“Yes, Mitt was not supportive. However, after he found out the facts, he had his people call Rush. They told Rush that Mitt would make a “corrective/supportive” statement “if he is asked about it”. Well, guess he hasn’t been asked! If and when he is asked it will be just too little and too late in my book.”
The corrupt Hugh Hewitt called Romney’s campaign to get Romney on the show to counter Rush’s disgust with Romney.
Now Romney is sounding down right right wing, defending Rush and using right wing language like loopy liberals and so one on, it is pure red meat language.
Through out that hour Hewitt keeps bumping how Romney has taken on the left defending Rush etc., he finished that hour saying that Fred just never got off the ground and that it is purely a Romney vs Guiliani race.
Hugh is a cheap salesman, who lacks honesty, and scruples.
I agree on Hugh. He has been a hugh disappointment with his pimping for Romney. There is a certain schadenfreude in listening to him try to keep it up where Mitt has spent so much and can show so little— 10,000 ads and Fred beats him by 10 or more points. Hugh should stop the bleeding as to his credibility and try some balance. But then, his dreams of working as Mitt’s press secretary a la Tony Snow are at stake as he has cast his lots...
I agree that Hugh has behaved wrongly. I think he has rationalized his behavior as right because of his evangelical leanings, which also prevent him from embracing Fred. He feels to do so would make him untrue to his own scruples -- at least, that's my guess. There is a breed of righteous Christian who is 80 percent right and solid, and just 20-percent-enough deluded in their own all-powerful knowledge and soaring-on-the-updraft-of-their-own-rhetoric of How God Means It To Be that the line behind pride and principle becomes wavery. It leads to irrational political choices like Hugh's infatuation with Romney.
That said, I probably do the same thing, confusing pride with principle. I can forgive Hugh, but I reject his take on Romney.