Take Me To Your Leader

PRESIDENT Obama and his enforcers are right. Rush Limbaugh is the leader of the Republican Party. And now that Bill Buckley’s gone, he’s the leader of the conservative movement too.

Technically, of course, you could say that the Republican Party doesn’t have a leader right now, and it won’t have one until its presidential nominee is picked in the summer of 2012.

But like it or not, Rush Limbaugh is Mr. Republican for the next few years. He, and not some politician, will be the face of the Republican Party and of conservatism.

Obviously the president and his political rottweilers think that Rush Limbaugh is a big fat juicy target for them to sink their teeth into. They have conducted polls, and the polls show that Limbaugh has high negatives and that independent women think he is too bombastic.

No doubt the Obamunists think that, by painting Limbaugh as the leader of the Party of No, they will intimidate Republicans into softening opposition to the president’s programs.

I say good luck to the president and his hunting dogs. But they shouldn’t forget that there’s a risk in hunting Rush Limbaugh.

If they challenge Republicans on courage and leadership, who knows, Republicans might one day surprise them.

The great elephant in the room of US politics today is that 99.9 percent of people are scared to death of being called a racist—or a sexist or a homophobe or exclusive or mean-spirited. That’s why liberals sic the rottweilers on anyone who dares to raise the mildest question about any government social program.

But Rush Limbaugh is not afraid. Or, at least, he acts as if he is not afraid.

There is a word that means: acting as if you are not afraid. That word is: Courage.

Now, nobody except Rush Limbaugh knows if he was just born with the courage to say on ESPN that Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb got a pass from the sports media because of his race. Maybe he had to teach himself to put up parodies on his show like “Barack the Magic Negro.” My own guess is that it’s a bit of both. Rush was ornery enough to drop out of college and defy his rather opinionated father. But Rush is also reported to be quite shy. By his own admission he had his chauffeur in Manhattan drive around the block a few times while he summoned up the courage to go in and meet Bill Buckley for the first time.

Courage is what you look for in leaders. Ronald Reagan had it. He had the courage to develop and hold on to his conservative agenda through the long years of ascent and through his tumultuous presidency. President Bush had it. He had the courage to invade Iraq and then the courage to implement the surge when “everyone” said that the Iraq war was lost.

We don’t know yet if Barack Obama has this sort of courage. The president has lived a rather sheltered life thus far, being helped along by well-meaning liberals. He never seems to have had a serious reverse to overcome. In this he unlike Rush Limbaugh, whose career as a radio personality was a failure until he started his local talk show in Sacramento in 1984.

We don’t have much of a record yet on President Obama. But we have one significant decision to analyze.

After the election in November 2008 the Obama team had a choice. It could have announced that, given the financial crisis, all bets were off. Job One would be the credit crisis. Until the crisis was over there would be no politics as usual. But the Obama team did not change strategy. It encouraged the Reid-Pelosi Congress to write a monster special-interest “porkulus” bill. It produced a federal budget that could have been written back in July 2008.

In President Bush and his Iraq strategy, our liberal friends analyzed this sort of behavior as “stubbornness” and “obstinacy.” They have not, of course, characterized the Obama transition in these terms. President Bush’s “obstinacy” took courage. President Obama’s steady-as-she-goes transition did not take courage. It might even suggest weakness.

So there’s a danger in the Obama team’s tactic of painting Rush Limbaugh as the leader of the opposition. People might find out how courageous he is. They might like that. They might even get to like the idea of No, not one dime more of my money.

Rush Limbaugh is setting a leadership example for all conservatives. Sooner or later, we conservatives are going to have to summon up the courage to say to the next liberal that calls us names: Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn.

When we have summoned up that courage we will know that we are ready, once again, to lead the people of the United States, the last best hope of mankind on earth.

What is the point of being a Republican In Name Only, or even a Conservative In Name Only?

Christopher Chantrill blogs at www.roadtothemiddleclass.com. His Road to the Middle Class is forthcoming.

print view

To comment on this article at American Thinker click here.

To email the author, click here.

TAGS

Civil Society

“Civil Society”—a complex welter of intermediate institutions, including businesses, voluntary associations, educational institutions, clubs, unions, media, charities, and churches—builds, in turn, on the family, the primary instrument by which people are socialized into their culture and given the skills that allow them to live in broader society and through which the values and knowledge of that society are transmitted across the generations.
Francis Fukuyama, Trust

What Liberals Think About Conservatives

[W]hen I asked a liberal longtime editor I know with a mainstream [publishing] house for a candid, shorthand version of the assumptions she and her colleagues make about conservatives, she didn't hesitate. “Racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-choice fascists,” she offered, smiling but meaning it.
Harry Stein, I Can't Believe I'm Sitting Next to a Republican

Liberal Coercion

[T]he Liberal, and still more the subspecies Radical... more than any other in these latter days seems under the impression that so long as he has a good end in view he is warranted in exercising over men all the coercion he is able[.]
Herbert Spencer, The Man Versus the State

Moral Imperatives of Modern Culture

These emerge out of long-standing moral notions of freedom, benevolence, and the affirmation of ordinary life... I have been sketching a schematic map... [of] the moral sources [of these notions]... the original theistic grounding for these standards... a naturalism of disengaged reason, which in our day takes scientistic forms, and a third family of views which finds its sources in Romantic expressivism, or in one of the modernist successor visions.
Charles Taylor, Sources of the Self

US Life in 1842

Families helped each other putting up homes and barns. Together, they built churches, schools, and common civic buildings. They collaborated to build roads and bridges. They took pride in being free persons, independent, and self-reliant; but the texture of their lives was cooperative and fraternal.
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism

Society and State

For [the left] there is only the state and the individual, nothing in between. No family to rely on, no friend to depend on, no community to call on. No neighbourhood to grow in, no faith to share in, no charities to work in. No-one but the Minister, nowhere but Whitehall, no such thing as society - just them, and their laws, and their rules, and their arrogance.
David Cameron, Conference Speech 2008

Faith and Politics

As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable... [1.] protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; [2.] recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family... [3.] the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.
Pope Benedict XVI, Speech to European Peoples Party, 2006

Never Trust Experts

No lesson seems to be so deeply inculcated by the experience of life as that you should never trust experts. If you believe doctors, nothing is wholesome: if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent: if you believe the soldiers, nothing is safe. They all require their strong wine diluted by a very large admixture of insipid common sense.
Lord Salisbury, “Letter to Lord Lytton”

Conservatism's Holy Grail

What distinguishes true Conservatism from the rest, and from the Blair project, is the belief in more personal freedom and more market freedom, along with less state intervention... The true Third Way is the Holy Grail of Tory politics today - compassion and community without compulsion.
Minette Marrin, The Daily Telegraph

Class War

In England there were always two sharply opposed middle classes, the academic middle class and the commercial middle class. In the nineteenth century, the academic middle class won the battle for power and status... Then came the triumph of Margaret Thatcher... The academics lost their power and prestige and... have been gloomy ever since.
Freeman Dyson, “The Scientist as Rebel”

Government Expenditure

The Union publishes an exact return of the amount of its taxes; I can get copies of the budgets of the four and twenty component states; but who can tell me what the citizens spend in the administration of county and township?
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America

Conservatism

Conservatism is the philosophy of society. Its ethic is fraternity and its characteristic is authority — the non-coercive social persuasion which operates in a family or a community. It says ‘we should...’.
Danny Kruger, On Fraternity

mysql close