Posted on 01/22/2013 1:49:00 PM PST by Kaslin
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: This Tom Brokaw and Andrea Mitchell, NBC News, Washington, and this is yesterday on the Today show. They're on there with Matt Lauer and they are celebrating. They're celebrating because they think the Republicans have given up, and they're right. Everybody's giving up. My impression is that everybody is giving up and they're waiting for events that nobody can predict to maybe change the direction that we're headed; events that nobody can predict that will stop Obama in his tracks; events that'll happen that will wake people up.
The sense I get is that there's no point in opposing because we're only gonna be hated. There's no point in pointing out where Obama's making a mistake, transforming the country in a bad way, 'cause that's only gonna make us hated and disliked; people aren't gonna like it. We don't want to be hated and disliked. We lost. That's what happens when you lose. The winners get to do whatever they want, and we'll just wait for some unknown series of events, and we'll pray that something karma related will come along and save us, bail us out. That's what I sense is where much of what you would think would be opposition to this in Washington is. First off, Andrea Mitchell.
MITCHELL: It's been so toxic that I think the president is betting that the American people -- it's clear in our polls -- the people are ready fed up with this and that it will be in the Republican Party's advantage to play somewhat toward getting something done. You saw that in Williamsburg, Virginia, with the House caucus last week when Paul Ryan steered the party and the more radical elements of the Tea Party which supported him toward some sort of compromise short term, at least on the debt ceiling.
RUSH: Yeah, let's not oppose anything. Oh, my God, just let Obama have what he wants. You know, people are fed up with us. The Republicans are running around, I think they actually think everybody hates them. Voters, not just Republican supporters, donors, everybody. So the president's betting the American people are fed up with the Republicans. The best thing the Republicans can do is just be invisible and just let Obama have his way. And, of course why wouldn't the media do this? The media has succeeded in making the Republicans think that criticizing Obama is gonna irritate independents, while Romney was winning independents in double digits in five of the eight battleground states. The reason the Republicans lost the election is because they didn't turn out their base.
Let's grab Ivan, Virginia Beach. I'm glad you called, sir. Welcome to the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER: Oh, thanks, Rush, for having me on.
RUSH: You bet.
CALLER: I just wanted to point out one line that really stuck out to me in this whole speech. I'm paraphrasing, but basically Obama said, "Now is not the time to solve the question, the centuries old question of the role of government, but to solve our current problems now." And to me it's a great sleight of hand because he's kind of pushing the conservatives off to the side while at the same time ignoring the fact that the role of the government is actually the central issue, whether you're talking about the debt, gun control, gay marriage, whatever, it's the role of the federal government that that's the real issue.
RUSH: The centuries old problem over the role of government is exactly the problem. It makes total sense that Obama would want to shove it aside. Look, let's shelve the debate over whether government should be big or not so that I can go ahead and transform this country while nobody's paying attention. And let's go ahead and argue about solving the problems the way I want to solve 'em, because everybody's agreed not to oppose me. So let's just get rid of the negatives that attach to me, and the Republicans are saying, "Okay, if you don't want to talk about the negatives attached to you, we won't." So he's basically asking for a clear road, and he's being given one.
CALLER: Exactly.
RUSH: I think, actually, that Obama believes that the role of government's already been solved. We've got Obamacare. We have the Julia commercial. I think he believes that he's now convinced a majority of Americans that the government should be the central focus of everybody's life in terms of their needs and their wants and their safety and security. You go to government for it. I think he's already succeeded at that. The role of government has been debated, voted on, and solved, and he won. And so Obama basically in his speech yesterday was calling for us to become a country of the government, by the government, and for the government. With him and his buddies in charge of it. Thanks, Ivan.
Mark in Chicago, glad you called, sir. Welcome to the EIB Network.
