Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ed Gillespie the RNC chairman has said Republicans aren't still for limited government...
Rrush Limbaugh | 9/2/2003 | the Unveiled Lady

Posted on 09/02/2003 10:20:18 AM PDT by The UnVeiled Lady

Rush was just talking about the RNC Chairman who was interviewed in the Baltimore paper and he has said that the Republican party is no longer for limited government. Now the party will take a poll of what the people want and then will throw money at that special interest.

Let's give this guy a poll!!!


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism
KEYWORDS: anticonstitution; biggovernment; bigspenders; chairman; edgillespie; gillespie; gop; jellyfish; leftists; liberalism; liberals; limitedgovernment; noconservatives; noprinciples; prostitutes; recordspending; republican; republicanparty; rino; rnc; sellout; semisocialist; whores
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last
To email a comment http://www.rnc.org/contact/contact.htm
1 posted on 09/02/2003 10:20:18 AM PDT by The UnVeiled Lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
to call
202-863-8500 then press #1 for Constituant services and leave a comment

2 posted on 09/02/2003 10:21:23 AM PDT by The UnVeiled Lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
to call
202-863-8500 then press #1 for Constituant services and leave a comment

3 posted on 09/02/2003 10:21:26 AM PDT by The UnVeiled Lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
to FAX
202-863-8820

Sorry about the double post
4 posted on 09/02/2003 10:22:13 AM PDT by The UnVeiled Lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
Like Rush said... 15 years of work down the drain...
5 posted on 09/02/2003 10:22:19 AM PDT by jbstrick (Behold the Power of CHEESE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
The RNC appears to have decided what's important is occupying the middle. You know, leave the Democrats with nothing to say.
6 posted on 09/02/2003 10:22:59 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
Rove is reenergizing the Rockefeller wing.
7 posted on 09/02/2003 10:24:04 AM PDT by B Knotts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
funny way to get bigger government but with less tax money coming in.
8 posted on 09/02/2003 10:25:21 AM PDT by Pikamax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts

9 posted on 09/02/2003 10:27:03 AM PDT by GraniteStateConservative (Inconceivable!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
"the Republican party is no longer for limited government."

Not exactly news, I guess.

10 posted on 09/02/2003 10:28:35 AM PDT by Sam Cree (Democrats are herd animals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
Ed Gillespie doesn't speak for me. I simply don't want to be in bed with people who think this way. I may as well be french-kissing Schmuckie The Rat Schumer or Fat Teddy The Killer.

Maybe I need to take a closer look at the Constitution Party. I would rather vote with a loser I agree with than vote with a loser I disagree with!

11 posted on 09/02/2003 10:29:38 AM PDT by Gritty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
Im with Gillispie on this one...
Hopefully soon we will have only a large govt
and only one political party...and voting for it is mandatory...
then we dont have to go through all this agravation
and just sit back and enjoy our soma ration...
finger flipping lip going blp blp blp blp
12 posted on 09/02/2003 10:30:55 AM PDT by joesnuffy (Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GraniteStateConservative
Do you think Gillespie is right?
13 posted on 09/02/2003 10:32:15 AM PDT by B Knotts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
Rus was reading an editorial from the Manchester Union-Leader.

Even he stated that he doubted that Gillespie spoke in the tone of the editorial.

But Rush did use it for a weak springboard for his rant.

Ed Gillespie also has been recently interviewed by Limbaugh himself.

14 posted on 09/02/2003 10:33:55 AM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Let's not jump to any conclusions here, just yet. Rush is upset and rightfully so. As a conservative, I'm upset, but lets see the actual article. If someone can find it. I find this out of character for Ed Gillispie.
15 posted on 09/02/2003 10:34:03 AM PDT by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy
Yep...you'll be able to just put your hat on backwards and watch football as our betters run our lives the way they should be run. :-(

This is starting to feel kinda like "The Empire Strikes Back."

16 posted on 09/02/2003 10:34:09 AM PDT by B Knotts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
Baltimore paper ?


Which one........ Or is Rush referring to the Manchester Union Article of a couple of days ago that asserts the same but offers no quotes.....

