Cantor has to stand for election and as such cannot be advocating failure. Limbaugh gets to sit on the sidelines and say whatever he wants (as he should).
Is it that hard for people to recognize the distinction?
“Is it that hard for people to recognize the distinction?”
He did NOT repudiate Limbaugh or attack Limbaugh.
He gave a weak response/dodged the issue, but it wasn’t like he condemned Limbaugh or anything.
<<
Cantor has to stand for election and as such cannot be advocating failure. Limbaugh gets to sit on the sidelines and say whatever he wants (as he should).
Is it that hard for people to recognize the distinction?
>>
Let him run as a democrat, then.
Yeah, I recognize the distinction: personal aspirations over priciple.
I agree. Its one thing to resist Obozo, its another to talk about hope for “ Obama’s failure.” Rush can get away with it and he carries the message...but for anyone who is not Already committed and understands the conservative message, Cantor is right.
Its hard for me. Rush says he “wants Obama to fail if his mission is to recreate America without Capitalism and individual liberty”.
Cantor said he does not agree with Rush.
What is so hard to understand about what Rush said? What part does Cantor not agree with?
Why is it so hard to recognize THAT distinction?
That's crap. If you heard Rush's speech you would know he was advocating success not failure. The 2006 mentality seems to be alive even today--cower from the electorate, act guilty and abdicate any courageous shot at leadership and for gods sake don't advocate a good free market alternative to socialism. Then hope the voters don't notice you're singing an octave higher than before.
Stand up and be counted, that’s all Limbaugh is asking. No we do NOT want our voices uncounted, we do not want Liberty ruined, the founding principles perverted and the rights of men, and the G-d who granted them, as asserted in the Declaration of Independence forgotten. For those reasons Obama must fail, and we must publicly demand that he fail for he has set themselves against those principles.
OK. So play the game. But the fool used Rush. That is a no, no. If he can't stand on his own and has to downplay Rush, to hell with him. A real pussssssssss.
So having to stand for election means you have to check your spine at the door ???
Cantor is a rino who voted for TARP. Behind closed doors he pushed for it.
He needs to be defeated.
Then he should have kept his mouth shut instead finding a microphone.
A busy Congressional Whip may want to distance himself from contetious rhetoric but he needs to do it sensibly.
It wouldn’t be hard to say, “Well Mr. Snuffleupagous, I am unable to keep up with the exact context of every comment by dozens of commentators expressing national disgust with Democratic excess in a time of national economic troubles but what does your network think is the cause of such public opposition?”
Playing their game on their propogandist hardwood can always be destroyed by truth.
Sometimes they forget that 'strategery' has to be employed.
Is it that hard for people to recognize the distinction?"
Right; we need politicians that don't speak with any integrity, and represent something different than their speeches say?
We've had enough of catering to some "broad voterbase" while giving up on principle. What Limbaugh said is simply that he hopes that socialism is a failure, so that we can get back to values that were intended in the Constitution. If Cantor is not in accord with that, he's not a Conservative but just another politician who will say anything to stay in office.
Oh, we recognize it all right, it is called being chicken sh**, ,or cowardly if you will. You stand for the principles of the people who elected you, and those were conservatives. This guy is just plain cowardly. Is it too hard for YOU to recognize the distinction between standing for your convictions and that of being a coward in order to try to win elections?
That is RNC Chairman Steele and now Representative Cantor(R) that have panned the Limbaugh speech at CPAC. Good weekend for Obama as GOP circular firing squad assembles!
“Cantor has to stand for election and as such cannot be advocating failure.”
That argument fails. Cantor is in as safe a Republican District as Virginia offers; even in the Obama ‘08 election, Cantor got his lowest vote ever ... 63%. His clarifying Rush’s point would have helped his reelection, not hurt it.
This was an opportunity to clarify for dolts like Stephanopolous exactly what Rush meant. Cantor flubbed it, and I’m really disappointed.
If people would listen to the complete Limbaugh paragraph then the choice is clear — support Obama’s determination to turn us into a liberal, one world, nation or fight him every step of the way. I vote for #2 and Rush.
yes, there are some that don’t care about others.
I support the President but not his socialist Policies , There that was easy Wasnt it ?