CALLER: Hey, Rush, thanks for taking my call. And fascinating subject today. I love it. Rush, real quick. I mean, if we were in charge and being a conservative, I mean, my heart's desire, I think all our hearts' desire is to take out the Democrats. And I think we would do it a little differently. We would do it through policy. And, you know, Rush, I'm 54, and in my lifetime, I don't think I've ever seen -- correct me if I'm wrong -- a Republican president that had had the control Obama has had from '08 to '10. And, you know, I think at the end, the people are gonna decide which party is gonna prevail --
RUSH: Well, some might say that George W. Bush had it for a while, but of course he's a different temperament. But, you know, your first point is really important, it's really valid. If the situation were reversed, the way we would be attempting to eliminate opposition is in the arena of ideas. We would not be smearing these people. We wouldn't be running campaign ads telling lies about people, accusing them of murder and all these other things. That's not how we would be doing it. But Obama is doing it that, and he's winning doing that. He is winning telling lies about his opposition. He's triumphing big time doing so. It's an important point. I'm glad you made it, and we will be right back.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: I just played Andrea Mitchell in which she expressed satisfaction that the Republicans are scared, given up, exactly as they should. Here's Brokaw weighing in on that idea.
BROKAW: I think it's an indication. I think it's a telltale sign about where the Republicans are. Four years ago when the president was making that speech, Republicans were meeting at night --
MITCHELL: Exactly.
BROKAW: -- trying to decide how they were gonna defeat him when he runs for reelection. They lost that big time. He had a very robust electoral victory and a significant popular vote victory. Now the Republicans are in disarray trying to organize their party so they have a future.
RUSH: They're not even thinking about that yet. The Republican Party is trying to stay out of Obama's crosshairs right now. People who donated to the Republican Party are trying to stay out of Obama's crosshairs right now. There are all kinds of people who think of themselves in the opposition who are trying not to be noticed by Obama right now. There is a profound amount of fear for Obama and what his government could do and might be inclined to do to people to teach them a lesson. So it's low-profile city all the way, and let's just sit back. We can't stop it anyway, so let's hope something comes along outside of anybody's control, some event or series of events that wakes people up and rights the ship. I think that's where people are right now. Not everybody, but a vast majority.
Now, one other thing here about this business of Reagan and transformational and Obama. There's a big distinction here that needs to be made. You have all of these media types marveling here at Obama. I was warning everybody, but they're all sitting there marveling how Obama's replicating and emulating Reagan, changing the trajectory of the country, transforming America, blah, blah, blah. That's not what Reagan did. Reagan mighta changed the trajectory in the sense that he reoriented people's lives to themselves and away from government.
Reagan celebrated the Constitution, the founding, the uniqueness of this country. Reagan respected our democratic system. By transformational applied to Reagan, it means that Reagan was trying to rebuild the country. Reagan was trying to save it. Reagan was attempting to reorient the country toward its founding. That's not what Obama's doing. And yet by giving Obama the imprimatur of Reagan, it's a really dangerous thing to do, because here we have the Republican Party -- well, certain commentators basically awarding Obama with Reaganism and Reagan-type characteristics. And there isn't anything similar.
Reagan did not govern in defiance of the Constitution. Reagan did not govern in defiance of the founding. Reagan was not angry and fed up. Reagan was not about grievance politics. Reagan didn't think that a bunch of people had gotten away with murder in the past and they needed to be gotten even with now. Reagan wasn't about targeting the enemy other than the Soviet Union and other communists. He wasn't about targeting the enemy and wiping them out. You will not find, in eight years of Reagan, anything like what you're reading today about eliminating the Democrats, pulverizing the Democrats, going for the throat, wiping them out. That's not what Reagan was. That's not what Reagan did.
Reagan won in the arena of ideas. Reagan won people's hearts and minds. Obama's not doing that. Obama's not winning with his ideas. Obama's not garnering support for his ideas. This is what frustrates me. Obama is winning purely and simply by lying and demonizing his opposition. Brokaw couldn't be further from the truth here in explaining Obama's victory. (imitating Brokaw) "Oh, yeah, a popular election, he won it big time, very robust electoral victory, significant popular vote."
