control the judiciary, and, at liberals' direction, government is absorbing ownership and control of large chunks of the private sector. They must also shut up the opposition.

We have genuine cause for alarm on multiple fronts -- and actual alarm indeed exists among increasing numbers of people, not all of whom are predisposed to excitability.

The government has declared war on innocent life in the womb in the name of "free choice." It is spending unconscionable amounts of money it doesn't have and can't possibly acquire without taxing the primary producers in this nation into abject servitude. It's set to impose "cap and trade" taxes in the name of protecting an environmental threat that exists mostly in the data-resistant prisons of their ideological minds, which will yield no environmental benefit but will cause irreparable economic harm.

It has passed constitutionally repugnant and morally odious legislation, carving out new crimes for violent acts motivated by "hate" against certain protected groups. Neither military veterans nor conservative males are among the protected groups, but pedophiles very well may be. The proscribed "hate" under the statute may not be "hate" at all, but mere political or theological disagreement with the view of the dominant media culture and the ruling class on, for example, the normalcy of homosexual behavior. Meanwhile this same ruling class and its enablers, who are so selectively indignant about certain majority opinions they mischaracterize as "hate," openly bask in the kind of behavior no one can rationally dispute as hateful at the White House Correspondents' Association dinner.

Continue reading "Fearing Our Government"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:48 PM

May 07, 2009

Memo to Capitalists: Be Very Afraid

Lately, MSNBC's Chris Matthews has been on a childish tear, taunting Republicans to admit their belief in the biblical account of the Creation. Someone ought to ask this paragon of smug self-satisfaction why, if he's so brilliant, he unquestioningly echoes the demagogic hyperbole of global warming fanatics hellbent on destroying the economic system responsible for producing unprecedented prosperity in the advanced industrialized world.

Oh, yes, it's fashionable to denounce capitalism these days, but the historical record is clear. As Richard C. Bayer documents in his 1999 book, "Capitalism and Christianity," the gross domestic products remained flat in the 1,000-year period from 500-1500 for all now-advanced industrial countries but rose geometrically with the advent of merchant capitalism (1700-1820) and modern capitalism (1820-present).

More specifically, "Real per capita U.S. GDP in 1989 ($18,317) was seventeen times what it was in 1820 ($1,048)," using 1985 real dollars. The growth rates of the other advanced industrial nations showed exponential jumps in that period, as well. But this track record didn't keep class warfare exponents in the 1930s from blaming our economic hardship on capitalistic exploitation, and it isn't keeping them from doing it today.

As long as people have different worldviews, there will be vigorous debates about the effectiveness, fairness and morality of capitalism compared with other economic systems. But common sense supports history's empirical evidence in validating the generalized notion that robust economic production will accompany political and economic liberty rather than command and control systems.

People will produce more when they are allowed to retain more of the fruits of their labor. You simply cannot expand the economic pie by separating rewards from efforts. To do so is a failsafe prescription for economic stagnation -- if not immediately, then in the long run. Yet the current administration and its wholly owned congressional partners have embarked on a course to destroy capitalism from every imaginable front.

Continue reading "Memo to Capitalists: Be Very Afraid"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:41 PM

May 04, 2009

Obama's Propaganda Campaign To Mainstream Extreme Liberalism

A fellow conservative I highly respect told me last week that he doesn't see how Republicans can ever regain the majority without reaching out to moderates, because, he said, only 30 percent of Americans are conservative. Let me try to clear up this growing misconception.

The issue is quite timely, considering that GOP-defecting Sen. Arlen Specter is rationalizing his self-serving move as necessitated by an increasingly intransigent conservatism in the Republican Party. He echoes the David Frum Republicans that the party is too conservative, backward-looking, stale and out of fresh ideas.

It's true that a recent Washington Post/ABC News poll shows that only 21 percent of Americans now identify themselves as Republicans, compared with 35 percent as Democrats and 38 percent as independents. But there's a huge difference between party identification and ideological identification.

The bipartisan Battleground Poll, as recently as Aug. 20, 2008, revealed that 60 percent of Americans identify themselves as conservative and only 36 percent as liberal.

So it's the Republican Party that's in trouble, not conservatism. The GOP's shrinkage can't be because it's too conservative. George W. Bush, our most recent Republican president, was hardly an extreme conservative. His most outspoken critics today include wide swaths of conservatives who decried his failure to rein in federal spending and control illegal immigration, among other things.

Continue reading "Obama's Propaganda Campaign To Mainstream Extreme Liberalism"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:45 PM

April 30, 2009

Gay Tail Wags Hetero Dog

Ordinarily, we would probably be wise just to move on from last week's flap over Miss USA contestant Carrie Prejean's truthful pageant answer on same-sex marriage, but subsequent news reports reveal we are drawing the wrong lessons from the brouhaha.

Prejean -- in response to the trick question from gay activist blogger Perez Hilton, one of the pageant's judges -- refused to endorse same-sex marriage, which probably resulted in her losing the crown she was favored to win.

Not satisfied with unilaterally disqualifying Prejean and possibly damaging her career, Hilton publicly excoriated her, saying she "gave the worst answer in pageant history" and calling her a dumb B-word and worse.

Prejean, in stark contrast, said that as a Christian, she loved Hilton and was praying for him, a graciousness met with further ungraciousness from Hilton.

Hilton told the "Today" show's Matt Lauer: "I personally would have appreciated it had she left her politics and her religion out, because Miss USA represents all Americans. ... The answer she gave alienated myself (and) millions of gays and lesbians. ... Miss USA is not a person that's politically incorrect. Miss USA ... represents ... all America and is inclusive and give(s) the right answers. ... I want someone who is going to (say) things that will make everyone feel welcome. ... For example ... she's a Christian, but I don't want her talking about Jesus, Jesus, Jesus, because that's offensive to all of the Jewish Americans, to all of the Muslim Americans, to all of the atheist Americans."

Continue reading "Gay Tail Wags Hetero Dog"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:37 PM

April 27, 2009

Beware Abhorrent Hate Crime Legislation

Homosexual activists aren't easily deterred. Unable to persuade even the people of California to change the definition of marriage to legitimize their lifestyle, they're resorting to a backdoor approach to accomplish the same thing: pushing federal hate crime legislation while few are paying attention.

Well, people better wake up, because the House Judiciary Committee has already approved Barney Frank's bill, H.R. 1913, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act. The full House is expected to vote on the bill April 29, and various liberal groups, from gay activists to liberal religious organizations, are engaged in a full-court press to get this bill passed.

The bill would make it a federal crime to willfully cause bodily injury to someone (or to attempt to do so with firearms or explosives) because of his or her actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability.

If states want to pass their own hate crime legislation, they are free to exercise such poor judgment. But they don't need the long arm of the federal government cramming it down their throats.

Not only is there little constitutional justification for the federal government to legislate in this area but also the bill further impinges on state sovereignty by subjecting people to criminal liability for acts for which they've already been acquitted under state criminal systems.

Continue reading "Beware Abhorrent Hate Crime Legislation"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:57 PM

April 23, 2009

Lifesaving Memos

I sincerely hope our justifiable anxiety over government spending and taxes will not obscure our vision in regard to other alarming threats to our liberties resulting from radical policy changes from the Obama administration, including those concerning our national security.

The administration's endless multi-continent America-bashing expeditions, its hostility to strategic missile defense, its look-the-other-way approach to the ongoing nuclear and ballistic missile advancements of rogue nations while flirting with dismantling our own, and its reported termination of assembly line production of F-22 fighters -- while China and Russia are engaged in the full-tilt manufacturing of fifth-generation fighter jets -- are representative of its new approach.

But in my view, the second-biggest outrage unfolded this week, with the administration's gratuitous decision to release internal CIA memos broadcasting our enhanced interrogation techniques against enemy combatant prisoners following the 9/11 attacks. The ultimate outrage is the administration's green light to Congress to prosecute Bush administration officials for these policies, which manifestly prevented terrorist attacks and saved American lives. If these efforts make it past the partisan fantasies of such congressional charlatans as Sen. Pat Leahy of Vermont, the slumbering public might finally awaken to the totalitarian thuggery of the leftists currently in charge of the government.

Here are just a few things to consider as we contemplate these outrages:

--The administration voluntarily surrendered and published these memos instead of objecting to their discovery by the American Civil Liberties Union, assuring us, quite unconvincingly, that President Obama wrestled deeply with the issue.

Continue reading "Lifesaving Memos"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:36 PM

April 20, 2009

Peace Through Weakness

Observing the Obama administration's approach so far to the war on terror is somewhat reminiscent, if you'll accept the crude analogy, of watching Panamanian boxing legend Roberto Duran's rematch against American boxing legend Sugar Ray Leonard. Duran was within his rights to say "no mas" and quit, but it didn't keep him from losing.

But here the analogy breaks down. While Duran could avoid further Leonard blows by quitting, a nation under attack by a warring force cannot prevent further attacks against itself simply by declaring an end to hostilities. Yet that's precisely what the Obama administration appears to be doing in the war on terror, most recently with its outrageously reckless public release of classified Justice Department memos on the legality of CIA interrogation techniques used on enemy prisoners.

Democrats ceaselessly complained about the Bush administration's allegedly misguided approach to the war, contending it was too broad (Bush should have focused almost exclusively on al-Qaida in Afghanistan), that he engaged in cowboy diplomacy, and his treatment of enemy prisoners was inhumane.

Deny it if you choose, but the gravamen of these complaints was that the United States, in many ways, was the bad guy, the aggressor nation that attacked Iraq without provocation or justification, was inflicting gratuitous "collateral damage" on Iraq and its people, and routinely -- and as a matter of policy -- was brutalizing and torturing enemy prisoners in Iraq, Guantanamo Bay and everywhere else our heartless authorities could get their hands on them.

During the campaign, then-presidential candidate Barack Obama embraced these themes wholesale, saying we'd alienated other nations with our unilateralism, stirred up the Arab street against us, and become a virtual terrorist recruitment factory.

Continue reading "Peace Through Weakness"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:11 PM

April 16, 2009

Homeland Security Slanders

There has been a lot of outrage over the Department of Homeland Security's leaked summary report on "Rightwing Extremism," but by far its most odious aspects are its implications that military veterans are fertile targets for radical, violent groups and that right-wingers are inclined toward racism.

Information from this April 7 report was provided to law enforcement officials to help them prevent terrorist attacks against the United States.

The "Key Findings" are way light on objective facts but heavy on subjective opinion -- opinion clearly colored by the worldviews and biases of those issuing the report. Right off the bat, DHS admits it "has no specific information that domestic rightwing terrorists are currently planning acts of violence, but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues. The economic downturn and election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment."

There's more. "The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks."

At the risk of incurring the scrutiny of the DHS, I must say that these gratuitous sentences are outrageous. In the first place, I don't know anyone playing on "fears about several emergent issues" more than the current administration, of which the DHS is a part. Even when President Barack Obama is delivering a speech on the economy purportedly geared toward reassuring Americans that things will be all right, he has to stoke their fears and anxieties about other financial shoes he expects to drop in the near future. He and his aides are the ones who have signaled they have something to gain from keeping the public in crisis mode, that "something" being the opportunity to make foundational changes to our economy and the relationship between government and the private sector.

Continue reading "Homeland Security Slanders"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:01 PM

April 13, 2009

Radicalizing Even the Faith-Based Program

President Barack Obama's recent appointment of Harry Knox to his Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships adds another redundant nail to the coffin of the irresponsible myth that he is a bipartisan unifier.

In light of the daily outpouring of evidence, one wonders whether our "moderate" Republican Obama apologists will ever admit their error in willingly suspending their disbelief in Obama's radical leftism all because of what Michael Gerson refers to as "his moderate instincts and conciliatory temperament."

Perhaps Obama's appointment of Harold Koh as legal adviser to the State Department despite Koh's unapologetic belief that American courts should sometimes refer to foreign law in interpreting our Constitution doesn't bother you. Or even his selection of Indiana law professor Dawn Johnsen to head the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel despite her taking such positions (in a Supreme Court brief, no less) that pregnancy can be comparable to involuntary servitude.

How many in-your-face radical leftist appointments must Obama make before some realize this apparently conciliatory man is indeed a polarizing radical?

Let's just look at the Knox appointment. Former President George W. Bush originally established the faith-based program, wisely or not, to help faith-based groups participate in the public square.

Continue reading "Radicalizing Even the Faith-Based Program"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:46 PM

April 09, 2009

A Christian Nation?

President Barack Obama said in Turkey: "We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values."

Well, I don't know what "we" consider "ourselves," but I do think we ought to examine that statement and why Obama felt compelled to make it a part of his world apology tour.

Can you imagine the Saudi king coming to America and bragging that his nation is not Muslim? I assure you that he's not ashamed of the Islamic character of his nation, even though his nation is demonstrably less tolerant of other religions.

So is (or was) America a Christian nation? If by that we mean that America is a Christian theocracy, that our government should give Christians preferential treatment, or that members of other faiths aren't welcome, the answer is an emphatic "no."

But if we are talking about the ideals that led to the very colonization of this land, our declaration of independence from Britain, and the formulation of our Constitution, then the answer is certainly "yes."

Continue reading "A Christian Nation?"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:26 PM

April 06, 2009

Somewhere Under the Rainbow

Alfred Hitchcock dedicated his 1940 film "Foreign Correspondent" to "those intrepid ones who went across the sea to be the eyes and ears of America ... who early saw the clouds of war while many of us at home were seeing rainbows."

Kind of brings into focus the old saw that history repeats itself. Only this time, it's our commander in chief who is seeing rainbows -- everywhere except, apparently, in America.

It's bad enough when the George Soros brigades continually disparage America, but it's almost unbearable for the president to do it -- and even worse when he's on foreign soil.

At a town hall meeting with French and German citizens in Strasbourg, France, President Barack Obama proved he hadn't just been posturing on the campaign trail when he castigated then-President George W. Bush for his "unilateralist" foreign policies. It's now clear that Obama wanted not only the American electorate to understand his disdain for his predecessor and the country he led but also the rest of the world to know it.

He told his European audience: "It's always harder to forge true partnerships and sturdy alliances than to act alone. ... In America, there's a failure to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world. Instead of ... seeking to partner with you ... there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive."

Continue reading "Somewhere Under the Rainbow"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:18 PM

April 02, 2009

Holder's Injustice

Remember the cacophonous wailing of the left over the Bush administration's alleged politicization of the Justice Department? We always knew they were just projecting, but now we have even more proof.

I first learned from my friend Andy McCarthy's blog post on National Review Online that Attorney General Eric Holder had rejected the legal opinion of his own Justice Department lawyers that the D.C. voting rights bill, which would give the District of Columbia a voting member in the House of Representatives, is unconstitutional.

Why would Holder reject the legal opinion of his own deputies? Dumb question. Because he doesn't like the answer and neither does his boss, President Obama. They both strongly support passage of the bill and do not believe a little trifle, such as an express constitutional provision forbidding it, should be permitted to get in their way. How many times do leftists have to demonstrate that they are an ends-justify-the-means bunch before it sinks in?

The Washington Post confirms that the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, "an elite unit that gives legal and constitutional advice to the executive branch," did issue an unpublished opinion earlier this year that the voting rights bill is unconstitutional. Holder couldn't let that stand, so he went back to the well, hoping for a different opinion.

Lo and behold, the solicitor general's office dutifully served up that opinion and said it could defend the legislation in court should the bill be challenged on constitutional grounds. Hmm.

Continue reading "Holder's Injustice"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:42 PM

March 30, 2009

Another Day, Another Scary Nomination

As usual, President Barack Obama is multi-tasking the dismantling of the American system on so many fronts that not all of the outrages can be properly monitored. So while you should be mortified by his dictatorial power grab with General Motors, please don't miss his recent nomination of former Yale Law School Dean Harold Koh as legal adviser for the State Department.

In his new position, Koh not only would represent the United States before international bodies, such as the U.N. and the International Court of Justice, but also would influence the degree to which laws of other countries should influence American jurisprudence.

After reading an alarming piece by Meghan Clyne in the New York Post concerning the Koh nomination and the degree to which Koh believes it's appropriate for courts to consider other nations' laws in interpreting our Constitution, I read a number of Koh's legal writings and speeches.

Clyne reported that New York lawyer Steven Stein said that Koh, in addressing the Yale Club of Greenwich in 2007, claimed that "in an appropriate case, he didn't see any reason why sharia law would not be applied to govern a case in the United States."

It turns out that on March 21, 2007, Carol Iannone, on Phi Beta Cons blog, published a letter from Stein to Dean Koh about his Yale Club remarks. Stein wrote, in part, "In your discussion of 'global law' I recall at least one favorable reference to 'Sharia', among other foreign laws that could, in an appropriate instance (according to you) govern a controversy in a federal or state court in the US."

Continue reading "Another Day, Another Scary Nomination"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:55 PM

March 27, 2009

Budget Smoke and Mirrors -- Where's the Outrage?

There has doubtlessly been great anxiety about the economy, but I think even greater anxiety exists over what President Barack Obama is doing and planning to do to this country. We've always had economic downturns, and we've always recovered, but we've never deliberately planned to spend ourselves into bankruptcy, from which we may not be able to recover.

True, our smorgasbord of entitlements has threatened our long-term solvency for some time, and reckless politicians have been negligent in refusing to reform them and, instead, have just created more. But Obama takes profligate spending to entirely new levels while pretending to be a fiscal hawk.

With all due respect to Mr. Obama, I don't recall ever seeing another president whine so much about the mess his predecessor left him, disgracing the motto of former Democratic President Harry Truman that "the buck stops here." Though childish and unpresidential, the worst part about it is that he's using it as a bogus justification to do much worse.

Seriously, how many times are we going to have to hear him say, "Republicans have a short memory, because as I recall, I'm inheriting a $1.3 trillion annual deficit from them"?

Stop right there. This is grossly misleading on many levels. In the first place, President Bush's budget deficits were declining nicely each year before the subprime crisis hit in 2008 (fiscal year 2004: $412.7 billion; FY 2005: $318.3 billion; FY 2006: $248.2 billion; FY 2007: $160.7 billion; and FY 2008: $454.8 billion). Second, Democrats took control of Congress in 2006 and thus share blame. Third, the 2009 budget, upward of $1.3 trillion, contained the extraordinary bailout and rescue expenditures, which Obama voted for. Fourth, eight months of this FY 2009 budget that Obama is blaming on President Bush will occur on Obama's watch (Jan. 20 through Oct. 1, 2009). Fifth, but most important, Obama is seeking to establish this atypical, artificially bloated FY 2009 as the new baseline from which his budgets should be compared, falsely implying that President Bush incrementally increased the deficit each year until it reached the annual figure of $1.3 trillion (the above numbers show the opposite) and that it will remain that high unless he -- Obama -- brings it down. Apparently smiling at our collective stupidity, he thus plans to disguise his increases in annual spending as decreases and take credit for cutting the budget in half by the end of his term.

Continue reading "Budget Smoke and Mirrors -- Where's the Outrage?"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 02:38 PM

March 23, 2009

Beltway Arrogance and Blind Faith

Rep. Charles Rangel's recent comments about President Barack Obama's budget exemplify the liberal ruling class's Beltway arrogance and blind faith in an ideology that compels it to press on the accelerator as we head for the cliff toward the nation's financial ruin.

How else do you explain the administration's and Congress' seeming indifference to the inevitably bankrupting consequences of their profligacy; their disguising a $1 trillion political patronage bill as an economic stimulus package when only 23 percent of it is arguably stimulative in the short term; and their audacity in forcing (and rewarding) banks to make uncreditworthy loans, pressuring Freddie and Fannie to "securitize" them, encouraging AIG and others to traffic in "derivatives," and then punishing all of them instead of taking the blame themselves? They are the ones who created this havoc and then refused to take corrective regulatory action when warned of the impending financial disaster.

Chris Wallace, the host of "Fox News Sunday," asked Rangel whether he was troubled by Congressional Budget Office estimates that Obama's deficits will be $2.3 trillion higher than the already-astronomical White House projections.

"I am more impressed," said Rangel, "with the fact that Obama is looking for a better-educated and a healthy -- a stronger work force, going into a new green economy, that this has to show that America can get off the ground with the deficit and move to where we were under the Clinton administration -- drawing a strong surplus. The only way for us to get out of this is to change our way of living in this country, and that's the direction in which the Obama budget is going, and I strongly support it."

When Rangel says we need to "change our way of living in this country," he does not mean that the solution to our unsustainable budgets is to tighten our federal belt and curtail government intervention in the market.

Continue reading "Beltway Arrogance and Blind Faith"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:25 PM

March 19, 2009

Mark Levin's 'Liberty and Tyranny'

Mark Levin's "Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto" couldn't be more relevant or important. It is a masterful restatement of conservative principles that is succinct (205 pages) and yet comprehensive. It is thoughtful and deep but highly readable. It is timely yet timeless.

Conservatism is under attack from puffed-up liberals, feeling their oats with the ascendancy of President Barack Obama and the huge Democratic congressional majorities, and from a disgruntled group of conservatives who believe that conservatism, to remain politically effective, needs a face-lift.

Liberal columnists are writing with unrestrained glee about conservatism's internecine wars, and conservatives are engaged in intramural debates about which principles and policies conservatives should be promoting. Levin's book will go a long way toward muting the liberals' premature gloating and refuting the arguments of those who, perhaps with good intentions, would hijack conservatism from within and transform it into liberalism lite, all in the name of political pragmatism. "An 'effective' government that operates outside its constitutional limitations is a dangerous government," Levin writes. "By abandoning principle for efficiency, the neo-Statist, it seems, is no more bound to the Constitution than the Statist. He marches more slowly … but he marches with him nonetheless."

There has not been a widely read conservative manifesto as such since Barry Goldwater's "The Conscience of a Conservative" in 1960. Given the unbridled assault on conservatism today, not to mention the personal attacks on its leading proponents, we must celebrate the release of "Liberty and Tyranny" as the modern road map back to our conservative roots.

Having eaten, breathed, slept and studied conservatism, politics, law and history his entire life, Levin, who is my friend and client, is uniquely qualified and situated to have written this book. In undertaking this formidable task, he stands on the shoulders of the giants who have preceded him but has made those giants very proud with this work.

Continue reading "Mark Levin's 'Liberty and Tyranny'"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:47 PM

March 16, 2009

Calling on Democratic Capitalists

I don't use the term "Marxist," in connection with President Barack Obama's policies, lightly or even to inflame, but to express my genuine fear that if we don't put the brakes on his agenda to remake America in his image, we'll end up both enslaving and bankrupting America by the end of his tenure.

Perhaps conservatives used the term "Marxist," "socialist" or even "Commie" too loosely on some occasions to describe the liberals' political sympathies, but that debatable question now seems moot, given our new president's overt contempt for capitalism.

This guy makes Bill Clinton look like John Birch, and yet to this day, few Democrats have dissociated from him. So where are the Democrats who have always professed their conservatism? How can they sit by idly as we witness this administration's ongoing assault on capitalism?

Where are those liberals who have always insisted that on economic issues, they differ with conservatives only in degree, not in kind -- that they are actually committed capitalists who just believe in somewhat greater government control, a somewhat larger safety net and marginally higher taxation? Where are those Democrats who, for the past 20 years, have been condemning soaring deficits and an exploding national debt? Is there anything Obama could say or do that would cause them to break ranks in defense of the capitalistic system to which they claim allegiance? With a few exceptions, it does not appear so.

When President Clinton initiated his class warfare rhetoric against Reaganomics and "trickledown economics," when he described a slightly slowed-down economy as "the worst economy in 50 years," he was mostly trying to get elected, and it worked. Remember "it's the economy, stupid"? True, he did raise taxes when elected, and he and his wife tried to nationalize health care. But in the end, he was more about himself than permanently transforming the country.

Continue reading "Calling on Democratic Capitalists"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:59 PM

March 12, 2009

Obama's Relentless War on the American Dream

It's probably poor form to piggyback onto another columnist's work, but Wall Street Journal columnist Daniel Henninger's disturbing discoveries about President Barack Obama's budget summary justify an exception. Those not blinded by the Obama cult fog have produced abundant evidence of Obama's grudge against capitalism, but Henninger's revelations are hard to top.

Despite Obama's later denials, he was most serious when he cavalierly told Joe the Plumber he wanted to "spread the wealth around." We've seen it born out in his policies so far and in the promises of those to come.

He will restore the Clinton tax hikes on higher-income earners, but there is so much more. He'll reduce the effective charitable gift deduction, thus reducing charitable giving. This is no surprise, though, because he believes "charity" is the province of government -- not the private sector.

He'll impose a cap and trade tax on corporations under the pretense of making them "greener," raise the tax rates on capital gains and dividends, reverse welfare reform, and nationalize health care.

He'll eliminate the ceiling on payroll tax contributions, which is presently about $110,000. This will be a major hit to those earning more than $110,000, not that Obama cultists will have any sympathy for those greedy beneficiaries of life's lottery, to borrow from the Al Gore vernacular.

Continue reading "Obama's Relentless War on the American Dream"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:15 PM

March 09, 2009

The Orwellian Presidential Bully Pulpit

Does the following statement from Melody C. Barnes, director of President Barack Obama's Domestic Policy Council, strike you as a) patronizing or b) Orwellian? "The president believes that it's particularly important to sign this (presidential memorandum authorizing federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research) so that we can put science and technology back at the heart of pursuing a broad range of national goals."

Your answer should be both a and b, especially when considered in conjunction with another presidential memorandum "aimed at insulating scientific decisions across the federal government from political influence."

The president brazenly sermonizes against scientifically challenged conservatives while triggering federal funding of research that is scientifically controversial and preparing to impose cap and trade penalties on corporate America in deference to global warming junk science.

While you won't hear much about this in the mainstream media, there is a meeting currently taking place in New York City that serves as an ironic backdrop for Obama's embryonic stem cell order.

OneNewsNow.com reports that more than 70 scientists -- representing the views of tens of thousands more scientists -- are meeting at The Heartland Institute's second annual International Conference on Climate Change to make the case that politically motivated alarmism, not science, is driving climate change activism, which potentially threatens the sovereignty of the United States.

Continue reading "The Orwellian Presidential Bully Pulpit"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:48 PM

March 05, 2009

There'll Be No Debate

While the erudite, urbane left demonstrates its sophistication and collegiality by personally attacking Rush Limbaugh, the nation is going down in financial flames, largely because of the unchecked policy insanity being unleashed by our new president. Yet his flacks in the media continue to shield him from even rudimentary questions that any other president would receive.

That's why you don't have to wait in suspense to see whether the president will accept Rush's offer to debate the issues. It would not be in Obama's personal interests to shift the public's attention from childish insults about Rush to substantive policy.

Do you honestly think President Obama wants public scrutiny of his policies? Do you think he'd feel comfortable being challenged on his inconsistencies, misrepresentations and astonishingly early breaches of his campaign promises?

