All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 30, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:52
January 30, 2012, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Greetings, my friends, and welcome back.
The views expressed by the host on this program documented to be almost always right 99.7% of the time.
It's great to have you here.
Our telephone number, if you want to be on the program, 800-282-2882, and the email address ilrushbow at eibnet.com.
We got lots of audio soundbites coming up, and I have the transcript of what Will Weatherford said here about the redistricting in Florida.
I've got the audio soundbite coming and all the way.
New York Times, steady stream of endorsements, been flowing to Mitt Romney with his campaign promoting Republicans who are giving their blessing to his candidacy.
Yet on the eve of the Florida primary, he has been unable to land the biggest catch-of-all, Jeb Bush.
Not been for a lack of effort by Romney, who has made phone calls, traded emails, met privately to try to win over Mr. Bush.
The campaign was poised to make him a national co-chairman, a role that Jeb Bush would have shared with Chris Christie of New Jersey, but several Republicans familiar with the offer say that it was declined.
As the center of Republican politics once again returned to Florida, Romney and Gingrich making final appeals, Jeb Bush has been noticeably, and several friends say purposefully, absent from the conversation.
Jeb Bush Jr., who is Jeb Bush's younger son, youngest son, said if dad got behind him, that would help shut the door, but that's just not his style.
In his conversations about an endorsement, Jeb Bush also conveyed to Romney and his allies that his double-digit defeat in South Carolina primary did not warrant an endorsement.
He needed to earn it.
You don't get my endorsement when you lose by double digits in South Carolina, Jeb Bush told Romney.
But if weekend polls showing Romney with a double-digit lead in Florida offer an accurate picture, an endorsement from Jeb Bush may not matter, says the Times.
It may be unnecessary.
I don't know, folks.
I think that this stuff with Romney polling is not going to reflect, not going to indicate.
But you heard the first caller today.
We've got others.
Even though this is the kind of campaign that's gone on for eons, people still hate it.
They still hate.
You don't know what kind of effervescing opposition to Romney might be happening out there because of this stuff.
Doesn't look good.
It may be part of the fabric, but it still doesn't look good.
Doesn't make people comfortable.
So we'll see.
The election is tomorrow.
Do I think what?
Do I think Jeb Bush's endorsement was fine?
I don't, you know, I don't know.
I don't know.
In South Carolina, Jim DeMint didn't choose sides.
Terry Branstead in Iowa didn't choose sides.
They didn't endorse anybody there.
No, no, no, no, no.
Nobody's following my lead.
I just, I don't, I don't know what kind of power endorsements have.
Anyway, let's go to the audio sound bites.
We're up to number five.
I want to skip number four.
This was yesterday on this week.
It was during the roundtable.
Jake Tapper, our buddy Jacob, again, the fill-in host there.
I guess Christiana Monpoor has gone back to the foreign affairs.
She's going back to CNN.
Is that what?
Or she's staying at AB, whatever.
She's back on the foreign affairs beat.
Just wants to get back in that trench coat.
You know, that's the uniform of foreign policy correspondents.
They want to look like secret agents out there, spies.
The only thing missing now is the cigarette.
You know, hanging around in the alley with your cameraman and your microphone reporting on the latest from Beirut.
Remember Peter Jennings doing that?
That's where Christiana Monporer's head is.
Jacob Tapper is sitting in as the, because Stephanopoulos, the full-time guy.
Jacob Tapper said to Donna Brazil, Donna, who do you think Obama would rather face here?
A lot of people seem to express some skepticism that Gingrich would be the preferred one, but it would be so easy to use the Warren Buffett rule and this tax code changes to go after Romney.
Here's a multi-millionaire several times over, only pays 15% tax rate.
Before I play you this bite, I think I was among the early voices who offered the counter theory that it was the regime's choice to run against Romney.
That I thought that's what Occupy Wall Street was all about.
They wanted to run against a wealthy Republican.
They want to run against Romney because of health care.
I mean, Romney Care takes that whole issue, they're thinking, off the table.
I mean, you've got Romney Care as basically a junior version of Obamacare that Romney will not distance himself from.
So I'm sure the regime thinks that takes that issue off the table.
And they want to run against this 1%, 99% stuff, and that's Romney.
I've often thought that the regime was trying to take out everybody else.
Remember, you've forgotten, but up until recently, the regime, the Democrats, were not attacking Romney at all.
Everybody else, but not Romney.
So Donna Brazilians asked about this.
You know, the regime, what's your thinking here?
Who they want to run against?
There's no question that Mitt Romney in his record, his record at bank capital, his taxes, the fact that he has to now amend his financial disclosure form.
Mitt Romney would be a great candidate to run against in terms of the economy because all of the so-called assets he had in terms of I'm a business person, I know how to run things.
I mean, Newt Gindrich has exposed him.
He couldn't even come up with a good, precise number on the number of jobs created.
This goes back to New Hampshire and in South Carolina where Newt was ripping Romney from the left, ripping capitalism.
Remember, everybody was upset with, oh my God, I mean, including me.
Newt, what are you doing?
What?
Even Giuliani, Newt, what are you doing here?
But Newt was fuming because all the negative ads that Romney Super PAC had run against him in Iowa.
Here's Axelrod.
He was over on Meet the Depressed David Gregory, David Oxelrod, who runs Obama's operation.
Gregory said, you think that this goes on particularly because of the split between the establishment and the Tea Party?
Well, I think it could.
I've always thought that Governor Romney was a weak frontrunner.
I still think he's a weak frontrunner.
He's overpowered Gingrich in Florida with five-to-one spending advantage and a very negative campaign.
When we had a long primary process with Senator Clinton, it strengthened us.
We didn't see our numbers erode the way Governor Romney's numbers have eroded.
Independent voters are fleeing Governor Romney now, and his numbers are falling.
He's underwater nationally.
This process is not helping him.
And they seem happy about it over at the regime.
So it can go either way.
Bottom line is the regime is going to go after whoever our nominee is.
But it also stands a reason the regime would love to pick our nominee.
Just as the media has always tried to pick our nominee.
And they're always going to pick the one they think is the easiest beaten.
Sarah Palin was on Fox justice with Judge Shanine pre-roll on Saturday night.
And Judge Janine said, how can Newt distance himself and say that he's not an insider?
There are those who would say he's the consummate Washington insider.
You speaker of the House.
He was in Congress for 20 years.
When both party machines and many in the media are trying to crucify Newt Gingrich for bucking the tide and bucking the establishment, that tells you something.
And I say, you know, you've got to rage against the machine at this point in order to defend our republic and save what is good and secure and prosperous about our nation.
We need somebody who's engaged in sudden and relentless reform and isn't afraid to shake it up, shake up that establishment.
So if for no other reason, rage against the machine, vote for Newt.
Annoy a liberal, vote Newt.
As more debate happens, Judge, we'll hear more from Newt and from the other candidates who will oppose his position as he claims that he's not part of the establishment.
Let's hear more about it.
That's Saturday night.
So Sarah Palin's done a South Carolina here.
South Carolina, she endorsed Newt.
I live there.
I'd vote Newt.
This is the closest she's going to get to it.
Rage against the machine, vote Newt.
Annoy a liberal, vote Newt.
She's clearly sending a message to Florida and other primary voters.
Keep this campaign going.
Keep it running.
She keeps talking about the need to have everybody vetted here, the desire to have conservatism debated front and center, full-fledged media attention for as long as possible.
Saturday night at the Lincoln Day dinner, the Palm Beach County Republican Lincoln Day dinner, Herman Cain endorsed Newt.
I hereby officially and enthusiastically endorse Newt Gingrich for President of the United States.
Speaker Gingrich is running for president and going through this sausage grinder.
I know what this sausage grinder is all about.