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/974547/posts?

17 posted on 09/02/2003 10:34:14 AM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dane
And the Editorial had ZERO Quotes in it from Ed.......
18 posted on 09/02/2003 10:35:58 AM PDT by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
It is good, though, to always remain vigilant. I smell some of this (Gillespie's alleged sentiments) in the California recall race. Remember that the checked-pants Republicans initially opposed the recall effort, until they saw a chance to install one of their own.
19 posted on 09/02/2003 10:36:03 AM PDT by B Knotts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: deport
That's the one!
20 posted on 09/02/2003 10:36:31 AM PDT by StriperSniper (The Federal Register is printed on pulp from The Tree Of Liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: deport
If thats the editorial, Rush pretty much wasted his time, there are no quotes, this is all the writer's assertions.
21 posted on 09/02/2003 10:38:21 AM PDT by Pikamax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: deport
And the Editorial had ZERO Quotes in it from Ed......

Yep, and Rush mentioned that for a millisecond.

22 posted on 09/02/2003 10:39:50 AM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: deport
sorry I didn't get the paper right and saw there was another thread about this, I did a search but it didn't include RNC or Ed Gillespies name in the title.

Which ever, if Ed wants to take a poll about what we want, there are the contact numbers and let's give him a poll.

Thanks, I have called and emailed.
23 posted on 09/02/2003 10:40:10 AM PDT by The UnVeiled Lady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
What's there to poll about? He's correct.

We are out of the mainstream here. We are some of the few people in this country who still want smaller gov't.

24 posted on 09/02/2003 10:40:51 AM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: deport
Looks like Rush did overreact.

There's not one quote from Gillespie, or from anyone else. This is pure hearsay, nothing more. If someone can find actual quotes form Ed Gillespie, PING me. Otherwise.....

25 posted on 09/02/2003 10:42:00 AM PDT by Reagan Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax
funny way to get bigger government but with less tax money coming in.

It's called huge deficits, higher interest rates, and eventually a stagnating economy.

26 posted on 09/02/2003 10:43:46 AM PDT by FreeLibertarian (You live and learn. Or you don't live long.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
He might as well be in the DFL side of the Minnesota legislature.
27 posted on 09/02/2003 10:51:16 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
For one thing your title is a lie. He said no such thing. The Manchester Union leader (Who endorsed John McCain in the last election) Thinks that is what he said.They even say that much.They enfer that is what he said.
28 posted on 09/02/2003 10:52:30 AM PDT by cksharks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
No big surprise now, is it?

29 posted on 09/02/2003 10:54:04 AM PDT by swarthyguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
This is being taken out of context for sure.

Anyone who has read Gillespie on the GOP Team Leader would have a hard time believing this BS.

Give me a break. What a bunch of hooey.
30 posted on 09/02/2003 10:54:09 AM PDT by rwfromkansas ("Men stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up as if nothing had happened." Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
and my assertion is proved right by reading the article that started this whole mess

I hope some of you will apologize to Gillespie. He is a good guy.
31 posted on 09/02/2003 10:55:58 AM PDT by rwfromkansas ("Men stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up as if nothing had happened." Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Most likely hearsay. But this is a very good time for Gillespie to get his name and the party position in the news by refuting this. He can be very concise and let everyone know exactly where the party stands.
32 posted on 09/02/2003 11:25:19 AM PDT by FreeInWV
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
I don't think he overreacted. If only to say to the RNC, "Don't even think about it," it would have been worth it.
33 posted on 09/02/2003 11:29:47 AM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
Time for a change at the top.
34 posted on 09/02/2003 11:32:50 AM PDT by Redbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
Never mind the rnc, if it is true I'm out of here. Libertarians or some other party that believes in limited gov't. is were I'll hang my hat.
35 posted on 09/02/2003 11:32:52 AM PDT by taildragger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreeInWV
"He can be very concise and let everyone know exactly where the party stands."

Don't hold your breath...

