Top Republican to Limbaugh: It’s easy to talk, not so easy to lead; Update: Quote misattributed
posted at 6:10 pm on January 27, 2009 by Allahpundit
A response to Rush’s claim that Obama fears him more than he does John Boehner: When you have to worry about reelection, ideological purity is a luxury you can’t afford.
“I think that our leadership, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, are taking the right approach,”
[Rep. Tom] Price[Rep. Phil Gingrey] said. “I mean, it’s easy if you’re Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh or even sometimes Newt Gingrich to stand back and throw bricks. You don’t have to try to do what’s best for your people and your party. You know you’re just on these talk shows and you’re living well and plus you stir up a bit of controversy and gin the base and that sort of that thing. But when it comes to true leadership, not that these people couldn’t be or wouldn’t be good leaders, they’re not in that position of John Boehner or Mitch McConnell.Asked to respond to Gingrey, Limbaugh, in an email to Politico, wrote: “I’m sure he is doing his best but it does not appear to be good enough. He may not have noticed that the number of Republican colleagues he has in the House has dwindled. And they will dwindle more if he and his friends don’t show more leadership and effectiveness in battling the most left-wing agenda in modern history. And they won’t continue to lose because of me, but because of their relationship with the grassroots, which is hurting. Conservatives want leadership from those who claim to represent them. And we’ll know it when we see it.”
I.e. we’ll know it if they stick to their guns about opposing the stimulus, which Obama’s press secretary told the press corps this afternoon he doesn’t think they’ll do. Neither do I — not all of them, anyway. Let’s settle this.
Update: A botched quote from Politico: It was Phil Gingrey who made the statement about Limbaugh, not Tom Price. I’ve corrected the quote above.
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: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Again I’ll just say that the analogy is ludicrous. Rush is a modern-day Thomas Paine – and Thomas Paine never ran for nor held any political office in the United States that I know of.
A better analogy?
Rush is better at his job than the Republican leadership currently is in theirs.
HondaV65 on January 27, 2009 at 8:57 PM
Man, does Rush engender the hate.
Recidivist alcoholic wife-beater Jack Cafferty of CNN and bloviating pompous-ass manwhore Keith Olbermann of DNCTV are both playing holier-than-thou with Maha Rushie.
I wonder if these fools actually turn on his program at all?
KingGold on January 27, 2009 at 8:58 PM
The Founders believed that limited government was a good idea in part because concentrating too much power in government is an invitation to corruption. At Congressional Quarterly, Peter Schweizer reminds us of the sad precedent of the New Deal:
With taxpayer dollars going to banks, investment houses, and automakers (with others certain to get into line) and heavy spending on infrastructure and other works projects coming soon, there has been a sharp and healthy debate about whether this burst of Keynesism actually makes good economic sense.
Overlooked is the harsh reality that the Obama economic agenda can stimulate political graft, cronyism and corruption in Washington. … The notion that the Obama administration and leaders in Congress will somehow separate sound economic decision-making from partisan political gain is a seductive myth.
Consider our experience with the last New Deal. … Professors Jim Couch and William Shugart, using other data, found that Depression-era agricultural programs, designed to help destitute farmers, often ended up in the hands of successful farmers and political allies, and that the “distribution of agricultural relief was guided more by Roosevelt’s electoral strategy” rather “than by objective economic need.”
We’ve seen that phenomenon already, with Barney Frank’s and Maxine Waters’ cronies moving to the head of the line in the bank bailout. Giving Democrats control over hundreds of billions of dollars in new pork spending is isn’t just an invitation to corruption, it is corruption per se. Republicans should propose their own stimulus bill, based on defensible economics, and take a firm stand against the Democrats’ carnival of pork. (powerline)
Keemo on January 27, 2009 at 8:58 PM
Republicans have fallen into Obama’s trap.
sandman on January 27, 2009 at 9:00 PM
Are you ready for MAS?
I knew you were:
Bleeding banks prompt talk of new big U.S. bailout
Tue Jan 27, 2009 5:12pm EST
AP
artist on January 27, 2009 at 9:00 PM
KingGold on January 27, 2009 at 8:58 PM
Having those two ass clowns hating you is proof positive that you’re on the right track… Keep at em Rush!
