Posted on 12/06/2011 3:27:47 PM PST by COBOL2Java
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: It's like clockwork. It's becoming predictable. I don't care who it is, a Republican presidential candidate breaks out of the pack, gets close to Romney -- or even surpasses Romney in polling data in certain states -- and the Republican establishment goes after him. Today there is a coordinated -- well, I don't know that it's coordinated, but it sure appears to be. Regardless, no matter where you look in the Republican establishment media today, there looks to be a coordinated attack on Mr. Newt. I'm not gonna mention any names because you know when I do, all I do is elevate these people and the names don't matter here.
I've never shared this, folks. Being number one, I mean there's nothing like it and I wouldn't trade it, but it carries limitations, it brings limitations with it. By definition anybody I talk about is smaller than I am so when I talk about 'em I elevate 'em and call attention to what really is not noticed by a whole lot of people. So there's a lot of stuff I can't, either by virtue of my professional policy and by virtue of common sense, there's a lot of stuff that I don't talk about because it doesn't deserve to be any more widely spread than it already is on its own. Do you understand what I'm saying, Snerdley? It's a very limiting thing, and it's amazing how this has changed over the course -- I remember the first five years this program, I don't care what it was, unless, you know, some little newspaper in Oshkosh ripped me, I wouldn't talk about that, but I mean for the most part I could talk about pretty much anything and not worry about giving it a wider berth than it already had.
But now pretty much everything I talk about is gonna get a wider berth than it already has which is one of the reasons why I have this ban on MSNBC. Why should I give them a bigger audience than they can attract on their own, for example? You see what I'm talking about here? (interruption) What were you gonna say? I know. Exactly right. There are people who try to trick me into talking about them, hoping I'll talk about 'em to put 'em on the map. Exactly right, Snerdley. Very perceptive on your part. So I'm just gonna tell you, there are -- count 'em, one, two, three, four -- there are five, not counting whatever's happened on television, there are five hit pieces on Newt Gingrich today that come from Republican establishment conservative media. It's amazing.
I want to call these people and say, "Let me ask you a question. When this is all over, who would you rather have --" and, by the way, none of this is to defend Newt. I don't want to be misunderstood on this, folks. None of this is to defend. I mean this is pure, 100% commentary right now. But I feel like calling some of these people, which of course I would never do, I don't call anybody 'cause I actually don't like talking to people. I would say, "Do you really at the end of the day prefer Obama to Newt? 'Cause that's what you're gonna bring off here if you keep this up." What's happening, anybody that gets close to Romney -- we talked about this yesterday, we talked about this back in November. The Republican establishment is now, I'm convinced, fully invested in Romney, which is fine, I'm not endorsing anybody, but the reason is the House and Senate, not the White House.
I am convinced the more I read and the more I read between the lines, these people I'm talking about don't seem all that confident Obama can be beat, but they do think that Romney can help the Republicans pick up Senate seats and hold the House. I didn't think holding the House was in question here, but some of these people think that it is. Now, of course your goal and my goal is much different than this. We want the White House. We want to dispatch Obama. We look at this list of Republican nominees and we take any of them over Obama. So while you and I may have problems with each candidate, some of them more so than others, we still take every one of them. Whoever wins this we're gonna support them.
Now, actually that's not true. There's some rock-ribbed conservatives who may, if the wrong candidate's nominated here, sit out, but you are different than the people I'm talking about. These people, we're not even talking about ideology with conservative versus liberal or Republican versus Democrat. This is strictly inside-the-Beltway political machinations that are going on here that are the determining factor. So it's just interesting to categorize it.
I said yesterday, I was talking to a friend of mine, he sent me a note and he was all bent out of shape about this. This friend of mine, he tunes in or reads a lot of conservative blogs and websites, he's pulling his hair out, "I thought these people were conservative?" I said, "You are misunderstanding something. There is not a conservative movement in the media." And there really isn't. The conservative movement, and I mean this from bottom of my large beating heart -- ba-boom, ba-boom, ba-boom -- the conservative movement is made up of me, talk radio, the Tea Party and the American people who are conservative. But a conservative movement made up of movement media people, there hasn't been that since Mr. Buckley passed away. I really don't believe so.
So you look at today in these pieces, and they run the gamut, one piece talks about all of Newt's baggage that you have forgotten or that you don't any longer care about but that these professional media people, it's their business, they haven't forgotten and they have to remember it and it will be a disaster if he wins, and it will be a disaster if he wins the White House, it will be a disaster for everybody. I'm thinking, "Ehhh, versus Obama?" Which is really what it cuts down to. I'd rather have Newt in there than Obama. I'd rather have Romney in there than Obama. I would rather have Ron Paul in there than Obama. I would rather have any of these people in there than Obama. What are we talking about? Do we want to become Europe? You know, the only reason Europe's being propped up, folks, and that is an entirely interesting story in and of itself what's happening in Europe. Europe is right before our very eyes socialism failing on a grand scale yet again.
Everything Paul Krugman and Thomas "Loopy" Friedman, New York Times, everything they hold dear is failing right before their very eyes, and our very eyes, but they can't allow that 'cause that's Obama. So Europe has to be propped up by the IMF. Europe has to be propped up by Germany. Europe has to be propped up by us somehow. Europe has to be propped up by Obama at least through the next election. Everything has to be propped up artificially in order to protect Obama's reelection bid, pure and simple. George Will, I mentioned this yesterday, George Will has called Newt a Marxist. Fine; he can do whatever he wants. But I don't recall him ever calling Obama a Marxist. So there's a huge effort out there today, and it's not just today; of course it's been building. It was Herman Cain before Newt. It was Rick Perry when he came out strong. This effort's been directed at Michele Bachmann. And it is essentially an attack on conservatives. It is conservatives that nobody in the establishment inside the Beltway appears to want. Republicans and Democrats alike really apparently do not want genuine conservatives winning elections at the upper levels of the Republican Party.
END TRANSCRIPT
Your reasoning is illogical. Are you smoking crack??
Bachman has burned her bridges with conservatives by going after the other conservative candidates and not Romney or Obama. Had she been doing both she would still be a viable candidate. It was all downhill when she brought up gardisil and Perry
Frugal Socialist ditto.
My, my resorting to calling Conservatives “Bible Thumpers” only took one reality post on Newt, the Frugal Socialist Candidate.
I was using an exaggeration to make a point and a distinction - but since you took it personally and totally out of context - I have no desire to try and help you through the point I was making.
Since you have no interest in anything but starting a food fight anyway.
“Yep.
As someone who agrees more with Bachmann than Newt, I would still support Newt because
A: he understands the battle is about Obama, and not about the other Republicans and
B; MB is too dull to figure that out and
C: Newt will actually accomplish more for conservatism than MB will IMO, even though she is more conservative philosohpically.
Being a mom of 58 kids and thumping your Bible harder does not make an effective leader (and I love kids and the Bible...just sayin’ what I’m looking for out of government)”
Well said
your kidding right?
Beck did a total set up today for Bachmann - He admitted he's a libertarian - he would go for Paul if not for Paul ready to give the keys of the kingdom to Iran.
Beck orchestrated a hit piece on Newt - nothing else to call it. He does 1/2 hour on radio - can see only BECK - and pommels him with his version of what he takes from past moves of Newt and not only doesn't really listen to Newt's answers but while Newt is talking, he looks to his other radio guy and sneers -
Then he had Bachmann on his TV show - for most an hour, nice close up face times. He asks her NO real questions, just sits and has a chatty gab fest and lets her go on about anything she wants.
Nothing but a fluff commercial for Bachmann.
So totally lopsided, unprofessional and deliberate to malign Gingrich and prop up Bachmann. Dishonest.
I have canceled my subscription to GBTV and add that monthly stipend to my Newt contribution.
Oh, there WAS one question Beck asked Bachmann. He asked in the case of things getting so bad that the national guard had to be called out across the country, what would she do?
She said she would talk to the people and ask them "What kind of country do you want? I would talk to the people.'
Wow, that's comforting.
The Ivy League Establishment Elitists are coming out of their initial shock phase of wondering "What the heck is happening? We've picked Romney. Why aren't the people getting in line?"
We need to remember and keep spreading the word that ROMNEY, not Newt, is the Washington Insider. He's the pick of the WAshington elite...not Newt.
Newt went to a - GASP - college in Georgia!. He did NOT, like Palin did not, go to Yale or Harvard. He's not Skull & Bones, He didn't take One World Gov't: 101. He's already indicated who he may pick for his VP - (Col West) - a man who also NOT "one of them."
(They made a deal with Reagan when they saw he was likely to win - they'd sit out attacking him if he took one of theirs for VP - GHWB - and stack his cabinet and appointments with their people. (One of the reasons he was unable to fulfill his campaign promise of dismantling the Dept. of Education.) It's amazing he was able to accomplish all that he did.
Gingrich has enough of a power base that they can't force him to put in their people. They know their Power is in serious danger of being broken, like Humpty Dumpty.
WE are, at this point in the game, fighting the Republican Establishment Cabal. The media will gleefully join their attacks.
We need to repeat over and over that ROMNEY is the insider!
I’m attacking Newt for the same reason I attacked Rick Perry. He is an open border RINO who runs “The Americano” out of his K Street headquarters. He is even worse and more objectionable than Perry on immigration.
(1) What’s the difference between Newt and Obama on immigration? When Obama and Holder push for amnesty, they inspire resistance which leads to Republican victories in Congress and in states like Virginia.
When George W. Bush and Juan McCain and Newt Gingrich push for amnesty, they succeed in demoralizing conservatives and energizing the opposition, which predictably results in massive lack of enthusiasm which results in massive losses in Congress and the states.
(2) Why not bring back Arlen Specter and Lincoln Chafee and Bob Inglis of “No Labels” Why not let Juan McCain run again on his Hispandering platform of demoralizing conservatives to the point where the Republican candidate loses Indiana?
(3) What did Newt accomplish for conservatism as Speaker of the House?
(4) Bible thumping has nothing to do with it ... though, Newt might want to read the Bible, seeing how he is on his third wife.
Newt Gingrich is not from Georgia. He is not a Southerner. Newt was born and raised near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newt_Gingrich
Your arguments are such a litany of false choices, misrepresentations, exaggerations that they are not worthy of response.
Picking Col. West for VP would be a brilliant move.
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.