36 posted on 09/02/2003 11:33:18 AM PDT by At _War_With_Liberals
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
That's why I don't give money to the RNC. I have a membership with the state party, and I'm active with the county party, which
A. Is for limited government.
B. Where I can have the most influence with tomorrow's reps.
37 posted on 09/02/2003 11:35:38 AM PDT by Dan from Michigan ("Boom Boom! Out go the lights!" - Pat Travers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
It's not merely Gillespies' quote, or alleged quote: it's this entire administration's legislative agenda, from the Dept. of Fatherland Security to the "No Child Left Behind" invasion of state educational systems.

Doesn't matter what was said - judge them by what they DO!
38 posted on 09/02/2003 11:37:21 AM PDT by Redbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/974547/posts
39 posted on 09/02/2003 11:38:16 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: deport
The article was written after a meeting between the Union Leader editorial board and Gillespie, based on what he said.
40 posted on 09/02/2003 11:41:31 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Redbob
Doesn't matter what was said - judge them by what they DO!

Yep like pushing tax cuts, killing Kyoto and the International Court, getting a PBA ban through in the next month, relaxing Carter era enviromental standards, etc. etc.

41 posted on 09/02/2003 11:41:58 AM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Redbob
Dept. of Fatherland Security

*chuckle*

42 posted on 09/02/2003 11:43:41 AM PDT by B Knotts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: The UnVeiled Lady
Let's give this guy a poll!!!

No, how about a punch in the nose. What a schmuck. I thought he would be an improvement over homo-loving Racicot. I guess I was wrong--just like Bill Frist is no better than Lott, and perhaps worse.

43 posted on 09/02/2003 11:44:37 AM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TBP
The article was written after a meeting between the Union Leader editorial board and Gillespie, based on what he said

And not one quote. This was written by an editorial writer from a paper, that as stated earlier on this thread that endorsed McCain in 2000.

44 posted on 09/02/2003 11:44:43 AM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
Why hasn't Gillespie come forth and denied this?

The editorial board met with him and reported what he said (as they understood it.) He hasn't denied it.

It's not news anyway. It's what the Republicans have been doing for a long time. At least Gillepsie is honest enough to admit it.
45 posted on 09/02/2003 11:44:46 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: All
Sigh, it's true
46 posted on 09/02/2003 11:48:54 AM PDT by luckydevi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: TBP
The editorial board met with him and reported what he said (as they understood it.) He hasn't denied it.

Huh I guess we have a "new" understanding of the word hyperbole.

The NYT and the Manchester Union-Leader both use it. They are in the press, why give the hyperbole by the editorial board any credibility.

JMO, but this was a cry of cheap publicity by the Manchester Union-Leader and Rush took the bait.

47 posted on 09/02/2003 11:51:38 AM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Redbob
"It's not merely Gillespies' quote, or alleged quote: it's this entire administration's legislative agenda, from the Dept. of Fatherland Security to the "No Child Left Behind" invasion of state educational systems."

Not to mention the steel traiffs, a farm bill that spends more than ever, apologizing to the Red Chinese for letting them shoot down our airplane, attacking conservatives for "balancing the budget on the backs of the poor," defending Affirmative Action, agreeing to the uncosntitutional McVain-Whinegold campaign finance deform bill, and the largest budget in American history.

Other than the war on terror and a penny-ante tax cut, what have Republicans done? They have increased government. They are acting like Democrats. At least Gillespie is honest enough to admit it.

But the whole basis for the two-party system is the idea that the two parties provide meaningful alternative policies. What are we to do when they don't? Shouldn't at least one major party stand for conservative, limited-government principles?

I'm not a Libertarian, but I'll say this much for them: They do stand for limited government, which is more than I can say for Republicans.

If conservatives would rally around the Constitution party or some similar entity and vote for it, we would stand a chance of having a significant party that stands for our principles, not mee-tooism.
48 posted on 09/02/2003 11:53:25 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Dane
The Union Leader editors heard what he said. It's paraphrased, but they merely reported it.
49 posted on 09/02/2003 11:54:38 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: cksharks
The Union Leader endorsed Forbes, not McCain in 2000.

50 posted on 09/02/2003 11:55:57 AM PDT by GraniteStateConservative (Inconceivable!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson