TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Rush Limbaugh - "I hope Obama Fails"
Pages (12): « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 »

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss you are both right and wrong IMO.... The Democrats are pointedly trying to create and reinforce the theme that Rush is the de facto GOP leader. This strategy is a good strategy because so many view him as a polarizing figure. As Rush himself said about this:

Aren't the Republicans the ones that gave him the keynote at CPAC?

People like Rush Limbaugh, James Dobson, etc. are the reason that people flee the Republican party.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss But, I think the mistake they are making is that they are turning him into a martyr of free speech. He is galvanizing a grass roots effort that may be the spark that finally inspires the millions of Republicans that stayed home on Nov. 5th because they couldn't bear to vote for McCain.

Well this is the million dollar question isn't it. Its almost as if Republicans completely missed the last election. They play like there is a fire somewhere waiting to be unleashed. That was the last 8 years, they had their shot and blew it, like uh, hello? This generally comes from the conservatives that think their current problems are from not being conservative enough. Its grasping at straws for blind hope of still being relevant.

We will ultimately find out in the midterms. If they loose even more seats it will be an unequivocal denunciation they can't deny and prove they are completely out of touch with the public.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka Rahm probably didn't catch this follow up interview on CNBC (fwiw), though I think only a couple hundred thousand people watch CNBC regularly, and unfortunately I'm one of 'em. A bit of clarification by Rush, who is still obviously a lightning rod for controversy.

Off topic how does CNBC compare to MSNBC or where does it place on the spectrum? I ask because I know some people that watch it and the political leanings of those people are hard to pin down. I've never viewed CNBC so I'm curious

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss you are both right and wrong IMO.... The Democrats are pointedly trying to create and reinforce the theme that Rush is the de facto GOP leader. This strategy is a good strategy because so many view him as a polarizing figure.

Well this is odd - you quote Rush frequently as the voice of conservatism in arguments on a host of subjects... yet you protest when Democrats say he's the intellectual leader of your party? If not him, then who? Surely not Cantor or McConnell. Michael Steele? Sarah Palin? We sure haven't heard much from Mitt Romney or Bill Kristol lately. I'd say you've got Rush, for better or worse. Have fun with that.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Well this is odd - you quote Rush frequently as the voice of conservatism in arguments on a host of subjects... yet you protest when Democrats say he's the intellectual leader of your party? If not him, then who? Surely not Cantor or McConnell. Michael Steele? Sarah Palin? We sure haven't heard much from Mitt Romney or Bill Kristol lately. I'd say you've got Rush, for better or worse. Have fun with that.

Rush is the voice of conservatism, I'm not debating that. But he is a private citizen, not an elected official... therefore, he is not the leader of the party; conservatism is not a paty. Michael Steele would technically be the leader, but he's too new to make a huge impact as of yet. I like Boehner... Bobby Jindal is a fresh face, but not a leader yet.... but he's getting there because of his actions, not his words (except for that weirdly delivered speech last week that set him back a bit). I say, watch for Mitt to go back on the rise by 2010.

quote:

Originally posted by josh4 Well this is the million dollar question isn't it. Its almost as if Republicans completely missed the last election. They play like there is a fire somewhere waiting to be unleashed. That was the last 8 years, they had their shot and blew it, like uh, hello? This generally comes from the conservatives that think their current problems are from not being conservative enough. Its grasping at straws for blind hope of still being relevant.

There is a fire... but there has not been anyone to really lead them. Bush went off the conservative rails, and McCain was not accepted as a leader because, well, he wasn't. Conservative principles do not "go out of style" or become irrelevant... the GOP itself went out of style because they tried too hard to be like Democrats, trying to appeal to every spcial interest group and demographic rather than to people as individuals regardless of the group, ethnicity, or gender.... and just ended up looking like charlatans in the process.

If and when a leader steps up, they'll be back. Don't forget that 58 million people voted against Obama with a hack like McCain on the top of the ticket. You can't really believe that Democrats are in power forever under the current spending spree format we're seeing. It goes through cycles.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss I say, watch for Mitt to go back on the rise by 2010.

As a conservative or a liberal this time?

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka Rahm probably didn't catch this follow up interview on CNBC (fwiw), though I think only a couple hundred thousand people watch CNBC regularly, and unfortunately I'm one of 'em.

Is it unfortunate that you watch CNBC regularly, or that more people don't watch it more frequently? I watch CNBC either in the morning or at night. As you obviously know, it's one of the few channels that focuses on business related news. I also watch the bloomberg channel on occassion. For some stupid reason I can never determine which channel bloomberg is on.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss There is a fire... but there has not been anyone to really lead them. Bush went off the conservative rails, and McCain was not accepted as a leader because, well, he wasn't. Conservative principles do not "go out of style" or become irrelevant... the GOP itself went out of style because they tried too hard to be like Democrats, trying to appeal to every spcial interest group and demographic rather than to people as individuals regardless of the group, ethnicity, or gender.... and just ended up looking like charlatans in the process. If and when a leader steps up, they'll be back. Don't forget that 58 million people voted against Obama with a hack like McCain on the top of the ticket. You can't really believe that Democrats are in power forever under the current spending spree format we're seeing. It goes through cycles.

