Rush Limbaugh *endorses Mitt Romney

posted at 2:03 pm on February 5, 2008 by Bryan

Levin, Hannity, Ingraham and now Nobel nominee Rush Limbaugh (membership req’d): Big talk radio swings unanimously for Mitt Romney. Rush makes several solid points that you’ve heard before, mostly regarding how McCain represents the GOP’s national security wing, Huckabee represents its social conservative wing, and Ron Paul represents the economic conservative wing, but Romney is the one candidate who represents all three by himself. Romney is a late convert to all three, which as I wrote the other day explains why conservatives have taken so long to warm up to him.

Rush also makes a point that conservatives won’t benefit if the GOP expands its base by attracting liberals as liberals to the party. I had a similar thought last night while watching Bill Maher tell Larry King what Republicans ought to do to become more competitive in the future. Never mind Republicans have historically held the presidency more than Democrats over the last 60 years. Never mind that Maher hates Christians and conservatives, so he obviously doesn’t have social conservatives’ interests in mind, and never mind that Maher is not exactly friendly to either economic or national security conservatism. Maher noted that McCain has flanked himself with Rudy Giuliani and Arnold Schwarzenegger, and that that trio ought to be the GOP’s future. Of course he would think that: He’s a liberal and so are two of them on at least one of the three major GOP planks and McCain’s maverickness makes him a liberal on some issues. If the GOP becomes the kind of party that attracts leftists like Maher and they remain leftists, what does the party stand for?

Turned around another way, McCain’s supporters make much of the fact that he has a record of reaching across the aisle and working with Democrats. But in every case, he’s reaching across the aisle to do what the Democrats want. Where’s the evidence that McCain has ever reached across the aisle and plucked off a few Democrat votes for a conservative issue or cause? I can’t think of a single case, so I’ll put it to the McCain supporters in the HA readership: Name an issue where McCain reached across the aisle and ended up benefiting conservative issues, ideals or causes.

Here’s Rush’s endorsement of Romney. It remains to be seen if it was too little, too late.

RUSH: I think now, based on the way the campaign has shaken out, that there probably is a candidate on our side who does embody all three legs of the conservative stool, and that’s Romney. The three stools or the three legs of the stool are national security/foreign policy, the social conservatives, and the fiscal conservatives. The social conservatives are the cultural people. The fiscal conservatives are the economic crowd: low taxes, smaller government, get out of the way.

Of course, the foreign policy crowd is obviously what it is. I don’t think there’s anybody on our side who doesn’t care about national security, which is why I found it amazing that McCain gets the bulk of those, because the idea that Romney or Huckabee are going to punt national security? In Huckabee’s case, you might just say the things he’s saying about it represent an ignorance born of inexperience in the subject. I don’t think Huckabee has any deleterious intentions about the country. When it comes to the fiscal side, you cannot say — you just cannot say — that John McCain is interested. He’s even admitted he’s not interested in the social side. He’s not interested in the economic side. He said this, and when he has spoken up about it, he sides more often with liberal Democrats on fiscal issues than he does with his own side. That’s problematic. This is why I think — and why I have said — that the Republican Party, not conservatism, but the Republican Party is in big trouble if it is empowered and gets elected by attracting people who also hold liberal Democrat views simply because they like McCain because of his character, his honor, his prisoner of war story, and they don’t like Hillary or Obama.

Now that Rush has endorsed Romney, his “carrying water” speech in 2006 is being brought up against him. You can “gotcha” anyone who spends 20 years, 3 hours a weekday, giving their opinion on the air, and it’s all too easy to snipe from the bushes at someone who’s willing to take a public stand for or against something. The point he made then remains valid, though: The 2006 Republicans were far from perfect but were better on just about every issue than the Democrats who defeated them and that’s why he supported them. There’s a cautionary tale in that election for Republicans who want to sit out 2008, too.

*Clarification: It’s clear from the above, and from Rush’s longstanding criticisms of McCain, that Rush supports Romney for the GOP nomination. Some commenters here and a reader have emailed that strictly speaking, Rush didn’t endorse Romney. I didn’t hear the entire show yesterday or today, but they say that Rush said that he’s still not expressly endorsing a candidate. Fair enough, though that’s a great deal of nuance to pack into a headline. And then there’s how Rush’s site headlined the article in which he names Romney as preferrable to McCain. Here’s a screencap of that.

rush-mittheadline.png

That’s on Rush’s site right now. Don’t call me a “liar” for interpreting the clip above plus that headline as an endorsement.

Update (AP): It’s obviously an endorsement, guys. Rush can cover his ass however he likes but his meaning surely isn’t lost upon his listeners.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

McCain-Kennedy ALONE disqualifies McCain.
You mean BUSH – McCain – Kennedy. I’m just waiting for you to slam the 43rd President as a RINO too, and tell me that you wished you voted for Gore and Kerry instead.

Pax americana on February 5, 2008 at 4:36 PM

I correctly used ‘McCain-Kennedy’ to describe the bill.

I have been writing, calling, and FAXing President Bush and my Senators since 2001 complaining on this issue.

fred5678 on February 5, 2008 at 4:41 PM

JayHaw Phrenzie on February 5, 2008 at 4:32 PM

Have you even listened to that lying sack of crap McCain?

He is the master of lies and pandering.

csdeven on February 5, 2008 at 4:42 PM

JayHaw Phrenzie on February 5, 2008 at 4:40 PM

Would it be childish if I said you proved mine too?

Kai on February 5, 2008 at 4:42 PM

its not too late. as shown in the post, to any intelligent person it was clear who rush wanted to be the frontrunner. rush made it clear, in a roundabout manner, for the last few weeks who he wanted to be the one walking out of super tuesday with a win.

blatantblue on February 5, 2008 at 4:42 PM

Or you can just complain a lot on the Internet. Your choice!

bnelson44 on February 5, 2008 at 4:18 PM

Cool! Thanks! I will!

Oh, wait- I’ve been doing that for a while now. Nevermind.

I can’t blame anyone for picking Romney over McBackstabber McCain, just as I can’t blame anyone for distrusting or disagreeing with Multiple Choice Mitt enough to vote for McCain. Can’t blame Rush for taking taking a side, even if too late to make a difference.

My caucus location is a two minute drive away, it’s a nice day out (for Minnesota), I’d have plenty of time to get there after work, and I have no plans tonight.

Still not going to vote. Kudos to the rest of you for participating in the Democratic process, though. I just wish there was someone in the race I could support. Instead I’m stuck whining on the Internet.

Hollowpoint on February 5, 2008 at 4:43 PM

MB4 on February 5, 2008 at 4:36 PM

Sure thing. Even today folks can toss the terms liberal and conservative around in arguments without a common agreement on the meaning.

To me when I hear “liberal” today I mostly think of a belief that more government and more government involvement in private or social affairs can make the country a better place. I’m opposed to that general idea. Not everyone would have the same definition though.

dedalus on February 5, 2008 at 4:44 PM

I have not seen one poll from any source, at any time in this campaign, that shows Romney with moresupport in the general election than Obama or Hillary. In fact mac does better by 10-15 points in all that I have seen.

Now, of course, polls aren’t always never right, especially in this election season, but aside from Bravado, what can possibly make a Mitt supporter think that their candidate will do better in the general?

JayHaw Phrenzie on February 5, 2008 at 4:18 PM

Let me introduce a new concept you: ‘Objective observation’.

Have you ever spent more than 30 minutes on http://www.mittromney.com?

Didn’t think so.

Have you spent any time on McCain’s website? Of course you have.

If you are intelligent as you claim to be, then you should be able to comprehend this:

It has always been obvious to me that McCain is going to lose in the general election against Hillary or Obama.

This was confirmed to me after having a conversation with my liberal friends. They were quietly snickering about the Republicans only chance being John McCain, because of his age…… etc.

Romney in the general election, in the debates, in interviews, will hands down win it all, because he will rise to the occasion of the particular challenge at hand, which is how he has been successful throughout his life.

This ability to rise to a challenge is a quality that only slowly comes to life over time, since the most we hear from him is quick sound bites here and there.

Romney truly wants to serve the people of this country, with only the best motives in mind.

His only ulterior motive, if you will, is to do what is best for the country.

And if…. Mitt Romney hasn’t figured it all out yet what is good for the country, he will, as time goes by and he is presented with the challenges ahead.

Browsing through his website http://www.mittromney.com, one can see fairly quickly that his entire effort is the most thought out, comprehensive and wonkish of them all.

This by the way, is intimidating to the establishment officials who resist change, as well as to ignoramuses at large.

This quality/ability to rise to a challenge is also what appears to many as flipping and flopping, when actually it’s just true evolution towards improvement, visa vi what’s good for the people he’s serving at the time.

Mitt Romney is a perfect candidate for those of us who believe in having a voice-in-the-Republic, because he truly does want to listen to all well thought out arguments.

The: ‘Ask Mitt Anything’ campaign was not a farce or a joke, it was and is real.

Mcguyver on February 5, 2008 at 4:48 PM

He is the master of lies and pandering.

csdeven on February 5, 2008 at 4:42 PM

McCain might have lied more than Mitt has (Mitt hasn’t been 100% honest either), but only Huckabee has come close to the level of pandering that Mitt has done this election.

Hollowpoint on February 5, 2008 at 4:48 PM

Perhaps too little too late. If push comes to shove I’ll vote for McCain in the general. Its really a matter of perspective. Just listening to the Dem candidates talk about the plans they’ve got for America would almost make Ron Paul plausible. Almost. I’m going to hang in there with Romney as long as he’s willing to hang in there himself though. Otherwise I suspect I may one day be living in a country that doesn’t represent a single thing I stand for.

blankminde on February 5, 2008 at 4:48 PM

well socialists and communists hijacked the word long ago. Sort of the way they call the extreme right Nazi’s…same difference, change a word’s meaning or perceived meaning and you are one step closer to changing reality. Effin’ commies.

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 4:49 PM

I don’t care what the polls say about Mitt beating Hillary or Obama; polls have been wrong before.

I drool at the thought of Romney taking on Hillary. Hillary, the Beltway insider and Obama the neophyte. They are both running on populist themes and in a national debate, Romney would SMOKE them. He would kick either of their @sses.

Rainbows, daisies, fairies and a pot of someone else’s gold are what Democrats promise; conservatives say I’ll get government out of the way so you can succeed. Reagan always felt that people were innately more conservative but we lack the candidates to articulate the vision but Romney I think has it. And put him head to head with some empty heads like Obama and Clinton and people will see it.