Keemo on January 27, 2009 at 9:01 PM
Fox needs to get rid of Greta and replace him with Rush. O’Reilly, Hannity, and Limbaugh would be kick ass.
lavell12 on January 27, 2009 at 9:01 PM
califcon on January 27, 2009 at 9:03 PM
Seems hapless Stupid Party Congressman Phil Gingrey has never contemplated something called a principled stand on these issues.
Zorro on January 27, 2009 at 9:03 PM
Not necessarily….I think Democrats have made the mistake of thinking Republicans have no voice.
Rovin on January 27, 2009 at 9:05 PM
More on the subject from powerline.com
This was the most laughable item in the news today:
On the eve of a key vote, President Barack Obama privately promised Republican critics he stands ready to accept changes in $825 billion economic stimulus legislation, and urged lawmakers to “put politics aside” in the interest of creating badly needed jobs.
What a joke! The Dems’ $825 billion pork-fest bill is nothing but politics. Every constituency of the Democratic Party, every crony of powerful Democratic legislators, every pet liberal project will be showered with bacon. The idea that “putting politics aside” has anything to do with this bill is an insult to your intelligence.
There are some good resources to track what the Democrats are up to. Check out Read the Stimulus, where you can read the text of the bill and its various amendments, search for specific items in the legislation, link to analyses of the pork extravaganza, and access other information like charts showing the Congressional Budget Office’s analysis of the Dem bill. Like this one, which shows that the overwhelming majority of the funds being appropriated in the bill won’t be spent during 2009. In other words, they will have no impact on the current recession:
Keemo on January 27, 2009 at 9:07 PM
Note: that would be powerlineblog.com
Keemo on January 27, 2009 at 9:08 PM
Mr. Gingrey, you, Sir are a disgrace. You will enter history as timid, backsliding, weak and irrelevant (in an extremely small footnote to be sure). Political midget, wimp and sure- to-be former member of Congress. Practice saying, “Do you want fries with that”? Your next job. Enjoy the paper hat.
Mason on January 27, 2009 at 9:10 PM
This whole quote is utterly amazing to me. Does this guy really believe that Rush and Hannity and Gingrich don’t want what’s best for the Republican party???! I would have loved for Newt to run for president. I don’t trust many of our so called leaders in the Republican party, I do rely somewhat on people like Rush and Hannity to point out and sum up what’s going on. On both sides of the isle!
4shoes on January 27, 2009 at 9:10 PM
Flame me if you want to, but Gingrey is as entitled to express his opinion as anyone else and I think we should reserve judgment on him until we know how he votes tomorrow.
califcon on January 27, 2009 at 9:13 PM
Why do some of these politicians think they are going to get the “obama treatment” and not get criticized or exposed.
sherry on January 27, 2009 at 9:16 PM
Rush is right as usual.
The Stimulus plan is pretty much all pork, except for a small payroll tax rebate.
I won’t be getting any of that because my income is not subject to a payroll tax; investments, IRA, pension, and SS.
The actual bill is 647 pages long (so far).
Read it here: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h1ih.txt.pdf
Dasher on January 27, 2009 at 9:21 PM
To be fair, we do have several members of Congress fighting a principled battle in defeating this Carnival of Pork. Michelle Bachman has a site that tracks where the money is allocated and essentially which Dem is the recipient of the payoff. Chech out the details: http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/01/022665.php?format=print
onlineanalyst on January 27, 2009 at 9:22 PM
While I think you’re right about them not sticking, that’s pretty sad. I’ve been reading the bill, and there’s a lot of stuff in there which makes me think we are really going Socialist. If you search on the term COBRA, notice what’s in store for companies providing insurance — the COBRA insuree gets a 65% discount, and the government is not going to cover the discount; the company providing the insurance apparently gets to eat the loss. Companies are required to provide COBRA, and now the COBRA recipient gets a discount way below the cost of coverage for an employee. That’s scary to me; I see my healthcare going away if something like that makes it into law — for COBRA is only mandated for companies providing employee healthcare coverage.
We’ve gotten Planned Parenthood out of the bill, but I haven’t found an ACORN earmark — I’m sure they are using a lot of parenthetical expressions to describe ACORN without naming it, but I haven’t found the gobbledygook.
unclesmrgol on January 27, 2009 at 9:26 PM
Shouldn’t they be criticizing Obama?
