Author Topic: Anyone watch Rush address to CPAC? (Read 12045 times)

grampster · « **on:** February 28, 2009, 06:27:36 PM »

Great speech. Copies ought to be given to ever county Republican organization in America.

digitalandanalog · « **Reply #1 on:** February 28, 2009, 06:49:05 PM »

Transcripts?

grampster · « **Reply #2 on:** February 28, 2009, 07:16:43 PM »

It was on Fox News. Try their website.

Judging from the vitriol on some blogs, and I checked Fox News, it's clear that a lot of people on the left don't have the capacity to either listen or have any ability to comrehend what they aren't listening to. On the other hand, perhaps they are exactly as Rush portrays them. Actually, I believe all three.

Rush's bombast is a good deal of his schtick. I actually enjoy it. But what I really enjoy is his willingness to speak his mind about just what we Conservatives are and should continue to be all about as well as his willingness to tell the truth about the agenda of liberal Leftists.

wquay · « **Reply #3 on:** February 28, 2009, 11:09:55 PM »

yeah, it was pretty good.

the only problem is the republican party's lack of credibility. it's tough to make a stand on deficits, spending, and bailouts after eight years of GWB and still be taken seriously.

grampster · « **Reply #4 on:** February 28, 2009, 11:35:40 PM »

Yah but......

I think I'm beginning to see a resurgence of conservatives. It wouldn't surprise me to see rino's get challenged in primaries in 10 and a slate of new conservatives begin to appear. That might even encourage Red Dog democrats to shuck the party line.

I'm helping a conservative friend who wants to get elected in the 100th district here in Michigan. He's only 50 and maybe he moves up at some point if things work out.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #5 on:** March 01, 2009, 12:22:51 AM »

Quote from: wquay on February 28, 2009, 11:09:55 PM

yeah, it was pretty good.

the only problem is the republican party's lack of credibility. it's tough to make a stand on deficits, spending, and bailouts after eight years of GWB and still be taken seriously.

Isn't that the point they're trying to make? It wasn't a Republican event. It was the Conservative Political Action Conference. I don't know much about them, but I would assume that un-Bushing the Republican Party would be one of their main goals.

wquay · « **Reply #6 on:** March 01, 2009, 12:28:33 AM »

Quote from: Mr. Tactical pants on March 01, 2009, 12:22:51 AM

Isn't that the point they're trying to make? It wasn't a Republican event. It was the Conservative Political Action Conference. I don't know much about them, but I would assume that un-Bushing the Republican Party would be one of their main goals.

That point wasn't made, at least not during the speech by Rush that I saw. There was some condemnation of McCain, but that was about it. The rest was very much "liberals/Democrats bad, conservatives/Republicans good.

And, the problem wasn't just Bush.

wquay · « **Reply #7 on:** March 01, 2009, 12:33:50 AM »

Quote from: grampster on February 28, 2009, 11:35:40 PM

Yah but......

I think I'm beginning to see a resurgence of conservatives. It wouldn't surprise me to see rino's get challenged in primaries in 10 and a slate of new conservatives begin to appear. That might even encourage Red Dog democrats to shuck the party line.

I'm helping a conservative friend who wants to get elected in the 100th district here in Michigan. He's only 50 and maybe he moves up at some point if things work out.

The problem is systemic. Just finding a better candidate won't change a thing.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #8 on:** March 01, 2009, 01:37:33 AM »

The fact remains that this was a gathering of Conservatives. One can assume they are as disgusted with the Republican Party's failures on spending as anyone else. And of course, nobody ever said that Bush was the only problem.

The speech lasted about an hour and a half. It looks like you didn't hear the whole thing. But you were correct that it had a lot of liberals bad, conservatives good. You feel that is a bad thing? Or do you not agree with the sentiment? I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

Lastly, if you have identified a specific systemic problem, and know of a solution, this board would be very receptive to such. I hope you will start a thread on the issue.

grampster · « **Reply #9 on:** March 01, 2009, 08:33:32 AM »

Rush made the point very clear that C's are the ones who are actually inclusive; individuals that would rather see everyone be successful and lift themselves up. He also said we are not divisive groups of people but rather individuals that cherish liberty and life and the pursuit of happiness.

Newt, in his speech, said pretty much the same thing as above. Without mentioning the R party he said that we are or should be the party of independents, D' and R's that believe in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; small government, less regulation and lower taxes.

The key is whether we Conservatives are able to convince the over 1/2 of those that vote and those that don't vote to shuck off the victimhood with which the D party has enveloped them.

Personally, I think Conservatives need to find black and hispanic leaders that can convince those "groups" to reject diversity and become "one of us" as Joseph Conrad said. E Pluribus Unum should be the rallying cry of Conservatives.

erik the bold · « **Reply #10 on:** March 01, 2009, 11:12:05 AM »

Transcript and video is here: http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_030209/content/01125106.guest.html

Monkeyleg · « **Reply #11 on:** March 01, 2009, 11:15:16 AM »

He made some excellent points, although it certainly took him a long time to do so. He didn't hold back on going after establishment conservatives, including McCain, George Will, Kathleen Parker, and others. He repeatedly said that conservatives should not alter their beliefs in order to win elections, which is precisely what nearly all conservative candidates and incumbents--including Bush--have done.

If you don't particularly like Rush, but have the time to watch even a portion of the speech, I'd be interested to hear your reaction.

SteveS · « **Reply #12 on:** March 01, 2009, 06:47:35 PM »

Quote from: Monkeyleg on March 01, 2009, 11:15:16 AM

If you don't particularly like Rush, but have the time to watch even a portion of the speech, I'd be interested to hear your reaction.

I wish I could help you, but I just can't get past his schtick and his playing loose with the facts. Granted, this isn't based on anything recent, as I haven't really listened to him since the 90's. I certainly don't hate him, but I think there are better conservative voices out there.

geronimotwo · « **Reply #13 on:** March 01, 2009, 06:58:12 PM »

i only had time to watch him for a short period. he made some very good points but also contradicted himself.

HankB · « **Reply #14 on:** March 02, 2009, 09:08:40 AM »

I missed the beginning, but from what I heard, I thought it was a GREAT speech.

My only real quibble was with the delivery . . . Rush made a few two many asides and digressions.

But I could just see people like McCain (and other RINOs) squirming as (or is it if?) they listened?

This morning I saw a news clip of Rahm Emmanuel asserting that Rush was the voice of the Republican Party. How untrue . . . if the GOP actually had been listening to Rush, we wouldn't have a Democrat majority in Congress or a Barack Hussein Obama in the White House.

jamis-jockeys-cabin-boy · « **Reply #15 on:** March 02, 2009, 08:59:12 PM »

Quote from: SteveS on March 01, 2009, 06:47:35 PM

...I think there are better conservative voices out there.

I agree. Rush is more of a "entertainer". He does play loose with some facts but his fan base is huge hence the popularity. I think the best conservative talk show host on air now is Mark Levin.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #16 on:** March 02, 2009, 09:37:33 PM »

They're mulitiplying!!

Jocassee · « **Reply #17 on:** March 02, 2009, 10:14:42 PM »

Quote from: geronimotwo on March 01, 2009, 06:58:12 PM

i only had time to watch him for a short period. he made some very good points but also contradicted himself.

According to today's show, they originally had him scheduled for 30 mins but once he was up there kept it going for 1:30. Also he speaks extemporaneously w/o notes.

Pretty darn good job all considered.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #18 on:** March 02, 2009, 10:37:12 PM »

Michael Savage is throwing a fit (what else is new) because "not once did he say 'Borders, Language, Culture'!!"

1. If he had, we'd hear Savage's usual whining about how people always steal his material.

2. He's always been solid on the border, so what's your point?

Hey, I have to listen. It keeps me from falling asleep over my schoolwork.

Monkeyleg · « **Reply #19 on:** March 02, 2009, 10:58:49 PM »

Judging from Rahm Emmanael's reaction, Rush hit a nerve or two in the Obama administration.

seeker_two · « **Reply #20 on:** March 03, 2009, 08:00:54 AM »

Quote from: Mr. Tactical pants on March 02, 2009, 10:37:12 PM

Hey, I have to listen. It keeps me from falling asleep over my schoolwork.

You need to download G Gordon Liddy's podcasts...he's a whole lot easier to stomach...

http://www.radioamerica.org/POD_ggl.htm

AZRedhawk44 · « **Reply #21 on:** March 03, 2009, 12:10:10 PM »

Quote from: Monkeyleg on March 02, 2009, 10:58:49 PM

Judging from Rahm Emmanael's reaction, Rush hit a nerve or two in the Obama administration.

Notice that he's the only conservative able/willing to do so...

It's a sad state of affairs when the de-facto leader of the GOP is a radio jockey rather than a sitting representative of the people. All of our "republicans" now... suck.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #22 on:** March 03, 2009, 01:14:00 PM »

Quote from: AZRedhawk44 on March 03, 2009, 12:10:10 PM

It's a sad state of affairs when the de-facto leader of the GOP is a radio jockey rather than a sitting representative of the people.

But he IS a representative of the people. Sitting in the Atilla the Hun chair.

MicroBalrog · « **Reply #23 on:** March 03, 2009, 07:55:17 PM »

Quote from: AZRedhawk44 on March 03, 2009, 12:10:10 PM

Notice that he's the only conservative able/willing to do so...

It's a sad state of affairs when the de-facto leader of the GOP is a radio jockey rather than a sitting representative of the people. All of our "republicans" now... suck.

Mark Sanford? Sarah Palin? Paul Broun? Ron Paul?

MechAg94 · « **Reply #24 on:** March 03, 2009, 08:12:51 PM »

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/03/02/a-note-to-michael-steele/

Michael Steele doesn't seem to be showing much leadership right now.

News:

Author Topic: Anyone watch Rush address to CPAC? (Read 12045 times)