LIMBAUGH RIPS BUSH WHITE HOUSE OVER GLOBAL WARMING 'FLIP-FLOP'

Drudge Report ^ | 6/3/02 | Matt Drudge

[hchutch]

Just the headline

[itsahoot]

I want to root for somebody once in a while, not just against
somebody or something

I bet some Roman's were rooting for their gladiator too.

We can no longer operate on the theory that it could be worse.
That is foolish.

[itsahoot]

One thing that dawned on me while I was driving home from the youth football board meeting tonight. When I mentioned the reversal of the government's position on the 2nd amendment, several people harshed on me saying things along the lines of "those were just words that didn't change anything yet. Wake me when something actually changes". What dawned on me is that with this "flip-flop" it is the same thing.

No it is not the same, because the press will not give the
2A any constructive coverage. On the other hand the global
warming issue will be front page anytime it suits their cause.

[fightinJAG]

yep, the "George W. Algore" comment---and that comment showing up on NBC NIGHTLY NEWS---was enough for me, if I hadn't had enough already.

That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Not only ridiculous, it was beyond the pale for a man who is so far above Algore in so many ways . . . well, it just made me sick.

RUSH OWES W. A PUBLIC APOLOGY OVER THAT ONE.

[hchutch]

Fine - you go ahead and help elect those that oppose everything you stand for. I'll stay and fight.

[Dales]

You are right. Without this, the NYT and other papers would never tout global warming as a fact. And nowhere made any mention of the reversal on the interpretation of the 2nd. As a matter of fact, it is amazing we ever heard about it. /sarcasm

[fightinJAG]

Actually, the name-calling is just as bad if you are a person who happens to support Bush on a particular issue.

Some people don't want to discuss the merits of any given issue or agree that there are some issues on which reasonable people can disagree. They simply want to call those they disagree with names and impugn their integrity and their motives.

CaptBlack, I do not happen to agree with some of your concerns regarding our President. But I would never consider you a whiner or disloyal.

I do have a problem, however, when, in my view, criticism of a good man (Bush) is not well thought-out or justified by the facts and that view can't be raised without being labeled a goosestepper.

[exmarine]

Fine - you go ahead and help elect those that oppose everything you stand for. I'll stay and fight.

Huh? The Constitution Party more closely reflects everything I stand for much more closely than the corrupt Republican Party. It's time to bail out - I've hung around long enough to no avail. I simply do not see alot of difference between the two major parties anymore. They both thumb their noses at the U.S. Constitution! I will vote for a Republican when he is the best candidate in a particular race (i.e. his values reflect mine better than all other candidates in the field).

[Z-28]

Rush seems to be "ripping" Bush almost daily now about one thing or another that Bush has caved-in on to the Liberals. I think Rush said 11 or 13 different major items.

And some of you Bushies were on my case recently in here for doing the same thing.

I voted for Bush, but I didn't vote for him to give away the entire ship to Daschle.

[Twodees]

Yes they were the bad guys indeed. Those radicals used the slavery issue as a pretext to set aside the Constitution. Keyes now intends to do the same thing with the abortion issue, further expanding the federal government's power over the states and the people when all that's necessary is for Roe v Wade to be ignored by several state legislatures at once.

You obviously don't know that the early republican party was made up of several different camps, one of them so radical and insane that they idolized a mass murderer who seized a federal arsenal. That camp was also rather influential and wasn't being reined in by the other republicans, which is why the Southern states knew that they had to get out of the union or be subjugated by their own government. Turns out they were still subjugated by that government but they had to try to fight it.

[hchutch]

But the Democrats are against everything. No tax cut, pro-cloning. Anti-national defense, too, at least as I see it.

And I fee that third parties only help elect the Democrats.

[itsahoot]

I think you flatter yourself; the very few of you aren't going to
destroy this party.

Again, you misunderstand. I have not tried, nor do I want to
destroy the Republican party. I just pointed out that they are
doing a pretty good job of it themselves.

If we regain the Senate and Trent Lott, is still majority leader,
what do you expect to be better? Lott made fools of the real
Republicans from the House. When GW took office he had a
majority in both houses, did anyone bring up the core conservative
issues?

[Joe Hadenuf]

Start praying for the man, read the Scripture more carefully, and the truth about George W. Bush might be revealed to you and your fellow "Christians."

