Posted on 11/08/2006 8:49:43 AM PST by MNJohnnie
Having listened to Rush everyday, he was "on fire" for the last six weeks.
Rush wasn't listened to by a lot of conservatives either. I think he is fighting for his influence today.
The election is over and as a conservative first, it is time to engage in 'conservative crackdown' mode and get back to our roots.
I'm disappointed in how Rush is piling on President Bush. This isn't the Rush I'm familiar with, the one who is always skeptical of the conventional wisdom. So far today, his analysis has been utterly conventional. "Conservatism" didn't lose--- "Republicanism" did? Then how does he explain Ken Blackwell and Rick Santorum getting crushed? Does he really think it was the medicare entitlement that brought President Bush down? And how does Rush extrapolate from the fact that President Bush says he's going to work with the Democrats that he's going to sell out his principles for higher approval numbers? Rush is a genius and he may be correct... But how can he be so certain on this count? The fact is, President Bush doesn't give a flying f******* whether he has a high approval rating except insofar as it advances the agenda he thinks will best help America.
ND, you're correct that Rush hasn't for conservatives as much as he could have. Arlen Spector backed him down on air, and from that moment on, Rush acted lukewarm about the Toomey challenge.
Besides which, Rush, because he doesn't listen to his competitors, probably doesn't know how much President Bush has been attacked by them from about 2004-on down.
Right now, with conservatism discombobulated and feeding on its own, it looks it's McCain or Giuliani representing the Repubs in 2008 vs HRC.
But things can change... If the Democrats can bring down the Republicans, the Republicans can bring down the Democrats.
Great points, but the media will keep spinning it as "Bush's fault" till at least 2008.
Regardless of what the new blue Congress does.
AMEN!
We really need to take this shot in the arse and get back to what got the GOP in power to begin with......
could you imagine the torture I would put a man through....
Your above is very revealing, but for some reason I don't think you will notice for the better your above.
I know this has little to do with the immediate problems at hand, but it's bugging me, so I'm going to ask: What did Rush mean when he kept saying at the end of the 12:00 hour that they were going to "gyp" in to Bush's press conference if it started before :06 after the hour, when Rush's show usually comes back? I mean, I understand what he meant, but I've never heard the term before. Gyp? Gip? Jip?
That would be a tragedy.
Giuliani? I know he's a social liberal, but he's dead right on Islamofascism, and I think he'd be a great war-time leader. For me, that'll be the top (and nearly the only) criterion for 2008. If we don't stop the Muslim thugs, none of the rest will matter.
careful....
you will be blasted for that....
Caving to the demands of RABID RATS is a BIG mistake.
Anything stopping/placing time limits on the freedom of speech, particularly political speech,is unconstitutional.
Campaign finance was a travesty and I do not understand why Bush did not use his little veto pen. If he did not use it then, he won't use it now (unless its for something he, personally wants, like open borders and unchecked immigration)
We need a Coach Newt to orchestrate a contract with America II.
(or one like him)
No way in heck can a McCain or Guiliani do that.
I see Amnesty, I see tax hikes, I see race quotas, I see sex politics, I see a renewal of the assault weapons ban,
It would not surprise me if pelosi's solution to the military is to force the military to accept homosexuals.
Tha main problem is for one, Rush is preaching to the choir, and 2 the MSM preaches to the American people and unfortunately they listen. THAT is where we need to make changes. The MSM played a huge role in the dims win, they need to be stopped--how is another story.
O'Reilly was no help with this election either.
I really had to bite my tongue on that one.
He could also be name Deputy Ambassador - which doesn't need Senate Approval - and draw a salary. Bush simply would not nominate an Ambassador.
Everyone needs to read #567
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.