Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Limbaugh defends Newt: Coordinated Avalanche Against Newt Doesn't Match My Memory of Reagan Years
Rush Limbaugh.com ^ | January 26, 2012 | Rush Limbaugh

Posted on 01/26/2012 11:15:49 AM PST by Kaslin

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: How long's it gonna be, folks, before we start seeing billboards all over, Florida, other upcoming primary states with Rick Perry on 'em saying, "Miss me yet?" How long's that gonna be? You remember when they had the George Bush billboards, "Miss me yet?" a couple months into the regime?

Anyway, great to have you here, folks, already Thursday, fastest week in the media. Goes even faster when one of the days you spend 12 hours, ten hours, whatever it was, in an airplane, like I did? Great to have you here, as always, it really is a thrill and a delight. Telephone number if you want to be on the program today, 800-282-2882, and the e-mail address, ElRushbo@eibnet.com.

Boy, this Newt stuff. Did you know any of this Newt stuff, Snerdley? Let's go through the list. By the way, you should know, there's a blog in the Washington Post. It's called The Plum Line and it's written by a guy named Greg Sargent, and I think he used to be at Editor and Publisher back when it was in business. He was one of the guys there when it went out of business. Very, very left-leaning. He's got a post that includes this. "The New York Times reports today -- based on unclear sourcing -- that Mitt Romney has endorsed a strategy of raising doubts about Newt Gingrich’s 'emotional stability.'" And then there are others that are raising questions here about Newt and his mendacity, his forthrightness.

It is incredible. Yeah, yeah. Well, during the CNN debate with John King, he said that he had all kinds of friends that could vouch for the fact that he had never told his wife he wanted an open marriage. And so yesterday Newt in the campaign said, (paraphrasing) "Nope, nope, there aren't any friends. It's just my two daughters. What I said in the debate, that wasn't true." But that's just the tip of the iceberg. Here's the front page of Drudge. Let's give you the headlines.

Newt flashback, 1983: "Reagan Responsible For National Decay." This is Newt saying these things.

Newt 1986: "The Reagan Administration Has Failed, Is Failing."

Newt, 1988: "If Bush Runs As A Continuation Of Reaganism, He Will Lose." Now, of course, Bush ran as a continuation of Reaganism, and he won, and he soundly defeated the loser, Michael Dukakis.

Then here's the story on the debate claim. "During last Thursday’s debate, when CNN moderator John King asked about Marianne Gingrich’s interview on ABC accusing Newt Gingrich of having requested an 'open marriage,' part of Gingrich’s crowd-pleasing answer was this charge: 'Let me be quite clear. The story is false. Every personal friend I have who knew us in that period said the story was false. We offered several of them to ABC to prove it was false. They weren’t interested because they would like to attack any Republican.'

"Now, last night, King reported on his show CNN’s John King, USA that Gingrich had spoken inaccurately when he said that friends had been offered to ABC to rebut the story. 'Well, tonight, after persistent questioning by our staff, the Gingrich campaign concedes now Speaker Gingrich was wrong both in his debate answer and in our interview yesterday,' King said. 'Gingrich spokesman R.C. Hammond says the only people the campaign offered to ABC were the speaker’s two daughters from his first marriage.'" So he's out there, and he told John King during the debate, this is one of the answers that got a standing O. That he'd offered ABC a whole bunch of friends of his to rebut this point that he never said to his wife he wanted an open marriage. That turns out not to be true.

Then there is YouTube video in 1988: "Bush Won't Win If He Runs To Continue Reaganism." Of course, Bush 41 won in a landslide in 1988 and it was largely because the American people wanted four more years of Reagan. There are other examples of this profound criticism of Reagan. Drudge's lead headline is, "Insider: Gingrich Repeatedly Insulted Reagan." Now, when I saw all it is stuff -- and obviously it's a coordinated document dump here, opposition research dump. It's obviously coordinated. And this stuff, by the way, that's on Greg Sargent's blog, Plum Line, that's the thinly sourced stuff in the New York Times about Newt being emotionally unstable and Romney putting that out, that's why Romney is not liked by the Republicans that don't like him. It's that kind of stuff that his campaign puts out.

If you want to know, why do these people hate Romney so much? In 2008, you recall, Huckabee and McCain hated Romney. Now they both love Romney, but back then they hated Romney. It's because of stuff like this. He's doing stuff like this in ads before they had any money to run their own ads. And, I'll tell you what, the way this hit me, I told you people this before. I first heard of Newt Gingrich when he was perhaps the premiere defender of Ronald Reagan. This was in the early 1980s of course, Reagan assumed office in 1981. I was working in Kansas City. Between 1979 and 1983 I was working for the Kansas City Royals. In 1983 I left the Royals and corporate America and went back to radio. I was gonna give it one more shot because that was my passion, it's what I loved and it's what I did best. And I learned that corporate structures were not for me.

But even during those last two years, of course, I'm in my private time which there wasn't a lot of when you work for a professional baseball team, 18-hour days, during home stands and so forth. But nevertheless I was as immersed in politics then as I am now. What's funny is nobody at the Royals knew it because nobody ever talked about it. All you did was talk baseball there. If you talked about anything other than what was in the sports page, there was something wrong with you. So nobody I worked with had any idea that I had any interest whatsoever or knowledge whatsoever in politics. But I'm watching this stuff and what happened was, the moment Reagan's inaugurated, the Democrats, the media, it was as vicious an assault on a human being, on a Republican, as there is today.

Now, those of you who were not paying attention back then or who were too young to pay attention, don't doubt me, it was vicious. And Reagan did not have a media on his side. It was the three networks and CNN and the newspapers. There was no talk radio. There were no blogs, of course. There wasn't the Internet. There was no alternative media. Reagan had National Review. That was his lone ally in the media, William Buckley's National Review. That was it. And early on in the Reagan years, does the name David Stockman ring a bell? David Stockman, the first budget director for Reagan, within the first year goes rogue and says Reaganomics won't work, can't work, it was bad.

It was a total back stab. That's where the name "trickle down" actually got created I think, and became standard vernacular in the popular lexicon. That, and supply-side. And I remember the stories about Reagan taking Stockman to the woodshed. That's a quote from the story. That's how it was described, to get his mind right. But that unleashed a torrent from Tip O'Neill, from every Democrat, I mean all these people. Reagan lied, Bush was right, it is voodoo economics, oh, this is horrible. We were in a great recession at the time here. The Democrats loved what Stockman did, and the guy who self-appointed himself to stop all this was Newt. And that's where I first heard of him.

Newt Gingrich and Bob Walker and a couple of others that were members of what was called the Conservative Opportunity Society, I don't know that it had been named as such yet, but it was a bunch of young, relatively new members of the House on the Republican side who were conservatives. They had special orders every night. Once the House had finished its official business, as long as somebody shows up on the floor of the House to speak, the cameras on C-SPAN stay on. It didn't matter that nobody else was in the House chamber. They stayed on until the last person left the floor. And Newt and his guys were in there five hours a night. They were rotating, each of them would speak for an hour. They would yield to each other. They would interrupt themselves for questions and so forth. But the cameras only were focused on the well. You never knew that there was no audience there, except there was never any applause. You never knew that the House chamber was empty, unless you knew what special orders were.

And this went on for years. And it's where I heard of Newt Gingrich. And Newt had appointed himself the personal defender of Ronald Reagan and had appointed himself the singular person with his buddies to counter all of what he thought were the lies of the day being spouted by the media and the Democrats. Then I leave the Royals and I get back into radio. And I decide that I want to get this guy Gingrich on the air to have a chat with, and it was difficult. Couldn't do it. The requests that Gingrich were getting were overwhelming; he wasn't really interested in doing a lot of them. He didn't really have a whole lot of time.

The station I was working on was owned by the Mormon church, Bonneville Broadcasting. It turned out that somebody inside Bonneville Broadcasting unearthed a contact that was able to get to Newt, and I got an interview with him for about 20 or 25 minutes. I don't remember anything about the interview. These are just little details here to spice up the story. But this went on for years. These special orders went on for years, and it wasn't just the defense of Reagan. Newt Gingrich was ripping the Speaker of the House at the time, Tip O'Neill; and when Tip left and "Fort Worthless" Jim Wright came in, the assault continued.

It was everything you wish was happening today, is all I can tell you. It was everything you wish the entire Republican Party was doing today. It was let by Newt Gingrich, and what was he doing? He was defending Reagan. Now, all of this stuff that hit Drudge and everywhere else last night about Newt telling everybody the country goes to hell if they continue Reaganism and that Newt insulted Reagan and that the Reagan administration failed and Iran-Contra... I never heard any of that. I started doing this particular program in Sacramento in 1984, and I was just as immersed in national politics then as I am now, and I could honestly tell you this.

I'm not denying it happened, don't misunderstand. I just telling you, because it did happen. I've got the audio; the YouTube video is out there. Newt did say this stuff. I just don't remember it. I don't remember anybody in 1988 telling George Bush, "You're gonna lose big if you just continue Reagan," because the whole Republican Party strategy was to fool Republicans into thinking that that's what Bush was gonna do. Their whole strategy was to tell the Republicans, "Okay, I'm going to." I remember George Bush at that New Orleans convention. His theme was, "I'm gonna complete my mission," and it was based off the fact he had been shot down in World War II.

They had the video of him being rescued at sea after his plane was shot down. He had to parachute out of his plane to be shot down. Great hero story. "Complete my mission." It was all intertwined with continuing what had happened after Reagan, economically. Now, you people know that I am blessed with a pretty good memory. And I don't remember Newt Gingrich in the 1980s -- I'm not denying it happened. I'm just telling you, this stuff was a total shock to me last night when I learned that Newt had said this stuff. (interruption) I don't know. Well, we've got the audio and we'll listen to it and see whether it was off the cuff or what, 'cause Newt does... (interruption)

It's like... (interruption) Well, it's like... (interruption) He does. The latest thing he blurted out is a moon colony. We're gonna have a moon colony, get 13,000 people on the moon, and make it the 51st state. And we can have honeymoons in space, honeymoons and weddings in space. It would be really funny because of weightlessness. Wait 'til people find out how much fun you can have when you're weightless! This stuff just came rolling out yesterday. Now, here's the problem with that. Here we are in Florida and Obama has effectively killed the space program so obviously Newt says (summarized), "Hey, I got an idea for space: We'll colonize the moon!

"We'll make at it 51st state, we'll have weddings and honeymoons and weightlessness." Well, the problem with that is the other part of his campaign is focused on reducing spending and reforming entitlements and some modification in health care spending, Social Security spending. So you're in a state where that is a crucially important thing to people. I mean, you're telling them to do all that and then at the same time you're gonna go colonize the moon. It's a disconnect. But that would fall under the category of "grandiose," and it just came out of nowhere. Then National Review Online has a DEVASTATING piece on Newt.

Elliott Abrams, who was in the Reagan administration for foreign policy. Elliott Abrams is married to the daughter of Norman Podhoretz. Elliott Abrams is of impeccable, reputation and character. I think Elliott Abrams... In fact, last time he was at the White House he was walking out of the West Wing as I walked in. He's always been nice, stopped, shook my hand, thanked me for saving the country. (These guys always say that, then they smile and walk off.) But anyway, this piece by Elliott Abrams, it just slices and dices with the most harmless tone. There nothing vicious about it.

