Skip to comments.It's Up to Us to Win This Election and Mitt Romney is the Man We've Entrusted with the Task...
Posted on 07/10/2012 12:27:49 PM PDT by Kaslin
RUSH: Now, yesterday, ladies and gentlemen, I spent practically the whole program discussing the state of the country, where we are, where we're going, what kind of country are we. And admittedly, a lot of people yesterday felt -- well, not a lot, but I had enough e-mails from people that made me realize I'd better come in here and set some things straight. Even Cookie said, "Are you giving up? Is it all over?" And this is the problem that you encounter. When you attempt to properly, honestly identify a problem -- I mean a problem, by definition, is negative, and when you properly identify a negative, a lot of people paper them over.
No, I'm not giving up at all, folks. Quite the contrary. The whole point of yesterday's program is identifying the problem. Here's what we're up against. This is what we have to do. The whole point yesterday, for example, Boehner had this quote. We had a caller irritated at Boehner who was asked about Romney. (paraphrasing) "Nobody is gonna fall in love with Romney." And I said, "Nobody's gonna fall in love with Boehner, either." The bottom line is we don't have anybody on our side that anybody's gonna fall in love with, and frankly that's fine with me. We don't want people falling in love with candidates. That's what people did with Obama in 2008. We don't want that.
We find ourselves in a unique situation here. We don't have the ideal nominee. There wasn't the ideal nominee this time around. But we do know something that trumps everything else and that is this administration must be dispatched on Election Day. We have to get rid of it. Regardless what Romney is, if Romney is less than a Reagan -- of course, everyone is -- if Romney is just somebody to occupy the Oval Office for four years while we put a stop to what's going on and try to reverse the direction of the country, it's all gonna boil down to us. (interruption) What are you saying? What's your reaction? No, it's not McCain, but my point is we conservatives do not have a Ronald Reagan running here. I don't want that to make people feel negative about what our prospects are.
What I'm getting to here is that it's up to us to do something about this. We are not big government people. We don't want to rely on other people to do things for us. We have to place our trust in elected officials, but to take ourselves out of the equation and to say that we play no role in this is a mistake. What I'm going to try do today is focus a little bit on the problems the Democrats have, 'cause they've got a myriad of problems. They are weighed down. Obama, as Krauthammer said yesterday, and I happen to agree with Krauthammer on this, Obama, by doing what he did yesterday with the Bush tax cuts is basically waving the white flag. He's basically surrendering on the whole notion that his economic answers work. That's really what he did yesterday. By extending the Bush tax cuts for 98% of the American people, he is tantamount admitting that his policies are failures. This must be said. This must be pointed out.
Now, if Republican elected officials aren't gonna point it out, we do, we will. But I happen to think that's a correct estimation, because, as I mentioned yesterday when I opened the program, Obama has been blaming the Bush tax cuts for all the problems he inherited. He has admitted that in three-and-a-half years he is unable to do anything about what Bush did, not able to fix it. He's admitting his incompetence. He's admitting yesterday that his policies are failures, and he's moving to the right, which I said yesterday and on numerous previous occasions, the Democrats always do this when it nears elections, when we near elections, when it comes to time to win them, what do they do? They move to the right, try to make themselves sound and look conservative, not in name, obviously, but lifestyle policy-wise. You won't hear any more talk of gay marriage, for example, that kind of stuff. That stuff's all out of the way.
You're gonna see Obama tacking to the right throughout this campaign while offering lip service as much as he can to his fringe kook base. Ninety-eight percent of the American people are going to now benefit -- here's another thing about this. Everybody keeps calling these the Bush tax cuts. They aren't tax cuts. They are the current tax rate. The Bush tax cuts occurred ten, 11 years ago now. That is the current tax rate. The Democrats want to continue to call them tax cuts as though they're always temporary and that we gotta get back to some norm. They're talking about the Clinton tax rates that we should get back to, which I've agreed to if we'll go back to Clinton spending levels. Clinton's budget in 1992 or 1993, $1.8 trillion. That's an Obama deficit now. And the Democrats talk about the Clinton years as magical and wonderful and filled with prosperity. Well, let's go back to 'em. Including the spending levels, which, of course, they won't do.