You've surely seen his reactions on those rare occasions he's been challenged. Take his response to the Republicans' appeal that he fulfill his promise of bipartisanship on the stimulus package: "I won."

I suppose that if the president were in a debate, he could continue to dodge and obfuscate, but at least someone would be putting questions to him instead of giving him free rein to wreak havoc on our capitalistic system with the undisciplined destruction of a juvenile delinquent playing with his new chemistry set.

Continue reading "There'll Be No Debate"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:38 PM

March 02, 2009

This Is Way Bigger Than Rush

The Democrats, along with those on the right who seem more worried about incurring the disdain of the wrongheaded left than of their fellow patriots, are feverishly promoting their Saul Alinsky-inspired scheme to demonize and divide their most effective political opponents.

What would be amusing, were matters not so gravely serious today, is the utter juvenile transparency in the liberals' efforts to vilify Rush Limbaugh.

They've been doing it for 20 years, but this time, they're better-organized and have a broader purpose. So those who haven't had the courage to stand by him should understand that Rush is not the ultimate target here. We all are -- those, that is, who oppose their Marxist agenda and Stalinist tactics.

Have you noticed their coordinated effort to label Rush the leader of the Republican Party? Do you think it's accidental that James Carville so describes him? Do you think it's just coincidental that Obama called Rush out personally and that the entire flock of mainstream media sheep followed suit? Is it just serendipitous that liberal Chris Matthews baits his guests nightly to castigate Rush? Is it fortuitous that Obama's, er, ABC's George Stephanopoulos demands his guests, such as Republican Rep. Eric Cantor, to either defend or denounce Rush?

But again, they're not just after Rush. They want to destroy the Republican brand -- as if they need any help doing that.

Continue reading "This Is Way Bigger Than Rush"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:42 PM

February 26, 2009

It Just Keeps Getting Worse

Remember when liberals were wringing their hands and accusing President George W. Bush of being a dictator and a king? Of course, that was breathtakingly absurd, but what's really ironic is that these people actually want a king, provided they get to pick him.

As Barack Obama feverishly presses forward with his socialist agenda, one wonders whether any act of executive overreaching might cause the compliant, nay, conspiratorial Democratic congressional majorities to pause or, better yet, to resist.

I think not. Every assault Obama inflicts on the budget is met by Congress with: "Thank you, sir. May I have another?"

I realize liberals take umbrage at the pejorative terms "Marxist" and "socialist," but in invoking them, my purpose is neither to exaggerate nor to provoke. If the terms bother you, could you please tell me how Obama would be behaving differently if he were a socialist or Marxist just elected in this country?

Better yet, given the policies Obama and Congress are cramming down our throats, please tell me why you even mind those terms? Why not wear them proudly?

Continue reading "It Just Keeps Getting Worse"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:09 PM

February 23, 2009

The Usurpers

America's Founders believed that federal power was a necessary evil that would swallow the liberties their ancestors left Europe to obtain unless it was severely limited. But today we seem to have forgotten that freedom cannot survive the unrestrained governmental encroachments that are raining down daily from our nation's capital.

You need not have written a doctoral thesis on the political theories espoused in the Federalist Papers to understand that socialism impoverishes nations despite the professed good intentions of its benefactors. You needn't have a master's in history to realize that America is the freest and most prosperous nation in the history of the world because its prescient Framers devised a constitution that would maximize liberty by imposing restraints on government. And you don't need to be a rocket scientist to grasp that unless we put the brakes on our out-of-control federal government soon, we will go the way of all other great nations before us.

While there has long existed a tension between liberty's usurpers and watchdogs, rarely have the usurpers been in such ascendance. They are in firm control of the executive and legislative branches and are using the full force of the federal government to stack the deck in their favor in perpetuity. Just look at the taxpayer-funded payoffs of defaulting mortgagors, unions, governors, big-city mayors, liberal "public interest" groups, and ever-expanding dependency constituencies, including illegal immigrants.

But why can't they be honest about what they're doing? Have they even tried to dispute the charge that an untold amount of this so-called stimulus money will not be spent in the near future and that much of it, even when spent, will not stimulate? No, because they cannot explain away their subterfuge in such shenanigans as allocating billions of taxpayer dollars to community organizing groups, such as ACORN, whose real function is to secure elections for like-minded "progressives."

It's as if President Barack Obama and Congress were trying to turn us all into conspiracy theorists. Indeed, only the grossly naive believe the usurpers are not calculating their systematic power grabs.

Continue reading "The Usurpers"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:46 PM

February 19, 2009

Picking Winners and Losers by Executive Fiat

It is ironic to the point of absurdity that leftists could ever complain about conservatives threatening their liberties. Now back in power, they're in a full sprint to grab power and reduce our liberties.

Of course, we always knew the left's spurious charges against President Bush were not just rank partisanship but also classic projection -- accusing him of precisely the type of tactics they would employ if they were in power. And now they are -- big-time.

Let's consider just a few examples.

Former New York Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey, at the personal expense of incurring the fury of such liberal mouth foamers as MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, has helped expose hidden health care provisions in President Obama's stimulus nightmare that "will affect 'every individual in the United States.'"

The bill creates a new bureaucracy, the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, which "will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective." Note: not what your doctor deems appropriate, but what the federal government does. Doctors and hospitals will face penalties if they fail to kowtow to this fiat requiring uniformity. This new bureaucracy will receive greater funding than "the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force combined."

Worse, the bill will result in the rationing of care for the elderly. But that's OK because Big Brother has determined that individuals will benefit in their younger years and will have to sacrifice later. I'm not making this up. This is one of the rationales defenders of these innovations are serving up.

Continue reading "Picking Winners and Losers by Executive Fiat"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:19 PM

February 17, 2009

Uncanny, Disturbing Historical Parallels

Recently, I reread the chapters on the New Deal in Larry Schweikart's superb "A Patriot's History of the United States" to review parallels with Barack Obama's radical economic agenda. Here is an eye-opening, side-by-side sampling, with Schweikart's observations on FDR and the New Deal, along with mine on President Obama and his policies.

Schweikart wrote, "During the campaign, FDR, a man whose presidency would feature by far the largest expansion of the federal government ever, called for a balanced budget and accused Hoover of heading the 'greatest spending Administration in ... all our history.'"

Obama's stimulus bill sets frightening new records for federal spending. But while campaigning, he said, "I'm running for president because I believe we can choose our own economic destiny ... to go another four years with the same reckless fiscal policies that have busted our budget, wreaked havoc in our economy, and mortgaged our children's future on a mountain of debt; or we can restore fiscal responsibility in Washington."

Schweikart wrote, "Roosevelt heaped dishonor on the defeated Hoover, denying him even a Secret Service guard out of town."

At Obama's inauguration, his supporters booed, heckled and chanted tauntingly at President George W. Bush. Obama went to dinner during President Bush's farewell speech and repudiated the Bush era in his inaugural address and on his new White House Web site.

Continue reading "Uncanny, Disturbing Historical Parallels"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:24 PM

February 12, 2009

The Worst of All Worlds

At the risk of beating a very live horse, the worst of all the horrible things about President Barack Obama's "stimulus" bill is that even if it worked to stimulate the economy beyond the president's wildest expectations, it would cause a further explosion of the national debt, which would become a worse "catastrophe" than the one this bill promises to alleviate.

Yet the president is so eager to start spending the people's money he can barely be trifled to acknowledge the growing debt as a concern. When backed into a corner, all he can do is attack the credibility of his critics on the issue, as if pointing fingers at the other kid in the schoolyard either exculpates him or addresses the problem.

Twice during his tightly controlled prime-time marketing infomercial, billed as his first presidential news conference, he aimed partisan fire at Republicans for daring to raise the issue.

He said: "When it comes to how we approach the issue of fiscal responsibility ... it's a little hard for me to take criticism from folks about this recovery package after they've presided over a doubling of the national debt. I'm not sure they have a lot of credibility when it comes to fiscal responsibility."

He used the same specious argument to deflect another objection to the bill: that it's long on pork and short on stimulus. He said, "First of all, when I hear that from folks who presided over a doubling of the national debt ... I just want them to not engage in some revisionist history. I inherited the deficit ... and the economic crisis that we have right now."

Continue reading "The Worst of All Worlds"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:26 PM

February 09, 2009

No Consensus on 'Stimulus' Bill

President Barack Obama has done more in the first three weeks of his presidency to validate the suspicions of his critics than I thought possible. But of all his objectionable actions, nothing compares to his falsely labeled "stimulus" bill, which he is trying to force upon us with fear and deception.

Just consider his smug assertion that "there is no disagreement that we need action by our government to jump-start the economy."

Maybe Mr. Obama has been cooped up in the White House too long and hasn't seen the dissent, such as that expressed in a strong protest letter signed by umpteen respected economists: "With all due respect Mr. President, that is not true. Notwithstanding reports that all economists are now Keynesians and that we all support a big increase in the burden of government, we the undersigned do not believe that more government spending is a way to improve economic performance." The letter cites the failed record of "stimulus" spending in the Depression era and in Japan in the 1990s and recommends lower tax rates and reduced government as the best remedies.

But even if you accept Obama's disputed premise that spending is the panacea, his bill fails his own criteria. It's just smoke and mirrors aimed at blurring his larger goal of radically restructuring the economy. But he pleads urgency anyway, as if he were trying to set speed records for breaking faith with the electorate.

The blogger Calafia Beach Pundit trenchantly observed: "Very little of the bill involves immediate stimulus or anything that might be actually stimulative; only a little over 10 percent of the money gets spent this fiscal year, and about 30 percent gets spent next fiscal year. ... About 30 percent of the money goes to transfer payments. ... Only $20 billion would be spent over the next 18 months on highway construction; and about 20 percent of the bill doesn't get spent until 2012-19."

Continue reading "No Consensus on 'Stimulus' Bill"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:22 PM

February 05, 2009

Liberalism on Full Display

Perhaps the silver lining to the new Obama administration's frenetic flurry of executive orders, proposed legislation, "diplomatic" rhetoric and autocratic commands is that people are getting a bird's-eye view into the misguided perspectives of liberals.

By deifying Obama, his cult followers in the media and grass roots stoked his already exaggerated sense of self-confidence and encouraged him to unmask his true liberalism and unleash, full-bore, his paternalistic mischief. Let's hope that with all the hype, people are focusing and will wake up to the dangers of a hyper-energetic, intermeddling federal government and the unbridled arrogance of those who believe they are better-suited to run our lives than we are.

In just these first few weeks, we have seen alarming shifts in our approach to national defense, the war on terror, international relations, ethics in government, social issues and domestic policy.

First, there was his in-your-face executive fiat reinstituting America's support for foreign agencies performing abortion and then his proactive endorsement of the militant homosexual agenda. Then his edict on automobile emissions standards. Next, his stunningly hypocritical support for nominees manifestly guilty of wrongdoing and his self-serving exemptions for appointees from rules he has promulgated.

These were followed by the outrageously inappropriate programs Obama and his congressional colleagues tried to sneak through under cover of the sheer volume and complexity of their budget-busting pseudo-stimulus package. Then there was Obama's autocratic dictate to corporate-CEO recipients of "bailout" money to reduce their salaries to what he deems appropriate.

Continue reading "Liberalism on Full Display"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:43 PM

February 02, 2009

Senate Must Reject Faux Stimulus

Americans should contact their congressmen before it's too late about their instinctive concerns over efforts to convert the world's greatest engine of free market prosperity into a socialistic leviathan under the euphemistic cover of possibly successive rescue "stimulus" bills.

The stated rationale for the original Troubled Asset Relief Program "bailout" wasn't to stimulate the economy to get it moving again, but to toss it a liquidity life raft to loosen credit markets and keep it from drowning. That is, the idea was to prevent a catastrophe, not to empower little Napoleons in government to play God with the economy.

Former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's scare tactics -- heartfelt or not -- panicked the country into action, and TARP became a reality. Yet not much seemed to change. Politicians will always be able to say that if we hadn't implemented TARP, America's economy would have tanked beyond our wildest nightmares. And being without the supernatural power to prove a negative, we'll never be able to disprove their claims.

Of all the concerns we had concerning TARP, our greatest should have been that once we opened the door to this magnitude of governmental intervention -- especially under a Republican administration -- we'd have even greater difficulty in resisting efforts by politicians to reopen it in the future anytime they pronounced there was a crisis.

Sure enough, Mr. Obama and his confidants view this "crisis" with eager anticipation as an opportunity to actualize their dreams for government to assume its rightful place as Master of the Universe and choreograph the economy on a super-macro level.

Continue reading "Senate Must Reject Faux Stimulus"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:18 PM

January 29, 2009

Targeting Rush: Saul Alinsky Would Be Proud

In his eight full years as the recipient of endless vile, often-delusional slander, President George W. Bush rarely grumbled, much less counterattacked his tormentors. Yet before he completed his first week in office, President Barack Obama -- a dedicated disciple of Saul Alinsky, who is to left-wing radicalism and social agitation what Karl Marx is to communism -- declared war on Rush Limbaugh.

This was a calculated move by a man who professes to be open to all ideas but apparently brooks no dissent. He not only does not tolerate dissent well but also really doesn't even like to be questioned, as we saw during the campaign, when he accused the normally fawning press of grilling him for merely asking a follow-up question. We caught another glimpse of this last week, when he showed irritation at the White House press corps for daring to ask him a policy question after he had decreed that the sole purpose of his visit was to press the flesh.

But Obama's effort to target Rush is not just his ego at work. He has begun a full-court press to advance his extreme left-wing agenda and was angling both to garner enough Republican support to insulate himself against future accountability for failure and to validate his self-styled image as a bipartisan uniter.

That's why he invited a group of Beltway conservatives for dinner, in a move reminiscent of Hillary Clinton's "listening tour" -- as if discerning observers believe that listening, as opposed to projecting an image of openness, was either Clinton's or Obama's purpose. That's why he surrounded himself with big-business CEOs as he unveiled his misnamed "stimulus" package. That's why he often throws meaningless, abstract bones to conservatives in his speeches while having no intention of diluting his specific concrete liberal policies.

Obama is savvy enough to realize he can't eliminate all dissent. But he's enough of an Alinskyite to know that marginalizing and demonizing his strongest opponents could intimidate the fainthearted into supporting or withholding criticism of his policies and increase his chances for success.

Continue reading "Targeting Rush: Saul Alinsky Would Be Proud"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:57 PM

January 26, 2009

Gitmo Questions for Press Secretary Robert Gibbs

During his first week in office, President Barack Obama signed an executive order requiring that the Guantanamo Bay detention facility be closed within a year. Later communications from his office disclose that he hasn't yet fully explored the potentially negative consequences of closing the facility. The problem, he said, is more complicated than it first appeared. This raises a number of questions, Mr. Gibbs:

--How can President Obama credibly maintain that the issue is more complicated than he thought, when people have been raising these problems for years? Is he just now discovering that there are serious consequences involved, or did he already know and finesse the issue during the campaign for political purposes? If he didn't know (and even more so if he did know), doesn't he owe former President George W. Bush an apology for his unfair criticisms? Doesn't he owe the American people an explanation as to how he could possibly have been unaware of such rudimentary aspects of this fundamentally important national security issue?

--Given that he now concedes there are unexplored complications, wasn't it precipitous and imprudent of him to issue the closure order? What if further research indicates there are no reasonable alternatives other than to bring these prisoners to the U.S. mainland and grant them the full panoply of constitutional rights? Or does he actually favor full-blown constitutional rights for terrorists? If so, will he not be leading America back to its pre-Sept. 11, 2001, mindset, which treated terrorism as a law enforcement matter rather than a military one?

Continue reading "Gitmo Questions for Press Secretary Robert Gibbs"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:33 PM

January 22, 2009

They're Poor Winners Too

Leftists are always lecturing Republicans and conservatives on the importance of civility and bipartisanship yet revealing, whether winner or losing, that they are the ones who need lessons in manners and collegiality.

If you aren't convinced of the left's nonpareil arrogance and nastiness from observing their behavior toward President Bush and Vice President Cheney for the past eight years, then contrast the behavior of Mr. Bush's staff leaving office and that of Mr. Clinton's, who literally trashed the White House like juvenile delinquents.

Fast-forwarding to this week, did you see Obama supporters booing President Bush at the inauguration, singing, "Na, na, na, na, hey, hey, hey, goodbye"? Pure class.

The Washington Times reported that these same Obama supporters mocked Mr. Cheney "with derisive laughter when he appeared on huge TV screens by the Capitol grounds, rolling down a ramp in a wheelchair after suffering a back injury moving out of his Naval Observatory home. 'Good riddance!' one man yelled."

Nor was it just rude mobs at the parade. "Hardball" host Chris Matthews wasn't content to bask in his euphoria over Obama's assumption of office. Like many of his colleagues, he needed to kick Bush as he was going out the door. "There'll be no more bullying of the world, no more acting like one of the bad guys on occasion. We're going to try again to be the good guy of the world and to get along with our fellow democracies. It is a dramatic change that's to come." Dramatic, indeed, Chris.

Continue reading "They're Poor Winners Too"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:44 PM

January 19, 2009

Republicans Must Turn Down the Kool-Aid

It's going to take real courage the next four years for Republicans to swim against the tide and oppose Barack Obama -- in whom so many have placed their hopes, almost to the point of idolatry. But if Obama governs in a way that's consistent with his promises, the country's future security and prosperity will depend on spirited opposition.

It's bad enough for the liberal media to deify Obama, but it's almost unbearable for right-wing commentators and politicians to jump on this bandwagon, as well, as if Obama's personal attributes have blinded them to the policy dangers he represents.

During the Bush years, the left blamed Bush for the absence of bipartisanship, when, by any rational measure, they were the ones whose relentless vitriol made bipartisanship impossible.

Forgive the analogy, but their reversal of blame is reminiscent of a memorable scene in the movie "Animal House," when fraternity hotshot "Otter" pressured the hapless legacy pledge, "Flounder," into lending him his brother's car. When Otter returned the car after having demolished it, Otter chastised Flounder for entrusting the car to him. "You (screwed) up. You trusted me."

Now, after eight years of this poison, the same specious theme from the Bush bashers has found a new application: "Republicans must work with Barack Obama and restore a spirit of collegiality to Washington," as if they have any moral authority to be lecturing, but even more importantly, as if a spirit of collegiality will solve America's problems.

Continue reading "Republicans Must Turn Down the Kool-Aid"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:12 PM

January 15, 2009

Bloodlust of the Avenging Left

There is obviously no limit to the political left's bloodlust for all things George W. Bush, as witnessed by two news items this week. If Barack Obama is as levelheaded and pragmatic as his supporters insist, he'll have his work cut out for him dealing with these avengers on his side of the ideological spectrum.

On Tuesday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers issued a 500-page report, whose executive summary boasts "was drafted to itemize and document the various abuses that occurred during the Bush Administration." The report recommends "that the new Administration conduct an independent criminal inquiry into whether any laws were broken in connection with these activities."

The same day, Slate magazine published an op-ed by Yale law professor Bruce Ackerman suggesting that 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Jay Bybee be impeached, essentially because "he was responsible for the notorious torture memos that enabled the excesses at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, and other places."

Both of these items are equally outrageous and demonstrate the potential dangerousness of leftists in power. How ironic that the gravamen of each complaint is an alleged abuse of power while its recommended remedy would constitute a worse abuse (the criminalization of policy differences), especially considering the weakness of the complaints.

The Conyers vendetta seeks to criminally probe Bush officials involved with the National Security Agency's surveillance program, the tough interrogation techniques of enemy combatants, the manipulation of intelligence, the firing of U.S. attorneys, and other matters.

Continue reading "Bloodlust of the Avenging Left"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:02 PM

January 12, 2009

Obama's Conflicting Goals

President-elect Barack Obama's enormous stimulus package would be scary enough without learning the details. To inject the same staggering amount of government-created or borrowed money into the economy as has already been spent or set aside for the government bailout when there's no proof it will jump-start our economy and no thought given to how we're going to recoup this money is madness. But when you hear some of the uses he has for this money, it is way beyond madness.

Let's put aside for a moment our valid objections to the Keynesian idea that the government can create prosperity simply by printing and distributing money as if it were "Monopoly" money. If that were true, the only limit to our sustained prosperity would be the amounts of paper and ink we could produce.

Let's also put aside the enormity of the liberal hypocrisy of railing against deficit spending for the past eight years, as Obama stands blissfully poised to dwarf those records.

Instead, let's just examine Obama's inflexible commitment to two conflicting goals, as evidenced in his interview on "This Week" with George Stephanopoulos: 1) spending the "Monopoly" money in a way most likely to stimulate the economy (assuming here the validity of Keynesian theory) and 2) spending the money in a way most likely to satisfy liberal social planners.

Obama said: "Here are a few things we're going to do. We are going to double alternative energy production. We are going to weatherize 2 million homes. We are going to create a much more efficient energy system."

Can someone explain how these ideas, apart from constitutional objections, are going to do much more than lower utility bills for those the liberal planners decide are worthy and please the High Church of Al Gore? But stimulate the economy? Please.

Continue reading "Obama's Conflicting Goals"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:52 PM

January 08, 2009

To Your Battle Stations, Conservatives

The best long-term solutions for our ailing economy are to restore market forces in every possible sector, reduce the crippling tax burden, and restore responsible fiscal practices to the federal government. Sadly, the incoming Obama administration plans on moving in the opposite direction in all these areas and believes it has a mandate to do so. Are conservatives asleep or just worn down?

Too many Americans have succumbed to the propaganda that the market is inherently evil and fraught with excesses fueled by "capitalistic greed" and that such systemic corruption has led to our economic woes. Only large-scale government intervention can rescue us from this pernicious system.

Under Democratic and Republican administrations alike, we have advanced ever more rapidly away from a free market environment and toward a command and control economy. Steadily we have accepted the notion that politicians should pick winners and losers based on their ideas of fairness rather than having market forces be the ultimate arbiter.

We have swallowed the fearmongering admonitions of public officials who insist that even apart from the moral question of picking winners and losers, our government must bail out "essential" segments of the economy, such as the automobile industry, lest the entire economy be doomed for extinction. Indeed, this word "essential" has proved to be an essential tool for the left in these difficult times.

True conservatives out there -- however many remain -- must not forget the ominous words of Obama's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, who said: "Rule one: Never allow a crisis to go to waste. They are opportunities to do big things."

Continue reading "To Your Battle Stations, Conservatives"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:49 PM

January 05, 2009

Are They All Democrats Now?

Barack Obama, itching to implement his gigantic stimulus package as soon as possible, is dangling the idea of combining his spending package with a tax cut in hopes of securing another kind of stimulus: Republican support for his package. Republicans should remember that when you polish manure, you still have manure.

Obama went to Capitol Hill Monday to promote his stimulus plan of between $675 billion and $775 billion. An estimated 40 percent of the package (between $270 billion and $310 billion) would consist of tax cuts.

Obama strategists say the proposed tax cuts are based on historical and empirical evidence of what works, not ideology. But despite his denials, Obama's intention to target the cuts to the "middle class" and exclude higher-income earners, whose stimulated activity has been shown to have the greatest economic impact, betrays his crippling bondage to ideology.

The lion's share of the relief would involve $500 tax cuts per individual or $1,000 per family for income earners and an equal amount in credits for those who qualify for the "earned-income" credit. But he would phase out those cuts and credits for households with incomes of $200,000 or more, which is inexplicable apart from ideology and class-warfare populism.

Also demonstrating his ideological motivations, Obama's plan envisions short-term relief via one-time tax credits or refunds rather than long-term changes to the tax code. As others have noted, long-term changes are far more effective at stimulating growth because producers and consumers look to the long term in making their investment, hiring and spending decisions.

Continue reading "Are They All Democrats Now?"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:28 PM

December 29, 2008

Biden's Bogus Feud with Cheney

If Vice President-elect Joe Biden were slightly less enamored with his own voice he might not confuse himself so often on issues that matter so much, such as his views of presidential and vice presidential authority.

We've all heard about Biden's feud with Vice President Dick Cheney over Cheney's supposed view of executive authority relative to the other branches of government and Cheney's view of the vice president's role.

These happen to be two separate issues. Whether the president encroaches on the constitutional authority of the other branches is a different issue from whether the vice president oversteps his bounds inside the executive branch, or in his limited role in the legislative branch.

The problem is that Biden conflates these issues. He can't seem to keep straight whether he's exercised about an overreaching executive branch or an overreaching vice president mostly inside that branch.

My guess is that he confuses the two issues because, like other Democrats and liberals, he sees Cheney as the real villain in both cases. He blames Cheney, Bush's presumed puppet master, for Bush's alleged executive power grabs and he blames Cheney for overstepping his bounds as vice president.

Continue reading "Biden's Bogus Feud with Cheney"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:44 PM

December 22, 2008

New Column: Beware of Obama's Middle-Class Task Force

When you read reports that President-elect Obama is going to establish a "task force to assist middle-class families" and that incoming VP Joe Biden will be its point man, keep a very sharp eye on what's going on here. It's an appeal to form over substance designed to convince voters he cares so much that even if he fails, he should be lauded and, of course, re-elected.

Modern Democrats have perfected the art of political propaganda, as seen in their demonization of "the Bush economy" for most of Bush's two terms despite the mostly positive economic numbers during that period. My guess is that under President Obama, they'll seek to do the reverse, if necessary: wooing the public with constant overtures to "the middle class" designed to mollify it irrespective of actual economic conditions.

Analogous to a teacher "teaching to the test," when a teacher imparts information to students to help them score higher on college entrance exams as opposed to increasing their actual knowledge of the material, President Clinton mastered the art of governing to the polls.

He had an entire team working 24/7 on enhancing his image and eulogizing his policy agenda. It's true that their task was aided by a robust economy, but the Clinton "war room" was still undeniably powerful well beyond the elections.

How much more shocking it was, then, for the young neophyte to take the Clintons to school, especially in the organizational and grass-roots aspects of the campaign. It would have been no less amazing if one of Muhammad Ali's sparring partners, such as Jimmy Ellis, had knocked Ali out instead of being knocked out himself.

Continue reading "New Column: Beware of Obama's Middle-Class Task Force"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:38 PM

December 18, 2008

Recapturing Supply-Side Coherence

It is widely assumed in conservative circles that Republicans, even under President Bush, pretty much had tax policy right but failed on the spending side. Unfortunately, there's more to it. If conservatives plan to recapture ascendancy on economic issues, they better come to a clearer understanding of supply-side theory. Then perhaps they can articulate it and recapture it as a powerful electoral weapon.

Even when history is on their side, Republicans seem to find a way not to capitalize on it and routinely forfeit the narrative to Democrats, who dwarf them in the communications department from sheer repetition, if nothing else.