Dice the party up into groups and throw under the bus whomever you want. The public doesn't see it that way and they certainly don't separate Bush from Republican or Republican from Conservative.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss the GOP itself went out of style because they tried too hard to be like Democrats

quote:

Originally posted by Clovis

How else do you think McCain ended up as the candidate? Because the foolish GOP strategists and pundits saw how the efforts of the Democrats was working so well, and thought the way to victory was to have a candidate that could appeal to independants, democrats, and republicans. Rather than a leader who stands for principles, the pundits and strategists said McCain was the only one who could beat Hillary or Obama because he's shown the ability to "walk across the aisle". He ended up looking like a pandering fool, which is basically what McCain is. In the end, the independants broke for Obama anyway. The GOP has some lame ass strategists these days.

quote:

Originally posted by josh4 Dice the party up into groups and throw under the bus whomever you want. The public doesn't see it that way and they certainly don't separate Bush from Republican or Republican from Conservative.

The public is horribly uninformed. Or, as they say, the masses are asses.

Rush is the ideological leader of the Republican Party. That really is a sad scenario...Divisive politics at its best...

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss How else do you think McCain ended up as the candidate? Because the foolish GOP strategists and pundits saw how the efforts of the Democrats was working so well, and thought the way to victory was to have a candidate that could appeal to independants, democrats, and republicans. Rather than a leader who stands for principles, the pundits and strategists said McCain was the only one who could beat Hillary or Obama because he's shown the ability to "walk across the aisle". He ended up looking like a pandering fool, which is basically what McCain is. In the end, the independants broke for Obama anyway. The GOP has some lame ass strategists these days.

You guys split some hilarious hairs with your whole "who's really republican" thing...

quote:

Originally posted by josh4 Off topic how does CNBC compare to MSNBC or where does it place on the spectrum? I ask because I know some people that watch it and the political leanings of those people are hard to pin down. I've never viewed CNBC so I'm curious

Eh, it's mixed. It caters to Wall Street, so you'd expect a typical more GOP tilt, but you'd be surprised some of the time. Generally they try to focus more on business, but business and politics are so intertwined that they get into both. You'll generally find plenty of opposing viewpoints on it though. The station is horrible though as far as anchors and objectivity go (on both sides).

Too funny:

quote:

During his much-discussed keynote address at the Conservative Political Action Conference on Saturday, Rush Limbaugh accused Barack Obama of pursuing the "bastardization of the U.S. Constitution." It was one of the more politically acidic notes in a speech defined by rambling political assaults. But the conservative talk show host wasn't exactly standing on firm footing. Just a few moments earlier he himself had actually -- not theoretically -- "bastardized" the Constitution by confusing it with the Declaration of Independence. From Limbaugh's speech: quote: We want every American to be the best he or she chooses to be. We recognize that we are all individuals. We love and revere our founding documents, the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. [Applause] We believe that the preamble to the Constitution contains an inarguable truth that we are all endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, among them life. [Applause] Liberty, Freedom. [Applause] And the pursuit of happiness. [Applause] Those of you watching at home may wonder why this is being applauded. We conservatives think all three are under assault. [Applause] Thank you. Thank you. Limbaugh, it seems, meant to say "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness," which, of course, is in the Declaration of Independence.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/...i_n_171029.html

According to Rush we have a right to liberty and pursuit of happiness only as long as we agree with him...

quote:

Originally posted by Clovis You guys split some hilarious hairs with your whole "who's really republican" thing...

It's pretty cut-and-dry... Republicans are us. Democrats are them. That's all there is to it.

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On It's pretty cut-and-dry... Republicans are us. Democrats are them. That's all there is to it.

Libertarians are I.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/...i_n_171029.html

almost as funny as when Obama made up those languages that people in Afghanistan speak. I always chuckle when you quote the Huffpo, after one of their people just got busted for doctoring video by cutting Trace Gallaghers voice saying one thing over John Gibson's who was saying another to make him look racist (to Huff's credit, they fired the guy but that's the kind of people that work over there). See doctored video below, followed by the real video.

http://homepage.mac.com/mkoldys/blog/rex256797662.html

How characteristically irrelevant of you.

quote:

Originally posted by The17sss almost as funny as when Obama made up those languages that people in Afghanistan speak. I always chuckle when you quote the Huffpo, after one of their people just got busted for doctoring video by cutting Trace Gallaghers voice saying one thing over John Gibson's who was saying another to make him look racist (to Huff's credit, they fired the guy but that's the kind of people that work over there). See doctored video below, followed by the real video. http://homepage.mac.com/mkoldys/blog/rex256797662.html

Your article, had you read it, would have informed you that the video was doctored by WBAL-TV (wherever the hell that is)... and just to let you know, HuffPo is a blog... not a newspaper.

quote:

Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On How characteristically irrelevant of you.

And yeah, I don't know how I fall for that shit all the time. Of course his response is to hit the site that hosted the story and not respond to the verifiable fact that Rush doesn't know the Constitution from the Declaration of Independence, which is not exactly like mixing up languages that 98% of Americans have never heard of while not making an attack against someone else for mixing them up.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Your article, had you read it, would have informed you that the video was doctored by WBAL-TV (wherever the hell that is)... and just to let you know, HuffPo is a blog... not a newspaper.

Why the hell did BO call on them for a question at his first Q&A Press Conference? (You may not know the answer. I sure as hell don't.)

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka Why the hell did BO call on them for a question at his first Q&A Press Conference? (You may not know the answer. I sure as hell don't.)

Beats me. But Eric Cantor and other congressmen talk to Matt Cooper at TPM too, and that's assuredly just a blog as well.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.