Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dick Morris Restates "Big Theory" (Rush Limbaugh)
Rush Limbaugh ^ | June 24, 2003 | Rush Limbaugh

Posted on 06/24/2003 3:28:54 PM PDT by TLBSHOW

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 441-452 next last
To: Satadru
I am glad you side-stepped the David Souter issue.

Yep. And Clarence Thomas.

41 posted on 06/24/2003 4:16:50 PM PDT by lepton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Satadru
Your pet thing is smaller gov't.Your views reasonate with maybe 150,000 nationwide,so really, you shouldn't be offering your advice on the proper way to lead.You go first, and bring more over to your cause, and when you can get someone elected to national office, you maybe taken seriously.
42 posted on 06/24/2003 4:18:49 PM PDT by habs4ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Dane
I have never offered any excuse for O'Connor, although there is a huge difference. When Sandy was nominated she was fairly right-wing at the time. Maybe she seemed fairly conservative for the early 80's, but it was not entirely sure how she would vote on key issues 20 years later. On the other hand, everyone knew from day 1 that David Souter is a liberal. Bush nominated him because he didn't want to stick his neck out for another Thomas type nominee. That goes onto show how uncommitted he was towards conservatism. Always beware of New England Republicans. The only reason they joined the Republican party is because it is easier to get ahead than in the Democratic party. I don't think Bush Sr has one bone of conservatism in his body.
43 posted on 06/24/2003 4:19:21 PM PDT by Satadru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Southack
AMEN!
44 posted on 06/24/2003 4:19:39 PM PDT by Kentucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Clinton won and presided over the country for eight years.

Now in your mind was that good thing or a bad thing.

Bad, I thought so at the time, that's why I voted for Bush 41. Even so, I'm not going to blame Perot for Bush's blundering campaign and alienation of many of his '88 voters.

No one owes a politician their vote.


45 posted on 06/24/2003 4:21:52 PM PDT by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
I can't wait to vote for President Bush in 2004. Everyone has their own version of what conservative means. Everyone.

To me, conservative begins with pro-life. I can work with the imperfections. This is not a monarch. It is a representaive republic. Mr. Bush has to deal with a congress, especially a Senate that does not contain 60 GOP members, much less, 60 that are conservative. The real problem is not Bush, it is the RINOs in the New England states, and our good friend, John McCain, of Arizona. Let's not forget our buddy, Arlen, from PA. We just need to get off of fantasy Island, and realize that we have to deal with other people, who are elected in liberal states. We have to work with what we have.

It is my guess that Limbaugh is griping because he is not as popular as he was with Clinton in office. He also has the likes of Sean Hannity breathing down his neck. And yes, Limbaugh is a little too proud for me.

All those here at FR that pretend to be conservative (all for the purpose of creating division here) are just setting themselves up to cry bitter tears in November, 2004. I'll be laughing at them so hard, won't you?

Mr. Bush will destroy everyone else nominated from every other party.
46 posted on 06/24/2003 4:22:10 PM PDT by AlGone2001 (If liberals must lie to advance their agenda, why is liberalism good for me?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Satadru
I have never offered any excuse for O'Connor, although there is a huge difference. When Sandy was nominated she was fairly right-wing at the time. Maybe she seemed fairly conservative for the early 80's, but it was not entirely sure how she would vote on key issues 20 years later. On the other hand, everyone knew from day 1 that David Souter is a liberal. Bush nominated him because he didn't want to stick his neck out for another Thomas type nominee. That goes onto show how uncommitted he was towards conservatism. Always beware of New England Republicans. The only reason they joined the Republican party is because it is easier to get ahead than in the Democratic party. I don't think Bush Sr has one bone of conservatism in his body

IOW, IMO, you are making excuses for Reagan's mistake and blaming it on Bush.

I am not surprised, it seems to be the modern day malcontents way.

47 posted on 06/24/2003 4:22:13 PM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Southack
It's a good bet that Bush will get Social Security privatized in the next 6 years, as well as get school vocuhers passed so that the power of the public school teachers' unions will be broken by private schools. Bush is also getting our ABM system installed in Alaska.


I'll take that bet...............
48 posted on 06/24/2003 4:24:02 PM PDT by WhiteGuy (MY VOTE IS FOR SALE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: habs4ever
I somewhat agree with you. It is hard for me to get elected if I go on and tell the electorate that the gravy train will dry up during my administration. But if both political parties pander to big govt, then what alternative do conservatives have? I am not saying I am a great leader, what I saying is that Bush has been a failure. When one is the President of the US, one has to take flaks for his failure.
49 posted on 06/24/2003 4:24:06 PM PDT by Satadru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: AlGone2001
He also expected to be invited to this White House; it's not happening. Notice he says "emails I get from people who were at meetings with Bush..."

Nobody's returning his phone calls.
50 posted on 06/24/2003 4:24:27 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
I do all three of those. Can I be the President? Or do I have to lie about my principles and motivations, and then I can have a shot.
51 posted on 06/24/2003 4:25:50 PM PDT by Satadru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
Bad, I thought so at the time, that's why I voted for Bush 41. Even so, I'm not going to blame Perot for Bush's blundering campaign and alienation of many of his '88 voters.

No one owes a politician their vote.

Like I said in reply #40 of this thread, your answer would be wishy-washy and followed by the vain picture signature.

Oh BTW, no one owes a vain malcontent the time of day either, especially one that makes excuses for his own selfish vanity in the political realm.

52 posted on 06/24/2003 4:25:59 PM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth; habs4ever
The American Republic will endure until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money. -- Alexis de Tocqueville



 
53 posted on 06/24/2003 4:27:49 PM PDT by Lady Eileen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Southack
What you are saying is that Bush is not bad as a liberal Democrat. I agree, but he is not a conservative either. As such, conservatives shouldn't vote for him.
54 posted on 06/24/2003 4:27:54 PM PDT by Satadru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Satadru
Didn't you see GWBush in the flight suit?
55 posted on 06/24/2003 4:28:24 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife (Lurking since 2000.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: habs4ever
Bush is giving the people what they want.

So Bush 43 can't be blamed for "giving the people what they want," regardless of the morality of that gift, because he needs the votes, right?

If we accept that, then a corollary must be that Bush 41 can be blamed precisely because he didn't "give the people what they want" in 1992, and thereby didn't earn their votes. Right?


56 posted on 06/24/2003 4:28:58 PM PDT by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Rush was invited to this Bush White House, back in the earlier part of 2001. He mentioned that when entering the Oval Office, he couldn't help but imagine Clinton there with Monica, and that he is so very relieved that GWBush is now in office.

GWBush gave the Oval Office a good scrubbing!
57 posted on 06/24/2003 4:30:38 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife (Lurking since 2000.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
I said that President Bush's strategy is to steal away Democrat issues by voting for big government programs.

Bush isn't stealing issues. He's buying them with our money.

58 posted on 06/24/2003 4:30:44 PM PDT by Moonman62
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sabertooth
I have to leave now, the real world intrudes, I will be back thogh to see your wishy washy replies, basically excusing Clinton and each one signed ny your signature picture vanity.
59 posted on 06/24/2003 4:31:34 PM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife
Didn't you see GWBush in the flight suit?

Oops. I withdraw all previous objections.


60 posted on 06/24/2003 4:31:37 PM PDT by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 441-452 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson