Posted on 03/01/2009 11:30:09 AM PST by cc2k
During our exclusive interview on "This Week," Republican Whip Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., rejected comments made by Rush Limbaugh at the CPAC conference.
<Snip> Limbaugh said Saturday to the conservative conference, "What is so strange about being honest and saying I want Barack Obama to fail if his mission is to restructure and reform this country so that capitalism and individual liberty are not its foundations?"
Cantor today rejected Limbaugh's rhetoric.
"So the Rush Limbaugh approach of hoping the president fails is not the Eric Cantor, House Republican approach?" I asked.
"Absolutely not," Cantor said. "And I don't -- I don't think anyone wants anything to fail right now. We have such challenges. What we need to do is we need to put forth solutions to the problems that real families are facing today."
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.abcnews.com ...
I agree. I just don't think that one vote or one "bad" interview (which is being overblown here anywise) makes somebody a "weak hand". Cantor has 100% pro-life, pro-gun, ACU voting records. Shoot, he's probably more conservative than you are! (j/k)
So why do you think Cantor would have done conservatism a service if he'd come out and laid into Obama hard core?
Cantor’s wrong, Rush is right. I wonder how many more will be weeded out by responding to Rush’s speech at CPAC...
Cantor just needs to learn to say, “I don’t accept the underlying premise of your question,” and then re-state the issue in an acceeptable way. I realize he may face a fight, but it’s better than giving in. These journalists are not the brightest bulbs on the tree. Asking, “When did you stop beating your wife” questions is just their lazy way of leading a better-intentioned guest into a trap.
But then, the more I see of Congressmen, the more I seek deliverance elsewhere. Hard to recognize this as the same country that, from a much smaller population, produced Adams, Franklin, Jefferson & Washington - at the same time.
So on the basis of a one-sentence diplomatic statement in an interview, you're assuming that Canton supports the socialisation of the US economy?
Sorry, but no. THAT has no credibility.
That right there is ultimately the problem here - Cantor wasn't thinking on his feet enough to dodge or refute an obviously slanted question.
Trying to drive a wedge through the GOP is like trying to drive a wedge through a pile of marshmallows. Cantor: anyone who supports Obama in any way is my enemy. No more “lesser of two evils”.
Cantor: “I don’t think anyone wants anything to fail right now.”
Speak for yourself, Mr. Cantor.
Here is one that wants to see any unconstitutional, gargantuan, federal spending bill fail.
And I also want to see the shuck-and-jive Marxist president we have who is pushing this stuff fail, just as Rush so eloquently put it.
In a lighter vein, Ann Coulter did this well when sparring with Joy Behar recently. Ann knew she was dealing with a hostile airhead, so Ann just played with Joy by challenging the premise of Joy’s argumentative questions.
BEHAR: So you would like him to continue torturing people, is that what you’re telling me?
COULTER: We don’t torture people, Joy. (LAUGHTER)
BEHAR: We don’t? That’s not what I heard.
COULTER: No. Though, if they’re really bad — no.
BEHAR: If they’re really bad, we torture them.
COULTER: I was going to say, they start showing them old “Views.”
BEHAR: “The View.” Oh, yes, you’ve been on the show.
That — did you feel we ganged up on you last time?
COULTER: No...
BEHAR: Or somewhat?
COULTER: It was a lot of fun. It was like the sisterhood of the traveling pants. ....
BEHAR: So what do you care if we ganged up on you?
COULTER: I didn’t say you ganged up on me. You did.
BEHAR: Well, you sort of acted like we did.
COULTER: No, I said it was a Joyful occasion.
For the Congressmen, some pre-deposition run-throughs with a trained litigator might help them answer, as they must, in an acceptable way. Cantor, et al. do need to accept that these journalists are the enemy, not just fellow-travelers of the Beltway who’ve invited them to a cocktail party.
yes, there are some that don’t care about others.
"So the Rush Limbaugh approach of hoping the president fails is not the Eric Cantor, House Republican approach?" I asked.
Face it, supporting RINO's didn't work with McCain.
"Absolutely not," Cantor said.
Touché.
Right. Tell you what. Let’s see how you do on your next televised interview with a hostile interviewer.
Oh gee, ya think I would?LMAO
Knee jerk liberal debate tactic.
1) Avoid the central point of conversation.
2) Set up a straw man to deflect the weakness of your argument.
I don’t see how my debate skills are relevant to the unwillingness of an elected Republican Whip to be critical of a sea change in the function of the United States economy which borders on Socialism.
You missed the whole point.
My statement was questioning whether you would have done any better in the same situation as Rep. Cantor did. In other words, you're criticising him severely, yet I doubt you'd have done any better, which means that I doubt that your criticism of him is either valid or fair. Which is neither avoiding the central point nor is it setting up a straw man. Instead, it's challenging the whole premise of your argument.
When he retired, Hunter had a 92 lifetime ACU rating. That is quite impressive over a 26 year career. He wrote the Secure Fence Act and did all he could do to make it a reality. No candidate running for President was anymore qualified, and many, not nearly as qualified as Hunter. He was more knowledgeable on defense issues than any other candidate, McCain included.
Sitting behind a PC screen and picking and choosing votes you disagree with is quite easy. It is another thing entirely to be in the drivers seat and have to make the decision. We do not live in a perfect world, or country for that matter, where all people think just as you and I. I realize this and if you do not then I can certainly understand why you do not “understand the strange enthusiasm.”
Not to mention that Gingrich was the driving
force for S-CHIP...what a POS that legislation is
Sorry, but I don’t have time to waste watching a video of another idiot Republican. The article included this quote:
“”So the Rush Limbaugh approach of hoping the president fails is not the Eric Cantor, House Republican approach?” I asked.
“Absolutely not,” Cantor said. “And I don’t — I don’t think anyone wants anything to fail right now. We have such challenges. What we need to do is we need to put forth solutions to the problems that real families are facing today.” “
If that is an inaccurate quote, then the article should be pulled. If it is an accurate quote, I stand by my initial assertion. I want ZERO to fail. There. I said it again.
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.