No one will vote for liberal “light” however (McCain), if they’ve got a real lib on the ticket. If those policies attract you, why vote for the pretender?

linlithgow on February 5, 2008 at 4:50 PM

Hollowpoint on February 5, 2008 at 4:48 PM

How so? Huckabee is the biggest populist I have ever seen (on the Republican side) from attacking Mitt for being “rich” to attacking capitalism and “bosses”. He’s is in no way comparable to Romney.

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 4:51 PM

No one will vote for liberal “light” however (McCain), if they’ve got a real lib on the ticket. If those policies attract you, why vote for the pretender?

linlithgow on February 5, 2008 at 4:50 PM

Exactly, that’s why conservatives are beside themselves about a McCain ticket.

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 4:52 PM

I wish Rush had done this a week or more ago.

Mooseman on February 5, 2008 at 4:52 PM

I wish Rush had done this a week or more ago.

Mooseman on February 5, 2008 at 4:52 PM

I think Dobson’s pseudo-endorsement might actually be more important. There are an awful lot of people that care about what he’s got to say, and I think a good portion of them would otherwise be in the pot for Huck. Maybe Dobson could rob Huck of his base? At this point I care more about what specials Dominos is offering…I’ll check back when the smoke clears tomorrow afternoon.

blankminde on February 5, 2008 at 4:59 PM

Maybe if Rush would have endorsed Rudy we would not have this current debacle

georgealbert on February 5, 2008 at 4:59 PM

There is so much spin on both sides, I’m getting a headache. But I think McCain finally lost my vote today when he said Mitt spent 10 million dollars on attack ads in California. To me, class warfare is the unpardonable sin. I also feel that the URWCs have damaged the GOP by their unwillingness to respectfully disagree with other conservatives. It’s fun to tweak liberals by questioning their patriotism, but it’s not that fun when you have your own conservatism questioned.

myamphibian on February 5, 2008 at 5:00 PM

Maybe if Rush would have endorsed Rudy we would not have this current debacle

georgealbert on February 5, 2008 at 4:59 PM

Maybe if Rush wasn’t an opportunist…

Vizzini on February 5, 2008 at 5:00 PM

Vizzini on February 5, 2008 at 5:00 PM

You can’t even prove the opportunistic angle. Out of the clear two competitive front runners he is picking the more conservative, less risky candidate.

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 5:02 PM

myamphibian on February 5, 2008 at 5:00 PM

I agree, that’s why Huckabee is a non-starter and McCain as well. Wealth envy is a tactic used by loosers to attract loosers, read: dems and liberal revolutionaries.

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 5:04 PM

How so? Huckabee is the biggest populist I have ever seen (on the Republican side) from attacking Mitt for being “rich” to attacking capitalism and “bosses”. He’s is in no way comparable to Romney.

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 4:51 PM

The comparison was strictly with regards to campaign pandering- Huckster’s pandering was more general in that he pandered to conservatives in a way that his record didn’t support. Romney did something similar, but also on a state by state basis- ag subsidies in IA, support for the auto industry in MI, offering the elimination of Social Security taxes on seniors when in Florida, etc.

Hollowpoint on February 5, 2008 at 5:06 PM

Hollowpoint on February 5, 2008 at 5:06 PM
I cede your…ehh…point…

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 5:07 PM

I can’t think of one of these guys on either side that hasn’t done that…I like the Malkin policy for various cyclical economic woes…prepare for the worst and suck it up.

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 5:09 PM

WELL TONIGHT HAS BEGUN!

Early Exit Polls in Massachusetts: Dems Close, Romney Up Big

My first word of exit poll results says that the first two waves of results in Massachusetts show a “dead heat” between Hillary and Obama, and a 20-point margin for Romney among Republicans.

02/05 05:11 PM

bnelson44 on February 5, 2008 at 5:15 PM

I hope his indorsment wasn’t to late!!!!!!Why now? i’m wonder is it because of the letter from Dole ,trick from M-Cain’s ?

beachkatie on February 5, 2008 at 5:19 PM

Perhaps Rush’s timing was strategic, while it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize Rush was favoring both Thompson and Romney, what it means to actually endorse on a day like this is press coverage. Rush is getting free press as the media spread his announcement across the country.

I say he made a good move today, despite calls of “too late” and so forth. Perhaps, but let’s save the hand wringing and “should have’s” after today.

Weebork on February 5, 2008 at 5:21 PM

I love Rush. We will see how much power he really has after tonight race.

beachkatie on February 5, 2008 at 5:26 PM

beachkatie on February 5, 2008 at 5:26 PM

You loathe Rush…don’t lie.

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 5:27 PM

Would it be childish if I said you proved mine too?

Kai on February 5, 2008 at 4:42 PM

No, just inaccurate.

JayHaw Phrenzie on February 5, 2008 at 5:34 PM

I’m going to sound old but i have been a dittohead since92.

beachkatie on February 5, 2008 at 5:35 PM

Let me introduce a new concept you: ‘Objective observation’.

Mcguyver on February 5, 2008 at 4:48 PM

Or, even more accurately, “Wishful thinking”.

JayHaw Phrenzie on February 5, 2008 at 5:36 PM

By the way, Political extremists always feel that the reason they lose elections is that they are not extreme enough.

Reality never rarely that diagnosis, regardless of the party.

JayHaw Phrenzie on February 5, 2008 at 5:38 PM

Reality never rarely that diagnosis

Meant to say “rarely matches”.

JayHaw Phrenzie on February 5, 2008 at 5:40 PM

By the way, Political extremists always feel that the reason they lose elections is that they are not extreme enough.

I’m just a dumb prior-active duty guy, what is your point? Is it to provide a counter intuitive assertion that coming together with leftists is the real ticket to victory? I would rather loose to a commie that I know is a commie. I don’t want a pseudo-conservative (McCain) for the sake of victory, principles first JayHaw. Man you are like HotAir’s active fifth column..

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 5:42 PM

By the way, Political extremists always feel that the reason they lose elections is that they are not extreme enough.

I’m just a dumb prior-active duty guy, what is your point? Is it to provide a counter intuitive assertion that coming together with leftists is the real ticket to victory? I would rather loose to a commie that I know is a commie. I don’t want a pseudo-conservative (McCain) for the sake of victory, principles first JayHaw. Man you are like HotAir’s active fifth column..

There, that’s better

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 5:43 PM

I am extremely patriotic and extremely against anything un-American. The majority of the Democratic platform is patently un_American.

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 5:45 PM

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 5:45 PM

Yah, I get your point, anyone that disagrees with you is Unamerican. You have made that clear.

JayHaw Phrenzie on February 5, 2008 at 5:46 PM

Wow, it’s almost as contentious in here as it is in the “real world politics”…

Bryan, I enjoy your posts, thank you. I also hate to admit it, but I enjoy watching a good smackdown every now and then, good job! I am sad to report that I can get a little close minded when it comes to McVain, (yes I said McVain) and if audio were available, I’d do my little McVain laugh which the bf says is a pretty good imitation!

But when push comes to shove, if and God forbid, WHEN, McVain becomes the party rep in the general, let us all remember one little, itty, bitty, almost inconsequential fact (thank you William Amos, et al, for this reminder)… the Dems would LOVE to rip apart our military. You know it, and I know it. Billy and Al did their damndest in the 1990′s to de-fund, de-moralize, and de-stroy our boys with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” letting the ladies serve on the FRONT LINES (remember Pvt. Jessica Lynch anyone?), not to mention ending over 300,000 DoD jobs, and closing half our damn military installations. I’m a blame-placer, and I’ll be damned if I don’t BLAME Slick Willy for 9/11.

Now, I am an ardent supporter of Mitt’s, and I can say with all my heart that I wanted him for POTUS back on September 5th, 2006, when he sharply criticized Harvard University for inviting Mohammed Khatami to speak on the eve of the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, and REFUSED to allow state funds to protect this “dignitary”. I completely jumped the bandwagon for FRED! though, and obviously have jumped back to Mitt, because I cannot abide by the class-warfare and denigration of the 11th commandment by Senator McVain, McLame, McSnide, McNasty, whatevah.

But people, the ONE binding committment we ALL as Republicans (well, except Ron Paul of course) is that WE ARE ALL PRO-Military, am I right? So, please Romney, pull out the win for us, but EVEN if he DOES NOT win, we MUST in good conscience, pull that lever for the MILTARY.

End of story.

Those Dems cannot WAIT to de-fund, de-moralise and de-clare de-feat in Iraq. For this, we MUST UNITE.

Damn McVain.

Califemme on February 5, 2008 at 5:48 PM

And I’d bet my last dollar Rush agrees.

Califemme on February 5, 2008 at 5:50 PM

Man Im hacing fun reading theBBC board about the US elections. The paul nuts are upset that the BBC isnt taking him serious and the BELOW answer is priceless

however personally prefer Democrats to win the election than Republican, as I think US need some changes.
Tehran, Iran
—————————–
This is why I vote Republican!!

David, Atlanta

William Amos on February 5, 2008 at 5:53 PM

If the fact that conservatives have defined Bush (the whole Bush dynasty) as RINO is new to you, then you probably shouldn’t be commenting Pax (or at least tuck in your stupid).

The only reason Bush is President is that he was up against Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004. Hell, even I voted for him twice just because I detested Gore and then Kerry so much I felt I really had no choice. But as a individual who tries to live and learn (I refuse to make the same mistake over and over expecting a different result) I will not be voting for McCain just because I loathe Hillary.

I really love the Giuliani supporters who aren’t embarrassed that their ex candidate endorses McCain. It’s obvious now that many of us were 100% right and Rudy is just another undercover Democrat.

I’m afraid that Rush’s halfazzed endorsement of Romney is too little and too late but I understand the problem. My Romney ad would say “At least I’m not McCain” which would hardly be an endorsement either.

Buzzy on February 5, 2008 at 5:54 PM

Name an issue where McCain reached across the aisle and ended up benefiting conservative issues, ideals or causes.

How about the confirmation of Samuel Alito, as well as the preservation of the Republican’s ability to block future liberal appointments as a minority party. Does getting the most conservative justice on the Supreme Court confirmed benefit conservatism?

RightOFLeft on February 5, 2008 at 5:54 PM

Cute…JayHaw Phrenzie on February 5, 2008 at 5:46 PM. Reducto Absurdum only works if you you are intellectually honest.

The origins of our country, it’s ethos and spirit are not up for debate, our country is one founded on individual rights, not group rights, not identity rights. Remember, rugged individualism? You can’t get past the silly defense mechanism can you?