That's Herman Cain Saturday night in West Palm Beach endorsing Newt.
Then yesterday on the syndicated program, the McLaughlin group, John McLaughlin spoke with Pat Buchanan about the Republican primary.
McLaughlin said, has Newt overstated his role in the Reagan administration, Pat, you were there.
In the Reagan White House, Newt Genrich was considered, quite frankly, by a lot of folks to be something of a political opportunist and who was not trusted and who played no role whatsoever.
He was a Rockefeller Republican in the great Goldwater-Rockefeller battle where conservatism really came of age.
I don't think he has a fundamental ideological and political core.
I think, look, he moves.
He was a Rockefeller Republican.
It comes up.
I remember meeting him in 78 when he came to town.
You know, he's knocking Reagan.
I don't think he has an ideological core.
I think he moves from one issue to another and another.
So it's just all over the place out there.
And again, I didn't know 68.
I didn't know that Gingrich was a Rockefeller Republic.
I only learned that last week when I heard the soundbite, played the soundbite.
But my memory is that there was nobody defending Ronald Reagan like Gingrich was in the 80s in those special orders.
That's my memory.
All this other stuff is stuff that I didn't know.
And of course, some people would question Buchanan now.
I mean, nobody is clean and pure as the wind-driven snow when they come forth with these assessments of everybody.
I think it all's feeding into this monster that the voters are out there saying, enough of this.
And I'm going to tell you, you people who keep up all this negative criticism, we're going to vote against you.
Wouldn't be surprised if Newt does a lot better tomorrow in the Florida vote than what the polls indicate.
What are you laughing at in there, Snerdley?
Oh, of course, I know.
I've seen the Romney ad.
Reagan didn't know who Newt was, only mentioned him once in the Reagan diary.
I don't care about any of that.
All I know is what I saw Newt do.
They got it out there now that Newt was against repealing the fairness doctrine in 1987.
Do you know that?
I got that email last night.
I forget who, but Newt was against repealing the fairness doctrine in 1987.
Yeah, that's what it said that he opposed Reagan on that.
I did not know that for crying out loud.
And I still don't know if it's true.
That's one of the things about all this stuff flying back and forth is you have no idea whether any of this is true or what of this stuff is true.
But the fairness doctrine, kind of important to me, the fairness doctrine being repealed is what made this program possible.
That was from the Club for Growth, I'm told, that put out that Gingrich opposed.
Yeah, they're reputable, Snerdley says.
Here's George Will.
Go back to ABC with the guest host Jacob Tapper during the roundtable.
Tapper said, George, just in the last few minutes here, we got some new polls out of Florida, Marist poll.
It's got Romney at 42, Gingrich 27, Santorum 16, Ron Paul at 11.
Romney opening up the gap even more than the Miami Herald poll.
What's going on out there, George?
Tell us.
I don't know if you've ever told Longfellow's nursery rhyme to your four-year-old daughter, Alice.
No, not yet.
There is a little girl who had a little curl right in the middle of her forehead.
When she was good, she was very good indeed.
And when she was bad, she was horrid.
And we're at the horrid stage with Newt Gingrich.
Whoa.
Whoa, whoa, folks.
So Herman Keynes out there in the sausage grinder.
By the way, what kind of sausages were those that grinded Herman?
Herman says he'd been in the sausage grinder.
What were his sausages and what kind?
And so here George Will and the Longfellow nursery rhyme.
We're at the horrid stage with Newton.
Britt Hume, Fox News Sunday.
Chris Wallace said the president's saying, Brit, our policies, we Democrats will protect the middle class.
Republicans will protect the rich.
One, is that true and two, is it smart?
A lot of Republicans think Obama's so weak that they ought to nominate the most conservative person they could find because they can't lose.
I think they can lose if they nominate somebody who can be successfully painted as an extremist or an exotic character, not worthy of the trust needed for the Oval Office.
So I think that the argument the president makes in class warfare and rich versus poor and all that may rally his base, but he's not going to win this election.
