News Journal: Number 12, September 17, 2010: The Buckley, Limbaugh, and Pronk Rules–Videos

Posted on September 17, 2010. Filed under: Issues, Law, Mass Media, Movies, News, Politics, Radio, Web | Tags: Bill Buckley, Classical Liberal, Libertarian, Politics, Ray Pronk, Rules, Rush Limbaugh |

Rush On The Buckley Rule: O’Donnell Is Worth The Risk

WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY AND KENNETH MINOGUE part 1

WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY AND KENNETH MINOGUE part 2

WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY AND KENNETH MINOGUE part 3

WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY AND KENNETH MINOGUE part 4

WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY AND KENNETH MINOGUE part 5

WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY AND KENNETH MINOGUE part 6

Buckley’s Rule: “The wisest choice would be the one who would win. No sense running Mona Lisa in a beauty contest. I’d be for the most right, viable candidate who could win. If you could convince me that Barry Goldwater could win, I’d vote for him.”

Limbaugh’s Rule: “In an election year when voters are fed up with liberalism, you vote for the most conservative Republican in the primary — period.”

Pronk’s Rule: “Vote for the candidate that shares your political philosophy–classical liberal or libertarian.”

Suppose you are a German and wanted to vote in the 1933 elections.

Who would you vote for if you were a classical liberal?

The four major parties were:

1. National Socialist German Workers Party.

2. Social Democratic Party

3. Communist Party

4 Centre Party

The first three were clearly not classical liberal but socialist parties.

The fourth was classical liberal to a large extent but had a decidedly Catholic point of view on the issues.

If you followed the rules, what would be the outcome in Germany of 1933:

Buckley’s Rule: National Socialist Workers Party candidate? I think not.

Limbaugh’s Rule: Would not vote!

Pronk’s Rule: Centre Party or a new classical liberal party.

Who won?

Party	Vote percentage (change)		Seats (change)
National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP)	43.9%	+10.8%	288	+92
Social Democratic Party (SPD)	18.3%	-2.1%	120	-1
Communist Party (KPD)	12.3%	-4.6%	81	-19
Centre Party (Z)	11.2%	-0.7%	74	+4
German National People’s Party (DNVP)^[1]	8.0%	-0.3%	52	+/-0
Bavarian People’s Party (BVP)	2.7%	-0.4%	18	-2
German People’s Party (DVP)	1.1%	-0.8%	2	-9
Christian Social People’s Service (CSVD)	1.0%	-0.1%	4	-1
German Democratic Party (DDP)	0.9%	-0.1%	5	+3
German Farmers’ Party	0.3%	-0.1%	2	-1
Agricultural League	0.2%	-0.1%	1	-1
Other	0.0%	-0.9%	0	+/-0
Totals	100.0%		647	+63

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_federal_election,_March_1933

Following either the Buckley Rule or Limbaugh Rule will still get you Hitler and the Nazis.

Following the Pronk Rule may get you Hitler and the Nazis or a new political party that grows over time and eventually wins.

Suspend the Buckley and Limbaugh rules and join or start a third-party with a classical liberal or libertarian political philosophy.

In the case of Christine O’Donnell for the 2010 Senate seat in Delaware,l she is definitely a conservative and not a moderate Republican like Mike Castle.

Buckley, Limbaugh and Pronk would all vote for Christine O’Donnell over Mike Castle.

The Republican establishment better get a clue or face a further erosion of their base as more and more conservatives and libertarians become independents.

Background Article and Videos

Buckley Rule (vote for most conservative primary candidate likely to win general election)

“…Conservative author and commentator William F. Buckley (1925-2008) was asked, in 1967, whom he would support in 1968 for U.S. president. Buckley responded with what would late be called the ‘Buckley Rule” for primary voting: “The wisest choice would be the one who would win. No sense running Mona Lisa in a beauty contest. I’d be for the most right, viable candidate who could win. If you could convince me that Barry Goldwater could win, I’d vote for him.”

The term “Buckley Rule” wouldn’t be popularly used until the 2000s, but the language “rightward-most viable candidate” (not the exact words) has been often repeated. The word “viable”—a candidate who is the most likely to win the general election—adds an element of pragmatism to the conservative philosophy.

Conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh disagreed with the “Buckley Rule” and established a new “Limbaugh Rule” on September 14, 2010. Limbaugh said that it requires clairvoyance to determine who will win the general election, so one should just simply vote for the most conservative candidate.

http://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/buckley_rule_vote_for_most_conservative_primary_candidate_likely_to_win_gen/

Kenneth Minogue

“…Kenneth Robert Minogue^[1] (born 11 September 1930)^[2] is an Australian political theorist who is Emeritus Professor of Political Science at the London School of Economics. Born in New Zealand,^[3] His publications include The Liberal Mind, Nationalism, The Concept of a University, and Alien Powers: The Pure Theory of Ideology. He has written academic essays on a great range of problems in political theory. His latest work is Politics: A Very Short Introduction.

He is a libertarian,^{[citation needed]} and a leading member of the euro-sceptic Bruges Group and the European Foundation. …”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Minogue

German federal election, March 1933

“…The German federal election, March 1933 in the Weimar Republic was held on 5 March 1933. Thanks to the success of the Nazi Party and its allies in the poll, its leader and Chancellor of Germany, Adolf Hitler, was able to pass the Enabling Act, which effectively gave him the power of a dictator.

The election took place shortly after the Reichstag fire, in which the German parliament was set alight, allegedly by a Dutch Communist, Marinus van der Lubbe. This event had the joint effect of lowering the popularity of the Communist Party (KPD), and enabling Hitler to persuade President Paul von Hindenburg to pass the Reichstag Fire Decree. This emergency law removed many civil liberties and allowed the arrest of the leaders of the KPD shortly before the election, suppressing the Communist vote and consolidating the position of the Nazis. While at that time not as heavily oppressed as the Communists, the Social Democrats were also restricted in their actions, as the party’s leadership had already fled to Prague and many members were acting only from the underground. Hence, the fire is widely believed to have had a major effect on the outcome of the election. As replacement, and for 10 years to come, the new parliament used the Kroll Opera house for its meetings.

To further assure the outcome of the vote would be a Nazi majority, Nazi organizations “monitored” the vote process. In Prussia, 50,000 members of SS, SA and Stahlhelm were ordered to monitor the votes as deputy sheriffs. …”

Aftermath

“…Despite achieving a much better result than in the November 1932 election, the Nazis did not do as well as Hitler had hoped, polling 43.9%, rather than the 50+% that he had expected. Therefore, he was forced to maintain his coalition with the Nationalist German National People’s Party (DNVP) to control a majority. In addition to this, Hitler needed a two-thirds majority to pass the Enabling Act (a law which allowed him to pass laws without consulting the Reichstag), which he gained by persuading the Centre Party to vote with him. The bill was passed on 23 March. Only the Social Democrats opposed the measure, which came into effect on 27 March. Moreover, Social Democratic representation was suppressed, because some Social Democratic deputies that were elected to the Reichstag were prevented from taking their seats by the Nazi SA. Had the Communist Party participated, its representatives would have contributed 12% of the Reichstag votes. Instead, their representatives were under arrest for their suspect role in the Reichstag Fire. Though the Enabling Act was only meant to be effective for four years, it was formally prolonged twice. The powers gained from the bill allowed the KPD and Social Democratic Party (SPD) to be outlawed, and firmly established Germany as a dictatorship. …”