Posted on 01/14/2012 8:35:27 PM PST by katiedidit1
Top conservative talker Rush Limbaugh says Newt Gingrich may have made a "good move" by raising Mitt Romney's Bain dealings -- even if the criticisms had some mistakes. Limbaugh, on his show Friday, also noted that Gingrich's Bain attacks came after Romney allies spent millions of dollars in negative ads attacking Gingrich, which Gingrich has said included falsehoods or distortions of his record. Rush read Gingrich's statement asking his supporters that run Winning Our Future Super Pac to fix their video about Bain or pull it. Rush said: "Newt Gingrich released the following statement calling for truth and accuracy from campaigns and so-called 'Super-PACs' supporting candidates. 'The American people have a right to know the facts about the records of the men and women who are asking them for their vote. Governor Romney is running as someone who knows how to create jobs. In fact, he has claimed to have created 100,000 jobs while at Bain Capital. However, numerous analyses have said that figure is as inaccurate as President Obama's claim to have "saved or created" millions of jobs. Furthermore, Governor Romney's experience as a portfolio manager did not help him create an environment in Massachusetts that was friendly to job creation.'" Rush continued: "It goes on, but basically what Newt is saying here, what he announced today, "I am calling for the Winning Our Future Super-PAC supporting me to either edit its 'King of Bain' advertisement and movie to remove its inaccuracies, or to pull it off the air and off the internet entirely," and I am urging Romney to do the same. Read more on Newsmax.com: Limbaugh: Newt's Attacks May Be 'Good Move'
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Thank you kindly.
There were many times that Rush would show the how the media is in lockstep with the same talking points by playing clips of them repeating the same words.
It was very illustrative BUT why didn’t he do the same thing when the media, and that includes Fox, used the same thing about Gingrich.
All I heard was how ‘ANGRY’ and ‘BITTER’ Gingrich was over and over again from the media and that includes Brit Hume, a man I previously held in high regard.
Rush could have run with that if he could have put aside his bias if he wasn’t so busy defending Romney.
I’ve heard many say Rush DID go after Romney when he said...”are you sitting down, are you ready for this, if you’re driving pull over...Romney is sounding just like Obama”
Many took this as a slam against Romney, I took it as Rush being shocked SHOCKED that a moderate like Romney finally took his mask off to reveal, he is a moderate.
Pretty interesting turn around.
It will be interesting to see how many talk show hosts follow this lead...and how they will do it.
Disclaimer: I finally had to turn off talk radio this last week. Now I am compelled to listen.
I’ve resorted to researching news on my own. So fed up with Fox and talk radio..would hope the gop establishment grasps the fact that the Tea Party fought hard to vote folks like Romney OUT. We don’t want a rino for president
I completely agree. Being a cynic by nature makes me distrustful.
I don’t think the establishment or the media (left or right) “gets it”. Very sad.
This primary coverage has made my head spin. I kinda feel like Linda Blair, lol.
Pretty good, I occasionally manage to run across the sort that Murray Rothbard described in his memoir of his time with the Rand inner circle.
When the old witch ordered Murray to divorce his wife because she was Catholic Murray decided that the Randians were too crazy for his tastes.
LOL well, maybe we can do an exorcism on the msm
Her Bible
The Biblical nature of Atlas for many Randians is illustrated by the wedding of a Randian couple that took place in New York. At the ceremony, the couple pledged their joint devotion and fealty to Ayn Rand, and then supplemented it by opening Atlas – perhaps at random – to read aloud a passage from the sacred text.
Wit and humor, as might be gathered from this incident, were verboten in the Randian movement. The philosophical rationale was that humor demonstrates that one "is not serious about one’s values." The actual reason, of course, is that no cult can withstand the piercing and sobering effect, the sane perspective, provided by humor. One was permitted to sneer at one’s enemies, but that was the only humor allowed, if humor that be.
Personal enjoyment, indeed, was also frowned upon in the movement and denounced as hedonistic "whim-worship." In particular, nothing could be enjoyed for its own sake – every activity had to serve some indirect, "rational" function. Thus, food was not to be savored, but only eaten joylessly as a necessary means of one’s survival; sex was not to be enjoyed for its own sake, but only to be engaged in grimly as a reflection and reaffirmation of one’s "highest values"; painting or movies only to be enjoyed if one could find "rational values" in doing so. All of these values were not simply to be discovered quietly by each person – the heresy of "subjectivism" – but had to be proven to the rest of the cult. In practice, as will be seen further below, the only safe aesthetic or romantic "values" or objects for the member were those explicitly sanctioned by Ayn Rand or other top disciples.
As in the case of all cults and sects, a particularly vital method for moulding the members and keeping them in line was maintaining their constant and unrelenting activity within the movement...
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard23.html
Interesting how they sound like the Jehovah’s Witnesses of atheism using Objectivism as an extreme means of exerting control over their emotions and inner desires.
Faith in anything is a choice. Force is oppression. What I gained from reading Atlas Shrugged is about one’s right to freedom from the state to pursue own’s excellence and have the right to do with one’s own goods as one pleases. This is in agreement with liberty as defined in the Constitution, and free will as ordained by God. Socialism requires unwilling confiscation by force and I believe totally contrary to the Constitution and God’s law.
Randian cult activity, if truly as described in the text you quoted has nothing to do with freedom and I have no use for it.
“Randian cult activity, if truly as described in the text you quoted”
Oh, I’m sure it’s reliable. The author is Murray Rothbard, who himself had been a member of the NYC Objectivist circle that held regular meetings at Ayn Rand’s residence. He knew Rand, the Brandons, Alan Greenspan, the whole founding generation of Objectivists. He is writing about events and people that he knew firsthand.
Well we know Ayn was an athiest who hated ‘mystics’. Her gang sounds about as charming as cocktail hour with the Stalinists.
More fun with Ayn.
Ayn was toying with the idea for a novel based upon a man in the news back in the ‘20s. Her hero was to be “..born with a wonderful, free, light consciousness — [resulting from] the absolute lack of social instinct or herd feeling. He does not understand, because he has no organ for understanding, the necessity, meaning, or importance of other people ... Other people do not exist for him and he does not understand why they should.”
Ayn thought she saw such admirable Nietzschean qualities in William Edward Hickman, a man who most certainly wasn’t restrained by the prejudices of conventional society; he knew his goals and set out fulfilling them:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Edward_Hickman
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.