Hanky's right about that.
I think this country is Way too sophisticated.
This country is not majority sympathetic to Occupy Wall Street.
Not what they're doing in Oakland.
So anyway, I've got to take a break here, folks.
We're up against it on time.
More of your phone calls are coming up right after this.
Back to the phones we go.
Here is Amy in Potomac, Maryland.
Great to have you on the EIB Network.
Hi.
Hi, I just wanted to call and just make a comment about what I think is the headwind that Mitt Romney's running into that nobody's talking about.
And we talked about the first time around, but not so much this time.
And that is the evangelical vote.
And when you talk about the earlier caller who hates him and you talk about people who hate him, I don't think what's being said is that there is an undercurrent of evangelical disapproval with Mormons.
I think they would vote for a secularist over a Mormon.
And my daughter, you know, was looking it up, was kind of hurt by comments from evangelicals towards Mormons being offended because we claim that we're Christian and Christ is the center point of our religion.
And we honor the Bible.
We love the Bible and we teach from the Bible.
But our other beliefs, the way we get to Christ, they disagree with so vehemently.
And she started looking up articles, saw something out of the Washington Monthly that was written by a woman for 2008.
And it talked about how she, as a young child in her Baptist church, was shown films where Mormons were placed right between Jim Jones and devil worshipers.
McCain said that Romney may have lost South Carolina because of the vote against Mormons.
I think so.
Just to tell you something, Amy, in everything I've not heard, that's not what I'm hearing from people.
If they're thinking it as their primary reason for being mad at Romney, they're not telling me that.
Well, when he went in there to Iowa the first time and had a very good ground game, a lot of organization, Huckabee came in late and papered that area with anti-Mormon literature and turned that caucus around.
And it had a profound effect.
And I think he suffers from the same thing you suffer from.
How many times over the years have I heard people call in how they've needed to defend you and stand up to people?
And a lot of times they're women or their mothers or their wives or people that they work with.
And they get down to the point where they admit, no, I've never really heard him.
I just hear what other people say about him.
And oftentimes they've done some external and internal polling.
And people's view of Mormons is so low, incredibly low, because they believe what other people say about them.
And then when they know a Mormon, their opinion of Mormons is tremendously raised.
They see them and they're not this devil that they've been painted out to be.
Wait a second.
I'm still trying to figure out.
Are you a Romney supporter?
Well, I wasn't.
Honestly, I've come to that point.
I am now at this point.
Because it says up here what you wanted to talk about was that he's getting hit from the right and the left.
He's getting hit from the right and the left.
And inside the party, I think it's very much an anti-evangelical vote.
A year ago, I happened to be- No, wait, wait, hold it.
I don't understand that.
You mean the evangelicals are voting no?
Oh, I think so.
I think that when you talk about why Mitt Romney was plateauing at 25% and everybody's looking for the anti-Romney, I think the unspoken thing is the evangelicals want to vote for anybody but a Mormon.
I really think that that's a lot of it.
And so when they hear negative things about Romney, they believe it.
And it has gotten emotional.
I think, frankly, the Mormon thing's been out there for so long.
I don't think that's what this is.
I think the people that oppose Romney oppose him because they know he's not a conservative.
Oh, but he has come to a conservative position that he's strongly.
Well, they don't trust that.
See, that's because he's got too much on the record of proudly saying I'm a moderate.
I've voted for a Republican every time there's been a Republican ballot.
That's a little bit of a stretch of things, too.
But don't fool yourself here.
The Romney thing's been vetted.
It's out.
It's done there since 2008.
There's a fear here because of Obama.
He's not conservative enough.
Do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do.
Ha!
Hurry you.
Welcome back.
Great to have you here.
Mitt Romney's goal in Florida.
No longer just winning.
One Romney staffer told a blog, it's not about winning in Florida anymore.
It's about destroying Gingrich.
And it's working.
So a Romney campaign guy says, we're not just trying to win here.
We are trying to destroy Newt.
And they think that it is working.
Now, people hear that.
It's tough to predict.
Let me try to explain something.
I know a lot of people may misunderstand me when I say this.
And it's a deeply personal thing.
Well, don't misunderstand that either.
When I say deeply personal, I mean strictly related to me.
I've been doing this for 25 years.
I know there are people who hate me, and I don't care.
And I know there are people who lie about me, and I don't care.
And I am never motivated or oriented to correct the record.
I don't care.
I learned long ago, and it was very painful when it first started happening, and it was really brutal.
I mean, I never hated anybody growing up.
Nobody ever thought I hated anybody.
And after two months on the national radio show, I was a racist bigot, sexist, homophobic.
I said, where does this come from?
Everything's a learning experience.
It was simply because I was a conservative, and those are the cliches that attach.
And there were newspaper stories out there with lies and all kinds of things.
We're trying to build the radio show.
We're trying to get it affiliated on as many stations as possible.
And I really thought that stuff's going to hurt.
And I'd run around asking, what do we do about this?
And nobody had any advice.
There was nobody could tell me how to deal with it.
Not a single person.
For everybody I asked, there was a different piece of advice how to deal with it.
Some said, you can't let that stand, especially when they call you racist.
If you don't stop that, then it's over.
You're never going to go anywhere.
Other people said, you got to ignore it.
The more you respond to it, the more it's going to happen, because the more they're going to think it bugs you.
And the mistake I was making in all of it was thinking that I could stop it.
It can't be.
Not in the business that I'm in and in the arena I play in.
It just can't be stopped.
I also recognize the unfairness.
But it is what it is.
And I've tried to tell people I live in Realville.
I live in Litteralville.
And something that is, is, I have learned over the past 23 plus years in dealing with this stuff that the advice I got, the more you try to stop it, the more it's going to happen, turns out to be correct.
The more I reacted to it, the more outraged I got, the more I tried to defend myself, the worse it got, the happier the critics became.
Even when it was demonstrated they were lying through their teeth.
It didn't matter.
They were thrilled.
I had a national radio show and they had the attention of a national radio show.
And that's all it meant.
They didn't care.
They're unscrupulous, dishonest people.
And so I found out the best thing for me to do was two things.
Not let it bother me and ignore it.
I do both.
It really doesn't matter to me for a host of reasons.
I know that A, none of it, unless I screw up, has a damn thing to do with whether or not I'm happy.
Now, if I let it, it could make me miserable.
And I don't want to give those people telling a bunch of lies that kind of power over my mood and over anything else about me.
I try now to laugh at it and have fun with it and deal with it that way rather than act outraged.
You believe what they said about me.
I can't believe I've just learned it doesn't help.
It doesn't resolve anything.
So in the context of this campaign, the fact that people are telling lies about each other in politics, to me, is another example of it is what it is.
Now, there are ramifications.
It doesn't happen in a vacuum.
Romney's running a big risk.
You can go too far with this stuff and you create all kinds of two things, anger at you for perpetrating this kind of filth and sympathy for your victim or for your target.
That's why I say, who knows if the polls are even catching the fact that there are without question lots of Floridians ticked as they can be about the filth of this campaign, the muddiness, the dirt, the lies, all these silly things that are being said.
And you never know how it's going to redound and how it's going to matter in the outcome of the election.
On the other hand, there's always the fear, the reality that people will believe the criticism, too.
It cuts both ways.
Now, as far as for me, I wish the stuff didn't have...
Of course I wish it didn't happen.
But I really, I don't, I don't view, I don't really think I have any power to stop it.
I don't think there's any way it can be stopped, as it is said about me.
So what I rely on, what gives me quote-unquote comfort, if you will, is that I know that each one of you in this audience know what's true and what's not true.
You know when something in the media is alleged about me that isn't true, and I know it ticks you off, and I know you want to do something.
And I know primarily, though, that you know it's false and that you don't believe it.
And you are my audience, and you are what this program is all about.
You are the focus of what I do here.
Talk about meeting and surpassing audience expectations every day.
That's every word of it true.
I know there are a lot of high expectations.
What are you frowning at me about in there?
Okay.
Now, okay, Snerdley is saying he still wants bad things to happen to people who lie about me.
Well, really bad things.
I know because they do it on purpose and they know what they're doing is what Snerdley's telling me.
And it ticks him off.
People around me don't understand why it doesn't make me mad.
And I apparently have not explained that sufficiently or in a satisfactory way.
And I guess when I say I don't care, people don't understand that.
I don't know how else to say it.
So anyway, that's me.
That's how I react to this stuff.
So if I were a candidate, let's relate this now to a campaign.
If I were a candidate, I would expect that kind of stuff.
And I would have a strategy to deal with it.
But it wouldn't be defending myself.
I wouldn't allow myself to be put on defense because, as I say over and over, nobody ever won anything defending it.
The response for me would to stay on issue and stay conservative, especially if there are things that had happened in the campaign that had won me a standing ovation or won me a primary or had told me what I was doing that really connect.
I keep doing that.
Of course, I wouldn't have to strategize it because that stuff's in my heart.
A conservative, being a conservative, I don't have to be one.
I am one.
And I don't have to ask somebody how to be one.
I am one.
So I would just continue to be who I am.
But I'm not these guys.
And I also know that they are not going to listen.
I mean, they've got these consultants and so forth, and some of them they listen to and some of them they don't.
And the ones they listen to are the ones who get to them and talk to them in the same emotion they're feeling.
So if you've got candidate Slobodnik, I'm not going to mention her name.
You've got candidate Slobodnik who's all ticked off about what's being said about him.
The consultant he'll listen to is the consultant who makes him think he's also ticked off about it and wants to do something about it.
He won't listen to the consultant that advises him to do something different, distant from what's because you want to get even and you want to stop the stuff.
It's a natural human emotion.
You want to do that.
But for me, I just, in my life, I've just learned you can't stop it.
You just can't.
You can ask anybody.
You can ask, they were still alive.
You could ask Ronald Reagan.
You could ask George W. Bush.
You could ask anybody.
Yeah, but I remember you saying you wished Bush would have definitely.
Yeah, I did.
But not.
Why did I say that?
Not to stop it from happening and not to correct the critics.
Bush needed to defend himself to keep his audience.
He needed to defend himself to keep his audience with him.
They were hanging because the stuff said about Bush was the stuff said about his supporters.
Bush needed to respond in order to keep his supporters and his base energized.
Not to change anybody's mind and not stop the criticism because you can't.
No matter what you do, you just can't stop it.
It won't.
And the more, I'm telling you, if I've learned one thing, the more you act like it bothers you, the more it is going to happen.
Because that's half the fun of criticism.
That's half the fun of it.
It's getting a rise out of the person you're trying to rip.
Anyway, I have to take a brief time out.
We'll come back and squeeze in some more calls after this.
Don't go away.
Hi, welcome back.
Great to have you.
Rush Limbaugh, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network and the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies, Lincoln, Kansas.
And this is Keith.
Keith, great to have you on the program.
Hello, sir.
Rush, my overview on the whole situation is this.
First of all, Newt should never let Annie Mae. or the ethics violation bother him, first of all.
Secondly, Romney will spend five times more.
The establishment wants him.
The Republican establishment, the regime wants him.
They know that if they get Romney in there, they can get him to go across the aisle.
We'll have control of the Senate and the House.
They know they'll still have on health care.
Wait, well, hold, hold, hold, hold it, hold it.
This is, you know, I'm just confused.
And I'm not sure I understood what you just said.
You just said they know they get Romney in there.
They get him to go across the aisle.
And then we'll have control of the House and Senate.
I don't understand how those two go together.
What good is having control of the Senate if Romney goes across the aisle?
And I assume you mean works with Democrats.
Yes, he'll work with both of them.
And the health care that he still believes in the mandate, I still believe the Republicans will go work with the Democrats, and they will get it together.
They'll just try to change it.
They'll try to repeal it.
And they'll put it in their own version.
and Romney will get what he really wants, basically, even if it goes to the states where they set up a commonwealth, like in Massachusetts.
Not only that, but he has a tendency, too, to be able to—he has nothing in— I don't see nothing in stone on his tax reform.
The thing about it is, any state that he ran that was 47th in job creation, not only that, but in Barney Frank and his own partner can get married in that state.
If this guy's been pro-choice before, if he's been...
Okay, wait.
I need to know something here to be able to understand this.
Are you criticizing Romney or are you for him?
No, I'm for Newt, but here's the problem.
I see right now Romney gaining all the momentum.
And if Newt lets it bother him, and if Romney spends five to one, then this is what the Obama administration wants because they're not going to afford him any debates.
It's going to be just a money against money, a billion against $200 million on the airways.
I'll guarantee you, Obama will not afford him the debates that he would like to have to make any kind of a statement about Obama's one hour two in poverty or his $5.8 trillion spending or his $14 million on food stamps or the fact that he spent $5.8 trillion.
I mean, the guy and Bush together have spent $10.7 trillion.
That's more than all the presidents since 1776.
Where Gingrich, if he gets in there, the establishment knows he'll change the czars, the departments.
He'll go against what they've had to shake hands on for many, many years.
Gingrich will make a statement if he gets in there.
They don't want it.
They know he'll change Washington.
They don't want it changed.
Okay, I get you now.
So Romney is the establishment.
No matter what party, the establishment will get what they want whenever they want it.
Romney will give it to them.
The differences between the parties are minuscule.
There will be health care, maybe change at the margin a little bit, but it'll still be there.
It'll still be a mandate.
That's what you're saying.
Exactly.
Exactly.
And Newt is not going to do this, just like on that new stock amendment where the insider trading like Peter Zweitzer.
This has been going on for a while.
And I'll tell you what, they do not want the establishment changed.
I don't care how they go about it.
They're going to do everything they can.
And it's basically working against Newt because it's like the regime, the Obama administration wants.
Romney, the Republican establishment wants.
Romney, I support Newt because I think he's the only one that'll stand up against him.
All right.
Okay.
I thought that's where you were going, but I thought you were going to say something entirely different based on what's on the call screen where I apologize.
I thought you were going to say it's over, that the game's been rigged, that Romney's in there because everybody wants him in there and it's over.
And I thought you were just going to be fatalistic about it.
So that's my mistake.
I'm having trouble following what you were saying based on what I thought you were going to say.
Doug in Salem, Oregon, welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello.
Hey, Rush.
I guess I've got a question for you.
Yeah.
And you're the wise teacher.
Why does the establishment, or anybody else for that matter, want the loser to McCain in 08 to be our nominee?
Well, why would Romney bring the loser up on stage to endorse him?
Well, yeah, that too.
I didn't understand that.
That's just, I think what that was, if you want to know the truth, I think that was the establishment looking to people like you and say, look at this.
You.
This is who we are.
And you may think you can stop us, but you can't.
I think that was an anti-Tea Party.
That was an anti-conservative statement by the establishment.
I don't think there's any doubt about it.
And that's why they're hanging together.
That's why Huckabee, I just play you.
Huckabee admitted in 2000 he hated Romney, but now he loves him.
He's endorsed him because Romney's not saying bad things about him this year because he's not running against him this year.
Great peeps in the Wall Street Journal.
Grace Marie Turner scoring last week's Romney Care debate.
This is reinforcing my perception, probably yours too, that San Torum hit a grand slam with his challenge of Romney Care to Romney in the debate.
We've got that.
Lots of stuff still ahead.
▲
Export Selection