The Reagan tax cuts were so phenomenally successful that it's amazing Democrats were able to recover politically as quickly as they did. Despite historical revision to the contrary, all income groups did much better under the Reagan cuts. Remarkably, a Treasury Department study showed that 86 percent of people in the lowest 20 percent of income earners in 1979 graduated into higher categories during the '80s.

The tax cuts skewered then prevailing Keynesian economic theory, producing sustained peacetime economic growth without inflation. The reductions in marginal-income- and capital-gains tax rates even increased revenues.

It doesn't matter how much we repeat this truism or how blue our faces become in the process; the relative deficit explosion during the Reagan years was not caused by the tax cuts but by increases in government spending. Yet Democrats succeeded in establishing the narrative that the tax cuts were at the expense of essential government services and that the cuts increased the deficit and the national debt, thus dubbing the '80s the decade of greed.

Continue reading "Recapturing Supply-Side Coherence"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:46 PM

December 15, 2008

What's in a Middle Name?

When I first heard that Barack Obama said he had decided to include his middle name, "Hussein," in his swearing-in ceremony, I wondered whether the satirical Web site ScrappleFace had tricked the mainstream media.

Surely, after Obama's acolytes scolded commentators for using Barack's Muslim-sounding middle name during the campaign, the president-elect himself wouldn't so quickly reverse course. But, in fact, he did.

In an exclusive interview with the Chicago Tribune, Obama said he'll use his full name in the ceremony like every other president.

I have no problem with that, as far as it goes. But Obama went further. He's not using his middle name simply because it's his middle name, but as part of a deliberate strategy to "reboot America's image" among the world's Muslims. He also plans to deliver a major speech in an Islamic capital, possibly within the first 100 days of his presidency.

Why, you might ask, is all this necessary?

Simple: because of President Bush's myriad sins against Muslims since 9/11. The Associated Press reports, as if imparting objective fact, "The U.S. image globally has taken a deep hit during President George W. Bush's two terms in office, primarily because of opposition to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, harsh interrogation of prisoners, the indefinite detention of terrorist suspects at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and mistreatment of inmates at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq."

Continue reading "What's in a Middle Name?"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:46 PM

December 11, 2008

No More Bailouts

If our government's economic experts really knew what they were doing, they wouldn't be frenetically experimenting with the people's money, treating billions like nickels. They wouldn't be so hellbent on dampening expectations and instilling fear as if oblivious to the real impact of public psychology on the economy.

I'm just not buying their doomsaying anymore. Even if they're right and we do end up in a full-scale financial meltdown, at least it will be finite and America's best days will still be ahead of us. But if we don't stop this panic-driven government intervention madness now, the chances are we'll still face a major meltdown and pass the point of no return into the bottomless pit of socialism.

The auto bailout and future proposed gargantuan government interventions must be rejected.

Government bailout architects ominously warned that unless we adopted their original "$700 billion" bailout proposal to purchase distressed mortgage assets, we'd face catastrophic economic consequences rivaling or exceeding the Great Depression.

Just weeks later, these same architects betrayed their own warnings and said their do-or-die plan would not work after all. Buying the troubled assets wouldn't inject capital into the banks quickly enough, so instead the government would have to distribute the money directly to major financial institutions.

Continue reading "No More Bailouts"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:48 PM

December 08, 2008

Responding to the Relentless Liberal Tide

If there's one thing I've learned in my 55 years, it's that liberals are relentless and will win through sheer persistence if conservatives abandon the fight.

The incoming U.S. government stands poised to forever alter the balance between governmental power and individual liberties and to replace the free market economy with socialist planning.

And what do we hear from many conservatives? That we should be encouraged that President-elect Obama has announced certain key centrist appointees and that we should convince ourselves this means he will not pursue the agenda he plainly tells us he will pursue. Savvy liberals must be laughing themselves silly.

Pro-life forces have made inroads into the collective consciousness and against the abominable practice of abortion, and they've been gratified by the appointments of two strict constructionist justices in Roberts and Alito. That said, Americans have just elected the most life-hostile president in our history, who got a complete pass on social issues during the campaign and who might be in a position to appoint three or more liberal activist judges.

But what are many conservatives saying? That Republicans got trounced because of the Christian right's uncompromising positions on social issues. That analysis doesn't square in theory (the majority of Americans are not pro-choice) or in reality (social issues were on the backburner in the national election, and social conservatism triumphed in state ballot initiatives, even in the liberal California).

Continue reading "Responding to the Relentless Liberal Tide"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:40 PM

December 04, 2008

What the Obama Cult Factor Portends

The cult mystique of Barack Obama continues while his fawning supporters blindly accept every move he makes, proving their support for him in the general election was not based as much on policy as personality. This could play right into Obama's hands if, as I believe, he does have major change on his mind.

From a policy standpoint, Obama's campaign was fueled -- initially, at least -- by his unequivocal stance against the Iraq war. He was the only credible candidate (excluding such buffoons as Dennis Kucinich) who maintained from the outset that he opposed the war.

Apart from his charisma and superior organizational operation, especially in the caucus states, his opposition to the war might have been the single most important factor contributing to his defeat of Hillary Clinton. Clinton, thinking she was the inevitable nominee, presumably believed she could sporadically assume the role of hawk with impunity looking to the general election. By the time Hillary was done posturing back and forth on the war, no one could be sure what her position really was, other than that she would say what she needed to say, consistency be damned, to best preserve her presidential viability.

Obama shrewdly capitalized on Hillary's ambivalence, parlaying his opposition to the war to his maximum advantage. Given the nation's Bush fatigue -- no matter how unjustified from a broad historical perspective -- and Bush's very low approval ratings, it only made sense for Democratic presidential aspirants to make themselves the anti-Bush.

Because the Iraq war was perceived as Bush's greatest sin and almost all other sins flowed from Iraq or were somehow conflated with it -- Abu Ghraib, rendition, waterboarding, "unilateralism," NSA surveillance, Halliburton, Gitmo, etc. -- Obama was uniquely positioned to be the anti-Bush.

Continue reading "What the Obama Cult Factor Portends"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:46 PM

December 01, 2008

Obama a Centrist? Like I'm a Liberal

I am far less convinced than many that Barack Obama will be a centrist in office. Despite his announced future Cabinet appointees, I find it amazing that people are so willing to believe he'll change his stripes that fast.

Just what about Obama's very liberal voting record to date causes one to believe he'll be any different as president? I could see an aspiring presidential candidate establishing a centrist legislative record in the state and federal senates to make himself more electable as president, but not the other way around.

There's another red flag that should give pause to those hoping against hope -- pun intended -- that Obama will indeed govern as a centrist. The very liberal mainstream media are giving Obama nothing but plaudits for his presumed centrist appointments. If they truly believed he had changed his governing philosophy, they would be anything but sanguine.

Even the far-left blogosphere has not thrown in the towel yet. They're not ecstatic, but I think deep down, they know they have a fellow traveler about to take the oath of office. As one writer for the liberal Huffington Post put it, "He will be the president we want him to be."

Also, just because this or that appointee was in the Clinton administration does not mean Obama is a centrist. The media have whitewashed any liberalism associated with the Clintons and portrayed them as committed moderates.

Continue reading "Obama a Centrist? Like I'm a Liberal"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:20 PM

November 24, 2008

Bipartisanship: For the Common Good?

Many say that now that Barack Obama has been elected, we should all work together for the common good. That sounds wonderful until you realize that we don't all agree on what is the common good.

Notice I don't take the position that Republicans should refuse to cooperate with Mr. Obama because Democrats have been indescribably partisan, cruel and unfair to President Bush for the past eight years. Those are certainly grounds to call them hypocrites, but we must always put the best interests of the nation above petty partisanship -- obviously.

So we must ask: Would it be in the best interest of the nation for Republicans to work with Barack Obama?

The only sensible answer is: It depends on what policies Obama pursues. As much as people want to believe that getting along is the highest good, there are many more important things.

If Democrats were being honest, they would agree with that statement. Otherwise, they owe us an explanation as to why they opposed President Bush at every turn. Could it be they think their ideas on Iraq, the war on terror, education, stem cell research, judges, the environment, immigration and the rest are more important to them than simply getting along? I thought so.

Continue reading "Bipartisanship: For the Common Good?"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 01:25 PM

November 20, 2008

Evangelicals -- A Drag on or Essential to the GOP?

A good friend of mine (let's call him Bob) is convinced that unless the GOP puts abortion "aside as its focal point, it simply cannot win and regain power." That's especially interesting in light of Kathleen Parker's latest column, which disses the evangelical wing of the GOP.

Bob's point is that "we've lost a majority of women over this issue as they have become one-issue voters." It's not only liberal women but also others who believe it's simply not the government's business.

Kathleen Parker broadens the point considerably beyond abortion: "The evangelical, right-wing, oogedy-boogedy branch of the GOP is what ails the erstwhile conservative party and will continue to afflict and marginalize its constituents if reckoning doesn't soon cometh." Since the 1980s or so, says Parker, the GOP "has become increasingly beholden to an element that used to be relegated to wooden crates on street corners. ... The GOP has surrendered its high ground to its lowest brows. In the process, the party has alienated its non-base constituents."

I'll resist the temptation to respond specifically to Kathleen's uncharitable indictment of us knuckle draggers because I like Kathleen personally and because I want to respond to her and Bob's overlapping contention that certain social conservatives are dragging the party down.

Bob's opinion is largely based on his personal conversations with women, and Kathleen writes, "If one were to eavesdrop on private conservations among the party intelligentsia, one would hear precisely that ... armband religion is killing the Republican Party." But do their anecdotal reports justify their conclusions?

Continue reading "Evangelicals -- A Drag on or Essential to the GOP?"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:43 PM

November 17, 2008

Toward the Tipping Point

In the aftermath of the 2008 Republican electoral bloodbath, many are discussing what direction the party should take to recapture its vitality and viability. Liberals -- as if they have the best interests of the GOP at heart -- and so-called elitist, Northeastern Republicans seem to agree the party should tack center. I disagree.

Traditional conservatism and its advocates invariably get bad raps. They're painted as uncompromising, uncompassionate extremists who won't adjust to the realities of the 21st century.

But those familiar with modern history understand that these intramural debates have been going on for decades. I remember my father complaining about Rockefeller Republicans in the early '60s, so the schism had to have begun much earlier than that.

From what I can gather, the David Brooks and David Frum wing of the conservative movement wants conservatism to grow, sort of like liberals want the Constitution to be a "living document." Big government -- at least, an active, energetic government -- is here to stay, and we better get on board. Our debate with liberals must be one of minor degree rather than kind. We should accept, rather than resist or attempt to roll back, the leviathan and instead address how best to direct it, lest we relegate ourselves to political irrelevance.

We traditionalists should acknowledge that in one sense, the Davids have a point. After all, it was no less a traditionalist than Mark Steyn, if I may categorize him as such, who recently lamented that "settled democratic societies rarely vote to 'go left.' Yet oddly enough that's where they've all gone."

Continue reading "Toward the Tipping Point"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:25 PM

November 13, 2008

Sanctimonious Stone Throwers

God bless Sarah Palin, and shame on elitists from both sides of the aisle who have denigrated, demonized and dissed her. I don't care how many "smartest people in the room" types offer pseudo-sophisticated analyses to prove she was a drag on the GOP presidential ticket. They are all manifestly and embarrassingly wrong -- and woefully out of touch -- which is par for the course for elitists.

Speaking of elitists, it's time to address their contempt for rural and southern America, particularly their ongoing smear of the South (and, truth be told, rank-and-file conservative Republicans) as racist.

For all the accolades Barack Obama is receiving, he should acknowledge a bit of egg on his face for invoking race with his failed prediction that his opponents would play the race card. "They're going to try to … make you scared of me," he said. "You know, 'He's not patriotic enough; he's got a funny name.' You know, 'He doesn't look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills."

Then there was Newsweek's poster boy for liberal smugness, Jonathan Alter, hypothecating a scenario in which Obama could lose because of racism. Alter said the following factors would have contributed:

--"Erosion in the critical I-4 corridor near Tampa and in the Panhandle, where the astonishing Republican margins among whites could be attributed only to race."

--"The transformation of the northern part of (Virginia) couldn't overcome a huge McCain margin among whites farther south. They weren't the racists of their parents' generation, but they weren't quite ready to vote for the unthinkable, either."

Alter then cited an earlier Newsweek story, which asked, "Is America Ready (for a black president)?" "The answer: only if Obama proved close to a flawless candidate, and even then, we won't know for sure until Election Day. That doesn't mean Obama lost because all, or even most, McCain voters allowed race to be a factor. But enough did to change the outcome."

Continue reading "Sanctimonious Stone Throwers"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:59 PM

November 10, 2008

Liberal Censorship and Its Roots

The most unnerving aspects about the Democrats' sweeping victory Nov. 4 are their intolerance for dissent and their willingness to censor and otherwise suppress their opponents. Consider:

We keep hearing that Sarah Palin's criticism of Obama for "palling around with terrorists" increased death threats against him, which is bogus in the extreme but consistent with the inveterate liberal tactic of chilling conservative speech by saying it incites violence.

Ohio state employee Vanessa Niekamp said she was ordered to run a child-support check on Joe the Plumber, the man who asked Barack Obama an innocuous question about redistributing taxpayer income. Niekamp doesn't remember ever having checked into anyone else without having a legitimate reason to do so, such as discovering that someone recently came into money.

Democratic prosecutors in St. Louis threatened criminal prosecution against candidate Obama's critics. In Pennsylvania, lawyers for Obama wrote intimidating letters to TV and radio stations that aired unflattering ads documenting Obama's anti-gun record. The Obama campaign complained to the Department of Justice about the American Issues Project's ad tying Obama to William Ayers. Obama supporters flooded Chicago radio station WGN with harassing calls during its interviews of conservative writers investigating Obama.

On election night, Philadelphia police arrested a man who dared to wear a McCain-Palin '08 T-shirt at an Obama celebration rally. What's scarier is that the Obama crowd reportedly chanted with joy as cops arrested the man for exercising his freedom of political expression. According to the liberal worldview, arresting someone for disagreeing with you is not censorship, but implying someone is not patriotic is.

Continue reading "Liberal Censorship and Its Roots"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:49 PM

November 06, 2008

Conservatives, Don't Be Hypnotized

Let me first say that we conservatives should be gracious in defeat because it's the right thing to do. That does not mean, however, that we should for one minute abandon the vigorous pursuit of our ideas. The left never does, and we cannot afford to.

We mustn't be sucked in to demands for bipartisanship from those who wouldn't practice it if their lives depended on it, lest we continue down the perilous path of unilaterally surrendering our ideas in the misguided hope that getting along is our highest aspiration.

Remember in 2001, after liberals had already bludgeoned President Bush for 36 days and accused him of stealing an election they'd tried to steal, when they demanded he show bipartisanship? That is, those who lost insisted that those who won reach out to them. They said Bush didn't have a mandate and should voluntarily dilute his conservative policy proposals in the interest of getting along.

In that case, bipartisanship meant that conservatives should become more liberal on their own instead of the two factions fighting for their respective programs and letting the votes fall where they may.

Now the liberals have won, and again, they are calling for bipartisanship. But they're not demanding from themselves, as the victors, the same standard they demanded of President Bush in 2000 or 2004. They aren't counseling themselves to moderate their own positions to make them more palatable to congressional conservatives; they're saying that congressional Republicans should move toward Obama in a spirit of "bipartisanship." Heads I win; tails you lose.

Continue reading "Conservatives, Don't Be Hypnotized"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:24 PM

November 03, 2008

Sorry, but Obama Scares Me

The prospect of a Barack Obama presidency makes me very nervous.

Obama's entire campaign has been based on the need for radical, transformational change, which implies there is something very wrong with America.

It's hardly surprising, then, that he has painted the bleakest picture of America instead of acknowledging, as a starting point, that we are still the greatest nation in the world.

For the past eight years, Democrats have slandered America as an imperialistic country that always prefers force to diplomacy; that attacks nations without provocation to enrich itself and to project its power; that intentionally targets civilian lives; that encourages sadistic torture of enemy prisoners, as opposed to tough interrogation techniques to extract information to save the lives of its people; that eavesdrops on private conversations among its citizens rather than monitoring terrorist communications into its borders; and that abuses rather than goes out of its way to accommodate the savages in Guantanamo's prison. None of it is true.

For eight years, Democrats have poor-mouthed the mostly growing economy. They've lied that Bush's tax cuts for all income groups were only for the wealthy and that the cuts reduced revenues. They pretend to be deficit hawks, when Obama's new spending plans alone will make Bush look like Scrooge. They said Bush wanted to destroy Social Security, when he's the only one in the past 20 years who had the courage to try to reform it. All lies.

Continue reading "Sorry, but Obama Scares Me"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:12 PM

October 30, 2008

From Being Watchdogs to Needing Watchdogs

The mainstream media, who forgot Felix Frankfurter's admonition that "freedom of the press is not an end in itself but a means to the end of a free society," long ago abdicated their role as government watchdog and now require a watchdog themselves. Never has that been clearer than in the 2008 presidential election, during which they are covering up rather than covering Barack Obama's shady past and alliances, his knee-deep involvement in corrupt practices threatening the very core of our democratic system, and his many policy misrepresentations.

Consider some items the MSM would have explored if they were guardians of liberty instead of the Obama campaign.

--When Democrats insist every vote must count, do they also mean multiple votes from individuals and votes from dead and nonexistent people? If not, why aren't the MSM demanding answers about Obama's incestuous relationship with the criminal enterprise ACORN, whose serial crimes could alter the outcome of this election?

--How can the MSM allow ACORN's dissemblers to deflect the charge that they are seeking illegal votes with "these are registrations, not ballots," as if there is any purpose in procuring illegal registrations apart from maximizing illegal votes?

--The MSM preach that money in politics necessarily corrupts, so why do they ignore Obama's broken promise to accept public financing, his record-breaking campaign receipts, and the large number of untraceable contributions?

Continue reading "From Being Watchdogs to Needing Watchdogs"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:35 PM

October 27, 2008

Fundamental Change? Count on It

I am sincerely worried that if Obama wins, the checks and balances incorporated into our Constitution may not be enough to prevent a radical and irreversible diminution of our individual liberties because a confluence of factors has emerged to create a climate conducive to fundamental change.

These factors are: a shockingly unknown candidate, whose mysterious past and numerous shady alliances are deliberately left unexplored by a corrupt, supportive media; the candidate's charismatic qualities that inspire a cultish loyalty; his intellectual trappings that create a fascination and allure among the intellectual elite, including some hypnotized conservatives; a major financial crisis that exacerbates the people's fears and uncertainties; a largely manufactured cloud of negativity placed over America by the media and a grossly partisan Democratic Party that places its self-interest above the national interest; and an apparently discredited Republican Party and conservative movement that have been blamed for our actual and perceived problems.

All of these could lead to entrusting this man with unprecedented power, giving him a license to operate with minimum scrutiny and an opposition party effectively impotent to oppose his radical blueprint for America.

More than ever, perception is trumping reality. An unprincipled Democratic Party, aided by a morally decadent media, has demonized President Bush, the Republican Party and America itself with distortions and polarizing propaganda designed to dispirit and divide Americans on the bases of race, class and gender. Just look at the domestic and foreign policy picture they have painted the past eight years.

While we are having serious financial problems now, we had a strong economy for most of President Bush's two terms, but the media pushed the Democrats' critique that it was in perpetual recession. As for our real financial crisis, objective observers understand Democratic programs and policies primarily caused it, but Democrats have successfully blamed Republicans for it.

Continue reading "Fundamental Change? Count on It"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:21 PM

October 23, 2008

Obamanomics Abhors the Free Market

For Obama Kool-Aid guzzlers who believe Joe the Plumber was a premeditated Republican plant to trap Obama into admitting his communist inclinations (even though Obama approached Joe, not the other way around), I refer you to Obama's history of similar utterances in favor of soaking the rich.

In June, Obama said he'd designed his tax and spending policies to deal, in part, with the challenge of our "winner-take-all" economy, where the gains from economic growth skew heavily toward the wealthy. "A strong government hand," he said, "is needed to assure that wealth is distributed more equitably." He said he'd seen "no evidence" that tax cuts, particularly on business, spurred growth, calling the idea "flawed economics." He must be unfamiliar with the Kennedy, Reagan and George W. Bush years, pre-financial crisis.

In April 2005, Obama mocked President Bush's reference to an "ownership society," where "each of us are on our own, managing risks and returns in the free marketplace." When asked how "the government should help us share the risks of the new economy and reap greater rewards from the new economy," Obama replied, "Well, right now what we're seeing is the average American is reaping all the risks and not many of the rewards."

In September 2006, Obama agreed with a questioner that "there needs to be an increased focus on the common good, directing more energy and resources toward improving the income and standard of living of Americans who are not in upper-income brackets." Obama added, "I think the problem is that they've got a different idea of America than the idea that we've got." You think?

In March 2007, Obama said Bush wants government to have no role in ensuring that America is prosperous for all people and not just some. The "term for it (is) 'social Darwinism' -- every man and woman for him or herself." Obama must be kidding to suggest Bush has no commitment to a safety net, with his prescription drug and education policies, to name a few.

Continue reading "Obamanomics Abhors the Free Market"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:52 PM

October 20, 2008

OK, Let's Skip the Liberal Label

There's little doubt America is a center-right nation, which is why Barack Obama denies and conceals his liberalism and packages himself as a harbinger of hope and change.

Obama's policies represent change all right: change from almost everything our Founding Fathers considered sacred and vital to the preservation of individual liberty in America.

He also offers hope: hope for those who share his shame in what America has become, what it stands for, and what makes it unique in world history. Hope that an unenlightened America can be remade by this "transformational" man in an image pleasing to George Soros, the Hollywood elite, MoveOn.org, the Daily Kos and Michael Moore.

But if labels bother you, let's look at Obama's alliances and policies and let them speak for themselves.

If you are so intoxicated with "hope" that you believe Obama wasn't aware of and not in sync with the Rev. Wright's militantly racist and anti-American views or his black liberation theology, then it's probably too much to ask for you to be objective about his links to Bill Ayers and ACORN.

Continue reading "OK, Let's Skip the Liberal Label"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 02:24 PM

October 16, 2008

Socialism! There, I've Said It

In certain unscripted moments, Barack Obama has given us a glimpse of his socialist inclinations, but I wonder what percentage would vote for him if they truly understood the extent of his radicalism.

Yet the financial crisis has created a climate of fear and uncertainty and unleashed an unprecedented tolerance for large-scale government intervention, which is playing perfectly into Obama's hands. People are blaming this largely Democratic-spawned mess on Republicans because Bush is still president.

Maybe I'm being too much of an alarmist, but I'm worried for the first time in my life that the election of a presidential candidate could lead to a fundamental change in our system of government. Just listen to the comments of post-debate focus group members expressing a knowing willingness to accept Obama's socialism, such is their angst at the subprime mortgage mess.

Already some 38 percent of Americans do not pay income taxes, and Barack Obama wants to increase that percentage dramatically. How ironic that he and other Democrats pretend to be targeting their message to "working-class" people when many of their constituents aren't working. But such is class warfare that the upper-middle class and wealthy are demonized as not earning an honest living.

Do you suppose it has registered with class warfare-receptive Obama voters that Obama is deliberately turning the American dream on its head? Could it be any clearer that his message to the middle class is: Don't aspire to achievement, success and wealth because a) it is immoral to have more than others, b) the government will take your wealth away from you and give it to others, and c) why bother to bust your rear end to make more when you can vote yourselves money from the public trough?

Continue reading "Socialism! There, I've Said It"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:08 PM

October 13, 2008

Still Time for Voters To Wake Up

Strapped to a polygraph on national TV, I would assert quite confidently that I would strongly condemn thuggish and criminal tactics by a candidate I supported. The ends do not justify the means for me and most other conservatives I know. I wish I believed the same were true for liberals, far too many of whom are deliberately turning their backs on the corruption defining Obama's campaign.

It would be bad enough if the Stalinesque stench engulfing the messiah's campaign were limited merely to its efforts to elect him. But what we fear is that these campaign tactics are of a piece with his policy agenda and his vision for America.

Sincerely intending no melodrama here, it's hard not to conclude that Obama aims to change America in fundamental ways, the common denominator of which would be to diminish individual liberties, the most distinguishing feature of the unique American system. Sadly, most Obama supporters have no clue what Obama is ultimately about or how his innocuous-sounding ideas could permanently destroy our freedoms.

It's inconceivable that even a low-level Republican candidate could have Obama's associations and employ his campaign tactics without being driven from the race. And yet we've got a man running for the highest office in the land surrounded with anti-American allies and covert election burglars, all protected by an unprecedented mainstream-media cover-up.

Democrats tell us they place the highest possible value on the integrity of the election process, yet their uniform response to ACORN's systematic assault on the voter registration process is unmitigated indifference and denial.

Continue reading "Still Time for Voters To Wake Up"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:36 PM | TrackBack (0)

October 09, 2008

The Stealth Candidate

Democrats assume Republicans are raising Obama's many questionable relationships in a desperation effort to salvage the election. You might think this is splitting hairs, but I believe the reason is that these relationships scare the daylights out of us.

Conservatives were very much opposed to Bill Clinton for myriad reasons, but with decades in elective office in Arkansas, at least he wasn't a stealth candidate. Though rumors and mysteries abounded, Clinton was hardly a blank slate who emerged out of nowhere.

Obama is different. He burst onto the political scene and has risen with such alacrity that even many of his supporters don't have a clue what he's about or where he would take America.

It's no wonder the conspiracy types are whispering that he's the Manchurian candidate. It's not as if he's embracing his past; it's more as if he's concealing it, and for good reason. People have a right to know just how radical this man is because America's destiny is in the balance.

I've always been extremely confident that no matter which party is in power, it can only do so much damage in four years because of the ingenious safeguards our Constitution contains to preserve the essential structure of government that maximizes individual liberty. But I admit I'm more concerned today.

Continue reading "The Stealth Candidate"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:12 PM

October 06, 2008

Don't Go Wobbly; Follow Sarah

There are many reasons that Sarah Palin is energizing the conservative base. It's not just her authenticity, freshness, noble defense of traditional values, and vivaciousness. This lady is finally giving red-state conservatives a voice, and she's taking it to the other side without apologies.

Democrats are crying foul because she's confronting Barack Obama for his worrisome attitudes about America and his way-more-than-casual association with unrepentant domestic terrorist William Ayers. Some squeamish conservatives are counseling that we ignore this issue either because it is unpleasant and unfair or that it's a distraction from the "substantive" issues.

Nonsense. This issue is neither unfair nor a diversion. It is imperative that we learn the extent of Obama's intimacy with this man. It's vital that we examine whether this relationship is part of a pattern of Barack Obama associating himself with people and causes that are hostile to the foundational principles of this nation.

We must reject the Democrats' convenient talking point that McCain and Palin can't walk and chew gum at the same time. That if they focus on Ayers, they can't explore Wright, Rezko, Raines, ACORN, the Democrats' primary culpability for the financial crisis, the evils of socialized medicine, the danger to America in Obama's retreat-and-defeat foreign policy, or his hostility to the free market.

Indeed, we must applaud Sarah Palin for standing up to her opponents and returning hostile fire. We're ready for her to lead the charge, not only on Obama's sordid relationships but also in articulating the monumental differences between the liberal and conservative approaches to governance.

Continue reading "Don't Go Wobbly; Follow Sarah"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:51 PM

October 02, 2008

Election-Altering Media Bias

It would be foolish of me to deny the obvious truth in a recent e-mail message I received pointing out how different the presidential polls would be today if the mainstream media were not so liberal.

Quit complaining, you say; there's an alternative media led by your brother, you whiner. Quit calling me a whiner, especially about the current plight of Republicans. It's my party, and I'll whine if I want to.

Unlike the MSM, the alternative media are honest that they are in the opinion business and freely admit their ideological leanings. They don't pretend to exemplify objective journalism. But unlike the MSM, their ethical commitment to truth is not routinely compromised by their mind-altering bias, as with that disgraceful episode known as Rathergate.

The MSM are a case study in psychological anomalies. They don't just deny their biases to us; they deny them to themselves, all while conspiring to affect the outcome of the election.

How do you reconcile their sincere self-denial of bias with their simultaneous demonstrations of bias? An epidemic of liberal insanity, with one side of the liberal brain forgetting to inform the other of what it's up to?

Continue reading "Election-Altering Media Bias"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:25 PM

September 29, 2008

Pinning the Tail on the Donkey

I believe John McCain won the foreign policy debate hands down, but he was unimpressive on economic issues, which, in fairness, were not supposed to be the subject of the first debate. But he can redeem himself in the next debate. Thankfully, Obama is exceedingly vulnerable here, even more so than on foreign policy, which is a mouthful.

McCain must attack Obama's class-warfare assertion that every economic problem we face, including, preposterously, the financial crisis, is a result of the Bush tax cuts. If McCain's going to be a supply-sider, he must begin talking like one. He must also steer far away from the silly populist line that the free market is somehow to blame for the crisis. Leave such blasphemy to the Obama Democrats.

But McCain's first order of business must be to address the financial crisis head-on -- instead of in generalities, as both he and Obama did in round one.

McCain should not consider this a problem but a softball served up by recent history and the comparative behavior of the two political parties and the two presidential candidates that he must knock out of the park. If McCain is willing to hit Obama in the gut with the full truth about the genesis of the crisis, he could emerge from the next debate as the clear favorite.

McCain's opportunity here is even richer when you consider that on this matter, despite his scant political record, Obama has very dirty hands. He cannot be allowed to pretend to have been a bystander when it's incontrovertible that the policies leading to this crisis were vintage Obama. The people who caused it are Obama's political allies and close friends.

Continue reading "Pinning the Tail on the Donkey"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:44 PM

September 25, 2008

Hiding the Ball

Why does Barack Obama play hide the ball with his personal resume, concealing his extreme leftist ideology and denying his damning associations? Question kind of answers itself, wouldn't you say? Be concerned, very concerned.

Obama hides his liberalism for the same reason every other liberal presidential candidate has: The electorate tilts center-right. This isn't just my gut speaking or some self-serving theory I'm propounding.

The Battleground poll -- a well-respected bipartisan affair conducted by the Terrance Group, a Republican polling organization -- and Lake Research Partners, a Democratic organization, tells us 60 percent of Americans identify themselves as conservatives.

But the specifics are even more telling. Twenty percent consider themselves very conservative, 40 percent somewhat conservative, 2 percent moderate, 27 percent liberal, 9 percent very liberal, and 3 percent don't know or didn't answer.

So John Kerry in 2004 and Barack Obama in 2008 didn't deny they were the most liberal senators because liberalism has become a dirty word through a clever conservative propaganda campaign. They denied it because liberalism is a minority position in reality, albeit an extraordinarily effective vocal minority.

Continue reading "Hiding the Ball"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:44 PM

September 22, 2008

The Hair of the Dog

"The private sector got us into this mess. The government has to get us out of it," said Barney Frank, which illustrates why conservatives often say liberals have a socialist bent.

Free market conservatives understand that many problems have been caused by government's officious intermeddling in the private sector. The subprime mortgage crisis is no exception.

History has shown that liberal prescriptions don't work, but when they fail, liberals invariably not only deny responsibility for their do-gooder manipulation but also insist on even more government intrusion. Think of it as "the hair of the dog" remedy on steroids.

For example, many of our health care problems can be traced to increased government control and the reduction of market forces. Yet the liberal solution is full-blown nationalized health care. Never mind that it doesn't work anywhere in the world and always leads to waiting lines and inferior health care. Never mind that the United States has the best health care in the history of the world, notwithstanding admittedly serious problems.

Another example is Social Security. Instead of creating a trust fund segregated from general revenues, congressional liberals with an insatiable appetite for spending raided Social Security revenues from day one. The system has been one big Ponzi scheme funded by IOUs from one arm of government to another. Bill Clinton and Al Gore had the audacity to propose a "lockbox" to secure Social Security, when their ideological predecessors happily breached their promise for the original lockbox.

Continue reading "The Hair of the Dog"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:26 PM

September 18, 2008

Scapegoating Tax Cuts

One has to wonder just how much more Democrats will milk class-warfare politics before people wake up to their deception.

No matter what economic problems we face, Democrats always find a way to blame them on the "rich" and the Bush tax cuts. Why? Because it rallies their base and -- they hope -- will alienate enough others against evil Bush Republicans to give Democrats a prohibitive advantage on domestic issues.

Joe Biden even blamed the current mortgage crisis on the Bush tax cuts. He said: "We should try to correct the problems that caused this ... (which are) the profligate tax cuts to the very, very wealthy that John (McCain) wants to continue."

Never mind that low- and middle-income earners received greater tax rate reductions than the highest-income earners; that doesn't fit within the Democrats' class-envy template. Forget the reckless legislation forcing financial institutions to lend money to people who probably couldn't pay it back -- to satisfy the liberals' obsession with looking compassionate and pandering to minorities. Forget that Obama was the second-highest recipient of campaign cash from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (according to the Center for Responsive Politics), cash aimed at keeping congressional regulators off their backs. Forget that big fat cat Democrats served in executive positions at these quasi-governmental entities and milked them at taxpayers' expense. Forget that Obama chose one of those fat cats, Jim Johnson, to serve on his vice presidential search committee.

Despite the Democrats' destructive practice of blaming every economic woe -- from Enron to rising oil prices -- on the Bush tax cuts, the tax cuts had nothing to do with those problems, including the mortgage crisis.

Continue reading "Scapegoating Tax Cuts"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:02 PM

September 15, 2008

On Theocracy and Double Standards

In the next few weeks, we're going to hear a lot of hot air from Joe Biden as he tries to recapture the spotlight from Sarah Palin. One thing I doubt we'll hear from him is that rare sensible gem he uttered a few years ago about Democrats and people of faith. But he would do well to remember his fleeting words.

Biden said: "We have too many elites in our party who look down their nose on people of faith. ... That's the big problem with my party."

You can say that again, Joe. But next time, you ought to try listening to your own words instead of just talking to hear your head rattle.

If Biden was sincere, why won't he take issue with liberals in the media and elsewhere who routinely demonstrate their contempt for Christians?

Whether it's Whoopi Goldberg hyperventilating about the separation of church and state, Charlie Gibson distorting Sarah Palin's views on the intersection of faith and governance, or Obama himself disparaging small-town Christians for their unashamed reliance on the Bible, liberals just don't get it. For them to occasionally pretend they do just adds insult to injury.

Continue reading "On Theocracy and Double Standards"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:36 PM

September 11, 2008

Enduring Authenticity vs. Fleeting Charisma

Many Democrats, including Joe Biden himself, are second-guessing Barack Obama's selection of Biden, but I have to wonder how many are having even greater misgivings about Obama leading the ticket.

How quickly the political landscape can change. The dynamics of this presidential campaign have turned faster than a Jack Bauer torture target. But those praying that Palinmania is as ill-conceived and fleeting as Obamamessiahmania will be sorely disappointed. Building one's house on the rock of Sarah Palin is quite different from erecting it on the shifting sands of Barack Obama.

As the Democratic primary season was winding down, discerning Democrats began to have serious buyer's remorse about Obama, as shown by Hillary Clinton's dominance in the late primary contests.

But Democrats faced a titanic dilemma because cashiering Obama might have salvaged this election but caused a permanent exodus of black voters from the party.

These unpleasant realities, I believe, forced Democrats into denial about Obama. They might have had rumblings of awareness that he wasn't the demigod they'd assumed but clung to the illusion that he was at least partially a post-partisan paladin who could rise above the mundane milieu where mere mortals meander.

Continue reading "Enduring Authenticity vs. Fleeting Charisma"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:41 PM

September 08, 2008

Palin's a Tough, Smart Conservative Woman: Deal With It!

Liberals excel in blinding themselves to their own biases and hypocrisy and blaming conservatives for their own sins, all of which they are showcasing in their frantic reaction to the Sarah Palin nomination.

Not only are they trying to destroy Palin. They are straight-facedly denying it and accusing Republicans of manufacturing this charge to exhibit phony sympathy for women.

Conservatives, after all, couldn't possibly be supportive of female Palin based on merit; it's just a political ploy to purloin Hillary voters. Liberal captives of identity politics just can't comprehend that neither gender nor race matters to conservatives. It's all about the candidate's political philosophy, approach to governance and qualifications to serve -- not those artificial constructs that liberals have exploited through the years.

Don't get me wrong. Palin's beauty and tough-as-nails femininity are refreshing icing on a delicious cake for conservatives, but if she were not demonstrably conservative, they'd be depressed -- not energized.

But you'll never convince the liberal press, which sees everything through the lens of gender and race consciousness and indiscriminately projects that propensity onto conservatives.

Thus, Newsweek's Anna Quindlen is reduced to grousing about the "hypocrisy" of conservatives in honoring the Palins for bringing a baby with Down syndrome to term rather than scolding them with "pursed-lip accusations of promiscuity."

Continue reading "Palin's a Tough, Smart Conservative Woman: Deal With It!"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:43 PM

September 04, 2008

Get Back in the Kitchen, Sarah

If I were an aspiring sexist or racist -- God forbid -- yet still cared what people thought about me, I'd make sure I became a conspicuous liberal. I'd also make sure my targets were conservative. That's the ticket to immunity for all kinds of outrageous conduct and statements.

If you are a liberal darling, like Bill Clinton was for a decade and a half, you can exploit, abuse and sexually harass women and still be considered a champion of women's rights. When you're his equally leftist wife, you can be the commander in chief of bimbo eruptions, obliterate your husband's victims' characters, and be celebrated as a feminist icon.

If you're a liberal icon like Jimmy Carter, you can refer to Barack Obama as a "black boy" without anyone batting an eye. If you're a liberal like Joe Biden, you can "praise" Obama as clean and articulate or joke about Indians and Dunkin Donuts' with barely a whisper of disapproval from the monolithically liberal mainstream media.

If you're a liberal cartoonist like Ted Rall, you can caption Condoleezza Rice as the president's "House Nigga." If you're a liberal talk show host like Sly Sylvester, you can refer to her as Aunt Jemima. And when conservatives demand an apology, you can say: "It is with a heavy heart that I apologize this morning to Aunt Jemima. She wasn't a self-serving hack politician who got up in front of Congress and lied." And the quickest path to the top of the liberal class is to ridicule Justice Clarence Thomas.

So when it comes to the liberals' treatment of Sarah Palin, it's business as usual -- and then some.

Continue reading "Get Back in the Kitchen, Sarah"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 01:52 PM

September 02, 2008

Who's Being Hypocritical?

Liberals are outraged at the supposed hypocrisy of Sarah Palin (and conservatives) for supporting abstinence-only education and family values generally in light of revelations concerning the pregnancy of her teenage daughter. It's only fair, then, that they should be called upon to explain their own hypocrisy in the compassion, privacy, gender and race departments.

Liberals are sick and tired of conservatives lecturing them about family values. Yet it is liberals who do most of the moralizing and sermonizing, seeming to derive their entire sense of superior self-worth in favorably comparing themselves with heartless, bigoted conservatives.

Liberals claim a monopoly on compassion for the poor, minorities, women and homosexuals. Yet when they get the chance to score political points, they abandon their allegiance to these groups as quickly as Barack Obama threw the Rev. Jeremiah Wright under the bus. Just ask Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice or Michael Steele.

Liberals are fed up with conservatives for trying to regulate their "private" behavior. Yet it is they who want to regulate every minute aspect of our lives, from smoking to eating to weapons to energy consumption to confiscatory taxation to health care to retirement security.

Liberals insist that what a public official does in his private life is irrelevant to his public fitness or conduct. Yet they're now telling us that the private conduct even of a relative of a conservative candidate is fair game.

Continue reading "Who's Being Hypocritical?"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:33 PM

August 28, 2008

Obama: Too Cool By Half?

Obama is the perfect candidate, not for the nation, but for Democrats, who have been waiting for Godot since George W. Bush's first-term inauguration -- someone to deliver them, to deliver America from the wretched George W. Bush.

The paradoxical Democratic Party, which holds itself as the party of the people, often manages to find a presidential candidate that is anything but a man of the people. From Adlai Stevenson to John F. Kennedy to Michael Dukakis to Al Gore to John Kerry, and now, Barack Obama. Elite, intellectual, erudite, sophisticated? Arguably so in most cases. But common? Someone who can relate? Only in their Utopian dreams.

This year, the party's unspoken, perhaps even unrealized yearning for a super-elitist nominee is an outgrowth not only of the party's self-perception as superior to red-state, flyover America but also eight long years of perceived suffering under the "reign" of George W. Bush.

We may argue over whether liberals are ashamed of their nation generally. But it is absurd to deny they're ashamed of it as long as George W. Bush is its president. To them, he is a national embarrassment and, while he's in office, America is an embarrassment.

They've demeaned Bush as a simpleton cowboy with dangerous bravado who has set us back decades in foreign relations. They can't wait to put a different face on America, one that will, in the words of Bill Clinton, have "more partners and fewer adversaries" and "rebuild our frayed alliances." One that doesn't "assault science" or defend "torture." Or, in the words of Barack Obama, an America whose people won't embarrass us because they can't speak French when in France.

Continue reading "Obama: Too Cool By Half?"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 02:32 PM

August 25, 2008

Party Unity, My, er, Eye

In one sense, it's incomprehensible that Barack Obama would forgo an opportunity to reunite his party by picking Hillary Clinton as his running mate. But in his place, wouldn't you be willing to sacrifice a little if it guaranteed you'd never have to view and smell Bill Clinton's sock feet propped up on the Oval Office desk?

But whatever will this messianic emissary of change do to unite his party? That is a legitimate question, is it not, since unity, harmony, love and bliss have been Obama's main campaign themes since his entry onto the presidential campaign stage?

How, inquiring minds wonder, can Obama join us all together -- bitter clingers and all -- in one big communal bond of sentimental good will if he can't even inspire unity in his own party?

That's unfair, you say? It's not his fault? It's those grudge-holding Clintons and their die-hard supporters who won't bury the hatchet?

Oh? I thought it was George W. Bush's fault that the countries of Old Europe wouldn't support the American efforts against Iraq. I thought it was Dubya's fault -- that evil, unilateralist, go-it-alone cowboy -- that the United Nations wouldn't do the right thing and enforce its own resolutions that Saddam Hussein had violated at will.

Continue reading "Party Unity, My, er, Eye"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:37 PM

August 21, 2008

The 'Swiftboating' Charge and Infanticide: A Guilty Diversion

You can always tell when you've scored points against a liberal candidate. He and his minions, following the combined examples of Bill Clinton and John Kerry, immediately assume counterattack mode -- rather than addressing the allegations -- and accuse the accusers of "Swiftboating," by which they mean smearing with false charges.

John Kerry's handlers adopted the technique when Kerry's fellow Swift boat veterans unveiled his true military record after Kerry brazenly made his record an essential campaign issue. They attempted to turn the table on the truthful Swiftees by painting them as liars.

The episode proved that the mainstream media will go to any lengths to save a floundering Democratic presidential campaign, including conspiring to manufacture a new word for our political lexicon designed to discredit and silence the accusers. Henceforth, "Swiftboating" would describe the untrue smearing of a political opponent.

The irony and injustice is that the Swiftees -- not John Kerry -- owned the truth. Never did Kerry or the mainstream media refute any of their allegations. But the Swiftees did expose Kerry -- objectively -- as having lied about his record in a surprising number of particulars. Kerry never even attempted to answer the allegations, despite repeatedly promising that he would. He didn't because he couldn't. The only option left open to him was to launch a diversionary and fraudulent counterattack.

Which brings us to the present campaign. The Democratic Party, acting like a man in heat who is driven by anything but his rational mind, lusted after Barack Obama and made him its nominee when it should have known better.

Continue reading "The 'Swiftboating' Charge and Infanticide: A Guilty Diversion"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:57 PM

August 18, 2008

Pro-Choice McCain Veep Equals Political Suicide

I hate to rain on John McCain's parade right after he trounced Barack Obama at Rick Warren's Saddleback Church forum, for which I heartily applaud him, but McCain's trial balloon consideration of a pro-choice running mate demands a response.

The prospect of an Obama presidency is so horrifying that many conservatives have temporarily put aside their misgivings about McCain to focus on defeating Obama.

They hold their noses on McCain's immigration record, his campaign finance reform zealotry and his newfound acquiescence to the propaganda narrative of environmental extremists. But they are profoundly appreciative of his tougher stance against tax increases and mindful of his undeniable superiority over Obama on foreign policy and national defense. Recent world events, including Russia's naked aggression against Georgia, magnify this already-glaring contrast.

But while national defense necessarily occupies the front burner, McCain would make a fatal mistake to assume that social issues, especially abortion, are ever off an equally blazing front burner for an inestimable number of social conservatives, the Republicans' most reliable voting bloc over the past three decades.

Last Wednesday, McCain "floated the prospect" of picking a pro-choice running mate and said that former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge would be an acceptable -- and possible -- selection.

Continue reading "Pro-Choice McCain Veep Equals Political Suicide"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:23 PM

August 14, 2008

Relentless Race Narrative

Sadly, there isn't the slightest chance liberals will forgo the race narrative in this presidential race because painting the other side as racist is essential to their need to feel morally superior.

They can't accept Obama's candidacy as evidence of progress toward racial equality. They can't permit the advancement of colorblindness because they sense it is detrimental both to their political interests and their self-esteem. After all, if liberals lost their self-anointment as moral paragons, they'd have nothing left because their policy agenda has the track record of an Edsel, with the exception that it won't ever be taken off the market.

A mainstream media favorite, MSNBC's Howard Fineman, in a piece criticizing McCain for allegedly painting Barack Obama as less American and patriotic than McCain, couldn't help but throw in a pointed reference to race.

In describing the attendees at a Pennsylvania event for McCain that McCain surrogate Joe Lieberman headlined, Fineman wrote: "The crowd comprised a slice of America that McCain needs if he intends to win Pennsylvania and the election. And that slice is: white (I did not spot a single African American in the crowd), rural, 'exurban,' and mostly Protestant, with local roots stretching back centuries."

See who always brings up this subject? What conservative would spend his time obsessing on skin color to the point of surveying the crowd for evidence of racial diversity? And what conservative would refer to American Caucasians as a "slice" of America, as if whites were some monolithic voting bloc?

Continue reading "Relentless Race Narrative"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:48 PM

August 11, 2008

The 'Making Abortion Rare' Hoax

ABC reports that the group "Democrats for Life," whose title gives new meaning to "oxymoronic," decided last week not to press the Democratic Party to restore a life-tolerant "conscience clause" to its party platform. Isn't it time the party quit this charade that it wants to make abortion "rare"?

The "conscience clause," which appeared in the 1996 and 2000 platforms, at least paid lip service to tempering the platform's express support of a woman's "right to choose," stating: The "Democratic Party is a party of inclusion. We respect the individual conscience of each American on this difficult issue, and we welcome all our members to participate at every level of our party."

But the party ended all pretense of inclusion in 2004 by replacing the "conscience clause" with a statement that Democrats "stand firmly against Republican efforts to undermine" abortion rights. And despite the obviously halfhearted efforts of Democrats for Life, the clause will also be absent from the 2008 platform.

As Democrats for Life's Director Kristen Day asked during the 2004 platform debate: "So what are they saying, that because we want to protect the rights of the unborn, our own party says we're automatically Republicans? This has to be one reason that our party is having trouble appealing to many people in churches."

Amen, Kristen. But perhaps instead you ought to be asking yourself why you are still a Democrat and why you gave up in 2008 with barely a whimper. Just how committed can you and your organization possibly be to protecting the lives of the unborn when you shamelessly roll over on the issue that presumably matters the most to you?

Continue reading "The 'Making Abortion Rare' Hoax"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:44 PM

August 07, 2008

It's Obama's Viability, Not McCain's, That Should Surprise Us

The press is shocked that Barack Obama has "yet to close the sale," given the "political logic" that favors Democrats in this election. They must not have been paying attention during the final segment of the primary season, when Hillary Clinton consistently thrashed the hollow superstar.

That said, Obama's handlers betray not the slightest concern because they believe that despite the statistical tie in the polls, Obama's supporters are much more intense than McCain supporters. "That is going to mean more favorable turnout patterns; it is going to help us register voters; it is going to help us organizationally," said Obama's campaign manager, David Plouffe.

Indeed, political analysts have been speculating for months now that Obama could transform presidential politics by energizing a whole new class of voters.

If that's true, McCain has his work cut out for him because the voters Obama is inspiring seem more enamored with his image than who he really is and what he stands for. Being largely apolitical and emotionally driven, they won't be as receptive to the ever-unfolding, troubling revelations about Obama.

While the media are stunned that Obama is not resonating in line with their expectations, others wonder how he can resonate at all, given his McGovernesque, leftist agenda and his damning associations with America-hating preachers (Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pfleger), terrorists and radicals (William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn) and a mentor (Frank Davis) who was a member of the Moscow-controlled Communist Party USA and who, according to Investor's Business Daily, "fled Chicago after the FBI and Congress opened investigations into his 'subversive,' 'un-American activities.'"

Continue reading "It's Obama's Viability, Not McCain's, That Should Surprise Us"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:35 PM

August 04, 2008

Liberal Press Circles Wagons Around Obama

The liberal media are unhinged over John McCain's recent ad campaign against Barack Obama, which erased Obama's 9-point lead in the polls and tied the race. How dare McCain challenge their anointed one?

Obama is not the only one convinced he is "the one we've been waiting for." The media are also annoyed they have to endure this irritating uprising from McCain, who is officiously intermeddling with the inexorable flow of history.

Sunday show hosts, editorial pages, and both print and TV news stories this past weekend were pregnant with outrage over McCain's "negative" campaigning -- "negative" being defined as anything, truthful or not, that places Obama in a less favorable light than they require.

Their attitude toward Obama is not unlike their approach to the global warming issue: They accept the environmentalists' edict that man-made, apocalyptic warming is occurring, and no one is allowed to dissent.

So if McCain exposes Obama's policy inconsistencies, questions his character, highlights his presumptuousness, inexperience or superficiality, lampoons the media's crush on him, criticizes his injection of race into the campaign, or responds to Obama's attacks, the media yell "foul."

Continue reading "Liberal Press Circles Wagons Around Obama"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:15 PM

July 31, 2008

Obama's GOP Support Groups

I suppose I have to accept the insanity that some glassy-eyed Republicans are considering voting for Barack Obama, but I don't have to like it.

Whether or not this is an example of the liberal media trying to create rather than report news, The New York Times is reporting that small enclaves of Republicans are meeting around the country to discuss their support for Obama. Let's call them "support groups."

One such support group in Indiana is calling its attendees "whispering Republicans." Fittingly, these renegades, as the Times called them, met over iced tea and brownies, as if to signify the sweetness of their move toward the other party's "unity" candidate. At the meeting, they "took turns explaining why they liked Mr. Obama and recalling the strange stares from other Republicans."

Why would they call disapproving stares "strange"? I'd say they were perfectly normal, considering Obama's far-left plans for America.

One member of the Indiana kumbaya group reported: "It was sort of like a group therapy session. We all wanted to make sure we weren't a little crazy."

Continue reading "Obama's GOP Support Groups"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:31 PM

July 28, 2008

Obama's Ongoing Foreign Policy Implosion

There is one unexpected gift that John McCain's presumptive nomination brings to the GOP. McCain was certainly not my choice, but if any other Republican candidate were running, it's unlikely we'd be seeing as much emphasis in the campaign on foreign policy, and Obama's unfolding incompetence in this area might have escaped essential scrutiny.

Democrats were no doubt looking to capitalize on the Iraq issue before it became apparent that the success of the surge had exceeded all but our most optimistic expectations. Because McCain is perceived as one of the most ardent proponents of the surge and Obama fiercely opposed it, Obama finds himself caught in a trap over the entire issue.

Obama's arguments, echoing the perennial anti-Iraq-war line Democrats have been peddling for years now, that we shouldn't have attacked Iraq in the first place are falling flat, given the radical reduction in violence levels the surge has produced. He is reduced to him-hawing, sputtering, spinning and misrepresenting his unequivocal opposition, which he was earlier showcasing -- during the Democratic primary season -- to contrast himself with chief rival Hillary Clinton.

In the process, Obama's worst attributes are coming to the fore: his pride and arrogance, which paralyze him from admitting any real weaknesses, such as his egregious foreign policy judgments, and his astounding shortcomings as a would-be commander in chief, starting with a profound naivete, inexperience and either ignorance or fundamental dishonesty.

Although liberals generally confer a presumption of sophistication and erudition on fellow left-wingers, they have to be shaking their heads in disbelief, wondering just what their nomination contest has wrought. They can't help but realize that Obama is proving himself daily to be woefully unprepared for the presidency.

Continue reading "Obama's Ongoing Foreign Policy Implosion"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:26 PM

July 24, 2008

The New York Times and Liberal Fairness

I don't know which troubles me more: the liberal media's fawning over Barack Obama or the great number of people who are buying into his mystique so uncritically. But what bothers me more than either of these is the arrogance of the liberal press, which sadly is typical of so many liberals.

The media's deification of Obama is largely responsible for the perception that Obama is superhuman. Their coverage of his European tour -- the most breathtakingly presumptuous junket we've witnessed in American politics in ages -- is but the latest example.

How anyone can fall for the media's Obama rock star charade, given his repeated demonstrations of unfitness for the presidency, is a subject better suited for psychoanalysts.