My point here, and I don't want to be misunderstood, is I'm simply trying to rally everybody. We are going to have to pitch in and do this rather than count on elected officials. We don't have an ideal nominee. We weren't gonna get one in this cycle. (interruption) What do you mean, I won't play the game? What game? What game am I supposed to be playing? Well, but that's not happening. Snerdley, you are falling prey to the game. You're succumbing to the conventional wisdom of what happens after a nomination is completed and so forth. Boehner said, (paraphrasing) "No, you're probably not gonna love Mitt Romney," and he went on and added his Mormon stuff. And my only point is we don't have to love these people. The objective here is to stop Obama. That's it, in its entirety. Romney is the vessel for that. He's going to benefit from that.
One of the central themes of yesterday's program was that a traditional campaign on the economy isn't gonna work because a bad economy has become accepted by way too many people. It's no longer something that creates a crisis mentality in a lot of people. Pat Caddell has a huge -- I mean this thing prints out to over 20 pages, if you include the comments, and I've got an audio sound bite somewhere here in the stack of him talking about it. His point is the Republicans don't know the great opportunity they've got here. They're blowing it by continuing to focus on the economy, and it's not about the debate of whether Obamacare, the mandate, is a tax or a penalty. It's a tax, and it's the biggest tax increase in the world. It's the biggest tax increase in world history. And that ought to be the focus on how to talk about Obamacare and the economy and Obama and his regime, his administration.
This tax, while he's trying to get credit for a tax cut, which they're now saying Obama is cutting people's taxes. He's not cutting anybody's taxes. He's leaving the current tax rates alone, not cut -- for 98% of the people. And again he's a sitting duck on this stuff because he's blaming these tax cuts for the last four years for the economic malaise this country is in. He's blaming those tax cuts. Now here he is extending them for the second time in his three-and-a-half year term. He's a sitting duck on this. He's a sitting duck on taxes because of what he did yesterday. He's a sitting duck on taxes because of Obamacare.
One thing that is universal, one thing that is timeless, and that is nobody wants to pay higher taxes, and when they find out how much a tax increase Obamacare is, it is the best way to go about, A, defeating Obama, B, repealing Obamacare. And we can get into the nuts and bolts of the actual things that are gonna happen with the implementation of Obamacare, but we've done that. But the thing that's new here is that thanks to the Supreme Court, it's just been called a tax. It's not even Obamacare anymore. It's ObamaTax. And it needs to be approached that way and it needs to be hit on that way and Caddell is exactly right in this. I'll share some of his thinking on it as the program unfolds before your very eyes and ears.
But the bottom has fallen out for Obama. I don't want anybody to think that the tone -- actually yesterday, folks, I must tell you, I felt great after the program yesterday because when you strip it all away, it was uplifting. It's what we all can be. It's what we all don't want to lose. We all know what the reason for this nation's greatness is. We all know why we're unique. We all know what American exceptionalism is. And we all have a president who doesn't believe in any of it; and, in my mind, it makes him a sitting duck. We've got serious problems taking place in the country, and I'm probably gonna detail some more of them today as show prep indicates here. I've got some more examples of it. So I just... I don't want to be misunderstood. Yeah, I was not trying to be negative, fatalistic, or anything of the sort. Just quite the opposite.
RUSH: Here's Pat Caddell, by the way. He was on Cavuto on Fox. Question: "The new poll puts the president ahead of Romney in 12 battleground states by two points. It's close, but he's surviving."
CADDELL: The fact that he is still even marginally ahead given the kind of month he had, says something about how well his campaign is doing, frankly, and how difficult his opposition is of (sic) keeping control of the initiative. The health care bill? He is the master distraction. He's been standing on quicksand since the court decision. Because the court decision made the mandate, which 67% of Americans oppose, into a tax. And he told them, "Oh, no, no!" It was not gonna be a tax. The Republicans cannot get their message. Instead, they're talking about trying to repeal the whole bill, which is a ho-hum thing, rather than even today saying, "Wait, Mr. President. You want to talk about taxes? We want to repeal ObamaTax, the health care bill."
