Why Rush Limbaugh Should Endorse Fred Thompson Now (and Break His Own 11th Commandment)
By Terrie Posted in Archived — Comments (149) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Rush Limbaugh is, arguably, the most influential conservative Republican of the post-Reagan/post-Buckley era – someone whose support is essential to any GOP presidential nominee and the next GOP president. If you doubt his impact, check Mike Huckabee's poll numbers since Rush responded over the airwaves two weeks ago to ill-considered insults hurled at him by the Huckabee campaign.
Since his national emergence in 1988, Rush has pledged never to endorse any Republican candidate during the presidential primaries. In 2007, he seemed to come close to breaking his own 11th commandment twice. First, he identified Fred Thompson as the only conservative participant in the CNN/YouTube GOP debate and defended Thompson against charges of laziness. Then Rush commended Mitt Romney's speech on faith, although he also criticized Romney's less-than-conservative record and his Iowa debate comment about not losing any sleep over the tax burden on upper income Americans.
Limbaugh may not issue official un-endorsements, either, but attentive listeners can easily discern his sympathies and antipathies. Among the top tier candidates, he has been completely positive about Thompson. Conversely, John McCain is a longstanding target of Limbaugh’s disdain. In a 2004 Wall Street Journal opinion piece about the conservative themes running through convention speeches given that summer by McCain, Giuliani, and Arnold Schwarzenegger, Rush characterized McCain as the most liberal of the trio. He also lauded Giuliani for taking “on John Kerry directly, detailing his equivocations and flip-flops on matters of war and peace, and pointing out how such indecision and expediency endanger America's security” (please see http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110005563).
However, if Limbaugh holds fast to his illusion of impartiality in the 2008 primaries, his reward might well be the nomination of Senator McCain.
Romney is, I believe, a fatally flawed candidate. Regrettably, Giuliani’s aforementioned warnings about Kerry’s flip-flopping and expediency apply likewise to Mitt Romney. The GOP base is divided among those who hope Romney means what he says today, those who are skeptical of his Clintonesque glibness, and those who will never vote for a Mormon. Significantly, he is clearly disliked by his GOP opponents.
Giuliani appears Clintonesque in his personal life, holds social beliefs unacceptable to evangelicals, and his Florida-centric campaign strategy may be his political downfall. If so, where will his supporters go? He has expressed admiration for McCain and ostensibly could endorse him.
Conceivably, Huckabee would continue through the primaries as a spoiler, buoyed by his evangelical base. Thompson seems like the natural beneficiary of a Huckabee collapse. Nevertheless, as Huckabee’s Iowa support was seen to decline, Romney and McCain also enjoyed increased poll numbers there.
The only criticisms published of Fred Thompson are personal (the “laziness” charge that is belied by his current campaign schedule and his resumé) and strategic (his late entry into the race). His conservative credentials are widely heralded and stand in stark relief against the records and positions of his “moderate” competitors.
If Thompson fails to finish well in Iowa and New Hampshire, he probably skips Michigan and enters South Carolina with a substantial disadvantage, politically and financially, from which it will be extremely difficult to recover. Thompson endorsed John McCain in the 2000 presidential race and it is no great stretch to imagine that he will endorse McCain again if he drops out.
That would be a death blow to the conservative movement of Buckley, Goldwater, Reagan, and Limbaugh, which has not had a genuine conservative nominee since 1984. More importantly, the conservative principles Thompson would bring back to the White House are needed desperately to win the war on fiscal irresponsibility, win the war on our borders, and win the war on terrorism as they steadfastly won the Cold War.
If Limbaugh were to endorse Thompson this week before the Hawkeye cauci, single-handedly Rush could return the national conversation to conservative vs. liberal ideology, overturn the conventional wisdom so beloved by beltway and drive-by media types, and spurn the McCain surge. In a battle of wits, ideas, principles, integrity, and gravitas, Fred Thompson is best armed to lead us to victory.
while sitting in for Rush on his show last Thursday.
The "Third Worst Person in the World" and aiming higher.
He mentioned it in the context of his discourse about his contention that many 'Pubs haven't yet picked anybody. He said something like, "If I'm asked that question, I have an answer. Fred Thompson. And I can tell you why, too."
As I recall, he didn't continue along the line of giving us his reasons, but he did say Fred was the man he supported.
The transcript should be on the website.
The "Third Worst Person in the World" and aiming higher.
On Wednesday, January 2nd.
So, again...I urge everyone to email this page to ElRushbo@eibnet.com
and lose the caps.
The Unofficial RedState FAQ
“You are not only responsible for what you say, but also for what you do not say. ” - Martin Luther
But, drawing on my professional experiance in advertising, CAPS are meant to draw attention to something important.
in I/T, writing in CAPS is YELLING and considered quite impolite in online discussions.
The Unofficial RedState FAQ
“You are not only responsible for what you say, but also for what you do not say. ” - Martin Luther
I am sincerely sorry if I offended you. However, it is a skill that is ingrained with communications.Please note however that the entire post was not capitalized, only "headline" type items that I deemed important. I really am an amiable guy, and not interested in "shouting down people."
That said, let's "agree to disagree" and not get distracted from the original intent of the post.
It is distracting and rude. And eventually the moderators will put a stop to it. So you should stop before they make you.
The Unofficial RedState FAQ
“You are not only responsible for what you say, but also for what you do not say. ” - Martin Luther
I already appolgized and explained myself that after 30 plus years of advertising and communications, such things are ingrained...and difficult to get away with; especially after I just got done moments prior to the original piece...putting together a major communications email which needed such caps. But, I gratiously appologized for it. It seems "others" here are intent in piling on.
