May 12, 2008

New Column: 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 "New Column: 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