Name one pro-individual platform or policy of the democratic party that doesn’t involve transferring wealth, killing unborn babies or ridiculous environmental radicalism..YOU CAN’T but thanks for playing….

Yah, I get your point, anyone that disagrees with you is Unamerican. You have made that clear.

GAWD, so immature.

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 5:55 PM

RightOFLeft on February 5, 2008 at 5:54 PM

And what did he say about Alito? That he’d never nominate someone as conservative as Alito….nice try

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 5:55 PM

Name one pro-individual platform or policy of the democratic party that doesn’t involve transferring wealth, killing unborn babies or ridiculous environmental radicalism..YOU CAN’T but thanks for playing….

And this goes directly back to McCain, he is too cozy with people and a party whose ideology will change what fundamentally makes America the greatest country on the planet…

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 5:59 PM

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 5:59 PM

Contrary to your smears, Senator McCain is a Republican.

I get that you don’t like him, but that does not make him a Democrat.

JayHaw Phrenzie on February 5, 2008 at 6:01 PM

And this goes directly back to McCain, he is too cozy with people and a party whose ideology will change what fundamentally makes America the greatest country on the planet…

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 5:59 PM

But McVain cannot and more importantly WILL NOT harm the Military, and that alone should propel you to NOT stay home in November…

And I daresay, our MILITARY is “what fundamentally makes America the greatest country on the planet…”

Califemme on February 5, 2008 at 6:02 PM

He’s a Republican, not a conservative…and you still didn’t address my main issue

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 6:02 PM

And I daresay, our MILITARY is “what fundamentally makes America the greatest country on the planet…”

Califemme on February 5, 2008 at 6:02 PM

So Government to you makes our country great? We had the notion of and the foundations prior to the military. We ceded from the Brits with a revolution, a real uprising. We didn’t even have a navy. You are wrong.

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 6:04 PM

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 6:02 PM

You have not raised an issue, your posts are mostly incomprehensible, streams of consciousness and raving.

please clarify, what point, other than you hate McCain, are you referring to?

JayHaw Phrenzie on February 5, 2008 at 6:06 PM

I don’t hate McCain! You defense of and claims that McCain is a republican conservative are incoherent. He isn’t a Republican, he isn’t conservative. He claims both, you have claimed as much and I want you to prove it. You can’t.

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 6:08 PM

He is the master of lies and pandering.
csdeven on February 5, 2008 at 4:42 PM

Oh, I wouldn’t go that far.
He is no MASTER of lies;
Most rational people can see right through them… He is an untalented, amateurish liar. If he didn’t have that “I was a POW.” thing to fall back on, even his supporters would have to admit it.

And he isn’t a MASTER at pandering either. Oh, I’ll admit he is darn good at pandering to Vincente Fox, Felipe Calderone and all the illegal aliens that they want to send on the Gran Invasión Norteña….
And he is fairly good at pandering to the America is the cause of ‘Global Warming’ kooks.

But he is absolutely horrible at his attempts to pander to Republicans and especially to the conservatives that the GOP USED to represent. If he was a Master of Pandering, we’d be licking his hand just like Juan Hernandez and Jerry Perenchio do.

LegendHasIt on February 5, 2008 at 6:10 PM

Bush is a RINO, I don’t want another RINO in the White House

Of course Bush is a RINO. The first Bush was a RINO too. And the great Ronald Reagan (and, don’t get me wrong here, Reagan WAS great) signed an amnesty bill.

The more I know about McCain, the less I like him. I have never supported him as the GOP nominee.

But I still fail to understand how another Clinton presidency or an Obama presidency is going to do anything but get us down the river faster. And, yes, I’ve listened to the “Republicans in Congress will go along with McCain, but not with a Dem” – I’m not buying it.

The only person who makes sense to me in this situation is Peggy Noonan, who calls Republicans “the stupid party”…and it is manifestly stupid to throw yourselves into the arms of the left, expecting to be rescued by the second coming of Reagan.

But that’s what conservatives appear to be doing. I keep hoping that this is all a giant ruse, meant to pull McCain to the right – and maybe some of it is. But the rest of it just sounds to this conservative like pompous, self-righteous hogwash.

Priscilla on February 5, 2008 at 6:11 PM

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 5:55 PM

This alleged “Alito is too conservative” remark doesn’t make a lot of sense. McCain voted for Samuel Alito, and convinced seven Democrats to do the same. How is that not supporting conservative interests?

RightOFLeft on February 5, 2008 at 6:17 PM

and it is manifestly stupid to throw yourselves into the arms of the left, expecting to be rescued by the second coming of Reagan.

But that’s what we do, Priscilla. We conservatives eat our own and then whine about the consequences.

We never seem to be able to focus our wrath on the right target.

BacaDog on February 5, 2008 at 6:18 PM

So Government to you makes our country great? We had the notion of and the foundations prior to the military. We ceded from the Brits with a revolution, a real uprising. We didn’t even have a navy. You are wrong.

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 6:04 PM

And I think YOU are wrong.

Were it not for our military defending the freedom that the founders declared was our God-given right, there would be no America today. Period. You are just trying to pick a fight.

With a lady.

And lost.

