The Rush Limbaugh LIVE Radio Show Thread - Thursday, November 8, 2012

EIB Network ^ | November 8, 2012 | Rush Limbaugh

[Ingtar]

elections are not about me

This is the group who voted for Romney, even those of us who did not like him but voted anyway. We are outnumbered by those who believe it is, "All about me." There is another group, consisting of that "impressionable middle" the GOP chases in recent elections. This group does not have the courage of any convictions, so remain home on election day at the slightest excuse: line too long, they get busy with something else, not feeling as if they will count... all sorts of reasons.

[Fawn]

I really thought Mitt would of been a great President...I think he was a true Patriot. It’s a damn shame that ppl didn’t see that.....

[thouworm]

“I don’t know, maybe she was on to something, i.e., that their language is really, really important to hispanics. If reaching out to them in their own language could help peel off some significant percentage, why not? I’d like to see a hispanic(as long as they are true conservative) on the 2016 ticket.”

Maybe even more important is the “words” Repubs use, whether in Spanish OR in English. See my post 88. I want to hear more about Luntz’ findings. I think he is on to something Dems already know as a big “DUH.”

[acsrp38]

I know what we all think of the RINOs — however -

NONE of them would have proposed have of the idiot socialist ideas that Obama and the libs did. Even most of the Dems wouldn’t have. (Which is why Reid is stalling all the House bills from the last two years — they would pass with Dems joining in)

RINOs will go along to get along, but they would not actually sponsor those ideas

[Kit cat]

I said I would NEVER, NEVER, EVER vote for Romney, however as I
watched him I grew to believe he was an honorable man NOT a liar!!!
I VOTED Romney I would have walked over broken glass to vote
Romney. In my gut I believe something was fraudulent!!! I will NEVER
believe that ANY conservative would let this man walk back into OUR
White House!!!!

[Kit cat]

Fox launched a Spanish station in September!!!

[upsdriver]

How do you combat negative ads, Rush? You hit back twice as hard. Obama was vulnerable on so many issues. The GOP needs to learn to go after the jugular. Get down and dirty. It works.

[sloop]

well - its not ideal in some ways - it is an out island so it WILL (and is) be hit by hurricanes first - its narrow and has some low areas - so storm surges can be a problem - its utility infrastructure is shaky (it can take 2 years to get a phone)

but - its paradise - pink sand beaches - crystal clear waters - wonderful climate - close to the united states - bedrock is not that far down so building ‘hurricane proof’ is almost possible

the people are very laid back and nice - which is good and bad - getting work done there takes FOREVER - but you know what you are dealing with and the laws are flexible if you grease the skids - its almost as easy as looking at a published table to see what it will cost to bring in outside builders

i have 3020 acres with 4 miles of beach on the atlantic and 4 miles on the lee side - airport nearby with a 6500 foot runway - customs ‘on site’ (meaning you call for a guy to come, but he'll probably tell you to leave the form and go on - or if leaving, to leave the $15 bucks on the counter and go)

not very developed - no walmarts or anything like that so finding hunts brand canned tomatoes might be a problem but you will have some brand available

its a little too type b personality for me but nice - a ‘restaurant’ might literally be someone’s home kitchen with a lady cooking for you

i joked that i would build a hospital there if obamacare stands - europe has india to escape to for medical treatment - we will need the same - maybe bain capital is interested....lol

[Yosemitest]

I've had it with our stinking "Establishment Republicans" who keep blaming conservatives for THEIR LOSES.
And yes, I DID cast a vote for LOSER and "Establishment Republican" Romney, and AGAINST the Arab-Kenyan Barack Hussein Obama II, (a.k.a. Barry Soetoro),
the one guilty of TREASON !
That last caller should have told Rush that Conservatives have little in common with "Establishment Republicans".
Every time "Establishment Republicans" tell us what to do, WE LOSE !
Every time "Establishment Republicans" sell us a COMPROMISING LIBERAL, we lose !
Don't you get it ?
No more MONEY or VOTES for "Establishment Republicans" !

Jack Kerwick's article May 24, 2011 titled The Tea Partier versus The Republican was right.

Thus far, the field of GOP presidential contenders, actual and potential, isn’t looking too terribly promising.

This, though, isn’t meant to suggest that any of the candidates, all things being equal, lack what it takes to insure
that Barack Obama never sees the light of a second term; nor is it the case that I find none of the candidates appealing.
Rather, I simply mean that at this juncture, the party faithful is far from unanimously energized over any of them.

It is true that it was the rapidity and aggressiveness with which President Obama proceeded to impose his perilous designs upon the country
that proved to be the final spark to ignite the Tea Party movement.
But the chain of events that lead to its emergence began long before Obama was elected.
That is, it was actually the disenchantment with the Republican Party under our “compassionate conservative” president, George W. Bush,
which overcame legions of conservatives that was the initial inspiration that gave rise to the Tea Party.

It is this frustration with the GOP’s betrayal of the values that it affirms that accounts for why the overwhelming majority
of those who associate with or otherwise sympathize with the Tea Party movement
refuse to explicitly or formally identify with the Republican Party.
And it is this frustration that informs the Tea Partiers’ threat to create a third party
in the event that the GOP continues business as usual.