So, forgive me all; for being human and not being able to "switch modes" so fast. It is nothing to worry about. So, if the moderators want to throw me off for such a small transgression...then there are really big problems in the world.
Again, you who are "throwing stones" are all missing the point and worrying about such silly and small things. The caps were indeed intended to call attention to something else that was more important...the task of emailing Rush. Don't "sweat the small stuff" and worry about the big picture.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com
that kept telling eveyone how humble he was while all the time robbing an old man blind!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uriah_Heep_(David_Copperfield)
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com
to catch up on the classics.
Next year (2009). I graduate in Dec. of this year...if I ever get through these final classes.
read all the classics and it was one of the best things I ever did. They mean more to you after you've lived a bit more. Esp Dickens, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy etc
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com
Well, thank God...people are proud enough of their positions to fight for something they believe in. Sorry that we differ in opinion
while Rush cannot be convinced to dance, he can be influenced to conduct the orchestra.
========
Considering where the good doctor's head was, when practicing medicine, is it any wonder that the man has issues?
I agree...and considering David Limbaugh's recent blog (linked below) I think this is what Rush is doing...trying to thread the needle and doing so via a surrogate, his own brother.
Maybe we'll have a suprise tomorrow, maybe not...
he will take people such as Huck to task for non conservative positions. He will say good things about Fred. What he will not do is make an endorsement during this primary.
___________________________________________________________
Molon Labe!
Am I wrong. Frankly, if he does not endorse (well anyone for that matter) it just shows he is protecting his own rear. He seems to want to endorse Fred, but if Fred does not do well, he look foolish. If the anti-Fred (Rudy or Huck) do well, he looks even worse.
Let's pray he's on the air Wed. and says something good.
Jason in NorCal
His first day back in January 2nd. The day before the Iowa caucus. I think he may just break his own rule, if we email and encourage him to do it, but it is great that Mark endorsed Fred.
by endorsing a candidate that is more likely to lose than win. As a spokesperson for the conservative movement, it is one thing for him to make veiled remarks about one candidate or another, but to endorse FDT and then have him lose would be a disaster for Rush. It would prove he doesn't have the impact or influence that he needs to be a successful commentator. I hate to break this to you, but Rush's first priority is not necessarily the advancement of conservatism.
It is monarchical and aristocratical government only that requires ignorance for its support.
- Thomas Paine, Rights of Man, 1792
Rush is not about to bury his relevancy by endorsing a candidate that is more likely to lose than win.
That he stayed neutral when Bill Clinton was running... he would sure hate to back a loser and "bury his relevancy." Rush's relevancy has nothing to do with picking winners. People don't listen to him because he has powers to predict and control the future. People listen to him because he's right.
I hate to break this to you, but Rush's first priority is not necessarily the advancement of conservatism.
Yea, yea, it's all about raking in the jack. He must be one of those elitist ivy league overeducated fat cat wall street manhattanites you Huck fans are always going on about. Wait till the Huckster gets to the White House... then he'll make them pay.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
Of course he is in it for the money, ego, power and pride - the same elements that motivates all of us; not just Ivy leauge elite etc.. The very reason why we devise a political system that dissipates inHisfluence and power acorss a wider spectrum to reduce the impact of those motivations.
He doesn't get hurt when a Democrat wins becuase he knows his influence does not spread to the left side of the aisle, but he would never risk marginalizing his viewpoint by publicly going all out for a primary contestant (even more so one running so far behind).
Of course he is in it for the money, ego, power and pride - the same elements that motivates all of us
It's not all about money, ego, power, and pride. Maybe that's all that motivates you, but it's not all that motivates everybody. It's not at all clear to me that's what motivates Rush, either.
He doesn't get hurt when a Democrat wins becuase he knows his influence does not spread to the left side of the aisle, but he would never risk marginalizing his viewpoint by publicly going all out for a primary contestant
People don't listen to the guy because he has the power to influence the future, or knowledge of the future. He isn't in the prediction business. People listen to him because they agree with viewpoint and because he's entertaining. Those reasons are not affected by endorsing a loser in the primary.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
According to his website, Rush returns to the airwaves on Wednesday, January 2, 2008.
He won't endorse IMO, and I regret that I agree with matchmatic, but his first priority is not to promote conservatism, its himself and the maybe the GOP.
But I still like him.
Jason in NorCal
"his first priority is not to promote conservatism, its himself and the maybe the GOP."
Rush has said many times that he's a conservative before he's a Republican. He would promote himself by promoting conservatism.
The "Third Worst Person in the World" and aiming higher.
and Rush does a great job of that, but his #1 interest and subject of promotion is conservatism. I suspect he's as disgusted with the GOP as many of us are.
I would like to see Rush endorse Fred and I believe he prefers him, but I don't think it will happen. I'd be happy to be wrong.
You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you.
I e-mailed David Limbaugh earlier today suggesting he might want to urge Rush to do this very thing. There is simply too much at stake, THIS WEEK, to responsibly do otherwise.
A couple of points, though. I don't think I'm the odd man out when I say that I chose to support Fred far more for his principles, character, record, and ideas than for any concerns about the other potential nominees. Stress those. Romney, Giuliani, the Huckster, and those other people will do themselves and each other the requisite damage; there's no need for us to stress their flaws.
Secondly, Rush is at least a sufficiently skillful communicator to make his endorsement statement clearly as a statement of preference, without demeaning or detracting from any of the other candidates, stressing that the definition of conservatism and the core of the Republican Party are on the line. Rush's strength is as a commentator much less than a prognosticator. If his endorsed candidate somehow does not garner the nomination, that does not prevent Rush from also endorsing the eventual nominee once they've sewn things up. I think he is wise enough to know that anyone in real contention for the GOP nod would be a better choice than any of the donkeys, from their leaders all the way down to the fringe.
