Yesterday, the grand Pooh-Bah of conservative talk radio chirpily announced that he might “have another installment of Operation Chaos before the Democrat primaries are all said and done.” If your brain cells have lived that long, you may recall Operation Chaos I, when in March of 2008 Rush directed his zombie followers to vote in Democratic primaries for Hillary Clinton, who was then, as now, sliding fast. The idea was to stop Barack Obama from clinching Democratic nomination early, and to maximize the chance of a messy Democratic nominating convention. Rush claims that his dastardly plan “worked”: Clinton won the Ohio and Texas primaries with large pluralities from rural, as in conservative counties, presumably full of Ditto-heads. On the other hand, Obama still won the nomination easily, then the election, and the United States was stuck with an incompetent, arrogant leader for eight years.
If that’s what Rush calls a successful plot, I hope we never see one of his unsuccessful ones.
But here he is again, considering the same tactic, though this time the idea is to have conservatives vote for an incompetent socialist, Bernie Sanders, whom none of them would even consider voting for in a real election even if someone was pulling their fingernails out with pliers. This is, as before, unethical in many ways, and it is particularly revolting to read the likes of Instapundit and Newsbusters cheering Rush on. “At the very least this could help make the Democrat primaries more fun to watch as they stretch on and on and….. ” smirks P.J. Gladney, at the latter.
Conservatives are nomore ethical than progressives, it’s just that their lack of ethics expresses itself in different ways.
Operation Chaos and its threatened sequel could only be devised by someone who thought Richard Nixon’s dirty tricks (which included the treasonous dirty trick of sabotaging LBJ’s Viet Nam War peace talks) were a scream, and could only be applauded by conservatives whose love for democracy just applied when it favors them. Rush’s steaming pile of depraved Machiavellianism is not worth my composing a new brief against it: I did a good job the first time. Here, in part, is what I wrote about Operation Chaos, while gagging in disgust, in 2008. It still stands. I’ll just substitute Bernie for Hillary. I don’t have to change anything else except a verb and pronoun here and there:
Here’s an ethics tip: if you think of a way to accomplish something by appearing to do the opposite, it’s probably unethical.
Of course, the clever people who [have decided] that persuading Republicans to vote for [Bernie Sanders] in Democratic primaries is the perfect way to maximize the likelihood of chaos at the Democratic convention may not care about such niceties of right and wrong. After all, how can it be unethical to cause trouble for Democrats?
Such is the sad state of politics in America… the right wing radio prophets, from Rush Limbaugh all the way down the evolutionary scale to Mark Levin, [are] urging their listeners to go to the polls, declare themselves Democrats, and vote for [Bernie], whom, you may recall, they detest….But their trick [is] grossly unethical, unfair and (are you ready, Rush?) profoundly un-American.
Simply put, [this is an] attempt to sabotage the Democratic primaries and nominating system by creating a result based not on voter preference, which is what elections are supposed to measure, but on a desire to make the system break down. That is wrong, dirty pool, malicious, and cheating. A political party has the right to hold an orderly national nominating process for its presidential candidate without having to endure efforts by people not in the party to cause it to malfunction. The votes for [ Bernie Sanders] being solicited by the Right [are] not intended to express a preference for her candidacy over that of [Hillary Clinton], or a desire to see [him] elected president. They [are]a tactical device to try to prevent the Democrats from arriving at a consensus for as long as possible, and to increase the chances of a divisive Democratic Convention. That’s not democracy, and that’s not politics. That is mischief-making. Voting in American elections is a constructive act, a right that Americans have fought and died to protect. This trick transform[s] the cherished act of voting into something dishonest, disrespectful, cynical, perverse, and destructive.
You can say that again.
________________________
Source and Graphic: Newsbusters
Ethics Alarms 
Jack,
Apropos of nothing: Did you have plans to comment on the Texas grand jury’s decision to bring charges against the Center for Medical Progress? Are there ethical issues there to mine? I’d be curious to hear your take.
Hope all is well.
Sincerely,
Neil
Indeed. Just trying to figure out the angle.
Everyone involved is an asshole, everyone involved is wrong?
There is that!
I think that’s a safe default position, generally.
What the hell does this have to do with this topic?
I think that’s what he meant by “apropos of nothing”, unless I’m mistaking the meaning of that (wouldn’t be the first time).
Long about the same time, equally unethical Sean Hannity initiated the “Stop Hillary Express”. Well, she was stopped and look what we got instead. Kind of afraid of what Operation Chaos will get for us.