Califemme on February 5, 2008 at 6:19 PM

How about the confirmation of Samuel Alito, ….. Does getting the most conservative justice on the Supreme Court confirmed benefit conservatism?
RightOFLeft on February 5, 2008 at 5:54 PM

And McCain has since said, privately, that Alito is TOO conservative to serve on the Supreme Court.

And his meddling on those nominations messed up Frist’s attempt to force the issue Constitutionally, rather than just making the back-room deals like the Senate Fraternity Club does under normal circumstances.

LegendHasIt on February 5, 2008 at 6:21 PM

Okay, explain to me how on a daily basis the big government military is ensuring your freedom to worship…if an adherent from the religion of peace kicked your door in tomorrow explain to me how the military would protect your freedom of worship…

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 6:22 PM

Oh I don’t mind loosing to a lady. I am married, I loose often. If you “beat” me in our exchange I will cede…your logic doesn’t hold up.

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 6:23 PM

And I daresay, our MILITARY is “what fundamentally makes America the greatest country on the planet…”
Califemme on February 5, 2008 at 6:02 PM

No, The Constitution, Conservativism and Capitalism are what makes America the greatest country on the planet.

The Military allows us to keep that distinction, but they don’t MAKE us the greatest.

Without the success of the ’3C’s we couldn’t afford to have the greatest military on earth.

LegendHasIt on February 5, 2008 at 6:26 PM

Califemme

Also, the biggest threat to our freedom aren’t enemies abroad, it’s that sect of Americans that are chipping away at our individual liberties. It isn’t a coincidence that they are Democrats and RINO’s, of which McCain can count himself at least in ideology.

With regards to the real threat to our freedoms, where will you deploy the 3rd MAR DIV to meet this threat?

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 6:27 PM

I got another chat room going if anyone wants to join.

Rightwingsparkle on February 5, 2008 at 6:29 PM

Three C’s, nice touch….

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 6:29 PM

Okay, explain to me how on a daily basis…

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 6:22 PM

First, WTF? “daily basis the big government military is ensuring your freedom to worship…”

Did I say that? No. So quit trying to pick a fight.

Oh, and second, explain to me how it doesn’t.

Califemme on February 5, 2008 at 6:36 PM

McCain’s people rigging the West Virginia caucus today was despicable. We now have two candidates (Clinton – McCain)that have removed all doubt that morals and ethics have no place in the leadership of this nation.Wouldn’t surprise me if Lil Johnny sucked up to Hill for the second spot like he tried with Kerry. For those brainwashed and don’t think McCain tried with Kerry…..Google: Kerry McCain Vice President.

volsense on February 5, 2008 at 6:38 PM

Without the success of the ‘3C’s we couldn’t afford to have the greatest military on earth.

LegendHasIt on February 5, 2008 at 6:26 PM

Sorry, I didn’t explain well, but I believe you are right.

So now on to:ColdBore76
What is your deal?

You have come in here and just started picking fights with with me, and for what? I am not here to defend McVain, so I am not sure why you keep throwing down the mantle at my feet.

If you disagree with me, at least try to disagree with me on something I said.

Califemme on February 5, 2008 at 6:41 PM

I just got back from voting and the place was packed. I tried showing my license but the person who gave me the ballot has known me for years and didn’t bother looking at it.

I was surprised to see Fred! and Duncan listed on the ballot. I thought the ballots would have been printed more recently. As a Fred! head, I wanted to vote for him, but I voted for Mitt instead.

Go MITT!!!

Mooseman on February 5, 2008 at 6:43 PM

Okay Califemme, when you replied to my McCain comment, you said,

But McVain cannot and more importantly WILL NOT harm the Military, and that alone should propel you to NOT stay home in November…

And I daresay, our MILITARY is “what fundamentally makes America the greatest country on the planet…”

Califemme on February 5, 2008 at 6:02 PM

What’s your deal?

I then called you wrong (DISAGREEING WITH WHAT YOU SAID) on saying that are military is what makes us fundamentally the greatest country on the planet.
I am guessing, because I don’t read minds that you were saying that AT LEAST a vote for McCain is a vote to keep military budgeting at current or higher levels.

I wasn’t attacking you, what did I say that made you think I was?

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 6:50 PM

I merely disagreed with your assertions as to what makes the U.S. great…same as LegendHasIt…but you rebut me with “why are you attacking me for something I didn’t say??” comment. You know what, you’re a racist!!

Just kidding…

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 6:52 PM

Mooseman–I just got back a little while ago and still saw “FRED!” at the top of the ballot. It was tempting, I admit.

And there was Alan Keyes! I remember voting for him back before I realized he was…a little off. (For those of you who only know him through this election cycle, he didn’t used to be like he is now. Used to be an amazing orator and a social conservative with some foreign policy experience. I had high hopes.)

see-dubya on February 5, 2008 at 6:52 PM

No to McCain-Kennedy.

No to McCain-Feingold.

No to McCain-Lieberman.

No to McCain.

profitsbeard on February 5, 2008 at 6:54 PM

Okay, explain to me how on a daily basis the big government military is ensuring your freedom to worship…if an adherent from the religion of peace kicked your door in tomorrow explain to me how the military would protect your freedom of worship…

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 6:22 PM

Does this ring a bell? I didn’t throw ANY of this YOUR way, you came at ME with this…

And I was on a WHOLE ‘nother page than you were, if you would go back and read my first post on this thread, you’d agree.

