Posted on 01/07/2006 8:38:11 PM PST by lainie
It's more of a mistake that Rush forgot Elian as the "one other example I'm leaving out".
As far as Ruby Ridge goes, the FBI guy in charge Larry Potts was promoted by higher-ups in the Clinton administration, from Freeh to Reno to even Clinton himself.
Bush I had no such direct part of Ruby Ridge.
I've always said the Democrats don't know Jack. But, I wasn't talking about Abramoff.
I can't believe he missed that. Get a rope!
:)
Well, Rush reads, too. I think it's about high time we figured out a way to stop that "pretty common" as you say, misstatement from spreading.
In fact, I just found something kind of disturbing.. I'll post to all.
The Spanish Inquisition.
Bill
Horiruchi (sp) was reassigned, but spared personal liability (IIRC). The government settled with Randy for 4 million bucks, also IIRC. Given the timescale and personal scale of Ruby Ridge, I doubt the president was personally involved in either the initial contact or the legal events following.
"Party over principle" is the guiding phrase for far too many people.
W has been able to swell the ranks of the federal government in ways that Clinton never dreamed. And tpp many "conservatives," who fought Clinton for every dime, are more than eager to give dollar after dollar to W's boondoggles.
"I consider Rush to be every bit as important to the movement as Barry Goldwater and Ronaldis Magnus."
I agree. From the late '90's when I started to listen to Rush and while Ronaldus Magnus was alive, I constantly and persistently stated that Rush was the 2nd greatest living American.
Reading this (admitted lefty, POS) forum, Rush made the same "misstatement" numerous times on the air 12/22/2005? What's up with that?
I was listening to the great Rush yesterday. He was defending the president's wiretapping escapades. He was having a little trouble weaving his web of spin. His problem was that there were a few real conservatives listening, not just blind neocon sheep. They knew an abuse of power when they saw it. Time and time again, this point was made. What if a future Democratic president had the same power that Bush now wields? This was great. His demonization of the democrats was coming back to haunt him. This is such a rarity on right-wing talk radio. The host was being challenged by conservatives. He could not simply demonize them they way he would if they were liberals. His response was this. If Democrats took power they would get rid of the Patriot Act, and then proceed to wiretap anyone they wanted anyways. Good one Rush.
During the course of the spinfest, at least three or four times the Ruby Ridge incident was cited as an example of past Democratic abuses of power. I have a little tidbit of info for Rush and his neocon minions. When Federal agents made their assault on Ruby Ridge, the president was George H.W. Bush.
I would have ended the reply at the word baggage.
These same partisan loyalists show up on the California Topic to crucify the few remaining conservatives. There is no appeasement.
Again, I think it's just a mistake. We've all done it. It's easy to do in this case, since Ruby Ridge and Waco are linked so often.
Later reading.
Truthfully, I can't even follow what he's so mad about. Because I won't express (given, obvious) indignation about democrats lying about something, he's saying I don't have the right to notice Rush misspoke. I think? I dunno. Don't really care, either.
He's got alot on his mind. I figure Ruby Ridge isn't one of the bigger deals in his recall. I caught him "forgetting" about having had Specter on air discussing donations from Soros, just before the 2004 election (Republican Main Street Partnership / Main Street Individual Fund).
Rush was talking a couple months ago about Specter in some context where that past was relevant (I forget the exact context), and Rush didn't make the connection. I did because I'd researched RMSP/MSIF closely, etc. He (Limbaugh) just has his own set of fact close at hand, different from yours and different from mine.
I just found something kind of disturbing.. I'll post to all.
Ut-Oh ;-)
Well.
It would be an awful thing, if Rush is trying to add legitimacy to a common error. Like I said, it's high time he stopped making that particular mistake.
I care, and every little word that's wrong is counted. We're going to bounce him out of radio yet, if it's the last thing we do!
:) Denote sarcasm.
see 50.
Oftentimes when he "stands up" for someone like Janet Reno, it's to illustrate absurdity by being absurd. It's sort of like that day back in 1996 he said he was going to support Bill Clinton's re-election. That pronouncement burned up his phones and he got the last laugh.
I'd have to hear the tape for myself.
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.