Posted on 01/14/2012 8:35:27 PM PST by katiedidit1
Top conservative talker Rush Limbaugh says Newt Gingrich may have made a "good move" by raising Mitt Romney's Bain dealings -- even if the criticisms had some mistakes. Limbaugh, on his show Friday, also noted that Gingrich's Bain attacks came after Romney allies spent millions of dollars in negative ads attacking Gingrich, which Gingrich has said included falsehoods or distortions of his record. Rush read Gingrich's statement asking his supporters that run Winning Our Future Super Pac to fix their video about Bain or pull it. Rush said: "Newt Gingrich released the following statement calling for truth and accuracy from campaigns and so-called 'Super-PACs' supporting candidates. 'The American people have a right to know the facts about the records of the men and women who are asking them for their vote. Governor Romney is running as someone who knows how to create jobs. In fact, he has claimed to have created 100,000 jobs while at Bain Capital. However, numerous analyses have said that figure is as inaccurate as President Obama's claim to have "saved or created" millions of jobs. Furthermore, Governor Romney's experience as a portfolio manager did not help him create an environment in Massachusetts that was friendly to job creation.'" Rush continued: "It goes on, but basically what Newt is saying here, what he announced today, "I am calling for the Winning Our Future Super-PAC supporting me to either edit its 'King of Bain' advertisement and movie to remove its inaccuracies, or to pull it off the air and off the internet entirely," and I am urging Romney to do the same. Read more on Newsmax.com: Limbaugh: Newt's Attacks May Be 'Good Move'
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
“HUH??? Wasn’t Rush ragging on Newt last week for sounding like a democrat ?”
Yes, he was, and I am sick of such stupidity coming from so many people, when they should be able to understand that Newt and Perry were not being democrats or “attacking capitalism”, but delving into one man’s record.
Rush has gone off the rails lately. Last week he actually declared that Perry is not a conservative. He didn’t have the guts to name him, just described the guy who didn’t do well in the early debates and was wrongly seen as dumb. THAT, after much talk in recent months of Perry’s solid conservatism.
You’re right. Rush has taken to just mailing it in, blowing with the winds, probably based on what an aide tells him about his e-mails.
That’s possible. Certainly, Rush does enjoy his hobnobbing with the rich and famous, and he never misses an opportunity to remind us how wealthy he is. It could have something to do with insecurity.
But whatever is the cause of it, I feel at the very least that he’s losing his focus and putting less thought and research into what he says. Maybe he’s tired of the whole thing and just wants to hang out at the golf course with the Rockefellers and his latest wife or something...
You're not the only person here who thinks he "understands" Rand. I was 16 years old when I read my first Ayn Rand story, "Anthem." By the time I was 19, I'd read pretty much everything she'd written, and though she was an atheist, interestingly "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead" were powerful nourishment in my own relationship with Christ. Rand said she didn't believe in God. Well, I don't believe in atheists, and I pray for Rand's soul. She was a GIFT from God, and I trust that God has taken her under His wing.
Rand DID venerate capitalism; she mistook the morality in the men who made it great as being a result of Capitalism, when in fact that morality, AND THE RESULTING SUCCESS OF CAPITALISM, was due solely to God knows how many hundreds of generations of Europeans and Americans whose ENTIRE CULTURES were founded on the Judeo-Christian moral code.
Her grasp of the PHILOSOPHY, the THEORY, of laissez-faire capitalism was and remains a worthy beacon. But don't for one instant kid yourself into thinking that she wasn't sadly mistaken in confusing it, as she did, with a kind of spiritual strength the fount of which BELONGS SOLELY TO THE ALMIGHTY.
He lost it for me in 2008 when he flat out refused to vet Obama’s past and especially his natural born citizenship. I've been done with Rush since then.
He will do the same again in 2012. Bet on it.
Your commentary is really right on target. I see Ayn Rand as grasping the true philosophy of free will and freedom and malice to none, but enriching the spirit within ourselves as individuals. The missing link is the realization of communion with God and one another, and I sense that Ayn was very conflicted about that, perhaps as being a Jew in a very oppressed society from which she came.
But I totally relate to your point that she enriched my spiritual and Christian beliefs and really helped me to understand that charity comes from the heart and one’s free will, not from government mandate and confiscation. Thanks for sharing a great post!
Go watch "Bridge on the River Kwai" and UNDERSTAND that Col. Nicholson was driven ENTIRELY by "the principle involved." I know, it was "just a movie," and you can use that as your rationale for dismissing its message, but the MESSAGE IN THE MOVIE REMAINS HONEST AND TRUE, and that cautionary tale is perfectly applicable to Rush Limbaugh.
Not hardly, FRiend!
I'm still thinking about your dad's description of seeing all those bombers flying overhead. Making me want to watch "Memphis Belle" again!
Gosh ... thank you so much for your kind words, and I am ELATED to find that others, also, had their faith boosted by Rand the atheist! God does work His wonders in the most strange and mysterious ways! And times like this are when FReeping is just plain GOOD FOR THE SOUL!
Very true, and Rand very vividly describes how socialism starves and kills the soul. I have made this argument sometimes with ‘compassionate’ liberals and when they allow themselves to see how socialism is so contrary to their spiritual and religious beliefs, it really is depressing to them. Oftentimes that depression leads them to new revelations. I see our national depression leading us in that direction, but the process, just as it is painful for the individual, is much the same for society as a whole.
Really, I thank you for bringing this subject up. I could discuss it all day. Thanks!
“Tea partiers are just dying to vote for somebody who will stand up and fight for what is right.
If nobody is willing to do that, we know the Republican candidate is going to get mauled by the Dems and the media.
So it’s definitely an asset that Newt will play just as mean. I have no problem with that.”
Finally, someone else who shares my perspective. When evaluating candidates, it is essential to consider how the candidate will campaign under the intense propaganda of the Dem party and its well-funded machine in media. The Repub party is fighting against a party that has legislated its own funds (through required union dues), shapes the perspective of new voters (by controlling education), and has a free, vast propaganda machine (in television and print news outlets). Any candidate opposing that kind of political force must be smart and aggressive. I am not speaking in support of any one candidate but only wish to point out that some Republican candidates are just far too weak, myopic, and easy-going to be running for President against the Dem machine.
I don’t want to overdo the comparison but consider the fight for control of the Soviet government following Lenin’s death. Who won that battle? Was it the noble, nice guy? Was it the guy with the best interests of the people at heart? In 2012, in the US, we have to stop the bad guys from destroying the country and our candidate must be tough and his message must be clear and undeniably correct—else we get a corrupt gov’t of despots. Corrupt gov’ts tend to be the norm. What we have is unique, incredibly valuable, and worth being tough to protect. I don’t care if Newt pees on some dead Taliban, I like his smarts and toughness—not an endorsement, just suggesting something the other candidates might want to adopt if they don’t want us to be McCain’d again.
Good post. You explained it far better than I ever could.
Good post, thanks.
Maybe Kathryn likes Mitt...
How is the trolling going?
Funny....!!! Thanks.
Crony captialism is indefenseable....period.
Good point....!
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.