RUSH: TheHill.com. I'm debating whether or not to discuss this. Headline: "Rush Limbaugh Is a Hypocrite When it Comes to Trump." And it's written by a young Rush fan. Snerdley brought me this. He couldn't wait to bring me this. I have it here.
RUSH: It's a column, it's an op-ed. TheHill.com today, by Travis Hale, who's a contributor. I just want to read to you how he opens the piece.
"In the summer of 1992, Rush Limbaugh saved me from myself. I was an 18-year-old high school graduate about to begin college, too impatient to wait for adulthood to come to me. So instead, I went in search of it the only way I knew how: by engulfing myself in presidential politics and the fascinating campaigns that summer between Bill Clinton, George Bush and Ross Perot."
So he openly credits me for helping him understand politics and to see the conservative way. And he goes on to credit me in this piece as being the conservative voice. In other words, if you're in America and you want to know what conservatism is, then you listen to Rush Limbaugh, which is what he says he did.
Now, the headline of the piece: "Rush Limbaugh is a Hypocrite When it Comes to Trump." And he has five areas where he says, Travis Hale says that I'm being hypocritical and not true to my own identity and principles as it's related to this campaign and the way the Trump campaign is treated on this program, which I am the program, so that would mean the way I am treating Trump. And the five areas that he thinks I'm being hypocritical are these: The polls, my oft-used phrase that words mean things, big government, the Kardashianification of American politics, and the Limbaugh Theorem.
He supports and believes all of those and thinks I'm violating every one of them, because he believes that I have tacitly endorsed Trump. I have endorsed no one. I never do in primaries. Just the other day, after my appearance on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace, during the lightning round I was asked for a quick reaction to several people. And one of those people was Ted Cruz. What I said about Ted Cruz has ended up on a major fundraising appeal that the Cruz campaign has sent out. And in it they say that I, your host, El Rushbo, made a major move to Cruz on Fox News Sunday. But I haven't endorsed Cruz, either. I haven't endorsed anybody.
When I was asked about Trump on Fox News Sunday, I said the great service Trump is performing and, by the way, the Trump campaign put that quote out and they tweeted that all over the place, too. Which is fine. Don't misunderstand. Not complaining about that. What I said about Trump was, paraphrasing myself here, the great service he's performing is to show that you, as a Republican, don't have to be afraid of the media. You can be courageous. You don't have to worry about what the media's gonna say about you and you don't have to worry about what the Democrat Party's gonna say about you.
You can triumph. You can win. You can lead without worrying about what the media is gonna say. That's a huge thing. I was hoping that a whole lot of Republicans in the field would see this. I mean, look, I've got a story here in one of the other stacks, if I've seen this headline once, I've seen it a thousand times. You know what we're facing right when January shows up and the holidays are over and Congress comes back, you know what you're facing? A government shutdown. Oh, yeah. Because of the budget.
So, once again the media is already in consort with the Democrat Party, trying to intimidate and bully the Republican House into giving Obama yet again another budget deal, exactly what he wants, otherwise the government's gonna be shut down. And you're gonna see, won't be long before every Republican strategist and consultant is all over Fox News warning that we can't do this, we can't shut down the government, that will be the end of the Republican Party's presidential hopes. Cycle repeats. Trump is showing you don't have to be afraid of any of that. But saying that is not endorsing Trump.
The other thing I said is Trump is demonstrating that you do not have to fear violating political correctness. That you can spit on it, you can violate political correctness. As long as you have built a bond with your audience, you will not lose them, you will not be harmed, you can thrive. But none of that adds up to an endorsement. And yet Mr. Hale is afraid that it does. Don't misunderstand. Don't get mad. Mr. Hale is afraid for me. It's actually a piece that he has written out of concern. He is afraid I'm betraying myself, and he doesn't want me to betray myself. He thinks that I am abandoning some of my own rock-solid philosophies in order to endorse Trump, which, again, I haven't done.