You've got another piece by Bob Tyrrell (known in public as R. Emmett Tyrrell. He started the American Spectator.) It just dumps on Newt, and Elliott Abrams' piece specifically focuses on Newt's relationship with Reagan and how there really wasn't one. So this is obviously a coordinated attack that's designed to take Newt out here in Florida. That's what's going on. It's happening. We all knew stuff like this was gonna happen. We all worry about when candidates are gonna implode and this kind of thing. My only point here is: I didn't know any of this stuff. That's the only thing I'm telling you, and I was shocked when I read it.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: You've got Nancy Reagan. People have produced, I think, either a letter or a video from Nancy Reagan saying that Newt would be the obvious inheritor of Reaganism. And you've got Michael Reagan, Ronald Reagan's son, who's endorsed Newt. This Elliott Abrams piece, though, folks, of all the stuff that's out there is probably the most devastating because Elliott Abrams' credentials are impeccable. He almost went to jail for the cause. For example, here's one thing he says about Newt: "As a new member of Congress in the Reagan years -- and I was an assistant secretary of state -- Gingrich voted with the president regularly, but equally often spewed insulting rhetoric at Reagan, his top aides and his policies to defeat communism. Gingrich was voluble and certain in predicting that Reagan's policies would fail, and in all of this he was dead wrong." That's the tone of the entire piece by Elliott Abrams. But there's more than just an opposition research document dump here going on. You have Elliott Abrams, Bob Tyrrell coming out with some of this stuff. It is overwhelming, and it happens in one day.

END TRANSCRIPT


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Breaking News; Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: elections; florida; gingrich; newt; waronnewt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-79 next last

1 posted on 01/26/2012 11:15:51 AM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Drudgereport has become a Newtbashingpoluzia today.


2 posted on 01/26/2012 11:18:34 AM PST by Biggirl ("Jesus talked to us as individuals"-Jim Vicevich/Thanks JimV!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The only reason the left and the RION’s are so intent to wage war on Newt is because they all know that Newt can defeat the Kenyan-In-Chief this November and they also know that Romney absolutely will continue the tradition of Dole and McCain by losing to a Democrat.


3 posted on 01/26/2012 11:24:52 AM PST by MeganC (No way in Hell am I voting for Mitt Romney. Not now, not ever. Deal with it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I would think that conservatives ("conservative" - meaning commitment to founding ideas) would be more interested in what Romney was defending and criticizing during those years. You know, "Let him who casts the first stone . . . ."

Romney may have used a clever tactic in his attempt to minimize Gingrich's contributions or work during the Reagan years. The point may not be whether Reagan "mentioned" him, but where was Romney during that period and what contribution was he making to conservatism?

Methinks Romney supporters protest too much in their Pelosi-like efforts to discredit Gingrich. By doing so, they may discredit themselves and their authenticity as spokespersons for conservatism.

Hopefully, the unveiling of the video of Nancy Reagan's words might reveal Romney's misleading comments about Gingrich's links to Reagan and the conservative cause of that era.

Voters might ask, where were Romney's efforts in the conservative victories during those years. When Brian Williams asked about any such efforts, Romney seemed to think that raising a family and starting a business career in a "consulting firm" qualified as contributing to the "conservative movement."

In the meantime, during those same years, other business men and women were spending their dollars and their time out there warning citizens that if they didn't rein in their elected representatives in government and return to constitutional principles, the free enterprise system which allowed them the freedom to "raise a family" and "work in the private sector" might disappear from the earth.

Working in what Romney calls "the private sector" and working to preserve the Founders' "freedom of individual enterprise" principle which underlies all the other freedoms Americans enjoy are two very different things.

Romney has done the first: Gingrich has done the latter.

Krauthammer's frank assessment of the apparent incapability of Romney to explain conservative ideas is a telling evaluation. By the way, ordinary citizens out here know the difference between fast talk, blinking eyes, discomfort when asked to define "conservatism", shifting to another subject entirely, versus the Gingrich ability take a question, calmly set the answer in a context of understanding, and provide more depth of explanation than the questioner implied.

When viewing, it's like the difference between a used car lot salesman avoiding the CarFax question and a Lexus commercial. One just "gets" the difference.

4 posted on 01/26/2012 11:31:54 AM PST by loveliberty2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeganC

Michael Reagan just did an interview with Megyn Kelly about an hour ago on Fox and backed Newt being a Reagan supporter. Said Elliott Abrams probably did not support tearing down the wall either like a lot of others and SO WHAT? Does that mean they did not support Reagan? No! I am waiting for that interview to post online and then I will put it up on FR.


5 posted on 01/26/2012 11:32:06 AM PST by sheikdetailfeather (It's a Newtiful Day today!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sheikdetailfeather

Ronald Reagan didn’t believe in surrounding himself with “yes” men, he wanted lively debate between members of his administration on certain issues.


6 posted on 01/26/2012 11:33:35 AM PST by dfwgator (Don't wake up in a roadside ditch. Get rid of Romney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl

>>>Drudgereport has become a Newtbashingpoluzia today.

Drudge is giving Newt a full Alinsky.


7 posted on 01/26/2012 11:34:15 AM PST by Keith in Iowa (Willard Romney, purveyor of the world's finest bullmitt. | FR Class of 1998 |)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

If Reaganism means cut taxes and borrow then I’d be against that too. Those deficits cost us a lot of goodwill and W Bush didn’t help by following that formula.

Newt was the only one who gave us the winning formula of cutting taxes and balancing the budget. Of course, establishment Republicans don’t like that because it means giving up their pet programs.


8 posted on 01/26/2012 11:38:21 AM PST by ari-freedom (If SOPA/PIPA passes, we will lose our Free Republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeganC

“The only reason the left and the RION’s are so intent to wage war on Newt is ... “

Something is going on. Washington is filled with opportunists. If Newt were all that promising, there would be plenty of people trying to get close to him to cash in on his success.

Something isn’t right.