RUSH: Now, if you read the entire Caddell piece, basically he says that the Republicans are blowing a big opportunity to talk about an issue called "trust." We can't trust Obama. Nobody trusts Obama. Hit it! Another thing he's pointing out is that this notion of "repeal, repeal," is falling on dead ears. It doesn't mean anything. It's been used for way too many months now. "Repeal this! Repeal and replace." Go for what's current! The Supreme Court just called it a tax. That makes it the biggest tax in the world. Go after this and put it all on Obama. It's made to order!
RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, my staff on the other side of the glass here (I should tell you this), are still in a state of shock. In fact, if I weren't such a highly trained professional, I'd be distracted by what's going on in there. They are talking to each other. They are ignoring the program. They're not paying any attention to it attention to it whatsoever. They're talking to themselves, and I know they're talking about me, and they're talking about what I said about Romney. And they can't believe it.
They think that I've lost it, gone over the cliff, committed some sort of great political crime here because I dared say that there isn't a lot of love for Romney. I don't it. See, as the mayor of Realville, do I have to even explain this? All right, I'll give it a shot here. It's not a negative. There aren't very many political candidates that have that kind of passionate support. The last candidate who was loved in this country, for example, was Obama in 2008. And my point is: We don't want that.
We don't want blind, slavish attachment to people because we can make of them whatever we want them to be. My point in saying that Romney is not "loved" is only to illustrate what this election is about. Why were you not as irritated at me for saying what I said yesterday and the week before when I said, "Romney better understand the election is not about him"? It's the same thing. Saying people aren't in love with Romney is the same thing as saying the election is not about him.
In fact, I would think if anybody is gonna be offended is something it would be when I say, "Romney better learn the election isn't about him." All I mean is... Can I just be honest? Among our side, the conservatives, the independents -- everybody who wants there to be significant change in this country -- very few are running around saying, "We want Mitt! We want Mitt! We want Mitt." They're running around saying, "Get rid of Obama and the Democrats! Get rid of Obama and the Democrats!"
That is the animating thing of this election. That is the motivating thing of this election. Clinton was loved, and look how easy it was for him to mislead everybody. I don't like this notion that we fall in love with candidates. My point is we need to be adults about this. We loved Reagan and we still do. But Reagan was not a manipulative, insincere, conniving president. The love that people had for Reagan was a genuine love, not a celebrity idolatry. People loved Reagan deeply as a man, as a human being.
They loved his character, every aspect, policy, you name it. And we knew he loved the country. There was a profound respect. He wasn't the Celebrity of the United States. And those candidates are rare, is my only point. This election is about getting rid of the forces who are attempting to transform this country. No matter what... Let me try it this way: No matter what Romney is and no matter what he does as president, it ain't gonna be anything like this. Now, it might not be ideal, conservative-wise, but it's not gonna be anything like this.
Everybody on our side is oriented toward stopping this. The question is: How? I take you back to Michael Goodwin's piece yesterday. He said Romney's biggest problem is something he had no control over. He was born in a different era. He still thinks of American politics as it was practiced 30 and 40 years ago, and it's changed now. The economy, simply running on the economy is not enough. Too many people are accepting of the economy as it is. There isn't widespread outrage over it, because there's not a lot of pain attached to it.
Not as there has been to unemployment and similar economic distress in years past. What we love is the country. What we want to save is the country. And we are entrusting that task to Mitt Romney because he is the Republican presidential nominee. We are entrusting the task of stopping the direction this country is headed to Mitt Romney. This is a business decision. It is a full-fledged American, political, business decision that will be made in November, just as it was in the midterm elections in November of 2010.
Now, when you peel away all the phony poll sampling. When you consider the unpopularity of Obamacare. When you measure the mood of small business owners. When you look at the way Democrats are jumping off the Obama bandwagon (and more and more of them every day are jumping off the bandwagon and more and more are saying they're not going to the Democrat convention). When you consider the breadth and the depth of the results of the 2010 midterm elections.
When you consider the significance of Scott Walker's victory in Wisconsin. When you see the positive employment impact of Republican governors. For every Republican governor elected in 2010, the last 17 of them, unemployment is going down in those states. Unemployment is dropping in states that elected Republican governors. It is clear when you add all of that up. Those are individual items, but when you lump them together, when you add them all up, it is clear that a majority of likely voters are ready to replace Obama. I have no doubt that a majority of people are ready for this.
