Fred and Rush vs Mitt and Huff vs Silent Rudy [UPDATED re Romney]
By gamecock Posted in Archived — Comments (62) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
[UPDATE- I am advised that Mitt Romney has clarified his previous statement and now supports Rush - will provide details later today in addition to the following e-mail info I received:
Last night, Governor Romney went on the Hugh Hewitt show and discussed Rush Limbaugh. These are Governor Romney’s first comments on the issue. Below is a link to the audio and a partial transcript:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pvy9h59UnNk
HUGH HEWITT: Morning glory and evening grace, America, it’s Hugh Hewitt , thanks for listening, what a strange, strange year it’s going to begin to be in politics. A week ago, on September 26, Rush Limbaugh, speaking on his program, denounced a phony soldier, a guy who is actually serving time in jail now for pretending to be a veteran and an anti-war veteran at that. He picked up on a story that had been on ABC News two days earlier and then this week, the lefties out there, beginning with Hillary’s front group Media Matters, begin to attack him on it. And then the Harry Reids of the world take to the Senate floor to denounce Rush Limbaugh and Rush has been talking about it. I catch up now with former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney to talk about new media and this political climate. Governor, always a pleasure to talk to you.
GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: Thank you, Hugh, good to be with you.
HEWITT: Thanks for joining us. Have you been able to follow this story?
GOV. ROMNEY: Well, you know you sort of follow it from afar as you’re going from place to place and I think anybody who looks at the story, hears what Rush Limbaugh has to say, which of course makes perfect sense; he was referring to this soldier who had doctored up his resume, was a phony solider and he was critical of that soldier and he had every right to be critical of that soldier. And it’s amazing to watch the Democrats turn that into something which clearly he had not intended to make it. And certainly for his explanation people should say, ‘Oh, okay, I understand what you were saying – what you mean – I understand the context, and that’s fine…the truth of the matter is, Rush Limbaugh supports our troops and supports the rights for American to express their views. After all, he does that very thing day in and day out.
Relatedly, Governor Romney has consistently opposed attempts to limit free speech on talk radio and has vowed to veto the fairness doctrine if elected President. Appearing on The Lars Larson Show on June 28, 2007, The Governor described the fairness doctrine as “censorship, Democrat style.” Below is a link to the audio and a partial transcript.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3TM53CSsvU
GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: The effort to try to impose the Fairness Doctrine on radio stations is, if you will, censorship Democrat style. It basically says we're not going to let you keep talking about the things you want to talk about and the market wants to hear. Instead, we're going to impose a requirement that you talk about something else. It is a form of censorship. It is plain and simply wrong
The reactions of Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson and the still silent non-reaction of Rudy Giuliani to the smear campaign currently being conducted against the Reagan-anointed leader of the conservative movement, Rush Limbaugh provides a near perfect example of the differences between the candidates and why another Hollywood actor is the best choice to the lead the nation beginning High Noon, 20 January 2009.
Mitt on September 28 swallowing the Media Matters line hook, line and sinker and, incredibly, SENDING A PRESS RELEASE TO THE FAR LEFT HUFFINGTON POST WEBSITE:
Governor Romney would disagree with the negative characterization of those men and women who serve with honor and distinction in the United States Military. There may be disagreements with individual opinions, but no one would ever dispute the fact that those members of the military who disagree with the war have earned the right to express that opinion.
We don't know if Mitt, like he did when he denounced Gen. Pace after taking the word of an MSM reporter slander of Pace on gays, simply and lazily, responded off the cuff or made a calculated decision to attack the most credible important leader of conservative republicanism since Reagan left the public scene.
Fred Thompson, on the other hand, as is his won't, obviously studied the matter for a few days and got it, like he gets nearly every issue, DEAD ON RIGHT AND WITH AN ECONOMY OF WORDS:
Fred Thompson on Harry Reid’s attacks on Rush Limbaugh
Posted on October 3rd, 2007
By Fred in AnnouncementsCongressional Democrats are trying to divert attention from insulting our military leader in Iraq and pandering to the loony left by attacking Rush Limbaugh. He is one of the strongest supporters of our troops, yet Democrats claim he is not being strong enough. I wonder who General Petraeus and his troops think is most supportive?
Rudy Giuliani so far:
silence
Is Mitt trying to usurp Vice President Lindsey Graham's role for McCain? The role that precludes attaining the GOP presidential nomination?
