Most often conservatives, especially evangelical, are portrayed as followers ("easy to command" anyone?). However, there is wide variety among those that claim the label of "evangelical." Case in point, Christian conservative philosopher and professor John Mark Reynolds bluntly describes Rush's recent pronouncements at CPAC as a "bad speech."

He lays out several points as to why he considered the speech a failure. Here's his last two:

3. Philosophically it relied on the dubious notion (to
conservatives) that “the people” are good . . . as opposed to the
“checks and balances view” of people and government that trusted
neither people or the state with total power.

What happened to fear of “mob rule” on the right?

4. It did not take into account our present situation. Did 2008/2009
happen for Rush? Surely, some business out there deserves condemnation
for looting and pillaging the economy? Does Rush get the change that is
occurring at all?

Reagan would adjust his anecdotes to frightening times, but Rush
acts as if the return of prosperity is right around the corner. In
tough times, he came across as a plutocrat when plutocrats are busy
pillaging the national treasury. Any conservative should have been able
to lambaste the present Washington-Wall Street axis, but Rush missed
this easy connection to a broader audience.