Gitmo closer, abortion promoter, tax thief hirer, apologist for religious crackpots, panderer to Islamofascists…
profitsbeard on January 27, 2009 at 9:31 PM
What is so hard about taking lobbyist money, voting yourself a raise, having a fawning staff and getting great benefits?
flyoverland on January 27, 2009 at 9:32 PM
The ACORN money is under another name. I can’t remember exactly but it’s something like the Neighborhood Reinvestment something…
Anybody know?
ACORN is getting billion in this bill.
katy on January 27, 2009 at 9:33 PM
Assumptions: clear thinking, conservatives, not in love,…
Entelechy on January 27, 2009 at 9:35 PM
Thanks for the Link that led to the the link to Michelle Bachman site.
That money I sent her a few months ago seems to have been the only political ‘investment’ of mine that wasn’t a total waste.
LegendHasIt on January 27, 2009 at 9:37 PM
Here’s the searchable stimulus bill (all 1588 pages of it), with the portions on “neighborhood stabilization” up front:
http://readthestimulus.org/index.php?query=neighborhood
I think AP or Ed posted this the other day. Great site. National nightmare.
califcon on January 27, 2009 at 9:45 PM
Indeed they have. *Sigh* Alinsky Rule 13: Pick the target (Conservatism), freeze it, personalize it (Rush), polarize it (Repubs).
That didn’t take long, huh? We’re screwed.
conservative pilgrim on January 27, 2009 at 9:48 PM
That didn’t take long, huh? We’re screwed.
conservative pilgrim on January 27, 2009 at 9:48 PM
Eh, there are sixty million people who didn’t vote Ogabe, and how knows how many more who are only now discovering the sordid details of this stimulus disaster.
Bishop on January 27, 2009 at 9:58 PM
conservative pilgrim, not to worry. If the O w/b so sure footed why would he care about Rush? It is the sign of a small man. Look how the harped at GWB for years and he never gave them the pleasure of acknowledging them. This thin-skinned dude lost it in week one.
Entelechy on January 27, 2009 at 9:59 PM
If you search on the term COBRA, notice what’s in store for companies providing insurance — the COBRA insuree gets a 65% discount, and the government is not going to cover the discount; the company providing the insurance apparently gets to eat the loss. Companies are required to provide COBRA, and now the COBRA recipient gets a discount way below the cost of coverage for an employee. That’s scary to me; I see my healthcare going away if something like that makes it into law — for COBRA is only mandated for companies providing employee healthcare coverage.
This is indeed scary – and how I think O will usher in a single payer healthcare system. Here’s how: I own a small business where we offer a healthcare benefit open to all FT employees. Only a couple take advantage of it but the price goes up like 30-40% annually. In tough times I can see small employers deep-sixing their health plans (and especially if the cost go up per the govt.) as a non-value added cost – which opens the door for O to pick them up.
volnation on January 27, 2009 at 10:00 PM
Keemo quoted much of what is on the powerlineblog site. The Bachman link is a sweetener.
LegendHasIt: Boehner put a gag rule on the Republican caucus for a good reason. The bill should be owned by the Dems and shot down for the harm that it will do to our economic recovery. By targeting Obama,rather than the bill itself, Republicans get painted as adversaries of the president rather than opponents of bad legislation.
The bill essentially has enough Democrat votes to pass. The Dems want cover (as does Obama), and they want to paint this legislation as bipartisan in order to avoid blame. As it’s constructed right now, it will FAIL the American people.
Obama is going through his Mr. Smooth routine in meeting with the Republicans who presented an alternative list of amendments. He has done the same with his three visits to the House.
The wiser heads in the Republican caucus need to rally the squishes and in unison defeat this bill.
We need to contact those represenatives and senators who are doing a yeoman’s work and congratulate them for it. Boehner, Pence, Bachman, Hensarling (sp?), and DeMint come readily to mind. Perhapa others could add to this list. These people need to know we value their support on our behalf.
onlineanalyst on January 27, 2009 at 10:03 PM
Dems having kicked NE Republican ASS in 2006 and 2008, have working majorities in both houses, Obama only wants a few token Republican votes for political cover, and Rush is the problem for Republican leadership?