9 posted on 01/26/2012 11:39:30 AM PST by brownsfan (Aldous Huxley and Mike Judge were right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MeganC; Biggirl

Michael Reagan was earlier on Megan Kelly’s America Alive and he confirmed that Newt has always been pro Reagan


10 posted on 01/26/2012 11:40:28 AM PST by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Drudge is trying to rewrite history today.....


11 posted on 01/26/2012 11:42:25 AM PST by FreedomProtector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

It was hard for me to figure out where Rush was coming from today, and what point he was trying to make by continually pleading his own ignorance of the facts. I kept waiting for him to conjecture on some explanation for the comments he was talking about being on YouTube, but all he said was that it was totally schocking to him that the comments had actually taken place.


12 posted on 01/26/2012 11:43:48 AM PST by Burkean (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Rush was quick to rush to Romney’s aid when the Bain ads came out, and he is equally quick to pile onto Newt, while claiming he isn’t doing that. It’s his show, and his business who he really wants, though he won’t admit it. This way he won’t have difficulty bashing President Romney when taxes go up, we get Mittcare and bigger government. He can always claim he didn’t endorse anyone.


13 posted on 01/26/2012 11:45:57 AM PST by pallis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomProtector

Reminds me of how Stalin covered up the fact that Lenin warned the rest of the Politburo not to allow Stalin to succeed him, Stalin managed to rewrite history, claiming that Lenin had indeed hand-picked him.

He who controls the past, controls the future.


14 posted on 01/26/2012 11:46:22 AM PST by dfwgator (Don't wake up in a roadside ditch. Get rid of Romney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Keith in Iowa

If someone other than Romney is the Candidate are all these characters going to join the Controlled Media chorus for the Total State and the Dear Leader? I couldn’t have imagined Tyrell throwing grenades at Gingrich in favor of Romney.


15 posted on 01/26/2012 11:46:53 AM PST by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's "Economics In One Lesson.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: sheikdetailfeather

I did see it too, and will check for the video after the program


16 posted on 01/26/2012 11:48:49 AM PST by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Limbaugh is flummoxed.

obviously it's a coordinated document dump here, opposition research dump. It's obviously coordinated. And this stuff, by the way, that's on Greg Sargent's blog, Plum Line, that's the thinly sourced stuff in the New York Times about Newt being emotionally unstable and Romney putting that out, that's why Romney is not liked by the Republicans that don't like him. It's that kind of stuff that his campaign puts out.

You're damned right about that, Mr. Limbaugh.

Problem is, this "dumping" is exposing all the dirty characters, and their dirty machinery, and their dirty waste. And with the most important election of our lifetimes at stake, maybe we don't want to "take it."

P.S. There's nothing "impeccable" about people who are out to bury good people.

17 posted on 01/26/2012 11:49:44 AM PST by GVnana (Newt 2012 - He Speaks for Us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Limbaugh gave Specter his microphone, to prevail in a GOP primary. Rush is a party man, when the chips are down.


18 posted on 01/26/2012 11:50:15 AM PST by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pallis

He wasn’t rushing to Romney’s aid, he just didn’t like that Gingrich attacked capitalism and there were others who didn’t like it either


19 posted on 01/26/2012 11:54:24 AM PST by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

All this tells me is that Rush has gotten very lazy. He is more and more a reactionary all the time. He is uninformed and it is embarrassing for a former supporter like me.


20 posted on 01/26/2012 12:01:41 PM PST by david1313 (Newt all the way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Perhaps he did so, because at that time Specter was the chairman of the judicial committee and he wanted to make sure the Supreme Court nominations of Samuel Alito and John F. Roberts would go through


21 posted on 01/26/2012 12:04:04 PM PST by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I’m only reading this, not hearing audio, but it seems Rush is shocked in a Claude Rains way, and not displeased. Well, I can live without Rush too, if that’s the case.


22 posted on 01/26/2012 12:12:00 PM PST by Lady Lucky (A tea party in name only is worse than no tea party at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I disagree. I didn’t like the attack on capitalism either, but Rush approached his reproach with a flair that went beyond a defense of Romney’s right to practice good business. I’m sure a lot of people here would agree with that. Rush has been soft on Romney all along, and quick to take a hit on Newt. At least that’s my take, and I try to listen for awhile each day.


23 posted on 01/26/2012 12:13:02 PM PST by pallis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl

Drudge used to (still does?) date Ann Coulter. Is he under her thrall?


24 posted on 01/26/2012 12:13:20 PM PST by luvbach1 (Stop the destruction in 2012 or continue the decline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I have pretty good recollections of those early 80s, in the heady days of the Reagan Revolution. One recollection is of a young group of conservative republicans, most of whom were swept into office in 1980 with Reagan’s coattails, who became increasingly vocal against and mutinous of both the old guard GOP and the heavy handed rule of Tip O’Neil. This group was called the “Young Turks”, they were my heros and their leader was a conservative congressman from Georgia — Newt Gingrich.

Now, Newt might have gone off the reservation at various times over the last few years, and deserves some criticism for this; but the people who today are trying to portray Newt Gingrich as an insignificant minor player in the 1980s are LYING. To any conservative who was paying attention to politics in the 1980s, Newt Gingrich, Phil Crane, Bob Dornan and, a little later, Dick Armey were all household names.


25 posted on 01/26/2012 12:17:41 PM PST by kevao
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Here is more

RUSH: Now, back to this Newt stuff. I got a note from Jeffrey Lord. Jeffrey Lord writes for the American Spectator, which is Bob Tyrrell's bunch. Bob Tyrrell has a devastating piece: Newt is Bill Clinton, only worse! Oh, it's devastating. This Elliott Abrams piece is devastating. And they all happen the same day. So Jeffrey Lord sais: Wait a minute now, Nancy Reagan, 1985, Goldwater Institute, after the Reagan era -- and Jeff Lord says, "Believe me, if Nancy Reagan thought for a nanosecond that Newt was anti-Reagan, she would never have been on the same platform with him." I can vouch for that. I've never seen a more protective wife of anybody than Nancy Reagan. If you in your life said one thing against Ronald Reagan, you were gone. You were banished. You were never allowed to be in the same room.

