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

Skip to comments.

Rush Calls Bush Like Nixon. Republicans cannot claim to be for small government.
Rush Live broadcast ^ | 11/25/03 | rushy

Posted on 11/25/2003 9:59:43 AM PST by Mark Felton

Rush has spent the last several minutes likening Bush to Nixon. Nixon gave us OSHA and the EPA. Bush is giving us Prescription Medicine benefits for seniors.

Rush says the Republican party cannot claim to be the party of smaller government.

This sounds likme the OLD Rush of 10 years ago!

Go Get Em Rush!


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: chat; dickmorris; movetochat; soccermompolitics; thisischat; triangulation
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 281 next last
To: quidnunc
"Rush is in danger of becoming an anachronism."

Au contraire, my FRiend...Rush has tapped into a rich vein of committed conservative Republicans and independents who are increasingly concerned with--and appalled by--the Bush-led GOP's lack of spending discipline. Many of us have worked 20-30-50 years to see a GOP POTUS and GOP Congress simultaneously in the sincere hope that the Federal Leviathan would be restrained from growing out-of-control. Instead, it's growing faster than ever...what gives?!

"After 9/11 America's mindset began to change, but Rush continues to harp on pre-9/11 themes."

"Pre-9/11 themes" have not gone away just because we are fighting a War on Terrorism (which Rush has enthusiastically endorsed and cheerled, BTW!!)

"Unless he gets up to speed he's going to be talking to a smaller and smaller audience as time goes by."

If "getting up to speed" implies signing onto the Bush GOP's spending bonanza, I believe you are sadly mistaken. Rush's audience continues to stand by him because of his principled conservatism, not for his alleged cheerleading of the Republican issue du juor.

FReegards...MUD

161 posted on 11/25/2003 12:38:05 PM PST by Mudboy Slim (RE-IMPEACH Osama bil Clinton!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: Dane
"I guess you would rather have tom daschle and nancy pelosi as leaders of Congress."

I would rather have a Democratic president for the next 4 years if it means that future Republican governments will look back on the failure of triangulation and create policy that furthers conservative values. I'll also take gridlock over this Republican-socialist lovefest anyday.

Let me ask you a question: Do you think Al Gore, if president, could have gotten this Medicare bill passed? The house would have killed it in committee. The same is true of other big government legislation that Bush has pushed through. Accordingly, our government has moved farther left under Bush than it would have under Gore.

162 posted on 11/25/2003 12:38:29 PM PST by Texas Federalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: Texas Federalist
I would rather have a Democratic president for the next 4 years

Nuff said.

163 posted on 11/25/2003 12:43:28 PM PST by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Mudboy Slim
I agree in making Ted Kennedy spitting bricks, which is what happened. There was a great groundswell against Hillarycare in 93, because people didn't trust her. Rush and dashcle talk about not being a great groundswell for this bill, the other side of the coin is that there isn't a groundswell against it.

JMO, but people are trusting GW in handling this big issue and in the bill is included the seeds of privitization, which is a good thing. Something that would never be included in a Hillary bill.

164 posted on 11/25/2003 12:50:34 PM PST by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: epluribus_2
This IS for the WAR. By getting W another four years, we will WIN it. Now Florida is a LOCK. Let the junior bin ladins and saddams of the world quake in fear. They won't have a Dem president to kick around in 2004. [post 37]

What reasoning. I almost forgot that W was the president on 9/11, and that didn't appear to slow anyone down.

165 posted on 11/25/2003 12:52:00 PM PST by berserker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple; Southack
Well-stated defenses of the Medicare spending, my FRiends, although I still believe we couldda written legislation that covered the 1.5 million folks who have the problems paying for prescription drugs without creating an expensive entitlement for all 42 million seniors (most of whom are already covered for their drugs).

In any event, I hope Dubyuh and his advisors and the GOP Congress get the undeniable message that conservatives are rightly concerned with their free-spending record over the last three years!! There's still time to right their ship before next November...and if they do, I can foresee a Reagan'84-like landslide fer the GOP in the offing!!

FReegards...MUD

166 posted on 11/25/2003 12:59:13 PM PST by Mudboy Slim (RE-IMPEACH Osama bil Clinton!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Mudboy Slim
As I understand it, participation in the prescription drug program is voluntary.
167 posted on 11/25/2003 1:01:01 PM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: Dane
"Rush and dashcle talk about not being a great groundswell for this bill..."

D'a$$hole said that?! Doesn't sound like something that RAT would say...

"...the other side of the coin is that there isn't a groundswell against it."

Obviously not enuff to stop it from becoming reality...let's hope it doesn't come back and bite us on the butt!!

"JMO, but people are trusting GW in handling this big issue and in the bill is included the seeds of privitization, which is a good thing. Something that would never be included in a Hillary bill."

I hope this privatization becomes a reality like y'all claim...I reckon this is but the first in many battles we will be fighting over entitlement spending in the upcoming years. Hopefully, future battles will result in decreased entitlement spending instead of dramatically higher. That'd really help my self-esteem...LOL!!

FReegards...MUD

168 posted on 11/25/2003 1:06:54 PM PST by Mudboy Slim (RE-IMPEACH Osama bil Clinton!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
The time when you could convince the American people that the elderly should pay for their own health care is past.

I am honestly perplexed as to why you would say this.
Sure, you're statement would ring true if it was asked to folks 65 yrs and older.
But you might be surprised at the response from those 30 yrs old and below.

169 posted on 11/25/2003 1:11:35 PM PST by jla (http://hillarytalks.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
"...participation in the prescription drug program is voluntary."