The Republican base stayed home because they were angry at the Republican Party and at Romney, but people voted against Romney. They were not voting for Obama. This is what everybody misses. Obama had demonized Romney for a full year, and people believed it. They believed that Romney didn't care when a guy's wife died. There has never been a candidate for the White House more charitable, more giving, and more decent. Forget political ideas and concepts, just in terms of humanity, there's never been a better person run for the office than Romney. Maybe some people are close. And to have the American people end up believing that this guy hated dogs, quickly allowed people's wives to die without caring about it and had secret money stashes all over the world, not paying his taxes and so forth. I mean, it was robust, to use Brokaw's language.
It was robust the way Romney was destroyed. That's how Obama wins. And that's what Obama's gonna continue to do, and that's what the media's urging him to do, is the point. Then they come along and say that, "Well, like Reagan, he's transforming America. He's gonna try to fundamentally change the trajectory and so forth." In his dreams Obama will be as successful as Reagan. But one thing Obama couldn't do, he couldn't get close to winning the way Reagan did. He can't get close to emulating Reagan in terms of transforming the country. That's not what Reagan did.
Reagan didn't win by telling lies about his opposition. Reagan didn't win by demonizing everybody. Reagan didn't win by convincing people that the Democrats were big reprobates, you know, human debris and all that. That's all Obama's got. He can't win on the strength of his ideas, and he doesn't run on them. His inaugural address was a bunch of pap and emptiness. It was just more of the same in terms of his lofty plans for a government that was never intended to be, by virtue of the founders of this country. And to attach Reagan to that the way some of these analysts are doing is quite offensive.
"Yeah, well, he seeks fundamental change." He does. But Reagan was a defender of the Constitution, not a destroyer of it. Huge difference. And it is kind of galling. This is why I've been mentioning it, folks. Maybe I haven't been communicating this well enough. Lord knows that's possible. It's just been galling to me to watch the Democrat Party co-opt Ronald Reagan, use him to advance themselves while in the process totally misrepresenting who and what Reagan was and did. And then to have analysts sit by and marvel at it has been a little bit much, tough to take. But it is what's been happening, and continues to.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Look, folks, here's another thing. Apparently Brokaw and Andrea Mitchell, NBC News, Washington, and all the rest of these media people appreciate sleazy campaigns, which is what Obama's campaign was. It was a campaign full of sleaze, and these guys are out there endorsing it and saying, "We need to up the sleaze! Yes, we need now to pulverize the Republicans. We need to strangle the Republicans. We need to take the Republicans out." They're encouraging Obama to do more of this.
Reagan won two landslides. Obama wins, what, 51% or 53%, by three points, whatever it was? Reagan never had a media in his pocket doing his bidding. Obama couldn't win without them running interference for him. I'm just telling you that it galls me a little bit to see all these Reagan comparisons and have them not be properly analyzed. In his dreams and only in his dreams is Obama Reagan, is the point. There aren't any similarities. And yet you wouldn't know that if you pay attention to the Drive-Bys.
END TRANSCRIPT
“They should have been name calling from 2007 onwards.”
I’ll go you one better than that, Candor7.
Conservatives should have been showing up back in the 1970s at school board meetings to kick commies out of the classrooms. They should’ve showed their faces at local village and county board meetings to stop sky-high property taxes.
Conservatives are lazy and self-centered and care only about worshipping Mammon and remodeling their stupid kitchens. And then they scratch their heads and wonder how leftists took over the country.
You got it. The GOP played nice and "reached across the aisle" after Bush was President and they controlled Congress, instead of pushing their agenda. They seemed to be afraid of losing, and didn't want to provoke the leftists and their MSM into attacking them.
But the leftists and their MSM were going to attack them regardless, and they did lose, first Congress in 2006, then everything. The sad part is that the GOP has nothing to lose by making a stand since the lefties will continue to attack them regardless of what they do, and plenty to gain by standing up for Conservative principles, so they could at least give us a reason to support them. Too bad they can't see that far ahead.
