This Page

has been moved to new address

Massive Clue

Sorry for inconvenience...

Redirection provided by Blogger to WordPress Migration Service
Bloviating Zeppelin: Massive Clue

Bloviating Zeppelin

(in-ep-toc'-ra-cy) - a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Massive Clue


We've all been thinking -- and some bloggers have been writing -- that the GOP and Conservatism appear to be on geometrically diverging paths. There have been no end (myself included) of posts wondering what to do, how to solve the problem, and the resolutions that some are considering -- to include not even showing at the polls this November.

Now, the Number One Republican protagonist, the Number One Carrier of President Bush's Water, Rush Limbaugh, has come out on-air and said:


Conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh stunned his listeners by announcing that he might not support the Republican presidential nominee in this year’s election.

Limbaugh said on Monday’s show: "I can see possibly not supporting the Republican nominee this election, and I never thought that I would say that in my life."

The reason: “You don’t have a genuine down-the-list conservative” among the GOP candidates.

But Limbaugh’s remarks are not quite so surprising in light of statements he made about GOP candidates Mike Huckabee and John McCain last week:

“I'm here to tell you, if either of these two guys get the nomination, it's going to destroy the Republican Party. It's going to change it forever, be the end of it. A lot of people aren't going to vote. You watch.”


Coming from Limbaugh, this borders on complete and utter heresy.

Yes, people, we have actually sunk that low. How depressing.

Solutions in sight?


BZ

P.S.
Many thanks to Texas Fred for the heads-up.

5 Comments:

Blogger bigwhitehat said...

I listen to Rush regularly. This is no surprise. He has been complaining about the lack of conservatism for some time now.

I wouldn't call him a carrier of Bush's water. He really hasn't been that supportive of Bush. Me on the other hand, I ran out of water.

Wed Jan 23, 09:44:00 AM PST  
Anonymous WMD_Maker said...

I dont think that not voting is the answer. Mitt, or Rudy would be a step, NOT a great leap, above any dem. McCain is a dem and Huck is Jimmy The Peanut Brain reincarnated. I do admit that none of them are my first choice, but to not vote would leave us with Hillary or Osamabama

Wed Jan 23, 10:23:00 AM PST  
Blogger Mark said...

maybe by the 2012 election conservatives will get organized and the country will be tired of Pres. Hillary....maybe.

the problem is with the electorate, lookit who gets the votes. people just vote for whoever promises them the most free shit.

Wed Jan 23, 12:03:00 PM PST  
Blogger Bloviating Zeppelin said...

BWH: I've not been a Rush listener for some time; I usually am taking in a local AM show or Prager. I posit that only recently Rush has hesitated to carry the Bush or the GOP bucket. And when you hear that kind of talk issuing from one of THE most staunch Republican supporters extant, you KNOW that validates what you and I and many others have been thinking for some time: Conservatism isn't just walking away from the GOP; it appears to be fleeing by the busload.

WMD: and NOT showing up to the vote is NOT the answer! AGREED! I still agree that any GOP'er is better than Hillabama.

Mark: "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.
Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage."

Yes, precisely.

BZ

Wed Jan 23, 01:55:00 PM PST  
Blogger The Griper said...

"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.
Great nations rise and fall."

i don't think the past is a good yardstick to measure by in regards to this issue. the reason being is that if you look back on history those great civilizations all had something in common, the form of government.

they all were ruled by a government that dictated to the people.

they were all ruled by a government where leaders were determined in regards to a specific class of people. and class as identified here includes family.

they were all ruled by a government that was centralized and without checks and balances in regards to power.

but i believe that the biggest fault was their quest for expansion of power.

and this does not take anything away from what you said, bz.

what it does do is add to what you said and is a point against "socialism" which all of what you said along with what i said depends upon to exist.

if there be any arguement between us it would come from your use of the word, democracy. democracy, as a form of government, cannot exist in this world. democracy can best be defined as a process used by groups to make decisions as a singular unit.

Wed Jan 23, 04:14:00 PM PST  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home