Jeremiah 17:9.
Pastor Dan, thank you for your helpful suggestions.
This was my first blog post at Red State. I made the assumption that most Red State readers would already be familiar with Fred Thompson's ample qualifications and therefore I focused instead on what I thought might motivate Rush Limbaugh to break his own rule about primary endorsements, i.e., how other candidates might fold and feed McCain's surge.
I also neglected to mention that I believe Fred can win on his own merits without Rush's intervention. But I am more than a little anxious about the premature dismissal of his campaign by Roger Simon, Jill Lawrence, Rich Lowry, Fox News Channel, and the MSM in general. Since Rush is "equal time" to balance the drive-by media, as he rightly claims, I am praying that he will help however he can. I hope your correspondence with David Limbaugh is successful.
I have one contact in the entire state, and have never set foot any nearer there than Chicago. Rush's website station locator lists nine Iowa stations, covering the whole state. Of those, six list broadcast times that would be live in Central Time.
Jeremiah 17:9.
I thought he might be willing to put in a word. I'm guessing, truthfully, that the idea's already been well debated among them before either heard from here, though I obviously have no way of knowing this. A little positive reinforcement never hurts, though.
Jeremiah 17:9.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but I agree with matchmatic. Yes, I can feel a very chilling wind over hell -- might be a freeze coming....
I am a well-known Fredhead, and I want hiim to win. Very, very badly, I want him to win. I even would love it if Rush were to endorse him. But he ain't gonna, and honestly he shouldn't. For starters, if match is right and Fred loses, then we have a general election coming up in which Rush has, in effect, anti-endorsed the GOP guy. That will have consequences at the ballot box.
If on the other hand Rush swings the pendulum and Fred wins, well now Rush is the kingmaker. And he doesn't want to be that, ever. Certainly Rush is after ratings and bucks like any good free-market conservative businessman. But he is ALSO about changing hearts and minds. He can't be that, AND the kingmaker.
Third bad thing is, from now on, there would be tremendous pressure put on Rush EVERY TIME, to endorse somebody. Some years we have crap to choose from.
So in my most perfect world, Rush speaks glowingly of Fred, but does not actually endorse him.
Stare decisis is fo' suckas -- Feddie
You and JforFred are up to something, right? It isn't April 1st....must be something else going on. Hmmmmm.
It is monarchical and aristocratical government only that requires ignorance for its support.
- Thomas Paine, Rights of Man, 1792
"So in my most perfect world, Rush speaks glowingly of Fred, but does not actually endorse him."
Exactly...Not that Hugh Hewitt is as big as Rush, but if Romney loses, I think it really hurts Hewitt.
This is so insignificant in the grand scheme of things, but my father has run for school board, city council, state assembly, won every election, and rarely gets business owners to advertise for him.
As Rodney Dangerfield said, you got to look out for "#1, but don't step in #2."
I'm 1/2 to the flu, so goodnight and happy new year all.
Jason in NorCal- If you want to volunteer for Fred08 email me.
Jason, I think Hewitt is already diminished by letting his radio broadcast and blog become a virtual spin room for the Romney campaign. In my opinion, Hugh has rendered the second best radio talk show in America unlistenable. On the day that Romney's reminiscence about his father and MLK was proven false, the only mention of it on Hugh's 3-hour program was made by Mort Kondracke who had to sneak it in during a Hewitt harangue over a minor Huckabee peccadillo.
Rush and Sean Hannity may be slow to criticize a Republican president, but they always welcome opposing points of view and, in fact, Rush puts those who disagree with him at the front of the line. If Rush were to endorse a primary candidate, I agree that he wouldn't sell his soul to do it.
He will just attack those not in his good favor. Endorsing a candidate would be risky and take guts.
Fred is the only candidate with the foreign policy experience necessary to understand and deal with the dangerous world we live in now. The events in Pakistan have reminded us of that. There is just too much at stake for us to take chances with someone who is not experienced in these matters. I think this is the reason that Rush should break his rule and endorse Fred.
He'd indorse Romney before Thompson, Rush is first and foremost a fi-con, and Romney embodies that. (Now, I am being facetious, but seriously, he would).
I distinctly remember a few weeks ago, Rush had a caller - a woman from Germany. She wanted Rush's advice on who to vote for. I'm paraphrasing, but she indicated she pretty much wanted to vote for a winner. (I believe she was to vote absentee in the SC primary). Rush said "not so fast." (ALL PARAPHRASING). He encouraged the caller to vote for the candidate that shared her principles, etc.
Rush has already stated that Fred is the one true conservative. I DO wish he would reiterate that again on 1/2/08. I PRAY HE DOES THAT.
Mind you, I AM NOT SLAMMING ANY OTHER CANDIDATE, but I don't see how Rush or anyone else could NOT endorse Fred. He's the real deal. SOOO much is on the line in 08. I just cannot imagine what this country will look like in 2012 if we have a DIM in the WH beginning in 08.
pathetic?
Well done is better than well said. —Benjamin Franklin
happy new year!
A lot of attention for a 2nd tier candidate.
Romney is a superior candidate. His experience, resume, drive, strategy, character and charisma all surpass that of Fred. Romney is committed to the three pillars. Romney is in a better position to win.
If Rush wants to help save the GOP from Huck, or Guiliani, then he should endorse Romney. I don't think even an endorsement from Rush could help Fred at this point.