Four or eight years of heart Bern.
I scream and nearly drive off the road when Hannity comes on the radio, but I don’t know if he’s unethical. I think he’s just an extreme imbecile.
It’s embarrassing to listen to him. Cringe-worthy stuff.
Remember the old joke when talking about college degree’s – BS is Bull Shit – MS is More Shit – PHD is Piled Higher and Deeper; well Rush’s ramblings put him at the top of the pile as the undisputed Conservative version of the King of the PHD hill.
Rush is an embarrassment to intelligent Conservatives and, in my opinion, has done more harm to Conservative ideology over the years than any other vocal Conservative with one new exception, Donald Trump who is single handedly destroying Conservative ideology in the mindset of average Americans and in-turn is destroying the future of the Republican Party.
Which is a shame, since Donald Trump doesn’t actually *have* a conservative ideology. What he represents is conservative identity politics. But that’s become so conflated that many conservatives don’t even know the difference any more.
Donald Trump is a caricature of what the Liberals think Conservative ideology is all about not what real Conservative ideology is all about.
There’s nothing ideological about Trump at all. Conservatives are fools to attack him on that basis. There’s nothing ideological about Hillary either.
Yup.
Expanding and refining my comment from above a little bit.
Trump IS a caricature of what the Liberals think Conservative ideology and values are all about not what real Conservative ideology or values are all about.
Trump is condemning Republicans “with every syllable he utters”; yes “though this be madness, there is method in’t”. Trump is full of rhetoric that is entrenched in unwavering intellectual dishonesty guided by his appallingly unethical character that is projecting his complete and utter moral bankruptcy and he is using his uncivil rhetoric to steamroll over anything in his path. Trump is using Liberal politicking tactics and he has put them high doses of crack cocaine; the narcissist thinks he’s invincible and he’s actually stated as much.
Trump’s values are everything real Conservatives are not, there is nothing ideological about Trump.
I swear Trump is campaigning against Republicans and Conservative ideology.
I have very little doubt of that anymore. There is going to be some terrible buyers remorse for his followers to deal with, whether he wins or not.
He talks like a comment thread at breitbart or vox populi, are those people not conservatives? Is this a no true Scottsman situation?
On certain issues, sure. On immigration, Muslims, and women, he is a caricature of the right wing. On other conservative issues, like abortion, religious freedom, same-sex marriage, and even progressive taxation he is either silent or left-leaning. He’s all over the map, and he’s duped lots of conservatives into supporting him out of their shared xenophobia and racism when they don’t even know the first thing about his economic policies.
Same-sex marriage? I remember a couple years ago him saying he was against it, assumed it was just lip-service. Why would they want him to go out of his way to talk about it now though?
Res judicata, yes? It’d be like caring how a candidate feels about the moon landings. They already happened, we can’t un-land on the moon.
I don’t know if you’ve ever listened to him, but Andrew Wilkow is pretty much the only conservative host I listen to anymore. He seems much more articulate and reasonable than the rest.
I don’t know who Andrew Wilkow is; what about Tom Sullivan?
No, but I’ll check him out.
Andrew Wilkow is on Sirius right? I don’t do Sirius.
I’m pretty sure his website has podcasts.
I’ll have to check them out sometime.
Mark Davis.
texaggo04,
Can you provide a link or something more than just a name?
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=%22mark+davis%22+AND+conservative+AND+radio
I don’t think it can “work” at any rate this time around. The GOP field is rather contentious as well. Would a die-hard Cruz fan (if they exist) really risk Trump prevailing in their state just to stick it to Hillary? Not very likely.
It didn’t “work” the FIRST time, either.
Sure. That’s why I put it in quotes. But the call for action is even less compelling and foolish this time around, with the GOP race still in contention.
Is there a reason they couldn’t do both?
In most states, you can either vote in the Democratic or Republican primary, but not both.
The more you know. In Canada, you can be a card carrying member of every party and vote in all leadership debates
I’m still weighing the virtues of jungle primaries (especially regarding Executive positions)
We’re doomed.
But then I said the same thing in 2007. And we haven’t been destroyed by our own stupidity quite yet. It takes longer to destroy a semi functioning republic than I thought.
Be patient; there are dedicated professionals on the job.
Yep. “The Three Stooges” (Trump, Sanders. and Hillary) along with our current POTUS.