"Everybody is guilty of some transgression somewhere against conservatism… except Santorum." ~ Rush Limbaugh 1-31-12
Might the brothers be coalescing behind one candidate? You be the judge. We already know that David has made his support widely known, and in a recent NewsMax piece, describes how the 'Buckley Rule' points directly to Santorum:
Conservatives are fighting among themselves about not just who the best candidate would be but also who is most electable. Sure, electability has always been an issue, but now some are saying that to support someone, it's essential not only that we show he is electable but also that he is the most electable.
This amounts to replacing the "Buckley rule" — that "we should support the most conservative candidate who is electable" — with "we should support the most electable candidate, provided he is at least marginally conservative."
Now many of the same people are telling us that we have to compromise on 2012, as well, that we can't support a candidate who is more conservative, even during the primary, because it would reduce our chances of defeating Obama.
I appreciate the concern, but the logical extension of this kind of thinking is that we all have to become mini political operatives, always engaging first in strategic political calculations and never voting our hearts.
I reject the conventional wisdom that Rick Santorum could not win the general election, because I believe he represents the best contrast to Obama and is the least vulnerable to attack, among other reasons.
I will support whoever emerges as the Republican nominee, but I do not apologize for supporting Rick Santorum.
So we're crystal clear where David Limbaugh stands, but what of his brother, Rush? Well, although he still hasn't openly endorsed a candidate, Rush said something at the very end of yesterday's program that alludes to his inner-most thoughts about the appropriate candidate. He doesn't have to openly say it...we know!
