Posted on 02/25/2016 7:06:19 AM PST by smoothsailing
Uhhh, hate to break it to you but it wasn’t Rush’s argument. He was reading an article by Ben Shapiro, as is obvious in the photo you included. Hello?
“People pay this guy to hear this stuff?”
His show is downloaded on YouTube every day. So no, I don’t pay to listen to him.
Major Fail. This wasn’t Rush’s argument.
Lots of people who do not really listen to Rush claim that he says things that he really does not.
Rush is quite sophisticated in his political analysis.
Accuracy in listening, try it sometime.
Rush is right, again!
I guess I could understand some question about yesterday, but I listened to the first hour and it seemed to me that Rush stood IN FAVOR of emotion and anger against the system as being as reputable, righteous and legitimate as so-called “reason of established lore” for legitimate dissent.
IOW, whether you truly fit some rigid tightass’ vision of legitimately ‘conservative’ doesn’t matter. Anger and rage and total disgust and railing and revenging at the system (yes, I include GOPe dogma as part of that ‘system’) is no more illegitimate than any other reason.
I’ve always said something to the effect “Butterflies are like little girls - they need no excuse.”
I consider rage and anger against the kind of indignities these so-called conservatives and ‘republicans’ and RINO feather bedders have visited upon us for decades. NO MORE!
I think he is still hoping for another to win, but isn't going to damage Trump any further.
My 2 cents.
Apparently you went full retard.
True, but I tend to agree with the claim incorrectly attributed to Rush however, after hearing him call Rubio a “rock ribbed conservative” and all that. Having extolled the principles of conservatism for as long as he has, I can’t imagine how he’d fail to recognize Rubio for what he is, unless as others have implied, there is more to this that isn’t publicly known.
Sundance calling anyone else election year delusion is rich...the guy went bat sheet crazy.
anyway I agree it wasn’t Rush’s analysis....he did kinda call Trump supporters battered wives
Why did Rush read the article? What was his assessment of it?
I for one don’t understand the “logic” of attacking your weaker opponents in the race. Common sense would tell you, if you want to win, you try to take out those who are in front of you, not those behind. So I don’t care if it was Rush or Ben Shapiro who said this, they are right.
I heard it and know Rush too. It wasn’t his original argument but the way he delivered it was obvious he goes along with it. He just doesn’t have the balls to come out and take a stand he has to do it by proxy. Interesting that a guy with multiple failed marriages and a nasty drug habit is rooting for a character attack on Trump.
Listening comprehension & rudimentary analytical skills would have helped this deranged writer actually make sense instead of the inaccurate jibberish that he produced.
Sundance is so snake-fascinated with Donald Trump he’s making sh!t up.
As long as it slimes Trumps detractors whether it’s factual or not.
Rush Limbaugh has more political acumen in his little toe than “sundance” could have in his wildest dreams.
This is kamikaze style advice for sure by someone who is not in the arena and has nothing to lose. If Cruz takes this birdbrained tack he will flame out for good in this campaign and his political career will be toast.
FReepers need to learn to ignore Sundance.
He’s a full Trump-nutter, devoid of facts.
How much time have you spent reading articles on The ConservstiveTreehouse site?
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.