There’s also some bait and switch. The GOP establishment saw Romney as the genteel Republican that everyone would like, including the media. The media basically baits the GOP with favorable coverage of a moderate who then gets deemed electable and once he accepts the GOP nomination then becomes the antichrist. Might as well go for broke in 2016 and nominate an “unelectable” Republican candidate.
homo defectus
Instead of playing along, the republicans should vote present on every bill. Let the dems own everything. Then when it all crashes they won’t have anyone to blame. As it is, the republicans will be blamed no matter what. I firmly believe you have to be evil to be a democrat but you have to be stupid to be a republican.
I DO?
Damn!
I thought I had a RATIONAL hatred for HERESY!
Who knew!!!
A lot better than ISLAM 'feels' toward them!
At least they ain't claiming to be Christian; and the only TRUE christians at that!!!
!
Really?? Romney is the anti-Christ??
Whatever.
You know, I thought conservatives didn’t vote for Romney because he was too liberal. Now I know that there were people who didn’t vote for him because he is a Mormon. How small minded. And ludicrous. You don’t want Romney in office because he follows a certain religion that you don’t like, yet because you chose not to vote for only one of two viable candidates because you didn’t like his religion, the other candidate who is evil personified is again in charge of our Republic, this time with no reason to pretend to be pro-American.
Just wondering, are you anti-Semitic, too? Anti-Catholic? Anti-Babtist? Anti-Protestant? I bet you’re at least two of those.
No wonder this country is lost. God help us.
You REALLY need to pay a bit closer attention to just WHO types these things...
| It's true. I've had more than one under-25-year-old tell me they thought Romney was the Anti-Christ. Straight from the White House campaign staff via the Comedy Channel. Romney - no conservative, but a very decent and respectable JFK Democrat - was taken out by a scurrilous campaign of lies and slander, one that a functional news media would have easily countered with factual reporting. 11 posted on Tuesday, January 22, 2013 5:07:09 PM by Mr. Jeeves (CTRL-GALT-DELETE) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse] |
I'll bet that you would NOT castigate a person for NOT voting for a MUSLIM.
Am I correct?
Ode to Mittens
by Jean Ann Esselink
You pursued a cutthroat game plan,
In your brutal Primary fight.
Wherever your opponent stood,
You scurried to his right.
You thought you’d shake the Etch- a-Sketch,
And start again anew.
And that’s why we’re not inaugurating you.
When a soldier in Afghanistan,
Asked if you had your say,
Would you reinstate Don’t Ask Don’t Tell?
And told you he was gay.
You stood there without speaking,
When the crowd began to boo.
And that’s why we’re not inaugurating you.
You didn’t speak when Sandra Fluke,
Was called a “slut” by Rush.
You were silent when your party,
Tried to take our votes from us.
You said nothing when Todd Akin,
Claimed that not all rapes are true.
And that’s why we’re not inaugurating you.
When asked if you would sign,
A woman’s Right to Choose away,
You’d answer women only cared,
How much was in their pay.
You made Ann your link to women,
When she never had a clue.
And that’s why we’re not inaugurating you.
You embarrassed us in Europe,
Wherever you would go.
Ann’s horse made the Olympics,
But you didn’t even show.
You’d have let Michigan go bankrupt,
From Detroit to Kalamazoo.
And that’s why we’re not inaugurating you.
You thought, like you, that everyone,
Loved nothing more than money.
And shaving off a classmates hair,
Was your idea of funny.
You like your women bound in binders,
Unless they’re pregnant in a shoe.
And that’s why we’re not inaugurating you.
You gave millions to the Mormons,
To Fund Proposition Eight.
You may have called that charity,
Gay couples call it “hate”.
You threatened to kill Big Bird,
And you’re married to a shrew.
And that’s why we’re not inaugurating you.
There are forty-seven percent of us,
For whom you had no care.
You claimed it wasn’t our concern,
If you were taxed your share.
In your heart, you didn’t love us,
And we didn’t love you too.
And that’s why we’re not inaugurating you.
Which one?
The Christian one; or the MORMON ones?
Why Should He??
|
Are you still killing your unborn? -- GOD |
Comedy Central?
Maybe.
But from what I witnessed over the past year here, half of Free Republic. Some FReepers did more to demonize Romney than any combination of Comedy Central Yucks.
17% of 310 million is almost 53 million.
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.