Posted on 10/13/2011 4:57:33 PM PDT by COBOL2Java
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: I hate this. I really hate getting into all this. This is... We all used to be on the same team, do you realize that? I've been doing this for 23 years, and I remember the first ten, we were all on the same team. There wasn't a dime's worth of difference. Now, I don't know... I'll have to think about this. I'll have to think about when the Republican establishment finally gave up and decided they wanted to be Democrat light. I don't know -- or better stated, when did they decide they had to start taking out conservatives? Now, I know they didn't like Reagan. I know you can trace it all back and the Republican establishment always been who they are. I'm not taking that off the table. I'm just telling you that from the standpoint of media, when I started this in 1988, the next ten years, I mean, yeah, there were jealousies.
When Mr. Buckley died, everybody was angling to be the next William F. Buckley to be the leader of the conservative movement, and there were those typical fraternity-type battles. But we were all on the same team. I know the Republican establishment in 1995 hated the government shutdown. But we're not on the same team now it seems. You know, this is what's tough about this. So here's Bill Kristol, who once thanked me for defending him against some attack that had been launched against him at a party at Bill Bennett's house. That would never happen today. There wouldn't be a party at Bill Bennett's house and Kristol wouldn't thank me for anything. Anyway, I'm forced to ask here: How many constituents does Bill Kristol have at the Weekly Standard?
How many readers? What's the reach there? How many constituents do these guys Scott Reed and Vin Weber have, versus the constituents that we know Tea Party has? How many conservatives support Chuck Schumer or read the New York Times? How many conservatives crave being covered by the New York Times? How many conservatives salivate and consider it a career advancement to be quoted in the New York Times? Not many. So essentially, I guess the Ruling Class does not like "the people," and they tell us in this New York Times piece that the people are infantile, puerile, impotent, and can't win. Well, we shall see. They're doing everything they can to force a nominee on the Tea Parties that they don't want. They're trying to limit the presidential choice on the Republican side. We'll see. But I just... I do have nostalgia. I remember, folks, when we were all on the same team.
And now we're not.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Yep, the Republican establishment doing everything it can to force a nominee on 'em they don't want, meaning the Tea Party. They're trying to limit the presidential choice between a hard-leftist, socialist Democrat hell-bent on taking down the country and a fairly liberal Republican who doesn't want to rock the boat. That's what the Republican establishment wants: Just don't rock the boat.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: A lot of people as I'm checking the e-mail, are weighing in on, "What was it that caused the breakup of the team?" Everybody's got their own starting point. It's fascinating to listen to some people's opinions on this. I'll share them with you in just a second. But I've got another example media propaganda. Dana Milbank, today's Washington Post: "The Tea Party Loses Another Round -- It was another great day to be a member of the Washington elite," is how Mr. Milbank writes his piece. The article goes on to crow about how the House of Representatives passed three free trade agreements. The piece makes it clear that the Tea Party doesn't like free trade agreements. I thought the Tea Party did. Michele Bachmann has pushed for these free trade agreements.
Anyway, from now on we are going to be getting a steady diet of stories like this, chronicling the demise of the Tea Party's power. I predicted this to you. Everything is coming to pass. Folks, I hate "I told you so's." You do, too. But we predicted this Republican establishment thing, too. We told you they don't like conservatives. (sigh) They don't like rocking the boat. Here's one theory as to when the team broke up: "The morning that George H. W. Bush claimed victory in 1988. Rush, all of the people that you have mentioned in the New York Times piece," Kristol, Scott Reed, Vin Weber] all these names are former colleagues of the gentleman who writes me the note. "The switch from Reagan to Bush carried with it the sense that the revolution was finally over and that the Republican establishment was back.
