Posted on 03/05/2009 5:23:07 AM PST by CASchack
It's been a win-win the past few days for Democratic and Republican loyalists, but what about the rest of us?
You know. Americans who either don't think that (a) spending nonexistent trillions is quite the way to proceed in an economic crisis, or that (b) Rush Limbaugh is the messiah.
Oh wait, that's right, Barack Obama is the messiah. I get confused sometimes, what with so much deification going on. Limbaugh's 85-minute speech at last weekend's Conservative Political Action Conference, frequently interrupted by grateful applause from a slightly star-struck audience, was, dare we say it, Obama- esque.
But where there's deification, there's bound to be demonization. Thus, Rush told conferees that Obama, in essence, is Stalin. And Obama, via chief commando Rahm Emanuel, anointed Limbaugh as leader of the GOP, calling him the "voice and the intellectual force and energy behind the Republican Party."
Talk about damning with praise.
El Rushbo can't have minded much, despite his protestations that he was being manipulated and maligned by the White House to distract Americans from the "plunging economy." What could be better for a talking head than to be chosen by a president as his worthy adversary?
At least finally both sides certainly should agree on one thing: The Fairness Doctrine is a terrible idea! Who wants fair and politically balanced commentary on the airwaves when being "unfair" is keeping both armies in their Humvees?
The body politic, meanwhile, resembles a tempest-tossed ocean liner on which passengers scurry across the deck as the ship pitches. On one side is the president, promising to build a new $3.6 trillion ark. On the other is El Rushbo, clutching the conservative tablature: Thou shalt not raise taxes.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
This makes me laugh.
Yes, I do pay more attention to what he does, and not what others say, which is exactly why the Mitt bashing threads and the spam they invite are getting less and less interesting to read.
The question is how long will it stay addressed before you lay that card once again...
Habits, it isn't your fault really, it's ingrained...
Yes, we are on the same website.
I do not participate in the Mormon bashing. The theological issues are interesting, but that’s between Mormons and G-d.
I do, however, know Romney, and do join with those who spread the truth about Romney and his conversion-of-convenience to conservatism.
Since the Republican primaries, the only ones consistently bringing up Romney’s religion have been Romney supporters, who are primarily mormon themselves.
It’s just like Obama supporters -— “Oh, you think Obama’s a socialist? Well, that’s because you’re a bigot.”
Romney supporters use the same cheap tactic -— then play victim when they are not.
The fake “victim” is an old dishonest liberal trick, and Romney’s use of it is yet more evidence of his dishonesty.
Rush has made it clear on his show that he wouldn’t “endorse” anyone, so for him to say what he did, crossed the line, even for him. As close to an endorsement as you will get from him. Here’s what he said.
“Now, I think now, based on the way the campaign has shaken out, that there probably is a candidate on our side who does embody all three legs of the conservative stool, and that’s Romney. The three stools or the three legs of the stool are national security/foreign policy, the social conservatives, and the fiscal conservatives. ... I think right now Romney probably — as the campaign has coalesced and as the campaign has progressing on down the highway — I think the one candidate of the three still out there on our side matter (and actually it’s just two, because Huckabee doesn’t, in terms of a chance to win) in saying who more closely embodies all three legs of this conservative stool, you’d have to say that it’s Mitt Romney. There’s actually no choice in the matter. It certainly isn’t Senator McCain.”
Then we will respectfully disagree. I take Bork at his word, and I respect the man greatly. What he said about Mitt is right on!
You could give it a 2.0, wouldn’t make a difference. That’s what happened.
Not ingrained, but certainly conditioned from so much of actual activity from the same people in both threads and from the similar ping lists.
I also live next to his Nephew. (who, incidentally was the real owner of the dog that Mitt put on the roof. He was actually talking the dog to him when they met up on a family outing)
Just a bit of Mitt trivia there...
No bias there, right?
What magazine/newpaper were you interviewing Mitt for?
Has Romney shown remorse or apologized to the Mauck family, yet?
Doe Romney show remorse that he took campaign contributions to coverup the BIGdig?
I'm guessing that since sevenbak works at the Deseret News (which is a Mormon rag) that he interviewed Mitt for the Deseret News. Correct me if I'm wrong, seven
FC:That ought to tell how well your God/Man will do in the political future.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
7:Hm, I didn’t think Jesus Christ was running for office. Perhaps you have inside info?
********************************
You have obviously just tried to spin your way out of admitting that Mitt is working on the God/Man model. Or, are you telling me instead that you don’t believe one twit of the BOM and that High Mormon Priests like Romney are unable to become Gods of their own planets? Are we seeing doubt in Mormon dogma expressed here?
Either Mitt is on track to become a Man/God, or he is not and Mormon doctrine is false. Which is it?
Whilst looking at my name in a post (your follow on speak of the devil post)
Nice excuse wrapped in a cute tale, good fiction, don't sell yourself short with a 2.0...
There is a cure, and I have shared it with you before...
Is Mitt really worth it?
There are many true conservatives worthy of such efforts, and if it is a “must have” that they are LDS members, certainly there are actual real rock ribbed Conservatives in the Mormon church, hell I have seen a few of them...
Yeah, I knew about the $295 per worker tax per year. Romney vetoed that provision, but it was overridded. I wouldn't exactly call that a mandate.
I agree with you it's bad, but come on, it's just $295. It's peanuts.
You can't seriously claim that's on the same level as what Hillary tried to impose.
If Rush made it clear on his show that he wouldn't "endorse" anyone, how on earth can you have his name, and that quote, on a list CLEARLY TITLED "ENDORSEMENTS" ??? You LIE to mislead your fellow Republicans in order to convince them to support your guy. You have to do it -- you are reduced to doing it -- because the truth is that conservative pundits that I know FOR SURE -- Limbaugh and Levin and Michael Reagan, because I have taken the trouble to track down the actual words and context of their supposed "endorsements" -- I know FOR SURE that when Romney supporters claim that those three guys are on the same side they are, that they are LYING. Plain, clear, absolute, FALSEHOODS they must resort to.
It is disgusting, and you people who do it should be embarassed, ashamed, and hounded until you weep. YOU ARE LYING to fellow Republicans about what others think about your candidate. The worst part is that you do it over and over and over and over and over on Free Republic at least, and it frightens me to think of other places you do it where people are ignorant and gullible enought to believe your repeated, proven LIES and MISREPRESENTATIONS about what respected conservatives think of Romney.
You are playing the game that if you repeat a LIE long enough and loud enough, that people will just believe it as fact. YOU ARE BAD DOGS, every one of you, and you make me ashamed to have you in the same political party. You don't belong here if you have to LIE and DISTORT TRUTH to convince others to support your guy.
That says volumes about your candidate.
More interesting that you, curiosity, support Obama as well as Romney
--Mitt Romney CPAC 2009
That was NOT an ‘endorsement’, but a mere stating of FACTUAl information.
WHERE does Rush say, “I choose Mitt over the others?”
Inform us about the WRONGness of Presbyterianism; too, Seven.
HA Ha ha!!
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.