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

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

[hchutch]

Just the headline

[sam_paine]

Thanks for your list. I did one too, but not as many items....though many lined up...odd!

[hchutch]

The fact of the matter is that the media has changed in an important way:
They have become more partisan towards the Left.

Conservatives are 35-40% of the population. The left is another 35-40%. To win an election, we have to keep the base together and also pull out more centrist voters (independents/moderates) than the other side.

This is done in one of two ways: Either by very good packaging (see Ronald Reagan) or by using wedge issues that resonate. However, what seems to get me is the fact that we have a number of people here, who do not seem to understand the fact, and I am growing more and more frustrated with a lot of that.

[billbears]

Sorry the tax cut we've seen so far had to paid back on this year's income tax form. As for Kyoto, I guess this flip-flop changes that. Bush is not a conservative

[PhiKapMom]

I would agree with you except this report from the NY Times is wrong! Other than that!

[B Knotts]

[marajade]

Sorry the tax cut we've seen so far had to paid back on this year's income tax form.

Then you need a new tax accountant... Or the updated software version of taxcut which clearly stated that it didn't have to be paid back only claimed if you didn't in the previous year.

[garv]

I've yet to meet a liberal who's realistic about anything. As I said, I just find it somewhat disturbing that you would posit a theory that Limbaugh and Hannity are engaged in an orchestrated smear campaign against Bush simply because they criticized him. It's the same way fellow freepers who criticize Bush administration policies are attacked.

[willa]

Rush is the one who is the true Conservative, by sticking to his guns. He isn't the one enacting the entire democrat agenda because he mistakenly thinks it will win votes.

I agree with your post. I don't understand why it is ok to critisize a democrat for liberalism but not a republican - on this site. I am amazed how people will defend everything and anything. I thought this was a Conservative forum about "freedom."

Maybe it is too scary for some to step back and see what is happening. If GW is really a liberal, what hope have we got?

By the Republican party agreeing with the theory of "global warming" there wont be any way to stop the miriads of new legislation just around the corner. We've lost our main defense - that it is global worming as an unproven thoery.

It just seems that lately the Republicans, through GW's legislation, are in effect saying that the democrats have been right all along. When we have sacrifice the truth for a short term gain - the gain will be short lived.

[Dane]

As for Kyoto, I guess this flip-flop changes that.

A "flip-flop" based on a NYT "report". If you beleive that, I guess you will buy a bridge up for sale in Brooklyn.

[marajade]

I just find it somewhat disturbing that you would posit a theory that Limbaugh and Hannity are engaged in an orchestrated smear campaign against Bush simply because they criticized him.

They are if they are repeating an inaccurate article from the NYT aren't they?

[ksen]

If more people believe that Bush and Republicans are reasonable about the environment, then more people will vote for them.

So it's reasonable to think that Humanity, well make that Western Humanity, is causing global warming? (If there is such a thing.)

-Kevin

[Reagan Man]

I was referring to Reagan's first term only.

With Republicans controlling the Senate, Reagan openly negotiated with Tip O'Neil and got a lot accomplished during his first term. President Bush is up against the ultimate Senate obstructionist, Tom Daschle.

[hchutch]

Look, the New York Times misrepresented the report, but STILL pointed out that there was NO CHANGE IN POLICY by the Administration. Anyone who says there WAS a change in policy has either not read the article, or is overlooking this to get a few digs in, IMHO.

[Howlin]

Ratings. It has to the "best of them."

[marajade]

through GW's legislation

Hate to burst your bubble... But President's don't write legislation...

[The Grim Freeper]

The Environmental industry and lobby are huge. "Environmentalism" has far-reaching tentacles. It funds state and federal governments, the creme de la creme of law firms, gives entree into foreign countries (Philippines, Brazil, Argentina, Costa Rica, China, Egypt). Environmentalism $'s are the chips in the political card game, and it is apparently time for U.S. to ante up. It's not going to get better.

[wcmcgr01]

right on man.. Thats what I have been trying to say all along. I have no confidence in what Bush is willing to sacrafice for political victory. Nothing is safe, especially anything based on conservative principle.

[Howlin]

You obviously missed the big point: why are all these "reports" coming out now? Why did the FBI woman wait until May to write her memo if she KNEW about it on 9-11?

Why, in the face of the FACT, that the NYT is LYING about this report, are Sean and Rush not only "falling for it," but perpetutating the lie? It seems like to me, you'd be asking THEM that.

[caddie]

Oh, I have much more, but this single bit of lunacy is more than enough to make him a total failure to me.

Now what will you be saying in Bush's defense when the second 9-11 occurs, thousands more Americans die, and we find out that it, like the first, was Saudi financed and organized?

Will you consider Bush to be just as much of a genius when another dress-wearing fatass Saudi prince comes over to the disaster site, and basically blames us for the attack, specifically, ties it to our just alliance with Israel, as happened last September?

What will you say then?

I admit, I don't see it your way.

I can't imagine how you calculate out how Bush's treatment of the Saudis is some brilliant kind of foreign policy tour de force.

It's half delusion, and half cowardice, in reality.

Delusion that these Saudi barbarians will be anything but, and

cowardice to find our own energy without being tied to the Saudi's apron strings.

[Howlin]

They are if they are repeating an inaccurate article from the NYT aren't they?

Yes, but that, of course, doesn't matter. After all, it IS Sean and Rush.