Posted on 11/22/2018 5:34:48 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
“Well that there is your problem dummy. That was long before the NY Slimes were finally outed as a fake news agency.”
Rush didn’t fly up to NYC to attend a dinner with the Gang of Eight? Really?
Well none other than Rush himself disagrees with you.
From rushlimbaugh.com:
“But the New York Times somehow found out about a dinner that I was asked to attend. They reported the fact that the dinner had occurred.”
And listen to Rush himself talk about the dinner at the Palm Restaurant with the Gang of Eight. (He was interviewed on Fox about the issue once exposed.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kln_aIKOB9Q
So who is the “dummy?”
I’ll await your apology.
As someone who listens to Rush often, I can tell you with 100% certainty that he NEVER opposed Trump. He, like I, call them as we see them. When Trump said things injurious to his cause, such as attacking Ben Carson for being a potential killer, Rush may have criticized him. Criticism of specific points is NOT opposition to the cause as a whole.
Rush has known the President for many years, and they have always been close pals.
Not buying it. I heard the way Rush spoke during the campaign.
We woul be talking about PRESIDENT Rubio today were it not for his nefarious Gang of 8 participation. Rush challenged Rubio, whom he considered a friend, on his show about the downsides of comp immigration “reform”, and Marco gave him piss-poor boilerplate answers with which Rush did not concur. Not then, nor ever.
We woul[sic] be talking about PRESIDENT Rubio today were it not for his nefarious Gang of 8 participation.
With that comment, you should consider a career in stand-up comedy.
If Rubio opposed the nutty Gang of 8 proposal, he may well have won. He fell like an anvil in my own and many others’ (including Rush’s?) judgments from top of the list to barely above Juan McCain.
Oh, BTW Pal, typos happen.
Since I was reproducing a quote of yours, I was appropriately identifying a pre-existing typo of yours. Otherwise, someone could accuse me of purposely misspelling a word to make you look foolish.
Got it pal?
Pal, a (d) would have sufficed. Got it?
You may be correct on politics, but you surely seem like one smarmy dude.
No a "d" would not have sufficed as that would have mean't I misreported a quote.
Got it pal?
Mean’t?
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.