Rush, Instapundit debate II

Bottom line: A Democratic victory would not be the end of the world

Published on October 17, 2006 By Draginol In Republican

Today on Rush Limbaugh's show, Rush referred indirectly to yesterday's article about the Instapundit vs. Rush fallout.

From listening to the show, Rush clearly seems to think that conservatives, such as myself, are being naive or as he put it, should "expand their horizons" on what the repercussions of a Democratic victory in November would be.

Considerable time was spent on the premise that votes shouldn't be used to "teach a lesson". Or more to the point, that a vote really can't be used to teach a lesson. I disagree. You can bet that if the Republicans lose, especially given how loud the right has been about its dissatisaction with Republicans in congress, that they will take it to hear.

The difference is that many conservatives, myself included, don't think the world will end if Democrats gain control of the house (and even the senate). We're not like the hysterical left that thinks if its opponents win that the world will be destroyed.

I don't think we'll see some massive tax increase, I don't think we'll "cut and run" from Iraq, I don't think Bush will be impeached, I don't think we'll lose the war on terrorism. If the Democrats were about to get a big majority of congress, I might feel differently, but at most, the Democrats would have a tiny majority in both houses with a veto-wielding Republican in the white house.

If congressional Democrats start acting like kooks for all the American people to see, they'll suffer in 2008 when the stakes are much higher.

And you can also be sure that congressional Republicans won't soon forget what happens in the age of the "new media" if you piss off your base.

So Rush, spare us the patronizing "we've been brainwashed by the 'drive by' media". It was on-line conservatives that got Trent Lott out after his foolish remarks about Thurmond. It was on-line conservatives that exposed the forged documents on 60-minutes. We don't get our marching orders from the MSM. If anything, the marching orders to the MSM increasingly come from the blogsphere. Sites like Instapundit, JoeUser, and tens of thousands of others who in turn express the opinions of ordinary Americans.

We are unhappy with Republicans. That doesn't mean we'll vote for Democrats out of spite, they have their own constiuencies to deal with. If Republicans lose, it's becauase they didn't earn our vote. And you can bet they will remember that. They will have plenty of statistical research to drive that point home. And the world won't end.

Update: And no, I won't be "glad" if Republicans lose. I just think if they lose, they brought it on themselves..

Update: Yes, I understand there are lots of Democrats who act like kooks. And yet, when the senate was narrowly under Democratic control prior to 2004 it wasn't the end of the world. IF the Democrats win back the house AND IF they pass bills that Republicans don't find acceptable THEN Bush should use his VETO. IF he does not use it, then that speaks to a totally different problem.

Response: Rush discussed this on the show, here is a response.

Comments (Page 2)

Red Paul

on Oct 17, 2006

Problem is, people who think like you (and InstaPundit) are liberals in conservative clothing.

Aine

on Oct 17, 2006

Who would have guessed that a Democratic majority of 1 or 2 seats in either/both houses would spell the end of civilization as we know it- even, as one poster said yesterday, of *democracy*. And Don G. says that we have to understand that the dems will fix it so that they will NEVER lose again. It's not as if the repubs haven't been doing the same thing for the last 6 years- and it's not as if the dems could succeed. And Don, do you *really* believe that either party is going to materially change the number of kids in your local school that don't speak english? do you not realize that your tax situation is going to get worse in the next few years no matter who wins?

Do your homework. If the dems win they will have a razor thin majority and history says that they will lose that and the house in 2 years. And yes, the thought of Pelosi as speaker is repellent- even to my demmie friends (yes, I have some), but living with the triumphalism is something that the repubs probably need to do- a taste of one's own medicine. Of all the mistakes that have been made, the biggest one is to make politics nastier than it has been in decades. It is ironic that the party so associated with Christianity has no sense of the golden rule: do unto others as you would have them do unto you. To quote the Economist, one of the best things about a democracy is that you get to throw the bums out every so often. Time for some fresh faces that will get back to the business of running an efficient, accountable, government.

Draginol

on Oct 17, 2006

Problem is, people who think like you (and InstaPundit) are liberals in conservative clothing.

..Right.

Let's see..

Supports War on Terror. Check.

Supports War in Iraq. Check.

Supports tax cuts. Check.

Supports strict constructionist supreme court justices. Check.

Supports secure borders. Check.

But if I don't blindly pull the Republican trigger, I'm really a liberal. I thought it was only left-wingers who blindly obeyed the party line...

mcg

on Oct 17, 2006

OK, after my negative kvetching above, let's get positive for a second. It is important to point out that there ARE entirely appropriate venues within which to "punish" the Republican party for its drift away from conservatism. Those venues are, of course, the primaries. And while incumbents enjoy a considerable advantage in primaries that exceeds even what they have in the general, they are NOT invulnerable: Both Cynthia McKinney on the D side and Joe Schwarz on the R side fell this year. And Laffey came tantalizingly close. If conservatives were to form an organzied coalition to engage in dedicated GOTV efforts during primary season, I really do believe that they can effect change in the party.

But primary season is over, folks, and to abandon your party in hopes that maybe they'll learn a lesson is simply counterproductive. Power switches are not gradual events, they are seismic shifts, and it is far easier to hold onto power and extend it than it is to regain it.