And Rudy, where is the tough guy we thought we knew that was featured as a coveted interviewee in The Limbaugh Letter and on The Rush Limbaugh program? Are you becoming more of an inside the beltway spineless republican that will not stand up to MSM_DEM_LIB attacks anymore than Dubya will?
If, so, we don't need you, and it has nothing to do with your disingenuous rhetoric on Roe or your positions on social issues. We evangelicals have loved you anyway for your strength on the war, racial issues, the economy, government spending and taxes, but most of all because of how you USUALLY stand up to the LIBS.
If you won't stand up for THE MAN, i.e. Rush, not you or any of the other dwarfs in comparison that we call politicians, then, I, like God
spew you out of my mouth.
Fred '08
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
The HinzSight Report
The Minority Report
Race 4 2008
http://www.win-the-war.com/
This was Fred on September 13 during a campaign swing through Central Florida:
Are you suggesting that Fred didn't criticize MoveOn.org and the Democratic leadership or praise Gen. Petraeus and the troops here? Oh, wait, I see that he did.
-- digitalhap
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson
often defended and lauded Rudy. I would support either enthusiastically in the general. I had been listening to Fred for over a year on his Paul Harvey radio fill ins and reading his columns. After he entered the race, I waited and studied more. Then we he showed he understood that it is suicide not to drill for our own oil wherever we can; that he is willing to call Iran's acts of war by its name and even consider re-visiting birthright citizenship, ALL THREE, THINGS THAT MITT AND RUDY WOULD NOT SAY,
how could I not
http://race42008.com/2007/09/18/how-can-i-not-endorse-the-foghorn-to-my-...
So, yes, I am biased in favor of water over thirst from experience, and Fred over the rest due to same.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson
Mitt commented on it on the 28th before Rush felt the pressure to clarify his statements. I agree that Romney should clarify and come out and condemn the liberal media for this worthless attack.
Probably the only reason Fred just commented is because he didn't know about it until now. That would fit in with his larger pattern of being unfamiliar with current events and issues.
Rush did not need to clarify anything. He has supported the troops for a couple decades on the air. Molon Labe!
In other words, Mitt jumped aboard a left-wing bandwagon without even bothering to get the context of the original quote (really, all you needed to do was listen to the audio or review the transcript - I guess nobody on his campaign thought it necessary to check the facts before putting out a statement).
Lame.
"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill
Perhaps the Romney campaign really is that Liberal Wolf (or to be fair, moderate to left Fox)in Sheep's clothing many have suspected.
While saying all the right Conservative things in public, behind the scenes distaste for Rush and other real Conservative issues could be a festering boil for the campaign
You, know, the ole adage about changing a tiger's stripes...
by Rush. His defense to date has been the transcript of the show. To a native speaker of English, there was no controversy.
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
but even I wouldn't have believed a Reuters reporter quoting a Media Matters press release about Rush. If Romney wants to be our Republican/Conservative leader, he ought to already have taken the measure of our leading proponents. If he had that measure, he wouldn't have made that press release. This is part of why before Fred entered the race, my leaning toward Romney was decidedly qualified. And his reaction to the Rush imbroglio is what I expect from a nominal Republican in an ultra-blue state.
than a few times defended Mitt with callers on his show.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson
Thompson issued a statement about Patraeus on September 13
"Fred Thompson used an appearance before about a thousand central Florida retirees this afternoon to ramp up his rhetoric on the MoveOn.org ad attacking Army Gen. David Petraeus, criticizing the liberal group that created it, The New York Times for carrying it and the Democrats who have not denounced it.
"The commander of U.S. forces in Iraq is 'a brave leader,' Thompson told the seniors who endured the heat to come out to the conservative-leaning retirement community's town square.
"Yet 'when he comes home he's met with a full-page ad in The New York Times,' Thompson observed, interrupted with boos and hisses at the mention of the newspaper before he could even complete his sentence, 'paid for by MoveOn.org, which basically funds the Democratic Party, calling him a traitor in effect and giving a discount -- did you read this? -- giving him a discount to make sure it gets the widest possible circulation. That's what we're dealing with. And the majority in the Congress, the Democratic-controlled majority, will not disavow it.'"
http://fred08.com/NewsRoom/PressRelease.aspx?ID=adc8ddb7-cbf6-4de3-b7db-...