But we can chalk up the media's irrational exuberance to their eagerness to have someone of like mind -- someone sufficiently socialistic and appeasement-oriented -- back in the Oval Office. With their insane aversion for President Bush and their craving for undefined change, it's hardly surprising they're blind to Obama's increasingly obvious flaws.

What's more difficult to stomach is their reckless obliviousness to their own close-mindedness, intolerance, unreasonableness and conceit -- and their mistaken projection of these attributes onto their conservative opponents.

Continue reading "The New York Times and Liberal Fairness"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:20 PM

July 21, 2008

Obama: Milking His Failures

Isn't it enormously ironic that Barack Obama now finds himself the unintended beneficiary of the Iraq surge that he so vocally -- and wrongly -- opposed?

It seems that Obama's untimely calls for a withdrawal timetable have lingered long enough to have some merit in the eyes of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Al-Maliki told Der Spiegel, a German magazine, that U.S. troops should withdraw from Iraq "as soon as possible, as far as we are concerned. U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama talks about 16 months. That, we think, would be the right timeframe for a withdrawal, with the possibility of slight changes."

Assuming al-Maliki said it, and there has been some dispute, it doesn't make Obama right -- even now. But it's hard to imagine al-Maliki would be saying anything helpful to Obama's campaign today if the United States had followed Obama's disgraceful surrender policy instead of implementing the surge in 2007 -- over his strenuous objections.

Obama Democrats have been adamantly opposed to our intervention in Iraq from the beginning, including when they voted for it for political expediency and then later claimed they were duped into it.

Continue reading "Obama: Milking His Failures"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:23 PM

July 17, 2008

The Liberal Establishment's Race Race

One would have hoped that Barack Obama's presumptive capturing of the Democratic presidential nomination would have dampened the mainstream media's obsession with race, but instead, they've figured out a way to obsess even further about it since Obama's putative victory.

You almost can't read election headlines in a major newspaper without some reference to race issues. Earlier this week, Google News featured three back-to-back stories in its "Elections" section highlighting race:

"McCain looks to make gains among black voters," "Race, Foreign-Policy Plant Doubts for Obama" and "Poll Finds Obama Isn't Closing Divide on Race."

The last one is a New York Times article analyzing results from the latest New York Times/CBS News poll. It proves the Times just can't let race go, whether it's because of the liberal guilt of its reporters and editors or because they want to keep the racial pot stirred for purposes of newspaper sales or because they deem racial polarization advantageous to Obama.

The story's lead paragraph reads: "Americans are sharply divided by race heading into the first election in which an African-American will be a major-party presidential nominee, with blacks and whites holding vastly different views of Senator Barack Obama, the state of race relations and how black Americans are treated by society, according to the ... poll."

Continue reading "The Liberal Establishment's Race Race"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:12 PM

July 14, 2008

Tony Snow

I can't pinpoint the precise date I met Tony Snow, but I remember it was over the telephone. We talked about one of his passions: radio. And we became fast friends. From that point on, we talked every few months, until about three or four months ago when I could only get his voice mail.

I knew something was up because he was always good about returning calls. Still, I probably would have chalked it up to his busy schedule, except that I read news reports that he was forced to cancel a number of speeches because of illness.

I remember e-mailing a few mutual friends: Lucianne Goldberg and Kathryn Lopez. Both shared similar concerns, but we were all cautiously relieved when follow-up news stories reported Tony was OK.

I had no idea Tony had taken a turn for the worse, so the news of his death Saturday completely shocked me. The last time I talked to Tony about his disease, he was entirely upbeat and optimistic.

In retrospect, I have to wonder whether he wasn't sparing some of his friends the extent of his illness because he never wanted to dwell on himself and certainly was never seeking sympathy.

Continue reading "Tony Snow"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:43 PM

July 10, 2008

Ashamed of America?

Some say Obama's critics have taken their eye off the ball in focusing on his associations with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers, thus giving his far-left policies a pass. But that's a false choice.

Those criticisms would have more validity but for the fact that Obama's associations and his approach to policy are inextricably intertwined, flowing from a particular -- and consistent -- mindset.

It's no accident that Obama sat for 20 years and had his children baptized in a church whose pastor revved up his congregation by denouncing America with expletives, that he had a working relationship with a professor who expressed pride in his past anti-American terrorism, or even that his wife admitted a first-time pride in the United States with the advent of her husband's electoral success.

Repeated references to Obama's close connections with these people and others are not drive-by attacks designed to incriminate Obama merely by association. Their purpose is to shine a spotlight on Obama to help determine whether he embraces or is sympathetic to the same negative views about America as his soul mates.

When you couple Obama's associations with his many statements and policies, a disturbing picture emerges, suggesting Obama might lack a robust pride in America -- at least in what he considers to be its present state. This point was driven home again this week, as Obama expressed "embarrassment" that American children can't speak foreign languages while European children can speak English.

Continue reading "Ashamed of America?"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 08:08 PM

July 07, 2008

Behind Enemy Lines

While everyone is focusing on Barack Obama's shifting positions on issues such as campaign finance, NAFTA, telecom immunity and Iraq, we're missing his incursion into enemy territory to capture those reviled, though politically coveted values voters.

His recent proposal to adopt a modified version of President Bush's faith-based initiative is just another piece of his strategic plan to seduce evangelical voters to his cause.

Obama is aiming for a threefer: wooing values voters, reconciling with small-town Americans, and neutralizing the taint of Jeremiah Wright and turning the religious issue into a net plus for his campaign. Hey, no one says this guy is politically naive.

You see, most liberals aren't really concerned about the intermixture of church and state unless it involves the Christian church, and only then if it involves the promotion of biblically based ideas and values. They have no problem with the government's endorsement of the values of other religions, New Age, or secular humanism. Even the state's or politicians' endorsement of nominally Christian values don't bother them, as long as they are watered down enough to detach them from any legitimate connection to Bible-centered Christianity and reframed to embrace the secular liberal worldview.

That's why liberals react as though the world is coming to an end when Christian conservatives promote their values in the public square and political arena but approve when Democratic politicians campaign from the pulpit of churches whose congregations are sympathetic to their political agendas. That's why the press attacked Republican Mike Huckabee for using religious symbols in his campaign ads but praised Obama for "bridging the cultural divide" when he did the same thing.

Continue reading "Behind Enemy Lines"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:49 PM

July 03, 2008

Obama Protesteth Too Much

Sen. Barack Obama spoke on the subject of patriotism this past week in an effort to undo some of the damage he has already inflicted on his own image -- through his associations, his statements and policy positions -- and to obscure his liberalism.

Liberals rightly feel defensive about their patriotism because they always seem to find themselves blaming the United States for this or that, exhorting us to be more like the "enlightened" nations of Europe or forever shouting that we are a "laughing stock" in the eyes of other nations.

It was not a conservative who wrote in an editorial this week: "Tuck the soaring speeches in a drawer for another time. This year, America doesn't deserve to celebrate its birthday. This Fourth of July should be a day of quiet and atonement. For we have sinned."

It was Philadelphia Inquirer columnist Chris Satullo, who, like so many liberals, is angry at America because he sees it as standing for torturing prisoners, imprisoning enemy combatants without hearings, rendition and other denials of human rights. According to Satullo, America isn't safer because our alleged abuses have "spawned new enemies by the thousands, made the jihadist rants ring true to so many ears. So put out no flags. Sing no patriotic hymns. We deserve no Fourth this year."

Sorry, but you just don't hear much of this type of rhetoric from conservatives. And Obama and the entire Democratic establishment know it.

Continue reading "Obama Protesteth Too Much"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:24 PM

June 30, 2008

Obama's Leftist Armies

Be afraid; be very afraid. If you think Barack Obama is arrogant and leftist, you ought to see those he will have to cater to if elected -- and, according to them, even to get elected in the first place.

These leftist "netroots" are none too pleased with Obama's feint to the center the past few weeks, his "capitulation" on retroactive immunity for telecoms for cooperating with the government to monitor terrorist communications, his alleged disagreement with the Supreme Court for invalidating the death penalty for child rapists, and his flip-flop on the D.C. handgun case.

They are abuzz about the messiah's apparent abandonment of their orthodoxy. Interestingly, though, not many of the complainers really believe Obama has left them. Like Obama's longtime pastor, Jeremiah Wright, they realize Obama is quite willing to mask his inner self to get elected. But many are disgusted that he's even playing the game.

One blogger at The Huffington Post writes: "Sen. Barack Obama is risking his brand as a political reformer, according to reports today in the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post. In recent weeks, he has moderated or changed positions on a number of politically-charged issues, leading to criticism from demoralized Democratic activists."

Will Marshall, president of the Progressive Policy Institute, added, "I've been struck by the speed and decisiveness of his move to the center."

Continue reading "Obama's Leftist Armies"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:55 PM

June 26, 2008

Evolving Standards of Indecency

The Supreme Court's barring of the death penalty for child rapists in Kennedy v. Louisiana underscores the hazards in the court's abandonment of moral absolutes in favor of "evolving standards of decency" and the court's unbridled arrogance in substituting its subjective judgment for the legislatively enacted will of the people.

In Kennedy, the court reversed the decision of the Louisiana Supreme Court to uphold the capital punishment of a convicted child rapist, holding that the Eighth Amendment's cruel and unusual punishment clause prohibits executing such offenders "where the crime did not result, and was not intended to result, in the victim's death."

A United States Supreme Court with a majority of Constitution-respecting justices would have evaluated the Louisiana statute in light of the originally understood meaning of the cruel and unusual punishment clause.

Instead, today's sometimes Obama-inclined liberal activist majority subordinated to the lowest rung the clause's original meaning in favor of "the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society."

And how does the majority identify that new, enlightened standard applicable to child rape cases not resulting or intended to result in death?

Continue reading "Evolving Standards of Indecency"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:42 PM

June 23, 2008

It's Only About Winning

The Washington Post reports that Sen. Barack Obama is aggressively trying to reintroduce himself to voters, echoing the spin of Obama's advisers that not everyone knows him yet. In reality, Obama's major campaign challenge will not be to reveal, but to conceal his true identity.

Obama is not trying to introduce himself to unreached voters, but is engaged in damage control with many he's already reached -- and insulted and disillusioned.

As long as he was soaring above the fray with the lofty rhetoric of hope, change and unity, Obama could masquerade as a quasi-messiah figure. But once forced into the nitty-gritty of contested issues and debates, his false visage began to crack. Those cracks expanded into campaign-threatening fissures when voters learned about Obama's sordid associations and left-wing elitist snobbery toward small-town America.

The Post says that in his reintroduction, Obama has "offered a clear road map for the kind of candidate he is likely to become...: an ambitious gamer of the electoral map, a ruthless fundraiser and a scrupulous manager of his own biography in the face of persistent concerns about how he is perceived."

What the Post left out is that Obama has also shown himself to be an unscrupulous master of the politics of calculation and expedience. Whether on public finance, NAFTA, Iran, Iraq, Jerusalem, special interests, Cuba, illegal immigration or the decriminalization of marijuana, Obama has demonstrated a propensity for flip-flopping that could embarrass the grandmaster himself, Sen. John Kerry.

Continue reading "It's Only About Winning"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:22 PM

June 19, 2008

Ravi Zacharias: 'Beyond Opinion,' Part 2

In my most recent column, I introduced you to "Beyond Opinion," a Christian apologetics book, edited by Ravi Zacharias, that offers suggestions on how to approach the skeptic, depending on the skeptic's background or reasons for doubt or non-belief. Before leaving the subject, let me give you a stronger flavor of this interesting apologetics method and this fascinating book.

Ravi tells us an effective apologetic "pays very close attention not just to the question but to the questioner. That, in turn, leads to the relevance of the answer." He cites Jesus' walk on the Emmaus road as an instructive example.

The disciples find themselves walking with the risen Lord, wholly oblivious to his identity and telling him -- with unmatched irony -- that he must be the only one in the world unaware of what had happened in the past few days (Jesus' death and resurrection), when, in fact, he was the only one who fully comprehended it and its significance.

Instead of just dramatically proclaiming, "It is I," Jesus "explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself." Why did he take that approach? It's not that he hadn't proclaimed his identity at other times, e.g., John 4:26. Rather, "Jesus did what was needed in this moment: he pointed out to these two disciples a vast context of fifteen hundred years to show why the event on Calvary had to take place."

Among other things, he opened their eyes to understand why their presuppositions clouded their vision of who he was. They were expecting the Messiah to bring political deliverance, crushing their Roman oppressors. Instead, they crucified him. But he showed them he had come to offer a different kind of deliverance, which only his sacrificial death could achieve. As an apologist, it's best if you -- like Jesus -- approach people mindful of their circumstances and their possible presuppositions.

Continue reading "Ravi Zacharias: 'Beyond Opinion,' Part 2"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:14 PM

June 16, 2008

Ravi Zacharias: 'Beyond Opinion'

As a former skeptic, I have a particular interest in Christian apologetics: the defense of the Christian faith. I've read and recommended many excellent books on the subject but want to call your special attention to one I've most recently read because of the uniqueness of its approach and content.

"Beyond Opinion: Living the Faith We Defend" is a compilation of essays by renowned Christian apologists compiled and edited by my friend and Christian philosopher and apologist, Ravi Zacharias, that together "suggest a new vision for Christian apologetics in this century."

I love apologetics because it helped me overcome certain intellectual hurdles that I believed, rightly or wrongly, were obstructing my faith. As I delved into the subject, I was immensely gratified to learn that most of my doubts and questions had been asked and answered by biblical scholars who embraced, rather than dismissed, such challenges.

If, for example, you can't reconcile the notion that an omnipotent, omnibenevolent God could permit evil and suffering in the world, you might be surprised to discover that your concerns are hardly new. Such questions have troubled people for millennia. Brilliant and scholarly works exist addressing such questions, as well as seemingly problematic scriptural passages.

Continue reading "Ravi Zacharias: 'Beyond Opinion'"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:19 PM | TrackBack (0)

June 13, 2008

Obama's Thinly Veiled Truculence

I was watching television the other night, and someone was interviewing people on the street about the presidential election. More than one respondent stated that they would be supporting Obama because "he can bring us together." You have to hand it to Obama for being a grand master at pulling off this unity sophistry.

Indeed, Obama is so good at this scam that he has John McCain believing it -- or afraid to state otherwise for fear he'll alienate this presumed longing of the people for unity, harmony, bipartisanship, civility, hope and utopia itself.

So as a small public service, I figure I ought to do my part to debunk this myth, mostly pointing to Obama's own words and actions. Does he really pass his own test for ushering in an era of harmonious ecstasy?

While McCain is busy excoriating North Carolina Republicans for pointing to Obama's dubious relationships, Obama is wasting no time proving that he will reciprocate with no such courtesies.

Anytime someone criticizes Obama, he responds with outrage at the mere suggestion that he is subject to criticism. He has intimidated John McCain into bringing the proverbial knife to a gunfight, while he's arming himself with rhetorical grenades and rocket launchers. Obama, for example, has set up a Web site to refute alleged smears against him and calls some of the accusers "liars" -- not the kind of truculent and aggressive language one would expect from a man promising harmony.

Continue reading "Obama's Thinly Veiled Truculence"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:33 PM

June 09, 2008

McCain's Potentially Fatal 'Exit, Stage Right'

Sen. McCain could be making a fatal strategic blunder in thinking he can cobble together a winning coalition in November via the unorthodox route (for a Republican) of courting moderates and jilting the conservative base, including Christian conservatives.

It's possible that McCain will win in November, but if that happens, it will more likely be a result of Obama beating himself -- assuming Obama's campaign doesn't disintegrate before he formally secures the nomination.

McCain must begin with the bad news that his historic appeal to centrist voters is in jeopardy in two major ways. The first concerns Obama's natural fit with these voters. His mythical narrative that he can unify Americans and usher in an era of "hope" will be irresistible to many who are hungrier for kumbaya than any particular policy agenda.

Second, McCain's favorable image among centrists could disappear as quickly as the mainstream media withdraws its opportunistic love for him -- a process that has already begun. Their affinity for McCain was purely a function of his being a thorn in the side to President Bush, Republicans and conservative causes. But now that he is the GOP presidential candidate, he represents the evil Republican Party, which must be destroyed at all costs.

If this weren't enough, he is running -- how dare he? -- against their chosen messiah, Barack Obama. If they turned on Hillary Clinton over it, McCain is way beyond crisp toast. This heretical challenge to the savior from a Republican will not be tolerated.

Continue reading "McCain's Potentially Fatal 'Exit, Stage Right'"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:52 PM

June 05, 2008

The Arrogance of Obama's Leftist Supporters

It's interesting that the main people pushing Obama in the name of unity and civility are the same ones brutally trashing Hillary (and Bill) Clinton. They seem to have no sense of their own hypocrisy in defending the Clintons yesterday for far greater misconduct than that for which they are mercilessly excoriating them today in their editorials and so-called news reporting.

The hypocrisy and absence of self-reflection of this group -- mostly the mainstream media and the leftist cabal of the Democratic Party -- is born of its profound arrogance. This arrogance is also evident in the striking incoherence of their assumption that Obama can be a unifying force while working to change America in ways that are repugnant to a large plurality, if not a majority, of Americans.

You have to recognize that something about this group is just not natural when its members, such as MSNBC's Chris Matthews, can say without embarrassment that Obama sends shivers up his leg or when swooning crowds of supporters faint in his presence.

The group's obliviousness is demonstrated in its stunning state of denial over Obama's virtual free fall since the revelations about his associations with such unsavory characters as Tony Rezko and William Ayers and his longtime membership in a Christian church whose pastors and theology seem more race-oriented than Christ-centered.

You would think these fawning zealots would take notice of the backlash against Obama since he issued his outrageously divisive critique of small-town America as embittered gun- and Bible-clingers. But their Obama-intoxication blinded them to seeing anything other than that Obama still had an insuperable lead in the delegate count.

Continue reading "The Arrogance of Obama's Leftist Supporters"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:12 PM

June 02, 2008

Obama's Unity Charade

The $64 million question is how long Barack Obama can carry forward this ruse that he is a uniter, when he has placed himself in a climate that is, at the very least, quite accommodating to an anti-white racist perspective, vulgarity and anti-Americanism. How many more shoes can drop without Obama's presidential quest completely imploding?

It strained credulity that Obama could have been unaware of the toxic environment of his Trinity United Church of Christ and its pastor, Jeremiah Wright. Actually, that didn't pass the laugh test.

But now we have the Rev. Michael Pfleger bursting on the scene -- the scene being the now-infamous Trinity Church -- and spewing the most offensive, racially charged remarks imaginable.

Truly, if Obama weren't the protected darling of the mainstream media and if the Democrats were not horrified of losing their monopolistic hold on the African-American vote, superdelegates would abandon Obama in stampedes -- yesterday.

Have you watched the video of the Rev. Pfleger's racist bilge before Obama's former congregation? Just as importantly, did you witness the approving reaction of the congregation? After all, as I said at the time the Rev. Jeremiah Wright tapes surfaced, what was as disturbing as Wright's tirades was the congregation's approving reaction.

Continue reading "Obama's Unity Charade"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 08:38 PM

May 29, 2008

McCain and National Security

I'm aware of the widely held assumption that John McCain's path to victory in November requires him to capture a healthy percentage of independents and even Democrats. But his strategy could backfire if he doesn't restrain his urge to betray conservatives.

Because of his military record, his POW experiences and his pro-defense Senate record, McCain has a decided advantage over Barack Obama on national security, the most important issue for many voters and plenty important for the rest, as well.

Even McCain's outspoken support of the "unpopular" Iraq war, ironically, adds to his favorable national security image. This despite the Democrats' propagandizing against the war, their attempt to sever it conceptually from the overall war on terror, and their phony yet persistent argument that we've diverted resources away from fighting al-Qaida. The Democratic Party goes into any election with the burden of proving it can be trusted with power during times of war.

Yet for all our talk about McCain's comparative advantage on national security, many conservatives are nevertheless mystified at some of McCain's anomalous positions on the war on terror and his penchant for moving to the left here, as in so many other areas. Of all policy areas, you would think McCain could score a 100 percent among conservatives on national security, but his apparent desire for mainstream media approval and his addiction to projecting an image of unpredictability must be overwhelming.

Just this week, The Washington Post reported that McCain appears to be flip-flopping on his earlier position in favor of granting telecoms immunity for cooperating with President Bush in Bush's warrantless surveillance program to monitor terrorist activities. McCain has always sided with conservatives to deny the liberal trial lawyers their bonanza in going after these companies for rising to the president's call.

Continue reading "McCain and National Security"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:23 PM

May 27, 2008

McCain Takes Obama to School on Iraq

On Monday, John McCain wisely urged Barack Obama to join him in visiting Iraq, something Obama hasn't done since 2006, when he declared the war lost. This is exactly what McCain ought to be doing: taking it to Obama on an issue that appears to favor Obama but in reality favors McCain.

In thrashing President Bush over Iraq since before we invaded, the mainstream media and the Democratic Party have succeeded in convincing much of the public that the war is a failure and that we must withdraw immediately. The propaganda effort has been so relentless that this perception remains to a great extent, even after the dramatic turnaround occasioned by the surge. But this is primarily because the media do their best to suppress any good news coming out of Iraq.

According to Karlyn Bowman, a public opinion researcher at American Enterprise Institute, while polls indicate a majority of Americans believe the war in Iraq was a mistake (also thanks to the Dems and the MSM), they also believe substantial progress has been made because of the surge. Surprisingly -- you'd never hear this emphasized by the MSM -- only 18 to 20 percent of Americans consistently say we should remove our troops now.

A Quinnipiac University poll conducted May 8-12 basically validates Bowman, saying 22 percent believe we should withdraw ASAP, compared to 48 percent who believe we should set a timetable and 28 percent who insist we should keep troops there as long as needed.

Admittedly, different polls show different results, largely because of the wording of the questions. An ABC News/Washington Post poll, for example, asked, "Do you think the United States should keep its military forces in Iraq until civil order is restored there, even if that means continued U.S. military casualties?" It's not surprising that only 41 percent answered yes because respondents, in order to answer affirmatively, were forced to say they favored a scenario that would lead to American casualties.

Continue reading "McCain Takes Obama to School on Iraq"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:55 PM

May 22, 2008

The Real Obama OR Change We Don't Dare Believe In

Columnist Robert Novak reports that John McCain will not yield to Barack Obama's efforts to shame him into running a vanilla campaign. Instead, he says, McCain is lining up crack research operatives. Interestingly, their charge is not to gather dirt on Obama per se, but "to focus on the real Barack Obama." From where I'm sitting, that looks like one whale of a target-rich environment.

That is, McCain's operatives don't have to dig up dirt on Obama to damage his chances; they merely have to dig through the facade and uncover the real Obama. Even with the damning revelations concerning his association with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and former terrorist William Ayers, I suspect Obama explorers have barely scratched the surface.

While Obama will continue to complain that an examination into his associations is dirty politics, it is anything but. We are known by the company we keep, and this goes for applicants for leader of the Free World as well.

But in Obama's case, the McCain researchers will just be getting started with Obama's sordid associations. Where he's really vulnerable -- the area where he most doesn't want you to find out who he really is -- is on policy.

Given his George Soros brand of extreme leftism, Obama will do his best to conceal his real policy self, except to the San Francisco environmental- and social-issues anarchists, the arts and croissants crowd of the Northeast Corridor, and the neo-Marxist professorial elite in academe. Of course, now that he knows microphones and bloggers can pop up anywhere, he won't even feel comfortable letting his guard down in these friendly venues to edify us about such things as small-town bitterology.

Continue reading "The Real Obama OR Change We Don't Dare Believe In"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 01:41 PM

May 19, 2008

Over the Top Barack

Based on Barack Obama's hysterical, paranoid reaction to President Bush's remarks to the Israeli Knesset condemning the practice of appeasing terrorists, one might infer Obama was lying in wait for just such an opportunity to capture some national security street cred.

After all, Democrats begin any presidential race with a national security credibility deficit, and this one should be no different, notwithstanding the unpopularity of the Iraq war. Democrats like to think they gained congressional seats in 2006 because of the war, but a better read is that Republicans did themselves in through reckless spending, scandals and other abandonment of conservative principles.

Despite his puffed-up posturing, Obama probably recognizes this, as well. Otherwise, why would he have lashed out so nastily at both Mr. Bush (and Sen. McCain) for assuring our closest Middle Eastern ally that we would stand by it?

Obama was so sure Bush's remarks were aimed at him that he shed his nice-guy facade and gave the nation a little glimpse of his inner anger. For those who insist Obama is all sweet and light, I challenge you to listen to his tantrums in response to the president's non-attack.

Obama shouted: "I'm a strong believer in bipartisan foreign policy, but that cause is not served with dishonest, divisive attacks of the sort that we've seen out of George Bush and John McCain over the last couple days. They aren't telling you the truth."

Continue reading "Over the Top Barack"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:53 PM

May 15, 2008

None Dare Call It 'Appeasement'

Let me get this straight. It's perfectly fair for Barack Obama and his cohorts to repeatedly disparage President Bush's foreign policy as "cowboy diplomacy" but unspeakably horrific for Bush to analogize the Democrats' approach to foreign policy to appeasing Hitler?

When Obama compared Hillary Clinton's threats against Iran to President Bush's threatening "bluster" and "cowboy diplomacy," no one batted an eye.

But when Mr. Bush, in addressing Israel's
Knesset, compared those who want to negotiate with today's terrorists and tyrants to an American senator in 1939 who lamented that Hitler's march into Poland might have been avoided "if only I could have talked to Hitler," Obama, other Democrats and the mainstream media went ballistic.

What's wrong with the president assuring our major Middle East ally that, under his watch at least, America will stand by it against our common enemies, such as the Holocaust-denying Iranian regime?

Well, plenty, if you listen to Democrats and the MSM. If President Bush is articulating a position with which they don't agree, he is politicizing foreign policy -- an unforgivable sin. Never mind that Democrats not only have been politicizing foreign policy for the past seven years but also undermining our official policies in the process. Jimmy Carter’s intermeddling with Hamas, Nancy Pelosi's junket to Syria and trips to Iraq by other Democratic members of Congress to sabotage U.S. policy are but several egregious examples.

Continue reading "None Dare Call It 'Appeasement'"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:54 PM

May 12, 2008

John McCain and the Global Warming Train

If John McCain were truly a maverick, he would publicly break from the politically correct culture that demands obedience to its global warming narrative. But sadly, he continues to do the opposite.

Liberals have denominated McCain a maverick because he has taken so many positions contradictory to his party's platform and to the conservative ideology that undergirds it. Now that he is the putative Republican nominee, you don't hear much about his maverick nature, but it's certainly not because he's changed his ways in opposing his party.

Last week, he affirmed his commitment to comprehensive immigration reform, even though earlier he stepped back from it to curry favor with conservatives. One wonders what other shoes will inevitably drop should he win the presidency, especially because he has indicated he would most likely be a one-termer.

Will he revert to his visceral revulsion to the Bush supply-side tax cuts? Many supply-siders, after taking McCain to the woodshed on the issue, assure us he can be trusted on it.

If so, their efforts will redound to the benefit of the economy and nation should McCain win the election. But some of these same supply-side advocates insist we shouldn't expect him to move rightward on too many other issues.

Sorry, but I reject that zero-sum thinking, as should my fellow supply-siders; they certainly do in the realm of tax policy. While I will vote for McCain against either Democratic opponent, I don't believe we should abandon efforts to reform the "reformer" on other issues besides taxes. Are we supposed to declare a moratorium on the expression of our principles for fear it could damage his electability?

Continue reading "John McCain and the Global Warming Train"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:49 PM

May 08, 2008

In Fairness to Hillary

The question, my fellow election watchers, is not, "Why won't Hillary do the honorable thing and quit?" but "Why won't Democrats do the honorable thing and quit trying to force her to?"

Did Democrats make Ted Kennedy quit when he fought Jimmy Carter through the Democratic convention in 1980 in an effort to dislodge pledged delegates though Carter had already secured a majority? That was far worse than anything Hillary is doing.

Until one of the candidates secures the magic number of delegates (a majority) -- and that number is a moving target, given the limbo status of Florida and Michigan -- there is no nominee. A plurality won't cut it.

Nor is the candidate with the most pledged delegates automatically entitled to the nod of the superdelegates or even most of them. The superdelegates are free agents, who may choose either candidate for any reason.

The superdelegate system was designed to give the superdelegates maximum prerogative, which only makes sense because the party bosses established it to ensure their own control over the nomination process. The whole idea was to give them the power to substitute their judgment for the will of the people if, in their political omniscience, they determine the people's choice to be not prudent.

Continue reading "In Fairness to Hillary"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:51 PM

May 05, 2008

Is Barack a Team(ster) Player?

Almost every week, a new damaging story emerges about Barack Obama. Lucky for this wounded "messiah" that his disciples in the mainstream media neglect, until the last possible minute, their duty to investigate these reports. This week, there's a brand-new one, which has surfaced too late to affect the critically important Indiana and North Carolina primaries, but demands scrutiny nonetheless.

The Wall Street Journal -- admittedly a mainstream media outlet, save the editorial page -- has started the ball rolling on this one with a May 5 article examining the possible reasons behind the International Brotherhood of Teamsters' endorsement of Obama. We'll have to see whether Barack's disciples follow up.

The public line -- both of Obama and the Teamsters -- is that Obama secured the union's support by strongly condemning NAFTA, which the Teamsters believe results in the exportation of jobs. Hillary Clinton has been critical of NAFTA, as well, and even says she opposed it from the beginning. But her assertion is almost as incredible as the Bosnian sniper-fire tale because she and her two-for-one co-president were instrumental in bringing the trade agreement to fruition.

So NAFTA might be a factor, though Obama doesn't completely toe the line on protectionism, favoring certain smaller-scale agreements the Teamsters oppose. He also opposes expanded oil drilling in Alaska against the preferences of the union and favors comprehensive immigration reform over strenuous Teamsters objection. So what does Barack have over Hillary, besides her lateness to the party in opposing NAFTA?

The Journal tells us on page A1, "Sen. Barack Obama won the endorsement of the Teamsters earlier this year after privately telling the union he supported ending the strict federal oversight imposed to root out corruption, according to officials from the union and the Obama campaign."

Whoa! What's this all about?

Continue reading "Is Barack a Team(ster) Player?"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:08 PM

May 01, 2008

'Willful Blindness' to the Jihad

You might expect the lead prosecutor against the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing to tout the criminal justice system as the premier strategy to fight terrorism. If so, you're wrong.

It is precisely because of Andy McCarthy's experience in that capacity that he understands -- in a way others can't -- the crippling limitations of law enforcement and criminal prosecutions in combating global terrorism.

Though he led the Justice Department prosecution team that convicted Omar Abdel Rahman, the "Blind Sheik," McCarthy is painfully aware that "as a class, baby-boom attorneys know nothing of war. Prosecutors included." Even this successful effort left way too many militants in place and encouraged the idea that they could attack us with impunity.

The entire orientation of the criminal justice system is to protect the rights of innocents, affording the accused due process and a litany of other constitutional protections. But we are at war with an enemy who doesn't fight wars according to conventional rules. If we continue to treat them as criminal suspects rather than enemy combatants, they'll always be many steps ahead of us in a war that only they are fighting. While our government frets over their constitutional rights -- rights to which enemy combatants have never been historically entitled -- it abdicates its duty to protect American lives.

Before the 9/11 attacks, we simply did not understand that Islamic terrorists had declared war against the United States and that to have any chance in this war, we'd have to engage them militarily.

Continue reading "'Willful Blindness' to the Jihad"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:08 PM

April 28, 2008

The Rev. Wright Just Can't Help Himself

When it comes to the connection between Barack Obama and his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright -- or to John McCain's various positions on whether criticizing Obama for his relationship with Wright is fair game -- my head is spinning.

At first, the Obama defenders said Jeremiah Wright doesn't speak for Obama. Not only have Obama's ill-wishers taken Wright's statements out of context but they have unfairly imputed those statements to Obama.

Next, we witnessed the beginning of the Jeremiah Wright rehabilitation tour. He appeared on Bill Moyers' show, endeavoring to present himself as a calm, reasonable person whose statements had been twisted against him.

Then he spoke at the Detroit NAACP dinner. Forgive me if I have a different take than most Wright critics, but I read the transcript of the Detroit speech in its entirety and did not detect too much, if any, incendiary language.

Wright presented a rather innocuous talk about the differences in human beings and how our differences do not mean certain groups are deficient -- "just different." His theme seemed to be that we should strive to overlook people's differences and work toward reconciliation because we are all made in God's image. Bravo. Who could object to that?

Continue reading "The Rev. Wright Just Can't Help Himself"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:31 PM

April 24, 2008

It's Barack, Like It or Not

Loyal Democrats should be grateful to Hillary Clinton, the Energizer Bunny of presidential politics, for her perseverance. Had she not stayed in the race against enormous pressure to bow out in favor of the media's anointed one, Democrats would have ended up nominating that "seriously flawed" candidate.

But wait. They're almost destined to anyway. They have little choice. How can they avoid nominating Barack Obama -- no matter how compromised he has become?

Just consider the magnitude of the Democrats' dilemma. They desperately want to regain the White House. They believed, as did political oddsmakers, the stars were lining up to make 2008 their banner year for both the presidential and congressional elections. Barack Obama had emerged as seemingly the most impressive candidate in years.

But when things seem too good to be true, they usually are. There was no way Obama could measure up to the supernatural image his supporters and the media painted of him. But little did we know that he would crash so far and so fast, that he was not only not messianic but also, like Hillary, "seriously flawed," in the words of Washington Post columnist David Broder.

Despite Obama's string of successes, he hasn't been able to win any major states, except for his home state of Illinois. He got blown out in Pennsylvania, even against the other "seriously flawed" candidate, who recently reminded voters, via sniper tall tales, of her propensity to prevaricate.

Continue reading "It's Barack, Like It or Not"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:47 PM

April 21, 2008

Beware: Obamutopia

Barack Obama, stubbornly clinging to his right to be charismatically shallow, at first complained that Hillary Clinton was unfairly criticizing him for being all flair and fluff with no substance. Now he's upset that Clinton and the media won't let him discuss substance. Based on some of his speeches lately, I'm thinking he ought to be grateful for the diversion because his policy proposals might not survive serious scrutiny.

Maybe it's unfair to interpret literally Obama's repeated stump speech assertion that we Americans aren't perfect but are "perfectible" and conclude he possesses a New Age or secular humanist worldview rather than a Christian one, which clearly rejects the notion of man's perfectibility.

Then again, his policy proposals do sound strikingly utopian -- almost as if he's saying we truly can achieve perfection, end poverty, eradicate health care problems, establish universal harmony, legislate away all corruption, and attain wholesale energy independence without, by the way, liberating ourselves from the shackles of enviro-policemen, who forbid us from exploiting our own resources.

Obama's pitch to fawning audiences is so hopelessly idealistic and his promises so painfully unrealistic that it's amazing he's taken as seriously as he is.

If George W. Bush were to deliver the pap Obama routinely includes in his speeches, he'd be laughed off the stage. "Saturday Night Live" skits would be hard-pressed to exaggerate the vacuousness of his utterances. In fact, I'd be surprised if sympathetic journalists weren't cleaning up Obama's quotes before publishing them. But YouTube isn't so forgiving. "We believe we can change, and that's the kind of hope I'm talking about."

Continue reading "Beware: Obamutopia"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:14 PM

April 17, 2008

Mainstream Media Oblivious to Relevancy of Many Obama-gates

The dirty little secret about Barack Obama's indictment of flyover country is that he said what liberals, including Hillary Clinton, believe. Sufficient proof of this can be found in the liberal outrage at Wednesday night's Democratic presidential debate, where Obama was pressed both by the moderators and Clinton to explain Bitter-gate, Wright-gate, Ayers-gate and Flag pin-gate.

Consider the uncannily similar reactions of columnists Tom Shales and Stephen Silver.

Shales expressed indignation that ABC News moderators Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos would dare ask Obama to justify his insulting remarks about small-town Americans and his relationships with certain anti-American people.

Shale's fumed, "For the first 52 minutes … Gibson and Stephanopoulos dwelled entirely on specious and gossipy trivia that already has been hashed and rehashed, in the hope of getting the candidates to claw at one another over disputes that are no longer news. Some were barely news to begin with."

Shales was particularly perturbed that Stephanopoulos "came up with such tired tripe as a charge that Obama once associated with a nutty bomb-throwing anarchist."

Continue reading "Mainstream Media Oblivious to Relevancy of Many Obama-gates"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:37 PM

April 14, 2008

Obama's Projections of Bitterness

One of the silver linings of the mostly dismal presidential campaign has been that Democrats have finally come to see -- perhaps admit is a better word -- that the Clintons are pathological and ruthless power addicts. But that late-coming epiphany looks increasingly irrelevant, as the ascendancy of Barack Obama delivers a whole new set of deeply troubling concerns.

Democrats -- all but committed to this fresh, charismatic figure -- are forced to deny or downplay the almost daily revelations about Obama that would have derailed less promising candidates already. But they have to be concerned.

Given Obama's uncompromising liberalism, it was only a matter of time before his pretense toward unity and bipartisanship would be exposed for the mirage that it is. The contentiousness of the Democratic contest has just accelerated the process.

As these damaging items slowly dripped out about Obama, he was able to brush them aside dismissively. You'll recall his refusal to wear a flag pin, his categorical statement that "it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons under any circumstances," his assessment that the lives of our fallen soldiers in Iraq have been "wasted," his mindless promise to withdraw troops from Iraq according to an irresponsibly arbitrary timetable, and his naive remark that he would attach no preconditions to negotiating with the tyrants of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea.

The cumulative force of Obama's common-themed actions and statements would have compelled even a statistician to doubt they could be attributed to coincidence. Wasn't an objective pattern emerging to suggest that Obama would hardly be the fiercest guardian of America's national security interests?

Continue reading "Obama's Projections of Bitterness"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:19 PM

April 10, 2008

National Security Is THE Issue

While there is plenty of room for robust debate about Iraq, what concerns me is that the direction of this discussion has, ironically, taken our eyes off the real ball, which is our national security.

Don't get me wrong. I believe the Iraq war has everything to do with our national security. How we proceed -- whether we maintain sufficient forces there to ensure the nation's long-term stability or prematurely withdraw with reckless disregard for the consequences -- is critically relevant to our national security.

But instead of focusing on the national security implications, we are perennially bogged down in quibbling over the partisan flash points of whether we should have attacked Iraq in the first place or whether we're being perceived as liberators or imperialists.

Have any of the Democratic presidential candidates ever been asked, for example, whether they've considered the consequences of withdrawing our troops according to an arbitrary time schedule they have fashioned for political purposes?

They are forever excused for dodging this question on the illogical basis that the consequences of a precipitous withdrawal are not their responsibility. They didn't get us into this war in the first place (allowing here, of course, for a willing suspension of disbelief as to Hillary's assertion that she was deceived into voting for the Iraq war resolution).

Continue reading "National Security Is THE Issue"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:08 PM

April 07, 2008

Democratic Presidential Magic Goes Poof

The Democratic primary contest has degenerated from a perceived battle between the party's highest ranked superheavyweights to a fight for survival between two badly damaged club fighters.

In its early phases the campaign featured only "Hillary, the Entitled." Her inevitability had been decreed by party powers still operating under the deluded assumption that the Clinton years inspired mostly positive images, especially those of economic prosperity.

Sure, there was Bill's baggage, but the country had rejected the Republicans' attitude toward it when it punished them in the 1998 congressional elections, right? The mainstream media instantly dubbed it a "referendum on impeachment," though an equally reasonable interpretation was that the GOP losses were in line with historical midterm election trends.

But there is no denying that Bill Clinton is the only Democrat to have held the presidency since Jimmy Carter -- that's 28 years. He is the only guy that consistently stuck it to the Republicans with success, despite being politically crippled. There had to be magic with this guy -- with the Clintons.

The Clintons had become the only symbol of victory for Democrats. Even Al Gore couldn't make it to the White House when he'd won -- according to Democratic propaganda -- the 2000 election. Nor could John Kerry dispose of this Dubyah "dunce" in 2004, even with the aid of equally entrenched Democratic myths that Bush lied about Iraqi WMD, had made himself king and had destroyed our civil liberties.

Continue reading "Democratic Presidential Magic Goes Poof"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:35 PM

April 03, 2008

MSM Whiplash Victims

Hillary and Bill Clinton must be beside themselves over the way the mainstream media has treated them this presidential election cycle. If they were glass-half-full types, the power couple would be counting their blessings that this treatment didn't kick in when Bill was committing and covering up his felonies.

Had the MSM been scrutinizing and exposing the Clintons' behavior in the '90s, it's very possible Bill never would have survived his impeachment ordeal. Imagine how different it would have been had the MSM focused their investigative microscopes and analytical energies on Hillary's cattle futures bonanza; the indefensible disappearance of her law firm billing records; her heartless and capricious firings of White House travel office personnel to benefit her friends; Bill's unconscionable, unsolicited pardons of FALN terrorist inmates to shore up the Hispanic vote for Hillary's New York Senate campaign; the endless trail of corruption with Red China and North Korea; the credible rape and sexual assault allegations against Bill coupled with Hillary's collusion in defusing the "bimbo eruptions"; and much more.

What a difference a few years and the advent of a promising young liberal candidate such as Barack Obama make. Now that the media have chosen sides in favor of Obama, they've lifted their protection for the Clintons, and we're getting a glimpse of the vulnerability of the Clintons when they're separated from their MSM bodyguards.

Not long ago, the MSM was heralding Bill as the first black president, with no apparent awareness of the absurdity of this caricature. Today they're showcasing his race-baiting antics in the primaries, making no effort to obscure, rationalize or apologize for them.

Until very recently, they couldn't get enough of the microphone-grabbing, attention-starved, headline-stealing former president. Today they deride him for the very narcissism they so shamelessly enabled and are even lamenting "Clinton fatigue."

Continue reading "MSM Whiplash Victims"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 08:10 PM

March 31, 2008

Self-Destructive Democrats?

Democrats seemed determined to convert their sunny 2008 forecast into a perfect storm, which only can be diverted if either the approaching Obama front or Clinton front dissipates soon or changes directions to join forces with the other via the proverbial "dream ticket."

Until Pastor Wright managed to become Obama's potentially career-shattering albatross, Obama looked unstoppable, indeed superhuman. But as has happened repeatedly in this campaign, Hillary's persistence was rewarded -- briefly, anyway. Obama's long and close association with the incendiary pastor undercut his perceived ability to rise above both race and party.

With the passage of a little time, though, Obama appears to have recovered. Or are his rising poll numbers merely a result of Hillary's umpteenth gratuitous tall tale?

It's hard to imagine that Obama's 52 to 42 percent national lead among Democrats, his narrowing of the superdelegate gap, and his lopsided acquisition of endorsements since Super Tuesday (64 to nine) are the result solely of Hillary's fraudulent assertion of sniper-tested heroism.

It's more likely that concerns about Obama's association with Wright have diminished with the cessation of a 24/7 news cycle devoted to it. The mainstream media's reversion to Obama adoration following his dreamy post-Wright lecture on race in America hasn't hurt him, either.

Continue reading "Self-Destructive Democrats?"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:37 PM

March 27, 2008

The 2008 Campaign Mess

It would be fun to watch this bizarre seesaw contest between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, except for the horrifying possibility that one of them could end up being our next president.

Conservatives have long recognized the power lust and ruthlessness that defines the Clintons. Finally, many Democrats opened their eyes to this, too, as they watched Bill Clinton's deliberate ignition of racial tensions in efforts to quell the Obama surge. Who does this upstart Obama think he is, trying to disrupt the inexorable flow of history leading to a continuation of the Clinton co-presidency?

Though Bill's strategy only yielded the Clintons temporary fruit, Obama delivered them bushel baskets of his own with revelations of his longtime association with a stridently racist black pastor. Obama might have been finished but for Hillary's quasi-masochistic penchant for self-destruction.

Hillary just couldn't resist claiming she came under sniper fire in Bosnia, presumably so she could add this combat experience to her resume of otherwise mostly vicarious achievements.

Continue reading "The 2008 Campaign Mess"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:52 PM

March 24, 2008

Forsaken So We Could Live

I was one of seven people who each spoke at our church's Good Friday service on one of the seven sayings of Christ on the cross. I chose, "My God, My God, why have you forsaken Me?"

In my more skeptical days, I viewed the question as odd -- almost ammunition for the cynic. Why would Christ, if he were truly God, need to ask God about anything? Also, why would an all-powerful God have been in such a vulnerable position?

I now realize that these questions are no more unique than the basic misunderstandings of Christianity and Christian doctrine that give rise to them. But interestingly, this utterance of Christ that was once a stumbling block for me has now become a powerful reinforcement for my faith.

I used to wonder how the crucifixion, no matter how much physical suffering Christ endured, could cancel out our sins. After all, other human beings have experienced similar physical punishment. But I was completely unaware of the spiritual wounding that was involved. The Scripture tells us, "The human spirit can endure in sickness, but a crushed spirit who can bear?"

Continue reading "Forsaken So We Could Live"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:58 PM

March 20, 2008

Obama Not Yet Out of the Woods

Barack Obama is nothing if not smooth. He seamlessly turned a would-be apology over his pastor's racism into an indictment against society's racism.

It wasn't, "Jeremiah Wright was wrong, and I was wrong for going to his church for 20 years despite his apparently unforgiving spirit, his racist and anti-American utterances, and his vulgarity, including taking the Lord's name in vain from his very pulpit -- the one venue above all on God's sacred planet that such irreverence is inalterably forbidden. No matter what racial injustices have been perpetrated over the years by mankind toward mankind, they are never an excuse for disrespecting God, and especially in His house."

Instead, Obama said, essentially, "I reject many of Rev. Wright's remarks as divisive and perhaps even unfairly critical of America, but you have to admit, he has a point."

You can talk all you want to about Obama's "audacity of hope" theme, but the only audacity I heard in his speech was his lecturing Americans on their racism instead of explaining his longtime intimate relationship with Wright.

Obama's forte is not, as many have suggested, waxing eloquent while saying nothing. His real gift is saying one thing while appearing to say the opposite, so mellifluously and disarmingly that audiences shake their heads in affirmation of the very proposition they oppose. Without changing their minds, they believe they have agreed with him. Amazing -- and scary.

Continue reading "Obama Not Yet Out of the Woods"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:35 PM

March 17, 2008

Wright Connection Fatally Undermines Obama's Central Theme

The racist, anti-American rantings of Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama's spiritual mentor and pastor of the church Obama attended for 20 years, raise many red flags about Obama's supposedly best selling point: his unique capability for healing societal divisions.

Considering our deep-seated societal disagreements over cultural and political issues, promises by politicians to end societal divisiveness are dubious enough on their face. But when the promisor's personal history contradicts his promises, even further scrutiny is required.

It's difficult to gauge Obama's genuineness in standing on this kind of platform because he has such a short political history to evaluate. Stories have been written, pointing to his extreme liberalism and scant record of reaching across the aisle, that cast serious doubt on his unifying claims. Until now, his lofty speeches have obscured these inconsistencies.

But with reports of his pastor saying "blacks should not sing 'God bless America, but G-- d--- America," and, concerning the 9/11 attacks, America's "chickens are coming home to roost," the burden of proof has now shifted to Obama. He must demonstrate not only that his claims to offer healing are sincere but also that he does not actually share his pastor's and, manifestly, his congregation's deeply disturbing views on race and America.

What can Obama say to meet this burden of proof?

Before this story heated up beyond the mainstream media's ability to suppress it, Obama casually dismissed the pastor's tirades merely as "controversial" remarks -- as if they had some legitimacy and were not outright indefensible but in any event should not be taken too seriously. Now he appears to be saying he was unaware of the offensive statements. But if Obama's deepest passion in life is to heal, wouldn't it follow that he would make it his business to know -- taking the willing suspension of disbelief here to new heights -- what driving passions stir his pastor?

Continue reading "Wright Connection Fatally Undermines Obama's Central Theme"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:19 PM

March 13, 2008

A War of Worldviews

When Barack Obama promises change for America, I graciously assume, for now, that he doesn't mean he will change America to conform to his apparently racist pastor's vision for this country, though that whole subject deserves far more scrutiny. But we should also seriously examine his promise to deliver a more harmonious climate.

It's not just Obama. A lot of Democrats have been pushing the idea of bipartisanship for years. One of the Democrats' earliest criticisms of President Bush was that he didn't reach across the aisle and extend a hand to Democrats.

Of course, the truth is precisely the opposite. Bush, unlike any president in recent memory, genuinely made a determined effort to work with Democrats. Not only did they rebuff him, but they attacked him with a relentless viciousness from before day one.

Democrats weren't looking for bipartisanship. They were looking to get their way, even with a Republican president in office. They condemned as partisanship anything short of that, somewhat reminiscent of the Soviet Communists redefining imperialism not as the Soviets' swallowing up of smaller nations but as the United States' efforts to resist such Soviet imperialism.

Understand that I am not criticizing Democrats for being partisan; I'm suggesting they are cynically insincere or grossly self-deceived when they pretend to aspire to bipartisanship. They don't seek compromise; they want the unopposed implementation of their unadulterated liberal agenda, which, of course, is their prerogative.

Continue reading "A War of Worldviews"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:36 PM

March 10, 2008

National Security and Iraq Winning Issues for GOP

When it comes to national security, Democrats are serving up softballs for John McCain. But he better be getting a lot of batting practice so he can knock it out of the park once the general-election campaign gets in full swing.

Democrats downplay the scope of terrorist threat and constantly obstruct our efforts to pursue this "overblown" enemy.

Having run out of all other excuses to oppose extending the bill that permits warrantless monitoring of international conversations between terrorists, they have settled on the specious argument that the private telecoms don't deserve immunity from frivolous lawsuits commandeered by the trial bar.

It doesn't matter to Democrats that these companies patriotically responded to the president's call to assist with surveillance and relied on his assurances that they would be acting legally. What matters is that trial lawyers are among the biggest contributors to the Democratic Party -- the party that supposedly eschews special-interest politics. The trial bar must be paid back whenever possible, even if it means telecoms will not cooperate in the future for fear of stepping into a malicious litigation trap.

Continue reading "National Security and Iraq Winning Issues for GOP"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 08:52 PM

March 06, 2008

Democrats' Dicey Presidential Politics

The Democratic Party cashiered Howard Dean and replaced him, fairly early in the process, with the deeply flawed John Kerry when it became apparent that Dean was unelectable. But what if party honchos, much later in the game, conclude Obama is unelectable? Look out.

Right now, it's premature to conclude that Obama's momentum has been permanently quashed. He won 12 states in a row before losing three out of four Tuesday night. But for a candidate whose main attraction has been his superhuman aura to lose those major contests should be cause for concern.

In terms of delegate count, Obama still holds a commanding lead. According to ABC, if Clinton were to win all 12 remaining states with 55 percent of the vote, she would end up with 1,793 delegates, short of Obama's 1,841. If that scenario were reversed, Obama would end up with 1,902 and Clinton 1,732, which would leave Obama still short of the 2,024 delegates required.

Assuming no changes in the super-delegates from their present leanings, Obama would need to win 77 percent of the remaining pledged delegates to hit 2,024, which is extremely unlikely given the Democratic rules of proportional delegate allocation. But Clinton would need a staggering 94 percent.

Obviously, neither will win without movement of the super-delegates, and Obama will likely end up ahead in pledged delegates and overall popular vote even if Hillary continues to do well, including in the possible do-over contests in Michigan and Florida.

Continue reading "Democrats' Dicey Presidential Politics"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:52 PM

March 03, 2008

Obama's Halo Not Attached with Superglue

To me, the greatest irony of the Democratic primary contest is that while Hillary Clinton has tried desperately to make herself more human, Barack Obama has basked in the efforts of others to make him less so.

Eventually, Obama will be brought back down to earth from his pseudo-divine perch. When that happens, there will be plenty of areas of vulnerability for his opponent -- presumably, John McCain -- to exploit.

Unhappily for Hillary, she hasn't been able to seize on Obama's weaknesses. This is because many of them she shares, and the others she can't politically afford to draw attention to. Obama's extreme liberalism across the board makes him ripe for attack from the right, or even the center, but Hillary is hardly in a position to make a credible case against him there, except possibly on national security and Iraq.

With cool, premeditated calculation, Hillary methodically positioned herself as plausibly hawkish enough for the general election. How was she supposed to know she would face such a formidable challenger in the primaries?

Her response hasn't helped. Instead of defending her position on Iraq and presenting Obama as irresponsibly dovish on foreign policy, she has distorted her vote on the Iraq War resolution to con the base into believing she was with them all along.

Continue reading "Obama's Halo Not Attached with Superglue"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:16 PM

February 28, 2008

MSM Gods, Hillary and John McCain

Memo to former mainstream-media darling John McCain: I hope you are paying close attention to the MSM's palpable favoritism toward Barack Obama because we haven't seen anything yet. You think The New York Times was an exception? Just wait. I urge you to review the tape of the Ohio Democratic debate from Tuesday night.

In one sequence after another, Brian Williams and Tim Russert took proactive roles in the debate, playing "gotcha" mostly against Hillary Clinton instead of facilitating a debate between the candidates.

"So what?" MSM apologists might say. "This isn't a high school debate where we are trying to pick the best debater. This isn't about fairness to the candidates. The purpose is to elicit the most information from the candidates and test them under fire so the voters can make the most informed decision."

