Just when you thought there’s no reason for hope…
Despite the temporary elation delivered by a Rush Limbaugh pep talk at CPAC, conservative morale is at an all-time low. Painfully aware of the hold that Obamania has over the media and therefore the nation, those on the right who are forced to align with the GOP are feeling the winter blues more keenly than at any time in our history. Under assault on all fronts — socially, economically and politically — and taking the usual friendly fire from our Senate moderates, there seems little cause for hope.
But, as in all tribulation, there is always a silver lining. And like George Washington in the winter of 1776, we’ve got to take advantage of conditions and launch an attack out of our perceived weakness. With this prolonged and snowy winter, we’ve already got the global-warmists on the run and more importantly, with the stock market plunging every time anyone in the Administration approaches a podium, people are starting to feel the effects of the recession like never before.
The one positive aspect of the 2008 elections is that now that we’re out of power, we can go on offense instead of dealing from a cowering, defensive position The time is past when we must summon our policy wonks, or even Rush, to define and defend our views. The very definition of conservativism is, in a way, a backward-looking concept and the only way to sell our message to an America that desires “change” is to force the left’s true agenda out into the open; and then at election time, to contrast theirs with our own.
The key to solving our dilemma is to put liberals in defense of their grand plan. We can cry “socialism” all we want, but if its tenets are unknown to the American people, we are merely spitting into a howling wind of propaganda. If you’ve ever engaged in a discussion with a product of the liberal brainwashing machine, you know what I mean. It is useless to use simple facts to refute their programmed views; because these are never based on actuality, but on emotion.
And emotion is an ultra-powerful tool when it comes to politics, and it has always been so. This was well demonstrated by William Shakespeare in his tale of the fickleness of the Roman people in the wake of Julius Caesar’s assassination. Recalling how the use of rhetoric swayed the mob and then applying it to modern America, it makes one want to cry out with Mark Antony, “O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts, And men have lost their reason!”
So instead of coming to praise conservatism, let us instead bury socialism. Let’s start asking questions; tough, specific questions. Questions that, if asked calmly and often enough, will force Democrats to explain themselves; a perilous risk in defense of an ideology that must constantly be masked with rhetoric and utopian platitudes like “hope” and “change.”
Are Democratic solutions to black poverty working? Why have countless other minorities come to this country and flourished — sometimes in less than a generation — when many American-born blacks wallow in liberal-fed despair? Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden can make all the jokes they want about Indians owning gas stations and donut shops, but the fact remains that other peoples of color have managed to work hard and make the American dream their own. Why?
How can jobs possibly be “created” if the government taxes and regulates businesses out of business. This can be especially effective when countering ludicrous claims that Republican measures are responsible for jobs going overseas. Try this: Can the spate of companies going offshore possibly be the result of onerous taxes, outrageous union demands and/or choking governmental regulation?
Name one country that has a nationalized healthcare system that provides more speedy or cutting-edge care than ours? And, as to the reason why our system needs “fixing,” what can possibly be the reason? Might the insidious demands of the trial-lawyer lobby have something to do with rising costs?
Why have Japanese scientists, those in the backyard of Kyoto, published a report debunking man-mad global warming, calling it an “unprovable hypothesis” and the equivalent of “ancient astrology”? And, do the plans to wreck our economy with wild “cap-and-trade” policies rest on real science, or merely on scientific consensus? Define the difference between the two, please.
If unions are good for business, why are the industries most connected to them failures? Could their infiltration at the municipal level account for bankrupted local governments? Is their nearly total control of our dreadful education system responsible for that continuing debacle? Might their shrinking membership in the private sector be a warning bell? Should the national hatred for workplace greed apply to them?
We must force these and many more questions to be raised every morning at American kitchen tables. We can be fairly sure that our media will never put forth any of the above of their own volition, but that doesn’t mean that we lack venues for their address. As liberals are fond of pointing out, we own talk radio and a great deal of the Internet; and we do have some great advocates in Congress.
Most of all, let’s make this a disciplined effort, meaning that whatever the provocation, we stay on offense at all times. As General Washington said, “Discipline is the soul of an army. It makes small numbers formidable; procures success to the weak, and esteem to all.”
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
H/T to National Review Online