Posted on 07/27/2011 7:41:18 PM PDT by sickoflibs
RUSH: "Tea Party Members Are Suggesting Speaker Boehner Be Replaced." I can't tell you how I knew this was coming, but I knew it was. I knew it was coming. The Tea Party people are serious. There's about a hundred of them in the House. Well, close to a hundred of them, 57, somewhere in there. But rank-and-file Tea Party voters understand something. Despite the massive landslide that occurred last November, both parties still have the same leadership. Nothing has changed. I knew this was coming. When I say I knew it was coming, because I have been told I can't tell you by how many people who consider themselves Tea Party people, Tea Party members, short leash. Leadership doesn't reflect what the election results indicated, get rid of 'em.
Now, the leadership thinks the Tea Party is a bunch of kooks. The leadership in both parties thinks the Tea Party's a bunch of kooks. It's not that they're Tea Partiers, it's that they're outsiders, they're not of the establishment. In Washington it's really not that hard to be a kook. You want the word "cut" to mean cut. When you start talking about cuts, you mean cuts. That makes you a kook within the ruling establishment in Washington. It's really no more complicated than that. Now, I don't know how this is gonna manifest itself, but I do know that this has been effervescing out there and it's now effervesced, or for those of you in Rio Linda "bubbled up," to the surface.
RUSH: We have an opportunity here. The frustrating thing here is it's Obama's who's on the ropes. If they called me and asked my opinion -- which they don't, by the way. I may be the titular head of the party, but they don't call me and ask me my opinion. If they did, I'd say, "I think you guys ought to stop going up there. You know, you did the right thing when you didn't return the phone call. You did the right thing. They're the ones that need this! It's Obama who needs to pull his irons out of the fire.
"It's Obama's reelection we're talking about here; that's what all this is about. This is not about anything other than Obama's reelection. Why help him. Why be his lifeline to that? He doesn't present a plan. Make him pay a price for this! Make him put a plan on paper. Who is this guy? He's the least qualified guy when he walks into any room he's in, and he gets to be referee, and he gets to act above it all? After running up all this spending, after practically personally doubling the debt ceiling himself with his spending, he now gets to sit there and tell us what's approvable and what isn't and what will work and what won't and what he'll sign and what he won't? I know he's president of the United States; I understand that. But it's his reelection that all this is about.
"Obama's reelection has been cast here as 'saving America.' It is Obama's defeat that saves America, not Obama's reelection!" Now, anything that is a lifeline to Obama on this that gets him out of a mess... There's month moral victory to be had here. "What do you mean by moral victory?" I'll give you an exact definition of a moral victory. It's the Super Bowl. Your team qualified by virtue of a bunch of quirk plays in the playoffs. There are five teams better than yours, but you make the Super Bowl, and you're playing the best team in the NFL -- and for three quarters you keep the game close but then in the fourth quarter you get blown out. At the end of the game the coach says, "You guys, this is a great moral victory. You showed the world something today! You show that you don't give up."
It's a loss! There's no such thing as a moral victory, and you don't get credit for moral victories. Voters do not credit losers for moral victories. Now, we won the election in November, and as such, we don't compromise. Winners don't compromise. Loser compromise. We are compromising with ourselves, because we are scared, because we are afraid we're gonna get blamed for whatever calamity that might befall the country. There is no way, in real terms, we get blamed for this because we didn't do this! I'm talking about all this reckless spending, the loss of jobs, this economic disaster. This ain't us. We didn't do this. (interruption) Mr. Snerdley, I am fully aware that the press goes ape every time somebody says, "Don't compromise." (interruption)
Which line? (interruption) Oh, the media is playing that line? Oh, I didn't know that. I didn't know that. I've been too busy playing with OS X Lion. I didn't know. They're replaying that line, that losers compromise; winners don't? That line is being played out there? (interruption) Oh, that's why! That's why they're calling me the titular head. That's why they're now all of a sudden saying these guys are listening to me, because I'm the architect of no compromise? Well, then I wear that badge proudly! I wear that uniform proudly. I wear that hat proudly. I told you on this program in Los Angeles last week, "You're compromising with yourself. There's not even a plan!
"You come up with a plan, you go to the White House, and the president says, 'I don't like that, I don't like that, I don't like that, I don't like that.' You go back, you come back, you go back, you come back. He doesn't ever submit anything. He just tells you what about your plan he's not gonna sign or doesn't like." Well, they end up compromising with themselves. Meanwhile, Carney, the press secretary, said yesterday, they don't even have a plan! Somebody tell me what's wrong or what's incorrect about the philosophy "Winners don't compromise"? Let me tell you something: When the Democrats win, show, give me the examples of their compromises when they win.