Yes, but when the moderators team up against one of the two candidates, the dynamics change. It's hard not to be defensive when everyone in the room who's talking is against you. That's difficult to overcome psychologically.

It reminds me of certain jury trials I've witnessed where the trial judge was noticeably prejudiced against one side and projected his feelings -- in body language, words and attitude -- to the jury. The less-favored litigant had little chance. And it was outrageously improper.

Continue reading "MSM Gods, Hillary and John McCain"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:13 PM

February 21, 2008

Obama's Weaknesses Off Limits to Hillary

Poor Hillary. She can't afford to attack Obama where he's vulnerable, but she can't afford not to. Even if she does, it's likely it won't resonate with a leftist base made to order for Obama. Worse yet, it's probably too late anyway.

The irony is that if Hillary had been willing to be who she really is -- an antiwar leftist -- she'd probably be in the driver's seat right now. But her calculated and inconsistent shift to the center several years ago in anticipation of a general election created a gigantic Obama-shaped hole on the left.

Hindsight reveals that Hillary's strategy of holding herself out as the battle-tested, experienced candidate was ill-conceived. Not only was it untrue -- most of her experience was vicarious, which doesn't really count -- but the very theme of experience did not play well with a leftist base that was agitating for change, radical change, even if it had to come from a greenhorn. Hillary's claim of mature leadership just reinforced that she is part of the Washington establishment that gave us Iraq.

Even if that issue is becoming moot, its bitter memory is not. Hillary will always be damaged goods to the unforgiving antiwar left, no matter how often she pretends she was duped by a "dope" into voting for the resolution authorizing war.

Of course, Hillary says she's for change, too -- she wants to revert to the Clinton glory years. But with Bill's unattractive side -- defensive, combative, narcissistic -- in such prominent display on the campaign trail, voters are reminded more of the Clinton scandals than their so-called glory years. Simply put, the left wants change, and Hillary has no credibility as a change agent.

Continue reading "Obama's Weaknesses Off Limits to Hillary"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:37 PM

February 19, 2008

Conservatives and First Principles

Something is missing in all the intramural debates among different stripes of Republicans this primary season. Bigger-government Republicans don't seem fully to appreciate the extent to which the differences between conservative Republicans and liberals are about more than policy.

Conservatives and liberals differ not merely over the level of taxation, protection of the unborn, immigration, the war and other issues -- though the importance of these disputes cannot easily be overstated.

Admittedly, conservatives view these policy differences as matters of great urgency. The power to tax is the power to destroy. Abortion kills human beings. Illegal, unregulated immigration jeopardizes our national security, undermines the rule of law, could bankrupt our government and, because of the negligence concerning proper assimilation, would likely radically change the culture. Successful prosecution of the war on terror, in Iraq and elsewhere, is essential to our national security.

But at an even more fundamental level, conservatives, being sentimental saps, believe -- apparently unlike Michelle Obama -- that the United States is not only the greatest nation in the world but also that it owes its greatness largely to its Constitution.

Even if liberals were to concede this point, they would probably have different reasons for believing it is so. They tout their fondness for the Bill of Rights and little else in the document, but even here, close inspection reveals their affinity is selective.

Continue reading "Conservatives and First Principles"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:50 PM

February 14, 2008

McCainiacs Must Persuade Grassroots, Not Commentators

Political commentators from various points on the right-wing spectrum are still arguing about the McCain presidential candidacy, lecturing and scolding each other -- as if their opinions are going to decide the election. They take themselves too seriously.

The McCainiacs are warning McCain's conservative opponents that unless they stop criticizing McCain immediately, he'll never recover in time for the general election.

This assumes that if the pundits come around, the grassroots will follow, like mindless sheep. Newsflash: They are neither intellectually shallow nor easily led. They are informed, engaged, independent minded and principled.

Nothing illustrates this better than the controversy surrounding the revival of McCain's candidacy. I haven't seen this much anxiety among conservatives since the Clinton impeachment.

I've never received more e-mails, and they've never been more passionate. My correspondents fall roughly into three groups:

Continue reading "McCainiacs Must Persuade Grassroots, Not Commentators"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:58 PM

February 11, 2008

GOP Rearrangement Syndrome

Here we are -- the non-McCainiacs -- just minding our own business and contemplating such lofty ideals as party unity while the McCainiac cabal lobs yet more rhetorical cruise missiles our way. Hold your fire, boys, we're trying to meet you at the peace table.

If I were just slightly inclined toward the conspiratorial, I'd wonder whether this were an orchestrated assault by the McCain forces against the recalcitrant. Could more be going on than meets the eye?

Given the aggressiveness of McCain's soldiers, I'm thinking they are not as interested in a rapprochement with Reagan conservatives as they are in taking over the party from them.

If they were seeking reunification, would they be making their attacks personal? Would they be suggesting that those not-yet-warm to John are afflicted with McCain Derangement Syndrome? Would they be salivating over their delusional fantasy that Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin and Laura Ingraham are losing their influence?

You'd think they'd think twice before hurling invectives toward the very base of the Republican Party, whose support in the general election is indispensable to McCain.

Continue reading "GOP Rearrangement Syndrome"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:59 PM

February 07, 2008

Critics of McCain's Critics Should Chill

Isn't it ironic that GOP moderates are harshly criticizing GOP conservatives for being harshly critical of GOP presidential frontrunner John McCain?

What mortal sins have conservative McCain critics committed? Oh, they've stuck to their conservative principles, fighting for the values they believe in and refusing, prematurely, to surrender. What good would they be if they so readily threw in the towel of defeat?

"Enlightened" moderates are shocked at conservatives, tagging them as uncompromising extremists who represent the very fringe of the Republican Party.

John Dilulio, a principal architect of President Bush's arguably non-conservative, faith-based initiative, is among those making these arguments.

Writing for the Weekly Standard, Dilulio says that only 3.6 percent of Republicans identify themselves as "very conservative." Is Dilulio making the unwarranted leap of implying that McCain's critics come from this 3.6 percent fringe and that mainstream conservatives have no problem with McCain?

Continue reading "Critics of McCain's Critics Should Chill"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:37 PM

February 04, 2008

Republican Party Can't Afford More Liberal Leaders

I suppose I could be accused of over-dramatizing, but I truly worry about the direction this nation is headed when contemplating a presidential race where the choices are liberal and liberal-light. If John McCain is the GOP nominee, that's what we'll be faced with, despite the Herculean efforts of some to spin it otherwise.

In that case, the presidential candidates of both parties would be willing to use the bully pulpit and governing power of the presidency to suppress political speech, punish producers, oil companies and drug companies, open wider our borders, cater to the whacko environmental movement and its junk-science-driven pseudo-consensus on global warming, nominate judges who don't "wear their conservatism on their sleeve," close Gitmo, confer constitutional civil liberties on enemy combatants, end life-saving interrogation techniques, demonize evangelical conservatives, and obstruct efforts of conservative Republican legislators.

It is also distressing that many conservative commentators are so deeply mired in rationalization in order to spin their support for John McCain.

Sure, if I'm a paid staffer for McCain or a high-school debater forced to take the affirmative side of the proposition that McCain is a conservative, I can make a colorable case -- intellectual honesty be damned -- that he's a conservative. But I am under no such constraints.

Getting 50 endorsements from well-placed Republican officials or even respected conservatives doesn't make McCain conservative. Being a conservative makes one a conservative. I bet, truth be told, McCain can't even stand the word.

How quickly we forget that McCain said that conservative evangelicals are "agents of intolerance" and that social issues just aren't his thing.

Continue reading "Republican Party Can't Afford More Liberal Leaders"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:49 PM

January 31, 2008

McCain, the Anti-Conservative

It's true that McCain is unpopular with Reagan conservatives because he decidedly is not, on far too many issues, a Reagan conservative. But it's more than that. He is the anti-conservative. He instinctively sides against conservatives and relishes poking them in the eye.

He enjoys cavorting and colluding with our political enemies and basks in the fawning attention they give him. Adding insult to injury, he now pretends to be the very thing he is not: an across-the-board Reagan conservative. This fraudulent pretense inspires fundamental distrust among Reagan conservatives.

Consider: Robert Novak has corroborated John Fund's account of McCain dissing Samuel Alito as too conservative, or as "wearing his conservatism on his sleeve." True, McCain voted to confirm Alito, but that's a far cry from nominating such a judge in the first place.

McCain’s characterization of Alito is troubling on another level, as well. There is a difference between a judicial-restraint philosophy and judicial activism that promotes conservatism. McCain wholly ignores that distinction and echoes the liberal line of disinformation that judges like Alito are conservative activists. This type of thinking is born of liberal instincts; McCain often thinks like a liberal.

That's unfair, you say? Well, isn't it true? Doesn't he have liberal instincts, or at least an irrepressible desire for liberal approval on global warming? Don't liberal assumptions underlie his crusade for campaign-finance reform?

Continue reading "McCain, the Anti-Conservative"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:16 PM | TrackBack (0)

January 28, 2008

The Clintons' Possible Political Demise -- a Bittersweet Pill

It's a good thing for Hillary Clinton that she and her political-bodyguard husband aren't Republicans. She'd be out on her ear for race-baiting alone.

Do you remember a few short weeks ago when Hillary suggested that the real mover and shaker on civil rights was not MLK but LBJ, without whom MLK's efforts would have been for naught, essentially? Do you remember the Clintons' surrogate, Robert Johnson, smearing Barack Obama with allusions to his youthful drug experimentation?

Liberals, including the mainstream dinosaur media, circled the wagons around her, insisting she couldn't possibly have intended racial slurs. Even many conservatives hastened to defend her against this charge.

Had a Republican made a statement like Hillary's about the respective accomplishments of MLK (an African American) and LBJ on the heels of making a similar comparison between Obama (an African American) and herself, liberals would have savaged him and driven him out of the race. They would have invoked the irrebuttable liberal presumption that conservatives are racists. Just ask Trent Lott.

With Democrats, the opposite presumption applies. Hillary couldn't possibly have intended a racial slur, nor could she have been guilty of racial insensitivity, because she is a liberal Democrat and liberal Democrats are enlightened and incapable of racism. You need look no further than the race-based assaults by liberal cartoonists against Condoleezza Rice to understand the magnitude of this double standard.

Continue reading "The Clintons' Possible Political Demise -- a Bittersweet Pill"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:53 PM

January 24, 2008

"Maverick" and "Conservative" Aren't Synonyms

Many conservatives have said Sen. John McCain is not conservative enough to suit them. Some of McCain's defenders have not only disagreed but have impugned his critics, hypocritically blaming them for divisiveness.

But intramural bickering isn't the issue. What's important is that conservatives have an intellectually honest and open discussion about GOP presidential contenders.

It's disappointing to watch good conservatives demean themselves by trying to present McCain as something he's not. No matter how much they spin, they can't fool conservatives familiar with McCain's record. McCain's detractors are not the ones having to stretch and massage the facts in order to turn McCain -- overnight -- into a Reagan conservative.

McCain is not only not conservative enough; he has also has built a reputation as a maverick by stabbing his party in the back -- not in furtherance of conservative principles but by betraying them. McCain delights in sticking it to his colleagues while winning accolades from the mainstream liberal media.

Former senator Rick Santorum, whose conservative credentials are beyond question, said, "I don't agree with (McCain) on hardly any issues." Santorum told radio host Mark Levin, "I just have to tell you, as a leader, as someone who had to put these coalitions together, it was always hard and we very rarely on domestic policy had any help from the senator from Arizona." Santorum said McCain has been damaging to conservative causes and would be no friend to conservatives in the White House.

Continue reading ""Maverick" and "Conservative" Aren't Synonyms"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:47 PM

January 17, 2008

Answering Fred's Call

Commentators are citing the unpredictability of the Republican primary contests as proof that Reagan conservatism is dead when precisely the opposite conclusion is warranted.

The main reason the conventional wisdom is being shattered in the primaries is that conservative voters, so far, have not been persuaded there is an electable, reliable conservative in the race.

But as I've stated before, I believe Fred Thompson is a reliable, consistent conservative. There are others in the field I could support, but not without some reservations. The more I learn about Fred and observe him in action, the more convinced I become that he's the right choice.

I was among those who urged Fred to step up and prove to the people he wanted the job. Regardless of whether Fred actually had "fire in his belly," the unmistakable perception out there was that he did not, so I encouraged him to add a little spring to his step.

But I've also appreciated Fred's unwillingness to be somebody he is not. He will not respond like a puppet when a debate moderator tells him to raise his hand to signify a childishly simplistic approval or disapproval of a certain policy. He will not be goaded by interviewers into saying things he doesn't feel comfortable saying. He won't divide us with class envy or pretend we can be friends with rogue regimes or terrorists. He does not promise a chicken in every pot or pander to liberals on global warming.

Continue reading "Answering Fred's Call"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:32 PM

January 14, 2008

Hillary's Pro-Active Political Jiu-Jitsu

Hillary is playing with fire on the race issue. What ground she gained by playing the gender card while denying it, she might lose by playing the race card while denying it.

There is no principle the Clintons pretend to stand for that they will not abandon in pursuit of political power -- power they insist they need to advance those abandon-able principles. So it is with the issue of race.

Until recently, Hillary had employed essentially a two-pronged strategy in her presidential primary campaign. The first was to depict her main opponent, Barack Obama, as an eloquent and gifted speaker but also as a candidate with no experience, no record, no substance and no plan to match his lofty rhetoric. The second, developed out of desperation to staunch her post-Iowa bleeding, was to play the gender card by appealing to women voters through showing her supposedly vulnerable, "human" side.

Now, she has also invoked the race issue, something only a liberal or Democratic candidate would even think about doing. First, she trotted out a well-known African American, Robert L. Johnson, the founder of Black Entertainment Television, to make an unmistakable yet deniable allusion to Obama's self-admitted youthful experimentation with drugs.

On the stump with Clinton in Columbia, S.C., Johnson said, "To me, as an African American, I am frankly insulted that the Obama campaign would imply that we were so stupid that we would think Hillary and Bill Clinton, who have been deeply and emotionally involved in black issues since Barack Obama was doing something in the neighborhood -- and I won't say what he was doing, but he said it in the book ... "

Continue reading "Hillary's Pro-Active Political Jiu-Jitsu"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:09 PM

January 10, 2008

Conservatism's Identity Crisis

Liberals have every reason to be pleased with the three remaining Democratic presidential candidates and what they portend for the vitality of political liberalism in the Democratic Party. The same cannot be said for conservatives concerning the Republican candidates and the vitality of conservatism.

There isn't a dime's worth of ideological difference between Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards. They just present their respective brands of statism in different ways. In the Democratic Party, big-government liberalism is alive, well, robust and vibrant.

Hillary might resume "Third Way" Clintonian politics if she wins the nomination, but for now, she's bragging that her health-care plan is more Marxist than Barack's.

But for Republicans, there's a fierce intramural debate not just over how conservative the party should be but also over the very definition of conservatism.

This debate wouldn't be as significant if it were limited to the candidates alone, but a growing number of conservative intellectuals have also surrendered to the oxymoronic notion that conservatism must adapt to survive as a powerful political force in this nation.

Continue reading "Conservatism's Identity Crisis"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 08:21 PM

January 07, 2008

Observations on the Presidential Races

1. We expect promises of change from Democratic candidates, but it's disappointing to watch certain Republican candidates yield to that superficially seductive sound bite, too. It's like the global-warming freight train, which few politicians have displayed the guts and character not to board.

2. It's disappointing to watch candidates from both parties accept the premise that criticizing your opponents' records and pointing out their inconsistencies and lies is engaging in dirty politics. It is not dirty but obligatory to draw distinctions between you and your opponents. Dirty politics is distorting one's record or spreading lies about a candidate. Why do so many refuse to see the difference? It's the same type of shallow thinking that prefers that politicians get along rather than promote their ideas.

3. Until very recently, "experts" have proclaimed that only Rudy and Romney had a realistic path to the GOP nomination and that Hillary was inevitable on the Democrat side. Now, many tell us Romney is dead unless he wins in New Hampshire, Rudy is already toast and Hillary is almost toast. The common denominator is that the punditocracy has been consistently wrong, which will not deter them from continuing their pseudo-omniscient, mostly erroneous analysis.

4. "Experts" also say that if McCain wins New Hampshire, he'll be the clear frontrunner -- though New Hampshire is not a bellwether state and McCain will remain, based on logic and experience, an overwhelming long shot.

5. Fred Thompson can't get anyone to give him the time of day. Debate moderator Chris Wallace, for example, overtly directed most of his questions to Huckabee, Romney and McCain. Then, in his post-debate analysis, he criticized Fred (and Rudy) for not being more assertive in the debate. What?

Continue reading "Observations on the Presidential Races"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:36 PM

January 03, 2008

Rededication to Conservative Principles

Many have discussed whether certain candidates have "fire in the belly." What I'm wondering is whether, at this point in our national history, conservatives in general have fire in their bellies.

Given Gov. Mike Huckabee's remarkable performance so far in the GOP presidential contest in the name of conservatism, and especially after seeing his interview on the "Tonight Show," I question how brightly that flame is flickering.

When Ronald Reagan was running for president in 1980, conservatives had more reasons to be discontent. We had been conditioned to believe that inviolable economic principles dictated that there was a necessary trade-off between unemployment and inflation: You couldn't decrease one without increasing the other.

The Carter years were characterized by full-blown pessimism. Interest rates, inflation and unemployment all soared. Nuclear-freeze liberals were hell-bent on our unilateral disarmament. The ravages of the Warren Court were in full bloom, and the Republican Party was mired in the taint of the Watergate scandals.

Ronald Reagan came along and offered hope. He refused to acquiesce to the defeatism of the period. He refused to accept that half the world would remain under the tyrannical hand of global communism. He revived the latent conservatism in the hearts of the "silent majority" by proclaiming and proving that neither America nor American ideals were dead; they only needed permission to breathe again.

Continue reading "Rededication to Conservative Principles"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:11 PM

December 31, 2007

Time to Step Up, Fred

It's time to step up, Fred. Conservatives need a leader about whom we have no major reservations. The only one looming out there about you is your failure, so far, to persuade voters you want the job.

All of the GOP candidates are vastly superior to all of the Democrat candidates, but here's the way I see the field now.

Rudy is a strong leader and very good on national security and the war. But he is a social-issues liberal, whose pledge to appoint originalist judges is encouraging -- but not completely convincing.

John McCain is a war hero and a patriot. He has been strong on Iraq but disappointing on Guantanamo, tough interrogation techniques and other war-related issues. He is not a supply-sider and is abysmally bad -- obviously -- on campaign finance reform and thus free speech. Also profoundly troubling is his history of sycophancy toward the liberal media elite and, in turn, their sporadic love affair with him.

Mike Huckabee, I believe, is a strong and sincere Christian. That means a lot to me. It doesn't bother me that he wears it on his sleeve -- assuming he's not being exploitive of his religion, and there, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. Every candidate's worldview guides his beliefs and agenda, and it would be far worse for Huckabee to deny the strong influence of his worldview in forming his identity and contributing to his ideology. It's one thing to be upset with Huckabee if you believe he has used his Christian credentials subtly to highlight and demean Mitt Romney's Mormonism, but I don't believe that's what he's done. Christians shouldn't be accused of attacking other faiths when they are simply promoting their own.

Continue reading "Time to Step Up, Fred"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:12 PM

December 27, 2007

The Case For The Real Jesus

It's interesting that many who dismiss the Bible and certain essential Christian claims -- saying they believe there is scant evidence to support them -- are able to readily embrace rival belief systems and their texts, which are far less reliable.

Former atheist Lee Strobel has used his formidable journalistic and legal background as legal editor of the Chicago Tribune to research and write a number of bestselling books in defense of the Christian faith. His recently released "The Case for the Real Jesus" goes beyond the traditional apologetic to address some of the current attacks on the identity of Jesus Christ, typified by the heretical storyline in the popular The Da Vinci Code.

I strongly recommend this book this Christmas season because it compellingly debunks many of the most recent mythical challenges to Christianity. It is perfect for believers whose perceived spiritual security could be threatened by the crop of fantastic notions now circulating and for nonbelievers who are open to the evidence.

Strobel correctly observes that ideas have consequences and, particularly, what we believe about Jesus will have profound consequences for us individually. Since modern theories directly attack what Christians believe about the very identity of Jesus, Strobel wanted to examine their validity to determine whether the Christian idea of Christ could survive rigorous inquiry.

Continue reading "The Case For The Real Jesus"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:18 PM

December 20, 2007

Hillary's Spousal Albatross

Hillary Clinton doesn't have the luxury Al Gore did of choosing to dump Bill Clinton on the presidential campaign trail. She's stuck with him, for better or for worse. And if she becomes president, so is America.

People always questioned Gore's judgment to cut his umbilical cord from Mother Bill, some saying he had to do it to free himself of the taint of the scandals and others saying the move cost him the election because he was unable to capitalize as much on the Clinton economic record.

There's doubtlessly merit to both arguments, and Gore was probably hurt some and helped some by the decision. Ultimately, though, voters surely were and are smart enough to evaluate the candidate on his own merits, regardless of the strength of his ties to his predecessor.

But in Hillary's case, it's obviously more complicated. Bill will not just have been a past president with very close ties to President Hillary, should she win. He won't merely be with her in the White House. He will be in her space.

Think about it. Right now, Hillary is probably conflicted about Bill's role in the campaign. She's obviously aware of a certain segment of the public's adulation for the man -- mystifying though it is -- but equally aware of another segment's visceral (and cerebral) revulsion.

Continue reading "Hillary's Spousal Albatross"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:54 PM

December 17, 2007

Huck: Playing to Our Inner Jimmy Carter

At the risk of incurring a roundhouse kick from the great Chuck Norris, I must confess that I'm even more troubled by Mike Huckabee's direction than I was last week.

On "Meet the Press" in January 2007, Tim Russert asked Huckabee, "You said this: 'I have a hard time seeing (Sen. John McCain) being elected president, just because I think, at times, some of his views have alienated very important segments of the Republican Party. I'm not sure he can mend the fences with the evangelical wing of the party, the pro-life part of the party.' You stand by those words?"

Huckabee responded, "Well, sure, I said them. I, I have a lot of respect for Senator McCain. He's a great American hero. But I do think that there are going to be some challenges that he'll face, and some of them have to do with issues that really have alienated many conservatives."

Bingo -- except now these words could apply equally to Huckabee -- not concerning the pro-life issue but Huckabee's unfortunate piece in Foreign Affairs magazine, where he joined the Democratic amen chorus in indicting President Bush for his "arrogant bunker mentality."

Until now, Huckabee has been fairly Teflon, avoiding real damage with conservatives for some of the unappealing aspects of his record and policy agenda. But the Foreign Affairs article, "America's Priorities in the War on Terror," could be his "Howard Dean scream" moment -- assuming Republicans are listening with a modicum of objectivity.

Continue reading "Huck: Playing to Our Inner Jimmy Carter"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:50 PM

December 14, 2007

Single-Issue vs. Comprehensive Conservatism

Since its emergence as a dominant political force in the '80s, the religious right has been a favorite whipping boy of the mainstream media and political left and a sometimes embarrassment to certain conservative elitists. Yet neither group of critics can deny the electoral power Christian conservatives have wielded.

The group's uncompromising commitment to protecting life and defending America's traditional institutions has been instrumental in beating back the left's relentless assault on our culture. Without its grassroots contributions, we'd be seeing a lot more Ruth Bader Ginsbergs and a lot fewer Antonin Scalias.

But this primary campaign season, because of the competing resumes and platforms of various Republican presidential candidates and the complex interplay of religion and politics that has emerged, I am concerned that Christian conservatives could lose sight of the big picture of conservatism, all of whose principles are vitally important for this nation.

In my view, there's no perfect GOP candidate, but all of the viable Republican candidates are immeasurably preferable to their Democratic counterparts, and we should all support the eventual Republican nominee. But not all Christian conservatives agree.

The venerable Dr. James Dobson, for example, has said he couldn't support Rudy Giuliani. Rudy is not my first choice either, but he's a strong, capable leader who will fervently protect our national security. I pray he'll honor his pledge to appoint constitutionalist judges. Rudy is a far safer bet on life than any Democratic candidate.

Continue reading "Single-Issue vs. Comprehensive Conservatism"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:11 PM

December 10, 2007

Huckabee, Romney, Church and State

The surfacing of the "religion question" in the Republican presidential primary campaigns of both Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee has raised important issues and exposed much public confusion about the intersection of religion and politics.

Secularists feign sympathy with Romney for having to address the Mormon question in response to alleged anti-Mormon bigots but condemn him for failing in his speech to expressly include nonbelievers among those whose religious liberty he would safeguard.

This particular attack on Romney by the secularist bigot patrol reveals their own religious bigotry, their ignorance or their disingenuousness. It goes without saying that robust religious liberty includes the freedom to believe in any religion or not to believe at all.

But the secularists' attacks on Huckabee are more serious. They have taken him to task for identifying himself as a "Christian leader" in Iowa, with some saying he was exploiting Romney's Mormonism and also violating the spirit of the constitutional prohibition on requiring religious tests for public office.

In a campaign ad, Huckabee says, "Faith doesn't just influence me. It really defines me," and he identifies himself as a "Christian leader."

Continue reading "Huckabee, Romney, Church and State"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:10 PM

December 06, 2007

Obama Should Push Hillary Out of Her Comfort Zone

Paradox: Hillary seems both inevitable and inconceivable to me. Part of me says, "There's no stopping her," and the other part says, "Hold on, do you realize what you're saying? This is Hillary Clinton we're talking about! No way." On the bright side, the inevitability applies mostly to her nomination, and the inconceivability to the general election.

I think most people, including commentators, have considered her nomination a foregone conclusion.

This consensus was briefly threatened during Barack Obama's initial deification by the media, but then it was pretty much restored. After the mainstream media's early infatuation with Obama wore off, they were back to worshiping at Hillary's altar, both promoting and protecting her.

They called her "presidential," "inevitable" and "experienced" and said she was running an error-free campaign. Actually, the media were just ignoring her mistakes, inconsistencies and embarrassingly unpresidential episodes, as when she patronizingly spoke in black dialect to an African-American audience.

The media didn't just shield her errors. They also insulated her from the ordinary scrutiny all other presidential candidates receive. They allowed her to choose what she wanted to talk about and what questions she would answer. With few exceptions, they gave her a pass.

Continue reading "Obama Should Push Hillary Out of Her Comfort Zone"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:49 PM

December 03, 2007

Mitt Should Can "The Speech"

I think it's a mistake for Mitt Romney to give "the speech" -- the one aimed at addressing his Mormonism and its relevance, or irrelevance, to his candidacy.

There have long been rumors that Romney would make "the speech," but the matter seemed dormant until recently, when evangelical Mike Huckabee began surging in the polls, especially in Iowa.