* PRIESTCRAFT is thus defined: “The stratagem and frauds of priests; fraud or imposition in religious concerns. Management of selfish and ambitious priests to gain wealth and power, or to impose upon the credulity of others.”
I could care less who Rush endorses.
I will say it will not and should not be Romney. Romney is the exact candidate the Dems would nominate... one who is polished without any philosophy. He will say anything to get elected.
Rush would support someone like Romney that changed their view about prolife when they decided to run for Prez??
I guess it depends on the meaning of the word "saw," as in "I saw my father march with Martin Luther King." Sadly, this is not an isolated incident.
I will vote for Romney, Giuliani, McCain, or Huckabee if one of them is the nominee, but none of them will do much to advance conservative principles.
Romney is pro-life. Why would he endorse someone who lobbied for Planned Parenthood, or supported McCain Feingold, or is for big government, or is weak on crime, or raised taxes, or is endorsed by liberal newspapers, or has accomplished little as a senator, or claims to be Christian but doesn't attend church, or cheated on his wife, or is RP?
All candidates have flaws. Romney has a much better chance at the nomination than Fred, so I would think Rush would want to strengthen Romney, rather than weaken him so that McCain, Huck, or Rudy could get the nomination.
* PRIESTCRAFT is thus defined: “The stratagem and frauds of priests; fraud or imposition in religious concerns. Management of selfish and ambitious priests to gain wealth and power, or to impose upon the credulity of others.”
Are you freakin' serious. I personnally would never vote for a Mitt - he lies. Call me crazy, but I refuse to vote FOR anyone who does not stand for anything; Mitt does not. He is a typical politician... perhaps a good (or gret) manager... but Mitt is no Leader. A leader has convictions, and infatically defends them... regardless of the consequences. Mitt panders. Mitt lies. Mitt flip-flops. Mitt has no core values. (I would love to see Mitt's head superimposed on John Kerry's windsurf board... that would be funny... and true).
But who cares. I am just one vote.
Fred has the substance to become a great leader. The others like Mitt & Mike, have the style. Today the American people seem to think style is more important than a leadership.
A leader like Fred comes once in a lifetime. A Fred loss will be America's loss..
Mitt Romney already has proven leadership.
* PRIESTCRAFT is thus defined: “The stratagem and frauds of priests; fraud or imposition in religious concerns. Management of selfish and ambitious priests to gain wealth and power, or to impose upon the credulity of others.”
and why I think that Rush shouldn't endorse him. He is a conservative. He has a very good voting record. BUT he does not have leadership. He did not show leadership in the Senate and he has not shown inspiring leadership in the campaign (except for inspiring an apparent Red State takeover). (If you are going to disagree, then please give specific examples, because I have not been able to find any.)
The Republican nominee can't just belive in conservative principles, he has to lead others to believe in them as well. I can't see Fred Thompson doing that. So while he may have some substance to -someday- become a great leader, he is not one now. I want to vote for a conservative Leader of the Free World. That is why I am voting for Romney.
Things are changing. People are starting to care what the fat cats in DC say and cocentrate more on their own areas. This may sound crazy, but if God forbid, Hillary wins the WH, there is a whole group of people that will not recognize her as their leader, and there could be more state's rights issues come up, and there are some places where people will even consider secession.
Folks, this is for the future of this grand republic that we all dearly love, and America needs Fred!
that now on top of everything else, electing Fred will prevent Civil War. You all have just about changed my mind! I was almost convinced when it was determined that he has the talent and intellect of not only Ronald Reagan, but George Washington as well. This new revelation may just seal the deal!
"We're hoping for the best, but we need to prepare for the worst." -Fred D. Thompson
That some are already trying to do it, including the Lakota tribe seceded the other day. And I am not saying civil war, but separation. The state where I live, all men above the age of 18 belong to the state militia, no matter whether you are in the national guard or not. It is about protecting state's rights
that Thompson is materially different enough from say, McCain or Romney (or any of our guys for that matter), that his loss to either of these candidates would justify a "separation". This is a spectacular assertion, and one that is rotten at its core. I can only hope that you are getting caught up the in exuberance for your candidate.
"We're hoping for the best, but we need to prepare for the worst."
-Fred D. Thompson
Matchmatic, I agree with you that separation is a red herring. However, Thompson is a consistent full spectrum conservative and federalist, which sets him far apart from McCain, Romney, and the rest of the GOP field.
Here are 200 reasons for conservatives to support Fred and dread McCain -- the number of judges the next president will appoint. Furthermore, as Thompson points out, Romney has taken too many conflicting positions and we cannot safely assume that he has any core principles he will fight for when the going gets tough, as it assuredly will, especially if the Democrats hold Congress.
Yes, Rudy has Ted Olson to help him with judges and I think Rudy would probably be a better leader on the war on terror than most of the other candidates except Fred. But some of his fiscal and most of his social policies are flat out liberal.
Terrie
What makes you think that any Republican who gets elected President will not reach out to Ted Olson once elected?
It's a red herring to say that only Rudy will have the services of Mr. Olson, a future Supreme Court justice in my mind.
______________________________________
Proud member of the Barry Goldwater wing of the party !
SteveLA, Rudy has Ted Olson committed to his campaign right now. As a conservative, that does make me feel better about Rudy on the issue of judges.
If Rudy drops out, Ted is a free agent and would be an asset to any other candidate.
How many judges will Rudy nominate right now, under the guidance of Ted Olson....last time I checked 0.
When a Republican is elected, Ted Olson will advise on judges, simple.
