Mitt is Kicking Butt Out There

Rush Limbaugh.com ^ | May 25, 2012 | Rush Limbaugh

[Kaslin]

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Mitt Romney yesterday on his website and his YouTube channel (he has a YouTube channel) released a new ad entitled, "Day One, Part 2." Romney's staying on message. There's one thing... I probably, in the near future, need to spend a little bit more time in this. But you know, everybody's talking about Obama and his daily events and so forth. But Romney is kicking butt out there, and Romney is staying on message, and Romney is rapid-firing back. And this is part and parcel of what has them a little bit discombobulated.

So here is a Romney ad staying on message Day One, Part 2.

ANNOUNCER: What would a Romney presidency be like? Day one: President Romney announces deficit reductions, ending the Obama era of big government, helping secure our kids' futures. President Romney stands up to China on trade and demands they play by the rules. President Romney begins repealing job-killing regulations that are costing the economy billions. That's what a Romney presidency will be like.

ROMNEY: I'm Mitt Romney, and I approve this message.

Day One

RUSH: Now on CNN's Starting Point this morning, Christine Romans, the fill-in host, talked to Debbie "Blabbermouth" Schultz, who runs the Democrat National Committee. By the way, do you know Debbie "Blabbermouth" Schultz was scheduled to appear and make a speech after services at a Miami temple, a Jewish temple? And a member of the temple, a man by the name of Tate stood up and said (paraphrased), "I'm outta here. If you bring her in here to make some concocted political speech on Friday night, I'm outta here. I mean, I'm out!"

So they canceled her. A Miami temple canceled the appearance by Debbie "Blabbermouth" Schultz. When was the last time you heard of that happening? Normally that's the kind of stuff that happens to us. One of us is scheduled to go someplace, the left protests it, and whoever was scheduled to host it shuts it down. Debbie "Blabbermouth" Schultz was disinvited or uninvited, and this Tate guy... I forget his first name. Stanley? I'm not sure. Anyway, he persevered.

And this temple is very close to her district. It's in Miami but it's very close to her district. Anyway, she was on CNN's Starting Point this morning and Christine Romans said, "I want to start with this attack on Romney and Bain Capital. A lot of people, Debbie, are seeing this as an attempt to disqualify Romney in battleground states, so the lunch-bucket Democrats have somebody to blame for their factories closing. The White House said this is their big strategy: Go after Bain; go after Romney. Will it play in those battleground states, and if it doesn't, what's Plan B?"

Day One, Part Two

SCHULTZ: It's not strategy! What it is is that Mitt Romney has made his record at Bain Capital his experience in the private sector -- which is almost exclusively at Bain Capital -- the central premise to American voters, uh, that ... that they should elect him president. There are thousands of workers who he laid off, uh, companies that they deliberately forced into bankruptcies, and Mitt Romney and his partners run -- made hundreds of millions of dollars.

RUSH: "Deliberately forced into bankruptcy."

So they're doubling down on Bain.

Whether it's working or not, they are going to double down on Bain.

And Romney's ads are entirely positive. And, by the way, remember all these calls against negative ads? "Gotta stop all the negative ads!" Well, Romney's out there running positive ads, and the media is still dissing his ads. The media is still ripping Romney's ads. The media is still criticizing Romney for his ads even though they're the essence of positive. So Debbie "Blabbermouth" Schultz says there basically is no Plan B. "We're going after Bain, we're going after Romney, and nothing gonna change." So Christine Romans says, "Well, why is it not hypocrisy for the president to take campaign donations from private equity when he's attacking private equity, making that an essential part of his campaign?"

SCHULTZ: Accepting a contribution from a particular person involved in venture capital and criticizing Mitt Romney -- who has made his record as a venture capitalist at Bain the central focus of his credibility and his qualification for being president -- are completely different things! So Mitt Romney, in the way that he ran Bain Capital -- the companies that he deliberately drove into bankruptcy, the creditors that he left with less than pennies on the dollar in return, and the thousands and thousands of people who he left on the unemployment lines while making hundreds of millions of dollars of -- in profits for himself and his partners -- is an appropriate examination for a man who is saying that this is the reason we should elect him president.

Who contributes to Barack Obama --

RUSH: Stop it! I feel like I'm I listening to Hillary. I can't stand it. It's nothing but... It's just poppycock. It's just lies. It's all lies. It's all absurd. I tell you what I'm gonna do. When we come back at the top of the hour, we'll do Marc Thiessen. Washington Post headline: "Forget Bain -- Obama's Public-Equity Record is the Real Scandal." And it's a list of all and every one of Obama's abject failures -- bailing out companies, green energy sector -- using your money. Romney used his own. Obama is using your money, taxpayer money is got a dismal record.

You talk about bankruptcies and people losing their jobs?

Obama's the king of destroying companies!

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: The fact of the matter is Bain Capital was trying to keep these companies out of bankruptcy, and they were asked in to save these companies. These were not takeovers. This woman doesn't have the slightest idea what she's talking about.

END TRANSCRIPT

[muawiyah]

Pretty obvious you are a Mormon of some kind, so, which one is it that's legitimate and which ones aren't?

I think we deserve an answer to that question ~

[Kazan]

With Ghettobama it’s 100 percent certainty pf disaster. with romney it’s probably 50 to 75 percent of disaster.

The risk with Romney is much greater because the party in the White House almost always loses seats in Congress.

The choice is between Obama and growing conservative majority in Congress or Romney and shrinking Republican minority. The latter is a far worse combination.

[Kazan]

Mitt’s political flip-floppiness shows the silver lining that yes, given sufficient pressure he can be influenced.

What makes you think conservatives are going to have that sort of leverage? We've seen Republicans far more conservative sellout their principles when exposed to DC culture and the media.

And, Romney KNOWS you'll vote for him no matter what he does. He establishment you and those voting for him are making threats they never follow through on.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Like, just to pick something at random, Scalia would want to quit for Mitt? Give Scalia credit for some sense?

How is it that this father of gay marriage has now suddenly disowned his offspring? Could it have been an adoption of convenience, and abandoned as quickly?

The time to cast the soul saving vote was in the primary. Now we are faced with the question whether the guard should change. You can’t cast a vote for a spoiler and pretend before either man or God that this time around it won’t do what spoilers always do.

[Kazan]

If Mitt would like four to be eight, he’s going to care.

You'll vote for him no matter what he does if office because you will always convince yourself he is the lesser of two evils. He and the establishment know that. You're making threats you never follow through on. It's like the little boy that cried wolf.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Shoot, if in 2016 a more sensible rival appears in the primaries, I’d cast a primary vote for him/her without a qualm. That’s the time to worry about souls. In November now the question is, should the guard change (or if it must change, which of two possibilities should it change to). Greater America will sit out Mitt if not vote for a Rat rival, if it is dispirited enough with his performance.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Let’s see, will a flip flopping, mushy moderate who always has a finger in the wind (but does have a lot of business sense) prove a less competent steward than a resolute far lefty who pretends that, say, requiring religious organizations to carry insurance policies that support things contrary to the religion (with the meaningless difference of “who” pays for it being “the company” i.e. the subscriber) is some kind of compromise?

The choice in November being such stinks to high heaven, of course.

[sergeantdave]

“You keep wanting to pretend voting for a man with liberal record and no principles is going to make the country better. It won’t.”

And you’re pretending that a second Buckwheat term won’t damage the republic more. Buckwheat is already illegally ruling through the fascist bureaucracy and executive dictates, doing whatever he wants.

If we had Republicans such as Thaddeus Stevens and the Radical Republicans like in the 1860s, I could see taking Buckwheat out. Stevens stripped Johnson of his commander in chief role and took over the military. He also effectively neutralized the court and pushed through Reconstruction without Johnson’s assent.

The entire Republican leadership today are gutless worms. There’s not a single Thaddeus Stevens among them.

What’s your plan to neutralize Buckwheat and his Nazi bureaucrats?

[Longbow1969]

Pretty obvious you are a Mormon of some kind, so, which one is it that's legitimate and which ones aren't?

Um, no. I am not Mormon. In my view, Mormon's are not Christian. However, I don't see the need to bash them. In my view they are just another one of many religions I don't subscribe to. I don't vote based on a politicians religion. I know lots of wonderful Mormon people and I hold nothing against them. I also know many terrific Buddhist and Hindu's and have no issue with them either.

I think we deserve an answer to that question ~

Actually, you don't. But I gave you one anyway. Are you one of the FR Mormon bashers? I hadn't associated your name with that twisted group before, but looking at your responses I am beginning to think you may be one of them.

[Elsie]

Mitt is Kicking Butt Out There

Of COURSE he is!!!

