Cheerleaders of Operation Chaos

I have said that Rush Limbaugh’s Operation Chaos, in which he urges Republicans to cross over and vote in Democratic primaries purely for the purpose of messing up the Democrats, is unethical. It’s bad enough that open primaries exist in the first place, making meaningless the idea of a party primary and undercutting the idea of democratic representation. But to exploit that flaw in our electoral system deliberately to harm the other party is disgusting and shows a lack of principle.

Furthermore, other conservatives seem to like what Rush is doing, or at least have no problem with it. As reported at Powerline, when Andrew McCarthy appeared on Limbaugh’s show to discuss McCarthy’s new book on the Islam threat, the following exchange occurred:

MCCARTHY: Is this the C-in-C USOC?

RUSH: This is C-in-C USOC: Commander-in-Chief US, Operation Chaos.

And Powerline commented:

The respect is mutual in Rush’s excellent interview of McCarthy.

McCarthy with his jocular greeting seemed to be expressing approval of Operation Chaos, and Powerline thought this was just fine. I don’t think conservatives should respect Rush Limbaugh for launching and boasting about his unethical and vandalistic Operation Chaos.

- end of initial entry -

Daniel P. writes:

Call me a cheerleader.

I think Operation Chaos is a tit for tat move and a way eventually to close the primaries. Republicans can get hosed from now till eternity and nothing will be done, but now Democrats are also feeling the pain.

As a result of Operation Chaos I think we will see a move to close the primaries and I don’t think the GOP leadership will help in any significant way.

LA replies:

I’m not aware that the Democratic party organized a concerted effort to encourage Democrats to vote in Republican primaries for the purpose of harming the Republican party. In New Hampshire and other states where Democratic and Independent crossovers into the Republican primary had a significant effect, that was the actions of individual voters voting for the candidate they liked, McCain.

So I don’t see Operation Chaos as tit for tat. I see it as deliberate act of mass political vandalism on Limbaugh’s part.

Further, has Limbaugh ever said that the purpose of Operation Chaos is to bring an end to the open primary system? The only purpose I’ve heard him mention is his purpose of dividing and weakening the Democratic party. Since he rejoices in his supposed ability to make this happen through crossover votes, it hardly seems likely that his purpose is to banish crossover votes.

Adela G. writes:

Rush Limbaugh is obviously a conservative in name only. He proves with this ill-conceived and unethical scheme that, just like so many of his liberal brethren, he has no idea of the effect his words have on others.

This scheme lies at the intersection of practicality and morality and fails both. It gives the left ammunition to claim that their rights were violated (possibly even that Obama’s nomination will have been “stolen”). And it allows them actually to occupy the moral high ground that they vacated decades ago yet still claim as their special province.

Finally, he’s evidently forgotten (and I take leave to doubt now that he ever knew) that “chaos” has two meanings: “disorder” and “the void”. He’s so all-fired anxious to stir up the first that he’s unaware he had to descend into the second, a moral void, to do so.

What an idiot—and not even a useful one.

Joel P. writes:

I don’t think the fundamental issue here is one of poor ethics or the undermining of democracy. After all, had Limbaugh done this in order to achieve some kind of good, like put a permanent end to the open primary process or to help elect a traditionalist conservative candidate, I don’t think anyone here would be complaining.

But this is not the aim of Limbaugh. He makes a mockery of American democracy not so that some greater good might come out of it, but instead to help elect the detestable, anti-American liberal John McCain! That, to me, is what is truly disgusting about this whole thing.

I agree with Adela G. that Limbaugh is nothing but a conservative in name only.

LA replies:

Evidently Joel thinks my entire argument against Operation Chaos is a dishonest front, in which I’m claiming to oppose, as unethical, something that I would not oppose at all, if only there was a good Republican nominee this year whom the unethical Operation Chaos was helping.

Joel P. writes:

That’s not the point I was trying to make, and I did not intentionally mean to insinuate that your argument was in any way dishonest. But I guess that’s exactly what I did with my sweeping, all-inclusive language. Next time I’ll speak for myself instead of lumping you or others into a category in which you don’t necessarily wish to belong.

What I was trying to say was that FOR ME Limbaugh’s real sin here is not that he’s simply acting unethically, but that he’s doing so for the sole purpose of weakening the Democrats so as to make the victory the liberal John McCain more likely. I find that unacceptable.

But yes, I will admit that if John McCain were a traditionalist candidate, and I KNEW that Operation Chaos would help him win (which, I’d like to add, I’m not anywhere close to being convinced of), then I wouldn’t be nearly as upset about Limbaugh employing it. Stuffing ballot boxes with the phony votes of non-existent people in effort to rig an election is one thing, but this, as far as I’m concerned, is merely taking advantage of a legal loophole. If that makes me an unethical evil person, then so be it.

Of course, I’d rather see the loophole closed altogether…

LA replies:

Ok. Thanks for the clarification.

However, I don’t think that electing McCain is the main reason Limbaugh is doing this. Yes, that would be the main effect of what he’s doing. But Limbaugh, as far as I gather, doesn’t speak about McCain at all, and indeed has always been very anti-McCain.

In fact, I think his inner conflict over McCain is the reason he’s gotten so frenetically wrapped up in this embarrassing Operation Chaos, with his incessant boasting about the great, brilliant thing he’s doing. It is his escape from the reality he doesn’t want to face, namely that he’s ultimately going to support the election of the man he’s been denouncing all this time as Mr. Anti-Conservative.

Daniel P. writes:

I don’t know that there was an organized effort but Democrats and independents certainly did hand McCain several of his wins and I believe Rush Limbaugh made statements, to the effect of “they [Democrats] were telling them to vote for McCain,” which would imply some sort of coordination. Furthermore, while they may have been voting for the candidate they like most they were not party members and had no business choosing party leadership; moreover, I think they stacked the deck so to speak by voting for their favorite republican fully intending to vote for the democrat in the general election.

I believe, it’s from foggy memory a few months back, before the Texas primary he was ranting about how the Democrats straddled us with McCain and dealt us a serious blow; then after the primary he was going on and on about how the Democrats can cross party lines to straddle us with the most liberal candidate and that’s bipartisanship, but when Republicans do it its pernicious, evil, etc.

I don’t know whether he ever intended to try to end open primaries or if it was from sheer anger, or possibly even malice. I haven’t heard him explicitly state why but I only occasionally listen to his show. Nevertheless it appears to me to be tit for tat.

Finally I think it will cause the primaries to be closed regardless of Limbaugh’s intent, and I support it on that basis, ugly though it may be.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at May 03, 2008 12:12 PM | Send