______________________________________
Proud member of the Barry Goldwater wing of the party !
and believe or not I respect that those differences are of great importance to FDT supporters. My point was that those differences don't even begin to justify talking about, much less implementing what is tantamount to a Civil War. It is ludicrous. It is dangerous. When support for your candidate devolves to this point, well, I am almost speechless.
"We're hoping for the best, but we need to prepare for the worst." -Fred D. Thompson
and believe or not I respect that those differences are of great importance to FDT supporters. My point was that those differences don't even begin to justify talking about, much less implementing what is tantamount to a Civil War. It is ludicrous. It is dangerous. When support for your candidate devolves to this point, well, I am almost speechless.
"We're hoping for the best, but we need to prepare for the worst." -Fred D. Thompson
I am a big RUSH LIMBAUGH fan, and frequent caller to his show.
RUSH lights the way for all Americans every day.
That is his job, that's what he does. He opens doors and sheds light and lets his listeners come to their own conclusions.
But sometimes, people can be slow on the uptake and need some spoon-feeding. This is one of those rare occasions.
With the compressed primary/caucus calendar, crafted specifically to give the highly fragmented Democrat Party an advantage in this election cycle, RUSH needs to step up and carry some water.
RUSH do the right thing and endorse FRED THOMPSON for President BEFORE the IOWA caucuses.
I completely agree with the lead post. I was going to argue the same points, but I was beaten to it. If Fred loses and McCain is the nominee, it's a repudiation of conservatism as we know it. Rush has argued against McCain for years because he is not a conservative. Yet, Rush's silence is the very thing that will lead to McCain's nomination.
Rush says it wouldn't be right to endorse a candidate. Why is that so? In 2000, he certainly endorsed Bush with his frequent attacks and criticisms of McCain. What's the difference there. Even one of Rush idols endorsed a candidate. Remember William F. Buckley? He started a campaign to defeat Lowell Weiker, a Republican, in 1988. That gave us Lieberman, a Democrat and near Vice President.
Whether it's Fred or even Mitt, Rush is the one person who can shake up the McCain dynamic. If he doesn't we will get McCain and conservatives won't have a candidate. At a time when we can finally regain control of the Supreme Court, we don't won't a nominee who doesn't share core conservative beliefs.
with his repeated complimentary remarks about Fred, and his mild rebukes of Huck, Mitt and Rudy [and major repudiations of McCain] he has nearly admitted his preference for Fred.
It is time for Rush to come out of the closet and admit his choice.
hear what you want to hear. I have got just as strong a vibe from Rush on Romney. Biased listening will have that effect.
I have not heard the supposed pro-Fred vibe, anymore than I have heard a pro-Romney vibe. In fact, I thought Rush might outright endorse Romney after the speech.
* PRIESTCRAFT is thus defined: “The stratagem and frauds of priests; fraud or imposition in religious concerns. Management of selfish and ambitious priests to gain wealth and power, or to impose upon the credulity of others.”
recognizing the bias in yourself. I recognize that my bias is pro Romney and also anti-Huck, therefore, I think Rush will continue as he has done in the past and not endorse anybody.
* PRIESTCRAFT is thus defined: “The stratagem and frauds of priests; fraud or imposition in religious concerns. Management of selfish and ambitious priests to gain wealth and power, or to impose upon the credulity of others.”
Awareness of our biases as well as an attempt to understand other perspectives is essential in any debate. I, however, often fail in the attempt.
But I keep trying:)
the MSM anti-Conservative, anti-Republican, anti-American bias in everything they report.
OH, wait! The MSM bias does exist, it is nuanced bias among conservative pundits that do not exist.
========
Considering where the good doctor's head was, when practicing medicine, is it any wonder that the man has issues?
Have all of you watched the video to Iowa voters on fred08.com?
http://www.fred08.com/
For some reason they took down the youtube version of this video, but I encourage everyone to take 20 minutes to watch the video.
Someone above asked if Iowa is a Rush state... I know that WESTERN Iowa is, our radio stations reach into the Redstates of Nebraska and South Dakota.
Steve King of Western Iowa's 5th District is endorsing Fred, so he will do well with that endorsment on the LEFT side of the State, but I think Fred will finish 2nd in Iowa BUT then Rush will Endorse Fred AFTER THAT Finish. NH is not a very good State for Fred, so a RUSH Endorsment will help Fred THERE more than Iowa.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
Ben Franklin
why in the world do you think rush would want to get in the middle of that mess? This line of thinking defies logic! I am starting to have actual concern for the FredHead diehards when the inevitable comes to pass - I only hope that his supporters will stick with the race and support our Republican candidate.
"We're hoping for the best, but we need to prepare for the worst." -Fred D. Thompson
The Drudge report now has Fred's video to Iowa Voters posted on their front page with the caption:
FRED THOMPSON: TERRORIST WON'T REST UNTIL MUSHROOM CLOUD OVER U.S. CITY...
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
Ben Franklin
The case to be made for Rush making an explicit endorsement is the real possibility that McCain could ride a NH win to the nomination. I don't think an endorsement tomorrow would affect Iowa, but it could have an effect in SC. My fear was never that Huckabee would win and SC. I am confident that Mitt or Fred could be the person conservatives rally around, but the proclivity for SC to want to go for a winner gives McCain a shot. This despite the fact that the straight talk express ran off the tracks in 2000 after a huge NH win. McCain was caught on tape contradicting himself on Roe and judges, insulted Christians, was wrong on taxes and flip flopped on the flag and other issues.
Rush will, I am sure, remind everyone a lot of McCain's issue problems. I doubt he will explicitly endorse.
What Fred needs to do is trumpet Rush's implicit endorsement.