...if you look at the exact words, but he definitely needs to come out and clarify his remarks and set the record straight with regard to Rush's record. I'll give Mitt the benefit of the doubt and say he was just lazy and bought the media line, which was "Rush slandered the troops". Again, Mitt never used Rush's name, but he needs to come out and "get right" on this little kerfuffle.
“.....women and minorities hardest hit”
why am I reminded of........never mind. Bottom line -- this was a time and a great opportunity for Mitt to boldly defend conservative turf. He didn't do it.
It's war -- so when can we start shooting back at the enemy Democrats?
a traditionalist mindset, you know, the one when you expect media people to have at least a passing interest in the truth.
You are attacking Rudy for not commenting on the Limbaugh story? This is some very thin broth.
Molon Labe!
And Rudy knows priorities, and know when to move FAST. There's still plenty of time to comment on Rush.
did it actually fall. With all due respect, if Fred said something about the ad, no one knew anything about it. Party faithful don't google. Rudy stood front and center, and that was my point. It seems as though as supporters you are choosing the moment that you notice your guy leading to start to talk about leadership.
If Fred's leadership is great on this issue, the Rudy's leadership is equally great on the Moveon.org issue, so again, I don't see how this proves anything.
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help'"
Ronald Reagan
"Difficulty is the excuse history never accepts."
Edward R. Murrow
on Hillary and MoveOn.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson
Is about Rudy going after Clinton. What are you going to do tomorrow if Rudy defends Rush stronger than Fred, change your vote?
Molon Labe!
If you won't stand up for THE MAN, i.e. Rush, not you or any of the other dwarfs in comparison that we call politicians, then, I, like God spew you out of my mouth
The vote will be changed!
defends him, I will praise Rudy despite his +24 hours reading learning disability.
But my reasons for supporting Fred go beyong this issue
obviously, and Doc
I'm your huckleberry
Hound
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson
I am certainly not in the tank for Rudy. I am commenting on what I consider a weak argument, no more no less.
Molon Labe!
I was the first to write about the Rush smear on RS http://www.redstate.com/blogs/doc_holliday/2007/sep/29/liberals_smear_li...
(as far as I know), so I take it quite seriously. If Rudy actually chooses not to support Rush, then he is making a really stupid mistake. I just thought he should be given a bit more time.
And GC, I am your Huckleberry
finn
Molon Labe!
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson
but even after I tried it, I still can't seem to find where Rudy defended Rush from a Soros funded, MSM assisted, Democrat slandering drive by attack.
As I posted before, I'm really not too concerned about the General, he's defended himself from worse and is likely to have to do so again in the future. The ad never had legs for anything other than Dem fund raising and nobody in the military will mistake it for other than what it is.
The attack on Rush however, is an attempt to once again shut us up. They're only using Rush as the bogieman. To defend us, Rudy needs to defend Rush. Rudy doesn't understand that because at his heart, he is a social liberal. Rudy's web of liberal logic will not reveal to him truths visible from the web of conservative logic. Rush is useful to him because Rush will say nice things about Rudy, and that advances him in the polls. I doubt Rudy does this as a malicious calculation, but it that does mean we can't rely on Rudy to understand these issues. Which is why I don't really trust him on the judges question. He has observed that if you don't "placate" the pro-life masses, you can't win the national conservative vote. He has noted that promising to nominate only originalists will "placate" at least some social conservatives. He doesn't understand the connection, but he can observe the reaction, and so he goes with it. I could probably live with this for judges. But what happens when a real world situation arises which he has not previously had a chance to safely observe and only the web of conservative logic, which is unavailable to him, will point you to the correct answer? I'm pretty sure I don't want to take that chance.
I'd like to see something from Rudy; we'll see. But Mitt has burned yet another bridge.
"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill
... that after his experience in Massachusetts and over the course of his campaign, he still seems to instinctively believe what a journalist tells him is true.
That's really messed up.
But I'll be charitable and chalk it up as a learning experience.
I don't have a horse yet, but you are right, I think. He simply believed what he was told. He needs to get a little more savvy about reporters, and fast.
absentee
Let's be specific, this was Kevin Madden that said this, not Mitt Romney. Yes, Kevin is Mitt's spokesperson so you may ask what's the difference? Personally, I don't think Kevin has done a good job with ad hoc interviews where he obviously didn't know what the MSM was talking about. His statement is about the men and women of the armed services. Rush was talking about one woman, a soldier, who never served in Iraq. Mitt needs to clean up Kevin's mess and I'm waiting for it.