Angry Dumbo on January 27, 2009 at 10:07 PM
Sorry, LegendHasIt. My message should have been directed to profitsbeard (with whom I usually agree).
If, indeed, Gingrey was a NAY vote on the TARP, then someone who has his ear should give him an attaboy and tell him that Rush Limbaugh is in his corner for fighting for a fiscally conservative NAY vote on this bill, too. His principled rejection is a type of leadership, too. He needs to be encouraged to influence his fellow representatives instead of directing hie ire toward Limbaugh.
onlineanalyst on January 27, 2009 at 10:09 PM
So to criticize Rush is to commit sacrilege against the holy of holies? Unbelievable.
the only leadership he has ever demonstrated was in hiding his drug problem.
Of course his lackeys and fanboys/girls cannot bear to ask the question but any rational person should ask “Why doesn’t Rush ever run for office if he is such an uber patriot with all the answers?”
Bradky on January 27, 2009 at 10:12 PM
FWIW – I love Rush Limbaugh and I trust him because he’s not running for re-election. He has not going through all this for himself.
Oink on January 27, 2009 at 10:16 PM
News flash! He has never ever been elected for anything and 400 million dollars for himself should give you a clue as to what his main motive is.
Bradky on January 27, 2009 at 10:19 PM
Don’t go there, Bradky. We have a laundry list of elements in Obama’s life, education, and career that are top secret. What is he hiding?
The Obamabots have raised up a glib celebrity who spent much of his rebellious youth self-admittedly snorting, blowing, and smoking some mind-altering substances. He’s not exactly the sort that serves as a role model.
A society that intends to keep its freedoms and not succumb to the tyranny of government (or a demagogue) is an informed society. Rush Limbaugh provides a source of information to support his opinions in order to reach those who may not have the luxury of time to reasearch for themselves.
onlineanalyst on January 27, 2009 at 10:23 PM
Consider the positive employment impact which Rush has had on his industry through his employees, employees of affiliate stations, advertising revenue, and profits for advertisers. Rush has had an enormous positive impact on the radio business, its vitality and the good fortunes of his sponsors. Remember Snapple? Initially a very small company which encountered explosive growth mostly due to the publicity given by one man.
Compare that to the negative employment impact of preening politicians most of whom spent their time in the majority telling us about “nuclear options”, “power sharing”, and other dreck shoveled by Frist, Hastert, Lott, Hatch and then by the spineless Gang of Fourteen (incl. Grahamnesty, McVain, Specter) which co-opted leadership from those former Four Stooges of “We’ve Got the Majority – What Do We Do Now?” fame.
Gingrey should do us all a favor and speak when spoken to. Limbaugh serves a constructive purpose. Until Gingrey can demonstrate he’s doing the same and direct his expectations at the opposition that noisy pol should play the quiet game posthaste.
viking01 on January 27, 2009 at 10:25 PM
Isn’t there something more important to do then sending out petitions to silence a private citizen. Don’t we have a country to save.
Brat4life on January 27, 2009 at 10:26 PM
All the comments about Obama’s admitted drug use yet for Rush it is “Don’t go there”? In the words of a wise old woman “Welllllllllll isn’t that special?”
Maybe Obama and Rush should sit down and smoke a peace pipe or something together. Love and harmony will ensue.
Bradky on January 27, 2009 at 10:26 PM
Just a teensy weensy dramatic.
Free markets for everyone!! Let’s hear it for America!!
katy on January 27, 2009 at 10:27 PM
Not easy to lead? That must be why the republicans don’t have any leadership. It’s too hard for them. Maybe we should hire a bunch of Illegals to lead the republican party since there doesn’t seem to be any Americans that want to do the job. We hired you pinheads to lead but you abdicated your responsibility for the last 8 years and kowtowed to the liberals in Washington until they became liberals also.
Corsair on January 27, 2009 at 10:29 PM
How do you mix up “Price” and “Gingrey”?
Jim Treacher on January 27, 2009 at 10:29 PM
Would better represent the truth you said A society that refuses collectively to do its own research and background reading other than taking soundbites from a radio broadcast or snippets from the blogosphere is a lazy society that has ceded the desire for meaningful discourse.