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com
as far as getting more voters would be using the other candidates own words.
If I were running the campaign, I'd make a commercial using the parts from the debates where the other candidates say, 'I agree with Fred'.
Then I'd use the part from the CNN/YouTube debate where Huckaflea said, "I'll be anyone's president".
I'd run those commercials over and over again in SC and ride it all the way to the presidency.
Then we wouldn't have to worry about Rush's endorsement, that'd just be icing on the cake.
Texas Proud and Texas Loud
Ya know Rush might not out-right endorse Thompson ....but he probably would say on the air about the volume of email he recieved on Fred.What do ya think?Ready to fill his inbox!? !!I think it's worth a shot.Go Fred!
Well done is better than well said. —Benjamin Franklin
You don't like Fred enthusiasm. Are you trying to be as annoying as those you criticize?
The Unofficial RedState FAQ
“You are not only responsible for what you say, but also for what you do not say. ” - Martin Luther
bs
The list of reasons for Fred's campaign not catching on is long and inglorious. When are you going to lay the failure of Fred to catch on, despite his great message, right where it belongs, at Fred's feet.
Fred might have the best ideas and I probably agree with him more than any other candidate in the race, but he can't sell his ideas worth a darn. Couple that with Fred's inability to sell himself to evangelical social conservatives, thanks to Pastor HuckaFraud, he has never caught on.
Having the "best" ideals is not always the road to success, but selling those ideas effectively is.
______________________________________
Proud member of the Barry Goldwater wing of the party !
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
A 17 minute video! Only on the Internet.
Exhibit A that Fred and his campaign does not get it.
Nobody, and I mean nobody outside of hard core believers are going to sit through 17 minutes. 30 seconds, 60 seconds and then people are off to the next thing.
Fred may have the best ideas, but he can't sell them. Plain and simple.
______________________________________
Proud member of the Barry Goldwater wing of the party !
17 minutes is not really that long. State of the Union addresses are about 4 times that long. I watched the whole thing. I thought it was pretty impressive.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
NT
Nice comment, blame the consumer if the product sucks and they won't buy it. I think in the advertisement biz that's call will they eat the dog food. In this case your comment seems to be that people are too stupid to understand the greatness of your guy, which about sums up why FredBots are almost as annoying as other flavors of 'bots here on RS.
For someone in the media biz, Fred has hired morons to advise him.
______________________________________
Proud member of the Barry Goldwater wing of the party !
I was snarking at s_g's multi-thread rants about Fred enthusiasm.
The Unofficial RedState FAQ
“You are not only responsible for what you say, but also for what you do not say. ” - Martin Luther
don't make me go all mbecker over you.
By the way, I was being complimentary in the remark you responded to, not snide.
As far as the multithreaded part, this Fredgasm stuff is a little out of control, right now how many Fredthreads are there talking about all kinds of crazy stuff? TOO MANY!
Well done is better than well said. —Benjamin Franklin
And I've been Tbone'd before (908 has nothing on him) - I'm not frightened...
The Unofficial RedState FAQ
“You are not only responsible for what you say, but also for what you do not say. ” - Martin Luther
"Suppose you were a congressman, and suppose you were an idiot. But I repeat myself." - Mark Twain
I am a man of principle. A man of character. I support Fred Thompson because he stands for my values... he is consistent... he is authentic... he is truly conservative (according to my definition).
I have supported, contributed, and blogged for Fred's campaign because I believe in this! I put my $ where my mouth is - this is not about an election, this is about where I believe America should go and I am willing to put my good name behind Sen. Thompson.
For me, I believe that anyone who supports Fred should say so... on the record. Otherwise, they are just a talking head. By not endorsing their candidate... they are being 'coy'. By not endorsing (if they have decided who they believe who is the best)... they are an empty suit.
I respect Oprah; she stood up (as an individual) for what she believes. Though I disagree with her, she has demonstrated her character. That means everything.
If Rush has chosen a candidate, he should say, and say why. If he is undecided... that is fair. But to not put his name behind 'his choice' is pandering.
And if he doesn't do everything within his power to help his choice, he is just a guilty as all of the others (i.e., the non-voters) and he should not complain.
It is all about my good name. I am a proud supporter of Sen. Fred Thompson. I will continue to campaign for him, I will continue to contribute to his campaign - I am not just a talking head. I am a man of principle.
Chris Fischahs (Los Alamos, NM) endorses Sen. Fred Thomspon!
I finally got around to watching Fred Thompson’s 17 minute video he made for the folks in Iowa. In watching it I more and more believe that the man is not just a stuffed shirt. When he talks about being a leader he talks about what it really means to be a leader. Most politicians I classify as managers. There is a big difference and I have a little bit of experience at being both.
The questions for Republicans and conservatives is can you really handle a conservative leader like Fred? Look inside yourself. Do you really want somebody who will do the tough things required? Or do you just want somebody who can make you feel good and not interrupt your life? Everybody has their own personal list of what they want the president to address. But how many candidates have stood up and actually said they are looking out for the best interest of the country and not whatever special interest group they happen to be addressing at the moment?
I think Fred is that man. You need to give this video a view and watch it and listen, really listen. At the end if you don’t think he is a conservative and you still consider yourself a Republican maybe you need to reevaluate who you consider to be a RINO (Republican In Name Only). Are you looking at the candidates based merely on the “electability” factor or are you willing to vote for someone who will attempt to restore the conservative principles that Republicans used to stand for?
I'll nitpick a few things. Keep in mind that I am probably one of Fred's most ardent supporters.