If and when those conservatives and libertarians who compose the bulk of the Tea Party, decided that the Republican establishment
has yet to learn the lessons of ’06 and ’08, choose to follow through with their promise,
they will invariably be met by Republicans with two distinct but interrelated objections.

First,
they will be told that they are utopian, “purists” foolishly holding out for an “ideal” candidate.

Second, because virtually all members of the Tea Party would have otherwise voted Republican if not for this new third party,
they will be castigated for essentially giving elections away to Democrats.



Both of these criticisms are, at best, misplaced; at worst, they are just disingenuous.
At any rate, they are easily answerable.

Let’s begin with the argument against “purism.” To this line, two replies are in the coming.


No one, as far as I have ever been able to determine, refuses to vote for anyone who isn’t an ideal candidate.
Ideal candidates, by definition, don’t exist.
This, after all, is what makes them ideal.
This counter-objection alone suffices to expose the argument of the Anti-Purist as so much counterfeit.
But there is another consideration that militates decisively against it.

A Tea Partier who refrains from voting for a Republican candidate who shares few if any of his beliefs
can no more be accused of holding out for an ideal candidate
than can someone who refuses to marry a person with whom he has little to anything in common
be accused of holding out for an ideal spouse.
In other words, the object of the argument against purism is the most glaring of straw men:
“I will not vote for a thoroughly flawed candidate” is one thing;
“I will only vote for a perfect candidate” is something else entirely.



As for the second objection against the Tea Partier’s rejection of those Republican candidates who eschew his values and convictions,
it can be dispensed with just as effortlessly as the first.

Every election season—and at no time more so than this past season—Republicans pledge to “reform Washington,” “trim down” the federal government, and so forth.
Once, however, they get elected and they conduct themselves with none of the confidence and enthusiasm with which they expressed themselves on the campaign trail,
those who placed them in office are treated to one lecture after the other on the need for “compromise” and “patience.”

Well, when the Tea Partier’s impatience with establishment Republican candidates intimates a Democratic victory,
he can use this same line of reasoning against his Republican critics.
My dislike for the Democratic Party is second to none, he can insist.
But in order to advance in the long run my conservative or Constitutionalist values, it may be necessary to compromise some in the short term.

For example,

as Glenn Beck once correctly noted in an interview with Katie Couric,
had John McCain been elected in 2008, it is not at all improbable that, in the final analysis,
the country would have been worse off than it is under a President Obama.
McCain would have furthered the country’s leftward drift,
but because this movement would have been slower,
and because McCain is a Republican, it is not likely that the apparent awakening that occurred under Obama would have occurred under McCain.


It may be worth it, the Tea Partier can tell Republicans, for the GOP to lose some elections if it means that conservatives—and the country—will ultimately win.

If he didn’t know it before, the Tea Partier now knows that accepting short-term loss in exchange for long-term gain is the essence of compromise, the essence of politics.

Ironically, he can thank the Republican for impressing this so indelibly upon him.

I'm fresh out of "patience", and I'm not in the mood for "compromise".
"COMPROMISE" to me IS a dirty word.
Let the RINO's compromise their values, with the conservatives, for a change.

Mitt Romney and the "Establishment Republicans" can go to hell!

[rightwingintelligentsia]

This RINO says he got to know Obama in the Senate? Obama spent hardly any time in the Senate. He was running for Prsident as soon as he got there.

[KittenClaws]

All of the Latino’s/Latina’s [Mexicans] that I know here in W. Texas - and I know plenty personally, voted the Republican ticket.

This sorting people out by race is stupid. It is ideals, character, vision that is most important.

[bluerose]

I agree. They’re a class act family. Such a shame. But Ronald McDonald would have been better than hussein. Then any work that needed to be done could have with Mitt as President. Good luck now, fools.

[RetSignman]

[...first generation, is hard working, they were educated, and the were about owning property and business...]

I know, while I was in Cuba in the 60’s, I talked with them and they hated Castro , they had dreams of coming to America.

[Cboldt]

-- One of my friends in the office here is on suicide watch. --

Obama voter?

Just kidding. There are many things in life, more important than politics. I'd say putting the job at hand ahead of politics is prudent - and good for you too.

[writer33]

Good luck now, fools.

Yep. Enjoy trying to stay employed now.

[MrB]

You know how you can tell when you’re speaking the truth about leftism, leftists, and those that support them?

They FREAK OUT.

This is exactly what is happening with Rush’s analysis of the election.
People vote for the Democrats because of the promise of free stuff without having to work for it. Period. No other concept is more important to ‘rat voters than this.

“They aren’t interested in working for it.”

“THEY AREN’T INTERESTED IN WORKING FOR IT.”

[acsrp38]

EXactly

I want my Obamaphone

[bluerose]

I don’t have time to read all of your rantings but I’ll say two words:

Akin. Mourdock.

[KittenClaws]

“THEY AREN’T INTERESTED IN WORKING FOR IT.”
_________________________________________

Nail on head, MrB.

Red, Yellow, Black, White or Brown and all shades in-between are not the problem.

The problem is out and out laziness created by social engineering - race is just used as a poitn of derision.

[sloop]

and akin

2 seats to the democrapz in the senate

seems their ‘principles’ will assure even more abortions - and they will be funding them