Skip to comments.Meet the Press Panel Blames Romney Loss on Limbaugh and ‘Loons and Wackos’ of Conservative Base
Posted on 11/11/2012 5:33:53 PM PST by Sub-Driver
Meet the Press Panel Blames Romney Loss on Limbaugh and Loons and Wackos of Conservative Base By Brent Baker Created 11/11/2012 - 6:01pm
Sundays Meet the Press featured a panel of five, none of them conservative (Congressman-elect Joaquín Castro, Republican strategist Steve Schmidt, author Doris Kearns Goodwin, the Washington Posts Bob Woodward and NBCs Chuck Todd), to assess why Mitt Romney lost and the future of the GOP. And they agreed conservatives are the problem.
Todd, NBCs political director, decided the GOP has become a coalition of special interest forces and fretted the leaders in Washington cant control the special interest groups as Republicans, like Democrats in the past, succumbed to their base.
As if the Obama campaign this year didnt succumb to and exploit the liberal feminist agenda on Planned Parenthood.
Steve Schmidt, who managed John McCains 2008 loss, argued that to too many swing voters in the country, when you hear the word conservative now, they think of loons and wackos.
In an obvious allusion to Rush Limbaugh, a clip of whom host David Gregory had played earlier, Schmidt snarled: Our elected leaders are scared to death of the conservative entertainment complex, the shrill and divisive voices that are bombastic and broadcasting out into the homes.
Earlier, liberal historian Doris Kearns Goodwin declared: The fundamental loss of this campaign probably took place in the Republican primaries when they put out a group of people who were so far off the political cliff on issues that mattered to Latinos, to women and to young people.
(Picking up on how the new Lincoln movie is based on Goodwins Team of Rivals book, host David Gregory cued her up to explain how Obama can be a great President like Lincoln: The polarization then so profound; as this President now strives to be a great President, like Lincoln, what is his challenge to break this polarization? Does it all come back to bipartisanship at some level?)
From the Sunday, November 11 Meet the Press:
CHUCK TODD: Lets look back at the Republican Party. How did they become a coalition of special interest forces? They really do look like the Democratic Party of the 70s and 80s where they seem to -- the leaders in Washington cant control the special interest groups. And this is what happened to the Democrats, labor, all of these special interest groups that were, the folks in Washington knew what the right way was to try to win national elections. They couldnt quite do it because they were -- basically, they succumbed to their base. The Democratic Party, started with Bill Clinton, and Obama successfully has been able to carry this over, has never been able to allow the base of the Democratic Party, special interest groups, to overtake the national message. The Republican Part, its unbelievable that they have allowed to happen.
STEVE SCHMIDT: Conservatism is a serious governing philosophy that has served this country well. But to too many swing voters in the country, when you hear the word conservative now, they think of loons and wackos. We gave up five U.S. Senate seats over the last two election cycles by people who were just out there, completely extreme, manifestly unprepared for the offices that theyre, that theyre running for. Our elected leaders are scared to death of the conservative entertainment complex, the shrill and divisive voices that are bombastic and broadcasting out into the homes. And this country is rejecting the social extremism of the Republican Party on issue after issue. And if you look at the four states that legalized gay marriage, on a range of issues, our coalition is shrinking and the Republican Party has a lot of soul searching to do if we are going to assemble a majority.
They’re ALL (RINOs included) in cahoots to get shed of Rush Limbaugh. In fact, chomping at the bit. - The day after the election, Rush said that the country has become where the “takers” outnumber the “producers” and went on to say “you can’t fight Santa Claus (Baracka Claus)”. He was more on target than Rove and the rest of them; and he got a lot of flak for it the next day from everywhere. They’ve bullied their “educamated” liberal crowd into being afraid to listen to Rush, for fear of being called stupid. He IS right a lot of the time.
Hey, it was RUSH who shot his mouth off and made Sandra Fluke a cause celeb giving us the "War on Women." He's been around long enough to know better.