Talk to the people who knew them both and worked with them, and they'll confirm that. So Jeff Lord says (paraphrased), "Well, if all this that we're hearing yesterday's true, what the hell's Nancy Reagan doing out there giving Newt basically a huge award?" She said, "The dramatic movement of 1995," that was going on then, "is an outgrowth of a much earlier crusade that goes back half a century. Barry Goldwater handed the torch to Ronnie," her husband, "and in turn Ronnie turned the torch over to Newt and the Republican members of Congress to keep that dream alive." That's Nancy Reagan in 1985. Now, Jeff Lord worked in the Reagan White House.

He's posted that Elliott Abrams never said a word to him at the time about Newt, not one. And Jeff says, "Suffice to say the political office of the Reagan White House made it our job to defend Reagan from Republican members of Congress. I never heard any criticism of Newt, either, firsthand from Elliott or secondhand from anybody else," and then he posts his take on all it is at American Spectator. So what do we have here? Tyrrell says that Newt Gingrich is Bill Clinton without Clinton's charm. This is a long list of people here who have just come out both barrels blazing on the same day or within close proximity of the same day: Elliott Abrams, Bob Tyrrell, Drudge, Brit Hume of Fox News, Dr. Krauthammer, the New York Sun, the National Review, Vin Weber.

We've got the audio. I don't have it ready to play yet. It's back in the stack somewhere. I'll find it eventually, but he did say all this stuff. I just didn't know it. That's what has me stunned. My memory of Newt Gingrich is as a premiere defender of Ronald Reagan. So this stuff caught me totally by surprise. And all these people -- Elliott Abrams, Bob Tyrrell, Dr. Krauthammer -- have impeccable credentials. And then there's this. This is a post at The Corner, National Review Online. "Operation Chaos in Reverse." It's actually a front page Washington Post story. "Liberal Groups Join in Florida Ad War Against Romney -- Newt Gingrich isn't the only one trying to beat Romney in Florida.

"Several liberal groups are funding new ad campaigns in Florida, targeting the vulnerable GOP presidential candidate, part of an unusually bold effort by Democrat supporters to bolster Obama's chances in November by influencing the Republican primaries." So the Democrats are doing Operation Chaos here in Florida. The unions are running anti-Romney ads, big time, all over the state. This is an expensive media market. There are ten sizeable, significant media markets in the state of Florida. You need a lot of money to saturate this state with TV ads. And these pro-Obama people are coming in. You've got a $1 million add bye from the American Federation of State County, Municipal, Employees. That's the nation's largest public employee union. They're focusing on Romney's history as head of Bain Capital.

SEIU and Priorities USA Action, a pro-Obama super PAC, have also jointly launched a Spanish-language radio campaign in Florida accusing Romney of having two faces, and they're even... Reuters has a hit piece on Marco Rubio coming tomorrow. I mean, folks, everybody involved in politics with a vested interest has opened both barrels of the shotgun and are firing at everybody. Every Republican of note and of stature is under a full-fledged assault in this state today. If you didn't know better after this Reuters piece, you would think that Marco Rubio contributed money to Adolf Hitler's campaign. That's how bad this hit piece is.

It just all over. Newt was on Univision. He was on Univision, and he was talking some weeks ago how he gave depositions in his divorce case. There weren't any depositions in his divorce case. He didn't give any depositions. His wife told the media there weren't any depositions. So everybody is scratching their heads. "Why would Newt say that all kinds of friends were available to prove to ABC? Why would he do this? Why would he tell ABC that he had all kinds of friends who could back up his claim that his wife was lying, Marianne was lying that he never did ask for an open marriage -- and then tells Univision that he had depositions in his divorce when there weren't any depositions?"

Then this grandiose stuff with the moon colony! Ha. You add all this up, it's amazing. You know, I had hopes that this campaign would go on and on and on and on all the way to the convention, and I'll tell you something that's happened. Folks, Romney's getting hit, too. Romney's doing his own version. He's got some imploding going on out there with Romneycare. There's a devastating ad that somebody's put together, pointing out that Obamacare is Romneycare. Oh, it's one of Newt's super PACs. And then there's another ad that makes the bridge, completes the bridge from Romneycare to Obamacare and does it with Romney's two advisers that went from Massachusetts to the Oval Office. The point is one guy is emerging entirely unscathed in all of this, and that's Santorum.

Santorum, nobody is saying a negative word about. He's not under assault by anybody. And we want this campaign to go on and on. There are two reasons. There are two primary reasons that we want this campaign to go on. I know a lot of people are panicked. They can't handle all this negative stuff about Republicans in the media every day, but it's going to happen. If they have to lie and make stuff up, this is going to happen. Republicans are hit every day in the media. There's no way this can be stopped. You're just gonna have to come to grips with it. There's nothing I can do, there's nothing anybody can do to stop the media assault on any Republican candidate or high-profile personality.

So it's gonna happen. What we don't want to happen... If we happen to choose a nominee after Florida, if our race is essentially over after Florida and we have our nominee -- either after Super Tuesday or right at Super Tuesday -- then guess what? Obama can start his focused negative ads on our nominee in March and run them continually through the election. If the campaign can be dragged out, no winner until right before the convention, then Obama can't focus specifically on the nominee. They have to focus on everybody that's running and it could delay him, and Obama's got a lot of money. One of the ways of equalizing the disparity in the money is to have a long, drawn-out campaign that delays Obama's focused spending anti- our nominee.

'Cause we can compete financially in a two, three-month campaign that starts in September, but we can't keep up with 'em starting in March, or it would be hard. The preferable way... The second reason is, keep this conservative debate going in the news, in the media each and every day. So as long as Obama doesn't know who specifically to destroy, he's gotta aim at everybody. That means dividing and diluting his resources. Newt's also stepped in it, too. He said that he was a Goldwater supporter when he was a Rockefeller state chair. These are the kinds of things, as you heard in the early part of the campaign, people worry about what Newt is going to say at any time, and you don't know here it's gonna come from and you don't know... (interruption) Yeah, he did say it. He said he's a Goldwater supporter. He was a Rockefeller state chair. He was a regional chair for Rockefeller. (interruption) Nelson Rockefeller. Yeah. Yeah. The Rockefeller wing of the party. Correct. Exactly right.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Here's some audio. And welcome back. Rush Limbaugh, half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.

Tom DeLay has joined the fray. Tom DeLay is now saying Newt Gingrich is another Bill Clinton. DeLay says, (paraphrasing) "Yeah, we'd have leadership meetings almost every day and every day Newt had a new agenda. Nothing was ever organized." You know, the criticism is a lot of people say Romney doesn't believe in anything and Newt believes in everything. It just depends on the day. Now, if Romney's behind this attack, we may have to rethink our opinion of his cut 'em off at the knees talents. The question is, whoever's doing this, do you think they have the guts to do this against Obama? That's the real question. (interruption) You do? Have you seen any evidence of this? Have you seen any evidence the Republican Party's willing to go after Obama like they're going after each other? I haven't.

I hope that Elliott Abrams and Bob Tyrrell and the rest of them will have just as much fire against Obama as they do Newt. I hope that we see this same kind of focused opposition to Obama once that day comes. I really do. Snerdley says, "Oh, yeah, no doubt." Really? Where's the evidence? Where's the evidence that anybody in our party's got the guts to go after Obama the way they're going after Newt here, the way they've gone after Perry, the way some of them have gone after Romney, where's the evidence? We don't have the evidence. We have to wait and see. And I'll bet you a bunch of people in this audience, if you ask 'em to make a bet, they would bet the Republican Party doesn't have the guts to go after Democrats the way they're going after themselves. I'll just bet you. We'll find out. We'll ask 'em when I get to the phones tomorrow. Just kidding. We'll get to the phones today. Here's Romney. This is an ad and you'll hear Gingrich in this ad. This is a pro-Romney super PAC Restore Our Future ad.

GINGRICH: I worked with President Ronald Reagan. Worked with Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan playbook. President Reagan. Reagan. Reagan.

ANNOUNCER: Gingrich exaggerates, dropping Reagan's name 50 times. But in his diaries Reagan mentioned Gingrich only once. Reagan criticized Gingrich, saying, Newt's ideas, quote, "would cripple our defense program."

RUSH: April 11th, 1988, Gingrich on a show, host says, "Can the vice president run as Bush on the issues that provided such success for Reagan?"

GINGRICH: I don't think so at all. I think that the years of 1980-1984 are the past, and the American people are a people peculiarly addicted to the future. If George Bush runs as a continuation of Reaganism, I think he'll lose because I think on Election Day the American people, given a choice between more of eight years or something new, will vote for something new.

RUSH: So that's one of the things circulating. And this is January 13th, 2008, four years ago on This Week with George "Snuffleufagus."

GINGRICH: We are at the end of the Reagan era. We're at a point in time when we're about to start redefining, as a number of people have started talking about, that we're starting to redefine the nature of the Republican Party in response to what the country needs.

RUSH: Newt was one of the early signatories to the premise "the era of Reagan is over." That's 2008. (imitating Newt) "We're at the end of the Reagan era here, in 1988. Nah, nah years of '80, '84, that's the past, American people peculiarly addicted to the future. If George Bush runs as a continuation of Reaganism, he'll lose." Newt was wrong. The stuff's out there. Last night was the first time, and I was shocked, 'cause I know everything, and I remember everything, and I had never heard that stuff before.

BREAK TRANSCRIPt

largeRUSH: Bob Dole has gone nuclear. Bob Dole said, "Hey, hey, don't leave me out of this." Dole, National Review Online on The Corner blog: "I have not been critical of Newt Gingrich but it is now time to take a stand before it is too late. If Gingrich is the nominee it will have an adverse impact on Republican candidates running for county, state, and federal offices. Hardly anyone who served with Newt in Congress has endorsed him and that fact speaks for itself. He was a one-man-band who rarely took advice. It was his way or the highway.

"Gingrich served as Speaker from 1995 to 1999 and had trouble within his own party. Already in 1997 a number of House members wanted to throw him out as Speaker. But he hung on until after the 1998 elections when the writing was on the wall. His mounting ethics problems caused him to resign in early 1999. I know whereof I speak as I helped establish a line of credit of $150,000 to help Newt pay off the fine for his ethics violations. In the end, he paid the fine with money from other sources. Gingrich had a new idea every minute and most of them were off the wall. He loved picking a fight with Bill Clinton because he knew this would get the attention of the press. This and a myriad of other specifics helped to topple Gingrich in 1998.

"In my run for the presidency in 1996 the Democrats greeted me with a number of negative TV ads and in every one of them Newt was in the ad. He was very unpopular and I am not only certain that this did not help me, but that it also cost House seats that year. Newt would show up at the campaign headquarters with an empty ice-bucket in his hand -- that was a symbol of some sort for him -- and I never did know what he was doing or why he was doing it." Imagine that picture. Newt Gingrich showing up at headquarters with an empty ice bucket. (laughing) Of all the things that Bob Dole remembers to include in this piece.

"In my opinion if we want to avoid an Obama landslide in November, Republicans should nominate Governor Romney as our standard bearer. He has the requisite experience in the public and private sectors. He would be a president we could have confidence in." So it is both barrels.

Back to the audio sound bites. Nancy Reagan in Phoenix, the Goldwater Institute dinner in 1995. Number 26, 27, and 28.

NANCY: The dramatic movement of 1995 is an outgrowth of a much earlier crusade that goes back half a century. Barry Goldwater handed the torch to Ronnie, and in turn Ronnie turned that torch over to Newt and the Republican members of Congress to keep that dream alive.

RUSH: Ronnie turned the torch over to Newt and the Republican members of Congress. Nancy Reagan. Now, she obviously didn't know that Newt had been out there saying, "The era of Reagan was over" in 1988. If she'd-a known that she wouldn't have said this. Here's Newt Monday night in Tampa, he's live on NBC. This is during the debate. Brian Williams said, "Mr. Speaker, you've been talking a lot about conservative principles in this campaign so far. Is that enough for you? Is that good enough to get you through here?"

GINGRICH: Look, I don't want to spend my time commenting on Mitt. I'd like to just tell you that I started -- I went to a Goldwater organizing session in 1964. I met with Ronald Reagan for the first time in 1974. I worked with Jack Kemp and Art Laffer and others to develop supply-side economics in the late seventies.

RUSH: Okay. That's from the debate Monday night. Let's go back to April 11th, 1988, a Washington news program, Newt Gingrich.

GINGRICH: I think this party in that sense is a very different party than it was, say, from the fights of the years of the Rockefeller/Goldwater process. A period in which, by the way, I was a Rockefeller state chairman in the south.

RUSH: Snerdley can't believe it. (laughing) Snerdley's mouth, his chin is on the desktop. (imitating Newt) "I tell you, I went to a Goldwater organizing session in 1964. I met with Reagan for the first time..." Both of these could be true. He could have gone to a Goldwater organizing session in '64, didn't like it, and joined the Rockefeller campaign. But it does sound like back in 1988, I'll say this -- (interruption) Well, you got a debate tonight. It's obvious they're clearing the field for Romney. Back in 1988's Newt's making it plain he was a Rockefeller Republican. And, by the way, in 1988 that was your ticket to the establishment.

Remember, folks, the Republican establishment never liked Reagan. I know I say this over and over again. He didn't like Reagan. He was Rockefeller's state chair in 1968 in the south. In 1968, he was a Rockefeller state chairman, talks about going to a Goldwater meeting in '64. Remember, now, in 1988 the establishment was happy. They couldn't wait to get rid of -- in fact, Jeff Lord at American Spectator has written about some of the things that happened when the Bush 41 people showed up and took over the West Wing. They got rid of all the Reagan stuff. I forget the specifics. But in 1988 your ticket to the top of the GOP was to sign up for being a moderate. So at least best you could say maybe Newt was practicing opportunism there.

So that's that. That's the Newt stuff. It was kinder, gentler, the Bush 41 kinder, gentler. Thousand points of light. I was number 732, if you remember. I was number 732 of the thousand points of light. I even printed a certificate. I figured out how to use Pagemaker, so I printed my own certificate. I was number 732 out of a thousand points of light.

END TRANSCRIPT

26 posted on 01/26/2012 12:20:31 PM PST by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

This is just...weird. It’s almost as if Newt just has “bad days” where he’s pissed at everyone and sometimes, it might have been Reagan.


27 posted on 01/26/2012 12:29:13 PM PST by RockinRight (If you're waiting to drink until you find pure water, you're going to die of dehydration.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


28 posted on 01/26/2012 12:48:39 PM PST by RedMDer (Forward With Confidence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; loveliberty2; MHGinTN; All

Below is the First response to an article linked below. It could make a great Newt thread on it’s own. If the titles of the links were in the post it would make it even more compelling.


http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/newt-gingrich-in-1988-bush-wont-win-if-he-runs-t

Michael Anthony
Sorry folks but all of these know nothings attacking are all shills for Romney. The Romney is inevitable crowd are playing a serious game of lies now caught big time. Don’t ask any leftist about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan Nat’l Security Advisor Bud McFarlane: http://bit.ly/zd9eAF.

Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan Economist Art Laffer: http://bit.ly/xEDETi.

Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan WH political director Jeffrey Lord: http://bit.ly/zw2ZMb.

Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials/Ask Reagan Policy Analyst Peter Ferrara http://bit.ly/zq1QxI.

Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan bonafides. Ask Reagan media consultant Richard Quinn: http://on.msnbc.com/y2sPM2.

Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan’s Speechwriting Dir. Bently Elliott: http://thedc.com/xOkDvA.

Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan’s older son Michael Reagan: http://bit.ly/yYVy7L.

Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Ronald Reagan’s beloved wife Nancy: http://bit.ly/zrWvAw.


29 posted on 01/26/2012 1:03:00 PM PST by cpforlife.org (A Catholic Respect Life Curriculum is available 4 FREE at CpForLife.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I don’t remember this, either. I do know that Newt has run his mouth a lot. Am I supposed to get all bothered about this?


30 posted on 01/26/2012 1:40:24 PM PST by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl
Drudgereport has become a Newtbashingpoluzia today.

What do you mean today? Politico had a story last June that talked about the fact that in the previous 13 months, there was only one negative reference to Romney, and that was just a headline about Bachmann outraising Romney for a few days. Not exactly a negative headline.

Drudge is in the bag for Romney - one of Romney's campaign people is good friends with Drudge.
31 posted on 01/26/2012 2:19:59 PM PST by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Keith in Iowa
"Drudge is giving Newt a full Alinsky."

And Mitt a full Lewinsky.

32 posted on 01/26/2012 3:16:24 PM PST by Jim Robinson (Rebellion is not just brewing, rebellion is here!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Drudge AND Limbaugh are OLD news now and they just pushed themselves further off the cliff of relevancy.


33 posted on 01/26/2012 3:18:27 PM PST by austinaero (Obama or America - can't have both)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; onyx; trisham; TheOldLady; DJ MacWoW; JoeProBono; RedMDer; musicman; Lady Jag; MEG33; ...

Long read, but Rush Limbaugh defends Newt!!


34 posted on 01/26/2012 3:21:11 PM PST by Jim Robinson (Rebellion is not just brewing, rebellion is here!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: austinaero

Rush is defending Newt here! Read it through.


35 posted on 01/26/2012 3:22:18 PM PST by Jim Robinson (Rebellion is not just brewing, rebellion is here!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: pallis

Rush is GOP Establishment. He just plays a conservative on radio until push comes to shove.

I don’t know how other Freepers feel but I am...this close...to dumping the GOP across the board and walking away. I can’t participate in empowering treason. It’s all a bunch of “how can we fool ‘em next” B.S. and has been for a long time.


36 posted on 01/26/2012 3:22:59 PM PST by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
This whole thing is very odd. Makes me think that Newt is off the script, and that is why he is under attack. It was supposed to be Mitt's turn, and everyone was supposed to play along. Newt didn't.
37 posted on 01/26/2012 3:27:38 PM PST by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: luvbach1

Drudge is gay... Coulter’s gay... Drudge is dating Coulter... Coulter is dating Bill Maher...

FR has been tying itself in knots lately.


38 posted on 01/26/2012 3:28:21 PM PST by WhistlingPastTheGraveyard (Some men just want to watch the world burn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SaraJohnson

“Rush is GOP Establishment. He just plays a conservative on radio until push comes to shove....

...I don’t know how other Freepers feel but I am...this close...to dumping the GOP across the board and walking away. I can’t participate in empowering treason.”

Sara, I feel the exact same way. The Establishment has to be beaten. I’m giving more money to Newt tonight. Myth is nominated...I will call off work the next day to nix my registration as a Republican.


39 posted on 01/26/2012 3:29:14 PM PST by rbmillerjr (Conservative Economic and National Security Commentary: econus.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: SaraJohnson

I’ve been there for some years now.

The BS is up to the roof tops.


40 posted on 01/26/2012 3:29:32 PM PST by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

Click


Support Free Republic!

41 posted on 01/26/2012 3:30:42 PM PST by RedMDer (Forward With Confidence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Bump!


42 posted on 01/26/2012 3:32:47 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; Syncro; RedMDer; Kaslin; DJ MacWoW; TitansAFC; greyfoxx39; Lakeshark; Windflier

I listened to Rush today!

Finally, he understands the dirty politics of Romney, whose insatiable lust for power will stop at nothing to achieve its goal.

Of course the cowardly liar can’t bring himself to call obama “a socialist” but it’s -OK to lie and smear our patriot, conservative Newt Gingrich, because conservatives are Romney’s enemies along with the enemies of the GOP-E and whole damn lot of Newt haters!

REBELLION IS ON!!!

GO NEWT!!

GO TEA PARTY!!!


43 posted on 01/26/2012 3:34:15 PM PST by onyx (PLEASE SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC - DONATE MONTHLY! If you want on Sarah Palin's Ping List, let me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: RedMDer

BUMP TO THE TOP!!!


44 posted on 01/26/2012 3:35:06 PM PST by onyx (PLEASE SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC - DONATE MONTHLY! If you want on Sarah Palin's Ping List, let me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

No matter how many times I read it, that’s a VERY watery defense. :(


45 posted on 01/26/2012 3:35:41 PM PST by Lady Lucky (A tea party in name only is worse than no tea party at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org

Sorry folks but all of these know nothings attacking are all shills for Romney. The Romney is inevitable crowd are playing a serious game of lies now caught big time. Don’t ask any leftist about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan Nat’l Security Advisor Bud McFarlane: http://bit.ly/zd9eAF.

Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan Economist Art Laffer: http://bit.ly/xEDETi.

Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan WH political director Jeffrey Lord: http://bit.ly/zw2ZMb.

Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials/Ask Reagan Policy Analyst Peter Ferrara http://bit.ly/zq1QxI.

Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan bonafides. Ask Reagan media consultant Richard Quinn: http://on.msnbc.com/y2sPM2.

Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan’s Speechwriting Dir. Bently Elliott: http://thedc.com/xOkDvA.

Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan’s older son Michael Reagan: http://bit.ly/yYVy7L.

Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Ronald Reagan’s beloved wife Nancy: http://bit.ly/zrWvAw.

worth a repeat


46 posted on 01/26/2012 3:35:47 PM PST by rbmillerjr (Conservative Economic and National Security Commentary: econus.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I am looking at the latest headlines

Dole assails Gingrich in plea to conservatives

ABCNEWS: Romney Failed to Disclose Swiss Bank Account Income: $1,700...

And thinking that all those that started thread after thread bashing Santorum personally and politically ought to be thankful Santorum didn’t drop out.As we never know... he may be the last one standing.


47 posted on 01/26/2012 3:39:42 PM PST by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Rush is radio. I’d have to listen to it to make a final determination. But reading the transcript, it sounds awfully feeble. Not asking him to endorse, and I understand why he doesn’t. Nevertheless — he could do better if what he wants to do is advance Newt or slow down Romney.


48 posted on 01/26/2012 3:41:59 PM PST by Lady Lucky (A tea party in name only is worse than no tea party at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
"Santorum, nobody is saying a negative word about. He's not under assault by anybody."

Rush obviously spends no time on FR.

49 posted on 01/26/2012 3:44:54 PM PST by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Lady Lucky

I listened to it live. It sounded to me that Rush was trying to play both sides of the fence....unlike Mark Levin, who came out blasting Romney and the Republican establishment for the despicable attacks on Newt.


50 posted on 01/26/2012 3:46:48 PM PST by CASchack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-79 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson