. . . it appears Rush has it in for the Indiana governor. I’m not sure what Daniels did to draw Limbaugh’s ire, but he seems to have been singled out for particular scrutiny. HoosierAccess, which apparently isn’t exactly a ringer for the Daniels organization, comes to his defense — something, frankly, I would have expected to see more of by now. (Yes, even though the governor hasn’t even declared his intentions yet.)
We have seen major battles regarding the rights of public-sector workers to unionize, a battle that has boiled over in Wisconsin and became a cause that rallied conservatives around the country. On his very first day in office in 2005, Mitch Daniels took away collective bargaining rights for state employees. This is something Limbaugh has pounding the table about for months, so shouldn’t Limbaugh be praising Daniels for this? Or does Limbaugh simply not know about it?
At a time when other states and the federal government are piling up debt on top of debt, the state of Indiana is running in the black because of wise fiscal choices made by Daniels. Keep in mind that he did this with the Democrats controlling the Indiana House of Representatives. Not everyone is happy with all of the choices Daniels has made but there is no doubt he takes the need for fiscal responsibility seriously – something that cannot be said about Barack Obama.
I can understand having skepticism toward any candidate who is too closely identified with the party establishment. That’s to be expected in this political climate, and you’d be a fool not to give it some consideration.
But, what sticks in my craw about Rush’s hits against Daniels is the fact that he’s calling into question Daniels’s conservatism. We are talking about the same man who forwarded Donald Trump as a credible candidate, devoted a pretty good share of positive airtime to him, and largely dismissed what would have been disqualifying shortcomings had any other candidate been saddled with them.