Hopefully the legislation is written so that is does not promote corporations' "volunteering" their retirees out of their existing programs and into the Federal safety net.

FReegards...MUD

BTW...it's not only Rush slamming Dubyuh on this Prescrition Drug Bill...the local Richmond conservative radio talkshow host just called Dubyuh "Lyndon Baines Bush!!" OUCH!!

170 posted on 11/25/2003 1:12:18 PM PST by Mudboy Slim (RE-IMPEACH Osama bil Clinton!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
voluntary or mandatory........................

It's going to cost (at least) FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND MILLION DOLLARS.

Wrong is wrong.

171 posted on 11/25/2003 1:19:11 PM PST by WhiteGuy (Take off your knee pads, take a stand for AMERICA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: jla
Perhaps, but those below age 30 don't ever think they will get sick, nor do they worry about being a burden on their children. Ask those under 30 if they want to assume all the costs for their own elderly relatives. I think that would be a different answer.

Look, I think Medicare and the insurance companies have managed to drive up the cost of health care. There is no easy solution to this, despite what Rush says. There are many, many factors in this problem, ranging from trial attorneys, insurance profiteering, companies who want to avoid paying for excessive insurance, demands for AIDS treatment, citizens who think everything should be free, use of emergency rooms by Medicaid types, drug companies, foreign countries who demand drugs cheaper in order to enter their market, excessive research and testing costs, etc. etc. etc. I probably could list another 100 reasons for the health care mess, ALL of which contribute to the high cost and lack of availability in some areas.

This bill is an attempt to turn the Titanic. It is not the end solution but merely a small start. I think conservatives are getting upset over hyperbole from radio hosts, myself.

172 posted on 11/25/2003 1:19:41 PM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: Dane
They are the ones who cut off their nose to spite their face.

Dane...Are you honestly for returning this country to that deswcribed and enumerated in our Constitution?
If so, and you also advocate this Win Incrementally strategy, at what point in time would you say we'll start seeing real results?
4 yrs...10 yrs...25...50...100?

No matter how long, it only serves to give the Left ample time to defeat the purpose, as they've shown repeatedly that they're more than capable of doing.
RE: Judicial nominees.

173 posted on 11/25/2003 1:21:22 PM PST by jla (http://hillarytalks.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Mudboy Slim
Conservative radio hosts often follow Rush's lead. I bet your local guy doesn't know what's in the bill, either.

I do not think it good to make policy decisions on health care based on radio talk show hosts and/or columnists.

I prefer to look at what is actually being done. For example, why would you take Rush's word over Newt's? Why believe George Will over Senator Frist? All of us can disagree about whether or not this will work and whether or not it is too expensive (I happen to think not given current health care costs) but to act like the Republicans and the President are simply interested in creating a big, pork-type boondoggle is simply demagoguing, in my opinion.

174 posted on 11/25/2003 1:23:38 PM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: jla
The problem is we are incrementing in the wrong way. I could accept the incremental change strategy if we were taking baby steps towards unraveling these monsterous programs. Unfortunately we are expanding them by a mix of baby steps and giant leaps like this prescription drug bill.
175 posted on 11/25/2003 1:24:47 PM PST by stljoe71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
Ask those under 30 if they want to assume all the costs for their own elderly relatives. I think that would be a different answer.

Why should they have to? The ww2 generation was not the greatest generation they were the grasshopper generation. They frolicked and played instead of saving for retirement and now they want the ants to give them our food during the winter.

If they need money for drugs I hear wal-mart is hiring.

176 posted on 11/25/2003 1:26:23 PM PST by stljoe71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: stljoe71
I am assuming you were born in 1971, given your screenname.

Let me put it to you this way: the generation that fought WWII (like my father) did pay their way, and put their kids through school. They didn't have a lot of help from the US government to do that. My parents paid for my education without student loans or Pell Grants. They did the same for my 3 sisters and my brother.Now most of their drugs were covered by insurance, but even the co-pay on their medications was quite expensive. I suppose you think my mom should be out there in her wheelchair working as a Wal-Mart greeter. And my dad should have hobbled around on crutches to do something to get his heart medicine.

You are young and perhaps have not had sick relatives yet. I hope for your sake you get gain some compassion.

177 posted on 11/25/2003 1:33:39 PM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
Very well said, Miss Marple. I will use your analysis in discussion with others who do not have all the facts and are opposed to this bill.
178 posted on 11/25/2003 1:33:42 PM PST by BlueAngel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
"...why would you take Rush's word over Newt's? Why believe George Will over Senator Frist?"

I guess becuz both Newt and Frist have shown the propensity to be overcome with Inside-the-Beltway Fever...and I haven't heard Will's take on this legislation.

"All of us can disagree about whether or not this will work and whether or not it is too expensive..."

Beyond that argument, I would value your opinion on Dubyuh's and the GOP's Discretionary Domestic Spending record to date...how the heck can OUR SIDE be outpacing the admittedly out-of-control spending growth of Slick Willie and the RATS' record of '93-'94?! We're supposed to be the Party of Fiscal Displine!!

"...to act like the Republicans and the President are simply interested in creating a big, pork-type boondoggle is simply demagoguing, in my opinion."

Perhaps, but until the GOP and Bush demonstrate the ability to rein in Federal Domestic Spending, it's not demagoguing to come to the conclusion that we have lost our principles with respect to promoting Limited Government!!

FReegards...MUD

179 posted on 11/25/2003 1:34:24 PM PST by Mudboy Slim (RE-IMPEACH Osama bil Clinton!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice...."

Charlotte (Wingnut) Corday

180 posted on 11/25/2003 1:36:14 PM PST by Charlotte Corday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 281 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