Wednesday, March 4, 2009

Conservatism With Heart: Rush Limbaugh at CPAC!!#links#links#links#links#links#links#links

* Conservatism With Heart: Rush Limbaugh at CPAC!! #links#links#links#links#links#links#links

Thank you Dee from CWH! I have seen Rush's CPAC speech but missed Ann Coulter's. She is a riot with some great points with regard to Democrats views on President Obama.

* Liberals beware: Listening to these Talking Heads could be hazardous to your presupposed political ideologies. Do not listen if you have no intention of becoming a Republican. Knowing you are living a lie while aiding and abetting the biggest scam in American history could do damage to your self-worth and personal religion. If you have no intentions of changing then run out of the house right now and hug a tree; throw your hard-earned money toward the government; and dust off your statue of Karl Marx and straighten you portrait of Barack Obama. If you do want a good belly laugh and are willing to accept that your political stances are bent, then by all means, listen. You have been warned. Chip's Church Chat (C3) cannot be held liable for dissensions in any family, institution, or political camp where members who use their brains convert from hyper-liberalism to rational-conservatism. For a full disclosure of all release of liabilities, contact Levine, Levine, and Levine law firm @


Anonymous said...

Look, when you come right down to it--that is, when you cut away special interests, like guns, and unions, and religion, and gay rights, and all of the big one-issue voters on both sides of the aisle--the difference between republicans and democrats, or conservatives and liberals, or whatever, is the extent to which we feel it's appropriate to warp the free market to reflect our values.
I don't think anybody advocates complete free market--we did that in the nineteenth century, and we ended up with eight-year-olds working 80 hours a week in coal mines.
And I don't think anybody advocates complete abdication of free market--look how well the USSR did in the 80s.
So the answer is somewhere in between. I'm not sure we need a federal dolphin registry administration (which I made up, but we do have agencies like that), but on the other hand, are you going to argue that rural electrification, national highways, or the Nuclear Regulatory Administration are examples of evil and intrusive government meddling?
And more to the point, if you think NASA is a waste of money, and I think it's worth the extra taxes, neither of us has a basis to call the other bad names--we just disagree, like we might disagree about whether brussels sprouts are tasty.

Anonymous said...