But Romney has to capture this momentum, and he has to bring home a victory. And the momentum is not attached to his winning the Republican primaries. It is not attached to him winning the nomination. There was going to be a Republican nominee. The momentum, the thing that needs to be gotten hold of here and ridden is the trouble the Democrats are in; the trouble Obama's in; the problems that they have that are the result of the disastrous policies they've implemented. That is the source of the momentum. It's all Obama. The election must be about Obama. It's got to be about the disaster that is Barack Obama and his administration. The economy is just one disaster. Obamacare is another disaster. They are inexorably linked.
There cannot be an economic recovery in the private sector with full implementation of Obamacare. Not possible. Because Obamacare has now been stripped bare, and everybody now knows, who is paying attention, what Obamacare is. It is a massive expansion of government, funded by the biggest tax increase the history of the world. That's what it is. And nobody wants it. A vast majority, 67% have been opposed to the individual mandate; over 53% have been opposed to the entire bill. There has never been public sentiment for this. There is no reason to act timid in opposing any of this. We're in a single elimination tournament, so to speak, one-and-done. A Republican loss in the House or the Senate or the presidency is game, set, and match.
We have to win all three, and then after that, we have to do the right things with the new power that we will have been entrusted with, or I should say they have to because we aren't gonna be there. If we lose the House, it's over. If we lose the Senate, it's over. If we lose the presidency it's over for the economy and for individual freedom. But the reality is, the truth is that the country is poised for a sweep of the series. A Scott Walker, Tea Party-style campaign is what likely voters want. There's an ABC/Washington Post poll out today. The sample has a 9% edge in Democrats, a plus nine. And it is of registered voters, not likely. Registered voters, which is meaningless. They sample 9% more Democrats than Republicans or independents. And in this poll Romney is tied with Obama in registered voters. That means Romney is way ahead in likely voters, which is why the Washington Post is not publishing a poll of likely voters.
RUSH: One slight correction. I erred when I said that the Washington Post sampled more Democrats than Republicans and independents. They sampled 33% Democrat, 36% independent, 24% Republican. So they sampled 9% more Democrats than Republicans. That is bogus, number one. You and I know that in terms of the ideological delineations that are made in the country, according to polling data, twice as many people identify as conservative as liberal. It is standard operating procedure. It's a blind assumption that there are that many more Democrats than there are Republicans, particularly now. So the sample is flawed, but even worse, it's registered voters, not likely voters.
The entire poll is difficult to believe. It claims that Obama and Romney are tied at 47%. Same as they were in May. This is July. Two months have gone by since the last poll, and it's still 47-47? We're supposed to believe that voters haven't changed their minds at the job numbers, the Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare, the unprecedented backdoor amnesty? We are to believe that with those major changes in policy, that nobody's changed their mind in the presidential race in the Washington Post poll? Sorry. I suspect things are much worse than the Washington Post is letting on.
The Rasmussen poll today has Romney plus three over Obama with likely voters and Obama with a minus 18 strongly disapprove number. And that poll, the Rasmussen poll, is likely voters versus registered. It's far more accurate just on that basis alone. Rasmussen Reports that 53% of likely voters want Obamacare repealed; 43% strongly support repeal; 31% strongly oppose repeal. There is not broad-based support for ObamaTax, which is what it is now, anywhere.
Romney isn’t the “nominee” until after he is nominated at the Republican Convention in Tampa.
Anything can happen at the convention. He wasn’t the only person who acquired delegates during the past primary season.
His actions in strong-arming people into voting for him rather than who won a particular primary is sickening, and definitely unAmerican.
When has a “nominee” actually waited until after the convention? Please share.
Romney has for all intents won the Nomination.
He has not yet picked a running mate.
That however is not the main point. For all intents the nomination has been won.
What’s this “we” stuff, kemo sabe?
I haven’t entrusted uber-RINO Romney with anything...
Oh for God's sakes... like what? What is going to happen?
Is Sarah Palin going to ride into the convention on a unicorn and be annointed by the palm frond waving hordes? Or maybe they'll produce the still living head of Ronald Reagan and give him the nod. Or Dick Cheney with a steel bionic heart.
Or maybe, just maybe, Romney will escape the convention with the nomination intact.