In talking about this Kasich ad that they're putting together, you support Trump, Trump's gonna get rid of everybody, he's gonna get rid of everybody he doesn't like. What I want to know is, why hasn't there be an ad like this run about the Democrats? Why haven't any Republicans decided to run ads like this against Democrats who actually are in the process of doing some of these things that Kasich is accusing Trump of wanting to do? EIB
Already posted. Your nightly quota of anti-Trump hate is duly noted.
So, what are YOUR thoughts?
CBS
“I wish Walker was still running.”
Said no one ever.
OH!
CW, what you’re doing isn’t helping anyone, least of all the GOP establishment, whom you appear to work for.
You’re doing nothing but vandalizing Free Republic with your anti-Trump posts, day in and day out. Frankly, I don’t know why JimRob puts up with you.
Exactly what do you think you’re accomplishing with this?
The writer of the article doesn’t get Rush. You apparantly don’t get him either. Rush has never endorsed any candidate. I’ve been listening to him since 1987 and I don’t understand why the writer is claiming hypocracy.
Trump may be the liberal you claim but all I’ve ever heard Rush say about Trump is how he doesn’t let the media frighten him nor does he seem to worry about PC. I’ve not heard Rush endorse Trump at all. There’s things he admires about Trump, but I don’t necessarily consider that an endorsement. Rush has mentioned the well known fact that Trump has violated all the political wisdom of the establishment GOP and the political pundits - yet is still leading the other candidates. That is not an “endorsement” either.
As to Trump being “vague” when it comes to specifically HOW he will fix certain problems, well, all of the candidates are pretty vague when it comes to that- but, I don’t see that with Trump when it comes to immigration. He’s pretty clear about what he wants to do. The Hill article says Trump will always be in “campaign” mode and never get to specifics. Well, Trump IS in a presidential campaign and has never been president before, so I think it is unfair to presume that he will remain in campaign mode after he’s elected (assuming he wins). That criticism doesn’t even make sense at this point.
Rush has pointed out how Obama always acts like he’s never been in office the past 7 years in his perpetual campaigning against problems that he has contributed to or ignored. How can the writer criticize Trump about that when he’s not even president yet?
Anyway. The writer, for all his claims of being a Rush listener for several years, sounds like he really has never listened to Rush during a presidential campaign season.
Rush hasn’t endorsed anyone. He has specifically said that this week.
I don’t think you listen to him at all, otherwise you would know that.
You should stop pushing bullshit, you are incredibly annoying.
Hale repeats the tired lie that Trump isn’t specific, despite his having released specific plans on immigration, taxes, etc. before the other candidates did. He says because Trump doesn’t turn his speeches into a symposium on tax brackets he isn’t specific enough. That’s not what a campaign rally is about. It’s about firing people up and making them feel like part of a winning team*. What Trump does is lay out markers, goals. No president gets exactly what he wants out of Congress, but smart negotiators know how to start the negotiations beyond what they expect to get and force the other side to twist their arm to what they wanted. Unlike our stupid politicians who start out compromising halfway, then compromise more, whether it’s Obama and Kerry negotiating with Iran, or Boehner and McConnell negotiating with Obama.
*If your candidate had been able to do that Gov. Walker might still be in the race.
One word for this overwrought piece...PATHETIC....
Give it up CW. You were a much better Freeper when you were throwing all your efforts into trying to convince us that Walker was the conservative answer for everything. Now that he’s gone your silly efforts to trash Trump at every opportunity are just getting ridiculous.
If you don’t like Trump, then push for someone else who has a snowballs chance in Hell of getting the nomination that is more conservative.
Right now the only two candidates that are acceptable to me are Trump and Cruz. Your anti Trump crusade is just wasting bandwidth.
I know you hate Trump but he has set forth a lot of very conservative positions.
This article actually criticizes Trump for wanting to deport illegal aliens and rebuild the military because it would create a bigger government. Are you kidding me? Is this the kind of BS that you rely on to dump Trump
Pathetic.
thanks for posting this
Hmm, let's see:
The writer's assertion is patently false, and amounts to nothing more than clumsy propaganda.
How many new ones? ZERO.