"It was palpable. They were ecstatic that the eight years of Reagan had come to a close. It wasn't long before Bush White House aides were giving Reagan people grief about wearing Ronald Reagan cufflinks in the White House. The Bush people were saying to the Reagan people, 'This is the Bush White House, not the Reagan White House.' 'This is the Bush White House, not the Reagan White House,' snapped someone I knew well who had been treated very well by the Reagan team and was then a prominent White House Bushie -- and it was said in the New York Times, on the record. There was far more going on than Bush versus Reagan; it was the establishment versus the conservative rank-and-file.
"Rush, you have hit the nail on the head, and by now this sentiment is clearly understood by the Tea Party. This is a considerable undercurrent in the campaign on our side without doubt." Another theory. "Rush: I totally remember the very first time I saw the split between the conservative elites and us. It was over illegal immigration, California Prop 187, 1994. They all scolded us about how wrong we were -- and that if we, the base, were seen as anti-Hispanic, there would be no future for the Republican Party. I remember how shocked we all were at being scolded by our own guys. They all were doing calculations on demogarphics. We were focused on principle. Remember how mad they all got when you emphasized principle over woeful at your CPAC speech?
"Anyway, there might have been earlier cracks but that California passion was one I noticed big time we in the base couldn't believe they be see it our way." That Prop 187, of course, was Californians were simply sick and tired of paying for welfare, health care, education for illegal immigrants and they have to do not to any more -- and a federal judge said, "Hey, you can't do that! That's unconstitutional." So, anyway, it's heating up. One of the reasons I've said that for the Tea Party to ultimately succeed, it's going to have to take over the Republican Party. You can't go third party. Third party's end of the line. You have to take over the party, and the party doesn't exist. Honest to God, can you pronounce the name of the chairman of the Republican National Committee?
You can pronounce it? I can't. Now, I'm deaf, so I've never heard it pronounced. I look at it written, but I can't pronounce it. I don't know how to pronounce it. I don't know what they're doing. I don't know what he's doing. You know, one of the reasons why there is so much attention being focused on this presidential nomination process -- and it's natural that there would be -- is that people instinctively (and perhaps subconsciously) are aware that there is not is any leadership anywhere else and that all of the leadership for what we believe is gonna have to reside in the nominee. Ergo, that's why there is so much angst about it because the establishment is pushing a nominee who is a fairly liberal Republican who has no intention of rocking the boat. That would be Romney.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Mike, St. Louis, great to have you on the program. Hello, sir.
CALLER: Hi, Rush.
RUSH: Hi.
CALLER: You were talked earlier about the Republican establishment and when it took over after the conservative revolution, and when that was.
RUSH: Well, what I said was that, in a media sense, I can remember when I started this program in 1988 -- which was the end of the Reagan year, the beginning of the Bush years -- I was under the impression that all of us on the conservative media were on the same team. Now we're not, and so the question was, "When did split happen?" I've been trying to think about it and other people have been calling in, writing in with their theories on when the split happened and that's what you're calling about, I'm sure.
CALLER: Right. I'm calling about the realization that I had that the Republicans didn't stand for me anymore, and that was when they didn't follow through on the Clinton impeachment. I thought that they should have taken more action there. I just felt that it showed me that all the elites are gonna stick together.
RUSH: Yeah. That was instructive. That was very instructive. That was the establishment circling the wagons.
CALLER: I think they scared themselves, the Republicans.
RUSH: Yeah. They had a case. They had a case, and look what it did to Lindsey Grahamnesty. He was one of the House managers. He was one of the House managers presenting the case in the Senate for the impeachment of Clinton. I I think, in truth, not just that, but don't forget: Newsweek spiked the whole Lewinsky story. If it weren't to the intrepid Matt Drudge that would have never hit the wires; we'd-a never know about it. I think the elites, the inside the Beltway establishment, they were just... That whole Lewinsky thing embarrassed them. They thought it was beneath them, they didn't want to go there -- and I'm talking about on our side -- and they missed the whole point about Clinton committing perjury and what it meant for a chief executive to do that. Even our guys were saying, "Yeah, it's just sex. Come on, he was just lying about sex! Everybody lies about sex."