In the case of Oprah, I'm not sure what her standing up for Obama means. It could mean that she firmly believes in whatever it is she thinks he stands for, or it could simply mean that she is a racist. It could simply mean that her extreme hubris pushes her to garner as much media attention as possible, and she calculated this to be that path. It does mean that she is willing to risk alienating some of her admirers, but I suspect that she has calculated that she will gain more than she loses.
In Rush's case, I don't think he's necessarily pandering if he fails to endorse anyone; he's hedging his bets, which could also be seen as cowardice (though I don't see it that way myself). IMHO, if he doesn't endorse anyone, it will be his way of protecting his empire.
Now, I suggest he could just say, "I don't endorse candidates in primaries, never have, never will, but if I were going to endorse anyone this time around, it would be Fred Thompson." Of course, biased as I am, I think he's more or less already said that, despite his praise for Romney's religion speech.
Jeremiah 17:9.
Oprah (and her good name) is beyond reproach. While I do not watch her show, read her website, nor subscribe to her magazines... I do know that I trust Oprah, and believe that she is a woman of conviction! Just me... but I believe that to suggest her endorsement is racist is beyond reproach - no further comment. She is a lot like me... or me, like her. She is authentic, and principled. I respect her and I trust her. [If she said that I inhaled, I would admit it! LOL]
Re: Rush's case. God bless him. For me, I have to live with what I do, and am judged BY MY ACTIONS. I stay positive, I am an optimist, and I have to be true to myself... first, always. & I believe that one man can make a difference. Me! You! (Sen. Thompson!!!) I must just do my best :-)
Thanks for your thoughs Paster Dan. chris
If Fred fails we are left to choose from:
-A Masssachusetts Flip-Floper & Sure Loser in General Election
-A pro-"choice" candidate
-A 1st ammendment gutter
-A tax-hiker
"Help us Rush, you're our only hope"
Spitballs?!?! / Yo No Soy Marinero, Soy Capitan
point one, Limbaugh is not going to endorse anyone in the primary, nor should he
point two, Limbaugh's endorsement would not revive an anemic campaign, that has to come from Fred Thompson himself
point three, are you so desperate to read all of your hopes and dreams into one candidate that you despair that all the other candidates are not sufficiently (conservative/electable/holy/whatever)?
All of them except Paul and Huckabee can beat the democrats and all would be at least more conservative than the current administration.
"Nothing works like freedom, Nothing succeeds like liberty"
Kyle
"All of them except Paul and Huckabee can beat the democrats and all would be at least more conservative than the current administration."
All of them except Paul and ROMNEY can beat the democrats...Romney has no pan-electorate appeal of a winning candidate. Huck has some, due to the ability to bring in ex-Buchanan and Perot voters.
Spitballs?!?! / Yo No Soy Marinero, Soy Capitan
While what I said above was true - I endorse Fred Thompson...
I do not believe, nor support the idea, that Sen. Thompson 'needs' Rush's endorsement; Fred's and his ideas stand above one man... and Fred leaves it for each to choose. He is only the messenger from which conservatives can support... completely.
Whether or not conservatives choose to vote for him... that is their choice. If he wins, he will be a Leader for these principles; if he losses... he will go home, knowing that he gave the Republicans a legitimate, consistent voice on these principles. Either way, Sen. Thompson stepped up, stayed true to his beliefs, and can stand tall.
And should Fred loose, I will know that supporting him was one of my proudest moments; along with supporting another of my political heros - Sen. Barry Goldwater.
No, Fred doesn't need Rush. But I again say... if he has decided with whom he supports and does not do all that he can to support his candidate - be it Fred or anyone else... its called Pandering... and I personally don't respect that (person).
I cannot listen to anyone from National Review now because of their choice of Romney.....anything they say just sounds biased...Rush has 20 million listeners and at least 1/4 would be offended by his endorsement.....he should hold tight to his choice and in the general go after the Democrat....period.
Freedom of Religion not Freedom from Religion
I've had a wee bit of the same feeling, although I'm OK with Romney - but just knowing that bias is there makes me a little leery of what I'm reading.
Since I'm a Fred supporter, I wouldn't have a big problem with Rush endorsing him, but he'd be dumb to do it and risk losing listeners who are not Fred fans. His current philosophy is the wise one - talk up the candidate he likes without overdoing it and beat up the ones he doesn't like (e.g. the Huckster).
The Unofficial RedState FAQ
“You are not only responsible for what you say, but also for what you do not say. ” - Martin Luther
and identify which candidates subscribe and adhere to those principles, while pointing out the shortcomings of those who don't. The "endorsement" will become self-evident without actually having gone on record.
***
“Peace is the highest aspiration of the American people. We will negotiate for it, sacrifice for it; we will not surrender for it, now or ever.” – Ronald Reagan
The Unofficial RedState FAQ
“You are not only responsible for what you say, but also for what you do not say. ” - Martin Luther
If no one has yet done it, maybe we need to ask Mr. Limbaugh to for his endorsement of Fred Thompson. I will do so now...
"Mr. Limbaugh, considering the criteria needed for a presidential candidate to present themselves as a true conservative, the criteria you have set down and which are modeled upon those of Ronaldus Magnus, do you believe Fred Thompson to be that candidate, and will you now officially endorse him, before the upcoming Iowa caucus?"
Many regards,
grumpy_old_soldier
... who will go vote for Thompson just because Rush Limbaugh tells them to. Fredheads can't look to Rush to salvage Thompson's candidacy; that's something Thompson needs to do himself.
Maybe Oprah's audience includes a lot of worshipers who let her tell them what's best, but I'm pretty sure most of Rush's listeners have already thought seriously about who they prefer in the nomination contest. A Rush endorsement of Thompson could tip the balance for a small number of people who are already on the edge of going for Thompson; but for people who favor another candidate, or at least have decided Thompson isn't the right one, Rush's endorsement would not change their mind.
Rush has said favorable things about Thompson, and to the extent listeners agree with his analysis (probably most of them, including me), that would influence them toward supporting Thompson, to be weighed along with a lot of other factors for and against Thompson. An explicit endorsement of Thompson would add very little influence to what Rush has already said.
...that Mitt Romney is a "fatally flawed candidate." In fact, he has largely heaped nothing but praise on Governor Romney.
that "make the host look good", that allow him to bring up a point without seeming like he is pushing an agenda.
I can see him taking a caller tomorrow saying "Rush, what do you think of Fred Thompson?" or some such. This would allow him to say the things he wants to say about Fred as a response to a question rather than as a proclamation or an endorsement.
"Rush, you said that if any true conservative distinguished themsleves you might make an endorsement. Have any of the candidates done that?"
If a candidate can't make it on their own why should Rush save them?
I say them them fall!
I don't want a loser as our nominee.
This hardly means Fred is a loser but, he's performing far far lower than I expected.
giving his opinion in a somewhat oblique manner, if not giving an outright endorsement. It will probably take the entire three hours for him to finish.
_The "Third Worst Person in the World" and aiming higher._
Fred's candidacy is a litmus test for the stupidity factor that currently has most Americans in a death-grip.
We tend to look more to the MSM or to Hollywierd to tell us who we should vote for (the likes of perfectly coiffed men like Mitt or carnival barkers-cum-preachers like Huckabee) and our lust for licentious living fed by reality hellivision like "American Idol" and "Tila Tequila" informs us that murdering babies is A-OK, as are serial marriages and/or marital infidelity, as seen in Giuliani and many of the (other) Democratic candidates.
Now, no one is perfect, and neither is Fred Thompson - we are all human and cursed with a burden of sin.
However, if the GOP and Americans at large with even the most meagre dose of intellect (or at least common sense) fail to see a candidate that humbly offers himself up for service without the lust for power (i.e. the tired old "lack of fire in the belly" meme) as well as hitting all the solid strokes of conservativism (limited federal government, tightened spending and lower taxes, strong defense, and sound family values but not forced morality)...
If America and her people fail to see all of that in Fred Dalton Thompson, and fail to vote for him in sufficient numbers to secure his nomination... then perhaps America deserves her long (RINO-led) or rocket-sled (Democratic) slide into third-world status and spiritual darkness, and ultimately, international ridicule as an object of scorn and loathing.
Because if we fail to elect a conservative POTUS this year, evil shall abound in this land.
Fred Thompson: Hands Down, the ONLY Consistently Conservative candidate.
I believe he says he doesn't endorse a candidate. Thats different from being neutral. You can't be a leader of the conservative movement and be neutral.
But then spends the whole program attacking Hukabee and McCain. He also said lots of nice things about Thompson, including saying that coming in third in Iowa is not a flop. Fred may not feel up to campaigning, but Rush certainly does.
his views on conservatism. I will admit this, Rush has clearly endorsed Huckabee losing today, and he is right to do so. Rush is taking a chance, he is saying Huckabee is not conservative.
___________________________________________________________
Molon Labe!
...altho he's trying to play that game coyly while being heavily critical of McCain today and Huckabee.
Rush knows his audience is full of social conservatives and Huck fans and that is why he tries to walk gently while putting down Huck. Of course, Rush has historically always talked 98% fiscal conservatism with a few perfunctory head nods to social conservative and evangelical right issues throughout the years which you can tell he has zero passion for as a nonchurchgoing guy who wants his taxes lower. But he's always very aware its heartland churchgoing conservatives who listen largely.
Since when is pointing out the truth an attack, unless you don't like the truth -- Huckabee has been a manipulative liar throughtout this entire campaign.
He is a pro-life, anti-gay liberal -- I guess we can call Huckabee a stopped clock conservative -- he is right on two issues and wrong (left) the rest of the time.
with candidates does not change Rush's non-endorsing status.
and does not have conservative bona fides
I loved how he used that Huckabot to prove his point about the press conference.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
Caller asks which is more important, abortion or financial issue. Rush says they are linked, you have to have both.
Then he backtracks and says that a candidate doesn’t really have to be anti-abortion, as long as he says he will appoint the right judges. Congratulations Rudy, you have not been thrown under the buss yet.
WOW...Rush just said "there isn't one Regan Conservative in the primary...well mabey there's one."
Perhaps Rush will tell us who the ONE true conservative is?
You don't endorse somebody without actually endorsing them. Just because people keep stating this and other FredHeads agree with them doesn't mean it is true. Maybe you need to read my post on groupthink.
Rush has not and as he said, will not, endorse anybody.
* PRIESTCRAFT is thus defined: “The stratagem and frauds of priests; fraud or imposition in religious concerns. Management of selfish and ambitious priests to gain wealth and power, or to impose upon the credulity of others.”
...he will simply attack the candidate(s) he dislike and praise those he likes. He is not neutral. I just wish he would stop playing games by saying he is neutral.
That is the key to victory for the Hucksters. They really need to come up with some clever name to call him, like the "Club for Greed." Maybe Huck's buddy Rollins has something in mind.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
---quote from Rush Limbaugh, 1/3/08, 12:30PM CST
Rush is NOT going to endorse anyone. Period.
The Unofficial RedState FAQ
“You are not only responsible for what you say, but also for what you do not say. ” - Martin Luther
Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
www.fred08.com