I am guessing, because I don’t read minds that you were saying that AT LEAST a vote for McCain is a vote to keep military budgeting at current or higher levels.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand NOW we’re on the same page.

Califemme on February 5, 2008 at 6:56 PM

I just got back a little while ago and still saw “FRED!” at the top of the ballot. It was tempting, I admit.

see-dubya on February 5, 2008 at 6:52 PM

I don’t know if I would have had the strength to resist.

SimplyKimberly on February 5, 2008 at 6:57 PM

And his meddling on those nominations messed up Frist’s attempt to force the issue Constitutionally, rather than just making the back-room deals like the Senate Fraternity Club does under normal circumstances.

LegendHasIt on February 5, 2008 at 6:21 PM

Where would the Republican minority be under Frist’s proposed rule changes? What kind of judges would we get if Obama or Clinton could get any appointment confirmed with a 51-50 vote? The “nuclear option” was short-sighted and not necessarily even going to work. Republicans held only a 5-vote majority, and the Democrats were prepared to fight back hard against the rule changes – threatening to shut down all legislative business if the rules changes were passed. Democrats only needed to convince 6 Republicans to oppose the rules changes, and they only needed to hold off the cloture vote off for long enough to kill the Alito nomination with a majority after the 2006 elections.

McCain, in all likelihood, saved the Alito nomination, and preserved the Republican minority’s power to oppose liberal nominations.

RightOFLeft on February 5, 2008 at 6:57 PM

No to Clear Channel.. :}

Chakra Hammer on February 5, 2008 at 6:57 PM

So Government to you makes our country great?

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 6:04 PM

She said military, not government. Though the military is part of the gov’t, they are not the same.

And I daresay, our MILITARY is “what fundamentally makes America the greatest country on the planet…”

Califemme on February 5, 2008 at 6:02 PM

Spot on! They are just a part of what makes America great, but they are definitely what keeps us great. This is where McCain, Huckabee and Romney are all PROFOUNDLY different from Clinton or Obama, god forbid Edwards.

CB you should spend more time on left wing sites until you grasp their hatred of the “military-industrial complex.” They want to take most military funding and redirect it to a department of peace and free love for the rest of the world. They can do immeasurable damage in a few years, just like Clinton-1 did. Soldiers will die as a result.

DreadWolf on February 5, 2008 at 6:59 PM

Califemme on February 5, 2008 at 5:48 PM

My original post, to include my “original” frame of mind.

I wasn’t attacking you, what did I say that made you think I was?

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 6:50 PM

Kinda felt like you came out of left field, since I did not comment re religion. I was simply saying that YES, at the very least, McVain will protect our military from those who would:

de-fund, de-moralise and de-clare de-feat in Iraq.

Califemme on February 5, 2008 at 7:04 PM

Soldiers will die as a result.

DreadWolf on February 5, 2008 at 6:59 PM

Zactly.

Califemme on February 5, 2008 at 7:06 PM

He didn’t want to get this close to endorsing a candidate. This was a last resort.

Some say he should have come out for Romney sooner. Well, hell,he’s been chewing on McCain’s arse since I can remember, and he’s been differentiating Huck’s populism from conservatism for months now too. What else, short of an endorsement, could he possible do.

Some say he should have come out for Romney sooner. Who are they, the mind-numb robots?

petefrt on February 5, 2008 at 7:09 PM

Point taken Califemme, I certainly wasn’t attacking. I apologize if I came across as harsh.
I love the military, served during both administrations; BJC and GWB, the contrasts are unbelievable..I know from firsthand experience. Are we square?

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 7:12 PM

CB you should spend more time on left wing sites until you grasp their hatred of the “military-industrial complex.” They want to take most military funding and redirect it to a department of peace and free love for the rest of the world. They can do immeasurable damage in a few years, just like Clinton-1 did. Soldiers will die as a result.

DreadWolf on February 5, 2008 at 6:59 PM

Brother, I don’t know if my blood pressure could take spending anytime on the left wing sites…

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 7:14 PM

Those Dems cannot WAIT to de-fund, de-moralise and de-clare de-feat in Iraq. For this, we MUST UNITE.

Califemme on February 5, 2008 at 5:48 PM

As a real-time example, Hillary was on the phone with Greta a couple of hours ago: (Paraphrased from memory)

Greta: If you could only accomplish one thing in office, what would be the one thing you would immediately do when elected?
Hillary: We have to get the troops out of Iraq. I will start withdrawal within 60 days.

None of the Republicans except RP would agree. I know I don’t. There is a difference, and it is measured in lives.

DreadWolf on February 5, 2008 at 7:30 PM

I at least understand why McCinton and Hillary are so tight. They are cut from the same cloth. He and his talking heads have lied about the Dole letter. Dole was not supporting McClinton. He was asking for Rush to support the winner regardless of who it was.
I think what most people are missing is that every time one of the McClinton taliking heads or Rudy say that McClinton has an 80% conservative rating, I cringe. The truth is he does have a life long rating of 80%, but if you take in just the last 8 years it is 60%. Of course, you are not going to get the truth out of the mainstream press or the East Coast elite’s in the republican party.
I will not vote for McClinton regardless of who is the Democratic nominee.

pwb on February 5, 2008 at 7:33 PM

DreadWolf on February 5, 2008 at 6:59 PM

I agree that BHO will gut the military but I don’t believe the Clintons will. Look at it this way, In future history books what is Billy going to be known for? He’ll have * next to his name, impeachment, sex scandal, ignored the islamo threat . And I remember something about their concern for legacy. They’ll be like LBJ, guns and butter. If we’re not bankrupt already, we will be after them. Just a thought.

jerrytbg on February 5, 2008 at 7:34 PM

RightOFLeft on February 5, 2008 at 6:57 PM

OK… Just so we are on the same page;
You prefer the usual Back Room Senatorial Fraternity deals rather than operating Constitutionally?