While I am grateful to everyone who defended General Petraeus, that wasn't exactly a tough thing for a Republican to do.
On the other hand, standing up for Rush Limbaugh is bound to put any Republican leader in the cross-hairs of the most rabid of leftists and how often are the leaders in any race warned against making a mistake? This is part of why it is so refreshing to see Fred's remarks because you know he had to have been warned by some of his advisors that making a statement could easily backfire. Still he did the right thing and for that I am enormously impressed.
He is a big boy and can stand up for himself. It isn't something candidates for president should concern themselves with, IMO. There are far more people that deserve their attention. People that don't have millions and the highest rated radio show on the air.
We have to kill this notion that the government is the nation's problem solver.
That's silly, the point is Democrat politicians are taking false information from far left smear sites and making hay out of it. It is worse than dishonest, it reflects an assumption that we are either idiots, or people who want propaganda (in other words, Kossaks). If you think propagandists throwing their weight around on the house floor is inconsequential ... well I don't know what.
absentee
Should we really be spending time trying to defend a man that has millions and three hours everyday to defend his own words and actions? There are millions living in border states that have to deal with illegal immigration's effects. There are millions getting taxed into oblivion. Meanwhile we take time out to defend a guy that needs no help? I don't get it personally. Rush will be fine. This is a distraction.
We have to kill this notion that the government is the nation's problem solver.
This affected air of nonchalance is a little too practiced for me. Saying Rush is a big boy is an issue dodge. And you completely failed to address my point. I bring up the democrats peddling trash from a left-wing propaganda site, and you're back to waxing blasé and lacing your post with borderline class warfare.
All a bit suspicious if you ask me. Frankly, I wonder why, if you are so disinterested, you continue to engage the topic?
absentee
I am concerned that people are being distracted by this issue. I am not a class warrior or some troll. I just don't see why we need to circle the wagons. The leftists are screeching. It doesn't seem to be a new development. People on both sides have already made up their mind.
I am not attacking anyone though. If you feel that strongly about it then you may know something or see something I don't.
-My policy positions-
Non-Interventionist.
Unrestricted Free Trade.
Abolish the Fed.
Abolish IRS and use Sales Tax.
Privatize Social Security.
Government out of marriage.
Pro-Choice.
No Amnesty.
There are far more people that deserve their attention. People that don't have millions and the highest rated radio show on the air.
so because Rush is successful, and the number one supporter of conservatives on the airwaves, we should all just let him fend for himself -- hey he's rich, right?
Not a very auspicious beginning for your first two hours...
We don't have to defend him because he doesn't need help. His job isn't in jeopardy. He has the means to defend himself. It is a non-issue to me. It isn't that he is rich, but that he doesn't need help. He has a very popular pulpit from which to defend himself. Meanwhile who is speaking for the people in the Republican base that are worried about taxes, immigration, and national security? It seems that there are more important things to worry about. At least for me. Everyone has their own opinion on the matter, but I think it is a distraction and not a helpful one.
We have to kill this notion that the government is the nation's problem solver.
who is speaking for the people in the Republican base that are worried about taxes, immigration, and national security?
Well actually, RUSH does! Which is exactly WHY we should support HIM!
I don't see why candidates should be blamed or praised for supporting him. There are many other more important (IMO) matters to consider in this race. For me personally I just don't feel that worried about this issue. It seems to be a fabrication that distracts people. Rush will be okay. The way to support him is to continue to listen to his show. As long as he gets ratings he'll be fine.
We have to kill this notion that the government is the nation's problem solver.
Lefties will screech just as a rooster crows. I think Rush is perfectly capable of handling this one himself.
We have to kill this notion that the government is the nation's problem solver.
I just remain unfazed by the weak demo attacks on this one. I don't see it being effective.
-My policy positions-
Non-Interventionist.
Unrestricted Free Trade.
Abolish the Fed.
Abolish IRS and use Sales Tax.
Privatize Social Security.
Government out of marriage.
Pro-Choice.
No Amnesty.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson
We have to kill this notion that the government is the nation's problem solver.
You would think libertarians would be all over this. Why should the government (congress) get involved in a spat between a web site, the LSM and a talk show host?