Just what is the truth about George W. Bush? Specifically. I am just curious. Could you explain it to me?

[fightinJAG]

You raise a valid point, NL, but I do think there is a difference between "supporting" the President and "supporting" Rush. Rush is an entertainer!

[VoodooEconomist]

Rush is Right. Bush is Left. 'Nough Said.

[caddie]

Why don't you admit you don't like Bush and never did.

Actually, I used to like him a lot. I voted for him, and was very pleased up until he turned on me and all conservatives. It is W who has changed course, who seriously deviated from his campaign promises, and I have to, as a thoughtful person, reassess my loyalty to him.

You, yourself, said that something worse than 9-11 would happen. Not me.

Actually, two weekends ago I had the distasteful experience of seeing W's Vice President Cheney, on the television, telling us Americans that there would be another event worse than 9/11. Bush also said this. It is not my prediction; it is that of Bush's Administration, and he has been very vocal about spreading it around. I think the term they were all told to use was, "it's not a matter of 'if', but of 'when'."

Do you remember seeing any of these Bush-ordered warnings on television?

Secondly, President Bush's actions in light of 9-11 have been just fine in my opinion.

I respect your opinion, but, frankly, I find his quavering and simpering about another possible attack, entirely repulsive and un-American. It is simply cowardly for him to respond to the threat of treasonous muslims in our borders, not by deporting them, but by snivelingly giving us another 'heads up, America, here it comes again,' warning. It is just sickening behavior on the part of a President. Shameful.

Believe it or not, it IS possible to still disagree with the President and still support him.

I DO support him. I have no choice. I pay taxes, I try to keep current, and I protest on this civilized forum when he says or does something stupid. I am, as a non-yes-man loudmouth, a friendly advisor.

Alas, if only he or one of his people would take some of my comments to heart.

I asked you a direct question about what you'd do. Your answer was cutting ties with Saudi Arabia. That's it?

I think that we should attack Saudi Arabia, achieve total victory, and have them as a colony, subdue their people, administer some sort of democratic government, and pump out all their oil. Any other muslim nation that comes to the aid of the Saudis, they get the same treatment.

If this conflict had occurred in the 1930s to the 1960s, this is what would be going on right now.

[fightinJAG]

For many people "out there" who have never listened to Rush, and have only heard that he is a right-wing whacko, maybe playing his ridiculous "George W. Algore" clip on NBC will only reinforce the stereotype of Rush as a loon and boost W's credibility further (with enemies such as Rush . . .)

We can only hope the reaction goes in that direction. Can't believe your average American would agree that W. is ANYTHING like Algore.

[fightinJAG]

Actually, the Rats don't always do that good of a job of sticking together either. Sometimes some of them peel off to vote for, say, Nader (a Mr. Forgettaboutit candidate).

Then they get their arch-enemy, GWB, instead.

There will always be a segment in both parties that is willing to peel off over some issue.

Just a little object lesson.

[itsahoot]

Well he's lost of listeners today if this thread is any indication.

Maybe, five or six at least. Monday was his best show in a long
time. Golf and Cigars are of little interest to me.

[Sci Fi Guy]

My friend (he who alerted me to this thread :) calls Bush's political philosophy of governance 'stealth conservatism' --- it's there, but you can't see it, touch it, taste it, nor feel it. I think he's got it nailed

Actually it would be more accurate to recognize some basic facts about George Bush.

1. He has committed himself to advancing major parts of the conservative agenda i.e. tax cuts, conservative judges, missle defense, privatize Social Security, etc.
2. Bush trys to reach out to the soccer moms and other non-political types by making some sort of warm and fuzzy liberal-sounding statements (like speaking to the NAACP, that wasn't to get their vote it was to get the soccer mom vote.) These upset and annoy conservatives, but do very little harm to the conservative agenda.
3. Bush is so desperate to regain control of the senate. That he is willing to sign many bad bills, in order to deny the democrats issues.
4. Bush is trying so hard to set a high standard of Presidential behavior (to repair the damage that Clinton has done.) That he is failing to engage in the politics necessary to advance the conservative agenda. (e.g. fighting for his judges.)

[fightinJAG]

I was wondering what was going on with Marta. I had not heard anything about "the lovely and gracious Marta" in a very long time.

Funny, just the other day I happened to be wondering, "What's with Marta on all this? Is she not around giving Rush the feedback he needs on how he is coming off these days?"