About Rush...

And you're sincerely wrong. You are insinuating that our elected conservative leaders would be rudderless and have no clue as to how to carry out conservative ideas without Rush. Rush doesn't put forth conservative ideas, he doesn't propose legislation, instead he reacts to what happens in Washington. You do know this, correct?

 

Get your story straight, would you? In other posts you claim the media is all powerful, determining who the Republican nominee will be; here you claim they have no influence.

[snip rant]

 

You are conflating two issues here and misrepresenting what he said.

 

Rush moves the heart of the people who work HARD to insure that these candidates get elected and supported. Think that the tea party just arose from a vapor (or that it has gone away)? Silly man... Never understimate the power of the media, in either direction. Hence the reason all dictators strive to control it and use it for propaganda. Rush is the "anti-propaganda" media individual, which is why liberals hate him so much.

Can't be because of how "vile" he is, for he isn't but a drop in the bucket of what gets said -- WITH A FREE PASS -- by almost all of the liberal counterparts.

 

See below... I said "never understimate the power of the media."

I stand by that and am not backpeddling whatsoever.

 

Yeah, I know. If not for Rush the mark of the beast would be embedded in our foreheads by now. Silly me.

 

You really can be the back side of a donkey on some days... :thumbsup:

 

Which days...are you going to start another poll? :laugh:

 

Only the days that end in "y".

 

Limbaugh is not what the Republican used to stand for, and that would be decency. However, I will make this general statement. Anyone who would give any creedence to Rush Limbaugh would also probably vote for Mitt Romney, as they are about par in the department of Christian ethics, or any other type of ethics for that matter.

 

Interestingly, Rush is about as against Romney as you are...

He understands the difference between a RINO and a true conservative.

Perhaps you should listen to him more often.

Oh, and you are utterly true about Rush being "not what the Republicans used to stand for..." He is not a looney-toons like Nixon, nor is he a moderate like both Bushes or Ford. He is a bit like Reagan, however.

 

You are right, Rush is not like any of them. To repeat the description of Rush, he is a pill popping, womanising, foul mouth, self indulgent slob. What does that have to do with the liberal conservative debate, and how do you justify defending such garbage?

 

Ahh you're just bitter because Rush said Ron Paul was hurting conservative candidates. Would we be hearing all this vitriol otherwise?

 

The lastest wrinkle in the Sandra Fluke uproar: She is being represented by Anita Dunn's public relations firm, SKDKnickerbocker. Anita Dunn, Obama's former communications director who once revealed that Communist leader Mao Tse Tung was one of her favorite political philosophers.

So there is the connection to the White House.

 

The term "Rush said" is enough to make anyone throw up. There is no vitriol in me about Rush Limbaugh, only an objective observation. You can belittle Ron Paul all you want, which makes no sense because you know he is unelectable. It seems very odd to me that you demean Ron Paul who is a decent man, and admire Rush Limbaugh who is not.

 

Is the fusion ballot going to help prevent Obama from getting New York's electoral votes? Not that it will make any difference if Romney is the nominee.

 

If your comments - "He is nothing but a pill popping, immoral, womanising, gluttonous, self indulgent slob...Rush Limbaugh is nothing but pure trash..." are not vitriolic we must have completely different definitions of the word. There are anger management classes available.

I didn't demean R.P. in the least in my comments, and I didn't "admire" Rush. He has said many things that I would never speak of or even think.

 

My words stand becaue they exactly describe the person. Anger management has nothing to do with it. I propose it is a problem you have by not being angered by people that influence others with this character. It is the same way Romney angers me by pandering for votes with the blood of innocent children.

 

Especially those who have criticized R.P. Or are winning more votes than R.P.