Some Romney strategists fear his conservative Christian supporters in Iowa are shifting to Huckabee -- an ordained Baptist minister -- because they are uncomfortable with Mitt's Mormonism.

Huckabee's Christian credentials are doubtlessly helping him with many Christian conservatives. But I don't think Mitt's Mormonism is driving Romney voters to Huckabee. If Romney's Mormonism didn't bother them before Huckabee surged, it isn't bothering them now.

This is not to say that Romney's Mormonism isn't a potential liability for him. I think it is, but not among those who have already been supporting him. The more attention he draws to his religion, the more of a liability it will become. He should leave well enough alone.

Continue reading "Mitt Should Can "The Speech""

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:13 PM

November 29, 2007

Clinton News Network

The CNN/YouTube Republican presidential debate serves as a perfect example of why conservatives refer to CNN as "Clinton News Network." Republicans should have declined CNN's invitation, just like Democrats declined Fox News, though it's doubtful Fox would have orchestrated or permitted a similar ambush of Democratic candidates.

The "debate" involved many questions designed not so much to highlight the candidates' differences (other than Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney on immigration) but to place the entire conservative agenda in a negative light.

Many were "When did you stop beating your wife?" questions because they included premises calculated to make Republicans look bad irrespective of the candidates' responses. Even if CNN didn't conspire with the questioners, the effect was the same. You'd never catch Democrats in such a situation. Let me give you a few examples and, with some, offer alternative responses.

One questioner asked what criminal penalties should be imposed against an aborting mother -- not whether there should be criminal penalties but what they should be. The purpose was to divert attention from the horror of abortion to the seeming harshness of criminalizing pregnant women who choose to end their babies' lives. Conservatives are uncaring, uncompassionate and evil. Are Democrats ever asked whether the denial of a woman's "choice" to abort is outweighed by the denial of the baby's very right to live?

Continue reading "Clinton News Network"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:39 PM

November 26, 2007

2008: Holding Democrats Accountable on War

Some say Democrats won't have Iraq as an issue for the 2008 presidential campaign due to our dramatic turnaround there. Republicans should take it a step further and make it an issue themselves.

Democrats have accused President Bush of politicizing the war any time he merely reported favorably on our progress or made a speech defining the enemy and explaining our multi-pronged strategy to defeat him. All the while, it was Democrats who were exploiting the war for partisan gain.

They clearly tried to do so in the 2006 congressional campaigns, and when they recaptured their congressional majorities, they proudly declared their victory was a mandate for their position on Iraq (though exit polling data indicates otherwise).

Indeed, until frustrated by our recent progress in Iraq, Defeatocrats had been planning on making Iraq the central issue in the 2008 presidential campaign. But now, even The New York Times ruefully acknowledges that "as violence declines in Baghdad, the leading Democratic presidential candidates ... are trying to shift the focus to the lack of political progress there, and highlighting more domestic concerns like health care and the economy.

Continue reading "2008: Holding Democrats Accountable on War"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:37 PM

November 23, 2007

Reports of Bush Insider Defections Greatly Exaggerated

Though things have begun to turn around in Iraq and Bush's perseverance is in route to vindication, don't expect any mea culpas from the Bush bashers. Predictably, we're just witnessing new tactics in their seven years war to destroy him.

They thought they'd hit the jackpot with the excerpts from the new book by former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan. McClellan claims, "I had unknowingly passed along false information (about Scooter Libby and Karl Rove's role in the Valerie Plame CIA leak case). And five of the highest ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the Vice President, the President's chief of staff, and the President himself."

From Chris Matthews to Keith Olbermann to David Shuster, mainstream-media talking heads thought they'd uncovered another smoking gun in the president's hand. The print big boys took their cue.

The Los Angeles Times apparently saw this as an opening to resurrect an older story first appearing in The New York Times on April 1, 2007, detailing how ex-Bush aide Matthew Dowd had "lost faith in Bush."

Dowd, a Texas Democrat, had signed on with Bush because he "was impressed by the pledge of Mr. Bush, then governor of Texas, to bring a spirit of cooperation to Washington." But after being part of Bush's "political brain trust" for six years, he decided that Bush was not living up to his promise.

Continue reading "Reports of Bush Insider Defections Greatly Exaggerated"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 03:56 PM

November 19, 2007

Will Apple Pie Be Next?

If you want to acquire greater insight into the mindset of much of Hillary Clinton's base -- the type of people she caters to, and will continue to cater to if she is elected -- you should familiarize yourselves with a couple of recent news stories involving the Boy Scouts and our troops.

In Philadelphia, the glorious city where our unique experiment in constitutional governance began, the city solicitor issued the Cradle of Liberty Boy Scouts Council a dire ultimatum. Unless it renounces its policy excluding homosexuals by Dec. 3, it will forfeit the right to rent from the city a building it has rented for $1 a year since 1928.

Solicitor Romulo Diaz said, "While we respect the right of the Boy Scouts to prohibit participation in its activities by homosexuals, we will not subsidize that discrimination by passing on the costs to the people of Philadelphia."

The solicitor apparently doesn't care that the Supreme Court has ruled that the Scouts have a right to exclude homosexuals or that Congress passed a law two years ago -- the Support Our Scouts Act -- to restrict the right of cities to deny Scouts access to public facilities because of their policy.

Gay-rights advocates often insist on rights going one way: their way. They demand that homosexuals be permitted "the right" to join the Scouts, though it would deny this private organization its constitutional right of free association and what values it chooses to uphold.

Continue reading "Will Apple Pie Be Next?"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:05 PM

November 12, 2007

Giving Defeat A Chance

Listening to the Democrats denying our progress in Iraq is reminiscent of a high school debate where one team gets stuck with the wrong side of the issue and has to defend it valiantly anyway. But in real life, especially when life-and-death consequences are involved, such artificial, unreasonable positions are not valiant but disgraceful.

On Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace asked Democratic presidential candidate Bill Richardson whether his plan to withdraw all troops from Iraq was outdated now that the surge "shows signs of working." Wallace noted that U.S. casualties for October were the lowest since March 2006 and civilian casualties, murders and roadside bomb attacks have all fallen dramatically.

Straight-faced, Richardson replied, "First of all, I don't believe the surge is working. ... You don't measure progress by body counts."

Oh? You sure could have fooled Richardson's fellow Democrats who used that yardstick with a vengeance prior to the surge.

Continue reading "Giving Defeat A Chance"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:27 PM

November 08, 2007

Mark Levin, Blessed by an Angel

A good friend of mine, who died several years ago from diabetes-related complications, once said to me, "Show me a dog lover, and I'll show you a good person." I'm sure there are many exceptions to this adage, but the principle it expresses couldn't be more applicable to my close friend Mark Levin, whose new book, "Rescuing Sprite," makes poignantly clear.

Mark was about to write a completely different book when the death of his dog, Sprite, turned his world upside down. Mark was devastated by Sprite's death and was forced to switch gears.

He said, "You'll probably think I'm crazy, but I feel compelled to write a book about Sprite now and need to put the other book on hold."

At first, I was stunned because I believed his other book needed to be written. I also couldn't imagine how he could fill a book's worth of pages with stories about a dog -- no matter how much I shared his love for canines.

Continue reading "Mark Levin, Blessed by an Angel"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:44 PM

November 05, 2007

Time for GOP Backbone and Leadership

This latest "torture" flap concerning Judge Michael Mukasey's attorney-general nomination raises an important question. Why do Republicans always let liberals co-opt the moral high ground and back them into a corner where their only escape is to prove they are as "compassionate" as liberals?

If Republicans are serious about reestablishing themselves as the dominant party, they should recapture their moral courage and start defending principles they claim to believe in.

The Republicans' timidity shows up on a wide array of issues, from Social Security to torture, where they're on the defensive and apologetic, and they allow the liberals' revisionist "facts" to become "conventional wisdom."

Republicans should have owned the Social Security issue. President Bush is the only political leader in modern history to take on the "third rail of politics" after years of both parties warning about its imminent insolvency.

Continue reading "Time for GOP Backbone and Leadership"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:44 PM

November 01, 2007

Hillary Indecisive? Please

I have to laugh at the suggestion that Sen. Hillary Clinton displayed "indecisiveness" in the recent Democratic presidential debate. Clinton is about as indecisive as a Calvinist on the doctrine of election.

She knows exactly what she thinks about -- as opposed to where she should stand for maximum political effect on -- the issues. So when she vacillates on driver's licenses for illegal immigrants, don't hand her the excuse that she is torn on a tough issue.

There's nothing difficult about this decision at all. It's a slam-dunk for anyone professing the slightest allegiance to the rule of law. Illegal immigrants should not be permitted to drive in New York or any other state.

But for Clinton, it's not that simple. While not torn on the issue, she's torn between two constituencies: ethnic pressure groups and the vast majority who oppose New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer's irresponsible policy. The allure of this new ready-made constituency is too tantalizing to resist. Driver's licenses are but a baby step away from voting -- and voting, she presumes, Democratic.

Continue reading "Hillary Indecisive? Please"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:46 PM

October 29, 2007

In Partial Response to Christopher Hitchens

Last week, I strongly endorsed "What's So Great About Christianity," Dinesh D'Souza's impressive defense of Christianity against the almost-organized assault by such "antitheists" as writer Christopher Hitchens. I heartily reiterate my endorsement.

I have since read portions of Hitchens' new book "God is Not Great" and watched his debate with theologian Alister McGrath. Please indulge me in addressing a few of Hitchens' arguments.

Hitchens unfairly and illogically conflates Christianity with other religions, blaming it not only for the evils committed in its own name but also for those committed by practitioners of other religions.

Hitchens' approach is only fair if you accept the modern pluralistic ruse that all religions are the same, which they aren't since many of their truth claims contradict each other.

Continue reading "In Partial Response to Christopher Hitchens"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:02 PM

October 25, 2007

D'Souza: Debunking Atheists

My goal here is to convince as many of you as possible to read Dinesh D'Souza's compelling new book, "What's So Great About Christianity."

Since I wrote my book chronicling the war against Christianity in our culture, many atheists have come out of the closet to admit their hostility toward Christianity and formally declare war against it.

Anti-Christian books have cropped up like alien pods in "Invasion of the Body Snatchers," not only disputing Christianity but arguing that it is a societally destructive force.

I have often lamented that too many Christians have opted out of the culture wars, for varying reasons. Some are apathetic; others mistakenly believe that the biblical injunction to rejoice in their persecution also means we should roll over and surrender. Still others grossly underestimate the stakes involved and the fierce determination of their opponents.

Dinesh D'Souza is not among the AWOL Christians. And, unlike some other Christian apologists, he meets the enemy on his own turf, confronting and deconstructing his arguments rather than merely reciting Scripture that might be intelligible only to "the choir."

Continue reading "D'Souza: Debunking Atheists"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:32 PM

October 22, 2007

Phony Indignation over a Phony Scandal

The dirty little secret about Sen. Harry Reid's failed character assassination attempt against my brother, Rush Limbaugh, is just how contrived the Senate Democrats' outrage was about the fraudulent allegation that Rush had impugned certain soldiers.

I won't rehash the facts in detail, but essentially, Rush was falsely accused of calling troops who had expressed opposition to the Iraq War "phony soldiers."

Not only was Rush not criticizing soldiers, but he was defending soldiers who had been criticized by pretend Iraqi War veterans who had lied about their combat service in Iraq to gain credibility when they accused the actual soldiers there of unspeakable atrocities.

If Reid's true instinct was to defend soldiers, he would have agreed with Rush's criticism of the fake soldiers who lied about the real ones. He would have shared Rush's outrage and demanded strict proof.

Continue reading "Phony Indignation over a Phony Scandal"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:04 PM

October 18, 2007

The Liberal Compassion Mirage

Two recent news items remind us of the disconnect between the Democrats' claimed monopoly on compassion and the effects of their policies.

First, consider the emotionally charged public debate over President Bush's veto of a proposed expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Programs.

Standing by congressional Democrats in their push to override the veto, singer Paul Simon said with earnest indignation, "The president's veto of the reauthorization of SCHIP appears to be a heartless act. I'm here today to ask those of you who supported the veto to reexamine your conscience, to find compassion in your heart for our most vulnerable and sweetest citizens, our children."

Giving him the benefit of the doubt, the compassionate Simon is obviously unaware that the matter is not as simple as merely throwing money at the problem. To quote House Minority Leader John Boehner, "There are 500,000 kids in America who are eligible for this program who have not been signed up, yet there are some 700,000 adults who are already on the program."

Continue reading "The Liberal Compassion Mirage"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:56 PM

October 15, 2007

An Egregiously Reckless Resolution

Why, now, of all possible critical moments, are congressional Democrats insisting on passing a resolution guaranteed to offend Turkey, our vital ally in the Iraq War, by denouncing the Ottoman Empire's century-old massacre of Armenians as a "genocide"?

Nancy Pelosi and her cohorts have been warned that Turkey will be deeply offended by the move and may even take punitive action against us by withdrawing their permission for us to use Incirlik Air Base, through which well more than half of our air cargo passes in route to supply our troops in Iraq. Human Events editor Jed Babbin reports that some 95 percent of the new MRAP (mine-resistant, ambush protected) vehicles, designed to save our troops' lives, pass through Incirlik. Also as a result, Turkey might decide to attack Kurdish terrorist forces against our strong urging not to do so.

What on earth are Democrats trying to pull here? They are the same people that barely blanch when Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad denies the Holocaust. It's not like we need to worry about offending Iran, a charter member of the Axis of Evil and by last count a sworn enemy of the United States, actively working to defeat us in Iraq.

Democrats constantly castigate President Bush for alienating the international community by "going it alone." Their presidential candidates are united in promising that if their party recaptures the White House, they'll restore sound relations with foreign nations. In a recent speech, the irrepressibly garrulous Bill Clinton stressed that this would be a major theme in the next Clinton co-presidency.

Continue reading "An Egregiously Reckless Resolution"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:04 PM

October 11, 2007

Liberty or Security -- a False Choice

I doubt it's the Democrats' concern for freedom and civil liberties that drives their opposition to extending the Protect America Act. Rather, it's their failure to take the threat posed by global jihadists seriously enough.

Congress passed the Protect America Act in August, over much Democratic opposition, to authorize continued wiretapping under the NSA terrorist surveillance program. But the law is set to expire in January unless Congress votes to extend it.

Congressional Democrats are now balking at the proposed extension and are proposing revisions that the administration believes would impose unnecessary limitations on our terrorist monitoring and severely compromise our national security.

Democrats want the law revised to require the government to obtain warrants before eavesdropping on calls into this country from suspected terrorists overseas. Democrats have repeatedly mischaracterized the monitoring of these communications as "domestic spying," though the administration says that with such calls, it is targeting the overseas terrorists, not Americans. The administration insists Americans are never targeted without warrants and that it has already obtained some 100 warrants this year where Americans were targeted.

New Mexico Rep. Heather Wilson said, "If I'm targeting you, I don't know who you're going to call next." Wilson argues that under the Democratic proposal, the government would need a warrant for every call because there's always a chance that the international caller could contact someone inside the United States. For the first time in our history, we'd have to get warrants to eavesdrop on terrorist calls or Internet transmissions coming from outside the United States into this country.

Continue reading "Liberty or Security -- a False Choice"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:51 PM

October 08, 2007

Confusion Everywhere

No matter what "conventional wisdom" purports to tell us about the dominance of the Christian worldview in our culture, recent headlines illustrate the formidable challenges confronting Christian conservatives from inside and outside the church.

On ABC's "The View," Whoopie Goldberg dressed down the program's lone conservative, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, for daring to air her pro-life views. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama appeared at a megachurch in South Carolina calling for the creation of an earthly kingdom. And President Bush reportedly said, "All religions pray to the same God." Let's consider each story.

On "The View," Hasselbeck spoke favorably of a proposal of Hillary Clinton's that "might help reduce abortions." Goldberg -- apparently feeling assaulted over the innocuous remark -- told Hasselbeck to "back off a little bit" since Hasselbeck admitted to never having been in a position to abort a child. "Very few people want to have abortions," said Goldberg, who reportedly has had a number of them. "Americans," said Goldberg, ought to "revere" women who have had abortions. "It's the hardest decision that a woman ever has to make."

This densely packaged example of wrong-headedness illuminates the depth and intensity of the cultural divide in this country. Goldberg's position is so patently illogical that it wouldn't require refutation but for the lamentable fact that it is shared by a frightful percentage of social liberals.

The first self-evident fallacy is that only those who have been in a position to have an abortion have the moral authority to address the issue, which, right off the bat, excludes all men. This follows the same pattern of liberal illogic holding that only those who have been in combat have the moral standing to advocate the combat deployment of our troops.

Further, Goldberg's assertion that few women want to have an abortion flies in the face of the reality that nearly 50 million children have been aborted since the Roe decision in 1973.

Continue reading "Confusion Everywhere"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:38 PM

October 04, 2007

Actual Malice

My brother Rush has nothing for which to apologize concerning the left's maliciously manufactured "phony soldier" scandal. He said nothing wrong and his accusers know it. There is no gray area here.

Rush is fraudulently accused of calling soldiers who oppose the Iraq war "phony soldiers." On his September 26 show, he referred to men, like Jesse MacBeth, who lied about their service in Iraq and went on to impugn the service of those who actually have served there as "phony soldiers."

Two days before, on September 24, Rush recorded his "Morning Update," which aired on September 25 and mirrored an ABC "World News with Charles Gibson" piece that used the phrase "phony heroes" three times and "phonies" once to describe men like MacBeth who falsely claim to be veterans. Rush noted that the anti-war left makes celebrities of such frauds who falsely claim to have witnessed American soldiers committing atrocities in Iraq.

In his dialogue with the caller "Mike in Chicago" on the 26th, Rush used the phrase "phony soldiers," clearly referring to -- in Mike's words -- "soldiers that come up out of the blue." Rush never stated or remotely implied that any soldiers other than those who had been caught in such fabrications are phony. He did not say, would not say and never has said that soldiers who oppose the war are phony soldiers -- because he doesn't believe it.

Continue reading "Actual Malice"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 05:46 PM

October 01, 2007

At War with Being at War

New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman must be awfully tired of the global war on terror (GWOT). In his column "9/11 Is Over," he laments that "we've become 'The United States of Fighting Terrorism.' ... I will not vote for any candidate running on 9/11. We don't need another president of 9/11. We need a president for 9/12."

Alrighty, then. Let's just declare the war over.

Liberals have tried to convince us they are hawks on the GWOT but that they just don't believe Iraq is part of it. They want to go back into Afghanistan with greater force, or perhaps into Pakistan and capture Osama bin Laden, who President Bush "let escape" at Tora Bora.

Many conservatives have long been skeptical about the Democrats' claim to be hawkish on the GWOT. As I've detailed before, Democrats have opposed President Bush at every turn in the GWOT -- not just on Iraq.

They've scoffed at President Bush's moral clarity in depicting the GWOT as a struggle between the forces of good and evil. They've tried to undermine the Patriot Act, which was designed to break down the walls between our intelligence agencies and help us "connect the dots" to prevent future terrorist attacks.

Continue reading "At War with Being at War"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:14 PM

September 27, 2007

An Unhappy Marriage

Every political observer knows of the far left's hostility toward President Bush, his war policies and anyone who supports either or both. But has it occurred to you how much the base must also distrust most of the major players in the Democratic Party? That's one thought I took away from this week's Democratic presidential debate.

The relationship between the base and the party's candidates and officials is like a forced marriage characterized by a mutual dependence and reciprocal distrust.

The base, typified by groups like MoveOn.org, has no choice but to accept the Democratic Party as its vehicle to promote the liberal policy agenda. There is no other viable alternative. In turn, party leaders must cater to the far left because of its indispensable funding and grassroots contributions.

While there are many blind followers in the base, there are also plenty of savvy operators who are fully aware of the massive deception Democratic leaders have perpetrated on the American people concerning Iraq.

Continue reading "An Unhappy Marriage"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:15 PM

September 24, 2007

Columbia University's Selective First Amendment Affinity

Over an avalanche of protests, New York's Columbia University invited Iran's Holocaust denying dictator Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak on campus. That any American institution would furnish a propaganda platform for this murderous thug is symptomatic of staggering ignorance about our enemies in this global war on terror.

Self-congratulatory liberals, like Columbia's President Lee Bollinger, actually see the university's hosting of Ahmadinejad as a cause to celebrate -- advancing free speech and diverse viewpoints -- as opposed to something that must be reluctantly tolerated.

What will it take to wake people up to the reality that this tyrant is every bit as pernicious as Osama bin Laden? Then again, many would probably jump to offer bin Laden a forum, as well. After all, they believe both have legitimate grievances against U.S. policy.

Columbia history professor Kenneth T. Jackson said New York has more than a legal duty to accommodate controversial figures from abroad. "It's a moral obligation as a great city," said Jackson. "New York's record is one of toleration of difference."

Continue reading "Columbia University's Selective First Amendment Affinity"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:48 PM

September 17, 2007

The Party of George Soros

I don't think nearly enough has been made of the despicable MoveOn.org character assassination attack ad against General David Petraeus and the Democratic leadership's striking refusal to repudiate it. If you want to see the face of the modern Democratic Party, re-read that ad.

The full-page New York Times ad, reportedly purchased at a radical discount, directly accused Petraeus of "cooking the books for the White House," called him "a military man constantly at war with the facts," and said he "is likely to become "General Betray Us."

Lest you think I'm exaggerating, consider the comments of MoveOn's executive director, Eli Pariser. He said, "If you have a general who is being willfully misleading to the public and the Congress about the state of a military endeavor, that's a big problem."

Most Democratic leaders refused to condemn the ad. Some, like Hillary Clinton, independently echoed its sentiment. Clinton unmistakably called Petraeus a liar when she told him, "I think that the reports that you provide to us really require a willing suspension of disbelief."

Continue reading "The Party of George Soros"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:16 PM

September 13, 2007

Shifting the Iraq Debate

I am constantly amazed that in the ongoing debate over the Iraq War the central question that ought to drive our decision is seldom considered. We focus on the difficulties in staying the course and achieving the mission, but rarely discuss the consequences of abandoning it. This is sheer insanity.

Following General David Petraeus' congressional testimony and based on his recommendations, President Bush outlined his plan to reduce troop levels in Iraq to their pre-surge levels by next summer. Quite predictably, Democrats immediately proclaimed their opposition to the plan.

In the face of this impressive report and General Petraeus' stellar reputation for competence and good character, I can think of only a few reasons Democrats would remain in obstruction mode.

Sadly, Democrats have boxed themselves into a defeat scenario, having placed every single one of their eggs in that basket since before the 2006 elections.

Continue reading "Shifting the Iraq Debate"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 06:30 PM

September 10, 2007

How Low Will They Go?

Has the left no remaining ounce of shame? Its latest target: the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, General David Petraeus, whom Senate Democrats unanimously confirmed.

Remember Democrats faulting President Bush for being inflexible, not following the advice of the generals and having no strategy in Iraq -- never mind that they've never had so much as a paper-napkin sketch of a clue as to what to do in Iraq or the War on Terror? Yet, when he took decisive action that can fairly be said to have addressed all of these criticisms, they reflexively opposed him again, proving once more their allegiance to party over nation.

He replaced Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and appointed Petreaus to implement a new strategy in Iraq, which Democrats tacitly approved in confirming him. But even before the "surge" was fully in place, Democrats declared it a failure.

Now that the surge's military successes are so manifest that even some recalcitrant Democrats have been forced to admit them, they are doing everything they can to obscure those successes and to force a reversal in strategy that would completely erase them.

Continue reading "How Low Will They Go?"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:38 PM

September 06, 2007

Reclaiming the High Ground on Iraq

Given our success with the counterinsurgency operations and the stakes involved in the outcome of the war in Iraq, President Bush and other Republicans have a window to restate their case for the importance of Iraq in the War on Terror. They should seize the opportunity before war opponents have another chance to discourage the war effort.

Let's agree to disagree right now on whether we should have attacked Iraq in the first place. Let Democrats savor the prospect of using that issue for the 2008 elections -- if things turn back around for them and against our progress in Iraq.

But we're in Iraq now, and whether we win or lose matters -- believe it or not -- and when we begin to withdraw our troops matters because it will affect whether we win. But we shouldn't allow the answer to either question to be affected by disputes over the justification for our initial attack.

The preliminary success of the "surge" has greatly undermined the Democrats' position on a number of fronts, which is why they are trying to destroy General David Petraeus's credibility in advance of his favorable report. It is why they are developing new strategies to secure our withdrawal, such as backing off their demands for a firm withdrawal date to lure "moderate" Republicans into joining their cut-and-run scheme.

Continue reading "Reclaiming the High Ground on Iraq"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 04:58 PM

September 04, 2007

Correction: Texas Party Platform

In my just-posted column, "Hypocrisy as an Impeachable Offense," I stated that no one is advocating the resurrection of sodomy laws. An astute reader has just informed me of my error. Apparently, the Texas Republican Party platform does indeed provide:

Texas Sodomy Statutes - We oppose the legalization of sodomy. We demand that Congress exercise its authority
granted by the U.S. Constitution to withhold jurisdiction from the federal courts from cases involving sodomy.

This provision will remain in this correction until someone else tells me the platform has been changed back. I guess I should have said -- "No one I know is engaged in the quixotic exerice of trying to resurrect sodomy laws." But had I said something of the sort, Congress would probably have kowtowed to the demands of the Texas legislature and I'd have had egg on my face anyway. Sometimes you just can't win out there.

So, my bad. Or, to use a less hip cliche: live and learn.

I think I'll step out in blind faith and stand by my statement that no one is advocating that video cams be installed in people's homes. But stand by on that too. I have some alert detractors and I don't want to get cocky, especially in light of this most egregious error.

Posted by David Limbaugh at 11:01 PM

Hypocrisy as an "Impeachable" Offense

Why did Sen. Larry Craig resign? Was it that he was exposed as a homosexual? That he is also a Republican? That he lied? That he committed a misdemeanor? That he is a hypocrite? Or that Republicans had to offer him in sacrifice lest they too -- horrors -- be accused of party-wide hypocrisy?

Obviously, he resigned under pressure from the left -- which ought to be defending him -- and his GOP colleagues.

The larger question, then, is why both the left and right came down so hard on Craig. MSNBC's Chris Matthews inveighed against Craig because Republicans have railed against "San Francisco Democrats" and "hypocrisy does loom here."

Matthews' "Hardball" guest, Salon's Joan Walsh, agreed. "Hypocrisy absolutely looms, Chris. ...The Republican Party has made itself the party of the bedroom police. They've gone after gays, they've snickered about San Francisco Democrats, and they went after Bill Clinton in a sexual kind of witch hunt, and so they've left themselves really open to double standards."

Continue reading "Hypocrisy as an "Impeachable" Offense"

Posted by David Limbaugh at 07:48 PM | TrackBack (0)