They shouldn't...but here they are planning resolutions condemning or supporting Rush Limbaugh. Has any private citizen ever been the subject of a congressional resolution purely because of a statement made on a political subject?
Congress needs to get off their high horses. They are there to make LAWS, not to govern our lives or protect us from scary conservative talk show hosts that we could turn off ourselves if we didn't want to listen.
I LIKE hearing a presidential candidiate step up and say he supports Rush Limbaugh...although I wish they'd also say Congress should shut up.
Don't get me wrong on any of this....I am 100% in Rush's corner, and I'm glad some members of congress posted here to support him. I just don't think congress as a whole should be debating what Rush said and whether he should have said it.
When the only tool you own is a hammer, every problem begins to resemble a nail. -- Abraham Maslow
Don't be surprised if Rudy joins the chorus of critics. Most likely he'll try to stay mum.
But let us not forget that Rudy sided with Bill Clinton when Pope John Paul II criticized Clinton for his stance on abortion.
That Rudy did not immediately defend Rush is further proof he's not one of us.
Gamecock,
I love your posts. But, I think I want to call you on this one. I realize this is why you don't like Mitt anymore, and I understand your reasons. Personally, it doesn't move me that much, but I've wanted to understand what the big hullabaloo is all about, so I've read both sides and I think they're both wrong.
Media Matters thinks Rush is talking about Rep. Murtha and John Kerry and some other guy. Rush says he was only talking about one soldier (who lied about facts), Jesse MacBeth. Rush said the following:
CALLER: No, it's not. And what's really funny is they never talk to real soldiers. They like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and spout to the media.
RUSH: The phony soldiers.
I don't buy into Rush's explanation. If he truly was "thinking" Jesse MacBeth, then he would have said, "That phony soldier." Not the plural, "The phony soldiers". So, to me Rush isn't being totally being honest on this one, but I sure as hell don't agree with Media Matters as to who Rush meant! I wouldn't call Murtha or Kerry "phony soldiers", but I'd sure give them my #1 & #2 Wiener Award.
Back to the statement made by Kevin Madden, "Governor Romney would disagree with the negative characterization of those men and women who serve with honor and distinction in the United States Military. There may be disagreements with individual opinions, but no one would ever dispute the fact that those members of the military who disagree with the war have earned the right to express that opinion." I'm trying to see where I disagree with the Romney campaign's statement if we are talking about soldiers who served with honor and distinction.
If someone serves with honor and distinction and expresses a different opinion than me, should I attack their character? No! Obviously the Democrats are trying to take what Rush said and draw attention away from MoveOn.Org's character smear of Gen. Patraeus. They are wrong for doing that. Do we know who Rush was talking about? Yes, phony soldiers. That's it. He didn't say who was an example until much later in the full transcript. So, Rush's statement was correct if you include his clarification almost 2 minutes later in the conversation. But when he said, "The phony soldiers." Was he only thinking of Jesse at that moment? I don't think so or he has a problem with plurals and singulars.
Was Kevin Madden (Romney's Spokesperson) wrong saying what he said? I don't know. What was the question posed to him by the reporter from Huffington Post? Weren't we talking about phony soldiers? Doesn't sound like the answer was even to a question about phony soldiers, but soldiers of honor and disinction. How did the reporter frame the question to Kevin? Looks like the Huffington Post didn't post that context. I'm just looking for all the facts before I make a huge position change like you did.
I almost want to say that the caller was a MediaMatters plant. Rush made the phony soldiers comment, and the caller then talked about soldiers that are against the war. That was not the subject of the caller's message (from what I had heard) at the time of Rush's comment. Or at least it sounded odd to me. Rush, unlike many folks on radio and TV, allowed the caller to complete his statements, which went on until Rush explained about Rush's phony soldiers comment. No one challenged Rush to explain it. He did right then and there. We here all know about the New Republic phony soldier. There are many of them. The FBI has task force checking into their stories. This story should be about MacBeth, not Rush. These two words are the only words quoted by the libs.
Geraldo (on Factor) said Rush to should explain his comments. Rush has spent all nine hours this week doing just that. Does Geraldo want Rush to go to the Senate floor and waste his time too? Hannity should have played the audio tonight so even Colmes would agree with Sean.
I am disappointed that one of my Florida senators, Bill Nelson, who represents Rush, signed on with Reid. And I told Nelson so in an email yesterday, which will do little. I reminded Nelson that he represents Rush (Palm Beach, FL), not Soros or Hillary or Reid.
