RUSH: What if it were Clinton?

Rush Limbaugh show | April 10, 2002 | Rush Limbaugh

[Risky Schemer]

(The following is PARAPHRASED - not exact quotes, from a discussion that covered a couple of segments.)

Rush got a caller during the last part of the first hour of his show, who wanted to complain about Rush's "Bush bashing."

"You're always bashing Bush. Every time I tune in you are bashing Bush," the caller said. Rush protested, "Not every time."

The caller said,"You've criticized him on campaign finance reform, the education bill, taxes, Israel policy . . . I just don't think that now, since we have a conservative in office, that we ought to be giving the left material they can use against him in the nest elections - 'Look, Bush let you down . . .'. You don't believe Bush should compromise, that it's necessary?"

Rush said, "I've said before, I'm all for compromise when it advances the conservative agenda. I am tired of compromise that advances the liberal agenda."

Rush then asked the caller, "What is my job here?" Rush then explained his job was not to act as a mouthpiece for the Republican party, but to advance conservatism and resist liberalism.

"Look," Rush said, "Bush said he was opposed to campaign finance reform, said it was wrong, and then he signed it. During his campaign he said he that Jerusalem should be the capital of Israel and now he has come out for a Palestinian state."

"Let me ask you something, all you people who think I am Bush bashing. What if it were Clinton. What would you people be calling me about now?"

[ChadGore]

Re: Rush *quoted* this, and even praised it, as Reagan's policy. But he NEVER said it was holy, inviolable writ. And he never said it was his own policy, as he has criticized many Republicans (McCain, Gingrich, Olympia Snow, etc., etc., etc.) MANY, MANY times.

I can understand your take on this, and you're right. You're right as far as the tome in question ("Thou shall not speak ill of a fellow Republican.") was not chisled in stone by the almighty and walked down from the mountian top in the hands of almighty moses, BUT . . . . The success of Reagan prooves that IT WORKS !

I prefer to learn from success and duplicate it, rather that ignore success and be damned to search for it.

[princess leah]

Just remember the 2 old adages: "Actions speak louder than words" and "Do as I do, not as I say"...both are very poignant for our stance in this middle east conflict...Bush actions have been to send his cabinet members to the region (first Cheney, THEN Powell - that is significant in and of itself) and second, I haven't seen any less actual support of Israel other than verbal criticism, has anyone else?

[CWRWinger]

The tentacles of big government continue their quest for total tyranny and control over the citizens of this country. The list would be very long of all the policies and bogus laws of this government which violate the Constitution. Big government has a monopoly on the courts at virtually all levels. Not much relief for citizens there. The courts throw us a bone once in a while.

Local control of our public schools is impossible. The Feds have strings attached to everything. Mr. Bush could close the Dept. of Education tomorrow. But he won't.

The Dept. of Energy has not done a thing to produce one barrel of oil. Mr. Bush could close that down, too. But he hasn't. America needs to be come self sufficient again in energy production. But Mr. Bush is not interested in the sovereignty of this country.

The IRS tax code is so confusing (on purpose), and so involved that ordinary people cannot get a fair tax bill without hiring expense expertice (which is beyond their means). Mr. Bush has not addressed this issue at all. That phony 'tax rebate' was nothing but a scam.

Mr. Bush has promiced us an endless war with a lose of liberties (now that's not very conservative). He hasn't gotten OBL. He's backed down from letting Israel take Arafat. For the sake of political expediency, he doesn't even follow his own definition of 'terrorist'.

The airlines are in shambles due to left-wing big government policies. He's paying out doles to keep them afloat. (Please show me where that one is in the Constitution)

Mr. Bush allows illegal immigrants to overrun our country and make a mockery of the rule of law. They are in this country against the law. He continues to to allow the illegals to live off of our system and steal from the taxpayers. This is not my idea of conservatism.

Mr. Bush is afraid to follow up on crimes committed by X42 and Reno. It doesn't matter what evidence is presented, he isn't going to do anything.

Mr. Bush reneged on CFR and has given a cold shoulder to true conservatives.

And I suppose you are going to tell me this is all a part of some grand intelligent plan that will benefit America. If you love big government, then yes, you could say Mr. Bush has accomplished a lot.

BTW, I have not throw up my arms, I have no French in me. I did joined the League of the South and do go to the rifle range more than I use to.

[Dr. Scarpetta]

I am waiting to see what happens, and in my opinion Rush is not contributing to understanding what is going on.

In the final analysis, I also trust Bush and will give him the benefit of the doubt. Rush is making a mistake by disagreeing with Bush every day as if nothing else is going on in the country. If Rush wants to point out his disagreements, he could do so without being repetitive and boring.

[Dr. Scarpetta]

In electing public officials, the only choices we EVER get are the least evil of those who are electable. If you don't like it, who does? If you do not participate, or vote for someone who is non-electable, then you are only helping to elect the greater evil, making you an evil-doer.

I especially admire the way you expressed yourself. Very well said...

[BluesDuke]

George W. Bush is an enormous improvement over Bill Clinton...

It takes that much to be an enormous improvement over Bill Clinton? Meanwhile, while Mr. Bush might not have committed have the foreign policy nefarity of Mr. Clinton, the fact remains that while he is producing a predominantly bravura performance (predominantly but not exclusively, as witness the Middle East) around the world, he is also doing nothing to abort the continuing metastasis of the suprerogatory State, and the continuing deconstruction of the Constitution and its prescription of minimal, properly construed government.

[BluesDuke]

er, that should have read, "half the foreign policy nefarity..." My bad!

[Tuor]

I prefer to trust Bush, keep my mouth shut and see what transpires. If when all is said and done Bush blows it, I'll be the first to admit it, but we're in the middle of the mess, so give the guy sometime to work it out.

In the matter of the Middle-east, I more or less agree. However, on other matters, such as CFR, education, and immigration policies, he has already acted. His part in those choices is over. Therefore, we can and should reach some sort of conclusion on Bush's actions.

Tuor

[Tuor]

democRATs are everything that's wrong with America.

Here you and I disagree. I think the government is what is wrong with America...and, to a lesser degree, the people, too. The democrats get elected, so someone votes for them, those people are (presumably) Americans, therefore a good chunk (popular majority, anyone?) believes, rightly or wrongly, in the Liberal agenda. Furthermore, many Republican so-called conservatives have 'compromised' on the liberal agenda, or even moved it forward on their own (RINOs).

When a good chunck of both government and the citizenry follow a social-political way of thinking that is virulently destructive to our society, then I think that the 'something wrong' extends beyond the mere Democrat party and into the very guts of our social fabric.

Tuor

[paul544]

No, what it means is that Rush is so pathetic, he cannot exsist without bashing SOMEONE. He used to talk about "how can he have a show if there is no one in the White House to bash" and so on. He has nothing worthwhile to add to anything so he just attacks. He's a has-been that doesn't know it yet.

[Tuor]

People shoot off their mouths all day on the radio and right here, when they have not a FRACTION of the information President Bush has.

Okay. I've had enough of this. Too many people are mouthing this meaningless drivel. Time to shoot it down to hell where it belongs.

People, we live in a *Republic*. We are *supposed* to comment on these sort of things. We are *not* supposed to just blindly follow whatever our leaders condenscend to tell us (assuming it's even true). We are *not* supposed to be sheep. The President *is* expected to inform the people of what he is doing and why, not so as to endanger intelligence assets, but certainly so as to keep us informed.

Wake the heck up! Are you listening to what you're saying? Bush knows more than us and we are just stupid sheep who shouldn't say anything, but just follow the wise shepard?

Not me.

Tuor

PS This post was directed at everyone saying 'Bush knows and we shouldn't comment', not just the person I'm responding to.

[admiralsn]

So then, ideally, in a perfect world, who do YOU want to see as President in 2004? Simple question really: give me a name.

[CWRWinger]

Who for President in 2004? Do I get 30 minutes free Internet time if I answer this correctly?

I'm not so much interested in a 'who' as I am in in the protection and enforcement the Constitution, a return of the rule of law to the states and turning the clock back on the size of and involvement of big government in our lives.

The weight and burden imposed on honest, normal, average citizens is increasing every day. At the same time, the burden on drop-outs, misfits, perverts, criminals and government free-loaders is getting proportionally lighter. I stand in line at a grocery store and watch people who don't even speak English getting large quantities of food with Food Stamps. Food which I normally can't even budget.

Those sworn to uphold the Constitution and represent us have reneged and taken the position that they represent the government TO us. I'm looking for a government which does not put government policy over the Constitution.

To most people, just getting government off of their backs and being left alone to prosper, unencumbered by government policy and tyranny would be relief enough. But no, those in government, including Mr. Bush, continue to play shell games with our liberties and God given rights.

It is probably impossible to elect someone who will do the above. The voter pool is so diluted and polluted with 'takers' that a return to the rule of law is no longer possible. Also, I will always have a healthy distrust of people elected to any office.

Besides, it's too early to tell who all is going to be running in 2004.

[fporretto]

he is also doing nothing to abort the continuing metastasis of the suprerogatory State, and the continuing deconstruction of the Constitution and its prescription of minimal, properly construed government.

You know I can't argue with you, Duke. But Dubya is an improvement, even so.

Charles Oliver, in writing about the 1988 elections, noted that we freedom weenies were getting about as much as we could reasonably expect with the election of George H. W. Bush. The temperament, preferences, and thought patterns of the country simply wouldn't allow a more dramatic turn toward freedom. I think he had a point.

Douglas Hofstadter, in his great Godel, Escher, Bach, made a similar comment of wider scope: human systems and institutions are not primaries, but consequences of the thought patterns of men. If some unimaginable event were to destroy the American political system this morning, all the way down to bedrock, but leave the rest of the country untouched, We The People would recreate it with an appalling exactitude before dinner.

Progress back toward political freedom will be no faster than the re-acceptance of the rightness and necessity of freedom by the American people. When they stop saying "there oughta be a law" and return to "mind your own business," we'll be able to see some real motion.

Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit The Palace Of Reason: http://palaceofreason.com

[steve50]

Bullshit. Get up off your damn knees and be a man.

The Patriot Act, the EO on presidential FOIA, killing every klintoon investigation, and signing CFR has showed me this mans true colors. From the lack of respect this man has shown for the Constitution I hope they don't give him a single judge. And I voted for the bum.

[steve50]

Then from now on I'm an evil doer.

I've come to the conclusion that a man who loves his Constitution and freedoms has about as much business in the Republican or Democratic Party as a preacher in a whorehouse....if he's not there converting the heathens he's got some damn explaining to do.

[admiralsn]

It is probably impossible to elect someone who will do the above. The voter pool is so diluted and polluted with 'takers' that a return to the rule of law is no longer possible. Also, I will always have a healthy distrust of people elected to any office. Besides, it's too early to tell who all is going to be running in 2004.

I understand everything you said, and agree with a lot of it, especially your words I selected above. That was the point of my question, it is impossible- yes, impossible, to find someone who will do all of those things. (You didn't name anyone.) Call me negative, but there has to be a give and take. I don't like it either, but that's the way it is. Short of advocating revolution, it will not change. I look back at many of Reagan's policies that I would have disagreed with, however (had I been old enough,) I know that I would not have criticized him for it. (President Reagan could have shut down the Dept. of Education too, just to name one example). I simply feel that I have to look at the BIG picture. George W. Bush is doing an excellent job as president.
(Your 30 minutes begin----- now!)

[CWRWinger]

The RNC's view of "The Big Picture" has some serious parallax which will aid in the distruction of this country.

[Steve0113]

At 1:57 Dallas time, there was a commercial aired during Rush's show sponsered by "The Alliance for Peace and Justice".

It attacked the (so called) occupation of Palestine by the Israelis....blah...blah.

Anyone else hear this trash ?

Yes, I caught it on the DC affiliate of CBS. Don't recall what time it was. That was the biggest pack of lies I've heard since the last time Daschle opened his mouth.

[admiralsn]

Whoa. And I thought I was being negative. (LOL!)