They cannot even let well alone. For them, the healthy debate and the give and take of honest Americans is old hat. They are virtually totalitarians. They wish to completely eliminate the Winston Smiths within a democracy, that still follows the dictum, which is:
I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
DITTO, Exactly right!
Thank you sweet Clyde, but some things are just easy-peasy! LOL.
And speaking of killing, let’s go ahead and kill this “conservative entertainment complex” thing right freaking now. Because these days pretty much every news network and program is to some extent entertainment-driven, some more than others. Viacom ought to buy MSNBC so they can use the airstaff as God intended: Building a political “news” satire network around the twin tentpoles of &ldquop;The Daily Show” and “The Colber Repor”.
Please, please GOP. Please announce that conservatives like Ronald Reagan and his admirers, Sarah Palin and her admirers, Herman Cain and his admirers, Rush Limbaugh and his admirers, Sean Hannity and his admirers, et al. have no place in the GOP. Please you scum sucking elitist Establishment Republican (Boehner, McCain, Cantor, McConnell, Graham and others) cowards. You don’t have the gonads to stand up to the Marxist in the White House. Are you afraid of a bunch of smelly old conservatives that you loathe, hate and despise? You don’t have the courage of your convictions. Cowards. Yellow Bellied scum suckers? Do you need to check with your wives first? They are just like the Democrats. You like it when they rub your asses and call you Sweetie.
You know they just want whats best for Republicans. How kind and generous of them...not.
It’s easy for the GOP to plan its strategy. Just do the exact opposite of what these idiots say. Steve Schmidt, the genius of 2008?
One word, California.
What is the woman’s name that caused Palin grief? She and Schmidt were backstabbing and I haven’t seen her face around and can’t even remember her name.
If a belief in the true God of the BIBLE and good old fashioned VALUES is enough to make one a loon or wacko then I will ALWAYS support “loons and wackos”!!!
I weep for this nation.
” - - -Steve Schmidt, who managed John McCains 2008 loss, argued that - - - “
Stevie “Lose at any cost” Schmidt is Mr. RINO. Whatever Stevie says we can take as gospel that the opposite is a truer, better course of action for Conservatives.
Freakin left wing whack jobs.
Rush and anyone else had zip to do with Romney’s loss.
Guy is a crap product and that’s why he lost.
The Meet the Pravda panel prefer left-wing loons and wackos. They also prefer the candidate endorsed by the Communist Party USA and Marxist dictators.
Yep. Pete Wilson and the Sperminator were such great moderates. The voters love the GOP moderates so much now. Just ask Gov. Whitman and Sen. Fiorina, and the 2/3 GOP majority in the legislature. Oops.
This is how we know the Libs are worried about out power:
” - - - And they agreed conservatives are the problem.”
The “inconvenient truth” is that Romney IGNORED Conservatives during the Primary, Post-Primary AND the General Campaigns. Well, Romney DID say that during a previous life as Gov. of Mass he was “Seriously Conservative.”
BTW, I had no idea that “Serious” was in such dire straits that it needed to be Conserved! Who knew?
I don't see why they are blaming us. Most of us supported Romney, sometimes reluctantly, but by and large we did since we knew Obama was so much of a worse choice. We voted for the guy. We helped financially. Some of us campaigned for him. How much more can we do? And somehow we're the "problem"? How are you a problem if you end up supporting the party's candidate? Why is that a problem? Would it have been less of a problem for Romney if we didn't? Would that magically have gotten him more votes somehow?
It appears to me that a bigger problem is that the majority of the electorate preferred Obama. They want more free stuff from da gummint. That's a much bigger problem for the country as a whole than conservatives who supported the nominee.
You are 100% correct.
When liberals rate Romney as right wing, words have ceased to mean anything.
He'd have to tack hard a starboard to be a moderate.
Conclusion of the liberal panelists: the Republican Party should adopt the programs and principles of the progressive i.e. socialist Democrat Party. Even though a shift of one and one half million votes or about one percent of the vote would have won it for Romney. What else do you expect socialists to say?
Don’t take the bait. Concentrate on what we need to do.
You are exactly right.
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.