Romney is the Republican nominee and it's not changing. Adjust to that reality and go forward.
Personally still waiting to see if in August Romney does become the one. If so I believe we are screwed, but will vote for the bastard only to get rid of Obama.
We have to get the Congress, and get it BIGTIME. Hopefully with as many true Conservatives as possible, and we the people jump on the backs of the RINO’s, and stay on their backs.
If we must micromanage our Congress for several years then that’s what we have to do to get what we the people want, and then vote out the RINO’s at every opportunity along the way.
The numbers work better with an Obie win, the the GOP gains seats in 2014 and we can try to run an actual conservative in 2016. Putting a socialist with an R after his name in the White House give the libs total control. I don’t vote socialist, EVER, I don’t care what letter comes after their names, all socialists are scum and bad for the country, they can’t save the country, because they’re the problem.
Well said. It sucks, but it is reality.
Entrusted? Hardly. Mitt destroyed any GOP candidate in his way who did not self-destruct on their own. He is nothing more than the last man standing - when he started the firefight.
And I have yet to see him direct anything remotely resembling that kind of live fire at Obama. This election should have been a butt-whumping for Obama. Yet the GOP-E managed to insert their chosen RINO into the nomination - a man uniquely unqualified to take on Obama regarding Obamacare, a man incapable of relating to middle-class concerns, and a man stunningly unfitted to fire up the base by offering a strong vision of American values and conservatism.
Romney may still win this election. But it will happen because of Obama's weakness, not Romney's strengths.
The only question is...which Mitt are they shoving down our throat? I love a mystery.
You have two choices; Obama or Romney. That is it. There is no “third choice.” Either you want 0bama as your president for another four years, or you do not. If you want to bash Romney, and have a second 0bama term, go for it. It’s your right.
It's also possible that Salma Hayek will divorce her billionaire husband and marry me.
As Mark Steyn says:
We have a badly flawed candidate and it’s up to us to drag him across the finish line a winner.
Rush’s first priority is clearly the party, and not the timeless principles upon which this nation was founded.
If he had the slightest bit of courage, he’d be pounding the message home that we must reject the Republican party’s liberal candidate (and his liberal agenda), and take the rebellion to the convention in Tampa. He ought to be exhorting us to gather in the millions to protest all of the egregious transgressions that have been committed by our elected government.
It’s crunch time in American history, and he’s folded to the establishment. Sitting in his palace, pontificating on events and conditions that cannot touch him personally - he’s as out of touch as the rest of the ruling class establishment.
It is clearly past time for the people to abandon the ‘system’ and seek redress of grievances from their government, yet Rush fails to see that, and asks us to throw our support behind the puppet masters’ pawn.
This disgusts me no end.
Speak for yourself, Rush.
But what's to stop the same old pattern repeating: Conservative A and Conservative B split the conservative primary vote, allowing RINO C to take the nomination.
The problem with that line of though is, like I later learned after voting for McCain ,Romney, like Mc Cain has no intention of winning. For that matter, nor does the Republican Party.
Such a quandary of difficult questions. If someone said you have to pick between two socialists which would you choose?
I'm going for the second one 'cause everyone else is doing it...but that's just me. I also got a Romney is a severe conservative tattoo the other-day. It's sooo cool, wanna see it?/s
Well said. It sucks, but it is reality.
It's only reality, because people like yourself are going into agreement with it. If every real conservative were to reject the Republicans' choice of this liberal candidate, we'd have a different nominee next month.
I find it a bit ironic that someone whose tagline is, "stand up defend or lay down and die", is folding so easily for the establishment.
We were willing to accept him over McCain in 2008, why aren’t we willing to do so over the dictator-wannabe?
Nothing. But that’s no reason to vote for a socialist with an R after his name.
I learned a long time ago that Limbaugh is there for the entertainment and act as a mouthpiece for the Republican Party.
And it's a BAD business decision.
Rush, I lova ya, guy. But no sale.
If I interpret the statement correct I think Mr. Limbaugh believes if Romney wins then in 2016 the GOP will nominate someone else. I disagree with this. The GOP has always in modern history re-nominated a sitting POTUS who was running for re-election. Romney will be the nominee in 2016 and of course we will be stuck again choosing the lesser of two evils.