They don't. They don't compromise when they lose. Why should we? Why is the onus always on us to compromise? And the only reason we have people who think the onus is on us and that we should compromise is because they've been made to believe that whatever it is we want or believe somehow is extreme, when it's not. It's mainstream. We are the mainstream. The kooks in this country are the left. Obama is president of the kooks! You and I, ladies and gentlemen, are not the kooks. The Tea Party is not a collection of kooks. Mainstream conservatives are not kooks. Now, you're gonna see -- if I'm right about this, you're gonna see -- Republicans go after some conservatives, leading conservatives in the House as being "obstructionists" and so forth, standing in the way. That's what will happen. That's the Ruling Class going after the new arrivals.
Where was the compromise on Obamacare?
Somebody tell me.
Where was the compromise on Obamacare? The point is, they didn't compromise anything. I just am saying: Why is the onus always on us? Now, you might say, "Okay, well, Rush, Obama won the presidency. He won. He's the president. He won." What Obama believes, what Obama ran on, what Obama has done lost in the November elections. Obama won nothing in the November elections -- and furthermore, what Obama believes and what Obama wants has been losing at the state level. He lost in Wisconsin. He's losing in Texas. He's gonna lose in Ohio. He's gonna lose in Indiana. He's in big trouble. Obama is not winning. He is not the winner that we're talking about now -- and he's not compromising, either. They lose cap and trade in the Senate. What do they do? Pursue it at the EPA. That's compromise, right?
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
They are counting on a Republicans failure here because they got a debt plan in mind that Republicans will definitely hate.
The time to Replace Boehner was in January or back in 2009, and it would have been a good idea, but it's a bit off in timing to talk about that now.
I heard this segment live today and thought I would post it. Rush is pretty optimistic about this, but then again I remember his optimism some 15+ years ago on a similar situation.
btrl
The Tea Party did not exist back in 2009. And I’ve got news for you.
We are not going away. This sham deal will only enbolden credible Tea Party Candidates to jump in. 2010 was a warm up compared to what 2012 is gonna look like.
We are not going to get depressed and stay home. We are going to vote for any credible Tea Party Candidate running for anything. That candidate could be a republician or an independent. But it won’t be RINO’s
Is that old windbag still on the air ?
You probably will have your wish and tomorrows bill will never be put into law, but the one that Democrats cheering it's failure demand will not be to your liking.
Whom exactly are you referring to?
I would suggest to the Republicans is that they give their best deal first. And when the Democrats reject the deal, the Republicans dig in deeper removing more compromise. And so on. When the DemoRats see that they are going nowhere and the Republicans are taking everything off the table one step at a time, maybe they will take the offer. Their choice and the stability of our country rests totally in their greasy hands.
Dennis Kucinich is on now and says none of the plans are acceptable to him either, he says they have to demand a debt increase with no spending cuts.
‘The time to Replace Boehner was in January or back in 2009...’
Better late than never.
To continue Rush’s analogy, you don’t stick with a quarterback who is throwing interceptions. You yank him and put in someone who can, hopefully, do a better job.
Inspect and adapt. Do it or get left behind.
John Boehner=Tavaris Jackson.
NO Cheers, unfortunately.
Is that old Al Baby still posting on FR? ;^)
I don’t have a problem raising the debt limit. I have a problem with future phantom cuts and the Blue-Ribbon Commission. CUT SPENDING NOW.
This bill will propably pass, after all the old retired GOP hacks have been pressuring them. I can only imagine the strong arming going on.
Neither plan begins to solve the spending crisis this country faces.
And until that is addressed, this crisis will not disappear. It will only get worse. And if you are waiting to draw a line in the sand until the GOP controls all three branches of govt, u may be waiting a while. Even with a majority, u will have the McCains, The Snowe’s, the Grahams, the McConnell’s to tie things up. So when is the best time to draw a line in the sand? The next deal, the next crisis, the next election, the next decade?
Boehner was GWB TARP strong-arm man in the house. So it is not like anyone can plead ignorance. It was just January they made him speaker. I have no idea why. How come Rush didnt speak up then?
Something about joining Obama, Reid, Pelosi, and all the libs on MSNBC in defeating this bill strikes me not being the best move.
.
Rush neglects the fact that we didn’t not win a Super Bowl and thereby can claim a final victory.
We only won ONE house not the whole shooting match so we have a looong way to go towards that total victory.
Round two next November will be determined by whether we lose patience and get divided or stay together and improve on what has happened. Slow but sure. We won’t win with a ninety yd td but can complete some 15 and 20 yarders to put ourselves in a chance to win.
I hope this passes the House - it will fail in the Senate. They know that there is no hurry.
We need to get back to CCB.
Thanks I just e mailed that to my sister and her son (obama voters )
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.