Huffington, Kos, Rush, Ann, etc. their fans are all the same — unwilling to do the hard task of reading a book on the subject and perfectly content to have their beliefs poured into their brain.
Bradky on January 27, 2009 at 10:30 PM
And more power to free markets but let’s not grovel to someone who does this for money.
Bradky on January 27, 2009 at 10:31 PM
Of course it’s fine to criticize Limbaugh or any other conservative. Why is it though that criticism is always ad hominem, and not about ideas? I know that’s the left’s MO, but jeez…
ddrintn on January 27, 2009 at 10:33 PM
Stimulus ain’t going to fix the economy any more than the bailout did. Obama needs cover and Republicans may just be stupid enough to give it to him.
Stimulus spending did not pull us out of the great depression and did not pull Japan out of the lost decade of the 1990s. History dictates that it will not work here.
As Tom Sowell said in his column this morning the target of this stimulus is the growth of government not the economy. Obama definitely knows this, God help us if this is news to Republicans.
Angry Dumbo on January 27, 2009 at 10:33 PM
Disagree with your view. Look at any thread at HA and if someone remotely criticizes Limbaugh or another conservative on the issues the ad hominem attacks are directed at them; you know.. libtards like you, Obamabot, traitor, RINO, CINO, etc.
Who is taking the high ground?
Bradky on January 27, 2009 at 10:35 PM
Stimulus ain’t going to fix the economy any more than the bailout did. Obama needs cover and Republicans may just be stupid enough to give it to him.
Stimulus spending did not pull us out of the great depression and did not pull Japan out of the lost decade of the 1990s. History dictates that it will not work here.
http://www.cato.org/special/stimulus09/cato_stimulus.pdf
As Tom Sowell said in his column this morning the target of this stimulus is the growth of government not the economy. Obama definitely knows this, God help us if this is news to Republicans.
Sorry for the repost. : )
Angry Dumbo on January 27, 2009 at 10:37 PM
Michele Bachmann (one ‘l’ in Michele) is the one of the best representatives. I don’t have to guess how I think she might vote on an issue. She always votes with her conscience and her principals. I had to move in order to get in her district, but it was worth it.
Dasher on January 27, 2009 at 10:39 PM
Sonny, Rush Limbaugh articulates daily some of the finest principles of conservatism, especially in the arena of economic free-market capitalism. His ideas are those shared by economists of the finest credentials.
Dredging up your National Enquirer-worthy history of Limbaugh’s past prescription dependence does not take away from the man’s capabilities…unless you want us to use the same judgment criteria when assessing Obama.
Criticize Limbaugh’s ideas if you must criticize him at all, but work with some intellectual content, would you, Bradky. (It’s bad enough having an adolescent leading our country and a buffoon in second position without putting up with your nonsense.)
onlineanalyst on January 27, 2009 at 10:40 PM
Those whom envy Rush’s economic success should take note:
Rush can make a fortune simply by showing up, being who he his, enjoying his day while sharing it with other people. He hasn’t had to shake down the tobacco industry to make a fortune, or stage accidents, or contrive frivolous lawsuits. Limbaugh has made his fortune by creating and fostering productive businesses not by looting them. Perhaps that is why the typical DC lawyer / politician gets cranky when weasel words aren’t keeping voters happy.
This is why Rush can give a nod of approval to someone like Steve Jobs. Those two may be diametrically opposites politically yet when it comes to adding to peoples’ enjoyment both have provided enjoyable, useful products which have met with phenomenal success. People can turn on their radio or switch on their Mac and instantly be reminded that their investment in both are worthwhile.
viking01 on January 27, 2009 at 10:43 PM
I pray for the day when you will use the same judgment criteria instead of being a quasi-hypocrite about it. I doubt that you have once stepped into a thread where comments outside of Obama’s policy stances were being bandied about and said to cut it out.
Bradky on January 27, 2009 at 10:43 PM
Absolutely. I called Michele Bachmann’s office three times today. Just to let her know we support her. I sent John Boehner last week right after the ‘I won’ statement came out recommending ZERO votes from Republicans. The Dems should own this lock stock and barrel.