How many billions of dollars will it cost to make the military so great your head will spin?
Don't know, butu in any event, such expenditures will be entirely Constitutional and not require any new government agencies.
Furthermore, Trump is on record with his desire to eliminate several of the unneeded (and unconstitutional) alphabet agencies as well.
How many government workers will be required to build the Trump wall, complete with a beautiful Trump door?
Don't know but, again, at least it would be for a Constitutionally valid reason, and I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the work ended up being done in partnership with the private sector.
This article really couldn't be much weaker in terms of content, logic, and persuasiveness. It's laughable on its face.
Let me be very clear. Trump is far from perfect. But, aside from Cruz, Trump is one of the very few who will lead, and at least try to accomplish his stated goals.
I still prefer Cruz, but Trump would also make a fine President. Whoever wins the nomination should select the other as his VP.
Furthermore, Donald Trump will garner votes from many diverse elements of the political spectrum: blacks, independents, fiscal conservatives, etc.
He'll destroy Hillary in the general election.
Trump has both the GOPe and the Democrats (the party of Perjury and Obstruction of Justice) scared out of their wits.
Who could ask for anything more?
Climb aboard the Trump Hype Train, CW. Sooner or later, you will...
I finally figured out who you are! Took time, but hot lickety damn! You’re “Anchor Baby Michelle”, the one who got fired from O’Reilly after Geraldo called you out on it!
Ok, this may be a breath of etiquette as I am technically a n00b, but I’ve lurked here for many years and finally signed up once I retired from the Army, it also may be because I am awake at freaking 0500 on a holiday morning but this post and subsequent discussions have seriously irked me. So here goes...
1) CW, if you have listened to Rush a such as you claim, how do you not understand that core of his show is making and discussing his obstervations of the American political scene, Donald Trump has shaken that scene more than any other recent political figure since FDR. Given Trump’s unapologetic defense of conservative positions the poitical establishment has seemingly placed out of bounds, it is no wonder that Rush’s comments may occasionally border on gleeful.
2) Rush also was similarly enthusiastic about Gov. Walker’s counter-union stand in Wisconsin and he has been effusive in his praise for both Ted Cruz (my first choice by far) and he is a clear admirer of Ben Carson as well. The bottom line is that we suffered from an embarrassment of riches in the quantity and quality of GOP candidates this year.
3) Given the breadth and depth of the field this year, something was going to have to give, Perry, Walker, and yes, even Jeb! at one point, did good things in the past, but also both have compromised themselves (Perry never took on the execrable David Dewhurst, who should have stopped the illegal alien tuition bill).
4) In Trump, Cruz, Carson, and even Rubio (who was conservative except for his fatal embrace of the gang of eight) we have a field that is not only conservative, but unapologetically so. Trump, counter to most recent political figures, seems to be becoming more conservative as time goes on. For the moment, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, thought my heart and gut tell me Cruz is the better choice.
5) Finally, your inability to counter fieldmarshaldj points undermine your already weak arguments. He is a virtual encyclopedia of American political history and I believe is a reasonable authority on what does and does not constitute an endorsement. You snipes against him and others who concur in his assessment are reflecting poorly upon you.
I respect you position as a long time poster, but your assessment is incorrect. Rush likes Trump, but is, in no sense, making an endorsement. Have a Happy Thanksgiving.
I think that part of it is that Rush is very in awe of anybody with money. I remember when Romney ran, Rush couldn’t stop gushing about what a “decent” man he was and how he was a model for us all. Both Romney and Trump were born into wealth, of course, and used their contacts to make more, hardly a rags to riches American achievement story!
Oh it’s a CW thread. I stepped on dog poop once, after cleaning my shoe I avoided the poop spot so as to not soil my shoe again. This is like that! ZOT!
Rush is like Trump in the respect that he is his own man and not intimidated by others.
He also has some Trump swagger.
Does it even matter to you who says bad stuff about Trump and his supporters? When do you expect to start posting articles by terrorists/illegals/Hillary?
Two words for you: Thora Zine