Do you know something the rest of us don”t?
As much as it stinks - its either mittens or obama.
Sarah is not going to descend from the heavens to save us, Newt, Santorum, or Cain are out of it and dont have the ability to fundraise to run vs obama. Ron Paul has faded into obscurity.
SO WHAT IS YOUR PLAN TO OUST OBAMA THE COMMUNIST TRAITOR AND DESTROYER?
Principles, My FRiend, are like virginity, once one loses or abandon them, you do not get them back. It matters not why one sells their principles, it only matters that one sold them. And no, I will not be voting for Romney.
No, it's the reality because a plurality of GOP primary voters selected liberal hump Mitt Romney as the nominee.
The person who gets the most votes in the GOP primaries is generally the party nominee. That's how the system works.
You propose some revolutionary fantasy where the angry horde storms in and overturns the election to strong arm their own candidate into the position. It will never happen, and if it did we'd be one giant step closer to the third world shit hole that appears to be our destiny.
Unless he drops dead between now and late August, he will be the 2012 Republican party nominee for president, making Romney the only viable alternative to another four years of Obama. Like most FReepers, I wish we had a conservative as our candidate...but we do not. I agree with those who contend that a more conservative House and Senate will help curb some of a President Romney's more liberal penchants but the overriding goal for me and millions of other Americans is to get Obama and the Democrats out of power while we still can. Sneering at Romney all day long and calling him names may be enjoyable for some but serves no purpose. On balance, Obama is the problem, not Romney.
Republican “A” in 2012, does not mean Republican “A” in 2016.
Romney is a lot of things, but the Democrat machine is vastly more powerful.
I’d guess Romney is a one-termer. Palin would be my challenger.
Or for that matter, running mate.
Is he really the best we've got?!
Rush supports Mitt?
Some of you people are amazing.
Obama 2nd term = 100% chance of collapse and communism
Romney 1st term = 50-75% he is a disaster.
Vote for the 25% he does the right thing. Its not a matter of anything but facing R E A L I T Y.
An Obama 2nd term just because some peoples’ little pony and unicorn was not on the ticket in the first place is insane.
"We"? Speak for yourself. I've never supported the grinning liberal fraud.
Wait - haven’t most of those saviors you listed said voting for that idiot Mitt, and not some pretend candidate, is a good idea? Then they must suck too. If only everyone were as wonderful as the FR-e
It's a self-fulfilling prophecy, because you and others believe it.
Until you find it within yourself to stand up and disagree with the course of events, they'll continue to steam roller on. And over us.
I do not in any way, shape or form support Ron Paul. I do not support Obama, either.
I want Obama out of the White House! Republicans have an opportunity to wipe-out Democrats, and the GOPe backs...a socialist like Romney! What the Hell?
Political conventions are just that - political. No one delegate is required BY LAW to vote for Romney. There are rules but Romney himself has conspired with GOPe in many states and cheated.
ABO will not win this election for the Republicans. The socialist Romney will not win this election BECAUSE he isn’t offering any reason to vote FOR him over socialist Obama!
We can only win this election with a candidate who can state clearly what he will do to pull us out of the mess created by Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama. Romney isn’t going to do that because he has no core conservative values.
Delegates to Tampa this August aren’t stupid. They’re aware of this problem. Romney can threaten all he wants - there is no enthusiasm for his candidacy and ‘whipping’ the delegates will only result in revolt.
The convention this August in Tampa will be a free-for-all. It will be a political party looking for a real candidate.
If you’re enthused by Romney, fine: all I hope you would consider is an alternative to the road to serfdom.
I don’t look at any of these people as saviors.
I have one focus in 2012 and one only - GETTING RID OF OBAMA
P E R I O D
This nation will not survive a second term of this disaster.
I am going ask the question that Mark Levin asked last week, who would be the candidate to replace Romney at the convention.
Palin has said she is not interested. I keep hearing replace, but with no realistic alternative.
I don't care how much you may hate Romney, or who you wanted to see get the nomination. But you and anyone else who thinks "anything can happen at the convention" are so clueless as to not even be part of this conversation. You may as well have posted a picture of a rabbit with a pancake on its head.
Que the circular firing squad
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.