Dasher on January 27, 2009 at 10:47 PM
You left out the Cafferty hit and run driving thing.
It’s amazing to witness irresponsible cretins deriding others for their faults.
drjohn on January 27, 2009 at 10:47 PM
“Pussy-whipped” is the phrase that comes to mind….
drjohn on January 27, 2009 at 10:49 PM
We all do something for money. You’ll learn someday when you get your first paycheck.
katy on January 27, 2009 at 10:50 PM
Vernon Hardapple on January 27, 2009 at 10:50 PM
I can argue with you all day long about Obama without once mentioning Obama’s past drug use, his body size, or any physical characteristics or without disparaging Obama’s general level of intellignece. I have yet to see a member of the left be able to do the same about any conservative figure.
ddrintn on January 27, 2009 at 10:51 PM
I’ve seen the President and his staff on TV a lot over the past week. It seems talking (at least coherently) to them is not very easy.
Tommy_G on January 27, 2009 at 10:51 PM
Honey that first paycheck was some 38 years ago. But keep on trying to insult while groveling to Rush.
Bradky on January 27, 2009 at 10:52 PM
Oh really? then what about this?
I’d say your claim is without merit.
Bradky on January 27, 2009 at 10:54 PM
You say it like it’s a bad thing
Ampersand on January 27, 2009 at 11:06 PM
Rush is right to keep the pressure on the Republicans. It’s a counter to the Obama love machine that will envelop us in socialism if we don’t resist. So if they complain, let them — it’s not just Rush it’s almost all his 20 million listeners. We don’t listen to Rush because we idolize him; we listen to him because he voices what we are thinking and it keeps us sane. So you guys who want to bash Rush instead of the lack of conservative leadership in the House and Senate, go ahead. But particularly on Hot Air you are not changing many minds.
Christian Conservative on January 27, 2009 at 11:10 PM
Obama has made his fortune off being a politician. Is he just doing it for the money?
Ampersand on January 27, 2009 at 11:11 PM
We know who Republicans in Congress represent.
They represent themselves.
Anybody besides me notice that everyone in Congress is very wealthy within a few years of going to Washington? They appear to be much more successful at saving and investing their own $175K salaries than they are at spending and investing the taxpayers money.
notagool on January 27, 2009 at 11:16 PM
Obama is much like Clinton. He is in politics because, frankly, there is very little of which he’s legitimately capable besides campaigning.
viking01 on January 27, 2009 at 11:17 PM
Seven Percent Solution on January 27, 2009 at 11:18 PM
Then it’s apparently taking you longer than most to learn simple free market capitalism. ;)
It’ll come…
katy on January 27, 2009 at 11:19 PM
Actually, it’s worse. They’ve made the mistake of thinking conservatives have no thoughts TO voice. Because they think conservatives have no brain, and simply wait to be led about by one TV personality or another.
This is what irritated me so much about how they treated Palin and Joe the Plumber. It was like they were saying to us, “Don’t you see, idiots? These people are idiots! Don’t listen to them! Pay no attention to what that plumber just asked; his real name isn’t even Joe!”
Like I need a bunch of liberals to tell me what to think. Like I need them to tell me who to admire (Palin), or which questions need asking (Joe the Plumber).
Rush doesn’t tell me what to think. I don’t even listen to him. But when I do (or read his web site) I discover that, while I disagree with him on a fair amount, he is actually saying . . . wait for it! Something I already thought myself!
Liberals don’t realize that when they denigrate and mock conservative spokespeople, they denigrate and mock all conservatives.
I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m sick of being insulted that way, particularly since 99% of the time it is by people who are in fact less educated and experienced than I am.
Alana on January 27, 2009 at 11:20 PM
For all those who are GA residents, here is a link to Representative Gingrey’s e-mail portal. I have used this to let him know in no uncertain terms what I think about his having alienated his base. I asked him what is next – will he jump on the “Fairness Doctrine” bandwagon?
Representative Gingrey has been good up to this point, so I find it shocking that he uttered that blurb against Rush, Sean, and Newt. But my shock has not and will not paralyze me into inaction when I feel betrayed by those who are supposed to be representing me.
We true conservatives will not go quietly into this night.
OneVision on January 27, 2009 at 11:30 PM
What did one have to do with the other? How does the second refute the first? It doesn’t.
I’m not so sure. I think they know that they can’t compete, really, so the easiest argument is to call your opponent stupid.
ddrintn on January 27, 2009 at 11:38 PM
Sounds like the perfect job description of the GOP leadership. Doctor, heal thyself!
‘The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.’ Thomas Jefferson.
DannoJyd on January 27, 2009 at 11:47 PM
I predict that the Dems trying to “stampede the cattle” again will hurt them.
The bill is a debacle.
Tarp II already being talked about.
Time for responsibility.
Gird your loins.
Starlink on January 27, 2009 at 11:57 PM
I take that you don’t like Rush.
Johan Klaus on January 28, 2009 at 12:03 AM
So, are you an Obama supporter?
Johan Klaus on January 28, 2009 at 12:06 AM
I am sick of some of you always criticizing Rush for his former drug habit. It was not his fault that he had to start on the medicine and Drs need to be very careful about the over use of it. No, I’m not addicted, never have been, but I find it funny that dope heads who smoke dope and want it to be legal can talk about Rush.
We don’t need to criticize these conservatives, we need to support all of them – Rush, Sean, Glenn etc. For heavens sakes the dems want them all off the air. Get rid of the trolls and the rinos and maybe we can really start a conservative party.
Bambi on January 28, 2009 at 12:24 AM
First of all, to answer your question you simply need to ask yourself this question: “Why would Rush pass up speaking on behalf of 25 million Americans a week to only speak for 600,000 to 800,000 constituents in a House District or just one state as a Senator?” His audience (constituency) is second only to that of the President.
Secondly, he’s never sought political office because it was never his dream to be a politician.
Thirdly (is that a word?), suggesting that he should (I’m paraphrasing) “shut up or run” is akin to saying that only those who are running for office should speak up.
Fourthly (if thirdly is a word, than this must be too), with 3 ex-wives, no kids and prescription drug addiction in his past, all of his critics would try to destroy him on both sides of the aisle.
Fifthly (see above), why should he take the pay cut?
Sixthly (ditto), why would he want to join a group of people that trade their political beliefs for votes.
rmel80 on January 28, 2009 at 12:27 AM
Unless he ran as a democrat…
katy on January 28, 2009 at 12:33 AM
Unless he ran as a democrat…
Then, as he would say, it would be a resume enhancer!
Goody2Shoes on January 28, 2009 at 12:36 AM
yup
katy on January 28, 2009 at 12:37 AM
Really. Who with their wits about them would trade total leadership in talk radio for the chance to put in only an occasional spot on C-Spam? It would be about four microseconds before Rush suggested to Brian Lamb that there’s no point in faking a “Republican” call-in line if it’s only a disguised hotline for Lefty seminar callers.
Nowadays income for Rush is merely a means of keeping score. Unlike most politicians he doesn’t need the money. He’s comfortable and successful being who he is hence no desire to become a political actor.
viking01 on January 28, 2009 at 12:38 AM
Total.cynical.bulls**t.
That assertion completely sums up why the Republican party has been having its head handed to it. Integrity gets votes.
JDPerren on January 28, 2009 at 12:51 AM
Obama pays back his constituents through ACORN-encrusted pork. http://spectator.org/archives/2009/01/27/acorns-stimulus This bill is the biggest wealth-transference crock that deserves to go down in flames.
onlineanalyst on January 28, 2009 at 1:13 AM
Ask yourself this question:
When is the last time you were proud of the Republican party?
Personally, it’s been since the Newt Gingrich days of keeping Clinton in line. Where has that fight and fire of the Republican party gone?
smartsy on January 28, 2009 at 1:25 AM
Rush is a cheerleader and a very good one.
Elected officials are our employees and they’re not doing a good job.
We, as conservatives, have many enemies, the greatest of our enemies is the MSM.
The MSM: the mouthpiece for the liberal left. The destroyer of lives, of personal information, and of families of those who would run for office. They even eat their own when instructed to do so. The vetting process is absolutely unfair and bias.
Oh sure, vetting an elected candidate or elected official is necessary, but to what extent is non-relevant information necessary. Just look at the vetting of Sarah Palin. Armies of the MSM stormtroopers parachuted into Anchorage Alaska digging tunnels through the snow looking for any dirt. Fabricating dirt when it couldn’t be found and at any cost to their reputation, for what it’s worth. That’s the purpose of the MSM. To destroy. Journalism no longer exists. This is why I consider Palin a hero in the political realm. Whereas, McCain is a hero; a war hero, but not a political hero. Reagan, was a political hero; He and Palin are benchmarks. True to their values and unwavering. These are the people we need; strong and committed.
Our other enemy is us. We vote these people into office. We don’t hold them to the standards we expect. We put them into office and they lose their backbone. It’s like they leave our towns and cities for DC and enter through a tunnel and come out different people. This has got to stop.
Kini on January 28, 2009 at 1:48 AM
OK……….
……………… show me one instance of leadership, from those still in power?
……………… show me where the Republicans have documented the Democrat policies and politicians that have caused this crisis”?
……………… show me a single Federal, State, and Local Bureaucracy that is not filled with waste, graft, fraud, and abuse>
……………… show me the truth!
Seven Percent Solution on January 28, 2009 at 2:20 AM
Yeah………..
………… I thought so.
Seven Percent Solution on January 28, 2009 at 3:07 AM
TMK on January 28, 2009 at 4:21 AM
I’d like to make a bet with you about this. How much are you willing to risk on him? :)
Bizarro No. 1 on January 28, 2009 at 4:22 AM
Thomas Paine — no friggin way. Arianna Huffington on the other hand is a much better comparison in terms of style/classiness. Rush has never led anything – nothing. Yet he has the answers to all the problems of the universe? Sure, pass the koolaid…
Bradky on January 28, 2009 at 5:30 AM
Republican “leaders” is an oxymoron with emphasis on MORON!
sabbott on January 28, 2009 at 5:38 AM
Are you aware of the depth of humor involved when a know-it-all such as yourself criticizes someone else for being a know-it-all? I am just curious, because you seem rather obtuse…
Bizarro No. 1 on January 28, 2009 at 5:54 AM
Leadership really is like pornography. You know it when you see it and they can both get you excited (in different ways) when done well.
BTW, I’ve been counting on Rush to keep me informed since 1988. In those 20 years the only (and I mean Only) time I’ve ever been disappointed by him is when he dumped his abortion update theme because his advertisers got cold feet. I understood it – without advertisers you don’t have a show – but I was still disappointed. Not bad for 20 years. Keep rockin, Rush. When you’re taking flak, you know you’re over the target.
SKYFOX on January 28, 2009 at 5:58 AM
Rank and File Republican to So-Called “Top” Republican: Take a hike, loser. Rush didn’t just suffer two consecutive electoral asskickings in a row due to corruption, lethargy, and an inability to inspire confidence in the American people. You jerks on The Hill did. Dismiss the man at your own peril but it’s gonna cost ya. Already has, or don’t you miss those comittee chairs yet?
SuperCool on January 28, 2009 at 5:59 AM
Huh.
Bradky, now you’re an expert on the “style/classiness” of Rush Limbaugh, Arianna Huffington, and Thomas Paine? You are one remarkable, multifaceted commenter!
Jaibones on January 28, 2009 at 6:37 AM
I admit. I am pretty surprised that one would have this kind of reaction after hearing about this kind of news. I figured all (hasty assumption on my part, I guess) would note the much larger and pressing issue of:
This is now the second time that Congress has targeted, singled out, and made official federal business of besmirching a private citizen’s name within a year. The third time on the federal level if you wish to include the President’s initial statement. All of this in context with the momentum that the Fairness Doctrine has been gaining with these people.
Bad, dirty government.
anuts on January 28, 2009 at 6:42 AM
This seems a more reasonable place to work from. I’ll go out on a limb, here: Rush is better at what he does than any of the Republican leadership have ever been at anything.
And Bradky, if you’re subscribing to the Gingrey position that it’s hard to think clearly about proper governance when you’re scrambling to get re-elected, remember that Obama has never performed with distinction in any job that he has ever held, but rather, he talks in public and gets people to agree with him.
This is different from what Limbaugh does how, precisely?
Jaibones on January 28, 2009 at 6:42 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »