Skip to comments.Gingrich: Limbaugh right to apologize for remarks (AP headline)
Posted on 03/04/2012 6:25:04 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
click here to read article
What, you mean Freepers are sticking up for Rush vs Newt? Say it ain’t so?
ABC: “This Week”..........STEPHANOPOULOS: And I’m going to ask David Axelrod about Secretary Chu in just a moment.
But also, Rush Limbaugh created quite a stir this week with his attack on the Georgetown student Sandra Fluke who testified in support of President Obama’s policy that insurance plans should provide coverage for contraception. Let’s show what Rush said right here.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LIMBAUGH: She goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex. What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? Makes her a prostitute? She wants to be paid to have sex.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHANOPOULOS: The Democrats pounced. President Obama called the student. Under pressure, Mr. Limbaugh did apologize yesterday. I know you disagree with the framing on this issue. You believe this is an issue of religious liberty. The Democrats have called this part of a war on women. Do you worry that Rush Limbaugh helped reinforce that Democratic message?
GINGRICH: No, I worry that the elite media are so desperate to not describe this accurately. You know, Cardinal George has indicated, the cardinal of Chicago, that the president’s policy — which by the way, George, includes sterilization and abortion pills. And let’s be clear about this. The president’s policy, according to Cardinal George, would lead the Catholic Church to give up every Catholic university and every Catholic hospital.
Now, I’m kind of amazed that there aren’t more voices in the elite media in favor of religious liberty in America and suggesting that, first of all, this young lady can buy contraception all she wants to. There is no place in America that’s difficult for her to get contraception. The question is, should a religiously-affiliated institution — not just Catholic, but for example the Christian University of — the Ohio Christian University, which is Protestant, but is right-to-life— finds that sterilization and abortion provisions of Obamacare totally unacceptable.
Now, is that something people are going to look at and say this is a religious liberty issue, or are we just going to have the government from here on out define for us what rights we have and say to us, oh, it’s OK to be religious for one hour on Sunday, but let’s not take it seriously the rest of the week?
I think this is a very profound question about freedom.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Do you think Rush was right to apologize?
GINGRICH: I think he was right to apologize. But let’s talk about apologies for a second. I think the president was totally wrong as commander in chief to apologize to religious fanatics while our young men are being killed in Afghanistan, and I think it was a disaster of an apology—
STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me ask you—
GINGRICH: We now have the U.N. commissioner to Afghanistan — no, just let me finish. You have the U.N. commissioner to Afghanistan in essence saying, since the president has admitted the United States is guilty, these people should be tried. Now, I think that is a disastrous position for us.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But you know, before the president apologized.......”
You Santorum supporters are the nastiest most vitriolic people on this website.
Disagree - Rush probably wishes he had thought a second before commenting the way he did. Newt only applied some common sense and instead of condemning Rush, merely agreed with his follow-on. I was listening when Rush made the comments and I could hear the mental gyrations as he realized he had probably opened a hornets nest and tried to soften the initial comments. He knew he had opened the door to allow another high-jacking of the issues and move it into the realm of the heart vs. the realm of rational thought.
A “not too smart” from an old friend hurts a hell of a lot more than a “you a**hole!” from an acquaintance.
I’ll be surprised if Rush goes anywhere near this topic again regarding this specific person. Any references he makes to her now may be construed by his advertisers that his apology wasn’t sincere.
Typo correction : A real leader takes bold steps... not reacting after the fact.
...but our beloved host JR has the dreaded ZOT handy if we get too far out of line.
As opposed to that "consistent conservative"?
(bet I told you;)
That is just not true. Gingrich did not throw Rush under the bus. If you bothered to listen to him ths morning on several of the SMTS, he was clear. He told David Gregory if he wanted to make the discussion about apologies, lets talk about Obamas apology to Afghanistan, and the damage done to our troops. My heavens, Obama and the msm is keeping the American dialogue directed at the republicans, Newt is always, always attempting to redirect it back to the failed Obama presidency. He wants to move on to higher issues and idiots still want to talk about limbaugh and birth control.
ROFLMAO! That's EXACTLY what Santorum did!
Seriously, you Santorum fanatics are beyond logic and reason. Like your candidate, you really do not think before you open your mouths.
Newt was correct and would never have allowed himself to get into a situation, of the kind that Rush has talked himself into. Rush is now in serious legal trouble for Slander. And this is far from over.
Indeed. Newt pretty much had to say what he said.
And it's not just Newt himself. Applying the fanatical standards of FR, what do you call a woman who slept with a married man for 8 years?
“So let it be with Rush now. The noble Pelosi
Hath told you Rush has been too vicious.
If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
And grievously hath Rush now answered it.
Here, under leave of Brutus and the rest
For 0bama is an honorable man;
So are they all, all honorable men”
Here under leave of ‘media’ (medea) and the rest....
You may be right - I still think there might - might being the key word - be a chance that on Monday Rush will run a double reverse on this - especially since Bill Maher has chimed in with some idiotic comments today that will support Rush’ case.
C. Edmund Wright has been a strung supporter of Newt. He thinks very strategically. I believe he’s saying that Newt should have stopped with “.....while Obama is apologizing....”. By continuing Newt set up a dynamic wherein the press will now go to Rush with Newt’s statement ....then come back to Newt with what Rush says.... and so on. Not exactly what you want to be talking about heading into Super Tuesday. In effect by continuing to speak Newt has entered the fray, and fallen into one of the media traps that Santorum has shown a propensity to fall in. I could be wrong.
Well that's interesting, because I am not sure it was sincere and I am not sure Rush thinks there's any salvaging the weenie sponsors anyway at this point.
Now I am not sure of the other either. Monday will be interesting .
No Trapped, you are not wrong - you nailed by sentiments on this exactly. Newt made some typically brilliant Newt points on this, and yes, had he stopped before the “glad Rush apologized” line, it would have been another Newt home rum.
In our headline driven world, he unfortunately gave the world the impression he was throwing Rush under the bus. Obviously that’s not the case, but look at all the Freepers who think he did.
Thus, my point is validated. Sadly.
Between McCain the Huckster and Romney—three RINOs—who would YOU have endorsed?
Mitt was the lesser of three evils and even I supported him then over McCain and the Arkansas Clinton-lite.
Gingrich is trying to get past this.
Why don’t we all forget about this and move on to the most important issue - OMG - Obama Must Go! Gingrich the nominee defeating obama!
The more shrewd Newt deflected the bait on offering direct criticism and takes it to the press for spending more time on Rush than Obama's apologizing to Afghanistan while tolerating the murder of our military. You know, things that matter.
If it wasn't "right to apologize," would Rush have done it? Think about the logic of your statements. Is Rush suddenly the voice of the GOP? Did he become RNC chair? Is he running to be standard bearer in the 2012 election?
As usual Santorum supporters take any opportunity to attack Newt for uttering anything, no matter how true or statesman-like.
Better left unsaid was Rush's initial characterization that's cost him four sponsors, sucked up valuable airtime ahead of Super Tuesday, dragged the conservative and Republican brands through the mud ... do you get the picture yet?
It was plainly obvious from the testimony she was an activist and this was a trap that Rush should've been keen enough to avoid. He could've made his point about the absurdity without offering the personalizing soundbite. Sometimes I think he can't help himself and craves to be talked about no matter the collateral damage to his supposed side.
Gingrich is our only hope but the hold the communists have on America he will not make it. The communists democrats will make sure Romney will win the nomination because they know King Obama and the lying MSM, Hollywood, and the Unions will hit him so hard poor Romney will just crumble.
I don’t know. This actually increases my respect for both Rush and New. I am a Christian before I am a Republican or an American or anything else, and I cringed when I heard Rush (live) go down that path. I know what he meant to convey, but calling people defamatory names, even when arguably true, isn’t normal Christian practice. Love tells the truth, yes, but if doesn’t beat you over the head with it. Rush did the right thing. This is not a hill worth dying on.
OMG. Just not what Gingrich did on MTP. He immediately moved the dialogue to Obamas apology to afghanistan. Then Gregory wanted to talk about he national dialogue on birth control, at which point, Newt then started talking about Obamas voting record on infanticide. If anyone wants to take a statement to Rush, it should be Santorum’s, calling Rush absurd and an entertainer.
This has become a national movement against Rush. Newt's comments show that Newt is looking at this from that perspective, since he is deeply experienced in Legal matters. The “apology” was made from a legal perspective only, to quell any further outrage. But in the long run, it opens up the door for a long drawn-out and expensive legal case.
You are totally missing my point, therefore being guilty of what you are accusing me of.
I fully understand that Newt’s statement, in its entirety, is very good. I fully understand the logic of what you say. So let me say this again, for about the 50th time: Newt gave one inarticulate response that has become a HEADLINE that will make 95% of the folks think he threw Rush under the bus.
I repeat, the HEADLINE quote will be all that most folks ever hear of Newt’s statement, and therefore, they will assume Newt is more or less aligned with Santorum on this - which he is not. THUS, it was a poor decision on Newt’s part to utter the “glad he apologized line” and the “silly” line.
AND, should Rush pull a double reverse, an operation reverse apology, on Monday, it would be far preferable for Newt to have huge separation from Rick on this issue. Thanks to that headline, he does not in the minds of most people.
Apparently, you have merely skimmed my comments and missed my point - and assume I have done the same with Newt. Not so.
With due respect, you so misapprehend the nature of the battle we are in. So so so misapprehend it.
You may well be right. I hope not, but you might be.
In 2008 Romney was the worst candidate, as events proved, that is why he came in third.
Romney is the most hard left, anti-conservative man who has ever made it this far in the GOP.
I agree that Santorum’s statement was sillier, but the media will take any opportunity take Newt off message before Super Tuesday.
I wrote in Thompson at the last minute, because even though I liked Palin, (And intended to vote McCain on her behalf) I just could not force myself to vote for McNasty. With the split vote in 2008, it was a disaster anyway, and I knew that the Left would likely win.
Good Morning CEW-
I'm not following your condemnation of Newt on this. I read the article at the link and the only things in quotes attributed to Newt is one word and one phrase: “silly” and “trying desperately to protect (Obama)” ...that's it! Everything else is the author's opinion/paraphrasing of what Newt “said.”
It is not clear; however, perhaps you actually heard Newt on the program (I didn’t). That said, from what is offered at the link, there isn't much substance for any condemnation of Newt that I can discern. How do you get from the those two quotes to “Newt screwed the pooch”??? (It goes without saying that I NEVER trust anything attributed to any Conservative by the media unless I see that it is in quotes and I can verify that the quote is correct.)
I know we're both Newt supporters and I know you are sincere and thoughtful; however, in this case I am not following your criticism and am asking you to elaborate if you would.Thx!
You astutely nailed what was behind Newt's very Presidential analysis!
“only things in quotes attributed to Newt is one word and one phrase” = only things in quotes attributed to Newt ARE one word and one phrase
(That’s what I get for not “proofing” my own comments!)
In regards to all the companies who abandoned Rush.
Rush may charge high rates for these start up companies to run ad’s on his program but there is a good reason for it...they become national brands.
Once the become national brands they have to sell to ALL the people, regardless of political affiliations or those with no political views at all.
Once politics have been attached to their products, they have no choice but back off just to stay in business. How many times have we heard the old saying IT IS NOT PERSONAL, IT’S JUST BUSINESS?
Rush is fully aware of this and probably has had personal conversations, beforehand, with these companies in regards to their decisions. If Rush is the man I believe him to be, he won’t blame them but where it belongs...on the very core of what started this scandal and his, heat of the moment, choice of words.
I know many of us, in our rush to defend Rush, went after the regime’s latest naive puppet of the left with a vengeance and I was among them. When Rush apologized, we felt betrayed and then in our fury we attacked him.
As heated rhetoric cools, we have to keep in mind it should not be personal...it’s just business and, more importantly, how radicals conduct their business.
With all due respect right back atcha, I do understand this conflict, and naturally I think I understand it better than you (why else have an opinion forum, eh?). The Bible describes the war behind the war. As a Christian first, I believe that account. The reason Alynski acknowledges Lucifer is because his methods, not just his objectives, were and are Luciferian. Adopting calculated defamation as a way to diminish one’s political opponents is corrupting to the one who so adopts. You worry about the battle. So do I. No good soldier puts himself or his fellow warriors in harms way unnecessarily. And no such warrior who relies on God’s blessing for success in battle will do what alienates him from his God. If God does not help us in this particular fight, we are truly doomed. And as Jesus and the apostles specifically rejected the tactic of insult and defamation, Christians who are serious about winning will follow that lead.
I congratulate Rush for having the courage to apologize for his poor use of words. Just because the left uses the same words describing conservative women, does not make it right for us to lower ourselves to the same depth of stupidity. Two wrongs does not make it right. Personally, I would be embarrassed for the stupidity of the coed, and as a mother, I would be ashamed if she was my daughter.
Fair question: so I say look at the headline - which is a fair headline in light of one comment Newt made. It was that comment, and that comment only, that I wish he had not made. It allows for a headline that immediately seemed to put Newt very close to the Santorum “absurd” camp.
Now, in totality, Newt was nowhere near Santorum, but the headline is the headline. That is 90% of my comment.
The other 10% is the “silly” comment, where Newt said it is “silly to say that Rush speaks for the Republican Party.” This has the smell and the feel of Rick’s “just an entertainer” comment.
I think both of these invite a wrong impression - and to back me up - please go look at how the Santorum folks jumped on this in the early posts in this thread. That’s what headlines do. They form impressions that most people are left with.
...and apologizing to this crowd is NOT being wise as a serpent - it is taking the “gentle as doves” thing way too far.
Now, a case can be made that the statements should not have been said to begin with - or said differently. But to apologize to this crowd NEVER, and I repeat NEVER had the intended effect. It always, and I mean ALWAYS actually advances the cause of darkness.
With due respect, you are still misapplying Biblical principles IMO.
You are correct about national brands, but I submit this one thought: this is changing. Brands are becoming more and more associated with either liberals or conservatives and I think we are just on the cusp of this starting to crystallize more and more.
The brands that realize this, and realize they need to get all of their 50% instead of none of the 100% will eventaully win this battle which I sense is JUST beginning.
There are already undercurrents of this. There are any number of conservative leaning local ad vehicles and any number of conservative barter exchanges.
There is already a political undercurrent in Ford V GM (though Ford is too stupid to figure it out, but that’s another story).
Fed Ex v UPS.
Lowes V Home Depot.
Walmart V all others.
Food Lion V unions.
Its’ out there. It’s coming. It is changing. (Now, if I can figure out how to capitalize on this...)
Willing to let bygones be bygones you stupid head;)
Anyhoo,Romney indeed was the worst candidate as events proved and I voted for Fred Thompson anyway in our SC primary but “at the time” Romney's lies were more promising than Huckabee or McCain's records.
We were screwed either way—like now.
Everyone is hyperventilating over silly details. The economy is in the tank and won't get better for years. The FedGov is growing at an alarming rate and assuming dictatorial powers.
In the end, the goal should be to defeat Obama.
I don’t know what you are talking about in regards to anything from some other thread, but do not carry personal baggage from thread to thread, and you can let off the name calling.
You are wrong about Romney being the best choice in 2008, and you were wrong to support him, and you are wrong to try and convince people today that Romney was the best candidate in 2008 when the race got down to the final three We conservatives here did everything we could to get you Romney guys to look at Romney’s record, which we posted over and over.
Romney was and still is the worst possible choice, he does not even belong in GOP politics.
I am a Newt fan. Not too fond of Rush at the best of times, sorry, I simply feel he has too much influence and runs sound bites not substance, but I solidly agreed with him UNTIL he made the sex tape crack.
That went beyond the pale for me. It was wrong.
Calling her co-students (if not her) sluts - that is calling a spade a spade. If you can’t afford contraception, don’t screw around. Kinda simple. I ain’t paying for your sinning.
Asking for a sex tape - tacky to the max and reminded me why I don’t often listen to Rush.
Newt was a gift on a par with Bill Buckley and Ronald Reagan to the conservative movement or the salvation of real America BACK IN THE EARLY NINETIES.
Now he is old obese and ugly and even if he talks like Thomas Jefferson he comes across as a clever stand up comic Lou Costello to America's MSM brain damaged majority...and we can't win a serious race with just that.
I had concerned that this could be Rushs nappy headed hos moment.Except that Rush was correct and Imus was trying to be funny at the expense of some gals just playing ball. Yeah...no comparison.
Amen to that. There isn't an issue or women that represents what is wrong with the nation. It's an issue more important than the economy or price of gas to those the realize the underlying problems we face go well beyond economics.