END TRANSCRIPT
Bump for tomorrow...
The false prophet Media has led half the country astray.
ditto
Wow.
The Media & Establishment Rebublicrats are trying like hell to serve up a crap sandwich (Willard).
Bottom line: I will NEVER vote for Willard. Ever.
The “Team” broke up when those in a position of power and influence became afraid that they would lose that power and influence because conservatives really might win. Now it is Katie bar the door. We might even see prominent Dems and RINO unite to try and stop the flood.
To clarify: Wow. Rush gets it. BTW, lsm, Rush has followers. LOTS of them.
I expect the fGOP to go after Rush now. He’s taken the gloves off, and so will they.
Expect a smear campaign against Rush from the “right.”
The crack between establishment and grassroots of the GOP go back at least to Goldwater and Rockefeller in ‘64. Heck, you could say that it goes back to Ike vs. Joe McCarthy.
Rush is setting it straight. The Republican Party does not represent the bulk of American conservatives by design. It represents itself.
Not convinced? Just listen to a ‘Boner’ speech or interview like I did last night. Made me want to puke. And that is just the start of it. We have much work to do.
Interesting part is that none of those who have fallen for the media’s portrayal of say, Mitt Romney for example, have let go their belief in the fundamental principles of liberty. They’ve just been suckered into believing Romney is as flawless as his haircut.
To quote Ronald Reagan “I didn’t leave the Republican party, the Republican party left me”.
I will not vote for Mitt Romney.
Rush is way behind the get a clue curve. Most FReepers have realized that the republican establishment is rotten to the core for quite awhile.
You beat me to it!
I think the whole body of political news says it is here today. No "might" about it. That is what this is all about.
For me the establishment split off when they kept propping up Arlen Specter as well as the Bush 41 gun import ban.
That’s why I consider myself conservative, and not Republican.
That there are so many people who need to do the same explains why the Democrats were able to pull off their blue-dog ruse.
I wasn’t fooled for a moment. But, some evidently were since the Republicans neither cleared the brush nor fought fire with water.
Is the establishment born that way? Do they have tenure in the party? What are their levers?
If you ask the RINOs what caused them to turn away from conservative Americans, it'll be the letters they get from 'the crazies'. Fake letters. Letters written by dems - and sent out as if they're from us.. That's my guess.
I've seen people in the news refer to those letters - the ones filled with hate...or great praise or pity - but always to make a liberal feel good and a conservative who backs conservatives to feel bad. Letters written in dem war rooms or liberal elite PR firms - made to manipulate... made to hurt.
Rush should already know this - all the fake calls he's gotten over the years... from people starting the conversation by saying 'I've been a Republican for 30 years BUT ... and then go on to trash something or someone conservative. The people calling Rush with fake calls were organized. They had scripts - and talking points. Does he think they don't do the same with fake letters with someone writing 'I've been a Republican for 30 years, BUT....
We all used to be on the same team, do you realize that?
When?
Some of Reagan’s support came from Reagan Democrats. (We didn’t leave the Democratic Party. They left us.) Some of them were tough on communism and outside threats, but soft on socialism within our borders. The Reagan coalition fell apart when Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union fell apart. The biggest outside threat had vanished. Some of the Reagan Democrats went back to being liberals. A lot of them probably voted for Clinton. Twice.
They continued to call themselves Republicans and conservatives, partly because the far left had taken over the Democratic Party and was obviously anti-American, but they really never were fiscal conservatives. It was safe to be socialist again. And they wanted a socialist Republican Party where they could be comfortable.
The new Republicans probably didn’t care for the Bush Sr./ Rockefeller types, country club Republicans, but they could make use of them. Because the country clubbers just wanted everything to be stable. Don’t rock the boat. So, they could be gently nudged to the left over time, and what do you know, we have a kinder, gentler Republican Party, all mushy and flexible, and coming up with new spending programs and taxes.
The fiscal conservatives were left without a party. Thus, the Tea Party.
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.