---

The

DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS

OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS

SECTION 71

Revelation given to Joseph Smith the Prophet and Sidney Rigdon, at Hiram, Ohio, December 1, 1831. HC 1: 238–239. The Prophet had continued to translate the Bible with Sidney Rigdon as his scribe until this revelation was received, at which time it was temporarily laid aside so as to enable them to fulfill the instruction given herein. The brethren were to go forth to preach in order to allay the unfriendly feelings that had developed against the Church as a result of the publication of some newspaper articles by Ezra Booth, who had apostatized.

1–4, Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon are sent forth to proclaim the gospel; 5–11, Enemies of the saints shall be confounded.

1 Behold, thus saith the Lord unto you my servants Joseph Smith, Jun., and Sidney Rigdon, that the time has verily come that it is necessary and expedient in me that you should open your mouths in proclaiming my gospel, the things of the kingdom, expounding the mysteries thereof out of the scriptures, according to that portion of Spirit and power which shall be given unto you, even as I will.

2 Verily I say unto you, proclaim unto the world in the regions round about, and in the church also, for the space of a season, even until it shall be made known unto you.

3 Verily this is a mission for a season, which I give unto you.

4 Wherefore, labor ye in my vineyard. Call upon the inhabitants of the earth, and bear record, and prepare the way for the commandments and revelations which are to come.

5 Now, behold this is wisdom; whoso readeth, let him understand and receive also;

6 For unto him that receiveth it shall be given more abundantly, even power.

7 Wherefore, confound your enemies; call upon them to meet you both in public and in private; and inasmuch as ye are faithful their shame shall be made manifest.

8 Wherefore, let them bring forth their strong reasons against the Lord.

9 Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you—there is no weapon that is formed against you shall prosper;

10 And if any man lift his voice against you he shall be confounded in mine own due time.

11 Wherefore, keep my commandments; they are true and faithful. Even so. Amen.

 

The Official Scriptures of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
© 2006 Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved.
Rights and use information. Privacy policy.

[Elsie]

I hadn't associated your name with that twisted group before, but looking at your responses I am beginning to think you may be one of them.

See what happens when you speak of the DEVIL??

He APPEARS!!!

[Elsie]

How is Romney his "boy"? Pointing out that Romney is going to be the GOP nominee and that he is better than Obama doesn't make him anyone's "boy". Most people here wanted someone else, but our candidates lost or didn't run.

Office of First President & Living Prophet®:

April 21st, 2012

URGENT!

Fellow MORMON Freeper Christians!!

 

Hot diggity dog; our boy has MADE it!!

Now beware; for the media is gonna be on us like... well; you know the saying.

I've been getting lots of feedback from those of you on Free Republic (spit) about a certain ELSIE (or something like that), who is REALLY giving us a hard time there!

 

Why not try to point out to the uninformed how OBSESSED he seems to be.

 

Let's see if we can tangle him up so much trying to defend his reputation

that he'll no longer have as much time to post facts about MORMONism.

 

As always, Tommy M.  

 

(Keep pressing that we are CHRISTIAN and avoid anything MORMON like the DEVIL!!)

[Cyclops08]

Mitt is NOT a prophet, he is a D*** politician. The verses you quoted do NOT apply to Mitt.

Mitt is kicking but for a number of reasons, but the main one is: Mitt is NOT Obama.

The verses you quoted have NOTHING to do with politicians.

[Elsie]

You make yourself sound ridiculous when you continue to suggest Romney still may not be the nominee.

Yeah!

That's so dumb.

Where only a wishful thinker would claim that NOTHING can happen between now and November...

[Elsie]

I really think it's driven a lot of mainstream conservatives away.

Yup!

And they were most ALL MORMONs; who could NOT hold their own in a religious discussion without getting UGLY.

[Elsie]

I really think it's driven a lot of mainstream conservatives away.

Don't worry; they STILL ain't gonna vote for Obama or go over to DU.

[Elsie]

The fringe Mormon bashers will make no political difference, though I do think they are hurting this website.

Oh well; things like that happen when heresies like MORMONism get exposed.

FR loses (according to you)

Heaven gains (according to me).

[Elsie]

That is part of any political forum, and not necessarily a bad thing.

Finally!

A straw upon which to grasp!

[Elsie]

The key for a healthy forum is that the vast majority of grounded, sane, reasonable people keep the fringe in check.

Aw...  shucks...

 

[Elsie]

Pretty obvious you are a Mormon of some kind, so, which one is it that's legitimate and which ones aren't?

Maybe not. Perhaps just a lack of discernment.