Cycloptichorn

on Oct 17, 2006

What really makes me laugh, is how afraid the average voter is of Pelosi et al holding 'investigation after investigation' into the Bush admin.

Why is this such a big deal, to Conservatives? Surely if the Bush admin had done everything on the up-and-up, it would be easily shown.

The truth is, down deep - really deep, farther back than most Republicans would like to admit - they know that Bush's administration will not survive the investigatory process. That they will be shown to have done things which are not conducive with the way most Americans believe things should be done. And they are afraid of this.

Cycloptichorn

on Oct 17, 2006

What really makes me laugh, is how afraid the average Republican voter is of Pelosi et al holding 'investigation after investigation' into the Bush admin.

Why is this such a big deal, to Conservatives? Surely if the Bush admin had done everything on the up-and-up, it would be easily shown.

The truth is, down deep - really deep, farther back than most Republicans would like to admit - they know that Bush's administration will not survive the investigatory process. That they will be shown to have done things which are not conducive with the way most Americans believe things should be done. And they are afraid of this.

Dave

on Oct 17, 2006

"If the Democrats start acting like kooks, they'll suffer in 2008 when the stakes are much higher."

What do you mean by using the word 'start'? When North Korea sets off a nuke, they obsess over the scandel-de-seur with Foley. They are kooks. They just might sober up after twenty years of stinging defeats, that's what it's going to take. The reps will sober up after one unfavorable election.

Best possible scenerio is that the reps learn their lesson by ALMOST losing the house. They've got enough sense of self-correcting behavior that this would be possible. Don't give up on that.

mcg

on Oct 17, 2006

Oh please, that's just stupid. Investigations are only a "concern" because 1) you can't count on Pelosi, Reid & co. to conduct any such hearings honestly; and 2) they would further obstruct the ordinary conduct of Congress.

on Oct 17, 2006

Mature and rational adults vote for the representation that they think can represent them the best. Adults know that sometimes life is unpleasant that way and the best is far from great or what we would wish for - especially in a time of world wide war. It demonstrates how spoiled and lazy some republican voters have become that they have even come to thinking this way.

For those saying the world will not end, no matter who leads this country, I sincerely hope you are right, but I am pretty sure you're wrong. Even with the best we can elect, doing their best, we will still lose a tragically large number of brave people, and many innocents will die.

Eventually we will be attacked in the US with nuclear weapons, and that day may come in the next two years - no one can say. The day we wake up to hear that New York and Washington are not there anymore, I do not want the grief and shock to be compounded by hearing that President Pelosi is on Air Force one deciding how to respond.

Cycloptichorn

on Oct 17, 2006

What 'ordinary conduct' of Congress would they be disrupting, exactly?

Would they get in the way of massive earmarking?
Perhaps they would drop the ball on Electronic Voting reform.
Maybe they would mess up Immigration reform.

There is no substantial reason to believe that the Dems wouldn't run any investigations 'honestly.' You certainly haven't provided any, merely asserted that they 'can't be trusted.' Why is any voter to believe that they can be trusted less than the Republicans who currently are making a mess of the 'ordinary conduct' of Congress?

mcg

on Oct 17, 2006

Look, I could take the old Gingrich line that no business is better than Democratic business, but I don't. There is a fair amount of business that enjoys bipartisan support. Heck, earmark reform is one good example, thanks for pointing that out. I'd love to see legislation mandating both paper ballot receipts and voter ID verification, but Dems really aren't interested in preventing voter fraud, so I don't think that will happen.

Now, as for immigration reform, you have a point. Given GWB's softness on immigration, they could very well pass something that makes my blood boil but that GWB will sign. You might have given me a good reason to welcome those investigations after all.

And you want evidence that the Dems wouldn't run an investigation honestly? Well, I don't blame you, you probably get your news from the MSM, so you probably don't know about Reid's ethics issues, or Murtha's premature conviction of the Haditha soldiers, etc. And don't play equivalence games here. Even if I were to concede that Republicans would conduct similar investigations with similar levels of dishonest partisanship---and you know, I just might concede that---the fact is that THEY AREN'T CONDUCTING THEM. So there is no comparison.

Draginol

on Oct 17, 2006

The truth is, down deep - really deep, farther back than most Republicans would like to admit - they know that Bush's administration will not survive the investigatory process. That they will be shown to have done things which are not conducive with the way most Americans believe things should be done. And they are afraid of this.

Hence back to the "If Democrats behave like kooks" comment...

Jwt4412

on Oct 17, 2006

Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court is the only REASON you need. What is the matter with you?

Draginol

on Oct 17, 2006

This is basically the kind of attitude far-left people had about Bush getting re-elected. The difference is that conservatves are supposed to know that the Federal government really isn't THAT powerful. I don't want the Republicans to lose but I don't feel they automatically get my votes just because the views of their opponents I find repulsive.

And to people comparing Democrats to Islamism. I suspect some of the comments in this thread will be used next time I argue that the left has the overwhelming majority of the kooks.

Kustie the Klown

on Oct 17, 2006

The democrats aren't going to win back either house.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!