LIMBAUGH RIPS BUSH WHITE HOUSE OVER GLOBAL WARMING 'FLIP-FLOP'

Drudge Report ^ | 6/3/02 | Matt Drudge

[hchutch]

Just the headline

[Redbob]

Dang.
I thought "WTF" was "World Tennis Federation"

"Wisconsin Trucking Federation"?

[Scott from the Left Coast]

However, in order for the "take back the Senate" explanation of adopting the Democrat agenda to hold, two things must then also apply:

1. The majority of votes in this country must be solidly left of center -- and in favor of greater government outlays, enviromentalist, anti-free enterprise, Pro-Palestinian, and so forth. If movement is made to the left this strongly in order to acquire the votes necessary to win, then how will it be possible to ever move back to the right? Will there ever come a time when those votes will not be necessary to win?

2. Once having adopted at least a good measure of Democrat positions, how then does Mr. Bush credibly flop back to the right? If he states that they are right on the issues, how then does he ever oppose them in the future? For example: Having stated that the Democrats/religious environmentalists are correct about the causes and effects of global warming how then, in the long term, is an effective argument made not to adopt policies to ameliorate it? By adopting their premise, he has granted them a nearly endless supply of material to demagogue him (and pro-business Republicans for many years in the future) with.

To wit: How can you give tax breaks and "environmental regulation" breaks to rich corporations and greedy special interests when it means that your children will get melanoma by age 25 because of the greed of nasty businesses?

Or don't you think you'll hear that? We've seen the result of what has happened to Republican backbones over the "starving grandma and the children" attacks. What will we see when now the Republicans are endlessly accused of killing children outright? And all because a Republican President admitted that they were right???

[Dane]

..why alienate the base in attempting to do the impossible?!

And yep the New York Times hypes and distorts a story(which has been debunked) and Drudge and Rush follow blindly. Looks like the NYT's plan is working fine.

[B Knotts]

I mean that Reagan inherited 15+ years Great Society-inspired thinking, and a Republican Party that was still dominated by the Rockefeller wing. There were still a lot of liberal Republicans in those days. By the time Bush 41 took over, with his promise for a "kinder, gentler America" (boy, that ticked me off), there was a more significant conservative domination in the Republican Party.

[Mudboy Slim]

"Why do you assume that we're not thinking about this fall?"

I never said that, my FRiend. In fact, I assume you believe that moving to the center on a lot of these issues will benefit the GOP in November. Otherwise, why would you support things that I do not believe you intrinsically support? My point is that I believe Dubyuh loses more than he gains when he compromises with those who will never support him regardless.

FReegards...MUD

[garv]

No, but as soon as I finish my box of John Birch Crunchies I'm sending away for the decoder ring!

[Howlin]

And I see you're insinuating that those of us who support Bush aren't, right?

If you don't see that Sean Hannity has become STRIDENT and unreasonable in his "demands" there isn't much we have left to discuss.

But at the very least, Sean DOES have principles that he adheres to; Rush just bounces from topic to topic on off golf days.

[KC_Conspirator]

Whose back? The "soccer moms"? I heard one today on Rush.

[eraser X]

The above is up to date info linked from the 9 chapter report...the repost all the Bush bots have read. It is time for us to believe Global Warming is real and caused by American capitalism. Go Bush Go!

[B Knotts]

[marajade]

There's more independent vote out them than registered Dems... Maybe that's who he's shooting for? Still, the bottom line is the NYT wrote an inaccurate article about a report that's been out there for a week and Drudge, Rush, and now Hannity are carrying their water...

What does that have to do with Bush and turning left at all?

[Howlin]

I'd be interested in knowing what you think liberals are realistic about anything.

[B Knotts]

Yes, and remember, that it's not caused by the good Chinese businesses! :-)

[Dane]

Rush just bounces from topic to topic on off golf days.

And picks up his copy of New York Times after the back nine. Wow what great show prep.

[Howlin]

Otherwise, why would you support things that I do not believe you intrinsically support?

Since I consider you one of the "wise ones," how about telling me what you think I support that I don't support? :-)

[sam_paine]

Would somebody tell me, besides the war on terrorism (which is getting a bit big for its britches to me), what ten things Bush has done that even resembles conservative thought?

I'll play your silly little game!

1. Bush's DOD is going into full production on the Lockheed Martin PAC-3 missile, and Boeing et al are developing other ABM systems over the shrill objections of the luddites.
2. Bush got the EP-3 crew back and then started flying reconnaissance missions again.
3. Bush nixed Kyoto.
4. Bush canceled the ABM treaty with the defunct USSR.
5. Bush did more in Afghanistan than France's popular opinion would support if Algore was in charge.
6. Bush's interior dept has backed off on the Klamath Falls farmers and is treating the sucker fish like a fish not a God.
7. Bush's USAG rejected a congressional demand directly after 9/11 to use the FBI background check database to search law-abiding citizens for possible "terrorists."
8. (You'll hate this contorsion)Bush avoided a fatal public relations defeat for gun rights by DENYING firearms to pilots!! 'Huh?' you say? Well a single injury on a plane caused by a pilot would permanently set back 2A rights for all Americans. IMHO. Besides, Richard Reid and Flt 93 proves that an unarmed passenger bay can be sufficient to deal with terrorists.
9. Bush signed every tax cut that has come out of the democrap congress.
10. Bush has made "conservatism" palatable to a liberal VOTING electorate of 75%. (How did Newt help the popularity of conservatism??)

A Democrat in the WH would get you NOTHING that you agree with, but a hollow pyhrric (sp?) victory.

Besides, what does this report give the enviro-weenies that they want??? N O T H I N G!!!! They hate Bush. Bush is an anti-environmentalist. Now he agrees with them? How is that good for their argument? And best of all, "maybe global warming exists, maybe it is partly because of human actions, we can't change it, so let's adapt."

WHAT THE HECK IS WRONG WITH THAT????

[Mudboy Slim]

"If this "story" had been true, I'd be emailing the White House right now; but, much to the sorrow of some on here, it's not."

I look forward to Dubyuh's discounting the veracity of the study's claim that American industrial activities must be curtailed to avert a Global Warming catastrophe. Capitalism is not a significant cause of global temperature increase, IMHO...and those who argue otherwise are enthusiastically invited to offer evidence to the contrary. This story--as written--implies an alternative belief, IMHO.

FReegards...MUD

[Deb]

Both Rush and Drudge used to know the NYT was the official mouthpiece of the Democrats.

What the Hell has happened to them?

[Mudboy Slim]

"Karl Rove is at the root of much of our current discontent with the President."

YEP...and I'm not too displeaseed with Karen Hughes' move back to Texas, either...MUD

[marajade]

I can understand why Drudge might be tempted but Rush? Makes you wonder if anyone has emailed Rush yet to let him in on the secret that he was duped big time...