Posted on 11/19/2007 3:37:47 PM PST by wagglebee
RUSH: Mark in Great Barrington, Massachusetts. Am I reading that right? Welcome to the program. Don't have my glasses on so I couldn't really read it, but I guessed and got it right.
CALLER: Yes you got it right, dittos, long-time listener, 24/7 member, and fellow talk show host inspired by you, my friend.
RUSH: Well.
CALLER: Been at it for five years on the Internet, think I've got the biggest show on the Internet, and I've got a big question for you.
RUSH: All right, ask away.
CALLER: All right. The question is this. I think the most conservative candidate that we have for president is Duncan Hunter, going through his website, listening to what he's got on the news, his different interviews and stuff, I mean he definitely meets the conservative agenda head on. And we're just not hearing a lot from him. And we're not hearing a lot from him, from you. And I'm wondering, sir, do you have any plans in the near future for interviews with him, for talking to him on the air? I mean, I did hear, you spoke about an e-mail update you got from him the other day, but other than that it looks like the best candidate here is not getting pushed by the strongest conservative people.
RUSH: Well, here's my answer to your question. I'm asked this a lot and historically I have not gotten involved in primaries, because if I had any of these people, and they have all asked to come on this show, and I respectfully say no, because I'd have to ask them all back. And I really don't look at this program as a campaign vehicle during primaries. Among other things, I, frankly, Mark, I have the belief that political candidates have a duty to get noticed themselves. It's an unfair process in terms -- Mrs. Clinton. Mrs. Clinton is strictly there because she didn't divorce her husband. In fact, she's strictly there because she married him. If her last name weren't Clinton, she'd be the dean of some all-girls' school in Albania touring villages at night and doing whatever you do in a village at night, when you run an all-girls' school. She's just benefiting from conventional wisdom. In the case of Rudy, the reason Rudy is getting a lot of attention is the northeastern bias in the media. The northeastern bias in the media wants two northeasterners to run.
Even some of our conservative journalist friends who are headquartered and work in the northeast, in New York and Washington, are willing to overlook, in some cases, the lack of genuine conservatism in some candidates because they're from the northeast. They have a geographical bias because of where they live. People in the northeast think it's at that it's the heartbeat and the pulse of the country there, and the rest of the country is flyover country and all of that. So it's tough to get out of the bottom tier. You need a really humongous debate performance, and you need an early announcement in some cases when you're going against somebody that's going to benefit from all the conventional wisdom, the media and others. But I sit and watch until one of them surfaces because that's what their job is to do, not mine.
Why is that? BECAUSE HE HAS NO MONEY! Thats right, hes grassroots, all the way. The media is not gonna get a big chunk of change out of this candidate and they damn well know it. So theyve blackballed him.
***Well, that explains the media blackballing him. They know what business they’re in. He’s a double target — they won’t make money from his campaign and they also dislike what he has to say.
Then you need to re-read the transcript, it is very clear.
From Accuracy In Media:
“...Associated Press story that named Saudi Arabia as a Giuliani client listed News Corporation, the parent company of Fox News, as another Giuliani client. This AP story, which was not disputed by Giuliani or News Corporation, was carried on the Fox News website. “
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1833642/posts
Giuliani’s Firm Lobbied Government
Giuliani’s law and lobbying clients have included Saudi Arabia, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., and chewing tobacco maker UST Inc.
In the case of Rudy, the reason Rudy is getting a lot of attention is the northeastern bias in the media. The northeastern bias in the media wants two northeasterners to run [against each other].
Your argument makes no sense, since Rudy and Romney are already running against each other.
He is talking about the MSM's desires for the future, general election race for the WH.
Which northeast candidates (PLURAL) are not "genuine conservatives" but still getting a pass from CONSERVATIVE journalists?
No conservative journalist is giving Hillary a pass, Rush is talking about more than one GOP candidate from the northeast.
As I said earlier, if you don't like it then you should take it up with Rush, but his meaning is clear.
Ya if you want to spin I don’t deal in maybe’s!
Even some of our conservative journalist friends who are headquartered and work in the northeast, in New York and Washington, are willing to overlook, in some cases, the lack of genuine conservatism in some candidates because they're from the northeast. The ONLY conclusion is that Rush is talking about two GOP candidates from the northeast.
I realize you don't like it and I realize that Romney has marginal excuses for it, but a politician who spent most of his career pro-abortion (and campaigned for governor as pro-abortion) AND introduced what can best be described as socialized medicine to his state AND stood by as homosexual marriage was imposed in his state IS NOT going to be considered a conservative.
FOTFL
Rush did interview Pat Buchanan when Buchanan was running 3rd party, so I don’t know why he won’t give Hunter an interview.
FWIW, I heard yesterdays Rush show and detected NO such implication. It was clear to me that he was talking about a Giuliani/Clinton match-up when he said the northeastern bias in the media wants two northeasterners to run.) Anyway, Rush DID actually talk specifically about Mitt on yesterdays show during his live simulcast with Fox News Channels Martha MacCallum. Heres a transcript of that portion of the interview:
MacCALLUM: So, another thing I wanted to ask you about happened over the weekend, or started really on Friday. Mitt Romney is the subject of some push polling in New Hampshire, and theyre getting people on the phone, asking them a few basic normal questions about the election, and then theyre sort of going into this territory where they say, Well, do you realize that Mormons think that the Book of Mormon is superior to the Bible? A lot of outrage about this. Lets just play the sound bite and get Rushs reaction to it.
ROMNEY (sound bite): I think anyone recognizes that attacking a person based on their faith is un-American, and simply wrong. And, at a time like this, the irony with attacking a person on their faith, as we celebrate the founding of a nation, which welcomes people of different faiths, is not lost on any American.
MacCALLUM: What do you think?
RUSH: I think hes got a point. Attacking peoples faith, the last time this was really done and I thought we overcame it was when Jack Kennedy ran in 1960. Everybody was worried about whether the pope would actually be running the country. Now people are worried about whether Joseph Smith is going to be running the country.
MacCALLUM: Its a different situation, though. I mean I know that comparison exists. You have 42 million Catholics I think in 1962 in America
RUSH: Right.
MacCALLUM: and now, maybe 5.5 million Mormons in the United States. Do you think that the Mormon religion is an issue for Mitt Romney in terms of his possible nomination?
RUSH: Well, it is in the sense that Republican primary voters are largely made up of evangelical Christians. You know, there are ways that he can deal with this. I think hes right to be somewhat offended by the push polling, but this is politics. I hate to sort of echo the Clintons here. I remember down here in Florida when Jeb Bush was running for governor the first time against Lawton Chiles, Lawton Chiles was running push polling on Jeb telling senior citizens hes going to cut off their benefits and their housing and so forth. This kind of thing happens. The religious component here makes this sort of fertile ground. If Mitt would just say, Hey, look, I have a vision for the country, and this is what it is: A, B, C, D, and E, and, I believe in God, and I have a great deal of faith in Gods relevance to this countrys founding, and then move on.
MacCALLUM: Thats what hes tried to. I mean, thats what hes been saying. But theres also been this move to do the speech, like John Kennedy did, and say, You know, I wont be ruled by the Pope, in Kennedys case. Do you think its wise for Romney to consider doing that speech? Do you think he is considering it, or do you think he says, Thats something Ill do down the road?
RUSH: I dont know. Im sure hes considering it. I dont know. I dont know what hes going to do. His circumstance right now the reason this is happening to him, in part is because hes leading everywhere in a lot of places in these early primaries, New Hampshire and Iowa, and I think he probably may be in a little bit of a protect-the-lead-mode by not amplifying this stuff beyond what it already is.
Link: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_111907/content/01125106.guest.html
That’s all well and good, but in the transcript that is posted on this thread and linked from his website, he is clearly referring to GOP candidates from the northeast AND he is talking about more than one candidate.
You can spin this however you want, we are simply commenting on what Rush said. If you have a problem with what Rush said then you should take it up with him. It’s not our fault that Rush doesn’t think Rudy and Romney are genuine conservatives. I don’t know exactly why Rush doesn’t think Romney is a conservative (I know why I don’t, but I won’t speak for Rush), but if I had to guess it would have something to do with the FACT that he was pro-abortion (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzZC92IXHyw, http://www.lifenews.com/nat3292.html) and introduced socialized medicine and homosexual marriage to Massachusetts as governor.
You bore me!
Rush said the media wants 'two northeasterners' to run (for President).
Now, unless they changed the rules since .... oh, two minutes ago -- that would mean ONE candidate from each party.
The northeast media wants the race to eventually be Rudy vs Hillary.
Rush's point was that EVEN conservatives in NYC who should know better are "overlooking" the lack of conservatism in Rudy -- and are subconsciously rooting for him to win -- JUST SO there would be "two Northeast liberals" running for President.
Jeeze. This aint rocket science. It's plain English.
Even some of our conservative journalist friends who are headquartered and work in the northeast, in New York and Washington, are willing to overlook, in some cases, the lack of genuine conservatism in some candidates because they're from the northeast.
And this refers to the norhteast GOP candidates who are getting a pass from conservative journalists.
"Should have"?
You missed the entire point of Rush's response. It's not his maddog job to promote the candidates when they can't or won't do it, and neither is it his job to police the rest of talk radio.
I invite you to supply any script of comments you would like to hear Rush repeat in which he takes Hannity to the woodshed for being a Giuliani cheerleader. I guarantamdee you, it won't read like anything Rush would say out loud.
That may seem clear to you, but, having heard the show live, it didn't come across that way to me at all. I agree with the posters who say Rush was talking about Giuliani and Clinton running against each other, and that's what was clear to me.
As in your transcript, Rush has no problem naming names when it serves his purpose, just as he specifically named Giuliani in your excerpt. And, just as he named Romney in the exerpt restornu posted about the push poll controversy. I'm a fairly regular Rush listener, and when he becomes a bit more oblique in his language, the result of which is the hair-splitting we're doing on this thread, IMO there's an underlying issue he's not comfortable being specific about. In this case, I'd say the source of his discomfort is not wanting to name his friend, Sean Hannity.
Thank you for clarifying this more!
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.