I responded to the “endorsement” issue. You ignored it. Yes, Rush made it a point not to make a formal endorsement. He had announced that he would not endorse anyone during the primary, IIRC.
But more than once he had very good things to say about Romney, including the quotd on this thread, where he was that of the three candidates remaining, Romney was the one who was articulating the position he believed in.
I said all that, but you ignored it. Instead, you just get more and more cranked up. What, pray tell, is your problem, other than blind, irrational rage whenever anyone has the temerity to support Mitt Romney?
WHY do you think he said it?
Answer, please?
It's kind of like if three years ago, you needed a vehicle but were so broke you had to choose between three cars -- one with a bad suspension, one with a rusted body, and one that had been in the shop nine times in the last five months. Out of desperation, you opt for the one with the bad suspension as the best choice of a bad lot -- and here I am, three years later, telling everyone that you are a really big fan of cars with bad suspensions.
That's what Romney supporters are doing to Rush and Levin I know for certain sure, and therefore I am inclined to think that it probably holds true for nearly every name on the faux-endorsement list that Romney supporters present so disingenuously.
When you spin Rush's words and when your fellow Romney supporters go so far as to lie and call Rush's words an "endorsement," you're trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear at the expense of your ethics and your honesty.
I didn't ignore what you said -- indeed, you ignore what Rush actually said, and you ignore it when I point out what Rush actually said.
...Blind, irrational rage ... is how you describe my tone. All I can do is shake my head in amazement.