Posted on 06/05/2002 10:41:16 AM PDT by Matchett-PI
Gore's conduct in the election is irrelevant in this case. Rush's analogy was to Gore's views on global warming.
Every so often someone would post an insult to Rush, or complain about his golf talk or his talk about his personal life, and I would counter. Nothing can take away the things he did for conservatism and I will always respect him for that.
That being said, I have found that lately he is way off track, no longer fun to listen to and I found myself being depressed after his program.
He used to say that he couldn't just talk politics for 15 hours a week, but lately he has been ranting and negative for 15 hours a week; so for medical reasons, I stopped listening.
If he ever decides to get back on track, I will listen again, but I don't think I will ever feel quite the same about him.
Actually, I would have to say he has been in "crackpot" territory as long as I have known him. Anyone that would be the lapdog of the liberal republican party has some problem with reality.
Of course, that is the caveat. But I think he's confident that Bush is not a leftist, and will come through for conservatives when push comes to shove.
I would do exactly what Rush is doing on his show if I was in his shoes. He is going to stand for conservatism no matter what, because that is what he is. He is NOT a kool-aid drinker for the Republicans, and neither am I.
And those Republicans he puts on his show that defend Bush no matter what -- ARE Kool-Aid Drinkers. They are willing to sell out conservatism (if they even know what that is) and refuse to criticise Bush.
They denounced Clinton's supporters for doing the same thing that they themselves are doing right now.
Rush is setting the proper example and refusing to do that. He is now being trashed for sticking to the principles he believes in.
GO RUSH!!! RUSH RULES!!
However, unlike some people on both sides, I'm not the type to toss someone overboard for a few offenses, especially when it is an honest disagreement over tactics. The fact is that both Bush and Rush agree with me more than I disagree with them, so I'll stick with both of `em. It's as simple as that.
I'll call things as I see it. I think Bush has been playing things a little too cute - although I think he will pull it off and a lot of the complaining will cease as we get results. I think Rush is being a little too leery of the methods, and I think he needs to realize that we have to adapt somewhat to political realities.
But that's just me. I just want to defeat the Democrats, and I think both Bush and Rush are needed to do that. That's where I stand on the matter. I think both sides need to take a few deep breaths, and remember the common foe - the Left here.
Any questions?
I found it amusing that Rush claimed in 2000 that Hillary Clinton would NOT run for the Senate.
I found it disgusting when Rush failed to read the EPA's own document (which used the enviroNazi's own language against their global warming argument) and then extrapolated from a document which he either didn't read or couldn't understand to a Bush=Gore statement.
Not only was that wrong, but on other issues such as withdrawing from the International Criminal Court, killing the Kyoto Treaty, withdrawing from the U.S. - CCCP ABM treaty, Bush is clearly on the OPPOSITE side of the field from Gore.
Of course, Rush has an established audience and a self-marketing machine that will keep him going for some time, even though he is saying, historically, some anti-conservative things (such as those mentioned above).
But I wouldn't brag about that too much. My own analogy is that using popularity such as Rush has to convince people to overlook your intellectual flaws is a lot like the smart girl who "plays dumb" so that more boys will like her. But that's the most flattering option. The other choice is that Rush played a deliberate hand in Clinton's 1992 election, something that I'm not entirely ready to support...
The reason we're kinda ticked or flamingly furious at Rush is that lately he seems to have forgotten the common enemy in favor of railing about the president. I don't like it.
I wouldn't mind him pointing out where he thinks Bush has gone wrong; I can think of things myself. It is his whole tone, his monomaniac stance, and his too-quick to attack persona that I find distasteful.
I used to not care much about illegal immigration; on Sept. 11 I changed my view.
Does that make me a kook?
An entertainer who's almost single-handedly responsible for the conservative movement as it is today.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
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.