-- I see abortion as a pro-choice issue... the baby's choice would be life.
-- imwithfred --
It was obvious that Rush was referring to the ongoing phenomenon of lefties holding up frauds as their spokespeople from "the inside". It was clear what he meant to anyone not dense, and was clarified later for anyone who is.
As far as I'm concerned, that makes it a with us or against us moment. Either you support one of the most important conservative voices in defense against the propagandists of the left, or you support those propagandist voices.
The enemy of my friend ...
absentee
before this. And it relates more to how impressed I am with Fred's willingness to take on specific issues that I have been calling on to be addressed for years, i.e drilling for domestic oil, ending birth right citizenship and calling Iranian acts of war what they are.
And RS, Rush does not lie. Period.
He gave a commentary the day before on phoney soldiers. ABC did recently. He was speaking of the the actual phoney soldiers out there, not just any soldier that is against the war.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson
I really don't see what the attraction is/was with Mitt Romney. He isn't a conservative, that much is obvious.
I really don't see him winning the nomination, or even the Iowa caucus. The main reason Romney has been ahead in the early polls in Iowa and New Hampshire is due to his spending millions of dollars on ad buys. Now that the other candidates are starting to spend more time and money in those states, I doubt Romney's early lead will hold. I predict Thompson or Huckabee will win Iowa, and Giuliani will win New Hampshire. Time will tell...
I'm not an agent, I just write books
..this whole Rush thing is a joke. He shouldn't lower himself to a debate over a talk show host's comments.
The Petraeus thing was completely different. This is the leader of our war effort. The MoveOn.Org ad went right to the very heart of the policy debate on whether we should be there. They were claiming the facts as presented by Petraeus were likes. Rudy called them on it.
Here, we have a bunch of Democratic leaders looking absolutely foolish wasting their time on an obviously false interpretation of a talk show host's comments in an attempt to whip up some campaign dollars.
Rudy doesn't need to get involved in that foolishness. He's out being the most effective advocate for our war on islamic fasicsm, the war in Iraq, and a return to conservative economic principles and the most effective candidate at rebutting Hillary.
one that featured him in one of the once a month LimBaugh Letters, ie most read political journals and a talk show host that was given an honorary membership in the Congress by Newt and that Congress as being instrumental in the GOP re-capturing the House after 50 years, and who
no less than
The Gipper
himself symbolically passed the baton of the leader of the conservative meovement to.
"A talk show host" the dems so fear that they have spent a week in Congress trying to intimiadte and silence.
Rush is more important than Rudy.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson
Statements like "He shouldn't lower himself to a debate over a talk show host's comments" demonstrate a certain other-worldly insouciance on what is going to be a vicious prolonged attack on the First Amendment as Harkin & Reid attack Rush Limbaugh in the Senate.
The ultra-left post-modern Soros-cide nihilists are going to make talk radio, where they have no real support, the object of their moronic oxymoronic "Fairness Doctrine" Putsch against free speech, soon to be front-and-center in the MSM froth-filled frenzy to eliminate opposition of any kind.
Socialism is a totalitarian philosophy and N. Korea, Cuba, Zimbabwe, Burma, Belorussia, [the former] Saddam's Iraq are/were all socialist states where opposition is deleted or persecuted. Free Speech is non-existent or at best, a roll of the dice.
Venezuela is a work in progress and when cretins and gays like Sean Penn and Kevin Spacey go there to kiss the ring of a guy eliminating opposition media, you know Hollyweird is 100% behind the Democrat putsch against traditional values.
If we allow demagogues like Harkin, himself a prevaricator on his own war record, and Reid, a sad commentary on Dem leadership capabilities or lack of same, to initiate a campaign against free speech---and then ask Republican candidates to keep quiet---we are falling into the sort of quietism that always allows evil to flourish.
I know that Fred is your guy, however if I spin this around he was nowhere to be seen when Petraeus was attacked. How does that bode well for him being the right man for the job? When the general in the field was being smeared, Rudy stood up and took on the NY Times, Hillary Clinton and Moveon all at once. Where was Fred?
With all due respect, your opinion is completely slanted.
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help'"
Ronald Reagan
"Difficulty is the excuse history never accepts."
Edward R. Murrow
www.proprietornation.blogspot.com