LegendHasIt on February 5, 2008 at 7:44 PM

I define myself as Fiscal Conservaive, National Defense Conservative, Social Moderate and completely non religious.

JayHaw Phrenzie on February 5, 2008 at 4:01 PM

Me too. The difference seems to be the conclusions we draw: I consider John McCain to be an existential threat to, not a champion of, my demands that government manage fiscal matters as a small business must, that government takes its Constitutional responsibility to protect our nation and its interests seriously, and that Government stays out of our private lives and thoughts.

I believe that John McCain is yanking the Republican party to the left, where these ideas are considered bad. And for that, he is my enemy.

RushBaby on February 5, 2008 at 7:50 PM

Califemme,

As a side-bar, you shouldn’t be so sensitive about religion…it was only an extreme example of how the military doesn’t protect the individual, the individual protects themselves and those around them.

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 7:51 PM

Brother, I don’t know if my blood pressure could take spending anytime on the left wing sites…

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 7:14 PM

I agree it’s not easy, but it’s important to understand the depth of the insanity there. Corporations and the military defense complex are two things that the Dems (at least the far left) irrationally despise and want to utterly deconstruct.

I agree that BHO will gut the military but I don’t believe the Clintons will.

jerrytbg on February 5, 2008 at 7:34 PM

I might have agreed with you a couple of years ago, but all the Dems have had to veer hard left in order to keep dKOS et al off their backs. If she wants a second term she will have to show them some actions to keep them from “primary-ing” her. Only 10% of them favored Hil over BHO or Edwards, and they will push her incessantly on Iraq and the military. She’ll choose re-election over legacy.

DreadWolf on February 5, 2008 at 7:57 PM

DreadWolf on February 5, 2008 at 7:57 PM
She’ll choose re-election over legacy.

Frankly, I hope we don’t have to face that. I remember reading from some mideast sites not too long ago that she does understand the threat and is prepared to do something about it. I’ll see if I can find’em. If she is the POTUS come next year I could see her spinning it to be more agressive in her first term then take care of the other agenda in her second. I can hope can’t I? I’m not advocating a vote for the Clintons but I am an anti-BHO one.

jerrytbg on February 5, 2008 at 8:12 PM

Coldbore76,

You said:
“RINO’s, of which McCain can count himself at least in ideology.”

In McCain’s case you should have used the ‘idolatry’ instead of ideology, he has worshiped the Office of the Presidency for a very long time.

And for all you that think just because he’s a war hero he should be made President, I think we heard something similar in 1996.

McCain ’08 ==Dole ’96

belad on February 5, 2008 at 8:14 PM

I’ve got to run now. bbl

jerrytbg on February 5, 2008 at 8:14 PM

belad on February 5, 2008 at 8:14 PM

Very good point Belad.

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 8:18 PM

watching an interview of a “youth voter” on Fox made me realize what the Obama movement really is….let me know if I am WAY off on this..
Could the USS OBAMA be harnessing the wind of a perfect storm?

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 8:27 PM

nevermind. lost my train of thought

ColdBore76 on February 5, 2008 at 8:30 PM

I think McCain did reach across the aisle once, to pass a spoiled eclair to Joe Biden.
It’s the thought that counts.

whitetop on February 5, 2008 at 8:41 PM

Wow, just think how well the flopper would have done without Rush’s “endorsement”.

huckfan on February 5, 2008 at 9:05 PM

And for that, he is my enemy

Oh, good lord.

Priscilla on February 5, 2008 at 9:09 PM

I think someone just cut the (government) cheese. Outta here.

RushBaby on February 5, 2008 at 9:24 PM

i’m wonder is it because of the letter from Dole ,trick from M-Cain’s ?

beachkatie on February 5, 2008 at 5:19 PM

McCain is an absolute snake, and what he did with this letter proves it in spades. His campaign tactics are as sleazy as the Clintoon’s.

I read the early news about this letter, possibly one in Politico, and it was portrayed as Dole being rather unhappy with Rush. There was also a considerable amount left out of the “news” articles on this letter which clearly portrayed McCain in a very favorable light. Who else would have done this?
Now we find out Dole never leaked it, and Rush didn’t think enough of it to comment on it until the media implemented McCain’s smear tactic.

This makes me wonder if McCain has been using Politico all along as a vehicle to attack. Politico was the one who ran the leak that Thompson was dropping out right before Iowa. Wasn’t it Politico that ran the story that Thompson was also dropping out right before South Carolina and endorsing McCain? Then the media continued pushing McCain highlighting his RINO endorsements.

So McCain/Feingold actually means manipulation of the media on a huge scale, while shutting out any response…including those demonstrably false.

I agree with Rush. He should post the letter and auction it off giving the proceeds to Romney.

91Veteran on February 5, 2008 at 9:49 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4